Congress Undemocratic Ideology - 4

[acharya]

Monday, January 21, 2008<b>
Manmohan promoting many nation idea</b>
http://www.organiser.org/
By J.G. Arora

Immediately after Muslim League demanded Pakistan and exchange of population, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar wrote his book “Thoughts on Pakistan” in 1940 in which he held that creation of Pakistan would act as a ‘settlement’ of Hindu-Muslim conflict, and also held that exchange of Hindu-Muslim population must accompany the creation of Pakistan.

Countless Pak-Bangla terrorists and infiltrators bent upon creating one more Muslim country on Bharat’s soil, genocide and eviction of Hindus from Kashmir, global missionary organisations Christianising India, government control over Hindu temples whereas no mosque or church is covered by such control, special privileges to non-Hindus under Article 30, special rights to Muslim majority Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370, de-Hinduisation of education and history and banishment of Sanskrit from education, denigration of Hindus and Hinduism by most of media, and provision of Haj subsidy though none of 57 Islamic countries gives any such subsidy are just a few perversities of secular India.

Justice and equity demand that Bharat should be declared a Hindu Republic. It is a logical, laudable and achievable goal which will boost Hindu morale. Apart from protecting Bharat’s Hindu identity, Hindu Bharat will transform the present imbecile India into an assertive nation. No one can object to a Hindu Bharat when the world has over a hundred Christian and 57 Islamic countries. All pro-Hindu individuals and organisations should join hands to transform India into a Hindu Republic of Bharat by all peaceful, constitutional and lawful means.

Despite the Supreme Court’s judgements delivered on July 12, 2005 and December 5, 2006 to deport infiltrators, the government has done nothing in this regard. Rather, more infiltrators are entering India through soft borders every day.

Though Bharat’s Hindu identity is being hammered and erased bit by bit every day, the Union Government’s affidavit filed before the Supreme Court in September 2007 rejecting the existence of Ram and Ram Sethu de-legitimised Hindu faith itself.

This affidavit is the latest ploy to demolish Hinduism the way other native religions and cultures have been wiped off in the world.

Though the affidavit was withdrawn after protests, it would never have been filed if truncated India i.e. Bharat had been proclaimed a Hindu Republic in 1947 as a logical consequence of India’s partition on religious basis, and creation of Pakistan as demanded by Muslims.

And why should Hindu majority Bharat and Nepal disown their Hindu identity when over a hundred Christian-majority countries are declared as Christian countries and 57 Muslim-majority countries are declared as Islamic countries?

Besides, why cannot Bharat, the birth place of Sanatan Dharma, commonly known as Hinduism, and having Hindu traditions since time immemorial be a Hindu Republic?

No more Pakistans
Pre-1947 situation which created Pakistan is being re-enacted in India through divisive ‘communal budgeting’ and through Sachar Commission and reservation for Muslims in government jobs though such measures are unconstitutional, and also unwarranted after the creation of Pakistan as demanded by Muslims.

To prevent the creation of more Pakistans on Bharat’s soil, one must remember how Muslim League grabbed one-third of Bharat as Pakistan.

Bharat Varsh comprising of entire Indian sub-continent was Hindu land with zero Muslim population till 711 when Muhammad bin Qasim’s Arab army attacked Sindh. Hindus lost Afghanistan in 987, and present day Pakistan and Bangladesh to Muslims in 1947. During the repeated Muslim attacks for a thousand years, Hindus kept on fighting valiantly to defend their Dharma and motherland.

After overthrow of Muslim rule, the British took over India from 1857 to 1947. Muslim League was formed in 1906, and demanded Pakistan for Muslims in 1940.

This is what Muhammad Ali Jinnah said in Lahore on 23rd March, 1940 while demanding Pakistan, a separate country for Muslims, comprising of Muslim majority areas in India:

“Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs, and literatures. ….. and to two different civilisations. Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent, and the final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.”

Immediately after Muslim League demanded Pakistan and exchange of population, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar wrote his book “Thoughts on Pakistan” in 1940 in which he held that creation of Pakistan would act as a ‘settlement’ of Hindu-Muslim conflict, and also held that exchange of Hindu-Muslim population must accompany the creation of Pakistan.

