Don’t use my son’s murder to spread communal tension, pleads Ankit Saxena's father

Jun 1: Gold prices rose on Monday as riots in major U.S. cities rattled investors already reeling from strained Sino-U.S. relations and boosted demand for the safe-haven metal, with a weaker dollar lending further support.

Spot gold gained 0.8% to $1,739.75 per ounce by 0242 GMT. U.S. gold futures ticked up 0.1% to $1,752.60.

"Concerns about the unrest in the United States at the moment appear to be weighing on market sentiment," said Michael McCarthy, chief strategist at CMC Markets, adding that rising tensions between the world's top two economies provided further support to gold.

Protesters have flooded the streets in the United States over the death of George Floyd in police custody, in a wave of outrage sweeping a politically and racially divided nation.

The closely packed crowds and demonstrators not wearing masks have sparked fears of a resurgence of COVID-19, which has killed more than 101,000 Americans.

In Asia, China's state media and the government of Hong Kong lashed out on Sunday at U.S. President Donald Trump's pledge to end Hong Kong's special status if Beijing imposes new national security laws on the city.

Gold is often used as a safe store of value during times of political and financial uncertainty.

Indicative of sentiment, holdings of SPDR Gold Trust, the world's largest gold-backed exchange-traded fund, rose 0.3% to 1,123.14 tonnes on Friday, a fresh seven-year high.

Further supporting gold's appeal, the dollar index fell 0.4% against its rivals.

Elsewhere, silver jumped 2% to $18.20 per ounce, its highest since Feb. 26, before retreating slightly to trade 1.8% higher at $18.16.

Speculators cut their bullish positions in COMEX gold and increased them in silver contracts in the week to May 26, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission said on Friday.

Palladium rose 0.7% to $1,958.25 per ounce, while platinum declined 0.3% to $835.56.

New Delhi, Jun 25: The Congress on Thursday asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi why has not India gained anything from the "strange bonhomie" which it claimed he shared with China.

Seeking to turn the tables on the ruling party, Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera said the BJP also shared bonhomie with the Communist Party of China (CPC) with several party-level exchanges taking place in the past.

He sought to know whether India's borders have become safe after these exchanges in the last many years.

The Congress leader asked what has the country gained out of these exchange delegations and why are the borders insecure despite the bonds that the two ruling parties of India and China share with each other.

"There is a strange kind of bonhomie between Narendra Modi and China, a two decade old bonhomie. Why doesn't the country get the benefit of that bonhomie," he asked at a virtual press conference.

Khera said all that the Congress will continue to question is about the political will that just does not get visible when it comes to China.

"Whatever is happening on the border today, is it despite the bonhomie which you have with China, or is it because of the bonhomie which you have with China. The country needs to know," he asked.

"We do want to ask you, if as president of the party, Rajnath Singh, Nitin Gadkari and Amit Shah have been sending delegations,  strengthening the bonds between the Communist Party of China and the BJP. What has the country gained out of these bonds? Why are the borders insecure despite these bonds that you have," he also asked.

The ruling has hit out at the Congress for signing an MoU with China's Communist Party and has questioned its "bond" with the ruling party in China.

Khera also asked what role did the India Foundation, an organisation run by National Security Adviser Ajit Doval's son has in strengthening the bonds with China.

"Why does India Foundation keep visiting these countries? Who do they meet? What's the outcome? What's the role of NSA Ajit Doval's son- Shaurya Doval? He keeps attending these meetings through India Foundation? These are important questions in the light of what is happening," he asked.

Khera said the prime minister is showing "red eyes" to those who are asking him questions instead of showing them to the enemy.

"It is time to stand with the Army and show red eyes to China," he said.

The Congress leader said questions will be asked to Modi especially when there are definitive reports, satellite images of incursions in the Ladakh region of India by the Chinese.

He alleged that China laps up the comment of Modi and uses it across the world that the Indian prime minister says that China is in its own territory and Galwan is theirs.

"After a lot of pressure, PMO contradicted what the prime minister said. This kind of a goof up is unpardonable," he alleged.

New Delhi, Jan 4: "Sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic" is how India is referred to in the preamble of the Constitution. However, J Nandakumar, a key RSS leader and All India Convenor Prajna Pravah, a Sangh offshoot, wants India to reconsider the inclusion of the word "secular", claiming secularism is a "western, Semitic concept".

In an exclusive interview to news agency, Nandakumar said: "Secularism is a western, Semitic concept. It came into existence in the West. It was actually against Papal dominance."

He argued that India does not need a secular ethos as the nation has moved "way beyond secularism" since it believes in universal acceptance as against the western concept of tolerance.

The RSS functionary on Thursday released a book here named "Hindutva in the changing times". The book launch event was also attended by senior RSS functionary Krishna Gopal.

Nandakumar, who has attacked the Mamata Banerjee government in his book for alleged "Islamisation of West Bengal", told IANS: "We have to see whether we need to put up a board of being secular, or that whether we should prove this through our behaviour, actions and roles."

It is for society to take a call on this, rather than by any political class, on whether the preamble to the Indian Constitution should continue to have the word "secular" in it or not, he added.

In between signing his books and obliging wannabe Hindutva cadres with selfies, Nandakumar said that the very existence of the word "secular" in the preamble was not necessary and how the constitution founders too were against it.

"Baba Saheb Ambedkar, Ladi Krishnaswamy Aiyaar -- all debated against it and said it (secular) wasn't necessary to be included in the preamble. That time it was demanded, discussed and decided not to include it," he said.

Ambedkar's opinion was, however, disregarded when Indira Gandhi "bulldozed" the word "secular", in 1976, said the head of the Prajna Pravah, an umbrella body of several right-wing think-tanks

As Nandakumar prepared to return to his base in Kerala, where, he emphasises, the RSS has its work cut out in the "fight against the Kunnor model", he said that the inclusion of "secular" was done with the intent to damage the concept of Hindutva.

"It was to demolish, destroy the overarching principle of Hindutva that binds us together", he said.

Asked whether the Sangh would pressurise the BJP, which has 303 seats in the Lok Sabha, to omit "secular" from the Constitution preamble, Nandakumar smilingly refused to reply.