SHARE

Thursday, June 07, 2012

தொடரும் பக்ச முற்றுகை!



அனைத்துலக தமிழ் மக்களுக்கு இத்தாலி ஈழத்தமிழர் மக்களவை கோரும் ஓர் அவசரமான வேணடுகோள்:

Jun 7, 2012 / பகுதி: முக்கியச் செய்தி / பதிவு.கொம்

அன்பார்ந்த உறவுகளே!!

நாளைய தினம் எம் இனத்தை அழித்துக்கொன்டிருக்கும் இன அழிப்புக் குற்றவாளி மகிந்த ராஐபக்ச புனித பாப்பரசரை வத்திக்கானில் சந்திக் போகின்றார். இதை வன்மையாக கண்டிக்கும் முகமாக அனைத்து  தேசிய அமைப்புக்களின் அனுசரனையுடன் 4 அம்ச கோரிக்கைகள் உள்ளடக்கிய ஒரு
மனு வத்திக்கான் அரச செயலகத்திற்கு அனுப்பி வைக்கப் பட்டுள்ளது. 
இம்மனுவில் உள்ளடங்கிய கோரிக்கைகள் பின்வருமாறு :

1) தமிழர் தாயகத்தில் தொடர்ந்து இடம் பெறும் திட்டமிட்ட சிங்கள குடியேற்றங்கள் நிறுத்தபபடவேண்டும்.

2) பேராயர் இராயப்பு ஜோசெப்பின் பாதுகாப்பை உறுதி செய்தல், மற்றும் 1984ம் ஆண்டு முதல் 2009 வரை படுகொலை செய்யப்பட்ட வணபிதாக்களுக்கு நீதி கிடைத்தல்.

3) இலங்கை அரசின் மதவாத அரசியல் கொள்கை நிறுத்தப்படல் வேண்டும், மற்றும் ஏனைய மதங்களின் சுதந்திரத்தை உறுதி செய்தல்.

4) ஈழத்திழர்களுக்கு எதிராக மனித உரிமை மீறல்கள் மற்றும் போர் குற்றங்கள் செய்த நபர்களுக்கு எதிராக சர்வதேச விசாரணைகளை மேற் கொள்ள அனைத்துலகத்திற்கு அழுத்தங்களை கொடுத்தல்.

இவை சம்பந்தமான மனுவானது இத்தாலி மொழியில் இணைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இந்த மனுவை காலத்தின் கட்டாயம் கருதி கீழ்க் கண்ட மின்னஞ்ஞல் முகவரி ஊடாகவும், தொலை நகல் மூலமாகவும் அனுப்புமாறு தாழ்மையுடன் கேட்டுக்கொள்கிறோம்.

அனுப்ப வேண்டிய மின்னஞ்சல் முகவரிகள் :

vati023@genaff.segstat.va

cepsegreteria@evangel.va

அனுப்ப வேண்டிய தொலை நகல் முகவரிகள்:
0039-06698850880039-0669880118

நன்றி.

தமிழரின் தாகம் தமிழீழத் தாயகம்

இத்தாலி ஈழத்தமிழர் மக்களவை
=========================================================

Alla cortese attenzione di                                     
                                                               
                   Sua eccellenza Papa Benedetto XVI           
                                                               
                             Città del Vaticano

Oggetto: sollecito a sua eccellenza di rifiutare l’incontro con
il presidente dello Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksha fautore di
crimini di guerra e contro l’umanità nei confronti della
popolazione Tamil

Eccellenza,                                                    
                                                               
                            le inviamo questa lettera in
qualità di  rappresentanti della forte comunità di milioni di
Tamil della diaspora per dimostrare le sofferenze del nostro
popolo e di chiederle di rifiutare l’incontro con un soggetto
che ha commesso dei crimini di guerra e contro l’umanità,
portando avanti una politica genocida incentrata sulla
cancellazione delle radici storiche, linguistiche, religiose,
culturali e territoriali del popolo Tamil.  La veridicità di
tali colpe è stata confermata da una commissione ONU guidata da
Darusman nel 20101 in cui vi sono dati molto allarmanti: oltre
40.000 civili  Tamil sterminati dai bombardamenti governativi
su campi profughi e ospedali, e di altri crimini contro
l'umanità, quali esecuzioni sommarie, torture, stupri da parte
delle forze armate dello Sri Lanka. Tale commissione dopo aver
accertato i fatti che avvennero nella fase finale della guerra
nel maggio del 2009, chiese allo Sri lanka di avviare una
inchiesta indipendente su questi fatti ma il presidente dello
Sri Lanka ha  dimostrato il suo diniego su tale richiesta. Nel
2011 lo Sri Lanka ha istituito una sua commissione (Lesson
Learnt and Reconciliation Commission) che non rispettava i
standard di imparzialità utili all’avvio di una procedura di
giustizia  internazionale  bensì sta procedendo in un contesto
di fallimento del governo a combattere l’impunità e le continue
violazioni dei diritti umani2. Il vescovo di Mannar, Rayappu
Joseph[3] [4] [5] ha esposto a tale commissione dei dati
concernenti le violazioni dei diritti umani e delle uccisioni
extragiudiziarie, sulla massiccia presenza dei militari che
accentuano una politica colonizzatrice basata sul cambiamento
demografico, sulla scarcerazione dei civili detenuti senza
alcuna accusa da parte delle forze armate, sui profughi che
sono tuttora in attesa di ritornare nelle loro città d’origine
e sulle persone scomparse che ammontano a oltre 146,679.
Adesso, il vescovo di Mannar rischia la sua vita perché subisce
continue minacce da parte del governo dello Sri Lanka, tutto
questo perché ha voluto dire la verità e farsi da portavoce
delle vere esigenze della popolazione sofferente Tamil! Coloro 
che professano religioni diverse da quella Buddista sono
vittime di una politica teocratica in cui i Cristiani,
Induisti, Musulmani sono costretti a vivere nella paura di
professare il loro credo[6][7]. Nel 2006 scomparse padre Jim
Brown nella località di Allaippiddy il quale venne ucciso dalle
stesse forze armate, nel 2008 è stato ucciso il sacerdote
Mariampillai Xavier Karunaratnam, parroco della chiesa di
Vannivilaangkulam 8 attivista per i diritti umani, fautore del
dialogo e della riconciliazione, fondatore e presidente dell’
organizzazione “North East Secretariat on Human Rights”, che
aveva denunciato le violazioni e gli abusi delle forze armate e
fornito assistenza psicologica alle popolazioni rimaste vittima
del conflitto.                                                 
                  Quest’anno durante la 19a sessione della
commissione Onu dei diritti umani 9 svoltasi a marzo ha
approvato tramite votazione una risoluzione in cui si attesta
l’inefficacia del LLRC che in questo arco di anni non ha
applicato adeguatamente ciò che doveva fare nel garantire la
giustizia e a soddisfare gli standard internazionali mettendo
in dubbio la reale efficacia di tale commissione istituita
dallo Sri Lanka. Nel mese di Aprile, un responsabile ONU dello
sminamento dei terreni [10] [11] ha riferito di aver ritrovato
una bomba a grappolo inesplosa in una zona in cui avvenne il
conflitto etnico nel 2009, nonostante lo Sri Lanka lo avesse
negato, ciò indica un ulteriore testimonianza dell’utilizzo di
armi vietate dalla comunità internazionale da parte di tale
Governo. Altre testimonianze di questa politica genocida e
discriminatoria sono date da altre procedure mirate anch’esse
al cambiamento demografico in cui si vuole agevolare con
100.000 rupie  la nascita del terzo figlio12 alle famiglie
della marina, aviazione, esercito e polizia. Si tratta di un
provvedimento "scorretto" che rischia di portare a una "crisi
etnica", perché le forze armate sono al 98% Cingalesi quindi è
un tentativo di avere una popolazione di un'unica etnia e
religione. Noi ci chiediamo: quale sarà il futuro del nostro
popolo? Un capo di stato che ha commesso tali atrocità e nega
l’identità di un popolo dicendo che un intera etnia è
Terrorista solo per aver chiesto pari dignità e libertà di
vivere come esseri umani e di professare il proprio credo  può
essere accolto da Lei sua Santità che rappresenta la pace e la
fratellanza globale?                                           
                      La ringraziamo della  sua attenzione e
speriamo che lei possa accettare il nostro sollecito per ridare
il sorriso e la speranza di vivere sereni in un futuro prossimo
nella nostra terra liberi da ogni forma di paura.

Fonti di approfondimento:

1Fonte sul report della commissione Darusman
http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Sri_Lanka/POE_Report_Full.pdf

2 Lettera congiunta di Human Rights Watch, Amnesty
International ed   international crises group:
http://www.hrw.org/node/93600

3,4,5 Fonti sulle dichiarazioni del vescovo di Mannar:         
                              
catholic-diocese-of.html http://www.asianews.it/notizie-
it/Cinquemila-cattolici,-musulmani-e-indù-difendono-il-vescovo
-di-Mannar-da-accuse-“ignobili”-24870.html
http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=33380

6,7 Fonti sulla discriminazioni religiose da parte del governo
dello Sri Lanka:                      
dello-Sri-Lanka:-il-governo-ci-ha-abbandonati-24838.html
distruzione-di-una-moschea-da-parte-dei-buddisti-24598.html

8 Fonte sull’uccisione di padre Xavier Mariampillai
Karunaratnam:       
http://www.fides.org/ita/martirologio/liste/mar_2008.php

9Fonte relativa alla diciannovesima seduta dei diritti umani
dell’ONU:                                                      
ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/126/71/PDF/G1212671.pdf?
OpenElement

10,11 Fonti relativi al ritrovamento di bombe a grappolo nello
catid=13&artid=35127
bomb-20120426/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17861187

12 Fonte relativa all’incentivo per la nascita del terzo figlio
delle forze armate:                    
governo-al-terzo-figlio.-Ma-solo-per-le-Forze-armate-24762.html
 Cordiali Saluti
==========


'UK Arrest Warcriminal Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse'
ராஜபக்சேவுக்கு ஆதரவளிக்கும் எலிசபெத் அரசியாரை எதிர்த்து கனடிய தமிழர்கள் முற்றுகை!

Jun 8, 2012 / பகுதி: செய்தி / பதிவு.கொம்

 பிரிட்டிஷ் அரசியாரின் வைர விழா கொண்டாட்டத்தில் இலங்கை அதிபர் கலந்துகொண்டதனைத் தொடர்ந்து கனடிய மக்கள் பெரும் கண்டனம் தெரிவித்துள்ளனர்.


இந்த ஆர்ப்பாட்டம், தொரொண்டோ பிரிட்டிஷ் பொது தூதரகத்தின் முன் நடந்துள்ளது. இங்கிலாந்து அரசியான அவர், பிரித்தானிய நாட்டின் தலைவர் மட்டுமல்லாது கனடாவின் அரசியாரும் ஆவார்.

`ராஜபக்சே போர்க் குற்றவாளி` என எழுதப்பட்ட எதிர்ப்புப் பலகைகளை ஏந்திய தமிழ்மக்கள்,தமிழர்களுக்கு எதிராக நடந்துவரும் இனப்படுகொலையை எதிர்த்தும் போராட்டத்தின்போது முழங்கியுள்ளனர். மேலும், பொதுநலவாய நாடுகளில் இலங்கையின் அங்கத்துவத்தை எதிர்த்தும் கண்டனம் தெரிவித்துள்ளனர் கனடிய தமிழ்மக்கள்.


வரலாற்று சிறப்புவாய்ந்த அத்தகைய கொண்டாட்டத்திற்கு இலங்கை அதிபர் ராஜபக்சேவை அழைத்திருப்பது போர்குற்றங்கள்; மனித உரிமை மீறல்; மனித இனத்திற்கு எதிரான குற்றச்சாட்டுக்களில் மேன்மேலும் இலங்கைக்கு எதிர்வினைகளையே உண்டாக்குவதாக ஆர்ப்பாட்டக்காரர்கள் கூறியுள்ளனர்.


இதன் தொடர்பாக மேலும் கருத்துரைத்த ஒருவர், பொதுநலவாய நாடுகளின் பொருளாதார மன்ற கூட்டத்தில் மேடையேர இருந்த ராஜபக்சேவின் உரை ரத்து செய்யப்பட்டதுபோல் அரசியாருடனான மதிய உணவு விருந்துபசரிப்பிலும் ராஜபக்சே கலந்துகொள்வதை பொதுநலவாய நாடுகளின் பொதுச்செயலாளர் கமலேஷ் ஷர்மா தடை செய்திருக்க வேண்டும் என்றுரைத்துள்ளார்.


இதனிடையே, இலங்கை அதிபருக்கு அழைப்பு விடுத்த பொதுநலவாய நாடுகளின் தலைமைத்துவம், ஜெனிவாவில் எடுக்கப்பட்ட இலங்கையின் போர் குற்றங்கள்; மனித உரிமை மீறல்கள் தொடர்பான UNHRC-இன் தீர்மானங்களின் போலி பின்னனியையே குறிப்பதாக தமிழ்மக்கள் மேலும் குறிப்பிட்டுள்ளனர்.


அதிகளவிலான புலம்பெயர் தமிழர்களைக் கொண்ட பொதுநலவாய நாடுகளில் ஒன்றான கனடாவில் நடந்த இம்முற்றுகை போராட்டம், லண்டனில் வசிக்கும் தமிழ்மக்கள் தங்கள் ஆதரவை விரிவாக்கும் செயலாக கருதுவதாக போராட்ட ஒருங்கிணைப்பாளர் தெரிவித்துள்ளார்.

வெற்றிக்குமரன் தமிழரசி

சிரியா: எத்தனை நாள் துயின்றிருக்கும் ஐ.நா

Secretary-General
SG/SM/14338
GA/11252 
7 June 2012
----------------------------------------------------------
Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

‘Syria and Region Can Quickly Move From Tipping Point to Breaking Point,’
Secretary-General Says, Calling for Urgent Implementation of Annan Plan

Following are UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s remarks to the General Assembly on the situation in Syria, today, 7 June, in New York:

Let me begin by welcoming the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, Nabil Elaraby, and our Joint Special Envoy, Kofi Annan.

We join forces at a grave and grievous hour.  The situation in Syria continues to deteriorate.  Each day seems to bring new additions to the grim catalogue of atrocities:  assaults against civilians, brutal human rights violations, mass arrests, torture, execution-style killings of whole families. 

For many months, it has been evident that President [Bashar Al-]Assad and his Government have lost all legitimacy.  The recent slaughter in El-Houla brought this fact into horrifying focus.

Men, women, even children were executed at point-blank range; some had their throats slit or skulls crushed.  The trail of blood leads back to those responsible.   Any regime or leader that tolerates such killing of innocents has lost its fundamental humanity.

Nabil Elaraby Today’s news reports of another massacre in Al Kubeir and Kafr Zeta are shocking and sickening.  A village apparently surrounded by Syrian forces — the bodies of innocent civilians lying there — they were shot, some allegedly burned or slashed with knives.  We condemn this unspeakable barbarity and renew our determination to bring those responsible to account.

The United Nations monitors were initially denied access.  They are working now to get to the scene.  And I just learned a few minutes ago that, while trying to do so, the United Nations monitors were shot at with small arms.  Peaceful protesters have bravely persisted in calling for dignity and freedom.  Yet too often, they have paid with their lives.

We see too little evidence that the Syrian Government is living up to its commitments under the six-point plan endorsed by the Security Council more than two months ago.  For their part, many elements of the opposition have unfortunately turned to arms and declared that they will no longer respect the plan. 

The inability of either the regime or the opposition to engage in any meaningful political dialogue makes the prognosis extremely grave.  And the longer this conflict goes on, the more difficult the path towards peace and eventual reconciliation will become.

The international community must recognize these realities — and act, with unity and collective will.  Our priorities remain clear:  to stop the violence and protect the Syrian people and their rights; to deliver humanitarian aid to those in need; and to advance a political solution to the crisis.

The Annan Plan remains the centerpiece of these efforts.  We continue to support it with stronger steps to ensure compliance. At the same time, in view of the deteriorating situation, I would welcome further international discussion on how we can act more effectively.

No one can predict how the situation in Syria will evolve.  We must be prepared for any eventuality.  We must be ready to respond to many possible scenarios.  Syria’s neighbours in the region bear a special responsibility.  That is why this Assembly endorsed the League of Arab States decision to appoint our Joint Special Envoy.

I regret that the Government of Syria has not supported this dual mandate and has refused entry to Deputy Joint Special Envoy [Nasser] Al- Kidwa as part of the negotiating team.  This is unacceptable. Syrian authorities must correct the situation immediately.

I wish to express my strong appreciation for Secretary-General [Nabil] El Araby’s hard work and the commitment of the League of Arab States to help the people of Syria realize their legitimate political aspirations — aspirations that have been denied for far too long.

I would also like to recognize the extraordinary efforts of the Joint Special Envoy, not only for his tireless efforts on behalf of the people of Syria, but also for his important contribution to the United Nations Supervision Mission to Syria. 

Our brave United Nations observers are working with the utmost dedication in the most difficult and dangerous circumstances.  They are the eyes and ears of the international community.  They bear witness to the worst atrocities.  When innocent civilians were slaughtered in El-Houleh two weeks ago, they reported the facts, objectively and without bias.  We must acknowledge the risks at which they operate, however.  And in full knowledge of those risks, it is incumbent upon us today to do everything within our power to end the killing and advance a political solution to the crisis.

As the Joint Special Envoy has warned, Syria is at a pivotal moment, and so are we.  Syria and the region can quickly move from tipping point to breaking point.  The dangers of full-scale civil war are imminent and real.  I therefore call on President Assad to urgently and unconditionally implement the six-point Annan plan.  I call on President Assad to allow the United Nations observer mission to do its work, safely and without interference or intimidation.  I call on Syrian authorities to allow United Nations humanitarian teams to operate freely.  More than 1 million civilians need assistance.  So do the more than 100,000 Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries.

Finally, I call on all Member States to exert their maximum influence — with both sides — to help the Joint Special Envoy succeed in this all-important mission.  Every day, more people die.  Every day, more people are forced from their homes.  All violence must end — by the regime, by the armed opposition.

Now is the time for the international community to take bold and concerted action, in the name of our common humanity.  Thank you.

* *** *
Source: UN web

Tuesday, June 05, 2012

மகிந்தவுக்கு மரியாதை!


London June 05 2012

நிர்வாணத் தாண்டவத்தின் அறுபதாண்டு ராணி!


இந்தியாவில் பிரிட்டிஸ் ஆட்சியால் எதிர்காலத்தில் ஏற்படப் போகும் விளைவுகள்(கா.மார்க்ஸ் லண்டன், வெள்ளிக்கிழமை, யூலை 22, 1853) கட்டுரையிலிருந்து.

------
முடிவாகச் சில குறிப்புரைகளை எடுத்துக் கூறாமல் இந்தியா எனும் இந்தத் தலைப்பை என்னால் பூர்த்தி செய்ய முடியாது.

தன் தாயகத்தில் கௌரவமான வடிவங்களை மேற்கொண்டும், அதே சமயத்தில் காலனிகளில் நிர்வாணத் தாண்டவமாடியும் வரும் முதலாளித்துவ நாகரிகத்தின் அப்பட்டமான போலித்தனமும் உள்ளார்ந்த காட்டுமிராண்டித்தனமும் வேடம் கலைக்கப்பட்டு நம் கண் முன்பு காட்சியளிக்கின்றன. முதலாளி வர்க்கத்தினர் சொத்துடைமையைத் தாங்கி ஆதரவளிப்பவர்கள்தான், ஆனால் வங்காளத்திலும், சென்னையிலும், பம்பாயிலும் நடைபெற்றிருப்பதைப் போன்ற விவசாயப் புரட்சிகளை புரட்சிக்கரக் கட்சி எதுவாயினும் எந்தக் காலத்திலேனும் தோற்றுவித்துள்ளதா? அந்த மாபெரும் கொள்ளைக்காரனான லார்ட் கிளைவ் கூறியிருக்கும் சொற்களையே பயன்படுத்திச் சொல்வதென்றால், இந்தியாவின் சாதாரண லஞ்சம் அவர்களது கொள்ளைக்காரத்தனமான பேராசைக்கு ஈடுசெய்ய முடியாததால் கொடூரமான முறையில் பலவந்தமான சூறையாடலில் அவர்கள் இறங்கவில்லையா?. தேசியக் கடனின் புனிதத்தன்மை நிரந்தரமானதென்று ஐரோப்பாவில் அவர்கள் பிதற்றிக் கொண்டிருந்த அதே போதில், தமது சொந்த சேமிப்புக்களை கிழக்கிந்தியக் கம்பனியின் நிதிகளில் முதலீடு செய்திருந்த சுதேசி இராஜாக்களுக்கு கொடுக்க வேண்டிய லாப ஈவுகளை இந்தியாவில் அவர்கள் பறிமுதல் செய்யவில்லையா? “தமது புனித மதத்தைப்” பாதுகாக்கின்றோம் என்ற சாக்குப்போக்கில் பிரஞ்சுப்புரட்சியை எதிர்த்துப் போராடிய அவர்கள்
அதே பொழுதில் இந்தியாவில் கிறீத்தவம் பரப்பப்படுவதை தடைசெய்யவில்லையா?. ஒரிசாவிலும், வங்காளத்திலும் உள்ள ஆலயங்களுக்கு திரண்டு செல்லும் யாத்திரிகளிடம் பணம் பிடுங்குவதற்காக ஜகன்னாதர் கோவிலில் புரியப்பட்டு வந்த தற்பலியையும் விபச்சாரத்தையும் தமது வாணிபமாக்கிக் கொள்ளவில்லையா? இவர்கள்தான் “சொத்து, முறைமை, குடும்பம், சமயம் ஆகியவற்றின் பாதுகாவலர்கள்!”



