• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Power centers in the corridors of power, Extra Con
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>'Be honest',Swami to Sonia</b>
4/24/2006 10:39:21 AM Press release by Subramania Swamy
The Janata Party advocates cell in Uttar Pradesh will seek the rejection of Ms.Sonia Gandhi's nomination for contesting as a candidate in the Rae Bareli Lok Sabha by-poll on the ground of admitted perjury.

<b>In her 2004 nomination papers Ms.Sonia Gandhi had claimed in a sworn affidavit that she had been 'educated in the University of Cambridge'. </b>http://www.eci.gov.in/GE2004_Affidavits/Uttar%20Pradesh/Affidavits/19/Sonia%20Gandhi/SG_sc5.html ( See her affidavit filed befor Election Commmission) The University in three separate letters to NRIs (with copy to me) had denied Ms.Sonia Gandhi was ever admitted as a student in the University, much less "educated" there.

<b>In her nomination filed yesterday, Ms.Sonia Gandhi now claims in her affidavit that she received 'a certificate in English' from Lennox Cook School in the city of Cambridge, U.K.</b>

<b>First of all, this is an admission of perjury, and hence she has confessed to a crime committed u/s 177 of the IPC, and 125A of the Representation of People's Act (1951). These two offences together carry a punishment of three years</b>.

Secondly, the 2006 claim of education is rubbish because the so-called Lennox Cook School is not recognized by the Board of Education U.K. as a educational institution empowered to award certificates. It has closed down in 1985. <b>My inquiries reveal that it is a fly-by night shop to enable poor Italian and Spanish girls to learn enough English to get jobs as cooks and waitresses. It is by no means an education recognized by any academic standard.</b> <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

What Ms.Sonia Gandhi must honestly admit that she is an uneducated person. No Indian voter will object to such an honest admission. If she can lie about her 'education', what else has been lying about her past? <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>Italian subject in personal law, Indian in public law!</b>
Wednesday April 26 2006 00:00 IST
S Gurumurthy

Sonia Gandhi does own a house, in fact, a home, but not in India. In  Italy! Not an ordinary home, it's her ancestral home, her emotional connect to Italy.

This is not an allegation by a Subramanian Swamy pointing to her obsession for her motherland, Italy. It is Sonia's own admission in her nomination form for the Rae Bareilly Lok Sabha constituency. Statistically, she is among the millions of poor, homeless people of India.

More, she does not own even a car. So, she is not among the millions who own cars in this country. So, in form at least she is among the crores of poor people of this country who do not own cars. She seems to suffer further in comparison with the poor. For, these hundreds of millions of Indians at least own bicycles or bullock carts. But obviously, she does own either.

Yet, this homeless person does live in one of the largest and luxurious bungalows in Delhi at No.10 Janpath. Valued in terms of its worth in the market, it will cost some Rs 100 crores! But that is owned by the government, but exclusively for her use.

Protected under special law, the government has to provide houses, security-compatible houses, and cars, bulletproof cars, for her. Thus, it is not that she does not own houses or cars. She does not need to own them.

Also, owning creates problems which enjoying without owning avoids. Owning a house for instance costs lots of money, particularly in Delhi. High municipal taxes, expensive repairs and maintenance, water charges and so on. So obviously, by not owning a house, Sonia is not among the homeless millions of India. By not needing to own a house and having a government to own the house for her, she is in a unique position.

So the logic is self-evident: you need not own anything, should somebody else, preferably the government, is obliged to own and provide for you. But this is not what her list of assets would show. Of course, what the government cannot provide, she has. The government cannot provide her jewellery. So, she has them, jewellery worth Rs 21 lakh. She has other assets.

But that Sonia does not have a house of her own in India had remained a national secret. So is the fact that she has a home in Italy. Thanks to the mandatory rules of the Election Commission compelling her to declare their assets, it is now known that she has a home in Italy, and she only resides here without a residence, of course. But the EC rules are inadequate to detect what she enjoys without having
to own!

That she is homeless in India may be a political talking point but, it dents her claim to have become an Indian. Her claim as Indian rests solely on the belated nationality papers she secured in 1983. See this legal gap in her status as an Indian.

In law, that she has an ancestral home in Italy and does not own a house in India, shows her intention to retain her domicile, the desire to settle finally, in Italy. In law domicile means permanent home. Sonia may hold a certificate of nationality here, but that decides her political status, but does not testify that she has abandoned her domicile of origin, Italy. In private international law, the domicile of origin of Sonia case as an Italian continues until she abandons Italian connections and by choice acquires India as her new home.

