அஸ்ஸலாமு அலைக்கும்.அன்பு தோழர்கள் அனைவரையும் என்னுடைய இணைய தளத்திற்கு வரவேற்கிறேன்.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Huge explosion rocks Afghan capital

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the blast, which struck the Afghan capital [REUTERS]

At least 16 people have been killed in a suicide car bombing targeting Nato forces near the US embassy in Kabul, the Afghan capital.

Six Italian soldiers were among those killed in the blast on Thursday on a road linking Kabul's international airport to the US embassy, the Italian defence ministry said.

Afghan officials said at least 10 civilians were also killed in the attack and 50 more were injured.

Speaking in Rome, Ignazio La Russa, Italy's defence minister, said the suicide bomber
rammed his explosives-laden car into two Italian military vehicles, The Associated Press news agency reported.

He said six of those aboard were killed and four wounded.

Taliban 'responsible'

Afghan troops could be seen carrying wounded civilians to ambulances near the wreckage of a military vehicle bearing the insignia of the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf).

Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr, reporting from Kabul, said the Taliban have claimed responsibility for the attack.

"[They said] the purpose is to show that there is no where safe in Afghanistan.

"We were at the site of the explosion mid-morning. There was a lot of chaos.

"The situation is deteriorating, with violence really at an all time high.

"As violence continues people are concerned about the security situation and the political uncertainty in this country."

Our correspondent said the blast marked the fourth major attack in the capital in five weeks.

On September 8, at least three civilians died in an attack targeting a Nato convoy near the entrance to the military airport in Kabul.

Jakarta 'bomb plotter' dies in raid


Top was wanted in connection with a number of attacks including the 2002 Bali bombings [AFP]

The suspected mastermind of last July's suicide attacks on two luxury hotels in Jakarta, the Indonesian capital, has been killed in a raid on a house in Java, police have said.

Noordin Mohammed Top was identified by his fingerprints after the bodies of at least four people were removed from the house on Thursday.

"It is Noordin M. Top," Bambang Hendarso Danuri, the national police chief, told a televised news conference.

"There are fourteen points of similarities that are identical in the fingerprint tests."

"Al Jazeera's Step Vaessen, reporting from Jakarta, said that it was an emotional news conference by the police chief.

"When he finally announced that Noordin M Top was dead people started cheering and clapping," she said.

Solo siege

Counter-terrorism troops searching for suspects involved in the the attacks on the Ritz-Carlton and JW Marriott hotels, which left nine people dead and 53 wounded, sealed off the area in a suburb of Solo city late on Wednesday.Shooting could be heard overnight before an explosion around daybreak.


Indonesian television showed footage of a burnt-out house, with no roof and blown-out walls after the raid.

Nanan Soekarna, the national police spokesman, said that "explosives, weapons, and a grenade" had been found in the house.

A woman was injured in the raid and is being treated at a hospital in Solo, police said.

The besieged property was rented several months ago by a young couple who work as teachers at an Islamic boarding school and a kindergarten, Suratim, a local village chief, said.

Analysts believe that Top and his associates frequently used safe houses in Central Java, helped by a network of sympathisers in the area.

Sidney Jones, a senior adviser with the International Crisis Group think tank, told Al Jazeera that Indonesian officials would be pleased with the success of the operation.

"They are very proud of what they have achieved and they believe this will make a major dent in Indonesia's terrorist networks," she said.

"He [Top] was very clearly trying to be an Indonesian replica of Osama bin Laden. He was the one major terrorist in Indonesia who was following Bin Laden's directive of workig to wage war on America and its allies wherever possible."

Top is believed to be head of a splinter group with connections to Jemaah Islamiyah, a group fighting for an Islamic state in Southeast Asia.

In a 2005 video, he claimed to be al-Qaeda's representative in Southeast Asia and to be carrying out attacks on Western civilians to avenge Muslim deaths in Afghanistan.

Deadly attacks

Top was wanted in connection with the Bali bombings in 2002, which killed more than 200 people, and a number of other deadly attacks.

Peter Hughes, a survivor of the Bali bombing in 2002, told Al Jazeera: "I guess after seven years we have got some small justice.

"I tend to think that if he's not around others might stop and think 'we won't go forward with what his radical thoughts were'," he said.

Hughes praised the police for tracking down Top.

"I take my hat off to them. After seven years ... they have brought about a good result."

Several suspects in the July 17 bombings have been detained or killed in raids in recent weeks, but the authorities are still searching for several operatives believed to have planned the operation and recruited the bombers.

பாஜகவை அத்வானி சர்வாதிகாரித்தனமாக நடத்துகிறார் - கூட்டணி கட்சி குற்றச்சாட்டு.

பாரதிய ஜனதா கட்சியை அத்வானி சர்வாதிகாரித்தனமாக நடத்துகிறார் என இந்திய தேசிய லோக் தள் கட்சி பொதுச் செயலாளர் அஜய் செளதாலா குற்றம் சாட்டியுள்ளார். ஏற்கனவே உட்கட்சி பூசலிலிருந்து வெளியேற முடியாமல் தவித்துக் கொண்டிருக்கும் அத்வானியை சர்வாதிகாரி என கூறியிருப்பது அத்வானியின் செல்வாக்கிற்கு மேலும் களங்கத்தை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது.

இது குறித்து இணைய தளம் ஒன்றிற்கு பேட்டியளித்த அஜய், பாஜக, எப்போதும் கூட்டனி கட்சிகளை தங்களின் ஆசை, அதிகாரத்திற்கு தான் பயன்படுத்தி வருகின்றனர் என்றும், கூட்டனி கட்சிகளுக்கு துரோகம் இழைப்பதை ஒரு வாடிக்கையாக கொண்டுள்ளனர் என்றும் கூறியுள்ளார். இதற்கு உதாரணமாக, ஆந்திராவில் சந்திர பாபு நாயுடு, ஒரிஸ்ஸாவில் நவீன் பட்நாயக், ஜம்மு-காஷ்மீரில் பாரூக் அப்துல்லாஹ் ஆகியோருடன் பாஜக வைத்துக் கொண்ட உறவினையும், பிறகு முறித்துக் கொண்டதையும் அவர் குறிப்பிட்டார்.

அதேபோல் அத்வானியை பிரதமராவதை மக்கள் நிராகரித்து விட்டனர் என்று கூறிய அவர், மோடியை எதிர்கால பிரதமராக முன்னிறுத்தியதும், வருன் காந்தி, சிறுபான்மை மக்களை குற்றம்சாட்டி பேசியது, பாஜகவின் தோல்விக்கு காரணங்கள் என்றார்.


குஜராத் போலி என்கவுண்டர் - கார்ட்டூன்


source: Twocircles.net

Sunday, September 13, 2009

American Muslims eight years after 9/11

“Change” was President Barak Obama's campaign slogan. The seven-million strong American Muslim community, firmly believing in his “change” slogan, voted overwhelmingly for him in the 2008 presidential elections with the hope that his administration would bring an end to their humiliation and sufferings they faced in the Bush era in the name of “war on terror.”

American Muslims were both pleased and surprised by President Obama’s inclusive words in his inaugural address, on January 20th, when he said America is "a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and non-believers." Such words signaled Obama's recognition that Muslims are an important part of the American fabric.

In his historic June 4 speech in Cairo, President Obama hinted to the problems facing American Muslims by saying that the United States “rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.”

His Cairo statement coincided with a statement by Attorney General Eric Holder: "The President's pledge for a new beginning between the United States and the Muslim community takes root here in the Justice Department where we are committed to using criminal and civil rights laws to protect Muslim Americans. A top priority of this Justice Department is a return to robust civil rights enforcement and outreach in defending religious freedoms and other fundamental rights of all of our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the housing market, in our schools and in the voting booth.”

Similarly, in his September 2nd speech at the White House Iftar dinner, President Obama emphasized that “the contributions of Muslims to the United States are too long to catalogue because Muslims are so interwoven into the fabric of our communities and our country.” While noting the contributions of American Muslims, the president also alluded to their problems when he shared the story of the Muslim sixth-grader Nashala Hearn from Oklahoma, who was suspended twice last fall because the school officials claimed her hijab violated their dress code policy. The President said: “When her school district told her that she couldn't wear the hijab, she protested that it was a part of her religion. The Department of Justice stood behind her, and she won her right to practice her faith.”

Not surprisingly, Valerie Jarrett, a Senior Advisor and Assistant to President Obama for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, was the keynote speaker at the inaugural session of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) Convention 2009. She paid a tribute to the diligent work of Muslim Americans on behalf of the country. Citing President Obama’s April 2009 Cairo Speech, Ms. Jarrett acknowledged the contribution of American Muslims to the overall development of American society and the strengthening of American institutions. Ms Jarrett pointed out: “Your work here is crucial in confronting the challenges that all Americans are facing. And you help advance the new beginning between the United State and Muslim communities around the world that the President called for in Cairo.”

These courteous and good gestures by President Obama are accompanied by the appointment of a number of American Muslims to some minor positions in his administration. Rashad Hussain, an American Muslim lawyer, has been appointed as Deputy Associate Counsel to the President. Dalia Mogahed was appointed by President Obama to serve on the Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) National Executive Director Kareem Shora has been appointed a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

However all these good gestures and public policy measures have little positive impact on the restoration of civil rights of American Muslims curtailed since 9/11. Profiling has been institutionalized in the post-9/11 America. State and federal agencies, under the guise of fighting terrorism, have expanded the use of this degrading, discriminatory and dangerous practice. The damage to civil liberties has been extensive, and a lot of work remains to be done.

American Muslims and civil libertarians are particularly concerned about Justice Department guidelines implemented in the last days of the Bush administration, which allow race and ethnicity to be factors in opening an investigation. Other civil rights concerns include FBI agent provocateurs sent into American mosques, citizenship delays, politicized “terror” trials, and misuse by the Department of Justice of the “unindicted co-conspirator” label.

Today, eight years after 9/11, incidents of racial and religious profiling in the United States have increased dramatically. Soon after the 9/11 attacks, racial profiling became the norm at American airports where anyone belonging to the Arab or Muslim communities was systematically called out for questioning and sometimes even detained. Eight years hence, August 14, 2009 detention of Indian Muslim superstar Shah Rukh Khan’s detention at Newark Airport in New Jersey is only one of the scores that take place every day.

  • COINTELPRO operation against the Muslims

Last October — in the waning days of the Bush administration — FBI director Robert Mueller signed new guidelines allowing broader FBI authority in pursuing potential threats to national security. The new guidelines allow agents to consider race or ethnicity in determining whether someone is a suspect. These guidelines – which became effective Dec. 1, 2008 — allow the FBI to launch a criminal investigation against someone without any factual predicate and without approval from FBI headquarters.

The guidelines are similar to COINTELPRO, an FBI program used in the 50s and 60s to spy on civil rights, environmental and labor groups, with the goal of unearthing Communist ties those organizations may have had. At Congressional hearings last May, FBI Director Mueller — who continues to serve as FBI director in the Obama administration — said the guidelines simply formalized processes the FBI had begun to use, post-9/11. President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have not indicated whether they intend to scrap the new guidelines.

Tellingly, the Obama administration has also formalized laptop seizure rules. On August 27, 2009, the Obama administration disclosed that it will carry on Bush administration policies that allowed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to seize and search international travelers' laptop computers, cellular phones, cameras, and other electronic devices, even in the absence of suspicion of criminal activity. The DHS made public two directives that formalized operational practices established by the Bush administration to carry out searches of the personal digital instruments of travelers, U.S. citizens or not, passing across U.S. borders.

According to the directives, border police "may detain electronic devices, or copies of information contained therein, for a brief, reasonable period of time to perform a thorough border search. If DHS turns up nothing incriminating, to regain the confiscated item the traveler must return to the border crossing where the item was seized, or else pay for its shipment.

Although the electronic media search regulations apply to all passengers but Muslims are perhaps the main target at present because they are the target of extra scrutiny at the airports and other points of entry.

In April 2009, Muslim Advocates released a report - Unreasonable Intrusions: Investigating the Politics, Faith & Finances of Americans Returning Home - documenting the systematic and widespread practice of federal agents interrogating Muslim, Arab, and South-Asian Americans returning home after international travel — violating their rights to privacy and nondiscrimination, among others. The report pointed out: “Currently, no DHS policy limits the scope of interrogations, even those that probe the religious beliefs, political views and other First Amendment-protected activities of law-abiding Americans.

"For many hard-working, law-abiding Muslim Americans, questions about their political beliefs, religious practices, and charitable causes they support, as well as surrendering their business cards, credit card numbers and laptop and cell phone data, have become the price of admission to return home to the U.S. ," says Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates.

On June 30, 2009 the ACLU issued a report titled: The Persistence of Racial and ethnic Profiling in the United States. The report said: “The Obama administration has inherited a shameful legacy of racial profiling codified in official FBI guidelines and a notorious registration program that treats Arabs and Muslims as suspects and denies them the presumption of innocence and equal protection under the law.……….As a result, in 2009, with a new administration in office, the practice of racial profiling by members of law enforcement at the federal, state, and local levels remains a widespread and pervasive problem throughout the United States, impacting the lives of millions of people in African American, Asian, Latino, South Asian, and Arab communities.”

Tellingly, as a candidate, President Barack Obama’s campaign released a “Blueprint for Change,” which stated that, if elected, “Obama and Biden will ban racial profiling . . . ” In 2005 and in 2007, then-Senator Obama cosponsored End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) which has continued to languish in Congress since its introduction in 1997. ERPA is the key piece of federal legislation as it would compel all law enforcement agencies to ban racial profiling; create and apply profiling procedures; document data on stop/search/arrest activities by race and gender; and create a private right of action for victims of profiling.