ஐரோப்பா அளவுக்குப் பரந்து விரிந்ததும் பதினைந்து  கோடி ஏக்கர் நிலத்தைக் கொண்டதாயும் உள்ள ஒரு நாடான இந்தியா சம்பந்தப்பட்டவரை
நேர்ந்துள்ள ஆங்கில தொழிற்துறையின் நாசகர விளைவுகள் ஸ்தூலமானவையாயும் திகைப்பூட்டுவனவாயும் இருப்பதைக் காணலாம். ஆனால் அவை இப்போது உருவகம் பெற்றுள்ள பொருளுற்பத்தி அமைப்பு முறை முழுவதுடனும் இணைந்த விளைவுகள் மட்டுமே என்பதை நாம் மறந்துவிடக்கூடாது. அந்த உற்பத்திமுறை மூலதனத்தின் தலைமையான ஆதிக்கத்தை அடிப்படையாகக் கொண்டிருக்கிறது. மூலதனம் ஒரு சுயேச்சையான சக்தியாக திகழ வேண்டுமானால் மூலதனத்தை மையப்படுத்துவது அவசியமாகும். உலக மார்க்கெட்டுக்களின் மீது அந்த மையப்படுத்தல் முறை செலுத்திவரும் அந்த நாசகரமான செல்வாக்கே நாகரீகம் அடைந்த ஒவ்வொரு நகரிலும் இப்போது செயல்பட்டுக் கொண்டிருக்கும் அரசியல் பொருளாதாரத்தின் உள்ளார்ந்த கட்டமைப்பு விதிகளை மிகவும் பிரம்மாண்டமான பரிமாணங்களில் வெளிக்காட்டுகிறது. வரலாற்றின் முதலாளித்துவக் காலகட்டம் புதிய உலகத்துக்குரிய பொருளாயத அடித்தளத்தைப் படைத்துருவாக்க வேண்டும்: ஒரு புறத்தில் மனிதகுலத்தின் பரஸ்பர சார்புநிலை மீது தோற்றுவிக்கப்பட்ட சர்வவியாபகமான ஒட்டுறவையும், அந்த ஒட்டுறவுக்கான வழிவகைகளையும் உருவாக்க வேண்டும்;  ‘மறுபுறத்தில் மனிதரின்
உற்பத்தி ஆற்றல்களையும் பொருள்வகை உற்பத்தி இயற்கைச் சக்திகள் விஞ்ஞானபூர்வமான மேலாண்மையாக  உருமாற்றப்படுவதையும் வளர்த்துச்
செல்லவேண்டும்.  மண்ணியல் புரட்சிகள் பூமியின் மேல்பரப்பைப் படைத்துருவாக்கி இருப்பது போன்று அதே வழிகளில் முதலாளித்துவ தொழிற்துறையும் வாணிகமும் புதிய உலகத்துக்கான இந்தப் பொருளாயத நிலைமைகளைப் படைக்கின்றன. மகத்தான சமூகப் புரட்சியானது முதலாளித்துவ சகாப்தத்தின் சாதனைகளையும் உலக மார்க்கட்டையும் நவீன உற்பத்திச் சக்திகளையும் வசப்படுத்தும் முழுத் தேர்ச்சி பெற்று மிகவும் முன்னேறிய மக்களின் பொதுவான கண்காணிப்புக்குக் கீழடக்கினால் மட்டுமே மனித குலத்தின் முன்னேற்றம் கொலையுண்டோரது மண்டையோடுகளில் இருந்து மட்டுமே அமுதம் பருகும் பயங்கரமான காட்டுமிராண்டி விக்கிரகத்தை ஒத்திருக்கும் நிலைக்கு முடிவுகட்டும்.
==============
மார்க்ஸால் 1853 யூலை 22 இல் எழுதப்பட்டது.
(மார்க்ஸ் எங்கெல்ஸ் தேர்வு நூல்கள் பன்னிரண்டு தொகுதிகளில் தொகுதி 3 பக்கம்213-15)

==============

Monday, May 28, 2012

London Guardian பத்திரிகைக்கு IMF Christine Lagarde அளித்த பேட்டி

IMF நிதியாதிக்க கும்பலின் ஒடுக்கப்படும் தேசங்கள் மீதான வெறியாட்டத்தை எதிர்ப்போம்!


When Christine Lagarde became the first female finance minister of a major global economy, it's a measure of how much happier the world was back then that media interest focused chiefly on her talent for synchronised swimming. She was the foxy Frenchwoman who'd won medals in the national team in her teens, then worked her way up to chair an American law firm in Chicago, before being invited back to Paris in 2005 as trade minister and promoted two years later to the Treasury. Journalists had lots of fun picturing her upside down in a pool, wearing waterproof lipstick and a nose clip – and Lagarde played along with the joke, crediting the sport with teaching her a useful political skill: "To grit your teeth and smile."

No one is writing about synchronised swimming any more. On the day we met last week, the papers were agog with economic Armageddon, as the new French president flew off to Berlin to face a German chancellor whose austerity creed appeared to be on a collision course with France's new mission for growth. Athens was unravelling into chaos, unable to form a government and forced into fresh elections, plunging the markets into freefall as Europe's leaders abandoned any pretence that a Greek exit from the euro might not be imminent. The future of the euro itself was, one headline declared, "a chronicle of a death foretold". When François Hollande's plane was struck by lightning, the heavens themselves seemed to be trying to tell us just how much trouble we are in.

Coming face to face with Lagarde, however, you could be forgiven for thinking you must have imagined the whole crisis. We meet at the Paris office of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), a concrete grey modernist building so unassuming as to lack even a sign advertising its existence. Inside, the decor is plain and functional, the atmosphere eerily hushed. An empty lift glides up to a floor of deserted offices, where I wait by myself for a while until a tall, strikingly self-possessed woman appears and greets me with the elegant serenity of a Parisian hostess receiving a dinner party guest. "Let us sit here," she suggests, ushering me to a window seat beside a vase of flowers. "You can look at my orchids."

The managing director of the IMF may look like one of those statuesque silvery models who appear in Weekend's All Ages fashion pages, but she is one of the world's most powerful women, in the eye of the world's worst storm in living memory. In the years leading up to the 2008 crash, the IMF had been starting to look, if not quite redundant, then not massively important; most of the world's economies appeared to be ticking along quite happily without it. But the crash changed everything, so I'm curious to know when she first thought of running for the job. Actually, she says, it wasn't her idea, but George Osborne's.

"We were travelling together and we were sort of thinking about the political scene, and he said you know [Dominique] Strauss-Kahn is bound to be a candidate for the French presidential elections. What's going to happen with the IMF? Have you thought about it? That's how it started. That's when I started to play with the idea."

But events moved faster than expected last May – "Yes, faster than we ever thought!" – when the incumbent, Strauss-Kahn, was accused of the attempted rape of a New York hotel maid and forced to resign. On top of the sex scandal there was a ding-dong over whether the post should go, as it always has, to another European – another French one, at that – when the global economy today bears no resemblance to the one for which the job was originally designed in 1945. A French candidate would have to be extraordinarily impressive – and Lagarde is certainly that, lauded by everyone from Alistair Darling to Timothy Geithner, who praised her "lightning-quick wit, genuine warmth and ability to bridge divides". But, 67 years after its creation, I'm not sure everyone even really understands exactly what the head of the IMF is meant to do, so I ask Lagarde to explain in words an 11-year-old would understand.

"Well, I look under the skin of countries' economies and I help them make better decisions and be stronger, to prosper and create employment." You could think of the IMF as a global payday loan company for countries who have got into trouble and can't meet their financial commitments – the difference being that instead of charging sky-high interest rates, it demands radical economic reforms. And if they say they don't like the sound of that? "If I'm confident that the sound of it is accurate, I say, well, I'm terribly sorry but this is the sound we are making."

"If I'm confident that the sound of it is accurate, I say, well, I'm terribly sorry but this is the sound we are making."

