science.nasa.gov/mission/msl-curiosity/location-map/

(9 of 9) This is the satellite view showing the locations of the rover and the variance in parallax. Note that MSL 3703 is far from the target (1.2 mi.) and yet, back to my original point, there is a wide shadow on the face of the formation. It seems to me that the opposite should be the case if the rover is so far away and off to the side. And now, once the rover is close to the formation (MSL 4217) with a nearly square, head-on view, all the sharp details and shadows disappear. It goes back to the question: If NASA obtained pictures of a structure, would they allow us to see it? Or would they obfuscate it in accordance with the recommendations from the Brookings Report?

Posted via email from Dwayne's Obfuscated Ramblings

Posted via email from Dwayne's Obfuscated Ramblings

.

' .

. .

.

.

~ .

.. c t: .

~ .

___r ., .

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION.

SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES .

~ UNITE AGAINST THE POLITICS OF HATRED I.

Friends, 21.08.2002.

The Election Commission deserves the highest praise from all the secular and democratic people of our country for bringing to.

an halt, at least for the time being, the Sangh Giroh's dangerous designs in Gujarat. The Gujarat carnage -involving violence against.

the minority community on a scale not seen since the days of Partition -took place with the acUve connivance and support of the state ,..

.

administration under the leadership of Chief Minister Narendra Modi. After having presided over the state-sponsored genocide, the BJPis now hoping to convert it into electoral gains through early polls.What the people of Gujarat think of the Narendra Modi government had been quite clear after the panchayat polls and.

assembly by-elections in which the BJP had been thoroughly routed. However given the present situation in the state -hundreds of ".

thousands displaced from their homes and an atmosphere of fear and intimidation still being prevalent with the perpetrators of the riots.

going unpunished-a free and fair elections would hardly have been possible. And that was what the BJP was banking on. .

.

Frustrated in their attempt, the RSS-BJP is now trying to denigrate the institution of the EC, with the BJP even making official.

statements attributing a political bias to it. Now, the government has decided to make a Presidential reference to the Supreme Court..

This new found respect for the law comes from a political formation vvhich was openly hurling defiance at the apex court on the Ayodhyaissue afew months back and it is just another attempt to obfuscate the issue.While the upright stand taken against the Sangh Glroh's fascistic designs by institutions like the NHRC and the EC gives.

cause for optimism, the struggle for democracy and secularism in our country cannot be won without popular mobilizations. As a part ofthis effort the JNUSU is organizing a public meeting tomorrow on the Gujarat elections. We would like to invite all members of thestudent community to this meeting. .

PUBLIC MEETING.

GUJARAT ELECTIONS.

Reaping the Harvest of Hatred .

.

Speakers: Prof. C.P. Bhambri, Prof. Utsa Patnaik, Pr.of. Ghanshyam Shah, Prof. Dipankar Gupta \.

22.08.2002 (Thursday) .

2.30 p.m. .

SSS Auditorium .

Sd/-~ Abdus S~lam, Chandan Chaudhary, Harish Wankhede, Mahesh Sarma, Subhanil Choudhury .'· Councillors, SSS-JNUSU . . .. .

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION.

SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES.

UNITE AGAINST THE POLITICS OF HATRED !.

Friends, 21.08.2002.

The Election Commission deserves the highest praise from all the secular and democratic people of our country for bringing to '.

an halt. at least for the time being, the Sangh Giroh's dangerous designs in Gujarat. The Gujarat carnage -involving violence against.

the minority community on a scale not seen since the days of Partjtion -took place with the active connivance and support of the stateadministration under the leadership of Chief Minister Narendra Modi. After having presided over the state-sponsored genocide, the BJP.

is now hoping to convert it into electoral gains through early polls..

I 'A'hat the people of Gujarat think of the Narendra Modi government had been quite clear after the panchayat polls and.

.

assembly by-elections in which the BJP had been thoroughly routed. However given the present situation in the state -hundreds of.

thousands displaced from their homes and an atmosphere of fear and intimidation still being prevalent with the perpetrators of the riots.

going unpunished -a free and fair elections would hardly have been possible. And that was what the BJP was banking on. .

'{ Frustrated in their attempt, the RSS-BJP is now trying to denigrate the institution of the EC, with the BJP even making official.

statements attributing a political bias to it. Now, the government has decided to make a Presidential reference to the Supreme Court.

.

' This new found respect for the law comes from a political formation which was openly hurling defiance at the apex court on the Ayodhyaissue a few months back and it is just another attempt to obfuscate the issue.While the upright stand ta~n against the Sangh Giroh's fascistic designs by institutions like the NHRC and the EC givest) cause for optimism, the struggle for democracy and secularism in our country cannot be won without popular mobilizations. As apart of.

this effort the JNUSU is organizing a public meeting tomorrow on the Gujarat elections. We would like to invite all members of the.

student community to this meeting. .

.

I. PUBLIC MEETING.

GUJARAT ELECTIONS.

Reaping the Harvest of Hatred.

.

.

-t .

Speakers: Prof. C.P. Bhambri, Prof. Utsa Patnaik, Prof. Ghanshyam Shah, Prof. Dipankar Gupta22.08.2002 (Thursday) 2.30 p.m. SSS Auditorium.

Sd/-.

Abdus Salam, Chandan Chaudhary, Harish Wankhede, Mahesh Sarma, Subhanll Choudhury.

Councillors, SSS-JNUSU .

.

'\.

.,..,.

~ t ....

\ \. .,. .

II' ' 4" .

~-~--..· ....... ,.

.

"" .-. .

... .

' :.~ .

.

.

... .

. .

.

.

.

. .

. .

.

.

.

.. .

.

.

.

.

AHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION .

19.11.05 b:l:::iorli.~ctfle.NJSU. 1raised these questions because certain members ofthe current JNUSU had clearly violated the democratic norms oftheespec~itregardtothe.JNUSU's position regarding the Prime Minister's visit. In response to my pamphlet, yesterday apamphlet wascertain representatives ofthe JNUSU, ostensibly to respond to my claims. However, the pamphlet issue by the aforementioned .

uo~=""""" 171'2005,1 issued apan tpbleti1 my official capacity as an elected Councilor in the JNUSU, raising questions about the democratic .

re;esentatives failed to address the issues raised in my pamphlet, and in fact seeks to avoid or obfuscate on several of the major questions·.

The pamphlet avoids addressing the fact that,because itwas called less than 24 hours in advance, the "Emergency Meeting" calledon November 13th was INVALID according to the JNUSU constitution. The pamphlet seeks to deflect attention towards the JNUSU.

President and the circumstances in which the meeting was called, thus avoiding the central issue. NOWHERE does it address the fact thatthe .

2 Joint Secretary and Vice President broke the rules ofthe JNUSU Constitution when they called the meeting.In regard to the above-mentioned violation, the pamphlet states that "The SL councilor should have actually refused to attend the meeting ifthis.

seemedto him asawryserious matter... In fact, wtien anothercouncilor raised the issue ofthe meeting being constitutionally invalid, he was.

told oy the Vice President that in orderto present any such statement, he would first have to sign the attendance sheet and thus "officially attend".

the meeting. In other words, the Vioe President told those of us who objected that we could not even express our opinion that the meeting was.

invalid unless we "officially attended" the meeting! Thus the Vioe President foroed us to either agree to his organization's terms, or be kicked.

out ofthe council meeting entirely! .

3. .

The pamphlet also erron~states at "the SL Councilorhas falsely stated thatthe two memoranda submitted to the PM and HRD Minister.

were not voted upon and passed unilaterally in the Council." On the contrary, Idid not state that the memoranda were not voted on. Istated,quite correctly, that THE "DECISION" TO SUBMITA MEMO IN LIEU OFAPROTESTWAS NOT DEBATED OR VOTED UPON BY THEJNUSU, BUT RATHER WAS UNILATERALLY DECLARED BY THE VICE PRESIDENT AND HIS ORGANIZATION. The pamphlet does noteven address this issue. .

4. .

The tally ofvotes given in the pamphlet fails to mention that IDID NOT VOTE on either ofthe memoranda,because as Istated in my previous.

pamphlet, Iviewed both as constitutionally invalid and not democratically representing the sentiments ofthe JNU student body..

5. .

The authors ofthe pamphlet have also stated that they would like to "enlig~ten"me ofthe ."fact that there has ber.n no such norm in the JNUSU.

ofsubmitting proposals to the Chairpersonally without allowing all the members ofthe Council an opportunity to debate on it. This is precisely.

why resolutions are tabled, debated and passed/rejected in the Council." This is my point exactly. Ifirst gave amotion verbally, sa~ngthatthe meeting was constitutionally invalid and that any vote on the memorandum would be similarly invalid, and proposed that instead individualrepresentatives sign on the memorandum in their own names, not in the name ofthe JNUSU, and gave my suggestions for demands to be.

included in such amemorandum. The Vice President, who was chairing the meeting, told me to put the proposal in writing, which Idid before.

any voting started. STILL, THE VICE PRESIDENT DID NOT PUT MY PROPOSAL FORWARD FOR DEBATE OR VOTE. HE IMMEDIATELY.

PUT THE MEMORANDA TO VOTE AND ADJOURNED THE MEETING. Iwould like to ask the Vioe President and other signatories ofthat.

pamphlet to "enlighten" me, what else must aJNUSU representative do to have their proposals recognized by the chair? Iwould also like to.

point out that the proposals ofseveral other councilors present at the meeting, both written and verbal,were similarly ignored by the Vice.

President .

6. .

The following issues put forward in my pamphlet were also not addressed by the authors ofthe above-mentioned pamphlet:.

Why did the Vice President unilaterally declare both in the meeting with the Vice ChancelloronNbvember 2nd and during the meeting ofJNUSU.

representatives on November 13111 that amemorandum would be submitted to the Prime Minister in lieu of aprotest, WITHOUT ASKING FOR.

ADEBATE OR VOTE ON THE ISSUE, OR EVEN CONSULTING ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.

Why did the Vice President state in the All Organization Meeting on November 1311 that the JNUSU opposed any protest during the visit ofthe.

Prime Minister, when THIS WAS NOT ADECISION TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?·.

Why did the Vice President attempt to preventstudents from using certain slogans during the JNUSU protest march on November 13111, saying.

that the JNUSU had decided against using such slogans, when in actuality NO SUCH DECISION WAS TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE BODY.

OFTHEJNUSU? .

Why did the Vice President refuse to allow an elected JNUSU representative speak during aJNUSU public meeting, while allowing an SFI.

activist who is NOT amember ofthe JNUSU to speak for more than ten minutes?.

.

Far from being an "assault" on the JNUSU, as the authors of that pamphlet would like the student community to believe, my.

questions are an attempt to ensure that the JNUSU remains atransparent, democratic, and representative body that represents the.

demands and aspirations OF ALL THE STUDENTS OF JNU. Ibelieve that in order to do so, decisions taken in the JNUSU MUST BE MADE.

THROUGH ADEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, NOT BY THE UNILATERALLY DIKTATS OF INDIVIDUAL OFFICE BEARERS. Irespectfully.

challenge the authors and signatories ofthat pamphlet to address the questions and issues Ihave raised,ifthey are indeed committed to ademocratic.

JNUSU. .

And this is more than just aquestion of parliamentary points oforder. As the aforementioned pamphlet implies, Ido believe that the mobilization of.

the common people in an actual protest, especially in front ofthe highest-ranking individual ofthe establishment, is more effective than submitting a.

pieoe of paper that can be easily ignored or tossed away. What Ifind issue with is that this option ofprotest was never discussed and actually.

suppressed by certain members of the JNUSU. Ialso feel that the undemocratic suppression ofthis option to prote:st on the partofthose members reveals not only their capitulation to and complicity with the JNU Administration, but also their complicity with.

the current government in power, and their willful intention NOT to protest its policies. .

Sd/-Tyler Williams,Councillor, SLL&CS .

.

Nothing special, just a typical sunrise before the clouds obfuscated it.

pole is in right of way beside house from bridge suprisingly obfuscated

Purposely obfuscated. You'll know what it is if you're meant to know. I've kept it since 2005, and I hope to take it out again in 2014.

.

.. --I ATC:..4' 6.12.05.

.

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY .

STUDENTS' UNION.

Union, especially in regard to the JNUSU's position regarding the Prime Minister's visit. Inresponse tomy pamphlet yesterday apamphlet wa~ .

51 issued bycertain representatives of the JNUSU, ostensibly to respond to my claims. However, the pamphlet issue by the aforemAntinnarfl .

on November 17" 2005,Iissued apamphlet inmy official capacity as an eleCted Councilor inthe JNUSU, raising questions aboutthe rtanvv-r~~.

-functioning ofthe JNUSU. 1raised these questions because certainmembers ofthe currentJNUSU had clear1yviolated the demoaaticnormsFn .

I We 1.the The pamphlet avoids addressing the fact that, because it was called less than 24 hours In advance, the "Emergency Meeting" called .

to<ou all representatives failedto address the issues raised In my pamphlet, and in fact seeks to avoid or obfuscate onseveral ofthe major questionsno iss1 Presidentand the circumstances In which the meeting was called, thus avoiding the central Issue. NOWHERE does tt address the fact that the re\ on November 13111 was INVALID according to the JNUSU constitution. The pamphletseeks to deflect attention towards the JNUSU .

2..

im rer In regard to the above-mentioned violation, the pamphletstates that"The SLcouncilor should have actually refused to attend the meeting ifthis .

. Joint Secretary and Vice President broke the rules ofthe JNUSU Constitution when they called the meeting..

is~/ .

Frier .

Ac jttWI .

the meeting. In otherwords, the Vice Presidenttold those ofus who objectedthatwe could not even express ouropinion that the meeting was .

th rhe invalid unless we officially attended" the meetingI Thus the VIce President forced us to either agree to his organization's terms, or be kjcked seemed tohim as avery serious matter..." In fact, wtien anothercouncilor raised the issue ofthe meeting beingconstitutionally invalid, he was .

told by the Vice Presidentthat in orderto present anysuch statement, he would first have to sign the attendance sheetand thus officiallyattend .

st.

bt ISSU 3. out ofthe council meeting entirely!.

The pamphletalso erroneouslystates that "the SL Councilor has falsely stated thatthe two memoranda submitted to the PM and HRD Minister .

were notvoted upon and passed unilaterally In the Council." On the contrary, Idid not state thatthe memoranda werenotvoted on. 1stated, .

ll .

quite correctly, that THE "DECISION" TO SUBMITA MEMO IN LIEU OFA PROTESTWAS NOT DEBATED ORVOTED UPONBY THE .

s.

t" JNUSU, BUT RATHER WAS UNILATERALLY.

even address this issue..

t .

4..

r DECLARED BY THE VICE PRESIDENT AND HIS ORGANIZATION..

pamphlet, Iviewed both as constitutionaUy invalid and not democratically representing the sentiments ofthe JNU student body. 5. The pamphletdoesnot.

