[GreenYouth] Iran presidential elections: Tehran mayor drops out to back hardliner: Mohammad-Baghar Ghalibaf steps aside to boost campaign of Ebrahim Raisi against reformist incumbent Hassan Rouhani

[Sukla Sen]

[Until recently, (Ebrahim) Raisi, a former prosecutor general of Iran,
was a relatively unknown political figure outside the eastern province
of Khorasan-Razavi, where he is still the custodian of Astan Quds
Razavi, the wealthiest charity in the Muslim world and the
organisation in charge of Iran’s holiest shrine, the Imam Reza shrine
in Mashhad.
Raisi had barely reached adulthood when the 1979 Islamic Revolution
took place, but rose quickly through the ranks of Iran’s religious
institutions. In the summer of 1988, he was one of the four sharia
judges who ordered the mass execution of leftists and dissidents.
Raisi’s human rights record has troubled many. “A man who should be on
trial for the most heinous crime in contemporary Iranian history, is
instead seeking the presidency,” said Hadi Ghaemi, the executive
director of the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI).
“Allowing him to run for president is yet another grievous wound for
the families who unjustly lost their loved ones in 1988.”]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/15/iran-presidential-elections-tehran-mayor-drops-out-to-back-hardliner

Iran presidential elections: Tehran mayor drops out to back hardliner

Mohammad-Baghar Ghalibaf steps aside to boost campaign of Ebrahim
Raisi against reformist incumbent Hassan Rouhani

Iranian campaign workers distribute electoral posters Ebrahim Raisi.
Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA

Saeed Kamali Dehghan Iran correspondent
Monday 15 May 2017 13.39 BST Last modified on Monday 15 May 2017 22.00 BST
Tehran’s mayor has dropped out of Iran’s presidential election,
allowing hardliners to a coalesce around a powerful conservative in
the fight against the reformist-backed incumbent, Hassan Rouhani.

Mohammad-Baghar Ghalibaf, who has twice before been defeated in
presidential elections, issued a statement on Monday saying he was
stepping aside to bolster the campaign of hardliner Ebrahim Raisi.

Raisi has been touted as a frontrunner to succeed the country’s
supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. A presidential win would pave
the way for a possible succession, while a defeat could scupper his
chances.

“What is important now and vital is preserving the interests of the
people, the country and the revolution and this cannot be achieved in
any way other than a change in the current situation,” Ghalibaf said,
according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

“We should make a fundamental decision to create unity in the
revolution’s front and I call upon all my supporters across the
country to come out in support of my esteemed brother Hujjat al-Islam
Ebrahim Raisi and make him succeed in forming the government of work
and dignity.”

Ghalibaf took just over 6m votes in the 2013 presidential election,
which was won in the first round by Rouhani with 18.6m votes and
50.71% of the vote share. Under the Iranian system, candidates need an
absolute majority of votes to win. If no candidate wins more than 50%
of the vote in the first round, the top two candidates go to a
second-round run-off.

In the absence of credible polling in Iran, it is difficult to gauge
Raisi’s popularity across Iran, particularly given that he has not run
for presidency before.

***Until recently, Raisi, a former prosecutor general of Iran, was a
relatively unknown political figure outside the eastern province of
Khorasan-Razavi, where he is still the custodian of Astan Quds Razavi,
the wealthiest charity in the Muslim world and the organisation in
charge of Iran’s holiest shrine, the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad.***
[Emphasis added.]

***Raisi had barely reached adulthood when the 1979 Islamic Revolution
took place, but rose quickly through the ranks of Iran’s religious
institutions. In the summer of 1988, he was one of the four sharia
judges who ordered the mass execution of leftists and dissidents.***
[Emphasis added.]

***Raisi’s human rights record has troubled many. “A man who should be
on trial for the most heinous crime in contemporary Iranian history,
is instead seeking the presidency,” said Hadi Ghaemi, the executive
director of the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI).
“Allowing him to run for president is yet another grievous wound for
the families who unjustly lost their loved ones in 1988.”*** [Emphasis
added.]

Rouhani alluded to this controversy during a campaign rally recently,
saying: “The people of Iran will announce in this election that they
don’t accept those who only knew executions and prison for 38 years.”

Friday’s presidential elections are the first since 2015’s landmark
nuclear agreement, under which Tehran agreed to roll back its nuclear
programme in exchange for the removal of sanctions. The elections are
seen in part as a test of Iran’s economic progress under Rouhani since
2015.

Rouhani has stabilised the Iranian economy and brought down inflation
but unemployment is high and his opponents have questioned whether his
administration has done enough to bring tangible economic be

[GreenYouth] Re: Two Positive Notes on OBOR/BRI Summit

[Sukla Sen]

["While New Delhi chose to skip the inaugural Belt and Road Forum
(BRF) in Beijing citing sovereignty concerns over the China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor (CPEC), six of India’s neighbours signed at least 20
agreements with China — seeking aid in advancing infrastructure,
power, banking and finance — during the two-day event."

That's evidently a telling comment on the self-congratulatory claims
by the Modi government of spectacular performance in the domain of
foreign policy.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/pak-to-lanka-6-india-neighbours-sign-20-infra-deals-with-china-obor-cpec-4657550/

Pakistan to Sri Lanka: Six India neighbours sign 20 infra deals with China

During the forum, China dubbed CPEC a flagship One Belt One Road
(OBOR) project, and 10 more agreements connected to the contentious
corridor that runs through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) were
formalised.

Written by Apurva | Beijing | Updated: May 16, 2017 8:16 am

During the forum, China dubbed CPEC a flagship One Belt One Road
(OBOR) project, and 10 more agreements connected to the contentious
corridor that runs through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) were
formalised.

***While New Delhi chose to skip the inaugural Belt and Road Forum
(BRF) in Beijing citing sovereignty concerns over the China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor (CPEC), six of India’s neighbours signed at least 20
agreements with China — seeking aid in advancing infrastructure,
power, banking and finance — during the two-day event.*** [Emphasis
added.]

During the forum, China dubbed CPEC a flagship One Belt One Road
(OBOR) project, and 10 more agreements connected to the contentious
corridor that runs through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) were
formalised. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif addressed the
opening ceremony of the BRF and led a delegation including four chief
ministers and several federal ministers.

Read | Nepal too joins OBOR, China experts say India must reconsider stance
But Pakistan was not alone in cooperating with China on OBOR, a pet
project of Chinese President Xi Jinping. Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh,
Myanmar and Afghanistan all signed MoUs, cooperation agreements and
planning documents connected to OBOR.

India has raised the CPEC issue at various levels, including with
President Xi at the BRICS summit in Goa last October. In January,
Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar had said, “China is a country which is
very sensitive on matters concerning its sovereignty… so we would
expect that they would have some understanding of other people’s
sensitivity about their sovereignty. CPEC passes through a piece of
land which we call Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which is a territory
that belongs to India and is illegally occupied by Pakistan.”

Wang Yiwei, Professor at the School of International Studies at Renmin
University, said China’s neighbours would benefit immensely from the
OBOR initiative. “The CPEC project is expected to solve Pakistan’s
energy independence and infrastructure issues through special economic
zones and the Gwadar Port. I believe its economy will take off after
the second stage of development that begins in 2020. By 2030,
Pakistan’s economy will be the new emerging power in the world,” he
said.

Earlier this week, another Chinese scholar, Wang Dehua, Director,
Institute for South and Central Asia Studies in Shanghai, had said,
“It is natural that India’s neighbours want to be a part of the Belt
and Road Initiative. It is a great opportunity for them. They want
China’s technological knowledge and, of course, they want the money.”
He had added that India’s neighbours may even work on convincing
India, whose influence cannot be denied in South Asia, to join the
OBOR initiative.

Wang Yiwei believes India is becoming more flexible about the
initiative. “I believe India has shown positive signs over a
China-Nepal-India economic corridor… Even the US and Japan have sent
representatives,” he said.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Three Reports / Comments on Indian Petition before the ICJ as regards Kulbhushan Jadhav in Pakistan Custody

[Sukla Sen]

I/III.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/kulbhushan-jadhav-hearing-live-india-set-to-counter-pak-s-claims-at-icj/story-dLMHS18YCn1tmcdLhj4oKK.html

Highlights: ICJ hearing on Kulbhushan Jadhav’s case ends, Pak says
India’s relief appeal ‘unnecessary and misconceived’

India and Pakistan presented their arguments before the International
Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague over Kulbhushan Jadhav’s death
sentence. The alleged Indian spy was sentenced to death by a Pakistani
military court earlier this year.

INDIA Updated: May 15, 2017 20:13 IST
HT Correspondent

Television channels show news about the ICJ hearing on Kulbhushan
Jadhav’s death sentence.(AP Photo)

India and Pakistan ended their submissions before the International
Court of Justice at The Hague on Monday over the Indian national
Kulbhushan Jadhav’s death sentence.

India took up the issue of consular rights to its national and accused
Pakistan of violating the Vienna convention and conducting a “farcical
trial” without a “shred of evidence”.


New Delhi also demanded the immediate suspension of Jadhav’s death
sentence, expressing fears that Pakistan could execute him even before
the ICJ hearing was over. Pakistan argued that the world court has no
jurisdiction in this case as it pertains to national security.

It is after 18 years that an India-Pakistan dispute is playing out in
the world court.

Here are the live updates:

7:25 pm: The ICJ chair addresses the court and says ICJ will render
its order as soon as possible. The date will be duly communicated to
the parties. “The sitting is closed.”

7:20 pm: Indian counsel’s claim that Delhi wasn’t provided consular
access to Jadhav is far removed from the truth.

It was “wholly inappropriate” for India to seek provisional measures
from this court: Pakistan

Qureshi ends his arguments.

7:18 pm: Earlier in the afternoon, ICJ declined Pakistan’s plea to
play a video of Jadhav’s “confession”, reports news agency IANS.

7:15pm: To kidnap a man in Iran and get him for the purpose of
confession is far-fetched, says Pakistan.

7:10pm: Point by point, Pakistani delegation gives reasons for why
Islamabad is not violating Vienna Convention, as claimed by the Indian
side. The focus then shifts on the passport controversy as Pakistan
claims Jadhav carried a false document.

Article 55 (of Vienna Convention) says there must be no inference in
the internal affairs of the receiving state. Espionage, terrorism are
clearly internal affairs of the country: Pakistan argues before the
ICJ about the jurisdiction of the court in this case

“Not one jot of evidence has been advanced by India.”

7 pm: Pakistan questions the “objective” of this case as it
disseminates the case examples presented by the Indian side before the
ICJ.

“If the only relief India is seeking is not available, what is the objective.”

The court should exercise considerable caution in matters where the
court can’t provide relief, says Qureshi.

6:55 pm: Pakistan harps on the urgency of India’s plea, tells ICJ the
matter is not urgent. “This court does not exist for time wasting.”

At the very least what is required is annulment and release of Jadhav.
“There is no realistic, plausible relief in this case... These relief
are aspirational.”

6:50 pm: India’s position advanced towards this court is a sham, says
Pakistan’s counsel... “India invoked the court with respect to
urgency, not Pakistan.”

6:40 pm: Pakistan’s counsel QC Khawar Qureshi now addresses the ICJ bench.

I will invite this court to dismiss this application, says Qureshi,
listing out reasons for the claim. There is no urgency and the
jurisdiction in this case is limited and unqualified.

6:37 pm: After saying that Jadhav has confessed to being an Indian
spy, Md faisal -- agent of Pakistan government addresses the ICJ --
says the video (of Jadhav’s confession) is publically available for
everyone to see.

6:35 pm: India has been provided with the copy of the passport that
was in possession of Commander Jadhav. The passport bears a Muslim
name, which clearly isn’t his name. India is unwilling to provide the
explanation for his passport... We submit that India’s silence is
telling: Pakistani delegation

“Instead, India appears to be on a hyperdrive to brief its press on
Commander Jadhav.”

Faisal says India’s urgency claim, saying that the Indian national may
be executed soon, is not accurate as a period of 150 days is provided
for Jadhav to seek clemency.

There is a no need for provisional measure: Pakistan

6:31pm: Moazzam Ahmad Khan (agent), Mohammad Faisal (agent), QC Khawar
Qureshi (Counsel) to argue in ICJ for Pakistan in #KulbhushanJadhav
case.

Pakistan says India’s application is misconceived and unnecessary, and
New Delhi is using ICJ as a political theatre. “India has used this
court as the scene of political theatre. We will not respond in kind.”

“Despite being ambushed for appearing before the court, we will
present the case today.”

“We will not be cowed by terror

[GreenYouth] Moon’s Seoul to take a softer line (vis-a-vis N. Korea)

[Sukla Sen]

http://www.asianage.com/opinion/oped/160517/moons-seoul-to-take-a-softer-line.html

Moon’s Seoul to take a softer line

Skand Tayal
The writer has served as India’s ambassador to Uzbekistan and South Korea

Published : May 16, 2017, 12:10 am IST Updated : May 16, 2017, 12:10 am IST

Moon served as a respected human rights lawyer in the difficult days
of authoritarian rule in the 1980s.

Newly elected South Korean President Moon Jae-in speaks during his
inauguration ceremony at the National Assembly in Seoul, South Korea.
(Photo: AP)
 Newly elected South Korean President Moon Jae-in speaks during his
inauguration ceremony at the National Assembly in Seoul, South Korea.
(Photo: AP)
The train of events in South Korea that led to the impeachment of
President Park Geun-hye came to a denouement on May 9 with the
election of a new President. The consistent frontrunner in the race
and eventual winner was left- leaning Democratic Party of Korea’s
candidate Moon Jae-in. He led in all the opinion polls and finally
received 41.1 per cent of the votes.

The other two serious candidates were Ahn Cheol-soo of the centrist
People's Party, who secured 21.4 per cent votes, and Hong Joon-pyo of
the ultra-conservative Liberty Party, who received 25.5 per cent
votes.

Mr Moon, 64, is a person of resolute will and principles. During
military service in 1976, he was involved in a daring commando
operation in the demilitarised zone between North and South Korea. He
served as a respected human rights lawyer in the difficult days of
authoritarian rule in the 1980s. He was chief of staff of late liberal
President Roh Moo-hyun and has rich experience in dealing with complex
governance issues. In 2012, Mr Moon had lost the presidential race to
Ms Park with a narrow margin of 48 per cent against 51 per cent. In
the presidential campaign, Mr Moon presented himself as a champion of
democracy and an advocate of a fair and just society. His campaign
slogan was:  “A reliable President to build a decent nation”.

The rightists were on a sticky wicket in the presidential election due
to the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye and the anti-incumbency
factor, as her predecessor Lee Myung-bak too was from the rightist
Saenuri Party. In the South Korean polity, voters in the 50-plus age
range tend to be more conservative and the young and middle-aged
incline to be more liberal in their social, economic and political
beliefs.

In the second place came 62-year-old Hong Joon-pyo of the Liberty
Korea Party, who represented the hard conservative section of the
South Korean polity. He was governor of the industrialised South
Gyeongsang province and has been a tough public prosecutor. Mr Hong
promised a hard line towards North Korea, revival of death penalty and
a crackdown on trade union leaders who he had accused of shackling the
economy. He was clearly out of touch with the public sentiment.

In the third place was a relatively recent entrant to politics:
55-year-old Ahn Cheol-soo, who has been a successful doctor and
software entrepreneur. He founded the People’s Party earlier this year
after breaking away from the Democratic Party of Korea, once he
realised that he was unlikely to be its presidential candidate. It was
a bitter parting as in the 2012 elections, Mr Ahn had withdrawn in
favour of Moon Jae-in so as not to split the liberal vote.

Prior to the election, Time magazine had correctly predicted that Mr
Moon would be the next President of South Korea and put him on its
cover in the week preceding the election. In his interview to the
magazine, candidate Moon said that his destiny was to bring the two
Koreas together after seven decades of being apart. This goal reflects
the dream of his mentor former President Roh Moo-hyun, who tried his
utmost for reconciliation with the North. He continued the “Sunshine
Policy” of President Kim Dae-jung and had a summit meeting with then
North Korean supremo Kim Jong-il in October 2007. After the election,
Mr Roh said that he was open to visiting North Korea under the “right
conditions”.

With the latest missile test on Sunday, Kim Jong-un has signalled that
North Korea would press on with its policy of defying the UN Security
Council and the United States. President Roh Moo-hyun condemned the
launch as a “provocation” and said that dialogue was “only possible
when the North shows a change in attitude”.

What is still likely is that after a complete failure of the “trust
politik” of President Park Geun-hye and a policy based on strict
reciprocity followed by President Lee Myung-bak, South Korea may again
embark on a policy of unilateral concessions to the North. During the
last two conservative presidencies there was a virtual freeze on any
credible direct contact between the two Koreas. In its recent remarks,
the North Korean official media has favoured a return to the earlier
era of communication and cooperation followed by the two left-leaning
Presidents during 1998-2007.

In his Time interview candi

[GreenYouth] US President Donald [Dumb or Sinisrer?] Trump Stirs Up yet another Storm for Himself, His Cronies Fielded to Provide the Direly Needed Cover

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/16/15646848/trump-mcmaster-russia-intel-leak

National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster responds to Trump leaking
classified intel to Russia

The administration is set to give a statement this morning.

Updated by German Lopez@germanrlopezgerman.lo...@vox.com  May 16,
2017, 11:37am EDT

H.R. McMaster on Trump giving Russia classified information
National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster responds to President Trump's
leak of highly classified information to Russia.

Posted by Vox on Tuesday, 16 May 2017

At 11:30 am on Tuesday, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is
scheduled to comment on a bombshell report by the Washington Post
(ref: 
)
that found President Donald Trump had recently disclosed highly
classified information to Russian officials (ref.:
).

The classified information, which was reportedly about ISIS, was
closely held even within the US government. As one US official told
the Post, Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador
than we have shared with our own allies.”

The Post’s reveal comes as Trump faces continuing scrutiny over his
own ties to Russia. Last week, Trump fired FBI Director James Comey,
who was leading the agency through an investigation into whether the
Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials to sway the 2016
election. Trump admitted to NBC News anchor Lester Holt that the
Russia investigation was on his mind when he fired Comey, drawing new
criticisms that the president had committed obstruction of justice.

A day after firing Comey, Trump met with Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It is in this
meeting where he reportedly disclosed highly classified intelligence
to the Russians, who are widely seen as an adversary to US interests
on the global stage.

Though initial rounds of administration statements included non-denial
denials about leaking information to Russians, Trump himself on
Tuesday morning confirmed on Twitter that he shared information with
Russian officials last week, though he did not say if that information
was classified.

Now Trump’s staff is cleaning up after him.

(Herebelow's an account of the attempted clearing up operation.
But, how effective?
Only time will tell.)

II.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/16/donald-trump-defends-giving-highly-classified-information-russians/

Donald Trump 'did not give Russians location of his intelligence
source because he did not know it'

[Video of McMaster certifying his boss.]

 Harriet Alexander, new york
16 MAY 2017 • 5:27PM
H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, says Trump's
conversation "wholly appropriate"
Trump accused of sharing top secret information on Islamic State with Russians
McMaster says real concern should be leaking of private conversations
McMaster dodges question about whether Trump gave away city from which
intel came
McMaster says Trump not even aware of details of where intel came from
Trump insists he has "the absolute right" to share classified intel
Intel came from a third country; concerns now that allies will stop
sharing information with US
Peter Roberts: Like the political leaders before him, Donald Trump has
the right to share intelligence
​H.R. McMaster has defended Donald Trump's sharing of information with
the Russians, describing his conversation as "wholly appropriate".

Mr McMaster, briefing the press inside the White House, said that the
May 10 conversation with Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, and
Sergei Kislyak, the ambassador, was "routine".

Trump Lavrov
Donald Trump and Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister
On Monday night the Washington Post reported that Mr Trump had shared
information with the Russians about Isis which had come from a third
party - information so sensitive only a few people inside the
government were aware of it.
The report roiled the White House, and Mr McMaster was dispatched late
on Monday to insist that the president had done nothing wrong.

On Tuesday morning, however, Mr Trump admitted that he had shared the
information - but said he was perfectly entitled to do so. A president
can indeed chose when to declassify information.

 Follow
 Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled
W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts
pertaining
4:33 PM - 16 May 2017
  13,643 13,643 Retweets   45,839 45,839 likes
 Follow
 Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
...to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus
I want Russia to greatly step up their fight agains

[GreenYouth] Donald Trump and the latest mess (of his own making) he's in: Two comments

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/16/15649914/trump-comey-flynn-russia-investigation-holt

Trump sure seems to have lied about Comey and Flynn
The White House has another crisis on its hands.

Updated by Alex w...@alexwardvoxalex.ward@vox.com
May 16, 2017, 7:15pm EDT

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn answers questions in
the briefing room of the White House February 1, 2017 in Washington,
DC. Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

President Donald Trump’s interview last Thursday with NBC’s Lester
Holt seems so long ago at this point. But the latest news has brought
it back into the spotlight.

That’s because what Trump told Holt just five nights ago is now being
contradicted by the latest reporting in New York Times and the
Washington Post.

Here’s the Times’s lead with the explosive revelation:

President Trump asked the FBI director, James B. Comey, to shut down
the federal investigation into Mr. Trump’s former national security
adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in an Oval Office meeting in February,
according to a memo Mr. Comey wrote shortly after the meeting.

“I hope you can let this go,” the president told Mr. Comey, according
to the memo.
And the Washington Post confirms the story, claiming that Comey’s own
notes reveal that Trump “pressured” Comey into ending the Flynn probe.

That reporting completely contradicts what Trump explained to Holt
last week. The key part is below:

[Screenshot]

Trump told Holt that he wanted the investigation to go faster.
Instead, it now appears that not only did he try to slow it down but
he tried to end the portion that looked into his ol’ pal Flynn.

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting
Flynn go,” Trump reportedly said to Comey. “He is a good guy.”

Good guy or not, it now seems Trump personally tried to influence the
outcome of the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between an
associate of the president and Russia.

As Vox previously reported, Flynn and three other Trump associates
feature prominently in that investigation.

Last week, the Senate Intelligence Committee subpoenaed Flynn to get
documents related to his communications with Russian officials. The
committee also asked the Treasury Department to look into Flynn’s
finances.

While subpoenas are normal parts of investigations, for them to
continue the investigation means there is something to look into. In
other words, the investigators think there’s a there there.

The White House has responded to the New York Times story, denying it
completely:

View image on Twitter
[Screenshot]
 Follow
 Shane Goldmacher ✔ @ShaneGoldmacher
No one at the White House willing to put their name on this statement
3:07 AM - 17 May 2017
  421 421 Retweets   489 489 likes

That denial is going to be hard to substantiate, especially if the
paper trail of what Comey deemed to be the “president’s improper
efforts to influence a continuing investigation” does in fact exist.

If that’s the case, Trump may want to bust out those “tapes” he claims
to have of his and Comey’s conversations. That’s probably the only way
he’s going to refute a paper trail now.

When Trump fired Comey (last week!), my colleague Matthew Yglesias
wrote that “a whiff of obstruction of justice is in the air.”

That whiff just became a much stronger scent.

II.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/15/15627284/trump-comey-firing-obstruction-justice-nixon-watergate

Donald Trump has committed the exact offense that forced Richard Nixon to resign

Updated by Dylan Matthews@dylanmattdy...@vox.com
May 16, 2017, 6:20pm EDT

Javier Zarracina / Vox

We don’t actually know if Richard Nixon ordered the break-in to the
Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex on
June 17, 1972.

That, to me, is still the most remarkable feature of the Watergate
crisis. A president was forced out of office for the first time in
American history by a scandal centering on a single crime, and we
still don’t know if he actually ordered it.

In his memoirs, Nixon denies it, though he smugly adds, "I could not
muster much moral outrage over a political bugging." Jeb Magruder, a
dirty tricks operative for Nixon, revealed three decades later that he
had overheard Nixon and his reelection chair John Mitchell planning
the burglary. But as historian David Greenberg notes, “Mr. Magruder
had [previously] discussed that same meeting without noting Nixon's
participation.” Dirty tricks operatives aren’t the most reliable of
sources.

We don’t even know why it happened — if the burglars were looking for
evidence that the DNC was receiving money from the North Vietnamese or
Cuban governments (as conspirator Howard Hunt insisted), or
information embarrassing to White House counsel John Dean (as G.
Gordon Liddy, who planned the break-in with Hunt, claimed), or, as
another popular theory has it, trying to find out how much DNC chair
Larry O'Brien knew about Nixon’s financial dealings with billionaire
tycoon Howard

[GreenYouth] New Delhi and Nepal (in the shadow of New Delhi): A View from Kathmandu

[Sukla Sen]

http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2017-05-17/new-delhi-changes-tack-assumes-neutral-position.html

New Delhi changes tack, assumes ‘neutral position’

Observers say India has softened stance on Nepal’s constitution and is
encouraging Madhes-based forces to take part in polls
- KAMAL DEV BHATTARAI, Kathmandu

Delhi for long maintained that there should be broader acceptance of
the constitution for which the demands of the Madhesi, other
marginalised groups need to be addressed

May 17, 2017-

The successful conduction of the first round of local elections which
took place on Sunday after a long spell of uncertainty has paved the
way for the second round polls on June 14, and if the current
political mood is anything to go by, the agitating Madhes-based
parties will actively participate.

During a meeting with the leaders of the Rastriya Janata Party Nepal
(RJPN), a newly formed unified force of six Madhes-based parties,
Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal on Monday urged them to participate
in June 14 polls.

Not much of resistance was shown by the Madhesi leaders, according to
sources. How the government will take the constitution amendment bill
forward is yet to be seen, as a change of guard is on cards and a new
government under the Nepali Congress is likely to hold the second
round of elections.

Will the Madhes-based parties, which earlier vehemently objected to
local polls and announced to disrupt them, will participate in June 14
polls then?

They will, say officials and experts.

Their belief that the Madhes-based parties will go to polls stems from
developments in the recent months at home as well as in New Delhi.

Some officials and experts the Post talked to on Tuesday were of the
view that India is encouraging major political parties and the
Madhes-based forces to soften stances on constitution amendment and
polls.

Though Delhi maintained silence for long on Dahal government’s plan to
hold local elections, it about 10 days before the May 14 polls came up
with an official version on the announced elections.

“Local elections are an important tool in any functioning democracy for

consolidation of grassroots democracy,” Gopal Bagalay, spokesperson
for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, said on May 4.

This was viewed as India’s changed position when it came to
constitution amendment and the way it was carrying the Madhes-based
parties’ concerns.

Delhi has for long maintained that there should be broader acceptance
of the constitution for which the demands of the Madhesi and other
marginalised groups need to be addressed.

Observers say it now appears that New Delhi does not want to stick to
that view that strongly, thereby encouraging the Madhes-based parties
to moderate their stance on constitution amendment and participate in
polls.

“We feel that both sides [the establishment and agitating forces]
should sit for regular dialogue and consultations to find a middle
point on constitution amendment and conduction of second phase of
elections,” an Indian government official told the Post requesting
anonymity.

The successful conduction of the first round of polls too has created
pressure on the agitating forces to participate in the second round.

“The demands of the Madhes-based parties are related to the conclusion
of the peace process. I think India wants early consensus between
major parties and the Madhes-based forces,” said Nihar R Nayak, a
research fellow at Institute for Defence Studies and Nepal-India
expert.

Following the promulgation of the constitution, the Madhes-based
parties were up in arms, resorting to protests at major Nepal-India
border points, particularly in the eastern region. India’s terse
response to adoption of the new charter in Nepal and subsequent border
blockade resulted in souring of relations between the two countries.

But two years down the line, New Delhi seems to have decided to take a
“neutral position”.

When the Post asked a Madhesi leader whether there has been a change
in India’s stance, he expressed his ignorance.

“This question should be asked to Indian ambassador,” Laxman Lal
Karna, a Madhesi leader, said. “I do not have any information about
it. So no comments,” said Karna.

The Madhes-based parties, however, have been saying that the
constitution should be amended before the second round of elections.

A revised constitution amendment bill is currently in Parliament.

The next meeting of Parliament is scheduled for Friday. Ruling parties
so far have been hesitating to move the amendment bill forward, as
they say they lack the required numbers to endorse it. Two-thirds
majority will be required in 593-strong House to endorse the bill.


Published: 17-05-2017 09:38



---
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send 

[GreenYouth] The majority complex: Julio Ribeiro

[Sukla Sen]

[All our prime ministers, except one, who was a Sikh, have been
Hindus. Real power resides in the prime minister and his council of
ministers. More than 85 per cent of ministers have been Hindus. Most
civil and defence service officers have been Hindus. From where, then,
did Sudarshan and his organisation get this peculiar persecution
mentality of the 85 per cent being eclipsed by the 15 per cent?]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-majority-complex-discrimination-muslim-christian-rss-modi-mohan-bhagwat-4659150/

The majority complex

The minority may be forced to reconcile to being second-class
citizens. But will the majority enjoy a better life if the rule of law
is forsaken by those mandated to uphold it?

Written by Julio Ribeiro | Published:May 17, 2017 12:02 am

Sudarshan, the predecessor of Mohan Bhagwat, was staying at the home
of my batchmate’s friend. Illustration by C R Sasikumar

It was only 20 years after my meeting with K.S. Sudarshan, the
then-sarsanghchalak of the RSS, that I finally realised what he meant
by the figure “85”. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s spectacular victory
in the UP Vidhan Sabha elections opened my mind’s eye to the
significance of that number.

Let me elucidate. A couple of years after my return from Romania, I
was invited by my IPS batchmate, D.S. “Vasant” Soman, to meet
Sudarshan, who was visiting Mumbai.
Sudarshan, the predecessor of Mohan Bhagwat, was staying at the home
of my batchmate’s friend. It was a meeting over dinner and there were
a few other invited guests.
After acknowledging my presence in the gathering, Sudarshan dwelt on
just one point — justice for 85 per cent of the population, which he
felt was being treated like second-class citizens. When he repeated
this accusation more than half a dozen times, I realised that the
sarsanghchalak felt that the Muslim and Christian minorities, that, 20
years ago, added up to about 15 per cent of the populace, were being
appeased by the ruling dispensation.
My thoughts, I remember, were on the figure “85”. How did the RSS
chief arrive at that number? He obviously counted the Sikhs in that 85
per cent, though the Sikhs themselves would not be happy to be
categorised as such. Secondly, I was not able to figure out at that
time how Sudarshan or the RSS had come to the conclusion that the 85
per cent were not being given their due.

All our prime ministers, except one, who was a Sikh, have been Hindus.
Real power resides in the prime minister and his council of ministers.
More than 85 per cent of ministers have been Hindus. Most civil and
defence service officers have been Hindus. From where, then, did
Sudarshan and his organisation get this peculiar persecution mentality
of the 85 per cent being eclipsed by the 15 per cent?

The only grouse that the majority or, rather, sections of the majority
owing allegiance to the philosophy of M.S. Golwalkar, could have
against the Christians was that they indulged in converting poor
Dalits and tribals, thereby disturbing the established social order.
More than that, perhaps, was the fact that Sonia Gandhi, born a
Christian and an Italian, had been accepted by millions of Hindus as
their leader.

The grouses against the country’s largest minority, the Muslims, were
many. But all the charges were now whittled down to just one — of
being pampered in pursuit of votebank politics. In actual fact, all
concessions made to Muslims were made to their religious leaders on
matters that the latter arbitrarily interpreted as affronts to their
personal laws. The community, as such, continued to live in poverty,
no attention being paid to the education or health of its members,
particularly women, because of which the community continued to remain
backward.

On the other hand, only the Dalits and the tribals, from among the
“85”, could be counted among the poor and the dispossessed. The RSS is
keen to include them in the Hindu fold, despite reservations from the
orthodox elements of the chaturvarnya who have been known to use the
whip against Dalits skinning dead cattle for a living.

When I joined the IPS in 1953, I did not think of myself as a
Christian in a Hindu land. My colleagues, my seniors and my juniors
never showed any sign of differentiating between one policeman and
another on the basis of religion. One of my first bosses was Vasant
Vinayak Nagarkar, a Pune Brahmin, who invited me, then a bachelor, to
stay with him, his wife and children, in his official residence. He
died years ago but I remember him with great affection.

These were the thoughts that raced through my mind at that time 20
years ago when I met Sudarshan. Now, 20-odd years later, when Modi won
a remarkable victory in the UP elections, I became suddenly aware that
“85” meant the rule of the majority, by the majority and for the
majority.

Well, the “15” need not complain because this does happen in other
parts of the world too. In Pakistan, for example, Hindus and
Christians are often accused of “bl

[GreenYouth] High Court issues notice to Attorney General on petition seeking Yogi’s disqualification

[Sukla Sen]

http://www.jantakareporter.com/india/high-court-yogis-disqualification/123635/

High Court issues notice to Attorney General on petition seeking
Yogi’s disqualification

By JKR Staff - May 16, 2017

The Allahabad High Court today issued a notice to Attorney General of
India on a petition seeking disqualification of Chief Minister Yogi
Adityanath and his deputy, Keshav Prasad Maurya, from their respective
posts.

***The Lucknow bench of the high court has set the matter for next
hearing on May 24.*** [Emphasis added.]

A division bench comprising justices Sudhir Agrawal and Virendra Kumar
passed the order on the Public Interest Litigation petition filed by
Sanjai Sharma.

The petitioner pleaded that a parliamentarian cannot not become the
minister of a state government and this is in violation of article
101(2) of the Constitution of India and as such the appointment of
Adityanath as the CM and Maurya as the Deputy CM should be set aside,
for both are still continuing as MPs. The petitioner also sought that
their Lok Sabha seats be declared vacant.

Sharma challenged the constitutionality of section 3(A) of the
Prevention of Disqualification Act. Since the constitutionality of a
central act cannot be tested without hearing the Attorney General, the
court issued him notice.

Adityanath and Maurya were sworn-in on March 19. Both of them are
likely to resign from their parliamentary seats only after casting
their vote in the presidential election this July. As per norms, they
have to be elected to the legislature in their states within six
months since they were sworn in. They can contest elections to the
state legislature only after quitting as MPs.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Cabinet clears proposal to build 10 new indigenous (PHWR) nuclear reactors

[Sukla Sen]

[Proposal for 10 new indigenous nuclear reactors (PHWR) of capacity
700 MWe each (the largest indigenous reactors so far) has been cleared
by the Union Cabinet of India.

Worldwide nuclear power is experiencing a dip because of safety,
environmental and cost concerns.
China, Russia and India are the frontline states on an expansion spree though.
(See: 
.)]

I/II.
http://www.news18.com/news/india/in-nuclear-boost-cabinet-clears-proposal-to-build-10-atomic-reactors-1404127.html

In Nuclear Boost, Cabinet Clears Proposal to Build 10 Atomic Reactors

News18.com
Updated:May 17, 2017, 7:05 PM IST facebook  Twitter  google  skype

In Nuclear Boost, Cabinet Clears Proposal to Build 10 Atomic Reactors
File photo of the Kudankulam nuclear power project in Tamil Nadu.
(Photo: Reuters)

New Delhi: The Union Cabinet on Wednesday cleared a proposal to build
10 indigenous Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors, boosting the nuclear
power generation in the country.

The 10 reactors of 700 MW each will give much needed fillip to the
domestic nuclear industry."A total of 7000 MW capacity will be added,"
said Union Power Minister Piyush Goyal.

The reactors will be developed by the Department of Atomic Energy, PTI reported.
The 10 reactors would be built at Mahi Banswara (Rajasthan), Chutka
(Madhya Pradesh), Kaiga (Karnataka) and Gorakhpur (Haryana).

India currently has installed nuclear power capacity of 6780 MW from
22 operational plants. Another 6700 MW of nuclear power is expected to
be added by 2021-22 when currently under-construction projects go on
stream in Rajasthan, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu.
“As the government marks three years of its nation and people-centric
governance, in a first of its kind project, the 10 new units will come
up in fleet mode as a fully homegrown initiative. It would be one of
the flagship Make in India projects in this sector," a government
statement said.

The project is expected to help transform the nuclear industry with
possible manufacturing orders of around Rs 70,000 crore and generate
over 33,400 jobs.

(With PTI inputs)

II.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/cabinet-clears-proposal-to-build-10-atomic-reactors/article18473481.ece

Cabinet clears proposal to build 10 atomic reactors

SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT NEW DELHI ,  MAY 17, 2017 16:02 IST
UPDATED: MAY 17, 2017 23:16 IST

Each reactor will have the capacity to produce 700 MW of electricity.

The Union Cabinet on Wednesday cleared the proposal to construct 10
indigenous pressurised heavy water nuclear reactors with a total
capacity of 7,000 MW.

Briefing the media on the Cabinet decisions, Power Minister Piyush
Goyal said the reactors each would have a capacity of 700 MW. “We
already have 6,780 MW of operational nuclear power plants and about
6,700 MW of plants under implementation, which will be set up by
2021-22.”

The decision comes against the backdrop of recent troubles for India’s
international collaborations in nuclear projects. While the U.S. deal
involving Toshiba Westinghouse for six 1000 AP reactors is floundering
after Westinghouse filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the deal with
French company Areva for reactors in Jaitapur remain mired in
negotiations over costing.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
 Follow
 Frank Noronha ✔ @DG_PIB
#Cabinet approves construction of 10 units of Indigenous Pressurized
Heavy Water Reactors. Read more:
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/mberel.aspx?relid=161865 …
5:59 PM - 17 May 2017
  66 66 Retweets   92 92 likes
Twitter Ads info & Privacy

While the Minister said these 10 plants would create ₹70,000 crore
worth of business for domestic manufacturers and generate about 33,400
jobs, he did not provide a timeline of their completion, saying the
government would update the details when they are clear.

“The approval also shows our strong belief in the capability of
India’s scientific community to build our technological capacities,”
an official statement said.

Rapid advances by India
“The design and development of this project is a testament to the
rapid advances achieved by India’s nuclear scientific community and
industry. It underscores the mastery our nuclear scientists have
attained over all aspects of indigenous PHWR technology.”

India generated 37,674 million units of nuclear energy in 2016-17,
according to the Nuclear Power Corporation of India, at a capacity
factor of 80%. The two major projects under construction at the moment
are located in Rajasthan and Gujarat, of 1,400 MW each. Both plants,
comprising two units of 700 MW each, are under review.

“The ten reactors will be part of India’s latest design of 700 MW PHWR
fleet with state-of-the-art technology meeting the highest standards
of safety,” it added.

Snipped


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from 

[GreenYouth] The MoU for Nuclear Reactors 5 & 6 at Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu between India and Russia Remains Stalled despite Russian Proddings because of India's Push for NSG Membership?

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
http://www.timesnow.tv/india/article/india-russia-china-nsg/61207

India wants Russia to convince China for its entry in NSG

May 17, 2017 | 15:57 IST | SOURCE : Times Now, TNN Reports

New Delhi: It has come to light that India has warned Russia that it
will stall cooperation with its foreign partners for development of
its civil nuclear projects, as it has not yet got access to the elite
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

As per a Times of India report, India has threatened to put on hold a
Memorandum of Understand (MoU) with Russia for developing to civil
nuclear projects - Kudankulam 5 and 6 reactor units.

It is no secret that Russia and China share a cordial relation, and
India is trying to convince Russia to sway China to allow India’s
entry into the elite group.

The report adds that Russia is “worried” that India might be purposely
delaying the MoU, to ensure a guaranteed spot in the NSG.

Worried about India’s reluctance, Russia’s deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin
took the matter up with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in their meeting
last week, top sources confirmed to TOI. But no clear guarantee was
given by Rogozin on India’s stance on the MoU before leaving India.

Another integral part of the meeting between Rogozin and PM Modi was
to prepare an initial groundwork for Modi’s summit with President
Vladamir Putin.

Considering the fact that Russia is India’s oldest and most reliable
partner in the development of its nuclear energy programme, the
Putin-led country would not want to come empty-handed from the summit.

India has also made it clear to Moscow that it would have no option
but to go for an indigenous nuclear energy programme if its bid to
become an NSG member is denied.

II.
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/policy/kudankulam-plant-final-agreement-for-units-5-6-awaits-clearance-from-pmo/article9705029.ece

Kudankulam plant: Final agreement for units 5, 6 awaits clearance from PMO

PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

Modi to meet Russian President on June 1

NEW DELHI, MAY 17:
With barely a fortnight to go for a meeting between Prime Minister
Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin, a key pact on
units five and six of Kudankulam nuclear plant awaits clearance from
the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).

The General Framework Agreement (GFA) for units 5 and 6 of the plant
in Tamil Nadu has already been cleared by an inter-ministerial group
and is with the PMO for its nod, government sources said, suggesting
that no final assurance has been given to the Russian side so far on
whether the pact will be inked during Modi-Putin meeting in St
Petersburg on June 1.

A GFA is the final agreement before a project can commence.“After its
evaluation by the inter-ministerial group, the proposal has now been
sent to the PMO and is awaiting its green signal,” a top government
source said.

Significantly, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin was here
last week to prepare the ground for the bilateral meet between the two
leaders.

He co-chaired an inter-governmental commission meeting with External
Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj where the two sides agreed to take
forward collaborative projects in a range of sectors, including
nuclear energy, and joint projects in third countries.

According to an October 2015 joint statement after a meeting between
Modi and Putin, the two sides “reaffirmed” their intention to conclude
the GFA and the Credit Protocol for Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant
(KKNPP) units 5 and 6 by the end of 2016.

Reasons for delay

Government sources said the GFA between India and Russia was to be
signed by December 2016. They also added that it was pending because
the two sides had disagreement over credit protocol.

The delay also comes in the backdrop of concerns in India over growing
proximity between Moscow and Islamabad.

India also wants Russia to make more efforts to get New Delhi into the
elite Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

A part of the KKNPP project, units 5 and 6, with a capacity of 1000 MW
each, are being built with Russian collaboration. Unit 1 and 2 of the
KKNPP are already operational.

In August 2016, Modi and Putin jointly dedicated Unit 2 of the plant
to “India-Russia Friendship and Cooperation” and witnessed the laying
of foundation concrete for Kudankulam units 3 and 4 through
video-link.

(This article was published on May 17, 2017)


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Trump's (Latest) Outburst: “No politician in history, and I say this with great surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly.”

[Sukla Sen]

[“Look at the way I’ve been treated lately, especially by the media,”
Trump said on Wednesday during a speech to the Coast Guard Academy in
Connecticut. “No politician in history, and I say this with great
surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly.”]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/17/donald-trump-presidency-media-coverage-russia-scandal

Trump: 'No politician in history has been treated more unfairly'

President tries to brush off controversies by complaining of media treatment
Paul Ryan: we need the facts on Comey memo and Russia investigation
Politics live: all the latest as Trump claims ‘tremendous’ achievements

[0.58-min. video clip:  Trump decries media treatment in coast guard
commencement speech]

Lauren Gambino in Washington and Tom McCarthy in New York
Wednesday 17 May 2017 18.13 BST Last modified on Thursday 18 May 2017 01.10 BST
No politician in history has been treated as unfairly as Donald Trump,
the president claimed as he struggled under the weight of a series of
major controversies.

“Look at the way I’ve been treated lately, especially by the media,”
Trump said on Wednesday during a speech to the Coast Guard Academy in
Connecticut. “No politician in history, and I say this with great
surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly.”


Chaos on Capitol Hill as Republicans reel from latest Trump controversy
 Read more

He told the coast guard graduates: “You can’t let them get you down.”
Responding to their cheers, he commented: “I guess that’s why we won.”

On Capitol Hill, the House speaker, Paul Ryan, the most senior
Republican in Congress, said he still had confidence in the president
after a week of stunning revelations that sent shockwaves through
Washington.

But Justin Amash, a conservative from Michigan, became the first
Republican legislator to publicly concede that if the new allegations
against Trump were true, the president could be impeached.

Ryan warned about rushing to conclusions in the wake of a New York
Times report that Trump had asked Comey to stop an investigation into
his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn. That news came a
day after a Washington Post report that Trump had revealed highly
classified information during a meeting with Russian officials. The
two controversies came in the wake of Trump’s equally contentious
firing last week of the FBI director, James Comey, who was leading the
agency’s investigation into Russia’s reported meddling in the US
election.

“Our job is to get the facts,” Ryan told reporters. The Wisconsin
Republican said the House oversight and government reform committee
had “appropriately” requested that the FBI hand over any memos and
documentation Comey kept on his meetings with the president and said
lawmakers would remain “sober” in their search for “the facts”.

“It is obvious there are some people out there that want to harm the
president, but we have an obligation to carry out our oversight
regardless of which party is in the White House,” Ryan said. “And that
means, before rushing to judgment, we get all the pertinent
information.”

On Wednesday, the Senate intelligence committee joined the House
oversight committee in asking the acting FBI chief, Andrew McCabe, to
hand over any notes or memos from Comey on such meetings. The Senate
committee also wrote to Comey asking him to appear before it in both
open and closed sessions.

Asked if he still had confidence in Trump, Ryan replied: “I do.”

Ryan spoke after a closed-door meeting with Republicans, the first
caucus-wide meeting since the House returned from a 10-day recess.

For weeks, Republicans have carefully avoided casting criticism on the
president, but by Wednesday, that loyalty was being tested.

After the House meeting, Justin Amash told reporters that if Trump had
tried to quash an FBI investigation, it would merit impeachment.


“Yes,” the congressman replied when asked whether the report would
qualify as an impeachable offense, according to a report in the Hill.
He added: “But everybody gets a fair trial in this country.”

On the whole, however, Republicans and Democrats have refused to say
whether they believe the accusations, if true, would lead to
impeachment.

“I’ve been through an impeachment hearing. They’re not good for the
country, let alone the individual,” said Senator Diane Feinstein, a
California Democrat and the ranking member of the judiciary committee.
“I think until we know more this should remain where it is ... off the
table.”

Meanwhile, Republican Adam Kinzinger, who was previously opposed to
appointing a special prosecutor to conduct an independent
investigation into links between Trump’s team and Russia, said he was
open to one.

“It is time we look at the idea of an independent commission or
special prosecutor,” the Illinois congressman told CNN.

House Democrats on Wednesday planned to use procedural maneuvers to
force a vote on a bill that would establish an independent commission
to investigate Russian interferenc

[GreenYouth] A citizens’ report released last week explained why Kashmiri youth have been hurling stones at the security forces

[Sukla Sen]

[It was a 10-day visit by a citizens’ group to 10 districts in the
Kashmir Valley late last year. But the report by the 25-member group
was released last week at the Constitution Club. The report, it was
claimed, explained why Kashmiri youth have been hurling stones at the
security forces, something which the Government and the security
forces seem determined not to address.]

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/2017/05/15/ram-madhav-please-spare-3-minutes-to-read-and-respond-citizens-report-kashmir

A citizens’ report released last week explained why Kashmiri youth
have been hurling stones at the security forces. The Government,
however, is determined not to address it
Ram Madhav, please spare 3 minutes to read and respond

The BJP General Secretary on Sunday reiterated the govt’s policy of
eliminating the last dissenter and not to talk to anyone holding a
stone in the Valley, a citizens’ report provides the flip side

Saurav Datta
May 15th 2017, 03.44 PM

It was a 10-day visit by a citizens’ group to 10 districts in the
Kashmir Valley late last year. But the report by the 25-member group
was released last week at the Constitution Club. The report, it was
claimed, explained why Kashmiri youth have been hurling stones at the
security forces, something which the Government and the security
forces seem determined not to address.

The report goes on to make the following points :

A large section of people in the Valley see action by security forces
as ‘acts of vengeance’ to force people to subjugation and taking away
their democratic right to protest peacefully.

A regime of indiscriminate arrests and killings, of enforced
disappearances, of “mass-blindings” by the use of pellet guns and PAVA
(Pellargonic Acid Vanillyl Amide- an organic compound found in chilli
pepper) shells had been unleashed.

Mosques, sites of peaceful protests and meetings which provide both
financial and material support to the community, were targeted,
especially during Friday prayers.

Security forces would enter mosques with their shoes on , snatch
public address systems and vandalise graves.

In many villages, prayers at mosques were disallowed and the local
media gagged from carrying these reports.

In a span of four months between July and November, 31 students were
killed including a class VII student who tried to flee out of fear.

As many as 24 schools were set on fire by security forces, forcing the
community to set up makeshift schools in mosques, open ground and
private homes.

While these informal schools were functioning during curfew hours,
government teachers who opted to teach at these schools were
intimidated, arrested and prevented from teaching.

A bitter Khurram Parvez of JKCCS declared at the panel discussion that
Indians should stop “thinking and speaking for Kashmiris” and instead
worry about themselves, for the illegal military occupation in Kashmir
is being replicated in various other parts of India.

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising was sharply critical of the way in
which draconian laws such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act
(AFSPA) and the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act have been used. She
noted how the AFSPA has been continuously used to overawe and take
over the civil administration, in blatant violation of the
government’s undertaking not to do so, given to the Supreme Court in
1997.

Documentary film-maker Sanjay Kak, whose 2007 documentary
Jashn-e-Azadi has been repeatedly censored by the Indian state, said,
“We are in a curious situation where the army itself is asking for a
political solution in Kashmir”, and hence it is imperative for India
to recognise and fulfill the right to self- determination, “else the
gangrene set in by India won’t remain confined to the Pir Panjal”.

“Even the percentage of students sitting for the centralized Class X
and XII examinations is regularly used by the Indian state to display
the degree of ‘normalcy’ in the valley, much like the voter turnout in
elections,” the report pointed out.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Cabinet nod to maternity benefit programme, scheme restricted to firstborns (reduced from two live births earlier)

[Sukla Sen]

["The Indira Gandhi Matritva Sahyog Yojana (IGMSY) is a maternity
benefit program run by the government of India. It was introduced in
2010 and is implemented by the Ministry of Women and Child
Development. It is a conditional cash transfer scheme for pregnant and
lactating women of 19 years of age or above for first two live births.
... Presently, the scheme is implemented on a pilot basis in 53
selected districts and proposals are under consideration to scale it
up to 200 additional 'high burden districts' in 2015-16."

(Source: 
.)

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/cabinet-gives-nod-to-maternity-benefit-programme/1/956065.html

Cabinet nod to maternity benefit programme, scheme restricted to firstborns
Pregnant women and lactating mothers are eligible to receive a cash
benefit of Rs 5,000 in three installments from the Women and Child
Development Ministry.

IndiaToday.in  | Posted by Isha Gupta
New Delhi, May 17, 2017 | UPDATED 19:29 IST

HIGHLIGHTS
1Mother will receive the initial Rs 1,000 after early registration of pregnancy.
2Rs 2,000 after at least one antenatal check-up.
3And Rs 2,000 after the child birth is registered.

The maternity benefit programme providing Rs 6,000 each to lactating
mothers got a nod from the cabinet today. However, the scheme was
restricted to firstborns only.

"A pregnant or lactating woman having her first child will get up to
Rs 6,000. Out of this, Rs 5,000 will be given by the women and child
development ministry in three installments," said Power Minister
Piyush Goyal at a cabinet briefing today.

Piyush Goyal maintained that the scheme was for the women having their
first child. However, he added that the pilot scheme was applicable
for 'the first two live births'.

Pregnant women and lactating mothers are eligible to receive a cash
benefit of Rs 5,000 in three installments through direct benefit
transfer from the Women and Child Development Ministry.

The mother will receive the initial Rs 1,000 after early registration
of pregnancy, Rs 2,000 after at least one antenatal check-up (after
six months of pregnancy) and Rs 2,000 after the child birth is
registered and has received the first cycle of BCG, OPV, DPT and
Hepatitis-B or its equivalent/substitute.

"The eligible beneficiaries would continue to receive the remaining
cash incentive as per approved norms towards Maternity Benefit under
existing programmes after institutional delivery, so that on an
average, a woman will get Rs 6,000," said an official release.

In his address to the nation on December 31 last year, Prime Minister
Narendra Modi had announced pan-India expansion of the existing Indira
Gandhi Matritva Sahyog Yojana, which was being implemented across 56
districts on pilot-basis since 2010.

(With inputs from PTI)
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Don't Hang Kulbhushan Jadhav Before Final Verdict: UN Court Tells Pak: Two Reports

[Sukla Sen]

[I. The ICJ has ordered a "stay" on execution of Jadhav till its final
ruling, and it is "binding" (on Pakistan).
II. The order does not "prejudge" the issue of either "jurisdiction"
of the court in the present case or the "admissibility" of the case.
III. So, it's an ad interim stay.
Nothing more, nothing less.
IV. And, finally, there was no "stay" till now, as was being claimed
by numerous quarters in India; only *now* onwards, there is a "stay" -
till the final order, and it is "binding".
Nor this order is any comment, either way, on the merits of the
execution order passed by a military court in Pakistan.

It's, no doubt, a welcome development.
It, in all likelihood, prevents (a hurried) excecution of Jadhav till
detailed evaluation of the merits and demerits of the stances of the
two contending states by the ICJ.]

I/II.
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/international-court-of-justices-decision-on-kulbhushan-jadhav-death-sentence-in-pakistan-soon-1695224

Don't Hang Kulbhushan Jadhav Before Final Verdict: UN Court Tells Pak
The 11-judge bench of ICJ agreed with India that there was urgency in
the case, and noted that Pak had given no assurance that Mr Jadhav
wouldn't be executed till its verdict.

Reported by Nidhi Razdan, Edited by Deepshikha Ghosh |

Updated: May 18, 2017 17:25 IST

[2.15-min. Video clip: International Court of Justice holds Kulbhushan
Jadhav's execution in Pak pending final verdict]

HIGHLIGHTS
International Court of Justice rejects Pak arguments
Says case falls under Vienna Convention, asserts jurisdiction
Urgency in case, Jadhav at risk of being executed: Court

Kulbhushan Jadhav's death sentence has been halted for now, with the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague today ordering
Pakistan to ensure that the Indian is not executed until it takes a
final decision in his case. "Pakistan shall take all measures at its
disposal to ensure that Mr Jadhav is not executed pending the final
decision in these proceedings," the top UN court ruled in a decision
it called unanimous and binding.

It also said that Pakistan should have given India consular access to
Kulbhushan Jadhav, rejecting Pakistan's argument that a person
convicted of espionage is not entitled to it.

The UN court announced its interim ruling on India's urgent appeal
accusing Pakistan of violating the Vienna Convention, which guarantees
diplomatic help to foreigners accused of capital crimes.

In an emergency hearing on Monday, the government had accused Pakistan
of "egregious violations of the Vienna convention" by denying the
former navy officer legal counsel and consular access and refusing to
reveal the charges or evidence against him.

The 11 judges today agreed with India's stand that there is urgency in
the case, and noted that Pakistan had given no assurance that Mr
Jadhav would not be executed till its verdict.

Mr Jadhav, 47, was arrested in March 2016 and Pakistani officials
claimed he had confessed to spying for Indian intelligence services.
He was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court last month.

Mr Jadhav was "an innocent Indian national, who, incarcerated in
Pakistan for more than a year on concocted charges has been held
incommunicado... and faces imminent execution," India told the
tribunal.

Hours later, Pakistan told the world court that the execution was not
imminent and that Mr Jadhav had time at least till August for legal
remedies. Its representative also accused India of "political
grandstanding" and told the court Mr Jadhav "has confessed to having
been sent by India to wage terror on the innocent civilians and
infrastructure of Pakistan".

The two countries are battling it out in the international court amid
a sharp escalation in tension over ceasefire violations by Pakistan,
terror attacks in Jammu and Kashmir and the recent mutilation of two
Indian soldiers by Pakistanis.

The last time India and Pakistan took a dispute to the ICJ was in 1999
when Islamabad protested against the shooting down of a Pakistani navy
plane that killed 16 people. In that case, the tribunal decided it was
not competent to rule in the dispute and closed the case.

II.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-4518436/UN-court-orders-Pakistan-halt-execution-Indian-spy.html

UN court orders Pakistan to stay execution of Indian 'spy'

By AFP
PUBLISHED: 12:02 BST, 18 May 2017 | UPDATED: 12:37 BST, 18 May 2017

India's battle at The International Court of Justice to stop Pakistan
executing one of its nationals accused of spying has highlighted
tensions between the nuclear armed rivals

The UN's top court on Thursday ordered Pakistan to stay the execution
of an Indian national convicted of spying, in a decision hailed by New
Delhi.

Judges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in a
unanimous and binding decision that Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav must not
be executed by Islamabad until they have had time to pass final
judgement in the case.

Jadhav was arrested in the restive southwestern Paki

[GreenYouth] Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain Should be Rejected

[Sukla Sen]

https://www.armscontrol.org/issue-briefs/2017-05/arms-sales-saudi-arabia-bahrain-should-rejected

Volume 9, Issue 3, May 2017

President Donald Trump is set to make his first foreign trip as
president to the troubled Middle East region. He will meet with King
Salman of Saudi Arabia, as well as the members of the Gulf Cooperative
Council. The humanitarian crisis in Yemen and the Saudi-led
coalition’s war there will certainly be key topics. So too will
pending U.S. arms sales to Riyadh and Manama that the Obama
administration put on hold but the Trump administration is now pushing
through Congress.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis meets with Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin
Abdulaziz al-Saud in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, April 19, 2017. DoD photo
by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Brigitte N. BrantleyDefense Secretary Jim
Mattis meets with Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, April 19, 2017. DoD photo by U.S. Air Force
Tech. Sgt. Brigitte N. BrantleyThe potentially massive Saudi arms
sale, involving precision-guided munitions (PGM) worth hundreds of
millions of dollars, was suspended by Obama in December, in part due
to independent reports that Saudi forces have repeatedly struck
civilian areas, including locations the United States asked be
off-limits.

The new Saudi arms deal has not yet been formally notified, but it has
been sent to the chairs and ranking members of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee for review. A
multi-billion dollar sale of 19 F-16 fighter jets to Bahrain is in a
similar pre-notification status and does not include human rights
preconditions that the President Barack Obama administration had
mandated. Reports suggest an even larger Saudi arms deal, ranging in
value from $100-300 billion, may be in the works and discussed while
Trump is in the region.

The Trump administration initiative ignores Saudi Arabia’s repeated
failure to avoid civilian targets and would compound the growing
humanitarian crisis in Yemen that is largely the consequence of the
devastating conflict there.

Unfortunately, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson devalued promotion of
human rights in an address to his State Department staff on May 3,
suggesting that placing an emphasis on others upholding American
values “creates obstacles to our ability to advance our national
security interests, our economic interests.” Senator John McCain
(R-Ariz.), among others, has delivered a passionate rebuttal of this
argument.

In addition, there are strong national security and legal reasons why
these proposed sales are unwise.

A Deteriorating Disaster in Yemen

Since the Yemeni rebel movement, the Houthi, seized the capital Sanaa
in 2015, the United States has backed a Saudi-led coalition fighting
nominally on behalf of exiled president Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, often
providing refueling for war planes and other support. The coalition
has retaken portions of Yemen, including Aden, which Hadi ostensibly
uses as a base for his government. But many Yemenis still live in
areas outside of Hadi’s control, including in the capital Sanaa. All
sides in the conflict have been implicated for violations of
international humanitarian law, including the Saudis who have ignored
U.S. “no target” lists and bombed hospitals, civilian areas, and
funerals in attacks that may amount to war crimes.

The war has also fueled a humanitarian disaster. After two years of
fighting, the United Nations launched an appeal early this year on
behalf of 18.8 million people who it found needed assistance in
Yemen—more than two-thirds of the country’s population. At that time,
it warned of a possible famine with 3.3 million people being acutely
malnourished.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres painted a chilling picture April
25 of what he called “a tragedy of immense proportions,” noting that
“On average, a child under the age of five dies of preventable causes
in Yemen every ten minutes.” Now, Houthi leaders in Sanaa have
declared a state of emergency after a cholera outbreak that has killed
more than 100 people.

The flow of new weapons to states involved in the conflict will only
worsen the humanitarian situation. Ignoring UN findings that a
military solution is not possible and pleas to unblock access to ports
to help address the “largest humanitarian crisis in the world,” the
port city of Hodeida is identified as a next target for the Saudi-led
coalition. Despite being crippled by earlier strikes and blocked from
receiving new cranes for unloading supplies, a significant portion of
humanitarian assistance enters the country through the port. An attack
there would likely further cut supplies and significantly escalate
human suffering.

News of the potential sale of precision-guided munitions as well as an
attack on Hodeida have swirled in Congress since at least March, with
many members wisely engaging to express concerns about addressing the
humanitarian situation, Saudi behavior, and authority fo

[GreenYouth] China drafts law on broad surveillance powers

[Sukla Sen]

[The Chinese government has released the first draft of a new
intelligence law aimed at formalising its sweeping security powers,
with broad authority to engage in surveillance at home and abroad.
The document would create a legal framework for the country's
extensive domestic and foreign intelligence work, which already
includes widespread monitoring of communications and broad authority
to detain anyone suspected of harming national security.]

http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/china-drafts-law-on-broad-surveillance-powers-117051801589_1.html

China drafts law on broad surveillance powers

AFP |  Beijing
May 18, 2017Last Updated at 21:22 IST

ALSO READ
China official lauds Macau security law in hint to Hong Kong
China drafting law to regulate use of national anthem
China says it followed law in approving 38 Trump trademarks
China mulls revision to mapping law to inculcate patriotism
Report: Human rights lawyers in China beaten, arrested

The Chinese government has released the first draft of a new
intelligence law aimed at formalising its sweeping security powers,
with broad authority to engage in surveillance at home and abroad.

The document would create a legal framework for the country's
extensive domestic and foreign intelligence work, which already
includes widespread monitoring of communications and broad authority
to detain anyone suspected of harming national security.



It is part of a raft of legislative measures drafted by China in
recent years that grant the government formal authority to crack down
on perceived threats to domestic stability, including laws on national
security, espionage and cybersecurity.

Like those documents, the National Intelligence Law's current draft is
short on specifics: just six pages filled with ambiguously-worded
phrases, according to a copy of the text posted on the website of the
National People's Congress on Tuesday.

The text, which was made available for public comment seemingly
without a formal announcement, had already received 236 responses by
this evening.

Among its 28 provisions, the draft gives the government wide authority
to collect intelligence both at home and abroad and demand cooperation
from companies and individuals in investigating national security
concerns.

It would also allow the use of "technological reconnaissance
measures", a term that refers to hacking and wire-tapping among other
surveillance methods.

Articles 10 and 11 specifically address intelligence operations with
respect to "foreign bodies, organisations and individuals," saying
that those "engaging in acts harming the national security and
interests...Must be punished".

Since President Xi Jinping took power in 2012, the country has become
increasingly leery of foreign influence, with government officials
regularly accusing so-called "foreign black hands" -- everyone from
journalists and human rights campaigners to textbook publishers and
university professors -- of attempting to subvert the country's
government.

Beijing has sought to raise public awareness of these supposed threats
to national security, with campaigns warning against the dangers of
dating foreign spies and encouraging tipsters to turn in "agents" for
cash rewards.

"Under the backdrop of globalisation, the covert struggles between
different countries and regions have become more complex, so Chinese
citizens need to be educated to build and enhance their sense of
intelligence," Yang Jianying, a professor at China's University of
International Relations, told the state-run newspaper the Global
Times.

In addition to expanding the government's authorities, the draft law
also seeks to place some curbs on Beijing's power.

The measures, if implemented, would require the government to pay
compensation for damages incurred during the course of reconnaissance
or investigations.

It also makes provisions for filing complaints against intelligence
organisations, saying that "any individual or organisation" may report
abuses of power and other "unlawful acts to higher-level authorities".

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is
auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] 'Polls open in ‘important’ Iran presidential election'

[Sukla Sen]

I/III.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/05/19/522408/Iran-Presidential-Election-City-Village-Council

Polls open in ‘important’ Iran presidential election

Fri May 19, 2017 3:1AM

*Iranians are heading to the polls at home and abroad on Friday in
closely-contested elections to choose the country’s 12th president.*

Some 63,500 polling stations opened at 08:00 local time (0330 GMT)
across the country and are to close at 18:00 (1330 GMT) Friday, but
voting hours will likely be extended amid estimates of a high turnout.

Expatriates can also cast their ballots in the presidential election
at 310 polling stations in 102 countries.

Long lines had already formed at polling stations around the country,
with Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei being among
the first to cast his ballot.

Speaking after casting his vote, the Leader said, “I thank God
Almighty for the blessing of democracy and people's participation in
the election. This is a great blessing.”

"Braise be to God, our people are thankful for this blessing. You see
they are participating and my advice is that more and more people
participate and come to the polls at the earliest time possible."

Ayatollah Khamenei described the 2017 elections as very important,
saying the destiny of the country is in the hand of the masses.

"I believe a good work should be done in early hours and should not be
delayed. I also believe the presidential election is very important,"
the Leader said.

"The destiny of the county is in the hands of the people who choose
the chief executive. They should heed the importance of this task,"
Ayatollah Khamanei added.

[Video]

Besides picking a president, Iranians inside the country are also
voting to choose members of the country’s City and Village Councils.

“The City and Village Councils Election is also important as it elects
those who are in charge of urban and rural services, namely the
everyday issues involving the people,” the Leader added.

This year’s presidential race features four presidential candidates,
namely incumbent Hassan Rouhani, who is running for a second term,
Seyyed Ebrahim Raeisi, former deputy judiciary chief, member of Iran’s
Expediency Council Mostafa Aqa-Mirsalim and former vice president,
Mostafa Hashemi-Taba.

However, Rouhani and Raeisi are viewed as the viable contenders after
two candidates from a field of six, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer
Qalibaf and Vice President Is’haq Jahangiri, dropped out in the final
days of campaigning.

Rouhani has been campaigning on the platform of an active foreign
policy meant to enhance international relations.

Raeisi has also vowed a strong economic management towards the
elimination of poverty and unemployment.

The first vote was cast by an Iranian researcher at Victoria
University of Wellington in New Zealand’s capital. The voting began in
Wellington, as well as the country’s cities of Aukland, Christchurch
and Dunedin at 09:30 a.m. local time (02:00 a.m. in Tehran, 2130 GMT).

The Iranians based in the country were, therefore, the first ones to
cast their ballots in the election.

In line with the event’s timeframe, the lranians based in the Americas
will be the last ones participating in the polls.

Based on Iran’s election law, if no candidate manages to secure over
50 percent of the votes, a runoff will take place a week later.

There are more than 56 million eligible voters in Iran.

Weeks of heated campaigning came to an end on Thursday morning, 24
hours before the start of the elections.

Ayatollah Khamenei has called on Iranians to turn out en masse, saying
the nation and Islamic establishment are the true winners of the vote
no matter which candidate emerges victorious.

[This item is being updated.]

II/III.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/polls-open-iran-presidential-vote-atomic-deal-47504424

Polls open in first Iran presidential vote since atomic deal

By ADAM SCHRECK AND AMIR VAHDAT, ASSOCIATED PRESS
TEHRAN, Iran — May 19, 2017, 12:19 AM ET

In this photo taken on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, supporters of Iranian
President Hassan Rouhani hold posters with his image, during a street
campaign ahead the May 19 presidential election in downtown Tehran,
Iran. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani staked his political future on
opening Iran ever so slightly to the outside world and overcoming
hard-liners' opposition to secure a historic nuclear deal in exchange
for relief from crippling sanctions. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

Iranians began voting Friday in the country's first presidential
election since its nuclear deal with world powers, as incumbent Hassan
Rouhani faced a staunch challenge from a hard-line opponent over his
outreach to the wider world.

The election is largely viewed as a referendum on the 68-year-old
cleric's more moderate policies, which paved the way for the nuclear
accord despite opposition from hard-liners.

Economic issues also will be on the minds of Iran's over 56 million
eligible voters as they head to more

[GreenYouth] Rouhani forges clear lead Iran presidential race, expected to win

[Sukla Sen]

[The Iranian Interior Ministry has declared the almost final results
of the Friday presidential election, putting Hassan Rouhani in the
lead with 22,796,468 votes so far.
Out of the 40,076,729 votes cast, 38,914,470 ballots were declared valid.
The candidate with the second largest number of votes was Seyyed
Ebrahim Raeisi, who garnered 15,452,194 votes, according to the
Interior Ministry.

(Source: 'Interior Ministry declares latest official results of Iran
presidential poll' at
.)]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-election-idUSKCN18E2Y8

Sat May 20, 2017 | 4:10am EDT

Rouhani forges clear lead Iran presidential race, expected to win

By Parisa Hafezi and Babak Dehghanpisheh | DUBAI/BEIRUT
President Hassan Rouhani has taken an unbeatable lead in Iran's
presidential election, an Iranian official source told Reuters on
Saturday, citing an early unofficial tally, and is set to hand an
emphatic defeat to his hardline rival Ebrahim Raisi.

In a briefing for reporters, interior ministry official Ali Asghar
Ahmadi outlined a similar proportion of votes, which if confirmed
would give the pragmatist cleric a second term in which to pursue
Iran's re-engagement with the world.

"It's over, Rouhani is the winner," the source said on condition of anonymity.

One Rouhani supporter warmly welcomed the news, but said she expected
him to provide greater social and economic freedoms, pledges he made
when first elected in a landslide in 2013 by Iranians weary of
economic decline and clampdowns on dissent.

"I am very happy for Rouhani's win. We won. We did not yield to
pressure. We showed them that we still exist," said 37-year-old
Mahnaz, a reformist.

"I want Rouhani to carry out his promises."

Rouhani won 21.6 million votes in Friday's hard-fought contest,
compared to 14 million for Raisi, with 37 million votes counted, the
source said, adding about four million more votes were still to be
tallied.

Ahmadi, the interior ministry official, said that with 25 million
ballots certified by the authorities so far, Rouhani had won 14.619
million and Raisi gained 10.125 million.

He said 40 million votes had been cast, indicating a turnout of about
70 percent, roughly similar to the showing in 2013. Ahmadi said final
results would be announced later on Saturday.

The big turnout appeared to have favored Rouhani, whose backers' main
concern had been apathy among reformist-leaning voters disappointed
with the slow pace of change.

"The wide mobilization of the hardline groups and the real prospect of
Raisi winning scared many people into coming out to vote," said
Nasser, a 52-year-old journalist.

 leftright
23/23leftright
Iran's President Hassan Rouhani casts his ballot during the
presidential election in Tehran, Iran, May 19, 2017.
President.ir/Handout via REUTERS

"We had a bet among friends, and I said Raisi would win and I think
that encouraged a few of my friends who might not have voted to come
out and vote."

CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM

Analysts expressed caution about how much Rouhani would be able to do
to bring about broader reforms, despite his apparently decisive win,
given the influence of security hardliners in Iran's hybrid
clerical-republican system.

"The last two decades of presidential elections have been short days
of euphoria followed by long years of disillusionment," said Karim
Sadjadpour, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment who focuses on
Iran.

"Democracy in Iran is allowed to bloom only a few days every four
years, while autocracy is evergreen."

Rouhani, 68, who took office promising to open Iran to the world and
give its citizens more freedom at home, faced an unexpectedly strong
challenge from Raisi, a protege of supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

The election is important "for Iran's future role in the region and
the world", Rouhani, who struck a deal with world powers two years ago
to curb Iran's nuclear program in return for the lifting of most
economic sanctions, said after voting.

Raisi, 56, had accused Rouhani of mismanaging the economy and has
travelled to poor areas, speaking at rallies pledging more welfare
benefits and jobs.

He is believed to have had the backing of the powerful Revolutionary
Guards security force, as well as the tacit support of Khamenei, whose
powers outrank those of the elected president but who normally steers
clear of day-to-day politics.

"I respect the outcome of the vote of the people and the result will
be respected by me and all the people," Raisi said after voting,
according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

However, Raisi later appeared at the Ministry of Interior in Tehran on
Friday and complained of a shortage of ballot sheets at many polling
stations, according to Fars. More ballot sheets were subsequently sent
out, the agency reported.

The Guards and other hardliners had hoped that a win for Raisi would
have given them an opportunity to safeguard econo

[GreenYouth] (I) Trump Told the Russians That 'Nut Job' Comey's Firing Relieved 'Great Pressure' and (II) New Russia probe leaks threaten to derail Trump's foreign trip

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
[During a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak last week, President Trump told the men that
fired FBI Director James Comey was a “nut job,” and that his removal
would relieve pressure on his administration over its ties to Russia.
The New York Times reported the exchange on Friday, and the White
House did not dispute it—an unusual move for a communications staff
that has offered at least token pushback and often serious dispute
even on stories that are unmistakably correct. During the same
meeting, Trump revealed highly sensitive classified information,
shared with the U.S. by an ally, about an ISIS plot.
In a statement, Press Secretary Sean Spicer acknowledged that Trump
believed dismissing Comey would distract from the Russia probe.
“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia's
actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to
engage and negotiate with Russia,” Spicer said. “The investigation
would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey
would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our
national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and
highly classified conversations.”]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/trump-told-russians-that-nut-job-comeys-firing-relieved-pressure/527451/

Trump Told the Russians That 'Nut Job' Comey's Firing Relieved 'Great Pressure'
The president told the Russian foreign minister and ambassador that
firing his FBI director had “taken off” the pressure he had faced, The
New York Times reports.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP
DAVID A. GRAHAM  MAY 19, 2017

Updated on May 19 at 5:36 p.m.

During a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak last week, President Trump told the men that
fired FBI Director James Comey was a “nut job,” and that his removal
would relieve pressure on his administration over its ties to Russia.

The New York Times reported the exchange on Friday, and the White
House did not dispute it—an unusual move for a communications staff
that has offered at least token pushback and often serious dispute
even on stories that are unmistakably correct. During the same
meeting, Trump revealed highly sensitive classified information,
shared with the U.S. by an ally, about an ISIS plot.

RELATED STORY

The Trump Presidency Falls Apart

In a statement, Press Secretary Sean Spicer acknowledged that Trump
believed dismissing Comey would distract from the Russia probe.

“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia's
actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to
engage and negotiate with Russia,” Spicer said. “The investigation
would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey
would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our
national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and
highly classified conversations.”

Meanwhile, The Washington Post reports that the ongoing probe into
ties between the Trump campaign and Russia has “identified a current
White House official as a significant person of interest.” The paper
reported that its sources say the person is a current senior staffer,
but would not further identify who it is. Trump has repeatedly denied
that he had any ties to Russian interference in the campaign, and says
he has no business ties to Russia, either.

By acknowledging the exchange with the Russians, the White House has
effectively admitted it lied in explaining why Comey was fired. The
“nut job” conversation is the latest confirmation that Trump’s
motivation in firing Comey was not, as he and his aides initially
claimed, Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s
emails; nor was it, as they subsequently claimed, a result of Comey
losing the confidence of FBI agents. Instead, as Trump suggested in an
interview with NBC News’s Lester Holt, he was upset about the Russia
probe. A slew of other reports confirmed that behind closed doors,
Trump was upset about the investigation, and Comey’s testimony under
oath that Barack Obama had not “wiretapped” Trump, as the president
claimed without evidence. His comments, and Spicer’s statement, also
bolster allegations of political tampering and perhaps obstruction of
justice by the president.

“If he knows that he personally faces criminal prosecution and his
purpose in trying to shut down or slow down the investigation is to
prevent him from getting caught, or if he knows that someone he knows
or cares about is at criminal risk, like a friend or a family member,
and the purpose is to protect them from criminal indictment, then I
think anyone would view that as obstruction,” said Bruce Green, a law
professor at Fordham and a former associate counsel for the
independent counsel in the Iran-Contra case. Although it's not clear a
sitting president could be prosecuted for obstruction, both that and
related charges would turn on Trum

[GreenYouth] Re: The MoU for Nuclear Reactors 5 & 6 at Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu between India and Russia Remains Stalled despite Russian Proddings because of India's Push for NSG Membership?

[Sukla Sen]

Govt denies NSG link with Russia deal

The ministry of external affairs said on Friday that the MoU or
general framework agreement (GFA) with Russia for Kudankulam 5 and 6
reactor units was at the stage of internal approval. It denied that
there was any link between the delay in signing the agreement and
India's pursuit of NSG membership.

This was in response to a TOI report on Wednesday about Moscow being
worried that India's reluctance to sign the MoU might be linked with
its desire that Russia pro-actively support India's membership of NSG.
This paper had reported that Russian deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin had
taken up the issue of delay in signing the agreement with PM Narendra
Modi when he met him last week. The GFA was meant to be signed late
last year. The government has urged Russia to do more to facilitate
India's membership of NSG. TNN

(Source: 
<http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Indias-N-chase-back-at-2009-mark-20052017014009>.)

Sukla

On 18/05/2017, Sukla Sen  wrote:
> I/II.
> http://www.timesnow.tv/india/article/india-russia-china-nsg/61207
>
> India wants Russia to convince China for its entry in NSG
>
> May 17, 2017 | 15:57 IST | SOURCE : Times Now, TNN Reports
>
> New Delhi: It has come to light that India has warned Russia that it
> will stall cooperation with its foreign partners for development of
> its civil nuclear projects, as it has not yet got access to the elite
> Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
>
> As per a Times of India report, India has threatened to put on hold a
> Memorandum of Understand (MoU) with Russia for developing to civil
> nuclear projects - Kudankulam 5 and 6 reactor units.
>
> It is no secret that Russia and China share a cordial relation, and
> India is trying to convince Russia to sway China to allow India’s
> entry into the elite group.
>
> The report adds that Russia is “worried” that India might be purposely
> delaying the MoU, to ensure a guaranteed spot in the NSG.
>
> Worried about India’s reluctance, Russia’s deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin
> took the matter up with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in their meeting
> last week, top sources confirmed to TOI. But no clear guarantee was
> given by Rogozin on India’s stance on the MoU before leaving India.
>
> Another integral part of the meeting between Rogozin and PM Modi was
> to prepare an initial groundwork for Modi’s summit with President
> Vladamir Putin.
>
> Considering the fact that Russia is India’s oldest and most reliable
> partner in the development of its nuclear energy programme, the
> Putin-led country would not want to come empty-handed from the summit.
>
> India has also made it clear to Moscow that it would have no option
> but to go for an indigenous nuclear energy programme if its bid to
> become an NSG member is denied.
>
> II.
> http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/economy/policy/kudankulam-plant-final-agreement-for-units-5-6-awaits-clearance-from-pmo/article9705029.ece
>
> Kudankulam plant: Final agreement for units 5, 6 awaits clearance from PMO
>
> PRESS TRUST OF INDIA
>
> Modi to meet Russian President on June 1
>
> NEW DELHI, MAY 17:
> With barely a fortnight to go for a meeting between Prime Minister
> Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin, a key pact on
> units five and six of Kudankulam nuclear plant awaits clearance from
> the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).
>
> The General Framework Agreement (GFA) for units 5 and 6 of the plant
> in Tamil Nadu has already been cleared by an inter-ministerial group
> and is with the PMO for its nod, government sources said, suggesting
> that no final assurance has been given to the Russian side so far on
> whether the pact will be inked during Modi-Putin meeting in St
> Petersburg on June 1.
>
> A GFA is the final agreement before a project can commence.“After its
> evaluation by the inter-ministerial group, the proposal has now been
> sent to the PMO and is awaiting its green signal,” a top government
> source said.
>
> Significantly, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin was here
> last week to prepare the ground for the bilateral meet between the two
> leaders.
>
> He co-chaired an inter-governmental commission meeting with External
> Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj where the two sides agreed to take
> forward collaborative projects in a range of sectors, including
> nuclear energy, and joint projects in third countries.
>
> According to an October 2015 joint statement after a meeting between
> Modi and Putin, the two sides “reaffirmed” their intention to conclude
> the GFA and the Credit Protocol for Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant
> (KKNPP) units 5 and 6 by the end of 2016.
>
> Reasons for delay
>
> Government sourc

[GreenYouth] Japan-India nuclear pact clears Lower House despite opposition concerns

[Sukla Sen]

[A civilian nuclear cooperation pact between Japan and India cleared
the Lower House on Tuesday, paving the way for Tokyo to export nuclear
power equipment and technology to the fast-growing economy not part of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
As the Lower House takes precedence in approving treaties, the bill is
set to gain Diet approval despite fears expressed by the opposition
bloc that the South Asian nation could make military use of the
technology.

(It has bearing on the prospects of the Jaitapur nuclear power plant
as the Areva/EDF nuclear reactors, understandably, need critical
Japanese component(s).)]

Japan-India nuclear pact clears Lower House despite opposition concerns

KYODO
MAY 16, 2017

A civilian nuclear cooperation pact between Japan and India cleared
the Lower House on Tuesday, paving the way for Tokyo to export nuclear
power equipment and technology to the fast-growing economy not part of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

As the Lower House takes precedence in approving treaties, the bill is
set to gain Diet approval despite fears expressed by the opposition
bloc that the South Asian nation could make military use of the
technology.

The pact, signed in November when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi
visited Tokyo, prohibits New Delhi from using nuclear materials and
technologies for developing atomic bombs and requires the country to
accept inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Under the accord, India may reprocess nuclear materials and
byproducts, but cannot make highly enriched uranium without approval
from Japan. Highly enriched uranium has the potential for use in
nuclear weaponry.

A separate document confirmed that Japan will halt the nuclear deal if
India breaks its 2008 promise to maintain a moratorium on nuclear
testing.

The main opposition Democratic Party has spoken out against the bill,
pointing out that since the provision to suspend the treaty was not
included in the pact, there is no explicit guarantee to limit the use
of nuclear technology.

Tokyo has insisted that the treaty enables a strong response — by
suspending cooperation — if India were to conduct nuclear tests.
Unlike nuclear deals with Jordan and Vietnam, however, the India-Japan
accord does not specify nuclear testing as a condition for terminating
the agreement.

Opposition parties have asked the government why there is no mention
of “nuclear test” as a condition to halt the pact. During
negotiations, India had firmly rejected adoption of the wording.

Adding to concerns is a provision that gives special consideration in
cases where a third-party state acts in a way that threaten’s India’s
national security. This has sparked controversy because the language
is vague as to Japan’s response under the scenario.

Referring to the provision, Democratic Party Lower House member
Rintaro Ogata cautioned last week that if India conducts a nuclear
test as a countermeasure to any similar experiment by Pakistan, Japan
may not be able to terminate the agreement.

Whether a subcritical nuclear experiment would constitute a
deal-breaker under the accord also remains unclear. Foreign Minister
Fumio Kishida has said Tokyo will “respond appropriately” if it
confirms such tests have taken place, but he stopped short of saying
whether Japan will suspend cooperation under the deal.

India conducted nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998 without joining the
NPT, which is designed to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

Some civic groups in Japan oppose the pact, saying it goes against the
nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament goals of a country that
stands as the sole victim of nuclear attack.

An international ban on the export of nuclear plant equipment to India
was lifted in 2008, prompting Tokyo to begin negotiating the civilian
cooperation pact in 2010. India has already signed similar nuclear
deals with Britain, France, Russia and the United States among other
countries.

India is estimated to possess up to 120 nuclear warheads.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] The latest from the Supreme Court: Aadhaar petitions to be heard on June 27

[Sukla Sen]

[On May 4 last, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court reserved its
judgement on the Aadhaar-PAN mandatory linkage case.
Despite the fact that the Court was to go on vacation from May 10
onwards till July 2. And the last date for linking one's PAN with the
Aadhaar number is June June 30.
Yet, the Court did not deliver its judgement till May 9th.
Thereby the case itself became largely infructuous by implications.

The Supreme Court, subsequently, "on May 9 refused to consider the
plea for an interim order" against making Aadhaar mandatory for a
number of purposes including social welfafare schemes.

Then again, in an apparent U-turn, on May 12, it agreed to hear the
(fresh) petition before it on May 17.

Nothing, apparently, happened on May 17.
Yesterday, on May 19, the Court has now "said that it will hear the
plea challenging various notifications of the Centre to make Aadhaar
card mandatory for availing benefits of government schemes, on June
27."

That's the latest phase of the story.
Quite interesting, had it not been so traumatic for so many.]

I/III.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/june-30-not-a-deadline-to-get-aadhaar-govt-tells-sc/article18510863.ece?homepage=true

June 30 not a ‘deadline’ to get Aadhaar, govt. tells SC
Krishnadas Rajagopal NEW DELHI,  MAY 19, 2017 23:22 IST
UPDATED: MAY 20, 2017 10:11 IST

Court defers petition to June 27 for full hearing.

The Supreme Court on Friday refrained to order an interim stay on a
series of government notifications requiring citizens to have Aadhaar
by June 30, 2017, to equally access benefits and entitlements, even as
the Centre denied imposing any such “deadline” to force people to get
Aadhaar.

The government was responding to a petition challenging 17
notifications issued by various government departments over the past
few months, making Aadhaar compulsory after June 30, 2017, to equally
access benefits, entitlements, services and welfare schemes. The
petition asked the court to stay these notifications as an immediate
interim relief.

A Bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha deferred to June
27 the hearing on the petition after learning that there were other
pleas with identical prayers already pending in the court. The court
said it would hear all the pleas in an omnibus hearing on June 27,
just three days before the notifications are scheduled to be
implemented from June 30.

‘Inbuilt extensions’

Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi submitted that there were “inbuilt
extensions” in these notifications to help citizens access services
and schemes even if they are unable to possess an Aadhaar card by June
30. He said June 30 was not a hard-and-fast “deadline.”

At one point, when Justice Khanwilkar asked whether the date could be
extended beyond June 30, the AG declined, saying that this date was
not a hard-and-fast “deadline” and there were alternatives provided.

“If you don’t have Aadhaar, you just need to enrol and show your
enrolment slip. Again, if beneficiaries are not able to enrol by June
30, they just need to register their request for enrolment... Just
register your mobile number. Besides, States are obligated to set up
enrolment centres,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted.

But advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Magsaysay award winner and
former National Commission for Protection of Child Rights chairperson
Shanta Sinha and feminist researcher Kalyani Sen Menon said the
language of the notifications is quite clear. Citizens are forced to
either posses an Aadhaar card or show proof — an enrolment slip — to
access services and entitlements after June 30.

‘Stupendous anxiety’

“You are excluded unless you have Aadhaar or you have to at least
apply for it and show proof. If this is not mandatory in nature, what
is? This means that, no matter what, you have to start the process of
enrolment for Aadhaar before June 30, 2017,” Mr. Divan submitted.

Mr. Divan said the public at large are waiting for the court’s
intervention with “stupendous anxiety.”

Mr. Rohatgi accused the petitioners of engaging in multiple litigation
against Aadhaar and engaging in abuse of the processes of the court.
He argued that similar interim reliefs were sought and not granted by
the Supreme Court in the past.

The government's top law officer referred to the recent slew of
petitions against the linking of Aadhaar with PAN and the filing of
income tax returns. The Supreme Court had refused to stay the law. Mr.
Rohatgi submitted that 115 crore people have enrolled for Aadhaar as
of date and none of them have challenged the scheme in the SC. “The
purpose of the scheme is to get rid of the ghosts in the PDS (Public
Distribution System) and mid-day meal schemes,” he said.

Finally, the AG said the Aadhaar matter should be decided by a
Constitution Bench, and that can be done after the court opens post
summer vacations on July 1.

Noting that the compulsory enrolment of citizens fits the profile of a
surveillance State, Mr. Divan said the petitioners should be allowed
th

[GreenYouth] Re: [भारत-चिँतन:46288] Re: The MoU for Nuclear Reactors 5 & 6 at Koodankulam, Tamil Nadu between India and Russia Remains Stalled despite Russian Proddings because of India's Push for NSG

[Sukla Sen]

"The ministry of external affairs said on Friday that the MoU or
general framework agreement (GFA) with Russia for Kudankulam 5 and 6
reactor units was at the stage of internal approval. It denied that
there was any link between the delay in signing the agreement and
India's pursuit of NSG membership."

That amounts to "official denial", one'd guess.

***That does not, ipso facto, make it all that credible.
All statements, "official" or otherwise, call for careful and rational
scrutiny.***

Soon after the ToI news, on May 17, that Russia is by India being
pressurised to in turn pressurise China to ensure NSG membership for
India, a torrent of articles emanated from Pakistan, fed by its
foreign office, alleging India has stockpied fissile materials enough
to make around 2,600 nuclear warheads (and also is likely to change
its "no first use" policy), and thereby made it a case against India's
NSG membership. (See: 'India capable of making 2,600 nuclear weapons:
FO', dtd. May 18, 2017 at
<http://nation.com.pk/national/18-May-2017/india-capable-of-making-2-600-nuclear-weapons-fo-spokesperson>,
'India’s growing nuclear programme poses threat to strategic stability
in S. Asia: FO', dtd.  May 18, 2017 at
<https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/headline/indias-growing-nuclear-programme-poses-threat-to-strategic-stability-in-s-asia-fo/>,
 'India’s N-programme fastest growing: FO', dtd. May 19, 2017 at
<http://nation.com.pk/national/19-May-2017/india-s-n-programme-fastest-growing-fo>.
Immediately thereafter, comes the India's denial.
The sequence is, no doubt, interesting.
Could it be a mere coincidence?

In any case, some more on denial, albeit in a rather round-about way.

Sukla

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kudankulam-mou-in-final-stages-says-mea/article18510595.ece?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication

Kudankulam MoU in final stages, says MEA

Suhasini Haidar NEW DELHI,  MAY 19, 2017 22:43 IST
UPDATED: MAY 19, 2017 22:43 IS

Process is at the stage of internal approval, says Ministry of External Affairs

The discussions over the next MoU for units five and six of the
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) are at an advanced stage within
the government, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) announced on
Friday. However, it did not confirm whether the MoU will be ready for
signing when Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets with Russian President
Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg next month.

“Discussions have been held on [the] Kudankulam [5 and 6] document.
The process is at the stage of internal approval,” the MEA
spokesperson said in a statement, indicating the MoU is at the final
stages before it can be signed.

Bilateral talks

Mr. Modi is due to travel to Russia on June 1-3, where he has been
invited as one of the chief guests at the St. Petersburg International
Economic Forum (SPIEF), and he and President Putin will also hold
bilateral talks.

The General Framework Agreement (GFA) and Credit Protocol for KNPP 5
and 6 to be built in Tamil Nadu is among the deals on the table that
was expected to be signed, and has already missed a deadline in 2016.
When the two leaders last met in October 2016, the India-Russia joint
statement had noted their “intention to conclude the GFA and the
Credit Protocol for Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) units 5 and
6 by the end of 2016”, which would be executed by Russia’s publicly
owned ROSATOM and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL).

According to officials quoted by news agency Press Trust of India
earlier this week, the GFA has been cleared by an inter-ministerial
group and is with the Prime Minister’s Office at present, but that
India had so far given no assurance it would be ready in time for PM
Modi’s visit.

On 20/05/2017, Sankara Narayanan  wrote:
> Never believe a statement unless and until it is officially denied.
>
> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Sukla Sen  wrote:
>
>> Govt denies NSG link with Russia deal
>>
>> The ministry of external affairs said on Friday that the MoU or
>> general framework agreement (GFA) with Russia for Kudankulam 5 and 6
>> reactor units was at the stage of internal approval. It denied that
>> there was any link between the delay in signing the agreement and
>> India's pursuit of NSG membership.
>>
>> This was in response to a TOI report on Wednesday about Moscow being
>> worried that India's reluctance to sign the MoU might be linked with
>> its desire that Russia pro-actively support India's membership of NSG.
>> This paper had reported that Russian deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin had
>> taken up the issue of delay in signing the agreement with PM Narendra
>> Modi when he met him last week. The GFA was meant to be signed late
>> last year. The government has urged Ru

[GreenYouth] Rouhani forges clear lead Iran presidential race, expected to win

[Sukla Sen]

[The Iranian Interior Ministry has declared the almost final results
of the Friday presidential election, putting Hassan Rouhani in the
lead with 22,796,468 votes so far.
Out of the 40,076,729 votes cast, 38,914,470 ballots were declared valid.
The candidate with the second largest number of votes was Seyyed
Ebrahim Raeisi, who garnered 15,452,194 votes, according to the
Interior Ministry.

(Source: 'Interior Ministry declares latest official results of Iran
presidential poll' at
.)]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-election-idUSKCN18E2Y8

Sat May 20, 2017 | 4:10am EDT

Rouhani forges clear lead Iran presidential race, expected to win

By Parisa Hafezi and Babak Dehghanpisheh | DUBAI/BEIRUT
President Hassan Rouhani has taken an unbeatable lead in Iran's
presidential election, an Iranian official source told Reuters on
Saturday, citing an early unofficial tally, and is set to hand an
emphatic defeat to his hardline rival Ebrahim Raisi.

In a briefing for reporters, interior ministry official Ali Asghar
Ahmadi outlined a similar proportion of votes, which if confirmed
would give the pragmatist cleric a second term in which to pursue
Iran's re-engagement with the world.

"It's over, Rouhani is the winner," the source said on condition of anonymity.

One Rouhani supporter warmly welcomed the news, but said she expected
him to provide greater social and economic freedoms, pledges he made
when first elected in a landslide in 2013 by Iranians weary of
economic decline and clampdowns on dissent.

"I am very happy for Rouhani's win. We won. We did not yield to
pressure. We showed them that we still exist," said 37-year-old
Mahnaz, a reformist.

"I want Rouhani to carry out his promises."

Rouhani won 21.6 million votes in Friday's hard-fought contest,
compared to 14 million for Raisi, with 37 million votes counted, the
source said, adding about four million more votes were still to be
tallied.

Ahmadi, the interior ministry official, said that with 25 million
ballots certified by the authorities so far, Rouhani had won 14.619
million and Raisi gained 10.125 million.

He said 40 million votes had been cast, indicating a turnout of about
70 percent, roughly similar to the showing in 2013. Ahmadi said final
results would be announced later on Saturday.

The big turnout appeared to have favored Rouhani, whose backers' main
concern had been apathy among reformist-leaning voters disappointed
with the slow pace of change.

"The wide mobilization of the hardline groups and the real prospect of
Raisi winning scared many people into coming out to vote," said
Nasser, a 52-year-old journalist.

 leftright
23/23leftright
Iran's President Hassan Rouhani casts his ballot during the
presidential election in Tehran, Iran, May 19, 2017.
President.ir/Handout via REUTERS

"We had a bet among friends, and I said Raisi would win and I think
that encouraged a few of my friends who might not have voted to come
out and vote."

CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM

Analysts expressed caution about how much Rouhani would be able to do
to bring about broader reforms, despite his apparently decisive win,
given the influence of security hardliners in Iran's hybrid
clerical-republican system.

"The last two decades of presidential elections have been short days
of euphoria followed by long years of disillusionment," said Karim
Sadjadpour, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment who focuses on
Iran.

"Democracy in Iran is allowed to bloom only a few days every four
years, while autocracy is evergreen."

Rouhani, 68, who took office promising to open Iran to the world and
give its citizens more freedom at home, faced an unexpectedly strong
challenge from Raisi, a protege of supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

The election is important "for Iran's future role in the region and
the world", Rouhani, who struck a deal with world powers two years ago
to curb Iran's nuclear program in return for the lifting of most
economic sanctions, said after voting.

Raisi, 56, had accused Rouhani of mismanaging the economy and has
travelled to poor areas, speaking at rallies pledging more welfare
benefits and jobs.

He is believed to have had the backing of the powerful Revolutionary
Guards security force, as well as the tacit support of Khamenei, whose
powers outrank those of the elected president but who normally steers
clear of day-to-day politics.

"I respect the outcome of the vote of the people and the result will
be respected by me and all the people," Raisi said after voting,
according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

However, Raisi later appeared at the Ministry of Interior in Tehran on
Friday and complained of a shortage of ballot sheets at many polling
stations, according to Fars. More ballot sheets were subsequently sent
out, the agency reported.

The Guards and other hardliners had hoped that a win for Raisi would
have given them an opportunity to safeguard econo

[GreenYouth] Iran: Rouhani's Landslide Victory Belying All Apprehensions

[Sukla Sen]

[Rouhani's massive victory is apparently a public snub to the ageing
and ailing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran.
The fissures within are, most likely, exacerbate.

Only a gross and transparently malicious move by the incumbent Trump
administration against Iran, not too unlikely at any rate, would
surely work as an effetive antidote.]

I/II.
[In a victory speech to the nation on live TV, Rouhani promised to
rule for all Iranians. But while celebrating his huge mandate in the
election, which he labelled the “most competitive ever”, he also
described his opponents as dangerously backward-looking.
...
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei holds the position for life, but he is 77 and
thought to be in poor health. A hardliner keen to preserve his legacy,
he is believed to have tacitly backed Raisi as president, and possibly
favoured him as a possible successor.
After the vote he issued a statement addressed to the Iranian people
in which he praised the “massive and epic” turnout. However in
contrast to the 2013 elections, he offered no congratulations to
Rouhani.]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/20/iran-hassan-rouhani-set-for-landslide-in-huge-victory-for-reformists

ran: Hassan Rouhani wins landslide in huge victory for reformists
Reformist Rouhani wins second term with more than 23 million votes to
Ebrahim Raisi’s 15.8 million

[Hassan Rouhani declared winner of Iranian election – 1.27-min. video]

Emma Graham-Harrison in Tehran and Saeed Kamali Dehghan Iran correspondent
Saturday 20 May 2017 17.27 BST First published on Saturday 20 May 2017 05.33 BST
The Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, has won a sweeping endorsement
for efforts to end Iran’s international isolation and bring greater
freedoms at home, with an unexpected landslide victory in a fiercely
contested re-election bid.

His powerful mandate protects the nuclear deal, which has been his
landmark achievement to date, and his courting of foreign investment.
It could also have much longer-term implications for Iran’s future, by
giving reformists a greater influence over the looming battle to
choose a new supreme leader.

Polling stations were forced to stay open until midnight in parts of
the country because so many Iranians wanted to vote, defying fears of
voter apathy. Rouhani claimed 23.5 million votes, while his rival
Ebrahim Raisi trailed on 15.8 million, after nearly three-quarters of
the electorate cast their votes, the interior ministry said.

***In a victory speech to the nation on live TV, Rouhani promised to
rule for all Iranians. But while celebrating his huge mandate in the
election, which he labelled the “most competitive ever”, he also
described his opponents as dangerously backward-looking.

Analysis Iran presidential elections: everything you need to know
As voters prepare to go to the polls this week, we look at the two
frontrunners and examine what is at stake for the country*** [Emphasis
added.]
 Read more

“Yesterday, you said no to those who wanted us to return to the past,”
he told the nation. The scale of his victory provides a strong
platform to challenge hardliners who still hold ultimate control in a
Iran’s unwieldy hybrid of theocracy and democracy.

And in a signal that he planned to turn an outspoken campaign into a
combative second term, Rouhani also thanked reformist figurehead
Mohammad Khatami, his most important ally and backer. Security forces
have banned any mention of the hugely popular former president’s name
in the media, meaning Rouhani crossed a red line just hours into his
new term.

“Millions and millions of people are happy because Rouhani won,” said
businessman Ahad Esmaili, 31, one of a crowd breaking into dance at a
spontaneous celebration in the heart of Tehran’s crowded bazaar, when
the final figures were announced.

The election was a tense showdown between Rouhani and hardliner Raisi,
both senior clerics but with little else in common. The challenger
consolidated conservative support behind his initially lacklustre bid
for power, by mounting a campaign that mixed economic populism with
religious conservatism and an isolationist foreign policy.

Raisi’s last-minute surge may have unwittingly helped Rouhani, as
moderates spooked by the prospect of slipping back into international
isolation and stricter controls at home raced to the polls.

“I’m even happier than I was four years ago when he won the first
time,” said tailor Mariam Farmayeshi, 34. “My husband voted for the
first time in 20 years, because he thought it was necessary to keep
out Raisi.”

Watch salesman Yousef Khaleghi said he spent the entire day driving
dozens of friends and relatives to the polls. He had gone bankrupt
during the government of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and was determined to do
everything he could to prevent another hardliner coming to power.


Iran election: frantic campaigning as high-stakes vote goes down to wire
 Read more
“I love Mr Rouhani,” he said with a grin, before adding he was
grateful to Iranian women

[GreenYouth] The Battle Lies Within: Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism

[Sukla Sen]

[Muslims, one of the most deprived communities in 21st century India,
have been the most adversely impacted by communal politics in recent
years. The result of the UP Vidhan Sabha elections and subsequent
developments in the state have shaken the foundation of “inclusive
politics”; the state government has criminalised some traditional
occupations of the community.
...
A deeper look into the problems reveals that traditionalists among
Muslims and neo-Islamists are also responsible for the community’s
social, economic and educational backwardness, and its adverse
reputation. Triple talaq, halala, an avoidance of appropriate mehr,
the usurpation of women’s property rights and the practice of female
circumcision among certain sections of the community are justified as
“belief”, though they run contrary to the concept of insaaf, justice
in Islam, and modernity.
...
The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational practices
that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere. These also
undermine progressive relationships between religion, politics and
economy, and between communities. The cultural imports have slowed —
even scuttled — reforms on women’s rights (including triple talaq) and
the modernisation of the traditions of the Muslim community.
Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-battle-lies-within-politics-muslim-community-neo-islamists-triple-talaq-halala-mehr-indias-pluralism-4664458/

The Battle Lies Within
Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism

Written by Abdul Shaban | Updated: May 20, 2017 11:38 am

The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational practices
that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere.
(Representational Image.)

***Muslims, one of the most deprived communities in 21st century
India, have been the most adversely impacted by communal politics in
recent years. The result of the UP Vidhan Sabha elections and
subsequent developments in the state have shaken the foundation of
“inclusive politics”; the state government has criminalised some
traditional occupations of the community.*** [Emphasis added.]

Frustrated with such developments, many Muslims advocate that the
community take a sabbatical from electoral politics for some time,
make its identity in politics invisible, and concentrate on rebuilding
its progressive and developmental institutions.

***A deeper look into the problems reveals that traditionalists among
Muslims and neo-Islamists are also responsible for the community’s
social, economic and educational backwardness, and its adverse
reputation. Triple talaq, halala, an avoidance of appropriate mehr,
the usurpation of women’s property rights and the practice of female
circumcision among certain sections of the community are justified as
“belief”, though they run contrary to the concept of insaaf, justice
in Islam, and modernity.*** [Emphasis added.]

The neo-Islamists have discovered a new form of Islam as a result of
contact with West Asia. Religio-cultural imports from West Asian
countries have considerably changed the cultural behaviour of Muslims.
Dresses like the naqab, hijab and afiah, alien to Indian Muslims till
a few decades ago, have become prevalent in the community in many
parts of the country. Some of these cause divisions between religious
communities and are inimical to the effective participation of women
in everyday social, political and economic activities.

***The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational
practices that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere.
These also undermine progressive relationships between religion,
politics and economy, and between communities. The cultural imports
have slowed — even scuttled — reforms on women’s rights (including
triple talaq) and the modernisation of the traditions of the Muslim
community. Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s
pluralism.*** [Emphasis added.]

Although economic compulsions and availability, not choice, shape the
engagement of Muslims with educational institutions, the
traditionalists’ emphasis on Urdu and Urdu medium schools have led
them to ignore modern languages like English. A large share of Muslim
students get educated in Urdu or vernacular medium schools, which have
poor infrastructure and teachers of poor quality.

Urdu is neither the first language of the state, nor the market, so
children educated in Urdu medium schools and madrasas add to
unskilled, casual and menial workers. Maharashtra, where about 46 per
cent of Muslim students are enrolled in such schools, is an example of
such backwardness.

The drop-out rate among Muslims across states, after middle-level
education, is high. Only a very small proportion of students from the
community complete higher education, mainly from low-grade
universities and colleges. Most of these graduates are not able to
relate to modern economic sectors or to find gainf

[GreenYouth] Trump Seals a Record Arms Deal with Saudi Arabia

[Sukla Sen]

[King Salman gave a more favorable welcome to Trump than he had
granted last year to Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, who was seen
in the Arab kingdom as soft on Iran and hesitant on Syria.
(Extracted from the report at sl. no. II below.)

The trail of controversy did not stop when the US commander-in-chief’s
wife Melania refused to cover her head during the Saudi trip, as is
decreed by the kingdom’s regulations.
Trump's daughter and adviser Ivanka Trump also opted-out of covering
her head during the state visit.
Trump in 2015 had criticized then-first lady Michelle Obama for not
wearing a headscarf during a visit to Saudi Arabia, saying on Twitter
that her hosts had been "insulted."
(Extracted from the report at sl. no. I below.)]

I/II.
http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/05/21/522646/US-Saudi-Trump-Tillerson-Melania-Iran

Trump busts a move after record Saudi arms deal

Sun May 21, 2017 5:36AM

[Video]

*US President Donald Trump joins a sword dance held in his honor in
Saudi Arabia after signing Washington’s largest-ever single arms deal
with Riyadh.*

He was accompanied at the Saturday jubilation by Secretary of State
Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.

Trump had arrived in in the Saudi capital earlier in the day on the
first leg of a nine-day overseas tour. Upon arrival and official
reception, he proceeded to sign the $110-billion deal and other
agreements amounting to $250 billion before joining the party.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir still put the volume of the
collective bilateral deals higher, saying they were worth more than
$380 billion.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on Twitter that the “defense
agreement” was the "largest single arms deal in US history."

Speaking after the signing ceremony, Trump said, "That was a
tremendous day. Tremendous investments in the United States. Hundreds
of billions of dollars of investments into the United States and jobs,
jobs, jobs."

Iran focus of arms deal

Tillerson claimed the intent of the arms deal was to support Riyadh
"in particular in the face of malign Iranian influence and
Iranian-related threats which exist on Saudi Arabia's borders."

He was echoing Saudi Arabia’s recurrent accusations against Iran of
intervening in the region against the kingdom.

The kingdom has been pounding Yemen for over two years and killing
thousands of civilians there, accusing Tehran of such intervention in
the impoverished country.

Tehran has invariably spurned the claims. It said recently through its
Foreign Ministry that its response to such repeated provocative
remarks was that it was not seeking tension with Riyadh, and was even
open to dialog with it.

Read more:

Iran says not seeking tensions with Saudi Arabia

Riaydh, itself, is widely accused of funding and fueling Takfiri
terrorism throughout the region. Iranian military top brass have, time
and again, blamed the kingdom for hiring terrorists to operate against
the Islamic Republic.

Tillerson, however, sounded in harmony with Riyadh’s rhetoric when he
urged Iran's President Hassan Rouhani to dismantle "Iran’s network of
terrorism" and to end the Islamic Republic’s ballistic missile tests.

Iran says its missiles are not capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
It says its missile program solely serves the country’s defense and
that it will not seek anyone’s permission to boost it.

Rouhani on Saturday called on Riyadh and its allies in the Persian
Gulf to improve democratic standards within their own borders instead
of playing a blame game with the Islamic Republic.

Later through the trip, Trump is expected to visit Israel, the
Vatican, Sicily, and Belgium.

Observers say the drawn-out tour serves to misdirect attention from
domestic woes, which emanate from Trump’s controversial and
unpredictable measures, and serious standing accusations that his
presidential campaign benefited from Russian contribution.

Trail of controversy

***The trail of controversy did not stop when the US
commander-in-chief’s wife Melania refused to cover her head during the
Saudi trip, as is decreed by the kingdom’s regulations.*** [Emphasis
added.]

***Trump's daughter and adviser Ivanka Trump also opted-out of
covering her head during the state visit.*** [Emphasis added.]


US First Lady Melania Trump (L) shakes hands with Saudi King Salman
bin Abdulaziz al-Saud upon arrival at King Khalid International
Airport in Riyadh on May 20, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

***Trump in 2015 had criticized then-first lady Michelle Obama for not
wearing a headscarf during a visit to Saudi Arabia, saying on Twitter
that her hosts had been "insulted."*** [Emphasis added.]

Under the kingdom's dress code for women, Saudi women and most female
visitors are required to wear a loose, black robe, known as an abaya,
in public.

The US president also gave his trademark thumbs up to the press as he
rode the escalator from the tarmac to the royal terminal at the
airport in Riyadh.

In much of the Arab world, the gesture is consid

[GreenYouth] Re: [issuesonline_worldwide] The Battle Lies Within: Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism

[Sukla Sen]

ay, it is
> comparatively easy to convince the soceityto change the evil customs and
> practices.  So neo Hinduismwhich seeks to develop scientific temper and get
> rid of superstitionis to be welcomed and can never be equated with anything
> Islamicwhich takes pride in not changing even a single word of their'divine
> guidance' handed over to them 1400 years ago.  It isfutile exercise just to
> appear balanced.
> Sanjeev
>
>   From: "Sukla Sen sukla@gmail.com [issuesonline_worldwide]"
> 
>  To: foil-l 
>  Sent: Sunday, 21 May 2017 11:14 AM
>  Subject: [issuesonline_worldwide] The Battle Lies Within: Neo-Islam, like
> neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism
>
> [Muslims, one of the most deprived communities in 21st century India,
> have been the most adversely impacted by communal politics in recent
> years. The result of the UP Vidhan Sabha elections and subsequent
> developments in the state have shaken the foundation of “inclusive
> politics”; the state government has criminalised some traditional
> occupations of the community.
> ...
> A deeper look into the problems reveals that traditionalists among
> Muslims and neo-Islamists are also responsible for the community’s
> social, economic and educational backwardness, and its adverse
> reputation. Triple talaq, halala, an avoidance of appropriate mehr,
> the usurpation of women’s property rights and the practice of female
> circumcision among certain sections of the community are justified as
> “belief”, though they run contrary to the concept of insaaf, justice
> in Islam, and modernity.
> ...
> The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational practices
> that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere. These also
> undermine progressive relationships between religion, politics and
> economy, and between communities. The cultural imports have slowed —
> even scuttled — reforms on women’s rights (including triple talaq) and
> the modernisation of the traditions of the Muslim community.
> Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism.]
>
> http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-battle-lies-within-politics-muslim-community-neo-islamists-triple-talaq-halala-mehr-indias-pluralism-4664458/
>
> The Battle Lies Within
> Neo-Islam, like neo-Hinduism, is injurious to India’s pluralism
>
> Written by Abdul Shaban | Updated: May 20, 2017 11:38 am
>
> The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational practices
> that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere.
> (Representational Image.)
>
> ***Muslims, one of the most deprived communities in 21st century
> India, have been the most adversely impacted by communal politics in
> recent years. The result of the UP Vidhan Sabha elections and
> subsequent developments in the state have shaken the foundation of
> “inclusive politics”; the state government has criminalised some
> traditional occupations of the community.*** [Emphasis added.]
>
> Frustrated with such developments, many Muslims advocate that the
> community take a sabbatical from electoral politics for some time,
> make its identity in politics invisible, and concentrate on rebuilding
> its progressive and developmental institutions.
>
> ***A deeper look into the problems reveals that traditionalists among
> Muslims and neo-Islamists are also responsible for the community’s
> social, economic and educational backwardness, and its adverse
> reputation. Triple talaq, halala, an avoidance of appropriate mehr,
> the usurpation of women’s property rights and the practice of female
> circumcision among certain sections of the community are justified as
> “belief”, though they run contrary to the concept of insaaf, justice
> in Islam, and modernity.*** [Emphasis added.]
>
> The neo-Islamists have discovered a new form of Islam as a result of
> contact with West Asia. Religio-cultural imports from West Asian
> countries have considerably changed the cultural behaviour of Muslims.
> Dresses like the naqab, hijab and afiah, alien to Indian Muslims till
> a few decades ago, have become prevalent in the community in many
> parts of the country. Some of these cause divisions between religious
> communities and are inimical to the effective participation of women
> in everyday social, political and economic activities.
>
> ***The neo-Islamists also emphasise religious and educational
> practices that undermine male-female equality in the public sphere.
> These also undermine progressive relationships between religion,
> politics and economy, and between communities. The cultural imports
> have slowed — even scuttled — reforms on women’s rights (including
> triple talaq) and the modernisation of the traditio

[GreenYouth] A prominent economic neo-liberal and pro-nuclear commentator puts across economic arguments against import of nuclear reactors: Pretty interesting, on that ground alone

[Sukla Sen]

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Swaminomics/dont-go-for-pricey-foreign-n-power-plants-when-solars-going-dirt-cheap/

Don’t go for pricey foreign N-power plants when solar’s going dirt-cheap

May 21, 2017, 2:10 AM IST SA Aiyar in Swaminomics | India, World | TOI

Forget the Bush-Manmohan Singh vision of a nuclear power renaissance.
Recent developments — cheap solar power plus the bankruptcy of
Westinghouse — call for a total overhaul of nuclear plans that now
look obsolete, dangerous and ultra-costly.

I say this as one who solidly supported the Bush-Manmohan deal in
2005. That deal lifted sanctions against India, and provided access to
imported uranium and nuclear technology. In return, the US, France,
Japan and Russia were to build six nuclear plants each in India,
reviving their flagging equipment industries.

In 2005, the nuclear industry expected a boom following global
concerns on greenhouse gases. Nuclear power then was costlier than
coal-based power but much cheaper than solar. With many nations going
big on nuclear, scale economies plus third-generation technology
promised to make nuclear power as cheap as thermal power, minus the
carbon.

Then came the Fukushima disaster in Japan. This highlighted the
nuclear power risks. It led to the closure of old nuclear plants and
cancellation of new ones across the world. The disappearance of mass
orders killed scale economies for equipment, while new safety concerns
led to expensive re-design.

Meanwhile 3G technology flopped in the power stations France’s Areva
was building in Finland and Normandy, causing huge cost and time
overruns. Areva sank financially, and was rescued by EDF of France.
But EDF itself was financially stressed and could not find the equity
capital for a contracted nuclear station at Hinkley Point, UK. That
project was saved when China Nuclear Electric agreed to take a 33%
stake. The project will supply power at Rs 8/unit, double the current
wholesale price, amidst widespread criticism.

Westinghouse, owned by Japan’s Toshiba, has suffered huge time-cost
overruns at two US plants and declared bankruptcy. Toshiba will suffer
a net loss of $9.9 billion this year, and is quitting nuclear
construction. If the bankrupt rump of Westinghouse finds no buyer or a
non-Japanese buyer, India’s political obligation to buy its equipment
disappears.

During the parliamentary debate on the Bush-Manmohan deal, the
government claimed that nuclear power would cost no more than
coal-based power, which was Rs 2.50/unit then. Today it is Rs 4/unit.
Can foreign nuclear suppliers match this? No. Aniruddh Mohan of the
Observer Research Foundation says the two new Russian reactors,
Kudankulam 3 and 4, have a negotiated tariff of Rs 6.30/unit. He
estimates tariffs will be Rs 9 for Westinghouse and Rs 12 for Areva.
News reports say India seeks to cap the Areva tariff at Rs 7/unit.

These tariffs look insanely costly compared with the latest solar
power deal of Rs 2.62/unit in Rajasthan. This price cloaks implicit
subsidies like cheap land, accelerated depreciation, and hidden costs
for transmission and the backing down of thermal plants. But nuclear
power also gets cheap land, cheap insurance (a huge subsidy) and
guaranteed offtake.

Besides, the price of solar power keeps falling, and could halve
again. New N-plants could take 8-10 years to build, by which time
solar power may cost just Rs 1.50/unit, and storage costs may fall
below Rs 1/unit. It is crazy to build nuclear plants producing power
several times costlier. The solar revolution means that, a decade
hence, other forms of power will be needed mainly for peak evening
demand. Nuclear power is totally unsuitable for peaking.

Now, the nuclear deal implicitly obliged India to buy nuclear plants
from the four foreign powers. But at the time, these were supposed to
be competitive with thermal power. That’s now a pipedream.

To avoid gargantuan financial losses, India needs to exit these
foreign deals if at all possible. Diplomacy mandates that India cannot
renege simply because solar power has become cheap. But India can
demand that suppliers stick to the original idea of thermal price
parity. If they cannot — as is the case — India should politely excuse
itself, saying it can live up to its side of the implicit deal only if
foreign suppliers live up to theirs.

General Electric of the US has anyway opted out of Indian nuclear
plants, saying Indian liability limits for accidents are insufficient.
If Westinghouse finds no buyer, or a non-Japanese buyer, India can
scrap that deal. For Areva and future Russian plants, India should
insist on thermal price equivalence, even if it sinks those deals.

India’s indigenous nuclear power plants are the cheapest, at Rs
5/unit. If fixed for 25 years, this is competitive with coal and less
polluting. We need a fresh 10-year plan to create an optimal mix of
solar, thermal, and nuclear power.
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscrib

[GreenYouth] 'Anchor jihad is like WWF, but the damage is real': Aakar Patel

[Sukla Sen]

["The jihadi anchor is not loyal to any cause higher than ratings.
This can be proved quite easily. It will be a call for more surgical
strikes one day and the doings of the Mukherjeas the next."
That's not entirly true though.

Arnab or Zee TV or India TV, for example, has a clear, and consistent,
political agenda.
That's too self-evident.

As the author labels this genre as 'consevative', he also essentially
upholds that fact.]

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/aakarvani/anchor-jihad-is-like-wwf-but-the-damage-is-real/

Anchor jihad is like WWF, but the damage is real

May 21, 2017, 2:00 AM IST

Aakar Patel in Aakarvani | Edit Page, World | TOI

Something unusual happened in America this week. More people watched
liberal MSNBC and centrist CNN than they did conservative Fox News.
This is unusual because the norm is that the conservative media
dominates ratings for news, whether radio or TV. This is for two
reasons. First, what passes for conservatism is usually a blend of
racism, misogyny and xenophobia. The Western obsessions of these
times, meaning immigration, terrorism and border walls, all respond to
this blend.

The second reason is that people who are prejudiced like having their
prejudices repeated to them. Conservative talk show hosts offer little
illumination, but what they have is certitude and strong emotion and
their listeners tune in to nod in agreement.

On the other hand, liberals are more relaxed and also they tend to
accept and offer a diversity of opinions (the place I work in, a civil
society organisation that is stuffed with such people, reminds me of
this daily). The lack of uniformity and a general openness means that
liberal talk shows are not of the constantly angry variety. The
problem is that it makes them less entertaining than the ones hurling
brimstone and fire, and less satisfying to those seeking validation.
This general rule explains why conservative news shows are the ones
that do better in terms of ratings.

Why has this reversed this week in America? Because an incompetent
presidency is imploding and the conservative networks are not
reporting the story. At this time it is not a defence of ideology that
most viewers seek, but information, and because of their nature,
conservative stations don’t do information as well as they do opinion.

In India’s media, angry opinion of course always dominates. Whether it
is a ‘liberal’ or ‘rightwing’ government in power, the kooks are
running the asylum from the studios.

I’m coining a phrase: anchor jihad. It is the fake crusade launched
from the studios every night, recklessly urging the nation to war.
There is of course no real fighting in this jihad of make-up and
cameras. Like WWF wrestling there is shouting and threatening but
little else. Retired soldiers and politicians and assorted experts and
hapless people representing the ‘enemy’ (no doubt paid to accept their
ritual humiliation) are the forces arrayed in this fake war.

They claim to worship the jawan but in reality have zero respect for
the fighting man, who is expected to martyr himself so that they can
show our nationalism.

The jihadi anchor is not loyal to any cause higher than ratings. This
can be proved quite easily. It will be a call for more surgical
strikes one day and the doings of the Mukherjeas the next. Everything
is reported at the same level of lunatic intensity. And news media is
ultimately a business, which is fine but it means that the currency
they operate in and the one that the anchor is given his increments
and promotions on is ‘impact’, meaning how many people watched the
show.

Focusing on issues requiring the gathering and analysing of data is
tough and it is boring and it does not make good visuals. Hence the
daily screaming and threatening. All of this would be entertaining but
for the fact that it is quite damaging to India.

In the US, 10,000 children do not die of malnutrition  every week (as
in India). They don’t have the abysmal healthcare and education system
that stunts millions of Indians, physically and mentally. They can
afford to obsess over trivial things in their nightly news, meaning
the doings of their enemies across the border. We don’t have that
luxury.

When our media deliberately and for economic reasons turns the focus
away from the meaningful to the trivial, there is real damage it does
to other Indians. The reason why we have enthusiastic participation
from the government on our debates is that it is much easier to shout
about Pakistan and terrorists and then return home for supper, than it
is to offer an update on health and education. That is why Kashmir and
violence in the Adivasi belt are covered like they are recent stories
of separatist perfidy rather than complex conflicts that have been
with us for decades.

Most of what I have written, readers of The Sunday Times of India
already know. However, the reason I am writing this is that it is
actually getting worse. I do not know how many readers have noticed

[GreenYouth] 'France Has Dodged a Bullet in its Head: Macron’s Victory Offers a Much Needed Reprieve Against Narrow Nationalism' by Harsh Kapoor

[Sukla Sen]

http://www.sacw.net/article13266.html

FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 2017
France Has Dodged a Bullet in its Head: Macron’s Victory Offers a Much
Needed Reprieve Against Narrow Nationalism

by Harsh Kapoor, 20 May

Text only
[a shorter version of this article has appeared in Mainstream Weekly,
20 May 2017]

On April 23, the first round of the French elections eliminated the
established parties, leaving two final contenders for the final round
of May 7; Emmanuel Macron, a former economy minister and cosmopolitan
political novice representing his newly created movement called ‘en
marche’ [on the move] and Marine Le Pen leader of the forty year old
Front National (FN) [an anti immigrant and anti European party of the
far Right]. Two opposing conceptions of France were in the race.
Macron won in a landslide with 66% of the vote, yet many voted for him
simply to keep Le Pen out of power.

Macron’s victory over Le Pen is certainly good news for France and a
post-Brexit Europe, but it is naïve to see this electoral defeat of FN
as the beginning of the end for hateful identity politics in France.
Let us say a storm has passed for now, but the dark clouds loom large.

JPEG - 106.1 kb
Manifestation anti-FN, place de la République, le 1er mai 2002. Photo
Joël Robine. AFP
Fifteen years ago there was a similar situation: Jean Marie Le Pen the
founding leader of the National Front, had reached the Presidential
run-off. At that time one and a half million people had marched on the
streets in a resounding no to the FN. A republican front of all
parties, left and right was formed and the FN defeated by a record 82%
votes in 2002. Today there is comparably little political mobilisation
against the FN - which has been normalised.

Macron the Maverick’s Big Gamble

Macron hails emotionally from the Left. He is a liberal democrat who
stands for enlightenment ideals, opposes racism and xenophobia, and
offers hope in a common European future by attacking economic
isolation as a reactionary idea. His alliance is made up of
free-market elites, centrists and social democrats.

Macron is bitterly hated by unions for the labour reform law he
brought in under the socialist party govt he was once part of but has
humanist convictions and has had the moral courage to publically say
that: ‘Colonisation is a part of French history. It is a crime, a
crime against humanity … it belongs to a past that we must face up to,
while offering an apology to the people who were on the receiving
end.’

Macron, the finance man is a fine example of the intellectual rigour
of people who constitute French political elites. Unlike the RSS
sanchaalak in India who proclaims there was plastic surgery in ancient
times, or the real estate salesman and TV showman in the US who sees
climate change as a conspiracy, Macron wrote a philosophy thesis on
Hegel (supervised by Etienne Balibar); was Paul Ricoeur’s editorial
assistant when Ricoeur was writing his book La mémoire, l’histoire et
l’oubli. Macron’s ideas are influenced by the work of John Rawls and
Amartya Sen on justice and equality of opportunity.

The Far Right, its banalisation and national presence:

France’s two main established political parties have been losing
credibility with the people and facing opposition to their policies.
In consequence they have ceded ground to anti-establishment,
anti-immigrant, anti-European, and anti-globalisation sentiment.
French parties failed to draw the lessons from the shock of 2002.
Instead of trying to combat the FN’s ideas, politicians focused on
shutting them out of power. In 2007 Nicolas Sarkozy kept Le Pen out of
the run-off, but only by peddling identity politics to court FN
voters. The FN’s achievement was the ‘Le Pen-isation’ of other
parties.

For its part, the Left resorted to scare-mongering. But what France
needed was to confront identity politics, actively educate and
cultivate a secular, pro-European society that faced terrorist
violence and a xenophobic backlash. The Front National (FN) has been
the key beneficiary of this backlash, becoming the main party of the
working class over the past years. Nearly half the working-class votes
in the 2017 presidential election went to Le Pen, and over 40 percent
of them belonged to lower socio-economic categories and less educated.

With the exceptions of two big regions, the FN everywhere scored above
10 percent of the vote. It scored above its national average in
fifty-five départements of France, and got over 30 percent in twelve
regions. 10.5 million people voted for Marine Le Pen in 2017, twice
the number her father got in 2002.

The most alarming phenomena has been that a section of the Far left
voters and sympathisers have voted for FN in the last 15 years. 4%
voted Front national en 2002. In 2017 41% chose Marine Le Pen. In 2002
10% sympathisers of the French Communist Party voted FN. [1]

Its been a meteoric rise for a small party created in 1972. At the end
of the second world war there were a few of sm

[GreenYouth] 'Chasing the Ghost of Osama' by Cathy Scott-Clark & Adrian Levy

[Sukla Sen]

[Al Qaeda shura (leadership council) members revealed the schism that
opened up when 9/11 was first plotted, describing how they rejected
the plan while Osama and Khalid Shaikh Mohammad (who was not in Al
Qaeda) pressed on in secret. They described how they had been
astonished on the day the Twin Towers fell, excited at Al Qaeda having
achieved something so staggeringly shocking, that they had no choice
but to back the operation.]

http://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/others/sunday-read/chasing-the-ghost-of-osama/articleshow/58770321.cms

CHASING THE GHOST OF OSAMA
Mumbai Mirror | Updated: May 21, 2017, 05.23 AM IST

By Cathy Scott-Clark & Adrian Levy

The authors of The Exile on how and why they decided to write a book
about bin Laden and the big break that made it possible.

In 2012, almost a year after Osama bin Laden was run to ground in the
garrison town of Abbottabad, and with a toxic plume of a scandal still
hanging over the Pakistan military, a sample from the Al Qaeda
leaders’ letters and communiquéés seized from the house was released.
Previewed in a powerful Washington Post opinion piece, headline:
“Osama bin Laden, a Lion in Winter,” the files suggested that Al Qaeda
was finished. The report referenced video footage showing a greying
Osama watching his TV set, while unnamed US Defense officials riffed
on his alleged pornography collection.
That year, the Obama administration also went into the movie business,
backing Zero Dark Thirty, a nail-biting account of the sleuthing that
led to the raid on Abbottabad. An American president, Barack Obama,
canvassing for his second term in the White House, had beaten an old
enemy who had gone to seed, the messaging suggested.

But Zero Dark Thirty was materially wrong in many ways, especially
claiming that torture had elicited the clues that led to Osama’s
capture. And only one per cent of the million-plus-document trove of
files recovered from Abbottabad were declassified, even as another
large cache of enemy documents, including records of Saddam Hussein’s
high command in Iraq and Al Qaeda material from Afghanistan, all held
at the National Defense University in Washington, DC was shuttered by
the Pentagon.

This got us thinking. Eighteen years into an epoch of Islamist terror
that began with horrific attacks on US embassies in East Africa in
1998, and we are still being led by the nose. There are few books that
have told the story of Al Qaeda from the inside.

Obviously, to try and research such a project was a foolish idea.
Getting into any volatile, paranoiac outfit that executes outsiders as
spies or kidnaps reporters is hair-raising.

But right now — in a post-truth world, awash with alt-facts — we need
more details and not fewer if we are to ever tamp down the ongoing
bloody conflict with Islamist extremism. And it is from this place — a
desire for a contemporary, complex, untidy, knotted, verbal history,
where no one is regular or consistent, and where allies are
murderously betraying their friends, in which good men make poor
choices, and switch sides, and wives become double agents — that the
idea for The Exile began.

We had a helping hand in February 2012 when on a dark Islamabad night
we met Zakariya al-Sadeh, a Yemeni student, pro-democracy campaigner,
and brother of Amal bin Laden, Osama’s youngest wife.

He had come to Pakistan trying to free his sister from the legal limbo
the ISI had slung her into alongside Osama’s other wives, several
children and grandchildren.

At that meeting, everyone was nervous. Zakariya was frightened of
worsening his sister’s predicament by being caught with Western
journalists, and we were worried about being glimpsed with him, as we
were engaged in the middle of complex negotiations with the Pakistan
Army on another delicate project.

But that tense discussion with Zakariya led to an exchange of ideas,
and nervy conversations with many others in Yemen, Jordan, the Gulf
and Mauritania that resulted (after trust was won) in meetings with
Osama’s family, friends, mentors, companions, factotums, security
chiefs, and religious and media advisers.

Gradually, something unique came into focus — a story told about Al
Qaeda by Al Qaeda men and women with nothing more to lose. They, too,
had letters, e-mails, text messages and chat transcripts, videos and
photo albums that corroborated their claims.

And they too were just as conscious of their constituencies as the DC
panjandrums. At one meeting in dusty Nouakchott, a photograph we took
that showed a religious leader tapping away on his computer had to be
erased, as he needed to be seen by his flock (and the CIA) as low-fi.
In another, in a remote Jordanian town, two clerics who feasted on
roasted sheep pleaded to be photographed only after the meal was
cleared away less starving fighters in Syria see them gorging.

But once a thread of trust unfurled, so did a story.

Al Qaeda shura (leadership council) members revealed the schism that
opened up when 9/11 was first plo

[GreenYouth] USA (Today) vis-a-vis Russia and the World: Two (Different) Non-American Views

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
[Donald Trump sets off on Friday to create the fantasy of an Arab
Nato. There will be dictators aplenty to greet him in Riyadh, corrupt
autocrats and thugs and torturers and head choppers. There will be at
least one zombie president – the comatose, undead Abdelaziz Bouteflika
of Algeria who neither speaks nor, apparently, hears any more – and,
of course, one totally insane president, Donald Trump. The aim,
however, is simple: to prepare the Sunni Muslims of the Middle East
for war against the Shia Muslims. With help from Israel, of course.
...
That only leaves one nation out of the loop of this glorious
charivari: Russia. But be sure Vladimir Putin comprehends all too well
what is going on in Riyadh. He will watch the Arab Nato fall apart.
His foreign minister Lavrov understands Syria and Iran better than the
feckless Tillerson. And his security officers are deep inside Syria.
Besides, if he needs any more intelligence information, he has only to
ask Trump.]

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/43659-the-real-aim-of-trumps-trip-to-saudi-arabia

The Real Aim of Trump's Trip to Saudi Arabia
By Robert Fisk, The Independent
19 May 17


*The Sunni Saudis and the Gulf kings possess immense wealth, the only
religion that Trump really respects, and they want to destroy Shia
Iran, Syria, the Hezbollah and the Houthis – which is a simple
‘anti-terrorist’ story for the Americans*

***Donald Trump sets off on Friday to create the fantasy of an Arab
Nato. There will be dictators aplenty to greet him in Riyadh, corrupt
autocrats and thugs and torturers and head choppers. There will be at
least one zombie president – the comatose, undead Abdelaziz Bouteflika
of Algeria who neither speaks nor, apparently, hears any more – and,
of course, one totally insane president, Donald Trump. The aim,
however, is simple: to prepare the Sunni Muslims of the Middle East
for war against the Shia Muslims. With help from Israel, of course.***
[Emphasis added.]

Even for those used to the insanity of Arab leadership – not to
mention those Westerners who have still to grasp that the US President
is himself completely off his rocker – the Arab-Muslim (Sunni) summit
in Saudi Arabia is almost beyond comprehension. From Pakistan and
Jordan and Turkey and Egypt and Morocco and 42 other minareted
capitals, they are to come so that the effete and ambitious Saudis can
lead their Islamic crusade against “terrorism” and Shiism. The fact
that most of the Middle East’s “terrorism” – Isis and al-Qaeda, aka
the Nusrah Front – have their fountainhead in the very nation to which
Trump is travelling, must and will be ignored. Never before in Middle
Eastern history has such a “kumidia alakhta” – quite literally “comedy
of errors” in Arabic – been staged.

On top of all this, they have to listen to Trump’s ravings on peace
and Islamic “extremism”, surely the most preposterous speech to be
uttered by a US president since he is going to have to pretend that
Iran is extremist – when it is Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi Isis clones who
are destroying Islam’s reputation throughout the world. All this while
he is fostering war.

For Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (henceforth MbS)
wants to lead his Sunni tribes – plus Iraq if possible, which is why
Shia Prime Minister Abadi has been invited from Baghdad – against the
serpent of “terrorist” Shia Iran, the dark (Shia) “terrorist” Alawite
regime of Bashar al-Assad, the “terrorist” Shia Lebanese Hezbollah and
the aggressive “terrorist” Shia Houthis of Yemen. As for the Gulf
states’ own Shia minorities and other recalcitrants, well, off with
their heads.

After all, that’s what the Saudis did to the prominent Saudi Shia
leader Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr last year: they cut his head from his body,
Isis-style, in a classic bit of Wahhabi decapitation, along with 47
other “terrorists”. And any powerful Shias in neighbouring Gulf
countries will be cut down, too – which is what happened to Bahrain’s
Shia majority when the Saudi army moved in to occupy the island in
2011 at the “request” of its Sunni ruler.

And you can see why America’s disgraceful President, a man who truly
falls into the regional pantheon of raving loonies – he surely ranks
among the Gaddafis and Ahmadinejads of the Middle East – goes along
with this. The fact that Isis – Trump’s mortal enemy and the strategic
adversary of his defence chiefs – is a creature of the same Salafist
cult as Saudi Arabia, is neither here nor there. The Sunni Saudis and
the Gulf kings and princes possess immense wealth, the only religion
that Trump really respects, and they want to destroy Shia Iran and
Syria and the Hezbollah and the Houthis – which is a simple
“anti-terrorist” story for the Americans – and this means that Trump
can give MbS and his chums $100bn (£77bn) of US missiles, planes,
ships and ammo for the war-to-come. America will be happy. And Israel
will be happy.


I guess Crown Prince Jared Kushner thinks he can handle this end of
the Arab-Nato all

[GreenYouth] Yeddyurappa visits Dalit house but eats hotel food, faces untouchability charge

[Sukla Sen]

[Karnataka President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) BS
Yeddyurappa has landed himself into a major controversy, after
allegations emerged that he ate food from a hotel instead of the meal
prepared at the house of a Dalit family in Tumakuru.
The senior BJP leader has now been accused of practicing
untouchability, with a man called D Venkatesh from Mandya filing a
police complaint against Yeddyurappa, reports The Times of India. The
complaint, which has also been filed with Home Minister G
Parameshwara, alleges that Yeddyurappa’s refusal to eat the food
cooked in a Dalit household amounted to caste discrimination. The BJP
has, however, denied the charge.]

http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/yeddyurappa-visits-dalit-house-eats-hotel-food-faces-untouchability-charge-62375

Controversy

Yeddyurappa visits Dalit house but eats hotel food, faces untouchability charge
The BJP has, however, denied the allegation and called the complaint
politically motivated.

TNM Staff
 Sunday, May 21, 2017 - 09:15

Karnataka President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) BS Yeddyurappa
has landed himself into a major controversy, after allegations emerged
that he ate food from a hotel instead of the meal prepared at the
house of a Dalit family in Tumakuru.

The senior BJP leader has now been accused of practicing
untouchability, with a man called D Venkatesh from Mandya filing a
police complaint against Yeddyurappa, reports The Times of India. The
complaint, which has also been filed with Home Minister G
Parameshwara, alleges that Yeddyurappa’s refusal to eat the food
cooked in a Dalit household amounted to caste discrimination. The BJP
has, however, denied the charge.

The incident occurred on Friday, when Yeddyurappa and several other
BJP leaders visited the house of a Dalit family in Gubbi taluk in
Tumakuru district.

According to multiple media reports, a breakfast had been arranged at
the house of a Dalit man, who had prepared pulao to serve the leaders.
However, Yeddyurappa reportedly ordered idly and vada from a hotel and
consumed it.

Political leaders from the JD (S) and the Congress, including CM
Siddaramaiah and HD   Kumaraswamy came down heavily on Yeddyurappa for
not eating the food cooked at the house.

After criticism arose from various quarters, Yeddyurappa said that he
had eaten at a Dalit's house to convey the message that his party
supported a socially equitable society.

"The reason for having breakfast at a dalit's home was to send out a
message that the BJP and I are for a socially equitable society . But
what can I say when people are criticising me for having breakfast
bought from outside?" he was quoted as saying.

The BJP also claimed that the complaint was politically motivated, to
thwart the party’s Dalit outreach programme.

[Video]

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Learning From Ambedkar: His struggle to reform Hindu society has lessons for the triple talaq debate

[Sukla Sen]

[In these meetings [of the Anti-Hindu Code Bill Committee], its
primary participants, which included several members of the RSS,
characterised themselves as “religious warriors” who were fighting a
religious battle. On December 11, 1949, the RSS held a massive rally
in the Ramlila Maidan in Delhi where its members denounced the bills
in the strongest possible terms. The next day, a march was organised
to the Constituent Assembly where effigies of Ambedkar, Jawaharlal
Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah were burnt.

(Here, it'd be quite in the fitness of things to recall that Ambedkar
at, what'd eventually turn out to be, the very fag end of his life, in
late 1956, renounced Hinduism to embrace Buddhism in a well publicised
massive public event, in order to honour a commitment he made to
himself and his followers decadess back in 1935: "I was born a Hindu
because I had no control over this but I shall not die a Hindu.” [See:
.
Also: .]
- Sukla)]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-on-triple-talaq-learning-from-b-r-ambedkar-4667223/

Learning From Ambedkar
His struggle to reform Hindu society has lessons for the triple talaq debate

Written by Arnav Das Sharma | Updated: May 22, 2017 1:03 am

As the nation gears up for the landmark SC judgment, Ambedkar’s
unwavering commitment to the principles of liberalism is a lesson well
worth remembering.

When the Supreme Court delivers its verdict on the contentious triple
talaq issue, it would be, perhaps, one of the landmark promulgations
in independent India’s judicial history. If the SC were to declare
triple talaq unconstitutional, it could well open up the path for the
institution of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) — an ideal that has been an
important demand of the BJP for a long time.

But as the arguments and counter-arguments are meted out in court, it
is worth looking back on the years that led to the formulation of the
landmark Hindu Code bills. It is pertinent to invoke this incident for
two reasons: One, much of our present debate on the UCC and the triple
talaq controversy is still under the shadow of that landmark event.

Second, the pioneering role that B.R. Ambedkar played in bringing
those bills to fruition. It is important to remember the degree of
opposition that the bills garnered during that time. For instance, in
March 1949, the Anti-Hindu Code Bill Committee was formed, which
enjoyed vast support from clerics and other conservative lawyers. As
Ramachandra Guha chronicles in India After Gandhi, the committee would
campaign against the reform bills from place to place.

***In these meetings, its primary participants, which included several
members of the RSS, characterised themselves as “religious warriors”
who were fighting a religious battle. On December 11, 1949, the RSS
held a massive rally in the Ramlila Maidan in Delhi where its members
denounced the bills in the strongest possible terms. The next day, a
march was organised to the Constituent Assembly where effigies of
Ambedkar, Jawaharlal Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah were burnt.***
[Emphasis added.

The version of the bill that Ambedkar wanted was never to be had. With
the first general election imminent, and fearing a massive Hindu
backlash, Nehru had to compromise. Besides, in the Constituent
Assembly, many amendments to the original bill were demanded; it took
more than a year to get even four clauses passed. Eventually, the bill
lapsed. This caused Ambedkar to resign as law minister.

At one point in his resignation letter, Ambedkar, expressing his
shock, writes: “The Cabinet unanimously decided that it [the Bill]
should be put through in this Parliament… As the discussion was going
on, the Prime Minister put forth a new proposal, namely, that the Bill
as a whole may not be got through within the time. The Prime Minister
suggested that we should select the Marriage and Divorce part.

The Bill in its truncated form went on. After two or three days… the
Prime Minister came up with another proposal. This time his proposal
was to drop the whole Bill, even the Marriage and Divorce portion.
This came to me as a great shock.” The reason for Ambedkar’s shock is
two-fold. First, arising from the failure to get the bill passed in
its entirety, and second, and more importantly, seeing the core
element of the bill — which was about marriage and divorce — rejected
as well.

Throughout his life, apart from fighting caste oppression, if there
was one cause Ambedkar espoused, it was that of gender emancipation.
As his writings testify, Ambedkar very clearly saw the way caste
endeared itself to masculinity in order to perpetuate itself. He
realised that the primary way to break caste oppression was to make
way for marriage reforms. This endeavour was tied to Ambedkar’s larger
radical role in taking the Hindu texts to task, by opening them up 

[GreenYouth] Dear Mr Modi, the only growth you have achieved is in propaganda

[Sukla Sen]

http://www.catchnews.com/politics-news/dear-mr-modi-the-only-growth-you-have-achieved-is-in-propaganda-61950.html

Dear Mr Modi, the only growth you have achieved is in propaganda

DIVYA SPANDANA | Updated on: 20 May 2017, 18:42 IS

Dear Mr Modi,

It’s been 3 years since you were sworn in to power. 3 years that you
have wasted, much to the misfortune of this country. You have taken a
majority entrusted by the people of India and squandered it in a quest
for absolute power. The power you have, has treated you well.

You’ve spent your time in jet setting across the world and campaigning
for municipal elections all across the country. Really great
utilisation of your time as the Prime Minister of India. No matter
that almost every area of governance and growth is failing, led by
corrupt and incompetent ministers. However, one area that saw
undisputed growth is your propaganda team.

FUDGED NUMBERS
So well, that it seems you have drafted Government of India
statisticians on to the propaganda team. GDP growth not as per your
tall claims? No problem, lets change the basis the way GDP is
measured. Inflation numbers not meeting your poll rhetoric? Let’s
tinker with the basket of goods so that you can get the desired
result.

The latest of course is the tinkering with the Industrial Production
numbers. By the old series, you were struggling, by the new series you
are a rock star. Your state governments are not to be left behind in
the matter of fudging statistics. Blatant fudging of sex-ratios in
Haryana and MP have been widely reported. I’m sure as we move along,
we’ll find that actual work done is far smaller than what the
statistics suggest.

We still don’t know how much money came back from demonetisation, let
alone the black money it was supposed to flush out. Just how long does
it take to count? It’s not that the money came in sacks. It was
deposited in banks with receipts. Totalling should not take more than
a few minutes, let alone a few months.

On the domestic front, Gau rakhsaks are running riot across the
country. Spreading death and terror in the minds of innocent citizens.
None of your state governments are able or want to keep a check on
them. Mainly because those in government subscribe and promote the
views held by Gau Rakshaks.

NATIONAL SECURITY MESS
Kashmiris are not enemies. They are citizens of India. But your
propaganda team keeps portraying them that way. So good is this
propaganda that ordinary Kashmiris are being attacked across the
country, denied accommodation and jobs. Meanwhile, militancy is at a
decade level high. Ten years of peace in Kashmir has been squandered
away by ham handed handling.

Even at the height of the Kashmir militancy, we never had a situation
where girl students were raining stones on the very people who are
there to protect them. All because you handed over the affairs of such
a sensitive part of the country to policeman instead of a politician.

While your anti-Muslim bias is clear and explain the above two, it’s
not that your governments have left other downtrodden citizens in
peace. The ongoing riots in Saharanpur between upper castes and
Dalits, shows the true nature of the BJP and the unfitness of any BJP
leader to hold power.

Even settled matters like internecine strife in Assam is making a
comeback. The red terror in the heartland is becoming uglier by the
day and you just sit and twiddle your thumbs.

Internal security is a complex matter. Perhaps beyond your or your
Home Ministers skill sets. Even farmers distress is not being
addressed by you in a fair and equitable manner. Poll promises to
farmers are not being met. The southern states of
Andhra/Telangana/Karnataka and Tamil Nadu are reeling from the effects
of drought.

You had the time to meet and praise Tamil origin farmers in Sri Lanka,
but didn’t have the time to meet farmers in your own country? What
sort of incompetent leadership is this?

This is a repeating pattern, you have time to tweet on world events,
but are mum on the travails that citizens of India are facing. Are you
the Prime Minister of India? Or the head of the United Nations? At
least the head of the UN would have tweeted about India.

