Swami Chidanand Saraswati performs special prayers, Ganga Aarti for AI-171 crash victims
Calling the incident 'shocking and disturbing,' Swami Chidanand said the entire environment was engulfed in grief as thousands joined in the collective prayer for the departed souls and the speedy recovery of the sole survivor.
He also paid tribute to former Gujarat Chief Minister Vijay Rupani, who died in the crash, describing him as a 'very dear person.'
Speaking to ANI on Friday, Swami Chidanand Saraswati said, 'The accident is shocking and disturbing. The whole environment is sad... Today, thousands of people performed aarti on the sacred bank of the Ganga in Parmarth Niketan for the souls of those who left us. We also prayed that injured people recover quickly and return to their homes... Former Gujarat CM Vijay Rupani was a very dear person, who passed away in the accident... PM Modi says that India is his family... Whenever there is a moment of sorrow, he is always there... He went there and spoke to the survivor and expressed grief to the bereaved family members...'
The deadly accident has shaken the country and led to condolences and prayers pouring in from several states.
In Uttarakhand's Haridwar, hundreds of people gathered on the banks of the Ganga River to offer prayers for the deceased.
Locals and priests performed rituals and lit lamps as a mark of respect for those who lost their lives in the horrific crash.
In Tamil Nadu, members of the Rameswaram People's Protection Council paid heartfelt homage to the victims at Agni Theertham beach in Pamban.
Flowers were floated into the sea, and silence was observed to remember the passengers and crew who died in the crash.
In Uttar Pradesh's Lucknow, the King George Medical University (KGMU) held a solemn condolence meeting to honour the memory of those who perished.
University officials and students came together to express grief and observe a moment of silence.
On Thursday, the Al-171 Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 plane bound for London's Gatwick crashed shortly after it took off from the Ahmedabad International Airport. The airline said only one out of the 242 people on board the aircraft survived the crash.
According to Air Traffic Control (ATC), the aircraft departed from Ahmedabad at 1339 IST (0809 UTC) from runway 23. It made a Mayday call to ATC, but thereafter, the aircraft did not respond to the calls.
Immediately after departing Runway 23, the aircraft crashed outside the airport perimeter, and heavy black smoke began emanating from the accident site.
Vishwashkumar Ramesh miraculously survived the Air India plane crash a day ago, in which 241 other passengers died. Kumar, a British national of Indian origin, was seated in row 11, at the left window seat in the flight's economy class section, right behind an emergency exit.
There were 169 Indian nationals, 53 British nationals, seven Portuguese nationals, and one Canadian national on board the crashed plane, airline authorities said. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Hong Kong pro-democracy activists granted asylum in Australia and Britain
TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — A Hong Kong pro-democracy activist and a former lawmaker who are wanted by the city's authorities have been granted asylum in Great Britain and Australia, respectively. Tony Chung, an activist who was imprisoned under Hong Kong's sweeping national security law, and Ted Hui, a former lawmaker who was facing trial for his role in anti-government protests in 2019, both announced over the weekend that they have received asylum in the countries where they now live. They are among dozens of activists on the run from Hong Kong authorities. Civil liberties in the city have been greatly eroded since Beijing in 2020 imposed a national security law essentially criminalizing dissent in the former British colony. Both Beijing and Hong Kong have hailed the security law as bringing stability to the financial hub. Hui, who fled Hong Kong in December 2020, is part of a group of overseas activists who are targeted by police bounties of up to 1 million Hong Kong dollars ($127,800). The former lawmaker is now working as a lawyer in Adelaide. He announced on Facebook on Saturday that he and his family have been granted protection visas. 'I express my sincere gratitude to the Government of Australia — both present and former — for recognising our need for asylum and granting us this protection,' Hui wrote. 'This decision reflects values of freedom, justice, and compassion that my family will never take for granted.' While in Hong Kong, Hui had been an outspoken pro-democracy lawmaker. He was also known for disrupting a legislative session after he threw a rotten plant in the chamber to stop a debate of the national anthem bill — controversial legislation making it illegal to insult the Chinese national anthem. He was subsequently fined 52,000 Hong Kong dollars ($6,600) for the act. Chung, who had advocated for Hong Kong's independence, was sentenced to almost four years in prison for secession and money laundering in 2020. He was released on a supervision order, during which he traveled to Japan, from where he fled to Britain seeking asylum. In a post on social media platform Threads on Sunday, he expressed his excitement at receiving refugee status in Britain along with a five-year resident permit. He said that despite his challenges over the past few years, including persistent mental health problems, he remains committed to his activism. British and Australian authorities didn't immediately comment on the activists' statuses. Hong Kong's government did not comment directly on the cases but issued a statement on Saturday condemning 'the harbouring of criminals in any form by any country.' 'Any country that harbours Hong Kong criminals in any form shows contempt for the rule of law, grossly disrespects Hong Kong's legal systems and barbarically interferes in the affairs of Hong Kong,' the statement read.
