Murdered by the Indian army?
In March 2000 just before Bill Clinton was due to visit India, 38 Sikhs were massacred in the Indian part of Kashmir. The government blamed Muslim militants but it seems Clinton knew what really happened. wrote a different account his in Madeleine Albright’s book (until recently).
The former U.S. President Bill Clinton has emphasized that Hindu militants were responsible for the massacre of 38 Sikhs at Chatisinghpora in occupied Kashmir in March 2000, a KMS report says.
…
He pointed out, “During my visit to India in 2000, some Hindu militants decided to vent their outrage by murdering 38 Sikhs in cold blood. If I hadn’t made the trip, the victims would probably still be alive. If I hadn’t made the trip, I couldn’t have done my job as president of the United States”. [Pakistan Times]
Added: The book was later edited out after an Indian blog pointed out that actually Lashkar-e-Taiyba was behind the massacre.
But an investigation by India’s Outlook Magazine (registration req). found that not everything was clear-cut as the army made out.
Security forces operating in the Kashmir Valley are familiar with the term ‘white terrorism’. For the average Kashmiri, it is a form of state-sponsored action with the tacit approval of the authorities to ensure that “the right message goes out”. The skewed idea is to keep the local population terrorised so that they do not extend any help to militants.Was the killing of five civilians in the early hours of March 25, 2000, by the army following the Chitsinghpura Sikh massacre a case of white terrorism? The chargesheet filed by the CBI, after three years of investigation, raises serious questions about the army’s role and the shocking cover-up. The sordid tale in a nutshell is that on the eve of President Bill Clinton’s visit, militants struck at Chitsinghpura on May 20, killing 36 Sikhs. Five days later, the army responded by gunning down five villagers in Pathribal, Anantnag district, and passing them off as the militants responsible for the May 20 attack.
The CBI chargesheet, accessed by Outlook, exposes the institutional efforts of the army to cover up the incident and to protect the guilty. A series of letters and documents annexed to the chargesheet show that at every stage army headquarters and its lower formations refused to cooperate with the CBI. The army top brass tried to shield the officers involved from being prosecuted by a civilian agency. But what has also angered many is the fact that the army chose to promote all the accused even while the investigation was on.
…
All five were disfigured beyond recognition and after several false starts, including reports of samples being tampered with, it was finally established that they were local villagers.
Sick sick sick. State terrorism is alive and well.
[Post edited. See comments]
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: South Asia
Despicable. There was a similar massacre of Hindu pilgrims earlier this year, with many rumours in India that this too was ‘white terrorism’. This also makes a mockery of the Indian governments attempts to link assorted terrorist attacks in India with Pakistan/Kashmir. Reminds me very much of the Arab-Israel situation, with Israel constantly being blamed for things which it had no part in.
I must say it is good to see the Indian media taking the lead role in exposing this deception and barbarity. Bravo to these brave journalists.
Sunny,
You need to check up on facts, before publishing such claims.
clinton and his publisher apologized for the obviously flawed statement.
Anup, can you provide a link? And did Outlook also withdraw its article? Doesn’t look like it, and neither does it look like everything is as clear-cut as the army wanted it to be made out. Another article I found:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e37deb66-073b-11db-9067-0000779e2340.html
Sunny, I’m pretty sure that Clinton did withdraw the comment about ‘Hindu’ militants as being a mistake. I think the book has now been edited. The separate accusations about the army being involved in the killings of the supposed ‘militants’ have not been withdrawn by the Indian media.
Since when has clinton being the gold-standard on Kashmir. Sunny i am falbbergasted that YOU a well known journo choose to publish this story. It would have been ok if you would have been neutral. But no great Sunny for great Sunny massacres of Kashmiri Pandits arent worth a mention while an insubstatiated allegation is a ‘fact’. Dont tell me you’ll be callin Bhindrewale a ’sant’ next.
This mistake had been pointed out by Nitin Pai at “Acorn” ( http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/?p=1943 ) (why you never read his blog is a mystery to me), the story was later on picked up Times of India.
@raz:Pakistani Amry and jehadis are no saints. Do you believe that Indian Amry drove out 0.5 million Kashmiri Hindus??? Indian army doesnt need to do anything to discredit Pakistan. It already is with the A.Q Khan affair. To this day there has been NO conclusive proof as to Indian army’s involvement in the 2000 massacre. It is a old jehadi tatic to go around killing civilians in Indian army uniforms.
There was a similar massacre of Hindu pilgrims earlier this year, with many rumours in India that this too was ‘white terrorism’.
These “rumours” are nothing but Pakistani sources. The role of Lashkar-e-Toiba has been established in the said incident.
Ahh yes, now I remember. There was an Indian blog that managed to get the publisher to edit that out. I suspect it was probably because nothing has yet been proven regarding who actually killed those 36 villagers.
err dont mind some of those typos there… i think i’ve broken a key or two on my keyboard…
I suspect it was probably because nothing has yet been proven regarding who actually killed those 36 villagers.
and you choose to blame Indian army for it based on a story from Pakistan Times (wonder wonder)…
That’s the blog.
Vikrant – you know I don’t usually play by the rules that everytime I mention something about an area I have to also condemn everything else related to that area. That I have nothing but contempt for the so-called Kashmiri “freedom fighters” would have been well-established by now you’d think?
“There was an Indian blog that managed to get the publisher to edit that out. I suspect it was probably because nothing has yet been proven regarding who actually killed those 36 villagers.”
That is usually a good enough motive to edit such statements out.
Link to story
Those were the good old days of America trying to do its balancing act between India and Pakistan and Clinton, being a bit of an egomaniac, saw himself as some sort of savior. So did Colin Powell, who basically mouth inane statements in both New Delhi and Islamabad and then proceeded a couple of years later to say that he took pride (basically the U.S. took all the credit) in helping to avert a nuclear war between the two countries as if Musharaff and Vajpayee were morons who didn’t know the consequences of nuclear war. So one can understand Clinton’s desperate attempts to believe that the same govt. that invited him to India with great fanfare then proceeded to murder Sikhs to get back at him for actually accepting the invitation and coming to India . Makes a lot of sense. It would have been nice for him to logically explain the rationale behind this in Albright’s book, but having to retract such tripe is punishment enough.
(Note: this is separate from the other incident, where the army’s complicity/innocence is much less clear cut). Those accusations stand.
“There was a similar massacre of Hindu pilgrims earlier this year, with many rumours in India that this too was ‘white terrorism’.”
Could you please provide links to back this statement up – that it was the Indian govt. and not militants? (non-Pakistani sources please.) Thanks.
Sunny i say you must read Acorn rather than usual commie-bullcrap of The Other India….
Well the Outlook investigation itself states quite clearly (from what i read in this post) that the villagers were murdered by militants (Outlook does not seem to be challenging this fact, wonder why?) and it was the army’s murder of 5 innocent villagers and scapegoating them as said militants that it is the problem.
I think that any attempt by Indian media or individuals or HR groups to investigate army abuse and brutality is a responsible and worthy endeavour – it will ultimately strengthen the body politic.
>>Outlook investigation itself states quite clearly (from what i read in this post) that the villagers were murdered by militants
ie the first 36 villagers.
Outlook does not seem to be challenging this fact, wonder why?
Because mirax, there is no proof whatsoever to suggest the otherwise. 5-6 mujahids entered the village gunned down all Sikh males they could find. Indian Army under pressure from its bosses in South Block murdered 5 villagerws in cold-blood claiming it to be an “encounter killing”….
I much prefer The Other India, thanks :p
I’ve now amended the article, thanks for correcting me.
>>State terrorism is alive and well.
Well Sunny, tell me this : is the CBI which has been actually conducting a long and difficult (in the face of army intransigence) investigation, not itself a part of the Indian state?
Sunny it seems that you read only those blogs that say what you want hear eh?
is the CBI which has been actually conducting a long and difficult (in the face of army intransigence) investigation, not itself a part of the Indian state?
CBI is responsible to the PM and the President directly overiding local authorities which shackle the local investigating agencies…
Indian state sponsored terrorism is definately alive and kicking in India and has been since the country was artificially drawn up in 1947. Politicians such as vajpayee, modi and indira executed killings of minorities in order to gain substantial votes from the Hindu majority and disguised it under ‘tackling terrorism.’
For instance you have a known mass murderer by the name of kp gill who has been assigned by the central government to tackle the naxalite-maoist uprising in 13 Indian states.
India is the worlds largest hypocracy and not democracy
had a different account in his book until recently.
Sunny it isnt his book. The pompous dingbat wrote in a foreword to his chamcha-in-chief Albright’s book….
mirax >>>I think that any attempt by Indian media or individuals or HR groups to investigate army abuse and brutality is a responsible and worthy endeavour – it will ultimately strengthen the body politic
curious boywhile you r at it… why dont you go about ejaculating Khalistani propoganda as your other chums do here from time to time?
Not a suprise to see the usual suspects in denial on this thread. Reminds me very much of idiot Muslims who refuse to believe that 9/11,7/7, etc were carried out in their name. Pathetic. India’s atrocities in Kashmir constitute some of the greatest violations of human rights in the world today by far (80,000 plus murdered so far, not to mention countless thousands more raped, tortured and ‘disappeared’), and until moderate Indians take a stand against this state terror, the horror will continue.
This is about human rights and not a single cause. Christains, Sikhs, Muslims, Dalits, and many brave Hindus have suffered the same fate.
As for Khalistan- you don’t need to push propaganda to prove the truth
(80,000 plus murdered so far, not to mention countless thousands more raped, tortured and ‘disappeared’)
Raz, the figure you quote actually includes the people killed by jehadis. By why let this small detail get in the way eh?
It has NEVER been a calculated policy of Indian Amry to massacre civilians as a part of anti-terrorist operations… If it were then the hypocrites of Hurriyat would have had their long overdue rednedezvous will ‘encounter specialists’. Yes i’m not denying that Indian army may have commited gross human rights abuses but they pale in scale ‘mujahids’ achievements. Obviously Pakistani mujahids or its army are not subject to same human rights standards as the Indian army (ask Balochis).
Vikrant say’s:
Commie-bullcrap of The Other India….
Sunny it seems that you read only those blogs that say what you want hear eh?
lol! does anyone else see the irony in it?
“Not a suprise to see the usual suspects in denial on this thread. Reminds me very much of idiot Muslims who refuse to believe that 9/11,7/7, etc were carried out in their name. Pathetic. India’s atrocities in Kashmir constitute some of the greatest violations of human rights in the world today by far (80,000 plus murdered so far, not to mention countless thousands more raped, tortured and ‘disappeared’), and until moderate Indians take a stand against this state terror, the horror will continue.”
You were merely asked to provide links for the claim that you made about Indian govt. maybe being responsible for killing Hindu pilgrims earlier this year. As far as I know, no Indian paper or no brave Indian journalist alleged that the Indian govt. killed those Hindu pilgrims. So, it would be nice for you to provide the links to back up your claim of rumors to that effect. You haven’t done so as yet.
And also please provide a link that the Indian state is responsible for all 80,000-plus murdered so far. Those militants who behead people, innocent Muslims and sometimes whole Muslism families who are accused of being informers included, or gouge out their eyes or slice off their tongues, are innocent of course. No one is denying that the Indian Army could have killed five people and labelled them as militants. The fact that the CBI is actually investigating it proves that the truth there is not clearcut and if the claims are proved, the offenders should be punished. Pray tell who is investigating the state-sponsored terrorism of the militants?
However, there is no shred of proof that the govt. murdered 38 Sikhs, but people are quite willing to believe that. Who’s in denial here? Awaiting those links. Thanks.
sheesh how sweet curious…. you dont need to be a Hindutvadi to be an Indian nationalist. And you dont need to descend in to hyperbole and emotional talk to prove your point. The so-called “abuse” of Christians is an evangelist fuelled exaggeration (wonder why it doesnt constitute Christian abuse when Sikhs start shouting at evangelists), Christians are treated with same dignity as any Indian citizen i believe. Ravi will vouch for that.
“Raz, the figure you quote actually includes the people killed by the Indian army and then blamed on the jehadis/Pakistan”
Fixed that for you
There is no shred of proof that the Indian gov’t didn’t murder those 38 civilians- they’ve did it before (operation woodrose, extrajudicial killings, gujarat)
The usual suspects in denial, Raz? Come on, what kind of ‘argument’ is that?
Sunny made a really silly mistake with the first part of his post, though he had a valid point to make about the outlook investigation. Not a single person on this thread denied the army has to answer for killing the 5 innocent villagers. Where is the denial?
But now we have segued into India bashing for kashmir, the naxalites, the sikhs, the dalits and goodness knows who else – you can just flush this entire thread down the loo. Where it belongs.
