Prime Minister Modi while addressing an event held by Tamil magazine reminded media of its duty of presenting credible news to public. Delivering a televised address from Delhi on Tamil political and satirical journal Tughlaq’s golden jubilee celebrations in Chennai, PM Modi said that facts give moral strength to news and asked media houses to present intelligent and logical arguments before the public.
Making a veiled attack at Congress, PM Modi said after coming to Delhi did he get to know that those who ruled the country for so many years liked to keep things in pendulum mode perpetuating uncertainty. “Cause the problem, further it and then pretend to solve it. But things have changed now. Our government has taken up mission of solving problems that have persisted for decades,” PM Modi said.
Stressing upon the development, PM Modi said that some people with vested interest are not able to digest it. “They are trying their best to mislead, confuse and create unrest,” he said.
Appreciating media’s role in spreading awareness about cleanliness and single use plastic, PM Modi said that he hoped the media would continue to support such nation-building initiatives.
Cautioning against those with vested interest trying to mislead public and cause unrest, PM Modi said that in such times it is the duty of the media to give credible news to public. Vice President Venkaiah Naidu, who was also present at the event, said that ethical journalism should be practiced by all media houses.
Aam Aadmi Party led by Arvind Kejriwal on Tuesday gave ticket to Abdul Rehman to contest from New Delhi’s Seelampur constituency in upcoming elections. Rehman, along with ex-Congress MLA Mateen Ahmed, have been named in an FIR by Delhi Police for ‘provoking the crowd’ to join the protests.
According to the FIR, a crowd had gathered at Seelampur T-point and had started pelting stones and throwing petrol bottles at police. At around 2:30 PM, an uncontrolled mob marched toward Jafrabad Police Station and Rahman had allegedly provoked people from nearby streets to join the mob. Rehman is currently East Delhi Councillor.
In December 2019, a rioting crowd in Delhi’s Seelampur set a schoolbus on fire and also resorted to beating up policemen. A Police post was also set on fire by the mob along with police and private motorcycles. Drone cameras were brought in to assess the rioters. The mob reportedly taunted the policemen to run after them following which they pelted stones at them.
As anti-CAA rioters took to violence in New Delhi’s Seelampur, it was an Azaan, a call for namaz, that led to the rioting crowd to disperse. Following the azaan, the stone-pelters who were attacking police calmed down and simply stood in the street. Delhi Police saw an opportunity to control the mob and reached the mosque to appeal for peace to people. Police first talked to the members of peace committee and then the other people present there. Soon after the azaan, an appeal for peace was also made from the loudspeakers.
In the candidate list released yesterday, AAP has repeated 46 sitting MLAs while 15 sitting MLAs have been replaced and 9 vacant seats are given to new candidates. Arvind Kejriwal will contest elections from New Delhi constituency while Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia will contest from Patparganj.
Left-wing politicians are not unknown for peddling lies, but this reached a new height today when one of them lied about their god, Karl Marx. Kavita Krishnan, a politburo member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (CPI-ML), today said that Karl Marx came from an extremely poor family, and therefore comparing Kanhaiya Kumar with him is correct.
Kavita Krishnan was replying to a tweet by fellow leftist Kunal Kamra, who had agreed that people objecting to him calling Kanhaiya a modern-day Marx were right. He gave three reasons why the two were not same, Kanhaiya is from a poor family, he is popular while he is alive, he can be understood by masses.
A lot of people from the left angry at me for calling Kanhiya a Modern Day Marx…
I Agree, This is an absolute unfair comparison for three reasons…
But Kavita Krishnan didn’t agree with any of the points, and she rebutted them all. She said that Marx came from an extremely poor family, he too was popular when he was alive, and he was understood by masses. Although the later two are subjective topics subject to interpretation, the claim that Marx came from an extremely poor family is an absolute lie, because he came from a fairly wealthy middle-class family.
Marx came from an extremely poor family and lived
desperately poor, supported by Engels all his life. ??♀️??♀️He
too was popular while he was alive. He too was and is very much understood by
the masses. Please stop misrepresenting Marx. You don’t do Kanhaiya any
favours like this.
Karl Marx was the son of Heinrich Marx, who was a lawyer in Trier city now in Germany. The family lived a relatively wealthy and middle-class life, and was not ‘extremely poor’ as the Marxist leader is claiming. The Marx family lived in a three-storied house, where the family occupied a total of five rooms on the ground floor and first floor. Karl Marx was born in this house, which has been converted to a museum now. A year after Karl’s birth, the family had moved to a ten-room property in the same city. Heinrich Marx also owned a number of vineyards, and he occupied a respected in the social life of the town as a lawyer.
