Saturday, April 30, 2016

Can Blockchain Be A Tool Against Corruption?

Can Blockchain technology be used as a tool against corruption, such as tampering with records or even under-the-table transactions? Attempts are being made in this direction:

http://reason.com/blog/2016/04/30/bitfury-desoto-blockchain-land-registry

Perhaps the technology could be used for passport records, or birth certificates, or other things which are vulnerable to being doctored or forged. A citizenship registry? Issuance of licenses or permits?

IBM and others are currently betting big on Blockchain technology:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/29/ibm-announces-blockchain-services.html

Friday, April 29, 2016

Quick notes: Erdogan's games, Prejudice in courts...



Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Trump Nears GOP Victory; Desai Compares Him to Modi

Lord Meghnad Desai compares US Presidential candidate Donald Trump to Narendra Modi:

http://www.theglobalist.com/donald-trump-the-narendra-modi-of-america/

I think it would be nice if Trump and Modi could replicate the famous 'Ron-Yasu' relationship between US President Ronald Reagan and Japan's Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone, which smoothed over US-Japan ties. Trumpism and Moditva share a lot in common:



Trump has virtually locked up the Republican Party nomination after a big win in his home state of New York, and a string of further victories last night.



The positive turn for Trump's campaign has been attributed to the elevation of experienced campaign consultant Paul Manafort.

Ironically, Trump is said to be unhappy with Manafort, who incidentally has worked as a lobbyist for Ghulam Nabi Fai and his Kashmiri American Council in the past:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/donald-trump-paul-manafort-corey-lewandowski-222430

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2016/04/26/politico-reports-trump-is-not-happy-with-paul-manafort/

Fwd: d- Ten behavioural traits India must change to successfully counter Pakistan by sanjeev nayyar in Firstpost.com


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar

Ten behavioural traits India must change to successfully counter Pakistan by Sanjeev Nayyar 27.4.16
 

One of the reasons why India is unable to deal with the Pakistan problem is its faulty thinking. The Pakistani establishment (ISI, Army, Government) knows how to expose our fault lines because India's behaviour is so predictable. It is able to keep India on the defensive and export terror relentlessly.

Amongst the many teachings of The Holy Gita and Kautilya's Arthashastra, Pakistan has incorporated two into their India containment strategy.

The Gita repeatedly refers to the importance of perseverance. Pakistan has been implementing its plan to bleed India with a thousand cuts for decades.

The six methods of foreign policy enunciated by Kautilya include "Vigraha - hostilities is another instrument of foreign policy. It is classified into open war, secret war - attacking the enemy in a variety of ways, taking him by surprise; and undeclared war, clandestine attacks using secret agents and occult practices".

Since 1947, Pakistan has followed these teachings to the T.

A solution to the Pakistan problem depends on our soch - As we think, we shall become.

To read full article CLICK on Link above.

Also read two more articles by me.

1. What stops me from loving Pakistan - http://www.dailyo.in/politics/india-pakistan-kashmir-gwadar-khalistan-kargil-dawood-ibrahim-kandahar-ghulam-ali-kasuri-book-launch/story/1/6817.html

2. Understanding the sub-continent Muslim mind through Dr Ambedkar - http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapters/Understanding-the-Muslim-mind-through-Dr-Ambedkar-1.aspx

Warm Regards
sanjeev nayyar
to unsubscribe write back



--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: India does a U-turn, cancels visa+China Remains a Proliferation Concern+Diplomatic chess in Cam Ranh Bay highlights Vietnam's dilemma +Kathmandu faces fuel shortage


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar


1. China Remains a Proliferation Concern in the Indian Subcontinent by r kazi 22.4.16 http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/china-proliferation-concern-in-the-indian-subcontinent_rkazi_220416
"Recently, a mineral smuggling operation involving export of several tonnes of beryl1 — an atomic mineral ore of beryllium2 — reportedly to China, was jointly thwarted by the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the Rajasthan Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) in Kanakpura, Rajasthan.3 By the end of January this year, Rajasthan ATS had reportedly arrested six men. This incident highlighted two important issues.
Recently, China has accelerated its nuclear cooperation with Pakistan that involves setting up of at least six nuclear power projects in Islamabad.9 The China-Pakistan nuclear commerce is alleged to have been arranged without the sanction of the NSG. China's argument that its actions are in compliance with NSG guidelines is far from credible as the agreement lacks adequate transparency."
 
2. New Delhi may get dragged into tussles by zhang f 24.4.16 http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/979873.shtml
'Indian diplomacy rests on engagement with major world powers instead of clinging to a particular country. By adopting an ambiguous strategy, India places itself in a position that all the major powers woo it, but it never explicitly promises anything regarding the policies of other nations.
By joining the communiqué in support of China's stance on the South China Sea, India seemingly tries to strike a diplomatic balance at a high level. Yet it doesn't connote any change in India's diplomatic intentions to seek a balance between powers. India's moves to substantively bolster the US in military cooperation and meanwhile disappoint the latter right before the South China Sea arbitration outcome is released indicates the duality of India's policy. They show that India also takes a two-sided stance in dealing with China. "
 
My take – Happy to this speaking in different languages. Let us see how it shapes out. Has GOI done this before?
 
