Forums

The Prime Minister has created a controversy by giving first right to Muslims on natonal resources. When people protested, PMO accused opposition and other interested groups of reading it wrongly. Now the controversy is being dismissed as a case of poor drafting compounded by a slip in delivery, resulting in an impression that he was speaking of a specific community rather than all deprived sections. Are ‘poor drafting’ and ‘slip in delivery’ expected from PM, who has a battery of speech writers and is considered one of the best speakers? It was a cleverly thought out performance to give a message to Muslims keeping UP elections in view. Even most of congress leaders view the reference to Muslims as quite clearly intended. A new low has been reached in minority appeasement by congress and the government.

<b>Runaway PM </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> 15 December 2006: What would you call it? Running away? In the middle of the Parliament session, prime minister Manmohan Singh takes off for Japan. The irony is he hasn't faced Parliament since renewed controversy broke out over the Indo-US nuclear deal. But he speaks about it, and related issues, to the Diet, the Japanese Parliament. Who is he PM of? India or Japan?
............
...........
In political terms, what does this mean? The PM is unable to face the opposition in Parliament on the nuclear deal. He cannot stand up to the consummate questioning of skilled and seasoned parliamentarians like Advani or Jaswant Singh or the insuperably brilliant Arun Shourie. So what does the PM do? Or what does his party chief do? She replaces him from the firing line with Pranab Mukherjee. Manmohan Singh flies to Japan. He addresses a Parliament which won't ask him questions. So judge for yourself if he is PM material. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->

Runaway PM. Yes MMS can be called a runaway PM. His going to Japan was really running way from India.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Setback for advocates of Muslims first </b>
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
Jobless rate among Hindus, Muslims almost equal: Survey
A sample survey carried out by the Centre has exploded the myth that far more Muslims were unemployed in India than the Hindus.

The survey said that the Worker Population Ratio (WPR) for the male in the age group of 15 and above in the educational level in urban India among the Hindus and Muslims was equal at 71 per cent followed by Christians at 64 per cent.

Outside the education parameter, in urban India the WPR among <b>the Hindus male was 56 per cent, barely three per cent more than the Muslims. The WPR among the Christian male was 51 per cent.</b>

The data released on Friday by the National Sample Survey Organisation under the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, for 2004-2005, would come a big setback for the advocates of more affirmative action for the Muslim community.

The survey also pointed out that the WPR for <b>Christian women (24 per cent) was much higher than that among Hindu (17 per cent) and Muslim women (12 per cent). </b>

The survey also said that the <b>unemployment rate in urban areas for Hindus and Muslims was the same at 4 per cent</b>. But in <b>rural areas, the unemployment rate was higher among the Christians at 4.4 per cent as compared to those among the Hindus at 1.1 per cent and the Muslims at 2.3 per cent.</b>

Interestingly, among the males in the rural areas, the l<b>iteracy rate for Hindus and Muslims was 68 and 63 per cent respectively. In case of urban males, the literacy rate for Hindus and Muslims was 89 and 77 per cent respectively</b>.

In urban areas, the proportion of
<b>Hindu </b>households depending on
'self-employment', regular wage/salary and casual labour were
36 per cent 43 per cent and 12 per cent respectively whereas the corresponding shares for the
<b>Muslims </b>were 49 per cent, 30 per cent and 14 per cent respectively and for the
<b>Christians </b>27 per cent and 47 per cent and 11 per cent respectively.

<b>Unfolding the truth</b>

Urban Worker population Ratio (WPR) for male among Hindus and Muslims is equal at 71 per cent

Urban WPR for Christian women (24 per cent) is much higher than that among Hindu (17 per cent) and Muslim women (12 per cent)

In rural areas, unemployment rate is higher among Christians at 4.4 per cent as compared to those among Hindus at 1.1 per cent and Muslims at 2.3 per cent
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Now Moron Singh should hang himself with shame, he is misguiding country and creating a division in society.

<!--emo&<_<--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dry.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='dry.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:green'>I thought MMS is the smartest PM who can boast of Foreign secy in form of Sonia but no, he keeps on coming out with paranoa off and on:

1st it was when Musharaff told Vajpayee that MMS did not want him to call on Vajpayee when Mush visited India on invitation of PM MMS.

And now full fledged paranoa that BJP is holding havans to wish MMS death as if his death changes political spectrum of nation.

We only hope that these are stray incidents of paranoid reactions of a man under stress and not the manifestations of Schizophrenia per se.</span></span>

Capt Manmohan Kumarji,
I have merged previous MMS wisdom. I think he had lost his mind. Gone crazy. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Now you know why I have started calling him Moron Singh, as we say in Agra Hindi - <i>Pagala gaya hai</i>.

Some comments from IE - enjoy it <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
This demand for Santa Banta joke,
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->•  <b>PM Statement</b>
  Dear Sirs,
Yes Manmohan Singh is the greatest PM for India. He is the greatest because today we have

1. Virtually entire cabinet full of Currupt fools.
2. PM has zero power and the Italian lady is the defacto leader.
3. PM needs the permission of the Italian lady even to go to loo.
4. If the BJP devided India on 2 groups ( Hindus and Muslims ) Manmohan has managed to increase these divisions to hudreds ( Hindus, Muslims, Brahmins, SC, ST etc)
5.Courts have no right to point out Govt mistakes, they are now subjects of Govt.
6. If any Congress Govt looses majority then the CM should be given indefinite time to manufacture that by hook or crook.( market economy)
7. All Govt schemes to have a salutation of one of the Gandhis and none other.
8. We do not care for any other party except my team members.
9. We can fight elections seperately , but post that support Congress and you will be rewarded.
10. If Congress says it is Day then even if it is Mid night twelve, it got to be day. So even if US says we will scrap this Nuclear deal if you test atomic weapon- they will not do it as I am saying thye will not.

These are the Great Ten Commandements.

Rgrds
Prem Kumar

<b>  Opn did Havan</b>
  The PM is not that old to be talking so senile; someone must have put these words in his mouth

Posted by: PIN, United States, 18-08-2007 at 1023 hours IST
 
<b>•  Mr.Manmohan singh</b>
  Dr.Singh,now, frieghteningly sounds like Smt.Indira Gandhi After JP started the Nava nirman movement which culminated in the "emergency'

Posted by: Krishnan, India, 18-08-2007 at 0913 hours IST

 
<b>•  AN IRONICAL JOKE !</b>
  Manmohan's statement qualifies for 'laughter challange'.But since it is coming from an eminant scholar,who happens to be a Sikh,it only shows why we have SANTA-BANTA jokes.But if he is serious then he should name the BJP leaders and those BJP leaders should be suitably punished.

Posted by: A.K.SHARMA, India, 18-08-2007 at 0859 hours IST

<b>Go and die</b>
  Who cares let out PM die so that we can get better PM

Posted by: pari123, India, 18-08-2007 at 0853 hours IST

 
•  <b>Opp did havan.....</b>
  I think he is completely ignorant of Havan's significance and relevance and there is no surprise at all as ""you are as the company you live in"?Havan is conducted for demolishing the poweful who can not be destroyed other wise and not for puppets?Dear Manmohan ask your self what is your status ?And to all others,Manmohan appears good because unlike most others he has no record of dishonesty in public life etc?How can he?It is not hard to find most amongst teachers as they by and large do not have any role or power which they can misuse to their advantage?So what is starange that he was never in any such scandle???And what makes people think that because he was a good teacher he is good overall?
It is entirely a different thing to be good teacher or doctor or lawyer but that does not automatically make you a good administrator,rather teachers have been found to be poorest of the administrators?Manmohan is just a stoog in the hands of Nehru g=family and it's goons and now so are the P and VP and any one can guess what can be the outcome?It is unfortunate for India????But perhaps Indians with centuries of slavery are used to it?????

Posted by: Naren, India, 18-08-2007 at 0845 hours IST

 
•  <b>Havan</b>
  One has to be silly to talk about things like havan in this age. PM is an educated person and when he talks about havan it is just about scoring political points. How low our politicians can get.

Posted by: Jitendra, Australia, 18-08-2007 at 0651 hours IST

 
<b>•  PM had lost his mind
  Manmohan Singh had found a novel idea to insult Hindus by saying that Havan had performed for his death.
PM had lost his mind.

Posted by: anjali gupta, Israel, 18-08-2007 at 0543 hours IST</b>

 
• <b> My view</b>
  Two words come to my mind to describe this PM. Pathetic and a liar. He never gave respect to the opposition leaders since he was sworn. He acts like his loyalities are with party chief, not the nation. How can such a man be trsuted to conduct nuclear deals beneficial to India? He conducted the talks in total secrecy? Why is that? What was he hiding from the Indian public? There was no debate, no scrutiny by the national security establishment nor the parliament. Yet, the rogue media is trying to pump support for this deal. For me, Sonia is behind the whole deal to bind India from ever conducting nuclear tests and also award huge contracts for American firms in return for middlemen commission. Only the PM and Sonia are very much passionate about this deal. Why is that? I wish Indian public pay more attention to national security matters than Bollywood movies.

Posted by: Venkat, India, 18-08-2007 at 0510 hours IST

 
•  <b>Oppn did havans</b>
  I see the emotional comments made on PM's remarks. But keeping emotions aside, can't you see the truth behind George Fernades' statement. Why are the Commies opposing a deal, which is, for all practical purposes, highly beneficial to India? Because China does not like it. And if a commie ever lands in China, without opposing this deal, he would be shot for sure. Or even if they do not leave Indian shores, they will be poisoned, like the former KGB agent was poisoned in London.

By the way, PM Singh has surely been influenced by his commie friends in making such outrageous claims like havan for his death!

Posted by: PIN, United States, 18-08-2007 at 0335 hours IST
 
•<b>  How cheap is this PM that he disrespects the Hindu religion </b>

  Is he a Prime Minister? who whines like a helpless person not of a leader of billion people. A person lacking any character or morals who is a chamcha talks like this.

PM sounds like a irrational women whining. He cannot argue about fact but fashion.

On people did havans for his death is against the principles of Hinduism and an insult to Hindus.

The joker Pm who is chamcha has no one to defend him and resort to cheap political gimmicks as he is man who could not win election on his own.

Posted by: Sanjay, India, 18-08-2007 at 0256 hours IST
link
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<b>Who rules India? PM or CPM? </b>
Swapan Dasgupta
As the Middle Kingdom celebrates a remarkable foreign policy triumph achieved entirely by leveraging its hold on India's internal affairs, we should be asking one fundamental question: Who governs India? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh or CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat?

It's always hazardous to prophesise the course of Indian politics but the exultant body language of Messrs Karat, Yechuri and Bardhan last Thursday suggested that the Communists knew they had won their most famous victory since Non-Alignment mortgaged Indian foreign policy to the Soviet Union.

The scale of the Communist victory should not be minimised. First, regardless of all the brave talk of international diplomacy resuming in November, it is safe to surmise that time-servers in the Congress don't want the shadow of a snap poll looming over the UPA Government for the remainder of its tenure. They will ensure that the nuclear issue is not resurrected as long as the Communist threat persists. As far as they are concerned, the grandstanding is not worth jeopardising the remaining months in power at the Centre.

The Prime Minister's spin doctors have argued that a temporary postponement does not materially affect the negotiations at IAEA and with the NSG, but this is an optimism aimed purely at salvaging the week's headlines. Manmohan's pathetic isolation within his own party will become obvious regardless of Congress' acknowledgment of the merits of the nuke deal.

Second, the Congress will be naïve in believing that appeasement of the Left has secured peace and that subsequently good-cop Yechury will prevail over bad-cop Karat. Adept at boxing above its class, the August crisis has demonstrated to the Communists that it is possible to win the ideological game without spilling blood. It is now certain that the Left will now enlarge the battlelines to other spheres, viz economics, education and social policy. Incredible India should be ready to confront its most serious internal challenge.

Third, in taking on the threat of the Prime Minister to withdraw and be damned, the Left has shown that it is the more resolute player. Manmohan has not merely blinked, he has been forced to eat humble pie. Already regarded as weak, his belated attempt to come across as a decisive leader has come a cropper. Since failure is never a collective responsibility, the Prime Minister has cleared many obstacles in the path of his exit route. He looks set to go down in history as the leader who walked on snow and left no footprints.

Finally, the Left has not merely won a famous battle against "US imperialism", it has taken a giant leap towards shedding a baggage that it has been forced to carry for decades: The taint of being at odds with Indian nationalism and nationhood. This is a charge that has dogged the Communist parties right from their inception. Exorcising the movement of charges of extra-territoriality is, under the circumstances, a stupendous gain.

Curiously, the CPI(M) didn't have to lift a little finger to show that it is leading the charge to uphold Indian sovereignty against foreign encroachments. Its work was done by those who nominally sit in the Opposition benches in Parliament. The BJP's impression of reaffirming a me-too Leftism -- driven, it would seem, by the need to proclaim the infallibility of its spokesmen -- has unwittingly served as the most glowing testimonial to Communist nationalism.

