J-K LG grants government job to wife of Adil Hussain, who died saving tourists in Pahalgam Terror Attack
Jammu and Kashmir
Lieutenant Governor
Manoj Sinha
on Saturday met the family of
Syed Adil Hussain Shah
, who was killed in the April 22
Pahalgam terror attack
while trying to save tourists, and handed over a permanent government job appointment letter to his wife, Gulnaz Akhter.
Expressing his condolences to the grieving family, LG Sinha praised Adil's extraordinary courage and sacrifice. "We had already decided earlier that we would visit Adil ji's family. The Jammu and Kashmir administration and the Ministry of Home Affairs had already extended
financial assistance
to them," he said.
He further stated that various state governments from across the country have also come forward to support the family, acknowledging Adil's courageous act.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
An engineer reveals: 1 simple trick to get all TV channels
Techno Mag
Learn More
Undo
"In recognition of his sacrifice, his wife has now been appointed to a permanent position in the Forest Department in Anantnag. This is a token of gratitude from the administration. We also spoke with his father, family members, and the local villagers. They voiced the need for more employment opportunities in the area, which we will certainly consider seriously," he added.
In a post on social media platform X, the J-K LG wrote, "Met the family members of martyr Syed Adil Hussain at Anantnag. Handed over the appointment letter to his wife, Mst. Gulnaz Akhter on compassionate grounds. The whole country is proud of the bravery of Adil who sacrificed his life while protecting tourists at Pahalgam on 22nd April."
Live Events
The Pahalgam Terror Attack which took place at the Baisaran meadow, one of Kashmir's popular tourist spots claimed the lives of 25 Indian nationals and one Nepali citizen.
In retaliation, India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7. It struck nine terror sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir.
After the attack, Pakistan retaliated with cross-border shelling across the Line of Control and Jammu and Kashmir as well as attempted drone attacks along the border regions, following which India launched a coordinated attack and damaged radar infrastructure, communication centres, and airfields across 11 airbases in Pakistan.
After this, on May 10, an understanding of the cessation of hostilities between India and Pakistan was announced.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
No longer Canadian: Wayne Gretzky's Canadian identity questioned after Donald Trump friendship sparks controversy
Wayne Gretzky's association with Donald Trump has sparked controversy in Canada (Getty Images) Wayne Gretzky, one of Canada's most beloved sports figures, has found himself at the center of a firestorm — not for anything he did on the ice, but because of who he's standing beside politically. The hockey legend's long-standing relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump has fueled nationalistic backlash, especially as Trump continues to make inflammatory remarks about Canada. Canadian fans claim Wayne Gretzky has 'lost' his Canadian identity The controversy reached a boiling point earlier this year after Donald Trump proposed a 25% tariff on Canadian goods and even joked about Canada becoming the 51st U.S. state. During this tension, Trump publicly referred to Wayne Gretzky as a 'free agent' when it comes to choosing between the U.S. and Canada. That comment didn't sit well with many Canadians, who viewed it as both divisive and disrespectful. — daveryder (@daveryder) Matthew Iwanyk, Chief Operating Officer and host at Edmonton Sports Talk, voiced what many Canadians were feeling. 'You were a great Canadian, but now you are not,' he said in March, according to the New York Times. 'That is the majority sentiment you will get from Edmontonians. ... As much as we love hockey, we love our country more." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo This emotional reaction underscores how deep Gretzky's influence runs in Canadian culture — and how serious the fallout can be when that identity is questioned. Wayne Gretzky responds with diplomacy, but critics remain unswayed Despite the uproar, Gretzky has made it clear he wants no part in political warfare. Speaking with Ben Mulroney on Toronto's AM-640, he said, 'I don't worry about those kind of things because you can't make everybody happy... But, trust me, I have no political power with the prime minister or the president.' Still, images of Gretzky in a MAGA hat and attending Trump events with FBI Director Kash Patel haven't helped his case in the eyes of critics. His wife, Janet Gretzky, even posted — and later deleted — a heartfelt thank-you to fellow hockey icon Bobby Orr for defending Wayne: 'It has broken his heart to read and see the mean comments.' Also Read: Throwback to when Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, and Bo Jackson became animated crime-fighters in 90s cult cartoon ProStars In the end, Gretzky's silence on Trump's policies may not be enough to protect his legacy from political fallout — especially in the country he once so proudly represented.
