Why Clinton should visit Pakistan

Krashid #190:

You have not been able to answer the questions I have raised. You have chosen to ask a question instead. I am surprised that even the other prominent CHowk Pakis have not.

What you are suggesting for Kashmir is:`Okay let me have it first, then I`ll decide what to do with it!`. Do you think that is a rationale that will win the support of the world community?

What is Kashmiri liberation about really?

www.rediff.com/news/2000/mar/30onkar1.htm

...But the mirwaiz admitted that foreigners like the Afghans are also fighting Indian security forces along with the Kashmiri militants. ``We are fighting for a just cause and we welcome help from any quarter. I admit that we have training camps in Azad [Pakistan-occupied] Kashmir. We are getting support from the Pakistani government. We are also getting support from the ISI,`` he told rediff.com...

So Farangi_Kush, your facts kicked you. Now you say the story of four brahmins who refused to take oath from a Dalit President. Now you agree to me that you were wrong. As always, you are wrong on facts again Kush (on the 4 brahmins). No such thing ever happened here. Because here it would have caused a huge furore and they would have been tried for it. Find it out for yourself.

I don`t know your source of information, but that

you are the epitome of a muslim fundamentalist/terrorist, as the world knows it, is beyond doubt.

I do wonder at times, how pakistan idolises Ghori/Ghazni and many other barbaric marauders? For the west punjab/sindh/balichistan were first places to have been ransacked,raped and

and destroyed. And forgetting history(selective amnesia!), you name your missiles after ghori and ghazni. Try reading about the ``Sahiya dynasty`` which fought till its elimination, bravely defending that region. They were one amongst you.

History is to be read and understood, but Pakistan lives in history and derives solace from it.May be it is finding it difficult to digest the defeats of three wars and kargil.

The day Pakistan wakes up to the present and has a plan for the future, it will naturally see reason in coexistence with India.

I don`t think I should defend hinduism here.It has always defended itslef stoically and

will continue to flourish. Know only this much that caste is a social issue like dowry is, and not a religious distinction.While social evils do take time to be removed, they can be and will be removed. India is trying for it.

Rest assured, pakistan needs assistance to

keep it`s herd united.Fat chance FARANGI. You and your tribes` misinterpretation of religion and it`s purpose, will eat into pakistan.

regards

Re Reply 193:

Asif Naqshbandi--you wrote: ``No wonder that millions of hindus converted to Islam in the Subcontinent, Islam where all believers are the same and equal and where even unbelievers have the same rights [on payment of the jizya] on life, property, freedom etc.``

Remember, a lot of the conversions were made under the sword. And of late, you`ve had economic-related conversions. Earlier on, many converts to Christianity were referred to as ``Rice Christians.`` Likewise, some of the newer converts are being referred to as ``polyester muslims.``

Don`t give us the usual rag on equality. It doesn`t take too long to detect the hatred you have for Hinduism in your post. Religion is a personal preference, and if you prefer to wear it up your sleeve, it`s your choice. Just as your religion is superior to you, christianity is the superior religion to Jerry Falwell, Sikhism the superior religion to Bindranwale and Hinduism the superior religion to Nathuram Godse. Grow up. Learn to tolerate the viewpoints of others. When you use religion as a blinder, you`ll find that it blinds your vision. To each person their beliefs.

Coming back to your equality rag, if all muslims have the same rights, etc., how come your Arab brethren treat you like crap when you work for them. A friend of mine, a devout Hyderabadi muslim CA from Madras [beard and all], who was on partner track at one of the largest Indian accounting firms took up a job in Saudi Arabia in the early 90s to make money. After his 3 year contract was up, his Saudi bosses offered him a renewal at a lower salary. Then he found out that the American accountants who reported to him made twice as much as he did and were offered raises during contract renewal. When he accosted his Saudi bosses and brought up the ``I`m a muslim, treat me fairly`` angle, he was told that he was an Indian, and take it or leave it. He left and is now in Singapore where he not only supervises whites, chinese and other desis, he makes more than the people he supervises. My friend told me that his case was more the norm and says that he views this brotherhood stuff as stuff of dreams, as do most of his Indian muslim friends who worked in the Gulf.

And re: the numerous banterings of Monsieur Farangi-Kush, he does not disappoint us by consistently reaching new depths each and every time. Perhaps, he should start thinking about writing comedy for a living. He seems to have such a natural streak in him. To waste it otherwise would be a real tragedy.