The debate over the Indo-US nuclear agreement is not going to dominate the political discourse at the grassroots either now or in the future. The next General Election, whenever it is held, will be fought on bread and butter issues. However, the long-term effects of a thwarted agreement will haunt India. Future historians may come to view August 2007 as the moment the political class stalled India's leap into the big league. We may still get there but who will compensate for the lost time?

Still, magnanimity demands we shouldn't begrudge the victory celebrations in our eastern and western neighbourhood. They have shown that containing India is a remarkably low-cost option.

<!--emo&:blow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blow.gif' /><!--endemo--> everyone is criticizing the government. why don't you overthrow the government??? and bring in a new candidate who cares about development of nation. If the new candidate fails, overthrow him.

Why don't you take a example from Chile??? The people of Chile democratically elected a good candidate to run their country. As soon as the candidate was bribed by the US government, the people overthrew him.

There is a lot to learn from LATIN AMERICA. Please visit this website to see how latin america has moulded itself and that too BY THE PEOPLE.

www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13131.htm

WAKE UP... BETTER LATE THAN NEVER.

Posted by . @ 10/17/2007 2:01 AM

Enjoy comments - <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->MM Singh a lackey of the UK, and hence......
by veerar on 17 Oct 2007
MM Singh seems to be the man of the World Bbank(and definitely is a lackey of the UK),which is a front of the Trilateral commission.His selection of Ahuliwalia,of WB,for leading the Planning Commission, seems to confirm this. This is why a Constitutional Amendment barring people with foreign connections,by way of birth,marriage,education,teaching etc etc is mandatory.for National Security. MM Singh has come out as an untrustworthy person,anti-poor,anti-Hindu and pseudo-intellectual, from this episode(the so called,"Indo-US Nuclear Deal")and a threat to our nation,by his Autocracy.

Reply | Forword | Report Abuse Hapless PM
by abcxyz on 17 Oct 2007
It is the right time for our PM to resign immediately and gracefully.

Reply | Forword | Report Abuse Mouse Mohan Singh
by Uddharet on 17 Oct 2007
If you compare the UPA Government with a computer, Manmohan Singh is not even a keyboard -- he is just a mouse that is being clicked by you know who. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->  <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

Reply | Forword | Report Abuse wounded PM
by romesh.sharma on 17 Oct 2007
Well its true that Mr PM is wounded but was he ever healthy and stout?He got this job with artifical respiratory aid and crutches to hold himself straight.Such a responsible job of leading a great Nation like India was/is not for an economist and that he will prove a great failure was known right from the first day he was sworn.Sonia was refused by Prez and she wanted a weak and obsequious person.There couldn't be a better choice.Sonia who is illegitimate to hold any Govt or policy making office has shown the world how foolish and non-patriotic Indians are.That is another part of the story but onething they,thePM and Sonia Miano, do have in common and that is the both are very ingenous whenever it comes to finding excuses.Every move they make has nothing to do with the Nation's interests but to retain chair,atleast for one whole term.

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

From Rajiv's blog:
manmohan weakest PM? no, he's the worst

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Dr Hollow Cause </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Manmohan is economical with history
When in trouble, divert attention. It is the oldest trick in the politician's armoury and for an apparently non-political person, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has learnt it fairly quickly. Under fire for capitulating to the Left and all but abandoning the India-US nuclear deal, he has hit back by questioning the BJP's "moral authority". He has likened the Gujarat violence in 2002 to the Holocaust and reminded Mr LK Advani, the BJP's senior leader, of the "fiasco" at Agra in 2001, when talks with President Pervez Musharraf broke down. It is telling Mr Singh's use of the expression "Holocaust" pointedly referred to the riots that broke out across Gujarat on February 28, 2002. He was not referring to the incineration, a day earlier, of 58 innocent pilgrims, including little children, by an Islamist mob, but that is integral to a hypocrisy that one has come to associate with the UPA Government. If Mr Singh is so convinced of his logic, let him repeat the "Holocaust" remark at an election meeting in Gujarat. It is tempting for a political leader to cite precedents and past instances to make his point. For Mr Singh's party, this is a double-edged weapon. The Congress has ruled India simply so long that it is guilty of almost everything it accuses other parties of doing. The turbulence in Gujarat five years ago pales in comparison to what Congress goons did to countless Sikhs in the aftermath of Mrs Indira Gandhi's assassination in 1984. People had their homes and livelihoods looted and destroyed, many were killed or burnt alive; the scars still haunt "resettlement colonies" in the heart of the national capital. How did the then Congress president respond? He dismissed the pogrom, saying: "When a big tree falls, the earth shakes." To many people, it sounded like an explication of the "Final Solution"; to Mr Singh, however, it was anything but a "Holocaust".

