Student Activities Media Release Form: Fill & Download for Free

1. Skull and Bones [Wikipedia]Members of the Skull and Bones (George Bush is left of the clock) [1947]The Order of Skull and Bones, a Yale University society, was originally known as the Brotherhood of Death. It is one of the oldest student secret societies in the United States. It was founded in 1832 and membership is open to anelite few. The society uses masonic inspired rituals to this day. Members meet every Thursday and Sunday of each week in a building they call the “Tomb”.According to Judy Schiff, Chief Archivist at the Yale University Library, the names of the members were not kept secret until the 1970s, but the rituals always have been. Both of the Bush presidents were members of the society while studying at Yale, and a number of other members have gone on to great fame and fortune.The society is surrounded by conspiracy theories; the most popular of which is probably the idea that the CIA was built on members from the group. The CIA released a statement in 2007 (coinciding with the popularity of the film The Good Shepherd) in which it denied that the group was an incubator for the CIA. You can read that document here.2. Freemasons [Wikipedia]Freemasons Annual Meeting [1992]The Grand Masonic Lodge was created in 1717 when four small groups of lodges joined together. Membership levels were initially first and second degree, but in the 1750s this was expanded to create the third degree which caused a split in the group. When a person reaches the third degree, they are called a Master Mason.Masons conduct their regular meetings in a ritualized style. This includes many references to architectural symbols such as the compass and square. They refer to God as “The Great Architect of the Universe”. The three degrees of Masonry are: 1: Entered Apprentice, this makes you a basic member of the group. 2: Fellow Craft, this is an intermediate degree in which you are meant to develop further knowledge of Masonry. 3: Master Mason, this degree is necessary for participating in most masonic activities. Some rites (such as the Scottish rite) list up to 33 degrees of membership.Masons use signs and handshakes to gain admission to their meetings, as well as to identify themselves to other people who may be Masons. The signs and handshakes often differ from one jurisdiction to another and are often changed or updated. This protects the group from people finding out how to gain admission under false pretenses. Masons also wear stylized clothing based upon the clothing worn by stone masons from the middle ages. The most well known of these is the apron.In order to become a Mason, you must generally be recommended by a current mason. In some cases you must be recommended three times before you can join. You have to be at least 18 years old and of sound mind. Many religions frown upon membership of the Masons, and the Roman Catholic Church forbids Catholics to join under pain of excommunication.3. Rosicrucians [Wikipedia]Secret Symbols of the RosicruciansThe Rosicrucian order is generally believed to have been the idea of a group of German protestants in the 1600s when a series of three documents were published: Fama Fraternitatis Rosae Crucis, Confessio Fraternitatis, and The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz anno 1459. The documents were so widely read and influential, that the historian Frances Yeats refers to the 17th century as the Rosicrucian Enlightenment. The first document tells the story of a mysterious alchemist (Christian Rosenkreuz) who travelled to various parts of the world gathering secret knowledge. The second document tells of a secret brotherhood of alchemists who were preparing to change the political and intellectual face of Europe. The third document describes the invitation of Christian Rosenkreuz to attend and assist at the “Chemical”wedding of a King and Queen in a castle of Miracles.Current members of the Rosicrucian Order claim that its origins are far more ancient than these documents. The authors of the documents seemed to strongly favor Lutheranism and include condemnations of the Catholic Church. Rosicrucianism probably had an influence on Masonry and, in fact, the 18th degree of Scottish Rite Masonry is called the Knight of the Rose Croix (red cross).There are a large number of Rosicrucian groups today – each claiming to be closely tied to the original. Of the two main divisions, one is a mix of Christianity with Rosicrucian principles, and the other is semi-Masonic. The Masonic type tend to also have degrees of membership.4. Ordo Templis Orientis [Wikipedia]Crowley with OTO InstrumentsThe OTO (Order of the Temples of the East) is an organization that was originally modeled on Masonry but, under the leadership of the self-styled “Great Beast” Aleister Crowley, it took on the principles of his religious system called Thelema. Thelema is based around a single law: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law, love is the law, love under the will” [1904]. Membership is based upon degrees of initiation and highly stylized rituals are used. The OTO currently claims over 3,000 members worldwide.Crowley created a “Mass” for the OTO which is called the Gnostic Mass. Of the “Mass”, Crowley wrote:“I resolved that my Ritual should celebrate the sublimity of the operation of universal forces without introducing disputable metaphysical theories. I would neither make nor imply any statement about nature which would not be endorsed by the most materialistic man of science. On the surface this may sound difficult; but in practice I found it perfectly simple to combine the most rigidly rational conceptions of phenomena with the most exalted and enthusiastic celebration of their sublimity.”The ritual is very stylized and uses virgin priestesses, children, and priests. Many Ancient Egyptian God’s are invoked, as well as the Devil, and at one point the priestess performs a naked ritual.5. Hermetic Order of The Golden Dawn [Wikipedia]Golden Dawn SymbolismThe order of the Golden Dawn was created by Dr. William Robert Woodman, William Wynn Westcott, and Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers. All three were Freemasons and members of Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia (an organization with ties to Masonry). It is considered by many to be a forerunner of the Ordo Templi Orientis and a majority of modern Occultgroups.The belief system of the Golden Dawn is largely taken from Christian mysticism, Qabalah, Hermeticism, the religion of Ancient Egypt, Freemasonry,Alchemy, Theosophy, Magic, and Renaissance writings. William Yeats, and Aleister Crowly are two of the more famous members of the group.The fundamental documents of the order are known as the CipherDocuments. These were translated into English using a cipher attributed to Johannes Trithemius. The documents are a series of 60 folios containingmagic rituals. The basic structure of many of these rituals appear to originate with Rosicrucianism. There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the origins of these documents.6. The Knights Templar [Wikipedia]Mediaeval Templar’s SwordThe Knights Templar (full name: The United Religious, Military and Masonic Orders of the Temple and of St John of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes and Malta) is a modern off-shoot of Masonry and does not have a direct tie to the original Knights Templar – a religious military group formed in the 12th century. Members of the Masonic Knights Templar do not claim a direct connection to the medieval group, but merely a borrowing of ideas and symbols.In order to become a member of this group, you must already be a ChristianMaster Mason. This organization is a distinct one, and is not just a higher degree of Masonry. Despite Freemasonry’s general disclaimer that no one Masonic organization claims a direct heritage to the medieval Knights Templar, certain degrees and orders are obviously patterned after the medieval Order. These are best described as “commemorative orders” or degrees. Nevertheless, in spite of the fraternity’s official disclaimers, some Masons, non-Masons, and even anti-Masons insist that certain Masonic rites or degrees originally had direct Templar influence.7. The Illuminati [Wikipedia]The Pyramid, an illuminati symbolA movement of freethinkers that were the most radical offshoot of TheEnlightenment — whose followers were given the name Illuminati (but who called themselves “Perfectibilists”) — was founded on May 1, 1776 in Ingolstadt (Upper Bavaria), by Jesuit-taught Adam Weishaupt. This group is now known as the Bavarian Illuminati. While it was not legally allowed to operate, many influential intellectuals and progressive politicians counted themselves as members. Even though there were some known Freemasonsin the membership, it was not considered to be endorsed by Masonry. The fact that the Illuminati did not require a belief in a supreme being made them particularly popular amongst atheists. This, and the fact that most members were humanists, is the reason for the widespread belief that the Illuminati wants to overthrow organized religion.Internal panic over the succession of a new leader, and government attempts to outlaw the group saw to it collapsing entirely in the late 1700s. Despite this, conspiracy theorists such as David Icke and Was Penre, have argued that the Bavarian Illuminati survived, possibly to this day, though very little reliable evidence can be found to support the idea that Weishaupt’s group survived into the 19th century. It has even been suggested that the Skull and Bones club is an American branch of the Illuminati.Many people believe that the Illuminati is still operating and managing the main actions of the governments of the world. It is believed that they wish to create a One World Government based on humanist and atheist principles.8. The Bilderberg Group [Wikipedia]A Bilderberg MeetingThis group is slightly different from the others in that it does not have anofficial membership. It is the name given to a group of highly influentialpeople who meet ever year in secrecy (and usually with strong military and government sponsored security). The topics discussed are kept secret. The structure of the meetings is that of a conference – usually held in five star hotels around the world. Attendance at the meeting is strictly by invitationonly. The first meeting took place in 1954 at the Hotel Bilderberg in the Netherlands.The original meeting was initiated by several people. Polish emigre and political adviser, Joseph Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting understanding between the cultures of The United States of America and Western Europe.Although the agenda and list of participants are openly available to the public, it is not clear that such details are disclosed by the group itself. Also, the contents of the meetings are kept secret and attendees pledge not to divulge what was discussed. The group’s stated justification for secrecy is that it enables people to speak freely without the need to carefully consider how every word might be interpreted by the mass media.Needless to say, this group is constantly surrounded by controversy and conspiracy theories.9. The Priory of Sion [Wikipedia]Logo of the Priori of SionAfter the publication of the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, a great deal of interest in the Priory of Sion has been created. Unfortunately for those hoping to find and join the Priory, it is, in fact, fictional. It was a hoax created in 1956 by a pretender to the French Throne, Pierre Plantard. Letters in existence dating from the 1960s written by Plantard, de Cherisey and de Sède to each other confirm that the three were engaging in an out-and-out confidence trick, describing schemes on how to combat criticisms of their various allegations and how they would make up new allegations to try to keep the whole thing going. Despite this, many people still continue tobelieve that the Priory exists and functions to this day.The authors of the well known book, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, misled by the hoax, stated:1. The Priory of Sion has a long history starting in AD 1099, and had illustrious Grand Masters including Isaac Newton and Leonardo da Vinci.2. The order protects certain royal claimants because they believe them to be the literal descendants of Jesus and his alleged wife Mary Magdalene or, at the very least, of king David.3. The priory seeks the founding of a “Holy European Empire” that would become the next hyperpower and usher in a new world order of peace and prosperity.10. Opus Dei [Wikipedia]Opus Dei is an organization of the Catholic Church that emphasizes the Catholic belief that everyone is called to holiness and that ordinary life is a path to sanctity. The celibate numeraries and numerary assistants live in special centers, while associates are celibate members living in their private homes. The order was founded in Spain in 1928 by Roman Catholic priest Josemaría Escrivá with the approval of Pope Pius XII.When Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code was published, it claimed that Opus Dei was a secret organization within the Church whose aim was to defeat the Priory of Sion and those who seek to uncover the “truth” about Christianity and the alleged royal bloodline of Christ. Outside of the book, there has been a great deal of controversy over Opus Dei because of the strictness of its religious structure.source:http://listverse.com/

