The Candid Eye

March 3, 2010

ISI protecting IM founder Riyaz Bhatkal in Karachi

The attempts by the Pune police probing the February 13 German Bakery blast to track Riyaz Bhatkal may prove futile, since there is confirmation now that the founder of the Indian Mujahideen is safely ensconed in Karachi.

A police officer from Hyderabad, who is currently interrogating Ahmed Khwaja, a Lashkar-e-Tayiba militant currently in custody of Hyderbad police, told rediff.com that Bhatkal is in Karachi.

The official said that Khwaja was also questioned in-depth regarding the Pune blast, but he did not appear to know much about the plot.

Riyaz Bhatkal, the terrorist

“He has details of the Indian Mujahideen operatives and says that there are three key persons who control the IM. Bhatkal and Mohsin Chaudhary head the India operations, but they report directly to a man by the name Aamir Raza, who is a Pakistani national,” the officer said.

Khwaja also revealed that Bhatkal, who stayed in Dubai for a considerable amount of time, was asked to shift base to Pakistan at the insistence of the Inter Services Intelligence.

Indian Mujahideen

Bhatkal is a high-profile personality for them, and he is being protected by the ISI. Sources in the Intelligence Bureau told rediff.com that Bhatkal holds the key, and nabbing him would help crack the entire IM network in India.

The IB further adds that they have got information that Bhatkal has been housed under the protection of the ISI at the high-security Defence Enclave in Karachi, which show his importance for the ISI..

Karachi plot

The IB says that the interrogation of Khwaja and Shahzad (who was picked up by the Delhi police from Azamgarh, UP in connection with the Batla House case) have made one thing clear and that is the ISI was not planning on launching attacks in India with its Pakistan and Afghanistan based cadres.

Both Shahzad and Khwaja were aware of the Karachi plot (IB had sounded off a warning pertaining to a terror plot that was being hatched in Pakistan to target several Indian cities), and during their interrogation, their bosses told them that they needed to gear up for this.

The IB says that this is a worrying factor since the ISI is roping in Indian operatives for this plot. They are setting up their network in India and most of the heads of the India-based terror groups have been told about this plot, so that when they plan on carrying out the attacks, there would be no problems with the logistics.

The ISI, which plans on carrying out the Karachi plot with the help of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Al Qaeda and the Harkat-ul-Jihadi-Islami, will depend on Indian operatives for logistics and also to ensure that they provide a safe passage into the country for their fidayeen fighters.

January 28, 2010

One Republic – Two flags!!

In our republic, which boasts of one nation, one people and one union, we have two flags. One for India and the other for Kashmir.
No one asks why? An wonderful article from Tarun Vijay on having TWO flags for ONE republic.

If the mere picture of a foreign national irks, embarrasses and makes the government apologetic, should a flag, put on a par, parallel to the flag of our republic for which we swear to live and die, make us happy and proud?

There is one tricolor, which is our soul. We sing for it, love it, feel thrilled when it’s fluttered on any part of this planet. That’s us and our invincible tricolour.

And here is another flag. We hardly know about it. A piece that has to be displayed on the bonnets of the Ambassador cars the governor, the chief minister, the Union home minister or even the Prime Minister uses to negotiate a Kashmir road. Suddenly there are two flags, two people, two lands. And still one republic? Ask Justice Sagheer Ahmad and hear the “give more autonomy to J&K” call. More, still more, autonomy for what? A seperate flag and wanting to be more seperate?

Whose flag is it, any way? They say it’s Kashmir’s flag. So why don’t our rulers hoist it too in the Republic Day parade in New Delhi? A bit red-faced, they say it’s just for Kashmir.

Indian Flag : Image Courtesy - TOI

Jammu & Kashmir Flag : Image Courtesy - TOI

So why not Bihar and Uttarakhand and Punjab  and, please, Tamilnadu too have their separate flags?They say Kashmir is special and other states are NOT.

Really?

Why not every state in India is special?

Why not every Indian citizen is equally special?

We, the Indians, the people of India.

Who gave the Constitution to themselves on January 26, 1950, hence the republic and the parade for it.

We can’t buy an inch of land in Kashmir because there is a provision in the Indian Constitution that bars it. That’s called Article 370.

It says we are not authorised to be citizens of Kashmir. But we are Indian citizens?

So what?

Article 370 says we are not naturally Kashmiri citizens, even if we are Indians.

If we are Indians, we can be Biharis, Tamilians or Arunachalis. But not Kashmiri.

There was a man whose name was Syama Prasad Mookerjee. He died protesting separate provisions for Kashmir. The news agency IANS reported recently: “Mukherjee was imprisoned for entering the state without a proper permit in violation of Article 370. His entry was in protest against the separate constitution, head of the state and flag of Jammu and Kashmir.

“Mukherjee wanted that Jammu and Kashmir be declared an integral part of India and governed like any other state of the country.”

Mookerjee (that’s how he spelt his name) died mysteriously in a Srinagar jail.

Who cares for such a “mad” man, giving his life for national integration in its truest sense?

Live peacefully, in your Lutyens’ bungalow and offer government constructive cooperation.

That makes life easy, you know.

Let me reproduce some extracts from the constitution of Jammu and Kashmir? It has a separate identity from the Indian Constitution and no law that the Indian parliament passes is applied in J&K unless the J&K assembly  passes it too and it has the right to overrule the Indian parliament and change the contents of the laws passed by the parliament situated in New Delhi.

The J&K constitution says —

Preamble:

We, the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, having solemnly resolved, in pursuance of the accession of this State to India which took place on the twenty sixth day of October, 1947, to further define the existing relationship of the State with the Union of India as an integral part thereof, and to secure ourselves-

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and opportunity; and to promote among us all;

FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity of the Nation;

IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this seventeenth day of November, 1956, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.

