NEW DELHI, May 9, 2013
Supreme Court wants law to insulate CBI from interference

J. VENKATESAN

The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati to take instructions from the government and let it know whether a law could be enacted to insulate the CBI from extraneous influence and make the agency an independent organisation and to ensure its functional autonomy.

A three-Judge Bench comprising Justices R.M. Lodha, Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph told the A-G: “We would be happy if a law is put in place before the next date of hearing [on July 10.] The government need not wait for Parliament approval. There are other methods to achieve the objective [implying that an ordinance could be promulgated] and it would be a golden day if that happens.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-wants-law-to-insulate-cbi-from-interference/article4696677.ece

Congress gains 1.8%, BJP loses 13.9%
TNN | May 9, 2013, 02.39 AM IST

The BJP would like to believe that it got decimated in Karnataka only because of the split in the party and former chief minister B S Yediyurappa's party Karnataka Janata Paksha (KJP) playing spoiler, but that is only a half-truth. A detailed analysis of vote shares shows that the BJP's share declined by a massive 13.9% from 2008 to settle at 20%. The KJP, on the other hand, won only 9.8% of the votes cast.

What that means is that the combined BJP-KJP tally in this election is still 4.1% less than the saffron party's vote in 2008 and almost 7% lower than the Congress' vote share of 36.5%. Interestingly, the Congress gained only 1.8% over its 2008 vote share and the JD(S) added a mere 1.1% to its share from fi ve years ago, but given the massive decline in the BJP's tally that was enough. In the process, the JD(S) not only matched the seat tally of the BJP, but even went just marginally ahead in terms of votes getting 20.1% of the total votes polled.

A region-wise analysis shows the BJP suffered the worst consequences of the split in the Bombay-Karnataka region in the northwest of the state, the Hyderabad-Karnataka region in the north-east, in Central Karnataka and in the south's Malnad area. The KJP picked up 10.3% , 14.2%, 19.8% and 16.8% respectively of the votes in these four regions. Had this been added to the BJP's tally, it would have been just behind the Congress in vote share in Bombay-Karnataka and Hyderabad-Karnataka and clearly ahead in Malnad. Between them, these three regions account for 104 seats. However, the BJP can't blame the split for its debacle in the coastal region consisting of the districts of Uttara and Dakshin Kannada and Udupi. Its seat tally dropped from 10 in 2008 to 3 this time in this part of the state because of a 7.2% decline in vote share. The KJP got only 2.5% of the votes here.

Similarly in Old Mysore, the largest region with 87 seats in the southern parts, BJP's vote share collapsed from 27.5% to just 16% now though the KJP won only 6.7% of the votes here. Apart from the KJP, another party that made a signifi cant impact as a minor player was the Badavara Shramikara Raitara Congress Party led by B Sriramulu, exaide of Sushma Swaraj and confi dant of the Reddy brothers of Bellary, and also a minister in the BJP government in Karnataka. While state-wide his party's vote share was just 2.7%, in Hyderabad-Karnataka, Sriramulu's home turf, it polled 8.4% of the votes and in central Karnataka it got 6.4%, enough to make a difference to the bigger picture.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/specials/news/Congress-gains-1-8-BJP-loses-13-9/articleshow/19960287.cms?

Coalgate scam: Careful, Mr PM, the fig leaves are falling off…
by Venky Vembu 55 mins ago

It’s only the early days of summer in New Delhi, but there is already a distinct autumnal feel to the political air in the Delhi durbar. That’s because the fig leaves that were hiding the nakedness of the UPA government in the ongoing court drama over the Coalgate scandal are steadily falling off. The sight of a denuded government, stripped of any residual sense of morality and propriety, is far from edifying to anyone who cares for decorum in public life, and yet the courtiers of the Manmohan Singh government are brazening it out, unwilling to acknowledge that the emperor has no clothes.

The Supreme Court’s observations on Wednesday, while hearing the CBI Director’s affidavit on the agency’s conduct during the investigation into alleged criminality in the allocation of coal blocks, were markedly restrained, even if individual remarks sounded harsh in the extreme.

For instance, the court made no direct censure of or even make an observation on the conduct of Law Minister Ashwani Kumar, who – it has now been established – convened a meeting in his office to get the CBI to make substantive changes (not just “grammatical changes”) to its draft report of its preliminary enquiry into the coal block scandal. And even in respect of Attorney-General Goolam Vahanvati, who has been shown to have wilfully misrepresented facts (lying, in other words) in an open court, the court pointedly did not address the petitioner’s case for initiation of proceedings for making false statements.

How long can Ashwani Kumar dodge responsibility? PIB
And yet, taken in their totality, the court’s observations have the effect of establishing that the UPA government was actively looking to interfere in a criminal investigation in which it was the primary accused, so to speak, and thereby obstruct the due process of justice. What’s worse, the court’s observations have exposed the web of lies that top law officers of the government wove at the behest of the political executive, evidently to cover their tracks once the court was alerted to the fact that much mischief was afoot with the objective of derailing the CBI investigation.

Even for a government that has so lowered the bar of accountability to which Ministers ought to be held in a democracy, the court’s observations should have amounted to a distinct rap on the knuckles. But courtiers of the government are claiming that since observations by the court don’t amount to a formal passing of strictures, there was no overarching compulsion for either the Law Minister or for the law officers to resign or otherwise submit themselves to public accountability.

Alongside all this, we see another sordid saga unfolding – of Railway Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal being drawn inexorably into the corruption case against his nephew, who is being investigated by the CBI for receiving bribes to secure plum railway postings, which he evidently boasted, his mama could deliver. There too, the Congress has taken the untenable view that Bansal – who has effectively disowned his nephew – doesn’t need to resign.

The Supreme Court’s observations on Wednesday were focussed on the CBI’s unwillingness to exercise its autonomy from political interference in the manner in which a Supreme Court ruling in 1997 empowered it. The court observed memorably that the investigating agency had allowed itself to become a “caged parrot” with “many masters” – and sternly forbade it from sharing any more details of the investigation into the coal block allocations with the political executive.

But, somewhat quizzically, while coming down harshly on the CBI, the court was overly restrained in addressing the flip side of the case, which is that if the CBI feels enslaved today, it is because it is the slavemaster, in this case the political executive, who wields the authority over it. It’s true, of course, that the court has directed the government to report back on the measures it plans to put in place, including bringing in legislation before Parliament, to ensure that the CBI investigations are immune to political interference. But in this express case, it has stopped well short of going to the root of what amounts to brazen interference by Ashwani Kumar, evidently to shield Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, by securing a self-serving preliminary report from the CBI (and then getting the top law officers to lie about it in court).

It is this that the Congress and its courtiers cite as the last residual fig leaf to claim that no shame adheres to the UPA government.

But read between the lines of the court’s observations, and you will see that even the court has tangentially called even the Prime Minister to account for the cover-up into the effort to sabotage the CBI investigation. Everyone wants to make changes to the Preliminary Enquiry 2 report, in respect of the coal block allocations made between 2006 and 2009. Why, it wondered, would the Joint Secretaries in the Prime Minister’s Office and the Law Ministry go over to the CBI office to vet the draft report of its investigations?

These observations acquire significance because it was Manmohan Singh who served as Coal Minister between 2006 and 2009, and it was under his direct watch that the mala fide allocations of coal blocks were made. And the unstated premise of the entire “sordid saga” – as the court put it – is that everyone around, from the Law Minister downwards, is looking to ring-fence Manmohan Singh from personal culpability in the scandal.

Which leads to the Rs 1.86 lakh crore question. If, as the UPA government claims, there was no wrongdoing in the allocation of coal blocks, why did the Law Minister and officials from the Prime Minister’s Office go to such elaborate lengths to doctor the CBI’s draft report? And why would they get the Attorney-General and the Additional Solicitor-General to lie in court about the extent of their involvement in the vetting of the report?

And just how small does the fig leaf have to get for the Manmohan Singh government to realise that it is certifiably nude?

http://www.firstpost.com/business/coalgate-scam-careful-mr-pm-the-fig-leaves-are-falling-off-765211.html

A Hindu hell on earth: Families are being torn apart by their desperation to flee persecution in Pakistan



Andrew Buncombe

Tuesday, 7 May 2013
They had waited for years. So when the opportunity came they took it, even if it meant leaving behind friends and neighbours, brothers and husbands. Even a three-day-old baby boy. Seven weeks ago, almost 500 Hindus from Pakistan crossed into India on the pretence of visiting a religious festival. In reality, they had come to escape religious persecution and poverty. Some said they would rather commit suicide than go back.


