New Delhi: Delhi Ministers and AAP leaders Saurabh Bhardwaj and Atishi Singh and others meet wrestlers during their ongoing protest at Jantar Mantar, in New Delhi, Friday, April 28, 2023. (PTI Photo/Ravi Choudhary)
New Delhi: The protesting wrestlers rejoiced “the first step towards victory” as Delhi Police decided to file an FIR against WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. However, they will continue their agitation and demanded that the BJP MP be removed from all the positions he holds.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi Police, told a Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha that the FIR would be registered on Friday.
The wrestlers, who have accused the WFI chief of sexual harassment and intimidation, have been demanding that an FIR be filed since they resumed their agitation on April 23.
“This is first step towards victory but our protest will continue,” Sakshi Malik told reporters at Jantar Mantar, where they put up huge banners, with one of those listing all the ongoing criminal proceedings against Brij Bhushan.
Vinesh Phogat said it took Delhi Police six days to file an FIR and they don’t trust the probe agency.
“It (Police) might file a loose FIR. We we will see, observe then take a decision (on calling off protest). He should be behind the bars and removed from all the posts he holds, otherwise he will try to influence the investigation,” World Championship medallist Vinesh said.
Srinagar, Apr 28: Authorities in the Regional Transport office here on Friday asked all the registered dealers, officers, officials of the Motor Vehicle Department and insurance agencies not to make any sale, purchase or register any vehicle involving a minor.
A circular, issued by the Office of the Regional Transport Officer (RTO), Kashmir, a copy of which lies with the news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), reads that it has observed that motor vehicle dealers have sold and registered motor vehicles in the name of minors, which amounts to a violation of Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
In the circular, it is underlined that under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, any sale agreement executed with a minor is deemed void abinitio, adding that a registered motor vehicle along with its registered owner is a legal person and in case of violation of provisos of motor vehicle laws and rules made thereunder, by any such vehicle invokes penal action against the owner.
“Now, therefore, in the interest of law and justice, it is enjoined upon all the registered dealers, officers/officials of the motor vehicle department, the general public, insurance agencies, and other stakeholders, not to make any sale/purchase or to register any vehicle involving a minor,” the order reads—(KNO)
Xi Jinping’s phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskiy was a long time coming, but it should not have come as a surprise. Beijing is on everyone’s shortlist when it comes to prospective peacemakers in Ukraine. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, is no exception. “I know I can count on you to bring back Russia to reason and everyone back to the negotiating table,” Macron told the Chinese leader during their meeting in Beijing this month.
Though Xi replied that he would call the Ukrainian president, he was in no rush. He has no illusions about the difficulty of serving as mediator in a war where Ukraine and Russia are in diametrically opposing positions. Yet China’s recent success in bringing about the normalisation of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia may entice him to help engineer a diplomatic solution to the biggest war fought in Europe since 1945. But what would that solution look like?
The Chinese have repeatedly stressed, most explicitly in the 12-point peace proposal they released on the one-year anniversary of the war, that peace in Ukraine can be restored only through negotiations that “ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire”. Despite conventional wisdom, Beijing was not advocating a ceasefire that would freeze the current battle lines as new borders (an arrangement that would leave large swathes of Ukrainian territory in Russian hands), but rather the beginning of a political process that would “ultimately” lead to a permanent cessation of the fighting. Moreover, the proposal said nothing about the territorial terms of a settlement and indeed stressed the need for both sides to show restraint – a formulation repeated in China’s readout of Xi’s conversation with Zelenskiy. Most importantly, it stressed the need to respect the “sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries, regardless of whether they were weak or strong, rich or poor”.
The phraseology is pertinent: China is meticulous about its diplomatic language, especially in public statements. Beijing certainly wants to preserve its “no limits friendship” with Moscow, but has been careful not to adopt a stance so favourable to Russia that Ukraine would be unwilling to accept China as a mediator.
Xi doubtless realises by now that Russia cannot achieve its territorial objectives – which, at minimum, are to partition Ukraine – by winning the war militarily, and that the fighting can only end through an agreement based on mutual compromise by the two parties. As important as Russia is for Beijing, Xi also wants to protect Chinese economic interests in Ukraine over the long term: China remains Ukraine’s largest foreign trading partner and has ploughed money into major infrastructure projects, including the modernisation of Mykolaiv port and the construction of a new subway line in Kyiv.
The US and some of its European allies will probably dismiss Xi’s overtures to Zelenskiy as yet another stunt to obscure Beijing’s political and economic support for Putin during the war – for instance by importing Russian crude oil, which reached a 33-month high in March, and refusing to support UN resolutions condemning Russia’s invasion. This, in part, explains Washington’s rejection of Beijing’s 12-point plan.
Yet China’s careful moves to position itself as the broker of a diplomatic settlement in Ukraine ought not to be dismissed summarily. Xi would not have wasted time having a long conversation with Zelenskiy to no end. Nor would the Chinese have announced their readiness to send “a special representative for Eurasian affairs to Ukraine and other countries” purely as a public relations gambit. China also would not go to such lengths if it didn’t have support from Russia and Ukraine for a diplomatic initiative. Tellingly, Zelenskiy was quick to characterise his call with Xi as “meaningful” and positive, and the Russian foreign ministry commended Xi for his “readiness to strive to establish” a diplomatic track.
We should be under no illusions: while China may be interested in jump-starting a negotiating process between Kyiv and Moscow, reaching an agreement that ends the war will not happen quickly, and it may even be unattainable. Xi can read the battlefield and the positions of the combatants as well as anyone,and he understands the blunt reality that there will be more, not less, war over the short term. The Ukrainian military is in the closing stages of preparing for a major counteroffensive against Russian positions in the south and east. The US and its Nato allies continue to coordinate efforts to ensure that Kyiv possesses the weaponry – including tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, mine-clearing equipment and air defence systems – required for a successful campaign. The Russian military has spent months solidifying its defensive positions in the roughly 20% of Ukraine it controls, even as the Wagner mercenary group tries to capture Bakhmut after an eight-month slog. Neither Ukraine nor Russia will therefore rush to the bargaining table any time soon. And even if they do eventually sit down for talks, efforts at mediation could prove to be a fool’s errand given how far part Russia and Ukraine are on the minimal terms for a deal.
Still, Xi’s call with Zelenskiy, and Kyiv and Moscow’s positive reaction to it, might at least stimulate creative thinking about ways to end the war. Without that, the death and destruction will drag on indefinitely.
Rajan Menon is the director of the grand strategy programme at Defense Priorities, a professor emeritus at the Colin Powell School for Civic and Global Leadership at the City College of New York, and co-author of Conflict in Ukraine: The Unwinding of the Post-Cold War Order
Daniel R DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune and Newsweek
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
[ad_2]
#China #broker #peace #Ukraine #Dont #rule #Rajan #Menon #Daniel #DePetris
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Occupation Part-time history lecturer, part-time cleaner
Voting recordGrew up in Montana, a Democrat surrounded by conservatives
Amuse bouche As a teenager and inspired by Tolkien, Nick invented his own language called Hesperian
Peter, 60, Bristol
Occupation Computer science professor
Voting record A Labour party member until recently, Peter is no fan of Keir Starmer and sometimes votes Green
Amuse bouche Once lived in a squat in London. “The police burst in, but we didn’t have any drugs, so they left with their tails between their legs”
For starters
Nick He was a lovely man. I could tell he was very much in this for the conversation. He wasn’t quite as into the menu as I was – that was half my motivation. I had paneer tikka and a prawn curry.
Peter He was smart and thoughtful, able to hold his own but also listen. I could be his father – he’s younger than my daughters – but I can’t say it made any difference. The food was very good, too.
The big beef
Nick Peter seems to have this mindset that the young today – Gen Z and millennials – have it uniquely bad, and that this explains what people term the mental health crisis. I see it more as a self-fulfilling prophecy. I guess I see what were formerly just normal conditions of life – things people addressed through philosophy or religion – being medicalised.
Peter No generation has it easy. But if I was the same age as Nick, I’d be thinking: “I can’t buy a house, rent is really expensive” – and that would make me worry about the future. I’d be concerned about climate change, mass extinction events. That creates a lot of stress for people.
Nick I accept that a lot of problems like anxiety and depression probably have roots in brain chemistry. But for students worried about doing poorly on tests or not fitting in, it becomes: “I now have anxiety as part of my identity.” It is something they embrace and then don’t really try to overcome. Maybe I’m projecting a bit unfairly.
Peter It’s a spectrum – everyone is physically ill sometimes, and almost certainly slightly mentally ill sometimes as well. In the end, it’s that medics are better able to diagnose it.
Sharing plate
Peter We agreed that Brexit had been economically bad. But I think it might be good for the following reason: some people look back at the empire and think Britain is this fantastic leading country, but actually it isn’t. If Brexit teaches humility, that is a good thing, and Britain may then become a good European nation rather than being the bad boy in the room all the time.
skip past newsletter promotion
after newsletter promotion
Nick I view the election of Trump in similar terms. I hate him – there was a legitimate risk he could have subverted democracy. But at the same time it has forced America to reckon with its place in the world. When I was growing up, we were literally told we were so lucky to be born in the most free, wonderful country that God ever created. I don’t think it’s the same here, but imperial nostalgia is confronting reality now.
For afters
Nick One of the reasons Peter had for voting against Brexit was that it would unleash a rightwing coup.
Peter The EU is a neoliberal club, but it is blunted, and that EU club has blunted the neoliberals here. They want to be released from those restraints. I feared a rightwing coup, and that seems to have happened – Johnson coming into power, the Tufton Street cabal, Kwarteng, Truss and so on.
Nick I think Britain is a more socially democratic country than before, though whether that is because of Covid is another question. I don’t agree with Peter’s overblown fears about what Brexit would unleash. That is partly shaped by his experience of the 80s – he seems like a school of Tony Benn type.
Takeaways
Nick So much of the resentment I have towards my own generation is because it’s impossible to have these kinds of broad discussions. It was nice to talk about how societies can be overhauled rather than getting bogged down in identity politics. At the same time, it was a reminder that I’m a bit cloistered in my own attitudes.
Peter I do like being challenged. It was a very positive experience. We exchanged numbers, so who knows – maybe I’ll invite him and his partner round for dinner. I’m not so good, but my wife is very good at cooking.
Additional reporting: Kitty Drake
Nick and Peter ate at Nutmeg in Bristol.
Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take part
[ad_2]
#Dining #divide #dont #agree #overblown #fears #Brexit #unleash
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Ali Hussein Jaloud, a 21-year-old Iraqi who lives next to one of BP’s biggest oilfields, was meant to ask a question at the company’s annual shareholder meeting today. He was going to challenge the CEO on why his company continues to poison his neighbourhood with cancer-causing pollution. But, just a few days ago, Ali died of a form of leukaemia that has been linked to chemicals released by the burning of fossil fuels. His grieving father will ask why BP did not use its vast profits to help save his life.
Over the past two years, my fellow investigator Owen Pinnell and I got to know Ali while making a documentary for BBC News Arabic, Under Poisoned Skies, which revealed the deadly impact of gas flaring in southern Iraq, including at BP’s Rumaila oilfield where Ali lives, surrounded by oil company-patrolled checkpoints. We also found out that Rumaila has more gas flaring than any other oilfield in the world.
Routine gas flaring is a wasteful and avoidable practice used by oil companies to burn off the natural gas expelled during drilling. The process releases both greenhouse gases and dangerous air pollution. The gas could be captured instead and used to power people’s homes, saving them from dangerous emissions. But for more than a decade, BP and its partners have failed to build the necessary infrastructure. Since the Iraq war, BP has extracted oil worth £15.4bn from the country. BP said it was “extremely concerned” by the issues raised by our film (and in February said it was working to reduce flaring and emissions at Rumaila) but announced record profits from the oilfield in the year we launched the film.
A keen footballer, Ali was diagnosed with leukaemia at 15. He had to drop out of school and his football team, and embark on two painful years of treatment. His family had to sell their furniture and take donations from their community to pay for it. “Sometimes I wished I would die so that I could stop torturing my parents,” he told us. But, miraculously, Ali survived. He was too old to return to school, so he set up a small mobile phone shop.
Ali had been told by doctors that pollution had probably caused his cancer, and he quietly started advocating for a greener Iraq, one where children could breathe clean air. In his last Instagram post, just days before his death, Ali called for the oil companies to stop routine gas flaring and “save the youth of the country from kidney failure and cancer”.
‘In Iraq, the law states that gas flaring shouldn’t be closer than 10km (6 miles) from people’s homes.’ Excess gas is burned off near workers at the Rumaila oil field, south of Basra. Photograph: Atef Hassan/REUTERS
Rumaila, the town where Ali was living, is heavily guarded and journalists are denied access, so we asked Ali to record video diaries documenting his daily life. In the first scene of our film, he opens his front gate to reveal a towering black cloud of smoke, just a few hundred metres away, beneath which children play hopscotch. In Iraq, the law states that gas flaring shouldn’t be closer than 10km (6 miles) from people’s homes.
“These children are happily playing, they’re not aware of the poison that is coursing through their veins,” he says over the video. In the next shot, he loads his cute five-year-old nephew, Abyas, on to the front of his motorbike and they scoot off, passing the primary school, which is also engulfed in thick black smoke, before arriving at a spot by the canal where gas flares punctuate the skyline in every direction.
When we showed that footage to David Boyd, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights and the environment, he called it “a textbook example of a modern sacrifice zone, where profit is put above human life and the environment”.
