Srinagar, Mar 26, KONS: Reacting to the latest controversy over the legitimacy of stone-pelting, the chairman of the Hurriyat (G), Syed Ali Shah Geelani, today said that those speaking against stone-pelting youth should first study the approach of the armed forces personnel, as there was no comparison between the gun and the stone as the latter could not take human life.
Though Geelani himself is on record for having repeatedly appealed to youth to desist from stone-pelting and other forms of violence during demonstrations, his latest remarks come in the midst of a debate in the media and the public circles about the viability and legitimacy of stone pelting, particularly after the head of the Jami’at-e-Ahl-e-Hadees, Maulana Shaukat Ahmad Shah described the act as un-Islamic.
On the day after his arrival in Srinagar after a three-month stay in New Delhi, Geelani today visited the family of Shahid Ahmad Ahangar in Rainawari who was killed in CRPF firing on protestors in Nauthatta.
Speaking at a gathering in Nauthatta where he met the family of detained pro-freedom activist, Aashiq Hussian Rangrez, Geelani said that the deployment of thousands of armed personnel needlessly in populated areas was a provocation in itself, and it was natural for youth to react with anger and pelt stones.
“To impose undeclared curfew even at prayer time and confine people indoors in tantamount to inflaming passions,” he said. “If anybody expects peace to be maintained after this, he is not using his mind.”
Asking opponents of stone pelting to first consider the behaviour of the armed personnel, Geelani said that the stone was minor thing as compared to a gun as it could not take anybody’s life.
“Under no circumstances can bullets be the answer to stones in a civilized state as this is absolute mercilessness and savagery that has no justification,” he said.
Taking a dig at pro-India leaders, Geelani said that they bore a greater responsibility than India itself for the travails of Kashmiris because they gave the stamp of legitimacy to Indian occupation, and the serious and pathetic situation in Kashmir could not reach the outside world as long as they were in power.
“They are the cause of distancing our goals,” he said, appealing to the people not to support pro-India political parties.
“Our struggle will continue so long as maintain its military occupation of Kashmir. The Indian army is not here as a peace-keeper but as an aggressor which has no justification to remain here,” he said.
