The Chicken Hawks Of Pakistan

Farang_Kush;

``They say that those who have been slaves for a long time cannot be chivalrous & generous toward others.The sense of insecurity & low-esteem always makes them coward & `bania`-like``

Or the inferiority complex of the dispossessed Moghuls squealing like wild boars from the fringes crying at their disinheritance, the ghetto stunted mind of the Paki who saw the ship of Islam sink in the Ganga, Allah`s birthright that should have been his, relegated and spanked by idol worshippers for eternity....

Or the bleatings of the inadequate refugee Paki, sitting on his deobandi island in the West crying rivers of tears about the defeat of Arabism and the ascent and triumph of Western civilisation, mouthing pathetic epithets straight from his wet dreams of the coming hegemony :) of Islam while he performs fellatio on the great Kaffir USA/Canada,living amongst heathen, liberals, Christians and infidels....Such self loathing, insecurity and pomposity, a heady mix indeed....a hilarious mix indeed, the impotent geriatric screaming at the Niagra falls to stop falling.....

Did Iqbal write a poem about that? Let us know Paki, will be great to read it.....

...................................

wassalaam :)

CONTROLLED INSURGENCE?

I define ``Controlled Insurgence`` as an Insurgency that is under control. We as Paksitani should be very careful when we analyse and interpret the news of Kasmiri freedom fighter`s military actions, slaying of Kasmiris in fake Army encounters, and the death of villagers at some very startegic points of time. Especially the case when the death squads of Indian Army killed 40 sikhs during Clinton`s visit which was immediately followed by massacre of Hindu pilgrims by the same death squads. Even the opposition parties of India did not buy the last case and demanded a full investigation under the supervision of the upper-house (Senate).

With 700K army in place, I dont think any insurgency can ``act`` for long. THat is why we hear the news of measely pipe bombs exploding, damaging bicycles in Sri Nagar and some sporadic cases of firing where Indian army kills Kashmiris in fake encounters.

The purpose of keeping this facade of Insurgency alive for a while makes sense if you understand and analyze the Indian diplomatic efforts to sell their story of Pakistani intervention. The burden of proof that the Kashmiri Insurgence is purely indigenous lies with people of Kashmir and Govt. of Pakistan. Pakistan Army should deploy a good portion of ISI to analyze the Insurgenecy with this perspective. Once India and people like FerozeK etc. succeed in selling their point to US and India gets a nodd from US it will be just matter of hours the ``insurgencey`` will be ``extinguished`` with 700K-800K army.

My post #272
It was the Mirwaiz`s father who was assassinated in 1990 and both pro-India and anti-India groups are blamed for it. It seems clear, however, that the Pakistani Army put the lid on JKLF`s activities in teh early nineties because it was pro-independence rather than pro-accession. I have asked this question repeatedly to the Pakistani Army experts on chowk who are also interested in issues of human rights and freedom fighting, why so?

And those who shed tears of pride on the Pakistani role in Afghanistan may check this out:
http://www.expressindia.com/news/may17/world1.html
``... More than 80 per cent of Afghans said women should be allowed to move about freely and that Islamic teachings did not restrict women`s human rights, as the Taliban contends, the group said.

The report, available on www.phrusa.org said 94-98 per cent of women in Taliban-controlled areas said the Taliban had made their lives ``much worse`` and attributed their declining mental and physical health to its policies....``

Before raising cries of bias, one question is, why with so many Pakistani citizens and organizations very energized about human rights, freedom and rights of Muslims, no Pakistani agency or group has carried out such a survey in Afghanistan? Or the opinion of people living in societies labelled primitive and tribal donot count to the civilised?

Krashid # 257

Once again you have made up something that I never said. Karashid it is useless, unless you bring up something I said that you feel is wrong or otherwise have decency to point out that you understand my message the way you understood. That is the purpose of conversation. When you don’t understand something you ask, you don’t misinterpret based on some wild assumptions.

May I ask how and why you imply that ``Also, your contention that the Afghani women have to take away their Burqa to get education is utterly wrong``.