Voters in Greece and France have decided they don't like the sound of it at all and so, as the crisis accelerates, Lagarde's job is looking increasingly indivisible from a mission to save the euro. Some critics have suggested that the appointment of a Europhile former French finance minister was akin to putting a drunk behind the bar; a former IMF chief economist has warned she is essentially in denial about the fundamental flaws of the euro and likely to "throw loans" at its problems, while Ed Balls has argued, "The IMF's job is to support individual countries with solvency crises, not to support a whole monetary union which cannot agree the necessary steps to maintain itself." So I ask if she would be trying just as hard to save the single currency if she were, say, Mexican.
"Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah. There is an emotional side of me that is pro-European," she acknowledges. "But I try to not be French, not be European, when I do my job. And I know that resolving the Euro area crisis matters also to the Mexican, the Australian, the Brazilian."
She has travelled the world asking countries to contribute to a firewall fund, but several have asked – not unreasonably – why they should have to pay for Europe's mistakes, when Europe is still richer than most of the world. Does the eurozone crisis matter more to their own interests than they realise? "Oh, I think they realise it," Lagarde says quickly, sounding deadly serious. "There has not been a capital I have visited in the last 10 months where the first question has not been: what is the situation in Europe? Are the Europeans sorting it out?"

Nevertheless, while this might come as a surprise to Greeks suffering under extreme austerity, some say Lagarde's approach to the eurozone is less draconian than the IMF's traditional policy towards developing world economies. Is it easier to impose harsh demands upon small economies, but much harder to tell difficult truths to the big ones – particularly fellow Europeans? "No," she says firmly. "No, it's not harder. No. Because it's the mission of the fund, and it's my job to say the truth, whoever it is across the table. And I tell you something: it's sometimes harder to tell the government of low-income countries, where people live on $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000 per capita per year, to actually strengthen the budget and reduce the deficit. Because I know what it means in terms of welfare programmes and support for the poor. It has much bigger ramifications."

So when she studies the Greek balance sheet and demands measures she knows may mean women won't have access to a midwife when they give birth, and patients won't get life-saving drugs, and the elderly will die alone for lack of care – does she block all of that out and just look at the sums?
"No, I think more of the little kids from a school in a little village in Niger who get teaching two hours a day, sharing one chair for three of them, and who are very keen to get an education. I have them in my mind all the time. Because I think they need even more help than the people in Athens." She breaks off for a pointedly meaningful pause, before leaning forward.

"Do you know what? As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax."
Even more than she thinks about all those now struggling to survive without jobs or public services? "I think of them equally. And I think they should also help themselves collectively." How? "By all paying their tax. Yeah."

It sounds as if she's essentially saying to the Greeks and others in Europe, you've had a nice time and now it's payback time.

"Do you know what? As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax."

"That's right." She nods calmly. "Yeah."

And what about their children, who can't conceivably be held responsible? "Well, hey, parents are responsible, right? So parents have to pay their tax."

Lagarde is a beguiling mixture of steel and silk, for she can switch seamlessly from this sort of hardball talk to nimble diplomacy. Asked if she expects to be the last European to run the IMF, she replies, "Well, I hope I'm not the last woman." But the last European? "I don't know." She smiles, adding playfully, "I might last for a long time."

I begin a question about British Eurosceptics – "Lots of people where I come from – " but she can see what's coming and interjects warmly, "A beautiful island." When I ask if she enjoyed dealing with Gordon Brown, she offers, "Erm… I don't think he was ever finance minister when I was." That's a rather graceful way of avoiding the question, I say, smiling. Lagarde affects a blank expression of innocence, and starts to laugh.

Everybody talks about Lagarde's phenomenal charm and it doesn't take long in her company to see why. She goes, "Pouff!" when I say so, batting the compliment away with a flick of the wrist, but she is neither an economist, nor even really a politician – she spent just six years of her career as a minister in France – so I wonder if charm is actually the key qualification for the job.

"Well, I think when you drill down and ask what it takes to be managing director of the IMF, then the ability to listen, the ability to understand the perspective of your entire membership, the respect and tolerance for the political diversity, the cultural diversity, I think that's very important actually. I mean, it's often underestimated because many people will say you need to be a very strong economist. Well, maybe so. But I wouldn't qualify for the job. I'm not the top-notch economist; I can understand what people talk about, I have enough common sense for that, and I've studied a bit of economics, but I'm not a super-duper economist. But, yes, that appreciation for the interests pursued by the other side at a negotiation table, a sense of the collective interest and how that can transcend the vested individual interests of the members, that matters."

She doesn't claim these as feminine virtues, but acknowledges, "I've criticised enough women who are fighting so hard to look like a man that it destroys half of their own sanity and humanity." How often does she feel judged as a woman at the IMF? "Oh, quite often. That wouldn't surprise you! Come on." When she had the temerity last autumn to point out the obvious truth that Europe's banks were under-capitalised, "that's an occasion where I think some observations were related to me being a woman." She drops her voice to mimic the catty whispers: "'She doesn't know what she's talking about, silly woman, she must have been poorly advised.'"

So what does she do about it? "I think you can choose one of two options. Either you become bitter, and you complain constantly about it, and argue that people will criticise you or undermine you because you are a woman. Or you decide to take advantage of it. Not overplaying the feminine side of things; not being on the seducing side, not playing the attractive woman in high heels – I've never done that and I think my mother would be horrified if I did, and I don't want that to happen because I loved her very much. But…" She falls silent. But what? "Men will not insult you or will not easily say no when you tell them you need more money to secure the institution and make sure it can do its work." Does she mean it's easier for her to ask for money as a woman? "Yes," she flashes back. "Yes. Yes. Absolutely." Because masculinity responds to a woman saying I need more money? "Yes," she agrees, smiling. "People have said that to me. 'How can I say no to you?'"

For all Lagarde's charm, it's hard not to feel a sense of Alice In Wonderland bewilderment about the IMF's work. The Americans are recovering with a stimulus programme more familiar to Europe than Washington, while a Frenchwoman is trying to save the eurozone with austerity measures that would please the Tea Party. The whole point of the European project was to prevent the sort of conflict that once engulfed the continent, and yet the IMF's life support strategy has seen neo-Nazis elected in Athens, and now risks destabilising the marriage between Germany and France on which the European dream depends. When democratic elections produce politicians unwilling to play by the IMF's rules, they have been replaced by unelected technocrats – Mario Monti in Italy, Lucas Papademos in Greece – gifting Eurosceptics evidence for their charge that the EU is fundamentally anti-democratic.

Were voters in Greece and France basically wrong to elect anti-austerity politicians? "You are never wrong when you have voted because you've acted in accordance with your conscience and your beliefs, and you've exercised your democratic right, which is, you know, perfectly legitimate in our democracies."
But Germans elected Hitler in 1933, and we don't think they were right, do we?

Were voters in Greece and France basically wrong to elect anti-austerity politicians?
"You are never wrong when you have voted because you've acted in accordance with your conscience and your beliefs, and you've exercised your democratic right, which is, you know, perfectly legitimate in our democracies."
But Germans elected Hitler in 1933, and we don't think they were right, do we?
Christine Lagarde 

"Well, somebody once said if people are not happy with their government, you change the people." She laughs, deftly sidestepping the question. "What's really interesting," she says more seriously, "is that wherever you see a change of government, for instance in Spain, do you see major changes from the economic and financial policies that were conducted by their predecessors? No." She suspects we will see a similar pattern now in France. "I'm very much a believer that it's action that matters much more so than, you know, the flurry of political promises and statements and slogans that are used during political campaigns. So let's see."

 Christine Lagarde in her youth: 'I’ve criticised enough women who are fighting so hard to look like a man that it destroys half of their own sanity and humanity.' Photograph: Holten-Arms School
Is she saying there's no need to panic about a rift between Paris and Berlin? "I should think so," she agrees quietly, with a knowing smile. "I think it's largely overstated."

Lagarde's unflappable calm seems to come quite naturally. She was born in Paris in 1956, the eldest daughter of a university lecturer and a teacher; her father suffered from motor neurone disease and died when she was just 17. After failing twice to get into the prestigious Ecole Nationale d'Administration, the elite incubator for French civil servants, she joined the American law firm Baker & McKenzie and rose to become its first female chairman. In her early 30s she had two sons with her first husband, but after that the details get a little hazy; she married again while in Chicago, to a British businessman, but now lives with a Corsican she first met in her 20s at law school. In the French tradition, that's about as much as we know of her private life, apart from the fact that she is teetotal, vegetarian and a fanatical swimmer who will stay only in hotels that have pools. "She radiates," an acquaintance once said of her. "I think that's because she swims so much."
She certainly radiates assurance, but of course part of being reassuring means not saying anything very bold. I ask how she squares austerity with growth, but she thinks the furious debate between the two is generating more heat than light.

"What we say is it cannot be either or; it's not either austerity or growth, that's just a false debate. Nobody could argue against growth. And no one could argue against having to repay your debts. The question and the difficulty is how do you reconcile the two, and in which order do you take them? I would argue that you do it on a country by country case; it's not going to be a one size fits all."
In the UK's case, Lagarde thinks we are broadly on the right lines; public spending cuts, quantitative easing and low interest rates all meet with her approval. I tell her it doesn't feel that way to a lot of people here, and ask for an exit narrative – the story of how we'll get out of this mess – that could cheer people up.

"There will be an exit," she says firmly. "No question about it." Yes, but what is it? "Well, we're going to invent it. To give you a couple of positive messages, firstly, protectionism is not reappearing. The second reason for optimism is, there's a lovely sentence by Robert Musil, which says, 'Man is capable of anything – including the best.' And when you see how a situation can be turned around by one individual – get Mr Berlusconi out, you bring Mr Monti in, he's dedicated, he couldn't care less about his political future because he's not interested. And he does the job. And he changes the perception, and restores confidence. That's also a sign of hope."

When history books are written about the financial crisis, they will say it began in 2008. What date will they give for its end? 
"Well, I'm sure about the first two digits: 20. But I'm not sure about the last two digits."
Christine Lagarde
That may be true, but it's not an exit strategy narrative. "Ah," she says briskly, laughing. "You'll have to come back for that." Could she at least say where we are on the curve; is this as bad as things can be, or will they get worse? "I'm not in the business of reading tea leaves. I don't have a crystal ball. Some of the major issues are being resolved – but it's not over now. Let's face it, it's not over yet."
And for Greece – is the euro over? Lagarde won't say. I ask if I'll be packing euros if I go on holiday to Greece next year and she just smiles. "A holiday in Greece, it's a good investment for the country!"

She will put her name to just one firm prediction: she's going to be at the synchronised swimming at the Olympics this summer. "Osborne promised me that I would be invited, so, yes, I will try to do that. I'm desperate to."

I try once more. When history books are written about the financial crisis, they will say it began in 2008. What date will they give for its end? "Hmm, after the hyphen? After 2008? Two thousand," she says firmly. How odd, I think – her English is perfect, but she must have misunderstood the question. I ask again, but she is laughing. There was no misunderstanding.
"Well, I'm sure about the first two digits: 20. But I'm not sure about the last two digits."
Source: London Guardian

Sunday, May 27, 2012

BILL C-10 கியூபெக் மாணவர்கள் எதிர்த்துப் போராடும் கனேடிய கறுப்புச் சட்டம்.


What is Bill C-10?

On September 20, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson tabled Bill C-10, an omnibus bill titled the Safe Streets and Communities Act.  Combining amendments from nine separate bills that had failed to pass in previous sessions of parliament, Bill C-10 would make fundamental changes to almost every component of Canada’s criminal justice system.  It proposes:

New criminal offences

New and increased mandatory minimum sentences
The selective elimination of conditional sentences
Increased pretrial detention and new, harsher sentencing principles for young offenders
Longer waiting times before individuals can apply for pardons
Increased barriers for Canadians detained abroad who wish to serve the remainder of their sentence at home
The Bill also introduces some changes outside the criminal justice system:
Amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act would grant the Minister of Immigration broad discretion to deny work permits to any foreign national who is ‘at risk of abuse’
Amendments to various pieces of legislation to allow victims of terrorism to sue certain foreign entities and governments for damages



இரண்டரை இலட்சம் மாணவ சமுத்திரம்

What are the problems with Bill C-10?

In the CCLA’s view, the Bill proposes a few welcome changes, including requiring the Parole Board of Canada to provide annual statistics relating to record suspensions (which replace pardons for some offences) and empowering victims of terrorism to seek redress for loss and damage resulting from a terrorist act.

Overall, however, the direction these changes set out for the Canadian criminal justice system – jail more often, for longer, with more lasting consequences – is a dangerous route that is unsupported by the social science evidence and has already failed in other countries.  Indeed, the research suggests that putting an individual in jail for longer will actually increase the likelihood of re-offending.  It’s hard to see how this Bill will make streets and communities safer.  What it will do is needlessly increase the number of people in prison, skyrocketing costs and imposing unjust, unwise and unconstitutional punishments.  This is exactly the kind of policy Canada doesn’t need.

Below are six broad points where CCLA is most concerned about the impact of this Bill.

1. Broad and vague amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act: Amendments give a very broad mandate to deny any foreign national a work permit and do not specify what factors would be used to target an individual as ‘at risk’ of being exploited.  It is also poor public policy to punish foreign individuals who are vulnerable to abuse as opposed to addressing the Canadian employers who exploit these populations.

2. Hollow expansion for the rights of victims: Both torture and terrorism are serious crimes of international concern.  Numerous Canadian victims of torture have been unable to access meaningful justice in Canadian courts– and yet the government has chosen only to make these amendments available to victims of terrorism.  Even victims of terrorism would have to have their cases ‘pre-approved’ by the government, which has the ability to decide which governments can and cannot be sued.  Canada should not play politics with victims of torture and terrorism.

3. Unconstitutional use of mandatory minimums: The use of mandatory minimums for broad and vague underlying offences may result in the imposition of unjust, grossly disproportionate sentences.  The drug provisions include low-level drug offences – producing as little as six marihuana plants – and extremely broad aggravating factors which would target all those who rent or live in a house they do not own.

The child pornography provisions criminalize, and would impose mandatory minimum jail sentences, for the consensual, legal sexual activities of youth and young adults.  There is little evidence that mandatory minimums provide any deterrent impact, enhance community safety or lower crime rates.  There is also little evidence to suggest that they will significantly impact sentences for the most serious offenders – who are already being sentenced to significant amounts of jail time by the judiciary.  Rather they will handcuff the judiciary, preventing them from responding to unique facts and exceptional personal circumstances.


போராடும் மாணவர்களை நையப்புடைக்கும் பொலிஸ் பட்டாளம்

4. Prison conditions and disparate impact of amendments on aboriginal peoples and persons requiring mental health care:  The proposed will amendments greatly increase the prison population, and are likely to have a disproportionate and devastating impact on already-marginalized communities – particularly Aboriginal peoples and those with mental health needs.  These populations are already greatly over-represented in correctional institutions, and existing programs and services are already ineffective and insufficient to keep up with general demand.  The elimination of conditional sentences for a range of offences is particularly concerning, as these flexible sentencing tools are used by the judiciary to allow single mothers to continue working while serving their sentence and preventing the breakup of families, or to ensure that those with underlying mental health needs get the community treatment that best ensures their recovery and rehabilitation.

5. Unconstitutional amendments to the International Transfer of Offenders Act: The amendments attempt to give the Minister an unconstitutional level of discretion over when Canadian citizens, incarcerated abroad, can return to Canada.  From a policy perspective, facilitating such transfers enhances public safety as rehabilitation and reintegration is enhanced when individuals are close to their families and have access to high-quality, culturally-appropriate programs.  When offenders serve a portion of their sentence in Canada, it also allows the government to create records of their crimes and monitor their rehabilitation.  Absent such transfers, offenders would simply return to Canada at the end of their sentence without any records or legal restrictions on their activities.

6. Increasing transparency and accountability: The CCLA welcomes the required 5-year review of the mandatory minimum provisions set out in s. 42 of the Bill and the requirement that the National Parole Board submit an annual report that includes the number of applications for record suspensions and the number of record suspensions ordered.  Similar reviews and public reports to parliament should be undertaken with respect to the changes to the other acts.

Source: CCLA

எகிப்தில் தேர்தல்

The top two presidential candidates, Mohamed Morsi, left, and Ahmed Shafik.

In Egypt’s Likely Runoff, Islam Vies With the Past
CAIRO — The runoff to become Egypt’s first freely elected president is shaping up as a contest between two of the most powerful and polarizing forces in Egyptian society: political Islam or the leadership of the past.

After a wild and fluid two-month campaign by more than a dozen candidates, Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood and Ahmed Shafik, a former air force general who served as President
Hosni Mubarak’s final prime minister, emerged with the most votes on Friday, according to independent tallies and the official state news media.

Mr. Morsi won about a quarter of the vote and Mr. Shafik slightly less, effectively reprising the power struggle decades old between a military-backed, secular strongman and Islamists
from the Muslim Brotherhood. At least for the moment, the results appeared to dim the hope that last year’s popular uprising would open a middle path, transcending divisions that kept Egypt paralyzed between fear of religious radicalism and fear of the secular police state.

The outcome provoked frantic warnings on Friday of either a counterrevolution should Mr. Shafik win, or an Islamist takeover, should Mr. Morsi emerge as the next president. The candidates who tried to offer a more unifying vision — and were critical of both the Mubarak era and the Brotherhood — failed to overcome the deep divisions in Egyptian society. The result will be a runoff that offers a wrenching choice for the majority of voters who cast their ballots for one of the
other candidates.

“It is a shock,” said Ahmed Kabany, 38, an engineer, after the voting. “I don’t want either one, so I am not going to vote.” Although Mr. Shafik never explicitly promised to resurrect the old order, he campaigned as a strongman who would crack down on street protests, restore law and order and check the power of the Islamists. He surged in popularity toward the end of the campaign, by playing to voters’ fears of crime and lawlessness, and to the worries of Egypt’s Christian minority about the
growing power of the Islamists, who already control Parliament. And he never backed away from comments he made during the uprising against Mr. Mubarak comparing the insurrection to a
disrespectful child who slaps his father.

Mr. Morsi, facing a serious challenge from an Islamist rival during the campaign, reverted to a conservative and expressly religious appeal, portraying his platform as a distillation of
Islam itself while promising to carry out Islamic law.

Although both candidates have pledged to support the peace treaty with Israel, the runoff set up a stark choice between the Brotherhood’s vows to unite Palestinian factions in order to increase pressure on Israel to recognize a Palestinian state and Mr. Shafik’s pledges of continuity with positions of the former government.

Though official final results are to be released in a few days, early returns show that about 20 percent voted for Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, a former Brotherhood leader campaigning as both an Islamist and as a liberal in an effort to break out of Egypt’s culture war. And another roughly 20 percent voted for Hamdeen Sabahi, a secular populist with a record of fighting the Mubarak government on behalf of the poor. (Fifth place went to Amr Moussa, a former foreign minister who presented a softer and more conciliatory version of Mr. Shafik’s secular law-and-order appeal.)

Handicapping the runoff was all but impossible. Although candidates from the Muslim Brotherhood or more conservative Islamist parties won about three-quarters of the seats in Parliament, Islamists and more secular candidates split the vote in the first stage of the presidential election. It was
unclear whether voters who picked Mr. Sabahi, the secular populist, would lean toward Mr. Morsi to avoid returning a Mubarak minister to power, or to Mr. Shafik in order to avoid giving so much power to the Brotherhood. But at the end of the day, the possibility of low turnout favors the Brotherhood because its vast political machine can drive its voters to the polls.

As soon as the results became clear, each of the two leading candidates began to try to shift to the center, by rallying against the other. In a Friday night news conference, officials of the Muslim Brotherhood announced that they were inviting the other “revolutionary candidates” — effectively, all but Mr. Shafik — to a meeting to talk about a coalition to oppose the former prime minister and about sharing power in a Brotherhood-led government.

“Rescuing the homeland includes securing victory for a candidate who belongs to the revolutionary camp, and the camp that struggles against the old regime,” Essam el-Erian, a Brotherhood lawmaker, said, trying to portray Mr. Morsi as the champion of the whole popular uprising and not just the
Islamist forces.

Supporters of Mr. Shafik, meanwhile, circulated a cellphone message urging unity against the Brotherhood. “I beg you to please put your differences aside and go vote for Shafik not because you believe in him but because it will be a catastrophe if we consolidate all power to one party (presidency and Parliament)!” the message read. “History has proved, so please spread!”

The race is further complicated by the uncertainty about the powers of the next president. A committee picked by Parliament that was supposed to draft a new charter has become deadlocked
in a dispute between Islamists and liberals. The military council that has governed Egypt since Mr. Mubarak’s ouster says it will issue an interim constitution to define the president’s powers, but it has not yet done so.

Mr. Shafik has close ties to the members of the military council, and his opponents often accuse the generals of actively supporting his campaign, but no conclusive evidence has emerged. Indeed, the Brotherhood has also indicated that it intends to take a conciliatory approach toward the generals,
allowing them to preserve the commercial empire they control, protecting their budget from public scrutiny and keeping them out of civilian courts.

Mr. Morsi, the least charismatic of the leading candidates in the race, relied mainly on the Brotherhood’s political machine to turn out his voters. He sat out the one televised debate,
and his face barely appeared in his television commercials.

Mr. Shafik, a gruff former fighter pilot, earned the nickname “the Pullover” for the sweaters he wore in television interviews and on campaign posters, apparently to make him seem more approachable. It was all but unheard-of for a Mubarak minister to appear in public without a jacket and tie. Both Mr. Morsi and Mr. Shafik were derided for their awkward speaking styles. During his brief tenure as prime minister, Mr. Shafik was forced to resign after a humiliating public debate on a television talk show with a liberal critic and author, Alaa al-Aswany. “I fought in wars,” Mr. Shafik said in
exasperation at one point. “I killed and was killed.” His signature campaign commercial plays to the public anxieties about the crime and lawlessness that have swept Egypt since Mr. Mubarak’s ouster, when police and security forces scattered or stopped working. The commercial begins with jarring television images of protests and riots, and the clipped voice of a television newscaster in the background. “Chaos,” the voice says. “The country has fallen.” Then, over somber notes from a piano, Mr. Shafik says, “Egypts needs justice, and the safety for its citizens.”

Saturday, May 26, 2012

ஐரோப்பாவை உலுக்கும் அச்சம்: வங்கி வைப்புக்களை மக்கள் மீளப்பெறுதல்.


Europe's biggest fear
A run they cannot stop
May 25th 2012, 11:20 by A.P. | LONDON The Economist

It’s been a week since shares in Bankia plummeted on reports, later denied, that customers were pulling deposits out of the Spanish lender. Fears of a full-scale bank run in Greece have not yet materialised. But the possibility of a deposit run in Europe's peripheral states is still very much alive. It is also the thing that policymakers are least prepared for.

