Tag: Supreme Court of the United States

  • Gay Marriage Case US Supreme Court,Constitutional ? Audio Text

    The Gay Marriage issue has hotted up in The US, the case  has reached The  Supreme Court for hearing and is being hotly debated.

    The Supreme Court,US To hear Gay Marriage.
    The Supreme Court,US To hear Gay Marriage.

     

    What has hitherto an aberration in Behavior, has been  taken as sanctioned socially.

     

    They may not agree that it has never been an aberration.

     

    The whole issue snowballed into a Legal and Constitutional Controversy because California vetoed Gay Marriage and a Couple (Gay) have approached the Court for marriage.

     

    Gay Marriage has now become an issue of Constitutional importance involving the  the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 is unconstitutional.

     

    What beats me is the argument that the Homosexuals couples want to be treated on par with hetero sexual couples!

     

    The very terms used to denote these groups distinctly is, because of their difference, behaviour.

     

    It is like making a Circle equal to a Square!

     

    What exactly are these people demanding now?

     

    To be treated on par with hetero sexual Family and the benefits?

     

    You want the approval of the Society?

     

    You did not listen to the objection of the majority, normal one at that,of going Homosexual, citing all and sundry arguments to justify not-normal behaviour!

     

    You went ahead.

     

    Why do you seek approval from the Society , only to claim the benefits from the Society?

     

    Or respect and regards  from the people?

     

    This is obtained by vilification or arguments but by adhering to Social Norms.

     

    Since you chose a different path, have a set of rules and benefits among yourselves for yourselves.

     

    Well. you can not eat the cake and have it too.

     

    Story:

    Inside the court’s ornate chambers, some justices wanted to slow things down.

    “You want us to step in and render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution, which is newer than cellphones or the Internet?” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked. “We do not have the ability to see the future.”

    Even Justice Sonia Sotomayor, whose questioning indicated that she was skeptical of the reasons proffered for why gay couples should not be allowed to marry, seemed to think that it might not be time for the court to make a bold decision.

    “If the issue is letting the states experiment and letting the society have more time to figure out its direction, why is taking a case now the answer?” she asked.

    A ‘difficult question’

    Sotomayor’s question indicated the complicated nature of the case at hand.

    Washington lawyer Charles J. Cooper is representing proponents of Proposition 8 in defending the law, since California officials have refused. He said the court should respect the decision of California voters, who faced the “agonizingly difficult question” of whether to protect traditional marriage after the state Supreme Court ruled that gay couples could wed.

    Theodore B. Olson, representing two California couples who want to marry, wants Proposition 8 overturned. But he is also pushing the court to find that the Constitution demands that the fundamental right to marry be extended to same-sex couples nationwide.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-historic-moment-for-same-sex-marriage-arrives-before-supreme-court/2013/03/25/c8d85442-95ad-11e2-b6f0-a5150a247b6a_story.html?hpid=z1?wpisrc=al_comboNP_p

    United for Marriage has organizeddozens of pro-gay marriage eventsacross the nation Tuesday, many with the aid of Episcopal, United Church of Christ, Methodist, Unitarian Universalist and other congregations.

    Meanwhile, anti-same sex marriage groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Family Research Council and the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, have also made broad calls, each asking for prayers this week in support of keeping laws that bar same-sex marriage on the books.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/25/gay-marriage-church-support_n_2949179.html

     

    The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in the case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, which challenges California’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage known as Proposition 8. Read the transcript or listen to complete audio of the arguments below. You can annotate the recording with comments and reactions by logging into SoundCloud.

    DOMA oral arguments at Supreme Court (full audio)

  • In Defense of Afzal Guru,We Do Not Need Pakistan

    I read an article in Tehelka now.

    I am posting portions of the article by Prem Shankar Jha and some of the comments from the article.

    I am, at the end of the post the Text of Supreme Court judgement on Afzal Guru.

    Do read Afzal Guru on His Life and Mission.

    http://ramanisblog.in/2013/02/22/parliament-attacker-afzal-guru-on-his-life-mission/

    We do not need people to instigate terrorism and de-stabilize India.

    Article on Afzal Guru.

    Afzal Guru
    Afzal Guru

    Kept hanging between life and death, between hope and despair, he has been denied even the time to accept his end and find the strength within himself to face it with dignity. This has driven him to the edge of madness and made him beg to be put to death immediately. but the Law has been as impervious to his pleas for death as it has so far been to others’ pleas to spare his life.

    Every inquiry about what the government intends to do; every demand to hasten the president’s decision on his mercy petition, has been met with the lofty response, that there are a score of ‘cases’ ahead of him in the queue, so the wheels of justice cannot be speeded up for him alone. Of all the grotesque parodies of democracy that we live with, this insistence upon equality among the condemned is the most heartless.

    But what is the grand process of Law that is taking so long? Last week we found out that it consisted of no more than some official in the Delhi state government losing Guru’s file for four years. but was his file really lost? Or was this Sheila Dixit’s favour to a central government that knows the moral and political cost of hanging Guru, but cannot muster the courage to recommend to the president that she commute his sentence to prison for life?..

    Only the hopelessly naïve will not know the answer. The truth is that from the day he was sentenced Afzal Guru has been the foil in a no-holds-barred fencing match between the BJP and the Congress. Every other consideration — the morality of the death sentence, the injunction that it be applied in the rarest of rare cases, the possible impact of his hanging upon the youth of Kashmir, upon India-pakistan relations, and upon relations between the Hindus and Muslims of India — has faded into the background.

    The match was not begun by the Congress. From the day that Guru was sentenced to death, the bjp has filled the air with taunts, diatribes, and accusations of cowardice and lack of patriotism, aimed at steamrolling Manmohan Singh’s government into hanging him regardless of the cost….

    Comments.

    “Guru, on the other hand, has actually killed no one. He was a facilitator for a crime that would have been truly heinous if it had succeeded. but he believed he was striking a blow for Kashmir’s freedom. His motives were therefore similar to those of Laldenga, who led the Mizo insurgency for 24 years before striking a deal with new Delhi to end it.”..

    How can the death of any one , even a terrorist create a ‘win-win ‘ situation for any one.Mr Jha oversimplifies issues and shamelessly creates propaganda for the congress. Sad to see that the calibre of people who write in Tehelka is so poor.We would like to read articles written by people who are unbiased and morally uprigh…

    • Wow Mr. Jha…Please first write to Islamabad to get the head of our soldier back…Maybe then we should read your rants about BJP and how traitors should be punished…

      REPLY
    • raj February 11, 2013 01:23

      Well done mr jha this guy was innocent he was charged purely on circumstantial evidence and given death penalty even the courts had there doubts but there are no doubts about modi and thackery the indian state doesn,t have the guts to charge them for killing thousands and media which is always playing on hype because its controlled by vested interests shameful democracy in democratic countries all are equal before the law in india that is unless you are muslim when the nato troops leave afghanistan next year then all the concentration will back to the eastern front the payback is surely coming

      REPLY
    • Harinder February 11, 2013 06:10

      Sriram, well said..people are no longer able to think. I applaud Tehelka!

      Supreme court Judgement on Afzal Guru.

      The net result of the above discussion is that the conspiracy to commit terrorist acts attracts punishment under sub-Section (3) of Section 3. The accused Afzal who is found to be a party to the conspiracy is therefore liable to be punished under that provision. Having regard to the nature, potential and magnitude of the conspiracy with all the attendant consequences and the disastrous events that followed, the maximum sentence of life imprisonment is the appropriate punishment to be given to Mohd. Afzal under Section 3(3) of POTA for conspiring to commit the terrorist act. Accordingly, we convict and sentence him.

      The conviction under Section 3(2) of POTA is set aside. The conviction under Section 3(5) of POTA is also set aside because there is no evidence that he is a member of a terrorist gang or a terrorist organization, once the confessional statement is excluded. Incidentally, we may mention that even

      going by confessional statement, it is doubtful whether the membership of a terrorist gang or organization is established.

