Kashmir | News & Discussions.

[dabong1]

Let me try to put the 1000 year crap in perspective....

it is more due to the disunity among the hindu kings and the not-so-present loyalty (Rajputs aligning with Mughals) that u were able to rule for the so called 1000 years. and not so much due to the bravery of the Muslim kings.

I see you havent bothered to put my quote into context............your indian friend was saying that muslims went around india forcing the hindus to accept islam as a norm.
There must have certain instances of "forced conversion" which i am not denying but overall during a long time of muslim rule if the policy had been to force hindus to accept islam then there would be no hindus today....they exact same way a hindu can say to me that indian does not force muslims to convert to being hindu becauce if they had the number of muslims would be going down each year.....it was only a simple logic to explain a point that you indian shave taken to heart.
When i mention the thousand year rule its not in some jingoistic way to show that muslim are somehow superior to hindus but to show that in such a long spance of time of muslims rule if they where that bad and ruthless as some people make out then they would have wiped hinduisim out.

If they had been united like the invaders were u wouldn be able to do shyt.

Hanvt got a clue about that but i think the hindu kings did try a few times to unite under one banner but where defeated.

remember how much the Marathas and the Sikhs kicked the rear end of the mighty Mughals.??

When the mughal s where on there last legs.....wasnt long after that the Marathas and the Sikhs back to being subjects but this not to the mughals but to the british just like the mughals.......you had you few years of "glory" and you cant forget it.

And the Muslim hordes with all their armies couldn do jack in South India especially Tamil Nadu and Kerala and in the North East India were the Hindu Ahoms again repeatedly defeated the mughals.

Well done

Eh..? before the invading Muslim kings came pillaging and killing innocents no religion related war ever happened on this beautiful land.

.....but they have had wars though havnt they?........if there "religion related" there bad in your book but if there not motivated by faith then they must be "good" wars.
The british invasion of india was not motivated by faith so it must be okay?

You are probably referring to that Hindu bigot Bakhtiyar Khilji and the destruction of Nalanda, those damn buddhists who stole our Ashoka had it coming!

Actually i was talikng about King Pusyamitra

If hindus had that mas-killing tendency that was prevalent among the Christian and Islamic kings then there wouldn be much Christians,Muslims left in India wich has a 80 % Hindu majority.

Where do i say that hindus have a mas-killing tendency? i was just pointing out that hindu kings have killed large numbers of buddhist the same way you say muslims killed large numbers of hindus and its not like muslims kings didnt attack each other also.

According to the 2nd century Ashokavadana:
"Then King Pusyamitra equipped a fourfold army, and intending to destroy the Buddhist religion, he went to the Kukkutarama. Pusyamitra therefore destroyed the sangharama, killed the monks there, and departed.
After some time, he arrived in Sakala, and proclaimed that he would give a hundred dinara reward to whoever brought him the head of a Buddhist monk" (Shramanas) Ashokavadana, 133, trans. John Strong.

A Buddhist tradition holds him as having taken steps to check the spread of Buddhism as "the number one enemy of the sons of the Shakya's and a most cruel persecutor of the religion". The Divyavadana ascribes to him the razing of stupas and viharas built by Ashoka, and describes him as one who wanted to undo the work of Ashoka.

 

[dabong1]

Fateh you just made mass killing a joke ,but cant help laughing ..

King Pusyamitra ......keep laughing

Bakhtiyar Khilji was the reason for the decline of Budhism in India...But he is Muslim not Hindu ...dabong please do some research before posting ..

Or is that sarcasm?? .sorry if it is

Thankyou professor saab for letting us know(sarcasm)

"do some research before posting".......Please keep you advice to yourself.

So the buddhist where flourshing in india where there before the muslim came along?

By destryoing a university-library the muslims destroyed all remanants of Budhism in india
I hope you know that Bakhtiyar Khilji destroy the library after finding out that they did not have the koran.......you might think it to be a bit of an extreme measure but it shows that he destroyed for a reason and not just for the sake of it.

 

[dabong1]

This is the logic used by hardcore bigots to whitewash the black deeds of likeminded bigots from the past. Unfortunately, those bigots from the past wrote glowing accounts of their deeds in their own court documents.