  • Islamophobia

Eight years after 9/11, there is a rising tide of Islamaphobia, intensified by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and U.S. government measures at home. Americans' attitudes about Islam and Muslims are fuelled mainly by political statements and media reports that focus almost solely on the negative image of Islam and Muslims. Politicians, authors and media commentators are busy in demonizing Islam, Muslims and the Muslim world. Eight years after 9/11 attacking Islam and Muslims remains the fashionable sport for the radio, television and print media. Few recent incidents of Islamophobia:

In February 2009, Republican Senator Jon Kyl hosted screening of an anti-Islam film ‘Fitna’ at the Capitol building and invited anti-Islam far-right Dutch lawmaker, Geert Wilders, as his guest. Tellingly, Wilders was denied entry to London earlier that month because British authorities believed that showing his controversial film posed a threat to public order. Islamophobe Wilders, who built his political career on fear-mongering, compares Islam’s holy book Qur’an to Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and calls for its banned.

Islamophobes are also teaching hatred towards Islam and Muslims to the school children. On August 24, Faith Sapp, a 10-year-old daughter of Wayne Sapp, pastor of the controversial church, the Dove World Outreach Center, in Gainesville Florida, was sent home for wearing a T-shirt with the words 'Islam Is Of The Devil' printed on it. Next day three more students were sent home for wearing the anti-Islam T-shirts. On their front, the T-shirts had a verse from the Gospel of John: "Jesus answered I am the way and the truth and the life; no one goes to the Father except through me." The message "Islam is of the Devil" is on the back of the shirt. The Dove World Outreach Center’s anti-Islam T-shirts episode came a month after the church displayed a series of hand-painted anti-Islam signs.

In the latest incident of Islamophobia, Clarksville, Tennessee, Mayor Johnny Piper, on Sept. 4, sent an e-mail to every City Council member, every department head, and numerous other city employees, friends and family members, to protest a US Postal Service stamp commemorating two Islamic holidays of Eid. The e-mail falsely claims that the stamp is new, and its creation was ordered by President Barack Obama. In fact, the stamp was first issued in 2001, and was reissued in 2002, 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Not surprisingly, Islamophobia has created an atmosphere of suspicion among the fellow Americans towards the Muslims. In this Islamophobic charged atmosphere, it is not surprising that 48 percent Americans have an unfavorable view of Islam according to a 2009 poll by Washington Post-ABC News. Nearly three in ten (29 percent) said they see mainstream Islam as advocating violence against non-Muslims. Unfortunately, what most Americans continue to see on television and read in newspapers since 9/11 are examples of Muslims and Arabs responsible for terror attacks, the repression of women, and riots.

Islamophobia incited incidents targeting American Muslim individuals and institutions. Eight years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, American Muslims and Arabs continue to suffer a severe wave of backlash violence. The hate crimes included murder, beatings, arson, attacks on mosques, shootings, vehicular assaults and verbal threats. Recent hate crimes include a bias-motivated attack on a Muslim woman and child in Seattle by a self-proclaimed white supremacist, vandalism of mosques in California, Florida and North Carolina, an anti-Islam sign outside a Florida church, racist fireworks sold in Wisconsin, the beating of a Muslim student in New York, and the death of a California Muslim leader in a “suspicious” fire.

Last month, an Islandia, New York, man threatened to kill a Muslim woman and her 20-year-old daughter as he tried to run them down with his car at a gas station. The victim, 49, and her daughter were dressed in an abaya, a traditional Muslim garment that completely covered their bodies and face, except for their eyes.

  • FBI infiltrated spies into South California mosques

In February 2009, the American Muslim community was shocked at the revelation, that the FBI has been infiltrating spies into a number of mosques in Southern California. The Orange County Register reported that the FBI sent a convicted criminal, Craig Monteilh, to pose as an agent provocateur in several of California’s mosques. In April, Monteilh told The Los Angeles Times that he posed as a Muslim convert at the request of the FBI to gather intelligence that might aid anti-terrorism investigators. Monteilh said he was instructed to lure mosque members to work out with him at local gyms.

FBI agents later would obtain security camera footage from the gyms and ask him to identify the people on the tapes and to provide additional information about them. He was told that the agents then conducted background checks on the men, looking for anything that could be used to pressure them to become informants.

The Council of Islamic Organizations of Michigan (CIOM), in April 2009, asked Attorney General Eric Holder to launch an investigation into complaints that Michigan Muslims are being approached to spy on activities of Muslim congregations by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).

Through coercion of certain members of congregations, the FBI is reportedly promoting entrapment of innocent, law-abiding citizens in otherwise peaceful houses of worship, said a CIOM statement. CIOM is an umbrella organization of mosques and Islamic organizations within the state of Michigan. The Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI), which is a CIOM member, had received complaints that the FBI has approached Michigan Muslims, asking them to spy on unsuspecting worshippers including monitoring their legitimate charitable donations.

  • Muslim charities

Eight years after 9/11, Muslim charity organizations remain under pressure. In June 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union released an extensive report about how the U.S. terrorism finance laws and policies were unfairly preventing the seven-million-strong American Muslim community from practicing their religion through charitable giving.

The 164 page report, "Blocking Faith, Freezing Charity," is the first comprehensive report that documents the serious effects of Bush administration terrorism finance laws on Muslim communities across the nation. The core of the report is about how Muslims are being scared away from making zakat (a religious obligation) donations to Muslim charities. “U.S. terrorism finance laws and policies unfairly prevent Muslim Americans from practicing their religion through charitable giving, create a climate of fear and distrust in law enforcement and undermine America's diplomatic efforts in Muslim countries,” the report said.

Since December 2001, the ACLU reports that the government has seized the assets of three Muslim charities, closed seven others and conducted raids of more. The stated purpose was to cut off the money that supposedly was heading from Muslim charities to groups that support or carry out terrorism. "Without notice and through the use of secret evidence and opaque procedures, the Treasury Department has effectively closed down seven U.S. -based Muslim charities, including several of the nation's largest Muslim charities," said Jennifer Turner, a researcher with the ACLU Human Rights Program and author of the report.

"While terrorism financing laws are meant to make us safer, policies that give the appearance of a war on Islam only serve to undermine America's diplomatic efforts just as President Obama reaches out to the Muslim world. These counter-productive practices alienate American Muslims who are key allies and chill legitimate humanitarian aid in parts of the world where charities' good works could be most effective in winning hearts and minds," Turner added.

