http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/sep/27/ipcc-climate-report-six-things-learned
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
It was amusing to see some soi-disant intellectuals and pundits pontificating on whether Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi should be the Bharatiya Janata Party's candidate for the prime minister's post in 2014. What was interesting was the touching concern these people had for the BJP's chances of winning.
They intoned gravely about how Modi's candidacy would be bad for the BJP (I could practically hear the tut-tutting in the background). This would have been laudable if only these experts hadn't been furiously reviling the BJP as the devil incarnate for as long as I can remember.
Be that as it may, now that Modi, their bête-noire, has been chosen, it would only be fair to discuss threadbare the possible choices for the PM candidate for the Indian National Congress.
The reason is that the most obvious candidate, Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi, has begun to be curiously downplayed by the Congress -- almost as though they were embarrassed by him; of course, I must be wrong, because, as a dynast, he commands absolute loyalty.
But people on average are paying less attention to Rahul Gandhi. I say this partly based on data from (external link, may need a sign-in) Google Trends, which shows that interest in "Rahul Gandhi" peaked in August 2011 and has languished since then, with little general interest above a baseline. This doesn't suggest his campaign is on fire, especially as compared to surging interest in "Narendra Modi".
But more importantly, it looks as though Rahul has been absent in a number of situations where he could have made an impression. For instance, there was hardly a word from him -- and it would surely have been a sign of leadership if he had spoken – in: a) the Delhi gang rape in December 2012, b) the Uttarakhand flood in June, or c) the Muzaffarpur riots in August.
Surely his handlers in the Congress would have wanted to have him get some mileage. Unless, of course, they were afraid it would boomerang based on a poor performance.
There is precedent for backfiring: Rahul got a lot of attention for his April speech to the Confederation of Indian Industry, wherein his speech-writer came up with metaphors of bee-hives and rescue boats. But Rahul's delivery was mystifying, as though he were sleep-walking. Furthermore, he made an unfortunate sotto voce statement as he was flipping through his notes, trying to find his place: "I've lost it".
That was sort of a Freudian slip. Pretty unfortunate.
Besides, Rahul was not exactly successful in organising the Uttar Pradesh poll effort last year, and the Congress didn't do well there. And there is the real possibility that politics really isn't Rahul's cup of tea. He is trying -- as in two speeches recently -- but it isn't clear he can or wants to be responsible for running a government. He seems to be going through the motions because that's what's expected of him, not because of any great passion for politics.
The question of the hour is whether the Congress has given up on the idea of Rahul leading them as the shining knight on a white horse to a third successive term in government. This, even though Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently announced -- unprompted, if I am not mistaken -- that he would be happy to serve under Rahul.
Naturally, there is no better candidate than a scion of the Nehru Dynasty. If not Rahul, then there's Priyanka Vadra -- but she has the serious baggage of the dubious land deals of her husband Robert. And her child is probably a little too young to be heir to the throne, although, in comparison, the Bhutto clan did anoint a callow youth to the post.
Well, there is another bearer of the Nehru genes -- Varun Feroze Gandhi, but a little bird tells me that he would not be acceptable.
The Congress must feel some pressure to come up with a Plan B, now that Modi is making waves and has more or less got -- even if grudgingly -- some acceptance from his entire party. And it may occur to Rahul that he should follow in his mother's footsteps and manage from behind the scenes, with a regent in place: power without responsibility, thus quite a lot more than a leader manque.
Therefore, I shall provide here, gratis, my list of the other eligible candidates.
My premise is that Congress candidates are chosen based on name recall, accomplishments and winnability. That is not altogether different from how most political candidates are chosen anywhere in the world.
Based on name recall, nobody will be as good as a Nehru scion, but there is one other who can be considered: Sachin Tendulkar. He can guarantee a huge turnout wherever he goes. Whether that will turn into votes we do not know, but going by a pretty impressive show by former cricketer Imran Khan in Pakistan maybe a star cricketer can capture some votes and the proven Congress machine can get hold of enough of the rest -- enough to win.