Its simple......did the muslims force the majority of hindus to accept islam during there rule?.....that was question i was trying to ask before all you indian started jumping to own conclusions that i wanted somehow the take over of india by "islamic" forces.

The real problem is it that the logic of my argument that if the muslims where that bad as you guys make out and where forcing everybody to convert to islam there would be no hindus left is a simple argument that you cant counter act a have to resort "his a bigot line".

You probably think mughal empire collapsed because trecherous hindus sold themselves to British I know your type and your polemics

There you go again like a jumping to own conclusions.....and i bet you think that all muslims should be killed or forced into being hindus.

 

[Raghu]

Its simple......did the muslims force the majority of hindus to accept islam during there rule?.....that was question i was trying to ask before all you indian started jumping to own conclusions that i wanted somehow the take over of india by "islamic" forces.

I would answer it this way.

The longer the mulsim ruled certain areas , the more muslim it became.The converse is also equally true.

For example,todays Pakistan Sindh and punjab,even Afghanistan were the first one to come under muslim rule and remained to till date if i can say like that and Bengal ,parts Bihar too came under year 1200 , that why u see majority people are Muslims there.

While on the other hand u see least number of muslims in my state of Odisha which came under the muslim rule in relatively recent past in 16th century or say Nepal where muslims dont even count 5% of the population. I argue the same for the sourthen states also though muslim population is relatively high in 10-25%.


Other reasons could be due to the strenth of hindu religious values far were always far stronger in the interiors states of india compared north west(todays Pakistan) and Bengal(todays Banladesh) where followers of placidly peaceful Buddhism outnumbered hindus even before Muslim forces arrived on the coast of Sindh.

I must make special mention of Kashmir where big numbers forced conversion took place in moghul era .Its evidence is clearly there since its relatively recent.

The real problem is it that the logic of my argument that if the muslims where that bad as you guys make out and where forcing everybody to convert to islam there would be no hindus left is a simple argument that you cant counter act a have to resort "his a bigot line".

haha,

I'll tell u about my state.
The Jannath temple of Puri built in 1247 is the one among four most sacred places of worship of Hindus .And its was attacked 18 times 200yrs of muslim rule,once Odisha came under the muslim rulers of Bengal in 1565 and later on the moghus.The priests of the temple put their lives on the line to hide the deities every time the temple came under attack.
Then finally one moghul general caught hold the deities in a remote village where it was hidden and brought them to burn them down.The legend has it ,when the moghul gereral started the fire, he own body started giving burning sensation and pus was generated from wounded parts .Hence he stopped the fire and flowed the deities in the river Ganga from where the deities were later recollected and brought back to the temple.

Konark Sun temple was damaged by muslim forces too and still its were remains was beautiful enough to become UN world Heritage site.

The point is simple the Hindu religion survived in india inspite off agnist all the odds,aganist on slaught of muslim forces ,not due any concessions of the its muslim rulers of the past.

 

[Spring Onion]

Betrayal of Kashmiris, once again
Thursday, 21 January 2010 09:32
E-mail Print PDF

By Afshain Afzal

The puppet Chief Minister of Indian held Jammu & Kashmir (IHK), Omar Abdullah, met Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on December 30, 2009, in New Delhi to discuss Justice Saghir Ahmad’s report (Fifth Working Group) on centre-state relations. During the meeting reports of all the five Working Groups, which were set up following second Round Table Conference on Kashmir in May 2006, were discussed and Omar Abdullah insisted on implementation of these reports. The issues discussed included special status of the IHK border state within the Indian Union, methods of strengthening secularism, rule of law in the state and democracy. Both the leaders discussed steps leading to decentralization of powers and replacement of regular Indian Army with Paramilitary Forces.

Another important point of discussion was secret, quiet and off the table talks with various independence seeking groups and examination of the question of autonomy in the light of various formulas. Ironically, despite strong opposition from Kashmiri Muslims, Hindu Pundits and other groups across the state, Omar Abdullah is unable to hear the voices of the masses and still insisting on implementation of Working Groups reports. It is interesting to note that while all other Working Groups presented their reports at the third roundtable conference in Delhi in April 2007, the fifth Working Group, headed by Justice Saghir Ahmed failed to submit its report in time. There was not a single meeting of this group since September 3, 2007. However out of the blue, the Group submitted report in the last week of December 2009, at the time when controversy over separate state status to Telegana is in full swing. There is no doubt that it was a golden opportunity for New Delhi to fool the Kashmiris once again.