Acquiring Indian citizenship does not terminate her Italian domicile, choose India as her home. Also, in law, she cannot have Italian and Indian domiciles simultaneously. That she has been physically resident in India for long periods does not mean she has acquired Indian domicile by choice.

Factually, also legally, she does not have a residence in India at all! However luxurious the government provided accommodation is, that is only her postal address, not own home in law. In contrast, she has her home, ancestral home only in her domicile of origin, Italy.

Retaining her ancestral home in Italy and not having a residence in India makes it clear in law that she intends to settle in Italy. Abandonment of Italian domicile, which is her origin, and acquisition of Indian domicile require in law strong evidence of both. Here her deliberate retention of her ancestral home suggests that she never intended to abandon her Italian domicile at all.

The intention to abandon the domicile of origin, Italy, to acquire new domicile in India is completely absent because she has no residence in India but has a permanent, ancestral home in Italy. This is the legal position. She resides here without residence, but, has her home in Italy. She would have got the best legal advice. Yet, whey does she retain her ancestral home which dents her claim as an Indian? The answer is evident. Despite the risks, she would still not opt for India entirely.

<b>But, what difference does it makes if Sonia, with Indian citizenship papers in her name, is domiciled in Italy? The difference is this. Under private international law, domicile decides the personal law applicable.

Italian domicile will mean she will be governed in personal matters by Italian, not Indian, law! So, Sonia, the ruling alliance leader will be Italian subject in matters of personal law, that is, in inheritance, marriage and like areas. So, she is Italian in personal law and Indian only in public law, that is, law of crimes and like laws. That is, half Italian and half Indian.</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Congress ministers out of PM’s control
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Congress ministers out of PM’s control
- By Seema Mustafa and Venkatesh Kesari

New Delhi, April 29: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is finding it difficult to control the Congress ministers in his Cabinet who are publicly airing their differences on crucial issues with the support of several party leaders. Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s silence is encouraging the Congressmen to target the Prime Minister in a sustained attack that is acquiring the dimension of a new offensive.

The criticism is no longer muted but a topic of open conversation with Union human resources development minister Arjun Singh’s reservation policy and former external affairs minister Natwar Singh’s interviews to the media being central to the dissent. Many MPs who had maintained a grim silence when Mr Natwar Singh had to resign from the party in the wake of the Volcker report are now openly shaking their heads and saying, "Poor man, he was such a loyalist and look at the way he is being treated." Mr Natwar Singh himself was surprised at the number of telephone calls he received congratulating him for his strong views against the government’s current foreign policy.

Mr Arjun Singh’s comments on reservation have been more controversial, although several MPs told this newspaper that minister Kapil Sibal "had no business" contradicting the senior leader’s proposal once this had been made public. The Prime Minister is being held responsible for Mr Sibal’s open contradiction of a government policy announced by a Cabinet colleague as both were, at the time, travelling together on a visit to Germany and Uzbekistan. The anti-Arjun Singh section of the Congress party, which was also very active last week, had been maintaining that the minister was eyeing the top post by positioning himself as the new voice for the backwards in the Manmohan Singh government.

Officially, the Congress party has decided to keep out of the reservations policy even though it cannot contradict Mr Arjun Singh on the issue either. The Congress president’s son, Mr Rahul Gandhi, summed up the non-reaction on Saturday when he told reporters at Rae Bareli that "it is a very complex issue, both sides have valid points". Mr Arjun Singh and Mr Natwar Singh met recently on the former’s invitation. Sources said the silence from 10, Janpath is seen by the party as a "green signal" to continue with Dr Manmohan Singh finding it impossible to influence the senior Congress ministers, who insist on independent functioning.

The latest to come out against the Prime Minister is permanent invitee to the Congress Working Committee M.L. Fotedar. In characteristic style, Mr Fotedar used the book on written by the late Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao on Ayodhya to strongly censure Dr Manmohan Singh. He said in a recent interview that at a Cabinet meeting on December 4, 1992 he had raised the issue of the Babri mosque and had then said, "Nothing has been done there, anything can happen." Mr Rao, he said, had responded to this by saying he was looking into it. Dr Manmohan Singh, finance minister at the time, supported Mr Rao, according to Mr Fotedar. "I told him (Dr Manmohan Singh), ‘Kindly keep quiet, it is our duty to protect the disputed structure,’" he said.

In the same interview, to a Hindi magazine, Mr Fotedar spoke of the Cabinet meeting of December 6, 1992, when, he claimed, he had suggested that Mr Rao should take responsibility for the demolition of the mosque as this would ensure the emergence of a new Congress party. He said all the Cabinet ministers remained silent, "no one supported me". Mr Fotedar went on to speak of Mr Rao’s "chamchas", saying that while some sycophants retain some basic status, in this case the "chamchas" forgot all their principles. "I do not want to take the names of such persons," he said. Congress leaders are openly reading these remarks as a reference to the Prime Minister.

It might be recalled that the Tiwari Congress, formed just ahead of the 1996 Lok Sabha elections against then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, was spearheaded, amongst others, by Mr Arjun Singh, Mr Natwar Singh and Mr M.L. Fotedar. The then UPCC president, Mr N.D. Tiwari, had broken away from the official Congress party to head the new formation that was named after him. Mr Tiwari, currently chief minister of Uttaranchal, is extremely unhappy in the current setup and has submitted his resignation on more than one occasion to Mrs Sonia Gandhi. The last resignation, a few weeks ago, was neither accepted nor rejected.

Sources said Congress MPs will now not hesitate to voice differences over policy decisions. Panchayati raj minister Mani Shankar Aiyar is reportedly very unhappy with the government’s silence over US ambassador David C. Mulford’s remarks while speaking at the American Enterprise Institute at Washington earlier this week on the India-US civilian nuclear energy initiative. Ambassador Mulford was quoted by a news agency as having said in response to a question on the Iran pipeline project that "the Indians have made a change recently in their ministry of petroleum, which is read, in India at least, as the removal of the person who was very much keen on that project, out of that department." This was a clear reference to Mr Aiyar. The envoy then went on to say about the current petroleum minister, Mr Murli Deora: "There is a new person in there. He has a much broader knowledge of the energy problem and so on. So I don’t see why that really should be a problem."
What is going on within Congress? Is it a ploy to make Sonia PM?
PM is spineless no surprise but puppet is doing his job according to instructions given by Queen.
After Queen’s election we may see new PM.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>'How can Sonia afford to dine in five star hotels?'</b>
<i>Cong chief told EC she only has Rs 20,000 with her, then how did Rahul spend 10 years in London, asks Amar</i>
Lakshmi Iyer
New Delhi: Samajwadi Party's Amar Singh is curious to know how Congress chief Sonia Gandhi can afford to dine in five-star hotels with just Rs 20,000 to her name.

"In her declaration to the Election Commission (EC), Sonia has said she does not have a car and possesses a cash deposit of only Rs 20,000, <b>but many a time I have seen her eating Chinese food in five-star hotels. Surely, the sum of Rs 20,000 would not be enough to afford it,"</b>  <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> he said at a press conference in Delhi.

Turning his attention to the declaration made by <b>her son Rahul, Singh alleged that the Lok Sabha MP from Amethi is passionate about speed biking and that he had spent 10 years in London</b>.

[B]"How did he live in London with 55 pounds in his bank account? ]Did mama Quattrocchi pay for it? Was that why his account was frozen? This is unacceptable.[/B We want the ethics committee of the Rajya Sabha (headed by Karan Singh of the Congress) to draw up guidelines for all MPs."

Singh's charges were prompted by the Supreme Court asking Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members to show his income tax returns from 2001-06 and also his investments in the same period in response to a PIL filed by a Congress leader named Vishwanath Chaturvedi.

"The apex court's order did not come as a surprise to us. We can fully comply with it because both Mulayam and his son Akhilesh Singh have been filing I-T returns every year. But what we cannot countenance is there being two sets of rules. All those in public life should be asked to reveal their I-T returns for the past five years," Singh said.

He said Chaturvedi had been propped by the Congress only to embarrass Mulayam. "He is very much like Madan Mohan Shukla, the man Congress set up to unseat Jaya Bachchan (from the Rajya Sabha). Right now, Chaturvedi is a guest at the chief minister's suite in Haryana Bhawan."

Singh believes Chaturvedi has drawn most of his material for his PIL from the declaration made by Mulayam Singh Yadav before the EC.

In between all these allegations, the EC's direction asking Amar Singh to appear before it on June 16 in connection with the office-of-profit issue was buried. "I am prepared to face any penal action," Singh said.
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/ <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>How many times must I clear my name? </b>
<i>CBI being misused for political vendetta against me, writes Maneka Gandhi</i>
Misusing the CBI to witch hunt political opponents indicates a weak, vindictive and unscrupulous Govern- ment. This is not the first time I have been targeted. In a recently published book, the <b>former director of RAW, MK Kao, has revealed how the Congress party 'high command' had earlier too illegally and improperly misused Government funds and agencies to act against me.</b>
This time too, bureaucrats and CBI officials confess they have received directives from the very top. The case they have brought is laughable. It has been filed as a PIL by a first cousin who is a Congress party member, who stood against me in the last election and lost his deposit and has been in land litigation cases with my family for the last 15 years.   

