Indo-UK: News & Discussion

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 27 Jan 2010 21:10

Women suffer from Gandhi's legacy

British intellectual takleef at MKG's growing popularity across the Atlantic divide ??

Read the Brit comments for more juicy bits.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 28 Jan 2010 03:08

It is unbelievable on how so ignorant and patronizing that the British are.

By the way, I was looking at the population census on by decade and century. It was a shock to me to find out that in the 1750 to 1800, India's population was around 125 million to 160 million people while Britain's population was from 5 million to 6 million. I find it really hard to believe that a nation of only 5 million managed to subjugate and oppress a country that is 25 times bigger than theirs. It only speaks volumes of our leaders' incompetence. I do not buy the theory that the Britain were far more advanced in technology. Guns and cannons were extensively used in Indian warfare before the British came on the scene so it was not like for the first time that Indians experience cannon warfare.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Jan 2010 03:53

Brutish did not face united India. They alway fought with small city states ruled by Raibhadurs.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 28 Jan 2010 05:15

The EIC had constancy of purpose across generations where as we didnt.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jan 2010 14:03

ravi_ku wrote:The EIC had constancy of purpose across generations where as we didnt.

It was survival for them with competition from other european states from 1600 -1800.
Spanish and Portuguese success in expendition changed the balance in Europe. Russia expansion to the Pacific by 1700 created enormous pressure on the English and the French

Read the book - Asia and the western domination -
http://www.archive.org/details/asiaandw ... 09963mbp[b]
Asia And Western Dominance A Survey Of The Vasco Da Gama Epoch Of Asian History (1959)

Author: K. M. Panikkar
Publisher: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Language: English[/b]

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 28 Jan 2010 18:36

"The resentment doesn't stop.

http://www.navy-net.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=25006.html

Note the comment "an upstart Ind"

Yes, there are many of these crude, bigoted, envious remarks by the British on various forums. But what explains some Indians doing it, particularly when India achieves something concrete, like a space launch, a missile launch, developing a new supercomputer, a new car etc. Check out the rediff.com message boards. Most of the crude, negative remarks would be from Indians/persons of Indian origin. Thankfully, these are offset by more intelligent and positive readers, who praise the achievements, or at least see the good in all these events. That's one big difference between rediff and the British message boards.

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 29 Jan 2010 18:21

I can't understand this spiteful/jealous/vindictive attitude.
As always look at some of the comments:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatn ... -2016.html

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 29 Jan 2010 19:19

^^^Haresh, take it easy pal.

So, two UK-stani schmucks vomited their brains online. Big deal, happens all the time.

If this commentary is indeed representative of UKstanis in general, then its a whole new balls-game. Until then, chillax, move on. Just like imitation is an undeniable form of flattery, envy is an undeniable form of acknowledgement.

jai Ho.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 30 Jan 2010 13:59

Just like the pakis use MMS's sharm el sheik stupidity for their own propoganda purposes, the apologists of British colonialism use MMS' London stupidity for their own propoganda purposes.

In the words of British colonialism apologist Niall Ferguson

You know your own prime minister made a wonderful speech in Oxford in 2005, which made me wonder if he had read my book since it could have come from there. He mentioned a litany of things that India can say it inherited from the British empire . I thought it was a very important and mature speech. It acknowledged that empire was not all bad and that there were benefits.

Look at the intellectual jargon he uses to to whitewash British colonialism.Surely when a thief attack a pedestrian and stabs him, his intention is surely not to stab the pedestrain as such, but to loot him.In order to loot him, he stabs him and he is not concerned about the result of his stabbing.Going by our esteemed 'historian', Are we to assume that since the theif's intention is not to harm the person as such and hence the theif is not that bad after all !

When you look at per capita GDP under British rule, the question is whether that was a failure that was intended or whether it was a consequence of the limits of government power at the time. The British achieved a lot of what they set out to achieve. They massively expanded irrigation, they built a railway vastly superior to that of China. They made improvements in public health, the result of which was population growth. It's clear that India's GDP increased but so did India's population. I don't really think there was a conscious strategy of keeping Indians poor. I don't see any evidence that British administrators had that strategy any more than they deliberately created famines. It wasn't a conscious strategy to impose mass deaths. My sense is that when Manmohan Singh gave that lecture, it was a moment of marvelous candour on the part of an Indian politician . And I think it's only possible now because India has regained its self-confidence . It was a mark of that confidence that it's possible to acknowledge that the British weren't all bad. He wasn't saying it was all great. And nor was I.