I have been told by some women that Rahul is handsome. Apparently this matters, at least to some women voters. I was told, by an otherwise sensible Indian-American woman friend in San Diego, that she voted for Obama "because he is handsome." In that case, there are a couple of others that should be considered, especially because they have solid resumes and records of accomplishment.
That would be Union Minister of State for Human Resource Development Shashi Tharoor and Reserve Bank of India Governor Raghuram Rajan. Both of them would be guaranteed to get the female vote; both have solid track records.
Tharoor, who writes very well and became famous with his work in the United Nations, won handily in Trivandrum a few years ago because the entire female population voted en massefor him. Rajan is considered a 'rock-star' economist, and has a history of making bold and correct economic predictions. Both of these gentlemen have substantial name recognition, at least among the chatterati.
Speaking of track records, there are two others: Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen and Infosys co-founder Nandan Nilekani. Sen, a darling of the current establishment, can wave his Nobel Prize about, and impress people. He could well be another Manmohan Singh, a regent-cum-economist, who provides the masque and the mythology while, behind the scenes, the usual suspects carry on.
Nilekani, the darling of the urban middle class crowd, is a long-shot, although he may content himself this time with dipping his toe in the water in Bangalore south.
As party stalwarts, there are of course Finance Minister P Chidambaram and External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid. Both have played many roles in government and have been around the block a bit. Chidambaram carries his Harvard Business School cachet; anything with Harvard has a fan-following in India.
Either of them should be able to command enough clout within the party machine. But can they win? Chidambaram carries the handicap of being a southerner, and Khurshid that of being a Muslim.
In terms of being successful vote-getters, there are several Congress chief ministers who have mastered the art in their home states. Any one of these people can be elevated to the post, and with suitable support from the party machine, they can do the trick for the Congress. People such as New Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dixit come to mind.
Similarly, there is an entire cohort of bright young things in Parliament, for instance the likes of Union Ministers Sachin Pilot and Jyotiraditya Scindia who must be getting groomed for bigger and better things.
So the Congress has a plethora of prime ministerial candidates. Unfortunately, nobody is perfect, and given the formidable competition from Modi, it behooves them to announce their man/woman immediately.
So who will it be? Priyanka? Tendulkar? Tharoor? Rajan? Chidambaram? Sen? Khurshid? Dixit? Or will Rahul be forced to take on a role that he clearly is uncomfortable with? As a certain TV anchor might bellow, "We the people want to know!"
The ball is in your court, Congress!
The island that popped up near Gwadar is the fourth in this region since 1945. One of the best known mud volcanoes of the region, the Chandragup, is located just inland from this location, a little way off the Hingol river. The volcano serves as a holy site for Hindu pilgrims who make their offerings here in April each year before proceeding to the nearby cave temple of Hinglaj.
Dear Friends,The information that it was suggested to Heathrow immigration that Baba Ramdev was a 'terrorist' is confirmed, but I wish to check the supposed markings in his passport to convey such a message. I have asked to see his passport, when I meet him this afternoon.On reflection, it seemed to me unusual that anyone in Delhi immigration would actually leave behind physical evidence of such an outrage, which therefore merits verification. However, all other facts are verified, some by sources, including the British Home Office that UK Muslim groups were incited to lodge a protest about the presence of a 'Hindu extremist' in the UK.Baba Ramdev was evidently poised for deportation, which was halted because of the personal intervention of Keith Vaz, MP because as the chair of the parliamentary Home Office Select Committee. He was at the press conference after Baba Ramdev was allowed to remain in the UK.Thanks,dddddddOn 21 September 2013 22:13, ddddd wrote:
I spent the afternoon in Heathrow with Baba Ramdev. The critical reason for UK immigration seeking to deny him entry to the UK (though they relented when MP Keith Vaz, Chair of the Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee arrived to intervene) originated in Delhi. Delhi immigration had stamped Ram Dev's passport with a code that designated him a terrorist. It is the equivalent of an Interpol Red Corner notice. He was held for 8 hours and then required to attend another interview with UK immigration exactly at the time the conference was scheduled to begin the next day.
