250 Killings a "Genocide"

Omar Must Emphasise On Nationalistic Outlook
Fri, 2009-02-06 03:26
By J N Raina - Syndicate Features

"The old order changeth, yielding place to new…." Tennyson

A new wave of ‘political modernisation’ is discernible in Jammu and Kashmir. Omar Abdullah, grandson of legendary Kashmir leader Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, has emerged as a top banana in the volatile Northern state. He has taken over the reins of the state administration, heading the resurgent National Conference-Congress coalition, on the crest of a charged political scenario, following the Amarnath wave. We are now witnessing a generational change in Kashmir, for the first time in 75 years, since Sheikh Abdullah began his crusade against the autocratic Dogra regime.

Omar Abdullah (38) has earned the distinction of being India’s youngest Chief Minister. People, who have voted for peace, stability, economic development and democracy, will expectedly find in him a dynamic leader, imbued with a different outlook and an approach to various problems confronting the state. His line of action seems to be different than those of his predecessors, including his maverick father, Dr Farooq Abdullah, who took everything casually.

Omar’s cut out task is formidable. He has to pass through many hurdles and keep at bay not only the separatists, represented by two factions of the Hurriyat Conference—one led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and the other by rambunctious Jamaat-e-Islami leader Syed Ali Geelani—but also the ‘soft-separatist’ People’s Democratic Party (PDP) clan, led by Mufti Mohammad Sayed and his daughter Mehbooba Mufti. Omar’s opponents are crestfallen, but defiant. People have overwhelmingly voted for better governance, stability, modernization and democracy. They are fed up with Pakistan-sponsored militancy.

Omar has a different pedigree and does not seem to suffer from prejudiced notions as such. His mother Mollie Abdullah is a Christian. His Grandmother Akbar Jehan’s father, Michael Harry Nedous was a European hotelier. Omar was born in the United Kingdom on March 10, 1970. He studied in a missionary school in Srinagar and finally got a MBA from Scotland. He was the youngest minister at 29, in the Vajpayee cabinet as minister of state for Commerce and Industries in 1999. Later he was shifted to the External Affairs Ministry in 2001. His role has been generally praise-worthy. It was Begum Akbar Jehan who would support him in his political activities.

Soon after he was voted to power, Omar gave vent to his powerful feelings and announced that he wanted a coalition government, consisting of parties ‘committed to nationalistic outlook’. He made it known succinctly: “We cannot afford to have any experiments when expectations of people in Jammu and Kashmir are so high. We have to have a coalition government which can be stable, which consists of parties committed to nationalistic outlook”.

He is upbeat and has started discussing issues with separatists and others who have a different agenda. He has a different wavelength, with emphasis on nationalism rather than ‘Kashmir-centric’ polity. ‘No one has talked about nationalistic outlook but only on Kashmir-specific issues’, he said during and after the poll. He need not placate the separatists as the Mufti did. Omar must convince his detractors that Talibanisation of Kashmir will not be allowed. He must tell them to roll back madrassas, the breeding ground of terrorism, as in Pakistan.

PDP is quite upset with the NC-Cong alliance, fearing retribution. The Mufti made frantic efforts to wean away Congress from NC. He even offered Chiefministership to Ghulam Nabi Azad, his betenoir, for full six-year term and was ready to concede more. The Mufti wanted to further his party’s interests, and adopt a resolution, aimed at resolving the so-called Kashmir issue, outside the ambit of the Indian Constitution. But he has failed in his scheming. Last year he had supported an “Out-of-box” solution for Kashmir as was suggested by former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf. He had also advocated for floating Pakistan currency in Jammu and Kashmir, along with the Indian currency. But people could understand his game plan and prankish approach, because no one can dare to talk of resolving the Kashmir tangle outside the Constitution. It was this kind of stance which harmed him.

Poll results have changed the contours of mainstream politics in Jammu and Kashmir. Every segment of the society was involved in the hectic poll activity. Azad’s assertion that mandate was ‘fractured’ than that of the previous poll and that the ‘unfortunate mandate’ is not good for the people of the state is preposterous. His remark that the BJP has won 11 seats, but Jammu has lost is not only irksome but uncalled for.