Oh yeah course christains are and nagaland is an extremely place, lol yeah whatever. Why is it that groups such as rss which have thousands of branches in India view Christain activity as a threat. Not all
Indian nationalists are Hindutva fanatics- my dads a commie and he is also a proud nationalist.
Christain missionary activity does go on in punjab but you don’t see Sikh panthic bodies declaring them a dangerous threat and using sometimes covert methods in order to annihilate that threat. If ppl wanna convert then let them-their own will (something which hasn’t exactly drilled into the heads of those neo-Hindutva groups)
The so-called “abuse” of Christians is an evangelist fuelled exaggeration
Rubbish. I have a report by Amnesty International (or HRW) in my little library titled ‘We don’t have orders to protect you’ (or something like that), which details the concerted attacks on Indian Christians by the Hindutva crew.
Anyway, this thread is in danger of descending into an all-out Sikh, Hindu, Christian and Muslim cussing match over atrocities in Kashmir.
Let me start by declaring my dad was closely involved with the Indian army, and my bro is in the British army. I have a fair idea that despite the best of intentions, people in the army are just that – people who also commit heinous acts.
That the CBI exists is not a good enough reason to totally exnoerate the Indian state’s past crimes against its own people.
No one is in the right here, so let’s try and have a sensible discussion before this has to be shut down.
lol! does anyone else see the irony in it?
Heh.
Vikrant,
What emotional talk, does stating the truth hurt you and your proud Indian (Hindutva?) sentiments???
I might just stop now, I don’t wanna hurt your ego
>That the CBI exists is not a good enough reason to totally exnoerate the Indian state’s past crimes against its own people.
Slippin and slidin’ all over the place! Did anyone, apart from yourself, say the indian state had to be totally exonerated for its crimes against its citizens?
You know something, it may just be that much easier to actually hold the Indian terrorist state to account for its nefarious crimes if journalists like you actually took some care to be more exact with the details and accuracy of the crime. Just a thought.
I suggest you read the Niyogi Comission report from the 1950s, done under the auspices of the Nehru Congress government and read its conclusion on Christian missionary activitiy in India. There have been abuses by the Hindutva group, but there are also abuses by Christian groups in India as well, most notably in the northeast, but also elsewhere in India.
“Christain missionary activity does go on in punjab but you don’t see Sikh panthic bodies declaring them a dangerous threat and using sometimes covert methods in order to annihilate that threat. If ppl wanna convert then let them-their own will (something which hasn’t exactly drilled into the heads of those neo-Hindutva groups)”
From a couple of years ago:
“Tarlochan Singh, vice-chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, wrote to the presidents of the Catholic Bishops Council of India and the National Council of Churches in India, citing incidents in Punjab, Bhilai and Jharkhand where “Christian missionaries fully supported with medical teams have been going around in many villages alluring poor Sikh families to adopt Christianity.” Directing the Christian leaders “to desist from this activity” he wrote, “I have been approached by a large number of Sikh organisations to take up this matter. I request you to… adopt a policy not to make further attempts of converting Sikhs through any means.”
Whatever happened to “if people want to convert, let them?” Why go runnign to the Sikh member of the National Commission on Minorities and complain. And how dare he ask the Christina bodies to “desist”? Isn’t India a secular democracy? How come he wasn’t called communal for trying to order Christians to stop their activities? How come he wasn’t accused of persecuting Christians because he basically accused them of luring converts through fraudelent means? After all, we all know the conventional wisdom is that they never use force or material goods to lure converts and anyone (oops, anyone who is Hindu) who says so is a raving Hindutva lunatic. Looks like Tarlochan Singh is also a raving Hindutva lunatic.:) And so are those Muslims in Kashmir who a year or two ago arrested Christian missionaries for luring Muslims to convert to Christianity. Oops, Muslims too are raving Hindutva lunatics.:)
for its nefarious crimes if journalists like you actually took some care to be more exact with the details and accuracy of the crime.
Mirax – tell me. What are the exact details in the incidents mentioned above? Tell us exactly what happened so us journalists can be shamed for our incompetence.
xyz
Yes and you are a raving Hindutva lunatic too
“let’s try and have a sensible discussion before this has to be shut down”
There’s not much change of that, seeing how some people have their heads stuck so firmly in the sand. I’ll say this and this only:
India’s conduct in Kashmir is a complete disgrace by any objective standard. This is not Pakistani propganda – major human rights bodies of the world (which have been banned from freely investigating there … hmmm wonder why!) have damned India for its crimes. Moderate Indians must confront this menace of state sponsered terror head on. It is their duty. I understand it is difficult for you to deal with – it doesn’t suprise me that Pickled Politics has been running for so long and this is the first time Indian atrocities in Kashmir have been raised in any meaningful way. Many Muslims have similar issues in facing up to the ‘demons’ of their own societies. But someone has to lead the way. Well done to Sunny for raising this issue.
“Yes and you are a raving Hindutva lunatic too .”
Yup, right up there with Tarlochan Singh and the Muslim government of Kashmir and (in fact pretty much all Muslim governments around the world), the Pope and the Catholics of India.
I know, I know. Facts are really annoying.
But do please keep those binoculars trained to your eyes. Tunnel vision is the way to go.
“I’ll say this and this only:”
Nice way to avoid responsiblity for actually providing links to back your claim.:) Start with aggressive hyperbole and then back down into mouthing platitudes. Also, how many Human Rights reporters have been allowed into PoK or Balochistan?
xyz – I don’t think I’ve seen Raz excuse or deny human rights abuses in Pakistan. Why not simply accept the same happens in India. Or is it absolutely necessary to point fingers at others everytime before accepting some culpability at home?
Why are we looking at this from the perspective of religion and nationalism?
The idea that the army of any state, is abusing human rights be that the above mentioned or the recent news about America, and even the video footage of the British army. Surely there is a lot more to be said about this rather than accusations and counter accusations. Why are such acts occurring, and why aren’t they held to account?
You know if you still have not grasped this and actually ask me to tell you where you have gone wrong- I’m speechless.
1. You started with outdated information – the Albright book foreword, now withdrawn. Like vik said, it is not even Clinton’s own book.
2. You took a single sentence there – without any other verification as gospel truth and actually, you were worse, Clinton blamed hindu militants for the massacre, while you laid the blame at the door of the Indian govt.
3. You did not seem to have grasped how the Outlook article itself did not support your first accusation, though you presumably read it.
This leads to the question: are you actually acting in good faith? Is not the massacre of the sikh men important enough in itself that we should search for the truth and the real perpetrators (it may turn out to be the fucking indian army, but you just don’t know right!)rather than score political points with their deaths?
Every sloppy case of HR abuse makes it easier for the Indian state to dismiss other genuine cases – which none of us doubt do exist, claiming that HR NGO’s have an axe to grind. Your sloppiness makes it easier for the Indian govt.
On this site, I have been one of the biggest critics of Islamic extremism and its destructive effect on Pakistani society. Persecution of minorities, treatment of women, violence towards the West, radicalisation of British Pakistanis – I’ve covered all these. Anybody who has been following my posts on other PP threads can judge this. XYZ on the other hand, does nothing but apologise and diminish any criticism of Hinduvata barbarity. Don’t think we have forgotten your pathetic attempts at ’spin’ on previous Gujurat genocide threads. What a disgrace you are.
xyz – I don’t think I’ve seen Raz excuse or deny human rights abuses in Pakistan. Why not simply accept the same happens in India. Or is it absolutely necessary to point fingers at others everytime before accepting some culpability at home?
Sunny, as far as I can tell, no one here has denied that the Indian army has been culpable in some of the killings in Kashmir and has committed excesses and atrocities. It’s the way of all armies and the perpetrators should be punished. At least the Indian state, for all its faults, has a more democratic set-up and a system of checks and balances in place to investigate such things. But there is no proof that they were to blame for the killings of the Sikhs. Why not simply accept that?
Raz claimed that there were rumors that the Indian govt. had been to blame for killing Hindu pilgrims earlier this year. That’s a pretty serious claim. I asked for links to back that claim. Is that unreasonable? So far, no response. Raz claimed that India is responsible for 80,000-plus deaths in Kashmir. Again, link please. Is that unreasonable? Who is really in denial here?
“XYZ on the other hand, does nothing but apologise and diminish any criticism of Hinduvata barbarity. Don’t think we have forgotten your pathetic attempts at ’spin’ on previous Gujurat genocide threads. What a disgrace you are.”
Now who’s spinning? I usually at least try to provide facts and links to provide all sides of a story, not just one skewed viewpoint. I do not condone anyone’s barbarity, but I do question skewed and biased reporting of whatever political flavor. And I’m still waiting for your links, otherwise I will have to accuse you of being a disgrace and attempting to spin something and diminishing Pakistan’s well proven role in fomenting terrorism in Kashmir (of course, anyone who says that is a bigot in your eyes.)
It’s also pathetic the way xyz tries to bring Pakistan into the equation, despite the fact that this thread was about India and its conduct in Kashmir. A standard Hinduvata tactic.
Is the Indian government responsible for excesses and abuses and atrocities in Kashmir? Yes.
Is Pakistan responsible for fomenting terror in India? Yes.
There, it’s as simple as that. There are facts to support both statements.
You know if you still have not grasped this and actually ask me to tell you where you have gone wrong
No Mirax, I didn’t ask where I had gone wrong, because my amends to the original article already detail that. I asked you what the “facts” were. Big difference.
It’s also pathetic the way xyz tries to bring Pakistan into the equation, despite the fact that this thread was about India and its conduct in Kashmir. A standard Hinduvata tactic.”
Actually, you mentioned Pakistan in your first comment. Also, it’s pathetic how you still havent’ been able to furnish the links to back your claims. Still waiting.
But keep mentioning the words Hindutva, it usually does the trick of deflecting attention from a lack of facts to substantiate a claim.
Were Sikhs killed by Hindu militants as Clinton mistakenly pointed out? – Only those who say that 9/11 was done by Americans themselves will say so. Sunny stop propagating false rumours.
Were 5 muslims killed and claimed as terrorists by Army, really responsible for it? – NO. Its been proven as much as it could be that they were also innocent civilians.
XYZ:
“Raz claimed that India is responsible for 80,000-plus deaths in Kashmir.”
Are you saying that most of the 80,000+ have been killed by “jihadists”? Not to deny that this number compromises those acts of violence as well, but how is it that the killings of the jihadists somehow outnumber those of the army– the military– which is occupying Kashmir?
I can already see it, this thread is going to veer off into Hindu vs.Muslim vs.Sikh and India vs. Pakistan tones….
Poor Bangladesh and Nepal, forgotten deshes of South Asia!!!
The way conspiracy theories have embedded themselves into the minds of so many deluded fools really is hilarious too me.
“THE CIA BLEW UP THE TWIN TOWERS ON 9/11!”
“MI6 COVERED UP THE JULY 7 BOMBINGS!”
“ISRAEL CARRIED OUT THE SUICIDE BOMBINGS IN EGYPT!”
“PAKISTAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FORMENTING TERROR IN INDIA!”
Laughable. Yes, keep on blaming the Big Bad Pakistani Bogeyman for all your troubles. I used to think the Arab obsession with blaming ‘the Jews’ for their problems was bad, but it seems someone wants to give them a run for their money.
Raz:
“It’s also pathetic the way xyz tries to bring Pakistan into the equation, despite the fact that this thread was about India and its conduct in Kashmir. A standard Hinduvata tactic.”
Just because someone brings up Pakistan doesn’t mean they are “Hindutvavadis”. Pakistan, for better or worse, has been involved in Kashmir (from what I understand). One can criticize Pakistan without being a Hindutvavadi.
“Just because someone brings up Pakistan doesn’t mean they are “Hindutvavadis”. Pakistan, for better or worse, has been involved in Kashmir (from what I understand). One can criticize Pakistan without being a Hindutvavadi.”
And, I forgot to add, by the same token, one can criticize Hindutvavadis without being “Islamic sympathizers”, “self hating Hindus” and “pseudo secular” (labels that have been flung at me a couple of times)
“XYZ on the other hand, does nothing but apologise and diminish any criticism of Hinduvata barbarity.”
Raz, do you mean ‘Indian’ barbarity? I am not sure if you are resentful of India – which is a secular state that includes all major religions – or hindus.
I think the main point here is that there is no evidence that the Indian army committed a massacre. But if it did and you want to blame it on people’s religions, then you should include muslims, christians, jainists, sikhs as well.
“Are you saying that most of the 80,000+ have been killed by “jihadists”? Not to deny that this number compromises those acts of violence as well, but how is it that the killings of the jihadists somehow outnumber those of the army– the military– which is occupying Kashmir?”
No, I didn’t say that. Where did I say that? If I had said that I would have furnished a source. I merely asked him to provide a source for his claim that India is responsible for 80,000-plus deaths.
“I can already see it, this thread is going to veer off into Hindu vs.Muslim vs.Sikh and India vs. Pakistan tones….”
I think that was pretty predictable.
desi italia,
If you had followed xyz’s behaviour on previous threads about the Gujurat massacre, you would see why he has earned himself this label
ravi naik,
I have stated previously on this forum: I have nothing against Hindus. I have nothing against Indians. I do have certain problems with the nation state of India – in terms of its policy towards Pakistan and its treatment of its own people in certain areas, notably Kashmir. I most certainly have issues with the Hinduvata ideology, which i consider, along with Islamic fundamentalism, to be one of the major problems in the subcontinent today.
XYZ:
“No, I didn’t say that. Where did I say that?”
Arre, I was WONDERING, that is why I ASKED!!!
Just like how you had asked Raz, too.
>>On this site, I have been one of the biggest critics of Islamic extremism and its destructive effect on Pakistani society. Persecution of minorities, treatment of women, violence towards the West, radicalisation of British Pakistanis – I’ve covered all these. Anybody who has been following my posts on other PP threads can judge this.
Yes, you are right Raz. You have repeatedly spoken out against what is wrong. I even admit to being surprised by your magnanimity towards Israel.
Re Kashmir, I see that as a legitimate issue for the Indian army to be involved in, just as I saw the put-down of the sikh separatism movement, including the golden temple storming as a legitimate issue for the indian state to tackle. If tomorrow the indian army moves into tamil nadu to shoot (hopefully after some torture) some relatives of mine who want to secede from the union and are planting bombs in aid of this endeavour, I assure you, I will not be changing my position. Er, I hate my Indian relatives, so I’ll probably be holding a party to celebrate
I know that this answer will not make you happy but that’s it. Does kashmir deserve atttention on this blog? Yes, why not.I will no doubt learn something from it.
>> XYZ on the other hand, does nothing but apologise and diminish any criticism of Hinduvata barbarity. Don’t think we have forgotten your pathetic attempts at ’spin’ on previous Gujurat genocide threads. What a disgrace you are.
To be fair, I have not seen xyz do this.I read a lot of his posts. He is much more nuanced than that : he usually condemns the atrocity and then goes to attack some sloppiness in reporting or bias he perceives and in the ensuing debate his condemnations are entirely forgotten, hindutva charges are flung around, he gets even more incensed and that’s that.
I used to tell off Vikrant a lot for his pro-hindu bias as I did jonz for his anti-muslim bias – in fact these were the 2 individuals that I used to be *deliberately* rude to. I’ve stopped doing so for a couple of reasons :
Vik is really young and learning; in fact he seems to be more reasonable now.
Jonz is just too weird; it doesn’t help at all.
I felt really angry being called a communalist/hindutvadi myself in the usual PP hysteria/smearing – in fact you too did it to me- and realised that to be sticking racist/hindutva labels on others may not be quite right.
“PAKISTAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FORMENTING TERROR IN INDIA!”
Laughable. Yes, keep on blaming the Big Bad Pakistani Bogeyman for all your troubles. I used to think the Arab obsession with blaming ‘the Jews’ for their problems was bad, but it seems someone wants to give them a run for their money.”
Sadly, that is a predictable response from you. No one is saying that Pakistan is responsible for all India’s troubles. Stop engaging in hyperbole. There is nothing conspiratorial or inaccurate about the statement: Pakistan is responsible for fomenting terror in India. Are you claiming that Pakistan has played absolutely no role whatsoever, ever in the history of time, in fomenting terror in India?
Interesting that you should object so strongly to this statement yet not to the equal statement I made about Indian govt. being responsible for some atrocities in Kashmir. Again, who’s really in denial here? Anyways, back to facts. Still awaiting those links:) All your shouting is not going obscure the fact that you haven’t provided facts to prove your own little “conspiracy theories.” As far as I can tell, it’s ok for you to hurl accusations at India but if anyone dares hurl one back at Pakistan, they are bigoted and anti-Muslim.
Off to watch Germany-Italy and more nataks of a different kind.:)
Everybody, look:
I think it is pretty useless to play a game of ping pong of “India does this” and “Pakistan” does that. Both countries– and NOT the only ones in South Asia–have done a lot of messed up things. People have been persecuted for their religion, for being minorities, for political opposition, etc.
Yes, Indian governments have played the religious card several times, even cynically pitting religious groups for their own political benefits. And genocides have happened, and extremist governments have been in power.
But the same good be true of Pakistan.
>>I asked you what the “facts” were. Big difference.
You’re asking me? Did I claim to know them?
Your blog,your post, your accusations. It was up to you to substantiate them. It is YOUR credibility that is at stake.
“But the same good be true of Pakistan.”
Typo: not “good” but “could”.
xyz – I don’t think I’ve seen Raz excuse or deny human rights abuses in Pakistan. Why not simply accept the same happens in India.
>>So true. Hudood laws exist in Pakistan, Why not simply accept that they exist in India too. I mean whats the difference between two countries? Both are being ruled by dictators, one from Majority community other from minority one. Same Same.
“Just like how you had asked Raz, too.”
Here’s what raz said:
“India’s atrocities in Kashmir constitute some of the greatest violations of human rights in the world today by far (80,000 plus murdered so far.”
Here’s what I said to him:
“Please provide a link that the Indian state is responsible for all 80,000-plus murdered so far. Those militants who behead people, innocent Muslims and sometimes whole Muslim families who are accused of being informers included, or gouge out their eyes or slice off their tongues, are innocent of course. No one is denying that the Indian Army could have killed five people and labelled them as militants.”
What he said and what I said are very different. He makes absolutely no mention of atrocities by militants in Kashmir as contributing to those 80,000-plus deaths and chooses to make the Indian government the sole culpable one. I, at least, accept that both are to blame. He’s stating that as a fact. Very different to what I asked him, which was to provide the source for this “fact.”
“Both are being ruled by dictators, one from Majority community other from minority one. Same Same.”
You forget that the minority dictator Manmohan Singh was actually elected as opposed to the majority dictator Musharaff:)
“You forget that the minority dictator Manmohan Singh…”
Oops, perhaps I should have said the minority dictator Sonia Gandhi was elected.
Lay off of Sunny. He isn’t propogating anything. He is just pointing out what Clinton belives using a direct quote. He isn’t the only one. Pankaj Mishra has a new book out that echoes Clinton’s statement.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e37deb66-073b-11db-9067-0000779e2340.html
Raz:I have stated previously on this forum: I have nothing against Hindus. I have nothing against Indians. I do have certain problems with the nation state of India – in terms of its policy towards Pakistan and its treatment of its own people in certain areas, notably Kashmir.
>>India’s goverment is elected by the people of India. And if its action in last 50 odd years havent satishfied you, then you are actually blaming Indians. After all they seem to have no problem against their own goverment’s actions.
Yes, I know I was just over at SM and read your post.
I also read the review. But it looks like neither you, Sunny or I have yet to read the Mishra book – and know the exact accusation and the basis for it- or even read the AI report on the massacre, though you linked a part of the eyewitness account, it appears to be commentary on the report rather than the report itself.
Waiting for clinton to come back with a clarification?
Touching naivete.
mirax,
Thanks for your well thought out post. Obviously, there is going to be little consensus on the Kashmir issue, even amongst ‘moderates’ like ourselves. This thread rapidly devolved into a flamewar, which was predictable from the outset. Whether that means these issues should be avoided altogether (and where do you draw the line, given the simmering tensions of the subcontinent?) is a tough one to answer.
BTW I’m sorry if I ever called you a Hinduvata. Maybe if we ever meet , you should ‘punish’ the bad Muslim boy for being so rude
From Abhi’s SM article:
>>According to Amnesty International, “the attackers wore uniforms of the armed forces and were led by a tall man whom they addressed as Commanding Officer (CO). All Sikh men were rounded up, ostensibly to check their identities, and made to sit on the ground in two groups against the walls of the gurdwaras [Sikh temples] a few hundred metres from each other; they were shot at point blank range. As the attackers withdrew, they reportedly shouted Hindu slogans…”
Yes, this nugget of information and your comes from Khalistanis, whose cred we can judge by this in the SAME article:
“The book Soft Target by Canadian journalists Zuhair Kashmeri and Brian McAndrew , shows that the Indian government blew up its own airliner in 1985 to blame Sikhs and justify further repression. It quotes an agent of the Canadian Security Investigation Service (CSIS) as saying, “If you really want to clear up the incidents quickly, take vans down to the Indian High Commission and the consulates in Toronto and Vancouver. We know it and they know it that they are involved.”
You know, if you worked yourself just a bit harder, you could really find a BONAFIDE HR atrocity in India to condemn, you know. Ask the HR NGO’s there. Read their press. Heck even trawl the AI site! Don’t bloody waste your time on khalistanis and Clinton FFS. Unless of course, this is all so much light entertainment for you.
Mirax,
Four words from that quote were from the Khalistani website. The rest is a quote from the AI report unless it is a made up quote. I will go with my gut and say that it isn’t. I tried finding the Amnesty International report online but couldn’t, so please spare me your indignation.
It seems clear to me that Clinton believes what he is saying is true. What is wrong with acknowledging that?
>> of information and your comes from Khalistanis, whose cred we can judge by this in the SAME article
I missed out the word ‘link’ after ‘your’.
Look, it is no loss to me if it is proved that it WAS an Indian army black op – the massacre of the 36 men that is, the key being ‘proved’ at least to some reasonable level of evidence instead of all this rather ridiculous conjecture.
Do you really think the Indian army would carry out a supposedly covert operation in full uniform and end with hindu chants after? Allow witnesses to remain alive, so they can attest to this curious behaviour?
When they are supposed to be such cunning killers?
Now I begin to see why you are waiting on Clinton to deign an answer.
>It seems clear to me that Clinton believes what he is saying is true
Based on what? You have a telepathic link with the old charmer?
Mirax, I don’t think you get the implication here.
Clinton would not have put the words in the book unless he believed it to be true. And by the way, how many big “Hindu militant” groups do you know in Kashmir? It is a coded term for the Indian army.
Because he can’t prove it doesn’t mean Clinton does not believe it. And given the Indian army’s later willingness to kill five innocent Kashmiris so they could blame someone stinks like a piece of shit. To be polite here.
But for all your indignation, we are both in the dark about what really happened? Why, because the Indian state has been studiously trying to avoid the CBI investigating properly. How surprising.
I’ve reflected the article with information later provided to be, so digs at my credibility won’t work unless there is a FACT you feel I have missed out deliberately.
We are fully justified in pointing fingers at what happened in Kashmir if the Indian govt refuses to be more open, as is already detailed in the Outlook article. Those with an agenda against transparency will find whatever excuse they want to dismiss us anyway. Pseudo-Secular, Pinkos, Islamo-apologists etc words come to mind. That does not detract from what is a despicable affair and that I’ve tried to reflect in this post.
Based on the fact that I have a direct quote from him. What do you have? Also if you read my post you would have seen that his aide Strobe Talbott corroborated Clinton’s opinion in his own book.
By the way, here is the Amnesty International report:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA200242000?open&of=ENG-IND
Great post, Sunny.
Clinton and Mishra may indeed believe it is true, but they have not proved it at all with any reliable evidence or sources. (Mishra did an article on it for the NYT a few years ago). Clinton also believed a milk factory in Sudan was manufacturing weapons and bombed it based on “evidence.” I think he still maintains that it was producing weapons and he was right. I admire him for many things, but he doesn’t always have a good grip on the truth or the facts, and conveniently forgot them when it suited him.
“As the attackers withdrew, they reportedly shouted Hindu slogans…”
Yes, and this proves they were the Indian Army? If the Indian Army wanted to pin the blame on Islamic militants, would they really wear IA uniforms and shout Hindu slogans in such an obvious manner? And many of the higher-ups in the Indian Army are Sikhs themselves. Do you think they would tolerate this or it could be done without their knowledge? Clinton believes this was done to get attention. Isn’t it also plausible that this was done to embarass the Indian government just as the U.S. President was visiting for a hugely high profile visit?
What sort of parents call their child Strobe?
Arguably this is off-topic, but it is a valid point nonetheless.
“What sort of parents call their child Strobe?”
If only his surname was Light
“His aide Strobe Talbott corroborated Clinton’s opinion in his own book.”
Yes, and Dick Cheney/Condi Rice/other Bush acolytes will corroborate Bush’s opinion that Hussein had huge hoards of weapons of mass destruction in their future books. Shall we believe them? And Clinton looked directly at the camera, wagged his finger and said he did not have sex with that woman. I haven’t read Talbott’s book, but do you know what evidence he cites for his belief? Thanks.
