pred_label
stringclasses 2
values | pred_label_prob
float64 0.5
1
| wiki_prob
float64 0.25
1
| text
stringlengths 34
1.02M
| source
stringlengths 37
43
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
__label__wiki
| 0.704987
| 0.704987
|
EDITORIAL | ELECTION SPECIAL | Monday, 10 March 2008
After this photofinish: Rise to the occasion
The Nationalist Party, after over 20 years in government (since 1987), has pulled off a narrow yet remarkable electoral victory winning by a relative majority of just 1,200 votes.
It is a first for Malta, reminiscent of the Florida result in the 2000 American national election. The result is also a personal endorsement for Lawrence Gonzi, who fought and won this election single-handedly in view of the strategic decision to fight a presidential-style campaign. Politically this was a dangerous gamble, which effectively saw the leader of the Nationalist party placing his job on the line. In the end, it paid off.
But this election result also leaves us with a fractured country, split directly down the middle, with an increasing number of disenfranchised citizens. The neck-and-neck scenario, fought down to the wire, was a photo finish if there ever was one. It also exposed a number of our national idiosyncrasies, and calls for political analysis of the implications of the closeness of the vote.
In a little way, the election result also vindicates our much-maligned surveys, which have always showed very clear electoral trends.
One thing is clear: the people have spoken. They have endorsed the policies of the ruling party; but the people also sent a message to the Nationalist Party by reducing its majority. There is much change fine tuning and soul searching to be done.
The PN must take stock of this protest and respond accordingly.
It is a different ball game now, and the closeness of the vote calls for a truly different way of doing politics. Political conclusions should be drawn from this narrowest of victories. First and foremost this should encourage Gonzi to act nationally and to do away once and for all with the culture of winner takes all, which has permeated our political system where traditionally the winner picked up all the spoils and totally ignored the opposition. Accordingly, appointments should be offered also to persons with different political leanings.
Dr Gonzi should take note of this close result and break with tradition once and for all by emulating French President Nicolas Sarkozy (in more than just mimicry of his electoral slogan). He must appreciate that his majority has been watered down from that achieved by the Nationalist party in 2003; this result must not be allowed to degenerate into a situation whereby half the population feels disenfranchised and out of the political loop, as this can only have ripple effects on the national mood and future well being of the country. It is up to the PM to rise to the occasion and act like a statesman to unite the country after this narrowest of victories.
The result also has consequences on the Labour party and its leadership. Surely it marks the close of the chapter of Dr Sant as leader. The MLP, too, needs to undertake a soul-searching process and certainly to put into motion the process to change its leader, after his third consecutive electoral defeat.
It must also revisit its policies to see which needs to be fine-tuned, adjusted or indeed changed altogether. It has to ask itself why the electorate has opted to keep it in opposition for nearly quarter of a century.
In the national interest, we expect that, while the winning party implements its electoral programme which has been endorsed by the people, it also considers taking a leaf out of the electoral programmes of the other parties. It may wish to consider implementing a few of the other party proposals, especially in the social field and in that of the environment; as well as the fight against corruption and in norms of accountability and transparency.
These are all part and parcel of the European way of doing politics and in this – our first election since EU membership – government should consider acting boldly.
This unthinkable result is conclusive proof of the need to reform our electoral law with the full implication of covering all wasted votes with the insertion of a threshold clause, which gives a fighting chance to all small parties to gain representation in parliament.
This result also calls into question our method of counting votes. Surely the absurdity of waiting 10 hours to get the result should galvanise the parties to agree to have an electoral process that lends itself to a more open democracy and a faster more effective counting system.
Reforming the electoral system and process should be at the top of the agenda for Dr Gonzi.
Download full issue [pdf file 3.7Mb]
DOWNLOAD PDF FILE:
Issue 8 - 10 March 2008
Issue 4 - 29 February 2008
Copyright © MediaToday Co. Ltd, Vjal ir-Rihan, San Gwann SGN 9016, Malta, Europe
Managing editor Saviour Balzan | Tel. ++356 21382741 | Fax: ++356 21385075 | Email
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line8
|
__label__wiki
| 0.658374
| 0.658374
|
Check out this comprehensive list of 46 startup resources and opportunities for women
“Define success on your own terms, achieve it by your own rules, and build a life you’re proud to live.”
— Anne Sweeney, formerly co-chair of Disney Media
According to PitchBook, female-founded startups continue to gain a greater percentage of venture investment in 2019, with VC dollars committed to US female founders rising by 8.1 times over the last decade. However, the share of VC dollars that flowed into startups founded by a woman or a group of women is only 2.7 per cent of the total investment in 2019.
Will we be able to work towards increasing that percentage in 2021?
With this list of resources, we hope that all women founders, innovators, and change makers can step up to start building their dreams to help create a better world for all.
From competitions and initiatives to accelerators and incubators and female-focused investors, this list has resources catered for female founders at any stage of their startup idea!
Competitions, initiatives and networks
Amplify is a Girls in Tech startup competition for women founders. The competition has helped to provide funding, exposure on a global stage, and a community of investors and change makers committed to supporting women entrepreneurs.
Cartier Women’s Initiative
The Cartier Women’s Initiative is an annual international entrepreneurship programme that aims to drive change by empowering women impact entrepreneurs. Founded in 2006, the programme is open to women-run and women-owned businesses from any country and sector that aim to have a strong and sustainable social and/or environmental impact.
H.E.R Entrepreneur
H.E.R Entrepreneur is a platform where it inspires, educates, empowers and connects entrepreneurs, leaders, government, and investors across Asia through its online resources, meet-ups, workshops, and conferences.
Intel Capital Diversity Initiative
In June 2015, Intel Capital announced the venture industry’s largest-ever commitment to invest in technology companies led by women and underrepresented minorities (African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans).
All Intel Capital investments cover a broad spectrum of innovative industries, including artificial intelligence, autonomous mobility, data center, and cloud, 5G communications and next-generation computing.
Also Read: Levelling the playing field: How to build a home for women in tech
She Loves Tech
She Loves Tech is a global platform committed to building an ecosystem for technology, entrepreneurship, and innovation that creates opportunities for women. The company houses a tech startup competition focused on women-led or women-impact businesses.
So Gal
SoGal is the largest global platform for the education and empowerment of diverse entrepreneurs and investors. Its mission is to close the diversity gap in entrepreneurship and venture capital.
SoGal Foundation is bringing the top 150 women & diverse founders to Silicon Valley to participate in the final round of the largest global pitch competition for underrepresented entrepreneurs, as well as participate in a three-day immersive startup bootcamp.
WEConnect International
WEConnect International is a global network that connects women-owned businesses to qualified buyers around the world. WEConnect International identifies, educates, registers, and certifies women’s business enterprises based outside of the US that are at least 51 per cent owned, as well as managed and controlled by one or more women, and then connects them with multinational corporate buyers.
Women Startup Competition
WSC’s signature is a yearly startup competition series across Europe with the mission to give early-stage female-founded or female-led startups brand exposure, pitching opportunity, and presenting semi-finalists from each country at a Final Event (London) to a panel of international investors, press, corporate executives and angel investors.
Women Who Tech
Twice a year, Women Who Tech recruits women founders who are creating innovative tech products to solve big problems to the Women Startup Challenge, an 8-week virtual programme.
Grants and Funds
Amber Grant
Amber Grants began in 1998 in honour of Amber Wigdahl, who died before fulfilling her dreams. An Amber Grant of US$4,000 is awarded every month, and one of their 12 monthly recipients receives an additional $25,000 Amber Grant at the end of the year.
Businesses operating in the US or Canada are eligible for the grants.
Also Read: How women in tech can navigate the 2021 business landscape
Global Fund for Women
Global Fund for Women is one of the world’s leading foundations for gender equality, standing up for the human rights of women and girls. It works to advance rights by getting money and support to organisations led by women, girls, and trans people who are fighting for justice in their own communities.
It supports organisations led by historically marginalised groups who are working to build strong, connected movements for gender equality, justice, and human rights
Tory Burch Foundation Capital Program
The Tory Burch Foundation Capital Program powered by Bank of America provides women entrepreneurs in the United States the opportunity to access affordable loans through Community Lenders.
SEAF Women’s Economic Empowerment Fund (SWEEF) / SEAF Women’s Opportunity Fund (SWOF)
At the core of SWEEF’s investment framework is a women-centred strategy focusing on Southeast Asian investments in primarily Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
The Fund will invest in women entrepreneurs as well as businesses operating in sectors where women comprise a large portion of the labor force, those delivering products and services meeting the unique and unmet wants and needs of women and girls, and those where the leadership demonstrates a strong commitment to gender equality and wider diversity.
Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative
We-Fi allocated US$249 million over two financing rounds in 2018 and 2019 to implementing partners for work in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean.
The programs aim to benefit 115,000 women-owned SMEs. Projects are implemented in over 50 countries with over half of the funds going to low income (IDA-eligible) countries, including many facing fragile and conflict-affected situations. It has mobilised US$2.6 billion in public and private funds.
Women’s Fund Asia
Women’s Fund Asia is a regional women’s fund, committed to supporting women and trans people led interventions to enhance and strengthen access to women’s and trans people’s human rights. It envisions a peaceful and egalitarian region in which women’s and trans people’s participation, leadership and enjoyment of all their human rights are ensured and secure.
South Asia: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan
Southeast Asia: Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam
East Asia: Mongolia
Also Read: Women in tech: A global evaluation
Accelerators and Incubators
Astia was founded in Silicon Valley in 1999 as a non-profit organisation dedicated to identifying and promoting best-in-class, high-growth ventures that include women leaders.
Astia levels the investment playing field by cultivating a trusted global ecosystem of engaged male and female investors and advisors, who offer crucial resources, including capital, networks, and expertise.
Aviatra Accelerators
Aviatra Accelerators aims to empower female entrepreneurs. It enables women to start and sustain businesses by giving them the resources they need to be successful. Through its expertise in business basics, guidance from mentors and coaches, and access to capital, Aviatra Accelerators continuously encourage its members to move forward, and it embraces them when they return, helping to refuel and reignite their passions.
They currently serve markets in Northeast Ohio & Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky.
CRIB aims to empower women by providing the support they need to achieve their entrepreneurship dreams. This will benefit women as they achieve personal fulfilment; their families, as women gain financial empowerment and work-life balance; and society as a whole, as it creates businesses with a social impact, raise diversity in the workplace, and contribute to positive economic impact.
Founded in 2012 by tech pioneer, Kathryn Finney, Didtechnology, Inc (d.b.a digital undivided), is a social startup with 501 status that merges data and heart to develop innovative programs and initiatives that catalyzes economic growth in Black and Latinx communities.
Get Sh!t Done Accelerator
The Get Sh!t Done Accelerator is an industry-agnostic virtual accelerator for female entrepreneurs who want the power to choose their path to scaling profitable US$1million+ business.
Halo Incubator
Halo Incubator is a New-York-based incubator founded by two Chicago Booth alumnae. Their core and only focus is helping imaginative, passionate women solidify business plans, shape strategies, and raise capital, while amplifying their voices along the way. It guides founders through every stage from ideas to seed round.
Her Corner
Her Corner runs The Accelerator, the first in-person programme focusing on business growth and scalability specifically for women business owners in New York City, Washington, D.C and Philadelphia.
MassChallenge
Headquartered in the United States with locations in Boston, Israel, Mexico, Rhode Island, Switzerland, and Texas, MassChallenge strengthens the global innovation ecosystem by accelerating high-potential startups across all industries, from anywhere in the world for zero-equity taken.
NewMe
NewME is an entrepreneurship education program, serving early-stage business founders and their teams through mentorship, specialised curriculums, and for those companies chosen — capital investment. Its program enables founders to completely reevaluate product, sales, and marketing strategies, prepare for investment pitches and connect them to its network of partners. As the first underrepresented founder focused program in the United States, NewMe has led founders to more than US$47million in funding.
Prosper Women Entrepreneurs
Prosper Women Entrepreneurs (PWE) was created to advance women-led companies. The Prosper Women Entrepreneurs Startup Accelerator is a for-profit organization focused on increasing women entrepreneurs’ access to growth capital and the number of women investing in early stage capital markets.
Ready Set Raise
Ready Set Raise is an industry-agnostic national startup accelerator, consciously created by and for women and non-binary founders. Their goal is to find, support, and advance high-growth, pre-seed startups across North America.
Simona Accelerator: APAC Women Founders
Simona Ventures is a platform that provides access and opportunities to empower businesses and initiatives that solve gender gap challenges.
In early 2019, Simona Ventures presented its first APAC Women Founders Accelerator. The goals of the programme are not only to support gender equality by showcasing inspirational women leaders but also to build a community of women entrepreneurs across Asia Pacific.
Springboard Accelerator
Springboard’s accelerator program serves as the pipeline into its community of world-class entrepreneurs, investors and business development professionals. Springboard hosts programmes annually in industry verticals such as Life Science, Digital Health, Fashion Tech and Digital Media/Technology. It has partnerships with affiliates in Israel and Australia where it also co-produces programs in Life Science and Technology. Each accelerator class includes between 8-12 companies that are recruited, qualified and advised by its world-class expert network.
The Refinery
The Refinery, an early-stage accelerator program designed to assist innovative women-led ventures in becoming scaleable and investable businesses. The Refinery engages local intellectual and financial capital to participate in the growth of new businesses while leveraging community resources.
Women Accelerators
Women Accelerators, formerly de la Femme, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit Massachusetts organisation. It is passionate about promoting the advancement of women and bridging the gender gap. This can be seen in the wage gap and under-representation of women in senior-level positions, and the boardroom and in the government, from Corporate 500 to startups.
Women of Startup Nation Accelerator
Women of Startup Nation (WOSNA) is a four weeks programme, dedicated to accelerating the success of female-founded companies in Israel. The accelerator accepts teams that have at least one female founder.
Women’s Startup Lab
Women’s Startup Lab is a Silicon Valley-based startup and leadership accelerator for women entrepreneurs globally who have the bold vision to lead the wave of innovation and change that is required for growth and competitiveness in today’s economy.
All Raise is a nonprofit formed by 34 senior female investors and has committed to doubling the number of female partners in the next 10 years.
BBG Ventures is an early-stage fund focused on consumer tech startups with a female founder.
Backstage Capital has directed over US$4million in investments towards underrepresented founders, almost exclusively backing women, people of colour, and LGBT founders.
Also Read: 3 leadership lessons for women in tech
Chloe Capital
Chloe Capital is a seed-stage venture capital firm that invests in women. It catalyses solutions to the gender and diversity gap in entrepreneurship by offering investors the opportunity to Do Well by Doing Good. The company recruits women-led technology and tech-enabled companies and uses its national network to drive business after its investments. Chloe Capital is excited to advance the next generation of inspiring leaders as it continues to build a community that supports women entrepreneurs.
Female Founders Fund makes small, supporting investments in companies sourced by its Venture Scouts but operating in sectors or stages that are currently outside of its focus on institutional seed-stage opportunities.
Golden Seeds
An early-stage investment firm focused on vibrant opportunities for women-led businesses.
Jane VC
Jane VC is an early-stage venture capital fund that invests in high-growth female-led startups. It invests globally in visionary founders.
MergeLane
MergeLane is a VC firm that invests in high-potential startups and venture capital funds with at least one female leader.
Next Wave Impact
Next Wave is a movement driving impact, diversity, and inclusion in early-stage investing and the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Its global fund has 99 women investors, 25 of them women of color, which is led by an experienced investment committee of ten women.
she1K
Startups can pitch to she1K to get connected to a network of corporate executive women, angel investors, and partners. worldwide, from all industries, to empower innovative entrepreneurship with high growth potential. Applications are reviewed on a rolling basis so you can apply anytime you want!
SoGal Ventures
The first female-led millennial venture capital fund investing in diverse entrepreneurs in the U.S. and Asia. Powered by the SoGal Ecosystem across 40+ cities around the world, SoGal Ventures is galvanising a brand new demographic — millennial and GenZ women and minorities — to take centre stage in entrepreneurship and creation.
XFactor Ventures
XFactor Ventures is focused on making pre-seed and seed-stage investments in companies with billion-dollar market opportunities that have at least one female founder.
Also Read: Women in tech: Carman Chan’s Click Ventures is one of the most consistent VC funds globally
Kiva is a nonprofit organisation that crowd funds small, zero per cent interest loans for entrepreneurs, often prioritises funding women-led ventures.
iFundWomen
iFundWomen is a startup funding platform providing access to capital through crowdfunding and grants, expert business coaching on all the topics entrepreneurs need to know about, and a network of women business owners that sparks confidence, accelerates knowledge, and ignites action.
Women You Should Fund
Women You Should Fund is a rewards-based crowdfunding platform brought to you by Women You Should Know, a leading digital hub of women’s and girls’ empowerment.
Do you know of any other initiatives, funds, investors and/or resources catered for women entrepreneurs?
Let us know in the comments so that we can update this list to empower all females for a gender-equal world even further!
This article first appeared here.
Image Credit: Gemma Chua-Tran on Unsplash
The post Check out this comprehensive list of 46 startup resources and opportunities for women appeared first on e27.
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line9
|
__label__cc
| 0.552845
| 0.447155
|
Beauty Queens Models Actors Youtubers Singers Producers Politicians Presidents Prime Ministers Senators Baseball Player Basketball Player Golf Player Tennis Player Philosophers Nobles Poets Chess Players
Zach Gilford Actor
Zach Gilford is a 40 years old actor from United States of America from Evanston, Illinois. He was born on January 14, 1982 in Evanston, Illinois.