\ of submitting proposals to the Chairpersonally without allowing all the members ofthe Council an opportunity to debate on ~. This is precisely The tally ofvotes given in the pamphletfails to mention that I DID NOTVOTEon eitherofthe memoranda, because asIstated inmy previous The authors ofthe pamphlet have also stated thatthey would like to "enlig'":ten" me ofthe .,actthat there has bec:1 no such norm inthe JNUSU why resolutions are tabled, debated and passed/rejected in the Council." This is my point exactly. Ifirst gave amotionverbally,sayingthat .

the meeting was constitutionally invalid and that any vote on the memorandum would be similarly invalid, and proposed that instead individual .

representatives sign on the memorandum in theirown names, not in the name ofthe JNUSU, and gave my suggestions fordemandsto be .

induded in such amemorandum. The Vice President, who was chairing the meeting, told me to putthe proposal in writing, whichIdid before .

.

anyvoting started. STILL,THE VICE PRESIDENT DID NOT PUT MY PROPOSAL FORWARD FOR DEBATE OR VOTE. HE IMMEDIATELY .

pamphlet to enlighten me, what else must aJNUSU representative do to have their proposals recognized by the chair? Iwould also liketo President.

point out that the proposals ofseveral other councilors present at the meeting, both written and verbal, were similarly ignored bytheVice .

6. PUT THE MEMORANDA TO VOTE AND ADJOURNED THE MEETING. Iwould like to ask the Vice President andother signatories ofthat.

Wny did the Vice President unilaterally declare both in the meeting with the Vice Chancellor onNovember 2"d and during the meeting ofJNUSU .

representatives on November 13111 thatamemorandum wouid be submitted to the Prime Minister in lieu ofaprotest Wft'ROOTASKiNGFOR .

The following issues put forward in my pamphlet were also not addressed by the'authors ofthe above-mention·ed pamphlet.

ADEBATE OR VOTE ON fHEfS-SUE~OREvENCONSULTING ALL TH-EREPRESENTAfiVES.

..Y Wny did the Vice President state in the All Organization Meeting on November 13" that the JNUSU opposed any protest during the visitofthe -OF~THECOLLECTIVEJNUSU?Why did the Vice Presidentattempt to preventstudents from using certainslogans during the JNUSU protest march onNovember13",saying .

Prime Minister, when THIS WAS NOTA DECISION TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?· ---OFTHEJNI!StR .

that the JNUSU had dedd~dagainst using such slogansJ....w_ben in actyality ~2SUCH DECISION WAS TAKEN BYTHE COLLECTIVE BODY . .

-_ ---__ .

Why did the Vice President refuse to allowan elected JNUSU representative speak during aJNUSU publicmeeting, while allowing an SFI .

activist whois NOT amemberof the JNUSU to speak for more than ten minutes? .

-· .

Far from being an "assault" on the JNUSU, as the authors ofthat pamphlet would like the student community to believe, my .

demands and aspirations OF ALL THE STUDENTS OF JNU. 1believe thatinorderto doso,decisions takeninthe JNUSU MUST BE MADE .

questions arean attempt to ensure that the JNUSU remains atransparent, democratic, and representative body that represents the .

challenge the authors and signatories ofthat pamphletto address the questions and issues Ihave raised, iftheyare indeed committed to ademooatic .

JNUSU. .

'THROUGH ADEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, NOTBY THE UNILATERALLYDIKTATS OF INDIVIDUAL OFFICE BEARERS. IrespectfuDy .

And this is morethan just aquestion ofpar1iamentary points oforder. As the aforementioned pamphlet implies, Ido believe that the mobilization of .

the common peopleinanactual protest, especially infrontofthe highest-rankjng individual ofthe establishment, is more effectivethan submitting a.

the current government in power, and theirwillful intention NOT to protest its policies. .

suppressed by certain members ofthe JNUSU. I also feel that the undemocratic suppression ofthis option toprotest on the part .

piece of paperthatcanbe easilyignoredortossedaway. What Ifind issue with is thatthis option ofprotestwas neverdiscussed and actually ,I .of those members reveals not only their capitulation toand complicity with the JNU Administration, but alsotheircomplicity with .

Sd/-Sd/-Tyler Williams..

Dhaoaojay, Vice-President, Councillor, SLL&CS.

.

JNUSU .

.

via Google announced on Monday that it’ll now be deploying more secure and stricter rules for the Chrome extensions in the Chrome Web Store. The new regulations will come in effect with the forthcoming Chrome 70, while extensions containing obfuscated code will be blocked immediately. ift.tt/2NlT118

From my project "Impermanence", exploring the temporary nature of human existence through layered reflections.

Weekend assignment 1: 10x10x10

I didn't like how the flowers obfuscate the sign, but wasn't allowed to move around for this assignment. Set the top of the sign to the upper 1/3rd line0

.

.-.

. .

.. .

i~ . .

~.:-...

.. ,. .

.:; .

'· .

' .

I' .

On t.he JNUSU led agitation.

6.11.2012 .

The JNUSU arrived upon an agreement of understanding with the administration on the 10th day of hunger strike..

.

a significant advancefor the student movement. .

The agreement has already been circulated among the student community. The SFI-JNU sees this agreement as.

.

..

Concrete Achievements .

There have beensignificant achievements on important demands:.

1. On increasing MCM scholarships, the university has been forced to agree for the first time that it would.

increasethe MCM amount to Rs 3000 from the next semester. The administration has also accepted that itwould convey the status of funds for providing the MCM by January 2013, thus agreeing to a concretethe required resources to increase MCM scholarship from the next semester. The JNUSU should continue .

deadline with the JNUSU. The JNUSU should ensure that the administration makes all steps to mobilize.

its agitation ifthe administration backtracks on its commitment InJanuary...

2. The administration has assured the JNUSU that it would take all measures to protect the autonomy ofGSCASH. The GSCASH would also have representationin the Security Committee..

3. A Committee including Prof BS Chimni, Prof A K Pasha and the JNUSU President and General Secretary.

.

has been constituted to look into the issue of deprivation points for Muslim minority students. This.

Committee would submit its report to the next Academic Council. .

after AC's approval, which means it has beenstopped for this year. .

4. The delinking of BA~MA has been sent to the Board of Studies. It would only be added in the prospectus.

.

5. APlacement Cell would be started within two months..

6. Democratic representation in the EOO would be ensured. To start with the JNUSU would haverepresentation in the EOO..

7. .

The administrauon has agreed to build two new hostels by 2014. The demand for a single seater hostel for.

8. women research students has been accepted.The demand for starting remedial lectures by paying proper remuneration to students has been accepted..

9. .

The JNUSU would have representation in the committee for ensuring barrier free campus..

10. The quartile list would be updated. .

upcoming IHA meeting. .

11. The university has agreed to provide mess facility in the SPS dorm. This issue would be finalized in the.

12. Footpath from Koyna to Tapti hostel would be built in2-3 months..

13. Progressive shop allotment policy would be implemented..

On many other important demands the administration has given positive assurance to the JNUSU and conveyed.

that it is pursuing matters. .

Viva Voce Weightage .

One major issue which could not be clinched is the reduction of viva-voce weightage. The administration has.

.

formed yet another committee as a delaying tactics. It is unfortunate that an overwhelming majority of faculty.

.

members in the Academic Council did not support the JNUSU's demand. This has once again highlighted the.

polarization against social justice in the university's highest decision making bodies. However, it has to be noted.

administration in March, did not make any concrete recommendations on the issue and left matters open ended. .

.

that the Committee to look into this issue which was formed after the previous JNUSU's agreement with the.

The former JNUSU President who was a part of the committee and a signatory to the report did not express any.

.

dissent against the Committee not making any concrete recommendations on the issue. This fact was also.

.

exploited by the sections against social justice in the AC to mobilize opinion against this .demand by obfuscating the.

otherwise clear cut evidence of discrimination from the data available to the Committee..

The JNUSU should explore all legal political options to expedite the·struggle for reduction of viva-voce weightage..

The Constitution Bench Judgment of the Supreme Court which categorically lays down 15% weightage for viva-.

voce as the benchmark should be the guiding principle in this struggle. .

_ P.T.O. .

,~.. .

.

.

Dear Friends. .

17. 3. 1.~1 0.

It is really heart warming to see that the campus is live with the fervour Ior implementation ofconstitutional.

n1andate of 'reservations.' There appears little doubt that most of us, excep\. for the tribe that has been.

traditionally opposed to .

.

'affirmative action', are genuinely interested in tht implementation of thisconstitutional mandate. The point however is how to make this a reality? .

\Ve all knov~~ frotn out experiences that ·reservations' is a vexed issue, for tf it were r~t then we would not.

have been tJiking of ::;truggle today. It is a tiny concession that the ruling elite, afflictvj with dpper caste.

chau\ inist ~entitnents as they are, are loath to concede. The compulsion of having to ·oncede it in the.

.

Constitution npctrt. the JHlm~·rous agitntinns against reservations sponsored by one sectit, of the ruling.

cla~sL's \)I' thl' other arc a proof of thi"i. Dot:s this then not point to the sitnple fact that thi~is not a easy.

.

struggl~ well w·ithin the capdrity of somt' hra\'e heart knights ofsocial justic~ to achieve it by th·mselves? Is.

there not n nl:l'd to ,n;:ush~d ali tht:, f()tTcs at our command. to mobilize the broadest sections of he campus.

faculty fnr thl' ·'defence nnd impleJncntation~~ of reservation poiiey? Is there not then the need to 'Drrnulate.

focus~ed JcnwnJ.s wwarJs this cn<Y) It i:-; in the context of these questirm.;; that \ve need to exan.ine the.

Potenti31 of the or:<!oinc..... httn!..!er strike h\ the thinlv veiled Ar~ '\ outt~t f DI R.

.

.._ -...

~ r ., ,-..

\".'hile \I".\ may IHl\'C genuine claims to being the biggest student organization on the campus, this carurit.

b~. .

or at h~ttSI should not be any ground for AISA to try to monopolize the issues which are of com;non.

interest to Jil. Being the biggest organization, the tcmptntion to monopoiize ali credit for actil'!g on such.

issues may be understandable but ct:rtainly not justifiable Neither can the) get a\vay by saying that wh-J.t we.

