Na Bhai Na Bhaiya Sabse Bara Indian Rupia - Zara Hat Ke Team Analysis On Facebook Removing Or Disabl

[lovely.jutt]

 

[chandbibi]

200 plus people are dead in Turkey and 10000 in jail. Erdogan just announced emergency for three months and you guys bend over backwards in praise of Turkey. Human rights are more endangered in muslim countries than anywhere else. Kashmir will resolve itself and better because its part of a secular India. Banned terror groups cannot be given patronage on social media because Many muslims widely support anything which involves creating unrest and anarchy. Fortunately the rest of the world now understands the perils of pandering to separatists.

 

[SAIT_]

200 plus people are dead in Turkey and 10000 in jail. Erdogan just announced emergency for three months and you guys bend over backwards in praise of Turkey. Human rights are more endangered in muslim countries than anywhere else. Kashmir will resolve itself and better because its part of a secular India. Banned terror groups cannot be given patronage on social media because Many muslims widely support anything which involves creating unrest and anarchy. Fortunately the rest of the world now understands the perils of pandering to separatists.

And this justifies what is India doing in Kashmir. Idiot

 

[chandbibi]

It shows the hypocrisy of pakistanis who don't care about lives of muslims living in China and Turkey and balochistan. And i am not an idiot but your inability to get into UNHCR shows how credible the world considers you to be.
India is doing nothing in Kashmir, people go on protests and riots, kill public servants, loot, these are civil issues and happen in many countries, remember your dharna and model town incidents operations against balochis and other ethnic groups in pakistan are commonplace. Kashmiris who take the law in the hand will also face the same problems like others who riot. Such protests or random killings of police do not constitute freedom movements. It is only the valley which is disturbed because it has mischief makers, the rest of jammu and kashmir is peaceful. These people also have human rights as do Kashmiri pandits and they are all citizens of India and following the law of the land is not an optional subject.

And this justifies what is India doing in Kashmir. Idiot

 

[SAIT_]

It shows the hypocrisy of pakistanis who don't care about lives of muslims living in China and Turkey and balochistan. And i am not an idiot but your inability to get into UNHCR shows how credible the world considers you to be.
India is doing nothing in Kashmir, people go on protests and riots, kill public servants, loot, these are civil issues and happen in many countries, remember your dharna and model town incidents operations against balochis and other ethnic groups in pakistan are commonplace. Kashmiris who take the law in the hand will also face the same problems like others who riot. Such protests or random killings of police do not constitute freedom movements. It is only the valley which is disturbed because it has mischief makers, the rest of jammu and kashmir is peaceful. These people also have human rights as do Kashmiri pandits and they are all citizens of India and following the law of the land is not an optional subject.

Still no answer to original question, are you trying to justify killing of innocent Kashmiries with this crap. Shame on You. Actually you are a hypocrite who is talking about whole world but do not care about killing of innocent kashmiries. Kashmir is not a civi issue it is an Iternational issue, recognized by world. Stop distorting the facts.

PS: Let me educate you, there is no UN resolution on Bluchstan, Turkey, and China. Stop jumping like a monkey by posting irrelevant sh!t. Come to the issue on hand.

 

[amad salim]

200 plus people are dead in turkey and 10000 in jail. Erdogan just announced emergency for three months and you guys bend over backwards in praise of turkey. Human rights are more endangered in muslim countries than anywhere else. Kashmir will resolve itself and better because its part of a secular india. Banned terror groups cannot be given patronage on social media because many muslims widely support anything which involves creating unrest and anarchy. Fortunately the rest of the world now understands the perils of pandering to separatists.

a chann di wife yakinan indian a

 

[chandbibi]

The UN resolution died long ago. It is not under an enforceable section and in 2010 kashmir has been removed from list of disputed territories. Pakistanis live in their own delusional world. Kashmir is a law and order internal matter of India. India does nothing there, they kill their own police, loot arms and terrorists stand behind stone pelters and throw bombs. Are the lives of our law enforcement agencies cheap? If these stone pelters stay home they can have their peace and quiet nobody is going to disturb them. And terrorists can rot in hell where they belong.

