BBC NEWS | South Asia | ‘Militants’ kill Kashmir Hindus This is worth following because of the “seperatist” nature of the conflict. Does anyone witnessing the Mexican influx into California think it will be any different here when suddenly people cry, “We want what is ours!”?

Suspected Islamic militants have killed at least 35 Hindus in two separate attacks in Indian-controlled Kashmir, police say.

Twenty-two people were shot dead after being taken from their homes in mountainous Doda district, police say.

The death toll in an earlier attack in neighbouring Udhampur district has risen to 13, officials say.

India says the attacks, the worst since it agreed a 2003 truce with Pakistan, are aimed at derailing peace efforts.

Indian foreign minister Anand Sharma told the BBC that militant groups based in Pakistan were responsible. “It is cross border terrorism. It’s not the first time we are saying it.”

More than 60,000 people have been killed since an armed separatist insurgency began in Kashmir in 1989.



  1. alexdagrate says:

    Are you suggesting that Americans of Chicano/Latino/Hispanic decent will move to have California re-annexed to Mexico?

    Or are you suggesting that the Catholic majority of Norte California will kill all the Episcopalians?

  2. rwilliams254 says:

    Terrorists are terrorists no matter where they are. (No they’re not insurgents or any other fu-fu name that they’re relabeled). By definition of the name alone, they are terrorists. They inflict terror.

    Alex: It’s going to be Lutherans v. Episcopalians. 🙂

  3. doug says:

    funny – the last seperatist rebellion in the US was committed by people who are probably the ancestors of those crying, “they’re taking over!” about the Mexican immigrants.

    and if we are dismembering the Union, I absolutely demand that we give Florida back to the Spanish and Missouri back to the French.

  4. moss says:

    It always seems to go back to the Brits. That’s a metaphor for the original waves of European colonialism, folks.

    When India was partitioned into India and Pakistan — dumb move #1 — the Raj of Kashmir was one of the British quislings who had served them well. So, even though the overwhelming majority of the residents were Muslim — you can guess what the Brits left in place and the Indian government accepted as holy writ. That’s sort of dumb moves 3 through 17 because they and other Eurothugs repeated the process throughout the Middle East and Near East.

    So, you ended up with countries like Lebanon — wholly a creation of the French. You ended up with Kuwait NOT being part of Iraq [see Kashmir above]. You ended up with Palestine which the Brits kept for themselves for a long time. And the musical chairs continues.

    Except, of course, you get shot or bombed when someone wants their chair back. And, now, the idiots in Washington think they can do a better job of ruling other peoples’ resources than did the Brits, French, Belgians, Germans, Portuguese, blah, blah, blah.

  5. Pterocat says:

    “The British should come back and run Jamaica”.
    This was said to me by a Jamaican person (of African ancestry), who was exasperated at how her post-colonial culture had fared. I think what she meant was the infrastructure (I doubt they want to be “British-ized” all over again). But she was just another regular person, a planetary citizen, tired of living in a place where people grow up in a climate of fear and mistrust of of other people, disregard of civil laws, attitudes of unproductivity and perpetual oppression, kids learning at an early age how to be violent over ‘honor’ issues, etc. etc. Of course those things happen here sometimes, too, but when one looks at places like, say, the Middle East… forget it!

    There’s a stark truth in all of this, which is that It must be a real drag to want (or have) to leave your homeland to get a better life that you believe is somewhere else. That place over the hill there simply ‘looks’ better because the people there have developed a somewhat more peaceful and stable society (and wealthier, too, but that doesn’t necessarily come from those things). But hey, these newcomers are perfectly intelligent hard-working folks, just as capable as the rest of us at getting along better and not thinking in an us-and-them mentality.

    Here are some considerations for any planetary person coming from Mexico to settle in El Norte:

    – North Americans love much about the culture of Mexico, the food (yummy), the history and art, the language interesting and useful (but don’t expect everybody to learn it just because you think they should), respect for ancestors and family traditions (very important), the music fun (though a little monotonous to some ears). There are a lot of Catholics here, but also people of many other faiths, too.