The Mufti was highly disturbed over the stitching of the NC-Cong alliance, although the PDP-Cong combine if formed would have just been 38, against the NC-Cong alliance’s 45 in the 87-member House. This clearly exhibits his opportunistic politics and unfulfilled agenda of making Kashmir ‘green’, in alliance with the secessionists. Sonia Gandhi did best to avoid Mufti in government formation, as it would have led to horse-trading and political corruption. The former Chief Minister wanted to further his soft-separatist ideology, to the chagrin of the nationalists in Jammu and Ladakh.

I remember the day when Omar, then just 12, was roaming barefooted on Srinagar’s Maulana Azad Road, sucking his thumb. It was September, 1982, a few days before Sheikh Abdullah died. When a journalist friend of mine told him to go home as someone would ‘kidnap’ him, Omar just smiled and gesticulated with his thumb.

It is wrong to infer that the NC’s alliance with the BJP (when NDA was in power) had tarnished its face in the valley. Rather it was Sheikh Abdullah’s policy to align with any party at the Centre to avoid confrontation. Omar has been ill-advised that ‘his key goal should be to undo NC’s image of being a party that had bowed down to New Delhi’. It is absurd, as if Kashmir is a sovereign state. This is how the people are being misled.

Jammu and Kashmir has enough of autonomy, a separate flag, a separate Constitution et el. Any attempt to demand for more autonomy (greater autonomy as the proponents claim) will jeopardize relationship between Kashmir and the rest of the state. It will create regional imbalance. Two-month-long agitation in Jammu is an eye-opener. Kashmiris want a society free from corruption. What has the autonomy given to them? It is a weapon to play fraud with the masses and to hoodwink them.

If Omar has a proposal to set up a “ Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to investigate custodial killings, torture etc, he must also probe the circumstances which led to the genocide of five lakh Kashmiri Hindus and forced them to leave their ancestral land of birth. No government can survive if it continues to be Kashmir-specific.

Mufti’s healing touch policy for the militants has proved disastrous. Ultimately he had to bow out. Geelani must see the writing on the wall rather than create fresh trouble for Omar. The Hurriyat Conference has stirred up a hornet’s nest by declaring at a seminar, when Omar was being installed as Chief Minister that ‘elections were not a setback to the secessionist struggle’.

- Asian Tribune -

Code:

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/15478

Date : 2005-01-30
A home for uprooted Kashmiri Pandits
By J.N. Raina - Syndicate Features



Will there be dawn of peace in Kashmir, in the near future? Will the Kashmiri Hindu Pandit community, now in ‘exile’ for the past 15 years, return to their roots? These two questions are juxtaposed to each other.

The four-day Pugwash Conference (on Science and World Affairs), held at Kathmandu from December 15, should have felt some concern about their plight and sought their cooperation, while involving a broad spectrum of Kashmiri leadership on either side of the LoC, for establishing durable peace in Jammu and Kashmir. The pro-Pakistan Hurriyat Conference is not the sole organization to represent the people of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. The two regions of Ladakh and Jammu constitute nearly half the entire state population. Area-wise, the Valley’s share is just over 11 per cent of the state’s total landmass.

Kashmiri Pandits’ roots are embedded deep in the Elysian valley- culturally, ethnically and politically. Peace in the valley is generally associated with the return of over 3.5 lakh Kashmiri Hindus to their land of birth. In Jammu, the state’s winter capital, I got an impression that the Muslim majority community, by and large, want Pandits to return to their original abode. This seems to be the pet theme of even some separatist leaders, who chant: “ Kashmir is incomplete without Kashmiri Pandits”. They do not hesitate from accosting the community to join the so-called mainstream of ‘Kashmiriyat’, little believing in plural society.

But the stark question arises: has the euphoria of ‘keeping the Kashmiri Hindus away from the Valley’ died down? Does Syed Ali Shah Geelani, the die-hard fundamentalist Jamait-e-Islami leader – the betenoire of the Pandits—really want them to return, or it is just a publicity stunt?

Arguably, the Mufti Mohammad led PDP-Congress Government has kept up its chant of asking the Pandits to return, but intriguingly, the ground situation is quite different. Price of land for construction of houses has skyrocketed, especially in Srinagar, the state’s summer capital. Till the Kashmiri Pandits were ‘ pressured’ to dispose off their properties at throw-away prices, a unit of plot measuring 5,000 square feet, along with a three-storied house, in posh Rawalpora Housing colony, fetched a Kashmiri Pandit just Rs 13 lakhs, against the then market price of Rs 30 lakh. Nearly 75 per cent of Hindus have sold their property in the valley. It is mind-boggling that the same plot in the colony now costs from Rs 60 lakh to a crore. The cost escalation has taken place in just three years.

