Is Gaddafi’s U.N. speech winning him a fan base in Kashmir?

September 30, 2009

A street vendor in Srinagar, Kashmir’s summer capital, sold hundreds of framed portraits of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in the last one week.

Kashmiri separatists and many residents are all praise for Gaddafi after his maiden address to the U.N. General Assembly last week in which he said Kashmir should be an “independent state.”

It was a diplomatic embarrassment for India but has Gaddafi’s U.N. speech actually won him an enthusiastic fan base in strife-weary Kashmir where Muslim militants are fighting New Delhi’s rule since 1989.

The Libyan leader told the U.N. General Assembly last week that Kashmir should be an independent state, not Indian, not Pakistani.

Last week, dozens of Kashmiris carried placards reading “Gaddafi The Lion of Desert II” referring to the 1981 Hollywood movie “Lion of the Desert”, which is about Omar Mukhtar, who led the rebellion against Italian rule in Libya and was captured and hanged in 1931.

The movie on Omar Mukhtar encouraged rebellion in Kashmir in 1985. This is for the first time in recent times a Muslim leader outside the Indian sub-continent has advocated Kashmir’s complete independence both from India and Pakistan.

The two countries claim the region in full but rule in parts.

Encouraged by the speech, separatist leaders say Gaddafi’s statement in the U.N. General Assembly should serve as an eye-opener for Indian and Pakistani leaders.

Despite two wars over Kashmir, India and Pakistan have so far failed to find a solution to the more than six-decade-old dispute over Kashmir.

New Delhi has so far largely struggled to win the hearts and minds of the people of Kashmir, where anti-India sentiment still runs deep.

Gaddafi also opposed the expansion of the U.N. Security Council by including countries like India. New Delhi, which has downplayed Gaddafi’s statement, has not yet reacted officially.

Has Gaddafi’s U.N. speech on Kashmir’s “freedom” won him foes in India and friends in Kashmir?


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

Just ignore his rantings …

His own translator can’t even understand him …

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive

This dictator and terrorist wants to represent Kasmirirs?

I thot most Kashmiris are democratic and secular!

Posted by Dev | Report as abusive

Mr.Sheikh Mushtaq,
Muammar Gaddafi is a big joker.India has no need to listen hs advise. Pls read below article.  /Mocking-Bird/entry/gaddafi-the-colourf ul-colonel

Posted by brr | Report as abusive

Mr. Gaddafi has become present outside hero for kashmir and earned respect for his country libya,in the hearts of kashmiri.I dont know how much insult India want to earn on the name of kashmir,before giving us our right of freedom………

Posted by Aadil | Report as abusive

Kashmiris should be given a choice to select their future. Also, being an Indian, I feel, Pakisthan will be a threat, and using the muslim-muslim sympathy, they will invade the region, as they did, decades ago.
Howvever, Kashmiris have the freedom (as already have referandum on UN)to select there future as well as freedom.
But, again, being Indian, I feel deep hurt in allowing them to leave from our nation. If they are not happy with us, then, it should be up to their choice…

Posted by mujeebpatla | Report as abusive

May be Gaddafi can stand in elections in Kashmir. Kashmiries always went behind wrong people.

Posted by Krishna | Report as abusive

To your question that: “Has Gaddafi’s U.N. speech on Kashmir’s “freedom” won him foes in India and friends in Kashmir?” my answer would be yes. But who cares. If supporting the truth adds up your enemies than it is understandable. Kashmiris can’t be enslaved for long. They are all set to get independence from the clutches of India with or without the help of UN or other countries.

Posted by Nush | Report as abusive

the world leaders should learn from brave Faddafi and speak against Indian occupation in Kashmir. I am sure it at least hurts India.

Posted by juneeda shafi | Report as abusive

I don’t understand why these Indians shy away from discussing Kashmir. Or feel embarrassed when any leader talks about Kashmir’s freedom. Accept realities and support Kashmir cause, Kashmir’s solution is good both for India and Pakistan.

Posted by hina shafi | Report as abusive

Gaddafi is definetly a hero. After so long someone has taken cognizance of Kashmir miseries and Indian, and Pakistani occupation of grater Kashmir. I am sure other freedom loving leaders will follow and ask India to finad an amicable solution to the dispute which has taken a large toll so far.

