What's new

Kashmiri Pundit : What was done to them by Kashmiri Muslims

So what if I tell you that innocent where killed by Bomb blasts and terrorist attack in name of freedom fight. Should I call Mumbai attack, Mumbai local train blasts, etc. a freedom fight ?

Whenever civilians are deliberately targeted, it is terrorism. No one has ever denied that Mumbai attack was a terrorist attack, no matter what the attackers called it or how they justified it.

BTW how can you accuse IA for religious biasedness ?

I am not accusing the army of religious bias but, since the 'enemy' in this case were (Kashmiri) Muslims, the brunt of the army's excesses were borne by those Muslims.
 
.
Since that propaganda site tells the story of 20th century history so lopsidedly, it's hard to fully trust the details of any of the earlier claims. This is not to deny that persecution happened, but the site itself shows that the episodes of persecution were directly tied to specific rulers, not the community as a whole.

In any case, what we are discussing here are the events of the late 20th century and their context.

In case you rubbish the persecution of Pandits as propaganda why bother when Indians reubbish the alleged Kashmiri muslim persecution by the Indian army as propaganda ?

And the events of the late 20th century are directly related to the events preceding them because your initial claim was The two communities had been co-existing peacefully for centuries, even through the 1947 partition. Now, all of a sudden, the mistrust mushroomed and violence happened. So, what changed?.

No they were not "peacefully co-existing for centuries". The persecution of Pandits started as soon as Islam entered the valley.

Also, there is no confusion between terrorism and freedom fighting. Targeting civilians is terrorism, no matter who does it, even an army. Targeting an army is not terrorism, again no matter who does it.

Indian Army was targeting the well armed, cross-border trained Mujaheddin who were fighting for secession and hence it was upholding the writ of the state, its lawful & constitutional duty.

And moreover freedom fighting is when the natives fight - not Oakistani punjabis, afghans, arabss, chechens etc. It is called jehadi terrorism.
 
.
In case you rubbish the persecution of Pandits as propaganda

I am not rubbishing the persecution, merely the simplistic narrative presented by that site. The way it describes the 20th century conflict one-sidedly is nothing short of propaganda.

No they were not "peacefully co-existing for centuries". The persecution of Pandits started as soon as Islam entered the valley.

Once again, even by that site, the episodes of persecution were tied to specific rulers during specific time periods. It was not as if the whole communities were constantly at loggerheads throughout their mutual existence.

Indian Army was targeting the well armed, cross-border trained Mujaheddin who were fighting for secession and hence it was upholding the writ of the state, its lawful & constitutional duty.

And moreover freedom fighting is when the natives fight - not Oakistani punjabis, afghans, arabss, chechens etc. It is called jehadi terrorism.

You are just repeating the official Indian propaganda, discounting the local movements, so there's no point responding.
 
.
Whenever civilians are deliberately targeted, it is terrorism. No one has ever denied that Mumbai attack was a terrorist attack, no matter what the attackers called it or how they justified it.
I am not accusing the army of religious bias but, since the 'enemy' in this case were (Kashmiri) Muslims, the brunt of the army's excesses were borne by those Muslims.

Yeah same army which also protects 150 million Muslims. Why is that PA don't kill Baloch and IA kills Muslims according to you ?
 
.
I am not rubbishing the persecution, merely the simplistic narrative presented by that site. The way it describes the 20th century conflict one-sidedly is nothing short of propaganda.

Just because it does not fit in with "oh-poor-kashmiri-muslims-persecuted-by-India" theory they preach in Pakistan, does not mean it is propaganda. It is what the Pandits have faced for centuries at the hands of these people and it was just history repeating itself.


Once again, even by that site, the episodes of persecution were tied to specific rulers during specific time periods. It was not as if the whole communities were constantly at loggerheads throughout their mutual existence.

Still it busts the claim that they were peaceful throughout the centuries and lived in mutual dignity. What existed was intermittent period pf brutal repression and the consequent peace of the graveyard where they lived "peacefully" as second class citizens. It means just because they were not physically at logger-heads with each other for most of the time, they automatically lived in dignity and honor.