On foreign policy, instead of using seasoned diplomats, you’ve used a
RSS pracharak and a policeman. Both of whom see foreign relations as a
nail and think that a hammer can make it go away. As a result, we have
Nepal, which has much closer ties with China and will soon have an
all-weather road link with China.

×
We have Russia, an all-weather friend since the 60s, who is now not
only selling arms to our neighbour (breaking an exclusive relationship
with us), but also running military exercises. While your spin-masters
have tried very hard to present it positively, the fact is that in 3
years you’ve squandered decades of goodwill.

Speaking of spin, you had pet journalists talk about how India has
stood up to China on OBOR, but the fact is that China has isolated us.
We are the only major country who

[GreenYouth] Hackathon on EVM tampering: As EC throws ‘challenge’, AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal claims ‘backtracking’

[Sukla Sen]

[It is, understandably, nobody's case that a voter may arrive at the
polling booth, and in the limited time available to poll his/her vote
s/he can hack the machine to make it register all the subsequent votes
polled register in a particular way.

The claim is that these machines are vulnerable to tamparing by "insiders".
So, in oreder to test the validity of that claim, the claimant will
have to be provided a comparable opportunity.
Otherwise, the "challenge" is meaningless, rather misleading.

In any case, ***if all all the voting machines, from now onwards, are
accompanied with VVPAT machines - as directed by the Supreme Court,
and votes registered by a reasobale percentage of voting machines,
selected randomly, are mandatorily tallied with the corresponding
paper trails, the debate becomes essentially academic***.]


http://indianexpress.com/article/india/hackathon-on-evm-tampering-as-ec-throws-challenge-aap-claims-backtracking-4653443/

Hackathon on EVM tampering: As EC throws ‘challenge’, AAP chief Arvind
Kejriwal claims ‘backtracking’
EVM hackathon: The AAP is set to reach out to other parties on the
issue to decide the future course of action.

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Updated: May 13, 2017 12:18 pm

EVM tampering row: “It was BJP who opposed EVMs till 2014. Now BJP
supports EVMs?” tweeted Arvind Kejriwal. (Source: AP Photo/File)

Not satisfied with the Election Commission’s “challenge” to tamper
EVMs, the AAP remained at loggerheads with the commission and alleged
that it had “backed out” from the promised “hackathon”. The party
sparred over the “definition” of “hacking” and demanded that the EC
should “provide AAP with a machine that the party will try to hack”.
The AAP is set to reach out to other parties on the issue to decide
the future course of action.

Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, who attended the all-party meeting with the
Election Commission, along with Greater Kailash MLA Saurabh Bhardwaj,
and adviser to CM, Gopal Mohan, told the gathering that the demand for
“hackathon” should not be viewed “negatively”. “This is not to
question faith in EC but to help it evolve…” Sisodia said. As the
meeting progressed, activist Tehseen Poonawalla, who has been backing
the AAP on the EVM tampering allegations, tweeted, “It is not a
hacking challenge. I am in the meeting. ECI has again changed goal
post.”

Later in the day, Kejriwal tweeted, “Sad that EC has backed out of
hackathon”. “Surprising. It was BJP who opposed EVMs till 2014. Now
BJP supports EVMs?”

“Why is the Election Commission scared of having a hackathon? If EVMs
can’t be tampered, then hackathon will prove it!” tweeted Atishi
Marlena, member of the AAP Political Affairs Committee.

Sisodia, meanwhile, put out some demands — the EC should provide AAP
with a machine that the party will try to hack. Use VVPAT machine on
all booths in all upcoming elections and make a rule for the counting
of 25 per cent VVPAT slips in all Assembly. Make arrangements for
political funding of all parties 100 per cent transparent. Stop
present government from making arrangement for corporate funding via
back gate. He says ‘this is dangerous for democracy. In this, anyone
giving Rs 2,000 to a party is held accountable but no one know about
the one gives crores’.”

Bhardwaj told The Indian Express, “The EC has backtracked on the
hackathon and put forward an absolutely wrong definition of a
hackathon. They want us to tamper the EVM in in-situ conditions, which
will not be a hackathon… This is exactly what the EC had done in 2009.
If we are not allowed to open up the EVM then how will it be hacked?
They should have made it an opportunity to prove that EVMs cannot be
tampered with.”

“The EC also misquoted court judgments and did not even bring up the
recent Supreme Court order. We will now reach out to other political
parties agitating against the issue and decide on the future course of
action,” he added.
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] UN panel releases draft treaty banning possession and use of nuclear weapons: States would have to destroy any nuclear weapons they have and would be forbidden from transferring them

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
https://www.pressenza.com/2017/05/ican-applauds-draft-treaty-ban-nuclear-weapons/

ICAN applauds draft treaty to ban nuclear weapons

22.05.2017 - Geneva, Switzerland - International Campaign to Abolish
Nuclear Weapons

Confidence the treaty will be completed by July 7 increases

ICAN welcomes today’s release of a draft treaty to ban nuclear weapons
as an essential milestone in the years-long effort to ban these
indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction and an important step
towards their eventual elimination.

Beatrice Fihn, Executive Director of the International Campaign to
Abolish Nuclear Weapons, said: “The draft language is strong and
categorically prohibits nuclear weapons. The President of the
negotiations, Ambassador Elayne Whyte Gomez, has captured the key
elements agreed upon in March. And while we expect debate on the text
as this process moves forward, we are confident that this text
provides a good basis for adopting a treaty by July 7.”

“We are particularly happy the text is rooted in humanitarian
principles and that it builds on previous prohibitions of unacceptable
weapons, such as biological and chemical weapons, landmines and
cluster munitions,” Fihn added.

Countries now face the task of finalizing the treaty at the second
negotiation session, which begins on June 15 and ends on July 7.

“Now that we have a draft, nuclear-armed and nuclear-alliance states
should take the opportunity to engage productively in these
discussions. Failure to participate undermines any objection they
might have once the document is complete. This is a test of their
commitment to a world without nuclear weapons,” Fihn said.

Over 130 countries participated in the first negotiation session in
March, when participants shared initial positions and goals for treaty
language. Nearly all focused on the humanitarian cost of nuclear
weapons use and the threat it poses to every country. Most also
compared a nuclear weapons ban to previous bans on chemical and
biological weapons, land mines, and cluster munitions, which have had
significant impact and changed international behavior.

Fihn continued, “Nuclear weapons are ethically unacceptable in the
21st century. Intended to indiscriminately kill civilians, this 1940s
technology is putting countless of lives at risk every day. Their
continued existence undermines the moral credibility of every country
which relies on them. A treaty to ban them, as a first step towards
their elimination, will have real and lasting impact.”

II.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/23/un-panel-releases-draft-treaty-banning-possession-and-use-of-nuclear-weapons

UN panel releases draft treaty banning possession and use of nuclear weapons

States would have to destroy any nuclear weapons they have and would
be forbidden from transferring them

A UN draft treaty would ban the possession and use of nuclear weapons
but the US says the threat posed by North Korea shows why nuclear
deterrence is still needed. Photograph: Ahn Young-joon/AP

Ben Doherty and agencies
Tuesday 23 May 2017 00.42 BST Last modified on Tuesday 23 May 2017 00.44 BST
A United Nations-backed panel has publicly released a draft treaty
banning the possession and use of all nuclear weapons.

The draft treaty is the culmination of a sustained campaign, supported
by more than 130 non-nuclear states frustrated with the sclerotic pace
of disarmament, to prohibit nuclear weapons and persuade nuclear-armed
states to disarm.

Nine countries are known or believed to possess nuclear weapons: the
US, UK, Russia, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and
Israel. None has supported the draft plan.


Julie Bishop hits back at North Korea as Labor backs 'harder-edged' US stance
 Read more

The draft treaty obliges state parties to “never under any
circumstances … develop, produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire,
possess or stockpile nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive
devices … use nuclear weapons … [or] carry out any nuclear weapon
test”.

States would also be obliged to destroy any nuclear weapons they
possess and would be forbidden from transferring nuclear weapons to
any other recipient.

Costa Rica’s ambassador to the UN, Elayne Whyte Gómez, who chaired the
treaty drafting conference, said she expected revisions and there was
“a good level of convergence among the delegations, especially on the
core prohibitions”.

Disarmament advocates say the draft treaty, supported by dozens of
countries, is now on track to be discussed at a second session in New
York in mid-June that could end with the document’s adoption as a UN
treaty in July.

The US and other nuclear powers have argued states should strengthen
and improve the 47-year-old nuclear non-proliferation treaty instead
of adopting a total ban.

US officials have cited the threat posed by North Korea, which has
conducted a series of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile tests this
year, as reason why nuclear deterrence – and gradual nuclear
disarmament – is s

[GreenYouth] 'Human shield' Farooq shocked at award to Major Gogoi

[Sukla Sen]

[It's a blatant trampling of all civilised norms and also of the
Geneva Convention.

Holding a "non-combatant" - an uninvolved civilian, as a captive and
using him as a "shield" in a military operation, putting his life and
limbs at mortal risk, goes against the very basics of the Geneva
Covention.
It's a criminal offence.

In fact, the case is under investigation (separately) by both the army
and the police. (Ref.:

and 
.)

Yet the man responsible is awarded!
A frightening disregard for the rule of law, by an arm of the state itself!]

http://www.theweek.in/news/india/human-shield-farooq-appalled-at-award-to-major-gogoi.html

'Human shield' Farooq shocked at award to Major Gogoi

By Tariq Bhat | May 23, 2017

[File photo] The incident had sparked outrage within and outside
Kashmir and had brought in major embarrassment to the PDP-BJP
government

The major, who tied Farooq to use as a human shield, has been honoured
by the army

Farooq Ahmed Dar, who was used as a human shield by Major Nitin Leetul
Gogoi on April 9 in Kashmir's Budgam, said award to the army major
reflected army's mentality towards Kashmiris. Major Gogoi was on
Monday honoured with the army chief's 'commendation card' for his
'sustained efforts' in counter- insurgency operations.

Army source said the officer has been awarded for his excellent track
record in counter-insurgency operations.

“I want to ask the army chief how would he feel if someone ties his
son to the jeep and parades him for 27 kms for no fault of his?” Dar
told THE WEEK. “It is highly shameful that the man who put me through
such a horror has been felicitated.”

The 26-year old shawl artisan said he was yet to recover from the
trauma and resume work. “What they did to me is still playing in my
head,” he said. “They fractured my hand and it sill hurts. I am yet to
resume work because of what they did to me.”

The incident had sparked outrage within and outside Kashmir and had
brought in major embarrassment to the PDP-BJP government. Many former
army officers, journalists and citizens had described the act as
highly damaging to the image of the army internationally.

Curiously, the award coincided with the birthday of Chief Minister
Mehbooba Mufti, once a champion of rights, who had promised
investigation into the matter for action against the accused.

However, awarding the accused officer is seen as a setback to the
government and army's efforts to restore order in Kashmir which has
witnessed renewed agitation by the youth and students April.

Recalling how he was seized and strapped to the front bumper of the
jeep, Farooq, a resident of Chil Bras in Budgam and one of the few
people who had voted in the morning of the Lok Sahba polls for
Srinagar on April 9 that recorded a dismal 7.13 per cent turnout, said
he was going to attend a condolence meeting of a relative at Gampora
in Pulwama on his bike when the Army stopped him at Utligam and
thrashed him.

Some women had tried to intervene but the Army took him with them and
made him to sit on a tyre on the front bumper. “After that, a soldier
was daring the stone pelters to throw stones at the jeep,” he said.
Dar was later released upon the village sarpanch's request.

He said he didn't register a complaint against the army for fear
reprisal. “I have an old mother to look after, I left it at that,” he
said.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Re: 'Human shield' Farooq shocked at award to Major Gogoi

[Sukla Sen]

What are human shields?
International laws originally defined human shields as “using the
presence (or movements) of civilians or other protected persons to
render certain points or areas (or military forces) immune from
military operations”. Over time that definition has grown to also
include civilians in non-international armed conflicts.

At its core, the term refers to armed forces using civilians to
protect themselves while attempting to carry out an objective. This
could be as blatant as strapping a civilian to the front of a military
vehicle to prevent attacks. It could also be as complex as ensuring
that soldiers are mixed in with civilians on trains heading to or back
from conflict zones.

What is wrong with that?
Modern nations operate under the presumption that, in the case of
armed conflict, the state must do everything to ensure civilians are
not hurt. Human shields, on the other hand, force civilians to face
danger, with the aim of reducing the threat to the armed forces. They
are almost never voluntary and while they might occasionally work
tactically, coercion of civilians into endangering themselves can turn
a population against the state.

Is it legal?
The Fourth Geneva Convention, Additional Protocol 1 and the Rome
Statute that set up the International Criminal Court all prohibit
human shields in armed conflicts, and consider their use a war crime.

The definition and protections given to civilians against being used
as human shields have over time been extended to non-international
armed conflicts as well. According to the International Committe of
the Red Cross, any such practice would be prohibited by the
requirement that civilians ought to be protected against the dangers
arising from military operations.

The Red Cross goes on to say that human shields in non-international
conflicts, if they are non-voluntary, would amount to hostage-taking –
which is expressly prohibited – and also flouts the principle of
distinction, which obliges states to take feasible precautions
separating civilians from the military.

As a result, almost all general legal approaches consider human
shields illegal both in domestic circumstances and international
conflicts. The only space that is somewhat unclear is when civilians
volunteer to be human shields, but even there questions have often
been raised about how to test whether a civilian was simply coerced
into volunteering for a dangerous operation.

(Excerpted from: 'Kashmir ‘human shield’ video: The facts remain
unclear – but the practice is banned even in Israel' by Rohan
Venkataramakrishnan on Apr 14, 2017 at
<https://scroll.in/article/834640/kashmir-controversy-using-human-shields-is-considered-a-war-crime-and-is-even-banned-in-israel>.)

Sukla

On 23/05/2017, Sukla Sen  wrote:
> [It's a blatant trampling of all civilised norms and also of the
> Geneva Convention.
>
> Holding a "non-combatant" - an uninvolved civilian, as a captive and
> using him as a "shield" in a military operation, putting his life and
> limbs at mortal risk, goes against the very basics of the Geneva
> Covention.
> It's a criminal offence.
>
> In fact, the case is under investigation (separately) by both the army
> and the police. (Ref.:
> <http://www.ptinews.com/news/8727976_Army-officer-who-tied-man-to-jeep-in-Kashmir-awarded.html>
> and
> <http://indianexpress.com/article/india/officer-who-tied-kashmiri-man-to-jeep-gets-award-bjp-mp-paresh-rawal-says-do-this-to-arundhati-roy-4669043/>.)
>
> Yet the man responsible is awarded!
> A frightening disregard for the rule of law, by an arm of the state
> itself!]
>
> http://www.theweek.in/news/india/human-shield-farooq-appalled-at-award-to-major-gogoi.html
>
> 'Human shield' Farooq shocked at award to Major Gogoi
>
> By Tariq Bhat | May 23, 2017
>
> [File photo] The incident had sparked outrage within and outside
> Kashmir and had brought in major embarrassment to the PDP-BJP
> government
>
> The major, who tied Farooq to use as a human shield, has been honoured
> by the army
>
> Farooq Ahmed Dar, who was used as a human shield by Major Nitin Leetul
> Gogoi on April 9 in Kashmir's Budgam, said award to the army major
> reflected army's mentality towards Kashmiris. Major Gogoi was on
> Monday honoured with the army chief's 'commendation card' for his
> 'sustained efforts' in counter- insurgency operations.
>
> Army source said the officer has been awarded for his excellent track
> record in counter-insurgency operations.
>
> “I want to ask the army chief how would he feel if someone ties his
> son to the jeep and parades him for 27 kms for no fault of his?” Dar
> told THE WEEK. “It is highly shameful that the man who put me through
> such a horror has been felicitated.”
>
> The 26-ye

[GreenYouth] Jharkhand lynching: Two officers, 30 policemen watched the four murders

[Sukla Sen]

[It was not just a mob that witnessed the lynching of four men in a
village near Jamshedpur for nearly five hours early on May 18,
following rumours of child-lifters being present in the area. Present
at the spot were also a Deputy Superintendent of Police, a Circle
Inspector, two Assistant Sub-Inspectors and at least 30 policemen,
including those from the local station in Rajnagar.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/jharkhand-lynching-2-officers-30-policemen-watched-the-4-murders-4669030/

Jharkhand lynching: Two officers, 30 policemen watched the four murders
Jharkhand lynching: At 5 am on May 18, the four started calling their
relatives in Haldipokhar to tell them that they were surrounded by a
mob and feared for their lives.

Written by Ravik Bhattacharya | Rajnagar (jharkhand) | Updated: May
23, 2017 11:05 pm

Video grab (left) show ASI Gope, his face to camera; (right) in-charge
T P Kushwaha. Subham Dutta

It was not just a mob that witnessed the lynching of four men in a
village near Jamshedpur for nearly five hours early on May 18,
following rumours of child-lifters being present in the area. Present
at the spot were also a Deputy Superintendent of Police, a Circle
Inspector, two Assistant Sub-Inspectors and at least 30 policemen,
including those from the local station in Rajnagar. The Indian Express
tracked down two of the policemen who are seen speaking to the mob in
videos of the incident and spoke to several eyewitnesses to piece
together the sequence of events that ended with the deaths in
Shobhapur of Naim (35), Sheikh Sajju (25), Sheikh Siraj (26) and
Sheikh Halim (28).

It’s not a story of policemen looking the other way. Here, they were
watching the lynching unfold in front of their eyes. On the night of
May 17, Naim, Sajju, Siraj and Halim, all residents of Haldipokhar,
reached Shobhapur, 15 km away, to visit Halim’s brother-in-law Sheikh
Murtaza.

At 5 am on May 18, the four started calling their relatives in
Haldipokhar to tell them that they were surrounded by a mob and feared
for their lives. “Halim told me the mob would kill them and that we
should rescue them. I gathered a few people from my village and left
for the spot on motorbikes wearing helmets to conceal our identities.
But when we saw hundreds of people beating them, we fled. The calls
kept coming till 6 am, then they stopped,” said Sheikh Salim, Halim’s
elder brother.

At 6 am, policemen at the Rajnagar station received calls from some
villagers in Shobhapur about the assault. By 6.30 am, T P Kushwaha,
the officer in charge, two ASIs and five constables reached Shobhapur.
“We saw people beating up a youth, alleging that he was a
child-lifter. For the next 45 minutes, we spoke to some members of the
mob, trying to pacify them. But what can you do if the rest of them go
on a rampage? There were so many people and more kept pouring in.
There was so much commotion. I had never faced such a situation in my
career,” said Kushwaha. “Please, I beg you. Don’t talk to me, I am
just a small officer. I was there but I cannot talk to you. Please
contact my superiors,” said Sashibhusan Gope, the ASI on duty at the
Rajnagar station on Monday. Gope is seen in one of the videos of the
lynching with another ASI Manoj Kumar Singh. Singh is now on leave due
to ill health.

At around 7.30 am, reinforcements, including a DySP, CI Rajiv Niraj
and 20 policemen, arrived at the spot from the Seraikela district
headquarters, 14 km away. “There has never been such an incident in
Seraikela. It is easy to say things sitting in an office, but the
ground reality is different. Till 11.30 am, we thought there was only
one victim, we did not know there were others. There was a huge crowd
and some people were instigating the mob. When we first received
information about the incident, we thought it was a local fight.
Later, we found out it was a different case,” said Rakesh Bansal, SP,
Seraikela.

According to eyewitnesses and family members of the victims, Sajju,
Siraj and Halim managed to flee the spot and take refuge in Padnamsai
village nearby. But in Shobhapur, the policemen looked on as the mob
beat Naim with rods and lathis. For over three hours, Naim, who was
soaked in blood, begged for mercy until he collapsed.

At around 11 am, police dragged a critically injured and unconscious
Naim to Seraikela hospital, where he died within minutes.

At around 1 pm, police picked up the bodies of Sajju and Siraj from
the main road at Padnamsai. They had been tracked down by the mob,
beaten, their bones broken, and their bodies set ablaze. The victims’
family members claimed they had informed police officers about the
location. “But they ignored our calls. The policemen didn’t even go to
Padnamsai until late in the afternoon to collect the bodies,” said a
family member.   ”There was a lot of commotion. Groups of villagers
were running here and there. It was difficult to ascertain what was
happening,” said SP Bansal. Halim’s body was recovered the next day,
fr

[GreenYouth] Intensified (?) Exchange of Fires (and Video War) between India and Pakistan: Two Reports

[Sukla Sen]

[Quite interestingly, very much unkike this time, there was no release
of video(s) to buttress the earlier claim by the Indian Army of
"surgical strikes" across the LoC (see:
),
rubbished by its Pak counterpart.
Indian Home Minister, Rajnath Singh, had though vaguely hinted at such
a possibility in some future. (See: '‘Wait and watch’, responds
Rajnath to clamour for footage of cross-LoC strikes', dtd. Oct 02,
2016, at 
.)

So, the video war is a new feature added to the ongoing low level
armed conflicts between the two nuclear-tipped neighbours.]

I/II.
http://www.abplive.in/india-news/to-counter-indias-claim-pakistan-army-releases-video-of-destroying-indian-posts-531004

To counter India's claim, Pakistan army releases video of "destroying
Indian posts"

ABP LIVE  INDIA
ABP News Bureau | Last Updated: 24 May 2017 10:07 AM

New Delhi: In a bid to counter India’s claims of carrying out a
punitive assault on its posts, Pakistan Army on Tuesday night released
a video of allegedly destroying Indian posts in Nowshera Sector on May
13.

Around 9.40pm, Pakistan uploaded footage that showed several clips of
thick smoke and explosions, saying its army struck Indian posts "in a
befitting reply" on May 13.

[Video]

Major General Asif Ghafoor, the official spokesperson of Pakistan
Armed Forces, tweeted saying “no Pakistani post was destroyed by India
on May 13. Indians targeted civilians on both sides of LOC. Pakistan’s
response were restricted to military targets only.”

[Screenshot of Press Release dtd. May 23]
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
 Follow
 Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor ✔ @OfficialDGISPR
PR277/17
No Pakistani post destroyed by India on 13 May. Indians tgt civ on
both sides of LOC. Pak response restricted to mil tgts only. 1/2
9:25 PM - 23 May 2017
  441 441 Retweets   962 962 likes
Twitter Ads info & Privacy

In his second tweet, Ghafoor released a video dated May 13, 2017,
which read “India targeted innocent civilians. In befitting response
Pak Army destroyed Indian posts in Nowshera Sec. 2/2.”

[Video]
 Follow
 Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor ✔ @OfficialDGISPR
On 13 May 2017, India targeted innocent civilians. In befitting
response Pak Army destroyed Indian posts in Nowshera Sec. 2/2.
9:41 PM - 23 May 2017
  1,545 1,545 Retweets   2,800 2,800 likes
Twitter Ads info & Privacy

The prompt reaction from the neighbouring country came after Indian
Army announced that it has been carrying out punitive fire assaults
across the line of control to thwart infiltration bid of terrorists
from Pakistan.

"A recent action by our troops in the Naushera sector has caused some
damage to the Pak army posts, which are supporting infiltrations. This
is part of our overall strategy to counter terrorism," Major General
Ashok Narula, head of army’s public information wing, informed media
persons on Tuesday afternoon.

Reports say the strikes on Pakistani army posts were carried out on
May 9-10. The "fire assaults" were probably in response to the
beheading of two Indian soldiers on May 1 in Krishna Ghati.

The Indian Army has for the first time made public footage of
"punitive fire assaults" across the Line of Control.

[Video]

Meanwhile, Pakistan in September last year also denied the surgical
strikes by India and accused it of cross-border firing that killed two
Pakistani soldiers.

"This quest by Indian establishment to create media hype by rebranding
cross border fire as surgical strike is fabrication of truth. Pakistan
has made it clear that if there is a surgical strike on Pakistani
soil, same will be strongly responded," the Pakistani military's press
wing, had then said.

II.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/todays-newspaper/army-avenges-martyrs-mutilation.html

ARMY AVENGES MARTYRS’ MUTILATION

Wednesday, 24 May 2017 | Pioneer News Service | New Delhi

The Indian Army carried out a major counter-offensive across the Line
of Control (LoC) on May 9 targeting Pakistan Army posts that aided
infiltrators in Naushera sector in Jammu region. The “punitive fire
assault” is seen as India’s retaliatory response to mutilation of the
bodies of two Indian soldiers by Pakistan’s Border Action Team (BAT)
on May 1 in Poonch sector.

Several Pakistani posts, which provide fire cover to terrorists during
infiltration bids, were destroyed. The Army plans to continue with
this strategy of “taking out” specific posts helping terrorists to
sneak into the border State and this action will take place in Jammu &
Kashmir divisions, the Army said here on Tuesday.

The “fire assault” in Naushera saw the Army using intense firing by
Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGM), Automatic Grenade Launchers (AGL),
Recoilless Anti-Tank Guns and Rocket Launchers in direct firing

[GreenYouth] One Dalit is killed as Saharanpur is back on the boil, attack after Mayawati’s rally

[Sukla Sen]

[ONE PERSON was killed and at least 13 injured in fresh violence in
Saharanpur on Tuesday evening. Barring a Muslim who was injured, the
others are all Dalits.
According to reports, the victims were targeted — in small groups
across different areas — when they were returning after attending BSP
chief Mayawati’s public meeting in Shabbirpur village. Some of the
injured said they were attacked by Thakurs, with rods, lathis and
knives. Police, however, did not confirm the identity of the
attackers. Nobody has been arrested so far.]

One Dalit is killed as Saharanpur is back on the boil, attack after
Mayawati’s rally
The person who died has been identified as Ashish Meghraj, 25, a
resident of Sarsawa.

Written by Abhishek Angad | Saharanpur | Published:May 24, 2017 5:51 am

Inderpal, 50, a resident of Shabbirpur village in Saharanpur, suffered
injuries on his head and arms. (Source: Express photo by Gajendra
Yadav)

ONE PERSON was killed and at least 13 injured in fresh violence in
Saharanpur on Tuesday evening. Barring a Muslim who was injured, the
others are all Dalits.

According to reports, the victims were targeted — in small groups
across different areas — when they were returning after attending BSP
chief Mayawati’s public meeting in Shabbirpur village. Some of the
injured said they were attacked by Thakurs, with rods, lathis and
knives. Police, however, did not confirm the identity of the
attackers. Nobody has been arrested so far.

Opinion | Why is Dalit Politics Getting So Radicalized?

“One person was brought dead to Saharanpur district hospital while 13
were injured. Three of the 13 sustained grievous injuries and have
been sent to Meerut,” said SP City (Saharanpur) Prabal Pratap Singh.
Asked if the attackers were from the Thakur community, he declined
comment.

The person who died has been identified as Ashish Meghraj, 25, a
resident of Sarsawa. “He had a stab injury on the right side of his
abdomen and other injuries on his body. The cause of death is yet to
be ascertained,” said B S Sodhi, Chief Medical Officer, Saharanpur
District Hospital.

“One person sustained a bullet injury, while two others had deep
wounds which appeared to have been inflicted by knives. All have been
sent to Meerut,” said Sodhi. The three have been identified as Phool
Singh, Akbar and Mavasi.

The others who were injured have been admitted to the district
hospital. Inderpal, 50, who was undergoing treatment in the emergency
ward, said that half-an-hour after Mayawati’s meeting, he was attacked
by about 10 people. “Five are Rajputs from my village. They thrashed
us with rods and lathis. Both my arms are fractured, and I suffered a
head injury also,” he alleged, adding that he was from Shabbirpur
village.

Shekhar, 16, said he was on his bicycle, returning from Mayawati’s
meeting, when he was attacked near Shimlana canal, about seven
kilometres from Shabbirpur. The youth suffered head injuries in the
attack. He too alleged that the attackers were Rajputs.

Another injured, Narendra Kumar from Halalpur, said he was on his
motorcycle with two others, when they were targeted in Ambheta, about
15 kilometres from Shabbirpur. “They hit us on our heads and bodies.
We don’t know why we were attacked,” he said.

Following the attacks, Dalits gathered outside the district hospital
at about 9 pm and demanded justice. In the last 18 days, this is the
third time that the district has seen inter-caste violence.

It began on May 5, when a Thakur man was killed and 25 Dalit homes set
ablaze in clashes that lasted around five hours after Dalits in the
village objected to loud music being played by Thakurs in a procession
to attend a function in honour of Rajput ruler Maharana Pratap.

Meanwhile, Additional Director General, law and order, Aditya Mishra,
said the situation was under control and additional forces had been
sent to the area.

Terming today’s violence as unfortunate, Chief Minister Yogi
Adityanath, in a statement, said the officials concerned would be
punished for any laxity. He appealed to the people to maintain peace
and also sought cooperation from the opposition parties in restoring
peace and harmony.

A delegation of four senior officials — Secretary (Home) Mani Prasad
Mishra, ADG (law and order) Aditya Mishra, IG (STF) Amitabh Yash and
DG (Security) Vijay Bhushan — has been sent to the district.

“Peace and harmony had been restored in Saharanpur. But there was an
atmosphere of tension and disturbance after the visit of a former
chief minister… an unfortunate incident occurred… an innocent youth
was killed,” said Cabinet Minister and government spokesperson
Shrikant Sharma.

— With ENS inputs, Lucknow
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Vi

[GreenYouth] Fwd: Nuclear conflict risk: Why the bomb is back

[Sukla Sen]

-- Forwarded message --
From: john hallam 
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 16:16:42 +1000
Subject: Nuclear conflict risk: Why the bomb is back


Nuclear conflict risk: Why the bomb is back
Jonathan Marcus
Diplomatic
correspondent

   - 5 May 2017

   - From the sectionWorld 


   http://www.bbc.com/news/world-39818276


   These are external links and will open in a new window
   - Share this with Facebook 
   - Share this with Twitter 
   - Share this with Messenger
   - Share this with Email
   


   - Share 

[image: Filming on the set of Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop
Worrying and Love the Bomb on 14 March 1963]Image copyrightEXPRESS/GETTYImage
captionThe film Dr Strangelove satirised fears of a nuclear conflict
between the US and the former Soviet Union

The film Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the
Bomb - to give it its full title - remains a comedy classic. Starring Peter
Sellers in multiple roles and directed by Stanley Kubrick, it illustrated
the way in which the US and the then Soviet Union might unintentionally
drift into all-out nuclear war. Back in 1964, when it was first released,
it was a very dark comedy indeed. Audiences then lived under the very real
shadow of the Cold War nuclear arms race.

Mindful of the dangers, over the years, an elaborate series of arms control
and arms reduction agreements were concluded between the two superpowers to
try to manage their nuclear rivalry.

But with the Cold War over, nuclear arsenals were scaled down. The nature
of international conflict seemed to change; no longer rivalry between great
powers but bitter local wars where countries disintegrated into chaos or
terrorist groups sought to capitalise on ungoverned space to mount their
nihilist campaigns.

But now there are those who fear that the nuclear spectre is becoming all
too real again. The US non-governmental organisation Global Zero certainly
thinks so. It has brought respected former officials and military men
together to campaign for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

It is launching a new initiative on Friday in Vienna to establish what it
calls the Nuclear Crisis Group, which it hopes will serve as a kind of
shadow-Security Council to deal with potential nuclear flashpoints.
Image captionTensions have risen over North Korea's nuclear programme

As Global Zero Executive Director Derek Johnson told me, "from Ukraine and
the Korean Peninsula, to south Asia and the South China Sea and Taiwan, all
of the nuclear-armed states and their allies are tangled up in conflicts
and crises that could go nuclear at any moment."

"It's true," he notes, "that each of these crises has been simmering for a
long time, but they're all heating up." The world, he argues, "has never
been faced with so many nuclear flashpoints simultaneously".

The growing tensions between the US and North Korea are clearly very much
on Global Zero's minds. "The election of Donald Trump," says Johnson, "has
injected an alarming new level of incoherence and volatility into a
uniquely perilous moment in human history."

   - How might Donald Trump do a deal with North Korea?
   
   - What can the outside world do about North Korea?
   
   - North Korea's nuclear programme: How advanced is it?
   

The message of Global Zero is that mankind is "simply not equipped to
manage existential risks indefinitely". The new Nuclear Crisis Group will
monitor potential flash-points; seek to publish reports to educate and keep
these issues in the public eye, while also engaging in behind the scenes
diplomacy to try to influence the main players.

The NCG is co-chaired by the respected US diplomats and ambassadors Richard
Burt and Thomas Pickering, and by a former general, James E Cartwright. It
describes itself as embracing "a cadre of seasoned diplomats, political and
military leaders and national security experts from key countries,
including China, India, Japan, Pakistan, Poland, Russia, South Korea and
the United States".
A nuclear race?

The NCG and its sponsoring organization - Global Zero - are clearly part of
a nuclear disarmament lobby that in many ways feels that it has been pushed
to the sidelines. While it would be wrong to speak of a new Cold War,
relations between Russia and the US are clearly at a very low-ebb.

But their relative positions and capabilities have changed. Russia -
despite its military adventure in Syria - is a shadow of the former Soviet
Union.
Image captionPresident Putin is seeking to modernise Russia's nuclear
arsenal

Nonetheless Moscow's Syria intervention illustrates that Russia cannot
simply be ignored and t

[GreenYouth] *CRPF IGP says fake encounter in Assam by Army, police, his force* and *‘False account of planned murder, shown as brave act’*

[Sukla Sen]

[In his report, (Rajnish) Rai (an Inspector General of Police, serving
with the CRPF in the North East) has observed, “Had this unlawful act
been committed by a group of a few deviant officers, I would not have
been so concerned. However, since multiple security agencies were
involved in this incident, it indicates a deeper institutional malady
in the functioning of the country’s most prestigious security forces.
It represents a dangerous deterioration and degradation of
institutional processes.”
Calling custodial killings “worse than insurgency/militancy” because
they have the authority of the state behind them, Rai says in the
report: “Security forces do not have the right to kill them
(dastardliest of criminals/militants) in cold blood under the cloak of
larger societal good. Therefore, it is crucial to strike a balance
between individual human rights and societal interests while combating
insurgency. Failure to do so is a cure worse than the disease.”

(Excerpted from the report at sl. no. I below.)]

I/II.
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/crpf-igp-says-fake-encounter-in-assam-by-army-police-his-force-4670809/

CRPF IGP says fake encounter in Assam by Army, police, his force

Two suspected NDFB(S) men were killed in cold blood, weapons were
planted, says CRPF IGP’s report

Written by Deeptiman Tiwary | New Delhi | Updated: May 24, 2017 12:06 pm

An Inspector General of Police, serving with the CRPF in the North
East, has raised several questions regarding an encounter carried out
in a joint operation by the Army, Assam Police, CRPF and the Sashastra
Seema Bal (SSB) in Chirang district of Assam in the early hours of
March 30 this year.

In his report sent to CRPF headquarters in Delhi, Gujarat cadre IPS
officer Rajnish Rai, currently posted in Shillong with CRPF as IG,
North East Sector, has alleged that the encounter — neat Simlaguri
village under Amguri police station — that led to the death of two
suspected members of the National Democratic Front of Bodoland
(Songbijit), or NDFB(S) faction, was staged. And that the two men were
picked up from a house in D-Kalling village and killed in cold blood
in Simlaguri.

Calling for a full-fledged investigation, Rai has alleged that weapons
were planted on their bodies.

The two killed were identified as Lucas Narzary alias N Langfa and
David Islary alias Dayud.

He says he has witnesses who have identified the bodies as those of
the two men who were picked up and that these witnesses are in his
safe custody.

Rai’s report, dated April 17, 2017, is marked to Assam Chief Secretary
V K Pipersenia; the then acting CRPF DG Sudeep Lakhtakia; Lt Gen A S
Bedi, GOC, 4 Corps & Chairperson, Operational Group, Unified Command;
Assam DG Mukesh Sahay; SSB DG Archana Ramasundaram and CRPF ADG (NE
Zone) Mohd Javed Akhtar.

Also Read | ‘False account of planned murder, shown as brave act’

The salient points made in the Rai’s report:
* GPS records show how a CRPF unit of the CoBRA visited the encounter
spot in Simlaguri a few hours before the encounter. “It leads to the
suspicion that the CoBRA () team was trying to identify a suitable
location where the alleged encounter with the NDFB(S) cadres could be
stage managed,” Rai’s report says.

It refers to “discreet” enquiries by senior officers who contradict
the official version of the events.

* It cites statements of witnesses who have identified the photograph
of the two slain cadres as the men picked up from D-Kalling village on
the night of the encounter. Rai has not attached their statements to
protect the identity of the witnesses but claims they would be
presented to an independent investigation team.

* An 11-year-old boy was present in the house from where the suspected
NDFB(S) men were picked up. This boy, says the report, was taken away
by a woman who lived in the adjacent house even as the operation was
on.

* As per the Special Situation Report prepared by those involved in
the operation, Team No. 15 of 210 CoBRA was involved in the operation.
However, when the enquiry officer asked some of the men from the team,
they flatly refused being part of it. The report says this shows there
was something amiss as the same men were earlier taking credit for the
operation.

* The report suggests that a team (of Assam police and Army) picked up
the NDFB(S) cadres from D-Kalling village and then met another team at
Ouguri. It was then that the decision to kill the duo was taken.

[Facsimile]

***In his report, Rai has observed, “Had this unlawful act been
committed by a group of a few deviant officers, I would not have been
so concerned. However, since multiple security agencies were involved
in this incident, it indicates a deeper institutional malady in the
functioning of the country’s most prestigious security forces. It
represents a dangerous deterioration and degradation of institutional
processes.”*** [Emphasis added.]

***Calling custodial killings “worse than insurgency/militancy”
because they have the autho

[GreenYouth] 'New India under the Maximum Leader' by Antara Dev Sen: Realities mocking Rhetorics!

[Sukla Sen]

[To believe or not to believe, that is the question. As we celebrate
three years of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, we are told
that life is beautiful. We are doing fabulously, corruption has been
eradicated, reforms have made everyone’s life so much better, we now
live in a clean and captivating Swachh Bharat, Sundar Bharat, we have
jobs, food and economic growth, we are charging forth creating more
wealth and everyone from farmers to industrialists have reason to
cheer. Mr Modi is our Maximum Leader, we hear, who has put India
decisively on the path to glory. He is also firmly on the side of the
poor and downtrodden, and is working towards development for all:
Sabka saath, sabka vikas.
Meanwhile, every single day you see stuff in the news that makes you
catch your breath and wonder what happened to your country. Lynching
seems to have become acceptable. Majoritarian vigilantism has
government sanction. Mob justice is a way of life. The police watches
silently as citizens are killed. Institutions are losing their
independence. History is brazenly being rewritten. Democratic freedoms
guaranteed by the Constitution are scornfully cast aside.]

http://www.asianage.com/opinion/oped/240517/new-india-under-the-maximum-leader.html

New India under the Maximum Leader

Antara Dev Sen

Antara Dev Sen is Editor of The Little Magazine. She can be contacted
at: s...@littlemag.com

Published : May 24, 2017, 3:00 am IST Updated : May 24, 2017, 3:00 am IST

In three years of Mr Modi’s rule, the government has managed to
obfuscate India’s constitutional guarantees.

To believe or not to believe, that is the question. As we celebrate
three years of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, we are told
that life is beautiful. We are doing fabulously, corruption has been
eradicated, reforms have made everyone’s life so much better, we now
live in a clean and captivating Swachh Bharat, Sundar Bharat, we have
jobs, food and economic growth, we are charging forth creating more
wealth and everyone from farmers to industrialists have reason to
cheer. Mr Modi is our Maximum Leader, we hear, who has put India
decisively on the path to glory. He is also firmly on the side of the
poor and downtrodden, and is working towards development for all:
Sabka saath, sabka vikas.

Meanwhile, every single day you see stuff in the news that makes you
catch your breath and wonder what happened to your country. Lynching
seems to have become acceptable. Majoritarian vigilantism has
government sanction. Mob justice is a way of life. The police watches
silently as citizens are killed. Institutions are losing their
independence. History is brazenly being rewritten. Democratic freedoms
guaranteed by the Constitution are scornfully cast aside.

Even the last pillars of democracy are under threat. Justice is not
always blind, nor is it always just, now that it has started to ask
the victims and the perpetrators to mutually work out a solution in
some politically charged cases. And the voting mechanism, which
carries the nuts and bolts of democracy on its shoulders, is being
challenged as well. Only the fact that the Election Commission has
invited displeased political parties for a hackathon — challenging
them to show how EVMs can be tampered with — reminds us that we are in
India, where we have the right to ask questions and be treated with
respect.

In three years of Mr Modi’s rule, the government has managed to
obfuscate India’s constitutional guarantees. And confused by glowing
reviews by a careful media, we fail to see that we are on our way to
replacing the inclusive, pluralistic, rational Indian nationalism
promised by the Constitution with an exclusive, divisive, faith-based
Hindu nationalism that flies in the face of almost everything that our
Constitution ensures.

Now suddenly we are not Indians, defined by our nationality, with the
same set of rights but Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and others,
we are dalits or OBCs or upper castes, we are women or men, and our
rights seem to vary accordingly.

In these three years, we have started to believe that our private life
is not private. That it is okay for the government to suddenly scrap
our currency notes. And to tell us how much of our own money we can
spend in a day, or in a week. And to tell us that the voluntary
Aadhaar card is now mandatory. That you will not get what is your
right without it, that your child will not get her/his mid-day meal in
school without it. So you must have the Aadhaar card, which will be
linked to everything and the government and its friends will have all
your personal data, and so will any hacker in our hacker-friendly
government systems.

We have started to believe that we can go out and meddle in other
people’s private affairs. We can beat them up or kill them if we think
they eat beef. We can lynch any cattle trader because the cow is our
mother. We can lynch a Muslim for allowing another Muslim to elope
with a Hindu girl. We can drag a man out 

[GreenYouth] BJP Minister, MLAs, other prominent functionaries, senior and middle-level cops of Maharashtra at wedding of Dawood niece, raise eyebrows

[Sukla Sen]

[BJP leader and medical education minister Girish Mahajan, known to be
a trusted aide of chief minister Devendra Fadnavis, and ten police
officers found themselves embroiled in a controversy on Wednesday for
attending the marriage of a relative of fugitive gangster Dawood
Ibrahim in Nashik on May 19.
While one of the ten cops who attended is an assistant police
commissioner, the other nine are those at the inspector level. And
Mahajan himself was not alone at the wedding: he was accompanied by
BJP legislators Devyani Farande, Balasaheb Sanap and Seeema Hiray,
Nashik mayor Ranjana Bhanasi and deputy mayor Prathamesh Gite (both of
the BJP) and a section of local municipal councillors.]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/min-mlas-cops-at-wedding-of-dawood-niece-raise-eyebrows/articleshow/58831684.cms

Minister, MLAs, cops at wedding of Dawood niece, raise eyebrows

Prafulla Marpakwar | TNN | Updated: May 25, 2017, 12.06 PM IST

[Video]

MUMBAI: BJP leader and medical education minister Girish Mahajan,
known to be a trusted aide of chief minister Devendra Fadnavis, and
ten police officers found themselves embroiled in a controversy on
Wednesday for attending the marriage of a relative of fugitive
gangster Dawood Ibrahim in Nashik on May 19.

While one of the ten cops who attended is an assistant police
commissioner, the other nine are those at the inspector level. And
Mahajan himself was not alone at the wedding: he was accompanied by
BJP legislators Devyani Farande, Balasaheb Sanap and Seeema Hiray,
Nashik mayor Ranjana Bhanasi and deputy mayor Prathamesh Gite (both of
the BJP) and a section of local municipal councillors.

Nashik police commissioner Ravindra Singhal has ordered an inquiry
into the presence of the ten policemen at the event, and their
statements have been recorded. The CM has called for a report from
Singhal on the matter.

Singhal confirmed that the bride was Dawood's wife's niece. He told
TOI, "Our information is that Dawood's wife and the bride's mother are
sisters."

Mahajan admitted that he had attended the marriage but told TOI he was
not aware of the fact that the bride's family was linked to Dawood.
The groom is the nephew of local Muslim community leader Shahar A
Khateeb. "I attended the marriage on the invitation of Khateeb, the
most respected religious leader of the Muslim community. Khateeb has
been one of the pillars of social activities undertaken by the medical
education department in the Nashik region. He had taken keen interest
in a medical camp organised by the department in Nashik and Nandurbar
and also in last year's Kumbh mela," Mahajan said.

Mahajan claimed that a day after the marriage, he was told that the
bride's family was related to Dawood. "I am guardian minister of
Nashik. I receive many invitations, but it is not possible to check
the antecedents of people. In the present case, I attended the
marriage since I personally knew Khateeb. I was accompanied by our
party legislators and the mayor and deputy mayor of Nashik," Mahajan
said.

Singhal said, "No cases have been registered against the bride's
family, nor is there a previous history. However, we are inquiring
into the presence of senior police officials at the marriage. It's not
an investigation, it's an inquiry."

A senior police officer said the ten cops under scrutiny are assistant
police commissioner Sachin Gore and inspectors Madhukar Kad, Somnath
Tambe, Sanjay Deshmukh, Samsherkhan Pathan, Manoj Shinde, Hanumant
Ware, Kantilal Chavan, Vinod Kedar and Vijay Londhe.

Confirming that their statements had been recorded, the officer said,
"We sought information from them on a) the purpose of their visit, b)
who had invited them and c) whether they were aware of antecedents of
the bride's family," he said.

Another police officer said the cops admitted that they had attended
the wedding and reasoned that they had done so only due to their good
relationship with the bridegroom's uncle.

The officer endorsed Mahajan's views, saying Khateeb was an important
person in Nashik and was not even distantly associated with Dawood's
activities. "Khateeb has been helping us in maintaining communal
harmony and peace in the city. He has been a member of the peace
committee for a long period," he said.

Top Comment
This is not wondering that cops and politicians were attending
Dawood's family members wedding.. These above said people are focusing
on thier loyal to Dawood rather than the country,This black sheep...
Read More
Sp Saravanan

Mahajan happens to be the second BJP man in the Fadnavis government to
have found himself involved in a controversy over Dawood. Earlier, it
was Eknath Khadse in his capacity as revenue minister. Hacker Manish
Bhangale had alleged in 2016 that Khadse had received calls from
Dawood's sister. Subsequently, it was found that the allegation was
baseless+ and that Bhangale's credentials were doubtful.

(With inputs by Ranjan Dasgupta in Nashik)



-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You receiv

[GreenYouth] Trump promised to protect the sick and the poor. He lied: Trump’s health care plan and budget show the scandal hiding in plain sight

[Sukla Sen]

[Because make no mistake: Trump lied in public about the most
consequential policy decisions he is now making as president. He lied
on the trail, and he is lying again now from the Oval Office. His
budget, released on Tuesday, is an assault on the poor and the
vulnerable, and a repudiation of the economic populism that sent him
to the White House. The CBO analysis of the Republican health care
bill — which Trump has fought to pass, and promised to sign — reveals
the proposal would cost 23 million people their health insurance and
force millions more onto the stingy, high-deductible insurance plans
Trump promised to free them from.]

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/24/15685786/trump-promised-protect-sick-poor-he-lied

Trump promised to protect the sick and the poor. He lied.
Trump’s health care plan and budget show the scandal hiding in plain sight.

Updated by Ezra Klein@ezraklein  May 24, 2017, 5:58pm EDT

Donald Trump’s budget, alongside the Congressional Budget Office’s
analysis of the revised American Health Care Act, is a test of our
capacity for outrage in American politics. Can we be as shocked about
lies told in public, and revealed through appendix tables, as we are
about lies told in private and revealed through shadowy leaks? Can we
muster as much fury on behalf of the stark facts revealed by the
Office of Management and Budget as for the titillating what-ifs being
investigated by the Senate Intelligence Committee? Will we care as
much about Trump’s betrayal of the poor and the sick and the disabled
as we do about his betrayal of James Comey and the Israeli
intelligence services?