Posted by shah niyaz | Report as abusive

I pity on some concentrators who say use joker word for Gaddafi and at the same time call themselves democratic and secular. has Gaddafi spoken ill or false. Kashmir still stands a dispute and will secede from both India and Pakistan in near future.

Posted by Saqlain | Report as abusive

Gaddafi is a hero in Kashmir today. Anyone who advocates for Kashmir’s freedom is our dear friend. Long live Gaddafi

Posted by Nizhat | Report as abusive

Mr. Mushtaq writes that Gaddafi’s passing reference about Kashmir in his speech “was a diplomatic embarrassment for India.”

This statement reflects absolute lack of understanding for the status that Gaddafi holds in the world community. For Mr. Mushtaq’s information, Gaddafi is the clown that everyone laughs at, especially in the West. His speech was not taken seriously by anyone at the UN barring his own representatives. If at all, there was any embarrassment for anyone in his speech, it was for Gaddafi himself. Almost every news analyst, every commentator and every columnist mocked at Gaddafi for his marathon ramblings and rants in the West. No one even paid attention to Gaddafi’s references except for self-consoling and self-comforting Kashmiri separatists. So I don’t know how the author considered Gaddafi’s blabbering a diplomatic embarrassment for India.

Posted by Singh | Report as abusive

A dictator talking about ‘freedom’. First he should free his own people from his clutch then he should talk for others. A person who supports terrorism worldwide and aided in Lockerbie bombing taking away many innocent life, how his speech can be justified as speech for someone’s freedom. Presently, he has changed his anti-American stand, not because he has change of heart, but he fears the similar consequences that Saddam Hussain faced.

Posted by vishal | Report as abusive

Let’s just all take a step back. First of all, as who is this Gaddafi guy? Well, he came to power via a Coup and was a dictator, who dabbled with terrorism and backed murderous, genocidal tyrants in the African continent. The few ignorant ones, who are trying to make money off of his image are just selling a few minutes of fame and cannot claim to love the man, unless they condone his actions of the past. To sum it up, Gaddafi has no moral basis for his rants and neither do the Kashmiri separatists reaching for the latest Islamic Military Tyrant who slews hollow words without meaning.

Gaddafi is irrelevant and those who cheer him.

Posted by GW | Report as abusive

I must admit to a chuckle over this one. When I saw the news item in the press, I said to myself this is bound to come up on the Reuters blog and make some journalist’s day.

As for my opinion, I think his own interpreter said it best – “I can’t take it anymore” and gave up in disgust. I cannot imagine anyone taking this buffoon seriously. A 15 min speech spread over a couple of hours. If a Libyan had not been the current President of the Assembly, it would have been a no show again for him.

Posted by Dara | Report as abusive

Having failed so miserably on the Palestine file, Kashmir is not set to become the next major cause celebre for autocratic Arab dictators and the broader global left. Gaddafi is the first sign of this. India should be careful about this trend.

That being said, given that Kashmiris are giving up a developing India for a increasingly regressive Pakistan (everybody knows that true Kashmiri independence is a pipe dream), it will give the wider global community pause, before they seriously back the aspirations of Kashmiris. And if the best Kashmiris can do is get a leader who led a campaign of murder and terror against his own people and foreign citizens, to back their cause, they’re in far dire straits than I imagined. Hard to take any group seriously when they are trumpeting the endorsement of a man like Gaddafi.

Posted by Keith | Report as abusive

Wasn’t this guy convicted of terrorism?

So he wants to be popular now!

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive

As expected, I see a lotta Pakistanis jump on Mr. Gaddafi’s back & cry ‘freedom’ for the Kashmiris. BTW, in case you guys forgot to read the article, he’s suggesting a totally independant Kashmir, which includes Pakistan occupied Kashmir as well.
It’s quite ironic that a dictator (who lacks any international credibility whatsoever) is talking about freeing the citizens of the world’s largest democracy. Instead of an embarrassment for India, this is an embarrassment for the Kashmiris.
Since you’ve decided to become the voice of the freedom-seekers Mr. Gaddafi, how about calling for some freedom for the Baluchis, Pashtuns & Sindhis of Pakistan? I guess, being a bigot & hypocrite, you have different standards for Islamic nations!

Posted by Mortal | Report as abusive

“Having failed so miserably on the Palestine file, Kashmir is not set to become the next major cause celebre for autocratic Arab dictators and the broader global left.”

–>There is an undercurrent of a creed at work, relentlessly working to re-affirm the 7th century on humanity through any means and tools possible: terrorism, lying, conspiracies, propaganda and its goals may lie hundreds of years in the future. This creed’s goal is to enslave humanity and throw us all back to the dark ages, where we quit using our ability to question and grow as human beings, but follow what we have been told like mental slave like drones.

This creed will use any conflict it can, as a lightning rod to suit its broader goal of planetary conquest. Democracies and liberal societies are already beginning to fall prey to this and waking up and beginning to realize.

Gadafi is just the tip of the iceberg.

Posted by GW | Report as abusive

Just to clarify my previous point, I am referring to a cabal group of people, who do NOT represent the 99,9% of the peoples of the arab world. This small group of people are using the politics of religion to to polarize the non-muslim world against the muslim world, to breathe truth into the misinformation that they slew, to gain political strength and sympathy from unsuspecting followers. Drunk on religious hatred, they claim for the plight of muslims and Ummah, yet they butcher muslims civilians, for their own political gain. Osama bin laden was one of them Al-Q and such movements are the creed that I am referring to. It is the moderates that must fight this creed.

Posted by GW | Report as abusive


@Having failed so miserably on the Palestine file, Kashmir is not set to become the next major cause celebre for autocratic Arab dictators and the broader global left. Gaddafi is the first sign of this. India should be careful about this trend.

–Can you clarify? —-Kashmir is NOT SET TO become OR SET TO become the next major cause celebre for ……..?

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

–Can you clarify? —-Kashmir is NOT SET TO become OR SET TO become the next major cause celebre for ……..?
– Posted by rajeev

Meant to say “now set become”

Posted by Keith | Report as abusive

Kashmir should have been let go long ago. I really feel sorry for the Kashmiris who are living under a military siege and militant threat.

Unfortunately geo-political circumstances of today prevent them from realizing their wishes. There is too much at stake for India if it gives up Kashmir all of a sudden now. Revolts and riots will break out inside the country if Kashmir is let go. So there is a practical side to making decisions of this kind. Ideally speaking, my vote is yes for Kashmir’s independence. However, the current situation prohibits any move in that direction. Kashmiris deserve to fulfill their wishes. But at the same time, it cannot be at India’s expense. Only a compromising solution that works out for both partis can be aimed at for now.

And India will never let go of Kashmir for Pakistan’s sake. So Pakistan has to be taken out of the equation for India to work with Kashmiris. Let us see if they can do that. There is tremendous amount of ego involved. Just like Pakistan will not bow down to India, one cannot expect India to bow down to Pakistan. And Kashmir solution at Pakistan’s terms will never happen.

Kashmiris can salute every lunatic who speaks on their behalf. But India has grown a little too big to be pushed around. Terrorism, militancy etc have been tried over the years and it has bled Pakistan more than India.

The first thing a smart Kashmiri would do is to distance himself from Pakistan, if he needs anything from India as a concession. Being a Muslim does not have to translate into being anti-Indian. It is a question of give and take. What can Kashmiris give India in return for their independence? Indian citizens will demand that in return for anything Kashmir demand.

Taking on India by militancy will not work. India is not the US. Soldiers and human lives are expendable in the Indian context. And for twenty years, India has lost many lives and has not yielded an inch. That should tell something to Kashmiris. They should think of what they can do to calm India by peaceful means and make friends with them. If you make an enemy out of India, you have blown all your chances away. In today’s context, India has a huge international clout. The thing that would please India dearly is distancing yourself from Pakistan and its evil plans. That is the first step. Having sacrificed its soldiers and people and resources over the years to protect the territory from Pakistan’s covert assault, India will expect Kashmiris to sacrifice their links to Pakistan completely.

Let us see if Kashmiris can think practical and see what is best for themselves. Confronting India has been tried and it has failed. Now Pakistan has come to the stage of saying that its Kashmir issue with India has led them to this state of misery. For them to give up that obsession, Kashmiris have to divorce Pakistan from their hearts and turn friendly towards India.

I am all for everyone’s well being and freedom. But I am against doing it at others’ expense. I support Kashmiris right to self determination. But they will have to give something to India in return. It is left to them to figure out what it is.

Posted by Mauryan | Report as abusive

Good News!

India and Pakistan agree to work together in Pakistan.

Krishna said that he was pleasantly surprised by Pakistan’s suggestion, and has expressed India’s willingness to work together for rebuilding Afghanistan.

Is ISI on board? tm

Posted by Ramin | Report as abusive

well i totally agree wt Gadaffi…its high time tht Kashmir should be given freedom and Kashmiris should be made the masters of their own destiny…India cant keep ‘clinging’ to kashmir….

Posted by dia | Report as abusive

” fan base in Kashmir ” … for a military dictator and an extremist. now thats smart.

although im not too sure of the accuracy of that statement.”

yeah im sure that kind of thinking is going to solve issues in Kashmir.

apprently the poeple of Kashmir rather be fans of people like Gaddafi than Nelson Mandella.

Posted by John | Report as abusive

gadaffi also said that UN security council is terror council and UN headquatered should be shifted to Libya his own country. this shows the way he looks the world. the same way he is looking kashmir. if what he said in his whole UN speech is correct and needs to be implemented then suggestion on kashmir is also has to be implemented. iran’s president said isreal has to be eliminated from world map. US president said, he will have nukes and all other countries should not have nukes and he brought resolution also in that regard. let you people implement all presidents speech and resolutions of UN and definitely india consider indepedence to kashmir. people who dont keep their home in order, blames the others. UN assemply should not be the place for the same.

Posted by venkat | Report as abusive

well i totally agree wt Gadaffi…its high time tht Kashmir should be given freedom and Kashmiris should be made the masters of their own destiny…India cant keep ‘clinging’ to kashmir….

– Posted by dia

In case you hadn’t noticed he was referring to ALL of Kashmir. It’s high time Pakistan gave up its portion as well.

If they really cared about Kashmiri independence they’d start by setting a precedent with their portion. Or is Kashmiri independence really about taking land from India?

Posted by Keith | Report as abusive

this is perhaps the only time in his life that ghadaffi might be right on anything. Kashmir, along with palesine, tibet, and Kurdistan, all have the right to be seperate and independent states. free from the oppressive hands of the governments who control them. It seems as if the worlds has given a blind eye to Kashmir. the stark choices of Kashmir becoming a part of india or pakistan are terrible.India does not deserve kashmir because it treats its current muslims population terribly and it will just become another target for hindu extremist like the BJP, so why should they have control over a majority muslim region. Pakistan does not deserve Kashmir because it can’t care for its current population and can’t keep taliban influence out of what it already has, so why give them more. FREE KASHMIR NOW

Posted by Hassan | Report as abusive

@Ideally speaking, my vote is yes for Kashmir’s independence.

Mauryan: Do you realize that there is no provision by UN or 2 nation theory or the viability of free Kashmir—which ever logic you like—for Kashmir to an independent nation.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

– Posted by Hassan

–Hassan: Do you really think Kashmiris (India + POK) will be able to run a country? I do not think so considering their political leadership—-remenber when their will be merger, POK kashmir will be dominant iver Indian Kashmiri (remember Muhajir thing?). So they will again be stuck. I can not see a single kashmiri separatist leader in India (in POK all are puppets or are Pakistanis) who is leading the Kashmir politics from the front. If they canot do it now, how can they do it later? Kashmiris have been relying on Pakistan-based terrorists who never even saw Indian Kashmir.

@it will just become another target for hindu extremist like the BJP, so why should they have control over a majority muslim region.
–You are calling BJP terrorists. Do you know that it was the “BJP terrorists” (as you named them) which started the talks with pakistan on Kashmir issue, despite the kargil war by Pakistan.

Also, what you said above about Kashmiri (Muslims) attacked by Hindu extermists is just a speculation, but what is a hard fact is that hundreds of Kashmiri Pundits have been killed by Pakistan-based Muslim terrorists, supported by some Kashmiri Muslims or they watched silently.

Whether it is today or tomorrow or 100yrs, one thing I can tell you is that Kashmir will not be completely independent—neither pakistan nor Indian will give the land they are occupying for a number of reasons.

Kashmiris should get used to the idea of 2 Kashmirs—just like Punjab and Bengal split–as part of India and Pakistan. If history is any proof, a “free kashmir” will be attacked by pakistan to get the land they are drooling over.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

you forgot to add southern Philippines, southern Thailand, Chinas Ughuir province to your list.In 20 yrs, Holland, England, France and Germany.But seriously, I agree with some sympathy that Kurdish people must be given some concessions,their language is indeed getting wiped out. I had some Kurdish friends.

