Vajpayee’s Srinagar offer of Talks to Pakistan

What would happen if BJP and it`s more political offshoots came to power in the next election? Could they make India into a Hindu Republic?

Who is Mr. Affirmitiveaction. Wharton?

Rsridhar, the reason why there are not widespread demonstrations by the masses is because of illetracy. The illetracy rates are falling and people are more concerned with putting bread and butter on the table instead of getting into these shananigans.

Any hows,

cya

re:#406 by arjun_m
As i said, i would not take these jehadi-minded chowkies seriously. Sometimes one has to respond to various allegations but by and large i think one can stay clear of these characters. They are high on the testosterone level and low on I.Q.
I have come to one conclusion. Barring a few (people like Asma Jehangir), few give a rat`s A$$ to democracy in Pakistan. There are a lot of so called ``westernised elite`` making a lot of noise in newspapers and public fora but have you ever seen any popular demonstrations in Pak in favor of democracy? Pak does not deserve democracy because Pakis have no concept of what that word means and they are not willing to fight for their own rights. They are happy under a dictator as long as that dictator puts up some semblance of a fight against India. That seems to be the big thing with Pakis: how Pak looks vis-a-vis India.
So, talking to Pakis about lack of democracy in their country or asking them why a dictator continues to rule them after 50 years is like (as the popular hindi proverb goes) ``bhais ke agey been bajana`` (playing flute in front of a buffallo). That is one thing i have learnt from Chowk.
Sridhar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re:#390 by HisExcellency
So, to repeat the question that has been asked in Chowk many times, how many generals /army officers incriminated in the Hamdoor Rehman report have been prosecuted?
It is a stupid question of course. Pak has been ruled (directly or indirectly) by military dictators since its inception. So, where is the question of prosecuting any army officer?
Sridhar

re:#386 by HassanShah
Hey Jehadi Boy,
Care to give us the Url on that report?
Sridhar

re:#385 by HisExcellency
So, your brilliant Mushy planned the Kargil without taking into account the fact that India can choose to widen the conflict when it chooses. What did Mushy think? That Kargil would remain a border conflict?
Nawaz Sharief was just a scape goat. He had to rush to US to save Pakistan. And who gets the accolades? Mushy! And who dismisses the elected govt (elected by 2/3rds majority) when Army`s predominance is threatened? Mushy! It is the same story again and again from Ayub Khan onwards. Looks like you guys just do not learn your lessons.
Sridhar

re:#381 by puyu
I would advice you and other Indians strongly not to respond to allegations of atrocities against minorities by Pakis in Chowk. Except for a few enlightened ones like tahmed, Nazarhayat, Feroz etc, rest of the crowd harbour a jehadi mentality. It is impossible to convince these jehadi-minded chowkies that minorities in India live in relative peace, incidents like Godhra notwithstanding.
It is their ideological belief (carefully drilled thr` school, media etc) that makes it imperative for them to believe that minorities (especially muslims) cannot simply be happy in India. They simply have to believe in that ideology to sustain them and their benighted nation.
Pakistan, you must have figured out by now, is the very antithesis of India. The two are poles apart. So, you are wasting your time if you are interaciting with this jehadi crowd, trying to convince this jehadi crowd that India is a secular nation. They will not believe it. Their best detractors are Indian muslims like ballukhan, who are doing a fine job in chowk.
Sridhar

Reg #398 by puyu on October 1, 2003 9:45am PT
Ditto for #395

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

puyu:

HE is a bit of an enigma. His mastery of the facts are exemplary, but his conclusions seem to be very far from where stand. It is not a question of bigotry but of interpretation and forecast.

His excellency!!
post #397 is for you!!!
regards

++
Without historical perspective, we cannot objectively evaluate Pakistan (or for that matter) India`s role in Kashmir especially in the ongoing 14-year insurgency. Since there is not enough distance in time between us and the insurgency, any such evaluation is bound to be subjective and uninformed.
++
Doesn`t this make all your previous arguments meaningless?

++
Vajpayee wanted peace ....was not ready for a unilateral about-turn on Kashmir in 1999.
++
Well ,now you are not as bigoted as others make you out to be!! ;-)
Yourt views here are very very close to the Indian outlook.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

How the Paki military hate machine thinks....this news is about sick guys!!!!!!

Pak troops raid Indian posts (and severed the head of a soldier)

PTI[ WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 01, 2003 01:00:47 PM ]

JAMMU: Troops along the Indo-Pak border have been put on high alert in the wake of surprise raids by Pakistan army`s sabotage Border Action Teams (BATs) that attack Indian posts to push heavily armed militants in Jammu and Kashmir.

``Pakistan troops have started a fresh gameplan of conducting raids by its specialised sabotage group, BATs, that target Listening Posts and border patrol along the Line of Control (LoC) in order to engineer infiltration of heavily armed militants into Jammu and Kashmir recently,`` top defence sources said here on Wednesday.

In one recent attack, Pak soldiers crossed the LoC and raided a border patrol of the Jat Regiment in Jangard area of Noushera sector in Rajouri district and killed four jawans.

The team, while going back, severed the head of a soldier and took it away with them as a trophy, the sources said. A fortnight before, four more jawans were killed in another such attack on a Listening Post in Uri sector of Baramulla district.
Surprise raids by Pakistani soldiers have occurred after a gap of three years.

Pak neck-deep in terrorism: British MP

IANS[ WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 01, 2003 01:56:39 PM ]

NEW DELHI: A leading British parliamentarian says he is ``completely convinced`` after a visit to Jammu and Kashmir that Pakistan is actively supporting cross-border terrorism in the strategic border state.

``I came here a little sceptical of the claim that Pakistan is actively supporting cross-border infiltration, terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. I thought probably they were turning a blind eye rather than actually encouraging terrorism.

``I am going back completely convinced that the Pakistani authorities are actively engaged in supporting cross-border terrorism in a deeply, profound way,`` Peter Luff, assistant chief of the Conservative Party in the House of Commons, told IANS in an interview here.
Luff, who is leading a 10-member delegation of the Conservative Parliamentary Friends of India (CPFI) on a visit to this country, spent two days in Jammu and Kashmir over the weekend. The CPFI was set up to create a bridge of understanding about India in British Parliament, he said.
``The case is made. We are absolutely convinced Pakistan is up to its neck in supporting terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir,`` Luff, widely seen as a potential leader of the Conservative Party, said.

He said what convinced him and his team about Pakistan`s active complicity in cross-border terrorism was the briefing given to them by the army authorities in Jammu and Kashmir.
``I am absolutely convinced by the case. We have seen the captured documents, intercepts of telecommunications,`` he added.
He said he was ``very grateful`` to Pakistan for its support in fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. ``I say thank you but it must understand that terrorism is a global phenomenon wherever it occurs.
``And just because of the problem over Kashmir between India and Pakistan it (Islamabad) cannot selectively fight terrorism when it suits them,`` he added.
``I am going to talk to the Pakistani high commissioner when I go to London (and ask), what is your perspective and why is it happening,`` Luff said.
He said as a ``complex and a fragile`` country he understood the political realities of Pakistan. ``But it is no excuse to actively support terrorism.``

At the same time, Luff said India was not totally blame-free. ``I am also convinced that India does not have an absolutely fair record in Jammu and Kashmir`` and it had to address that.