Because make no mistake: Trump lied in public about the most
consequential policy decisions he is now making as president. He lied
on the trail, and he is lying again now from the Oval Office. His
budget, released on Tuesday, is an assault on the poor and the
vulnerable, and a repudiation of the economic populism that sent him
to the White House. The CBO analysis of the Republican health care
bill — which Trump has fought to pass, and promised to sign — reveals
the proposal would cost 23 million people their health insurance and
force millions more onto the stingy, high-deductible insurance plans
Trump promised to free them from.

None of this is interpretation or inference — these are the facts of
the budget he put his name on and the health care bill he begged
Congress to pass. We are not waiting for any whistleblowers to reveal
their secrets or investigators to issue their subpoenas. We have the
evidence right in front of us.

"I am going to take care of everybody," Trump told 60 Minutes before
being elected. "I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s
going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now."
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the AHCA would lead to
23 million fewer people with health insurance than if Trump simply
left the system alone.

Trump warned that “there was a philosophy in some circles that if you
can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with
us.” But it is going to happen with him. The reason so many people
lose health insurance under his plan is because they can’t afford it,
and under Trumpcare, if you can’t afford it, you don’t get it.

Trump promised he would make sure everyone had health insurance plans
with “much lower deductibles.” The AHCA removes regulations stopping
insurers from offering yet higher deductibles than they do now, and
then it shrinks and redesigns its tax credits to push people into the
new, cheaper, plans. The results are so dystopic, CBO writes, that it
expects millions of people to end up in “policies that would not cover
major medical risks.”

As recently as April 30, Trump told the country that “preexisting
conditions are in the bill — I mandate it.” He said the AHCA has “a
clause that guarantees” protection for anyone with preexisting
conditions. In fact, the crucial provision that permitted it to clear
the House allows states to waive the Affordable Care Act’s protections
for preexisting conditions.

The CBO predicts that about a sixth of states would use those waivers,
and in those states, “less healthy individuals (including those with
preexisting or newly acquired medical conditions) would be unable to
purchase comprehensive coverage with premiums close to those under
current law and might not be able to purchase coverage at all.”

But it’s not just the health care bill. Trump’s budget also represents
a breathtaking reversal on core campaign promises with the same result
— harming vulnerable Americans.

“I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and
I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid,” Trump told the Daily
Signal in May 2015. But his budget cuts Medicaid by $1.49 trillion —
about half its expected budget — and slashes Social Security’s
disability insurance program by $31.4 billion.

During the campaign, Trump said his tax plan was “going to cost me a
fort

[GreenYouth] An award for Gogoi: When institutions of the state do not conduct themselves according to the law, they endanger legitimacy of the state itself

[Sukla Sen]

[Most of all, however, Gogoi’s action was a violation of the right to
life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The army is bound to uphold the Constitution. At all times, its
actions must be aimed at protecting the citizens of the country. Dar
is an Indian citizen.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/kashmir-human-shield-kashmir-stone-pelting-an-award-for-major-nitin-leetul-gogoi-4672323/

An award for Gogoi
When institutions of the state do not conduct themselves according to
the law, they endanger legitimacy of the state itself

By: Editorial | Updated: May 25, 2017 10:11 am

The army chief, General Bipin Rawat, said that whatever the outcome of
of the inquiry, there is no reason for disciplinary action against
Gogoi.

The army’s commendation of Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi, the officer who
tied Farooq Ahmed Dar, a Kashmiri artisan, to an army jeep’s bonnet
and paraded him, apparently using him as a human shield for his troops
against stone-pelters, is a troubling move. For one, it pre-empted due
process — the army’s own internal inquiry into the circumstances of
the officer’s action. The army chief, General Bipin Rawat, said that
whatever the outcome of of the inquiry, there is no reason for
disciplinary action against Gogoi.

Only last week, India made a case for the importance of due process at
the International Court of Justice in its legal battle to save
Kulbhushan Jadhav, sentenced to death on charges of spying by a
Pakistani military court. India also invoked the Vienna Convention and
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. There is no
evidence that Dar was a stone-pelter.

In fact, by all accounts, he was among the pitifully small number of
Kashmiris who defied the mood on the ground to vote in the Srinagar
parliamentary by-election held on that day. Gogoi’s action was also a
violation of the ICCPR that lays down that no one shall be subjected
to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Most of all, however, Gogoi’s action was a violation of the right to
life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The army is bound to uphold the Constitution. At all times, its
actions must be aimed at protecting the citizens of the country. Dar
is an Indian citizen.

Justifying torture or the degrading use of one civilian as something
that helped to save hundreds of lives, including those of the troops
under Gogoi’s command, raises more questions than it answers. Is it
being suggested here that Gogoi’s only other option was to shoot into
a crowd, to kill? When institutions of the state do not conduct
themselves according to the law, they endanger the legitimacy of the
state itself.

General Bipin Rawat has said Gogoi was given the award “to ensure the
confidence level of the officer and others operating in a similar
environment”. This should rightly raise concern about the message it
has sent out to troops deployed in Kashmir and in other theatres in
the country about the limits of acceptable conduct for the world’s
third largest professional army. Just as importantly, it should raise
concerns about the message it sends out to an already alienated people
in the Valley.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] 'Agents of anger: Are celebrities like Abhijeet Bhattacharya and Paresh Rawal inciting more hatred on social media?': Indian Express Lead Edit Today

[Sukla Sen]

[On May 22, Abhijeet Bhattacharya spewed insults to some female
Twitter users, in particular, JNU student-activist Shehla Rashid. He
wrote to Shehla, “There is rumour she took money for two hours and
didn’t satisfy the client... Big racket. [sic]” A complaint was filed
thereafter and Abhijeet’s Twitter account was suspended.

(But quite unfortunately, though rather on expected lines, there is no
police action, as yet, on this ground.)]

http://www.asianage.com/entertainment/bollywood/250517/agents-of-anger.html

Published : May 25, 2017, 12:07 am IST Updated : May 25, 2017, 4:06 am IST

Singer Abhijeet Bhattacharya has championed the case of putting one’s
foot in the mouth ever so often. The crooner has had a long history of
ranting on the micro-blogging site. On May 22, Abhijeet Bhattacharya
spewed insults to some female Twitter users, in particular, JNU
student-activist Shehla Rashid. He wrote to Shehla, “There is rumour
she took money for two hours and didn’t satisfy the client... Big
racket. [sic]” A complaint was filed thereafter and Abhijeet’s Twitter
account was suspended.

In 2016 too, he had written quite a few tweets, which were brazenly
xenophobic, chauvinistic and anything but cultured, coming from a
cultural icon. “U not proud of Indian? Wats your breed? U sk pakis..I
fk Pakis, U lick..I kick, dnt block just wait”[sic], read one of his
tweets from February, 2016.

One of his spats with a journalist also had him arrested for a few
hours. He had drawn flak for his posts on Salman Khan’s hit-an-run
case after he posted: Kutta rd pe soyega kutte ki maut marega, roads
garib ke baap ki nahi hai i as homles an year nvr slept on rd
@BeingSalmanKhan @sonakshisinha [sic].

Abhijeet Bhattacharya
Abhijeet Bhattacharya

However, seems like he has not lost his touch to deliberately  incite
hatred. Abhijeet tweeted in solidarity with an equally imbecilic tweet
from actor-turned-BJP MLA Paresh Rawal on Sunday night, and then the
abuse towards Shehla began.

Almost a day later , after vehement lashbacks from Twitterati,
Abhijeet’s handle was suspended. While many have welcomed the move,
several others are calling the suspension a biased act. Many have come
out in support of the singer with hashtag #IstandWithAbhijeet, which
started trending on the site. Meanwhile, Sonu Nigam had also voiced
his opinion, but ended up deleting his account.

“What happened with Abhijeet’s Twitter account was long overdue. In
fact, I was one of the people who helped deactivate it by reporting
abuse on his tweets. The problem is that, his Twitter handle getting
deactivated does not really mean anything in the long run unless some
stricter action is taken,” says filmmaker Karan Anshuman.

However, this is not the first time Abhijeet has invited trouble. Last
year, AAP spokesperson, Preeti Sharma Menon registered a complaint
against the singer, which led him to be arrested and later released on
bail. “The cyber crime branch hasn’t done much since then,” says
Preeti. Abhijeet was booked under Section 500, 509 of IPC and 67 of IT
Act. “However, as we speak, I am writing a fresh letter to the DCP of
Mumbai Cyber Cell.”

She continues, “What’s most disturbing is the fact that celebrities
like Paresh Rawal, Abhijeet and Sonu Nigam sit in their
air-conditioned bungalows and send out such hate messages. There are
people who will fall prey to more violence. They are the influencers
of our country, and if they behave in such a way, then we are heading
in an extremely wrong direction.”

Sonu Nigam
Sonu Nigam

When we tried to get in touch with Abhijeet, he messaged asking the
reporter to call after ten minutes, however, when called, he didn’t
answer.

“In most democracies abroad,” points Karan, “saying the kinds of
things that he, and Paresh Rawal for that matter, have said, would
have resulted in getting debarred from committees and alienation at
least and some legal action as well, when it goes to the extent that
it has with Abhijeet.”

Rahul Ram from Indian Ocean has a matter-of-fact approach to the
debacle. “These guys follow an ideology which prefer aggression. Look
at all of them. It is unfortunate that we are expecting anything
better out of them. Didn’t Paresh Rawal spew venom on some fake news?
But unfortunately this is their way of diverting our attention from
the more serious issues at hand,” laments Rahul. However, not everyone
is buying the ideology, according to him. “There are two sides to it.
You also have artistes who are vehemently opposing Paresh and
Abhijeet’s stance. The most disturbing fact is, this aggression and
inciting the mob will go on for at least another good ten years,” he
points out, half-jokingly.

Early on May 24, singer Shaan, a Abhijeet and Sonu Nigam’s
contemporary, tweeted: “We understand the frustration and hopelessness
that You feel.. bhai I can only urge and request you to stay and
spread the Love @sonunigam.” (sic) However, Shaan was unavailable for
any further comments.

“You have a very disbalanced n

[GreenYouth] Green energy’s battery explosion

[Sukla Sen]

[It’s not news that the world must rapidly transform its energy
systems if it’s to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Nor is
it news that a giant obstacle to energy transformation is the
intermittency of solar and wind power. (As no doubt you’ve heard, the
sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow.) Here’s the
news: Large battery factories are coming on line very fast and appear
ready to send energy storage prices tumbling precipitously.
Today in Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel oversees groundbreaking at
a $540 million Daimler plant where lithium-ion batteries will be
assembled. Large battery facilities are also planned in Sweden,
Hungary, and Poland. US electric-car firm Tesla, meanwhile, even
before it finishes its giant, $5-billion “Gigafactory” in Nevada, is
working on four additional Gigafactories.]

http://thebulletin.org/green-energy%E2%80%99s-battery-explosion10781

22 MAY 2017

Green energy’s battery explosion

By Lucien Crowder

It’s not news that the world must rapidly transform its energy systems
if it’s to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Nor is it news
that a giant obstacle to energy transformation is the intermittency of
solar and wind power. (As no doubt you’ve heard, the sun doesn’t
always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow.) Here’s the news: Large
battery factories are coming on line very fast and appear ready to
send energy storage prices tumbling precipitously.

Today in Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel oversees groundbreaking at
a $540 million Daimler plant where lithium-ion batteries will be
assembled. Large battery facilities are also planned in Sweden,
Hungary, and Poland. US electric-car firm Tesla, meanwhile, even
before it finishes its giant, $5-billion “Gigafactory” in Nevada, is
working on four additional Gigafactories.

Battery production on such a scale is bound to drive down costs.
According to a Bloomberg outfit called New Energy Finance, global
battery manufacturing capacity is set to double within four years—and
prices for lithium-ion batteries will drop more than 40 percent over
the same time. Electric cars, Bloomberg claims, could be cheaper than
fuel-burning models within 10 years.

But wait! An even rosier evaluation comes from the investment bank
UBS, which bought a Chevy Bolt, took it apart to examine its power
train, and determined that electric vehicles are much cheaper to
produce than previously believed. According to UBS, the total cost of
owning an electric car in Europe will draw even with the cost of
owning a conventional vehicle as soon as next year.

Clean-energy news is coming so fast, you’d think it was a White House scandal.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] The Changing Face of Modi Regime: Hardening Hindutva and "Nationalism" Acquiring a Populist Edge: Two Laudatory yet Insightful Assessments

[Sukla Sen]

[Strutting in a Rs. 10 lakh (?) golden Namabali suit in the close
proximity of the then US President Barack Obama, was closely followed
by the near-complete wash out in Delhi assembly election.
The persistent, but eventually abandoned, attempts to scrap the land
acqusition act to favour the state and the money-bags came the
resounding defeat in Bihar. (Of course, there was a Mahagathbandhan.)

The astute politician that Modi is, triggered a change of tack -
limited in substance but powerful in terms of propaganda blitz.
The symbolic milestone being the much riled demonetisation.
That put across a pro-poor, anti-rich and anti-corrupt image of Modi -
sort of a new, refurbished Modi, pretty much effectively.
Quite a few other measure have followed.
Loan waiver for (a major section of) UP farmers is just one.

Simultaneously, going on the brutal attacks in the name of Gau Raksha
and Anti-Romeo brigades etc.

And the "Nationalist" edge is further sharpened in the aggressive
postures vis-a-vis Pakistan, and also China.
(The latest claim of "punitive strikes" across the LoC, award for
Major Gogoi and boycott of BRI forum in China are just three
illustrative examples.)]

I/II.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/modi-government/news/three-years-of-modi-government-hindutva-and-pro-poor-message-corners-opposition/articleshow/58848189.cms

NDA@3: Hindutva and pro-poor message corner opposition

Subodh Ghildiyal | TNN | Updated: May 26, 2017, 08.17 AM IST

The opposition's elusive search for a coherent narrative to take on
BJP has defined Narendra Modi's three years in office — a desperation
that now appears to border on a crisis in the wake of the saffron
sweep of UP.

Modi's stint at the top started as an unprecedented blend of hardline
Hindutva and aspirations. The saffron helmsman has added a 'pro-poor'
plank to his outreach, further shrinking the space for rivals to
manoeuvre.

On NDA's three years in office, 'marginalisation of the opposition' is
the common refrain in conversations among politicians and
commentators. From the time its stars rose in mid-2014 to the high of
the UP results in March 2017, BJP has had its ups and downs.
The party followed up its Lok Sabha victory with a string of assembly
wins but stumbled at two challenges from imaginative rivals — Nitish
Kumar-Lalu Prasad in Bihar and Arvind Kejriwal in Delhi.

But just when Modi's appeal appeared to be losing its magical touch,
BJP won critical battles against Congress and capped it with massive
victories in UP and Uttarakhand.
Opposition leaders concede that post-UP, it is crisis time.
BJP bounced back from the Delhi and Bihar defeats by winning Assam on
its own in 2015. Its success in civic and local polls even on turfs
where it was not considered strong attests to Modi's appeal and
agenda.

The Assam and UP wins underscore that it has not been hurt by the
antipathy of Muslim voters — a worrying sign for rivals. The
opposition appears to be groping in the dark.
Leaders admit to the lack of a grand catchline around which a strategy
of campaigning and collecting votes can be woven. Most of all, the
opposition lack a mascot to match the man who has saturated the air
waves and the internet with his relentless campaign. Rahul Gandhi is
yet to demonstrate he can step up to the plate.

Under Modi, BJP has laid a multi-level trap for rivals. It has been
able to touch off a Hindutva polarisation, which in India's social
composition, can hand the party a big advantage. No amount of outrage
over communal violence or the over-aggressive street tactics of
saffron stormtroopers has made the party back down on its core
strategy of polarisation.

Even Modi's 'shamshan-kabristan' and Diwali-Ramzan themes during the
UP campaign were seen as an attempt to cater to base sentiment, an
indication of what lesser leaders countrywide would be doing. Here
again, the lessons for the opposition, which have often calculated
that majority-polarisation is more unlikely than
minority-consolidation, are sobering.

BJP's harsh campaign notes effectively tapped into resentment against
the 'appeasement' of Muslims. The saffron camp's success in using the
outrage over communalism and intolerance to polarise Hindus has
visibly killed the 'secular' camp's appetite for raising issues like
unrest in universities. When BJP last ruled the Centre with Atal
Bihari Vajpayee as PM, Congress and the opposition used their
credentials as the champion of the 'aam aadmi' to successfully block
BJP's rule that had come to be identified with the middle class and
the upper castes.

II.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/modi-government/news/surge-of-nationalist-pride-with-a-polarising-edge/articleshow/58849964.cms

NDA@3: Surge of nationalist pride with a polarising edge

Rajeev Deshpande & Sidhartha | TNN | Updated: May 26, 2017, 07.57 AM

BJP has always played the "nationalism" card, but it has not been as
front-and centre as it is under the Narendra Modi-Amit Shah
dispensation. The Prime Minister's

[GreenYouth] Rahul Gandhi Denied Entry Into Saharanpur: Gandhi was supposed visit Saharanpur today

[Sukla Sen]

[Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi has been denied permission to
visit Saharanpur, where a caste conflict had erupted in which many
Dalits were allegedly targeted.
The confirmation of this development has been given by Additional
Director General of Police Law and Order Aditya Mishra to ANI.]

http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/05/26/rahul-gandhi-denied-entry-into-saharanpur_a_22110585/

Rahul Gandhi Denied Entry Into Saharanpur
Gandhi was supposed visit Saharanpur today.

 26/05/2017 2:19 PM IST | Updated 8 hours ago

Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi has been denied permission to
visit Saharanpur, where a caste conflict had erupted in which many
Dalits were allegedly targeted.

The confirmation of this development has been given by Additional
Director General of Police Law and Order Aditya Mishra to ANI.

Gandhi was supposed visit Saharanpur to take stock of the prevailing situation.

Clashes occurred on Tuesday after Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP)
supremo Mayawati's visit to Saharanpur, where one person was killed
and several others were injured.

The State Government also announced to give compensation of Rs 15 lakh
to relatives of the person, who was killed during this incident.

In the wake of clashes between two communities in Saharanpur, the Yogi
Adityanath Government on Thursday transferred 174 Sub-Divisional
Magistrates.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) also asked the Uttar Pradesh
Government to submit report on the recent worrisome clashes in
Saharanpur.

Earlier, Saharanpur District Magistrate Nagendra Parsad Singh was
sacked after he was unable to control the clashes between two
communities in the area.

On May 5, one person was killed and 16 people, including a head
constable, were injured in clashes between the Dalits and the Rajputs
in Shabbirpur and Simlana villages.

Reports said that the police stopped the Maharana Pratap procession
after some Dalits informed the police. This angered Rajputs, who
allegedly resorted to violence.

Also on HuffPost India



-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] At the End of Third Year of Modi Regime: Hardening Face of Hindutva (and Sharpening of Other Menacing Features together with a Dash of Populism): Latest Being Virtual Ban on Cattle Slaugh

[Sukla Sen]

[Strutting in a Rs. 10 lakh (?) golden Namabali suit in the close
proximity of the then US President Barack Obama, was closely followed
by the near-complete wash out in Delhi assembly election.
(Apparently, the tag - 'Suit Boot ki Sarkar', stuck.)
Soon after the persistent, but eventually dropped, attempts to scrap
the land acqusition act to favour the state and the moneybags came the
resounding defeat in Bihar. (Of course, there was a Mahagathbandhan.)

The astute politician that Modi is, triggered a change of tack -
limited in substance but powerful in terms of propaganda blitz.
The symbolic milestone being the much derided demonetisation.
That put across a pro-poor, anti-rich and anti-corrupt image of Modi -
sort of a new, refurbished Modi, pretty much effectively.
Quite a few other measure have followed.
Loan waiver for (a major section of) UP farmers is just one.

Simultaneously, going on the rampage by Gau Rakshaks, Anti-Romeo brigades etc.
And the "Nationalist" edge is further sharpened in the aggressive
postures vis-a-vis Pakistan, and also China.
(The latest claim of "punitive strikes" across the LoC, award for
Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi and boycott of BRI forum in China are just
three illustrative examples.)

All at the same time, rises a menacing surveillance state, under the
cover and through the instrument of Aadhhar, even if this chilling
dimension remains almost, though not altogether, unnoticed.

The latest move, brought in almost surreptitiously, would evidently
hit hard the livelihoods of a large number of people and affect the
food plates of even far larger number.
Quite ironically, the subject gazette notification is done by the
Union Environment Ministry, which is otherwise busy dismantling
erstwhile existing environmental regulations, almost with gay abandon,
in the presumed ineterest of "development".]

I/III.
http://www.news18.com/news/india/10-points-decoding-centres-countrywide-ban-on-cattle-slaughter-1413389.html

10 Points Decoding Centre's India-wide Ban On Cattle Slaughter

News18.com

Updated:May 27, 2017, 9:01 AM IST

10 Points Decoding Centre's India-wide Ban On Cattle Slaughter
According to the new rules, cattle cannot be brought to an animal
market for sale for slaughter. (File photo/Reuters)

New Delhi: In a surprise gazette notification, the environment
ministry has banned cattle slaughter and introduced restrictions on
the sale of cattle to prevent their killing. A gazette notification,
titled Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock
Markets) Rules, 2017 by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change states that no one can bring cattle to an animal market
unless he or she has furnished a written declaration that the cattle
will not be sold for the purpose of slaughter. Further, upon sale of
cattle, the animal market committee will take an “undertaking” that
the animals are for agricultural purposes and not for slaughter.

Here are 10 points you need to know to make sense of the debate around it:

1. Rule: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock
Markets) Rules, 2017

2. Primary Act: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

3. The Rule applies to the whole of India, except the State of Jammu and Kashmir

4. Cattle cannot be brought to an animal market for sale for slaughter.

5. Animal Market consists of: Marketplaces where animals are brought
from other places for sale or auction. It includes animal fairs, or
areas adjoining a market or a slaughterhouse

6. Cattle as defined: A bovine animal including bulls, bullocks, cows,
buffalos, steers, heifers and calves and includes camels

7. All existing animal markets will have to be registered within three
months with the District Animal Market Monitoring Committee by making
an application to the Committee

8. Cruel and harmful practices have been prohibited for animals
including, painting of horns, ear cutting buffaloes, making animals
lay on hard ground without proper bedding

9. Purchaser of cattle cannot sell animal for slaughter or sacrifice
the animal for religious purposes

10. The rule mandates the appointment of Veterinary inspectors who
shall screen the animals before they enter the market. The inspector
shall also check whether animals are being transported in trucks which
are authorised by law to carry animals.

First Published: May 27, 2017, 7:30 AM IST

II/III.
http://www.news18.com/news/india/environment-ministry-bans-cattle-slaughter-across-india-restrictions-on-sale-too-1413225.html

Centre Puts Ban-Like Restrictions On Cattle Slaughter Across India

Tushar Dhara, Debayan Roy
Updated:May 26, 2017, 6:19 PM IST

Centre Puts Ban-Like Restrictions On Cattle Slaughter Across India
Representative image

New Delhi: In a move aimed at curbing cattle slaughter, the
Environment Ministry has banned sale of cattle from marketplaces for
the purpose of culling.

A gazette notification, titled Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
(Regulation of Livestock Markets) R

[GreenYouth] Two Interesting Assessment of the Three Years of Modi regime (and What It Tells about Ourselves)

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
https://scroll.in/article/838700/shiv-visvanathan-four-ways-i-underestimated-narendra-modi-three-years-ago

OPINION

Shiv Visvanathan: Four ways I was wrong about Narendra Modi three years ago
The Indian prime minister has contempt for intellectuals because they
got him wrong. They did.

Yesterday · 08:00 am
Shiv Visvanathan

A report on the completion of three years of the Narendra Modi regime
should lead to a moment of reflectiveness. A report has a sense of
being objective, distanced, a list of observations by an observer
dispassionately watching a regime. There is a dualism here that we
must break because a report, rather than being objective, is a
dialogue between storyteller and subject. The storyteller is not the
analyst but part of the case study that he is reporting. He has to ask
critically whether his own narrative has changed in these three years.
Did he make mistakes in assessment or description? Where did he miss
out on the total picture?

1) Underestimating Modi
First, I think one of the big mistakes I made was in underestimating
Modi. The scale and size of his victory, and his impact on India is
stupendous. It is not that I was marginally wrong in assessing the
power of the majority. I was colossally wrong in sensing that Modi, as
a Rorschach of middle class majoritarian Indians, wields unbelievable
power. Modi has contempt for intellectuals because they got him wrong.
They did. But I think that the power of intellectual life resides in
recovery, in rebuilding critique in more creative ways. Intellectuals
confronted violence at a different scale, and were also surprised by
the silence around Modi. It is as if the Opposition lost its voice,
and dissent its tongue. The marginalisation of dissent, and the power
of celebration around Modi is worrying. The irony is that we saw a
monster being created. We also saw the middle class loving the
monster, and realising that the monster was us. Modi, in that sense,
was not just a figment of the communal mind, but a representative of
middle class resentment, which needed nationalist jingoism to cover up
its inferiority. He belonged more to the people than intellectuals
did.

2) Misreading middle-class India
The second phenomenon we did not understand was the Indian ability to
normalise violence and be happy with authoritarianism. Modi, Bollywood
style, believed that goodness was weak, socialism was slow and that he
needed to create an assertive aggressive Indian for whom the end
justified the means. Middle class India is quite happy to be Chinese,
Indian style, to argue that democracy beyond a point does not make
sense. Majoritarian rule is middle class India’s answer to the success
of authoritarianism elsewhere. India is now committed to erasing
plurality in the name of development. The normalisation of brutality
and violence is not something we anticipated fully. We somehow felt
that democracy would curb the majoritarian evil. We did not realise
that one of the ironies of a democracy tired of itself is that it adds
to violence, and evil. Many social scientists trapped in secular
concepts were ambushed by the dangers of Modi. Admittedly, social
science did not function as a critique, an early warning system about
Modi. The only two domains that did – marketing and management – had
already been appropriated by Modi.

3) Over-ideologising Modi
Third, in narrating Modi’s rise to power several people
over-ideologised him, seeing him as communally obsessed. It took us
some time to realise that the only aphrodisiac Modi responds to is
power. Modi loves power, and wants more of it. In their love for
power, Modi and his right-hand man Amit Shah work in tandem. They are
ideological when they need to be, but it is the pragmatism of the BJP
that has surprised this commentator. As they chart their invasion of
the North East, or their plan for South India, it becomes clear that
Modi is quite happy with politicians crossing over from any party.
Modi realises that the loss of power corrupts absolutely. Second, his
pragmatism of playing to film stars long after their careers are dead
or moribund, shows his sense of the fan club being the equivalent of
the cadre and shakha. Shah and Modi showed astuteness at a tactical
level that we did not expect. There was a realisation that it was not
the movements devoted to social justice that they were committed to.
Modi and Shah were more interested in movie stars playing out the
fiction of social justice. Modi understood that democracy in India
needed the myths of justice enacted by these fading stars more than
the realism of politics.

4) Propaganda guru
Finally, Modi’s understanding of the information society – in which
the creation, distribution, and manipulation of information is a
significant political, economic and cultural activity – and its logic
was more acute than I imagined. He realised that unlike knowledge,
information allowed for erasure and amnesia. What he created through
development was an erasure of the 

[GreenYouth] Donald Trump Declines to Commit to Paris Climate Agreement at the Conclusion of G-7 Meet, Gets Isolated 6-1, Defers His 'Final Decision'

[Sukla Sen]

[While the Paris Climate Agreement itself has been considered far less
than satisfactory by the environmentalists, by and large; an outright
torpedoing of the accord cannot be deemed anything but an unmitigated
disaster for the humanity as a whole.
That's the grim truth we're faced with today.

Just to recall, Trump had called climate change a "Chinese hoax". (He
had tweeted: "The concept of global warming was created by and for the
Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." See:
.)
Apparently, he still holds on to that and is thereby pushing the
humanity to the very brink of extinction.
That's a criminal act of humongous proportions.]

I/II.
[In a final communique, the Group of Seven industrialized countries
said that the United States "is not in a position to join the
consensus." The other six members reaffirmed their commitment to
swiftly implement the 2015 accord to limit greenhouse gas emissions.]

http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/donald-trump-fails-to-commit-to-paris-climate-agreement-as-he-concludes-first-overseas-trip-1704747

Donald Trump Fails To Commit To Paris Climate Agreement As He
Concludes First Overseas Trip
The G-7 summit marked the last stop of Trump's first overseas trip as
president, a grueling nine-day tour that included high-level
discussions in the Middle East and with NATO, as well as a meeting
with Pope Francis at the Vatican.

World | © 2017 The Washington Post | Karen Deyoung, Philip Rucker, The
Washington Post | Updated: May 28, 2017 08:17 IST

Donald Trump tweeted that he would announce final decision on Paris
climate agreement "next week."

HIGHLIGHTS
Will announce final decision 'next week', Donald Trump tweets
Trump was on a 9-day trip; G-7 Summit was his last stop
'We have made extraordinary gains on this historic trip,' he said

 President Donald Trump failed to commit to remaining within the Paris
climate agreement during a two-day meeting with world leaders that
ended here Saturday, but he tweeted that he was still considering it
and would announce a final decision "next week."

***In a final communique, the Group of Seven industrialized countries
said that the United States "is not in a position to join the
consensus." The other six members reaffirmed their commitment to
swiftly implement the 2015 accord to limit greenhouse gas
emissions.*** [Emphasis added.]

The G-7 summit marked the last stop of Trump's first overseas trip as
president, a grueling nine-day tour that included high-level
discussions in the Middle East and with NATO, as well as a meeting
with Pope Francis at the Vatican.

After leaving this picturesque town on the rugged Sicilian hillsides,
Trump went by helicopter to the U.S. Naval Air Station at Sigonella on
the island to board Air Force One for the flight home. He summed up
his journey in a rousing campaign-style speech to assembled U.S.
service members at the base, promising it would pave the way for "a
lot of strength" and "a lot of peace."

"From Saudi Arabia to Israel to NATO to the G-7, we made extraordinary
gains on this historic trip to advance the security and prosperity of
the United States, our friends and our allies," Trump said. "And we
paved the way for a new era of cooperation among the nations of the
world to defeat the common enemy of terrorism."

Trump reflected on how many places he had visited, saying, "We have
been gone for close to nine days . . . and I think we hit a home run,
no matter where we are."

Earlier, in an off-camera briefing for reporters, National Economic
Council Director Gary Cohn said of the climate discussions, "We're all
trying to get to the right place, respectful of each other." He
described a "very robust conversation . . . a lot of give and take" in
discussions that included leaders from Japan, Britain, France,
Germany, Canada and Italy.

Asked if Trump had given a sign of which way he was leaning on the
accord, which he called a job killer and vowed to rip up during his
campaign, Cohn said, "I don't know."

After a first round of meetings Friday, Cohn, who favors retaining the
agreement, had said Trump's position was "evolving."

National security adviser H.R. McMaster, who joined the briefing with
Cohn, said that Trump had "delivered on all three" of his core
objectives for the trip: reaffirming American global leadership and
alliances, solidifying "key relationships" with world leaders, and
bringing a message of tolerance and unity against terrorism to
Muslims, Jews and Christians.

Both McMaster and Cohn refused to respond to questions about Trump
senior adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner, the subject of a new
controversy roiling Washington after a Washington Post article
revealed that he had discussed with the Russian ambassador to the
United States the possibility of establishing a back-channel line of
communications with Russia.

"I'm not prepared to talk about it," McMaster said, adding that he and
Cohn were p

[GreenYouth] Sounds of silence as Russia probe pierces Donald Trump’s inner circle: Donald Trump readies to combat concerns over aides’ Russia ties, including reports that Jared Kushner sought a secre

[Sukla Sen]

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/mYpNC8s4vOrTFcpcoNwbuO/Sounds-of-silence-as-Russia-probe-pierces-Donald-Trumps-inn.html

Sounds of silence as Russia probe pierces Donald Trump’s inner circle
Donald Trump readies to combat concerns over aides’ Russia ties,
including reports that Jared Kushner sought a secret communications
line with Moscow

AFP

US President Donald Trump with his son-in-law and senior adviser Jared
Kushner. Trump has called the Russia probe ’the greatest witch hunt’
in American political history. Photo: Reuters

Washington: Donald Trump, just back from his first international trip
as US president, geared up to combat concerns on Sunday over aides’
Russia ties, including explosive reports that his son-in-law sought a
secret communications line with Moscow.

The latest furore was stirred up after The Washington Post reported
late Friday that Jared Kushner—arguably Trump’s closest White House
aide, and husband to the president’s eldest daughter Ivanka—made a
pre-inauguration proposal to the Russian ambassador to set up a
secret, bug-proof link with the Kremlin.

Kushner, 36, even suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the
US to protect such a channel from monitoring, The Post said, quoting
US officials briefed on intelligence reports.

The report, if confirmed, would raise new questions about the Trump
team’s relationship with the Russians, who US intelligence agencies
say tried to sway the 2016 US presidential election in Trump’s favour.

News reports said the White House, reeling from the explosive
developments in the long-running Russia saga, is creating a new
rapid-fire communications unit to respond to the controversy, led by
Kushner, senior presidential adviser Steve Bannon and White House
chief of staff Reince Priebus.

After some delay, a senior Trump administration official en route back
to Washington briefed reporters for almost 25 minutes, on matters from
anti-terror cooperation to the administration’s view that the summit
had been a smashing success — despite huge differences on climate
change.

Trump plans to make an announcement within the week on his climate
position, the official said.

But the said official did not address the Kushner reports on Saturday.

Trump then returned to Washington on Saturday night from his first
overseas trip, to the Middle East and Europe. Accompanied by first
lady Melania, Trump waved to reporters as he made his way into the
White House but made no comment.

National security adviser H.R. McMaster refused to talk about the
allegations. But he said that in general, “We have backchannel
communication with a number of countries. What that allows you to do
is communicate in a discrete manner.”

“I would not be concerned about it,” he added.

But a former head of the US National Security Agency harshly condemned
Kushner’s alleged effort to set up a secret communications line,
saying if it is true, it would reveal a dangerous degree of ignorance
or naivety.

“What manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion, contempt would
you have to have to think that doing this with the Russian ambassador
was a good or appropriate idea?” Michael Hayden said on CNN.

He said he leaned toward “naivete” as an explanation, though he did
not find it comforting.

Malcolm Nance, a retired naval officer and expert on terrorism and
intelligence, said: “This is now sinister. There is no way this can be
explained, from the intelligence perspective.”

“That is indicative of espionage activity of an American citizen that
is working in league with a hostile government,” he told MSNBC.

The Washington Post said Kushner’s secret communications proposal was
made on 1 or 2 December at Trump Tower in New York, according to
intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by US
officials.

Michael Flynn, who was Trump’s national security adviser for just 24
days before being fired amid questions about meetings he held with the
Russian ambassador, was also present, the newspaper reported.

The Post said the Russian ambassador to the US, Sergei Kislyak, was
surprised by the future White House aide’s idea of a secret channel
and passed it on to the Kremlin.

The New York Times said the channel was never established.

Trump returned to Washington to face a cascade of other worries
related to the Russia probe in the coming days, including expected
testimony by fired former FBI director James Comey before a Senate
committee.

In another development, The New York Times reported on Friday that
Oleg Deripaska, a Russian once close to Trump’s former campaign
manager Paul Manafort, has offered to cooperate with congressional
bodies probing alleged Russian election meddling.

Kushner boasts an enormous portfolio of domestic and international
responsibilities underscoring his importance as Trump’s chief
aide-de-camp, despite having no experience in politics before the 2016
White House race.

He is the only person currently in the White House known to be under
investigation.

The P

[GreenYouth] 'A nation of vigilantes - Lynch mob republic': Mukul Kesavan

[Sukla Sen]

[These three years have seen the State fuse with the street to create
a vigilante nation. If India's first national movement was a
mobilization against foreign rulers, the new nationalism, the
principal style of which is vigilantism, is directed at the enemy
within.]

https://www.telegraphindia.com/1170528/jsp/opinion/story_153811.jsp

Sunday , May 28 , 2017

A nation of vigilantes

- Lynch mob republic
Mukul Kesavan

These three years have seen the State fuse with the street to create a
vigilante nation. If India's first national movement was a
mobilization against foreign rulers, the new nationalism, the
principal style of which is vigilantism, is directed at the enemy
within.

'Vigilantism' used in this way needs an explanation. Vigilantes are
ordinarily defined as people who take the law into their own hands.
For example, Amitabh Bachchan (with the aid of Manmohan Desai and
Prakash Mehra) dominated the box office in the Seventies and Eighties
as the vigilante hero who tried to set an irredeemably corrupt world
to rights. Films like Zanjeer, Deewaar and Coolie defined a new genre
in Hindi cinema.

Plain vanilla vigilantism of the Bachchan sort is different from
vigilante nationalism in two ways. First, it's a form of individual
heroism whereas contemporary Indian vigilantism is organized and
collective. Secondly, the filmi vigilante is at odds with the 'system'
and the corrupt State that underwrites it. The modern Indian
vigilante, on the other hand, is in a patron-client partnership with
the State; this is not an adversarial relationship.

Modern vigilantes bend the system to their will and take the law into
their hands with the tacit or explicit blessing of the State and in
the name of the virtuous Nation. This is a Nation that is
insufficiently realized because its coming into being has been
thwarted by a false nationalism and a corruptly administered republic.
The new vigilante is insurgent in this thwarted Nation's cause.

×
Even under Narendra Modi's new management the routines of the State
and its institutions - courts, bureaucracies, uniformed services -
aren't sufficiently responsive to the cause of the Nation. They need
to be aided by organized citizen auxiliaries and revitalized by the
spirit of vigilante nationalism which is simply an expression of the
popular will, unmuffled by bureaucratic flannel.

Since we're talking about State-vigilante coordination, it's important
in this context to distinguish vigilante nationalism from vigilante
counter-insurgency. Vigilantes of the sort who belong to militias like
Salwa Judum or Sulfa or the Ikhwan force are renegade mercenaries.
They are creatures of the State who serve a counter-insurgency
purpose. Vigilante nationalists, on the other hand, are the soulmates
of an ideological party, bound to it by a common purpose: the forging
of a Hindu nation.

Yogi Adityanath's provincial government is the first fruit of this
fusion of the State and the street. Adityanath is best understood as
Uttar Pradesh's Chief Vigilante. His democratic mandate legitimizes
his private vigilante militia, the Hindu Yuva Vahini. The anti-Romeo
squads who police Hindu-Muslim romance, the cow goondas who patrol
UP's highways attacking cattle transporters and butchers are examples
of the state government of India's most populous province informally
sub-contracting out law enforcement functions to avowedly Hindu
militias.

The political patrons of these vigilante nationalists sometimes
prioritize the galvanizing of the nationalist street over the
maintenance of law and order. There have been a series of beatings and
lynchings in states ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party which have
resulted in Muslims at the receiving end being booked and their
assailants defended by BJP office bearers, ministers and chief
ministers.

Undeterred by the violence, BJP state governments have made the cattle
trade conditional on so much paperwork that they have effectively laid
the groundwork for protection rackets run by vigilante militias. These
governments have raised the jail tariffs for cow slaughter and
effectively made cow vigilantes licensed predators. Yogi Adityanath,
whose elevation to UP's chief ministership was justified by the BJP by
citing his talent for law and order, seems to have temporarily ceded
control of his state's highways from Noida to Saharanpur to thugs with
murder and arson and rape on their minds.

One reason for this is that the BJP understands that political parties
of its sort don't live and grow by policy and law-and-order alone. As
the BJP expands its footprint and its membership under Amit Shah's
stewardship, it needs camaraderie and purpose. The Hindutvavadi
Right's militias are its violent satyagrahis. They are nationalist
foot soldiers of a different time, pledged to the service of a
different sort of nation. Unlike anti-colonial nationalists, they own
the State already, their project is to remake the nation's citizenry
in their own image, and to subordinate those

[GreenYouth] Palestinian prisoners in Israel suspend hunger strike: Deal struck with Israel after intense talks hailed as 'victory' for Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike for 40 days

[Sukla Sen]

["After intense negotiations, a compromise was reached on the just
demands of the prisoners and based on the agreement, the details of
which will be disclosed later, the strike has ended," Jamal Mheysen, a
member of the central committee of Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas's Fatah movement, said in Ramallah.
"Today, we declare the victory of the prisoners and the Palestinian
people. We declare the triumph of the prisoners in their epic struggle
and fight for freedom and dignity," he added.]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/05/palestinian-prisoners-israel-suspend-hunger-strike-170527074751097.html

 ISRAELI–PALESTINIAN CONFLICT YESTERDAY

Palestinian prisoners in Israel suspend hunger strike
Deal struck with Israel after intense talks hailed as 'victory' for
Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike for 40 days.

Palestinians celebrated in Ramallah after prisoners ended their 40-day
hunger strike [Mohamad Torokman/Reuters]

A mass hunger strike staged by Palestinian prisoners over conditions
in Israeli jails was suspended on Saturday after a deal with Israel,
officials said.

About 1,500 inmates launched the actionon April 17, in one of the
largest such strikes.


What's behind Palestinian prisoners' hunger strike? – Inside Story
The 40-day hunger strike raised tensions with Israel as protests in
support of the strikers spilled over into clashes in the occupied West
Bank and along the Israel-Gaza border.

More than 800 prisoners, who had stuck with the hunger strike until
Saturday, ended it after talks held with the International Committee
for the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Palestinian Authority concluded in an
agreement with Israel, allowing prisoners to receive two visitors per
month.

Issa Karaka, Chairman of Prisoners' Affairs at the Palestine
Liberation Organisation (PLO), confirmed the inmates had agreed to
stop the strike.

WATCH: What's behind Palestinian prisoners' hunger strike?

On Wednesday, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad
al-Hussein urged Israel to improve conditions for Palestinians in its
custody.

Both Karaka and the Israeli Prisons Service did not initially divulge
the full details of the agreement. However, the Prison Service did say
that a second monthly family visit would be reinstated after it had
been cut in the past.

***"After intense negotiations, a compromise was reached on the just
demands of the prisoners and based on the agreement, the details of
which will be disclosed later, the strike has ended," Jamal Mheysen, a
member of the central committee of Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas's Fatah movement, said in Ramallah.*** [Emphasis added.]

***"Today, we declare the victory of the prisoners and the Palestinian
people. We declare the triumph of the prisoners in their epic struggle
and fight for freedom and dignity," he added.*** [Emphasis added.]


The strike was called by Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, the most
high-profile Palestinian jailed in Israel, to protest against solitary
confinement and an Israeli practice of detention without trial that
has been applied to thousands of prisoners since the 1980s.

Other demands included longer and more regular family visits,
landlines installed in prisons and better healthcare.

There are currently 6,500 Palestinian political prisoners held by
Israel, including more than 500 administrative detainees, according to
Jerusalem-based prisoner rights group Addameer.

READ MORE: How my father survived a hunger strike in Israel

Speaking to Al Jazeera from Ramallah, Majed Bamya, who oversees the
prisoner files for the Palestinian foreign ministry, said the outcome
of the hunger strike was a success.

"This was one of the widest and longest Palestinian hunger strikes in
history of the prisoners' movement and it was for basic demands.

"Israeli reaction was that there will not be a dialogue, nothing will
be given. They tried to break the hunger strike by force and utterly
failed. The hunger strikers remained steadfast, dialogue was
established and the demands were met.

"We will have the details in the coming hours."

The Free Marwan Barghouti campaign said in statement that "the
Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike prevailed".

"This is an important step towards full respect of the rights of
Palestinian prisoners under international law. It is also an
indication of the reality of the Israeli occupation, which has left no
option to Palestinian prisoners but to starve themselves to achieve
basic rights they are entitled to under international law," the
statement added.

Barghouti was convicted for his involvement in the second Palestinian
intifada, and sentenced in 2004 to five life terms.

Surveys show many Palestinians want him to be their next president.

Source: Al Jazeera News

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googl

[GreenYouth] Donald Trump eyes White House overhaul, outside lawyers and PR team: Donald Trump on Sunday unleashed a furious flurry of tweets, lashing out at what he called the "fake news" media.

[Sukla Sen]

[President Donald Trump is considering overhauling his White House
staff and bringing back top campaign strategists, frustrated by what
he views as his team’s inability to contain the burgeoning crisis
involving alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Expanding
teams of lawyers and experienced public relations hands are being
recruited to deal with the drumbeat of new revelations about Moscow’s
interference and possible improper dealings with the Trump campaign
and associates.
The disclosures dogged the president during his first trip abroad
since taking office and threaten to overwhelm and stall the agenda for
his young administration. As he mulls outside reinforcements to his
operation, Trump returned late Saturday from his nine-day journey to a
White House seemingly in crisis mode, with a barrage of reports
hitting close to the Oval Office and involving Jared Kushner, his
son-in-law and influential adviser.
A rally planned Thursday in Iowa was postponed due to “an unforeseen
change” in Trump’s schedule.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/world/trump-eyes-white-house-overhaul-outside-lawyers-and-pr-team-4678195/

Donald Trump eyes White House overhaul, outside lawyers and PR team
Donald Trump on Sunday unleashed a furious flurry of tweets, lashing
out at what he called the "fake news" media.

By: AP | Washington | Updated: May 29, 2017 8:38 am

A rally planned Thursday in Iowa was postponed due to “an unforeseen
change” in Trump’s schedule. (Source: AP photo)

***President Donald Trump is considering overhauling his White House
staff and bringing back top campaign strategists, frustrated by what
he views as his team’s inability to contain the burgeoning crisis
involving alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Expanding
teams of lawyers and experienced public relations hands are being
recruited to deal with the drumbeat of new revelations about Moscow’s
interference and possible improper dealings with the Trump campaign
and associates.*** [Emphasis added.]

***The disclosures dogged the president during his first trip abroad
since taking office and threaten to overwhelm and stall the agenda for
his young administration. As he mulls outside reinforcements to his
operation, Trump returned late Saturday from his nine-day journey to a
White House seemingly in crisis mode, with a barrage of reports
hitting close to the Oval Office and involving Jared Kushner, his
son-in-law and influential adviser.
A rally planned Thursday in Iowa was postponed due to “an unforeseen
change” in Trump’s schedule.*** [Emphasis added.]


After maintaining a limited social media presence throughout his trip,
Trump on Sunday unleashed a furious flurry of tweets, lashing out at
what he called the “fake news” media. He focused heavily on leaks —
both those coming out of the White House and an intelligence leak
blamed on Americans about this week’s deadly bombing at a concert in
England.

On the bombing investigation Trump said: “British Prime Minister May
was very angry that the info the U.K. gave to U.S. about Manchester
was leaked. Gave me full details!”
Trump also said that “many of the leaks coming out of the White House
are fabricated lies.” He added that it is “very possible that those
sources don’t exist but are made up by fake news writers.”

Even when authorized, however, top officials in the Trump White House
frequently request anonymity to brief reporters “on background,”
meaning their names will not be disclosed. The latest reports in the
Russia matter said Kushner spoke with Russia’s ambassador to the
United States about setting up secret communications with Moscow
during the presidential transition.

While overseas, Trump’s longtime lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, joined a
still-forming legal team to help the president shoulder the
intensifying investigations into Russian interference in the election
and his associates’ potential involvement. More attorneys with deep
experience in Washington investigations are expected to be added,
along with crisis communication experts, to help the White House in
the weeks ahead.

“They need to quarantine this stuff and put the investigations in a
separate communications operation,” said Jack Quinn, who served as
White House counsel for President Bill Clinton. During the Monica
Lewinsky investigation, the Clinton White House brought on a dedicated
group of lawyers and a created a separate media operation to handle
investigation-related inquiries so they didn’t completely subsume the
president’s agenda.

Trump, according to one person familiar with his thinking, believed he
was facing more of a communications problem than a legal one, despite
the intensifying inquiries. The person, like others, spoke on
condition of anonymity in order to discuss private conversations.