You are just repeating the official Indian propaganda, discounting the local movements, so there's no point responding.

And you the Pakistani/Islami propaganda of denying anything bad happened to the Pandits. Infact I have seen paks claiming that the Pandits migrated for economic reasons. That is how strong the propaganda is on the Pak side.
 
.
Yeah same army which also protects 150 million Muslims. Why is that PA don't kill Baloch and IA kills Muslims according to you ?

Once again, you run off into irrelevancies. The issue is the conduct of Indian Army in Kashmir, not around the world or around India.

If there were a huge separatist movement in, say, Tamil Nadu and the army were deployed, it is inevitable that human rights abuses would occur. Then the army would be guilty of abuses against those people, including Hindus. It wouldn't matter one whit what the army did elsewhere.

Just because it does not fit in with "oh-poor-kashmiri-muslims-persecuted-by-India" theory they preach in Pakistan, does not mean it is propaganda. It is what the Pandits have faced for centuries at the hands of these people and it was just history repeating itself.

Once again you, and the authors of the site, miss the point that the treatment of Kashmiri Pandits did not occur in a vacuum. It was in the context of a war, where all sides were being victimized. You want to focus on just one aspect, while we are highlighting the broader picture.

Still it busts the claim that they were peaceful throughout the centuries and lived in mutual dignity. What existed was intermittent period pf brutal repression and the consequent peace of the graveyard where they lived "peacefully" as second class citizens. It means just because they were not physically at logger-heads with each other for most of the time, they automatically lived in dignity and honor.

You can continue to project whatever exaggerations you wish to suit your narrative. I am saying that, even by that site's own
account, the episodes of persecution were confined to specific rulers.

And you the Pakistani/Islami propaganda of denying anything bad happened to the Pandits. Infact I have seen paks claiming that the Pandits migrated for economic reasons. That is how strong the propaganda is on the Pak side.

Irrelevant distraction. We are accepting that Pandits were mistreated.
 
.
Once again you, and the authors of the site, miss the point that the treatment of Kashmiri Pandits did not occur in a vacuum. It was in the context of a war, where all sides were being victimized. You want to focus on just one aspect, while we are highlighting the broader picture.

The war itself was on the Kashmiri Pandits by the Kashmiri muslims on account of their religion.

And no, until this round, the Kashmiri Muslims were not victimised. It was the Pandits who suffered religious persecution at the hands of the majority community in Kashmir.


You can continue to project whatever exaggerations you wish to suit your narrative. I am saying that, even by that site's own
account, the episodes of persecution were confined to specific rulers.

First of all the rulers were Kashmiri muslims themselves.

Second as I have already pointed out, what existed was intermittent period of brutal repression and the consequent peace of the graveyard where they lived "peacefully" as second class citizens. It means just because they were not physically at logger-heads with each other for most of the time, they automatically lived in dignity and honor.

Understand the bolded parts.

Irrelevant distraction. We are accepting that Pandits were mistreated...

.....at the hands of the Kashmiri Muslims, which incidentally happens to be the thread title.
 
.

Now you are going into pure, unadulterated propaganda with exaggerated, one-sided claims which ignore the larger context.

There's no point going in circles so I won't bother repeating myself.
 
.
Now you are going into pure, unadulterated propaganda with exaggerated, one-sided claims which ignore the larger context.

There's no point going in circles so I won't bother repeating myself.

The larger context is the persecution of the Kashmiri Pandits that has happened throughout the centuries which was ignored by the Pakistani posters who ignorantly claimed that the persecution in the 90s was somehow the innocent reaction to the alleged brutalities of the Indian Army.

it is your dear poster who is ignoring the larger context here, not me.
 
.
The larger context is the persecution of the Kashmiri Pandits that has happened throughout the centuries which was ignored by the Pakistani posters who ignorantly claimed that the persecution in the 90s was somehow the innocent reaction to the alleged brutalities of the Indian Army.

it is your dear poster who is ignoring the larger context here, not me.