``There is a certain insensitivity on the part of the security forces in dealing with the civilians. But the big difference is that it is not the policy of the Indian government.
``That happens perhaps the young men in the security forces are not trained well, or perhaps they just get carried away by the situations. It is more a matter of training and discipline,`` he added.

He said he was ``delighted`` with his visit. ``This is the one of the most interesting foreign trips I have made as a parliamentarian. I have learned more, seen more and I have been treated better than I have ever been treated before.``

He described the Indian economy as ``one of the most important economies of the world now.``

``I knew this but it has been dramatically brought home to me during the visit. It has become quite clear that Britain must engage in every possible level with the Indian economy,`` he added.

``It is clear that India and China are the most important emerging economies. Perhaps there is a little more fascination with China than India at the moment (in Britain) and it is important to sharpen people`s perception about India where Britain can take advantage of the development in India and India of what is taking place in Britain,`` he added.

A British tory parliamentarian blames both sides http://sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=318273] for the situation in Kashmir after visiting the valley. The tone is somewhat pro-indian as he was speaking in New Delhi. Excerpts:

``I came here a little sceptical of the claim that Pakistan is actively supporting cross-border infiltration, terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. I thought probably they were turning a blind eye rather than actually encouraging terrorism.``

``I am going back completely convinced that the Pakistani authorities are actively engaged in supporting cross-border terrorism in a deeply, profound way,`` Peter Luff, assistant chief of the Conservative Party in the House of Commons, told IANS in an interview here.``

``The case is made. We are absolutely convinced Pakistan is up to its neck in supporting terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir,`` Luff, widely seen as a potential leader of the Conservative Party, said.``


``At the same time, Luff said India was not totally blame-free. ``I am also convinced that India does not have an absolutely fair record in Jammu and Kashmir`` and it had to address that.

``There is a certain insensitivity on the part of the security forces in dealing with the civilians. But the big difference is that it is not the policy of the Indian government.

``That happens perhaps the young men in the security forces are not trained well, or perhaps they just get carried away by the situations. It is more a matter of training and discipline,`` he added.``

The farting contest continues over kargil . Stupid people trying to justify the mis-adventures of their so called jihadi criminals and Generals just because they happen to share the same nationality.
Indian muslims have a very clear understanding of PAki muslim elite`s games. They have repeatedly asked the Pakistani muslim elites to refrain from showing concern about their problems and training the ignorant amonst them in subversion and terrorist methods through incitement. THey want the guys like HE, HS, Musharaff to shut up and have requestds them to elevate the problems of their own co-religious brothers in the streets and villages of Pakistan, they have repeatedly asked them not to try and be spokes-persons to Indian muslims just to score some points in their own domestic territory.

But the very logic of the ``two nation theory`` on which the elites have buit the foundations of PAkistan INEVITABLY forces them to adopt this belligerent posture towards non-muslim ``them``. (Imagine if Pakistan was bordering America then would it have lived in peace?). THe ONLY SOLUTION is to re-built the SECULAR traditions of the original constitution of PAkistan and reverse the Islamization of Constitution which started with General Zia.

http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01082002/01082002049.htm

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HisExcellency #379

{{Helluva difference between Hamood-ur-Rehman Report and Indian Kargil Committee`s Report. The former was inked 3 decades ago; most of the people named are already retired or dead. OTOH, the Kargil Report is much more relevant since it will expose the incompetence and weaknesses of BJP, Indian Army and intelligence network.}}

You omitted the most salient difference.

The Hamood-ur Rehman commission report stayed sealed for three decades. The Kargil Report was commissioned in late 1999, shortly after the end of the Kargil Conflict, handed over to Prime Minister Vajpayee in January 2000, was tabled in the Indian Parliament on February 23rd 2000, and has been in the public domain ever since.

{{Sealing the Kargil Report is the only way India can sustain the ``media myth`` of its so-called military might. … Goebbelian disinformation in this age of information and glasnost?}}

HE, why do you do this to yourself? Perhaps your mother never taught you that honesty is the best policy – it helps you keep your story straight. Now just who is engaging in disinformatsia in this age of glasnost?

#377 by AlephNull

You are perhaps not aware that Kargil Committee Report is a semi-official document. And this report was itself released after several deletions and omissions of classified material. I have read the Kargil Committee Report released in 2000 but unfortunately it does not give an operational account of the military campaign.

It is a good starting point because K. Subramanyam received unprecedented support from governmence agencies. But it falls short of a definitive, revealing account of military operations. In this regards, it pales in comparison with the Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission Report which was extremely revealing about military`s conduct.

Do you have any links that point to declassified operational details about the military campaign??

Inspired by the quote-articles-on-the-web game, here`s a little something for you to choke on:

Kargil Crisis Recedes in Wake of Clinton-Sharif Meeting, But Menacing Kashmir Problem Remains Unsolved

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not belong to either India or Pakistan. This is a fact that many outside the subcontinent do not know, and some do not care to recognize. Anyone who is even remotely interested in resolving the menacing Kashmir dispute, however, needs to remember that in this case the devil is not in the details but in the basic underlying facts.

The issue is not Kargil or Daars, as it has been made out to be in recent weeks in the international media. It is the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir which is contested in a dispute that jeopardizes the peace of one of the most heavily populated regions of the world. Further, the organized international community needs to be reminded that it pledged through the United Nations in 1948to let the 13 million people of Kashmir determine their own political future. It is a promise that has gone unredeemed for the past half-century.

The subcontinent has paid a heavy price in economic and human terms for this denial of the right of self-determination–a principle honored by great powers all over the world in the abstract, but repeatedly denied to all who are prepared to fight and die for it. The Kargil crisis, it must be recognized, is just the latest example of the willingness of Kashmiris to lay down their lives for their freedom.

Unfortunately, there is more hypocrisy than honesty in international relations. Depending on who is defining them, the groups that have revived the demand for an independent Kashmir are identified as mujahedeen, freedom fighters, intruders, infiltrators or mercenaries. Whatever they are called, they are people dying for their own independence, a cause with which Americans, only two centuries after their own similar struggle, should easily empathize. This is particularly so since, until it is resolved, the Kashmir dispute presents the world’s greatest threat, by far, of nuclear war. The half-century-old Kashmir dispute has proven, beyond a shadow of doubt, that time is no healer, as it has defied all manner of delaying tactics over the years.

New Delhi has been able to avoid a settlement only by deploying more than 700,000 army and paramilitary troops to “keep order” in the Indian-occupied two-thirds of Kashmir. Nor has any amount of counterfeit democracy reduced the demand for freedom in the state. India has arrested prominent Kashmiri leaders belonging to the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, a conglomerate of groups fighting for freedom, and India’s puppet Kashmiri chief minister, Farooq Abdullah, has accused his fellow Kashmiris living in the Kargil-Daars area of supporting alleged mercenary intruders. However, none of this theater or fakery has changed the mind-set of the local population, who have suffered deeply under severe repression. Their struggle for freedom continues unabated.

The Kargil Crisis

Pending final settlement of the Kashmir dispute, a temporary Line of Control (LOC), was set up some 27 years ago demarcating the Indian- and the Pakistani-controlled parts of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Ever since, the LOC, which marks the front lines at the time a cease-fire was negotiated, has been monitored by a U.N. peacekeeping force, although the artificial boundary has been porous, especially during the short summer when snow and ice do not impede passage.

India accused Pakistan of aiding and abetting “intruders” who breached the LOC and occupied high ground on the Indian side, shooting down at the Indian troops trying to regain the lost territory. It is snow-clad and treacherous terrain and, by New Delhi’s own admission, the Indian army suffered major casualties.

Military skirmishes and exchanges of fire began in mid-May, with both sides making contradictory claims. The United States called only for a return to the status quo, and respect for the LOC. India quotes the Simla Agreement of 1972 wherein the two countries had agreed to “resolve” all issues, including the Kashmir dispute, through bilateral negotiations. And Pakistan, which acknowledges no control over the mujahedeen, has lost trust in bilateral talks and accuses India of “stalling” instead of negotiating sincerely to resolve the dispute. Pakistan wants third-party (preferably American) mediation. But the stalemate remains.

The mujahedeen succeeded in tying up a vastly larger Indian force. But even with the support of Pakistan it is not clear that they can win the war. Nor is it clear how long India can sustain the human and economic costs of maintaining positions in Kargil, especially in view of the impending snowfall that will begin in late September. Will Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee pay a political price in India’s September elections for the huge military strain in Kargil? Mujahedeen withdrew from Kargil and the Indian army has re-occupied its lost posts. Tensions have been defused for the time being.

Internal Realities

Atal Behari Vajpayee’s caretaker government (BJP) is faced with mid-term national elections in September, but he cannot afford to call for a delay in the voting because the opposition will interpret it as a departure from democratic procedure and a confession of political weakness. Pakistani Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif also rides a tiger and faces a difficult task. Pakistan’s economy is still heavily dependent on external assistance for survival. Therefore he cannot afford a costly, extended conventional war with India. He also faces the reality that his own powerful army will not be happy if he surrenders the upper (literally) hand that has been achieved in the heights of Kashmir. But the option of opening up alternative military fronts on the lengthy India-Pakistan border to take pressure off the combatants in Kashmir risks a nuclear war that no one wants. Ironically, as happened in the Soviet-U.S. Cold War, the nuclear capability on both sides has become a deterrent against the outbreak of a full-fledged war like the three that already have been fought in the second half of the 20th century between India and Pakistan. But if mutually assured nuclear destruction becomes the only bulwark for peace between the two governments, the next millenium will become a perilous one in the subcontinent.

#376 by puyu

I agree with your comments about Jihadi violence. Attacks in Nadimarg, Chittisinghpura, Anantnag and Kaluchak have complicated matters for Pakistan as well as the Kashmiris.

IMHO, Lahore Declaration was a step in the right direction. The problem with Lahore Declaration was not in the declaration itself... but with the people who were signing it. Vajpayee wanted peace but didn`t want to compromise on India`s rigid ``atoot ang`` rhetoric. Nawaz wanted peace but secretly okayed the Kargil plan before meeting Vajpayee. While Lahore Declaration was being signed, mullahs were leading mass demonstrations against it. And the 3 Services Chiefs refused to even receive Vajpayee at Wagah. Lahore was a half-hearted effort at best, a deception at worst. Perhaps it came too early. Public opinion in Pakistan was not ready for a unilateral about-turn on Kashmir in 1999.

++
You take a high moral ground on this issue. please evaluate how Pakistan has helped the Kashmiris.
++

Without historical perspective, we cannot objectively evaluate Pakistan (or for that matter) India`s role in Kashmir especially in the ongoing 14-year insurgency. Since there is not enough distance in time between us and the insurgency, any such evaluation is bound to be subjective and uninformed.

Perhaps you should ask this questions after another 5 years.

Other facts:

According to the Times of India, June 2, 1999, the Indian army in Kashmir became aware of the presence of Mujahideen on the Kargil heights on May 6, 1999, when they were informed by a shepherd. The paper goes on to say that it took six days for the information to reach the defence ministry in Delhi and another two days for the ministry to conclude that ``the infiltrators only occupied remote and unheld areas``. The then suggests that ``there is something deeply wrong with our security decision making. The sudden switch from inaction to high-profile air strikes with their escalation potential testifies to the same flaws``.

``On May 9 India launched a major assault to drive out some 400 or so Muslim guerrillas, allegedly trained by Pakistan from its side of the Line of Control (LoC) in the desolate, high-altitude Kargil sector of Kashmir`` wrote the Rising Nepal of Kathmandu, June 9, 1999. ``This attack was apparently beaten back with heavy losses to the army which prompted a Colonel to remark `we are dying like dogs here`. At this point, India lost three aircraft, two fighter jets and one helicopter gunship besides suffering 50 casualties. The initial Indian euphoria concerning the use of air power for the first time in Kashmir since 1971 has been dampened considerably``.

A report published in The Times of India, June, 12, 1999, stated, ``In fact, on the night of May 12, the Northern Area Commander, Lt. Gen. H. M. Khanna, had informed defence minister George Fernandes at the Siachin brigade headquarters at Partapur that a batch of about 100 intruders had occupied three ridges in the Batalik sub-sector and would be dislodged within two days``. Of course, this statement by a high-ranking Indian officer never came true.

Also, then there`s the entire issue of George Fernandes offering a ``safe passage`` to anyone in Kargil. As Tribune India, June 3, 1999 states: ``The Defence Minister, Mr George Fernandes’ statement on providing “safe passage” to Pakistani intruders in the Kargil sector came under strong criticism from senior retired service officers as well as the Congress party. Mr Fernandes was more ‘’concerned about the well being of the aggressors than in the defence of the nation’’ charged Congress spokesman, Mr K Natwar Singh. He also said it was ‘’unfortunate’ that the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee had endorsed Mr Fernandes’ stand today.`` If India was so easily victorious in Kargil, why would George Fernandes be so willing to extend such a generous offer?

Then there is the The Telegraph of Calcutta, June 27, 1999 which said, ``Exactly a month after Operation Vijay was launched, the army has made little gain, finding only a toehold in a few peaks in the Drass sub-sector, while most of occupied Kargil remains in the hands of the intruders.... The Pakistanis are showing no signs of ceding territory ... By the army`s own admission, the success percentage is low``.

``The high casualties on the Indian side``, reported The Hindustan Times, June 23, 1999 from Srinagar, ``has given them the reason to prolong their stay, hiding in the natural rock covers when jets hover over them and coming out when the sky is clear and targeting the Indian positions``. It went on to state.``It is in this scenario that the Army is finding it difficult to retrieve the bodies of the officers and soldiers from the high ridges``

Bottom line. There was much loss of human life in Kargil. Please stop rejoicing in it and making silly, gleeful claims that aren`t correct.

#378 by arjun_m

++
If Pakistan was winning in Kargil, why did Nawaz Sharif rush to DC, uninvited and on the 4th of July?
++

To salvage American support and prevent widening of the conflict. Indian Army`s progress during latter half of June and early July was extremely slow and frustrating. With monsoons just weeks away, Musharaf`s brilliant plan appeared quite successful. Nawaz feared that India would widen the theater of conflict out of frustration. Pakistan successfully dictated terms in the limited conflict, but in a wider conflict (i.e. war across the international border), India would dictate terms. Nawaz feared nuclear escalation.

