An Accent in Kashmir

http://www.newsline.com.pk/html/impressions.html

Indian Spring

MARCH 2001 ISSUE

- By Sairah Irshad Khan

A Muslim Indian explained why. ``Traditionally, the Indian Muslim has displayed a visible arrogance towards the Hindu faith. He has mocked his deities, shunned his beliefs and adopted the high moral ground in relation to the Hindu lifestyle. If this is the Indian Muslim, who has coexisted with the Hindu forever, it is presumed, naturally, that the Muslim from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will be far more intolerant. The arrival of seven Pakistanis for the Kumbh and their obvious respect for Hindu customs, has therefore, made for a pleasant surprise. And this really is how we can build bridges, gulf the divide.``

Said an Indian Muslim businessman with a Pakistani wife and a large branch of his family on our side of the border, ``There used to be a time when Pakistanis would visit their relatives in India and speak of the quality of life they enjoyed in Pakistan as first-class citizens. The Indian Muslim would then bemoan his lot, and wonder whether he`d taken the right decision at Partition. But over the years, things changed. Between the Middle East, India`s economic boom, their own initiative, the Muslims have done better. Then along come the `mohajirs` from Pakistan with their tales of oppression and injustice, and suddenly the Indian Muslim thinks, `we`re not so badly off after all.``` He added that Kashmir has created another problem for the Indian Muslim. ``Always hard-pressed to prove his loyalty to his country, every time the Kashmir issue flares up, the loyalties of Muslims in India come under suspicion. Recently, I heard a group of Indian Muslims discussing the situation, and one of them turned around and said the Pakistanis are not interested in Muslims – only Kashmir. If they were, they`d worry about what happens to the huge Muslim community in India every time they instigate trouble in Kashmir.``

WEDNESDAY JANUARY 09 2002



Cover story

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C7-2002013426%2C00.html



A state of war



BY TREVOR FISHLOCK



The dispute over Kashmir has brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war. But why has this beautiful state become the subcontinent`s powder keg?



Poets hymned it as a land of love and languor. In 1627 the dying emperor Jahangir, who shaped its blissful gardens, was asked to name his last desire. “Only Kashmir,” he murmured. “Only Kashmir.”

India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promised melodramatically that its name was written upon his heart. Today, millions make the same emotive claim.

Passions for Kashmir run hot and bitter, the bayonets almost touch and the urge for war is strong. Two rivals, two ideas, two faiths stand nose to nose in one of the world’s most dangerous places. One mistake or misjudgment and the spark falls on the fuse.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars, two of them over Kashmir. The great bulk of their armies are based along the frontier that runs through Punjab and Kashmir. The border is always tense.

In Kashmir there has been an almost permanent grumbling small war of artillery bombardment. Apart from the all-out conflicts, India and Pakistan have two or three times pulled back from the brink, and now the assessments of their military power have to include their nuclear capability. There was a particularly dangerous stand-off in 1990.

It was inevitable that the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament on December 13 would bring India and Pakistan once more to the edge of the abyss. It was an echo of the October suicide bomb attack on the Kashmir assembly. The Parliament in Delhi is the heart and emblem of what India stands for. Now India is raging.

Poor Kashmir. It lies in the Himalayan ramparts where the borders of India, Pakistan and China rub together. Reality mocks its beauty. There is no escaping the permeating melancholy of a land that lies under the gun. It is as if malevolent gods, jealous of its loveliness, placed a curse upon it.

The poison entered the garden in 1947 when the war-weary British quit their Indian empire and partitioned it. They had no wish to cut it up: one of their imperial achievements, they said, was to have united India and made it secure. They divided it to meet the demands of Muslim leaders who said that Hindus and Muslims could not live together in one country, that the communities formed two separate nations. Pakistan was therefore created as a homeland for the subcontinent’s Muslims.

Britain ruled India with the co-operation of more than 500 Indian princes, a galaxy of maharajahs, rajahs, ranas, raos, khans, mirs, jams, nizams and nawabs, loyal to the British crown, well-oiled with flattery, some fantastically rich and a few of them barmy. In the summer of 1947, these rulers had to choose whether to take their states into India or Pakistan. It was a personal decision, without referendum.

Public opinion hardly came into it. Most princes joined India. Most knew that they would be extinguishing themselves as a ruling class, but it was clear to all but a few that the game was up. On the eve of independence, all the princes had made up their minds except four.

The Maharajah of Kashmir, Sir Hari Singh, was one of the ditherers. He was vain, pompous and addicted to hunting bears and shooting ducks. As a young man he had an unfortunate scrape in London, being found in bed with a woman at the Savoy Hotel and milked for a lot of money by a blackmailer pretending to be the woman’s husband.

At Partition, Kashmir, more fully known as Jammu and Kashmir, was in a key position: a prize because it was a large state and famously beautiful, a honeymooners’ resort of lakes and cool alpine meadows.

Given its place on the map, it could have swung either to India or to Pakistan. Because of its overwhelming Muslim majority, Pakistan’s new leaders expected that it would join their Islamic entity. But the maharajah had to decide — and he was a Hindu. This was not unusual. In princely India, Muslims often ruled Hindus and vice versa. But Hari Singh dithered. He could not believe that the British would really go home. He did not want to join Pakistan because he could not bear the thought of his state being subsumed. He dreamt that Kashmir could somehow be an independent country and he could keep his power.

India and Pakistan became independent in August. Hari Singh was still dithering in October. As he fiddled, the storm broke. Thousands of Pathan warriors from the North-West Frontier, bordering Afghanistan, rushed into Kashmir, vowing to seize it for Pakistan. Although they were a rabble, they might have succeeded. They were close to Srinagar, the capital, when they were delayed by their lust for loot and women. While they pillaged towns and raped girls and nuns, the hapless Hari Singh gathered up his diamonds and Purdey shotguns and fled his palace in a motorcade.

India acted fast and decisively. In a flurry of action the maharajah agreed to join India, and Indian forces flew to save Srinagar. This was the first Kashmir war, not an all-out confrontation but a series of fights and communal conflicts. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of Pakistan, wanted to send the new Pakistan regular Army into action, but did not do so when the absurdity of the situation was pointed out to him: the forces of India and Pakistan shared a commander-in-chief, Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck, while many officers on both sides were British.

Kashmir was left divided along the line where fighting stopped in 1948. A United Nations ceasefire came into force on January 1, 1949. In 1965 Pakistan tried and failed to annexe Kashmir and was defeated in brief and bitter fighting. At one stage Indian forces were almost at the gates of Lahore and could easily have taken it. Pakistan’s leaders believed that Kashmiris would welcome Pakistani troops as liberators. It was a shock that they did not. In 1971 India and Pakistan went to war again, India assisting the secession of East Pakistan, which became Bangladesh. Pakistan was left truncated and humiliated.

Yet the story of a vacillating maharajah and the ensuing bloody quarrel over territory is only the half of it.

Kashmir is a tragedy for its divided people and a continuing source of danger in a subcontinent inhabited by a fifth of the world’s population. The tragedy has deep roots. Kashmir is the offspring of bitterly divorced parents. Pakistan aches for it but will never possess it. India will never let it go: it is not negotiable. The trouble is that both sides define themselves by this feud.

Their mutual suspicions date from the 8th-century Muslim conquest of western India and the many hundreds of years of Mogul rule that were brought to an end by the British Raj. For India’s Hindu majority, independence in 1947 was a reclamation of their vast land, the end of centuries of foreign domination. Nehru and others believed passionately that this new India would be a daring concept, an embracing of all its religious, linguistic and regional diversity, a magnificent secular state.

The steely and intractable Jinnah did not believe it. His new country of Pakistan grew out of that scepticism, the belief that Muslims in India would be vulnerable, second-class citizens.

Pakistan was an invented state, a by-product of the great Indian struggle for independence. It evolved in the last few years of British rule among people who wanted to escape religious and political discrimination in the new order. Landowners especially thought they would lose out in India. Democracy barely made the journey to Pakistan.

In a sense Pakistan remains stranded in 1947. Its great debate has centred for half a century on what it is for and what it should be. Jinnah mused that it could be a secular country. But in that case, what was the point of Partition? Some of his successors said that Pakistan was nothing if not Islamic and determined to make it more so, a military theocracy.

Yet Islam proved an unreliable glue. It did not cement Pakistan and East Pakistan. Bangladesh erupted as the assertion of Bengali language and culture. Nor did it cement the disparate parts of Pakistan itself — Punjab, Baluchistan, Sindh and the North- West Frontier — or, indeed, the many shades of Islamic belief. Thus Kashmir is useful, the “unfinished business of Partition”. However much Pakistanis disagree about the nature of their society, they find common cause in Kashmir, the belief that they were robbed in 1947. This is the unifying insult. It is why Pakistan has supported Kashmiri insurgents. India’s treatment of Kashmiris during the long years of internal strife are held as proof that Jinnah was right, that Muslims needed their homeland.

