Air India Flight 171 Crash: Sabotage Angle Also Under Probe, Says Aviation Minister
The crash occurred on June 12, shortly after the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner took off from Ahmedabad, resulting in the deaths of 241 of the 242 people on board. The final death toll now stands at 260, including 19 people killed on the ground, according to Gujarat authorities, slightly lower than the initial estimate of 270.
The AAIB, India's top aviation crash investigation agency, is leading the probe. Both the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and the flight data recorder (FDR) were recovered from the crash site and sent to Delhi for forensic analysis.
Speaking at an event in Pune, Minister Mohol told NDTV: "It (plane crash) was an unfortunate incident. The AAIB has begun a full investigation into it... It is being probed from all angles, including any possible sabotage. The CCTV footage is being reviewed and all angles are being assessed... several agencies are working on it."
The Ministry of Civil Aviation has stated that data extraction from the black boxes began on June 24 with assistance from both Indian and US investigators, including members of the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The Crash Protection Module (CPM) from the front black box was safely retrieved, and the memory module was accessed and downloaded on June 25 at the AAIB lab in Delhi.
A multidisciplinary investigation team was formed by the AAIB on June 13. The team comprises Indian and international experts, including aviation technical staff, a specialist in aviation medicine, and an air traffic control officer, in line with global aviation safety norms laid out by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
Investigators are working to reconstruct the final moments of Flight AI-171 to determine the root cause of the crash. The ongoing analysis of the CVR and FDR data is expected to provide critical insights into the sequence of events that led to the disaster.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
10 minutes ago
- First Post
'Trump is desperate': Mamdani counters US president's jibes, says 'will fight back'
Zohran Mamdani, an Indian-origin candidate for New York City mayor, has hit back at US President Donald Trump, calling him 'desperate' after Trump threatened to deport him. Mamdani accused Trump of using personal attacks to distract from his failures. read more Zohran Mamdani, New York's Indian-origin mayoral candidate, has fired back at US President Donald Trump after Trump threatened to deport him, calling the president 'desperate.' Mamdani accused Trump of trying to divide people and using personal attacks to distract from his failures to help working-class Americans. In a video posted on X, Mamdani vowed not to back down, saying he would keep fighting against Republican efforts to silence dissent. 'Yesterday, Donald Trump said that I should be arrested. He said that I should be deported. He said that I should be denaturalised,' Mamdani said during a rally in New York. 'He's saying these things not only because of who I am—a potential first immigrant mayor, first Muslim, and first South Asian mayor of this city—but because he wants to distract from what I fight for. I fight for working people.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Since Mamdani's primary victory, Trump has repeatedly attacked him, calling him a 'communist' and a 'lunatic,' and making remarks about his background. Mamdani criticised Trump for fuelling division instead of addressing the struggles of working-class Americans across the country. He also condemned Trump's major tax and spending proposal, known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which faces a key vote in Congress on Thursday. More from World Is Zohran Mamdani at risk of losing his US citizenship? Mamdani claimed Trump is attacking him to avoid discussing the bill, which he argues would cut healthcare access and leave more people hungry. His comments come a day after Trump threatened to arrest Mamdani over his promise to limit New York City's cooperation with federal immigration authorities. 'Well then, we'll have to arrest him,' Trump said during a visit to a Florida detention centre, referring to Mamdani's vow not to assist ICE. 'We'll be watching over him very carefully on behalf of the nation.' Trump also falsely claimed Mamdani might be in the US illegally, saying, 'A lot of people are saying he's here illegally.'