This myth of continued persecution is your fabrication. As noted, even your propaganda site fails to substantiate your claim of ongoing systematic persecution. All it has are sporadic episodes which are no different than persecution of any group throughout history.

If the Kashmiri Muslims were intent on purging Kashmir of Pundits, why did they wait until the arrival of the Indian army? They didn't "finish the job" during all these centuries of Muslim rule but waited until 700,000 Indian army boots were pressing on their necks?
 
.
Pakistan should have sent it's forces into Junagarh at that time, when the Nawab ran away to Pakistan - you cannot put your failures on us.

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.



Majority Kashmiri's were with the Maharaja when he acceded because PA backed Mujahadeen and regular forces who infiltrated Kashmir in 47 started killing, looting and raping Kashmiri's.

You seem to be missing bits from your timetable of events.
The kashmirs wanted to join pakitsan and when the maharaja dithered there was a uprising by regiments in Gilgit.The maharaja got scared and called for indian help with the indian willing to help only if signs the Instrument of Accession.The indian invaded and thus pakistan countered.


You already made your choice - you are a Pakistani now - we are talking of Indian Kashmiri's here and you don't represent them.

Your are an indian and you represent only indians.......we are talking about kashmir and Kashmiri's here and you don't represent them..

We rigged election so Muslims will rape KPs. What an idiotic logic. Lalloo yadav (Messiah of Muslim) rigged election, did Hindus start raping Muslims daughter. Malpractice is part of democracy, 5 year later Public punish the cheater.

Bhutoo killed , your Kashmiri Muslim started raping KPs. Election rigged, your Muslims started raping Hindus. What a logic.. Such logic may hold value in Pakistan not India.

Don't bring Gujrat, if you don't know the truth. When you guys get out opf logic start bringing Gujrat, RamJanm Bhoomi etc. Soon you will start talking of CIA, FSA, MI4, RAW and 9/11. talk about KPs, why Muslims and Mulla radio threaten KPs??

Arundhati roy has much respect in India, don't bring her here. Some faction of society don't like her, but yet she has right to put her view. We Indian don't mark "Kaffir" those who disagree.

What are u talking man???? Indian Army were in Barrack or LoC, not in Vally, ask your father, He might tell you truth. Your Mulla teacher may not tell the truth. Yes During war to defend villages, Army do come to village.

Show me a single incident where KPs conspire against Mussalman..

Question remain unanswered, Why KPs were tortured, why Muslims running brothel in KPs houses,... Watch the video, once at least you should listen to other party as well..

BRAINWASHWED BY INDIAN MEDIA
 
.
Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

You seem to be missing bits from your timetable of events.
The kashmirs wanted to join pakitsan and when the maharaja dithered there was a uprising by regiments in Gilgit.The maharaja got scared and called for indian help with the indian willing to help only if signs the Instrument of Accession.The indian invaded and thus pakistan countered.

Your are an indian and you represent only indians.......we are talking about kashmir and Kashmiri's here and you don't represent them..

I represent Kashmiri pandits though and the other millions of non Muslims who are citizens of J and K, but you do not represent anybody not even the Kashmiri Muslims who overwhelmingly want nothing to do with Pakistan.

As to what they wanted - the Maharaja wanted a separate state so did the Kashmiri's - but there wasn't an option of an independent state - so might be the Kashmiri Muslim population have had a thought of joining another muslim state = but that's conjecture at the moment - but after the invasion from Pakistan they were overwhelmingly supporting the Maharaja on his decision.
 
.
Sanjay Tickoo remembers it well. It was a warm summer's day in 1990, when he found a poster pasted to the outside wall of his home in Srinagar, the capital of Indian-administered Kashmir. It was written in Urdu, which Sanjay could not read, so he took it to his grandfather and asked him to translate it.

"As he read it out to us, tears rolled down his cheeks ... it basically instructed our family to leave the valley or die," Tickoo tells me as we sit in a café at the foot of Jhelum River in Srinagar.

