hassamun
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2016
- Messages
- 771
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hmm so a minor who was in her house at time of pelting was not innocent hmmIrrelevant. There is no innocent on streets in a protest being held in curfew.
Very interesting.
Could you quote the oath of office that these officers have to take? could you give me a copy of the constitution they follow, for my study?
Thanks.
Hmm so a minor who was in her house at time of pelting was not innocent hmm
Not many people know that there is a President and a Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir...It would be a good step for India to follow...
Before our friends bring in Baluchistan we should remind them that even Liberation Parties are represented there...They have won a few seats in Baluchistan Parliament...
Kashmir is part of Pakistan that is why we observe Black Day not bloody indians.... genrations of these Bloody Indians will never understand this until Kashmir gets freedom
So real events become rants when they dont fit your narrative hmmDid you ascertain those facts or is it the usual nonsensical rant on Kashmir?
Because if you read the post #228 of @hassamun who I was replying to before you decided to come in with this tripe, you will find explicitly and eloquently detailed the circumstances of this incident.
Somehow the grey cells undergo increased atrophy when Kashmir is written anywhere, eh?
I can post counter-nonsensical claims ... so maybe just can the nonsense.
We know that.
Also we had the same system till we decided to assimilate the state.
WOW!!!
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS SINCERELY REGRETTED IF FELT
"....wake me up, when bullshit ends"
Inspired from the album 'The American Idiot', Track 7 'Wake Me Up When September Ends' by Green Day
Will keep up this line for all BS that is posted .. across the spectrum
So real events become rants when they dont fit your narrative hmm
http://m.greaterkashmir.com/news/kashmir/story/223073.html
So using pellets that have blinded hundreds is a non lethal way hmm in most of the world only rubber bullets,water cannons and tear gas are used to disperse charged crowds but their main aim isnt crowd control its harming them so that their will to resist is eliminatedTake up with your fellow country man ...
And the piece is nonsense .... no one .. fires into a house. First go to kashmir and then see how the crowd control is done there by police.
Do you even know the procedures before fire is initiated?
Seriously man, I try to be neutral as I am always open to views and ideas but such nonsense which is perpetuated contrary to all logic, infuriates me.
And being a proponent of less lethal and more effective crowd control measures, it really infuriates me when such incidents are incorrectly projected.
How many times has this issue been discussed. It's like flogging a dead horse. Here are your answers in brief.
As per UN Resolutions of 1948, Part II, it very clearly states that Pakistan is to withdraw all its forces included those tribals used for the purpose of fighting in J&K. (That includes Pak Administered Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan).
.
But now Pakistan has complicated things further by gifting 5800 sq km of Kashmir's Shaksgam Valley to China in 1963, against the wishes of the Kashmiri people.
India claims that acceptance of Resolution 47 (1948) was stated by Nehru to be conditional on the withdrawal of Pakistani forces from territory within the 1947 boundaries of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, in accordance with the terms of that Resolution. Pakistani forces have, of course, never been withdrawn.
The factual position is as under:-
(a) The demilitarization of Jammu and Kashmir was to take place in a synchronized manner on both sides of the ceasefire line. It was India which refused to implement the process of demilitarization.
(b) The proof of Indian refusal to demilitarize is to be found in the report of Sir Owen Dixon (an eminent Australian Jurist and United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan) to the Security Council, contained in Document S-1971, in which he concluded as follows:-
"In the end, I became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any form or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of any such character, as would in my opinion, permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which the freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperilled."(Para 52 of Document S/1971).
(c) It should also be noted that after a thorough examination of the matter the Security Council in its Resolution No. 98(1952), adopted on 23rd December 1952, allowed both India and Pakistan to maintain a limited number of their forces on each side of the cease-fire line at the end of the period of demilitarization in order to maintain law and order. This number was to be between 3000-6000 armed forces remaining on the Pakistani side and 12000-18000 remaining on the Indian side of the cease-fire line. Pakistan agreed to this proposal; India did not.
(d) To claim, in the face of this clear and irrefutable evidence, that the plebiscite could not be held because Pakistan refused to withdraw its forces, is patently an attempt to deceive the world. The simple truth is that India did not allow the creation of conditions necessary for the holding of a free and fair plebiscite under UN auspices.
Almost every scholar holds that, to the contrary, it was Pakistan which acquired 750 sq. miles of administered territory.
https://defence.pk/threads/what-we-...-know-the-sino-pak-boundary-agreement.310842/
So using pellets that have blinded hundreds is a non lethal way hmm in most of the world only rubber bullets,water cannons and tear gas are used to disperse charged crowds but their main aim isnt crowd control its harming them so that their will to resist is eliminated
You are wrong. Here is the link to resolution 47 from the United Nations website. It clearly states that Pakistan must clear out of all of Kashmir; then once it is proven that Pakistan has got out, then India should reduce its military to minimum required to maintain law and order. Then and only then will there be referendum required. Read it yourself.
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/47(1948)
Dixon proposal also involved removal of Sheikh Abdullah from power
"Dixon, however, had offered no alternative. He had taken position there could be no fair plebiscite under Abdullah regime. It was on this issue and nothing else discussions had broken down. GOI was still willing to discuss direct with GOP or under auspices SC solution involving partition with plebiscite in Vale under conditions which reasonable observers U.N. must consider fair"
I quote Noorani above.