President Pervez Musharaff’s Views
Soma Kumar June 30, 2003
#143 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 7:27:37 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#142 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 7:27:37 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#141 Posted by rsridhar on July 2, 2003 6:26:56 pm
re:#134 by HisExcellency
Sometimes ago,someone in Chowk posted an article showing very few people in Pak (a small percentage) even read those liberal English dailies. OTOH, Urdu papers have a much wider circulation in Pak. What do these Urdu papers say? Are they not holding an extreme view point? Are they liberal in debating the various aspects of problems confronting Pak? I can`t answer that question as i do not read Urdu. But what i have heard is not pleasant.
(English dailies in India, OTOH, have a much wider circulaton, due to low cost of paper and printing as well as a much larger readership).
Sridhar
Sometimes ago,someone in Chowk posted an article showing very few people in Pak (a small percentage) even read those liberal English dailies. OTOH, Urdu papers have a much wider circulation in Pak. What do these Urdu papers say? Are they not holding an extreme view point? Are they liberal in debating the various aspects of problems confronting Pak? I can`t answer that question as i do not read Urdu. But what i have heard is not pleasant.
(English dailies in India, OTOH, have a much wider circulaton, due to low cost of paper and printing as well as a much larger readership).
Sridhar
#140 Posted by pmishra2 on July 2, 2003 5:48:43 pm
Includes a picture of an ISRAELI TOURIST (oh, no, bad enough that the hindus are back, but hunoon AND yahood??????).
-------------------------------------------------------------
From the Calcutta Telegraph, Wednesday July2, 2003
Season of peace brings back tourists
MUKHTAR AHMAD AND AGENCIES
A tourist skis on the Dal Lake in Srinagar. (PTI)
Israeli tourists in Srinagar. (AFP)
Srinagar, July 1: Thousands of tourists have been flocking to Kashmir this summer, encouraged by the recent peace overtures between India and Pakistan.
Nearly 50,000 tourists, including 3,200 foreigners, have visited the state so far this year, Mohammad Ashraf, director general, tourism, said. There were only 10,104 tourists during the same period last year.
“Year 2003 is different. Not only have the domestic tourists been coming here in good numbers but the message that has gone out because of the renewed tourist influx is heartening,” Ashraf said, his face breaking into a smile.
He said the trend indicated more were likely to visit the state this year than in 1999, when a record 2.17 lakh showed up due to a lull in militancy between Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Lahore bus ride and the outbreak of hostilities in Kargil.
Tour operators said tourists now felt confident about visiting Kashmir after a thaw in India-Pakistan tension, triggered by Vajpayee’s renewed bid in April to make peace between the neighbours. Despite the thaw, violence has continued, with 12 soldiers being killed in a suicide strike on an army camp on Saturday.
“I am sure the peace initiatives have encouraged these tourists,” said Mohammad Aksar, a houseboat owner. “I pray that peace returns to the Valley.”
Mudasir Shah, who owns a hotel, shared the same sentiment but kept his fingers crossed. “I think the present thaw is the contributing factor and the word is spreading (that all is well on the ground). I hope things remain normal so that more tourists arrive here in the coming months.”
Hotels and houseboats have been packed to capacity and there is a huge rush for bookings, especially in the health resorts of Gulmarg and Pahalgam. Taxi drivers, too, have been blinking in disbelief. “I am pleasantly surprised at the turn of events this year. I have been doing good business for the last one month and not one day has gone by without a booking during this time. I am seeing this happen after ages,” said Mushtaq Ahmad, who drives tourists around in his Tata Sumo.
Tourists also appear willing to believe that Kashmir is not that unsafe after all. Some have even taken a chance based on pictures in newspapers of tourists frolicking on the Gulmarg greens. Not only that, they have been spreading the good word.
Rahul Bharti, a doctor, said he had a “wrong notion” that Kashmir was not safe. “But on reaching here we were amazed. Things are far better than we have heard,” he said. “It is breathtaking, very beautiful.”
Another doctor, one Rita from Haryana, said she had decided to visit the state despite fears expressed by her family. “I saw a picture in the newspaper and this prompted me to come here,” she said. “I found the places I visited fairly normal though one has to be careful. The Valley is at present tension-free and maybe it is because of the thaw in Indo-Pak relations,” she added.