Zach Gilford, American actor
Birth Sign :
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Zach Gilford is an American actor best known for his role as Matt Saracen on the NBC television drama series Friday Night Lights. Gilford starred alongside Terrell Owens in the 2008 NBA Celebrity All-Star game. Gilford graduated from Northwestern University and Evanston Township High School. He serves as a Trip Leader for Adventures Cross-Country. He has led wilderness and adventure trips for teenagers to California, Hawaii, Alaska, the South Pacific, and British Columbia. Gilford worked as a staff member f...
Kiele Sanchez, American actor
He married with Kiele Sanchez (43), in 2012. Zach Gilford was 29 and Kiele Sanchez was 35 years old. Married for 10 years, 15 days.
Zach Gilford net worth
He has a net worth of 6 million dollars.
Zach Gilford Movies (12)
There are 12 movies of Zach Gilford.
His first feature film was The Purge: Anarchy (2014, as Shane). He was 32 when he starred in this movie. Since 2014, he has appeared in 12 feature films. The last one is Greenlit (2010). In this movie, we watched him as himself .
Dare (2009) As Johnny Drake, he was 27 years old
Post Grad (2009) As Adam Davies, he was 27 years old
In Our Nature (2012) As Seth, he was 30 years old
Devil's Due (2014) As Zach McCall, he was 32 years old
Greenlit (2010) As Himself, he was 28 years old
View all Zach Gilford movies.
Zach Gilford movie characters
The names of the characters/jobs in the films he starred in are as follows:
Character/Job
Shane The Purge: Anarchy (2014) 32
Zach McCall Devil's Due (2014) 32
Jerry Bailey The Last Stand (2013) 30
Adam Davies Post Grad (2009) 27
Jerry Super (2010) 29
Gus The River Why (2010) 28
Maxwell McKinder The Last Winter (2006) 24
Matthew Crazy Kind of Love (2013) 31
Johnny Drake Dare (2009) 27
Seth In Our Nature (2012) 30
Gordon Boy Genius (2019) 37
Himself Greenlit (2010) 28
Zach Gilford TV Shows (13)
His first TV Show was Teen Choice Awards (1999).
Off the Map He was 28 years old
Grey's Anatomy He was 23 years old
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit He was 17 years old
The Mob Doctor He was 30 years old
Teen Choice Awards He was 17 years old
View all Zach Gilford TV shows.
He graduated from Northwestern University and Northwestern University School Of Communication
What is Zach's zodiac sign?
Zach Gilford zodiac sign is capricorn.
When is Gilford's next birthday?
Zach Gilford was born on the 14th of January 1982 , which was a Thursday. He will be turning 41 in only 363 days from today (16 January, 2022).
Other facts about Zach Gilford
Languages spoken, written or signed
Gilford. Show people with the surname Gilford
Work period (start)
On focus list of Wikimedia project
WikiProject PCC Wikidata Pilot/Northwestern University Libraries
Zach Gilford age by year
He was 39 years old
Zach Gilford Is A Member Of
Film Actor
Television Actor
Enter your name here:
Enter your email here:
Your message is required.
Markdown cheatsheet.
©2022 HowOld.co. All rights reserved.
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line13
|
__label__cc
| 0.739959
| 0.260041
|
Kandy Emailing: tooth_temple
Tooth Temple
Kandy, Sri Lanka
Dalada Maligava
(temple complex where the tooth of Buddha is housed)
Kandy, city, central Sri Lanka, capital of Central Province, on the Mahaweli River, in the Kandy Plateau. It is one of the island nation's largest cities and the economic focus of the tea-producing central highlands.
Temple of the Tooth
Dalada Maligava (the Temple of the Tooth), repository of a sacred Buddhist relic said to be a tooth of the Buddha, is here, and the University of Peradeniya (1942) is nearby. Kandy was the capital of a Sinhalese kingdom from 1592 to 1815, when it became one of the last sections of the island to be annexed by the British as part of colonial Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Population (1990 estimate) 104,000.
Temple entrance
(redecorated since the bomb damage in 1998)
Buddha statue
tells the story of the tooth being rescued from the
Sandalwood cremation of Buddha
presentation of the tooth to the temple for safekeeping
the tooth was displayed to save the country from draught
the altar where the tooth is held
stupa with processional standards
more processional standards
Royal Platform next to the temple
Anglican church location next to temple grounds
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line14
|
__label__wiki
| 0.776449
| 0.776449
|
Fratricide In The Lodge
Let the Republican fratricide begin!
Although our most recent caesar emeritus, former President George Walker Bush, whose self-delusion is surpassed only by that of the currently reigning caesar, President Barack Hussein Obama, is not a member of any Masonic lodge, he is, of course, a member in good standing of Skull and Bones, the secret society to which his father, former President George Herbert Walker Bush, and the Democratic Party presidential nominee in 2004, United States Senator John F. Kerry (D-Massachusetts), a pro-abortion Catholic belong. One does not have to be a member of the "lodge" to be infected with its anti-Incarnational spirit of naturalism, something that Pope Leo XIII noted in Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884:
For, from what We have above most clearly shown, that which is their ultimate purpose forces itself into view -- namely, the utter overthrow of that whole religious and political order of the world which the Christian teaching has produced, and the substitution of a new state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.
What We have said, and are about to say, must be understood of the sect of the Freemasons taken generically, and in so far as it comprises the associations kindred to it and confederated with it, but not of the individual members of them. There may be persons amongst these, and not a few who, although not free from the guilt of having entangled themselves in such associations, yet are neither themselves partners in their criminal acts nor aware of the ultimate object which they are endeavoring to attain. In the same way, some of the affiliated societies, perhaps, by no means approve of the extreme conclusions which they would, if consistent, embrace as necessarily following from their common principles, did not their very foulness strike them with horror. Some of these, again, are led by circumstances of times and places either to aim at smaller things than the others usually attempt or than they themselves would wish to attempt. They are not, however, for this reason, to be reckoned as alien to the masonic federation; for the masonic federation is to be judged not so much by the things which it has done, or brought to completion, as by the sum of its pronounced opinions.
Similarly, the former Governor of the State of Alaska, Sarah Heath Palin, is not a member of any Masonic lodge. She is, however, very much infected by the Judeo-Masonic spirit of religious indifferentism as she weaves, sometimes incoherently, in her speeches from one point to another, moving in accord with the same viscera ("gut," if you will) that guided the shallow former caesar, George Walker Bush. Neither Sarah Heath Palin or George Walker Bush are serious students history. Both jumble the language without ever realizing for a moment that clear speaking is a sign of clear thinking. It is thus fairly laughable to see the George Walker Bush pot calling the Sarah Heath Palin kettle black:
WASHINGTON - Two years of retirement haven't dulled George W. Bush's political zest - and President Obama and Sarah Palin are among his under-the-radar targets.
The 43rd President has told friends the ex-Alaska governor isn't qualified to be President and criticizes Arizona Sen. John McCain for putting Palin on the 2008 GOP ticket and handing her a national platform.
"Naming Palin makes Bush think less of McCain as a man," a Republican official familiar with Bush's thinking told the Daily News.
"He thinks McCain ran a lousy campaign with an unqualified running mate and destroyed any chance of winning by picking Palin." (http://www.nydailynews.com/index.html#ixzz14QyyfnI0.)
Well, it takes one to know one, that's for sure.
George Walker Bush, whose refusal to acknowledge the ongoing carnage of Catholics in Iraq was the subject of yesterday's article, As Blind Now As He As Always Been, was stumped by interviewers throughout the course of his quest for the Republican presidential nomination in 1999 and early-2000. Merely being the son of a former vice president and president and having served as Governor of the State of Texas for precisely fifty-two months prior to the announcement that he made on June 17, 1999, that he was running for the 2000 presidential nomination of the Republican Party does not qualify one to be president of the United States of America. And while Bush the Lesser is indeed correct about the utter lack of Sarah Heath Palin's qualifications to be president, his own resume was awfully thin back in 1999 when he portrayed himself as the "compassionate conservative," although not as thin as Barack Hussein Obama's was in 2007, it should be noted.
For those of you unfamiliar with my very public criticism of Sarah Heath Palin, who was a Catholic until her father took her entire family out of the Faith when she was twelve years old in 1976, you may review my early and repeated criticism of her in 2008 by reviewing these articles: Gradually Accepting Naturalism's False Premises, Absolute Insanity, Facts Are Troublesome Things, and It's Still Absolute Insanity.
First, Sarah Heath Palin has no business running for any office, no less the presidency of the United States of America. Her vocation is to be with her young son, who suffers from Down Syndrome.
Second, Sarah Heath Palin is not, despite her protestations to the contrary, "pro-life." She is a full-throated supporter of contraception and believes that little babies in their mothers' wombs may be sliced and diced in cases where it is alleged that a mother's life is endangered.
Third, Sarah Heath Palin is yet another shill for the murderous policies of the State of Israel (as is Mike Huckabee, the former Governor of Arkansas who is said to be the candidate that the Obama White House fears the most, and as is Mitt Romney, the Mormon former pro-abortion and former supporter of perversity who had his "road to Damascus" conversion on those issues only after he had left the governorship of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on January 4, 2007, as he began his own question for the 2008 presidential nomination of the Republican Party). This means that Sarah Heath Palin would undertake any war that furthered the interests of the State of Israel, making her another George Walker Bush in a pants-suit.
Fourth, Sarah Heath Palin is incapable of following, no less articulating, a logical train-of-thought (see It's Still Absolute Insanity). Obviously, this is not a disqualification in a world of naturalism, where illogic and emotionalism and sentimentality reign supreme. However, the mere fact that a person can motivate large numbers of people by means of cliche-ridden speeches does not mean that that person is qualified to hold an office of public trust, no less the presidency itself.
Fifth, although I carry no brief for self-anointed Republican "gatekeepers" such as Karol Rove, who was George Walker Bush's Senior Advisor in the White House from January 20, 2001, to August 31, 2007, serving also as Deputy White House Chief of Staff from February 8, 2005, to August 31, 2007, such "gatekeepers" are entirely correct when they conclude that Barack Hussein Obama would eviscerate Sarah Heath Palin in a general election. There is no question about this at all. She would articulate nothing coherent. She would be as utterly lost in interviews with hostile interviewers then as she was so infamously with anchorette Katie Couric in 2008.
Yes, the "electability" issue was used against Patrick Joseph Buchanan in 1995 and 1996 by establishment Republicans and even by the so-called "Christian Coalition," whose executive director was the smarmy Ralph Reed, and by various establishment "pro-life" leaders, including "Father" Frank Pavone of Priests for Life and various representations of the political action committee associate with the National Right to Life Committee, an organization that takes no stand in opposition to contraception and supports the direct, intentional killing of innocent human beings in their mothers' wombs in cases where it is alleged that a mother's life is endangered.
Pat Buchanan's problem with the establishment figures in the Republican Party had nothing to do with being inarticulate or incoherent. Pat's "sin" was that he dared to criticize the policies of the State of Israel and the hold that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) had on members of both major political parties in both houses of the United States Congress. Pat was right then. His assertion that Capitol Hill is Israeli-occupied territory is correct today (see AIPAC Lauds Elections of Pro-Israel Stalwarts; two of those stalwarts are United States Representative John Boehner, who will be Speaker of the United States House of Representatives when the 112th Congress convenes on January 3, 2011, and the man who will be his party's Majority Leader, Eric Cantor; another two who were hailed were the current Speaker, Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi, and her Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer). Any discussion of the hold that Israeli and its lobbyists have on American electoral politics and national security policy is taboo. That was the real reason that Patrick Joseph Buchanan was opposed by the Republican establishment. There is only the faintest of parallels, therefore, between establishment opposition to Sarah Heath Palin by the Republican establishement now and the opposition that greeted Patrick Joseph Buchanan fifteen years ago.
There is a real possibility, however, that establishment figures in the Republican Party would go the route chosen by then former President Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 when he ran on his own third party ticket, the Progressive (or "Bull Moose" Party) against the then Governor of New Jersey, Thomas Woodrow Wilson, and Roosevelt's own hand-picked successor, President William Howard Taft, if Mrs. Palin won the Republican Party's presidential nomination. The Republican fratricide of 1912 was indeed ironic as both Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft were members of Masonic lodges (Roosevelt belonged to the Matinecock Lodge on West Main Street in Oyster Bay, New York; Taft belonged to the Kilwinning Lodge in Cincinnati, Ohio). Establishment Republicans would rather see the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama in a three-way race in 2012 than cede control of the party to Sarah Heath Palin.
Although it is far, far too early to even begin handicapping the contest for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, one can be perfectly assured that its naturalist leaders will do everything possible to prevent the voice of the "people" from being heard to their detriment. When you come right down it, of course, the Republican establishment has just as much contempt for the "people" as does Barack Hussein Obama and his band of naturalist elitists of the "left." They only have use for the "people" when they can claim that their beloved masses have given them a "mandate" to do as they please with the reins of governmental power.
Pope Pius XI analyzed this farce perfectly in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922:
To these evils we must add the contests between political parties, many of which struggles do not originate in a real difference of opinion concerning the public good or in a laudable and disinterested search for what would best promote the common welfare, but in the desire for power and for the protection of some private interest which inevitably result in injury to the citizens as a whole. From this course there often arise robberies of what belongs rightly to the people, and even conspiracies against and attacks on the supreme authority of the state, as well as on its representatives. These political struggles also beget threats of popular action and, at times, eventuate in open rebellion and other disorders which are all the more deplorable and harmful since they come from a public to whom it has been given, in our modern democratic states, to participate in very large measure in public life and in the affairs of government. Now, these different forms of government are not of themselves contrary to the principles of the Catholic Faith, which can easily be reconciled with any reasonable and just system of government. Such governments, however, are the most exposed to the danger of being overthrown by one faction or another.
Pope Leo XIII had warned in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, that the concept of the "sovereignty" of the "people" was bound to produce instability, especially when the "people" are not informed by the truths of the Catholic Faith:
The sovereignty of the people, however, and this without any reference to God, is held to reside in the multitude; which is doubtless a doctrine exceedingly well calculated to flatter and to inflame many passions, but which lacks all reasonable proof, and all power of insuring public safety and preserving order. Indeed, from the prevalence of this teaching, things have come to such a pass that may hold as an axiom of civil jurisprudence that seditions may be rightfully fostered. For the opinion prevails that princes are nothing more than delegates chosen to carry out the will of the people; whence it necessarily follows that all things are as changeable as the will of the people, so that risk of public disturbance is ever hanging over our heads.
To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God.
The madness of the naturalistic farce of 2010 is over. King "Money" will rule the day in the 112th Congress as it has in the 111th Congress.
The madness of the naturalistic farce of 2012 is now in its early stages. There is no place for Christ the King in this farce as it mocks His Social Reign over men and their nations, tickling the itching ears of the "people" with pious platitudes designed to win votes so as to "divvy up" power between competing sets of naturalists.
We must remember that we are in a diabolical trap created by the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King by the Protestant Revolt and institutionalized by the ethos of Judeo-Masonry and the vast array of naturalistic ideologies and philosophies and movements allied with it. There is no secular, religiously indifferentist, nondenominational or interdenominational way by which our problems are going to be resolved. And while the naturalists in the Democratic Party will be engaging in some fratricide of their own now that Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi has announced her intention to remain the floor leader of her substantially reduced Democratic Caucus in the United States House of Representatives, we must never mistake this fratricide as representing anything other than warfare among competing sets of naturalists who believe that men and their nations do not have to submit themselves to the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by the Catholic Church.
Our goal must be, as ever, to plant the seeds for what Pope Saint Pius X urged us in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910, to restore: the Catholic City:
This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.
No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo.
We help to restore the Catholic City by remembering that this is the time that God has ordained from all eternity for us to live in, seeking therefore to cooperate with the graces He won for us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flows into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces, to persevere to the point of our dying breaths in states of Sanctifying Grace as members of the Catholic Church.
The final triumph belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must never despair. We must simply ask her to be valiant, faithful and tireless champions of her Divine Son, Christ the King, at all times and in all circumstances, looking never for "results" in this life, seeking only to remain faithful to Our King through her, Our Queen, until we draw our dying breaths, pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Americas and of the unborn, pray for us.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saint Martin of Tours, pray for us.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line16
|
__label__cc
| 0.578815
| 0.421185
|
Unclogging Courts, Expediting Justice in India
Civilisation emerges from the lawless jungle riding on the back of a juridical system that resolves disputes through non-violent means. India has had an uneven history in this regard but the relatively stable structure that we had inherited from the British is crumbling because people are now, more often than not, taking the law into their own hands. Not because the judges are incapable, though in some cases that may be true, but because they are not able deliver their judicial services in time. Justice is being denied to large sections of the population simply because of abnormal delays. There are so many examples of this sorry state of affairs that it is pointless to give specific instances. The fact is too well known. Question is what can we do about it? Obviously there is no magic wand, no silver bullet but perhaps a technology driven, business process reengineering approach -- so beloved of management consultants -- can help.
“Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement. If you can’t measure something, you can’t understand it. If you can’t understand it, you can’t control it. If you can’t control it, you can’t improve it.”