Ali helped us uncover high levels of the cancer-causing chemical, benzene, produced by gas flaring, in the air and bodies of children living in his community. Benzene is known to cause acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) – the cancer from which Ali and many other children we met were suffering. After our documentary appeared, the Iraqi government acknowledged, for the first time, the link between the oil industry’s pollution and the local population’s health problems.
In December 2022, we found out Ali’s leukaemia had returned. His doctor in Iraq said that his only option was palliative care. But his father, who described Ali as his best friend, refused to accept this. He found a doctor at Columbia University who said that Ali could be eligible for experimental T-cell therapy. A supporter of the film, Callum Grieve, began a fundraising campaign to try to raise the £70,000 needed to send him to India. The donations were steady, but relied on the generosity of ordinary people with only small sums to give.
I began to notice in our calls with Ali that his face looked bloated, and his cheekbones hidden because of the effects of steroids. But I had no idea we would lose him so soon. On Friday 21 April, the first night of Eid, we received the terrible news that Ali had died. We had already lost to cancer three of the children we got to know while making this film.
A Guardian investigation found that nine million people a year die as a result of air pollution. Getting to know Ali helped to make that feel like much more than a statistic.
Despite the barren and apocalyptic landscape Ali grew up in, he was a keen gardener. He used to send us videos of him watering the tiny, sparse patch in his front yard where he grew a handful of small palms and some unusual species like the “bambara” or white mulberry tree. When we showed him pictures of the countryside in England, he marvelled at the greenery and the clear skies. It contrasted so starkly with the constantly orange and acrid sky he was used to.
Companies like BP are still breaking Iraq’s law by gas flaring illegally close to people’s homes. If you are looking down on us now, Ali, please know that your death will not be in vain. Britain’s biggest pension fund, Nest, and other investors are launching a shareholder rebellion against BP for rolling back on its climate targets. They told us their actions were partly inspired by our film. And this story could help secure justice for the thousands of lives put at risk by pollution from fossil fuel companies.
Jess Kelly is a documentary film-maker and journalist. Owen Pinnell also contributed to this piece.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
When I started in broadcasting, I always seemed to be the youngest person in the room. I liked it this way. Yes, I was occasionally patronised a bit, and doubtless got on my elders’ nerves, in a who-does-this-kid-think-he-is kind of way. But I didn’t mind being talked down to one jot. After all, they knew a lot more than me about things and I had plenty to learn.
This was in the BBC’s business news department. The best of them were only too happy to sit me down and talk me through one of the many topics I didn’t understand. I spent many hours learning at the feet of gifted correspondents such as Rory Cellan-Jones, Simon Gompertz and Jackie Hardgrave. I’ll for ever be grateful to them. They looked out for the work experience kid, professionally and socially. When I was hungover, they probably gave me Calpol. It was good to be the junior; I felt as if I was ahead of the game.
Now, all a sudden, I’m not the youngest. I’m the oldest. This wise old owl feels old enough for the role, but nowhere near wise enough. In fact, I’m still seeking wisdom much more than I’m dispensing it. To this day, I call Rory for explanations, and he has been retired a year or more. Am I anywhere near as helpful to my young colleagues, or a grumpy old deadweight? I’m taking a long look at myself.
I went to the Croatian embassy recently for a gathering of Croatian professionals in the UK. Upon entering, I thought I’d walked into the wrong event; it felt more like a youth club for exceptionally well-dressed people. I was a good quarter of a century older than nearly everyone there. They all seemed more confident and wiser than me. All of them spoke English far better than I spoke their language. It felt as if I didn’t have a lot to offer.
I got talking to one impressive young woman studying chemical engineering.
“Postgrad?”
“No. First degree. I’m only 20.”
She turned out to be the daughter of a famous Croatian goalkeeper. Sloping off home, I checked his Wikipedia page and discovered that I’m considerably older than him, too.
When I got back, I made myself some cocoa and went to bed.
[ad_2]
#oldest #person #room #dont #feel #wiser #Adrian #Chiles
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
The Daily Beast’s anonymous source attributed the firing, in part, to Carlson’s foul language. He allegedly used the “C word” to describe stolen election theorist Sidney Powell, and not just once. This information supposedly surfaced during discovery proceedings in the Dominion Voting Systems defamation lawsuit. The Los Angeles Times relied on an anonymous source to say the firing “came straight from Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch with input from board members and other Fox Corp. executives,” and another alleging that the discrimination lawsuit filed by a recently fired producer on Carlson’s show was the cause.
