President of the Global Council of Indian Christians: 'Not only Trump, India does not welcome Muslims either'.

President of the Global Council of Indian Christians: 'Not only Trump, India does not welcome Muslims either'. (AsiaNews).

"Those shocked by Trump’s executive order prohibiting entry to refugees and citizens from seven countries with an Islamic majority, should look to similar laws in India”, says Sajan K George, president of the Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC). Commenting on the decision of the newly elected American president that has shocked world public opinion, the Christian leader also reports that the Indian government is launching similar policies. An amendment of the Citizenship Act provides that it can only be accorded to minority Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian of Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Therefore Muslims are excluded altogether. Even those who are suffering "horrific forms of persecution" such as the Rohingya in Myanmar, the Buddhist Tibetans and Uighurs in China. Below his comment.

President Donald Trump's executive order suspending the country's refugee entry programme for 120 days, and banning the entry of citizens from seven primarily Muslim countries – Yemen, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran and Sudan – for 90 days was passed with the apparent objective of protecting US national security.

While many in India have recoiled at the manner in which the Trump administration has made its refugee and immigration policy, Indians should also turn to look at similar legislative provisions being proposed in our own country.

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill of 2016 is a short, three-page document that seeks to amend Section 2(b) of the Citizenship Act. The Citizenship Act deals with the acquisition and termination of Indian citizenship. Section 2(b) of the Citizenship Act defines the term "illegal immigrant".
The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill proposes to amend the definition of this term by adding this provision:

"Provided that persons belonging to minority communities, namely, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, who have been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any order made thereunder, shall not be treated as illegal migrants for the purposes of this Act.".

Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan to qualify for naturalization as a citizen of India if they are resident in India

The Preamble to the Bill, which seeks to explain the aims and objectives of the act, states:
The phrase "Many persons of India origin including persons belonging to the aforesaid minority communities..." is telling. It is clear that that this proposed amendment is not aimed at all persons of Indian origin but only some, namely non-Muslim ones.

What is even more interesting is that the bill is not aimed at all religious minorities in all neighbouring countries, and it clearly excludes many communities that may be experiencing horrific forms of persecution, such as the Muslim Rohingyas in Buddhist-majority Myanmar or Buddhist Tibetans and Muslim Uighurs in China.

legislation on refugees, or be a signatory to the 1951 Convention, treating the decision to grant refugee status as a matter of political expediency. Even if it does not want to sign the 1951 convention, nothing prevents it from enacting a domestic law that incorporates its principal features. The fact that the government is not interested in doing so means granting protection to victims of persecution is not its primary objective.

What does that leave us with, then? The Bharatiya Janata Party's 2014 election manifesto gives us the answer.

Page 37 of the manifesto states that "India shall remain a natural home for persecuted Hindus and they shall be welcome to seek refuge here". Why should India be a natural home for persecuted Hindus, as opposed to persecuted Muslims or Christians? Invoking the image of the "persecuted Hindu" is a masterful way of pushing the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's notion of India as a 'Hindu nation', and an embattled one at that. Just as the claim of a threat to national security
,
If the Narendra Modi government wants to provide protection to religious minorities in neighbouring countries from persecution – a laudable objective – then it need not have looked further than the existing international frameworks of refugee law.

Central to the definition of a refugee in the 1951 Refugee Convention is a well-founded fear of being persecuted on the grounds of religion, race, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion by the country of one's nationality. Till now, India has consistently refused to promulgate a central order

Video - Hindu Dr Subramanian Swamy Talks 101 on Islam

India has placed the Catholic charity Caritas on a government watch list.

India has placed the Catholic charity Caritas on a government watch list. (ET).

NEW DELHI: India has placed the Catholic charity Caritas on a government watch list, an official and news reports said on Tuesday, in a growing crackdown on foreign organisations operating in the country.

A home ministry official told AFP Caritas had violated India’s foreign funding laws by financing groups that were working “against the country”.

He said Caritas had been placed on a list of organisations needing prior government approval to receive or distribute funds in India, a move also reported by the Indian Express daily.

“There was clear violation of foreign funding law,” said the official, who asked not to be named, citing funding for groups which protested against a nuclear plant in the southern state of Tamil Nadu.

The right-wing government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has launched a massive crackdown on non-governmental organisations, cancelling the foreign funding licences of nearly 9,000 charities in recent months.

It has also frozen the domestic and international bank accounts of Greenpeace India, although the domestic accounts were recently unfrozen on the orders of a court.

In April it placed the Ford Foundation, an American charitable organisation, on the same watch list as Caritas, saying it was funding groups which acted against the national interest.

No one at Caritas India was immediately available for comment.

The group has been operating in India for more than 50 years and works on health, education and poverty-related issues. Read the full story here.

In Pakistan, Hindus say woman's conversion to Islam was coerced.

In Pakistan, Hindus say woman's conversion to Islam was coerced.(NDTV).In the predawn darkness on Feb. 24, Rinkel Kumari, a 19-year-old student from a Hindu family, disappeared from her home in Mirpur Mathelo, a small village off a busy highway in Sindh Province. Hours later, she resurfaced 12 miles away, at the home of a prominent Muslim cleric who phoned her parents with news that distressed them: Their daughter wished to convert to Islam, he said.
Their protests were futile. By sunset, Ms. Kumari had become a Muslim, married a young Muslim man, and changed her name to Faryal Bibi.
Over the past month, this conversion has generated an acrid controversy that has reverberated far beyond its origins in small-town Pakistan, whipping up a news media frenzy that has traced ugly sectarian divisions and renewed a wider debate about the protection of vulnerable minorities in a country that has so often failed them. At its heart, though, it is a head-on clash of narratives and motives.
Hindu leaders insist that Ms. Kumari was abducted at gunpoint and forced to abandon her religion. Local Muslim leaders say she wanted to marry her secret sweetheart: Naveed Shah, a young neighbor who said he had been conducting a secret courtship with her via mobile phone and the Internet for several months. Ms. Kumari, for her part, has said in a court filing and media interviews that she converted of her free will - but public figures have questioned whether she had been pressed or intimidated into saying that.
The truth may emerge Monday, when the young woman is due to testify before the Supreme Court in Islamabad. For the past two weeks she has been sequestered in a women's shelter in Karachi on court orders. When she takes the stand on Monday, many Pakistanis hope she can resolve the central mystery: where do her religious, and romantic, intentions lie?
After Ms. Kumari declared herself a Muslim in her town court on Feb. 27, Mr. Mitho triumphantly led the new convert from the courthouse, parading her before thousands of cheering supporters. Then he drove her in a caravan to an ancient Sufi religious shrine controlled by his family and famed as a site where Hindus have been converted.
There, Ms. Kumari was welcomed by Mr. Mitho's elderly brother, Mian Shaman - the same cleric who had converted her three days earlier - who led her into the towering shrine. When she emerged, now wearing a black veil, gunmen unleashed volleys of celebratory Kalashnikov fire into the air and shouted "God is calling you!"
Hindu leaders, enraged, viewed the images as a crass provocation. "If the couple was really in love, then why this fanfare of guns?" said Amarnath Motumal, a Hindu lawyer and human rights activist in Karachi. "It clearly shows they are trying to embarrass the Hindu community and are bent on taking our girls forcefully."
Ms. Kumari's parents pursued the case through the courts, claiming that their daughter had been abducted by a Muslim supremacist, and that the police and judiciary were biased against them because they came from a minority background.
"Mian Mitho is a terrorist and a thug. He takes the girls, and keeps them in his home for sexual purposes," said Ms. Kumari's father, Nand Lal, a government schoolteacher, noting that Mr. Mitho's armed guards had escorted his daughter to court appearances and news conferences. His wife, Sulachany Devi, issued an anguished appeal. "Rinkel was my blood, and she remains my blood. All I want is for her to return home," she said.
The case has caused division within the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party, of which Mr. Mitho is a member. Earlier this month, President Asif Ali Zardari privately intervened to have Ms. Kumari taken into protective custody. Later, the president's sister, Dr. Azra Fazal Pechuho, delivered an impassioned speech to Parliament about the plight of the Hindu community.
"I have a lot of discomfort with this kind of behavior," said a senior party member from Sindh Province, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political delicacy of the matter. "The state is not giving the Hindus an equal environment. So they are turning to a narrative of forced conversion to fight back."
Pir Muhammad Shah, the local police chief, agreed that Mr. Mitho's actions had aggravated the situation. "It teased the whole Hindu community, and led them to believe the conversion had been done at gunpoint."
Officials with the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan have spoken of up to 20 forced conversions a month - and Hindu families fleeing for India - but they admit that the research is thin.
As Ms. Kumari's anticipated court date nears, it has revived many old tensions. And while no one is expecting widespread violence in her case, in some of its particulars it bears a remarkable resemblance to an earlier conversion scandal - one in 1936, when a British magistrate returned a Hindu girl to her parents after she had been converted. The result was an 11-year uprising by Muslim Pashtun tribesmen that at one point involved 40,000 British troops.Read the full story here.

Author Salman Rushdie calls Pakistan’s Imran Khan a “dictator in waiting”

Author Salman Rushdie calls Pakistan’s Imran Khan a “dictator in waiting”.(BM).
New Delhi (dpa) – British author Salman Rushdie lashed out at Pakistani cricket captain-turned-politician Imran Khan, describing him as a “dictator in waiting,” media reports said Sunday.
Rushdie was speaking at a conference in New Delhi from which Khan, founder of the popular Pakistan Movement for Justice (PTI) party withdrew, saying “he did not dream of being seen with Rushdie for the immeasurable hurt he has caused to Muslims.”
Rushdie attacked Khan for skipping the India Today Conclave, organized by the India Today news magazine, and said the neophyte politician was not a liberal.“I’m not sure Imran Khan has liberal points of view and I think if he ever gets in the seat, we might see the consequences,” he said.
“He has made deals with both the army and the mullahs. I think that’s pretty clear, in order to be where he is,” he said in comments broadcast on CNN-IBN network.Pakistani observers speculated that Khan, known for his close links to religious parties, decided to stay away from the event for fear of backlash from conservative circles in Pakistan.Rushdie denied causing harm to Muslims through his writing.“Fanatics cause biggest harm to Islam. Immeasurable harm has been caused to Muslims by terrorists,” he said.Rushdie’s 1988 novel, The Satanic Verses, created a storm in the Muslim world and Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini issued a death edict, forcing the writer to spend the next 10 years in hiding.The book is banned in Pakistan and India. Two months ago, Rushdie withdrew from the Jaipur literary festival after threats by Muslim groups.
Rushdie also criticized the Indian government and some of its political leaders of “cowardice” over their failure to defend the freedom of expression amid protests by Muslim and Hindu radicals.
“In India, religious fanaticism and political opportunism and, I have to say, public apathy is damaging the freedom on what all freedoms depend, freedom of expression,” he said.
“Freedom is not absolute, if you don’t defend it, you will lose it.”Hmmmm....Love the following comment on this story in 'Pakistantoday':"We are moderate Muslims...Imran Khan is face of Moderate Islam...we hate Rushdie...Taslima and Rushdie should be tried for blasphemy..."........if you had any doubts this was 'Moderate Islam'.Read the full story here.

British Islamist Anjem Choudary Launches 'Shariah for India,' Vows to Demolish Hindu Temples and Bollywood.

British Islamist Anjem Choudary Launches 'Shariah for India,' Vows to Demolish Hindu Temples and Bollywood; Muslims Urged to Join In New Delhi March Next Month Marking 88th Anniversary of the End of Islamic Caliphate.(Memri).By: Tufail Ahmad.
British Islamist Anjem Choudary and Omar Muhammad Bakri – both former leaders of British jihadist organization Al-Muhajiroun – have launched an organization called Shariah for Hind (India) to advance their agenda for reestablishing Islamic rule in India. The group has planned a major public event in New Delhi on March 3, 2012, which marks the end of the Turkey-led Islamic caliphate 88 years ago.

It should be noted that during the British rule, Indian leaders like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Mahatma Gandhi campaigned for the Islamic caliphate led by Turkey – Gandhi doing so perhaps to gain Muslim support against British colonial rule in India.