The peace initiatives apart, tour operators have been doing their promotionals well, too. An operator who bumped into Sanjeev Sharma at Vaishno Devi in Jammu literally prodded and pushed him to take a break in Kashmir. “I think we took the right decision to take a week-long holiday in the Valley,” he said, wife Saroj, and children Rahul and Sunita in tow.
But overwhelmed tour operators and houseboat owners have been giving a large slice of the credit to tourism director general Ashraf, who has relentlessly promoted the state for the last 30 years. “Even during the darkest period, Ashraf used to organise groups of tourists,” an operator said.
“I never lost hope and today my optimism seems to be paying off,” Ashraf said, smiling.
-------------------------------------------------------------
From the Calcutta Telegraph, Wednesday July2, 2003
Season of peace brings back tourists
MUKHTAR AHMAD AND AGENCIES
A tourist skis on the Dal Lake in Srinagar. (PTI)
Israeli tourists in Srinagar. (AFP)
Srinagar, July 1: Thousands of tourists have been flocking to Kashmir this summer, encouraged by the recent peace overtures between India and Pakistan.
Nearly 50,000 tourists, including 3,200 foreigners, have visited the state so far this year, Mohammad Ashraf, director general, tourism, said. There were only 10,104 tourists during the same period last year.
“Year 2003 is different. Not only have the domestic tourists been coming here in good numbers but the message that has gone out because of the renewed tourist influx is heartening,” Ashraf said, his face breaking into a smile.
He said the trend indicated more were likely to visit the state this year than in 1999, when a record 2.17 lakh showed up due to a lull in militancy between Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Lahore bus ride and the outbreak of hostilities in Kargil.
Tour operators said tourists now felt confident about visiting Kashmir after a thaw in India-Pakistan tension, triggered by Vajpayee’s renewed bid in April to make peace between the neighbours. Despite the thaw, violence has continued, with 12 soldiers being killed in a suicide strike on an army camp on Saturday.
“I am sure the peace initiatives have encouraged these tourists,” said Mohammad Aksar, a houseboat owner. “I pray that peace returns to the Valley.”
Mudasir Shah, who owns a hotel, shared the same sentiment but kept his fingers crossed. “I think the present thaw is the contributing factor and the word is spreading (that all is well on the ground). I hope things remain normal so that more tourists arrive here in the coming months.”
Hotels and houseboats have been packed to capacity and there is a huge rush for bookings, especially in the health resorts of Gulmarg and Pahalgam. Taxi drivers, too, have been blinking in disbelief. “I am pleasantly surprised at the turn of events this year. I have been doing good business for the last one month and not one day has gone by without a booking during this time. I am seeing this happen after ages,” said Mushtaq Ahmad, who drives tourists around in his Tata Sumo.
Tourists also appear willing to believe that Kashmir is not that unsafe after all. Some have even taken a chance based on pictures in newspapers of tourists frolicking on the Gulmarg greens. Not only that, they have been spreading the good word.
Rahul Bharti, a doctor, said he had a “wrong notion” that Kashmir was not safe. “But on reaching here we were amazed. Things are far better than we have heard,” he said. “It is breathtaking, very beautiful.”
Another doctor, one Rita from Haryana, said she had decided to visit the state despite fears expressed by her family. “I saw a picture in the newspaper and this prompted me to come here,” she said. “I found the places I visited fairly normal though one has to be careful. The Valley is at present tension-free and maybe it is because of the thaw in Indo-Pak relations,” she added.
The peace initiatives apart, tour operators have been doing their promotionals well, too. An operator who bumped into Sanjeev Sharma at Vaishno Devi in Jammu literally prodded and pushed him to take a break in Kashmir. “I think we took the right decision to take a week-long holiday in the Valley,” he said, wife Saroj, and children Rahul and Sunita in tow.
But overwhelmed tour operators and houseboat owners have been giving a large slice of the credit to tourism director general Ashraf, who has relentlessly promoted the state for the last 30 years. “Even during the darkest period, Ashraf used to organise groups of tourists,” an operator said.
“I never lost hope and today my optimism seems to be paying off,” Ashraf said, smiling.
