New Delhi: India and Qatar on Tuesday held discussions to strengthen cooperation in combating money laundering and terrorism financing, focusing on advanced IT systems, strategic partnerships, and the role of virtual digital assets, according to  the ministry of finance.

Nine-member delegation

A nine-member Qatari delegation, led by Sheikh Ahmed Al Thani, head of Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) Qatar, met with Vivek Aggarwal, head of FIU-India, to review current practices and explore areas for collaboration.

The discussions included the use of advanced IT systems, such as India’s Financial Intelligence Network (FINNET) 2.0, and innovative initiatives like FIU-India’s Public-Private Partnership (FPAC) and Private-Private Partnership (ARIFAC) for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT), the ministry said.

“The meeting was enriching for both sides as they discussed and touched upon various areas such as the IT systems used by respective jurisdiction, the Public-Private Partnership initiative of FIU-IND (FPAC), Private-Private Partnership for Alliance of Reporting Entities in India For AML/CFT (ARIFAC), strategic analysis and various tools used by the two FIUs as well as FIU-IND’s experience in areas of virtual digital assets service providers (VDA-SPs),” the statement added.

India and Qatar have partnered to fight money laundering and terrorism financing through collaborations between their Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs).

In September, Global terror financing global watchdog Financial Action Task Force (FATF) placed India in the “regular follow-up” category, a distinction it now shares with only three other G20 countries—the UK, France and Italy.

FATF said India has achieved a high level of technical compliance across the agency’s spectrum of recommendations while taking significant steps to implement measures to tackle illicit finance.

However, the Paris-headquartered body, founded by the G7, said India needs to address a backlog in money laundering cases pending the conclusion of court processes.

“FIU-Qatar and FIU-IND (India) have cooperated over the years, through the informal information exchange on offences related to money laundering, and financing of terrorism,” the ministry statement said.

“Both the FIUs are members of Egmont Group and FATF and have been actively associated with various initiatives taken by these international organisations,” it added.

The BJP hits back sharply to Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge’s allegation of labelling them a “party of terrorists,” alleging that the opposition party has a history of supporting terrorism.

BJP spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi condemned Congress for supporting traditional Islamic practices like triple talaq, halala, and hijab, asserting that they are now making baseless accusations against Hindu society, PTI reported.

“This is the design of the urban Naxal mindset that Prime Minister Narendra Modi talks about,” Trivedi said.

Kharge had earlier called the BJP a “party of terrorists”, as he hit back at Modi over his recent remarks that the opposition party was being run by a “gang of urban Naxals”.

Union minister Giriraj Singh claimed that Kharge’s remarks show his reflections on his own party as it was the Congress which always supported terrorists.

Another Union minister, Pralhad Joshi, claimed Kharge “mistakenly” called the BJP a party of terrorists as a slip of tongue.

Taking to X, Joshi said, “It was Sonia Gandhi who shed tears for terrorists who died in Batla House. It was Congress which went soft on Afzal Guru. It was Congress which repealed POTA in 2004. It was their PM Manmohan Singh who shook hands with separatist militants.”

Joshi also said it was under Modi that terrorist activities saw a significant decline.

BJP spokesperson C R Kesavan said Kharge’s comments have exposed Congress’ “prejudiced and toxic mindset and ideology of divide and rule”, similar to that of the colonial British.

“The nation should not forget how the Congress equated terrorism with the Hindu community in 2013. It was no less then a Union minister in the Congress-led UPA government, Sushil Kumar Shinde, who derogatorily and demeaningly talked about Hindu terrorism,” he said.

Earlier, Kharge had also hit out at Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat over his remarks on the condition of minorities in Bangladesh, with party president Mallikarjun Kharge accused him of supporting a party “which wants disunity in the country.”

Kharge said, “You (Bhagwat) are the one who supports the party (BJP) which wants disunity in the country. It starts with changing the Constitution, ending reservation, and then speaking different things about Muslims.”

JAMMU: At just 29 years old, Shagun Parihar made history as the youngest winner of the 2024 J&K assembly elections. But her victory in Kishtwar, a district often marred by militancy, is more than just a political triumph — it is deeply personal.
Shagun’s candidacy is poignant, rooted in personal tragedy. Hizbul Mujahideen terrorists gunned down her father and BJP functionary Ajit Parihar and her uncle Anil Parihar near their home before the panchayat elections on Nov 1, 2018.
In a heartfelt speech Tuesday, she emphasised the heavy toll that years of conflict have taken on her community. “We have lost a large number of our soldiers. I have lost my father, and some have lost their brothers and sons. My first effort will be to ensure that every child here has the shadow of a father over his head, that there is peace and prosperity in the area. My efforts will be to bring happiness to every home.”
Initially focused on her academic pursuits — she is currently pursuing a PhD —Shagun had no intentions of joining politics. Yet, her family legacy, combined with a sense of duty to her community, led her to step into the political arena.
Shagun is one of just three women to have won in these elections. But her victory was no easy feat. She triumphed over Sajjad Ahmed Kichloo, a former minister and a prominent figure from NC and Firdous Ahmed Tak from PDP. In a tightly contested race, she secured 29,053 votes, defeating Kichloo by a slim margin of just 521 votes.
By fielding Shagun, BJP made a strategic move to broaden its appeal in Kishtwar’s diverse religious landscape. With a large Muslim population and a smaller Hindu community, the district has long been a stronghold for NC, which had won the seat five times. BJP had first claimed the constituency in 2014, when Sunil Sharma won, but this latest win by Shagun has a deeper resonance for the people of Kishtwar.
During the campaign, PM Narendra Modi acknowledged the gravity of Shagun’s personal history. Referring to her slain father and uncle, he said: “She is not just our candidate; she is the living example of BJP’s resolve to finish off terrorism.”
As Shagun begins her new role, her focus remains clear: the safety, security, and prosperity of her community. “This victory is not just mine. It belongs to the people of Kishtwar,” she said.

Editor’s Note: Dean Obeidallah, a former attorney, is the host of SiriusXM radio’s daily program “The Dean Obeidallah Show.” Follow him @DeanObeidallah@masto.ai. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN.

CNN
 — 

Last year, GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia spoke at a white nationalist event organized by Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes that caused Republican leaders to denounce her.

Last week, Greene’s Twitter account was temporarily suspended by the Elon Musk-headed platform over a tweet with a graphic referring to a “Trans Day of Vengeance,” as she denounced a planned transgender rights rally.

And come Tuesday, Greene has announced plans to protest in New York City when former President Donald Trump is expected to be arraigned on an indictment of more than 30 counts, calling the proceedings against him an “unconstitutional WITCH HUNT!”

But on Sunday, Greene was featured on CBS’ “60 Minutes” in an interview the long-running show promoted on Twitter with the tease: “Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, nicknamed MTG, isn’t afraid to share her opinions, no matter how intense and in-your-face they are. She sits down with Lesley Stahl this Sunday on 60 Minutes.” The images attached to this tweet by “60 Minutes” include Greene and Stahl walking through the US Capitol, taking a stroll outside and Greene showing Stahl something on her phone.

In the segment that aired Sunday night, Stahl noted the congresswoman had moved from the fringe to the GOP’s front row in two years despite a “sharp tongue” and “some pretty radical views” as well as “over the top” comments such as “the Democrats are a party of pedophiles.” Stahl also referred to video of Greene chasing a Parkland, Florida, school shooting survivor, still maintaining that the 2020 election was stolen and failing to criticize Trump over spending. (The interview was conducted before news of his indictment.)

But Stahl didn’t mention Greene spoke at a white nationalist event a year ago while a member of Congress or her extreme anti-Muslim views and her defense of January 6 rioters.

Criticism of CBS for amplifying Greene has been swift and well-deserved even before the program aired. Former GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois tweeted beforehand: “Wow. Insane that 60 min would do this.” (Kinzinger is a CNN senior political commentator.)

Journalist Molly Jong-Fast also slammed “60 Minutes” with the tweet: “Attention is currency and 60 minutes is spending its currency on the Jewish space lasers woman.” (Jong-Fast was apparently referring to Greene’s past claim that a massive California wildfire was started by “a laser” beamed from space controlled by a prominent Jewish banking family.)

David Hogg, who survived the 2018 horrific school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland and has since become an activist against gun violence, responded, “I look forward to your questions about why she thinks school shootings are fake and why she’s supported QAnon.”

Greene amplified the conspiracy theory — two years before being elected to Congress — that the Parkland shooting that took 17 lives was staged. And in 2019, Greene appeared on video confronting Hogg outside the Capitol when he was championing laws to save lives from gun violence, screaming that the then-teenager was a “coward.” She also called Hogg “#littleHitler” on social media.

Greene’s own tweet promoting Sunday’s segment was not filled with her typical smears of “fake news” when she doesn’t like the coverage. Rather, Greene urged people to tune in as she praised “60 Minutes” host Stahl (and misspelled her first name): “It was an honor to spend a few days with the legendary icon Leslie Stahl and talented crew @60Minutes.” Greene added, “Leslie is a trailblazer for women in journalism. And while we may disagree on some issues, I respect her greatly.”

Now, it is true that “60 Minutes” over its 50-plus-year history has featured what the show has dubbed “controversial” guests. These include a 2000 interview with Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, whose 1995 terrorist attack left 168 dead, including 19 children. And the show did a 1979 interview with Iran’s Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Perhaps “60 Minutes” views Greene — who has repeatedly downplayed and even defended the January 6, 2021, attack plus called for the GOP to become the party of “Christian nationalism” — in the vein of its long list of controversial guests. (CBS had not responded to a request from CNN for comment at time of publishing.)

However, the choice of Greene as a guest instantly recalls the comments of then-CBS CEO Les Moonves during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign when he admitted that Trump’s candidacy “may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.” Moonves added, “The money’s rolling in and this is fun. … (T)his is going to be a very good year for us,” concluding, “Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”

Moonves may be gone from CBS, but it appears his mindset continues at “60 Minutes.” And that may be good for “60 Minutes,” but it’s definitely not good for America.

A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.

New York
CNN
 — 

Americans have grown used to corporate executives treading the well-worn paths of the Northeast corridor to convene alongside elected officials in Washington, DC, and discuss geopolitics, policy and all that’s in-between.

In 2017, major CEOs from across the country came together to oppose North Carolina’s transgender bathroom law. In 2019, they called abortion bans “bad for business.”

After the deadly attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, many of corporate America’s biggest names denounced the rioters and pledged to halt their political giving.

Recently, more than 1,000 companies promised to voluntarily curtail their operations in Russia in protest of Moscow’s war on Ukraine.

Dick’s Sporting Goods stopped selling semi-automatic, assault-style rifles at stores and Citigroup put new restrictions on gun sales by business customers after the mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida, in 2018.

A year later, after mass shootings at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, and a nightclub in Dayton, Ohio, Walmart ended handgun ammunition sales.

Corporate leadership has long been vocal on the issue of gun control – in 2019 and again this past summer nearly 150 major companies – including Lululemon, Lyft, Bain Capital, Bloomberg LP, Permanente Medical Group and Unilever – called gun violence a “public health crisis” and demanded that the US Senate pass legislation to address it.

That’s why corporate America’s silence in the wake of the latest mass shooting at a school in Nashville is so jarring. The United States has come to rely on the increasing power of large corporations as political advocates.

But Yale professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a vocal advocate of corporate social responsibility who has a direct line to major CEOs around the globe, said that top executives are forlorn. Their previous efforts haven’t done much to push the needle on gun control legislation and without more backing, they don’t know what else they can do at the moment, he said.

Before the Bell spoke with Sonnenfeld, who runs Yale School of Management’s Chief Executive Leadership Institute, a nonprofit educational and research institute focused on CEO leadership and corporate governance.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Before the Bell: CEOs have been quiet about gun reform since the latest mass school shooting in Nashville, have you heard anything about plans to speak out?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld: Where is everybody else? Where is all of civil society? CEOs are just one group of people and it’s like we’re turning to them to be our saviors on every topic. They’ve joined causes with valor and nobility but they can’t just be taking cause after cause as if there’s nobody else in society. The social change that happened in the 1960s wasn’t being led primarily by CEOs. Social changes really happened when we saw the interfaith activity of clergy locking arms and canvassing legislators. We saw campuses alive and aroused. Where’s all the student activism?

The CEOs are still the most active even if they’re less active than they were six months ago. They’re not there as hired hands of shareholders to fill the role of politicians and civic leaders. They’re there to join that chorus, but they don’t want to be the only one singing.

So is this what you’re hearing from top CEOs? Have they gotten tired of advocating?

I just got off of a CEO call on voting rights and this morning we had a forum on sustainability – CEOs are still the most active on these fronts. It’s the same thing on immigration reform. If a CEO was working an 18 hour day on a 12 day week, they still couldn’t address all of the issues that need addressing.

The nation’s CEOs are waiting for everybody else to join them. They don’t need to restate something they’ve already stated. They’ve jumped in the pool, where’s everybody else?

So what do you think has led to this complacency amongst Americans and the growing reliance on CEOs to advocate on our behalf?

They’ve taken a very strong stance and they’ve gone out further than the general public. They are where the general public is on surveys, but they’re not where the general public is on action in the streets. So we’re ready for others to now do something. Enough already on saying ‘what are the CEOs doing?’ Social capital is as valuable as financial capital. CEOs understand that in their soul, they want there to be social capital. They want there to be public trust, but they need the rest of civil society to join them. And that’s their frustration.

It sounds like CEOs are frustrated?

Yeah, they’re frustrated.

But don’t these CEOs hold the purse strings in terms of donating to powerful politicians?

You would think that, but since the 2020 elections much less of campaign contributions have come from big business. Since the 2021 run on the Capitol, a lot of businesses either had an official moratorium or they’ve given mere pennies to politicians. The common impression on the street that CEOs are controlling campaign purses strings is 100% wrong.

By CNN’s Chris Isidore

Tesla reported. a modest 4% rise in sales in the first quarter compared to the final three months of last year, despite a series of price cuts on its lower priced vehicles and talk by CEO Elon Musk about strong demand at those lower prices.

The first quarter also marked the fourth straight quarter that Tesla has produced more vehicles than it has delivered to customers. Some of that may be due to the ramp up in production at two new factories, one in Texas, the other in Germany, which opened last spring, and a lag between that increased production and sales.

Tesla said there was an increase in the number of its more expensive models, the Model S and Model X, in transit to Europe, the Middle East and Africa, as well as to the Asia Pacific region.

But it does mean that over the last 12 months Tesla has produced 78,000 more cars than it has sold, suggesting that talk of strong demand by Tesla executives may not be backed up by the numbers.

“Early this year, we had a price adjustment. After that, we actually generated a huge demand, more than we can produce, really,” said Tom Zhu, Tesla’s executive in charge of global production and sales. “And as Elon said, as long as you offer a product with value at affordable price, you don’t have to worry about demand.”