Kashmir Conflict: The Legacy of a Zionist Agent

Research into the Zionist’s involvement in Kashmir and India brings out evidence that the Zionists had their hands in the Kashmir Conflict from the very beginning. Most people know that Edwina Mountbatten was the wife of Louis Mountbatten but very few people know that she was a dedicated Zionist and was grand-daughter of British Zionist banker Ernest Cassel. According to World War II British correspondent Douglas Reed’s work “The Controversy of Zion”; Ernest Cassel is the same Jewish banker who along with Maurice de Hirsch financed Theodore Herzl’s movement for a World Zionist Organization. Theodore Herzl supported the immigration of the Jews to Palestine in an attempt to create a Jewish State and he is also known as the spiritual father of the state of Israel. According to retired Pakistan Naval Officer Lt. Tariq Majeed’s book “The Global Game for a New World Order” which was written during the peak time of Kashmir insurgency and was published in 1995; In his book he explicitly claimed that Edwina Mountbatten was a dedicated Jewess and a Zionist agent in the sub-continent who exercised influence on Louis Mountbatten, Cyril Radcliffe and Jawaharlal Nehru to give birth to Kashmir conflict. The role of these prime actors in giving birth to Kashmir conflict is well documented in history. Edwina was a Zion’s trusted member who executed her scheme aimed directly against newly-emerging the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Her daughter Pamela Mountbatten in an interview to Indian journalist Karan Thapar in 2007 confirmed that her mother’s affair with Nehru got the Kashmir deal done. 

 

 

Putting historical facts aside for a moment, even if we apply military theory of conventional warfare it becomes plain and clear that taking Kashmir from Pakistan was strategically essential for this band of adversaries because of Kashmir’s strategic location in the South Asia. Kashmir is the vortex point in between Russia, China, Pakistan and India.  Whosoever controls Kashmir not only controls the strategic military position in the northern hemisphere of South Asia but also controls the source which supplies water to South Asian countries through its more than twenty-eight rivers and several networks of canals.  

 

The occupation of Kashmir on the part of the Zionists through Indian military forces was empirically based on revenge motivation. But on what political developments on the part Muslims in the sub-continent, this revenge was taken? The answer lies in two words “The Khilafat Movement” which established a pathway to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The emergence of a state claimed on the basis of Islamic ideology was a great setback for World’s Zionist Movement. Thus, the creation of Kashmir either as an independent state or as proxy of India was essential for the Zionists. Kashmir conflict emerged during the same time when Palestine issue emerged. Both are Muslim dominated regions, both are being oppressed by the occupation forces; the only difference in between the two conflicts is that Palestine is claimed by the Zionists as their Jewish Holy-land, on the other hand the land of Kashmir is being used by the Zionists as a unit for bone of contention in between India and Pakistan to control the chess game in South Asia. Kashmir conflict had resulted into three major wars in between India and Pakistan. In the midst of these wars Israel Lobby in the US, their banks and US Military Industrial Complex managed to sell weapons to both sides and greatly profited from Indo-Pak wars. This is why US decorated General Smedley Butler says: “War is Racket”. 

 

If we carefully study the history of Khilafat movement (1919-1924) we will eventually come to realize to the fact that Kashmir Conflict in many ways was intentionally started by the Zionists to take revenge from the Muslim leadership in the sub-continent. This movement was intended to support and protect the Khilafat which sent shockwaves among the members of Anglo-Israeli alliance. According to the author if there had not been any “Khilafat Movement” in British India perhaps there would be no Pakistan today.  This movement not only created problems for PM Lloyd George’s administration in Britain but also disturbed Zionist project in the Middle-east for two years which was aimed at snatching Palestine from the Ottoman Khilafat through British mandate. It is an open secret today how British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour under Lloyd George’s administration wrote a letter to Lord Rothschild to ensure a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Khilafat Movement led by the Islamic scholars resulted into political gains such as nationalist movements for Muslims in the sub-continent. Gandhi took this opportunity as a tool and joined hands with the Islamic scholars in 1920 for the purpose of political gains for not only Hindus but for the Muslims of the world. He was against the illegal occupation of Palestine by the state of Israel. 

 

The murder of Gandhi right after five months of India’s independence was not merely an accident it could have been a carefully planned operation by the Zionists who used Nathuram Godse (an RSS member) to kill Gandhi and to pave the way for their friend Jawaharlal Nehru to rule India. If we apply the same theory it makes sense why Sheikh Abdullah and his family were installed in Kashmir. Abdullah family of Jammu and Kashmir is commonly known among Pakistanis and Kashmiris as puppets of India and the United States. Former President of Pakistan Gen. Ayyub Khan in his book “Friends Not Masters” explains how the situation in Jammu and Kashmir got worse with the installation of Sheikh Abdullah to govern Jammu and Kashmir. Recently in 2017 NPP leader Bhim Singh also exposed his son Farooq Abdullah being as CIA’s silent agent. According to Canadian Historian Henry Makow’s thesis “The Myth of India’s Independence”; Nehru was a dedicated member of the Zionist Movement in India. Everyone knows that he was the father of Indira Gandhi and but very few knows that he was the son of a Zionist Motilal Nehru who according to official Masonic website of India was initiated into freemasonry at Lodge Harmony in Kanpur in 1884. 

 

These secret relationships are still maintained today in between the ruling families in India and Israel, and are based on their mutually shared common ideology of “The End of History”. The Hindu-Judaic conception of “The End of History” is remarkably similar to each other; both the Brahman Hindu and Jew consider themselves as elite of human civilization and consider all other non-Brahman and non-Jew to have been created with an inferior status. This laid the foundation for secret brotherhood in between the Brahman Hindus who rule India and the Zionists who rule Israel today. This is one secret of all secrets which are only known among the elite Jewish-Kabalistic circles and the elite Brahmans of India.  

