Kashmir Lecture at Georgia Tech
dchat...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
writes:
> In article <1sm77d$g...@acsc.com> bap...@hill.acsc.com writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>Here's how I see it. There is a war of secession being waged in Kashmir with
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> At the risk of souding obtuse, isn't Kashmir still a disputed territory?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I wouldn't agree. Kashmir is disputed in what sense ????
It belonged to the last Rajah of Kashmir, who decided to merge with India.
You may not like it, as your country (Pakistan) has been bitching about
India since 1947. The same was when India blasted the N-bomb in 1972 in
Pokhran. Bitching against "idolators" has been Pakistan's way to revive
its image in front of its Islamic brethren.
> I know all the right winged propoganda about "Kashmir Bharat ka atoot
> ang hai" (Kashmir is an inseperable part of Bharat), but as far as
> the Pakistani's are concerned, the movement in Kashmir is anything
> but a "sucessionist movement", so how could the be guilty of supporting
> a sucessionist movement?
>
Just answer this question: will U.S.A tolerate the same manner if Canada
does what Pakistan is doing in India ?
If tomorrow, Quebecers (only for example) say
that NY state is to declare independence for
blah blah reasons, what will Bill Clinton do ?
Will he not sent troops to crush the insurgency
and remain faithful to what the Americans strove
for a century and half ago ?
>
> Dangerous situation faced by Indian Security forces? Hmm. It could be
> argued that the reason the situation is dangerous in Kashmir is becuase
> the "security forces" are trying to hold by force a people who don't
> want to be held.
>
What about Amanullah Khan, Javad Ahmad Mir, Maqbool Ilhai, Abdul Ghani Lone
and the Paki supported Hizbul Mujahadeen ???? They are preaching the
message of Peace as communicated by the charming GOP ???? Right ????
Or did they also come to Georgia Tech. and told the "3 year old Kahmiri
Hindu toddler" defeated them in an armed encounter, right ????
>
> What counter measures? Lets see, to quote Amnest International:
>
> "In September 1990, the government announced that a screening
> committee would be set up to examine complaints of excesses by
> the security forces. Jammua and Kashmir Governer, Girish Saxena, has
> ordered severeal investigtations of such abuses, in one case leading to
> charges of murder being brought against the Director of the Border
> Security Force (BSF). But such investigations have usually been
> conducted by police or other officials rather than by an independent
> and impartial body. Amnesty International does not know of any cases
> in which officials allegedly responsible for such human rights
> violations have been brought to justice and convited."
> AI- Sept, 1991
>
Noone is denying the AI. If I maybe allowed to quote the AI, then I can
also say:
" Islam and global terrorism are equivalent " (See special 1990 AI report
that has a special issue about Islam.) Or, is it that the Western press
is biased when it comes to Islam, and, when about human rights only for
Muslims, the Western Press is always right.
> I know what the response will be: "Who cares what AI has to say, anyway"
> or "AI has been duped by KAC thugs" or something along the same lines.
> Well can the same thing be said about the U.S. State Department who
> published an indepth report on Kashmir in 1991, in which Indian
> Security Froces were accused of denying the most basic human rights to
> the Kashmiri, right such as freedom to change their government,
> the right to privacy of person and the right to peaceful assembly, all
> of which are guaranteed by the Indian constitution!?!
In the same breath: when Hizbul Mujahadeens, Allah Tigers have slain the
Kashmiri Hindus, what about their rights ? Or, as majority population
members, the Hindus have been ordained by Mr.Allah to be decapitated in
the hands of Muslims, who pray 5 times a day for walking the way that is
towards God ?
Why in kashmir it is as:" KASHMIR-MEY-AGAR RAHENA HAI/ ALLAH-O-AKBAR
KAHENA HAI ?"
>
> My friend, you have admittedly made up your mind about the real truth in
> Kashmir. I guess you have ruled out any possibility of massive abuse
> by the security forces in Kashmir. I have often heard the line that its
> neccessary to hold on to Kashmir by "hook or by crook" to ensure the
> continuity of the indian union. My question is: "Is it O.K. even if
> the Indian Security Forces are committing all the crimes that the
> Kashmiris are accusing them of?" Why?