In 1945-46 elections, Muslims voted for creation of Pakistan.
Muslim League kept up the pressure, and in 1947 got a third of Bharat’s land as Pakistan comprising of West Pakistan and East Pakistan. In 1971, East Pakistan became Bangladesh while West Pakistan remained Pakistan. Both Pakistan and Bangladesh are Islamic Republics, and have driven out most of Hindus and Sikhs from their land.

However, most of Indian Muslims who had demanded Pakistan and exchange of population did not go to Pakistan. Rather, the present percentage of Muslim population in India is much higher than that in 1947.

Further, to plant one more Islamic country on Indian soil, Pak-Bangla combine has sent countless terrorists and crores of infiltrators into India.

Despite the Supreme Court’s judgements delivered on July 12, 2005 and December 5, 2006 to deport infiltrators, the government has done nothing in this regard. Rather, more infiltrators are entering India through soft borders every day.

Secular Bharat is being battered and grabbed bit by bit by Pak-Bangla terrorists and infiltrators every day.

Fraudulent ‘secularism’
Logically, on India’s Partition on religious basis and creation of Pakistan for Muslims, Bharat should have been declared a Hindu republic. But surprisingly, Bharat was made a ‘secular’ country. However, in India, ‘secularism’ stands for anti-Hinduism. In secular India, Hinduism is being persistently attacked and demolished.

With each passing day, India is being made more Islamic and more Christian and less Hindu.

Countless Pak-Bangla terrorists and infiltrators bent upon creating one more Muslim country on Bharat’s soil, genocide and eviction of Hindus from Kashmir, global missionary organisations Christianising India, government control over Hindu temples whereas no mosque or church is covered by such control, special privileges to non-Hindus under Article 30, special rights to Muslim majority Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370, de-Hinduisation of education and history and banishment of Sanskrit from education, denigration of Hindus and Hinduism by most of media, and provision of Haj subsidy though none of 57 Islamic countries gives any such subsidy are just a few perversities of secular India.

Similarly, late Pope John Paul II’s outrageous call to convert Asia to Christianity was given in secular India’s capital in 1999.

Moreover, since secular India did not help Hindu Nepal, combined might of Maoists, Christian missionaries and Pakistan’s ISI divested Nepal of its Hindu identity in 2006.

Logical solution
Since sham ‘secularism’ and secular India have been a disaster for Hindus, only the Hindu Bharat can protect Hindus, Hindu Dharma, Hindu heritage, and Hindu identity of Bharat. Besides, since secular India never helps Hindus in distress either in India or abroad, Hindu Bharat would be a source of strength for the Hindus worldwide.

Moreover, only an assertive Hindu Bharat can liberate Hindus from tyranny of fake secularism; and restore Hindus’ fighting spirit and self-esteem. Hindu Bharat will also remove enactments and laws which discriminate against Hindus.

And there should be no apprehension, whatsoever, about Hindu Bharat. Since Hinduism is all embracing, Hindu republic of Bharat will give justice to all and appease none. In Hindu Bharat, there will be one law and one nation; and no distinction of majority and minority, and no discrimination, whatsoever, against any community. And all citizens in this Bharat will have equal rights. Such a Bharat will also dismantle fake-secularism, and liberate the nation from countless terrorists and crores of Pak-Bangla infiltrators.

And Hindu Bharat will remember M.A. Jinnah’s above-mentioned ‘Two Nations’ theory expounded in Lahore in 1940, and take pre-emptive action to prevent creation of more Pakistans on Bharat’s soil.

Justice and equity demand that Bharat should be declared a Hindu Republic. It is a logical, laudable and achievable goal which will boost Hindu morale. Apart from protecting Bharat’s Hindu identity, Hindu Bharat will transform the present imbecile India into an assertive nation. No one can object to a Hindu Bharat when the world has over a hundred Christian and 57 Islamic countries. All pro-Hindu individuals and organisations should join hands to transform India into a Hindu Republic of Bharat by all peaceful, constitutional and lawful means.