In May 2009, after a series of legal twists, secret evidence and questionable witness of Israeli intelligence agents, five former officials of the Holy Land Foundation, once a leading American Muslim charitable organization, were sentenced upto 65 years imprisonment on charges related to humanitarian aid given to Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The defendants said they were engaged in legitimate relief work, while the government claimed that work benefited terrorists. During the trial, defense attorneys accused the government of bending to Israeli pressure to prosecute the charity, and of relying on old evidence. The five were never accused of supporting violence and were convicted for funding charities that aided needy Palestinians.

To borrow the OBM Watch, the Holy Land Foundation trial sends a chilling message to the U.S. charities. It is virtually impossible for charities to determine what foreign organizations they can legally partner with. At the trial, Robert McBrien from Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control testified that it can be illegal to deal with groups that have not been designated as supporters of terrorism and placed on government watch lists. He said that keeping up with front groups "is a task beyond the wise use of resources." As a result, charities now have to guess about whether or not any local charity or community leader may be considered a supporter of terrorism, said the OBM.

“Ramadan, Giving Wisely and With No Fear” is the title of an article about zakat which reflects the dilemma of Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation of zakat which is usually given during the month of Ramadan. Government crackdown of Muslim charities has caused tremendous fear and anxiety among Muslims, with many still fearful that a simple act of charity could lead to federal agents knocking at their door. Unfortunately Obama’s pledge to work with American Muslims to resolve the problem has so far helped little to assure the Muslims. In July, Muslim organizations joined other nonprofit organizations in signing a letter urging President Obama to follow up on his Cairo commitment to revise charitable giving rules.

On August 26, the Treasury Department issued a statement about charity giving in Ramadan. “As Ramadan begins, the US Department of the Treasury recognizes the particular importance of charitable giving throughout the holy month of Ramadan for Muslims in America and around the world. Charitable giving is a fundamental characteristic of many faiths, and zakat, one of the five pillars of Islam, is a sacred obligation for Muslims.” However, the Treasury Department has failed to provide a safe list of charity organizations so that Muslims can donate without fear.

In short, eight years after 9/11, Muslims in America remained at the receiving end with assault on their civil rights and their faith. Muslims are the prime targets of the post 9/11 reconfiguration of American laws, policies, and priorities which have not been changed under the Obama administration. Defending civil rights remains the single most important challenge before the seven million-strong American Muslim community.

It will not be a harsh judgment to say that eight years after 9/11, American Muslims remain under siege. Despite healing words from President Obama about bridging the divide between the Muslim world and the West, America's Muslim community is subject to pervasive and persistent attacks by the federal government, many spearheaded by the Joint Terrorism Task Forces.

As President Barack Obama made his public appearance with Turkish President Abdullah Gul on April 6, 2009 as part of his first trip to a Muslim country, U.S. federal agents were preparing to arrest Youssef Megahed, a student from Egypt, in Tampa, Fla. Just three days earlier, a jury in a U.S. federal district court had acquitted him of charges of illegally transporting explosives and possession of an explosive device. Megahed was being held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for a deportation proceeding. The charges were the same ones from which he was completely acquitted. Surprisingly, in August he was released when an immigration judge refused to deport him, ruling the Department of Homeland Security had failed to prove terrorism charges.

Many people believed that after Bush had left the White House, rampant arrogance combined with stunning hypocrisy had also gone. Events have so far proved otherwise. Although Obama is able to give a more compassionate and intelligent speech than was possible with Bush, the essence of their policies is identical. To borrow Ted Rall: “Obama doesn’t talk like Bush; he just acts like him?”

Source:Al jaseera.

Israeli Shoots 2 Palestinians in Occupied Jerusalem

An Israeli settler opened fire at two Palestinians in a parking lot in occupied Jerusalem's Old City on Friday evening. The two Arabs, residents of the Silwan neighborhood in occupied east Jerusalem, were wounded and were evacuated to the Hadassah Mount Scopus Hospital in the capital.

The shooter was arrested near Dung Gate and claimed that he had fired at the two – a 40-year-old man and a 13-year-old boy – after feeling threatened.

The Israeli claimed during his interrogation that he had been attacked by six people and had opened fire at them using a rifle in his possession. He claimed he had felt threatened by the fact that Arabs were standing next to him.

குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் ஆபத்தானது: உலக சுகாதார நிறுவனம் எச்சரிக்கை

கோலாலாம்பூர்: விஷக்காய்ச்சல், பறவை காய்ச்சல், பன்றிக் காய்ச்சல் வரிசையில் அடுத்து குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் வந்துள்ளது. நோய் வாய்ப்பட்ட குரங்குகளில் உள்ள வைரஸ்கள் மூலம் மனிதர்களிடம் இந்த காய்ச்சல் பரவுகிறது. நீண்ட வால் குரங்குகளிடம் இருந்துதான் இந்த பாதிப்பு அதிகமாக வருமாம். மலேசியாவில் குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் மிக வேகமாக பரவுவதாக எச்சரிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.

கடந்த ஆண்டு ஜனவரி மாதம் முதல் இதுவரை 150-க்கும் மேற்பட்டவர்கள் குரங்கு காய்ச்சலுக்கு சிகிச்சை பெற்றுள்ளனர். அவர்களில் 2 பேர் சிகிச்சை பலனின்றி இறந்துள்ளனர். இந்த நிலையில் இந்தோனேசியா நாட்டி லும் குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் பரவி இருப்பது தெரிய வந்துள்ளது.

குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் மிக வேகமாக பரவுவது இல்லை. ஆனால் அந்த நோய் தாக்கினால் ரத்த ஓட்டத்தில் சிக்கல் ஏற்படும் மூச்சு விட கஷ்டப்பட வேண்டியதிருக்கும். உரிய மாத்திரை சாப்பிடாவிட்டால் சிறு நீரகங்களை குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் பழுதாக்கி விடும். எனவே குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் மிகவும் ஆபத்தானது என்று உலக சுகாதார நிறுவனம் கூறி உள்ளது.

இந்தியாவில் காய்ச்சலை பரப்பும் தன்மை கொண்ட குரங்குகள் இல்லை. எனவே இந்தியர்கள் பயப்பட வேண்டியதில்லை என்று அறிவிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. என்றாலும் சுற்றுலா பயணிகள் மூலம் குரங்கு காய்ச்சல் இந்தியாவுக்குள் வந்து விடக்கூடாது என்று கண்காணிக்கப்பட்டு வருகிறது


Palestinians Hold iftar outside Ofer Prison

009 Time : 18:55

RAMALLAH, September 12, 2009 (WAFA)- Palestinians, international and Israeli solidarity activists gathered to break the Ramadan fast (Iftar) on a hilltop overlooking the Israeli prison, Ofer, the International solidarity Movement said Saturday.

After the meal, a series of speeches were given voicing opposition to Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and brutal detention policy, noting that there are approximately 11,000 political Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

During the month of Ramadan, families and communities break the fast together and iftar was taken collectively as a sign of solidarity with the prisoners in Ofer.

At least 150 people came from various villages in the region around Ramallah to support this action.

Relatives of incarcerated Palestinians gave the speeches following iftar and the evening culminated with a speech, via mobile phone, by Hamsa Sulliman Yasen, a current inmate in the Israeli prison system.

This display of solidarity with the prisoners of Ofer follows three weeks of regular Monday morning protests at the gates of the prison by local Palestinians and international activists.

The response of the Israeli forces to these peaceful protests is becoming increasingly aggressive. At the latest demonstration border police were seen preparing tear gas to fire on the crowd before the leaders of the protest chose to end the demonstration.

Ofer prison holds well over 1,000 of the 11,000 Palestinians currently incarcerated by Israeli Occupation Forces.

Israel and 9/11

  • What role did the U.S.-Israeli relationship prlay in 9-11?

On the day of the 9-11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for U.S.-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: “It’s very good….Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel).”

Intelligence wars rely on mathematical models to anticipate the response of “the mark” to staged provocations. Reactions thereby become foreseeable—within an acceptable range of probabilities. When Israeli mathematician Robert J. Aumann received the 2005 Nobel Prize in economic science, he conceded that "the entire school of thought that we have developed here in Israel" has turned "Israel into the leading authority in this field."

With a well-planned provocation, the anticipated response can even become a weapon in the arsenal of the agent provocateur. In response to 9-11, how difficult would it be to foresee that the U.S. would deploy its military to avenge that attack? With fixed intelligence, how difficult would it be to redirect that response to wage a long-planned war in Iraq -- not for U.S. interests but to advance the agenda for Greater Israel?

The emotionally wrenching component of a provocation plays a key role in the field of game theory war planning where Israel is the authority. With the televised murder of 3,000 Americans, a shared mindset of shock, grief and outrage made it easier for U.S. policy-makers to believe that a known Evil Doer in Iraq was responsible, regardless of the facts.

The strategic displacement of facts with induced beliefs, in turn, requires a period of "preparing the mindset" so that “the mark” will put their faith in a pre-staged fiction. Those who induced the March 2003 invasion of Iraq began "laying mental threads" and creating agenda-advancing mental associations more than a decade earlier.

Notable among those threads was the 1993 publication in Foreign Affairs of an article by Harvard professor Samuel Huntington. By the time his analysis appeared in book-length form in 1996 as The Clash of Civilizations, more than 100 academies and think tanks were prepared to promote it, pre-staging a "clash consensus"--five years before 9-11.

Also published in 1996 under the guidance of Richard Perle was A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (i.e., Israel). A member since 1987 of the U.S. Defense Policy Advisory Board, this self-professed Zionist became its chairman in 2001. As a key adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Perle’s senior Pentagon post helped lay the required foundation for removing Saddam Hussein as part of a Greater Israel strategy, a key theme of A Clean Break – released five years before 9-11.

A mass murder, articles, books, think tanks and Pentagon insiders, however, are not enough to manage the variables in a “probabilistic” war-planning model. Supportive policy makers are also required to lend the appearance of legitimacy and credibility to an operation justified by intelligence fixed around a pre-determined agenda.

That role was eagerly filled by Senators John McCain, Joe Lieberman, a Jewish Zionist from Connecticut, and Jon Kyl, a Christian Zionist from Arizona, when they co-sponsored the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Echoing Tel Aviv’s agenda in A Clean Break, their bill laid another mental thread in the public mindset by calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein--three years before 9-11.

The legislation also appropriated $97 million, largely to promote that Zionist agenda. Distracted by mid-term Congressional elections and by impeachment proceedings commenced in reaction to a well-timed presidential affair involving White House intern Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton signed that agenda into law October 31, 1998 -- five years before the US-led invasion that removed Saddam Hussein.

After 9-11, John McCain and Joe Lieberman became inseparable travel companions and irrepressible advocates for the invasion of Iraq. Looking "presidential" aboard the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt in January 2002, McCain laid another key thread when he waved an admiral’s cap while proclaiming, alongside Lieberman, "On to Baghdad."

  • By way of deception

The chutzpah with which this game theory strategy progressed in plain sight could be seen in the behavior of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, another Zionist insider. Four days after 9-11, in a principals’ meeting at Camp David, he proposed that the U.S. invade Iraq. At that time, the intelligence did not yet point to Iraqi involvement and Osama bin Laden was thought to be hiding in a remote region of Afghanistan.

Frustrated that President George H.W. Bush declined to remove Saddam Hussein during the 1991 Gulf War, Wolfowitz proposed a No-Fly Zone in northern Iraq. By 2001, the Israeli Mossad had agents at work for a decade in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. Intelligence reports of Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda also came from Mosul -- reports that later proved to be false. Mosul again emerged in November 2004 as a center of the insurgency that destabilized Iraq. That reaction precluded the speedy exit of coalition forces promised in Congressional testimony by senior war-planner Wolfowitz.

The common source of the fixed intelligence that induced America to war in Iraq has yet to be acknowledged even though intelligence experts agree that deception on such a scale required a decade to plan, staff, pre-stage, orchestrate and, to date, cover up. The two leaders of the 9-11 Commission report conceded they were stopped by Commission members from hearing testimony on the motivation for 9-11: the U.S. -Israeli relationship.

The fictions accepted as generally accepted truths included Iraqi WMD, Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, Iraqi meetings with Al Qaeda in Prague, Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories and Iraqi purchases of “yellowcake” uranium from Niger. Only the last fact was conceded as phony in the relevant time frame. All the rest were disclosed as false, flawed or fixed only after the war began. An attempt to cover-up the yellowcake account led to the federal prosecution of vice-presidential chief of staff Lewis Libby, another well-placed Zionist insider.

Did game theory-modeled pre-staging also include the Israeli provocation that led to the Second Intifada? An intifada is an uprising or, literally, a "shaking off" of an oppressor. The Second Intifada in Palestine dates from September 2000 when Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon led an armed march to Jerusalem’s Temple Mount – one year before 9-11.

After a year of calm—during which Palestinians believed in the prospects for peace—suicide bombings recommenced after this high-profile provocation. In response to the uprising, Sharon and Netanyahu observed that only when Americans "feel our pain" would they understand the plight of the victimized Israelis. Both Israeli leaders suggested that shared mindset (“feel our pain”) would require in the U.S. a weighted body count of 4,500 to 5,000 Americans lost to terrorism, the initial estimate of those who died in the twin towers of New York City’s World Trade Center—one year later.

  • The American Valkyrie?

When successful, game theory warfare strengthens the agent provocateur while leaving the mark discredited and depleted by the anticipated reaction to a well-timed provocation. By game theory standards, 9-11 was a strategic success because the U.S. was portrayed as irrational for its reaction -- the invasion of Iraq – that triggered a deadly insurgency with devastating consequences both for Iraq and the U.S.