Your rant that muslims are illtreated in India gets a response from me- a big yawn. My muslim friends openly say thay are lot freer in India than most of the muslim nations.India is the only nation with a separate muslim personal law and is the only nation that allocated reservations in university admissions (eg.,andhra)to muslims and to fund muslim pilgrimage to mecca (can you believe that), from taxpayers money.Similar aid is denied to hindus. Also, Hindu temple collections go to state treasury but not those of mosques, churches and gurudwaras.Government regulates temple administration but keeps hands off places of other religions.Im sure you will come back with that riot or this demolition. What happened to 25 million hindus,sikhs and christians in Pakistan. why do you care.

Posted by avatar | Report as abusive

Gaddafi may want it but no need to erect new Berlin walls!!!

The Indian subcontinent hosts hundreds of ethnicities, speaking 1000 languages and practicing all the religions in God’s earth. There are linguistic ethnic groups- Sindhis, Gujaratis, Bengalis, Maratis, Pathans, Punjabis, Tamil, Telugus, Kashmiris .and so on….the list is long. The only single (ethnic +linguistic) group in the subcontinent that constitutes a separate country is Bangladhesh- born because of genocide of three million Bangladheshis perpetrated by the Pakistan army in 1971.

Some Kashmiri muslims (mainly sunni sect) living in a small valley wanting a separate country seems to have born out of sense of entitlement out of events of partition, UN resolutions, etc. Either that or it is born out of the special racial supremacy some of them feel. Hindus, Shia muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs all living in the Indian administered Kashmir are opposed to this separation sought by the Sunni muslims of Kashmir valley. FREEDOM FOR THEM MEANS HELL FOR THE BUDDHISTS, HINDUS AND SIKHS LIVING RIGHT THERE.

In either case another intolerant country based on religious exclusivity is the last thing the subcontinent needs!!! International community is not interested in another country “Islamic Republic of Kashmir” led by Syed Salahuddin of “United Jihad council” as its supreme leader who will collude with Gaddafi. That too in the vicinity of Afghanistan and Pakistan!!!!

Very funny. Not going to happen.

The priorities are – control of religion based terrorism, as waged by Kashmir “freedom movement” should be completely stopped. Once this is achieved LOC could be liberalized, but this is going to take a long time after terrorism is stopped. Other genuine grievances of Kashmiri muslims if any could be fulfilled without redrawing of India’s current borders. Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir will remain an area where people belonging to all religion can live together.


Posted by Raj | Report as abusive

Rajeev writes: “Do you realize that there is no provision by UN or 2 nation theory or the viability of free Kashmir—which ever logic you like—for Kashmir to an independent nation.”

I know all that. But I can express what my heart feels. I see Kashmir as a unique case in the sub-continent. Pakistanis blew every chance for a peaceful settlement by using the issue as an excuse to build their armaments and keep their hostility towards India.

I want India to deal with Kashmir on its own terms with no international pressure or Pakistani wishes. Kashmir does not enjoy its special status amongst the other states in the union for no reason. If Kashmiris are treated with respect like all other citizens of the union, without unchecked military activities and atrocities, I am sure they will choose to distance themselves against Pakistan. They can see the picture for themselves. Pakistan’s support of Kashmir is not out of love for them. Pakistan is using Kashmir as a tool to sustain its antagonism against India. Until 1989, Kashmir was peaceful and India did not have to keep half its military there. It is so unfortunate that Pakistan has managed to alienate them from us. I want accountability brought for any brutal acts of the security forces. I have seen some horrible videos on how these people are treated by the security forces and how they are helpless against the militants at the same time. They can get away blaming a country and its military because they are legitimate institutions. But they are helpless in dealing with the militants. Out of fear many are parroting what the militants want. And the strategy is to prolong the feeling of insecurity in the people and they will vent it against the security forces, who in turn will retaliate brutally. This process of alienation is gaining strength in the valley. Pakistan is frustrated that it is unable to continue with its plan due to the war on terror in its neighborhood. Kashmiris should turn towards India and become friendly and accept them as a reliable nation. And India for its part should try to build trust and faith in these people. We are inheriting bad karma because of brutal actions that go unreported. And I want this situation to change somehow.

