Kashmiris must be allowed to decide their future: Imran Khan

[Nilgiri]

we are ready anytime .

lets finish this madness make a free country called kashmir

How did that concept turn out with Danzig (now called Gdansk)?

 

[Soumitra]

Converting LoC to IB is Indian wish not acceptable to Pakistan's or Kashmiris. That's fine if you don't want peace, nobody is forcing you. Pakistan will keep shooting indian occupiers and at the same time continue to show world that it wishes peace dialouges.

We will keep killing the terrorists and using pellets on protestors. You can keep crying in the UN while world continues to ignore you and do billions of dollars of business with us. Like I said the status quo suits us.

There is a saying "Paisa Khuda To Nahin, Par Khuda Ki Kasam Khuda Se Kam Bhi Nahi"

Till India is a rich economy with a lot of money no nation is going to help you in your quest to liberate Kashmir and this fact is not going to change in a very long time.

Even you got your bharat back after like 800 or 900 years...comparing to that 71 years is a joke.

That is right and you think that after all these years we will let go the land of Rishi Kashyap to some mulla with an AK47 ?

 

[American Pakistani]

We will keep killing the terrorists and using pellets on protestors. You can keep crying in the UN while world continues to ignore you and do billions of dollars of business with us. Like I said the status quo suits us.

There is a saying "Paisa Khuda To Nahin, Par Khuda Ki Kasam Khuda Se Kam Bhi Nahi"

Till India is a rich economy with a lot of money no nation is going to help you in your quest to liberate Kashmir and this fact is not going to change in a very long time.


That is right and you think that after all these years we will let go the land of Rishi Kashyap to some mulla with an AK47 ?

And Pakistan will also killing whoever of those 7 lakh indian occupier terrorists they find.

And yes I agree the ignorant world will ignore indian terrorism for sake of milking bharat mata.

And you think Pakistan will let go an important part that belongs to IVC? Just keep status quo and Pakistan will keep doing what it is.

 

[Soumitra]

And Pakistan will also killing whoever of those 7 lakh indian occupier terrorists they find.

And yes I agree the ignorant world will ignore indian terrorism for sake of milking bharat mata.

And you think Pakistan will let go an important part that belongs to IVC? Just keep status quo and Pakistan will keep doing what it is.

Then don't call for "peace talks" when the whole world knows that you are not serious

 

[American Pakistani]

Then don't call for "peace talks" when the whole world knows that you are not serious

Well, Pakistan has to prove the world that it is peace wishing while india is a peace blocker and destroyer.

 

[HalfMoon]

More like inherently contradictory.

No contradiction at all.

Hinduism believes that there are many paths to attain moksha. So it does matter if you believe in Jesus or Allah or Vishnu or Shiva or Buddha or a non believer. Every path is acceptable.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

No contradiction at all.

It's filled with contradictions. Hinduism contains ideas which espouse atheistic, monotheistic, polytheistic and pantheistic (among other) ideas. You cannot have a coherent ideology that supports all of these different philosophical ideas.

Every path is acceptable.

Then what's with this "ghar wapsi" nonsense?

 

[HalfMoon]

^^ This document is bogus. In 1995 Indian authorities claimed that the original copy of the treaty (letter of accession) was either stolen or lost

Unfortunately for you, Just because you say it does not make it bogus.

The document is officially provided by Government of India as a response to RTI application.

International law clearly states that every treaty entered into by a member of the United Nations must be registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations. "The Instrument of Accession" was neither presented to the United Nations nor to Pakistan. Hence India cannot invoke the treaty before any organ of the United Nations

The Instrument of Accession document was accepted on 27th October, 1947 by accepted by Lord Mountbatten.

India is a founding member of the United Nations. On June 26, 1945, India was among 50 countries to sign the UN charter. India joined the United Nations after ratifying the UN Charter on October 30, 1945.

http://in.one.un.org/page/un-celebrating-70-years/

So India joined UN as British India. The document of accession was also accepted by the authorized head of the British India.

Even though India got Independence on 15th August, 1947 it was still a dominion and became a full republic on 26th January 1950.

Jammu and Kashmir's Document of Accession In Public Domain At Last
All India | Written by Sidharth Pandey | Updated: October 27, 2016 01:23 IST
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored
3/4/5 BHK Row Houses Off International Airport Rd. True Meaning Of Luxury & Conveniences. … (Assetz Property)
These Twins Were Named "Most Beautiful In The World," Wait Till You See Them Today (Give It Love)


SHARE
EMAIL
PRINT
1COMMENTS

Jammu and Kashmir's Maharaja Hari Singh had acceded to India on October 26, 1947.


NEW DELHI:
HIGHLIGHTS

1. National archives has given permission to take copies of the document
2. Dr Karan Singh said it should silence critics who question its existence
3. Pakistan has cited papers that claim this document is a myth

For decades, crucial documents relating to accession of princely states to join India had been locked away in government files. But no longer.

For months, RTI campaigner and programme coordinator with the Commonwealth human rights initiative, Venkatesh Nayak, had been trying to obtain the documents of accession of 540 princely states.

He had even filed an RTI with the home Ministry, which finally transferred his petition to the National archives. Recently, the national archives gave him permission to take copies of these documents.

"The accession of J&K is a fact of history known to all of us, but for the first time , citizens can look at the actual document," Mr Nayak said.

The ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, had acceded to India on October 26, 1947, by signing the "instrument of accession" like other princely states.

"I have not seen this document in decades and it brings with it a flood of emotions," Dr Karan Singh, Rajya Sabha lawmaker and son of Maharaja Hari Singh, told NDTV.

