Congress Undemocratic Ideology - 3

[Guest]

Good series on Moron Singh greatest achievements.

Failed PM - MMS

[acharya]

http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/may07/230507.htm

[Guest]

Subramaniam Swamy Backs Sonia Libel Defendants

[ramana]

Can be x-posted in a lot of threads. But this one is the most appropriate.

FYI.
Pioneer, 30 June 2008-Op-Ed:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shutting out the truth

A Surya Prakash

In this age of transparency, accountability and right to information, the Government has surely touched a 'RAW' nerve by prohibiting officials in intelligence and security agencies from writing their memoirs. Following a slew of books in recent years from such officials which contain damning information about the way these agencies are run, the Government has responded by prosecuting one of the authors and has now issued an order forbidding sleuths from penning their memoirs. Unfortunately, these governmental moves come at a time when civil society is getting ready to give the anachronistic Official Secrets Act a decent burial. Instead of going with the times, the Government is injecting new life into the OSA's decrepit provisions and is also finding new ways to come down on whistle blowers who are doing our democracy proud.

The ban comes after the Government decided to proceed against Maj Gen VK Singh, a former Joint Secretary in the Research & Analysis Wing, who authored the controversial book, India's External Intelligence -- Secrets of Research & Analysis Wing under the OSA. Looking at the intimidatory tactics employed by Government, one wonders whether this is the same Government that bought the Right to Information Act into being?

Also, is this the Government that appointed the second Administrative Reforms Commission? After a comprehensive review of the RTI Act, this Commission, headed by Mr Veerappa Moily, declared that the time had come for the Government to move "from the prevailing culture of secrecy to a new culture of openness". As regards the Official Secrets Act, it said that this law had "illiberal and draconian provisions" and that it was an anachronism in its present form.

<b>The ban has been imposed on officials working in Government agencies that are placed outside the purview of the RTI Act. Section 24 of this Act says that this law will not apply to organisations dealing with intelligence gathering and security which are listed in Schedule II of the Act. Among the 18 organisations listed here are the Research & Analysis Wing, the Intelligence Bureau and paramilitary organisations.</b>

The Armed Forces and the Central Bureau of Investigation do not find mention in this schedule. But, given the level of discomfort within Government to this new fad among bureaucrats and sleuths, it may find ways to arm twist others as well including senior bureaucrats.

<b>The gag order is unfortunate because it is only in recent times that citizens working for the Government had begun to breathe the fresh air of freedom. </b>Here is a sample of what we would have been denied if the Government had imposed this gag order some years ago: Inside IB and RAW -- The Rolling Stone That Gathered Moss by K Sankaran Nair, former chief of RAW; The Kaoboys of R& AW -- Down Memory Lane by BRaman, former head of Counter-Terror Division of RAW who retired as Additional Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat; Maj Gen VK Singh's India's External Intelligence -- Secrets of RAW and Open Secrets -- India's Intelligence Unveiled my Maloy Krishna Dhar, former Joint Director, Intelligence Bureau.

<b>Mr Sankaran Nair,</b> who was a trusted lieutenant of the Nehru-Gandhis, talks of how Sanjay Gandhi got his appointment as Director of IB cancelled on the eve of the imposition of Emergency because he refused to subject himself to an 'interview' by the Prime Minister's son before he was given the letter of appointment. He also talks of how he carried a cheque for $ 6 million and credited the same to a numbered account in a Swiss Bank. This sum was supposedly a kickback to some persons close to the Shah of Iran who had organised a $ 250 million loan from Iran to India in 1974 to enable the latter to tide over a foreign exchange crisis.

Both <b>Mr Raman and Maj Gen VK Singh </b>discuss the working of RAW in their books and make invaluable suggestions in regard to periodic audit of the agency's work. Apart from highlighting "glaring anomalies" in procurement of equipment, Maj Gen Singh <b>talks about ego clashes among officers, lack of leadership and accountability</b>. He also discusses the <b>ease with which foreign intelligence agencies planted moles in RAW</b>. Mr Raman says there is <b>need for "limited parliamentary monitoring" of the performance of espionage agencies</b>.

<b>Mr Dhar </b>opens a can of worms when he talks about the manner in which <b>Mrs Indira Gandhi deployed the IB for personal and political purposes</b>. Though <b>Congress Prime Ministers have traditionally used the IB as if it were part of a jaagir that comes with office,</b> Mr Dhar's revelations are truly shocking. He speaks of how <b>Mrs Gandhi us</b>ed <b>the agency</b>, without any qualms, <b>for both private and political purposes </b>like spying on her daughter-in-law Maneka Gandhi and her mother Amteshwar Anand.

Apart from these books, we also have A Cabinet Secretary Looks Back by Mr BG Deshmukh, former Cabinet Secretary, and Who owns the CBI -- The Naked Truth by Mr BR Lal, former Joint Director, CBI. Though the gag order does not apply to officials like Cabinet Secretaries or those working in agencies like the CBI which are not listed in Schedule II of the RTI Act, there is every danger of the political establishment extending it to other areas of Government as well.

<b>Mr Deshmukh</b>, for example, talks of how <b>after 1980, the Congress switched from domestic to foreign sources for collecting party funds and much of this came by way of commissions given by foreign companies on Indian deals. He also says that he was aware that "the Prime Minister's house (of Rajiv Gandhi) had access to funds from abroad". </b>Even more disturbing is his account of how <b>an unknown, unqualified Italian "consultant" was brought in by Rajiv Gandhi to "train" the Special Protection Group</b>, much against the advice of top officials. This Italian threw his weight around and misbehaved with senior SPG officers.

The book carries a graphic account of how the <b>then Director of RAW was asked to carry suitcases full of Italian currency to Rome to personally hand over the "consultation fee" to this so-called expert, who Mr Deshmukh realised was Mr Gandhi's "in-law". </b>Coming as it does from the country's top bureaucrat, these inputs are invaluable for those who value democracy.

People like Mr Deshmukh and Mr Sankaran and the others mentioned in this article believe that it is in the public interest to place these truths in the public domain. Should we allow a small bunch of insecure or corrupt politicians and bureaucrats to stifle these voices simply because they are uncomfortable with the truth?

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

A common theme in all the bolded parts is the systematic issues and political maluse that are being sought to be muzzled. Its not National security issues but problems due to maluse which have invited this gag order.

[acharya]

The Moving Finger Writes

UPA decline. Faster than expected
By M.V. Kamath
<b>
The Congress has no clear-cut ideology or policy and is singularly bereft of ideas. No vision for the future, in fact. And where there is no vision, political parties, like people, perish. For sixty years since Independence, Congress played with secularism and sought to purchase the Muslim vote by blandly pandering to Muslim communalism.
</b>
On June 1, 2008 there appeared a full page advertisement in many dailies in stunning colour. Within 30 days, the advertisement said, 4,30,00,000 farmers will get debt waiver or debt relief for over Rs 71,000 crore. The advertisement issued by none other then the Ministry of Finance further said that “small and marginal farmers (cultivating upto 5 acres of land) and other farmers (cultivating more than 5 acres) will be entitled to relief in accordance with the Scheme announced by the Central Government”.

All that they had to do was to go to the branch of the bank that gave them the loan. If their name was in the list of beneficiaries, they would be entitled to relief. Evidently, the Congress Party is getting into high gear to fight the coming general elections which, considering the Congress-Left clash over the Nuclear Deal, could be well ahead of the scheduled date in May 2009. The loan for farmers was originally announced by the Finance Ministry while the annual budget was being laid down, in Parliament. The Assembly elections in Karnataka since then must have gravely shocked the Congress. It may be remembered that the loan waiver was included in the budget practically at the last minute, on the urgent advice of Sonia Gandhi.

The question uppermost in many minds these days is: Will the loan waiver really do much for the Congress to win back the vote of the farmers? Many doubt it. The argument is that, in the first place, the loan waiver has come a little too late. Upward of 40,000 farmers have committed suicide in the decade between 1997 and 2007. And just in Vidharbha, 287 farmers have taken their lives in the first quarter of 2008, despite the governments’ announcement of the loan waiver. What else could there be to damn the Congress and the UPA? A recent media report specifically pointed out that in the past three years, foodgrains worth Rs 31,500 crore had been siphoned off the Public Distribution System (PDS) which, in plain words, meant that people living below the poverty line had been cheated of 53 per cent of the wheat and 39 per cent of the rice that the state had procured for them. The PDS had, for all practical purpose, become a state-sponsored largesse for blackmarketeers, including corrupt babus, ration shop owners and a set of middle men. Are the poor and the deprived going to take this lightly?

On March 31, 2008, a nation-wide poll conducted by a credible agency, the TSI-ICMR-C noted that if elections were then held, the nation would be in for another fragmented mandate, while another poll commissioned by the Congress itself on a confidential basis showed that were elections held at that point in time, it would win between 90 to 120 Lok Sabha seats, while the BJP may fare a little better by winning between 130 to 170 seats. Will the economic scene change so positively between now and, say, November, to give the Congress an edge over the BJP? According to the TSI-ICMR-C poll, not the Leftist parties but The Bahujan Samaj Party will become the King Maker. If the Congress opts to fall at Mayavati’s feet to stay in power, it will be a case of jumping from the frying pan to the fire.

Presently, it is seeking to make peace with the most unprincipled of all parties, the Janata Dal(S). In these last four years it has been living on the goodwill of the Leftists who have treated it cruelly and shabbily. With the Congress-Left break-up, who will benefit? Evidently the Congress has no principles worth talking about. And associating itself with the JD(S) is bound to further decrease its credibility with the voter. Sleeping with one’s enemy is not a wise way to spend an electoral night. What are the factors that may, in the end, decide Congress destiny? Inflation, for one. What is the guarantee that it will not rise to two figures, say, by November? Won’t it hurt Congress badly? Then there is the issue of lack of leadership. Poor Dr Manmohan Singh. If rumors afloat have any truth, he has been plainly told by Sonia Gandhi that if elected to power, the party will not give him a second term as Prime Minister. Then who will the Congress present as its candidate to that chair? Rahul Gandhi?

At electioneering, he failed to make the grade both in Gujarat and Karnataka. As one columnist noted, he looked less like a political scion than a goofy NRI. And if the Congress seeks to come to power by hook or by crook, will Mayavati be happy being an innocent by-stander? For all one knows, she may herself wish to be a contender to the Prime Ministerial gaddi. And that will be the end of Sonia Gandhi’s political hegemony. All this, of course, presuming that the BJP will not astonish all pollsters by getting voted in by a majority, especially in the context of the Congress-Left rift. That is perfectly possible, considering the BJP’s known record for the last twelve months. As one newspaper put it smartly, grit and tenacity are encrypted in the BJP’s DNA. It is on a winning streak in both state assembly and by-elections and it has transformed itself from a bitterly divided house to a party united by a common mission. As one political commentator noted recently, a miracle alone can save Sonia. Miracles, alas! are rare these days.

The recently announced pay hike hasn’t satisfied many segments of society either, and that is another issue Congress has to face. The sad truth is that, as Lord Meghnad Desai recently put it, the Congress has no clear-cut ideology or policy and is singularly bereft of ideas. No vision for the future, in fact. And where there is no vision, political parties, like people, perish. For sixty years since Independence, Congress played with secularism and sought to purchase the Muslim vote by blandly pandering to Muslim communalism. The Muslims have now learnt their lesson. They are now leaning on Mayavati, who is giving them their self-respect. They don’t want to be treated as hostages to mullahs. They want to retrieve their self-respect by declining Congress patronage and be on their own. Where Muslims and dalits are concerned, Congress is totally at sea.
<b>
For all one knows, the Congress, presently is on its last legs. One can foresee its demise because it has almost become inevitable, pre-ordained. For everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under the sun. That’s what the Bible says and Sonia Gandhi, no doubt, has read it. </b>In the years immediately following independence and for a couple of decades afterward, the party held the Indian heart; now the purse is holding the party which is a sure sign of decadence—and ultimate death. And with the party’s loss, it will be time for Sonia to take vanavas and for dynasticism to be given a decent burial.

[acharya]

How the Congress mismanaged the N-deal
Aditi Phadnis

July 02, 2008

The attacks on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [Images] have started. One cabinet minister has said people elected from the Rajya Sabha should not be the ones to decide India's fate. Another minister has said that the Congress is looking to its president to set the priorities right -- the decision to go for elections should be taken by the party, not by the government.

Congress President and United Progressive Alliance Chairperson Sonia Gandhi [Images] is saying nothing. Last week a delegation from Madhya Pradesh met her to tell her that if elections were to be held, the assembly elections should be delinked from the general elections. If the two were held together, the Congress would be wiped out. "Aisa hai?" (is that so) she asked with seemingly gentle incredulity.

The fact is, the disarray in the managerial ranks of the Congress Party is out in the open for the second time in a year. First the presidential elections and now this.

The story tells itself if you view the Congress-Left relationship as an M&A gone wrong. When the Left parties decided to support the Congress, they did so because they wanted to keep the political marketplace free of the tainting influence of the Bharatiya Janata Party. The family that defines a common enemy stays together. So far, so good. But below the surface, there was also an attempt to suborn the other: elements in the Congress believed they could capitalise on the vastly superior secular credentials of the Left; the Left thought it could radicalise the Congress and claim the credit for it.

Both processes occurred in the parallel. Those in the Congress who were drawn into the honeypot of Left support became the strongest supporters of the Left within the Congress. The logic was: if we have to continue to fight against the BJP, we need a relationship with the Left because not just now, later too, we will need Left support to form a coalition. The days of single-party governments are gone.

Those in the Left parties keen to see a common front against the BJP prosper and flourish with some crumbs falling their way also looked the other way when ideological compromises were made. So when Sonia Gandhi went to Baharampur, West Bengal and said: "I am with the people of Nandigram [Images] who faced sorrow and hardship, especially with the women, children and farmers" and slammed the Left Front government over the law and order situation, the Left parties just ignored the jibe. That the UPA government was undertaking no land reform, was not the subject of popular strikes and agitations. It was only a subject for editorial writers at People's Democracy.

All these calculations didn't really affect the vast central stream in both groups that was content to hear views from the Left and right but refused to be swept off its feet by either.

This is where coalition management went wrong. It is the job of middle management to do Swot analyses, to anticipate difficulties. Shouldn't someone in the Congress have been talking to the Samajwadi Party in the full knowledge that the Left might have to pull out one day? Shouldn't efforts have been made to win over disgruntled allies of the BJP including Nitish Kumar? Could the Congress have prevented the deterioration of relations with the Telangana Rashtra Samiti to the point where they had to leave the UPA?

The straightforward fact is the Congress party is pretty much wasting its time setting such store by allies like the RJD and the DMK. In the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections --whether they are held early or on schedule -- Lalu Prasad is unlikely to get seats above single digit. With the DMK's electoral alliance all but collapsing, new actors -- literally and metaphorically -- are certain to emerge on the scene in Tamil Nadu politics, rendering the DMK politically irrelevant, at least temporarily. So a section in the Congress is citing pressure from allies to put off elections and dump the nuclear deal; but these are allies which are going to have zero or negligible value when the next election comes around.

So what does that tell us about Sonia Gandhi's leadership of the Congress? The presidential election was date-bound. It wasn't as if her party was unprepared for it. The Congress is going blue in the face claiming Pratibha Patil [Images] was their candidate all along, they just didn't want to show their hand. But frankly, no one believes this and sees that election as the biggest management failure of the Congress. Similarly, the current mess, where Pranab Mukherjee and A K Antony are running breathlessly from meeting to meeting -- with the Left, with the Prime Minister, with the Congress President -- and trying to cobble up strategic allies at the last minute to save the government and the nuclear deal is nothing but another management failure.

It is now clear that Sonia Gandhi is not the ruthless, tough Congress leader Indira Gandhi [Images] was. If she had been, she would have sacked then Punjab chief minister Amarinder Singh a long time ago, kept other Congress chief ministers on tenterhooks and evaluated their performance through independent agencies. There is much that she would have learnt. She might also have been wiser in her choice of Governors -- Buta Singh embarrassed the government but there are many others like him around, only less obvious.

Lalu Prasad paid great tributes to her respect for democracy. But the way Congress ministers are telling it, the whole party is against the nuclear deal -- barring the prime minister and Sonia Gandhi. So what we're seeing is not democracy at all, they say. The question is: what does Sonia Gandhi have to say about it all?

[acharya]

Can you Send MMS Now?
<b>
CHINA :</b> Can you Send MMS from your Mobile Mr. Bush?
<b>
BUSH :</b> I don't need a Mobile to send MMS, I can send MMS anywhere -> to Japan for discussion and call 123 to US before my term completes ??

<b>CHINA :</b> That's not RIGHT Bush, We have LEFT in India to STOP that Happen

<b>BUSH :</b> Ha Ha Ha Ha, You know why the Crude Price is Rising ... ?, leave it,, you know reason why Sun is Rising....?, dont' worry, answer is the middle two words in my name "US" [BUSH], so then why not sending MMS without a Mobile my friendly foe ??
<b>
CHINA: </b>Uncle Sam u r so clever, u can even send an MMS to the whole of India fooling them "India is Rising" and get ur FBI Agent back to Power in the coming elections <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->)

[acharya]

How do you rate the Congress party's handling of this issue? Has the Congress played its hand well?

Yes, the Congress has shown that no matter its decline as a national party, the grand old dame hasn't lost its touch in manipulative politics. The high water mark was the 'consensus' wrung out of reluctant protagonists to take the file to the IAEA. The plea -- then as now -- was that our prime minister must be given an exit route and a face-saving formula must be found so as to freeze the deal.
<b>
The creation of the United Progressive Alliance-Left committee was a shrewd move. It ensured that all criticism of the deal got confined within the four walls of the committee. The public debate became a one-sided affair. In turn, this enabled the government to let loose a propaganda war. Go the archives of our newspapers; the establishment propagandists had a field day in recent months, they saw a Red Star over the Indian horizon; they screamed that critics of the nuclear deal are Chinese agents. They called them anti-national.</b>

On balance, my feeling is that Congress is overreaching. The deal may please influential corporate houses. It may even help Congress get a slice of the middle class votes that would have been with the BJP. But in the ultimate analysis, all that may still not add up. The nuclear deal is not exactly going to set the Ganges on fire.

Too much elitism -- that is what makes prime minister's media managers speak in terms of his 'credibility' problem. The prime minister's 'credibility' ultimately lies in securing a renewed mandate for the party to rule. The remaining eight or nine months of stable governance and a programmatic approach in the run-up to the April 2009 elections -- that is what is needed. Instead, what do we see? The prime minister can have a pleasant meeting with George W Bush on the sidelines of the G-8. Doesn't it sound pathetic?

[acharya]

Are the supporters of Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh justified in claiming that he will lose face if the deal is dumped?

This is a ludicrous argument. Who is the prime minister in comparison with the nation? In a democracy, no political personality is indispensable. Second, an elected prime minister must be first and foremost answerable to the people. Third, I also think that if our prime minister's political credibility is indeed in some jeopardy today, that is more on account of the government's pursuit of neo-liberal economic policies. Our prime minister has a reputation as an economist. That reputation is in jeopardy today. His political legacy lies in leading the coalition government for the full term and, more important, in utilising the remaining period in office to do something to reorient the economic policies in directions that meet the interests of the common people, so that his party and its allies can hope to get a renewed mandate to govern the country.

[acharya]

If the Left had objections to the deal, why raise them now, and not in 2005 itself?

I think there is no great mystery here. The Left took the prime minister at his word. Do not forget that the prime minister admitted to shortfalls in the deal and assured Parliament that the government remained concerned. We do not know if those flaws have been duly addressed. The lack of transparency on the government's part in placing the IAEA draft agreement for public scrutiny leads one to believe that grey areas remain.

It is sheer sophistry on the part of the government to keep dodging from allowing the document to be discussed publicly. The IAEA is a world body and India is a full-fledged member. There is nothing sacrosanct about this draft. Why is the government hiding behind lame excuses?

[acharya]

<b>
Imperative of govt. to seek confidence vote: BJP</b>

New Delhi (PTI): Terming the newly found bonhomie between the SP and Congress as that of "convenience and opportunism", the BJP on Friday said it was imperative of the UPA government to seek a vote of confidence with political morality and integrity in the event of the Left parties withdrawing support to it.

"It is imperative of the government to seek the House's confidence if the Left withdraws its support," party spokesperson Ravi Shanker Prasad told reporters here today.

Asked if the party would persist with its demand if the Samajwadi Party renders support to the government, Prasad said, "the demand for seeking confidence is irrespective of any other parties supporting the government."

We would expect Manmohan Singh to seek the vote of confidence with political morality and integrity expected of the government, he said.

"BJP is deeply concerned over the political theatre of the absurd being played in Delhi designed to save the tottering UPA government wherein governance has become a serious casualty," he added.

"We are finding the worst kind of opportunistic politics being played. Some parties are trying to withdraw from the temporary parking lot known as the UNPA and switch over to the UPA," Prasad said.

This politics of convenience is taken to further absurd limits wherein, Samajwadi parties' declared opposition to dynastic politics is suddenly replaced by the alleged larger danger of the BJP and an apology is given for preventing Sonia Gandhi from becoming the Prime Minister in 1998, he said.

"This is political opportunism as its worst," he added.

[Capt M Kumar]

<!--emo&:felx--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/flex.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='flex.gif' /><!--endemo--> Time to press for confidence vote: Legal experts

Pioneer News Service | New Delhi

With the Left withdrawing support to the Congress-led UPA Government, legal experts believe it is time for the Opposition to bring a no-confidence motion against the Government as it is under no obligation to seek a trust vote.
[COLOR=blue]
"Confidence motion is moved in Parliament in case of newly formed Government. It is for the Opposition to do so and not the President," senior advocate and former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan said.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?m...t&counter_img=3

[Capt M Kumar]

SMS has many uses. In a politically charged atmosphere, such as the one that obtains in Delhi now, a wordsmith can use this tool to reach millions of people with his smart take on the events. Thus, an SMS presently doing the rounds says: “From Lal Salaam to Dalal Salaam, what a fall for Sonia Gandhi and Dr Manmohan Singh!”

It’s an apt commentary on the thoroughly opportunist manner in which the Congress president and the Prime Minister have attempted to save the Indo-US nuclear deal and also save their government. They might succeed, but at what cost — to the nation, to the Congress party and to the political culture in India?
http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/334813.html

[acharya]

http://www.desiprimeminister.com/2008/06/w...an-history.html


<img src='http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/2803/rajivsoniaqc4.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

http://www.desiprimeminister.com/2008/05...ardar.html

<img src='http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/6709/soniarajiv2gk8.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

[Guest]

<b>Centre still silent on SC query on foreigner holding govt post</b>
Author: Dhananjay Mahapatra
Publication: The Times of India
Date: July 15, 2008

More than a year ago, the Supreme Court had sought the Centre's response
to a constitutional question-whether a person not born in India could be
appointed to a public office-but the UPA government, given the query's
natural link to Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, is yet to put in its reply.

On April 16, 2007, the court, acting on a plea filed by NGO Rashtriya
Mukti Morcha (RMM), had asked if a person "who is not a citizen of India
within the meaning of Article 5 of the Constitution has the right to be
elected or appointed to any public office under the Constitution.'' On
Monday, the government did not want to commit whether it would file a
reply to the query, thus recording its stand on the issue that has a
direct bearing on Sonia. Additional solicitor gener al P P Malhotra said
the issue could be taken up for final hearing some time later and that
if the Centre felt it necessary, it would file a formal reply. <b>The "some
time later'' plea for final hearing indicated the government's anxiety
not to make it an issue for public debate at a time of political
realignments in the wake of the nuclear deal fallout.</b> A bench comprising
CJI K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam posted the matter for
hearing after eight weeks, which means there could be no debate in court
over the issue at least till the end of September.

[Guest]

<b>Lies, deceit and betrayal</b>
http://www.sanghparivar.org/lies-deceit-and-betrayal
*By M.D. Nalapat* (15 July 2008)

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Since 2004, "secularism" has been defined in Soniaspeak as a policy that in
effect discriminates against the majority community. Why should only the
places of worship of a single community be under the control of governments,
including those known to follow an exclusivist agenda?


Since he took office as the proxy of Sonia Gandhi more than four years ago,
Manmohan Singh has sought with zeal to carry out her agenda of rendering
India helpless to any economic challenge from the EU or a military one from
China. Even in her election campaigns, Sonia Gandhi conveyed the message
that the minorities were in danger of losing their lives and property. Just
as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney scared the US voter into giving them a
second term in office—by painting rival John Kerry as an individual
incapable of protecting them against terrorism—Sonia frightened the
minorities into supporting her hodgepodge of competing corporate interests
masquerading as political parties.

Manmohan Singh took four years to expose himself as simply window-dressing
for implementing the policies of Sonia Gandhi. Policies that have by now
ensured the near-emasculation of the Indian business community in its battle
against foreign competition.


An action that is seditious in the extreme is the attempted effort to bind
India to the NPT and CTBT after decades of struggle to develop domestic
alternatives. Manmohan Singh has long been against India's nuclear
expansion, including when he was Finance Minister (1991-96). Instead of
permitting the AEC to reprocess all the spent fuel at its disposal,
including at Tarapur, he has instead declined to source uranium from non-NSG
states and more vigorously develop the country's own uranium reserves. By
throwing the country at the mercy of states that for long have sought to
contain India, Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi are in fact going against the
vision of Indira Gandhi, who boldly went in for a programme of nuclear
self-reliance. What needs to be done is to increase efforts for procuring
uranium, fast-track the thorium programme, open up the nuclear and broader
defense sector to Indian corporates and reprocess spent fuel. The agreement
now sought to be entered into with the IAEA and the NSG ought to be replaced
with another one that protects the country's technology and future. Should
the US decline to agree to an equitable deal, India needs to sign a
bilateral agreement with Russia, a country that has once again demonstrated
its independence.


The country would find itself hard pressed to survive another term of the
Sonia team. They need to go. Because of their access to money power, the
Sonia-Manmohan duo is expecting to win its vote of confidence, thus giving
it a few more months to fulfill Sonia Gandhi's vision of an India helpless
before the EU and China. What the country needs is another general election,
as soon as possible. And to ensure that the country is spared a repeat of
the present, the NDA needs to go before the people and warn them that each
vote is needed to protect the country from the catastrophe to which it is
being led by the UPA. The next round could well decide the future of India.


In the UPA regime, one of the first steps was to open the floodgates for
hundreds of thousands from Pakistan and Bangladesh to come to India. Those
masterminding groups active in mayhem now no longer needed to sneak across
the border, protected by fire from Pakistan's army. They could, and did,
come in on regular visas. It is no surprise that jehadi nests have sprung up
precisely in those cities where such "tourists" collected: Jaipur,
Hyderabad, Lucknow and Mumbai. Since 2004, a powerful and largely home-grown
network of terrorist groups has been formed across the country, that is
building up its capabilities in order to strike at people and installations.
Of course, the benefit of doubt has always been given to Pakistan. Even
after the Kabul car-bomb, senior officials spoke off-the-record to
mediapersons denying the involvement of the ISI. The suggestion that this
misleading impression be put out came from a very high level within the UPA,
one that is intent on painting Pakistan as a "victim" rather than as the
epicentre of terrorism. It is only when Afghan authorities shamed these
pro-Pakistan propagandists within the UPA that they fell silent, but not
before several television outlets had run scrolls that "according to senior
government sources", the ISI was not involved in the blast.


Next came the unlocking of restraints on pro-Pakistan elements within
Kashmir, headed by Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, the politician who as Home
Minister was directly responsible for the actions that caused the 1989-1999
jehad in Kashmir. Today, with his vicious opposition to the leasing of land
to facilitate the Amarnath Yatra (in the face of his own numerous favours to
miscellaneous organisations, mostly pro-Pakistan), Sayeed is seeking to
ignite a second jehad in Kashmir. The first caused the deaths of more than
40,0000 lives. A repeat may result in the felling of more than 200,000. It
is because of the patronage given to him by Sonia Gandhi that the PDP leader
and his flock are openly seeking to convert Kashmir into a mono-religious
land, where only a single faith—that of the Wahabbis—will be allowed to
exist.


Rather than bow to such a grotesque demand, secular elements within the
state need to build a massive temple in the Kashmir Valley, as well as
churches and gurudwaras, to send home the message that India is a secular
country. By such an action, it will become clear to Wahabbi elements in
Kashmir, as well as the rest of the pro-Pakistan brigade, that their efforts
to destroy Kashmiriyat will not succeed. The building of different houses of
worship in the Kashmir valley ought to have been done earlier.
Unfortunately, even during the term in office of the NDA, there was a
cosseting of religious extremism in Kashmir ,with the result that the
degeneration of the secular ethos that has been witnessed since 1989
continued during 1998-2004 as well. Both Mufti Mohammad Sayeed as well as
his secular-phobic daughter was indulged in by the PMO during 1998-2004.
However, the license given to them to pursue their toxic agenda has sharply
accelerated under the UPA, which has allowed the government in Kashmir to
function as an agent of the Wahabbis, in defiance of the Constitution of
India.


What needs to be done is to reveal a complete list of the land grants made
by the PDP-Congress combine since it took office, so that the public can see
for themselves the nakedly extremist logic behind the well-funded agitation
against the lease of a small area of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board.
Governor N.N. Vohra has distinguished himself in the past for his adherence
to transparency, hence the request that he release records of land grants
made by the now-defeated government. The people have a right to know. Of
course, as has been witnessed by the secrecy with which the nuclear
negotiations are being conducted, Sonia Gandhi's team is allergic to sharing
information with the people of India, even information already made
available to external interests. The country is waiting to see if high
constitutional functionaries such as President Patil and Governor Vohra will
ensure through their behaviour that their allegiance is to the people of
India and not to the particular politician who placed them in their current
jobs. This columnist respects both, and trusts that they will show their
mettle in the period ahead.


From a security perspective, there is a strong case for containing—before
reducing—the Wahabbi influence over the Kashmir administration by creating a
separate Ladakh state and a Jammu state. These two zones have nothing in
common with Wahabbism, yet their ability to roll back the onrushing Wahabbi
tide is being constrained by the control that the Kashmir administration has
over them. The sooner Kashmir is trifurcated, the better for the people of
the entire state, as well as for the nation. Also, in view of the fact that
Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is a jehad factory, there needs to be a security
cordon between it and the rest of Kashmir. This would be in contrast to the
gaps in the existing firewall that have been deliberately created since
2004.


Particular attention has to be paid to West Bengal and Assam, as there are
more than ten million illegal Bangladeshi migrants residing in these two
states, several with unlawfully-obtained voting rights.


Since 2004, "secularism" has been defined in Soniaspeak as a policy that in
effect discriminates against the majority community. Why should only the
places of worship of a single community be under the control of governments,
including those known to follow an exclusivist agenda? Why should
institutions started by the majority community not be given the same
privileges as those started by others? In a secular state, all faiths get
equal treatment, unlike in India, where a particular faith has long been
singled out for discrimination against its adherents.

Just as the Sonia team has sought to exacerbate societal tensions, whether
those of community or caste, it has systematically worked to demolish the
economy. Interest rates have doubled, and are threatening to go up further.
The tax system has once again become punitive and authoritarian, with the
remedies available to the citizen drastically reduced. Growth-boosters such
as Special Economic Zones have practically been banned, while once again,
the Nehru policy of creating private monopolies is being followed. Yes,
politicians made money. The difference is that in the past, this was because
of taking decisions that created new enterprises and wealth. These days, the
bribes are being paid to perpetuate existing monopolies or create new ones,
just as was the case during 1950-80. As for the field of education, centres
of excellence are under government attack, and the potential for India to
emerge as the education hub of the globe is being squandered.


<i>*(The writer is Vice-Chair, Manipal Advanced Research Group, UNESCO Peace
Chair & Professor of Geopolitics, Manipal University.)*</i><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Capt M Kumar]

In the Westminster system, bipartisanship in legislative business is traditionally encouraged by the unpredictability of the backbenchers. The stringent anti-defection provisions passed by Parliament itself since 1985 have taken away the fear of the backbench — in fact, political parties have little leeway to open communication with individual members of other parties. It thus falls upon the leaderships of political parties to track overlaps between each other’s perceptions of the larger legislative good. No matter what happens on Tuesday, the Congress may well rue its missed opportunities.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/338191.html

[Guest]

<b>'The MIM has been given Rs 5,000 crore'</b>

July 20, 2008 | 16:48 IST

<i>Asaduddin Owaisi, a British-trained barrister, is the public face of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen. The son of party president Salahuddin Owaisi, he was elected to the Lok Sabha from Hyderabad, a Muslim-dominated constituency and MIM citadel. Owaisi, 35, has announced his support to the United Progressive Alliance government during the trust vote in the Lok Sabha. A decision that has surprised many, given the impression that Muslims are opposed to the India-US nuclear deal. Mohammad Siddique asked the young MP why he decided to support the UPA: </i>

<b>Why has the MIM decided to support the UPA government?</b>

For us the deal is not the immediate concern. Our top priority is to stop the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and L K Advani from coming to power as they pose an immediate threat to the secular polity of the country and to the life, identity and development of Muslims.

While voting tomorrow my immediate concern will be how to stop L K Advani from becoming the prime minister of this great nation as he is an accused in the Babri Masjid demolition criminal case. On the nuclear deal we have already conveyed our reservations and concerns to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi.

<b>How do you explain your decision to your support base when it is being said that Muslims are against the deal with the US?</b>

First, there is no basis for saying that Indian Muslims are against this deal. It is an international agreement and by trying to give a communal colour some parties are indulging in cynical manipulation of Muslims for their own political ambitions and desires.

M K Padhe of the CPI-M and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati are telling the people that Muslims are against it. I would like to question the CPI-M and Mayawati why don't you say that Hindus are for the deal, that Dalits are against it and whether the backwards were for or against the deal.

Why do you have to put a gun on my shoulder and fire? Why do you have to put me in the spot? The MIM believes this is a canard being spread that will lead to more hatred towards the Muslims. This will give a handle to the Sangh Parviar and help them in the electoral process.

We will tell the people we are trying to stop Advani and the BJP by voting in support of the UPA.

<b>But what is your stand on the deal?</b>

We have strong reservations about it and we believe it will have an impact on the foreign policy of the country. We also strongly condemn what the United States is doing in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. We are also concerned about the US's design on Iran. We have discussed all this with the prime minister.

He told me to quote him on this. He had told the US that the attack on Iraq was a monumental mistake and it will be unworthy of him as prime minister of this country if he compromises on foreign policy. He also assured me that India will press ahead with the Iran gas pipeline project. Whether or not the deal will impact foreign policy will become clearer when a testing time comes.

The prime minister has also told the US that military action against Iran is not a solution. He has also drawn the attention of the US to the fact that India has 5 million of its people in the Gulf who will be affected by any war in the region.

On the nuclear deal the crux of the issue is that we require power. There is no dispute as far as that is concerned. The biggest example I can give which all of us are facing is that we are suffering three hours of power cuts in Hyderabad, the state capital. It is five, six hours in the districts.

But for us the question is who the biggest evil is. For us it is L K Advani first, second is Prakash Karat and then comes (US President George W) Bush.

<b>Why Karat?</b>

History will never forgive the CPI-M and Prakash Karat for creating this political crisis in the country, which will only benefit the forces of Hindutva and weaken secularism. To me, the BJP and CPI-M are the two sides of the same coin.

I would like to ask the CPI-M if their love for Muslims is so much why did you kill Muslims in Nandigram? How is it that in your 33 years of rule in West Bengal where 28% Muslims reside, their share in government employment is only 2.8%.

This love for Muslims is not shown over there but when it comes to further their own political ambitions to hide their ideologies they make Muslims the Bali Ka Bakra (scapegoats).

Mayawati is also making similar noises linking the opposition to the deal to the Muslims.

If she was genuinely concerned about Muslim, why did her government and the Samajwadi Party government since 2001 not comply with the court order to club the two cases of the Babri Masjid demolition. If that was done, the case against Advani would have become much stronger.

There is a strong case against Advani, Uma Bharti and the entire top brass of the Sangh Parivar.

<b>So you feel it is odd that the nuclear deal is being linked to the Muslims?</b>

We strongly detest this entire business of dragging Muslims into the nuclear deal issue.

If so much importance is given to my likes and dislikes on an international agreement, a simple question arises. As a Muslim I would like to ask these parties who are using me to further their political ideologies and desires, why did you demolish the Babri Masjid? Was I asked? Was I taken into confidence before my families were butchered in Gujarat, where pregnant women's stomachs were slashed open and properties were looted?

Accusations are flying thick and fast that individual MPs are being lured by offering crores of rupees to support the UPA. What you have been offered?

<b>I am not so cheap to be sold for Rs 25 crore. The MIM has been given Rs 5,000 crore. I am not kidding. </b>The prime minister <b>has promised to look into our demand for the implementation of the Fatimi committee report on the Sachar committee findings. Under this four centres of the Aligarh Muslim University and Maulana Azad National Urdu university will be set up and it will be a great boon to uplift Muslims educationally. The committee has also made many other recommendations.</b>

<b>Finally, are you happy with what the UPA has done for the minorities during last four years?</b>

Yes. In its five years the NDA (National Democratic Alliance) had spent all of Rs 20 crore on only two schemes for Muslims in the country. The UPA on the other hand has doubled the minority welfare budget from Rs 500 crore to Rs 1,000 crore in the last one year, increased the Maulana Azad educational fund corpus from Rs 100 crore to Rs 250 crore in two years and in the 11th Plan the corpus is going to be increasede to Rs 750 crore.

The UPA created a national commission for minority education. For minority welfare the NDA government had only given Rs 200 crores in the entire 10th Plan whereas the UPA gave Rs 1,000 in 2008-09.

They repealed the draconian POTA under which hundreds of people were booked and many of them are still languishing in jails. The UPA government has given ex gratia to the victims of the pogrom in Gujarat and the Bhagalpur riots.



URL for this article:
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/jul/20inter1.htm

[ravish]

Just before the confidence vote, the Left parties suddenly raised the theory that the Muslims of India were opposed to the Nuclear Deal. How hollow was the claim, cmae out once the voting results were out. So far , no cross voting by the Muslim MPs of the Congress has been reported. We can now safely presume that the Muslims voted as per their parties wishes.It has been wrong on the part of the selfstyled leaders of Muslims in India to champion their cause ; without finding out what actually is the mood in the community.

[Guest]

Congress bought MPs what a shame and sham was voting?
That day was death of democracy in India.

SP Muslims switched side before election and joined BSP, inluding RS member of SP. Congress muslim were following SOnia's buddy deoband Mardani fatwa before election, where he asked them to support Queen.
All these were bought by Congress.

Somnath Chatterjee turned out to be greedy joker and Congress stooge. He want to resign after his trip to Malayasia. Crooks never miss any chance.