It is true that India could have managed Kashmir more wisely, less roughly. But Pakistan has to live with the fact that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan. India has the second largest Muslim population in the world: evidently Hindus and Muslims do live together in a secular society, Nehru’s idea of India, even if it is not always easy. And Kashmir, the only Indian state with a Muslim majority, is in Indian minds the shining fact of secular India. Its existence throws the question to Pakistan again: what was Partition for? India has a powerful idea of its identity. It is the giant of South Asia, its Armed Forces are huge and it is proud of its democracy, even if this is somewhat battered. Pakistan, on the other hand, does not enjoy such a positive identity. It thinks of itself in terms of its neighbour and endures the negative of being Not India.

It means that even if the impossible were to happen, that Kashmir should somehow become part of Pakistan, the anxieties and insecurities of Pakistan would endure. There would have to be another issue by which Pakistan could seek to establish its identity and purpose.

In the meantime the two nations face each other again — and judging from what we see and hear, there are many on both sides desperate to fight. Centuries of prejudice are poured into the funnel of Kashmir.

People on both sides treasure the slights of history. There is an endless misunderstanding of each other’s beliefs and opinions. Estrangement is total. Trivial matters become huge. Hindu nationalists complain that Muslims cheer for Pakistan during Test matches. In both India and Pakistan, keen teams of monitors comb through guide books and encyclopaedias searching for maps that might contain instances of “cartographic aggression” — inaccuracies that seem to favour one side or the other.

Words are traps, and there is a sense that a comma could cause a crisis. But the opinions of outsiders are not welcome. For this is a feud between cousins, a quarrel in the family. It could hardly be more acrid and perilous.

http://www.washtimes.com/world/default-2000814232059.htm

Camps train Kashmir-based militants

By Aamir Latif

SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

SHIKARPUR, Pakistan — Ahmad Jan says he has trained hundreds of Islamic militants to fight for independence in the Indian-held portion of Kashmir, where stepped-up violence before India`s Independence Day celebrations killed 16 persons and wounded dozens more.

Employing techniques they have learned at his training camps in the Afghan city of Kandahar, the militants use suicide squads to attack military facilities and stage deadly encounters with Indian soldiers, the soft-spoken, 27-year-old explained calmly.

His statements contradict repeated claims from Afghanistan`s Taleban rulers, who acknowledge the existence of camps like that where Mr. Jan works, but say they are used only to train fighters for the civil war in northeastern Afghanistan.

Mr. Jan, a black belt in karate who wears his black hair in long strands, said in an interview that he serves alongside his older brother, Ibrahim, as an instructor for Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, one of the main Islamic groups fighting Indian forces in Kashmir, where fighting with Indian forces has claimed 30,000 lives.

The group, which has a few other camps in and around Kandahar, changed its name from Harkat-ul-Ansar after being listed as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

The group was blamed in 1995 for the disappearance of five foreign tourists, including two Americans, who were kidnapped in Kashmir. One was found beheaded and the others are believed to have been murdered.

Mr. Jan denied that his organization had ever kidnapped or murdered foreigners, including American citizens. But even if it has been branded as terrorist, ``the juggernaut of Jihad [holy war] cannot be reversed,`` Mr. Jan said in his hometown of Shikarpur, 250 miles north of Karachi, where he returns occasionally to visit his family.

Thousands of armed police and paramilitary personnel were in place on the streets of the Kashmiri capital, Srinagar, yesterday, braced for attacks from groups like Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. Today is India`s Independence Day, traditionally a time for attacks by the Kashmir insurgents.

Kashmir`s largest Muslim separatist group, the Hizbul Mujahideen, claimed responsibility for two land-mine attacks on a convoy of buses carrying border guards to Srinigar to help with security. The attacks killed six and wounded 40, 10 of them critically, the Associated Press reported.

Also yesterday, an army foot patrol sighted militants in a remote, mountainous area 160 miles north of Jammu and opened fire on them. An ensuing gunbattle left 10 rebels dead, Maj. Gen. P.P.S. Bindra said. No army casualties were reported.

Mr. Jan said it was the teachings of Islam that led him to join the mujahideen, which sent him for ``special task force`` training at the Afghan city of Khost. He transferred to the training camp in Kandahar two years ago.

``Training of all kinds including martial arts and sophisticated weapons is being imparted in my camp. I am responsible for martial arts training,`` he said of his duties.

Mr. Jan maintained that neither the Pakistan government nor the Taleban movement had any role in the running of the camps.

``The Taleban do not have total control in Afghanistan,`` he said. ``The local commanders and people of various cities like Kandahar have accepted the Taleban regime, but [the Taleban] have no authority in the outskirts of Afghanistan.``

Asked how the mujahideen was able to travel from Afghanistan across Pakistan to reach Kashmir, Mr. Jan noted with a wide smile that the two countries share a rugged 1,375-mile border.

``The Pakistani government cannot control the border with Afghanistan,`` he said. ``There are various ways to enter Afghanistan without confronting the security forces, although they often do not give us a hard time.``

Asked about financing for the training camps, he said there was ``no single person or group`` who provided the money.

``The whole Pakistani nation is behind us. We do not have any funding problems, the people of Pakistan give us more than generously. I can count a number of people who give hundreds of thousands of rupees every month for the cause of Jihad.``

Mr. Jan remained silent for some time when asked about suspicions that some of the money came from the Afghan-based Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, accused of masterminding the bomb attacks that killed 212 persons at two embassies in Africa last year.

``Not exactly,`` he said. ``We do not receive any direct funding from Osama, although we support him and his mission unequivocally.`` He refused to comment further on the matter.

The Shankaracharya Rock temple in Srinagar is not so ancient as per :

http://216.32.165.70/travel/1998/jan/20shan.htm

-arun gupta

Murad,

This is subsequent to clarifications given by you. While agreeing with several parts of your well-written travel report, I notice a subtle attempt at (shall I say, ``revisionist``) re-interpretation of history. I, in particular notice your account about ``Mihirakula, recent convert to Hinduism``.

This article (and your earlier article, Pagan conversion...) indicates a desire to redefine “Hinduism”, and to portray it as a violent religion. Your article also indicates that your definition of Hinduism is different from the one followed by millions of “Hindus”. Though I am not an expert on “Hinduism”, let me attempt to clarify that definition for you. ``Hindu`` was a word coined to denote people living east of Indus. People of this region were in general idol worshippers or animist. Though regions or group of people had a prime deity, binding factor was belief that god can be reached by multiple paths. This permitted different faiths and practices to coexist. As indicated in the references given at the end of this posting, there were different groups, some worshipping Shiva, other worshipping Indra and still other worshipping Vishnu. There were numerous local gods. Research indicates that while several central Asian tribes were Shivaites (e.g. Shakas, Kushans, white huns), tribes in Persian region were sun worshippers. There were some areas where ``asur/ ashur culture`` was prevalent. East and central India was dominated by animists. Though each group had a ``main god``, other gods were also accommodated in their hierarchy. This is not to say that clashes never happened.

Most of these groups influenced each other and to say that any one was less ``Hindu`` than other is wrong. I will argue that by today`s definition, all of those groups should be called ``Hindus``. Perhaps you can compare them to various Muslim sub-religions e.g. Shia, Sunnis etc.

Early Buddhism developed very much in a similar fashion. Its religious books are full of references to Indra, Indrani, Airavat and other Hindu gods. Even now, image of Gautam Budhha is kept in many temples along with other deities. In Nepal, Ladakh and Sikkim you can find Budhha’s image coexisting with those of “Hindu gods”. You are certainly aware that Rudra is an integral part of Tibetan Buddhism images. I have read several Chinese tales that refer to “White monkey god, Hanuman”. Garuda and Nagas are inseparable part of architecture of Buddhist monasteries in Nepal, China, Thailand etc.

That being said, I will now comment on specific points from your article. Your reference to “Mihirakula, recently converted to Hinduism” is an attempt to make Hinduism responsible for Mihirakula’s cruelty. First correction required is that white hunas, residing in central asia were followers of Shiva and Mihirkula was not a recent convert. His father Tomarana and Mihirkula, both shaivaites were part of a war like tribe. They were not specifically attacking Buddhism. They were looting remnants of largely Hindu Gupta kingdom. Mihirakula was finally confronted by a pan-Hindu alliance of Yashovarman of Kannauj and Baladitya, the Gupta emperor.