Part II of “The State” of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir:

Relationship of the State with the Union of India – The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India.

On April 7, 1958, the Plebiscite Front of Sheikh Abdullah adopted a resolution specifically citing Article 370, and stated that : “Jammu and Kashmir state has not yet acceded to any of the two dominions, India and Pakistan. Therefore, it will not be right to call Pakistani invasion on Jammu and Kashmir as an attack on India.” Using Article 370 Kashmiri Muslim leaders have opposed any family planning and welfare schemes formulated by the government of India, and the programme was implemented only in the Hindu majority Jammu. The former chief minister, G M Shah, had said that the aim of the government family planning programme was to convert the Muslim majority into a minority. The former external affairs minister M C Chagla had told the United Nations that the Article was a temporary measure. The two former chief ministers of Jammu and Kashmir Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad and G M Sadiq too wanted this Article to be repealed.

Articles 3 and 5 of the State constitution of Jammu and Kashmir state that it will remain an “inseparable” part of India and Parliament should immediately repeal Article 370.

Friends on the internet suggest, “Those Kashmiri Muslims who have declared themselves to be Pakistanis should be asked to apply for Pakistani citizenship, and if their applications fail, they should be declared stateless persons and no longer citizens of India, and therefore no longer citizens of any part of the dominions of the Republic of India.”

Article 370 (though originally Article 306-A) drafted by Gopalaswami Ayyengar in close consultation with Sheikh Mohd Abdullah reads as follows:

“Temporary provisions with respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir:

1. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,
(a) the provisions of Article 238 shall not apply in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir;

(b) the power of Parliament to make laws for the said State shall be limited to,
(i) those matters in the Union List and the Concurrent List which, in consultation with the Government of the State are declared by the President to correspond to matters specified in the Instrument of Accession governing the accession of the State to the Dominion of India as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws far that State; and

(ii) such other matters in the said Lists as, with the concurrence of the Government of the State, the President may by order specify.

Explanation:
For the purposes of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognised by the President as the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers for the time being in office under the Maharaja’s Proclamation dated the fifth day of March, 1948;

(c) the provisions of Article 1 and of this article shall apply in relation to that State;

(d) such of the other provisions of this Constitution shall apply in relation to that State subject to such exceptions and modifications as the President may by order specify:

Provided that no such order which relates to the matters specified in the Instrument of Accession of the State referred to in paragraph (i) of sub-clause (b) shall be issued except in consultation with the Government of the State:

Provided further that no such order which relates to matters other than those referred in the last preceding proviso shall be issued except with the concurrence of that Government.

2. If the concurrence of the Government of the State referred to in paragraph (ii) of sub-clause (b) of clause (1) or in the second proviso to sub-clause (d) of that clause be given before the Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing the Constitution of the State is convened, it shall be placed before such Assembly for such decision as it may take thereon.

3. Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may, by public notification, declare that this article shall cease to be operative or shall be operative only with such exceptions and modifications and from such date as he may specify:
Provided that the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State referred to in clause (2) shall be necessary before the President issues such a notification.

In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 370 the President, on the recommendation of the Constituent Assembly of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, declared that as from the 17th Day of November, 1952, the said Article 370 shall be operative with the modification that for the Explanation in Cl. (1) thereof, the following explanation is substituted namely.

Explanation – For the purpose of this article, the Government of the State means the person for the time being recognized by the President on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly of the State as the Sadr-i-Riyasat (now Governor) of Jammu and Kashmir, acting on the advice of the Council of Ministers of the State for the time being in office.”

That’s our republic. And the second flag. And the two peoples in one land. Viva the flag hoisters.

Where is the pain and where is the shoulder?

