Kashmir : An Illusive Solution

Kashmir issue can be solved: Ex-RAW chief

Solution to the festering Kashmir issue is very much “doable” and is not an “impossible” thing since we have come a long way from 1947 but Prime Minister Modi has “wasted the first 18 months in changing the status quo,” observed former RAW chief A.S. Dulat here on Tuesday.

“Great leaders world over try to bring major changes in the first few years after that it does not matter whether it is a five year or a six year term,” exclaimed the author of the best selling book ‘Kashmir – The Vajpayee Years’ during a conversation with author Karri Sriram organised by the ‘Hyd Park’ at Taj Krishna.

Calling Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee as one of the “greatest Prime Ministers”, Mr. Dulat said the former could have got elected “unopposed if he had contested from Srinagar in 2003” and he continues to be popular there. Hence, “Kashmiris were excited when Modiji got elected” and had a “huge opportunity but it got wasted as he has all the qualities that Vajpayee had”.

Workable solution

“Pakistan’s arrogance has helped us” and even Kashmiris knew India will not let go and that the gun had brought only “death and destruction”. Only workable solution for now will be to recognise the present “Line of Control”. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh too wanted to do a deal “but did not know how to go about it”, he explained, during the course of his conversation and later taking questions from the gathering.

“We have to show empathy, find a way out of the status quo. Talks are a tedious process…we have to carry it forward” he said.

Although some feel India should be more macho about tackling terrorism, “we have dealt with it exceptionally well”.

“20 secret meetings”

About failure of the Agra summit between the then Pakistan President Gen. Musharaf and Prime Minister Vajpayee, Mr. Dulat, also a former special director in the Intelligence Bureau, felt that it was more because the Pakistanis “put all eggs in Vajpayee basket”.

He also revealed that the then Pakistan Ambassador Jehangir Qazi had held “20 secret meetings” with Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani before the Agra summit was announced by the latter.

But, Gen. Musharaff and Mr. Advani began on a sour note when the latter sought handing over of Mumbai blasts accused and underworld don Dawood Ibrahim during a meeting at the Rashtrapati Bhavan.

He has no doubt that Dawood is a “state guest” of the Pakistan Government living in Karachi and moving around. Bin Laden too was a guest of Pakistan and he was quite sure the CIA had informed the Pakistan Government before the Abottabad raid.

The former RAW chief noted Kashmiris followed a liberal Sufi Islam and Muslims were descendents of Saraswat Brahmins. Therefore, it was all the more “unfortunate” that the majority of Pandits had to leave Kashmir because the threat was real.

Mr. Dulat said the Rubaiyya Sayeed kidnapping was “clumsily handled” whereas “indecision” by the powers that be allowed the Kandahar hijacked plane IC 814 to leave the Amritsar airport to Lahore.

Kashmir issue can be solved: Ex-RAW chief

Is genocide of pandits part of sufi principles? Please give me sources to the sufi scriptures followed by Kashmir people. I will read them and come back to you. I have read quran already and hence I can speak with full authority of normal islam.
 
As I said, by being unreasonable and violent, you have caused harm to many people who were reasonable. You could have negotiated but didn't. Instead you attacked, killed lakhs of Roman and its allies. Why do you think you have a right to live? Also, now who will undo or compensate for the damage you caused? Obviously, the answer to this is - since you caused the damage, you will compensate it yourself. Since you won't do it yourself, we will force you to do it by enslavement.

they do try to negotiate for a way to spain.. this is why they didn't attacked after battle of arausio... but then reading is not part of your knowledge gathering I assume.
Enslavement is only a compensation for the damage caused. This is natural law.
seriously... let me remind you this is earth not mars.. freedom is most natural law of nature
Boundaries are needed as man is a material being. People are allowed to travel but only peacefully.
so you choose things which suits you and not those which are correct. but you have audiocity to call this fear and greed and limited capacity to operate as natural laws.

I too like reasoning but in an unrestricted manner. I can't be a patriot just because you created a political entity at your whims and fancies without taking anyone's permission, referendum or reasoning. You are just saying that you want me to be a slave who should listen to your rules, your laws, your authority while you owe me nothing. This is nothing but declaration of war.

shouldn't you atleast not be contraicting your own statement in same post?

I am no keyboard warrior.

you are
Just because I haven't picked up arms, doesn't mean I don't know anything. I will pick up arms as and when there is an opportunity to do something right.

this statement is very defination of keyboard warrior.

Kashmir became islamic by slavery, genocide, rape and torture. People are trained to behave in certain manner by regular education and preaching at childhood. Once programmed, people are hard to change. It doesn't matter whether the culture is right or wrong as in this case - jihad being a duty of islam. So, there is no way to end the culture other than to end the person himself.

and how many thousands you had killed for this injustice done... if it's 0.. then my dear I hope you understand the word hypocrisy.

Muslims are also biologically humans. It is just the culture that is different. So, obviously the way of working will be similar but with different end goals. War has to be fought with bloodshed whereby anything that is hostile and non negotiable is wiped out. It is the limitations of biology. I don't know how to do mind reading or mass hypnosis. The only thing I know is to kill the person who has unreasonable way of life

and had you reactified the problem by killing any?

Either speak of solutions in clear cut manner or you go back to your hole
there are solutions but you see they are beyond your limited understanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
this is not a failure of them. they never tried to implement it as there was no incentive for government workers not they were trained and educated enough to make this a success. Another reason was the very process of election and winner in our nation where a man with most votes wins not a man with majority votes.

Sir.

This is where I shall have a difference of opinion with you. You may want to revisit the history of Family Planning Program as launched in 1952, making India the first country in the world to have a dedicated effort by the Government to control the population.

The abject failure of the policy initiative and effect of legislative enforcement can be gauged from the fact that the population of India in 2000 stood at twice what was aimed for at the start of th program.

To contend other wise and attribute the same to reasons as above is to mitigate the effects of poor leadership, policy implementation and enforcement on part of the executive of the country.

Hence, to extrapolate the failures of the nation's leadership as exemplified by this very small yet significant point to an overall approach over the question of Kashmir, would be, in my opinion, a mistake.


there is just a little problem... our rights are protected by constitution and laws but our duties are voluntary... which makes our rights as freely given and as human nature shows we always misuse free things.


This is where the misconception remains. Fundamental duties are not voluntary.

I would like to draw your attention to the specific clauses under Article 51A as introduced vide 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of India (1976). If you were to take a look at the list enumerated, while the Constitution itself is silent on the question of enforceability of the Fundamental Duties, the spirit of the law holds that Part III (Fundamental Rights), Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy) and Part IVA (Fundamental Duties) have to be read in conjunction and not in isolation.

In Chandra Bhawan Boarding v. State of Mysore, the Supreme court made the following observation prior to the insertion of Article 51-A:

“It is a fallacy to think that in our Constitution, there are only rights and no duties."

While there is no legal enforceability of fundamental duties by the Constitution on it's own, the Constitution empowers the Government under Part IV and provisions of Article 51A to introduce and enforce legislation that can facilitate the performance of the Fundamental Duties as enumerated.

Again an issue of Executive and not of Judicial implementation.



I am a religious man so I don't suggest that but if a system allows a fool of 34 years to be an student of philosophy and use Indian tax payer money to abuse India and still a science grad is forced to finish his education in 3-4 years and get a job without a proper research under his/her belt... there is no balance.. and to create balance we need to allow underdog to perform.

That, sir, again reiterates my point regarding the executive nature of the issues at hand.
 
This is where the misconception remains. Fundamental duties are not voluntary.

I would like to draw your attention to the specific clauses under Article 51A as introduced vide 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of India (1976). If you were to take a look at the list enumerated, while the Constitution itself is silent on the question of enforceability of the Fundamental Duties, the spirit of the law holds that Part III (Fundamental Rights), Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy) and Part IVA (Fundamental Duties) have to be read in conjunction and not in isolation.

In Chandra Bhawan Boarding v. State of Mysore, the Supreme court made the following observation prior to the insertion of Article 51-A:

“It is a fallacy to think that in our Constitution, there are only rights and no duties."

While there is no legal enforceability of fundamental duties by the Constitution on it's own, the Constitution empowers the Government under Part IV and provisions of Article 51A to introduce and enforce legislation that can facilitate the performance of the Fundamental Duties as enumerated.

Again an issue of Executive and not of Judicial implementation.
You had given a good point here.. and it has been 5 years from the time I read the constitution.. please allow me a little bit time to revisit the great book and certainly we can hold a fruitful discussion over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
God has given me the intelligence and ability to write and has allowed me to choose to write or not. So, I wrote. If I was born blind I wouldn't have written, for example.

God is the entity which created the world and made the default natural laws. What is its shape or form is something I don't know. God has given me no revelation or advice. It is just a reference to the entity that created.

Do you refer to a tangible quantity sir? If not, theological discussion has no place on this thread.




Nation is a group of people following common values and living in common region who group together due to the conventional wisdom of strength in numbers. Simply put, one nation can have only one set of values. The values need not be too strict or detailed. There may be subculture too. But, a common basic principle of life is mandatory. Two groups whose design of living is antagonistic and hostile can't be part of same nation.


Sir.

In Sorbonne on March 11th, 1882, Ernest Renan, a famous French Theorist, delivered his rather famous lecture titled "Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?".

I quote him:

I propose to analyze with you an idea which, though apparently clear, lends itself to the most dangerous misunderstandings..............

and

At the time of the French Revolution, many believed that the institutions of small independent cities such as Sparta and Rome could be applied to our great nations of thirty or forty million souls. In our days, a yet greater error is committed: one confounds the idea of race with that of the nation and attributes to ethnographic, or rather linguistic, groups a sovereignty analogous to that of actually existing peoples. Let’s try to achieve some precision in regards to these difficult questions, questions in which the least confusion over the meaning of words in the first steps of the reasoning process can produce by the end the most disastrous errors.

What characterizes these different states? It’s the fusion of the populations that comprise them.


Further

A nation is a soul, a spiritual principle. Two things which, properly speaking, are really one and the same constitute this soul, this spiritual principle. One is the past, the other is the present. One is the possession in common of a rich legacy of memories; the other is present consent, the desire to live together, the desire to continue to invest in the heritage that we have jointly received. Messieurs, man does not improvise. The nation, like the individual, is the outcome of a long past of efforts, sacrifices, and devotions. Of all cults, that of the ancestors is the most legitimate: our ancestors have made us what we are. A heroic past with great men and glory (I mean true glory) is the social capital upon which the national idea rests. These are the essential conditions of being a people: having common glories in the past and a will to continue them in the present; having made great things together and wishing to make them again. One loves in proportion to the sacrifices that one has committed and the troubles that one has suffered.

One loves the house that one has built and that one passes on. The Spartan chant, “We are what you were; we will be what you are”, is, in its simplicity, the abridged him of every fatherland. A people shares a glorious heritage as well, regrets, and a common program to realize. Having suffered, rejoiced, and hoped together is worth more than common taxes or frontiers that conform to strategic ideas and is independent of racial or linguistic considerations. “Suffered together”, I said, for shared suffering unites more than does joy. In fact, periods of mourning are worth more to national memory than triumphs because they impose duties and require a common effort. A nation is therefore a great solidarity constituted by the feeling of sacrifices made and those that one is still disposed to make. It presupposes a past but is reiterated in the present by a tangible fact: consent, the clearly expressed desire to continue a common life.


A nation’s existence is (please excuse the metaphor) a daily plebiscite, just as an individual’s existence is a perpetual affirmation of life. Yes, I know, that is less metaphysical than divine right and less brutal than so-called law of history. In the scheme of ideas with which I present you, a nation has no more right than a king to say to a province: “You belong to me, I am taking you.” For us, a province is its inhabitants and, if anyone in this affair has the right to be consulted, it is the inhabitant. A nation never has a true interest in annexing or holding territory that does not wish to be annexed or held. The vow of nations is the sole legitimate criterion and that to which it is necessary to constantly return. We have chased metaphysical and theological abstractions from politics. What now remains? Man remains, his desires, his needs. The secession and, in the long run, collapse of nations are the consequence of a system which placed these old organisms at the mercy of often poorly enlightened wills. It is clear that, in such a matter, no principle should be pushed too far. Truths of this order are only applicable when taken together and in a very general way. Human will changes but then what doesn’t beneath heaven? Nations are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have an end. A European confederation will probably replace them. But, if so, such is not the law of the century in which we live. At the present moment, the existence of nations is a good and even necessary thing. Their existence is the guararantee of liberty, a liberty that would be lost if the world had only one law and one master.


Man is a slave neither of his race, his language, his religion, the course of his rivers, nor the direction of his mountain ranges. A great aggregation of men, in sane mind and warm heart, created a moral conscience that calls itself a nation. As long as this moral conscience proofs its strength by sacrifices that require the subordination of the individual to the communal good, it is legitimate and has the right to exist. If doubts are raised along the frontiers, consult the disputed populations. They certainly have a right to express their views on the matter.

Examples - muslims are people of death - who live so that they can die to go to heaven. Hindus live to continue life and acquire knowledge of this world and hence people of life. The two can't be part of same nation.

I pity you sir. You have been deprived of an opportunity to open your horizons. You have been consistent here and elsewhere in other fora, in your insistence on narrowing the concepts that are simply beyond your capability to appreciate.

The day you start to dissect a nation on the lines of religion, caste, creed, race, language or any other insignificants, that is the day you begin to kill your nation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
The situation has completely changed due to CPEC and Pak brutalities on Original POK residents. Pakistan of today is completely different from Pakistan of 80s which was a vibrant society, very open in its views and life style. Do you know Karachi had more bars and discs in 1970s than Mumbai?
The laws against Ahmadis and discrimination of Shias, has created a new situation in POK and Gilgit-Baltistan. It is this which will ensure what I wrote about.


Sir. I am well aware of the Pakistani society till 70s, the deliberate Islamisation as State policy as implemented by Zia (or should I say the usurping of the utopia of Bhutto to position the country as a leader of Islamic World to rival the perceived hold of Nehru as leader of NAM in the immediate aftermath of Indian independence and carried forward by India successfully in the Cold War era?).

The 'original' inhabitants will be how old?
 
Do you refer to a tangible quantity sir? If not, theological discussion has no place on this thread.







Sir.

In Sorbonne on March 11th, 1882, Ernest Renan, a famous French Theorist, delivered his rather famous lecture titled "Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?".

I quote him:

I propose to analyze with you an idea which, though apparently clear, lends itself to the most dangerous misunderstandings..............

and

At the time of the French Revolution, many believed that the institutions of small independent cities such as Sparta and Rome could be applied to our great nations of thirty or forty million souls. In our days, a yet greater error is committed: one confounds the idea of race with that of the nation and attributes to ethnographic, or rather linguistic, groups a sovereignty analogous to that of actually existing peoples. Let’s try to achieve some precision in regards to these difficult questions, questions in which the least confusion over the meaning of words in the first steps of the reasoning process can produce by the end the most disastrous errors.

What characterizes these different states? It’s the fusion of the populations that comprise them.


Further

A nation is a soul, a spiritual principle. Two things which, properly speaking, are really one and the same constitute this soul, this spiritual principle. One is the past, the other is the present. One is the possession in common of a rich legacy of memories; the other is present consent, the desire to live together, the desire to continue to invest in the heritage that we have jointly received. Messieurs, man does not improvise. The nation, like the individual, is the outcome of a long past of efforts, sacrifices, and devotions. Of all cults, that of the ancestors is the most legitimate: our ancestors have made us what we are. A heroic past with great men and glory (I mean true glory) is the social capital upon which the national idea rests. These are the essential conditions of being a people: having common glories in the past and a will to continue them in the present; having made great things together and wishing to make them again. One loves in proportion to the sacrifices that one has committed and the troubles that one has suffered.

One loves the house that one has built and that one passes on. The Spartan chant, “We are what you were; we will be what you are”, is, in its simplicity, the abridged him of every fatherland. A people shares a glorious heritage as well, regrets, and a common program to realize. Having suffered, rejoiced, and hoped together is worth more than common taxes or frontiers that conform to strategic ideas and is independent of racial or linguistic considerations. “Suffered together”, I said, for shared suffering unites more than does joy. In fact, periods of mourning are worth more to national memory than triumphs because they impose duties and require a common effort. A nation is therefore a great solidarity constituted by the feeling of sacrifices made and those that one is still disposed to make. It presupposes a past but is reiterated in the present by a tangible fact: consent, the clearly expressed desire to continue a common life.