Still no answer to original question, are you trying to justify killing of innocent Kashmiries with this crap. Shame on You. Actually you are a hypocrite who is talking about whole world but do not care about killing of innocent kashmiries. Kashmir is not a civi issue it is an Iternational issue, recognized by world. Stop distorting the facts.

PS: Let me educate you, there is no UN resolution on Bluchstan, Turkey, and China. Stop jumping like a monkey by posting irrelevant sh!t. Come to the issue on hand.

 

[nepali.nationalist]

well done bro ...These people have a habit of confusing DISPUTED TERRITORY which their FOUNDING FATHERS have admitted to holding PLEBESCITE FOR in the UN. But no, when it comes to UN observers, they kick them out there because their dirty work is exposed. And then they come to talk about UNHCR. How about you implement what your founding fathers agreed to ??

Yeah India does nothing their just holds 700 000 army men with numerous reports of UN certified r@pe and abuse. Thats All :biggthumpup:

Kashmir is a disputed territory and if you want to talk about internal issues then Khalistan, 7 sister states, assam, tamil nadu, Vidharba and many other are also active, lets talk about their freedom as well since its all kosher now.:biggthumpup:

Still no answer to original question, are you trying to justify killing of innocent Kashmiries with this crap. Shame on You. Actually you are a hypocrite who is talking about whole world but do not care about killing of innocent kashmiries. Kashmir is not a civi issue it is an Iternational issue, recognized by world. Stop distorting the facts.

PS: Let me educate you, there is no UN resolution on Bluchstan, Turkey, and China. Stop jumping like a monkey by posting irrelevant sh!t. Come to the issue on hand.

 

[nepali.nationalist]

What jokes !...if in 2010 kashmir was discarded from a list of discussions then can they show us how did the UN close the resolution ??[hilar][hilar]. And if that is the case why did Indians order the UN oberservers on Kashmir based in delhi to leave in 2014 ??

Kya 4 saal biryani khila rahey thay kya ??[hilar][hilar]

inko jhooth bolnay ki aur ronay ki boht adat hai ...the convention was held on Nov 2010 and the UN specifically made a statement that Kashmiri is absolutely a disputed territory. Here is an excerpt from Indian media itself :

Kashmir remains on UN Security Council agenda

Last updated: 17 November, 2010
United Nations, Nov 17, (PTI):
Kashmir remains on the UN agenda even though it was not explicitly mentioned in the annual report of the Security Council, which only covered disputes that were discussed from August 2009 to July 2010.
Clarifying why UK's top envoy Mark Lyall Grand did not mention Kashmir last week while ticking off disputes under the Security Council, the British mission's spokesperson Harriet Cross said "conflicts mentioned in the statement were all considered by the SC during this period.

"As Kashmir was not considered by the Council during this period, it was not mentioned in the report." The summary of matters, issued in March 2010 by the UN, noted that the "India-Pakistan question" had not been considered at a formal meeting during the three-year period from January one, 2007 to December 31, 2009 but the Security Council remained seized of the matter.

Pakistan repeatedly raises Kashmir as an issue for UN intervention but India asserts that it is an internal matter. Since UK holds the presidency of the Security Council for November, Grant had presented the annual report of the Security Council on behalf of all the Security Council members at the annual debate held in the UN General Assembly on Friday.

Following Grant's statement, Pakistan objected that he had not mentioned Kashmir. Amjad Hussain B Sial, Pakistan's acting envoy to the UN, said "We understand this was an inadvertent omission, as Jammu and Kashmir is one of the oldest disputes on agenda of the Security Council."

Cross also said that the UK's position for India and Pakistan is "to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir, one which takes into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people."