The Kashmiris, irrespective of the fact that they are Muslims, Hindu Pundits or Sikhs, want to get rid of Indian occupational forces and New Delhi-sponsored dictators out from IHK. It is an open secret that they are not likely to compromise or agree to any deal less than complete independence from Indian Union. Kashmiris want to express their right of self-determination in the shape of free and impartial plebiscite. It is worth mentioning here that since partition in August 1947, thousands of Kashmiri Muslims were forced by India to migrate to different Pakistani cities and Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

The Indian government and its security forces also expelled the Hindu Pundits from their ancestral houses and orchards, presently under occupation of Indian Armed forces. Today, the forced-homeless Hindu Pundits are living in miserable condition in various refugee camps in India. It is quite depressing to note that the Indian government is not interested in providing an opportunity to Kashmiri Muslims and minorities to live with harmony.

The Working Committee Reports have authenticated presence of Indian armed forces by mere relocating the security personnel from agriculture lands to other locations.

Indian state-sponsored propaganda machinery is propagating that the recommendations of the Working Group regarding Article 370 is inconsistent with the spirit of the declarations made in the Constituent Assembly at the time of incorporation of the Article in the constitution and that these recommendations will reduce the minority communities of the Jammu and Kashmir State as second class citizens in their own home state.



The fact cannot be denied that Article 370 is illegitimate and is in clear violation to 3rd June Plan and United Nations Security Council Resolution. The recommendations in the report regarding the appointment of the Governor in IHK by the Centre would deprive Kashmiris of their democratic rights for ever and the state would be directly governed by Centre through representative of Indian Union. Kashmiri Muslim groups have strongly rejected the Working Committee reports and are not ready to become part of the Indian conspiracy once again. Hindu parties, including BJP, have rejected Justice Saghir Ahmed’s report and demanded its revocation. They have also demanded the Prime Minister’s intervention. BJP had announced launching of awareness campaign in entire Jammu region on January 4, 2010 and threatened that if there will be no response from the Centre over the report, mass agitation will be carried out. BJP is also demanding abrogation of Article 370 that gives special status to Jammu and Kashmir.

Panun Kashmir has also rejected the recommendations of the Working Group and termed them as a complete sell-out of the interests of the displaced Kashmiri Pundits, the people of Jammu and Ladakh. Panun Kashmir is of the view that the recommendations of the said report have the potential to take the State back to 1952-position and plunge the State in a constitutional and social crisis of an unprecedented dimension.

Panun Kashmir claimed that proposal regarding doing away with Article 356 of the constitution is dangerous manure since IHK is a frontline state. And in the event of an emergency, the Centre would not be able to invoke the provisions of Article 356 while people of the state would be left at the mercy of the situation. Jammu & Kashmir National Panthers Party (JKNPP) has called Justice Saghit Ahmed’s report as biased and is of the view that it deserves to be dumped into the dustbin without any further discussion. The Panthers Party Chairman appealed in person to the leadership of BJP, Congress, Jammu State Morcha, Left parties and other social groups, including Chamber of Commerce, Trade Unions, Bar

Associations, Sangarsh Samiti, students and youth organizations and all those who share our view on the fraudulent report of Justice Saghir Ahmed to put their collective efforts to teach central-State government a lesson forever. There is lot of opposition to Justice Saghir Ahmed’s report from every corner of IHK, irrespective of the fact that they are Kashmiri Muslims, Hindus or Sikhs. With the exception of National Conference (NC) and some symbolic Centre-backed parties, everyone is dagger drawn to the recommendations in the report. Generally speaking, it seems that the recommendations are in favour of Kashmiris, especially the Muslims, but there is a big conspiracy being hatched against every individual linked with Kashmiri freedom struggle. If we trace back the conspiracy, the Indian government at Centre and its Intelligence agencies through a systematic plot divided the people of IHK on ethnic and sectarian lines.

Hindu political groups in India exploited the situation to create situation that led to exodus of religious and ethnic minorities in IHK which in couple of months led to a very dangerous situation. New Delhi sponsored mass migration of Hindu Pundits and Sikhs and created such conditions in IHK that it became impossible for them to live in the state.