My friend, you are fanatic anti-Indian Moslem. You are one of those
persons, who are pests of the society, b'coz you guys (like you) believe
in the putrid maudoodism, that only sexually impotent, mullah-sodomized,
primitive troglodytes believe. Just as there are save countries, where the
rich move in porsches and effortless think that a Mercedes is a fast
moving camel, you people (fanatic mullahs) think that unless the whole
world is Islamized, and, Khomeinism is instituted, the Glory of Allah will
not be spread.
It is those intellectually constipated, mindlessly violent morons like u',
who have the primitive indecency as that of a self-molesting street kid
that are isotopes of terrorist culture. This is because you come from
Pakistan. Therefore to bitch about anti-Quranic people/ culture, and, thus
spreading hate for others in the name of Allah is what you guys do.
Unfortunately, many Muslims who have progressed by way of more rational
thinking, and, have followed the Islam of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) rather
than the one enunciated by Maulana Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi, keep quiet and
are causing harm to Islam.
To purify Islam, fanatics like you, need to be identified and thrown back
into those caves that the mad, uncultured, towelheads still dwell in.
> Unfortunately, somehow, somewhere someone decieded that nationalism was
> justification enough for perpetrating the gravest crimes in humanity. I
> hope that the people of India do not choose to endorse that conclusion.
If there is one and only one God (Allah) and Muhammad (PBUH) is His Messegner
then I
sincerely pray to Allah that India rises and destroys Pakistan - who have
raped 300,000 women and are still continuing rapes/ loot/ arson/ murder
in the name of The Allah, The Beneficient, The Merciful.
For Prophet Muhammad was a courageous and a righteous person. I think that
if we are to follow the call for humanity, the cries of the thousands of
Indians who are now refugees in their own motherlands, Pakistan must be
mercilessly nuked, till the savage country is wiped out from the face of the
earth.
Both the Qur'an and Gita says that one must rise and destroy the oppressors.
Thus following the message from the Divine scriptures, we (Indians) must
swear to destroy the savage country that has been terrorizing hapless Indians
since 1947.
ALLAH O' AKBAR, WA KARIM !
>
>
> Raheel Ahmed Khan
>
- Allah Hafiz,
deb chatterjee
(a good samaritan)
Raheel Khan
In article <97...@hydra.gatech.EDU> you write:
>>
>>>Yesterday, May 10, 1993, the Theater of the Arts at Georgia Tech hosted
>>>a performance on the art of lying. William Baker, who is the founder and
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> It was pretty easy to understand what Mr. Baker espoused when
> the pre-speech posters were replete with blatant lies
The pre-speech posters merely announced the event. The text of the
posters was as follow:
"KASHMIR: Inside the killing fields
an eye-witness account of a human rights nightmare that threatens
to precipitate a nuclear conflict in South Asia."
Now how is this text replete with blatant lies.
>
>
>> to a letter sent by India Club (on May 5).
>>
>>>president of CAMP (Christians and Muslims for Peace), tried to discredit
>> Kashmir on his own money and met the Kashmiri people on his own initiative.
>>
>
>
>> His lecture at Georgia Tech was orgainzied by the Muslim Students Association
> Why would Mr. Baker go to Kashmir on his own money? He had no
> vested interests? If he had nothing to do with KAC, why was it
> that many of the pre-speech posters had "KAC" emblazoned on it?
>
>
Professor Baker went to India on his own expense so that he could
witness Kashmir first hand. He wants to write a book on the Kashmiri
situation.
I don't see the point of the reference to the prespeech posters. Are
you implying that Mr. Baker put up those flyers himself? The
function was organized by the Muslim Students Association and the
publicity was also done by the MSA.
Some of the flyers used were procured from the KAC. The were
very cooperative when they heard that the MSA had organized a lecture on
Kashmir. It was impossible for MSA to come up with decent flyers on such
short a notice. However, all the banners and posters were made by the
MSA and none of them contained any detailed information about the
Kashmiri situation.
Like Bosnia Kashmir is an issue of concern for all Muslims. We condemn
injustice to everyone, but we are specially concerned when injustices
are being committed against our brothers and sisters. Information
from independent sources proves beyond doubt that excesses are being
committed against the Kashmiri Muslims. The function was organized by
the MSA in order to shed light on the ongoing abuses against Muslims
in Kashmir. We have no quarrels with any government, except those
governments which are involved in persecution of Muslims. It was the
Indian Student body at Tech which gave this event a nationalistic and
political hue.