I don’t know how and why you made that up. And BTW in case you don’t read newspapers & hear radios, and I am not talking about Pakistani media, the Taliban have allowed women`s right to education and girls schools are functioning. All co-education schools are closed though and only female teachers are teaching female students. In a country where only worry on peoples` mind is to think about the next meal, I don’t think that many female or male teachers are left there to teach anything. To fill the void the madrassahs come into the picture. ``? I do think that in a war ravaged country where otherwise people kill for a sack of rice, the strict discipline IS required to maintain peace and human decency. A country where children play with anti-tank rockets, maintaining peace is a gigantic task. And Taliban have done that.

And the way NGOs schools work or have worked in Peshawar and Waziristan agencies they did try to teach students about getting rid of their Pardah, they did try to give condoms to Afghan women etc. Lets leave the discussion once again that sex education and education against Pardah is good or bad and take the things as they are, do you think Afghans will send their women to such schools? Can`t the sex education and Pardah etc, wait until they are ready to accept it due to their will and heightened level of awareness and not because they are given a choice between food and ``western education``?

I think that also answers rest of your post on Fard etc.

Basically, my point is that: It is not the right time to export an ideology into Afghanistan. Food for hungry and medicine for dying comes first. I think it is in-human, in-decent, and mean-spirited to prevent someone to get food and medicine unless he agrees with your political agenda first. If you cant help then get out of the way of who are helping.

I know it is too hard for you to swallow that for once GOP line of reasoning can be correct. It will be easier for you to comprehend that if you think that you are siding with truth and good reasoning and not the GOP necessarily.

Re: Rdesikan

Good observation! In order to answer your question, I will borrow a page from the Indian history of pre-1947. Incidently, my defination of the term ``Kashmiri`` denotes a collective identity and includes both the majority and minority interest groups.

As far as representing the interests of the Hindu minority is concerned, it goes without saying that their preferences, on the finality of the Kashmiri problem, will have to be taken into consideration. They are, for a lack of a better term, ``part and parcel`` of the Kashmiri problem and it cannot be solved without any meaningful input from them.

There is an another option in this matter, which I will put forward and that is one based on the principle of separte electorates for the Hindu minority in Kashmir. Just like the Muslims demanded a separte electorate from the British and a quantified level of political represention, the minorities in Kashmir could be given this option - call it the fourth option, if you will. The only question and the unknown is how will Pakistan and India react to this proposal. In this scenrio, it is the Kashmiris you will be calling the shots and not the mandarins in New Delhi and Islamabad.

Hope this answer helps...!

Re: Shankar

Your request has been considered and permission is given contingent upon a witty style involving the following criteria: sarcasm, panché, a rapier like wit capable of mortally wounding any ego and above all else, faithfully observing Davy Jones Rule Number 1: No quarter shall be asked or given and the losers shall walk the plank!

If you agree to follow these guidelines, then may the best wit win!

Ciao!

anamika #261
`` Yet, I have heard that divorces can actually improve the situation if done right - thru compromise and negotiation. ``

You havenot said what may happen during the divorce. Last time a quarter million people died.

``As to the ``domino effect`` of (parts of) Kashmir separating,``


``IMHO, there has to be an (Internationally supervised) elections in Kashmir based on the existing electoral roles``


Is the problem the fairness of elections? Will the candidates change if the elections are internationally supervised? Why are elected village chiefs being killed now, and block presidents of political parties? Is this because the militants and those who fund them have higher standards of the democratic norm?

I am more worried about the domino effect of India laying the seeds of an Islamic state and getting out of the way to let the Saudis and other interested parties in. The Kashmiri economy is in a mess and needs a lot of money. Holding elections will not change the green color of the money coming in. I`m sure giving the strategic location of the state and the decimated and polarised condition of the polity, the elections will be mainly fought between, religious organistions, the ISI, CIA, RAW and maybe the Chinese intelligence(this is known as multiparty democratic process).

And lets not forget, securing a toehold in Indian J&K, will mean that religious parties will have good reason sweep the next elections in Pakistan.

Good luck.

hobbyt #269
``Now, the Indian proposes to pick their (Kashmiri) leader. Perhaps it is this kind of arrogance that led the Kashmiri to conclude that they have to seperate from with the Indian.``

Better take this up with CE Musharraf and the Pakistani Army. They have been picking their(Pakistani) leader for many decades. The concept of likemindedness is uniquely Pakistani as is the arrogance.