It is not only a stupid move, but an anti-national move by the Congress to side with four erring senior most judges of the Supreme Court of India who have openly rebelled against the Chief justice for not allocating some important and sensitive cases to them for hearing, in which they have some vested interests. Their action has brought shame and disrepute to the Supreme Court, the most sacred institution of India, by creating a shadow of doubt in the minds of the people about the independence and impartiality of the Supreme Court. Hence, it is the four rouge judges who should be impeached by the Parliament. Here , i am giving a detailed note on this unfortunate development.On January 12th, 2018, four senior most judges of the Supreme Court, namely justice Chelameshwar, Ranjan Gogoi, Joseph Kurian and Madan Lokur stunned the people of India by openly revolting against the Chief Justice of India and conducting a press conference in Delhi accusing CJI Deepak Misra of selective allocation of important cases for hearing to junior judges in an improper and inappropriate manner. Allocation of cases to different benches is the sole prerogative of the Chief Justice of India. Many important cases have been allocated to junior judges in the past and there is nothing unusual or unfair about it. The four dissident judges claim that all judges are equals and that the chief justice is only the first among the equals. On the other hand, contradicting their own assertion, they refuse to treat their own junior judges as their equals. Thus, their allegations against the chief justice Deepak Misra can be seen as baseless and without any merit. Hence, the open mutiny staged by the four rebel judges is highly condemnable. This episode has not cast any shadow of doubt on the reputation and credibility of CJI Deepak Misra. On the contrary, it is the four rebel judges who now stand exposed as judges with vested interests by their open expression of frustration and anger over non-allocation of certain cases of their interest to them. Their open revolt has only helped to expose their undue interest in getting certain cases allocated to them for their own vested interests which has raised questions about the impartiality and credibility of the Supreme Court. Thus, by this hasty and immature act, they have created an open rift among the senior judges and brought disrepute and embarrassment to the Supreme Court, hitherto considered as the most sacred institution in India. The Supreme Court and the armed forces are two very important pillars of our democracy. People in India have the highest regard for the Supreme Court. This image built up over the last seventy years has been irreparably damaged by the atrocious act of the four rebel judges. Now, people are convinced that even the Supreme Court is afflicted with the malady of corruption and favoritism after witnessing the fight among the senior judges for allocation of certain cases of their interest to them.Surprisingly, on January 14th, four retired judges, namely P.B.Sawant, Hosbet Suresh, A.P.Shah and K. Chandru had written a letter to the Chief Justice Dipak Mishra expressing their support and agreement with the serious allegations raised by the rebel judges against the CJI and requesting the CJI to take immediate steps to resolve all their differences. They have also requested the CJI to allocate all important and sensitive cases only to a constitutional bench of five senior most judges until the differences with the four rebel judges are resolved. Meanwhile on Janusry 15th, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan lodged a complaint against Supreme Court Chief Justice Dipak Mishra alleging his suspected involvement in the Lucknow medical scam and seeking an in-house probe by a collegium of senior most judges to look into the allegations against the CJI, as part of an effort to further corner the CJI.What could have prompted the four senior rebel judges to take such an unwarranted action of openly challenging the authority of the Chief Justice of India by publicly criticizing his style of functioning, thus maligning the reputation of the most sacred institution in India and also putting their own reputation at grave risk? To find an answer to this question, we just have to see the background of some of the prominent people who have come out openly in support of the four rebel judges, as per details given below.P.B.Sawant:He is a former judge of the Supreme Court. After his retirement, he took to NGO activism and joined Medha Patkar-led anti-development lobby and started taking part in NGO action group movements over human rights violations and acquisition of land for development work, etc. He had opposed the hanging of Yakub Memon (accused in 1993 Bombay blasts), Afzal Guru (accused in Parliament attack case) and Ajmal Kasab (accused in 26/11 Mumbai attack). He is also closely associated with activist and Modi baiter Teesta Setalvad and had formed a committee to defend Teesta Setalvad in various criminal cases registered against her in connection with her campaign against Modi government in Gujarat.A.P.Shah:He is a former chief justice of Delhi High Court. He has openly criticized the action taken against the JNU students for raising some anti-India slogans and described it as gross misuse of power. He had criticized the government action to crush the Idinthikarai people’s agitation against the Kudankulam Atomic Power Plant in Tamil Nadu. He had also openly charged that hanging of Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon was politically motivated.Prashant Bhushan:He is a senior advocate of Supreme Court, and a human rights activist closely associated with the PUCL. He is a supporter of anti-development lobby in India and has supported all their agitations against various mega development projects in India. He is a strong supporter of the demand for removal of AFSPA from Jammu & Kashmir and a sympathizer of Kashmiri separatists. On October 12, 2011, he was beaten up by some members of Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena within the Supreme Court premises for his remarks in support of Kashmiri separatists. He is also a supporter of the Maoist movement and had opposed all armed action against the Maoists.Indira Jaising:She is a senior Supreme Court advocate and a former additional Solicitor General of India. She has a soft corner for all anti-national movements in India like the separatist movement in Kashmir and Moist movement. She not only supported the break- India movement of JNU student leader Kanhaiya Kumar and his gang, but even criticized the undertaking that Kanhaiya had to give to the court agreeing to restrain himself from such break-India activism in future for getting his conditional bail. In an open letter to all judges in India, she had described such an undertaking as onerous, oppressive and unconstitutional and asserted that there cannot be any anticipatory restraint on free speech.Hosbet Suresh:He is a former judge of the Bombay High Court. He is a hard core human rights activist with deep sympathy for all anti-national movements in the country like the separatist movement in Kashmir, insurgency in the northeast, Islamic terror and the Maoist movement. After the 2002 Gujarat riots, Hosbet Suresh had conducted an extensive campaign against the Modi-led Gujarat government, both within and outside the country, describing the riots as state-sponsored and holding Modi personally responsible for the massacre of Muslims by not taking prompt action to control the riots. As part of his campaign, he had also visited London and had given an interview to prominent historian and academic Richard Bonney of the UK holding Modi as the mastermind behind the riots which had drawn wide coverage by the international media.K. Chandru:He is a retired judge of Madras High Court. He is an activist of the Lawyers Collective founded by senior Supreme Court lawyer Indira Jaising. He is a sympathizer of Maoist movement and a close associate of V.Suresh, National General Secretary of PUCL.On a closer scrutiny, it could be seen that those judges and lawyers who have come out in support of the four rebel judges have some common anti-national traits as mentioned below.1)They all support the secessionists in Jammu & Kashmir.2)They support Maoist movement.3)They all hate Modi, BJP and Sangh Parivar.4)They support Sikh militancy, Tamil nationalism movement in Tamil Nadu and various insurgency movements in the Northeast.5)They are sympathetic to the efforts of Christian missionaries to alienate Dalits and Adivasies from Hinduism.6)They support all agitations against mega development projects in India, particularly coal, steel, thermal and nuclear projects.7)They opposed stringent anti-terror laws like TADA and POTA earlier, and now they are pressing for the removal of AFSPA from J&K and Northeast.In short, these eminent judges and senior lawyers are supporters of a lobby which supports all anti-national movements in India. The question naturally arises as to how and why such eminent dignitaries have chosen such a destructive path to act against the interests of their own motherland, betraying their own conscience. The truth is that they all belong to a conglomeration of activists commonly known as civil society groups, consisting of NGO and human rights activists and pseudo-secularists. There is a general perception in India that the greatest threat to India’s national security comes from our two hostile neighbours i.e. China and Pakistan. However, the truth is that the most serious threat to India’s unity and territorial integrity comes from the vast network of activist NGOs and human rights activists and the so-called secularists in the country who are all now commonly known as civil society groups. These civil society groups are cultivated, supported, funded and controlled by some western intelligence and church agencies and some American and European Foundations. Such civil society groups have now been established in almost all the countries in the world by the western powers led by the US with the primary aim of protecting the interests of the US and its NATO allies all over the world. Their aim and objectives however may differ from one country to another depending upon the strategic interests and objectives of the US lobby in a particular country and the political affiliation of the ruling regime in that country. In most countries considered as friendly to the western lobby, the role of these civil society groups would be to cultivate agents in all major political parties and at top levels of administration, judiciary and security forces to ensure the continued support of the ruling regimes to the US policies in the international affairs and developments. In countries where the ruling regimes are considered as hostile to the interests of the US and its allies, the role of these groups would be to use the vast network of their painfully cultivated assets to build up a congenial atmosphere in the country for the overthrow of the ruling regime by abetting, funding and supporting all anti-government forces and all other militant movements in the country. Later on, at an opportune occasion, a regime change operation will be undertaken by these groups with the active cooperation and combined might of all anti- government forces by triggering a colour-revolution type uprising to achieve the objective of overthrowing the hostile regime and replacing it with a friendly regime. India is considered as hostile by this lobby simply because India with its vast size, population and growth potential could emerge as a powerful world power soon which is considered as a threat to the global interests of the western lobby. But in India’s case, it is not simply a regime change that they want, but a break up of India into 10 or 15 smaller nations, so that the possibility of India ever becoming a stronger global power can be eliminated. Obsessed with this objective, the US and its allies have been trying to create instability and chaos in India since seventies by funding and promoting all militant and secessionist movements in the country like the separatist movement in Kashmir, Khalistani movement in Punjab, insurgency in the northeast and Naxal/Maoist movement in the country.Action groups and support groups are the two major components of the civil society groups. The action groups consist of those NGO activists who are actually working in the field, mainly among the marginalized sections of people in the rural and tribal areas and guiding and empowering them to lead militant people’s movements in support of their various demands and grievances. The support groups consist of pro-leftist intellectuals, pseudo secularists and human rights activists representing the influential and elite sections of the society like retired judges, senior lawyers, eminent academics, retired bureaucrats, writers, journalists, theater personalities and ex-service men who can use their power and influence to mobilize support of the intellectual class in different fields and use them as pressure groups to exert influence on the government for favourable action on issues taken up by the action groups.After creating activist lobbies among various sections of the society like the bureaucrats, academics, journalists, historians and theater personalities, the civil society groups started recruiting lawyer activists for the first time in 1989 when senior Supreme Court lawyer Colin Gonsalves founded an NGO called the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) with himself as its Executive Director.Human Rights Law Network (HRLN).The HRLN is a collective of lawyers and social activists dedicated to the use of legal system to advance human rights in India. It is the largest human rights NGO in India and is affiliated to Socio Legal Information Center. It was founded in 1989 by senior Supreme Court lawyer Colin Gonsalves.Objectives1)To protect fundamental human rights and increase access to basic resources for marginalized communities.2)To create justice delivery system that is accessible, accountable, transparent, affordable and works for marginalized communities.3)To equip through professional training, a new generation of public interest lawyers who are comfortable both in the world of law as well as in social movements.HRLN collaborates with human rights groups and grassroots development and social movements to enforce the rights of poor and marginalized people and to challenge oppression and exploitation and discrimination against any group or individual on the grounds of caste, gender, religion, economic or social status. HRLN provides pro bono legal services, conducts public interest litigation, engages in advocacy, conducts legal awareness programmes, investigates rights violations and participates in campaigns against injustice.Hidden objectivesThe HRLN is found to be very sympathetic to all anti-national movements and organizations in the country like the separatist movement in Kashmir, Maoist movement, Khalistsni movement, Northeast insurgency, Tamil nationalist movement in Tamil Nadu and the anti- development lobby consisting of NGO, human