Five years after I demitted the office of MOS of Social Justice and Empowerment, the CBI started investigating on the basis of this PIL. I am not an accused in the PIL, which is against the Ministry itself and charges the Ministry's organisation Maulana Azad Foundation of having sanctioned funds meant for schools for minority communities.

The CBI filed an affidavit in the High Court in 2004, which is on the Court's record saying that there was no crim- inality at all. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment also filed an affidavit saying that they had looked into the matter and they did not found any evidence of wrongdoing when they investigated the allegations. It is noteworthy that the PIL was filed and the clearances were given long after I had demitted the office of Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment.

The Government changed in 2004 and the UPA came into power in May 2004. Soon after, the new Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment made a request asking the court for a reinvestigation by the CBI. The CBI again exonerated me.

In October 2005, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment sent a formal request to the CBI asking for a reinvestigation. The CBI refused to reinvestigate the matter. Then, before a new bench, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment asked the court in October 2005 to instruct the CBI to investigate the matter again. If the Government is suddenly seized of some new information, why doesn't it investigate again as is supposed to be the procedure? It is highly improper for the Government to ask the court to coerce the CBI - which is the investigative agency of the Government and it is being asked to investigate a department of the Union Ministry. However, the new bench of Justice Vijendra Jain obliged and the CBI went for a third inquiry to investigate Maulana Azad Foundation. Between the first two inquiries based on detailed evidence, which are on the files, and the third one, what new material has suddenly appeared? On October 19, High Court Judge Jain asked the CBI to reinvestigate "alleged irregularities" during Maneka Gandhi's tenure as minister in the NDA Government even when the Centre's counsel said in the court that CBI was not ready to reinvestigate the matter despite the formal request.

I am not a party to the High Court case, which is against Maulana Azad Foundation so I could not defend myself or have a lawyer or get any occasion to say anything. The court itself monitored the investigation. And yet the CBI has informed the court that an FIR is being filed against me. I was informed by a very senior member of the Government that, at a meeting on Monday, August 7, 2006, CBI officials were told that the UPA president desired that criminal prosecution be filed against me.

Accordingly on Thursday, August 10, the CBI moved court saying that they want to file a case against me under Section 420 of the IPC dealing with cheating and conspiracy.

<b>Cheating whom? The Government?</b>
Maulana Azad Foundation is an independent organisation under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. It has its own board and is headed by the then Minister of the Ministry. At the time the Maulana Azad Foundation, which have in its a board eminent people, including the President of India and the ex-Cabinet Secretary, sanctioned funds for 385 educational and vocational institutions for minorities in India. As Minister, 5 years ago, I was also on the board of the foundation. Of the entire investigation done on the 385 educational institutions, the CBI found nothing wrong in 383 and has honed in on two in Pilibhit out of the 40 given to Pilibhit.

<b>Do they claim that these schools were not made? </b>
No, they say that not only have they been made but they are also the leading schools in their areas.

<b>What is the total allocation to these two NGOs?</b>
Rs 30 lakhs or even less.

<b>Did Maneka Gandhi release the monies to them? </b>
No, they were released by the board after she had demitted the office of the Ministry.

<b>Did the district administrations certify that the NGOs were bona fide? </b>

<b>Did the district administrations certify that the monies had been fully utilised? </b>

<b>Did Maneka Gandhi have anything to do with these institutions or any other to whom funds were given? </b>

<b>Were the funds released in installments, each time after investigations were done on the utilisation of earlier tranches? </b>

<b>Are these schools providing education and training to minority community students?</b>

<b>Were any undue favours given? </b>

<b>Did the Ministers who succeeded me release the monies to the same institutions? </b>

<b>If I were to use undue influence, would I not have had monies released to all the applicants in Pilibhit? Did I?</b>
No, according to the records of the Maulana Azad Foundation.

<b>Did I alone make the decision or was the entire board present each time?</b>
They were present each time

<b>Were procedures followed? </b>

<b>Was any wrongdoing found in any of the other 385 institutions given money including those in Pilibhit? </b>

<b>Who is the complainant? </b>
An estranged relative who is fighting land cases against the family and has stood against me for over 10 years and now fought an election as the Congress candidate against me

<b>So how does 420 apply as cheating and conspiracy? Cheating whom, and conspiring with whom?</b>
In 2005, two years after the PIL was filed, the charges were changed midstream after it was found that none of the charges made against the first 9 institutions were tenable or true. Four NGOs were added: Gandhi Rural Welfare Trust, Nidhi Education Society, GS Memorial Education Society and New Modern Dayal Shiksha Samiti.