“Pakistan is worse than hell for Hindus,” said one of those who managed to flee, Laxman Das, a fruit trader from Hyderabad.

Though Pakistan was established as a state for Muslims, the original vision of its founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was of a place of tolerance and inclusion.

“You are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the state,” he said in speech in August 1947.

Yet Jinnah’s vision has steadily been eroded. Today, as Pakistan prepares for a historic election on 11 May, its Christians and Hindus, which together comprise perhaps 3 per cent of the population, face persecution and assault. Some have fled.

“If people have any resources, they want to leave here,” Dr Ramesh Kumar Vankwani, of the Pakistan Hindu Council, said from Karachi.

The Pakistanis who have made their way to the village of Bijwasan, not far from Delhi’s international airport, all belong to the same low Hindu caste and come from the same part of Sindh province. They have applied unsuccessfully for visas to India for years and hit upon the idea of asking to visit the Kumbh Mela festival, the most auspicious date in the Hindu calendar. Though the festival is held every three years, it is only every 12 years that it is held at the confluence of the sacred Ganges and Yamuna rivers in Allahabad. This year the festival was held in February and March.

“Getting a passport is not so difficult. But getting a visa is very hard,” said 35-year-old Hanuman Prashad, another fruit trader from Hyderabad, explaining how they told the Indian authorities they wished to attend the festival.

The Hindus, who came in three groups, said their biggest motivation to leave was the challenge of educating their children. There was discrimination in government schools, where they were referred to as “kafirs”, told to go and work in the fields and obliged to recite the six kalimas, or tenets, of Islam.

For girls, it was even more difficult, so much so that few of the families bothered sending their daughters to school. “For the wealthy Hindus it is easier – they can send their children to better schools or else abroad,” Mr Das said.

They said the situation had become worse since the rule of the military leader General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who seized power in 1977 and for the next decade oversaw an increased Islamisation of Pakistan. Following the notorious destruction of India’s Babri mosque by a Hindu mob in 1992, the Hindus of Pakistan were often the victims of revenge attacks.

While hundreds of Hindus received visas to attend the festival, not everyone did. Almost everyone at Bijwasan – where they are squeezed more than 20 to a room in a former school, the air filled with flies – can tell a story of leaving someone behind.

Hanuman Prashad, who came to India with his wife and six children, said his parents had not been successful. When it came to leaving, with the knowledge he would not return, everyone wept. But his parents were insistent. “Whatever happens to us, go and save your life. Take your kids,” they told him.

Bharti Sulanki had travelled to the crossing at the Pakistani border town Khokhrapar with her husband and seven children, the youngest being only three-days old. She said the Pakistani authorities demanded a passport and visa for the newborn, too young even to have been named.

She said she pleaded with the guards to let her cross with the boy she was still breastfeeding but they refused. Dazed and tear-stained, Ms Sulanki said she believed she had no alternative but to hand the child to a relative who had come to the border with them. Since then she has been unable to make contact to discover what has happened to her baby.

She said she had prayed they would get their visas earlier so she could have given birth in India.

“I had no option,” she sobbed. “I sacrificed the baby for the sake of the other six children, so they can have an education.”

A 30-year-old pregnant woman called Laran Keswari was equally distraught. She had crossed with her five children but her husband, who is disabled, had not obtained a visa. She told him she did not want to go without him but he insisted she go ahead for the sake of their children. “God is on your side,” he told her.

Ms Keswari is anxious about how she will manage by herself with her children, hoping against hope that her husband will be able to join them. “We speak on the phone but we are both always crying,” she said.

An irony of the group’s exodus from Pakistan, a journey to escape discrimination, is that it was made possible by people with fundamental and, in some cases, extremist views. Their host in Bijwasan was Naher Singh, a former customs officer and policeman, who accommodated another smaller group of refugees in 2011. He asked his rent-paying tenants to leave his property and housed the Pakistanis instead. “These people are my God and Goddess. I worship them,” he said.

Mr Singh said the cost of feeding and housing the 483 people was met by various hardline Hindu groups, including the Vishva Hindu Parishad, the Bajrang Dal and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Some of their members have been linked to confrontations with minority groups across India.

Mr Singh, who has been rousing his refugee guests at 3am to lead them in yoga and religious chants, said he wanted to forcibly drive Muslims from India. He made a series of inflammatory remarks.

Mr Singh was accompanied by a Hindu priest. Asked if Mr Singh was not displaying the sort of bigotry from which he claimed to be saving the refugees, the priest replied: “This is God talking through him. And I agree with him.”

The government of India has yet to publicly comment on the refugees or its plans for them. Sending them back to Pakistan would be politically fraught. Pakistan has not commented on the matter.

Mr Singh said he would fight any attempt to repatriate the refugees and claimed they would be accepted by the local community. He said: “We will find jobs for them here in the villages.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/a-hindu-hell-on-earth-families-are-being-torn-apart-by-their-desperation-to-flee-persecution-in-pakistan-8606774.html

Chinese are coming…

By Bharat Verma Issue: Vol. 28.2 Apr-Jun 2013 | Date : 09 May , 2013

After the Mughals and the British, it now appears to be China’s turn to encircle, enslave and make India a surrogate power. Apparently, China firmly believes that two tigers cannot live on the same mountain.
Under the weight of its collective incompetence, New Delhi continues to fiddle while Beijing unleashes a creeping invasion.

Pacifism may be good for the individual’s soul but it is suicidal for a nation’s security. With the advent of Buddhism, Tibet, wallowing in pacifism, lost its freedom. Yet South Block refuses to learn. Nehru was too petrified to come to the rescue of a small nation like Tibet. Nepal realized this and as insurance, opened up communication channels with China. The total collapse of India’s foreign policy saw Kathmandu exit our sphere of influence and become a vassal state of China. Bhutan will soon follow suit as it watches a helpless India unable to protect itself.

Under the weight of its collective incompetence, New Delhi continues to fiddle while Beijing unleashes a creeping invasion. The Chinese grand design envisions India as a surrogate power in Asia led by Beijing. However, the chinks in the Chinese armour are Tibet and Sinkiang. Despite the extraordinary infrastructure developed and the ability to induct multiple military divisions in Tibet, Beijing faces a rebellion, a wound that continues to fester.

Owing to the extraordinary incompetence of the Indian Defence Minister, the modernization of the Indian armed forces unfortunately is stuck in a groove for the last decade. Help of Western technology and India’s belated move to upgrade infrastructure in the North-east are points of major concern for China. Very few may have noticed that every time India moved closer to the United States, Beijing was upset and it successfully unleashed its lobby in India to counter this. Controlled media in Beijing vehemently criticized when the French Rafale was chosen by India for the Indian Air Force, terming France as ‘irresponsible’! Rapid induction of far superior Western technology into the Indian military and denied to the Dragon will upset the balance of power enjoyed by China in Tibet which the former is even today unable to fully integrate with the mainland. This chink in China’s armour needs to be exploited.

India will need robust minds and not pacifists, who lose the battle in their minds even before it begins…
With Japan, Taiwan and others fortified by a commitment by the US for protection against China’s foray in South China Sea disputes, Beijing is likely to make noises but will, for multiple reasons, concentrate militarily on the softest target available, the Indo-Tibet border.

First, Beijing’s assessment that the leadership in New Delhi is extremely weak and will not be able to respond to any developing crises is accurate. Second, the Chinese who minutely monitor all internal developments within India are aware of the deficiencies in manpower and the equipment within the military. They are witness to the veterans returning their medals in disgust to the President. Like Nehru, bereft of pragmatism, the political masters have simply not equipped the military with adequate lethality. Third, and possibly the most important consideration is that with the withdrawal of the American forces from Afghanistan, the strategic vacuum needs to be filled. Therefore, it is intelligent to not only keep India away from Afghanistan but also acquire as much territory as possible without firing a single shot in the Eastern Sector.

The weak-kneed Indian leadership, ill-equipped military, internal turmoil and China’s intention to occupy with the help of Pakistan military, the empty strategic space, aids its grand design.

By hiding hundreds of incursions into the Indian Territory from the people, the government has encouraged China to intrude 19 km inside in the DBO area enlarging its claims in Eastern Ladakh. China insists on changing the ground rules here as it supports Pakistan’s claim on J&K and calls it a disputed territory. This deep intrusion helps it prevent India playing the Gilgit-Baltistan and the POK card where, in connivance with Islamabad, PLA is involved in pacifying the area under the garb of construction activities to the advantage of its proxy.
Since China and Pakistan have joined forces against India, we should extend ‘moral support’ in Gilgit-Baltistan, POK and Balochistan.

India will need robust minds and not pacifists, who lose the battle in their minds even before it begins, to work out a counter plan against China and China-Pakistan combine to foil their attempts to illegally occupy our territory with an aim to dismember India. It will require a strong national leadership and induction of military thinking in the foreign office. The propaganda by the pacifists and the Chinese lobby, that since we are militarily not prepared, we need to concede our territory and self-respect, is not true. Nation’s have won with much less with the backing of firm resolve and strong generals, both political and military.

Despite the temporary reprieve and face-saving provided by withdrawal from DBO by the Chinese to India in view of the visit of their Prime Minister, the incursions and land grabbing will continue.

The Indian game plan, therefore, should be based on the following:

The rebellion in Tibet for independence must be provided with ‘moral support’. India also needs to revisit Dalai Lama’s government-in-exile, which is quietly supported by the Western Alliance.

Since China and Pakistan have joined forces against India, we should extend ‘moral support’ in Gilgit-Baltistan, POK and Balochistan. If Balochistan becomes independent, the Gwadar port will not be available to China causing a huge setback.

In the long term, invite technology transfer under joint ventures in private sectors with enhanced FDI of 49 per cent to create modern defence production facilities in the country.

India has trivialized the term ‘strategic partnership’ by signing it with all and sundry. It is in India’s interest to invest in strategic partnerships with Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam as also to create decisive political, military and economic relationship with the USA and the Western Alliance. The balance of power should remain in India’s favour.

It is important to appreciate that China and Pakistan are the only two countries that lay claim on huge chunks of Indian territory. Both are authoritarian regimes that conflict with our liberal values. Despite every effort at appeasement by New Delhi, they will endeavour to weaken our democratic structure.

Our investment in Afghanistan should not be wasted as the Americans withdraw. Alone and with international support (including Russia), India should extend ‘moral support’ to the Afghans and disallow the Taliban to take over with the help of Pakistan’s ISI.

Diversify economic interest away from dependence on Chinese goods by creating business-friendly environment for Japan, South Korea and the Western Alliance. The Chinese economy is slowing down and their need for the vast Indian market is huge. This is an interesting card in our arsenal.

Sprucing up the military and intelligence capabilities of India on a war-footing is vital since we face two naturally hostile fronts. Initially, quick imports of basic weapon systems are a necessity as it is not possible for a temporary compromise with national security as suggested by many analysts. In the long term, invite technology transfer under joint ventures in private sectors with enhanced FDI of 49 per cent to create modern defence production facilities in the country.

…under the prevailing confusion of demarcation of LAC, our military should intervene and create similar incursions on the Chinese side.

For a long time Indians and Chinese have, on the ground, been in possession of areas along LAC and China did not pose major objections. Cleverly after building the infrastructure and the military wherewithal, it started flexing its muscle by enlarging its claim in Eastern Ladakh by the 19 km incursion in the DBO sector. The claim by the Chinese lobby in India that they can induct 30 divisions against us makes them look like a ‘superman’.

The truth is that they need acclimatization of these troops for high altitude, which is time consuming and nullifies the element of surprise. On the other hand, India can build troop levels faster as it already has a functional Corps headquarters in place.

At the local level, incursions by Chinese troops must be stopped immediately and under the prevailing confusion of demarcation of LAC, our military should intervene and create similar incursions on the Chinese side. This should be the Standard Operating Procedure.

Otherwise New Delhi will lose the plot, territory and enormous self respect.

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/chinese-are-coming/

Indian American Intellectuals Forum
Email: Katarian@aol.com
Blogspot: Narainkataria.blogspot.com
(718) 478-5735/(718) 271-0453

 

May 8, 2013

 

SUB:  HINDUISM FACES ECLIPSE

 

Respected Colleagues:

 

Enclosed herewith please find an article “ HINDUISM  FACES ECLIPSE” prepared by our group. This article explains in details as to how the anti-Hindu forces within and without India are working  in tandem on an insidious mission to destroy our civilization and culture, and obliterate Hinduism from the  Indian soil.

 

In nutshell the articles says that what the Hindus of India are facing today is not terrorism. It is something much worse and sinister. It is a jihad proper, raw and gory in its medieval and macabre form, launched by Pakistan and other radical groups.  The Hindu leadership must realize that today Jihad is the only fully globalized enterprise across the world with millions of shareholders and franchises in more than 60 countries, including India, who are working overtime to destroy all non-Muslim nations

 

Warning Hindus the article further says that in this holy war, terrorism will be used as a strategic tool.  However, it has been kept under wraps by political leaders and mainstream English media to lull naïve and gullible Hindus into believing that everything is just fine. 

 

The article runs into 12 pages.  It requires a serious reading.  Please save it and study it at your leisure.

 

Best regards,

 

 

Narain Kataria

President

 

Indian American Intellectuals Forum
Email: Katarian@aol.com
Blogspot: Narainkataria.blogspot.com
(718) 478-5735

 

 

HINDUISM FACES ECLIPSE

Future of A Besieged Civilization

 

“There was a siege going on; it had been going on for a long time, but the 

besieged were the last to take notice of it.”

- Paula Fox

The conquest of India by Islamic invaders is a long and dreadful narrative of multiple ferocious wars between the invaders and the valiant Hindu Rajas who ruled over different parts of India during medieval times. The barbaric invaders, including Muhammad Ghauri and Babur, took morbid delight in building towers of the skulls of slaughtered ‘kaffirs’ (read Hindus), a stark fact, proudly recorded by a number of Muslim historians in great detail. Most braveheart Hindu rulers zealously defended their motherland, their subjects and above all their honor at a terrible cost; unlike the Arab conquest of the Persian empire within a short span of two decades and similar fate of Byzantine empire and smaller kingdoms of central Asia. In sharp contrast, the Islamic invaders had to fight multiple tortuous, gut-wrenching battles for centuries to subjugate the Hindus. The resistance offered by the masses to invaders and freebooters was formidable indeed. Occasionally there were some traitors, too, like Raja Jaichand of Kannauj, whose name has become synonymous with treachery.

 

The hostility between two kingdoms, namely the Chauhans of Rajasthan and Gahadwala Rajputs of Kannauj was a major cause of the defeat of Prithviraj Chauhan in 1192. Had the armies of two gutsy Hindu rulers stood united in the battle of Tarain, the invading armies could have been defeated.

 

The atrocities committed by Muslim rulers on Sikhs of Punjab and Marathas in south were horrendous. Jahangir had murdered the fifth Sikh Guru Arjan Dev in a most diabolical manner. The epitome of courage Arjan Dev was made to sit on a hot plate and hot sand was poured on him to torture him to death. Later on Aurangzeb, the cruelest of all Muslim kings not only beheaded Guru Tegh Bahadur, but also murdered four gallant sons of Guru Gobind Singh. Two elder sons, Sahibzade Ajit Singh and Junjhar Singh attained martyrdom in 1704 during the battle of Chamkaur Sahib, while the younger sons Fateh Singh and Zorawar Singh were bricked alive in 1705 at Sirhind by Faujdar Wazir Khan, under orders of Aurangzeb.

 

Starting with the invasion of Sind by Muhammad bin Qasim in 712 A.D. the next 900 years witnessed a relentless onslaught by hordes of Muslim invaders pouring in through Khyber and Bolan passes. Among the barbaric murderers and freebooters were Mahmud Ghazanvi, Muhammad Ghauri, Babur, Ahmad Shah Abdali and Nadir Shah. In fact, Guru Nanak has given in the Babur Vani a vivid description of the atrocities committed by invaders on the hapless Hindus of Punjab and north-western India. According to the eminent historian, Will Durant, “the Mohammedan conquest of India is perhaps the bloodiest story of history”. He calls it a discouraging tale, for its only lesson was that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace could be overthrown at any time by barbarians invading from without and multiplying within.” [Source: Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Part I, p. 459].

 

A detailed narrative of the tyranny and atrocities committed by Muslim invaders was given by a well known Muslim author and thinker, Rizwan Salim, who wrote in The Hindustan Times, New Delhi, on December 28, 1997, an article titled, “What the invaders really did?” justifying the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992. Rizwan Salim highlighted that the wrecking of Hindu temples went on from the early years of the eighth century to well past 1700 A.D. a period of almost 1000 years. [Source : The Hindustan Times, New Delhi, December 28, 1997]. Every Muslim ruler of Delhi (or Governor of the Province) spent most of his time fighting the Hindu kings in the north and the south, the east and west. Rizwan continues emphasizing that “savages at a very low level of civilization and no culture worth the name began entering India from the early eighth century onwards. Islamic invaders demolished Hindu temples, destroyed unaccountable sculptures and idols, plundered innumerable palaces and forts of the Hindu kings, killed vast number of Hindu men and carried off Hindu women. This story, the educated - and lot of even the illiterate Indians - know very well. The history books recount it in a remarkable detail^. [Source: Ibid].