Indian Express
14 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Escape from Tibet: How Nehru, despite concerns, granted the Dalai Lama asylum
In the history of Tibet and Indo-China relationship, April 26, 1959, was a turning point. Having fled his homeland following China's invasion, the Dalai Lama met Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru who declared that the spiritual and political leader of Tibetan Buddhists 'should be allowed to live in peace' in India. On Wednesday, the Dalai Lama, who turns 90 on July 6, reiterated that the institution would continue and only his Gaden Phodrang Foundation would have the authority to recognise the reincarnation, ending uncertainty on whether he will have a successor or not after his death. The Dalai Lama, who is the 14th to hold the title, made the announcement from Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh, where all those decades ago he set up the Tibetan government-in-exile. At the time, following his arrival in the country, Nehru had told the public that the Tibetan spiritual leader 'had to undertake a very big and difficult journey' before meeting him. '… The circumstances of the journey were also painful to the Dalai Lama,' the PM said, adding it was 'only proper that the Dalai Lama should get an opportunity in a peaceful atmosphere to consult his colleagues on the ups and downs in Tibet and get over the mental strain'. The journey up to that point was long and arduous. Following China's occupation of Tibet and the violent repression that followed, the Dalai Lama and several other Tibetans left for India. The Dalai Lama, his family members, bodyguards, and fellow Tibetans were received by Indian border guards at the Khenzimane Pass in Arunachal Pradesh on March 31, 1959. On April 2, Indian government officials formally welcomed him at the Chutangmu outpost on April 2, 1959, and took him to the Tawang monastery. The following day, the Nehru government announced it had granted the Dalai Lama political asylum. Subsequently, P N Menon, the former Consul-General in Lhasa and PM Nehru's envoy, welcomed the Dalai Lama and carried messages from the government. The Dalai Lama eventually moved to Tezpur in Assam, where he released his first statement from Indian soil. On April 18, 1959, he criticised China for shelling the Norbulingka Palace, one of his residences in Lhasa, the month before. He expressed his deep gratitude to the Government of India and thanked the Indian public for their 'spontaneous and generous welcome'. In the same statement, the Dalai Lama mentioned he came to India 'of my own free will and not under duress'. For Nehru, too, it was not all smooth sailing when it came to granting the Dalai Lama asylum. The PM faced immense criticism, with many warning him of the consequences of 'antagonising China'. V K Krishna Menon, who was then India's Defence Minister, is said to have raised objections to the asylum at a crucial Cabinet meeting, Bharatiya Jan Sangh leader Deendayal Upadhyay had said the move 'obstructs, rather than helps, fulfillment of this objective [of actively supporting Tibet's struggle for independence'. The day the Dalai Lama released the statement from Tezpur, China officially lodged its protest, accusing India of meddling in its internal affairs. Beijing insisted that the Dalai Lama 'be returned'. That laid the foundation of a future deterioration of Indo-China relations and eventually led to the 1962 Sino-Indian war. Nehru, however, cited 'moral and humanitarian' grounds to allow the Dalai Lama entry into India and also the decision to grant him political asylum. In October 1959, the PM told Parliament, 'Very probably, the Tibetan developments have angered and soured the minds of the government in China, very likely… And perhaps they have reacted strongly to what we have done, I mean, to the asylum we have given to the Dalai Lama.' Before getting political asylum, the Dalai Lama had visited India in 1956. Along with the Panchen Lama — considered second only to the Dalai Lama in spiritual authority in Tibetan Buddhist culture — they were in India for the 2,500th anniversary of the Buddha's parinirvana. At the time, they had informed Nehru of the conditions in Tibet after China went back on its terms of the 1951 agreement on Tibet's autonomy. Then Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai was also present in New Delhi and had detailed discussions with Nehru about Tibet and assured the PM that Beijing would honour Tibet's autonomy. It was upon these assurances and Nehru's advice that both the Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama returned home. In The Dalai Lama: An Extraordinary Life, Alexander Norman writes that the Dalai Lama had made clear to Nehru his intention to seek asylum in India. But the PM did not seem to fully commit, reportedly saying that India could not support him at the time. According to another renowned Tibetologist and author Claude Arpi, the Dalai Lama sent a telegram to Nehru on March 26, 1959, in which he wrote: 'Ever since Tibet went under the control of Red China … We are entering India via Tsona. I hope that you will please make necessary arrangements for us in the Indian territory. Confident of your kindness…' According to Arpi, Nehru replied to the Dalai Lama's telegram on April 3. In it, the former PM provided details of the officers who would be meeting the Dalai Lama and facilitating his travel. (Check dates, not matching) In the same letter, Nehru told the Dalai Lama that the Indian government had not yet decided where he should stay. The PM wrote (separate letter, if so, to whom): 'We are instructing P N Menon (former Consul-General to Lhasa) to inform the Dalai Lama orally that it would be best for him not to issue any long statements to the press here at this stage. The Dalai Lama will undoubtedly appreciate the inadvisability of saying anything which would cause embarrassment to him and to us.' After Tezpur, the Dalai Lama lived in Mussoorie (now in Uttarakhand) for several months. In 1960, upon the invitation of the government, he moved to McLeodganj in Dharamshala and has been there since then, with the town becoming the centre for Tibetan cultural and political activities in exile.
