जे.एन.यु. - नक्की काय सुरु आहे??

अफझलच्या बाबतीत वरकरणी भोकाड पसरणारे अलगतावादी, डावे आणि अविचारवंत तथाकथीत धर्मनिरपेक्ष हे सतत अफझलचे नाव घेत आणि त्यावर झालेला कथीत अन्याय यावर तावातावाने बोलत असताना असताना जनतेला एका गोष्टीचा पद्धतशीरपणे विसर पाडायला लावतात. तो म्हणजे अफझलचा चुलतभाऊ शौकत गुरू आनि आत्ता ज्याला राष्ट्रद्रोहाखाली अटक झाली आहे तो गिलानि. संसदेवरील दहशतवादी हल्ल्यानंतर ज्यांना पकडण्यात आले त्यात अफझल गुरु व्यतिरीक्त शौकत गुरू, गिलानी आणि नवज्योत संधू उर्फ अफसान गुरु ही शौकतची बायको देखिल होती. ह्या चौघांना प्रमुख आरोपी करण्यात आले होते. या सर्वांवरील आरोपाची स्पेशल कोर्टाने भरपूर छाननी केली. सुरवातीस कोर्टाने त्यांना सरकारी वकील देखील दिला होता. (नंतर मला वाटते त्यांनी स्वतःचे वकील घेतले होते). त्यातील अफसान गुरूस या स्पेशल कोर्टाने देशाविरुद्ध युध्द करण्याचा कट रचण्याचा एक आरोप सोडल्यास इतर आरोपातून मुक्त केले. एका आरोपासाठी तिला पाच वर्षाची सक्त मजूरी देण्यात आली. पण अफझल, शौकत आणि गिलानी यांना फाशीची शिक्षा दिली. पुढे हायकोर्टाने (सुप्रिम पण नाही!), यातील अफसान आणि गिलानी ला सोडून दिले तर शौकत गुरूस दहा वर्षाची सक्त मजुरीची शिक्षा दिली. त्यात देखील चांगल्या वर्तणुकीसाठी शौकतची शिक्षा ही कमी करून त्याला नऊ महीने आधी सोडण्यात आले. अफझलच्या बाबतीत मात्र सुप्रिम कोर्टाला दिलेला पुरावा योग्यच वाटला आणि म्हणून परत एकदा विनंती केली तरी देखील त्याची ह्या दहशतवादी हल्यातली भुमिका ही (खल)नायकाची ठरवत त्याला भारतीय दंड विधानानुसार "rarest of the rare" अशी मृत्यूदंडाची शिक्षा दिली. ती शिक्षा युपिए सरकारमधील काँग्रेसचे गृहमंत्री सुशीलकुमार शिंदे यांनी अमलात आणली. ती देखील कशी, तर त्याच्या निकटच्या नातेवाईकांना (बायको, मुलगा वगैरे) न सांगता. आणि यांचे राहूल गांधी आता जेएनयुत जाऊन इतक्या वर्षांनी सुतक पाळत बसलेत... सुप्रिम कोर्टाने यालप वून केलेल्या अंमलबजावणीवर नाराजी व्यक्त करत फाशीची शिक्षा आमलात आणण्यासंदर्भात काही नियम घालून दिले. जे याकुब मेमनच्या वेळेस पाळले गेले (तरी देखील भोकाड पसरणारे पब्लीक होते हा मुद्दा वेगळा) हे अलगतावादी, डावे आणि अविचारवंत तथाकथीत धर्मनिरपेक्ष अफझलचे नाव घेत आपली न्यायसंस्था कशी वाईट आहे ह्याचे खोटे चित्र रंगवत बसतात. दहशतवादाचा आरोप असलेल्या चार प्रमुख आरोपींपैकी याच न्यायव्यवस्थेने आणि तत्कालीन सरकारने तिघांना काय न्याय दिला या बद्दल मात्र बोलायला तयार नाहीत. अर्थात तसे बोलले असते तर ते डावे आणि तथाकथीत सेक्युलर राहीले असते का?

इतर सर्व पक्षांची साठमारी एकवेळ समजु शकते. त्यांचं पोटपाणी चालतं त्याच्यावर. पण केजरीवालांना विरोधी पक्षाची स्पेस घेरण्याची एव्हढी घाई का झाली आहे कळत नाहि. अत्यंत थर्ड्क्लास कमेण्ट्स देऊन हा माणुस आपली उरली-सुरली इज्जत घालवायला किती उतावीळ झाला आहे. कधि कधि वाटतं मोदी आणि आआप यांचं प्राक्तन सारखंच आहे. मोदिंच्या मेहेनतीला भाजपचे बोलघेवडे ग्रहण लावतात, तर आआपच्या स्वच्छ राजकारणाच्या कन्सेप्टला हा केजरीवाल नासवतो.

वकिलाच्या वेशातील काही लोकांनी कायदा हातात घेऊन, मिडिया सहित काही लोकांना मारहाण केली होती, त्या कायदा हातात घेणाऱ्या लोकांवर कारवाई, सध्यातरी झाली नाही असे वाटते, काय कारण असावे बरे ?

एक मोठा विरोधाभास पहा. काहींच्या हातात अफजलचे पोस्टर आहेत आणि काहींच्या हातात आंबेडकरांचे आहेत. मनुवाद,ब्राह्मणवाद,भगवाकरण याला विरोध म्हणून त्यांनी आंबेडकरांचे पोस्टर हाती घेतले आहेत. दुसरी गोष्ट अशी कि अफजलला फाशी या देशाच्या कायद्याने/संविधानाने दिली आहे,आणि त्या संविधानाचे शिल्पकार बाबासाहेब आहेत. तसेच "अफजल तेरे कातिल जिंदा है"| या घोषणा दिल्या जातात.म्हणजे आपण नेमकं काय करतोय हे त्या विद्यार्थ्यांना समजत नसावं. किंवा हे दोन गट वेगळे असावेत 1) देशविरोधी घोषणा देणारे(अफजलसमर्थक) 2) मनुवाद,संघवाद विरोधक कन्हैया हा दुसर्या गटातला आहे. पण हे दोन्ही गट एकाठिकाणी येवून आंदोलन/प्रदर्शन करत आहेत,त्यामुळे सगळा गोंधळ उडाला आहे.

चुकीच्या आंदोलनाची चुकीच्या पद्धतीने हाताळणी !

ओमर खालेद फरारी आहे म्हणतात..मग तो अर्नब गोस्वामी परवा कोणावर बेंबीच्या देठापासून बेम्बाटत होता ? खालच्या लिंक मध्ये दिसणारा मुलगा आणि ओमर खालेद सारखेच दिसतात म्हणून विचारलं...की हाच ओमर खालेद आहे ? मग तो फार केंव्हा झाला ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-2DNF3q3H0

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Kanhaiya Kumar's Anti National Presidential speech in JNUSU 2015.

