Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

21 killed as terrorists stage serial attacks to disrupt Kashmir polls

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Double Edge
    replied
    So finally the two parties have come up with an agreement that will allow them to start administering the state.

    Agenda for Alliance: Full text of the agreement between PDP and BJP | DNA | March 01 2015

    It shall be the mission of the coalition government to be the most ethical state in the country from the present day position of being the most corrupt state.
    Sense of humour ?

    The Union Government has recently initiated several steps to normalise the relationship with Pakistan. The coalition government will seek to support and strengthen the approach and initiatives taken by the government to create a reconciliatory environment and build stakes for all in the peace and development within the sub-continent.

    The same will be pursued by taking confidence building measures such as, enhancing people to people contact on both sides of the LoC encouraging civil society exchanges, taking travel, commerce, trade and business across the LoC to the next level and opening new routes across all three regions to enhancing connectivity.

    The earlier NDA government led by Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee had initiated a dialogue process with all political groups, including the Hurriyat Conference, in the spirit of “Insaaniyat, Kashmiriyat aur Jamhooriyat”.
    Vajpayee, take #2

    All lands other than those given to the security forces on the basis of lease, licenses and acquisition under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act shall be returned to the rightful legal owners, except in a situation where retaining the lands is absolutely imperative in view of a specific security requirement. In any case, monetary remuneration, be it in the form of rents or compensation should be made fairly at market rates.
    Protecting and fostering ethnic and religious diversity by ensuring the return of Kashmiri Pandits with dignity based on their rights as state subjects and reintegrating as well as absorbing them in the Kashmiri milieu. Reintegration will be a process that will start within the state as well as the civil society, by taking the community into confidence

    For the deprived groups, the coalition government will

    Work out a one-time settlement for refugees from Pakistan Occupied Kashmir of 1947, 1965 & 1971

    Take measures for sustenance and livelihood of the West Pakistan refugees.

    Extend all benefits accruing to the people living on the LoC to the people living on the International Border.

    Make the families of the victims in cross border firing qualify for benefits given under SRO 43.

    Construct shelters in vulnerable areas on the LoC and the International Border to prevent loss of life.
    This would have been difficult to achieve from two parties that have very different ideologies but have decided to move forward in the interest of the people.

    The twain shall meet | IE | march 02 2015
    Inside take by RSS Ram Madhav who was part of the negotiations.

    The J&K assembly elections have thrown up a difficult and complex verdict. Any government without BJP participation would have meant the exclusion of one full region of the state in the administration. Thus the options were restricted. And we decided to go for the most difficult, yet most durable, option — a PDP-BJP alliance.
    It took a full two months to stitch this alliance carefully. As Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed described it aptly, the two parties are like the “North and South Poles”. There were difficulties, highs and lows, as well as stalemates during the nerve-wracking negotiations.

    There were at least a couple of occasions when we almost decided to call off the talks and pack up. It was like the proverbial war of nerves.

    Yet we succeeded in the end because of two factors. First, neither side looked at government formation as arithmetic. We had a much larger objective in mind. We had a distinct mandate that needed to be respected. There was an opportunity to bring the people of Jammu and the Valley closer. As Mufti pointed out, the geographical distance can be covered in six hours; but the emotional distance couldn’t be covered in 60 years. We are also presented with the opportunity to decimate the emotional barriers between J&K and the rest of the country.

    Second, our success depended on the fact that we didn’t allow any extraneous factors to influence us. We kept the negotiations strictly under wraps, not with any ulterior intention, but to ensure that we don’t get distracted.
    This is how business gets done in the real world, takes hard compromises and a will to see it through. Lock the two up in a room and they only come out once they figure out how to proceed.

    There will be teething problems with either side speaking out of step or making inappropriate statements but i would give this one time to mature.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 05 Mar 15,, 00:37.

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
    You mean the terrorists fighting the GoI and it's forces and not the innocent Kashmiris?
    Yes or civilians from other states for that matter.

    This was a payback op isn't it, the IA has exterminated a lot of their comrades in arms.

    The IA is very willing to keep on doing that.

    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
    Haven't those terrorists butchered innocent Pandits as well as driven them away from Kashmir? And this is not the only or an isolated incident I'm pointing out.
    Right, this is why they should stick to the army.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Innocents is a strong statement. They are not innocent. You can cut the head of a terrorist group and make sure another head doesn't grow. But how do you fight an entire nation that's sole purpose of existence is to kill every Indian ?
    Civilians are innocent and should not be targeted by terrorism.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 17 Dec 14,, 00:28.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemontree
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Well , after the first attack the policemen returned with injuries and the villagers now knowing what happened haven't done acted on it. How long will it take for his neighbour to turn his gun on one of the other's ?.....

    To be honest I haven't been in such a situation and am not sure how I will react at that moment. But we are talking about a whole village against a few. Come on...
    I understand your point, but the reality of the situation in villages is completely different. The dynamics that shape their behaviour and politics is alien to you and me.