A nation’s existence is (please excuse the metaphor) a daily plebiscite, just as an individual’s existence is a perpetual affirmation of life. Yes, I know, that is less metaphysical than divine right and less brutal than so-called law of history. In the scheme of ideas with which I present you, a nation has no more right than a king to say to a province: “You belong to me, I am taking you.” For us, a province is its inhabitants and, if anyone in this affair has the right to be consulted, it is the inhabitant. A nation never has a true interest in annexing or holding territory that does not wish to be annexed or held. The vow of nations is the sole legitimate criterion and that to which it is necessary to constantly return. We have chased metaphysical and theological abstractions from politics. What now remains? Man remains, his desires, his needs. The secession and, in the long run, collapse of nations are the consequence of a system which placed these old organisms at the mercy of often poorly enlightened wills. It is clear that, in such a matter, no principle should be pushed too far. Truths of this order are only applicable when taken together and in a very general way. Human will changes but then what doesn’t beneath heaven? Nations are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have an end. A European confederation will probably replace them. But, if so, such is not the law of the century in which we live. At the present moment, the existence of nations is a good and even necessary thing. Their existence is the guararantee of liberty, a liberty that would be lost if the world had only one law and one master.


Man is a slave neither of his race, his language, his religion, the course of his rivers, nor the direction of his mountain ranges. A great aggregation of men, in sane mind and warm heart, created a moral conscience that calls itself a nation. As long as this moral conscience proofs its strength by sacrifices that require the subordination of the individual to the communal good, it is legitimate and has the right to exist. If doubts are raised along the frontiers, consult the disputed populations. They certainly have a right to express their views on the matter.



I pity you sir. You have been deprived of an opportunity to open your horizons. You have been consistent here and elsewhere in other fora, in your insistence on narrowing the concepts that are simply beyond your capability to appreciate.

The day you start to dissect a nation on the lines of religion, caste, creed, race, language or any other insignificants, that is the day you begin to kill your nation.
The most important thing is civilization, not state. The whole point of nation is to have a group of people without hostility. Otherwise, why not have international government?

I am loyal to civilization. Civilization needs division of labour. Hence, system of Varna is inevitable. Caste is a result of islamic brutality that destroyed the civilization, created endless wars and a situation of uncertainty whereby hereditary was the only way of succession. The time to take exams, tests didn't exist as every now and then people had to fight and flee.

I can't be loyal to a state which was arbitrarily created. The state which says that anyone who is born in a region is a citizen is actually racism. Any classification must be based on merit, even citizenship. As far as I see, no one follows the dictat of constitution in real life. So, constitution is invalid as it doesn't reflect reality
 
Last edited:
I have been thinking about one thing for a while
ever since the CPEC project started the unrest has started in full swing,
most certainly the loan money from the Chinese is being used for fuelling the Kashmirs unrest


Sir.

On what factual evidence or even remotely hearsay do you base your claim on?
 
The most important thing is civilization, not state. The whole point of nation is to have a group of people without hostility. Otherwise, why not have international government?

So you disavow India as a nation?

Or are you confused between the terms civilizations and State sir?


I am loyal to civilization. Civilization needs division of labour.

Adam Smith is hardly the topic of discussion here sir.

Hence, system of Varna is inevitable. Caste is a result of islamic brutality that destroyed the civilization, created endless wars and a situation of uncertainty whereby hereditary was the only way of succession. The time to take exams, tests didn't exist as every now and then people had to fight and flee.

Are you suffering from a frontal lobe injury with hyper-responsive amygdala? A lot of suppressed anger issues. The former can be cause of such an approach.

My apologies if so.

I can't be loyal to a state which was arbitrarily created. The state which says that anyone who is born in a region is a citizen is actually racism. Any classification must be based on merit, even citizenship. As far as I see, no one follows the dictat of constitution in real life. So, constitution is invalid as it doesn't reflect reality

In short, you subscribe to the salafist ideology. Thanks.
 
So you disavow India as a nation?

Or are you confused between the terms civilizations and State sir?




Adam Smith is hardly the topic of discussion here sir.



Are you suffering from a frontal lobe injury with hyper-responsive amygdala? A lot of suppressed anger issues. The former can be cause of such an approach.

My apologies if so.



In short, you subscribe to the salafist ideology. Thanks.


You speak arbitrarily without reasoning or evidence. I can't continue my debate with you. Bye
 
You speak arbitrarily without reasoning or evidence. I can't continue my debate with you. Bye


Sir.

Please re-read your own declarations above. If any other conclusion can be derived from your posts, let me know. I will certainly try to look at the conclusion as you reach which may differ from my understanding of what you have typed.

I agree, there is neither reasoning nor evidence, a mere commentary on what the content is on which I comment. Rest, I assume, you are equipped enough to derive a conclusion on your own, from.
 
Gunmen Loot Cash From Bank In Kashmir's Pulwama

Unidentified gunmen on Monday looted Rs. 1 lakh from a branch of Jammu and Kashmir Bank in south Kashmir, police said.

