Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
You think? I seem to think that a rather different wind is blowing in quite a different direction.
Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable
- Thread starter HAIDER
- Start date
You think? I seem to think that a rather different wind is blowing in quite a different direction.
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
Secessionist leaders exchange blows
Praveen Swami
Meeting called to discuss future of Kashmir Islamist mobilisation ends in chaos
SRINGAR: A meeting of secessionist groups, called to discuss the future of what has been characterised as the largest Islamist mobilisation since 1990, dissolved into chaos after members of rival factions exchanged insults and blows.
Leaders of the Ali Shah Geelani-led Tehreek-i-Hurriyat and Srinagar cleric Mirwaiz Umar Farooqs All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) charged each other with engaging in actions damaging the course of the ongoing movement, provoking their supporters to engage in scuffles.
Sources present at the meeting said APHC leader G.M. Hubbi was physically attacked by his Tehreek-i-Hurriyat counterpart Masrat Alam, and several important leaders, including Mr. Geelani and the APHC-affiliated Shabbir Shah, left the meeting in disgust.
Both groups had said earlier that they would organise a joint protest at Srinagars Idgah on Friday, where the future course of the agitation was to be made public.
It is now unclear if the two groups will be able to announce a shared programme of agitation, and, indeed, if their fragile alliance will survive Wednesdays clashes.
Kashmirs Mufti-e-Azam (chief cleric), had earlier denounced Mr. Geelanis call for all Srinagar residents to offer Friday prayers only at the Idgah, saying it was repugnant to Islamic practice.
Simmering tensions
Tensions between the secessionist leaders have been building up since Monday when Mr. Geelani asked tens of thousands of people who assembled at a protest rally to endorse him as the leader of the secessionist movement.
Mr. Geelani also made clear his belief that the movement was for the cause of Islam, and Jammu and Kashmirs incorporation in to Pakistanassertions that incensed rival secessionist leaders such as the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Fronts Yasin Malik.
Mr. Geelani later apologised for any offence his remarksbut did not withdraw his claim to be the principal leader of the movement.
Within the APHC, too, tensions have been high ever since Mirwaiz Umar Farooq agreed to unite with the Tehreek-i-Hurriyat in June.
The Mirwaiz and Mr. Geelani agreed to join hands just as protests against the grant of land-use rights to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board was picking up. Both leaders agreed to a three-point formula for joint action, in a declaration that appeared to meet Mr. Geelanis long-standing demand that the APHC not engage in direct talks with the Government of India.
Senior APHC leaders like Bilal Gani Lone and Abdul Gani Bhat were highly critical of the unification plan, complaining that they were not consulted.
From the outset, Mr. Geelani defined the agenda of the alliance, relegating the APHC to the role of junior partner. Even the alliances first joint rally, a June 20 gathering held to protest against the sale of liquor, gambling and drug abuse, was led by Mr. Geelani.
Mr. Geelani also alarmed centrists in the APHC by characterising their joint movement as a struggle for the defence of Islam, rather than a political movement.
Religious aggression
For example, at the June 20 rally, Mr. Geelani decried the grant of land-use rights to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board as part of Indias cultural and religious aggression. He said India wished to force Kashmiris to backtrack from the gift of Islam given to us by Mir Syed Ali Hamdani 650 years ago.
Mr. Geelani also claimed that universities and educational institutions are being used as platforms for spreading Shaivism, Kashmiriyat and degraded Sufism. Vice Chancellors of these universities are trained by intelligence agencies to percolate imperial and lethal occupational designs.
The Hindu : Front Page : Secessionist leaders exchange blows
Praveen Swami
Meeting called to discuss future of Kashmir Islamist mobilisation ends in chaos
SRINGAR: A meeting of secessionist groups, called to discuss the future of what has been characterised as the largest Islamist mobilisation since 1990, dissolved into chaos after members of rival factions exchanged insults and blows.
Leaders of the Ali Shah Geelani-led Tehreek-i-Hurriyat and Srinagar cleric Mirwaiz Umar Farooqs All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) charged each other with engaging in actions damaging the course of the ongoing movement, provoking their supporters to engage in scuffles.