    All of that didn't happen in broad daylight as you know and I am pretty sure if there were people around then things would have been different. Unfortunately in India the unity shown by the goonda's and rowdies are not shown by good men. Had they all stood up to them then things might have been different.
    That is because we all have an innate fear and the instinct to survive, the urge to hit back only comes when one of our own is in danger. That is the psychology of human nature.

    One person can't stand up to 15 or even 5 goonda's and can't fight cinematic fights and be the hero.
    Oh yes that is possible. Haven't you heard for the Gorkha soldier, Vishnu Shresta from 8 GR, who fought of 40 dacoits who were trying to rape a teenager in a train?
    All you need is moral and physical courage.
    Last edited by lemontree; 16 Dec 14,, 08:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Guys I am not saying that someone who "expresses" his mind should be pounded and anal raped. All I am saying is if proven accomplice you have to face the music. Period. I have never said innocent men and women needs to be thrown in dungeon and given a daily dosage of craziness.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteveDaPirate
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    So you are saying everything is black and white and tomorrow if a Jihadi preaches beheading in front of your house your police will not arrest him but rather sympathize with him? I understand every human has a right for expression but not at the cost of killing innocent men and women?
    In the US at least, the police will not sympathize with the preacher, but they will protect him. The police in the US can force you to get a permit that defines when and where you can speak in public, but they cannot deny you the right to speak or tell you what you can or can't say.

    As a result, we have some groups such as the Westboro Baptist Church, that take advantage of this to preach hate and intollerance. They are almost universally reviled, but the police protect their right to free speech as much as any other group.

    There are a few exceptions, such as threatening the life of the president, or advocating the overthrow of the government, but outside of these specifically defined areas you can say whatever you want without fear of prosecution from the state.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 15 Dec 14,, 22:48.

    Leave a comment:


  • Firestorm
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    So you are saying everything is black and white and tomorrow if a Jihadi preaches beheading in front of your house your police will not arrest him but rather sympathize with him?
    They will arrest him for violating hate speech laws. Freedom of Expression isn't absolute anywhere. Pretty much every country puts limits on it. If you start shouting in your town square, imploring people to kill all the Jews, your a$$ will be thrown in jail (unless you are in iran or Saudi Arabia, where they will just build a bigger stage for you). But you can't torture people for hate speech, nor does cheering for ISIS or Pakistani terrorists count as hate speech.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Either you have freedom of expression or you don't. Freedom of Expression is not about hearing what you want to hear. It is about people expressing ideas that you don't like. You have a right not to listen and you have the right to call them idiots but you do not have the right to slience them.

    Otherwise, you have thought police. You're only allowed to voice those thoughts that the thought police allows you to. Case in point, North Korea. North Korea wants to go to war because we call Kim fat.

    As long as I don't do any of those things, I can voice my support for them. That is the legal definition of Freedom of Expression. There is no such right as the right not to be offended.

    I am even more repulsed by thought police.

    But you already assumed guilt by association. I knew Joe Jihardi. He was my friend. Yeah we were together last night. What we did is none of your business.

    And you're already ready to torture me to find out what we did. For all you know, we were just getting drunk watching a boxing match.
    So you are saying everything is black and white and tomorrow if a Jihadi preaches beheading in front of your house your police will not arrest him but rather sympathize with him? I understand every human has a right for expression but not at the cost of killing innocent men and women? So why are the governments pounding on those that are helping these terrorist activities then are they all wrong at everybit? Then by your saying someone who is funding the operation is also not culpable because he only provided them with monetary support right ? Also the guy that makes bombs for them is not guilty because hey he is not detonating them but merely making them right ? I understand someone trying to control your thinking is way more dangerous than those terrorists. But come on... what you are saying looks more dangerous to me.

    What the CIA did was exactly what you are saying. I wasn't supporting that and said only after enough evidence pointing towards your involvement in helping him is what makes you an accomplice and not before,

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Freedom of expression is good, but for good things that can develop humanity and such and not about violence. After all we are living in a civilized world aren't we. Then maybe we can go to stone age where everything was black and white.
    Either you have freedom of expression or you don't. Freedom of Expression is not about hearing what you want to hear. It is about people expressing ideas that you don't like. You have a right not to listen and you have the right to call them idiots but you do not have the right to slience them.

    Otherwise, you have thought police. You're only allowed to voice those thoughts that the thought police allows you to. Case in point, North Korea. North Korea wants to go to war because we call Kim fat.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    So agreeing with IS you agree to their ideology. You support beheading of innocent people and helping them recruit more foot soldiers so they can rape Kurdish women and sell them in the market ? Kill non believers and go on a rampage?
    As long as I don't do any of those things, I can voice my support for them. That is the legal definition of Freedom of Expression. There is no such right as the right not to be offended.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Based on whether you are cheering for barbaristic activities or a civilized one. And like I said because of hundreds of people cheering for this barbarism the IS is emboldened to increase it's attack on innocent victims. Had everyone condemned would this group have grown to such powerful organization ?
    I am even more repulsed by thought police.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Nope I didn't. I was clear when I said Innocent should not be harmed whichever side they were on. But what CIA did was the opposite and without evidence that linked those apprehended to the terrorists were tortured I am against it.
    But you already assumed guilt by association. I knew Joe Jihardi. He was my friend. Yeah we were together last night. What we did is none of your business.