So the first step is to take stock of every litigation, or court case, in the country. Yes, every one of 3+ crores cases needs to be captured in a searchable database, but strangely enough this not as intractable problem as it sounds. Every court in the country publishes a daily cause-list that has the essential details of every case that is scheduled to be heard on a particular day. Fortunately all this data is in digital PDF format and most of it can be found online, but in case any court does not publish the cause-list regularly it must be compelled to do so since it is a cornerstone of the juridical process. In fact it may be a good idea to have a common format for all cause-lists but even otherwise, once cause-lists are available, a reasonably sophisticated text analysis software can be developed to extract this data and convert it into a form that can be stored in a structured, searchable database for subsequent analysis..
The next step would be to track changes in the cause-list over successive dates and determine the “speed” at which a particular case is moving through the system. The biggest cause of delay in the system is because hearings are postponed, often on trivial grounds, and the next date of hearing is months away. So by tracking cause-lists over a couple of months, it would be possible to determine how many times each case comes up for hearing and what is the interval between these hearings. From this it would be possible to build up a life-history of each and every case. Some people may baulk at the sheer volume of the task and the fact that the difference-processing has to be done every day but thanks to open source technologies like Hadoop this problem can be addressed very comfortably.
Within a short period of time, this will create a real-time picture of the topology of juridical delay across the entire country. Where are the hot-spots ? Where are the biggest bottlenecks ? What kinds of cases are held up the most ? Which courts are the biggest culprits ? Which cases have been in the doldrums for the longest time ? Are some courts better than others ? Are some judges quicker than others ? Are there any cases that have been held up for months? Can these be expedited ?
Instead of crying hoarse about delay in general, we can now seek out particular troublesome areas and focus the best minds in the juridical system to come out with specific solutions to the most difficult problems. This could involve, among other things, moving one set of cases from one court to another or appointing, or transferring, an additional number of special judicial officers to specific courts to facilitate the “debottlenecking” of the system. Solutions will emerge once the contours of the problem are clearly visible.
One specific approach to the “debottlenecking” problem would be to motivate judges to improve the efficiency or through-put of the system. As a key component of the juridical architecture, judges have immense authority to allow or disallow adjournments based on their personal perception of the situation on the ground and this is turn has a direct impact on juridical delay. However they have no motivation to expedite matters and, in many cases, they are indifferent to the hardship faced by litigants when cases are deferred or adjourned. So how can we induce a sense of judicial accountability ?
Continuing with our belief in measurements, we may consider a mechanism to monitor their performance and offer a set of performance related rewards -- though this may be unheard of in government service. Those with a deeper understanding of the judicial process may come up with a better metric but one can begin with a simple metric that depends on just two factors. First the number of final judgments that a judge delivers every month, and second, the number or fraction of judgements of a judge that are subsequently overturned on appeal at the next level. The first would be a measure of speed and the second would be a measure of quality or reliability of the work done by a judge. By creating a composite metric that gives an appropriate weightage to both factors, namely speed and reliability, it should be possible to measure the performance of most judicial officers in the country. This simplistic measure may not be appropriate for those judges who are seized of complex matters like constitutional law or international jurisprudence but should be good enough for the vast majority of those who are involved in the more run-of-the-mill cases -- and this would constitute the vast majority of cases that are clogging the system. Such a mechanism is no different from a formal performance appraisal system that is used by most well managed corporate organisations to evaluate all but the most senior members of the management. It should not be beneath the dignity of any judge to evaluated in a similar manner especially because the evaluation would be done within the framework of the juridical system of the country and not by any external agency that may have a malafide agenda.
Going along with the corporate analogy, it may be good idea if judges were to view themselves, less as some lofty dispenser of justice and more as a provider of dispute resolution services. From this perspective, a litigant is no more supplicant begging for relief but a customer who, through his court fees and taxes, is paying for the resolution of a dispute. If judges can reconcile themselves to the fact that the relationship between a litigant and a judge is no different from that between a customer and a vendor, then many of the best practices of the corporate world can be transferred to the rather archaic corridors of the judiciary.
The easiest way to ensure faster disposal of cases is to dramatically increase the number of judges, particularly in the lower courts were most cases are stuck. Fortunately, India is blessed with a large, educated, middle-class population, many of whom are trained lawyers and who would love to work as judges. So it may not be too difficult for a central agency like the UPSC to evaluate and recruit another 15,000 judges over the next three years. But where will they sit ? and hold court ? Recruiting so many judges may still be feasible but building so many courtrooms would be impossible. Again, we need to think differently.
Why not have all courts, except perhaps the Supreme Court, work on two shifts on every working day? So with the same physical infrastructure of courtrooms we can have twice the number of judges, hopefully delivering twice the number of judgments every month. Given the overstaffing, endemic to any government office, there would neither be any need for additional staff nor for any extra record rooms but judges may have to share an office with another one if he or she stays on premises beyond the shift hours. So net-net the capacity of the Indian juridical system can be effectively doubled quickly without incurring any significant capital expenditure and without the delay involved in constructing thousands of courtrooms.
In fact if we view juridical services to be as important for the country as, say electric supply, railways and telecommunications then there is no reason why judges should not work in two shifts. But again this calls for a significant change in the perception of the work done my judges -- they are not dispensing any largesse, they are simply providing a service to a customer.
Monitoring performance of judges and operating courts in two shifts would represent a radical change in the way the juridical system operates in the country and would surely be met with stiff resistance from those who are entrenched and benefit from the current way of doing things. No change is painless but if the key stakeholders can be convinced or coerced through an competent process of change management to agree to a more corporate style of delivering judicial services, then it will surely lead to a significant improvement in the speed of delivery of justice in India.
Real-time monitoring of the live court cases on the other hand is something that is easy to do with existing technology and with minimal disruption. It should be started right away so that we can benefit from some low hanging fruits.
This article was published in the inaugural issue of Swarajya.
Posted by Prithwis at 7:07 am
Labels: governance, government
SuchindranathAiyerS said...
The judiciary have been enabled to be unaccountable to notions of law, equity and fair play by the executive and superior courts through social engineering appointments and immunity from impeachment among other things and by the Constitution that has enshrined exceptions to both the Rule of Law and Equality under law in the Indian Constitution. Apart from eroding competence and integrity, the resultant culture has bred insouciance and arbitrariness of a very high order. The deleterious effect of this on the National character has been as extreme as the corrosion of education for political convenience. Today the Courts are defenders of the four important principles of any Banana Republic, "Just because you did it does not mean you are criminal", "Just because the statute book says so, does not make your actions a crime", "Evidence lies in the perception of the judge", and "Just because you did not do it, does not mean you are innocent".
It is unlikely that anything will change until: (1) Inequality under law and exceptions to the rule of law are expurgated from the Constitution and laws of India. (2) Bribe Taking is defined as criminal extortion or treason and made a capital offense with special rules of evidence and special courts with summary powers (akin to a Military Court Martial). (3) All court proceedings are video graphed and archived for public viewing and can be used as evidence to prosecute Judges and Magistrates at all levels under special laws and special courts with summary powers akin to a military Court Martial, for insouciance, negligence, tardiness, disregard for law and propriety, behaviour unbecoming of a Judge such as lack of etiquette and manners, (4) every job on the "Public" i.e. Government Pay Roll has specific and unique Key Responsibility Areas, Key Performance Parameters and Objectives for which they are held accountable on pain of summary dismissal for non-performance or life imprisonment for treason for sabotage under special laws and special courts with summary powers akin to a military Court Martial and (5) India creates an Ombudsman Service of reemployed and retrained military officers (Colonel and Below, JCOs and NCOs) who retire before 50 to serve as presiding officers, investigating/prosecuting and enforcement officers at the afore mentioned "Special Courts", one for every taluk with powers to arrest, incarcerate, try and punish any and all from the President of India to a peon in accordance with the Special Laws framed therefor.
Painted Storks at Rabindra Sarovar
Satyam ? Shivam ? or Sundaram ? of Shivaratri
Andamans : From Kalapani to Neelapani
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line20
|
__label__wiki
| 0.811226
| 0.811226
|
About Brian Goodison-Blanks
Polar Archive:Francis Davies Falkland Island Flag
Polar Archive: Francis Davies RRS William Scoresby
Nathaneil Hill, 18th century Globe maker
Polar archive: Francis Davies
Star Wars..The saga continues
An Edwardian Scottish International Football Medal
Exploring the Past: A 19th century Polar Exploration Sledge Flag
Donald McNarry master miniature ship builder
Diving Helmets and Maritime Antiques
Brian Goodison-Blanks' Blog Home
Antique Guns & Firearms
Ceramics & Glassware
Scrimshaw & Sailors Art
Brian Goodison-Blanks is the Head of the Maritime and Sporting Department at Bearnes Hampton & Littlewood. He is based at Honiton in Devon.
Contact Mr Goodison-Blanks
As part of the Discovery II Expeditions to the South Seas and Antarctic regions the RRS Discovery II and RSS William Scoresby travelled to the Falkland Islands to undertake a survey of penguins. Francis Davies travelled aboard the RSS William Scoresby and collected a number of photographs and mementos along the way. Induced in the Francis Davies Polar Archive is an interesting version of the Falkland Island flag.
The 1865-1925 version of the Falkland Island flag collected by Francis Davies during the Discovery II Expeditions
The system for British Colonial flags was established in 1865 when the practice of the defacement of the blue ensign with the ‘seal’ or ‘badge’ of the colony was introduced. The Falkland Islands seal was approved in 1865 depicting a bullock on the shore and a sailing ship in the distance. This ‘Bullock Triumphant’ version was the official seal from 1865 to 1925 but was probably in use up until the 1940s when it was altered to the sheep above ship version. A little tattered and torn from the cold winds of the South Seas, it is a nice memento within the Francis Davies Polar archive of his numerous journeys to the Antarctic regions
More about Brian Goodison-Blanks
Wednesday, July 24, 2019 3:11:25 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Maritime | Trackback
In September 1921 Francis Davies was accepted as Fourth Officer aboard RRS Discovery II in service of the voyages of the Discovery Expeditions to the Falkland Islands and Antarctica. Initially he joined the crew of RRS William Scoresby and took part in the Second Wilkins-Hearst Expeditions to Deception Island of the coat of Antarctica.
RRS William Scoresby pitching during heavy seas on route form South Africa to South Georgia 1929
A photograph by Francis Davies aboard a rolling RRS William Scoresby on route to Antarctica 1929
No doubt Francis Davies earlier experience of travelling to Antarctica aboard RYS Terra Nova served him well as the conditions on the journey from South Africa to South Georgia aboard RRS William Scoresby were not the easiest as they encountered rough weather between South Africa and South Georgia. Francis Davies own photographs taken aboard a heavily pitching RRS William Scoresby show how far the ship rolled in heavy seas, yet if you look closely you’ll be astonished to see that Francis Davies managed to try and persuade a shipmate to pose on deck, though only a single arm hanging on for dear life can be seen to one side of the photograph!
A photograph by Francis Davies aboard RRS William Scoresby with unidentified but brave crew member hanging onto the deck, 1929
Tuesday, July 23, 2019 3:52:43 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
| Trackback
As a globe maker Nathaniel Hill (fl,1746-1748) had impeccable credentials, which is why he is perhaps one of the most sought-after makers of the 18th century. Nathaniel Hill was apprenticed to the map maker, surveyor, publisher and globe maker Richard Cushee (1696-c1734) who worked at the sign of the Globe & Sun between Chancery Lane and St Dunstan’s Church, London.
Nathaniel Hill (fl.1746-1748) a 2 inch pocket globe:, signed 'A New Terrestrial Globe by Nath Hill 1754'
Nathaniel Hill originally worked as a surveyor on the Fens in Yorkshire and also around London. In 1731 Richard Cushee took Nathaniel Hill on as an apprentice and from there he established himself as one of the finest globe makers of the 18th century. It is interesting to note that the globe displays California as a Peninsula and the North-West Atlantic Coast is titled ‘Unknown parts’. It would not be until over a century later that the ‘Northwest Passage’ would finally be known and not until 1906 when Roald Amundsen finally travelled the complete passage.
Collectors | Maritime | Trackback
After taking part as a crew member of the British Antarctic ‘Terra Nova’ Expedition 1910-1913, Francis Davies remained in contact with several fellow crew members and scientists throughout his lifetime.
One of Francis Davies strongest friendships was that with the Terra Nova’s captain Harry Pennell (1882-1916) in fact Francis Davies even gave his son ‘Pennell’ as his middle name. The strength of this bond is seen within Francis Davies Polar Collection in a letter from Harry Pennell written aboard HMS Queen Mary during World War One. Harry Pennell was Commander of HMS Queen Mary at the time and writes to Francis Davies of his concerns regarding Sir Ernest Shackleton during his Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition of 1914-1917 of which Pennell writes ‘Undoubtedly and Expedition will have to be sent to the Weddell Sea this next season to try and relieve Sir Ernest’.
A letter from Harry Pennell to Francis Davies on his concern for Sir Ernest Shackleton.
Harry Pennell goes on to write about other expedition members Williams and Nelson and their wartime situations, in particular the fact that Nelson was now the only original officer of his regiment surviving the war. The letter is a glimpse into the relationship of two men who understood the perils of Polar Exploration and of war. It is even more pertinent when one considers the date on which Harry Pennell writes to Francis Davies, the 11th May 1916. Harry Pennell was to be killed on the 31st May 1916 aboard HMS Queen Mary when she was sunk during the Battle of Jutland
Friday, July 12, 2019 4:37:33 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
As a young boy Francis Edward ‘Frank’ Davies (1885-1952) was inspired after reading ‘Farthest North‘ an account of Fridtjof Nansen’s Polar Exploration aboard the ‘Fram’, to one day travel the world on an adventure and explore unknown regions. On the 4th July Francis Davies reported to the Royal Naval barracks Devonport and signed on as a shipwright for twelve years, beginning his own lifetime of adventure and exploration. In 1910 Francis Davies was selected as the ships carpenter aboard the Terra-Nova for Captain Scott’s British Antarctic Expedition of 1910-1913, where he proved himself invaluable by keeping the aged ship afloat, even spending nights asleep beside the Terra Nova’s ever troublesome main pump. Francis Davies was instrumental in the preparations and construction of the expedition’s winter quarters of ‘Scott’s Hut’ at Cape Evans on Ross Island, Antarctica and after hearing the news of the loss of Scott and his party on the return journey from the South Pole, Francis Davies constructed the Terra Nova memorial cross erected on Observation hill. Both structures still stand today and are designated Antarctic Historic Monuments.
RRS Discovery II leaving London, December 1929
The friendships established on the Terra Nova Expedition were to last throughout Francis Davies lifetime, through both World Wars and further participation in Polar Expeditions aboard RRS Discovery II and RRS William Scoresby in the late 1920s. A selection of Francis Davies Polar archive from his later expeditions along with a collection of correspondence are to be included in Bearnes Hampton & Littlewoods Maritime Auction of the 14th August 2019.
RRS William Scoresby with plane aboard for the Second Wilkins-Hearst Polar Expedition
Among Francis Davies Polar Archive is a photograph album of the Second Wilkins-Hearst Polar Expedition of 1929-1930 with some wonderful images of both the RRS Discovery II and RRS William Scoresby. Also included in this Polar archive are a number of images of the planes used during the Wilkins-Hearst Expedition and the conditions that he men faced in Antarctica.
RRS William Scoresby with float plane in Antarctica 1929-1930
Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:18:11 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away….well it was 1977 and it was London, but I like many young boys at the time was captivated by Stars Wars, a film that was, and still is, one of the most memorable ever. Such an influential film on a young nerd leaves it mark, so it was no surprise that during a recent valuation event in North Devon an absolute gem of a collectable was revealed.
An original 1977 issue Luke Sky Walker 12 inch action figure
There in his original box in pristine condition and with the more unusual grappling hook accessory was an original 1977 issue Luke Sky Walker 12 inch action figure. The inner nerd re-surfaced and I spent the rest of the day telling everyone how fantastic this item is. Since there have been later films and re-issues of various figures, the holy grail for collectors’ are the original issue figures. These are harder to come by in their packaging, especially after forty years so this figure should really get the bidding war going. Included in the Two Day Sporting & Collectors Auction at Bearnes Hampton & Littlewood, Exeter, 17th & 18th May (sadly not May 4th!).
Friday, April 07, 2017 12:02:02 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Collectable Toys | Collectors | Trackback
Recently consigned for inclusion in the Sporting & Collectors Auction is this Edwardian 9ct gold and enamel Scottish International football medal for Alexander Bennett. Pre-war football memorabilia has always had a strong following for devoted collectors and this piece should prove to be no exception.
Edwardian 9ct gold and enamel Scottish International football medal for Alexander Bennett
Alexander 'Alex' Bennett began playing for his local club Rutherglen Glencairn in 1901 and was selected for the Scottish International Junior side in 1902, scoring three goals in junior internationals, In 1903 he signed for Celtic Rangers and was a regular first team player in the squad that won the Scottish League title for four years consecutively from 1905-1908. In 1908 he left Celtic and signed for Glasgow Rangers (ten days after scoring the winning goal against them) and became the first player ever to play for both Celtic and Rangers. The signing did not pass without an enquiry from Celtic into the transfer, but the appeal was eventually turned down by the Scottish FA in June 1908. During the First World War he played for Dumbarton and finished his foot balling career with Albion Rovers in over the 1920/21 season. He went on to manage Third Larnak and Clydebank as well a writing a regular column for the Daily Mail. Over his playing career he made eleven appearances for the Scottish International team scoring two goals and represented the Scottish League on ten occasions.
