Change in India Media discourse

[Adux]

I think it is highly imperative that the Indian media change the way it address the problem creators of Kashmir. They should hence forth not be called Kashmiri separatist. They are in reality Islamist separatist who just happen to be from Kashmiri. This will address the confusion in the Indian public and see it for what it is.
I think we should all put it up in twitter as well as push this discourse, it will be a first step towards many changes in Kashmir and also for the Pandits

 

[indiatester]

I think it is highly imperative that the Indian media change the way it address the problem creators of Kashmir. They should hence forth not be called Kashmiri separatist. They are in reality Islamist separatist who just happen to be from Kashmiri. This will address the confusion in the Indian public and see it for what it is.
I think we should all put it up in twitter as well as push this discourse, it will be a first step towards many changes in Kashmir and also for the Pandits

That would antoganize a broad spectrum of Muslims in India. If you really want to isolate a section, make it restrictive and insulting. For example:- Uneducated Kashmiri Terrorists or something like that. The description should make it insulting and marginalizing (by virtue of action) rather than broadening IMHO

 

[Voldemort]

Just call them terrorists. Every separatist is a terrorist.

 

[JBH22]

Become a big bully like China. See what they have done and nobody dares to say anything.

Be ruthless and powerful.

 

[Adux]

That would antoganize a broad spectrum of Muslims in India. If you really want to isolate a section, make it restrictive and insulting. For example:- Uneducated Kashmiri Terrorists or something like that. The description should make it insulting and marginalizing (by virtue of action) rather than broadening IMHO

It wont, The whole idea that it will, why this was never called.

There is a reason why the Mufti of Srinangar didnt want the Pandits back. Truth has to be called out for what it is.

This is not a Kashmiri Freedom movement, rather this is a Islamist movement in an area where Muslims are more under guise of Kashmiri movement.

Only Hindus and Idiots thing it will be like that.

If we can call Terror as Maoist as well as Saffron, then we can call Islamist terror for what it is.

You dont understand the issue clearly, that much is evident.

 

[hit&run]

I think it is highly imperative that the Indian media change the way it address the problem creators of Kashmir. They should hence forth not be called Kashmiri separatist. They are in reality Islamist separatist who just happen to be from Kashmiri. This will address the confusion in the Indian public and see it for what it is.
I think we should all put it up in twitter as well as push this discourse, it will be a first step towards many changes in Kashmir and also for the Pandits

Not only that but there is plenty of ironing needs to be done of many apologist hosts who let them have their say on Indian channels. They do not call them out for the contradictions, biases and hypocrisies, at times connives with them with a script dictated by vested interested and previously UPA2.

 

[pmaitra]

It wont, The whole idea that it will, why this was never called.

There is a reason why the Mufti of Srinangar didnt want the Pandits back. Truth has to be called out for what it is.

This is not a Kashmiri Freedom movement, rather this is a Islamist movement in an area where Muslims are more under guise of Kashmiri movement.

Only Hindus and Idiots thing it will be like that.

If we can call Terror as Maoist as well as Saffron, then we can call Islamist terror for what it is.

You dont understand the issue clearly, that much is evident.

You are right. It is not a "Kashmiri Freedom Movement," because, it is non-inclusive and does not have the support of all Kashmiris, not even the Shias.

However, @indiatester has a point. We have to be careful how we word it. Calling it "Islamic" poses the risk of alienating the moderates, Ikhwanis, and the Shias. We don't need that. I am of the opinion that we need to vilify Wahhabi ideology, which relies largely on hate and brutality.

 

[Adux]

India is a secular country, if Indian muslims are islamist, then they dont belong in secular India. If they are secular, then they should have no problem calling other
If Hindu's dont have problem having serious mud being slinged at RSS or Hindu terror even when it is not true, then why should the muslims of India have anything for Islamist of Kashmir.

It is a Islamist movement, it should not be given the cover of Kashmiri movement, the delhi elite and its media should stop this nonsense.

Truth is sometimes ugly, and it should be as such.

Let the Muslims who understand it, fight against their own. They will have our support.

 

[Ajesh]

enth und da? CUSATil Padtham onnum eIllae?