rights and environmental activists in India. From its past activities, it is obvious that its real objective is to give a strong legal support base for all the above mentioned anti-national forces in India. The HRLN was in the forefront in opposing anti-terror laws like TADA and POTO and getting it abolished. It had played a key role in getting ‘Salva Judum’, an anti-Maoist movement, banned. It is also striving to get the Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA) withdrawn from Jammu & Kashmir and Northeast. It also helps the anti- development lobby by creating legal hurdles aimed to delay or stall various mega development projects in India.Independent People’s Tribunal on Environment and Human Rights (IPT)The same Colin Gonsalves who founded the HRLN, founded another very important and sensitive organization called the ‘Independent People’s Tribunal’(IPT) in 1993 to create an activist lobby of retired judges of upper courts and human rights activists with the aim of setting up independent people’s courts to conduct parallel trial of human rights and environment violations in India and bring their probe reports before the public in India and abroad. The cases of rights violations that the IPT had taken up in the past and the probe reports submitted so far have clearly showed the so called independent body’s firm commitment to an anti-national agenda. In the name of fact-finding missions, the IPT has always been trying to promote the interests of various militant and secessionist groups in India like the Kashmiri separatists, Maoist groups, Sikh militants and northeast insurgents by always accusing the security personnel of gross violations of human rights in all their clashes/encounters with such militant groups, dubbing all encounters as fake and manipulated and holding the security forces and the police as the real culprits behind all the terrorist/Maoist violence in India. Some of the activities and fact finding missions undertaken by the judge and lawyer activists and their probe reports given as under, will confirm their evil intentions and destructive agenda.Judge activist Hosbet Suresh, along with Collin Gonsalves, founder of both HRLN and IPT, had visited Imphal in 2000 on an invitation from local human rights activists, to conduct a probe into the atrocities on local population by the army and other security personnel in Manipur in the name of combing operations. As expected, in their probe report submitted to top human rights functionaries in India and abroad, they had indicted the army and other security personnel for committing grave atrocities like rape and murder against the innocent locals misusing the provisions of Armed Forces Special Power Act, and demanded the immediate withdrawal of the AFSPA from Manipur.On March 7, 2011, the Ratnagiri district administration had banned the entry of retired S.C. judge P.B.Sawant, retired H.C.judge Kolse Patil and social activist Vaishali Patil into Ratnagiri district as a precautionary measure to prevent them from participating in the anti-Jaitapur nuclear power plant agitation at Jaitapur in Maharashtra.Judge activist Hosbet Suresh had led a joint probe by the HRLN and ANHAD into the human rights violations in Kashmir valley in February 2010 and their report released on September 8, 2010 in Delhi had accused the security personnel of gross violation of human rights of innocent local people and had demanded immediate withdrawal of Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA), which gave protection to the army personnel from prosecution, from Jammu & Kashmir.In October, 2013, a postcard campaign was carried out by “Justice for All”, a movement launched by judge and lawyer activists like P.B.Sawant, Yusuf Musala and Teesta Satalvad, to put pressure on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for early tabling of the controversial bill called ‘The Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations Bill)’ which was termed as an anti-Hindu Bill by the BJP and all other Hindu organizations. The said bill was ultimately dropped by the UPA government due to mounting opposition from all Hindus from different parties.Retired judges P.B.Sawant and Hosbet Suresh, along with other judge activists like justice Panachand Jain, H.S.Bedi, S.N.Bhargava, K.Chandru and others had sent a mercy petition to the President of India in July 2015 seeking mercy for Yakub Memon who was convicted to death for his role in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts, and pleading to save him from the noose.Late S.M.Daud, a judge activist of IPT and a close associate of Hosbet Suresh had played a key role in the merger of CPI-ML People’s War Group and Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) in September, 2004 to form the CPI-ML- Maoist. He had addressed a state convention of CPI-ML-Red Flag held at Dombivli in Thane district of Maharashtra in November 2004, stressing the need for unity of various Naxal groups in the country.Rajinder Sachar, who headed the Sachar Committee under the UPA government is a prominent judge activist and a close associate of Hosbet Suresh and Colin Gonsalves. He had expressed his support for various militant and secessionist groups in the country like Maoists, Kashmiri separatists, northeastern insurgents and Sikh militants through various articles and speeches he had made in the past. In January 2000, Rajinder Sachar had strongly condemned the arrest of Th. Muivah, General Secretary of NSCN-IM, (the most dominant Naga insurgent outfit) of Nagaland by the Thailand police and had sought the intervention of the Government of India for his immediate release. Sachar later flew all the way to Bangkok to express his solidarity with the arrested Naga leader. Later, participating in a symposium organized by ”Friends of Nagas”, a front organization of NSCN-IM at Bangkok, Sachar along with pro-naxal lawyer activist Nandita Haksar and human rights activist Swami Agnivesh and some other Naga leaders like K.S.Paul Leo and S.Kho John had passed a resolution demanding the immediate release of Th. Muivah. It may be noted that Th. Muivah was arrested by Thiland police on 19th. January, 2000 while he was travelling from Karachi to Bangkok on a fake South Korean passport. He was however released on bail, only to be rearrested on 30th January while trying to fly to Bonn from Hatyai airport in South Thailand, again on a fake passport.In a press release issued on March 27, 2002, Sachar had described the arrest of Kashmir separatist leader Yasin Malik under POTA by the J&K government in connection with a foreign exchange offence, as a gross abuse of power and had demanded his immediate release. Speaking at a convention on the topic “Kashmir and Indo-Pak friendship” organized by ‘Secular Democratic Forum’, at New Delhi on 15th August, 2001, Rajinder Sachar had said that restoring pre-1953 status to the J&K was the only solution to the Kashmir problem and had declared his whole-hearted support to the demand for autonomy to the J&K. Despite such a shady background and doubtful integrity, Rajinder Sachar was appointed by the UPA government to head a committee to study the backwardness and problems of the Muslims in India and suggest remedial measures for their economic upliftment. As expected, the Sachar Committee used selective indicators and parameters to exaggerate the extent of Muslim backwardness and deprivation and submitted a report which is blatantly biased and deliberately aimed to mislead the Muslim masses that anti-Muslim bias and discrimination was mainly responsible for the general backwardness of Muslims in India.Activist B.G.Kolse Patil, a retired judge of Bombay High Court, who headed a so-called three-member independent inquiry commission to probe into the police crack down on anti-nuclear protesters at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu on September 10, 2012 had submitted his probe report condemning the state authorities and supporting the cause of the anti-nuclear protesters. He is the same activist who had courted arrest in 2011, while participating in the agitation against the Jatapur nuclear power plant in Maharashtra. The same Kolse Patil had headed a 15-member independent inquiry committee in 2006 only to prove that the three Muslim terrorists who were shot dead by the police in an encounter in front of the RSS headquarters in Nagpur on June 1, 2006, were innocent people killed in a fake encounter.IPT’s secret agendaThough the IPT was reportedly formed by retired judges, senior lawyers and human rights activists to position itself as a people’s court to conduct free and fair trial of grave human rights violations and to ensure environmental justice, a very important, dangerous and hidden objective of this lobby is to recruit serving judges, mainly from Supreme Court and High courts and create secret cells of serving judges and use their services to get favourable judgments in some of the important and sensitive cases taken up by lawyer activists. Over the years, the lobbies of both lawyer activists and judge activists have emerged as much more stronger and powerful showing symptoms of its adverse impact on the independence and impartiality of some of the judgments of even the Supreme Court of India, especially on issues like the threat to environment, tackling the Maoist/secessionist movements and human rights violations. Though the serving judges generally do not participate in any of the activities of the lawyer and judge activists, some sitting judges of Indian courts along with two judges of the Constitutional Court of South Africa had attended an eight-day long ‘national conference on human rights, social movements, globalization and law’ organized by the HRLN at Panchgani, Maharashtra, in December, 2000. Some of the High Court and Supreme Court judgments favouring Maoists, environmentalists, etc, in the past, could be attributed to the influence of IPT sleeping cells in the courts. A few such instances of illogical and irrational judgments of the Supreme Court, suspected to be influenced by the IPT, are quoted below.Supreme Court verdict goes in favour of MaoistsThe Supreme Court on July 5th 2011 declared the anti-Maoist outfit ‘Salva Judum’ as illegal and ordered the Chhattisgarh government to disband and disarm 6500 special police officers (SPOs) engaged in anti-Maoist operations, stating that the use of such ill-trained and under-qualified tribals as SPOs is against the moral and constitutional mandate of the government.Blaming the Maoist violence on the iniquitous policies of the state and striking down the centrally funded scheme to arm the tribal youth as counterweight to extremists, an S.C. bench consisting of Justice Sudarshan Reddy and Justice S.S. Nijjar ordered the Union government to cease and desist forthwith, from using any of its funds in supporting, directly or indirectly, the recruitment of SPOs for the purpose of engaging them in any form of counter-insurgency activities against Maoist/ naxalite groups.The SC verdict had put the Chhattisgarh government, which has borne the brunt of Maoist violence, in great difficulty as the S.C order has seriously upset all its efforts to neutralize the Maoist threat. The Chhattisgarh government has recruited the SPOs from mostly amongst the ranks of the Salva Judum, a people’s resistance movement against Maoist atrocities in the state. The ‘Salva Judum’, meaning ‘peace march’, was formed in 2006 by Mahendra Karma, a Congress leader with the support of all other political parties in the state as a last resort against the incessant atrocities like extortion, kidnapping and murder by the Maoists. The formation of the Salva Judum had given a big jolt to the Maoist movement and that is the reason why the western-funded civil society activists had come to their rescue. The verdict against the SPOs had come as a big set back to the fight against the Maoists. The judgment had a crippling effect on anti-naxal operations in six states where the Centre had financed the recruitment of SPOs who would help the under-staffed local police with their knowledge of the terrain and utility in intelligence collectionThe Supreme Court judgment against funding and recruitment of SPOs for the purpose of anti-Maoist operations has pleased only the Maoists and their supporters, mainly the NGO and human rights activists who now project themselves as civil society activists. It is these civil society activists like Prof. Nandita Sunder, historian Ramachandra Guha, activist Swami Agnivesh and former IAS officer E.A.S. Sarma who had approached the Supreme Court seeking a ban on ‘Salva Judum’ and SPOs. All these activists are known supporters of Maoist movement who had always opposed the government’s efforts to end the Maoist menace in the country. They had submitted some extracts from the reports of ‘Human Rights Watch’ and a documentary telecast by the ‘Channel 4’ of Britain on Maoist struggle in India in the court as evidence in support of their argument. The ‘Human Rights Watch’ and the ‘Channel 4’ of Britain are notorious for their blatant criticism against Indian security personnel for their alleged excesses and gross human rights violations against ‘poor and innocent’ Maoists and other militant elements in the country. However, supporting the petitioners, the Supreme Court held the iniquitous policies of the government responsible for the Maoist violence. But, there is irrefutable evidence to conclude that certain western NGOs and human rights organizations and Christian funding agencies, guided by their own strategic designs and need for creating mayhem and chaos in India, had played a key role in promoting Maoism in India, taking advantage of acute poverty and unemployment of people in the remote villages. Financial assistance received from these foreign agencies are utilized by some Indian NGOs and human rights organizations to build up the Maoist movement in India. The intelligence wing of the Maharashtra police had identified and submitted to the state home department in March 2008 a list of 56 NGOs that raise funds and help the Maoists in recruiting new cadres. These NGOs work under the umbrella of the Tactical United Front (TUF), a conglomerate of groups sympathizing with the naxal cause. (http://naxalwatch.blogspot.com/2008/03/56-ngos-raising-funds-cadres-for-naxals.html)Two years after the S.C. ban