December 12, 2009

Negationism and the Muslim Conquests

From: Rewriting the Indian History

It is important to stop a moment and have a look at what the Belgian scholar Koenraad Elst, has called “negationism in India”. In his foreword to the book of the same title, Koenraad explains that negationism, which means in this context “the denial of historical crimes against humanity”, is not a new phenomenon. In modern history, the massacre by the Turks of 1,5 millions Armenians, or that of the 6 million Jews by the Nazis, the several millions of Russians by Stalin, or again the 1 million Tibetans by the Chinese communists, are historical facts which have all been denied by their perpetrators… But deny is not the exact word. They have been NEGATED in a thousand ways: gross, clever, outrageous, subtle, so that in the end, the minds of people are so confused and muddled, that nobody knows anymore where the truth is. Sometimes, it is the numbers that are negated or passed under silence: the Spanish conquest of South America has been one of the bloodiest and most ruthless episodes in history. Elst estimates that out of the population of native Continental South America of 1492, which stood at 90 million, only 32 million survived; terrible figures indeed but who talks about them today ? “But what of the conquest of India by Muslims”, asks Elst? In other parts of Asia and Europe, the conquered nations quickly opted for conversion to Islam rather than death. But in India, because of the staunch resistance of the 4000 year old Hindu faith, the Muslim conquests were for the Hindus a pure struggle between life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and their populations massacred. Each successive campaign brought hundreds of thousands of victims and similar numbers were deported as slaves. Every new invader made often literally his hill of Hindu skulls. Thus the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000, was followed by the annihilation of the entire Hindu population there; indeed, the region is still called Hindu Kush, ‘Hindu slaughter’. The Bahmani sultans in central India, made it a rule to kill 100.000 Hindus a year. In 1399, Teimur killed 100.000 Hindus IN A SINGLE DAY, and many more on other occasions. Koenraad Elst quotes Professor K.S. Lal’s “Growth of Muslim population in India”, who writes that according to his calculations, the Hindu population decreased by 😯 MILLION between the year 1000 and 1525. INDEED PROBABLY THE BIGGEST HOLOCAUST IN THE WHOLE WORLD HISTORY. (Negat.34)
But the “pagans” were far too numerous to kill them all; and Hinduism too well entrenched in her people’s soul, never really gave up, but quietly retreated in the hearts of the pious and was preserved by the Brahmins’ amazing oral powers. Thus, realising that they would never be able to annihilate the entire Indian population and that they could not convert all the people, the Muslims rulers, particularly under the Hanifite law, allowed the pagans to become “zimmis” (protected ones) under 20 humiliating conditions, with the heavy “jizya”, the toleration tax, collected from them. “It is because of Hanifite law, writes Mr Elst, that many Muslim rulers in India considered themselves exempted from the duty to continue the genocide of Hindus”. The last “jihad” against the Hindus was waged by the much glorified Tipu Sultan, at the end of the 18th century. Thereafter, particularly following the crushing of the 1857 rebellion by the British, Indian Muslims fell into a state of depression and increasing backwardness, due to their mollah’s refusal of British education (whereas the elite Hindus gradually went for it) and their nostalgia for the “glorious past”‘. It is only much later, when the British started drawing them into the political mainstream, so as to divide India, that they started regaining some predominance.
Negationism means that this whole aspect of Indian history has been totally erased, not only from history books, but also from the memory, from the consciousness of Indian people. Whereas the Jews have constantly tried, since the Nazi genocide, to keep alive the remembrance of their six million martyrs, the Indian leadership, political and intellectual, has made a wilful and conscious attempt to deny the genocide perpetrated by the Muslims. No one is crying for vengeance. Do the Jews of today want to retaliate upon contemporary Germany? NO. It is only a matter of making sure that history does not repeat its mistakes, as alas it is able to do today: witness the persecution of Hindus in Kashmir, whose 250.000 Pandits have fled their 5000 year old homeland; or the 50.000 Hindus chased from Afghanistan; or the oppression of Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan. And most of all, to remember, is to BE ABLE TO LOOK AT TODAY WITH THE WISDOM OF YESTERDAY. No collective memory should be erased for appeasing a particular community.
Yet, what has happened in India, at the hand of Hindus themselves, is a constant denial and even a perversion of the genocide committed by Muslims in India. Hasn’t the “radical humanist” M.N. Roy, written “that Islam has fulfilled a historic mission of equality and abolition of discrimination in India, and that for this, Islam has been welcomed in India by the lower castes”. “If AT ALL any violence occurred, he goes on to say, it was a matter of justified class struggle by the progressive forces against the reactionary forces, meaning the feudal Hindu upper classes..” Want to listen to another such quote? This one deals with Mahmud Ghaznavi, the destroyer of thousands of Hindu temples, who according to his chronicler Utbi, sang the praise of the Mathura temple complex, sacred above all to all Hindus… and promptly proceeded to raze it to the ground: “Building interested Mahmud and he was much impressed by the city of Mathura, where there are today a thousand edifices as firm as the faith of the faithful. Mahmud was not a religious man. He was a Mahomedan, but that was just by the way. He was in the first place a soldier and a brilliant soldier”… Amazing eulogy indeed of the man who was proud of desecrating hundreds of temples and made it a duty to terrorise and humiliate pagans. And guess from whom is that quote? From Jawaharlal Nehru himself, the first Prime Minister of India and one of the architects of independence!
M.N. Roy, and Nehru in a lesser degree, represent the foremost current of negationism in India, which is Marxist inspired. For strangely, it was the Russian communists who decided to cultivate the Arabs after the First World War, in the hope that they constituted a fertile ground for future indoctrination. One should also never forget that Communism has affected whole generations of ardent youth, who saw in Marxism a new ideology in a world corrupted by capitalism and class exploitation. Nothing wrong in that; but as far as indoctrination goes, the youth of the West, particularly of the early sixties and seventies, were all groomed in sympathising with the good Arabs and the bad Jews. And similarly in India, two or three young generations since the early twenties, were tutored on negating Muslim genocide on the Hindus. In “Communalism and the writing of Indian history”, Romila Thapar, Harbans Mukhia and Bipan Chandra, professors at the JNU in New Delhi, the Mecca of secularism and negationism in India, denied the Muslim genocide by replacing it instead with a conflict of classes. The redoubtable Romila Thapar in her “Penguin History of India”, co-authored with Percival Spear, writes: “Aurangzeb’s supposed intolerance, is little more than a hostile legend based on isolated acts such as the erection of a mosque on a temple site in Benares”. How can one be so dishonest, or so blind? But it shows how negationism is perpetuated in India.
What are the facts? Aurangzeb (1658-1707) did not just build an isolated mosque on a destroyed temple, he ordered ALL temples destroyed, among them the Kashi Vishvanath, one of the most sacred places of Hinduism and had mosques built on a number of cleared temples sites. All other Hindu sacred places within his reach equally suffered destruction, with mosques built on them. A few examples: Krishna’s birth temple in Mathura, the rebuilt Somnath temple on the coast of Gujurat, the Vishnu temple replaced with the Alamgir mosque now overlooking Benares and the Treta-ka-Thakur temple in Ayodhya. (Neg 60). The number of temples destroyed by Aurangzeb is counted in 4, if not 5 figures; according to his own official court chronicles: “Aurangzeb ordered all provincial governors to destroy all schools and temples of the Pagans and to make a complete end to all pagan teachings and practices”. The chronicle sums up the destructions like this: “Hasan Ali Khan came and said that 172 temples in the area had been destroyed… His majesty went to Chittor and 63 temples were destroyed..Abu Tarab, appointed to destroy the idol-temples of Amber, reported that 66 temples had been razed to the ground”.. Aurangzeb did not stop at destroying temples, their users were also wiped-out; even his own brother, Dara Shikoh, was executed for taking an interest in Hindu religion and the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded because he objected to Aurangzeb’s forced conversions. As we can see Romila Thapar and Percival Spear’s statement of a benevolent Aurangzeb is a flagrant attempt at negationism. Even the respectable Encyclopedia Brittannica in its entry on India, does not mention in its chapter on the Sultanate period any persecutions of Hindus by Muslims, except “that Firuz Shah Tughlaq made largely unsuccessful attempts at converting his Hindu subjects and sometime persecuted them”. The British, for their own selfish purpose, were of course greatly responsible for whitewashing the Muslims, whom they needed to counterbalance the influence of the Hindus and the Congress. It is sad that Jawarlhal Nehru and the Congress perpetuated that brand of negationism. But that is another story.