House where Karl Marx was born
During childhood, Karl Marx was privately educated before he was admitted at the High School. After Schooling, he had enrolled in the University of Bonn, and later he was transferred to the University of Berlin by his father as his academic performance was not good. Far from being from an ‘extremely poor’ family, actually Karl Marx had led an extravagant lifestyle in university, which had made his father unhappy. An anguished Heinrich Marx had written to Karl that his son had spent almost 700 thalers in a single year, while the most wealthy didn’t spend more than 500 thalers a year.
Kavita Krishnan also added that Marx and his wife Jenny lived in poverty in London, and had lost three children to diseases. She wrote that while Jenny was from a wealthy family, she married an impoverished Karl. This also a lie, as Jenny had started dating Karl when he was at the university, leading an extravagant life according to his own father.
It is true that later Karl Marx lived as a poor man, but that is not because he came from an ‘extremely poor family’, but because of choices he had made in his life. He was not forced into poverty, he had chosen it. As a university educated graduate, Karl Marx could have taken any decent job at that time, but he had chosen to peruse the leftist ideology.
After completing education, he had become a journalist, and the first newspaper that he had joined was shut down after it published his articles, as the governments didn’t like his socialist ideas.
After he could not find a job any German newspaper, he had moved to Paris, but he was expelled from France for his writings, from there he had moved to Belgium, but he was expelled from Belgium also for the same reason. After that, he moved to England, where a large number of socialists expelled from Europe were living, and lived as a stateless person there for a long time. During this time, his source of income was limited, and mainly depended on aides given by people sympathetic to socialism. Even then, when he had received a large amount as inheritance after the death of his father, he had given away one-third of the same to workers organising revolutionary activities.
Therefore, although Karl Marx lived a poor man for a substantial part of his life, he didn’t come from an extremely poor family as Kavita Krishnan was claiming. He came from a relatively wealthy family, but fell into poverty due to his socialist ideas.
One of the four convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya rape and murder case, Mukesh Kumar (32), today submitted a mercy petition to the Tihar jail authorities against his pending capital punishment. His mercy petition would now be sent to the Delhi government, then the Ministry of Home Affairs and finally the President for review.
This might be seen as a delaying tactics by Mukesh, who along with the other three convicts – Vinay Sharma (26), Akshay Kumar Singh (31) and Pawan Gupta (25) – is scheduled to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail as a Delhi court had issued their death warrants on January 7.
The death warrant has to be executed in 14 days, according to the order, and the convicts have this period to use exercise their remedies.
Mukesh might have resorted to this last resort since the Supreme Court refused to stay his execution while dismissing a curative petition filed by him and another accused, Vinay Sharma, against their conviction and capital punishment, earlier in the day today. The five-judge bench comprising of Justices N V Ramana, Arun Mishra, R F Nariman, R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan upheld the convictions and confirmed the death penalties handed to the four men.
A curative petition is the last to last legal option against the death sentence.
All the four convicts in the Nirbhaya rape and murder case will be executed together at Tihar jail, where officials had started preparing a month ago, the court had said on Tuesday.
The four adult accused were convicted by the trial court in September 2013, and was awarded a death sentence. The High Court had upheld that verdict in March 2014. In the same year, the Supreme Court had stayed their execution until their appeal was heard by the apex court.
In May 2017 the Supreme Court had rejected their appeal against the death sentence, and in 2019 the review petitions were also dismissed. Subsequently, the president had rejected their mercy plea on the recommendation of the Home Ministry.
Mukesh Singh, Pawan Gupta, Vinay Sharma and Akshay Thakur were convicted of brutally raping and murdering a 23-year-old physiotherapy student, nicknamed as Nirbhaya by media, on December 16, 2012. The fifth convict was a minor, and he was released after spending 3 years in a juvenile home. The sixth person involved in the crime and also the main accused, Ram Singh was found dead during the trial period, who had allegedly committed suicide in Tihar Jail on March 11, 2013.
Senior Congress leader and close aide of former Congress president Rahul Gandhi, Mani Shankar Aiyar, has finally graced the protests at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi. Aiyar’s entrance comes after the Delhi Police initiated attempts to clean the area of protesters as residents were suffering due to blockade of roads for a month caused by the protests and the resultant wastage of time and fuel.