3. South China Sea on the boil again 25.4.16 by radhakrishna rao http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/south-china-sea-on-the-boil-again/
 
4. Indian Airborne Troops Script History 25.4.16 by danvir singh http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/indian-airborne-troops-script-history/
 
5. Kathmandu faces fuel shortage again not because of India 25.4.16 http://thehimalayantimes.com/business/valley-faces-petrol-shortage/
 
On April 12, two Japanese destroyers sailed into Cam Ranh Bay in southern Vietnam. It was the first time a Japanese Self-Defense Force vessel had ever appeared in the bay, a strategically important point only about 550km from the contested Spratly and Paracel island chains in the South China Sea. For Vietnam, the visit posed something of a dilemma. On one hand, it served as a warning to China, which has been building a military base in the controversial waters. On the other, it had the potential to raise the ire of its massive neighbor, with which it has deep economic and political ties.'
 
7. India does a U-turn, cancels visa to Chinese dissident Dolkun Isa. Read what M K Bhadrakumar has to say 25.4.16 http://www.rediff.com/news/column/why-modis-u-turn-on-china-is-a-smart-move/20160425.htm
 
My take – many including myself were initially upset about this U turn. I think it is a point well made to the Chinese. No need to escalate further. Drive home the point that the India China Expressway is now two way.
 
8. Will no longer seem help in peace process with Taliban says Afghan President 25.4.16 http://tribune.com.pk/story/1091321/will-no-longer-seek-pakistans-help-in-peace-talks-says-afghan-president/
 
9. China in the Indian Ocean 20.4.16 by d s rajan http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/node/1977
Warm Regards
sanjeev nayyar
to unsubscribe write back



--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: Modi government's biggest battle set to begin in the warfield of education


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Date: Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:39 AM
Subject: Modi governm



For the first time in independent India, the Left-of-Centre narrative will be seriously challenged.

If you think you have already seen the fiercest ideological battles in the Narendra Modi era, you may be mistaken.
The debates over intolerance and nationalism were storms that shook much. But the twister that is going to play out more truculently, even profoundly changing the old landscape, is on the horizon.
The biggest battle in the next few months is going to be fought over education.
While controversy's favourite child, Smriti Irani, is going to be its face, in the deep background, faceless people are at work.
The government and its ideological guides want to recast a system which they view as biased, antiquated, irrelevant for large swathes of the population, and a refuge of work dodgers, beneficiaries of Congress-Left patronage and the rank incompetent.
The first salvo is going to be the National Education Policy, for which a massive yagna is afoot. Meetings have apparently been held in 94,000 villages across the country, and more than 1.1 lakh written suggestions are being screened and processed.
The new policy is supposed to bring defining changes in the structure of education, not so much in the content. Vocational training, for instance, is likely to be made part of core education. Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) may move from the periphery to the mainstream.
In villages, the government may bring rural institutes as ITI equivalents to impart rural-focused vocational training. There could also be a proposal to have Navodaya Vidyalayas (NVs) — residential schools for poor students in the ancient gurukul tradition — in every district.
Most of these schools are going through an acute fund shortage. The Centre may step in to resuscitate the chain.
Also, the sainik school network may be expanded to encourage more students to think of forces as a career. There are more than 20 sainik schools today. The big push will be on regular and time-bound training of teachers. Even yoga will be a component of this. But more importantly, strict monitoring of how much time teachers are spending in the class and how much on junketeering abroad has already started.
Many in the government believe that recent unrest in some universities was fuelled from behind by those rattled by these checks. Also, India's government institutes may finally adopt the Western "publish-or-perish" credo, in which teachers need to constantly contribute and reinvent.
Besides bringing in accountability of teachers and administrators, the government wants to ensure that non-NET scholarships are distributed among women, minorities, disabled and backward castes; that there is last-mile utilisation of funds; and that students get fellowships through direct benefit transfer.
But the trickier ground is content. The new National Curriculum Framework, which is supposed to come later this year, could be explosive. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in November last year asked NCERT to look into 182 supposed discrepancies and mistakes in Classes VI to XII history books.
The direction came in response to a PIL by the National Centre for Historical Research and Comparative Studies (NCHRCS). The centre's director, Hemant Goswami, argued that certain shlokas from the Rig Veda and other scriptures had been mischievously translated to mean exactly their opposite.
The Aryan invasion theory is being challenged too, along with interpretations of words like "dasa" and "dasyu". Architects of the new policy are already squelching through the half-lit marshlands of history, working on highly contested patches, encountering dangerous creatures.
For the first time in independent India, the Left-of-Centre narrative in education will be seriously challenged in the coming months; both structurally and in content. This is the battle of all battles, and much ink will spill.
(Courtesy of Mail Today.)



--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Saturday, April 23, 2016

Quick notes: Western caste system, Land grab...



Thursday, April 21, 2016

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Fwd: Each and Every Argument by Modi’s Critics about his Governance Completely Ripped Apart. Do Read it Full !!


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Capt.(Dr.) S G Naravane


http://satyavijayi.com/indias-prime-minister-narendra-modi-really-helping-india-get-better-amazing-answetr/
April 18, 2016

I compiled these points after an argument with one of my friends who said that all this government is doing is marketing and cheap politics. I did not have a definite answer at the top of my mind then, but given the scores of reports I had read as part of my official work, I had a fair bit of an idea that he might be off the mark on that comment.