Your references to the Buddhist temples at Badrinath and kedarnath getting replaced by “Hindu” are not supported by any historical evidence. I have read several of Younghusband’s accounts and couldn’t identify the references pointed by you. I am trying to get my books on Younghusband from India and will write more details on him later. I will not frankly consider Younghusband a very truthful teller of history. I never had a chance to read Oakley’s book but based on my travels and reading of many other books, I will suggest that one of the reasons behind disappearance of Buddhism in Himalayas may have been its slow re-absorption by mainstream Hinduism.

I will speculate that perhaps Islam & Christianity will also get modified and accommodated with various other “Hindu” faiths in this “beyond Indus - Hindu” part of world.

Following are some of my references

Later Indo-Scythians, Alexander Cunningham, Indological Book House, India (1962 (1893))

The Political History of the Hunas in India, Atreyi Biswas, Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi (1973)

Peoples and languages in pre-islamic indus valley --Dr. Tariq Rahman, Fulbright Visiting Fellow

The Royal Patrons of the University of Nalanda, Rev. H. Heras, S.J., M.A. Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, PART I. Vol. XIV 1928

Encyclopedia Britanica

Regards

happy #76

Thanks. I found the Lotus Temple unforgettable, too. And by its pictures, the Sydney Opera House is also very lovely. I read somewhere how when it was just getting built, it was generally considered just too unconventional and not expected to turn out well!

Re mosques, there is a famous `blue` mosque in Samarkhand I have to definately go see someday.

Sadhana

PPS:

`Chatracter` + chatty character!

t.h.o. #73

Buckminister Fuller would be `Happy` indeed:)

I thought all road led to Egypt and China via Mexico and Rome!

Onion: that is life. Don`t we peel it crying?

Gaudi: And yet another twist! You missed that.

Pamela Anderson? Got to hand it to you. Don`t know though, whether to attribute this to your insight, sense of humour or obsession. Aakar, you know this chatracter. Help!

;)

regards,

temporal

PS: And am still ambivalent about the art you pursue.

Re: Sadhana

Funny you should mention the Delhi Bahai temple. It is the ONLY Bahai temple that is not a dome! Please visit http://www.columbia.edu/cu/bahai/temple.html for links to pictures of all Bahai temples.

Looking at the pictures it is obvious how the onion dome is the inspiration for most of these structures. The reference is obviously to where Abdul Baha was from. But you will also notice how all structures try to incorporate local architectural vernacular. The one in Chicago has western classical elements while the ones in Uganda, Samoa & Panama take inspiration from indigenous tent/ teepee structures. The departure in Delhi is significant because of the Lotus form. It ends up being not a dome but a radial cluster of hyperbolic paraboloids. See Jorn Utzorn`s Sydney Opera house for another cluster of `Hyper-paras`. This is also interesting because the shape of a lotus petal (as depicted in the temple) is nothing but an ogive (onion) arch.

In my opinion the Delhi Bahai temple is one of the most staggering and awe inspiring spaces in the world.

Speaking of Lotus shaped Onion forms. There is a temple in Baroda called the EME temple because it was designed and built by the EME cops of the Army. It was primarily constructed as a place of worship for the residents of the cant but became such an icon that the whole town uses it. It looks very similar to the Bahai temple but it was solely constructed from Aluminum salvaged from wreckage of a single plane crash. It has a pantheon of the Four major Indian religions located in four corners of the central space. If I remember correctly Hinduism was given North and Islam East. Pretty awesome sight watching people of different faith praying under the same roof and then inter mingling.

Happy One #73:

That was very funny. You made me smile. Wonder how Rsaxena and Krashid reacted, after all the intllectual debate on onions, domes and onion shaped domes. :)

Thanks.

Satyavadi

Re: all the hooplah about pyaaz

Why spin the observation about onion-shaped domes into anything more than that?

the happy one #73

How about the beautiful Baha`i Lotus temple in N. Delhi? Is that a geodesic dome?

Types of domes:

1. Semi-Circular: Invented by the Romans who also invented the Arch. Basically a bunch of arches stacked radially. This form of a dome has since been used in all schools of architecture (all roads lead to Rome :).

2. Onion: Invented by Islamic architects in the 8th century. The use of this dome spread to Russia, Bavaria & Spain where its use was widespread because of its quick snow shedding shape. The onion dome is actually associated more with Kremlin than with Tehran. Ironically most domes in the sub continent are structurally semi-circular but appear to have an onion profile due to the decorative capital. This dome is also called ogive or cupola (named in the honor of its inventor Francis `don vito` Ford :)

3. Pendentive: A brilliant Byzantine invention to take a square floor plan and segmentally converting it into a circular dome. Prime example is the great Hagia Sofia in Istanbul (Nobody`s business but the Turks`:).

4. Geodesic: The modern version popularized by the late Bucky Fuller. Basically using the tetrahedron (the most structurally stable solid) as a module to construct domes of various frequencies. What Bucky did not know was that due to its popularity amongst nomadic free loving flower children this kind of dome would see more action than any other kind...well, accept for the next kind...

5. Anderson: These kinds of domes named after their most celebrated user Ms. Pam Lee Anderson come in two kinds... silicone and saline. Not known for their structural integrity but appreciated by many for their stunning aesthetic qualities these domes embody the new American ethos in all its glorious splendor.

So there.... nothing wrong with a dome looking like a pyaaz... just another kind of a dome... nothing derogatory about it at all.

PS: Just looking to see if hatred can be drowned by nonsensical trivia!

Asim, how will you wash your hands of the blood of Kashmiri victims of Pakistani Hizbul bombs in Srinagar?

RSaxena #70

Are you really talking about inverted onions.

Lookey here now Pakis. Uncle Salahuddin, that austere and great leader, had the following to say:

``ISLAMABAD: Hizbul Mujahideen on Saturday urged Pakistan to send troops into the Kashmir region, even if it means a war in South Asia. ``Pakistan should physically involve itself in Kashmir. We want war because war will solve the issue,`` Hizbul chief Syed Salahuddin said..``

Re: krash-Id

``RSaxena

You are talking about inverted onions.``

Yes, inverted onions...I should have been more careful and not left that detail out.

Re: krashid

That is a reliable news source written by a Muslim. Go meet those injured Muslim journalists and Kashmiris in the hospital if your Pakistani horse blinders keep you from seeing reality.

How cruel and shameless of Pakistan to pretend to cry for Kashmiris on the one hand and then kill them on the other for territorial gains.

To ylh,

To understand the dominant ideology of a country, one has to look at institutions. I completely accept your view that pakistan is not a `jihadic` country, if it is based on your experiences, your day to day interactions. I have known several pakstanis, some were good friends, who even brought gifts from pakistan which we still treasure. There was no shard of extremism in their views, they were some of the finest individuals I have ever met.

Those are my individual experiences and that should not bias my observations about the institutions in pakistan and the response and reaction of the educated of pakistan to them.

You know and you abhor honour killings. But I can assure you that there will never be an article on this topic in chowk about the legal and religious frame work of this macabre act. There will be no expose of the legal process under which the killer goes scot free. This is collective pakistan, including the educated like you. Theses are what define a society, the worst form of sensorship is self censorship, and that is what is happening in pakistan.

India could be a bad example, but let me state one. The killing of Christian priest, Staines, there is a memorial for them, there is going to be an award in their honour, because in India we believe that defects of the system, even that of religion should be exposed and corrected by legislation. Bride burning, there are daily reports of it, in many states, for example in Kerala, if a married womam dies with in seven years of marriage due to an unnatural or suspected circumstance, the husband has to be charged with murder and investigated.

Think of pakistan, the self censor ship prevents artcles and reporting of honour killings. Fron page reports of killings in kashmir by the jihadists. Honour killing you want to hide, jihadic killing you want celebrate, to attaract more donations. You have posted so valiently about kashmir, do you enjoy the killing reports in the front pages of all pak english papers. Just think why are they there.

Look at the institutions of pakistan. If you find them moderate, post an alternate interpretation of the events. Spare the 2% extremist view, spare the corruption theories. Come up with some thing alternate, an alternate explanation.

Regards and best wishes.

jay.

RSaxena!

Out of 15 people killed in blast 14 were soldiers/security personnel police and one photographer Bhatia.

Should I produce the news here.

I told you get out of your biased media and read some reliable news.

Re: ylh

``DO THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR WANNA BE WITH INDIA ?``

Is that any business of your`s or of Pakistan`s?

To Jay,

I have just about had it with your non sense and BS about us being the ``children of the TNT`` and what not.

I don`t wish to change your views. I just have the following to say, We wanted Pakistan we got it. It was our democratic right…. Whether or not it was the right thing for us to do or not but a majority of us decided to make Pakistan and we made it … and you are no one to decide … I know I am oversimplifying the issue but maybe you should really think about getting a fresh attitude. Now we have never been a fundamentalist state and we are not going to be any time soon. Our people are Muslims but for the most part they are not fanatics. We are compelled by people like you to take a hard line approach towards India.