The happiest in this matter must be the Muslims themselves. What fools these Hindus are, they must be telling themselves: We killed them by the millions, we wrested a whole nation out of them, we engineer riots against them, and they still defend us!… But don’t the Hindus know that many orthodox Indian Muslims still cling to the Deoband school, which says that India was once “Dar-ul-Islam”, the house of Islam, and should return to that status. Maulana Abul Kala Azad, several times Congress President, and Education Minister in free India, was a spokesman for this school. The Aligarh school on the contrary, led by Mohammed Iqbal, propounded the creation of Pakistan. What particularly interests us in the Aligarh school is the attempt by Muslim historians, such as Mohamed Habiib, to rewrite the Chapter of Muslim invasions in India. In 1920, Habib started writing his magnum opus, which he based on four theories: 1) that the records (written by the Muslims themselves) of slaughters of Hindus, the enslaving of their women and children and razing of temples were “mere exaggerations by court poets and zealous chroniclers to please their rulers”. 2) That they were indeed atrocities, but mainly committed by Turks, the savage riders from the Steppe. 3) That the destruction of the temples took place because Hindus stored their gold and jewels inside them and therefore Muslim armies plundered these. 4) That the conversion of millions of Hindus to Islam was not forced, “but what happened was there was a shift of opinion in the population, who on its own free will chose the Shariat against the Hindu law (smriti), as they were all oppressed by the bad Brahmins”…!!! (Negationism p.42)
Unfortunately for Habib and his school, the Muslims invaders did record with glee their genocide on Hindus, because they felt all along that they were doing their duty; that killing, plundering, enslaving and razing temples was the work of God, Mohammed. Indeed, whether it was Mahmud of Ghazni (997-1030), who was no barbarian, although a Turk, and patronised art and literature, would recite a verse of the Koran every night after having razed temples and killed his quota of unbelievers; or Firuz Shah Tughlak (1351-1388) who personally confirms that the destruction of Pagan temples was done out of piety and writes: “on the day of a Hindu festival, I went there myself, ordered the executions of all the leaders AND PRACTITIONERS of his abomination; I destroyed their idols temples and built mosques in their places”. Finally, as Elst points out, “Muslim fanatics were merely faithful executors of Quranic injunctions. It is not the Muslims who are guilty but Islam”. (Negationism in India, p. 44)
But ultimately, it is a miracle that Hinduism survived the onslaught of Muslim savagery; it shows how deep was her faith, how profound her karma, how deeply ingrained her soul in the hearts of her faithfuls. We do not want to point a finger at Muslim atrocities, yet they should not be denied and their mistakes should not be repeated today. But the real question is: Can Islam ever accept Hinduism? We shall turn towards the Sage, the yogi, who fought for India’s independence, accepting the Gita’s message of karma of violence when necessary, yet had a broad vision that softened his words: “You can live with a religion whose principle is toleration. But how is it possible to live peacefully with a religion whose principle is “I will not tolerate you? How are you going to have unity with these people?…The Hindu is ready to tolerate; he is open to new ideas and his culture and has got a wonderful capacity for assimilation, but always provided India’s central truth is recognised.. (Sri Aurobindo India’s Rebirth 161,173) Or behold this, written on September 1909: “Every action for instance which may be objectionable to a number of Mahomedans, is now liable to be forbidden because it is likely to lead to a breach of peace. And one is dimly beginning to wonder whether worship in Hindu temples may be forbidden on that valid ground (India’s Rebirth p. 55). How prophetic! Sri Aurobindo could not have foreseen that so many Muslim countries would ban Rushdie’s book and that Hindu processions would often be forbidden in cities, for fear of offending the Muslims. Sri Aurobindo felt that sooner or later Hindus would have to assert again the greatness of Hinduism.
And here we must say a word about monotheism, for it is the key to the understanding of Islam. Christians and Muslims have always harped on the fact that their religions sprang-up as a reaction against the pagan polytheist creeds, which adored many Gods. ” There is only one real God they said (ours), all the rest are just worthless idols “. This ” monotheism versus polytheism business ” has fuelled since then the deep, fanatic, violent and murderous zeal of Islam against polytheist religions, particularly against Hinduism, which is the most comprehensive, most widely practiced of all them. It even cemented an alliance of sorts between the two great monotheist religions of the world, Christianity and Islam, witness the Britishers’ attitude in India, who favoured Indian Muslims and Sikhs against the Hindus; or the King of Morocco who, even though he is one of the most moderate Muslim leaders in the world, recently said in an interview: ” we have no fight with Christianity, our battle is against the Infidel who adores many gods “. But the truth is that Hinduism is without any doubt the most monotheist religion in the World, for it recognises divine unity in multiplicity. It does not say: ” there is only one God, which is Mohammed. If you do not believe in Him I will kill you “. It says instead: ” Yes Mohammed is a manifestation of God, but so is Christ, or Buddha, or Krishna, or Confucius “. This philosophy, this way of seeing, which the Christians and Muslims call ” impious “, is actually the foundation for a true monotheist understanding of the world. It is because of this ” If you do not recognize Allah (or Christ), I will kill you “, that tens of millions of Hindus were slaughtered by Arabs and other millions of South Americans annihilated by the Christians. And ultimately the question is: Are the Muslims of today ready to accept Hinduism ? Unfortunately no. For Muslims all over the world, Hinduism is still the Infidel religion ” par excellence “. This what their religion tell them, at every moment, at every verse, at the beginning of each prayer : ” Only Allah is great “. And their mollahs still enjoin them to go on fight ” jihad ” to deliver the world of the infidels. And if the armies of Babar are not there any longer; and if it is not done any more to kill a 100.000 Hindus in a day, there is still the possibility of planting a few bombs in Bombay, of fuelling separatisms in the hated land and eventually to drop a nuclear device, which will settle the problem once and for all. As to the Indian Muslim, he might relate to his Hindu brother, for whatever he says, he remains an Indian, nay a Indu; but his religion will make sure that he does not forget that his duty is to hate the Infidel. This is the crux of the problem today and the riddle if Islam has to solved, if it wants to survive in the long run.
We will never be able to assess the immense physical harm done to India by the Muslim invasions. Even more difficult is to estimate the moral and the spiritual damage done to Hindu India. But once again, the question is not of vengeance, or of reawakening old ghosts, but of not repeating the same mistakes. Unfortunately, the harm done by the Muslims conquest is not over. The seeds planted by the Moghols, by Babar, Mahmud, or Aurangzeb, have matured: the 125 million Indian Muslims of today have forgotten that they were once peaceful, loving Hindus, forcibly converted to a religion they hated. And they sometimes take-up as theirs a cry of fanaticism which is totally alien to their culture. Indeed, as Sri Aurobindo once said: “More than 90% of the Indian Muslims are descendants of converted Hindus and belong as much to the Indian nation as the Hindu themselves”…(Rebirth of India, p.237) The embryo of secession planted by the Mahomedans, has also matured into a poisonous tree which has been called Pakistan and comes back to haunt India through three wars and the shadow of a nuclear conflict embracing South Asia. And in India, Kashmir and Ayodhya are reminders that the Moghol cry for the house of Islam in India is not yet over.
* For more details, read “Negationism in India, concealing the record of Islam”, by Koenraad Elst, Voice of India, New Delhi.