A key road between Noida and South East at the area has been closed since December 15 as a large number of people, including women, have been holding a sit-in protest on the road. As a result, the police have cordoned off the road by putting barricades, causing huge traffic jam and forcing the motorists to take longer alternate routes.
At the protests, Aiyar thanked the protesters for ‘saving’ Bharat Mata. He also said, “No one can imagine an India without Islam and Muslims.” He also refered to Modi as ‘Katil’ (murderer), when he said ‘if there is any need to sacrifice, I am also part of that. Now lets see whose hand have more power, us or that murderer’.
#WATCH Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar at the protest against #CAA & #NRC, in Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh: Jo bhi qurbaniyan deni hon, usme main bhi shaamil hone ke liye tayaar hun. Ab dekhein ki kiska hath mazboot hai, hamara ya uss kaatil ka? pic.twitter.com/ojV4QU9dMs
However, most interesting is the timing of Aiyar’s entrance at Shaheen Bagh. His entrance comes at a time when the police is trying to peacefully resolve the standoff.
Even more suspiciously, however, Aiyar went to Shaheen Bagh three days after attending an event in Lahore, Pakistan. This is particularly suspicious because the protests have been going on at Shaheen Bagh since the 15th of December and yet, the senior Congress leader went there only three days after he spoke at the ‘ThinkFest’ in Lahore.
Conspicuously enough, Aiyar spoke about the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in Pakistani soil. Speaking at a session on “Is Liberal Democracy Dead?”, which is itself ironic given the fact that it was organized in an Islamic State that uses terrorism as state policy, Aiyar again insulted India.
During the discussion, while Aiyar said that India must not emulate Pakistan’s example by creating a religious state, he said that there was indeed something India could learn from Pakistan. He said, “What India must learn from Pakistan is the smooth way of transfer of power from one democratic government to another in the last three general elections.” Aiyar’s comment is rather shocking given the nature of Democracy in Pakistan. The transfer of power after elections in India have been always smooth, while in Pakistan democratic governments have been replaced by military rule multiple times. So it is not sure what India has to learn from Pakistan in this regard.
In another discussion in which Sadanand Dhume participated in as well, themed around “India’s Populist Revolution”, Aiyar expressed great ‘despair’ at the turn India was taking and spoke extensively on the Citizenship Amendment Act and the NRC and spread lies and distortions on the subject. He denigrated Hindutva and claimed that Narendra Modi had given a ‘Triple Talaq’ to the Muslim community.
The discussion with Sadanand Dhume happened on the 12th of January as per the schedule. The schedule, however, does not mention Aiyar as a speaker in this particular discussion. The ThinkFest was also attended by numerous Pakistani ministers, including the Minister of Science and Technology, Fawad Hussain who justified slapping a journalist during the panel discussion he participated in. The event was organized over two days, the 11th and the 12th of January.
Aiyar’s entry into Shaheen Bagh protests merely a couple of days after attending an event in Pakistan is particularly troubling as, in the past, he had sought Pakistan’s help in order to oust Narendra Modi from the Prime Minister’s seat and help Congress return to power. He has denigrated India and praised Pakistan on Pakistani soil on several occasions in the past.
Shaheen Bagh is the same place where ‘Jinnah wali Azadi‘ slogans were raised by the protesters against the Citizenship Amendment Act, hinting at the Radical Islamic inclinations of the protesters. It is pertinent to remember that Aiyar, again in Lahore, had hailed Jinnah and condemned Veer Savarkar during an event two years ago.
The generation gap is nowhere more prominent than it is on social media. All of us, in some way or the other, have helped our elders get accustomed to the internet. However, often, we find ourselves exasperated by how our previous generations navigate their way through social media. And as it turns out, it is an experience that the youth the world over have to go through.
Judy Murray, the mother of tennis superstar Andy Murray, recently shared an image on Instagram of some Mandarin oranges arranged in some order with the caption “How to say Hello in Mandarin”. However, the pattern wasn’t exactly obvious from the picture as it was cropped on the photo-sharing platform. Presumably, the pattern said ‘hello’. Soon, Andy Murray commented on the post, explaining to his mother how it all worked.
Andy said, “…if you post a picture with half the content cut out it doesn’t work.. you will get less likes and people will unfollow you (probably a wise decision on their part)”. Then, adding further cheek to the comment, he added, “This just looks like a few mandarins scattered on a table.. I wouldn’t want people to think you’re a mad old lady. Please try to do better. Love from your baby boy.” To sum up the funny exchange, he ended the comment with “This is your final warning before I unfollow”.
Andy Murray’s funny and adorable exchange on Instagram with his mother is relatable at all too many different levels. All of us have had a similar experience at some point or the other. Judy later uploaded another image, much better than her previous one, after her son’s comment.
Judy Murray and Andy Murray share a very strong relationship and the Tennis player has always credited his mother greatly for his success in the courts. During his matches, Judy could be often spotted in the crowd being a total nervous wreck, as mothers are often wont to be.
Even as the protests against the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act is on the ebb, some of the attention-seeking CAA detractors took to Wankhede stadium in Mumbai to express their opposition to the Act that came into force last week.
The group of individuals sat in the formation of “No NPR, No NRC and No CAA” during the first ODI match in the 3-match series between India and Australia in Wankhede stadium, Mumbai. The individual letters of the message were written in large font on their white t-shirts. However, soon, individuals supporting CAA, NRC and NPR accosted the group as the crowds surrounding them started chanting pro-Modi slogans.
Group of individuals break into a ‘No NPR, No NCR, No CAA’ formation at the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai.
As can be seen in the above video, when some individuals, confront the group of anti-CAA protestors, seemingly for their No CAA, No NRC and No NPR formation, crowds sitting around them enthusiastically start chanting “Modi! Modi!”.
Towards the end, one can also hear spectators shouting “Bharat Mata ki Jai” and “Vande Mataram” slogans, prompting the beleaguered group donning the “No CAA, No NPR and No NRC” t-shirts to also join in raising the nationalistic slogans.
The passage of the Citizenship Amendment Bill has sparked off anti-CAA protests, mainly among left-liberals, who have staunchly opposed the act aimed at granting citizenship to the persecuted minorities of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Several left-leaning universities saw violence, arson and acts of vandalism as anti-CAA protestors ran riot under the pretext of carrying out peaceful protest.
However, the protests have tend to fizzle out after extensive awareness campaign from PM Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, educating the people about the provisions of the Act and allaying their fears that were fanned by Congress and other opposition parties.
An Aligarh Civil Court advocate has sent a notice to Marxist historian Irfan Habib for allegedly taking a swipe at PM Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah during a speech at Aligarh Muslim University. The remarks came in the aftermath of the controversy surrounding the new Citizenship Amendment Act, that came into force last week.
Advocate Sandeep Kumar Gupta, who sent a notice to Habib has asserted that the speech delivered by the left-leaning historian at the Aligarh Muslim University on Monday was “against the unity and diversity of India and it also challenges the sovereignty of the country”.
Gupta accused Habib of asking Union Home Minister Amit Shah to get rid of his surname “Shah” in his speech citing the name’s alleged Persian origins. Kumar also stated in the notice that Habib said in Aligarh Muslim University that RSS was formed with the aim to attack Muslims and that the Hindutva ideologue Veer Savarkar was responsible for the partition of the country, extenuating Mohammad Ali Jinnah who propounded the two-nation theory. The notice also mentioned Habib criticising the use of Gandhi’s spectacles in government’s “Swwacchta Abhiyan”.
Habib had also said that there is strong circumstantial evidence that Savarkar was involved in murder of Mahatma Gandhi, and referred to PM Modi as ‘Jahil’.
#Breaking | SHOCKER: Eminent historian Irfan Habib takes a jibe at PM Modi and HM Amit Shah; calls PM a ‘jahil’ and says HM should change his name as Shah is a Persian name.
The advocate, in the notice, also took cognisance of Habib’s “poisonous statements” in various newspapers against the current dispensation. Demanding Habib’s apology within the next 7 days, the notice read that if he failed in doing so, the advocate will initiate strict legal action against him.
Ever since the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act, that grants citizenship to the persecuted minorities from the neighbouring countries of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, Marxist historian Irfan Habib is having a hard time coming to terms with the new reality.
Earlier, Habib had heckled Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan and physically disrupted his speech while he was speaking in support of the Citizenship Amendment Act. The incident happened at the inaugural meeting of the 80th session of the Indian History Congress held at Kannur University in Kerala when Khan was dispelling the apprehensions surrounding the Citizenship Amendment Act.