But, unlike the estimated 100,000 Hindus from the valley - known as Kashmiri Pandits - who embarked on a mass migration south to Jammu following the start of the insurgency against Indian rule in 1989, Tickoo's family refused to leave.

Instead, Tickoo, who was in his early twenties at the time, decided to take the threat to the local newspaper, where he paid for it to be placed as an advertisement in the classifieds section.

"It was published on the back page. I wish I still had a copy, but they published it as is," he recalls.

No sooner had it been published, than shocked Muslim neighbours and friends congregated at Tickoo's home, apologising for the misdeed and promising that his family faced no threat. They urged him not to leave.

The Hindu minority in Muslim majority Kashmir shrank from an estimated 140,000 in the late 1980s to 19,865 by 1998. Today, Tickoo says there are fewer than 3,400 Pandits in Kashmir. Others say the number is around 2,700.

But Tickoo, who now heads up the KPSS, an organisation that looks after the affairs of the Pandits who remain in Kashmir, says that the plight of the community is complex.

On the one hand, he says, the community did experience intimidation and violence, which culminated in four massacres in the past 20 years. But, on the other, he says, there was no genocide or mass murder as suggested by Pandit communities based outside Kashmir.

"Over the past 20 years, we estimate that 650 Pandits were killed in the valley," Tickoo says, adding: "The figures of 3,000 to 4,000 killings [as suggested by some Pandit organisations] is propaganda, which we reject."

"Not that 650 is a low number, because even one killing should be not ignored, but we must get the numbers right."

While Tickoo's organisation says that 399 Pandits were killed between 1999 and 2008, and 650 in total, this pales in comparison with those estimates that put the figure at 3,000, but exceeds the state's suggestion that 219 were killed between 1990 and 2008.

But collating the numbers, or even unravelling the language of migration and exodus, is part of the historical ambiguity that surrounds the Pandits' flight from the valley. And it has been made all the harder by the fact that Pandits outside Kashmir have dominated the narrative, while those inside have remained largely silent.

On the subject of how many Pandits fled Kashmir, Mridu Rai, a lecturer in Indian Studies at Trinity College, Dublin writes in Until My Freedom Has Come that the figure of 700,000 put forward by Panun Kashmir (Our own Kashmir), a group advocating a homeland for Kashmiri Pandits, "refers to a much larger collection of Pandits who had departed [from Kashmir] at different times over the centuries".

Rai adds that the language used by Pandits who left the valley - 'exodus' or 'in exile' - serves as "an indictment of the Indian state for not protecting them within their homeland and then for neglecting them outside it". These terms also, Rai contends, create a single narrative of victimhood, when, in fact, it is difficult to ascertain why individual Pandits left Kashmir.

While Tickoo dismisses claims that Pandits were 'ethnically cleansed', he says that relations between the two communities did sour when the insurgency began.


He says people left because they felt threatened.

"I am not saying that [Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims] were brothers in arms, living in each other's homes or something before 1989. Yes, there was an unmistakable tolerance and respect for each other ... violence was unheard of ... but it would be a lie to say something did not change when the trouble started."

From hateful slogans that blared from the loudspeakers of mosques to comments whispered on the streets, Tickoo says there was a sudden change in attitude towards Hindus. And these shifting sentiments were used by politicians on both sides, helping to stoke fear among the Hindu minority.

"Until today, we don't know who posted that threat on my wall," Tickoo says.

Surrounded in Myth

Fifty-one-year-old Motilal Bhat, the president of the Pandit Hindu Welfare Society, formed in the mid-1990s to rebuild relations between Pandits and Muslims, says the early 1990s was a time when myth-making prevailed.

"[Those who left] thought they would be gone for three or four months, and that they would return when things improved ... no one expected to stay there for years ... Kashmir had always been a peaceful state," explains the softly-spoken headmaster.

He rejects the figures presented by the KPSS and says most of the killings took place after the mass migration.

"I think the government's figures are correct," Bhat says. "I reject this figure of 650 [and] even the figure 399. This community was made up of small numbers by proportion and, yes, we had around 600,000 to 700,000 people, but maximum people left around 1990/1991 - and major killings took place after 1991."

He says both communities displayed a great deal of chauvinism.

"There was a strange perception at the time which saw the KPs [Kashmiri Pandits] thinking that no matter what they would be protected by the Indian army, while the KMs [Kashmiri Muslims] thought that if anything happened to them, the entire Muslim world would come to their rescue.

"As we have now seen, both were shown to be wrong," he adds matter-of-factly.


Bhat says that people soon realised - whatever their political persuasion or sympathies - that they were at the mercy of both the security forces and the separatists.

He contends that Kashmiri Muslims, who he says "regretted" the departure of the Pandits, were too slow to react.

"It was too late, and people had already left ... they should have come forward to the minority. It is the moral duty of the majority to look after the minority and include them ... if you are in a minority you face a psychological threat, a vulnerability."

He says the Pandits who stayed behind were sometimes treated with distrust.

"The question on everyone's mind at the time was: If all the Pandits have left, then why are you still here? [Consequently] both sides often saw us [Pandits] as informers. We suffered intimidation from both sides."

It is a sentiment Suman Vikash Bhat, a 33-year-old assistant professor of Microbiology at Islamic University of Science and Technology, situated at the foothills of a range of mountains some 28km outside Srinagar, shares.

He says that during the 1990s, when militancy was at its peak, it was common for the army to take out their frustrations when soldiers were killed on the civilian population, irrespective of religion. As a community, Kashmiri Pandits were not spared the indiscriminate crackdowns and violence meted out to Kashmiri Muslims.

"They would often respond by beating civilians and there was a lot of these crackdowns where people would be gathered ... for sure they would give us ordinary people a thrashing," Suman Bhat says.

"They used to sometimes pick people up ... both sides did so ... but there were also good and bad people on both sides."

Suman Bhat says he remembers the late 1980s and early 1990s vividly - the curfews, the crackdowns and, crucially, his Hindu relatives leaving.

"It was easy to feel insecure," he reminisces, "the newspapers at the time were full of stories of violence and as we watched the militancy or terrorism or whatever you want to call it increasing, [teamed] with the fact that people were being killed, it was only natural [that] the community became insecure."

But he says that his family's relations with Kashmiri Muslims made them feel confident that they were not under threat. "My father is a renowned teacher and his Muslim friends urged him not to leave."

When he moved to Pune in India to study in the late 1990s, however, he began to worry more about his family's safety.

"We would hear about violence in Kashmir on the television or in the papers and often I could not sleep until I got hold of my parents and found out that they were okay," he says.

Caught in the flood

So, why did some Pandits choose to stay?

Suman Bhat offers two reasons.

"We did not migrate because we were not financially well off and we thought that it would be difficult to survive in Jammu. My father had invested almost all his money in land and property here.

"The other reason is that my father's Muslim friends refused to let him leave; we were told that 'we will die, but we won't allow you to go'."


Even now that he is armed with a PhD from Bhaba Atomic Research Centre in Mumbai, one of India's premier science institutes, which could land him a top job in any city in the country, Bhat chooses to remain in the valley.

"I returned in 2010 to Kashmir to find that my father was ill; and I could have taken him to Mumbai for treatment, but he is a man of [the soil] and a man of principal. It would have been a punishment to take him away from Kashmir ... he loves Kashmir a lot, and so do I, and even I do not want to get away from this place."

But even those who remained behind have a story to tell, Motilal Bhat says.

"Everyone has a story to tell, everyone suffered ... the violence came like a flood ... and in a flood, everyone suffers."

His sister was killed in one of the three notable massacres targeting the Pandit community. The first, in Sangrampora in 1997, resulted in the deaths of seven Pandits, then in 1998, 18 were killed in Wandhama, and in 2001, five people were killed in Anantnag, including Motilal Bhat's younger sister.