The most misfortunate part of the whole event was that many (Indian)
people had already deceided that whatever William Baker had to say
was untrue because to admit any part of his testimony would be
unpatriotic.
>>
>> Anti Semitic? How so? How can he support the Arabs (who are semites)
>> and still be Anti-Semetic? Talk sense, man!
>
> Mr. Baker is clearly anti-semetic (anti-Jew). He maligned
> the Jewish culture, Israel, and declared a virtual jihad
> against Judaism
>
I don't want to get embroilled in any war of words because I fear it leads
no where. However, you have mad three mistakes in this one knowence,
which I feel I must point out:
1) Anti-Jew is not anti-semetic. The Arabs are semites as well.
2) Prof. Baker is not anti-semetic but he is against zionism, the policy
through which huge anti-jewishzionist) Jews immigrated to Palestine
and gradually pushed the original occupants out in order to establish
a homeland for the Jews. Even to this day there are many Jews who
believe that what happened in Palestine was wrong.
3) How can Mr. Baker declare a Jihad against anyone when he is a
Christian?
>>
>> Anti-American? Prof. Baker is an ex-Marine! Who gave you the right
>> to deceide that Mr. Baker is anti-American?
>
> Mr. Baker has accused the American government of being a liar
> repeatedly. He has associated with groups and nations that
> are clearly anti-American (such as Hezbollah and Libya)
>
I think that most Americans don't share your defination of Patriotism
where anyone who doesn't accept the government line in a religious
manner become unpatriotic. By the way he met with Hezbollah in order
to negotiate the release of American hostage held by them and as far
as I know he hasn`t been to Libya.
>>
>> It this past paragraph you have done nothing to absolve India of the
>> charges of Human rights abuse but you have only slandered Mr. Baker.
>> Fine sense of propriety you have, Mr. Razdan!
>
> In any paragraph, you have done nothing to absolve the role of the
> people you support in the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus.
> Fine sense of propriety you have, Mr. Khan!
>
Nice tit-for-tat. You win.
> Not only has India been absolved, but the blame has been put on the
> real violators of human rights-- the Pakistani-supported fundamentalist
>
> groups in Kashmir
That was easy! Claim India is innocent and that every one who say other-
wise is a liar paid by the KAC. And then proclaim your victory. Sounds
like Saddam Hussein's "Victory" over the US in the Gulf War.
>>>terrorist movement in Kashmir with training camps, sophisiticated and deadly
>>>weaponry (machine guns and rocket launchers) and escape havens. Yet he
>>>claimed that the Kashmiri militants were righteous freedom fighters. The
>>
>> But the Pakistani government did more to help the Afghans during their
>> war of resistance. That did not mean that Afghans were not "righteous
>> freedom fighters". Righteousness of any cause has very little to do
>> with which government is supporting or opposing it.
>>
>
> You seem to be confused in your response here. You have not
> contested the U.S. government implicating Pakistan in supporting
> terrorism (not only in Kashmir, but in the whole world)
>
If it was OK for Pakistan to support the Afghan's in their Jihad against
those who oppressed them then its certainly OK for Pakistan to support
the Muslims in Kashmir. I have never claimed to share your defination
of terrorism where a man trying to fight an oppresser is labelled as
a terrorist.
The question is not whether Pakistan is supporting the Kashmiris or not.
As far as I am concerned, the question is whether the Kashmiri cause is
legitimate or not.
>>>US government, the CIA, the State Department - are all lying? And only
>>>he speaks the truth? Right? You don't have to be from Tech to recognize
>>>that he's pulling a fast one.
>>
>> The following are quoted from an executive summary of the U.S. State
>> I guess, I can ask the same question, Mr. Razdan: `US government, the
>> CIA, the State Department - are all lying? And only you speak the
>> truth? Right? You don't have to be from Tech to recognize that you're
>> pulling a fast one.'
