Jammu & Kashmir Govt Sacked Employees For Fraud Recruitment- Know Name Of These Employees Here
Srinagar, Jan 21: Government has dismissed six employees for secured jobs on fake degrees in the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, officials said on Saturday.
They told Srinagar based news agency Kashmir Dot Com that six Junior Statistical assistants of the Planning and Monitoring department who had obtained jobs on the basis of ‘fake degrees’ were dismissed from the service by the Lt governor administration.
“It came to the notice of the department that six employees had used fake degrees to obtain the jobs. The verification conducted by the department proved that the degrees obtained by the six employees were fake ,” they said, adding that accordingly appointments were cancelled .
ALSO READ: JKSSB Releases Provisional Selection List For Various posts- Check District Wise List
The dismissed employees were identified as
Suhail Ahmad Sheikh, a resident of Kachdoora Vehil Shopian,
Feroz Hamid son of Peerzada Abdul Hamid , resident of Sopore near Bus Stand,
Gulzar Ahmad Wani son of Ghulam Mohiuddin Wani, a resident of Bustand Kulgam,
Mehraj ud din Dar son of Mohammad Ramzan Dar, a resident of Sadar Bazar Kulgam,
Mudasir Ahmad Bhat son of Ghulam Mohi ud Din Bha, a resident of Wani Mohalla Kulgam, and
Showkat Ahmad Parray son of Mohammad Ramzan Parray, a resident of H N Pora Kulgam.
All the six Junior Statistical Assistants from Kashmir division were selected through Service Selection Board (SSB) of Jammu and Kashmir in the year 2012.
A top official while confirming the development to KDC said “In view of adverse verification report of qualifications in respect of all six Junior Statistical assistants, the appointments were subsequently cancelled ab-initio.” (KDC)
ALSO READ: IGNOU Admissions 2023: January Session Re-registration Last Date Extended, Apply Online Here
CLICK ON THE BELOW PROVIDED LINKS TO FOLLOW KASHMIR NEWS ON:
OUR APPLICATION IS ALSO LIVE ON GOOGLE PLAY STORE, DOWNLOAD OUR MOBILE APPLICATION AND GET LATEST UPDATES ON YOUR MOBILE SCREEN.
A handful of congressional Democrats have encouraged federal probes into Abbott’s handling of the contamination of formula products, which ultimately triggered a major recall and shut down a key plant located in Sturgis, Mich. last February. A whistleblower alleged Abbott employees falsified documents and covered up food safety violations from FDA inspectors before the recall.
The DOJ and FDA declined to comment on the investigation.
The Sturgis plant had produced about one-fifth of the nation’s infant formula supply, and the closure triggered massive shortages that rippled through the country and months later sparked a political crisis for President Joe Biden.
The DOJ investigation comes just a few weeks after Abbott and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced the company’s plans to build a new $536 million manufacturing facility in the state to produce specialty and metabolic formulas for medically-vulnerable children and adults who were hardest hit by the shortages. Abbott has struggled to ramp up production of the special formulas at its Sturgis plant, and has recently pushed back the availability of a slate of metabolic formulas to April.
[ad_2]
#Abbott #criminal #investigation #baby #formula #crisis
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Anantnag; A 38-year-old man suffered a cardiac arrest and passed away on Saturday early morning in south Kashmir’s Anantnag district.
The 38 year old man fell unconscious at home.He was immediately rushed to District Hospital Anantnag for treatment where doctors decalred him dead on arrival.
According to an Hospital official the person was brought dead to the hospital after having suffered cardiopulmonary arrest.
“He has been identified as Nazir Ahmad Mir alias Nazir Ashiq (38), a resident of Palpora Dailgam,” he said.
Pertinently to mention that due to Cardiac arrest 11 People dies in past 9 days so far.
A new prime minister for New Zealand has been chosen by the Labour party after the shock resignation of Jacinda Ardern on Thursday.
Chris Hipkins – the minister for education and policing, and one of the primary architects of the Covid response – was nominated uncontested by the party caucus on Saturday morning, after efforts by senior MPs to achieve consensus and secure a smooth transition in Ardern’s wake. The caucus is due to formally endorse his selection on Sunday.
Taking on the prime ministership would be “the biggest responsibility and the biggest privilege of my life”, Hipkins said on Saturday, speaking to reporters on parliament’s steps in his first appearance since the nomination. “The weight of that responsibility is still sinking in.”
An experienced MP with a ruthless streak in the debating chamber and an intimate knowledge of the machinery of government, Hipkins will face perhaps the biggest challenge of his political career: persuading New Zealanders to grant Labour another term in government, without Ardern’s star power at the helm.
Hipkins paid tribute to his predecessor, saying she had been “an incredible prime minister” who had “provided calm, stable, reassuring leadership, which I hope to continue to do”.
He also spoke on some of the challenges Ardern had faced including threats and abuse, particularly in relation to the Covid pandemic. “There has been an escalation in vitriol, and I want to acknowledge that some politicians have been the subject of that more than others,” he said. “Our current prime minister Jacinda Ardern has absolutely been on the receiving end of some absolutely intolerable and unacceptable behaviour.”
How the world fell in love with Jacinda Ardern – video
Around New Zealand, Hipkins, 44, will be best known as the face and primary implementer of the Covid elimination strategy, a role that saw him taking the podium next to Ardern for weekly updates as the pandemic evolved.
That background may help and hinder him: it gave him a significant profile and made him a household name, but also gives him immediate associations with a chapter many New Zealanders are now hoping to put behind them, and which has galvanised a small, radical and often vitriolic core of anti-vaccine opponents.
While his profile is lower than Ardern’s, the MP has had a few moments of international virality.
In one Covid-era gaffe, he became a meme after encouraging New Zealanders to “go outside and spread their legs” in a national announcement.
Last year, he bemused internet observers with a birthday cake constructed entirely of sausage rolls.
The question of Hipkins’ deputy has not yet been decided – a vote will take place on Sunday. Hipkins would not comment on whether he would choose a woman to serve alongside him, except to say: “For the first time in New Zealand’s history, we have a gender balanced parliament. Women are going to occupy senior roles in our parliament. That is good, that is fantastic, and we should be proud of that as a country.”
A career politician who has held office since 2008, Hipkins was the safest choice for Labour. Of the candidates considered for the role, he is most capable of stepping immediately into the work of governance and carrying the government’s legislative agenda through to the October election.
Over the last term, as well as meaty portfolios in education, Covid response and policing, he has been leader of the house and public service minister, two wonky roles that are deeply immersed in the nuts and bolts of governance and provide an intimate knowledge of the political process.
Speaking to the Guardian in 2021, he said one of his political strengths was “Understanding how the machinery of government operates, which is something that I’ve developed over about 20 years.
“I’ve watched people come into politics from outside, very talented people, very knowledgable, with a lot of subject matter expertise – but they’ve struggled to get the machinery of government to do what they wanted to do. And I like to think that I’ve managed to – I’m not perfect – but that I’ve managed to kind of figure that out.”
While that makes him well-equipped to carry Labour’s last sets of reforms through this term, his larger battle will be on the campaign trail. Curia polling released on Friday – drawn from before Ardern’s resignation – placed her party at 32%, compared with National’s 37%. Right- and leftwing coalition partners Act and the Greens were sitting at 11% apiece.
With an election approaching on 14 October, Hipkins faces a steep road ahead – to transform Labour’s fortunes and gather the support to form a new government.
Asked by reporters “Can you win the election?” Hipkins responded simply: “Yes.”
[ad_2]
#Chris #Hipkins #set #prime #minister #Zealand
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Joe Biden has been accused of hypocrisy for demanding the release of journalists detained around the world while the US president continues seeking the extradition of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange from Britain to face American espionage charges.
The campaign to pressure the Biden administration to drop the charges moved to Washington DC on Friday with a hearing of the Belmarsh Tribunal, an ad hoc gathering of legal experts and supporters named after the London prison where Assange is being detained.
The hearing was held in the same room where Assange in 2010 exposed the “collateral murder” video showing US aircrew gunning down Iraqi civilians, the first of hundreds of thousands of leaked secret military documents and diplomatic cables published in major newspapers around the world. The revelations about America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including alleged war crimes, and the frank assessments of US diplomats about their host governments, caused severe embarrassment in Washington.
The tribunal heard that the charges against Assange were an “ongoing attack on press freedom” because the WikiLeaks founder was not a spy but a journalist and publisher protected by free speech laws.
The tribunal co-chairperson Srecko Horvat – a founder of the Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 whose father was a political prisoner in the former Yugoslavia – quoted Biden from the 2020 presidential campaign calling for the release of imprisoned journalists across the world by quoting late president Thomas Jefferson’s dictum that “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost”.
“President Biden is normally advocating freedom of press, but at the same time continuing the persecution of Julian Assange,” Horvat said.
Horvat warned that continuing the prosecution could serve as a bad example to other governments.
“This is an attack on press freedom globally – that’s because the United States is advancing what I think is really the extraordinary claim that it can impose its criminal secrecy laws on a foreign publisher who was publishing outside the United States,” he said.
“Every country has secrecy laws. Some countries have very draconian secrecy laws. If those countries tried to extradite New York Times reporters and publishers to those countries for publishing their secrets we would cry foul and rightly so. Does this administration want to be the first to establish the global precedent that countries can demand the extradition of foreign reporters and publishers for violating their own laws?”
Assange faces 18 charges over WikiLeaks’ publication of classified documents, largely the result of a leak by the former US army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison but released after President Barack Obama commuted her sentence in 2017. Manning has testified that she acted on her own initiative in sending the documents to WikiLeaks and not at the urging of Assange.
The tribunal heard that the accuracy of the information published by WikiLeaks, including evidence of war crimes and human rights abuses, was not in question.
Assange is a polarising figure who has fallen out with many of the news organisations with whom he has worked, including the Guardian and New York Times. He lost some support when he broke his bail conditions in 2012 and sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden to face questioning over sexual assault allegations.
The US justice department brought charges against Assange in 2019 when he was expelled by the Ecuadorians from their embassy.
Assange fought a lengthy legal battle in the British courts against extradition to the US after his arrest, but lost. Last year, the then-home secretary, Priti Patel, approved the extradition request. Assange has appealed, claiming that he is “being prosecuted and punished for his political opinions”.
Assange’s father, John Shipton, condemned his son’s “ceaseless malicious abuse”, including the conditions in which he is held in Britain. He said the UK’s handling of the case was “an embarrassment” that damaged the country’s claim to stand for free speech and the rule of law.
Lawyer Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA employee who was imprisoned under the Espionage Act for revealing defence secrets to the journalist James Risen, told the Belmarsh Tribunal that Assange has little chance of a fair trial in the US.
He said: “It is virtually impossible to defend against the Espionage Act. Truth is no defence. In fact, any defence related to truth will be prohibited. In addition, he won’t have access to any of the so-called evidence used against him.
“The Espionage Act has not been used to fight espionage. It’s being used against whistleblowers and Julian Assange to keep the public ignorant of [the government’s] wrongdoings and illegalities in order to maintain its hold on authority, all in the name of national security.”
The tribunal also heard from Britain’s former Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who said the continued prosecution of Assange would make all journalists afraid to reveal secrets.
“If Julian Assange ends up in a maximum security prison in the United States for the rest of his life, every other journalist around the world will think, ‘Should I really report this information I’ve been given? Should I really speak out about this denial of human rights or miscarriage of justice in any country?’” he said.
[ad_2]
#Biden #accused #hypocrisy #seeks #extradition #Julian #Assange
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Twin brothers who died in a hail of gunfire last summer outside a Canadian bank had been planning their attack for years, with a goal to kill as many officers as possible, police said on Friday.
An investigation by the Vancouver Island integrated major crime unit found that 22-year-old Isaac Auchterlonie and his twin, Mathew, showed up at the Victoria, British Columbia, area bank on 28 June 2022 wearing full body armor and carrying semi-automatic rifles.
The pair had strong anti-government and anti-police views and did not expect to live past the confrontation, police said.
“It was determined the suspects’ primary objective was to shoot and kill police officers in what they saw as a stand against government regulations, especially in relation to firearms ownership,” Cpl Alex Bérubé of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said during a news conference at the Saanich police department.
As the twins left the bank, members of the Greater Victoria emergency response team, who were in the area on an unrelated matter, drove into the parking lot to assist other officers, police said.
Six officers were injured in the ensuing gunfight. An earlier report said police fired as many as 100 rounds at the suspects, killing them both.
Bérubé said the pair had been planning some sort of “act of extreme violence” since 2019 and originally wanted the shootout to happen in mid-2023.
They decided to move up their timeline after finding out they had to move out of the house they shared with their mother.
“The suspects concluded that they could not move their arsenal of weapons to a new location without attracting attention, and thus electing the bank location at random,” Bérubé said.
In the trunk of their vehicle, police discovered more than 30 improvised explosive devices, four additional firearms and more than 3,500 rounds of ammunition.
The brothers had licenses for both non-restricted and restricted firearms, Bérubé said.
Police say the 22 staff and customers being held by the men during the 16 minutes they were in the bank were not targeted and were only being held to draw a police response.
[ad_2]
#Twins #killed #Canada #bank #shootout #aimed #kill #police
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
While the National Park Service declined to estimate the crowd size, and March for Life organizers did not respond to questions about attendance, there was a palpable sense of relief among anti-abortion leaders as they looked out at a sea of faces packed onto the National Mall.
“I’ve got to tell you, I was a little nervous. I was concerned that people wouldn’t continue the fight,” former Pennsylvania senator and Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, a staunch abortion opponent, told POLITICO. “But based on this reaction, it looks like the grassroots has not moved on.”
Abortion opponents are counting on that energy to compel state and federal lawmakers to pass laws further restricting abortion. Since Roe fell, abortion access has been virtually eliminated in a quarter of the country, and several speakers told the enthusiastic crowd on the National Mall on Friday that those bans are just the beginning.
Overturning Roe “was only the first phase of this battle,” House Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), the highest-ranking elected official to speak at the March, said to cheers. “Now the next phase begins.”
Scalise was one of the few prominent Republicans to attend. While the March in previous years featured appearances by Presidents Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and many other conservative officials hoping to prove their anti-abortion bona fides, none of the Republicans who have signaled an interest in running for president in 2024 appeared on stage on Friday. Neither did the top Republicans in the House or Senate — Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell — or any Republican governor.
Anti-abortion leaders waved away questions about the lack of participation from the top ranks of the GOP, arguing that the march is “issue-central” and “not a political event,” and pointing to Congress being out of session that day and members being back in their home districts.
While cognizant that federal restrictions on the procedure won’t become law with Democrats in charge of the Senate and White House, conservative activists plan to push the new GOP House majority to take more votes on anti-abortion bills. And to illustrate that new focus, the route of Friday’s March shifted for the first time to pass by the Capitol as well as the Supreme Court.
“One, two, three, four, Roe v. Wade is out the door,” chanted a gaggle of teens wearing matching knit beanies as the March wound its way down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the House and Senate. “Five, six, seven, eight, now it’s time to legislate.”
But while Republicans in the House took multiple anti-abortion votes as some of their first actions in the majority this month, they were on a non-binding resolution condemning violence against anti-abortion organizations and a bill reaffirming the rights of infants born after attempted abortions. Leadership has not scheduled votes on the more controversial measures groups are demanding, such as a federal ban on abortion at 15 weeks, which Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) proposed last year. And some House Republicans have spoken out against their leaders’ decision to tackle the issue at all, pointing to the 2022 midterm results as a sign voters will continue to punish the party if they pursue more restrictions.
Anti-abortion leaders at the March said their coming efforts will focus largely on states. Groups like Susan B. Anthony are hiring more staff to lobby state legislatures, fueled by what they say has been a spike in donations, and are particularly targeting Florida, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Virginia. They’re also planning more state-level demonstrations to pressure lawmakers, doubling the number of marches held outside D.C. from five last year to 10 in 2023.
“What an exciting time for us all to be rallying together right now,” Louisiana Attorney General Lynn Fitch told POLITICO after she addressed the crowd. “But now we have to think next steps.”
Fitch said that, along with other Republican attorneys general, she’s petitioning the FDA to reimpose restrictions the agency recently lifted on abortion pills, which have allowed them to be mailed to patients or picked up at pharmacies. She is also joining with others in the anti-abortion movement to push for policies like affordable child care and reforms to the adoption and foster care system — supports they feel are necessary to meet the needs of the many people that will be unable to access an abortion in the coming years.
But while anti-abortion leaders say they feel wind at their backs as state legislatures reconvene this month and debate a swath of new restrictions on the procedure, many challenges lie ahead at both the state and federal level.
Lawmakers in several liberal states have introduced bills that would shield patients traveling for the procedure and the doctors who treat them from prosecution. And several more states are preparing to put constitutional amendments that protect abortion rights before voters following victories in six states last year — California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana and Vermont.
“I think those ballot initiatives were a wake-up call that 50 years of work can be wiped out in a second unless you’re ready to go with a real battle plan,” Dannenfelser said in an interview, adding that her organization and others have to “up our funding game” after getting massively outspent by abortion-rights supporters in those state contests in 2022.