Pakistan is here and Pakistan is here to stay…the question is whether you Indians are going to accept it or not. I mean Jesus! this should not even be an issue … 53 years… wont you forget it now.

Pakistan though initially made to safe guard the Muslim minority but was made in essence for religious freedom for all…. I know we have fallen short of the ideal but your language is out of line …. India and its ruling Hindu Nationalists arent really the best of people either…

Now I`ll come to Kashmir … I am not even get into any justifications on any side …

The question is simple and easy …

DO THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR WANNA BE WITH INDIA ?

I think we know the answer to that.

Pakistan Zindabad

Quaid e Azam Zindabad

Ataturk Zindabad

Jiye Bhutto

Imran Khan for PM

-Yasser Hamdani

PS Please JAY spare us the BS? We will eternally grateful.

PPS To all Indians who wish to advise us about Pakistan, Pakistan is our problem not yours.

According to Mr. Baig,

If someone says Sat Sri Akal, he is liable to be shot

If someone sings Bulleya, he is liable to be butchered

If someone says Har Har Mahadev, he is liable to be chopped off

What warped logic is this?

It is like accusing the rape victim for tempting the rapist

Mr. Baig, your prejudices shine through your facade of intellectualism, use more grease to hide your bigotry

Muslim, Christian and Buddhist good, good, good.

Hindu, BAD, BAD, BAD?

Who burnt Nalanda University in Bihar?

Where have all the Buddhists of Central Asia gone?

This author makes my skin crawl, these pseudo intellectuals weaving their web of theories in their drawing rooms make me sick, and I pray to God that he is not a fellow Hyderabadi

The usual Hindu-baiting going on here...the author makes everything out with a Hindu connection to be harmful to Kashmir...he writes of Hinduism as being foreign to Kashmir...``The people were originally Buddhist``???...why does he conveniently forget the heavy Shaivaite influence in Kashmir, the influence of Shaivism on Kashmiri Tantric Buddhism?...of the great Shaivaite Hindu poets who are revered by Hindu and Muslim and all the goddamn others?...and don`t give me the bullshit that he has a wife with a Hindu name...God these bigots make me sick

no regards

Kabuli

Re: krashid

Calling the messanger a liar doesn`t cover up your own lies. Here`s the proof - the article from the Asian Age (written by a Muslim!) describing the terrorist attack. So much for Pakistan`s love for their Muslim brethen in Kashmir.

``The two civilians killed in the blast included a New Delhi-based photographer of The Hindustan Times, Pradeep Bhatia. The other civilian killed was Bashir Ahmed Gandroo, an accountant at a nearby shop who died of shock.

Habibullah Naqash, photographer of The Asian Age in Srinagar, is among the seven photojournalists injured in the incident. One of the injured photographers, Irfan Manzoor, an assistant cameraman with Zee News, was seriously wounded and later in the evening was shifted to Gover-nment-run Bone and Joint Hos-pital from the Sher-e-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences where right foot was amputated. Several others, mainly those trapped inside adjacent shops and other buildings were also injured.

As they began gathering around the vehicle, and thus falling into the trap of the militants, the bomb was detonated. A flash of light and deafening sound littered the street in seconds with the mutilated and half-burnt bodies of policemen, as well as the two civilians.

Bilal Ahmed Butt of Asian News International, also injured, said: “It was like hell breaking on us.” Profusely bleeding, as were many other colleagues, Bilal walked inside the nearby Kothibagh police station from where he was taken to hospital.

Pradeep Bhatia was not that lucky. His body will now be taken back to New Delhi on Friday morning. Bilal, a videographer, said that minutes before the car bomb explosion, Pradeep was enquiring from him about flight timings.

He was looking desperate, trying to send his film rolls through first available flight out of Srinagar. “I told him this (grenade explosion) was not a big incident, and that I didn’t think I needed to send footage out to my office in Delhi. But still I was willing to help him out,” Bilal recalled.

Back at the scene of the blast, pieces of human flesh and shoes and sandals were splattered along the bloodstained back street. Several shops and other buildings were extensively damaged with the impact of the blast. Their window panes were caved in on the roadside. The explosive-laden car was now only a rubble of steel.

Its tires were still burning. The air was filled with the smell of burning flesh. Some policemen standing guard at the street corner were discouraging reporters from venturing ahead. Witnesses said that with the deafening sound of the blast, the security forces present in the area and in the neighbourhood starting firing volleys from their service weapons in all directions.

The policemen killed in the car bomb blast included sub-inspector Muhammad Yaqoob, constables Jan Muhammad, Davinder Singh, Naseer Ahmed, Nissar Ahmed, Muhammad Ashraf, Budh Raj and Imtiaz Ahmed (driver), all from Kothibagh police station.

Among the journalists injured are Muhammad Amin War (The Tribune), I. Tariq (Srinagar News) and Fayaz Kabuli (Reuters). Suhasni, a CNN producer, while fleeing from the scene, fell on the road and sustained minor injuries.``

RSaxena#58

Don`t spread lies here.

It is today`s news, not 50 years old, so that you can speak whatever you like.

Most of the people killed were police officers and soldiers, who came to pick up the check.

If you are in doubt and have time to read apart from your own TRUTHFUL media, go to BBC.com.

The recent terrorist (car bomb) attack by Pakistani Hizbuls in Srinigar killed more Muslims than anyone else. All victims were innocent bystanders or journalists...

Shows how much Pakistan values human life, let alone how much it values the lives of Kashmiri Muslims living in India. This ``bleeding heart`` crap is the most disgusting, self-serving lie I have ever heard. Exposes what Pakistan`s true goal is...the pursuit of land.

This picture is very sad but also telling. A wounded Muslim man being helped by an Indian soldier.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20000810/wl/mdf99157.html

Shame on Pakistan and shame on the chowkwallahs who will undoubtedly try to spin these facts. And before you throw your tired old accusation about who did it, remember that the Hizbul has officially taken responsibility for this act of terror.

RE: Reply #: 41 Umairr

BREAKING NEWS: Hizb calls off ceasefire in Kashmir

``The freedom fighers, Pakistan and even the rest of the world have bent over backwards to accomodate India`s wishes on Kashmir. However India still clings to its stubborn stand (which will eventually prove very harmful to Indians). It must have taken a lot of effort from Pakistan, USA and the Hizb to coordinate this peace move. The Pakistan govt. received a lot of flak from most of the religious parties for influencing the Hizb to call a truce. But India has blown the opportunity again. Is India interested in peace at all?``

This is pretty ingenuous coming from you. At the outset, it is the Hizb which called off the cease-fire not India, so one can hardly blame India on this count. Second, it is the Hizb which imposed the impossible condition on India that Pakistan should be included in the talks. This is obviously due to some serious armtwisting by Pakistan since it wants to muscle in on the action despite India`s constant rebuffs to it`s insincere advances due to Kargil. But, more than anything else, it is yet another myopic action by the Pakistani ruling elite which have never subscribed to the view that such problems take months or years, not weeks to be solved. Look at how they have destroyed democracy in Pakistan time and again by similar short-term, self-centered actions.

Ref dost-mittar #: 55

You said {We see in North America Honda Civic, Accord,Integra, Accura and Prelude, but not Accent.}

Mr. Baig referred to the Hyundai Accent, so you got the wrong car maker in your statement.

But automobile companies do use different names for the same cars in different countries. For instance, the 1954 Morris Oxford is the 2000 Hindusthan Ambassador. Oops, wrong example ;-) though correct factually.

Let us see; the Chevy Nova could not be sold under that name in Spanish-speaking countries since `nova` would mean `not moving` in Spanish. Also, car makers try use names that might have appeal to the locals based on some connection to local landmarks. Thus you have models called the Bolan and the Khyber in Pakistan.

When Sanjay Gandhi went to Suzuki of Japan to build the people`s car, he decided to rename the Suzuki 800 the Maruti. Well, you know, there is a saying in the South about trying to make an idol of Ganesh and ending up with a monkey instead. I have always wondered about what you would end up if you initially wanted to make a monkey and, fortunately, we have the answer!(Maruti -- Hanuman)

Murad #50

Murad, thanks for sharing with us your further observations and conclusions, esp the interactions with local people.

Sadhana

re: veeresh # 15 and Murad

PILs seem to have become the preferred and most effective method of initiating progressive legislation.

I was wondering if this could be used to demand an increase in the size of the judiciary itself. I have heard that some committees for judicial reform in the past have recommended the setting up of a Judicial Services Commission along the lines of UPSC. Recently there was an article in the NY times in which the last law minister said that it would take 324 years to dispose of (deciding is an inappropriate term for the current process) all current cases. The ratio of judges to population is 10-20% of that in the west. The law minister like other politicians tried to cover his inaction in this regard by using the usual excuse of India being a poor country. I would like to know what you think of a PIL demanding a growth in judicial services (in inflation adjusted money) proportional to growth in government revenues, a time bound plan to achieve a target ratio of judges to population, and the setting up of a judicial services commission. A PIL would perhaps spark public interest in the issue and put pressure on the politicians.

Ashish

ps. a larger judiciary would also bring more people to hear PILs (a nice selfish motive) and also generate a culture of using the proper mechanisms for legal and legislative matters (contrary to the current legislation by the judiciary and judgement by the lawmakers)

krashid wrote (reply #49)

``First of all the myth of Abraham Lincoln and comparision of it to India is as saying black is white.``

Pakistan`s establishment has its own agenda. And sympathy and support for the residents of Jammu & Kashmir (even those that are Sunni Muslims) are not of a concern for those that are screaming ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` in the cantonments of Lahore and Rawalpindi.

The mindset can be well gauged by the remarks of General Tikka Khan (an esteemed member of Pakistan`s establishment) as quoted by General Niazi (the general who signed the surrender documents on 12/16/1971) in his recently published book. General Niazi quotes General Tikka Khan as making it very clear after taking charge in Dhaka that the military was not interested in the people of East Pakistan, only in the land. To this end, General Tikka Khan was willing to sacrifice the life of as many Bengalis as it might take.

This cynicism in Pakistan`s establishment continues to this day and is best exemplified by the fate of the quarter million ``Biharis`` whose lives have been in limbo for the last 29 years in ``Geneva camps`` in Bangladesh. These ``Biharis`` had been used till 1971 to advance the interests of Pakistan`s establishment. But after the surrender of 12/16/1971, the ``Biharis`` were no longer of any use and have been unceremoniously discarded like the rind of a squeezed lemon. If Pakistan`s establishment can be so heartless about the fate of a quarter million ``Biharis,`` it is no surprise that it hasn`t bothered their conscience to engineer the expulsion of 350,000 Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley.

Pakistan`s rulers claim that it is all about self-determination. But actions belie their declarations. Anyone can see that it is all about real estate. ``Biharis`` are not welcome to Pakistan because they won`t come with any real estate. And Jammu & Kashmir must endure savagery by ISI-trained mercenaries so that a ``cleansed`` Jammu & Kashmir can be annexed by Pakistan. It matters very little to Pakistan`s rulers how many residents of Jammu & Kashmir (Muslims & non-Muslims alike) are either killed or forced into exile. Well-being of the Kashmiris is no more important than those of the ``Biharis.`` All that matters is the land - a principle so well expressed by General Tikka Khan way back in 1971.

krashid wrote (reply #49):

``The south wanted to continue slavery.``

Pakistan`s rulers want to impose the religious homogeneity of PoK on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir as well. More imporatntly, they want to annex the land for themselves.

krashid wrote (reply #49):

``As India wants to continue to subjugate Kashmir.``South wanted to suppress the rights of black. As India wants to suppress the rights of Kashmiris.````

India is a federation of states. In such a federation, Jammu & Kashmir has as much right as any of the other 25 states of India, and actually more because of Articel 370. Indians from the other 25 states of India, for example, are barred from buying immovable property in Jammu & Kashmir. But Kashmiris can buy property and do business anywhere in India. If East Pakistan had the rights that Jammu & Kashmir has, it might still have been a province of Pakistan.

It is Pakistan`s establishment that has managed to turn its back on the people. It has refused to allow the evolution of the state into a federal democracy. 1971 crisis erupted because it wouldn`t share power with the elected representatives of the people, most notably from East Pakistan. The situation is no different today when one particular province is allowed to rule the roost to make Pakistan safe for the military.

India, on the other hand, has a tradition of peaceful transfers of power thru the ballot. Jammu & Kashmir is just one of 26 states of India.

India has more Muslims than Pakistan. And even smaller states like West Bengal and Kerala have much larger Muslim populations than the Valley. It is dishonest to demand ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` on the basis of Jammu & Kashmir`s Muslim population. ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` is not the voice of the freedom-loving Kashmiris who have peacefully coexisted in a multi-religious and multi-lingual environment for centuries, nay, millennium. ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` is the voice of Pakistan`s rulers.



krashid wrote (reply #49):

``So if any parallell can be drawn between America and India it can be drawn between Southerners and India and not the other way round.``

It is Pakistan`s rulers that are fighting for imposing the religious homogeneity of PoK on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir where nearly 40% of the population is non-Muslim, and where peaceful; coexistence in a multi-religious society has been the tradition. Pakistan`s rulers have no respect for the pluralistic tradition of Kashmiris. They have no respect for the ordinary people in Kashmir and even within Pakistan itself. It murdered 3 million Bengalis in 1971 (more than the entire Muslim population of the Valley in 1971). It has allowed a quarter million ``Biharis`` to rot in refugee camps for the last 29 years. It has engineered the expulsion of 350,000 Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley. And now it can`t rest in peace till it has annexed the rest of Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistan`s ruling establishment has always been contemptuous of the people. As General Tikka Khan had made it clear even in 1971, all it cares for is the land. Pakistan is willing and able to fight to the last Kashmiri to advance its agenda. And that is why they have had no qualms about unleashing hired mercenaries from different lands on the people of Jammu & Kashmir.

To ``pakis`` of all sorts, be they from India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Chile, Burma, UAE, Pakistan, Australia, etc. . . if any honky calls you a paki, please respond with a John Bull. Run fast if alone, stand fast if able to . . . but don`t worry, when we get together we can continue to fight over Kashmir, right????

Following responses were sent by Murad Baig via email.



A few comments on the huge response to my article about driving the Accent in Kashmir that you might like to put up.

___________________________

This is an attempt to address some of the many responses to my article covering my recent visit to Kashmir with my wife and brother-in law.

1. My editor friends at Chowk wickedly pinched my article on Kashmir and put it up on Chowk. It was sent to them merely for information. I am, however, happy with the interest it has generated. It is part of my regular monthly motoring travelogues for Business Standard`s auto magazine called MOTORING. I have also written about the Honda City, Daewoo Matiz, Ford Ikon, Opel Astra and almost all the others going to exotic places.

2. About myself. I am Indian but first consider myself a world citizen. A student of History as well as a writer. I know almost every part of India well, as I used to be GM marketing for a tractor company for many years before becoming a writer and management consultant. My father retired as Indian Ambassador to Iran and I had two uncles in the Pakistan Foreign Service (one was Pakistan`s Foreign Secretary) but I do not claim to be a political commentator. I hold no political brief. I consider myself a concerned human and have sincerely reported what I have seen and heard.

3. Five days in Kashmir after 12 years does not qualify me to know everything about Kashmir but these are my genuine impressions after meeting roughly 80, mostly Muslim Kashmiris from common Shikarawalas, pony men, surrendered militants and peasants to the Chief Secretary, Government officials and a few journalists.

4. All Kashmiris are highly intelligent and articulate and speak their minds freely for and against the India, the local Government, Pakistan and the militants.

5. The security is undoubtedly very oppressive with numerous checkpoints but the people do not seem as tragically unhappy as is usually portrayed by media reports and sad photographs after every massacre. There is little evidence of blood, tears or bitter memories. Despite the ever-present threat of violence, people are surprisingly cheerful and hospitable. There is no hunger or starvation and the rich agriculture of the valley ensures enough food for all.

6. The Kashmiris are not happy with India but do not want to be part of Pakistan either. Many militants who were in Pakistan or POK have returned disillusioned. They learned that Pakistan is no bed of roses and also that Pakistanis looks down on Kashmiris and this opinion is now widely spread.

7. According to the two surrendered militants, after the initial excitement, they found that it was mostly a hard and boring life with cold, hunger, discomfort and danger. Few Kashmiris lasted more than a year or two. Many families were very unhappy when the militants coerced their sons to join the movement. Most opined that there were few Kashmiris among the militants and that the majority of militants were of foreign origin.

8. Most Kashmiris said that they would prefer to be independent of both countries if such a position were politically or economically possible.

9. Political solutions have eluded both India and Pakistan for 50 years. Under the UN charter, Pakistan was required to vacate the portions occupied by them as a prelude to plebiscite. It failed to do so. India later had cold feet about plebiscite and failed also. India looks at Kashmir in legal terms and Pakistan in religious terms but battle over the poor area in overt and covert military terms.

10. The former kingdom of Kashmir had four regions. Predominantly Buddhist Ladakh, Hindu Jammu, Muslim POK/Azad Kashmir and the 90% Muslim Valley that has the max population. Should there be separate plebiscites for all four regions? Should the choice only be India or Pakistan or Independence as well?