Winnipeg Free Press
a day ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Putin emerges from the Alaska summit with increased stature and Trump echoing a Kremlin position
In Alaska, President Vladimir Putin walked on a red carpet, shook hands and exchanged smiles with his American counterpart. Donald Trump ended summit praising their relationship and calling Russia 'a big power … No. 2 in the world,' albeit admitting they didn't reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine. By Saturday morning Moscow time, Trump appeared to have abandoned the idea of a ceasefire as a step toward peace -– something he and Ukraine had pushed for months -– in favor of pursuing a full-fledged 'Peace Agreement' to end the war, echoing a long-held Kremlin position. The 'severe consequences' he threatened against Moscow for continuing hostilities were nowhere in sight. On Ukraine's battlefields, Russian troops slowly grinded on, with time on their side. The hastily arranged Alaska summit 'produced nothing for Mr. Trump and gave Mr. Putin most of what he was looking for,' said Laurie Bristow, a former British ambassador to Russia. The summit spectacle Putin's visit to Alaska was his first to the United States in 10 years and his first to a Western country since invading Ukraine in 2022 and plunging U.S.-Russia relations to the lowest point since the Cold War. Crippling sanctions followed, along with efforts to shun Russia on the global stage. In another major blow, the International Criminal Court in 2023 issued an arrest warrant against Putin on accusations of war crimes, casting a shadow on his foreign trips and contacts with other world leaders. Trump's return to the White House appeared to upend all that. He warmly greeted Putin, even clapping for him, on a red carpet as U.S. warplanes flew overhead as the world watched. The overflight was both 'a show of power' and a gesture of welcome from the U.S. president to the Kremlin leader, 'shown off to a friend,' said retired Col. Peer de Jong, a former aide to two French presidents and author of 'Putin, Lord of War.' Russian officials and media reveled in the images of the 'pomp-filled reception' and 'utmost respect' that Putin received in Alaska. Putin has 'broken out of international isolation,' returning to the world stage as one of two global leaders and 'wasn't in the least challenged' by Trump, who ignored the arrest warrant for Putin from the ICC, Bristow told The Associated Press. For Putin, 'mission accomplished' Putin 'came to the Alaska summit with the principal goal of stalling any pressure on Russia to end the war,' said Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. 'He will consider the summit outcome as mission accomplished.' In recent months, Trump has pressed for a ceasefire, something Ukraine and its allies supported and insisted was a prerequisite for any peace talks. The Kremlin has pushed back, however, arguing it's not interested in a temporary truce -– only in a long-term peace agreement. Moscow's official demands for peace so far have remained nonstarter for Kyiv: It wants Ukraine to cede four regions that Russia only partially occupies, along with the Crimean Peninsula, illegally annexed in 2014. Ukraine also must renounce its bid to join NATO and shrink its military, the Kremlin says. After Alaska, Trump appeared to echo the Kremlin's position on a ceasefire, posting on social media that after he spoke to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, 'it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' In a statement after the Trump call, the European leaders did not address whether a peace deal was preferable to a ceasefire. The pro-Kremlin tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda described it as a 'huge diplomatic victory' for Putin, whose forces will have time to make more territorial gains. The summit took place a week after a deadline Trump gave the Kremlin to stop the war or face additional sanctions on its exports of oil in the form of secondary tariffs on countries buying it. Trump already imposed those tariffs on India, and if applied to others, Russian revenues 'would probably be impacted very badly and very quickly,' said Chris Weafer, CEO of Macro-Advisory Ltd. consultancy. In the days before Alaska, Trump also threatened unspecified 'very severe consequences' if Putin does not agree to stop the war. But whether those consequences will materialize remains unclear. Asked about it in a post-summit interview with Fox News Channel, Trump said he doesn't need 'to think about that right now,' and suggested he might revisit the idea in 'two weeks or three weeks or something.' Alexandra Prokopenko of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and a former adviser at the Russian Central Bank, posted on X that it was 'an important tactical victory for Putin' that gives Moscow 'an opportunity to build alternatives and be prepared.' More pressure on Ukraine In a statement after the summit, Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an 'understanding' on Ukraine and warned Europe not to 'torpedo the nascent progress.' But Trump said 'there's no deal until there's a deal.' In his Fox interview, Trump insisted the onus going forward might be on Zelenskyy 'to get it done,' but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. Zelenskyy will meet Trump at the White House on Monday. Both raised the possibility of a trilateral summit with Putin, but Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said it wasn't discussed in Alaska. The Kremlin has long maintained that Putin would only meet Zelenskyy in the final stages of peace talks. 'Trump now appears to be shifting responsibility towards Kyiv and Europe, while still keeping a role for himself,' Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center wrote on X. Fiona Hill, a senior adviser on Russia in his first administration, told AP that Trump has met his match because 'Putin is a much bigger bully.' Trump wants to be the negotiator of 'a big real estate deal between Russia and Ukraine,' she said, but in his mind he can 'apply real pressure' only to one said — Kyiv. Hill said she expects Trump to tell Zelenskyy that 'you're really going to have to make a deal' with Putin because Trump wants the conflict off his plate and is not prepared to put pressure on the Russian president. Far from the summit venue and its backdrop saying 'Pursuing Peace,' Russia continued to bombard Ukraine and make incremental advances on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front. Russia fired a ballistic missile and 85 drones overnight. Ukraine shot down or intercepted 61 drones, its air force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked. Russia's Defense Ministry said it had taken control of the village of Kolodyazi in the Donetsk region, along with Vorone in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine did not comment on the claims. Russian forces are closing in on the strongholds of Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2022 but still only partially controls. 'Unless Mr. Putin is absolutely convinced that he cannot win militarily, the fighting is not going to stop,' said Bristow, the former ambassador. 'That's the big takeaway from the Anchorage summit.' —— Associated Press writers John Leicester in Paris and Elise Morton and Pan Pylas in London contributed.