 

Barely 66 years after independence, India's Hindu identity and centuries old ethos are again in grave peril. Sharply growing attacks on innocent Hindu citizens, their temples and targeting of unarmed pilgrims going to Amarnath and Vaishnodevi and repetitive attacks on Hindu festivals are clear pointers to the rising crescendo of a virulent jihad being waged against Hindus of India. Soon after Al Qaeda's attack on twin towers on September 11, 2001, a proclamation was made on Al Jazeera Television channel in October 2001 that in addition to the Christians and Jews, henceforth the so-called 'Hindu India' will also be the target of Islamic jihad. Within two months of that announcement a determined and indoctrinated group of Pakistan-trained Jihadis (including Afzal Guru and several others) attacked the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001. Thereafter thousands of terrorist attacks have been made across the country from Kashmir to Kanya Kumari. The avowed goal of jihadi warriors has been to destroy the faith of Hindu masses by terrorizing them in a bid to destroy their resolve to fight back - a strategy ordained in their scriptures and elaborately explained by a retired Pakistani Brigadier S.K. Malik in his book, The Quranic Concept of War. Unfortunately, the two most important facts that a regular jihad has been declared against Hindus of India, and that terrorism will be used as strategic tool in this holy war have been kept under wraps by political leadership and mainstream English media.

 

In India’s decadent culture of political correctness and pock-marked ‘taqaiyah’ of “paid news”, when no national leader dare muster the courage to speak truth, it fell to the lot of that irrepressible police officer, K.P.S. Gill , to speak out boldly in September, 2006, at a gathering of college students in Mumbai that the jihadis were trying to destroy the Hindu civilization. Gill's bluntspeak was indeed a timely warning. It is time, we Indians, smelt gunpowder rather than smelling coffee. We must realize that the dice of terror is heavily loaded against us on many counts, both internally and externally. Sandwiched as we are between the two terror factories of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the millennia-old Hindu civilization is under siege. Yet the ruling political dispensation continues to blame the peace-loving Hindus of unleashing ‘saffron terror’ against the Muslim minority. Although the sacred saffron color has been the traditional symbol of the valor and sacrifices of Hindus and Sikhs in defense of our motherland, today it is used in a pejorative sense by vote-bank besotted politicians and our ‘paid media’. They don’t understand that freedom-fighters had placed ‘color saffron’ on top of Indian tricolor to boost and promote the spirit of sacrifice among Indians. These anti-national dimwits need to be reminded that it was not for nothing that Sardar Bhagat Singh sang, “Mera rang de basanti chola” to his mother while he stood in Death Row. A clumsy attempt is being made to pass a law titled ‘Prevention of Communal & Targeted Violence Bill’.  The bill is being pushed in the Parliament to harass the majority community by blaming them for the rising crescendo of communal riots across India.

 

In her seminally researched tome, ‘The Politics of Communalism’, published in 1989, Zenab Banu, a Muslim scholar, had analyzed 74 cases of Hindu-Muslim riots which occurred between 1953 and 1977. She found that in 75 percent cases the rioting had been started by the Muslim community. To comprehend what causes communal violence, the National Advisory Council (NAC) and the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Chairperson are advised to read Zenab Banu’s scholarly book.

 

          Equally relevant for understanding the cause of fast-rising communal tension in India and abroad is the judicial verdict pronounced by Z.S. Lohat, Metropolitan Magistrate of Delhi on July 31, 1986, in a case under sections 153-A and 295-A IPC filed by Delhi police against two Hindus, Indra Sain Sharma and Rajkumar Arya, for publishing and circulating a poster in Hindi citing 24 ayats of the Quran under the caption, ‘Why Riots Take Place in the Country’. The ayats cited in the poster were taken verbatim from an authentic edition of the Quran translated in Hindi and published by a Muslim scholar, Mohammed Farooq Khan of Maktaba al-Hasnat of Rampur in Uttar Pradesh. In his book the author had provided the original Arabic text of the Quran, along with Hindi and English translations reproduced in parallel columns. On the basis of a complaint lodged with the police the two Hindu activists were arrested and charged under Sections 153-A and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code for circulating 24 ayats of the Quran which commanded the Muslims to fight against the followers of other religions. The ayats of Quran cited by the two accused persons were 9.5, 9.28, 4.101, 9.123, 4.56, 9.23, 9.37, 5.5, 33.61, 21.98, 32.22, 48.20, 8.69, 66.9, 41.27, 41.28, 9.111, 9.58, 8.65, 5.51, 9.29, 5.14, 4.89 and 9.14.

 

The poster further added that “there are numerous other ayats of the same sort. Here we have cited only twenty-four ayats. Obviously these ayatscarry commandments which promote enmity, ill-will, hatred, deception, fraud, strife, robbery and murder. That is why riots take place between Muslims and non-Muslims in this country as well as (the rest of) the world.” The poster claimed, “In the above mentioned twenty-four ayats of the Quran Majid, Mussalmans are commanded to fight against the followers of other faiths. So long as these ayats are not removed (from the Quran), riots in the country cannot be prevented.

 

On behalf of the government the Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the ayats at serial No. 2,5,9, 11 to 19 and at serial No.22 in the poster were either not in the Quran, or that they were distorted version of the ayats in the Quran. The accused, however, rebutted the arguments of the government prosecutor and asserted that the ayats cited by them were part of the Quran and had been taken verbatim from the book of Mohammed Farooq Khan and these do exhort the Muslims to fight against the followers of other faiths. They submitted that so long as these ayats continued to be part of the Quran Majeed, communal riots in India cannot be prevented.

 

After hearing both sides and discussing their arguments, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate discharged the two Hindus, Inder Sain Sharma and Rajkumar, on the ground that prima facie there was no case made out against them. No charge could be framed against the two accused persons because theayats reproduced in the poster were found to be true and correctly reproduced. The learned Magistrate stated in his order, “I have personally compared the disputed ayats with Quran Majeed (translated in Hindi) with notes by one Mohd Farookh Khan and found that the most of the ayats have been reproduced in the poster in the original form as is available in the Quran Majeed”. The learned Magistrate concluded, “In view of the above discussion, I am therefore of the view that there is no prima facie case against the accused as the offences alleged against the accused do not fall prima facie within the four corners of Sections 153-A /295-A.” The aforesaid judicial verdict clearly endorsed the view that certain ayats in the Quran have the potential to create communal violence! It is a matter of record that no appeal was filed against the historic judgment by the leaders of the Muslim community on whose complaint the two Hindus were arrested and prosecuted by the police. Apparently they knew very well that their holy book did preach hatred and violence against non-Muslims and for that reason they dare not challenge the judicial verdict by appealing to the High Court. Equally important is the fact that the Delhi government, too, did not think it prudent to file an appeal against the judgment and allowed the judicial truth to remain on record unchallenged. It is high time that the partisan members of the NAC read the aforesaid historical judgment and the relevantayats of the Quran to understand the growing cult of communal violence, even after partition of the country !

 

The proposed law, invented by NAC, gives the right to veto exclusively to the minority community in matters concerning communal violence by defining them as ’the group’ and by vesting extra-constitutional powers in a seven members super-outfit called the National Authority for Communal Harmony. This super-outfit comprising four members of the minority communities (including the Chairman and the Vice Chairman, both belonging to the minority community) has been assigned the responsibility for directing and overseeing the administration of the proposed vicious legislation. The deliberate inclusion of a provision sidelining the majority community in constituting the so-called National Authority shows the immense distrust in the majority community and aims at promoting hatred against them. Interestingly the term ‘group” used in the bill applies only to the minority groups (both religious and linguistic). The draft bill does not make even a cosmetic pretense of protecting the so-called majority against violent attacks by members of the ‘group’.

 

The Bill aims at making the police, including the process of investigation, subservient to the whims of the minority-community-dominated National Authority. It is common knowledge that most communal riots cannot be controlled easily by the meager manpower presently available at a police station in India, or for that matter, even in a district. Worldwide there is a norm of at least 225 policemen for one lakh (one hundred thousand) of population. But in India the ratio of police to the population ranges between 125 to 150 per one lakh (one hundred thousand) of the total population. Despite repetitive jihadi attacks across the country and fast-paced spread of communal politics by vote-bank-besotted politicians, India remains the least and most ineffectively policed country. As against a measly manpower of 15-16 lakh policemen spread across 35 States and Union Territories, today the number of privately organized security guards in India stands at nearly 54 lakhs !