As he mulls changes, Trump has entertained bringing his former
campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, and former deputy campaign
manager, David Bossie, formally back into the fold. Both Lewandowski
and Bossie discussed

[GreenYouth] (BJP's pick) Army chief Bipin Rawat on Kashmir unrest: Wish protesters fired at us instead of pelting stones (and people have to be afraid of us)

[Sukla Sen]

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/army-chief-bipin-rawat-on-human-shield-row/1/964946.html

Army chief Bipin Rawat on Kashmir unrest: Wish protesters fired at us
instead of pelting stones
Indian Army chief General Bipin Rawat today said that he cannot tell
his troops to 'just wait and die' when they are fighting a 'dirty war'
in Kashmir.

IndiaToday.in  | Edited by Dev Goswami
New Delhi, May 28, 2017 | UPDATED 10:42 IST

HIGHLIGHTS
1Can't tell my men to 'wait and die': Gen Rawat.
2Troops need innovative ways to fight Kashmir's 'dirty war': Army chief Rawat.
3Kashmir needs a composite solution, he said.

Indian Army chief General Bipin Rawat today defended his troops over
the human shield controversy saying that his men needed innovative
ways to fight the "dirty war" in Kashmir.
Rawat told PTI that when people were throwing stones and petrol bombs
at Army personnel, he cannot tell his men to 'just wait and die'.

"This is a proxy war and proxy war is a dirty war. It is played in a
dirty way. The rules of engagements are there when the adversary comes
face-to-face and fights with you. It is a dirty war That is where
innovation comes in. You fight a dirty war with innovations," Rawat
told PTI.

"People are throwing stones at us, people are throwing petrol bombs at
us. If my men ask me what do we do, should I say, just wait and die? I
will come with a nice coffin with a national flag and I will send your
bodies home with honour. Is it what I am supposed to tell them as
chief? I have to maintain the morale of my troops who are operating
there," Gen Rawat said.

Rawat went on to indicate that stone pelters had complicated the
security situation in Kashmir, saying his force would find it easier
to quell protests if instead of stones, weapons were used.

"In fact, I wish these people, instead of throwing stones at us, were
firing weapons at us. Then I would have been happy. Then I could do
what I (want to do)," Rawat told PTI.

Saying that the Army cannot run away from its role to provide
security, Rawat said, "Tomorrow elections have to be held in Anantnag
and similar things may happen. If the army does not respond to call
for assistance, then the trust between the people whom we are
protecting, police and army will break."

"That is something I cannot allow to happen. This is what the
militants want. It can create a divide between the army and other
security forces," he said.

'NEED TO FEAR THE ARMY'

He added that the Indian Army is a friendly force and is practising
maximum restraint to deal with the Kashmir situation. Rawat noted that
the force can only do its job if the country fears it.

"Adversaries must be afraid of you and at the same time your people
must be afraid of you. We are a friendly army, but when we are called
to restore law and order, people have to be afraid of us," he said.

Rawat also spoke about the core issue of Kashmir, saying that it is
something that needs a composite solution and is a process in which
everybody will have to get involved.
"It will have to be a composite solution. Everybody will have to get
involved. Army's role is to ensure that violence does not take place
and the common man who is not indulging in this (violence) is
protected," he said, when asked about the solution to the Kashmir
issue.

HUMAN SHIELD CONTROVERSY

The Army chief's statements come days after Major Leetul Gogoi of the
53 Rashtriya Rifles was awarded a Commendation Card by General Rawat
for the former's role in countering insurgency in Kashmir.

In his PTI interview, Rawat said that Gogoi's commendation was awarded
with the aim of boosting the morale of his troops. "As Army Chief my
concern is morale of the Army. That is my job. I am far away from the
battle field. I cannot influence the situation there. I can only tell
the boys that I am with you. I always tell my people, things will go
wrong, but if things have gone wrong and you did not have malafide
intent, I am there," he said.

Major Gogoi is the same officer who sparked nationwide controversy
after tying a Kashmiri local to an Army jeep. Gogoi, in a statement
delivered recently, said his actions were aimed at saving the lives of
the men under his command as well as those of stone pelters in
Kashmir.

On April 9, the day of polling for the Srinagar Parliamentary bypoll,
Major Gogoi and his team were called to the Utligam polling both to
rescue civilian and security personnel trapped at the location.

Major Gogoi said that around 1,200 protesters had surrounded the booth
and in order to escape from the booth, with the people he had just
rescued, he grabbed a person he believed to be the ring leader of the
protesters and got him tied to a jeep.

The man - Farooq Ahmad Dar - has denied that he was a stone pelter.
Gogoi and his team then drove the jeep with Dar tied to it out of the
area.

A video of the incident, shared by former Jammu and Kashmir Chief
Minister Omar Abdullah, went viral on social media and caused a huge
controversy, forcing the

[GreenYouth] Trump's Trip Was a Catastrophe for U.S.-Europe Relations: Angela Merkel has served formal notice that she will lead the German wandering away from the American alliance

[Sukla Sen]

[Polls show that German confidence in the United States, already
lowered under Obama, has collapsed under Trump to a level barely
better than Putin’s Russia. Facing elections in the fall—and reassured
that she has gained a congenial partner in France’s President
Macron—Merkel has served formal notice that she will lead the German
wandering away from the American alliance. In a speech before 2,000
people on Sunday, she declared that Europe cannot at this time rely on
the U.S. and the U.K. “The times in which we could completely depend
on others are on the way out. I've experienced that in the last few
days,” she said. “We Europeans truly have to take our fate into our
own hands.” Notice that she said “Europeans,” not Germans. Notice too
that she did not rule out that Europe might rely on the U.S. and U.K.
in the future: The door is not closed. But the old order has passed.
Join those words to Trump’s ostentatious refusal to endorse NATO’s
famous Article 5, the guarantee of mutual defense, at the NATO summit,
and it’s hard to imagine that the messaging of Trump’s first trip
could have been more perfect for Vladimir Putin if he’d written the
script himself.]

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/trump-nato-germany/528429/

Trump's Trip Was a Catastrophe for U.S.-Europe Relations
Angela Merkel has served formal notice that she will lead the German
wandering away from the American alliance.

BPA Agency via Reuters
DAVID FRUM  MAY 28, 2017

Seven years after the end of the Second World War, on the 10th of
March 1952, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom,
France, and the newly established Federal Republic of Germany received
an astounding note from the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union offered to withdraw the troops that then occupied
eastern Germany and to end its rule over the occupied zone. Germany
would be reunited under a constitution that allowed the country
freedom to choose its own social system. Germany would even be allowed
to rebuild its military, and all Germans except those convicted of war
crimes would regain their political rights. In return, the Allied
troops in western Germany would also be withdrawn—and reunited Germany
would be forbidden to join the new NATO alliance.

RELATED STORY


America's Friendship With Europe Has Been Horribly Damaged

Historians have long debated whether the note represented a genuine
offer or a cynical ploy. (Current consensus: ploy.) There’s no debate
about what happened next. Determined to anchor Germany securely in the
Western camp of nations, German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer rebuffed
the “Stalin note.” West Germany would enter NATO in 1955, build the
European Union, and develop as an Atlanticist liberal democracy.

The Soviets did not quit, however. Again and again through the Cold
War they would probe for ways to split Germany from the West, and
especially from the United States. They probably came closest in the
early 1980s, when millions of Germans marched in the streets against
NATO nuclear missile deployments. (The 1983 song, “99 Luftballons” is
probably now the most enduring memento of that dramatic moment.)

But in the end … it didn’t work. The alliance held. The Soviet bid for
dominance collapsed, as did the Soviet Union itself. Germany was
reunited on Western terms: liberal and Atlanticist from the Moselle to
the Oder. The deft diplomacy of President George H.W. Bush and Brent
Scowcroft over-mastered the objections of Moscow—and not just Moscow.
“I love Germany so much that I am grateful there are two of them” went
a quip usually attributed to the French novelist Francois Mauriac. For
many in London and Paris, Margaret Thatcher and Francois Mitterrand
very much included, the quip was no joke. Much of the present
malfunctioning architecture of the European Union—including the lethal
euro currency—originated in French demands for reassurance that
reunification would lead to “a European Germany, not a German Europe.”

Without the United States, German reunification would never have
proceeded so smoothly or rapidly. That assistance is still gratefully
remembered in Germany. But gratitude cuts only so much ice in
international relations. When the U.S. tried to mobilize the European
powers to manage the breakup of Yugoslavia, Germany balked at the
risk. But it was the George W. Bush-Gerhard Schroeder split over the
Iraq war in 2003 that definitively ended German deference to American
leadership.

Since then, Germany has deferred less and less to the United
States—and walked more and more its own path. Germans cheered
candidate Obama in 2008, but German-U.S. relations if anything sank
even lower under President Obama than under President Bush. Merkel
ignored Obama’s pleas to reflate the German economy after the
financial crisis of 2008 and the euro crisis of 2010. The Snowden
revelations—including exaggerated claims that the United States had
tapped Merkel’s ubiquitous personal cellphone—poisoned the mood even
more deeply.

[GreenYouth] 'The march to spectacle': A very thoughtful comment from an eminent pro-establishment commentator (on the significance and implications of General Bipin Rawat's showmanship)

[Sukla Sen]

[The relationship between the Indian Army and Indian democracy might
be entering new and unchartered waters. The ethical and constitutional
issues in the incident involving Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi using a
human shield have been discussed well by two columns (‘Why Major Gogoi
is wrong’, by Omar Abdullah, IE, May 24, here and ‘A blemished medal’,
by Praveen Swami, IE, May 25 here). But there is a larger
institutional transformation underway that does not bode well, either
for democracy or the army. A professional army needs three things:
Broad social legitimacy where the worth and excellence of the
institution is recognised; a clear set of political goals and a legal
framework within which it can operate; and the right degree of
professional autonomy, where it can exercise judgment based on the
highest professional standards. The “human shield” crisis has revealed
that all three are under more threat than we recognised.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-march-to-spectacle-4678260/

The march to spectacle
Army faces a tough mob in front of it. But it has more to fear from
the mob behind it, egging it on

Written by Pratap Bhanu Mehta | Updated: May 29, 2017 10:39 am

The threat emanates from an unlikely source. Whether we like it or
not, we live in an age of spectacle, where the dominant political
idiom is a seemingly unmediated conversation with the public.
(Representational)

The relationship between the Indian Army and Indian democracy might be
entering new and unchartered waters. The ethical and constitutional
issues in the incident involving Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi using a
human shield have been discussed well by two columns (‘Why Major Gogoi
is wrong’, by Omar Abdullah, IE, May 24, here and ‘A blemished medal’,
by Praveen Swami, IE, May 25 here). But there is a larger
institutional transformation underway that does not bode well, either
for democracy or the army. A professional army needs three things:
Broad social legitimacy where the worth and excellence of the
institution is recognised; a clear set of political goals and a legal
framework within which it can operate; and the right degree of
professional autonomy, where it can exercise judgment based on the
highest professional standards. The “human shield” crisis has revealed
that all three are under more threat than we recognised.

The threat emanates from an unlikely source. Whether we like it or
not, we live in an age of spectacle, where the dominant political
idiom is a seemingly unmediated conversation with the public. It used
to be that you were nobody if you did not have money or power; now,
that is sometimes not necessary, and often, it is not sufficient.
Politics has become a frenzied contest over unmediated representation,
with an impatience for all institutions and processes. But that has
also inflected other institutions. Parts of many institutions,
including the judiciary and bureaucracy, have also convinced
themselves that merely doing their professional jobs will not get them
social legitimacy or visibility. Something else, some splash, was
required. In boring terminology, this is called communication. But
underlying it is a shift in the norms of social legitimacy. You are
nobody if you have not trended. This is disfiguring many institutions.

The army is becoming a double victim of this. There is no doubt about
the army’s social legitimacy. It has also had to do our dirty work for
us. But there is a growing sense in the army that it was being
socially marginalised. In quotidian terms, everything from the OROP,
to shifting norms of social acclaim, convinced many in the army that
it was being given short shrift. Second, there always have been, and
should be, people who ask questions of the army. And a professional
army will answer them professionally. If it is institutionally strong,
it can remind people that it even court-martials officers for wrongful
killing, as it did after the Machil incident.

But those who really question the army are always politically
insignificant. Yet, the media has managed to create the impression
that the biggest challenge the Indian Army faces is assorted human
rights activists out of control. This is patent nonsense. But the
society of spectacle has exaggerated the suspicion under which the
army operates; it has created imaginary internal enemies for the
Indian Army.

The widespread support for Major Gogoi, both inside and outside the
army, has little to do with operational considerations or the wisdom
of the action. Instead, the issue has become a symbol of standing up
for the army. In this sense, the army is being drawn into a vortex
where a quiet, dignified and assumed acknowledgment of its
professionalism will no longer be enough. It will constantly have to
be granted its place in a society of spectacle. Chasing media phantoms
disfigured other institutions. There is a danger this rot can afflict
the army as well. It may begin to measure its social legitimacy in a
different way.

[GreenYouth] Pak's 1998 nuke tests created balance of power in South Asia: Nawaz Sharif

[Sukla Sen]

["Pakistan's nuclear programme created balance of power in South Asia,
just becoming a symbol of peace as the smaller states in the region
also heaved a sigh of relief," he said.]

http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/pak-s-1998-nuke-tests-created-balance-of-power-in-south-asia-nawaz-sharif-117052800440_1.html

Pak's 1998 nuke tests created balance of power in South Asia: Nawaz Sharif
He adds the day was an unforgettable day for Pakistan

Press Trust of India|  Islamabad
May 28, 2017Last Updated at 19:47 IST

Nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan in 1998 created balance of power
in South Asia and gave a strong message to the "enemies" that
aggressors would meet an exemplary fate, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif
said on Sunday.

Sharif, in his message to commemorate the historic nuclear tests, said
that the day was an unforgettable day for Pakistan.

***"Pakistan's nuclear programme created balance of power in South
Asia, just becoming a symbol of peace as the smaller states in the
region also heaved a sigh of relief," he said.*** [Emphasis added.]

The Prime Minister said that after becoming a nuclear power, now was
time to make the country an economic power, Associated Press of
Pakistan reported.

"Nineteen years ago, we had made country's defence as impregnable.
Today, with same dedication and passion, the country's economy is also
being made strong and stable. In this age, the defence of any nation
cannot be separated from its economic stability," he said.

Sharif said the journey of national economic development was going on
with fast pace and "just like nuclear explosion, Pakistan will also
carry out an economic explosion. The whole world believed in such
possibilities," he said.

The nuclear tests also gave a strong message to the enemies that
aggressors against Pakistan would meet an exemplary fate.

He said some 19 years ago, when the Pakistan Muslim League government
decided to carry out nuclear tests, it had been facing numerous
challenges.

"The nation is also thankful to the personalities who showed bravery
at that time and played their role to make Pakistan an atomic power,"
he said.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Take Torture Off Agenda [of Trump Administration]

[Sukla Sen]

[According to President Donald Trump, people who are tortured deserve
it. Trump’s initial draft executive order in January revealed his
passion for reopening U.S. black site prisons, loading Guantanamo with
prisoners, and rewriting the Army Field Manual to redefine allowable
interrogation techniques.
...
The Bush administration tortured foreign prisoners using
waterboarding, forced feeding, rectal feeding, slamming into concrete
walls by the neck, freezing water, stripping, beating, dragging, mock
executions, isolation, drug injections, agonizing enclosure in tiny
boxes, forced runs while hooded, and harrowing threats to families.
Such despicable behavior, hypocritically to preserve American values
and safety, makes some Americans want to shred their flags.]


http://www.countercurrents.org/2017/05/29/take-torture-off-agenda/

Take Torture Off Agenda
in World — by Kristin Christman —   May 29, 2017


waterboarding-torture

***According to President Donald Trump, people who are tortured
deserve it. Trump’s initial draft executive order in January revealed
his passion for reopening U.S. black site prisons, loading Guantanamo
with prisoners, and rewriting the Army Field Manual to redefine
allowable interrogation techniques.*** [Emphasis added.]

Sure, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis opposes torture. But multiple CIA
agents, military brass, legislators, and citizens have opposed torture
for decades. Those with a will for torture find a way.

***The Bush administration tortured foreign prisoners using
waterboarding, forced feeding, rectal feeding, slamming into concrete
walls by the neck, freezing water, stripping, beating, dragging, mock
executions, isolation, drug injections, agonizing enclosure in tiny
boxes, forced runs while hooded, and harrowing threats to families.
Such despicable behavior, hypocritically to preserve American values
and safety, makes some Americans want to shred their flags.***
[Emphasis added.]

Guilt of foreign captives is often unknown. There are no trials.
There’s not even a clear definition of guilt. Even if guilt were
proven, torture is immoral and illegal. The post-9/11 torture program
violated the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Uniform Code of Military
Justice, and international law.

U.S. torture policy rested partly upon psychologists James Mitchell’s
and Bruce Jessen’s absurd logic that since dogs cease resisting
electric shocks when learning resistance is futile, prisoners will
release truthful information when tortured. Notice, the poor dogs
didn’t divulge any information. And given affectionate training, dogs
will joyfully cooperate.

In 2002, Mitchell and Jessen implemented torture at a U.S. black site
in Thailand run by Gina Haspel, who had the site’s videotapes
destroyed in 2005 and is now Trump’s CIA deputy director. That year,
the CIA outsourced almost its entire interrogation program to
Mitchell, Jessen, and Associates who developed 20 “enhanced
interrogation techniques” for $81.1 million. A sadistic murderer
could’ve done that for free.

What was the excuse for tax-funded depravity? CIA attorney John Rizzo
explained, “The government wanted a solution. It wanted a path to get
these guys to talk.” Rizzo believed that if another attack occurred
and he’d failed to force captives to talk, he’d be responsible for
thousands of deaths.

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales defended the torture
program’s “ability to quickly obtain information from captured
terrorists … to avoid further atrocities against American civilians.”

So cruelty is defended in the name of protecting us, as if we’re
chickens running around, believing the sky will fall if we don’t get
tough now. But if timely action is critical, doesn’t it waste time to
quickly go in the wrong direction?

After all, seasoned interrogators know torture is useless. It damages
mental clarity, coherence, and recall. In its 2014 report, the Senate
Intelligence Committee recognized torture’s unquestionable failure as
an information-gathering tool: It acquires neither actionable
intelligence nor prisoner cooperation. Victims, crying, begging, and
whimpering, are rendered “unable to effectively communicate.”

Particularly disgusting is the U.S. double standard of justice.
Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Trump have protected
torture program members from prosecution, often by invoking the “state
secrets executive privilege.” Apparently, torture folks don’t belong
on trial. They’re above the law. We’re supposed to understand that
they were doing their best, serving our nation, following orders,
pressured, fearful: good people with noble motives.

Yet when we turn to suspected Mid-Eastern militants, we’re not
supposed to consider their circumstances, motivations, pressures, or
fears. Apparently, they also don’t belong on trial. They’re below the
law. Nail them with drones, the extrajudicial killing more politically
palatable than extrajudicial torture.

Mitchell, Jessen, and Associates face a lawsuit in court June 26

[GreenYouth] France's Macron, alongside Putin, denounces two Russian media for election meddling

[Sukla Sen]

[During the fraught election campaign, Macron's camp banned two
Russian news outlets - state-funded Sputnik news agency and RT TV
channel - from having media access to his campaign headquarters,
saying they were spreading propaganda rather than reporting real news.
With Putin alongside him, the 39-year-old Macron repeated the
accusation in a reply to a journalist's question, saying: "During the
campaign, Russia Today and Sputnik were agents of influence which on
several occasions spread fake news about me personally and my
campaign.
"They behaved like organs of influence, of propaganda and of lying
propaganda," he said.
During the campaign, which climaxed with Macron's election on May 7,
Macron's camp also irritated the Kremlin by saying its campaign's
networks, databases and sites had come under attack from locations
inside Russia.]

http://www.reuters.com/article/france-russia-influence-idUSL8N1IV3LN

Mon May 29, 2017 | 12:55pm EDT

France's Macron, alongside Putin, denounces two Russian media for
election meddling

May 29 French President Emmanuel Macron, standing alongside Russia's
Vladimir Putin, on Monday dubbed two Russian media outlets "agents of
influence" which he said had spread fake news about him during his
election campaign.

In one of the sharper moments of a news conference marking a visit by
Putin, Macron added that he had already raised the issue with the
Kremlin leader in a post-election phone call, going on to say the
episode was in the past and would stay there.

"When I say things once, I don't usually repeat myself," he said.

During the fraught election campaign, Macron's camp banned two Russian
news outlets - state-funded Sputnik news agency and RT TV channel -
from having media access to his campaign headquarters, saying they
were spreading propaganda rather than reporting real news.

With Putin alongside him, the 39-year-old Macron repeated the
accusation in a reply to a journalist's question, saying: "During the
campaign, Russia Today and Sputnik were agents of influence which on
several occasions spread fake news about me personally and my
campaign.

"They behaved like organs of influence, of propaganda and of lying
propaganda," he said.

During the campaign, which climaxed with Macron's election on May 7,
Macron's camp also irritated the Kremlin by saying its campaign's
networks, databases and sites had come under attack from locations
inside Russia.

When his camp barred journalists from the two Russian outlets from
Macron's headquarters a Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman denounced
the move as "outrageous ... bare-faced discrimination".

The Kremlin and RT itself have rejected allegations of meddling in the election.

Putin did not react to Macron's comments about the Russian media,
though he bristled when a journalist suggested that Moscow's hand was
behind cyber attacks on the Macron campaign. These hacking
allegations, he said, were not based on facts.

The Kremlin appeared to favour Macron's far-right opponent Marine Le
Pen for the presidency during the campaign and Putin offered her a
publicity coup when he granted her an audience a month before the
election's first round.

Putin, though, said on Monday that his meeting with Le Pen did not
mean he was trying to influence the outcome of election.

He said he saw nothing wrong with Moscow agreeing to meet foreign
politicians who sought good relations with Russia.

(Reporting by Denis Dyomkin, Michel Rose and Simon Carraud; Writing By
Richard Balmforth; Editing by Andrew Callus; )


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Amidst Debate Over Beef Ban, BJP Leader from Meghalaya Promises Cheaper Beef if Party Comes to Power

[Sukla Sen]

[‘Consumption of beef is a routine thing among Garo people, most of
who are Christians. But the prices are very high as there is no
regularisation. If elected, our party will regularise sale, which will
bring prices down,’ (Bernard) Marak (president of the party’s Tura
city unit in Garo Hills) said. Meghalaya is predominantly Christian,
with the community accounting for 74.59% of the state’s population in
the 2011 census.
...
However, State BJP chief Shibun Lyngdoh said that Marak’s views were
his own and not of the party. ‘As a party we haven’t made any promise
of bringing down prices of beef if elected to power in the State next
year. But ***there won’t be a ban on beef in Meghalaya*** (emphasis
added),’ he said.]

https://eclecticnortheast.in/bjp-mla-from-meghalaya-bernard-marak-has-promised-that-he-will-make-beef-cheaper/

Amidst Debate Over Beef Ban, BJP Leader from Meghalaya Promises
Cheaper Beef if Party Comes to Power

on: May 29, 2017In:

Amidst debate over beef ban in the country, Bernard Marak, a BJP
leader from Meghalaya has claimed that his party would make beef
cheaper if voted to power next year. This statement from Marak comes
at a time when the BJP-led union government is facing severe criticism
for its recent directive banning sale and purchase of cattle from
animal markets for slaughter.

***‘Consumption of beef is a routine thing among Garo people, most of
who are Christians. But the prices are very high as there is no
regularisation. If elected, our party will regularise sale, which will
bring prices down,’ Marak said. Meghalaya is predominantly Christian,
with the community accounting for 74.59% of the state’s population in
the 2011 census.*** [Emphasis added.]

There would be no ban on consumption of beef in the state, said Marak,
who is the president of the party’s Tura city unit in Garo Hills.

***However, State BJP chief Shibun Lyngdoh said that Marak’s views
were his own and not of the party. ‘As a party we haven’t made any
promise of bringing down prices of beef if elected to power in the
State next year. But there won’t be a ban on beef in Meghalaya,’ he
said.*** [Emphasis added.]



-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] I. 'How India is killing the country’s largest economy of the poor' and II. 'A constitutional misadventure: The proposed ban on the sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter at agricultur

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/how-india-is-killing-the-country-s-largest-economy-of-the-poor-57964

How India is killing the country’s largest economy of the poor

Richard Mahapatra@richiemaha  |  Tuesday 30 May 2017

New restriction on cattle slaughter will severely cripple the
livestock economy which is bigger than crop economy; poor farmers
shifted to livestock in face of uncertain rain and dwindling income

Livestock has assumed the most important role in providing employment
and income generating opportunities. Credit: Samrat Mukherjee / CSE

Quick Read
Ban on procuring animals from market place for slaughter will
adversely affect India’s poorest farmers
It has been more than a decade that livestock economy is booming as a
result of farmers’ conscious decision to switch over from crops
The poor’s new economy risks a meltdown due to the constant confusion
over ‘beef’ policy and the increasing intolerance to meat eating

Forget about the loss of revenue from exporting buffalo meat after
government’s ban on procuring animals from market place for slaughter,
the real impact will be on India’s poorest farmers, and the economy of
livestock which is worth more than Rs 3 lakh crore.

The debate over the ban criminally revolves around federalism and
religious sentiments. Rather, it is all set to kill an economy that
India’s small and marginal farmers switched over to as adaptation to
uncertain monsoon and dwindling income from regular crops

In just a decade, there is a historic shift in the agriculture sector.
Economic contribution of livestock is today more than that of food
grain crops. Traditionally, of the three components of the
sector—crops, livestock and fisheries—crops drove the growth, and food
grains are a major part of it. As a result, policy and programmes
focused on crops.

This lack of knowledge of changing agrarian economy in the country has
also resulted in misplaced debates after these recent regulations.
While media focuses on the loss of export revenue, there is hardly any
talk over the local economy of livestock which decides agricultural
growth unilaterally now.

It has been more than a decade that livestock economy is booming as a
result of farmers’ conscious decision to switch over from crops. When
in 2002-03, monetary contribution of livestock surpassed that of food
grains, policy makers ignored it as a temporary coping mechanism of
the poor in the face of sluggish agriculture due to repeated droughts.
But livestock contribution has since remained higher by 5-13 per cent,
according to economists at the National Centre for Agricultural
Economics and Policy Research. In fact, both livestock and fisheries
components have been growing faster than the crops component for a
decade. A report prepared for the 12th Five Year Plan (ended in 2017)
accepted this shift by recognising livestock as the engine of
agriculture growth.

Livestock controls close to a quarter of the agriculture gross
domestic product (GDP). In 2010-11, it generated outputs worth Rs 3,
40,500 crore (at current prices). This was 28 per cent of the
agriculture GDP and about 5 per cent of the country’s GDP.

After livestock, paddy is the next highest contributor to the
agriculture GDP. In 2009-10, output from livestock was 2.5 times the
value of paddy and more than thrice the value of wheat, as per the
Central Statistical Office data. “Animals are natural capital, which
can be easily reproduced to act as a living bank with offspring as
interest, and an insurance against income shocks of crop failure and
natural calamities,” says an economist.

Driving livestock growth are changes in the utility of livestock for
farmers and in food consumption pattern. Importance of livestock as
the “draught power” has declined due to mechanisation of agricultural
operations and declining farm sizes. Use of dung is also being
replaced by chemical fertilisers. At the same time, consumption of
livestock products like eggs, milk and meat is increasing due to rise
in the income of the booming middle class, both in urban and rural
areas.

For many agriculture economists, due to this constant confusion over
‘beef’ policy and the increasing intolerance to meat eating, the
poor’s new economy risks a meltdown. For example, the new regulation
debars people from trading in market places. Most of the cattle are
sold in local weekly markets. These markets are accessible and are a
convenient option for farmers who otherwise have to spend a lot on
transportation.

Recognising the boom in livestock economy, way back in 2010-11,
economists predicted that overall agriculture growth will be high. In
2009, despite severe drought, the agriculture sector registered growth
due to the booming livestock economy. Livestock has assumed the most
important role in providing employment and income generating
opportunities. While crops still employ the maximum people, employment
in livestock is fast catching up.

Rise of the livestock sector has implications fo

[GreenYouth] Visiting South Orange [8th Grade] Students Refuse Photo With Speaker Ryan

[Sukla Sen]

[“I can’t take a picture with someone who supports a budget that would
destroy public education and would leave 23 million people without
healthcare,” said 8th grade SOMS student Matthew Malespina.
“I didn’t want to be in [the picture] because he believes in most of
what Trump believes in,” said another SOMS 8th grader, Louisa
Maynard-Parisi.
However, many students chose to participate in the photo — even if
their political views differed from Ryan’s.
“I thought it would be interesting to see one of the nation’s
lawmakers in person even if I strongly disagree with many of his
views,” said Alex Klint, an eighth-grader at SOMS.]

https://villagegreennj.com/towns/south-orange/about-50-of-visiting-south-orange-students-refuse-photo-speaker-ryan/

Visiting South Orange Students Refuse Photo With Speaker Ryan

By Mary Mannaccess_timeMay-25-2017

About half the students in a group of South Orange Middle School 8th
graders touring the Capitol in D.C. this past week refused a photo
with House Speaker Paul Ryan, according to students on the field trip.
(Some SOMS students on the trip were still en route to the Capitol on
buses.)

Elissa Malespina, a school librarian who is also the parent of a SOMS
eighth grader, reported that her son was among the students who
declined to pose with Ryan for a photo.

“I am so proud of my son,” Malespina wrote on Facebook.

The kids gave reasoned opinions for their choice — and said they were
not fueled by partisanship.

“I think that taking the picture represents that you agree with the
same political views and I don’t agree with his political views so I
chose not to be in it,” said Wendy Weeks, an 8th grade SOMS student.

“I can’t take a picture with someone who supports a budget that would
destroy public education and would leave 23 million people without
healthcare,” said 8th grade SOMS student Matthew Malespina.

“I didn’t want to be in [the picture] because he believes in most of
what Trump believes in,” said another SOMS 8th grader, Louisa
Maynard-Parisi.

However, many students chose to participate in the photo — even if
their political views differed from Ryan’s.

“I thought it would be interesting to see one of the nation’s
lawmakers in person even if I strongly disagree with many of his
views,” said Alex Klint, an eighth-grader at SOMS.

Many locals expressed support for the students who opted out on social
media; others had reservations.

“I’m sort of torn on this (although each kid has the right to make
this choice),” wrote one SOMA resident. “Even though I totally
disagree with everything he stands for, he is a legitimately elected
official and represents our government at work. Meeting our
representatives is an honor for a kid–at least for what the office
stands for (even if the person occupying that chair is less than
honorable). And I do feel if there had been some conservative school
where the kids refused to pose with President Obama, we would have
been appalled by that.”

Matthew’s mom said she supported her son’s decision. “I am proud of my
son and all the other students who chose to respectfully not to
participate in the photograph with Speaker Ryan,” wrote Elissa
Malespina, in a message to Village Green. “My son does not believe in
the policies that Speaker Ryan believes and does not want to be
associated in any way with him or his policies. It is his right as a
citizen to do so and I commend him and his fellow students for doing
so in a respectful way. Listen to the children they get it.”

On Monday, May 29, South Orange-Maplewood Superintendent of Schools
Dr. John J. Ramos Sr. added his voice to the conversation, issuing a
statement to the community stating, “”While we should all respectfully
and appropriately acknowledge those in authority, taking a
conscientious position about a photo op is within our constitutional
right. We are proud of all of our students, who exercised their rights
and chose whether or not to participate for their own individual
reasons.”

Updated 9:41 a.m. May 26 with a quote from a student who chose to
participate in the photo with Speaker Ryan. Updated May 29 to note
that about half the students on scene at the Capitol opted out of the
photo: some SOMS students were still en route to the Capitol on buses.
Updated May 29 with a response from South Orange-Maplewood
Superintendent of School Dr. John J. Ramos Sr.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] President Trump's First Europe Tour: Sounds the Death Knell for Western Alliance (and a Moment of Grand Celebration for Putin)?

[Sukla Sen]

[It is easy and appropriate to blame President Trump for this state of
affairs. But despite her cautious phrasing, Ms Merkel has also behaved
irresponsibly — making a statement that threatens to widen a dangerous
rift in the Atlantic alliance into a permanent breach.
The case against Mr Trump is easiest to make. His performance in
Europe was disastrous. In a speech to Nato, the US president failed to
reaffirm Article 5, the alliance’s mutual defence clause.
This was not an accidental oversight and sent a clear message that
America’s commitment to the defence of Europe can no longer be taken
for granted. That, in turn, risks encouraging Russia to test Nato’s
defences.
At a G7 summit, Mr Trump stood alone in his failure to endorse the
Paris climate accord. And he was also widely quoted as calling Germany
“bad, very bad” for the sin of selling too many cars in the US.

(This should provide us with a fairly clear idea why Putin was so keen
to Have Trump installed as the US President.
It's, of course, rather pointless - in fact, pretty stupid, to blame
him for doing something which he is just meant to do.)]

https://www.ft.com/content/dc911cb8-4449-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996

Angela Merkel’s blunder, Donald Trump and the end of the west

Chancellor’s speech was irresponsible and risks becoming a
self-fulfilling prophecy
Gideon Rachman

YESTERDAY by: Gideon Rachman

Donald Trump’s first visit to Europe was awkward. Its aftermath has
been explosive. Speaking at an election rally in Munich, shortly after
the US president had returned to Washington, Angela Merkel came close
to announcing the death of the western alliance.

The German chancellor warned that: “The times in which we can fully
count on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past
few days. We Europeans must really take our destiny in our own hands.
Of course we need to have friendly relations with the US and with the
UK and with other neighbours, including Russia. But we have to fight
for our own future ourselves.”

Ms Merkel’s remarks swiftly made headlines. Richard Haass, who as
president of the Council on Foreign Relations is the doyen of the US
foreign-policy establishment, tweeted: “Merkel saying Europe cannot
rely on others & needs to take matters into its own hands is a
watershed — & what US has sought to avoid since WW2.”

***It is easy and appropriate to blame President Trump for this state
of affairs. But despite her cautious phrasing, Ms Merkel has also
behaved irresponsibly — making a statement that threatens to widen a
dangerous rift in the Atlantic alliance into a permanent breach.***
[Emphasis added.]

***The case against Mr Trump is easiest to make. His performance in
Europe was disastrous. In a speech to Nato, the US president failed to
reaffirm Article 5, the alliance’s mutual defence clause.*** [Emphasis
added.]

***This was not an accidental oversight and sent a clear message that
America’s commitment to the defence of Europe can no longer be taken
for granted. That, in turn, risks encouraging Russia to test Nato’s
defences.*** [Emphasis added.]

Related article
Europe cannot rely on US and faces life without UK, says Merkel
‘We must take destiny into our own hands,’ warns German chancellor

***At a G7 summit, Mr Trump stood alone in his failure to endorse the
Paris climate accord. And he was also widely quoted as calling Germany
“bad, very bad” for the sin of selling too many cars in the US.***
[Emphasis added.]

Faced with all this, and with Brexit Britain, Ms Merkel may feel that
she is merely stating the obvious in suggesting that Germany can no
longer count on its American and British allies. Nonetheless, her
speech was a blunder for at least five reasons.

First, it is a mistake to allow four months of the Trump presidency to
throw into doubt a Transatlantic alliance that has kept the peace in
Europe for 70 years. It may come to that. But it is also possible that
Mr Trump is an aberration and will soon be out of office.

Second, the US president actually had a valid point to make about the
failure of most European countries to meet Nato targets on military
expenditure. Mr Trump’s behaviour in Europe was crass. But his
argument that it is unsustainable for the US to account for almost 75
per cent of Nato defence spending is correct — and was also made by
Robert Gates, defence secretary for President Obama. Given that
Germany has been freeriding on American military spending, it is a
little cheeky to blame the US for being an unreliable ally.

Third, by implying that the western alliance is now coming apart, Ms
Merkel has compounded the error that Mr Trump made when he failed to
endorse Article 5.

Both events will have encouraged the Russian government in its hope of
breaking up the western alliance. That, in turn, makes Europe’s
security situation more dangerous.

Fourth, Ms Merkel was unwise and unfair to bracket the UK with Trump’s
America. In the climate change discussions, Britain sided with the 

[GreenYouth] (BJP's pick) Army Chief Bipin Rawat has clearly crossed the Red Line (with dumb machismo): a Lead Edit by the IE and a Detailed Comment Saikat Datta

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
[This last statement could also be read as a transgression into
territory outside the army chief’s domain. General Rawat’s
responsibility is to guard the nation’s physical frontiers from
enemies; it is not to draw red lines for political actors in the
system.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/general-rushes-in-army-general-bipin-rawat-kashmir-4679921/

General rushes in
Army chief’s remarks on human shield, on the force’s role in J&K,
obfuscate distinctions, are unbecoming of his high office

By: Editorial | Published:May 30, 2017 12:12 am

General Rawat’s responsibility is to guard the nation’s physical
frontiers from enemies; it is not to draw red lines for political
actors in the system.

In an interview, Army Chief General Bipin Rawat has defended and
praised Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi for his decision to tie a Kashmiri
artisan to an army jeep as a human shield and parade him through
several villages, as a warning to stone-pelters. By doing this, and by
his implied support for the short-circuiting of the army’s internal
due process vis a vis Major Gogoi’s actions — the army commended the
major even as a court of inquiry was finalising its probe into the
incident — General Rawat risks hurting the enormous institutional
credibility of the force that he heads. It bears reiteration that
Major Gogoi’s conduct was a violation of the constitutional promise of
due process, and of the fundamental rights enshrined in the
Constitution for every citizen, and that it is the army’s duty to
uphold both. But the army chief treads even further on dangerous
ground.

“This is a proxy war and proxy war is a dirty war… You fight a dirty
war with innovations”, the general said. He went on to suggest that it
would have been easier for the armed forces if the protestors were
firing weapons instead of throwing stones: “Then I could do what I
[want to do]”. General Rawat is understandably concerned about the
difficult challenges that confront his men in Kashmir. But can he
afford to lose sight of a fundamental distinction — between armed
militants and civilian protestors? By not acknowledging or respecting
the difference between the two, or suggesting that there is none,
General Rawat could be accused of potentially redefining the army’s
role and mandate in troubling ways, which could end up reducing the
political space for manoeuvre in the Valley. Unwisely, he dismisses
the possibilities of political engagement in Kashmir: “Has political
initiative not been taken in the past? What was the result, you had
Kargil…”.
***This last statement could also be read as a transgression into
territory outside the army chief’s domain. General Rawat’s
responsibility is to guard the nation’s physical frontiers from
enemies; it is not to draw red lines for political actors in the
system.*** [Emphasis added.]

It is undeniable that the army has been thrust into a crisis in
Kashmir not of its making, one that the political leadership should
have taken the lead to resolve. In these circumstances, General Rawat
must arguably aim to limit the fallout of the army’s exposure to what
is primarily a political problem. His ill-judged statements, however,
send out the impression that the army is fighting the people of
Kashmir. This is particularly unfortunate given the fact that the
Indian Army has done stellar work in its effort to build bonds with
the people of Kashmir, through schools, sports activities and rescue
operations during the 2014 flood, as well as this April, when the
waters rose dangerously in some parts of the Valley. The chief of the
Indian Army cannot sound like an angry retired prime time warrior. He
must, at all times, acknowledge the responsibility — and the
constraint — of his high office.

II.
[(T)here is an ever deeper problem in the Army chief’s words. He said
that he wanted citizens to “be afraid” of the Army. While he said this
in the context of Kashmir, the fact is that once the civilian
population starts fearing the Army, they cease to be part of a
democratic union. Never in the history of State-sponsored oppression –
be it the Holocaust by Nazi Germany, the repression in the Soviet
Union by Josef Stalin, or the cultural revolution by Chairman Mao in
China – has the military ever stood up to despots as an institution.
On the contrary, it has willingly become the instrument of oppression
for the despots in power.]

https://scroll.in/article/839060/dealing-with-protests-in-kashmir-the-army-chief-has-spoken-why-is-the-prime-minister-silent

Dealing with protests in Kashmir: The army chief has spoken. Why is
the prime minister silent?
The democratically-elected civilian leadership needs to clarify
whether Indian citizens should be afraid of their army.

14 hours ago

Saikat Datta

In a recent interview that General Bipin Rawat gave to the news agency
PTI, in which he defended Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi – the officer
accused of using a Kashmiri man as a “human shield” last month – the
chief of Army staff made

[GreenYouth] 'Shocked' South Korea leader orders probe into U.S. THAAD additions

[Sukla Sen]

[South Korean President Moon Jae-in has ordered a probe after his
Defence Ministry failed to inform him that four more launchers for the
controversial U.S. THAAD anti-missile system had been brought into the
country, his spokesman said on Tuesday.]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-south-thaad-idUSKBN18Q0I3

Tue May 30, 2017 | 5:51pm EDT

'Shocked' South Korea leader orders probe into U.S. THAAD additions

FILE PHOTO: A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor
is launched during a successful intercept test, in this undated
handout photo provided by the U.S. Department of Defense, Missile
Defense Agency. U.S. Department of Defense, Missile Defense
Agency/Handout...

By Heekyong Yang and Ju-min Park | SEOUL
South Korean President Moon Jae-in has ordered a probe after his
Defence Ministry failed to inform him that four more launchers for the
controversial U.S. THAAD anti-missile system had been brought into the
country, his spokesman said on Tuesday.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system battery was
initially deployed in March in the southeastern region of Seongju with
just two of its maximum load of six launchers to counter a growing
North Korean missile threat.

During his successful campaign for the May 9 presidential election,
Moon called for a parliamentary review of the system, the deployment
of which infuriated China, North Korea's lone major ally.

"President Moon said it was very shocking" to hear the four additional
launchers had been installed without being reported to the new
government or to the public, presidential spokesman Yoon Young-chan
told a media briefing.

Moon had campaigned on a more moderate approach to Pyongyang, calling
for engagement even as the reclusive state pursues nuclear weapons and
ballistic missile programs in defiance of U.N. Security Council
resolutions and threats of more sanctions.

The Pentagon said it had been "very transparent" with South Korea's
government about THAAD deployment. "We continue to work very closely
with the Republic of Korea government and we have been very
transparent in all of our actions throughout this process," Pentagon
spokesman Jeff Davis told a news briefing.

Separately on Tuesday, the U.S. military cheered a successful,
first-ever missile defense test involving a simulated attack by an
intercontinental ballistic missile, a major milestone for a program
meant to defend the United States against North Korea.

The Missile Defense Agency said it was the first live-fire test
against a simulated ICBM for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD),
a separate system from THAAD, and called it an "incredible
accomplishment." [L1N1IW1MM]

CHINA TENSIONS EASING

Moon's order of a probe into the THAAD launchers came amid signs of
easing tensions between South Korea and China, a major trading
partner.

China has been incensed over the THAAD deployment, fearing it could
enable the U.S. military to see into its own missile systems and open
the door to wider deployment, possibly in Japan and elsewhere,
military analysts say.

South Korean companies have faced product boycotts and bans on Chinese
tourists visiting South Korea, although China has denied
discrimination against them.

On Tuesday, South Korea's Jeju Air said China had approved a plan for
it to double its flights to the Chinese city of Weihai from June 2.

Also, a Korean-Chinese joint drama production “My Goddess, My Mom"
starring South Korean actress Lee Da-hae was told by its Chinese
partner recently that it will soon be aired, according to Lee's agent
JS Pictures. Previously its broadcast had been indefinitely delayed.

An official at South Korean tour agency Mode Tour told Reuters it
hoped China may lift a ban on selling trips to South Korea, which had
been in place since March 15, as early as the second week of June.
Although there had been no official orders from the Chinese government
to lift the ban, a few Chinese travel agencies have sent inquiries
about package tours, he said. However, South Korea's Lotte Group has
yet to reopen any of the 74 retail stores in China it was forced to
close in March after the group allowed the installation of the THAAD
system on land it owned.

BOMBER DRILL

The United States, which has 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea,
has a mutual defence treaty with Seoul dating back to the end of the
1950-53 Korean War, which ended in a truce that has left the peninsula
in a technical state of war.

South Korea's Defence Ministry said on Tuesday it had conducted a
joint drill with a U.S. supersonic B-1B Lancer bomber on Monday, which
North Korea's state media earlier described as "a nuclear
bomb-dropping drill".

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe talked to Moon by phone on Tuesday
and told him that dialogue for dialogue's sake with North Korea would
be meaningless, and that China's role in exerting pressure on the
North was important, Japan's Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

North Korea's KCNA news agency

[GreenYouth] Rail cops uncover fake Aadhar scam (and 'How To Make Fake Aadhar Card From Mobile Phone In Just 2 Minutes!!' websites)

[Sukla Sen]

[According to the police, touts learnt to make fake Aadhar cards
through an instructional video available online, titled, ‘How To Make
Fake Aadhar Card From Mobile Phone In Just 2 Minutes!!’ (see, e.g.:
). In the last three odd
months, this video has proved to be a rage among the touts
(unauthorisedly selling reserved train tickets).

(Also look up:  for Modi
on Aaadhaar card in 2013.)]

http://www.asianage.com/metros/mumbai/310517/rail-cops-uncover-fake-aadhar-scam.html

Rail cops uncover fake Aadhar scam

THE ASIAN AGE. | ARPIKA BHOSALE Published : May 31, 2017, 2:29 am IST
Updated : May 31, 2017, 2:29 am IST

Touts providing pre-booked tickets on the basis of forged cards to customers.

The railway police stumbled upon the racket after they arrested a tout
recently. (Representational photo)

Mumbai: The railway police have taken under its scanner, touts who are
providing pre-booked long-distance train tickets on the basis of
forged Aadhar cards to customers at double the price. On being
approached by a customer, the tout sells him a ticket booked in
somebody else’s name along with a forged Aadhar card. The police
stumbled upon the racket after they arrested a tout recently and
recovered dozens of fabricated Aadhar cards from him.

According to the police, touts learnt to make fake Aadhar cards
through an instructional video available online, titled, ‘How To Make
Fake Aadhar Card From Mobile Phone In Just 2 Minutes!!’. In the last
three odd months, this video has proved to be a rage among the touts.

The Railway Police Force (RPF), who cracked down on the racket, had no
clue that tickets were being sold in this manner to desperate
passengers, till one of them was caught red handed by an alert ticket
checker on May 24. Miraaj Khan, the tout, was brought in for
questioning after the RPF realised that the ID accompanying the
tickets did not look authentic.

CR, senior divisional security commissioner (Sr DSC) Sachin Bhalode
said that it was only after questioning Khan, who owns a agency
through which ticket booking are officially outsourced at a 12 per
cent commission, did they realised that it was a Aadhar cards scam
too. “Khan would book the ticket under random names at the counter,
and then he would sell it to a passenger along with the fake Aadhar
card.”

The RPF is now on a high alert and is keeping a close watch on other
touts. “Right now we are identifying touts who might be using the same
modus operandi,” he said.

The RPF has been trying to clamp down on illegal touts in the market.
One of the other major rackets of touts includes use of software that
speeds up the booking after a passenger logs onto the Indian Railway
Tourism & Catering (IRCTC) website. What it means is that, once the
booking starts at 8 am every morning, the software helps the passenger
gain an unfair advantage by becoming fourth in queue for booking a
ticket of his choice.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] ‘Expel those who attacked Sooraj (who had taken part in a beef festival in the campus to protest Union Government's move to ban cattle slaughter)’: IIT-M students list 3 demands in letter

[Sukla Sen]

[Now, the students, including APSC representatives are staging a
protest and have given a set of three demands: First, that the
perpetrators should be expelled. Second, that all medical expenses of
Sooraj should be taken care by the Institute. Third, that the
punishment to the attackers must be informed to the general students’
body.

(Pls. visit the website, especially for a number of photographs.
May also look up:
.)]

http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/expel-those-who-attacked-sooraj-iit-m-students-list-3-demands-letter-institute-dean-62901

Protest

‘Expel those who attacked Sooraj’: IIT-M students list 3 demands in
letter to institute dean
Students also want Sooraj's medical expenses to be borne by the institute.

TNM Staff
 Wednesday, May 31, 2017 - 12:39

On Wednesday morning, a flurry of activity and police presence dawned
on IIT Madras campus as many students started protesting against the
attack on a PhD scholar, allegedly for eating beef.

Sooraj R, a member of the Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle (APSC),
sustained injuries after he was assaulted on Tuesday, allegedly by
eight students of a right wing group, for attending a beef festival.

***Now, the students, including APSC representatives are staging a
protest and have given a set of three demands: First, that the
perpetrators should be expelled. Second, that all medical expenses of
Sooraj should be taken care by the Institute. Third, that the
punishment to the attackers must be informed to the general students’
body.***

Protesters has also alleged that the attackers have a “history of
violent behavior” and that they “are a threat to safety of everyone in
the institution.”

Apart from APSC, left students group Revolutionary Student Youth Front
(RSYF) and SFI members also joined the protest. Many were not allowed
entry into the campus and were detained outside.

They left up placards showing their support to APSC and demanding
justice for Sooraj.

Student representatives have also submitted a letter to the dean,
alleging that a person called Manish Kumar Singh had approached Sooraj
when he was sitting in the Himalaya mess at lunch on Tuesday. Manish
then allegedly questioned Sooraj about his personal details and also
whether he had eaten beef.

When Sooraj replied in the affirmative, Manish “got very agitated and
angrily asked Sooraj whether he would eat beef and come to a Jain
mess.”

***“Immediately afterwards, before Sooraj had a chance to respond,
Manish brutally attacked Sooraj with a blow to back of the head. As
soon as the attack began, a group of students who had accompanied
Manish surrounded Sooraj and help him back (sic),” the letter
continues.***

After some people intervened, the attackers left the scene quickly,
the letter says. Sooraj was taken to the institute hosted, where
Manish allegedly came some time later. The letter says that Manish
“boasted of having beaten up Sooraj and made death threats to [student
name], one of the students who had come to check up on him. He also
names [student name] as another one whom he would kill.”

The perpetrators, the letter alleges, had also made threats on social
media against students who participated in a discussion in IIT about
the Central government’s recent notification banning cattle trade for
slaughter. “Manish had warned the participant students of dire
consequences,” the letter states.





Students protesting inside IIT-M campus

It also alleges that the attack was “pre-planned, well thought out and
executed”, because Manish had apparently finished lunch and was
waiting for Sooraj and his friend.

The letter adds that Sooraj was referred to a private hospital after
scans revealed injuries to his right eye and face, which would require
surgery.

“Horrifying attacks like these will hamper the culture of harmony in
these institutions,” says the letter and states the aforementioned
demands.





-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] The Bullshitter-in-Chief: Donald Trump’s disregard for the truth is something more sinister than ordinary lying

[Sukla Sen]

[As the Princeton University philosophy professor Harry Frankfurt put
it in a famous essay, to lie presumes a kind of awareness of and
interest in the truth — and the goal is to convince the audience that
the false thing you are saying is in fact true. Trump, more often than
not, isn’t interested in convincing anyone of anything. He’s a
bullshitter who simply doesn’t care.
In Trump's own book, Crippled America: How to Make America Great
Again, our now-president describes himself in a way that Frankfurt
could hold up as the quintessential example of a bullshitter. Trump
writes that he’s an "I say what’s on my mind" kind of guy. Pages
later, he explains that doesn’t mean he’s necessarily an honest guy.
"If you do things a little differently," he writes of the media, "if
you say outrageous things and fight back, they love you." The free
publicity that results from deliberately provoking controversy is
invaluable. And if a bit of exaggeration is what it takes, Trump
doesn’t have a problem with that. "When," he asks "was the last time
you saw a sign hanging outside a pizzeria claiming ‘The fourth best
pizza in the world’?!"]

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/30/15631710/trump-bullshit

The Bullshitter-in-Chief
Donald Trump’s disregard for the truth is something more sinister than
ordinary lying.
Updated by Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesiasm...@vox.com  May 30, 2017, 8:40am EDT

Donald Trump says a lot of things that aren’t true, often shamelessly
so, and it’s tempting to call him a liar.

But that’s not quite right. As the Princeton University philosophy
professor Harry Frankfurt put it in a famous essay, to lie presumes a
kind of awareness of and interest in the truth — and the goal is to
convince the audience that the false thing you are saying is in fact
true. Trump, more often than not, isn’t interested in convincing
anyone of anything. He’s a bullshitter who simply doesn’t care.

In Trump's own book, Crippled America: How to Make America Great
Again, our now-president describes himself in a way that Frankfurt
could hold up as the quintessential example of a bullshitter. Trump
writes that he’s an "I say what’s on my mind" kind of guy. Pages
later, he explains that doesn’t mean he’s necessarily an honest guy.

"If you do things a little differently," he writes of the media, "if
you say outrageous things and fight back, they love you." The free
publicity that results from deliberately provoking controversy is
invaluable. And if a bit of exaggeration is what it takes, Trump
doesn’t have a problem with that. "When," he asks "was the last time
you saw a sign hanging outside a pizzeria claiming ‘The fourth best
pizza in the world’?!"

When Trump says something like he’s just learned that Barack Obama
ordered his phones wiretapped, he’s not really trying to persuade
people that this is true. It’s a test to see who around him will
debase themselves to repeat it blindly. There’s no greater
demonstration of devotion.

In his first and best-known book, The Art of the Deal, Trump writes a
passage that is one of the most remarkable ever set to paper by a
future American president. It’s deeply telling about Trump’s views on
the distinction between integrity and loyalty. Trump sings the praises
of Roy Cohn — Joe McCarthy’s infamous legal attack dog later turned
Trump mentor:

Just compare that with all the hundreds of “respectable” guys who make
careers out of boasting about their uncompromising integrity but have
absolutely no loyalty. They only care about what’s best for them and
don’t think twice about stabbing a friend in the back if the friend
becomes a problem. What I liked most about Roy Cohn was that he would
do just the opposite. Roy was the kind of guy who’d be there at your
hospital bed long after everyone else had bailed out, literally
standing by you to the death.
Trump, ironically, would not stand by Cohn’s deathbed as he perished
of AIDS; instead, he disavowed his friend. For Trump, loyalty is a way
to size up those around him, suss out friend from foe. It is not a
quality he cares to embrace in his personal life. Now president, it’s
the same in his political life.

The two passages taken together illuminate an important facet of
Trump’s personality, and of his presidency. He’s a man who doesn’t
care much about the truth. He’s a man who cares deeply about loyalty.
The two qualities merge in the way he wields bullshit. His flagrant
lies serve as a loyalty test.

Trump’s tactics, in a different context, would be understood as
typical authoritarian propaganda — regimes often propound nonsense
more to enforce expectations on their citizens than because they are
expecting anyone to actually believe it. The United States isn’t the
kind of place where that can work. There’s a free and vibrant press
and political debate operating wholly outside the world of Trump’s
bullshit. But by filling the heads of his fans — and the media outlets
they consume — with a steady diet of bullshit, Trump is nonetheless
suc

[GreenYouth] Trump 'poised to quit Paris climate deal'

[Sukla Sen]

[This is going to be the very height of criminality as it'd push the
entire human race to the very btrink of extinction just to guarantee
reaping of boundlress profits for the private capital.

- Sukla]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40108659

Trump 'poised to quit Paris climate deal'
1 hour ago

The Paris agreement is meant to reduce carbon emissions

US President Donald Trump is poised to pull the country out of the
Paris climate accord, US media report, quoting senior officials.

The 2015 accord for the first time united most of the world in a
single agreement to mitigate climate change.

It was signed by 195 countries out of 197 in a UN group on climate
change, with Syria and Nicaragua abstaining.

In a tweet on Wednesday, Mr Trump said he would announce his decision
within the "next few days".

What is climate change?

Climate deal is essential, says UN chief

What was agreed in Paris?

Climate change, or global warming, refers to the damaging effect of
gases, or emissions, released from industry and agriculture on the
atmosphere.

The Paris accord is meant to limit the global rise in temperature
attributed to emissions.

***Countries agreed to:

Keep global temperatures "well below" the level of 2C (3.6F) above
pre-industrial times and "endeavour to limit" them even more, to 1.5C

Limit the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by human activity to the
same levels that trees, soil and oceans can absorb naturally,
beginning at some point between 2050 and 2100

Review each country's contribution to cutting emissions every five
years so they scale up to the challenge

Enable rich countries to help poorer nations by providing "climate
finance" to adapt to climate change and switch to renewable energy***

To date, 147 out of the 197 countries have ratified the accord,
including the US, where the accord entered into force last November.

Why does Trump object?

Mr Trump has previously called climate change "a hoax" devised by the
Chinese government.

He promised to "cancel" the Paris deal during his election campaign
last year, saying it was "bad for US business" because it allowed
"foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use".

This file photo taken on November 4 2016 shows The Arc de Triomphe
illuminated with the words Image copyrightAFP
Image caption
Paris celebrated when the climate accord came into force in November

His supporters argue the accord restricts America's ability to do what
it wants with its energy resources - an important sector of the
economy.

However, under the accord, countries set emission limits themselves -
not an outside panel.

grey line

A slap in the face - Analysis by BBC News environment correspondent Matt McGrath
If he does decide to pull out of the accord, the key question is how
will he do it?

The agreement stipulates a three-year waiting period before a country
can give notice of leaving, which adds another 12 months and brings us
to June 2021.

It could be that President Trump will be out of office before the US
would be out of the deal.

Alternatively he could declare that the agreement is a treaty which in
US law needs approval by the Senate. It's likely that the Republican
majority in the chamber would mean the end of the road for Paris.

A more extreme option would be to pull out of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change upon which the Paris deal is
built.

It dates back to 1992 and was agreed by President George Bush, and
left in place by his son, George W, who was no great fan of climate
action.

Leaving this longstanding convention would only take 12 months, but
would be seen as perhaps a bigger slap in the face for the
international community, as it places strong emphasis on the
environmental rights of developing nations.
Follow @MattMcGrathBBC

grey line

Can America leave just like that?

It remains unclear when or how the administration might plan to pull
out of the climate agreement, the BBC's Paul Rincon writes.

A four-year period is required to quit the Paris deal but by pulling
out of the UN's climate body - the UNFCCC - the US could extricate
itself in one year.

However, this would represent a significant move: the US signed up to
the convention in 1992, under then President George Bush Snr.

A small team including Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott
Pruitt is working on the details of how the withdrawal will be
executed, the Axios news site reports, quoting unnamed sources.

Does it matter if the US pulls out?

America is the world's second-biggest carbon dioxide emitter after
China so its withdrawal would have a real impact.

Under the Paris accord, it is committed to reducing greenhouse
emissions by 26-28% below its 2005 level by 2025.


Media captionAntonio Guterres: "The agreement doesn't collapse if a
country leaves the agreement"

There are fears that other countries could follow the US lead or show
less commitment to the goals of the Paris accord.

However, China, India and the EU have indicated th

[GreenYouth] India’s GDP slows to 6.1% in fourth quarter, is 7.1% for 2016-2017: Analysts say November’s demonetisation drive could have dragged down the economy’s growth

[Sukla Sen]

https://scroll.in/latest/839272/indias-gdp-slows-to-6-1-in-fourth-quarter-is-7-1-for-2016-2017

BUSINESS NEWS

India’s GDP slows to 6.1% in fourth quarter, is 7.1% for 2016-2017

Analysts say November’s demonetisation drive could have dragged down
the economy’s growth.

India’s economy grew 6.1% from in the first quarter of 2017 – January
to March – government data showed on Wednesday. China’s GDP grew 6.9%
during the same time period, reported The Times of India. In the
previous quarter – October to December – India’s GDP was 7%.

The demonetisation drive could have dragged down the economy, reported
Financial Times. Most sectors had been hit after the government
demonetised Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes in November 2016. Economists had
predicted a 7.1% GDP for the fourth quarter.

The GDP for the fiscal year 2016-’17 came in at 7.1%, as per the
official estimate. The economy grew a revised 8% in 2015-’16.

“The numbers make a lot of sense from a trajectory perspective,” said
Sajjid Chennoy, chief India economist for JP Morgan, was quoted as
saying by Financial Times.

Earlier, global ratings agency Moody’s Investors Service had predicted
India’s GDP would gradually increase to around 8% over the next three
to four years.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Yogi Adityanath sets agenda, prays at Ayodhya temple site

[Sukla Sen]

[The saffron in Ayodhya has acquired a deeper hue. The slogan “Ram
Lalla hum aaye hain, Mandir yahin banayenge” rent the air in Ayodhya
on Wednesday as Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath entered
the holy city to offer prayers at various temples, including the
makeshift Ram Janambhoomi temple. He became the first chief minister
in 15 years to visit Ayodhya.]

http://www.asianage.com/india/all-india/010617/yogi-adityanath-sets-agenda-prays-at-ayodhya-temple-site.html

Yogi Adityanath sets agenda, prays at Ayodhya temple site

THE ASIAN AGE. | AMITA VERMA Published : Jun 1, 2017, 2:03 am IST
Updated : Jun 1, 2017, 3:04 am IST

Hopes rise as UP CM orders faster development work.

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath pours milk in the Sarayu
river during a prayer ceremony in Ayodhya. (Photo: AP)

Ayodhya: The saffron in Ayodhya has acquired a deeper hue. The slogan
“Ram Lalla hum aaye hain, Mandir yahin banayenge” rent the air in
Ayodhya on Wednesday as Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath
entered the holy city to offer prayers at various temples, including
the makeshift Ram Janambhoomi temple. He became the first chief
minister in 15 years to visit Ayodhya.

Amid unprecedented security, the CM began his tour with a visit to the
Hanuman Garhi temple, the makeshift Ram Janambhoomi temple, Ram ki
Pairi and then participated in the aarti at the Saryu river.

He announced beautification of the ghats at the Saryu river and said
regular aarti must be held here on the pattern of the Ganga aarti in
Varanasi. Yogi Adityanath also announced a “Saryu Mahotsav” in Ayodhya
and renovation of the Ram Janki temple.

Yogi Adityanath’s Ayodhya visit has significance as it comes just a
day after senior BJP leaders were charged with criminal conspiracy
over the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition by a CBI special court.

“His visit gives us fresh hope for the Ram temple construction. Yogi
Adityanath has been actively involved in the temple movement. His
spiritual guru, Mahant Avaidyanth, was a pioneer of the temple
movement. Knowing his nature, we are confident he will not give up on
this issue so easily”, said Pandit Hemant Upadhyaya, a priest, after
the CM’s visit to Hanuman Garhi.

Yogi Adityanath, at a function, said that a new atmosphere was being
created in favour of the temple. “Some vested interests do not want
the issue to be resolved. We should amicably settle the matter and
build a temple”, he said.

His colleague, Pandit Sharad Tiwari, added: “He is the first chief
minister to have dared to visit the Ram Lalla temple at the Ram
Janmabhoomi spot and offer prayers, and that reflects his conviction.”

More than the religious agenda, it was the chief minister’s
development agenda that seems to have enthused local people.

“Yogi Adityanath has decided to turn Ayodhya-Faizabad into a municipal
corporation, which means development is finally going to take place.
Despite being a world-famous pilgrimage spot, there are no basic civic
amenities here. The drains and roads are broken, power supply is
erratic and the district hospital has no facilities. Rail connectivity
is poor and there is no air connectivity. We need to build a better
infrastructure so that the tourist influx increases”, said Rupan
Agarwal, a young engineer.

He said if tourist infrastructure comes up, the local economy would
get a boost and migration from here would be checked. Even small
businessmen are now migrating as every time there is talk about the
temple, there is trouble and business gets adversely affected.

“We need security and development along with the temple rhetoric. Yogi
Adityanath seems to understand this, that’s why we have high hopes
from him”, said Shreela Chatterjee, who runs a boutique in Faizabad.

The chief minister reviewed development work at a meeting of senior
officials in Faizabad and asked the officials to speed up work. He
also met party workers and assured them of the twin towns’
development.

The CM later had lunch at the Digambar Akhara, where he met saints and
seers. Mahant Gauri Ram said: “The chief minister already has a
blueprint for the development of Ayodhya, and he would take steps
needed to clear hurdles for temple construction.”

The chief minister also attended the Janamotsav function of Mahant
Nritya Gopal Das and inspected an eye hospital before returning to
Lucknow.



-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] Peacocks are Brahmachari, they don't have sex: Rajasthan HC judge

[Sukla Sen]

[Sharing a baffling view on the national bird peacock, Rajasthan High
Court judge Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma on Wednesday said they are
brahmachari (celibrate) and don?t have sex.
"Peacock was made the national bird of India because it is
Brahmachari. Cow is pious like peacock. Peahen doesn't need to have
sex to get pregnant. It just swallows tears of the peacock," he said.
After suggesting the Centre to make cow national animal, Justice
Sharma defended his stance saying "the cow helps us in every possible
way and its milk has always been used to cure various diseases".
While addressing the life imprisonment for cow slaughter, the
Rajasthan High Court judge earlier in the day stated that cows deserve
respect similar to that of parents.

(Reportedly, yesterday was his last day in Office.)]

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-peacocks-are-brahmachari-they-don-t-have-sex-rajasthan-hc-judge-2457379

Peacocks are Brahmachari, they don't have sex Rajasthan HC judge

Wed, 31 May 2017-10:56pm , ANI

Sharing a baffling view on the national bird peacock, Rajasthan High
Court judge Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma on Wednesday said they are
brahmachari (celibrate) and don?t have sex.

?Peacock was made the national bird of India because it is
Brahmachari. Cow is pious like peacock. Peahen doesn't need to have
sex to get pregnant. It just swallows tears of the peacock," he said.

After suggesting the Centre to make cow national animal, Justice
Sharma defended his stance saying ?the cow helps us in every possible
way and its milk has always been used to cure various diseases?.

While addressing the life imprisonment for cow slaughter, the
Rajasthan High Court judge earlier in the day stated that cows deserve
respect similar to that of parents.

"This issue is related to sympathy, conviction and faith that why
protecting and respecting the cow is an important factor. We should
come up in protest to this, only then we can safeguard our animals.
The way we respect our parents we should respect cows," Rajasthan High
Court Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma told ANI.

Earlier in the day, during the hearing over the Hingonia Gaushala
matter, Justice Sharma matter recommended the Centre that cow be made
the national animal, adding that the punishment for cow slaughter
should be escalated to life imprisonment.

Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) and Additional director general (ADG) of
police has been ordered to prepare report every three months on
cowshed and the court has also directed Urban Development & Housing
(UDH) Secretary and municipal commissioner to visit once every month.

Sharma has also instructed the forest department to plant 5,000 plants
in the cowshed every year.

The judgment comes in the wake of the Centre's order on ban on sale of
cattle for slaughter, which is facing a strong opposition by the state
governments of Kerala, Karnataka and Tripura.

Earlier last year, following the death of over a hundred cows in the
past few weeks at a government-run cowshed in Jaipur, the Rajasthan
Government had sought a report on the matter and vowed to improve the
situation in Hingonia Gaushala.

Reports said the death of cows was due to alleged lapse in maintenance
of cowshed.

"The Chief Minister has asked for report on Hingonia Gaushala. We are
drafting a road map and action plan to improve situation there," said
Rajasthan Minister Rajendra Rathore.

According to reports, the authorities initially said the cows which
died were already unwell and suffering from malnutrition.

There are over 8,000 cows at the Hingonia Gaushala which are taken
care of by a team of 14 veterinarians, 24 livestock assistants, and
about 200 other staff.

(This article has not been edited by DNA's editorial team and is
auto-generated from an agency feed.)


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] GDP figures finally show note ban effect and an economy on shaky ground

[Sukla Sen]

[Three consecutive quarters of slowing growth, with Q4 even putting
India behind China, and it is now likely that the first quarter of
FY2017-18 will also feel the note ban impact. This suggests India
cannot get by just having weathered the demonetisation storm. Instead,
the economy needs the government’s promises of Modi’s move leading to
huge growth to come true. Supporters of the move have been promising a
“V-shaped” recovery – a big dip followed by a huge jump – for some
time now, but too big a dip could scare off investment and make the
uphill climb that much harder. And this year’s budget did not offer
any major sops from the government that could make up for how badly
demonetisation hurt the economy.]

https://scroll.in/article/839304/the-daily-fix-gdp-figures-finally-show-note-ban-effect-and-an-economy-on-shaky-ground

GDP figures finally show note ban effect and an economy on shaky ground

3 hours ago

Rohan Venkataramakrishnan

Hard work
The other shoe seems to have finally dropped. When Gross Domestic
Product growth figures for the third quarter (October-December) of
Fiscal Year 2016-’17 seemed to suggest that demonetisation had not
affected the economy, Prime Minister Narendra Modi mocked economists,
claiming that India’s people knew the difference between Harvard and
hard work. Apparently both do not have to be mutually exclusive.
Figures released by the Central Statistics Office on Wednesday
suggested that India’s economy, touted to be the fastest growing
worldwide, is skidding.

Numbers for Q4, January-March, were particularly dire. A poll of
economists surveyed by Reuters ahead of the data had estimated the Q4
figure would be 7.1%, faster than the 7% clocked in Q3, and also ahead
of the 6.9% recorded by China in the same period. Estimates ranged
from 6.5% to 7.8%. The first estimate from the Central Statistics
Office, however, has put the number much further behind at 6.1%. A
more careful look at the details suggests even more cause for concern.
Gross Value Added growth, the largest component of the headline GDP
number, dropped to 5.6% from 8.7% in the same period last year.
Removing “public administration, defence and other services”, the
portion of the data referring to government expenditure, the Q4 Gross
Value Added growth number comes down to 4.1%.

Clearly, demonetisation has had its impact. Investment demand fell
into negative territory. Industry growth for Q4 dropped to 3.1% from
the 6.2% it had clocked in Q3. Construction activity was also in the
red, at negative 3.7% year-on-year, compared to 3.4% in the previous
quarter. But demonetisation is not the only story here. Economic
growth has now fallen for three quarters consecutively, including one
quarter – July-September 2016 – that was completely unaffected by
Modi’s note ban move, which was announced in November. The first GDP
estimate for the entire fiscal year is 7.1%, down from 8% the previous
year. And this was in a year with a good monsoon.

Demonetisation was such a massive shock to the system that most
analysis has been focused on figuring out how it affected India’s
economy, especially because official GDP numbers can only estimate
what has happened in the informal sector that was hardest hit by the
note ban. This was even more so because the third quarter’s results
were perplexing, since they did not seem to show any effect of
demonetisation. Now it is clear that Modi’s massive effort has hit the
economy hard.

But the bigger picture is also troubling. Three consecutive quarters
of slowing growth, with Q4 even putting India behind China, and it is
now likely that the first quarter of FY2017-18 will also feel the note
ban impact. This suggests India cannot get by just having weathered
the demonetisation storm. Instead, the economy needs the government’s
promises of Modi’s move leading to huge growth to come true.
Supporters of the move have been promising a “V-shaped” recovery – a
big dip followed by a huge jump – for some time now, but too big a dip
could scare off investment and make the uphill climb that much harder.
And this year’s budget did not offer any major sops from the
government that could make up for how badly demonetisation hurt the
economy.

The government’s other big move, the Goods and Services Tax, has also
been touted as an effort that will lead to GDP growth, but that will
not come immediately. Indeed, it is likely that economic activity will
be affected as the move is rolled out across the country, starting
July. The one bit of good news is that the Met department expects this
year’s monsoon to be normal. With the economy headed onto a slippery
slope, India desperately needs that prediction to come true.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to green

[GreenYouth] Drop in (India's) GDP: Another (Significant) Report, by ToI

[Sukla Sen]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/indias-gdp-in-fourth-quarter/articleshow/58926528.cms?

India’s GDP in Q4 grows 6.1%, loses fastest growing economy tag

Ramarko Sengupta | TIMESOFINDIA.COM | Updated: May 31, 2017, 07.01 PM IST

India's GDP or gross domestic product grew 6.1 per cent year-on-year
during the January-March period, government data showed on Wednesday.
With this, India loses its status of the world's fastest growing
economy. China's GDP grew 6.9 per cent during the same quarter.

The GDP growth rate for the full year (2016-17 ) came in at 7.1 per
cent in line with official estimate compared to a revised growth
figure of 8 per cent in FY16.

A Reuters poll of 35 economists, had predicted India's fourth quarter
GDP growth at 7.1 per cent. During the previous quarter
(October-December) India's GDP grew at 7 per cent.
Wednesday's GDP data, that missed Street expectations will be a
disappointment for the Narendra Modi government that completed three
years at the Centre last week. PM Modi's demonetisation drive that
outlawed high-value currency notes last year in November in a bid to
curb black money likely had an impact on the GDP numbers, analysts
said.

"Q4 data is definitely disappointing and clearly reflects some amount
of extreme impact from demonetisation. Based on the quarterly numbers,
we can expect a strong commentary from the central bank (RBI) in their
next policy meet," Tirthankar Patnaik, India strategist, Mizuho Bank
said. The Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) monetary policy review is due
early next month.

Yes Bank's chief economist Shubada Rao also felt that demonetisation
had a role to play in the lower than expected numbers. "The
lower-than-anticipated fourth quarter GDP number reflects the
lingering impact of demonetisation," she said.

During the reporting quarter, the agriculture, forestry and fishing
sectors grew at 5.2 per cent; mining and quarrying at 6.4 per cent;
manufacturing at 5.3 per cent; electricity, gas, water supply and
other utility services at 6.1 per cent; trade, hotels, transport and
communication at 6.5 per cent; financial, real estate and professional
services at 2.2 per cent; and public administration, defence and other
services at 17 per cent. However, the construction sector shrank 3.7
per cent.

The fourth quarter GDP data was expected to get a boost from the
revision in the IIP or Index of Industrial Production and WPI or
Wholesale Price Index series to the 2011-12 base. Brokerage firm
Nirmal Bang predicted a boost of about 20-30 basis points during the
reporting quarter. The Central Statistical Office (CSO) earlier this
month revised IIP and WPI series, changing the base year to 2011-12
from 2004-05.

However, global ratings agency Moody's Investors Service on Wednesday
said it expects India's GDP to gradually accelerate to around 8 per
cent over the next three to four years. The Indian economy will grow
by 7.5 per cent during financial year ending March 31, 2017 (FY17) and
7.7 per cent in the fiscal year 2018, it said.

India's biggest tax reform since independence in 1947, the GST or
Goods and Services Tax is also expected to contribute 2 per cent to
the country's GDP. GST that aims to subsume all central and state
taxes will be rolled out across the country on July 1, bringing India
under a single tax regime. The contribution to GDP will happen
eventually and the impact will be weighable by FY18, say economists.

Most economists, however, don't take India's GDP figures at face value
after a change in methodology two years back that transformed a
sluggish economy into a world-beater overnight.

Top Comment
Not a big deal, as one quarter was expected to be impacted by demo.
Katariamravi

What is encouraging though is this year monsoon rains have hit the
Kerala coast early raising prospects of a good harvest that will boost
farm incomes. And with government pay hikes also in the works, the
outlook for a sustained recovery looks good. However, analysts still
worry over India's uneven growth and ground realities. While private
sector investment continues to be subdued, the country's state banking
sector is laden with bad debts.

(With inputs from Reuters)
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] I. 'Trump is deciding on the Paris climate agreement with virtually no science advisers on staff' and II. 'Paris climate deal: EU and China rebuff Trump'

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
[(I)t’s unlikely Trump has considered any of the science involved in
the Paris agreement -- he has virtually no one in his White House
advising him on scientific issues. Instead, it appears that Steve
Bannon, White House counsel Don McGahn, and climate denier EPA
Administrator Scott Pruitt — who all favor leaving the agreement — are
influencing his position with nationalist ideology and fossil fuel
industry allegiances.
But it’s still remarkable that Trump has not appointed someone to run
the White House Office of Science and Technology (a person who
traditionally serves as the President’s chief science officer). OSTP
is reportedly running on fumes. Foreign Policy recently reported that
posts on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology
— a group of civilian science and tech leaders who advise the
president — have also gone unfilled, and are unlikely to be filled.]

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/5/31/15719870/trump-climate-science-advisers-paris

Trump is deciding on the Paris climate agreement with virtually no
science advisers on staff
What he does have: a lot of climate change denying voices in his West Wing.

Updated by Brian Resnick@b_resnickbr...@vox.com  May 31, 2017, 2:45pm EDT

: People march from the U.S. Capitol to the White House for the
People's Climate Movement to protest President Donald Trump's
enviromental policies. Photo by Astrid Riecken/Getty Images

President Donald Trump is on the verge of making a decision that could
reverberate across generations into the future. He’s reportedly
leaning toward pulling the US out of the 2015 Paris climate agreement,
an accord that got 190 countries working together on reducing
emissions to keep global warming beneath a critical threshold of 2
degrees Celsius.

Now, the Paris agreement was never guaranteed to save the world. Other
countries may pick up the slack and cities and states in the US will
continue their efforts to reduce emissions. And the agreement has
rallied the global community around avoiding the worst risks of
climate change that scientists say are pretty much guaranteed if
emissions aren’t sharply reduced soon.

But it’s unlikely Trump has considered any of the science involved in
the Paris agreement -- he has virtually no one in his White House
advising him on scientific issues. Instead, it appears that Steve
Bannon, White House counsel Don McGahn, and climate denier EPA
Administrator Scott Pruitt — who all favor leaving the agreement — are
influencing his position with nationalist ideology and fossil fuel
industry allegiances.

But it’s still remarkable that Trump has not appointed someone to run
the White House Office of Science and Technology (a person who
traditionally serves as the President’s chief science officer). OSTP
is reportedly running on fumes. Foreign Policy recently reported that
posts on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology
— a group of civilian science and tech leaders who advise the
president — have also gone unfilled, and are unlikely to be filled.

Both of these groups are meant to give the president an ear to leading
scientific expertise. In the past, they’ve advised presidents on
issues as diverse as biomedical research, cybersecurity, the emergence
of infectious disease, nuclear policy, and, yes, climate science. (Not
to mention, there are vacancies in many other science-related federal
agencies: Trump has yet to appoint a new director of the CDC, for one.
And you’ll recall he fired the surgeon general.)

Trump has assembled a business advisory council, a group of civilian
executives who have the president’s ear. Tesla-SpaceX founder Elon
Musk is on it. But it seems like the president is poised to dismiss
his concerns.

 Follow
 Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
Don't know which way Paris will go, but I've done all I can to advise
directly to POTUS, through others in WH & via councils, that we remain
11:04 PM - 31 May 2017
  14,634 14,634 Retweets   50,452 50,452 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

 Follow
 Elon Musk ✔ @elonmusk
@schneby Will have no choice but to depart councils in that case
11:08 PM - 31 May 2017
  3,510 3,510 Retweets   13,008 13,008 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

(Musk also sits on the president’s Manufacturing Job Initiative
council, and reports he’ll vacate both seats if Trump goes through
with pulling out of the climate agreement.)

And know: The impact of not having scientists close to the White House
stretches further than the topic of climate change. On a recent press
call, Rush Holt, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science, said there “have been very limited conversations” with
regards to Trump decision-making on the federal budget and the
scientific community. That budget document slashed billions away from
medical research that saves lives and invigorates the economy (among
other potentially devastating cuts to scientific research across the
government).

Earlier in the year, it was reported that 

[GreenYouth] 'Aadhaar isn’t progress — it’s dystopian and dangerous': Hits the nail right on its head

[Sukla Sen]

[Imagine your government required you to consent to ubiquitous
stalking in order to participate in society — to do things such as log
into a wifi hotspot, register a SIM card, get your pension, or even
obtain a food ration of rice. Imagine your government was doing this
in ways your Supreme Court had indicated were illegal.
This isn’t some dystopian future, this is happening in India right
now. The government of India is pushing relentlessly to roll out a
national biometric identity database called Aadhaar, which it wants
India’s billion-plus population to use for virtually all transactions
and interactions with government services.]

https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2017/05/26/aadhaar-isnt-progress/?utm_source=newsletter-mofo&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=aadhaar&utm_content=text&utm_term=4121052

Aadhaar isn’t progress — it’s dystopian and dangerous

Jochai Ben-Avie

May 26, 2017

*This opinion piece by Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker and
Mozilla community member Ankit Gadgil first appeared in the Business
Standard.*

***Imagine your government required you to consent to ubiquitous
stalking in order to participate in society — to do things such as log
into a wifi hotspot, register a SIM card, get your pension, or even
obtain a food ration of rice. Imagine your government was doing this
in ways your Supreme Court had indicated were illegal.*** [Emphasis
added.]

***This isn’t some dystopian future, this is happening in India right
now. The government of India is pushing relentlessly to roll out a
national biometric identity database called Aadhaar, which it wants
India’s billion-plus population to use for virtually all transactions
and interactions with government services.*** [Emphasis added.]

The Indian Supreme Court has directed that Aadhaar is only legal if
it’s voluntary and restricted to a limited number of schemes.
Seemingly disregarding this directive, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s
government has made verification through Aadhaar mandatory for a wide
range of government services, including vital subsidies that some of
India’s poorest citizens rely on to survive. Vital subsidies aren’t
voluntary.

Even worse, the government of India is selling access to this database
to private companies to use and combine with other datasets as they
wish. This would allow companies to have access to some of your most
intimate details and create detailed profiles of you, in ways you
can’t necessarily see or control. The government can also share user
data “in the interest of national security,” a term that remains
dangerously undefined. There are little to no protections on how
Aadhaar data is used, and certainly no meaningful user consent.
Individual privacy and security cannot be adequately protected and
users cannot have trust in systems when they do not have transparency
or a choice in how their private information will be used.

This is all possible because India currently does not have any
comprehensive national law protecting personal security through
privacy. India’s Attorney General has recently cast doubt on whether a
right to privacy exists in arguments before the Supreme Court, and has
not addressed how individual citizens can enjoy personal security
without privacy.

We have long argued that enacting a comprehensive privacy and data
protection law should be a national policy priority for India. While
it is encouraging to see the Attorney General also indicate to the
Supreme Court in a separate case that the government of India intends
to develop a privacy and data protection law by Diwali, it is not at
all clear that the draft law the government will put forward will
contain the robust protections needed to ensure the security and
privacy of individuals in India. At the same time, the government of
India is still exploiting this vacuum in legal protections by
continuing to push ahead with a massive initiative that systematically
threatens individuals’ security and privacy. The world is looking to
India to be a leader on internet policy, but it is unclear if Prime
Minister Modi’s government will seize this opportunity and
responsibility for India to take its place as a global leader on
protecting individual security and privacy.

The protection of individual security and privacy is critical to
building safe online systems. It is the lifeblood of the online
ecosystem, without which online efforts such as Aadhaar and Digital
India are likely to fail or become deeply dangerous.

One of Mozilla’s founding principles is the idea that security and
privacy on the internet are fundamental and must not be treated as
optional. This core value underlines and guides all of Mozilla’s work
on online privacy and security issues—including our product
development and design decisions and policies, and our public policy
and advocacy work. The Mozilla Community in India has also long sought
to empower Indians to protect their privacy themselves including
through national campaigns with privacy tips and too

[GreenYouth] Trump abandons global climate pact; allies voice dismay: A crime against humanity, of humongous proportions

[Sukla Sen]

[A crime against humanity, of humongous proportions.

While the Paris climate agreement itself was considered inadequate by
environmentalists, by and large; outright torpedoing the accord,
arrived at after huge collective efforts, by the second largest GHG
emitter, very much amounts to pushing the human race to the brink of
extinction.

One can only hope that procedural complexities of 'withdrawal' will
work, at least to an extent, as a shock absorber and may eventually
somehow save the day.
One doesn't really know how.
Things, at the moment, look extremely bleak.

(May look up, for top 10 GHG emitters:
.)]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange-trump-idUSKBN18R1J4

 Thu Jun 1, 2017 | 11:12pm EDT
Trump abandons global climate pact; allies voice dismay

[Video]

By Valerie Volcovici and Jeff Mason | WASHINGTON

President Donald Trump said on Thursday he would withdraw the United
States from the landmark 2015 global agreement to fight climate
change, a move that fulfilled a major campaign pledge but drew
condemnation from U.S. allies and business leaders.

Trump, tapping into the "America First" message he used when he was
elected president last year, said the Paris accord would undermine the
U.S. economy, cost U.S. jobs, weaken American national sovereignty and
put the country at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of
the world.

"We don't want other leaders and other countries laughing at us any
more. And they won't be," Trump said.

"The same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries
that have collectively cost America trillions of dollars through tough
trade practices and in many cases lax contributions to our critical
military alliance," Trump added.

Supporters of the accord, including some leading U.S. business
figures, called Trump's move a blow to international efforts to curb
the warming of the planet that threatens far-reaching consequences for
this century and beyond. Former Democratic President Barack Obama
expressed regret over the pullout from a deal he was instrumental in
brokering.

"But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this
administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the
future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will
step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future
generations the one planet we’ve got," Obama added.

"Today's decision is a setback for the environment and for the U.S.'s
leadership position in the world," Goldman Sachs Group Inc Chief
Executive Lloyd Blankfein wrote on Twitter.

Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, said his administration
would begin negotiations either to re-enter the Paris accord or to
have a new agreement "on terms that are fair to the United States, its
businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers." He complained in
particular about China's terms under the agreement.

International leaders including the pope had pressed Trump not follow
through on an election campaign promise to abandon the accord, and
they lamented his decision.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron and
Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni said in a rare joint statement
the agreement could not be renegotiated and urged their allies to
hasten efforts to combat climate change. They pledged to do more to
help developing countries adapt.

"While the U.S. decision is disheartening, we remain inspired by the
growing momentum around the world to combat climate change and
transition to clean growth economies," said Canadian Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau.

China's state news agency Xinhua published a commentary on Trump's
decision to withdraw from the Paris accord, describing it as a "global
setback."

China overtook the United States as the world's biggest emitter of
greenhouse gases in 2007.

With Trump's action, the United States will walk away from nearly
every other nation in the world on one of the pressing global issues
of the 21st century. Syria and Nicaragua are the only other
non-participants in the accord.

RELATED COVERAGE

VIDEOTrump pits U.S. vs. world in climate pact pullout
VIDEOTrump withdraws U.S. from Paris climate agreement
VIDEO'Make our planet great again': France's Macron rebukes Trump
FACT BOX Critics lament Trump climate move, supporters seek new deal

Fiji's Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who is the incoming head of
the U.N. Climate Change Conferences, which formalized the 2015 Paris
accord, said Trump's decision was "deeply disappointing".

Fiji, like many other small island nations, is seen as particularly
vulnerable to global warming and a possible rise in ocean levels as a
result of melting polar ice.

The United States was one of 195 nations that agreed to the accord in
Paris in December 2015. Under the pact, which was years in the making,
countries both rich and poor committed to reducing emissions of
greenhouse gases gen

[GreenYouth] Aadhaar doesn’t empower people, only the state: A number of myths, rather lies, busted

[Sukla Sen]

[Menacing rise of a surveillance state is the real essence of the Aadhaar.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/uidai-aadhaar-card-the-real-beneficiary-4684994/


   - The real beneficiary

The real beneficiaryAadhaar doesn’t empower people, only the state
Written by Reetika Khera
 | Published:June
2, 2017 2:15 am

Why are governments resorting to such desperate measures to defend Aadhaar?
Primarily because during UPA 2, they over-sold the benefits of Aadhaar


Peddling long-debunked assertions on savings as facts without any proof is
an old UIDAI strategy. Pandey’s strongest claim, “an independent study by
the World Bank”, reportedly estimates that “Aadhaar can potentially save Rs
72,000 crore every year by plugging leakages.” Actually, the study only
states that “the value of these transfers is estimated to be Rs 70,000
crores ($11.3 billion) per annum”. There is no estimate of potential
savings. Ironically, in the week that the UIDAI revealed its draconian
face, serving a legal notice to those who exposed flaws in the Aadhaar
eco-system, Ajay Pandey (CEO, UIDAI), wrote, “The critics tend to forget
that Aadhaar empowers the people, not the state” (‘Criticisms Without
Aadhaar’, IE, May 13). However, government data reveals that Pandey is
wrong to believe that “Aadhaar empowers the people”.

Pandey claims that Aadhaar has “cleansed delivery databases of fakes,
duplicates and con men/intermediaries”. Job cards and ration cards
cancelled in the course of routine updation (or “cleansing”) drives are
attributed to Aadhaar. In fact, in many cases, the cancellation pre-dates
integration with Aadhaar. For instance, the 20 lakh cards deleted in
2014-15 in West Bengal are credited to Aadhaar-integration though only
15,000 cards were Aadhaar-seeded on March 2015.

The case of LPG subsidies is well-documented. In July 2015, Chief Economic
Advisor (CEA) Arvind Subramanian wrote in The New York Times that cash
transfers resulted in “estimated savings of about $2 billion”. Yet, Cabinet
Secretariat minutes from November 2015 report only Rs 91 crore savings due
to Aadhaar. Later, the CEA himself clarified that it was potential (not
actual) savings he had in mind, but the government still uses the earlier
figures. The government’s claim on deleted ration cards is also
interesting. Out of 1.2 crore deleted cards, 62 lakh were from West Bengal.
Here’s the catch: All states (except West Bengal) report the number of
cards in terms of families; West Bengal reports individuals. The ministry
ignores the difference in units, adds them up, thus inflating the numbers.

Why are governments resorting to such desperate measures to defend Aadhaar?
Primarily because during UPA 2, they over-sold the benefits of Aadhaar. For
instance, Aadhaar cannot reduce quantity fraud. When a PDS dealer
undersells, whether I am forced to put my thumbprint in a paper register or
a POS machine makes no difference to quantity fraud.

Aadhaar cannot enhance inclusion. Possession of Aadhaar alone cannot
guarantee benefits (say, pensions or scholarships), one still has to meet
the eligibility criteria of those programmes. Exclusion from welfare was
rarely due to the lack of ID documents (in a response to an RTI query,
99.97 per cent of those who enrolled in Aadhaar did it on the basis of
existing ID documents). What Aadhaar can fix is identity fraud — for
example, if I illegally get two ration cards or duplicates. But then,
Aadhaar is one among several ways of de-duplication, and not the most
efficient either — smart cards, or even painting the full list of
beneficiaries on panchayat walls works well to identify ghosts and
duplicates!

The key question with respect to identity fraud (and the Aadhaar project)
is what Senior Advocate Arvind Datar asked the government in court (during
the PAN-Aadhaar linkage case), “Did you do any study?” The fact is there is
no reliable evidence on the scale of identity fraud in welfare programmes.
We are told that people are getting their benefits “directly from the
government without middlemen usurping them” due to Aadhaar. Three
clarifications are in order: One, benefits under some of the schemes he
lists have been credited into bank accounts for years, so middlemen were
absent from the payment process to start with. For example, payment of
MGNREGA wages into bank and post office accounts became mandatory in 2009.
Two, where middlemen existed (pensions delivered by a postman who demanded
money), one type of middleman has been replaced by another (banking
correspondents have taken the place of postmen). Three, the Aadhaar
eco-system is breeding an army of middlemen (enrolment, re-enrolment of
biometrics, Aadhaar-seeding, correcting demographic details, etc).

Meanwhile, Aadhaar is also disempowering people. For example, names are
being struck off pension lists without people’s knowledge (say, for not
submitting their Aadhaar number) or MGNREGA wages get “lo

[GreenYouth] "Donald Trump’s “Screw You” to the World': An Incisive Comment on US Withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement

[Sukla Sen]

[In writing the speech that Trump delivered on Thursday, Bannon—or
Stephen Miller, or whoever composed it—gave free rein to Trump’s
maniacal, zero-sum view of the world. The Paris accord wasn’t
portrayed as the well-meaning, nonbinding, and, in many ways, modest
deal that Barack Obama agreed to join in 2015. Trump spoke of it as if
it were an urgent threat to the economic livelihood of god-fearing
Americans. “Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect
America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw,” Trump
said.
He could have left it there, but he didn’t. This was to be a lengthy
repudiation of environmentalists, and a paean to the coal miners and
other hardhats whom the globalists had trampled on. It was a blowback
to those who thought, when Trump declined to pull the United States of
out of nafta, that the globalists inside his Administration—the Gary
Cohns and Rex Tillersons—had neutered the nationalistic America
Firsters. And, above all, the speech was a “screw you” to the world
beyond America’s borders—to the Macrons and Merkels who had pleaded
with the President in vain not to take this step.
...
This was Trumpism in its full glory—the world as a conspiracy against
its sole superpower, a country that accounts for a quarter of global
G.D.P. and about forty per cent of global personal wealth. “At what
point does America get demeaned?” Trump demanded, his voice rising.
“At what point do they start laughing at us as a country?”
The answer is that the laughing stopped a good while back. What once
seemed like a punch line—Donald Trump in the White House—is now an
everyday reality that the rest of the world is trying to deal with.
After this latest display of nihilism, it only seems more alarming.]

JOHN CASSIDY

DONALD TRUMP’S “SCREW YOU” TO THE WORLD

By John Cassidy   June 1, 2017

In pulling the U.S. out of the Paris climate-change accord, Trump was
ignoring the advice of his senior economic advisers, many of his
fellow-businessmen, and, reportedly, his own daughter and son-in-law.
PHOTOGRAPH BY ANDREW HARRER / BLOOMBERG VIA GETTY

On Thursday, a fine spring day in Washington, D.C., Donald Trump took
to the podium in the White House’s Rose Garden and announced that he
was pulling the United States out of the Paris climate-change
agreement. In doing so, he was ignoring the advice of his senior
economic advisers, many of his fellow-businessmen, and, reportedly,
his own daughter and son-in-law. Ivanka Trump was nowhere to be seen
at the announcement event, but Steve Bannon, the President’s chief
strategist, was strutting around. That was the tip-off for the sort of
address that Trump was about to deliver.

On major occasions, Trump doesn’t do uplifting speeches: we know that
by now. From the campaign stump to his remarks at the Republican
Convention in Cleveland and his Inaugural Address, his big speeches
have all been distinguished by their alarmism, fearmongering, and
negativity. To be sure, he always promises to restore America to past
glories, but that pledge is merely used as the coda to a jeremiad. His
underlying theory of the case is always the same: the United States
has been ripped off, exploited, and swindled.

***In writing the speech that Trump delivered on Thursday, Bannon—or
Stephen Miller, or whoever composed it—gave free rein to Trump’s
maniacal, zero-sum view of the world. The Paris accord wasn’t
portrayed as the well-meaning, nonbinding, and, in many ways, modest
deal that Barack Obama agreed to join in 2015. Trump spoke of it as if
it were an urgent threat to the economic livelihood of god-fearing
Americans. “Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect
America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw,” Trump
said.*** [Emphasis added.]

***He could have left it there, but he didn’t. This was to be a
lengthy repudiation of environmentalists, and a paean to the coal
miners and other hardhats whom the globalists had trampled on. It was
a blowback to those who thought, when Trump declined to pull the
United States of out of nafta, that the globalists inside his
Administration—the Gary Cohns and Rex Tillersons—had neutered the
nationalistic America Firsters. And, above all, the speech was a
“screw you” to the world beyond America’s borders—to the Macrons and
Merkels who had pleaded with the President in vain not to take this
step.*** [Emphasis added.]

“The Paris climate accord,” Trump declared, “is simply the latest
example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages
the United States, to the exclusive benefit of other countries,
leaving American workers, who I love, and taxpayers to absorb the cost
in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly
diminished economic production.”

He added, “The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris
Agreement. They went wild. . . . For the simple reason that it put our
country, the United States of America, which we all love, at a very,
very big economic disadvanta

[GreenYouth] India, Russia Sign Agreement For Units 5 And 6 Of Koodankulam Power Plant

[Sukla Sen]

[With Prime Minister Narendra Modi in St Petersburg, India and Russia
today signed an agreement on the setting up the Units 5 and 6 of the
Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu.

(It may be worth taking note here that in the wake of the Indo-US
nuclear deal, ending India's punitive exile from the global nuclear
market, no final agreement for any foreign nuclear reactors, except of
course from Russia, has as yet been stitched up. Despite the lapse of
more than eight years since.
Of course a number of deals for uranium import from various countries
have been sealed.
And, negotiations for nuclear reactors etc. are on.