The board made procedures to benefit educational facilities for backward and minority communities.

<b>What were the procedures that were changed for all NGOs? </b>
That new institutions could also apply provided they passed all the checks instituted by the local Government administration and the Maulana Azad Foundation

<b>So what is the crime according to CBI? </b>
They haven't yet made up their mind. The truth is that they are being pressurised to persecute me as part of a political and personal vendetta.

With ministers of this Government involved in criminal cases, including rape, and corruption cases running into hundreds of crores, thereby setting an example that encourages the whole country to cheat and indulge in scams, it is shameful that the nation's premier investigative agency CBI should be diverted from its duty to pursue the UPA chairperson's political ends.

Rather than catching criminals, it is going after someone for discharging a job honestly and efficiently. Maybe for this Government that is a crime!

Twice over, the CBI has investigated in this same case and both times returned the finding that there was no wrongdoing on my part. I have never before even been mentioned as a party in this case. It is revealing that only after the Congress has taken office that the CBI suddenly and mysteriously changed its own finding to try and implicate me in the matter.

<b>It is clear that this action is motivated by political considerations and I strongly condemn the CBI for allowing itself to be exploited by the party in power </b>
She means IB Dy director MK Dhar.
<!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo--> <b>Rlys works overtime on Rs 60-cr link: Lalu village with Rabri’s </b>
Raghvendra RaoPosted online: Thursday, August 17, 2006 at 0000 hrs

NEW DELHI, AUGUST 16:While scores of railway projects wait to take off, work on the 20.9-km stretch between Hathua and Bathua Bazar on the Hathua-Bhatni section of North Eastern Railway is moving at a breakneck pace.

The line from Hathua will touch Lain Bazar, Salar Khurd, and Phulwaria before reaching Bathua Bazar, and all these places in Gopalganj district will have new railway stations. Salar Khurd will serve as the station for Rabri’s Salar Kalan.

Rabri is learnt to have requested Yadav to get both their villages connected by rail some time back.

Rs 230 crore has been earmarked for the 79.64-km Hathua-Bhatni link, announced in this year’s Railway budget. The 20.9-km stretch between Hathua and Bathua Bazar will have three major and 10 minor bridges and is estimated to cost around Rs 60 crore.

Railway officials maintain that, although the “two-village link” suggestion has influenced work on the stretch, the project is not unjustified. “The area between Hathua and Bathua Bazar is heavily populated and there had been demands in the past to lay a railway line,” said a North Eastern Railway official.

With a deadline set for December, North Eastern Railway officials are racing against time. The minister is learnt to have expressed his desire to inaugurate the line on Durga Pooja.

Officials said work on embankments, level-crossings and bridges was “at an advanced stage” and was being carried out on a “war footing.”

“Laying the tracks can be completed in 15 days and will be done as soon as all the rest of the works are completed,” said an official.
raghvendra.rao@expressindia.com [/font]

<b><i><span style='font-family:Times'><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Lalu has a rail coach factory for Sonia’s Rae Bareli</span></span></i></b>
<!--emo&Tongue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo--> <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Courier'>Sonia Gandhi the super duper PM is not happy after Malegaon and Mumbai bomb basts.

Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee may be formally designated the deputy prime minister and shifted to the Home Ministry to succeed Shivraj Patil who is believed to have lost confidence of Congress President Sonia Gandhi after the Malegaon and Mumbai bomb basts.

Sonia plans to move Patil out - Pranab Mukherjee is the new deputy PM with Home Ministry to stop terrorism.