Posted by Unofficial: Subramaniam Swamy on Saturday, February 20, 2016

विकास ह्यांनी अमेरिकेतील ज्या कायद्याचा एकेठिकाणी उल्लेख केला तो यु एस ए पेट्रीओट कायदा येथे देत आहे , हा कायदा सर्व सामान्य जनतेला जाचक वाटू शकतो भारतीय विचार्जंतांना तर तो वाचून भोवळ येईल पण ह्यामुळेच तेथे अजूनही दहशतवादाची झळ परत बसली नाही. The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Congress enacted the Patriot Act by overwhelming, bipartisan margins, arming law enforcement with new tools to detect and prevent terrorism: The USA Patriot Act was passed nearly unanimously by the Senate 98-1, and 357-66 in the House, with the support of members from across the political spectrum. The Act Improves Our Counter-Terrorism Efforts in Several Significant Ways: 1. The Patriot Act allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking. Many of the tools the Act provides to law enforcement to fight terrorism have been used for decades to fight organized crime and drug dealers, and have been reviewed and approved by the courts. As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What's good for the mob should be good for terrorists." (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01) Allows law enforcement to use surveillance against more crimes of terror. Before the Patriot Act, courts could permit law enforcement to conduct electronic surveillance to investigate many ordinary, non-terrorism crimes, such as drug crimes, mail fraud, and passport fraud. Agents also could obtain wiretaps to investigate some, but not all, of the crimes that terrorists often commit. The Act enabled investigators to gather information when looking into the full range of terrorism-related crimes, including: chemical-weapons offenses, the use of weapons of mass destruction, killing Americans abroad, and terrorism financing. Allows federal agents to follow sophisticated terrorists trained to evade detection. For years, law enforcement has been able to use "roving wiretaps" to investigate ordinary crimes, including drug offenses and racketeering. A roving wiretap can be authorized by a federal judge to apply to a particular suspect, rather than a particular phone or communications device. Because international terrorists are sophisticated and trained to thwart surveillance by rapidly changing locations and communication devices such as cell phones, the Act authorized agents to seek court permission to use the same techniques in national security investigations to track terrorists. Allows law enforcement to conduct investigations without tipping off terrorists. In some cases if criminals are tipped off too early to an investigation, they might flee, destroy evidence, intimidate or kill witnesses, cut off contact with associates, or take other action to evade arrest. Therefore, federal courts in narrow circumstances long have allowed law enforcement to delay for a limited time when the subject is told that a judicially-approved search warrant has been executed. Notice is always provided, but the reasonable delay gives law enforcement time to identify the criminal's associates, eliminate immediate threats to our communities, and coordinate the arrests of multiple individuals without tipping them off beforehand. These delayed notification search warrants have been used for decades, have proven crucial in drug and organized crime cases, and have been upheld by courts as fully constitutional. Allows federal agents to ask a court for an order to obtain business records in national security terrorism cases. Examining business records often provides the key that investigators are looking for to solve a wide range of crimes. Investigators might seek select records from hardware stores or chemical plants, for example, to find out who bought materials to make a bomb, or bank records to see who's sending money to terrorists. Law enforcement authorities have always been able to obtain business records in criminal cases through grand jury subpoenas, and continue to do so in national security cases where appropriate. These records were sought in criminal cases such as the investigation of the Zodiac gunman, where police suspected the gunman was inspired by a Scottish occult poet, and wanted to learn who had checked the poet's books out of the library. In national security cases where use of the grand jury process was not appropriate, investigators previously had limited tools at their disposal to obtain certain business records. Under the Patriot Act, the government can now ask a federal court (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court), if needed to aid an investigation, to order production of the same type of records available through grand jury subpoenas. This federal court, however, can issue these orders only after the government demonstrates the records concerned are sought for an authorized investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a U.S. person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a U.S. person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment. 2. The Patriot Act facilitated information sharing and cooperation among government agencies so that they can better "connect the dots." The Act removed the major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from talking and coordinating their work to protect the American people and our national security. The government's prevention efforts should not be restricted by boxes on an organizational chart. Now police officers, FBI agents, federal prosecutors and intelligence officials can protect our communities by "connecting the dots" to uncover terrorist plots before they are completed. As Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) said about the Patriot Act, "we simply cannot prevail in the battle against terrorism if the right hand of our government has no idea what the left hand is doing" (Press release, 10/26/01) Prosecutors and investigators used information shared pursuant to section 218 in investigating the defendants in the so-called “Virginia Jihad” case. This prosecution involved members of the Dar al-Arqam Islamic Center, who trained for jihad in Northern Virginia by participating in paintball and paramilitary training, including eight individuals who traveled to terrorist training camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan between 1999 and 2001. These individuals are associates of a violent Islamic extremist group known as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET), which operates in Pakistan and Kashmir, and that has ties to the al Qaeda terrorist network. As the result of an investigation that included the use of information obtained through FISA, prosecutors were able to bring charges against these individuals. Six of the defendants have pleaded guilty, and three were convicted in March 2004 of charges including conspiracy to levy war against the United States and conspiracy to provide material support to the Taliban. These nine defendants received sentences ranging from a prison term of four years to life imprisonment. 3. The Patriot Act updated the law to reflect new technologies and new threats. The Act brought the law up to date with current technology, so we no longer have to fight a digital-age battle with antique weapons-legal authorities leftover from the era of rotary telephones. When investigating the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, for example, law enforcement used one of the Act's new authorities to use high-tech means to identify and locate some of the killers. Allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred. Before the Patriot Act, law enforcement personnel were required to obtain a search warrant in the district where they intended to conduct a search. However, modern terrorism investigations often span a number of districts, and officers therefore had to obtain multiple warrants in multiple jurisdictions, creating unnecessary delays. The Act provides that warrants can be obtained in any district in which terrorism-related activities occurred, regardless of where they will be executed. This provision does not change the standards governing the availability of a search warrant, but streamlines the search-warrant process. Allows victims of computer hacking to request law enforcement assistance in monitoring the "trespassers" on their computers. This change made the law technology-neutral; it placed electronic trespassers on the same footing as physical trespassers. Now, hacking victims can seek law enforcement assistance to combat hackers, just as burglary victims have been able to invite officers into their homes to catch burglars. 4. The Patriot Act increased the penalties for those who commit terrorist crimes. Americans are threatened as much by the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button. That's why the Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad. In particular, the Act: Prohibits the harboring of terrorists. The Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses, such as: destruction of aircraft; use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons; use of weapons of mass destruction; bombing of government property; sabotage of nuclear facilities; and aircraft piracy. Enhanced the inadequate maximum penalties for various crimes likely to be committed by terrorists: including arson, destruction of energy facilities, material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations, and destruction of national-defense materials. Enhanced a number of conspiracy penalties, including for arson, killings in federal facilities, attacking communications systems, material support to terrorists, sabotage of nuclear facilities, and interference with flight crew members. Under previous law, many terrorism statutes did not specifically prohibit engaging in conspiracies to commit the underlying offenses. In such cases, the government could only bring prosecutions under the general federal conspiracy provision, which carries a maximum penalty of only five years in prison. Punishes terrorist attacks on mass transit systems. Punishes bioterrorists. Eliminates the statutes of limitations for certain terrorism crimes and lengthens them for other terrorist crimes. The government's success in preventing another catastrophic attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001, would have been much more difficult, if not impossible, without the USA Patriot Act. The authorities Congress provided have substantially enhanced our ability to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of terror. आपले पंचतारांकीत नगरीत स्वागत आहे.

मागाशीच एका बातमी वाहिनी वर अफजल गुरुचा एक इंटरव्ह्यू पाहिला, त्यात त्यानी पाकिस्तानात ३महिने एका रिटायर्ड आर्मी जनरल कडून ट्रैनिंग घेतले, मग भारतात येऊन संसदवरती हमला केला, आणि बरेच काही, हे सर्व अगदी न घाबरता शांत पणे सांगितले! अश्या आतंकवाद्याला फाशी देणार नाही तर काय!? आणि त्याला पाठिंबा देणारे काही कमी अपराधी नाहीत, सौदीत / साउथ कोरियामध्ये असे काही झाले असते तर सरकार विरोधी कारवाईत आत्ता पर्यंत फाशी झाली असती! भारतातली जनता नशीबवान आहे की कमनशिबी हा मोठा प्रश्न पडतो अश्या वेळी!

बातमी (बीबीसी रेडीओ) > बीबीसी प्रवक्ता - "क्या झंडा फैलाने से देश भक्ती जाग उठेगी!?" ( हा काय प्रश्न आहे का!? ) > उत्तर - "हांजी बिलकुल.. आप अमेरिका देख लिजिये, चीन या अन्य कोई भी देश! वहा हर जगह उनके उनके झंडे फैलाए जाते है, और अगर हम अपना झंडा अपने देश मै नही फैलाएंगे तो फिर कहां फैलाएंगे!?" ( अशी उत्तरं द्यायची वेळ लागली आहे! ) - हे असे फालतू प्रश्न आणि अशी दुर्बल उत्तरं! हल्ली बातम्या अश्या आहेत… देशभक्ती/द्रोही आहात क नाही सिद्ध करा!

वहा हर जगह उनके उनके झंडे फहराएं जाते है. फहराएं, फहराना, फहराते है....लिहा शंभर शंभर वेळा ;)