NDTV
19 minutes ago
- NDTV
Why Eating With Hands Is So Alien To The West, Why It Is Not To The Rest
Trigger Warning: Abusive comments ahead "Disgusting... like animals. I***F if it's culture... still disgusting." "Spoons exist for a reason, if you ask me." "That's f***ng psychotic - that's the same hand he literally wipes his a** with." "So unsanitary and 3rd world." "Animals such as dogs and cats and even ants etc. have better personal culture when eating than they do." If you're wondering where these are from, they're just a small sample from the thousands of racist, unfiltered, and dehumanising comments flooding social media in response to a now-viral video of Zohran Mamdani, the 33-year-old Democratic nominee for New York City's mayoral race in 2025, eating biryani with his bare hands. Zohran says his worldview is inspired by the 3rd world while eating rice with his hands — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) June 29, 2025 Yes, you read that right. A man eating food with his hands. Not committing a crime, not making a policy blunder. Just eating, the way millions do around the world. Eating with hands may not be a practice familiar to the West, but ridiculing those who do things differently definitely seems to be. Mamdani, the son of Ugandan academic Mahmood Mamdani and Indian-American filmmaker Mira Nair, was raised in a household where hand-eating was not just accepted, it was the norm. Like in many South Asian homes, meals weren't just about nourishment. They were rituals of connection, of culture, of comfort. And here's the thing: Eating with hands isn't just a cultural quirk or family tradition. It's ancient, intentional, and, dare we say, more delicious (A study shows this too). Since The Oldest Civilisations Way before forks and knives strutted into European dining rooms, humans were already eating. And eating fine without them. The Egyptians, Greeks, Mesopotamians and, yes, the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation (around 2500 BCE), all ate with their hands. It wasn't messy or uncouth. It was a mindful way of consuming food, believed to prime the body for digestion. In fact, the sacred Indian texts, the Vedas and the Upanishads, mention eating with hands as a practice that aligns the body and spirit with the act of eating. Each bite becomes a sensory experience involving sight, smell, taste, and touch. Ayurveda, India's ancient medical system developed more than 3,000 years ago, reinforces this. Wellness expert Luke Coutinho also further explains that touch stimulates digestive enzymes and signals the body to prepare for nourishment. So, while cutlery may offer convenience, hands offer connection - to food, to tradition, and to self. Geography Shaped Our Plates It also comes down to food types. Indian cuisine, with its fluffy rice, soft breads, aromatic gravies and tangy pickles, lends itself beautifully to hand-eating. Mixing and scooping with fingers allows us to combine textures and flavours exactly the way we want, a piece of naan dipped just right into dal, or a portion of rice mashed with curry to perfect consistency. In contrast, much of Western food - think roasts, grilled meats, pastas (with less spices and flavour) - is structured, needing to be cut or portioned. Hence, the rise of knives and forks. But even in the West, hands weren't always shunned at the table. What The? Cutlery didn't always rule Western dining tables. Forks first appeared in southern Europe around the 11th century, gained some popularity in 14th-century Italy thanks to pasta, and slowly made their way across Europe. But they weren't always welcome. Many considered them unnecessary. In America, forks became commonplace only in the late 18th to early 19th century. Before that, early colonists mostly used spoons... and hands. That's right. Hand-eating was once done by Americans themselves. Formal dining etiquette, and the cutlery obsession that came with it, was largely a classist invention. In medieval and Renaissance Europe, aristocrats used forks and knives as markers of sophistication. Manuals like The Courtier by Baldassare Castiglione outlined elite table manners to separate the wealthy from the working class. Today, you can spot these 'royalty' people teaching on social media on the 'right' way to eat food items. View this post on Instagram A post shared by William Hanson (@williamhanson) Anyhoo, back