One request I have from you before you read on – please keep an open mind. For the duration of this answer, forget about what you've been hearing in the media and just focus on the facts below (these have been accumulated from various sources, including other answers on Quora after verification).

Here we go…

· We know about the whole story around our strong GDP etc.; here are few details about the same which are not being discussed on news panels as they are busy with beef and intolerance stories:

  • The Index of Industrial Production (IIP) is an index which details out the growth of various sectors in an economy such as mining, electricity and manufacturing. If you say Make in India is not working: IIP as of 25 sept 2015 stands at 2.8% (was -0.1% in 2014 under UPA). Make in India is a first of its kind initiative which encourages companies to manufacture products in India. I would go ahead and attribute some of this stupendous growth in indices to this initiative – feel free to disagree and please let me know if you think otherwise
  • Manufacturing, the most neglected sector in our country for decades, is now one of the biggest contributor to GDP growth; Read online to understand why a fledgling economy would always need a dominant agriculture and manufacturing sector (This should help you get started:Manufacturing very important to India:  Willy C Shih)
  • Fiscal deficit target retained at 4.1 pc of GDP for current fiscal and 3.6 pc in FY 16
  • Control over the double digit inflation figures, fall in the customer price inflation to less than 5%, a drastic cut in the current account deficit on trade, fall in the commodity prices etc.
  • Fuel price deregulation to avoid subsidies in the future and also to avoid sudden increase/decrease leading to artificial gaps and pressure on the market (read: common people) — if you think subsidies are good (as certain state governments would make you believe), please consult someone with an economics background to understand how subsidies actually hurt people in the long run and are a mechanism by which governments make popular, mass-pleasing decisions while actually hurting the economy – all the while making you believe that you are paying less when the balance actually comes out of your own pocket
    EDIT: based on a comment on this answer, I'm including a couple of articles for your reference on this point: 1. https://www.imf.org/external/pub… , and 2. IMF applauds India for cutting fuel subsidy; and just to add some more facts:
    • Fact 1: Decontrolling or deregulating the petrol prices mean that, the government will no longer be subsidizing petrol prices and the prices will be purely linked to the international crude prices. However, perfect deregulation won't/can't happen overnight and you have to bring some sort of sanity back into the system in small steps.
    • Fact 2: India's total fuel subsidy has fallen to Rs 22,000 crore in April-December from Rs 76,000 crore in the year-ago period (India's crude oil import bill for current fiscal may fall 45% – The Economic Times ).
    • Fact 3: And just to elaborate on what UPA did and did not do –Spending on subsidies surged, education and health lagged during 10 years of UPA – Times of India ; to quote- "Much higher on the list, at number three, is petroleum as higher fuel subsidies have pushed up the allocation more than 18 times to around Rs 65,200 crore in 2013-14, compared with Rs 3,567 crore in the revised estimates for 2004-05"
  • PSUs in profit (BSNL reporting operating profit after almost a decade; others doing well too)
  • ... deleted




--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

#28pages may hurt hillary in NY; hope #ishratfile nails chidambaram

chidambaram is being hung out to dry by the rest of the congies. knowing him, he'll not go down without a fight, and will finger italian and son. fun times ahead. of course the MSM will sweep #ishratfile under the carpet.
--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Monday, April 18, 2016

Pakistani Comedy Calls Hindus 'Dogs', Audience Applauds

Apparently, Pakistani comedians are scraping the bottom of the barrel for laughs these days - but their audiences seem to love it:

http://zeenews.india.com/news/south-asia/in-pakistan-comedy-means-calling-hindus-dogs_1877274.html

No word on whether any Bollywood Khan is concerned about intolerance in Pakistan.

Sunday, April 17, 2016

Fwd: Madhu Exposing Lies Against PM Modi by Rajdeep & Co for 12 Long Years on his Face!!


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Capt.(Dr.) S G Naravane

Madhu Kishtwar is well known for articulating her views, clearly and concisely. She can hardly be dominated in a debate simply because she comes prepared with facts and has well informed opinions she doesn't hesitate to express. We may not agree with all of her ideas or thoughts, but this video should be viral on the Internet.

This 10 minute long video is more than enough to expose Rajdeep Sardesai and Co, who for a long span of 12 years, continued to spread lies about now Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Watch Madhu Kishtwar exposing Rajdeep Sardesai, on his face

https://youtu.be/SuYYH8maG78





--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: The anti-Hindu streak in British politics: The House of Lords on religious freedom in India


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: S G Naravane


The anti-Hindu streak in British politics: The House of Lords on religious freedom in India17-04-2016This article has been co-authored by Jay Jina and Prakash Shah.

