ARE YOU GETTING IT BACK, MOHAMMED? IT IS NO 1947 WHEN YOU HAD AN EASY WALK-OVER OVER OUR DEAD BODIES
........................... (PRESS RELEASE)
......................... Los Angeles April 15,
An attempt to pass resolutions in a high level conference, Supporting the Pakistani position on Kashmir and demand its merger with Pakistan, was foiled by various scholars. Dr. B. R. Sardesai of University of California, Dr. Jagan Kaul of the University of Portland, local Hindu community particularly Kashmiries and members of Indo-American Kashmir Study Group were the main instruments for foiling these attempts at various stages of the conference. UCLA Burkle Center organized the conference for International Relations apparently to boost the position of Pakistan's military ruler, Pervez Musharraf, just before the referendum on his leadership.
Lord Nazir Ahmed a member of the British House of Lords and the lead speaker of Pakistan, who had been invited to speak, made inflammatory statements grounded in manufactured statistics about the Indian armed forces in Kashmir, was hooted down and subsequently disallowed to address the conference. He accused the Hindus of India and the armed forces of having raped Kashmiri Muslim women by the thousands The Indian members of the audience strongly protested against his untruthful remarks and demanded that he be expelled from the conference. There were shouts and fists in the air, which shook the conference. The university security was immediately called to protect him from the enraged members of the audience. He made wild accusations against India and claimed that the document with regard to the accession of Kashmir to India does not exist implying therefore, that India's control upon Kashmir was illegal and invalid.
To pacify the audience and to bring the conference in order, Dr. B.R. Sardesai, a senior professor of UCLA and one of the organizers of the conference immediately got -up and declared that no politician, meaning thereby Lord Ahmed, will be allowed to speak in this conference.
Among other things, this conference was designed to put public pressure on India to negotiate with Pakistan the future of Kashmir and factor in the possible American mediation. However, due to an active part and protestation by the Indian community particularly the Kashmiri Hindus, who were present with their families, children and friends, that move failed. The conference management had also to give up the idea of passing any resolutions in order to maintain the orderly conduct of the function. The pro-Pakistan elements who obviously had a strong role in designing the program of this conference had planned to pass resolutions demanding plebiscite in the Indian part of Kashmir without even making a reference to Pakistan's withdrawal from PoK as required by the UN Security Council Resolutions.
In terms of the panelists and the audience, which was allowed only through the process of registration, Pakistan was given unreasonably high representation. Most of the speakers were known anti-Indians or the persons from the Pakistani cainp.
Nonetheless, the defense of India's position by Kishore Kaul, Dr. Amrit Nehru, Kuldeep Hak, and B.L.Tikku - all of Our Kashmir Organization was so strong that the managers had to make mid-course correction.
They denounced the conference for secrecy surrounding its decisions, lack of adequate representation to India and Kashmiri Hindus; they accused the conference for having provided an umbrella for the re- emergence of Al Qaeda, Taliban and Ismalic fundamentalist supporters.
The gathering was billed as a conference on Kashmir but the Dogras, Sikhs, Buddhists, Shiias and Bakarwals were given no representation.
The predominant representation to Pakistan had converted this conference in an academic setting to look Re a Pakistani conference in which not a word was said about the "ethnic cleansing" of the Pandits, Sikhs, Buddhists and Christians.
The Indian activists strongly objected to the participation of a Pakistani Brigadier General in this conference as a panelist. They also questioned the suggestion made by the Los Angeles based Consul General of Pakistan that UN peace keepers should be placed on the borders of Kashmir to observe the movement of people. Mr. Bansi Lai Tikku responded that UN Observers have been on the borders with PoK for the last 50 years. If that did not prevent the Pakistan based terrorists from infiltrating into India how is it going to do so now?
Dr. Amrit Nehru produced the latest report on terrorism issued by the US State Dept. in which the US govt. has acknowledged those Pakistani terrorists and local Muslims had actually killed a large number of Pandits, Sikhs and others. Mr. Kishore Kaul suggested that those of the Kashmiris who want to go to Pakistan should be allowed to do so and India could consider giving them some compensation.
Responding to the distorted and twisted version of the Indian history presented by Prof. Stanley Wolpert in which Jawaharlal Nehru was blamed for every thing Pakistan has endured, Dr. Amrit Nehru questioned the interpretation and knowledge of the professor? He said that Dr. Wolpert failed to make even a casual mention of the exodus of the non-Muslim minorities of Kashmir and "ethnic cleansing" suffered by them at the hands of Muslim terrorists from Pakistan. Is it right to ignore the fate of 500,000- people by a scholar of his stature he asked? He told reporters that if Prof. Wolpert for any reason wanted to have this conference to support Pakistani contention he could have done so in a transparent manner. But to present the conference as "neutral" yet providing every opportunity for anti- Indian and anti-Ifindu propaganda is hardly befitting the image and caliber of public institution of higher leaming Re UCLA.
Dr. Jagan Kaul of Oregon presented 5 important reasons of why Kashmiri Pandits were targeted by Pakistani terrorists:
a) Terrorists believed that the disappearance of Pandits will mortally hurt the Indian political system;
b) Disappearance of Pandits from Kashmir will be an ultimate > humiliation for Hindus of India;
c) Their elimination will substantially weaken the supporters of Kashmir's accession to India;
d) Pandits were considered India's 5th column in Kashmir and therefore, a threat to cessationist elements; and,
e) Being stubbornly opposed to Islam's primacy they were a stumbling bloc in the way of the complete Islamization of the state.
In the end, Pakistani investment in this conference did not only fail to yield any tangible results but their attempt at exploiting an academic institution of UCLA"s prestige was greatly criticized by the common observers.
GET OUT OF LAHORE AND KASHMIR AND THE WHOLE OF EAST BENGAL, YOU SCHIZOPHRENIC SEPARATIST MOHAMMEDAN RASCALS, KILLERS AND MORONS.
.....YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU ARE INDIAN, ITALIAN OR ARAB.