And of course, the British colonialism needs to be justified because it all because of "truth" and equal-equal.Some one needs to tell the 'historian' that even a theif will also have good asset in his overall balance sheet but that does not mean a theif is not a theif.

As a historian, I strive for truth and truth requires balance. One cannot simply look at the liability side of the balance sheet

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 30 Jan 2010 17:44

Philip,

I think the UK govt should not finance ANY religous based school.
Sure one Hindu school and maybe a couple of Sikh ones. But most are islamic. This school is just a way of them saying "Look we have given YOU one as well, so whats the big deal about the moslem schools".

Religous schools are devisive. In the UK we have all sorts of islamic schools, they are heavily influenced by Hizb ut Tarir, the saudis/paks etc.

The govt finances them because votes are at stake. There are thought to be 1.2-2.5 million moslems in the UK, thats alot of votes and internal security problems.

Regards

Haresh

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 30 Jan 2010 18:44

recent article suggested that many UK islamic schools were closing down due to lack of funds being forthcoming from parents. which means that those that remain open will do so because of saudi funding... not a good thing in any scenario

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 31 Jan 2010 01:41

UK suspends students’ visas in north India

The decision was taken in view of applications jumping from 1,800 for the academic year 2009 to 13,500 for 2010. It will be reviewed in February-end. The number of applications received from these three north Indian centres (for the academic year 2008) was 1,000.

This move, however, will not affect other category of visas.

Though the decision does not affect the western and southern regions, the UK High Com-mission advised students from north India against travelling there for visa application without prior appointments. “The aim is to process visa applications fairly, thoroughly and quickly,” Chris Dix, UK Border Agency Regional Director said.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 31 Jan 2010 15:10

^^ lol, these stupids dont understand a simple fact that increase in student visa application in UK/USA is simply because of decrease in Australian visa application !

anishns · Post by **anishns** » 03 Feb 2010 03:50

Nobel laureate 'Venki' not good enough to buy phone in UK

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 529409.cms

They are trying to pass this with a racist overtone....but, its also possible the system didn't find the firstname Venki!
Who knows?

BSR Murthy · Post by **BSR Murthy** » 03 Feb 2010 04:41

Blair Called a Liar in British Iraq Inquiry

Appearing before an official inquiry into the conflict, Clare Short provided an electrifying counterpoint to Mr. Blair’s testimony on Friday.

Mr. Blair had called Saddam Hussein “a monster,” said he had no regrets about the war and warned that the same concerns that led to war over Iraq now applied to Iran and Western concerns that Tehran is secretly developing nuclear weapons.

Ms. Short, who quit as international development minister two months after the invasion in 2003, repeatedly accused Mr. Blair of “misleading” her and other cabinet ministers about the advice he was getting from government lawyers who questioned the legality of invading Iraq.

On that issue, and on her written warnings of a “humanitarian catastrophe” in the invasion’s wake, she said that Mr. Blair had effectively circumvented cabinet debate. Instead, she said, he had relied on an inner circle of “his mates” in government, having “little chats” with outsiders like herself and plying what she called a “poodle-like” relationship with the United States.

She also accused Mr. Blair of deceit in his argument

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 03 Feb 2010 08:19

UK suspends student visas from India ---- Al Jazeera

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 04 Feb 2010 00:41

India is ignoring its citizens

the takleef of the british free press remains.

Alongside the great internet firewall of China, the vicious paranoia of Burma's ruling junta, and the lists of murdered journalists in Sri Lanka, India appears as a beacon of free speech and open-minded self-criticism (but its not ).And yet, for all the vociferous passion of its journalists and activists in calling the powerful to account, the overall impression is of voices screaming into a vacuum.

Nowhere is this feeling more evident right now than on the issue of the left-wing insurgency raging through India's poorest regions. Under the broadbrush moniker of Maoists or Naxalites, these insurgents represent one of the few forms of resistance for villagers and hill tribes against the inequities of continuing feudal structures and the encroachment of global corporations – backed by the state – who treat them as awkward impediments to mining plans.

The fact is that any number of exposés on the wrongs of this campaign has little or no impact on voters with so many other issues and allegiances to consider. Nor does the government fear the opprobrium of the international community, which is preoccupied with winning India's support in Afghanistan and salivating over her enormous defence budgets. The editor of one leading news publication admitted last week that the media's efforts were having "no political impact".

The most pessimistic conclusion to draw is that free speech in India only serves to strengthen those who flout other articles in the constitution. "How can we be authoritarian," the government can protest, "when we allow the media such freedom to criticise us?" Too often, however, the only victory of expression is its freedom to exist, rather than its power to effect change.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Feb 2010 00:51

anishns wrote:Nobel laureate 'Venki' not good enough to buy phone in UK

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 529409.cms

They are trying to pass this with a racist overtone....but, its also possible the system didn't find the firstname Venki!
Who knows?

Can't believe this Nobel Laureate brought up the R word for not being deemed credit worthy. Hardly racist, more likely a mistake.
Come on

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 04 Feb 2010 01:01

Jarita wrote:
Can't believe this Nobel Laureate brought up the R word for not being deemed credit worthy. Hardly racist, more likely a mistake.
Come on

Exactly, despite his earlier platitudes on "science for the sake of science" and "science without nationality" he now comes across as a snobbish has been than a real down to earth intellectual like APJ Kalam.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Feb 2010 03:11

anishns wrote:Nobel laureate 'Venki' not good enough to buy phone in UK

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 529409.cms

They are trying to pass this with a racist overtone....but, its also possible the system didn't find the firstname Venki!
Who knows?

the credit check is quite normal when you enter into a long term agreement with a phone company who will let you walk out of the store with an expensive handset, it is a very standard procedure done on-line whilst you wait. the database is not that clever, it searches for your exact recorded name and returns a rating which tells the salesperson if they are allowed to complete the contract with you. the salesman does not usually have the authority to bypass the process.

your rating is comprised of your cumulative credit history supplied every month by your bank and any lenders. if you don't have any significant transactions recorded by UK banks, there is no historical rating. he may have got the mortgage on the strength of his demonstrable income and guarantees from employers, etc. however, being new to the country, it is not surprising that there was no on-line response, especially when searching for an unconventional form of his name.

so charges of racism in this case are unfounded. he is just trying to hide his embarrasment at being declared credit unworthy by a computer

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 04 Feb 2010 07:04

TOIlet on latest baksheesh from UQstan:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 533041.cms

Indian slum dwellers’ plight depicted in the Oscar-winning film, Slumdog Millionaire, has touched British hearts. {Yeah.. right.. wait until we launch GSLV-Mk3, we will see a video of that Binge drinking Angrezi ch*tiya on youtube who tells us what we did was a mortal sin}
inhabitants of shanty towns will benefit from a 14.5 million pound grant from the United Kingdom government’s Department for International Development (DFID).{Hey... what about the 1 Trillion odd and 5 - 6 generations worth of money you stole from us?}

Development minister Gareth Thomas announced that eight million of India’s urban poor will get access to water, better sanitation and shelter by virtue of the new scheme. The DFID fund would support Indian government’s 6 billion pound Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission. The money will initially be utilised in 20 cities.

{TOIlet spin start}
Embarrassingly for India, the DFID pointed out: ‘‘Although India has seen strong economic growth over the past few years, the scale of its need remains huge. 76% of the population lives in poverty and there are more people living on less than $1 a day in India than in Sub-Saharan Africa.’’
{1$ a day , does anyone have the source for where this came from??, BTW most needs of Indian's would be satisfied if they have a dollar a day. Idiots dont know what PPP value means}
Thomas added: “Films like Slumdog Millionaire {Jai Ho...., the movie has achieved classic status in the p0verty p0rn business, wish Mother Teresa was alive to expound on the poverty of India} have helped to give British audiences a brief insight into the reality of how difficult life is for people in slums. It is right that we take action to help those people who need it most.” {I guess since Danny made more money than he imagined with this movie, they are throwing some Baksheesh at us, now the average usually below poverty, binge drinking Brit knuckle head would think that with this donation (that could have helped poverty in UQstan instead) would give him the right to dictate $hit to India}

{TOIlet spin end}

TOI is truly a white mans slave! I dont know what else to call this kind of reporting.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 04 Feb 2010 07:36

Jarita wrote:
anishns wrote:Nobel laureate 'Venki' not good enough to buy phone in UK

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 529409.cms

They are trying to pass this with a racist overtone....but, its also possible the system didn't find the firstname Venki!
Who knows?

Can't believe this Nobel Laureate brought up the R word for not being deemed credit worthy. Hardly racist, more likely a mistake.
Come on

Exactly. By bringing up R word for silly issues, he is actually undermining the gravity of Racism that Queendom actually has engaged in the past and continues. That's really a mockery of people who have actually faced the racism by the queendom. Queendom would be feeling elated, if more such frivolity is made by these worthies, because that will actually start looking as if Racism was not all that bad, all one had to endure was that one could not get an iphone because of racism.
There is subtle sense of entitlement by some of these Desis, as to as if they have accomplished in their field, it automatically translates to being a higher being than the ordinary mortals. His being nobel laureate and his standing other than creditworthiness is not of consequence to this matter. Similarly a few months back another desi landed in the Indian airport and started berating that since he is qualified, even without the proper papers the authorities in India should put him on a pedestal and lax the rules. This brown sahib mentality is carried through. The sad part is many worthies feel slighted because their entitlement is/was trampled upon, because they are qualified one way or the other. Instead of focussing on the real issue of breakdown in system, the worthies focus on their entitlement.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 04 Feb 2010 10:16

Lilo wrote:Under the broadbrush moniker of Maoists or Naxalites, these insurgents represent one of the few forms of resistance for villagers and hill tribes against the inequities of continuing feudal structures and the encroachment of global corporations – backed by the state – who treat them as awkward impediments to mining plans.

Great, maoists behead the tribals, loot them of their money by imposing taxes, prevent tribal children from getting an education by demolishing schools and yet this reporter wants the world to call maoists a messiah for the tribals.

Wonder why doesnt this reporter open a local chapter of maoists in UK and follow the same activities in UK.

If murder and looting are so great acts of the brave why are citizens of UK denied these treatment.

And how is the reporter going to give a positive spin to the act of maoists of killing animals in the zoo. Where the animals in the zoo govt agents too? Maoists attack Bengal zoo; kill scores of birds, 2 deer

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 04 Feb 2010 17:25

Embarrassingly for India, the DFID pointed out: ‘‘Although India has seen strong economic growth over the past few years, the scale of its need remains huge. 76% of the population lives in poverty and there are more people living on less than $1 a day in India than in Sub-Saharan Africa.’’
{1$ a day , does anyone have the source for where this came from??,

I noticed this scam propaganda quite some time back. Well it's like this. In a family of 5 there's one bread earner in developing countries. That means in India there would be 250-300 million people who work. 600 million Indian citizens would be children, who don't work. Means they earn, forget 1 USD a day..nothing. Like in the US, Russia, UK, France anywhere. take another 150-200 million non working house wives. Voila you have a population of 750 million who earn less than 1 USD a day. Actually no they earn nothing. Now twist that a bit..and say 700 million in India 'live' on less than 1 USD a day, forget about PPP etc. Who bothers once you want to throw dirt. Link up that figure with Sub Saharan Africa and you have tragedy bites on the loose for India. Who benefits? NGO's, several of the 3 million odd doing god knows what in India.

Same logic 3/4ths of USA, 200 million people earn nothing. The same applies to any population within any national boundaries on this planet. Scam propaganda.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Feb 2010 17:53

Wise words for our MEA mandarins too and the new NSA in the PMO!
Earlier on,one of our scribes questioned the so-called "strategic relationship" wioth the US which was neither strategic nor a relationship,because,as he put it,this relationship has not made one iota of difference towards curtailing Paki terror against India and the financing of that terrorist state and equipping it with arms (to be later on used against India,acknowledged by Gen.Musharrat) by the US!

India's national interests too should prevail.

The US is our ally, but we aren't its servant
Our foreign policy should be designed to serve Britain's national interests, argues Nick Clegg.

By Nick Clegg
29 Jan 2010

The attitude of the US towards Britain has changed Photo: Getty
At long last we are reaching the final act of Labour's disastrous foreign policy. Today's evidence from Tony Blair, Labour's best-rehearsed performer, to the Iraq inquiry will be a pivotal moment in answering a question millions of British people are still asking themselves: why did we participate in an illegal invasion of another country?

But as the Chilcot Inquiry reminds us once again of all the tortuous twists and turns of that fateful decision, there is a risk that a much larger question will go unaddressed: namely, why have successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, chosen to make British foreign policy subservient to the interests of the United States?

Ever since the Suez crisis, the British political establishment has operated on the principle that the "Special Relationship" is sacrosanct. Tony Blair himself spelt out the stark consequences: "They [the US] need to know, are you prepared to commit, are you prepared to be there when the shooting starts?"

I am a strong believer in the value of the transatlantic relationship. It is obvious that Britain's interests on everything from terrorism to climate change and banking regulation to military procurement are heavily influenced by the policies of the world's leading superpower. I would never advocate a churlish rejection of our historic alliance with the United States. But an alliance must be balanced by the interests of both parties. It must not be a one-way street. Where Britain's interests diverge from those of the United States, we must have the freedom and self-confidence to say so.

Yet the reality is that, on far too many issues, Britain has acted as a passive satellite state for American interests: Tony Blair and Gordon Brown remained shamefully silent about allegations of torture at Guantánamo Bay and extraordinary rendition; neither the Conservatives nor Labour are prepared to question the case for the like-for-like replacement of Trident, a Cold War system dependent on Pentagon support.

Both parties were mute during the disproportionate military operation by Israel in Gaza a year ago, for fear of contradicting US policy in the Middle East. When George W Bush proposed locating the forward stations for his ill-judged missile defence shield in Yorkshire, the Government immediately agreed to make British facilities available, rather than dare to question the wisdom of the scheme; and crucially, we pursued a hopelessly under-resourced strategy in Afghanistan for eight years because of the Bush-Blair obsession with fighting an unjustified war in Iraq instead.

So the decision to invade Iraq is not the only example of subservience by default to the White House. It is simply the most dramatic. Meanwhile, the world is evolving fast in ways that make the sacred status of the Special Relationship ever harder to justify. The rise of China and India as the new superpowers of the East heralds an emerging world order in which power and influence are more dispersed. A world-view based on the pre-eminence of a single nation over all others will make less and less sense in the decades ahead.

Most telling of all is the attitude of the United States towards Britain. At the height of the Cold War, Europe was the stage upon which the great ideological conflict between capitalism and communism was played out. The world order was organised around the Berlin Wall. At that time, Britain logically stood out as the most important ally for the United States – a partner in Western Europe that could be relied on to hold the line against the Soviet Union's influence in a way that France, Germany and Italy could not. The United Kingdom was the stable bridge across the Atlantic, cemented by the Nato alliance, that allowed the United States to confront Moscow – and win.

Now, however, Europe occupies an entirely different place in the strategic calculations of President Obama and his administration. Now the challenge to US power comes from Beijing and Delhi, not Moscow. Now there are a host of other European countries, especially those released from the yoke of Soviet rule in Central and Eastern Europe, who are just as willing as the UK to promote and defend US interests.

In other words, President Obama does not need to cherish one relationship in Europe above all others in the way his predecessors did. Indeed, he has made it crystal clear that the value of the United Kingdom to the United States these days lies in our ability to foster greater coherence within Europe, so that America can increasingly deal with Europe as one. This is a simple point, but one entirely lost, it seems, on the Conservative Party.

The way in which Europe was sidelined by a deal between the US and China at the Copenhagen summit last month illustrates a new, brutal reality: Europe will only count for something in the new world order if it becomes the sum of its parts. A divided Europe will be swept aside.

So Britain has a simple choice: do we persist in believing that a limpet-like allegiance to the Special Relationship will serve our interests? Or do we drop our sentimental attachment to a world which no longer exists, and pursue our own interests by standing tall in our own European backyard? My answer is clear: it's time we repatriate our foreign policy, for the good of Britain.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 04 Feb 2010 19:24

I am a strong believer in the value of the transatlantic relationship. It is obvious that Britain's interests on everything from terrorism to climate change and banking regulation to military procurement are heavily influenced by the policies of the world's leading superpower. I would never advocate a churlish rejection of our historic alliance with the United States. But an alliance must be balanced by the interests of both parties. It must not be a one-way street. Where Britain's interests diverge from those of the United States, we must have the freedom and self-confidence to say so.

Re the bolded part, UK-stan certainly did.
In Aug-Sept 2008.
Or so says Sri Paulson's much awaited tome. His credibility in moi eyes is mud but still, bears a read, IMHO.
"The Brits screwed us..." are IIRC the exact words he has used.
In the runup to the liquidity dryup that caused the much vaunted Wall St to go into cardiac arrest, the Brist insistence on not waiving their banking rules to let Lehman live stopped the music in the game of musical chairs. And Lehman was left w/o a chair. But surprise, surprise, so was Merril Lynch. And BankAm. And JPM and (gasp1) Goldman itself. Not to mention RBS and HSBC and other UKstani biggies (the trail blazed by Northern Rock beckoned).
The gubmint kicked taxpayers and sundry spectators off the chairs they were sitting on and promptly provided the same to the banks only.
Special relationship indeed.
UK-stan has special needs, it would seem like and hence the unseemly clamor for a 'special relationship'.
Jai Ho.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 04 Feb 2010 21:13

Finally, some good press on UKstan

From the phoren policy journal, no less.

Sample some sweetmeats

Though security officials in Britain insist that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab radicalized after he left the country for Yemen (Sanaa, in turn, blames everything on London), the case of the Underwear Bomber has dramatized (traumatized?) the extent to which Britain remains a launching pad for jihad. (Nigerian Nobel Prize laureate Wole Soyinka prefers the term "cesspit" to describe London's function as an Islamist breeding ground.)

Amen, O Sri Wole Gole!

Last month, an [anonymous U.S. State Department] official told the Daily Telegraph that their country "has the greatest concentration of active al Qaeda supporters [in the West]," posing a threat to Britain and "the rest of the world."

Right. So an anon US SD afsar suddenly develops pious concern for Britain's security and that of the rest of the world's, eh? Yeh bolo ki yanquistan ki phategi agar UKstani jihadi samandar paar karenge.... Welcome to the shadow of jihadi terror US-UK machinations in propping up TSP have put Yindia under.

The same article cited a fresh and ominous finding from the director of MI5. He estimated his service was aware of some 2,000 "radicalized Muslims" who might be involved in terrorist plots. That figure, of course, doesn't include the population of plotters who have escaped MI5 scrutiny, like Abdulmutallab.

Some 2000, eh? Wow, am sure the likes of janaabs Zaid Hamid Gul would be proud.

For decades, he says, Britain tolerated plotting by domestic Islamic radicals as long as they targeted other countries, often ones in the Middle East. "We gave them freedom to preach violence and extremism -- [as long as] they were preaching it abroad and not in the U.K. They used that freedom to take over community organizations, mosques, TV stations," he says. "They've been building capacity for their viewpoint." He describes the radicals' techniques as strikingly reminiscent of those of 20th-century communists and fascists. The Islamists have also mimicked the Irish Republican movement by using ostensibly non-violent political groups to covertly radical ends.

So merry england was breeding snakelings so far? Whuddathunkit, eh? Tandoori cheickens coming home to roost now or what? Don't worry, have curry.

That sums up the dilemma facing British society in the years to come about as well as anything else I've read. Let's just hope that they can work something out before the next young Londoner emerges into the headlines thanks to a bomb plot.

More yap-yap only.

Whatever, glad to note that the prime instigators and sponsors of jihadist terror in the cold war era may soon have to come face to face with the Frankenstein they reared. Sweet vindication for long suffereing victims like Yindia only. Global jihard has overtaken the west's sponsorship. It's burning aflame on its own oxygen supply (and oil supplies of course).

The coming days promise to be interesting, in the chinese sense of the term.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Feb 2010 14:21

BAE admits guilt over corrupt arms deals

Arms firm pays out £300m after long-running Guardian investigation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/fe ... corruption

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 91027.html

BAE Systems pays $400m to settle bribery charges

BAE Systems is to pay up to $450m (£288m) in fines after it pleaded guilty to false statements and accounting practices, notably over deals with Saudi Arabia and Tanzania, in a landmark settlement between the defence giant and the US and UK authorities.

sunnyP · Post by **sunnyP** » 07 Feb 2010 19:41

Was not sure where to put this but given the mentioned 'jihadi' is a Brit then here it is:

Amnesty International is ‘damaged’ by Taliban link

A SENIOR official at Amnesty International has accused the charity of putting the human rights of Al-Qaeda terror suspects above those of their victims.

Gita Sahgal, head of the gender unit at Amnesty’s international secretariat, believes that collaborating with Moazzam Begg, a former British inmate at Guantanamo Bay, “fundamentally damages” the organisation’s reputation.

In an email sent to Amnesty’s top bosses, she suggests the charity has mistakenly allied itself with Begg and his “jihadi” group, Cageprisoners, out of fear of being branded racist and Islamophobic.

Sahgal describes Begg as “Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban”. He has championed the rights of jailed Al-Qaeda members and hate preachers, including Anwar al-Awlaki, the alleged spiritual mentor of the Christmas Day Detroit plane bomber.

Amnesty’s work with Cageprisoners took it to Downing Street last month to demand the closure of Guantanamo Bay. Begg has also embarked on a European tour, hosted by Amnesty, urging countries to offer safe haven to Guantanamo detainees. This is despite concerns about former inmates returning to terrorism.

Sahgal, who has researched religious fundamentalism for 20 years, has decided to go public because she feels Amnesty has ignored her warnings for the past two years about the involvement of Begg in the charity’s Counter Terror With Justice campaign

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 017810.ece

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 07 Feb 2010 20:22

x-post from the persp thread only (sanitized for this thread's seriousness level. Only)

Hari Seldon wrote:The only bright spot with good future prospects in an otherwise flailing G7 duniya is, of course, UK-stan. Here's more corroboration....
There but for the grace of God goes Britain

History repeats first as tragedy, then as farce. They say. Here's the greek tragedy first:
Greece is indeed buried deep in the financial mire. At first gradually, and then with alarming speed, the country has lost credibility with investors to such a degree that it is now having to offer an interest rate of 7 per cent to persuade them to buy its debt, compared with 4.5 per cent a few months ago. Some, including Papandreou, characterise this as a speculative move aimed at splitting up the euro; others see it as a statement of economic disgust at a country whose public finances, always bad, have now dipped into no-hope territory.
Is there an object lesson here? You betcha.

There is some truth to both theories, but, more important, at least for both Gordon Brown and David Cameron, there is a broader lesson: the only thing that matters more than knowing what to do about the deficit is persuading the markets that you know what you’re doing about the deficit. Because there but for the grace of God goes Britain. There is no knowing how and when investors will lose their faith in a government, but when it’s gone, there isn’t much you can do to get it back.

Greece, in other words, is the fiscal Petri dish that reveals in gory detail what could happen in the UK if this Government – or the next – fails to maintain the confidence of investors.

It is not merely that those interest rates are already inflicting an awful toll on borrowers in Athens and beyond.

It is that they are sending the national government towards a full-blown debt spiral, in which the cost of its annual interest bill becomes so unmanageable that it can hardly afford to supply its citizens with basic services.
That last bolded part is the punchline, the meat of the article only.

Aah. But the IMF is there nah, you aver...the big dada. IMF'll bail 'em out and make 'em problems go away. No?

And an IMF bail-out would only layer new debt on top of the old. In the end, the only solution is to find some way to slash spending and raise taxes without a) sparking riots or revolution and b) critically damaging the economy.
Something that Greece is finding hard to do indeed, what with its largest unions declaring jeehard against gubmint 'austerity'. Would UK find it similarly difficult, you may wonder. Its not called great for nothing now, is it?

Should markets pass the same verdict on Britain as on Greece, the results would be almost identical. In its Green Budget yesterday, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, with the help of Barclays Bank, attempted to map out what would happen if the Government failed to achieve the necessary cuts in its budget in the coming years.
The verdict: a “very large, and fast-acting” impact on interest rates, pushing them even higher than Greek rates today.{Whoa!}
Still, we are not there yet.
And there are four reasons to be cautiously optimistic about Britain’s chances. {}well, ok, if ya say so, I guess

The first is that much of the population is already reconciled to some form of austerity. Both main parties want to cut the deficit sharply, and although the Tories talk a little tougher, in economic terms there is actually not that much clear water between their proposals and those already laid out by the Treasury.

Second, the UK started the crisis with national debt below 40 per cent of gross domestic product, compared with Greece, whose national debt was already close to the 100 per cent of GDP – near the tipping point for a debt spiral.

Third, it is a little-appreciated quirk of the British market that, rather like a homeowner on a long fixed-rate mortgage, the Government has to roll over its debt far less regularly than other countries, so is significantly insulated from a Greek-style crisis.

And fourth, unlike Greece, Britain has its own currency, which affords it more leeway to adjust.
Whew. All is well. Chillax, people.

But as Greece has shown, a credibility collapse can take place even when you least expect it. Despite George Osborne’s pledge earlier this week to safeguard Britain’s credit rating, some still reckon there is an 80 per cent chance of the UK losing its coveted triple-A status – something that could trigger an investor panic. So both main political parties should, as a matter of course, prepare detailed emergency plans saying what overnight cuts they would impose in the event of a similar crisis.

However, avoiding such a credibility collapse will not spare Britain from having to drag itself through an economic transformation with the same end: to reduce debt and to live within its means. For some countries, the financial crisis was painful because people suddenly started spending less.
For Britain, it uncovered the fact that the nation had duped itself into believing it was more prosperous than it really was.
We mistook a debt bubble and the proceeds of financial engineering for sustained and lasting growth.
Time to get real.

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 07 Feb 2010 23:55

Britain and India agree nuclear power deal

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... 015281.ece

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 08 Feb 2010 03:29

^^^ An interesting comment from the above article :

"The UK is still one of the market leaders in this sector"... They please tell me why we have to rely on the French (EDF) to build our proposed nuclear power plants?

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 08 Feb 2010 17:20

With one eye firmly on the past, new chapter begins for East India Company

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/b ... 018409.ece

And

Asia is taking the lead in petrol production

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/mark ... ction.html

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 09 Feb 2010 00:03

Britain plans to cut flow of foreign students

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/world ... ?ref=world

In the face of mounting concern about abuse of student visa rules by migrant jobseekers and potential terrorists, Britain said Sunday that it was planning an immediate tightening of its border controls that could reduce the flow of people entering the country as students by tens of thousands a year.