And this endeavour will certainly succeed as Atharva Veda proclaims, “Kritam may dakhshine haste, jayo may savya aahitah” (effort is in my right hand, and victory in my left).

(The author is a former Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. His e-mail address is: jgarora@vsnl.net)

[acharya]

CONG-COMMUNAL PRINT EMAIL<b>
Incidents like serial blasts started after BJP rathyatra: Cong</b>

NEW DELHI, JULY 28 (PTI)

Congress today hit out at the BJP in the wake of the serial blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad, alleging that such incidents have started only after senior BJP leader L K Advani's 'rathyatra' and "communal campaign".

..

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Jul 27 2008, 02:32 PM-->QUOTE(ravish @ Jul 27 2008, 02:32 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->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.
[right][snapback]85225[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The leaders who are supported the confidence vote were in fact those very same people who burnt effigies of George Bush when he visited India. They are the ones who were on streets inciting riots when America bombed Afghanistan/Iraq. They are the ones who called off Danish PMs visit to India on the cartoons issues.
Whether they've had a change of heart now are flip-flopping for their ever shiffting ideological reasons, it remains to be seen.

[acharya]

Jaitely rapped Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil [Images] for saying that the setting up of a federal agency to investigate terror related incidents you needed to have a constitutional amendment as law and order was a state subject. He pointed to a judgement of the apex court which said that the centre had discretion to act in these matters.

Jaitely wondered why the media had failed to track down man called Sanjeev who paid the three BJP MPs for not voting against the Manmohan Singh [Images] government.

"Everyone knows where he lives and his face is well known, all that you need to find out from him is on whose behalf he was distributing the money. The channel which executed the sting operation has been changing its stand saying that the speaker has forbidden them from airing the tapes in question," Jaitely said.

[acharya]

** IBN has right to air tape
Jump to Comments

CNN-IBN said it has the right to air tape: Somnath to Advani

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/341620.html

NEW DELHI, JULY 28: The onus for telecasting the CDs containing footage of the supposed cash-for-vote scam now lies with news channel CNN-IBN following an exchange of letters between Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha L K Advani.

According to senior BJP leader Sushma Swaraj, the Speaker, while leaving the decision of making the CDs public to the House committee constituted to look in to the scam, told Advani that the channel has claimed that it has the right to telecast the CDs whenever it wants. Swaraj said the Speaker has also said in the letter that the channel has copies of the CDs.

The channel, after refraining from telecasting the CDs, had voluntarily handed them over to the Lok Sabha secretariat. The CDs are among the evidence awaiting an examination by the V Kishore Chandra Deo committee, which is looking into the scam.

Advani had on Sunday written to the Speaker demanding that the CDs be made public without any delay to enable people to come to a well-informed and fair conclusion after having watched the display of currency notes by three BJP MPs in the House. “People’s right to information cannot be circumscribed in any manner,” he had said in his letter.

Along side, Advani maintained that the “investigation material pertaining to the whistle-blowing operation by our three MPs cannot be treated as the private property of the channel”.

“Hence, we urge you to ask the channel to share the entire unedited tape with the three MPs concerned immediately,” said Advani.

Citing the petition of the three BJP MPs before the Speaker, Advani said, “They have also affirmed that CNN-IBN agreed to work with them in investigating the matter and sent a team that actually recorded almost the entire trail of the bribery operation.”

“The details of the joint operation by them and the CNN-IBN team is attested by the three MPs in their petition to you,” he said. “In any such investigation by a media organisation, the investigated material does not become a property of the investigator. It is held in trust for the public of India — its contents must be shared both with the people at large as well as with the whistle-blowers (in this case the three MPs), without whose permission and co-operation the channel could not have conducted the investigation,” said Advani.
<b>
“The channel had assured the whistle-blowers that the recorded tape would be telecast soon. However, this was not done. In any democracy, it would be the grossest impropriety if the whistle-blowers are let down by the media organisation that conducted the investigation.</b>

It is unfortunate that the TV channel is now treating the investigated material as its private property and has chosen to impose a mysterious self-censorship on itself,” Advani added.