 

[Ajesh]

India is a secular country, if Indian muslims are islamist, then they dont belong in secular India. If they are secular, then they should have no problem calling other
If Hindu's dont have problem having serious mud being slinged at RSS or Hindu terror even when it is not true, then why should the muslims of India have anything for Islamist of Kashmir.

It is a Islamist movement, it should not be given the cover of Kashmiri movement, the delhi elite and its media should stop this nonsense.

Truth is sometimes ugly, and it should be as such.

Let the Muslims who understand it, fight against their own. They will have our support.

enth und da? CUSATil Padtham onnum eIllae?

 

[Adux]

enth und da? CUSATil Padtham onnum eIllae?

Son, I am little older than what you think I am.

 

[Energon]

I think it is highly imperative that the Indian media change the way it address the problem creators of Kashmir. They should hence forth not be called Kashmiri separatist. They are in reality Islamist separatist who just happen to be from Kashmiri. This will address the confusion in the Indian public and see it for what it is.
I think we should all put it up in twitter as well as push this discourse, it will be a first step towards many changes in Kashmir and also for the Pandits

The Kashmiri separatist movement is inexorably connected to geography so it is impossible to separate one from the other. Also Islamist insurgencies around the world are by no means a monolith. There are many separate entities with differing agendas ranging from small scale political tit for tats to global domination. Blindly collating all movements under one banner actually strengthens the validity of the pan Islamists which is the last thing you want.

Furthermore, in nations with heterogeneous populations where Muslims are not the majority, funneling blame to Islam creates internal tensions which are all the more counterproductive. This is especially true in India where due to the pathetically inadequate law and order mechanism, things like mob violence are still very much a part of life. The problem in India is that there is always someone who's just waiting to exploit a chance to unleash large scale violence upon some group or the other. The minute you rechristen the Kashmiri separatist movement into a pan Islamist one, someone somewhere will immediately rile up a crowd and set upon the nearest Muslim owned slums, tenements and shops. This in turn will start another cycle of violence that is simply not worth it IMO.

The inconvenient ground reality for all countries with Muslim minorities is that on one hand there's the infuriating situation where a group of people are openly hostile toward the state while simultaneously enjoying all it's benefits. However in all fairness there's also no denying that in most parts of the world Muslim minorities are forced to live in fear due to the overhanging specter of violence and/or wide scale discrimination. Needless to say this tense standoff always has the potential to destabilize the society at large. The bitter truth is that there's no easy way out of this. The only way the conflict can be commuted in the long term is by slowly integrating all the elements of the minority (as distasteful as that may seem) and provide alternatives to violence so that eventually the incentive to take up arms is all but gone.

 

[Adux]

Absolute hogwash of a post, The appeasement mentality is nauseating not to mention the 'academic' mentality of 'i know what to mango abdul and mango ram will do and think'. It is not geographical movement, it is a Islamist movement, plain and simple. Other than the Sunni's nobody else wants to, which in itself shows reality.

 

[Ray]

In Kashmir, the so called 'separatism' is basically a Sunni movement, espoused that too by a section of political misfits wanting to capitalise their existence with a so called cause, with very little Shia participation.

Further, the religion that was prevalent was Suifsm with overpowering Kashmiri blend.

The concept of what is Kashmir and is Kashmiyat emerged in sufi poetry which has a unique blend of Mahayana Budhism ,Vedanta and Islamic Tassavuf in kashmiri thought .

Here is some examples of Sufism from the poetry of some Sufi saints/ sages.
(1)
Yot yithh zanamuss kenh chhunaa Laarun
Daarnaai daarun Soham Soo
Brahma Vishnu Maheshwar Gaarun
Daarnaai daarun Soham Soo.
Ram Ram karun gau nam sandarun
Dharnai dharun......Sohum su.
( shah Gafoor )
After being born ,What is here to gain ;
So hold SOHAM kriya for existence .
Create Brahma , Vishnu and Maheshwara
And own SOHAM kriya for existence .
(got this from Lawrence's Valley of Kashmir)

(2)
Raahe badh Nishi kar Traahi Bhagwaan
Puniyee Paap Traavithh kar Yaksaan.
Voan samad Miran Shastra heyoo
Paru OM Soo Om SOHAM Soo
( Samad Mir )
Be away from the misleading path
Think not of evil or Good but be unvarying ,
Samad Mir speaks the message of shastras
And recite OM and SOHAM soo .

