What's new

Unrest in Kashmir : A neutral and comprehensive report by Caspian report

. . . .
.
It mentions Lahore declaration but skips over Kargil, the great betrayal after Lahore declaration which necessitated the presence of armed forces in Kashmir. It skipped 65 war initiated by Pakistan. Biased report
 
. . . .
It mentions Lahore declaration but skips over Kargil, the great betrayal after Lahore declaration which necessitated the presence of armed forces in Kashmir. It skipped 65 war initiated by Pakistan. Biased report


ya right...everything is biased for u or Pakistan funded....heck i donot know who is Caspian Report.....

it has given the most comprehensive analysis of illegal occupation of Kashmir...time to give them independence or India faces another generation of bleed India.
 
.
Name them now. He is a Shia Muslim by the way.

Ah where do I start ? I dont even remember if I remember all from the video. But here are a few glaring ones-

1. In the beginning he mentions that Kashmir's Hindu ruler joined India after which Pakistan invaded Kashmir. Truth is that the Hindu ruler was undecided on who to join when Pakistan invaded Kashmir to annex it apprehending that he might join India. It is only when the Hindu ruler heard about the news and the massacres, raping and pillaging the Pak irregulars were causing that he requested India for military help. India asked the ruler to sign the instrument of accession in favour of India. Once he did that, it was only after this that India sent its military to Kashmir, to the territory that it legally owned now.

2. He doesn't even make a mention about the massacre of Kashmiri Hindu minorty by Muslim miltants in Kashmir and from Pakistan which led to the mass exodus of the Kashmiri Hindu community. Around more than 300 Hindu minorities (roughly) were massacred in 1989 itself when the separatism movement started.

3. He called the protestors unarmed, when in reality these protestors are usually huge mobs armed with stones and bricks and have caused deaths as well. Btw, how do even 4000 policemen get injured if these protestors were "unarmed" ? Lying through his teeth.

4. While mentioning the casualties in the current conflict he mentioned 60+ civilans dead but doesnt mention the 2 members of security personnel that were killed in cold blood by these so called unarmed protestors. Here's an example.

http://news.sky.com/story/kashmir-violence-mob-drowns-policeman-10498355

5. He doesn't mention the civilian deaths caused by Kashmiri and Pakistan terrorist organisations. There are plenty, including of Muslim civilans who were perceived to be supportive of India or informers.

6. Besides, he didn't mention the terror attacks by militant organisation on Indian forces. I can understand he doesnt cover the attack on Indian forces yesterday that killed 18 soldiers while sleeping in Kashmir but there have been many such attacks in the past and he doesnt even mention them.

^^^ These are the few glaring mistakes and deliberate omissions.
 
Last edited:
.
He is pretty good in summing up the situation in a relatively small clip... one can say he missed this and that but this is not an exhaustive report.. this will do for people who dont know what the fuss is all about.
based on his grip on the subject(he got pretty good researchers i would say).. i tend to think his other reports are accurate too.
 
.
Simple if a Pakistani is posting an "unbiased" report it will be one which supports its stand. If an Indian is posting an "unbiased" report it will be the one which will support India's stand

So "unbiased" reports will not convince anyone
 
.
Unbiased my a*s :lol:

He is an Azerbaijani Muslim supporting his co-coreligionists in Pakistan just like his country.

I found so many factual inaccuracies. I wont even bother listing out , they are so many.
That's it so you are saying it is Hinduism vs Islam right? Good :)
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom