Sad Story Of IAS Officer Mr.Narayanaswamy

First Rank in State in Secondary School Examination
First Rank in University in Plus Two
First Rank in IIT Entrance Examination
First Rank in All India IIT Computer Science
First Rank in IAS Entrance Examination
First Rank in IAS Training Institute

On passing out from IIT Chennai Mr. Narayanaswamy was offered scholarship by the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology , USA .. He who came from a middle class family believed that he had a moral obligation to give something in return for the lakhs of rupees the government spent on him as an IIT student. He had the intelligence and conviction to realize that this money came also from the poorest of the poor - who pay up the excise duty on textiles when they buy cloth, who pay up customs, excise and sales tax on diesel when they travel in a bus, and in numerous other ways indirectly pay the government. So he decided to join IAS hoping he could do something for the people of this country. How many young men have the will power to resist such an offer from USA ? Narayanaswamy did never look at IAS as a black money spinner as his later life bears testimony to this fact.


After a decade of meritorious service in IAS, today, Narayanaswamy is being forced out of the IAS profession. Do you know why?

A real estate agent wanted to fill up a paddy field which is banned under law. An application came up before Narayanaswamy who was sub collector the, for an exemption from this rule for this plot of land. Upon visiting the site he found that the complaint from 60 poor families that they will face water logging due to the waste water from a nearby Government Medical College if this paddy field was filled up was correct. Narayanswamy came under intense political pressure but he did what was right - refused permission for filling up the paddy field. That was his first confrontation with politicians.

Soon after his marriage his father-in-law closed down a public road to build compound wall for his plot of land. People approached Narayanaswamy with complaint.

When talking with his own father-in-law did not help, he removed the obstructing wall with police help. The result, his marriage broke up.

As district Collector he raided the house of a liquor baron who had defaulted Rupees 11 crores payment to government and carried out revenue recovery. A Minister directly telephoned him and ordered to return the forfeited articles to the house of the liquor baron. Narayanswamy politely replied that it is difficult. The minister replied that Narayanaswamy will suffer.


In his district it was a practice to collect crores of rupees for earthen bunds meant for poor farmers, but which were never constructed. A bill for rupees 8 crores came up before Narayanaswamy. He inspected the bund. He found it very weak and said that he will pass the bill after the rainy season to ensure that the bund served the purpose. As expected the earthen bund was too weak to stand the rain and it disappeared in the rain. But he created a lot of enemies for saving 8 crores public money. The net result of all such unholy activities was that he was asked to go on leave by the government. Later such an illustrious officer was posted as "State Co-Ordinator, Quality Improvement Programme for Schools". This is what the politician will do to a honest officer with backbone - post him in the most powerless position to teach him a lesson. Since he found that nothing can be achieved for the people if he continued with the State Service he opted for central service. But that too was denied on some technical ground.


What will you do when you have a brilliant computer career anywhere in the world you choose with the backing of several advanced technical papers too published in international journals to your credit?


When you are powerless to do anything for the people, why should you waste your life as the Co-Ordinator for a Schools Programme?


Mr. Narayanaswamy is on the verge of leaving IAS to go to Paris to take up a well paid United Nations assignment. The politicians can laugh thinking another obstacle has been removed. But it is the helpless people of this country who will lose - not Narayanaswamy. But you have the power to support capable and honest bureaucra ts like Narayaswamy, G.R.Khairnar and Alphons Kannamthanam who have suffered a lot under self seeking politicians who rule us. You have even the power to replace such politicians with these kind of people dedicated to the country. The question is will you do the little you can do NOW? At least a vote or word in support of such personalities?

The States Get the Bad News

(NYT)


In Kentucky, home of the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, residents woke up on Monday to news articles like these: Widespread government spending cuts that begin on Friday will cost 21,484 jobs in the state. A construction project at Fort Knox will come to a halt. Three airports may endure partial shutdowns. Nearly $12 million in grants to public schools would be cut, putting at risk the jobs of 160 teachers and aides. More than 1,000 children would lose access to Head Start.
The White House released warnings for every state on Sunday in the hope that angry voters would besiege Republican lawmakers like Mr. McConnell and the House speaker, John Boehner, to stop the $85 billion in cuts, known as a sequester. President Obama wants to replace the sequester with a mix of tax increases on the rich and less damaging spending reductions. Republicans say they won’t consider any proposal that isn’t all cuts, so the sequester is all but certain to begin this week.

The White House strategy on the sequester was built around a familiar miscalculation about Republicans. It assumed that, in the end, they would be reasonable and negotiate a realistic alternative to indiscriminate cuts. Because the reductions hurt defense programs long held sacrosanct by Republicans, the White House thought it had leverage that would reduce the damage to the domestic programs favored by Democrats.

It turns out, though, that the defense hawks in the party are outnumbered. More Republicans seem to care about reducing spending at all costs, and the prospect of damaging vital government programs does not seem to bother them. “Fiscal questions trump defense in a way they never would have after 9/11,” Representative Tom Cole, a Republican of Oklahoma, told The Times. “But the war in Iraq is over. Troops are coming home from Afghanistan, and we want to secure the cuts.”

Cuts this draconian have no place in a tottering economy. But, realistically, the only way to break this standoff is for the cuts to exact their toll on daily life, causing Republicans to face pressure from the public to negotiate an alternative plan with higher revenues in March as part of talks to finance the government for the final six months of the fiscal year.

The details the White House released over the weekend are eye-opening. In Ohio, Mr. Boehner’s home state, the cuts could cost 30,000 jobs. An 8 percent cut in federal research grants “would probably bring us to our knees,” said Dr. Thomas Boat, dean of the University of Cincinnati’s College of Medicine, according to The Cincinnati Enquirer.

New York would lose $42.7 million in education aid, according to the White House, putting at risk nearly 600 jobs for teachers and their aides. About 12,000 civilian defense workers would be furloughed, and there would be big cuts to grants for law enforcement, job training, child care, public health and environmental protection.

The White House should have released these kinds of details months ago, when there was more time to make a strong case to the public against these cuts. Instead, administration officials failed to discuss the consequences, fearing political blame while confidently predicting the Republicans would cave. The result of that miscalculation — and of the Republican disdain for the health of the economy and those who depend on government services — will become clearer in just a few days.

Oscars winners 2013: Jennifer Lawrence is just hitting her stride

(Los Angeles Times)


The lead actress winner may have stumbled on her way to the stage but not in her performance.

It's hard to believe that it was only two years ago that Jennifer Lawrence, at 20, was in the running for her first Oscar. As Ree in "Winter's Bone," Lawrence cut a swath through the bloody Ozark mountains that no one will soon forget. The film, and her Oscar nomination, was an extraordinary coming-out party.

Just as hard to believe that in such a short time — and seven films later — Lawrence is back for another round. This time with the win, taking home an Oscar for her off-kilter and impossibly energetic young widow in "Silver Linings Playbook." To breathe life into Tiffany — feisty, funny and fractured — Lawrence cut a different kind of swath. And yet another as Katniss the invincible in "The Hunger Games," though the Oscar doesn't officially credit that, or "X-Men," "Like Crazy" or the rest of her good work.

Oscars 2013: Nominee list | Red carpet | Highlights
She may have stumbled briefly on her way to the stage, but those moments are rare. It was as if the academy wanted to recognize the entire range and depth of her work, remarkable for one so young. There is a fierceness that runs through all of her performances that is refreshingly brash.

 As strangely charming, as authentic, as original as her "Silver Linings" turn was, it still feels as if Lawrence is only beginning to come into her power as an actress.

I'm not convinced hers was "the" performance of the year. Did she deserve to win? Yes. But I have a suspicion that the best is yet to come.

Spending Cuts to Start Friday in U.S. Without Compromise

(BloomBerg)


U.S. lawmakers have four days to avoid the start of across-the-board government spending cuts, known as sequestration. So far, there is little indication that President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans will reach an agreement this week.
Here are questions and answers about the cuts and where talks stand:
Enlarge image
Democrats, including U.S. President Barack Obama, are recommending that a mix of tax increases and spending cuts replace sequestration.
What is sequestration?
It’s the official name for the automatic federal spending cuts that will begin March 1. Sequestration will reduce projected spending by $85 billion over the final seven months of this fiscal year and by $1.2 trillion over the next nine years. Half of the cuts will affect defense spending; the remainder will be spread over other federal agencies.
Why has Congress come so close to the deadline?
Lawmakers can’t agree on how to prevent sequestration from starting.
Will there be immediate effects on March 1?
Probably not, in many cases. Agencies have had five months -- since the start of the fiscal year Oct. 1 -- to plan for changes, so the effects may be gradual. That makes sequestration different from a partial government shutdown like the ones that occurred in 1995 and 1996.
What are the consequences for government services?
Under sequestration, the Pentagon would furlough up to 800,000 civilian employees, requiring them to take unpaid time off. Employees must be given 30 days’ notice. Cuts at the Federal Aviation Administration and the Transportation Security Administration could mean delays at airports. Spending on child nutrition and housing vouchers also would be reduced.
What are some specific cuts that could happen?
The FAA would probably close more than 100 air-traffic control towers, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Feb. 21. The Coast Guard would reduce its presence in the Arctic by one third, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Feb. 14.
What are the economic consequences if Congress does nothing?
By the end of the year, sequestration would reduce gross domestic product by 0.6 percent and cost 750,000 jobs, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Do the cuts affect all federal spending?
No. Military pay and veterans benefits are exempt, as are Social Security benefits. Payments to Medicare providers would be cut less than other spending, with a maximum of 2 percent. Those exemptions create a disproportionate effect in other areas of the budget, such as defense contracts, meat inspection and national parks.
How big are the automatic cuts?
Compared with annual spending, the cuts will be about 8 percent for defense programs, Danny Werfel, controller at the Office of Management and Budget, told a Senate committee Feb. 14. Non-defense programs face about a 5 percent cut. Because the first year’s cuts would be made over the final seven months of fiscal 2013, the effective reductions would be about 13 percent for defense programs and 9 percent for non-defense programs, Werfel said in a Feb. 8 briefing.
How do agencies decide what to cut?
The law requires them to make equal cuts in every program. Agencies with contractual agreements they can’t break or those that spend a large share of their costs on staff may have little choice other than to implement furloughs.
“Every account has to be cut by a certain percentage,” Werfel said Feb. 8. “It’s not like the agencies can move money amongst accounts.”
Why can’t Congress stop these cuts from happening?
With a few exceptions, lawmakers say they want to avoid sequestration because its across-the-board nature is a poor way to make choices about spending cuts. The issue is that they don’t agree on how to do it.
What do Democrats want?
Democrats, including Obama, are recommending that a mix of tax increases and spending cuts replace sequestration. Obama says he wants to pursue a broader budget deal that would include a rewrite of the tax code and some cuts to health care programs.
What do Republicans want?
Republicans, noting that tax rates for top earners rose Jan. 2, say they won’t accept additional revenue as a way to replace the deficit reduction from sequestration. Instead, they say spending cuts alone, particularly in entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, should be the solution.
Have financial markets been affected?
Unlike during the tax negotiations in November and December, stocks and Treasury bonds haven’t reacted instantly to statements from congressional leaders. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index has increased 6.3 percent so far this year, as of 4 p.m. in New York on Feb. 22. Yields on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury bond increased to 1.96 percent on Feb. 22 from 1.76 percent on Dec. 31, according to Bloomberg Bond Trader prices.
Defense contractors have seen slower growth. The Standard & Poor’s Aerospace and Defense Index gained 6.8 percent in the past 12 months, trailing the 11.6 percent gain for the broader Standard & Poor’s 500 Index.
Is Congress going to vote?
The Senate is scheduling a vote as soon as this week on a $110 billion plan that would delay the cuts until January 2014. The plan relies half on spending cuts, such as ending some farm subsidies, and half on higher taxes, primarily a minimum 30 percent tax rate on top earners. The tax provision is known as the Buffett Rule after one of its leading proponents, billionaire Warren Buffett. Republicans are expected to block the proposal from coming to the floor for an up-or-down vote.
What about the House?
House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, says he will consider anything the Senate passes. Last year, the House twice passed bills to delay the automatic cuts and replace them with other spending reductions. Those bills expired when the new Congress began Jan. 3.
Would Congress be affected by the cuts?
Yes. The legislative branch would be treated like any other agency with cuts to such things as committee budgets and building maintenance. Lawmakers’ salaries wouldn’t be affected.
Why did Congress create sequestration?
Because lawmakers couldn’t come up with a better option. In August 2011, as they debated an increase in the federal debt ceiling, Republicans were demanding spending cuts equal to the size of the debt limit. Obama wanted a debt limit increase of more than $2 trillion to get past the 2012 election. Lawmakers agreed to cut about $900 billion up front and do the rest through sequestration, intending to create an outcome so unpalatable that they would come up with a way to avoid it.
Why is it called sequestration?
The name stems from a 1985 deficit-reduction law, when the across-the-board cuts were first enacted to ensure that Congress would act. In 2011, the administration proposed -- and Republicans accepted -- sequestration as the backstop to deficit reduction if a 2011 supercommittee and regular congressional rules didn’t produce results. They didn’t.
Is this the only fiscal feud?
No. A temporary measure extending government spending expires March 27, and failure to act would cause a partial government shutdown. Several months after that, the U.S. will again approach the debt limit. Any resolution to sequestration could include provisions that would address the other deadlines.

Oscars: 'Argo' wins Best Picture; Day-Lewis, Lawrence get best acting nods

(FoxNews)

Oscar has a bit of egg on its golden face.

“Argo” took home the Best Picture award during Sunday night’s Academy Awards.
The film’s director, Ben Affleck, was famously left off of Oscar’s Best Director list of nominees.
Affleck, who sped through an emotional acceptance speech, did not mention the snub, and had only kind words to say about his film's competitors.
 "There are eight great films that have every right, as much a right to be up here as we do," he said said, his voice cracking later when he thanked his wife, actress Jennifer Garner.
"Argo" had already snapped up every major award leading up to the Oscars, so its presenter may have been more of a surprise than the winner.
First Lady Michelle Obama, introduced by Jack Nicholson, appeared via satellite to announce the Best Picture award.
But "Argo" didn't hog all of the Oscar spotlight.
Daniel Day-Lewis took home the Best Actor award for his role in “Lincoln," and Jennifer Lawrence won Best Actress for "Silver Linings Playbook."
The 22-year-old was so excited she tripped and fell hard as she walked up the steps to the stage to accept her award.
"You guys are just standing up because you feel bad that I fell," she said to the audience.
Ang Lee won the best director award for "Life of Pi." It was a major upset, as Steven Spielberg had been favored for "Lincoln."
"I really want to thank you for believing this story and sharing this incredible journey with me," Lee said.
Christoph Waltz took home the first big award of the night, winning best supporting actor for his role in "Django Unchained." It was his second Oscar from his second Quentin Tarantino film. He won an Oscar for supporting actor in 2009 for "Inglourious Basterds."
Anne Hathaway took home the award for best supporting actress for her role in "Les Miserables."
Hathaway, whose perkiness helped carry her and the listless Franco through an ill-starred stint as Oscar hosts two years ago, is the third performer in a musical to win supporting actress during the genre's resurgence in the last decade.
"It came true," she said, clutching her Oscar.
There was another Oscar surprise when a tie was announced in the Sound Editing category. Teams from "Skyfall" and "Zero Dark Thirty" both took home golden statues. It was not, however, the first Academy Award tie. According to History.com, there were ties in 1943, 1949 and 1986.
But the big winners of the night were perhaps slightly overshadowed by the show's controversial host and seemingly endless musical performances.
Seth MacFarlane, of “Family Guy” fame, kicked off the ceremony by pushing the crudeness envelope early-on, but Captain Kirk -- yes Captain Kirk -- wasn’t having it.
William Shatner, dressed as his "Star Trek" character, appeared on a screen less than 10 minutes into the telecast to cut off what he called MacFarlane’s offensive jokes.
Shatner said he was coming from the future to “stop you from destroying the Academy Awards.” He then went on to hold up a news article that read “Seth MacFarlane Worst Oscar Host Ever.”
As the night began, MacFarlane took jabs at Mel Gibson, Jodie Foster, Chris Brown and Rihanna. His jokes were met with mixed applause and scattered laughs from the celebrity audience.
Following MacFarlane's initial show introduction, the Oscars quickly took turned into a musical extravaganza, as promised.
A series of musical numbers were presented as a salute to movie musicals of the last decade. Daniel Radcliffe, Jennifer Hudson and Catherine Zeta Jones were among the night's performers.
The star-studded cast of “Les Miserables” also took the Oscar stage to perform, including Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Russell Crowe, Helena Bonham Carter and Amanda Seyfried.
Their performance received a standing ovation.
Adele entertained the Oscar audience in a much-anticipated performance of her hit "Skyfall." The performance was part of a tribute to the James Bond franchise, which celebrated its 50th anniversary this year. She later won the award for best original song.
Earlier in the night, 76-year-old Shirley Bassey got a standing ovation after she belted out "Goldfinger" for the 007 tribute.

All of those performances took their toll on the show’s running length, however, which went about 35 minutes past its promised three-hour run time.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/02/24/oscars-are-predictable-wild-card-seth-macfarlane/#ixzz2Lt65hNqi

Bhopal Archbishop Leo Cornelio Granted Bail

(UCANews)


Judge Sharma directed the accused to furnish a bond of 10,000 rupees (US$183) each, remain in the country and cooperate with the court’s investigation.
Bhopal:
Three Church officials including the Archbishop of Bhopal, accused of attempting to poison a fellow priest, were granted anticpatory bail on Thursday.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Sriram Sharma granted bail to Archbishop Leo Cornelio, his vicar general Father Mathew VC and diocesan spokesperson Father Jonhy PJ.

The court case was first registered on February 7 on behalf of Father Anand Muttungal, former archdiocesan spokesperson, who alleged that the three men had conspired to use unnecessary medicines to make him think that he was mentally unbalanced.

Fr Muttungal has claimed that the conspiracy was in response to previous allegations of financial mismanagement that he had brought against the archbishop and others in the archdiocese.

Archbishop Cornelio and his co-defendants have all denied any wrongdoing. The court is set to hear the case on March 1.

Judge Sharma directed the accused to furnish a bond of 10,000 rupees (US$183) each, remain in the country and cooperate with the court’s investigation.

Counsel for Fr Muttungal objected to the granting of bail on the grounds that the accused posed a threat to his client because of their positions of leadership in the archdiocese.

The court ruled that the accused had no criminal history and granted the bail request.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Association of Bhopal has planned a candlelight procession on the grounds of the Bhopal parish church to show solidarity with the accused archbishop and his colleagues.

“The issue should have been settled within the Church and should never have gone to civil court,” said Daniel John, president of the association. “As head and father of the local Church, it is impossible that the archbishop indulged in any such alleged activities.”

He added that local parishioners hope the case will ultimately be withdrawn and settled amicably out of court.

Inquisition Comes Knocking, Again

Manish Manjul 

Those of you, who do not have the time or inclination to read the 'Prevention of Communal and targeted violence' bill, it is time to wake up. It will divide the entire nation into two communities. One the majority community and all other will be the 'elite' communities.

First of all, it is said to be a bill, which will try to solve 'communal riots' and save the 'secular fabric of the nation' (whatever it means).
Section 3(c) “communal and targeted violence” means and includes any act or series of acts, whether spontaneous or planned, resulting in injury or harm to the person and or property, knowingly directed against any person by virtue of his or her membership of any group, which destroys the secular fabric of the nation;

Now, anyone who has the faintest idea of our IPC and CrPC, knows that there are ample provisions to take care of such crimes. What is needed is the correct implementation of these provisions and removal of the draconian laws, without dividing the nation into warring communities.

Then what is the idea of another bill?

The answer to the question lies in section 3(e)
Section 3(e) “group” means a religious or linguistic minority, in any State in the Union of India, or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes within the meaning of clauses (24) and (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution of India;
Read the two paragraphs together. Slow. Real slow.


You will find out that according to this act, killing, plundering, hurting or raping Majority population is not 'communal or targeted violence'.

The intention behind the act will become clearer when one reads the definition of 'victim':
(j) “victim” means any person belonging to a group as defined under this Act, who has suffered physical, mental, psychological or monetary harm or harm to his or her property as a result of the commission of any offense under this Act, and includes his or her relatives, legal guardian and legal heirs, wherever appropriate;
Thus, if you are a Hindu, living in the only country where you are a majority, you or your wife, children, parents, siblings or any relatives may be butchered, raped or burnt to death by fanatics of other aggressive religions and still you or the poor wretches who have suffered, will not be considered victims. In Godhra, 58 Hindu men, women and children were burnt alive by a mob of Muslims. Instead of admitting that the fault lies in ideologies based on fanatical books, which promote hatred and senseless killing of innocents, this law will protect them because Hindus will not even be considered to be victims.

If you think I am stretching it a bit, dekho:
7. Sexual assault.– A person is said to commit sexual assault if he or she commits any of the following acts against a person belonging to a group by virtue of that person’s membership of a group
Thus, if you are a Hindu woman, you are fair game for anyone and everyone of the 'elite' communities. If Hindu women are raped or molested, it will not be considered a 'sexual assault'. What will it be ? A friendly game ?
When Manmohan Singh had said "Muslims have first right on the resources of the nation", did he mean the honor of Hindu women also?

May be. Did he forget to mention Christians, who are becoming more and more aggressive by every passing day.

Then there is a term called 'mass rape' in this very section of the act:
Explanation 1– For the purposes of this section, mass rape means the rape of more than one woman belonging to any group.
How very thoughtful! If one or more Hindu women are raped (like hundreds were raped in Kashmir), and they go to a police station, they will not be considered victims, nor they have been sexually assaulted and neither they have been mass raped.

Are they 'resources', to be plundered by the 'elite' communities?

Most of the nation knows the name 'Godhra riots' or 'Gujarat riots', but have limited knowledge of the chronology of the events. It is a good time to take a closer look at those horrible riots.


It so happened that on 27/02/02, a coach of Sabarmati Express was burnt by Muslim fanatics. The coach was carrying Men, Women and Children from their pilgrimage at Ayodhya. All Hindus. Charred to death. Read the full report of Justice Tewatia here. If this draconian and partisan act comes into force, those poor families, who suffer enormously due to the loss of a near and dear, will not be even considered as victims.

Can there be anything more cruel then this?

The only section, which considers the majority community as the citizens of the country is section 90.
90. Right to relief, reparation, restitution and compensation.- (1) All persons, whether or not they belong to a group as defined under this Act, who have suffered physical, mental, psychological or monetary harm or harm to his or her property as a result of the commission of any offence under this Act, and when death has occurred as a consequence thereof, the next of kin of such deceased person shall be entitled to relief, reparation, restitution and compensation as applicable to them in accordance with the provisions under this Chapter.
 Relief under this section will be granted not only to religious and linguistic minorities, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes but also to non-minorities and non-Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes affected by communal and targeted violence.
Look at the tenor of the statement - 'but also to'. As if they are being very magnanimous.
Sick bastards.
Now, why did they have to insert this section here. To take us for a ride. This section will be used by the propaganda machinery of the divisive forces to hide the monstrosity of the act. Articles will be planted in newspapers and double faced speakers will be planted in 'panel discussions' on TV channels, where they will read only this section to prove the 'good intentions' of the sickulars and the benign nature of the bill.

This bill proposes the setting up of a NATIONAL AUTHORITY FOR COMMUNAL HARMONY, JUSTICE AND REPARATION. The name seems really touchy, emotional and all full of empathy. Let me remind my compatriots that we have had such an office in our country earlier also. It was also given a very beautiful name. The name was 'HOLY OFFICE'.

The parallel that one can draw with this bill in history is during the period of Inquisition. This dreaded tribunal was operational from 1562 to 1812 in our country. During all these years, the Hindu populace had to suffer at the hands of Christian as well as Muslim rulers. The similarities are strikingly similar.


Here is how the Office of Inquisition (called holy office) was installed:
Before beginning to use the holy office of the Inquisition, persons to hold the following posts should be found out and selected: First, an advocate to work as promoter; and an apostolic notary, who should be a priest if one can conveniently be found, and, if not, a layman who should be an apostolic notary or a clerk of his majesty or belong to the ecclesiastical auditorium, whosoever may appear best qualified and most suitable; and also a meyrinho (officer of apprehended malefactor), who may be an ecclesiastic if one is available and a solicitor who would also serve as a gate keeper and a jailor. All these officers should be Old Christians, god fearing persons deserving of confidence who can keep secrets.

It should be easy to guess that the aim of this 'HOLY OFFICE' was to suppress those who were of different religion from Christianity. It has been wiped out of our history books by the ruling crooks but one can read all the glory of this 'holy office' in 'The Goa Inquisition' by A.K.Priolkar, published by 'Voice of India'. It is based on the church and Portuguese documents.

Now, let us compare the 'holy office' with the proposed setting up of National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation.-
(1) The Central Government shall constitute a body known as the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation to exercise the powers and perform the functions assigned to it under this Act.

(3) The National Authority shall consist of a Chairperson, a Vice-Chair-person and five other Members.

Provided that, at all times, not less than four Members, including the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson, shall belong to a group as defined under this Act.

Provided further that, at all times, there shall be –

1. one Member belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes;
2. four women, whether Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson or Member;
(2) No person shall be eligible to be appointed as a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson or Member of the National Authority if: (b) he or she has, in any manner, exhibited bias against any group, by acts or in writing or otherwise;

This effectively means that one can go on deriding Hindu religion, its followers and practices like missionaries have been doing for so many centuries. No one will call you biased. But the moment you will write anything criticizing (even genuine) any member, doctrine or dogma of the elite community, you will become ineligible.
This is not only theoretical but, as you will see, all those on drafting team are virulent when it comes to Hindu religion. But we will talK about that a little later.

Back to Inquisition and the present bill. The officers of the 'holy office' were considered above even the viceroy in those days. When the Inquisitor came from Portugal, he was provided the rulers residence.
Now, let us look at the power that this extra constitutional 'Authority' is asking for its gangsters to frighten 83% of Hindus.
29. Officers and other staff of the National Authority.- (1) The Central Government shall make available to the National Authority such police and investigative staff under an officer not below the rank of a Director General of Police and such other officers and staff as the National Authority may deem necessary for the efficient performance of its functions.
Just like Inquisition and Inquisitor was above all other rulers, if this authority comes into being, it will be above all other posts. Elected or Selected. Not below the rank of DGP?
What a joke! Is there any rank above that in Indian Police.

During the centuries, when Hindus lived like scared mice, they were tortured according to the whims and fancies of the Inquisitors. The regulations laid out were:
The Archbishop with the said deputies with such other theologians and canonists, as he may consider necessary, shall decide the final sentences and the interlocutory orders of torture.
If you have not got the import of this sentence, it means that the Christian fathers and bishops were the gangsters who decided the modes of torture to the poor Hindus, Muslims and Jews captured. Just that now, it will be exclusively for Hindus.

Am I being alarmist? Am I scaring the s*** out of you?

Let us look at the relevant sections. That would be section 12:
12. Torture.– Whoever, being a public servant, or under the control or direction of or with the acquiescence of a public servant, intentionally inflicts pain or suffering, whether mental or physical, on a person belonging to a group by virtue of his or her membership of a group, including causing grievous hurt or danger to life, limb or health or sexual assault, for the purposes of obtaining from him or her or a third person information or a confession or punishing him or her for an act he or she or a third person committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or her or a third person, is said to inflict torture.
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply to any pain, hurt or danger as aforementioned caused or inflicted in accordance with law.

So, if you do not belong to a group i.e. 'elite communities', which in plain language means that you are a Hindu, intentionally inflicted pain or suffering, physical or mental is not said to be torture. That is what heathens are meant for. Ain't it?

In the days of Inquisition, torturing the natives of our country was approved by 'ecclesiastical  persons'. The equipments they used for torture were really ingenious. Here is one example of the instruments of 'holy office'.

The above pictures show the chairs used to interrogate the unlucky heretics. These are the real ones, now placed in museums, the world over. Heretics are all those who do not behave according to the dogmas of church. The merriam webster dictionary defines a heretic as - a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth.

Thus all Hindu practices were considered heresy and all Hindus were considered heretics. It is just a coincidence that Sonia Gandhi, under whose guidance, the bill has been drafted is also an alleged Roman Catholic.

Therefore, just like the good old days of Inquisition, the torture that will be inflicted on Hindus will be considered 'mercy'. After all, they are lowly heathens, immersed in idolatry. They deserve this.
Let us move on with the bill. The section 82 says that:
82. Attachment of property.- (1) Where the charge has been framed in relation to an offence under this Act, the Designated Judge may direct that the property of the accused person be attached during the pendency of the trial and until conviction or acquittal, as the case may be.
Now, this must be a first of its kind for riots because usually such a provision is used for crimes in which the accused is assumed to have amassed wealth by ill gotten means, like sale of narcotics. On second thoughts, it is not the first of its kind. The Church knew such tactics very well. It seems the framers of the law or their handlers, working from behind the curtains had with them, the instructions manual of Inquisition. The manual of Inquisition says:
When a person is arrested for the crime of heresy, his entire property, whether moveable or immoveable, will be sequestrated and deposited in charge of persons of sound credit.
Persons of sound credit! Which would have been Christians only.
Now, the list will include everyone else, accept Hindus.

The missionaries have always been smart, they perpetrated their crimes by making laws that suited their agenda. The procedure of Inquisition was that anyone could go and tell the 'fathers' of Inquisition about the 'heresy' committed by anyone. The accused would be arrested. He would not be told about his crime nor about the complainant. He was supposed to 'confess' his crime. If the poor guy could not even think of any 'heresy' committed by him, the helping 'fathers' were always there to encourage him with their torture instruments. Thus, the onus of innocence was on the accused.

Our seculars have also devised the law based on the same lines.
74. Presumptions as to offences under this Act.- (1) If in a prosecution for any offence committed under this Act, it is shown that the accused committed or abetted or conspired to commit the offence of hate propaganda under section 8, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the offence committed was knowingly directed against a person by virtue of his or her membership of a group.
So, the premise of justice has been inverted from 'Innocent unless proven guilty' to Guilty unless proven innocent'.
Just like the 'fathers' of Inquisition, this bill intends to provide unbirdled power to the few selected persons of the 'elite' communities over Hindu men and women. Remember the adage Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. How the women were victims of the 'sex starved fathers' armed with such powers can be read here and here.

The similarities between the Inquisition manual and the proposed bill are stikingly similar, the changes, wherever they appear are just cosmetic. Let us look at another aspect of injustice.

Just like during Inquistion, the identity of the victim is to be kept a secret. Section 40.
40. Identity of victim and informant to be protected.- The National Authority shall take appropriate action to protect the identity of the victim or informant at all times.
and also in section 87
87. Protection of victims, informants and witnesses
(4) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (1), a Designated Judge may, on an application made by a victim, informant or witness in any proceedings before it or by the Special Public Prosecutor in relation to such victim, informant or witness or on its own motion, take such measures including:
(a) not mentioning the names and addresses of the witnesses in its orders or judgments or in any records of the case accessible to the public;
(b) issuing directions for non-disclosure of the identity and addresses of the witnesses;
That means, if any man or woman decides to ruin the life of Hindu, he/she has just to go to the nearest cop and tell him that he/she has been mentally tortured by 'such and such' act of the accused, the poor Hindu will find him behind bars for a cognizable/non bailable  offense. He will not be told about the name of the accuser. On top of it, he will have to prove his innocence.

Or think of another scenario, if a Hindu employer fires an inefficient employee belonging to any of the 'elite' communities, he can be 'taught a lesson' by the disgruntled employee because the guilt is presumed in this act.

This list of stupidities in built in the bill are illustrative and not exhaustive. They should be sufficient to give one the general drift of the thinking behind the 'drafting' (or should it be called fabricating) the bill.
This bill has been prepared by an entity called 'National Advisory Council' headed by Antonia Maino a.k.a. Sonia Gandhi. She has hand picked a band of seculars, who are going to protect the 'secular fabric' of our country. These sickulars have spent more then six years in drafting this perverted act.

The question is whether the act is perverted or the drafters are perverted?
But, who are these sickulars, for whom 'secular fabric' means putting 85% of the nations populace at the whims of fanatics of other religions?
Will talk about them some other time. In the mean time, you can read a little bit about Harsh Mander, one of the faces behind this monstrosity here.

Modi bats for dalits to solemnize Hindu weddings

(TOI)


GANDHINAGAR: That Dalits are not even allowed entry into temples in some pockets of Gujarat has not stopped the Narendra Modi government from coming up with the revolutionary idea of training 'safai kamdars' or manual scavengers in karma-kand (Hindu religious rituals).


The move was endorsed by the state budget presented in the assembly earlier this week—a couple of days after BSP chief Mayawati announced her prime-ministerial ambitions, throwing her hat into a ring already occupied by Modi's.
Gujarat's social justice department has proposed a new provision in the budget to train safai kamdars in Vedic religious rituals, a Brahmin monopoly till now. A provision of Rs 22.50 lakh has been made for the programme in the budget for 2013-14.

The move is aimed at helping Modi, himself belonging to an OBC caste, gain greater support among backward castes across the country. It is learnt that Modi plans to attend marriage ceremonies solemnized by priests from the most oppressed of all Dalit communities.
Under the proposed scheme, safaikamdars and their children will be trained for karma-kand at reputable institutions such as SolaBhagvatVidyapith and Somnath Sanskrit University. "The government will ensure reasonable employment through this training," said an official.
Dalit-rights activists have welcomed the decision. "The move is reformist," said ManjulaPradeep of Dalit-rightsorganisationNavsarjan. "We appreciate it. The state government should seriously address issues such as untouchability, ban on the entry of Dalits in temples, social and economic boycott, forced migration and manual scavenging."

Recently, about 100 Dalit families of Galsana village in Ahmedabad were prevented from entering the village temple, leading to clashes between communities. In September, the state government's role was criticized when three Dalit youths were killed in police firing in Thangadh in Surendranagar.

The languages of jihad-Islamic extremists are an increasingly multilingual bunch

(The Economist)

Islamic extremists are an increasingly multilingual bunch, especially online

ARABIC was for long the unchallenged language of Islamic extremism. Its speakers far outnumber any other linguistic group. Arab lands are the most fruitful recruiting grounds. Without Arabic, tyros may struggle at training camps and on the battlefield. And fluency implies piety: the language of the Koran also connotes learning and wisdom.

But the once monoglot world of jihad is increasingly multilingual. Al-Qaeda has long advocated the creation of self-starting, independent terrorist cells. Materials are being produced in the language of any part of the world that has a Muslim minority and thus potential sympathisers, says Thomas Hegghammer, an expert on violent extremism. Translations are appearing in the languages of countries where jihadist leaders want to see further activity.

In his 1,600-page opus, “The Call to Global Islamic Resistance”, released in 2005, Abu Musab al-Suri, an al-Qaeda strategist, called for jihadi materials to be released in other tongues, including English. Over the past ten years grassroots activists who connect with each other online have published ever more on the internet in an ever greater variety of languages, says Aaron Zelin, a research fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who runs a website called Jihadology.

Groups such as Fursan al-Balagh Media and Al Qadisiyah Media (which specialises in Asian languages such as Bengali, Hindi and Urdu) translate jihadi propaganda. In one document Abu Musab Abdel Wadoud, leader of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, warns Western powers considering action in Mali: “If you want it [sic] a war then we will meet your desire and the Great Sahara will be the grave of your soldiers and an annihilation for your money, Allah willing.” Organisations such as the Global Islamic Media Front, a virtual entity, then vet such stuff and distribute it. The international version of Ansar al-Mujahidin, a big online forum, is a clamour of different languages. English is foremost, but publications are also available in Albanian, Bosnian, Filipino, French, German, Italian, Pushtu, Spanish, Urdu and Uighur.

Militant groups need to reach enemies as well as possible friends. Threats lose their impact if the infidels do not understand the scolding. On the Ansar forum an al-Qaeda statement condemns the intervention in Mali of “crusader France” and threatens retribution—in French as well as English.

Effective public-relations campaigns require not only English, but also the use of social media. Hence the eagerness of the al-Qaeda-linked Shabaab militia that controls most of south Somalia to tweet in English. Fewer than 5,000 people follow its Arabic Twitter feed (and under 500 follow the Somali one). But more than 20,000 subscribed to the English tweets by the time Twitter closed the account in January (it had carried threats to kill two Kenyan hostages if the Kenyan government did not respond to the group’s demands). A new account set up this month gained 2,000 followers in a week. Its tweets have lost none of the old menace. “Arm yourself,” urges one, “a #Mujahid would loathe to fight the unarmed.”

Rahul Gandhi Slammed by Bihar Students in Gujarat Remarks

Bihar students force Rahul Gandhi to flee campus -


DARBHANGA — Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi, who is on a two-day visit to Bihar widely dubbed as an exercise to test the waters, had to leave Darbhanga after students of Lalit Narayan Mithila University got agitated over his Gujarat remarks.
Apparently to woo Muslim students, the son of Congress president Sonia Gandhi reportedly said, “India can change only if Gujarat changed first.”The students created ruckus accusing the scion of the Nehru-Gandhi family of doing politics in university campus. They asked him to abstain from making political utterances and that the campus was not a platform for such meetings.
Protesting students shouted, “There is Congress government in Maharashtra and you also have the government at Centre, but why do you keep your mouth shut when Biharis are beaten in Mumbai. Don’t ever come to Bihar to play your cheap and hypocritical politics.”

Gandhi had to apologize as Congress leaders present at the venue failed to calm down the angry students. He, finally, had to leave the campus as students refused to listen to him.

Earlier, he arrived in Bettiah in West Champaran district and drove to Bhitharwa Ashram from where Mahatma Gandhi had launched the Satyagraha movement in 1917.
Gandhi, who is expected to address more youth meetings in the state to galvanize party workers ahead of the polls, said,”Congress will contest on its own in the Assembly elections.”
Later, he will visit Bodh Gaya in Gaya district to meet Dalit youth. In the evening, Gandhi will visit Patliputra to meet Congress leaders at the party headquarters Sadaquat Ashram.

He will interact with girl students at a college in the city.With the Youth Congress having launched a membership drive on January 12, Gandhi will interact with potential candidates at several places.
The Congress managed to win only two out of Bihar’s 40 parliamentary seats in last year’s general election.

(With inputs from Agencies)



Student -Hamreh professor saab bolrahe theh political baat nahi honi chaheye university meh, phir tum political baat kyu ker raha hai....Maharashtra meh congress sarkar hai..kya kerteh woh bihario keh leyeh....
Rahul gandhi.-"mehne galti seh gujrat boldeya sorry".watch this video..
------

Student: Our professor said there should be no political talk, then why are you talking about Gujarat. A student from Bihar was killed in Mumbai. There is a Congress government at the Centre and in Maharashtra, what are you doing for students from BIhar

Rahul Gandhi: It's my mistake, I said Gujarat instead of Bihar by mistake

Student: When will Bihar improve to the standards of Maharashtra and Mumbai

Rahul Gandhi: I will tell you when it will improve, Bihar's situation will change on the day you change it

----------
Well done bihari student. Hats off to you.
Gujarat has highest GDP growth rate and Rahul wants to change it?
so strange. Does he wants Gujarat to stop growing ?Why cant Congress rules state develop at the rate Gujarat is developing? Lokk wat happeing to mumbai in rule of congress ...I know Rahul is uneducated(fake certificate he maded from london university az by madars high court who challenge rahul university certficate),, but he can read some magazine,journal and news paper at least.

He is just frustated as The Congress managed to win only two out of Bihar’s 40 parliamentary seats in last year’s general election.
And Bihar under Nitish rule, has become 2nd fastest growing state after Gujrat under Modi. We should always acknowledge good leadership and progressive government. Rahul, I think before he make statement just read a little bit and try to understand development because now Indian will no longer vote for “reservation” . India will vote for development.

Read more: http://www.unp.me/f46/rahul-gandhi-slammed-by-bihar-students-on-gujarat-remarks-68939/#ixzz2LmZUOslW

To Fight India, We Fought Ourselves

(NYTimes)



By MOHSIN HAMID
LAHORE, Pakistan

ON Monday, my mother’s and sister’s eye doctor was assassinated. He was a Shiite. He was shot six times while driving to drop his son off at school. His son, age 12, was executed with a single shot to the head.

Tuesday, I attended a protest in front of the Governor’s House in Lahore demanding that more be done to protect Pakistan’s Shiites from sectarian extremists. These extremists are responsible for increasingly frequent attacks, including bombings this year that killed more than 200 people, most of them Hazara Shiites, in the city of Quetta.

As I stood in the anguished crowd in Lahore, similar protests were being held throughout Pakistan. Roads were shut. Demonstrators blocked access to airports. My father was trapped in one for the evening, yet he said most of his fellow travelers bore the delay without anger. They sympathized with the protesters’ objectives.

Minority persecution is a common notion around the world, bringing to mind the treatment of African-Americans in the United States, for example, or Arab immigrants in Europe. In Pakistan, though, the situation is more unusual: those persecuted as minorities collectively constitute a vast majority.

A filmmaker I know who has relatives in the Ahmadi sect told me that her family’s graves in Lahore had been defaced, because Ahmadis are regarded as apostates. A Baluch friend said it was difficult to take Punjabi visitors with him to Baluchistan, because there is so much local anger there at violence toward the Baluch. An acquaintance of mine, a Pakistani Hindu, once got angry when I answered the question “how are things?” with the word “fine” — because things so obviously aren’t. And Pakistani Christians have borne the brunt of arrests under the country’s blasphemy law; a governor of my province was assassinated for trying to repeal it.

What then is the status of the country’s majority? In Pakistan, there is no such thing. Punjab is the most populous province, but its roughly 100 million people are divided by language, religious sect, outlook and gender. Sunni Muslims represent Pakistan’s most populous faith, but it’s dangerous to be the wrong kind of Sunni. Sunnis are regularly killed for being open to the new ways of the West, or for adhering to the old traditions of the Indian subcontinent, for being liberal, for being mystical, for being in politics, the army or the police, or for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

At the heart of Pakistan’s troubles is the celebration of the militant. Whether fighting in Afghanistan, or Kashmir, or at home, this deadly figure has been elevated to heroic status: willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, able to win the ultimate victory, selfless, noble. Yet as tens of thousands of Pakistanis die at the hands of such heroes, as tens of millions of Pakistanis go about their lives in daily fear of them, a recalibration is being demanded. The need of the hour, of the year, of the generation, is peace.

Pakistan is in the grips of militancy because of its fraught relationship with India, with which it has fought three wars and innumerable skirmishes since the countries separated in 1947. Militants were cultivated as an equalizer, to make Pakistan safer against a much larger foe. But they have done the opposite, killing Pakistanis at home and increasing the likelihood of catastrophic conflicts abroad.

Normalizing relations with India could help starve Pakistani militancy of oxygen. So it is significant that the prospects for peace between the two nuclear-armed countries look better than they have in some time.

India and Pakistan share a lengthy land border, but they might as well be on separate continents, so limited is their trade with each other and the commingling of their people. Visas, traditionally hard to get, restricted to specific cities and burdened with onerous requirements to report to the local police, are becoming more flexible for business travelers and older citizens. Trade is also picking up. A pulp manufacturer in Pakistani Punjab, for example, told me he had identified a paper mill in Indian Punjab that could purchase his factory’s entire output.

These openings could be the first cracks in a dam that holds back a flood of interaction. Whenever I go to New Delhi, many I meet are eager to visit Lahore. Home to roughly a combined 25 million people, the cities are not much more than half an hour apart by plane, and yet they are linked by only two flights a week.

Cultural connections are increasing, too. Indian films dominate at Pakistani cinemas, and Indian songs play at Pakistani weddings. Now Pakistanis are making inroads in the opposite direction. Pakistani actors have appeared as Bollywood leads and on Indian reality TV. Pakistani contemporary art is being snapped up by Indian buyers. And New Delhi is the publishing center for the current crop of Pakistani English-language fiction.

A major constraint the two countries have faced in normalizing relations has been the power of security hawks on both sides, and especially in Pakistan. But even in this domain we might be seeing an improvement. The new official doctrine of the Pakistani Army for the first time identifies internal militants, rather than India, as the country’s No. 1 threat. And Pakistan has just completed an unprecedented five years under a single elected government. This year, it will be holding elections in which the largest parties all agree that peace with India is essential.

Peace with India or, rather, increasingly normal neighborly relations, offers the best chance for Pakistan to succeed in dismantling its cult of militancy. Pakistan’s extremists, of course, understand this, and so we can expect to see, as we have in the past, attempts to scupper progress through cross-border violence. They will try to goad India into retaliating and thereby giving them what serves them best: a state of frozen, impermeable hostility.

They may well succeed. For there is a disturbing rise of hyperbolic nationalism among India’s prickly emerging middle class, and the Indian media is quick to stoke the fires. The explosion of popular rage in India after a recent military exchange, in which soldiers on both sides of the border were killed, is an indicator of the danger.

So it is important now to prepare the public in both countries for an extremist outrage, which may well originate in Pakistan, and for the self-defeating calls for an extreme response, which are likely to be heard in India. Such confrontations have always derailed peace in the past. They must not be allowed to do so again. In the tricky months ahead, as India and Pakistan reconnect after decades of virtual embargo, those of us who believe in peace should regard extremist provocations not as barriers to our success but, perversely, as signs that we are succeeding.

Mohsin Hamid is the author of the novels “The Reluctant Fundamentalist” and the forthcoming “How to Get Filthy Rich in Rising Asia.”

U.S. Catholics Divided On Church’s Direction Under New Pope

(PEW Forum)

As the pontificate of Benedict XVI winds down, many American Catholics express a desire for change. For example, most U.S. Catholics say it would be good if the next pope allows priests to marry. And fully six-in-ten Catholics say it would be good if the next pope hails from a developing region like South America, Asia or Africa.

At the same time, many Catholics also express appreciation for the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. While about half of U.S. Catholics (46%) say the next pope should “move the church in new directions,” the other half (51%) say the new pope should “maintain the traditional positions of the church.” And among Catholics who say they attend Mass at least once a week, nearly two-thirds (63%) want the next pope to maintain the church’s traditional positions.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Feb. 13-18 among 1,504 adults (including 304 Catholics) also finds that nine-in-ten U.S. Catholics have heard a lot (60%) or at least a little (30%) about Benedict’s resignation. Just one-in-ten Catholics say they have heard nothing at all about his resignation.

In a separate national survey conducted Feb. 14-17 among 1,003 adults (including 212 Catholics), three-quarters of U.S. Catholics (74%) express a favorable view of the pope. Benedict’s ratings among Catholics now stand about where they were in March 2008 (just before his U.S. visit) and are lower than they were in April 2008, when 83% of U.S. Catholics expressed favorable views of him. Benedict’s predecessor, Pope John Paul II, was rated favorably by upwards of 90% of U.S. Catholics in three separate Pew Research polls in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

U.S. Catholics voice dissatisfaction with Benedict’s handling of the sex abuse scandal in the church. Among Catholics who say they followed news of the pontiff’s resignation, nearly two-thirds (63%) think he has done a poor or “only fair” job of addressing the sex abuse scandal, while 33% give him excellent or good ratings for his handling of the issue. Benedict gets better marks for his handling of interfaith relations; 55% of Catholics say he has done a good or excellent job promoting relations with other religions, while 37% say he has done a poor or “only fair” job in this area. But the public is more negative now than in 2008 in its views both on Benedict’s handling of the sex abuse scandal and on his handling of interfaith relations. Immediately following his 2008 visit to the U.S., 49% of American Catholics gave the pope good or excellent ratings for his handling of the sex abuse scandal, and 70% said he was doing a good or excellent job promoting interfaith relations.

A Look Ahead to the Next Pope 

Half of U.S. Catholics (51%) say the next pope should maintain the traditional teachings of the church, while about the same number say the next pope should move the church in new directions (46%).

But among Catholics who say they attend Mass at least once a week, nearly two-thirds (63%) say the new pope should maintain the traditional positions of the church, while about one-third (35%) say the new pope should move the church in new directions. By contrast, among those who attend Mass less often, 54% say the next pope should move in new directions while 42% prefer to maintain the church’s traditional positions.

Six-in-ten Catholics who are college graduates say the next pope should move the church in new directions, compared with 38% who say the pope should maintain the church’s traditional positions. This balance of opinion is reversed among Catholics with some college or less education, among whom 56% want the church to maintain its traditional positions and 41% would like it to move in new directions.

There is little evidence of a generation gap on this question. Among Catholics under age 50 and those ages 50 and older, opinion is closely divided as to whether the new pope should move in new directions or maintain the church’s traditional positions.

Catholics who say the next pope should move the church in new directions were asked to describe, in their own words, in what new directions they would like to see the church go.

About one-in-five Catholics who think the next pope should move the church in new directions say simply that the church should become more modern (19%). And 15% want the next pope to do more to end sex abuse in the church and punish the priests involved. 

In addition, upwards of one-in-five mention issues regarding the priesthood, including 14% who say priests should be allowed to marry and 9% who say women should be allowed to serve in the priesthood.

Others mention a desire to see the church become more accepting and open in general (14%), and an additional 9% say they want to see the church become more accepting of homosexuality and gay marriage in particular. Of Catholics who want a pope who will move the church in new directions, 7% specifically mention birth control, mainly indicating a desire for a lessening of the church’s opposition to the use of contraception.

In response to a closed-ended question, nearly six-in-ten Catholics (58%) say it would be good if the next pope allows priests to get married, while 35% say this would be bad. Support for allowing priests to marry is much more common among Catholics who attend Mass less than once a week (66%) than among those who attend Mass regularly (46%).

Six-in-ten Catholic women (61%) say allowing priests to marry would be a good thing — about twice as many as say it would be a bad thing (30%). Men are more inclined than women to say that allowing priests to marry would be a bad thing (41% vs. 30%).

College graduates express more support than those Catholics with less education for allowing priests to marry (71% vs. 53%). There is little generational difference on this issue. 

A majority of Catholics (60%) say it would be a good thing if the next pope is from a developing region of the world, like South America, Asia or Africa. Only 14% say this would be a bad thing, while one-in-five say it would not matter either way (20%).

Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week and those who attend less often express similar views on this issue. The view that it would be a good thing if the next pope is from a developing region is more common among college graduates (71%) than among those Catholics with less education (56%).

Views of Pope Benedict 

Currently, about three-quarters of U.S. Catholics express either a very favorable (32%) or mostly favorable (41%) opinion of Benedict; roughly one-in-six U.S. Catholics (16%) express an unfavorable opinion. Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week are far more likely to express a favorable opinion of Benedict than those who attend less often (87% vs. 64%). 

Benedict’s favorability rating among U.S. Catholics has declined since April 2008, when it reached 83% immediately following the papal visit to the United States. The percentage of U.S. Catholics expressing a favorable opinion of Benedict has now settled back to levels seen in March 2008, prior to his visit. By contrast, in Pew Research polling conducted between 1987 and 1996, John Paul II was consistently rated favorably by upwards of nine-in-ten U.S. Catholics.

Of U.S. Catholics who have followed the news of the pope’s resignation, 55% say that Benedict has done a good or excellent job in promoting relations with other religions. Like the pontiff’s overall favorability rating, this number has declined in the past five years; it is down 15 points since the pope’s visit to the United States in 2008. Currently, 37% of U.S. Catholics give the pope poor or “only fair” marks for his handling of interfaith relations.

Most Catholics who have followed news of the pope’s resignation (63%) rate Benedict’s handling of the sex abuse scandal as “only fair” or poor; one-third say he has done an excellent or good job addressing the scandal. Current evaluations of the pope’s handling of the scandal are comparable to those seen in 2010 and are significantly more negative than in April 2008.

About the Surveys 

Most of the analysis in this report is based on telephone interviews conducted Feb. 13-18, 2013, among a national sample of 1,504 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia (752 respondents were interviewed on a landline telephone and 752 were interviewed on a cell phone, including 364 who had no landline telephone). The survey was conducted by interviewers at Princeton Data Source under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. A combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used; both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. Respondents in the landline sample were selected by randomly asking for the youngest adult male or female who is now at home. Interviews in the cell sample were conducted with the person who answered the phone, if that person was an adult 18 years of age or older. For detailed information about the survey methodology, see http://people-press.org/methodology/ 

The combined landline and cell phone sample are weighted using an iterative technique that matches gender, age, education, race, Hispanic origin and nativity and region to parameters from the 2011 Census Bureau's American Community Survey and population density to parameters from the Decennial Census. The sample also is weighted to match current patterns of telephone status and relative usage of landline and cell phones (for those with both), based on extrapolations from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey. The weighting procedure also accounts for the fact that respondents with both landline and cell phones have a greater probability of being included in the combined sample and adjusts for household size among respondents with a landline phone. Sampling errors and statistical tests of significance take into account the effect of weighting. The following table shows the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey:

Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Some of the analysis in this report is based on telephone interviews conducted Feb. 14-17, 2013, among a national sample of 1,003 adults 18 years of age or older living in the continental United States (502 respondents were interviewed on a landline telephone and 501 were interviewed on a cell phone, including 276 who had no landline telephone). The survey was conducted by interviewers at Universal Survey Center under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. A combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used; both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International. Interviews were conducted in English. Respondents in the landline sample were selected by randomly asking for the youngest adult male or female who is now at home. Interviews in the cell sample were conducted with the person who answered the phone, if that person was an adult 18 years of age or older.

The combined landline and cell phone sample are weighted using an iterative technique that matches gender, age, education, race, Hispanic origin and region to parameters from the 2011 Census Bureau’s American Community Survey and population density to parameters from the Decennial Census. The sample also is weighted to match current patterns of telephone status, based on extrapolations from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey. The weighting procedure also accounts for the fact that respondents with both landline and cell phones have a greater probability of being included in the combined sample and adjusts for household size among respondents with a landline phone. Sampling errors and statistical tests of significance take into account the effect of weighting. The following table shows the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey:

Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request.

In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Brad Keselowski shares vision for NASCAR's future

(USAToday)

Reigning Sprint Cup champion Brad Keselowski details dramatic changes he'd like to see in NASCAR in a wide-ranging interview
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. — Stroll through the compound where NASCAR's traveling circus lives, and it's easy to find Brad Keselowski's abode.

Just look for the motor home that doesn't resemble anyone else's.

At the end of a row inside the Sprint Cup drivers' gated community at Daytona International Speedway sits living quarters that could be disguised as a delivery truck .

"It's about $2.25 million for one of those brand-new Prevosts, and resale value is maybe $800,000 to $1 million," says Keselowski, 29, about his peers' motor homes. "That's ridiculous. They break down all the time."

So with the help of assistant Bill Cole, Keselowski built his home for about a third of the price but with a more spacious interior thanks to two pullout slides. The weekend he debuted his more reliable model last summer, he won at Kentucky Speedway.

It was further validation for the unconventional mind of the most iconoclastic NASCAR champion in recent memory.

"Every time I do something different, I'm more successful," says Keselowski, who was the first driver to tweet during a race a year ago when the Daytona 500 was stopped by a jet dryer inferno. "I know I'm doing something right when people look at me and go, 'You're (screwed) up.' "

PHOTOS: History of the Daytona 500

Butting heads has been a modus operandi since Keselowski broke into NASCAR's premier series full-time in 2010, warring with veterans such as Carl Edwards, Kyle Busch and Denny Hamlin. He earned respect in qualifying for the Chase for the Sprint Cup the past two seasons and becoming the eighth-youngest champion in history in 2012. Yet some drivers have dubbed him "Craze-lowski" because of his outspoken manner .

Whether it be about sponsors, the schedule, social media or Danica Patrick ("I don't think, 'Oh there's that girl.' I think, 'Oh, there's that 30th-place driver.'"), Keselowski seems to always have something to say.

PATRICK: Could change auto racing, sports forever

"I think we all sit back and chuckle at times at some of the things he says and does," five-time champion Jimmie Johnson says. "He is a great guy. He has the best of intentions for our sport; for his sponsor; for his team. He just needs to mature a little."

"I can always be wiser, if that's what he means," Keselowski says when told of Johnson's comments. "I can always make better decisions. Obviously, I'm mature enough to win a championship, so I can't be too far off."

IN DEPTH: Jeff Gordon talks wrecking, collecting and dancing

But it's not all bluster for the youngest of five raised by a Rochester Hills, Mich., racing family with bedrock Midwestern values and blue-collar work ethic. In his champion's speech last year, Keselowski struck themes of humility, piety and unity in pledging to help move the sport in a positive direction as it wrestles with relevance and recapturing a younger, hipper audience amid sagging TV ratings and attendance.

"I might not be that guy, but that doesn't mean I can't step up to the plate and try to swing the bat," he says. "It doesn't mean I'll be successful. You're trying to take a crack at a Randy Johnson fastball in his prime. It's a tough sell.

"But someone has to step up to the plate first. Until that happens, this sport isn't living up to its potential, and I think it has a very high potential. We've got a great story to tell."

USA TODAY Sports asked the reigning king of Sprint Cup to tell his. In a wide-ranging interview in that unlikeliest of motor homes, Keselowski shared his idyllic vision of NASCAR .

It's the world according to Keselowski. "It's a different place," he laughs.

Here it is in the champ's words.

Overall vision

The problem I see in the sport is that there are multiple entities that have to work together for us to be successful.

We have sponsors — partners, or whatever the hell you want to call them — tracks, the sanctioning body and the teams. Those are our four groups, and how well they cooperate dictates what we have as a product for our fans. And our fans create everything.

You combine that with the shift in all spectator sports to a TV-dominated world . For the longest time, NASCAR had twice the amount of people at the game than the NFL did, but we don't even have 50% of their TV viewership. What's happened is that TV has become more popular and attendance at the track or any sporting facility has dwindled with the exception of major events — Super Bowls, Daytona 500s, World Series.

PLAY NOW: USA TODAY Sports Fantasy Racing Challenge

We haven't adapted as a sport to that. But why haven't we adapted?

When Bill France Jr. was in charge of NASCAR, he had control of all these pieces and wasn't at the mercy of the TV world. He had control of the tracks and NASCAR, which is now divided in two with Lesa (France Kennedy, president of International Speedway Corp. that controls 12 tracks) and (NASCAR Chairman) Brian (France). France Jr. had relationships with the sponsors, drivers and teams. Now we don't have that. Those three other pieces are segregated. Those three pieces need to get together. And until all three of those can unite, we're a house divided, and we're making bad decisions that are affecting how to generate revenue for the sport.

In today's sports world, you have to be very powerful in drawing people to TV, and we're not TV friendly. That's one of the key areas for success. Part of that is we're not delivering a product. And we're fighting the tracks. We have to be up on the wheel a little more and looking for what's in front of us, and when we see it, we have to be able to react on it. And in order to be able to react on it, we need to be united.

At least 15 killed in two blasts in Hyderabad's Dilsukh Nagar

(IBN)
Hyderabad: At least 15 people are feared to have been killed in a series of explosions on Thursday evening which took place in Dilsukh Nagar bus stand area of Hyderabad. The explosions reportedly took place near an eatery and a movie theatre at around 7 pm, following which the area was cordoned off. At least 40 people sustained injuries in the blasts.

While one of the blasts took place near Venkatadri theatre, the second one occurred near Konark theatre. According to police, while the first bomb was placed on a motorcycle, the second bomb might have been kept inside a tiffin box.
Police are yet to ascertain the number of casualties and nature of the explosions. Following the serial explosions in the state capital, high alert was sounded across Andhra Pradesh.
VideoPhotoGallery
The blasts took place in a crowded area, injuring at least 40 people, who were immediately rushed to nearby hospitals.
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) said that at least three blasts have taken place in the Andhra Pradesh capital but the site of the third explosion is yet to be ascertained. The NIA also rushed its team to the sites where the blasts occurred.
While some of those who got injured were rushed to Osmania Hospital, others were taken to some other nearby hospitals.
Reacting to the incident, TRS leader Kiran Rao said the situation in the Andhra Pradesh capital was very chaotic. "This is not a time to have political divisions...this is an attack on our country and democracy, we all are together," said Kiran Rao.
Dilsukhnagar, the area were the incident took place is a crowded area in Hyderabad, and the biggest fruit market in Andhra Pradesh.