November 14, 2009

Anti-India Seminar on J&K in New Delhi

This is a little lengthy post by a Nancy Kaul, a Kashmiri Pandit.

India under siege – from within

Islamic terrorism and terrorists, separatists and secessionists, and soft-peddling politicians are outdoing each other to prove that they share the same mind set and agenda in Jammu and Kashmir. Besides these, there is another equally committed partner in the quest for disengaging the state of J&K from India; the ultimate political objective for which Islam has been waging Islamic terrorism or jihad in the state.

The truth is that this partner is neither willing to accept facts nor recognize the ground reality but is making an all-out effort to trample the Indian constitution under their feet. This ‘partner’ to whom I am referring to are intellectuals, politicians, journalists and the ‘secular’ liberals who are aiding and abetting the separatists and secessionists to move inch by inch towards Balkanizing the Indian nation.

The Muslims of Kashmir Valley have always been portraying themselves as being the sole inhabitants not only of the Valley but in the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is almost as if the Hindus of the Kashmir valley who were forcibly thrown out of their homes never existed and as if the Hindus of Jammu and the Buddhists of Laddakh also do not exist. Such is the stranglehold of the Muslims in the state that they have succeeded in propagating the myth that the only people who live in the state of J&K are Muslims. This is the success of Islamic terrorism and its methods.

Kashmir map

Kashmir map

This has been the premise the whole day today, in this seminar while referring to the state of J&K. It is as if the whole issue is only about the valley and only about Muslims. Every speaker has made out his case as if there is no Jammu and Laddakh and there are no Hindus and Buddhists. The whole seminar is valley-centric.

What about the Kashmiri Pandits? The people who know more than anybody else about the impact and consequences of the terror unleashed on them in the Kashmir Valley. And what about the people of Ladakh and Jammu?

Does the Indian constitution guarantee freedom of life and speech only to terrorists, separatists and politicians who take oath of office in its name and then proceed to do everything to erode the very sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country of which the state of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part?

In the name of democracy and dialogue, it is only this view point that is being placed forward and propagated in seminar circuits and this seminar too is no different. Panun Kashmir suspects that these debates have a design and a pattern to them and this is easily discerned from this seminar too. The seminar, organized by CSDS in NewDelhi was called, ” Multi Party Dialogue on the Political Future of Jammu and Kashmir”.

Initially the organizers ( Madhu Kishwar), gave the impression that all regions of Jammu and Kashmir had been invited to participate in the seminar and also that all the participants (read speakers) would get to place their view point. The organizers made out that the views expressed at the seminar would not be confined to the views of either the separatists or Valley politicians.

However, on the day of the seminar held at Nehru Memorial in Teen Murti, the venue was witness to a vicious campaign for de-linking Jammu and Kashmir from India. This was the only theme; it was neither a seminar nor a dialogue and certainly it was not represented by all regions or religions.

In the chair was Ram Jethmalani, the senior advocate who many a times himself led the attack against the Indian nation. Mr Jethmalani was bravado personified when he made common cause with the terrorist Yaseen Malik and actually looked pleased with himself as speaker after speaker hit out at the edifice of constitutional polity and the territorial integrity of India.

Mohammed Shafi Uri of the National Conference took the first dig while suggesting that the Pandora’s Box o of autonomy was the only solution and said that in 1953 the Kashmiris were betrayed by the Indian union.