Alex Bennett 9ct gold and enamel medal Scotland V England 1908
Wednesday, April 05, 2017 9:25:08 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Collectors | Medals & Militaria | Sporting | Trackback
Amongst a number of items of Polar Exploration to be included in Bearnes Hampton & Littlewood’s next Specialist maritime auction, is a rare and well preserved Arctic exploration sledge flag for Admiral George Richards CB, Commander of HMS Assistance in Sir Edward Belcher's expedition of 1852/3/4 in search of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror of Sir John Franklins Lost Expedition of 1845. The silk flag with Admirals Richard's personal heraldry comprising a lamb and flag crest with motto 'Laus Deo' (Praise God) in white silk on a blue reserve, is mounted in a glazed frame with inscription,
Arctic exploration sledge flag for Admiral George Richards CB, Commander of HMS Assistance
'This Banner was carried to the Arctic Regions by Admiral Richards CB. when Commander of HMS Assistance, in Sir E Belcher's Expedition 1852.3.4 in search of the Erebus and Terror, under Sir J Franklin. After wintering at the Head of Wellington Channel in 76°55' N. Lat it was taken, in the Spring of 1853 to Melville Island and floated on every conspicuous height discovered, and having accomplished near 1000 miles, it was returned to HMS Assistance. Passing a second Winter it was again carried on a Sledge journey down the Channel westward and through Barrow Straits, and again returned after a sojourn of 73 days on the Sledge. On reaching England in 1854 it was presented to Mr Barrow. When the late Expedition of 1875 was fitted out under Capt now Sir George Nares KCB it was carried up Smiths Sound and hoisted on Cape Joseph Henry in Lat 83° N. On its return to England it was restored to Mr Barrow who bequeaths it to the family of Adml Richards'
Admiral George Richards CB, Commander of HMS Assistance in Sir Edward Belcher's expedition of 1852/3/4 in search of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror of Sir John Franklins Lost Expedition of 1845.
Admiral George Henry Richards was captain of HMS Assistance under the command of Sir Edward Belcher on the Admiralty's last and largest Expedition to search for survivors of Sir John Franklin's Expedition of the Northwest Passage in 1845. In the early winter of 1850 the Assistance and the steam tender Pioneer became frozen in the ice off Northumberland Sound in the Wellington Channel forcing much of the searching to be undertaken by sledge. As sledges were man-hauled at this time by the men themselves they were treated in some degree as boats and each sledge named. The idea originated with Captain Horatio Austin who whilst leading a similar search in 1850 intended that sledge flags would "...retain esprit de corps, and a naval atmosphere,..' .The flags were usually the personal badge of the commanding officer who led the team on foot, carrying a gun ahead of the crew for protection. A similar sledge flag for Lieutenant Bedford Pim by Lady Franklin is held in the National Maritime Museum. A sledge flag used by Scott on his first Expedition of 1900-1904 made by his mother hangs in Exeter Cathedral.
Donald McNarry FRSA (1921-2010) is widely acknowledged among model ship builders as the master craftsman of extreme miniature model building.
A waterline model of the 20 -gun Sixth-rate frigate HMS Tartar (1734) modelled by Donald McNarry FRSA
Born in Walthamstow, February 21st, 1921 he took up model building as a boy and began entering competitions at the age of nine, winning several prizes at the annual Model Engineer Exhibition. In an early letter to the judges he expressed his dismay that his models were to be categorised as 'junior' rather than be judged against the 'proper' ship models.
An exceptional 16' 1" scale Admiralty Navy board style model of the 17th century eight gun Royal Yacht HMY Charles (1675) modelled by Donald McNarry FRSA:
After serving with the Gordon Highlanders during the Second World War he continued to make models in his spare time, describing many of the models made between 1946 and 1953 in his first published book 'Shipbuilding in Miniature ' in 1955. It was also at this time he changed from 'amateur' model builder to freelance professional model maker, creating over 350 models of historic ships from 700BC to the late 1960s. Working in either 100ft to one inch or 16ft to one inch, the models though small, contained as much detail as others executed on larger scales. Donald's wife Iris often helped with early models producing the sails and Donald even used strands of his own hair for rigging on these models before thinner wires and filaments became available. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts.
An exceptional 16' 1" scale model of the US brig 'Lexington' (1775) modelled by Donald McNarry FRSA
Examples of his work can be found in the Royal Collection, but he was particularly sought after by American Collectors and modellers. Some of his models can be seen at The Peabody Essex Museum, The Smithsonian and the Mariner's Museum. The quality and detail of his work is perhaps best acknowledged by his overall attitude as described in his own words in the introduction of his first book;
'I believe one of the most important things is to try and build miniature ships instead of ship models'
These three models of the US Lexington, HMY Chares and HMS Tartar are included in Bearnes Hampton & Littlewood’s next Specialist Maritime Auction of the 14th June 2017. For further information please contact Brian Goodison-Blanks bgb@bhandl.co.uk
Wednesday, March 08, 2017 9:28:52 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
If you missed attending the auction of The Anthony & Yvonne Pardoe Collection of Diving Helmets and Equipment at Bearnes Hampton & Littlewood (SS02) some catalogues from the sale are still available for £10 each.
The Antony & Yvonne Pardoe Collection of Diving Helmets & Equipment
Fully illustrated with over 150 diving helmets, diving pumps, boots knives and diving accessories it is a useful reference for anyone with a passion for collecting historic diving equipment.
Entries for the next Specialist Maritime Auction of the 14th June 2017 are currently invited. For further information please contact Brian Goodison-Blanks bgb@bhandl.co.uk
Wednesday, January 18, 2017 4:26:22 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Web Designers: Revell Research Systems
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line21
|
__label__cc
| 0.740124
| 0.259876
|
BOOK BLITZ: Shine Not Burn by Elle Casey
Shine Not Burn
by Elle Casey
Publication Date: June 30th, 2013
IT HAPPENED IN VEGAS. I can't be held responsible. Things that happen there are supposed to stay there, right? Right? Yeeeah. Not so much. ... Andie's just days away from tying the knot, but there's just ooooone little glitch. Apparently, she's already married. Or someone with her name is married to a guy out in Oregon of all places, and the courthouse won't issue her a marriage license until it's all cleared up. Tripping her way through cow pies and country songs to meet up with a man who gets around places on horseback is her very last idea of how to have a good time, but if she's going to get married, make partner at the firm, and have two point five kids before she's thirty-five, she needs to get to the bottom of this snafu and fix it quick ... before her fiance finds out and everything she's been working toward goes up in flames.
Interview with Elle
1. You started out writing in YA. What brought you over to New Adult?
I've been a reader of new adult titles even before they were called 'new adult'. And I love the age group it covers. 18-30 years old is such a great time in life, isn't it? I mean, it's when you sow your wild oats, learn about yourself in the context of the whole world and not just your family and friends; it's where you figure out who you're going to be. The adult-formative years I guess you could call it. And the sex part is awesome too, I won't lie. You can only get so sexy with a YA book, so as a writer, I have to hold back. In NA, I don't have to do that. It can be passionate, raw, sometimes awkward and full of bad decisions, but it can be REAL. I guess that's what I love about NA most … it's raw and real.
2. You have a lot of novels in the urban fantasy genre. What interested you in writing romances?
Romances were my first love. Well … aside from Disney fairy tales. But then again, those are all romances aren't they? They've got misunderstood heroines - beaten down by others - who are looking for love and understanding, finally finding it in the hands of a guy on horseback. I've read hundreds of romances in my time, from every publisher out there, including indie authors of course. It doesn't matter how many I read, I always want more. Since I love them as a reader, I really wanted to try my hand as a writer in the genre. I have so many romance stories simmering in my brain right now, at this point, it's like therapy just getting them out of there. I have 6 romances planned for the rest of the year and lots more for 2014. I'm going to be very busy. But I'm happy being busy because it's very important to me that I keep hunger readers fed. I live to write for voracious readers.
3. How do you write so many books in such a short period of time?
Short and sweet: I have a system for getting the work done, and I'm a helluva fast typer. More details: I have a ton of stories always waiting in my head to be told, and when I sit down at the computer, the words just kind of spill out. My stories are very character-driven, meaning I don't make up the story. I just find the characters wandering around in my head, put them in a situation, and let them run with it. Now that I'm a full-time writer, I can dedicate more of my time to writing that I used to when I was also teaching at a university. I treat writing as a business and try to be very disciplined about it. After eighteen months of writing, I've published 20 novels, so I think my system is working. :)
4. What's your favorite part of being a writer?
My readers. Hands down, it's the readers. I get emails and messages every day from devoted fans, and I can't express how much that means to me. There are readers out there who've set up book blogs just because they were so excited about my books, people who make it a point to promote my books on their Facebook pages and Twitter just because they want to share the reader-love, and whole families who are reading my series and discussing them at dinner. It just blows my mind that people would be so generous and so involved in my made-up worlds. Recently I had a fan dress as one of my characters at a comic con event. I also occasionally get a very heart-warming message about how my writing has changed someone's life - caused them to finally start reading or to go to college. To me, that's the sign of a life well-lived - that I've somehow inspired another person to reach for something they want in life that they thought they didn't have a chance at having before.
5. What books do you have in the pipeline right now?
All kinds of good stuff! I'm so excited to get them out to readers. Here's the NA Romance line-up for June, July, and August: Shine Not Burn, By Design, and Don't Make Me Beautiful, and then a 3-book series that will be released on surprise dates this year: Rebel, Hellion, and Trouble. Links to all of them on Goodreads here:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17973653-shine-not-burn
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17981510-by-degrees
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17981514-don-t-make-me-beautiful
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18111600-rebel
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18111602-hellion
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18111607-trouble
6. Why do you live in France?
I came here for a vacation with my husband in 2007 and we both fell in love with it. After the economy took a downturn and my husband lost his job, we started talking about simplifying our lives and focusing on different things. That's when the idea of living in a foreign country came up. We wanted to do it for one year, to give our three kids the opportunity to experience another culture and learn another language while also refocusing our grown-up lives to get away from the rampant materialism that had kind of taken over everything. And we loved France, so it seemed like the logical place to go. Once we were here, we fell in love more deeply and decided to stay indefinitely. We still love our home country of course, but for now, we're content with a very laid back life in the south of France. What can I say … we love wine and cheese ALOT!
7. How long have you been writing? What did you do before you were a writer?
I've been writing since January of 2012. Before that I was a lot of things … most recently an attorney. But you can add the following other jobs to the list: retail sales clerk, air traffic controller (in the Air Force), waitress, restaurant owner, stock broker, insurance salesperson, professor, and CEO of a medical device company. I'm one of those people who gets bored easily, so after being in a job for a few years, I need a change so I can be challenged again. The beauty of being a writer is it's never the same job twice, and it really doesn't feel like work. It's the best job I've ever had, hands down. It's the only job in the world were you walk into work (in my case, open the computer) and your boss starts the day by telling you how amazing you are. My readers are my bosses now, and I wouldn't have it any other way. They really are great motivators. :)
8. What do you hope to accomplish with your writing?
My goal is to entertain as many readers as I possibly can. If I can also get more people reading or cause people to think about important things, that's great too. But my overriding goal is to make people get so involved in the experience of reading my work that they skip doing chores, stay up until dawn, and tell everyone who will listen about my books.
9. What kind of romances do you like to read?
The kind where bad boys are tamed by courageous girls. It's really that simple for me. :)
10. What's the most important element in a romance in your opinion?
A sexy guy. Seriously, he just needs to be sexy as hell, and that doesn't mean sexy can't come in different packages. For example, in the film My Big Fat Greek Wedding, the MC, Ian, is very understated and shy, but man, he rocked my world. He reminds me a lot of my husband, actually. On the other hand you have your angsty fighters ... guys who you'd never let into your world in real life but who are safe to fall for in books. Travis from Beautiful Disaster comes to mind. Boy, did he cause a lot of fuss in the reader world! Chemistry comes in all kinds of packages, which is awesome, but the chemistry has to be there or the book falls flat for me.
BLOG TOUR & GIVEAWAY: Vigilante Nights by Erin Ric...
BOOK BLITZ: Bittersweet Junction by Ivy Sinclair
BLOG TOUR & GIVEAWAY: Speak Easy by Melanie Harlow
BLOG TOUR: Breaking Josephine by Marie Stewart
BOOK BLITZ & GIVEAWAY: Charmed by Cambria Hebert
BLOG TOUR: Some Quiet Place by Kelsey Sutton
BOOK BLITZ & GIVEAWAY: Ephiphany by Christina Jean...
BLOG TOUR & GIVEAWAY: An Endless Summer by CJ Duggan
BOOK BLITZ: Wuther by VJ Chambers
COVER REVEAL: Homecoming by Cecilia Robert
BOOK BLITZ & GIVEAWAY: Lost by M Lathan
BOOK BLITZ: Drawn to you by Robin Shaw
BOOK BLITZ: The Book by Jessica Bell
BLOG TOUR & GIVEAWAY: Dirty Little Secret by Jenni...
BOOK BLITZ: So Many Reasons Why by Missy Johnson
BOOK BLITZ & GIVEAWAY: We are Made of Stardust by ...
BLOG TOUR: Freshman Forty by Christine Duval
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line23
|
__label__wiki
| 0.888219
| 0.888219
|
Home Entertainment Review: Beyoncé Is Bigger Than Coachella!
Review: Beyoncé Is Bigger Than Coachella!
darudemagApr 16, 2018Entertainment0
Let’s just cut to the chase: There’s not likely to be a more meaningful, absorbing, forceful and radical performance by an American musician this year, or any year soon, than Beyoncé’s headlining set at the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival on Saturday night.
It was rich with history, potently political and visually grand. By turns uproarious, rowdy, and lush. A gobsmacking marvel of choreography and musical direction.
And not unimportantly, it obliterated the ideology of the relaxed festival, the idea that musicians exist to perform in service of a greater vibe. That is one of the more tragic side effects of the spread of festival culture over the last two decades. Beyoncé was having none of it. The Coachella main stage, on the grounds of the Empire Polo Club here, was her platform, yes, but her show was in countless ways a rebuke.
It started with the horns: trumpets, trombones, sousaphones. For most of the night, the 36-year-old star was backed by an ecstatic marching band, in the manner of historically black college football halftime shows. The choice instantly reoriented her music, sidelining its connections to pop and framing it squarely in a lineage of Southern black musical traditions from New Orleans second line marches to Houston’s chopped-and-screwed hip-hop.
Her arrangements were alive with shifts between styles and oodles of small details, quick musical quotations of songs (Pastor Troy’s “No Mo’ Play in G.A.,” anyone?) that favored alertness and engagement. As always, one of the key thrills of a Beyoncé performance is her willingness to dismantle and rearrange her most familiar hits. “Drunk in Love” began as bass-thick molasses, then erupted into trumpet confetti. “Bow Down” reverberated with nervy techno. “Formation,” already a rapturous march, was a savage low-end stomp here. And during a brief trip through the Caribbean part of her catalog, she remade “Baby Boy” as startling Jamaican big band jazz.
She does macro, too — she was joined onstage by approximately 100 dancers, singers and musicians, a stunning tableau that included fraternity pledges and drumlines and rows of female violinists in addition to the usual crackerjack backup dancers (which here included bone breakers and also dancers performing elaborate routines with cymbals).
Some superstars prize effortlessness, but Beyoncé shows her work — the cameras captured the force and determination in her dancing, and also her sweat. She performed for almost two hours, with only a few breaks, and her voice rarely flagged. Occasionally her set was punctuated with fireworks that, compared with what was happening onstage, seemed dull.
Beyoncé was originally meant to perform at Coachella last year, but rescheduled for this April after becoming pregnant; her Coachella performances this weekend and next are her only solo U.S. dates this year. “Thank you for allowing me to be the first black woman to headline Coachella,” she said midset, then added an aside that was, in fact, the main point: “Ain’t that ’bout a bitch.”
Big-tent festivals, generally speaking, are blithe spaces — they don’t invite much scrutiny, because they can’t stand up to it. But Beyoncé’s simple recitation of fact was searing, especially on the same night that, in Cleveland, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame finally inducted Nina Simone and Sister Rosetta Tharpe, 15 and 45 years after their deaths, and also Bon Jovi, a band in which everyone is very much alive.
She was arguing not in defense of herself, but of her forebears. And her performance was as much ancestral tribute and cultural continuum — an uplifting of black womanhood — as contemporary concert. She sang “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” often referred to as the black national anthem, incorporated vocal snippets of Malcolm X and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, and nodded at Ms. Simone’s “Lilac Wine.”
And she rendered her personal history as well. During the second half of the show, she unfurled a kind of This Is Your Life in reverse. First came her husband, Jay-Z, on “Déjà Vu” — with him, she was affectionate while easily outshining him. Then, a true surprise: a reunion with her former Destiny’s Child groupmates Kelly Rowland and Michelle Williams, during which she
happily ceded the main spotlight. After that came a playful dance routine with her sister, Solange, on “Get Me Bodied.” (Sadly, there was no “Ring Off” with her mother, nor a rendition of “Daddy Lessons” with her father.)
As Beyoncé has gotten older, she’s been making music that’s increasingly visceral, both emotionally and historically. She is one of the only working pop stars who need not preoccupy herself with prevailing trends, or the work of her peers. She is an institution now, and that has allowed her freedom. “Lemonade” is her most accomplished album, and also a wild and risky one — thematically but also musically.
