Pro-freedom voices in Azad Kashmir?

[mustang]

Would love to hear some opinions about systematic suppression of pro-freedom voices in Pakistan's part of Kashmir.

This Al-Jazeera article goes into detail with accounts of struggles from pro-independence advocates in Pakistan's Kashmir -- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...inking-pro-freedom-space-190304091423290.html

As Pakistanis or Kashmiris or Pakistani-Kashmiris, what are your thoughts on this? Let's please not make it a comparison thread of - "look what Indians did in Kashmir and Pakistan's side is not so bad ..." etc. I get it - the saffron brigade has done quite a bit of atrocities in Indian Kashmir. It would be a lot more productive if we stick to topic of suppression of viewpoints in Pakistan's Kashmir.

For context: I'm a veteran who was deployed in the middle east couple of times. One thing I have learned from complex regional conflicts is that there are so many sides to the story. Usually though people in each section have forced tunnel visions of only their side thanks to each side's media marketing engine.

 

[blackanhyellow]

There is a small segment of Azad Kashmiris that want to be independent as a country.

No one will deny that.

However, that number is so small its almost negligent.

There are voices like this all over Pakistan with a small percentage of people that are separatists, in sindh, kpk, balochistan, etc... This is the case with many other countries in the world. United States has those who want California to be its own country, or Texas to be its own country.

How anyone could compare that to IOK is beyond my comprehension. In an area where close to 90 percent of people want azaadi.

Go to Azaad Kashmir or Gilgit, the military there only guards the border. There is no need for 700,000 troops to police Azad Kashmir, simply because they are already azad.

Yes there are still protests there because they believe they are not getting their full rights in terms of sharing of resources or how CPEC projects will be allocated. Same is the case with KPK, Balochistan, etc... These are economic grievances.

The worst humans rights abuses in Pakistan were probably against the Baloch. Even this pales in comparison to the human rights abuses in IOK.

You said not to compare, but when a thread like this pops up in the current geopolitical climate, its important not to take away the black eye that is IOK by pointing somewhere else.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

The majority of people in what Pakistan calls Azad Kashmir speak dialects of Punjabi. Why would Punjabi speaking Muslims ever want to leave Pakistan? Sure there might a fringe who want an independent country, but there will also be a fringe in Punjab who want to leave as well.

There are actually more ethnic Kashmiris in Punjab there would be in Azad Kashmir. They came in the 1800s due to oppression from the Dogras.

 

[mustang]

There is a small segment of Azad Kashmiris that want to be independent as a country.

No one will deny that.

However, that number is so small its almost negligent.

There are voices like this all over Pakistan with a small percentage of people that are separatists, in sindh, kpk, balochistan, etc... This is the case with many other countries in the world. United States has those who want California to be its own country, or Texas to be its own country.

How anyone could compare that to IOK is beyond my comprehension. In an area where close to 90 percent of people want azaadi.

Go to Azaad Kashmir or Gilgit, the military there only guards the border. There is no need for 700,000 troops to police Azad Kashmir, simply because they are already azad.

Yes there are still protests there because they believe they are not getting their full rights in terms of sharing of resources or how CPEC projects will be allocated. Same is the case with KPK, Balochistan, etc... These are economic grievances.

The worst humans rights abuses in Pakistan were probably against the Baloch. Even this pales in comparison to the human rights abuses in IOK.

You said not to compare, but when a thread like this pops up in the current geopolitical climate, its important not to take away the black eye that is IOK by pointing somewhere else.

Fair enough about comparison and it is apparent fact that dissent/protest in Pakistan's Kashmir is non-existent or not even comparable to Indian Kashmir. I think everyone can agree on that across the board.

Your point about the protests being economic - the article actually states that the grievances referenced in the article are mainly political in nature. Comparison with Indian Kashmir is apples-oranges here because if Pakistan's stance is based on the moral high ground of Kashmiri people's rights, then shouldn't Pakistan's establishment make it a level playing field for all opinions in their part of Kashmir?

From the article I quoted above ...

Sulehria as well as representatives of the JKLF and the United Kashmir People's National Party (UKPNP) all said they were free to hold political rallies, but that their members were pressured through surveillance and court cases if any slogans targeting the Pakistani state are raised.

"We can take out political rallies, but we will be bound by restrictions, and people who attend will be threatened to limit attendance," said Sulehria.

"When we speak about [Pakistan leaving Kashmir], they treat us as if we are enemies of the state."

 

[mustang]

Fair enough about comparison and it is apparent fact that dissent/protest in Pakistan's Kashmir is non-existent or not even comparable to Indian Kashmir. I think everyone can agree on that across the board.

Your point about the protests being economic - the article actually states that the grievances referenced in the article are mainly political in nature. Comparison with Indian Kashmir is apples-oranges here because if Pakistan's stance is based on the moral high ground of Kashmiri people's rights, then shouldn't Pakistan's establishment make it a level playing field for all opinions in their part of Kashmir?

From the article I quoted above ...

Sulehria as well as representatives of the JKLF and the United Kashmir People's National Party (UKPNP) all said they were free to hold political rallies, but that their members were pressured through surveillance and court cases if any slogans targeting the Pakistani state are raised.

"We can take out political rallies, but we will be bound by restrictions, and people who attend will be threatened to limit attendance," said Sulehria.

"When we speak about [Pakistan leaving Kashmir], they treat us as if we are enemies of the state."

Also from this article - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...inking-pro-freedom-space-190304091423290.html

Pakistan has historically supported the Kashmiri movement for self-determination in Indian-administered Kashmir, both diplomatically and politically. India alleges that its neighbour also supports armed groups who have been fighting Indian security forces for decades, a charge that Pakistan has repeatedly denied.

In Pakistan-administered Kashmir, however, the room to express a political stance other than for accession to Pakistan is limited.

An electoral law, for example, requires all candidates for the legislative assembly of the autonomous AJK government to swear an oath to support accession to Pakistan.

"I solemnly declare that I believe in the ideology of Pakistan, the ideology of state's accession to Pakistan and the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan," reads the relevant portion of the electoral oath.

If Pakistan's intentions are truly towards the benefits of Kashmiri people then why force elected officials in AJK swear allegiance towards accession towards Pakistan?

 

[mustang]

The majority of people in what Pakistan calls Azad Kashmir speak dialects of Punjabi. Why would Punjabi speaking Muslims ever want to leave Pakistan? Sure there might a fringe who want an independent country, but there will also be a fringe in Punjab who want to leave as well.

There are actually more ethnic Kashmiris in Punjab there would be in Azad Kashmir. They came in the 1800s due to oppression from the Dogras.

Fair points. If it is only a fringe then why forcibly suppress the voices of that fringe through official government policy? Why not let them have their voices heard for equal representation?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Fair points. If it is only a fringe then why forcibly suppress the voices of that fringe through official government policy? Why not let them have their voices heard for equal representation?

What Pakistan has always wanted was a winner take all referendum in the complete State of Jammu and Kashmir that existed in 1947. Most people in Pakistan are convinced, for good reason, that if there are only two options, India and Pakistan, the people would choose Pakistan. If independence is also an option than its anyone game.


In Sindh, KPK, Baluchistan they have nationalist parties who run in elections. In Sindh they have no support. Some support in KPK, but with PTI now that is pretty much gone. Nationalist parties do decent in Baluchistan.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Fair points. If it is only a fringe then why forcibly suppress the voices of that fringe through official government policy? Why not let them have their voices heard for equal representation?