That insurgency, in turn, was an easily modeled reaction to the invasion of a nation that (a) played no role in the provocation, and (b) was known to be populated by three long-warring sects where an unstable peace was maintained by a former U.S. ally who was rebranded an Evil Doer. As the cost in blood and treasure expanded, the U.S. became overextended militarily, financially and diplomatically.

As “the mark” (the U.S. ) emerged in the foreground, the agent provocateur faded into the background. But only after catalyzing dynamics that steadily drained the U.S. of credibility, resources and resolve. This “probabilistic” victory also ensured widespread cynicism, insecurity, distrust and disillusionment along with a declining capacity to defend its interests due to the duplicity of a game theory-savvy enemy within.

Meanwhile the American public fell under a regime of oversight, surveillance and intimidation marketed as “homeland” security. This domestic operation even features rhetorical hints of a WWII “fatherland” with clear signs of a force alien to the U.S. with its welcome embrace of open dissent. Is this operation meant to protect Americans or to shield those responsible for this insider operation from Americans?

By manipulating the shared mindset, skilled game theory war-planners can wage battles in plain sight and on multiple fronts with minimal resources. One proven strategy: Pose as an ally of a well-armed nation predisposed to deploy its military in response to a mass murder. In this case, the result destabilized Iraq, creating crises that could be exploited to strategic advantage by expanding the conflict to Iran, another key Israeli goal announced in A Clean Break—seven years before the invasion of Iraq.

Which nation benefitted from the deployment of coalition forces to the region? Today’s mathematically model-able outcome undermined U.S. national security by overextending its military, discrediting its leadership, degrading its financial condition and disabling its political will. In game theory terms, these results were “perfectly predictable”—within an acceptable range of probabilities.

In the asymmetry that typifies today’s unconventional warfare, those who are few in numbers must wage war by way of deception—non-transparently and with means that leverage their impact. Which nation—if not Israel—fits that description?

  • Treason in plain sight?

Game theory war-planners manipulate the shared mental environment by shaping perceptions and creating impressions that become consensus opinions. With the aid of well-timed crises, policy-makers fall in line with a predetermined agenda—not because they are Evil Doers or “imperialists” but because the shared mindset has been pre-conditioned to respond not to the facts but to manipulated emotions and consensus beliefs. Without the murder of 3,000 on 9-11, America’s credibility would not now be damaged and the U.S. economy would be in far better shape.

By steadily displacing facts with what “the mark” can be induced to believe, the few-within-the-few amplify the impact of their duplicity. By steady manipulation of the public’s mindset, game theory war-planners can defeat an opponent with vastly superior resources by inducing those decisions that ensure defeat.

Intelligence wars are waged in plain sight and under the cover of widely shared beliefs. By manipulating consensus opinion, such wars can be won from the inside out by inducing a people to freely choose the very forces that imperil their freedom. Thus in the Information Age the disproportionate power wielded by those with outsized influence in media, pop culture, think tanks, academia and politics—domains where Zionist influence is most rampant.

Induced beliefs act as a force-multiplier to wage intelligence wars from the shadows. At the operational core of such warfare are those masterful at anticipating the mark’s response to a provocation and incorporating that response into their arsenal. For those who wage war in this fashion, facts are only a barrier to overcome. For those nations dependent on facts, the rule of law and informed consent to protect their freedom, such insider treachery poses the greatest possible threat to national security.

America is far less safe than before 9-11. Tel Aviv clearly intends to continue its serial provocations, as evidenced by its ongoing expansion of the settlements. Israel has shown no sign of a willingness to negotiate in good faith or to take the steps required to make peace a possibility. To date, Barack Obama appears unwilling to name senior appointees who are not either Zionists are strongly pro-Israeli. The greatest threat to world peace is not terrorists. The greatest threat is the U.S. -Israeli relationship.

In the same way that a decade of pre-staging was required to plausibly induce the U.S. to invade Iraq, a similar strategy is now underway to persuade the U.S. to invade Iran or to support and condone an attack by Israel. The same duplicity is again at work, including the high profile branding of the requisite Evil Doer. From its very outset, the Zionist enterprise focused on hegemony in the Middle East. Its entangled alliance with the U.S. enabled this enterprise to deploy American might for that purpose.

Only one nation had the means, motive, opportunity and stable nation state intelligence required to take the U.S. to war in the Middle East while also making it appear that Islam is the problem. If Barack Obama continues to defer to Tel Aviv, he can rightly be blamed when the next attack occurs in the U.S. or the European Union featuring the usual orgy of evidence pointing to a predetermined target. Should another mass murder occur, that event will be traceable directly to the U.S. -Israeli relationship and the failure of U.S. policy-makers to free America from this enemy within.


A fresh approach in Afghanistan: An end to war?

Left out of the options under consideration in "Obama's war" is the only one with any chance of success.

Despite assurances to the contrary in Washington and a major policy speech in London, one need not quibble with the obvious fact that the situation is deteriorating beyond repair in Afghanistan. Although international media is more concerned with what that means politically for United States President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, little attention is given to the browbeaten and war-weary people of that country.

One should know that public support for the war has greatly diminished, when conservative commentators like The Washington Post columnist George Will write: "U.S. forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy. America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, air strikes and small, potent Special Forces units."

Okay, so his narrative is still ultimately violent, but the fact remains that the war mood is changing. After all, Will's 1 September article was entitled, "Time to Get Out of Afghanistan."

Dan Senor and Peter Wehner responded with a peculiar diatribe in the New York Times, accusing Will of allowing his party allegiance to influence his views on the war. The two authors, senior fellows at major U.S. think tanks, offered a bloody rationale wrapped in deceptive wording. They argued that historically Democrats opposed Republican wars and Republicans have done the same, and that must change. It was implied that pretty much every major war in recent decades was a war that served U.S. national security interests; therefore, "Republicans should resist the reflex that all opposition parties have, which is to oppose the stands of a president of the other party because he is a member of the other party." In other words, yes to war, whether by Democrats or Republicans.

The intellectual wrangling, of course, is not happening in a vacuum; it almost never does. Indeed, there is much politicking going on; intense deliberation in Washington, political debates in London; defensive French statements, and more. It seems that the war in Afghanistan is reaching a decisive point, militarily in Afghanistan itself, and politically in major Western capitals.

But why the sudden hoopla over Afghanistan? For after all, the bloody war has been grinding on for eight long years.

The Taliban and various groups opposing the Kabul government and their Western benefactors are gaining ground, not just in the southern and eastern parts of Afghanistan. Daring Taliban attacks are now taking place in the north as well, long seen as peaceful, thus requiring little attention. On 26 August a roadside bomb hit the car of the chief of the provincial Justice Department in the northern Kunduz province, killing him, and sending shock waves through Kabul. The bloody message was meant to echo as a political one: no one is safe, nowhere is safe. Another attack was reported in the province of Laghman, in the east, where 22 people, mostly civilians were killed. Among the dead were four Afghan officials including the deputy chief of the National Directorate of Security, Abdullah Laghmani. The irony is too obvious to state.

