[GreenYouth] Arun Shourie slams Modi
I/III. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/arun-shourie-modi-government-karan-thapar/1/433260.html Shourie slams Modi: 10 things he said IndiaToday.in New Delhi, May 1, 2015 | UPDATED 10:13 IST In an exclusive interview with Headlines Today's Karan Thapar on the first anniversary of BJP-led NDA government on Friday, Arun Shourie, one of the most influential BJP ideologues during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for poor handling of the Indian economy and turning a blind eye to the attacks on minorities by the right-wing groups. SEE FULL VIDEO Here are the 10 things that Arun Shourie said about Modi government in the interview: Full text of Arun Shourie's interview 1) The government lacks clear thinking. The government has good ideas but poor in implementation. There is a big gap between perception and promise, and projection and performance. The government must become low profile. 2) Modi's economic policy is directionless. There is no big picture in economy policy. Modi's focus on the economy is like a CM. He should focus more on policy instead of projects. 3) Modi's foreign policy is a success but India has to follow up on the MoUs. Modi needs to execute policies quickly. China is a principal challenge for India. India's foreign policy is getting reoriented. Modi has to move much faster. Nobody is waiting for us. The US is already feeling impatient. Keeping Sushma Swaraj on the margins is wrong. 4) Lack of clarity in government on Pakistan. Need a steadier gaze towards Pakistan. 5) Investment has not picked up. The government can't ignore India inc warnings. The government needs to wake up. Investors still have hope but the industrial sector is waiting for concrete moves. The growth claims are only to make headlines and the government only wants to manage headlines. 6) Uncertainty exists over tax regime. Tax regime is confused. The government is alienating the investors. It is backtracking on tax decisions. 7) India needs labour reforms. There was no need for land bill controversy. Ordinances were ill-advised. They led to disruptions. BJP supported the previous Land Bill. Allies were not taken into confidence. Modi must embrace the opposition. No reform can take place without the oppositions' support. The opposition is ganging up against Modi and the BJP is frightening others. 8) Vacancies in critical posts are worrying. Don't know why the posts are not filled. Vital institutions are suffering. Institutions are being starved to death. Institutions are being devalued. 9) The government must respond to minority fears. Govt has failed on assuring minorities. No response to concern of minorities. Alienating minorities is dangerous. The Christians are rightfully upset. PM should speak out often. Modi must speak on critical issues. Modi silent on moral questions. 10) The monogrammed suit was inexplicable, a critical mistake. Don't understand why he wore it. II/III. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/economic-policy-directionless-minorities-anxious-shourie-on-modi-government/99/ SATURDAY, MAY 02, 2015 Arun Shourie takes swipe at BJP government, says Modi, Jaitley, Shah have frightened allies and own group Arun Shourie hit out at the BJP government in an interview (Source: Express Photo) By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Updated: May 2, 2015 11:05 am Saying that he “liked” Prime Minister Narendra Modi and believed “he was the man today”, former disinvestment minister Arun Shourie Friday took a swipe at the Central government and the BJP, saying that today, they consist of only three people — Modi, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley and party chief Amit Shah, who have “frightened not just the allies but their own group”. Shourie further said that “no corrective action” is taking place because even if these three take a wrong decision, they are also the “supreme court” who deliver the judgment on it. “I think, today the government of India and the party consists of three persons — Modi, Jaitley and Amit Shah… They work as a team. The three persons are not getting feedback from elsewhere. Secondly, they’ve frightened not just the allies but their own group — the extended party, etc,” Shourie said, talking to Karan Thapar on the show, To The Point, on Headlines Today. RELATED ‘Can’T Allow China To Dominate India’ Can't Allow China To Dominate India,We Need To Take Ourselves Seriously: Modi Manmohan Singh Is The 'Main Election Agent' Of Narendra Modi: Arun Shourie “Third problem is, as in all political parties, if I take a wrong decision and the consequences are terrible — let’s just say I get Kiran Bedi in… in Delhi, we lose. It’s regarded at that time as a master stroke of the master strategist and then you are slapped by the Delhi people — three seats out of 70. Who’s to now decide that some wrong decision was taken? The same three. So no corrective action takes place,” Shourie said. If that was a comment on the substance of the party,
[GreenYouth] More on India (Allegedly) Bribing US Politicians to Get the Indo-US Nuclear Deal Through
