Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Stupid politicians
Is it great felling that our country is under the hands of terrorism? No! Please don’t humiliate us dear politicians you should know that it’s not only yours country it’s the country of 9 billion people living together. You carry jade + security guards and what do you think you can handle us in the hand of some havaldars giving them weapons of Babur’s time it is just stupidity neither more or less than that. Stupid politicians you call the funeral of a martyr that even a dog would have not visited you ……. One day a when you will come down to a normal men even a donkey would not split on you. If you can not allot soldiers to protect the city why we will give votes to you. Parliament elections are near and you all sitting in the government is lowering the rates of petrol by 5 rs. No vote will given to you and when you will see the results your wings will be cut off.
Monday, November 10, 2008
now it's the era of barrack obama
Congratulations barrack Obama for being on the hopes of millions of people of world it’s the beginning of a new era where their will be no discrimination between white, black & brown. Congratulations to the people of America super power of world showed there is no discrimination in America. And a hearty congratulation to john McCain who never raised the topic of black…. It was a fair and a clear election.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
is humanity getting to a end
Weak ago in bombay several activties of roits took place but the question is that are human biengs becoming animals or criminals?Time and again politicians try to devide us in name of cast,creed, religion,region but they should remember that they are because of general public we can throw them off they can't devide us they are creating barriers but they will not be suceesful at all.ravan was killed and today's generation's ravana will also be killed.
Friday, September 5, 2008
who will come forward
Whole world is burning? When will god come? In geeta , kuran and various other ethics god has told when earth will be in danger I will come to save us . But is it true it questions the authority of god. We have to make our selves the god and it is true no body can save us if we will sit quietly no one is coming we r there that’s great .work!! Work!!Work to save the whole world work to save your selves
Who r the good men, who r they and that’s true. If god there calls him with pure heart we are the most awful creature even animals help each other and we fools fight and die. Hindus and Muslims, black &white. There r great politicians who gives a long page lecture & we listen it as the lecture will do everything .
Who will come forward.
Who r the good men, who r they and that’s true. If god there calls him with pure heart we are the most awful creature even animals help each other and we fools fight and die. Hindus and Muslims, black &white. There r great politicians who gives a long page lecture & we listen it as the lecture will do everything .
Who will come forward.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
'rational discrimination' is it true
Arriving in Britain by air the day after two men crashed a gasoline-laden Jeep Cherokee into the main terminal at Glasgow's international airport, and a couple of days after two car bombs were discovered in the heart of London, I was surprised by how calm everybody was.
Apart from the prohibition of passenger drop-off and pickup next to the terminal building at Birmingham Airport, everything was as usual. Men and women in Muslim garb mingled in the crowd with perfect tranquillity, expecting neither violence nor even verbal reproach.
Was this a sign of the admirable tolerance of British society, or of its bovine complacency born of an inability, or unwillingness, to make the effort to defend itself? Was it decency, cowardice, or stupidity?
I really don't know anymore, which is an indication of the problem: Only time will tell, and by then it might be too late. A friend who met me at the airport said something that must by now be true of many ordinary British people. Just as we used to wonder, on meeting Germans of a certain age, what they had done during World War II, so she wondered, when she found herself next to a young Muslim on a bus or a train, what he thought of the various bombings perpetrated by his coreligionists and whether he might be a bomber. She found herself looking for the nearest exit, as we are all enjoined to do by flight attendants before the plane takes off, in case of the need for swift exit.
There are reasonable grounds for suspicion, of course. Surveys — for whatever they are worth — show a surprising, and horrifying, degree of sympathy, if not outright support, for the bombers on the part of the young Muslim population of Britain. They show that a large number of Muslims in Britain want the implementation of Sharia law and think that murdering British Jews is justified simply because they are Jews. And when an atrocity is perpetrated by a Muslim, they evince no passion remotely comparable to that aroused by, say, the work of Salman Rushdie.
On the other hand, day-to-day relations with Muslims are often polite and friendly, and large numbers of Muslim small businessmen depend upon such relations with their non-Muslim customers for a living. This could change. One of the most sinister effects of the efforts of the bombers and would-be bombers is that they have undermined trust completely. This is because those under investigation turn out not to be cranks or marginals but people who are either well-integrated into society, superficially at least, or who have good career prospects. They are not the ignorant and uneducated — quite the reverse. Seven people detained in the latest plot worked in the medical profession.
The perpetrators do not bomb because of personal grievance but because they have allowed themselves to be gripped by a stupid, though apparently quite popular, ideology: radical Islam. Nor are they of one ethnic or national group only: We have had Somali, Pakistani, Arab, Jamaican, Algerian, and British Muslim terrorists. This means, unfortunately, that no one can ever be quite sure whether a Muslim who appears polite and accommodating is not simultaneously contemplating mass murder. Deceit, after all, is one of the terrorists' deadliest weapons.
Mistrust of Muslims in Britain has developed quite quickly and could develop much further. In my youth, I traveled extensively in the Muslim world and lived for a time in Africa with a Muslim family without being aware of any hostility or antagonism on my part toward the religion or culture. Had I been a woman, it might have been different, of course. Contrary to what the late Edward Said, author of the anti-Western "Orientalism," might have thought, I had inherited no anti-Muslim prejudice.
Now, despite friendly and long-lasting relations with many Muslims, my first reaction on seeing Muslims in the street is mistrust; my prejudice, far from having been inherited or inculcated early in life, developed late in response to events.
The fundamental problem is this: There is an asymmetry between the good that many moderate Muslims can do for Britain and the harm that a few fanatics can do to it. The 1-in-1,000 chance that a man is a murderous fanatic is more important to me than the 999-in-1,000 chance that he is not a murderous fanatic: If, that is, he is not especially valuable or indispensable to me in some way.
And the plain fact of the matter is that British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution even of moderate Muslims. The only thing we really want from Muslims is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property prices, and to sustain the luxury market. Their cheap labor that we imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant.
In other words, one of the achievements of the bombers and would-be bombers is to make discrimination against most Muslims who wish to enter Britain a perfectly rational policy. This is not to say that the government would espouse it, other than surreptitiously by giving secret directions to visa offices around the world. But why should a country take an unnecessary risk without a compensatory benefit?
The problem causes deep philosophical discomfort to everyone who believes in a tolerant society. On the one hand we believe that every individual should be judged on his merits, while, on the other, we know it would be absurd and dangerous to pretend that the threat of terrorism comes from sections of the population equally.
History is full of the most terrible examples of what happens when governments and peoples ascribe undesirable traits to minorities, and no decent person would wish to participate in the crimes to which this ascription can give rise. Yet it would also be folly to ignore sociological reality.
i belive it is wrong what about yu?
Apart from the prohibition of passenger drop-off and pickup next to the terminal building at Birmingham Airport, everything was as usual. Men and women in Muslim garb mingled in the crowd with perfect tranquillity, expecting neither violence nor even verbal reproach.
Was this a sign of the admirable tolerance of British society, or of its bovine complacency born of an inability, or unwillingness, to make the effort to defend itself? Was it decency, cowardice, or stupidity?
I really don't know anymore, which is an indication of the problem: Only time will tell, and by then it might be too late. A friend who met me at the airport said something that must by now be true of many ordinary British people. Just as we used to wonder, on meeting Germans of a certain age, what they had done during World War II, so she wondered, when she found herself next to a young Muslim on a bus or a train, what he thought of the various bombings perpetrated by his coreligionists and whether he might be a bomber. She found herself looking for the nearest exit, as we are all enjoined to do by flight attendants before the plane takes off, in case of the need for swift exit.
There are reasonable grounds for suspicion, of course. Surveys — for whatever they are worth — show a surprising, and horrifying, degree of sympathy, if not outright support, for the bombers on the part of the young Muslim population of Britain. They show that a large number of Muslims in Britain want the implementation of Sharia law and think that murdering British Jews is justified simply because they are Jews. And when an atrocity is perpetrated by a Muslim, they evince no passion remotely comparable to that aroused by, say, the work of Salman Rushdie.
On the other hand, day-to-day relations with Muslims are often polite and friendly, and large numbers of Muslim small businessmen depend upon such relations with their non-Muslim customers for a living. This could change. One of the most sinister effects of the efforts of the bombers and would-be bombers is that they have undermined trust completely. This is because those under investigation turn out not to be cranks or marginals but people who are either well-integrated into society, superficially at least, or who have good career prospects. They are not the ignorant and uneducated — quite the reverse. Seven people detained in the latest plot worked in the medical profession.
The perpetrators do not bomb because of personal grievance but because they have allowed themselves to be gripped by a stupid, though apparently quite popular, ideology: radical Islam. Nor are they of one ethnic or national group only: We have had Somali, Pakistani, Arab, Jamaican, Algerian, and British Muslim terrorists. This means, unfortunately, that no one can ever be quite sure whether a Muslim who appears polite and accommodating is not simultaneously contemplating mass murder. Deceit, after all, is one of the terrorists' deadliest weapons.
Mistrust of Muslims in Britain has developed quite quickly and could develop much further. In my youth, I traveled extensively in the Muslim world and lived for a time in Africa with a Muslim family without being aware of any hostility or antagonism on my part toward the religion or culture. Had I been a woman, it might have been different, of course. Contrary to what the late Edward Said, author of the anti-Western "Orientalism," might have thought, I had inherited no anti-Muslim prejudice.
Now, despite friendly and long-lasting relations with many Muslims, my first reaction on seeing Muslims in the street is mistrust; my prejudice, far from having been inherited or inculcated early in life, developed late in response to events.
The fundamental problem is this: There is an asymmetry between the good that many moderate Muslims can do for Britain and the harm that a few fanatics can do to it. The 1-in-1,000 chance that a man is a murderous fanatic is more important to me than the 999-in-1,000 chance that he is not a murderous fanatic: If, that is, he is not especially valuable or indispensable to me in some way.
And the plain fact of the matter is that British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution even of moderate Muslims. The only thing we really want from Muslims is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property prices, and to sustain the luxury market. Their cheap labor that we imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant.
In other words, one of the achievements of the bombers and would-be bombers is to make discrimination against most Muslims who wish to enter Britain a perfectly rational policy. This is not to say that the government would espouse it, other than surreptitiously by giving secret directions to visa offices around the world. But why should a country take an unnecessary risk without a compensatory benefit?
The problem causes deep philosophical discomfort to everyone who believes in a tolerant society. On the one hand we believe that every individual should be judged on his merits, while, on the other, we know it would be absurd and dangerous to pretend that the threat of terrorism comes from sections of the population equally.
History is full of the most terrible examples of what happens when governments and peoples ascribe undesirable traits to minorities, and no decent person would wish to participate in the crimes to which this ascription can give rise. Yet it would also be folly to ignore sociological reality.
i belive it is wrong what about yu?
sorry
sorry,my teachers &friends i dint blog tu i month of august due tu my exam . don't get angry......
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
terrorism
the systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. Terrorism has been practiced by political organizations with both rightist and leftist objectives, by nationalistic and religious groups, by rRevolutionary warfare often uses terror for its purposes, but terrorism has its own logic, often quite different from that of national or political groups seeking to control a state. Politically motivated terrorism, defined as the use of violence against noncombatants for the purpose of demoralization and intimidation, is an extremely old phenomenon. However, the September 11 attacks on the...evolutionaries, and even by state institutions such as armies, intelligence s...pickpocketing, vandalism, and breaking and entering. However, in the 1960s civil aviation became a recognized target for politically motivated crimes. These crimes came to include general acts of terrorism, such as mass shootings and bombings and, especially, aircraft hijacking.ervices, and police.Acts of terrorism committed within democratic countries or against their interests in other parts of the world occurred with increasing frequency beginning in the 1970s. In the United States remarkably few terrorist attacks had taken place before the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City. The deadliest single act of terrorism anywhere, the September 11 attacks of 2001,...
Sunday, August 3, 2008
How to prevent global warming
It is a burning topic” how to prevent global warming?” many nature lovers r working for plant, plant & plant trees? But the matter is that what r they doing for saving the nature .The conclusion are no... They r using AC”S in their each room. Is it right? Ac releases a large amount of CFC”S. Which is harm full to the ozone layer? The UV rays enter and play an important role in melting of glaciers.
Now lets us discuss the points how to solve this problem,
1. We should reduce the use of sprays which release S.P.M
2. Use of AC”S should be avoided which is the cause of CFC”S
They are stable compounds and breaks ozone O3 to O2.
3. Factories should not be encouraged and hand mill industries should be opened
Trough out the world. Waste from factories lead to pollution.
4 Do aforestation if you see cutting of one tree plant 5
Trees.
5. Last but not the least save water save our mother earth.
Save mother Earth.
Now lets us discuss the points how to solve this problem,
1. We should reduce the use of sprays which release S.P.M
2. Use of AC”S should be avoided which is the cause of CFC”S
They are stable compounds and breaks ozone O3 to O2.
3. Factories should not be encouraged and hand mill industries should be opened
Trough out the world. Waste from factories lead to pollution.
4 Do aforestation if you see cutting of one tree plant 5
Trees.
5. Last but not the least save water save our mother earth.
Save mother Earth.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
effect of global warming
chunk of ice spreading across seven square miles has broken off a Canadian ice shelf in the Arctic, scientists said Tuesday.Derek Mueller, a research at Trent University, was careful not to blame global warming, but said it the event was consistent with the theory that the current Arctic climate isn't rebuilding ice sheets."We're in a different climate now," he said. "It's not conducive to regrowing them. It's a one-way process."Mueller said the sheet broke away last week from the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf off the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada's far north. He said a crack in the shelf was first spotted in 2002 and a survey this spring found a network of fissures.The sheet is the biggest piece shed by one of Canada's six ice shelves since the Ayles shelf broke loose in 2005 from the coast of Ellesmere, about 500 miles from the North Pole.Formed by accumulating snow and freezing meltwater, ice shelves are large platforms of thick, ancient sea ice that float on the ocean's surface. Ellesmere Island was once entirely ringed by a single enormous ice shelf that broke up in the early 1900s.At 170 square miles and 130-feet thick, the Ward Hunt shelf is the largest of those remnants. Mueller said it has been steadily declining since the 1930s.Gary Stern, co-leader of an international research program on sea ice, said it's the same story all around the Arctic.Speaking from the Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen in Canada's north, Stern said He hadn't seen any ice in weeks. Plans to set up an ice camp last February had to be abandoned when usually dependable ice didn't form for the second year in a row, he said."Nobody on the ship is surprised anymore," Stern said. "We've been trying to get the word out for the longest time now that things are happening fast and they're going to continue to happen fast."
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
effect of globalisation on south asia
1. South Asia: An OverviewThe first section provides a geographic and cultural overview, as well as a synopsis of South Asian history from the Indus Valley civilization through the independence of India and Pakistan.
2. Politics and GovernmentThis lesson examines historical roots of the region’s political life, highlights each country’s uniqueness, and points to broad political trends that cross borders. Key challenges threatening political and social stability in the region are also discussed.
3. EconomicsThis section examines the types of economic activity found in South Asia at the start of the twenty-first century. The lesson also explores the region’s rich economic history, with focus on the post-independence period, and the six prominent drivers of economic development.
4. Population, Health, Environment, and ConflictThis segment looks at the issues of population, health, the environment, and conflict and their significant social and human consequences in South Asia. Reducing population growth, improving health and health care, reversing environmental decline, and resolving conflict are vital issues for the region.
5. South Asian Social and Cultural IssuesHome to one of the world’s oldest civilizations, the region has a history of social fragmentation and cultural diversity. This lesson explores the roots of South Asian society and culture, focusing on four important areas: religion; family life and the role of woman; the arts, architecture, and literature; and recreation and leisure.
6. South Asia in World AffairsThe instructional guide and videotape conclude with an overview of relations between the countries of South Asia and the rest of the world. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States demonstrated how sizeable a role South Asia plays in world affairs
2. Politics and GovernmentThis lesson examines historical roots of the region’s political life, highlights each country’s uniqueness, and points to broad political trends that cross borders. Key challenges threatening political and social stability in the region are also discussed.
3. EconomicsThis section examines the types of economic activity found in South Asia at the start of the twenty-first century. The lesson also explores the region’s rich economic history, with focus on the post-independence period, and the six prominent drivers of economic development.
4. Population, Health, Environment, and ConflictThis segment looks at the issues of population, health, the environment, and conflict and their significant social and human consequences in South Asia. Reducing population growth, improving health and health care, reversing environmental decline, and resolving conflict are vital issues for the region.
5. South Asian Social and Cultural IssuesHome to one of the world’s oldest civilizations, the region has a history of social fragmentation and cultural diversity. This lesson explores the roots of South Asian society and culture, focusing on four important areas: religion; family life and the role of woman; the arts, architecture, and literature; and recreation and leisure.
6. South Asia in World AffairsThe instructional guide and videotape conclude with an overview of relations between the countries of South Asia and the rest of the world. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States demonstrated how sizeable a role South Asia plays in world affairs
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
globalisation
It was the anti-globalisation movement that really put globalisation on the map. As a word it has existed since the 1960s, but the protests against this allegedly new process, which its opponents condemn as a way of ordering people's lives, brought globalisation out of the financial and academic worlds and into everyday current affairs jargon.
But that scarcely brings us nearer to what globalisation means. The phenomenon could be a great deal of different things, or perhaps multiple manifestations of one prevailing trend. It has become a buzzword that some will use to describe everything that is happening in the world today.
The dictionary definition is a great deal drier. Globalisation (n) is the "process enabling financial and investment markets to operate internationally, largely as a result of deregulation and improved communications" (Collins) or - from the US - to "make worldwide in scope or application" (Webster). The financial markets, however, are where the story begins.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the business model termed the "globalised" financial market came to be seen as an entity that could have more than just an economic impact on the parts of the world it touched.
Globalisation came to be seen as more than simply a way of doing business, or running financial markets - it became a process. From then on the word took on a life of its own. Centuries earlier, in a similar manner, the techniques of industrial manufacturing led to the changes associated with the process of industrialisation, as former country dwellers migrated to the cramped but booming industrial cities to tend the new machines.
So how does the globalised market work? It is modern communications that make it possible; for the British service sector to deal with its customers through a call centre in India, or for a sportswear manufacturer to design its products in Europe, make them in south-east Asia and sell them in north America.
But this is where the anti-globalisation side gets stuck in. If these practices replace domestic economic life with an economy that is heavily influenced or controlled from overseas, then the creation of a globalised economic model and the process of globalisation can also be seen as a surrender of power to the corporations, or a means of keeping poorer nations in their place.
But that scarcely brings us nearer to what globalisation means. The phenomenon could be a great deal of different things, or perhaps multiple manifestations of one prevailing trend. It has become a buzzword that some will use to describe everything that is happening in the world today.
The dictionary definition is a great deal drier. Globalisation (n) is the "process enabling financial and investment markets to operate internationally, largely as a result of deregulation and improved communications" (Collins) or - from the US - to "make worldwide in scope or application" (Webster). The financial markets, however, are where the story begins.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the business model termed the "globalised" financial market came to be seen as an entity that could have more than just an economic impact on the parts of the world it touched.
Globalisation came to be seen as more than simply a way of doing business, or running financial markets - it became a process. From then on the word took on a life of its own. Centuries earlier, in a similar manner, the techniques of industrial manufacturing led to the changes associated with the process of industrialisation, as former country dwellers migrated to the cramped but booming industrial cities to tend the new machines.
So how does the globalised market work? It is modern communications that make it possible; for the British service sector to deal with its customers through a call centre in India, or for a sportswear manufacturer to design its products in Europe, make them in south-east Asia and sell them in north America.
But this is where the anti-globalisation side gets stuck in. If these practices replace domestic economic life with an economy that is heavily influenced or controlled from overseas, then the creation of a globalised economic model and the process of globalisation can also be seen as a surrender of power to the corporations, or a means of keeping poorer nations in their place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
