:: As the title self explains the cause behind this thread, u are requested to analyse thoroughly the articles published in The Hindu newspaper and have a lively discussion on this thread.:cheers: As there was no activity on the similar thread …
As the title self explains the cause behind this thread, u are requested to analyse thoroughly the articles published in The Hindu newspaper and have a lively discussion on this thread.:cheers:As there was no activity on the similar thread -
http://www.pagalguy.com/discussions/analyze-the-hindu-editorial-25009756/243541, lets start it once again with a bangg!!!
But what we should discuss about the articles?? sud we do the summary or just a general discussion on the topic?
anything to everything:
summary
future prospects
economical effects
social effects
repercussions
next predictable event
wht it really meant
etc etc
u need not think much...this thread is meant to enhance our liking towards reading the editorials.Needless to say, discussion will follow:gm
:
all those in love with TheHindu watch this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmXPBp7DpQw&feature;=player_embedded
well I read both the beeped newspaper and hindu online, so kinda tongue-in-cheek with the video 😛
Here comes the first article. Lets start with summary puys
The final results of Iran's parliamentary elections will not be known until April, as 65 seats in 33 constituencies are to go to a run-off, but enough results have been declared for a pattern to emerge. A faction loyal to the country's lifelong Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is expected to win up to three quarters of the 290 places in the assembly or Majlis; President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who is supported by another faction, will be under considerable pressure for the remainder of his term, which ends in 2013. The Majlis has more power than many other national parliaments in the region, as it can set budgets and advise the government on foreign affairs and national security. It will now be substantially strengthened by the fact that the final say on all state matters in the Iranian theocracy still rests with Ayatollah Khamenei, who has been vali-e-faqih since June 1989. One immediate possibility is that Mr. Ahmedinejad's foreign policy statements could well become less confrontational, even if his civil nuclear policy - on which there is broad consensus within conservative and nationalist circles - remains unchanged.
The elections, nevertheless, give rise to other problems. The final result will be questionable, because a body called the Guardian Council, which is appointed by the Supreme Leader and has to approve all candidates, disqualified 36 per cent of the 5,395 people who tried to stand; international rights groups say many of its decisions were arbitrary. Opposition parties also decided not to take part, because they have no access to the media, and many of their leaders, such as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, are imprisoned or under house arrest. These are among the consequences of the 2009 presidential poll, which was followed by long and violent repression of protests by reformist parties and members of the public over alleged rigging which gave Mr. Ahmedinejad a landslide victory. As for the current election, the official turnout of 64 per cent cannot be independently verified. Furthermore, even though the choice has been between two conservative factions, no decisive economic vision is being offered to the electorate while unemployment rises and western sanctions are starting to affect all, including the professional and upper classes. Iran is far too important - and the evolving situation in the region far too volatile - to be governed in this manner. As the clouds of confrontation with the U.S. and its allies gather, Iran's rulers need to realise their country would be stronger and more secure if it were to have the sort of genuinely representative democracy its people deserve as of right.
The final results of Iran's parliamentary elections will not be known until April, as 65 seats in 33 constituencies are to go to a run-off, but enough results have been declared for a pattern to emerge. A faction loyal to the country's lifelong Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is expected to win up to three quarters of the 290 places in the assembly or Majlis; President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who is supported by another faction, will be under considerable pressure for the remainder of his term, which ends in 2013. The Majlis has more power than many other national parliaments in the region, as it can set budgets and advise the government on foreign affairs and national security. It will now be substantially strengthened by the fact that the final say on all state matters in the Iranian theocracy still rests with Ayatollah Khamenei, who has been vali-e-faqih since June 1989. One immediate possibility is that Mr. Ahmedinejad's foreign policy statements could well become less confrontational, even if his civil nuclear policy - on which there is broad consensus within conservative and nationalist circles - remains unchanged.
The elections, nevertheless, give rise to other problems. The final result will be questionable, because a body called the Guardian Council, which is appointed by the Supreme Leader and has to approve all candidates, disqualified 36 per cent of the 5,395 people who tried to stand; international rights groups say many of its decisions were arbitrary. Opposition parties also decided not to take part, because they have no access to the media, and many of their leaders, such as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, are imprisoned or under house arrest. These are among the consequences of the 2009 presidential poll, which was followed by long and violent repression of protests by reformist parties and members of the public over alleged rigging which gave Mr. Ahmedinejad a landslide victory. As for the current election, the official turnout of 64 per cent cannot be independently verified. Furthermore, even though the choice has been between two conservative factions, no decisive economic vision is being offered to the electorate while unemployment rises and western sanctions are starting to affect all, including the professional and upper classes. Iran is far too important - and the evolving situation in the region far too volatile - to be governed in this manner. As the clouds of confrontation with the U.S. and its allies gather, Iran's rulers need to realise their country would be stronger and more secure if it were to have the sort of genuinely representative democracy its people deserve as of right.
Here comes the first article. Lets start with summary puys
The final results of Iran's parliamentary elections will not be known until April, as 65 seats in 33 constituencies are to go to a run-off, but enough results have been declared for a pattern to emerge. A faction loyal to the country's lifelong Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is expected to win up to three quarters of the 290 places in the assembly or Majlis; President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who is supported by another faction, will be under considerable pressure for the remainder of his term, which ends in 2013. The Majlis has more power than many other national parliaments in the region, as it can set budgets and advise the government on foreign affairs and national security. It will now be substantially strengthened by the fact that the final say on all state matters in the Iranian theocracy still rests with Ayatollah Khamenei, who has been vali-e-faqih since June 1989. One immediate possibility is that Mr. Ahmedinejad's foreign policy statements could well become less confrontational, even if his civil nuclear policy on which there is broad consensus within conservative and nationalist circles remains unchanged.
The elections, nevertheless, give rise to other problems. The final result will be questionable, because a body called the Guardian Council, which is appointed by the Supreme Leader and has to approve all candidates, disqualified 36 per cent of the 5,395 people who tried to stand; international rights groups say many of its decisions were arbitrary. Opposition parties also decided not to take part, because they have no access to the media, and many of their leaders, such as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, are imprisoned or under house arrest. These are among the consequences of the 2009 presidential poll, which was followed by long and violent repression of protests by reformist parties and members of the public over alleged rigging which gave Mr. Ahmedinejad a landslide victory. As for the current election, the official turnout of 64 per cent cannot be independently verified. Furthermore, even though the choice has been between two conservative factions, no decisive economic vision is being offered to the electorate while unemployment rises and western sanctions are starting to affect all, including the professional and upper classes. Iran is far too important and the evolving situation in the region far too volatile to be governed in this manner. As the clouds of confrontation with the U.S. and its allies gather, Iran's rulers need to realise their country would be stronger and more secure if it were to have the sort of genuinely representative democracy its people deserve as of right.
Results of Iran's election are going to be out in few days but already there is a wave of hope flowing around. This may result in the win off supporters of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei which may bring a positive change both in the economic front and foreign policy front. But again there may be a problem of rigging of elections same as occured in 2009. Also, few of the opposition leaders are not taking part in the election. For Iran to be more strong, it should take care of the sanctions from US and Europe which may be bring about by the representative democracy.
In a long-drawn fight, new weapons always come in handy. The rivalry in the Kerala unit of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) between former Chief Minster V.S. Achuthanandan and the State secretary, Pinarayi Vijayan, is legendary. Although the murder of T.P. Chandrasekharan, leader of the Revolutionary Marxist Party, a breakaway group of CPI (M), in Onchiyam in Kozhikode earlier this month appears to have accentuated divisions in the party, this is but another phase in the seemingly never-ending Achuthanandan-Vijayan factional feud. As leaders of the ruling United Democratic Front pointed fingers at the CPI (M) for the murder, Mr. Vijayan and Mr. Achuthanandan used the killing as an opportunity to begin a fresh battle within the party. While Mr. Vijayan described Chandrasekharan as a traitor, Mr. Achuthanandan paid homage to the slain RMP leader. But in defending Chandrasekharan by stating there was nothing wrong in floating a new party, Mr. Achuthanandan was actually attacking Mr. Vijayan. The situation in Onchiyam was similar to the one prevailing in 1964, Mr. Achuthanandan said, alluding to the split in the Communist Party of India that gave birth to the CPI (M). And, taking the analogy further, he compared Mr. Vijayan to S.A. Dange, then chairman of the CPI, seen as a villain during the split, who was later expelled by the party. But those who think Mr. Achuthanandan was raising visions of a split in the party are mistaken. For the veteran Marxist leader, this was merely another shot at his rival, and not some strategic manoeuvre intended to split the party. Political murders are non-events in Kerala, and, in any case, the course of the CPI (M) will not turn on whether Chandrasekharan is seen as a traitor or martyr.
More than the murder, what is worrying Mr. Achuthanandan is that Mr. Vijayan does not seem intent on toppling the UDF government, which is surviving on a wafer-thin majority. If the 88-year-old Mr. Achuthanandan is to be CM again, his only chance is in the current term of the Assembly. The party lost a recent by-election in Piravom, and to lose another in Neyyattinkara next month would practically end any hope of the LDF finding a way back to power in the current Assembly. In his own interest, Mr. Achuthanandan will not rock the boat at this stage. To force a split would be to sabotage his chances of leading the next government. Mr. Vijayan, too, pulled back and refused to get into an extended war of words. The swords are thus back in their scabbards for now. But as long as this rivalry, which is both ideological and personal, endures, the CPI (M) cannot breathe easy in Kerala.