 

Apparently the members of the NAC of Sonia Gandhi do not know that every riot, especially a communal conflagration, erupts suddenly like a tornado and rips through its trajectory at a furious pace. Thereafter the storm of violence tends to slow down mostly on fourth or fifth day, after reinforcements are mustered and positioned. The NAC ought to know that it takes considerable time to collect additional manpower and procure reinforcements. The proposed Bill unfairly aims at penalizing the police officers and district magistrates on the bogus and trumped-up charge of partiality. Frankly, no member of the NAC appears to have the faintest idea of the anatomy and dynamics of riots. Nor are they aware of the ferocious momentum of riots and their un-anticipatable trajectory. They have no idea, absolutely none, of the methodology of riot control, much less any clue about the real cause of the mischief. None of the members of the NAC appears to have any “hands-on” experience of controlling a communal riot! Before embarking upon the anti-constitutional path chosen by them to blame Hindus for every riot, they will do well to learn a thing or two from the London riots of August 2011 which rapidly spread to nearly two dozen cities and could be controlled only after substantial reinforcements were spread across the riot’s trajectory and its furious pace had slowed down on the fifth day!

 

It is time that every Hindu and Sikh realizes that his ancient civilizational identity is under siege both internally and externally. The Hindu identity of India is under serious demographic threat, perhaps far more perilously than the Christian identity of Europe which continent is likely to become Muslim dominated in another 50 to 60 years. As pointed out by late Mari Bhat and Francis Zavier, two well known demographers, in a research study "the fertility of Muslims, which was about 10 per cent higher than that of Hindus before independence, is now 25 to 30 per cent higher than the Hindu rate".Furthermore, they disclosed that during the next 95 years (i.e., by 2101) the Muslim population will grow by 130 per cent, while that of Hindus will grow by only 50 per cent, even though Hindus will continue to remain the majority community. The following two major demographic trends are clearly visible:

 

i)                           First, any time between 2051 and 2071 the combined Muslim population of the sub-continent (i.e., India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, all counted together) will exceed the total Hindu population of the sub-continent; and

 

ii)                        Second, by 2101 India will have a large number of Muslim majority districts in the country, spread out across nearly ten States, including Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Kerala, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.

 

The definitive clue to the alarming demographic crisis likely to engulf India in near future is written across Statement 7 on page xlii of the Census 2001 Religion Data Report which provides the details of religious composition of 0-6 years old cohorts. An analysis of the 0-6 years old children (cohorts) reveals the following facts:

 

a) Although in 2001, Muslims constituted only 13.4 percent of India's population, their percentage in 0-6 years group was higher than Hindus by 21 percent thus giving them a headstart advantage of 7.6 percent in the matter of reproduction when these cohorts enter reproductive age, say any time after 2011 and beyond. 

b) It is well known, even officially admitted, that the acceptance of family planning among Muslims was 25 percent lower than among Hindus. The result: from 2015 onwards for the next three decades the growth rate of Muslims will be much faster than what has been witnessed during the last three decades. 

 

c) Out of 35 States and Union Territories (listed in Census 2001 Report), the percentage of 0-6 years Muslim cohorts is higher than that of Hindu cohorts in as many as 31 States and Union Territories (excepting Madhya Pradesh and Sikkim and 2 Union Territories of Andamans & Nicobar Islands and Daman & Diu where Hindu cohorts have a marginal advantage).

 

d) Due to fast declining proportion of Hindu cohorts, in the coming decades the percentage of youthful component among Hindus and Sikhs will go down substantially, while the youthful component of Muslims will remain much higher. That could spell trouble, as highlighted by Huntington, because aggressive youthful jihadis could overwhelm the sedate, introvert and ageing non-Muslims.

 

And moving forward let us look at another siege within - an equally challenging one. Due to sheer collapse of governance across the country, Pakistan's ISI has been able to establish a mammoth network of several thousand fifth-columnists to whom may be added several lakh sympathizers, including some Jaichandi politicians. They facilitate frequent jihadi attacks. And propelled and sustained by the double-barreled oxygen cylinder of foreign money and mega publicity, a powerful pro-terrorist lobby has been thriving which poses a sinister threat from within. This pro-terror cabal was seen in full cry against the nation's security apparatus when Isharat Jahan, a Lashkar-e-Tayeba mole, was killed in an encounter on the outskirts of Ahmedabad. The same lobby was into overdrive in an unseemly bid to seek clemency for Afzal Guru, the kingpin of Pakistan's jihadi onslaught on India's Parliament. Its malefic influence was manifestly visible during the visit of U.S. President, George Bush, to India in the first week of March 2006. No sane person could have imagined that the second publication of prophet Muhammad's cartoons in some European journals in February, 2006 , and the subsequent visit of the U.S. President in March, 2006, there will be widespread eruption of violent demonstrations in the Muslim streets of India. Mindless violence was unleashed by mobsters against members of the Hindu community which had nothing to do with the provocative cartoons which first appeared in the Danish newspaper,Jyllands-Posten, in September 2005. This onslaught, however, was entirely in keeping with the long standing tradition of pro-terrorist groups venting their ire on the majority community instead of protesting against the real culprits. The scale of violence witnessed during visit of George Bush in several cities and towns like Hyderabad, Lucknow, Meerut and Muzaffarnagar conclusively demonstrated massive radicalization of the Muslim community. In many cities prior preparations had been made to unleash violence on unsuspecting citizens. While hurling foul invectives at the visiting U S President, the demonstrators carrying aloft photographs of bin Laden unashamedly lionized him and eulogized the cult of suicide bombings. But the major targets of mobsters were Hindu shop-owners and passers-by.

 

As if responding to the praises showered on bin Laden and his tribe of suicide bombers, within the next four days the jihadis struck with a vengeance on Tuesday March 7, 2005, at the famous Sankatmochan temple in Varanasi. The three bomb blasts in the most sacred temple town of Hindus, easily comparable to what Mecca is to Muslims, resulted in death of 20 worshippers and injuries to nearly another 100 innocents.

 

The most shameful and ignominious jihadi attack on India was the Mumbai Massacre of 26^th November, 2008, during which the corporate capital of India was kept hostage for 3 days which was relayed across the world by 24/7 T.V. channel. But the worst aspect of the tragic narrative was that the Indian Mujahideen had circulated an e-mail on July 8, 2008, in which they unequivocally threatened the Hindus thus :

“(O Disbelievers) . We are guiltless of you and whatever worship beside Allah, we have rejected you and there has arisen between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever - unless you believe in Allah and Him alone (Quran 60.4) [Source: The Rise of Jihad, e-mail of Indian Mujahideen cited on the Wikipedia].

After quoting chapter and verse from Quranic verses in Arabic, the e-mail commanded the Hindus to convert to Islam in English in the following words:

“O Hindus! O’ disbelieving faithless Indians! Haven’t you still realized that the falsehood of your 33 crore dirty mud idols and the blasphemy of your deaf, dumb, mute and naked idols of Ram, Krishna and Hanuman are not at all going to save your neck, Insha-Allah, from being slaughtered by our hands”.[Source: Ibid].

 

What the Hindus of India are facing today is not terrorism. It is something much worse and sinister. It is jihad proper, raw and gory in its medieval and macabre form, launched by Pakistan. Time has come to speak out openly that a regular jihad is being waged to annihilate the centuries old civilizational ethos of India. On July 2005 a group of Lashkar goons tried to storm Ramjanambhoomi temple. Luckily they were killed by the alert CRPF contingent protecting the most sacred Hindu shrine. The unending series of attacks on Hindus and their temples, religious festivals and centers of excellence have all the trappings of a regular jihad ordained in their scriptures, as claimed by terrorists in their innumerable e-mails. Even though the soft Indian state and benumbed media invariably try to conceal the truth, the reality can no longer be denied. The repetitive targeting of the places of worship of Hindus and their festivals are part of a bigger design, perhaps a global design of jihadis to overrun India.

 

Over the years the terror groups, now deeply entrenched within India, have sent innumerable messages through regular bomb blasts and senseless killings that they will not allow the Hindus to live peacefully in their ancient homeland. Their avowed objective is to convert India into Dar-ul-Islam. Irrespective of the changing colors of the ruling political dispensation, the response of Indian government to the growing menace of jihad has been absolutely timid and weak-kneed - at times even cravenly submissive. Even after two long decades from their forced exile from Kashmir the five lakh Hindu refugees have not been able to return to their ancient homeland.

 

The real tragedy, however, is that despite centuries old barbaric encounters with jihadi Islam, neither Indian government, nor the Hindu society has learnt any lessons. In sharp contrast to the timid response of the Indian state, the USA, the UK and many European governments have displayed better understanding of the threat by taking on the jihadi groups in a no-nonsense manner. The effete response of Indian government and their failure to decode and analyze the jihadi matrix is both intriguing and deplorable. In openly trying to kill the so-called infidels and obliterate the civilizational ethos of Hindus the jihadis draw sustenance from the Preamble of Al Qaeda which proclaims that"Islamic governments have never been and will never be established by peaceful solutions and cooperative councils. They are established, as they have always been, by pen and gun, by word and bullet, by tongue and teeth". That is the real, raw and destructive face of militant Islam, now aggressively trying to overwhelm, subvert and subdue India.

 

Despite shenanigans of naysayer secularists, a feeling has grown in the Hindu community that India is moving in the direction of a religion-based faultline conflict, or civil war. Till recently the low-key discourse about the likelihood of a civil war erupting across the country was confined to hush-hush conversations in the drawing rooms of Luteyn's New Delhi and sun-kissed lawns of South Delhi. For a change, the simmering discontent among Hindus caused by relentless targeting of their temples and religious identity spiraling into a civil war was brought out boldly 6 years ago by the editor of TheEconomic Times, by initiating a debate on this politically shunned subject.Despite divergent views expressed by the three experts selected by the editor, including Ved Marwah, a former Commissioner of Police, Delhi, who also held gubernatorial posts, Prof. Neerja Gopal Jayal of JNU and Dr. Ajai Sahni of the Institute of Conflict Management, no one ruled out the possibility of a civil war engulfing the country.

 

Ordinarily a serious subject like the growing threat of civil war should have first received attention of prominent strategic analysts and mainstream politics-oriented newspapers and journals because lately it has been regularly alluded to at informal gatherings not only in the national metropolis, but even in many other cities and village towns. But the prevalent culture of political correctness afflicting our comatose middle class and leading lights of English media dare not bring out of closet this burning issue.

 

The much feared civil strife, spiraling out of the growing communal divide, is likely to be powered by the twin factors of fast growing jihadi attacks and galloping increase in the proportion of Muslim population. Anyone having his ears close to the ground can hear the rumblings of the coming civil strife in many parts of the country. The outbreak of communal clashes between Bodos of Assam and Bangladeshi infiltrators, the subsequent riots in Ranchi, Lucknow and Mumbai which led to sudden flight of thousands of innocents from Bangalore, Pune, Hyderabad and Mumbai to the north-east, caused by the hostility of Muslim mobsters are like straw in the wind pointing to the fearsome civil war like conditions erupting in several sensitive cities and States.

 

In the sensitive and populous State of Uttar Pradesh there have been repetitive eruptions of communal riots, numbering 27 within a span of few months. (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/27-communal-riots-in-up-since-sp-formed-govt-cm-admits-in-house/1083234/) Mutual hostility and fear are visible across many rural areas of Muzaffarnagar, Meerut and Ghaziabad districts of the State. Similar conditions prevail not only in most border areas of West Bengal, but in Kolkata city itself which has witnessed frequent sales of Al Qaeda sponsored Jihadi cassettes and CDs. Unless central government comes down heavily on jihadi groups and effectively prevents growing assaults on Hindu temples and centers of excellence, the situation is bound to get out of hand, perhaps sooner than one can imagine.

 

Yet the Goebblesian falsehood is propagated day in and day out by secularists that Al Qaeda has no followers in India and that jihadis have no support among Indian Muslims? Pray, then who were those fifty thousand mobsters mobilized by the Raza Academy on August 10, 2012, who attacked the police, the media and tried to savage women police officers during an arson-packed riot organized to protest against the so-called atrocities on Rohingyas in Burma and Bangladeshi infiltrators in Assam.

 

Again who were those thirty thousand momins (Muslims) who clappingly applauded the fiery hate speech of the notorious MIM leader Akbaruddin Owaisi on December 24, 2012, at Nirmal in Adilabad (Andhra Pradesh) threatening to kill 100 crore Hindus within 15 minutes, if the police were temporarily divested of their duties for that short duration? According to intelligence sources in numerous terrorist attacks staged in various parts of the country during the last 20 years quite a few thousand fifth-columnists operating in India were involved. Many of them had been trained in Pakistan and Bangladesh. For instance, one of the key ISI mole planted by Jaish-e-Mohammed, Maqbool Hussain, was involved in the July 2005 attack on Ramjanambhoomi temple. He was a resident of Dhubri in Assam and had reportedly spent five years (1992-97) studying in Deoband and had travelled to Bangladesh and Pakistan on forged travel documents to receive training and instructions from his jihadi masters.

 

Unfortunately despite centuries old violent encounters with jihadi Islam neither the Indian government, nor the comatose Hindu leadership, have learnt any strategic lesson. Time has come for Hindu leaders and masses to remember Arnold Toynbee's famous quote: "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder". Time has come to face the jihad courageously and stop sleep walking towards suicide cliff.

 

The Hindu leadership must realize that today Jihad is the only fully globalized enterprise across the world. And Messrs. Jihad Inc. have millions of shareholders and franchises in more than 60 countries, including India, who are working overtime to destroy all non-Muslim nations. It is time to act fast and boldly to break out of the ongoing jihadi siege of India. If we don't wake up now, it could be the 'last chance' for Hindu survival, before the threatened mega faultline strife near about 2050 or 2060 A.D. by which time the combined Muslim population of the sub-continent is likely to outstrip the Hindu numbers. That is the bottom line.

 

Narain Kataria

Sarasvati and Resurgent Hinduism
08/05/2013 13:36:27 Dr. Vijaya Rajiva

The importance of the references to the river Sarasvati in the Rig Veda is gaining greater significance today. Sarasvati is referred to in Book One of the Rig Veda as the giver of 'light', not only as precursor to her worship later as the patron of knowledge, but also as the possible focal point of Rig Vedic knowledge. We shall presently see why this reference is important.

Among the great discoveries of the last two decades has been the discovery of the Vedic river Sarasvati mentioned some 70 times in the Rig Veda and which disappeared owing to a variety of natural causes, mainly techtonic shifts and whose paleochannels have now been sighted by satellite photography.

Concurrent with this was the shift from the importance of the river Indus as the main site of the Indus Valley Civilisation (also known as the Harappan Civilisation) to the river Sarasvati.

The majority of the sites of the Harappan Civilisation are now known to have been on the once existent mighty river the Sarasvati, leading some Indic scholars to use the new name Sarasvati Sindhu Civilisation (Sindhu being the Sanskrit name for the anglicised Indus). And further studies have led to renewed attempts at the decipherment of the Indus Script (The Deciphered Indus Script 2000 by Dr. N. Jha & Dr. N.S. Rajaram & Indus Script Cipher 2010 by Dr. S.Kalyanraman). These are the most recent efforts in a long line of previous scholars.

Here, we shall note the importance given to Sarasvati, not only as the river but also as the giver of 'light' in the Rig Veda. Western scholars have traditionally dismissed the presence of the Goddesses (hereafter referred to as Devatas/Devis) on the Rig Veda and have downplayed them. Neverthless, for a correct reading we have to see Sarasvati not only as the river Devata giving abundance and plenty to the Rig Vedic peoples but also as the giver of 'light'.

The very first book of the Rig Veda says : ' . . . . Sarasvati, the mighty flood, she with light illumines, She brightens every pious thought . . . . ' (Book 1, Hymn 3, Line 12, Griffith translation).

The light here refers to intellection and devotion and explains the origin of Sarasvati as the patroness of learning, knowledge, music, arts etc. It is of interest to note that Book 1 is the work of Sage Agastya, also known for his famous Sasrasvati Stotram, where he hails the Devata as the source of knowledge. In the 10 books of the Rig Veda, there are 70 references to Sarasvati. Of these there are two that are directly addressed to her, but in these her descriptions are those of one who gives prosperity and plenty.

She is the mighty river that flows from the mountains to the sea. She is life giving water. There are one or two references to her as the origin of holy thoughts, but none as clear cut as the reference to the giver of light by Sage Agastya. Hence, one can infer that the Rig Veda already signalled the importance of knowledge. This fits in with the thesis propounded by Dr. N.S.Rajaram that Vedic mathematics was central to the civilisation (See his 4 articles The Origins of Indo Europeans & The Third Wave, Folks Magazine, Dec. 2012, Feb & March 2013 ) and that the geometric/algebraic notions of the period influenced Old Babylonia and Egypt and via that source the Greek philosopher Pythagoras whose theorem is well known to most readers.

What is ofcourse, startling and novel is his further argument that the formula for building the bricks for the fire altar for the Vedic homa in the Rig Vedic period was borrowed by the Indus people for the building of their cities.

This places the Vedic period before the Indus Valley Civilisation. The dates and the arguments are closely reasoned in the above mentioned articles by Dr. Rajaram.

Other scholars such as Dr. S. Kak, have written about the astronomical discoveries of the Rig Vedic period.

Sarasvati cannot be equated with the Greek Goddess of learning, Athena, since the Greeks of the time did not have the profound knowledge or the cosmic vision of the Rig Veda. It will also explain why unlike Greek thought the Vedic Agamic tradition never died out, bolstered as it was by the enormous contributions to astronomy and mathematics with which ancient India is associated. It was not merely that Greek civilisation was overpowered by the domination of Christianity, but that it did not have the sufficient resources to provide an ongoing intellectual enterprise.

The contrast with India is obvious.

In such a context Indic scholars have an additional line of inquiry to pursue. The Rig Vedic sages were not simply indulging in poetic fantasy, but immersed in deep devotion to the Devata who inspired their discoveries.

(The writer is a Political Philosopher who taught at a Canadian university).

http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=17293

See also:
http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/01/how-can-varadarajan-american-citizen.html How can Varadarajan, an American citizen continue as Editor, The Hindu? PM should take action.

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2012/06/press-registrars-letter-to-hindu-on.html 13.6.12 Press Registrar's letter to the Hindu on Siddharth Varadarajan, Editor, concealed from some Directors

IANS | New Delhi May 8, 2013 Last Updated at 18:32 IST

HC notice on Swamy's plea that editors must be Indian citizens

The Delhi High Court Wednesday issued notice to the centre on a plea by Janta Party leader Subramanian Swamy that editors of news organisations in India should be citizens of the country.

A division bench of Chief Justice D. Murugesan and Justice Jayant Nath sought a response from the Registrar of Newspapers for India and the information and broadcasting ministry.

It also asked Additional Solicitor General Rajeeve Mehra to explain how it interprets the definition of an editor under the Press and Registration of Books Act and the Indian constitution.

The court posted the matter for further hearing July 24.

The court's directions came on a plea saying editors of news organisations "must be Indian citizens and resident of India", and not foreign citizens.

Swamy said that as per the Press and Registration of Books Act, only Indian citizen can hold the post of an editor in any news organisation.

"No person who is not ordinarily resident in India, or who is an minor, shall be permitted to be the editor, answerable to the government for any infractions of law committed by such newspaper," the plea said, referring to the act.

Seeking a court to pass an order to rectify the existing law, Swamy said: "Rectify the lacunas prevalent in the Press and Registration of Books Act regarding the definition of an editor in section 1 as read with the provision to Section 5(8) of the Act."

"Clarify the definition of editor to bring it in consonance with the current times and keeping in mind the fundamental rights of the citizen of India," the petition further said.

Swamy contended that the media is held to be the fourth estate of democracy for its crucial role and as in the three other estates, the editor be an ordinarily a resident citizen of India.

The editor is responsible under law for what news items are and are not published in the newspaper, and has therefore to be committed to the restrictions under Article 19(2), that is freedom of expression, Swamy said in the plea.

"The editor if not a citizen of India cannot be expected to be committed to our nation and sensitive to Article 19(2)."

Swamy further pleaded that newspaper editorials have a profound effect in national debates and in the forming voter opinion in parliamentary and other elections.

"Only Indian citizens are entitled to this protection of Article 19(1)(a) of the constitution. Hence, foreign citizen editors cannot act as fearlessly in safeguarding the citizens' right to information, or be expected to be committed to the sovereignty, integrity and security of the Indian State as required under Article 19(2)," Swamy's petition said.

"Readers/subscribers' fundamental right to information and free expression, which is subject to reasonable restrictions, is prejudiced when the editor, who under the law is the decisive authority for selecting what will be printed, is a foreign citizen."

The plea further added that a 2002 cabinet decision to permit 26 percent FDI in news and current affairs print media imposes a pre-condition that all key editorial posts must lie with Indian citizens who are also ordinarily resident in India.

The editors in the visual and TV media are already required to be citizens of India, the plea noted.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/hc-notice-on-swamy-s-plea-that-editors-must-be-indian-citizens-113050800722_1.html

May 7, 2013
Dr. Subramanian Swamy has filed a PIL Writ petition in Delhi High Court to challenge Hindu editor's appointment since he is a US citizen. HC has issued notices.

The term “ordinarily residing” should be read to mean that the person functioning as Editor of an Indian Newspaper should be a citizen. The term 'ordinarily residing' should be harmoniously constructed with the concept of 'citizenship' which is a basic feature of the Indian Constitution. Citizenship should be a pre-condition before applying the term 'ordinarily residing' stipulated in the Act.

Serial Number 3 07.07.2012 Reply sent by the Press Registrar vide Letter D.O. No. R22/74/2012/R-III to the Petitioner stating that as per proviso to Section 5 (8) of the Act, an Editor needs to be ordinarily residing in India and the proof of the same has been provided by The Hindu newspaper. Concept of ‘citizenship’ evolved after India attained Independence. The Legislature has in an over sight not amended the definition of Editor to specifically that an Editor should be a citizen of India. Apart from tax laws, the term is no longer in “stand alone” use in any other statute. Furthermore, the concept of ‘ordinary residence’ does not entitle a person to become a citizen of India. A citizen of India should be ordinarily residing in India but an ‘ordinary resident’ does not become a citizen of India unless certain conditions encapsulated in the Citizenship Act, 1955 are fulfilled. The term “ordinarily residing” thus requires the person to be a citizen.

POINTS ON THE PIL AGAINST FOREIGN CITIZEN EDITOR


1. The matter herein arises from the violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner, under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, as also of the patriotic Indian subscribers of The Hindu newspaper.

2. READ Article 19(2). I submit readers/subscribers’ Right to Information and free expression, which is subject to First Amendment restrictions, is prejudiced when the editor, who is the sole authority for selecting what will be printed, is not a citizen of India, and hence not expected to be committed to our nation.

3. The Editor of the said newspaper is admittedly a foreigner, a US-born citizen [p.47], and therefore not a citizen of India.

4. For an editor to be fearless, he or she must have the secure cover of protection of fundamental rights under the Constitution, in particular the shield of Article 19(1)(a).

5. Thus I submit, it is a imperative under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution that an editor must be a citizen for the following reasons:

(a) The Hon’ble Supreme Court [in (2013) 3 SCC 697 at para 14] has held that news items published in a newspaper “cause far–reaching consequences in an individual and country’s life.”

(b) Newspaper editorials have profound effect in national debates and in the formation of opinion of the voter in an parliamentary or any other election.

(c) Only Indian citizens are entitled to this protection of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Hence foreign citizen editors cannot act as fearlessly, or be committed to the sovereignty, integrity and security of the Indian State as required under Article 19(2).

(d) The editor in the visual media is already required to be a citizen of India.

(e) The 2002 Cabinet decision to permit 26% FDI in news and current affairs print media imposed a pre-condition to require that all key editorial posts must lie with Indian citizens who are also ordinarily resident in India.

6. However, the presently applicable statute, the archaic Press and Registration of Books Act was enacted in 1867 when there was no lawful concept of citizenship.

7. Until after end of World War I in 1919, there was neither a formal concept of citizenship nor of a passport issued for travel purposes.

8. Hence an ambiguity has arisen that requires to be rectified for which it is prayed herein that the Doctrine of Casus Omissus be invoked.

9. However, this Hon’ble Court will not need to look very deep to discern what needs to be read into the existing provisions of the statute, and which can safely said to be most likely and in all probability the intention of Parliament.

10. This is because a new Bill for enactment has been introduced in 2011 in Parliament [p.43], which when enacted will repeal and replace the 1867 Act.

11. It is yet to be passed in Parliament, but on December 20, 2012 the Standing Committee of Parliament reviewed it and approved it for passage by Parliament.

12. The clear intention in the Bill [Section 2 (c ) on p. 46] and which has been cleared for enactment by the Parliament’s Standing Committee, is to require that the editor be a citizen of India who in addition is ordinarily resident in India.

13. Moreover, in 1954, the First Press Commission discussed the subject of foreign nationals as owners and of influence in the press [p.272], and viewed it “with disfavor”.