The stage set to their advantage, separatist and hurriyat leader Abdul Gani Bhat wanted the army and all security forces withdrawn from the valley. The man wanted ‘self governance’ in Kashmir, and also made the prepostrous suggestion that the state of Jammu and Kashmir should be a buffer zone between India and Pakistan instead of being a state within the Indian Union. He went on to announce that he would now like to sit with National Conference and PDP to chalk out a new strategy to achieve this.

Interestingly, only two days before this, Dr Farooq Adullah had said in Srinagar that the Muslims of the state were proud to be Muslims and proud to be the majority populace.Hour after hour the speeches continued even as PDP’s Muzzafar Beg wanted Article 1 of the Indian constitution amended apart from going on and on about how only self rule was the only solution.All the speakers spoke in tandem and in a well orchestrated manner. The only casulaty that day was the sovereignty and terroritial integrity of the country.

Kashmir - Nature's gift

Kashmir - Nature's gift

Mehbooba Mufti and her loud and aggressive ways need no new mention; last year the nation saw and heard her hysterical anti Amaranth campaign and political rhetoric. She too said she wanted to see Kashmir closer to Muzzafarabad and not wilt in the presence of India but bloom in proximity to Islamabad.After spiting and spewing venom, Mehbooba said that the final solution will have the rubber stamp of Syed Ali Shah Gilani(the rabid separatist and vehement campaigner for Jammu and Kashmir as a Pakistani entity on the basis of religion).

Neither the Chair nor Madhu Kishwar reacted to the day-long anti India and separatist tirade; on the contrary they encouraged and prodded the speakers in their anti-India tirade. Ram Jethmalani comically went so far as to say, ” I am 90% Pakistani and only10% Indian.”The ‘dialogue’ was only a series of unchallenged and uncontested monologue of speeches, each speaker only wanting the secession of Jammu and Kashmir from India.

Yet when it was the turn for a contrary view Madhu Kishwar and Ram Jethmalani did not allow the paper to be read till the end.Fist thumping Jethmalani said that he will not allow anything to be said except what was being said. He got up threateningly. Madhu Kishwar wanted the speaker to change her paper and declared that unless changes were made to the paper the Kashmiri Hindu point of view would not be allowed to be aired. ” No, No, I will not allow you to speak . You cannot speak this,” they both declared.

What does a person or a speaker to any conference, intellectual debate or for that matter a multi party dialogue expect? To be able to place his or her opinion and point of view. Nothing more and nothing less. Why did she not stop the Kashmiri Muslims who spoke hour after hour hitting out at the sovereignty of the country?

Kashmir in Winter

Kashmir in Winter

I will state unambiguously that all these reports or proposals that where being discussed and endorsed by these people was something that as a matter of fact, neither the Kashmiri Pandits nor the Hindus of Jammu and Buddhists of Laddakh want nor will ever agree to.Why were thay all agitated when the question of the issue of Hindus and Buddhists, Jammu and Laddakh being equal stake holders in the state was raised?

The truth is and remains that whether it is the self rule proposal or the autonomy report or the greater autonomy report or the separatist proposal, they are all aimed at severing the state from the Indian Union.

Why do all debates, conferences, seminars and discussions on J&K feature only the secessionists and separatists and their partners in secessionism in Indian polity? Why are the other stake holders marginaised and even ignored? I can only assume that this is an evil design to balkanize India and talibanize Kashmir and Hindus and Buddhists of J&K have to be kept invisible and voiceless for their diabolic agenda to succeed. Madhu Kishwar’s seminar was no different and served only the anti-India agenda.

Paper presented by Ms. Nancy Kaul at the seminar

I would like to submit for your consideration the prepositions which have been taken up by the speakers in respect of autonomy, self rule and self determination are aimed to de link the State of Jammu and Kashmir from India.There is nothing new that the speakers have said beyond that, which Pakistan and the separatist forces in Jammu and Kashmir State have been saying for the last six decades. It is a well orchestrated campaign.

I am a Kashmiri Pandit, belonging to the community of the Kashmiri Hindus, who have been subjected to genocide, and who have been driven out of their homes and hearths.I am aware, more than anybody else, in this country and outside this country, of the long and relentless campaign of jihad and terrorism that has been going on in the State for it’s disengagement from India.

The exclusion of the state from the constitutional organization of India, underlined by the autonomy proposal; the transfer of power to the separatist forces inside the state and operating in Pakistan, underlined by the self rule proposals; and independence of the State Proposed by the exponents of independence of Jammu and Kashmir, are aimed to cut the state from the Indian Union.

All these formulas draw deeply from the Kashmir Study group report and from which Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf also drew his plan. The broad structure of the proposals he made are:

Demarcation of the Muslim majority regions of the state including those situated to the west of river Chenab from the Hindu majority areas situated mainly to the east of river Chenab.

Dissolution of the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir.

The demilitarization of the State.

Self-rule.

Joint management of the State by India and Pakistan.

The demilitarization of the State, which forms the most prominent part of the Musharraf Plan, is aimed at the withdrawal of the Indian security forces from the Muslim majority zones of the state, and their replacement by the militarized separatist forces which have been fighting against India for the last two decades.

Best of Kashmir

Best of Kashmir

At the same time the proposals of autonomy, greater autonomy and self rule are no different. Both want to divide Jammu and Kashmir, in a manner that enables Kashmir and Islamabad to establish control not only over the geopolitical strategic Himalayan region, which is highly rich in green-gold, but also over river Chenab, which has the potential of producing more than 15,000 Mega Watt of electricity every year.

A few words on the self-rule doctrine and what it envisages would be in order.

What does the self-rule formula envisage or suggest?

It suggests abandonment of the universally accepted “notions of sovereignty and national borders”; a “pan-Kashmir” approach; “autonomy from the nation state of India”; “regionalization of power across J&K”; “sharing of sovereignty”; “economic integration that transcends borders”; a drastic change in the Indian Constitution that converts Greater Jammu & Kashmir into “a regional free trade area”; “dual currency system”; roll back of “Article 356” (under which New Delhi has the power to intervene if there is breakdown of constitutional machinery.