Raz, still waiting for the missing links:) Or are you the missing link? Or perhaps the weakest link?
All in good fun.
Ah finally, you finally find the AI report on which so much conjecture is based! It is quite telling that this was not your first instinct.
Let’s look at this in full:
In the first of the three incidents, perpetrated on 20 March 2000 in Chithisinghpora, it is not known if armed opposition groups, renegades(1) or state agents are responsible for the unlawful killings of 35 men(2). The evidence in the second incident on 25 March in which five people in Panchalthan were unlawfully killed, points to state responsibility. In the latest incident on 3 April, seven demonstrators were shot dead in Brakpora by security forces who reportedly used excessive force to control an agitated crowd.
Unlawful killings in Chithisinghpora on 20 March 2000
On the evening of 20 March 2000, 15 or 17 unidentified gunmen, some in Indian army uniform, entered village Chithisinghpora in Anantnag district, ordered the Sikh men to assemble and systematically from close range, shot dead 34 Sikh men. Several men were injured by gun shots; of these one man(3) died later from his injuries. A unit of paramilitary Rashtriya Rifles (RR) stationed close to the village failed to intervene and only visited the place of the incident on the following morning.
The Sikh population of Jammu and Kashmir is estimated to be between 70,000 and 90,000 out of a total population of some 8 million inhabitants of the state, spread over 130 villages. They are engaged in agriculture and transport and are centred around Anantnag, Tral and Baramulla. Whereas members of the Hindu minority(4) have frequently been targeted by armed groups(5), Sikhs and Muslims have lived in harmony with not a single attack on Sikhs reported before March 2000 since the flare-up of the conflict a decade ago. The fact that many members of the army and central police force stationed in Jammu and Kashmir are Sikhs did not in the past negatively impact on relations between the Muslim majority and the small Sikh minority. After the incident, Muslims pleaded that Sikhs – many of whom felt insecure – should not leave Jammu and Kashmir. During his visit to the area, Union Home Minister L.K. Advani on 26 March 2000 promised special protective measures to the Sikhs of the state but local Sikhs reportedly rejected the protection plan, with some of their spokespersons saying that the Muslim majority had not been hostile to them before and that no protection was needed.
To date it is not known who was behind the unlawful killings which took place on the eve of US President Clinton’s visit to the subcontinent(6); the attack was condemned by him, as by the Indian and the Pakistani governments. Despite the fact that an official inquiry let alone its outcome had not been announced, the Indian Government and the Jammu and Kashmir Government held two armed Islamist groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizb-ul Mujahideen responsible. Director General of Police, Gurbachan Jagat is reported to have said the ”incident is a clear indicator of the militants’ plan to turn Kashmir into a single-religion entity”. The Indian media have echoed Prime Minister Vajpayee’s characterization of the incident as a ‘fresh ethnic cleansing’(7) or a ‘communal massacre’(8).
Several Kashmiri groups, such as the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), a conglomerate of 23 parties, have claimed that the government was responsible for the deaths, perpetrated in an effort to discredit the ‘azadi’ [freedom] cause and to portray its supporters as ‘terrorists’ and religious fanatics prior to the Clinton visit. Spokespersons of both the groups held responsible for the killing by the government have meanwhile denied their involvement.(9) Hizb-ul Mujahideen leader Syed Salahuddin Ahmad said: ”Mujahideen have nothing against the Sikh community which sympathizes with our struggle. We assure them that there never was and there will never be any danger to Sikhs from Kashmiri freedom fighters.”
Three human rights activists from Punjab(10) in mid-April investigated the incident. They found that between 15 and 20 Urdu-speaking armed men had come to the village several times prior to the massacre and mixed freely with the villagers. According to the local population, they were careless with their arms, hanging them on trees while playing cricket with local boys. Several of these earlier visitors were reportedly recognized as the attackers of 20 March. However, some local observers told the activists that they did not believe the attackers to be ‘foreign mercenaries’(11) as they had returned repeatedly to the village and handled their arms very casually which is unusual for paid fighters.
The attackers wore uniforms of the armed forces and were led by a tall man whom they addressed as Commanding Officer (CO). All Sikh men were rounded up, ostensibly to check their identities, and made to sit on the ground in two groups against the walls of the gurdwaras [Sikh temples] a few hundred metres from each other; they were shot at point blank range. As the attackers withdrew, they reportedly shouted Hindu slogans. A small bottle of liquor was left behind by them.(12)
The human rights activists also spoke to two surviving men. Karamjit Singh, a teacher, had been stopped by the attackers at the start of the attack but had managed to slip away after warning a neighbour, Nanak Singh that he feared trouble. Nanak Singh who was injured by the gunfire, pretended to be dead and so escaped the killing as well. Both subsequently left the village with their families.
The human rights activists concluded that dress, language, careless handling of arms and behaviour are all factors that speak against the security forces’ involvement in the unlawful killing. In view of the presence of the paramilitary Rashtriya Rifles (RR) close to the village, the human rights activists considered it improbable that armed opposition fighters had been involved. Armed groups would not have openly visited the village several times. The inquiry team concluded that renegades were the likely perpetrators. Some villagers had told the human rights activists who were investigating the killing that the nearby RR unit knew about the attack on the Sikhs in advance and had done nothing to stop it – which again, given the patronage of renegades exercised by some paramilitary forces, may speak for the renegades’ involvement in the massacre.
Another organisation, the Ludhiana based International Human Rights Organization (IHRO) in late March released its own inquiry report which reportedly reached the same conclusion.
Mirmax,
How are your reading comprehension skills? Looking for the AI report WAS my first instinct. It was buried. That link took me 20 minutes to finally find, and guess what? The quotes match.
Sunny,
Is this the level of debate that you have to deal with on a daily basis? I take back what I said yesterday then. I admire your restraint brother
The key fact is that there were 2 Indian NGO’s (one Panjab based and the other from Ludhiana) that are the only two to have any of the groundwork investigation and both reached the same conclusion : guess what that was?
xyz,
still got your mouth on Advani’s dick, eh? Too bad
I must say I am thoroughly disappointed in the Indian Army. I mean it wasn’t even smart enough to change clothing and shout Islamic slogans in its attempts to pin this on Islamic militants. If this is the level of intelligence in the Indian Army, God help India:)
My comprehension skills? I reckon helluva lot better than yours, truth be said. Yes you found the AI report (have you READ it?)but when you hadn’t been pushed to find it, you were quite happy to link to dubious sources and rely on your ‘gut feeling’ – and yes, I am supposed to be applauding your journalistic rigour after all that! Good boy Abhi! Your quote matched but what else dear boy?
I know that you are not pushed too hard at SM when it comes to debate: you were bragging about banning and ‘controlling’ the debate there yesterday, weren’t you?
Sunny is British, he knows what it is to have a real debate, none of that poncey American PCness. To his immense credit, he is not into banning commenters either.
But still Abhi, thanks for reminding me how much more I prefer Sunny and PP to your blog, I was quite irritated with Sunny today and in danger of forgetting that.
“still got your mouth on Advani’s dick, eh? Too bad ”
Apparently, the word on the street is that that’s your fascination, not mine:)
Yawn. Poor tiresome Raz. Got hoisted with his own petard and now resorting to any type of obfuscation possible to hide the fact that he shot his big mouth off and now can’t back out of it.
Here’s a proverb. It’s Arab, so you may be familiar with it:
“While the word is yet unspoken, you are master of it; when once it is spoken, it is master of you.”
So, I’ll ask one more time. Please provide the (reliable) links to prove your claim that there are rumors that the Indian govt. was responsible for killing Hindu pilgrims earlier this year. It’s a simple, straightforward request written in plain English, even you can understand it, I’m sure. If you don’t provide the link, I’ll just assume that you were blowing in the wind or can’t understand English.
Abhi,
We know what kind of blocking/banning policy you have on SM. You have one heck of tolerant policy towords the different point views there. ON SM if you dont say Anna is most bootiful woman in the world And Abhi the tolerant guy there is high chance you will be blocked. I think its noted somewhere in your policy statement.
Mirax,
Don’t try and bait me dude. Ain’t going to happen.
DilliGuy,
No but it should be.
Now excuse me gents as I try and catch the end of the Ger/Italy game. As we are fond of saying in the states, Peace out my homies.
mirax dude
– give him it the anglo-saxon way 
you know you want to.
He responded by getting the full AI report – abit more and who knows what he may research next
Ger 0 – Itl 0 – 15 min Ex Time left
Justforfun
From U.S. State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2000
Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
February 23, 2001
“On March 20, militants massacred 35 Sikh inhabitants of Chatisinghpura town, Anantnag district, Jammu and Kashmir, in what appeared to be a well-planned attack. The militants, dressed in military uniforms, separated unarmed male members of the Sikh families from women and children, gathered the men in a school complex a short distance from their homes, and summarily executed them. It was the first known attack on the Sikh minority in Jammu and Kashmir by militants, and it appeared intended to drive other members of that community from the Muslim-majority state (see Section 5). ”
So, this report was compiled during Clinton’s presidency. If he had doubts and believed that Indian Army was responsible why is it not reflected in his own State Department’s report? Why did Strobe Talbott, as Deputy Secretary of State not convey his doubts and beliefs and evidence to his very own State Department or his very own Secretary of State Albright? And why haven’t they contacted the State Department since to correct this information and provide them with the evidence so that the State Dept. can correct this report?
This report was issued nearly a full year after the incident. Yet no mention of Hindu militants or Indian Army being involved. This report lays the blame on militants, not Hindu militants or Indian Army. It uses the word militants, the same word it uses throughout the rest of the report to describe people (Muslim militants) who attack civilians, the army etc. Where the State Department refers to abuses by the Indian Army it clearly says Indian Army or security forces.
From the same U.S. State Department report:
“On September 12, Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen militants wearing army uniforms entered an army camp at Beerwa, Budgam district, and fired automatic weapons at the sleeping soldiers; 11 soldiers were killed. ”
I suppose that was the Indian Army posing as Lashkar militants dressed up in IA uniforms massacring its own soldiers for PR benefit.:)
What’s also interesting is that the same U.S. State Department report cites Amnesty as a source for other incidents in India but does not quote or cite the above linked Amnesty report on the Chattisinghpura massacre when talking about it, even though the Amnesty report came out in June 2000, presumably while the State Dept. was researching its human rights report on India. So, if the State Department sees fit to cite Amnesty as a reliable source for several other incidents (including some in Jammu and Kashmir), why not on this specific one?
Is this the level of debate that you have to deal with on a daily basis? I take back what I said yesterday then. I admire your restraint brother
Haha! I get some sympathy, finally!
>>Mirax,Don’t try and bait me dude. Ain’t going to happen.
Hehe, not every blog is as vapid as SM. I noticed that you have closed down comments after 20 posts – 7 of them yours,one by your admin and the other 12, all giving you the grief you so richly deserve. Thinskinned in addition to being a prat?
What a squalid, grubby and worthless thread.
Someone above also mentioned the fact that the army has plenty of Sikhs at higher level, hence they would not be able to get away with this.
Wtf? Have you folks forgotten 1984? Indian armny not capable of killing innocent Sikhs? Indian politicians not capable or willing to use Sikhs as election fodder? Gimme a fucking break please! The fact that the Indian state continues to deny Sikhs in Panjab justice from 1984, and still has plenty of people innocently locked up should provide enough indication that the situation of Sikhs is not as stable as some make out it is.
The General of the Indian Army is Sikh.
Squalid perhaps – grubby perhaps but worthless?
Not entirely for me
- learnt that the CBI is doing its job,
- That the AI report writer thinks that fighters who are paid seem to handle their weapons better than renegades (who presumably arn’t paid which I find hard to believe). I presume the fighters referred to are the LeT (or some other insurgent group) and they are paid to fight. I had always thought they were in Kashmir for the ’cause’, not the money.
- Bill Clinton’s ego is still strong . He likes the sound of his own voice even when it is such a sensitive issue and he his ignoring his own government investigations.
- SM is a for people who drink ‘diet’ Coke.
Justforfun
“Wtf? Have you folks forgotten 1984? Indian armny not capable of killing innocent Sikhs? Indian politicians not capable or willing to use Sikhs as election fodder? Gimme a fucking break please! The fact that the Indian state continues to deny Sikhs in Panjab justice from 1984, and still has plenty of people innocently locked up should provide enough indication that the situation of Sikhs is not as stable as some make out it is.”
Sunny, No one is denying 1984 or collusion by pro- Congress Sikhs in that. The current Congress govt. has lots of goons who were involved in that. And it’s interesting that it’s always portrayed as a Hindu vs. Sikh thing when one of the prime accused is a Christian close friend of the Gandhi family. It is to Manmohan Singh’s shame, as a Sikh himself, that he is not more proactive on this, but then that would mean upsetting his real boss – Sonia Gandhi. And yes, the BJP govt. is guilty as well.
