Herschelle Gibbs rakes in dirty controversy again, tries to play KPL and then blames BCCI's "political agenda"

[Vilander]

Damn.. 5 posts in 12 minutes in the same thread lol... Triggered  @Azadi  man this has hit a sensitive nerve in Pakistanis hehe

[rangeelaraja]

1 hour ago, Azadi said:

What does airports have to do with this? Sure India has more money, but what is the use if you treat people like this? Morals over Money.

 

 

How do you treat Balochi  ? Why is there BLA ? Why is there PTM ? Why did you treat East Pakistanis ( Bengalis ) so badly that they wanted a different country ? 

 

Why do normal Afghans HATE Pakistan and Pakistanis ?

 

If you are care so much about "treating Kashmiris well", why is the state of PoK ( what is idiotically and laughably call Azad Kashmir ) so pathetic ?

 

What was the % of minorities in Pak at the time of partition & what is it now ? 

 

Minorities were less than 12 % of India's population in 1950 and are over 20 % now.  Whereas they were more than 10 % in Pak at time of independence and are less than 1 % now. 

 

Shameless munafiq ( hypocritics) people.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2021 by rangeelaraja

[Mariyam]

4 hours ago, Azadi said:

Hosting matches is very grim when you consider the oppression of Kashmiris under the current BJP regime. They deserve Azadi, hosting matches is just a diversion tactic to make the situation sound better. If India had the guts, it would hold a plebiscite, but they don’t.

The plebiscite has some pre-requisites as laid down by the UN.

First of all, Pakistan would have to withdraw all its forces: regular and irregular from the part of Kashmir that they occupy. Also relocate all those non Kashmiris who settled in the part of Kashmir they occupy.

Then India would have to reduce its forces and hold the plebiscite after appointing an election officer nominated by the UN.

 

Pakistan never stuck to its end of the deal. There was no adherence to step 1 for India to carry out step 2. In all this tu tu mein mein between India and Pakistan, the fault of there not being a plebiscite is squarely on Pakistan's shoulders. You must ask your successive leaders why they didn't withdraw as mandated by the UN resolution.

Pakistan has raised the plebiscite issue multiple times in the UN/ICJ but have lost the cases on these very grounds.

 

Now 75+ years later, what relevance does a resolution from 1948 hold? Can Pakistan ask the descendants of the Non Kashmiris who are settled in the Kashmir that Pakistan occupies to leave? That would be inhumane and impossible domestically.

 

Here is the entire UN resolution.

 

https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=S%2FRES%2F47(1948)&Language=E&DeviceType=Mobile

 

[rollingstoned]

3 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

The plebiscite has some pre-requisites as laid down by the UN.

First of all, Pakistan would have to withdraw all its forces: regular and irregular from the part of Kashmir that they occupy. Also relocate all those non Kashmiris who settled in the part of Kashmir they occupy.

Then India would have to reduce its forces and hold the plebiscite after appointing an election officer nominated by the UN.

 

Pakistan never stuck to its end of the deal. There was no adherence to step 1 for India to carry out step 2. In all this tu tu mein mein between India and Pakistan, the fault of there not being a plebiscite is squarely on Pakistan's shoulders. You must ask your successive leaders why they didn't withdraw as mandated by the UN resolution.

Pakistan has raised the plebiscite issue multiple times in the UN/ICJ but have lost the cases on these very grounds.

 

Now 75+ years later, what relevance does a resolution from 1948 hold? Can Pakistan ask the descendants of the Non Kashmiris who are settled in the Kashmir that Pakistan occupies to leave? That would be inhumane and impossible domestically.

 

Here is the entire UN resolution.

 

https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=S%2FRES%2F47(1948)&Language=E&DeviceType=Mobile

 

there have been demographic changes in both areas rendering 1948 plebiscite talks irrelevant. They won't do it anyway because 'solving' the issue will create an existential issue for them. 

[QuarantineTormentino]

 

[TheWall]

10 minutes ago, QuarantineTormentino said:

 

A slipper shot to the Pakistani trolls...

[Norman]

28 minutes ago, QuarantineTormentino said:

 

 

 

Lmao 

 

Abbuship ended with Panesar. Now Gibbs is their abbu again. 