Hindus are traditionally a quietest minority group in the United Kingdom and in other parts of the world where they have settled. On social and demographic indicators they tend to make a favourable showing. In the United States, a loose movement of community organisations and scholars has emerged in order to answer the increasingly felt discrimination and malevolent stereotyping of Hindus in various fields of public life.
In the UK, a similar coalescence is emerging in response to the stigmatising of Hindus. Such a consensus within the British Hindu community began to emerge most palpably as a consequence of the insertion of a provision on caste discrimination in the Equality Act 2010. A recent debate in the House of Lords once again signals the continuance of that denunciatory anti-Hindu tendency.
On March 17, 2016, Lord Singh of Wimbledon called a debate on religious freedom in India. The, by now familiar and expected, anti-India, anti-Hindu rhetoric confirm the stereotypes against India and indeed the Hindus, who are spread worldwide and hardly restricted to Indian borders.
The usual evidence of the absence of religious freedom in India was recited. Since the election of the current Indian government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi in May 2014, this has become the usual fare in the UK public fora, including the parliament, media andacademia.
It is distressing to learn that the British parliament is no exception to this trend and Hindus may legitimately wonder whether they can any longer call upon it for protection.
The debate pressed into service evidence from untrustworthy and biased sources, including the Amnesty International and the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).
The executive director of Amnesty in India has had no qualmsridiculing Hindu gurus in a national newspaper. The USCIRF is a pro-Christian body midwifed by protestant proselytising interests in the US.
Yet the USCIRF is referred to as an authoritative, "highly respected" body. One of its members, Katrina Lantos Swett is presumed to havelectured the Indian electorate on whom to vote for months before the 2014 general elections: "For the people of India, I think it is important for them to consider very carefully who it is who they want to be their next prime minister..."
The USCIRF has no interest in the harmonious coexistence of different religious groups but uses the trope of religious freedom to secure the supremacy of its own founding creed worldwide. It is only right that the Indian government refused its representatives a visa earlier this year.
hindu_041716112541.jpg
In the UK, there has been a stigmatising of Hindus. 
The House of Lords debate, on the other hand, unashamedly blames Hindus to ground its allegations of an atmosphere of intolerance in India. After all, they are held responsible for having elected Modi, leader of the "nationalist BJP" and, since he came to power, there is claimed to be "increasing support for the Hindu extremist agenda".
Indeed, Lord Singh is so convinced of this that "Hindu extremists" appear three times in his argument; and "Hindus" make a further five appearances. On each occasion, it is in a derogatory, accusatory light. Not once does "Hindu" or "Hinduism" appear in a neutral tone. Eighty per cent of the people of India are to blame, it would seem.
Evidently, Modi is somehow made responsible for the flaws in the Indian Constitution. Hindus are guilty of attempting to "dilute" and "erode" the Sikh identity to the extent that even Bollywood films, in which - to go by the "excellent briefing notes" prepared by the House Library - the Sikhs are "shown participating in Hindu religious ceremonies involving idol worship".
Perhaps, the most perverse of all of Lord Singh's statements concerned "students at a New Delhi university who were stopped from demonstrating against the imposition of the death penalty on a Muslim convicted of terrorism".
This refers to the February 2016 incidents at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). The police were right to have arrested the demonstrators who expressed vocal support for terrorists who had attacked the Indian Parliament and whose declared aim was to eliminate India's political establishment.
Leave aside that. To this day the defeat of such a planned attack against the British parliament is nationally celebrated as Guy Fawkes Day. The statement by Lord Singh effectively amounts to declaring support for any group of students at a British university who were to celebrate the actions of say the 7/7 bombers or the killers of soldier Lee Rigby murdered on a London street in broad daylight.
Would we tolerate such an outrage in Britain? Would it not be subject to some kind of police and legal action? Would Lord Singh have invoked any legal actions against such demonstrators as targeting Muslims? In fact, Lord Singh implies that Muslims support terror and don't condemn it.
In Lord Harries' speech of barely 700 words, there were four invocations of the "Hindu extremist" and one of "Hindu-inflicted violence". The former Anglican Bishop of Oxford made sure the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) got a dishonourable mention.
Although Lord Singh could not bring himself to recall it, Khushwant Singh does recount that those same "Hindu extremists" saved many Sikh lives in 1984. Lord Harries also invoked the canard of the rape of a "71-year-old nun" as the presumed work of "Hindu extremists".
But he should have known that the BBC had already reported that those arrested were Bangladeshis about whose religious identities there was little doubt. Repeated allegations of persecution of Christians in India, though easily falsified, acquire a sense of truth given their repetition, not least by church representatives. It is to be wondered what interest is being served in so doing.
These masterful performances were followed by speeches from Lord Hussain and Lord Ahmed, both of whom seemed to focus attention on exposing "Hindu extremism". A count of the "hits" is tabulated here:
Speaker in the India: Religious Freedom debate, March 17, 2016Reference to HindusComments on the context in which the word "Hindu" was used