>
> Mr. Khan, you really must read the reports more carefully. These
> reports mention that the Indian government is fighting a
> terrorist movement
>
Again, it doesn't really matter whether you call it terrorism or
whatever else you want. The question is whether the resistance has
any legitimacy or not. If indeed the Kashmiris are being oppressed to
the extent the US State Department's reprots indicate, or to the extent
Amnesty International or Asia Watch's reports indicate, then the Kashmiris
have every right to fight those who oppress them. It doesn't mean that
they have a license to do anything that they desire; I don't support
any oppression of innocent people even by the Kashmiri resistance
movement. However, AI, Asia Watch and other sources have mantained that
the resistance movement targets are mainly government and security force
members, a statement which is consistent with what the Kashmiris
themselves claim. I have yet to read any account of persection of
innocent civilians by the Kashmiris related by an INDEPENDENT source.
I realize that you can give tales of horror as related by Razdan or
government stories but neither of these sources qualify as an
independent source.
> You must also read the gruesome violations of human rights that your
> fundamentalist friends have committed in the name of religion.
> The continued propaganda is rather funny; it's like a mass murderer
> crying that his human rights have been violated. Even better, it's
> like a person killing his parents and then throwing himself at the
> mercy of the court, claiming that he is an orphan.
>
> If you're going to quote U.S. documents, quote them in context.
> You haven't, by the way, denied Pakistan's terrorist links yet.
>
A shot in the dark? I did in fact quoted the "US focus on Kashmir" report in
context. I think that you have no basis for the assertion that I have
mis-quoted the report.
I can post the entire report but I`d rather not. Its too much typing
and I have better things to do. Why don't you get a copy of the report
and read it yourself?
>>>.... People
>>>discussing their views near the Theater of the Arts were threatened.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> lecture. The policeman who was stationed at the theater told us that
>> their assembly in front of the theater constituted harassment and that
>> he would request them to either come in and join the lecture or leave
>> the premises.
>
> If this is true, why did the policeman not do so? You have heard
> of free speech, haven't you? People who oppose your view have
> the rights to discuss them without being threatened (which they
> certainly were)
>
What do you mean by "why did the policeman not do so"? He did in fact
ask them to either come in or move away form the main enterance.
Yes people have a right to discuss their views in America, but they
don't have the right to harass other people. The policeman told us that
the assembly in front of the main entrance was illegal.
The proper way of expressing your views is to do your own lecture. I
assure you that none of the Muslims on campus will call up the theater
of the arts and threaten to kill the speaker like some over-zealous
Indian students did!
>>
>> That brings me to another point: why was police there in the first place?
>> The answer to this question is truely revealing! A few days before the
>
> Hmmm...A group who openly advocates terrorism...Why would the police
> be there, I wonder....
>
>> cancel the program by some Indian students who complained that they were
>> "offended" by the program and warned him that there is a chance that the
>> function could be disrupted if the lecture took place.
>>
>
> Do you have any proof about this? It is more likely that he call
> was made by your fundamentalist friends. If Indian students wanted
> to disrupt the program, why didn't they do so? They could have,
> but they didn't
>
Here we go again. Why is it more likely that we ourselves made the
call? As for proof goes, I think that Miller Templeton (who is the
Dean of International Students) and Paul Ackerman (the Manager for
the Theater for the Arts) themselves called MSA representatives and
told us about the threats. Mr. Templeton expressed his sympathies with
us and told us that some Indian students were acting in an irrepsonsible
manner. Both these gentlemen requested us to have the policemen there
to insure that there was no mishap. I think that if I were an over-
zealous Indian then I would never have made such threats: what kind of
an impression do you think these people left on the school authorities?
>> The manager explained to them that in America everyone has the
>>>Mr. Baker represents all that is feudal and fundamentalist; Mr. Baker is
>>>the epitome of all that the West has fought against. He has done his best
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> You seem to be astonishingly in tune with the West! As a proponent
>> of "Hinduvta" as epitomized by the Bharatia Janta Party (BJP), your
>> support of America and your concern for Western values raises some
>> interesting questions!
>
> What right do you have to make judgements on what political parties
> Mr. Razdan supports? Do you know Mr. Razdan and know what parties
> he supports? In the same vein, as a proponent of the Jamaat-I-
> Islami, your support of America and your concern for Western values
> raises some interesting questions!