.

do. does n(')t prevent others from doing their bit. for tnis means that e\ er} student organization on the.

campu-; which stands in support of r~servl:ttions ·~;hould launch their own struggle for this common cause..

This is neither desirable nor feasible and would certainly lead to a situation that is laughable and.

catastrophic at the ~a1.

ne t1n1e. Being responsible political people as they are. they \vould acknowledge that it.

.

is not possible for any self respecting orgamzation to simply join their current effort when it was not even.

consulted about the modalities of struggle in first place. The need of the hour is to form a joint platform ofall organizations to steer this extremely important struggle to its desirable result, rather than the one up manship that is on display. .

PDSU has since the very beginning emphasized on the need for a joint struggle on the issue of reservations.

which has focussed demands and well thought out strategy to achieve then1. ln this respect rather than.

indulge in the semantics of how the cut off should be defined and weather the recomm,!ndations of the.

Aditya .t\1ukherjee cornmittee are acceptable or not, why can't we siinply de1nand that let tht!re be no cut off.

for either the general or the reserved categories. All the seats in the respective categories be filled on thebasis of the respective merit of the candidates in these categories, if the intend really is to jn1plementreservations. To obfuscate the issues and just keep parro~ing .

'implement reservations' -something to \Vhich.

everyone can agree and yet disagree, is to defeat the struggle. The need is to build an inclusive struggle onfocussed demands. We hope that good senses shall prevail on the 1nandnrins that are. .

Dr Vikas Bajpai, drvikasbajpaiC@.gmail.com, 9810275314.

-.

.

.

.

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' UNION 19.11.05.

.

On November 17th 2005, I issued a pamphlet in my official capacity as an elected Councilor in the JNUSU, raising questions about the.

democratic functioning of the JNUSU. I raised these questions because certain members of the current JNUSU had clearly violated.

the democratic norms of the Union, especially in regard to the JNUSU's position regarding the Prime Minister's visit. In response to my.

pamphlet, yesterday a pamphlet was issued by certain representatives of the JNUSU, ostensibly to respond to my claims. However,.

the pamphlet issue by the aforementioned representatives failed to address the issues raised in my pamphlet, and in fact seeks.

to avoid or obfuscate on several of the major questions:.

.

1. The pamphlet avoids addressing the fact that, because it was called less than 24 hours in advance, the "Emergency Meet-.

ing" called on November 13th was INVALID according to the JNUSU constitution. The pamphlet seeks to deflect attention.

towards the JNUSU President and the circumstances in which the meeting was called, thus avoiding the central issue..

NOWHERE does it address the fact that the Joint Secretary and Vice President broke the rules of the JNUSU Constitution.

when they called the meeting..

.

2. In regard to the above-mentioned violation, the pamphlet states that "The SL councilor should have actually refused to attend.

the meeting if this seemed to him as a very serious matter..." In fact, when another councilor raised the issue of the meeting.

being constitutionally invalid, he was told by the Vice President that in order to present any such statement, he would first.

have to sign the attendance sheet and thus "officially attend" the meeting. In other words, the Vice President told those.

of us who objected that we could not even express our opinion that the meeting was invalid unless we "officially attended".

the meeting! Thus the Vice President forced us to either agree to his organization's terms, or be kicked out of the council.

meeting entirely!.

.

3. The pamphlet also erroneously states that "the SL Councilor has falsely stated that the two memoranda submitted to the.

PM and HRD Minister were not voted upon and passed unilaterally in the Council." On the contrary, I did not state that the.

memoranda were not voted on. I stated, quite correctly, that THE "DECISION" TO SUBMIT A MEMO IN LIEU OF A PROTEST.

WAS NOT DEBATED OR VOTED UPON BY THE JNUSU, BUT RATHER WAS UNILATERALLY DECLARED BY THE VICE.

PRESIDENT AND HIS ORGANIZATION. The pamphlet does not even address this issue..

.

4. The tally of votes given in the pamphlet fails to mention that I DID NOT VOTE on either of the memoranda, because as I.

stated in my previous pamphlet, I viewed both as constitutionally invalid and not democratically representing the sentiments.

of the JNU student body..

.

5. The authors of the pamphlet have also stated that they would like to "enlighten" me of the "fact that there has been no such.

norm in the JNUSU of submitting proposals to the Chair personally without allowing all the members of the Council an op-.

portunity to debate on it. This is precisely why resolutions are tabled, debated and passed/rejected in the Council." This.

is my point exactly. I first gave a motion verbally, saying that the meeting was constitutionally invalid and that any vote on.

the memorandum would be similarly invalid, and proposed that instead individual representatives sign on the memorandum.

in their own names, not in the name of the JNUSU, and gave my suggestions for demands to be included in such a mem-.

orandum. The Vice President, who was chairing the meeting, told me to put the proposal in writing, which I did before any.

voting started. STILL, THE VICE PRESIDENT DID NOT PUT MY PROPOSAL FORWARD FOR DEBATE OR VOTE. HE.