[Azadi]

On 8/3/2021 at 1:44 AM, rangeelaraja said:

 

 

How do you treat Balochi  ? Why is there BLA ? Why is there PTM ? Why did you treat East Pakistanis ( Bengalis ) so badly that they wanted a different country ? 

 

Why do normal Afghans HATE Pakistan and Pakistanis ?

 

If you are care so much about "treating Kashmiris well", why is the state of PoK ( what is idiotically and laughably call Azad Kashmir ) so pathetic ?

 

What was the % of minorities in Pak at the time of partition & what is it now ? 

 

Minorities were less than 12 % of India's population in 1950 and are over 20 % now.  Whereas they were more than 10 % in Pak at time of independence and are less than 1 % now. 

 

Shameless munafiq ( hypocritics) people.

 

 

Yes, Azad Kashmir is pathetic for treating people justly. Just a few days ago elections for Prime Minister were held smoothly. It is called Azad because the people are free, not like India's inhumane treatment of Kashmiris.   

[Azadi]

20 hours ago, Mariyam said:

The plebiscite has some pre-requisites as laid down by the UN.

First of all, Pakistan would have to withdraw all its forces: regular and irregular from the part of Kashmir that they occupy. Also relocate all those non Kashmiris who settled in the part of Kashmir they occupy.

Then India would have to reduce its forces and hold the plebiscite after appointing an election officer nominated by the UN.

 

Pakistan never stuck to its end of the deal. There was no adherence to step 1 for India to carry out step 2. In all this tu tu mein mein between India and Pakistan, the fault of there not being a plebiscite is squarely on Pakistan's shoulders. You must ask your successive leaders why they didn't withdraw as mandated by the UN resolution.

Pakistan has raised the plebiscite issue multiple times in the UN/ICJ but have lost the cases on these very grounds.

 

Now 75+ years later, what relevance does a resolution from 1948 hold? Can Pakistan ask the descendants of the Non Kashmiris who are settled in the Kashmir that Pakistan occupies to leave? That would be inhumane and impossible domestically.

 

Here is the entire UN resolution.

 

https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=S%2FRES%2F47(1948)&Language=E&DeviceType=Mobile

 

I think both sides definitely have their share of blame. The point I was making is that people from AJK would prefer to stay with Pakistan, whilst imo people would ask for separation from India in J &K.  Honestly, do you think what India is doing to Kashmiris is right? Pakistan is not perfect either, but the Ksshmiris are treated well. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Azadi

[Azadi]

I would love to here opinions of Kashmiris (if they browse here) on what life is like. 

[diga]

1 hour ago, Azadi said:

I would love to here opinions of Kashmiris (if they browse here) on what life is like. 

Its hear and not here

[Mariyam]

10 hours ago, Azadi said:

I think both sides definitely have their share of blame. The point I was making is that people from AJK would prefer to stay with Pakistan, whilst imo people would ask for separation from India in J &K.  Honestly, do you think what India is doing to Kashmiris is right? Pakistan is not perfect either, but the Ksshmiris are treated well. 

Yes both sides have their share of blame.

 

I know nothing about the Kashmir that Pakistan occupies. I don't know what people there feel about us ( Indians). I don't think they want to be a part of India either. It's something that some media outlets would show clippings of, but that should be taken with a grain of salt. Why would they? 

 

Your" Is what India doing to Kashmir right"  very difficult to answer in a yes/no.

I don't doubt the intentions of the Indian state in Kashmir. The intention has always been to get the Kashmiris into the mainstream. To some extent, India has succeeded.

The state of India spent ( without taking into account military $) the highest amount of $ per capita on the erstwhile state of J&K. For some of the lowest tax returns. That is a declaration of intent.

The Indian state has also tried to keep the territorial sovereignty of the J and K intact. Indian hasn't ceded any of the land to China.

The Indian state funds studies on the Kashmiri language. Bears costs of publications of certain newspapers etc. 

Start ups/businesses find it easier to get state funding in J&K than many other states.

 

Have there been excesses? Have there been violations of human rights? Ofcourse, there have. It would be stupid to deny that. 

But those are mainly acts of individual excesses not state policy.

I can only hope that Kashmiris have access to legal recourse in such cases as is their right. No other way to get them into the mainstream than to make them feel that the state is accountable. 

 

Now with Article 370 abrogated there is a very good chance that the private sector starts pumping money into Kashmir. It will happen at some point. That means jobs/opportunities which generally keep disgruntled people content. I am hopeful.