to history. As the middle class grew, they mimicked the nobility, adopting these customs to climb the social ladder. In the US, women played a major role in establishing table etiquette within families, helping normalise cutlery use among the middle class. Distinctively, Americans developed a fork-switching method (cutting with the knife in the right hand, then switching the fork over to eat) a practice celebrated as uniquely "American". In contrast, Indian dining didn't evolve as a display of wealth or class but as an expression of spirituality and culture. Eating with hands wasn't about status - it was about sustenance. What About Chopsticks? And then there are chopsticks. Slender sticks of wood or metal that have travelled across continents to become symbols of elegance and finesse. Originally developed in China over 3,000 years ago, chopsticks were first used for cooking and serving. By around 400 AD, they evolved into the main utensil for eating, spreading to neighbouring countries like Japan, Korea and Vietnam. But much like the fork in Europe, chopsticks were once a marker of sophistication and class, associated with refined etiquette and deeply rooted cultural values. In Japan, chopsticks (hashi) are more than just tools, they're part of a dining philosophy. From the way food is prepared into bite-sized pieces to the rules about how you rest your chopsticks between bites, every gesture reflects mindfulness and respect for the meal. Using them incorrectly, like pointing them at someone or sticking them upright in a bowl of rice, is considered not only rude but spiritually inappropriate, as it mimics funeral rituals. In Korea, the tradition is different. Chopsticks are often made of metal, and they're used alongside a spoon, a practice believed to have originated in royal court dining. Meals are communal, laid out with many side dishes, and using both chopsticks and a spoon ensures shared food is handled delicately and respectfully. Today, chopsticks have shed their once "exotic" label in the West and are now celebrated as markers of taste and cosmopolitan flair. From sushi restaurants, ramen bars, to pan-Asian fine dining spots. Religion Too Now, back to our fork, knife, spoon and eating with hands debate. Out of everything else, religion too played a significant role in promoting eating with hands. The right hand holds a significant place in Indian cultural beliefs and practices, deeply intertwined with many religious rituals and traditions. It is customary for Indians to use their right hand not only for eating but also for a variety of auspicious activities (like sharing prasad or applying tilak or giving blessing). This stems from a shared belief system where the right hand is considered pure, representing good deeds and positive intentions. This tradition is rooted in several religions in India, including Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, and Jainism. The left hand, on the other hand, is traditionally viewed as impure, often reserved for tasks associated with personal hygiene. Let's Talk Dirty: The Matters Of Hygiene The only argument that the people who are calling eating with hands seem to be clinging to is hygiene. However, according to cultural anthropologist Dr Aditi Verma, "In Indian society, dining practices are not just about satisfying hunger; they are symbols of the society's broader perception of cleanliness and respect." Washing hands before and after the meals were also practiced as a tradition, which by the way, eliminates the question of hygiene. In every gesture made with the right hand, there lies a respect for the spiritual and physical purity that Indian culture holds dear. The influence of these beliefs extends beyond the dining table into daily life. For instance, when exchanging goods or money, or even shaking hands, many Indians still prefer using their right hand, as a gesture of goodwill. As urban lifestyles evolve, there has been a slight shift away from these customs, but they remain a vital element of cultural identity and heritage, especially in traditional communities. So, hand, knife, fork, spoon or chopsticks - whatever you want to use, the bottom line is this: people should be able to eat the way they want to without being subjected to racism, ridicule or mockery. Especially not for enjoying a plate of biryani the way it's meant to be eaten - by licking your fingers clean.