According to media reports, The changes in the ministry that may also witness appointment of a full-fledged foreign minister are likely next week after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh returns from his tour of Brazil and Cuba . Mukherjee is already number two in the government and has been holding lot many responsibilities as head of in-numerous Groups of Ministers (GoM) and committees and hence Sonia Gandhi wants to prop him up as the deputy prime minister, sources in 10 Janpath disclosed. They said she sees in Mukherjee not only a fire-fighter of the Congress to amicably settle any disputes that arise with the UPA partners and its left allies where Dr Manmohan Singh flounders but she also wants to remove the pro-American image of the UPA government by designating him as the deputy prime minister. Not happy with Dr Manmohan Singh not agree on the names she suggested to fill the foreign minister's post that had fallen vacant from the resignation of Natwar Singh, the sources said Sonia Gandhi has already sent the signal of her preference for more responsibilities to Mukherjee by nominating him to lead the Indian delegation to the UN General Assembly session. As regards Shivraj Patil, the sources said the Congress President lost her cool on him at the party's core group meeting in the Prime Minister's House Friday night when he sought to explain that the intelligence had reports of the possible bomb blasts in Malegaon town in Nasik district of Maharashtra. She reportedly shot back that he cannot get away by repeating every time that he had information about the attack. "What were you doing then? Why did you not take remedial steps to prevent the attack," she reportedly asked and flared up at Patil for his response to the Malegaon incident. "At least, your postures and statements should be such that they induce public's confidence, Sonia Gandhi was quoted telling Patil. Sources said Patil always enjoyed full confidence of Sonia Gandhi and as such her sudden blasts on him became more blatant when she cut him short trying to explain on Malegaon saying that nobody is interested in his "lectures" and switched subject to further attack him on the issue of appointment of governors. She wanted to know why the Home Ministry has not filled the vacancy in Andhra Pradesh even after six months of Sushil Kumar Shinde joining the ministry and why the NDA-appointee M K Seth continues to be Chhattisgarh governor even 18 months after completion of his term. Sources said her posers were a clean indication that she is not happy with Shivraj Patil continuing as the Home Minister. They said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh intervened to pacify her and assure her that all issues that concern her about the image of the Congress and the Government would be attended by him on priority basis after he returns. Those who attended the Congress Core Group meeting were Pranab Mukherjee, HRD Minister Arjun Singh, Ahmed Patel, political secretary of the Congress President, and senior CWC member and former Kerala Chief Minister A K Anthony. </span></span>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Singh was PM candidate in ’99 too: Sonia </b>
New Delhi: Congress president Sonia Gandhi on Wednesday night disclosed that Dr Manmohan Singh was her Prime Ministerial choice even in 1999 when she had staked claim to form the new government after the fall of Atal Behari Vajpayee-led coalition.
“I think so,” she told NDTV in an interview when she was asked whether Dr Singh would have been Prime Minister if her attempt to form a government had succeeded in 1999.

Mrs Gandhi said:<span style='color:red'> “Yes, in fact, I went first by myself and second time with Dr Singh. Yes, that is true.” </span>She was asked to confirm by the questioner about what he was told by the late President K.R. Narayanan that she had conveyed to him that if Congress were to form the government, Dr Singh would be Prime Minister.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:f*(k--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/f*(k.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='f*(k.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>Rahul at UN for diplomatic lessons</b>

There is an article by Tavleen Singh in today's Indian express online about Sonia Gandhi, her leadership, UPA longevity, etc. Singh questions how long Sonia, or the congress, thinks she/they can continue to govern India simply on the 'charisma' of the gandhi clan, without showing any real susbstance.

The article reveals nothing new. Yes, we get the picture...we got it quite a long time ago - that Sonia and her brood are exploiting the Gandhi name to garner votes from the poor, rural, ignorant masses of India to further their own personal agendas (personal wealth, power, fortune, etc..)

But what was more interesting, and amusing, was some of the reader responses. While nearly all the responses agreed with Singh's assessment on Sonia, and expressed disapproval for the Gandhi clan, here's one from some converted Christo from a god-forsaken island, expressing firm faith on Sonia's ability to lead the Indian shepards towards the light (just like she and the masses in these islands were led by the missionaries not so long ago). Boy, did I have a good chuckle!

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Charisma comes to Lady Sonia as God's blessings

  The petty and satanic jealosy displayed by T Sing against the great, pure, saintly lady of Faith Soniya Ghandey is to be expected. After all charisma is not given to T Sing inspite of her enslavement to Lusifer. Charisma has been given to Soniya because she is true to her Faith, and has taken up the gauntlet to save the souls of misguided Indian populace of one billion who are waiting for God's word for salvation and harvest to His Kingdom, Soniya has been blessed by charisma so that she can lead these sheep of the subcontinent to her Father's eternal light and Heavenly abode.

Posted by: Holly Ishprit, United States Virgin Islands, 31-10-2006 at 0457 hours IST

Indian express
Slogans during traders agitation in Delhi.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Incidentally, the crowd bayed for the blood of Congress leaders with slogans like, "Sonia Gandhi kuch to bolo, Italy jakar hotel kholo" and "Sonia, Sheila hosh me aao, Dilli chhodo, Paris Jao".

Although Rambabu Sharma - who led the rally in Malviya Nagar at the head of the procession in an open tempo - counselled protestors not to use intemperate language, it was without much effect.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sonia Gandhi kuch to bolo, Italy jakar hotel kholo" and "Sonia, Sheila hosh me aao, Dilli chhodo, Paris Jao".  <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:lol:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /><!--endemo-->

Vatican might be a better choice than Italy and Paris!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The knives are out? Natwar-Sonia spat may just be the beginning

By Rajinder Puri

Just after the Volcker controversy surfaced I urged on Mr Natwar Singh through these columns to speak the truth, clear the air and create a catalyst to reform the system. He had already been blamed. In defiance of all logic, the Congress party and its president were given a clean chit.