Asif #193, F_K #all

The difference between Indian society and Pakistani society seems to me, Indian society looks squarely at all the garbage and is trying to rise out of it, while Pakistani society is making determined efforts to sink lower into a cesspool of hatred and is making a virtue of it.

Even folk festivals have to be debased and discredited as insidious threats to pride and purity. Is Islam so fragile that people must break off all links to the past? Is this sort of social engineering, of making large groups of people totally one-dimensional monomaniacs better that all other forms of social engineering? And is it all to be justified solely by the inequities of the Hindu caste system?

Not only that, people like you refine and distill hatred and market it as if it is something sublime, `pride`, like an absolution available only to the privileged. Get used to it, the world will remain a diverse multi-ethnic multi-religious multi-cultural world of people aspiring for something better whether you shut yourselves off within walls of hatred or not. Much better to learn to deal with all as equals, especially if they live in the neighbourhood.

And if so concerned for the downtrodden in India(though I very much doubt it) its worth reading even 10 pages of VS Naipaul`s ``India: A Million Mutinies now``. You don`t have to have the least regard for the author or Indians to get the message nevertheless. Its better to know what it is and whom it is that you are investing so much in hating.

I notice, on this thread it is ``when the going gets tough, attack Hindus``. All this vitriol was brought on by a posting on Malaysia issuing a statement on not having invited Gen. Musharraf`s visit.

Now which dark corner of Hindu society will be highlighted when the Turkish PM Ecevit visits India and skips Pakistan? Lets wait and see.

Sadhana

sac

thanks for the query, I was not clear enough and I apologise for that. Let me try to explain, in both of our countries, the army deaths have a different perception, to that of civilian deaths. Hence, the body bags. I suspect the previous response to which I was answering relates to army personnel coming home in body bags, rather than civilian deaths. The reaction to army deaths is markedly different to that of civilian deaths, and I can give lots of examples (which I abhor and find totally dishonorable). If a town gets 20 jawans back in body bags, its not going to cause that much of a stir, since they are considered as ``martyrs`` (either to religion or to country). But to actually kill an unarmed civilian?, now that gets people upset.

What I was trying to say is that till concepts of honor and nationalism are foremost in peoples minds, there will be people ready to kill and die for it. Once more civilised concepts emerge as economic growth, human potential maximising, self actualising etc., then the cost of body bags will be significant and THEN it will start making a difference. These Indians are silly, they lost more than 800 men in the heights of kargil, keep on losing tens of men every month in the crevasses and mountains of siachin and still they are mucking around. These pakistanis are silly, keep on prodding that lumbering gigantic India with pin pricks and then when India turns around and swats them with a gunship, moan about it.

Having been on the receiving end of politicians orders to the military, I harbour a deep suspicion of them, for domestic political or religious reasons, they send out vast numbers of bright young men to die. Civilians dont help either, in both countries, take for example the chowkwallas here itself. So many people keep on talking about the military option, have a final fight, the jehadis will kick butt, the indian army is going to kick butt in return. It so very easy, isnt it? after all, you guys are NOT the people who actually will have to have their skin sticking to cold metal, you guys are NOT going to walk down streets with their necks prickling with the worry of a sniper

KRashid

Post#174

{{Killing of its own people (India claims as such) is evil. Leaving the wolf open in the form of security forces is evil. Terrorizing neighboring countries is evil.}}

Your point is well taken & no sane person can disagree with you in the above argument.

If we carry that point further, would you say that mujahadeen killing Kashmiri pandits & sikhs is evil too?! To add insult to injury they use the good name of a great religion (Islam) to justify the killing. Nowadays it seems that the word ``jehad`` is used to absolve all sins of the mujahadeen. Unfortunately, ``jehad`` has been invoked so many times in recent history, that it has lost its original sacred meaning & become synonymous with ``terrorism``. There is a tendancy to blame every atrocity on RAW & India. Even the hijacking & the cold blooded murder of Rupin Katyal was blamed on RAW. You cant fight evil with evil & hope to win.

{{Who can guarantee that if Kashmiris stop their militant attitude, India suddenly will realize the rights of Kashmiris}}

In my opinion, I will guarantee you the following:

1)

India will NEVER give Kashmir independance as long as the militancy continues. Militancy will only harden the Indian attitude. Right, wrong or indifferent, Indians blame Pakistani involvement to the militancy.

2)

Pakistan will NEVER win a proxy war or even a conventional /nuclear war with India.

Many Pakistanis smugly believe that they won the 65 war. To ``win`` a war is to achieve the objectives that start a war. Ayub Khan started the war by sending infiltrators to Kashmir. His objective was to gain Kashmiri independance . That objective wasnt achieved, so in my opinion ,Pakistan lost the 65 war.