At the Wall Street Journal, “people familiar with the matter” told the paper Fox was disturbed by the derogatory comments he made about the network in the Dominion documents, some of which were redacted but seen by Fox personnel. Anonymous Fox employees told Semafor they thought the discrimination suit and Carlson’s criticism of Fox executives, recorded in the court documents, had played a role. Rolling Stones’ anonymous sources spoke of an “oppo file” the network had kept on Carlson that would be used to retaliate against him if he spoke ill of Fox. The oppo file is said to contain information about workplace conduct, Carlson’s rude comments about Fox brass and colleagues, his lewd comments about women, and so on.
Surely the most fascinating anonymous tidbit appeared in Vanity Fair, where the source said that Carlson had gotten fired because Murdoch was annoyed by a messianic speech Carlson gave at the Heritage Foundation last Friday. “That stuff freaks Rupert out. He doesn’t like all the spiritual talk,” the source told the magazine. Such religious jabber, another anonymous source added in the piece, was behind the recent cancelation of Murdoch’s engagement to Ann Lesley Smith, a reputed Bible thumper who regarded Carlson as “a messenger from God.”
The comic thing about the conflicting anonymous accounts is while they seemed sure they knew why Carlson had been knocked off, Carlson himself is said to not know. How do we know that? From anonymous testimonies in New York magazine and Vanity Fair.
The journalists who were called upon to file quick turnaround stories on the canning of Carlson have our sympathies. “Why” is the most vital component of the Who, What, When, Where and Why formula behind news stories. News consumers want to know abut Carlson’s firing, but after that’s out of the way, they want to know why. An editor either instructs his reporters to find a source who can supply the why, or he allows reporters to pepper their copy with anonymous sources because it makes it look like they’ve answered the “why.”
As we see in the Carlson example, the anonymous sources — who are variously described as a “Fox news source,” “people familiar with the matter,” “a source,” “another source,” “sources,” “eight sources,” “a source briefed on the conversation,” “people familiar with the company’s thinking,” and other fuzzy IDs — don’t fundamentally agree on the reason for his ouster. Now, it could be, as NPR media reporter David Folkenflik said Wednesday on the WAMU show 1a, that the reason for Carlson’s firing is a little like the plot of Murder on the Orient Express: Everybody might be a little bit right. But the variety of early “reasons” throws doubt on the practice of relying on anonymous sources.
When anonymous sources provide documentation or other ancillary proof of their statements such as recordings, they surface information that can be verified and do readers a great service. But in many cases, they get to spout off without taking any responsibility for what they say. Readers are often given no way to judge the credibility of anonymous sources. For all we know, the “Fox news source” cited could be upper management or a spring intern. Does the source have an agenda that is coloring his blind quotations? How hard did the reporter work to verify what the anonymous source said?
In the coming days, we’re likely to learn more about the decision-making behind Carlson’s removal as named sources step up or if documents from the discrimination lawsuit and the Dominion case filter down to reporters. But until then, we can use the early Carlson reporting as a warning for readers not to overinvest in breaking news that depends so heavily on anonymice.
As the investigative journalist Edward J. Epstein once wrote, “Every source who has supplied a journalist with part of a story has selected that bit of information, whether it is true or false, for a particular purpose.” When those sources are anonymous, they can be entirely unaccountable and absolutely wrong. Read all the anonymously sourced stories you like, but be forewarned that they can be detrimental to your news health. Especially when they take a place of primacy in breaking news like the Carlson sacking.
******
Send no anonymous comments to [email protected]. No new email alert subscriptions are being honored at this time. My Twitter feed is always on the record. My Mastodon and Post accounts are like a ghost town. My Substack Notes calls itself a source close to Jack Shafer. My RSS feed wants to know what it needs to do to get fired.
[ad_2]
#Dont #Read #Tucker #Carlson
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“They’re also saying they’re going to ban abortion. Six weeks into a pregnancy? Well, clearly most of them don’t even know how a woman’s body works because most women don’t even know they’re pregnant at that stage of a pregnancy,” Harris said to a raucous applause.
For Harris, the event was a bit of a homecoming. The first vice president to hail from a historically Black college or university spoke to a packed auditorium of students and reproductive rights advocates on Howard’s campus in Washington, D.C., to multiple standing ovations and shouts of “H-U!” She responded: “You know!”
Attendees who’d seen Harris speak before say she felt like a different speaker Tuesday: That she was laid back in a way they hadn’t seen before and tied that to her being in the same auditorium that she had freshman orientation in.
“I feel like when she’s around Howard students, she feels at home. She feels comfortable around us because unlike the outside world, we don’t judge her,” freshman student Jomalee Smith said. “She is one of our heroes. When she’s here, she sees kids that look up to her. So, of course she’s going to be comfortable, be herself, walk around, crack jokes in the middle of a sentence.”