#139 Posted by rsridhar on July 2, 2003 5:48:43 pm
re:#130 by HisExcellency
Let me at the outset say that it is true that India has gone back on its pledge of holding a referendum in J and k. But, those were different times. The cold war realities had not set in. UN was a newly formed body and a lot of newly liberated countries (including India) had high hopes sit UN. And finally, India was ruled by that incorrigible dreamer Nehru. His heart told him he wanted Kashmir. His mind rebelled at the idea of doing anything that will bring him into disrepute. Hence his agreement to a UN plebescite.
Like all things that start with good intentions, this one did too but ended up in a fiasco after the valley was invaded by Mujahideens with collusion of Pak army. If India today had the whole of J and K, Pak would have a very strong case. The undisputed leader of Kashmir at that time was Sheikh Abdullah, a personal friend of Nehru. He had a lot of trust in Nehru and India`s secular credentials. So, betrayal of Kashmir is actually betrayal by Nehru-Gandhi clan, which has ruled India most of the last 50 years. Their own political expediency demanded that they give this UN plebescite thing a decent burial, which they did.
But much of water has flown down Jhelum and Chenab since those times. POK (or Azad Kashmir for Pakis) has undergone a lot of changes in demography and governance. Part of Kashmir held by Pak has been gifted away to China. All these make Pak`s case weak. When Pak can`t give democratic yearnings of Kashmiris in their own country any concrete shape, what right they have to tell India to hold plebescite?
You talk about autonomy to Kashmir. I say, every state in India needs substantial autonomy in decision making. And that is already happening. Southern states do not need to pamper Delhi anymore. CMs of T.N, A.P, Karanatak deal with foreign investors directly. They are visiting foreign capitals, trying to attract investments.
Kashmir has seen a fair election recently. It is on path to autonomy. A time will come when Kashmiris in India will decide everything for themselves and only things like currency, defense etc will be left to Center. This cannot happen until terrorists are taken care of. Kashmir should not become another Palestine. Only Kashmiris can ensure it does not become so.
Sridhar
Let me at the outset say that it is true that India has gone back on its pledge of holding a referendum in J and k. But, those were different times. The cold war realities had not set in. UN was a newly formed body and a lot of newly liberated countries (including India) had high hopes sit UN. And finally, India was ruled by that incorrigible dreamer Nehru. His heart told him he wanted Kashmir. His mind rebelled at the idea of doing anything that will bring him into disrepute. Hence his agreement to a UN plebescite.
Like all things that start with good intentions, this one did too but ended up in a fiasco after the valley was invaded by Mujahideens with collusion of Pak army. If India today had the whole of J and K, Pak would have a very strong case. The undisputed leader of Kashmir at that time was Sheikh Abdullah, a personal friend of Nehru. He had a lot of trust in Nehru and India`s secular credentials. So, betrayal of Kashmir is actually betrayal by Nehru-Gandhi clan, which has ruled India most of the last 50 years. Their own political expediency demanded that they give this UN plebescite thing a decent burial, which they did.
But much of water has flown down Jhelum and Chenab since those times. POK (or Azad Kashmir for Pakis) has undergone a lot of changes in demography and governance. Part of Kashmir held by Pak has been gifted away to China. All these make Pak`s case weak. When Pak can`t give democratic yearnings of Kashmiris in their own country any concrete shape, what right they have to tell India to hold plebescite?
You talk about autonomy to Kashmir. I say, every state in India needs substantial autonomy in decision making. And that is already happening. Southern states do not need to pamper Delhi anymore. CMs of T.N, A.P, Karanatak deal with foreign investors directly. They are visiting foreign capitals, trying to attract investments.
Kashmir has seen a fair election recently. It is on path to autonomy. A time will come when Kashmiris in India will decide everything for themselves and only things like currency, defense etc will be left to Center. This cannot happen until terrorists are taken care of. Kashmir should not become another Palestine. Only Kashmiris can ensure it does not become so.
Sridhar
#138 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 2:05:25 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#137 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 2:05:25 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#136 Posted by HisExcellency on July 2, 2003 1:50:29 pm
re: #119 by bbabu on July 1, 2003 9:32pm PT
Your comments about Pak-China relationship make an interesting counterargument to the ``Islamophobic theory``.
++
Then you should stop talking about secular and freedom of religion in other countries.
++
Pakistanis have a right and duty to expose Hindu fundamentalists who claim to be secular. Lets call a spade a spade.
++
Jinnah never intended to form an Islamic state. All this ranting about Islam started with the advent of OPEC, Saudi petro dollars. May be the loss of Bangladesh had something to do with it.
++
You are obviously ignorant about the Objectives Resolution passed in 1949 and various Islamic injunctions of Pakistan`s 1956 and 1962 constitutions. Even before 1947, Jinnah had declare that Pakistan would be the ``fortress of of Islam``. You are just kidding yourself if you believe that the Islamic ideal was suddenly hatched after partition.
++
The elections were for the constituent Assembly not for any partition plan.
++
This is actually not true. The 1940 Lahore Resolution had already spelt out creation of a separate state as a goal for All India Muslim League. Jinnah had also been accepted as the sole spokesman and leader of all Indian Muslims at that session. Between 1940 and 1945, Muslim League campaigned for Pakistan vigorously. Effectively, the 1945 election was a vote about partition plan. Between 1945 and 1947, the Congress and AIML were simply trying to find a workable solution within the Indian Union. By 1946 however, it was clear that two parties could not work together because of their diametrically opposed views.
++
The British imposed their ways on a lot of people. It works over decades and centuries.
++
Ah.. so finally you reveal the imperialist mindset behind all that ``secular`` and ``largest democracy`` eyewash! I am finding it hard to differentiate between your brand of ``forced secularism`` and Taliban`s brand of ``forced Islam``.
Your comments about Pak-China relationship make an interesting counterargument to the ``Islamophobic theory``.
++
Then you should stop talking about secular and freedom of religion in other countries.
++
Pakistanis have a right and duty to expose Hindu fundamentalists who claim to be secular. Lets call a spade a spade.
++
Jinnah never intended to form an Islamic state. All this ranting about Islam started with the advent of OPEC, Saudi petro dollars. May be the loss of Bangladesh had something to do with it.
++
You are obviously ignorant about the Objectives Resolution passed in 1949 and various Islamic injunctions of Pakistan`s 1956 and 1962 constitutions. Even before 1947, Jinnah had declare that Pakistan would be the ``fortress of of Islam``. You are just kidding yourself if you believe that the Islamic ideal was suddenly hatched after partition.
++
The elections were for the constituent Assembly not for any partition plan.
++
This is actually not true. The 1940 Lahore Resolution had already spelt out creation of a separate state as a goal for All India Muslim League. Jinnah had also been accepted as the sole spokesman and leader of all Indian Muslims at that session. Between 1940 and 1945, Muslim League campaigned for Pakistan vigorously. Effectively, the 1945 election was a vote about partition plan. Between 1945 and 1947, the Congress and AIML were simply trying to find a workable solution within the Indian Union. By 1946 however, it was clear that two parties could not work together because of their diametrically opposed views.
++
The British imposed their ways on a lot of people. It works over decades and centuries.
++
Ah.. so finally you reveal the imperialist mindset behind all that ``secular`` and ``largest democracy`` eyewash! I am finding it hard to differentiate between your brand of ``forced secularism`` and Taliban`s brand of ``forced Islam``.
#135 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 1:38:49 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#134 Posted by HisExcellency on July 2, 2003 1:11:03 pm
re: #124 by stuka on July 2, 2003 7:00am PT
I agree with most of your comments about human rights violations and opinion polls. Kashmiri opinion was not anti-India during the 1950s. So there is a possibility that with passage of time, they will learn to accept Indian rule and maybe even like it.
However, the human rights situation is a critical indicator of public opinion. India must act quickly to reduce these violations. An overwhelming number of Pakistanis identify themselves as ``Muslims first, Pakistanis second``. As a result of this Ummah-concept, sympathy for Palestinians and Kashmiris runs very high. If human right violations continue for long, even the staunchest peaceniks in Pakistan would find it difficult to control infiltration. Which will again bring the two countries close to nuclear confrontation.
I agree with most of your comments about human rights violations and opinion polls. Kashmiri opinion was not anti-India during the 1950s. So there is a possibility that with passage of time, they will learn to accept Indian rule and maybe even like it.
