It is a matter of research as to how the NY had not gone to the deep of the so-called freedom of Jammuu and Kashmir state, which was absolutely against democracy.
At present political leaders of India are divided in the two parts.
(1) First Part; It consists a very huge part of the people who has faith in democracy. These people were either deprived of factual information about Article 370 and 35A for the last 70 years. The Articles 370 and 35A was made available only in some of prints of the document of Indian constitution.
Besides this, it was introduced without following democratic procedures. The Indian Constitution says, it is temporary. Why the NY Times fails to understand this?
(2) The Second Part: This lot is having the leaders who have no faith in democracy, but they put mask of democracy. This lot includes most leaders who are in the politics, only for the purpose of making money through unauthorized sources.
NY Times has totally ignored as to what Farukh, Omar, Mehbuba and the Indira Nehru Congress (I.N.C. alias Congi) party’s top leaders too have sung the songs of democracy.
Leave the mentality of Congi leaders aside, as they have always murdered the principles of democracy and the principles of the social values, right from the period of Nehru to the period of his current progeny. The cultural allies of Congi have always played role of Anti-Nationals and they have supported the Congi as and when the Congi party was in need.
The Article 370 and 35A kills following fundamental democratic principles.
(1) 50000+ Hindus are not having voting rights in the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir State, despite of they are residents of the state since 1944. This is because they are identified by their Caste of birth under constitution of J&K.
(2) It discriminates the political and property rights of Males and Female. A female has no right.
(3) The people of the state has no Right to Information. Means a citizen is deprived of the information where its money being used.
(4) A Muslim can commit any communal offence against Hindus, the Muslim cannot be prosecuted against the will of the political leaders who are ruling.
(5) 3000+ Hindus were murdered, 10000+ Hindu women were raped, and 500000+ Hindus were forced to leave their house. They were asked to embarrass Islam otherwise be ready for the death. All these things were done openly under the eye of Farukh, Omar, Mufti and Congis under the association of the separatists, by means of loudspeaker in Mosq, moving in vehicles, public notices in the local print media and pasting pamphlets on Hindus’ houses in 1989-90.
Nobody was arrested, No FIR was filed, No investigation team was formed by the Government. No action was taken to protect the human rights and natural rights of Hindus. No Hindu was protected during the rule of Farukh, Muftis, Omar and Congis in the States though Farukh/Omar/Mufti-s and Congis had ruled the state for more than two decades thereafter. This was also, due to the Article 370 which does not permit the Central Government to take action in the State.
(6) Under the plea of Article 370, nobody can invest money in property or to have a business in the State. The people of the State are deprived of benefit of the price rise of their property.
Such benefit is available to the people in the rest of Indian States.
(7) No action can be taken to the persons acting to help the terrorists.
Now if the NY Times has respect towards the democracy, its readers can expect the sense of significance, sense of proportion and sense of moral values in the approach of NY Times.
We Indians do not want to reform the mindset of NY Times. Recall the Congi’s top leader’s statement of 1987 in the matter of Supreme Court’s Judgment on “3 Talaq” (case of Shahbano). The Congi had said “…if Muslims wanted to remain in GUTTER, let them live there, we are not here to educate them…”
Then Congis had amended the Constitution under the plea to safeguard the freedom of Muslims at the cost, to deprive the constitutional rights of a Muslim widow.
We the people of India by virtue of our culture committed to democracy and to be tolerant. We do not want to reform the people of outside of our nation against their will.
Third Eye (ત્રીજી આંખ) 