Mr Natwar Singh carried a letter from Mrs Sonia Gandhi for President Saddam. The delegation team was approved by Mrs Gandhi. The trip was financed by the Congress party. The Congress party, along with Mr Natwar Singh, had been named in the Volcker report as a beneficiary in the Oil-for-Food programme. Singling out Mr Natwar Singh for blame did not make sense.

On December 14 2005 I wrote: "Mr Natwar Singh's reputation is already damaged. Should he not, to clear the air, put pen to paper and write the whole truth about what exactly happened? And add a critique of how political funding in the present system is managed?

Mr Natwar Singh can convert challenge into opportunity. He could serve society and change politics." Mr Natwar Singh did no such thing. Meanwhile the political atmosphere became murkier. A proliferation of sting operations by media and by official agencies continued to worsen things.

Corruption and personal vendettas seemed to be the sole motivation for political discourse. On January 18 2006 I wrote: "The overall scene, therefore, is reminiscent of the mafia gang wars during the last century. The future of the present political class may not differ very much from what befell the mafia gangsters of America."

The mafia gangsters of course periodically destroyed each other through gang wars. Some days back Mrs Gandhi gave a TV interview in which she accused Mr Natwar Singh of having betrayed her and the Congress party. Mrs Gandhi did not mince words. The masks were off. The fight was out in the open.

What did impel Mrs Gandhi to choose this moment to attack Mr Natwar Singh? Has the Volcker probe succeeded in insulating Mrs Gandhi and nailing Mr Natwar Singh? One can only speculate. But a response from Mr Natwar Singh was a foregone conclusion. He did not disappoint. He gave his own interview to the media in which he made some interesting, and decidedly odd, observations.

Mr Natwar Singh told the media: "Anything can happen against me and my family. I can be harmed. My house can be raided. My grandsons could be harmed. Anything could be planted, and I could be sent to jail. Any intelligence agency may put something in my house, a file or a document, anything. I had been in the government, I know their tactics."

He went on to add: "This is a conspiracy, there is no doubt about it. Whatever has happened, happened before our leader and with her permission. Why don't they sack me from the party if I am guilty? You see, I know a lot of things about the party and the leadership!" Well, well! Shades of Godfather? This isn't an exchange between Chhota Rajan and Chhota Shakeel but between top national leaders.

The government could `harm' him and his grandsons? It could plant false evidence in his house? He claims he knows the government's tactics because he `had been in the government'.

One can only wonder how he coped with all this while serving in the government. Clearly, Mr Natwar Singh is rattled. In this state people often blurt out the truth, and their worst fears. He should be encouraged to speak the truth. Mrs Gandhi should also be encouraged to speak the truth.

All politicians in all parties should speak the truth. They will feel much better. Truth purifies. Mr Natwar Singh also made a veiled threat. He claims to know a lot about the party and the leadership. He could make exposures. That would be truly wonderful! It would be too much perhaps to expect Mr Natwar Singh to reveal all about the Volcker deal. He has already said everything was done with Mrs Gandhi's permission.

But what was everything? Revealing that could damage Mr Natwar Singh too. It is doubtful if he will speak on the Volcker findings. More likely he could spill the beans about various other matters he gathered through his long and unstinted record of being the dynasty's loyal servant. It would help clean politics here if he recalled them. To jog his memory one might put a few questions to him about whether there was any truth in various reports doing rounds in the grapevine.

Would Mr Natwar Singh tell us if it is true that Mrs Gandhi requested him to intercede in a case involving the arrest in America of Mr Rahul Gandhi along with a lady friend for possessing over 100,000 US dollars of unaccounted money?

Did Mr Rahul Gandhi spend a few nights in jail? Did Mr Natwar Singh approach Mr Brajesh Mishra, then National Security Advisor to the NDA government, for help? Did Mr Mishra contact American authorities who sought a personal request from the Prime Minister? And did Prime Minister Vajpayee oblige, securing thereby Mr Rahul Gandhi's release? One recalls newspapers reporting a case in the Lucknow court connected to this incident. But nothing was heard of it subsequently. Like much else, it either died a quiet death or languishes in the freezer.