Romair #263

Who is talking about legalities? No `freedom struggle` is ever legal in the literal sense. And I thought you are the one who said Kashmiri `freedom struggle` is not about religion? I thought you are the one who posted something about it being a its a question of Kashmiri identity. Are you saying its religion after all?

Is Kashmiri identity solely Muslim? If so why are so many Kashmiri Muslims getting killed by militants? If the Kashmiri identity is not wholly Muslim, and nonMuslim Kashiriyat is of as much importance, why is there no concern for Pandits, Sikhs, Buddhists expressed by the Hurriyat and various `freedom-fighting` organisations who profess jihad?

Why does the Hurriyat leadship refuse to talk to the Indian government in what it calls `the marketplace`, implying that Indian government should talk ONLY to the Hurriyat? If its the multi-religious Kashmiri identity is under threat then why the question about `legality` of religion-based movements?

btw, one Hurriyat member Mr Shaukat Aziz recently visited Pakistan and its the CEO and made several public statements condemning freedom-minded Kashmiris and declared that Kashmir will soon accede to Pakistan. Was that a legal statement, do you think and interfering with the God-given right to live in a egalitarian society of many Kashmiris especially of Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist persuasion?

`` What should a group of people do if they are being discriminated against and killed, or not being allowed to prosper, based on their religion?``

btw, Sheikh Abudullah was an `external power`? Strange.
What is your proof that this is what was happening in Kashmir pre-1989? Are you saying Indians just started killing Kashmiris just like that? Are you saying nonMuslims in Kashmir are prospering in contrast to Muslims? Then why are there close to half a million Kashmiris (nonMuslim Pandits) living in slums in various parts of India?

The biggest impetus for militancy among Kashmiris came not from `Indian discrimination and disallowance to prosper`, but from rigging of elections in `87 by guess who a Kashmiri party and the Congress party at the centre. The biggest impediment in Kashmiris progress till then was corruption and nepotism by KASHMIRIS themselves, and many candidates who expected to win the elections and overthrow the corrupt government found the elections rigged against them. But Pakistanis donot believe in elections, so why preach to the converted. Kashmir has always been highly subsidized by India and has more (constitutional) freedom granted under Art 370 than any other state, though I cannot say how much `freedom` it actually got to exercise.

The killings began with JKLF eliminating the Mirwaiz`s father( or grandfather) and many prominent Kashmiris both Hindu and Muslim.


You donot reply to my point of on what basis do some groups in Kashmir like the Hurriyat(and groups in Pakistan like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Jamati Islami) claim to be the sole representatives of all Kashmiris?

I am guessing this question is futile. Since the question of West Pakistanis claiming to be sole representatives of unified Pakistan inspite of election results and the question of Wolpert throwing up his hands in horror at Congress leaders` challenges(apparently a deadly mistake on the part of these `Hindu` leaders) to the Muslism League to prove their public support, since these questions are largely unanswered to this day.

Seeking and adhering to dictates of public consensus has not been acceptedor institutionalised in half a century in Pakistan, so why should a national ideology like Pakistan`s which considers democracy and secularism to be fake and futile concepts in the subcontinental context want Kashmir to have what Pakistan doesnot? Why should those cannot bring themselves to deal with minorities on an equal basis, care when they try to precipitate a second Partition?

qalandar #253

``too hindu banaigaa,naa musulmaan banaigaa

shaitaan kee aulaad hai shaitaan banaigaa

...

jo pakray remote haath mein voh khan banaiga

shaitaan kee aulad hai,shaitaan banaiga

...

Dummm mussst qalander dharr rrraghrraa. ``

Zindabad. Sadha qalandar aaway i aaway.

ROmair:

``India is a very peace-loving country.The proof is the great number of cease-fire agreements she has signed with all its neighbours``

Insha.

Come to think of it,these ahinsa-charees seem to have managed to pick a quarrel with EVERY neighbour.Nepal,Assam,Sikkim,Bhutan,Tripura,Tibet,China,Pakistan,Bangladesh,Sri Lanka,Kashmir & Miyanamar.

None of the above neighbours of India have any quarrel with their other neighbours.That should be an eye-opener in itself.