 

If anecdotal evidence means anything, most people I have come across in Kashmir (as a tourist) seemed content. And had enough of the restrictions/fighting and just wanted to get on with their lives. Many tour operators/souvenir shop owners  try to mark up prices and swindle you. How much more mainstream Indian can you get!

 

 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Mariyam

[TheWall]

13 hours ago, Norman said:

 

 

Lmao 

 

Abbuship ended with Panesar. Now Gibbs is their abbu again. 

Does Gibbs resemble a goat or a camel from any angle????

[EnterTheVoid]

What a thread

[EnterTheVoid]

Just now, TheWall said:

Does Gibbs resemble a goat or a camel from any angle????

 

[Austin 3:!6]

5 hours ago, Azadi said:

I would love to here opinions of Kashmiris (if they browse here) on what life is like. 

Heard PCB not allowing its contracted players to participate in KPL? What happened to the bhai chaara or are they threatened that this league will surpass PSL..LOL.

[Azadi]

4 hours ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

Heard PCB not allowing its contracted players to participate in KPL? What happened to the bhai chaara or are they threatened that this league will surpass PSL..LOL.

It was never supposed to be a huge league in terms of cricketing ability. Before this fiasco, not much people in Pakistan really cared about KPL because the quality of the tournament is low, but this recent incident has generated interest. PCB only approved the competition, the tournament is run by private Kashmiri business owners. So PCB not allowing central contracted players to participate makes sense. The purpose is to try to develop cricket in Kashmir, bringing some of these players into the spotlight and mingling with big names (even if they are old retired players).

[speed_thrills]

2 minutes ago, Azadi said:

It was never supposed to be a huge league in terms of cricketing ability. Before this fiasco, not much people in Pakistan really cared about KPL because the quality of the tournament is low, but this recent incident has generated interest. PCB only approved the competition, the tournament is run by private Kashmiri business owners. So PCB not allowing central contracted players to participate makes sense. The purpose is to try to develop cricket in Kashmir, bringing some of these players into the spotlight and mingling with big names (even if they are old retired players).

You missed to mention one more purpose ---- shout your handle at every given opportunity.

[Azadi]

8 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Yes both sides have their share of blame.

 

I know nothing about the Kashmir that Pakistan occupies. I don't know what people there feel about us ( Indians). I don't think they want to be a part of India either. It's something that some media outlets would show clippings of, but that should be taken with a grain of salt. Why would they? 

 

Your" Is what India doing to Kashmir right"  very difficult to answer in a yes/no.

I don't doubt the intentions of the Indian state in Kashmir. The intention has always been to get the Kashmiris into the mainstream. To some extent, India has succeeded.

The state of India spent ( without taking into account military $) the highest amount of $ per capita on the erstwhile state of J&K. For some of the lowest tax returns. That is a declaration of intent.

The Indian state has also tried to keep the territorial sovereignty of the J and K intact. Indian hasn't ceded any of the land to China.

The Indian state funds studies on the Kashmiri language. Bears costs of publications of certain newspapers etc. 

Start ups/businesses find it easier to get state funding in J&K than many other states.

 

Have there been excesses? Have there been violations of human rights? Ofcourse, there have. It would be stupid to deny that. 

But those are mainly acts of individual excesses not state policy.

I can only hope that Kashmiris have access to legal recourse in such cases as is their right. No other way to get them into the mainstream than to make them feel that the state is accountable. 

 

Now with Article 370 abolished there is a very good chance that the private sector starts pumping money into Kashmir. It will happen at some point. That means jobs/opportunities which generally keep disgruntled people content. I am hopeful.

 

If anecdotal evidence means anything, most people I have come across in Kashmir (as a tourist) seemed content. And had enough of the restrictions/fighting and just wanted to get on with their lives. Many tour operators/souvenir shop owners  try to mark up prices and swindle you. How much more mainstream Indian can you get!

 

 

Thanks for the response.

 

The Indian economy being invested into Kashmir is definitely a big advantage and hopefully that happens. The region has a lot of potential I think. Hopefully life for them gets better for them in all areas. 

[Azadi]

10 minutes ago, speed_thrills said:

You missed to mention one more purpose ---- shout your handle at every given opportunity.

Well, there is a political element, but I don’t think that was the original intention, maybe I am wrong.