That may be one reason that last year, Beyoncé lost the Grammy for album of the year to Adele, the sort of upset that triggered a storm of criticism about the Grammys’ relevance, and, effectively, an almost-apology from Adele. In time, though, that moment will feel like a glitch. That space on the mantel will be filled by a National Medal of the Arts, or a Presidential Medal of Freedom. Like no other musician of her generation apart from Kanye West, Beyoncé is performing musicology in real time. It is bigger than any tribute she might receive. History is her stage. (By Jon Caramancia NYT Critic)
Previous PostHere Are 60 Black-Owned Alternatives to Starbucks Next Post‘Scarface’ Was Not The People's Favorite until Hip-Hop gave it Credibility
SPORTS ATTIRE
FASHION PICK
RUDE MUSIC TV
Fenty Eau de Perfume
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line27
|
__label__wiki
| 0.508965
| 0.508965
|
THE LUTE
POETRIE
THE LUTE AND ITS POETRIE
The lute song permeated into so many aspects of the English life: from the songs written for the Queen at court, to the songs sung in the theatre, to the folk songs that were woven into highly complex lute solos – music and poetry was inseparable from the high societal life style. Performed in the original pronunciation of the time, “The Lute and its Poetrie” combines the drama and theatre of declamation with the refinement and poise of the song.
During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, knights came and went defending her honour and winning her favour. Of those knights, our programme includes poetry of the Earl of Essex and poetry dedicated to Sir Henry Lee – two knights famous for very different reasons. After a long and tumultuous relationship with the Queen turned sour, the Earl of Essex was beheaded for treason in 1601. Sir Henry Lee, on the other hand, was celebrated for his dedication to protecting his sovereign and at his retirement, Dowland dedicated “His Golden Locks” to this aging prolific knight. The poem “Soldiers are like the armour that they wear” was written by Richard Mynshall, a soldier fighting in the Earl of Essex‟s failed military campaign in Ireland. It depicts a grim scene of young boys meeting their untimely deaths in wars they do not belong in.
Another hero enters the stage with our setting of the English folk song “My Robin is to the greenwood gone” or “Bonny sweet Robin”, which became famous during the Robin Hood craze in the late 16th century.The text is referenced by Ophelia as she descends into madness in Shakespeare‟s Hamlet.
The programme reaches its critical climax with “In darknesse let mee dwell”. John Dowland, the true master of melancholic song, created the pinnacle of the repertoire with this darkest of songs. It has biting discords on words as „sorrow‟ and „woes‟ as can be expected, but also influences of the Italian baroque can be heard in the strange and beautiful melody rising from the words with a sense of inevitability, expressing an emotional intensity unsurpassed in any other song at that time.
“The Old Couple, a Comedie” written by Thomas May is about the relationship between two lovers in the twilight years of their lives. Their love is ridiculed by onlookers and in the scene in which “Deare do not your faire beauty wrong” is sung, a servant reads a love letter written from the old man to his old woman.
Composers: John Dowland (1563 – 1626), Thomas Campion (1567 – 1620), Thomas Ford (1580 – 1648), Thomas Morley (1557 – 1602), Michael Cavendish (1565 – 1628), Phillip Rosseter (1568 – 1623), Robert Parsons (1535 – 1571), Daniel Batchelar (1572 – 1619), Anthony Holborne (1545 – 1602), Robert Johnson (1583 – 1633)
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line29
|
__label__wiki
| 0.770577
| 0.770577
|
Schwarzenegger visits Terracotta Warriors (2)
By Zhao Xinying (Chinadaily.com.cn) 09:11, December 06, 2013
Movie Star and former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger visits terracotta warriors at the Emperor Qinshihuang's Mausoleum Site Museum in Xi'an, capital of northwest China's Shaanxi Province, Dec. 5, 2013. (Xinhua/Ding Haitao)
"I'll be back."
US movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger wrote his famous line on the museum guestbook after he visited the Terracotta Warriors in Xi'an on Dec 5.
Schwarzenegger, who had arrived the evening before, was making his fifth visit to China. On Dec 5, he attended a culture forum in Xi'an, one of the most famous Chinese historical cities.
The former California governor said he has always been interested in Chinese culture and had been looking forward a long time to seeing the Terracotta Warriors.
Schwarzenegger said seeing the Terracotta Warriors was a moving experience because it is rare to see such a well-preserved piece of history.
“Thank you for showing us the 8th Wonder of the World. I'll be back,” he wrote on the guestbook of the Emperor Qinshihuang's Mausoleum Museum, where the Terracotta Warriors are located.
After the visit to the historic site, Schwarzenegger appeared on a program of Shaanxi Satellite Television, in which he talked to Zhang Jizhong, a Chinese director of kungfu movies and TV series, about culture in China and the United States.
The 66-year-old native of Austria has been well-known by Chinese audiences for decades, with a string of successful films such as The Terminator, Total Recall and True Lies. He was the governor of California from 2003 to 2011.
（Editor：WangXin、Huang Jin）
Chinese premier makes 6-point proposal on SCO cooperation
Cities issue new housing policies
Shanghai air pollution hits dangerous peak
Qingdao safety, environment assessed after deadly blasts
Director Zhang admits he is father of 3 children
Family refuses to move out after row with developers
Japanese stage protest against secrecy bill
China's Li River named world's 15 best rivers for travelers
Morsi's supporters protest against Egyptian military in Turkey
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line32
|
__label__wiki
| 0.93038
| 0.93038
|
Find My Hero
PIONEERS OF PAKISTAN
Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah
RECORD HOLDERS
Abida Parveen
Amanullah Khan
Nadeem Baig
Rahat Fateh Ali Khan
Umer Shareef
Waheed Murad
Doctor Abdul Qadeer Khan
Abdul Sattar Edhi
Shahbaz Ahmed
Jahangir Khan
Anwar Maqsood
Rashid Minhas
Squadron Leader Hassan Mehmood Siddiqui
November 8, 2021 November 8, 2021 fmh 0 Comments
Muhammad Ali Jinnah: 25 December 1876 – 11 September 1948
Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a barrister, politician and the founder of Pakistan. Jinnah served as the leader of the All-India Muslim League from 1913 until the inception of Pakistan on 14 August 1947, and then as the Dominion of Pakistan’s first Governor-General until his death. He is revered in Pakistan as the Quaid-i-Azam (“Great Leader”) and Baba-i-Qaum (“Father of the Nation”). His birthday is observed as a national holiday in Pakistan.
Born at Wazir Mansion in Karachi, Jinnah was trained as a barrister at Lincoln’s Inn in London, England. Upon his return to British India, he enrolled at the Bombay High Court, and took an interest in national politics, which eventually replaced his legal practice. Jinnah rose to prominence in the Indian National Congress in the first two decades of the 20th century. In these early years of his political career, Jinnah advocated Hindu–Muslim unity, helping to shape the 1916 Lucknow Pact between the Congress and the All-India Muslim League, in which Jinnah had also become prominent. Jinnah became a key leader in the All-India Home Rule League, and proposed a fourteen-point constitutional reform plan to safeguard the political rights of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent. In 1920, however, Jinnah resigned from the Congress when it agreed to follow a campaign of satyagraha, which he regarded as political anarchy.
By 1940, Jinnah had come to believe that the Muslims of the subcontinent should have their own state to avoid the possible marginalised status they may gain in an independent Hindu–Muslim state. In that year, the Muslim League, led by Jinnah, passed the Lahore Resolution, demanding a separate nation for British Indian Muslims. During the Second World War, the League gained strength while leaders of the Congress were imprisoned, and in the provincial elections held shortly after the war, it won most of the seats reserved for Muslims. Ultimately, the Congress and the Muslim League could not reach a power-sharing formula that would allow the entirety of British India to be united as a single state following independence, leading all parties to agree instead to the independence of a predominantly Hindu India, and for a Muslim-majority state of Pakistan.
As the first Governor-General of Pakistan, Jinnah worked to establish the new nation’s government and policies, and to aid the millions of Muslim migrants who had emigrated from neighbouring India to Pakistan after the two states’ independence, personally supervising the establishment of refugee camps. Jinnah died at age 71 in September 1948, just over a year after Pakistan gained independence from the United Kingdom. He left a deep and respected legacy in Pakistan. Innumerable streets, roads and localities in the world are named after Jinnah. Several universities and public buildings in Pakistan bear Jinnah’s name. According to his biographer, Stanley Wolpert, Jinnah remains Pakistan’s greatest leader.
Early Years:
Family and Childhood:
Jinnah’s given name at birth was Mahomedali Jinnahbhai, and he likely was born in 1876, to Jinnahbhai Poonja and his wife Mithibai, in a rented apartment on the second floor of Wazir Mansion near Karachi, now in Sindh, Pakistan but then within the Bombay Presidency of British India. Jinnah’s family was from a Gujarati Khoja Shi’a Muslim background, though Jinnah later followed the Twelver Shi’a teachings. After his death, his relatives and other witnesses claimed that he had converted in later life to the Sunni sect of Islam. His sectarian affiliation at the time of his death was disputed in multiple court cases. Jinnah was from a wealthy merchant background, his father was a merchant and was born to a family of textile weavers in the village of Paneli in the princely state of Gondal (Kathiawar, Gujarat); his mother was also of that village. They had moved to Karachi in 1875, having married before their departure. Karachi was then enjoying an economic boom: the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 meant it was 200 nautical miles closer to Europe for shipping than Bombay. Jinnah was the second child; he had three brothers and three sisters, including his younger sister Fatima Jinnah. The parents were native Gujarati speakers, and the children also came to speak Kutchi and English. Jinnah was not fluent in Gujarati, his mother-tongue, nor in Urdu; he was more fluent in English. Except for Fatima, little is known of his siblings, where they settled or if they met with their brother as he advanced in his legal and political careers.
As a boy, Jinnah lived for a time in Bombay with an aunt and may have attended the Gokal Das Tej Primary School there, later on studying at the Cathedral and John Connon School. In Karachi, he attended the Sindh-Madrasa-tul-Islam and the Christian Missionary Society High School. He gained his matriculation from Bombay University at the high school. In his later years and especially after his death, a large number of stories about the boyhood of Pakistan’s founder were circulated: that he spent all his spare time at the police court, listening to the proceedings, and that he studied his books by the glow of street lights for lack of other illumination. His official biographer, Hector Bolitho, writing in 1954, interviewed surviving boyhood associates, and obtained a tale that the young Jinnah discouraged other children from playing marbles in the dust, urging them to rise up, keep their hands and clothes clean, and play cricket instead.
Education in England:
In 1892, Sir Frederick Leigh Croft, a business associate of Jinnahbhai Poonja, offered young Jinnah a London apprenticeship with his firm, Graham’s Shipping and Trading Company. He accepted the position despite the opposition of his mother, who before he left, had him enter an arranged marriage with his cousin, two years his junior from the ancestral village of Paneli, Emibai Jinnah. Jinnah’s mother and first wife both died during his absence in England. Although the apprenticeship in London was considered a great opportunity for Jinnah, one reason for sending him overseas was a legal proceeding against his father, which placed the family’s property at risk of being sequestered by the court. In 1893, the Jinnahbhai family moved to Bombay.
Soon after his arrival in London, Jinnah gave up the business apprenticeship in order to study law, enraging his father, who had, before his departure, given him enough money to live for three years. The aspiring barrister joined Lincoln’s Inn, later stating that the reason he chose Lincoln’s over the other Inns of Court was that over the main entrance to Lincoln’s Inn were the names of the world’s great lawgivers, including Muhammad. Jinnah’s biographer Stanley Wolpert notes that there is no such inscription, but inside (covering the wall at one end of New Hall, also called the Great Hall, which is where students, Bar and Bench lunch and dine) is a mural showing Muhammad and other lawgivers, and speculates that Jinnah may have edited the story in his own mind to avoid mentioning a pictorial depiction which would be offensive to many Muslims. Jinnah’s legal education followed the pupillage (legal apprenticeship) system, which had been in force there for centuries. To gain knowledge of the law, he followed an established barrister and learned from what he did, as well as from studying lawbooks. During this period, he shortened his name to Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
During his student years in England, Jinnah was influenced by 19th-century British liberalism, like many other future Indian independence leaders. His main intellectual references were peoples like Bentham, Mill, Spencer, and Comte. This political education included exposure to the idea of the democratic nation, and progressive politics. He became an admirer of the Parsi British Indian political leaders Dadabhai Naoroji and Sir Pherozeshah Mehta. Naoroji had become the first British Member of Parliament of Indian extraction shortly before Jinnah’s arrival, triumphing with a majority of three votes in Finsbury Central. Jinnah listened to Naoroji’s maiden speech in the House of Commons from the visitor’s gallery.
The Western world not only inspired Jinnah in his political life, but also greatly influenced his personal preferences, particularly when it came to dress. Jinnah abandoned local garb for Western-style clothing, and throughout his life he was always impeccably dressed in public. His suits were designed by Savile Row tailor Henry Poole & Co. He came to own over 200 suits, which he wore with heavily starched shirts with detachable collars, and as a barrister took pride in never wearing the same silk tie twice. Even when he was dying, he insisted on being formally dressed, “I will not travel in my pyjamas.” In his later years he was usually seen wearing a Karakul hat which subsequently came to be known as the “Jinnah cap”.
Dissatisfied with the law, Jinnah briefly embarked on a stage career with a Shakespearean company, but resigned after receiving a stern letter from his father. In 1895, at age 19, he became the youngest British Indian to be called to the bar in England. Although he returned to Karachi, he remained there only a short time before moving to Bombay.
Legal and Early Political Career:
Barrister:
At the age of 20, Jinnah began his practice in Bombay, the only Muslim barrister in the city. English had become his principal language and would remain so throughout his life. His first three years in the law, from 1897 to 1900, brought him few briefs. His first step towards a brighter career occurred when the acting Advocate General of Bombay, John Molesworth MacPherson, invited Jinnah to work from his chambers. In 1900, P. H. Dastoor, a Bombay presidency magistrate, left the post temporarily and Jinnah succeeded in getting the interim position. After his six-month appointment period, Jinnah was offered a permanent position on a 1,500 rupee per month salary. Jinnah politely declined the offer, stating that he planned to earn 1,500 rupees a day—a huge sum at that time—which he eventually did. Nevertheless, as Governor-General of Pakistan, he would refuse to accept a large salary, fixing it at 1 rupee per month.
As a lawyer, Jinnah gained fame for his skilled handling of the 1908 “Caucus Case”. This controversy arose out of Bombay municipal elections, which Indians alleged were rigged by a “caucus” of Europeans to keep Sir Pherozeshah Mehta out of the council. Jinnah gained great esteem from leading the case for Sir Pherozeshah, himself a noted barrister. Although Jinnah did not win the Caucus Case, he posted a successful record, becoming well known for his advocacy and legal logic. In 1908, his factional foe in the Indian National Congress, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, was arrested for sedition. Before Tilak unsuccessfully represented himself at trial, he engaged Jinnah in an attempt to secure his release on bail. Jinnah did not succeed, but obtained an acquittal for Tilak when he was charged with sedition again in 1916.
One of Jinnah’s fellow barristers from the Bombay High Court remembered that “Jinnah’s faith in himself was incredible”; he recalled that on being admonished by a judge with “Mr. Jinnah, remember that you are not addressing a third-class magistrate”, Jinnah shot back, “My Lord, allow me to warn you that you are not addressing a third-class pleader.” Another of his fellow barristers described him, saying:
He was what God made him, a great pleader. He had a sixth sense: he could see around corners. That is where his talents lay … he was a very clear thinker … But he drove his points home—points chosen with exquisite selection—slow delivery, word by word.
Trade Unionist:
Jinnah was also a supporter of working class causes and an active trade unionist. He was elected President of All India Postal Staff Union in 1925 whose membership was 70,000. According to All Pakistan Labour Federation’s publication Productive Role of Trade Unions and Industrial Relations, being a member of Legislative Assembly, Jinnah pleaded forcefully for rights of workers and struggled for getting a “living wage and fair conditions” for them. He also played an important role in enactment of Trade Union act of 1926 which gave trade union movement legal cover to organise themselves.
Rising Leader:
In 1857, many Indians had risen in revolt against British rule. In the aftermath of the conflict, some Anglo-Indians, as well as Indians in Britain, called for greater self-government for the subcontinent, resulting in the founding of the Indian National Congress in 1885. Most founding members had been educated in Britain, and were content with the minimal reform efforts being made by the government. Muslims were not enthusiastic about calls for democratic institutions in British India, as they constituted a quarter to a third of the population, outnumbered by the Hindus. Early meetings of the Congress contained a minority of Muslims, mostly from the elite.
Jinnah devoted much of his time to his law practice in the early 1900s, but remained politically involved. Jinnah began political life by attending the Congress’s twentieth annual meeting, in Bombay in December 1904. He was a member of the moderate group in the Congress, favouring Hindu–Muslim unity in achieving self-government, and following such leaders as Mehta, Naoroji, and Gopal Krishna Gokhale. They were opposed by leaders such as Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai, who sought quick action towards independence. In 1906, a delegation of Muslim leaders, known as the Simla Delegation, headed by the Aga Khan called on the new Viceroy of India, Lord Minto, to assure him of their loyalty and to ask for assurances that in any political reforms they would be protected from the “unsympathetic [Hindu] majority”. Dissatisfied with this, Jinnah wrote a letter to the editor of the newspaper Gujarati, asking what right the members of the delegation had to speak for Indian Muslims, as they were unelected and self-appointed. When many of the same leaders met in Dacca in December of that year to form the All-India Muslim League to advocate for their community’s interests, Jinnah was again opposed. The Aga Khan later wrote that it was “freakishly ironic” that Jinnah, who would lead the League to independence, “came out in bitter hostility toward all that I and my friends had done … He said that our principle of separate electorates was dividing the nation against itself.” In its earliest years, however, the League was not influential; Minto refused to consider it as the Muslim community’s representative, and it was ineffective in preventing the 1911 repeal of the partition of Bengal, an action seen as a blow to Muslim interests.
Although Jinnah initially opposed separate electorates for Muslims, he used this means to gain his first elective office in 1909, as Bombay’s Muslim representative on the Imperial Legislative Council. He was a compromise candidate when two older, better-known Muslims who were seeking the post deadlocked. The council, which had been expanded to 60 members as part of reforms enacted by Minto, recommended legislation to the Viceroy. Only officials could vote in the council; non-official members, such as Jinnah, had no vote. Throughout his legal career, Jinnah practised probate law (with many clients from India’s nobility), and in 1911 introduced the Wakf Validation Act to place Muslim religious trusts on a sound legal footing under British Indian law. Two years later, the measure passed, the first act sponsored by non-officials to pass the council and be enacted by the Viceroy. Jinnah was also appointed to a committee which helped to establish the Indian Military Academy in Dehra Dun.
In December 1912, Jinnah addressed the annual meeting of the Muslim League although he was not yet a member. He joined the following year, although he remained a member of the Congress as well and stressed that League membership took second priority to the “greater national cause” of an independent India. In April 1913, he again went to Britain, with Gokhale, to meet with officials on behalf of the Congress. Gokhale, a Hindu, later stated that Jinnah “has true stuff in him, and that freedom from all sectarian prejudice which will make him the best ambassador of Hindu–Muslim Unity”. Jinnah led another delegation of the Congress to London in 1914, but due to the start of the First World War found officials little interested in Indian reforms. By coincidence, he was in Britain at the same time as a man who would become a great political rival of his, Mohandas Gandhi, a Hindu lawyer who had become well known for advocating satyagraha, non-violent non-co-operation, while in South Africa. Jinnah attended a reception for Gandhi, and returned home to India in January 1915.
Farewell to Congress:
Jinnah’s moderate faction in the Congress was undermined by the deaths of Mehta and Gokhale in 1915; he was further isolated by the fact that Naoroji was in London, where he remained until his death in 1917. Nevertheless, Jinnah worked to bring the Congress and League together. In 1916, with Jinnah now president of the Muslim League, the two organisations signed the Lucknow Pact, setting quotas for Muslim and Hindu representation in the various provinces. Although the pact was never fully implemented, its signing ushered in a period of co-operation between the Congress and the League.
During the war, Jinnah joined other Indian moderates in supporting the British war effort, hoping that Indians would be rewarded with political freedoms. Jinnah played an important role in the founding of the All India Home Rule League in 1916. Along with political leaders Annie Besant and Tilak, Jinnah demanded “home rule” for India—the status of a self-governing dominion in the Empire similar to Canada, New Zealand and Australia, although, with the war, Britain’s politicians were not interested in considering Indian constitutional reform. British Cabinet minister Edwin Montagu recalled Jinnah in his memoirs, “young, perfectly mannered, impressive-looking, armed to the teeth with dialectics, and insistent on the whole of his scheme”.
In 1918, Jinnah married his second wife Rattanbai Petit (“Ruttie”), 24 years his junior. She was the fashionable young daughter of his friend Sir Dinshaw Petit, and was part of an elite Parsi family of Bombay. There was great opposition to the marriage from Rattanbai’s family and the Parsi community, as well as from some Muslim religious leaders. Rattanbai defied her family and nominally converted to Islam, adopting (though never using) the name Maryam Jinnah, resulting in a permanent estrangement from her family and Parsi society. The couple resided at South Court Mansion in Bombay, and frequently travelled across India and Europe. The couple’s only child, daughter Dina, was born on 15 August 1919. The couple separated prior to Ruttie’s death in 1929, and subsequently Jinnah’s sister Fatima looked after him and his child.
Relations between Indians and British were strained in 1919 when the Imperial Legislative Council extended emergency wartime restrictions on civil liberties; Jinnah resigned from it when it did. There was unrest across India, which worsened after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar, in which British troops fired upon a protest meeting, killing hundreds. In the wake of Amritsar, Gandhi, who had returned to India and become a widely respected leader and highly influential in the Congress, called for satyagraha against the British. Gandhi’s proposal gained broad Hindu support, and was also attractive to many Muslims of the Khilafat faction. These Muslims, supported by Gandhi, sought retention of the Ottoman caliphate, which supplied spiritual leadership to many Muslims. The caliph was the Ottoman Emperor, who would be deprived of both offices following his nation’s defeat in the First World War. Gandhi had achieved considerable popularity among Muslims because of his work during the war on behalf of killed or imprisoned Muslims. Unlike Jinnah and other leaders of the Congress, Gandhi did not wear western-style clothing, did his best to use an Indian language instead of English, and was deeply rooted in Indian culture. Gandhi’s local style of leadership gained great popularity with the Indian people. Jinnah criticised Gandhi’s Khilafat advocacy, which he saw as an endorsement of religious zealotry. Jinnah regarded Gandhi’s proposed satyagraha campaign as political anarchy, and believed that self-government should be secured through constitutional means. He opposed Gandhi, but the tide of Indian opinion was against him. At the 1920 session of the Congress in Nagpur, Jinnah was shouted down by the delegates, who passed Gandhi’s proposal, pledging satyagraha until India was independent. Jinnah did not attend the subsequent League meeting, held in the same city, which passed a similar resolution. Because of the action of the Congress in endorsing Gandhi’s campaign, Jinnah resigned from it, leaving all positions except in the Muslim League.
Wilderness years; Interlude in England:
The alliance between Gandhi and the Khilafat faction did not last long, and the campaign of resistance proved less effective than hoped, as India’s institutions continued to function. Jinnah sought alternative political ideas, and contemplated organising a new political party as a rival to the Congress. In September 1923, Jinnah was elected as Muslim member for Bombay in the new Central Legislative Assembly. He showed much skill as a parliamentarian, organising many Indian members to work with the Swaraj Party, and continued to press demands for full responsible government. In 1925, as recognition for his legislative activities, he was offered a knighthood by Lord Reading, who was retiring from the Viceroyalty. He replied: “I prefer to be plain Mr Jinnah.”
In 1927, the British Government, under Conservative Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin, undertook a decennial review of Indian policy mandated by the Government of India Act 1919. The review began two years early as Baldwin feared he would lose the next election (which he did, in 1929). The Cabinet was influenced by minister Winston Churchill, who strongly opposed self-government for India, and members hoped that by having the commission appointed early, the policies for India which they favoured would survive their government. The resulting commission, led by Liberal MP John Simon, though with a majority of Conservatives, arrived in India in March 1928. They were met with a boycott by India’s leaders, Muslim and Hindu alike, angered at the British refusal to include their representatives on the commission. A minority of Muslims, though, withdrew from the League, choosing to welcome the Simon Commission and repudiating Jinnah. Most members of the League’s executive council remained loyal to Jinnah, attending the League meeting in December 1927 and January 1928 which confirmed him as the League’s permanent president. At that session, Jinnah told the delegates that “A constitutional war has been declared on Great Britain. Negotiations for a settlement are not to come from our side … By appointing an exclusively white Commission, [Secretary of State for India] Lord Birkenhead has declared our unfitness for self-government.”
Birkenhead in 1928 challenged Indians to come up with their own proposal for constitutional change for India; in response, the Congress convened a committee under the leadership of Motilal Nehru. The Nehru Report favoured constituencies based on geography on the ground that being dependent on each other for election would bind the communities closer together. Jinnah, though he believed separate electorates, based on religion, necessary to ensure Muslims had a voice in the government, was willing to compromise on this point, but talks between the two parties failed. He put forth proposals that he hoped might satisfy a broad range of Muslims and reunite the League, calling for mandatory representation for Muslims in legislatures and cabinets. These became known as his Fourteen Points. He could not secure adoption of the Fourteen Points, as the League meeting in Delhi at which he hoped to gain a vote instead dissolved into chaotic argument.
After Baldwin was defeated at the 1929 British parliamentary election, Ramsay MacDonald of the Labour Party became prime minister. MacDonald desired a conference of Indian and British leaders in London to discuss India’s future, a course of action supported by Jinnah. Three Round Table Conferences followed over as many years, none of which resulted in a settlement. Jinnah was a delegate to the first two conferences, but was not invited to the last. He remained in Britain for most of the period 1930 through 1934, practising as a barrister before the Privy Council, where he dealt with a number of India-related cases. His biographers disagree over why he remained so long in Britain—Wolpert asserts that had Jinnah been made a Law Lord, he would have stayed for life, and that Jinnah alternatively sought a parliamentary seat. Early biographer Hector Bolitho denied that Jinnah sought to enter the British Parliament, while Jaswant Singh deems Jinnah’s time in Britain as a break or sabbatical from the Indian struggle. Bolitho called this period “Jinnah’s years of order and contemplation, wedged in between the time of early struggle, and the final storm of conquest”.
In 1931, Fatima Jinnah joined her brother in England. From then on, Muhammad Jinnah would receive personal care and support from her as he aged and began to suffer from the lung ailments which would kill him. She lived and travelled with him, and became a close advisor. Muhammad Jinnah’s daughter, Dina, was educated in England and India. Jinnah later became estranged from Dina after she decided to marry a Christian, Neville Wadia from a prominent Parsi business family. When Jinnah urged Dina to marry a Muslim, she reminded him that he had married a woman not raised in his faith. Jinnah continued to correspond cordially with his daughter, but their personal relationship was strained, and she did not come to Pakistan in his lifetime, but only for his funeral.
Return to Politics:
The early 1930s saw a resurgence in Indian Muslim nationalism, which came to a head with the Pakistan Declaration. In 1933, Indian Muslims, especially from the United Provinces, began to urge Jinnah to return and take up again his leadership of the Muslim League, an organisation which had fallen into inactivity. He remained titular president of the League, but declined to travel to India to preside over its 1933 session in April, writing that he could not possibly return there until the end of the year.
Among those who met with Jinnah to seek his return was Liaquat Ali Khan, who would be a major political associate of Jinnah in the years to come and the first Prime Minister of Pakistan. At Jinnah’s request, Liaquat discussed the return with a large number of Muslim politicians and confirmed his recommendation to Jinnah. In early 1934, Jinnah relocated to the subcontinent, though he shuttled between London and India on business for the next few years, selling his house in Hampstead and closing his legal practice in Britain.
Muslims of Bombay elected Jinnah, though then absent in London, as their representative to the Central Legislative Assembly in October 1934. The British Parliament’s Government of India Act 1935 gave considerable power to India’s provinces, with a weak central parliament in New Delhi, which had no authority over such matters as foreign policy, defence, and much of the budget. Full power remained in the hands of the Viceroy, however, who could dissolve legislatures and rule by decree. The League reluctantly accepted the scheme, though expressing reservations about the weak parliament. The Congress was much better prepared for the provincial elections in 1937, and the League failed to win a majority even of the Muslim seats in any of the provinces where members of that faith held a majority. It did win a majority of the Muslim seats in Delhi, but could not form a government anywhere, though it was part of the ruling coalition in Bengal. The Congress and its allies formed the government even in the North-West Frontier Province (N.W.F.P.), where the League won no seats despite the fact that almost all residents were Muslim.
According to Jaswant Singh, “the events of 1937 had a tremendous, almost a traumatic effect upon Jinnah”. Despite his beliefs of twenty years that Muslims could protect their rights in a united India through separate electorates, provincial boundaries drawn to preserve Muslim majorities, and by other protections of minority rights, Muslim voters had failed to unite, with the issues Jinnah hoped to bring forward lost amid factional fighting. Singh notes the effect of the 1937 elections on Muslim political opinion, “when the Congress formed a government with almost all of the Muslim MLAs sitting on the Opposition benches, non-Congress Muslims were suddenly faced with this stark reality of near-total political powerlessness. It was brought home to them, like a bolt of lightning, that even if the Congress did not win a single Muslim seat … as long as it won an absolute majority in the House, on the strength of the general seats, it could and would form a government entirely on its own …”
In the next two years, Jinnah worked to build support among Muslims for the League. He secured the right to speak for the Muslim-led Bengali and Punjabi provincial governments in the central government in New Delhi (“the centre”). He worked to expand the League, reducing the cost of membership to two annas (⅛ of a rupee), half of what it cost to join the Congress. He restructured the League along the lines of the Congress, putting most power in a Working Committee, which he appointed. By December 1939, Liaquat estimated that the League had three million two-anna members.
Struggle for Pakistan:
Background to Independence;
Until the late 1930s, most Muslims of the British Raj expected, upon independence, to be part of a unitary state encompassing all of British India, as did the Hindus and others who advocated self-government. Despite this, other nationalist proposals were being made. In a speech given at Allahabad to a League session in 1930, Sir Muhammad Iqbal called for a state for Muslims in British India. Choudhary Rahmat Ali published a pamphlet in 1933 advocating a state “Pakistan” in the Indus Valley, with other names given to Muslim-majority areas elsewhere in India. Jinnah and Iqbal corresponded in 1936 and 1937; in subsequent years, Jinnah credited Iqbal as his mentor, and used Iqbal’s imagery and rhetoric in his speeches.
Although many leaders of the Congress sought a strong central government for an Indian state, some Muslim politicians, including Jinnah, were unwilling to accept this without powerful protections for their community. Other Muslims supported the Congress, which officially advocated a secular state upon independence, though the traditionalist wing (including politicians such as Madan Mohan Malaviya and Vallabhbhai Patel) believed that an independent India should enact laws such as banning the killing of cows and making Hindi a national language. The failure of the Congress leadership to disavow Hindu communalists worried Congress-supporting Muslims. Nevertheless, the Congress enjoyed considerable Muslim support up to about 1937.
Events which separated the communities included the failed attempt to form a coalition government including the Congress and the League in the United Provinces following the 1937 election. According to historian Ian Talbot, “The provincial Congress governments made no effort to understand and respect their Muslim populations’ cultural and religious sensibilities. The Muslim League’s claims that it alone could safeguard Muslim interests thus received a major boost. Significantly it was only after this period of Congress rule that it [the League] took up the demand for a Pakistan state …”
Balraj Puri in his journal article about Jinnah suggests that the Muslim League president, after the 1937 vote, turned to the idea of partition in “sheer desperation”. Historian Akbar S. Ahmed suggests that Jinnah abandoned hope of reconciliation with the Congress as he “rediscover[ed] his own Islamic roots, his own sense of identity, of culture and history, which would come increasingly to the fore in the final years of his life”. Jinnah also increasingly adopted Muslim dress in the late 1930s. In the wake of the 1937 balloting, Jinnah demanded that the question of power sharing be settled on an all-India basis, and that he, as president of the League, be accepted as the sole spokesman for the Muslim community.
Iqbal’s Influence on Jinnah:
The well documented influence of Iqbal on Jinnah, with regard to taking the lead in creating Pakistan, has been described as “significant”, “powerful” and even “unquestionable” by scholars. Iqbal has also been cited as an influential force in convincing Jinnah to end his self-imposed exile in London and re-enter the politics of India. Initially, however, Iqbal and Jinnah were opponents, as Iqbal believed Jinnah did not care about the crises confronting the Muslim community during the British Raj. According to Akbar S. Ahmed, this began to change during Iqbal’s final years prior to his death in 1938. Iqbal gradually succeeded in converting Jinnah over to his view, who eventually accepted Iqbal as his “mentor”. Ahmed comments that in his annotations to Iqbal’s letters, Jinnah expressed solidarity with Iqbal’s view: that Indian Muslims required a separate homeland.
Iqbal’s influence also gave Jinnah a deeper appreciation for Muslim identity. The evidence of this influence began to be revealed from 1937 onwards. Jinnah not only began to echo Iqbal in his speeches, he started using Islamic symbolism and began directing his addresses to the underprivileged. Ahmed noted a change in Jinnah’s words: while he still advocated freedom of religion and protection of the minorities, the model he was now aspiring to was that of the Prophet Muhammad, rather than that of a secular politician. Ahmed further avers that those scholars who have painted the later Jinnah as secular have misread his speeches which, he argues, must be read in the context of Islamic history and culture. Accordingly, Jinnah’s imagery of the Pakistan began to become clear that it was to have an Islamic nature. This change has been seen to last for the rest of Jinnah’s life. He continued to borrow ideas “directly from Iqbal—including his thoughts on Muslim unity, on Islamic ideals of liberty, justice and equality, on economics, and even on practices such as prayers”.
In a speech in 1940, two years after the death of Iqbal, Jinnah expressed his preference for implementing Iqbal’s vision for an Islamic Pakistan even if it meant he himself would never lead a nation. Jinnah stated, “If I live to see the ideal of a Muslim state being achieved in India, and I was then offered to make a choice between the works of Iqbal and the rulership of the Muslim state, I would prefer the former.”
Second World War and Lahore Resolution:
On 3 September 1939, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain announced the commencement of war with Nazi Germany. The following day, the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, without consulting Indian political leaders, announced that India had entered the war along with Britain. There were widespread protests in India. After meeting with Jinnah and with Gandhi, Linlithgow announced that negotiations on self-government were suspended for the duration of the war. The Congress on 14 September demanded immediate independence with a constituent assembly to decide a constitution; when this was refused, its eight provincial governments resigned on 10 November and governors in those provinces thereafter ruled by decree for the remainder of the war. Jinnah, on the other hand, was more willing to accommodate the British, and they in turn increasingly recognised him and the League as the representatives of India’s Muslims. Jinnah later stated, “after the war began, … I was treated on the same basis as Mr Gandhi. I was wonderstruck why I was promoted and given a place side by side with Mr Gandhi.” Although the League did not actively support the British war effort, neither did they try to obstruct it.
With the British and Muslims to some extent co-operating, the Viceroy asked Jinnah for an expression of the Muslim League’s position on self-government, confident that it would differ greatly from that of the Congress. To come up with such a position, the League’s Working Committee met for four days in February 1940 to set out terms of reference to a constitutional sub-committee. The Working Committee asked that the sub-committee return with a proposal that would result in “independent dominions in direct relationship with Great Britain” where Muslims were dominant. On 6 February, Jinnah informed the Viceroy that the Muslim League would be demanding partition instead of the federation contemplated in the 1935 Act. The Lahore Resolution (sometimes called the “Pakistan Resolution”, although it does not contain that name), based on the sub-committee’s work, embraced the Two-Nation Theory and called for a union of the Muslim-majority provinces in the northwest of British India, with complete autonomy. Similar rights were to be granted to the Muslim-majority areas in the east, and unspecified protections given to Muslim minorities in other provinces. The resolution was passed by the League session in Lahore on 23 March 1940.
Gandhi’s reaction to the Lahore Resolution was muted; he called it “baffling”, but told his disciples that Muslims, in common with other people of India, had the right to self-determination. Leaders of the Congress were more vocal; Jawaharlal Nehru referred to Lahore as “Jinnah’s fantastic proposals” while Chakravarti Rajagopalachari deemed Jinnah’s views on partition “a sign of a diseased mentality”. Linlithgow met with Jinnah in June 1940, soon after Winston Churchill became the British prime minister, and in August offered both the Congress and the League a deal whereby in exchange for full support for the war, Linlithgow would allow Indian representation on his major war councils. The Viceroy promised a representative body after the war to determine India’s future, and that no future settlement would be imposed over the objections of a large part of the population. This was satisfactory to neither the Congress nor the League, though Jinnah was pleased that the British had moved towards recognising Jinnah as the representative of the Muslim community’s interests. Jinnah was reluctant to make specific proposals as to the boundaries of Pakistan, or its relationships with Britain and with the rest of the subcontinent, fearing that any precise plan would divide the League.
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 brought the United States into the war. In the following months, the Japanese advanced in Southeast Asia, and the British Cabinet sent a mission led by Sir Stafford Cripps to try to conciliate the Indians and cause them to fully back the war. Cripps proposed giving some provinces what was dubbed the “local option” to remain outside of an Indian central government either for a period of time or permanently, to become dominions on their own or be part of another confederation. The Muslim League was far from certain of winning the legislative votes that would be required for mixed provinces such as Bengal and Punjab to secede, and Jinnah rejected the proposals as not sufficiently recognising Pakistan’s right to exist. The Congress also rejected the Cripps plan, demanding immediate concessions which Cripps was not prepared to give. Despite the rejection, Jinnah and the League saw the Cripps proposal as recognising Pakistan in principle.
The Congress followed the failed Cripps mission by demanding, in August 1942, that the British immediately “Quit India”, proclaiming a mass campaign of satyagraha until they did. The British promptly arrested most major leaders of the Congress and imprisoned them for the remainder of the war. Gandhi, however, was placed on house arrest in one of the Aga Khan’s palaces prior to his release for health reasons in 1944. With the Congress leaders absent from the political scene, Jinnah warned against the threat of Hindu domination and maintained his Pakistan demand without going into great detail about what that would entail. Jinnah also worked to increase the League’s political control at the provincial level. He helped to found the newspaper Dawn in the early 1940s in Delhi; it helped to spread the League’s message and eventually became the major English-language newspaper of Pakistan.
In September 1944, Jinnah hosted Gandhi, recently released from confinement, at his home on Malabar Hill in Bombay. Two weeks of talks between them followed, which resulted in no agreement. Jinnah insisted on Pakistan being conceded prior to the British departure and to come into being immediately, while Gandhi proposed that plebiscites on partition occur sometime after a united India gained its independence. In early 1945, Liaquat and the Congress leader Bhulabhai Desai met, with Jinnah’s approval, and agreed that after the war, the Congress and the League should form an interim government with the members of the Executive Council of the Viceroy to be nominated by the Congress and the League in equal numbers. When the Congress leadership were released from prison in June 1945, they repudiated the agreement and censured Desai for acting without proper authority.
Independence and Mountbatten:
On 20 February 1947, Attlee announced Mountbatten’s appointment, and that Britain would transfer power in India not later than June 1948. Mountbatten took office as Viceroy on 24 March 1947, two days after his arrival in India. By then, the Congress had come around to the idea of partition. Nehru stated in 1960, “the truth is that we were tired men and we were getting on in years … The plan for partition offered a way out and we took it.” Leaders of the Congress decided that having loosely tied Muslim-majority provinces as part of a future India was not worth the loss of the powerful government at the centre which they desired. However, the Congress insisted that if Pakistan were to become independent, Bengal and Punjab would have to be divided.
Mountbatten had been warned in his briefing papers that Jinnah would be his “toughest customer” who had proved a chronic nuisance because “no one in this country [India] had so far gotten into Jinnah’s mind”. The men met over six days beginning on 5 April. The sessions began lightly when Jinnah, photographed between Louis and Edwina Mountbatten, quipped “A rose between two thorns” which the Viceroy took, perhaps gratuitously, as evidence that the Muslim leader had pre-planned his joke but had expected the vicereine to stand in the middle. Mountbatten was not favourably impressed with Jinnah, repeatedly expressing frustration to his staff about Jinnah’s insistence on Pakistan in the face of all argument.
Jinnah feared that at the end of the British presence in the subcontinent, they would turn control over to the Congress-dominated constituent assembly, putting Muslims at a disadvantage in attempting to win autonomy. He demanded that Mountbatten divide the army prior to independence, which would take at least a year. Mountbatten had hoped that the post-independence arrangements would include a common defence force, but Jinnah saw it as essential that a sovereign state should have its own forces. Mountbatten met with Liaquat the day of his final session with Jinnah, and concluded, as he told Attlee and the Cabinet in May, that “it had become clear that the Muslim League would resort to arms if Pakistan in some form were not conceded.” The Viceroy was also influenced by negative Muslim reaction to the constitutional report of the assembly, which envisioned broad powers for the post-independence central government.
On 2 June, the final plan was given by the Viceroy to Indian leaders: on 15 August, the British would turn over power to two dominions. The provinces would vote on whether to continue in the existing constituent assembly or to have a new one, that is, to join Pakistan. Bengal and Punjab would also vote, both on the question of which assembly to join, and on the partition. A boundary commission would determine the final lines in the partitioned provinces. Plebiscites would take place in the North-West Frontier Province (which did not have a League government despite an overwhelmingly Muslim population), and in the majority-Muslim Sylhet district of Assam, adjacent to eastern Bengal. On 3 June, Mountbatten, Nehru, Jinnah and Sikh leader Baldev Singh made the formal announcement by radio. Jinnah concluded his address with “Pakistan Zindabad ” (Long live Pakistan), which was not in the script. In the weeks which followed Punjab and Bengal cast the votes which resulted in partition. Sylhet and the N.W.F.P. voted to cast their lots with Pakistan, a decision joined by the assemblies in Sind and Baluchistan.
On 4 July 1947, Liaquat asked Mountbatten on Jinnah’s behalf to recommend to the British king, George VI, that Jinnah be appointed Pakistan’s first governor-general. This request angered Mountbatten, who had hoped to have that position in both dominions—he would be India’s first post-independence governor-general—but Jinnah felt that Mountbatten would be likely to favour the new Hindu-majority state because of his closeness to Nehru. In addition, the governor-general would initially be a powerful figure, and Jinnah did not trust anyone else to take that office. Although the Boundary Commission, led by British lawyer Sir Cyril Radcliffe, had not yet reported, there were already massive movements of populations between the nations-to-be, as well as sectarian violence. Jinnah arranged to sell his house in Bombay and procured a new one in Karachi. On 7 August, Jinnah, with his sister and close staff, flew from Delhi to Karachi in Mountbatten’s plane, and as the plane taxied, he was heard to murmur, “That’s the end of that.” On 11 August, he presided over the new constituent assembly for Pakistan at Karachi, and addressed them, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan … You may belong to any religion or caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the State … I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.” On 14 August, Pakistan became independent; Jinnah led the celebrations in Karachi. One observer wrote, “here indeed is Pakistan’s King Emperor, Archbishop of Canterbury, Speaker and Prime Minister concentrated into one formidable Quaid-e-Azam.”
Governor General:
The Radcliffe Commission, dividing Bengal and Punjab, completed its work and reported to Mountbatten on 12 August; the last Viceroy held the maps until the 17th, not wanting to spoil the independence celebrations in both nations. There had already been ethnically charged violence and movement of populations; publication of the Radcliffe Line dividing the new nations sparked mass migration, murder, and ethnic cleansing. Many on the “wrong side” of the lines fled or were murdered, or murdered others, hoping to make facts on the ground which would reverse the commission’s verdict. Radcliffe wrote in his report that he knew that neither side would be happy with his award; he declined his fee for the work. Christopher Beaumont, Radcliffe’s private secretary, later wrote that Mountbatten “must take the blame—though not the sole blame—for the massacres in the Punjab in which between 500,000 to a million men, women and children perished”. As many as 14,500,000 people relocated between India and Pakistan during and after partition. Jinnah did what he could for the eight million people who migrated to Pakistan; although by now over 70 and frail from lung ailments, he travelled across West Pakistan and personally supervised the provision of aid. According to Ahmed, “What Pakistan needed desperately in those early months was a symbol of the state, one that would unify people and give them the courage and resolve to succeed.”
Among the restive regions of the new nation was the North-West Frontier Province. The referendum there in July 1947 had been tainted by low turnout as less than 10 per cent of the population were allowed to vote. On 22 August 1947, just after a week of becoming governor general, Jinnah dissolved the elected government of Dr. Khan Abdul Jabbar Khan. Later on, Abdul Qayyum Khan was put in place by Jinnah in the Pashtun-dominated province despite him being a Kashmiri. On 12 August 1948 the Babrra massacre in Charsadda occurred resulting in the death of 400 people aligned with the Khudai Khidmatgar movement.
Along with Liaquat and Abdur Rab Nishtar, Jinnah represented Pakistan’s interests in the Division Council to appropriately divide public assets between India and Pakistan. Pakistan was supposed to receive one-sixth of the pre-independence government’s assets, carefully divided by agreement, even specifying how many sheets of paper each side would receive. The new Indian state, however, was slow to deliver, hoping for the collapse of the nascent Pakistani government, and reunion. Few members of the Indian Civil Service and the Indian Police Service had chosen Pakistan, resulting in staff shortages. Partition meant that for some farmers, the markets to sell their crops were on the other side of an international border. There were shortages of machinery, not all of which was made in Pakistan. In addition to the massive refugee problem, the new government sought to save abandoned crops, establish security in a chaotic situation, and provide basic services. According to economist Yasmeen Niaz Mohiuddin in her study of Pakistan, “although Pakistan was born in bloodshed and turmoil, it survived in the initial and difficult months after partition only because of the tremendous sacrifices made by its people and the selfless efforts of its great leader.”
The Indian Princely States were advised by the departing British to choose whether to join Pakistan or India. Most did so prior to independence, but the holdouts contributed to what have become lasting divisions between the two nations. Indian leaders were angered at Jinnah’s attempts to convince the princes of Jodhpur, Udaipur, Bhopal and Indore to accede to Pakistan—the latter three princely states did not border Pakistan. Jodhpur bordered it and had both a Hindu majority population and a Hindu ruler. The coastal princely state of Junagadh, which had a majority-Hindu population, did accede to Pakistan in September 1947, with its ruler’s dewan, Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, personally delivering the accession papers to Jinnah. But the two states that were subject to the suzerainty of Junagadh—Mangrol and Babariawad—declared their independence from Junagadh and acceded to India. In response, the nawab of Junagadh militarily occupied the two states. Subsequently, the Indian army occupied the principality in November, forcing its former leaders, including Bhutto, to flee to Pakistan, beginning the politically powerful Bhutto family.
The most contentious of the disputes was, and continues to be, that over the princely state of Kashmir. It had a Muslim-majority population and a Hindu maharaja, Sir Hari Singh, who stalled his decision on which nation to join. With the population in revolt in October 1947, aided by Pakistani irregulars, the maharaja acceded to India; Indian troops were airlifted in. Jinnah objected to this action, and ordered that Pakistani troops move into Kashmir. The Pakistani Army was still commanded by British officers, and the commanding officer, General Sir Douglas Gracey, refused the order, stating that he would not move into what he considered the territory of another nation without approval from higher authority, which was not forthcoming. Jinnah withdrew the order. This did not stop the violence there, which broke into Indo-Pakistani War of 1947.
Some historians allege that Jinnah’s courting the rulers of Hindu-majority states and his gambit with Junagadh are evidence of ill-intent towards India, as Jinnah had promoted separation by religion, yet tried to gain the accession of Hindu-majority states. In his book Patel: A Life, Rajmohan Gandhi asserts that Jinnah hoped for a plebiscite in Junagadh, knowing Pakistan would lose, in the hope the principle would be established for Kashmir. However, when Mountbatten proposed to Jinnah that, in all the princely States where the ruler did not accede to a Dominion corresponding to the majority population (which would have included Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir), the accession should be decided by an ‘impartial reference to the will of the people’, Jinnah rejected the offer. Despite the United Nations Security Council Resolution 47, issued at India’s request for a plebiscite in Kashmir after the withdrawal of Pakistani forces, this has never occurred.
In January 1948, the Indian government finally agreed to pay Pakistan its share of British India’s assets. They were impelled by Gandhi, who threatened a fast until death. Only days later, on 30 January, Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu nationalist, who believed that Gandhi was pro-Muslim. After hearing about Gandhi’s murder on the following day, Jinnah publicly made a brief statement of condolence, calling Gandhi “one of the greatest men produced by the Hindu community”.
In February 1948, in a radio talk broadcast addressed to the people of the US, Jinnah expressed his views regarding Pakistan’s constitution to be in the following way:
The Constitution of Pakistan is yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly, I do not know what the ultimate shape of the constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principles of Islam. Today these are as applicable in actual life as these were 1300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fair play to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan.
In March, Jinnah, despite his declining health, made his only post-independence visit to East Pakistan. In a speech before a crowd estimated at 300,000, Jinnah stated (in English) that Urdu alone should be the national language, believing a single language was needed for a nation to remain united. The Bengali-speaking people of East Pakistan strongly opposed this policy, and in 1971 the official language issue was a factor in the region’s secession to form the country of Bangladesh.
Illness and Death:
From the 1930s, Jinnah suffered from tuberculosis; only his sister and a few others close to him were aware of his condition. Jinnah believed public knowledge of his lung ailments would hurt him politically. In a 1938 letter, he wrote to a supporter that “you must have read in the papers how during my tours … I suffered, which was not because there was anything wrong with me, but the irregularities [of the schedule] and over-strain told upon my health”. Many years later, Mountbatten stated that if he had known Jinnah was so physically ill, he would have stalled, hoping Jinnah’s death would avert partition. Fatima Jinnah later wrote, “even in his hour of triumph, the Quaid-e-Azam was gravely ill … He worked in a frenzy to consolidate Pakistan. And, of course, he totally neglected his health …” Jinnah worked with a tin of Craven “A” cigarettes at his desk, of which he had smoked 50 or more a day for the previous 30 years, as well as a box of Cuban cigars. As his health got worse, he took longer and longer rest breaks in the private wing of Government House in Karachi, where only he, Fatima and the servants were allowed.
In June 1948, he and Fatima flew to Quetta, in the mountains of Balochistan, where the weather was cooler than in Karachi. He could not completely rest there, addressing the officers at the Command and Staff College saying, “you, along with the other Forces of Pakistan, are the custodians of the life, property and honour of the people of Pakistan.” He returned to Karachi for 1 July opening ceremony for the State Bank of Pakistan, at which he spoke. A reception by the Canadian trade commissioner that evening in honour of Dominion Day was the last public event he attended.
On 6 July 1948, Jinnah returned to Quetta, but at the advice of doctors, soon journeyed to an even higher retreat at Ziarat. Jinnah had always been reluctant to undergo medical treatment, but realising his condition was getting worse, the Pakistani government sent the best doctors it could find to treat him. Tests confirmed tuberculosis, and also showed evidence of advanced lung cancer. He was treated with the new “miracle drug” of streptomycin, but it did not help. Jinnah’s condition continued to deteriorate despite the Eid prayers of his people. He was moved to the lower altitude of Quetta on 13 August, the eve of Independence Day, for which a ghost-written statement for him was released. Despite an increase in appetite (he then weighed just over 36 kilograms or 79 pounds), it was clear to his doctors that if he was to return to Karachi in life, he would have to do so very soon. Jinnah, however, was reluctant to go, not wishing his aides to see him as an invalid on a stretcher.