They say that those who have been slaves for a long time cannot be chivalrous & generous toward others.The sense of insecurity & low-esteem always makes them coward & `bania`-like.The wealth accumulation & miserly existence is always waiting for those free-spirited men from the mountains.

It is this psyche that runs deep in the hindu nation.

The Khan heroes & hindu fair-colored heroines of the Indian movies is not a coincident it is a freudian-slip at the collective level.

Their wishes WILL be granted.

wassalaam.

Some Indians and Pakistanis on this board have been trying to make the point that there is a kind of moral equation between Pakistanis of support the freedom struggle in Kashmir, and Indans who support the efforts of their armed forces to extinguish the flame of liberty in Kashmir. This is a false argument.

The support for freedom cannot be equated to support for repression. If it is, then presumably the Freedom struggle in India was wrong and the British wrong to see reason and go home.

Others have argued that there is a paucity of ``Liberals`` within the Kashmiri leadership and an abundance of religious scholars and that this is an abnormal and intolerable situation. Now, the Indian proposes to pick their (Kashmiri) leader. Perhaps it is this kind of arrogance that led the Kashmiri to conclude that they have to seperate from with the Indian. Most resonable individuals would agree in positing the centrality of religious teaching, by way of ethics and morality, in all cultures and civilizations. Why would the Kashmiri be different? Indeed, why would any Muslim or any person, agree to the exclusion or rejection of religious teachers and scholars from the affairs of organized society?

A reminder, the label ``Liberal`` was meant to denote a political ideology proposing a ``reduced role for the state, the maximization of individual liberty, economic freedom and reliance on markets, and decentralized decision making`` (THE COMMANDING HEIGHTS - The Battle between Government and The Marketplace That is Remaking the Modern World - By Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw)

Social liberalism remains a personal choice, not one that bears dictation from Southern India or anywhere else.

Shankar # 256

(If I ``lose`` this mudslinging match I can always give a 1)``Pakistani`` excuse--``Oh you outnumbered me; so even though I fought valiantly & world famously, it stands to reason that I lost``)

sweets... why drag our good name into everything bad that happens, occurs, takes place, explodes? jay, harimuo saxena shakar the fink shrink...You indies please keep your mud slinging to yourselves...

many thanks

binifer

Romair,

It is surely legal for a movement to be based on religion in a state which is based on religion.

In a secular state a freedom movement cant be based on religion. Further, there is no obstruction on Muslims to practise their religion. Do you think the other communities will spare the Muslims if the Muslims of Kashmir succeed in breaking away from India??

Further, you are equating Kashmiris with Sunni Kashmiri Muslims of the valley. The Sikhs, Hindus, Buddishts, muslims of KArgil etc are also kashmiris. Pakis talking about self determination for Kashmiris is like a whore talking about virtues of virginity. Why dont Jehadis fight for free elections in Pakistan? and find out how many Pakistanis want to stay with Pakistan?

When is the Pak army & jehadis planning to free the portion of Kashmir in chinese possesion? Further, if Pakistan was so keen on solving the Kashmir problem why did it hand over parts of KAshmir to Chinese?

Whom does the APHC represent? Can any APHC venture out of the valley without Indian police escort. Let them go to Jammu and solicit support for their cause without police escort. Saalon ko kut kut ke bhoosa bana de.

The serpents of APHC confabulate each other day with the Pakis and their ambassador in Delhi and yet want to go to Pakistan? I would like to know what would have happened to APHC leaders had they been uttering the same words in Pakistan and meeting Indian ambassadors in islamabad. These vipers are taking advantage of the tolerance of the Indian Government and Indian people.

However, I am waiting for some time before Indians do a `poorna vijay`. See you in Muzzarafad!!

Krashid # 260:

``And you know gun and missile are frivolous things for Muslims which is difficult for armchair Bagla Bhagat jews and Hindus to appreciate and which very much irritates them.

Death to India``

Oh dear rsridhar!! You seem to have applied some really hot mircha to Dr Jaanwar`s nether regions :) Keep it up whatever you said, it seems like it has overloaded his circuits and cause system overload.

I hope he`s not administering any suppositries today because his hands will still be shaking with rage :)

Coming up soon, a treatise on the similarities between anti-semitism and Hindu-hatred amongst Paki-Nazis like Krashid and ylh...