And more importantly, the cold Chinese and American response had isolated Pakistan internationally. Since Pakistan was already under U.S. nuclear sanctions and at the brink of default, any loss of American support (and new sanctions) would be catastrophic for Pakistan in the longer run. Nawaz believed that the benefits of successfully altering LOC through Kargil intrusion would be outweighed by the economic and diplomatic costs.

Nawaz`s dash to Washington was motivated by these fears: economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and nuclear escalation. And in that order.

#383 by dost-mittar

I also don`t know what India gains through Siachen. Perhaps its vainglory. Or perhaps there is some strategic purpose that even Indian Army doesn`t know about! As for the Kargil-Siachen theory, I don`t think Pakistan launched Kargil just to get Indians off Siachen. Kargil had different aims and IMHO had greater strategic importance.

HE#382:
[Independently of which side is more to blame, it is legitimate to ask, What does India stand to gain by bleeding itself--and Pakistan--to control Siachen?]

A very good question!
I do not know the answer. But I do know that when Kargil was launched and seemed to be succeeding at first, there was a lot of talk from the Pakistani side (and the military rep. romair on chowk) that the operation was launched to force India to withdraw from Siachen as a quid pro quo for Pakistan vacating the captured lands in Kargil.

So to repeat your question, what does India -and Pakistan - stand to gain by this absurd stand-off at Siachen?

His Excellency and others,
The whole of India didn`t embark on a revenge campaign after Godhra.
Gujarat is only one of the 28(unless we have carved out another) states of India.
Even the most communally sensative Mumbai and Hyderabad were calm.
Hindus from other states didn`t cross into Gujrat to take up the cause of their brothern.
If you want to know the reaction of hindus to the post Godhra carnage read on.
a popular chain letter circulating in india.Its said to be written by Rajdeep Sardesai of NDTV(a horrible hindoo ,may i add).Even if he is not the author it represents the feelings of the majority in India.Also please read my previous post and see why I insist on Pakistan behaving responsibly and also on living upto the `high` moral standards they preach.

---

letter from Rajdeep Sardesai (NDTV) to Narendra Modi

---

My dear Narendrabhai, Firstly, many congratulations on
your famous
victory in Gujarat. Elections are often only about the
end result, the means do not matter, only the ends do.
Let’s be honest. You ran a strategically brilliant
campaign, one that was based on whipping up public
emotion and stirring a religious identity. I still
remember the classic ad that you ran on voting day.
The Congress campaign ad was a long sermon by
Shankarsinh Vaghela on the development of Gujarat,
written in small type, and with very little that we
hadn’t heard of in the last 55 years. Your ad was
simple and direct.

In bold type, you just reminded the reader of the old
Haqueeqat
classic, “Ae mere vatan ke logon” and asked the voter
of Gujarat to treat their franchise as a homage to the
dead. No specific mention of Godhra or Akshardam, as
per election commission rules, but a clear recall of
recent events. Little wonder then that the next ad
club function should honour you and your faithful ally
Arun Jaitley with the copywriter of the year award.

I also remember your campaign pitch on the last day of
campaigning.
While a complacent Congress was relishing the concept
of cashing in on the anti-incumbency mood, you were
waving a news item that you claimed was a religious
fatwa asking the Muslims of Gujarat to vote hundred
per cent for the Congress.

Of course, you didn’t have to tell the voter the
entire truth: that
there was no real “fatwa”, that all that had happened
was that some unknown Muslim cleric in faraway Uttar
Pradesh had issued an appeal to voters to support the
Congress, and that the advertisement in Gujarati
newspapers had been inserted by members of the sangh
parivar. The fatwa worked, and you were able to ensure
that Hindus came out in large numbers to vote for you
and your party.

I will also not forget the manner in which you were
able to successfully use the demonisation of Mian
Musharaff as a vote-gathering technique. We all
dislike the Pakistani general, and his refusal to end
cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, but you were able
to translate anti-Pakistani sentiment into a potent
state election issue.

What Musharaff had to do with the Gujarat elections is
unclear, but
somehow you were able to convince the voter that
Islamabad was monitoring every move in Gandhinagar.
“If I win, the entire country will celebrate, if the
Congress wins, crackers will be burst in Pakistan.” It
was yet another classic one-liner, designed to stir
the kind of jingoism that may not end the
low-intensity conflict on the border, but will
certainly add to your unique brand of macho politics.

As a representative of the pseudo-secular English
language media in
particular, I admired the manner in which you were
able to blame the
media for virtually everything that had gone wrong in
the state, from the killing of innocents on the
Sabarmati express, to the loot and mass murders that
followed to the large-scale exodus of Muslim families
from their homes.


Let me also say that I will never forget the manner in
which you were
able to use the Godhra incident for political benefit
for months on end, and suggest that somehow all
Muslims in the state were linked to an act of villainy
by a group of criminals from the minority community. I
distinctly remember how you had posters put up all
over the state of the burning train compartment. I
also remember how you got a family member of one of
the Godhra victims to be present at the inauguration
of your party office.

I remember your yatra to Godhra where you shared the
anguish of the
people who had lost their loved ones in the train
tragedy. Somehow, I don’t recall you ever reaching out
to those living in the Shah Alam camp, or Naroda-Patia
or the numerous other refugee camps in the state. Nor
did I ever see you in the company of Muslim children
who saw their entire families being burnt alive before
their eyes.

I must also admire the manner in which you were able
to use the Vishwa
Hindu Parishad cadres in the political campaign. Until
now, we were always told that the VHP was a
socio-cultural organisation that had little to do with
day-to-day politics. You made sure that the VHP
fiction was buried once and for all, and that Praveen
Togadia was transformed from surgeon to a political
rabble-rouser.

Finally, I must salute you for the way you stood up to
virtually anyone
who questioned the politics of Moditva. I will not
forget how you even put the prime minister in his
place.

When Mr Vajpayee asked you to follow the rajdharma,
you quietly
listened to him, and then went about doing your own
thing. A weakened Vajpayee was reduced to being your
self-appointed advocate by the end of the elections.
Indeed, in the last few election meetings, I didn’t
even see a single poster of Vajpayee or even of the
original Hindutva mascot, L K Advani. This victory
then is yours and yours alone.

While you celebrate your triumph, may I leave you with
a final thought?
Now, that you’ve won the battle, will you win the war?
Could you become the chief minister of each and every
one of the five crore Gujaratis, Hindus and Muslims,
you now claim to represent?

You could perhaps start with paying a weekly visit to
the homes of
those who still live in fear and despair. It may not
fit in with your worldview, but it would at least
convince some of us that Gujarat’s Chote Sardar is
more than just a hero of hatred.

Affectionately yours,
Rajdeep Sardesai.

The writer is managing editor, NDTV

Some crispy excerpts about Siachen from the international press..

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/05/20/siachen.kashmir/

``Mirza Aslam Beg, head of Pakistan`s armed forces a decade ago, told Reuters news agency that supplying troops with a loaf of bread costs India two rupees (four U.S. cents) in the plains and 200 rupees on Siachen because it has to be taken by helicopter. ``

http://members.tripod.com/~no_nukes_sa/siachen.html

Siachen is the world`s most strategically absurd high-altitude war, fought at elevations exceeding 6,000 metres. The dispute, over an undemarcated border beyond a point known as NJ-9842, has defied solution, although this is obviously in the interests of both India and Pakistan. Siachen means the loss of 2.7 men and Rs. 2.5 to 6 crores a day for India. Thousands of our soldiers are being exposed to frostbite, hypoxia and severe mental stress. Pakistan`s costs are perhaps a fourth of this. According to Indian army sources, air maintenance for the Siachen operation alone costs Rs. 2.5 crores a day, or Rs. 1,000 crores a year. A Cheetah helicopter sortie costs Rs. 20,000 an hour; it can only carry 25 kg when flying to high altitudes.