One evening, unidentified gunmen - local parlance for killings no one takes responsibility for - came into his sister's home in the southern district of Anantnag, ransacked the house and shot indiscriminately. A bullet hit his sister's heart and "she died on the spot ... three other Sikh girls were killed in the incident".

He says the loss of his sister hurt him deeply and he cursed himself for staying in Kashmir. "But finally I thought it was destiny and we have to continue working for a better future."

Return to Kashmir

Unlike Tickoo, Motilal Bhat and Suman Bhat, Poshkaranth Ganju, 65, from the Baramullah district in northern Kashmir, moved to Jammu in late 1990. He decided to leave after his brother was shot.

"[The] bullet brushed his neck and he survived but we left for Jammu, because of the chaos here .... We Pandits are a peace loving people and we thought it was best to preserve our life," he says.

But Ganju's family, who had run a textile business in Baramullah for three generations, found it difficult to adjust to Jammu's climate or to maintain the same standard of living they had grown accustomed to in the valley.

So, along with 20 other families, they returned in 1996 - six years after leaving.

On their return, the family found their house burned down, but their shop and its contents untouched. They also discovered that their neighbours were willing to pay 1996 prices for moth eaten textiles that had been lying in their shop since they fled in 1990.

"We came back to conduct business, and the Muslim welcome convinced us that we were safe here ... though there was a grenade attack outside the shop shortly after our return. We found out later that this was from a rival business competitor and had nothing to do with us being Pandits."

Ganju says that back then there was little government support for those who wanted to return and that even the community in Jammu voiced opposition.

"Families in Jammu told us not to come, but we told them that our Muslim brothers had welcomed us to come and so we felt confident to return, and so we thought that if the business would run smoothly, we'd stay, else we would return [to Jammu]," he says, adding: "Most of the families in Jammu still imagined Kashmir as if it was still the lawlessness of 1990."

But Tickoo says that Ganju's story is a unique one because living in a temple complex in Baramullah offered the family state protection. "Pandits in the villages did not receive special security from the state, remember that," he says.

Motilal Bhat says that in the early 1990s those who remained were vilified by those who had left - they "felt betrayed by the families who stayed behind" as if their continued presence in the valley undermined the experiences of those who had fled to difficult conditions in Jammu.

"Why people remained when [there was] so much pain and in spite of [the fact that] many left is a difficult question to answer," Tickoo says with a faint smile.

"Some will tell you that they could not afford moving to start a new life, others will tell you they are of the soil, that this is their motherland and they refuse to leave, and perhaps others will say something else ... but does this then mean that Kashmir meant anything less for those who left?" Tickoo asks rhetorically.

"Does it mean they feel no connection or their roots are not here? We are perhaps unable to answer why we are here ... we are just here," he concludes.

Motilal Bhat explains: "For those of us who remained ... we thought we'd watch events play out and then take it on a week to week basis. But these became months and then years."

Ostracised

But it was not easy, says Maharaj Krishan Pandita, who is in his sixties.

Two of the government telecommunications officer's cousins were killed in the violence and his brother was shot (but survived) during the 1997 massacre in Sangrampora. He says he witnessed the direct intervention of the state through forced removals under the guise of a 'security threat'.

"People were forced to move from their village and farmers who had to move suffered greatly after the massacre, but since I had a job in Srinagar and my family could move with me [there], it was manageable for us, but not for others.

"The one good thing I can commend the armed forces [for] was that in this case, they didn't move people to Jammu, they just moved people to another locality in the same district ... but we did lose everything."

Monica Pandita, 22, one of Maharaj Pandita's daughters, says she vaguely recalls the events of 1997, when her mother and sisters had to move from the village to Srinagar after the massacre in their district, but rarely thinks about it.

"All I remember is moving to my new school and nobody believing that I was a Pandit because my name is Monica," she laughs.

"We [Pandits] are like a wonder here," she says, conceding that she has no Pandit friends and adding "but it is not a problem for me".

But her playfulness barely disguises a deep-seated concern that as the community shrinks, Kashmiri Pandits may soon have to face the fact that they are becoming increasingly alienated from those that left the valley.

