David Cameron ambushed on Indian TV over the Koh-i-noor diamond

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-diamond.html

David Cameron has rejected a plea to return the fabled Koh-i-noor diamond - now the most famous of the Crown Jewels - to India. There has been a growing clamour on the sub-continent for the repatriation of the gem, and in an interview on India’s NDTV channel the Prime Minister was asked directly if he would give it back. After an awkward hesitation, Mr Cameron said 'that is a question I have never been asked before' and then insisted it could not be returned. The challenge came as the Prime Minister faced controversy after accusing Pakistan of 'exporting terror' and offered to share nuclear secrets and sell military jets to India. Mr Cameron is now on the final day of his whirlwind Indian trip, which has seen one of the largest UK delegations travel to the country since the sun set on the Raj in 1947.

The Koh-i-noor, whose name means ‘mountain of light’ in Persian, was originally discovered in India at least 700 years ago, and possibly 5,000 years ago, according to some Hindu scholars. The 105-carat diamond was seized by the East India Company after the capture of Punjab in 1849 and later presented as a gift to Queen Victoria. At that time it was owned by the Sikh Maharajah of Lahore (now in Pakistan), but had earlier been a prize possession of the Mughal emperors. Mr Cameron said returning the legendary diamond to India would set a dangerous precedent for other priceless cultural items held in British museums. Greece, for example, has mounted a long-running campaign for the return of the Elgin Marbles, looted from the Parthenon some 200 years ago and brought back to London by the Earl of Elgin.

The Prime Minister said: ‘What tends to happen with these questions is that if you say yes to one you suddenly find the British Museum will be emptied. ‘I know there is also a great argument about the original provenance of the Koh-i-noor diamond. I’m afraid this will disappoint viewers, but it’s going to have to stay put.’ Earlier this month Labour MP Keith Vaz called for the diamond to be returned to India as a symbol of the Coalition Government’s stated desire to build a special relationship with the former colony. Mr Vaz said: ‘This will certainly convey a new age of Indo-British relations. The Prime Minister will certainly win the hearts of all Indians if he is prepared to discuss the display of the Koh-i-noor in India itself, and possibly even its permanent return.’

• The original owners (Mughal Empire) are no longer around so you cannot 'give them back'.
• It is also claimed that they were not actually looted but swapped in return for British protection.
• The diamond, if left in the Mughal Empire would surely have been lost/put into a private collection.
• Would India like to return all of the schools/hospitals/bridges/buildings/railways that we built them?
• Would India like to return every penny of the billions we have given them in aid to?
• Mr Vaz is a twit.

This always annoys me, if we are to put things back into their de facto state then lets see; India (including the former Raj) would go back to a bunch of backward and dictorial tribal groups. Africa (the majority) would be returned to the British/French/Blegiums as next to none sovereign states existed there beforehand. The United States, Canada and Austrialia would be returned to the tribes & the British. South America would be returned to the Amazon tribesmen and the Spanish/Portugese.

If the Empire had not been in existence then I could bet on my life they [Africa/Asia/South America/North America/Austrialia/New Zealand] would still be running around the jungles and on the vast uncultivated plains with spears - so maybe India and the rest of the world would be inclined to return our language, technlogy, railway, roads, bridges, hospitals + much more if they want their diamond back.

For thousands of years Africans were standing on diamonds yet it took us to go over there and bring some use to them - yet we are accused as being thieves. India and others were standing on oil/had diamonds yet had no use for any of it - we came over and made use of it. So never let anybody tell you that somehow our past is something to be ashamed of. To add to that, Britain still sends hundreds of millions to India each year (not to mention all the jobs we loose here and go over there with call centres) so maybe its time India and the rest of the world learned the meaning of independence.

Thoughts, who owns the diamond in your eyes?

[Swastika]

Obviously giving India back the diamond would be an amazing start for Cameron to get this "special" relationship with India going that he's always going on about, however i agree with you about us British building them hospitals, railways and schools.
It's a hard one but i agree that the diamond should remain in Britain and not in India, at least here we know that it wont get stolen.

[Tash.]

This always annoys me, if we are to put things back into their de facto state then lets see; India (including the former Raj) would go back to a bunch of backward and dictorial tribal groups. Africa (the majority) would be returned to the British/French/Blegiums as next to none sovereign states existed there beforehand. The United States, Canada and Austrialia would be returned to the tribes & the British. South America would be returned to the Amazon tribesmen and the Spanish/Portugese.

If the Empire had not been in existence then I could bet on my life they [Africa/Asia/South America/North America/Austrialia/New Zealand] would still be running around the jungles and on the vast uncultivated plains with spears - so maybe India and the rest of the world would be inclined to return our language, technlogy, railway, roads, bridges, hospitals + much more if they want their diamond back.

For thousands of years Africans were standing on diamonds yet it took us to go over there and bring some use to them - yet we are accused as being thieves. India and others were standing on oil/had diamonds yet had no use for any of it - we came over and made use of it. So never let anybody tell you that somehow our past is something to be ashamed of. To add to that, Britain still sends hundreds of millions to India each year (not to mention all the jobs we loose here and go over there with call centres) so maybe its time India and the rest of the world learned the meaning of independence.

Thoughts, who owns the diamond in your eyes?

While I don't think the diamond should necessarily be given back, I think alot of what you just said here you need to rethink because honestly wow. How unsurprisingly egotistical of you to suggest that because we systematically took over lands which did not belong to us and modernised them they would not have done it without us.. that is shameful.

As for Africa, yes we seem to have done a world of good there, I mean Africa is practically thriving...

As for the bit in bold, I have no words.

[Technologic]

While I don't think the diamond should necessarily be given back, I think alot of what you just said here you need to rethink because honestly wow. How unsurprisingly egotistical of you to suggest that because we systematically took over lands which did not belong to us and modernised them they would not have done it without us.. that is shameful.

As for Africa, yes we seem to have done a world of good there, I mean Africa is practically thriving...

As for the bit in bold, I have no words.

He reads the mail, there's your answer.

[Tintinnabulate]

It's a hard one but i agree that the diamond should remain in Britain and not in India, at least here we know that it wont get stolen.

Oh yeah sorry, I remember getting robbed everyday in my 10 years in India ... NOT. Been robbed here in my 10 years though ... wonder which country is safer eh? Doesn't take a genius to work that out hmmmmm.

No ******* wonder India prefers USA to UK with attitude such as that.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-diamond.html

• The original owners (Mughal Empire) are no longer around so you cannot 'give them back'.
• It is also claimed that they were not actually looted but swapped in return for British protection.
• The diamond, if left in the Mughal Empire would surely have been lost/put into a private collection.
• Would India like to return all of the schools/hospitals/bridges/buildings/railways that we built them?
• Would India like to return every penny of the billions we have given them in aid to?
• Mr Vaz is a twit.

This always annoys me, if we are to put things back into their de facto state then lets see; India (including the former Raj) would go back to a bunch of backward and dictorial tribal groups. Africa (the majority) would be returned to the British/French/Blegiums as next to none sovereign states existed there beforehand. The United States, Canada and Austrialia would be returned to the tribes & the British. South America would be returned to the Amazon tribesmen and the Spanish/Portugese.

If the Empire had not been in existence then I could bet on my life they [Africa/Asia/South America/North America/Austrialia/New Zealand] would still be running around the jungles and on the vast uncultivated plains with spears - so maybe India and the rest of the world would be inclined to return our language, technlogy, railway, roads, bridges, hospitals + much more if they want their diamond back.

For thousands of years Africans were standing on diamonds yet it took us to go over there and bring some use to them - yet we are accused as being thieves. India and others were standing on oil/had diamonds yet had no use for any of it - we came over and made use of it. So never let anybody tell you that somehow our past is something to be ashamed of. To add to that, Britain still sends hundreds of millions to India each year (not to mention all the jobs we loose here and go over there with call centres) so maybe its time India and the rest of the world learned the meaning of independence.

Thoughts, who owns the diamond in your eyes?

1) No, it wouldn't be given back to that empire. It would be given back to the country.
2) British protection from what? LOL. I thought we kicked you out of our country?
3) Oh yeah, such a big diamond gets returned and it would obviously get lost :rolleyes: Obviously Indians are so dumb that they lose everything If only they had minds like the British eh? No wait, who is going to who to beg to be friends? Who easily survived the recession? MAN THATS A HARD QUESTION HMMMMMMMM.
4) Oh yeah, I forgot, India's hasn't built any schools or hospital or universities since 1947 . Oh yeah, what did a recent entrepreneur say in a interview (sorry forgot his name)? That his son applied to Oxford ... got in. Applied to Harvard ... got in. Applied to the top Indian university ... got rejected. Who do top companies such as Golden Sachs, Co-op, Mckinsey based in UK hire? Indian students who have not even graduated yet. How do I know? Four of my cousins got hired by them before they even graduated. Oh yeah, but you wouldn't know as you are so damn narrow minded and think only you help us.
5) Obviously Britain didn't steal anything when they invaded India.
6) I don't really give a crap about the diamond, but your views are seriously messed up.

That's the answer to your points.

Oh yeah, India obviously has not grown since 1947 :rolleyes:

AND PLEASE GIVE ROMANS LATIN BACK.

I am grateful UK built roads and stuff but man your post is just OTT.

This country is surrounded by water, yet you do not use hydropower. Switzerland uses like 50% or something (renewable energy). Means UK is obviously thick and needs to be invaded by Switzerland and taught how to use it.

[Frodo13.]

This is stupid. It's just a diamond.

[Moh]

The Koh-i-noor diamond is part of the Crown Jewels that belong to the British monarchy. Not exactly something Cameron can give away. All this countries wealth is pretty much taken from other countries, we're slowly giving it back - but not like this

I don't really think we even stole the diamond did we? Queen Victoria was Empress of India at the time

I would understand if we were making some sort of profit out of it, but since it's in the Tower of London - they're pretty secure and isn't going to get in the wrong hands. It's in a safe place, why do they have to complain?

[Tintinnabulate]

It's in a safe place, why do they have to complain?

He merely asked ...

[Moh]

He merely asked ...

Not the first time

When the Queen visited, they actually demanded them back.

[GommeInc]

Surely it's a matter of finders keepers/who stole it should keep it? It was hundreds of years ago, it would be a bit pointless. It has more history here than over there now, or any recordable history at least :/