What's new

Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable


LAHORE, Aug 23: The Kashmir Action Committee, Pakistan, has called upon Pakistan to approach India to allow it to send food and other goods to the Kashmir valley across the Line of Control (LoC) through Jhelum valley road because of the economic blockade by the Hindus of Jammu.

The demand was made in a resolution passed at a meeting of the executive committee of the KACP held here on Saturday. The resolution referred to the killings of Kashmiris by the Indian security forces and the protest marches by thousands of Kashmiris against the economic blockade and their slogans of Azadi and Pakistan Zindabad.

What is surprising is the callous indifference of the Indian government to the plight of the Kashmiris.

The resolution pointed out that these events demonstrated that the people of Kashmir had not reconciled to the idea of being a part of India.

Over the past six weeks when no food supplies of any sort are allowed to be brought to the valley from Jummu and no perishable fruit is allowed to be taken to Jummu, the Pakistan government has almost been a silent spectator.

All that rhetoric of opening the LoC for passage of goods from one side to the other is no longer heard.

The resolution said that Pakistan should have formally approached India to allow food and other necessities being sent across LoC through Jhelum valley road.

It said if Pakistani transport could not be allowed to go across the LoC, the supplies could be transferred on to Indian trucks at the LoC crossing point.

This will apart from providing relief to the beleaguered Kashmiris will be the biggest CBM which India has been insisting for the “sake of peace".

On the political front, the resolution said, the matter should have been raised in the UN and other world forums by Pakistan, but nothing was done probably because of the political flux at home. It was yet another failure of Pakistan to highlight the Kashmir issue.

The resolution reminded the All Parties Hurriyat Conference leaders of the KACP demand conveyed to them during their recent visit to Pakistan that they should not be misguided by the so-called composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan.

They should stick to their demand for the right of self-determination for the attainment of which hundreds and thousands of Kashmiris had laid their lives, it said.
 
You have nothing more but "Islam" and "Kashmiriyat" to keep you together. These apparently are "week" when one looks at history.

And the only thing keeping the india union together is "hinduisim" and "indianisim"........india only came about after 47 while kashmir has been a state longer.


Care to elaborate... Oh wait... you already have started with the pompousness....

Dont get you knickers in a twist...carry on reading.


Which is among the world's most preferred tourism destination... India or Pakistan?.

If kashmir was free of the indian army it could boost the number of tourist coming to kashmir......plenty of country's in the world that make a good living just from the tourist trade.
Nothing to do with who hasmore tourist now at the given moment.....i am talking about the future free of indian occupation.


The only mineral in abundance in the valley is mica; this is not in demand right now.?.

Just shows how much you know about kashmir...nothing!



What about the initial capital investment

What about it..?
The same way india and the rest of the world gets investment is the same way kashmir will.



Once 370 goes, the Indians and the Indian diaspora would invest millions and bring in foreign expertise.

They might be better starting with there own country......i dont have to tell you the number of poor in india.
Get the Indian diaspora to help there own people first.



Once we leave, you have a Taliban rump state in the Valley.

But then, you would like that, won't you?

What utter rubbish......brainwashed to the max...tune in to bollywood news next week .
 
Really? Well read this:

'Islam is not a slave'

24 Aug 2008, 0136 hrs IST,TNN


Syed Ali Shah Geelani is perhaps the most polarising figure in contemporary Kashmir. In his many avatars as Jamaat-e-Islami member, Hizbul Mujahideen's political face and Tehreek-e-Hurriyat's hawk, the octogenarian, bearded leader has led mammoth rallies, courted countless arrests and penned several books, including a passionate prison diary. On August 15 this year, Geelani donned the garb of Islam's saviour and declared to an azadi-chanting, green-flag waving crowd at Srinagar's Lal Chowk: "Our goal is azadi baraa-e-Islam (freedom for Islam)."

The media, constantly on the lookout for soundbites, moved to the separatists' other engagements in the day, ignoring the import of Geelani's new diktat and its fathomless falsity. In a single stroke, the Hurriyat hawk had coated his territorial battle with an Islamic flavour. Like Pakistan's founding father, the frail Mohammed Ali Jinnah in the tumultuous 1940s, Geelani has again tried to stoke a disturbing, though somewhat dormant, debate: "Is Islam incompatible with a secular society and must a Muslim majority live only in an Islamic state?"

