Date: 28 Dec 2009


Kashmir is in the state of permanent STALEMATE. It is not God's Will but Pandit Nehru's WILL. ////////////////// It is a state in which two states lay claim on one territory. Both feel fully justified in their stands. //////////////// In this case INDIA'S stand is AB INITIO weak. She accepted the division of country on TWO NATION theory. She was FAST ASLEEP but suddenly woke up at MIDNIGHT when Bandit Nahru stood on the rampart of Red Fort to see his own "glow of freedom". He was surrounded by a vast "sea" of grieving widows and crying orphans, pouring down from across Wagah border. ////////////////// Why did India accept the unconditional surrender, ignoring the Father of Nation, MK GANDHI, who cherished the ideal of SECULARISM? /////////////////// Now the two points of view are as follows: ////////////// PAKISTAN: (A) It is a Muslim majority state as SINDH once was. You gave us that. We will take this. (B) there should be Referendum to ascertain the wishes of the PEOPLE. ////////////////// NB: We should bravely acknowledge the fact that Pandit Nehru accepted the UN Resolution that called for REFERENDUM in Kashmir but never even once mentioned the word for the whole of India prior to Partition! ////////////////// INDIA: (A) We are secular and do not believe in treating anyone on the basis of RELIGION. (B) The Maharajah of the State signed the Act of Accession to India. (C) AFTERTHOUGHT: We did not ask for Referendum over PARTITION. So why should we accept it now for J & K State? //////////////// FUTURE: BLEAK because both countries have NUCLEAR weapons; because the Super powers do not wish to see conflict in the area. They want status quo to be maintained FOR EVER. //////////////// INDIA'S BLUNDERS were in reality acts of great WISDOM on the part of JAWAHARLAL NEHRU. He desperately needed Kashmir DISPUTE for two reasons: /////////////////// (A) To take the mind of his subjects off his own HIGH TREASON of accepting Partition (surrendering vast territories) on the basis of religion. He knew that he could be lynched by PEOPLE of India or executed by firing squad by 'men of honour in uniform' (military) in India. ////////////////// (B) To perpetuate his personal and Dynasty's rule over India appearing as the "SAVIOUR" from the ENEMY next door.//////////////// WHO IS PAYING THE PRICE? KASHMIR that is Asia's SWITZERLAND. Instead of being a paradise and a source of INCOME from tourists she is a war zone. Government of India spends BILLIONS of rupees every month to keep the terrorists in check and to pamper the Kashmiris with subsidies for food, electricity, water, housing and education.. ///////////////// WELL DONE NEHRU, "SON OF KASHMIR", for giving India a PERENNIAL bleeding ulcer. /////////////////// "Mr. Nehru, were you, in Truth and Reality, the SON OF A MUSALMAN, for scheming so brilliantly to bring the landscape of KARACHI, SOUTH WAZIRISTAN and MUZAFFARABAD to our HINDUSTHAN, the Land of Rishis, Sadhus, Mahatmas and Gurus?" ///////////////////// 28 Dec 9 =====================/////////////////// In a message dated 28/12/2009 18:38:09 GMT Standard Time, XXXXXXXXXXXXX.com writes:///////////// It should be quite clear to all concerned that India is in no position to dilute its stand on its position vis-e-vis J & K i.e that it is a part of India. We must also not forget that one third of the state of J & K is currently occupied by Pakistan as well as China. Pakistan makes a claim on the rest of the state as a Muslim majority area and sponsors terrorism from its territory.The fate of this part of the state has to be settled, sooner or later. There is no running away from this fact.////////////// There is another dimension to the problem and that is India's relationship with the population of the J & K.state itself. On the one side of the political spectrum would be that it should be well integrated with India like all other states which joined the union.. The other side of the spectrum is from partial autonomy to full autonomy within the constitution of India or total Independence from both India and Pakistan. There is an Article 370 of the constitution which forbids any non state citizens to settle in the state./////////////// It is all very well for us to indulge in rhetoric's but has any one got a clear answer to how he or she would tackle the problem piecemeal or in totality.with a contagious rogue Pakistan, with a majority Muslim population in the Valley??. //////////////// 000000000