J&K News and Discussion-2011

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 May 2011 02:48

^^^This story seems to appear on and off. The incident that I have heard of, supposedly occurred much earlier than Ranveer Singh, and in any case we do not know of any large number of "converted" KP's or all of "converted" KV population clamouring to return. The story really needs checking out.

Which "king" of Kashmir got "converted" and then wanted to come back to the fold and was refused? The Islamic transition happened under a non-Kashmiri who apparently initially wanted to become a Shaiva - was refused by the guru he approached - and agreed to an Islamic preacher who was more willing. This man was employed before by the last "kings" of Kashmir, who were increasingly relying on Islamist mercenaries and Islamists in admin - probably because of a deep hatred or distrust of their native population, and used the Islamists against resistance. [probably a very similar situation as of present]. But none of these Islamo-phile kings are known to have converted.

Exactly what made these last Kashmir kings [Harsha and successors] behave so needs deeper analysis, and probably the story is much more complicated than it is represented as. But no claims have been made - even in Rajatarangini that they "converted". I think the expression used was that "they behaved like Turuskas" in their iconoclasm and torture on their own shaiva/Buddhist populations. This could have led to the interpretation that they converted.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 May 2011 04:57

It would be a matter of shame if that same story, if true, was repeated today. For instance, what if some KM wanted to revert back to the faith of their ancestors? Will they be accommodated?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 May 2011 05:28

^ with open arms.

Now the question is where would they want to position themselves in Indic society? As FCs without any reservations or SC with lots of reservations

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 May 2011 08:42

Kashmiri Pandits welcome Muslims' support

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 12 May 2011 10:00

^ Funny I have heard about a branch of KP's which converted back to SD but nobody gave them daughters/sons in marriage alliances till now. Not sure how far that is true. Talk about turning your potential allies into enemies.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 12 May 2011 10:22

From http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 262494.cms

SRINAGAR: Jammu & Kashmir government has withdrawn Kashmiri communist leader Ram Pyara Saraf's book from school libraries for preaching secession.

The book — 'Collected works of R P Saraf ' — holds New Delhi "solely responsible" for Kashmir conflict and the alienation among Kashmiris. "Jammu and Kashmir is a disputed territory and for resolving the problem, it should be constitutionally accepted as an independent state enjoying sovereign power in all matters, except defence and foreign affairs, which should be entrusted jointly to India and Pakistan," the book says.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 12 May 2011 11:19

Lashkar, ISI engineered car bomb blast in JK: Police

Jammu, May 11 (PTI) The Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and Pakistan's ISI engineered the May 2 car bomb explosion in Udhampur district, Jammu and Kashmir Police said today after arresting a government officer on charges of conspiracy and detaining several others.

A sleeper cell of LeT headed by Ghulam Sarwar of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, who is at large, on the direction of its mentors in Inter Service Intelligence had executed the car bomb explosion at Udhampur to target a top army officer, they said.

Commandant of Military Hospital, Major General D S Pathania escaped narrowly in the blast on Jammu-Srinagar national highway at Bremi bridge in Udhampur district in which a milk vendor was killed and 10 others were injured.

"We have cracked the case of the car bomb blast. One PoK militant of LeT was involved in the blast along with some Over Ground Workers (OGWs).

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 12 May 2011 17:06

That story is most likely true. Arya Samaji's of yore know this happened in not just Kashmir but many places in North India, even after coming back into Indic fold it would take time for acceptability. Marriage and social acceptability was the main block in integrating those communities. Some of the deep hatred against Hindu's or Indic may also be due to this factor of acceptability. However in modern times when psudo secs are most keen to prove/ flaunt their Islamic/ urdu and anti Indic/ anti dharmic credentials it's hard to have people move back into the Indic fold even though acceptabilty issues would not be a problem today.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 12 May 2011 17:10

VikasRaina wrote:^ Funny I have heard about a branch of KP's which converted back to SD but nobody gave them daughters/sons in marriage alliances till now. Not sure how far that is true. Talk about turning your potential allies into enemies.