This kind of skulduggery is being indulged in by ‘vested interests’. Intrinsically, is it not a sinister design to discourage the Hindus from returning to Kashmir? And who purchases this landed property? The ‘poor’ Kashmiris, even in the absence of a viable economic activity! Certainly not.

A source told me on phone from Srinagar when I was in Jammu recently, that it is the money from Saudi Arabia and several Muslim countries, which is doing the rounds. May be, this is another plank to compel the residual Pandit community to sell their property at lucrative prices, so that no trace of them remains in the valley. The cost of agricultural land has proportionately risen many-fold. There are still ten to fifteen thousand Hindus left in the Valley. Hundreds visit the Valley now every year as visitors, residing in hotels.

The state Government’s discriminatory attitude towards the Pandits is disturbing. A lot of bungling has crept in the 2001 Census report. Dr K L Bhatia, Director Jammu Law School, while presiding over a seminar on: " Census 2001; Challenges and Solutions", on December 12, said the census figures in Jammu and Kashmir from 1991 and 2001 are totally baseless. He termed as ‘ ridiculous’ the census figures which showed the total population of Kashmiri Hindus in the valley as 1,00,912, in which the ratio of male has been shown as 90 per cent and that of the female population a just ten per cent. This is how the international community is being provided a distorted picture about Kashmir.

Internally displaced Kashmiri Hindu teachers or migrants, promoted to next grade some years ago, are being constantly coerced to serve in the troubled valley. Their promotion has been withheld because of their ‘inability’ to serve in militancy-ravaged areas. Similar is the lot of many other Hindu employees. My cousin, Badrinath Razdan of Pulwama district has been going from pillar to post, seeking compensation for his ‘grabbed’ house. His letters to the Union Home Ministry for compensation have been ignored. His fault is that he wants to return to his homeland and get his house evacuated. Similar is the lot of thousands of such migrants whose pleas are being ignored. I was myself a victim of this sort.

For the past ten to fifteen years, the Kashmiri Pandits have been living as refugees under tattered tents or one-room dingy apartments at various camps in Jammu and Udhampur. The PDP-Congress-led Mufti Government, on the instructions of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, has now acted upon a plan to add one more room to their dwellings. The Rs 150 crore project to construct 4,500 two-room sets for the migrants is not the be all and end all of the problem facing the Pandits. Even then, many an eyebrows were raised in Jammu. Some disgruntled people aired their views on BBC news channel against the project. They are against their permanent settlement in Jammu, although Jammu has progressed tremendously following the migration of the Pandits.

What the Pandits want is peace amid their natural surroundings in Kashmir. They want a honourable return to the Valley with their dignity in tact. Unless Kashmir’s composite culture is fully restored, no solution seems discernible. There has to be a harmonious blending of the age-old cultural relationship, which has been shattered because of Pakistan-sponsored militancy. There has to be a complete change in the mindset of the Muslim majority community towards Hindus, to start the process of reconciliation. Pandits’ population was 14 per cent in the Valley in 1947, in spite of repeated conversion during the harsh periods of the Muslim rulers.

Code:

http://www.asiantribune.com/oldsite/show_article.php?id=2103

Slow Eviction of Pandits from Kashmir
by M. Rasgotra

At the turn of the century, the population of the Kashmir Valley's Pandits was close to a million. Today, no more than a few thousand remain. More than 300,000, driven out by Muslim fanatics at gunpoint in 1990-91, are living precariously in refugee camps in Jammu, Delhi and elsewhere.
Cleansing the Valley of its Pandits has been going on since July 1931 when the first Muslim- Hindu riot took place there. Even under the Dogra rule, the Kashmiri Pandits were not favoured in the matter of recruitment to government service. Feeling vulnerable and neglected following the riot, they started moving out to Indian cities. A few adventurous ones left for foreign lands. Some 30,000 to 40,000 families are said to have moved out of Kashmir in the 1931-41 decade.

