"A slightly less confrontational, slightly more liberal BJP could make India much more successful on the world stage." foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/11/ind…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
An imprtant 🧵Communal harmony may have been put at risk by mischievous elements in India
There's a rumour circulating on @X which claims that beef and pig fat may have been used in the making of the famous Tirupati Temple Prasad Laddus.
There is a Twitter Spaces run by @IntConfused where speakers are starting from the position that this is absolutely proven (that Tirupati Laddus contain beef fat, prok fat and fish oils) and that Hindus have been betrayed and must rise up. See this
Unsurpisingly BJP handles have gotten in on the act.
@ncbn made a statement that animal fat was used in these laddus during the reign of @ysjagan, BUT a 'recent' test report showed the presence of beef and pig fat and fish oil in the making of these Laddus
I.N.D.I. Alliance or INDIA alliance? Why is India's R/W ecosystem going insance over the @RahulGandhi clip where allegedly he was caught out when he said that the term "INDI Alliance was a BJP framing" that it was INDIA. So what's the truth?
A 🧵
1st there is a difference between an abbreviation (as in DNA = stands for de-xyribose nucelic acid) where you speak out D, N, and A; and an acronym (OPEC the word substitutes for Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries), where you make a word out of the letters.
So it sounds odd to say "DNA acid" but its fine to say, "Kuwait is an OPEC country". the fact that the C in opec 'stands' for "country" does not make it wrong to say OPEC country.
What is the dumbing down force that makes even people of some eminence put out stupid posts on social media. Posts that mislead, misinform and pander to a prejudice? Like this one from @sanjeevsanyal ? Mr Sanyal is not some cheap troll. He served as India's Prin Econ Adv 6 yrs
And is now on the PM's Econ Adv Council. He is a published author and commentator and has a huge @X. So why do I take issue with that tweet of his about Sweden's support for migrant's who want to go back elsewhere?
Read on to see why I am so disappointed at the level of public discourse on social media even from people who should know better. 1. The substance of the tweet suggests that Sweden is rethinking its policy on taking in refugees and migants, and is seeking to send them back.
Of all the claims that @palkisu made in her fanciful @OxfordUnion debate on India under Modi, the most egregious was the claim about how, in the much dreaded queue at the UK Border Agency at Heathrow she observed throngs of Indians proudly presenting their INDIAN passports.
No longer did they have to shamefully and hesitantly reveal their Indian-ness. The implication was that before Modi arrived on the scene (and forced us to defend Indian democracy), all of us did precisely that - hide our passports as we slipped in shamefaced and embarrassed.
what utter bollocks! what balderdash!
If at all any Indian traveller arriving at Heathrow is not so knackered and bushed after a 9 hour flight that he presentes his Indian passport with a proud flourish its because of pride that he has obtained a Visitor Visa
This #50WordEdit from @ShekharGupta really takes the biscuit. He seems to have swallowed the usual Govt hype and self-praise about the recently concluded India-EFTA trade deal, and its description as a 100 billion USD deal. Let's delve behind the deal a bit shall we?
I presented an analysis of this deal in this twitter thread done a few weeks ago when it was still under negotiation.
But to reiterate a few points:
EFTA may have Europeean in its name - European Free Trade Association - but for avoidance of doubt it is not the European Union. EFTA is a customs area of 4 countries, Switzerland, Norway, Lichtenstein (a tiny city state of a mere 40,000 people)
Tucked away in the new Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita is Sec 148, under which a policeman can order
"any assembly of five or more persons ..to disperse;..." They need not be doing anything wrong. It's enough if the policeman thinks it is likely they will.
If they don't disperse as commanded, Sec 148(2) provides for the policeman to call up members of the public to assist him in making them disperse (These could potentially be goons from some saffron dal).
Sec 149 provides for the DM to summon the help ofthe army to disperse the crowd of 5 or more people.