Days Ahead Of Pahalgam Terror Attack, LeT Commander Called For Bloodshed In J&K: ‘Try it, Inshallah…'
Pahalgam Terror Attack: LeT commander Abu Musa referred to the abrogation of Article 370 and a bid to change the demography of Kashmir as he called for attacks in the valley.
Just days ahead of the terror attack in Pahalgam, in which 26 tourists were killed, Lashkar-e-Taiba commander called for jihad and bloodshed at a rally. The rally was held on April 18 in Rawalkot's Khai Gala in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) where LeT commander Abu Musa referred to the abrogation of Article 370 and a bid to change the demography of Kashmir as he called for attacks in the valley.
Abu Musa, who leads the so-called Jammu Kashmir United Movement (JKUM), said, 'India removed Article 370 and 35A to change the demography. You deployed your 10 lakh army. You wanted to echo 'Ram Ram' in Pulwama, Poonch, Rajouri. Lashkar-e-Taiba accepts your challenge. Modi, inside your closed courtrooms, you passed your orders. But the battlefield belongs to the mujahideen."
He added, 'Try it, Inshallah, we will shower bullets, slit your necks, and honour the sacrifices of our martyrs."
The April 18 rally was held as a 'tribute conference" for two militants – Akif Haleem and Abdul Wahab. Haleem was killed in Kupwara on March 17 by the 21st battalion of the Rashtriya Rifles while Abdul Wahab was neutralised in an encounter in Sopore on April 24, 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
J-K govt bans 25 books for propagating false narrative, secessionism
The Jammu and Kashmir government Wednesday declared the publication of 25 books, including those written by famous authors like Moulana Moudadi, Arundhati Roy, A G Noorani, Victoria Schofield and David Devadas, as forfeited for "promoting false narratives and glorifying terrorism". "It has come to the notice of the Government, that certain literature propagates false narrative and secessionism in the Jammu and Kashmir," an order issued by the Home Department said. It said available evidence based on investigations and credible intelligence "unflinchingly indicate" that a significant driver behind youth participation in violence and terrorism has been the "systematic dissemination of false narratives and secessionist literature by its persistent internal circulation, often disguised as historical or political commentary". It plays a critical role in "misguiding the youth, glorifying terrorism and inciting violence" against India, the order said. It said this literature would deeply impact the psyche of youth by "promoting culture of grievance, victim hood and terrorist heroism". "Some of the means by which this literature has contributed to the radicalization of youth in J&K include distortion of historical facts, glorification of terrorists, vilification of security forces, religious radicalization, promotion of alienation, pathway to violence and terrorism etc," it added. In this context, 25 books have been identified that propagate "false narrative and secessionism" in J&K and need to be declared as "forfeited" in terms of Section 98 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the order said. The identified 25 books have been found to "excite secessionism and endangering sovereignty and integrity of India", thereby, attracting the provisions of sections 152, 196 and 197 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, it said. "Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 98 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, the government of Jammu and Kashmir hereby declares publication of 25 books and their copies or other documents to be forfeited to the Government," the order said. The books include 'Al Jihadul fil Islam' by Islamic scholar and founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, Moulana Moudadi, 'Independent Kashmir' by Australian author Christopher Snedden, 'In Search of a Future (The Story of Kasimir)' by David Devadas, 'Kashmir in Conflict (India, Pakistan and the unending War)' by Victoria Schofield, 'The Kashmir Dispute (1947-2012)' by A G Noorani, and 'Azadi' by Arundhati Roy.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
80 years since Hiroshima, in the wake of Operation Sindoor, the nuclear conversation
Lost in the thrust and parry of the parliamentary debate on Operation Sindoor were PM Narendra Modi's several references to Pakistan's 'nuclear threats' and 'nuclear blackmail'. They reflected a deliberate articulation of India's more assertive security doctrine, representing a calculated move to redefine the deterrence equation in South Asia. That India is prepared to act against terrorism regardless of Pakistan's 'nuclear bluff' is ostensibly intended to enhance India's deterrent credibility. The three-way China-India-Pakistan nuclear relationship has created a complex web of interlocking deterrence. All three countries are modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals and delivery systems. Given the lack of transparency regarding nuclear arsenals and doctrines, and a marked reluctance to engage in a dialogue on measures to mitigate nuclear risk, the ongoing arms race can further destabilise the region, especially in a crisis such as Pahalgam. August 6, the 80th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, was a reminder of the horrors of a nuclear holocaust. We need to focus on the management of this complex dynamic and on the prevention of accidental or intentional escalation. China, while officially maintaining principles of both 'credible minimum deterrence' and 'no first use' (NFU), is engaged in rapid expansion of its nuclear arsenal — predicted to reach 1,000 warheads by 2030. At the same time, the PLA's Rocket Force (PLARF) is fielding increasingly sophisticated missile systems, such as the 12,000-15,000 km range DF-41 and the hypersonic DF-17. PLARF's inventory consists of both conventionally armed and nuclear-tipped missiles, raising a question about China's posture: Is this 'dual-capability' a deliberate strategic choice or merely an organisational detail? Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is aimed exclusively at India, and apart from reserving the right to 'first use', it has refrained from declaring an official nuclear doctrine. Pakistan's transition from 'minimum credible deterrence' to 'full spectrum deterrence' (FSD), which envisages the deployment of low-yield or tactical nuclear weapons, has been rationalised as a measure to counter the Indian army's 'Cold Start' doctrine. The latter, it may be recalled, was a conceptual remedy for India's slow general mobilisation during the 2001-2002 Operation Parakram. However, it is only now that this concept of integrated battle groups is seeing daylight in the form of recently announced 'Rudra' brigades. India's political leadership has stood by its two long-held beliefs: (a) that the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack, by holding out a threat of 'massive retaliation' and (b) nuclear weapons were political instruments rather than military warfighting tools. As a status quo power, India's declarations of NFU and its intention of maintaining a 'credible minimum deterrent' made eminent sense. But much has changed since this doctrine was promulgated in 2003. Moreover, emerging technologies have added to the complexity of existing nuclear conundrums. The 'dual-use' potential of technologies such as AI, advanced computing, and hypersonic delivery systems could blur the traditional distinction between conventional and nuclear. For example, a precise surface-to-surface missile could carry either a conventional or a nuclear warhead, making it difficult to ascertain the nature of an incoming attack and decide an appropriate response. The development of smaller, 'dial a yield' nuclear warheads permits calibration of a single warhead to be detonated with a range of explosive effects, varying from sub-kiloton to hundreds of kilotons. The availability of such options could make their use more thinkable in a conventional conflict scenario, potentially lowering the nuclear threshold. Since 1998, the Subcontinent has seen a few sporadic attempts at evolving confidence-building measures and nuclear risk reduction measures (NRRMs), including the 1999 Lahore MoU on measures to prevent accidental or unauthorised use of nuclear weapons, the 2005 Agreement on Pre-Notification of Missile Tests, and the 2007 Agreement to Reduce Nuclear Risks. But these are not enough, and a sustained dialogue is essential. In the context of NRRMs, serious note needs to be taken of media reports citing open-source intelligence that during Operation Sindoor, some of the Indian missiles that targeted Mushaf air base in Pakistan's Sargodha region and the Nur Khan air base near Rawalpindi had impacted in the close vicinity of either nuclear warhead storages or Pakistan's nuclear command and control nodes. While the IAF's DG Air Operations firmly denied the targeting of any of Pakistan's nuclear installations, mischievous speculation has persisted about India's 'warning strike', implying that it was a demonstration of capability rather than an attempt to destroy the underground facilities. The planners and custodians of nuclear weapons must note that targeting an adversary's nuclear assets, even inadvertently, with conventional weapons, can be misinterpreted as a 'counter-force' strategy, which is fraught with the risk of rapid escalation to nuclear war. The hazards and doctrinal confusion that would arise from such an action bear consideration. First, a conventional strike against a nuclear facility would be indistinguishable from a nuclear first strike. Given the extremely short timelines for decision-making in a nuclear crisis, the 'use them or lose them' syndrome may cut in, leading the targeted party to launch its nuclear arsenal before it is destroyed. Desperate options like 'launch on warning' or 'launch under attack' may be considered. Second, while it may not trigger a nuclear detonation, a conventional attack or 'near-miss' on a nuclear storage facility could cause a massive release of radioactive material, simulating a 'dirty bomb', with devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences. Finally, conventional attacks aimed at command-and-control nodes could render the adversary deaf and blind, depriving him of the ability to assess the situation accurately, communicate with his forces or issue rational orders. These are amongst some of the manifold reasons why there is an urgent need for initiation of a sustained nuclear dialogue between India and Pakistan, insulated from the vagaries of politics. Such an interaction, by reducing mutual suspicion and enhancing transparency, might slow down the nuclear arms race and the mindless build-up of arsenals. The writer is a former Indian Navy chief
Hindustan Times
4 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Shinde meets Modi, Shah, refutes suggestions of Mahayuti trouble
MUMBAI: Shiv Sena chief Eknath Shinde, who visited Delhi on Wednesday to meet prime minister Narendra Modi and home minister Amit Shah, rejected rumours that he was there to sort out his issues with his Mahayuti allies. Maharashtra's deputy chief minister said that he and his family members went to congratulate Modi on the success of Operation Sindoor and Operation Mahadev, and he later had a separate one-on-one meeting with him. New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde during a meeting, in New Delhi, Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2025. (PTI Photo)(PTI08_06_2025_000437A) (PTI) Accompanied by the Shiv Sena's MPs, Shinde also met Amit Shah. This is his third visit to the capital in the last one month amid speculation in political circles that he and his men have been cornered in the Mahayuti government. When media persons asked him if he was an indirect target of his allies, Shinde replied that his party had performed well in two elections and would also win the forthcoming local body polls. Speaking at a press conference, the politician showered fulsome praise on Modi and Shah, saying that Shah had just become the longest-serving home minister in the history of India, completing an uninterrupted term of 2,258 days. 'We met him to convey our heartfelt congratulations,' he said. Shinde called Shah's leadership 'decisive' and stated that from abrogating Article 370—thereby fulfilling the dream of Bal Thackeray—to leading Operation Mahadev against terrorism and effectively curbing Naxalism, the home minister had shown 'unwavering commitment and visionary leadership'. 'From cooperative development to national security, his contribution has been exemplary,' he gushed. The deputy CM took a snipe at the Thackeray cousins Raj and Uddhav when asked about a possible alliance between the two. 'So what will happen if the two come together?' he asked. 'People don't vote for names but for accomplishments. They don't vote for people who sit at home. Parties have a right to get into alliances but the people decide whom to vote for.' There were some questions on Thackeray attending the opposition alliance INDIA meet on August 7 but Shinde refused to answer them. The Shiv Sena chief announced that his party had extended its unconditional support to the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) for the upcoming vice-presidential election. He affirmed that his party remained one of the oldest and most trusted allies of the NDA.