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/...y-council.html

 

[nepali.nationalist]

So the question is that, that now that their false-from-the-beginning main argument has been quashed that "it was removed from a discussion list" will they now hold a plebiscite in Kashmir and also will they now honour the word of shastri and other Indian forefathers who wrote and attested the Kashmir resolutions in the UN that a referendum will be held ??

Can they atleast agree to atleast honour their own words as otherwise kashmir is naturally getting out of hand.:biggthumpup:

 

[miafridi]

The UN resolution died long ago. It is not under an enforceable section and in 2010 kashmir has been removed from list of disputed territories. Pakistanis live in their own delusional world. Kashmir is a law and order internal matter of India. India does nothing there, they kill their own police, loot arms and terrorists stand behind stone pelters and throw bombs. Are the lives of our law enforcement agencies cheap? If these stone pelters stay home they can have their peace and quiet nobody is going to disturb them. And terrorists can rot in hell where they belong.

How Kashmir became Part of India despite it being Muslim majority? Didn't the two nations theory said that the muslim majority areas should become part of Pakistan? And that is why Bangladesh became part of Pakistan?

 

[chandbibi]

You don't know how it became part of india? It was a princely state and they were given choice to remain independent or accede to India or pakistan. The same way you got Bahawalpur because the Nawab decided to join Pakistan. If you had not sent kabailis to forcibly occupy Kashmir it might have even remained independent, who knows. But you have no claim on it because it was never given to you by its ruler. Hari Singh acceded to India after your army tried to invade kashmir and take it over. If you are going to deny this fact then you will do nothing new. Most pakistanis have some other version of what happened. Now its time to get over your Kashmir obsession and move on.
As such Kashmir is independent, they are protected by Article 370 and they are living off Indian tax payers money. Valley wants independence but Leh Ladakh and Jammu do not. We can lock them in their own world and let them be independent without any money and without any army and without any access. Let's see what they do with their independence.

How Kashmir became Part of India despite it being Muslim majority? Didn't the two nations theory said that the muslim majority areas should become part of Pakistan? And that is why Bangladesh became part of Pakistan?

 

[miafridi]

You don't know how it became part of india? It was a princely state and they were given choice to remain independent or accede to India or pakistan. The same way you got Bahawalpur because the Nawab decided to join Pakistan. If you had not sent kabailis to forcibly occupy Kashmir it might have even remained independent, who knows. But you have no claim on it because it was never given to you by its ruler. Hari Singh acceded to India after your army tried to invade kashmir and take it over. If you are going to deny this fact then you will do nothing new. Most pakistanis have some other version of what happened. Now its time to get over your Kashmir obsession and move on.
As such Kashmir is independent, they are protected by Article 370 and they are living off Indian tax payers money. Valley wants independence but Leh Ladakh and Jammu do not. We can lock them in their own world and let them be independent without any money and without any army and without any access. Let's see what they do with their independence.

First of all Bahawalpur was annexed in Pakistan because its ruler was Muslim and its population was also muslim majority. Now if you say that Kashmir should have been part of India just because its ruler decided to join India, then why Hyderabad, Junagarh, Manipur, Bantva Manavadar, And others weren't allowed to Join Pakistan based on the same theory that their ruler wanted to Join Pakistan?

Pakistan Invaded Kashmir because they knew that India didn't allow Junagarh to be part of Pakistan even when its ruler had decided, so why Pakistan should allow the expected merger of Kashmir with India just because its ruler want to join India? Same goes with Hyderabad and Other states which India didn't allow to join Pakistan based on your theory.

If India so much believed in this theory then India must have allowed Hyderabad, Junagarh, Bantva Manavadar and manipur and others to Join Pakistan. But fact is India did injustice and wanted to get whatever it could..