As Masood Khan said in this article, they are even allowed to talk about independent Kashmir, however, the line is drawn when they talk about Pakistani military leaving AK. Military in AK are at the border, so its a national security issue. Shouldn't threaten them (the dissenting voices) though, that is wrong.

Secondly, they have local elections there. They can get a voice that way, the problem is, no one will vote for these kinds of candidates.

 

[Pakistanian]

Idk but this forum has a lot of people from Azad Kashmir based in Europe and most of them seem to identify with Pakistan. I am aware that people from Azad Kashmir are reallly well represented in the military.

 

[Kashmirilion]

Idk but this forum has a lot of people from Azad Kashmir based in Europe and most of them seem to identify with Pakistan. I am aware that people from Azad Kashmir are reallly well represented in the military.

As a azad Kashmiri myself I do not know of any movement that promotes independence from Pakistan.We are happy the way we are and the only only thing we have problem is with the corruption in the country which is a grievance most Pakistanis have from every region.

 

[mustang]

Thanks for the responses so far. The voices in Kashmir demanding freedom are much smaller than staying with Pakistan, the people are anyways much closer to Pakistan in terms of ethnicity/language/religion ... I get it.

My question is not about the 95% (or more) majority that conforms to integration with Pakistan but Pakistan's government also being accommodative of the 5% (figurative small percentage) in Pakistan's Kashmir that has the contrarian view of not integrating with Pakistan.

Pakistan's entire stance in Kashmir is based on having the moral high ground of fighting for the wishes of the people. Per this stance marketed by the government should they also give a platform (at least on paper) for all voices of Kashmiris? Crying foul of Indian atrocities on Kashmiris while also having official policies to block certain opinions of Kashmiris - does that not seem ironic/hypocritical?

The question really is not about how the contrarian independence camp is minuscule in numbers, it is about why a proclaimed champion of Kashmiris is suppressing specific voices of kashmiris. Even if there is just ONE person in Pakistan's Kashmir demanding freedom, a well crafted foreign policy of Pakistan should allow that ONE person to express herself/himself without inhibition I would say. By blocking such opinions they are indicating that they have something to fear after all.

 

[mustang]

What Pakistan has always wanted was a winner take all referendum in the complete State of Jammu and Kashmir that existed in 1947. Most people in Pakistan are convinced, for good reason, that if there are only two options, India and Pakistan, the people would choose Pakistan. If independence is also an option than its anyone game.


In Sindh, KPK, Baluchistan they have nationalist parties who run in elections. In Sindh they have no support. Some support in KPK, but with PTI now that is pretty much gone. Nationalist parties do decent in Baluchistan.

Good points. In essence Pakistan wants the process to be designed such that it's desired outcome will be the eventuality (and India taking the same approach for advocating the process to suit it's own needs). On top of it, both nations have their own marketing machines churn out good campaigns that can sway the opinions of their respective masses to suit their needs. This is very similar to gerrymandering and changing constituency geography (to influence demographic changes) here in the US.

 

[AdamM97]

Thanks for the responses so far. The voices in Kashmir demanding freedom are much smaller than staying with Pakistan, the people are anyways much closer to Pakistan in terms of ethnicity/language/religion ... I get it.

My question is not about the 95% (or more) majority that conforms to integration with Pakistan but Pakistan's government also being accommodative of the 5% (figurative small percentage) in Pakistan's Kashmir that has the contrarian view of not integrating with Pakistan.

Pakistan's entire stance in Kashmir is based on having the moral high ground of fighting for the wishes of the people. Per this stance marketed by the government should they also give a platform (at least on paper) for all voices of Kashmiris? Crying foul of Indian atrocities on Kashmiris while also having official policies to block certain opinions of Kashmiris - does that not seem ironic/hypocritical?

The question really is not about how the contrarian independence camp is minuscule in numbers, it is about why a proclaimed champion of Kashmiris is suppressing specific voices of kashmiris. Even if there is just ONE person in Pakistan's Kashmir demanding freedom, a well crafted foreign policy of Pakistan should allow that ONE person to express herself/himself without inhibition I would say. By blocking such opinions they are indicating that they have something to fear after all.

It is hypocritical, not going to lie. However, you will find a lot of Pakistanis who are okay with an independent Kashmir. Not sure if that’s the case in India.

 

[Lonewarrior]

we are now back to 1947/48, theres no Azad Kashmir and no Indian Kashmir. Theres no LOC.

 

[mustang]

It is hypocritical, not going to lie. However, you will find a lot of Pakistanis who are okay with an independent Kashmir. Not sure if that’s the case in India.

Of course. Not comparing with India at all here, only looking at the foreign (or is it domestic?) policy of Pakistan in this case. They would have had a much better ideological stance if they had not suppressed the pro-independence voices.

Also begs the obvious question - Are there very less pro-independence voices in Pakistan's Kashmir mainly because Pakistan has suppressed those opinions for 70+ years? Would there have been more pro-independence voices if it was not suppressed? Now you have had 2-3 generations with possible institutionalized thinking of accession to Pakistan is the only realistic choice, so even if you let them free now, the "normal" according to the masses is only accession to Pakistan and human minds are excellent in justifying reasons for that with long time brainwashing (just ask the saffron brigade or Trump brigade or ISIS whackos).

Reminds me of "Reek" from GoT ...

 

[Asim_khan]

Nice to see an Indian poster side with JKLF.

 

[mustang]

Nice to see an Indian poster side with JKLF.

Not Indian but an American. Veteran with couple of active deployments in the middle east.

 

[AdamM97]

Of course. Not comparing with India at all here, only looking at the foreign (or is it domestic?) policy of Pakistan in this case. They would have had a much better ideological stance if they had not suppressed the pro-independence voices.

Also begs the obvious question - Are there very less pro-independence voices in Pakistan's Kashmir mainly because Pakistan has suppressed those opinions for 70+ years? Would there have been more pro-independence voices if it was not suppressed? Now you have had 2-3 generations with possible institutionalized thinking of accession to Pakistan is the only realistic choice, so even if you let them free now, the "normal" according to the masses is only accession to Pakistan and human minds are excellent in justifying reasons for that with long time brainwashing (just ask the saffron brigade or Trump brigade or ISIS whackos).

Reminds me of "Reek" from GoT ...

View attachment 93948

I honestly don’t know for sure if Pakistan has ever had to deal with a large Kashmiri independence movement.

Pakistan has instilled nationalism in Pakistan since 1947 in order to stop independence movements based on ethnicity, that still hasn’t stopped the rise of ethno-centric movements like PTM or terrorist organizations like BLA. So I doubt that institutional thinking, suppression or nationalist propaganda is the reason why there are less pro-independence movements in Azad Kashmir.

Also, a lot of the inhabitants of Azad Kashmir are ethnic Potoharis who identify themselves as Pakistanis.

 

[Asim_khan]

Not Indian but an American. Veteran with couple of active deployments in the middle east.

Apologies. Indian pretending to be an American, with active deployments in the middle east.

 

[Syed1]

Apologies. Indian pretending to be an American, with active deployments in the middle east.

And spent several years living in India, by his own admission ofcourse.


