The environmental group Greenpeace India on Thursday said the AAP Delhi government’s claim that air pollution levels have reduced by 25% over the past few years was false.
According to a Greenpeace India analysis, “Historical ambient air quality monitoring and satellite data coupled with increasing fossil fuel consumption in Delhi and adjoining states contradict the government’s claims of a 25 per cent reduction in pollution levels over past years.”
In early September, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal had claimed that pollution had reduced in the national capital by 25% in four years, citing a report by Central Pollution Control Board.
Delhi government had also released newspaper advertisements claiming pollution in the National Capital had dropped by 25%. In the advertisements, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal had claimed that levels of PM 2.5 or particulate matter the size of 2.5 microns had reduced to an average of 115 between 2016 and 2018 from an average of 154 between 2012 and 2014. This amounted to a reduction by 25%, he had claimed.
Kejriwal had claimed that the opening of the Eastern and Western peripheral way along with the imposition of heavy environmental compensation charges has reduced the entry of trucks in Delhi by 30% and contributed to a 7% fall in pollution.
He said that Delhi is only 35% responsible for the pollution caused in the state while neighbouring areas of Gurgaon, Faridabad, Ghaziabad and Noida contribute the most to the pollution levels in the state.
Reacting to the Greenpeace report, AAP spokesperson Saurabh Bhardwaj said they are not concerned about the analysis made by Greenpeace. “The Centre in its affidavit to the Supreme Court has said it under oath that the pollution in Delhi has reduced and the pollution in October and November is due to stubble-burning.”
However, Greenpeace India said that satellite data did not show any statistically significant reduction in PM2.5 levels over the period from 2013 to 2018. The NGO said that the data showed only slight reductions in the later part of 2018 compared to the past three years.
Contrary to the claims made by the AAP government that pollution levels have fallen in the city, PM10 levels have actually increased in 2018 according to the data at the manual air quality monitoring stations operated by pollution watchdog CPCB, the NGO said.
“PM10 data at manual air quality monitoring stations operated by CPCB under National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Programme (NAMP) on the contrary shows higher PM10 levels in 2018 compared to 2013, 2014 and 2015,” it said.
Earlier this year in March, Greenpeace India had declared Delhi as the most polluted capital city in the world.
“It is noticeable that Delhi and the two states, Haryana and Punjab, saw a rise in coal consumption by 17.8 per cent from 2015-16 to 2018-19. On the other hand, total petroleum product consumption increased by 3.3 per cent over the same period, both contributing to increasing emissions and complicated clean air efforts,” Greenpeace said.
Avinash Chanchal from Greenpeace India said the steps taken in mid-2018 by the Delhi and central governments to reduce pollution were not enough to provide breathable air quality.
“The actions which have been taken and implemented to reduce air pollution in Delhi be it the bypass roads, shutting down of Badarpur Power plants, shifting the industries to PNG and availability of BS-VI fuel were taken in mid/end 2018. These steps along with others will surely result in a reduction of pollution levels on an annual average basis. But the majority of impacts of such steps collectively was not seen till the end of 2018 and these wouldn’t be enough to provide breathable air quality,” he said.
Chanchal emphasised that the trends in PM10, PM2.5 and NO2 levels indicate that emissions from fossil fuel burning are increasing in Delhi, Haryana and Punjab region while emissions from biomass burning from household and agricultural activities were falling.
The much-awaited verdict in the decades-old Ayodhya title dispute is to be announced before CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s retirement on November 17. In anticipation of the verdict in the communally sensitive case, governments in many states, especially UP, have been on high-alert to ensure public safety and peace.
As per reports, CJI Ranjan Gogoi has invited UP Chief Secretary and UP DGP Om Prakash Singh to discuss the preparedness of the government machinery in Uttar Pradesh ahead of the Supreme Court verdict on Ram Janmabhoomi issue.
Several other UP state officials from police and administrative services are also likely to meet the CJI.
Last night, UP CM Yogi Adityanath too reportedly had a late-night video conference with the top civil and police officials, including DMs, and police commissioners over the security preparations in the state over the Ayodhya verdict. CM Yogi is said to have individually enquired about the law and order situation in each district in the state.
Ayodhya has been turned into a fortress with several platoons of police and paramilitary forces deployed at the disputed site and surrounding areas. The Supreme Court had concluded hearings and reserved its order on October 16. The verdict is expected to come any day now before November 17.
Former US President Bill Clinton and the British Royal Family have been implicated in deceased pedophile Jeffery Epstein’s crimes against children in a recent video that was released by Project Veritas on social media. The video, which the organization obtained from sources, shows ABC news anchor Amy Robach telling colleagues that the news network deliberately spiked a ‘bombshell investigation’ into Jeffery Epstein.
BREAKING: @abcnews anchor @arobach caught on ‘hot mic’ in August disgustedly exposing networks decision to strategically spike bombshell investigation into Jefferey Esptein over THREE YEARS AGO.
Robach can be heard saying in the video, “I tried for three years to get it on, to no avail, and now it’s all coming out. And it’s like these new revelations and I freaking had all of it. I am so pissed right now. … What we had was unreal.” “Then the Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us in a million different ways,” says Robach. “We were so afraid we wouldn’t be able to interview Kate and Will that we, that also quashed the story. … She told me everything. She had pictures, she had everything. She was in hiding for 12 years, we convinced her to come out, we convinced her to talk to us.” “It was unbelievable what we had — we had [Bill] Clinton, we had everything,” Robach concludes in the leaked video. Robach also says that Epstein may be the most prolific pedophile in history.
Robach here is speaking of high-profile pedophile Jefferey Epstein who allegedly commited ‘suicide’ in prison. He was deeply entrenched in the Democrat and Republican establishment and had great connections with powerful politicians both sides of the aisle and across the globe. The official version maintains that he committed suicide during imprisonment but no one really believes that Epstein killed himself.
Epstein also owned a private island, dubbed the pedophile island, which numerous billionaires including Bill Clinton are alleged to have visited. The convicted pedophile also owned a rather unusual portrait of the former US President in a blue dress. According to the artist, there wasn’t anything sinister about it. She said, “In 2012, as a grad student at the New York Academy of Art, I painted pictures of Presidents Bill Clinton and Bush as part of my Master’s thesis. When the school put on a fundraiser at the Tribeca Ball that year, they sold my painting to one of the attendees. I had no idea who the buyer was at the time. As with most of my paintings, I had completely lost track of this piece when it was sold seven years ago. So it was a complete surprise to me to learn yesterday that it wound up in Epstein’s home.”
Petrina Ryan-Kleid, Parsing Bill (2012). Image via the New York Academy of Art.
The victim of Epstein referred to by Robach is Virginia Roberts Giuffre. The victim saw the interview with ABC as a gamechanger. “At the time, in 2015, Epstein was walking around a free man, comparing his criminal behavior to stealing a bagel,” Giuffre wrote in an email to NPR. “I really wanted a spotlight shone on him and the others who acted with him and enabled his vile and shameless conduct against young girls and young women.”
“I viewed the ABC interview as a potential game-changer,” she wrote. “Appearing on ABC with its wide viewership would have been the first time for me to speak out against the government for basically looking the other way and to describe the anger and betrayal victims felt.” Giuffre had accused Prince Andrew of sexually abusing her when she was 17 and claimed that she was ‘trafficked’ to the Prince. The Prince denied the allegations.
In a statement following the controversy, Robach claimed that the interview did not meet their ‘editorial standards’. She said, “As a journalist, as the Epstein story continued to unfold last summer, I was caught in a private moment of frustration. I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts didn’t air because we could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABC’s editorial standards about her allegations. My comments about Prince Andrew and her allegation that she had seen Bill Clinton on Epstein’s private island were in reference to what Virginia Roberts said in that interview in 2015. I was referencing her allegations — not what ABC News had verified through our reporting. The interview itself, while I was disappointed that it didn’t air, didn’t meet our standards.”
The ABC, too, issued a statement following the matter. It said, “At the time, not all of our reporting met our standards to air, but we have never stopped investigating the story. Ever since we’ve had a team on this investigation and substantial resources dedicated to it. That work has led to a two-hour documentary and six-part podcast that will air in the new year.”
The ‘editorial standards’ that the ABC appears to be advertising in its statement appears rather dubious. For instance, it ran with the Russian Collusion Delusion for years without a shred of evidence. The Mueller Report was an indictment of the mainstream media that peddled this propaganda without any inhibition. The ABC’s ‘editorial standards’ were nowhere to be found during the Kavanaugh Controversy when the now Supreme Court Justice was accused of gang-rape and peddling drugs based on hearsay. Not merely that, they relied on the now infamous ‘Creepy Porn Lawyer’ Michael Avenatti to further this propaganda, a man who has been indicted on 36 charges of tax-dodging, perjury and theft from clients.
If all this wasn’t enough, Leland Keyser, Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s friend who the accuser claimed would verify her allegations, refuted the story entirely. “Those facts together I don’t recollect, and it just didn’t make any sense,” Keyser told the authors of a book on the matter. “It would be impossible for me to be the only girl at a get-together with three guys, have her leave, and then not figure out how she’s getting home,” Keyser told Pogrebin and Kelly. “I just really didn’t have confidence in the story.” But the real explosive detail is added in the book as an almost afterthought.
Keyser told the authors further that she was being pressurized to confirm Ford’s story despite the fact that she had no confidence in it. “I was told behind the scenes that certain things could be spread about me if I didn’t comply,” Keyser told the authors who happen to be reporters at New York Times.
Thus, while the mainstream media was hounding a man without any evidence based on an accusation not even a great friend of the accuser had any confidence in, ABC sat on a story on a powerful pedophile, a story which appears to implicate former US President Bill Clinton and the British Royal Family. Thus, allegations with no evidence against a Supreme Court nominee meet the ‘editorial standards’ of the ABC but an explosive story against the most powerful individuals on the planet conveniently fail to meet the same. It seems rather suspicious, does it not?