 

[chandbibi]

Junagadh is a small place in the middle of a state. Such places cannot be allowed to join Pakistan. You know what happened with Bangladesh, you had no border with them and consequently you had to let them go. By your logic Lahore was having a very large hindu population so it should have been allowed to join India. In any case whatever has happened is what was destined to happen and hari singh joined India because you attacked his princely state. The blame of this so called aggression is fairly and squarely on you regardless of whatever skewed logic you are now offering.
Same thing happened with balochistan, the vote was never taken, the ruler decided, so no double standards please. The valley is landlocked place and economically unviable. Jammu is hindu majority and leh ladakh have majority buddhist population, they don't want any independence. Given this scenario disgruntled kashmiris should look for a settlement of their issues and give up this militancy because its not going anywhere.

First of all Bahawalpur was annexed in Pakistan because its ruler was Muslim and its population was also muslim majority. Now if you say that Kashmir should have been part of India just because its ruler decided to join India, then why Hyderabad, Junagarh, Manipur, Bantva Manavadar, And others weren't allowed to Join Pakistan based on the same theory that their ruler wanted to Join Pakistan?

Pakistan Invaded Kashmir because they knew that India didn't allow Junagarh to be part of Pakistan even when its ruler had decided, so why Pakistan should allow the expected merger of Kashmir with India just because its ruler want to join India? Same goes with other states specially with Hyderabad which was both muslim majority and also muslim ruler. But we being a good nation don't object to it being merged with India because there was no way for Pakistan to access Hyderabad if it had merged with Pakistan. And we also understand that not allowing junagarh to join pakistan just because its ruler wanted to join Pakistan was also good because it was a hindu majority and only a ruler shouldn't be allowed to decide the fate of the residents. But why Kashmir?

 

[miafridi]

Junagadh is a small place in the middle of a state. Such places cannot be allowed to join Pakistan. You know what happened with Bangladesh, you had no border with them and consequently you had to let them go. By your logic Lahore was having a very large hindu population so it should have been allowed to join India. In any case whatever has happened is what was destined to happen and hari singh joined India because you attacked his princely state. The blame of this so called aggression is fairly and squarely on you regardless of whatever skewed logic you are now offering.
Same thing happened with balochistan, the vote was never taken, the ruler decided, so no double standards please. The valley is landlocked place and economically unviable. Jammu is hindu majority and leh ladakh have majority buddhist population, they don't want any independence. Given this scenario disgruntled kashmiris should look for a settlement of their issues and give up this militancy because its not going anywhere.

I have asked you something which you didn't answer. Again Bangladesh was Muslim majority and wasn't princely state. The question was about Princely states. You said the Ruler can decide the fate of the residents, So why the other states weren't allowed to implement their decision then?

As for you other logic, I think it was wrong to ask for independence from British Empire then, Why not Hindus and muslims should have given up arms and their freedom movement and should have served them as millions of others were serving? Fact of the matter is that it is human nature that they don't allow outsiders to rule them. Kashmir as a whole was a princely state and as a whole was a muslim Majority. You cannot point out separate portions and say look that part was buddhist that part is Hindu etc etc. Because if that's the case then all the parts(even if it was a small town) of Hindustan should have been scatteredly converted into India and Pakistan, rather than deciding the fate of states as a whole..

 

[chandbibi]

They were not allowed because there was no contiguous border and having such pockets would have made it untenable. Such countries do not exist anywhere in the world. By your formula some villages in pakistan would be india and some villages in India would be pakistan. This is. why junagadh and hyd could not have joined pakistan. You are also forgetting that in the british times the geographic dispensation was very different. Bombay presidency included karachi and gujarat. Why did so many people have to migrate from India to pakistan and vice versa? We could have let them stay where they were and called one village India and another one Pakistan. But that didn't make any sense.

So we would need to go in to the details of the states as they existed back then to see how and why their partition based on religion was so difficult. In any case now we are partitioned and nearly 70 years have passed. We are in no position to do anything about our current boundaries. What has happened was neither done by you nor by me we have inherited this past. At the time of partition there wasn't so much of bitterness as there is today in spite of religious rioting at that time. Now all we have between us is bad blood and hatred and mistrust. How can anything get resolved in such circumstances?

I have asked you something which you didn't answer. Again Bangladesh was Muslim majority and wasn't princely state. The question was about Princely states. You said the Ruler can decide the fate of the residents, So why the other states weren't allowed to implement their decision then?

As for you other logic, I think it was wrong to ask for independence from British Empire then, Why not Hindus and muslims should have given up arms and their freedom movement and should have served them as millions of others were serving? Fact of the matter is that it is human nature that they don't allow outsiders to rule them. Kashmir as a whole was a princely state and as a whole was a muslim Majority. You cannot point out separate portions and say look that part was buddhist that part is Hindu etc etc. Because if that's the case then all the parts(even if it was a small town) of Hindustan should have been scatteredly converted into India and Pakistan, rather than deciding the fate of states as a whole..

 

[miafridi]

They were not allowed because there was no contiguous border and having such pockets would have made it untenable. Such countries do not exist anywhere in the world. By your formula some villages in pakistan would be india and some villages in India would be pakistan. This is. why junagadh and hyd could not have joined pakistan. You are also forgetting that in the british times the geographic dispensation was very different. Bombay presidency included karachi and gujarat. Why did so many people have to migrate from India to pakistan and vice versa? We could have let them stay where they were and called one village India and another one Pakistan. But that didn't make any sense.

So we would need to go in to the details of the states as they existed back then to see how and why their partition based on religion was so difficult. In any case now we are partitioned and nearly 70 years have passed. We are in no position to do anything about our current boundaries. What has happened was neither done by you nor by me we have inherited this past. At the time of partition there wasn't so much of bitterness as there is today in spite of religious rioting at that time. Now all we have between us is bad blood and hatred and mistrust. How can anything get resolved in such circumstances?

What you have written in the first paragraph isn't what I said. But It was you who said that in Kashmir a particular part belong to buddist majority and a certain part belong to hindus etc etc and I gave you the response that when partition was considered it wasn't village or district based but was based on a whole state. But now you are bringing in things like that part was hindu and that was buddist etc etc. I am saying that Kashmir as a whole was a muslim majority princely state..

As for your answer that contagious border should be kept in mind while deciding something, then for your information, kashmir has doubled the border with Pakistan and has better access from Pakistan than it is from India.. 2ndly if only contagious border was an issue then Why Bangladesh which didn't have any borders with Pakistan was allowed to be part of Pakistan, but not Hyderabad which like Bangladesh was only accessible through Sea route?

- So for your argument of contagious border Kashmir should have been part of Pakistan.
- And because of two nations theory it should have been part of Pakistan.
- But if you insist that the Ruler should decide the fate of its residents then Hyderabad, Junagarh, bantva mandavana and manipur should have been part of Pakistan.

In all cases India did injustice be it one way or another.. If they believed in a princely state ruler as the decider of the fate of its residents then they should also have done the same with Hyderabad, junagarh and other states. Simple isn't it? If they didn't believe in this theory, then they should have kept hyderabad, junagarh and other states but should have not accepted or intervened in Kashmir isn't it?

 

[SAIT_]

The UN resolution died long ago. It is not under an enforceable section and in 2010 kashmir has been removed from list of disputed territories. Pakistanis live in their own delusional world. Kashmir is a law and order internal matter of India. India does nothing there, they kill their own police, loot arms and terrorists stand behind stone pelters and throw bombs. Are the lives of our law enforcement agencies cheap? If these stone pelters stay home they can have their peace and quiet nobody is going to disturb them. And terrorists can rot in hell where they belong.

Wow, please stop smoking whatever sh!t you are smoking these days. Ok for sake of discussion even I accept that UN resolution is not in affect, but still kashmir is an international issue, Indian government has negotiated with Pakistan on Kashmir for so many times in the past which. If Kashmir is internal issue of india then why they negotiated on Kashmir with Pakistan.

