When will we stop calling parts our land as troubled area ?

There are hardly issues which can't be resolved , so why the people from North East or Kashmir are suffering for decades .
There is limit to everything, be it patience or capacity to bear adverse. The efforts of all successive governments were more or less cosmetic in nature, hence they all resulted in duds while finding solutions .
Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act which is the last resort and is to be enforced with caution even in case of an emergency is renewed after every review of the situation there .

When do we wish to withdraw the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act ?
What have our governments done to normalize situations there ?
Everyone knows that use of Military is a short time solutions, therefore the larger questions is, did our leaders lacked vision , commitment Or seriousness ?

A large section of our forces are assigned to manage law & order in these area ; so what's the point electing governments there ?
Law & order is a state subject; but insurgency and infiltration needs support and direct involvement of central government . Perhaps, its their responsibility to create a healthy, coherent and conducive atmosphere for talks , it was their duty to reach out to people in such areas and engage them in dialogue, help them overcome their issues , concerns & grievances !

But to country dismay no governments has done it this way , once elected they spend their time , energy & machinery in either hiding their flaws ( read scams), defending their wrong policies or witch hunting opponents till they are booted out making way for the other party or coalition to follow their footsteps for next 5 years !

But on a serious note, it hardly matters which alliance wins it should be on a priorities, as this delay in finding solution is alienating our own men apart from exhausting our armed forces doing they are not comfortable in ...

"no work all play" policy is costing them dearly !

In 2014 , there was nobody to challenge the then invincible Mr. Modi ,but this #Raffale and their "no work all play" policy is costing them dearly

!
Even if they come back to form a government again, Nitish Kumar & Ram Vilas Paswan will have an important say in "Koun Banega Pradhan Mantri" .
Irrespective to above Even Mr.Gadkari is playing safe . Perhaps, he knows he has an opportunity if BJP don't reach the magic figures alone , and therefore he has started portraying himself as a liberal amongst hardliners, a dove amongst eagles if not vultures ...
And frankly speaking no chanakya can reverse the damage Done already. The image of senior leaders has taken severe beating leaving enough loopholes for the opposition to dent the "no non sense government" image further with uncomfortable queries and questions creating doubt in the mind of voters, which in given time may not be easy task to wipe out or overcome politically....

#AccheDin

Rahul's political acumenship where he has to prove that his Congress is different and better than Narsimha Rao's, Manmohan Singh's even his mother Sonia Gandhi's led Congress !

Rahul has started well with new governments in all recently won states , but then his responsibility doesn't end there; in fact the expectation to deliver, begin now ....
He will be under tremendous pressure to outdo the BJP ruled states with good governance at one hand and maintainance of the law & order at the other, the two major concerns in right wing ruled states !
So anybody who thinks winning was the end are wrong as it's just the beginning of Rahul's political acumenship where he has to prove that his Congress is different and better than Narsimha Rao's, Manmohan Singh's even his mother Sonia Gandhi's led Congress !
It becomes imperative to add that Congress will have to choose either of the one, it can't be Mr.jekyll and Dr.hyde both as it has been all these years .
Rahul has shown maturity in handling the process of choosing Chief ministers and I expect similar intellect as that shall help him carve a niche for himself and for the long ailing Congress !

Jharkhand government has achieved what even the British rule could not !

The Jharkhand government has achieved what even the British rule could not—complete alienation of the tribal population from their land....

They made amendments to the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act (CNT Act) of 1908 and the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act (SPT Act) of 1949, passed on November 23 by the Jharkhand Legislature, allow use of tribal land for non-agricultural purposes by the government. Earlier, the government could take over land only for public welfare activities....

Under the #SPT_Act, no transfer of urban or rural land is allowed. It can only be inherited. The #CNT_Act is a little more lenient and allows transfer of land within the same caste and geographical limits, but with the approval of the district collector.

But the new amendments allows the use of agricultural land owned by schedule tribes, schedule castes and other backward castes for industrial and commercial purposes. The addition of Section 21 (B) in the CNT Act and Section 13(A) in the SPT Act by the Amendments allow the state government to frame rules from “time to time” for non-agriculture use of the land in the given geographical areas.....
These arm twisting amendments / changes allow easy transfer of land through the backdoor. “The use of ‘time to time’ wording clearly shows "unrighteous" intention of the state government.....
And the only way to correct this cronyism is to choose the next government in the state wisely ..

#Jharkhand_Turns_18

MAMATA MAY WIN THIS SYMBOLIC SECOND TERM ...

Bengal has not changed much since it has been under the rule of Mamata Banerjee-led Trinamool Congress (TMC). The TMC-led government has been trying to attract industries and investments from outside as did its Communist-led predecessor. And, as it was the case during the Left rule, all efforts by the present government in West Bengal to attract investors from outside the state or country have miserably failed. The fear aroused among industrialists following the forced exit of the Tatas from Singur hasn't died down as yet.

It is an undeniable fact that Ms Banerjee has lost much of that popularity she used to enjoy in the past and her image as a messiah for "common man" has taken a severe beating which has induced her two former adversaries, the communists and the Congress, to come together. And as the opposition combination has nothing to lose, maybe this is best time to win back some of the lost ground (read constituencies) by exploiting people’s disenchantment with Mamata & her party.

But the above does not mean that the Cong-Left alliance is any better placed. Their possibility of gain doesn’t conceal the fact that neither the Left nor the Congress has a capable, credible, let alone inspirational, leader. The former chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya is no longer a popular man in his own party. Similarly, the West Bengal Pradesh Congress Committee (WBPCC) is left with the second-rung leaders after nearly all its top brass migrated to the Trinamool for greener pastures. Yet the two allies still hope to gain from the anti-incumbency factor that is working against the Mamata party, whereas deep down the Communist-Congress alliance is aware that time is not ripe as yet and it shall be difficult to unseat Mamata now.

And so Mamata Banerjee may win this election, although it will be a symbolic second term with a government more fragile comparatively to the euphoria she had generated five years ago. Most importantly, her victory or defeat shall hardly make a difference to a state which is expected to remain mired in economic stagnation with high rate of unemployment making the youth cannon fodder in the hands of crafty politicians.

Although there have been some ornamental changes in the last five years, but they are too weak to be discussed about as they failed to make a positive difference to the exchequer of the state. But whatever the outcome be, one thing is certain that what seemed like a cakewalk for Mamata’s party a few weeks back has suddenly turned into an interesting electoral battle.



http://www.milligazette.com/news/14149-mamata-may-win-this-symbolic-second-term-west-bengal

Naming roads should be motivated by history not by political beliefs or chauvinism...

New Delhi Municipal Corporation has changed the name of a prominent thoroughfare in the city from "Aurangzeb Road" to "APJ Abdul Kalam Road". The road which was named decades ago after the Mughal emperor has now been renamed after India's "Missile Man".

No doubt, our current majestic masters would rejoice at our enthusiasm in naming streets or roads after great people. But with this un-solicitous rush, we have also added a degree of silliness to the process. The people who are euphoric with the replacement of the name have obviously missed the big point that New Delhi's geography had been motivated by history and not on political beliefs or chauvinism.

I mean Mahatma Gandhi certainly would have been on an eternal hunger strike if he knew that Delhi's congested Ring Road - which denotes everything about modernity that the Mahatma Gandhi ostracized - bore his name. Similarly, I fail to understand how Park Street of Kolkata which is famous for pubs & bars reflects the legacy of Mother Teresa or for that matter Marine Drive in Mumbai reflects the ideas & ideals of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

Apart from it many historians have pointed out that it is difficult to single out Aurangzeb as a particularly ferocious or brutal ruler, or even a rabidly anti-Hindu emperor. It is undeniable, he clamped down on certain Hindu religious practices, destroyed some temples and killed some people, but it was more to suppress rivals which was in no way connected to his personal religious belief. He destroyed some temples either for hidden treasures or to discourage their use for planning rebellion against him. All above can be verified by the fact, he did not abandon the Mughal graciousness of Hindu mansabdars.


He helped build, renovate and patronized many Hindu temples like the Chitrakut or Balaghat where the Emperor himself granted 300 bighas of land for the Mandir or Umananda, the oldest temple of Bhagwan Bhosle Shankar situated on the banks of river Brahmaputra in Guwahati or offered annual grants to Maa Kamakhya Mandir- another famous temple situated on the hills of Nilachaal near Guwahati. In Hindu holy city of Ayodhya he donated 1000 bighas of land to a Hindu trust to build a grand temple and also to build resting places for Hindu pilgrims- Yugal Kishore Sharan Shastri, head of Sarayukunj Ramjanaki Mandir in Ayodhya confirmed this in a social media post the other day.

Perhaps, it's imperative to understand that Aurangzeb was not democratically elected or inherited the empire peacefully; he had to fight hard to attain what he achieved, sustained and later ruled. Therefore it is understandable that the occurrences during such course was neither exclusive nor an exception or in anyway limited to Aurangzeb only, as it was the norm to ascend thrones during the period. It is impractical to jump to an opinion on Aurangzeb, as he was not a short-lived experience defined by a single event. He lived and shaped Indian history through nearly seven decades- first as Shah Jahan's son, then as his viceroy down south, followed by as "Shahenshah e Hind" or India's ruler.

Apart from it, if he had been so rabidly anti-Hindu - and hostile toward the large section of his subject - then it would have been impossible for him to continue on the Mughal throne for such long period.

Coming back to point, changing names of Roads are fine if it gives people the feeling of pride and self-respect. APJ Kalam was certainly a great scholar, a statesman and a former President of the country; there is nothing wrong on naming a street, town or a city after him, but why was he chosen for this particular Delhi road? Delhi is one of the greatest cities in the world with rich history of over 1,000 years. It would be unfortunate if residents fail to appreciate it and focus their energy on inconsequential things like naming of streets.

On the contrary, I wonder why nobody is seeking to rename Ashoka, Tughlaq, or Akbar roads. Unsurprisingly, it's no secret that Ashoka launched a bloody massacre against the state of Kalinga. It is believed that the sheer extent of that gory war led Ashoka to embrace Buddhism, although some historians contradict this and state that Ashoka continued his invasion against other states even after his conversion. The Tughlaqs were no less bloody either, particularly; Muhammad bin Tughlaq spared neither Hindus nor Muslims when he illogically decided to shift the entire population of Delhi to his new capital Daulatabad. And finally, it cannot be forgotten that the most celebrated Mughal King Akbar too had blood on his hands. Remember that Bahram Khan, the man who raised Akbar from his childhood, was
ultimately killed on the emperor's order.

But irrespective of all facts above, if killing innocents or razing religious structures is still a sort of a benchmark to judge someone, then I am sure historians some decades or centuries later will equate some of today's rulers in India to some Mughal rulers (tyrannical to some) because they too have led mobs to massacre of innocents and razed religious structures, sometime following the action-reaction theory and others in the name of beautification, broadening of roads, laying routes for metro rails and other development work.


http://www.indiatomorrow.net/eng/naming-roads-should-be-motivated-by-history-not-by-political-beliefs-or-chauvinism-


http://www.milligazette.com/news/12978-re-naming-should-be-motivated-by-history-not-chauvinism

NO POLITICS WITH OUR FEELINGS PLEASE ...

AS everybody else has an opinion on Yakub Memon's death by decree of law, irrespective of the fact that it is unlikely to change anything for him now, I still feel the urge to put things across in a simple, impartial and logical way. So, without wasting words on immaterial issue like whether he should have been extended leniency and compassion, the attention at the moment should be on another more pertinent question. Was he eligible for such an "act of gracious kindness" for the crime he committed or was forced to be an accomplice in it?

Mr B Raman (IPS), the then head of Pakistan's desk at Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) in his article in 2007 (http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/dead-raw-officer-raman-returns-to-question-death-sentence-to-1993-bombay-blasts-convict-yakub-memon-1024952.html) wrote: "There is not an iota of doubt about the involvement of Yakub and other members of the family in the conspiracy and their cooperation with the ISI till July 1994". It makes the rest of the argument unwarranted.

Many offer logic that Babri mosque was demolished 20 years ago with much oppression of the Muslims; have we gotten any justice? Gujarat genocide of Muslims occurred 10 years ago; have we gotten any justice? The horrendous Bombay communal riots happened 20 years ago; have we received any justice? Batla House false encounter and oppression of many Muslim youth from Azamgarh occurred five years ago and is continuing; have we received any justice? Sachar Committee report on gross Muslim deprivations was released six years ago; have we received any justice? All we have received in 65 years is a few bread crumbs thrown at us and we have been told to keep quiet.

But my question to all such people including​ Mr. Owaisi, (a lawyer himself) and the politically active millionaire Imam - who led the Namaaz e Janaza for Yakub in Kolkata - is why they did not take keen interest to fight all above cases, including that of Yakub, himself (Mr Owaisi). Why did they not hire lawyers to pursue all above cases, including that of Yakub again?

I feel it was more of a lip service to the community to give them a "feel good feeling" than anything else, because as a layman if I can understand that seeking clemency from capital punishment in itself was an acceptance of his crime, I wonder how a foreign-returned barrister like Owaisi could not understand that and demanded relief on communal lines. Does counting others' sins make one saint?
The argument should have been on the basis of the disclosure that Mr Raman made again in his article,​ where he wrote "But if one also takes into consideration his (Yakub's) conduct and role after he was informally picked up in Kathmandu, there is a strong case for having second thoughts about the suitability of the death penalty in the subsequent stages of the case".

And on that Imam of Kolkata, his mass prayers seem limited for dreaded terrorists, be it Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussain or controversial figures like Yakub Memon. Why did he not offer prayer for APJ Abdul Kalam who died recently? Why did he not offer any Namaaz e Janaza for Kargil Martyrs, Ehsan Jaffery and all those who were butchered in Gujarat, Mumbai or Muzaffarnagar? Weren't they Muslims? Aren't they martyrs? But creating confusion in the minds of innocent Muslims the Imam seems hell-bent on committing political hara-kiri, pushing the community in another deep abyss. Unfortunately for some Muslims love for their political parties is more pertinent than the love for the community. Otherwise, they could have limited their actions.

The community would have appreciated it if there were some logical and peaceful means of protest in the case of hanging of Yakub. Such Namaaz e Janaza sends wrong signal or depicts incorrect pictures of the community and ends up antagonising fellow citizens instead of letting them know of our concerns.

Such prayer is nothing but a big blunder ​​that makes the community more vulnerable and isolated. Such dim-witted show of strength of the community is just hollow and meaningless- and should be avoided ​at all cost.


http://www.indiatomorrow.net/eng/no-politics-with-our-feelings-please