American

 

[mustang]

Apologies. Indian pretending to be an American, with active deployments in the middle east.

?? Whatever floats your boats guys. Go back and read the history of me messages in this forum. I'm a proud American with mix of Hispanic and Indian ethnic groups.

Why the unnecessary focus on my ethnic/religious origin (I could be any human for all you care) instead of addressing the topic at hand?

 

[mustang]

And spent several years living in India, by his own admission ofcourse.


American

I spent 2 years in India if you call that several then according to you 2 inches is a very big size. Congratulations!

Again - your only contribution in this thread is attacking the messenger instead of any meaningful addition to the topic. Kudos to you.

 

[mustang]

I honestly don’t know for sure if Pakistan has ever had to deal with a large Kashmiri independence movement.

Pakistan has instilled nationalism in Pakistan since 1947 in order to stop independence movements based on ethnicity, that still hasn’t stopped the rise of ethno-centric movements like PTM or terrorist organizations like BLA. So I doubt that institutional thinking, suppression or nationalist propaganda is the reason why there are less pro-independence movements in Azad Kashmir.

Also, a lot of the inhabitants of Azad Kashmir are ethnic Potoharis who identify themselves as Pakistanis.

This is a good point. I read an article (wish I could find the link to reference it). Pakistan had to take this route and create some sort of unifying factor lest they get torn apart by regional forces. My inference is that this was one of the main reasons Pakistan's dictator-general (Zia?) "Islamified" the country. he made religion (Islam) that unifying force to overcome any intended sectarian element.

Did not know what Potohari is, just looked it up and learned something else new. I'm pretty sure 90% or more of Kashmiris in Pakistan want accession to Pakistan as the option and not independence. I for one think Pakistan's policy would be diplomatically more robust if they also offer level playing field for independence (given the special status of Kashmir compared to other provinces of Pakistan). By not doing it they have exposed a soft underbelly (or call it insecurity) and it is very easy for hawkish Indian policy makers to counter Pakistan's stance.

 

[Asim_khan]

?? Whatever floats your boats guys. Go back and read the history of me messages in this forum. I'm a proud American with mix of Hispanic and Indian ethnic groups.

Why the unnecessary focus on my ethnic/religious origin (I could be any human for all you care) instead of addressing the topic at hand?

'Indian ethnic groups'. Ok mate. We know which Indian ethnic groups you're on about, and it damn sure isn't the Apaches, Comanches or Navajo.

 

[mustang]

'Indian ethnic groups'. Ok mate. We know which Indian ethnic groups you're on about, and it damn sure isn't the Apaches, Comanches or Navajo.

Of course not. I did not say Native American, I said Indian (or are you too thick to notice that?). I'm Hispanic and Indian mixed. Looks like you are too obsessed with people's racial/religious backgrounds instead of making any meaningful contributions to the topics. Go back and read any of my past messages where I chose to entertain such obsessed fanatics like yourself whose only caliber is shooting the messenger instead of adding any discussion points.

Why does my ethnic background matter to you in any case? You don't see me questioning your personal background - whatever the heck it is.

 

[mustang]

Below data points from 2010

It revealed that on average 44% of people in Pakistani-administered Kashmir favoured independence, compared with 43% in Indian-administered Kashmir.

"However while this is the most popular option overall, it fails to carry an overall majority on either side.

The survey found that the "overwhelming majority" of people want a solution to the dispute, even though there are no "simple fixes".

Other findings include:

80% of Kashmiris on both sides of the LoC say that the dispute is important to them personally
Concern over human rights abuses stands at 43% on the Indian side and 19% on the Pakistani side
Concern over unemployment is strong across the territory - 66% on the Pakistani side and 87% on the Indian side
Few are optimistic over peace talks - only 27% on the Pakistani side and 57% on the Indian side thought they would succeed.

Source - https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171

So even as late as 2010 44% of people in Pakistani-administered Kashmir favored independence per above BBC source. This seems to contradict some of the opinions posted above justifying suppression of pro-independence voices in Pakistan's Kashmir.

 

[Asim_khan]

Of course not. I did not say Native American, I said Indian (or are you too thick to notice that?). I'm Hispanic and Indian mixed. Looks like you are too obsessed with people's racial/religious backgrounds instead of making any meaningful contributions to the topics. Go back and read any of my past messages where I chose to entertain such obsessed fanatics like yourself whose only caliber is shooting the messenger instead of adding any discussion points.

Why does my ethnic background matter to you in any case? You don't see me questioning your personal background - whatever the heck it is.

I wish you would. The simple fact of the matter is whilst Kashmiri people are terribly upset at the way they've been treated by the folks Quaid-E-Azam warned the rest of us about, you're here spreading the word of JKLF, but not what they've got to say about India, but what they've got to say about Pakistan, so don't mind me if I call bluff on you wanting to raise any important points 'Chief'.

 

[mustang]

I wish you would. The simple fact of the matter is whilst Kashmiri people are terribly upset at the way they've been treated by the folks Quaid-E-Azam warned the rest of us about, you're here spreading the word of JKLF, but not what they've got to say about India, but what they've got to say about Pakistan, so don't mind me if I call bluff on you wanting to raise any important points 'Chief'.

My voicing against the saffron psychos has been prevalent across many threads here (go read without blindly questioning). There have been no mentioning of pro-independence viewpoint in Pakistan's Kashmir which is why I was requesting opinions on these.

Calling someone 'Chief' with the intention of a subtle reference to Native American stuff (though I clearly mentioned I am not Native American) is a very racist thing to say. It is like me talking bad about your religion. Educate yourself before you spew such things because you bring nothing but bad rep to your countrymen by doing so.

Given your shallow opinions - I would be very surprised if you have anything substantial to add to the actual topic. I do prefer to be surprised though.

 

[Ram Shekhar]

This is the biggest joke I'm reading. Kashmir under Pakistan is pretty much happy and unlike the Kashmir we're holding currently.

 

[mustang]

Below data points from 2010

It revealed that on average 44% of people in Pakistani-administered Kashmir favoured independence, compared with 43% in Indian-administered Kashmir.

"However while this is the most popular option overall, it fails to carry an overall majority on either side.

The survey found that the "overwhelming majority" of people want a solution to the dispute, even though there are no "simple fixes".

Other findings include:

80% of Kashmiris on both sides of the LoC say that the dispute is important to them personally
Concern over human rights abuses stands at 43% on the Indian side and 19% on the Pakistani side
Concern over unemployment is strong across the territory - 66% on the Pakistani side and 87% on the Indian side
Few are optimistic over peace talks - only 27% on the Pakistani side and 57% on the Indian side thought they would succeed.

Source - https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171

So even as late as 2010 44% of people in Pakistani-administered Kashmir favored independence per above BBC source. This seems to contradict some of the opinions posted above justifying suppression of pro-independence voices in Pakistan's Kashmir.

To summarize ...

44% of Kashmiris in Pakistan's Kashmir favored independence even as late as 2010. Source - https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171 -- I personally think this could be less than 44% now, still some size-able minority opinion if we can agree?

Yet, there are actively enforced policies that discourage Kashmiri opinions favoring independence. Source - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...inking-pro-freedom-space-190304091423290.html

 

[mustang]

This is the biggest joke I'm reading. Kashmir under Pakistan is pretty much happy and unlike the Kashmir we're holding currently.