The Delhi Police has initiated efforts to clear Shaheen Bagh of protesters after the Delhi High Court directed the Police to handle the protests as per their wisdom. The protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act by the Muslims in this area have caused anger among the ordinary citizens of Delhi who have had to endure traffic disruptions caused by the protests.
Now, the Delhi Police has decided to involve the local community leaders in order to persuade the protesters to leave the venue. They will take help from local traders and religious leaders to bring an end to the standoff.
Sources: Delhi Police has initiated efforts to clear Shaheen Bagh of protestors as per HC order. They will focus on persuasive methods rather than use force. Police in touch with local traders’ bodies, religious leaders and community elders to amicably resolve the matter
The order of the Delhi Court came after a PIL was filed by advocate Amit Sahni seeking a direction to the Police Commissioner of the national capital to lift restrictions on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and Okhla underpass. The roads were closed since the 15th of December after the protests began. The petitioner asserted that the restrictions were causing traffic jams and a great wastage of time and fuel.
Shaheen Bagh is the same place where slogans of ‘Jinnah wali Azadi‘ was chanted by the protesters, revealing the Radical Islamic nature of these protests. Later, a multi-faith prayer event was held at the same place in order to mask the hatred that festered beneath the surface.
It is peddled as a truth universally acknowledged that men on the ‘left’ are progressive by default. They often like to portray themselves as patron saints of feminism and like to talk about how they’d like to smash patriarchy, especially the Brahmin kinds.
They are the ones who say they believe in ‘consent’ and hence often times women stay quiet on sexual assault by ‘progressive’ men from Left. Sometimes because they can’t wrap their heads around the fact that a ‘progressive’ man just violated them and sometimes because they’d rather let the man get away so as to not damage the ‘bigger cause‘. Men from the Left also have women going out of their way to shield them from allegations of sexual assault.
Men from the Left are often believed to be progressive. They are perceived to be the ones who believe in equal rights for women and these days often like to identify themselves as LGBTQI allies. They will often use pronouns in their Twitter bios to come across as ‘liberals’.
Of the ‘Liberal’ and ‘progressive’ men, two are often hailed these days as ideals and men to look up to. One is Communist Party of India leader Kanhaiya Kumar, with questionable quality PhD, and other is senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor.
आपको कन्हैया पसंद ना हो तो भी सुनिए। गलतियां निकालने के लिए सुनिए (जैसे हम कभी कभी PM जी की सुनते हैं।) मगर सुनिए।
Kanhaiya Kumar these days is hailed as the next best orator to come out of Bihar after Lalu Prasad Yadav. Kanhaiya is the ‘perfect’ orator.
The biggest myth that Indian media ever created was that Modi is a superb orator.
He never was. Modi is just a superb (SCRIPTED) orator.
Kanhaiya on the other hand, is the perfect orator, a street politician, who words can easily enter the hearts of the underprivileged & poor. https://t.co/Vs7oOh86Bs
It is a different thing that Lalu Prasad Yadav’s RJD didn’t give Kanhaiya a ticket to contest 2019 general elections because he was afraid Kanhaiya may outshine his offsprings who are yet to make any mark in mainstream politics.
Kanhaiya Kumar also often likes to demand ‘azadi’ from patriarchy. Except, last week, in a debate with BJP leader on Rajdeep Sardesai’s show on India Today, Kanhaiya asked the BJP leader whether he has worn chudiyan (bangles). ‘Haath mein chudiyan pehenna‘ is often used by people to refer to people who are not ‘strong enough’ to do work because they have worn bangles (like women).
The feminist youth icon likes to indulge in casual sexism.
Another icon of ‘progressive’ men is Shashi Tharoor. Last night, on a debate, he referred to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal as ‘eunuch’ because he wants power without responsibility. Tharoor later apologised and said that he used a line from British politics said by British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin who had actually used the term ‘harlot’ (prostitute) in place of ‘eunuchs’.
His transphobic comment comes across as an insult to the trans community. Moreover, one could argue that calling eunuchs as people who have power without responsibility is far from truth since eunuchs in India are quite the opposite and are far too marginalised to be powerful, with or without responsibility. As someone who takes immense pride in his vocabulary, surely Tharoor knew his comments were misogynist and transphobic. He still chose to use the term to refer to a political rival as ‘unmanly’. Because if you’re not a ‘man enough’, you are weak, or as Tharoor put it, someone who likes ‘power without responsibility’.
This just goes out to show that every ‘progressive man’ is man first.
