The envoy was in the Valley on a fact-finding mission after New Delhi, rather wisely, opened Kashmir to foreigners. During a briefing for a dozen diplomats, a smart brigadier flaunted a bunch of locally-published newspapers to claim how liberal the Indian system was. Like a majority of Indian intellectuals when they talk of Kashmir, deep inside his heart, the officer did not believe in what he was saying.

This particular guest sensed the ambiguity. Scanning the newspapers, most of which contained nothing but seditious matter from headlines to ads,he quipped, "In my country such people are placed behind bars." As the brigadier began waxing eloquent on Indian liberalism, the envoy cut him short: "Why don't you admit your system is incapable of acting tough even on matters of your security?"

One should have no complaints against the die-hard ideologues, who have spent a lifetime believing Kashmir ought to have gone to Pakistan. My mind goes to turncoats who would love to have the best of both the worlds -- privileges of the Indian system, including unlimited freedom of expression, and the Pakistani largesse. No wonder many of them have happily chosen India-bashing as a profession. My brush with this reality came from a senior colleague, who would turn out immaculately to lead a small contingent of somewhat scarred mediapersons to the Badami Bagh cantonment.

It was the time when militants had banned any interaction between journalists and the army, when the Kashmiri employees would hide their faces while entering the army area. His boldness left usstunned. Our friend was hailed as the bravest of the Kashmiris and he had gained the most exalted position in the annals of the BB Cant. It continued till one day I chanced to lay my hands on the propaganda arsenal of the insurgents. The most voluminous of the pamphlets, "Atrocities by the Indian Army", was compiled by the same journalist. Working in Kashmir, I soon realised I was wasting my energies arguing out these parasites. The system was out to pander to their needs and egos.

The game was simple. The louder and harsher you are an India-basher, the bigger the government house allotted to you. And if you manage to guide a firang journalist and manipulate things to make him see the Kashmir situation through Pakistani eyes, there is a fair chances that the director of information will drop by to invite you for a meal and include your name in the press accreditation committee.

The pro-Indians, like those with the news agencies, were told to wait even for routine government handouts, as "thosetroublemakers need more attention". "Aap kahan jayege?" the information chief would try to laugh off their grievances about late delivery of handouts. It got so bizarre that one day Yusuf Tarigami, a leftist Kashmiri leader, pleaded with the Press Council to get government houses for the pro-India journalists, so that "people like me at least can visit some media office".

Lastly a more bizarre anecdote. A young militant-commander is caught and serves his jail term. He soon discovers the omnipotence of the "press" label and joins a newspaper as an employee, only to walk through the border to Pakistan again. He is caught on his return. The entire press-corps stage a solidarity show and, lo and behold, our militant-journalist friend is off. Soon, he is seen sharing stage with a luminary like Mark Tully -- the latter was there to tell us about the "freedom of press in conflict areas".