Comparison is not with Indian and Pakistani Kashmir - very straightforward as everyone knows in that case given Indian atrocities in Kashmir.

Comparison is Pakistan's ideological stance for what it accuses India Vs what is actually enforced in Pakistan's Kashmir.

 

[Pakistanian]

The vast majority of British Pakistanis are from Azad Kashmir and they're some of the most Pro-Pakistan people in the world.

 

[ahmedzee]

These Al Jazeera articles are usually written by Pro Indian Mallus in Qatar. I don't believe what they say. Let them bark.

Truth is, there are more rights to locals in Azad Kashmir than maybe anywhere in Pakistan. A lot of bloggers, vloggers, foreign travellers would say the same thing. Just google any of the Foreign Travellers to Pakistan, and you would know the truth.
The locals are very hospitable and down to earth, and very Pakistani, more than any Punjabi Sindhi or Pathan.

 

[mustang]

The vast majority of British Pakistanis are from Azad Kashmir and they're some of the most Pro-Pakistan people in the world.

1. "Vast majority" is subjective, right? What percentage do you think it is? Per BBC survey, 56% of Kashmiris in Pakistan's side wanted to join Pakistan as of 2010. Is 56% a vast majority? Do you have sources for whatever majority percentage that you claim? Would there be any disconnect between Kashmiris in UK (assuming they are more visible for yourself) vs Kashmiris living there in Pakistan's Kashmir? - maybe not, just wondering.

2. Even if that number has grown from 56% in 2010 to 90% or more in 2019 (highly unlikely but let's go with it) - why deny the voices of that minority 10%? Why not also give them an equal platform if official policy is to be the saviors of Kashmiri people's preferences?

 

[mustang]

These Al Jazeera articles are usually written by Pro Indian Mallus in Qatar. I don't believe what they say. Let them bark.

Truth is, there are more rights to locals in Azad Kashmir than maybe anywhere in Pakistan. A lot of bloggers, vloggers, foreign travellers would say the same thing. Just google any of the Foreign Travellers to Pakistan, and you would know the truth.
The locals are very hospitable and down to earth, and very Pakistani, more than any Punjabi Sindhi or Pathan.

C'mon man, that is a bit of a left field stretch wouldn't you say? The article is not talking about some fluffy subjective opinion but an actual government policy in place which can be easily refuted if inaccurate.

 

[Pakpak]

Most Pakistanis in UK are from from Azad Kashmir. You only have to see the support we get everytime. My mother in law's family is from Azad Kashmir. Theyd laugh at India's face for equating both issues.

 

[Pakpak]

As usual the OP is slowly descending to the duplicitousness which was obvious.

 

[rhony]

Thanks for the responses so far. The voices in Kashmir demanding freedom are much smaller than staying with Pakistan, the people are anyways much closer to Pakistan in terms of ethnicity/language/religion ... I get it.

My question is not about the 95% (or more) majority that conforms to integration with Pakistan but Pakistan's government also being accommodative of the 5% (figurative small percentage) in Pakistan's Kashmir that has the contrarian view of not integrating with Pakistan.

Pakistan's entire stance in Kashmir is based on having the moral high ground of fighting for the wishes of the people. Per this stance marketed by the government should they also give a platform (at least on paper) for all voices of Kashmiris? Crying foul of Indian atrocities on Kashmiris while also having official policies to block certain opinions of Kashmiris - does that not seem ironic/hypocritical?

The question really is not about how the contrarian independence camp is minuscule in numbers, it is about why a proclaimed champion of Kashmiris is suppressing specific voices of kashmiris. Even if there is just ONE person in Pakistan's Kashmir demanding freedom, a well crafted foreign policy of Pakistan should allow that ONE person to express herself/himself without inhibition I would say. By blocking such opinions they are indicating that they have something to fear after all.

If what you said is true about 95 percent wanting to be with Pakistan, then there is no debate. You can't make everybody happy. 95 percent is way more than the acceptable 2/3rd majority and a lot more than 50 percent plus that is acceptable at many places. This is a terrific thread and is fascinating. I always thought religion obviously plays a huge role in this. So there is no doubt that AJK either wants to be part of Pakistan or wants to be independent unlike J&K where there are voices to join Pakistan. However, as per many accounts majority of J&K Muslims want to be an independent country rather than be part of Pakistan or India. If there were to be an impartial plebiscite now in AJK and J&K together would all AJK still go with Pakistan or would they want to be with J&K and form a different country

 

[mustang]

Most Pakistanis in UK are from from Azad Kashmir. You only have to see the support we get everytime. My mother in law's family is from Azad Kashmir. Theyd laugh at India's face for equating both issues.

I give a hoot about India equating both issues. This is me trying to reason the obvious irony in policies of Pakistan without any duplicity as you claim.

Your response only has personal accounts (and the usual defensive veiled attack when someone poses facts that do not conform to your ideology). Do you have facts justifying why Pakistan does not allow voices for independence in Pakistan's Kashmir?

 

[Pakpak]

I give a hoot about India equating both issues. This is me trying to reason the obvious irony in policies of Pakistan without any duplicity as you claim.

Your response only has personal accounts (and the usual defensive veiled attack when someone poses facts that do not conform to your ideology). Do you have facts justifying why Pakistan does not allow voices for independence in Pakistan's Kashmir?

I have family and I have known Kashmiri Pakistanis in UK for decade. And you have to see how our team is supported by fantaical fans which should tell you everything.

You're just another pathetic troll disguised as someone trying to be 'objective'. Just like the other fraud rhony who pretended to be a neutral and now has shown his colors.

Wish all you Indian trolls would bugger off. Sick of you seeing everywhere on every Pakistani portal.

Don't bother quoting me again. At this point I should auto block every Indian on my ignore list.

 

[mustang]

I have family and I have known Kashmiri Pakistanis in UK for decade. And you have to see how our team is supported by fantaical fans which should tell you everything.

You're just another pathetic troll disguised as someone trying to be 'objective'. Just like the other fraud rhony who pretended to be a neutral and now has shown his colors.

Wish all you Indian trolls would bugger off. Sick of you seeing everywhere on every Pakistani portal.

Don't bother quoting me again. At this point I should auto block every Indian on my ignore list.

Lovely, thank you for the insightful comments with facts and sources. Thank you also for displaying your intellect, open mindedness, and for posting without making unreasonable assumptions. Your fair and intellectual response has shown that you had access to very good environments at home while growing up. Everyone (Pakistani or not) is learning so much from your quoted post and you have made them all proud.

I'm quoting you regardless because I'm so impressed by your benevolent intellect, and also because it is a free country and I can do anything I damn well want so long as I'm not trampling on others' rights.

 

[mustang]

If what you said is true about 95 percent wanting to be with Pakistan, then there is no debate. You can't make everybody happy. 95 percent is way more than the acceptable 2/3rd majority and a lot more than 50 percent plus that is acceptable at many places. This is a terrific thread and is fascinating. I always thought religion obviously plays a huge role in this. So there is no doubt that AJK either wants to be part of Pakistan or wants to be independent unlike J&K where there are voices to join Pakistan. However, as per many accounts majority of J&K Muslims want to be an independent country rather than be part of Pakistan or India. If there were to be an impartial plebiscite now in AJK and J&K together would all AJK still go with Pakistan or would they want to be with J&K and form a different country

Agreed about 95%. But so long as the issue is not officially resolved, platform has to be given for all sides (no matter how small) if the said party (Pakistan) has taken the stance of representing true wishes of the people.