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
In battle of the delegations, real story lies in what went unsaid
In the aftermath of their recent military clash, rival delegations from Delhi and Islamabad converged on various global capitals, each aiming to shape elite opinion, win sympathy, and control the post-crisis narrative. Having witnessed some of the exchanges in London firsthand, the diplomatic duel across briefing rooms, think tanks, and diaspora events was as revealing for what was unsaid as for what was spoken. Messaging starts with messengers The difference in delegation profiles was notable. India's all-party parliamentary mission carried symbolic weight and cross-party legitimacy, including senior figures like Ravi Shankar Prasad and Pankaj Saran. Pakistan's team leaned more on technocrats and veteran advocates of global engagement, such as Sherry Rehman and Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. India's group projected cohesion and resolve; Pakistan's aimed to influence narratives and broaden appeal. India's cautious case India's delegation framed Operation Sindoor as part of a broader shift: limited cross-border retaliation to terrorist acts as policy, not aberration. They emphasized terrorism as a global threat whose response merits international understanding—not moral equivalence. The delegation linked India's counterterrorism struggle to challenges faced by Western democracies, with Pakistan as a common denominator. In my observation, Indian representatives appeared quietly frustrated that while many countries expressed sympathy after Pahalgam and tacitly accepted India's right to act, few explicitly condemned Pakistan. Though confident in their message, their delivery often felt restrained. In think tanks, the tone was formal, even stiff; diaspora engagements were reportedly more fiery. Though most accepted the delegation's basic premise, some observers noted the irony in Delhi resisting calls to frame Russia's invasion of Ukraine as a shared threat but now seeking solidarity on Pakistani-based terrorism. Crucially, the delegation faltered when pressed on domestic radicalization. Two of the Pahalgam suspects were reportedly Indian nationals. Asked how New Delhi planned to prevent disillusionment turning to violence, the only response was that 'things today are better than in the 1990s.' This was a missed chance to demonstrate nuanced understanding of the challenge. Other inconsistencies emerged. India's representatives rejected 're-hyphenation' with Pakistan, yet much of their messaging focused on Islamabad. While stressing the quarrel was with Pakistan's military, not its people, questions about suspending the Indus Waters Treaty complicated that briefings took place inside the High Commission, with diaspora members complaining to me that they thought too much political outreach was aimed at UK politicians of Indian heritage. Playing it safe has a certain logic, but may have limited engagement with new or skeptical audiences. Pak's polished—but problematic—pitch If India played it safe, Pakistan opted for smooth. Their delegation turned up at major think tanks eager to engage and keen to appear misunderstood. With assistance from lobbying professionals, their narrative was tightly crafted for European audiences: Pakistan sought peace through dialogue, emphasising Kashmir as the 'unfinished legacy of Partition,' terrorism, and water. Pakistan said it wanted talks, a neutral investigation into Pahalgam, and accused India of refusing cooperation or prove culpability. This narrative of peace sat uneasily beside claims of military success and personal attacks on Indian leaders. Critique of Indian media spin might have bolstered believability had it not been accompanied by other factual distortions: legal sleight-of-hand over Kashmir, misreadings of UN resolutions, and claims that India admitted culpability for terrorism in most convincing moment came on the Indus Waters Treaty, where the stark picture painted of the consequences struck a chord, even if significant action has yet to follow. A key question remains: what was the objective? If persuasion abroad was the objective, the reliance on longstanding misrepresentations made it a difficult sell to informed audiences. If the goal was domestic signaling, that focus likely came at the expense of deeper foreign engagement. Simpler sell, harder ask Ultimately, the Indian delegation framed all terrorism as emanating from Pakistan; Pakistan framed it as emerging from Kashmir. The narratives didn't just clash—they barely shared the same terms of reference. As performative exercises providing content for domestic media, both probably succeeded on their own terms. In the battle to move international opinion, outcomes were uneven. India may have achieved more, but it also had the easier task — framing terrorism as a universal threat aligns with European security narratives. Pakistan, by contrast, asked outside actors to invest political capital in corralling New Delhi back to the negotiating table — a much harder sell. Yet neither side escaped contradiction. India's claim to strategic clarity was weakened by deflection on domestic aspects of terrorism in Kashmir. Pakistan's message of peace was blunted by triumphalism and tired tropes. In diplomacy, silence often speaks louder than words. In London last week, the most telling signals were what each side omitted, ignored, or performed for the audience they believed mattered most. Ladwig III is a senior lecturer at the department of War Studies, King's College London
New Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Smelling cash in the space race
Space has an odour. Visitors to the Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, US, can smell it by pressing a button to inhale a puff of air that smells of space. Space is airless by definition, but the workaround is essential because we can't inhale 'space' without fatal consequences. Despite this logical complication, the experience is evocative and surprising. Space smells of long-distance travel. It smells of Indian highways far from big cities. It smells like the world did long ago on the railways, when almost everyone travelled without air conditioning. But hereafter, space could smell a little different. From the beginning of the space race, it has smelled of Cold War rivalry, military-industrial complexes and technology-based diplomacy. These metallic notes will remain; but from here on, space will also smell overwhelmingly of commerce, of paper money. Gold is economically and chemically stable. It has no smell, unlike space. The countdown of the Axiom-4 mission to the International Space station has been aborted twice but soon, astronauts from India, Poland and Hungary could be back in space after 40 years and more. In anticipation, their national media have already declared it to be a turning point for their domestic space programmes. But the composition of the Axiom-4 mission also indicates that the whole world has passed a turning point. The crew led by American Peggy Whitson will be taken to orbit on Elon Musk's commercial Dragon launch vehicle, and the project is a collaboration between NASA, the European Space Agency, ISRO and the Houston firm Axiom Space, whose most ambitious project is the first commercial space station. The purpose of the collaboration is to facilitate a range of commercial activities in space, from scientific research to space tourism. Space is about to be opened up commercially, just like the world was opened like an oyster by the European Age of Exploration. About 40 years ago, when India, Poland and Hungary last sent their citizens into space, it was a domain where national governments showed off their technological prowess to compete for geopolitical gains. These three countries made a place for themselves in space under the aegis of Interkosmos, a Russian state programme launched in 1967 to help satellite nations of the USSR and other socialist nations like Afghanistan and Cuba reach space. Non-aligned nations Syria and India were also under its umbrella.