Police said the gunmen, reportedly three in number, entered the Noorpora branch of the bank in Tral area of Pulwama district.

The gunmen after threatening the bank staff and some customers looted Rs. 1 lakh. They also fired several rounds in the air before decamping with the money.
 
Countries not willing to talk about Kashmir because of India's influence: Former Pak diplomat

A former top Pakistani diplomat has said that because of India's influence and economic power, countries are unwilling to raise the issue of Kashmir at international level, including at the UN.

Masood Khan, former Pakistani Ambassador to the UN, who is now president of Pak-Occupied Kashmir (PoK), rued that India has veto on the talks between the two South Asian neighbours.

Khan is currently in Washington, for what he described is part of his effort to appraise the international community about current situation in Kashmir.

"India has strategic alliances with certain countries. Because of the lucrative deals that it offers to powerful countries in the West, it has practically imposed a gag order on Kashmir," Khan said yesterday in response to a question at the Atlantic Council, a top American think-tank.

Khan said that because of increasing Indian influence, "people here (in Washington DC), in Brussels, in London or other world capitals don't talk about Kashmir, because this would have consequences… for these countries, like in terms of economic transactions, and strategic costs.”

Responding to questions at the thinly-attended Atlantic Council event, Khan alleged that the UN is not acting on its own resolution because of India.

"The United Nations is not acting because of real politics," he said.

"The Security Council, first because of cold war dynamics, and now because of number of other factors is not taking cognisance of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, which is regrettable because of mandate that is given to the Security Council by the UN charter under chapter six and chapter seven," he said.

Khan argued that UN should be acting. "It should be proactive. It's because of real politics. It is also because of two other factors," he said.

"One was that in the past 30 to 40 years, India and Pakistan have invested a lot of energy and time in bilateral talks. But these bilateral talks or dialogue have proved to be mirage for Kashmiris because it has produced no results," he said, adding that these talks have been non-productive.

Because of these talks, India has "acquired two vetoes" he said.

One on the agenda whereby they have in fact reduced the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir to a fraction of their whole agenda. It is one of 10 agenda items, he added.

Secondly, India has veto over the timetable. "They will start negotiations when it suites them and when they don't like it they will blame Pakistan for terrorism. And that has just got scuttled the dialogue process," he said.

Khan claimed that there are no terrorist camps in PoK. "None whatso ever," he said during the interaction.

"This is in fact a propaganda against the Kashmiris intended to demonie them," he said, and claimed that there is no terrorism right now in Kashmir. Neither there is any cross-border activities.

"This is not happening," he said.

"Right now, India has fenced the Line of Control. There are two layers of the fence. In between there are landmines. There are motion sensors. They also have electronic surveillance, thermal imaging. If any crossing takes place they would be detected," he added.

Countries not willing to talk about Kashmir because of India's influence: Former Pak diplomat
 
Kashmiris thwart bank robbery by pelting stones on militants

Srinagar (Jammu and Kashmir) [India] Dec. 05 : A major bank robbery was thwarted in the Noorpora area of the Kashmir valley when local people pelted stones on the militants attempting the robbery of the Jammu and Kashmir Bank's Branch. The militants fled the stone pelting and fired at the crowds who gathered to save the bank from being looted.

Munir Khan, the Inspector General of Police, Kashmir Range, complimented the locals for their bravery.

"Terrorists entered the Jammu and Kashmir Bank branch in Tral's Noorpora, and they obviously wanted to loot public money. Compliments to the people (locals) as they resisted very bravely that made the terrorists retreat," Khan told .

According to police, Zakir Musa of Ansar Ghazwat-ul-Hind, along with two other militants entered the bank's Noorpora branch. Soon after entering the building, the terrorists fired a few shots and started ransacking the infrastructure of bank.

On hearing gunshots, people from nearby areas rushed towards the bank. They not only raised hue and cry but also pelted stones on the militants. In the face of public anger, Musa and his associates panicked and started firing at the crowds, before slipping out.

The militant group had come armed with the motive of a big heist but seeing people's retaliation, they chose to escape with just Rs. 97,000.

An First Information Report (FIR) has been registered in Awantipora Police Station and further investigation is on.

In July, former Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist Musa was announced as the head of Ansar Ghazwat-Ul-Hind, the newly created al-Qaida cell in Jammu and Kashmir.