    – Don’t bring that judicial system of yours here. Leave it at home. You’ve got to have one that has at least some independence from the government and police, precendent based, and while there is some ‘mordida’ going on here, to let it get to the condition like that of your homeland might end up a real step in the wrong direction. It might become just like back there (didn’t you want to get away from all that?).

    – You may have heard of the “New York Minute” which is about a second long. Then there’s the “Mexican Second” which lasts about a minute or more, maybe. Running a business, getting ahead and whatnot you can’t go around acting like a hippie who says, “Later, man” all the time.

    There’s probably much more… (sure, some of the above is stereotypical, but you call us “gringos” and assume a lot about us, too).

    Actually, the best thing would be if Mexicans and Nortes could be free to go about and settle in each other’s countries as if it were all one common place. Maybe such a thing will happen someday.

  6. RTaylor says:

    This is a centuries old conflict of religious origin. I don’t see the link to American immigration. I do see a small number of people with the personal agenda of gaining power stirring up the masses. The biblical shepherd and sheep analogy is very true.

  7. Mr. Fusion says:

    Either a lot of people are unaware or just don’t know the history. When India was given independence, the country broke into three parts. The northwest portion would become a mostly Muslim nation to be called Pakistan, a smaller area around the Ganges delta, which was also mainly Muslim, would become a province of Pakistan and the rest would be called India proper. Although the breakup created quite a lot of problems and massive migration of Muslims to and Hindus from Pakistan. Borders were another problem. India took control of a large portion of Kashmir even though it was mainly Muslim. India promised a referendum to allow the province to decide if they wanted to be Indian or Pakistani. That referendum has never occurred. Since then there have been a few wars and several “incursions” by Kashmirs that want to become part of Pakistan. The Indian police and military have not been the kindest to the native Muslims in Kashmir in the process.

    A very brief summary of Kashmir.

  8. Marc Perkel says:

    I don’t agree. Muslims are murderers, Mexucans are not. If Mexico were Islamic I’d agree with you.

  9. rwilliams254 says:

    Wow Mark. That’s blatantly racist.

  10. site admin says:

    TOP TEN COUNTRIES FOR HOMICIDE, 2003
    COUNTRY

    PER 100,000
    (1) Columbia 63
    (2) South Africa 51
    (3) Jamaica 32
    (4) Venezuela 32
    (5) Russia 19
    (6) Mexico 13
    (7) Lithuania 10
    (8) Estonia 10
    (9) Latvia 10
    (10) Belarus 9

    Not seeing a lot of Muslim countries on this list…but wait..there’s Mexico!

    As for racism, geez does everthing HAVE to be racism? Muslims are pan-racial: black white, asian, with all ethnic groups. So how is this a racial comment? People are trivializing the term and it will have no meaning. If you disagree then say why. Don’t start using racism as the reason. And especially when in no way is race actually at issue. My god.

  11. Wow. Yeah, this really sucks for India and Pakistan. I don’t care about India or Pakistan, or many other countries in that part of the world. They’re all part of the problem, not part of the solution.

    Haven’t the wars over there been going on for hundreds or thousands of years? We had wars in America, too, but we either won or compromised. Either way, WE STOPPED THINKING IT WAS RIGHT TO KILL EACH OTHER OVER SILLY DIFFERENCES!!!

    The people can’t get along because they’re ignorant and obsessed with non-existent fantasy entities. Instead of sending them soldiers and political advice, we should send them books about science and peace, advise them that religion is eroding their societies, and worry about our own backyard. They’ll either learn to get along or kill each other off — one way or the other, it’ll end. Yah duh.

  12. jawani says:

    You are a clown, and dont grasp the situation. By generalizing the situation u just prve u dont have any credentials to speak on the matter. Its american policy that armed paksitan and lets the do this with no consequences. And dont tell us we’r euneductaed, when it comes to doctors, engineers and scientists, u just have to go to any Ameircan campus to see the Indian contribution. The Europeans have been fightin over Protestatism and Catholicism, why dont u castigate them?


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4606 access attempts in the last 7 days.