Globe and Mail
a day ago
- Globe and Mail
Court ruling on Indigenous claim creates uncertainty around land ownership
On a stretch of the south arm of the Fraser River, in the Vancouver area, the Cowichan Tribes in centuries past had an annual summer fishing village, a place they defended with a warrior ethos against other Indigenous groups. But in the mid-1800s, the Cowichan – whose home territory is on Vancouver Island – were displaced from that village as the British took control and, after British Columbia joined Canada, the land was sold over the years. Today, the land is occupied by an array of owners. Part of the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and other industrial operations are there. There's a golf course and private homes with small farms, along with a span of infrastructure such as roads and dikes. In a Globe and Mail analysis of property assessments, land and buildings in the area are worth more than $1.3-billion. On Aug. 8, the seeming solidity of land ownership was blown open by a major ruling from the B.C. Supreme Court that declared the Cowichan have Aboriginal title to the area in question. The lower court ruling vaulted unanswered questions in B.C. into the fore: what happens when Aboriginal title directly overlaps modern ownership of land under rights called fee simple? Andrew Coyne: To recognize aboriginal title is not to abolish property rights, but to uphold them Opinion: A land-claims ruling shakes the foundation of property rights in B.C. Justice Barbara Young noted that Aboriginal title is 'a prior and senior right to land' and said the question is not what happens to Aboriginal title after fee simple title is in place. 'The proper question is: what remains of fee simple title after Aboriginal title is recognized in the same lands?' the judge wrote. The potential provincewide implications of the judgment led to an immediate and aggressive response from the B.C. provincial government. After the court decision landed, Premier David Eby spoke of the crucial economic importance of clear title in property ownership, and last Monday the province announced it would appeal and seek a stay of the ruling. Companies such as Canadian Tire, Euro Asia Transload and Westport Intermodal, which have operations on the land, did not respond to requests for comment. Kash Heed, a Richmond city councillor and former provincial solicitor-general, said uncertainty has stoked anxiety among some owners in the area. 'They're in a world of, 'We're not sure what's going to happen to our property,'' said Mr. Heed. 'Which they feel they rightfully own.' The ruling, after an epic trial that spanned five years, made several other declarations beyond Aboriginal title. One was on fishing rights. Another said land titles held by the federal government and the city of Richmond were 'invalid' – a finding the judge suspended for 18 months so the various sides could negotiate. Private land titles were excluded from the declaration of invalidity but, regardless, now exist in a legal limbo. The Cowichan this week said they do not aim to displace private land owners and have previously said they'd expect compensation from governments for private land on their territory. The court decision effectively said the situation for private landowners is unchanged until it changes. Private ownership is 'valid until such a time as a court may determine otherwise or until the conflicting interests are otherwise resolved through negotiation,' Justice Young wrote. How that is figured out is 'not a matter for this court to address.' For now, some are in wait-and-see mode. Harry Hogler, a local resident and co-owner of the Country Meadows Golf Course, told The Canadian Press he wasn't worried about the court ruling but declined an interview. Geoff Plant, a former provincial attorney-general who worked on treaty negotiations and is a lawyer for one of the defendants against the Cowichan, said for a long time, private landowners in B.C. were told there was nothing to worry about, even as claims of Aboriginal title advanced in talks with government, in the courts and in court decisions. 'The average person should now start paying attention to this question more closely,' said Mr. Plant. Negotiations are likely the best way forward, he said. One example is last year's deal between B.C. and the Haida Nation. It granted the nation Aboriginal title to all of Haida Gwaii, islands in the province's northwest, while the Haida agreed to leave privately owned lands unchanged and under B.C. authority. Indigenous rights expert and law professor Dwight Newman, at the University of Saskatchewan, said governments are in a challenging spot as they try to negotiate deals and defend cases in court. What happens next in the Cowichan case is 'a giant legal question.' In the appeal courts process, Prof. Newman said judges will consider a wider spectrum of legal thinking than at the trial level. 'Courts are going to have to come up with something that makes sense and that's also practical and somehow tries to respect everyone's interests,' he said. The federal government has offered only minimal comment on the case. In a statement, the government said it is looking at the implications of the decision to 'determine how best to move forward.' Mr. Heed said the appeal courts will take a sharp eye at the initial ruling, which he argued was somewhat convoluted and disjointed. 'We know this is going to end up at the Supreme Court,' he said. 'We are several years away from any finality on this.'