3)

Pakistan can NEVER hope to liberate Kashmir on its own, with the support of local Kashmiris or without. Pakistan NEEDS support from other countries in this matter. Not polite ,vague diplomatic murmurs like ``the Kashmir problem needs to be solved``. No matter how hard Pakistan has tried to portray the plight of Kashmiris these 50+ years, no country has twisted India`s arm. In fact,Clinton bluntly told Pakistan that the US will not get involved, esp when you are trying to change boundaries with blood. Right or wrong, the US BELIEVES that ``elements`` in the Pak govt are behind the militancy.

If OPEC declares an oil embargo on India, the Kashmir problem will be solved in a minute. To this day, I have been puzzled why they havent done so. They did it in support of the Palestinians, why not Kashmiris?! I havent got a an answer to this question on Chowk. The only logical assumption is that even the other Islamic countries dont support Pakistan`s opinion on Kashmir.

Your die hard ally, China, is also tilting in India`s favor as far as Kashmir goes. They dont want an Islamic uprising in China. Besides, if they take a hard stance on a moral ground, it will only internationalise the plight of Tibet--which China isnt eager to do so. Gen Musharraf`s visit to China was successful in all aspects; EXCEPT Kashmir.

The bottom line is--no matter how hard Pakistan has tried, they are diplomatically alone as far as Kashmir goes.

The only hope Kashmir has for independance is a peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience. In the Indian independance struggle, Gandhi went on a hunger strike to STOP the movement when some policemen were killed in the rioting. Thats when the British & the world started taking him seriously. Kashmir needs someone like Martin Luther King, the Dalai Lama or Gandhi to get world support for the struggle.

Sure, that is going to take time & sacrifice. On the other hand, 10+ years of militancy hasnt done a damn thing.

Gymnosophist,

I owe you and a few other indians an apology an apology, for misjudging the gullibility of pakistanis. In fact I posted the story about the ministers refusing to take oath, the hindu king of nepal not allowing K.R. Narayan in to his palace and also some army oficers refusing to accept the medals from an untouchable. If i remember correctly, it was a response to an Indian muslim, studebaker.

The claim was so outlandish, i never suspected that any one would take it seriously. I was very wrong.

Regards

Jay

Gymnosophist,

1. I am not an expert on Islam and have never claim to be--I am simply a proud follower of the school of Hazrat Imam e Azam Abu Hanifa radhi Allah anhu; I ask those who DO know [the traditional sunni ulama] if I have any religious q`s/or I look it up in their works. Simple really.

2. I don`t think you have to wash a place which an infidel has visited--you`re either being funny or those people were misinformed. But I am willing to stand corrected (as far as I know, the kuffaar are called ``najis`` (impure,filthy) in the Qur`an by Allah Ta`ala , not for any outer physical impurity but because of their internal condition which is impure due to their rejection of Islam.

3. It is the HIndu religion which divides poeple into castes and degrades them so that an Untouchable cannot even visit the temples for fear of polluting them or a Brahmin wont let a shadow of such a person fall on him!! And other such beliefs! No wonder that millions of hindus converted to Islam in the Subcontinent, Islam where all believers are the same and equal and where even unbelievers have the same rights [on payment of the jizya] on life, property, freedom etc.

sac

thanks for the query, I was not clear enough and I apologise for that. Let me try to explain, in both of our countries, the army deaths have a different perception, to that of civilian deaths. Hence, the body bags. I suspect the previous response to which I was answering relates to army personnel coming home in body bags, rather than civilian deaths. The reaction to army deaths is markedly different to that of civilian deaths, and I can give lots of examples (which I abhor and find totally dishonorable). If a town gets 20 jawans back in body bags, its not going to cause that much of a stir, since they are considered as ``martyrs`` (either to religion or to country). But to actually kill an unarmed civilian?, now that gets people upset.

What I was trying to say is that till concepts of honor and nationalism are foremost in peoples minds, there will be people ready to kill and die for it. Once more civilised concepts emerge as economic growth, human potential maximising, self actualising etc., then the cost of body bags will be significant and THEN it will start making a difference. These Indians are silly, they lost more than 800 men in the heights of kargil, keep on losing tens of men every month in the crevasses and mountains of siachin and still they are mucking around. These pakistanis are silly, keep on prodding that lumbering gigantic India with pin pricks and then when India turns around and swats them with a gunship, moan about it.