In Washington, London and Paris politicians wish us to believe that they are not unnerved by all of this. They exaggerated the significance of the recent Afghani elections, attempting to once again underscore that the "crucial" elections placed Afghanistan on a crossroads. Crossroads? What does that even mean, in any practical terms? George Will, although selective in his logic, was honest enough to mention that President Hamid Karzai's "vice-presidential running mate is a drug trafficker." Even U.S. officials admit that the government they've created following the war is corrupt, to say the least.

Richard Holbrooke, among other foreign envoys "responsible for Afghanistan", told reporters in Paris on 2 September that U.S. officials have no preference among the candidates, nor are they particularly interested in runoff elections, but they wished to see a government that appoints "more efficient, less corrupt ministers". It behooves those "responsible for Afghanistan" to remember that inefficiency and corruption were the outcome of the very policies they have so eagerly adopted in the country. No sympathy for Karzai here, but it's unfair to point the finger at a feeble leader whenever a Western strategy fumbles, as it has repeatedly.

Speaking of strategies, what is the plan ahead? French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner promised that foreign troops will stay put in Afghanistan unless the country's security was ensured, reported Xinhua. In practical terms, this means never, for how could security ever visit that region as long as the strategy is hostage to two equally destructive narratives -- the Senor/Wehner troop surges vs Will's "offshore" strategy?

Hubris aside, Washington and London are facing some difficult political and military decisions ahead. Top officials in both capitals are using grim and somber language. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, responding to a call by the top U.S. general in Afghanistan for a fresh approach to the conflict, is considering yet another troop increase as part of Obama's new Afghan strategy.

The sense of urgency was invited by the detailed report of the newly appointed General Stanley McChrystal, who maintains that "success" was still possible, but a change of strategy is needed. The report resulted in intense deliberation in Washington, highlighted by grim press conferences involving the Pentagon's heavyweights, including Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, over what to do about "Obama's war".

Speaking at the Pentagon, Gates equivocated: "I don't believe that the war is slipping through the administration's fingers. I absolutely do not think it is time to get out of Afghanistan (but there remains) limited time for us to show that this approach is working."

The details of the new Obama strategy are still not very clear, but the commitment to the war is still unquestionable, as expressed in a "major" 4 September speech by Prime Minister Gordon Brown. "When the security of our country is at stake we cannot walk away," said Brown, according to the BBC.

As Brown was solemnly speaking about British security, NATO air strikes on a pair of fuel tankers killed up to 90 people, according to Afghan authorities.

Indeed, the situation in Afghanistan requires a fresh approach, although not the one George Will had in mind.

-- Ramzy Baroud is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers, journals and anthologies around the world. His latest book is, The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press, London), and his forthcoming book is, My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza The Untold Story (Pluto Press, London).

Oil threat to Australia wildlife


A handout photo from the Australian Maritime Safety Authority showing the oil leak
Environmentalists fear oil is heading towards an area where whales breed

Environmentalists have warned that an oil slick caused by an accident on a rig in the Timor Sea is threatening wildlife in Australian waters.

Oil has been flowing from the West Atlas platform for three weeks.

Safety authorities have been using chemicals to try to break up the spill but warn it could be at least two more weeks before the leak is plugged.

Up to 400 barrels of oil per day have been pouring into the Timor Sea to Australia's north.

An emergency rig has arrived from Singapore to repair the damage and aircraft and boats have been dousing the slick with dispersants.

Fragile environment

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority has said that this has helped to contain the spread of oil, the bulk of which remains around the drilling platform thanks, in part, to benign weather conditions.

Officials have stated that the slick is about 170km (100 miles) from the Australian coast.

Environmental groups believe the contamination poses a significant threat to wildlife and is heading towards land.

Piers Verstegen, from the Conservation Council of Western Australia, says the spill - off the north coast of the Kimberley region where whales congregate - is an ecological disaster.

"Humpback whales, an endangered species, go to that area and that region to calf and give birth and this oil spill is happening just off the Kimberley coast," Mr Verstegen said.

"The oil, as far as we are aware, is travelling towards the Kimberley coastline but it is definitely affecting areas that are used by these whales and dolphins."

Fishermen have reported seeing endangered flatback turtles covered in oil.

There have also been claims that fish and sea-snakes have been poisoned.

Conservationists believe that, in its rush to exploit abundant natural resources, Australia risks inflicting irreparable damage on its fragile environment.

இஸ்லாமிய வங்கியல்: ரிசர்வ் வங்கியுடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை


புதுடெல்லி:இந்தியாவில் இஸ்லாமிய வங்கியல் முறையை துரிதப்படுத்தும் முயற்சியின் ஒரு பகுதியாக டெல்லியைதலைமையிடமாகக் கொண்டுசெயல்படும் இந்தியன் செண்டர் ஃபார் இஸ்லாமிக் ஃபினான்ஸ் (ICIF) என்ற அமைப்பின் பிரநிதிகள் ரிசர்வ் வங்கியின் துணை கவர்னர் டாக்டர்.கெ.சி.சக்ரவர்த்தியுடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்தினர்.
ICIF இன் பொதுச்செயலாளர் ஹெச்.அப்துற்றகீப் ட்ரஸ்டிகளான டாக்டர் ரஹ்மத்துல்லாஹ், முன் ரிசர்வ் வங்கி மானேஜரான கெ.எம்.அப்துஸ்ஸலாம் ஆகியோர் இக்குழுவில் அடங்கியிருந்தனர்.
பொருளாதார துறையில் முன்னேற்றம் கொண்டுவருவது தொடர்பாக ரகுராம் கமிட்டி நடத்திய ஆய்வுகளை பிரதிநிதிகள் சுட்டிக்காட்டினர். சில மாற்றங்களை ஏற்படுத்துவதன் மூலம் தற்போதுள்ள முறையில் கேடுவராதமுறையில் வட்டியில்லாத நிறுவனங்களுக்கு சட்டவரையறையை ஏற்படுத்த இயலும் என்று ரகுராம் கமிட்டி சிபாரிசு செய்திருந்தது.
பிரிட்டனிலும் சிங்கப்பூரிலும் செய்ததுபோல் இஸ்லாமிய வங்கியல் முறைக்கு சாத்தியமாகும் முறையில் ரிசர்வ் வங்கியின் சட்டமுறைகளில் திருத்தம்கொண்டுவர ICIF பிரதிநிதிகள் வலியுறுத்தினர். பிரிட்டன், ஜப்பான், சிங்கப்பூர், ஹாங்காங் ஆகிய நாடுகளில் கொண்டுவந்த சட்டதிருத்தம் சம்பந்தமான ஆதாரங்களை பிரதிநிதிகள் ரிசர்வ் வங்கியின் துணை கவர்னரிடம் சமர்ப்பித்தனர்.
கேரளாவில் இஸ்லாமிய வங்கியல் முறையை துவங்குவதற்கு கேரள மாநில அரசு எடுத்துவரும் முயற்சிகளும் பேச்சுவார்த்தையின்போது இடம்பெற்றது. வட்டியில்லா வங்கிமுறைக்கு ரிசர்வ் வங்கி எதிர்க்காது என்றும் ஆனால் இதற்கு மத்திய அரசு பாராளுமன்றத்தில் சட்ட திருத்தம் கொண்டுவரவேண்டும் என்றும் துணைகவர்னர் சக்ரவர்த்தி கூறினார்.
சிறுபான்மை மற்றும் ஏமாற்றப்பட்ட சமூகத்திற்கு வட்டியில்லா வங்கிமுறை மிகத்தேவையான ஒன்று அதன்மூலம் அவர்களின் வாழ்வில் செழிப்பை உருவாக்க இயலும். மேலும் இத்தகைய வங்கிகளை துவக்குவதன்மூலம் வெளிநாடுகளிலிருந்து அதிகளவிலான முதலீடுகளை கவரமுடியும் என்று பிரநிதிகள் குழு தெளிவுப்படுத்தியது. பாராளுமன்றத்தில் சட்டதிருத்தம் கொண்டுவருவது சம்பந்தமாக மத்திய நிதியமைச்சர் பிரணாப் முகர்ஜியை இந்தவாரத்திலேயே சந்திக்கவிருப்பதாக அப்துற்றகீப் கூறினார்.