It is not that simple VRji. Would you give your daughter to man just because he is a Hindu? That is the fundamental criteria, but not sufficient enough.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 May 2011 18:18

I think we should give the KP's a break. Was this refusal to take back those who converted ingrained right from the beginning or did it develop over time? the earliest context would be that of Sindh, and the "devala smriti" recos taking back, under various degrees of light "suddhi" penitences [including specific mentions of women abducted/seduced/raped and falling pregnant]. The medieval/late medieval vaishnavs and sikhs did "reonvert" or reabsorb those converted. Chaitanya had Yavana Haridasa as a follower. The Sikh guru's can provide many examples of similar following.

As late as Jehangir and Sha-jehan, the Mughal admin moved in with force to prevent intermarriages - where Muslim/converted muslim women in Kashmir married KH men. The mughals objected to Muslim women of Kashmir marrying Kashmiri Hindu men - who remained "Hindu". Severe repression and penalties were imposed and the husbands either forced to convert or wives force to leave out of the glorious provisions of "automatic annulment" of Quranic/Shariati marriages of captive women or muslim women married to Qaffirs.

If in the period of Jehangir and Shah jehan, Mughals needed military/police intervention to prevent such mixing up, it does mean that Kashmiri Hindus of the period were not averse to "reabsorption" of members from families who had been forced to convert or convert out of some other factors.

But repeatedly we come across the mullahcracy, and the leadership of Islamic communities everywhere in violently resisting such absorption, and in the period we are talking about - the last 3-400 years of Islamic military dominance of KV - Kashmiri Hindus surely developed a deep discomfort and distrust of the converted Muslims. Because reabsorbing any component would probably bring a violent state sponsored or supported jihad on themselves. Moreover, the few examples of Muslim "trust" and "honourable" keeping of word given to the Qaffir are drummed into a din, but the plenty more cases of betrayal of trust are never mentioned or highlighted.

It is reasonable to expect the KP to have grown extra-sensitive to "reabsorption". Whether that is tactically desirable or not is a different issue altogether. When our uber pseudo secularist pseudo nationalists are so -so reluctant to reabsorb "peacefully converted" subcontinental Muslims, who by the p-sec's own propaganda have contributed so much to Indian civilization and come next to the Buddhists only in such contributions [who occupy the top position], and are so peaceful, honourable and trustworthy and also of such high culture - why single out the KP?

I am still not sure about the exact dimensions or magnitudes of this reluctance as well as the actual numbers who wanted to reconvert. I am afraid, in the absence of concrete data, we cannot take the risk of landing up with the "queen molested at Kasi" type story, which was supposedly related by a "learned Maulana" who learned it from "a friend" who had "seen a manuscript" and who promised to "deliver it" but died before he could do it.

Moreover, even if there are grains of truth in the "KP reluctance" story, shouldn't we extend to them the same considerations that we are supposed to extend to every non-Hindu community - that their behaviour is shaped by the cumulative past of their experiences and it takes society along time to change its attitudes? That we also have to respect such attitudes even if we find it contradicts our own "humanitarian" or "liberal" values?

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 12 May 2011 18:45

+1 to the great post B-ji

ManishH · Post by **ManishH** » 12 May 2011 19:01

harbans wrote:That story is most likely true. Arya Samaji's of yore know this happened in not just Kashmir but many places in North India, even after coming back into Indic fold it would take time for acceptability.

Yes, appears to be an India-wide trend; must read the account of how Shivaji Maharaj lobbied for acceptance of Bajaji (who had been force-Kalmafied), against great reluctance by the priests and society.

"Shivaji The Great" V.D. Katambale

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 12 May 2011 19:15

RamaY wrote:
VikasRaina wrote:^ Funny I have heard about a branch of KP's which converted back to SD but nobody gave them daughters/sons in marriage alliances till now. Not sure how far that is true. Talk about turning your potential allies into enemies.
It is not that simple VRji. Would you give your daughter to man just because he is a Hindu? That is the fundamental criteria, but not sufficient enough.

RamaY ji, Would you deny girl from your family to someone just on account that his forefathers were forced to convert to Islam once upon a time? and oh BTW if I am right, it was not only daughters but also sons.

I do understand that hindsight is 20-20 and probably our forefathers didn't realize the disaster that their actions brought to us in the long run. Maybe it was the right thing to do in those times. But Imagine Islamic world short of around 45 crore denizens from Indian Subcontinent.
Thats why I believe Swami Dayanand was the biggest social reformer of our times just on account of bringing back the souls that might would have been lost to enemical forces.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 13 May 2011 01:04

Can anyone enlighten me of the earliest source of the story of "massive appeal by KV" Muslims to Ranvir Singh to return to the fold? All modern sources seem to quote JLN from "Discovery of India" (in fact my copy says on p.267). But even he writes that Ranvir Singh proposed this to KP leaders and some Varanasi scholars, and does not write about the massive appeal from KM.

There was probably a basis to the story, but I am doubtful of the "numbers".

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 13 May 2011 05:52

brihaspati wrote:The mughals objected to Muslim women of Kashmir marrying Kashmiri Hindu men

The area where these mixed marriages took place was not "Kashmir" but along the route to the valley from the western part of the Jammu hills. Here Hindus and Muslims were in equal strength, and the Muslims had retained much of their ancestral Hindu customs and even bore Hindu names. These latter practices were also curtailed.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 14 May 2011 18:32

Stop looking through prism of Pakistan: Dehalvi to Geelani

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 17 May 2011 01:43

Arab League has 'no position' on Kashmir

Maintaining continuity with the traditional, friendly stance of the Arab world towards India, the Arab League on Monday said it had "no position" on the Kashmir issue. Talking to reporters on the sidelines of a peace conference organized by the government-appointed Kashmir interlocutors, Arab League ambassador to India Ahmed Salem al Wahishi said: "The League of Arab states has no position on the specific question of Jammu and Kashmir ... we look forward to peaceful coexistence, tolerance and dialogue among different civilizations."

Moderate separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said countries that were part of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) were supporting the separatists' "cause of self-determination".
"I don't think the Arab League speaks on issues like this. We are more concerned with the OIC, of which the Arab League is part, and (its) stand is clear. (It supports) our right (to) self-determination," the Mirwaiz said.

The Arab League ambassador's statement comes three days after a European Union delegation, led by its ambassador to India Danielle Smajda, said the Kashmir issue had to be resolved by the people living in the region.
The EU team had cancelled its scheduled meeting with hardline separatist Syed Ali Shah Geelani.

slowly and steadily we have to weed out these elements.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 May 2011 00:54

One possibility under the US compulsions for Indian restraint is a TSP military and terrorist offensive in Kashmir coupled with Omar Abdullah's wringng his hands while stoen pleters take up more offensive things.

Does anyone realise Omar Abdullah did an Allaudin Khilji on his father Farooq with Rahul Gandhi's help?

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 21:32

I have been watching this thread for a long time and have been lurking for a long time.

And I need to make some comments on my views on Kashmir.

Before i do that I would like to tell you that I was born in Kashmir (Srinagar) and lived the first 16 years of my life there. And also that I am a Punjabi and my family moved from our village in Muzaffarabad district in 1947 (our village is pp. 22 km from the LOC on the wrong side)

You have to understand the whole dynamics on why Shiekh Abdullah wanted to stay with India. The reason was beyond the LOC the people are Punjabi and the the Shiekh knew that he didnt stand a chance if Kashmir went to Pakistan cause then the Punjabis would be in power. Infact the Punjabis in Kashmir (Muslim, Sikh and Hindus) reffered to the Kashmiris as "Hato". The Shiekh conspired with Chacha Nehru and ensured that the Indian Army stopped its advance just where the Punjabi speaking area started and Chacha went crying to the UN.