Shariah for Hind plans to campaign for reestablishing Islamic rule in India with an ideological agenda which outlines a much purer form of Islamic rule for the country than that which existed during various periods of rule by Muslim kings in India both before and during the British era.

According to the ideological agenda stated on the group's website, Islamic Shariah will be enforced in India; temples and statues of Hindu gods and Indian leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi will be demolished; and Bollywood, the world's largest movie industry, will be abolished in order to make way for a monotheistic Islamic rule in the country.
Shariah for Hind – The Ideology

"There is a Consensus among All Muslim Scholars That It is Not Permitted for Non-Muslims to Have Authority over Muslims; India Needs to Return Back to Her Glorious Islamic Past; India Needs a Muslim Revolution"

In a statement, titled "The Need for Muslim Rule in India," Shariah for Hind notes that Muslims cannot live under non-Muslim rule, stating:

"There is a consensus among all Muslim scholars that it is not permitted for non-Muslims to have authority over Muslims. Allah says in the Quran, 'I have created you (Muslims) a leading Ummah (nation) in order to witness the affairs of mankind.' [EMQ 2:143]

"Islam is the only religion to have maintained its relationship with God, with a miraculous book called the Quran and meticulous sciences that ensure texts recorded during the life of the final Messenger Muhammad can be verified, understood and authenticated. This cannot be said for any of the other world religions, which have literally been lost in translation.

"Fundamentally however, Islam is not a secular religion and, unlike the 'biggest democracy in the world' [i.e. India], always refers its governance back to the supreme commander, Allah (God).

"The Islamic constitution remains intact 1400 years after its inception, and emphatically puts the Indian constitution to shame. Political parties such as the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] and Indian [National] Congress have let India down because just like their British predecessors they were never suited to be rulers and so ruined their country with backward and evil policies."

"India needs to return back to her glorious Islamic past. India needs a Muslim revolution."

What is on offer for Muslims in the battle for their votes is supposedly community empowerment, quality education, protection and sensitivity in one form or other. Even the Peace Party and Ulema Council [political parties led by Muslims] have emerged to claim their stake.
"Sadly, the true rights of Muslims … [are] nowhere to be seen and no Islamic Scholar has had the courage to demand it. This is that the whole of India is in fact [a] Muslim land, the authority belongs to them and that they should take it from the current ruling party to implement the Shariah. Instead [of] begging for rights from the Hindus, the Muslims in India must govern by the law of the creator Allah (SWT). In fact it is an act of shirk (polytheism) to [be] rule[d] by other than what Allah has revealed or to ask another to do so (i.e. by voting for them).

"There is no Islamic justification for the Deobandis or Barelvis to participate in the kufr (non-Islamic) electoral system to elect someone who will violate the sanctity of Allah (SWT) by ruling according to man-made law. This is an act of apostasy from any Muslim which must be condemned."
"We therefore call upon all Muslims to rise on the 3rd of March 2012 (the 88th anniversary of the destruction of the last Islamic State) in New Dehli [Urdu for Delhi] in a public demonstration and demand what is rightfully theirs i.e. the authority, to establish the Khilafah and rule by the laws of God alone. To raise awareness about this obligation and to call for it and to work to establish it is an obligation upon Muslims wherever they are and to accept anything less is an act of war against Allah and his Messenger Muhammad (saw).

"Once established, the Islamic State will guarantee the rights of all citizens, Muslim and non-Muslim. It will be the job of the Khalifah [Islamic caliph] to ensure that food, clothing and shelter are afforded to all citizens and that they have a good Islamic education. The Khalifah will also be responsible to remove all public idols and ban alcohol and free-mixing between the genders in the public arena. Moreover institutions such as Bollywood and the caste system will be eradicated.

"The non-Muslims, whether Hindu or Sikh will have certain rights and responsibilities as set out by the divine law, in summary the privileges that they will have are:

"1. In return for paying the Jizya [Islamic poll tax on non-Muslims], their life and property will have sanctity. The Imam (khalifah) will have a duty to protect the non-Muslim citizens from the Muslims and the non-Muslims because they are living under his authority. Moreover they will benefit from the same welfare as all other citizens except what Shari'ah specifies for them and as long as they commit to abide by the law of Islam in the public arena. They will live among the Muslims and take Daw'ah i.e. be propagated to by the Muslims to embrace Islam.

"2. The non-Muslims will be allowed to live in the Muslim land (India and other territories which will be annexed to it in due course) i.e. they can go everywhere except where Allah (SWT) or the Khalifah prohibits, such as the haram [the Holy Mosque] in Mecca or to live in the Arab peninsula, although they can go to trade there.

"3. Muslims will be obliged to protect the non-Muslims because they are part of the Islamic State.

"4. Muslims will never attack their own temples and not take their pigs or alcohol unless they demonstrate them publicly.

"5. The non-Muslims also have the right to access the welfare system. The Jizya is only taken from able-bodied mature men, not women or children or priest or majnoon (mentally ill) or those incapable or disabled."

"The Hindus or Sikhs or Other Non-Muslims… Must Not Build Any New Temples Nor Start to Sell Them and Buy New Ones, as Islam Forbids Us to Cooperate in the Bad Deeds; They Will Not Do Any Public Gathering of Their False Religion – Like Celebrating Christmas or Halloween or Diwali"

"In return, the Hindus or Sikhs or other non-Muslims will have certain duties, in summary:

"1. They must pay the Jizya depending on what the Khalifah adopts as the amount, for example a minimum of 1 Dinar a year or a maximum of 4 Dinar if rich.

"2. They must receive Muslims as guests if they are travelling. This applies to Muslims and non-Muslims if Muslims pass by.

"3. They must not build any new Temples nor start to sell them and buy new ones, as Islam forbids us to cooperate on the bad deeds.

"4. They must not show their symbols publicly or what is in their religion, like the pigs or alcohol or crosses or idols.

"5. They will not do any public gathering of their false religion – like celebrating Christmas or Halloween or Diwali or Guy Faulks night etc…

"6. Moreover they must be distinguished by their clothes so that we know who they are.

"7. They cannot raise their houses above ours.

"8. They must not harm Muslims in any way, not to insult Allah and his messenger or insult the book of Allah

"9. They will have the same liability in relation to the society i.e. the public law like in relation to adultery and stealing etc…"Read the full 'story' here.

The western media continues to ignore the issues of Muslim persecution of minorities .It Is Not Just the Christians But Hindus Too

HT:ShoebatFoundation.

MFS - The Other News

                       Morning  Posting.

• Syria Live Blog - May 25. Here .(Al-Jazeera).

• Libya Live Blog - May 23. Here (Al-Jazeera). 

• Yemen Live Blog - May 27 . Here. (Al-Jazeera).

• Updated !Earthquakes in the last 24 hours in the world seismic activity in Japan  today 4.9  ! Lots of activity in Turkey.More info here.

• Japan - Latest official Situation Update No. 123.On 30.05.2011 at 10:33 GMT+2
  
  Two workers from Japan's stricken Fukushima nuclear plant have been contaminated by high levels of radioactive iodine, the operator said Monday, prompting fears over their long-term health. The workers, reportedly men in their 30s and 40s, may have already been exposed to radiation levels higher than the recently boosted official annual limit, Japanese media suggested. Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) said it had been measuring the internal exposure to radiation of all employees involved in emergency work at the Fukushima Daiichi plant crippled by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. Internal exposure occurs when people take radioactive substances into their bodies through tainted air or food and drink. The company notified the governmental atomic energy agency of the possible problem and the agency confirmed that "the thyroid glands of two male employees showed high levels of radiation (iodine-131)", TEPCO said in a statement.
  
  The Jiji Press news agency said the two workers had stopped working at the plant and were not sick at the moment. They will undergo further check-ups. The inspection by the government agency found 9,760 and 7,690 becquerels of iodine-131 in the thyroid glands of the workers, 10 times higher than other workers at Fukushima, reports said. The two men were working at a variety of locations at Fukushima Daiichi, including the central control room, in March and April, including on March 11 and during the following days. The tests sparked fears that their radiation exposure had been several hundred millisieverts, Jiji said. A few days after the disaster, the government boosted the annual limit of radiation exposure for emergency workers to 250 millisieverts from 100 as the nation battled the world's worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl in 1986. No workers have been confirmed to have been exposed radiation higher than the annual limit since the disaster. Radioactive iodine is known to accumulate in the thyroid gland.Source : Here .

• Japan : For the most accurate info on the nuclear disaster go to : Paul Langley's Nuclear History Blog.Here.

• Classy. Obama Sits in Front Row and Chews Gum at Joplin Memorial Service (Video)Maybe he learned this at his Trinity Church?See the full 'story' here.

• The Complete #Weinergate Timeline: Crack investigative journalists at Politico ignore overwhelming evidence it really was Weiner's wiener.(DougRoss).When it comes to investigating Democrats -- especially nascent Democrat superstars -- the hacks at Politico must turn a blind eye to facts, logic and reason. Which also explains why they are Democrats. Consider what "media" must ignore to believe Rep. Anthony Weiner's story that the photo tweeted from his account, depicting a skinny white dude with bulging underwear, was not him. He asserts, on his Twitter account and through spokesmen, that his social accounts were all hacked and then immediately recovered somehow.Consider this timeline:Read and see the full story here.

• Another "CHANGE" brought to you by the Obama administration,no more 4th of July fireworks?(SignonSandiego).Fireworks shows need new environmental review.Court ruling could have sweeping impact.What started as a battle over fireworks shows led to a sweeping legal victory Friday for environmentalists that could stymie a wide range of events needing city permits, from the Rock ’n’ Roll Marathon to birthday parties held at parks.“According to the strictest interpretation of this, jumpy-jumps and everything else would be subject to environmental review if this ruling stands,” said lawyer Robert Howard, who represented the La Jolla Community Fireworks Foundation in the case. “It’s a breathtaking ruling.”

California Environmental Quality Act

• The statute requires state and local agencies to identify significant environmental impacts of their actions and avoid or mitigate them, if feasible.

• Its origin can be traced to passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The next year, the state Legislature passed its own version and Gov. Ronald Reagan signed it.

• Projects that need discretionary governmental approval and could have an environmental impact generally require review under the law, unless an exemption applies.

• Public agencies are entrusted with compliance, which is enforced by the public through litigation.

Superior Court Judge Linda Quinn said La Jolla’s annual Fourth of July fireworks show requires evaluation under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.The case, filed by the Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation in Encinitas, targeted San Diego’s approval of the La Jolla event but eventually drew in a broad swath of city permits. San Diego officials said they issue about 400 special-events permits annually, along with up to 20,000 park-use permits for smaller-scale gatherings — most of which would now need environmental assessment.“San Diego issues thousands of these simple park-use permits over the counter with the only consideration being space, just as other cities do across the state,” said City Attorney Jan Goldsmith. “Existing law has never been interpreted to require a CEQA review for this. ... This decision opens the door to absurd results. This is the reason appellate courts exist and we plan to ask for their help.”Even before the judge’s ruling was finalized, Chula Vista officials on Thursday pulled the plug on their July Fourth show in the face of funding shortfalls and environmental challenges.The future of La Jolla’s event was fuzzy Friday. Organizers likely can’t complete the time-intensive and costly CEQA analysis by July 4, but Howard said he would ask the court to allow this year’s event while the case is appealed.City Councilwoman Sherri Lightner, whose district includes La Jolla, said she hoped to find a solution. “We have to strike a balance that protects the environment but also allows our finest traditions to continue,” she said.On Tuesday, the City Council ratified a long-standing city policy of exempting fireworks shows from special-events permits unless food or alcohol is sold. It was an attempt to shield pyrotechnics from environmental challenges, but Friday’s decision means CEQA still applies.Environmental impact reports can take a year and cost tens of thousands of dollars.“Does that mean every event has to get a full environmental impact report? No, but it means that the city has to undertake the burden and applicants have to undertake the cost” of a lower-level CEQA analysis, Howard said.He said some “events” such as temporary Christmas tree stands have existing exemptions under the law, but many others don’t.Alex Roth, a spokesman for Mayor Jerry Sanders, framed the suit as part of a “bizarre crusade to stop fireworks.”“What’s next, a lawsuit against swimmers for polluting the ocean with their suntan lotion?” Roth said.Hmmmm......where will this dictatorship end?Read the full story here.

• You got to be kidding?Albemarle Road church fined $100 per branch for excessive tree pruning.(Charlotteobserver).Every two to three years, Eddie Sales trims and prunes the crape myrtles at his church, Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church.But this year, the city of Charlotte cited the church for improperly pruning its trees."We always keep our trees trimmed back because you don't want to worry about them hanging down in the way," said Sales, a church member.The church was fined $100 per branch cut for excessive pruning, bringing the violation to $4,000."I just couldn't believe it when I heard about it," Sales said. "We trim our trees back every three years all over our property, and this is the first time we have been fined."The fine will be dropped if the church replaces each of the improperly pruned trees, said Tom Johnson, senior urban forester for city of Charlotte Land Development Division.Hmmmmm......Goodbye private property?Read the full story here.

• 'Bradford is very inbred': Muslim outrage as professor warns first-cousin marriages increase risk of birth defects.(DailyMail).Inbreeding among British Muslims is threatening the health of their children, a leading geneticist warned yesterday.Professor Steve Jones, from University College London, said the common practice in Islamic communities for cousins to marry each other increased the risk of birth defects.‘There may be some evidence that cousins marrying one another can be harmful,’ he told an audience at the Hay Festival. ‘We should be concerned about that as there can be a lot of hidden genetic damage. Children are much more likely to get two copies of a damaged gene. ‘Bradford is very inbred. There is a huge amount of cousins marrying each other there.’ Studies have shown that 55 per cent of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins – and in Bradford, this rises to 75 per cent.Other research has found that children of first cousins are ten times more likely to have recessive genetic disorders and face deafness, blindness and infant mortality.But Prof Jones’s comments provoked anger among some Muslim groups yesterday.Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, which promotes the image of Muslims in Britain, said: ‘I know many Muslims who have married their cousins and none of them have had a problem with their children.‘Obviously, we don’t want any children to be born disabled who don’t need to be born disabled, so I would advise genetic screening before first cousins marry.'But I find Steve Jones’s comments unworthy of a professor. Using language like “inbreeding” to describe cousins marrying is completely inappropriate and further demonises Muslims.’Concern about the risks to children from first-cousin marriage has been described as the last great taboo.Read the full story here.More on Muslim Inbreeding: Impacts on intelligence, sanity, health and society here.

• Gaza: Sheikh Yassin's house declared heritage site.(Ynet).Hamas to open home of spiritual leader killed in 2004 to visitors, turning location into historical landmark.The Hamas government decided to open the home of its former spiritual leader and founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was assassinated in 2004, to visitors.A Hamas official announced the decision will allow visitors to learn more about Yassin's "Jihadist career" as well as his activities against the "Israeli occupation." "The goal is to commemorate his image in a place which saw him devote his life to the distribution of Islam," the official remarked.Hamas prime minister in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh gave his blessing to the project, saying: "It will help us revive the memory of the Sheikh amongst the Arab and Islamic population."Visitors will be able to see the many pictures hanging in Yassin's living room, including photos with such leaders as Former Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. The wheelchair he used to get around the house and his conference room will also be on display.Abu Bilal Yassin, the person tasked with maintaining the site, said the home embodies "the history of the Palestinian people's resistance as well as Yassin's life." Hamas made sure to preserve and display, for the first time ever, the wheelchair Yassin sat on when he was assassinated, as well as the blanket he covered himself with that day.Hmmmmm.......Hamas Obama's peace partners sanctifying murderous terrorists.Read the full story here.

• Will an Arab Spring be needed for Turkey?(HurriyetDaily).The question of what exactly President Barack Obama wanted to achieve by his Middle East speech was on everybody’s mind in Washington last week, which was filled by Israel related events. Obama’s speech on the Middle East and “shocking” 1967 lines reference created a political earthquake between him and Israeli right wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu along with conservative Jewish-Americans, many of whom I talked with during the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC’s annual conference in Washington.The AIPAC crowd was not only woeful with Obama’s rhetoric but also was disturbed by repercussions of the Arab Spring across the region in addition to serious signals about the possibility of the peaceful protests’ arrival into Palestine. These vexations subjoined by the fear of loosing regional allies left and right were clearly reflected on Netanyahu’s body language at the White House, while lecturing Obama in front of a whole world.Turkey was also another source of exasperation among the AIPAC crowd, which was lengthily discussed in two AIPAC panels. Robert Wexler, a former co-chair of the Turkish Caucus at the Congress, therefore had two extremely difficult tasks at the conference; to defend Obama’s speech against mostly wrathful audience, and explain the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, leadership to some other ireful listeners as not a total “enemy,” an observation, which Wexler only laughed at when I conveyed to him during post-panel conversation.There certainly seems to be a “Turkey” problem for Israel, though it increasingly appears from Washington that the United States administration has been settling for a “modus vivendi” with “fretful” Turkish administration, by mainly pursuing a case by case approach in the relations. Dr. Anne-Marie Slaughter, director of the Policy Planning at the State Department until just a few weeks ago, as the first woman to fulfill the position in U.S. history, in an interview after Netanyahu’s theatrical joint session of Congress address on Tuesday, stated Turkey did not exactly live up to the expectations of Washington as a regional partner in last two years, citing primarily the Tehran Reactor Deal, in which she refused to elaborate how exactly the accident happened. On Syria, Slaughter sees the Turkish diplomatic efforts to persuade Assad regime so far “ineffective... since Syria is still continuing its violence against its people,” though she believes that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu “have a real opportunity to exercise regional leadership here.”Ankara so far neither went far enough to join the West in sanctions against Assad regime, nor was able to stay indifferent to Damascus’ brutal crackdown on its civilians. In result, neither Damascus nor the West has come to appreciate its efforts.Views greatly vary over what constitutes ‘naivete’ or “foresight” for Turkey’s Syrian policy. One “realist” Turkey and Middle East expert this week was seeking an answer behind what the expert called Turkey’s “unrealist” policy towards Syria, arguing that “since the basic power structures of the Syrian regime are strong and civilian protests are over-blown by the Western media,” why then does Ankara push Assad into Iran’s arms and demolishes decade long political and economic investments there?What is taking place is probably the following: While S. Arabia, by large, is taking the lead of the counterrevolution forces in the region, the discussions continues in Ankara whether to take a lead of the “pro-change” forces during “the fourth wave of democratization,” as Slaughter calls the Arab Revolution, and this indecisive state of Turkish mind produces half-measured and thankless policies. “All previous waves of democratization have resulted in more democracies overall, those countries that make it, that cast off dictatorship and succeed in electing governments… over time they will also make the Middle East a more stable, peaceful, and prosperous region,” said Slaughter.It is not only the Arab world but also Turkey has a tough road ahead. While the Arab world will live through upheavals, Turkey will undertake a historic mission to write its own, civilian Constitution following the June elections, deal with the Kurdish reality head-on and witness if the Ergenekon trials will do a just, so Turkey can start its normal life.Indeed, in the post-election period, it is Turkey who will have to update its own democratic credentials by creating such an inclusive constitution so it can lead by its own example in an evermore democratized region.If the Turkish leadership cannot get these vital issues right, I am afraid, or confident, that we will witness the spirit of the Arab Spring begin with startling splashes in many corners of Turkey.That is why, there is no other way for Ankara but to set audaciously a sample for best democratic norms, for its and region’s future.Hmmmm......Turkey the next Iran.Read the full story here.

• Iranian Ayatollah Affirms Legitimacy of Suicide Operations, Approves Killing Israeli Civilians –Including Children.(Memri).   May 30, 2011 Special Dispatch No.3875

The issue of martyrdom operations and their religious legitimacy has been repeatedly discussed by Iranian ayatollahs. In a recent fatwa posted on his website in response to an online inquiry, Iranian Ayatollah Taqi Mesbah-e Yazdi ruled that martyrdom operations were not only legitimate but were a duty incumbent upon every Muslim.The inquirer asked whether such operations were considered suicide and were therefore forbidden, and whether Israeli civilians, especially children, were to be regarded as illegitimate targets, like civilians elsewhere. In his reply, Ayatollah Mesbah-e Yazdi expressed regret that the inquirer had apparently bought into the propaganda of the enemies of Islam, which presented martyrdom operations as suicide, and that the inquirer was wasting his time on this issue instead of focusing on "uprooting the Zionist regime" and its supporters. The Ayatollah ruled that when defending Islam and the Muslim ummah necessitated martyrdom, it was not considered suicide.

Martyrdom Operations Are Not Only Permissible but Obligatory

Q: "Some people say that martyrdom operations are considered suicide and that they are haram [forbidden] because they contradict Islam. They quote Hadiths, such as this one by Imam Ja'afar [Al-Sadeq]: 'A Muslim may fight and be killed [by the enemy], but will never shed his own blood' and ayat [Koranic verses] such as: 'Do not kill yourselves, for Allah is compassionate towards you. Whoever [does,] does so in transgression and wrongfully. We shall roast [him] in a fire, and that is an easy matter for Allah.' [Koran 4:29-30]

"They say this even about the martyrdom operations against military targets, such as the ones used by Hizbullah [in] Lebanon, or the ones used by the Iranian army against Saddam's army...

"The question [is whether] martyrdom operations, in which a person detonate[s] himself [in the midst of] enemy [forces], are haram. Is it suicide? Why or why not? Please answer this question, as there is lots of discussion and confusion about this issue."

A: "It is regrettable that the propaganda of the enemies of Islam has influenced the Muslim ummah so much that Muslims, instead of planning for the uprooting of the Zionist regime and its arrogant supporters, have occupied themselves with questioning and discussing the legitimacy of the Palestinians' self defense, which is carried out under the most oppressive conditions imaginable.

"[Certainly], when protecting Islam and the Muslim ummah depends on martyrdom operations, it not only is allowed, but is even an obligation (wajib), as many of the [great Shi'ite] scholars and Maraje' [sources of emulation], including [Ayatollah] Safi Golpayegani and [Ayatollah] Fazel Lankarani, have clearly announced in their fatwas. Consider the rewayah [i.e. tradition about] the prophet of Allah [i.e. Muhammad], who said: 'Whoever is killed in defense of his belongings, he/she is [a] shahid [martyr]' (Wasa'il al-Shi'ah, v.15, p.121)."

Only Those Israelis Who Openly Denounce Their Government Are Illegitimate Targets

Q: "Now, about [the] targeting [of] civilians in the Zionist state. Some say that according to the teaching[s] of [Ahl Al-Bayt, i.e. the Prophet Muhammad's household] and the Koran, it is haram to target civilians in any case. They also say that Israelis are civilians like any other people, while others believe they are settlers and usurpers [rather than] civilians.

"Are the operations [carried out] by Hamas and [Islamic] Jihad against [Israeli] 'civilians' haram? Why or why not? How about the Israeli children killed in such attacks? If it is not haram, what is the answer to those who quote the Hadith [which forbids targeting] non-combatants."

A: "Muslims should not attack those civilians of the occupied territories who have announced their opposition to their government's vicious crimes, except [in] situations in which they are used as human shields and [when] fighting the aggressors depends on attacking those [same] civilians."

Q: "...Given the fact that [today] there are [weapons of] mass destruction and that it is not always easy to prevent civilian [casualties] in wars [as it was in the past], what would be the ruling about attacks that unintentionally kill civilians in wars (as in the case of the Iran-Iraq war)?

"Also, say we live in a Muslim country, and there is another country which attack[s] one of our cities with nuclear weapons and wipe[s] it out. Then this country announce[s that] it will destroy our cities one by one using nuclear weapons.

"Supposing [this same] country ha[s] all its nuclear weapons in one of their cities – would it be [permissible] for [a] Muslim country to attack this city and destroy the nuclear weapons there before they are used to annihilate the Muslims, even though [this] would [cause civilian casualties] in that city, [if] this [were] the only way to protect the lives of the Muslims?..."

A: "In the case of conflict between two Muslim nations, Muslims should assist the oppressed against the oppressor.

"But before the war is waged, initiating [preemptive attacks] depends on [whether] permission [is granted by the] velayat-e faqih [rule of the jurisprudent]."With prayers for your success."Hmmmm......Read the full story here.

• Brotherhood sheikh to run for president wants to see no 'naked' women on the beaches,goodbye tourism.(Almasryalyoum)Muslim Brotherhood Sheikh Hazem Abu Ismail announced his intention to run in Egypt’s upcoming presidential elections.He said that if elected he would implement Islamic sharia law and cancel the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.Ismail was the Brotherhood’s candidate in 2005 parliamentary elections for Dokki in Giza.The group announced earlier that it would not take part in the presidential elections and confirmed that it would compete for only half the seats in Parliament. But Ismail is the second Brotherhood member to have announced his intention to run for president in defiance of the group's leadership. The other Brotherhood candidate is Abdel Moneim Abouel Fotouh, a liberal-minded Islamist.Abu Ismail said Saturday during a speech in a Dokki mosque that he will sweep the elections. Since he is an ordinary man, he said, the masses will support him.Abu Ismail said that his platform revolves around Islam, while "Mohamed ElBaradei, Amr Moussa, and Hamdeen Sabahi, the liberal candidates, will be unable to present a clear vision” for the country.“If I could apply sharia in Egypt, all people, including non-Muslims, would applaud me four years later,” said Abu Ismail.For his opinion on Brotherhood, he said, “They are chaste people and my opinion would not change even if they don’t support me.”Concerning the peace treaty with Israel, he said, “The Camp David peace treaty is insulting to the Egyptian people, so it must be canceled, and I will do my best to convince people to cancel it.”The sheikh said that no current presidential candidate represents the Egyptian people.“We seek to apply Islamic law, but those who don’t want it prefer cabarets, alcohol, dancers and prostitution, as the implementation of Islamic law will prohibit women to appear naked in movies and on beaches,”Abu Ismail added.Hmmmm......Welcome back to A.d.620?Read the full story here.

• Will Islam Destroy Itself?(SultanKnish).In his address to congress, Netanyahu said that militant Islam threatens Islam. As if there were any such thing as a non-militant form of Islam. An ideology that was militantly expansionistic from birth. And yet that expansionism does threaten it.It's not mere militancy that threatens Islam, but its own lack of proportion. Had the Nazis satisfied themselves with a round of domestic purges and only a little territorial expansionism, today they might still be running a bankrupt decaying state. And news stories from the 1970's and 1980's might carry reports of popular protests against the disastrous economics of National Socialism. But Hitler and his cronies lacked a sense of proportion. When they capped off an invasion of Russia, war in Africa and an air campaign against England, with a declaration of war on America-- they were done. And their ideology went down with them.

If an ideology fighting a simultaneous war on nearly every continent sounds familiar, it should. The new Islamic crusade is just as arrogantly overextended. Just as certain that it can win every battle because it's destined to. That its inherent superiority makes it unbeatable. And that its enemies are cowards who are easily tricked and even more easily beaten.

Petrodollars and Jihadis are being rushed to conflicts around the globe. And Muslim countries are racing to acquire nuclear weapons, even though it puts their own populations in the firing line of a nuclear war. Muslim terrorism is turning immigration into a national security issue. And Sharia is raising hackles even among many liberals. The arrogance and hubris of the Islamic crusade for a new caliphate has made too many enemies, too fast. And it relies on Western complicity and money. That remains its weak point.

Had Muslims focused on domestic revolutions, most of the world would have let it go. Western countries have lost their enthusiasm for armed interventions on behalf of tyrants. And if foreign businessmen can learn to live with Dubai and Saudi Arabia, they would have accepted similar transformations in Egypt and Syria. Muslims could have assembled a Caliphate with hardly an objection from abroad. But instead they spent more time focused on conquest, than on revolution.

Like an amateur gambler flush with his winnings, the Imams and Mullahs swelled with pride and decided they couldn't lose. They wouldn't just bring down their own countries, instead they would tie everything together and pull it all down. Use terrorism to blackmail and intimidate the West. And then use that as a lever for regime change. It's working quite well so far. But then again most battle plans work, when the enemy is hardly fighting back.The Islamists are assembling too many enemies too fast, to consider what would happen if those enemies united against them. They have spent too much time gloating over the Western dependency on their oil and their immigrants to think about what will happen the day the oil pipeline and the immigration pipeline are cut off. Like the Nazis, they are spending too much time moving pins on a map to note all the places where they are advancing, all the wars they are fighting and all the mosques they are building, to take the time to realize how vulnerable that makes them.Fortune rewards the aggressor who takes the initiative. But that's only until he overreaches. And then the other side takes the initiative.Read the full story here.

• At least six Yemeni soldiers killed in 'al-Qaeda-held town'.(Al-Jazeera).At least six Yemeni soldiers have been killed and dozens injured in an apparent ambush as they travelled to Zinjibar, a southern city reportedly under the control of al-Qaeda fighters, a security official has said.According to residents, Yemeni warplanes later targeted positions held by the fighters.Earlier on Sunday, residents spoke of up to 300 fighters entering Zinjibar and taking over "everything". The fighters were alleged to be al-Qaeda members.Opposition leaders accuse Ali Abdullah Saleh, Yemen's embattled president under pressure to quit and end his 33-year rule, of allowing Zinjibar on the Gulf of Aden, to fall to al-Qaeda and allied fighters in order to raise alarm in the region that would in turn win him support.The security official who spoke about the attack in Zinjibar said he not did not know who was responsible and gave no figures of the injured soldiers.Elsewhere in the troubled country swept by anti-government protests, at least 20 people were killed in the southern city of Taiz after soldiers opened fire indscriminately on a protest camp, a source said. They did not give further details on the violence in Taiz, but said the death toll was likely to rise.Ashraf Khandari, a journalist based in Aden, said protesters were sprayed with live bullets and hot water, adding that "a lot of people" had been killed.The latest unrest came days after troops loyal to Saleh clashed with Hashed tribesmen who support the opposition.Read the full story here.More here.

• Mark Zuckerberg Avoids Death Penalty in Pakistan: But Facebook Likely To Be Shut Down.(AhmadiyyaTimes).Source/Credit: Gizmo Crunch |By Christopher Hudson | May 26, 2011

Facebook had come under heavy criticism for its lackluster approach to privacy. While most tech pundits were certain that this would be the eventual demise of Facebook, a new turn of events show that the social network has managed to create waves in many other ways, seeing as the Facebook users and their content it technically the responsibility and property of Facebook.TG Daily reports that Mark Zuckerberg has just dodged the death penalty in Pakistan after a blasphemy case had been silently dropped by the Pakistani courts.Zuckerberg came under heavy fire when an American used Facebook for a 'Everybody Draw Mohammed!' competition. Pakistan had temporarily blocked access to the site but due to the absence of appropriate legislation the High Court ordered, the site was again accessible in Pakistan. Simultaneously, the Deputy Attorney General took legal action and prosecuted Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg under section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code:"Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine." - 295-C (Pakistan Penal Code).While we are certain that even if the charges weren't dropped, the Pakistani court would not have been able to lay down the sentence as they would have had a tough time extraditing Zuckerberg from the US. Nevertheless as TG Daily reports, while "he's no longer under threat of the death penalty. Unfortunately, though, a Pakistani court has essentially ordered the government to police Facebook for 'objectionable' content, meaning there's a high chance the site will be shut down in the country."Hmmmmm........The 'allies' of the Obama administration.Read the full story here.

• Bill to treat Hindus in India as Jews In Nazi Germany – All Under Sonia Gandhi Leadership.(HIDF).A Bill that damns the majority . May 28, 2011 2:27:22 AM .By Arun Jaitley.

The draft Prevention of Communal Violence Bill appears to be the handiwork of those social entrepreneurs who have learnt from the Gujarat experience of how to fix senior leaders even when they are not liable for an offence

A draft of a proposed legislation titled “Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011” has been put in public domain. The draft Bill ostensibly appears to be a part of an endeavour to prevent and punish communal violence in the country. Though that may be the ostensible object of the proposed law its real object is to the contrary. It is a Bill which if it is ever enacted as a law will intrude into the domain of the State, damage the federal polity of India, and create an imbalance in the inter-community relationship of this country.

What does the Bill in effect state

The most vital definition of the Bill is of the expression ‘group’. A ‘group’ means a religious or linguistic minority and in a given State may include the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Bill creates a whole set of new offences in Chapter II. Clause 6 clarifies that the offences under this Bill are in addition to the offences under the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Can a person be punished twice for the same offence? Clause 7 prescribes that a person is said to commit sexual assault if he or she commits any of the sexual act against a person belonging to a ‘group’ by virtue of that person’s membership of a group.

 Clause 8 prescribes that ‘hate propaganda’ is an offence when a person by words oral or written or a visible representation causes hate against a ‘group’ or a person belonging to a ‘group’.

 Clause 9 creates an offence for communal and targeted violence. Any person who singly or jointly or acting under the influence of an association engages in unlawful activity directed against a ‘group’ is guilty of organised communal and targeted violence.

Clause 10 provides for punishment of a person who expends or supplies money in the furtherance or support of an offence against a ‘group’. The offence of torture is made out under

 Clause 12 where a public servant inflicts pain or a suffering, mental or physical, on a person belonging to a ‘group’.

 Clause 13 punishes a public servant for dereliction of duty in relation to offences mentioned in this Bill.

 Clause 14 punishes public servants who control the armed forces or security forces and fails to exercise control over people in his command in order to discharge their duty effectively.

Clause 15 expands the principle of vicarious liability. An offence is deemed to be committed by a senior person or office-bearer of an association and he fails to exercise control over subordinates under his control or supervision. He is vicariously liable for an offence which is committed by some other person.

Clause 16 renders orders of superiors as no defence for an alleged offence committed under this section. Any communal trouble during which offences are committed is a law and order problem. Dealing with the law and order is squarely within the domain of the State Governments. In the division of powers between the Centre and the States, the Union Government has no direct authority to deal with the law and order issues; nor is it directly empowered to deal with them nor it can legislate on the subject. The Union Government’s jurisdiction restricts itself to issue advisories, directions and eventually forming an opinion under Article 356 that the governance of the State can be carried on in accordance with the Constitution or not. If the proposed Bill becomes a law, then effectively it is the Union Government which would have usurped the jurisdiction of the States and legislated on a subject squarely within the domain of the States.

India has been gradually moving towards a more amicable inter-community relationship. Even when minor communal or caste disturbances occur, there is a national mood of revulsion against them. The Governments, media, the courts among other institutions rise to perform their duty. The perpetrators of communal trouble should certainly be punished. This draft Bill however proceeds on a presumption that communal trouble is created only by members of the majority community and never by members of the minority community. Thus, offences committed by members of the majority community against members of the minority community are punishable. Identical offences committed by minority groups against the majority are not deemed to be offences at all. Thus a sexual assault is punishable under this Bill only if committed against a person belonging to a minority ‘group’. A member of a majority community in a State does not fall within the purview of a ‘group’. ‘Hate propaganda’ is an offence against the minority community and not otherwise. Organised and targeted violence, hate propaganda, financial help to such persons who commit an offence, torture or dereliction of duty by public servants are all offences only if committed against a member of the minority community and not otherwise. No member of the majority community can ever be a victim. This draft law thus proceeds on an assumption which re-defines the offences in a highly discriminatory manner. No member of the minority community is to be punished under this Act for having committed the offence against the majority community. It is only a member of the majority community who is prone to commit such offences and therefore the legislative intent of this law is that since only majority community members commit these offences, culpability and punishment should only be confined to them. If implemented in a manner as provided by this Bill, it opens up a huge scope for abuse. It can incentivise members of some communities to commit such offences encouraged by the fact that they would never be charged under the Act. Terrorist groups may no longer indulge in terrorist violence. They will be incentivised to create communal riots due to a statutory assumption that members of a jihadi group will not be punished under this law. The law makes only members of the majority community culpable. Why should the law discriminate on the basis of religion or caste? An offence is an offence irrespective of origin of the offender. Here is a proposed law being legislated in the 21st century where caste and religion of an offender wipe out his culpability. Hmmmm........Why do i have this gut feeling this 'law' will be followed by others?Read the full story here.