Earlier, I had suggested that Mr Natwar Singh could shed light on Mrs Gandhi's visit to Moscow on June 14, 2005, when he accompanied her. What Mr Natwar Singh can tell us now is whether it is true that in Moscow they were joined by Mr Ottavio Quattrocchi? And whether it is true that from Moscow Mrs Gandhi and Mr Quattrocchi visited Geneva in Switzerland? Earlier I had also asked questions of Mrs Sonia Gandhi.

Such as whether there was truth in the detailed allegations made against her by Ms Yevgenia Albats, in her book, about the KGB paying her two billion US dollars. Ms Albats, it might be recalled, is one of Russia's outstanding journalists.

She was a member of the Soviet Union's KGB Commission set up by former President Yeltsin. She had access to all KGB papers. Despite the reputation of the author, and the gravity of the charges, until now there has been only deafening silence from Mrs Gandhi and the Congress party. This is inexplicable. If the nation's most powerful politician is perceived to be bankrolled by foreign powers, what credibility can this system have?

If the Albats' allegation published in a reputed research book is false Mrs Sonia Gandhi should promptly deny it. Otherwise her silence could be perceived as assent.


<b>Not nice Once again, Sonia Gandhi has shown down the PM</b>.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Looking back, it is hard to find an Indira Gandhi 1969 parallel here with Sonia Gandhi. She tried with Sitaram Kesri after Narasimha Rao. He was ignoble. In 2004, denied or relinquishing the primeministership, whatever, Sonia stayed out in the party to control the government. First, it was formal informal control as chairperson of the National Advisory Council. When she had to quit that as well, she remained truly out of the government, but ironically, truly in as well.

That she is super PM is not in doubt. But her outside control of government, the opposite way of Nehru or Indira Gandhi, is extreme, and is undermining it. On FTA, there was a needless controversy in which the PM was demeaned. On SEZs, she correctly woke up to the scam in farming lands. But couldn't she have pressured the government from within? It's after all her own chosen PM. On FDI in higher education, she trumps the government, or rather, Arjun Singh. Did she hear him out? Even if she had to do what she did, couldn't she have done it quietly? On the petrol/ diesel price cut, she has got the PM and petroleum minister red-faced. Why embarrass the government?

It's either one or the other extreme. It's never been harmonious government-party relations. Perhaps it is utopian. In the established democracies of Britain and America, there is tension between the ruling party and government. But it's never so played out. What, ultimately, is Sonia getting out of showing down her PM and government? That she is the super PM? That she counts and no one else? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Nov 29 2006, 11:47 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Nov 29 2006, 11:47 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Not nice Once again, Sonia Gandhi has shown down the PM</b>.<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Looking back, it is hard to find an Indira Gandhi 1969 parallel here with Sonia Gandhi. She tried with Sitaram Kesri after Narasimha Rao. He was ignoble. In 2004, denied or relinquishing the primeministership, whatever, Sonia stayed out in the party to c ................... <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think this is true. It looks that congress want to project sonia as "aam aadmi" supporter and doesn't care about image of PM since he is not supposed to fight election in first place.
Way things have gone by in last few days, it looks that PM and oil minister had already decided to decrease oil prices and when they conveyed this to party, sonia was asked to make a public statement before that so that it would look like she is the one responsible for and cong can get credit for this. It was same in case of FDI in education when she conveyed what govt had already decided.
Do you think it is right to under mine PM of the country? Are you suggesting she is stupid and foolish who will act according to Congress, if that is the case then its better she should go back to her bar maid job. Otherwise she should take responsibility not takes cover when her halo is in danger.
In both case, office of PM had become just a joke.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->congress who worked hard, won election and are doing what they think is right<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, let me repeat again, Congress won only 5 more seats, but they were able to get Left to support them. Half of NDA colation just moved to UPA side.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->her bar maid job.
..now who is censoring this?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was her first job in London. Check her job history.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BottomLine: Congress formed the govt. and BJP is in opposition. its all that matters<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
True. BJP's not good at hoodwinking people into thinking that they are different than commies before election and going into bed with them after election.

Anish: Akshay Kumar has been refered to as thai cook on this forum. Valmiki as robber in his past life. Gandhi as a male nurse.
So, please keep up.
Sonia reference was the mediocrity exhibited at every avenues and opportunity presented and lack of requisite skills to bring a nation diverse as India together. Any dimwit having a favorable last name and being married (or born) in a right family can hold a bunch of self serving groupies together - current Bush another example like Sonia.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but its BJP's fault that country is in such a situation today. if they can't do their ground work properly, they have no right to blame congress who worked hard, won election and are doing what they think is right.
So you crediting Congress for the good work at polling stations for past 50+ years and BJP for ills in the country for running India for 5 years?
And the problems in India for past 3 years? BJPs fault for NOT running the country?

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)