Article 249 (under which the Parliament exercises legislative jurisdiction over the state); withdrawal of the “All India Service Act, 1951″ and all other Central Acts from the state and also jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India and election commission of india; change in the nomenclatures from Chief Minister to Wazir-e-Azam and from Governor to Sadar-e-Riayast”; “establishment of “regional council of Greater Jammu & Kashmir” comprising representatives from India, Pakistan and both parts of the state; and division of Jammu and Kashmir province into “sub-regions” and establishment of “sub-regional councils”.

The self-rule formula further suggests: I quote “Self-rule is aimed at providing the central element for a comprehensive architecture to be devised for the final and strategic settlement of the Kashmir issue. Self-rule will not be a mid-point into a journey or a tactical or evasive prescription. Instead, self-rule must also form the basis of relationship between the people of Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Pakistan” unquote.

It is hardly necessary to reflect on the implications of the self-rule formula as everything is self-explanatory.Suffice it to say that the self-rule formula, if accepted and implemented, would automatically mean a step short of independence from India and once it happens, it will not be difficult for the separatists to achieve their 62-year-old agenda.

I am surprised that the speakers have presumed that the Jammu and Kashmir State is only populated by the Muslims. The truth is that the Jammu and Kashmir State also has a 40% non Muslim population of Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists.I want to make it clear, that none of these people – Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists approve of any proposals which underline the secessionism of the state from India.

A demolished house of a Kashmiri pandit in Srinagar

A demolished house of a Kashmiri pandit in Srinagar

I wonder, how the people here who have spoken before me, have tried to create an impression that the lone stake holder in the Jammu and Kashmir state is Muslim population of the Valley.I would like to understand, as to why do all debates just end up with the secessionists or separatists or their supporters in politicians, who out do each other in their rhetoric of azaadi.Is Jammu And Kashmir State only valley and its Muslims? What about Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ladhakis and Dogras?

Does our constitution grant us the freedom to take the proprietary of land and declare it free or part of another country at our whim or violence?The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir in section 3 says that the State is the integral part of India and section 147 prohibits any amendment. So all the politicians of Jammu and Kashmir, who say that their State is different, need to understand this first.

Pandit Nehru in the Lok Sabha (in response to a pointed question by Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee in February 1964) was quoted – “Article 370 will get eroded in due course and vanish ultimately….”.

Mohammadalli Karim Chagla, in the Rajya Sabha was quoted – “The Prime Minister the other day spoke of the gradual erosion of Article 370. I hope that this erosion is accelerated and I also hope that very soon that article will disappear from the constitution. After all it is transitional and temporary. I think transitional period has been long enough!”

The Hindus, the Sikhs and the Buddhists are the important stake holders in the State. They have rejected the autonomy, self rule as well as the independence of the State. They have fought against the forces which have been trying to disengage Jammu and Kashmir State from India.Also, independence from India does not have the support of nearly 2 Million Muslims who are living in Jammu Province and several others like the Gujjars, Paharis, bakarwals etc.

Here, I want to make a reference to the transfer of power from the British to India and Pakistan in 1947, that the partition was not and did not apply to princely States, nor was the right of self determination recognized as the basis of accession of the States.The right of self determination was strongly opposed by both the British and the Muslim League. I also want to state for the information of all the participants here, that the British categorically denied the right of any State to assume Independence, the then Indian National Congress also categorically refused to recognize the Independence of these States

Massacre by terrorists

Massacre by terrorists

Courtesy - FACTINDIA

Courtesy - FACTINDIA

Therefore, is it a joint move of Pakistan and the separatist forces in the Jammu and Kashmir to initiate the process of Balkanization of India now?I would like to submit for your consideration, that the Autonomy of the State and self rule will lead to further communalization of the civil society in the State and the displacement of the 4 Million Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists of the State who are living in Jammu and Ladakh now.

I and my community are already in the State of exile in our country and suffering in all dimensions including political, cultural, and economical.I and my community want to live in dignity and honour in the moorings of Burzohama civilization which we are inheritors off and want to live in the State with the free flow of Indian constitution as envisaged by Panun Kashmir.

We have a right to this as we are equal and legitimate stake holders in the valley of Kashmir and in turn Jammu and Kashmir and victims of terrorism first and foremost.No solution to Kashmir or for that matter to the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be allowed or arrived at unless our return to the Valley is achieved at on our terms. The only solution possible is the reorganization of Jammu and Kashmir State.

Terrorism and secessionism being practiced in the valley has led to ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Hindu and their habitat. What is being asked for now is the exclusion of Jammu and Kashmir from the secular political fabric of the Indian State and further Islamization which is unacceptable to the Kashmiri Pandits in any form.

October 12, 2009

Is police in Kashmir Valley endorsing Islamist agenda?

A Hindu youth from Jammu, who was arrested by Ram Munshi Bagh police and kept under custody has been found to be dead under suspicious circumstances. It is being alleged that Rajneesh Sharma was killed because he married a muslim girl.

SOUNDS COMMUNAL but it is a fact that Kashmiris including politicians, bureaucrats and other high profile officials are ruling according to the law of Islam, which according to the radicals preaches that end of non- Muslims is the ultimate success of Jehad.

The death of a young boy from Jammu, Rajneesh Sharma, who was in the custody of Ram Bagh police station in Srinagar under mysterious circumstances is a clear pointer to the communal intolerance in the police and administration ranks. Sharma was accused of kidnapping a muslim girl, but his family members claim that he had no connection with any kidnapping case.