Lord Singh     83 direct references to Hindu extremists, and 5 more unflattering references to Hindus, which if made in another context, say with reference to Muslims, Jews or Africans would be considered prejudiced, discriminatory and unacceptable.
Lord Harries     54 quotes of "Hindu extremists" and 1 of "Hindu-inflicted violence".
Lord Hussain     2"Right-wing Hindu fringe groups" and "Hindu extremism". 
Lord Ahmed     4Phrases used: "Hindu nationalist", "Hindu propaganda", Hindu groups like VHP, RSS referred to as extremist forces.
Lord Ahmed referred to the shocking desecration of Guru Granth Sahib but, once again, economy with the truth prevailed: like the nun rape victim, here too, the same strategy was applied: frame the argument explicitly around "Hindu extremists", then lob in the crime angle and let the Hindus be the perpetrators even when they are not.
Like so many stories where Hindus are not the perpetrators, the news goes cold, and in the case of the desecration of the Sikh scripture, it turned out that some Sikhs were arrested. Was this indeed an attempt by outsiders to foment communal conflict in India?
The reference to "extremist forces" was voiced by the same peer who once argued against literary achievement being honoured by conferment of a knighthood to a writer if a minority might be offended.
It can be argued that the Lords are right to be critical and to debate, however flawed their data may be, on matters concerning intolerance, bigotry and extremism wherever and in whatever forms they exist.
So, one might expect to find similar strident language in matters to do with religious intolerance, the threats of Islamist radicalisation, Britain's image in the world with respect how it treats minorities, how the criminal and legal processes deal with race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, segregation, and the challenges of a multi-cultural society.
It is, therefore, revealing that by merely scratching the surface of the Hansard House of Lords debates, but leaving aside the parliamentary debates of 2010 and 2013 accompanying the introduction of the caste clause in the Equality Act 2010 and the ensuing propaganda effort, providing a further obvious opportunity to foment hatred against Hindus, one finds the following:
DebateReferences to extremismComments
India: Freedom of Religion, March 17, 2016.          1414 references to Hindu extremists/violence/fringe/propaganda/hardline.
Islam: Extremism, February 3, 2016.            7None of these were directly conjoined with any religion in particular and when any reference to religion was made it was in the form of "extremist interpretation of..." 
Islam, November 19, 2013.            5No conflation of any religion with the word "extremism" but one reference to Hindu nationalists in a debate on Islam.
Pakistan: Religious Violence, May 22, 2013            41 reference to Sunni extremists. The other three uses of "extremist" were without any religious link.
The data speaks for itself. Hinduism and Hindus are singled out as the religious group that can be openly criticised, maligned and discriminated against in a blatant fashion.
The British parliament is either unable or unwilling to defend British Hindus and their basic rights in the face of a destructive onslaught from evangelists and their allies.
In the Lords debates, on not even one occasion has a religious group other than Hindus been suffixed with the word "extremist" or its derivatives - not even when discussing the plight of minorities in Pakistan, where it is widely known that Hindus are a persecuted group, or the numerous debates on religious radicalisation. In fact, the perversity could not be more blatant: a debate on Islam actually threw up one reference to Hindu nationalists.
In relation to Islam, references to radicalisation and social issues are made with sensitivity and consideration. Muslims, quite rightly, are not demonised as a community, and taking note of this, phrases like "extremist interpretation of..." are used, but sparingly.
However, those railing against Hindus just mention "Hindu extremism" or cognate notions; this discrimination against Hindus is not considered an untoward expression of prejudice and stereotyping, it would seem. Hindus are fair game.
Curiously, only one reference to "Islamic fundamentalist" appears to occur in the Hansard debates. Lord Singh used this phrase in thedebate on the Same Sex Marriage Bill when referring to how Sikhs are sometimes mistaken for Muslims.
During a debate on Christians in the Middle East, Lord Parekh, an ostensible expert on "Hindu fundamentalism" and "Hindu fundamentalists" cited the epithet thrice.
In an otherwise sound argument on the power of democracy, he could not resist suggesting that it is (Western style) democracy that moderates Hindu culture rather than countenance the other obviously derivable viewpoint that Hindu culture, with its innate diversity, is what actually preserves democracy in the most diverse nation on the planet.
The debate on "Religious Violence in Pakistan makes it clear that, in the House of Lords, the Hindus of Pakistan and Bangladesh get short shrift. Their numbers have dwindled so alarmingly that they are virtually extinct in Pakistan and are on the verge of being so in Bangladesh. But no one murmurs its causes, or calls it out, much less name it what it so patently is: a systematic and sustained act of cultural and religious genocide.
Other non-pejorative, neutral references to Hindus are mostly made by practising Hindus, who are generally very temperate and almost apologetic in their nature. They desist from defending the Hindus, much less speak about Indian traditions or share any of their rich teachings with others in the Chamber. Diwali celebrations with samosa and chai at the House seems to be the sum of it.
Those of their Lordships who are most vocal about Hinduism and Hindu identity project the implicit impression that Hindus cannot be devout, for they worship false god(s); ipso facto, they are extremists.
It is indeed true that the House of Lords views religious freedom and human rights as important ideals to promote - except in the case when Hindus are victims and mostly in the case of "others" when Hindus are a majority and can be conveniently, but falsely, categorised as aggressors.