Sources present at the meeting said APHC leader G.M. Hubbi was physically attacked by his Tehreek-i-Hurriyat counterpart Masrat Alam, and several important leaders, including Mr. Geelani and the APHC-affiliated Shabbir Shah, left the meeting in disgust.
Both groups had said earlier that they would organise a joint protest at Srinagars Idgah on Friday, where the future course of the agitation was to be made public.
It is now unclear if the two groups will be able to announce a shared programme of agitation, and, indeed, if their fragile alliance will survive Wednesdays clashes.
Kashmirs Mufti-e-Azam (chief cleric), had earlier denounced Mr. Geelanis call for all Srinagar residents to offer Friday prayers only at the Idgah, saying it was repugnant to Islamic practice.
Simmering tensions
Tensions between the secessionist leaders have been building up since Monday when Mr. Geelani asked tens of thousands of people who assembled at a protest rally to endorse him as the leader of the secessionist movement.
Mr. Geelani also made clear his belief that the movement was for the cause of Islam, and Jammu and Kashmirs incorporation in to Pakistanassertions that incensed rival secessionist leaders such as the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Fronts Yasin Malik.
Mr. Geelani later apologised for any offence his remarksbut did not withdraw his claim to be the principal leader of the movement.
Within the APHC, too, tensions have been high ever since Mirwaiz Umar Farooq agreed to unite with the Tehreek-i-Hurriyat in June.
The Mirwaiz and Mr. Geelani agreed to join hands just as protests against the grant of land-use rights to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board was picking up. Both leaders agreed to a three-point formula for joint action, in a declaration that appeared to meet Mr. Geelanis long-standing demand that the APHC not engage in direct talks with the Government of India.
Senior APHC leaders like Bilal Gani Lone and Abdul Gani Bhat were highly critical of the unification plan, complaining that they were not consulted.
From the outset, Mr. Geelani defined the agenda of the alliance, relegating the APHC to the role of junior partner. Even the alliances first joint rally, a June 20 gathering held to protest against the sale of liquor, gambling and drug abuse, was led by Mr. Geelani.
Mr. Geelani also alarmed centrists in the APHC by characterising their joint movement as a struggle for the defence of Islam, rather than a political movement.
Religious aggression
For example, at the June 20 rally, Mr. Geelani decried the grant of land-use rights to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board as part of Indias cultural and religious aggression. He said India wished to force Kashmiris to backtrack from the gift of Islam given to us by Mir Syed Ali Hamdani 650 years ago.
Mr. Geelani also claimed that universities and educational institutions are being used as platforms for spreading Shaivism, Kashmiriyat and degraded Sufism. Vice Chancellors of these universities are trained by intelligence agencies to percolate imperial and lethal occupational designs.
The Hindu : Front Page : Secessionist leaders exchange blows
vish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 10, 2008
- Messages
- 867
- Reaction score
- 0
Dude, he's a politician... never take his word for granted.
Let me tell you which way the wind is blowing...
1 billion Indians no longer feel that Article 370 is necessary... go figure...
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
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
vish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 10, 2008
- Messages
- 867
- Reaction score
- 0
This is what I have been trying to say...
Its no longer about Kashmir... its about how 1 billion Indians feel about their country...
indianexpress.com
As an ‘argumentative Indian’ it pleases me when someone starts an argument with me. It pleases me even more when the challenger is a respected intellectual with more years of journalistic experience than little old me. So I was flattered that Prem Shankar Jha should consider it worthwhile to write a long, thoughtful piece in this newspaper last week to disagree with what I said on the current situation in Kashmir. What I said in this space was that it was disturbing not to hear Kashmir’s supposedly moderate leaders speak in a moderate voice at a time when sensible voices were so badly needed.
Mr Jha accused me of being “both simplistic and unjust”. In his critique of my piece he gave a lengthy account of the history of the Amarnath Yatra but ended up half agreeing with me: “Ms Singh is right when she says that (Yasin) Malik, the Mirwaiz, Geelani and even Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti fanned the agitation by joining it. But had they not done so they would have written their own epitaphs in Kashmiri politics.”