Shammi, Upmann, Narain and Misc. Others

India diligently and almost religiously controls border traffic across LOC for two reasons.

1. To stop the flow of men and weapons from Paksitani side. Indian, Afghani and Pakistani weapons smugglers are dying to get into this ``rich`` market. 700K Army supported by air force and gunship helicopetrs is more than an overkill to achieve this objective.

2. To prevent an influx of Kashmiri refugees into Pakistan for political reasons. It has already happened when India was operating its Serbian style Death Camps from early to mid 90s and Kashmiris migrated enmass to Pakistani side. THat is when world begining to realize what is happening behind the facade of Democracy and Secularism.

I would like to appeal all Indians to stop posting such meaningless, propaganda, and no-name websites to justify their position. It means nothing to world community. Just read the BBC website regularly and start knowing thyself. I dont think Pakistan has yet been able to buy BBC.

GET ON THE SIDE OF TRUTH AND SAVE HUMAN LIVES

sadna #251: From your comments, it seems like you have declared it illegal to base a freedom movement on religion. What are the legal basis for freedom movements, in your opinion? What should a group of people do if they are being discriminated against and killed, or not being allowed to prosper, based on their religion? Do they have no right to demand independence? If Muslim Pakistanis today started killing all the Christians Pakistanis, do you think it would justifiable for the Pakistani Christians to demand a separate independent area for themselves?

If it is wrong to want freedom based on a feeling of discrimation due to religion, then in your opinion, is it legal for a freedom movement to be based on geographical occupation (the Indian freedom movement against the British), ethnicity (the Bangladeshi freedom movement against Pakistan), language/culture (Quebecan independence movement against Canada), finances/taxation (the USA independence movement against the British), racism (the Black freedom struggles in South Africa), land (Palestenian freedom movement against Israel)?

And who is the ruling authority that decides the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the areas on which freedom movements can be based? In my opinion, it should be the people fighting for the freedom and not the people suppressing the freedom fighters.

I would be interested in your replies.

PM #250: Some answers to your questions, based on my opinion of the situation:

``Will independence/acession to Pakistan give the Kashmiris back their `identidy`?``

This is a question for the Kashmiris to decide. If they feel their identity is being crushed by the Indians, and they will get it back through independence/accession, then the answer is definitely yes. Otherwise no.

``If ``Kashmir is not a [religious] case``, how is it different in legitimacy from, say, the Baluchi independence uprising of the `70s?``

On an ethical and moral level, all independence uprisings are equal, and should be treated as such. The defining point being that a majority of the people, involved in the uprising, want freedom. As far as I am concerned, all quests for independence, including the Indian freedom movement, to the Pakistan movement, to the Bangladesh movement to the Kashmir movement are very legitimate. Based on a principled stance, one can either agree with all of them, or disagree with all of them. I think most Pakistanis, of the current generation, agree with all four. While most Indians agree with the first and third, but not the second and fourth.

Whether a freedom movement is based on religion, or ethnicity or the color of one`s hair is immaterail. If a majority of Baluchis want to separate from Pakistan, then by all means they should be allowed to do so, through a referendum. However, currently they do not want to separate from Pakistan, while the Kashmiris do want to separate from India.

The Kashmiris have the added justification that their independence falls under the UN resolutions (while the Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, potential Baluchi etc.) does/did not.

``If Kashmir were to be granted indepence, what are the chances that power will rest in the hands of the relatively liberal, nationalist (as opposed to religious) folks like the interviewed mullah?``

The purpose of the interview I quoted was to point out that the indegenous Kashmiri leadership does not consist of, ``Mullahs.`` I would encourage you to read the interviews, and hear the speeches of any of the APHC leaders, and decide for yourself. Many, if not all, of them are superb speakers, both in content and presentation. Not a single one of them is a, ``Mullah.``

The indegenous Kashmiri population, including the Kashmiri speaking Kashmiris, as well as the non-Kashmiri speaking ones (like those in my family) have traditionally been very non-violent (there are many jokes in the Punjabi language regarding the lack of ability of Kashmiris to fight), tolerant, and suppressed. They have been ruled by external powers throughout their history, including the Hindu rulers in the 1947 timeframe.