--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Saturday, April 16, 2016

Fwd: Where are the women judges in India's courtrooms? by Sanjeev Nayyar in DailyO


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar


Where are the women judges in India's courtrooms? by Sanjeev Nayyar 13.4.2016

Does a handful imply the opposite sex is incompetent?

 

The Supreme Court on April 11 frowned upon the practice of barring women between the ages of 10 and 50 years from the Sabrimala shrine in Kerala, asserting that religious practice and tradition could not be allowed to dent constitutional principles and values.

Questioning the validity of tradition which has been under attack from feminists and others, a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, V Gopala Gowda and Kurian Joseph said temple was a public religious place and it must observe the constitutional values of gender equality.

The judges said that the issue involved the question whether tradition could override the Constitution which prohibited gender discrimination. "Why this kind of classification for devotees to visit the temple? We are on constitutional principles. Gender discrimination in such matters is untenable. You cannot create corrosion or erosion in constitutional values," the bench said.

Such strong statements by the learned judges prompted the author to visit the websites of the Supreme and five key high courts to ascertain the extent of gender equality in the judiciary. Here is the status as on April 12, 2016.

women-judges_041316034657.jpg
 

Of the select courts, the percentage of women judges in Delhi High Court is the highest. Could the collegium system of the Apex Court find one only competent woman to be a judge? Did you know that from "1950 to November 2015 only six women became Supreme Court judges out of a total 229 judges appointed?"

India has had a woman prime minister and president but never a woman chief justice.

A November 2015 India Today report shares some interesting facts, "There are just 62 (9.2 per cent) women judges compared to 611 male judges (in high courts) in the entire country. In 24 state high courts, nine HCs did not have a single woman judge. Three high courts had only one woman judge." Is this a case of gender discrimination or does it imply that only male judges possess the best legal brains and women are incompetent? http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/supreme-court-keen-to-get-women-judges-now/1/516459.html

Look at the number of women doctors in our country and compare them with the number of women judges. Some might argue that women have taken to education recently in larger numbers. This is not true. Women in this country began taking to modern education even before independence and the pace picked up thereafter in virtually all fields, for example, the author's mother and mother-in-law became doctors in the mid-1950s in Punjab and Madhya Pradesh respectively.

It can be argued that in the medical discipline, women doctors succeeded because they ran their own clinics or worked in hospitals where they did not need to navigate organisational politics. Fair point. All the more reason why India needs more women judges. Since they are grossly under-represented in terms of numbers, there is a clear case for affirmative action (not reservation). Certainly, there are enough women lawyers in all high courts who can be elevated to the bench.

According to a November 2015 Mail Today report, when a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice Khehar was in the process of inviting suggestions to improve the collegium system for the appointment of judges, a large number of female lawyers complained of "gender discrimination" in appointment of judges to higher judiciary.

When faced with such complaints, the respected Justice Khehar asked, "We would first like to know what the ratio of female advocates to male advocates is. That is very important. The ratio of female judges to male judges must be in the same ratio."

I am inclined to respectfully disagree with this line of questioning. When under-representation of women in the judiciary is universally accepted, is it correct to compare the ratio of female to male advocates? Was the percentage reservation for schedules castes and tribes based on their population numbers or supposed backwardness?

Further, women lawyers told the court that would not be a fair criteria. "Please do not compare the number of women lawyers at bar and juxtapose it with the ratio of female and male judges. Women were allowed to practise in court only in 1922. Women face a lot of problems in practising in court. Despite that, they are coming out in large numbers to practice," said senior lawyer Mahalakshmi Pavani representing the Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association (SCWLA).

At the same meeting SCWLA also represented, "It is submitted that keeping the Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 15(3) (the power of the State to make special provisions for women and children) of the Constitution Of "India is a signatory to Conventions on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), 1979, which envisaged removal of obstacles of women's public participation in all spheres of public and private lives."  The source of Article 14 lies in the American and Irish constitutions. Before we get into the question of gender equality, we have to answer some fundamental issues on the Justice system and fundamental flaws relating to its practice in India. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/supreme-court-keen-to-get-women-judges-now/1/516459.html

1. How adapted is a British system of justice to an Indian culture, ethos, identity and practice? Is the understanding of gender equality the same in Indian and Western societies? Let me elaborate. It is a long term fundamental flaw in our system, which has not been addressed or has perhaps not even entered the consciousness of our western educated judicial practitioners. While all humans are created equal, it does not mean they are the same. Same and equal are two completely different concepts.

Equality in the Hindu system does not mean we have one toilet for men and women, one set of dresses for men and women.

Why India? It is the same worldwide. In Hindu philosophy, we say the soul of men and women does not have gender in its spiritual state. But for practical purposes, two sexes are created based on physical differences by the Gods. These differences at times have to be respected and catered to just like there are separate toilets for men and women. By doing so it does not mean we are disrespecting and abusing the notion of equality.

2. Now coming to the issue before the Apex Court on whether the current practice at the Sabrimala shrine, of barring women between the ages of 10 and 50 years, should be changed. Hindu Goddesses have a wider following than Hindu male gods in many parts of the country. In the same vein there are certain religious places that are men exclusive and in equal breath there are certain temples that are women exclusive.

There exists a women-only temple in Kerala.  While 95 per cent of the temples are common to both sexes please understand that Hinduism treats both equally, and that does not mean that each and every function on earth has to be the same. At times for reasons of tradition, certain things are male specific and equally certain things have to be reserved for women. This is a fundamental difference between Indian and western thought. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/A-women-only-temple-in-Kerala/articleshow/1709146.cms

If courts want to still force the issue of gender equality despite the arguments above they should do so. But keep in mind that the courts have to apply the law equally to all religions. That then would be real justice. The suggestion is either create a level playing field, or if the argument is that every community has its uniqueness, then let them cherish their uniqueness. You cannot have different rules for different people in the eyes of the law. We are repeating the mistakes made earlier by using British concepts of secularism and minorityism!