The new rules will apply to all applicants from outside the European Union, including the United States. But the primary focus appeared likely to be the Indian subcontinent and countries in the Arab and Muslim world, both because of the large numbers of allegedly fake applicants who originate there and because of concerns about combating terrorism by Islamic extremists.

The controls appeared to have been drawn up, in part, to meet American pressure for a tougher British approach to combating terrorist threats. While officials from both countries say counterterrorism cooperation has been close, United States officials have warned that Britain, with its large Muslim population and its relatively open borders, is among the countries that are central to American concerns as potential planning grounds for terrorist attacks against the United States.

bart · Post by **bart** » 09 Feb 2010 01:05

Ameet wrote: The new rules will apply to all applicants from outside the European Union, including the United States. But the primary focus appeared likely to be the Indian subcontinent and countries in the Arab and Muslim world, both because of the large numbers of allegedly fake applicants who originate there and because of concerns about combating terrorism by Islamic extremists.

So when it has got to do with terrorism the MOFOs call us the Indian subcontinent, whereas anything with a remotely positively spin references 'South Asia'.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Feb 2010 14:02

Britain, a "second Div" team? Good advice for India too,we should not integrate our armed forces with another's but be able to stand and fight our own battles ourselves,not depending upon an untrustworthy "Uncle Sam" who funds and arms our mortal enemy!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... m-Fox.html

Britain must be able to fight alone or become 'second division' warns Liam Fox
Britain's armed forces must retain the ability to fight alone to avoid becoming a "second division" military nation, Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, has warned.
08 Feb 2010

In a speech to the the Royal United Services Institute in London, he said that an incoming Conservative government would ensure that Britain remained a ''first division'' military power. Photo: EDDIE MULHOLLAND

Dr Fox rejected one of the central planks of the Government's green paper last week, that the UK will in future need to co-operate more closely with allies such as France to provide the full range of military capabilities.

In a speech to the the Royal United Services Institute in London, he said that an incoming Conservative government would ensure that Britain remained a ''first division'' military power.

Related Articles
Afghan death toll matches Falklands as two more die
Afghanistan: More helicopters will not prevent deaths, Defence Secretary claims
Liam Fox: 'troops in Afghanistan have been betrayed by the Government'
Thousands of war veterans locked in British prisons
Army chief admits Afghanistan bodycount made him question war
Afghanistan: David Miliband claims war is making Britain safer

''We cannot accept the assumption in the green paper that Britain will always operate as part of an alliance,'' he said. ''We have unique national interests and have to maintain the capability to act unilaterally if required.''

The green paper set out the framework for a full strategic defence review which all parties are committed to holding following the general election.

Dr Fox said that while the military could not be ''immune from the economic realities'', the review would be an opportunity for ''long overdue radical thinking and reform''.

''It will be carried out ruthlessly and without sentiment. Tough decisions will be made and there will be winners and losers at the end of the process but Britain will be safe and our interests secure,'' he said.

''We are at a tipping point in Britain. We need to decide if we want to stay in the first division or slide into the second division. I choose the former.''

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Feb 2010 16:55

Latest news!

Mukesh Ambani and Subrata Roy 'preparing Liverpool takeover bid'• Indian billionaires seeking 51% stake in Anfield club
• Ambani owns IPL cricket team the Mumbai Indians

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010 ... l-takeover

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 09 Feb 2010 18:31

This story also concerns the USA, but these (edited out - JE Menon) are very active in the UK and are the cause of much takleef for Indians.
They have a large membership and that means lots of votes for labour.

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/02/08/a-no ... -jihadi-2/

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 09 Feb 2010 18:43

Philip wrote:Latest news!

Mukesh Ambani and Subrata Roy 'preparing Liverpool takeover bid'• Indian billionaires seeking 51% stake in Anfield club
• Ambani owns IPL cricket team the Mumbai Indians

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010 ... l-takeover

RIL denies Mukesh Ambani's bid for Liverpool Football Club

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 10 Feb 2010 07:51

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... aisle.html

The driver stopped the bus without warning before removing his shoes and, using a fluorescent jacket as a prayer mat, beginning to chant in Arabic.

As the engine was running anyone could also have got in the cab and driven off with a bus full of passengers.
'He was also blocking the exit, so if something had happened we would not have been able to get off.
'Everyone was looking round in a mix of shock and amazement. It was truly bizarre, ludicrous and aggravating.