That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 May 2011 21:38

That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

Incoming!!!!

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 21:42

pgbhat wrote:
That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.
Incoming!!!!

Do it on the other forum

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 May 2011 21:44

^ No sir-ji. I will just grab pop corn watch.

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 21:48

pgbhat wrote:^ No sir-ji. I will just grab pop corn watch.

Just noticed. You joined BR 2 days after I did. Copycat

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 May 2011 21:51

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13385727

In 2001, for every 1,000 boys under seven in the state, there were 941 girls. Now the number is down to 859. No other Indian state has fared so badly over the past decade.

The mostly-Hindu Jammu region, which shares a boundary with the state of Punjab in the south, had a low child sex ratio even in 2001. But the valley was different and most of its areas had many more girls under seven than boys.

"[The decline in Kashmir is much worse than Jammu which is tough (really? ) to understand. We need people to wake up to the long-term implications for Jammu and Kashmir," Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said.

Hulaku wrote:Just noticed. You joined BR 2 days after I did. Copycat

But you are still a WKK. *runs away*

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 21:55

pgbhat wrote: But you are still a WKK. *runs away*

LOL wut ? Me a WKK ?

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 21 May 2011 22:29

hulaku wrote:<snip>....The Shiekh conspired with Chacha Nehru and ensured that the Indian Army stopped its advance just where the Punjabi speaking area started and Chacha went crying to the UN.

That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

I support US, pls pls hand me and my little Jaynagar to Uncle Sam and let me rot there. I will come back as slave driving Client to all the Ity-Vity consultants on BRF.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 21 May 2011 22:30

hulaku wrote: That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

Hulaku,

Your logic has a distinct problem. What is stopping the KMs from coming back to India after enjoying the TSP hospitality(maybe just hospitals! and Police Thanas) after a few years, and without getting the valley also back. So India loses more land but the problem population is still back.
Didn't most in former East Bengal also support partition and hence TSP. Then why are there 20 million of them in India now.
Also why are there around 2 lakh illegal pakstanis in India. The India-TSP border is much more secure or it would had been 20 million from West side also in India.

However, there is thin proposal for joint administration of Valley which may work out as follows:
Today 100% of govt jobs in valley are for Valley J&K Indians. It's possible to start with 1% reserved for Kashmiris from rest of Kashmir under illegal TSP occupation. Every year the percentage be raised by 1% to be a max of 30% in 30 years. The jobs still be based on entrance exam conducted in Valley with minimum cut off.
Rest of Kashmir also have a reciprocity where 30% of jobs are reserved in POK for Indian Kashmiris including Kashmiri pandits. The increase in percentage every year based on criteria that there be no terrorism and no interference from either govt. If there is, then the percentage decreases next year. That way TSP can be given a rope to join the comity of responsible nations.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 21 May 2011 22:38

hulaku wrote:That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

OK, let me fire the first salvo. Let me please help you recall what you just said in your post. "people there all support Pakistan...these bunch of traitors...our resources on them... them rot in TSP". Fair enough? I even highlighted the poignant parts. However, your immediate recommendation is to hand over Kashmir Valley (the land along with the traitors). Why not just the "bunch of traitors"? Let them go. let the pakis accept them. Keep the land. And, if you are closet paki, then you should be happy with that solution, right?

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 23:15

VikasRaina wrote:
hulaku wrote:<snip>....The Shiekh conspired with Chacha Nehru and ensured that the Indian Army stopped its advance just where the Punjabi speaking area started and Chacha went crying to the UN.

That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.
I support US, pls pls hand me and my little Jaynagar to Uncle Sam and let me rot there. I will come back as slave driving Client to all the Ity-Vity consultants on BRF.

I dont really get your point Maara.