In any case, 46% of Kashmiris on Pakistan's side prefer independence per BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171) but have never been given a voice by the Pakistani and the Pakistani-Kashmiri governments. I'm trying to reason why with facts (amidst the usual minefield of personal attacks).

 

[xbronze]

we are now back to 1947/48, theres no Azad Kashmir and no Indian Kashmir. Theres no LOC.

Wow...that must be great news for Pakistan then. Time to send tribals/'non state actors' to invade and capture Indian Kashmir. Problem solved.

 

[xbronze]

I have family and I have known Kashmiri Pakistanis in UK for decade. And you have to see how our team is supported by fantaical fans which should tell you everything.

You're just another pathetic troll disguised as someone trying to be 'objective'. Just like the other fraud rhony who pretended to be a neutral and now has shown his colors.

Wish all you Indian trolls would bugger off. Sick of you seeing everywhere on every Pakistani portal.

Don't bother quoting me again. At this point I should auto block every Indian on my ignore list.

Please don't do that. I for one enjoy your posts (even if I may not agree with all of them).

 

[rhony]

Please don't do that. I for one enjoy your posts (even if I may not agree with all of them).

Ignore Pakpak. He's a troll that says he blocks everybody but keeps referring to the same people he blocked apparently because he had a sense of betrayal when somebody has opposing views. Boohoo!!! People should grow up and try to understand the meanings or discussions or debates. Appears to me like an old world patriarch that seems to have people around him only if they agree. And this message is for him: stop your obsession with me and stop quoting me.if there is anything valuable you have to discuss them put it in the open forum so I will present my views as well.

 

[Pakpak]

@View Post
Today, 00:29
xbronze
Tape Ball Regular

This message is hidden because xbronze is on your ignore list.
View Post
Remove user from ignore list


Done after two days. How you're not banned is because Mods are really nice. But keep pushing it.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Ignore Pakpak. He's a troll that says he blocks everybody but keeps referring to the same people he blocked apparently because he had a sense of betrayal when somebody has opposing views. Boohoo!!! People should grow up and try to understand the meanings or discussions or debates. Appears to me like an old world patriarch that seems to have people around him only if they agree. And this message is for him: stop your obsession with me and stop quoting me.if there is anything valuable you have to discuss them put it in the open forum so I will present my views as well.

I can sympathize with his sentiments.

Indians due to sheer population are everywhere on the internet, spreading their negativity towards Pakistan. Be it Facebook, Youtube, etc... That is just the neutral sites, then Indians have their own as well.

So some PPers find it puzzling, that PP allows so much space for Indian propaganda.

PP has always been a fairly open platform for different ideas.

I wonder if there is an Indian based site as generous to Pakistanis as PP is to Indians.

 

[mustang]

Man all I had were facts and was requesting a reasonable discourse without resorting to personal attacks. First some of the Pakistani posters got into the usual personal attacks and then Pakpak went on some super psycho rant. How different is this from the blind contentless right wing blather from the saffron crowd? These same posters are then turning around and making personal attacks on me, behaving the same way as the people they accused before - the sad irony!

I'm more than happy to be proven wrong if someone engages in an objective discussion with facts. Somehow even a fact based discussion with opposing views seem to bring out the worst in some people. Or are my points raised here touching a nerve for some reason?

 

[Majestic_Inzi]

The vast majority of British Pakistanis are from Azad Kashmir and they're some of the most Pro-Pakistan people in the world.

Oh yes.... ��

 

[mustang]

I can sympathize with his sentiments.

Indians due to sheer population are everywhere on the internet, spreading their negativity towards Pakistan. Be it Facebook, Youtube, etc... That is just the neutral sites, then Indians have their own as well.

So some PPers find it puzzling, that PP allows so much space for Indian propaganda.

PP has always been a fairly open platform for different ideas.

I wonder if there is an Indian based site as generous to Pakistanis as PP is to Indians.

To clarify - I have no propaganda. You see me critiquing Indian posters and questioning things about India as well in other threads (read all of my history for proof). I understand the jaded experience with more Indians but also understand that not everyone who poses reasonable questions on your status quo is out there to "get" y'all.

 

[mustang]

As usual this thread that challenges Pakistan's position with reasonable data and question devolves into - "who are you to ask this with your xyz background", and "he said, she said" type responses.

How come topics critiquing Indian or Western entities have more actual responses but when a topic questions Pakistan with data and facts more of the posters just hijack the thread instead of actual responses and discussions?

 

[rhony]

I can sympathize with his sentiments.

Indians due to sheer population are everywhere on the internet, spreading their negativity towards Pakistan. Be it Facebook, Youtube, etc... That is just the neutral sites, then Indians have their own as well.

So some PPers find it puzzling, that PP allows so much space for Indian propaganda.

PP has always been a fairly open platform for different ideas.

I wonder if there is an Indian based site as generous to Pakistanis as PP is to Indians.

Couldn't care less about other Indian sites or any other sites. I stumbled upon this site years ago for cricket. I loved the analysis by more than a few very knowledgeable posters. More impressive was how people debated in a civilized way articulating their points well. I wasn't even in the time pass section until much later and found it interesting. It's fine if somebody blocks somebody else but why keep harping about some betrayal. Who cares? Would you rather see an Indian point of view from an Indian or from some other Pakistani? I'm sure many Indians come to this forum for the same reason. I absolutely have no stakes on either side but I sure have some strong opinions about certain aspects. It's not about generosity. It's surprising to see some people living in UK like Pakpak being so intolerant to opposing points of view. One would assume you'd meet different types of people in the west and hence are mature but I guess some build a "Trump wall" around themselves. Nobody cares. Ban or do whatever if Admins think it's worth it if somebody doesn't agree with you.

 

[mustang]

Couldn't care less about other Indian sites or any other sites. I stumbled upon this site years ago for cricket. I loved the analysis by more than a few very knowledgeable posters. More impressive was how people debated in a civilized way articulating their points well. I wasn't even in the time pass section until much later and found it interesting. It's fine if somebody blocks somebody else but why keep harping about some betrayal. Who cares? Would you rather see an Indian point of view from an Indian or from some other Pakistani? I'm sure many Indians come to this forum for the same reason. I absolutely have no stakes on either side but I sure have some strong opinions about certain aspects. It's not about generosity. It's surprising to see some people living in UK like Pakpak being so intolerant to opposing points of view. One would assume you'd meet different types of people in the west and hence are mature but I guess some build a "Trump wall" around themselves. Nobody cares. Ban or do whatever if Admins think it's worth it if somebody doesn't agree with you.

Well said! Why come into a forum for discussion/debate if you only want your similar views? Just talk in front of a mirror then!

 

[blackanhyellow]

Couldn't care less about other Indian sites or any other sites. I stumbled upon this site years ago for cricket. I loved the analysis by more than a few very knowledgeable posters. More impressive was how people debated in a civilized way articulating their points well. I wasn't even in the time pass section until much later and found it interesting. It's fine if somebody blocks somebody else but why keep harping about some betrayal. Who cares? Would you rather see an Indian point of view from an Indian or from some other Pakistani? I'm sure many Indians come to this forum for the same reason. I absolutely have no stakes on either side but I sure have some strong opinions about certain aspects. It's not about generosity. It's surprising to see some people living in UK like Pakpak being so intolerant to opposing points of view. One would assume you'd meet different types of people in the west and hence are mature but I guess some build a "Trump wall" around themselves. Nobody cares. Ban or do whatever if Admins think it's worth it if somebody doesn't agree with you.