மணிப்பூரில் மீண்டும் போலி என்கவுண்டர் கொலைகள்


இம்பால்:தீவிரவாதி என்று குற்றம்சுமத்தி கடந்த ஜூலை மாதம் அப்பாவி இளைஞர் ஒருவரை சுட்டுக்கொன்றதால் எழுந்த பொதுமக்களின் ஆவேச எதிர்ப்பு அடங்கும் முன்பாகவே மீண்டும் ஒரு போலி என்கவுண்டர் கொலைகள் அரங்கேறியுள்ளது மணிப்பூர் மாநிலத்தில்.
முஹம்மது ரஹ்மான் என்ற டோம்பே உட்பட 6 நபர்களை தீவிரவாதிகள் எனக்குற்றம் சுமத்தி ராணுவத்தினர் சுட்டுகொன்றுள்ளனர். கடந்த செவ்வாய் கிழமை இரவு இம்பால் மேற்கு மாவட்டத்தில் அவாங் ஜனொயில்தான் இச்சம்பவம் நிகழ்ந்துள்ளது. தங்கள் மீது தாக்குதல் நடத்தியதால் இந்த என்கவுண்டர் நடந்ததாக போலீசும், ராணுவமும் கூறுகின்றது. ஆனால் போலீஸ் இவர்களை சுட்டுக்கொன்றதாக குற்றச்சாட்டு எழுந்துள்ளது.
அனைத்து மணிப்பூர் ரிக்‌ஷா ஓட்டுனர் சங்கத்தின் உறுப்பினர்தான் சுட்டுக்கொல்லப்பட்ட முஹம்மது ரஹ்மான். இவர் உட்பட சுட்டுக்கொல்லப்பட்ட அனைவரும் அப்பாவிகள் என்றும் இம்பாலிலிருந்து மியான்மர் எல்லை நகரமான மோராவிற்கு ரிக்சா ஓட்டி வாழ்க்கை நடத்துபவர்தான் இவரென்றும் அசோசியேசன் கவர்னருக்கு அளித்துள்ள புகார் மனுவில் கூறியுள்ளது. இச்சம்பவத்திற்கு கண்டனம் தெரிவித்து பொது வேலை நிறுத்தத்திற்கு இவ்வமைப்பு அழைப்பு விடுத்துள்ளது. குற்றவாளிகளுக்கெதிராக நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கவேண்டும் என்று இவ்வமைப்பு கவர்னருக்கு கோரிக்கை விடுத்துள்ளது. கொல்லப்பட்டவர்கள் நிரபராதிகள் என்று கூறி அவர்களுடைய உறவினர்களும் களத்திலிறங்கியுள்ளனர். கடந்த ஜுலையில் பட்டபகலில் ஒரு இளைஞரை போலி என்கவுண்டரில் சுட்டுக்கொன்ற படங்களை பகிரங்கபடுத்தி டெஹல்கா பத்திரிகை வெளியிட்டதை தொடர்ந்து ஏற்பட்ட எதிர்ப்பு அடங்கும் முன் இந்நிகழ்வு நடந்தேறியுள்ளது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது

Ugandan king postpones town rally

Burnt-out cars litter the street around the razed Nateete police station in Kampala, Uganda on Saturday
Kampala is littered with debris after the king's supporters clashed with police

The king of Uganda's largest ethnic group, the Buganda, has put off a visit to a town in his kingdom, his spokesman has said.

It follows two days of riots in the capital, Kampala, in which at least 11 people were killed.

The spokesman said the king did not want to see violence spreading to the town, Kayunga. But he stressed the event was postponed, not cancelled.

The move defuses the tension for now, says the BBC's Peter Greste.

Our correspondent - reporting from neighbouring Kenya - says although Kampala is now calm, the police are maintaining a high profile, particularly in neighbourhoods that saw some of the worst violence.

'Lynched'

The spokesman for King Ronald Muwenda Mutebi II said the postponement of Saturday's planned youth rally would allow time for talks with the central government.

Ugandan armed police patrol the streets of Kampala, Uganda on Saturday
Armed police are out in force in parts of the capital

He said they would find a way to hold the event in a "peaceful and secure" environment.

On Thursday and Friday, the king's supporters set up barricades, looted shops and fought running battles with police.

At least 11 people are now thought to have been killed, the director of the main hospital in the city, Iga Matovu, told Agence France Presse news agency on Saturday.

He said some had been killed by bullets and others appeared to have been lynched.

The protests happened when the government - citing security risks - banned the king from travelling to Kayunga, which says it has seceded from his kingdom.

There have been reports that police opened fire on rioters.

A Ugandan government spokesman, Fred Opolot, told the BBC there would be a full investigation, but that he believed the police had behaved "absolutely professionally".

Farmland

Uganda map

Buganda is one of Uganda's four ancient kingdoms and its tribal members are Uganda's largest ethnic group.

The country's traditional kingdoms were banned in 1966 but reinstated by President Yoweri Museveni in 1993.

The Buganda have long called for the restoration of a federal administration that would give their largely ceremonial king the formal political power he is currently denied.

They are also seeking more control over the traditional lands, which include prime farmland they say has been taken by other ethnic groups.