Kashmir Truth Be Told Blog
Yus neereth gassan, pheereth cha yevaano: morda che gassan zinde (Kashmiri saying)


When slumdogs attempt writing about Kashmir

They end up embarrassing themselves.

Take the case of a dimwit who wrote this mindless drivel (click here to read article).

I knew we had a pretentious poodle on our hands the moment I read his first few sentences: "..[plebiscite] excites the cerebral neurons of a libertarian...[self-determination will have] deleterious consequences for its protagonists and antagonists..", he writes.

You perhaps already have an idea what a conceited slumdog we are dealing with here as soon as you read that sentence. When someone has to resort to the use of such needless pompous words to attempt concealing a weak argument, you know they must have lost their bearings. It reminds me of a great English professor in university, Mr. Noor-ul-Hassan, who once bestowed us with this simple advice: "Never use heavy-sounding words where simple ones will suffice: readers will figure out your attempt to cover-up a poor argument regardless, " he cautioned us. This gem of an advice holds true at all times, and is very apparent while reading our slumdog friend's blurts!

Let me attempt to see what else this clown has in store for us.

"Do Kashmiri Muslim aspirations qualify for legitimate independence or is this brouhaha nothing more than a devious design by a majority to establish its hegemony.", he writes.

He seems to have a fetish for the childish word "brouhaha" for some reason and has used it in some his previous write-ups as well. This is clearly an indication of his limited slumdog vocabulary, and evidence of a cut/paste job of words from an online thesaurus. Nowhere is this more evident than in the next sentence where he attempts to paint the recent protests against the murder of Neelofar and Asiya as mere tactics of Hurriyat to remain relevant in Kashmiri politics, and not the genuine outburst of an oppressed people: "..the Hurriyat is in a tizzy, resorting to obfuscatory tactics to remain relevant.", he foolishly attempts to explain.

Even novice writers can figure out that his pretentious use of "big" words such as "obfuscatory" is to conceal his naivety. In the same sentence, his use of other childish and immature words such as "tizzy" clearly expose his naivety when it comes to the use of English language. In reality, the word "tizzy" would more likely suit adolescent girls than in this pretentious writer's article--not that his article is any better than a child's rant. The writer attempts to appear as though using such words will cover for his laughable argument. 

Will continue later...


  1. I don't think this fellow deserves an answer for the simple reason that his mind is already made up against us Kashmiris (MF calls us Gadaars-ROTFL).

  2. Just a gamble of words to show that-


  3. Hey all your blog is fine..Can you please enlighten me about why kashmiri pandits were shown the door from kashmir?? Oe why is it that the kashmir peace was destroyed only after 1989( to the level which was not seen before?).

    I do accept that it is possible and very probable that Indian army has committed atrocities.But what about terrorists(or freedom fighters as you call them?).

    As per my little understanding Kashmir has been traditional sufi islam heaven.Now when did this fabric actually break?

    And last question,what should be the basis of freeing kashmir ..Religion or people's aspiration?

    I will thank you in advance...if you reply at all.

    My email id is f2005023@gmail.com!!

    I had been to kashmir for few days.Awesome place!!

  4. @aditya

    Kashmiri pandits left on their own and were encouraged by Jagmohan. Read relevant context here. Click here

    Armed resistance began in 1989 because our silent freedom struggle had been ignored even though nehru promised a plebiscite. India has to be blamed for the bloodshed because it ignored the genuine Kashmiri freedom aspirations.

    We are muslims, and proud of it. We respect other religions. There is no single sect that truly represents all Kashmiris like sufi islam, hanfi islam, shia islam, sunni islam, wahabi islam, etc. We respect all sects, and all are muslims. Kashmiris want independence from India no matter what sect we belong to. I think you should worry about fundamentalist hinduism creeping in India than worry about muslim sects in Kashmir.

    The basis of Kashmir's quest for independence is the same as has been with other freedom movements around the world. Ireland, Tibet, Kosovo, Xinjiang, East Timor, Quebec, Chechniya, and so on and so forth. You can answer the question your self as to what drove the freedom movements in these countries.

    India is occupying Kashmir and it cannot hide that fact for long behind painting our struggle as some religious fanaticism.

  5. hi...im an indian and a hindu and i completely endorse ur pov that india is 'occupying' kashmir and i want all of u out there to kno that im not a lone voice out here...there r loads who'll bak me up...r voices may not b heard by a prejudiced media and a blinded govt but pls dnt paint us all wid the same stroke....

  6. Dear Chinar, I take strong objection to your comments on the other article where you mentioed something which is permissible by Allah as Stone Age Practice. Remember, Quran is the last message sent by God and no new message has come and will never come. Do not transgress by rejecting four marriages as stone age practice. In Western countries, people may have only one wife yet they sleep with 100 girls. Islam is the only religion which recommends to have only one Wife but one has the option upto 4. Again, Islam is the only religion which has put the higher cap on number of wives. Remember Solomon, David etc in bible and how many wives they had. Remember Ram's father and check how many wives he had. Islam is realistic, natural and true religion in this age as God completed HIS Deen by sending Quaran and Muhammad(peace on him). Let us become true modernist instead of just imitating thoughts from westerners in wholesale without analysis. ajaztam@hotmail.com

  7. @Ajaz,

    My statement is against the Taliban and not against the Koran, I think you have misunderstood my statement.

    Also, I want you to read the Koran paak and mention the Ayah/verse where it says that a Man can have 4 wives and under what preconditions.

    Also ask Muslimahs around you if they would want to share their husbands with three other men and under what circumstances.

    I am a devout Muslim but know that there are conditions under which a man is allowed to have 4 wives and one them is the social setting of that particular area. In other words in warn torn Saudi Arabia of that time, many men were killed in constant wars and this left a lot of widows....the society at that time had no social schemes like we have today nor were the women educated/skilled enough in any trade to fend for themselves and therefore the concept of multiple wives was the only logical solution.

    Hope this gets the point through.

  8. @Ajaz, Chinaar, Dr Waleed

    I think we should allow individual muslims to freely voice what they think are laws governing our lives as good muslims. Freedom of expression is very important without danger of being labeled as a bad muslim.

    I think chinaar brought up a very important point and there is no reason to object to that. Although I also feel most of what chinaar had to say was based on reports from western media who are guilty of exaggerated accounts of muslim practices--but at the same time not entirely untrue either. We are well aware of many men with multiple wives and yet are not good muslims by any account. But to paint this practice as being forcefully enforced by Taliban or any other religious organization would be inaccurate--even though I am no fan of Taliban myself.

    At the same time I absolutely agree with Ajaz that even though Islam allows a man to legally marry upto four wives with strict precondition, we very well know that in the west people have multiple partners and it is not uncommon for a man to have kids with many many different women and likewise for women as well. Therefore I feel that stigmatizing Islamic marriage practices is being hypocritical. I personally feel that marrying and remaining faithful to a single woman is ideal but I would not judge someone harshly if he had four wives and everyone involved is happy.

    I also do not object people to freely question rules that they see will affect their lives including Islamic tenets. There is no law in Islam that forbids asking questions; infact it is encouraged.

    As for the question Chinaar: There are two sets of laws in Sharia. One that is explicitly mentioned in the Holy Quran, and the other set of laws are based of Hadis, verbal teachings of Pagambar (PBUH) and the examples of how he and his family lived their own lives as witnessed by their close associates.

  9. Thanks Koshur and Chinar... May Allah guide us all on the straight path.. ameen. ajaztam@hotmail.com