Controversial Radio Host Alex Jones was talking about Jeffery Epstein years ago. He even mentioned it on the Joe Rogan Experience, one of the most popular podcasts in the world that has earned numerous accolades. While he has been demonized by the mainstream media as an evil conspiracy theorist, Joe Rogan is great friends with him and maintains that he is the ‘most misunderstood guy’ on the planet. While Alex Jones, who admits that he comes across as crazy and he is crazy at times, was busy exposing pedophiles in high places, the entire mainstream media along with the establishment was trying to ban him from social media and he was eventually banned. And they succeeded in deplatforming him.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkjOST9SAUs]
It’s important to mention here that the ABC killed the Epstein story three years ago, at the same time when Bill Clinton’s wife Hillary Clinton was running for president against Donald Trump. Considering how hard the mainstream media was batting for Hillary Clinton, it appears entirely plausible that the ABC killed the story as a favour to the Democrat nominee, a favour that was undoubtedly compensated.
As it so happens, Hillary Clinton’s own campaign was hit with a pedophile scandal of its own. It was called the ‘Pizzagate’, which went viral on social media after the WikiLeaks dumped emails related to the DNC and John Podesta, chairman of Clinton’s campaign. Users claimed that there were code words in the emails that pointed towards a pedophile ring. The mainstream media claimed that it was a case of hysteria and when that ended up with a man trying to attack a restaurant over it, the media claimed how dangerous such conspiracy theorists were and hushed up the entire thing.
However, there were certain troubling aspects to the controversy which was highlighted by Joe Rogan and Alex Jones in the podcast (starts from 8:55). As a disclaimer, we cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of this but it’s a fact that some aspects of the story are extremely disturbing. It is also a matter of fact that soon after the Pizzagate controversy, close Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s husband Anthony Weiner pleaded guilty to a charge of sending sexual content to a 15-year-old girl. He was also forced to register permanently as a sex offender.
Thus, since the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, the sexual crimes involving minors of two men deeply entrenched in the American political establishment have come to light. While the entirety of the claims made by the Pizzagate ‘conspiracy theorists’ may not be completely true, the events since then do reveal that the mainstream media is more than willing to overlook a crime as heinous as pedophilia in order to maintain favourable relationships with the elite. On a side note, the NBC news network, too, engaged in a cover up of the Harvey Weinstein sex crimes in order to maintain a cozy relationship with the elite. The cover up was exposed by Ronan Farrow whose attempts to expose the truth were shut down by the NBC.
On the night of 7th November 2019, Ministry of Home Affairs said that writer and journalist Aatish Taseer is ineligible for getting an OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) card, as he had concealed the fact that his father was of Pakistani origin. Strongly rebutting a report in The Print which alleged that the union government is considering revoking Taseer’s OCI card after he had criticised Modi government in an article published in the Time magazine. Evidently, Taseer was given the opportunity to submit his reply/objections regarding his PIO/OCI cards, but he failed to dispute the notice. “Thus, Mr Aatish Ali Taseer becomes ineligible to hold an OCI card, as per the Citizenship Act, 1955. He has clearly not complied with very basic requirements and hidden information,” the MHA said.
While the MHA statement only came yesterday after The Print published conjecture about Taseer’s OCI being cancelled for a critical article he had written in May in TIME, the saga began in September 2019 as Taseer admits in his article today. In the article headlined “I am Indian. Why is the Government Sending Me Into Exile?”, Aatish Taseer makes no rebuttal of the claim itself. Not once, in his article or on Twitter has Aatish disputed the claim that he concealed the fact that his father was a Pakistani.
While Taseer’s silence on the matter is a clear indication that he indeed did not mention material facts in his OCI application, he has today taken to TIME to write an article full of conjectures, victim playing and over-all lies to claim that the Modi government is somehow being vindictive for an article he wrote back in May.
From the very start of the article, Aatish Taseer goes on to play victim without stating facts. He says that after he wrote the article where he called PM Modi the ‘Divider in chief’, he got threats and was maligned. The victimhood that Aatish peddles in his article is staggering.
He writes:
“I am Westernized; I am English-speaking; I am part of the despised elite whose entrenched power had helped fuel the rise of Modi. But there was another aspect of my identity that made me especially vulnerable to attack: my father was born in British India to a British mother and a father who became Pakistani when that country was created”
Further, he says that he was born out of wedlock and that his father, the Governor of Punjab in Pakistan was assassinated. Thereafter, he lived with his ‘famous journalist’ mother. He does, however, say that he was born in Britain and holds British citizenship but was raised in India, held an OCI and that his status as an ‘Indian’ was never questioned before this.
Firstly, Aatish is not an “Indian”. He is a Britisher who was granted an OCI because one of his parents was Indian. However, the rules of acquiring an OCI are rather clear. On the OCI website itself, the rules mention that none of the parents should be or should have ever been the citizen of Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Rules of OCI
Further, section 7A(1) of the Citizenship Act 1955, specifically states that if any person or either of their parents or grandparents or great grandparents is or had been a citizen of Pakistan, Bangladesh or any other country as notified by the government, such persons would not be eligible for getting the OCI status.
Thus, it can easily be argued that Aatish Taseer holding an OCI card in itself was a contravention of the law committed by the previous governments in India. And his OCI card has been rightly cancelled in accordance with the law.
Aatish, in his article, then goes on to lie blatantly. He writes (emphasis mine):
While the government did not initially reveal their motivations behind this action, they have now stated their reasons for removing my OCI: “concealed the fact that his late father was of Pakistani origin.” But it is hard not to feel, given the timing, that I was being punished for what I had written.
I read the letter, which in bland bureaucratic language informed me that the country I was raised in and lived in for most of my adult life was no longer mine: “after consideration of facts and circumstances in the matter, “ it read, “the Central government is of the provisional opinion that the registration as an OCI cardholder granted to Aatish Ali Taseer, may be cancelled under Section 7D(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, for obtaining OCI card by means of false representation and the concealment of material facts.”
Interestingly, while he says the ‘government did not initially reveal their motivations behind this action’, in the very next paragraph, he talks about how the letter he received from the Indian government in September mentioned that his OCI is liable to be cancelled because of the provisions of Section 7D(a) of Citizenship Act 1955.
It is thus hard to believe that Aatish did not know exactly the reason for which his OCI was being cancelled. Further, in the screenshot of the email provided by Aatish Taseer himself, a sentence is visible where he says there are ‘several incorrect statements’ in the letter. In the absence of the copy of the letter itself, one has to assume he was informed that his OCI is being cancelled because he failed to mention that his father was of Pakistani origin.
Email screenshot via @AatishTaseer
Aatish further writes about how much he supposedly loves India, however, unfortunately for him, even though his proclaimed “love for India” is under contention given his recent rant against Hindus, laws don’t really care much about his or anyone else’s feelings.
In his article, Aatish then goes on to lie about freedom of expression in India, the plight of Muslims etc which are lies that are so transparent, that it is almost an insult to the reader’s sensibilities to even rebut them in this article.
The fact that the cold, hard law was being applied to the Lutyens blue-eyed boy was not taken kindly to by the cabal. All of them, including Aatish’s mother, came up with the most wildly ridiculous reasons as to why Aatish’s OCI should not be cancelled.
First, The Wire journalist Maya Mirchandani claimed that this was patriarchy, the convenient conjecture that is made to suit every situation by the “liberals”. She said that “his mother doesn’t count” and hence, the government was being patriarchal. To that, The Hindu journalist Suhasini Haider responded and said Aatish Taseer had mentioned everything in details in his 2007 book.
The most puzzling accusation against Aatish Taseer is that he “concealed” anything,given his detailed 2007 book “Stranger to History”. That he was brought up in India, single handedly by his Indian mother is clear as well. https://t.co/9iXucVLCyo
Essentially, what Suhasini Haider wanted was for government officials to refer to his 2007 book for facts pertaining to his OCI certificate because Aatish Taseer is the famous son of a famous mother who is a famous journalist and belongs to the Lutyens circle and hence, the government has no right to inconvenience the privileged baby-boy with pesky details like the law.
Where there is asininity, Barkha Dutt is often not far away. She tweeted that that Government action against Aatish is extremely “sexist”. According to her, the government of India should have given agency to the fact that Aatish was raised by a single mother who is very brave.
This official GOI justification of @AatishTaseer case apart from everything else is extremely sexist in thinking. Gives little agency to the fact that he was raised by a single mother who, irrespective of your disagreements with her, has always shown guts to live her own life. https://t.co/60vKm3Z8zB
While one is not sure what bravery is required in India to lash out at Hindus and defend one’s son who regularly makes cow-urine jokes, much like the Pulwama terrorist, one is sure that Barkha Dutt frequently displays the courage to air her sub-human intellect publicly.
Barkha Dutt, who has long made the ridiculous claim that she is a journalist, conceals the fact that the law, in this case, is not “sexist”. It clearly says that a person is not eligible for OCI if either parent has ever been citizens of Pakistan or Bangladesh. Essentially, would Aatish Taseer or anyone, for that matter, be eligible for an OCI if the mother, and not the father, was Pakistani citizenship? No.
The Deputy Director of Amnesty South Asia also made the ridiculous claim that since Aatish had written a book in 2007, he was not required to follow the law.
Concealed the fact? @AatishTaseer wrote a book on his background. The Modi government strips one of the subcontinent’s best known writers of his nationality because it can’t stand criticism. Notice also how they mention Aatish’s middle name to try and out him as a Muslim. https://t.co/ImLnFzK0Jd
Rajdeep Sardesai jumped in the fray and ensured that he made no sense whatsoever.
India’s greatness lies in its accomodative spirit. If you disagree with @AatishTaseer views, counter him with your own. But why cancel his OCI card at short notice.. sorry, this reveals a pettiness and desire to settle scores.. https://t.co/Yo4kfiDuI7
Sushant Singh, a journalist with NDTV who was caught lying about ‘renewed aggression in Doklam’, must be at least given credit for raising a point that was different from the rest of the cacophony, however asinine. He asked that if Adnan Sami could be given citizenship, why couldn’t Taseer be granted OCI.
Genuine query. Someone whose father was a decorated Pakistani war hero for military action against India can be given Indian citizenship (Adnan Sami) but someone who was estranged from his Pakistani father can’t be given OCI status. That’s neither consistent nor sounds right.
What Sushant wilfully forgets is that Adnan Sami gave up his Pakistani citizenship to take Indian citizenship while Aatish Taseer wants to flaunt his British citizenship and then claim, that in contravention of the law, he has a right to hold the OCI card. What Sami did was legal. He gave up his Pakistani passport to apply to become an Indian citizen. What Aatish Taseer wants is the privilege of holding an OCI card, while remaining British citizenship in contravention of the law that makes him ineligible for OCI in the first place.
Finally, Aatish Taseer’s mother, Taveleen Singh tried, uselessly to defend him. While a mother’s tenacity is understandable, a journalist’s unconscionable lies are certainly not.
And, worrying to see that they do not check their own records or they may have noticed my application for him to live in India when I brought him here aged two. https://t.co/Xs1pq6bLsM
Even if Tavleen Singh did mention all the details when she got Aatish here when he was two-years-old, the fact remains that per the laws of the land, Aatish is not eligible for an OCI because his father was of Pakistani origin. That his OCI has not been cancelled earlier is what should be a concern, not that it has been cancelled now. Everything else is a conjecture.
There were several others who made similar arguments, but the crux of the issue remained strikingly the same – ‘Aatish serves our purpose. Leave him alone and let him break the law!’ Unfortunately for the Lutyens cabal, that they are the “English speaking elite”, as Aatish himself puts it, doesn’t make them eligible to break the laws. That they consider themselves above the unwashed masses, doesn’t make them special. That their coterie assumes to rule the narrative, doesn’t mean anything when it comes to cold, hard facts. Aatish Taseer’s Hinduphobia, while grotesque was not the reason his OCI is being cancelled. Aatish Tasser’s call for Muslims to unite is not why he is put through his inevitable fate. That he wrote a lie-laden article, is not the reason either. If it were, there would be no five-star journalists left in India. Aatish Taseer is not eligible for OCI because his father was a Pakistani and on top of that, he concealed that fact. That a Hinduphobic Islamist’s OCI is being cancelled, is just a bonus – an unintended one.
As the nation waits for the Ayodhya verdict before CJI Gogoi retires on November 17, police in various states, especially UP has been on high alert and intensifying preparedness to tackle any situation of violence, communal tension and unrest.
As per a report in Amar Ujala, the Meerut police have ordered a former MLA and a former minister to stay away from the district for the time being. In total, ten people with some history of instigating violence have been ordered to stay away from the district for now. They have been told that they will be arrested immediately if they are seen in the district on the day of the verdict.
Sources said that the former MLA and the former minister who has been ordered away from the district are Yogesh Verma and Yakun Qureshi respectively.
For maintaining peace and security, the district has been divided into 8 sectors and 31 zones. As per police sources, 1250 police personnel, five companies of PAC and 1 company of RAF have been deployed in the district. 200 extra personnel have been requested.
Several sensitive areas have been put under CCTV surveillance. Cyber cells have been activated to keep an eye on social media messages while special crime branch teams and surveillance teams have been activated too.
The Meerut police have also conducted meetings with Army officials to ensure co-operation and help when needed. ASP Ajay Sahni has confirmed the eviction notice sent to ten persons, including the former MLA and former minister. He has added that adequate law and order arrangements have been made for any untoward situation over the verdict.
As per a Times of India report, the top officials of Indian Army’s West UP Sub Area Command had held a meeting with Meerut’s IG, SSP and SPs along with DMs of the range yesterday. The meetings were held at the West UP Sub Area Command’s headquarters. The Army has agreed over cooperations in traffic management, management of clinics and law and order maintenance.
Ministry of Home Affairs has said that writer and journalist Aatish Taseer is ineligible for getting an OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) card, as he had concealed the fact that his father was of Pakistani origin. The ministry also rebutted a Print report alleging that the union government is considering revoking Taseer’s OCI card after he had criticised Modi government in an article published in the Time magazine.
In a series of tweets posted by the official Twitter handle of the spokesperson of Home Ministry, the ministry said that the Print article is devoid of any facts. The spokesperson tweeted that while submitting the PIO (Person of Indian Origin) application, Aatish Taseer had concealed the fact that his late father was of Pakistani origin. Taseer was given the opportunity to submit his reply/objections regarding his PIO/OCI cards, but he failed to dispute the notice. “Thus, Mr. Aatish Ali Taseer becomes ineligible to hold an OCI card, as per the Citizenship Act, 1955. He has clearly not complied with very basic requirements and hidden information,” the MHA said.
As per section 7A(1) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, OCI card is issued to those people who are citizens of another country, but previously were Indian citizens at any point of time in past after the Indian constitution came into effect, or were eligible to become India citizen, or children of such persons.
Section 7A of Citizenship Act
This section 7A(1) specifically states that if any person or either of their parents or grandparents or great grandparents is or had been a citizen of Pakistan, Bangladesh or any other country as notified by the government, such persons would not be eligible for getting the OCI status.
Moreover, section 4 of the citizenship act, which deals with citizenship of persons born outside India, has the following provisions: for persons born between 26th January 1950 and 10th December 1992, a person born outside India will be eligible for Indian citizenship if such person’s father was an Indian citizen at the time of birth. For persons born after 10th December 1992, if either of the parents is Indian citizen than the person can get Indian citizenship.
Section 4(a) of the Citizenship Act
Aatish Taseer was born in London on 27th November 1980. His father was Pakistani politician and businessman Salmaan Taseer, while his mother is Indian journalist Tavleen Singh. As Aatish was born outside India before 10 December 1992, he becomes ineligible to become an Indian citizen as per section 4 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, because his father was Pakistani citizen at the time of his birth in UK. If he was born after that date in 1992, he would be eligible for Indian citizenship as his mother is Indian.
Aatish Ali Taseer’s father was Pakistani citizen, he was never an Indian citizen, and was never eligible to become Indian citizen as per law, therefore he is not eligible to obtain the OIC card as per the provisions of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
As the political drama over formation of the next state government in Maharashtra continues, State Secretary of NCP Youth Ashish Mete posted a very controversial tweet regarding the matter attacking PM Modi, but later deleted it. In the tweet, Mete compared Narendra Modi with Ajmal Kasab, the lone Pakistani terrorist caught alive after the 2008 Mumbai attacks.
Screenshot of now deleted tweet of Ashish Mete
Ashish Mete posted the tweet in Marathi, translation of which would be, ‘even though Kasab burnt down the CST station, he had to cry because Tukaram Ombale fought with him. Just like that even after winning India, Modi is crying but Sharad Pawar with 54 seats is overpowering him’. In the shocking tweet, the NCP leader was comparing the situation of PM Narendra Modi with terrorist Ajmal Kasab who was hanged in 2012.
जिंकुन देखील भारत सारा
नरेंद्र मोदी रडला होता
कारण १०५ जागा जिंकुन सुद्धा
त्याला ५४ जागा जिंकणारा
शरद पवार नडला होता ।।
But later he deleted the tweet, and posted another tweet with the same message but dropping the Kasab reference. The new Tweet in Marathi says, ‘even after winning entire India, Modi is crying, because although he won 105 seats, Sharad Pawar is overpowering him with 54 seats.
Mete’s claim that Pawar is winning despite winning around half the number of seats won by BJP is contrary to the official position of NCP. The party has been maintaining that it has not won the mandate in Maharashtra, and the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance should form the government. Yesterday Sharad Pawar had reiterated the party position saying that the NCP-Congress alliance will not make any attempts to form a government in Maharashtra. “I don’t have anything to say yet. BJP and Shiv Sena have got the mandate of people, so they should form the government as soon as possible. Our mandate is to play the role of Opposition,” Sharad Pawar had said.
Although the results for Maharashtra assembly elections were announced on 24th October, no government has been formed yet as the winning NDA alliance partners BJP and Shiv Sena are locked in a stalemate over the power-sharing formula. In the elections, BJP has emerged as the single largest party with 105 seats, its partner Shiv Sena won 56 seats, while NCP and Congress won 54 and 44 seats respectively. But Shiv Sena is insisting on a 50:50 power-sharing formula and CMs from both the parties for 2.5 years each, which BJP is not agreeing to. Therefore, it is Shiv Sena which is creating a hurdle for Devendra Fadnavis in becoming the Maharashtra CM again, not NCP.
A 7-page advisory has been issued by the Railway Police on Thursday to all its zones, asking them to strengthen security measures ahead of the Supreme Court verdict on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case. The Railways have reportedly cancelled the leaves of the RPF personnel and directed them to escort the trains.
The advisory encompasses important facets such as security at railway stations, platforms, yards, parking spaces, bridges, tunnels, production units and workshops and listed down all the places where violence is likely to break out or could be used as a refuge for hiding arms and explosives.
The Railway Protection Force advisory has asked officials to keep tabs on all religious structures in proximity to railway stations or within its premises, as they have a potential to become “flash points” in case communal conflagration breaks out. The guardians of such structures have been strictly ordered to not leave the places unguarded.
About 78 major stations have been identified where the footfall is high and the security cover at those installations have been scaled up. These include Mumbai, Delhi, and other big stations.
Revoking their previous order which asked the railway stations to keep their lighting at 30 per cent and save electricity when there are no trains at the station, the advisory asked the railway stations to keep the lighting at 100 per cent at all times instead.