Alencia Johnson, a former Biden campaign senior adviser, said she hopes the administration (and campaign) takes Harris’ performance and the reception as proof positive they need to make sure they let her loose during the next 18 months.
“It’s clear abortion is a key issue for not just women, but young people and Black people of all ages given the packed auditorium with less than 2 days’ notice,” Johnson said. “And Vice President Harris is the perfect messenger in this moment in history. She was on fire. When they let her loose, especially on abortion, she connects with voters in a way many electeds can’t.”
The event also is an extension of Harris’ leading the administration’s push to protect reproductive access since POLITICO reported on the draft opinion that eventually became the 2022 Dobbs decision dismantling a federal right to abortion.
And administration aides say the choice to have the vice president speak about abortion to a group of young Black people at her alma mater was no accident. Though Harris had just one line about the reelection, (“I stand here, proud to run for reelection with President Joe Biden … so we can finish the job”), for the crowd, the impending fight was undergirding her appearance.
“What I saw was an experienced prosecutor who knows the case in front of her and capably prosecuted that case in front of this audience today,” EMILY’s List president Laphonza Butler said. “I’m excited about this reelection because that is the vice president that America is going to get a chance to get to know for the first time because she didn’t get to do it during the pandemic.”
In the first campaign video announcing his reelection campaign, Harris was featured largely throughout, a rarity for vice presidents and proof that the president will be leaning on his second-in-command during the campaign. It was also a not-so-veiled jab at the naysayers who doubt how close the two are and whether Biden sees her as an asset to his campaign.
Parts of Harris’ speech harkened to elements of the message Biden shared in that video about their reelection being about issues of freedom and democracy. Since the Dobbs decision, Harris has worked to tie the conversation of abortion access to a larger fight about privacy and the dismantling of democracy in the United States. On Tuesday, she said it was part of “an extremist plan to take this to a national agenda.”
“This agenda includes attacking your very right and freedom to express your voice through your vote at the ballot box,” she said. “Don’t think it’s not a national agenda when they start banning books to stand in the way of teaching America’s full history so the truth can be spoken. Standing for ideas that say that people cannot openly love the people they love — you know what’s happening with teachers down in Florida.”
[ad_2]
#Dont #Harris #urges #speech #Howard #University
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
While lawmakers agree that the system needs to be revamped, they want to make sure that doesn’t result in a full-scale government lockdown of the nation’s secrets.
Both Democrats and Republicans say it’s important to control who has access to information, while also reducing the amount of material that’s classified in the first place. There is so much needlessly classified information that the government cannot effectively protect the truly sensitive intel, they argue.
“People realize that there’s a lot of stuff that gets classified that really shouldn’t be,” Senate Intelligence Committee member John Cornyn (R-Texas) said in an interview. “The volume of classified materials has just exploded because of computers. And so they are not able to manage it. It’s a real problem.”
The issue of overclassification has been a longstanding concern, and news of the leak occurred just as the federal government was opening talks to revamp the process.
In 2021, a group of four-star military commanders in 2021 sent a rare and urgent plea to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence looking for ways to declassify and release more intelligence about adversaries’ bad behavior. Weeks after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, lawmakers called on the administration to “lean forward” to declassify information about Russian war crimes.
A central feature of the Biden administration’s intervention in the war has been a novel strategy of rapidly declassifying and publicizing intelligence in near real-time, chiefly to head off false narratives from Moscow. It’s also been used to line up support for Kyiv’s war effort in allied capitals, as when the U.S. reportedly shared the conclusion that China was considering giving military support to Russia.
For intel agencies, sharing information with allies and private-sector victims of cyber attacks has become more important than ever, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said in a speech in January. That’s why the government must solve the problem of overclassification, which she acknowledged has become “more acute, exacerbated by the growing amount of data available across a wide range of agencies.”
A 2013 government report found that a single intelligence agency classifies one petabyte of data every 18 months, or 49 million cubic feet of paper, she said.
The recent intel breach highlights the tricky balance the government has to strike between the imperative to share intelligence between government entities and the need to limit its access to those with a “need to know.”
“We have to find a happy middle; that’s something we’re absolutely watching,” said House Intelligence and Armed Services Committee member Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla.).
Regardless of which way lawmakers are leaning, momentum is growing in both the House and Senate to adjust intel agencies’ system for classifying intelligence.
“There’s way too much overclassification,” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in an interview. He called the possibility of overcorrecting “the issue” as lawmakers discuss potential changes.
McCaul cited his inability to obtain a document from the 1998 prosecution he led of Johnny Chung, convicted for tax and election law violations, as an example of the inability of the government to declassify information — even when the matters involved have been resolved a long time.
To be clear, many lawmakers want the investigation into the Pentagon leak to wrap before taking any legislative steps. While some are wary of any action that would impede greater sharing between agencies, which emerged in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, others express caution about declassifying too much.
Since news of the latest leak surfaced, lawmakers have pressed Pentagon officials to explain why a network manager in a state National Guard unit would need access to high-level intelligence or the top secret network that hosted it: the military’s Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.
“I still don’t know why the intelligence unit of that Massachusetts air wing had any particular need to be part of the network,” said Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. “There may be an answer to that. But just because you’re maintaining a network doesn’t mean that you need to see documents, or have the authority to print them out, or the ability to walk them out of a building.”
It’s not only the Pentagon leak but the recovery of records at properties associated with President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence that has injected a jolt of energy into long-simmering congressional efforts to revamp the handling of classified records.
“This is a thoroughly broken system,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in an interview. “I’m not convinced that people and documents that should be classified can get classified, and [there are] many documents that are classified that shouldn’t be classified.”
Wyden, with Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Cornyn and Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.), have been working on changing the classification system for years. Wyden and Moran offered a bipartisan bill in May 2020 on the issue, after which Warner’s panel held a hearing on ways to change the system, to no avail.
Reform efforts will now have to incorporate “these new developments,” Wyden said, referring to the presidential classified records incidents and the Pentagon leak.
“It’s been difficult because there’s no real political benefit,” Moran said in an interview. “This is about doing something well and right — what should be done — but there’s not a hue and cry across the country.”
Warner summed up the juggling act ahead for lawmakers as they seek to make changes.
“[We] probably need to classify less and then at the highest levels of classification potentially have a smaller universe of people looking at them,” he said, calling the presidential classified information and Pentagon leak incidents “bookends” for problems in the current classification system.
[ad_2]
#Congress #Pentagon #Dont #locking #classified #info
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
It happens to all pianists at some point: that terrifying moment when you’re on stage and can’t remember what comes next. My former teacher, Jean-Paul Sévilla, was once playing Bach’s Goldberg Variations when, at the end of Variation 7, he couldn’t remember how Variation 8 began. By the time he got off stage to find his score it came to him, but his evening was ruined. Then there was Vlado Perlemuter who, upon leaving home to go to the concert hall, was asked by his wife if he had forgotten anything. A friend in attendance jokingly said: “The beginning of the concerto!” When, a few hours later, Vlado walked on stage in Paris to perform Beethoven’s Fourth Piano Concerto (which famously begins with a quiet piano solo), he couldn’t find the notes. My own turn came when I was 50 years old, playing Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier (all four and a half hours of it) from memory in Stuttgart. It was part of a world tour in which I played that mammoth work 56 times in 26 countries. That night, however, I went wrong in the big A minor fugue from Book 1 and couldn’t find my way out. I had to go and get the score. You feel so ashamed – but we’re only human, and sometimes it happens.
On the whole, I’ve been blessed with an excellent memory – I suppose some would even say prodigious as I’ve performed the complete solo keyboard works of Bach (the exception being The Art of Fugue), the 32 sonatas of Beethoven, and who knows how many millions of other notes from memory over the years. I always thought it would have been a good idea to measure my brain before I memorised all that Bach and then again after to see how it had developed and changed. Too late now. At the age of 64, it’s definitely shrinking, and memorising has become a very conscious, frustrating and time-consuming activity. But I stick at it because memory is a muscle that needs to be constantly used to stay in any sort of shape.
When you’re a young pianist, memory almost comes without thinking. A huge part of it is reflex memory; add to that aural memory (especially if, like me, you had perfect pitch), visual memory (some pianists, like Yvonne Loriod, who was married to Olivier Messiaen, had a piece memorised after looking at it only once) and memory of association, and you have a relatively quick process.
I say I “had” perfect pitch because that has slipped with age. As a kid, I could instantly name all the notes in even the most complicated chords. Now I need time to think about it. Perfect pitch is related to memory: if one declines, the other does too. Everyone of a certain age who has had it seems to encounter this problem. It makes memorising a much more complicated task.
Memory is a subject we don’t like to talk about – like sex, love and religious beliefs – most likely because we are afraid of losing it. It takes courage to admit even to yourself that your memory is failing. Often friends or family notice it first. We shouldn’t feel ashamed, but rather embrace this normal sign of ageing and then do all we can to keep our brains alive. It upsets me when I can’t remember where I’ve put my boarding pass, as happened this morning at Heathrow (only to find it in the outside compartment of my bag, where I must have put it five minutes previously); when I can’t remember if I’ve taken my daily HRT lozenge (now there’s something that helps older women with memory!); and when I make the same mistake over and over again when learning a new piece.
