Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

FUND THE FIGHT

Urdu is not a basic language it is a derived language, actually it is the mixture of many other basic and derived languages like Arabic, Turkish, Persian and Hindi and even there are some words in Urdu which are borrowed from English. The term Urdu was derived from a Turkish word "Ordo", which means camp, army or group. The Urdu language was developed between the Muslim soldiers of the Mughals armies, these soldiers originally belonged to different civilizations and they were Turks, Arabs, Pathans, Persians, Rajputs, Jats, Afghans, Balochis and Punjabis. These soldiers lived together for many years of their lives to fight against their common enemy during which they used to interact with each other by communicating in their respective dialects, which gradually merged into each other and evolved into the present form of Urdu. It is due to this reason that Urdu was first known as "Lashkari Zaban" or the language of the army, which was later changed to "Urdu-e-Muallah" meaning the exalted army which was given by the great Shah Jahan, who was a Mughal Emperor. "Rekhta" meaning scattered was another name used for this language until the present name Urdu came into use.

BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER

Unlike his unflappable temperament, his lingering failings should and could be corrected. And they must be if his presidency is not just to rise above the 24/7 Spill-cam but to credibly seize the narrative that Americans have craved ever since he was elected during the most punishing economic downturn of our lifetime. We still want to believe that Obama is on our side, willing to fight those bad corporate actors who cut corners and gambled recklessly while regulators slept, Congress raked in contributions, and we got stuck with the wreckage and the bills. But his leadership style keeps sowing confusion about his loyalties, puncturing holes in the powerful tale he could tell.

THE nota roja, a section reporting the previous day's murders and car crashes in all their bloodstained detail, is an established feature of Mexican newspapers. It is also an expanding one, as fighting over the drug trail to the United States inspires ever-greater feats of violence. Last month in the northern state of Durango, a group of prisoners was apparently released from jail for the night to murder 18 partygoers in a next-door state. A few days later, 14 inmates were murdered in a prison in Tamaulipas. In all, since Felipe Calderón sent the army against the drug gangs when he took office as president almost four years ago, some 28,000 people have been killed, the government says. There is no sign of a let-up, on either side.

THE FINANCIAL PAGE about the Bush tax cuts and a more progressive tax system. At the core of the fight over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts is a simple question: who counts as rich? The Obama Administration's answer is that you're rich if you make more than two…

One of the singular victories of the rich has been convincing the rest of us that their disproportionate success has been due to abstract economic forces beyond anyone's control (technology, globalization, etc.), not old-fashioned power politics. Hopefully the financial crisis and the recession that has ended only on paper (if that) will provide the opportunity to teach people that there is no such thing as abstract economic forces; instead, there are different groups using the political system to fight for larger shares of society's wealth. And one group has been winning for over thirty years.

A corporate offensive is rolling down upon us, aimed at wholesale privatization of the public sector. If the Left has learned anything in the last year and a half, it should be that President Obama is Wall Street's guy, having "delivered the highest return on corporate campaign investment in the history of bourgeois democracy." In this struggle, the people will be left to their own devices.

It seems that just about every hundred years or so, the body politic we call America swells with fever as it fights off a democracy-destroying disease. That disease is "Special Interest Government".

Bravo to those religious leaders who are fighting the anti-Islam frenzy.

The Wisconsin Democrat faces a very tough re-election fight:  why the outcome genuinely matters

Does it matter that a majority of Americans believe the U.S. should not be fighting in that country?

With the November elections quickly approaching, the majority of  Americans will be thinking one thing: "Who cares?" This apathy isn't due  to ignorance, as some accuse. Rather, working people's disinterest in  the two party system implies intelligence: millions of people understand  that both the Democrats and Republicans will not represent their  interests in Congress.  This begs the question: Whom does the two party system work for? The  answer was recently given by the mainstream The New York Times, who  gave the nation an insiders peek on how corporations "lobby" (buy)  congressmen. The article explains how giant corporations - from  Wall-mart to weapons manufacturers - are planning on shifting their  hiring practices for lobbyists, from Democratic to Republican  ex-congressmen in preparation for the Republicans gaining seats in the  upcoming November elections: "Lobbyists, political consultants and recruiters all say that the  going rate for Republicans - particularly current and former House staff  members - has risen significantly in just the last few weeks, with  salaries beginning at $300,000 and going as high as $1million for  private sector [corporate lobbyist] positions." (September 9, 2010) Congressmen who have recently retired make the perfect lobbyists:  they still have good friends in Congress, with many of these friends  owing them political favors; they have connections to foreign Presidents  and Kings; and they also have celebrity status that gives good PR to  the corporations. Often, these congressmen have done favors for the corporation that  is now hiring them, meaning, that the corporations are rewarding the  congressmen for services rendered while in office, offering them million  dollar lobbyist jobs (or seats on the corporate board of directors)  that requires little to no work.  The same New York Times article revealed that the pay for 13,000  lobbyists currently bribing Congress is a combined $3.5 bil

AN AMERICAN general told Peter Singer once that insurgents most fear America's unmatched technology. Then, talking to a Lebanese newspaper editor as a drone circled overhead, he heard a different story: Americans and Israelis, the editor said, are cowards to send machines to fight for them. Much of the ethical conversation around America's unmanned aerial vehicle strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan has centered around unintended civilian casualties. This is certainly a worthy topic for conversation. But Mr Singer asked a different set of questions: how do drones change the nations that use them?

Liberals have conceded the good fights -- organizing workers, preventing war, a greener economy -- to corporations and the ruling powers for decades, argues Chris Hedges. In his book, Death of the Liberal Class, Hedges slams groups and institutions from academia, to the church, to the Democratic par