I am a Hindu first, MP later, Ram Mandir is my priority: Nalin Kumar Kateel

coastaldigest.com web desk
November 25, 2018

Mangaluru, Nov 25: Nalin Kumar Kateel, who represents Dakshina Kannada in Indian parliament, has said that he is a Hindu first and parliamentarian later.

After accepting a memorandum submitted by the Sangh Parivar during a Janagraha convention organised at Nehru Maidan, to exert pressure on the Centre to construct Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, the MP assured that construction of Ram Mandir will begin in 2019.

He said that for him Ram Mandir was a priority over his political position. “I am a Hindu and Ram Mandir is my first priority. I am a Parliamentarian later. I assure the issue will be discussed on priority during the Winter Session,” he said.

He assured that he would speak in favour of building the temple as the voice of people in Parliament.

Kateel went on to claim that he has not forgotten that it was because of his work as a Kar Sevak in the 1990s which made him MP.

Also Read: Be ready to resign if Centre fails to proclaim Ram Mandir ordinance: Pejawar seer tells BJP MPs

Comments

Joseph Stalin
 - 
Monday, 26 Nov 2018

Usually, if a MP came from Karnataka, he may do atleast for Karnataka. But this guy totally waste. 

Vinod
 - 
Monday, 26 Nov 2018

As a MP, he did nothing. He is BIG ZERO. Junior Feku

Reshma kodialbail
 - 
Monday, 26 Nov 2018

Shameless guy. this is like mocking people.. making fool

Indian
 - 
Monday, 26 Nov 2018

Anna Ram Mandir Katlle Edde Vishayane aitha ottige Pumpwel Bridge la katle anna

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
July 29,2020

Mangaluru, July 29: Justifying the transfer of Dakshina Kannada deputy commissioner Sindhu B Rupesh, district in-charge minister Kota Shrinivas Poojari has accused Mangaluru MLA U T Khader of politicizing the issue. 

The IAS officer was transferred by the Karnataka government on July 28, a day after a saffron activist issued a death threat against her on social media after she warned of legal action against the miscreants who attack cattle traders.

Condemning the development, Mr Khader had tweeted that the state government has punished the deputy commissioner instead of punishing the culprit, who issued death threat.

Responding to Mr Khader’s tweet, Mr Poojari said that the transfer of the officer was on administrative ground. “It is unfortunate that Khader politicized a transfer carried out by the government on administrative ground. This is not Khader’s time to protect any accused,” tweeted Mr Poojari. 

It is worth mentioning here that Mr Khader was the district in-charge minister of Dakshina Kannada before Mr Poojari taking over the position. 

Meanwhile, police has arrested a person in connection with the death threat against the IAS officer.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 28,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 28: The state government is set to allow investors who bought farmland for industrial and other purposes to sell it off if they fail to use it within seven years. The new buyers, however, must utilise the land parcel for the same purpose for which it was allotted.

An amendment bill in this regard will be tabled during the joint session of the assembly, which begins on February 17.

Currently, investors remain tied to unused parcels. Law and parliamentary affairs minister JC Madhuswamy said the amendment to Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, which deals with the purchase of farmland for non-agricultural purposes, would remove hurdles for disposal of such plots. “To prevent misuse of land, the bill makes it mandatory for the new buyer to utilise it for the purpose for which the land was purchased by the first investor,” he said.

The government will also table a bill which seeks to regulate the affairs of religious and educational trusts. It will empower the government to intervene in the affairs of the trusts when irregularities come to light.

“Currently, the government has no role to play when allegations of irregularities and mismanagement crop up against trustees. The bill seeks to address this,” Madhuswamy said. He clarified the government didn’t want to interfere in trusts’ affairs. But some issues, he added, were of concern: trustees illegally selling off the trust property.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.