Posted on 06/14/2007 7:42:49 PM PDT by Moseley
“Hmm. Upon reading the Posted Article and realizing that it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Ron Paul, I suspect many FReepers will regard this as the single dumbest “attempted Character assassination” post in the history of Free Republic primary debates.”
_____________
You have to read between the lines but the article obviously outlines the ongoing affair between Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton. I guess I’m happy to hear that Ron is no longer messing around with Paris Hilton.
I was talking about the fact that everytime the Kashmiris exercises their democratic right given to them by the Indian constitution and they go to vote their government, they are actually voting in favour of the Indian union by participating and exercising their right as and Indian in the worlds greatest celebration of democracy. In India only the Indians are allowed to vote, and everytime a Kashmiri goes to vote he/she reaffirms his/her status as an Indian. Get it?
The only problem is with the Pak occupied Kashmir. That part needs to be merged back to the rest of Kashmir.
“The vote that the people were promised in Kashmir 60 years ago has never occurred. “
Another of your Paki dissinformation. The vote happens every 5 years ...sometimes less then that in the worlds biggest democratic way.
“The maharajah, who was Hindu, decided FOR a predominantly Muslim population. (BTW, in Hyderabad, where the situation was reveresed — a Muslim maharajah and a predominantly Hindu population’
Who care Hindu or Muslim? India is secular and that “divided nation theory” argument doesnt work with India. Oh since you are a Muslim convert you wont know the difference.
India is not secualr in reality. It is a multinational state, and just like Austria-Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and other multinational states, that inherent instability will break it aprat sooner or later.
My point was that it was not the people who got to decide.
That is weak even for you, Gengis. You know that that is irrelevant to the point. That is an election within the framework of the Indian constitution in which independence (or any other political status than that as part of India) is not an option. it ximply changes the state leaders within an Indian framework. It bears no relation to deciding their status with regard to sovereignty.
What about politicians clearly corrupted by Saudi influence? The Saudi’s have been blatantly bribing congress since 1986, and they have pretty much succeeded in buying everybody off.
So if the most violent jihadists are coming from Saudi Arabia, why don’t we intervene militarily there? Saudi Arabia is a clear and present danger to the US.
Kinda reminded me of Argus Hamilton's style (a satirist from here in Oklahoma).
“India is not secualr in reality. It is a multinational state, and just like Austria-Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and other multinational states, that inherent instability will break it aprat sooner or later.”
That is only your opinion. Secularism is enshrined as part of the Indian constitution and is recognised universally as such. Your personal opinion on what India maybe in reality has no bearing on the argument whatsoever. I am only telling you why your Hindu-Muslim argument based on two-nation theory is not likely to work with India. The reason being India is secular.
“It is a multinational state, and just like Austria-Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and other multinational states, that inherent instability will break it aprat sooner or later.”
Have you ever been to India? I guess not. You are only an small time arm chair theorist, all your theories are wrong. Are we a diverse multinational state? .......Yes of course.
Are we unstable that we will break sooner or later?......
According to recently published FSI (Failed State Index) we were ranked at 110. Thats a very high number. Higher then China, higher then many European and Western countries. Your Pakistan ranks at 12 higher then Afghanistan alongside Iraq and Sudan.
Countries break-up not because they are multinational but because they are failed states. In 1971 Pakistan was more homogenous then India and yet it broke apart. Iraq is likely to break apart, again because its a failed state.
In a democracy they get to decide all the time.
I don’t entirely agree with Paul about Mideast policy; I don’t think that our leaving the area will suddenly turn these fanatical, terrorist Islamonazis into a bnch of nice guys. But that is a legitimate position and a far cry from what is being alleged here.
This is the main reason I will not be voting for Ron, he does not understand the danger of the Islamonazis. We can’t just hide our heads in the sand and hope for the best.
As a matter of fact its a very strong argument which you have not been able to refute effectively.
The Kashmiri people voting under the indian constitution is an affirmation in favour of the Indian constitution. yes so what if it was under the Indian constitution. They were not forced by India to vote. They had a choice of not participating in the voting excercise. The had the choice of rejecting the Indian constitution and its democractic exercise.
That would have been an indication that they rejected the Indian authority and that they do not recognise Indian constitution. That would have been an indication of their rejection of their status as an “Indian” or as part of Indian Union. Instead they have voted in massive numbers more then 70% of the population of Kashmir, this is almost twice the percentage of people voting in other states.