Independently of which side is more to blame, it is legitimate to ask, What does India stand to gain by bleeding itself--and Pakistan--to control Siachen? Strategically, the answer is, precious little. The glacier is too far away from the Karakoram highway to matter. There is no direct access to it through a major road from any direction. No other military factors are so weighty as to justify the disproportionate expense in human life, money and materiel. Rs. 2,000 crores a year is no joke. Nor are thousands of casualties. Sensible military leaders have called for an end to this horrible war. Little else explains the Indian stand than a predisposed refusal to vacate Siachen, expressed repeatedly by defence minister George Fernandes.

Persistence of the Siachen impasse has three implications. First, India and Pakistan are engaging in talks without a deep commitment to producing successful, if modest, outcomes through a give-and-take process. It is as if the two were talking largely in response to international pressure, not a desire to succeed. In the Indian case, there is no comprehensive Pakistan policy within which the talks can be located.

Second, the repeated failure to resolve outstanding disputes through bilateral talks is likely to generate a demand for third- party mediation--a proposal India loathes, but will find it increasingly difficult to resist, especially if there is another flare-up in Kashmir between the two now-nuclearised states over and above the 350-plus instances of cross-border firing in the first eight months of 1998 alone (compared to 50 last year).

Most important, a big question-mark hangs over the assumption that India and Pakistan can be trusted to behave responsibly and reasonably in the event of a military stand-off, in particular to avoid a disastrous nuclear conflict. A precondition for nuclear deterrence (a dubious doctrine in the first place) is that adversaries agree on what is in their interest, on just what constitutes ``unacceptable damage``, and how best to avoid it. The Siachen impasse shows that the assumption is fragile. If the two states cannot agree on something where their mutual interests converge, how can they be expected to wisely tackle hostility, especially its nuclear dimension?

#arjun_m

Shouldn`t you be honeymooning at some RSS convention ? Give the yapping without sense a break or respond to some of the questions put forth.

And has it started to rain yet or did they bundle some poor thing up with you without any good coming of it.

#HisExcellency

It`s a definite step in the right direction to have the LOC be a loose border of sorts, and to allow families to be reunited. Having said that, I don`t think it is a solution by itself in isolation. For one, it doesn`t solve the problem of living under the auspices of a regime hell-bent on oppressing minorities. Unless India puts an end to all this nonsense of granting full immunity to people like Advani, Modi and Bal Thackeray, stops idly standing by as mosques are razed, and pays heed to the wishes of people other arjun_m and his band of merry loons, there will be no long-term resolution. The Kashmir issue cannot be made to go away by disregarding the wishes of the people in Kashmir. Period. Although open borders might make life a whole lot better, they have to be supplemented by a less imperialistic approach on the part of the Indian authorities. Still, you`re right. The Kashmir conflict doesn`t seem as if it is going to be resolved overnight and doing something is better than doing nothing. Over the long run however, this positive step must be followed with many others.

[Of course, just because the idea seems like a step towards progress doesn`t mean it will be acceptable to the arjun_ms out there. I`m sure his schizophrenic mind will see it as a gambit aimed at making it easier for the ``external intrusion`` that will undoubtedly persist in Kashmir till Delhi stops foisting Farooq Abdullahs on the region]

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#372 by arjun_m

Helluva difference between Hamood-ur-Rehman Report and Indian Kargil Committee`s Report. The former was inked 3 decades ago; most of the people named are already retired or dead. OTOH, the Kargil Report is much more relevant since it will expose the incompetence and weaknesses of BJP, Indian Army and intelligence network. BJP is contesting elections today, not 32 years ago. Sealing the Kargil Report is the only way India can sustain the ``media myth`` of its so-called military might. Perhaps you should direct your barbed inquiries at your own government as to why it is resorting to Goebbelian disinformation in this age of information and glasnost?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

His Excellency(!!)
The Indians are aware of the poor human rights record in Kashmir.
But the point is ,the jihadists blowing up in the valley do not make them any more sensitive to the issue.On the contrary it makes their stand harder.Most of the Indians support the prime minister`s stance that terror will not be tolerated.
In the bonhomie created by the Lahore bus journey of the same man , even hindutva zealots reconsidered their stance on article 370 and also wanted to explore the possibiity of making the LoC the permanent border. But I dont have to tell you who made the entire effort a sham! (please dont tell me that it was the RAW that provided the logistic for the `mujahids`!). One good lesson from The Lahore episode (apart from that of distrusting the generals) is that the people can be CONVINCED of the necessity of solving the Kashmir issue and even of making COMPROMISES.
India is a democratic country.If the people deem something to be the in the nations interest then the leaders will follow the people.But how to make the people sympathetic to the kashmiri cause?Certainly not by sending jihadists across the border and blasting the indians in every international venue. this`ll only help the ultra nationalists to flare up the egos (yes ,i maintain that egos ,of the leaders and of people ,do run nations.atleast they are one of the factors.why else did USSR blast so much money in its space programmes when it couldnt feed its citizens?what else is behind the hutton drama in britain but the egotistic selfrighteousness of Blair?why else do cricket matches generate so much of pent up emotions on either side of the border?Why does the media celebrate victories so jingoistically and defeats with such anger ? and why do the politicians notice sports only when its something to do with India/Pakistan. ).
As you know the kashmiri dissent took a decisive turn in 1989 and it had more to do with the neglect of development issues by successive govts . NewDelhi put all their eggs in the abdullah basket who for lack of stronger words, usurped his position and power.The central govt refused to engage anyone else from the valley.I dont want to wash further linen infront of pakis and this is not an excuse.Our govt bungled!!
Now how did Pakistan use this opportunity? How did they make the kashmiri dissent a weapon in their blind pursuit for revenge?How did Kashmiriyat gave way to jihadi mind set?
Why are so many pakistanis (ghazi baba?now disown him like you disowned those hapless kargil infiltrators!) being killed in kashmir?
You take a high moral ground on this issue. please evaluate how Pakistan has helped the Kashmiris.
I can tell you how you can make a positive difference.Make `azad` Kashmir independent! Stop all those jehadis crossing over.No!dont stop your wailing at the UN altogether.You can do that a couple of times a year so that no one forgets.In short put a moratorium on all such acts for 5 years.This will make an impact on the Indian psyche than all those poor dastards who are cursed to end up in unnamed graves in a foreign country.It will also bring peace in the valley as insurgency will not sustain without foriegn weapons and foreign terrorists. The dissenters will take to non-violent means of protest.Then the army can be withdrawn which will further boost civil activities.You may know that the federal nature of indian constitution is getting stronger because of all those powerful regional parties.The policies of liberalisation also helps in making the state govts stronger.This means that
Kashmiris will be closest to their earlier demands of autonomy.Such a positive atmosphere will be ideal for a healthy solution of the problem.
One rider that comes with this package is that the Kashmiris,like the sikhs may prefer to stay in the Indian union ( with the present growth of the indian economy) !!