    And you're already ready to torture me to find out what we did. For all you know, we were just getting drunk watching a boxing match.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Freedom of Expression.
    Freedom of expression is good, but for good things that can develop humanity and such and not about violence. After all we are living in a civilized world aren't we. Then maybe we can go to stone age where everything was black and white.

    Laws change.
    Exactly, they do.

    Agreeing with the IS is not a crime. Even cheering for it is not a crime. Actually joining and participating in IS activities is.
    So agreeing with IS you agree to their ideology. You support beheading of innocent people and helping them recruit more foot soldiers so they can rape Kurdish women and sell them in the market ? Kill non believers and go on a rampage?

    Still not a crime.
    Based on whether you are cheering for barbaristic activities or a civilized one. And like I said because of hundreds of people cheering for this barbarism the IS is emboldened to increase it's attack on innocent victims. Had everyone condemned would this group have grown to such powerful organization ?

    You're changing the goal post again. You want to torture me just because I might know something.
    Nope I didn't. I was clear when I said Innocent should not be harmed whichever side they were on. But what CIA did was the opposite and without evidence that linked those apprehended to the terrorists were tortured I am against it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    You are free to think whatever you want, but keep it to yourself and don't support a lunatic who is in a rampage of killing people.
    Freedom of Expression.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Man made and not given by GOD himself. A hundred years ago in the US having a slave was permitted by law but is it now ?
    Laws change.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    What are your views about those twitter handlers and facebook admins who propagate IS views and help radicalising more people into joining IS ?
    Agreeing with the IS is not a crime. Even cheering for it is not a crime. Actually joining and participating in IS activities is.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    You call it cheering, I call it aiding a terrorist.
    Still not a crime.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    And we are not going to verify those information or keep a close watch on you again to see your activities afterwards ?
    You're changing the goal post again. You want to torture me just because I might know something.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Again, torturing innocent is not acceptable in any means. ONLY if a connection is established between you and the terrorist which actually lead to the killing of many others is when the innocence argument doesn't matter. What CIA did is wrong , they tortured innocents too. I think I was clear in stating that in the beginning of this debate.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Thought policing.
    You are free to think whatever you want, but keep it to yourself and don't support a lunatic who is in a rampage of killing people.

    No, it is not debatable. The laws are clearly defined.
    Man made and not given by GOD himself. A hundred years ago in the US having a slave was permitted by law but is it now ? What are your views about those twitter handlers and facebook admins who propagate IS views and help radicalising more people into joining IS ?

    Cheering is not punishable.
    You call it cheering, I call it aiding a terrorist.

    By that time, it's way too late. Torture is the most useless thing to get real time info. The person could just lie, either to stop the pain or deliberately, and send you on a wild goose chase.
    And we are not going to verify those information or keep a close watch on you again to see your activities afterwards ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Cheering / supporting is the same in my eyes tbh. You are encouraging him and making him believe whatever he is doing is correct.
    Thought policing.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    What and what is not a crime is debatable. Cyber crimes are still crimes eventhough they are not harming anyone. So will we let them scums go about supporting these hate groups without facing law ?
    No, it is not debatable. The laws are clearly defined.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Again, my views are entirely different and you have your own. But supporting terrorism in any form is punishable by law.
    Cheering is not punishable.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    We know you have a hand in it. And we know you are just an arrow and archer is safe hiding somewhere with the help of other arrows . We still need to find the archer and if you are not willing to help then we have ways to extract that info from you.
    By that time, it's way too late. Torture is the most useless thing to get real time info. The person could just lie, either to stop the pain or deliberately, and send you on a wild goose chase.

    Leave a comment:


  • commander
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    You're moving the goal post.
    Cheering / supporting is the same in my eyes tbh. You are encouraging him and making him believe whatever he is doing is correct.

    That is not a crime.
    What and what is not a crime is debatable. Cyber crimes are still crimes eventhough they are not harming anyone. So will we let them scums go about supporting these hate groups without facing law ?

    That too is not a crime.
    Again, my views are entirely different and you have your own. But supporting terrorism in any form is punishable by law.

    Then why do you need to torture if you got the info already?
    We know you have a hand in it. And we know you are just an arrow and archer is safe hiding somewhere with the help of other arrows . We still need to find the archer and if you are not willing to help then we have ways to extract that info from you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by commander View Post
    Not for cheering but by not divulging potential information that could lead to saving hundreds of innocent lives.
    You're moving the goal post.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    You lose the moral ground to say torturing in inhuman when you take pleasure in others dying.
    That is not a crime.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    I don't remember saying you cheering for them alone would mean we will take you in custody and torture you, but rather I said providing moral support by encouraging him to take more lives. You are guilty as much as someone who is doing the killing.
    That too is not a crime.

    Originally posted by commander View Post
    We are not just going to storm into your house all of a sudden and start torturing. As I said before innocents should be spared no matter which side they are on. I have always maintained that. We WILL and SHOULD do the background work and ONLY after strong evidence that you ARE aiding some terrorist we will nab you and do the dirty work.
    Then why do you need to torture if you got the info already?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X