Indian security forces ruthlessly massacred Hindus and Sikhs so that mass exodus takes place and blame is levelled on the Muslims. According to Indian official figures, there were three lakh Kashmiri Pundits in IHK prior to 1990 Indian military operation against Kashmiris. In Jammu Valley there was mass migration and their number decreased to 9000 in 1990 which further came down to around 4000 in 2008-2009. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visited Jammu in April 2004 and ordered construction of 5,442 flats at three locations at Jagjiti near Nagrota, Muthi and Purkhoo. His second visit took place in May 2008. There are around 30 organisations/groups representing the Pundit community, many among them are playing in the hands of Indian and foreign intelligence agencies.

The increase in activities of Mossad, MI5 and MI6 as well as CIA in IHK has even alarmed Indian agencies. There is a plan to move as many Hindus in IHK, especially in Jammu as possible.


The Indian government has made an open offer that those who have sold their properties in IHK prior to 1997 and do not possess any house there are entitled to reimbursement of same amount as cash assistance for construction of houses or collective housing societies. Those who would avail this offer would also be given other incentives including 6000 jobs for unemployed migrant of which half the jobs would be the responsibility of Central Government. Similarly Indian intelligence agencies and their agents have penetrated inside Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJ&K) and have arranged migration of a number of Kashmiris, especially refugees from IHK, on attractive incentives including cash to each family member and job security. One wonders, how long Indian government would suppress the voices of Kashmiris.


The acceptance of offer by some of the helpless Kashmiris is projected as great triumph, forgetting that it has been achieved on bayonet of the gun and blackmailing tactics. It seems that the International Organisations (IO) such as United Nations Organisation (UNO) and Non Governmental Organisations (NGO) have sold their conscience and are mere spectators waiting for the annihilation of all those who are fighting for their rights.


Betrayal of Kashmiris, once again

 

[Dance]

Another ignorant post about Bhagath singh..
I guess the question has been answered in another thread before whether to call him terrorist or not.

Ignorant people can call him "Indian" freedom fighter, but people with a little brain knew he never targetted civilians and fought for the whole subcontinent.

Also a little information. he was born in banga in faisalabad district of Pakistan.

There was no Pakistan at the time was there? So he's an indian freedom fighter. He did fight for the subcontinent but he wasn't a PAKISTANI freedom fighter. We have our own and you guys have yours I dont why you're making a big deal out of this.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Its simple......did the muslims force the majority of hindus to accept islam during there rule?.....that was question i was trying to ask before all you indian started jumping to own conclusions that i wanted somehow the take over of india by "islamic" forces.

The real problem is it that the logic of my argument that if the muslims where that bad as you guys make out and where forcing everybody to convert to islam there would be no hindus left is a simple argument that you cant counter act a have to resort "his a bigot line".

There you go again like a jumping to own conclusions.....and i bet you think that all muslims should be killed or forced into being hindus.

Your lack of comprehension is not afterall linked to your bigotry then! I did exactly called your stupid argument for what it is, an apologetic argument to divert attention from the plight of the hindu kashmiri pundits at the hands of bigoted terrorists. The hindu pundits are still hindu even after being kicked out of their homes by your heroes, and they are still hindu even after aurangzeb and his goons persecuted them and forced them to convert. just because some of them resisted the persecution and suffered and did not give in, does not mean they were NOT persecuted.

Your simplistic argument will go down very well with simplistic brainwashed minds who look at things from a religious angle only, but that so called logic proves nothing, however the court documents left behind by aurangzeb and some other (of course not all) muslim rulers clearly shows what really happened.

You can talk whatever rubbish you want abt me and what i think abt muslims, but my posts and views are clear enough on tolerance and co existence, something the hindu pundits of kashmir are denied by the bigoted heroes of hell. Shame on them and their dehumanlised religious supporters.

 

[jbond197]

@Jana's post (Betrayal of Kashmiris, once again)
Wow!! what an eye opening conspiracy theory. You know what IA is killing innocent hindus,sikhs and all every where in India so that they can build vacation homes for their family every where.

I can not believe the standard of journalism can go so low anywhere.
*FacePalm*

 

[dabong1]

I see you fail to mention post no 9

These Pundits will never be able to go home. Its better they move to India's mainland and start a new life there rather than trying to go to a place where they are not wanted.