This is enough to prove that Pakistan and Pakistani has a right to raise their concern on what is going on in Kashmir. Please stop making yourself a fool. You need to educate yourself.

You shameless has claimed that people behind the stone pelter throw bombs, can you show how many bombs has been thrown by Kashmiri people in last few days, even though over 50 people are brutally killed by occupied forces. Freedom is right of Kashmiri people, only a coward will stay home and surrender their right. So far kashmiries have proved that they are not coward like indian.

 

[chandbibi]

I suggest that you get out of this victim mentality and look at the realities of today. During partition populations moved because places could not be moved. Hindus and Sikhs moved out of pakistan and muslims from UP, Bihar, Gujrat, Rajasthan and central India moved to Pakistan.
Why did they move then? You should have allowed Lahore and nankana sahib to be part of India. why the double standards always. You only care about muslims because you are selfish and have always been. Your two nation theory was a prime example of selfishness and it is based on bloodshed and communal violence. Given your propensity to violence you are now faced with terrorism and radicalization. Give some thought why there is so much violence in pakistan despite your existence being on common religion. Your policy is to get famous by troubling others and that is called infamy. You should ask the late maharaja hari singh why he acceded his princely state to India. Your fake history may be telling you some story of victimization but the truth is out there for every sane person to see. Why should the world want another failed state on its map?

What you have written in the first paragraph isn't what I said. But It was you who said that in Kashmir a particular part belong to buddist majority and a certain part belong to hindus etc etc and I gave you the response that when partition was considered it wasn't village or district based but was based on a whole state. But now you are bringing in things like that part was hindu and that was buddist etc etc. I am saying that Kashmir as a whole was a muslim majority princely state..

As for your answer that contagious border should be kept in mind while deciding something, then for your information, kashmir has doubled the border with Pakistan and has better access from Pakistan than it is from India.. 2ndly if only contagious border was an issue then Why Bangladesh which didn't have any borders with Pakistan was allowed to be part of Pakistan, but not Hyderabad which like Bangladesh was only accessible through Sea route?

- So for your argument of contagious border Kashmir should have been part of Pakistan.
- And because of two nations theory it should have been part of Pakistan.
- But if you insist that the Ruler should decide the fate of its residents then Hyderabad, Junagarh, bantva mandavana and manipur should have been part of Pakistan.

In all cases India did injustice be it one way or another.. If they believed in a princely state ruler as the decider of the fate of its residents then they should also have done the same with Hyderabad, junagarh and other states. Simple isn't it? If they didn't believe in this theory, then they should have kept hyderabad, junagarh and other states but should have not accepted or intervened in Kashmir isn't it?

 

[chandbibi]

The only reason its still an international issue is because you have occupied part of kashmir which belongs to hari singh's princely state and should be allowed to rejoin with India. We are not discussing valley or any part of Indian Kashmir with you. We are discussing POK with you.
Time to get real! The last people to be talking about brutal occupation and killing are pakistanis. You know the reason very well.
Now tell us when you are vacating POK.

Wow, please stop smoking whatever sh!t you are smoking these days. Ok for sake of discussion even I accept that UN resolution is not in affect, but still kashmir is an international issue, Indian government has negotiated with Pakistan on Kashmir for so many times in the past which. If Kashmir is internal issue of india then why they negotiated on Kashmir with Pakistan.

This is enough to prove that Pakistan and Pakistani has a right to raise their concern on what is going on in Kashmir. Please stop making yourself a fool. You need to educate yourself.

You shameless has claimed that people behind the stone pelter throw bombs, can you show how many bombs has been thrown by Kashmiri people in last few days, even though over 50 people are brutally killed by occupied forces. Freedom is right of Kashmiri people, only a coward will stay home and surrender their right. So far kashmiries have proved that they are not coward like indian.