Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TBP; Gengis Khan; sukhoi-30mki
India's record on that score is quite different.

Bull$hit. Tell me about Bangladesh. Wo supported whom. And the Nixon-era China love-affair. And the one still going on with Pakistan. And the Saudis. And the Iraqis, before Saddam became the enemy. And Iran, in the late '40s.

The newspaper Hitavada reported that the late governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, was paid the equivalent of $1.5 billion to foment, organize, and support covert state terrorism in Punjab and in Kashmir.

Definitions. Definitions. Definitions.

Anyway, the mainstream terrorism is wiped out in Punjab. In Kashmir, it's dying. Plus, 1-billion to foment terrorism? A tad bit too much for a country like India, wouldn't you think? And foment terrorism for what gain? Punjab and Kashmir are states of the Union, and have no right, or its people, neither the will, nor the necessity, to secede.

18 posted on 05/11/2007 11:12:19 PM PDT by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: CarrotAndStick
1-billion to foment terrorism? A tad bit too much for a country like India, wouldn't you think?

1.5 actually, and yes, it's a lot. Especially when half the population lives below the international poverty line. But he was found with massive amounts of money and Hitavada was apparently able to trace it.

And foment terrorism for what gain?

To give themselves an excuse to cover the bloodshed that was being inflicted day after day.

Punjab and Kashmir are states of the Union, and have no right, or its people, neither the will, nor the necessity, to secede.

They do have the right. Kashmir was promised a plebiscite on its status, which has never occurred. Punjab was to become independent at the tim of independence, but stuck wiht India on false prom,ises from Nehru and Patel. No Sikh representative has ever signed the Indian constitution to this day. And the essence of democracy is the right to self-determination. The people hve the right to choose independence if they so desire.

If you're so sure they don't have the desire, why not simply do the democratic thing, hold a vote, and prove it? The marches for independence, seminars on independence, and other such peaceful, democratic, nonviolent activities would tend to indicate that there is at least some desire for sovereignty. As for the necessity, do I need to cite the statistics on the mass murders of minorities, the political prisoners, the arrests simply for making speeches, and so forth yet again?

20 posted on 05/11/2007 11:24:30 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson