Andhra प्रदेश्समाचार

Andhra प्रदेश्समाचार

DAILY NEWSOrganize

by SAMACHARA BHARATI

(AP Vishwa Samvad Kendra)Email : samaachaarabhaarati@yahoo.com, vskap1@gmail.com12 February 09
IM threw party after every blastFebruary 12th, 2009 By Our CorrespondentFeb. 11: Mohammed Akbar Ismail Choudhary, one of the arrested the bombers, said members of Indian Mujahideen (IM) would celebrate after the blasts occurred."The IM chief Riyaz Bhatkal's brother Iqbal Bhatkal told my elder brother, Mohsin Choudhary, to arrange a small function to celebrate the Jaipur blasts," said Akbar, who was brought to the city from Mumbai.The police said that Akbar confessed that Anique, another accused, and he were sent to Chikmagalur to be trained in explosives and firing by Waseem alias Ahmed Bawa of IM.Anique said Riyaz was upset that the bomb didn't explode at Dilsukhnagar. Rhetoric apart, can India tackle terror decisively? February 12th, 2009 By S. Nihal SinghSomewhere along the way the Indian authorities have lost the plot in coping with the consequences of the Mumbai terrorist attacks. Granted that the question of surgical strikes against militant camps in Pakistan-controlled territory became academic after 72 hours of the tragic happenings, New Delhi relied on the amorphous "international community" to pressure Pakistan to come clean. But the fragile civilian dispensation was unable or unwilling, or both, to deliver on its promises.There have, of course, been much posturing and many speeches from Indian leaders and their Pakistani counterparts on 9/11, but more than three months after the attacks on India's financial capital leading to many deaths, the score card remains unimpressive. The United States has expressed sympathy, the UN Security Council has passed a resolution, but New Delhi is far from reaching its objective of bringing those who sponsored or masterminded the operation to justice.The problem is two-fold: the limited interest of the major players in helping India in this area and the inability of the Indian establishment to measure up to dealing effectively with a cataclysmic event of the Mumbai variety. Americans are already seeking to make a distinction between good Taliban and bad Taliban as a prelude to striking a compromise in Afghanistan. The kind of terrorism India faces and will face in the future does not fall in the essential category for US policymakers, quite apart from who occupies the White House.Besides, despite the number of measures taken to streamline and upgrade the decision-making process and equipment, the Indian establishment is far from ready to face emergencies, as the recent false hijack drama revealed. It will take much more effort and cooperation between the state and federal governments to have an effective counter-terrorism fighting machine seamlessly going into action.On the political plane, a coincidence of inhospitable events and circumstances has made India's task unenviable. The apparent heart-warming remarks made by President Asif Zardari brought short-lived comfort because he had to obfuscate, rather than clarify, the Pakistani provenance of the attacks. They involved a wing of the powerful Army, the ISI spy agency, as has now been officially stated by India. Whatever the inclination of the civilian government, its writ does not run over the Army.In an effort to reconcile the irreconcilable, statements by Pakistani leaders were full of contradictions and red herring, as the official reaction to the Indian dossier revealed. The Zardari government seems to have little control over the terrorist camps, even assuming that it wants to abolish them, and the various forms of arrest of named leaders of terrorist groups are, at best, revolving door operations.The Indian authorities' problem is that they have to give the impression of exerting themselves in mitigating a national tragedy as best they can. Rhetoric, therefore, must substitute for action, and with the general election looming on the horizon, even war rhetoric on occasion. The Opposition BJP's taunt of the Congress-led government being soft on terror must be countered with thundering speeches and yet more calls on the "international community" and the United Nations to come to India's aid. But the nations that count have their own agenda and the UN is only the stepchild of the major powers.Many well-meaning Pakistanis appeal to India to strengthen the hands of the civilian government, rather than call a spade a spade. But New Delhi has no option but to deal with the power structure that exists. The ethos that has evolved in Pakistan almost since independence is of an Army-dominated state whose interests lie in opposing India, given the genesis of the Partition and the circumstances in which it lost half the country with the birth of Bangladesh.Ironically, it was an Army-ruled Pakistan that came closest to finding a basis for making peace with India, symbolised by the January 2004 agreement between General Pervez Musharraf and then Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee based on the promise of Islamabad not permitting the use of the territory it controlled for terrorist activities against India. As became evident later, the General chose not to keep his word and retained the elaborate terrorist structures and permitted open and clandestine collection of funds by terrorist organisations.The only other occasion that promised a basic redefinition of the India-Pakistan equation was after the defeat of the Pakistan Army in the Bangladesh war in 1971, with the Indira Gandhi government showing generosity in releasing thousands of Pakistani prisoners of war on the basis of an oral promise on Kashmir made by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. But he was the leader of a defeated country and promptly went back on his word. P.N. Haksar, Indira's key adviser, later told me that India made this historic gesture to bury the past and begin a new chapter in relations between the two countries.Returning to the present, the Pakistan Army appears to have got away with inspiring, if not organising, the Mumbai attacks with a few bruises but without much body harm. India has been unable to make the Pakistan Army pay for its actions. Pakistan's standing in the international terrorism league might have gone up by a few notches but its usefulness to the United States vis-à-vis Afghanistan has not diminished. In fact, it might have increased in the new thinking taking root in Washington of divorcing the Taliban from Al Qaeda. Islamabad might emerge as a valuable go-between in organising a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan for Americans.Which brings us to the central problem of the options India has. The stark message of post-Mumbai attacks is that there is no substitute for modernising and upgrading the anti-terrorism machine and the political decision-making apparatus that must go with it so that India is ready to meet the next attack with determination and immediate follow-up action. Can India make the transition from its traditionally sloppy ways, whatever the complexion of the government, to becoming a well-run modern state capable of giving a fitting answer to those who choose to attack? That is the question. From DECCAN CHRONICLE, 12, February 2009 Assembly turns into 'battlefield' Special Correspondent Free-for-all at House; 49 Opposition members suspended
Photo: PTI
BIG TROUBLE: Marshals carry one of the Opposition members out of the Assembly hall on Wednesday. HYDERABAD: The Andhra Pradesh Assembly turned into a virtual battleground on Wednesday as some Opposition members wrenched off microphones and took on the marshals when they tried to physically remove them from the House.As many as 49 members of the Telugu Desam Party, Telangana Rashtra Samiti and the Left parties were suspended earlier, but many resisted their ejection from the House leading to a scuffle with the marshals and bruises to both.In the free-for-all that ensued, some MLAs pounced on Chief Marshal Ch. A. Gajapathi Raju, injuring his elbow, and raised the broken microphones to hit marshals, forcing the latter to huddle in a corner. The members later trooped out on their own led by TDP leader N. Chandrababu Naidu, when the House re-assembled, this time with more marshals. The trouble started as soon as the House assembled when the TDP, TRS, CPI (M) and CPI tabled adjournment notices seeking a debate on Sandur Power Company, owned by Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, son of Chief Minister Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy. The notice alleged that "easy money" earned out of "shady deals" with Satyam Computers and Maytas Infra was diverted into Sandur. They shouted slogans and repeatedly rushed to the podium thrice and threw papers into air, forcing Speaker K. R. Suresh Reddy to adjourn the House two times. As his repeated appeals for restoration of normalcy failed to evoke any response, he suspended the Opposition members, including Mr. Naidu, after Minister for Legislative Affairs K. Rosaiah moved a motion to that effect. Marshals were called in as members did not move out.The Opposition claimed that several of its members including P. Keshav and Vem Narender Reddy, T. Harish Rao of TRS and Julakanti Ranga Reddy of CPI (M) sustained injuries at the hands of the marshals. They later stormed the chambers of the Speaker to protest against their treatment by the marshals. Mr. Naidu and others staged a dharna on the steps leading to the House and addressed a meeting denouncing the alleged shady deals in Sandur power.The Congress as well as the TDP described the unprecedented developments as 'a black day' in the history of the Assembly. From THE HINDU, 12, February 2009Send your Comments to vskap1@gmail.com or samaachaarabhaarati@yahoo.com
-- From :
R.MallikarjunaraoSamachara Bharati3-4-852, Barkatpura,Hyderabad, Andhrapradesh.