However, I think precisely because of 1984 and its aftermath and the international attention, that no respectable Sikh of importance in the army in 2000, especially the higher-ups who woud be involved in planning such a ridiculous deception, would tolerate the massacre of 36 of their own to score PR points. Or maybe I’m just being naive.
Maybe the current Chief of Army Staff JJ Singh should be accused of collusion then for keeping quiet about this massacre, allegedly by the Indian Army, because as a higher up for several years, including in Jammu and Kashmir, he would be complicit. The Amnesty report itself says that there were/are many Sikhs stationed in J&K. I guess they are all complicit then in keeping quiet because given the diverse nature of the Indian Army, it would be hard to pull this off without your comrades in arms in your own unit knowing about it.
Anyways, Clinton and Talbott and Mishra better contact the State Department with their “proof.”
Sunny – sure the Indian Army has killed innocent Sikhs. However it has killed many innocents of other groups as well, nut I think the commanders involved all thought they were undertaking legitimate military actions. In the storming of the Golden Temple the general in charge certainly thought he was and he was Sikh and he was chosen recommended for the job by the 2nd in command of the whole Indian Army at the time who was also a Sikh. A Sikh officer volunteered to be the first to attempt to access the temple.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jun/03inter.htm
I think the point being made is that a plan to
murder 35 Sikhs as a welcome present for President Clinton would not pass by the Sikhs in the Indian Army without some dissent and even mutiny, and the idea that sort of thing couild not be kept out of their sphere of knowledge is hard to believe – or are the Sikhs in the Indian Army just murdering automata?
Justforfun
Anyways, Clinton and Talbott and Mishra better contact the State Department with their “proof.”
I guess I too could be sarcastic in another debate regarding Clinton’s reliance on intelligence. But it’s well known that governments frequently bury stuff in order not to piss off friendly countries. For e.g., during the Gujarat massacres the British Foreign Office compiled a report saying that there too many worrying signs of state complicity in the riots. It was leaked to BBC News. The Indian govt told them to mind their own business, the FO buried the report and refused to release it to anyone.
a plan to murder 35 Sikhs as a welcome present for President Clinton would not pass by the Sikhs in the Indian Army without some dissent and even mutiny
The assumption here is that a lot of people knew, if indeed it was planned that way, that it was an army operation. I’m not saying it was.
The killing of five innocent villagers subsequently to implicate them was also a heinous act remember. It’s depressing the depths to which humanity will descend to despite protestations of higher ideals.
OK Sunny, I think you’re reaching for straws but fair enough. The BJP is out of government now. Congress is no friend of the BJP and would probably welcome a scandal involving it. So why doesn’t Clinton just come clean – I mean the man is a very-high-rent-a-quote machine these days — and provide all the evidence backing his claim? Merely stating that you believe something is not worthy of a man of his intellect and background. Sticking vague innuendos and pompous insinuations in someone else’s book is not worthy.
His own book came out some years ago. Was this claim also in that book and if not, why not? It was a huge book and dealt with his relations with India and Pakistan and Kashmir. I don’t remember any fuss then about him making such a claim in his own bestselling book. Why stick it in Albright’s book? Once he was done being president why would he have cared who he upset?
And if you’re going to suspect the State Department of burying this info or not being accurate, then how can you trust anything in its report? Or is it ok to cherry pick and say when the State Dept. accuses Indian security forces and cites Amnesty it must be true and when it doesn’t they must be burying info? If they really wanted to bury info about friendly governments they wouldn’t even be putting out this human rights report. They are not exactly shy about accusing the Indian security forces and police in several other egregious incidents. Why not bury those as well? Those are just as likely to upset the friendly Indian government.
But since we’re straining credulity here, let me have a go at it:
Clinton said the following in 2000:
WASHINGTON, APRIL 15: The US President Bill Clinton has said the massacre of 35 Sikhs in Chattisinghpura in Jammu and Kashmir on March 20 happened because he was visiting India and was perpetrated by those who don’t want the turmoil in the state to be eased.
“I’m sure they were murdered because I was there. Those people lost their lives because I went to India and Pakistan,” he said during a a fund-raising luncheon for Georgia Democratic representative Cynthia Mckinney at Atlanta on Friday.
“The people who don’t want their turmoil to be eased used my trip there as a pretext to highlight the difficulties. And somebody, we do not know who, killed perfectly innocent people – who, I might add, had never before been targeted in all the conflicts in Kashmir,” Clinton told the gathering which was attended by many members of the Sikh community.
He said that if the difficulties over Kashmir could be resolved, people in South Asia would explode as there is literally no limit to the potential of the life that could be had there.”
Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
Now, why would he risk offending the friendly government while he was in power? And if he was willing to publicly say so at a fundraiser just after the incident, why would the State Dept. then bury it in a report a year later for fear of offending a friendly government? He had already stated it publicly. And if he was going to state it publicly, why not just be brave and say Hindu militants or the Indian Army instead of cheap innuendo? It’s not as if the Indian govt. is so dense that it didn’t get the gist of what he was saying or implying.
Or, and here is the straining credulity part
, could it be that because the fundraiser was for Cynthia McKinney, known for her virulent anti-Indian stance (and other recent “misbehaviors”) and who accused Indian-Americans of orchestrating a campaign to unseat her, influenced the ever voluble Clinton (maybe miffed that one of his fellow Democrats was unseated by conservative Indian-Americans) to make this innuendo-filled statement at her fundraiser – attended by several Sikhs (am assuming they are not the friendly towards India types of Sikhs)? Maybe he was just playing to her constituency and backers? Have to raise that money you know? Tell them what they want to hear. Politicians have been also known to do that so as not to upset their friendly constituents and backers, and Clinton is the ever suave politician.
There, that’s my little conspiracy theory and what I believe. I have as much reliable proof to back this claim as Clinton, Talbott and Mishra have to back theirs. But it’s what I believe so there must be some kernel of truth to it. By they way, McKinney also believes that the Indian government blew up the Air India flight. Guess Clinton backs her on that too.
Oh, and here’s another bit to my conspiracy theory: I think Clinton was getting back at India because he was miffed that during a state dinner in India during his trip there in 2000, India’s President K.R. Narayanan publicly rebuked Clinton in a toast and said Clinton was being alarmist for calling the Indian subcontinent the most dangerous place in the world. Crafty Clinton kept quiet but probably thought: I’ll get you bubbas. Just wait till McKinney has her fundraiser and Albright writes her book
“Bill Clinton’s ego is still strong . He likes the sound of his own voice even when it is such a sensitive issue and he his ignoring his own government investigations.”
Ha ha. Reminds me of George Bush who believes (or believed, think he’s actually changing his mind or is being forced to change his mind) that there is no scientific evidence to back claims of global warming and climate change even though a government investigation that he himself ordered came to the conclusion that the evidence overwhelmingly backs climate change and global warming and basically agreed with the IPCC’s findings.
Sunny,
I’m commenting before reading all the comments following your post, so please forgive me if I’m repeating what has already been pointed out.
1. The Chittisinghpora massacre, the one Clinton refers to, is about the killing of the Sikhs. There is no evidence that this was carried out by Hindu militants. Therefore Clinton is wrong.
2. Further there is no evidence that the Indian Army carried out this massacre. There is controversy over the Army’s killing of five of the alleged perpetrators of the Chittisinghpora massacre. Criticism of the Army’s role in the killing of the 5 alleged terrorists is fair, as is criticism of its own internal investigation, as is criticism of its co-operation with the CBI. But it is purely speculative to extrapolate this and allege that the Chittisinghpora was state terrorism.
3. There cannot be any condoning the Army’s conduct if (and this is yet to be proven) it indeed killed five innocent people, or even five terrorists in this manner. But it is not at all reasonable to blame the army, or Hindu militants, for that matter, for the Chittisinghpora massacre.
“George Bush who believes (or believed, think he’s actually changing his mind or is being forced to change his mind)”
George Bush cannot “change his mind” because he has no mind to begin with
Every day, I hear his annoying voice on the radio, and it never ceases to amaze me that this guy is the “President”. Whenever I hear soundbites or interviews where he’s not repeating verbatim a speech that has been prepared beforehand by one of his speechwriters, ie when he has to actually respond with his own thoughts, I’m convinced that Bush is nothing but a puppet or spokesperson for the REAL dudes that rule– meaning his administration/friends.
Sorry, my rant was definately off track here….
Back to the Indian Army, massacres, Kashmir and whatnot.
“Back to the Indian Army, massacres, Kashmir and whatnot.”
I now realize that this comes off as trying to make light of an extremely serious discussion. Just for the record, I’m not.
How many of the so called atrocities blamed on Sikh militants were actually committed by them?
Why is Amnesty International still banned in the Punjab????????????
Hi – I am new to this website. What is it about anyway ? A Pakistani-Khalistani collaboration ? Good for you. Keep up the Indian Army bashing…. maybe the Indians will listen to your concerns some day, their long dormant conscience will be woken up and they will instantly disband their army, probably execute all the Indian soldiers for mass human rights violations agianst Kashmiris, muslims, sikhs, dalits, tamils, nagas, mizos etc. etc. …… as well as give away Kashmir, Junarhgarh and Hyderabad to Pakistan, freedom to Khalistan and Nagaland.
The purpose of this blog will then be served. The regulars here can then die happy.
In the past couple of weeks, there’s been a progressive increase of whacky, hysterical, and irrational comments that have been getting posted on several blogs.
Is it because of the heat? Is it because it’s summer vacation? Do a lot of people have quite a few time on their hands now that they are not in school?
But that is the point isn’t it…since brave and courageous Pakistanis and their friends do not have the power whether military or economic, to defeat India and get justice and freedom for the oppressed and depressed people like Kashmiris, Khalistanis, Nagas, Mizos, Tamils, dalits etc. etc. (cant blame them for not having tried hard hard enough, regardless – inshallah )…..the best they can hope for is blogs like this to appeal to the conscience of the Indian people, wake up from their self imposed ignorance and insensitve slumber and recognise the atrocities commited in their name by their ugly brutish thuggish soldiers.
So Sunny boy – you and your friends are doing a fantastic job. Shame the Indians into submission, eh ?
Amnesty International – you rock !!
“Keep up the Indian Army bashing…. maybe the Indians will listen to your concerns some day, their long dormant conscience will be woken up and they will instantly disband their army”
That’s just being a little too defensive. As far as what we really know about what’s going on here; five innocent people were killed and it was made to look like an anti-terrorist operation. They need to get some sort of justice and if Bill Clinton’s ego is the way to get it, then so be it.
The Indian army could use a greater push towards transparency and although this could have been one, I don’t think it’s going to happen if people continue to harp on about how it’s just one more way to push the Khalistani agenda. There’s a line between being patriotic and blindly supporting the government.
And Pakistani-Khalistani collaboration? I realize you’re being facetious (or I’m hoping you’re being facetious), but try telling some very pro-Khalistani members of my family about this Pakistan-Khalistan nexus. I’m sure they’ll laugh right after they finish up foaming at the mouth.
Oh, and Desi Italiana, your comment on Bush’s speechwriters made me laugh. Did you see the Daily Show segment where Jon Stewart wondered what Bush was going to say now that his head speechwriter has left? I’m not in the states right now and I’m a little dissapointed that I won’t get to here “his thoughts” for the first time live
Sleepy…as one of those bloody Indians completely insensitive to the killing of the poor innocents by my army, I thank you too for waking my long sleepy conscience…I also thank your family of Khalistani heroes…keep up the fight. Khalistan Zindabad !! Kashmir banega Pakistan !! etc. etc.
Hey, saying that they foam at the mouth is hardly a sign that I consider them heroes. They’re my family and I deal with it and argue with them whenever stupidity comes up.
Like I said, you can be a patriot and still (constructively) criticize the government.
Oh and another lesson I learned from my family, you can’t really argue with someone who’s bent on being stubborn and closed minded. Doubly so when the person has a great cover like the net. Therefore, I’ll get back to studying.
Raj wisely and with startling clarity and erudition says:
-”A Pakistani-Khalistani collaboration ? Good for you. Keep up the Indian Army bashing…. maybe the Indians will listen to your concerns some day, their long dormant conscience will be woken up and they will instantly disband their army, probably execute all the Indian soldiers for mass human rights violations agianst..”
-”I thank you too for waking my long sleepy conscience…I also thank your family of Khalistani heroes…keep up the fight. Khalistan Zindabad !! Kashmir banega Pakistan !! etc. etc.”
-”The regulars here can then die happy.”
-”appeal to the conscience of the Indian people, wake up from their self imposed ignorance and insensitve slumber and recognise the atrocities commited in their name by their ugly brutish thuggish soldiers.”