My answer is they should have. Kashmir needs leaders not politicians in its present crisis. If all that the ‘moderates’ can give us is politics and political expediency it would be better if they wrote their epitaphs quickly.It would make it easier for us to deal with the secessionists and jihadis who should under Indian law be tried for treason. Ten years ago I wrote a book that blamed the Government of India squarely for denying Kashmiris their democratic rights, thereby driving them towards armed insurgency. I believe this gives me the right to say that this time the Kashmiris have no cause. No country could have dealt with a secessionist movement more gently than India has after those initial mistakes in the early nineties. The movement for azadi turned into Islamist terrorism and India did nothing. Kashmiri Hindus were ethnically cleansed from the Valley and India did nothing. Jihadis came across our borders and turned Kashmiri Islam into a Saudi facsimile and India did nothing.
This is why when something as absurd as the Amarnath land row should have brought thousands of Kashmiris into the streets carrying Pakistani flags and shouting jihadi slogans the reaction from Indians has been: get out. Enough is enough.
In Delhi’s liberal drawing rooms they put it diplomatically. We should have a referendum, they say, and if the Kashmiris want to go to Pakistan then it’s time to let them go because, poor dears, they have suffered so much for their azadi.
As a reporter who prefers to listen to what ordinary people say let me tell you what I hear when I put my ear to the ground. I hear people say that anyone who wants to go to Pakistan must be allowed to leave and never allowed back into Kashmir. I hear people say that they are not prepared to surrender another inch of Indian territory. If Kashmiri Muslims have a problem living with us let them emigrate to that Islamic country across the border. Whoever wants to go must be helped to go. But, there will be no more changing of India’s borders. The more belligerent say let the Kashmir Valley go to Pakistan but then there will be no room in India for Muslims.
What I also hear is huge support for the movement in Jammu. So when our political leaders and politically correct TV anchors equate the two agitations they make a serious mistake. The way ordinary Indians see it is that we have one set of protesters who carry Indian flags and are ready to die for Bharat Mata and they cannot be equated with those who openly state their allegiance to Pakistan.
It is no longer about the Amarnath Yatra. It is about whether the Indian state has the courage to defend India from breaking up. And, defend the values India stands for. We stand for democracy, secularism and fundamental human freedoms that include the freedom of worship. These are good values and we must defend them against those who would have us make compromises with religious fanatics and traitors.
Those who do not share our values have every right to leave and find a country more suited to their way of thinking and their beliefs. But, if they choose to stay in India they must abide by the values of this land.
In the name of ‘secularism’ Dr Manmohan Singh’s Government has made too many concessions to jihadis and other lowlifes. This is being seen as a sign of weakness by those who have no compunction about waving Pakistani flags on Indian soil. If this is a ‘simplistic and unjust’ assessment of the situation in Kashmir so be it.
Its no longer about Kashmir... its about how 1 billion Indians feel about their country...
indianexpress.com
As an ‘argumentative Indian’ it pleases me when someone starts an argument with me. It pleases me even more when the challenger is a respected intellectual with more years of journalistic experience than little old me. So I was flattered that Prem Shankar Jha should consider it worthwhile to write a long, thoughtful piece in this newspaper last week to disagree with what I said on the current situation in Kashmir. What I said in this space was that it was disturbing not to hear Kashmir’s supposedly moderate leaders speak in a moderate voice at a time when sensible voices were so badly needed.
Mr Jha accused me of being “both simplistic and unjust”. In his critique of my piece he gave a lengthy account of the history of the Amarnath Yatra but ended up half agreeing with me: “Ms Singh is right when she says that (Yasin) Malik, the Mirwaiz, Geelani and even Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti fanned the agitation by joining it. But had they not done so they would have written their own epitaphs in Kashmiri politics.”
My answer is they should have. Kashmir needs leaders not politicians in its present crisis. If all that the ‘moderates’ can give us is politics and political expediency it would be better if they wrote their epitaphs quickly.It would make it easier for us to deal with the secessionists and jihadis who should under Indian law be tried for treason. Ten years ago I wrote a book that blamed the Government of India squarely for denying Kashmiris their democratic rights, thereby driving them towards armed insurgency. I believe this gives me the right to say that this time the Kashmiris have no cause. No country could have dealt with a secessionist movement more gently than India has after those initial mistakes in the early nineties. The movement for azadi turned into Islamist terrorism and India did nothing. Kashmiri Hindus were ethnically cleansed from the Valley and India did nothing. Jihadis came across our borders and turned Kashmiri Islam into a Saudi facsimile and India did nothing.
