The Berlin Strategic Offensive Operation by the Soviet Union, also known as the “Battle of Berlin” was the last major offensive against the Germans in the European Theatre of World War II.
On January 12, 1945, the Soviet Army advanced across Poland towards eastern Germany. The Soviet Red Army breached the German front in the Eastern arena of the European Theatre of World War II. This successful operation by the Red Army, known as the Vistula–Oder Offensive, took place between January 12 and February 2, 1945.
The Russians advanced westward as much as 25 miles (40 km) a day through East Prussia, Lower Silesia, East Pomerania, and Upper Silesia, temporarily halting on a line 37 miles (60 km) east of Berlin along the Oder River.
When the offensive resumed, two Soviet fronts attacked Berlin from the east and south, while a third overran German forces positioned north of Berlin.
At the same time, the Allied air forces devastated Berlin with bombing raids.
Hitler retreats to the Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker
As the Third Reich was rapidly disintegrating, Hitler, after deciding to stay in Berlin for the last great siege of the war, retreated to the Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker on January 16, 1945. He was joined by his senior staff, Martin Bormann, and later, Hitler’s mistress Eva Braun.
Two to three dozen support, medical, and administrative staff were also in the bunker complex. These included Hitler’s secretaries – Gerda Christian, Gertraud “Traudl” Junge, a nurse named Erna Flegel, and Rochus Misch, Hitler’s courier, bodyguard and telephone operator.
When Hitler moved to the underground Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker brought his pet Blondi, the seven-year-old female German Shepherd, gifted to him in 1941 by Martin Bormann, along with him, and Eva Braun brought her two Scottish Terrier dogs Negus and Stasi along with her. In the underground bunker Blondi had a litter of five puppies. Hitler named one of them “Wolf”, his favorite nickname and the meaning of his own first name, Adolf (Noble wolf).
Eva Anna Paula Braun
Eva Braun, hailing from a middle-class Catholic family, met Adolf Hitler, 23 years her senior, in Munich when she was 17 years old. She was then employed as an assistant to Heinrich Hoffmann, the official photographer for the Nazi Party (NSDAP). She was the longtime companion of Adolf Hitler.
On August 10 or 11, 1932, Eva attempted suicide by shooting herself in the chest with her father’s pistol. However, historians feel the attempt was a bid for Hitler’s attention. After Braun’s recovery, Hitler became more committed to her, and by the end of 1932 they had become lovers. She often stayed overnight at Hitler’s Munich apartment.
Eva then became a shadowy figure tucked away at the Alpine retreat at Obersalzberg, the main area of Nazi occupation in Berchtesgaden, spent her time with Hitler out of public view. She spent her time skiing and swimming. Though she had no perceptible influence on Hitler’s political career, she provided a certain domesticity to his life.
A few weeks before Hitler’s last birthday on April 20, Eva came to Berlin. From then on, against his will, she stayed with him until their death.
The advance of the soviet army
On April 16, 1945, the Russian Army started the Battle of Berlin and 2.5 million Russian soldiers reached the German capital. By April 19, 1945, the Red Army started to encircle the city.
When Marshal Georgy Zhukov’s Russian troops resumed its offensive, two Soviet fronts attacked Berlin from the east and south, while a third overran German forces positioned north of Berlin. Street fighting raged in the north of Berlin, with the few German troops putting up a desperate defence against the Red Army. The German Army did not have the means to halt Marshal Zhukov’s troops. The Soviet army outnumbered the Germans 15 to 1. Moreover, the Red Army seemed to have unlimited mechanized armor.
Two Soviet fronts attacked Berlin from the east and south, while a third overran German forces positioned north of Berlin. Street fighting raged in the north of Berlin, with the few German troops putting up a desperate defence against the Red Army. The German Army did not have the means to halt Marshal Zhukov’s troops. The Soviet army outnumbered the Germans 15 to 1. Moreover, the Red Army seemed to have unlimited mechanized armor.
Some battalions of the German army were making a hasty retreat westward to surrender to the Americans. Overwrought with rage, Hitler started issuing frantic orders to defend Berlin with his depleted armies.
In 1986, the East German government made plans to build a massive apartment complex on the corner of Vossstrasse and Wilhelmstrasse in what was then East Berlin. For constructing the complex it was necessary to demolish concrete from a darker past. Under the construction site, located 28 feet (8.5 metres) deep in the ground, was the most notorious and imposing bunker complex used by Adolf Hitler and his murderous band of Nazis at the close of World War II.
In 1987, Robert Conrad, a German photographer, disguised as a construction worker took the risk to secretly photograph Adolf Hitler’s decaying Reichskanzlei-Vorbunker-Führerbunker complex. Conrad said:
“Of course there was nothing in the newspapers about the Nazi bunkers. That was very much a taboo subject, as was everything about the Nazi period… Officially, they were just constructing a new residential neighborhood.”
Wilhelmstrasse (German: Wilhelmstraße) is a major thoroughfare in the central Mitte and Kreuzberg districts of Berlin, Germany. The street whose former name was Husarenstraße was renamed Wilhelmstraße in honor King Frederick William I, who died in 1740.
Wilhelmstraße was recognized as the centre of the government, first of the Kingdom of Prussia, later of the unified German Reich, housing in particular the Reich Chancellery and the Foreign Office.
King Frederick William I (August 14, 1688 – May 31, 1740) of Prussia built the Palais Schulenburg, at Wilhelmstraße 77, for his esteemed Lieutenant General Count Adolph Friedrich von der Schulenburg. The building was completed in 1739.
In 1875, after many ownerships, the feuding Radziwill heirs sold Palais Schulenburg to the German Reich. It became the Reichskanzlerpalais (Chancellor’s palace). It was the Chancellery of the German Reich from 1871 to 1945 from the time of Otto von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of Germany, and subsequent German Chancellors, the last being Adolf Hitler.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler decided to expand the Reichskanzlei (Reich Chancellery), which he considered too small for his needs. On July 21, 1935, Professor Leonhard Gall, one of Adolf Hitler’s architects, submitted unique plans for a large reception hall to be built as an expansion of the old Chancellery, that could also be used as a ballroom.
The plan envisaged a bunker 5 feet (1.5 metres) beneath the cellar of the large reception hall behind the old Reich Chancellery at Wilhelmstraß. It had a 6.25 feet (1.6 metres) thick roof. The thick walls of the bunker were designed to support the weight of the large reception hall on top of it. The bunker had three doorways – to the north, west and south.
The construction was completed in 1936.
The bunker was meant to be a temporary air-raid shelter for Adolf Hitler, his guards, and servants. It was officially called the “Reich Chancellery Air-Raid Shelter” until 1943, with the construction to expand the complex with the addition of the Führerbunker, located one level below. From then on this bunker became known as the Vorbunker or forward bunker or upper bunker.