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 21 May 2011 23:20

anupmisra wrote:
hulaku wrote:That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.
OK, let me fire the first salvo. Let me please help you recall what you just said in your post. "people there all support Pakistan...these bunch of traitors...our resources on them... them rot in TSP". Fair enough? I even highlighted the poignant parts. However, your immediate recommendation is to hand over Kashmir Valley (the land along with the traitors). Why not just the "bunch of traitors"? Let them go. let the pakis accept them. Keep the land. And, if you are closet paki, then you should be happy with that solution, right?

My point is all KMs are traitors. What do you suppose the Indian Govt. can do ? Drive all KMs out of Kashmir ? That would be called Ethnic Cleansing by the enlightened West. You really want that ?

And you calling me a closet Paki has all the hallmarks of the inanities that they do at the Deaf and Dumb Forum. Just because I have views that are not divergent with yours I am a Pig ?

saadhak · Post by **saadhak** » 21 May 2011 23:56

hulaku wrote:That being said my view is that Kashmir Valley should be handed over to Pakistan cause the people there all support Pakistan and why would want these bunch of traitors in our country and spend spend so much of our resources on them ? What do we gain in return ? Let them rot in TSP.

Without getting personal - this is my opinion on the solution. This has got to be one of the most myopic, laziest and ill-advised solution ever.
Traitors and scum-of-the-soil exist in all nations. Can't just run away from traitors and let them destroy your identity. Your survival as a nation will be very short if this is the mentality. By this logic, any enemy state would simply have to stoke and support a few insurgencies to wipe you out as a nation.
Perish the thought that seeks to give away a portion of your motherland - least of all to a nation which was born as your arch-enemy and whose only reason to exist is your destruction.
Anyone who does not want to live in India can go to their land of dreams.
To put things into perspective, I read on one of the threads today that the Indian Army said 'forget it' on the topic of negotiating de-militarization of Siachen.
It is a well accepted fact that Pakistan is not going to sit back and stop its war of thousand cuts after tasting blood and getting Kashmir valley. Where does it stop? Maybe someone with data-points would point out the implications of a TSP sitting in the Kashmir valley.
Lastly, India is bound by the unanimously passed parliamentary resolution to take back PoK and Aksai-Chin. The question of giving up any further land does not arise.

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 22 May 2011 00:12

Well it is very refreshing to hear the views of people who do not have the slightest idea about what the things are on the ground in Kashmir.

My first question is how many of you have ever been to Kashmir and mingled with local population as ordinary citizens ?

The Government of India spends billions on these KM's without giving a thought to the people of Jammu or Ladakh.

And I have personally experienced the apathy of the Indian Govt. to non-Muslims from Kashmir.

Did you guys know that the Kashmiri migrant relief I collect from the Govt only comes through when I bribe a low level babu in Delhi. And that I stand with the victims of the 84 massacre when I dare to try and complain against these injustisies. But then how does it matter to you because Kashmir is more important that all the refugees isnt it ?

Pathetic. And please go on with your India Strong diatribe.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 May 2011 00:14

hulaku, if you have a tenant in a room of your house and he starts behaving like a a$$, you will just give the room to him ?

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 22 May 2011 00:24

Rahul M wrote:hulaku, if you have a tenant in a room of your house and he starts behaving like a a$$, you will just give the room to him ?

Sirjee its not a tenant. They just converted.

If we cannot take care of displaced people in our own country but are more concerned with providing welfare to traitors then it is a problem.

You cannot take care of your relatives who have moved to your place but you are more concerned about the people who forced them to move.

Again I repeat how many of the people here have lived in Kashmir ?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 May 2011 00:27

saarjee, I know what folk are and I do not doubt the basic truth of your comments. however, it is still our land and we would be foolish to give it away. today it is kashmir, tomorrow it will be punjab and day after tomorrow delhi. yes, our policy has been not very effective but the solution is to change the policies, not to commit suicide.

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 22 May 2011 00:39

But how many people do I see here asking rights for the refugees coming from Kashmir ?