-”since brave and courageous Pakistanis and their friends do not have the power whether military or economic, to defeat India and get justice and freedom for the oppressed and depressed ”
PP, I think you have a great writer in the making here….a potentional regular contributor!!! [baqwaas, *yawn*]
Nationalists of every color and stripe are slowly emerging from the woodworks….must be the heat, summer vacation, unfulfilled desires and longings for girls on the beach.
“must be the heat, summer vacation, unfulfilled desires and longings for girls on the beach.”
I think it’s the world cup; why did Brazil have to lose? Knowing that Italy is now in the running to win just does wonders for bringing out the Khalistani in me
Raz : “India’s atrocities in Kashmir constitute some of the greatest violations of human rights in the world today by far (80,000 plus murdered so far, not to mention countless thousands more raped, tortured and ‘disappeared’), and until moderate Indians take a stand against this state terror, the horror will continue.”
First of all, define ‘moderate’ Indians. What % of Indian population do you think can be considered to be ‘moderate’ ? And what should Indians do to be considered ‘moderate’ ?
While you ponder on the above questions, let it be said that the people of India sincerely believe that Pakistani terrorists are responsibke for all those 80,000 plus killed or disappeared in Kashmir …..and any of the 80,000 who were actually killed, tortured or raped by Indian Army ,were India hating Islamic terrorists who deserved to be killed, tortured and have their women raped etc. etc.
And who are the ‘Indian Army’ ? Simple sturdy boys from rural India – sons of humble lower caste farmers from the hinterlands of UP, MP, Rajasthan, Bihar, Punjab, Haryana etc. Representatives of the real India. They are our boys. We are with them every inch of the way.
Indian Army wouldn’t be doing its job if they didn’t kill, torture India hating Kashmiris and rape their wives while at it…
People of India(‘moderate’ or not) want revenge for the systematic ethnic cleaning of Kashmiri Pandits conducted by Kashmiri Muslims in the early 1990s. Our only complaint is that Indian Army has hardly been ruthless enough.
Anybody within Indian terriroty who seeks seccession from India and bears ill will towards its people must be eliminated, after being systematically tortured.
Re: #126
WTF, is this guy on crack?
You’re denouncing “Islamic terrorists”, but you YOU sound like a terrorist.
Re: #126
WTF, is this guy on crack?
You’re denouncing “Islamic terrorists”, but YOU sound like a terrorist.
Sunny – ” It’s depressing the depths to which humanity will descend to despite protestations of higher ideals. ” – I couldn’t agree more.
Peoples’ posts after #110 are diverse, sometime amusing, ironic , tongue in cheek etc but all good knock about stuff. Desi Italiana has said “I now realize that this comes off as trying to make light of an extremely serious discussion. Just for the record, I’m not.” I hope that is taken as read for all of us.
But at the risk of just adding fuel to the fire, Raj’s last post 126 worries me the most not because it might or might not be his personal view or said in jest or not but for the following dynamic that has already been brought up earlier by Mirax.
The Indian Army needs to be held to account for its actions and this needs to be done in a calm and collected manner using evidence and legal process, without political interferance if at all possible. The Kashmiri insurgercency has been a dirty war for 20 years and has the potential to contaminate the Army and make it just a political militia. Once that happens , then 60 years of civilian control will be put at risk. Think of the consequences.
Sunny – I personally think that headlines like “Murdered by the Indian army?” are thought provoking and on first reading I was very very depressed. But as time has gone and reading all the posts and articles linked the situation has become clearer and I take comfort from Nitin’s post #113. However everyone does not try and read all and Raj’s post sums up probably what most ‘average Indian’s think – “The Indian Army needs to go out an be ruthless and just get the job done without any care in the world for the rule of law.”
We all know that would just be a disaster and the Army itself knows that.
Sorry to go abit off topic but a similar parrallel is happening here in the British Army. Its moral is dropping as it sees itself being more and more portayed as a political militia. In the past we have long and costly investigations into “Bloody Sunday” which all tried to follow a legal process. However now in the Iraq conflict it seems that there are more and more politically motivated interventions that confusing the soldier on the ground. They are questioning their purpose. In the future some will not want any part of Tony’s war and quit – there may be a small minority who might try and second guess what if required of them and go out and kick ass. I am sure this is the case in the US Army at the moment. Troops, who are taking their emotional and moral cues from their superiors, are then acting them out. I am sure the same dynamic happens in all armies.
We all need to press for more transparency and justice in India – but really need to try and keep a sense of the good as well as the bad.
Justforfun
Sunny your intellectual dishonesty shocks me.
@mirax: told ya SM is run by a bunch of prats who havent got a clue. For all their pretensions of PCness they end bashing India just to make Pakistanis feel better…
Without Rohin this place has become unbearable…
Many Indians are like Muslims in the West – with a chip on their shoulder and they cant take criticism.
A cursory examination of recent indian history, in which minorities have been slaughtered en masse in state sanctioned pogroms, and in which human rights abuses have taken place carried out by the army, are obvious and plain facts, undeniable.
And yet, to even raise the issue or question this seems to bring some Indians out in a rash and rage, spitting with pain and paranoid insult.
Why? Why the insecurity, denial, defensives squeals of pain and outrage?
Why the need to insult?
Some Indians need to grow up and stop being so immature. This is their sensitive spot. Mock Mohammad and Muslims go crazy. Mention the FACTS of human rights abuses in India, and the saffron chuddis piss in their khaki pants and have nervous breakdowns.
You can begin to see where the rage that sets fire to people and shoots and rapes people in Kashmir comes from when you look at their responses. Some major subterranean frustrations going on here, visible in many posts on this thread – it would make an interesting subject for sociological/psychological investigation, for sure.
Abhi,
Your SM post is a joke mate…
Sunny,
Obviously when you cant convince people, you confuse them… doncha mate?
Vikrant – “intellectual dishonesty” can be taken as a very perjorative statment. Do you really mean it?
You might disagree with Sunny, question his judgement, question his motives whatever … but how “dishonest”? – when he has allowed all to argue, added to his article when people have pointed out errors etc. If he was intellectually dishonest he would not do the above but rather try and censor us, mis-quote, partial quote , ban etc..
I personally think Sunny is a force for good as he is hosting a forum we can use to educate ourselves. By using the human need to change other people we post our drivel – but occasionally we pick up a gem.
Justforfun
Now that I’ve benn licking your bum for long enough Sunny – can we have the “Comment preview” back?
justforfun
We all know that would just be a disaster and the Army itself knows that.
Why would it be a disaster? Disaster for whom? Not for emasculated little men like Raj and Vikrant and the other brutish vulgarians on this thread, who view human life that opposes or threatens them as insect forms to be crushed, and any scrutiny and criticism of their holy world a crime against humanity. This is bravery, this is the pitiless logic of power my friend, this is real life
Socartes this brutish vulgarian happens to be a published contributer on this site… Your posts will be deleted anway. You dont know me nor my stand on Hindutva yet you decide to unfairly and viciously mischaracterise me. But then again with you being a Khalistani/Pakistani groupie what more can be expected of you…
Then again your language seems more sophisticated than the usual Khalistani/Hindutvadi/Pakistani troll we get here… or is because you used a Thesaurus???
Vikrant
Your words just emphasise how you are a vulgar thug and a textbook example of what I am saying. All you can do is slander and slur. I am neither a Pakistani and I have nothing to do with Khalistanis. But in your thuggishness I can see the pissing spitting rage of Indian violence. Your only recourse is verbal thuggery and slander on the page. You are thug behind a computer screen. As I said, criticism of objective FACTS brings you out in this kind of vulgar and crude mode of insult and denial. Why? Why the sensitivity to facts? Why? What is it in your psychology, what depths and inadequacies activate this rage and thuggery?
@justforfun: Point taken but then again his post #114 sounds as if hes got an axe to grind.
like I said, these thuggish pissants are like mullahs in the West. Criticise Indian abuses with recourse to objective FACTS and a nasty, brutish, hidden discourse emerges. At least with Muslims fundamentalists it is obvious and open. But the conspiracy theorising, paranoia, sublimated RAGE is similar.
THUGS.
rant on…
But the conspiracy theorising, paranoia, sublimated RAGE is similar.
THUGS.
easy there boy we might just have an heart attack.
An objective observation of you is not a rant. Unlike you, I have not insulted the founder of this website, for whom you assert you are valued member, nor have I passed comments of violent sinister thuggery, nor have I squealed like a pig in a slaughterhouse at the presentation of FACTS. A very ugly, nasty and hidden discourse emerges in discussions like this, there are some sublimated desires and sublimated rage involved here.
Hmm… even tough i may disagree with Sunny on many issues i consider him as a good friend, good enough that i authored his wikipedia biography. The (unprovoked) vitriol that you direct at me is the most illuminating.
The comments on this thread reflect pretty well the political discourse of the Pakistan vs India conflict. But I am sure we can agree with a few things.
It doesn’t REALLY matter where your loyalties are. Killing civilians is wrong, either by terrorists or by a state. PERIOD.
If indeed the Indian army is a) covering the guilty or worst, b) ordered the killings, then it is really rotten, but I have yet to see concrete evidence.
My feelings on this subject are summarised in #113.
Vikrant, you complain of intellectual dishonesty, confusion, but your every articulation is a tiresome cliche, without thought, originality, humane reflection or insight. You parrot like parakeet with tourettes standard thuggish tropes of Indian nationalism. You slander those who present FACTS about the viciousness of the Indian state in persecuting groups of people, and rather than reflect on how to change that, you resolve to default positions of nationalist thuggery. Like the Muslim idiotarians in the West, your thought is riddled with paranoia, conspiracy and persecution complex. As such you along with Raj reflect a seam of opinion and thought amongst Indians that could generously be described as menacing.
Socrates read up about what happened to the Kashmiri Pandits before you carry on sobbing into your thesaurus about the Indian Army.
‘A cursory examination of recent indian history, in which minorities have been slaughtered en masse in state sanctioned pogroms’
Exactly a ‘cursory’ examination. Perhaps you need to look at the root cause of some of the communal conflicts in recent Indian history.
Have you ever been to India? I have many times and the vast majority of people of differing religions get along fine,even with its large Muslim population, extremist groups like Al-Queda or their mates have almost no influence on Indias Muslims.
Dont be so lamely patronising Neil. The plight of the pandits does not preclude the persecution and atrocities carried out by the Indian state agencies in the last twenty years. You seem unable to acknowledge or realise that. You take this statement of fact as an assertion and violence against the fabric of Indian life. Why? Why the hyper defensivness, the conflation of different issues, the sly sophistry and displacment of facts about this persecution, the squirming in the space of one sentence to claim these circumstances are not real, or not to be commented on, or not to be bothered, then in the same sentence to ruminate ominously on the ‘root cause’ of the atrocities, which you simultaneously believe do not matter, or are not to be mentioned.
Where have I heard that phrase before as an ad hoc shuffle in argument before? Ah yes, when some Muslim idiotarian writes apologies for Islamist murder, they obfuscate with ‘root causism’ to smokescreen inconvenient FACTS and EVENTS.
Like I say, a seam of mind that can at best be described as menacing.
Doesnt anyone get curious,Raj and Socrates are sock puppets of each other. For one Socrates to his credit hasnt presented any facts in this discussion while i have (the story got edited coz of the facts I presented). I for one havent done anything to deserve Socrates’s thesaurus fuelled abuse it seems that its just curious trying to get back whilst Raj seems to be your hyperbolic-stereotypical Hindutvadi construct used largely to discredit Indian nationalists.
Socrates/curious… lets do this once again
Indian nationalism != Hindutva
50 quid to anyone who deciphers Socrates a.k.a “Thesaurus Guy”’s post in one go…
Ok guys, can we calm down a bit please. This thread is once again descending into silly name-calling. Let’s try and stick to the facts.
On another point, while it is undeniable that people such as Vikrant and xyz are fiercely protective of India, as raz is with Pakistan, none of them are apologists for religious fundamentalists. I can vouch for that given their comments on here.
We can still keep this sane. So let’s try shall we?
Vikrant – As justforfun pointed out (you’ll have comment preview this weekend), intellectual dishonesty is something else. I’ve laid down the facts on top as I saw them and as others have laid them out for me, which I’ve used to amend the article.
Now, to answer Nitin.
I agree that at this stage it is wrong to blame the army for the massacre of 36 Sikhs. You may or may not like to believe me but as I said my dad was closely associated with the Indian army so believe me when I say I have no vendetta against it.
But the fact that Clinton blames it on Hindu militants (and he is privvy to a lot more intelligence than we are), and that the army looks like it deliberately killed five innocent villagers to scapegoat for this massacre, instead of hunting down people belonging to LeT, makes me think there is something fishy here.
