Home Blog Page 661

Mirror mirror on the wall

DeepakB
-
0
Mirror mirror on the wall

Beauty queens all over the world are admired by ardent fans. They have multi-million dollar endorsements from cosmetics, fashion and other retail industries. Youth follow their life-style closely and emulate each aspect to fit in.

These celebrities are put on a pedestal as the epitome of beauty for people to follow, which is a wonderful thing.

If we were to take a different view of such pageants and scratch beneath the surface, it tells a different and damning story.

One of the earliest instances of Miss America pageant, which is still in existence, was started in 1921 by an American businessman to entice tourists to Atlantic City, New Jersey. The thing to note here is that it was not to celebrate the female beauty, but a business proposition to make money off of women.

The Miss Universe pageant finds its roots from 1920 when C.E. Barfield of Galveston, Texas organized an event called ‘Splash Day’ and featured ‘Bathing Girl Revue’ competition as the centerpiece of its attractions. It was to kickoff the summer tourist season. Here as well, the intent was to profit by enticing people to see women in bathing suits. Not for some pure sense of beauty.

Some might call it a marketing ploy, while others would say it reeks of male chauvinism and profiteering.

The Miss Teen USA pageant started in 1983 is for the age group between 14 – 19 years.

And then you have the Child beauty pageants for children usually under 16 years of age where they can have routines of talent, interview, sportswear, casual wear, swim wear, evening wear etc.

The ethical question comes up whether you want to push children be seen and judged as adult women? What about the audience attending these shows and more importantly the parents who do not mind having their children be judged as adults?

Interestingly, from a diversity standpoint, African-American women were not allowed to participate in the Miss America pageant due to rampant racism in the US. Because of which, those women started the Miss Black America contest in 1968.

Looks like the mindset of slavery and white supremacy in the US didn’t really stop with their independence as is claimed.

The role ‘swimsuit contests’ have played in beauty contests has been controversial from the start, when it was first introduced in 1946 in the form of bikinis (the name borrowed from the atoll – ‘Bikini Atoll’ being used for the atom bomb testing).

This industry by some estimates is now greater than $1B while the Global Cosmetics Products Market is expected to reach $805.61B by 2023.

With such revenue generating pressures, its no wonder these industries target children in order to increase their customer base, pushing products to kids and teenagers, which would otherwise be appropriate only for adults.

Objectifying women for profit, extends beyond the beauty contests into other arenas as well, like sports where you have cheer-leaders having to dress in the barest of clothes performing acrobatics and cheering the crowds to participate more eagerly in the proceedings.

If ever there are male cheer-leaders, you’d see them wearing long pants and t-shirts, so the question is why this discrimination and objectification of women? If its to increase the entertainment quotient of sporting events, does it require girls to dress in a certain manner for it? If so, we need to take a closer look in which direction society in general is moving and is that for the betterment of society?

Wearing certain types of clothes and presenting ourselves in a certain manner in the world, is a personal choice. The question is – are we in control of this choice or are we drones being controlled & objectified by western culture, its retail industry and its norms that need to be followed to be accepted as being beautiful?

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_pageant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Pageant_of_Pulchritude

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_bikini

Does statement and decision of Muzzafar Hussain Beigh reflect the desperation of the large section of politicians in J&K?

Fayaz Ganie
-
0
Does statement and decision of Muzzafar Hussain Beigh reflect the desperation of the large section of politicians in J&K?

In comes the statement of the Co-founder of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that he is ready to join the Third Front which has already taken some shape in the state of Jammu and Kashmir under the leadership of Peoples Conference Leader Sajad Lone. This is a significant development which might pave way for the formation of new government in the state.

This development is in line with a change that is being witnessed in the political landscape of the State, and of the country at large. The change is about the emergence of new politicians and people who are ready to hold the reins of power. It is this change which has unsettled the seasoned politicians like Muzaffar Hussain Being to stay relevant. It shows his fear of losing the plot and desperation to retain some ground.

Actually majority of the politicians of Jammu and Kashmir are facing this existential crisis and that is why there is no consistency in their statements and the way they behave on the political arena of the state and the country. The decisions of the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) and the PDP to boycott the Local Body and Panchayat elections is an indication of the existential crisis.

Boycotting these elections and fighting them though proxies and then deciding not to boycott the Assembly and Parliamentary Elections shows their desperation and confusion and the existential crisis. It shows that their decision to boycott the Local Body and Panchayat Elections was a kneejerk reaction and not a well thought out strategy, had it been they would have never fought these elections though proxies.

Then their decision of not boycotting the Assembly and Parliamentary Elections is a acknowledgment that their decision of boycotting the Local Body and Panchayat elections was an utter failure. Their stated purpose for boycotting these elections was the issue of Article 35-A of Indian Constitution and the ambiguous position of the Central Government.

The position of the Central Government has not changed a bit by the boycott, and it has not made the position public and the issue of Article 35-A is still intact. So, participation of the JKNC and the PDP in Assembly and Parliamentary elections again shows their desperation more to remain relevant than to gain power.

In politics the first thing a political party intends is to gain power and form government. For this great efforts are made to change public opinion in its favor. In case of the Jammu and Kashmir the main parties in the Kashmir Division of the State are not trying to gain power but instead their every move is to keep the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) away from the power. In politics it is a flawed strategy; it is a defensive tactic rather than a political master stroke. The BJP has gained much by the boycott of the PDP and the JKNC in the Kashmir division.

One can say that that the PDP and the JKNC Boycotted the Local Body and Panchayat Elections keeping in mind the Assembly and Parliamentary election. But in that case also the decision seems going off the track. The disconnect between the people and these parties seems widening with each passing day and the decision of boycotting the already held Local Body and ongoing Panchayat elections has not reversed the process, the gulf keeps on widening.

A fact about the political parties of the state is that the people of the state have been completely left out. Almost no leader of the PDP and the JKNC tries to reach out to them. The politics that is being played on the political turf of the state is not played considering the real problems that the people of the state face. Nay, it is played in the form of statements and counter statements of the politicians without addressing the basic issues of the people.

Instead to reach out to people the politicians play all their politics while sitting in their cozy homes while using twitter, facebook and other social media and other forms of media. That is the reason the same people who were ready to sacrifice their life for these politicians and parties are no more ready to vote for them.

The people are well aware that these politicians and parties are concerned about their own interests and nothing else. Their decisions of boycotting the Local Body and Panchayat elections and their subsequent decision of not boycotting the Assembly and Parliamentary election are all viewed with this prism of the concern for the personal and party interests and apathetic attitude towards the larger interests of the people.

The result of all this, it is reiterated, is the gulf between the people and the two main parties of the Kashmir Division of the state is ever greater today. The inability of the mainstream politicians, especially those belonging to the PDP and JKNC, to reach out to the people is making the prospects for any future connect bleak. The mileage that these parties tried to gain from the issue of Article 35-A failed to accrue and all this has increased the desperation of these parties and the politicians.

It is in this backdrop that the decision and statement of the Muzaffar Hussain Being can be viewed. His statement and decision gives an indication about the degree of confusion and desperation, insecurity and the existential crisis that is there in the mainstream politicians of Kashmir division in particular. When the co-founder of a party is ready to desert the party and join the Third Front the status of the common politicians can be well imagined.

If we relate this situation with the overall politics, if Muzaffar Hussain Being joins the Third Front and acquires a post of power in the government if that is formed it somewhere proves the elite theory of politics right, only the parties change and the politicians holding the reins of power remain more or less the same, half of the BJP is composed of the people who were previously congressmen. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.

The political drama in Jammu & Kashmir should have been avoided for the larger good

Fayaz Ganie
-
0
The political drama in Jammu & Kashmir should have been avoided for the larger good

The day has not even passed yet and the state of Jammu and Kashmir passed from the possibility of one government to second and eventually of no government. The Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly stands dissolved by the Governor of the state using the powers conferred on him by the Clause (b) of the subsection-2 of Section 53 of the Constitution of the state.