Some more:

Ahmed Shah Batwari:-

"Vishnas ti Krishnas Raesh Maidanas, Mahaganesh tate kas kare namaskar; Gange-raaz byuthum Gange-bal thanas, jan chum mileth jahaanas seet"

Ayub Betab: -

"Dyanas manz mas Shankar chunho parvati mozaan, kamdevas van baan chalevaeth yokun karehaes dhyaan".

Kashmir was never for Pakistan. If it were so, then when the tribal hordes officered by the Pak Army roaring into the Kashmir Valley would have been helped by the Kashmiris. They did not.

Further, the Valley would have erupted after the Instrument of Accession was signed, if Kashmir identified itself with Pakistan, which was born to be an Islamic State. In fact, it was Sheik Obdullah, the leader of Kashmir and the Muslim (yes, it was called then the Muslim Conference) Conference was the person who nudged the Maharaja to sign the Instrument.

The force majeure was Nehru's acquiescing to UN mediation and ceasefire. This catapulted the idea that there were more dimension to Kashmir than India. This theory was fed fat, by the Pakistanis and their backers, namely the US and UK, the latter most vociferously and being leaders of the world then, their canard stuck. This theory was given able assistance by such people as Alastaire Lamb, whose claim was to be an 'expert' on Kashmir.

And then in Kashmir, the political mess created shortly after thereafter by the Govt of India was, when Sheik Obdullah was made a hero one day and a villain he next.

The Sheik was the undisputed leader of Kashmir, the same way as Gandhi was for India. The manner in which he was being handled, slowly alienated the Muslims of the Valley.

Notwithstanding, it will be recalled that both during 1965 and 1999, it was the Kashmiris who alerted the Indian Army of the Pak infiltrators that led to disastrous consequences for Pakistan.

Therefore, to view Kashmir as a secessionist movement would be an incorrect surmise observing the chaos at times created in urban areas as Srinagar and its outskirts, Sopore, Baramullah or Ganderbal. These are the areas where it is the High Noon of the belief that Kashmir is in a grip of unrest. To rationalise, these are also the areas where vested political interests, to include Pak sponsored Hurriyat, play their cards to ensure their relevance to Kahsmiri politics that some have made an emotive issue of 'separate and exclusive identity within the ambit of the Indian Constitution', while some have made it a crusade to join Pakistan.

Is the Kashmir unrest an Islamic issue or not?

It is for the reason that the various terrorists groups are not malcontent of the Kashmiri people, but Pakistan sponsored terrorist imports from the world over that espouse the Islamic cause, which has aggrandised post Bush's War on Terror, which the Muslims have given a new image as War on Islam.

Therefore, what is happening in Kashmir is not really of Kashmiri character, but an alien Islam that has no resemblance to Kashmiri Islam.

Pakistan's Islamic jihad has overtaken Kashmir, in some areas, at best.

 

[Adux]

If Mango Ram has not killed the next Mango Abdul, even after killings of Hindu's in hundred Islamic terror bomb blasts in this country. So calling Kashmiri movement for what it is, Islamic Separatist....
Guess Mango Ram is more intelligent than you think he is, So is Mango Abdul

 

[Virendra]

Apart from the geenral emergence of Social Media, specific entities such as Media Crooks etc have a good following for the same reason - that mainstream media has failed us.
Mainstream Media's neutrality was expected because it is an institution, not a band of anonymous writers typing away on free internet (i.e. social media).
But it has got completely meshed in propaganda and bias.

 

[Tshering22]

That would antoganize a broad spectrum of Muslims in India. If you really want to isolate a section, make it restrictive and insulting. For example:- Uneducated Kashmiri Terrorists or something like that. The description should make it insulting and marginalizing (by virtue of action) rather than broadening IMHO

See this is where ethical journalism comes into play. Look at what we are having now. Jihad exists. It is reality. Islamist is a term used world over (not islamic), but in reality neither are different. Tell me something; all these so-called patriots started protesting and started taking demonstrations about something happening in Iraq between Sunnis and Shias. More than 25,000 signed up apparently to go there to protect their holy sites. They condemned this violence.