- Sukla)

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-russia-sign-agreement-for-units-5-and-6-of-kudankulam-power-plant-1706833

India, Russia Sign Agreement For Units 5 And 6 Of Kudankulam Power Plant
Under an agreement with PM Modi and Vladimir Putin in 2015, a deal to
build units 5 and 6 of Kudankulam was to be signed by 2016.

All India | Edited by Divyanshu Dutta Roy | Updated: June 01, 2017 23:36 IST

The reactors will be built by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd
and Russia's Atomstroyexport company

NEW DELHI:  ***With Prime Minister Narendra Modi in St Petersburg,
India and Russia today signed an agreement on the setting up the Units
5 and 6 of the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu.***
[Emphasis added.]

PM Modi, after meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, said the
signing of the agreement for the last two units of the Kudankulam
nuclear plant will further strengthen the ties between the two
countries.

"Energy cooperation is an important aspect of our bilateral relation,
Kudankulam plant is a testimony to that claim," PM Modi said in a
joint statement with Mr Putin this evening.

Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said the Russian government
was lending India $4.2 billion from next year for a 10-year period to
help cover construction costs, reported Reuters.

"We welcome the conclusion of the General Framework Agreement and
Credit protocol for Units 5 and 6 of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power
plant," said a document titled 'A vision for the 21st Century', issued
after talks between leaders of the two countries.

"We will strive to build an 'energy bridge' between our states and
expand bilateral relations in all areas of energy cooperation,
including nuclear, hydrocarbon, hydel and renewable energy sources and
in improving energy efficiency," the vision document said, adding "the
growing partnership in the nuclear power sector between India and
Russia has opened opportunities for developing advanced nuclear
manufacturing capabilities in India in line with India's "Make In
India" initiative.

The nuclear reactors will be built by the Nuclear Power Corporation of
India Ltd (NPCIL) and Russia's Atomstroyexport company, a subsidiary
of Rosatom, the regulatory body of the Russian nuclear complex. Each
of the two units will have a capacity to produce 1,000 MW of power.

Under an agreement with PM Modi and Mr Putin in 2015, a deal to build
units 5 and 6 of Kudankulam was to be signed by 2016. But the line of
credit to be extended by Russia proved a hurdle. News agency Press
Trust of India had yesterday quoted sources as saying that last-minute
talks are on to iron out details and language of the agreement.

With inputs from PTI and Reuters


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] 'An open letter to all Indians from Kerala' has caused some stir, and very rightly so

[Sukla Sen]

[The complete text of the subject (English) letter is reproduced at
sl. no. II below.]

I/II.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/kerala-open-letter-communal-violence-india-politics/1/90.html

Kerala man's open letter to fellow Indians addressing issue of
communal violence goes viral

In Kerala's Nilambur area, a man with criminal records was arrested
for vandalising a temple and trying to cause communal violence. After
the details of the incident came out, a Reddit user wrote an "open
letter to all Indians from Kerala".

IndiaToday.in  | Written by Sanjana Agnihotri

New Delhi, May 30, 2017 | UPDATED 10:38 IS

In Kerala's Nilambur area, a man with criminal records was arrested
for vandalising a temple and trying to cause communal violence. After
the details of the incident came out, a Reddit user wrote an "open
letter to all Indians from Kerala".

***The man behind the attack, identified as Mohanakumar S S, confessed
to vandalising the temple and idols and was booked under IPC Section
153A (promoting enmity between different groups on the grounds of
religion) and Section 295 (injuring or defiling place of worship with
intent to insult the religion of any class). A Deccan Chronicle report
said that he hailed from Kilimanoor in Kerala's capital
Thiruvananthapuram.*** [Emphasis added.]

Also read: Metro for Hindustanis: Delhi youngsters insult senior
citizen who requested for seat, ask him to go to Pakistan

"The doors of the main sanctum and the idols inside were found broken.
This was almost immediately followed by a hartal by Hindu Aikya Vedi",
the Reddit user wrote in the open letter.

The user also claimed that there was a social media campaign "urging
Hindus to be ready to open refugee camps across southern districts of
Kerala". According to the open letter, there were rumors of "possible
Muslim involvement".

Also read: Communal violence on surge in BJP-led states: MHA data

However, none of that happened because the Kerala Police department
caught the perpetrator within 24 hours. The user goes on to talk about
how lies are spread to create differences between people of different
religions. The accused had claimed that he attacked the temple to
protest against bad customs in the Hindu religion.

Also read: Modi government fueling religious tensions in India, says
Amnesty report

But the user pointed out, the smear campaigns being plot and how there
is a need to "resist fascism".

Read the full post here :
[Facsimile]

II.
https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/6e0tqp/an_open_letter_to_all_indians_from_kerala/

An open letter to all Indians from Kerala (self.india)
submitted 3 days ago by LondonCapital

Dear all,

Yesterday something happened in our state, to be precise, the very
next day after the "cattle ban for slaughter " and the first day of
the holy month of Ramadan.

A temple was found desecrated on Saturday near Nilambur (District of
Malappuram) . The doors of the main sanctum and the idols inside were
found broken. This was almost immediately followed by a hartal by
Hindu Aikya Vedi. The protesters tried to block the way of Shri.
Aryadan Muhammed , former Congress MLA and former minister of
electricity who was there to visit the place.

Next was the commencement of a direct and a social media campaign
urging Hindus to be ready to open refugee camps across southern
districts of Kerala. There were rumors of possible Muslim involvement.
But fortunately nothing happened according to the plan of the
instigators.

This was due to a timely intervention of the Kerala Police department
who caught the perpetrator within 24 hours. The accused is Rajaram
Mohandas, a Trivandrum resident. According to him, he did this to
protest against bad customs in the Hindu religion.

Not a believable story at all. Someone traveled more than 350 kms just
to protest against bad customs. He just by co-incidence chose the
district with the largest Muslim population. The beginning of Ramadan
is another co-incidence, cattle ban law is yet another one.. A series
of unfortunate co-incidences. You get the idea, don't you?

The timely action of our police is really commendable. Equally
appreciated is the maturity and composure shown by the Hindu brothers
and sisters of Malappuram who did not jump to conclusions based on
rumors and cooked up stories.

Unfortunately, this is not the first incident of its kind. Cooked up
stories have become the cause or have sparked major riots. You can
find numerous examples of similar incidents all across the country.
Here is a small example...

Prior to the Gujarat riots, a local newspaper reported an incident, a
story about how the bodies of two Hindu women were found on the banks
of a river. Two days later the newspaper disawowed the story in a
small column in a not so noticable place. But the damage was done. It
fueled cruelty towards women during the ensuing riots

But incidents like this are new to us. We are not familiar with the
purposeful spreading of lies to create a split among peo

[GreenYouth] Toward a Treaty Prohibiting Nuclear Weapons

[Sukla Sen]

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2017-06/focus/toward-treaty-prohibiting-nuclear-weapons

June 2017

By Daryl G. Kimball

Nearly five decades ago, the 1968 nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
(NPT) established the requirement that states-parties pursue
“effective measures” to end the nuclear arms race and to achieve
nuclear disarmament.

The United States and Russia have reduced their Cold War stockpiles
and verifiably banned nuclear explosive testing. But some 15,000
weapons remain, additional nuclear-armed states have emerged, and the
risk of nuclear weapons use is rising.

Key NPT disarmament commitments made in 2010 are unfulfilled. The
future of key nuclear arms control treaties, including the New
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear
Forces Treaty, are in doubt. The 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
(CTBT) has not formally entered into force. Global fissile material
stocks remain very substantial. Worse still, the world’s nine
nuclear-armed states are replacing, upgrading, or in some cases
expanding their arsenals.

In response, non-nuclear-weapon states have justifiably argued that
the grave risks posed by nuclear weapons demand more urgent action.
Last fall at the United Nations, 123 states voted to launch
negotiations on a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear
weapons.

The conclusion of such a treaty is now within sight. From June 15 to
July 7, representatives from some 130 states and civil society groups
will try to finalize a draft treaty text issued May 22 by the
president of the negotiating conference, Ambassador Elayne Whyte Gómez
of Costa Rica.

The draft preamble correctly notes that “further effective measures”
will be necessary to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and that
the “use of nuclear weapons would be contrary to the rules of
international law in armed conflict.” The draft also recognizes the
central role of the NPT, the CTBT, and nuclear-weapon-free-zone
treaties for achieving disarmament.

At its core, the new treaty would prohibit states-parties from using,
testing, developing, producing, manufacturing, or otherwise acquiring,
possessing, stockpiling, transferring, or receiving control over
nuclear weapons. It would also require each state to prohibit and
prevent the stationing, installation, or deployment of nuclear weapons
on their territory (but does not prohibit “transit”). These latter
provisions would affect the five NATO states that still host U.S.
nuclear weapons.

The text provides a solid basis for a final agreement, although, like
any first draft, it will under go refinements. As negotiators make
adjustments, they should ensure the treaty allows for the
establishment of effective means for disarmament verification on a
case-by-case basis, including special anytime, anywhere access by the
International Atomic Energy Agency as may be required to verify that a
nuclear-armed state has completely eliminated its arsenal and related
facilities and inventory of materials. Negotiators also should make
clear that the prohibition on nuclear explosive testing in the new
convention does not detract from or offer an alternative to states’
obligations under the CTBT, including its nuclear test explosion
monitoring and inspections regime.

The nuclear-weapon states have dismissed the initiative as irrelevant
and said it may undermine support for the NPT. In reality, efforts to
reduce the salience of nuclear weapons are fundamentally consistent
with NPT objectives and the common pursuit of a world without nuclear
weapons.

It is also a healthy challenge to nuclear deterrence orthodoxy, which
incorrectly and dangerously assumes that military postures threatening
large-scale use of nuclear weapons are sustainable and will not fail.
It is a reminder that, for a majority of the world’s states, these
weapons of mass destruction are a security liability, not an asset.

The emerging treaty has the potential to further delegitimize nuclear
weapons as instruments of national power and to strengthen the legal
and political norms against their possession and use. At a time when
the nuclear danger is growing, these contributions are especially
useful.

Although the emerging prohibition convention can help encourage
further action on disarmament, additional and difficult work lies
ahead. Prohibition treaty supporters, skeptics, and opponents must
find new and creative ways to come together to strengthen the NPT
regime, in part by advancing new and effective disarmament measures,
while easing the growing tensions between nuclear-armed states that
make progress difficult and increase the danger of nuclear use.

Leaders from the nuclear-armed states who say nuclear disarmament can
be achieved only in a progressive, step-by-step fashion must be
willing and able to walk the talk. Such measures include securing the
ratifications needed to bring the CTBT into force; reviving the
moribund U.S.-Russian arms control dialogue; bringing China, India,
and Pakistan furt

[GreenYouth] 'Trump Set To Roll Back Obama’s Cuba Policies'?

[Sukla Sen]

[President Donald Trump is set to announce a rollback of former
President Barack Obama’s policies toward Cuba, The Daily Caller has
learned.
Two sources told TheDC that the development is due to the
behind-the-scenes efforts of Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio,
Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez and Republican Florida Rep.
Mario Diaz-Balart.
This information coming from an anti-embargo group, which spoke on the
condition of anonymity, was confirmed Sunday by John Kavulich of the
nonpartisan U.S. – Cuba Trade and Economic Council. “The Trump
Administration has been ‘ready’ since February 2017 to announce
changes, but issues unrelated to Cuba have intervened,” Kavulich
said.]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/29/exclusive-trump-set-to-roll-back-obamas-cuba-policies/

EXCLUSIVE: Trump Set To Roll Back Obama’s Cuba Policies

ALEX PFEIFFER
Reporter

12:58 PM 05/29/2017

President Donald Trump is set to announce a rollback of former
President Barack Obama’s policies toward Cuba, The Daily Caller has
learned.

Two sources told TheDC that the development is due to the
behind-the-scenes efforts of Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio,
Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez and Republican Florida Rep.
Mario Diaz-Balart.

This information coming from an anti-embargo group, which spoke on the
condition of anonymity, was confirmed Sunday by John Kavulich of the
nonpartisan U.S. – Cuba Trade and Economic Council. “The Trump
Administration has been ‘ready’ since February 2017 to announce
changes, but issues unrelated to Cuba have intervened,” Kavulich said.

Former President Obama worked to enact several changes to Cuban policy
during his tenure in office. He ended the policy known as “wet foot,
dry foot” that gave Cuban illegal immigrants a path to legal status,
opened travel to the island nation, re-established diplomatic
relations and loosened restrictions on doing business in the country.

These moves were applauded along bipartisan lines, but Cuban
hardliners weren’t pleased. Trump himself has been on both sides of
the issue. He told TheDC in 2015 that the “concept of opening with
Cuba is fine,” but on the campaign trail he threatened to “terminate”
deals that the Obama administration made with Cuba.

The campaign trail rhetoric carried over into the administration, as
Trump said in a February press conference that he has “very similar
views” on Cuba as Sen. Rubio.

His administration launched a “full review” of Cuban policy, and White
House press secretary Sean Spicer told TheDC Sunday that there “are no
updates on this issue at this time.”

Rubio and Rep. Diaz-Balart, however, have been publicly confident that
Trump will bring back hardline policies against Cuba. The National
Journal reported Wednesday that Diaz-Balart said he is “1,000 percent
sure the president is going to deliver on his commitment.”

“I have no doubt that you’re going to see in short order a different
policy,” the Cuban-American legislator added. Rubio tweeted in March
that he is “quite confident” Trump will “treat [Cuba] like a
dictatorship.”

The Florida senator also told El Nuevo Herald, “We’ve been walking
through all these issues with the president and his team, figuring out
the right steps to take and when.”

Sen. Menendez has not spoken on the topic since Trump became
president, and a spokeswoman told TheDC she is unaware of these
concessions from the Trump administration.

Diaz-Balart’s office did not respond to a media inquiry about
behind-the-scenes work with the Trump administration, and a Rubio
spokesman said he can’t provide TheDC with “anything at this time.”

The anti-embargo group told TheDC that Trump will announce these
changes in a June speech in Miami. The White House also refused to
confirm or deny this.

Kavulich said that the administration will enact “increased
enforcement relating to travel,” and “a focus upon discouraging
transactions with entities controlled by the Revolutionary Armed
Forces (FAR) of the Republic of Cuba.”

Starwood Hotels & Resorts International currently has a hotel under
management that is owned by a company controlled by the FAR, according
to Kavulich.

The move to enact stricter policies toward Cuba will likely land the
president criticism from several of his Republican colleagues. A bill
introduced by Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake Thursday to remove
all travel restrictions with Cuba has nine Republican cosponsors.

“Recognizing the inherent right of Americans to travel to Cuba isn’t a
concession to dictators, it is an expression of freedom,” Sen. Flake
said in a statement. “It is Americans who are penalized by our travel
ban, not the Cuban government.”


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this g

[GreenYouth] Quite An Array of Significant Responses, by and large Ranging from Mildly Critical to outright Blistering, to Trump's Humongous Crime against Humanity, Yet Putin Refuses to "Judge"

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
http://www.fox25boston.com/news/world-leaders-celebrities-react-to-us-withdrawal-from-paris-climate-deal/528829388

World leaders, celebrities react to U.S. withdrawal from Paris Climate Deal

by: Kelcie Willis, Cox Media Group National Content Desk Updated: Jun
1, 2017 - 7:44 PM

[Video" 0.49-min clip of Trump speech rejecting Paris Climat Agreement]

After speculation, President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he
has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Accord.

Trump made the announcement at the White House Rose Garden.

Related Headlines
 WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 01: U.S. President Donald Trump announces his
decision for the United States to pull out of the Paris climate
agreement in the Rose Garden at the White House June 1, 2017 in
Washington, DC.
The Weather Channel reacts to end of Paris climate agreement

Political fallout from Trump climate change decision

What is the Paris climate agreement? 9 things to know
>> Read more trending news

The decision made waves across the country and among world leaders,
climate advocates and celebrities, prompting reactions on social
media.

After speculation, President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he
has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Accord.

Trump made the announcement at the White House Rose Garden.

Related Headlines
 WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 01: U.S. President Donald Trump announces his
decision for the United States to pull out of the Paris climate
agreement in the Rose Garden at the White House June 1, 2017 in
Washington, DC.
The Weather Channel reacts to end of Paris climate agreement

Political fallout from Trump climate change decision

What is the Paris climate agreement? 9 things to know
>> Read more trending news

The decision made waves across the country and among world leaders,
climate advocates and celebrities, prompting reactions on social
media.

Hillary Clinton ✔ @HillaryClinton
A historic mistake. The world is moving forward together on climate
change. Paris withdrawal leaves American workers & families behind.
5:08 AM - 2 Jun 2017
  50,461 50,461 Retweets   178,532 178,532 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
President of Mexico Enrique Pena Nieto said in a tweet that "Mexico
maintains its support and commitment for the Paris accord," according
to a translation from The Associated Press.
 Follow
 Enrique Peña Nieto ✔ @EPN
México mantiene su respaldo y compromiso con el Acuerdo de París para
detener los efectos del cambio climático global.
4:29 AM - 2 Jun 2017
  2,610 2,610 Retweets   5,284 5,284 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
 Follow
 Bill Clinton ✔ @billclinton
Walking away from Paris treaty is a mistake. Climate change is real.
We owe our children more. Protecting our future also creates more
jobs.
4:23 AM - 2 Jun 2017
  28,549 28,549 Retweets   89,369 89,369 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
 Follow
 Robert Iger ✔ @RobertIger
As a matter of principle, I've resigned from the President's Council
over the #ParisAgreement withdrawal.
4:23 AM - 2 Jun 2017
  47,150 47,150 Retweets   163,668 163,668 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

 Follow
 Emmanuel Macron ✔ @EmmanuelMacron
We all share the same responsibility: make our planet great again.
3:51 AM - 2 Jun 2017
  39,344 39,344 Retweets   79,867 79,867 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
The Associated Press reported that Environment Minister Josh
Frydenberg of Australia said, “It would’ve been preferable for the
United States to remain at the table. That being said, many other
major countries have reaffirmed -- like Canada, like Japan, India and
China -- have reaffirmed their commitment to Paris. Australia does
too.
Australia will carry on because as our prime minister has made very
clear, when we sign up to international agreements ...we will follow
through."
General Motors CEO Mary Barra said she will remain on President
Trump’s Strategy and Policy Forum, saying it provides GM a seat at an
important table to contribute to a constructive dialogue about key
policy issues," The AP reported. A separate statement from GM said,
“International agreements aside, we remain committed to creating a
better environment.”
Time reported that former President Barack Obama issued the following
statement in response to the announcement:

"A year and a half ago, the world came together in Paris around the
first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course
and protect the world we leave to our children.

"It was steady, principled American leadership on the world stage that
made that achievement possible. It was bold American ambition that
encouraged dozens of other nations to set their sights higher as well.
And what made that leadership and ambition possible was America’s
private innovation and public investment in growing industries like
wind and solar – industries that created some of the fastest new
streams of good-paying jobs in recent years, and contributed to the
longest streak of job creation in our history.

"Simply put, the private s

[GreenYouth] I. 'How Trump had already killed Paris deal in his 1st 5 months' and II. 'US climate pact pullout could add 0.3 degrees of warming: UN'

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
[If you cut through the smoke and mirrors of President Trump's
announcement of withdrawal from the Paris accord, and take a cold hard
look at what he has been doing for the past five months, one thing
stands out. He has already demolished the moderate attempts made by
Obama to tackle greenhouse gas emissions in the US through a series of
orders. So much so that US commitments under the Paris deal were
already dead in the water.
...
Its scrapping will lead to an addition of 200 million tons of gases by
2025. Emission standards for cars and light trucks are under review,
the moratorium on federal coal leases has been lifted, methane
reporting requirements have been withdrawn and the Social Cost of
Carbon, an accounting arrangement to build in costs of emissions, has
been rescinded.
The US had committed at Paris to reduce emissions by 26-28% below 2005
levels by 2025. Obama's policies would have reduced emissions by 10%,
the rest was still a work in progress. But all that is history now.]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/how-trump-had-already-killed-paris-deal-in-his-1st-5-months/articleshow/58968872.cms

How Trump had already killed Paris deal in his 1st 5 months

Subodh Varma | TNN | Jun 3, 2017, 01.00 AM IST

If you cut through the smoke and mirrors of President Trump's
announcement of withdrawal from the Paris accord, and take a cold hard
look at what he has been doing for the past five months, one thing
stands out. He has already demolished the moderate attempts made by
Obama to tackle greenhouse gas emissions in the US through a series of
orders. So much so that US commitments under the Paris deal were
already dead in the water.

President Trump rescinded Obama Administration's Climate Action Plan
(CAP). His "America First Energy Plan" promised to do away with
"burdensome regulations on our energy industry" and reviving America's
coal industry. His executive order on "energy independence" initiated
the process of "suspending, revising, and rescinding" a number of
existing policies, including the Clean Power Plan. Several other
federal policies aimed at controlling emissions are under review.

Just doing away with the CAP, which was to improve energy efficiency
and reduce methane emissions by 40-45%, especially from the fracking
industry, will add about 1,000 million tons of greenhouse gases
(measured in carbondioxide equivalent terms). The Clean Power Plan,
which was to reduce power sector emissions by 32%, was blocked by the
American Supreme Court and is now under review by the Trump
administration.

Its scrapping will lead to an addition of 200 million tons of gases by
2025. Emission standards for cars and light trucks are under review,
the moratorium on federal coal leases has been lifted, methane
reporting requirements have been withdrawn and the Social Cost of
Carbon, an accounting arrangement to build in costs of emissions, has
been rescinded.

The US had committed at Paris to reduce emissions by 26-28% below 2005
levels by 2025. Obama's policies would have reduced emissions by 10%,
the rest was still a work in progress. But all that is history now.

With Trump's anti-environmental, ultra nationalist stance, the
downward trend of emissions of the last decade will be reversed,
although efforts by States and cities may keep the momentum going.

Falling solar and wind energy costs, and industry backing to emission
control will also help. But the US is going to fail to keep its
emissions in check virtually holding the whole world to ransom.

II.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/06/02/climate-action-unstoppable-nations-should-stay-course-un-chief-

US climate pact pullout could add 0.3 degrees of warming: UN

The US withdrawal from the Paris climate pact could 'in a worst case
scenario' add a 0.3 degree Celsius rise in global temperatures over
the 21st century, the UN said Friday.

Source: AFP

2 JUN 2017 - 8:59 PM  UPDATED YESTERDAY 10:28 PM

The head of the World Meteorological Organisation's atmospheric
research and environment department, Deon Terblanche, underscored
however that the likely impact of US President Donald Trump's
widely-condemned decision remains far from clear.

"We haven't run new models overnight but the indications are that it
could be in the worst case scenario in the order of 0.3 degrees
Celsius," Terblanche told reporters in Geneva, referring to a possible
rise over pre-industrial temperatures.

"That is the worst case scenario and this probably not what will
happen," he added.

Under the Paris deal agreed in 2015, world nations vowed steps to keep
the worldwide rise in temperatures "well below" two degrees Celsius
(3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) from pre-industrial times.

What is the Paris Climate Agreement?
[Video]

The fight against climate change is "unstoppable" and nations should
stick to the landmark Paris accord, UN Secretary General Antonio
Guterres said Friday after the US chose to exit the deal.

"Climate change is undeniable and it is one of the 

[GreenYouth] Donald Trump's Torpedoing of the Paris Climate Agreement: An Informed Assessment by a (Non-Putinist / Non-Trumpist) Section of the Far Left

[Sukla Sen]

[We have repeated here (on this site) enough that the Paris Agreement
is only a declaration of intentions. But it is a declaration of intent
which at least has the advantage - it is the only one - of setting a
goal: "stay well below 2 ° C, and continue efforts not to exceed 1.5 °
C ". National contributions to this goal put us on the path of a 3 to
4 ° C warming by the end of the century. But doing nothing could push
up the mercury to 6 ° C. Now, doing nothing is precisely what the
United States has just decided. Trump is trying to make Americans
believe that its decision has no ecological consequences for them, but
it implies a difference well over 0.2 ° C!
...
In any case, the violence of Trump's words leaves little credibility
to this idea of ​​renegotiating (the Agreement). In addition to the
"emerging" and "developing" countries, the White House troll has taken
direct action to its European partners: "Those who ask the US to
remain in the agreement are countries Which are costly to the US by
their commercial practices and do not contribute to the military
alliance. "  Merkel is the target. The towel burns really between
Washington and Berlin. In any case, let us remember that, for Trump,
the profits of the US bosses and the militaristic policy of defending
their interests pass before the rescue of the climate of the Earth.
...
Precisely because he is weak, Trump chose to satisfy his base -
represented in his team by Bannon, Pence, Pruitt, Session and some
others. Mike Pence - who introduced his speech - and Scott Pruitt -
who commented on it - both insisted heavily on this aspect: the
President did what he said. (Pruitt, who really looks like a
master-shopper of his master's pumps) added to it in populism,
speaking of the "working class", and greeting Trump as "the champion
of the forgotten of this country"!).

(The emphatic denunciation of capitalism, in the comment reproduced
below, in the subject context, regardless of the fact that despite
repeated hiccups its end is just nowhere in sight, is of course par
for the  course.

What, however, is extremely noteworthy is the penetrating analysis of
Trump's speech delivered on the ocassion - in defence of the
indefensible.
Unravelling of the various constituent components (of Trump's response).

What is reproduced below is a google translation - option available
on-site, from the original in French.
Not too bad.

- Sukla)]

Climate: Trump plays its national-populist vault. What did you expect?

June 2, 2017 by Daniel Tanuro

The United States denounced the Paris climate agreement, canceled all
the measures decided by the United States under this agreement and
withdrew from the Green Fund for Climate. These are the major
decisions that Donald Trump finally announced, Thursday, June 1, after
a long suspense.

These decisions are in line with the promises made by the new
President during his election campaign. In the past few months, some
observers had wanted to believe that Trump would play another music,
but it was not. On the contrary, his speech in the Garden of the Roses
of the White House sprang from a disturbing nationalist and populist
demagogy. What did you expect? As advertised ...

Victimization and nationalism

For Trump, the Paris accord was nothing but a scandalous dupe market
imposed on the USA. "The Paris agreement does not deal with climate ,"
he said, " it deals with the financial advantage that other countries
get compared to the United States. The rest of the world applauded
when we signed the agreement. They were happy, for the simple reason
that we suffer from a very great economic disadvantage. "

Drawing an apocalyptic picture of the implications of the deal, the
president said it would lead to the loss of 2.7 million jobs, cost US
$ 3 trillion to US citizens, Purchase up to $ 7,000 / year. He added
the figures of the reductions in activity that would affect the
industrial sectors: "-86% in the coal sector" , he said ... omitting
of course to mention that solar already gives employment to 800,000 US
workers (against 67,000 in coal) and creates more jobs than the coal
industry loses.

For Trump, it is simple, there is a conspiracy: the poor Americans,
too honest, are victim of an enormous injustice hurled by an evil
machination of all the other countries. The denunciation of the
agreement is therefore an elementary surge of sovereignty and national
dignity: "The heads of state of Europe and China should not have more
to say about the policy of the United States than the American
citizens . We do not want to be the laughingstock of the world. We
will not be. "

Populist and security demagogy

Recounting the tone of his electoral meetings, Trump pushed hard and
throughout his discourse on social demagogy. As if the goal of its
billionaire government was to give decent employment and a decent
income to workers in Detroit and Pittsburgh, as if the Paris agreement
were to take the money and jobs of the American workers for the
Distribute t

[GreenYouth] OPINION This Russian joke helps explain the persistent government euphoria on the economic front: The demonetisation effect is visible in the falling GDP numbers. But the government says

[Sukla Sen]

[I have told this story before. I will say it again as its aptness to
describe our leadership style has never been so exact. The Russians
have a great joke on every misfortune they have to endure. One of the
best I have heard is about Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev
traveling together on a train when it unexpectedly stops. Then come
suggestions to fix the problem. Lenin suggests a subbotnik or day of
voluntary labour so that workers and peasants can fix the problem.
Nothing happens. Stalin puts his head out of the window and shouts
that if the train does not move immediately, the engine driver will be
shot. Nothing happens. Khrushchev then suggests having the rails from
behind put in front so that the train can start moving. Nothing
happens. When his turn comes, Brezhnev says, “Comrades, let’s draw the
curtains, turn on the gramophone and pretend we are moving!” There is
a similar air of eyes shut make believe in this government’s
persistent euphoria on the economic front.]

https://scroll.in/article/839496/this-old-russian-joke-helps-explain-the-government-spin-on-demonetisation-and-falling-gdp-numbers

OPINION

This Russian joke helps explain the persistent government euphoria on
the economic front
The demonetisation effect is visible in the falling GDP numbers. But
the government says all is well.

4 hours ago

Mohan Guruswamy

In January, no sooner was the demonetisation period officially over,
Chief Statistician TCA Anant told us, “The growth in GDP [gross
domestic product] during 2016-’17 is estimated at 7.1% as compared to
the growth rate of 7.6% in 2015-’16.” He also said the economy had
weathered the volatility caused by the withdrawal of high-value bank
notes in November and that it was now back on the growth trajectory.
Immediately, the full official caboodle, from the prime minister
downwards to the patently ignorant party spokespersons, went to town
and said the ill-effects, if any, of demonetisation were a passing
blip and all was well.

What they did not say was that the data on hand was till November
2016, before that singular act of great stupidity was inflicted on the
nation. This is typical of how this government uses and misuses data
to create the illusion of wellbeing. It is now known that
demonetisation cost us much more. India’s GDP growth for the last
quarter of 2016-’17 financial year is officially pegged at 6.1%. It’s
a huge fall from the 7.8% claimed for the previous year. Mind you, the
2015-’16 growth factors in a deflation of 1.4%, which means the
nominal GDP growth was only 6.4%. In the real world, it is nominal GDP
that is more important as value addition, profits and taxes are
computed as they are without adjusting for inflation or deflation.

Demonetisation was supposed to be the great big magic wand to clean up
the economy, elevate revenues and put us on a higher growth
trajectory. None of this happened or is happening. Cash transactions
are once again the norm. According to Reserve Bank of India data, the
number of digital transactions increased by 100 million to 200 million
in 2014-’16. This went up to 300 million till November. During the
months of November and December, when 86% of the cash in the system
was withdrawn, the number of digital transactions shot up to well over
500 million. In the first three months since currency curbs were
withdrawn, the number of digital transactions fell to 350 million.
This downward trajectory suggests that such transactions will hit
pre-demonetisation levels soon. Tax revenue mostly went up because of
additional tax collections on Seventh Pay Commission back dues.

GDP data
Gross domestic product growth is like a number on the speedometer in a
car. It tells us what pace the nation’s economic train is moving at.
By knowing this, we can estimate the distance to the next destination.
But suppose somebody tinkered with the speedometer to get a higher
reading even when at zero? Even when the vehicle is not moving, the
meter will tell you it is moving, and when it is moving it will tell
you it is moving faster than it actually is.

This is what the Narendra Modi regime did in February 2015. The GDP
growth rate was tweaked to put India on a higher trajectory, giving
itself an added 2.2% growth as a bonus. Since it was not real, it was
like adding water to milk. Adding this gave us a growth of 7.4% in
2015-’16. Without the tweaking, it would have been 5.2%, in line with
the International Monetary Fund’s forecast. If the Manmohan Singh-led
United Progressive Alliance government had done it a year earlier, the
growth in its last year in office would have been a healthy looking
6.9% instead of the dismal 4.7% computed.

Tweaked speed on the speedometer gets caught out when speed and time
cannot be reconciled with the distance travelled, and things like fuel
consumption. The lack of new jobs, just 210,000 in the organised
sector last year, and the falling investment to GDP ratio are some
giveaways pointing to a lower speed. But the cacoph

[GreenYouth] A matter of security: After receiving threats from Maoists, the badminton ace (Saina Nehwal) has taken precautions

[Sukla Sen]

["The Maoist threat to Saina Nehwal, following her decision to extend
financial support to families of the 12 CRPF jawans who were killed in
a Maoist ambush near Bastar on March 16, seems to have rattled the
badminton ace. She has barred incoming calls on her mobile phone, as
have her other shuttler friends. Her former coach Gopichand and her
current coach Vimal Kumar could not be reached either."

This is, evidently, deeply disturbing.
In case the report is factual, such threats deserve strongest condemnation.
No less than the brutal state repressions in various corners of the country.

Not because Saina is a sports icon, but because as any other Indian
citizen she must have full freedom to decide whom she can extend
humanitarian helps to.
It is not necessary that everybody else agrees with her priorities or choice.
Those who don't also should free to air their views.
But issuance of a threat is just unacceptable.]


http://www.asianage.com/sports/in-other-sports/020617/a-matter-of-security.html

A matter of security

THE ASIAN AGE. Published : Jun 2, 2017, 4:43 am IST Updated : Jun 2,
2017, 4:43 am IST

After receiving threats from Maoists, the badminton ace has taken precautions.

***The Maoist threat to Saina Nehwal, following her decision to extend
financial support to families of the 12 CRPF jawans who were killed in
a Maoist ambush near Bastar on March 16, seems to have rattled the
badminton ace. She has barred incoming calls on her mobile phone, as
have her other shuttler friends. Her former coach Gopichand and her
current coach Vimal Kumar could not be reached either.*** [Emphasis
added.]

The players are now in Thailand for a tournament. However, fellow
shuttler Jwala Gutta feels that the situation will be under control.
“Saina is an icon of our country and the government will definitely
make sure she stays safe,” Jwala said and added, “As a good citizen,
she has come forward to support the family of the CRPF personnel who
were killed in the attack. Now that she is getting these threats, the
government should take care of her security. It’s the duty of the
state to make sure that she is fine. I’m sure she’s been approached by
the authorities and there are people who will take care of this.”

Having played with her for most part of her career, Jwala feels Saina
is a tough nut to crack. “Knowing Saina, I don’t think this will
affect her. She’s mentally strong,” she said, adding, “But I am sure
her parents would be worried, so the government must provide all the
security that she needs.”

Jwala opines that sportspersons are better off without such
disturbances. “When you’re playing at the highest level, you need 100
per cent focus on the game, for there is a huge responsibility that
you carry on your shoulders and so much is expected of you. But sadly,
we live in a society where social pressures are just too much,
especially for a woman,” she said.

“However, Saina has been lucky to have had a good support system on
her way to the top. It should stay that way,” she concludes.

Police awaits word from Saina
Currently in Bangkok, Saina Nehwal is yet to seek security from
Telangana state police. The police department is awaiting
communication from her for further action. Intelligence Security Wing
Chief M.K. Singh said that they are ready to offer security provided
she approaches the police.

“We provide security as per the gravity of the threat. When she
approaches us, we will analyse the gravity of the situation and
provide the required security,” he said.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] 'The place of trumpism in history': A (Detailed and Well-Argued) Far Left View

[Sukla Sen]

[Trump has a project: to manage the United States as a great
enterprise, to transform it into a fortress of "Judeo-Christian
capitalism", to restructure it in the hussar, and then to restore it
to a world hegemony without sharing. Harassment of personnel,
brutality with competitors, denial of environmental externalities are
simply copied / pasted from the level of their business to that of the
company. Billionaire uncultivated, nationalist, racist, sexist,
homophobic, islamophobic, antisemitic, Trump ambitionne to reshape the
company USAnd the world map with the hammer, ignoring what exists and
shattering what resists.
...
It is in the interest of the exploited and the oppressed throughout
the world to mark their broadest and most active solidarity with the
mobilizations in the United States. Besides, it is not about
solidarity, but about common struggle. For the common interest of the
exploited and the oppressed of the whole world is to defeat Trump. His
defeat will be that of all despots - or despot candidates - who play
nationalism or populism to enslave the populations.
The showdown in the United States is global. If trumpism is defeated,
or if it has to "disengage" under the pressure of the street, this
victory will encourage the counter-offensive of the people everywhere.
If he were to win, however, the risk of a third world war would have
to be seriously apprehended.

(The comment reproduced below is a google translation - option
available on-site, of the original in French.)]

http://alencontre.org/ameriques/americnord/usa/la-place-du-trumpisme-dans-lhistoire.html

The place of trumpism in history
Posted by Alencontre 7 - February - 2017

Donald Trump and Stephen Bannon

By Daniel Tanuro

***Trump has a project: to manage the United States as a great
enterprise, to transform it into a fortress of "Judeo-Christian
capitalism", to restructure it in the hussar, and then to restore it
to a world hegemony without sharing. Harassment of personnel,
brutality with competitors, denial of environmental externalities are
simply copied / pasted from the level of their business to that of the
company. Billionaire uncultivated, nationalist, racist, sexist,
homophobic, islamophobic, antisemitic, Trump ambitionne to reshape the
company USAnd the world map with the hammer, ignoring what exists and
shattering what resists.*** [Emphasis added.]

Various fractions of the ruling class follow the fury of the new
President with anxiety. Will they be able to channel it? Will they
have to get rid of them? Both options are open. But a third can not be
excluded: that the blaster, by a forward flight, makes the world
tumble into a nightmare of war and climate disaster. For Trump does
not fall from the sky, it is a product of the inextricable capitalist
contradictions that neoliberal governance is more and more difficult
to master and which weaken political superstructures to the extreme in
a world in crisis of hegemony. Under these circumstances, the relative
autonomy of politics and of individuals tends to increase. Strong
power is trend. Not only among the protectionist Trump, but also among
its globalist competitors in Europe and Asia.

*

Understanding the meaning of trumpism implies taking a step back from
the contradictions of capital and their evolution, from which flows
the present situation. It will then be better to understand that the
election of Trump as President of the United States is not an accident
of course but the symptom of something deeper, which can mark the
beginning of a new era.

One of the major characteristics of capitalism is the growing
contradiction between the partial rationality of enterprises and the
global irrationality of the system. Companies - large companies in
particular - put the most modern science at the service of profit to
rigorously organize the work and plan the investments. On the other
hand, the economy and society as a whole develop without plan, in a
chaotic way, according to the constraints and the chances of the
market.

This contradiction is the product of the very nature of the mode of
production. On the one hand, decisions about what is to be produced,
how, for what, for whom and in what quantities are taken by competing
capitalists, based solely on profit. To survive, every owner of
capital is bound to leave nothing to chance. On the other hand, the
socialization of production takes place blindly. The general interest,
in fact, is defined only in a hollow: as the way society and the
environment fold, step by step, with the imperatives of the production
of goodwill.

A major turning point for the United States, a pivotal moment for the world

A key function of political and state superstructures is to disguise
this reality in order to ensure that the mode of production is
socially legitimate without which it can not survive. The neo-liberal
ideology and the resulting re-regulation are now very difficult to
assume this task. Especially in the United States. The bank re

[GreenYouth] Arnab Goswami's Republic TV caught adopting unethical tactic to jack up viewership

[Sukla Sen]

I/II.
http://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/other/cable-operators-ordered-not-to-favour-tv-channels/articleshow/58970103.cms

CABLE OPERATORS ORDERED NOT TO FAVOUR TV CHANNELS
Mumbai Mirror | Updated: Jun 3, 2017, 06.00 AM IST

The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has ordered multi
system operators (MSO) against resorting to unfair distribution
tactics to improve the TV ratings of specific channels. The order was
issued after it came to notice that the newly launched Republic TV
claimed to have more viewers than other news channels in a particular
week.

The complaint was filed by the News Broadcasters Association (NBA)
which contested a Broadcasters Audience Research Council (BARC) which
released the controversial figures. NBA had also appealed to BARC not
to release data for the English general news category for Week 19,
2017 as the rating was corrupted due to unfair distribution tactics.

Major English news channels, who are also members of the NBA, had
opted out of the measuring system to protect themselves from being
measured in a non-level playing field and had clarified that they
would return only after the unethical practices had been stopped.

TRAI in its recent mandate to the Multiple System Operators (MSOs),
also emphasized on ensuring that all channels falling in a particular
genre appear in its (MSO’s) network’s electronic programming guide
(EPG) under that genre, to make services more consumer friendly.

As a result of TRAI’s mandate and action, the rating of Republic TV
has gone down by over 50 per cent after the malpractice was
discontinued. This drop in rating brings Republic TV closer to
realistic levels of weekly reach of general English news channels
which is an average of 0.6 to 0.8 million.

After a series of discussions and complaints to BARC and TRAI, the
English news broadcasters have resumed their Watermark last Friday
night subjecting themselves to ongoing measurements as they were
sufficiently satisfied that due to TRAI’s intervention the
malpractices were discontinued. This was confirmed by most MSOs.

Mr Ashish Bagga, President, NBA, stated that the NBA’s stance today
stands vindicated. “Not only had TRAI released this important mandate,
it had also aggressively followed up with MSOs about putting a stop to
malpractices. The NBA is grateful to the TRAI for taking swift
measures to stop malpractices,” he said.

II.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/arnab-goswami-republic-tv-using-multiple-feeds-to-claim-viewership-pulled-up-by-regulator/1/954495.html

Arnab Goswami's Republic TV uses unethical tactic to push viewership,
NBA petitions TRAI
The News Broadcasters Association (NBA) has lodged a complaint with
the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) against Republic TV.

IndiaToday.in  | Posted by Nikhil Agarwal
New Delhi, May 15, 2017 | UPDATED 15:44 IST

HIGHLIGHTS
1News Broadcasters Association has complained to TRAI against Republic TV
2The TV channel is running multiple feeds on MSOs
3Republic TV was launched on May 6 as a free-to-air channel

TV journalist Arnab Goswami's Republic TV has been called out by the
News Broadcasters Association (NBA) for allegedly using unethical
tactics to claim a high viewership of the recently-launched news
channel.

In a first, the NBA has not only singled out the channel for the
malpractices, but also lodged a complaint with the Telecom Regulatory
Authority of India (TRAI) even before the first data of Republic TV's
viewership is released.

In its letter to the TRAI, the NBA has claimed that Goswami's channel
is running multiple feeds on various multi-system operator (MSO)
platforms, as reported by BestMediaInfo.com.

The way Republic TV does it is that it lists itself at multiple
locations across various genres in the electronic programme guide
(EPG) of various MSOs and other distributors on multiple logical
channel numbers (LCNs), which is a violation of TRAI rules.

 Follow
 mansi @rockymans
This is true actually.. On Den network.. Its playing on two channels!!
https://twitter.com/rahulkanwal/status/864096338115428352 …
6:07 PM - 15 May 2017
  42 42 Retweets   40 40 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

 Follow
 Anubhav Chatterjee @chatterbhavs
@rahulkanwal @republic Yes it's happening in Bengal too...Channel No.
64 and Channel No. 428(both @republic TV channel) at Siti cable.
5:47 PM - 15 May 2017
  8 8 Retweets   15 15 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy

"It shall be mandatory for the distributor to place channels in the
EPG, in such a way that the television channels of the same genre are
placed together consecutively and one channel appears at only one
place," says the TRAI rulebook.

Republic TV was launched earlier this month on May 6 as a free-to-air
channel through most DTH services and cable television operators.

[Facsimile]

INDIA TODAY TV CLARIFIES

Meanwhile, the India Today TV has clarified it uses single frequency
and has asked its viewers to flag multiple listing of the channel, if
any. "India Today T

[GreenYouth] Good News for Jaitapur (and Kovvada): Modi Macron Meet

[Sukla Sen]

"The two countries (India and France) are also in talks about nuclear
power and French utility EDF in Jan. 2016 signed a preliminary pact to
build six Areva-designed European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) at
Jaitapur, on India's western coast.
"But last month, India's cabinet approved plans to build 10 reactors
of indiginous Indian design and said that ***India will not buy
foreign reactors unless these reactors are already in operation***
[emphasis added].
"Four EPRs are under construction in France, Finland and China, but
all are years behind schedule and not a single EPR is in operation
yet."

(Excerpted from: 'France, India to cooperate in fighting climate
change', June 3 2017, at
.)

To be sure, "India will not buy foreign reactors unless these reactors
are already in operation" is not an official statement issued now.
It's a report on, and reconfirmation of, an earlier enunciated
position: "We will not buy a reactor unless a plant is operating in
their own country" - linked to Sekhar Basu, Secretary of the
government's Department of Atomic Energy. (See, e.g.: 'Foreign
suppliers urged to step up as India backs own nuclear design', May 18
2017, at 
).
This, at that time, had virtually escaped public notice.
If it turns out to be accurate, it's time for celbrations for Jaitapur
and Kovvada; Mithi Virdi got dropped out of the list even earlier.

The other point, arguably, of even greater import, which bears
reiteration is that after clinching of the Indo-US nuclear deal in
October 2008, foreign nuclear reactors only from Russia are on their
way (to India), as a consequence.
No other country has been able to make the cut, at least as yet.

Sukla


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[GreenYouth] "More than 1400 mayors of US cities with populations of 30,000 or more have pledged conform to the Paris (Climate) Accord"

[Sukla Sen]

[More than 1400 mayors of US cities with populations of 30,000 or more
have pledged conform to the Paris Accord, with financial cover from
former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg to UN Committee on Climate
Change to make up for the loss caused by President Trump's withdrawal
from the globally-endorsed treaty.]

American coasts and cities vs hinterland in climate change battle

Chidanand Rajghatta | TNN | Jun 3, 2017, 11.10 PM IST

WASHINGTON: It's American cities versus American hinterland. More than
1400 mayors of US cities with populations of 30,000 or more have
pledged conform to the Paris Accord, with financial cover from former
New York mayor Michael Bloomberg to UN Committee on Climate Change to
make up for the loss caused by President Trump's withdrawal from the
globally-endorsed treaty.

Comprising Democrats and Republicans, the US Conference of Mayors said
on Friday that President Trump's decision did not mean the rest of the
country was behind him. "There will still be leadership from the
United States," Jim Brainard, the Republican mayor of Carmel, Indiana,
said in a conference call. "It's going to come from the mayors of the
country." Elizabeth Kautz, another Republican mayor from Burnsville,
Minnesota, separately told a TV Network, "We don't need Washington to
tell us what to do; we are going to do it because it is the right
thing."

It is a package of measures that various cities and towns in America
have been taking in an effort to reduce the country's enormous carbon
footprint: from encouraging public transport and biking to backing LED
lighting, solar programs etc.

Not that the Trump administration has in any way discouraged this, but
the mayors, particularly those from littoral states and cities are
appalled at the President's embrace of coal given the threat of
coastal erosion and rising sea levels, and are determined to take a
public stand for the treaty.

"If you are a mayor and not addressing shifts in changing weather
patterns or preparing for the impacts of climate change you aren't
doing your job," Bill Peduto, the Democratic Mayor of Pittsburgh who
publicly snubbed Trump by disavowing the President's association with
the Steel City, said in a statement.

Separately, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is forming a
bipartisan coalition of states, cities and business leaders to meet
the climate pact's targets even as the president rescinds the nation's
commitment to it.

Bloomberg, a billionaire whose fortune is bigger than that of Trump (
a fact that appeared to pique Trump when he was running for the White
House), is also pledging $15 million for the UN Climate Change
Secretariat that it stands to lose from the US withdrawal from the
pact.

The White House made light of the largely urban/mayoral defiance
saying "we believe in states' rights and so, if a locality,
municipality or a state wants to enact a policy that their voters, or
their citizens believe in, then that's what they should do." But the
dissent extended across geography and politics, into business and high
finance.

Reflective of the deep unrest the decision has caused across the
spectrum, Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of GOldman Sachs, a firm that has
deep connections with the establishment, used his first-ever tweet to
criticize the Paris decision, calling it a "setback for the
environment and for American leadership position in the world."

In White House briefings, administration officials struggled to
explain if Trump still believed in climate change, which he had once
described as a "con job" and a "hoax," even as many analysts concluded
he simply was not educated enough on the subject - some going so far
as to calling him "stupid" (New York Times) and an "idiot" (Jeffrey
Sachs).

The administration meantime was opening up another crisis front (or
distraction) amid speculation that the President is considering using
his executive privilege to prevent former FBI Director James Comey
from testifying before Congress.

Although some officials have maintained the President has no such
plans, Democratic lawmakers who are all set to question Comey when he
comes before the Senate panel next week are leery of last-minute
hitches.

Comey is expected to appear on the Hill on June 8 in what is likely to
be one of the most watched testimonies in history, and it is certain
to draw the attention away from the climate change fiasco.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.