As with most aspects to the euro crisis, the usual answers are not much help. One tactic is to show customers the money. Old hands of emerging-market bank runs talk of how they used to pile cash up in full view of panicking customers so that they could see how well stocked the banks were with money. The equivalent now is to let the central bank provide enough liquidity that the ATMs always spit out cash. But if the idea is to get your hands on euros today in case of a currency redenomination tomorrow, then you will still want it out of the bank and under the mattress.


Another response to runs is to calm worries about the solvency of specific institutions by beefing up the scale of deposit guarantees. In the first phase of the crisis, which now seems almost innocent in its simplicity, that is what governments did. But that makes the problem worse, not better, if
government solvency is at the root of the problem.

The logical solution, as we argue this week, is to set up a joint deposit-guarantee scheme, in which euro-zone states pool resources to provide credible reassurance that depositors across the zone will get their money back, up to a harmonised threshold of €100,000 ($125,000). To get around the
redenomination risk, the guarantee would have to be a promise to repay the original value of the deposit in euros.

The problem, as analysts have noted this week, is that even if the political will to realise this end existed (which is highly questionable), it would take a long time to negotiate an agreement. There are all sorts of fiddly details for Eurocrats to get their teeth into. Should the scheme be prefunded? Should depositors be preferred creditors, or behind the ECB in the queue? What supervisory arrangements are needed to ensure that creditor nations have sufficient oversight of the deposit-
taking institutions they now insure in peripheral countries? And that is before you get into the rigmarole of ratifying agreements.


The trouble with this is that there is a horrible, insoluble mismatch between the timescales to which Europe’s policymakers work and the timescale of a bank run. A run is most likely within the next few weeks. And if a run starts, Europe’s governments will have to reassure within a matter of hours. You might just about get a communiqué from Brussels in that timeframe, but could it really reassure when so many questions are unanswered?

If it does not, then the run will continue until such time as the banks close their doors to further withdrawals or the central banks have satisfied depositors’ demand for cash. The former means trapping depositors inside a system they do not trust. The latter means providing liquidity to a banking system that has been abandoned by its own citizens. It would be hard to come back from either position.

பாங்கியா வங்கிக் காளிக்கு 24 பில்லியன் டொலர் படையல்!

Spain's Bankia seeks record bailout of ?19 bn

by Katell Abiven | May 26, 2012

Spain's fourth-biggest bank, Bankia, said Friday it will ask the government for 19 billion euros ($24 billion) in the largest bank bailout in the country's history.

The bank, which holds some 10 percent of the nation's bank deposits, said the request will be part of a recapitilsation plan which it approved at a board meeting on Friday and is backed by the government and the Bank of Spain.

"This plan has identified capital needs of 19 billion euros which will be entirely covered by the state," it said in a regulatory filing.


The government already spent 4.5 billion euros on Bankia earlier this month when it partially nationalised the lender.
The state took a controlling 45-percent stake in Bankia by converting a loan for that amount to its parent group Banco Financiero de Ahorros (BFA) into equity.

The bailout requested by Bankia on Friday will bring to 23.5 billion euros the total amount spent by the Spanish government to rescue the bank, which was formed in 2010 from a merger of seven troubled regional savings banks.
Spanish banks are at the heart of market fears that Spain, the eurozone's fourth-largest economy, could be forced to seek an international financial bailout.

Earlier this week Economy Minister Luis de Guindos estimated Bankia would need around seven billion euros to shore up its finances although he said his government would provide whatever funds were needed.

Bankia shares were suspended from trading Friday ahead of the bank's board meeting after newspaper reports said it planned to ask the state for aid of 15-20 billion euros.

Under the recapilitisation plan it approved Friday, Bankia's parent group BFA will ask Spain's bank restructuring fund FROB to subscribe to a capital increase of 19 billion euros.

Bankia will then launch a 12 billion euro capital increase which will be underwritten by BFA.
"Bankia clients can have absolute confidence that their savings are now safer than ever," said Bankia president Jose Ignacio Goirigolzarri.

The bank also announced that it had revised its results for 2011. Instead of posting a net profit of 309 million euros, it recorded a net loss of 2.979 billion euros due to write-downs made in its loan portfolio.

Bankia had problematic property assets amounting to 31.8 billion euros at the end of last year, according to Bank of Spain figures.

Standard & Poor's on Friday cut its credit ratings for five Spanish banks, including Bankia and its parent group BFA.

It downgraded Bankia to BB+, one notch into junk status, from BBB- and reduced its rating for BFA, which was already in junk status, to B+, four notches into junk territory, from BB-.

Standard & Poor's also cut its rating for Bankinter, Banco Popular and Banca Civica.

Daniel Pingarron, an analyst at Spanish brokerage IG Markets, said the injection of public funds into Bankia to save it "will not change things very much."

"What will happen is the FROB funds will run out, the fund will have to be replenished with public debt, and that does not sent a message of confidence" to markets, he added.

The government could add two other savings banks under its control, Novacaixagalicia and CatalunyaCaixa, to Bankia, which would create "the biggest public bank in Spanish history", and then sell the lender, Pingarron said.

The government refused to comment on this possibility.

Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy's conservative government this month instructed Spain's banks to set aside an extra 30 billion euros in 2012 in case property-related loans go bad, on top of 53.8 billion euros required under reforms enacted in February.

Bankia's shares plummeted 7.43 percent on Thursday to close at 1.57 euros, taking total losses to more than 58 percent since their listing in July 2011.

AFP

===================================================


* நிதியாதிக்க வங்கி மூலதனக் கொள்ளையர்களுக்கு, மக்கள் வரிப்பணத்தை வாரி வாரி இறைப்பதன் மூலம் மரணத்தறுவாயில் இருக்கும் முதலாளித்துவத்தைக் காக்க முடியாது!

* ஏகாதிபத்திய நெருக்கடிக்குத் தீர்வு சோசலிசமே, பாட்டாளிவர்க்கப் புரட்சியே!

* வங்கிகளை பாட்டாளிவர்க்க சர்வாதிகார அரசின் உடமையாக்குவதே!

===================================================

Thursday, May 24, 2012

அடிப்படை ஜனநாயக உரிமைகளைப் பறிக்கும் கனேடிய அரசு.



Over 700 students have been arrested in Canada during the latest night of rallies against tuition fee hikes and the adoption of controversial bill that is widely seen as a tool to limit freedom of speech, association and assembly.

­Police in Montreal dispersed unsanctioned protests and arrested 518 demonstrators on Wednesday night. The arrests were also made in Quebec City, where some 170 were detained, and in Sherbrooke. There were no reports of injuries or casualties.

Police used kettling tactics to encircle the protesters and contain them within a small space. People reportedly threw projectiles such as fireworks and bottles at officers, forcing them to carry out extensive arrests.

Most of those detained have already been released. Some face $1,000 fines.

­For over 14 weeks, Canada has been facing the most sustained student demonstration in its history. The protest on Wednesday started as a peaceful march of thousands, just like the majority of previous rallies.

In order to give the police another non-lethal means of pressure on protesters, Quebec's legislative assembly adopted a bill that introduces enormous fines of $24,000 to $122,000 against unions and student organizations which do not stop their members from protesting. Individuals found guilty of organizing a protest now face a fine of some $34,000.

On Tuesday, the movement marked the 100th day of demonstrations against the tuition hikes of around $250 per year with a massive rally in Montreal. Over 120 people were detained following the event.

"சயனைட்" நாவல் - ஒரு பார்வை

  "சயனைட்" நாவல் - ஒரு பார்வை "தங்கமாலை கழுத்துக்களே கொஞ்சம் நில்லுங்கள்! நஞ்சுமாலை சுமந்தவரை நினைவில் கொள்ளுங்கள், எம் இனத்த...