There were Muslim protests against him that were evidently instigated by the Congress party as well.
Baba Ramdev was only able to attend the Vivekananda 150th anniversary celebrations for its final ten minutes, after which the venue needed to be vacated. But he gave a really great speech to the 800 people who had waited patiently for 4 hours.
ddddd
Sent from my iPod
India is the perfect place for the Google Glass, according to the first surgeon in the country to perform an operation wearing the optical device.WSJ: ‘Google Glass Could Help Rural Surgeons’
J.S. Rajkumar, a tech-savvy laparoscopic surgeon at the Lifeline Multi Speciality Hospital in Chennai, on Tuesday carried out two operations wearing Glass, which uses a tiny, voice-controlled, Wi-Fi-enabled computer on the face.
“As you operate you can webcast to three or four senior surgeons sitting in Chennai, Delhi or Hyderabad and we would be able guide those rural surgeons,” Mr. Rajkumar said. “It’s implications are huge,” he added.
Warmongering Economist humiliated, licks its wounds
The Economist | America, Russia and Syria: The weakened West http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21586565-deal-over-syrias-chemical-weapons-marks-low-those-who-cherish-freedom-weakened-west?frsc=dg%7Cb via @theeconomist
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/22/dieting-disaster-evolution-daniel-lieberman
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/21/scuse-me-while-i-solve-the-immigration-problem/
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
India's future under #upa3
The Economist | German economic history: Where the angst comes from http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21586281-why-germans-are-so-frightened-inflation-where-angst-comes?frsc=dg%7Cb via @theeconomist
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
"They were questioning people, and they said, 'If you are Muslim you are on the safer side, but if you are Hindu or Christian you will be killed,' " Mr. Omoding said.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2013/sep/19/holy-water-faecal-matter
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24109190
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/sep/18/how-to-pick-up-women-with-science
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
A simple, cheap way to measure eyesight may face resistance.
Much of what doctors do could be automated.
Health-care spending is out of control. Can technology save us money?
Eye app: A smartphone displays a measurement of the refractive error of a person's eyes.
Vitor Pamplona isn't a doctor. He's not even an optician. He can't write you a prescription for glasses, or sell you a pair. Still, he's pretty sure he's going to disrupt the $75 billion global eye-care market.
At EyeNetra, the startup he cofounded, goofy curiosities like plastic eyeballs line the shelves, and a 3-D printing machine whirs in the background. It's printing out prototypes of a device that will attach to your smartphone and, in a minute or two, tell you what kind of eyeglasses you need.
The device, called the Netra-G, is based on some clever optics and software Pamplona came up with—a way to measure the refractive error of the eye using a smartphone screen and an inexpensive pair of plastic binoculars. The whole setup might cost a few dollars to make. It does the job of a $5,000 instrument called an autorefractor.
More important, just about anyone could use it. That's where the disruption comes in—and the trouble. Right now, only doctors or optometrists can prescribe glasses or contact lenses. Pamplona, a brash Brazilian programmer who arrived in the U.S. a few years ago, thinks that won't always be the case. "We're changing medicine by providing the user the right to measure themselves," he says. "We see doctors as more of a coach."
Mobile phones are giving rise to a new class of clip-on diagnostic devices that could challenge doctors' monopoly on diagnosing disease, not just errors in vision. Since doctors' fees account for over 20 percent of U.S. health-care spending—and fully 3 percent of the country's GDP on their own—such devices could potentially slash costs as well.
EyeNetra has received more than $2 million in financing from the outspoken Silicon Valley investor Vinod Khosla, who last year antagonized doctors by calling what they do "witchcraft" and predicting that 80 percent of their work diagnosing and prescribing could be done by machines.
Khosla's investment fund is also backing several other similar ventures, including AliveCor (see "Your Heartbeat on an iPhone"), which sells a heart monitor that attaches to an iPhone, and Cellscope, a company developing a phone camera that could let parents diagnose a child's ear infection (see "Parents Could Skip the Doctor's Office with This Device".)
... more deleted
 |
| BJP celebrates Modi's anointment |
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
The Economist | Obesity: Wider understanding http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21586269-how-bacteria-your-gut-may-be-shaping-your-waistline-wider-understanding?frsc=dg%7Cb via @theeconomist
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
Worms could be the next weapon in the fight against autoimmune diseases such as type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, and lupus.
The worms, or helminths as biologists call the …
http://www.futurity.org/invader-worms-beat-type-1-diabetes/
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
Junk science, but I liked the reverse causation. Childcare makes your gonads shrink!
Sent via Flipboard
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
sent from galaxy note, pardon brevity
On 8 Sep 2013 16:35, "sanjeev nayyar" wrote:
>
> High time countries deny U.S. Presidents a visa because they are promoting Islamic terrorism worldwide.
>
> Dicey dalliances with Islamists by Brahma C Sept 6 in Japan Times.
>
> http://chellaney.net/2013/09/06/dicey-dalliances-with-islamists/
>
>
> U.S. President Barack Obama's insistence on employing air power to punish Syria even if such a war breaches international law and unleashes major unintended consequences is just the latest chapter in a more than two-year U.S. policy whose calculations have gone wrong in backing jihad against Syrian President Bashar Assad's dictatorial rule. Military strikes could compound Obama's policy missteps, including inadvertently strengthening the hands of gun-toting Islamists.
>
> Before an internal insurrection in 2011 turned Syria into a proxy battleground for regional and global powers, the country probably was the most liberal, secular Muslim state in the arc of Islam. Today, it is a broken state — its social fabric in tatters, its physical infrastructure largely wrecked, and its cities pummeled daily by urban warfare, with much of the northern region under the sway of hardline Islamist groups, especially the Al Nusra Front.
>
> As also happened in Afghanistan from the 1980s and more recently in Libya, the spirit of jihad the United States helped instill in Syria to overthrow Assad — along with the supply of petrodollar-funded Western arms through Turkey and Jordan — has spawned hardcore Islamist militants wedded to the al-Qaida ideology. Al Nusra now overshadows the Free Syrian Army, established with help from the U.S. and the region's old colonial powers, Britain and France.
>
> In another major setback for Obama's policy, the once-tottering Assad regime has not only survived but consolidated its hold in Damascus and militarily gained the upper hand across much of the central and southern regions, with rebel hold limited to some pockets, including in suburban Damascus.
>
> The setbacks have compelled Obama to fundamentally alter his goals. From aiming to topple the Assad regime — a prospect that seemed so likely until last year that CIA teams in Turkey extended their rebel-support operations to northern Syria before this region came under the sway of the pro-al-Qaida groups — Obama has swung to seeking a military stalemate in Syria.
>
> Obama believes a protracted stalemate, despite its high humanitarian cost, would eventually open up a possible negotiated settlement. Because regime forces currently have the upper hand against the rebels, he wants to level the playing field by degrading their capabilities through concentrated air strikes.
>
> The visceral response to the alleged poison-gas attack — despite the relatively small number of fatalities from it compared with the death toll in the continuing civil war — shows that the chemical-weapon issue is just a fig leaf for Obama's Mission Stalemate, a scenario that will keep regime and rebel forces at each other's throats, thereby ensuring the Assad government's continual bleed and bottling up the independent Islamist groups. Given that Obama's missteps has left him with only bad options on Syria, he has settled for ensuring a military stalemate where Arabs kill Arabs, with the rebel weapons for killing paid for by Arab sheiks.
>
> The resolve to correct the military balance in Syria by wiping out much of the air capability of the ascendant government forces, however, will exact a heavy price regionally.