The Agra summit was doubtless a failure. The NDA Government walked into it unprepared and without taking the professionals in the Ministry of External Affairs into confidence. It sought to reduce foreign policy to a few, short blockbuster moves. The mistakes were acknowledged by the leaders of the NDA Government almost immediately. Yet, consider how Mr Singh treated the nuclear deal negotiations with the United States. He walked into it without preparing the ground back home, without selling it to a domestic audience. He bypassed the professionals in the Ministry of External Affairs and converted the deal into a one or two-man show. He reduced the building of a long-term strategic partnership to a few, short melodramatic moves. In short, he repeated every mistake of the Agra "fiasco". Indeed, from the ceasefire in 1948, with a part of Kashmir, including the crucial Northern Areas, under Pakistani occupation, to the series of giveaways at the Shimla summit of 1972, the Congress has a long tradition of such strategic blunders. Today, by first hyping up and rolling back the nuclear deal, Mr Singh has done his country another disservice. He has muddied the waters for any future Government that may want to revive the deal. His Government has also, unnecessarily, sought to project the deal as the defining factor in the India-US equation. If after all this he can only blame the BJP, good luck to him.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>False eloquence does PM in </b>
Pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has offered himself for direct election only once: In 1999, when he was the Congress candidate for South Delhi. 
In normal circumstances, Manmohan should have won. South Delhi had a significant number of middle and upper-middle class voters who were direct beneficiaries of the economic liberalisation he initiated in 1991. Many of them, particularly the beautiful people, came out openly in his support. The jhuggi clusters were, in any case, Congress strongholds. Additionally, the constituency had a generous proportion of Sikh voters who should have been glad to see one of their own in the Lok Sabha.

<b>Then something unexpected happened in the final days of the campaign. At one of those dreary Press conferences every candidate hosts, Manmohan was asked a routine question about the Congress involvement in the 1984 riots that led to the killing of more than 1,000 Sikhs in the four days after the assassination of Indira Gandhi. He calmly replied that the RSS was responsible for the riots.

According to local politicians, this was the turning point. On Election Day, I recall some BJP leaders saying there was a heavy Sikh turnout in South Delhi. It implied the Manmohan card was working for the Congress. The results contained many surprises but none greater than Manmohan's resounding defeat. On scrutiny, it was found that the Congress lost most heavily in Sikh-dominated areas. Manmohan's disingenuous bid to turn black into white and falsify the past rebounded on him</b>.

The 1999 defeat should have driven home to the Prime Minister a simple fact: That it doesn't behove him to play with a cross bat. People have different expectations from politicians. Lalu Yadav can get away being perpetually non-serious; slippery ambiguity is associated with Atal Bihari Vajpayee; dynastic gaffes come naturally to Rahul Gandhi; and inanity and Jyoti Basu are inseparable. LK Advani and Prakash Karat are known for their measured pronouncements; they can't get away with loose talk. And Sonia Gandhi never makes an unscripted utterance since she proclaimed "We have 272" in the forecourt of Rashtrapati Bhavan in 1999.

Manmohan is a prisoner of his own reputation. He is perceived as scholarly, serious, upright and kindly -- a cut above the average grasping politician. These attributes have conferred on him both respectability and acceptability. His limitations -- malleable, spineless and too wooden -- are known. But balanced against his strengths he has somehow passed muster in the cruel world of politics. The nation has defined its expectations of the Prime Ministers.

What they don't expect from him is falsiloquence -- a tongue-twister that means lying, deceitful speech. Yet, it was a harried Prime Minister who fell back on falsiloquence on the return flight from his uneventful African sojourn.

Responding to the BJP's call for his honourable resignation in the aftermath of his shamefaced surrender to the comrades and mullahs over the nuclear deal, he retorted that Advani had no moral right to pillory him. Had Advani, after all, not been Home Minister during the "Holocaust" in Gujarat?

<b>The PM is sufficiently well read to know that holocaust is a term that cannot be used casually.</b> In contemporary usage, it refers to the organised elimination of some six million Jews by Hitler's Nazis. It carries connotations of institutionalised evil on a grand scale.

According to a written reply to the <b>Rajya Sabha on May 11, 2005 by the Minister of State for Home Sriprakash Jaiswal, a total of 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed in the post-Godhra riots of 2002 in Gujarat</b>. Judged by casualties, the violence that gripped Gujarat after the arson attack on Hindu activists in a railway carriage outside the Godhra railway station is one of the most serious post-Independence. <b>It ranks just a notch below the killing of more than 1,000 Sikhs in Delhi (there were another 400 killings in other parts of India) -- a tragedy that Rajiv Gandhi justified with a facile analogy to falling trees.</b>

The murder of any Indian in sectarian violence is a blot. Yet, the incidents recur with monotonous regularity and the blame game goes on without interruption. It's <b>bad enough for the Prime Minister to once again lower himself to what Nehru once disdainfully called "the level of the bazaar". </b>His offence is compounded by his penchant for wilful exaggeration.

If the Gujarat riots were, indeed, another Holocaust, does it do the image of India any good in the eyes of the world? Or, is the Prime Minister so utterly contemptuous of the people of Gujarat that he would go to any extent to vilify them? The Holocaust utterance tells us more about the PM's insecurities and paranoia than it does about what happened in Gujarat five years ago.

Of course, Manmohan's Government has an intimate sense of what constitutes a Holocaust. In November 2005, Russia, Canada, Australia, Israel and the US moved <b>a resolution in the UN General Assembly calling for January 27 to be observed each year as a memorial day for the six million Jews and other victims of the Nazi Holocaust. India voted against it.</b>

The suggestion was that it was an attempt by the UPA to cosy up to the anti-Semitic lobby that thrives in parts of West Asia. The real reason, I suspect, was that Manmohan felt that the actual Holocaust happened in Gujarat.

It would be interesting to know what the people of Gujarat have to say about the Prime Minister's sense of history.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->He calmly replied that the RSS was responsible for the riots.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A lie. Blatant bald faced lie. Akalis and SGPC leaders in New Delhi have gone on record stating as to how RSS/VHP and other Hindu leaders were at the forefront defending Sikhs from the Congress death squads.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In November 2005, Russia, Canada, Australia, Israel and the US moved a resolution in the UN General Assembly calling for January 27 to be observed each year as a memorial day for the six million Jews and other victims of the Nazi Holocaust. India voted against it.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if 6 millions are killed, Manmohan's against designating it as holocaust! If 900+ die it's holocaust!!

Anyone know as to why Manmohan vote against recognizing holocaust in Germany? Possible reasons:
Pandering to the anti-Jewish lobby?
Ashamed of Sonia's father part in the Mussolini's thugh-o-cracy of late 30s and early 40s?
Wanted to reserve the 'holocaust' for one particular Indian state?

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A lie. Blatant bald faced lie. Akalis and SGPC leaders in New Delhi have gone on record stating as to how RSS/VHP and other Hindu leaders were at the forefront defending Sikhs from the Congress death squads.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is why he lost election with big margin. I still remember when he was standing on truck near his corner while house in Pancheel Marg just before election, people were cursing him, "<i>Sikhvaha ka dimag Ghum gaya hai</i>" I can never forget looks on Moron Singh face. Even after those days, this fool had nerve to say same nonsense. It just means "<i>Sikhvaha ka dimag kabi thik nahi huaa</i>".

<b>'Can a sad man lead a resurgent nation?'</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Jaitley alleged that the UPA government has not taken any significant decision in the recent months and dubbed reports about prime minister being embarrassed over the nuclear deal has a 'pathetic spectacle.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Can India's PM recover?
By Soutik Biswas
BBC News, Delhi
PM Singh's standing has taken a hit

Has India's ruling Congress party-led government been reduced to a lame duck one after its Communist allies appear to have scuppered a landmark civilian nuclear deal with the US?

Has PM Manmohan Singh's standing been diminished after he backtracked within weeks of daring the communists to try blackball the agreement?

On both accounts, the answer seems to be an emphatic yes.

Politicians and pundits alike say the way that the Congress party appears to have caved in to its Communist allies, putting at risk the nuclear deal which most say is largely favourable to India, is a hugely embarrassing setback for Mr Singh and the party, led by Sonia Gandhi.

'Sad moment'

At home, Congress stands accused of being ineffectual and failing to recognise the basic realities of how foreign policy is actually intertwined with domestic politics.

Abroad, India's image as a responsible deal maker has taken a beating.

"The upshot of this is a weak and indecisive government. More seriously, the party at the heart of coalition has lost its hold on the situation," says analyst Mahesh Rangarajan.

At one point Mr Singh appeared ready to ditch his left-wing allies and risk an early election rather than make concessions to the opponents of the nuclear deal.

Now he has displayed more the qualities of a survivor than a gambler.

"It is a sad moment for Indian politics when yet another immensely able and well meaning man, who all wanted to succeed, displays the curious powerlessness of power, the sort only mere survivors put up with," says analyst Pratap Bhanu Mehta.

When he became PM in 2005, Mr Singh set out a stirring agenda around his favourite themes - reforming India's rotting public institutions, revving up flagging economic reforms, ramping up higher education.


He then made the nuclear deal - seen as vital given India's poor natural energy resources - the centrepiece of his government.



Congress is a dynasty driven party

It was a tough road to hoe for a prime minister who has never actually won an election.


But then Sonia Gandhi took charge of the party to ensure that politics remained the art of the possible and the allies were kept happy.

Much of that now appears to be in tatters. The PM's efforts at revamping public institutions have been half-hearted, economic reforms are in painful slow motion, and plans to boost higher education are stillborn.

Now the nuclear deal appears to be as good as dead.

The much-publicised $2bn jobs for work programme to alleviate rural poverty looks a retread of similar programmes in the past. It has had a patchy record in its first year.

'Politics of stealth'


Sonia Gandhi's political management skills have been questioned after she failed to placate the communists or stop other favourable allies from openly expressing misgivings about the nuclear deal.

"She failed to assess the political ground which has been slipping away from the ruling alliance. The failure is of both the players," says Mr Rangarajan.

Manmohan Singh is now trying to make sense of his and his government's performance by pointing out that policy is impeded by India's fractious politics.

This would appear to be a tacit admission of how the Gandhi family-driven Congress party is struggling to cope with the era of coalition politics.

Coalition governments have become the order of the day as the appeal of Congress has declined.

Critics like analyst Swapan Dasgupta accuse the party of indulging in the "politics of stealth, which did not take into account the fact that policy initiative should be fully backed up politically by the party and its allies."



The communists have stiffly opposed the nuclear deal

But more seriously, analysts say, that it points to an unprecedented stasis in the party.


Why, they say, didn't Mr Singh face down the communists and risk an election, given that the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is hobbled by a bickering leadership and an equally painful poverty of vision?


What now, does Congress represent for the future?

Congress needs to reinvent itself as a party

Most of the previous Congress prime ministers represented something which grabbed public attention - Nehru had his ideas about India and the world. Indira Gandhi had her famous 'garibi hatao' (remove poverty) programme. Rajiv Gandhi sold himself as a moderniser in a hurry.

But, as Mahesh Rangarajan says, it is "unclear what Sonia stands for other than opposing the BJP, and some pro-poor concerns".

Her son, Rahul Gandhi, the heir apparent, has yet to make clear any substantial programme, or what his political ideology is.

The party still hopes that the dynasty name will work magic in India.


But politics is increasingly fractured and regionalised.

Grass roots caste-based regional leaders are seizing the advantage and the Gandhi name no longer guarantees a win at the hustings.

Pioneer.com
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The BJP said it would press that debate on the deal should only follow the discussion on the Nandigram violence in both the Houses. The party has said it would seek a discussion on the nuclear deal under the rule that entails vote but would not disrupt an objective discussion, even if it was allowed under a different rule. However, the AIADMK has given a notice in the Rajya Sabha for a discussion on the India-US nuclear deal under a rule, which entails voting

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is likely to miss a part of the Winter Session, as he would be on a foreign tour from November 19 and 26. The Left has criticised the PM for missing a portion of such an important session where issues like the nuclear deal, the Scheduled Tribe Bill and other issues would be taken up. The Left is also agitated over the price rise and the UNPA is planning to make a common cause with them on this issue.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Whenever there is a important discussion, this idiot just leave country.

Well Mudy, it makes sense now, check this out:
Don't raise Nandigram in Parliament, says Left
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->After a meeting of four Left parties, the leaders maintained that the Nandigram issue was a "state law and order subject" which could not be discussed in Parliament as rules did not permit such matters to be raised. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Of course if a dove flies into a closed window in the state of Gujarat, Parliament in Delhi grinds to a halt.