 

In International Relations there is a terminology known as ‘natural allies’; which is mainly used to describe cordial relationship in between two or more states. According to the author the natural allies in the international system are those who share similar religious ideologies not common national interests. Because common national interests shared in the context of secular means in international relations are not permanent but mutual national interests that are spawned through a common ideology shared in between two or more states are perpetual in nature. Therefore, cordial diplomatic and strategic relationship between India and Israel in the International System today is based on concrete foundation of a common ideology which is unbreakable in both war and peace. 

 

Interestingly, Larry Collins in his work Freedom at Midnight in 1975 had intentionally omitted these facts for casual readers because he was the member of an American-based Zionist bloodline ‘The Collins’. If we talk about the birth of the state of Israel during the same time when Kashmir conflict emerged, he also intentionally omitted the historical role and influence of the Anglo-American-Israeli Lobby in modern western civilization in creating the illegal state of Israel in his work O Jerusalem!

 

 

The United Nations episode on Kashmir started in January, 1948 when India saw retaliation from Pakistan. They used the UN platform to put international pressure on Pakistan to leave Kashmir. The UN Security Council resolution on Kashmir in 1947 was part of the master plan to checkmate Pakistan in Kashmir. This is why the United Nations Security Council resolution on Kashmir was sequential and conditional. Firstly; the very first step they took was that Pakistan will have to demilitarize to the satisfaction of the UN body that was to be established. Secondly; condition was set upon the satisfaction of that UN body with this demilitarization on the part of Pakistan, India was also supposed to demilitarize with a military presence being permitted by UN to defend itself from the so-called Pakistani aggression. Meaning, UN Security Council carefully crafted their resolution and took the right from Pakistan to defend itself from the Indian occupied forces. Lastly; having both of these two steps taken place in sequence to the preferences of the UN, then the plebiscite would be held. Meaning, it was a checkmate strategic planning in full swing against Pakistan and Kashmiri Muslims which was understood by then Pakistan’s military strategists and thus Pakistan never left the territory which is today known as Azad Kashmir. 

 

The Indian perspective is different to the actual principles of plebiscite as established by the UN resolution on Kashmir in August, 1948. The resolution says that when Pakistan will begin to withdraw its military from Kashmir, the United Nations proposed body would make an agreement with India on the withdrawal of Indian forces. When this step would be reached between the UN and India, Pakistan will then withdraw all its troops from Kashmir. There is an interesting point to present here that United Nations resolution of 13th August, 1948 had never suggested for the simultaneous withdrawals of all the Pakistan’s military and the Indian military from Kashmir. The United Nations body had assured Pakistan that once it will start to withdraw her military from Kashmir, then there will be a relation between more withdrawals of Pakistan’s military and the beginning of withdrawals of the Indian military from Kashmir.

 

In March 2015, the UN unclassified an important UN Mediatory report on Kashmir. The report was forwarded to United Nations Secretary General, U Thant in 1967 by a United Nations mediator in Kashmir, Dr. Frank Graham. He pointed in this UN Mediatory report that Pakistan had took the initiative to withdraw its military from the Kashmir, but it did not withdraw its remaining troops from Kashmir because the UN body was unable to reach an agreement with India on proposed withdrawal of its military. This failure of the UN Commission and efforts on the part of UN mediators to secure an agreement with India laid the foundation for the deadlock in the demilitarization and eventually provided a legit ground for Pakistan to not withdraw its entire military from Kashmir. The report also pointed that Pakistan accepted and India rejected most of the proposals of the many United Nations mediators for eradicating the deadlock in demilitarization.

 

 

The early years of the Kashmir conflict saw India being standing firm on the United Nations resolutions and rejected other proposals for resolving the dispute. Later on it refused to implement the obligations of these resolutions arguing that the conditions proposed in the 13th August, 1948 resolution had not been implemented by Pakistan. Then during 1990s, India started equating the resistance from Kashmiri freedom fighters with terrorism and accused Pakistan of “arming and funding militants” fighting in Indian Occupied Kashmir. This rhetoric absorbed further credence after the terrorist attacks on twin towers which led to the establishment of a US-led international coalition to fight War on terrorism. In the midst of these developments, India was able to capitalize on the Global War on Terrorism by framing the efforts of freedom fighters as Pakistan-led terrorism in Indian Occupied Kashmir. This is why; India managed to maintain the status quo in the Kashmir conflict as no further progress could be made between Pakistan and India in this regard. Since 1990’s India’s stance on Kashmir remained consistent that it is an issue of terrorism. This psychological and information warfare on the part of India against Kashmir and Pakistan also helped them strategically to legitimize and increase the use of force, hence the use of bullets and pallet guns against the innocent Kashmiris. 

 

 

The author of this article is himself a Kashmiri whose grand-parents migrated from Indian occupied Kashmir to Pakistan during the independence in 1947. The author wants to emphasize that not only Pakistan’s policy makers but also every Pakistani must wake up to the fact that they are being encircled slowly and steadily by Indian hegemonic designs. Understand the psychology of your enemy not only United States but also Israel is being emerged as its strategic and military partner in the post-911 world order. “TARGET PAKISTAN” is their policy where at one hand we see United States blaming Pakistan for Afghanistan crisis and on the other we see India framing Pakistan in Indian occupied Kashmir by portraying the efforts of freedom fighters as Pakistan-led terrorism against India. Now an obvious question arises that how can we deal with this issue? Following are the summarized strategies which must be used instantly before it gets too late for Pakistan: