 |
Monday,
December 31, 2001, Chandigarh, India  
|
POTO's
latest edition Hello,
it’s BSNL calling |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
India’s
diplomatic offensive Should
Indus Treaty be abrogated?
The
shoe-bomb terrorist Shared meal,
bitter-sweet memories
No
kung-fu for these actors
1964 Chemistry: DOROTHY HODGKIN
|
POTO's latest edition THE Union Government has ultimately accepted the main objections raised by the media and political parties in the case of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, better known as POTO. The Union Cabinet at its meeting on Saturday gave its approval to a new edition of the ordinance so that it could be acceptable to all sections of the polity. Now it should be passed by both Houses of Parliament without opposition members describing it as a draconian measure. However, how the Opposition reacts to the new form of POTO is not as important today as what the government has done and why, despite the fact that it has exposed itself as being wrong on the point raised by the Opposition and certain constituents of the ruling coalition. First let us take the changes the government has introduced. There were basically three objectionable clauses — III, VII and VIII — though aimed at achieving the laudable objective of preventing the growth of terrorism in the country. Sub-Clause VIII of Clause III had it that media people would be punished if they failed to divulge to the police any information they had which could be helpful in the prevention of an act of terrorism or in the arrest of such elements, even if that meant a journalist losing his sources of information in the process. The provision cut at the very root of Press freedom and has, therefore, been dispensed with. Clause VII of the original POTO had accorded objectionable powers to the Designated Authority so far as the arrest of a person under this law was concerned. The provision has been suitably amended so that an aggrieved person can appeal to the Special Courts to be set up under the law against an order issued by the Designated Authority. This has eliminated the factor of misuse of its powers by the Designated Authority under political or other pressure. Like the two provisions already discussed, Clause VIII too had inbuilt infirmities as it allowed the authorities to misuse the law to serve the interests of the ruling politicians as it invested in the Designated Authority powers to forfeit the property, movable or immovable, of a person arrested under POTO though there was a strong possibility of his being declared innocent by the court. The power of forfeiture has now been vested in the Special Court. The Union Cabinet has also accepted the demand for allowing a Sessions Court to try an accused till the Special Court does not come into being. This will go a long way in preventing harassment of an innocent person taken in custody under POTO. After this the question that comes to one's mind is why the government has agreed to do away with the controversial provisions when it was convinced of their usefulness and knew how to get the necessary parliamentary sanction for the purpose — by calling a joint session of the two Houses. The truth is that the ordinance was giving the government bad publicity which could have cost it dear in the coming elections. Moreover, the heightened tension in India's relations with Pakistan following the December 13 terrorist attack on Parliament and the diplomatic offensive initiated by New Delhi has rendered POTO meaningless so far as its vote-gathering aspect is concerned. UP Chief Minister Rajnath Singh had admitted that the Opposition had forced the BJP-led ruling coalition at the Centre to make POTO as his party's election plank under the guise of curbing terrorism. But there is a significant change in the circumstances. Now it is believed that the war-like situation has recharged the nationalistic feelings of the people which may benefit the BJP. This is, however, a simplistic view. There is a powerful anti-incumbency factor at play in UP as also in Punjab and Uttaranchal, slated to go to the polls in February, which may upset the applecart of the BJP. |
|
Hello, it’s BSNL calling THE government has got under the skin of profit-hungry private sector undertakings. Also, it has adapted itself to the new rules of competition. What is greatly significant is that it has enthusiastically put on the boxers glove, prepared to fight the full 15 rounds. This is the signal of the deep cut in the public sector BSNL’s long distance tariff cut announced on Friday. The new rates are a shade lower than what the private operators, thanks to a pruning of leasing charges by Bhartitel Indiaone optical fibre line, have promised from Republic Day. BSNL has taken a calculated gamble. It has the widest network and rakes in an annual revenue of Rs 20,000 crore, full Rs 12,000 crore from long distance calls. A major share of the income comes from calls made to a distance of 200 to 500 km and the reduction of tariff is sharpest in this segment. Obviously, BSNL hopes to persuade telephone users to avail of the attractive new rates to be in touch with their near and dear ones and business partners more frequently and swell its revenue. It knows that the loss on account of lower rates will be about Rs 3000 crore in the next six months and only a big rise in the volume of traffic will compensate it. BSNL does not say it, but it is certain that it covets the appetising market of five million cellular phone users who may migrate to it, stranding the Bhartitel in a no-man’s land. The cut rates will come into effect on January 14, the Sankrant day or Pongal in Tamil Nadu. The cellular operators have offered a similar gift from Republic Day, a day of national pride. These are days of rejoicing. But any celebration of the more affordable STD tariff is somewhat premature right now. BSNL did not obtain prior permission of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) before the dramatic announcement. It had just faxed its new rates. It is a technical default, although TRAI has been committed to low tariff. Two, the private cellular telephone operators tied up with Bhartitel have threatened to seek legal remedy. Their case is that BSNL is resorting to predatory pricing — that is, exploiting its huge size to shut out competition. This is not without merit. Another illegality is the active role of Communications Minister Pramod Mahajan in the announcement. He held the centre-stage of a decision by a corporation which is supposed to be autonomous. He wished away this act as “gracing” the occasion and announcing the government’s decision to enter a price war which “everyone welcomes and nobody wants a ceasefire”. He has got his fight but the courts will decide the winner. |
India’s diplomatic offensive PAKISTAN
should be grateful to Allah that the terrorists botched up its “Operation Parliament” on December 13. Had they blown it up, killed ministers and members of Parliament or kept them hostages, they would have left India without any option whatsoever. The attack on Parliament House, the nation’s seat of power and the symbol of our vibrant democracy, was nothing short of an act of war. To counter the attack would have been India’s legitimate right and only option. In his December 13 address to the nation Prime Minister Vajpayee did not go beyond stating that “the fight against terrorism had reached a decisive phase”. For President Musharraf of Pakistan, however, the failed operation was a blessing in disguise. He was clever enough to capitalise on it and condemn the “armed intruders”. He joined the chorus against terrorism with unusual alacrity and even offered a joint investigation into the attack. How considerate? But why don’t you, Mr President, ban LeT and JeM instead of harbouring them with hastily changed names? The reaction within the country was understandably strident although there were no street demonstrations or protests in front of the Pakistan High Commission. The public wants the government to take immediate military action against Pakistan for crossing all limits of proxy war. Twelve years have gone without any befitting response to Pakistan’s debilitating war against India. There are, however, others within and outside the government hierarchy who counsel patience and
forebearance. But Pakistan tends to misconstrue this as India’s weakness. Political rhetoric has become too commonplace for any sobering effect. Mr Vajpayee wrote to Mr Bush about India reaching its limits of patience after the October 1 attack on the J&K Assembly. Then, after the December 13 attack, he said something about “accepting the challenge”. Mr Advani has been voluble and clamorous as ever. The nation heard the same rhetoric when the Chhattissinghpura incident occurred. Terrorists’ intrusion in the Red Fort last year brought out the same rhetoric. “Deeds, not words” are what the country wants now. The government has to define its intent and objectives clearly. Then it should assess the relative capabilities of the fourth and the fifth largest armies in the world before embarking on a military drive. To preclude any bravado on our part, or for that matter the fear psychosis that Pakistan might hit back leading to a full-scale war, an objective analysis of costs and benefits must necessarily precede. The military brass in their briefing to the political leadership highlighted the likely scenario of military action against Pakistan soon after the episode of December 13. Crossing the LoC would lead to military action that would engulf the nation in four to six weeks’ war. And If pressed hard, Pakistan might be compelled to use the nuclear button in keeping with its policy of “First Use” when dictated by circumstances. Besides both nations being nuclear capable, Pakistan’s military might is considerable with near parity with India’s conventional prowess in the western sector. This was the dilemma in which the Indian government found itself on December 13. If it struck Pakistan, it faced repercussions that could not be overlooked easily. Besides the uncertainty of war, India could lose whatever US empathy is there for it. The USA is at present too busy with Afghanistan where its air force is deployed all over Pakistan’s bases. Under such circumstances, an Indo-Pak war would be an anathema to the Americans. Adverse reaction from other quarters would make the government’s position untenable. And if it did not go in for any deterrent action, it stood to reinforce Pakistan’s perception of India being a soft state that could be pushed to any extent at will. The attack on Parliament is the manifestation of this very perception and culmination of India’s consistently passive response. Lack of adequate response will only send a message that the terrorists and their mentors could get away with most provocative and heinous crimes against this nation. Far more consequential would be the likely signal to Pakistan that its “First Use” rationale has been able to deter India from taking the risk of attacking it. Pakistan’s implicit faith in its nuclear capability and FU posture, it feels, has neutralised India’s overwhelming conventional superiority. This is the trump card Pakistan seems to hold against India. However, Pakistan’s geography lacks strategic depth, and this one factor may prove suicidal for it in case it ever ventures to employ such a weapon against India. This country may lose a city or two, but Pakistan may be wiped out if it ever dares to use its nuclear capability against India. Notwithstanding this, India has to impose the similar cost on Pakistan’s military if it is to be discouraged from exporting terrorism in the future. Otherwise its belligerence will remain a thorn in India’s flesh forever. It is singularly responsible for imposing all the wars on India. And despite losing all of them, strangely, the Pakistan military remains forever provocative and defiant and continues to indulge in more hostile acts progressively. India must not overlook the fact that despite any action against Pakistan, it would be a miracle if terrorism disappears in the next few years. Besides precipitating the present crisis, Pakistan was the first one to deploy 50,000 to 60,000 troops along the international border and the LoC and
re-inforcing its 10 to 30 corps with additional troops from I2, 31, II and I corps respectively. This was further backed up by heavy armour and artillery. The message is sought to be conveyed that Pakistan is ready for combat action. It is in response to this brinkmanship that India was forced to mobilise its forces and put the Army and the Air Force on “high alert”. A confident and sensible nation would weigh all its options and work out carefully a graduated response. India has a host of diplomatic, political, economic, military and intelligence options to choose from, though concentrating on diplomacy at the moment. In any democracy, the military is always the last option. It is only when diplomacy and other avenues are exhausted that the nation resorts to military action. The outcome of a military action is often uncertain unless there is a marked asymmetry of the type that prevails between Israel and the Palestinians, or for that matter between the USA and Afghanistan. Military action, hot pursuit, surgical strikes on training camps and forays across the LoC are fraught with danger. A well-focused and a durable approach to neutralise Pakistan’s gameplan of destabilising India has to be evolved with the help of other nations that matter. India has rightly opted for a concerted diplomatic offensive in the first go. The most logical option is to garner full support of the international community. Now that there is a world-wide consensus against terrorism, a well-directed and focused approach will help build international opinion to force Pakistan to rein in its devious groups engaged in terrorism in the name of Islam and with the help of the ISI. This is the first time in the last 17 years that India has initiated a politico-diplomatic offensive against Pakistan. The offensive must not only be coercive but also persuasive in order to ensure the desired results without losing control over it. For, the next alternative is war only. India’s problem is that the USA is still not willing to see red so far as Pakistan is concerned. Washington’s protective hand over Pakistan is much too obvious. It is not the balance of power game as the USA’s own compulsions of keeping the US-Pak alliance intact that are inhibiting America from acting objectively for the time being. It needs Pakistan at present and is willing to pay any price for it. Bearing with General Musharraf’s duplicity in Afghanistan, the USA allowed the Pakistan Air Force to evacuate its military personnel fighting alongside the Taliban against the US forces. Although the USA has mended its stance to an extent, the confused signals from Washington, however, only highlight its dilemma. While seeking strategic partnership with India for wider consideration in the new world order, it is unable at the same time to shed the Pakistan syndrome. For India there is no other alternative but to defend itself in a stand alone mode. However, it is in our interest that Pakistan is coerced only to a certain limit. It is a long-term problem and would need a long-term solution. India should consider seriously, within the space available, to do to the enemy what it does to us. The opinion within the armed forces and outside is quite in favour of such a move. The writer, a retired Air Marshal, is a former Director-General, Defence Planning Staff, Ministry of Defence. |
|
Should Indus Treaty be abrogated? AFTER the December 13 incident the Government of India is engaged in preparing a carefully calibrated action plan for an offensive against Pakistan. One of the options being considered is the abrogation of the Indus Water Treaty (1973) which has resulted in the “gifting” away of a large volume of water to Pakistan and the placing of “restrictions” on India on consumptive use (for irrigation) of the three western rivers of the Indus system — the Chenab, the Jhelum and the Indus — and also preventing the building of any storage works in excess of a volume of 10,000 cubic feet. These restrictions have resulted in throttling the growth of both irrigation and the hydro works in J&K. Pakistan, the lower riparian state with hardly a 20 per cent catchment area, has got over 82 per cent of the total annual flows of the Indus system in an average year. There is a general feeling among the public that due to the unworthy behaviour of Pakistan India should take the appropriate action of throttling the canal system of that country. Is that possible? Before answering this question it is essential to consider the background of the circumstances which led to the signing of the Indus Water Treaty. The treaty was signed in 1960 at Karachi by Jawaharlal Nehru and General Ayub Khan. In simple terms, the treaty provides full utilisation of the flows of the three eastern rivers — the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi — amounting to 35.8 MAF (million acre feet). The total flow in the system amounts to about 200 MAF. In the case of the other rivers — the Chenab, the Jhelum and the Indus — India will not make consumptive use (for irrigation) of their flows and, while building hydro works, storage capacity larger than 10,000 cft will be created so that there is no danger of sudden flooding by opening the gates by the upstream country. Pakistan was given 10 years for “replacement works” for areas which earlier got water from the three eastern rivers, from the headworks of Madhopur located on the Ravi and the Hussainiwala headworks on the Sutlej. To help Pakistan in building the replacement works, the World Bank established a “kitty” to which various donor agencies and western countries contributed liberally. As a goodwill gesture, India contributed Rs 70 crore to the “kitty”. The treaty provided for setting up a body called the Indus Commission to monitor the working of the treaty. The commission meets at least once a year and holds inspections. We must look into the events which led to the signing of the treaty before deciding the question of its abrogation. The negotiations were held under the auspices of the World Bank for eight years at Washington DC. The problems faced by the Indian team during the negotiations are vividly described by N.D. Gulhati, then an officer of Punjab, in his book, “The Indus Water
Treaty (1973)”. He tells us how one proposal after another put by the Indian team was rejected by Pakistan, and the negotiations continued for eight long years. The Indian team was about to lose patience and put the proposal of diversion of the Chenab by constructing the Maru Tunnel. The proposal was backed by a feasibility report based on a photographic survey done by a German team. This led to a sudden change in the attitude of the Pakistani team, and it became possible to draft the treaty as it exists in the present form. Mr Gulhati writes that Pakistan agreeing to the exclusive use of the three rivers and allowing hardly 18 per cent of the total flows to this country, was the best deal India could make then. With the completion of the Thein Dam on the Ravi and the completion of the “replacement works” or “links” and three major storage dams at Mangla on the Jhelum, at Tarbela and Chashma on the Indus by Pakistan, there will not be any sudden impact on the irrigation system of the two countries. But it will enable India to undertake the construction of the river diversion works like the Maru Tunnel for the Chenab and other irrigation works with optimum storage from the Jhelum and the Indus. When completed, these will place India, the upper riparian state, in a position to control or throttle the flows in its favour and make Pakistan “behave” better. If abrogation of the treaty is considered, it must be combined with taking up the construction work at the Maru Tunnel for the diversion of the flows in the Chenab. Then, in the long run, the work of tapping up the full hydro-potential of the Indus can be taken up. The writer is Consultant, Water Resources, Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). |
The shoe-bomb terrorist SOME thought he was drunk, others that he was protesting at an in-flight smoking ban. A few tutted in disgust. When stewardess Cristina Jones screamed for help, however, several passengers immediately captured the dishevelled-looking man she had caught lighting a match next to his shoes. Yet even as the Miami-bound American Airlines plane made an emergency landing at Boston, many on board had no idea exactly what had occurred. They watched amazed as the sedated, trussed-up form of Richard Colvin Reid was carted off. They still did not know he was a human bomb. Reid had been trying to blow Flight 63 and all 196 of his fellow passengers out of the sky. As he wrestled with the very people he wanted to kill, he screamed: “I am wired.” Only when FBI agents examined his black suede basketball trainers and found them packed with plastic explosives did they realised what he had meant. Yet Reid could be just the first of a wave of bombers to come. Behind the 28-year-old Londoner lies a network of international terror links that stretch from London to Afghanistan. An Observer investigation has shown that Reid trained and travelled with Zaccarias Moussaoui, the so-called ‘20th hijacker’ in the World Trade Centre attacks now facing charges in New York that carry the death penalty. The two spoke on the phone late last year in a flurry of calls intercepted by British security services. Osama bin Laden’s network gave Reid’s suicide mission sophisticated backing, paying for him to criss-cross the world on numerous airline flights, despite his having no discernible form of work or official address. It taught him to obtain plastic explosives and fashion them into a cunningly disguised bomb. It provided training to enable him to avoid being picked up by security services at the numerous airports he passed through. It brainwashed him so that even now, Reid’s only expression of regret has been that he failed in his mission. It turned a one-time petty thief into a suicide bomber. Investigators are now scouring the passenger lists of Flight 63 to see if an unnoticed accomplice lurked among the holidaymakers and has disappeared again. One thing is clear: there are more Reids out there. At least 37 British men are believed to have been trained as bombers in the al-Qaeda camps of Afghanistan. They have been taught to form ‘sleeper cells’ and wait for the right moment to attack. Investigators combing the rubble of the camps have come across identities on al- Qaeda documents that hint at stories similar to Reid’s. There are names like Saeed Shah Mohamed, a 22-year-old from Leeds, or Hounslow-born Rahim and Saheb Khan, or Abdul Khalid Hussain, 28, from Bradford. They are now just names - perhaps false ones - but the world’s security services are desperate to track them down before it is too late. Because they missed Reid and the network that backed him. Only luck and an alert stewardess prevented a terrible tragedy. Five years ago it looked as though Islam was the answer to all Reid’s problems. When he emerged in 1996 after his last jail term, carrying just a black bin bag of belongings, the Brixton Mosque in south London gave him a job and an education. Worshippers who knew him have told The Observer that Reid was desperately keen to learn about Islam and seemed like an easy-going ‘backpacker type’. “He was young, shy and slightly nervous, the kind of person who meant well, no different to students who go and work in Africa during their summer holidays,” said Abdul Haqq Baker, the mosque leader. It seemed then that religion would save Reid from following in the footsteps of his father, Robin, who had spent 18 years behind bars for robberies. Reid had even been born while his father was in jail. The son of the marriage of a Jamaican father and Kent-born mother, Reid rarely knew a settled family life. His parents separated in 1978 when he was just four. They divorced six years later in 1984, and Reid had little contact with his father for seven years. During this time he drifted off the rails. Though his school, Thomas Tallis Comprehensive in Kidbrooke, London, is well run and successful, he fell into an easy streetlife of petty crime. He is thought to have indulged in minor marijuana dealing, car crime and then a string of muggings which eventually earned him several stretches in the notorious Feltham Young Offenders’ Institution in London. It was there he first attended Islamic lessons, encouraged by his father who converted in the 80s. He was taught by Abdul Ghani Qureshi, a travelling imam who was asked to leave in 1996 for inappropriate conduct. Qureshi’s son, Abdul Rahman, took over until he was suspended a month ago after becoming vociferously anti-American in the wake of 11 September. Two more prison imams have also recently been suspended. All this raises the prospect that British jails are a fertile recruiting ground for extremists. Prison mosques, where warders are excluded from prayers, offer a private space away from prying authority. “It’s against every principle of prison security. We weren’t allowed in as the worshippers said it was against their religion,” said a Feltham source. |
|
Shared meal, bitter-sweet memories I
saw Mariam Bibi and Rahim Dad for the first time only a few days ago. They looked old, older than their wrinkles. Both of them were crying. Their faces were fraught with untold pain, tears wilting on their cheeks as though hoping in vain for a smile. Mariam Bibi had gone to see her brother in Pakistan after, perhaps, many years. Brother and sister hugged each other and sobbed together. He took her home and over a meal, the two shared some bitter-sweet memories. For a while, two pairs of misty eyes shone like four bright stars in a dark night. They remembered the house in which they grew up, the little games they played with and on each other. The marbles of Rahim and the dolls of Mariam, the school that he went to and she didn't, the mangoes they stole together, the fun and happiness... they sat laughing and crying, lapsing into nostalgia. Nostalgia and romanticism- twins in Time's womb. One the memory of yesterday, the other the dream of tomorrow. The two old people didn't know what tomorrow would bring, if, that is, they lived to see it. They hadn't forgotten their first separation when a handful of strangers drew an invisible line across their land. This side, these people announced, would be India and the other Pakistan. Mariam and Rahim still bore the wounds of the riots that many years and many tears later hadn't stopped festering. In one fell swoop, children of the same mother had become citizens of two different worlds. Two pieces of paper had given them two different identities. Mariam had become Indian and Rahim Pakistani. The invisible line, like the hand of a malevolent god, was going to dictate their lives. Each time, the sound of bombs and bullets across that line was going to wrack their souls, torment them and bring back the ghosts they hadn't been able to exorcise for 50 long years. That day Mariam Bibi was holding her brother's face in her frail hands like she were holding a dear, fragile thing that would break if she let go. The two were sobbing away at the Attari railway station near Amritsar oblivious of all else. Their hearts felt the wrench of being torn asunder yet again. The train that had taken her to the brother's home was being withdrawn. She could do nothing but return to her own before that. It was part of her country's graduated response to his country's hand in raining terror this side of the line. His country hadn't forgotten the ignominy of 1965 and the insult of 1971. Her country hadn't forgiven his for fanning the fires in Punjab and Kashmir. Following the latest assault on its democracy, her government had withdrawn the train and the bus of friendship. It had also withdrawn Mariam Bibi and Rahim Dad's right to see each other. Perhaps forever. But then, what are a few people in the face of a vast nation? Indeed, what do a brother's sorrow and a sister's tears matter when pitted against the might of two countries? Mariam Bibi and Rahim Dad were simple people. Their minds, in a forgotten time warp of birds, songs, dolls and mangoes, could hardly comprehend the complex world of war songs, political manoeuvring and cold, diplomatic battles. But both knew, more than most, that "there is a today. Then a tomorrow. And then there is a day after tomorrow." They hadn't forgotten 1947. Their countries didn't seem to remember. Each continued to empty bullets from the barrels, and life from the souls of Mariam and Rahim continued to ooze out slowly. A handful of unknown people had divided them for the second time in their lives. I saw Mariam Bibi and Rahim Dad just a few days ago... on page one of a newspaper. The two, like their tears, were frozen forever on its top fold, now perhaps buried under the fold of Time. I haven't met them. But I feel like I know them a wee more while telling their story. Then again, their story could have been badly told. It may have factual errors. In fact, this may not be their story at all. But this one thing is true. The photographer just planted, to misquote Ben Okri a bit, "an epiphanic dynamite" in "an innocent-seeming image". |
No kung-fu for these actors THE best American director was born in Taiwan, one of the top talents in Hollywood did his landmark work in Hong Kong and one of the most critically acclaimed films in the USA last year was entirely in Chinese. Asian film and Asian stars are hot commodities in the US entertainment world. Despite the increased recognition in Hollywood, however, the Asian-American actors who struggle to find work on a daily basis contend that stereotyping is rife and mainstream roles are rare. The top Asian players in the entertainment world have made their mark in mainstream America. Taiwan-born director Ang Lee was named America’s best director earlier this year by Time magazine, Hong Kong star Jackie Chan commands about 15 million dollars per Hollywood picture and last year’s martial arts film “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” sent a charge through the Academy Awards. But ask Asian-American actors such as George Takei, Robin Shou, Jack Ong, Ravi Kapoor, Alec Mapa, John Cho, Karen Kim and Dustin Nguyen, who have all landed roles on network TV, and they will say Hollywood executives have trouble seeing Asian-American actors in roles beyond martial arts experts and a few other stereotypes. As for the stereotypes, there is the evil Asian man, usually a gang boss from a crime syndicate such as a Chinese triad of Japanese “yakuza” gang. Or men can be the undesirable partner who is wrapped up in his work, left his personality in his briefcase and is negligent toward his family. For the women, there is the China doll type — a fragile and enchanting beauty with a soft voice and long, dark hair. On the evil side is the dragon lady, the strong, seductive, completely unreliable and utterly corruptible woman. For both men and women, there is the fish out of water Asian who hopelessly tries to find his or her way in the USA, while snapping loads of pictures, fiddling with computers and speaking English with a hokey accent.
Reuters Deciphering genome to germ warfare At the dawn of the new millennium, biotechnology finally began to matter to people outside laboratories and brokerage houses. Scientist began deciphering the human genome in 2001, human embryos were cloned and gene research gained new urgency as microbiologists joined the battle against a suddenly very real danger — bioterrorism. In 2002, scientists hope to turn their understanding of how genes work into drugs, extract human embryonic stem cells from clone embryos and develop powerful vaccines against germ warfare. Already, researchers at the University of Wisconsin report success in the lab turning human embryonic stem cells into human brain cells, a critical step toward creating an endless supply of transplantable neural cells and tissue to repair spinal cord injuries and cell-based diseases like Parkinson’s. “Stem cell therapy has reached the heartland”, said Lee Silver, a Princeton University microbiologist and leading authority on cloning and stem cell science. “Most people in America know somebody with a disease”. Lobbying from patients helped persuade President Bush in August to authorise federally financed research on existing human embryonic stem cell lines. Nonetheless, the battle over destroying human embryos to obtain stem cells will be taken up again in 2002, with the US Senate expected to consider legislation that would criminalise all human cloning efforts.
AP |
|
Why fear when I am here? Never be afraid of anything because God is in you, with you, above you, around you. He follows you like a shadow. Never forget him. * * * There is no God other than love. Love is your life, your friend, your relative, your food and your everything. Heart that is filled with love can never be polluted. Love is nectarine. Once you fill it in your heart, the poison of evil will have no place in it. * * * Divinity pervades all that you see, hear and feel. Being in the constant company of such an all-pervasive divinity, why should you worry and fear. — Sathya Sai Baba, Sanathana Sarathi, May 2001 * * * A lady was singing a devotional song. It said among other things: “Thou art my father, Thou art my mother, Thou art my relatives, My possessions and all”, and so on. Sri Bhagavan remarked with a smile: “Yes, yes, thou art this, that and everything except “I”. Why not say, “I am Thou” and finish it. — Talks with Shri Ramana Maharishi, Ramanasaramam, page 558 * * * Just as a seed cannot bring forth fruit unless it dies we can never be spiritually fruitful and realise the Lord within ourselves until we have completely subdued our ego. As the seed has to merge in the earth in which it is planted, so has our ego to be eliminated. * * * We can never be conscious of the Lord as long as we are full of ego. Ego will eventually leave us only when we develop the quality of humility within ourselves. And this humility must not be superficial — it must be real true humility comes naturally from within. Calculated and artificial humility is just like cosmetic jewellery. As long as we are attached to the objects of creation we are full of ego..... When we are attached to the Divine Melody within, we automatically become detached from this creation and are filled with genuine humility. — Maharaj Charan Singh, Light on Saint John,
chapter 12. |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