Dabong:Have to disagree.......the pandits are our brothers and have just as much right as muslim-buddhist-sikh kashmiris to live in there own land.

Your lack of comprehension is not afterall linked to your bigotry then! I did exactly called your stupid argument for what it is, an apologetic argument to divert attention from the plight of the hindu kashmiri pundits at the hands of bigoted terrorists. The hindu pundits are still hindu even after being kicked out of their homes by your heroes, and they are still hindu even after aurangzeb and his goons persecuted them and forced them to convert. just because some of them resisted the persecution and suffered and did not give in, does not mean they were NOT persecuted.

Your simplistic argument will go down very well with simplistic brainwashed minds who look at things from a religious angle only, but that so called logic proves nothing, however the court documents left behind by aurangzeb and some other (of course not all) muslim rulers clearly shows what really happened..

historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims,(This historian must also be making stupid arguments) despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years. Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-Hindu by reasoning that if the latter were truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he appoint a Hindu as his military commander-in-chief? Surely, he could have afforded to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position. Banerjee further stated: "No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions." During Aurangzeb's long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals in Aurangzeb's administration, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus. Other notable Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. One wonders if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him and removed him from his throne?

Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had fourteen Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high officials in his court. (Ref: Mughal Government) But this fact is somewhat less known.

Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu Temples.
Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as Temple sites and support thereof in Benares, Kashmir and elsewhere. The official documentations for these land grants are still extant."

A stone inscription in the historic Balaji or Vishnu Temple, located north of Chitrakut Balaghat, still shows that it was commissioned by the Emperor himself. The proof of Aurangzeb's land grant for famous Hindu religious sites in Kasi, Varanasi can easily be verified from the deed records extant at those sites. The same textbook reads: "During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious activities." (p. 138) Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of Aurangzeb's fifty year reign and observed that every one was free to serve and worship God in his own way.

You can talk whatever rubbish you want abt me and what i think abt muslims, but my posts and views are clear enough on tolerance and co existence, something the hindu pundits of kashmir are denied by the bigoted heroes of hell. Shame on them and their dehumanlised religious supporters.

I hope they also build a load of house for the muslim refugees.

 

[dabong1]

@Jana's post (Betrayal of Kashmiris, once again)
Wow!! what an eye opening conspiracy theory. You know what IA is killing innocent hindus,sikhs and all every where in India so that they can build vacation homes for their family every where.

I can not believe the standard of journalism can go so low anywhere.
*FacePalm*

In March 2000 just before Bill Clinton was due to visit India, 38 Sikhs were massacred in the Indian part of Kashmir. The government blamed Muslim militants but it seems Clinton knew what really happened. wrote a different account his in Madeleine Albright’s book .

The former U.S. President Bill Clinton has emphasized that Hindu militants were responsible for the massacre of 38 Sikhs at Chatisinghpora in occupied Kashmir in March 2000, a KMS report says.
He pointed out, “During my visit to India in 2000, some Hindu militants decided to vent their outrage by murdering 38 Sikhs in cold blood. If I hadn’t made the trip, the victims would probably still be alive. If I hadn’t made the trip, I couldn’t have done my job as president of the United States”.

The book was later edited out after an Indian blog pointed out that actually Lashkar-e-Taiyba was behind the massacre according to the indians.

But an investigation by India’s Outlook Magazine (registration req). found that not everything was clear-cut as the army made out.

Security forces operating in the Kashmir Valley are familiar with the term ‘white terrorism’. For the average Kashmiri, it is a form of state-sponsored action with the tacit approval of the authorities to ensure that “the right message goes out”. The skewed idea is to keep the local population terrorised so that they do not extend any help to militants.
Was the killing of five civilians in the early hours of March 25, 2000, by the army following the Chitsinghpura Sikh massacre a case of white terrorism? The chargesheet filed by the CBI, after three years of investigation, raises serious questions about the army’s role and the shocking cover-up. The sordid tale in a nutshell is that on the eve of President Bill Clinton’s visit, militants struck at Chitsinghpura on May 20, killing 36 Sikhs. Five days later, the army responded by gunning down five villagers in Pathribal, Anantnag district, and passing them off as the militants responsible for the May 20 attack.
The CBI chargesheet, accessed by Outlook, exposes the institutional efforts of the army to cover up the incident and to protect the guilty. A series of letters and documents annexed to the chargesheet show that at every stage army headquarters and its lower formations refused to cooperate with the CBI. The army top brass tried to shield the officers involved from being prosecuted by a civilian agency. But what has also angered many is the fact that the army chose to promote all the accused even while the investigation was on.