No , I`m not teasing you.If you want to maintain the right of a higher moral stance you should prove yourself worthy of it.

regards

PS:-Who stands to loose the most if Kashmir is solved?

HisExcellency #371

{{Given the secrecy of Kargil operation in Pakistan and more so in India (where the govt. has refused to release the Kargil Committee Report),}}

HE,

If you insist on pedding your creative fictions on Chowk as factual, it helps to not make assertions that can be easily and crushingly refuted.

The Kargil Committee Report was tabled in the Indian Parliament on February 23rd, 2000 and its contents made available via newspaper websites etc. Here from the Rajya Sabha’s offical site is an executive summary. It states at its head that the authenticated copy of “the summary, Full Report and Action intitated by the government” is available in the Parliament Library.

The most important report that has not been released to the public is the Henderson Brooks report into the 1962 war with China.

Your systematic mistake is to extrapolate from the secretive behaviour of the Pakistani regime to characterise the behaviour of the Indian government. It would be difficult in any case for India to conceal from its aroused citizenry all operational details of India`s first war to be fought in the full glare of media publicity. For Pakistani, a far less open society, we have to choose between Dictator Musharraf`s fiction of `aggressive patrolling` and ousted PM Nawaz Sharif`s contention that 3000 soldiers of the Northern Flight Infantry lost their lives.

{{only the zeolously naive or decidedly mendacious can make any tall claims about the facts.}}

Given the above, don’t you think you qualify for membership in the “intentionally mendacious” class?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#370 by arjun_m

For the umpteenth time you have been mentioning a RAND report and Shaukat Qadir`s analysis. Perhaps you don`t know that authors of RAND report do not claim that their report is final. Look at the references of the report. It is based on editorials and prejudiced news reports published in Indian and Pakistani journals & newspapers. It is a report based on other people`s opinions, not on first-hand facts or de-classified material. The authors of the RAND report have therefore stated in the Preface...

http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1450/MR1450.pref.pdf

``This report presents the results of a quick-turnaround study conduced by RAND at the request of the U.S. government in the months leading up to the November 2000 presidential election in the United States...

The broad purpose of the study was to understand how India and Pakistan viewed the significance of the Kargil conflict, what lessons they drew from this conflict, and the implications of those lessons for future stability in South Asia. Consequently, this report is not an all-source document: it has deliberately avoided the use of all U.S. governmental documents and for the most part many other open-source American materials as well. Instead the source materials used are almost exclusively Indian and Pakistani...

This report is by no means intended to be the final word on Indian and Pakistani assessments about Kargil. In fact, it explicitly presents an early view of this issue, since Indian and Pakistani judgments may themselves evolve with time. As official documents on the conflict come to light, more systematic research on some of the key issues touched on in this report-- the genesis of the conflict; the character of the operations; the perceptions, judgements, and decisions of national leaderships; the significance of nuclear weapons; and the role of outside powers-- will be possible, and more considered conclusions may be derived. Until that time, however, this preliminary assessment is offered for public consumption in the hope that it will contribute to a better understanding of the problems of stability in South Asia...


RAND simply presents a cursory, early assessment of Indian and Pakistani perspectives, not the facts and details of the operations. RAND report essentially summarizes what the common man felt about Kargil and stability in South Asia-- not what the common man knew.

Shaukat Qadir`s analysis suffers from the same problem. It is based on indirect sources and opinions of retired officers. In the world of journalism, such sources are termed secondary sources.

Given the secrecy of Kargil operation in Pakistan and more so in India (where the govt. has refused to release the Kargil Committee Report), only the zeolously naive or decidedly mendacious can make any tall claims about the facts.

Which category do you belong to.. the zealously naive or the decidedly mendacious? I leave this up to you.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#366 by HassanShah

I agree with your comments.

Territorial unity of Kashmir is the best way of addressing Kashmiri & Pakistani concerns. However, such a solution will not be acceptable to India (which is an important party to this conflict).

However, we can collectively address this conflict through another route as well i.e. convert the LOC into a loose border between IHK and POK. This so-called ``open borders policy`` will help the Kashmiris separated by the LOC to freely visit their relatives & engage in trade. IHK and POK can politically remain parts of India and Pakistan, but this should not prevent the social and cultural experience of Kashmiris living on both sides of LOC.

This solution will maintain the social unity of Kashmir, despite the territorial partition into IHK and POK.

#365 by arjun_m

++
The US government spends billions a year on drug enforcement and yet the drug trade is booming
++

There is a difference.

The US government doesn`t blame the drug trade on Osama, USSR, China, France, Hitler and what not. In contrast, the Indian government and media go to extreme limits to blame the entire Kashmir movement on Pakistan, and deny the strong indigenous roots of this conflict.

++
the fact on the ground is that India hasn`t given up one inch on the ground..as opposed to the fearless pakis who couldn`t do what India did in Kargil and throw out the Indians from the commanding heights of siachen..
++

Your arguments are founded on the flawed presumption it was indeed Indian Army that expelled the NLI and Mujahideen. Unless you have access to declassified Pakistani or Indian material, such statements are fantastic conjectures at best and delusions at worst.

Why should Pakistan oust Indians from Siachen? Since India is occupying the heights, Indian casualties (mostly from frost bite) and logistics cost is exorbitant compared to Pakistan. What has India gained strategically since it first occupied the glacier 19-20 years ago?? If the aim was to threaten the KK highway between China and Pakistan, that aim has not been achieved. Otherwise, it is just a matter of vain pride (at exorbitant cost) for India. I don`t see why Pakistan should waste money on expensive and futile endeavors like India`s Siachen adventure. For Pakistan, low-intensity conflicts such as Kashmir and Kargil (in particular) are most cost-effective and militarily strategic. Think about it.

stuka,

``Learn something from the Americans and fight only those battles that you can win. There is no honor in fighting and losing because it is the victor that will write history.``

......... i agree with you 100%...........

#361 by hamidm2

Precisely right. I don`t think walking away from the Kashmir issue will lead to anything, except perhaps letting India have a free hand to cater to the whims and fancies of Advani et al. Ideally, the people of Kashmir should be allowed to be independent. I don`t think there`s much truth in this nonsense about them not being able to survive on their own. The land is fairly fertile in the valley and tourism is bound to boom. Unfortunately, I don`t think granting the people of Kashmir the right to self-determination figures amongst India`s list of desirable outcomes. In fact, I think the only solution acceptable to India is for the world to stop condemning the attrocities in Kashmir and for the people of Kashmir to resign themselves to sacrificing the virgins at periodic intervals to appease the monsters in Delhi (as has been going on in Bombay, Gujrat and Ayodhya).

So yes, you`re right. At the moment, it seems the only two ways of resolving the issue are by either waging war and leaving a handful of people alive in both countries, or turning a blind eye to suffering and condoning the systematic genocide of the Kashmirirs. Both are clearly unacceptable. As a result, the status quo will persist. The people of Kashmir will continue to rise up against the Indian authorities, the Pakistanis will continue to champion their righteous stand and the Indian army will continue to live in fear and retribution for their misdeeds. History has shown that it is impossible to repress a nation that is willing to stand up for its rights and eventually, not only half of Kashmir, but all of it will be Azad.