Of course people are going to see this as an unfounded agenda against the Indian army. I can’t control how people interpret my writing. But there is no ulterior self-hating-Indian agenda here. I thought the episode was interesting and wanted to ask if the Indian army was responsible for more than is attributed. The case is of course not closed because the army has made sure (by obstructing the CBI) that all the jigsaw pieces are not available.
Look Socrates you arent going to win any medals for having the biggest thesaurus !
You are arguing for a ‘conspiracy theory’, tha the Indian Army murders their own ciizens and then lays the blame elsewhere. Do you also believe that the Jews caused 9/11, or man didnt really go to the moon?
I noticed you didn’t answer any of my questions either,so am I right to assume you have little or no knowledge of the situation in India ?
Arrey bhaiyya…I am no hindutwavaadi, I am samajwadi
)…..Humra netaji ka naam mulayam singh yadav 
)
Anyway….my point is simple. There is no dearth of anti-India people. Not being able to defeat India militarily, India haters take recourse to propaganda. You cannot beat the Indian Army, so slander it. Call the Army a bunch of genocidal thugs and people who defend India or care for India as nazi hindutvawaadis, no different from the sort who rammed those planes into the WTC.
I know Indian Army soldiers. Almost every second family in my village in UP has a son in the Indian Army. Kids I played cricket and football with during my yearly visits to my village as a child are now currently serving in the Army. They are like my brothers. I did not join the Army myself, least I can do is talk back when people talk crap about my bros in some obscure internet forum….I know its not doing much….infact its even pathetic…but then thats what these blogs/shlogs are all about…each ot us vicariously fighting for our team……..effete pakis trying to feel macho by taking the p1ss on the hated Indian Army…….deluded khalistanis being deluded..etc.
People have already made up their mind, find facts to suit their opinion or prejudices rather than form their opinion on facts…so one cannot have a reasonable debate with such people. You say ‘Indian Army thugs kill innocent Kashmiris’ ? Okay. They do. So what are you gonna do about it, other than cry like a b1tch in the obscurity of internet ?
I did not join the Army myself, least I can do is talk back when people talk crap about my bros in some obscure internet forum
What a lame argument. I was raised by army people. I went to an army school. We had army soldiers as servants in India. I played Golf at the army golf course. That would mean I have more of a right to say than you.
“But the fact that Clinton blames it on Hindu militants (and he is privvy to a lot more intelligence than we are, and that the army looks like it deliberately killed five innocent villagers to scapegoat for this massacre, instead of hunting down people belonging to LeT, makes me think there is something fishy here.”
So since he is privvy to a lot more intelligence, does that mean he was right when he bombed a milk factory in Sudan? The Sudanese must have been lying then. The fact that Clinton and Harper-Collins meekly retracted the statement is more fishy. If he truly believed what he said, he would have just kept it in and justified his comment. But it’s nice to see some sudden backing for American intelligence services based on a very vague comment by Clinton lacking in substance and proof, compared to the healthy skepticism normally shown on PP to far more evidence and protestations by the U.S. and British intelligence services concerning other matters. I look forward to more favorable acceptance of pronouncements by Bush and Blair and the Indian government and whoever else (because they are clearly more privvy to more intelligence than the rest of us).
People should read Barry Bearak’s piece in the New York Times about this incident. It’s much better and fairer and far more comprehensive than Mishra’s. Basically, after his investigations, this is what he says, and it sounds very plausible:
1. The Sikhs he spoke to at Chattisinghpura identified Urdu-speaking militants as the culprits. However, days later, they changed their stories because they felt that they had to be safe living in a Muslim-dominated area and didn’t want to upset the militants. They admitted to Bearak that they lied on several occasions and changed their stories several times out of fear and apprehension at further retaliation from militants. Even while talking to Bearak, they admitted that they were trying to decide what story to give him, which one would be best for them. He travelled to Chattisinghpura with a respected Sikh journalist who translated for him.
2. Bearak dismisses the Indian govt.’s claim that the five men they identified were responsible for the massacre. The fact that there is a CBI investigation backs up his skepticism. But the fact that the Indian govt. may have blamed innocent people doesn’t mean they committed the massacre. The fact that British killed an innocent Brazilian man doesn’t mean the British intelligence services blew up those trains last July in London. Police around the world routinely arrest the wrong people for crimes or seek to unfairly pin crimes on people under pressure. Does this mean the police themselves committed all those crimes to begin with?
3. Bearak actually interviews a jihadi in Sialkot, Pakistan who confesses to the Chattisinghpura massacre and gives details of the crime. What happened to Clinton’s intelligence? Apparently he missed this confession. If we’re going to take Mishra’s word based on an article he did for the NYT and cite his article, how come no credence is given to Bearak’s far superior investigative piece in the very same NYT? Is the jihadi just a glory hound then taking credit? Why would he lie and admit to it – he’s not in jail in India, he’s not being coerced.
Since Outlook seems to be a trusted source here, here is what Prem Shankar Jha (no friend of the BJP govt.) and Vinod Mehta (no friend of the BJP govt. and a devoted slave of the Congress govt.) had to say about the Chattinsinghpura incident:
By PREM SHANKAR JHA
Former editor of The Hindustan Times.
Outlook, Oct. 2, 2000
“Mishra makes this breathtaking assertion [that the 35 Sikhs were killed by Indian security forces in an effort to defame Pakistan] without citing an iota of proof.”
“Theoretically, anything is possible in the dark, brutal world the Kashmiris now inhabit. But if Mishra chose to rely on circumstantial evidence and to establish the security forces’ guilt by association, then he had a duty to examine and present some of the circumstantial evidence that points the other way. First, the attack on the Sikhs was not sudden. In Jul. 1998, I’d been warned by Yasin Malik Sikhs were next on the list. The government, he said, was making the cardinal error of recruiting Kashmiri Sikhs into the Special Operations Group of the Kashmir police, which was even then chalking up half a dozen custodial killings a month. This was creating animosity towards the Sikhs.”
By VINOD MEHTA
Editor-in-chief of Outlook.
Outlook, Oct. 30, 2000
“Outlook had investigated the incident looking specifically for clues of Indian involvement. We had drawn a blank. I recommended to them the name of an organisation which aggressively monitors human rights violations in the Valley. I understand, after their inquiries, the foreign journalists too drew a blank.”
“If such a criminally audacious act was planned and executed by Indian security forces, the sanction for its implementation could not have come from the local B.S.F. chief or army colonel or raw agent. Sanction from Delhi would have been mandatory. Even if you exclude Vajpayee and Advani’s complicity, someone pretty senior in the pmo and home ministry would have to show the green light. From here the orders would have been passed on to the Valley and then to the executioners. It is difficult to imagine that such a dastardly crime perpetrated by the State on its own citizens, which involved a considerable number of Central and state officials, has not leaked out – even as gossip – in our very leaky republic.”
So even two noted BJP govt. baiters were rational enough not to make fools of themselves and indict the Indian Army or jump on the rumor mongering and conspiracy theory bandwagon for this massacre without any proof or evidence. They were able to condemn the Army’s behavior for in killing five men without also condemning it for the massacre.
Clinton may have had his doubts, doubts it seems which are ill founded or founded on some very bad “intelligence” or just plain old diplomatic balancing or just plain old egomania. Still, if he wanted to stick to his poorly founded suspicions, all he had to do was say “unidentified gunmen, whose identity is still in question” in the Albright book. The fact that he said Hindu and the fact that he promptly withdrew it wihtout a murmur, blamed it on poor fact-checking (how lame!) and refused to talk to the journalist who wanted to question him about this assertion shows the weakness of his statement. He realized his mistake and corrected it, to his credit. Sadly, as the Acorn so aptly put it, others still can’t see the forest for the trees and are holding on to a discredited conspiracy theory.
In fact, if you read Clinton’s foreword in Albright’s book, it’s all about religion and he was trying to give examples of people using religion for their own purposes. Although he’s primarily concerned about the Abrahamic faiths, as he calls them, and all the good that they have in common (apparently the rest of the world who follow other religions don’t matter), he decided in what is actually not a very well-written and meager foreword, to hastily put in a reference to some other religion. I guess that was the first thing that popped into his head and he forgot about fact checking and the truth and his memory and intelligence failed him. Probably thought no one would pay much attention to a foreword.
Smashed it XYZ, thats some good stuff you got there.
Correction, jihadi is from Sialkot, but his father was interviewed in Sialkot. So conspiracy theorists can say he was coerced into confessing by India. Fair enough. Bearak himself is not sure.
“What a lame argument. I was raised by army people. I went to an army school. We had army soldiers as servants in India. I played Golf at the army golf course. That would mean I have more of a right to say than you.”
Whoa whoa whoa…..you had army soldiers as servants eh, Sunny boy ? Big time charlie, ain’t you ? I merely played with soldier’s kids (who are now soldiers as well) in villages… never saw the inside of a golf course.
But that was hardly my argument as to who has a greater right or not to comment on Indian Army. My point was ‘Indian Army’ is no alien entity, but a true representative of the Indian people. It is kids from villages of India who mostly join Indian Army. Not folks raised on golf courses.
When you demonise Indian Army – you demonise the people of India.
Basically this is what you say Sunny boy ..
“Sick sick sick. State terrorism is alive and well.”
Blame the Indian people. We are a democracy. WE vote the ‘State’ to power. We are pretty much the ‘State’.
“I agree that at this stage it is wrong to blame the army for the massacre of 36 Sikhs. You may or may not like to believe me but as I said my dad was closely associated with the Indian army so believe me when I say I have no vendetta against it.”
You defintely have an agenda. What you dad’s job was is immatereal.
“But the fact that Clinton blames it on Hindu militants (and he is privvy to a lot more intelligence than we are), and that the army looks like it deliberately killed five innocent villagers to scapegoat for this massacre, instead of hunting down people belonging to LeT, makes me think there is something fishy here.”
Clinton said a lots of stuff, like – he didn’t have sex with that woman monica lewinsky. Clinton hasn’t explained his stand further on this matter. I will take it to be a case of ignorance and misjudgement rather than an agenda on his part.
“Of course people are going to see this as an unfounded agenda against the Indian army. I can’t control how people interpret my writing. But there is no ulterior self-hating-Indian agenda here. I thought the episode was interesting and wanted to ask if the Indian army was responsible for more than is attributed. The case is of course not closed because the army has made sure (by obstructing the CBI) that all the jigsaw pieces are not available.”.
We all have an agenda. In the 60s, an entire generation of Aemricans used to burn US flags. They thought they were being cool…
My point was ‘Indian Army’ is no alien entity, but a true representative of the Indian people. It is kids from villages of India who mostly join Indian Army. Not folks raised on golf courses.
Please, stop going patriotic on my ass. It does nothing for you. Yes the village kids join the army, and so do people raised on golf courses. The Army is not some mythical beast for me as it is for you. There is a brutal hierarchy, there is discrimination based on caste, region and religion, army people get killed mostly by mistake by their own comrades (the story my dad told me were sometimes horrific) and generally shit happens. And because they are ordinary kids, they are also liable to commit horrific crimes in the way the American soliders have done in Iraq.
When you demonise Indian Army – you demonise the people of India.
Son, this isn’t Bharat Rakshak. We try and use brains when talking here, not point to the Indian flag tattoed on the chest. When you grow some brains, come back and join the discussion.
Sunny is obviously right in everything he says, he has much greater worldly experience then anyone elso on this forum, so there is no point in making your view known if it doesn’t align exactly with his.
Sunny when are you gonna answer XYZ’s points? Allow watching the World Cup and go through them one by one.
Don’t you realise France V Portugal is all that matters right now?
xyz – I’ve never said the army committed the massacre for sure. But really all you have is one jihadi who wants to take responsibility for a massacre. That is your only real credible source isn’t it? Despite that LeT didn’t actually make any claims at the time.
Anyway, in case you didn’t see this, Mishra replied to Prem Jha’s article here:
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20001009&fname=opinionpankaj&sid=1
Once you are in Kashmir, that scepticism about the government’s ability to speak the truth returns, and multiplies fast. Not a single Kashmiri I spoke to believed the government’s story; and as the days passed it began to seem less and less the final word on the subject it was taken to be by the Indian press – if not any other press.
I still don’t think anyone is in a position to identify with certainty the killers of the Sikhs.
The scope for private investigation remains limited; there are areas in Kashmir journalists just can’t go to. People have their own suspicions; there are theories; there are the strange facts: for instance, that a patrol party of Rashtriya Rifles, which was 1.5 km from Chitsinghpura at the time of the massacre, heard the gunshots but did not bother to go and investigate. Suspicions and theories and some strange facts are not perhaps the best way to get to the truth but when the men in power declare, without offering any evidence, that they have the complete truth in their possession, and that there is no need for an inquiry; when those men go on to murder innocents in their attempt to make lies seem like truth, then it becomes all the more important for journalists to take some untrodden paths.