Having been on the receiving end of politicians orders to the military, I harbour a deep suspicion of them, for domestic political or religious reasons, they send out vast numbers of bright young men to die. Civilians dont help either, in both countries, take for example the chowkwallas here itself. So many people keep on talking about the military option, have a final fight, the jehadis will kick butt, the indian army is going to kick butt in return. It so very easy, isnt it? after all, you guys are NOT the people who actually will have to have their skin sticking to cold metal, you guys are NOT going to walk down streets with their necks prickling with the worry of a sniper

All this talk about Brahmin Vajpayee not wanting to take the oath of office from the Dalit President.

In the good old days, if a Dalit entered a temple, the temple was ritually cleansed with special pujas and other ceremonies.

After Vajpayee the Brahmin visited Minar-e-Pakistan, it was reported that a group of extremist Islamists took buckets of water to clean the Minar which had been defiled by the visit of the infidel.

Good to know that there is always someone willing to uphold Hindu traditions, particularly those which belittle other people. I would like our resident Islam expert Asif Naqshbandhi to tell us the chapter and verse in Quran which was used in that cleaning ceremony.

As somebody on Chowk once said, Pakistan may be the last refuge of Hinduism in the world.

JR #182

If you are aware of history of partition and history of Kashmir you would be more realistic.

Kashmir is predominantly Muslim.

During the independence movement, Sheikh Abdullah, the leader of Muslim conference wanted a self determination of Kashmir and an Independent Kashmir, and it was likely that he would be prime minister.

Maharaja Hari Singh, for his reasons wanted to remain independent of India and Pakistan.

The formula of partition gave States like Kashmir, Bhawalpur, Junagadh, and Hyderabad the power to join one or another country (dominion). Junagadh joined Pakistan with a predominantly Hindu population, although there was a significant number of Muslims also. But India attacked and annexed Junagadh on the premise that it does not reflect the desire of population. Same with Hyderabad, with a predominantly Hindu population, and significant Muslim minority.

In Kashmir the only problem was India could not stand on moral, ethical, democratic or any ground.

So it took another route. If they cannot keep Kashmir with themselves, it will be a blow to its secularism. So India had no plan to determine the rights of Kashmiris in the form of plebiscite.

Now the things are advanced further, and any secession of Kashmir is seen not as a threat to secularism, but a threat to the survival of India, where other nationalities will start demanding the same.

I have no doubt regarding the rights of Kashmiris for self detrmination.

To further elaborate, it is the voice of significant majority which is considered valid.

To give you example from recent history. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, although majority were Muslims, but Serbs and Croats particularly significant number of Serbs lived with them. And in their independence movement Serbs sided against Muslims. But it does not negate the validity of demands of Bosnia-Herzegovina Muslims.

To give an example of formation of India and Pakistan. Muslims voted heavily for Muslim League even in India, but it did not bring Hindu majority areas in Pakistan. Also in Pakistan, although Muslims voted heavily for Pakistan, but there was a significant minority which did not favor partition. It still resulted in formation of Pakistan.

The only question Umair and others are asking. Is India prepared to give Kashmiris their right of self-determination?

First answer this. If yes, then many ways and compromises can be found.

If no, then what is the use of going back to non violence, or Satya Garah or whatnot.

Regarding #186 and other myriad blabbering posts by F_K::

And I thought despite his silly name, F_K was an intelligent but closeminded obscurantist of the Taliban school. Never knew, he was such a demented bigot.

He started off a reasoned contrarian but seems like will end up as schizophrenic, prevaricating, and hateful maniac.

Maybe age is taking its toll in high speed. Or may I am bad judge of personalities.

Satyavadi

#184 #185(macgupta & the happy one)

So it is not entirely untrue.It was not Bajpayee but four Brahmin ministers who refused to be administered the oath to their offices by the Dalit President R.K.Narayan.

If you say so I believe you but It is true that this `secular` society has such gems.Please talk a little more about such gems instead of trying to analyse Pakistan.You are not us.

And please do not call the true hindu practitioners as those from the bush---some of them might be reading this.I can trust them more than a socialist/secularist anytime.



wassalaam.

http://theage.com.au/news/20000330/A37888-2000Mar29.html

Pakistan losing the propaganda war in Kashmir

By CHRISTOPHER KREMMER

CHAKOTHI, PAKISTAN-OCCUPIED KASHMIR

Thursday 30 March 2000

The brigadier is exasperated. The foreign journalists have been flown by helicopter to the mountainous forward post for his briefing on Kashmir, but all they want to know is how Pakistan helps Islamic militants infiltrate into India through these hills.