However, the human rights situation is a critical indicator of public opinion. India must act quickly to reduce these violations. An overwhelming number of Pakistanis identify themselves as ``Muslims first, Pakistanis second``. As a result of this Ummah-concept, sympathy for Palestinians and Kashmiris runs very high. If human right violations continue for long, even the staunchest peaceniks in Pakistan would find it difficult to control infiltration. Which will again bring the two countries close to nuclear confrontation.
#133 Posted by arjun_m on July 2, 2003 1:11:03 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#132 Posted by stuka on July 2, 2003 1:11:03 pm
HE:
Isn`t it better to grant Kashmir greater autonomy within Indian union, than ultimately to lose the entire province because of high handedness??
It is. Short sighted leaders of India had a major hand in creating the Kashmir problem.
Isn`t it better to grant Kashmir greater autonomy within Indian union, than ultimately to lose the entire province because of high handedness??
It is. Short sighted leaders of India had a major hand in creating the Kashmir problem.
#131 Posted by HisExcellency on July 2, 2003 1:11:03 pm
re: #120 by rsridhar on July 1, 2003 9:32pm PT
++
Pakis need to examine their own problems and the morass their country is in and debate among themselves as to what needs to be done (not that much can be done as long as a dictator rules over you guys; but at least let there be a debate).
++
Mr.Sridhar, I am surprised at your comment. Please take a peek at the various Pakistani newspapers and private news channels (although I doubt that they are available in India or the US). You will find that there is no dearth of debate about military rule and Kashmir policy.
I think freedom of expression means that people in Pakistan should also be aware of events happening in Indian Gujrat and Kashmir. After all, Indians also rant about 1971 which happened 32 years ago... whereas Gujrat happened last year and Kashmir is still happening.
++
Pakis need to examine their own problems and the morass their country is in and debate among themselves as to what needs to be done (not that much can be done as long as a dictator rules over you guys; but at least let there be a debate).
++
Mr.Sridhar, I am surprised at your comment. Please take a peek at the various Pakistani newspapers and private news channels (although I doubt that they are available in India or the US). You will find that there is no dearth of debate about military rule and Kashmir policy.
I think freedom of expression means that people in Pakistan should also be aware of events happening in Indian Gujrat and Kashmir. After all, Indians also rant about 1971 which happened 32 years ago... whereas Gujrat happened last year and Kashmir is still happening.
#130 Posted by HisExcellency on July 2, 2003 12:28:20 pm
re: #116 by rsridhar on July 1, 2003 9:32pm PT
We are going off the topic a bit here.. so I will keep my comments short.
I am not disputing that India is the world`s largest democracy (despite its flaws) and has a history of holding elections regularly. I am also not disputing that elections are generally free and fair (except in J&K).
However, Indian behavior in Kashmir contradicts everything that India claims to represent. Can you deny that in Kashmir India violated its own pledge (Plebiscite), international law as well as Kashmiri human rights?
Consider the American example. Despite being the world`s strongest and most genuine democracy, US is hated all over the world because of double-standards and refusal to honor international law. American credibility suffered a big blow in the Iraq War because the US concocted `evidence` of WMDs against Saddam and spread `rumours` about French assistance to Saddam. After all these lies, America has indeed won the war... but lost the peace in Iraq. More soldiers have died after the war, than during it. The entire Iraqi population hates Americans for one reason or the other. Some hate it because it failed to keep law and order; others hate it for nationalistic reasons. During this war, the world`s strongest democracy clamped down on freedom of expression. The French TV, Al-Jazeera and BBC are being ridiculed round the clock because they reported news that Americans didn`t like. Several embedded journalists were (allegedly) attacked in Baghdad because they worked for Al-Jazeera and BBC.
If simply being a democracy and multiethnic civilization was enough, why would the `liberators` be hated by the `liberated`? Why would US be hated by Germans and French who are equally democratic and free (if not more) than the Americans?
From Sheikh Abdullah, Bakhshi Ghulam Muhammad and Farooq Abdullah to Mufti Sayeed... all Kashmiri leaders are treated like vassals of the central government. Why doesn`t India let them represent their constituency?? So what if Kashmiri leaders want greater autonomy? Isn`t it better to grant Kashmir greater autonomy within Indian union, than ultimately to lose the entire province because of high handedness??