Posted by Mauryan | Report as abusive

This is a case of faith based separatism and terrorism, finding support from the likes of faith based terror leaders like nutty witty terror professor Gaddafi

Posted by Rohit | Report as abusive

Row over China Kashmir visa move 85106.stm

Now Chinese are giving visa on lose papers to kashmiris–not stamping on the passport.

Indian govt should not let them fly.
Kashmiris will be hurting their cause by getting into this game.
China factor is getting serious. what is our govt doing other than than “condemning”?

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

With he break up of USA into smaller states, which is an eminent fact, all the status quos of the world will change which includes Independence of Kashmir and Liberation of Palestinian lands from the illegal occupation by the Zionists.

I see liberation of Kashmir much earlier than that. Kashmiries are extremely motivated to achieve their Independence from India very soon.

Posted by John | Report as abusive

Gaddafi’s association with Kashmir is not recent. In fact, a few years back the leader had written an article on Kashmir which also talked about the grant of independence to Kashmir. He has also had very friendly relations with Islamabad. That Gaddafi cricket stadium in Lahore is named after him is a testament to this relationship

Posted by rizu | Report as abusive

I dont understand why Kashmiris are so over the moon over Libyan leader’s comment. Does it matter beyond, of course, little publicity. What clout does Libya wield in the world. If OIC’s rants on the state dont matter, where do you place Gaddafi

Posted by riyaz | Report as abusive

“If they really cared about Kashmiri independence they’d start by setting a precedent with their portion. Or is Kashmiri independence really about taking land from India?
– Posted by Keith ”

–>Thank you Keith, this is purely a land grab, nothing else, that is what I have been saying all along. Paks care damn about Kashmiris, human rights and all that nonsense, look at how they treat Afghans and Balochis. They consider both of them lower than cockroaches. Pak Army will set up shop in Kashmir, if the border is loosened.

Kashmir is India’s, lock stock and barrel, it is not up for talks or negotiation. If they want it, let them come and get it, let’s see if they walk away in one piece, like they did in 1971. Paks, don’t seem to understand that invading Kashmir, will lead to their annihilation.

Posted by GW | Report as abusive

I have always been curious about the concern of Pakistanis for Kashmir. If you care about muslims in India, then why just the Kashmiris? Why aren’t they concerned about the state of all muslims in India? And why aren’t the concerned about the impact on these muslims if the only muslim majority state departs the Indian union?

Posted by Keith | Report as abusive

Why do things of world like AQ (Al Quaeda), AQ (Abdul Quadeer), OQ (Ottavio Quattrochi), and posts of Sheikh MushtaQ end with a Q? Why? Kyoon?

Posted by Rohit | Report as abusive

Dear Sheikh Mushtaq/Moderator:

My 2 posts are sitting in your basket for a long time and have not been uploaded. My I know the reason?

I will appreciate if you let them go through.

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

@I see liberation of Kashmir much earlier than that. Kashmiries are extremely motivated to achieve their Independence from India very soon.
– Posted by John

-I see you are not interested in liberating Kashmiris in POK; interesting! They also deserve liberation or are they already liberated? Pakistan forces Kashmiris in POK to say “Kashmir banega Pakistan”[Kashmir will join Pakistan] if they want govt job or be part of the govt. Seems like these Kashmiris also need a bit of your sympathy.

Hipocrisy at its best!

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

@Why do things of world like AQ (Al Quaeda), AQ (Abdul Quadeer), OQ (Ottavio Quattrochi), and posts of Sheikh MushtaQ end with a Q? Why? Kyoon?
– Posted by Rohit
-You are funny (in a good way) :-)

Posted by rajeev | Report as abusive

Posts of Sheik Mushtaq do raise one more question in my mind. Kashmir has got nothing to do with people or development of libya. Are wheels of mecca playing some sort of role? Will they whip up another frenzy for another small Islamic Pakistan?

Posted by Rohit | Report as abusive

the impact on other muslims is not going to be a factor; 2 nations were formed (now 3) keeping muslim ‘safety’ as the primary reason in the dichotomy in 1947. The partition was based on religion at least as for as east and west Pakistan were concerned at that time (India chose to remain secular), so the rationality of ‘what about us’ loses credibility.

Posted by Avatar | Report as abusive