Tickoo says that despite the cultural symmetry with Muslims in Kashmir, very little epitomises their position better than the difficulty of finding suitable marriage partners within the community.

Marriage is, of course, the Achilles' heel of religious tolerance in South Asia. And Tickoo contends that with only 625 youth among the remaining Pandits, the issue is growing increasingly severe. He says there is still a stigma attached to the children of the Pandit community who have been raised under the turmoil of the past two decades.

And it is the women who bear the brunt of the burden.

"It is the kind of ostracization that serves no purpose ... so you find more and more are marrying outside the Pandit community as a result," he explains.

A separate Pandit state?

Motilal Bhat suggests that the decision to join India would be a practical one which has little to do with denying the distinctness of Kashmir. And, crucially, part of that heritage affirms that the idea of a separate homeland for Pandits is out of the question.

"You cannot differentiate a Pandit from a Muslim, culturally. Even in names of people, we often have [the] same names, [the] same sense of identity, style of living, and other things. And this is apart from India and the rest of the world. You can imagine that after a period of 22 years from migration, a Kashmiri Pandit living in Jammu is still totally different to a Jammu resident.

"I've made it clear that it is not possible to live without Muslims. We depend on them and they depend on us," he says.

Typically, Kashmiri Pandits claim to be linguistically and culturally distinct from Hindus from the rest of India, and though there has been a renewed move to return among those who left, there are questions about whether the young generation would be able to adapt to the unique environment of Kashmir.


"No one here enjoys the violence ... the authorities, the government and leadership from all sides must realise that time never comes again and again," he says. "They have to go for a political solution, they have to break the ice, they have to come forward, both they have to come forward for a solution in the interests of the common people."


Kashmiri Pandits: Why we never fled Kashmir - Kashmir: The forgotten conflict - Al Jazeera English

Yeah same army which also protects 150 million Muslims. Why is that PA don't kill Baloch and IA kills Muslims according to you ?

:disagree:


the PA isn't even in Balochistan and hasn't been for some years.....and even if they were, Balochistan is a Province of Pakistan - not a disputed or separate territory.

therefore your 'comparison' (one i've seen so many times I've lost count) -- is INVALID. sorry.
 
.
here's a VERY inconvenient truth the indians and their media would be scared & uncomfortable to share with the world:




All of you Pakistanis/Kashmiris of PDF should be more vocal about this and work hard to counter this treacherous myth being peddled by the indians about "genocide of hindu pundits"

it's simply a means of discrediting Kashmiri nationalism. So do your part also and don't remain silent or apathetic about it; counter this propaganda of theirs. Thankfully now with twitter, facebook and blogosphere (despite draconian measures, threats and harassment by indian intel and security apparatus) are existing and are a good way to get undigested facts from the people of Kashmir themself --rather than Arnab Goswami or some other twits sitting in another country and talking authoritatively about Kashmiri affairs
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Kashmiri Pandits are my brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers -- the same as any other Kashmiri. A strike against any of us is a strike against all of us -- any actions or hate speech against the Pandits is not only directed against Pandits, but Kashmiris as a whole, whatever our religion or culture or customs are. One nation, one Kashmir.

We have suffered collectively from bigoted feudal tyrants exploiting religion in the past - we cannot, we will not allow that to happen again - ever. There is no sacred blood, homogeneous ethnic group or other singularity in Kashmiri -- we are a diverse people, and that is what makes us so proud of our heritage, of who we are.

When I saw this picture I felt connected to the person -- the words that flowed in my mind were: Kashmiri, brother, own. This didn't change in the slightest when I read the caption.

We, as a people, reject any form of extremism absolutely. It's against the fabric of our society. Tolerance and compassion is our highest order; anything which transgresses against any of the Kashmiri people is against the foundations of our society itself, of Kashmiriyat. Remember that there are Saints that both Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims bury; remember there are those that believe Jesus Christ was buried in Kashmir -- remember that Kashmir is called "heaven on earth" -- and that the Almighty created us all equally.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom