Fwd: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia bankrolled Amarnath agitation

Thanks to Girish for the link.
At the time when N.Ram lashed out at the Governor, we raised some questions. Ram made some pretty harsh statements against the Governor. He then went on to blame the BJP and Islamists, fabricated lies, and tried to mislead the readers. Instead of supporting the Goverment's responsibility towards the citizens, Liar-in-Chief attacked the BJP on the pretext of overheads.

As in the context of islamic terrorism (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)Ram did not make any attempt to trace the root cause of violence or it would have dug up some inconvenient truths. We are now hearing confirmation that the violence was sponsored by the usual suspects.

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia bankrolled Amarnath agitation: Azad - Yahoo! India News

In his first public appearance in this border town, former chief minister Ghulam Nabi Azad Sunday accused Pakistan and Saudi Arabia of bankrolling the parties behind the violent agitation on the Amarnath land row.

Lashing out at all the groups that made an 'issue' of the allotment of the land to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB) and subsequent cancellation of the same, Azad said: 'Less than one percent of the population of the state was involved in these agitations, which were being carried out with money provided by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.'

The Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley was rocked by violent protests after the former Congress-led government transferred 40 hectares of forest land in south Kashmir to the SASB, the temple trust of the Himalayan Amarnath cave shrine.

The Hindu : Opinion / Editorials : In god's name

When Jammu and Kashmir Governor S. K. Sinha demits office on Wednesday morning and flies to New Delhi on a government jet, the ground beneath his feet will be ablaze with hate. Sharpening a communal divide, engendering street violence, uniting anti-India secessionists, and precipitating a showdown between the Congress and People’s Democratic Party: these will be remembered as this Governor’s abiding legacies.

The critics were, on point of fact, wrong, for no land was actually transferred to the SASB.

LiC in appeasement's name

The Hindu : Opinion / Editorials : In god's name

When Jammu and Kashmir Governor S. K. Sinha demits office on Wednesday morning and flies to New Delhi on a government jet, the ground beneath his feet will be ablaze with hate. Sharpening a communal divide, engendering street violence, uniting anti-India secessionists, and precipitating a showdown between the Congress and People’s Democratic Party: these will be remembered as this Governor’s abiding legacies.

Pretty strong statements coming from LiC. I would have thought the Governor must have done a blunder of Nehruvian magnitude to call for such contempt.

As is often the case, the hate that threatens to tear Jammu and Kashmir apart has been engendered in god’s name.

Notice that "god" here begins with a small letter. This convention is reserved for Hindus.

General Sinha and his supporters claim to be protecting the religious rights of Hindus.

Now, this is serious offense. How dare they even make the claim. Have Hindus forgotten that Muslims have first right of claim over anything in India?

His opponents claim to be defending Islam. Just what is in fact at stake?

LiC avoids mentioning how the opponents are defending Islam. Gory details dont make pleasant reading.

In May, the State government assigned 39.88 hectares of degraded forest land to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board, a regulatory body chaired by the Governor.

Most other newspapers I read pointed to 100 acres of forest land being transferred to SASB to erect temporary structures.

Islamists claimed this land transfer was part of a larger project to alter J&K’s demographic character — a fear that has stalked the State’s politics since Independence.

LiC is lying and misleading deliberately. J&K demographic character is protected from "outsiders" by the contentious article 365. It is the Islamists who drove the Pandits out to change the demographics.

While it rails against subsidies to Muslim religious institutions, it sees nothing wrong in committing public land — and over 40,000 police and paramilitary personnel diverted from counter-terrorism duties — to facilitate a Hindu pilgrimage.

Another motivated charge from the LiC. It is the government's responsibility to provide protection to its citizens, be it by deploying police or paramilitary or the army. LiC comparing this government's responsibility to government providing subsidies to muslim institutions is obviously wrong. One is a responsibility while the other is appeasement. LiC deliberately avoided brining Haj subsidies into the discussion or his point would hold no water.