Don't need certificate from mom-son duo out on bail: Modi slams Rahul, Sonia for questioning note ban

Jan 28: After Union minister Anurag Thakur, on Tuesday, BJP MP Parvesh Verma has stoked a controversy by saying that "Shaheen Bagh protesters will enter houses and rape sisters, daughters." The BJP MP even went on to say that if BJP is voted to power in Delhi, they "will clear Shaheen Bagh protest within an hour."

"If the BJP comes to power in Delhi on February 11, we will clear Shaheen Bagh of all protests and protesters within one hour. Not a single person will be visible," Parvesh Verma said during a meeting at Vikaspuri assembly constituency.

"Lakhs of people gather there [Shaheen Bagh]. People of Delhi will have to think and take a decision. They will enter your houses, rape your sisters and daughters, kill them. There's time today, Modi ji & Amit Shah won't come to save you tomorrow..." the BJP MP told news agency ANI.

"If our government is formed, then give me just a month after February 11, and I will remove all mosques built on government land in my Lok Sabha constituency," the BJP parliamentarian added.

Well, these statements didn't go down well with the netizens, who took to Twitter to express what they felt about the BJP leader's comments. A user wrote, "This is pure, unadulterated hate speech." While other user said, "Only when you thought BJP couldn't stoop any lower."

Earlier, on Monday, BJP leader and Union Minister Anurag Thakur triggered a row after he led the crowd to raise an incendiary slogan that "traitors should be shot". At the rally, Thakur, the Minister of State (MoS) for Finance, shouted: "desh ke gaddaron ko" to which the crowd responded, "goli maro saalo ko" (shoot down the traitors).

Addressing the meeting in support of BJP candidate from Rithala, Manish Chaudhary, Thakur raised the pitch of nationalism as he linked opposition parties with anti-CAA protests in Shaheen Bagh and with alleged anti-India slogans, and then asked the crowd to raise the controversial slogan.

For more than a month, over 200 women have been joined by hundreds of others every day at South East Delhi's Shaheen Bagh at a sit-in protest against the CAA which promises citizenship to only non-Muslim refugees from three neighbouring countries.

Protests have been ongoing in different parts of the country against the amended Citizenship Act (CAA) which grants citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists and Christians fleeing religious persecution from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh if they entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

New Delhi, Mar 22: The central government on Sunday decided to suspend all metro train services across the country till March 31 in view of coronavirus outbreak.

In a message to managing directors of all metro train corporations, Union Housing and Urban Affairs Secretary Durga Shanker Mishra said this is being done in continuation of suspending metro services during 'Janta Curfew'.

"In view of the current global pandemic of this Corona Virus & for containing its further spread through inter-personal proximity, it has been decided to close down metro rail services on all operational networks across the country till 31 March 2020," Mishra tweeted.

In another tweet, he said by the act of social distancing, people can protect themselves and their dear ones, and win the fight against COVID-19.

India reported three more coronavirus deaths on Sunday, including the first casualty from Bihar, taking the toll to seven and the number of COVID-19 cases rose to 341, officials said.

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.