on ‘Salva Judum’, Mahendra Karma, founder of Salva Judum and 30 others were brutally killed in an ambush of their convoy staged by the Maoists at Darbha near Sukma in Chhattisgarh on 25th May, 2013. So gruesome was his murder that even after killing him, the attackers danced around his body stabbing him several times. His body bore 78 stab wounds and 50 bullet wounds. The illogical and irrational verdict of the Supreme Court imposing a ban on ‘Salva Judum’, which was a people’s movement formed only to resist the atrocities by the Maoists, has to be held responsible for the martyrdom of a brave tribal leader like Mhendra Karma.Supreme Court declares Narco-analysis and polygraph test unconstitutionalThe Delhi police had arrested Kobad Ghandy, a top Maoist leader and a politburo member from Bhikaji Kama locality in Delhi on September 20, 2009. He is said to have played a leading role in the formation of the Coordination Committee of Maoist Parties and Organisations in South Asia (CCOMPOSA) and was also engaged in liaison work with the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN). The Delhi trial court, as per its order dated, 31st October, 2009, had allowed the Delhi police to conduct a narco analysis test on Kobad Ghandy, which could have helped the Delhi police to unearth a lot of information about the Maoist activities in India and also about their internal and external links. However some civil society activists had immediately moved the Delhi High Court challenging the trial court order allowing the Delhi police to conduct narco analysis test on him, raising the issue of violation of his personal liberty and seeking a stay of the trial court order. The Delhi High Court, delivering its verdict on November 5, 2009, stayed the trial court order allowing the narco test on Kobad Ghandy, pointing out that since a verdict on the validity of narco analysis test pending with the Supreme Court was expected shortly, it will be in the fitness of things for all the parties to wait for the apex court verdict in this matter. The Supreme Court had earlier reserved its verdict on a bunch of petitions moved by some mafia leaders like Santokben Jadeja, Arun Gawli and others challenging the validity of the narco analysis test, brain mapping and polygraph test. A Supreme Court bench consisting of CJI K.G.Balakrishnan, Justice R.V. Ravindran and Justice M.J.Panjal, giving its final verdict on May 5, 2010 termed the narco analysis test as unconstitutional as it amounted to a violation of personal liberty. The court said that a person could not be forced to undergo narco analysis test, brain mapping and polygraph test as it violates the Article 20 (3) of the Constitution that says that no accused can be compelled to be a witness against himself. Lawyer activist Dushyant Dave was the court-appointed amicus curiae in the case.Information obtained through narco analysis test is not admissible as evidence before a court of law. But such information gives valuable clues to the police and other investigative agencies in nailing the culprits involved in some important and complicated cases. For instance, the narco test was very helpful in cracking down the Telgi scam. Though the use of third degree methods has no legal sanction in India, it is a fact that such unethical methods are still widely used by the police in India as an easy option to crack many of the criminal cases. Many legal luminaries and other intellectuals in the country often advocate the need for sticking to only scientific methods for interrogation of criminals, as is the case in many of the developed countries, instead of taking recourse to old and barbarian method of torture. The narco analysis, brain mapping and polygraph test are all scientific methods widely used in many countries for obtaining information from the criminals and other wrong doers. Why should the Supreme Court ban the narco analysis test in India, a country worst-affected by terrorism?Supreme Court orders CBI probe into encounter killings in Manipur.Despite strong objections by the government and the Army, the Supreme Court on July 14, 2017 had ordered the CBI to institute a five-member SIT to probe into 98 encounter killings in Manipur by the army and other security personnel and the police. A bench of Justice Madan B.Lokur and U.U . Lalit was hearing a writ petition filed by the Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association seeking a probe and compensation in the alleged 1528 extra judicial killings in Manipur from 2000 to 2012 by the security personnel and police in the state. On February 12, 2018, expressing its displeasure over the progress of the probe, the S.C. slammed the CBI for not conducting an impartial probe in 81 alleged fake encounter killings in Manipur and instead registering FIRs against victims who were killed, without questioning the army personnel involved in the case. The court ordered a fresh probe to get at the bottom of the truth as reports of NHRC and a commission headed by S.C. judge Santosh Hegde had adversely commented on the role of security personnel in those encounters. Lawyer activist Colin Gonsalves had appeared for encounter victims.Manipur is an extremely disturbed area with the law and order situation in the state remaining as explosive as the situation in the Kashmir valley. But the Manipur situation does not attract much media attention in India, because unlike the Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur does not have an hostile neighbor like Pakistan to indulge in cross-border terrorism or to send trained fidayeen militants into Manipur to indulge in terrorist violence. Manipur is a small state with only a total population of just less than three million people. However, the state is badly hit by terrorist violence with about 30 terror groups functioning in the state, mostly based in the Imphal valley. Out of these 30 groups, there are only five or six major groups with the United National Liberation Front (UNLF) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) being the most dominant among these terror groups. Though the PLA was receiving some help from the China in the initial stage, it has not been getting any financial or material help from China since last two decades. All the terror outfits including the PLA, UNLF, NSCN-IM and other fringe groups are getting liberal financial aid from various western and church agencies, which was intended only to create chaos and instability in India. The NGO and human rights activists who always make a hue and cry about the human rights violations by the Army and other security forces are only the over ground supporters of the underground militants. The encounter killings in Manipur and Kashmir is a routine phenomenon. Even the army camps are targeted by the militants in Kashmir and Manipur and even senior officers of the army are getting killed by the militants. As long as such terrorist threat continues to haunt India, the army will have to take retaliatory action to neutralize this menace of terrorism. The western agencies are using their biased international agencies like ‘Amnesty International’ and ‘Human Rights Watch’ and their branches in different countries to malign and demonize the Indian Army by highlighting the distorted versions of human rights violations in India as reported by their human rights agents in India.Now the Supreme Court bench of justice Madan Lokur and justice U.U.Lalit on February 12th, 2018 had expressed their displeasure over the FIRs filed by the CBI in the fake encounter cases as it had failed to nail any army personnel in the case. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) has given protection to the Army from prosecution in alleged crimes in disturbed areas like Jammu and Kashmir and northeastern states. Still, the esteemed judges seem to have a special interest in getting some army men nailed in the case. It is to be noted here that Madan B.Lokur who is one of the two judges who delivered the verdict on Manipur encounters is among the four senior judges who rebelled against the CJI and conducted a press conference on January 12, 2018, criticizing the style of functioning of Chief Justice Dipak Misra.Chhattisgarh massacreBastar region in Chhattisgarh is notorious for being a stronghold of Maoists. Hundreds of security personnel have been killed or injured in this region in attacks/ambush by Maoists during the last ten years. In the midst of such unabated Maoist violence, Shri. SRP Kalluri, a tough and strict IPS officer took charge of Bastar region as Special IG in June, 2014. Under his supervision, the police crack- down on Maoists resulted in the surrender of many Maoists within two years. Many other Maoist leaders were killed in encounters with the police and other security forces. Kalluri’s crusade against Maoists had made him a bitter enemy of all Maoist supporters like the NGO and human rights activists and some Delhi-based academic activists like Dr.Bela Bhatia, a PhD holder from Cambridge, professor Nandini Sunder of Delhi University and professor Archana Prasad of JNU. Dr. Bela Bhatia had been camping, though intermittently, in Bastar region since 2007 as part of her research work on Maoist movement, but in reality working among the local Adivasis and motivating them to come under the Maoist fold to resist and fight against the injustice being done to them by various government agencies like the police, forest and civic authorities. Nandini Sunder and Archana Prasad also frequently used to visit all Adivasi pockets in Bastar region to carry on with their efforts to promote and expand the Maoist base in the area.With SRP Kalluri becoming a terror for all pro-Maoist forces in the area, It is these academic activists who started a campaign against the Bastar police headed by SRP Kalluri, accusing the police personnel of committing atrocities like rape and sexual assault against the local Adivasi women. The first Bela Bhatia-sponsored FIR against Bastar police was lodged on November 1st, 2015 by an Adivasi woman of Peddagelur village in Bijapur district. The second sexual assault complaint was lodged on January 21, 2016, with eight Adivasi women of Bellamnendra village of Bijapur district coming forward to testify about the sexual assault on them. Under the guidance of Bela Bhatia, several more sexual assault cases were filed against Bastar police during the year 2016. Bela Bhatia, who is very influential in Delhi, had also taken up these cases with the NHRC, which had instituted its own inquiries into these incidents. The NHRC in its report released on January, 2017, found that the Chhattisgarh police had sexually assaulted at least 16 Adivasi women between October 2015 and March 2016, and castigated the Chhattisgarh government for its inaction with respect to the repeated incidents of sexual assaults and held the state authorities vicariously liable for the offences committed by the security forces, and demanded compensation. The NHRC had reportedly relied heavily on a fact-finding mission report prepared by ‘Women Against Sexual Violence and State repression’, an organization having links with the Maoist movement. Dr. Bela Bhatia, who openly supports the Maoist movement had accompanied the NHRC team to Bastar on January7, 2017. She also accompanied a five-member NHRC team to Peddagelur and Bellamnendra villages in Bijapur district on January 19 and 20, 2017 to record statements of victims of sexual assault cases. The team was assisted by Bela Bhatia and Soni Sori in recording statements of sexual assault victims. Bela Bhatia is a known supporter of Maoist movement. Soni Sori is an over ground activist of Maoist movement. Her husband who was a Maoist leader, had died a few years back while in police custody. How can the NHRC justify its action of using the services of Bela Bhatia and Soni Sori in recording statements of sexual assault victims despite knowing that it was to be used against the state police?Dr. Bela Bhatia is quite unpopular among all non-Maoist people and also police personnel in the area because of her open support for the Maoists. After the new IG SRP Kalluri started his crusade against the Maoists, Bela Bhatia’s work in the area was mainly focused on touring different villages and instigating Adivasi women to come forward and lodge complaints against the police accusing them of sexual assault. The women Maoist cadres are ready to sacrifice their lives to defend their movement. It is not a big thing for such women to lodge a complaint of sexual offence against the police personnel as desired by their leaders. These vague complaints were drafted by Bela Bhatia herself or Soni Sori, a local Maoist, now aligned with Aam Admi Party. These complaints are without any proof about who, when and where, etc. of the offence committed. There are hundreds of human rights activists working in the Bastar region waiting to get such assault reports to pounce on the police offenders. If there was any such incident of sexual violence, it would have been immediately reported. The local police has turned against Bela Bhatia only because she was trying to nail them in fabricated cases, with the support of human rights activists and NHRC.On October 25, 2016, at several places in Raipur and Bastar regions in Chhattisgarh, villagers and former special police officers came out in large numbers and burnt effigies of human rights activists like Bela Bhatia, professor Nandini Sunder, Soni Sori, Manish Kunjam and Himanshu Kumar for their support for Maoist movement. On Monday, January 23d, 2017, about 30 people who came in two four-wheelers and some motorbikes, raided Bhatia’s house in Jagdalpur (Parpa village) and gave an ultimatum to Bhatia to leave the area in 24 hours. With various human rights activists based in Chhattisgarh and Delhi taking up this threat to Bela Bhatia’s life with NHRC authorities, there was tremendous pressure on the Chhattisgarh government and DGP to remove IG Kalluri from Bastar. Though Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh had full faith in IG Kalluri, under pressure from NHRC, he had to transfer Kalluri out to police headquarters at Raipur on 7th February, 2017. Before leaving Bastar, Kalluri wrote on his Whatsapp group as quoted below. “Bela Bhatia wins—going on leave—sorry for failing.”All the so-called human rights activists were desperately trying to get SRP Kalluri transferred from Bastar since 2015, as faced with constant pressure from police, the demoralised Maoists were forced to lie low and more and more Maoist cadres were surrendering to the police. After the transfer of Kalluri, there was a reversal of the situation with the demoralised police suspending their tough stance against the Maoists and Maoists becoming more aggressive. With the Maoists again gaining upper hand in the area, there was a bloody massacre of 26 CRPF jawans at Sukma in Bastar region of Chhattisgarh on April 25, 2017 in an ambush staged by the Maoists. The punitive transfer of SRP Kalluri may be a major factor responsible for the laxity on the part of the police in controlling the Maoist menace in the area. The role played by Bela Bhatia and the NHRC led by former CJI H.L.Dattu, which only helped the Maoist cause, also deserves outright condemnation for indirectly helping the Maoists.Neutrino project sabotaged by National Green TribunalThe government of India had decided to set up a very important and prestigious neutrino research laboratory (INO) in India and had selected Singara in Nilgiri hills in Tamil Nadu as the most suitable location for this project. The whole universe is filled with neutrinos. They are so tiny that they can pass through anything and everything in this universe. Still, the scientists knew very little about these elusive particles. Scientists believe that the study of neutrinos will help us to understand the universe and its origin better. The project report for the INO was submitted in 2002. The approval for the project came in 2007. The Planning Commission also approved the project and allocated a sum of Rs 950 crore and earmarked Rs 315 crore for disbursal during the 11th plan. The ministry of environment and forests gave its clearance for the project in 2008. The proposed laboratory was to be housed in a man-made cave beneath the tallest peak of the Nilgiri hills in Tamil Nadu. There are only handful of such labs in the world, and the INO was slated to be the most advanced among them and was expected to put India in the forefront of neutrino physics.However, some NGO and environmental activists, who were opposed to this project from the beginning, started a vicious campaign against this project raking up issues like threat to the environment and wild life and started spreading all sorts of lies and falsehood about this project. Even some international agencies like World Wild-life Fund also took an active part in this campaign. Even the Forest Department of Tamil Nadu opposed the project and refused to give clearance.Many eminent Indians like former president late Dr. Abdul Kalam, and top scientists like late P.K.Iyengar (former chairman of Atomic Energy Commission) had shown keen interest in early commission of the INO project. In August 2007, eleven leading physicists including Nobel laureates Sheldon Glashow and Masatoshi Koshiba had written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh urging him to intervene in the matter for early clearance for the project. However, the minister for environment and forests Jairam Ramesh rejected the proposal for the INO project at Singara on the ground that the project site falls in an elephant corridor and tiger reserve area. Singara was the site best suited for the location of INO project as per the site selection committee. It was declared as a tiger reserve area only in 2008, where as the forest clearance for the INO project at Singara was pending since 2006. Thus, it appears that Singara was declared as a tiger reserve area only to strengthen the cause of anti-INO lobby.Thousands of scientists all over the world are engaged in unveiling the hidden mysteries of these elusive neutrinos. The experiments being carried out by the European Organization for Nuclear research (CERN) at its research lab in Geneva are also linked with the neutrino research. The proton-colliding experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at Geneva with tentative evidence for the existence of Higgs boson (the God particle) has already created a sensation among the scientific community in the world. The neutrino research is certain to open the floodgate of new mysteries and revelations that could shock the mankind. We will now come to know more about the black hole, antimatter and dark energy. The neutrino research is expected to change the complexion of the universe as it is perceived today. The exciting possibilities of neutrino research may one day prove that many of the fictional events shown in the English serial “Star Trek” may not remain fictional any more. Another important fact is that the neutrino technology, just as the nuclear energy, will also have its use in military application. It is possible that those who master the neutrino technology will rule the earth in future. It is such an important project that the Sonia loyalist Jairam Ramesh and the NGO coterie successfully stalled at Singara.The neutrino project site was subsequently shifted to the Bodi West Hills in Theni district in Tamil Nadu. It may be noted that the new site was earlier rejected by the site selection committee, for not being good enough for the location of the project. The neutrino project at Singara was to be commissioned in 2012. Because of the green hurdles created by the NGO lobby and the MoEF, the INO project, the country’s biggest-ever research facility for basic sciences, already suffered a delay of 7/8 years when it was shifted to Bodi West Hills in Theni district. Even at the new site at Bodi West Hills in Theni, the NGO and environmental activists started a campaign against the project raking up various issues and spreading all sorts of lies and falsehoods to stall the project. The opponents of the project, mainly western-funded NGO and human rights activists and environmentalists, have been circulating a lot of propaganda materials, videos, etc, spreading rumours such as that (1) it is suspected to be a dumping ground for nuclear waste, the radiation from which could be a big health hazard for the local population, (2) it is a storehouse for nuclear weapons, (3) it is a lab for testing new nuclear weapons, (4) the lab will be a threat to the wildlife in the area and (5) it will endanger the safety of Iduki dam located across the border in Kerala.Removing all such fears and threats, when the project authorities finally decided to move ahead with the work on the project, the southern bench of National Green Tribunal on March 21, 2017 suspended the clearance given by the Environmental Ministry for the underground Neutrino Observatory project at Pottipuram in Theni district of Tamil Nadu. An NGO called ‘Poovulagin Nambarkal’ (Friends of the planet) headed by G.Sunder Rajan had lodged a complaint with the southern bench of the NGT in 2015 alleging that the environmental clearance was obtained by the INO authorities by concealing the fact that the Madhiketan Shola National Park in Iduki district of Kerala falls within just 4.9 kms from the proposed INO project site at Pottipuram and hence protected by the Wild Life Protection Act of 1972. The NGO further alleged that an unauthorized agency had conducted the study at the Bodi West Hills in Theni and submitted its report. Hence, the NGT stated that it requires further study from an accredited agency to get a fresh green nod. The NGT also said that it needs another clearance from National Board for Wild Life, as the INO project site lies near a national park. According to some newspaper reports, the INO authorities are now thinking of shifting the project location to Andhra Pradesh. Thus, even the location of a prestigious basic science project like the Neutrino observatory, work on which was initiated as early as in 2002, could not be finalized so far, because of the activities of some anti-national forces, backed and funded by some western agencies.The above instances show how the judge activists have not only succeeded in establishing their secret cell even among the Supreme Court judges, but they have even taken control of other constitutional bodies like the NHRC and NGT to further the cause of terrorist outfits like Maoists as seen in the case of the ban on ‘Salva Judum’ and narco analysis test, and Manipur militants through the verdict on encounter killings, and the anti-development lobby as in the case of withdrawal of environmental clearance to the Neutrino project.Senior Supreme Court lawyer Colin Gonsalves, who founded the Human Rights Law Network (HRNL) and Independent People’s Tribunal (IPT) is a suspicious character. He received International Human Rights Award from American Bar Association in 2004 and Mother Teresa Memorial Award for Social Justice in 2010. Colin Gonsalves was also awarded the Rights Livelihood Award, in 2017.CommentsThe rebellion by the four senior judges of the Supreme Court on January 12, 2018 has to be taken by the Government of India very seriously in the light of the above-mentioned facts and urgent necessary steps should be taken on a war footing to maintain the sanctity and independence of the Supreme Court by weeding out all undesirable elements from the top most court. The four rebel judges appear to be very close to a traitorous lobby of judge activists who want to ensure the balkanization of India by encouraging all anti- national and secessionist movements in the country. These four judges should be removed from the court with immediate effect through necessary impeachment proceedings in the Parliament. Some of the retired judges/chief justices who are appointed to head important constitutional bodies like National Human Rights Commission and National Green Tribunal, etc, also need to be subjected to close scrutiny as such bodies could act as a catalyst for internal sabotage, as has been already explained above.

Most Objectivist thinkers are ‘little known’ outside of Objectivist circles so I will post a list of the ones I know.Objectivist Intellectual’s Biographies (85) last updated 10/14/18 (not complete)Amesh AdaljaMD, 2002, American University of the CaribbeanDr. Adalja, a board-certified physician in infectious disease, critical care medicine, emergency medicine and internal medicine, specializes in the intersection of national security with catastrophic health events. He publishes and lectures on bio-terrorism, pandemic preparedness and emerging infectious diseases. He has been a guest on national radio and television programs.John AllisonMBA, Management, 1974, Duke UniversityMr. Allison is president and CEO of the Cato Institute. He was previously chairman and CEO of BB&T Corporation, the 10th-largest financial services holding company headquartered in the United States. During Allison’s tenure as CEO from 1989 to 2008, BB&T grew from $4.5 billion to $152 billion in assets.Carl BarneyCarl Barney is a businessman who, among other business activities, owns and manages several private business colleges.Rituparna BasuBS, Biology, 2010, Pennsylvania State UniversityMs. Basu is a health care policy analyst at ARI. Her work has appeared in publications such as Forbes and The Daily Caller, and she has been interviewed on radio and TV programs, internationally. Ms. Basu has briefed congressional staffers and speaks regularly at university campuses, including Georgetown, Emory and Temple.Ben BayerPhD, Philosophy, 2007, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignDr. Bayer teaches philosophy at Loyola University New Orleans. His research focuses primarily on questions about the foundations of knowledge and the freedom of the will.Robert BegleyRobert Begley is a writer for The Objective Standard. He is the founder and president of the NY Heroes Society, an organization dedicated to promoting heroism in the culture. Robert is also a judge in Anthem, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged essay contests. He was the host and producer for the Manhattan Cable TV program, The Voice of Reason. Robert is currently writing a book about the history of New York heroes.Michael S. BerlinerPhD, Philosophy, 1970, Boston UniversityDr. Berliner is the founding executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute and served as co-chairman of ARI’s board of directors. He is editor of "Letters of Ayn Rand", "Understanding Objectivism" and a recent biography of operetta composer Emmerich Kálmán. Dr. Berliner taught philosophy and philosophy of education for many years at California State University, Northridge.ANDREW BERNSTEINPhD, Philosophy, 1986, City University of New YorkAndrew Bernstein holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the Graduate School of the City University of New York. He has taught at Hunter College, the New School for Social Research, Pace University and Marymount College, where he was chosen Outstanding Faculty Member for 1995. He currently teaches at the State University of New York at Purchase, where he was selected Outstanding Faculty Member for 2004.Dr. Bernstein has lectured at universities across the United States, including at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, the United States Military Academy at West Point and many others; and at philosophical conferences both in America and abroad. He is the author of The Capitalist Manifesto: The Historic, Economic and Philosophic Case for Laissez-Faire, to be published in the spring of 2005 by University Press of America. His first novel, Heart of a Pagan, was released in 2002. He is currently writing Objectivism in One Lesson, an introduction to the philosophy of Ayn Rand. His website is Andrew Bernstein | Philosopher and TeacherDr. Bernstein is the author of "The Capitalist Manifesto" (2005), "Objectivism in One Lesson" (2008), "Capitalism Unbound" (2010), "Capitalist Solutions" (2011), and of numerous essays. He is currently writing “Heroes and Hero Worship” for the Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism. Dr. Bernstein lectures widely on Ayn Rand’s novels and Objectivism.DAVID BERRYD.M.A., Composition, 2002, University of South CarolinaDavid Berry is an associate professor of music. He teaches courses across a wide range of historical and theoretical musical subjects including film music. He is a recorded and published (BMI) composer with performances of his music in America and Europe in both fine art and popular music genres.CRAIG BIDDLEB.A., Fine Arts, 1988, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityCraig Biddle is the author of Loving Life: The Morality of Self-Interest and the Facts That Support It and is currently writing another book, Good Thinking for Good Living: The Science of Being Selfish. In addition to writing, he lectures on the Objectivist ethics and teaches workshops on thinking in principles. Editor and Publisher of “The Objective Standard”Specialties: Ethics, ObjectivismHARRY BINSWANGERPh.D., Philosophy, 1973, Columbia UniversityDr. Binswanger is the author of The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts, the editor of The Ayn Rand Lexicon and co-editor of the second edition of Ayn Rand’s Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. Dr. Binswanger is a professor of philosophy at the Ayn Rand Institute’s Objectivist Academic Center and is a member of ARI’s board of directors. He is currently working on a book on the nature of consciousness.Dr. Binswanger is the author of "How We Know" and "The Biological Basis of Teleological Concepts", the editor of "The Ayn Rand Lexicon" and co-editor of the second edition of Ayn Rand’s "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology". He is an instructor of philosophy at the Ayn Rand Institute’s Objectivist Academic Center and a member of ARI’s board of directors.TORE BOECKMANNWriterMr. Boeckmann has written and lectured extensively on Ayn Rand’s fiction and philosophy of esthetics. He edited for publication Rand’s The Art of Fiction. His own fiction has been published in Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine and Alfred Hitchcock’s Mystery Magazine. He is currently writing a book on Romantic literature.Thomas A. BowdenSpecialties: Legal issues, physician-assisted suicide, abortion rights, mandatory community service.Mr. Bowden, an attorney in private practice in Baltimore, Maryland, taught at the University Of Baltimore School Of Law from 1988 to 1994. Author of a booklet against multiculturalism, “The Enemies of Christopher Columbus,” he has also published op-eds in the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, Philadelphia Inquirer, Portland Oregonian, Los Angeles Daily News, Minneapolis Star Tribune, and Charlotte Observer. He is a former member of the board of directors of The Association for Objective Law, a non-profit group whose purpose is to advance Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, as the basis of a proper legal system. In that connection, Mr. Bowden has filed amicus curiae briefs in the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal for the Second and Third Circuits, challenging mandatory community service for high school students on legal and moral grounds.YARON BROOKPh.D., Finance, 1994, University of Texas at AustinDr. Brook is president and executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. A former finance professor, he has published in academic as well as popular publications, and is frequently interviewed in the media. He has appeared on CNN, Fox News Channel and PBS among others. On college campuses across America and in the boardrooms of large corporations, he has lectured on Objectivism, business ethics and foreign policy.Dr. Brook is executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. He is the coauthor of the national best-seller “Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government” and a contributing author to both “Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea” and “Winning the Unwinnable War: America’s Self-Crippled Response to Islamic Totalitarianism.”ANDY CLARKSONMBA University of MarylandMr. Clarkson is a decades-long Objectivist He has focused on researching the history of ideas and published The Impact of Aristotle Upon Christian, Islamic, and Jewish Cultures : A Compilation of Notes and Quotes From A Variety of Sources Plus Commentary, published in December 2016.PAT CORVINIPh.D., Electrical Engineering, 1995, University of California at Santa BarbaraDr. Corvini recently left a twenty-year career in semiconductor optoelectronics to work full time in the history of science and mathematics. She lectured on Archimedes at the 2003 Objectivist Summer Conference.SUSAN CRAWFORDB.S.N, Nursing, 1982, Marymount College, VirginiaSusan Crawford is a registered nurse. She has given two parenting courses and wrote the pamphlet “The Reading Habit/Money Management.” Susan is married to Jack Crawford and the mother of two sons, Jason and DavidERIC DANIELSPh.D., American History, 2001, University of WisconsinDr. Daniels is a visiting assistant professor of history at Duke University’s Program on Values and Ethics in the Marketplace. He has lectured at summer conferences and to numerous Objectivist community groups. He is an alumnus of ARI’s Objectivist Graduate Center (precursor to the Objectivist Academic Center). A contributor to the Oxford Companion to United States History, he is currently working on a book about American politics andDr. Daniels works at LePort Schools, teaching science and history, and as a curriculum developer. Previously, he was a professor at Clemson, Duke and Georgetown Universities. Dr. Daniels has published book chapters and articles on antitrust, individualism and economic freedom.John DennisPhD, Psychology, 2010, University of Texas at AustinDr. Dennis teaches at Catholic University in Milan, University of Perugia and University of Alberta. His research on motivation is funded by the EU and Templeton Foundation. He is a licensed psychologist trained in CBT. In 2013 Dr. Dennis started Melioravit, a scientific communication company that helps researchers get funded, published and cited.Robert van DortmondMSc in Applied Physics, Delft University of Technology; Executive Program, Stanford Graduate SchoolMr. van Dortmond teaches entrepreneurship at the University of Amsterdam/The Amsterdam Centre for Entrepreneurship. He is an active mentor, shareholder and board member of various startups. He speaks on Ayn Rand’s ideas and is an advisory board member of ARI Europe of which he was one of the initiators.Dianne DuranteSpecialties: Esthetics, painting, sculpture, homeschooling.Dr. Durante is a freelance writer on art and current events. She has lectured on painting and sculpture at Objectivist conferences; several of these lectures are available on tape from the Ayn Rand Bookstore. She has also just finished a book on New York sculpture, Forgotten Delights: The Producers. Dr. Durante and her husband homeschool their daughter in Brooklyn, NY.Alex EpsteinSpecialties: Current Affairs, racism, and moral defense of businessmen.Alex Epstein is an Objectivist speaker and writer living in Richmond, VA. His Op-Eds have been published in dozens of newspapers around the country, including The Houston Chronicle, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Miami Herald, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and The Washington Times. He is also a regular contributor to The Intellectual Activist, a monthly magazine analyzing political and cultural issues from an Objectivist perspective. Mr. Epstein holds a BA in philosophy from Duke University, where he was editor and publisher of The Duke Review for two years.STUART MARK FELDMANM.A., Art, 1975, Rowan University, New JerseyStuart Feldman works in bronze, stone and wood, creating sculptures of the human figure expressing man’s most noble and inspiring qualities. A former instructor at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art, he is cofounder of the Schuylkill Academy of Fine Art, in Philadelphia. His sculptures are held in private collections, and he has created a number of commissioned pieces.ROBERT GARMONGPh.D., Philosophy, 2002; University of Texas at AustinDr. Garmong is a graduate of the Objectivist Graduate Center, and has lectured on philosophy at many Objectivist conferences. He is the author of “J.S. Mill’s Re-Conceptualization of Liberty,” currently under submission to publishers. Dr. Garmong teaches philosophy at Texas A&M University and at Texas State University.MARILYN (GEORGE) GRAYB.S., Child Development, 1961, Iowa State UniversityMarilyn George is a retired Montessori teacher, school owner and administrator. She holds teaching certificates from both the American Montessori Society and the International Association of Progressive Montessorians and was a Montessori teacher for twenty-five years. She owned, administered and taught for ten years in her own school, which had an international reputation for excellence. She taught Montessori courses at Seattle University for more than ten years and has consulted for schools nationwide. Marilyn has been ballroom dancing since she met Ted Gray at a conference in 1989, at her first lesson, and today they compete at the Silver level.Debi GhateLLB, Law, University of Calgary, 1995Ms. Ghate is vice president of Education and Research at the Ayn Rand Institute, where she heads up a variety of educational and policy-related programs. She is also director of the Anthem Foundation for Objectivist Scholarship, an organization that supports academic scholarship based on Ayn Rand’s work.Onkar GhatePhD, Philosophy, 1996, University of CalgaryDr. Ghate is senior fellow and chief content officer at the Ayn Rand Institute. He specializes in Rand’s philosophy, Objectivism, and is ARI’s senior instructor and editor. He publishes and lectures on Rand’s philosophy and fiction, including application of Objectivism in the culture, and has been a guest on national radio and television programs.GENA GORLINPhD, Clinical Psychology, 2012, University of VirginiaMs. Gorlin has two years of experience conducting individual psychotherapy with anxious and depressed young adults. Her research has been published in highly regarded academic journals. She is also a graduate of the Objectivist Academic Center and a former board member of The Undercurrent, a national campus publication.Allan Gotthelf (deceased)Specialties: Love, self-esteem, happiness, Objectivism, AristotleAllan Gotthelf is emeritus professor of philosophy at The College of New Jersey. He is an internationally recognized authority on the philosophy of Aristotle, with many scholarly publications. He has lectured on Objectivism and Aristotle — including their views on love and sex, self-esteem, and individual happiness — throughout North America and in Europe and Japan. He has been a visiting professor at Swarthmore College, Georgetown University, Oxford University, Tokyo Metropolitan University, and most recently, the University of Texas at Austin. In 1987, Dr. Gotthelf was one of the founders of the Ayn Rand Society; a professional organization affiliated with the American Philosophical Association, Eastern Division, and has headed it since 1990. He enters his second year as Visiting Professor of Historyand Philosophy of Science (HPS) at the University of Pittsburgh. Prof. Gotthelf holds the Pitt Fellowship for the Study of Objectivism, funded by the Anthem Foundation and he will be working throughout the year on various projects in connection with his Fellowship. He is the author of On Ayn Rand (Wadsworth Publishing, 2000), the best-selling book in the Wadsworth Philosophers Series.4-19-2007 from his website:Visiting Professor, under the university's new Fellowship for the Study of Objectivism (Member: Classics, Philosophy and Ancient Science Program). A specialist on Aristotle's biology and philosophy, and on the philosophy of Ayn Rand, Gotthelf is emeritus professor of philosophy at The College of New Jersey, and has taught on a visiting basis at Swarthmore, Oxford, Georgetown, Tokyo Metropolitan, and the University of Texas at Austin. He is a life member of Clare Hall Cambridge, and was a visiting member of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton. Gotthelf is author of On Ayn Rand (Wadsworth Philosophers Series, 2000); co-editor of Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology (Cambridge 1987); editor of Aristotle on Nature and Living Things (Pittsburgh 1985); and has prepared for publication D.M. Balme's posthumous editions of Aristotle's Historia Animalium (Cambridge 2002, Cambridge MA 1991). His collected Aristotle papers will by published next year by Oxford University Press, under the title: Teleology, Scientific Method, and Substance: Essays on Aristotle's Biological Enterprise. He is currently working on several Aristotle projects and an extended study of Rand's theory of concepts, essences, and objectivity.TED GRAYB.S., Mechanical Engineering, 1965, Northeastern University;M.S., Mechanical Engineering, 1971, Brooklyn Polytechnic InstituteTed Gray, an engineer, has been dancing since his teens. They both consider dancing primarily a social and romantic activity. Occasionally, they enter amateur dance competitions. As a couple they have given many formal and informal group lessons—at home, at conferences and on a cruise ship. Ted is a mechanical engineer with forty years experience in design and analysis of structures, and prevention of vibration. He is an amateur student of history, enjoying especially the biographies of great Americans and the history of technology. He has been a student of Objectivism for thirty-eight years.Hannes HackerSpecialties: history and politics of the space program, science and technology.Mr. Hacker graduated from the University of Notre Dame with a BS degree in aerospace engineering in May 1988. He earned a MS degree in aerospace engineering at the University of Texas at Austin December 1990. He has eleven years of space-flight operations experience including work on the space shuttle, international space station and commercial communications satellites.DAVID HARRIMANB.S., Physics, 1979, University of California at Berkeley;M.S., Physics, 1982, University of Maryland;M.A., Philosophy, 1995, Claremont Graduate University, CaliforniaDavid Harriman is the editor of Journals of Ayn Rand and a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute. He has lectured extensively on the history and philosophy of physics. He is currently developing the physical science curriculum at VanDamme Academy and working on two books: one demonstrating the influence of philosophy on modern physics (The Anti-Copernican Revolution) and the other presenting Leonard Peikoff’s theory of induction (Induction in Physics and Philosophy).David HolcbergSpecialties: Environmentalism, science, capitalism. David Holcberg holds a degree in civil engineering and is a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute.JONATHAN HOENIGCommunications and Philosophy, 1999, Northwestern UniversityMr. Hoenig manages Capitalistpig Hedge Fund, LLC. A former floor trader, his first book, Greed Is Good, was published by HarperCollins. Mr. Hoenig has written for publications including The Wall Street Journal, Wired andMarketWatch: Stock Market News - Financial News. He was named one of Crain’s Forty Under Forty and appears regularly on Fox News Channel.Gary HullSpecialties: Philosophy, multiculturalism, business ethics, education.Dr. Hull is director of the Program on Values and Ethics in the Marketplace at Duke University. His op-eds have been published in numerous newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Orange County Register, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and the Chicago Tribune. He has made numerous television and radio appearances to discuss Ayn Rand’s philosophy, multiculturalism, affirmative action, the Elian Gonzalez affair, sex, ethics, politics. He has lectured on Ayn Rand’s philosophy at conferences around the world and, as a member of the Ayn Rand Institute’s Speakers Bureau, has spoken at universities across the country, including Harvard, Michigan at Ann Arbor, Wisconsin at Madison, Texas at Austin. Dr. Hull is the author of A Study Guide to Leonard Peikoff’s book Objectivism: the Philosophy of Ayn Rand, and is co-editor of The Ayn Rand Reader (Penguin/Plume, 1999), a collection of fiction and non-fiction writings by Ayn Rand.MARTIN F JOHANSENMS, Computer Science, 2009, University of OsloMr. Johansen is a PhD research fellow at SINTEF, the largest independent research institute in Scandinavia. He is currently completing his PhD studies at the University of Oslo as part of an international research project on software testing.Elan JournoBA, Philosophy, 1997, King's College, LondonMr. Journo, director of policy research at ARI, is completing a book on American policy toward the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. His 2009 book, “Winning the Unwinnable War,” analyzes post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy. His writing has appeared in “Foreign Policy,” “Journal of International Security Affairs” and “Middle East Quarterly.”ELLEN KENNERPh.D., Clinical Psychology, 1992, University of Rhode IslandDr. Kenner, a clinical psychologist, has taught university courses in introductory psychology, abnormal psychology and theories of personality. She gives talks on romance, self-improvement, psychological self-defense, parenting and communication skills. She is in her eighth year as host of the nationally syndicated radio talk show The Rational Basis of Happiness®.Ryan KrausePhD, Strategic Management and Organization Theory, 2013, Indiana UniversityDr. Krause is an assistant professor at Texas Christian University’s Neeley School of Business. He researches corporate governance and has published in “Academy of Management Journal,” “Strategic Management Journal” and “Journal of Management.” His research has been covered by the “Wall Street Journal,” “USA Today,” “Businessweek” and Fox Business Network.Andrew LaymanAndrew Layman is a Senior Program Manager at Microsoft where he works on Internet and database technologies. Prior to joining Microsoft in 1992, he was a Vice President of Symantec Corporation and original author of the Time Line project management program.Peter LePort, M.D.Specialties: Medicine, free market reform of healthcare, medical savings accountsDr. LePort, a full-time surgeon, lectures nationwide on free market reform in healthcare, particularly on the benefits of medical savings accounts. He is a member of the board of directors of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine. He co-wrote a healthcare reform proposal that discusses voluntary, tax-free medical savings accounts and high-deductible personal health insurance and which includes a method to privatize Medicare. He earned his medical degree from Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, and is a former assistant professor of surgery at that institution. He is a member of the Faculty of the American College of Surgeons and of the Orange County Surgical Society.Andrew LewisPostgraduate Diploma of Philosophy, 1994, University of Melbourne, AustraliaMr. Lewis has studied philosophy at the Objectivist Academic Center, the University of Melbourne and the University of Southern California. He worked with Leonard Peikoff on his radio show, has lectured at Objectivist conferences, and is principal at VanDamme Academy, where he teaches a three-year history curriculum covering ancient, European and American history.JOHN LEWIS (deceased)Ph.D., Classics, 2001, University of CambridgeDr. Lewis is assistant professor of history at Ashland University, where he holds an Anthem Fellowship for Objectivist Scholarship. He is Assistant Professor of History in the Department of History and Political Science. He has published in several professional journals, and has been a visiting scholar at Rice University and Bowling Green State UniversityEDWIN A. LOCKEPh.D., Industrial Organizational Psychology, 1964, Cornell University.Dr. Locke is Dean’s Professor of Leadership and Motivation (Emeritus) at the Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland, College Park. He is internationally known for his research and writings on work motivation, leadership and related topics, including the application of Objectivism to psychology and management. He is a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute and has published numerous op-eds.Keith LockitchPhD, Physics, 1999, University of Wisconsin at MilwaukeeDr. Lockitch is an ARI fellow and director of advanced training. In addition to speaking and writing for ARI on issues related to energy, climate and environmentalism, he teaches writing for the OAC and has developed courses on Ayn Rand’s ideas and novels for a variety of audiences.ROBERT MAYHEWPh.D., Philosophy, 1991, Georgetown UniversityDr. Mayhew is associate professor of philosophy at Seton Hall University. He is the author of Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato’s Republic and The Female in Aristotle’s Biology and the editor of Ayn Rand’s Marginalia, Ayn Rand’s The Art of Nonfiction, Essays on Ayn Rand’s “We the Living” and (forthcoming) Ayn Rand’s Q & A. He has completed a book on Ayn Rand’s HUAC testimony and is preparing for publication a collection of essays on Ayn Rand’s Anthem.Arline MannArline Mann is an attorney. She is vice president and associate general counsel of Goldman, Sachs & Co.John P. McCaskey, Ph.D. in history, is the founder and chairman of the Anthem Foundation for Objectivist Scholarship. He spent twenty years in the computer business, most recently as founder of Epiphany, Inc., before returning to academia in 2001. He studies and teaches history and philosophy of science at Stanford University.Scott McConnellSpecialties: Volunteerism, Communism in America, Ayn Rand's life. Mr. McConnell is a former literature teacher and high school English teacher. He has a BA in behavioral sciences and worked in Hollywood as a script reader. He has given several lectures on Ayn Rand's life.Shoshana MilgramPhD, Comparative Literature, 1978, Stanford UniversityDr. Milgram, associate professor of English at Virginia Tech, specializes in narrative fiction and film. She has lectured on Ayn Rand at Objectivist and academic conferences and has published on Ayn Rand, Hugo and Dostoevsky. Dr. Milgram is editing the draft of her book-length study of Ayn Rand’s life (to 1957).Ken Moelis. Mr. Moelis is founder and chief executive officer of Moelis & Company, a global investment bank that provides financial advisory, capital raising and asset management services to a broad client base including corporations, institutions and governments. Mr. Moelis has over thirty years of investment banking experience. Prior to founding Moelis & Company, he worked at UBS from 2001 to 2007, where he was most recently president of UBS Investment Bank and, previously, Joint Global Head of Investment Banking. Mr. Moelis serves on the University of Pennsylvania Board of Trustees, the Wharton Board of Overseers, the Board of the Tourette Syndrome Association, and the Board of Governors of Cedars Sinai Hospital.Jean MoroneyCertificate, 1996, Objectivist Graduate Center, Ayn Rand Institute;MS, Psychology, 1994, Carnegie Mellon University;MS, Electrical Engineering, 1986, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyMs. Moroney is president of Thinking Directions, a business that develops and teaches methods in applied psycho-epistemology. She has given her flagship course, Thinking Tactics, to corporate and public audiences across North America. She is writing a book titled “Smarter: How to Achieve Your Goals When Nothing Goes as Planned.”Adam Mossoff is Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law. He is also Co-Director of Academic Programs and a Senior Scholar at the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property at George Mason, which he co-founded in 2012. He teaches and writes in the areas of patent law, trade secrets, trademark law, property law, and internet law. He has published extensively on the theory and history of how patents and other intellectual property rights are fundamental property rights. His article on the very first patent war, the Sewing Machine War of the 1850s, has been widely cited in today's public policy debates concerning patent litigation, patent licensing, and patent pools. He has testified before the Senate, and he has spoken at numerous congressional staff briefings, professional association conferences, and academic conferences, as well as at the PTO, the FTC, the DOJ, and the Smithsonian Institution. He is Co-Chairman of the Intellectual Property Committee of the IEEE-USA, and he is a member of the Amicus Committee of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, the Public Policy Committee of the Licensing Executives Society, and the Academic Advisory Board of the Copyright Alliance. ADAM MOSSOFF is an expert in patent law and property theory. He has published numerous law review articles and book reviews on topics in legal philosophy, patent law, and property law, including in law reviews at the University of Arizona and UC-Hastings, and in the interdisciplinary law journal, the University of Chicago Law School Roundtable. He was a visiting lecturer and John M. Olin Fellow in Law at Northwestern University School of Law, where he taught a seminar on property theory. Immediately prior to coming to MSU College of Law, he clerked for the Hon. Jacques L. Wiener, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Professor Mossoff graduated from the University of Chicago Law School with honors in 2001. He has a M.A. in philosophy from Columbia University, where he specialized in legal and political philosophy, and a B.A. in philosophy from the University of Michigan, where he graduated magna cum laude and with high honors in philosophy. Hi is now an Associate Professor of Law at George Mason University School of LawSpecialties: Philosophy of Law, Constitutional Law, Intellectual Property Rights, Patent RightsJ. PATRICK MULLINS is a doctoral candidate in the history department of the University of Kentucky. He is in the last stages of writing his doctoral dissertation with the help of a generous grant from the Ayn Rand Institute.Travis NorsenSpecialties: Physics, science, history and philosophy of science, science education.Mr. Norsen is a physics and philosophy double-major at Harvey Mudd College in Claremont, CA. He is currently attending his final year of a PhD program in physics at the University of Washington in Seattle. Mr. Norsen is also a former adjunct instructor of physics at DigiPen Institute of Technology in Redmond, WA.JOHN E. OPFER, who still tops the list of Amazon Reviewers on the CyberNet Scoreboard, is Assistant Professor of Psychology at Ohio State University where he specializes in cognitive and developmental psychology. Nowadays he's too busy reviewing his research findings to review books. His work at OSU's Concepts and Learning Lab explores how young children form and change their concepts, such as concepts of living things and number. His website is at <Department of Psychology - John Opfer> where you will find links to several of his fascinating papers.Michael PaxtonMFA, 1984, New York UniversityMr. Paxton directed the world premiere of Ayn Rand’s Ideal (1989) and adapted and directed a dramatic presentation of Anthem (1991). His documentary, Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life, won an Academy Award nomination and a Golden Satellite Award for Best Feature Documentary. He teaches production design and film history at the Art Institute in Hollywood.Lee PiersonPhD, 1982, Psychology, Cornell UniversityDr. Pierson, director of the Thinking Skills Institute at Fairleigh Dickinson University, teaches students and business professionals how to keep any thought process moving toward its goal by activating the right knowledge as needed. He has a long-standing interest in and recently participated in life-extension research.AMY PEIKOFFJ.D., 1998, University of California, Los Angeles School of Law;Ph.D., Philosophy, 2003, University of Southern CaliforniaDr. Amy Peikoff is an Anthem fellow at the University of Texas at Austin, where she is teaching undergraduate courses in ethics and epistemology. Her writings on legal and philosophical issues have appeared in academic journals and leading newspapers. She has taught for the Objectivist Academic Center and lectured for Objectivist organizations and at conferences. Visiting Fellow at Chapman University’s Law School.Leonard PeikoffPh .D., Philosophy, 1964 New York UniversityFrom 1957 until 1973, Peikoff taught philosophy at Hunter College, Long Island University, New York University, the University of Denver and the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn.After that, he worked full-time on The Ominous Parallels (published 1982) and gave lectures across the country. He gave courses on Ayn Rand's philosophy regularly in New York City, which were taped and played to groups in some 100 cities in the U.S., Canada, and Europe. In addition, he spoke frequently before investment and financial conferences on the philosophic basis of capitalism.Dr. Peikoff, who is a naturalized American citizen, was born in Winnipeg, Canada, in 1933. His father was a surgeon and his mother, before marriage, was a band leader in Western Canada. He has been a contributor to Barron's and an associate editor, with Ayn Rand, of The Objectivist (1968-71) and The Ayn Rand Letter (1971-76).He is author of Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand (Dutton, 1991), the definitive statement of Objectivism.Steve PlafkerJ.D., 1973 USCPh.D., Math, 1966 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISBS, MATH, MIT, 1961Dr. Plafker is a retired Los Angeles County deputy district attorney. His teaching experience includes teaching law to law students and to undergraduates. Before becoming a lawyer, he taught mathematics at Tulane University. He is a founder and member of the Board of Directors of The Association For Objective Law (TAFOL).Richard RalstonSpecialties: Ayn Rand’s life, Objectivism (General), Projects of the Ayn Rand Institute, Volunteerism, Foreign Policy, Journalism and MediaAfter serving seven years in the U.S. Army, Mr. Ralston completed an M.A. in International Relations at the University of Southern California in 1977. He then began a career in newspaper publishing and direct marketing. He has been the circulation director and publisher of The Christian Science Monitor, a radio producer, a national television news business manager, and a book publisher. As an independent direct marketing consultant, his clients included IBM, British Airways, CNN, and the Los Angeles Times. His book Communism: Its Rise and Fall in the 20th Century was published in 1991. Mr. Ralston is now Managing Director for the Ayn Rand Institute.JOHN RIDPATHPh.D., Economics, 1974, University of VirginiaDr. Ridpath (York University, retired) writes and speaks in defense of capitalism, and on the impact throughout Western history—including the American Founding era—of the ideas of the major philosophers. A recipient of numerous teaching awards, and nominee for Canadian Professor of the Year, he continues to lecture throughout Europe and North America.Jonathan Paul Rosman, MDSpecialties: Medicine, psychiatry.Dr. Rosman is a board certified psychiatrist, with additional qualifications in the subspecialties of addiction psychiatry and forensic psychiatry. Prior to entering full-time private practice in California in 1989 he was an assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. For several years, Dr. Rosman has been a psychiatric consultant to the City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, California, and is the psychiatric consultant to the Sleep Disorders Center at Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena, California. He is also medical director for the Eating Disorder Center of California, a private, intensive outpatient clinic in Brentwood, California, devoted to the treatment of patients with anorexia and bulimia.Dr. Rosman is a published writer and lecturer on various aspects of psychiatry. Dr. Rosman's theoretical orientation is broad-based, drawing on and integrating aspects of cognitive-behavioral, short-term psychodynamic and biologic theories with Objectivist epistemological principles. He practices as both a psychotherapist and a psychopharmacologist.GREG SALMIERIB.A., Philosophy, 2001, The College of New JerseyPhD, Philosophy, 2008, University of PittsburghDr. Salmieri is a philosophy fellow at the Anthem Foundation and co-secretary of the Ayn Rand Society (a professional group affiliated with the American Philosophical Association). He teaches at Rutgers University. He has published and lectured on Aristotle and Ayn Rand and is co-editor of forthcoming books on both thinkers.Richard M. SalsmanSpecialties: Banking, free market economics, economic forecasting, capitalism, investmentsRichard M. Salsman is president and chief market strategist of InterMarket Forecasting, which provides quantitative research and forecasts of stocks, bonds, and currencies to guide the asset allocation decisions of institutional investment managers, mutual funds, and pension plans. He is the author of numerous books and articles on economics, banking, and forecasting from a free-market perspective, including Breaking the Banks: Central Banking Problems and Free Banking Solutions (American Institute for Economic Research, 1990) and Gold and Liberty (American Institute for Economic Research, 1995). Mr. Salsman’s work has appeared in The Intellectual Activist, the New York Times, Investor’s Business Daily, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and Barron’s. From 1993 to 1999, he was a senior vice president and senior economist at H. C. Wainwright & Co. Economics. Prior to that he was a banker at Citibank and the Bank of New York. Mr. Salsman is an adjunct fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research and the founder of The Association of Objectivist Businessmen.Lee Sandstead received his B.A. Philosophy/B.S. Mass Communication from Middle Tennessee State University in December 1996, when he was awarded the prestigious award for “Outstanding Magazine Journalism Graduate.” He has studied art history at the University of Memphis’ graduate program, and most recently, the art history doctoral program at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York City. He is a popular writer/photographer/lecturer of art-historical subjects. He has delivered almost 50 keynote lecture-addresses to such prestigious institutions as: Yale, Duke, University of Michigan, Penn State, NYU and the Academy of Realist Art in Toronto. Articles of his have been published in numerous journals, and his photography has been seen in publications such as: The New York Times, Fortune, and Ms. Magazine. He currently teaches art history at Montclair State University and is author of the forthcoming book on American master-sculptor Evelyn Beatrice Longman (1874-1954DINA SCHEIN FEDERMAN (deceased) is completing her article on "Integrity in The Fountainhead_" for ROBERT MAYHEW's upcoming collection of essays. She will also be delivering two lectures at the European Objectivist conference in London this month. Her writing projects include severalarticles on Virtue Ethics, a movement in academic ethics.DANIEL SCHWARTZBA, Liberal Arts, 2006, St. John’s CollegeMr. Schwartz is a doctoral candidate in philosophy at UC San Diego, where he is working on a dissertation titled “Baconian Foundationalism and the Problem of Certainty.” He specializes in early modern philosophy and the history of the philosophy of science.PETER SCHWARTZM.A., Journalism, 1972, Syracuse UniversityPeter Schwartz is the founding editor and publisher of The Intellectual Activist. He is the editor and contributing author of Ayn Rand’s Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, and is chairman of the board of directors of the Ayn Rand Institute.Thomas ShoebothamMM, Orchestral Conducting, 1996, University of New MexicoMM, Cello Performance, 1992, Eastman School of MusicMr. Shoebotham is music director of the Palo Alto Philharmonic. Previous conducting engagements have included Berkeley Opera, Opera San José, Peninsula Symphony Orchestra and many other groups. He has lectured on music, taught in school music programs and performed numerous recitals as a cellist and pianist over the last twenty years.Stephen SiekPhD, Musicology, 1991, University of CincinnatiDr. Siek, professor emeritus at Wittenberg University, has recently publishedEngland’s Piano Sage: The Life and Teachings of Tobias Matthay. For many years he has lectured and written about the early work of Frank Lloyd Wright, including a scholarly study of Wright’s 1909 home for Burton Westcott in Springfield, Ohio.BRIAN P. SIMPSONPhD, Economics, 2000, George Mason UniversityDr. Simpson is a professor at National University in San Diego. He is author of the book Markets Don’t Fail! and he has a number of papers published in academic journals. He is currently working on another book titled “Money, Banking, and the Business Cycle,” which he hopes to publish soon.Steve SimpsonJD, 1994, New York Law SchoolMr. Simpson is director of legal studies at the Ayn Rand Institute. A former constitutional lawyer for the Institute for Justice, he writes and speaks on a wide variety of legal and constitutional issues, including free speech and campaign finance law, cronyism and government corruption, and the rule of law.Aaron SmithPhD, Philosophy, 2010, Johns Hopkins UniversityDr. Smith is an instructor at the Ayn Rand Institute where he teaches in the Objectivist Academic Center and the Summer Internship program. He lectures for ARI and develops educational content for the Institute’s e-learning programs.Tara SmithPhD, Philosophy, 1989, Johns Hopkins UniversityDr. Smith, professor of philosophy at the University of Texas, holds the BB&T Chair for the Study of Objectivism and the Anthem Foundation Fellowship. She has published books on values, virtues, and individual rights. Her latest, “Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System,” is forthcoming in fall 2015 (Cambridge University Press).MARY ANN SURESM.A., Art History, 1966, Hunter College, New YorkMary Ann Sures taught art history at Washington Square College of N.Y.U. and at Hunter College. She applied Objectivist esthetics to painting and sculpture in a ten-lecture course, “Esthetics of the Visual Arts,” which was written in consultation with Ayn Rand. Her philosophical approach to art history is presented in “Metaphysics in Marble” (The Objectivist, February/March, 1969). She is co-author with her (late) husband Charles of Facets of Ayn Rand (published by the Ayn Rand Institute), memoirs of their longtime friendship with Ayn Rand and her husband Frank O’Connor.C. BRADLEY THOMPSONPh.D., History, 1993, Brown UniversityC. Bradley Thompson is the BB&T Research Professor at Clemson University and the Executive Director of the Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism. He has also been a visiting fellow at Princeton and Harvard universities and at the University of London.Professor Thompson is the author of Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea and the prize-winning book John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty. He has also edited The Revolutionary Writings of John Adams, Antislavery Political Writings, 1833-1860: A Reader, co-edited Freedom and School Choice in American Education, and was an associate editor of the four-volume Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment. His current book project is on the ideological origins of American constitutionalism.Dr. Thompson is also an occasional writer for The Times Literary Supplement of London. He has lectured around the country on education reform and the American Revolution, and his op-ed essays have appeared in scores of newspapers around the country and abroad. Dr. Thompson's lectures on the political thought of John Adams have twice appeared on C-SPAN television.LISA VANDAMMEB.A., Philosophy, 1994, University of Texas at AustinLisa VanDamme is the owner and director of VanDamme Academy, a private elementary and junior high school in Laguna Hills, California. She specializes in the application of Objectivism to educational theory. Her previous lectures on homeschooling, hierarchy and the teaching of values will be included in a forthcoming education anthology featuring Leonard Peikoff’s “Philosophy of Education.”Don WatkinsBA, Business Administration, 2005, Strayer UniversityMr. Watkins is a fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. He is the author of “RooseveltCare: How Social Security Is Sabotaging the Land of Self-Reliance” and coauthor, along with Yaron Brook, of the national best-seller “Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand’s Ideas Can End Big Government.”KEITH WEINERPh.D., Economics, 2012, New Austrian School of Economics (non-accredited)Dr. Weiner is the founder and CEO of Monetary Metals, a company on a mission to pay interest on gold, and the president of the Gold Standard Institute USA.He makes the economic arguments, as well as the moral, for a free market in money and credit. There has never been an unadulterated gold standard in history, as all governments (including the U.S.) have regulated and interfered with banking, even when other enterprises were unshackled. Today our monetary system is failing, and Keith describes the mechanics in detail, why making the passionate case for gold as the money of free markets.He is also the founder of DiamondWare, a software company sold to Nortel in 2008.Glenn WoiceshynSpecialties: Education, ethics, environmentalism, science, politics.Mr. Woiceshyn is currently developing curriculum and teaching materials for grades 4 to 6 based on his understanding of Objectivism and his experience in "homeschooling" his son and other children. As a freelance writer, Mr. Woiceshyn's op-eds have appeared in numerous newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, Houston Chronicle, Philadelphia Inquirer, Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald.JAANA WOICESHYNM.B.A., 1983, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration; Ph.D., Organization and Strategy, 1988, University of Pennsylvania (Wharton School)Dr. Woiceshyn is an associate professor at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary. She has taught business ethics and strategic management to undergraduate, MBA and executive MBA students and to various business audiences since 1987.BARRY WOODPh.D., History of Art and Architecture, 2002, Harvard UniversityDr. Wood is curator of the Islamic Gallery Project at the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. He has lectured and published on subjects ranging from Persian poetry to Web design.Darryl WrightSpecialties: Ethics, political philosophy, ObjectivismDarryl Wright is associate professor of philosophy at Harvey Mudd College, a member of the Claremont Colleges consortium. He received his Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Michigan in 1991, and his A.B. in philosophy from Princeton University in 1985. Dr. Wright has published scholarly articles and/or lectured on the history of ethics, early twentieth-century philosophy, value theory, coercion, and other topics in philosophy.