According to the 1941 census, the Kashmir Valley's population comprised 15 per cent Pandits as against 83 per cent Muslims. Twenty-five or even 30 per cent would be a more realistic figure for the Pandits at that time. Kashmir's censuses, conducted by junior, local Muslim officials are, notorious for describing Pandit households as Muslim families. The 1941 census marks the beginning of a statistical assault on the Pandits' numbers.

India's independence and Kashmir's accession did little to improve the fortunes of the Valley's Pandits numbering about 800,000 at that time. They remained as vulnerable as before. Virtually none of the billions in so-called development funds poured into the State by the Union Government reached them. For that matter, nor did much of that bounty reach the backward Muslim communities, such as Gujjars and Bakarwals.

At the time of Pakistan's invasion of Kashmir in 1947, some Pandit families did flee to safety in India, but most of them returned to their homes after the raiders were expelled. In a curious development, the State administration floated figures varying from 80,000 to 120,000 as representing the number of the Pandits remaining in the Valley. After visiting Kashmir, Ram Manohar Lohia mentioned in a letter to Nehru that no more than 80,000 Pandits were left in the Valley.

The effect of all this was to deny the Pandits their due representation in the state legislature. The design was further advanced by gerrymandering the constituencies in the Pandit-dominated areas of Srinagar, Anantnag, etc. to eliminate any possibility of the community putting up and electing candidates of its choice. To create an illusion of fairness in the matter, the administration did, however, ensure that one - but never more than one - Pandit found his way to the State legislature, often with Muslim voters' support. This also helped to justify to some extent the statistical violence on the Pandits' numbers.

The 1981 census put the Pandits' number at a little over 124,000 in a total population of 3.1 million. Their share in the Valley's population was down to five per cent as against 15 per cent in the 1941 census with a corresponding rise in the-percentage of Muslims, up from 83 per cent in 1941 to 95 per cent in 1981. The enormity of this injustice perpetrated by a supposedly secular and democratic government on this hapless community stood exposed in 1990, when 300,000 Pandits- men, women and children- fled the Valley under threat of the terrorists' guns and poured into hastily-organised refugee camps in Jammu and other places.

The statistical assault continued, this exposure notwithstanding. The 1991 census places the Pandits' share of the Valley's population at 0.1 per cent which would translate into a head count of 3,000. I believe some 50,000 or more are still in the Valley and another unaccounted 100,000 or so temporarily sheltered with relatives in Jammu and elsewhere in India.

Our own human rights enthusiasts, ever ready to smear the image of our armed-forces engaged in fighting Pakistan's dirty proxy war in Kashmir, have done little to highlight the Pandits' plight. Worse still, our media's casual, almost cynical, treatment of this slow-motion tragedy, thoughtless and repeated description of these victims of denial, deprivation and terror as 'migrants', has inured the country to this grievous wrong. It has dulled the nation's sense of responsibility towards an abused and aggrieved minority and lulled the authorities into complacency and inaction.

In all the current fuss in New Delhi concerning economic and political packages for Kashmir and plans to conduct elections to normalise the situation there, no one seems to spare a thought for the Pandits. The modalities of their participation in the elections, and the question of the rehabilitation in Kashmir, ought to figure in these packages and electoral plans.

The Pandits' lives in the 'camps' are not in the least enviable. Because of the generally bad living conditions, the death rate in the camps is high and rising; the birth rate has fallen steeply. Back in Kashmir their houses have been destroyed, their shrines torched, their land, businesses and other assets purloined by faceless marauders. There is nothing for them to go back to. Nobody seems to give much thought to their present fate or their future. As internally displaced persons they are entitled to the fullest possible financial and political support from the Government of India and from international organisations. What have we done to ensure that they get it?

For any future election in the Valley to have validity, it must be ensured that every Kashmiri Pandit adult of voting age, no matter where he or she is presently stationed, has the opportunity to vote. The displaced Pandits, deprived of their homes and properties, cannot be deemed to belong to and vote from their old constituencies in the Valley. A system of voting from their present locations must be devised. Their camps and other temporary locations should be organised into notional constituencies from which candidates can present themselves.

Equally important, it has to be ensured that their representation in the Assembly bears correspondence to their real numbers. In my reckoning they are entitled to a minimum of eight uut of the Valley's 48 seats in the Assembly. A seat or two out of these should be allotted to the Pandits temporarily residing abroad, who should be allowed the facility of postal voting.

The Pandits' rehabilitation in the Kashmir Valley will, obviously, have to await restoration of normalcy there. Equally obviously they cannot go back to their old homes and be subjected, once again, to old vulnerabilities. Their anguish, which has given rise to the demand for Panun, or a separate 'homeland' withing the Valley, north- east of the Jhelum river, is to be understood.

I must, however, add that I personally have no sympathy with this demand. Partitions do not resolve problems; they tend to multiply them. Security of life for the Pandits can be ensured in more pragmatic ways. In several towns and cities of India, there are whole mohallas inhabited exclusively by one or another community. Similarly, there are whole villages, inhabited wholly or largely by particular communities. We should think in terms of resettling the Pandits in separate, secure mohallas in some of Kashmir's existing towns and in new villages and towns to be established at suitable locations all over the Valley, with adequate educational and health faci1ities and self- generating opportunities for productive employment.

Government agencies involved in the preparation of financial and political packages for Kashmir should bear in mind these unavoidable needs of the immediate future. It is high time some responsible people in Government started talking these matters over with representatives of the Pandit community.

(Courtesy: Indian Express: August 26 & 27,1995)

Code:

http://ikashmir.net/history/rasgotra1.html

:. 'Not a single muslim forced us to leave' Prof Tikko

Two decades of Exile

Manohar Nath Tickoo

Professor Manohar Nath Tikko, 74, was a college teacher and head of the department of Education at the Governmnt College Islamabad. He lived in Haire Mohalla, Janglat Mandi in Anantnag before he left Kashmir at the peak of insurgency in 1990. For the last two decades, he is living at the scorching locale of Bohdi in Jammu .

Q1) What prompted your migration?

I left with my family on Friday, 31st May 1990 with the first light in the dawn and reached Jammu same day in the early afternoon. I still remember that fateful day when I was forced by none other than my own wife and daughters to leave. All my Muslim neighbours came to my home biding my family a fond farewell with tearful eyes. Me and my neighbours never wanted my family to leave Kashmir but there was definitely a massive psychological fear created by unknown agencies against the Kashmiri Pandits which forced us to leave. Although the fact remains that not a single Muslim forced us to leave.

Q2) Do you nurture any dreams of coming back?

A:- Well, I do believe that Pundits will get back to their home land but I can’t predict a time for it. However, I don’t not believe the Central [Indian] or [local] State government claims that the Pandits will be rehabilitated in their original homes. This is a blatant lie, as there hasn’t been any strategy for our rehabilitation since we have left the Valley. The past governments did built some residential houses at places like Tulmul, Budgam and Mattan, but I believe this was for electoral politics.

Q3) There are many examples of Pandits returning back. Could you perhaps follow the suit?

A:- No I am sorry. I don’t hesitate to tell u a stark fact that I would feel emotionally insulted if I return back to my home this time because we left our mother land without any force from our fellow people. I believe that Kashmiri Pundits should have remained in the Valley and they must have fought the freedom struggle with their fellow Muslim citizens. Even we should have sacrificed in the similar fashion our Muslim brothers did for the Kashmir cause, but unfortunately we did not do that. Even I wouldn’t mind if hundred thousand Kashmir Pundits would have been martyred for freedom struggle because Kashmir cause has no less a meaning for Kashmiri Pundits. It is bizarre when we “Kashmir Pundits” vociferously beat the drums, searching for “Panun Kashmir”, ironically outside the Kashmir , therefore it has literally lost its spirit and meaning..

Q4) How do you view the Kashmir problem?

A:- Kashmir is a very old issue which has mutated into a monster now. But it can be solved by sincere and honest leadership in India , Pakistan and Kashmir . Gimmicks like holding elections cannot be used to fade the reality of Kashmir being an unresolved issue. Holding election in the presence of half a million troops shows the level of legitimacy and the feigned democratic nature in Kashmir .
My personal opinion is that Kashmir issue is the issue of those who speak Kashmiri language. It should not be hyphenated or related to the other parts like Jammu and Ladakh; they have never been a relative part of Kashmir and had never any cultural, ethnic or communication links with Kashmir . Kashmir has its own history and it should be recognized as an independent state. It had never been a part of India or British India .