>
I have been reading SCI for quite some time now. I know Ashitosh's
political sympathies well. By the way, when did I claim that I am
a big proponent of Western values? I was simply pointing out the
obvious discrepency between support of militant Hindu organizations
like the BJP and support of "secular, Western values". The point is
that the West has struggled for centuries to build a society which is
radically different than the regressive and militant society BJP
espouses.
>>
>>>to malign modernism as it exists in the United States and India. His
>>>unpatriotic behavior gives away his presentation of blood, lies, and
>>>videotape.
>>
>> Come, come, why this concern for modernism? Are you trying to tell us
>> that modernism exists in India? In wake of the Barbri Masjid destruction,
>
>
> Yes, modernism does exist in India. India and America are in
> the same vein of modernism. This is quite unlike countries like
> Iran and Pakistan where there is state-sponsored massacres of
> minorities. These countries (at least Pakistan) require religious
> minorities to have separate identity cards a la the Jews during the
> Nazi regime
>
I don't know why you're comparing India with Pakistan and Iran. Neither
Pakistan nor Iran have ever claimed of being Modern in the Western sense.
However you have claimed that India and America are modern in the same
vein. How? It is obvious that India claims to be every thing that
America is (regardless of its merits).
How can India be a secular state when her official name is Bharat, her
flag has the Chakra on it, her official flower is the locust, all symbols
straight from Hindu Mythology? How can India be secular while Bande Matrem
is being sung in the schools? How can India be secular when the people
running the country are becoming increasingly communalised?
India claims to be a democracy, yet it has denied the Kashmiri people
the (promised) right to choose their own government for the past 45
years.
In what sense is Indian modernism in the same vein as American modernism?
>> and the Bombay and Surat massacres it would be more appropriate to
>
> You must be comparing about the carnage in Bombay when bombs were
> set off by your fundamentalist friends. That is modernism, Mr.
> Khan?
>
I think that the bomb blasts were misfortunate and unjust. I don't think
that any Muslim worth the name would support the killing of innocent
by standers in this manner: there is no declared war and certainly those
killed were not fighting against the murderers. However, bomb blasts by
crazed individuals are different then government involvement in riots.
Pakistan's involvement has not been established in the blasts. If they
are involved then they are wrong.
However, the involvement of Bombay police in killing Muslims during the
riots is documented (reports in NY Times for example). In addition,
government peace-keeping forces have frequently engaged in extra-judicial
execution of civilians during riots in Assam and Bihar riots according
to Amnesty International. ( I can post more detailed information on
the involvement of local police in the Bhaglapur massacre and the involvement
of PAC in the Assam riots later).
>> I think that BJP supported militancy is more appropriately called
>> "fuedal", "fundamental", and much more.
>
> I don't know why you're attacking the BJP when the question is
> Pakistan's support of terrorism around the globe. Are they
> not 'militant' enough for you?
>
Once again I fail to understand what Pakistan's alleged support for
terrorism has to do with India's human rights record in Kashmir. Excesses
by the Indian Army in Kashmir are not a matter of debate.Lets
leave prof. Baker and the US State Department aside and see what
some others have to say about the Kashmiri situation.
"In face of a mountain of allegations about human rights violations
in Kashmir, we cannot remain neutral. The Minister can't dispute
the scale of the human rights violations, in view of the authenticated
reports of the number of people who have been murdered, seriously injured
tortured, detained, raped, harassed and intimidated daily by Indian
security forces whose numbers we do not know-the minimum estimate is
150,000 and some estimates put it as high as 400,000 or 500,000 of
every variety in Kashmir.
Therefore, I urge the Minister and Her Majesty's government to take
action and put pressure on the Indian government to allow the people
of Kashmir to hold a referendum and decide their own future and the
destiny of their country."
British House of Commons, Debates, July 24, 1990
Why am I attacking the BJP? Because they are directly involved in aiding
and abetting the criminals who persecute my brothers and sisters in
India and in Kashmir. They are responsible for the death of thousands
of innocent people who have died because of the riots that BJP engineered.
BJP is responsible for flaming hatred between Muslims and
Hindus in India which has pushed India to the brink of a war between
different communities.
Raheel Ahmed Khan
--
KHAN,RAHEEL
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt7242a
Internet: gt7...@prism.gatech.edu