This past summer, I was chair of the jury of the Bach competition in Leipzig, in which the contestants were allowed to choose whether to play from memory or with the score. (From a score these days means mostly “from an iPad” with a foot pedal to turn the pages on the screen, although one competitor used the app that allows you to make a facial grimace to turn the page – something I found deeply disconcerting). At their age, I would never have dreamed of using the score, even for complicated contemporary pieces. Yet quite a few of them did. Could they not have spent the extra time needed to memorise the music? I know the trend these days is to say it doesn’t matter, but I know myself that when I can get up and perform something securely from memory, it gives me a wonderful sense of freedom and accomplishment.
Angela Hewitt performing at St George’s concert hall in Bristol. Photograph: Stephen Shepherd/The Guardian
One of the most common faults of pianists is that we spend too much time playing the notes and not enough time thinking about what we’re doing. “Think 10 times and then play once” said the wise Franz Liszt, who could rattle off more notes a minute than anybody else (and who, along with Clara Schumann, was the first pianist to perform from memory – an act considered arrogant by the public of the time). In fact, the best memory work is done away from the keyboard – just looking at the score, memorising your fingering, the harmonies, the places where it’s easy to go wrong, the intervals, how many notes there are in a chord, the dynamics, phrasing; nothing is too simple or evident to go unnoticed. You must visualise yourself playing the piece without being at a keyboard. Then go and play and you will be amazed by the progress you have made.
Even when you are concentrating very hard, the brain is constantly assailed by extraneous and often silly thoughts. As a pianist playing from memory, you train yourself to deal with this. I call it double concentration mode. Coughing from the audience (do people realise that just one cough in the wrong place can easily upset the whole apple cart?); the inevitable mobile phone (I go on as though nothing has happened, otherwise it makes things worse); even once I had a beetle slowly climbing up my bare arm during a Bach fugue. You have to be able to count on your concentration to get you through, no matter what happens.
You must also train yourself to think ahead – even if just by a split second. As the brain ages, this becomes even more difficult but necessary. I think that’s why older pianists on the whole (Martha Argerich being the exception) tend to play slower than the young ones, to whom speed often seems the ultimate goal. It’s also why, as an audience member, we are more disturbed by fast playing as we age. It’s just too much for our slower brains to process.
In my 20s, I lived in an artist’s studio above a branch of the Banque Nationale de Paris for two years. The staff knew I was the one playing above, practising away, and they professed not to mind except when I “played the same thing over and over again”. To steal an observation from the actor Roger Allam, the French word for rehearsal is “répétition”, and that’s what you need to do. Get yourself a silent piano if it drives your family or neighbours crazy; I often have one in hotel rooms when I’m on tour.
Performing with the Aurora Orchestra in London’s Kings Place. Photograph: www.kingsplace.co.uk/kplayer
Another thing you can train the brain to do is to think of several things at once. You can practise this by being in a crowded restaurant and listening to two or more conversations simultaneously. You’ll need that if you’re playing a Bach fugue, which can have up to five voices, each one as important as the other. When I walk out on stage, I remind myself to “sing” every note; indeed, when I practise I am constantly singing away, trying to imitate the human voice on an instrument whose sounds are produced by hammers hitting strings. By singing, I engage my concentration and my emotions, as well as my memory. Unlike my compatriot Glenn Gould, once I am on stage or in a recording studio I do this silently.
If this all sounds very tiring then, believe me, it is. Take breaks when you feel your brain has had it and make sure it gets all the nutrients it needs. Alcohol and sleeping pills don’t help – which is why I mostly avoid the former and refuse to use the latter. Backstage in concert halls I have my brain foods at the ready: tinned sardines, avocados, peanut butter, rye crackers, blueberries, bananas and lots of water.
So often I hear people say they can’t memorise anything any more. Yes, but have you really tried? If you’re not a musician, take a poem, a recipe or the phone numbers of your best friends. Above all, don’t just give up. Get to know your brain and work on it.
I always say I couldn’t have memorised the complete works of Bach and had four kids. That would have been impossible; I don’t even have one. But I’ve had a wonderful life in the company of some of the greatest minds that have ever existed, and to them, and to my musician parents who put me in front of a toy piano at the age of two, I am for ever grateful.
[ad_2]
#sex #religion #dont #talk #memory #pianist #Angela #Hewitt #shape
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