IMMEDIATELY PUT THE MEMORANDA TO VOTE AND ADJOURNED THE MEETING. I would like to ask the Vice President.

and other signatories of that pamphlet to "enlighten" me, what else must a JNUSU representative do to have their proposals.

recognized by the chair? I would also like to point out that the proposals of several other councilors present at the meeting,.

both written and verbal, were similarly ignored by the Vice President..

.

6. The following issues put forward in my pamphlet were also not addressed by the authors of the above-mentioned pamphlet:.

.

· Why did the Vice President unilaterally declare both in the meeting with the Vice Chancellor on November 2nd and during the.

.

meeting of JNUSU representatives on November 13th that a memorandum would be submitted to the Prime Minister in lieu of a.

protest, WITHOUT ASKING FOR A DEBATE OR VOTE ON THE ISSUE, OR EVEN CONSULTING ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES.

OF THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.

.

· Why did the Vice President state in the All Organization Meeting on November 13th that the JNUSU opposed any protest during.

.

the visit of the Prime Minister, when THIS WAS NOT A DECISION TAKEN BY THE COLLECTIVE JNUSU?.

.

· Why did the Vice President attempt to prevent students from using certain slogans during the JNUSU protest march on November.

.

13th, saying that the JNUSU had decided against using such slogans, when in actuality NO SUCH DECISION WAS TAKEN BY.

THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF THE JNUSU?.

.

· Why did the Vice President refuse to allow an elected JNUSU representative speak during a JNUSU public meeting, while.

.

allowing an SFI activist who is NOT a member of the JNUSU to speak for more than ten minutes?.

.

Far from being an "assault" on the JNUSU, as the authors of that pamphlet would like the student community to believe,.

my questions are an attempt to ensure that the JNUSU remains a transparent, democratic, and representative body that.

represents the demands and aspirations OF ALL THE STUDENTS OF JNU. I believe that in order to do so, decisions taken in the.

JNUSU MUST BE MADE THROUGH A DEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS, NOT BY THE UNILATERALLY DIKTATS OF INDIVIDUAL.

OFFICE BEARERS. I respectfully challenge the authors and signatories of that pamphlet to address the questions and issues I have.

raised, if they are indeed committed to a democratic JNUSU..

.

And this is more than just a question of parliamentary points of order. As the aforementioned pamphlet impSlide/s-T, yI ldeor bWeliilelivaemthsa,t the.

Councillor, SLL&CS.

..

576H 10:00 Cricklewood Depot - Northampton EMD (Train obfuscated/No headcode found) Approx +7L (VSTP)

.

'A~lf' ,..

it ' "'\t"'.... . ~ .

' ~ ·( ~ ... .

\' ·· . \1.

.....~~.

,_.,..,. r_ ~~ .

II . .

.. .

' .

~ .

A:. .

~ .

b ;;_ .

.

?C.

.

.

I .

I A:» .

.. ,._.

.

.,.

.

I .

!,.--~ ' .

*. .

...l-::t: l P.-~ .

I .

.J .

r . .

~ ~ .

·.

~ .

f : .

t.

-.

t.

:.J I .

~ .

,t .

.

I .

.

~ .

.

~I ~ .

-' I .

~ .

.

t' .

.

lit I .

.

.

.

7!i Mav :Naxalbari oav .

Rebuff the Fascist Offpn~i"a n~ V'V17' --_. n ~-3.6.08 I .

SFI's Sabre-rattling Against JNUSU: . 8.6.08 Fudging and Obfuscation on Real Issues and Silence Against the Real Targets II .

~versince~cu~ntJNUSU hastaken .o~,.theSFI.has directed:rts entiretime and energy in maf~gningtheJNUSU and scutlliYJ itselbbi, ~the~incli1atbn1o opposethe admnrstra~. SFIs leafle~I~ntghtwas yet.a~o~rexampleofthis: JNUSlfsetrtielealletrepxirgoo11e 5JuneACmeeting had been directed atcondemmng and expos1ng the JNU administration's move to scuttle smooth implementation ofOBC resetVations-and SfIlaughably cfaims this is a'celebration'! .

SFrs Changing Positions on OBC Reservations: Its Roadmap ofOpportunism .

We have seen ~FI's changing positions on ~e~ueif impl.emen~~fOBC reservations,and theirvirulentantk:ampaignagainstJNUSU. Thestudent~ityhasno~forgottenhowSFI,I~its~~tiontodiscredttJNUSU'shungerstrike,hadterrnedthei~ofOBC~. afa~~mp[i, claUTUng thatth1s had aJ:eadybeen ach~eved 1nlastyea~sACmeeting and was therefore aperipheral agenda (SFI parll)hletof26 .

April, JUSt one dayafterthe hunger strike was concluded). We hopethat SA realises how misplaced that complacence was. nowthat the sameAC'sdecision has been overturned.Let us also remember that the JNU AC could overturn its o'Ml previous decision, because nwas frst and foremostthe HRD Ministry which rejected thatdecision-and the SFI too had contributed to discrediting the roodalitles ofthatdecision and spreading confusbn regarding it .

Nowftstands proved howjustified JNUSU'svigilance was:oohavenowseenhowtherewas manyaslip betvJeen cup and fip,ard howtheri reseNatbnlstlobby within and'NithoutJNU (and within theAC too) has done its bestto stan and drag outthe octuaJ ~of1heD1evitatle08C quota.The HRD Ministry Itselfcreated the worsthurdles towards implementationofOBC quota atonegoin JNU-and theanti-quota k>bby i'l JNU left no stone untumed to make the most ofthese hurdles. This year, the two AC meetings since the SC verdict have been highly acrimonious, .

necessitating long hours ofdebate on partofthe JNUSU,~ghtingforeveryinch ofspace. Durir'YJ JNUSU's agitation (which oos mar1<ed by SFI's token presence), andafterSFitoo haddone its bestto:emftle resIlls oowbebreusall.JustasJNUSUhadfeared,oncethatroadmapwasjunked,andtheAC'sdecisbnovertumed,theanfi.qootaforoos'ltOllkjgeta68Sh chance todelayimplementafun ofthe OBCquota.Oncethe HRD MinistryshotdoWlJNU's proposal to implement2JO/o reservaOOn atooe~.lleri reservaOOnistlobbylntheACgo1a shotin the ann;and viJVIent!yarguedforrestricting OBCquo1a to the wryn1nimumof9%.JNUSU l'mk>fghtbng and hard againstthis, and arguedthatJNU'scurrent levelofsocialinclusion shouKf not be compromised. TheadministraOOn was bead t> CXX1CSdei'1 .

fli'"qletlCitherepreserrtaronofCJBCstudentsshoukjnotreduce.H~.thecx1mnistrationsharoofulylndugedi11l.JJreCalfldjgt>nBtlthe12% fgure (~1ranslatesto an approximately 18% seatincrease)which \o\Ould aduallyreduce the numberofOBC students1h1s year. .

SFl seems unawareof, oris deliberatelytrying to obfuscatethe actual obstacles athandand theirrealsources: if theirpamphlet ~nightiseny indicator, they seem unaware ofthe HRD Minister's refusal to allowJNU's 20% OBC intake through deprivation points to be taken into accooot. Instead, theyconti1ue to parrotthe sameformula of?% increase inOBC quota and 14%seat increasethathas alreadybeenshotdow'lflTheyalso continuetostickto the completelylegallyuntenableproposalthat27%OBC reservaoon could be implemented inone~,while 54%seatila aas a oouk:i be staggered overthe nextthree years.The SFI has continuously been changing its positions with the sole intenOOn ofmaV*lQfleAISIJ led JNUSU. Thls isdone nothing butemooldened the anti-quota k>bby and helped the administration spread panicand frenzy abouttheernlfof .

~infrastructurerequirements. The SHs real intentionsare clearfrom thetargetoftheircampaign: in the entire leaflet lastnight therewas notaword aboutHRDMnlllry v.mtt a) has notextended the required funds forspeedyand fuR ifll)ierrentationand is rather pushing k>r aphased~1tation; Clldb) stddcMn.

.

JNU's roadmap brfuJI implementation atonego. The JNU administration had proposed aroadmap using JNU's existing JeveJ_ofsocialilclusbls asleppngstone1omakeaspeediertransition. Byshootingthatcio'M1,HRDmirUs1ryislayingthegroundforphasedi'nplementaOOnofquoCaMdMn for lowering ofJNU's existing levels ofsocial inclusion.One shou~notbe surprised bySFI's silence.We havegotused 1D this baderuark J)R>liA' Govt slavishness! ThecalllJUS hasalso seen howtime and again, the SFI remains slJent on the adminisbaoon's role:Ifontheonehand theHRD MnLWyve;absolved of blame,the admlnisbation's deiberate rrisrepresentation to theAC was alsoglossed over. .

HaNever, we knowfrom pastexperiero3thatSA is leastinterested In ensuri~reservations forOBCs. Theyhave alongandsha amUIIadc .

I'ICIII"l'"lft ofreneging on theissue.During the firstphaseofMandaiCormission In 1990, SFIabstainedfrom voting ontheJNUSUraaollllbnblllldby .

hthenJNUSU f'rlosOent(notfromSA),v.tlerebythe pro-Mcrdalresolution was~atednthe UGBM.~aresulthe1henJNUSU~Sl4CULrJ .

the Mandai Commission In toto, hadto resign.Again, justtM> years back, during Mandai II (2006), when YFE was running anraiCIOUSiy--:.

.-caIP'VonthiscaIIP'JS, with hungerstrikes andslanderous pamphlets, SFI wasnowhere in thepicture.ltwasAIS4thatb.QittaeYFEblt ncj,houghpostersandpamphletsandon thesbwlsthrougha34-atY&dct .

asertouehelldacheforthern,whoareleatcommlttadto reservationsapartfrom lfp aervfce1nd ahrlll ~abc. .

l .

ad/-Ravi Prakaah, V.P., AISA, JNU sd/-Suchetll De, Gen.Secy..AIM..allfV .

.

.