Here is my morning watchlist routine - where I go over what…

PAKISTAN-INDIA WATER ISSUES – HOW INDIA STOPPED WATER IN PAKISTAN's CANALS IN 1948

Thread

After partition in 1947, the water system was also bifurcated between Pakistan n India.

India cheated Pakistan when on April 1, 1948, India suddenly n without warning stopped...
1/n

...the supply of waters flowing into Pakistan's Central Bari Doab and Dipalpur Canals.

The boundary award on the partition of the sub-continent had left the headworks of these canals in Indian territory, and in accepting it India had implied her willingness to leave...

2/n

...the historic distribution of common waters undisturbed.

India's action was therefore in flagrant disregard not only of international law n morality, but of her solemn commitments with Pakistan and a gross violation of this country's historical rights over common waters.

3/n

Faced with a threat of utter desolation of millions of acres of fertile land, Pakistan had perforce to sign a document with India in which she agreed to "India's progressively diminishing water supplies to these canals and to the West Punjab government's tapping...

4/n

...alternative resources".

A specific reservation was made in the document with regard to India's claim that she had full property rights over waters flowing into her territory, and could therefore use them as she liked.

The issue was, however, to be examined...

5/n

SK
@sk_diary1

Krishna & Paarijaata apaharana #sculpture #story #Thread

Parijata tree was in Indraloka which was one of gifts he received from churning of Ocean to obtain Amrit.

This beautiful #sculpture depicts Indra Dev chasing Shri Krishna for stealing parijatha tree branch from Indralok

📸- sculpture on outer walls of Hoysaleswara temple, Halebeedu,Karnataka

Krishna has 4hands with Shankha,Chakra,Mace&Lotus holding Satyabhama tightly,mounted on Garuda. Garuda has a beautifully carved Parijata tree trunk in left hand& a weapon in his right hand, attacking Indra.

Other side is Indra,riding on Airavata.Indra can be seen attacking Krishna with his Vajrayutham.Airavata is charging towards Garuda.Wife of Indra can be seen in pillion seat.Just look at the Detailing of Garuda & Airavat sculptures.

So what led Krishna to steal parijatha tree👇

Narada Rishi once returning from Indralok collected few Parijatha flowers&reached Dwaraka.There he met Bhagwan Krishna&gave the heavenly flowers to him.Narada explained the greatness of Parijatha flowers & also said that these flowers must be given to the most loved ones.

Despite knowing Satyabhama’s anger,Krishna gave it to Rukmani Devi.Narada Rishi then went to palace of Satyabhama. He narrated whole incident that had happened.Satyabhama turned furious on hearing that Krishna gave Parijatha to Rukmini.Then Satyabhama shows her anger to Krishna.

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".

Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018

The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?