Read it in full.
Sunny, I never said you said the army committed it for sure. But, correct me if I’m wrong, but you do seem to be giving a lot more credence to what Clinton or Mishra is saying than to what say Jha or Bearak is saying. In fact, before you edited your post to reflect Clinton’s retraction, you said:
“the government blamed Muslim militants but it seems Clinton knew what really happened.”
On what basis did you come to that conclusion? The way you phrased it just happens to make Clinton’s statement seem like a given fact, when it is anything but. The way you phrased it makes it seem as if the govt. is lying and Clinton is telling the truth. Just because Clinton said so? On what basis do you give more credence to what Clinton says than to what the government says? Why would Clinton, whose own government’s intelligence failed him on many occasions, be a better source of what really happened? Because of one line in his sketchy foreword to Albright? It might have been better to say: “But Clinton claims he knows differently.” So, I may be wrong, but it’s on that basis and subsequent comments you’ve made about things being fishy that I think you’re leaning towards the army being guilty more than it being innocent (of the massacre, not the subsequent killings). Of course, you’re entitled to that, if that is indeed the case.
My point is that at least Bearak and Jha seem more willing, as Jha says, to point out all the other circumstantial evidence in favor of the army’s claims. That’s all. The State Department’s own contradictory report, Clinton’s vagueness and really no evidence to back it up besides some feeling don’t ring very sound to me. I honestly believe it was a political statement on his behalf, first due to his balancing act between India and Pakistan (he couldn’t afford to offend Pakistan at the time, and I don’t blame him, he has to be the diplomat) and then he chose to first state publicly or repeat it at a political fundraiser for a conspiracy theory-prone Democratic party member whose constituents and backers are known to have anti-India agendas. I wonder if Bush makes a similar statement about something like that in someone’s book in the future, how many people here would be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt based on vagueness?
I find Bearak’s attempts to report on the incident more sound than Mishra’s. But that’s my opinion.
Bearak’s interviews with the Sikh residents who frankly admiited lying and changing their stories but who did say that the first people they blamed for the massacre was militants – the fact that all this was said in the presence of a well respected Sikh journalist with a history of solid reporting in Kashmir (unless we are to believe that both Bearak and this journalist are lying or stooges) whom the people trusted, makes me trust the story more. Vinod Mehta’s (he who loses no opportunity to bring down the BJP govt.) own opinion in Outlook confirms Bearak’s findings – that no journalist – other than Mishra it seems – was really able to find any evidence that the army committed the massacre or that there was any real proof linking the army to it. Merely repeating people’s predictable suspicions in a region deeply hostile to India is irresponsible reporting. [Statements like "the scope fo private investigation remains limited etc." absolves one of the responsibiliy of trying to dig deeper for real facts to either corroborate or disprove something. Of course it is difficult, but journalists try very hard to overcome those difficulties. I think Bearak tried harder] That proves nothing. That’s like Bearak reporting that the jihadi’s father blamed the Indian Army in his interview wit him, so therefore there must be some truth to it.
So are all the other journalists, Bearak included, merely mediocre journalists or sell-outs to the govt. and only Mishra was able to get the see through it all? Is Mishra willing to accept that people changed their stories out of fear? I mean if it’s plausible to him and others that the Indian Army staged this, why is it not equally plausible that this was done to embarass the govt. on the eve of Clinton’s visit? Does it really make sense that the Indian Army would dress in their own uniforms and loudly shout Hindu slogans and then try and pin it on militants? Why is not plausible that witnesses changed their stories out of fear? At least try and see both or all sides of the story, that’s all one can ask of a supposed journalist. I think Bearak does a much better job of this.
I mentioned the jihadi because Bearak actually takes the trouble to interview him. That is hardly the only evidence I cited, given all the other references I’ve given
And I did mention that Bearak himself says he’s not sure if the guy is telling the truth. As for the LeT, I think I would believe the Indian Army, all its warts included, over the LeT. That doesn’t mean I would swallow anything the IA said, but if it’s their word against the LeT, sorry, the lesser of two evils for me in this particular case given the lack of evidence to show otherwise. Given that the U.S. State Dept. report cites other incidents where LeT militants dressed in army uniforms, its hardly an unknown tactic for them. But instead of believing what is more plausible, people seem to want to believe what is more convoluted – that the IA pretended to be LeT militants but dressed up in IA uniforms and shouted Hindu slogans – a double deception that somehow managed to be hidden from the rest of the army and that either numerous Sikh army members in Kashmir/Delhi command knew nothing about or colluded with to score PR points with Clinton (I don’t think anyone with any brains was that enamored with Clinton to sacrifice 36 lives to impress your case on him – the man had just been exposed as a liar. Charming and witty, but a multiple liar nonetheless).
Anyways, I guess I choose to believe that, given the evidence available, it is much more plausible that the army is telling the truth about the massacre. I prefer Bearak’s piece to Mishra’s in the NYT, because it is more specific, in my opinion and I don’t think he rushed to judgment. That’s my opinion. Mishra says: “Suspicions and theories and some strange facts are not perhaps the best way to get to the truth…” I agree, that’s about the truest thing said by Mishra. I think Clinton must have realized that too, hence the retraction. The bottomline remains, given Mishra’s own admission that noone can positively identify who the killers were, Clinton was wrong to state Hindu militants as if it was a fact and right to retract it.
I’m all for greater transparency with the IA and holding it accountable for its abuses. I’m glad that in India, the army answers to the government and the people, not the other way around. Anything that makes them more answerable to the people is better. But I also think that knee-jerk reactions to the IA by people with their own agendas (and I’m not necessarily talking about Mishra here) is not constructive and crying wolf (as raz did with the rumors over the Hindu pilgrims being allegedly murdered by the IA – but no link or proof yet) harms the greater good. This goes for the government as well, by the way.
I think the reaction to the massacre and willingness to believe it was the IA, despite no evidence, was a knee jerk reaction to the BJP govt., and is the motivation for a lot of these leaky articles that found their way and often still find their way into the NYT – based on some truth but only focusing on some of the truths and not all of the truth and facts and background and evidence and suppressing what doesn’t suit the tone or theme of your article or story. The IA didn’t help itself by allegedly framing five innocent people and is to blame for giving fuel to conspiracy theorists.
XYZ… do the words ‘life a do have you’ make any sense to you?
The bottomline remains, given Mishra’s own admission that noone can positively identify who the killers were, Clinton was wrong to state Hindu militants as if it was a fact and right to retract it.
I think I can grudginly agree on this bit xyz, though I think you give more credence to Jha while I give more to Mishra for our own reasons. That is the best we can sort of agree on. I cannot reply with an essay to match yours as I have tons of work to do, but I think I agree with the broad gist of your argument, though with a slightly opposing view. I did give Clinton the initial benefit of the doubt without realising the publisher retracted the statement. That was of course amended later.
And finally, I am also more for transparency within the IA. But I believe that comes from digging and asking difficult questions that come, like Raj above would prefer not to be asked. That is not how I work. The army should be willing to defend itself against accusations.
“XYZ… do the words ‘life a do have you’ make any sense to you?”
Why you so vex boy? You so vex you gat yo sentence structcha all mix up. It pass your bedtime boy and you is vexing you self and you brain. Stop stuping yo teet. Brush dem and go to bed befo yo fada done pelt you one.
Clearly since you are so bothered and took the time to voice said botheration and vexation about annoying details you don’t have one.:)
One wonders if anyone who either publishes a blog or writes posts on blogs has a life
There, see, you’re not so special:)
Sunny, agreed. (Now give me a Booker for keeping it so short
Honestly, when I type into this box, it never looks that long).
XYZ I’ll take that as a no then.
“Son, this isn’t Bharat Rakshak. We try and use brains when talking here, not point to the Indian flag tattoed on the chest. When you grow some brains, come back and join the discussion.”
What brains are you talking about genius ? Assumptions made by you are as follows >
1. Clinton said ‘hindu militants’ killed those 36 sikhs.So it must be true.
2. Your father was in the Indian Army and he said Indian Army was sh1t , so it must be true.
3. Pankaj Mishra, a raving anti-India commie, said Indian Army killed those 36 sikhs, so it must be true.
4. 5 innocents were killed by Indian Army hunting for the killers of the 36 sikhs – so Indian Army killed those 36 sikhs as well. Its true..its true…
Is this what amounts to ‘brains’ on your part ?
Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind! Jai Hind!
In India our Army doesn’t kill our own people. It might be a bit hard for you Pakis to understand even after Clinton has corrected his quote.
“clinton and his publisher apologized for the obviously flawed statement.”
Please document this claim.
The statement happens to be correct, as reporter Barry Bearak of the New York Times found in his investigation and as separate, independent investigations by the International Human Rights Organization and jointly by the Movement Against State Repression and the Punjab Human Rights Organization also concluded. It was indeed accurate that the government carried out the Chithisinghpora massacre. Don’t try to bamboozle us.
“To this day there has been NO conclusive proof as to Indian army’s involvement in the 2000 massacre.”
They talked to each other in the language of the Indian army, not the local peopel’s language, according to an eyewitness (who survived by pretending to be dead.)
“Indian state sponsored terrorism is definately alive and kicking in India and has been since the country was artificially drawn up in 1947.”
It certainly is. Among other things:
The book Soft Target shows how the Indian regime bombed its own airliner in 1985, killing 329 innocent people, to justify further repression against the Sikhs. The flight was bound for Bombay. The book quotes an investigator from the Canadian Security Investigation Service as saying, “If you really want to clear the incidents quickly, take vans down to the Indian High Commission and the consulates in Toronto and Vancouver, load up everybody and take them down for questioning. We know it and they know it that they are involved.” The book shows that within hours after the flight was blown up, the Indian Consul General in Toronto, Surinder Malik (no relation to Ripudaman Singh Malik), called in a detailed description of the bombing and the names of those he said were involved, information that the Canadian government didn’t discover until weeks later. Mr. Malik said to look on the passenger manifest for the name “L. Singh.” This would turn out to be Lal Singh, who told the press that he was offered “two million dollars and settlement in a nice country” by the Indian regime to give false testimony in the case.
India fomented and pre-planned the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat, according to a police officer who was quoted in the newspapers. Government forces were caught red-handed in a village in Kashmir, trying to burn down the Gurdwara (Sikh place of worship) and some Sikh homes, to blame the Muslims.
The Indian newsmagazine India Today reported that the Indian government created the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, identified by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization. The January 2, 2002 issue of the Washington Times noted that India sponsors cross-border terrorism in Sindh. The Indian newspaper Hitavada reported that India paid the late governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, $1.5 billion to foment and support covert state terrorism in Punjab and Kashmir.
A report issued by MASR shows that India admitted that it held 52,268 political prisoners under the repressive “Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act” (TADA) even though it expired in 1995. Many have been in illegal custody since 1984. There has been no list published of those who were acquitted under TADA and those who are still rotting in Indian jails. Additionally, according to Amnesty International, there are tens of thousands of other minorities being held as political prisoners. The MASR report quotes the Punjab Civil Magistracy as writing “if we add up the figures of the last few years the number of innocent persons killed would run into lakhs [hundreds of thousands.]” The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, more than 300,000 Christians in Nagaland, over 90,000 Muslims in Kashmir, tens of thousands of Christians and Muslims throughout the country, and tens of thousands of Tamils, Assamese, Manipuris, and others.
“It has NEVER been a calculated policy of Indian Amry to massacre civilians as a part of anti-terrorist operations…”
False statement. Extrajudicial killings are a staple of Indian policy. In 1994, they paid over 41,000 cash bounties to police officers to kill sikhs. One bonus was paid to an officer who killed a three-year-old boy!
“wonder why it doesnt constitute Christian abuse when Sikhs start shouting at evangelists”
Wonder why you can’t see the difference between shouting at someone and breaking up a religioous festival with gunfire.
Who was it that put out a boklet on how to implicate Chrsitians in false criminal cases? Oh, yes, the RSS.
How come no international human-rights groups have been allowed into Punjab since 1978? Even Cuba has allowed them in more recently.
Sunny, you were right the first time, and so was Clinton.
“Bush acolytes will corroborate Bush’s opinion that Hussein had huge hoards of weapons of mass destruction in their future books.”
That is becaue Saddam’s own documents and what the American troops have found prove that the WMDs were there. But the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge that fact.
Timmer, there’s no need for anyone to bamboozle you. You do a very good job of bamboozling yourself. Keep it up.
“Why is Amnesty International still banned in the Punjab???????????? ”
Since 1978; even Cuba has let them in more recently.