However, the courageous move by the Valley's residents indicates that they are now able to see through the evil motives of terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir.
 
Afshan Ashiq: From stone-pelter to captain of J&K women's football team

21-year-old Afshan Ashiq and team met Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh on Tuesday.

dc-Cover-35iijdianrrsfrr6c9c6vb01p1-20171206113843.Medi.jpeg

Ashiq, who defends the 24-foot-long and 8-foot-high goal post for her team, said the youth in Kashmir Valley was talented and all that they required was a platform. (Photo: Twitter)

New Delhi: From the streets of upmarket Srinagar, where she emerged as the face of angry women students throwing stones at security forces, it was a dream walk for football lover Afshan Ashiq through the corridors of North Block where she met Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh on Tuesday.

The 21-year-old Ashiq, captain of Jammu and Kashmir's all-woman football team which called on the minister, said she was pleasantly surprised to see how he wasted no time in redressing their grievances over the lack of sports-related infrastructure in the state.

"When we told the home minister that Jammu and Kashmir lacks sports infrastructure, he immediately called up the Chief Minister (Mehbooba Mufti) and requested her to do the needful to help us," Ashiq, who is from Srinagar, said.

Ashiq, who defends the 24-foot-long and 8-foot-high goal post for her team, said the youth in Kashmir Valley was talented and all that they required was a platform.

"The minister also told us that Rs 100 crore had already been sanctioned (under the Prime Minister's special package) for the state," the captain of the CM’s-XI team told PTI.

She agree that her life and career had made a remarkable U-turn since the days when her picture was splashed in the national media as a stone pelter. The same hands that threw stones at the forces now ward off many a hard kick as she guards the goalpost.

"I don’t want to look back. My life has changed for ever. I want to be an achiever and do something to make the state and the nation proud," said Ashiq, whose life story may soon be turned into a biopic now that a renowned Bollywood filmmaker is planning to make a film on her.

During the 30-minute meeting with Singh, the team members conveyed to him that if proper infrastructure -- such as training facilities -- came up in Jammu and Kashmir, the youth could be motivated to hone their talents and bring laurels to the state, staying away from terrorism and other unlawful activities.

Team manager Tsering Angmo said the sports infrastructure in the border areas was particularly poor and needed urgent attention so that young Kashmiris could be weaned away from illicit acts. "With proper infrastructure in place, the youth can take up sports to nourish their talents and no one can brainwash anyone. No one will join terrorism or indulge in stone pelting," Angmo, who is from Ladakh, said.

Ashiq and Angmo thanked Singh for listening to them and for speaking to the chief minister about their problems. Later, the home minister tweeted, "Met the young and energetic girls of JK's first ever Women Football Team. They are highly motivated and driven when it comes to football."




He also said they were examples for others to follow. "Playing the role of new age 'Gender Benders', these girls are setting an example for others to follow. I wish them success and a great future," he tweeted.
 
We will live only under the rule of reason, not constitution. Constitution is another Quran. Why should I follow something that was arbitrarily made without a referendum, or by people who were true leaders? India didn't fight for independence properly but was gifted. Hence Mountbatten stayed back to ensure constitution is written according to British will. It was a form of neo colonialism. They were taking advantage of primitive and indifferent people in India to impose their own will by lying and deceit.

Anarchy is better than evil rule. If Anarchy is needed to eliminate evil, so be it. I would, however call it as freedom struggle to establish true India. Unfortunately, the people who lived in 1940s were disgusting, unreasonable and stupid. Because of their blunder, today has become a difficult life. But, that doesn't mean their mistakes must be continued upon. Mistakes must be rectified and not perpetuated in the name of peace. There can be no peace until everything is reasonable and questions can be properly answered

@Himanshu Pandey See, I always say one thing.

Every human being has a choice, and that choice is not provided by constitution, but by nature. The choice of free will. But a state, and who hold allegiance toward a state, also hold free choice.

To retaliate with full force when threatened.

@Kshithij Sharma By all means, go against the state. And fight against it. Bring your so called "Anarchy". But after that you have to live with the consequences.
Are you thinking you are the first one in past 70 years with this ideology to bring down the Republic?

@Himanshu Pandey I dont know why you doing such long discussion. Let him be, it needs guts to bring down Republic. We should support him, go buddy bring down the Republic.
But at the end of the day, he might end up like Kishenji, but I think he already know about this. So c'mon.