[Pretty much contrary to the claims made by the Left and Right Opposition in India that the deal was imposed upon India, because of which India's status as a Nuclear Weapons State gained de facto, even if not de jure, recognition by the global nuclear community and India's punitive exile from the global nuclear market became just a piece of history, Indian elite saw the deal as a bonanza coming its way. No wonder, Pakistan was cacophonously clamouring for the same deal during the process, was banging mad on the doors closed to them. But, alas, it was rudely rebuffed. Here the hyphenation between India and Pakistan got decisively ruptured. India, roughly six times in size, was considered strategically far more important. The following reports, the one at sl. no. I in particular, dwells on hectic Indian lobbying with Hillary (and Bill) at some length.] I/III. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/clinton-cash-book-india-nuclear-stance-secretary-state-117492.html Book alleges India cash swayed Hillary Clinton's nuclear stance Clinton's campaign dismisses the claims by author Peter Schweizer as conspiracy theory. By GABRIEL DEBENEDETTI 4/29/15 7:44 PM EDT Updated 4/30/15 4:57 PM EDT Clinton poses with former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in 2009. | Getty Hillary Clinton changed her position on a 2008 nuclear agreement between the United States and India after Indian business and government interests flooded various Clinton enterprises with cash, a highly anticipated new book alleges in a chapter obtained by POLITICO. The book -- Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Help Make Bill and Hillary Rich -- has become a major point of contention as Clinton kicks off her 2016 bid for the White House. She addressed the controversy surrounding it at a campaign stop in New Hampshire earlier this month, calling it one of many distractions and attacks, and her team has aggressively fought to both discredit its conservative author, Peter Schweizer, and to debunk its claims before publication. Due for release on May 5, while Clinton is scheduled to hold campaign events in Nevada, the book promises a look at allegedly inappropriate financial arrangements between foreign entities and the Clintons, in particular focusing on the family's $2 billion foundation and the Democratic front-runner's years as secretary of state. Clinton's team has responded to a series of reports about the book's contents -- including one in POLITICO about a chapter alleging that Clinton's diplomatic role directly affected the business of major foundation donor Frank Giustra -- by pointing out that Schweizer briefed GOP officials on his research, and that some of his sources have been proved false. The newly obtained chapter, titled Indian Nukes: How to Win a Medal by Changing Hillary's Mind, details a series of donations and overtures from Indians who supported the nuclear deal to the Clintons, and points to one case of an Indian-American Clinton donor -- who in April 2014 pleaded guilty in an illegal contribution scheme for Clinton's 2008 run -- receiving an award from the Indian government for his work in securing the agreement. In 1998 the Indian government conducted nuclear tests, Bill Clinton imposed restrictions on the export of U.S. nuclear technology, because this violated the nonproliferation treaty -- Hillary Clinton supported that position, Schweizer said Tuesday on MSNBC's Morning Joe, outlining the chapter. In 2005, the Indian government wanted those restrictions lifted. Hillary Clinton at that time supported a killer amendment to stop that from happening. ***After 2005, a number of Indian interests, including an Indian politician [i.e. Amar Singh] that admits now that his donation to the Clinton Foundation wasn't even his money, those donations flowed. In 2008, she reverses course and supports the export of U.S. nuclear technology.*** [Emphasis added.] While Clinton's stance toward India evolved over the years, a review of then-Sen. Clinton's statements and votes while the Indian nuclear deal was under debate shows that one of the key facts in Schweizer's argument on the topic is false -- Clinton actually publicly stated her support for the deal in 2006. Another is in dispute - Schweizer writes that Clinton voted to cap India's fissile production, when she actually voted against a measure that did that, though she did support a weaker one that imposed some limits. Schweizer, who wrote that Clinton voted for a 'killer amendment' that would have effectively gutted the bill by capping India's fissile production, contends that the Clinton camp is trying to blur Clinton's position. He says the killer amendment the book refers to is the one submitted by Sen. Russ Feingold that would have asked for Indian assurances that American nuclear fuel would not be used to increase fissile material production in unsafeguarded nuclear facilities - which Clinton did vote for. But as Feingold's
[GreenYouth] Global body gives India poor rating on nuclear safety, may stall entry into Nuclear Supplier Group
I/II. http://ntiindex.org/countries/india/ DATA RESULTS India Has Weapons-Usable Nuclear Materials SUMMARY India improved its score by one point compared to 2012, although ***it still scores near the bottom of the NTI [Nuclear Threat Initiative] Index*** [emphasis added]. India's improvement reflects its first contribution to the IAEA Nuclear Security Fund, resulting in an increased score for voluntary commitments. In the future, India's nuclear materials security conditions could be further improved by strengthening its laws and regulations for security and control of materials, particularly for control and accounting of materials, mitigating the insider threat, and for the physical security of materials during transport. India's nuclear materials security conditions could also be improved by establishing an independent regulatory agency in fulfillment of a Nuclear Security Summit commitment. India's nuclear materials security conditions also remain adversely affected due to its continued increase in its quantities of nuclear material, and high levels of corruption among public officials. Snipped II. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/global-body-gives-india-poor-rating-on-nuclear-safety-may-stall-entry-into-nuclear-supplier-group/articleshow/47117247.cms Global body gives India poor rating on nuclear safety, may stall entry into Nuclear Supplier Group By Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury, ET Bureau | 1 May, 2015, 08.40AM IST NEW DELHI: Ahead of the annual plenary session of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which is expected to discuss the case of India's membership to the coveted global body, the country has questioned Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) for rating the security arrangements at its nuclear installations as poor and below mark. India has said that it follows some of the best practices of many advanced countries. NTI - a Washington-based non-profit body which aims to strengthen global security by reducing the risk of use and preventing the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons - makes the assessment of the security mechanisms in countries having at least one kg of enriched uranium and publishes its assessment annually. It has been rating the security implementations at the Indian nuclear installations as poor and not up to the mark. NTI places India among the nations having poor practices with regard to nuclear security implementations, government officials told ET. However, according to a recent study conducted by the Narendra Modi government, India follows some of the best practices in the world. Officials said that field visits conducted by Indian experts to some of the vital nuclear facilities in UK, Japan and France confirmed that the country complies with best practices equivalent to those being followed in these countries. The move to question NTI's assessment follows apprehensions that its rating could be used to stall India's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group or NSG. The India-US nuclear deal signed in October 2008 ended India's isolation in the global nuclear order. In 2008, the NSG, which normally prohibits its members from nuclear commerce with states which have not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), agreed on a special waiver in the case of India. Since then, India has been trying to enter the NSG amid opposition from some member states including China. India and the US have held wide-ranging discussions on entry into the NSG, including during US President Barack Obama's last visit to the country. The government said that NTI's assessment is flawed on account of security as India has taken adequate steps and measures to prevent any attack on its nuclear facilities by terrorists from across the border. Security and safety measures at the country's nuclear sites, including during the disposal of nuclear and radiological materials, have been made more stringent. Use of technology to minimise human element both to avoid possible errors as well as to deal with insider threats has been increased. Unlike NTI's evaluations, India's nuclear security measures are comparable to best practices globally, an official said. India's security agencies have been tasked with constantly working on improving their ability to respond quickly and effectively and in a coordinated manner during emergency like attack on a nuclear power plant or nuclear facility. Though not unique to India, the population density in India's urban centres increases the vulnerabilities and the possible casualty levels in the event of an attack. The Department of Atomic Energy is working on integrated drills involving security both within the perimeter and outside operating in unison, officials said. Various rules were established under the 1962 Atomic Energy Act to address security related issues of India's nuclear programme. India has been steadfast in its adherence to the instruments and norms stipulated by the global nuclear security regime, an expert said. The
[GreenYouth] Fish workers edgy over blanket ban on fishing
Fish workers edgy over blanket ban on fishing *http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-kerala/fish-workers-edgy-over-blanket-ban-on-fishing/article7160991.eceFish http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-kerala/fish-workers-edgy-over-blanket-ban-on-fishing/article7160991.eceFish workers edgy over blanket ban on fishing* K.A. MARTIn The marine fisheries sector in the State looks set to enter a stormy phase reminiscent of the early 1980s with the Union government issuing an order on April 10 imposing a uniform ban on fishing by all fishing vessels in the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone. We will oppose the ban tooth and nail, said T. Peter of the National Fish Workers' Forum. He called the ban unscientific and a violation of traditional fishing rights. Issued by the Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries under the Union Ministry of Agriculture, the order said fishing activities on the West Coast of India, including Lakshadweep Islands, would come under the ban for 61 days from June 1 to July 31. The ban is effective on the East Coast, including Andaman and Nicobar Islands, between April 15 and June 14. The Centre had trampled over the rights of the States over fisheries, said Charles George of the Matsya Thozhilali Aikyavedi, representing fishermen manning outboard and inboard engine vessels. He said the order would lead to confrontation with the establishment as fishermen were readying to oppose the ban without compromise. Joseph Xaiver Kalappurackal of the Kerala Fishing Boat Operators' Association said the Centre had succumbed to pressure from foreign and joint venture trawlers, which still were out of the purview of the fishing ban. About 50 per cent of the fish landed on Kerala coast is caught during the monsoon season and a total ban on fishing boats during the peak season would have serious social impact as cheap fish would not be available to the largely fish-eating population of the State. He said that the economic impact of the ban would be enormous too for the fishermen. -- 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 http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[GreenYouth] Fwd: Baltimore Uprising Against Killing the Future: The Theft of Black Life
-- Forwarded message -- From: Marx Laboratory marx.laborat...@gmail.com Date: Fri, May 1, 2015 at 10:31 AM Subject: Baltimore Uprising Against Killing the Future: The Theft of Black Life To: Marx Laboratory marx.laborat...@gmail.com http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30489-killing-the-future-the-theft-of-black-life# Killing the Future: The Theft of Black Life Wednesday, 29 April 2015 00:00 By Nicholas Powers http://www.truth-out.org/author/itemlist/user/45693, Truthout | News Analysis [image: (Image: Lauren Walker / Truthout)](Image: Lauren Walker / Truthout http://www.flickr.com/photos/truthout) Tell me of the night your son was killed by the police, I asked. She sat up and a deep sorrow moved in her eyes. I had a habit of looking out the window to see my son, Danette Chavis said. But that night, I said to myself, 'oh leave the boy alone' and took a nap. The phone woke me up and my daughter was rushing out of the door. I followed her and saw police tape, cops standing around a body. I yelled to see if it was him. But they wouldn't let me close. Later, I went to the morgue and identified my son. We sat in the café, a few seconds passed in silence. She looked away as if seeing him dead for the first time and I regretted asking the question. Around us, people typed on laptops or chatted over coffee. They were so carefree. How do we reach a city that mostly looks at people of color in contempt or pity, but not solidarity? How do we get them to listen? I looked up from my notebook. Ms. Chavis, I asked, What do you miss most about your son? *Making Wounds Speak* Imagine hearing that someone you loved, died. Your heart would jump in your chest. Your body would clench like a fist around their memory. How angry would you be? How loud would you yell at the sky, at God, at anyone you could blame? Afterward, you'd float in a limbo of grief until you got answers, made sense of it and then slowly, said goodbye. Gathering at the funeral, you could complete the storyline of loss. The dead cannot be laid to rest because the cop who murdered them is not held accountable, and his violence is condoned. The stages of grief depend on narrative closure, the shoveling of dirt on the casket, eulogizing the dead. But for African-American parents whose children were slain by law enforcement, the stages of grief grind to a halt. The dead cannot be laid to rest because the cop who murdered them is not held accountable, and his violence is condoned. And to eclipse the officer's guilt, the victims are niggerized in public. Have a criminal record? It will be paraded in public. Ever took silly gangsta photos? They will be proof of a thug life. The parents see their child's image warped as they learn of more Black and Latino youth killed by cops. In a solidarity of despair, they embrace everyone's lost children as if they can hear the dead repeating their final words, asking for their lives back. In December 2014, 10 mothers whose children were killed by police held a rally in front of the US Department of Justice. Chavis was there and said into the megaphone, None of us are safe. Law enforcement around the United States is brutalizing, arresting and murdering. A large group surrounded her with signs and candles. One by one the mothers spoke. Some had fought for years like Chavis, who started a petition, now 35,000 signatures strong, to send to former Attorney General Eric Holder, or Valerie Bell, whose son Sean was shot dead by New York City Police Department (NYPD) officers in 2006. Other grieving parents were more recently bereaved, like Jeralynn Blueford, whose son Alan was gunned down by Oakland police in 2012. She stood in front of the rally, choking on tears and saying, Alan's last words were, 'why did you shoot me?' Alan's last words were, 'why did you shoot me?' Holding up the faces of their dead in front of the Department of Justice, the mothers confronted our nation's deepest contradiction. How can citizens be killed by agents of the very state that represents them, and not find any route to accountability? All of them were women of color. And many are working-class. Their presence was already the answer. Under our formal democracy is a long history of a legal racial slavery and segregation followed by a now informal White supremacist regime, in which White lives matter while Black ones don't. The mothers rallied in front of the Department of Justice, but it was dark and empty. Faced with a closed building, but wanting justice, they poured into the street and marched on Pennsylvania Avenue. Blocking traffic, they walked in between cars and shouted, Shut it down! Shut it down! *From Slave Chains to Handcuffs* Years ago, I visited a traveling exhibit on slavery and saw tourists standing quietly around a table filled with rusted shackles and chains. The host pointed at one and said it was worn by those enslaved in the Middle Passage. I reached out, fingertips above it then pulled back. Go