Having said this, Advani raised doubts about the authenticity of the tape submitted to the Lok Sabha secretariat. He said “soon after” the three BJP MPs had displayed the wads of current notes in the House, “the channel had announced that it was in the possession of the tape and had handed it over to the Speaker”.

TRUTH ABOUT MEDIA @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCEO4Rw9Z...re=related

[Guest]

<b>Cong backs SP, RJD demand to ban RSS</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Congress on Wednesday supported the demand of the Samajwadi Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal to ban the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

Both parties earlier welcomed the lifting of the ban on SIMI. 

<b>"The RSS has been banned three times in the past and I do not think the demand to ban it again is unjustified," said Congress spokesmen Shakeel Ahmad.</b>

His reaction came in the wake of both the SP and the RJD demanding a ban on organisations like the RSS and the Shiv Sena.

Ahmad, who is also a minister of state for home, clarified that he was speaking on behalf of the Congress party and not the government.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Congress, SP ,and RJD leadership should be sent to mental hospital, they join 72 houris. It will be good for earth and sanity of humans.

[Shambhu]

Re SP, RJD wanting to ban RSS:

This makes me think of how Nancy Reagan was against stem cells. Till Ronald Reagen died of Alzheimers. Then Nancy was all about "finding a cure using stem cells".

[ramana]

Shambu. Dont glorify thse turds by citing nancy reagan's stance on stem cells. Atleast there was a late realization.

OTH these folks molly coddled terrorists and might be at the root of the recent blasts in BJP ruled states.
Think about it if the Ind Muj claimed that they had takleef at Deshmukh in Mumbai and YSR in Hyderabad in their manifesto, how come there were no blasts there in the recent round? Why only in the BJP ruled states?

The manifesto is red herring or a false flag thing.

[Shambhu]

Ramana, I am not glorifying them; I am saying that they (SP, RJD) should feel personally and intimately the effects of what the jihadis have been doing (some of it at their behest); then they will see the RSS point of view...Churchill, I have said many times, was a racist, but he made one of the most applicable quotes ever: Nothing concentrates the mind of a man like the thought of being hanged.

[ramana]

Sigh, I guess I dont make my point.

Pioneer, 7 Aug. 2008

SIMI ban lift partof SP deal

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"SIMI episode, a part of the deal to appease SP"

PTI | New Delhi

<b>The BJP on Wednesday alleged that the revocation of the ban on SIMI was part of the UPA Government's "remission" for the support provided by Samajwadi Party to it during the trust vote.</b>

Demanding sacking of "delinquent" union Home Minister Shivraj Patil for the "incompetence" of the Government in not able to defend the ban, the party said that the Prime Minister's role was suspect as he was a beneficiary of the deal with Samajwadi Party.

"The BJP would like to ask whether this (lifting of the ban) is part of the 'deal' made by the Government to stay in power. This is part of the deal with the political party which supported the Government (in the trust vote)," BJP spokesperson Rajiv Pratap Rudy told reporters.

"Is it a partial remission of the deal or is it the full remission of the deal?" he asked the Government.

<b>Rudy recalled that Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav had during his tenure as Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh lifted the ban on SIMI.</b>

<b>Mulayam Singh Yadav and Railway Minister Lalu Prasad have welcomed lifting of the ban on SIMI by the tribunal headed by Justice Geeta Mittal.</b>

Accusing the Government of playing appeasement politics, Rudy said, "this Government is principally opposed to the ban on SIMI. We demand the sacking of delinquent Home Minister Shivraj Patil." He accused the Government of intentionally not placing evidence against SIMI.

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

I guess they will condemn the SC now that the ban has been held by them.

Its sad to say I told you so but others also feel the same.

And

LINK

[Shambhu]

Wait, I dont get it (in all sincerity, not being sarcastic or anything):

I know blasts in BJP ruled states (and the stampede in BJP-ruled HP too, it does not take much to engineer a stampede and run away) were done by SIMI to please UPA. SP un-banned SIMI in UP some time ago; they are feeling that SIMI has paid them back handsomely by targeting BJP states; SP, RJD welcome lifting of ban on SIMI nationwide now, and want to ban RSS.