But then tell me, where was this anger when Kashmiri pandits and sufis and sikhs and buddhists were thrown out?

Did ONE muslim orgnaization come to the streets to tell that it was unjust and demanded that it be undone? Did ONE muslim group say that what happened in Assam in 2013 was nothing short of international terrorism with Bangladeshi extremists coming into India and killing local Bodos in the name of religion and changing demography?

No. Not one.

Then why are you afraid of antagonizing Muslims who are offended by the very existence of non-Muslims? There is a small group among them who are rational, sensible and are equally dedicated to India as we all are. I agree. But this broader 'spectrum' is, well, not.

That's the sad reality.

This 'oh what will they think' mentality has to stop.

Those who haven't had any negative intentions will never oppose them being called jihadis or islamist separatists.

Those who want to create secularist-nationalist tensions will use even the most well meaning words to spread lies.

That is the bottomline.


The other day I was watching this international show on YouTube about who are these 'internet Hindus' as Ms. SecoolarSagarika had coined the term.

The debate had even Dr. Swamy, a US-based Indian expert (surprisingly he was very stable and balanced in his comments and thrashed Sagarika, making Swamy smile).


That show nailed it in front of the world what happens when you keep up the appeasement beyond a level.

 

[Tshering22]

India is a secular country, if Indian muslims are islamist, then they dont belong in secular India. If they are secular, then they should have no problem calling other
If Hindu's dont have problem having serious mud being slinged at RSS or Hindu terror even when it is not true, then why should the muslims of India have anything for Islamist of Kashmir.

It is a Islamist movement, it should not be given the cover of Kashmiri movement, the delhi elite and its media should stop this nonsense.

Truth is sometimes ugly, and it should be as such.

Let the Muslims who understand it, fight against their own. They will have our support.

Because their religion commands authority under one unity. They cannot defy it and be targeted by their own families and neighbours. That's the bitter truth. Though I was fortunate enough never to live near a muslim locality even in my stay in north India, one could always see in places like Inderlok in Delhi or the other parts of old Delhi, it was like a mini-Pakistan. Once I had the misfortune of visiting Saharanpur in UP.

I felt as if I had reached 80 years back in time and I was in some non-partitioned Pakistan in some lanes.

The last line you said that those who understand the problem will have your support;

The sad thing to inform you is that there are just barely 1.5% who will understand and agree with you.

The rest, they won't.

And this is where increasingly what Dr. Swamy says in coming true.

You heard Aligarh muslims shout and protest the arrest of an IM affiliate. You heard them condemn the Batla house encounter where a heroic police officer died fighting jihadi terrorists.

But how many protests have you heard from even the 'liberal' muslims about the killing of KPs, Assamese Bodos, UP Jats, Keralite hindus or other groups that are non-Muslim? Not one.



Acknowledging the reality doesn't divide the country.

Infact it separates dedicated Indians from fence-sitters and traitors. Liberalism as what Indian media and their socialist, secularist nehruvian elite say are actually against India and her cultures.

 

[Adux]

The other day I was watching this international show on YouTube about who are these 'internet Hindus' as Ms. SecoolarSagarika had coined the term.

The debate had even Dr. Swamy, a US-based Indian expert (surprisingly he was very stable and balanced in his comments and thrashed Sagarika, making Swamy smile).


That show nailed it in front of the world what happens when you keep up the appeasement beyond a level.

That was Sadanand Dhume

 

[Adux]

Infact it separates dedicated Indians from fence-sitters and traitors. Liberalism as what Indian media and their socialist, secularist nehruvian elite say are actually against India and her cultures.

I refuse to call them liberalist,
They are lying to people, condemning a large majority to suffer to appease the other lot. They are also trying to promote Islamist, which is far away from liberalism. Fact is, these are anti-hindu anti-captialist, for whom Hindu's and Capitalist are the bigger enemy than Islamist in India. Therefore they are together. I refuse to call them liberals.

Liberals tell the truth, are secular , are democratic and believes in equality, none of these nehruvien elites of India are. They are just like Energeon, lying to the people about the real truth.