Going through recent developments in Rammunshi Bagh police station it is evidently an eye opener in this direction. As, in a police cell where a blanket, tooth brush or even a paper pin is not tavailable normally, then, from where the rope came, with which Rajneesh was found hanged.

Contrary to police version several political, social and religious organizations have raised strong questions on the manner in which the matter is being handled. Earlier, there has been big drama whenever any death occurred in custody by Kashmiris but why is not any body raising voice over the suspicious and tragic death of a Jammu youth, asked the organizational heads and spokespersons of different parties and groups.

Kashmir

Kashmir

It may be worth to mention that in the name of custodial killings, Kashmiris have raised hue and cry against CRPF, Army and J&K Police every now and then but once the custodial death came in fore of a Hindu boy from Jammu where are these so called protectors of Human Rights Violation and custodian killing watch dogs, asks the believers of Kashmiriat.

“Suspending some unfortunate police cops under a planned design is not going to do, time has come when every commoner has to become a policeman, a journalist and a judge” said a religious leader and added that in the name of secularism and democracy Hindus of India have suffered unprecedented and irreparable losses but time has come when Hindus of India should wake up and stand unitedly to defeat the nefarious designs of the enemy.

“When Jammu and Kashmir government could order a CBI inquiry in the Shopian case , than why not in the case of Rajneesh” asked a student and added that it is acid test moment for government of Jammu and Kashmir as well as for the government of India as appeasement policy towards Kashmiris has been already exposed and response to the tragic custodial death of Rajneesh will be a clear eye opener for Hindus of Jammu in particular and of entire world in general.

The custodial death of a Sarwal youth in Sringar triggered tension outside Mortuary department of GMC after family members alleged police hand in the death of the youth instead of suicidal case and also targeted police for providing wrong information in case by mentioning death of elder brother rather than younger.

Mystery shrouds the death of a youth Rajneesh Sharma of Sarwal, whose dead body was shifted from Srinagar to Jammu in the name of his elder brother Pawan Sharma on Wednesday. Rajneesh son of Lt. Nanak Chand Sharma of Sarwal was picked by Bakshi Nagar police on September 30 and handed over to a police team from Ram Munshi Bagh police.

A case of kidnapping had been lodged against Rajneesh by family members of Amina, daughter of a house boat owner in Dal Lake in Srinagar.

Read the full report here.

Meanwhile BJP wants arrest of police officials & Brigadier Chitranjan Sawant says that Ameena,got converted to Hinduism and married Rajneesh Sharma,thus  making the Srinagar musilms angry which led to the custodial death of Rajneesh Sharma.

October 8, 2009

Talibans in J&K

Filed under: Islam,Jihad,Kashmir,Pakistan,Terrorism — thecandideye @ 6:00 AM
Tags: , , , , ,

From Express Buzz

Indian security forces will soon have their first encounter with the Taliban militants in Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistan based Talibans entering J&K

Pakistan based Talibans entering J&K

The grand conspiracy, hatched by Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence and army, is the first one after a lull of more than 10 months when India exposed the Pak hand in 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks forcing it to almost plead guilty in front of the international community.

“Sixty surrendered Talibanis in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir are waiting to sneak into J&K at the behest of ISI. It is sad to know that Pakistan is back to its sinister designs after 26/11.

Talibans in Afghanistan

Talibans in Afghanistan

We didn’t expect this kind of a treacherous move that would make the whole situation murky,” Home Ministry sources told Express.

The sources said that the ISI has asked 60 Talibani soldiers, who had recently surrendered before the Pak army along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, to either serve long-term rigorous sentences in jails or head to J&K for the glory of jihad.

“The move may coincide with shifting of durbar from Srinagar to the winter capital of Jammu as with the government still in the process of settling down, it would be an opportune time to create panic,” they said.

Based on credible and specific intelligence inputs, the threat perception was discussed at length in a review meeting in Srinagar headed by Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrasekhar.

Top officials of Home Ministry, Defence Ministry, Army and intelligence agencies were also present in the meeting.

October 5, 2009

On Dashami, Jammu housewife kills jihadi with axe

An brave and inspiring act by Rashidha Begum, a resident of Jammu.

As the country bid farewell to goddess Durga, the demon-slayer, on Dashami and witnessed the evil king Ravana being vanquished on Dussehra, a humble Muslim woman in a remote Jammu village slew a dreaded Lashkar terrorist single-handedly. Check the video.

Brave women who killed and drove out the terrorists

Brave women who killed and drove out the terrorists

Exhibiting astonishing, raw courage, Rashida Begum took on the two terrorists who had barged into her home late Sunday night in Thana Mandi village in Rajouri district. The woman, in her early forties, grabbed an axe and swung it wildly, killing one of the armed terrorists and injuring the other. Seeing his partner meet a bloody end, the other terrorist fled in sheer dread.

A Rajouri-based police officer said the two terrorists of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistan-based group that carried out the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, had entered Noor Ahmad’s home around 9pm with the intention of holding the family hostage.

Police said the two also wanted information on some local targets that Noor and his family members refused to provide. Angered by the resistance, the two began beating them up, threatening to eliminate the family, when Noor’s wife, Rashida, took them by surprise, pouncing on one of them from behind. She brought down an axe in powerful blows, killing the terrorist on the spot.

She then charged at his partner who, nonplussed, was trying to gather his wits. Rashida and the rest of the family members soon overpowered him and snatched his weapon. However, the terrorist escaped under the cover of darkness, but not before receiving sharp cuts in the face-off with the furious housewife.

Rajouri’s additional superintendent of police Shabir Ahmed said investigations were on establish to identity of the duo but the slain terrorist was believed to be Osama, a Pakistan-based LeT commander, wanted in many cases of extortion and terror related activities. “We are awaiting more details from the spot where a police team is carrying out further investigation,” Ahmed said. Security forces are combing the area for the escaped terrorist.

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.