11. Many regions in the subcontinent have many distinct religious, racial and other sub-national aspirations. Assam, Baluchistan, Bihar, Sind, Maharashtra or Tamilnadu, etc., have fairly large contiguous linguistic, cultural or religious populations but they all have large minorities of other people as well. The lesser groups are not colonies. Military solutions are not the answer.

12. I believe that the strident and aggressive religion preached by many of the priests of all religions are at variance with the gentle humanity of their founding prophets and sages. These priests prey on the gullibility of poor and uneducated followers who make superstition a tragic parody of spirituality and religiosity of religion.

13. I believe that religion should be a purely personal matter and should not be flaunted through noisy processions, aggressive flags or blaring loudspeakers to annoy or incite the followers of other faiths. The scripture of no religion encourages it.

14. There are several accounts that state that Shankaracharya`s temple was built upon the foundations of a Buddhist temple including Younghusband`s book. Accounts about Badrinath, Kedarnath and other temples in India and Nepal can be found in `Holy Himalaya` by E. S. Oakley where he quotes E. T. Atkinson. Crooke, Nepalese sources, etc. B. S. Dahiya`s book `Jats, the ancient rulers` details the comprehensive and sometimes violent destruction of Buddhism between the 8th and 11th Century throughout the sub continent by a new revivalist Brahminism that worshipped the Gods of the Puranas and not the Vedic deities.

15. Shankar was undoubtedly an amazing intellect who also defeated Buddhist luminaries in debate. He founded mostly Shaivite but occasionally Vaishavite temples in areas previously occupied by animist (tribal and non-Hindu) shrines or Buddhist monasteries. He evidently imported Namboodri priests from his native Kerela and introduced pilgrimages to bring a regular flow of Hindus to areas that had earlier been alien to them.

16. Dahiya`s book tries to detail the history of all the Jat tribes from the Caucasian area in the 8th century BC. I know little about the Khatris.

17. I found the environmental damage far less in Kashmir than I had expected or have observed in other parts of India and Nepal. I know quite a lot about environment but I am no expert.

18. I agree that every country should sign the CTBT and shut down their nuclear arsenals.

19. I would love the people of all countries to go everywhere including Kashmir. With the steady erosion of international barriers on trade and movement of people passports become meaningless as soon as people get educated. Passport controls diminish. With education and enlightenment the hold of the Mullas, Pandits and Priests of all faiths on the masses will weaken and so will chauvinistic nationalism that is promoted by priests and politicians.

20. Educated and computer literate Indians and Pakistanis are welcome in any country. Education may solve many more problems than can ever be solved by ideologies or weapons

First of all the myth of Abraham Lincoln and comparision of it to India is as saying black is white.

The south wanted to continue slavery.

As India wants to continue to subjugate Kashmir.

South wanted to suppress the rights of black.

As India wants to suppress the rights of Kashmiris.

So if any parallell can be drawn between America and India it can be drawn between Southerners and India and not the other way round.

Although ``Paki`` might be a derogatory term in England, but even that derogatory term has very good meaning ``cleanliness``.

And If India is fighting a war, it is as if southerners are fighting a war.

Whenever I`ve had a chance to read anything on Kashmir, I am amazed to read the twist in the conversations. The damn irony still remains there: Kashmiris are being mistreated. Unfortunately, every time issues concerning the plight of Kashmiris are brought up, they end up getting lost in the `agendas` of Indian and Pakistani tussle.

It is simply digusting to even think that there are human beings involved in making any peace decisions on both ends. Kashmir should be left on the discretion of the Kashmiris, that includes people from different faiths, dwelling on that land.

Recently, I happened to attend a dinner party thrown by a Kashmiri colleague of mine. In a hall of 100-150 people, I was the only Non-Indian besides one of my american colleagues. It was a birthday party followed by a multi-course sumptuous dinner. After a very warm welcome by my colleague and his wife, I cared to look around and was pleasantly surprised to find quite a few nice people. Not that I ever had any doubts, but I found it to be a very lively and sweet group of Kashmiris.

As the guests took their seat, I exchanged pleasantries with the couple sitting next to me, the lady was from Sri-Nagar. The moment she heard that I was from Pakistan, she ran to her husband who was busy talking to some other guests. For a minute, I was not sure of her reaction or I should say action. I remained calmly seated, enjoying the Bhangraa Music in the background. Both of them came back, and asked me, `Are you from Pakistan ?`[Kind of Verifying] I politely told them, `Jee.` Turned out that the gentleman was from Punjab. I was glad to meet them, but I was also very sad to hear the tragic details of the aftermath of partition. Basically, they lost all their assets! Interestingly, while expressing his grief and talking about his roots, he never said that partition should not have happened. He just exclaimed, `The Brits should have been intelligent enough to assist in this process.`
To Myself: [Trust the Brits ? Never!]

Finally, as we headed towards the dinner queue, the topic changed to the specialties of our choice, i.e Kashmiri Palao (Thank God - No biryaani!), Delicious Vegetable Mix, Lamb Dishes and etc.

As I drove back, my mind started weaving a thinking web, from the noticeable events at the dinner. I was convinced that one can never realize/know about people from each side unless one sits and talks. The apparent hostility is probably in the blood, therefore, it emerges every now and then. But there is something deeper than the `apparent hostility,` and it is the basic humanity that exists/will exist/and cannot be ignored among people from both sides.

In short, it was a very nice gathering. As I drove back, I was reminded of one of my favorite songs, an oldie.

The song is in a deep husky voice, with lovely acoustics - elec guitar and drum. Must Must Must hear !

`Every rose has its thorn
Just like every night has its dawn
Just like every cowboy sings his sad, sad song
Every rose has its thorn. `

(Poison)

Re #Khokan and every other sane person

Very well said Khokan. If Abraham Lincoln had conceded to the demand of southern states to secede, America had not been so great nation. We do not believe in TNT and will choose to fight against it. Moreover here is a worse situation:a state called Pakistan is instigating the people of our territory in the name of religion. And wants to merge it with its own. All the talk about independent Kashmir is a crap.

And Asim Sahab, I never thought you would be so little informed about the issues relating Kashmir.(his ignorance of Article 371). And if you have already made up your mind not to believe that the rule of law, to a large extent, exists in India and that that Kashmir has been accorded an autonomous status, it is your problem.

Sincerely

Mohtaram Dost-Mittar:
[Very Cute Name]

It is interesting that most of the times these controversial articles lead to - interesting and educating information. Being a Punjabi myself, I have never gone into these intricacies or even have had a chance to look into them. Thanks for the information.

Regards

krashid (reply #37) wrote:

``According to your theory that every act of self determination is wrong. Particularly if it as bad as atomic bomb and missiles.``

The article in question (reply #32) is pointing out that inhuman exclusivity even in the guise of self-determination is morally wrong. The forced exile of the Sindhi Hindus in 1947 from their ancestral land was wrong. The exile of the Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley isn`t anymore right.

Democracy entails not just voicing the aspirations of the majority but also protecting the fundamental rights of minorities, howsoever unpopular they might be. A murder doesn`t become right even if the majority in a mob votes to lynch the victim. Ayatollah Khomeni wouldn`t have been right even if he had won a majority in a referundum in Iran in favor of the deadly fatwa against Salman Rushdie.

krashid (reply #37) wrote:

``In the same way Kashmir is not a part of India. It belongs to Kashmiris. Kashmiris have their right for self determination.``

Kashmiri Hindus are also Kashmiris. ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` is not the voice of any freedom loving Kashmiri - it is the voice of Pakistan`s ruling establishment. Mercenaries, from across the LoC, do not have any moral right to try to impose the religious homogeneity of PoK on the rest of Jammu & Kashmir. And the freedom loving Kashmiris have a sacred obligation to protect their neighbors, even if they belong to a different faith, from the scourge of the mercenaries sent across the LoC by those that scream ``Kashmir banega Pakistan`` in the cantonments of Lahore and Islamabad.

Re: Jay and his advice to Jyoti on word Paki.

``The melodious word ``paki` which is used to denote the people of `second` nation is considered to be derogatory by the pakistanis.``

If you would have had a chance to have lived in U.K, you would know that the word paki is reserved by the equally rascist, illiterate, head-shaven british populace to refer to any south asian person, regardless of his affiliation to any of the south asian countries. So if you are brown, look asian, for all practical purposes you Sir, are a paki too. Infact the word`s origins started back in the 70`s during the british asian rights in the east end of England.