All five were disfigured beyond recognition and after several false starts, including reports of samples being tampered with, it was finally established that they were local villagers.

Sick sick sick. State terrorism is alive and well.

 

[jbond197]

^^^^
Another BS propaganda being taught to your likes..

Even Bill Clinton even retraced his statment after learning the fact the millitants dressed up in IA uniforms to that shameful act. That was cowardly act by millitants to get attention of visiting US president and to show IA in poor light nothing more.

Rest of your post is pure BS... if BS articles, posts keeps you and few others happy then we can't help.. Carry on with it...

 

[notsuperstitious]

I see you fail to mention post no 9


Dabong:Have to disagree.......the pandits are our brothers and have just as much right as muslim-buddhist-sikh kashmiris to live in there own land.




historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims,(This historian must also be making stupid arguments) despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years. Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-Hindu by reasoning that if the latter were truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he appoint a Hindu as his military commander-in-chief? Surely, he could have afforded to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position. Banerjee further stated: "No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions." During Aurangzeb's long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals in Aurangzeb's administration, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus. Other notable Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. One wonders if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him and removed him from his throne?

Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had fourteen Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high officials in his court. (Ref: Mughal Government) But this fact is somewhat less known.

Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu Temples.
Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as Temple sites and support thereof in Benares, Kashmir and elsewhere. The official documentations for these land grants are still extant."

A stone inscription in the historic Balaji or Vishnu Temple, located north of Chitrakut Balaghat, still shows that it was commissioned by the Emperor himself. The proof of Aurangzeb's land grant for famous Hindu religious sites in Kasi, Varanasi can easily be verified from the deed records extant at those sites. The same textbook reads: "During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious activities." (p. 138) Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of Aurangzeb's fifty year reign and observed that every one was free to serve and worship God in his own way.

The same cherry picked idiotic argument, as there are hindus left in india, that means they were not persecuted, as there are temples left in india, none were destroyed!

Using logic to deny Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom, to overlook the court documents, to deny history of somnath and nalanda is exactly what an apologist would do, use 'logic'.

Hey there are millions of muslims in kashmir even after 60 yrs of indian rule, thats proof enough that our rule is very tolerant compared to the now de hinduised valley of kashmir thanks to your well trained heroes! There, suck on your own 'logic'

 

[matti]

First Only representative of Kashmir's have the right to say that Kashmir wants freedom. It cannot be India saying they do not or Pakistani saying they want.

So far the first struggle is do we have a clear representative of Kashmir who can say majority want's freedom?

Once that is done then anyone fighting for freedom can be termed as freedom fighter.

The UN resolution that people talk about does not have any representation from Kashmir and only has India and Pakistan representation, so that cannot be used to say Kashmir want's freedom as it is not their voice period.

So if you them want's to call a Kashmiri fighting in Kashmir as Freedom fighter, then even people in Baluchistan can be called freedom fighter.

so you are saying we need to have referendum to find out if the majority of Kashmirs want freedom or not but at the same time you are you are saying we cant do that because Kashmir had no representation in UN?????
?

 

[Solomon2]

I hope Kashmiris get their referendum. Question is, how will Pakistan react if Kashmiris choose independence rather than union with either India or Pakistan? The GoP didn't like it when Pakistan sent infiltrators into Kashmir back in 1965 and the Kashmiris rejected them and called upon the India to kick them out; open war with India ensued. Does anybody want to see a repeat, on an even larger and deadlier scale?

 

[Dance]

I hope Kashmiris get their referendum. Question is, how will Pakistan react if Kashmiris choose independence rather than union with either India or Pakistan? The GoP didn't like it when Pakistan sent infiltrators into Kashmir back in 1965 and the Kashmiris rejected them and called upon the India to kick them out; open war with India ensued. Does anybody want to see a repeat, on an even larger and deadlier scale?

Pakistanis will be fine with it, thats why we're saying have a referendum. It's only the indians who seem to be having all types of problems. Because even a independent Kashmir will be pro-Pakistan, so it works out either way.