Well said! Why come into a forum for discussion/debate if you only want your similar views? Just talk in front of a mirror then!

Claiming to be neutral, or claiming not to have a motive doesnt sit well, when we have threads like Pro freedom voices in Kashmir, several days after India pulls a move to take away Indian controlled Kashmir's autonomy against their will.

Can you guys see, how this might look like trying to divert attention?

The fact is the situation in the two sides of kashmir are drastically different in terms of human rights abuses. This thread is a joke considering the timing of it.

So yes, even if you say you are neutral, or have no agenda, people will think otherwise.

 

[rhony]

Claiming to be neutral, or claiming not to have a motive doesnt sit well, when we have threads like Pro freedom voices in Kashmir, several days after India pulls a move to take away Indian controlled Kashmir's autonomy against their will.

Can you guys see, how this might look like trying to divert attention?

The fact is the situation in the two sides of kashmir are drastically different in terms of human rights abuses. This thread is a joke considering the timing of it.

So yes, even if you say you are neutral, or have no agenda, people will think otherwise.

I am neutral in some topics. My opinions are mine and I can be for or against or neutral depending on the topic. Not my fault if somebody expects me to be neutral which ironically means supporting their point of view. Anyway who cares if somebody is neutral. This is about making your own points which could be wrong or right. If somebody debunks it, make a case for your argument or just ignore or agree. As long as forum decorum is followed and as long as people are civil, debates are fine. Atleast that's what forums usually are. Anyway, I'm done debating about this topic. Mods can decide if they want to ban.

 

[mustang]

Claiming to be neutral, or claiming not to have a motive doesnt sit well, when we have threads like Pro freedom voices in Kashmir, several days after India pulls a move to take away Indian controlled Kashmir's autonomy against their will.

Can you guys see, how this might look like trying to divert attention?

The fact is the situation in the two sides of kashmir are drastically different in terms of human rights abuses. This thread is a joke considering the timing of it.

So yes, even if you say you are neutral, or have no agenda, people will think otherwise.

So if someone does not agree with popular view or if posters cannot come up with a reasonable set of opinions to counter and if the topic is questioning a stance by Pakistan - then the topic does not deserve to be discussed? How different is this from information black outs in Kashmir or Western China?

Being perfectly neutral on all things means having zero opinions, nobody can be that. We can be generally neutral with opinions leaning one way or the other on specific issues.

Kashmir is among top news in multiple international media - now is a great time to discuss all opinions on Kashmir. Why do you call it "divert attention" instead of "another viewpoint for Kashmir issue"?

For the record - I for one believe Kashmir valley and Azad Kashmir together being independent/autonomous, and Gilgit/Baltistan with Pakistan, and Jammu/Ladakh with India would be best for that region and people. But again I don't have to clarify my stance in order to garner reasonable non-personal attacking inputs.

The moment my post challenges Pakistan's status quo with facts and neutral sources I'm seeing personal attacks and borderline racist messages from some of the Pakistani posters. Pretty pathetic I would say.

For the record - I'm a regular poster in Stormfront (white nationalist message board) and even there I don't see unnecessary personal attack posts to the extent I see from some Pakistanis here.

 

[mustang]

So ...

44% of Kashmiris in Pakistan's Kashmir favored independence even as late as 2010. Source - https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171 -- I personally think this could be less than 44% now, still some size-able minority opinion if we can agree?

Yet, there are actively enforced policies that discourage Kashmiri opinions favoring independence. Source - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/...091423290.html

Can someone give a reasoning for Pakistan's policy on this? If overwhelming majority does want to be with Pakistan (debatable as we see from BBC but let's go with it) then more power to y'all - why not be confident and give floor to all opinions?

 

[Pakistanian]

1. "Vast majority" is subjective, right? What percentage do you think it is? Per BBC survey, 56% of Kashmiris in Pakistan's side wanted to join Pakistan as of 2010. Is 56% a vast majority? Do you have sources for whatever majority percentage that you claim? Would there be any disconnect between Kashmiris in UK (assuming they are more visible for yourself) vs Kashmiris living there in Pakistan's Kashmir? - maybe not, just wondering.

2. Even if that number has grown from 56% in 2010 to 90% or more in 2019 (highly unlikely but let's go with it) - why deny the voices of that minority 10%? Why not also give them an equal platform if official policy is to be the saviors of Kashmiri people's preferences?

Oh man Did you even read my comment? I never even said vast majority of Azad Kashmiris were pro-Pakistan. I literally said that the vast majority of British-Pakistanis were from Azad Kashmir. To make it easier for you to understand I'll repeat myself - THE VAST MAJORITY of Pakistanis in the UK are FROM Azad Kashmir, as much 70% according to some government sources especially in northern England. We have A LOT of posters from European that are originally from Azad Kashmir. [MENTION=134473]Haroon786[/MENTION] [MENTION=137893]enkidu_[/MENTION] [MENTION=10028]chacha kashmiri[/MENTION] @IAJ

 

[Pakistanian]

Of course there's always been a sizable minority that has wanted independence and I've met people from AJK that do want independence but they're far outnumbered by the ones that want to stay in Pakistan.

 

[blackanhyellow]

So if someone does not agree with popular view or if posters cannot come up with a reasonable set of opinions to counter and if the topic is questioning a stance by Pakistan - then the topic does not deserve to be discussed? How different is this from information black outs in Kashmir or Western China?

Being perfectly neutral on all things means having zero opinions, nobody can be that. We can be generally neutral with opinions leaning one way or the other on specific issues.

Kashmir is among top news in multiple international media - now is a great time to discuss all opinions on Kashmir. Why do you call it "divert attention" instead of "another viewpoint for Kashmir issue"?

For the record - I for one believe Kashmir valley and Azad Kashmir together being independent/autonomous, and Gilgit/Baltistan with Pakistan, and Jammu/Ladakh with India would be best for that region and people. But again I don't have to clarify my stance in order to garner reasonable non-personal attacking inputs.

The moment my post challenges Pakistan's status quo with facts and neutral sources I'm seeing personal attacks and borderline racist messages from some of the Pakistani posters. Pretty pathetic I would say.

For the record - I'm a regular poster in Stormfront (white nationalist message board) and even there I don't see unnecessary personal attack posts to the extent I see from some Pakistanis here.

What I am trying to tell you is, go post your views that Kashmir valley should be part of Pakistan on any neutral location like facebook or twitter, or on any indian forum, then look at the filth you get thrown at you from indians.

You will be more than happy at the space you are given on this pakistani forum.

 

[mustang]

What I am trying to tell you is, go post your views that Kashmir valley should be part of Pakistan on any neutral location like facebook or twitter, or on any indian forum, then look at the filth you get thrown at you from indians.

You will be more than happy at the space you are given on this pakistani forum.

Meh! Those actions speak volumes about those bad participants. Saying "we are not as bad as them" to avoid a discussion where Pakistani posters seem to have no response is a weak stance, one would think?