      We shall then consider whether the conviction of Afzal under Section 120B read with Section 302 IPC is justified. The High Court upheld the conviction and gave death sentence to the two appellants under this Section. We are of the view that the conviction and sentence on this count is in accordance with law. The conspiracy has many dimensions here. It is implicit in the conspiracy to attack the Parliament that it extends to all the offensive acts intimately associated with that illegal objective. Indulgence in terrorist acts, killing and injuring persons who are most likely to resist the attackers, using explosive devices, firearms and other dangerous things in the course of attack, ‘waging war’ against the Government of the country are all various manifestations of the conspiracy hatched by the deceased terrorists in combination with the appellant Afzal.

      Full Text at.

      http://ibnlive.in.com/news/full-text-supreme-court-judgement-on-parliament-attack-convict-afzal-guru/371782-3.html

      http://tehelka.com/death-games-that-politicians-play/

     

  • Tata, a part of the Government?

    = Ratan Tata, Charmain of the Tata Group
    Image via Wikipedia

    Promoting an individual to be a Minister,blocking an elected candidate to become a cabinet Minister,threatening through lobbyist  a  Minister, if he grants Licence to a competitor,attempt to benefit from a land scam,planting stories in the Media,control of Media funds and with holding it,donating (? )Hospital Equipment

    all this ‘official secrets’?

    Since when Tata did become  part of the Government?

    ( or he is?)

    On the same logic, even Terrorists can claim to privacy as it involves destabilization of  the Government?

    The Court has replied suitably, ad hoc, though.

    Let’s see.

    Tata group chief Ratan Tata argued before the Supreme Court on Thursday that telephone intercepts by law enforcement agencies, including the Niira Radia tapes, were part of official secrets and their leakage and unauthorized use by media was punishable under the Official Secrets Act.

    The Bench said: “The court will attempt and try a balance between right to privacy, right to interception and right of public to know.”

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Official-Secret-Act-violated-by-tapes-leak-Tata/articleshow/7567166.cms

    Related:

    News X funds controlled by Radia.

    Click link for audio.

    This conversation between the operations head of news channel NewsX and Niira Radiashows how she virtually controls and funds the channel.

    Niira Radia: Ya?

    Jehangir Pocha: Hi. Listen, we have a big problem here.

    NR: What?

    JP: Our salaries are due but money has not come in yet.

    NR: Salaries are…when are they due?

    JP: Due on first, na?

    NR: Haan…toh aa jayega first ko.

    JP: First is Monday.

    NR: Haan, toh tumhe Monday release karna hai na, payments ko? I don’t know how much Rajeev has asked. Maine budget to bhej diya.

    JP: Listen to me, na. Today is Friday. Even if it comes (on Monday) we have to issue our own money and cheques.

    http://ramanisblog.in/2010/12/21/news-x-controlled-by-radia-tapes/

    Radia with Chandolia on Funding a hospital in Raja\’s Constituency

    Click above link for audio.

    Chandolia.

    Any Comments, MrRighteous?.

    Discharging Social duty?

    Here Radia talks to Chandolia on the ways the Tatas can fund a hospital in PerambalurA. Raja’s hometown. Later, the Tata Foundation allotted Rs 9 crore to upgrade hospitals in the district.

    Niira Radia: Hi, How are you?

    RKC: Haan, good afternoon, I’m fine, how are you?

    NR: I’m all right. Well, I’m snowed under, in Bombay, or should I say washed under with the rain…

    RKC: Okay.

    NR: How are you?

    RKC: When are you coming back to Delhi?

    NR: Not till Tuesday, Wednesday…

    RKC: Okay, okay…could you speak?

    ‘(Tatas) can provide either equipment or some wards.’

    NR: I did speak to Krishna Kumar, I did speak to him, he was supposed to tell the…take the…you see, let me tell you where they are coming from…they’re going ahead, they want to do that, they (are) doing the hospital in Perambalur, no problem right? But what they want to do is, and because the charter of the trust allows them to do it only in a particular manner, what they have to do is, they have to provide equipment for the hospital.

    RKC: Okay.

    http://ramanisblog.in/category/radia-tapes-2/

     

    Radia with Tata’s staff,Tapes.

    Radia with Tata\’s staff.

    Radia talks to Venkat, who is a part of Ratan Tata’s office, about getting a clearance from Tata on a meeting (possibly Sunil Mittal) at a neutral place – at the Chambers or Radia’s residence. Venkat also says he (Tata) doesn’t want her to come to his (Sunil Mittal’s) office as he is worried someone might take undue media advantage (seeing her at Mittal’s office). Radia says she can handle the media. She also asks Venkat if he has spoken to his boss (Ratan Tata) about Noel (Tata)

    http://ramanisblog.in/category/radia-tapes-2/

    Controlling NewsX? Radia Audio.

    Radia with Yatish

    Click for Audio.

    Radia with Noel Tata,Tapes.

    radia with noel tata

    For additional information see categories’ Radia Tapes,Corruption,Media,India’

     

     

     

  • Courts/Govt. can not Decide Policy- Radia Tapes -Audio.

    Wordmark of Tata Steel
    Image via Wikipedia

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWr_7CPf3pI

    Click the link above for Audio.

    Shocking .

    Listen.

    ‘Supreme court ,Central Government,State Government can not decide on industrial Policy.

    Only Corporates can do that.

    Talks on getting Steel Mill for TATA,Spectrum for TATA Deal for Ambani.

    Is this a Cabal?

    Top it all Courts ‘Have No Jurisdiction’.

    Threatening Raja that TATA will retort if he  gives Ambani Spectrum6.2 MHz.

    150 Crores for  a Mine?

  • What is Wikileaks ,how it works-Full Story.

    Wiki leaks may,nay,has embarrassed the Governments the world over,yet the fact remains that it has exposed the hypocrisy and double-dealing diplomatic non-sense.

    The muted reactions from the Governments speaks for itself for the skullduggery being practiced by all.

    Internet and Wiki leaks have proved one thing ,that the world is really one and people need to be told how they are being manipulated by their own.

    Wiki leaks is really the Fourth Estate in its real sense

    Story:

    WikiLeaks is a not-for-profit media organisation. Our goal is to bring important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists (our electronic drop box). One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth. We are a young organisation that has grown very quickly, relying on a network of dedicated volunteers around the globe. Since 2007, when the organisation was officially launched, WikiLeaks has worked to report on and publish important information. We also develop and adapt technologies to support these activities.

    WikiLeaks has sustained and triumphed against legal and political attacks designed to silence our publishing organisation, our journalists and our anonymous sources. The broader principles on which our work is based are the defence of freedom of speech and media publishing, the improvement of our common historical record and the support of the rights of all people to create new history. We derive these principles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular, Article 19 inspires the work of our journalists and other volunteers. It states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. We agree, and we seek to uphold this and the other Articles of the Declaration.

    1.2 How WikiLeaks works

    WikiLeaks has combined high-end security technologies with journalism and ethical principles. Like other media outlets conducting investigative journalism, we accept (but do not solicit) anonymous sources of information. Unlike other outlets, we provide a high security anonymous drop box fortified by cutting-edge cryptographic information technologies. This provides maximum protection to our sources. We are fearless in our efforts to get the unvarnished truth out to the public. When information comes in, our journalists analyse the material, verify it and write a news piece about it describing its significance to society. We then publish both the news story and the original material in order to enable readers to analyse the story in the context of the original source material themselves. Our news stories are in the comfortable presentation style of Wikipedia, although the two organisations are not otherwise related. Unlike Wikipedia, random readers can not edit our source documents.

    As the media organisation has grown and developed, WikiLeaks been developing and improving a harm minimisation procedure. We do not censor our news, but from time to time we may remove or significantly delay the publication of some identifying details from original documents to protect life and limb of innocent people.

    We accept leaked material in person and via postal drops as alternative methods, although we recommend the anonymous electronic drop box as the preferred method of submitting any material. We do not ask for material, but we make sure that if material is going to be submitted it is done securely and that the source is well protected. Because we receive so much information, and we have limited resources, it may take time to review a source’s submission.

    We also have a network of talented lawyers around the globe who are personally committed to the principles that WikiLeaks is based on, and who defend our media organisation.

    1.3 Why the media (and particularly Wiki leaks) is important

    Publishing improves transparency, and this transparency creates a better society for all people. Better scrutiny leads to reduced corruption and stronger democracies in all society’s institutions, including government, corporations and other organisations. A healthy, vibrant and inquisitive journalistic media plays a vital role in achieving these goals. We are part of that media.

    Scrutiny requires information. Historically, information has been costly in terms of human life, human rights and economics. As a result of technical advances particularly the internet and cryptography – the risks of conveying important information can be lowered. In its landmark ruling on the Pentagon Papers, the US Supreme Court ruled that “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.” We agree.

    We believe that it is not only the people of one country that keep their own government honest, but also the people of other countries who are watching that government through the media.

    In the years leading up to the founding of WikiLeaks, we observed the world’s publishing media becoming less independent and far less willing to ask the hard questions of government, corporations and other institutions. We believed this needed to change.

    WikiLeaks has provided a new model of journalism. Because we are not motivated by making a profit, we work cooperatively with other publishing and media organisations around the globe, instead of following the traditional model of competing with other media. We don’t hoard our information; we make the original documents available with our news stories. Readers can verify the truth of what we have reported themselves. Like a wire service, WikiLeaks reports stories that are often picked up by other media outlets. We encourage this. We believe the world’s media should work together as much as possible to bring stories to a broad international readership.

    1.4 How WikiLeaks verifies its news stories

    We assess all news stories and test their veracity. We send a submitted document through a very detailed examination a procedure. Is it real? What elements prove it is real? Who would have the motive to fake such a document and why? We use traditional investigative journalism techniques as well as more modern rtechnology-based methods. Typically we will do a forensic analysis of the document, determine the cost of forgery, means, motive, opportunity, the claims of the apparent authoring organisation, and answer a set of other detailed questions about the document. We may also seek external verification of the document For example, for our release of the Collateral Murder video, we sent a team of journalists to Iraq to interview the victims and observers of the helicopter attack. The team obtained copies of hospital records, death certificates, eye witness statements and other corroborating evidence supporting the truth of the story. Our verification process does not mean we will never make a mistake, but so far our method has meant that WikiLeaks has correctly identified the veracity of every document it has published.

    Publishing the original source material behind each of our stories is the way in which we show the public that our story is authentic. Readers don’t have to take our word for it; they can see for themselves. In this way, we also support the work of other journalism organisations, for they can view and use the original documents freely as well. Other journalists may well see an angle or detail in the document that we were not aware of in the first instance. By making the documents freely available, we hope to expand analysis and comment by all the media. Most of all, we want readers know the truth so they can make up their own minds.

    1.5 The people behind WikiLeaks

    WikiLeaks is a project of the Sunshine Press. It’s probably pretty clear by now that WikiLeaks is not a front for any intelligence agency or government despite a rumour to that effect. This rumour was started early in WikiLeaks’ existence, possibly by the intelligence agencies themselves. WikiLeaks is an independent global group of people with a long standing dedication to the idea of a free press and the improved transparency in society that comes from this. The group includes accredited journalists, software programmers, network engineers, mathematicians and others.

    To determine the truth of our statements on this, simply look at the evidence. By definition, intelligence agencies want to hoard information. By contrast, WikiLeaks has shown that it wants to do just the opposite. Our track record shows we go to great lengths to bring the truth to the world without fear or favour.

    The great American president Thomas Jefferson once observed that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We believe the journalistic media plays a key role in this vigilance.

    http://wikileaks.ch/About.html