So why is it wrong to want to wish for a fight between SIMI and SP-RJD so that SP-RJD can personally feel the hurt?

I know that this is no ideological war as far as all these UPA parties are concerned; they have been using and directing islamic terrorism for their own political benefit.

Now apart from all this, if leading lights of RJD-SP-Congress were to *somehow* get blown up by SIMI (or some other outfit), would that not nudge the rest of RJD-SP towards forgetting all politics coming out against SIMI etc?

I know this does not sound plausible --why would any islamist of any stripe go against the hand that feeds them-- but why can one not wish for such a thing to happen?

I may be called naive for wanting such impossible things, but that I can live with..<!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

came in email, but guess it is from Deccan Chronicle

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
<b>SP support splits Simi </b>
 

New Delhi, Aug. 6: The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the special tribunal’s order lifting the ban on the Students’ Islamic Movement of India after the government warned of “serious consequences” if the outfit was allowed to operate.

The government moved the petition challenging Tuesday’s tribunal order before a bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan which issued notice to Simi and posted the matter for hearing after three weeks.

The additional solicitor-general, Mr Gopal Subramanium had to press hard to secure a stay as the bench was inclined to order status quo.  The confession of Simi chief Safdar Hussain Nagori, arrested in March, has, meanwhile, <b>revealed differences in the outfit over its leaders taking Samajwadi Party help. It states that Simi leader Sadar Falahi, after completing a jail term, accepted SP support to quash cases against Simi members</b>.

The SP is among the outfits to openly come out in Simi’s support. During interrogation, Nagori said: “Within us (Simi) differences had started cropping up.

<b>When Sadar Falahi was released from jail... he tried to finish cases against him... with Samajwadi support. This led to differences.”</b> <b>Nagori said Simi wanted to punish the perpetrators of the Gujarat and Mumbai riots, and avenge the Babri Masjid demolition. He said units led by Shibli, Hafiz, Kamruddin, Ikrar Sheikh and Shahwaz were training activists in camps in the forests of Simrol near MP, Hubli in Karnataka, Ujjain and Mumbai.</b>

<b>This “fresh evidence” gathered by the Centre could have helped secure an extension of the ban</b>. The home ministry, however, appended these as background material, and did not make them part of the basis for the notification seeking renewal of the ban. The tribunal quashed the ban on Tuesday.

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

[Guest]

I call it begining of death of India by Moron Singh and Sonia Gadhi.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Pro-Muslim to anti-Hindu </b>
Pioneer.com
Prafull Goradia
A perverse Government rules India
The Manmohan Singh Government has been candidly pro-Muslim from the day it was formed in 2004. Soon it appointed four committees for minorities, the leading one headed by Justice RS Sachar. By 2007, 'Muslims first' became a slogan often voiced by the Prime Minister. This year the UPA Government has turned from being pro-Muslim to Anti-Hindu.
On the morrow of winning the July 22 confidence vote, its advocate in the Supreme Court declared that Sri Ram had himself destroyed the Ram Setu after defeating Ravan and crossing back to home soil. Presumably, the stone setu that is visible immediately under the water surface is a Hindu illusion.

<b>Earlier, the Solicitor-General had denied the existence of Ram. The historicity of Ram was not only questioned but also denied -- how irrational! Even the factor of faith cherished by Hindus over the centuries was conveniently overlooked</b>. The oversight was merely to serve the desire of the DMK, a partner of the UPA Ministry. What was the vested interest of the south Indian party is difficult to tell. The Congress Prime Minister's interest was confined to appeasing a coalition partner.

For so small an advantage, how low could the UPA descend? Would the same Government have questioned the historicity of Jesus Christ or discussed the legend of his birth or the name of his father or was he god? Would the Government have dared to question anything about Prophet Mohammed and not accepted whatever has been stated in the Quran, the Hadith and the Sunnah? No one debates the attributes of allah; he is omniscient and omnipresent, period.

There is, however, no hesitation on the part of self-styled secularists who are born Hindus and who are likely to die Hindus to be cremated in grand style with the help of pure ghee and sandalwood. Hindus denying Ram in order to oblige some shipping companies is a moral nadir below which it is not possible to descend. And only a convinced anti-Hindu can do it. Uncannily, neither a Muslim nor a Christian would denigrate Ram. On the contrary, poet Mohammed Iqbal had described him as Imam-e-Hind.