Before the dissolution of the Assembly there was a political drama which started yesterday with the announcement of Muzaffar Hussain Beigh that he was ready to join Sajad Lone’s People Conference. His statement was viewed as a possibility of government formation by the Peoples Conference with the support of the Bhartiya Janta Party and others. Expectations were that the Sajad Lone will stake claim for forming the government with the support of the MLAs including those deserted from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) which he did but not before there was the drama.

As the 21st day of November, 2018 progressed the news started coming that the PDP, Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and the Congress have come to an understanding and they might stake claim for forming the government. The news started gaining the authenticity as the day progressed further. The parties did reach to some understanding and tried to give shape to a grand alliance against the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP).

The president of the PDP wrote a letter to the Governor stating the same and circulated the letter claiming the support of 56 MLAs to the media. But these was a twist, the president of the PDP followed her first tweet with the subsequent one stating that the Governor’s Office is neither receiving the fax of the letter nor is there anybody picking the phone.

As this was going on and the PDP was trying to deliver the letter to the Governor, Sajad Lone delivered a letter staking claim for forming the government in the state to the Governor’s PA via whattsapp. In the letter he claimed the support of more than sufficient members necessary for forming the government. Though the numbers seemed clearly with the PDP but the letter of Sajad Lone raised the suspicion that there might be some more twist in the arm and there might still be a surprise.

The surprise came but not from Sajad Lone but from the Governor. The governor in a short while issued a press communiqué stating that the Legislative Assembly has been dissolved. The leaders of the PDP, JKNC and the Congress reacted to this order sharply and some even tried to make some satire out of it. According to them when the Assembly was not dissolved for more the five months even when these parties had demanded for it, why was it dissolved after the three parties decided to form a grand alliance.

This really was a day or two of political drama in Jammu and Kashmir and who know there is more to it in the coming days. So far we can say that the happenings of the day have dented democracy even further in the state. All the parties it is proved are trying to serve their party interests by hook or crook without giving a thought about the state and the predicament in which the state is.
In a democracy the will of the people is supreme which they decide by giving power to their elected representatives. In case the sufficient number of representatives had agreed to form the government, no matter whether from one coalition or the other and whether headed by Sajad Lone or Mehbooba Mufti they should have been given the chance.

Waiting for months together that some arrangement might be reached and some parties may give shape to a coalition to form the government and then dissolving the government when such an arrangement had been reached is something which makes everything hazy. It is not in the best interest of the state, people of the state and democracy.

In a similar case in Karnataka the Supreme Court had ruled against such behavior by the Governor of that state and ordered a floor test. In case of Jammu and Kashmir also the Supreme Court directions should have been followed. Instead most of the people allege that the decision by the Governor is politically designed to benefit the BJP or at least to prevent losses and humiliation to this party.

Majority of the people are of the firm belief that the decision has been made in a partisan manner and the Governor of the state instead of being loyal to the constitution and the democratic form of government has acted as a member of the BJP. Better thought process was expected from the institution of the Governor of the state.

The decision has harmed the credentials of democracy in more than one way and another way it has harmed is by giving a feeling to the people of the state that New Delhi is never sincere with them. Many people who always keep saying that the Central Government imposes governments and people on the state and those who try to go against the ruling party at the Centre are disposed off like the other disposable items.

They cite various examples to support their argument like the one of rigging of the elections in 1987 and treatment that was meted to late Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah and his son Dr. Farooq Abdullah. Now they got another example to cite which is not in the interests of the state and the country. The NC, PDP and the state unit of the Congress have shown their loyalty towards the Indian state and by giving them the chance to form the government the state was not going to Pakistan.

The Legislative Assembly has been dissolved but the democratic institutions of the country which are duty bound to safeguard the constitution of the country should see the constitutional validity of such a decision. If there is a constitutional way to reverse the decision, it should be considered, else it should be enjoined upon all those people, institutions and authorities who work against the constitution and the constitutional arrangement of the country to desist from doing so.

Nobody should be allowed to erode the democratic credentials and institutions of the country. If India wants order to be established in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, she should show that order in the treatment of the central government towards the State. Otherwise, democracy in this part of the country is in a serious crisis.

BBC Boss interview with Mahismati reporter on fake news article

seafarer
-
0
BBC Boss interview with Mahismati reporter on fake news article

After a recent controversy for a BBC report on Fake News, Mahismati Court Reporter decided to clarify the issue directly with BBC Boss who was in lutyens Delhi for a brief visit. Below mentioned is the transcript of the interview –

MR- Mahismati Reporter
BBCB- BBC Boss

MR- Hello Sir, Thanks for the acceptance for the interview.

BBCB- Excuse me, it is to be articulated as – Thank you Sir, for accepting the request for an interview.

MR- Thanks sir for having corrected the English spoken by I.

BBCB- It should be me.

MR- Me what?

BBCB- you should have said me at the end of the sentence.

MR- Okay sir me.

BBCB- Oh, for god sake, may we maintain the continuum please?

MR- Yes sir, sure sir, definitely sir- Sir, we wanted to know your views about the recent controversy regarding the Fake News article by BBC India which turned out to be fake.

BBCB- Bullocks, the article was purely data interpretation and based on analysis by our team.

MR- but sir, the article was pulled back by BBC India.

BBCB- No, it was not, it was republished with some clarifications.

MR- Exactly, why clarifications were needed if the article was accurate.

BBCB- Oh, that happens as you people like to twist everything published in a classic news portal like BBC, what do you people say- BAAL KI KHAAL NIKALNA.

MR- Your Hindi is very good sir, anyway so you are confirming the article was factually correct and standing by it.

BBCB- I did not say that.

MR- Then what are you saying- is the article accurate or not?

BBCB- That is for the readers to decide.

MR- But readers decided that article was incorrect and one news website OpIndia also published the details why the article was fake news.

BBCB- I don’t consider that “thing” to be any news portal- it’s a propaganda machine.

MR- Do you know anything about Opinida?

BBCB- I don’t corrupt myself with such non-sense. You see, we have been in the business long enough to know such things.

MR- okay, so you are saying the article was accurate and all the people mentioned in the article are actually involved in spreading fake news.

BBCB- when did I say that? You people like putting words in the mouth, much like that horrendous Arnaabb Guswami.

MR- Sir, it is pronounced as Arnab Goswami.

BBCB- ya, ya, I don’t care.

MR- So why exactly the report was taken down from the website?

BBCB- Which report?

MR- The one about the fake news.

BBCB- It was never taken down, we republished it with some clarifications. You got to know the difference but then you people are not upto that standards, I guess.

MR- What kind of clarifications were needed?

BBCB- To explain why our fake news report was sounding like fake news?

MR- So you do accept that first draft of the report was indeed sounding like a Fake news

BBCB- I did not say that.

MR- So what did you mean?

BBCB- I meant what I meant when I said what I said.

MR- Excuse me?

BBCB- oh bloody hell, don’t you people understand simple English?

MR- Okay, moving on, Your team also apologised to certain people who were named in the report and accepted they made a mistake. What do you have to say on that?

BBCB- I don’t have that information. If they have accepted the mistake, we should applaud their journalistic ethics. Don’t know what you are complaining for!

MR- But sir, if apology has been tendered to people who were named for Fake news, it means that data in the report was not correct.

BBCB- That is one way to look at it.

MR- what is the other way to look at it?

BBCB- That is for you to decide.

MR- I consider that report was inaccurate and published erroneous data.

BBCB- that is your point of view and I reject it completely.

MR- So you consider only BBC team to have the correct point of view.

BBCB- mmm, yes, I sure hope so otherwise our credibility will be lost.

MR- That is quite elitist on your part.

BBCB- You people don’t even know the meaning of the word.

MR- So please explain to me.

BBCB- It should be I.

MR- What?

BBCB- Oh darn it.

MR- Hmm moving on, do you fear that Indian people losing trust in BBC as the result of this fake news report?

BBCB- we don’t work on expectations from you people. We decide what is news-worthy and go ahead with it.

MR- sir, so it is safe to conclude that BBC stands by the report and will continue to publish the final version on its website.

BBCB- I did not say that.

MR- I am confused now.

BBCB- Are you? Or you were just born that way.

MR- Sir, I am being polite as you are my guest.

BBCB- (murmering) Iski Maa ki Aankh…

MR- excuse me?

BBCB- I said nothing.

MR- it seemed that you said Iski maa ki aankh.

BBCB- you are hallucinating.

MR- am I?

BBCB- I don’t know, you ask a doctor.

MR- anyways, thank you for your precious time and we will be publishing this interview in our website without any edit.

BBCB- I sure do hope so or I have a legal team waiting to pounce on you. We don’t let anyone steal the narrative.

MR- What?

BBCB- Enough of this crap now, I am ending this here.

Let not cross pathy destroy 15000 years old AYUSH wisdom

S Ranganathan
-
0
Let not cross pathy destroy 15000 years old AYUSH wisdom

Although the scientifically proven medical system – Allopathy has imminent role in our health care system but the role of traditional systems like Ayurveda and Siddha cannot be undermined in the name of development. The biggest threat both Ayurveda and Siddha are facing from own graduates than from anyone else. Cross pathy by several institutionally qualified Siddha vaidyas in private practice is really affecting the role and relevance of Siddha system. Allopathic system can help humanity only when there is a medical problem and otherwise allopathic system has limited value.  But to remain healthy and free from any form of health problems, Siddha and Ayurveda scores significantly over allopathy.

The paramedical wellness of Siddha and Ayurveda system need less proof and evidence for paramedical benefit. The paramedical concepts of Siddha and Ayurveda start with mind and then it migrates to body. The importance of counselling, divine faith, spiritual thoughts, superstition, hymns etc., are very much included in the treatment regimen of Siddha and Ayurveda.

The confusion around Siddha and Ayurveda is not due to the lack of its merit or relevance but it is due to the way it has been promoted and popularized in the society. Siddha and Ayurveda has strong bondage with our culture, language, our spiritual practice, diet, dressing pattern, climatic conditions, family philosophy etc. Therefore we should promote Siddha and Ayurveda only as our native, faith based paramedical, wellness system and not as advanced medical science. The term medical science is quite western and its meaning is limited to English dictionary. But on the contrary, the term Ayurveda or Siddha cannot be defined objectively without considering and including the life in totality. Siddha refers to attainment of divine abode and Ayurveda refers to wisdom or Veda of life.

In the name of promoting and popularizing Siddha and Ayurveda, our past Government has re-defined and re-packaged Siddha and Ayurveda as yet another medical science exactly like allopathy. As a result many institutionally qualified Vaidyas of Siddha and Ayurveda in private practice started to compare and equate their role with MBBS graduates. Instead of applying the intuition, instinct, the sacred wisdom, the philosophical concepts, divinity, spiritual thoughts and holistic way of observation, many Siddha and Ayurveda Vaidyas in private practice have started to rely on stethoscope, BP apparatus etc., started to speak the language of modern medicine and reduced the role of Siddha and Ayurveda to diagnosis and treatment.

Siddha and Ayurveda are not just a mere health care practice but they are wellness centric, paramedical science aimed to elevate humanity from worldly life to spiritual awakening. It is not just for solving the health problems, but to help people to manage and prevent health problems alone both Siddha and Ayurveda were been gifted to mankind by our ancient spiritual masters.

The feeling of wellness, happiness, spiritual awakening, consciousness, faith, emotional bondage, family concepts etc., should not be subjected to scientific experiment or can be proved through laboratory experiment. Ayurveda and Siddha are faith based, culture linked, spiritually evolved practices. Both Ayurveda and Siddha are immortal, relevant and essential because they are meant not just for solving our health problem when we need it like allopathy but they are meant to uplift our life, help us to remain healthy, be in peace with what is and happy at the being level.

Unfortunately such a supernal, supernatural practice, many institutionally qualified Siddha and Ayurveda Viadyas in private practice have not learned properly and as a result are abusing Siddha or Ayurveda by engaging in cross pathy. Such Viadyas are doing injustice to both Siddha and Ayurveda, to humanity and to our health care system. Most of them are learning the brand names of several allopathic drugs, list of key diagnostic methods, concluding the diagnosis and engaging in cross pathy. Sadly they not only betray the great systems like Siddha or Ayurveda but also playing with the life of innocent people.

Progressively people are made to forget the essence of our ancient paramedical wellness system by none other than those who have institutionally qualified in the respective system. India’s health care delivery system is largely addressed by the private players and hence those Vaidyas in private practice who are engaged in cross pathy is going to affect the relevance of Siddha and Ayurveda adversely. Government must enforce a re-orientation programme to all those Siddha and Ayurveda practitioners in private practice to feel proud about own system and permanently abstain from cross pathy.

The wisdom of 15,000 years old we must preserve for future and cross pathy should not destroy the system. Strict legal actions must be imposed for those violate the law and medical ethics by engaging in cross pathy.

पड़ताल: प्रजापति एनकाउंटर मामले में मीडिया द्वारा खबर के नाम पर परोसा जा रहा है झूठ

अनुपम कुमार सिंह
-
0
पड़ताल: प्रजापति एनकाउंटर मामले में मीडिया द्वारा खबर के नाम पर परोसा जा रहा है झूठ

भारतीय अदालतों में दायर किये गए मुकदमों में से कुछ ऐसे होते हैं जिन्हें सिर्फ और सिर्फ किसी न किसी प्रकार के राजनीतिक हित साधने के लिए दायर किया जाता है. और अगर मीडिया उसे उछाल दे तो फिर कहना ही क्या. ऐसे समय मे जब सिर्फ भारत की शीर्ष अदालत में ही पचास हजार से अधिक मुकदमे लंबित पड़े हुए हों, ऐसे राजनीतिक फायदों के लिए झटपट पीआईएल दायर कर के कोर्ट का समय खराब करना तो बिल्कुल ही जायज नही है.

ऐसे “धमाकेदार” पीआईएल बस इसीलिए दाखिल किए जाते हैं ताकि कांग्रेस उन्हें मसला बना कर भाजपा के ऊपर हमला बोल सके और उनको आधार बना कर कोई “सनसनीखेज” खुलासे करने वाले बयान दिए जा सके. और इसका अगला स्टेप होता है उन बयानों को मीडिया के एक भाग द्वारा काफी जोर-शोर से फैलाना. अब आपको ये बताने की कोई जरूरत तो है नही की ये गिने-चुने मीडिया वाले कौन लोग हैं या कौन सी वेबसाइट्स हैं. हाँ, एक चीज जो इन सभी रिपोर्टों में समान होती है वो है किसी भी प्रकार के ठोस सबूतों का अभाव. तथ्य के नाम पर होती है तो सिर्फ एक कहानी क्योंकि कहानियां बिकती है और सच्चाई नही.

अब आजकल सुर्खियों में चल रहे या एक खास मकसद के तहत चलाये जा रहे 2006 के तुलसी प्रजापति एनकाउंटर वाले केस को ही ले लीजिए. इस केस के मुख्य जाँचकर्ता संदीप तमगड़े ने बयान दिया है कि इस एनकाउंटर को अमित शाह के ईशारे पर तीन पुलिस अधिकारियों- डीजी वंजारा, राजकुमार पांड्यन और दिनेश एमएन ने मिलकर “अंजाम” दिया. जाहिर तौर पर ये एक चौंका देने वाला बयान है जो हर नागरिक को इसके बारे में सोचने को विवश कर देगा और यकीन मानिए, इन्हें कुकुरमुत्ते की तरह कुछ समाचार एजेंसियों द्वारा सुर्खियां बना कर सोशल मीडिया में ज्यादा से ज्यादा फैलाने का मकसद भी यही होता है.

सच्चाई को पर्दे के पीछे रख कर ऐसी ही बिकने वाली कहानियों को सुर्खियां बनाने वाले समाचार पोर्टल द वायर ने भी अपने एक रिपोर्ट में कुछ इसी तरह का हैडलाइन दिया- “अमित शाह व डीजी वंजारा तुलसीराम प्रजापति हत्याकांड के मुख्य साजिशकर्ता: मुख्य जांच अधिकारी”. वहीं भोजन तक कि जाति खोज लेने वाले शेखर गुप्ता की कुख्यात वेबसाइट द प्रिंट ने भी कुछ इसी तरह की सुर्खियां बनाई है.

अगर आप इन सुर्खियों के लिखने के तरीके पर गौर फरमाएंगे तो आपको पता चलेगा कि इन्हें किसी खास मकसद के लिए ही बनाया गया है. जैसे कि अंग्रेजी में हैडलाइन के कुछ हिस्से को बड़े अक्षरों में लिखना या फिर विस्मयादिबोधक चिह्न देना. ये सब इन बात की निशानी होती है कि इस बिना सिर-पैर के लेख में कितना जहर भरा हुआ है.

हालांकि द प्रिंट ने इन खबर को द वायर से ज्यादा ईमानदार तरीके से पेश किया है. उसने पीटीआई के शब्दों को हूबहू पेश किया जो कुछ इस प्रकार है:

“सीआईओ संदीप तमगड़े जिन्हें जांच प्रक्रिया के बीच मे की निकाल बाहर किया गया, ने ये स्वीकार किया है कि उनके दावे को साबित करने के लिए उनके पास किसी भी प्रकार के साक्ष्य नही हैं.”

और रोचक बात तो ये है कि द वायर ने इस हिस्से को अपने लेख में कहीं जगह दी ही नही. उसने अपने लंबे-चौड़े लेख में पाठकों को ये तक बताने की भी जहमत नही उठाई कि सीआईओ संदीप तमगाड़े ने ये स्वीकार किया है कि उन्होंने अमित शाह और डीजी वंजारा को तुलसीराम प्रजापति एनकाउंटर के मुख साजिशकर्ता बताने वाले दावे को साबित करने के लिए अदालत में पेश किए गए चार्जशीट के साथ लिखित रूप में किसी भी तरह का कोई भी साक्ष्य नही पेश किया है.

इसके उलट द वायर से संदीप तमगाड़े के बयान को ही प्रमुखता से प्रकाशित किया है और कहा है कि ये “खुलासे” ऐसे निर्णायक समय पर आए हैं जब कई गवाह अपने बयानों से पलट रहे हैं. अव्वल तो ये की द वायर ने अपने लेख में ये भी नही बताया कि अदालत ने ये जाहिर किया कि इस केस के साथ राजनीति भी जुड़ गई है.

यहां आपको ये बता देना काफी जरूरी हो जाता है कि 2014 में सीबीआई की विशेष अदालत द्वारा अमित शाह को इस मामले से मुक्त किया जा चुका है और ये फैसला देते समय न्यायाधीश एमबी गोस्वामी ने कहा था:

“पुलिस केस ज्यादातर गवाहों के ऐसे बयानों पर निर्भर करती है जिनकी प्रवृत्ति अफवाहों जैसी है.”

अमित शाह के विरुद्ध एक “साक्ष्य” यह भी था कि उस कालांतर में उनके द्वारा डीजी वंजारा को कई फ़ोन कॉल किये गए थे. ये काफी हास्यास्पद है कि दो लोगों द्वारा “कई बार कॉल पर बात करने” को उनके विरुद्ध एक मुख्य सबूत के तौर पर पेश किया गया. और जैसा कि जाहिर है, अदालत द्वारा इसे नकार दिया गया.

तमगड़े अपने “खुलासे” में कहते हैं- “उन तीनों के खिलाफ कुछ ठोस सबूत थे लेकिन उन्हें चार्जशीट के साथ नही फ़ाइल किया गया.” ये अपने-आप में विरोधाभाषी है क्योंकि इस से पहले उन्होंने कहा था कि उनके पास कोई दस्तावेजी सबूत नही है. इसके बाद डिफेंस वकील ने एक आवेदन दिया जिसमें कहा गया कि सीबीआई को इन बयानों को अदालत में पेश करना चाहिए. अदालत इस आवेदन पर गुरुवार को सुनवाई करेगी.

आपको ये जान लेना जरूरी है कि अदालत ने 8 अप्रैल 2013 को प्रजापति केस को सोहराबुद्दीन केस के साथ रखा था. ऐसा द वायर के ही एक लेख में बताया गया है और उसे भी इसी पत्रकार ने 20 नवम्बर 2018 को लिखा था. उस लेख में लिखा गया है:

“पूर्व मुख्य जांच अधिकारी अमिताभ ठाकुर ने इस बात से इनकार किया कि मामले में 22 अधिकारियों को फंसाने को लेकर सीबीआई निदेशक अश्विनी कुमार ने उनसे कोई पूछताछ की थी. उन्होंने इस बात से भी इनकार किया कि उनसे और उनके सीनियर डीआईजी पी. खांटास्वामी द्वारा राजनीतिक फायदे के लिए मौजूदा 20 आरोपियों को फंसाने के बारे में अश्विनी कुमार ने कोई पूछताछ की थी.

ठाकुर ने कहा कि सोहराबुद्दीन की शरीर पर कथित रुप से पाए गए 92 नोटों से संबंधित कोई चीज नहीं है और न ही इसे लेकर कोई जांच हुई थी. उन्होंने कहा कि चार्जशीट फाइल करने के लिए आरोपी अहमदाबाद एटीएस के पूर्व सब-इंसपेक्टर के खिलाफ कोई सबूत नहीं था.”

द वायर ने अपने इस लेख में आवेश में आकर यहां तक दावा किया है कि अदालत इन सबके बावजूद भी अमित शाह को तलब कर सकती है. लेख में ये भी बताया गया है कि अमित शाह को सोहराबुद्दीन मामले में अपराधमुक्त करार देकर अदालत द्वारा बड़ी किये जा चुके हैं. ऐसे विरोधाभासों से भरे लेख कई संदेहों को जन्म देते हैं.

और तो और, द वायर यहां पर एक जांच अधिकारी की भूमिका में भी नजर आता है. तमगड़े के बयानों को पेश करते हुए उसने इस बात को काफी चालाकी से नजरअंदाज कर दिया कि उन्होंने खुद इन बात को स्वीकार किया है कि उनके पास कोई दस्तावेजी साक्ष्य नही है. द वायर के लेख में लिखा है:

“यद्द्पि इस मामले के पूर्व मुख्य जांचकर्ता और सीनियर पुलिस अधिकारी अमिताभ ठाकुर अपने बयानों से नही पलटे लेकिन एक गवाह के तौर पर वो अपने जांच में पाए गए सबूतों को पेश करने में विफल रहे.”

द वायर ने ये निष्कर्ष निकाला कि सोहराबुद्दीन केस के मुख्य जांच अधिकारी अमिताभ ठाकुर के पास सबूत तो थे लेकिन वो किन्ही कारणों से उन्हें अदालत में पेश करने में विफल रहे. अगर आप तह तक जाएंगे तो पता चलेगा कि ठाकुर ने खुद कहा था कि आरोपितों में से किसी के पास इस हत्या को अंजाम देने का कोई कारण नजर नही आता. तो फिर सवाल ये उठता है कि द वायर ने फिर किस आधार पर ये निष्कर्ष नुकाल लिया.

अब द वायर के एक और फिल्मी खुलासे पर गौर करते हैं. इसमे कहा गया है:

“तमगड़े के अनुसार पालनपुर स्पेशल ऑपरेटिंग ग्रुप के सुब इनपेक्टर आशीष पांड्या ने अपने आपको इस कथित एनकाउंटर में जख्मी दिखाने के लिए अपनी बायीं बांह मे खुद ही गोली मार ली. फिर उन्होंने अपने कथन को साबित करने के लिए कुछ फोरेंसिक रिपोर्ट्स और विशेषज्ञों द्वारा निकाले गए निष्कर्षों को आधार बनाया जो ये कहता है कि ऐसे जख्म संभव हैं भले ही इन्हें खुद से किया गया हो.”

ध्यान दीजिये, “भले ही” खुद से किया गया हो. तमगड़े का कहना ये है कि आशीष पांड्या ने खुद को इस एस एनकाउंटर में जख्मी दिखाने के लिए अपनी ही बांह में गोली मार ली. हालांकि फॉरेंसिक रिपोर्ट में ये नहीं कहा गया है कि ये जख्म खुद को गोली मार कर बनाई गई थी बल्कि रिपोर्ट में ये कहा गया है कि ऐसे जख्म संभव हैं, “भले ही इन्हें” खुद से ही किया गया हो.

मूल रिपोर्ट में अंग्रेजी में यहाँ “even if” का प्रयोग किया गया है और जो अंग्रेजी अच्छे से नहीं जानते वो भी ये पढ़ कर कहेंगे कि ये फॉरेंसिक रिपोर्ट तमगड़े के कथन को साबित नहीं करता.

अब एक ऐसे पहलू कि बात करते हैं जिसका द वायर द्वारा जान-बूझ कर काफी चालाकी से जिक्र तक नहीं किया गया. अभी कुछ दिन पहले ही सोहराबुद्दीन के भाई ने खुद कहा था कि का इस केस में एक साजिश के तहत कांग्रेस के शासनकाल के दौरान 2010 में अमित शाह का नाम जोड़ा गया. सोहराबुद्दीन के छोटे भाई नयाबुद्दीन शेख ने सीबीआई की विशेष अदालत को बताया था कि सीबीआई ने उनके द्वारा 2010 में रिकॉर्ड कराए गये बयान में खुद से गुजरात पुलिस अधिकारी अभय चुडसमा और अमित शाह का नाम जोड़ दिया. उसने अदालत से कहा, ‘‘मैंने इन दोनों का कभी नाम नहीं लिया.’

थोड़ा पीछे जायें तो 2014 में अरुण जेटली ने इस बारे में बयान दिया था कि कैसे कांग्रेस सरकार और सीबीआई अमित शाह को इस केस में जबरदस्ती आरोपी बना कर नरेन्द्र मोदी पर हाँथ डालने की कोशिश में लगी हुई थी. जेटली ने अपने फेसबुक पर लिखा, “यह दुख की बात है कि सीबीआई के द्वारा अमित शाह के खिलाफ कोई सबूत न होने के इस ओपिनियन के बावजूद एक नोट लिखा गया था जिसमें शाह को गिरफ्तार करने के बाद पुलिसकर्मियों को डरा-धमकाकर केस बनाना था। मोदी को इसलिए टार्जेट किया गया क्योंकि यूपीए का असली निशाना मोदी था। यह नोट सीबीआई के डायरेक्टर अश्विनी कुमार के द्वारा अप्रूव्ड किया गया था।”

यहाँ आपको ये याद कराना जरूरी है कि सोहराबुद्दीन शेख चालीस एके-47 असाल्ट राइफल रखने का आरोपी था. ये सारे राइफल 1995 में उसके आवास से बरामद किये गये थे. उनके मारे जाने के समय तक उसके विरुद्ध कुल 60 केस लंबित थे जिनमे गुजरात और राजस्थान में मार्बल फैक्ट्रियों से रंगदारी मांगे जाने से लेकर मध्य प्रदेश में हथियारों कि तस्करी और गुजरात-राजस्थान में कई हत्याओं तक शामिल थे.

शेख एक कुख्यात अंडरवर्ल्ड अपराधी था जिनके तार शरीफखान पठान उर्फ़ छोटा दाऊद से लेकर लतीफ़ गैंग के अब्दुल लतीफ़ और दाऊद इब्राहीम के ख़ास रसूल परती और ब्रजेश सिंह तक से जुड़े हुए थे. तुलसीराम प्रजापति उसका एक काफी करीबी सहयोगी था. ये भी माना जाता है कि तुलसीराम प्रजापति सोहराबुद्दीन एनकाउंटर का एक चस्मदीद गवाह भी था.

अब द वायर इसमें इशरत जहां केस को भी लेकर आता है. उस केस की जांच भी तमगड़े ही देख रहे थे. द वायर ने उस केस के आरोपितों के भाजपाध्यक्ष अमित शाह और प्रधानमंत्री नरेन्द्र मोदी के करीबी सम्बन्ध बताकर इन दोनों को यहाँ भी घसीटने की कोशिश की. जैसा कि जाहिर है, यहाँ भी वायर ने यहां भी कुछ जरूरी बातों का जिक्र करना जरूरी नहीं समझा.

इशरत जहां लश्कर-ए-तैयबा की एक कार्यकारी थी जिसे कांग्रेस सही कुछ अन्य राजनितिक पार्टियां मानने से इनकार करती रही है. कुछ ने तो उसे “बिहार की बेटी” तक का तमगा देने में भी संकोच नहीं किया. पाकिस्तानी-अमेरिकी आतंकी दाऊद सैयद गिलानी उर्फ़ डेविड हेडली ने अदालत को ये बताया था कि इशरत लश्कर की सदस्य थी. हेडली ने कबूल किया था कि लश्कर प्रमुख जकि उर रहमान लखवी ने उसे भारत में मुजम्मिल के ऑपरेशन के बारे में बताया था. इसी ऑपरेशन के तहत नाकों पर पुलिसवालों को निशाना बनाया जाना था। हेडली ने एफबीआई द्वारा पूछताछ के दौरान भी ये खुलासा किया था. ये बार-बार खुलासा होता रहा है कि इशरत और कुछ अन्य आतंकियों ने तब गुजरात के मुख्यमंत्री नरेन्द्र मोदी की हत्या कि साजिश रची थी.

कांग्रेस द्वारा इशरत जहां एनकाउंटर केस में अमित शाह का नाम घसीटने की लाख कोशिशों के बावजूद खुद कांग्रेस के शासनकाल के दौरान ही 2013 में सीबीआई ने चार्जशीट में अमित शाह का नाम न जोड़ने का निर्णय लिया था क्योंकि उनके खिलाफ कोई सबूत ही नहीं था. फिर से 2014 में भी सीबीआई ने ये बात दुहराई थी.

आरवीएस मणि के अनुसार कमल नाथ ने उनसे शहरी विकास मंत्रालय में उनसे मुलाक़ात कर इस केस में गुजरात के तत्कालीन मुख्यमंत्री नरेन्द्र मोदी का नाम जोड़ने और “हिन्दू आतंकवाद” कि अवधारणा को बल देने को कहा था. मणि ने दावा किया था कि उनके ऊपर इशरत जहां एनकाउंटर केस में नरेन्द्र मोदी का नाम घसीटने का काफी दबाव था. उनके अनुसार उन्होंने किसी भी प्रकार के दबाव के आगे न झुकते हुए सबूतों और तथ्यों में किसी भी प्रकार के छेड़छाड़ करने से साफ़ इनकार कर दिया था.

मणि के अनुसार कमलनाथ ने आरवीएस मणि को प्रत्युत्तर देते हुए कहा था “बाहर लोग राहुल गाँधी का पेशाब पीने को तैयार हैं, आप इतना छोटा काम नहीं कर सकते हो?”

द वायर के रिपोर्ट में एक और पहलू है. अंतिम पैराग्राफ में उसके लेख में कहा गया है कि 2015 में उनकी सरकारी सुरक्षा की सुविधा हटा दी गई थी और सीबीआई द्वारा उन्हें दो मामलों में आरोपित करने की कोशिश कि गई थी जिसे आलोचकों द्वारा झूठा बताया गया था- एक अपनी ड्यूटी के विरूद्ध जाना और दूसरा एक भ्रष्टाचार की जांच वाले मामले को उलझाना.

हद तो ये है कि अपने आरोपों को साबित करने के लिए द वायर ने अपने ही एक लेख का हवाला दिया जिसे आम आदमी पार्टी के नेता रहे आशीष खेतान द्वारा लिखा गया था. वहीं आशीष खेतान के लेख में किसी भी अन्य रिपोर्ट या सोर्स का जिक्र नहीं है. हमने भी इसे लेकर पड़ताल की लेकिन द वायर के इस आरोप का कहीं और किसी भी प्रकार का रिपोर्ट नहीं मिला.

सच्चाई से मुंह चुराते और विरोधाभासो से भरे इस लेख को और कोई नहीं बल्कि कांग्रेस अध्यक्ष राहुल गाँधी ने उठाया और इसका हवाला देकर कहा कि भाजपा को “ऐसे आदमी” को अध्यक्ष नहीं बनाना चाहिए. लेकिन ये ट्वीट करते समय वो ये भूल गए कि अमित शाह तो इन आरोपों से बरी हो चुके हैं लेकिन वो खुद भ्रष्टाचार के मामले में जमानत पर बाहर हैं.

ये तो साफ़ दिख रहा है कि कांग्रेस द्वारा निर्माण किया गया वो तंत्र अब ढह रहा है जिसमे भाजपा के नेताओं पर मनगढ़ंत आरोप लगा कर किसी मामले में घसीटने की कोशिश की जाती थी और इसके साथ ही हिन्दू आतंकवाद जैसे फर्जी शब्दों को इजाद करने की कोशिश कि गई थी वो भी नाकाम होती दिख रही है. अपनी पूरी ताकत से कांग्रेस ने अपने 10 साल के शासनकाल के दौरान सारी सरकारी एजेंसियों का इस्तेमाल कर नरेन्द्र मोदी, अमित शाह जैसे अन्य भाजपा नेताओं को को फंसाने में जो ताकत झोंक राखी थी, फिलहाल वो भी असफल होती दिख रही है.

(ये लेख मूल रूप से नूपूर शर्मा द्वारा  opindia.com पर अंग्रेजी में लिखे आर्टिकल पर आधारित है)

Ayodhya, Sabarimala and Hindus

OliveGreens09
-
0
Ayodhya, Sabarimala and Hindus

SC, recently has had its hands full with issues of substantial emotive appeal including the long pending Ayodhya Case arising out of the 2010 Allahabad HC case which decided to divide the land into three parts. The Civil appeals have been pending with the SC ever since.

Secondly, a more contentious issue is the the verdict on the entry of women to the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala. Both the verdicts were delivered by the SC on two consecutive days ie., 27 and 28 September 2018 with different views.

Ayodhya Case has been in the SC since the Allahabad HC judgement in 2010 when the HC in its wisdom divided the land onto three different parties equally. Besides, the SC also had to adjudicate on the remark then made “Mosque is not an essential part of practice of Islam”!
The SC refused to consider the question of constituting a larger bench on the issue of the remark and others.

The various pro-Mandir elements voiced satisfaction and claimed Pyrrhic victory. While the elements on the other side which had so vociferously demanded a larger bench were clearly dissatisfied according to the media releases.

Very next day an immediate and very present crisis engulfed the SC with its judgement on the contentious Sabarimala issue where the question of entry of women of certain ages was in question. The SC led by the the CJI Deepak Mishra and others decided that the restriction on entry of women of certain ages was ultra vires the Constitution as it violates the Fundamental Right of Equality leading to Gender Discrimination. The judgement was passed with a majority of 4:1 with the only woman judge on the Bench dissenting.

The history behind the restrictions on entry of women notwithstanding, SC passed an order which needed acute Political and Social consciousness for its implementation, it needed the Goodwill of the pilgrims, the people and above all a responsible government.

Unfortunately, the CPIM Government in power in Kerala was more interested in subjugation of the people rather than any amicable resolution to the impasse. It arraigned its political might against the devotees, the police responded with a high handedness reserved especially for the devotees.
The aftermath of the Sabarimala judgement has literally torn the administrative fabric of the State Of Kerala. The devotees have held more than a month of protests against the decision and have not allowed a single woman to enter the Shrine at Sabarimala ever since the SC judgement on 28 September.

Sabarimala has seen the kind of mobilization not seen in Kerala for decades. State government has asserted that the SC judgement will be honoured and the State shall make every effort to ensure implementation of the SC judgement.

While the SC has granted women the Right To Worship it surely hasn’t given any leverage in the manner the Pilgrimage is conducted after a fast of 41 days. Surprisingly, the verdict stems from a petition filed by non Kerala residents who have never ever visited the Sabarimala to perform the pilgrimage. Notwithstanding the fact that the NGO Young India is headed by a Muslim, the SC decided on the Right of Equality.

Shockingly, the attempt by Rehana Fatima to enter the shrine without the requisite fasting and other traditions seems like an attempt to demean the practices laid down over the centuries. It also raises another question, why was a Muslim woman who had never ever shown any an inclination to visit the shrine was allowed to climb up. According to certain media reports the woman in question was carrying soiled sanitary pads in her basket to throw at Lord Ayyappa. This is sacrilege!

The protests have continued even as we discuss the issue of entry of women, the fact that the Sabarimala protests have even changed the tune RSS was singing some years back is evidence enough of the potential that Sabarimala has in Kerala. In 2006, RSS had stated that it was against the restrictions imposed on the women but public opinion has forced the RSS to reshape its opinion. The fact that both RSS and the BJP are actively involved in the protests is proof of the power of public opinion on Sabarimala issue in Kerala in particular.

Even as Sabarimala razes in South, the SC on 28 October, exactly one month after the Sabarimala shocker gave yet another rude jolt to the prospect of an early hearing on the Ayodhya Case. It within minutes of sitting listed the Ayodhya Case for hearing in Jan 2019.

It summarily rejected the UP government’s appeal for an early hearing on Ayodhya title case. The statement made by the SC that the Court has its own priorities hasn’t gone down well with many sections of the Hindu society.

From Hindu Seers to VHP to RSS to muted voices of discontent by the ruling dispensation have all contributed to the angst of Hindus.

The office of the CJI has come under intense scrutiny by the votaries of RamMandir in Ayodhya. The statement accordingly trivialises the entire effort of Hindus to construct a Temple at the site which has been under litigation since 1885 when Nirmohi Akhada approached the District Collector of Faizabad with a Civil suit. The RSS Press conference had pointed out both the judgements as being violating the sentiments of the majority Hindus in the country.

Especially, the remark on own priorities has been held for specific criticism by the RSS. Manmohan Vaidya has, in a veiled criticism, questioned the propriety of such a remark which plays with the emotions of a Billion Hindu. Amit Shah BJP President, too raised the issue of Sabarimala in his speech questioning the efficacy of such judgements which can’t be implemented!

SC in its wisdom has the all the Right to pronounce judgements which are equitable, fair and justice able but it raises questions on judgements as being implementable or not?

It further raises questions whether such judgements are justice able weighing them on the parameters of social and cultural traditions, norms and values. Justice being served must be equitable not blind to sensitivities of the Society.

The discredited BBC report: How it satisfies five out of six criteria of publishing false findings

shanprab
-
0
The discredited BBC report: How it satisfies five out of six criteria of publishing false findings

Recently, BBC published a report on Fake news, and summarized its findings with the words ‘Nationalism is the Key driver of Fake news in India’. The report was summarily dissected and called out for its miserably small sample size, reliance on biased sources, questionable design and definitions, and flip flops over qualitative/quantitative/ethnographic research.

In the note on the authorship, the writer claims: ‘This is a work of empirical evidence, and not of opinions’. The strong claim implies full reliance on absolute quantitative methods but is being defended as a ‘qualitative report’, which is ‘just a starting point’.

The strong rebuttal of the report led to it being taken down, and there was a hope that probably the authors will address the specific queries raised, and subsequently have an objective look at the entire report. Unfortunately, none of that happened, and without any explanations to the core issues raised, BBC was back with an ostrich like attitude of ‘We stand by our report’.

In this light, it becomes even more important to call out their report which is completely opaque on the most important points and seems to be driving an agenda. This would not have been so harmful had it been an opinion piece. But furthering a biased agenda by appropriating the word ‘research’ to it must pass through the rigor that is demanded of scientific methods.

For considered to be a work of research, any work should fulfill these criteria:

  1. The data on which the report is based must be free of sampling bias.
  2. The conclusions obtained from the data, based on suitable methodologies, must be independently verifiable and reproducible.

The articles dissecting the BBC report have already demonstrated the biased sources of this report. That alone is enough to deduce that the findings of this ‘research report’ are false. Nevertheless, let us have a detailed look at the phenomena of reports with false findings.

False research papers are flooding us continuously
A landmark paper was published in 2005 in PLoS Medicine by John PA Ionnidis on the phenomena of false findings of published research and is titled ‘Why Most Published Research Findings are False’. This paper has more than 6000 citations till date, demonstrating that published reports with false findings are an epidemic in the academic field. The paper ascribes several reasons for research paper with fake findings, which fall under the umbrella of Bias.

Bias: “It is the combination of various design, data analysis and presentation factors that tend to produce research findings when they should not be produced” is the definition of bias in this paper. The corollaries or impact of having bias in a given study are listed as follows and has been taken from the paper.

  1. The smaller the studies conducted in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true (It studies the effect of small sample size).
  2. The smaller the effect size, the less likely the research findings are to be true (analyzes how small effect distorts the findings).
  3. The greater the number, and the lesser the selection of tested relationship, the less likely the research finding is true (studies impact of pre-study bias on the final outcome).
  4. Greater the flexibility in design and definitions, the less likely the research finding are to be true.
  5. The greater the financial and other interests and prejudices, the less likely the research findings are to be true.
  6. The hotter a scientific field, the less likely the research finding are to be true.

The study shows how the above factors often seep into the publications, making their findings inaccurate or outright false. The idea of scientific rigor exists to assure the above factors have been accounted for, and the findings can be objective and verifiable. If the above points are not adhered to and biases are not systematically eliminated, it is the purported research findings which become “simply accurate measures of the prevailing Bias”.

Examining the BBC article on the above criteria of reliable research
Let’s examine the BBC article in the light of the six points discussed above, where we also take into account their response to the criticism and updated methodology as well.

1. The smaller the studies conducted in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true:
The sample size of 40 people has been defended by BBC as being a qualitative report. In contrast, in the note in authorship, they have claim that this is a work of empirical evidences and thus the conclusions are undeniable.

2. The smaller the effect size, the less likely the research findings are to be true:
The above point implies that research findings are truer with large effects, and more tending to be false with small effects. Without more transparency coming from BBC and them addressing their bias, this can explain some aspects of their ‘research findings’. It looks probable that BBC found certain instances of ‘Nationalism driving False news’ which may or may not have been significant but has amplified this finding as its main conclusion without rigorous cross check and analyzing alternate hypothesis. That is, they found some qualitative evidence for this phenomenon, and have elevated it to their main conclusion due to their confirmation bias.

3. The greater the number, and the lesser the selection of tested relationship, the less likely the research finding is true:
This means “that the post study probability that a finding is true, depends a lot on the pre study odds”. As many have pointed out, it seems entirely possible that BBC first decided its conclusion, and then set out to find the evidence for it. This aspect is supported most by the response of the BBC to its criticism, where they have without responding to the point by point criticism, have simply announced that they ‘stand with the conclusions of their articles’. The questions of bias, political affiliation of the fact-check websites, have not even been touched upon. The most glaring evidence for it comes from the fact that there is no justification for the seed handles, which are used to determine the fake news cluster. One is simply required to take the BBC word for it on face value. This can only happen if the conclusions were already determined due to the political bias of BBC. The evidence of the leftist bias of BBC is well recorded here.

4. Greater the flexibility in design and definitions, the less likely the research finding are to be true:
The article mentions that “Flexibility increases the potential for transforming what would be negative results to positive results”. BBC has staged a coup here, where they come with their criteria of ‘sources having produced at least one fake news’. There is no reference to any community wide accepted definition of ‘sources of fake news’, no attempts for its justification, and no signs of acknowledging its mistake. The definition looks tailor made to include certain seed handles and reach an already decided conclusion. The worst part is, even for their own selected criteria, they refused to bring transparency by showing the purported fake news of the listed handles for fake news.

5. The greater the financial and other interests and prejudices, the less likely the research findings are to be true
This seems to an equal contributor to their report full of false findings. It need not be elaborated here as it has been covered in detail in various links. The BBC has relied on the ‘fact-check’ website altnews and factcheck, both of whose founders have connections to the congress party, which are political rivals of BJP and have been maligned in the report. As no explanation seems to be coming from BBC on this link, the explanation which is left is the report is an outcome of such prejudice, instead of being a work of honest analysis.

6. The hotter a scientific field, the less likely the research finding are to be true.
The arrival of social media has posed a great challenge to the traditional media and has broken their hegemony. Consequent attempts of portraying social medias as conveyors of fake news have been rampant and articles about this phenomenon are appearing in traditional media with high frequency. BBC seems to be capitalizing on it by publishing shoddy research, and they might have thought it may go unchallenged due to the high volume of such articles. But the contribution of this aspect looks rather small, as honest mistakes arising due to this would have been corrected after pointing fingers at it. In the face of their political bias, we are inclined to give BBC benefit of doubt on this count.

Thus, what we find is the already discredited ‘research article’ satisfies five out of six criteria which contribute to publishing reports with false findings. It is rather unfortunate and unbecoming of this institution to have adopted an ostrich attitude and refused to honestly answer the points raised about its articles. Its response has been nothing but an eyewash and does not augur well for its further credibility.

It brings to us the most likely explanation offered in the landmark paper, that what we are observing is the quantified bias of the people who have participated in this report. Such a bias maybe forgivable for an opinion piece but appending the word ‘Research’ to it must muster questions and probes.

Can BBC salvage the situation?
There is no salvation for BBC until it comes clear of the questions of methodology to select the twitter seeds, why the particular definition of ‘sources with at least one fake news’ was chosen, the questions about the political bias and transparency of the websites altnews and factcheck etc. However, as the article mentions, ‘this may require a change in the scientific mentality, that maybe difficult to achieve’. Will BBC try to regain any of its lost honor?

Postscript: The need of Transparency
There are few glaring questions which need to be addressed by BBC in this regard on an urgent basis.
1. The BBC report builds heavily on other reports. Was the veracity and bias of its reports analyzed, or the same was accepted as it was?

2. The report lists a number of twitter handles and websites as have ‘published fake news at least one time’. Please provide the source data for this. That is, please list ‘fake news’ spread by these handles which were found to be fake. The entire exercise is meaningless without this step, and independent verification is crucial to eliminate bias.

3. Were the above handles and websites contacted with the allegation of fake news against them, and was an effort to hear their side of the story? If yes, please list their response.

4. The criteria of ‘at least one fake news’ is satisfied by multiple websites, including BBC. Do you agree or disagree with it? Please refer this article for a detailed list. On what basis was BBC excluded?

5. The website ‘The Better India’ was included in the list of handles having at least one fake news. Subsequently it was attributed to a ‘human error’. Please list why it was included initially, and how this was removed subsequently. This too is an elementary step.

6. On the criteria of ‘at least one fake new’, who was responsible for preparing the labeled data or fake news and true news. Was it an algorithm or a human? If it was a human, what steps were taken to ensure eliminating any political bias?

7. There have been lot of reports of bias against Altnews, factcheck etc. Despite the multiple evidences, why are these not labeled as source of fake news and having political bias.

8. OpIndia has been a fact checking website which has exposed multiple lies. Its editor was invited by BBC itself in the panel discussion over Fake news. Why was this website not contacted for research purpose during the research phase?

Citation
1. Why most published research findings are false: author’s reply to Goodman and Greenland. PLoS Med. 2007;4(6):e215.

Urban Naxals an emerging breed of pseudo liberal society

Shubham Singh
-
0
Urban Naxals an emerging breed of pseudo liberal society

“Urban Naxals” is a term that may seem new to many people but this represent a whole ideology. An ideology that was existing in our society and still escalating with a great speed. Vivek Agnihotri, an author and film maker has used this term in his film “Buddha in a Traffic Jam”. Movie clearly shows that today Naxalism has not only been restricted to forests and hinterlands but it has made its place to the metro cities also.

This ideology is so influencing that anyone, who may be holding a good public position or him a influencer can be under the influence of this ideology. When people hear the terms, Human Rights Activists, Professor, Intellectuals and Poet it evokes a sense of respect and nobility to all. But imagine a situation where these terms are used to hide the anti national activities? Common people will never doubt the real truth behind their ideology.

These people have carry different agenda like, to liberate Kashmir, Manipur, Assam and many other parts of the country from India. They call themselves as sympathizers of the weaker section of the society. They talk about the caste and casteism. They show sympathy towards the minority section of the country. They target the youth studying in various universities of the country and do their brainwash so that they could be misused to fulfill their agenda.

Image used in the JNU to representing “Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta”

Jawaharlal Nehru University is somewhere facing a threat of displacement from this type of ideology. It has played a major role in student politics too. Definition of liberalism and leftist is being transformed so that they could attract more and more youth. Whenever a terrorist is killed by Indian Forces these people mourn for it’s death and when Indian Forces sacrifice their lives, there is a celebration made by them.

Their ultimate goal is to throw out the Indian State Government and established Naxal rule. A document was leaked titled CPI (Maoist) – Urban Perspective which give the details about the strategies to mobilize masses in the cities and make them revolt against the government. Document clearly mentions “the cities are the strongholds of the enemy and have a large concentration of enemy forces, it is therefore necessary to counter the cities also”.

Letter Seized by Police talking about Assassination of Prime Minister (Image by ANI)

A letter was found in which they talked about the dangerous plan of assassination of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the same in which assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was done. They have plans to spread hate among the people on the name of caste and religion. Letter talked about exploiting the death of youth during the Bhima Koregoan Clash and take benefit from it.

Danger don’t just end here as Police have seized documents that shows the names of prominent leaders that were having connections to such people. They are been continuously supported by their partners like Kashmiri Terrorists, Separatist, Intelligence agencies of Pakistan and China.

It’s time for getting serious as there were plans of Infiltration by them in armed forces in order to get the key information. Document mentions “It is very important to penetrate into the military, paramilitary forces, police and other government services.”

Comrade Bikram (a wanted naxallite)

Arnab was arrested as Comrade Bikram (a wanted naxallite) charged with more than 30 cases slapped by CPI(Marxist) and TMC government. Arnab alias Comrade Bikram killed Intelligence Branch Officer Partha Biswas and his own childhood friend Soumyajit Basu, a school teacher. He was an IITian and was good at academics but he was brainwashed and got involved into Naxalite activities. Now he is incarcerated in Presidency Jail in Kolkata.

Recently five people were arrested having charges of connection with the Naxals but they were granted bail. The leftists are protesting that arresting the five activists is a form of curbing their dissent, but they fail to realise that charges of assassinating the Prime Minister is not a form of dissent.

Naxalism is the biggest threat to India. Urban Naxalism cannot be defeated only by armed forces but by the collaboration of each and every individual as enemy is living among us. We all have to identify and capture it.

कांग्रेस पी एम मोदी को अपने रास्ते से क्यों हटाना चाहती है?

RAJEEV GUPTA
-
0
कांग्रेस पी एम मोदी को अपने रास्ते से क्यों हटाना चाहती है?

जब २०१३ में मोदी जी का नाम भारतीय जनता पार्टी ने पी एम पद के लिए प्रस्तावित किया था, तब से लेकर आज तक कांग्रेस की बेचैनी लगातार बढ़ती ही जा रही है. सार्वजनिक रूप से कांग्रेस के नेता यह भले ही स्वीकार न करें, लेकिन जानते वे भी हैं कि मोदी जी स्वतंत्र भारत के सबसे पहले प्रधान मंत्री हैं जो न सिर्फ सभी मोर्चों पर सफल रहे हैं, बल्कि उनके जैसा ईमानदार नेता आज की राजनीति में ढूंढने से भी नहीं मिलेगा. कांग्रेस की कुछ परेशानी तो मोदी जी की ईमानदार नेता वाली छवि है-बाकी की परेशानी सोशल मीडिया ने बढ़ा रखी है, जो कांग्रेस के किसी भी झूठ को ज्यादा समय तक चलने नहीं देता है.

पिछले ६० सालों के अपने कुशासन में कांग्रेस ने सिर्फ एक ही चीज़ में महारथ हासिल की है-वह यह कि झूठ,छल-फरेब और मक्कारी के बल पर येन-केन-प्रकारेण देश की सत्ता पर काबिज़ हो जाओ और एक बार सत्ता हाथ लग जाये तो देश को जबरदस्त तरीके से लूटो. पिछले ४ सालों से यह लूट बंद हो गयी है- कांग्रेस के नेता, कार्यकर्त्ता और समर्थक जो इस लूट में बराबर के हिस्सेदार थे, वे सब के सब अब बेहद मायूस हो चले हैं -लेकिन जैसे कोई डूबता हुआ व्यक्ति अपने आप को बचाने के लिए हर संभव प्रयास करता है, उसी तरह राहुल गाँधी खुल्लम खुल्ला झूठ का पुलिंदा लिए घूम रहे हैं और मोदी को किसी भी तरीके से भ्रष्ट साबित करने का प्रयास कर रहे हैं लेकिन शायद उन्हें और उनके सलाहकारों को इस बात का अंदाज़ा नहीं है कि इन लोगों की हताशा और बौखलाहट देश के लोग साफ़ साफ़ देख और समझ पाने में आज पूरी तरह सक्षम हो चुके हैं. सोशल मीडिया का हथियार देश की जनता को मिल चूका है, जिसका उपयोग करके देश की जनता कांग्रेसी  छल-फरेब से अपने आप को लगातार बचा रही है.

कांग्रेस की कोई भी तिकड़म मोदी जी के खिलाफ काम नहीं कर रही है- अवार्ड वापसी, मी टू, राफेल, दलित आंदोलन, किसान आंदोलन वगैरा-वगैरा सभी नाटक फेल हो चुके हैं. सी बी आई के अफसरों को खरीदकर उन्हें मोदी सरकार के खिलाफ भड़काने के षड्यंत्र का भी पूरी तरह से पर्दाफाश हो चुका  है. अब कांग्रेस के पास सिर्फ और सिर्फ एक ही रास्ता बचा है-“मोदी को अपने रास्ते से हटाओ”. मणि शंकर अय्यर ने पाकिस्तान जाकर वहां यही गुजारिश की थी. पाकिस्तान तो मोदी को कांग्रेस के रास्ते से नहीं हटा पाया. लेकिन कांग्रेस ने भी हार नहीं मानी और उसने अरबन नक्सलियों को मोदी के हटाने की सुपारी दे दी. अरबन नक्सलियों के पास से जो दस्तावेज बरामद हुए हैं उनमे कांग्रेस के वरिष्ठ नेता दिग्विजय सिंह का फ़ोन नंबर मिलना  अपने आप में इस बात का सुबूत है कि कांग्रेस लगातार मोदी को अपने रास्ते से हटाने के लिए प्रयासरत है. अभी एक कांग्रेस के नेता ने तो साफ़ साफ़ ही कह दिया था कि मोदी को जिन्दा जला देना चाहिए.

जैसा कि मैं पहले भी कई बार अपने कई लेखों में लिख चुका हूँ कि देश सोशल मीडिया के बढ़ते प्रभाव के चलते बहुत आगे निकल चुका है और लोग बहुत ज्यादा जागरूक हो चुके हैं. कांग्रेस के नेता इस हकीकत को या तो समझ नहीं पा रहे हैं या फिर जान बूझकर अनजान बने रहना चाहते हैं. कांग्रेस को अब यह समझना होगा कि जिन हथकंडों के बल पर उसने लगभग ६० सालों तक देश को लूटा है, वह हथकंडे अब नहीं चलने वाले हैं.

1...660661662...889Page 661 of 889