At the same time, it is not for an external group to decide whom the power rests with in an independent country. That is the whole purpose for demanding freedom, i.e. to decide how to live one`s life, rather than having it decided from New Delhi or Islamabad. If the Kashmiris want Mullahs as their leaders (which I doubt they do), that should be their own choice. Not for you or I to decide.

``Conversely, what are the chances that the hoardes of Afghani, Pakistani (and Indonesian?) will return home without their dream of a fundamentalist state?``

It is a misconception that there are hoards of Afghani and Pakistanis in Kashmir. This is due to the unfortunate attempts of the Indian media to turn the Kashmir struggle into a fictitous battle between the Indians and the hoards of Islamic fundamentalists, rather than present its true picture (please read Victoria Scholfield`s books on Kashmir for more unbiased info). If there were hoards of fundamentalists in Kashmir, the first thing the Indian govt. would do is to lift its ban on Amnesty International (a ban that has been in place since the early 90s) and the international press, and expose these hoards.

There are groups of fighters that do cross into Indian Kashmir on a regular basis from Pakistan(please read FerozeK`s previous post for more details on this). These infiltrators/freedom fighters/terrorists/volunteers (depending on the reader`s point of view) belong to groups in Pakistan like the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba etc. These fighters are provided logistics and perhaps training by the Pakistan government. It is the efforts of these people who have actually forced India onto the negotiating table. Otherwise, the Indian govt. would have completely decimated the Kashmiri freedom struggle into submission. At the same time, the fundamentalist views of these groups are not in line with the views of the average Kashmiri and the average Pakistani.

Due to the above-described contradiction, these groups could, in the long run, be a problem for Pakistan. However, I doubt they will be a problem for the Kashmiris, for the simple reason that there are probably no more than a few hundred of them in Kashmir, at any one time. The LOC is gaurded by 500k to 700k Indian soldiers (the largest per square population of soldiers anywhere in the world), whose sole purpose is to capture/kill anyone fighting for Kashmiri independence. It is thus not that easy for hoards of people to just cross into Indian Kashmir. Only very few can do so successfully.

``What are the chances that the rights of Non-Muslims in Kashmir will be safeguarded?``

There is always a potential problem of counter-suppression after freedom, based on religion (independent Kashmiri Muslims killing Kashmiri Hindus), when one group has been suppressed on religous lines (a primarily Hindu army killing Muslim Kashmiris). There are no clear cut solutions for this, unfortunately. At the same time, the Kashmiris themselves cannot be continously killed, just because the Indians have made an assumption that the Kashmiris will kill minorities, if they are given independence.

The APHC leaders have clearly stated that they will protect the rights of religious minorities, as the leadership views this struggle as a Kashmiri struggle involving all religions. However it is clear (through voting patterns and uprising patterns) that the Buddhists and Hindus in Kashmir (primarily in Ladakh and Jammu) would prefer to remain with India. The APHC leaders have agreed to this, as well (please read their interviews). Based on this, Ladakh and Jammu would be (and should be) allowed to join with India, as per the will of the people in those areas.

In the end, every human being has a God-given right to live the way he/she wants, under whomever he/she wants, and not have the will of others imposed on him/her, regardless of religion, caste, creed, etc. Anyone who believes in this concept, has to believe in the creation of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and hopefully soon the Kashmir Valley. Anyone who does not believe in this will go to all ends and come up with all kinds of creative (false) reasons to suppress other human beings rights to live their own lives.

As long as organziations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are completely banned in Kashmir by India, I am quite sure the actual situation in Kashmir is quite different from the one presented by the Indian media, and by most Indian repliers on Chowk.

In the long run, South Asia will be a much better place if all freedom struggles are/were handled through peaceful means, rather than suppression and killings. In the 21st century, if economic borders open, geographical borders become immaterial. A Kashmir that is independent (or part of Pakistan), as per the will of its people, and trades freely with India, is a far better situation for India (and Pakistan), then a Kashmir in which the local population is in a constant state of uprising against India.

The British were wise and adapted the peaceful option in 1947, knowing fully well that the end result would have been the same, had they tried to militarily crush the Indian independence movement. The Pakistanis (in the past) and Indians (presently), unfortunately, have not been wise.