A Hindu condemning his community or denying a Hindu avatar is an indication of mental or moral derangement. Could it be attributed to the Hindu suppression for centuries first by Muslim invaders and then by British conquerors? Sections of Hindus must have felt enslaved and helpless. A slave has access to few pleasures in life and in frustration might turn to masochism, so called after an Austrian psychologist Chevalier Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, who discovered that there are people who derive pleasure by experiencing pain or humiliation. Is the Hindu fringe which runs down Hindus and denies their avatars suffering from this mental illness?

The radical humanist MN Roy was earlier a dyed-in-the-wool Marxist. At a young age and although an Indian, he was an elected member of VI Lenin's Presidium in Moscow. He was an atheist and yet in 1930 he named himself 'Mahmood'. In Volume IV of his Selected Works (OUP, 2000), he wrote, "Hindu superciliousness towards the religion and culture of the Muslims is absurd."

More Hindu historians have been anti-Hindu rather than objective scholars. Take Prof Romila Thapar who has defended Mahmud Ghazni's idol-breaking with an extraordinary argument: He was a robber and not an iconoclast. Not satisfied with the strength of her defence, she went on to argue that even King Harsh Vardhan also used to desecrate temples in order to appropriate wealth.

Prof Gargi Chakravarthy, another historian, claimed that Mahmud Ghazni was not a religious fanatic because he neither converted the defeated people nor disallowed his soldiers to blow the sankh. The same distinguished scholar has defended Temur Lang's massacres on the ground that he had butchered more Muslims in Central Asia than Hindus in India. The same book of history published by People's Publishing House carries forward Prof Harbans Mukhia's defence of temple desecration by Aurangzeb: The emperor did not destroy temples unless they became centres of conspiracy or rebellion against the state. Prof Bipan Chandra, another well-known historian, has taken great pains to prove that Rana Pratap, Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh did much to undermine secularism and national integration.

Such anti-Hindu perversion is not confined to historians. It extends to political figures from early-20th century. Abdul Rashid murdered Swami Shraddhananda in 1926 because he persevered with offering shuddhi or return to Hinduism. In court, Asaf Ali, Jawaharlal Nehru's friend, defended him but failed. Rashid was hanged by the British Government. At the Guwahati session of the Congress in the same year, Gandhiji described Abdul Rashid as his "brother".
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

They are pro-Muslims for formenting communal trouble, raising cosmetic concerns like increasing subsidies or preventing Rs 250 allowance for divorced muslim wives or making noise about Sachar this, Mandal that - whatever helped vote bank politics.

If they were pro-Muslim they would have been investing in education. Story from Kerala's muslim majority areas:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Consider the figures: The Congress-led United Democratic Front government that governed between 1982 and 1986/1987 <b>cut its outlay on education from 37.2 per cent to 31.5 per cent</b> of the total budget; the successor Communist Party of India-Marxist-led Left Democratic Front government (1987 to 1990/1991) further <b>cut the outlay from 31.5 per cent to 27.45 per cent</b>; the UDF government that took over between 1991 to 1994/1995 <b>sliced the budget from 27.45 per cent to 26.67 per cent</b>; and the LDF government of 1995 to 2000 <b>further slashed the outlay from 26.67 per cent to 22.56 per cent</b>.

"Each government spends less and less on education -- just when the demand for facilities, for colleges, for increased seats in many more streams, is growing," U P Yahya Khan, a Farookh College professor and one of the delegates to a community conference on education, points out.

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

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The situation is seen to be so critical that the Ittihadul Shuban lil Mujahiddin (ISM), the activist youth wing of the Kerala-based Islamic reformist movement Nadwath ul-Mujahiddin, last August convened a two-day conference of educationists in Thalassery, Kannur district, to discuss the dimensions of the problem and to try and identify solutions.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
rediff link

[Guest]

Ashamed of Kargil?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Where were our "leaders", the people who, by the nomenclature thrust on them, are destined to lead us, to show us the way, on Saturday, July 26?

Where was the President and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, Pratibha Patil [Images]? Where was the prime minister, Manmohan Singh [Images]? Where was the defence minister, A K Antony? Where was the chief minister of Delhi, Sheila Dixit?

Yes, there was a celebration in the BJP office with Rajnath Singh in attendance, but was there any commensurate celebration in the Congress office? Was Congress president Sonia Gandhi [Images] present? Was there any celebration in the CPI or CPI-M headquarters? Were Prakash Karat [Images] and A B Bardhan there?

And so on.

If the leaders and their parties did observe Vijay Divas, their media minders have done a splendid job of hiding it from public view. If they didn't, the nation is entitled to ask why: Has the Kargil victory become something to be ashamed of for most of our political parties?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Today SOnia met Bilal Bhutto, It is like Bush is meeting Osama bin Laden.
Only Indian can sit and watch, had it US we know what would have happen.

[Bodhi]

Point Blank
By: T R Jawahar

It's just two weeks since the trust vote and the N-deal is almost a done deal from the Indian point of view. The ball is now in the US court, but the godspeed with which it has landed there speaks volumes of the PM's determination that has powered it, whatever his motives or predicaments.

But there was something else, more explosive, that happened on the day of the vote: the cash & carry scam! But that issue just rests in peace with M Singh preferring to neither see nor hear any evil and hoping it would recede from pubic memory soon. Now is that not quite unbecoming of the one and only Mr Clean?'Mr Clean' is an image that does not come easily in public life, particularly in politics. Even if one's own hand is clean there is always the reflected muck from colleagues and controllers that one cannot so easily wish or wash away. And then there is the usual cliched suspect, the 'system', in which all the pots and kettles wallow, some willingly and some willy nilly. Pundits also make a distinction between personal corruption and political corruption: the former is a sin and so raises a stink, but the latter is 'chaltha hai' variety. Again, even with personal corruption there are layers and attendant tolerance limits: from skin deep, the filth could go upto the core. A 'clean' politician is therefore a relative term. And often a matter of perception which brings us back to MSingh who even by the above liberal standards, is ... was, rather, seen as an oasis of 'complete' cleanliness in a desert of dirt.

Such a squeaky clean perception of MSingh had some validity in the initial years of his political life. Though he knew what he was getting into in politics, for it was no different in 1991, he was rather quite well insulated. PVN had drafted the economist with a one word motto: Reform. And the latter went about his task with clinical precision and single-mindedness. To him, the post of FM was not a political one but an extension of his bureaucratic tenure. In fact, the nation saw him as such. But that view should have changed in 2004 when he became PM after Sonia's missed call on PMO which eventually turned sour grapes and the nation got a new saint. This time too, the Sardar knew fully well what he has getting into; only that he would not have got into it had he been as clean as perceived. For, post PVN with the insulation gone, he would have had direct knowledge of Cong's corrupt culture and in any case, smoke was still billowing from the Bofors guns. So much for his cleanliness!

But if still the clean charade continued, it was more out of hope and habit than an honest appraisal of the 'changed' man. The career economist had already acquired all the viles of a professional politician, belying a nation's trust, which in any case was misplaced right from the start. His original sin was to offer his hard-earned credibility as well as the people's faith in his integrity as a cover for the dubious dynasty that has brought the country to ruin. He allowed a spurious saint to bask in his clean image in the garb of a renouncer par excellence. He proxied so that the person behind left no fingerprints. He perfected a system by which Race Course Road took the brickbats while the bouquets went to Janpath. He converted the constitutional post of the PM into just another puppet portfolio. He pawned the powers and prerogatives of the Premier to the pleasure of the Congress President. And as a parting kick, he has now unleashed the biggest ignominy on Parliamentary democracy by winning the trust vote through the foulest of means.