This is why when something as absurd as the Amarnath land row should have brought thousands of Kashmiris into the streets carrying Pakistani flags and shouting jihadi slogans the reaction from Indians has been: get out. Enough is enough.
In Delhi’s liberal drawing rooms they put it diplomatically. We should have a referendum, they say, and if the Kashmiris want to go to Pakistan then it’s time to let them go because, poor dears, they have suffered so much for their azadi.
As a reporter who prefers to listen to what ordinary people say let me tell you what I hear when I put my ear to the ground. I hear people say that anyone who wants to go to Pakistan must be allowed to leave and never allowed back into Kashmir. I hear people say that they are not prepared to surrender another inch of Indian territory. If Kashmiri Muslims have a problem living with us let them emigrate to that Islamic country across the border. Whoever wants to go must be helped to go. But, there will be no more changing of India’s borders. The more belligerent say let the Kashmir Valley go to Pakistan but then there will be no room in India for Muslims.
What I also hear is huge support for the movement in Jammu. So when our political leaders and politically correct TV anchors equate the two agitations they make a serious mistake. The way ordinary Indians see it is that we have one set of protesters who carry Indian flags and are ready to die for Bharat Mata and they cannot be equated with those who openly state their allegiance to Pakistan.
It is no longer about the Amarnath Yatra. It is about whether the Indian state has the courage to defend India from breaking up. And, defend the values India stands for. We stand for democracy, secularism and fundamental human freedoms that include the freedom of worship. These are good values and we must defend them against those who would have us make compromises with religious fanatics and traitors.
Those who do not share our values have every right to leave and find a country more suited to their way of thinking and their beliefs. But, if they choose to stay in India they must abide by the values of this land.
In the name of ‘secularism’ Dr Manmohan Singh’s Government has made too many concessions to jihadis and other lowlifes. This is being seen as a sign of weakness by those who have no compunction about waving Pakistani flags on Indian soil. If this is a ‘simplistic and unjust’ assessment of the situation in Kashmir so be it.
Last edited:
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
We must win the war against the strain of Islamic thought which says that its impossible to live with non-muslims.
The movement in Kashmir is based on this principle.
The modern world has moved beyond religion as the sole identity of a people. We must not let ourselves get fooled by the last shrieks of medieval thought.
The movement in Kashmir is based on this principle.
The modern world has moved beyond religion as the sole identity of a people. We must not let ourselves get fooled by the last shrieks of medieval thought.
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh please. Stop your nonsense. It's nothing to do with Islam. Kashmir is all to do with Kashmiris being forced to join with India, many of whom did not want to do so in the first place.
IF it were about Islam, most of the secessionists would be radicals, then you have nothing to fear in holding a plebscite since the secessionists (who you claim to be a minority and foreign), will be outvoted in their droves by the numerous Indian loving Kashmiris. Right?
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
Why don't you stop wish-thinking?
The people chanting Islamic slogans, the leaders demanding freedom for Islam.....the undercurrent of Islamic extremism which threatens to break the surface...how long will you continue to close your eyes to it?
vish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 10, 2008
- Messages
- 867
- Reaction score
- 0
Wrong... the Valley has been Islamisized... Did you not read what Geelani (currently the biggest cheer-leader in the region) had to say?
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
Someone seems upset
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
The Kashmir Valley was 95% Islamic in 1947, and it's now 94% Islamic. So it hasn't been Islamized in the slightest.
Keysersoze
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 4,858
- Reaction score
- 2
vish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 10, 2008
- Messages
- 867
- Reaction score
- 0
Islamisation here implies the enshrining of the xenophobic "we cannot survive in a non-Muslim majority establishment" feeling within the population... which by the way is a product of your own poking.
The local Kashmiri Islam or Kashmiriyat has been replaced with the pan/radical/Wahabi Islam.
dr.umer
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,460
- Reaction score
- 0
He realised he has a small penis and that modern science science can't help him
Very rightly said Sir
