Don't let him fool you.Acharya wrote:Looks like US establishment has got the messageshyam wrote:'US created the monster of China'
Good riddance.he acknowledged that he plagiarized sections of another writer’s article about gun control.
Oh, man, what a fall from grace for a rank Uncle Tom who had so much going for him personall. I wonder what made him a lift few passages that had no great insight or creativity anyway? All he had to acknowledge the source and that was that. Was he just lazy and negligent?Victor wrote:Freed Zakaria suspended by CNN-Time for plagiarismGood riddance.he acknowledged that he plagiarized sections of another writer’s article about gun control.
I think Syria is more important and touchy than might seem at first sight - it is a part of the Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hezbollah coalition, and issues like Israeli security and Iranian nukes are part of the mix.CRamS wrote:But what is it that FZ said on Syria that would have turned the screws on him?
Fareed had many opposition from other famour news analysts. I will get those names.Singha wrote:here is the jon stewart show episode which likely got him in trouble per Rudradev http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episod ... ed-zakaria
his part starts around 15:30
The whole saga began Friday morning after NewsBusters flagged a paragraph from Zakaria’s latest column, “The Case for Gun Control,” that bore a striking resemblance to Jill Lapore’s “Battleground America” for the New Yorker:
First, Zakaria’s “The Case for Gun Control” piece from Time magazine’s upcoming Aug. 20 issue:
Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, documents the actual history in Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. Guns were regulated in the U.S. from the earliest years of the Republic. Laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. Other states soon followed: Indiana in 1820, Tennessee and Virginia in 1838, Alabama in 1839 and Ohio in 1859. Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas (Texas!) explained in 1893, the “mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.”
Compare that to Lepore’s “Battleground America” New Yorker article back in April:
As Adam Winkler, a constitutional-law scholar at U.C.L.A., demonstrates in a remarkably nuanced new book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America,” firearms have been regulated in the United States from the start. Laws banning the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813, and other states soon followed: Indiana (1820), Tennessee and Virginia (1838), Alabama (1839), and Ohio (1859). Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas explained in 1893, the “mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.”
Probably most of his writing is delegated to underlings; it would be easy to get one of the researchers to do the plagiarism--of useless material about a useless topic--so that FZ can be nailed for it.CRamS wrote:RudraJi,
What I would like to know is whether FZ intentionally plagiarized those quotes, or was he just lazy and negligent in not acknowledging those quotes to their author? I mean I read those quotes, and granted I could care two whiskers for this useless gun debate crap, there shouldn't be one in the first place, but I didn't see anything so profound in those quotes for FZ to have become famous by stealing them.
NEW DELHI – With America’s presidential election looming, perhaps its most striking aspect from an Indian point of view is that no one in New Delhi is unduly concerned about the outcome. There is now a broad consensus in Indian policymaking circles that, whoever wins, India-United States relations are more or less on the right track.Throughout the Cold War, the world’s oldest democracy and its largest were essentially estranged. America’s initial indifference was best reflected in President Harry Truman’s reaction when Chester Bowles asked to be named ambassador to India: “I thought India was pretty jammed with poor people and cows round streets, witch doctors, and people sitting on hot coals and bathing in the Ganges…but I did not realize anybody thought it was important.”CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphIf that was bad, India’s political orientation was worse. The American preference for making anti-communist allies, however unsavory, tied Washington to Pakistan’s increasingly Islamist dictatorship, while India’s non-aligned democracy drifted toward the secular Soviet embrace. The US government regarded non-alignment with distaste; Eisenhower’s secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, notoriously declared that “neutrality between good and evil is itself evil.” In a world divided between two uncompromising superpowers, India’s temporizing seemed like appeasement at best, and aid and comfort for the enemy at worst.The nuclear accord simultaneously accomplished two things. It admitted India into the global nuclear club, despite its refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. More important, it acknowledged that US exceptionalism had found a sibling. Thanks to the US, which strong-armed the 45 countries of the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group into swallowing their concerns that special treatment for India could constitute a precedent for rogue nuclear aspirants like Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran, there is now an “Indian exception.”
CommentsView/Create comment on this paragraphUnder Obama, nothing quite so dramatic was possible: no spectacular breakthroughs were conceived or executed, nor could many have been imagined. But Obama – who had displayed a photograph of Mahatma Gandhi in his Senate office, carried a locket of the Hindu god Hanuman, and spoke often of his desire to build a “close strategic partnership” with India –struck the right symbolic chords in New Delhi and won over the fractious parliament.The US is India’s largest trading partner (if both goods and services are included). American exports to India have grown faster in the last five years than those to any other country. The Confederation of Indian Industry estimates that, despite the recent global financial crisis and the US recession that sparked it, bilateral trade in services is likely to grow from $60 billion to more than $150 billion in the next six years
My take is that indeed FZ quoted passages from elsewhere, but for sure those whities who are jealous of an SDRE like FZ having such a ball are using this milk the living daylights out of it and roasting FZ's backside. Whichever way, FZ's reputation has been damaged, and Il am not sure he will enjoy that kind of elite Uncle Tom status anymore.devesh wrote:^^^
intriguing. now we have twists and turns to this story...
The Booth Energy Group and the River Trading Company announce a $7 billion deal that could send nine million tons of coal a year to India from West Virginia and Kentucky. Such exports are rising as American demand for coal falls, as electric utilities burn more cheap natural gas. [The Associated Press]