Its only an affirmation of the fact that they have accepted the Indian Contitution and see themselves as part of Indian Union and are excercising their very “Indian” right to vote.
Those like HC who see themselves as seperate from India or see themselves as part of Pakistan chose not to vote. See the difference? And of course their numbers were small.
According to a independent BBC (MORI) survey on Kashmir, almost 70% wanted to be with India as against only 6% wanted to be with Pakistan? That says it all! They have integrated with India long time ago.
BTW meet your pro-Pak Kashmiri psycho.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1853718/posts
I am sure you support Kashmiri “freedom fighters” like him right?
False. They are given no other choice. They should be given the choice of whether to remain part of India, become part of Pakistan, or be independent. That was what they were promised in 1948 (!) and they ahve never gotten what was promised.
By the way Kashmiris voting for the Indian elections have already made their choice known. They had the choice of not voting if they considered themselves from India. By voting the chose India. End of story.
Too bad for you, you have trouble honoring their choice.
More of that completely dsistorted Indian Embassy logic of yours. Tehre was only one choice: vote (under Inidna auspices) or let others choose their oppressors for them. Voting in an election under the de facto authority does not mean that you chose that authority, and you know it.
The fact you won't deal with is that they were promised a plebiscite on their status and almost 60 years later they hve never had it. So India and its sycophants twist elections held under the occupying authority into the same thing.
The U.S. has given Puerto Rico the chance to vote on tehir status, repeatedly. Quebecers have gotten a vote on their status vis-a-vis Canada. But India refuses to honor its pledge to let the people of Kashmir vote on their status, which was imposed on them by a Hindu ruler and is enforced by hundreds of thousands of Indian troops. Not to mention letting any of the other national groups within Indian's artficial borders have a free and fair vote, which is what democracies do, BTW.
Okaaay then correct me with your Paki embassy logic. LOL!
BTW whats "dsistorted"? Was English a second language in your Madrassa (the first language being terrorism) or do you come from a country where they speak "dsistorted" English?
“Tehre was only one choice: vote (under Inidna auspices) or let others choose their oppressors for them. “
Others who? I dont see Biharis coming and voting in Kashmiri elections. The others are Kashmiris themselves. Either way they made the choice. Nobody forced them to vote. BTW India is spelt as I-N-D-I-A not I-N-I-D-N-A. The Pakis must be really on low budget to hire you.
“Voting in an election under the de facto authority does not mean that you chose that authority, and you know it.”
Who chooses then? Please tell me who is choosing the government in Kashmir? Excuse this is Indian election, not your Paki election where the Paki-Punjabi-Army establishment chooses the Prime Minister of the so-called “Azad(free) Kashmir”. Its the “Azad(free) Kashmir” that needs the plebiscite. By the way “plebiscite” is a UN demand, so now you are a UN boot licker punk huh?
” So India and its sycophants twist elections held under the occupying authority into the same thing.”
Another of your low budget Ptv propaganda.
BTW Puerto Rico and Quebec are not Kashmir. Kashmir is just like any other state of India, it is, was and shall always be part of India. All states in India was under Hindu or Muslims rule at one point of time. The idea of Pakistan itself was imposed on the Hindus and Moslems by the Brits and one single party the Muslim league. Secular, democratic India is one of the greatest example in history of a truly free, pluralistic, diverse and democratic republic that outshines some of the best examples of democracies of the west. Only you have a problem of digesting the fact. You would rather have India be a third world hell-hole like the Africas so that you can sustain western, white, supremacy over them. Only India stands in your way and has real the potential in future to outclass the west. Face the reality dude.
“Not to mention letting any of the other national groups within Indian’s artficial borders have a free and fair vote, which is what democracies do, BTW.”
Prove it buddy. Prove something at least for once.
BTW even UN, US and EU monitors have attested to the free and fairness of the Kashmiri (and Indian) election. You Paki clowns have trouble digesting it.
Unless you happen to be a minority, such as a Christian, Sikh, Kashmiri, Gujarati, Assaese, Bodo, Dalit, Manipuri, Tamil, etc., etc., etc. For the minorities, as Rep. Dana Rohrabacher noted, "India might as well be Nazi Germany."
Your precious Hinutva has been exposed and the collapse has begun. You just don't realize it yet. A few years from now, it may well be that neither India nor Pakistan will exist as we know it today. And that would enable a lot more people in South Asia to enjoy a lot more freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.