BJP mocks Pak's military actions with 2007 T20 World Cup clip
NEW DELHI: BJP launched a
digital offensive against Pakistan
on Friday, mocking its failed military retaliation after
Operation Sindoor
and exposing Islamabad's use of fake news to project false victories.
In a symbolic jab, BJP shared a 31-second clip from the tied India-Pakistan match during the 2007 T20 World Cup, where India clinched a 3-0 bowl-out win. Indian bowlers Virender Sehwag, Harbhajan Singh and Robin Uthappa hit the stumps with precision while Pakistan's Yasir Arafat, Umar Gul and Shahid Afridi failed completely. 'Kuch aisa tha. Operation Sindoor,' BJP posted on X, drawing a parallel between the cricketing humiliation and Pakistan's ineffective drone and missile retaliation after India's
cross-border strikes
on May 7.
'Pakistan's propaganda is quickly falling apart, exposing a web of lies and desperation,' BJP IT cell chief Amit Malviya said. 'In a blatant attempt to save face, deputy PM Ishaq Dar misled the country's Senate. The claim was so outrageous that even Dawn, Pakistan's leading newspaper, felt compelled to fact-check and debunk it,' he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Voter revision can't stop Assam's demographic invasion: Himanta Biswa Sarma
Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Tuesday said voter list revision cannot stop the demographic invasion which several areas of the state are facing. Sarma said Assam requires an indigenous solution for the problem as the cut-off date for determination of citizenship is 1951 in the rest of the country while in Assam it is 1971. The cut-off date for detecting foreigners in the state was set as March 24, 1971 in accordance with the Assam Accord , which was signed after a six-year anti-foreigners' movement led by AASU. Sarma told reporters in Guwahati that over the last four years, 160 sq km of land has been cleared through eviction and nearly 50,000 people have been asked to leave. He said the names of several of them are in the list of voters of two districts and the deputy commissions are striking off the dual names after the eviction drive. "Assam's situation is different," said Sarma. "Whoever was ever evicted, the deputy commissioner must have deleted the names from the voter list. So, voter revision cannot stop demographic invasion, as in Assam the citizenship starts from 1971, not 1951, like in the rest of the country. So, technically, you may not say that everybody is not an Indian."
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
BJP ally TDP seeks clarity on SIR, says exercise shouldn't link to citizenship or burden voters
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel New Delhi: Taking a contrarian view on the Special Intensive Revision ( SIR ) of electoral roll , key NDA ally Telugu Desam Party ( TDP ) said the purpose of the exercise should be clearly defined and delinked from citizenship verification , wrapped up at least six months before elections and the burden of proof should not be on the a four-page representation submitted to the Election Commission of India (ECI) on Tuesday, TDP sought clarity on the SIR's purpose -- a move seen as a guarded way of questioning the on-going exercise in openly criticising SIR, TDP has made four submissions which are against the current approach of ECI. TDP, whose 16 MPs provide crucial support to BJP-led NDA government at the Centre, has sought clarity on the "scope of SIR" and wants it to be completely delinked from the citizenship question. "The purpose of SIR must be clearly defined and limited to electoral roll correction and inclusion. It should be explicitly communicated that the exercise is not related to citizenship verification, and any field instructions must reflect this distinction," reads the TDP representation. It said adequate time should be given for such an exercise and it should take place "ideally not within six months of any major election". This is contrary to what is underway in Bihar, where a new assembly will be in place by November-end and SIR is underway with elections just three months documentation, TDP stated, "Voters who are already enrolled in the most recent certified electoral roll should not be required to re-establish their eligibility unless specific and verifiable reasons are recorded." TDP has sought to make a distinction between intensive roll revision and electoral roll revision and suggested that the last electoral roll revision be made the base year. This means that for Bihar it should be the electoral roll revision of January 2025 which should be the base year, not 2003. It cited a Supreme Court judgement in Lal Babu Hussein vs Electoral Registration Officer to say "prior inclusion created a presumption of validity and any deletion must be preceded by a valid inquiry."In the Bihar SIR, the ECI sought proof and asked voters to fill a form to ensure inclusion. However, TDP representation said: "The burden of proof lies with ERO or objector, not the voter, especially when the name exists on the official roll".
Economic Times
30 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Rogue bots? AI firms must pay up
When Elon Musk's xAI was forced to apologise this week after its Grok chatbot spewed antisemitic content and white nationalist talking points, the response felt depressingly familiar: suspend the service, issue an apology and promise to do better. Rinse and isn't the first time we've seen this playbook. Microsoft's Tay chatbot disaster in 2016 followed a similar pattern. The fact that we're here again, nearly a decade later, suggests the AI industry has learnt remarkably little from its mistakes. But the world is no longer willing to accept 'sorry' as sufficient. This is because AI has become a force multiplier for content generation and dissemination, and the time-to-impact has shrunk. Thus, liability and punitive actions are being discussed. The Grok incident revealed a troubling aspect of how AI companies approach accountability. According to xAI, the problematic behaviour emerged after they tweaked their system to allow more 'politically incorrect' responses - a decision that seems reckless. When the inevitable happened, they blamed deprecated code that should have been removed. If you're building systems capable of reaching millions of users, shouldn't you know what code is running in production?The real problem isn't technical - it's philosophical. Too many AI companies treat bias and harmful content as unfortunate side effects to be addressed after deployment, rather than fundamental risks to be prevented beforehand. This reactive approach worked when the stakes were lower, but AI systems now operate at unprecedented scale and influence. When a chatbot generates hate speech, it's not embarrassing - it's dangerous, legitimising and amplifying extremist ideologies to vast legal landscape is shifting rapidly, and AI companies ignoring these changes do so at their peril. The EU's AI Act, which came into force in February, represents a shift from reactive regulation to proactive governance. Companies can no longer apologise their way out of AI failures - they must demonstrate they've implemented robust safeguards before AB 316, introduced last January, takes an even more direct approach by prohibiting the 'the AI did it' defence in civil cases. This legislation recognises what should be obvious: companies that develop and deploy AI systems bear responsibility for their outputs, regardless of whether those outputs were 'intended'.India's approach may prove more punitive than the EU's regulatory framework and more immediate than the US litigation-based system, focusing on swift enforcement of existing criminal laws rather than waiting for new AI-specific legislation. India doesn't yet have AI-specific legislation, but if Grok's antisemitic incident had occurred with Indian users, then steps like immediate blocking of the AI service, a criminal case against xAI under IPC 153A, and a demand for content removal from the X platform would have been Grok incident may mark a turning point. Regulators worldwide are demanding proactive measures rather than reactive damage control, and courts are increasingly willing to hold companies directly liable for their systems' shift is long overdue. AI systems aren't just software - they're powerful tools that shape public discourse, influence decision-making and can cause real-world harm. The companies that build these systems must be held to higher standards than traditional software developers, with corresponding legal and ethical question facing the AI industry isn't whether to embrace this new reality - it's whether to do so voluntarily or have it imposed by regulators and courts. Companies that continue to rely on the old playbook of post-incident apologies will find themselves increasingly isolated in a world demanding AI industry's true maturity will show not in flashy demos or sky-high valuations, but in its commitment to safety over speed, rigour over shortcuts, and real accountability over empty apologies. In this game, 'sorry' won't cut it - only responsibility writer is a commentator ondigital policy issues (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Rumblings at the top of Ola Electric The hybrid vs. EV rivalry: Why Maruti and Mahindra pull in different directions. What's best? How Safexpress bootstrapped its way to build India's largest PTL Express business Zee promoters have a new challenge to navigate. And it's not about funding or Sebi probe. Newton vs. industry: Inside new norms that want your car to be more fuel-efficient Stock Radar: UltraTech Cements hit a fresh record high in July; what should investors do – book profits or buy the dip? F&O Radar | Deploy Bear Put Spread in Nifty to gain from index correction Weekly Top Picks: These stocks scored 10 on 10 on Stock Reports Plus