Earlier, the Ministry of Home Affairs sent additional 4000 paramilitary personnel for security arrangements in Uttar Pradesh, particularly Ayodhya.
A five-judge Supreme Court bench headed by CJI Ranjan Gogoi had heard the Ayodhya case on a day-to-day basis for 40 days and reserved its verdict on October 16. The court is expected to deliver its verdict on a dispute over the possession of 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya district in Uttar Pradesh before November 17, when CJI Gogoi retires.
Police forces in Uttar Pradesh and other states too have been put on alert ahead of the verdict. Section 144 has already been imposed in the areas surrounding the Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya.
A plush cafe in Pune, Maharashtra became famous on the internet overnight, but for the wrong reasons. Cafe BeHive located in the Hinjewadi area of Pune has been in the news ever since a woman visitor took to social media to narrate how she discovered a hidden camera inside the ladies washroom of the cafe.
One Nandini Dhingra took to her Instagram account to share her ordeal sharing an image of the hidden camera that she located inside Cafe BeHive’s washroom on November 3.
A hidden camera located in the washroom of Cafe BeHive in Pune
She wrote, “So we went to this place called BeHive Cafe in Pune. We found a camera fitted inside a women’s washroom. On addressing this issue to management, they asked us to wait outside and the camera was gone within 10 minutes.”
Nandini Dhingra’ Instagram post
The woman alleged that while she questioned the management, they attempted to bribe her: “Complaining to management was of no use it seems because excellent staff there kept on making excuses about finding culprit and the phone camera but no efforts were made. On being repeatedly asked and ruckus been made in the cafe, the manager tried to bribe us by saying, ‘What do you guys want?’ The phone and the culprit dammit! Excellent support Behiveindia.”
The women also wrote that the cafe got her reviews deleted from Zomato without her permission. “This has gone to the next level. I request all of you not to ignore this message and create awareness on social media,” urged the victim.
This news created a flutter on social media with angry Twitter users criticising the cafe and questioning the safety of women in such cafes. Bollywood actor Richa Chadha calling it the limit of perversion asked others to retweet this message widely and urged that the perpetrators should be immediately brought to book.
Have deleted my previous tweet, as someone pointed out a mistake. Behive, Hinjewadi was filming women in the ladies toilet. This is the limit of perversion. They have to be brought to book. RT widely. @PuneCityPolicepic.twitter.com/sPW7lWLSYS
Meanwhile, the Pune Police taking cognizance of the issue Tweeted that since this matter falls under the jurisdiction of Pimpri Chinchwad Police, they have been informed and necessary action would be taken soon.
The looming verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi Case will potentially conclude a centuries-year old aspiration of Hindus to reclaim the land of Ayodhya. Over the centuries, numerous efforts have been made to take back the sacred site for Hindus which was under the rule of the Jihadist barbarians.
However, due to unavoidable circumstances, often a consequence of fate or misfortune, reclamation of Ram Janmabhoomi proved to be evasive. But throughout the many wars that Hindu empires have waged, the holy land of Ayodhya and the sacred sites of Mathura and Kashi always featured prominently in the plans of those who aspired for Hindavi Swarajya. In this article, we shall show that the three sites always remained in the plans of the Maratha Empire.
Maratha Plans to Take Control of Ayodhya, Prayag and Banaras
During Safdar Jung’s second war against the Pathans in 1751-52, the Marathas had cooperated with him after they were invited and after his victory at Fatehgarh, Holkar had requested that the three holy sites be handed over to the Peshwa. But at the time, the request could not be granted in its entirety. Therefore, the Empire had to satisfy itself with other riches, which they were given in plenty. Moreover, the Marathas were playing a ‘double game’ of their own. They frustrated Safdar Jung even though they were aiding him and prevented the Pathans from inevitable ruin. The objective was to ensure that only the Marathas emerged as the sole winners in this whole fight.
Historian A.L. Srivastava in his book The First Two Nawabs of Awadh describes the situation thus: In addition to acquiring karores worth booty and half the Bangash territory and their daily expenses from Safdar Jung, they exacted fifty lakhs of rupees from Ahmad Khan Bangash and Sadulla Khan Ruhella, not as war indemnity as the historian Sardesai suggests, but as price for having secured for them such favourable terms, while the Nawab Wazir “had no more than the empty gratification of having humbled the enemy.”
Book excerpt of The First Two Nawabs of Awadh
Malhar Rao Holkar, one of the generals under the Peshwa, reached Kashi with a significant army during this time. Once there, he wanted to demolish the Gyanvapi Mosque built by Aurangzeb and reconstruct the ancient Temple at the site. However, he was dissuaded from doing so by the people of Kashi who argued that the Islamic barbarians were too strong in the region and once the Marathas left, they would be massacred.
Why the Gyanvapi Mosque Survived
GS Sardesai in his book New History of the Marathas notes, “The object of the Marathas in all these undertakings was both religious and political. They particularly intended to get the holy places of Prayag and Kashi back into Hindu possession.” In the same book, he notes a letter written by a Maratha agent on the 18th of June, 1751 as saying, “Malharrao has pitched his monsoon camp in the Doab. He intended to pull down the grand Masjid built by Aurangzeb at Benares and restore the original temple of Kashi Vishveshwar. The Brahmans of Kashi feel extremely terrified at such a move for they realise the Muslim strength in these places. What the holy Ganges and protector Vishveshwar can ordain will come true. The Brahmans are going to send a strong appeal to the Peshwa against any such attempt by his Sardars.”
Benaras, Allahabad, Ayodhya: The Peshwa’s Letters
The three places again find mention in a letter to Dattaji Shinde by Peshwa Balaji Rao in 1759. The message was conveyed through Ramaji Anant, the ‘manager’ of the Scindias. He says in the letter, “There are two or three undertakings to be achieved in connection with Shuja-ud-Daulah. Take Benaras, Ayodhya and Allahabad bad from him. He had promised to Dada (in 1757) to cede Benaras and Ayodhya but the case of Allahabad is still under discussion. If a settlement on the last question can be easily reached, make it.”
Another letter a few months later between the same set of correspondents mentions the Holy sites with the exception of Ayodhya. It says, “Camp at Delhi for this monsoon and proceed eastwards later. While in Delhi, arrest that corrupt Antaji Mankeshwar and send him to Pune at once. While proceeding eastwards, make sure that Meerut province is enlisted under the domain of the government (emperor of Satara OR the Pune executive). If Antaji cooperates and turns himself in, make his son a hazaari sardar (chief of 1000 horses). Remember that Najib is a traitor and half Abdali. Do not waste time negotiating with him. If possible unite Shuja and Surajmal against Najib and acquire at least 30 lakhs from the spoils for us. But ensure that Jat and Shuja do not become too friendly with each other. Hence keep the Mughal Vazir as friend.”
The Peshwa then adds, “Finally, I repeat, keep the Mughal vazir as your friend as far as possible, above all others. Only if he starts reneging the contract, then replace him with Shuja in exchange of good profit. But take charge of Kashi, Mathura and Prayag in our hands at all costs.”
Thus, we see that the Peshwa was very concerned with the reclamation of the Hindu Holy Sites.
Why couldn’t the Marathas complete the Reclamation Project?
Thus, we see that between 1751 to 1759, reclamation of the sacred sites was indeed a priority for the Marathas. And there’s sufficient indication that Sadashiv Bhau who led the Maratha forces in the third battle of Panipat received instructions regarding the same as well. However, the defeat that the Marathas suffered at the war in 1761 thwarted their plans and although they sprung back from the defeat within the next ten years, the balance of power had altered significantly with the rise of the British.
It is important to understand here that the Marathas projected their power from the Deccan. Therefore, at that point of time, they did not exert control over the Gangetic Plain. @ArmchairPseph, a Twitter handle with significant knowledge on these matters, argues that control over this region was essential towards the reclamation project. He says, “In the North, the Nawabs of Awadh and Bengal still held out versus the Marathas. Thus, given the Maratha armies were based further South, while they could project power into the Gangetic plain, reclaiming the sacred sites on a secure basis was not yet possible. They did not control the state structure, and thus would be unable to protect the reconstructed temples as well as Hindus in the sacred cities once their armies withdrew back to their bases. Thus, securing the Gangetic plain was necessary before the sacred sites could be reclaimed.”
And as the incident in Kashi demonstrated, Malhar Rao Holkar had to restrain himself from levelling the Gyanvapi as the Marathas did not exert enough influence in the region. If they pursued any such actions, Hindus in the region would have suffered. Even if the three sacred sites had been transferred to the Peshwa, until Maratha power in the region had been consolidated, they wouldn’t have been free to pursue their preferred policies. Thus, although reclamation of the sites was certainly in their minds, circumstances weren’t favourable for it.
Ahilyabai Holkar
That religion figured prominently in the political outlook of the Marathas is most evident, perhaps, from the glorious reign of Ahilyabai Holkar, the daughter-in-law of Malhar Rao Holkar, who became a ruler by her own right in Malwa 1767 as the power of the Peshwas declined significantly post the third battle of Panipat. It was she who built the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, as it stands today, in 1780.
The Ramachandra temple in Puri, Hanuman temple in Rameshwaram, Shri Vaidyanath temple in Parli Vaijnath and the Sarayu Ghat in Ayodhya, Kedarnath, Ujjain and numerous other sites have the unalterable mark of Ahilyabai Holkar. The Somnath Temple, which has suffered numerous blows over the years, was restored by all the Maratha Confederates in 1783 with significant contribution from her.
The Marathas never reached a point where they could reclaim the sites without adverse consequences for Hindus as well as their own political power and the tides of time have flown by since then. For them, Ram Janmabhoomi remained a dream unfulfilled. And thus, after all these years, we stand at the precipice of history with the potential of realizing an elusive goal that has evaded our ancestors for centuries.
