OF THE
TIMES
He noted that Israel's ongoing strikes against the Palestinians are "flagrant manifestations of war crimes" necessitating punitive action."Doubtlessly, the Zionist regime's crimes, which are threatening international peace and security today, stem from the condoning of the crimes this regime has been committing against defenseless Palestinians over the past 66 years," Pour-Mohammadi said.
Let us continue to strive for an original and smarter food security programme from this government but let us not allow that to blind us to the hypocrisy of the arguments made against India for its stance at the WTO negotiations.Dr.Nageswaran's argument primarily is that:
India is insisting upon change in the method of calculating the legally permissible subsidy. It cannot be based on prices that prevailed in 1986-88. That India has a badly designed and ultimately counterproductive grain procurement and distribution programme today is no reason to agree to the use of an outdated benchmark price to calculate the nation's food subsidy. At a future date, even a well-designed food security programme might still fail to comply with the treaty obligation if the reference prices are not updated. The reluctance to do the same raises many unanswered questions on the intent behind keeping the reference price from nearly two decades ago. Further, the numerical ceiling of the total food subsidy not exceeding 10% of the value of production (calculated at 1986-88 prices) needs to be reviewedIndia's stance has been the cause of much consternation with the developed countries.
WTO negotiations gave Narendra Modi the opportunity for stand up to his 'strongman' image, while protecting India's "food security" needs. Are there any other reasons for this bold move?
- India at present is running a massive food procurement programmes by providing minimum supporting price to the farmers and giving subsidised food to lakhs of BPL families through its public distribution system (PDS).
- The new WTO agreement limits the value of food subsidies at 10 percent of the total food grain production. India is flexing muscle on the issue because subsidies have been calculated by WTO taking 1986 as base year into account which will largely affect food procurement programme through MSP.
- India is raising its concerns by saying that while US is providing 120 billion as agriculture subsidy then why India can't give even one tenth (USD 12 billion) to their farmers.
- India which is home to about 25 percent of the world's hungry, has a viewpoint that it is a Government's responsibility and duty to ensure availability of proper food to its people.
- Moreover, India's food programme is largely domestic so it doesn't distort global food trade. The Indian sources say that once the TFA will be implemented it will be difficult to bargain on the food subsidy thing and that is why India has this brazen attitude.
India's WTO position reflects Modi's desire to emerge as a champion of farmers
Actually, Modi's explicit promise to Indian farmers that the government would ensure a 50% profit margin for them over and above their total costs could be a factor guiding the current knee-jerk response to WTO. Politically, his position has merit.
They want to pile up as many civilian dead as they can. They use telegenically dead Palestinians for their cause. They want the more dead, the better.Joseph Goebbels, November 16, 1941, essay in Das Reich, addressing Germany sympathy for German Jews forced to wear yellow stars:
The Jews gradually are having to depend more and more on themselves, and have recently found a new trick. They knew the good-natured German Michael in us, always ready to shed sentimental tears for the injustice done to them. One suddenly has the impression that the Berlin Jewish population consists only of little babies whose childish helplessness might move us, or else fragile old ladies. The Jews send out the pitiable. They may confuse some harmless souls for a while, but not us. We know exactly what the situation is.Rather than lard up the point with numerous defensive caveats about what is and is not being said here (which, in any event, never impede willful media distorters in their tactics), I'll simply note three brief points:
Comment: But what if it's not a missile, but a bomb? And Mossad is responsible? Read the following artcile to learn more:
Asymmetric Warfare: MH17 False-Flag Terror and the 'War' on Gaza