Dr Singh told NDTV that he recognized the document and the hand writing of his father.


"Invaders from across the border in Pakistan had crossed over into J&K and were about to take over the airport. Had it not been for the bravery of the Maharaja's soldiers, the airport would have fallen, making it impossible to sign the document," Dr Singh told NDTV.

The lawmaker said he hopes the document will silence critics from across the border, who had questioned its very existence.

Interestingly even at the time of writing this news report, Pakistan's ministry of foreign affairs website have links to documents challenging the signing of this document, calling it a myth.

Dr Karan Singh told NDTV that he was also present in his home on that day -- October 26, 1947, when his father, Maharaja Hari Singh, signed the instrument of accession. The document was sent along with a personal letter to Lord Mountbatten, who was the Governor General of India at the time.

1 COMMENT
"This is an important page from India's history and it is wonderful that it is being preserved in the national archives for the public to see," Dr Singh said.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/jam...of-accession-in-public-domain-at-last-1494726

Then you really have never looked outside Hinduism, not to forget having a very shallow understanding of Hinduism itself.

Help me understand where and exactly how is hinduism is inherently secular, and what makes you make a stupid claim that no other religion can beat that?

Many religions cannot accept god outside their set boundaries. Hinduism does not set any boundaries.

It's filled with contradictions. Hinduism contains ideas which espouse atheistic, monotheistic, polytheistic and pantheistic (among other) ideas. You cannot have a coherent ideology that supports all of these different philosophical ideas.

You are trying to understand Hinduism using Islamic logic hence you fail to understand it.

Two cardinal principles of Hinduism

1) There is no good or bad. There are only actions.

2) Some perceive god some don't. Everything is this universe is Maya.

Then what's with this "ghar wapsi" nonsense?

There is no concept of religious conversion into Hinduism.

Ghar Wapsi is political and has nothing to with Hinduism as a religion.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

You are trying to understand Hinduism using Islamic logic hence you fail to understand it.

No, I'm trying to understand Hinduism with general logic. It just so happens that Islam's ideology overlaps with this.

Two cardinal principles of Hinduism

1) There is no good or bad. There are only actions.

2) Some perceive god some don't. Everything is this universe is Maya.

You're not understanding my point. You cannot have ideas that espouse opposing ideologies whilst claiming that your religion is coherent, you need to pick one and roll with it otherwise you will fall into the problem of contradicting yourself.

There is no concept of religious conversion into Hinduism.

Ghar Wapsi is political and has nothing to with Hinduism as a religion.

I'm asking you why Hindus are doing it if there's no concept of it in Hinduism.

 

[HalfMoon]

No, I'm trying to understand Hinduism with general logic. It just so happens that Islam's ideology overlaps with this.

You're not understanding my point. You cannot have ideas that espouse opposing ideologies whilst claiming that your religion is coherent, you need to pick one and roll with it otherwise you will fall into the problem of contradicting yourself.

Think of this way. Hinduism is a super set of all religions that you could think off. For you it may look contradictory looking outside but for Hindus like me looking from outside every thing is normal.

I'm asking you why Hindus are doing it if there's no concept of it in Hinduism.

I have already answered it. Ayodhya and Ghar Wapsi are political issues not religious.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Unfortunately for you, Just because you say it does not make it bogus.

The document is officially provided by Government of India as a response to RTI application.

And unfortunately for you, just because you say it is not Bogus does not mean it is not bogus as it has never been presented to the UN or Pakistan ..... First supposed copy was published by India in 1960s ... And in 1995 it was claimed that the original Instrument of Accession is lost ... Until it was 'rediscovered' many years later !! ...

And here you are trying to tell us that just because an unknown person claims on the internet that he has seen the original Instrument of Accession, and an Indian politician confirms it, we should all believe him ... !!! Seriously??

The Instrument of Accession document was accepted on 27th October, 1947 by accepted by Lord Mountbatten.

India is a founding member of the United Nations. On June 26, 1945, India was among 50 countries to sign the UN charter. India joined the United Nations after ratifying the UN Charter on October 30, 1945.

http://in.one.un.org/page/un-celebrating-70-years/

So India joined UN as British India. The document of accession was also accepted by the authorized head of the British India.

Even though India got Independence on 15th August, 1947 it was still a dominion and became a full republic on 26th January 1950.

Republic of India and Pakistan are successor states of British India ... The document of accession was accepted by the head of the Republic of India... British India had ceased to exist by then ... British India and Republic of India are not the same ... stop being so naive

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Think of this way. Hinduism is a super set of all religions that you could think off.

I'm already thinking of it in that way, hence why I view it as being contradictory. My next question is, how can you believe in something that is inherently contradictory?

political issues not religious.

They're converting people to Hinduism, so clearly there's some religious motive behind it. I'm asking you to explain why this is the case.

 

[HalfMoon]

I'm already thinking of it in that way, hence why I view it as being contradictory. My next question is, how can you believe in something that is inherently contradictory?

You just believe what you want to believe in. That's it.

They're converting people to Hinduism, so clearly there's some religious motive behind it. I'm asking you to explain why this is the case.

It is just a political slogan and a jumla. No one is converting.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

You just believe what you want to believe in. That's it.

That isn't a very good principle to abide by. We should all seek the truth.

It is just a political slogan and a jumla.

Ok.

 

[HalfMoon]

That isn't a very good principle to abide by. We should all seek the truth.

You cannot define truth when you want people to discover it.

This is the reason why Hinduism does not define the path to finality. Everyone is expected to discover the truth in their own way.