And yes. The opinion on the other side of the border might be to only support causes that you can win, but please spare me this cowardly, opportunistic philosophy. You stand for what is right. Not what you can achieve and beat drums about... it is this mindset that allows you to achieve victory against all odds.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HamidM:

``........... but if mrs thatcher can send an aramada to fight over a rock in the atlantic inhabited by forty thousand smelly sheep and forty unbathed englishmen, it seems wimpy to walk away from kashmir .............. ``

India screwed around with Sri Lanka too..and Bangladesh. But it kept its nose clean in China.

Learn something from the Americans and fight only those battles that you can win. There is no honor in fighting and losing because it is the victor that will write history.

I repeat again with reference to my earler posts:
Pakistani muslim is not the representative of the Indian muslims and the Paki guys shoulsd shut up and do not speak about the atrocities unless the Indian muslims want them to speak for them. They are requested to look into their own problems and try to do something for the Pakistani muslims first. They should pay attention on building roads, infrastructuren economy, judiciary and most important restoration of democratic institutions than wasting their resources in fattening the military machines. They should work more for peace than for war.
I hope this is clear to all.

hey gober_head:

i have trained you well. see how well now you respond to your name. btw i think of india as tattistan. and i am not the only one. want me to prove it?

hassan mian,

......... you are doing fine, but what is the endgame ?.......... in my view there are only two ways to settle this issue: 1) declare war, stop playing the lfo games and march onto sirinagar. 2) simmer down, bring it up once a year only on kashmir day, step up aid to the local insurgents (indigeneous), shut down the lashkars, and go about the business of ``normalizing`` relations with india ............. the chinese continue to threaten taiwan with missiles even as the taiwanese are investing billions of dollars a month in china ............ you don`t have to bend over just because the other guy is big and bad .......... i don`t put too much stock in this honor and pride stuff, but you don`t want to be a vegetarian`s bi**h either !........

............... on the other hand, if as a nation we decide that we were wrong for fifty years and are willing to walk away, it is fine with me ............the kashmiris can go jump in dal lake for all i care ........... but if mrs thatcher can send an aramada to fight over a rock in the atlantic inhabited by forty thousand smelly sheep and forty unbathed englishmen, it seems wimpy to walk away from kashmir ..............

#340 by puyu

++
Its a question of ego.do u guys give up an inch in any of the discusssions?
so when its the question of the collective ego of nations ...!!!

PS: please stop putting up this show of `concern ` for the Kashmiris.
there may be individuals who are genuine in their support of the kashmir cause but pakiland as a state just wants to revenge the humiliation it suffered on India`s hands ....this hypocrisy is abominable!!!
++

Its not a question of ego. Pick up any report of Amnesty International and you will realize that India`s brutal suppression of Kashmiris as indeed polarized Pakistanis in the anti-India camp. Before 1989, many Pakistanis felt that Pakistan was unnecessarily creating a mountain out of a molehill. This is largely because from 1947 to 1989, the Kashmiris never rose in arms against New Delhi or the puppet regimes installed in Srinagar. (There was an uprising in 1962 but collapsed quickly).

However since 1989, all Pakistanis, even those who are usually critical of the Army, are convinced of the Kashmiri disenchantment with India. It is no hidden secret that Kashmiris have lost something between 30,000 (Indian official figures) and 90,000 (Pakistani claims) lives. Approximately 700,000 Indian troops chase just a few thousand Mujahideen every year and still fail to crush the insurgency.

Given the strong cultural and religious ties between Kashmiris and Punjabis, it is no wonder that Indian brutalities on Kashmiri population evokes a psychological and emotional solidarity of Pakistanis with Kashmiris. When Muslim terrorists killed 56 odd Hindus at Godhra, Hindus living all over India felt sympathy for them. Well Kashmir is like that for Pakistanis.

That is why it is extremely important for India to curb the human rights violations in Kashmir and give Mufti Sayeed a free hand in J&K. If Mufti ends up being New Delhi`s voice in Srinagar (like Farooq Abdullah), the election of 2002 will end up being an exercise in futility. The ensuing chaos will once again motivate Jihadis all over Pakistan, Europe and Iraq to swarm to Kashmir.

Simply blaming Pakistani ego for Kashmir problem is quite a naive knee-jerk reaction. At the end of the day, don`t forget that the origins of discontent are in Kashmir, not outside it.

Has India succeeded in addressing that discontent?? This is the million-dollar question that Mufti Sayeed, Vajpayee and over 1 billion Indians need to ask themselves-- repeatedly. Until this discontent is eradicated, Pakistanis are justified in their skepticism of J&K state assembly elections, Kashmir committees, PDP and what not.

Is India prepared to let a J&K chief minister toe his own line?? Is India prepared to let the Kashmiris have limited autonomy within the Indian Union?? Moreover, is India prepared to reduce its military presence in Kashmir and punish those responsible for human rights excesses??

Your posts create the impression that it is Indians who are in denial (about their despicable human rights record in J&K) and pursuing an egocentric course of action.

Regarding #352 by Ralph on September 29, 2003 8:42pm PT
**
All his reasoning leads to ONLY TWO conclusions -

(1) Feed Pakistani military - for that stories about India have be spun and repeated regularly. That these stories never stand the test of reality doesn`t mean that by repitition they don`t build Pakistani fear psychosis.

(2) Pay lip service to anti Mullah awakening but maintain the Mulla-Military alliance rock solid by saving it from any attack.
**
Let me add some more points:

Indian muslims have a very clear understanding of PAki muslim elite`s games. They have repeatedly asked the Pakistani muslim elites to refrain from showing concern about their problems and training the ignorant amonst them in subversion and terrorist methods through incitement. THey want the guys like HE, HS, Musharaff to shut up and have requestds them to elevate the problems of their own co-religious brothers in the streets and villages of Pakistan, they have repeatedly asked them not to try and be spokes-persons to Indian muslims just to score some points in their own domestic territory.

But the very logic of the ``two nation theory`` on which the elites have buit the foundations of PAkistan INEVITABLY forces them to adopt this belligerent posture towards non-muslim ``them``. (Imagine if Pakistan was bordering America then would it have lived in peace?). THe ONLY SOLUTION is to re-built the SECULAR traditions of the original constitution of PAkistan and reverse the Islamization of Constitution which started with General Zia.

http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01082002/01082002049.htm

Hassan

You seem to be a genuine pakistani, the typical one, with all of the energy focussed on solving the kashmir issue. Well that needs the help of another country, inputs from from people of another religion whom you all affectionately call as kafirs.
At least half the number of words you had written of kashmir were used on honour killings, may be quarter the words to wrte an article on abdus salam, we all would have been convinced about your homesty.
You are the bane of pakistan, an educated pakistani, trying out all the arguments to sustain a religious dicum of jihad and a firm believer that it is nothing other than killing kafirs.
Hassan, put your human rights credentials to the test, can you post this one liner, ``jihad is not killing of kafirs``.

dear hassan sha,
Is Pakisthan`s support making any positive change in Kashmiri lives?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Roohi (and others):

Firstly, I hope you have better sense than to believe that anything you read on the web is undeniable, irrefutable truth. Having said that, let me clarify that I have never stated that Pakistan is infallible. But that, or the million and one things wrong with Musharraf and the other politicians in Pakistan, does not mean that one should idly sit back and condone the brutality that goes on around the world. You asked me how I feel, and I`ll answer that question: I ``feel`` a lot worse about women being raped and innocent people being killed and tortured than I do about most other things. I`ve stressed this point once or twice before, but it seems to have been ignored. What is going on in Kashmir is wrong because of the savagery and oppression that is inherent there. The constant arguments about men and women suffering in Timbuktu do not change that or make it better. Yes, India`s occupation of Kashmir is not the only bloody chapter in history. But just because the Nazi regime consisted of some of the most evil men in the world does not make the Milosevics and Advanis any less guilty.