The chant of "freedom for Islam" is actually a gross misinterpretation of a faith which unambiguously calls God "Rabul Almeen (lord of the universe)" and Prophet Mohammed "Rahmatul Almeen (blessing for universe)". "Like the Hindutva hardliners hinduised the Shrine Board for Amarnath yatris, Geelani has used a political slogan to provide the separatist movement with a pan-Islamic colour. Muslims might have been enslaved or free in the last 1,400 years, but Islam has never been a slave to anyone. Since it's not a slave, it doesn't need to be freed," says Islamic scholar Asghar Ali Engineer. "Islam is democratic in spirit and has no conflict with secular, composite nationalism, an idea that the likes of Geelani vehemently oppose."

In Geelani's warped views, all Muslims must strive for and live in an Islamic state. "It's as difficult for a Muslim to live in a non-Muslim society as it is for a fish to live in a desert," writes Geelani in Rudad-e-Qaf, his prison memoir.
Bangalore-based Islamic scholar Yoginder Sikand, who has written extensively on Kashmir's composite culture, met Geelani a few months ago in Srinagar. "When I asked him to explain his theory of Muslims' discomfort in a non-Muslim society, he said that it was ordained by the Quran. If the separatists succeed, Kashmir will turn into another Talibanised Afghanistan," says Sikand.

How will an Islamised Kashmir, if it becomes a reality at all, look? To find that, don't look beyond Asia Andrabi, the leader of Dukhtaran-e-Millat (Daughters of Islam), who dictates head-to-toe hijab, issues fatwas against music and favours "covering" the women who dare to bare, preferably by sprinkling paint on them.

Geelani's ideological guru, Maulana Abul-Ala Maududi, Jamaat-e-Islami's founder, sought the idea of an Islamic state in a Quranic verse which says that if given power in the land, Muslims should establish salat (worship) and zakat (charity) and enjoin virtue and forbid evil. Maududi interpreted it as God's command to establish an Islamic state which needed to enforce the eradication of vice like adultery, drinking, gambling, vulgar songs, immoral display of beauty, promiscuous mingling of men and women, co-education and so on.

"Pakistan's original idea of establishing an Islamic state was never realised. Yes, Pakistan has a city called Islamabad, but true Islam remains in India," claims Akhtarul Wasey, who teaches Islamic Studies at Delhi's Jamia Millia Islamia. "The Prophet proved Muslims could co-exist with non-Muslims through the Covenant of Medina he signed with the Jews. Both the Jews and the Muslims became citizens of Medina with their separate identities."

Wasey's argument on the inclusivist nature of real Islam is backed by historical truth. Wahhabism, a revivalist, puritanical movement, expounded by Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahbab in 1740s in today's Saudi Arabia, lost its exclusivist edge once it hit the shores of multicultural India. Darul Uloom Deoband, the Islamic seminary which traces its origins to the wave of Wahhabism, eschewed fanaticism when it met the tolerant, spiritual Sufi influences in India. Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind, Darul Uloom Deoband's extension, which fought the British Raj, opposed the Muslim League's "two-nation" theory. Jamiat's stalwart Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madni, under fire from some misguided maulvis of the League, had to explain his advocacy of composite nationalism in a book called Muttahda Qaumiat Aur Islam (Composite Culture and Islam). Madni was hauled over the coals, yet he didn't budge from his stand.

The idea of an Islamic state did not attract even the venerable Maulana Abul Kalam Azad though his zeal for Islam was unmatched. Born in Mecca and trained in Arabic and Islam studies before his family migrated to Calcutta, the erudite Azad celebrated Islam's inclusivism in an 1913 essay: "It is the Muslims' duty to serve humanity...Every part of God's land is sacred, and all inhabitants of the land are dear to them." At another place, Azad declares that God's land cannot be compartmentalised into pak (pure) and na-pak (impure).

The Kashmiri youth who dance to the tune of "Teri jaan meri jaan, Pakistan, Pakistan" would do well to take time off from Geelani's harangues and read Islam in its right context.

mohammed.wajihuddin@timesgroup.com

'Islam is not a slave'-Review-Sunday Specials-Opinion-The Times of India

Syed Ali Shah Geelani is a great man and tell's it like it is...........an islamic kashmir.....islam first!
 
The local Kashmiri Islam or Kashmiriyat has been replaced with the pan/radical/Wahabi Islam.

The hindu's in jammu have shown there true colours....trying to strave to death the kashmiri muslims.
We need a islamic kashmir where islam comes first....all kashmiri hindu/sikhs ect are welcome to stay under a islamic govt...the ones that dont like it can have compensation and leave for india and live with there hindu brothers.
 
Let me repeat the critical question here, that the thread uses as its foundation.

We have, through the condition of plebiscite in the Instrument of accession, and the UNSC resolutions, a clear argument that the final status of Kashmir is to be determined through referendum.

India refuses to do so. One solution advocated is that the referendum be limited to the Kashmir Valley in India, and AK in Pakistan, with the remaining areas being left with Pakistan and India.