Is it not ironic, that you and jyoti so revel in the use of this word, knowing too well, that in U.K if both or any of you somehow happens to be walking late at night passes a deserted alley, that you could find yourself in the midst of the suposed neo-Nazis, with knives, and criket bats, ready to beat you both to apulp,. or at the very least an inch of your life, and would not stop calling you ``paki, paki, paki,. paki, paki``, despite your innocent, naive protests that you are not a paki, and that you hail from India.

Such is the power of gross generalisations, and racial prejudices. Hope you and jyoti learnt something from the above account of the word you ``folks`` love to misuse.

Yar Jay,

The rest of your comments can be summed up, dismissed by just one argumnet. You do agree that this jihad stuff started sometime back in 1989, with hizbollah and whatnots. From 1947, to 1989 a period of 42 years, you mean to tell me, that all was hunky dory form the Muslims in IOK, that according to you and jyoti, their rights were being provided to them, that their pleasde for help were being listened to.

Go on, be honest. In 42 odd years jyotis hiondu supremacist govt had not been able to gain the confidence and support of its Muslim populace in IOK, despite her shameful stance about law and other such humbuig. If despite your ``supposed`` massive efforts to bring the Muslims into your fold, Muslims still were not satisfied, and insurgency took place in IOK. what is that indicative of. To a logical mind it is indicative of the fact that, your efforts were mere exercises in PR, and futility, and that it was all makebelief much like your bought Farooq Abdullah, the CM of Kashmir.

Jyoti even even went so far as to try to convince herelf, that laws were there to protect those wretched people. Let me tell you, i am absolutelye confident atht the artcile no of the law she quoted, 371 must exits. But, remmeber that, the law which is not followed by the land, is worth the toilet paper used to clean one`s backside. So dont give me that jibberish about Kashmiris having autonomy.



Period!

Asim

Re #38,

Dear Jay

I am extremely sorry that I used the word ``Paki`` to say Pakistani. I did not know that the word is considered derogatory. I was only trying to avoid typing the full word. I extend my apologies to anyone who feels offended.

Sincerely

BREAKING NEWS: Hizb calls off ceasefire in Kashmir

(Updated at 1655 PST)

ISLAMABAD: The Hizbul Mujahideen group on Tuesday called off its ceasefire and directed its field commanders to resume fighting against Indian forces, well-placed sources said.

The announcement was made by Hizb`s Supreme Commander SyedSalahuddin at a press conference after the expiry of the deadline of 5 p.m. set by the Kashmiri group for India to respond positively to its goodwill gesture.

``We direct all the Commanders and the Mujahideen (freedom fighjters) in the field to break the cease-fire and go ahead along-with target oriented missions,`` he declared.

Hizbul Mujahideen has announced unilateral cease-fire on July 24 and invited India for unconditional talks to resolve the Kashmir dispute. Hizb leadership urged India to open three way talks between Islamabad, New Delhi and Kashmiris for this purpose.

New Delhi refused to involve Pakistan in the dialogue process. Salahuddin said, ``Indian leadership has failed to respond to our ice-breaking move, which could have become productive and meaningful if India (had) accepted unconditional tripartite talks between India, Pakistan and Kashmiris.`` (The News, Pakistan)

The freedom fighers, Pakistan and even the rest of the world have bent over backwards to accomodate India`s wishes on Kashmir. However India still clings to its stubborn stand (which will eventually prove very harmful to Indians). It must have taken a lot of effort from Pakistan, USA and the Hizb to coordinate this peace move. The Pakistan govt. received a lot of flak from most of the religious parties for influencing the Hizb to call a truce. But India has blown the opportunity again. Is India interested in peace at all?

Dost-Mittar,

You wrote that ``Khatris constitute the elite

among Panjabis.``

This is news to me. In West Panjab Khatris were

lowly shopkeepers and considered to be only a middle-ranking caste.

Not a single one of the gotras you mention is

highly regarded in either East or West Panjab.

One particular Saigol family has achieved great

success in Karachi buisness, but the Saigol

gotra is NOT considered to be `illustrious`.

Kakkars are Pathans not Khatris.

The famous and high status gotras are Bhatti,

Tiwana, Ghakkhar, Ghumman, Sial, Kharal, Khokhar

and various others. It is from these gotras that

Panjab`s landed aristocracy is drawn.

All of these are either Jat or Rajput. Not even

a single one is Khatri.

Wonderfully well written article. I think the author makes not just a good motoring correspondent but also an excellent travel writer.

jyoti,

The melodious word ``paki` which is used to denote the people of `second` nation is considered to be derogatory by the pakistanis. It is one of those contradictions of nature that the resident pakistani `hater` has to suggest a selective use of the word.

Asim,

I know you are a bleeding heart pakistani for the poor brothern of kashmir. Just introspect on the locus standii for this concern. As children of TNT, you have a mandate to care for the equally large number left in the first nation. Why only about kashmiris, is it because the jihadists can be easily slipped into kashmir. If it is a pan islamic bleeding heart, how did you support bombing of Iraq. Did the jihadists oppose it. If it is a fellow human bleeding, how about the miseries world wide. Is your concern for kashmir political, the UN resolution crap, ignoring the simla and lahore. Pakistan being the only country created because of islam do you feel that you have an obligation to introspect on the plight of muslims every where, or is it only a TNT mandate for muslims of india alone. To summarise it, does your concern spring from a religious belief materialised by the TNT, or is it a political UN stuff. Just introspect. The following to ylh is also relevant to you as well.

ylh,

What is important is to forget about jinnah and move on. There will be increasing number of books in the english about the greatness and `secular` vision of jinnah, all because the educated of pakistan are loosing out to the mullahs. Pakistan ka matlab kya is increasingly clear to the millions who live there, it is an islamic republic, rushing headlong on the taliban route.

Despite your personal convictions and the views of people you talk to, one has to look at the collective of pakistan, as charectarised by the institutions. The constitutional amendment to create seperate electorate, no one dares to talk of removing it. Honour killing, even the mighty musharaff could not declare it as human rights issue. Jihad and the cheap, mum and dad option of defense. Blasphemy laws. Madrassas and the colapse of the `modern` education system. The news item I posted earlier of death sentense for one calling himself god. What I cited are institutional features that characterise pakistani society. It has nothing to do with individuals, each is an exception to the norm. Each american hates to see the iraqi children die, but the sanctions continue. That is collective.

Pakistan has traversed a long way since the two faced speach to the pak assembly. Forget the past, try to weave a dream of hope for the pak people, a hope of better life, not one of jihadic death, which the mullahs are selling.

It is unfortunate that educated pakistanis on the chowk are also selling a dream to the pakistanis of integrating the muslim land of kashmir, a dream to hope for, masqrading as a human rights concern, pan islamic concern and Un resolution concern. Here the dream of the mullah and the educated confluence, in the killing fields of kashmir. Educated provide the rationale, mullah provides the death.

jay.

pullu, khokan, jyoti!

Can I ask you a question.

The whole world is demanding India to sign CTBT, and give up its missile program.

Why India is refusing? And do you back your Govet?

According to your theory that every act of self determination is wrong. Particularly if it as bad as atomic bomb and missiles.

In the same way Kashmir is not a part of India. It belongs to Kashmiris. Kashmiris have their right for self determination.

If guns are an answer.

Don`t worry there are lots of guns on both sides and there are lots of life to be killed.

Dost-Mittar: Thanks. Any thoughts of why the dhai-ghar were higher in the pecking order?

Murad:

Since you seem to know something about the origin of the Gills and the history of Kashyap, here is another question for you? Do you know anything about the ethnic history of Punjabi Khatris. Specifically, what is the history of the Khannas, Seths, Malhotras and Mehtas. These four families consider themselves to be among the upper echelons of Punjabi Khatri hierarchy. Without wanting to feed their vanity too much, I am curious as to who they are and why they have such vanity. Any clues?

Sorry I have posted it again so that it can be read by others.

Re to Asim#51,52 and scout

This thread will go off soon, so I will not attempt a detailed answer of ur questions. TNT had its way in 1947. India has already suffered a partition. There will be no more partitions in the name of religion. Abraham Lincoln had to face a civil war to prevent his nation from being disintegrated. So will India.

In reply to scout`s question, `` Pakistani terrorists`` should have been Pakistan backed terrorists. And most of the Pakistanis support terrorist activities barring a few enlightened ones. If you want to see the hatred in the heart of an average Paki read Hamidm`s postings. Regarding ``freeing`` Kashmir, a nation can not be allowed to disintegrate because some fanatics brainwash gullible people in the name of religion. Kashmir will be granted more autonomy, greater help from the people of India in developmental activities to make it a prosperous state.

And in reply to Asim`s questions, what can a govt do to win the confidence of people. Providing economic help: that Indian govt was doing till now, by meeting majority of its expenses.Social acceptance: There is no discrimination of any sort thatis especially applied against Kashmiris in any part of India. Freedom to practise their religion: Indian constitution provides that to all people of India. If you are talking of any special priviliges, then Article 371 guarantees them an autonomous status and no laws without the approval of Kashmiri parliament can be imposed on them except in the matters of defense, Communication, and foreign policy. They are free for everything else.