Are we willing to look within and change?

PS The author admires the judiciary for its role in exposing corruption and has full faith in its abilities to address issues in a fair and balanced way.

Also read:

1. Let us not make men out of women http://www.aparnasharma.in/pdf/Lets-not-make-men-out-of-women.pdf

2. Why secularism is not an Indian Concept http://www.rediff.com/news/report/slide-show-1-why-secularism-is-not-an-indian-concept/20130802.htm

3. Why India must have no place for religious minority http://www.dailyo.in/politics/constitution-of-india-minority-sikhs-punjabs-supreme-court-muslims-christians/story/1/8903.html

4. Worship of God as Mother in Indian Tradition http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapters/Worship-of-god-as-Mother-in-the-Indian-Tradition-1.aspx

5. What India can learn from Vidya Balan http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapters/What-India-can-learn-from-Vidya-Balan-1.aspx

6. Shakti, the Supreme Mother Goddess in Hinduism http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapters/Shakti,-the-Supreme-~-Mother-Goddess-in-Hinduism-1.aspx

warm regards
sanjeev nayyar
to unsubscribe write back




--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: Conspiracy of Silence - How a TV program of sex orgies of clergy and US politicians was banned


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sub



--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: d-China releases report on U.S. Human Rights+Modi’s foreign policy+The Nuclear Security Summit ignored Pakistan's threat+U.S. troops can use Indian bases+MORE


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar


1. Pakistan's Strategic Dilemma 14.14.16 by col anil athale http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/pakistans-strategic-dilemma/ 

'What India must do, but seldom does, is to constantly remind Pak of its strategic vulnerability. Its crucial targets and 'heart' that is Punjab province, is a barely 150 km deep strip of land along Indian border. Virtually every major 'strategic' target of Pakistan is within the range of Prithvi tactical missile of which India has aplenty.  From Mendhar in J&K the Kahuta nuclear installations are within the extended range of Pinaka rockets of Indian artillery.

The Pakistani strategists who tried to ape this Cold War concept forget that the Soviets never accepted this and had vowed that any use of nuclear weapons, tactical or otherwise will invite full response from them. India has likewise not accepted the Pak proposition of use of low yield nuclear weapons in the tactical battle area and has promised full response. But having thus trapped India, Pakistan has now invoked world support to restrain India's 'cold start' doctrine since it will lead to nuclear exchange in the subcotinent, that scares the world. 
Fear is the key to internal and external peace. It is fear of punishment that keeps the rule of law internally and fears of loss-territorial, economic or in terms of prestige that stops another nation from acting inimical to our interests. Unfortunately some in mushroomed 'Dilli strategic Schools' think otherwise. The basic Indian illusion is that peace begets peace, violence or use of force is evil and even retaliation to an attack is a sin. '

 

2. U.S. troops can use Indian bases – 10 things you need to know - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indian-bases-to-open-doors-to-US-warships-planes/listshow/51805127.cms?from=mdr

 

3. Indo-US strategic relationship: Why the balance is not in India's favour 14.4.16 http://www.firstpost.com/world/indo-us-strategic-relationship-why-the-balance-is-not-in-indias-favour-2727676.html

 

4. Modi's foreign policy by k c singh 14.4.16 http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/modi-s-foreign-policy/221967.html

The broad lessons are that the PM must rebuild traditional political consensus over foreign policy, particularly because he is really building on old themes, although his style may be more assertive, personal or even, at times, theatrical. Henry Kissinger says: "High office teaches decision making, not substance." That is why the PM also needs a rethink on his immediate aides, Cabinet colleagues and advisers. '

 

5. Understanding the sub-continent Muslim mind through Dr Ambedkar 14.4.16 by sanjeev nayyar  http://vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=3921

India's inability to understand the sub-continent Muslim mind has resulted in our failure to deal with Pakistan and solve the Muslim problem in India. This article takes extracts from Ambedkar's masterpiece Thoughts on Pakistan and gives a brief comment on each extract.

 

6. Will-Kat's India visit is sweet but Britain is a royal third rate power 13.4.16 by jyoti malhotra http://www.dailyo.in/politics/britain-prince-william-kate-middleton-modi-queen-elizabeth-jallianwala-bagh-massacre-security-council-indo-british-trade/story/1/10039.html

 

7. China;s aggression over land and water must be resisted 14.4.16 by ashok s ganguly http://www.telegraphindia.com/1160414/jsp/opinion/story_79956.jsp

When it comes to flouting international riparian laws and coastal rights, China is the gorilla in the room. The two major rivers of Asia - the Mekong and the Brahmaputra - are primarily sourced from the Tibetan ice-melt and monsoon rains. The disputes between countries along the Mekong - Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam with China - are critical for livelihood matters in these nation.'