 

[Muddaser]

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

"American" deployed in the Middle East who has lived in India for a couple of years.

Yeah right.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Meh! Those actions speak volumes about those bad participants. Saying "we are not as bad as them" to avoid a discussion where Pakistani posters seem to have no response is a weak stance, one would think?

You want a response for what?

Go on youtube, you can see protests for azaadi yourself in muzafarabad. Get as large as a few hundred.

Literally screaming azaadi, speaking against the government, etc...

Guess what? Pakistan is not blinding them by pellets, shooting at them, etc...

Every country will have a small group of people that want to separate, or want more autonomy, etc...

The issue in IOK is, that they used such extreme force to suppress the independence movement, the independence movement just spread. No, every man, woman, and child in Kashmir valley says they want Azadi.

Also, if 44% is the number that BBC claims, that is a huge number. Why dont these 44% vote for the separatist parties? Why dont they show up in greater number at these azadi marches?

Anyone who knows anyone from Azad Kashmir will tell you this is a joke. 5, 10, 15 % could be argued if you are being generous, but 44%???

 

[mustang]

You want a response for what?

Go on youtube, you can see protests for azaadi yourself in muzafarabad. Get as large as a few hundred.

Literally screaming azaadi, speaking against the government, etc...

Guess what? Pakistan is not blinding them by pellets, shooting at them, etc...

Every country will have a small group of people that want to separate, or want more autonomy, etc...

The issue in IOK is, that they used such extreme force to suppress the independence movement, the independence movement just spread. No, every man, woman, and child in Kashmir valley says they want Azadi.

Also, if 44% is the number that BBC claims, that is a huge number. Why dont these 44% vote for the separatist parties? Why dont they show up in greater number at these azadi marches?

Anyone who knows anyone from Azad Kashmir will tell you this is a joke. 5, 10, 15 % could be argued if you are being generous, but 44%???

True, I'm not the one claiming it. The data is from BBC (usually reputable source). My question is not regarding the actual percentage. Let's go with your suggestion of 5%-15% range. Even if it is that small, why is the Pakistani government suppressing those voices?

India's ideology - based on a legal paper signed back in the day.
Pakistan's ideology - based on the supposed wishes of Kashmiri people.

With me so far? If Pakistan's ideology in this conflict is based on wishes of Kashmiri people, why actively suppress the wishes of those same people no matter what debatable percentage that group may be? Indians are not claiming to be the moral champions, their stance is only on some legal signed document. Pakistan are the ones claiming moral high ground here.

By suppressing independence voices (no matter the %), Pakistan has risked the same general type of "sin" (not giving platform for wishes of Kashmiri people) as India has, have they not?

 

[blackanhyellow]

True, I'm not the one claiming it. The data is from BBC (usually reputable source). My question is not regarding the actual percentage. Let's go with your suggestion of 5%-15% range. Even if it is that small, why is the Pakistani government suppressing those voices?

India's ideology - based on a legal paper signed back in the day.
Pakistan's ideology - based on the supposed wishes of Kashmiri people.

With me so far? If Pakistan's ideology in this conflict is based on wishes of Kashmiri people, why actively suppress the wishes of those same people no matter what debatable percentage that group may be? Indians are not claiming to be the moral champions, their stance is only on some legal signed document. Pakistan are the ones claiming moral high ground here.

By suppressing independence voices (no matter the %), Pakistan has risked the same general type of "sin" (not giving platform for wishes of Kashmiri people) as India has, have they not?

Did you go on youtube and search for protests in azaad kashmir?


You may have to filter those indian channels wrongly showing protestors asking for more financial rights as independence seekers..

But there are some protests where kashmiris are asking for freedom and talking against Pakistan.

If there was an official policy that wanted to suppress kashmiri voices, how do these protests happen?

More importantly, when these protests happen, are they dealt with violence by Pakistani police / military? Are kids blinded by pellets or shot at?

One thing I agree with is that there is a statement that law makers have to make regarding accession to Pakistan. You can argue that is ethically wrong.

And regarding sin, like I said you say you are not comparing to IOK but again you are saying Pakistan is risked the same type of sins as India. This is why you got the types of responses that you got above.

Its not that people are not willing to debate with you, but statements like this make you seem insincere in debating and more on the side of diverting attention to say Pakistan does the same in Kashmir, so India isnt so bad. When in reality, the types of sin arent even close when it comes to kashmir.

Sure pakistan has made other choices throughout its short history, that you could argue were similar in sins. I.e. in my opinion what Pakistan did against East Pakistan is similar to what India did to IOK. But that is a completely separate debate. Not to mention this was 50 years ago, while IOK issues are happening as we speak.

 

[Pakistanian]

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

"American" deployed in the Middle East who has lived in India for a couple of years.

Yeah right.

lmaoo yeah he's a phoney

 

[Pakpak]

Stupid Indian trolls, its not about blocking you idiots to just have an echo chamber. Its that when I come here on PP I don't want to see Indians posting filth or spamming. I want to talk to my fellow countrymen hence why I am here.

If you idiots need to be heard then see how biggamer or Varun or Swashbuckler post. I still don't agree with them a lot of the times but I actually like debating with them. They're honest. They're not would be neutral frauds or people who post filth.

 

[mustang]

Did you go on youtube and search for protests in azaad kashmir?


You may have to filter those indian channels wrongly showing protestors asking for more financial rights as independence seekers..

But there are some protests where kashmiris are asking for freedom and talking against Pakistan.

If there was an official policy that wanted to suppress kashmiri voices, how do these protests happen?

More importantly, when these protests happen, are they dealt with violence by Pakistani police / military? Are kids blinded by pellets or shot at?

One thing I agree with is that there is a statement that law makers have to make regarding accession to Pakistan. You can argue that is ethically wrong.

And regarding sin, like I said you say you are not comparing to IOK but again you are saying Pakistan is risked the same type of sins as India. This is why you got the types of responses that you got above.

Its not that people are not willing to debate with you, but statements like this make you seem insincere in debating and more on the side of diverting attention to say Pakistan does the same in Kashmir, so India isnt so bad. When in reality, the types of sin arent even close when it comes to kashmir.

Sure pakistan has made other choices throughout its short history, that you could argue were similar in sins. I.e. in my opinion what Pakistan did against East Pakistan is similar to what India did to IOK. But that is a completely separate debate. Not to mention this was 50 years ago, while IOK issues are happening as we speak.

Nobody is debating atrocities in Indian Kashmir for past decades. You are comparing apples-oranges or shall I say you are diverting the issue by bringing in Indian Kashmir. We have already established what they have done is worse, and the Indians have no moral stance - rather their stance is based on a paper document. Nobody is questioning pellet guns, unmarked graves and whatever else - at least I'm not. By dragging those in and comparing Indian Kashmir, the core issue of this thread is being diverted. I say the comparison is apples-ranges because you are comparing a side claiming moral high ground with a side claiming paper document.

The apples-apples comparison is what is Pakistan claiming Vs Policies in place for Kashmiris in Pakistan. My fundamental question is - why the discrepancy from Pakistan's side?

The Al-Jazeera article I added also states that people can protest for freedom as you say and I'm sure we can find youtube videos of it. What is the point of empty protests if electoral candidates for independence are not given level playing field? What is the point of namesake independence candidates if they are forced to swear allegiance to Pakistan? Where is independence then?