In the end, India will be judged on its actions, not its professed beliefs and constitution. True, Indian democracy has performed considerably well in most parts of India.Sadly, Indian actions in Kashmir have not lived up to the same standards.
We are going off the topic a bit here.. so I will keep my comments short.
I am not disputing that India is the world`s largest democracy (despite its flaws) and has a history of holding elections regularly. I am also not disputing that elections are generally free and fair (except in J&K).
However, Indian behavior in Kashmir contradicts everything that India claims to represent. Can you deny that in Kashmir India violated its own pledge (Plebiscite), international law as well as Kashmiri human rights?
Consider the American example. Despite being the world`s strongest and most genuine democracy, US is hated all over the world because of double-standards and refusal to honor international law. American credibility suffered a big blow in the Iraq War because the US concocted `evidence` of WMDs against Saddam and spread `rumours` about French assistance to Saddam. After all these lies, America has indeed won the war... but lost the peace in Iraq. More soldiers have died after the war, than during it. The entire Iraqi population hates Americans for one reason or the other. Some hate it because it failed to keep law and order; others hate it for nationalistic reasons. During this war, the world`s strongest democracy clamped down on freedom of expression. The French TV, Al-Jazeera and BBC are being ridiculed round the clock because they reported news that Americans didn`t like. Several embedded journalists were (allegedly) attacked in Baghdad because they worked for Al-Jazeera and BBC.
If simply being a democracy and multiethnic civilization was enough, why would the `liberators` be hated by the `liberated`? Why would US be hated by Germans and French who are equally democratic and free (if not more) than the Americans?
From Sheikh Abdullah, Bakhshi Ghulam Muhammad and Farooq Abdullah to Mufti Sayeed... all Kashmiri leaders are treated like vassals of the central government. Why doesn`t India let them represent their constituency?? So what if Kashmiri leaders want greater autonomy? Isn`t it better to grant Kashmir greater autonomy within Indian union, than ultimately to lose the entire province because of high handedness??
In the end, India will be judged on its actions, not its professed beliefs and constitution. True, Indian democracy has performed considerably well in most parts of India.Sadly, Indian actions in Kashmir have not lived up to the same standards.
#129 Posted by HisExcellency on July 2, 2003 11:49:13 am
re: #128 by pmishra2 on July 2, 2003 10:05am PT
Read the article posted on Decency and Interaction Guidelines by Ana. You might learn something about cyber-etiquette and be taken seriously at last.
Read the article posted on Decency and Interaction Guidelines by Ana. You might learn something about cyber-etiquette and be taken seriously at last.
#128 Posted by pmishra2 on July 2, 2003 10:05:44 am
#125 HisFradulence (notice how many of these pakis have these childish grand titles? I guess it comes from living in a fauji state. After all, title is everything in the fauj)
[quotes]
Why not put Indian secularism vs. Jinnah`s Two Nation Theory to vote in Kashmir Valley??
[end-quotes]
Why stop there? Why shouldn`t we have a vote in entire India and Pakistan on the partition? Lets have a vote whether formation of Pakistan was a good idea. Lets ask
all the people in the region whether splitting a single cultural and economic unit in this way
was a good idea.
I have a feeling the pakistani thirst for referendum and democracy (always for others, never for themselves) may not be interested in this direction. Heh, heh,...
[quotes]
Why not put Indian secularism vs. Jinnah`s Two Nation Theory to vote in Kashmir Valley??
[end-quotes]
Why stop there? Why shouldn`t we have a vote in entire India and Pakistan on the partition? Lets have a vote whether formation of Pakistan was a good idea. Lets ask
all the people in the region whether splitting a single cultural and economic unit in this way
was a good idea.
I have a feeling the pakistani thirst for referendum and democracy (always for others, never for themselves) may not be interested in this direction. Heh, heh,...
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- zeejah: hellooo pinku ... i... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- pinku: #124 Posted by hamidm2... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 124 hamidm2... That is... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- tahmed32: #124 Hamidm: dont try... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- tahmed32: dost mittar #60 Both... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- tahmed32: #125 after 60 years,... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- tahmed32: pinku: Maybe the Kashmiris... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- hamidm2: pinku mian, ..... i keep... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
