India hosts Balochistan based terror head in its Capital.

[kasper95]

I agree completely and we shouldn't be covert on Baluchistan issue we should support them openly.

we will never do anything of that sort openly.
other than false bravado there is no added incentive in supporting openly. the very idea of proxy war will be defeated if anything can be traced back to us.

All we have to do is to return the favor in kind every time they try to do something to us.

 

[vsdoc]

we will never do anything of that sort openly.

Precisely.

Pakistani pleasure at what they see as Indian acceptance of meddling in Balochistan or elsewhere will remain limited to keyboard warriors.

After all, how else does a non combatant ever get the satisfaction of hitting the enemy ?

PDF has been doing a commendable job in providing this vicarious pleasure to both sides.

Am sure the real soldiers are mildly amused. Or disgustedly disdainful.

Good morning people.

 

[third eye]

Uno or any such org. Or any party who was ever shown that original Doc.?

Typos was pointed out,that when u claim such statements to be some official ones, u dont post ones with such tons of typos .... cuz then they lose credibility....u need this to be explained before you?

There is no way the UN would have intervened unless it was shared / shown the original document.

Next, why dont you read the standstill agreement Pak agreed to with Kashmir and then asses if Pak did right by sending in troops. Once it forced the issue then all bets are off.

 

[wiseone2]

What is the analogy in between kashmir and Baluchistan on the basis of which indians so desperate to support a movement for its seperation? Is there any official document (like multiple in case of Kashmir) which supports seperation? Please share anybody..

there was no official document for Bangladesh either

 

[Shamain]

There is no way the UN would have intervened unless it was shared / shown the original document.

Next, why dont you read the standstill agreement Pak agreed to with Kashmir and then asses if Pak did right by sending in troops. Once it forced the issue then all bets are off.

I want to read a typos free agreement. Anyways, ihave heard indianever produced originall I.o.A doc before any party.
Most important thing, Uno had rejected ur so called I.o.A.
I dont think so u wud be unfamiliar with this fact.

 

[third eye]

I want to read a typos free agreement. Anyways, ihave heard indianever produced originall I.o.A doc before any party.

I have heard ..sounds familiar.

Google nahin hai kya .. use it .

Most important thing, Uno had rejected ur so called I.o.A.

Link

 

[Zarvan]

After Pakistan Kashmir India turns focus on Balochistan

Updated: October 8, 2015 01:46 IST

• 
  
  
  • KALLOL BHATTACHERJEE
  • SUHASINI HAIDAR

BLO confirms presence of its political representative in Delhi After highlighting the alleged human rights violations in the Pakistani Kashmir, India is preparing to take an aggressive position on Balochistan, in a marked departure from South Block’s Pakistan policy of the past. The new Indian position over Balochistan became public when Balochistan Liberation Organisation (BLO) representative Balaach Pardili addressed a gathering in New Delhi on October 4, reading out a statement from BLO’s exiled leader Nawabzada Hyrbyair Marri. BLO, which is in favour of freedom of Balochistan from Pakistan, has confirmed to The Hindu about the presence of its political representative in Delhi.

Mr. Pardili, who originally hails from Afghanistan, has been living in Delhi since 2009 and was recently contacted by Nawabzada Marri to represent him at public meetings. The London-based Nawabzada Hyrbyair Marri is the leader of Free Balochistan Movement with a militant arm, Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), and BLO, the political wing. “I hope to facilitate Nawabzada Marri’s visit to Delhi in near future,” Pardili told The Hindu. In a statement to The Hindu, Nawabzada Marri said: “We wish that India, the largest democracy, have a clear policy about Balochistan. If Pakistani officials can openly meet the Kashmiri leadership, why shouldn’t India do the same?

The Red Cross does not have a hotline on Balochistan despite our repeated pleas. I want India’s help to start a crisis hotline with the Red Cross.” While the dynamics of the new policy have not been fleshed out, officials confirmed to The Hindu that both *** and Balochistan will be used more and more when India faces allegations from Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir. “This is an evolving policy. Remember, that taking up Pakistani kashmir and Balochistan is an old idea that hasn’t been worked upon within the government over the past few years,” a senior official said, referring to a proposal for highlighting human rights violations in Pakistan during the previous NDA government under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

Interestingly, National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, who is understood to have pushed the new line on Pakistan, was Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) in 2004. The event of September 4, in which Mr. Pardili featured as Nawabzada Marri’s representative, was organised by Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena which runs namopatrika.com, an e-publication supporting Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of “broad-based prosperity” in India. Subsequently, the video of the event was tweeted by some Baloch activists.

Speaking to The Hindu, Mr. Pardili said he feels safe in Delhi and has the support of a section of the BJP led by R.S.N. Singh and Tejender Singh of Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena. Mr. Pardili is confident of creating awareness on the oppression of the Baloch people in Pakistan. “Balochistan is divided among three countries, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. But the atrocities are taking place inside Pakistan which has conducted five military operations against the Baloch people and the last campaign that they began in 2004 has left 19,000 dead and many more displaced and missing. Pakistan also encourages the Taliban to torture the Baloch inside Afghanistan.” Tejender Singh says that next, Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena will take Mr. Pardili to the prominent universities of India, including JNU.

After ***, India turns focus on Balochistan - The Hindu

It's time to take revenge in most ruthless and brutal manner. It's time to make India pay.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

India has been playing this game longer than we have. It's about time they showed their true colours. And they have the audacity to call us terrorist. Indians are the definition of a hypocrite. Shameless nation.

 

[naveen mishra]

simply i love it........

 

[Bratva]

India confirms presence of BLA chief Hyrbyair Marri in New Delhi

By Web Desk
Published: October 9, 2015

Baloch separatist leader and head of the Balochistan Liberation Army Nawabzada Hyrbyair Marri is present in New Delhi, India confirmed on Thursday.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Vikas Swarup confirming Marri’s presence in India, said, “India has always been home to the persecuted people from all over the world.”

Indian newspaper, The Hindu, had reported that New Delhi-based Balaach Pardili, a representative of the Hyrbyair Marri-led Baloch Liberation Front/Free Balochistan Movement, has begun campaigning for the freedom of Balochistan from Pakistan.

Marri who has been living in London confirmed to The Hindu that Pardili has been assigned the task of representing him in public events in India.

“We deserve India’s support as India is the largest democracy and we believe India must shoulder the responsibility of upholding the tradition of democracy and human rights in the South Asian region,” Marri said.

Pardili, who made a public appearance on October 4 under the banner of Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena (BSKS), told the newspaper that he is ready to campaign under the banner of BSKS for separation of Balochistan from Pakistan.

Meanwhile, Pakistan said the presence of Pardili in Delhi proves India is fomenting trouble in Balochistan.

According to the report, a Pakistani diplomatic source said that in response, Pakistan might take up issues in India’s northeastern region.

Further, in July this year, the Balochistan government stepped up informal efforts to reach out to an estranged Baloch leader living in self-exile. A delegation comprising two influential tribal chieftains met’ with Khan of Kalat Prince Agha Mir Suleman Dawood. Prince Suleman, the 35th leader of the defunct Kalat royal family and the grandson of Beglar Begi Mir Ahmed Yar Khan, has been living in self-exile in London since the killing of Jamhoori Wattan Party chief Nawab Akbar Bugti in a military operation in 2006.

Balochistan has been wrecked by a bloody insurgency since 2004, which became bloodier since the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti in 2006. Baloch leaders living in self-exile, Hyrbyair Marri and Brahamdagh Bugti, have been blamed for fueling the insurgency from abroad.

However, last month self-exiled Baloch Republican Army (BRA) leader Brahumdagh Bugti agreed to hold talks with the government on the Balochistan issue, hinting at the possibility of withdrawing demands of separation — provided that was what the people in the province wanted.

In August this year, the government decided to approach five countries and the United Nations to seek extradition of top Baloch insurgents accused of fomenting unrest in Balochistan which has been in the throes of a low-profile separatist insurgency since 2006.

“We are taking up the issue of Baloch insurgents with five countries (India, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Iran and Afghanistan),” said a top security official, who did not want to be named. Dr Allah Nazar, Hyrbyair Marri, Brahumdagh Bugti, Javed Mengal
and some other wanted insurgents are commanding their fighters in the province, he added.

Hyrbyair, the head of the BLA, has been living in self-exile in the United Kingdom, where he has been granted political asylum. The BLA has been responsible for most violence in Balochistan.

During the 70th United Nations General Assembly meeting earlier this month, Pakistan handed over three dossiers to the UN secretary general, cataloguing what officials in Islamabad say is ‘irrefutable’ evidence of India’s involvement in fomenting terrorism and instability in their country.

The dossiers included details of Indian interference and support for terrorism in Balochistan and Karachi, as well as its security and intelligence agencies’ link with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), revealed Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the UN Bilal Ahmad.

This article originally appeared on The Hindu.

Source: India confirms presence of BLA chief Hyrbyair Marri in New Delhi

simply i love it........

Tum jesay haramkhor hotay hai who supports child murderers and innocent killers !

 

[BijliMamu]

there was no official document for Bangladesh either

Ambiguity at its high. Dont make it complex bro. Give me a solid analogy. No bu*sh*t..

 

[somebozo]

Well....lets talk about terrorism..where are the Indian trolls??
India having maximum pain from operation in Baluchistan ...I say Pak Army should simply start taking out these sardars in massive strikes without mercy!

Gawadr will be home to Chinese Navy...Chahbar will also fall under Chinese influence...India playing with Baluch rebels will also irk the Iranians who are sensitive to developments in Baluchistan-Sistan region for their own political stability!

 

[Shamain]

I have heard ..sounds familiar.

Google nahin hai kya .. use it .



Link

If I.O.A was accepted then why Uno had called for pleb? Nehru had gone to uno with claim over j and k which uno had rejected and gave te right to ppl. Why if i.o.A was accepted by uno then she calles for pleb? Answer me.

And here is some for everyone's entertainment over indian lies. Reality of ur Instrument of Accession.

Kashmir: The origins of the dispute

By Victoria Schofield, author of Kashmir in Conflict
In August 1947 when the Indian subcontinent became independent from Britain, all the rulers of the 565 princely states, whose lands comprised two-fifths of India and a population 99 million, had to decide which of the two new dominions to join, India or Pakistan.

The ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, whose state was situated between the two new countries, could not decide which country to join.

He was Hindu, his population was predominantly Muslim. He therefore did nothing.


Instead he signed a "standstill" agreement with Pakistan in order that services such as trade, travel and communication would be uninterrupted.

India did not sign a similar agreement.

Law and order

In October 1947, Pashtun tribesmen from Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province invaded Kashmir.

There had been persistent reports of communal violence against Muslims in the state and, supported by the Pakistani Government, they were eager to precipitate its accession to Pakistan.


Mountbatten favoured Kashmir's temporary accession to India
Troubled by the increasing deterioration in law and order and by earlier raids, culminating in the invasion of the tribesmen, the ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, requested armed assistance from India.

The then Governor-General, Lord Mountbatten, believed the developing situation would be less explosive if the state were to accede to India, on the understanding that this would only be temporary prior to "a referendum, plebiscite, election".

According to the terms of the Instrument of Accession, India's jurisdiction was to extend to external affairs, defence and communications.

Troops airlifted

Exactly when Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession has been hotly debated for over 50 years.

Official Indian accounts state that in the early hours of the morning of 26 October, Hari Singh fled from Srinagar, arriving in Jammu later in the day, where he was met by V P Menon, representative of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and signed the Instrument of Accession.

On the morning of 27 October, Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar.

Recent research, from British sources, has indicated that Hari Singh did not reach Jammu until the evening of 26 October and that, due to poor flying conditions, V P Menon was unable to get to Jammu until the morning of 27 October , by which time Indian troops were already arriving in Srinagar.

In order to support the thesis that the Maharaja acceded before Indian troops landed, Indian sources have now suggested that Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession before he left Srinagar but that it was not made public until later.

This was because Hari Singh had not yet agreed to include the Kashmiri leader, Sheikh Abdullah, in his future government. To date no authentic original document has been made available.

Pakistan immediately contested the accession, suggesting that it was fraudulent, that the Maharaja acted under duress and that he had no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan was still in force.

Pakistanis also argued that because Hari Singh fled from the valley of Kashmir , he was not in control of his state and therefore not in a position to take a decision on behalf of his people.

'Bad faith'

In the context of Pakistan's claim that there is a dispute over the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the accession issue forms a significant aspect of their argument.

By stating that the Instrument of Accession was signed on 26 October, when it clearly was not, Pakistan believes that India has not shown good faith and consequently that this invalidates the Instrument of Accession.

Indians argue, however, that regardless of the discrepancies over timing, the Maharaja did choose to accede to India and he was not under duress.

On the basis of his accession, India claims ownership of the entire state which includes the approximately one-third of the territory currently administered by Pakistan.

In 1949 Maharaja Hari Singh was obliged by the Government of India to leave the state and hand over the government to Sheikh Abdullah.