As an aside, do you grudge me the right to denounce the Indian government for its handling of the Kashmir issue ? Or do you insist that I blind myself to what`s going on across the border and follow Mr. John Doe`s suggestion on what ``nobler`` issues I should dedicate myself to ? Or would you rather that I abandon the demand that people get the right to self-determination ? I assume you to be sensible enough for none of these to hold true (of course it might very well be that after reading the yappity-yap posted by arjun_m and Indian -- the latter doing great justice to the motherland -- everyone else seems that way). If you merely want to me to realise that things are not perfect in Pakistan, well, rest assured that the fact is already well known to me and just because I have a very low opinion of the politicians in India does not mean I`m going to be any less caustic in my criticism of the issues that exist at home. For my part, however, I would like to stress that one can continue to strive on several fronts for a better, more peaceful, world.

# arjun_m

Quite a charmer aren`t you ? Well, dear friend, it seems you`re quite content to continue yapping about everything and anything (despite your obvious lack of knowledge on all subjects save perhaps the ideology of the RSS), without actually responding to the questions I asked earlier. Should I take it that the little pea in your headpiece filled with straw finds itself unable to deal with such profound philosophical enquiry or that you`re compensating for something else ?

But then again, it might simply be the fact that you`re busy with other committments and can`t bring yourself to focus amidst the excitement of what, understandably, has been a very big day for you (and many others in India):



My heartiest congratulations and bhabhi ko salam. Let me know if it starts to pour.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Dost Mittar, Stuka

``in another year, he will peddle the exact same story.``

This is what is most remarkable about Romair. He will create a story. Naturally it will have no legs. People will show him how absurd his stories are. He will fall silent. A few months go by and there he is with exactly the same story! This is an unbroken pattern week after week, month after month.

Thbe reason for this is that Romair does not interact with Indians. He has no intention of doing so. He speaks to Pakistanis. He rakes up their fear -

most recent is that BJP is planning to kill all Pakistanis or convert them to Hindutva after killing all Indian Muslims

their honor -

we can not live as slaves of India

to the tolerant, he asks they not oppose the religious killers if they are Muslim -

if you are tolerant, you must tolerate religious fanatics, unless they happen to be non Muslim

To the young he spins yarns in place of history -

`Mathematical impossiblity theorem` about 1947.

To anyone who tries to step out of his military logic, he will agree with everything but come back with how India is such and such and that at least he is not willing to trust India!

So Romair has only one purpose on Chowk: to make sure that Pakistanis are not able to break throug the wall of surreal unreality that the military has woven around them. All his reasoning leads to ONLY TWO conclusions -

(1) Feed Pakistani military - for that stories about India have be spun and repeated regularly. That these stories never stand the test of reality doesn`t mean that by repitition they don`t build Pakistani fear psychosis.

(2) Pay lip service to anti Mullah awakening but maintain the Mulla-Military alliance rock solid by saving it from any attack.

It will be impossible to reach the real people of Pakistan without grasping how this wall of deceipt is built and maintained around them by the agents of their military.

hey gober_head:

how come you dont post anything on that disease of yours? and do you want me to prove i can find more material along those lines in respectable western newspapers? (although not as important in stature as ottawa sun)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re:#328 by dionysus

``Pakistan will never give up on the Kashmiri freedom movement. You can cry, rant, rave or threaten on Chowk as much as you like, but it won`t change a bloody thing.``

Very good.
That will hasten the end of this farce called Pakistan. Looked at the GDP growths of India and Pak lately? That is what Pak gets for 50 years of crying, ranting, raving for Kashmir.
Sridhar

To All Pakis

We will walk out of Kashmir and hand it out to Kashmiris as soon as it`s usability of sucking paki blood and money is over. Promise.

Arjun:

Dude do you use some spidering mechanism to get all these links? I can`t believe you do this manually...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The day pakisthan stops supporting the kashmiris most of the indians will start approaching them with more sympathy?
Its a question of ego.do u guys give up an inch in any of the discusssions?
so when its the question of the collective ego of nations ...!!!

PS: please stop putting up this show of `concern ` for the Kashmiris.
there may be individuals who are genuine in their support of the kashmir cause but pakiland as a state just wants to revenge the humiliation it suffered on India`s hands ....this hypocrisy is abominable!!!

roohi #338 please dont confuse young Hassan with reality.

Mantolives #336 Yes indeed, if local folks can put up such a nice rendition of ``moulin rouge``, then there is hope yet for Pakistan. And it is quite fitting that Lahore, the new educational and cultural capital of Pakistan (Karachiites to please not be upset at losing this claim), leads the way.

Hassan

Curious ...

How do you feel about 2 million Kashmiris in an area that has been denied elections for 56 years ?

http://www.balawaristan.net
http://www.tehelka.com/channels/currentaffairs/2001/dec/3/ca120301abdul1.htm
http://in.news.yahoo.com/020313/43/1inm2.html
http://www.tibet.ca/wtnarchive/1998/6/21_4.html

---

How about a nice chunk of Kashmir (Aksai Chin) that was bartered off to China?

---

How about JKLF marginization by the Pakistan Government ?

---

How do you feel about 500,000 Kashmiris that were hounded out of their homeland by horrific violence ?

http://www.ikashmir.org/Atrocities/index.html

---

Samjha karo ... the state of Pakistan and it`s methods and motives are not as pure as you think (or pretend) either

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

tahmed...

Believe me you haven`t seen nothing yet from the Moulin Rouge the play.... the dresses were pretty skimpy... the picture that you show was from the play within the play `Spectacular, Spectacular`

Anyway... all I can say is that I have faith that `Bohemianism` is on the rise in Pakistan... a welcome development...


-YLH

Alephnull,

You have correctly identified my reference when France threw off the cloak of catholicism.. While I agree with your observation of differences between catholicism and Islam, I don`t agree with your estimate that there isn`t a movement with in Pakistan agitating for secularism... I think there is a rather strong one.. and it will rise its head in the future.

I disagree with your point no 2 about mass movements etc.. my reading of history suggests that League`s undefined movement while led by the `salariat` of UP initially (1937) , was a mass movement called Pakistan Movement by 1946.. see your logic doesn`t seem to work here.. on the one hand the League is accused of introducing the communal angle for successful mobilization and on the other hand you say it was elitist in nature... I am sure if you hark back to our earlier discussion, the increase in franchise from 1937 to 1946 led to a geometric increase in the League`s vote bank... and the crowds of half a million or more that the League used to pull those days and the way the league toppled Khizer Hayat just doesn`t fit in with your analysis.


Generally I agree with you in spirit.

-YLH

Dost Mittar:

``Has Pakistan become morally superior just because it lost? ``

That is exactly Romair`s point. Now he will not come