The cash for vote scam cannot be brushed under the carpet like his other sins of omissions and commissions. His regime's claim that the Lok Sabha Speaker is seized of the issue, as of the cash, is most sinister. MSingh cannot feign personal innocence and escape from crucial questions. After all, his continuance as the PM of the country was the most visible fallout of the whole trust vote. So, if the trust vote itself is under such a cloud, should the needle of suspicion not naturally zero in on the most obvious beneficiary? Elementary, Mr Reader. One is not yet suggesting that MSingh did a PVN a la JMM episode, but how can there be a premature exoneration? Can the 'clean' PM tell the nation, with a clean heart and straight face, that he was totally ignorant of all the shady activities, courtesy, Amar Singh, that were apace in Lutyen's Delhi and beyond to sustain 'his' Government? Or was not MSingh aware of the methods and machinations that ASingh would likely employ? Is the economist who could grasp the nuances and nitty gritties of a complex nuclear deal be so naive to the petty deals of a practising political mercenary? Aah, that beaming face behind the victory sign displayed more guile than what all the Shibu Sorens of the land can muster!

Granted, the cover of Parliamentary privilege precludes prosecution of MPs. But why not, in the interest of the nation, put it to the legal litmus test again? Maybe the Supreme Court may take the opportunity to revise its earlier views. Again, there are a whole lot of people who are not MPs caught in this corrupt loop. Why are they being let off without as much as a police complaint and case? The media that recorded the whole sting is in silent mode, self imposed or otherwise, but why not the Clean MSingh dare them to air it? Or will he at the least tell the nation if he has himself seen the tapes and what he thinks of them? An 'honest' man owes these.

Again, MSingh was earlier FM and RBI Governor. He knows to the last comma and the latest amendment what the various provisions of the Income Tax Act say on unaccounted cash. He is also quite acquainted with the latest Banking rules including the Banking cash transaction tax. There is also a Prevention of Money Laundering Act and a Financial intelligence unit that monitors suspicious transactions through the banking channels. The common folk cannot hold or draw even fifty thousand without those hounds breathing down their necks. But here is crores in hard cash in full public view. All that cash must have come, in one go or over a period, from some bank, other than blood bank, and must have seals and numbers. In any case, they are not counterfeit. Clearly all that cash is somebody's unaccounted wealth, and the source is not difficult to track and trace if there is will. But the hounds are not even barking: No enquiries, no notices, no raids, no seizures, no TDS, no PAN no tax demand... Now, what credibility can one attach to the words and deeds of this super-clean, super-clever economist and reformer non pareil? Or have the nuclear deal plus Amar's deals inflicted some kind of amnesia on the former FM that he has forgotten even his basic lessons?

Singh is king now, no doubt, but the emperor is, well, bare. Indeed, it's time for Mr Clean to really come clean!

http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=30

[dhu]

Rahul and Bilawal in powwow at Beijing!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->..
Sonia is in the Chinese capital at the invitation of the Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) to attend the inaugural function of Olympics-2008. Significantly, PRC did not find it necessary to officially invite India as a country. Neither the President nor the Prime Minister of its largest neighbour got the invite,<b> while both the President and PM of Pakistan were cordially invited.</b>

India’s foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee had travelled to China (naturally in the government’s chartered aircraft) to personally collect the invitation to his party boss. He personally handed it over to the queen mother immediately upon return.
..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Capt M Kumar]

<!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> Gandhi’s worst fears have come true

The Father of the Nation wanted to disband the Indian National Congress once it had outlived its raison d’etre of driving the British out of India. He felt that the best form of governance for India would be `swaraj’ (self-rule), by which Gandhi meant governance not by a hierarchical government but self governance through political decentralization and community building. But other political leaders of the time were least impressed by Gandhi’s idea of disbanding the INC or adopting Swaraj. Rather, the Congress Party went on to rule India ever since, except for an interregnum of 12 years when non-Congress combinations were in power. Contrary to Gandhi’s wishes, the Congress party’s leadership was usurped by the Nehru dynasty, which held the Prime Minister’s post for 33 out of 49 years when the Congress was in power. You can safely add four more years to the Nehru dynasty’s 33 year’s rule, given the fact that a member of the dynasty, Sonia Gandhi, is now the de facto prime minister, Dr Manmohan Singh being just her `mukhouta’ (mask).

http://news.in.msn.com/columns/article.asp...umentid=1408819