The advantages of finding such a compromise solution are tremendous - a massive Indian military presence will not be needed. Normalization of the relationship between India and Pakistan, ending the military rivalry that has primarily existed on the basis of this dispute, and over which all wars bar that in 1971 have been fought.

It could usher in new era of cooperation between South Asian nations - economic, social, cultural..

So bar the jingoism of 'Kashmir hamara hai", what rationale exists for not choosing such a compromise, given the potential benefits?
 
Curfew imposed in IHK ahead of Lal Chowk rally

* Govt says curfew meant to prevent attack on pro-freedom leaders
* One killed as soldiers open fire on Muslim protesters

NEW DELHI: People defied curfew and fought pitched battles with paramilitary forces in Srinagar and elsewhere in the Kashmir Valley on Sunday, as the army was summoned to South Kashmir. Scores of people were reported injured in the clashes.

The curfew was imposed in all 10 districts of Indian-held Kashmir by the authorities ahead of the Lal Chowk rally scheduled on Monday in Srinagar.

Reports said the army, which had been kept on a standby, was called out in Khnabal area of Anantnag district following mass public defiance on Sunday morning. Reports also said that army and paramilitary forces were conducting major search operations around the rural areas to arrest local pro-freedom activists and leaders.

Small groups of youth defied the curfew all day long, and came out on the streets in Srinagar, chanting “Allah-o-Akbar” (God is great) and “Indians Quit Kashmir”. The police fired at them at several places in the city to disperse them.

Reports said that violent protests had also broken out in Beeru in central Budgam district, injuring at least 14 people. In the Handwara town, protesters fought the paramilitary forces.

The Hurriyat Conference said that it would go ahead with Monday’s march to Lal Chowk despite restrictions. “As of now, we have decided to go ahead with tomorrow’s march to Lal Chowk,” Hurriyat Chairman Mirwaiz Umer Farooq said over telephone.

He said there was no reason for the government to impose curfew when all the previous processions in Kashmir had been peaceful. Mirwaiz trashed the official statement that the curfew had been imposed to save the lives of pro-independence leaders.

An official spokesman said on Sunday morning that the government had “credible” reports that vested interests were going to target leaders during the rally on Monday. “We have no such threat,” Mirwaiz said, asserting that the authorities had been unnerved by the massive public response to the calls given by the Kashmiri leadership.

Meanwhile, Hurriyat leader Shabbir Ahmad Shah went into hiding to evade arrest. He told a news agency over telephone from an undisclosed location that he left his house shortly before security forces raided it. He said the Central Reserve Police Force and Special Operation Group personnel ransacked his house and harassed his family, including his mother, wife and daughter.

It is believed that the Amarnath Shrine Board and government representatives had agreed on some proposals to end a month-long strike in the Hindu areas of IHK.

Killed: AP reported that paramilitary soldiers opened fire on a group of Muslim protesters in IHK after they allegedly defied curfew late on Sunday and tried to storm into a police camp, an official said. One man was killed and another seriously injured. iftikhar gilani/ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
 
One thing worth noting is that last time the anti India campaign started in Kashmir in 1989 was by armed groups who used armed method in an attempt to try to end Indian occupation.

The latest round has been started by common people who have come out in numbers against the Indian government. One should remember that it is not the starting issue that is important it is how the events unfold that is important. If by any means this protest turns purely anti India than there is going to be problem for the Indian government.

Crushing a movement of people is lot more difficult than crushing a select group. I am not saying that it might lead to a solution of Kashmir dispute but it surely will be a catalyst.

The way Kashmirirs have come out suggests that they are fed up of the status quo and want a solution to this problem.
 
And the only thing keeping the india union together is "hinduisim" and "indianisim"........india only came about after 47 while kashmir has been a state longer.

Is that the reason why we have one of the world's largest Muslim populations? Is that the reason why we have the world's largest Sikh population?

Dont get you knickers in a twist...carry on reading.

The point is the rhetoric was as useless below as it was above.

If kashmir was free of the indian army it could boost the number of tourist coming to kashmir

The Indian Army stepped in after your stooges effed the Valley up.

plenty of country's in the world that make a good living just from the tourist trade.

And Kashmir isn't one of them...

Nothing to do with who hasmore tourist now at the given moment.....i am talking about the future free of indian occupation.

You mean a future wherein the Mullahs rule supreme...

Just shows how much you know about kashmir...nothing!

Well than teach me...

What about it..?
The same way india and the rest of the world gets investment is the same way kashmir will.

Yeah yeah... that's how easy it us...

They might be better starting with there own country......i dont have to tell you the number of poor in india.
Get the Indian diaspora to help there own people first.