By 9 September, Jinnah had also developed pneumonia. Doctors urged him to return to Karachi, where he could receive better care, and with his agreement, he was flown there on the morning of 11 September. Dr. Ilahi Bux, his personal physician, believed that Jinnah’s change of mind was caused by foreknowledge of death. The plane landed at Karachi that afternoon, to be met by Jinnah’s limousine, and an ambulance into which Jinnah’s stretcher was placed. The ambulance broke down on the road into town, and the Governor-General and those with him waited for another to arrive; he could not be placed in the car as he could not sit up. They waited by the roadside in oppressive heat as trucks and buses passed by, unsuitable for transporting the dying man and with their occupants not knowing of Jinnah’s presence. After an hour, the replacement ambulance came, and transported Jinnah to Government House, arriving there over two hours after the landing. Jinnah died later that night at 10:20 pm at his home in Karachi on 11 September 1948 at the age of 71, just over a year after Pakistan’s creation.
Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru stated upon Jinnah’s death, “How shall we judge him? I have been very angry with him often during the past years. But now there is no bitterness in my thought of him, only a great sadness for all that has been … he succeeded in his quest and gained his objective, but at what a cost and with what a difference from what he had imagined.” Jinnah was buried on 12 September 1948 amid official mourning in both India and Pakistan; a million people gathered for his funeral led by Shabbir Ahmad Usmani. Indian Governor-General Rajagopalachari cancelled an official reception that day in honour of the late leader. Today, Jinnah rests in a large marble mausoleum, Mazar-e-Quaid, in Karachi.
Legacy :
Jinnah’s legacy is Pakistan. According to Mohiuddin, “He was and continues to be as highly honored in Pakistan as [first US president] George Washington is in the United States … Pakistan owes its very existence to his drive, tenacity, and judgment … Jinnah’s importance in the creation of Pakistan was monumental and immeasurable.” Stanley Wolpert, giving a speech in honour of Jinnah in 1998, deemed him Pakistan’s greatest leader.
According to Jaswant Singh, “With Jinnah’s death Pakistan lost its moorings. In India there will not easily arrive another Gandhi, nor in Pakistan another Jinnah.” Malik writes, “As long as Jinnah was alive, he could persuade and even pressure regional leaders toward greater mutual accommodation, but after his death, the lack of consensus on the distribution of political power and economic resources often turned controversial.” According to Mohiuddin, “Jinnah’s death deprived Pakistan of a leader who could have enhanced stability and democratic governance … The rocky road to democracy in Pakistan and the relatively smooth one in India can in some measure be ascribed to Pakistan’s tragedy of losing an incorruptible and highly revered leader so soon after independence.”
His birthday is observed as a national holiday, Quaid-e-Azam Day, in Pakistan. Jinnah earned the title Quaid-e-Azam (meaning “Great Leader”). His other title is Baba-i-Qaum (Father of the Nation). The former title was reportedly given to Jinnah at first by Mian Ferozuddin Ahmed. It became an official title by effect of a resolution passed on 11 August 1947 by Liaquat Ali Khan in the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. There are some sources which endorse that Gandhi gave him that title. Within a few days of Pakistan’s creation Jinnah’s name was read in the khutba at mosques as Amir-ul-Millat, a traditional title of Muslim rulers.
The civil awards of Pakistan includes a ‘Order of Quaid-i-Azam’. The Jinnah Society also confers the ‘Jinnah Award’ annually to a person that renders outstanding and meritorious services to Pakistan and its people. Jinnah is depicted on all Pakistani rupee currency, and is the namesake of many Pakistani public institutions. The former Quaid-i-Azam International Airport in Karachi, now called the Jinnah International Airport, is Pakistan’s busiest. One of the largest streets in the Turkish capital Ankara, Cinnah Caddesi, is named after him, as is the Mohammad Ali Jenah Expressway in Tehran, Iran. The royalist government of Iran also released a stamp commemorating the centennial of Jinnah’s birth in 1976. In Chicago, a portion of Devon Avenue was named “Mohammed Ali Jinnah Way”. A section of Coney Island Avenue in Brooklyn, New York was also named ‘Muhammad Ali Jinnah Way’ in honour of the founder of Pakistan. The Mazar-e-Quaid, Jinnah’s mausoleum, is among Karachi’s landmarks. The “Jinnah Tower” in Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India, was built to commemorate Jinnah.
There is a considerable amount of scholarship on Jinnah which stems from Pakistan; according to Akbar S. Ahmed, it is not widely read outside the country and usually avoids even the slightest criticism of Jinnah. According to Ahmed, some books published about Jinnah outside Pakistan mention that he consumed alcohol, but this is omitted from books published inside Pakistan. Ahmed suggests that depicting the Quaid drinking would weaken Jinnah’s Islamic identity, and by extension, Pakistan’s. Some sources allege he gave up alcohol near the end of his life. Yahya Bakhtiar, who observed Jinnah at close quarters, concluded that Jinnah was a “very sincere, deeply committed and dedicated Mussalman.”
According to historian Ayesha Jalal, while there is a tendency towards hagiography in the Pakistani view of Jinnah, in India he is viewed negatively. Ahmed deems Jinnah “the most maligned person in recent Indian history … In India, many see him as the demon who divided the land.” Even many Indian Muslims see Jinnah negatively, blaming him for their woes as a minority in that state. Some historians such as Jalal and H. M. Seervai assert that Jinnah never wanted the partition of India—it was the outcome of the Congress leaders being unwilling to share power with the Muslim League. They contend that Jinnah only used the Pakistan demand in an attempt to mobilise support to obtain significant political rights for Muslims. Francis Mudie, the last British Governor of Sindh, in Jinnah’s honour once said:
In judging Jinnah, we must remember what he was up against. He had against him not only the wealth and brains of the Hindus, but also nearly the whole of British officialdom, and most of the Home politicians, who made the great mistake of refusing to take Pakistan seriously. Never was his position really examined.
Jinnah has gained the admiration of Indian nationalist politicians such as Lal Krishna Advani, whose comments praising Jinnah caused an uproar in his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Indian politician Jaswant Singh’s book Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence (2009) caused controversy in India. The book was based on Jinnah’s ideology and alleged that Nehru’s desire for a powerful centre led to Partition. Upon the book release, Singh was expelled from his membership of Bharatiya Janata Party, to which he responded that BJP is “narrow-minded” and has “limited thoughts”.
Jinnah was the central figure of the 1998 film Jinnah, which was based on Jinnah’s life and his struggle for the creation of Pakistan. Christopher Lee, who portrayed Jinnah, called his performance the best of his career. The 1954 Hector Bolitho’s book Jinnah: Creator of Pakistan prompted Fatima Jinnah to release a book, titled My Brother (1987), as she thought that Bolitho’s book had failed to express the political aspects of Jinnah. The book received positive reception in Pakistan. Jinnah of Pakistan (1984) by Stanley Wolpert is regarded as one of the best biographical books on Jinnah.
The view of Jinnah in the West has been shaped to some extent by his portrayal in Sir Richard Attenborough’s 1982 film, Gandhi. The film was dedicated to Nehru and Mountbatten and was given considerable support by Nehru’s daughter, the Indian prime minister, Indira Gandhi. It portrays Jinnah (played by Alyque Padamsee) in an unflattering light, who seems to act out of jealousy of Gandhi. Padamsee later stated that his portrayal was not historically accurate. In a journal article on Pakistan’s first governor-general, historian R. J. Moore wrote that Jinnah is universally recognised as central to the creation of Pakistan. Stanley Wolpert summarises the profound effect that Jinnah had on the world:
Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation-state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah did all three.
← Abdul Sattar Edhi
Amanullah Khan →
Copyright @ 2021 - www.findmyhero.com - All Rights Reserved
Site designed and maintained by - Coding Bee Pakistan
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line34
|
__label__cc
| 0.600238
| 0.399762
|
Transatlantic Take
Looking at issues that affect Europe and the United States
A Chinese Marshall Plan for Europe — don’t bank on it
WASHINGTON—The past three years have been very good for China. No country has emerged from the ashes of the 2008 U.S.-led financial crisis stronger and more influential than China. Beijing’s international reserves are now more than seven times larger than the deployable funds held by the International Monetary Fund.
With such a huge cash stockpile, it is little wonder that Europeans turned to Beijing in recent days for financial help. Containing Europe’s current financial crisis will require a massive amount of money. And Europe hopes that Beijing will ante up the necessary billions to save Europe and, by extension, the world.
China has every reason to throw Europe a financial lifeline. The EU, after all, is China’s largest export market. China is also a significant foreign investor in Europe. And, from a strategic point of view, Beijing certainly views Europe’s dire plight as leverage when it comes to other issues that have long bedeviled Sino-European relations. In short, Europe’s financial crisis has handed China a golden opportunity to increase its global heft. Yet it is highly doubtful China will become Europe’s “savior.”
Despite Western fears over the rise of China, Beijing is not entirely comfortable as a global power. The mainland, to be sure, has not been shy about criticizing the United States for its part in triggering the global recession of 2008/09. Beijing has even gone so far as to broach the sensitive topic of having the Chinese renminbi replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. But China, in general, has been careful and coy about stepping out on to the global stage. It is almost as if China’s moment arrived too early — for Beijing and for the world at large. Beijing would like to lead from behind, when it leads at all.
Beijing is reluctant to grasp the mantle of global leadership since that would go against Deng Xiaoping’s famous directive:
“Observe developments soberly, hide our capabilities and bide our time, remain free of ambition, and never claim leadership”
Observe, hide, and bide your time — all of that was possible for China a decade ago, when the global economy beat to the U.S. tune. Then, the global economy was driven by the profligacy of the U.S. consumer. The Chinese pleaded poverty, and for good reason. China’s per capita income — roughly $5,100 in 2010 — is still a fraction of that in the United States or Europe. Sixteen percent of China’s population (some 215 million people) still lives on less than $1.25 a day. The mainland’s energy and food supplies are woefully insufficient for a population that is rapidly urbanizing. With only 8 percent of the world’s cultivated land, China must sustain nearly one-fifth of the world’s population. Decades of pell mell growth has decimated China’s environment. More problematic: roughly two-thirds of China’s approximately 660 cities have less water than they need, and 110 of them already suffer severe shortages. The lack of clean water and the deteriorating environment has become a social and political lightning rod, with the number of pollution-related protests rising steadily over the past decade.
Demographics represent another herculean challenge — China will grow old before it grows rich, placing tremendous pressure on the government to help care for China’s elderly. And income inequality is rising in the People’s Republic, raising the specter of further social and political unrest.
These challenges threaten China’s avowed goal of creating a harmonious society, one economically and politically in unison. This is paramount to Beijing’s chief goal: internal stability. As Kishore Mahbubani, author of “The New Asian Hemisphere,” notes:
“The Chinese mind has always focused on developing Chinese civilization, not developing global civilization. China today is willing to be a responsible stakeholder in the global order, but given these overwhelming domestic concerns, the Chinese leaders have little appetite to lead the world.”
In other words, throwing a financial lifeline to a bankrupt nation like Greece matters less to China than maintaining internal cohesion. The two objectives, of course, are intertwined. China surely understands that it is in its own self-interest not to see Europe implode. At the same time, Beijing risks a domestic backlash if China’s leadership appears to be more concerned about the plight of wealthy Europeans rather than the interests of poor Chinese.
In a sense, the global financial crisis has spawned an identity crisis in China. The country wants to be a global power but on its own terms and timetable.
Against this backdrop, China is most assuredly tempted to ride to Europe’s rescue, knowing that a Chinese Marshall Plan for Europe in 2011 would undermine the economic authority of the United States and subject Europe to the economic humiliation of being under the economic umbrella of the Middle Kingdom. The West, quite frankly, would never be the same. Such a move would confirm the rise of China and usher in a new world economic order.
However, the odds of any of this happening are slim. No matter how tempting, China is not about to become Europe’s “savior.”
Joe Quinlan is a Transatlantic Fellow with The German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of FRANCE 24. The content on this blog is provided on an "as-is" basis. FRANCE 24 is not liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.
allseo - Tue, 03/27/2012 - 04:01
Microsoft Windows 8 Plus License provides secure password manager Windows 8 access to every piece of information with Office 2007 seek out capabilities which Microsoft Office 2007 helps discovering information with reliev.And open browser, quickly search any flash video through the online video website you may need, and play Download Office 2007 License interne. Check out distinct comparisons made Microsoft Office 2007 Professional concernin programs or model, like the Avast as opposed to AVG comparison manufactured in this Buzzle post. Go for antivirus engines which provid a Office 2007 Download solid track record regarding virus detection. Opt for an application that uses the Office 2007 Professional devic resources without slowing it down excessive. Make sure that the program has a Microsoft Office 2007 Download virus detection tool and also a registry cleaner.
The mobile instanc Office 2010 Keygen developer needs t control his lure to copy this mobile application regarding other platforms.Among all your Microsoft Office 2010 scanning features offered b a program, look for Internet security features, that include hyperlink scanning, email scanning, P2P scanning and also Download Office 2010 network security. Real time encodin and scheduled scanning is offered by almost all programs today. Office 2010 Download Enterprise Serial Key brings extra value in terms of alluring features the fact that Microsoft Office 2010 Download perform unique capabilities, and that make it easy fo a recycler for you to conduct hassle-free organization. If you use your personal machine terminal for Microsoft Office 2011 online banking transactions,it is essential that the antivirus program possesse Office 2010 Key filters.
The German Marshall Fund of the United States is a non-partisan American public policy and grantmaking institution dedicated to promoting better understanding and cooperation between North America and Europe on transatlantic and global issues. This blog is written by GMF experts and examines current world issues and their effects on Europe and North America. All posts in this blog are copyrighted to the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Follow GMF on :
European Energy Security Should Remain a U.S. Priority
Why Are Germans So Sympathetic to Russia?
Why Is Turkey Increasing Tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean?
Group categories
Adyghe people (1)
Affirmative action (1)
African Union (1)
Aid (1)
Aid & Development (1)
Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib (1)
al-Assad (1)
Al-Qaeda (1)
Amy Studdart (1)
and German E.ON RuhrgaTurkey (1)
Palestine’s premature bid for UN membership
What the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline Means for Europe's Energy Diversity
Why the crisis between Turkey and Israel is hurting everyone
M. Hollande Goes to America
Ukraine and the EU: Ukraine
rayperry - 05/05/2014 - 05:23
Billet: China's Mediterranean Presence Is an Opportunity for NATO
Many Ukrainians are not
Jark - 03/03/2014 - 20:37
Billet: Al Qaeda's Possible Collapse in Syria
France 24 needs to
ONLY FOR US AND UK
globalwork - 10/09/2013 - 09:54
Billet: Bulgarians Take to the Streets
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line36
|
__label__wiki
| 0.870148
| 0.870148
|
James Purefoy
James Purefoy (born 3 June 1964) is an English actor. He played Marc Antony in the HBO series Rome, college professor turned serial killer Joe Carroll in the series The Following, and Solomon Kane in the film of the same name. In February 2018 he starred as Laurens Bancroft in Altered Carbon, a Netflix original series. He played James McCarthy, a young man accused of murdering his father, in "The Boscombe Valley Mystery," in Granada's The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes. One of his notable roles was as Nicholas Jenkins in the eight-part miniseries A Dance to the Music of Time for Channel 4 in 1997. He played Edward, the Black Prince in the film A Knight's Tale, Rawdon Crawley in Vanity Fair with Reese Witherspoon and Tom Bertram in the 1999 production of Mansfield Park. He has played major roles in several television costume dramas, including Sharpe's Sword, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, The Prince and the Pauper, The Mayor of Casterbridge, Blackbeard: Terror at Sea, Beau Brummell: This Charming Man, The Tide of Life, Camelot and Rome. He played Mark Antony in the HBO/BBC original television series, Rome. He starred as Teddy Rist in the summer television series, The Philanthropist, which aired on NBC beginning on June 2009. His character is a billionaire playboy who decides to use his wealth and power to help others in need. In 2013, The Following debuted, starring Purefoy as the lead antagonist of the series. He portrays Joe Carroll, a former professor who becomes a serial killer and leads a cult of followers, all whom help create Carroll's "story". It was announced in June 2014 that Purefoy would join the cast of the film High-Rise with Tom Hiddleston and Jeremy Irons. Later in 2014, Purefoy co-starred in the Formula 1-themed music video for David Guetta's song "Dangerous". In February 2019, Hybrid (who provided the score to Interlude in Prague) released a short film to accompany their single "Hold Your Breath" from the album Light of the Fearless. The film starred Purefoy as the brooding 'Mr Black'.
Place of Birth: Taunton, England, UK
Also Known As: Τζέιμς Πιούρφοϊ, James Brian Mark Purefoy, Джеймс Пьюрфой, Jame Purefoy, 제임스 퓨어포이
Movies List of James Purefoy
Beau Brummell: This Charming Man
Humphrey Jennings: The Man Who Listened to Britain
Fisherman's Friends: One and All
The Wedding Tackle
Wicked Blood
Interlude In Prague
Fisherman’s Friends
Goose on the Loose
Bright Hair
It's Me, Sugar
Feast of July
All Hail the Popcorn King!
Women Talking Dirty
Bedrooms and Hallways
Maybe Baby
The Cloning of Joanna May
A Knight's Tale
Resident Evil: The Final Chapter
|
cc/2022-05/en_head_0000.json.gz/line37
|
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
No dataset card yet
- Downloads last month
- 13