The New Reich Chancellery
Though Hitler lived in Reichskanzlerpalais he once commented that Bismarck’s Old Chancellery was “fit for a soap company” but not suitable as headquarters of a Greater German Reich. So, in January 1938, Hitler asked Albert Speer, his chief architect, to build a larger, grander, new Reich Chancellery on the same site as the existing structure. Hitler said he needed the new building built in a year, in time to host the foreign diplomats during his next New Year’s reception.
This huge undertaking was a tall order because the existing Chancellery was in full operation. After consultation with his assistants, Speer agreed to build it.
However, the site was cleared only in April, 1938. Speer employed thousands of workers in two shifts. He completed the task successfully in nine months.
Albert Speer presented the fully furnished New Reich Chancellery to Hitler two days earlier than the allotted last day.
Hitler, who had remained away from the project, was overwhelmed when he saw the large, impressive, structure that included a 480-feet (146 metres) long “Marble Gallery,” almost twice the length of the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles. In appreciation Hitler awarded Speer the Nazi Golden Party Badge. But in Winston Churchill’s words, it was the hub of “a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime.”
The most famous and arguably the most notorious and elaborate bunker complex in Germany consisted of two separate shelters, constructed in two phases. The Vorbunker completed in 1936, and the Führerbunker, to the west-southwest, completed in 1944. Since the bunkers were kept secret, information and details about them are rather scarce.
Increased bombing of Berlin led to the expansion of the Vorbunker as an improvised permanent air-raid shelter. The Führerbunker located 2.5 metres (8.2 ft) lower than the Vorbunker was built about 28 feet (8.5 metres) beneath the garden of the old Reich Chancellery, 390 feet (120 metres) north of the new Reich Chancellery building at Voßstraße 6.
The Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker was the last of the Führer Headquarters used by Adolf Hitler.
The above sketch of Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker is based on the photographs taken in 1988 by researcher Tom Posch of the remains of the bunkers and published in the book titled “The Berlin Führerbunker: The Thirteenth Hole, After the Battle, No.61“, Special Edition, Battle of Britain International Ltd, 1988.
The Vorbunker and the Führerbunker were connected by a stairway set at right angles and could be closed off from each other by a bulkhead and a steel door.
Besides being deeper underground, the Führerbunker had significantly more reinforcement than the Vorbunker. Its roof was made of concrete almost 10 feet (3 metres) thick. About 30 small rooms were protected by approximately 13 feet (4 metres) of concrete; exits led into the main buildings, as well as an emergency exit up to the garden.
Born in 1941, during World War II, I naturally have a fascination for the history of the Great War. Every time, I read about Adolf Hitler, the great dictator murdered more than 11 million people, including over one million children during the Holocaust, and his band of Nazis I look forward to coming across intriguing new viewpoints about the end of the Third Reich and the ultimate fate of its Führer.
According to popular consensus among historians, Hitler killed himself at the close of World War II. But, many unanswered questions, doubts, and uncertainties still linger about his death.
The perennial question: “Did Adolf Hitler commit suicide on April 30, 1945?” prompts those with even a modest knowledge of the history of World War II to pursue this issue even further. This question has also served as a catalyst for the prolific output of books and articles by conspiracy theorists.
Many historians claim that Adolf Hitler died of a self-inflicted gunshot while biting a cyanide capsule while Eva Braun committed suicide along with him by ingesting cyanide.
If we accept that Hitler committed suicide in April 1945, here again accounts differ about how he died:
Hitler died from a lethal injection administered by his personal physician Werner Haase.
Hitler died of a self-inflicted gunshot while biting a cyanide capsule while Eva Braun committed suicide along with him by ingesting cyanide.
Hitler after shooting his wife Eva Braun swallowed a cyanide capsule and shot himself.
An article written by Yorkshire war reporter Joe Illingworth in August 1945 casts doubt on events in the bunker, claiming that the Russians said there was no “convincing” proof of Hitler’s demise.
On September 26, 2009, the History Channel aired a documentary called Hitler’s Escape. For the making of the film, Connecticut archaeologist and bone specialist Nick Bellantoni flew to Moscow to inspect the Hitler trophies at the Russian State Archive which included the skull fragment with a bullet hole through it, which the Russians dug up outside the Führerbunker in 1946, as well as bloodstains from the bunker sofa on which Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun were believed to have committed suicide. The Russian government has been publicly claiming since 2000 that these articles belonged to Hitler.
“I had the reference photos the Soviets took of the sofa in 1945 and I was seeing the exact same stains on the fragments of wood and fabric in front of me, so I knew I was working with the real thing,” Bellatoni said.
Examination of the skull by Bellantoni revealed it belonged to a young woman and not that of the 56-year-old dictator. “The bone seemed very thin. Male bone tends to be more robust,” he said. “And the sutures where the skull plates come together seemed to correspond to someone under 40.”
Bellantoni applied cotton swabs and took samples for DNA tests during the one hour he was allowed with the Hitler trove. The swabs were then flown back to Connecticut. At the university’s Centre for Applied Genetics, Linda Strausbaugh, worked for three days on the samples sent by Bellatoni. “We used the same routines and controls that would have been used in a crime lab,” she said.
The DNA analysis revealed that the skull undoubtedly belonged to a female, and the only positive physical proof that Hitler had shot himself had suddenly been rendered worthless. The result of the DNA analysis reopened the mystery surrounding Hitler’s death. Many compelling questions resurfaced such as:
Why did the Russians exhibit the corpse of Hitler’s double? Was it because they believed it to be the real Hitler?
If Hitler allegedly shot himself in the right temple, then why did the Russians exhibit what is claimed to be Hitler’s cranium, showing a bullet hole in the back of his head?
Why did the Russians refuse to allow their Western Allies to see Hitler’s presumed autopsy report?
Was Josef Stalin, the Russian leader telling the truth when he told US President Harry Truman and others that Adolf Hitler had escaped from Germany?
Why did Hitler’s plane land in Barcelona, Spain, on April 27, 1945, three days before the alleged suicide?
Why did three German submarines, land at the coast of southern Argentina more than two months after the end of World War II?’
Many conspiracy theorists have rejected the accounts of suicide by Hitler as either Soviet propaganda or an attempted compromise to reconcile the different conclusions. According to every one of the conspiracy theorists, the investigations conducted by the American and Soviet armies at the fall of Berlin lead to the only conclusion that Hitler escaped alive and left Germany during the fall of Berlin, most probably on April 22, 1945.
If Hitler escaped from Germany, then where did he go, and how long did he survive? Some say there is evidence suggesting that Hitler may have fled to Indonesia, where he married and worked at a hospital in Sumbawa. However, the popular consensus among the conspiracy theorists is he fled to Argentina.
Present conspiracy theorists contend that evidence of Adolf Hitler’s suicide is flawed and that he did manage to escape from Germany. Simon Dunstan and Gerrard Williams, authors of the book ‘Grey Wolf: The Escape Of Adolf‘, claim that Adolf Hitler did manage to escape to South America. Their claim is more speculative and doubts have been raised about the validity of their conclusions. Guy Walters, the British author, novelist, historian, academic and journalist ridiculed the claims by the sensationalists as “2,000 per cent rubbish.”
I am not a professional historian. Still, from what I have read, I will describe to you in an abridged form, in my subsequent posts, of what happened in the Reichskanzlei-Führerbunker from January 16, 1945 to May 1, 1945.
There seems to be some sort of affinity between India and day 26.
On the occult side, Manmohan Singh, the 14th Prime Minister of India, from 2004 to 2014, was born on September 26, 1932. Maneka Sanjay Gandhi the new Indian Union Cabinet Minister for Women & Child Development in the Government of Narendra Damodardas Modi, was born on August 26, 1956.
Many incidents such as India’s Independence Day, Republic Day, major earthquakes, tsunamis, internecine communal riots, bloody terrorist attacks have taken place on day 26.
January 26, 1930 – India’s Independence Day
India gained freedom from the British rule on August 15, 1947, but patriotic Indians had celebrated their first “Independence Day” 17 years earlier, on January 26, 1930. The choice of the day was unforeseen.
In 1928, Motilal Nehru chaired a prestigious committee that drafted a “Constitution” for an Indian Dominion that would have been a secular democratic reflection of Britain’s parliamentary system.
Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his All-India Muslim League insisted on more “safeguards” for Muslims as their price for endorsing the Motilal Nehru Committee’s proposal.
Jawaharlal Nehru and other young radical leaders of Congress like Subhas Chandra Bose of Bengal viewed Motilal Nehru’s recommendations as too conservative.
Mahatma Gandhi remained aloof from such matters, preferring to spin his cotton, waiting to be called upon to lead the next Satyagraha.
Motilal Nehru was unable to rally the broad spectrum of Indian political parties to his constitution’s support and it was doomed to an early demise.
The Indian National Congress held its annual session in Lahore in December 1929. During the debates the All India Home Rule League and the All-India Muslim League favoured for a Dominion status for India within the British Empire as enjoyed by Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand and Newfoundland at the time. Leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal and many others argued for a complete separation from British rule. In the end, the latter group’s view prevailed.
The Congress then promulgated the “Purna Swaraj” or “complete self-rule” declaration resolving the Congress and Indian nationalists to fight for complete independence from the British rule as opposed to a dominion status for India.
Jawaharlal Nehru was chosen the president of the Congress. On the midnight of December 31, 1929, he raised the first “Swaraj” flag on the banks of the Raavi river in Lahore. This flag was adopted and it was first hoisted on October 31, 1931. This flag was used by the Provisional Government of Free India during the subsequent years of Second World War.
The Congress passed a resolution fixing the last Sunday of January 1930 as India’s “Independence Day”. Coincidentally, it was January 26. It resolved to hold countrywide demonstrations in support of the goal. The day was to begin with the hoisting of the flag and reciting the “pledge of independence”. Gandhi envisaged that besides the meetings, the day would be spent,
“… in doing some constructive work, whether it is spinning, or service of ‘untouchables,’ or reunion of Hindus and Mussalmans, or prohibition work, or even all these together.”
An official draft by Gandhi said:
“The British government in India has not only deprived the Indian people of their freedom but has based itself on the exploitation of the masses and has ruined India economically, politically, culturally and spiritually… Therefore, India must sever the British connection and attain ‘purna swaraj’ or ‘complete independence’.”
The Congress called on the people to pledge themselves to civil disobedience and “to carry out the instructions issued from time to time” by the Congress, till India attained complete independence. Celebration of such an Independence Day was envisioned to stoke nationalistic fervour among Indian citizens, and to force the British government to consider granting independence.
“An Autobiography” also known as “Toward Freedom” published in 1936 by The Bodley Head, is an autobiographical book written by Jawaharlal Nehru while he was in prison. It ran nine editions in the first year alone. In this book, Jawaharlal Nehru described the observances of “Independence Day” on January 26 as peaceful, solemn, and “without any speeches or exhortation”:
“From then on, the Congress members and supporters celebrated January 26 as the Independence Day till 1947, regardless of whether the actual transfer of power had taken place.“
August 15, 1947 – India gains Independence
Following the peaceful, civil disobedience and nonviolent resistance, led by the Indian National Congress for independence, the British government agreed to accord freedom to India on August 15, 1947.
Eleven days before August 15, 1947, Viceroy Lord Louis Mountbatten, Jawaharlal Nehru representing the Indian National Congress and Mohammad Ali Jinnah representing the Muslim League, which demanded a separate sovereign state for Muslims, prepared for the transfer of power from the British Crown.
During these deliberations, an abstract picture of a divided nation comprising India and Pakistan came into being as distinct from the agglomeration of princely states and provinces administered by the British Raj.
On August 14, 1947, the dominion of Pakistan which then included East Pakistan, declared independence from the British Crown.
On the eve of India’s Independence, towards midnight on August 14, 1947, Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of independent India, in his inaugural address to the Indian Parliament heralded India’s tryst with destiny.
“Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance.
It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity. …“
November 26, 1949 – Adoption of the Indian Constitution
After gaining independence, India, still owing formal allegiance to the British Crown, did not have its own Constitution and so it depended entirely on the amended colonial Government of India Act, 1935.
As a first step to evolve a sovereign republic, a constituent assembly of elected members of the provincial assemblies was set up to frame a new Constitution for the Republic of India. It included Jawaharlal Nehru, C. Rajagopalachari, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Shyama Prasad Mookherjee and Nalini Ranjan Ghosh. There were jurists like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer and K.M. Munshi.
Dr. Ambedkar was asked to lead the drafting committee of the Constitution. The committee met for 166 days over two years, 11 months and 18 days.
On November 26, 1949, the final document of the Constitution that enshrined 345 Articles and eight Schedules was adopted by the Constituent Assembly, replacing the Government of India Act (1935) as the governing document of India.
January 26, 1950 – India’s Republic Day
The Constitution came into force on January 26, 1950, and India officially became a Sovereign Democratic Republic.
January 26 was selected as the Republic Day because the Declaration of Indian Independence (Purna Swaraj) was proclaimed by the Indian National Congress on this day in 1930.
The people of India honour this day as their Republic Day.
On January 26, 1950, the Republic Day ceremonies began in Delhi.
On January 26, 1950, Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, the 34th and last Governor-General of India, read out a proclamation announcing the birth of the Republic of India. The Constitution of India came into effect, declaring India as a sovereign, democratic and secular state.
Dr. Rajendra Prasad took the oath of office as India’s first president, replacing the King as the head of the state, at the Durbar Hall of the Rashtrapati Bhavan (residence of the president of India). He addressed the crowd, first in Hindi and then in English. After the swearing in ceremony, the new president of India drove through the streets in his state coach to the Irwin Stadium (now renamed as the Dhyan Chand Stadium) and hoisted the national flag.
The government declared a two-day national holiday to a jubilant nation.
Currently, the Republic Day celebrations begin in India on January 26 with a grand parade held in the capital, New Delhi, from the Raisina Hill near the Rashtrapati Bhavan , along the Rajpath, past India Gate.
The Republic Day festivities end officially with the Beating Retreat ceremony conducted on the evening of January 29, the third day after the Republic Day.
These women dressed in pink and with laathi (bamboo stick) in their hands are fearless!
Their leader Sampat Pal Devi is a mother of five children and a former government health worker. She has a long list of criminal charges against her: unlawful assembly, rioting, attacking government employees, obstructing officers in the discharge of duty, beating a policeman for abusing her, and so on. Once she even went underground to hide from the law. However, her actions have secured notable victories for the community.
Sampat Pal Devi (born 1960) is a tough woman with a commanding personality. She hails from the Bundelkhand area in the state of Uttar Pradesh – one of the poorest region in India and notorious for its rebels-turned-armed bandits. Sampat is a vigilante and activist fighting for the rights of women in the villages.
She was given in marriage to an ice-cream vendor at the tender age of 12. She bore her first child, a girl, at 15.
In 2006, responding to widespread domestic abuse and other violence against women, Sampat Pal Devi formed the Gulabi Gang (Hindi गुलाबी gulabī, “pink”), a group of Indian women vigilantes. Most Gulabi members dress in pink and carry laathis in their hand.
Despite being born into a traditional family and married off early, Sampat evolved into a charismatic leader who acts as judge and jury for girls and women who are being abused by outlawed patriarchal traditions and the caste system.
Sampat and her gang are constantly on the move fighting causes for the betterment of the community. They crusade against child marriages, dowry, and female illiteracy.
To demand their rights, the rebellious women gang submits petitions and verbally attacks corrupt officials, sneering policemen and complaisant bureaucrats. They visit abusive husbands and beat them up with laathis and warn them to stop abusing their wives in the future.
They usually travel by cart and tractor. At times, they undertake long journeys by bus and train, to fight for justice for women and dalits and other untouchable people.
In 2008, when her village was deprived of electricity because the officials of the department expected to extract bribes and sexual favours from the women, she and her stick-wielding Gulabi Gang stormed the premises of the electricity department, locked the concerned officials in a room until they cried for mercy. An hour after they left the premises, the power was on in their village.
In 2008, the group was reported to have 20,000 members as well as a chapter in Paris, France. Now, the Gulabi Gang has taken root in Banda, Mahoba, Chitrakot, Fatehpur, Farrukhabad, Kanpur, Allahabad, Etawah and Bijnore and has about 300,000 women members.
The Gulabi gang is the subject of the 2010 movie Pink Saris by Kim Longinotto as is the 2012 documentary Gulabi Gang by Nishtha Jain.
Initially, it was reported that the Bollywood film, Gulaab Gang, starring Madhuri Dixit and Juhi Chawla as leads, is based on Sampat Pal’s life, but the director denied this, saying that he recognizes the work done by Sampat, but his movie is not based on her life.
Now, the all-women Gulabi Gang is heading for a split as there is a tussle in leadership. On Sunday, March 2, 2014, six years after its inception, the group’s founder commander Sampat Pal Devi was dethroned by the Maharashtra based national convener of Gulabi gang Jayprakash Shivhare at a meeting in Banda following allegations of financial irregularities – “taking money for resolving the problems of poor and suffering women,” and “involvement in self promotion” at the cost of the organization’s mission.
The national convener of Gulabi Gang, Jayprakash Shivhare said:
“There is huge resentment in the organization against Pal. She had been playing in the hands of the Congress party… She had stopped holding meetings of the group and used to take decisions autocratically. She contested Assembly elections on
Congress ticket without taking any suggestion from other members of the group… Later, she decided to visit Rae Bareli along with other members and campaign in support of Congress president Sonia Gandhi and against Aam Aadmi Party.”
“She also went to TV reality show Bigg Boss without consulting the working committee of the group. She had gradually become extremely selfish and minting money at the cost of the organization… Removing her from all posts was the only option left with us. Since she has been defying decisions of the group, it was decided that she would no longer be its primary member.”
Suman Singh Chauhan, commander of Mahoba unit has been appointed as interim commander of the group and a seven-member committee has been constituted to run the organization as of now. A meeting of the group has been convened on March 23 to elect a full-time commander.
However, Sampat Pal Devi, asserted her authority saying she was still the leader of the Gulabi Gang.
“I may appear to be an eccentric old man… But this is a free choice.” – José Mujica, President of Uruguay
On September 20, 2012, in the article “‘Poorest president’ donates 90% of his salary” published in Yahoo! News, Claudine Zap wrote:
How’s this as a man of the people: The president of Uruguay, José Mujica, has earned a nickname, “elpresidentemaspobre” (translation: “the poorest president”).
The 77-year-old recently admitted to the Spanish newspaper El Mundo that he donates almost all of his presidential salary, making him the poorest, or, as Univision pointed out, most generous president, in the world.
El presidente explained he receives $12,500 a month but keeps only $1,250. The public servant told the newspaper, “I do fine with that amount; I have to do fine because there are many Uruguayans who live with much less.”
He and his wife—a senator who also donates part of her salary—live in a farmhouse in Montevideo. His biggest expense is his Volkswagen Beetle, valued at $1,945.
Perhaps not surprisingly, under the former guerrilla fighter, who was elected in 2010 as a member of the left-wing coalition, the Broad Front, the country has become known for being one of the least corrupt on the continent.
Mujica has no bank accounts and no debt, and he enjoys one thing money can’t buy: the companionship of his dog, Manuela…”
The author of an article published in The Economist wrote that some Uruguayans see him as “a roly-poly former guerrilla who grows flowers on a small farm and swears by vegetarianism.”
In the article “After Years in Solitary, an Austere Life as Uruguay’s President“, published in The New York Times on January 4, 2013, Simon Romero, wrote:
“Some world leaders live in palaces. Some enjoy perks like having a discreet butler, a fleet of yachts or a wine cellar with vintage Champagnes. Then there is José Mujica, the former guerrilla who is Uruguay’s president. He lives in a run-down house on Montevideo’s outskirts with no servants at all. His security detail: two plainclothes officers parked on a dirt road.
In a deliberate statement to this cattle-exporting nation of 3.3 million people, Mr. Mujica, 77, shunned the opulent Suárez y Reyes presidential mansion, with its staff of 42, remaining instead in the home where he and his wife have lived for years, on a plot of land where they grow chrysanthemums for sale in local markets.
Under Mr. Mujica, who took office in 2010, Uruguay has drawn attention for seeking to legalize marijuana and same-sex marriage, while also enacting one of the region’s most sweeping abortion rights laws and sharply boosting the use of renewable energy sources like wind and biomass.”
An article titled “José Mujica – The Simple Living President of Uruguay” published about 10 months ago in rewordit.org, the author wrote:
“Being selected as the fortieth President of Uruguay must have really been a proud moment for José Mujica, but this appointment was far different than the rest of politicians we’re accustomed to seeing in the world. At such a juncture, when anyone else would have loved driving into an elaborately manned and chauffeur-driven vehicle to reach La Residencia de Suarez – the presidential palace, Mujica was better off driving his 87 model of Volkswagen himself together with wife Lucia and spend some solacing moments at Montevideo.”
The above is what most media say about the 78-year-old José Alberto “Pepe” Mujica Cordano.
However, Mujica has his share of detractors in his own country. Adolfo Castells in his article “Folclórico deslumbramiento primer mundista” (Dazzling Folklore of first-world) says:
“Mujica se presenta como ejemplo de político austero y abnegado, cuando en realidad sacrificio no hace ninguno porque no le gusta vivir confortablemente. Lo cual estaría en su perfecto derecho si no hiciese una suerte de exhibicionismo de la pobreza.“
Translation: “Mujica presents himself as an example of austere and self-sacrificing politician, when actually sacrifice has nothing to do here because he does not like living comfortably. This would be in his perfect right if he did not use it to create a sort of exhibitionism of poverty.”
Castells scoffs at the media that says Mujica is a vegetarian:
“… en el colmo de la desinformación— afirma que nuestro Presidente es vegetariano. Seguramente piensa que los chorizos del Quincho de Varela están rellenos de berenjena y soja.“
Translation: “… in the height of the disinformation — affirmed that our president is vegetarian. Surely they think that the sausages of Quincho de Varela are stuffed with eggplant and soya.”
Castells says that Mujica has successfully created the character ‘The poorest president’ like José Joaquín de Olmedo, who on October 9, 1820, declared the city of Guayaquil independent from Spain, and was Vice-President of Ecuador from 1830 to 1831. Castells says:
“Ese personaje se disfraza de pobre, llama a la prensa cuando va a comprar la tapa de un WC,“
Translation: “Mujica is so poor that he called the press when purchasing a lid for his WC,”
On January 8, 2013, Gerardo Sotelo in his article titled “Ejemplo” (Example) published in El País wrote:
“Suddenly, Jose Mujica appears in the New York Times and Korean television as ‘the world’s poorest president’. His austere lifestyle, which is in contrast to the pomp that surrounds most of their leaders, surprises foreign columnists. This international recognition leaves his followers spellbound, and his detractors full of resentment.”
Sotelo then goes on to compare José Mujica with Mahatma Gandhi:
“Are we witnessing the reincarnation of Mahatma Gandhi or a skilled politician who hides behind his austerity, a life devoted body and soul to gain power?
For now, there is nothing to compare the testimony of the life of the Uruguayan president travelling in a [Volkswagen] Fusca and cooking his own stew, with Gandhi.
The Indian leader lacked all material goods, except sandals, a pair of glasses, a prayer book, and a covered bowl to eat his lean food. Much more important was that, even though Gandhi was able to gather all the political and religious power he wanted he did not accept any position. His detachment [from possessions] and did what his conscience dictated was the way to his freedom, and he knew the same could help his people to achieve their own freedom.
Detachment makes sense when it affects something that is treasured. Unlike most of his colleagues, including several left leaders, Mujica can live with very little because he does not find value in the comfort that some material possessions offer. Therefore, he spends part of his valuable time on more mundane chores such as cooking food for his bitch Manuela. So, what value does his renunciation achieve?
Gandhi fasted to urge his compatriots to fight unitedly for freedom. His renunciation had enormous spiritual value because it was something that was necessary. We have not seen Mujica do anything like that.”
If the man gaping at a woman’s cleavage is handsome, she will coyly say: “He is audacious!,” if not she would retort: “He is a pervert!”
If the woman with an eyeful cleavage pays attention to a man, he will chuckle and say: “She is sexy!,” if not he would riposte: “She is a whore!”
Cleavage, anatomically known as the intermammary cleft or the intermammary sulcus, is the space between a woman’s breasts lying over the sternum.
From time immemorial, women’s breasts are synonymous with feminineness. Invariably, well-endowed women often use cleavage to physically attract and sexually lure others (mainly men). They accentuate their cleavage by wearing garments with low necklines, alluring evening attire, flimsy lingerie and revealing swimwear. Thus, they find sadistic pleasure in kindling jealousy in other less-endowed women.
Most men derive erotic pleasure when their female companions display their cleavage with aesthetic effect. However, a few envious men, mainly companions of slim flat-chested women, resort to branding the copious women as flirts and seductresses.
In western societies, opinions differ about how much cleavage exposure is acceptable in public. In many cases, though displaying cleavage is permissible, it may be prohibited by dress codes set by churches, schools, and workplaces, where flagrant exposure of any part of the female breast might be considered inappropriate, and a woman who dares to show her nipples or areolae is almost always considered immodest, lewd, and indecent.
When it comes to cleavages, former British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, former US Senator Hillary Clinton, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Vera Lengsfeld, the Conservative Christian Democratic Union candidate for Berlin’s Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg district gained attention on the international political front for wearing low-cut blouses revealing just the slightest hint of cleavage.
Former British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith
Jacqui Smith, a member of the British Labour Party was appointed Home Secretary in Gordon Brown’s first Cabinet reshuffle of June 28, 2007. Just one day into her new job bombs were found in London and a terrorist attack took place in Glasgow the following day.
Jacqui Smith drew attention for wearing a revealing black top under her tightly fitting white jacket. It caused a stir as other MPs struggled to concentrate on the security threat under discussion.
Her attire prompted the House of Commons wags to wisecrack as “Weapons of mass distraction.”
Former US Senator Hillary Clinton
On July 20, 2007, Washington Post published an article written by Pulitzer Prize winner Robin Givhan in its Fashion section titled “Hillary Clinton’s Tentative Dip Into New Neckline Territory.” Givhan wrote:
There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.
She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn’t an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.
The Washington Post’s editorial writer, Ruth Marcus, criticized Robin Givhan’s article. She wrote that Robin Givhan “dissected” Hillary Clinton “for showing cleavage.” Marcus added, “Might I suggest that sometimes a V-neck top is only a V-neck top? As a person of cleavage, I’d guess that Clinton’s low-cut shirt simply reflected a few centimeters of sartorial miscalculation, not a deliberate Fashion statement.”
Another Washington Post columnist, Dana Milbank, also seemed to distance himself from the Givhan article during a July 26 appearance on MSNBC News Live.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel
German Chancellor Angela Merkel wore a glamorous and impressive blue décolletage with a blue bolero shawl designed by Anna von Griesham while chatting with Jens Stoltenberg, prime minister of Norway, at the opening of the Olso Opera House on April 12, 2008. Mr Stoltenberg maintained crucial, and diplomatic, eye contact with his guest at the inauguration of the cultural landmark.
On April 14, 2008, Gawker, a media gossip website published a page titled “German Chancellor Angela Merkel not Afraid to Show Her Breastesses” written by Shea. The writer wrote:
“For my upcoming vacation in Germany, I decided to study up on some of its elected leaders. What was discovered about Chancellor Angela Merkel? She’s not afraid to show a little cleavage during a night out at the Opera! Click for it… if you dare.
Gawker welcomed commentators to make light of the German leader’s outfit with quips ranging from the flippant: “Deutschland booberalles” to the politically slanted: “Imagine. A female head of state okay with being a woman.“
This photo of Chancellor Angela Merkel provided enough fodder for the media around the world. The media focused on the German leader’s appearance. Unflattering photos of the chancellor wearing a peach-colored dress with sweat stains under her arms at the 2005 Bayreuth festival were widely circulated. In 2006, the British tabloid
The Sun published photos of Merkel changing into a bathing suit while on vacation in Italy, giving its article the headline “I’M BIG IN THE BUMDESTAG,” in a reference to the Bundestag, home of the German federal parliament. The article and photos solicited an indignant response from a number of German publications, which felt the country’s leader deserved more respect.
During a tough political campaign for the 2009 general election, Vera Lengsfeld (61), the Conservative Christian Democratic Union candidate for Berlin’s Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg district, used pictures of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and herself in low-cut dresses. To draw attention to serious election issues she put up 750 provocative campaign posters accompanied by the slogan “Wir haben mehr zu bieten” (“We Have More to Offer”). Lengsfield bought the rights to use the picture of Merkel but did not seek the Chancellor’s permission. However, the posters had a positive impact.
To her critics Lengsfield said: “It is ridiculous to suggest that I am being sexist or antifeminist. I am a woman and I am proud of that.”
It is said that a child’s fascination with breasts starts from the moment it is breastfed as a baby. The odor of milk emanating from a mother’s breast draws her infant towards her. The basic instinct in any living being is to seek safety from the surrounding environment. Hence, the child too finds comfort by nestling on its mother’s breasts. It finds not only nourishment while suckling the mother’s breast, but also the mother’s unconditional love.
If this assumption is true, then what about the children who were not breastfed?
Many bottle-fed children, especially those whose mothers were buxom are just as fascinated with breasts as those who were breast-fed.
When children, whether breastfed or bottle-fed grow up the embedded image on their brain of their mother’s breast surfaces sporadically as sexual fantasies. They eye women with large breasts and quite often become obsessed with them.
Women, whether breastfed or bottle-fed, do not react the same way as men because breasts naturally grow on their own in women. However, studies show that breastfed women have a healthier opinion of their own breasts in their adulthood.
Sigmund Freud, a firm supporter of the nature argument, believed that sexual drives are instinctive. He viewed sexuality as the central source of human personality. He said that a child’s first erotic object is the mother’s breast.
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is an African American civil rights organization in the United States, formed in 1909 with the mission:
“To ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination.”
On May 17, 2004, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., commemorated the 50th Anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision on Brown vs Topeka Board of Education that struck down school segregation. At this gala event, Dr. Bill Cosby, the American comedian, actor, author, television producer, educator, musician and activist gave a speech on the theme of blacks in America taking responsibility for their own lives.
In this speech, Bill Cosby said that African Americans should no longer blame discrimination, segregation, governmental institutions, or others for higher unemployment rates among Blacks or the racial achievement gap; rather, they have their own culture of poverty to blame.
While Cosby’s speech was much appreciated, it also evoked severe criticism from various quarters.
In his book “Is Bill Cosby Right?: Or Has the Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind?“, published in 2005, sociologist Michael Eric Dyson criticized Bill Cosby. Dyson said that Cosby, who built up years of mainstream credibility by ignoring race in his comedy routines and in his television programs, had chosen to address the issues of race by chastising poor Blacks instead of defending them.
On May 19, 2004, a write up in the “Reliable Source” column of the Washington Post, that was reprinted in several news media in the United States, overlooked a significant part of the information from Cosby’s statements. The article in the Post failed to point out that Cosby’s statements were explicitly in the context of focusing on the epidemic of nearly 50% of African American males in the inner city, dropping out of school. The Post article incorrectly ascertained Cosby’s statements as an overall assessment of the lower economic classes of the Blacks.
Bill Cosby explained that his comments were intended to be a call to action, to “turn the mirror around on ourselves.”
“I think that it is time for concerned African Americans to march, galvanize and raise the awareness about this epidemic to transform our helplessness, frustration and righteous indignation into a sense of shared responsibility and action.”
“I travel the country and see these patterns in every community-stories of 12-year-old children killed in the crossfire between knuckleheads selling drugs, the 14-year-olds with a sealed envelope as their first step into the criminal justice system, the young males who become fathers and not held responsible, the young women having children and moving back in with their mothers and grandmothers, and the young people who choose not to learn standard English.”
Since 2004, this famous “Pound Cake Speech” also known as “We can’t blame white people” speech has frequently surfaced on the internet and many times important pieces of information from the speech had been left out. There is a version on Snopes.com, and today I came across another version on Facebook.
Here is a version (edited) of the “Pound Cake Speech” I found on YouTube:
Ladies and gentlemen, I really have to ask you to seriously consider what you’ve heard, and now this is the end of the evening so to speak. I heard a prize fight manager say to his fellow who was losing badly, “David, listen to me. It’s not what’s he’s doing to you. It’s what you’re not doing.”
Ladies and gentlemen, these people set — they opened the doors, they gave us the right, and today, ladies and gentlemen, in our cities and public schools we have 50% drop out. In our own neighborhood, we have men in prison. No longer is a person embarrassed because they’re pregnant without a husband. No longer is a boy considered an embarrassment if he tries to run away from being the father of the unmarried child.
Ladies and gentlemen, the lower economic and lower middle economic people are not holding their end in this deal. In the neighborhood that most of us grew up in, parenting is not going on. In the old days, you couldn’t hooky school because every drawn shade was an eye. And before your mother got off the bus and to the house, she knew exactly where you had gone, who had gone into the house, and where you got on whatever you had one and where you got it from. Parents don’t know that today.
I’m talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was two? Where were you when he was twelve? Where were you when he was eighteen, and how come you don’t know he had a pistol? And where is his father, and why don’t you know where he is? And why doesn’t the father show up to talk to this boy?
The church is only open on Sunday. And you can’t keep asking Jesus to ask doing things for you. You can’t keep asking that God will find a way. God is tired of you. God was there when they won all those cases — fifty in a row. That’s where God was because these people were doing something. And God said, “I’m going to find a way.” I wasn’t there when God said it — I’m making this up. But it sounds like what God would do.
We cannot blame white people. White people — White people don’t live over there. They close up the shop early. The Korean ones still don’t know us as well — they stay open 24 hours.
I’m looking and I see a man named Kenneth Clark, he and his wife Mamie. Kenneth’s still alive. I have to apologize to him for these people because Kenneth said it straight. He said you have to strengthen yourselves, and we’ve got to have that black doll. And everybody said it. Julian Bond said it. Dick Gregory said it. All these lawyers said it. And you wouldn’t know that anybody had done a damned thing.
Fifty percent drop out rate, I’m telling you, and people in jail, and women having children by five, six different men. Under what excuse? I want somebody to love me. And as soon as you have it, you forget to parent. Grandmother, mother, and great grandmother in the same room, raising children, and the child knows nothing about love or respect of any one of the three of them. All this child knows is “gimme, gimme, gimme.” These people want to buy the friendship of a child, and the child couldn’t care less. Those of us sitting out here who have gone on to some college or whatever we’ve done, we still fear our parents. And these people are not parenting. They’re buying things for the kid — $500 sneakers — for what? They won’t buy or spend $250 on Hooked on Phonics.
Kenneth Clark, somewhere in his home in upstate New York — just looking ahead. Thank God he doesn’t know what’s going on. Thank God. But these people — the ones up here in the balcony fought so hard. Looking at the incarcerated, these are not political criminals. These are people going around stealing Coca Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake! Then we all run out and are outraged: “The cops shouldn’t have shot him.” What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand? I wanted a piece of pound cake just as bad as anybody else. And I looked at it and I had no money. And something called parenting said if you get caught with it you’re going to embarrass your mother.” Not, “You’re going to get your butt kicked.” No. “You’re going to embarrass your mother.” “You’re going to embarrass your family.” If you knock that girl up, you’re going to have to run away because it’s going to be too embarrassing for your family. In the old days, a girl getting pregnant had to go down South, and then her mother would go down to get her. But the mother had the baby. I said the mother had the baby. The girl didn’t have a baby. The mother had the baby in two weeks. We are not parenting.
Ladies and gentlemen, listen to these people. They are showing you what’s wrong. People putting their clothes on backwards. Isn’t that a sign of something going on wrong? Are you not paying attention? People with their hat on backwards, pants down around the crack. Isn’t that a sign of something or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn’t it a sign of something when she’s got her dress all the way up to the crack — and got all kinds of needles and things going through her body. What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don’t know a damned thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Shaligua, Mohammed and all that crap and all of them are in jail. (When we give these kinds names to our children, we give them the strength and inspiration in the meaning of those names. What’s the point of giving them strong names if there is not parenting and values backing it up).
Brown versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person’s problem. We’ve got to take the neighborhood back. We’ve got to go in there. Just forget telling your child to go to the Peace Corps. It’s right around the corner. It’s standing on the corner. It can’t speak English. It doesn’t want to speak English. I can’t even talk the way these people talk: “Why you ain’t where you is go ra?” I don’t know who these people are. And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk. Then I heard the father talk. This is all in the house. You used to talk a certain way on the corner and you got into the house and switched to English. Everybody knows it’s important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can’t land a plane with, “Why you ain’t…” You can’t be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth. There is no Bible that has that kind of language. Where did these people get the idea that they’re moving ahead on this. Well, they know they’re not; they’re just hanging out in the same place, five or six generations sitting in the projects when you’re just supposed to stay there long enough to get a job and move out.
Now, look, I’m telling you. It’s not what they’re doing to us. It’s what we’re not doing. 50 percent drop out. Look, we’re raising our own ingrown immigrants. These people are fighting hard to be ignorant. There’s no English being spoken, and they’re walking and they’re angry. Oh God, they’re angry and they have pistols and they shoot and they do stupid things. And after they kill somebody, they don’t have a plan. Just murder somebody. Boom. Over what? A pizza? And then run to the poor cousin’s house.
They sit there and the cousin says, “What are you doing here?”
“I just killed somebody, man.”
“I just killed somebody; I’ve got to stay here.”
“No, you don’t.”
“Well, give me some money, I’ll go….”
“Where are you going?”
Everybody wanted to go to North Carolina. But the police know where you’re going because your cousin has a record.
Five or six different children — same woman, eight, ten different husbands or whatever. Pretty soon you’re going to have to have DNA cards so you can tell who you’re making love to. You don’t who this is. It might be your grandmother. I’m telling you, they’re young enough. Hey, you have a baby when you’re twelve. Your baby turns thirteen and has a baby, how old are you? Huh? Grandmother. By the time you’re twelve, you could have sex with your grandmother, you keep those numbers coming. I’m just predicting.
I’m saying Brown versus the Board of Education. We’ve got to hit the streets, ladies and gentlemen. I’m winding up, now — no more applause. I’m saying, look at the Black Muslims. There are Black Muslims standing on the street corners and they say so forth and so on, and we’re laughing at them because they have bean pies and all that, but you don’t read, “Black Muslim gunned down while chastising drug dealer.” You don’t read that. They don’t shoot down Black Muslims. You understand me. Muslims tell you to get out of the neighborhood. When you want to clear your neighborhood out, first thing you do is go get the Black Muslims, bean pies and all. And your neighborhood is then clear. The police can’t do it.
I’m telling you Christians, what’s wrong with you? Why can’t you hit the streets? Why can’t you clean it out yourselves? It’s our time now, ladies and gentlemen. It is our time. And I’ve got good news for you. It’s not about money. It’s about you doing something ordinarily that we do — get in somebody else’s business. It’s time for you to not accept the language that these people are speaking, which will take them nowhere. What the hell good is Brown v. Board of Education if nobody wants it?
What is it with young girls getting after some girl who wants to still remain a virgin. Who are these sick black people and where did they come from and why haven’t they been parented to shut up? To go up to girls and try to get a club where “you are nobody….” This is a sickness, ladies and gentlemen, and we are not paying attention to these children. These are children. They don’t know anything. They don’t have anything. They’re homeless people. All they know how to do is beg. And you give it to them, trying to win their friendship. And what are they good for? And then they stand there in an orange suit and you drop to your knees: “He didn’t do anything. He didn’t do anything.” Yes, he did do it. And you need to have an orange suit on, too.
So, ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank you for the award — and giving me an opportunity to speak because, I mean, this is the future, and all of these people who lined up and done — they’ve got to be wondering what the hell happened. Brown V. Board of Education — these people who marched and were hit in the face with rocks and punched in the face to get an education and we got these knuckleheads walking around who don’t want to learn English. I know that you all know it. I just want to get you as angry that you ought to be. When you walk around the neighborhood and you see this stuff, that stuff’s not funny. These people are not funny anymore. And that‘s not my brother. And that’s not my sister. They’re faking and they’re dragging me way down because the state, the city, and all these people have to pick up the tab on them because they don’t want to accept that they have to study to get an education.
We have to begin to build in the neighborhood, have restaurants, have cleaners, have pharmacies, have real estate, have medical buildings instead of trying to rob them all. And so, ladies and gentlemen, please, Dorothy Height, where ever she’s sitting, she didn’t do all that stuff so that she could hear somebody say “I can’t stand algebra, I can’t stand…” and “what you is.” It’s horrible.
Basketball players — multimillionaires can’t write a paragraph. Football players, multimillionaires, can’t read. Yes. Multimillionaires. Well, Brown v. Board of Education, where are we today? It’s there. They paved the way. What did we do with it? The White Man, he’s laughing — got to be laughing. 50 percent drop out — rest of them in prison.
You got to tell me that if there was parenting — help me — if there was parenting, he wouldn’t have picked up the Coca Cola bottle and walked out with it to get shot in the back of the head. He wouldn’t have. Not if he loved his parents. And not if they were parenting! Not if the father would come home. Not if the boy hadn’t dropped the sperm cell inside of the girl and the girl had said, “No, you have to come back here and be the father of this child.” Not ..“I don’t have to.”
Therefore, you have the pile up of these sweet beautiful things born by nature — raised by no one. Give them presents. You’re raising pimps. That’s what a pimp is. A pimp will act nasty to you so you have to go out and get them something. And then you bring it back and maybe he or she hugs you. And that’s why pimp is so famous. They’ve got a drink called the “Pimp-something.” You all wonder what that’s about, don’t you? Well, you’re probably going to let Jesus figure it out for you. Well, I’ve got something to tell you about Jesus. When you go to the church, look at the stained glass things of Jesus. Look at them. Is Jesus smiling? Not in one picture. So, tell your friends. Let’s try to do something. Let’s try to make Jesus smile. Let’s start parenting. Thank you, thank you.
I love the action-packed “Fast and Furious” series of movie films and the lead characters Paul Walker and Vin Diesel of “XXX” fame. Yesterday (December 1, 2013), I was shocked when I heard the news that Paul Walker, who played the role of the undercover agent Brian O’Connor in the “Fast and Furious” movies, died in a violent, blazing car crash in Valencia, Santa Clarita, California.
When massive earthquakes devastated Haiti on January 12, 2010, Paul Walker saw the need for skilled personnel and resources in post-disaster situations. After that trip, he contacted his friends to help him in forming “Reach Out Worldwide” (ROWW) – a non-profit registered organization.
Roger Rodas 38, had met Paul Walker 40, at a race track and became his financial advisor in 2007. He helped Walker to set up ROWW, a network of committed professionals with first responder skill-set. ROWW operates on the philosophy that “by making a difference in just one person’s life, the world has been changed for the better.”
On November 30, 2013, around 3:30 pm PST, Paul Walker and Roger Rodas left in Rodas’ red 2005 Porsche Carrera GT after an event to raise money for “Reach Out Worldwide” to help the victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. Rodas was driving the car. Shortly after leaving, Rodas lost control and the car crashed into a light pole and a tree. Within seconds, the vehicle burst into flames. The Sheriff’s Department of Los Angeles County declared the two dead at the scene of the accident.
The local Santa Clarita Valley Signal newspaper reported that witnesses recognized Walker and one person even tried to extract him from the wreckage.
Walker had described himself on Twitter as an ‘outdoorsman, ocean addict‘, and ‘adrenaline junkie‘. He raced cars and he fearlessly executed many stunts in his own films.
The late Paul Walker is survived by his 15-year-old daughter Meadow.
An undeniable elegance coupled with once in a while revelation of enchanting playfulness, and an exceptional inclination toward timing, have always been the brand of Sachin Tendulkar, the cricketer.
The hurriedly arranged Test series India vs West Indies was mostly for Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar to bid farewell from cricket.
Yesterday, November 16, 2013, was a memorable Saturday for Sachin.
India won the second Test match against the West Indies by an innings and 126 runs for the second straight time, and the series 2-0. But that win was reduced to a mere footnote by an emotionally charged farewell speech by Sachin Tendulkar that stirred a rapt live audience in the fully packed Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai, and TV viewers around the world.
The speech revealed to the world a Sachin Tendulkar, the speaker.
At 11:47, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar, the ‘God’ of cricket, was finally saying goodbye to cricket and his fans with glistening tears on his face, after entertaining the world with his 24 years of phenomenal cricket.
This speech uncovered the remarkable person that Sachin was, underneath the universally recognized cricketer. He moved his audience and his adoring, ardent, die-hard fans to tears, and made them fall in love with him once again.
Sachin Tendulkar, the “Master Blaster” made his Test debut against Pakistan on November 15, 1989. Yesterday, he ended his cricket career with a total of 34,357 runs in international cricket and 15,921 runs in Tests. Ricky Ponting, the now retired former Australia captain scored 13378, and Jacques Kallis, the highest placed active player is now on 13,140 runs. In all likelihood, these figures of Sachin will never be beaten.
He was the greatest ambassador of the sport of cricket and has touched the lives of all cricket lovers around the globe.
Sachin Tendulkar has been the single colossal to inspire Indian cricket over three generations. He was the perfect ambassador of the sport of cricket, and has touched the lives of all cricket lovers around the globe.
This Saturday is doubly memorable because an official announcement was made by a release from the Prime Minister’s Office that Sachin Tendulkar will be conferred with Bharat Ratna.
According to a report, Sachin said: “I dedicate this to my mother.”
Sachin Tendulkar is the seventh person from Maharashtra to be conferred the Bharat Ratna after Dhondo Karve, Pandurang Kane, Vinoba Bhave, BR Ambedkar, Lata Mangeshkar and Bhimsen Joshi.