He died in Bombay in 1962


BBC NEWS | South Asia | Kashmir: The origins of the dispute

@engineer saad @fakhre mirpur read thisentire bbc article iposted

 

[deckingraj]

This is on expected line...India is going to be aggressive about her approach with Pakistan...This has been very evident from the way recent events have happened....I mean look at it...Indian leaders have never been so vocal about P-O-K as they have been under Modi........Aggressive response on LOC/IB has never been heard(as per best of my memory) of in Indian circles before....trying to draw new red lines in terms of bilateral talks and now this feather....

Much to Pakistan friends dislike, Indian strategist were long favoring such moves...In fact on various talk shows experts used to criticize govt. not milking Balochistan unrest in pakistan....may be those things are a history now?? Or may be this is more of messaging...that we are also prepared to return the favor should nefarious activities in kashmir doesn't halt??

 

[Burhan Wani]

If I.O.A was accepted then why Uno had called for pleb? Nehru had gone to uno with claim over j and k which uno had rejected and gave te right to ppl. Why if i.o.A was accepted by uno then she calles for pleb? Answer me.

And here is some for everyone's entertainment over indian lies. Reality of ur Instrument of Accession.

Kashmir: The origins of the dispute

By Victoria Schofield, author of Kashmir in Conflict
In August 1947 when the Indian subcontinent became independent from Britain, all the rulers of the 565 princely states, whose lands comprised two-fifths of India and a population 99 million, had to decide which of the two new dominions to join, India or Pakistan.

The ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, whose state was situated between the two new countries, could not decide which country to join.

He was Hindu, his population was predominantly Muslim. He therefore did nothing.


Instead he signed a "standstill" agreement with Pakistan in order that services such as trade, travel and communication would be uninterrupted.

India did not sign a similar agreement.

Law and order

In October 1947, Pashtun tribesmen from Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province invaded Kashmir.

There had been persistent reports of communal violence against Muslims in the state and, supported by the Pakistani Government, they were eager to precipitate its accession to Pakistan.


Mountbatten favoured Kashmir's temporary accession to India
Troubled by the increasing deterioration in law and order and by earlier raids, culminating in the invasion of the tribesmen, the ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, requested armed assistance from India.

The then Governor-General, Lord Mountbatten, believed the developing situation would be less explosive if the state were to accede to India, on the understanding that this would only be temporary prior to "a referendum, plebiscite, election".

According to the terms of the Instrument of Accession, India's jurisdiction was to extend to external affairs, defence and communications.

Troops airlifted

Exactly when Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession has been hotly debated for over 50 years.

Official Indian accounts state that in the early hours of the morning of 26 October, Hari Singh fled from Srinagar, arriving in Jammu later in the day, where he was met by V P Menon, representative of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and signed the Instrument of Accession.

On the morning of 27 October, Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar.

Recent research, from British sources, has indicated that Hari Singh did not reach Jammu until the evening of 26 October and that, due to poor flying conditions, V P Menon was unable to get to Jammu until the morning of 27 October , by which time Indian troops were already arriving in Srinagar.

In order to support the thesis that the Maharaja acceded before Indian troops landed, Indian sources have now suggested that Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession before he left Srinagar but that it was not made public until later.

This was because Hari Singh had not yet agreed to include the Kashmiri leader, Sheikh Abdullah, in his future government. To date no authentic original document has been made available.

Pakistan immediately contested the accession, suggesting that it was fraudulent, that the Maharaja acted under duress and that he had no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan was still in force.

Pakistanis also argued that because Hari Singh fled from the valley of Kashmir , he was not in control of his state and therefore not in a position to take a decision on behalf of his people.

'Bad faith'

In the context of Pakistan's claim that there is a dispute over the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the accession issue forms a significant aspect of their argument.

By stating that the Instrument of Accession was signed on 26 October, when it clearly was not, Pakistan believes that India has not shown good faith and consequently that this invalidates the Instrument of Accession.

Indians argue, however, that regardless of the discrepancies over timing, the Maharaja did choose to accede to India and he was not under duress.

On the basis of his accession, India claims ownership of the entire state which includes the approximately one-third of the territory currently administered by Pakistan.

In 1949 Maharaja Hari Singh was obliged by the Government of India to leave the state and hand over the government to Sheikh Abdullah.

He died in Bombay in 1962


BBC NEWS | South Asia | Kashmir: The origins of the dispute

@engineer saad @fakhre mirpur read thisentire bbc article iposted

I dont know why they started from 1947 what about post independent uprisings by kashmiri muslims.
- Quit Kashmir movement and poonch rebellion.
- They also ignore the role of Ex brirish army officers and Jawans WW1 and WW2 veterans.
- The creation of war council is also missing.
I will rate this article 2/10.