Kashmiris are as much Indians as any other people. And we can sort the affair out between ourselves. Why does Pakistan come on between.

Sincerely

The Horizon

30th October, 1998



Self-determination Isn`t Always Sacred

by Pravin Satsangi



Self-determination is fast becoming the most abused concept of our times. When Woodrow Wilson coined the word, it was to verbalize his compassion and concern for fellow human beings. But the political arm of terrorists,like those in Kashmir, use the word in a way that is a travesty of the lofty principles that had animated President Wilson and is a cruel mockery of human rights. No one can possibly be left in doubt about this once he witnesses the plight of the

quarter million Kashmiri Hindus who have had to flee their ancestral home in the face of fanatical terrorists from abroad seeking

self-determination for the Muslims in Kashmir.



The political representatives of the terrorists in Kashmir weave the word ``self-determination`` into their righteous chants in a clever public relations effort to glean support for their goal of turning Jammu and Kashmir in the mold of ethnically cleansed Pakistan. The world needs to be informed that self-determination of ``their`` people is ruthlessly violating the human rights of others.



Self-determination is indeed a basic human right. But it loses its sanctity when self-determination of a group implies marching orders for the rest. Ofcourse, people don`t leave their homes voluntarily. They have to be persuaded. That means killing them untill everybody gets the idea.



The massive ethnic cleansing of 1947 in Jinnah`s Pakistan is an example of self-determaination of this evil variety. Pakistan lived upto its name by becoming a ``cleansed land`` within weeks of independence. And now Kashmir is taking a leaf out of Jinnah`s book. Self-righteous chanters of ``self-determination`` with direct Pakistani assistance seem well on their way to stamping out religious diversity from Jammu and Kashmir.



Will we never learn the cruel lessons of history? The previous UN Secretary General Boutros-Ghali put it about as bluntly as could be: ``If every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation. Peace, security and economic well-being for all would become even more

difficult to achieve.``



Self-determination for a group must never sanctify the violation of human rights of another. Automatic self-determination, for whosoever shouts the loudest, is a sure recipe for tragedies like Kashmir. It is the greatest of evils to allow one person`s self-determination to degenerate into his neighbour`s extinction. Kashmir desperately calls out for respite from fanatical terrorists from abroad who have turned the land into a living hell.



Abraham Lincoln courageously faced down those that chanted ``secession`` to perpetuate the evil of slavery. We, too, must summon the courage to confront those that chant ``self-determination`` in heedless pursuit of Jinnah`s evil ideology of religious apartheid.

Kashmir is paradise on earth(awful cliche).It is the jewel of India(take another one).It is synonymous with hinduism(digest this cliche).

It may not be surprising if one of the main reasons for congress led by Nehru to hold kashmir,

could be the ones` mentioned above. Nehru`s ancestral roots incidentally can be traced to kashmir. There are myriads of other reasons.

But changing of religion by a large section, does not warrant interference from other nations nor does it justify demands to secede from a nation. I don`t see any connection.

Freedom does not come cheap. And if the vale

of kashmir is soaked in blood, it is because kashmiris have asked for it. Army is deployed only where there is trouble.

It would be lovely to have peace in Kashmir but

that would be under the shadow of Indian tricolor. If kashmiris do not agree to this and bleed us (as pakistanis call it) then it will only be reciprocated in kind.

Who is to be blamed? The Indian heart points at him, and the human heart stands confused.

I too did not know saffron flags were so dangerous. Secularism at it`s best. What to say about kashmiriyat! Since somebody else is fighting

(and talking) for kashmir, kashmiriyat can go and

fend for itself.

``Kashmir and Accent`` both have got

foreign hand. :)

sadhana #reply all

Jee, maine aapka haasya-vyangya wala reply padha tha. Is it worth a buy? wish you had typed that poem here.(high hopes!).

So u belong to the helping category.rare. Generally i have found females to be quite a bit disturbed and insecure while travelling. That is why I have always offered help,(not that i wouldn`t otherwise) which i loved :). BTW what is the name of that train by which you travelled north/south?

(cheers)

until next time,

pullu

Salmangorsi #27

You don`t have to take the pains of Kashmiris. Nor for anyother.

Your senior generations has taken enough pain for you so that you can write on this board with a full stomach.

If your previous generation had not struggled in bloodbath, you will be lamenting at apathy of whole world for your rights being trampled.

Have a good future and closed eyes.

All this beautiful land...lakes...snow capped mountains....bushy trees....furry animals for pashminas talk about Kashmir is sickening. It has no oil or skyscrapers or yuppie hangouts or ferragamo shops or pubs selling 100 varieties of beer.

Re: Jay and introspection.

My message still stands. Introspection is the only way to move forward. But it has to be done not by just one party, but both parties ionvolved with the bloodshed. I hope i could not be more unequiovcal than that. Herein lies the problem. The perceived value of introspection, and the ability to maintain a clear focus on truth as opposed to issues of futile pride.

Having said that, i have yet to see admittance from your side, Jay, that wrongs are being committed selectively on those unfortunate critters. No where did i see an accptance of the fact that in the IOK, the Indian govt has done little iof at all anything, to win the confidence of the Muslims of that area over whom they have been ruling for the last 53 odd years. Why have they not shown them meticulous fair, and equitable treatment that would have moved them to vote for them in defiance of all Pakistani efforts. In this age of competition and fast paced life, people in the third world countries like ours, mostly poor, simple and honest people. These people(dare i add the majority) do not give a damn about politics, or who owns Kashmir. They merely want to get on with the mundane business of living, a simple, honest life, without the ominous threats of loss of life or loved ones hanging on their heads, day and night. What has the various indian regimes done for them? What have they promised them? As far as the independent observer can see, NOTHING, ZILCH, NADA, NO SECURITY, NO REFUGE, NO EQUALITY, NO SHELTER, just pain, grieve, and suffering. Why are the various Human rights orgnaisations pursuing such Anti Indian agendas about the dearth of human rights being exercised in the IOK. Surely you have to agree that not all of them could be sponsored by ISI. I am not saying that HR rights are not trampled upon by Pakistan; for they are indeed. But for this issue over this land which you hold so sacred to your hearts,.. why are si many reports being seen by the international media of the suffering of people in IOK. That i believe needss severe and groos introspection.

20 Century has seen that bully`s need to be curbed by whatever means possible. You saw what happened in Iraq, in Bosnia etc. Though its very strategic as to why US does not want to get involved in this bloodshed. There is not much for them in this game, as opposed to oil in the midle east, and cutting doen the oppoistion to size (Milosovic) in Bosnia. US is not a superpower just for the words, it uses extreme intellect to run the world. Human sympathy comes right at the bottom of its ladder, unless the appreciation of symptahy is linked to its gains somehow. But I digress.

You want to keep IOK. At least have it in your heart to not blackmail the suffering ``MINORITY`` junta of that comatose land into submission using any which means you deem necessary because once again THE ALL TOO FAMILIAR ``indian`` pride is at stake.

The day you start introspection and deal with thise unfortunate people in an equitable manner, Pakistan too shall back off. Contrary to what you might think, we are not all insance, or retrded to carry on putting resources into a fight, at the expnese of the progress of this country. Let us give soem thought to the peace processs. Numewrous times Pakistan has extended the hand for bilateral talsk, numerpus times these talks have been rejected. Why? Does that show a recptive regime on your part. I think Not!

DIALOGUE NEEDS TO BE OPEN.

Asim

P.S I am against all bloodshed; bloodhsed happening in IOK by your forces is not any less reprehensible than that bbeing done by mine. Like i have said, both parties should shoulder the blame. No one can skirt the issue by putting blame sorely on the other. But there is a cause and effect chain of command here. Depends which way you look at the cause and effect. Right?

Certainly an eye catching article! The 1st paragraph, had a very nice opening. As a reader, I *had * to continue with the flow. A beautiful sequence of events! The historical information was also re-educating.

I think the *Accent`s * -(interior and exterior) details could have been brought up at the end. Personally, I was totally engrossed in the beauty of Gulmarg and the after effects of Dal Lake, when I got hit by the Tazkaa`ra` of Accent :-( This is the 2nd time, I am reading/hearing about a drive to Kashmir, where the narrator found it important to mention the vehicle. My dear father would always mention his, before partition, childhood family summer vacation trips to Kashmir. The route from Sialkot, the winding roads, the natural beauty, the ‘shor-machatae hoaae’ bachae’[In this case, my father and his sister], late grandfather – giving them the overview of the s