``Why doesn`t anybody ask me why the Kashmir issue has been left unresolved for so long?`` he asks.

It is spring, but the pine-clad, snow-dusted peaks and clear blue sky are deceptive. Over the mountain on the opposite bank of the Jhelum River, is the Line of Control separating the sparring armies of India and Pakistan, just over a kilometre away.

``We are directly within range of their machineguns here,`` says Brigadier Khaled Nawaz, commander of the Pakistan army`s 1 Azad Kashmir Brigade.

Today it is quiet, but the brigadier says 17,457 artillery and mortar rounds have rained down on Pakistan-occupied Kashmir so far this year. Thirty-five people have been killed and 113 wounded on the Pakistani side since the new year.

``Kashmir bleeds, and yet the international community looks away,`` laments Brigadier Nawaz.

Kashmir is not the only victim, for on this porous frontline between militant Islam and stubborn India, the truth gets wasted every day.

Pakistan`s combination of a military Government, nuclear weapons capability, and support for Muslim extremists in Kashmir, has transformed its image in the West from a somewhat autocratic, yet moderate Islamic nation, into that of a reckless and unstable country.

Many Pakistanis share such concerns, but welcomed the coup because they thought a military government might crack down on the Islamic right.

Yet five months after the coup, it is clear that General Musharraf has very little room for manoeuvre.

The United States President, Mr Bill Clinton, got some idea of just how little when he dropped in for lunch in Islamabad last Sunday. The general offered no concessions.

The banners that greeted the President on his drive through a capital turned ghost town by a massive security operation, graphically illustrated Pakistan`s fatal obsession with Kashmir.

All the way to Islamabad, the pedestrian overpasses sported official banners demanding human rights for the Kashmiris, a mock-up of Pakistan`s nuclear test site and replicas of the medium-range missiles the country has developed, with China`s help.

Reality, in Pakistan, has become surreal, and dangerously so.

Pumped up by state-run broadcast media, the nation of 140 million people is fed an unrelenting diet of distorted and highly emotive propaganda about the plight of their brethren in Kashmir, India`s only Muslim majority state.

Before leaving their briefing, journalists are handed a video and photographs, depicting decapitated civilians, allegedly the handiwork of Indian troops said to have crossed the Line of Control in February.

On the ground in what the Pakistan Government calls the ``liberated`` area of Kashmir - basically the part it controls - people displaced by the conflict are used to score points.

At Zaffar camp, they are brought out of their tents to denounce Indian shelling, and deny that armed Muslim guerrillas regularly cross over to attack Indian forces, and create mayhem of the kind that struck the Sikh-dominated village of Chattisinghpora, where 36 men were massacred by unidentified gunmen on the eve of Mr Clinton`s visit.

But Brigadier Nawaz admits the wider propaganda war is being lost. ``We can`t get our point of view across, because the world is looking at India as a vast market,`` he says.

Pakistanis feel a sense of betrayal by the West. ``We helped them defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. If that was a just freedom struggle, or Bosnia, why not Kashmir?`` is a common refrain.

Nobody can deny that the Kashmir dispute has caused untold suffering to the region`s people. At least 25,000 people have been killed in the Indian-occupied area alone in the past 10 years. Promises by Indian leaders to grant autonomy and even self-determination have been broken.

But Pakistan has also broken promises and its protests about injustices increasingly are falling on deaf ears.

General Musharraf is trying to turn the situation around to Pakistan`s advantage. He is offering to use his influence with the ``freedom fighters`` to ``moderate their activities``, if India takes reciprocal action to reduce tensions.

But for Brigadier Nazaw, a soldier`s soldier on the ground in a dirty war, it is enough to make a man lose his cool. ``By God, if there is a time Pakistan needs to expand its nuclear deterrent, it is now,`` he says.

Re: Firangi_Khush (you are a source of much hilarity to all farangis so keep on at it)

The story you refer to is based on three or four Brahmin ministers from the bush raising a fuss over taking the oath from a dalit. They eventually agreed to a separate private ceremony. Obviously either you or your `Indian Sources`` added the requisite mirch masaala to conclude that Vajpayee refused to take the oath from K.R. Narayanan.

This is funny and scary at the same time. Funny because you would have to be really stupid to believe something like this and scary because you would have to be really brain-washed & gullible to believe it. I know you are not stupid since you spew your hatred with great eloquence so I guess its scary!

Now, would you like me to send you a JPEG file of the swearing in ceremony?

Vajpayee refusing to be sworn in by the president! HA HA HA! or wait a minute... should it be BRRRRR?