 

[Pakpak]

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

"American" deployed in the Middle East who has lived in India for a couple of years.

Yeah right.

I know right?

 

[blackanhyellow]

Nobody is debating atrocities in Indian Kashmir for past decades. You are comparing apples-oranges or shall I say you are diverting the issue by bringing in Indian Kashmir. We have already established what they have done is worse, and the Indians have no moral stance - rather their stance is based on a paper document. Nobody is questioning pellet guns, unmarked graves and whatever else - at least I'm not. By dragging those in and comparing Indian Kashmir, the core issue of this thread is being diverted. I say the comparison is apples-ranges because you are comparing a side claiming moral high ground with a side claiming paper document.

The apples-apples comparison is what is Pakistan claiming Vs Policies in place for Kashmiris in Pakistan. My fundamental question is - why the discrepancy from Pakistan's side?

The Al-Jazeera article I added also states that people can protest for freedom as you say and I'm sure we can find youtube videos of it. What is the point of empty protests if electoral candidates for independence are not given level playing field? What is the point of namesake independence candidates if they are forced to swear allegiance to Pakistan? Where is independence then?

Brother you yourself said isnt Pakistan's sins the same kind as Indian sins in IOK....which is why I brought it up again.

First you claim Pakistani sins are the same as Indian sins in IOK, then when I give you reasons why that isnt the case, you tell me I am diverting the issue


Anyways I am done debating with you, I am tending to agree with the others, you seem like a troll.

 

[mustang]

lmaoo yeah he's a phoney

Yeah sure - I state facts that make you uncomfortable. Are you an immigrant here? Have you even heard of Trinidad and Caribbean origin Indians that have been in the US for generations along with the Hispanics? Are you aware how many from our community serve in the military? You probably immigrated here from UK or Pakistan into a free capitalistic country built upon defense service of communities like ours. Know your place and learn to show respect for other communities instead of harping on your usual Punjabi/Pathan infused pointless racial superiority.

 

[mustang]

Brother you yourself said isnt Pakistan's sins the same kind as Indian sins in IOK....which is why I brought it up again.

First you claim Pakistani sins are the same as Indian sins in IOK, then when I give you reasons why that isnt the case, you tell me I am diverting the issue


Anyways I am done debating with you, I am tending to agree with the others, you seem like a troll.

You are avoiding my question and harping on the word "sins". My context of using it is different than yours. Forget the word "sins" and just answer my question about discrepancies in Pakistan's stance if you can. I said Pakistan's sin is same as Indian Kashmir in the context of denying equal platform for Kashmiris and obviously not in the context of pellet guns or killings or torture. Stop taking what I said out of context.

 

[Pakistanian]

Yeah sure - I state facts that make you uncomfortable. Are you an immigrant here? Have you even heard of Trinidad and Caribbean origin Indians that have been in the US for generations along with the Hispanics? Are you aware how many from our community serve in the military? You probably immigrated here from UK or Pakistan into a free capitalistic country built upon defense service of communities like ours. Know your place and learn to show respect for other communities instead of harping on your usual Punjabi/Pathan infused pointless racial superiority.

blah blah blah, i'm not an immigrant old man. I was born and raised here unlike you that used to live in India by your own admission. I'm aware of Caribbean people with some south asian ancestry but the vast of majority of Americans don't know or care about your exotic background lool. I haven't posted anything about Punjabi/Pashtun superiority I''m not even one of them so you got me mixed up with somebody else lmaoo.

Btw just a little heads up since you're new in this country - pretending to have served in the military is a felony so don't go around telling people IRL

 

[mustang]

blah blah blah, i'm not an immigrant old man. I was born and raised here unlike you that used to live in India by your own admission. I'm aware of Caribbean people with some south asian ancestry but the vast of majority of Americans don't know or care about your exotic background lool. I have posted anything about Punjabi/Pashtun superiority I''m not even one of them so you got me mixed up with somebody else lmaoo.

Btw just a little heads up since you're new in this country - pretending to have served in the military is a felony so don't go around telling people IRL

and I'm not an old man - so much for your ageism infused comment. Your ego is so fragile that you feel good calling yourself a young one, ese? Vast majority of Americans in service do know about contributions from Hispanics and Caribbean Indians - I am mixed with both.

You are telling me about stolen valor, really? This is the funniest drivel I hear from someone who has not served. First learn not to abuse those who served to defend this country so you can sit behind a keyboard and abuse others. If you cannot, then surrender your work visa or green card and go back to your land.

You have no means to debate the topic here with facts and can only resort to whatever personal attack your parents' not so progressive education taught you? Oh, and btw - I had said multiple times over the past year about the 2 years I spent in India, look it up. If you call 2 years as "several" - then as I said before - 2 inches is a long measurement per your metrics.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Oh man Did you even read my comment? I never even said vast majority of Azad Kashmiris were pro-Pakistan. I literally said that the vast majority of British-Pakistanis were from Azad Kashmir. To make it easier for you to understand I'll repeat myself - THE VAST MAJORITY of Pakistanis in the UK are FROM Azad Kashmir, as much 70% according to some government sources especially in northern England. We have A LOT of posters from European that are originally from Azad Kashmir. [MENTION=134473]Haroon786[/MENTION] [MENTION=137893]enkidu_[/MENTION] [MENTION=10028]chacha kashmiri[/MENTION] @IAJ

We’re actually maldiyals who have settled in azad Kashmir
Our ancestors came from farghana and settled in Herat

 

[Wasim_Waqar]

I have lots of family in Azad Kashmir. The split is 90 percent favouring Pakistan union.

In Kashmir valley, Srinagar might be majority pro independence, but Baramulla, Kupwara, Shopian, Kulgam, Pulwama, Islamabad (Anantnag) are pro Pakistan.

India is worried about kashmir valley as it is pro Pakistan. Simple.

#KashmirBanegaPakistan

 

[rhony]

I have lots of family in Azad Kashmir. The split is 90 percent favouring Pakistan union.

In Kashmir valley, Srinagar might be majority pro independence, but Baramulla, Kupwara, Shopian, Kulgam, Pulwama, Islamabad (Anantnag) are pro Pakistan.

India is worried about kashmir valley as it is pro Pakistan. Simple.

#KashmirBanegaPakistan ����

These numbers you have, are they official of some kind? If so, please share the source.

 

[mustang]

I have lots of family in Azad Kashmir. The split is 90 percent favouring Pakistan union.

In Kashmir valley, Srinagar might be majority pro independence, but Baramulla, Kupwara, Shopian, Kulgam, Pulwama, Islamabad (Anantnag) are pro Pakistan.

India is worried about kashmir valley as it is pro Pakistan. Simple.

#KashmirBanegaPakistan ����

I respect your input since you have family there. But do understand that a lot of such claims in this thread are only based on personal accounts that may be inaccurate for various reasons. There seem to be no official stat supporting this and the only official stat from a neutral source is that BBC report (https://www.bbc.com/news/10161171) from 2010 that says 44% favor independence even in Pakistan's Kashmir.

Pakistanis in this forum always stress for sources and proofs when there are claims to surrender internationally accused terrorists living in your nation. Yet here in this case, you are denying the apparent neutral source and keep insisting on your personal accounts.