Q5) Would the Kashmiri Pandits accept independent Kashmir ?

A:- well, not necessarily. I am expressing my opinion without any bias and duality. The opinions are never same even on a common issue. Let me tell you that majority of Pandits did not support Sheikh Abdullah but the Ahrar Party of Moulvi Yousuf Shah. Well know Pandit activists Prem Nath Bazaz and Prem Nath Yash were in favour of Kashmir’s accession with Pakistan . I still remember that time when people were asked to opt between India and Pakistan . My late father Sarvanand Tikko who was the Post Master at Anantnag at that time and we used to live inside the Post Office, signed on the document favouring accession with Pakistan and his four collogues including Ghulam Muhammad Shah of Bijbehra and Jagan Nath Rayess. My late father unfurled the Pakistani flag on the top of the Post Office but the goons of National Conference which include Abdul Ahad Tak of Anantnag town made an assault on my father and his colleagues, beat them to pulp and put down the Pakistani flag. They also tried to set the Post Office on fire.

Q6) Many Kashmiris often refer to Sheikh Abdullah as ‘Gaddar’ or traiter. How do you view him?
9
A:- well, It is easy to be wise after the event. Sheikh Abdullah should have not done the “Ilhaq” or accession with India . He did a very serious blunder for the reason that kashmiri people are suffering a lot. Sadly Sheikh Abdullah had no political vision. Prem Nath Bazaz observed that Sheikh Abdullah had no sense of history and he had never read any history on Kashmir . So one can understand the level of political maturity and sincerity of Sheikh Abdullah.

Q7) The Pandit argument is that Kashmir has always been part of India ?

Kashmir has never been part of India and has no cultural, traditional, ethical and religious semblance with India . Even we Kashmiri Pundits have totally different religious ceremonial and ritual days than of the Indian Hindus and we practice a different mythology. We have no religious attachment with river Ganga ; we used to put the ashes of the dead into the “Naraan Nag Gangbal” near Sonamarg . We never celebrate Diwali but “Hearath”. We celebrate a religious day which is called “Sheshar Shenkraat” which is celebrated in the winters in order to avoid demonic influence in winters and there is no example of celebrating such a day in the Indian Hindu mythology. Moreover, Kashmiri Pundits celebrate “Shiv Raatri” differently than Indian Hindus; we prepare a lot of non vegetarian food to break the fast, contrary to Hindus who abstain from meat on the day.
Similarly Kashmiri Muslims have a different culture with no relevance with that of Indian culture. Politically, the UN resolutions stand witness to the Kashmir dispute and promises the right to self determination. Had Kashmir not been a disputed state then why Kashmir has its own constitution and flag. And why Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru took the Kashmir issue to the United Nations. It was only because of Indian political prejudice and insincerity that autonomy of Kashmir was eroded.

Q How would you see the contours of its resolution?

A:- Well, Kashmir is a much political issue than a religious one. Kashmir has suffered because of a historical political mistake so the key to its resolution is strong political struggle which is possible only when we have strong political institutions with sincere leaders having unanimity on the common Kashmir cause.
So far we have failed on diplomatic and international level only because of the poor and corrupt leadership. It is imperative to coordinate the political groups and bring them under one banner and one single leader. I would suggest Sayed Sayed Ali Shah Geelani who has shown strength and resilience while others change their cloaks often. But there has to be inclusion of Pandits in the political leadership.

Q10) How would you place Article 370 in this jigsaw puzzle?

A:- The Article 370 has no future unless it does not get a permanent place in the Indian Constitution. Since the Article 370 is a temporary Article, it can be abrogated any time by the parliament of India and BJP has included the abrogation of Article 370 in its election manifesto. I think we Kashmiris should have fought vigorously for the permanence of the Article 370. Since the Article 370 is followed with the word “Temporary” has no meaning unless it does not get divorce from it. Moreover, the Indian leadership has always failed to give the due share to the Kashmiris in their democratic doctrines as established in 1950.

Q12) How do you see the future of Kashmir ?

A:- We must pin hope against hope on the fourth generation after 1947 who can give respite to Kashmiris if they succeed to apply their brains properly.

Code:

http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexclusives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1234974634&archive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news