Anti-abortion groups are also working to shape the 2024 election, and have already begun meeting with prospective presidential candidates to press them to endorse and run on national abortion restrictions. But they’ve recently feuded with the only officially declared GOP candidate who leads in polls: former President Trump.
Earlier in January, Trump blamed anti-abortion groups for the midterms results in a social media post, specifically hitting them for opposing exemptions for cases of rape and incest and alleging that after winning the Supreme Court decision against Roe they “just plain disappeared, not to be seen again” and didn’t work hard enough to get voters to the polls in November.
Anti-abortion leaders called the accusation “way out of line” and “nonsense” and said Trump “needs to be corrected.”
[ad_2]
#Roe #abortion #opponents #March #Life #aim #targets
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
“During the course of the investigation, I spoke with each of the Justices, several on multiple occasions. The Justices actively cooperated in this iterative process, asking questions and answering mine,” Curley said.
Curley suggested that there was no “credible” information pointing to any of the justices or their spouses as sources for POLITICO’s story last May disclosing the draft opinion and reporting that the court was poised to overturn the federal constitutional right to abortion recognized in Roe v. Wade almost 50 years ago.
“I followed up on all credible leads, none of which implicated the Justices or their spouses. On this basis, I did not believe that it was necessary to ask the Justices to sign sworn affidavits,” Curley said.
While Curley’s investigation failed to identify anyone who could be considered by a preponderance of evidence to be responsible for the disclosure, several law clerks indicated they had discussed with their spouses the draft opinion and the vote count in the pending case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The court formalized the draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito in nearly identical form about seven weeks after POLITICO’s report, with five justices voting to overrule Roe and four dissenting from that position.
[ad_2]
#Supreme #Court #justices #actively #cooperated #leak #probe
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
But Biden’s remarks set off a back-and-forth later in the day that underscored the deep divide between the White House and House Republicans over how to approach the debt ceiling discussions.
McCarthy tweeted shortly afterward that he would accept a request to meet “and discuss a responsible debt ceiling increase to address irresponsible government spending.”
The White House responded in a statement issued later on Friday, where Jean-Pierre reiterated that “raising the debt ceiling is not a negotiation; it is an obligation of this country and its leaders to avoid economic chaos.”
“We are going to have a clear debate on two different visions for the country — one that cuts Social Security, and one that protects it — and the President is happy to discuss that with the Speaker,” Jean-Pierre said.
The development comes a day after Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that the U.S. had reached its debt limit and would need to use special measures to avoid a default. Yellen has projected that Congress has until at least June to pass a debt ceiling increase.
Biden officials have insisted that Congress pass a clean debt ceiling increasing, arguing that it is one of the government’s basic duties and shouldn’t come with any conditions attached.
The U.S. has never defaulted on its debt. Failing to do so for the first time ever, Democrats and a wide swathe of economists have cautioned, would destroy the nation’s financial credibility, tank the stock market and throw the global economy into chaos.
But Republicans are signaling that they plan to force a showdown over the debt ceiling, in a bid to extract a host of deep spending cuts from the administration. McCarthy earlier this week urged Biden and Democratic congressional leaders to begin discussions on a potential deal.
On Friday, Biden also said that he would address what he called a “fundamental disagreement” over how to control spending as part of his State of the Union address. The White House has hammered Republicans repeatedly over their suggestions that the government cut funding for Medicare and Social Security as part of a debt ceiling deal.
“Their way to deal with cutting that debt is to cut social security, cut Medicaid,” Biden said. “These are the kind of debates that we’re going to have.”
[ad_2]
#Biden #meet #McCarthy #avoiding #debt #ceiling #calamity
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
No two governors seem to exemplify nationwide partisan divide more than Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois and Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida … especially when you see them side by side.
While Pritzker pledged to ban assault weapons at his Jan. 9 inaugural address, DeSantis took to his stage on Jan. 3 in Tallahassee and said “Florida is where woke goes to die.”
On child care, DeSantis promised to enact laws to “defend our children against those who seek to rob them of their innocence,” while Pritzker advocated for universal preschool and quality child care options. “Let’s provide more economic security for families by eliminating child care deserts and expanding child care options,” he said.
[ad_2]
#Republican #governor #Democratic #inaugural #speeches
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
