Narendra Modi seems to be an exception. The leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won three general elections at a trot and ruled Gujarat, his home state, for more than 12 years before moving to Delhi in 2014. Since then, he has led his party to two decisive victories to govern India. The year 2002 will go down in history as a disturbing year in which the majority of Americans tried to recover from two shocks: first, the events of 9/11 that shook American self-esteem more than anything else in recent history, even Vietnam; Second, the recession, which has spread to almost every sector of the economy. All in all, a rather depressing year. Headlines in the US include: While the BJP has not been immune to scandals – including allegations of illegal mining fraud in the state of Karnataka – it has been able to capitalize on the declining fortunes of the Congress Party and improve its own political chances for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. In 2013, she put aside concerns about Modi`s actions during the 2002 violence in Gujarat and elected him party leader in the 2014 election campaign. He became the BJP`s candidate for Prime Minister. Modi was a vigorous campaigner and campaigned for his leadership in Gujarat, which had significantly improved the state`s economy. He successfully presented himself as a staunch opponent of government corruption and a man of the people, unlike the members of the Congress Party elite (especially the Nehru-Gandhi family) who had ruled India for so long since 1947. He also did not hesitate to express his long-standing views on Hindu nationalism or its ties to the strongly pro-Hindu organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. On 8 February, the Gujarat Supreme Court granted early parole to activists Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand, accused of corruption and embezzlement. In 2017, the Supreme Court rejected his request for release.
In May 2018, additional charges were filed for allegedly securing and fraudulently using public funds worth 14 million rupees ($200,000) for educational purposes between 2010 and 2013. The activists said the authorities filed complaints in retaliation for their work on behalf of victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots. The case was ongoing at the end of the year. On August 7, the Gujarat Supreme Court dismissed complaints filed in 2014 against Setalvad, alleging that she had uploaded offensive images of Hindu deities to a social media platform. However, 35 people were rescued when Akshardham staff managed to lock the temple doors. The choice of Akshardham indicates a shift in terrorist strategy, attacking soft targets instead of high-profile targets. This means a higher number of casualties that could trigger communal clashes. Such provocations can perhaps be avoided by hacking at the root. India must decide when it wants to do it.
Time ran out on September 24. – Ashok Malik, 7th Duke OctoberPooja BhattOomphPOOJA BHATTBhattJism`s new project, starring John Abraham, will be a thriller with some steamy but “aesthetic” love scenes. Nothing less than the stable of the bold and cheeky Bhatt. “It`s time we stopped cutting flowers every time adults have sex on the web. Why should we apologize for our bodies? Bhatt asks. She demonstrated this a few years ago when she dressed brilliantly for the cover of a film.- Eyecatchers, June 10OopsBHAI MAHAVIRAafter K.R. Narayanan refused to consider a list of Supreme Court and Supreme Court judges because it did not include Dalits or women, the governor of Madhya Pradesh said: “Only people of character should be appointed.” Who`s in turmoil now?- Indianotes, March 4FIGURE IT OUTThe Delhi Metro had its first try in 2002 and will be 240 km long. The first phase of the project will cost Rs 10,571 crore. HOLIER THAN THOUThe last time there would be a fourth war, but killing innocent people is unacceptable. L.K.
Advani on PakistanBITING THE BULLETWe are not married to India. If Vietnam emerges as a low-cost place in the future, we will have a footprint there. Azim Premji, CEO of Wipro In September 2018, a five-judge panel of the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the judiciary could not disqualify politicians accused of serious crimes and prevent them from participating in elections. The court called on parliament to pass laws to prevent people accused of a crime from standing for election.