We beg everyday in front of these sarkari babus in Delhi but does anybody care ? we havent got the relief since 2008 because the babu wants 50%. fvck you.

Because the Govt is busy spending all that money on Cashmere.

But obviously Cashmere with all its patriotic people is more important than us refugees, Isnt it?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 May 2011 00:47

>> But how many people do I see here asking rights for the refugees coming from Kashmir ?

each and every one !! dig the archives for the thread around the time of amarnath yatra. and I am sorry to say but pandits who are in a position to make a difference, in the media world, writers etc seem to be the MOST dhimmified of the lot. they are the ones who are most vocal about kashmiriyat and how it is unique and different from rest of India, how communalism from both hindus and muslims is a problem and so on.
what do you think is the message that is conveyed to the common folk ? 'hey, the pandits themselves don't blame pakistan or KM's, they blame the hindu communalists in stead"
why would govt with its vote bank politics care when the common folk do not care ?

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 22 May 2011 01:48

hulaku wrote:But how many people do I see here asking rights for the refugees coming from Kashmir ?

We beg everyday in front of these sarkari babus in Delhi but does anybody care ? we havent got the relief since 2008 because the babu wants 50%. fvck you.

Because the Govt is busy spending all that money on Cashmere.

But obviously Cashmere with all its patriotic people is more important than us refugees, Isnt it?

I don't understand your logic, you are claiming to be a Kashmiri refugee and you want to give away your own land? Don't even want Panun Kashmir?

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 22 May 2011 05:37

^^^^
He's claiming to be a "Punjabi" refugee from the Muzaffarabad area, or more accurately a "Pahari". The Kupwara district of the Kashmir valley is also Pahari dominated and was part of Muzaffarabad under the Maharajas, but the Hindu-Sikh refugees from Muzaffarabad in 1947-48, were forced by the new Kashmir-based administration to settle in Jammu instead.

In Jammu region the Paharis clash with the Gujjars who inhabit the same areas:

Cutting across party lines, the Pahari community of Jammu and Kashmir has demanded Schedule Tribe status as has been conferred to the Gujjars of the State in 1991. The Paharis live in the areas along the Line of Control and are concentrated in Karnah area of Kupwara district, Uri area of Baramulla (both in Kashmir) and entire belt of Rajouri-Poonch districts (in Jammu). The areas of the Gujjar concentration are also the same. At present the Gujjars of the State, who form the 90 per cent of its tribal population were conferred the Schedule Tribe status in 1991. Now, the Pahari population, a linguistic identity has also joined the demand for getting the Schedule Tribe status.

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 22 May 2011 07:35

Airavat wrote:^^^^
He's claiming to be a "Punjabi" refugee from the Muzaffarabad area, or more accurately a "Pahari". The Kupwara district of the Kashmir valley is also Pahari dominated and was part of Muzaffarabad under the Maharajas, but the Hindu-Sikh refugees from Muzaffarabad in 1947-48, were forced by the new Kashmir-based administration to settle in Jammu instead.

In Jammu region the Paharis clash with the Gujjars who inhabit the same areas:
Cutting across party lines, the Pahari community of Jammu and Kashmir has demanded Schedule Tribe status as has been conferred to the Gujjars of the State in 1991. The Paharis live in the areas along the Line of Control and are concentrated in Karnah area of Kupwara district, Uri area of Baramulla (both in Kashmir) and entire belt of Rajouri-Poonch districts (in Jammu). The areas of the Gujjar concentration are also the same. At present the Gujjars of the State, who form the 90 per cent of its tribal population were conferred the Schedule Tribe status in 1991. Now, the Pahari population, a linguistic identity has also joined the demand for getting the Schedule Tribe status.

Another short sighted response.

Kupwara is not Pahari, Rajauri-Poonch and Uri are. The Paharis there are actually Gujjars and Bakarwals.

And for the rest of what is written, you are giving me the lulz.

Refugees from Muzzafarabad were all brought to Kuruksheshtra