Kashmir is India...

What utter rubbish......brainwashed to the max...tune in to bollywood news next week .

Read Geelani's comments...

Syed Ali Shah Geelani is a great man and tell's it like it is...........an islamic kashmir.....islam first!

Contradictory are we?

BTW, any comments on the write-up...

The hindu's in jammu have shown there true colours....trying to strave to death the kashmiri muslims.
We need a islamic kashmir where islam comes first....all kashmiri hindu/sikhs ect are welcome to stay under a islamic govt...the ones that dont like it can have compensation and leave for india and live with there hindu brothers.

The Valley's Mulsims has shown its xenophobia and intolerence... why not ask the Indian Muslims who is right here? The Hindus or Muslims?
 
islam is just a relegion and u all r adding disgrace to it............great men are not those who seperate people to save relegion but r those who unite people to save them from relegion and the world knows who had better men.
 
islam is just a relegion and u all r adding disgrace to it............great men are not those who seperate people to save relegion but r those who unite people to save them from relegion and the world knows who had better men.

Uniting through religion, race, ethnicity or nationality is teh choice of a people - it is not up to you to determine who is right or not.

The whole idea of a 'nation' is discriminatory, and India is discriminatory, since it seceded from the British, and the 'Indic civilization' is celebrated as separate and distinct.

Similarly, people have the right to define their identity however they see fit.
 
Let me repeat the critical question here, that the thread uses as its foundation.

We have, through the condition of plebiscite in the Instrument of accession, and the UNSC resolutions, a clear argument that the final status of Kashmir is to be determined through referendum.

Referendum... conditions for which were never satisfied by all the three parties India, China and Pakistan.

India refuses to do so.

For reasons that are just.

One solution advocated is that the referendum be limited to the Kashmir Valley in India, and AK in Pakistan, with the remaining areas being left with Pakistan and India.

Why? On grounds of religion? Speaks volumes about the xenophobia...

The advantages of finding such a compromise solution are tremendous - a massive Indian military presence will not be needed.

The reason why we are there in those numbers is the fact that we are fighting a guerrilla war, which needs troop numbers in the ratio of 25:1. And who sent this guerrillas is not exactly a Mensa question.

Normalization of the relationship between India and Pakistan, ending the military rivalry that has primarily existed on the basis of this dispute, and over which all wars bar that in 1971 have been fought.

I doubt you guys will stop there... Khalistani movement being a case herein.

It could usher in new era of cooperation between South Asian nations - economic, social, cultural..

No it won't...

So bar the jingoism of 'Kashmir hamara hai", what rationale exists for not choosing such a compromise, given the potential benefits?

Why don't you guys stop the 'Hindu attrocities' blabber, and then we'll oblige...

What benefits? Death of secular India by the hands of the Valley's mullahs? You are ignoring the point AM... no longer we "care" about them... the potential implication is removal of Article 370...
 
Uniting through religion, race, ethnicity or nationality is teh choice of a people - it is not up to you to determine who is right or not.

The whole idea of a 'nation' is discriminatory, and India is discriminatory, since it seceded from the British, and the 'Indic civilization' is celebrated as separate and distinct.

Similarly, people have the right to define their identity however they see fit.

soory i just cant cant agree with u,am a christian i hav muslim,hindu,jain friends we all are close with relegion playing only in community certificates and livilg in india and all enjoy the same privileges.........ur attitude of just looking at relegious fanatics has given u a wrong picture india,please do vist india and find the reality yourself afterall seperatists are tiny in nos compared with the population of the country........even if u subtract the population of valley muslims,gujarathi muslims(who hav suffered from the safron brigade) india will still hav the largest poulation of muslims in the world.
 
Vish,

I have stated already that I have no interest in answering line by line incoherent retorts that distort the context of the post and add no value to the discussion.

Recompile your post into something coherent please - the question is simple enough, and 'no it wont' without any justification or rationale is nothing but intellectual laziness.
 
soory i just cant cant agree with u,am a christian i hav muslim,hindu,jain friends we all are close with relegion playing only in community certificates and livilg in india and all enjoy the same privileges.........ur attitude of just looking at relegious fanatics has given u a wrong picture india,please do vist india and find the reality yourself afterall seperatists are tiny in nos compared with the population of the country........even if u subtract the population of valley muslims,gujarathi muslims(who hav suffered from the safron brigade) india will still hav the largest poulation of muslims in the world.

I am a Pakistani who has Indian, American, Arab, Mexican and British friends.

You are fine with 'discrimination' and 'seperateness' on the basis of nationality, but take umbrage if someone identifies themselves on the basis of faith.
 
Back
Top Bottom