>
> The U.S. will not be able to control the developments its attack triggers. Indeed, the larger fallout will likely increase America's reliance on unsavory Islamist rulers in countries ranging from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. There is also the distinct prospect of an al-Qaida haven stretching across northern Syria and into Iraq.
>
> The spread of Muslim radicalism across large parts of the world has created a fertile ground for greater international terrorism. As an unintended byproduct of U.S. policies in support of or against regimes, al-Qaida type groups have gained ground in the Middle East and North Africa.
>
> The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq created a major opening for al-Qaida, whose affiliates now represent the Sunni struggle against Iraq's Shiite-dominated government. Grisly bombings have become commonplace.
>
> Regime change in Libya has brought chaos and the rise of al-Qaida, leading to the Benghazi killing of the U.S. ambassador. It has also exacerbated human-rights abuses and humanitarian suffering, imposed a system based on Shariah law, and promoted cross-border movement of weapons and militants to haunt neighbors' security.
>
> America's propping up of the regimes in Yemen and Saudi Arabia has contributed to the rise of the group, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Meanwhile, by allowing the Taliban to open a de facto diplomatic mission in Doha, Qatar, Obama has signaled U.S. desperation to cut a deal with this thuggish, Pakistan-backed Afghan militia that enforces medieval Islamic practices in the areas it controls.
>
> So what can be done? The lesson U.S. policymakers must heed is to take the long-range view and not be guided by narrow geopolitical considerations that involuntarily strengthen Islamists.
>
> Unfortunately, U.S. policy's dalliance with Islamist-leaning rulers has long been guided by the consideration that the cloak of Islam helps to protect the credibility of leaders who might otherwise be seen by their public as foreign puppets.
>
> Washington must now stop condoning the rulers of the oil sheikdoms for their alliance with radical clerics and for exporting militant Islam. It must also cease providing political succor to Islamists elsewhere. Until the military ousted him, the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohammed Morsi was America's man in Cairo.
>
> By supporting Islamist rulers, Washington — even if unintentionally — has promoted a growing conflict between Islamist and secular forces in Muslim countries, best illustrated by Turkey, which was wracked by unprecedented anti-government protests this summer. Obama has mollycoddled Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan by ignoring his heavy-handed efforts to annul secularism and free speech, and turn himself into a 21st-century sultan.
>
> Erdogan, who as Istanbul's mayor declared that "our only goal is an Islamic state," has jailed more journalists than any other country, including China, and thrown one in five of Turkey's generals and half of its admirals in jail since becoming prime minister in 2003. Today, he is Obama's most hawkish ally against Assad.
>
> Motivated by the larger geopolitical goal of containing Shiite Iran and its regional allies, U.S. policy has myopically embraced Sunni rulers steeped in religious and political bigotry, even though they pose a transnational threat to the values of freedom and secularism. Arab monarchs have continued to fund Muslim extremist groups and madrassas (Islamic schools) in other countries — from the Philippines and India to South Africa and Venezuela.
>
> U.S.-British-French policies in the arc of Islam, even if by accident, are contributing to an internally driven trend evident from the Maghreb to the Afghanistan-Pakistan belt — Muslims killing Muslims. This trend, of course, has been principally aided by the export of Wahhabi Islam by the sheiks in Riyadh, Doha, Abu Dhabi and elsewhere, and by the consequent rise of Islamist groups. These policies have averted the feared clash between civilizations, yet they have been a factor in the ongoing clash within a civilization. The effects of this clash are likely to be destabilizing regionally and counterproductive to the interests of the free world.
>
> Against this background, Obama would do well to heed tea party icon Sarah Palin's advice on Syria, "Let Allah sort it out" — unless Obama believes Allah has chosen him to do that.
>
> Brahma Chellaney is a geostrategist and the author, most recently, of "Water, Peace, and War" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2013).
>
>
> Warm Regards
> sanjeev nayyar
> https://twitter.com/sanjeev1927
> To unsubscribe write back