 

8. China releases report on U.S. Human Rights 14.4.16 http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/978520.shtml

'There were a total of 51,675 gun violence incidents in the United States in 2015 as of December 28, leaving 13,136 killed and 26,493 injured. USpolice shot dead 965 people last year as of December 24. No substantial progress concerning the economic and social rights of US citizens were made, the report says. In 2015, more than 560,000 people nationwide were homeless, and there were still 33 million people in the United States with no healthcare insurance. It also quotes figures to show that the United States continued to trample on human rights in other countries, causing tremendous civilian casualties. From August 2014 to December 2015, the United States launched 3,965 air strikes in Iraq and 2,823 in Syria, causing an estimated number of civilian deaths between 1,695 and 2,239.'

 

9. The Nuclear Security Summit ignored Pakistan's threat 14.4.16 by col anil athale. http://www.rediff.com/news/column/the-nuclear-security-summit-ignored-pakistans-threat/20160414.htm

The one important takeaway for India, that is concerned at the Pakistani plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons, is that we have to take care of this problem ourselves and should not expect any global help.'

 

10. Handwara: Quell passions, institute inquiry, let things cool down 14.4.16 by lt gen syed ata hasnain http://www.rediff.com/news/column/handwara-quell-passions-institute-inquiry-let-things-cool-down/20160414.htm

 

Warm Regards
sanjeev nayyar
to unsubscribe write back




--
sent from samsung galaxy note3 neo, so please excuse brevity

Fwd: E-Understanding the Muslim mind through Dr Ambedkar-Sanjeev Nayyar-14 April 2016


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sanjeev Nayyar
To: home <esamskriti@suryaconsulting.net>


India's inability to understand the sub-continent Muslim mind has resulted in our failure to deal with Pakistan and solve the Muslim problem in India. This article takes extracts from Ambedkar's masterpiece Thoughts on Pakistan and gives a brief comment on each extract.

 

http://vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=3921

Understanding the Muslim mind through Dr Ambedkar

Sanjeev Nayyar

14 April 2016

 

The Pakistan envoy to India, Abdul Basit, stunned India by unilaterally announcing the suspension of the peace process and saying the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir is the root cause of mutual distrust between the two nations.

 

Have we not heard this before? The only constant is India's inability to understand the Pakistani mind!

 

This article analyses extracts from Dr BR Ambedkar's 1941 masterpiece 'Thoughts on Pakistan' on the occasion of his 125th birth anniversary. The author's purpose is to share insights and not to provoke anybody.

 

1. Loss of political power

"The condition of Muslims was best stated by a liberal, R M Sayani in his Presidential address at the 12th session of the Congress held in 1896. … Before the advent of the British in India, the Muslims were the rulers of the country. The court language was their own (Persian was the official language till 1842). Every place of trust and responsibility, or carrying influence and high emoluments, was theirs by birthright. The Hindus did occupy the same position but were tenants-at-will of the Muslims.

 

"Meanwhile, British introduced English education into the country. The Hindus were used to this, as under Muslim rule, they had practically to master a foreign tongue, and so easily took to new education. But the Muslim had not yet become accustomed to this sort of thing. Muslims resented competing with the Hindus, whom they had till recently regarded as their inferiors." [History and Culture of the Indian People, Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, Vol. X, p. 295]

 

-          Whether it be 1896 or today, Muslims tend of hold the government responsible for everything, rather than pull up their socks and face the contemporary world. It is easy to criticize others but difficult to change oneself. The intrinsic nature of Sanatana Dharma helps Hindus to keep changing with time.

 

2. Cohabiting in independent India

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the founder of Aligarh Muslim University, said on 16 March 1888, "Now suppose all the Brits were to leave India, then who would be the rulers of India? Is it possible that Hindus & Muslims could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not."

 

-          Sir Syed and the Muslim leaders who fought for Pakistan clearly realized that one man one vote is at the heart of democracy. As Hindus outnumbered Muslims, the latter could not expect a disproportionate share of power. After partition and independence, they increased their population (from 3.77 crore in 1951 to 17.22 crore in 2011).

 

3. Communal composition of Indian Army  

"The Indian Army today is pre-dominantly Muslim in its composition. The Muslims who predominate are from Punjab and North West Frontier Province (see table below). It means that such Muslims are made the sole defenders of India from foreign invasion. The Hindus will have to pay for the Army but will not be able to use them because the realist must note that of all the Muslims, those of the North-West is the most disaffected Muslim, in his relation with the Hindus". [Thoughts on Pakistan, p. 89]

 

 Changes in the Communal Composition of the Indian Army @

No

Area & Communities

% in 1914

% in 1930

1.

Punjab, NW.F.P & Kashmir

47

58.5

2.

Nepal, Kumaon, Garwhal

15

22

3.

Upper India

22

11

4.

South India (includes Marathas)

16

5.5

5.

Burma

0

3

 

     Total

100

100

@ pg 75 2 . Post 1930 no data was available.

 

"Out of the total revenue of Rs 59.04 crs the Pakistan area contributed Rs 7.13 crs. Of this Rs 52 crs is spent on the army, the bulk of which is on the Muslim army drawn from the Pakistan area." [ibid].

 

-          That India is secure today because of its Army is incontestible. That is very likely the reason why the Army is sought to be weakened by tying it down in counter-insurgency operations and maligning it.

 

-          One wonders if the large percentage of Punjabis in the Pakistan Army is the reason for the latter dominating Pakistan's political landscape since independence, at the cost of the civil liberties of the population. 

 

... deleted