किम-ट्रंप मीटिंग से पहले US-नॉर्थ कोरिया कर रहे सीक्रेट बातचीत

अमेरिका और नॉर्थ कोरिया सीक्रेट तरीके से सीधी बातचीत कर रहे हैं. मीडिया रिपोर्ट के मुताबिक, अमेरिकी राष्ट्रपति डोनाल्ड ट्रंप और नॉर्थ कोरिया तानाशाह किम जोंग उन की होने वाली मुलाकात की तैयारियों को लेकर दोनों देश बातचीत कर रहे हैं. आइए जानते हैं पूरा मामला...

सीएनएन की रिपोर्ट के मुताबिक, कई अधिकारियों ने ये जानकारी दी है कि दोनों देशों के बीच बातचीत हो रही है. सीआईए डायरेक्टर माइक पोम्पीओ भी मीटिंग की तैयारियों पर नजर रखे हुए हैं.

बताया जाता है कि दोनों देशों के अधिकारी किसी तीसरे देश में मिले हैं ताकि ट्रंप और किम की मुलाकात की जगह तय की जा सके. हालांकि, नॉर्थ कोरिया ने खुलकर इस बात का ऐलान नहीं किया है कि उन्होंने ट्रंप को मिलने के लिए इन्विटेशन दिया है, लेकिन इसको लेकर तैयारियां की जा रही हैं.

आपको बता दें कि उत्तर कोरिया के तानाशाह किम जोंग-उन और दक्षिण कोरिया के राष्ट्रपति मून जे-इन भी मिलने वाले हैं. इनकी 27 अप्रैल को मुलाकात होगी. लंबे वक्त तक चले तनाव के बाद दोनों देशों के प्रमुख मिलने पर सहमत हुए हैं.

किम जोंग-उन और मून जे-इन की मुलाकात के लिए जो जगह चुनी गई है उसका नाम है पनमुनजोम. इससे पहले उत्तर कोरिया और दक्षिण कोरिया के बीच विंटर ओलंपिक गेम्स 2018 को लेकर भी दोनों देशों के प्रतिनिधिमंडल की पनमुनजोम में ही बातचीत हुई थी.

Source:-Aajtak

View More About Our Services:-Mobile Database number Provider and Digital Marketing 

Mr President, would you be able to distinguish this creature?

WASHINGTON: Identifying creatures and presenting a rundown of words are among the kind of difficulties contained in the psychological wellness test taken by US President Donald Trump.

As indicated by White House specialist Ronny Jackson, Mobile Number Database Trump scored "exceedingly well" (30 out of 30) on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and has "no psychological issues at all."

Jackson said Trump himself had asked for to sit the test after inquiries concerning his psychological well-being.

"I think he saw doing the physical as a chance to put some of that to rest," Jackson said. "What's more, I figure he wasn't in any way shape or form worried that he had anything to stow away."

Be that as it may, what is this test, first made in 2005, and how can it work?

Numeracy is inspected by requesting that the applicant subtract seven from 100 and rehash this operation five times (giving a progression of 93, 86, 79, 72, 65).

To test dialect, the competitor is requested to rehash two expressions and after that recount however many words starting with a specific letter as could be expected under the circumstances in a single moment. Eleven words are required to secure a point.

The two last inquiries are a deliberation test, where competitors need to decode a connection between two words, and "introduction", where the applicant needs to express the day of the week, and in addition the month, date, year and what city they are in.

In the underlying investigation that built up the test, the normal score was a little more than 27. Competitors with "gentle subjective weakness" scored a little more than 22 and individuals with Alzheimer's sickness around 16.


Source:-TOI

View More About Our Services:-Mobile Database number Provider

Barack Obama calls Narendra Modi, PM thanks him for boosting strategic ties

NEW DELHI: Just ahead of Donald Trump's inauguration as the President of the United States, President Barack Obama called up Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review "all round progress" in the relations between US and India.

As he wished the outgoing US President well for his future endeavours, Modi thanked Obama for strengthening the strategic partnership between the two countries.

"The two leaders reviewed with satisfaction the significant all round progress and cooperation in ties between India and the US in the past few years," said ministry of external affairs spokesperson Vikas Swarup.

According to a White House readout, Obama thanked Modi for his partnership and the two reviewed joint efforts of cooperation including defence, civil nuclear energy, and enhanced people-to-people ties.

"Recalling his visit as Chief Guest at India's Republic Day celebrations in 2015, President Obama wished the Prime Minister warm congratulations ahead of India's upcoming 68th Republic Day anniversary," said the statement.

Obama and Modi discussed the progress they have made on shared economic and security priorities, including recognition of India as a Major Defense Partner of the United States and addressing the global challenge of climate change.

Obama, who visited India twice in his eight year tenure, is leaving the White House on Friday. President-elect Donald Trump will be sworn-in as the 45th American President.

Among other south Asian neighbours, Obama also made a farewell call to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, who was joined by chief executive officer Abdullah Abdullah.

Source:-Timesofindia

Nice Attack: Islamic terror, wilful denial and rise of right-wing forces

When a terrorist attack takes place — and most are targeted against unarmed civilians in virtually every sphere of public life — the initial reaction of shock and horror is quickly replaced by anger. Grief needs a catharsis. In absence of the terrorists who have perpetrated the crime, the anger turns towards the political leaders whose job it is to provide security.

The blood has not yet been wiped off the streets of Nice that France has turned against President Francois Hollande. TV channels covering the Thursday night tragedy, showed how unmitigated anger poured out against a President largely seen as effete, ineffective and incapable of preventing waves and waves of terror attacks on French soil.

The attack in Nice was as gruesome a terror strike as any. Latest reports indicate that 84 people were killed when a large white truck, said to be driven by a French-Tunisian citizen, ploughed into a large crowd, who gathered at the beachfront Promenade des Anglais in southern city of Nice for a fireworks display on Bastille Day. Local French media reported that the driver shouted "Allahu Akbar" before taking out his gun and firing several times at the crowd before he was subsequently neutralised.

Bastille Day commemorates the Storming of the Bastille on 14 July, 1789, an important event in the French Revolution. It is marked with a military parade down Paris' most famous boulevard, a presidential address to the nation and a vast fireworks display. Founding values of French Republic, equality, liberty and fraternity, are glorified.

The significance of the day and the fact that a large number of citizens had gathered for celebration — made it a lucrative target. In one fell blow, two purposes were achieved. One, a huge number of people were killed ensuring widespread outrage and non-stop media coverage — aspects which serve as fuel for glorification of terror and draws more and more perpetrators. Two, a symbolic, cruel blow was dealt to the French ideal of syncretism, the bedrock on which the multicultural republic stands.

Source: http://www.firstpost.com

Trump, Clinton campaign will be nasty—and that's good news

As the presidential election looks to be featuring two of the most polarizing candidates in modern American politics, we can expect a hard sell of potential stories and ads to try and make Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton more appealing. But the real deciding factor will once again be an avalanche of negative advertising, designed to tear down the policies and besmirch the personal behavior of the other side. Already, commentators are expecting an historical use of negative campaigning. And voters should be thankful for this.

Appropriately, negative ads and campaigns get a very bad rap. They turn off voters, demonize opponents for perfectly acceptable policy disputes and coarsen the political culture — all of these are legitimate complaints. But negative campaigns are still a breath of fresh air compared to the toxic potential of positive ads.

 Positive campaigns may be loved in theory, but in reality they are not idealized "Lincoln vs Douglas" debates, with each side courteously presenting their argument. They are instead frequently issue-free, focused on the perceived personal benefits of the candidate's previous career and sunny pictures of family.

By now, with a stream of embarrassing sex scandals hitting the papers—and with a grandfatherly former Speaker of the House now serving time due to his action related to sexual assaults—we should hope that voters won't buy into the tightly controlled stories about happy political families. But those stories, and the other inspirational pieces about rising from nothing to seek high office, are all part of the same problem of positive campaigns: They are really designed to tell as little as possible about a candidate's actual policy.



Even when they do manage to deal with issues, positive policy proposals are presented in a facile manner, frequently with untruths and a complete unwillingness to face up to the likelihood of success versus failure. Donald Trump's critics have loudly proclaimed that most of his ever-changing policy proclamations are impossible to carry out.

Trump and his supporters have said the same about some of his competitors' plans, and will undoubtedly try to use the same arguments against Clinton. The only way for voters to actually judge these arguments is negative campaigns. Positive ads will not expose the elisions. Only negative ones have any hope of blasting holes and exposing the policy weaknesses of a candidate's pie-in-the-sky plans.

But that is not the biggest benefit of negative ads. They are simply more truthful and fact-based than negative ones. Vanderbilt University Professor John Geer, the author of In "Defense of Negativity: Attack Ads in Presidential Campaigns," has noted that negative ads may be unpleasant but they end up presenting vastly more factual information—60 percent more on average—than the shiny happy positive variety.

What negative ads do is present a strong policy contrast for voters, giving them a chance to draw a real distinction between the two candidates. Negative ads distort information—context is always left out and they take the absolute worst possible interpretation of any action by an opponent. But they are usually very issue-based and much more precise and detailed than the positive and glowing ads in favor of a candidate.


Source: http://www.cnbc.com