14. As a consequence, in 1955, the Union Cabinet passed a Resolution which endorsed this view, and this Resolution holds the field today.

Siddharth Varadarajan is NOT an Indian citizen,hence ineligible to be Editor, the Hindu:

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/748775/

Cabinet clears changes to PRBP Act, gives more teeth to govt

Swaraj Thapa Posted online: Fri Feb 11 2011, 03:22 hrs

New Delhi : The government will have the power to cancel titles of newspapers if the latter fails to provide annual statement of account for three consecutive years, a new draft Press and Registration of Books and Publications (PRBP) Act, 2009, approved by the Union Cabinet on Thursday, has proposed. Internet editions of newspapers will be covered under the new Act, while those convicted of terrorist acts “or anything done against the security of the state” will be barred from bringing out any publication, says the draft Act that will replace the Press and Registration of Books (PRB) Act, 1867.
Re-framing guidelines and rules for the print media, the PRBP Act proposes penalty provisions for those who bring out publications that fail to conform to the rules laid down by the law. Additionally, it proposes suspension of publication for a period upto 30 days if the publisher fails to print the print-line in the newspaper.

“It will have several new provisions. We have also defined the terms publication, newspaper, magazine and editor, which were not there. The earlier Act was formulated way back in 1867,” I&B Minister Ambika Soni said...

164.100.24.207/bull2/2012/24.1.2012.pdf This is the document which is the Lok Sabha bulletin which makes a reference that the bill has been sent to Standing Committee.
As introduced in Lok Sabha, Bill No. 124 of 2011 THE PRESS AND REGISTRATION OF BOOKS AND PUBLICATIONS BILL, 2011

Definitions 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—(c) “editor” means a person, whether called editor, chief-editor, sub-editor or by
whatever name called, who is a citizen of India and ordinarily resides in India, who controls the selection of the matter that is brought out in a publication;

LOK SABHA
________
BULLETIN – PART II
(General information relating to Parliamentary and other matters)
_______
Nos. 3618-3621 ] [Tuesday , January 24, 2012 /Magha 4, 1933 (Saka)

No. 3618 Legislative Branch-I
Statement regarding Government Bills pending in Lok Sabha
A Statement showing Government Bills pending in Lok Sabha at the end of the
Ninth Session of Fifteenth Lok Sabha is given below :-

36. The Press and Registration of
Books and Publications Bill,
2011
Information and
Broadcasting
Introduced on 16 December, 2011.
The Bill was referred to the
Standing Committee on Information
Technology by the Speaker and
intimation thereof was published in
Bulletin Part-II dated 5 January,
2012 vide para No.3597.

The bill referred to the Standing Committee of Parliament is very specific that an editor is a citizen of India and ordinarily resides in India. This is consistent with FDI guidelines which require editor to be a resident Indian. The key word is INDIAN in this guideline, Siddharth Varadarajan is a FOREIGNER. Citizenship did NOT exist in 1867 when the PRB Act was enacted. The Act is intended ONLY for Indians. Notification of 5 Jan. 2012 from Lok Sabha speaker confirms the intent of the PRB Act to deal with ONLY INDIANS, RESIDENT INDIANS. And, cannot be applied to Foreigners even if resident in India.

Excerpts from the Writ:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2013
IN RE:
DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
…PETITIONER
VERSUS
MR. SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
AND OTHERS
…RESPONDENT
FOR INDEX SEE INSIDE
PETITIONER IN PERSON
DR.SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
A-77, NIZAMUDDIN EAST,
NEW DELHI-110013
MOBILE:

INDEX

S.No
Particulars
Page Nos
1.
Memo of Parties

2.
Synopsis and List of Dates

3.
Writ Petition and Affidavits in Support of the Writ Petition

4.
ANNEXURE P-1, A copy of the letter sent to the Press Registrar on 06.06.2012

5
ANNEXURE P-2, A copy of the Complaint sent to the Press Council of India against the Editor of The Hindu, Respondent No. 1 by the Petitioner on 06.06.2012

6
ANNEXURE P-3, A copy of the Reply sent by the Press Registrar to the Petitioner vide Letter D.O. No. R22/74/2012/R-III on 07.07.2012

7
ANNEXURE P-4, A copy of the letter sent to the Ministry of Law and Justice seeking a clarification on the definition of ‘Editor’ on 16.07.2012

8
ANNEXURE P-5, A Copy of the letter sent to the office of the Prime Minister of India on 21.08.2012 by the Petitioner seeking a further clarification on the definition of ‘Editor’

9
ANNEXURE P-6, A Copy of reply given by the Press Council of India vide letter marked as File No. 14/234/12-13-PCI on 31.08.2012

10
ANNEXURE P-7, A Copy of the reply of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on behalf of the office of the Prime Minister of India vide letter no. D. O. No. 2/15/2012-MUC on 19.12.2012.

11
ANNEXURE P-8, A Copy of the Proposed Press and Registration of Books and Publications Act, 2011

12
Memo of Appearance

13
Proof of Service













IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2013
MEMO OF PARTIES
1. DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
A-77, NIZAMUDDIN EAST,
NEW DELHI-110013
PETITIONER
VERSUS
2. MR. SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
3. UNION OF INDIA
4. THE HINDU NEWSPAPER
…RESPONDENTS
PETITIONER IN PERSON
DR.SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
NEW DELHI
APRIL 2013

LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
This instant Writ Petition seeks a direction from this Hon’ble Court to ascertain the lacunas prevalent in the current Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (herein after referred to as “The Act”) regarding the definition of “Editor” in Section 1 and the Proviso to Section 5(8) of the Act.
The instant Petition arises from the fact that the Freedom of Press is regarded as the Fourth Estate of a successful and responsible democracy. The Press and its freedoms are enshrined within Article 19 (especially Article 19(1) (a)) of the Constitution of India. It is one of the most important and vital part of the Indian democracy. ‘The Hindu’ is one of the most important newspapers in the country today, if coverage and readership are kept in mind. Its Chennai Branch Editor is Mr Siddharth Varadarajan, Respondent No. 1 who is an American citizen and has been living and working in India for the past 17 years through a Residential permit and PIO Card. Owing to the important responsibility which an Editor has in spreading news through its articles and shaping opinions of its readers which are primarily citizens of India, such a responsibility should not be given to a foreigner.
Serial No.
Date
Event
1
24.04.2012
Mr. Siddharth Varadarajan, Respondent No. 1, takes over from Mr. N Ram as the newly appointed Editor of The Hindu newspaper for its Chennai Branch.
2
06.06.2012
Complaint sent to the Press Registrar of India by the Petitioner requesting to declare the appointment of the Respondent No. 1 as Null and Void as he is an American Citizen.
The Petitioner had also sent a Complaint against the Editor of The Hindu to the Press Council of India.
3
07.07.2012
Reply sent by the Press Registrar vide Letter D.O. No. R22/74/2012/R-III to the Petitioner stating that as per proviso to Section 5 (8) of the Act, an Editor needs to be ordinarily residing in India and the proof of the same has been provided by The Hindu newspaper. The proof was found satisfactory by the Press Registrar and on the basis of the same a revised Registration Certificate was issued to The Hindu newspaper by the Press Registrar.
4
16.07.2012
Aggrieved from the above mentioned reply of the Press Registrar the Petitioner then requested the Ministry of Law and Justice to clarify to the Press Registrar the definition of Editor as has been amended in the Press and Registration of Books Act, 2011 which includes the requirement of being a citizen of India and accordingly advise the Press Registrar to not allow Respondent No. 1 from being the Editor of the
Hindu newspaper.
5
21.08.2012
The Petitioner wrote a letter to the Prime Minister of India seeking a further clarification as to the definition of ‘Editor’ and also regarding the amendment to the Press and Registration of Books Act.
6
31.08.2012
The Press Council of India vide Letter marked File No. 14/234/12-13-PCI informed the Petitioner that it considered the Complaint of the Petitioner against the Editor of The Hindu newspaper as outside its purview and has hence treated the matter as closed.
7
19.12.2012
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vide letter no. D. O. No. 2/12/2012-MUC replied to the Petitioner’s letter to the Prime Minister and stated that the Amendment to the Press and Registration of Books Act include the pre-requisite of being a citizen of India.
8
.04.2013
The Petitioner has exhausted all the avenues to protect the integrity and freedom of the press and seeks the indulgence of this Hon’ble Court in removing a Foreigner, i.e., Respondent No.1, from the important post of Editor of the Chennai Branch of a National Newspaper, i.e., The Hindu.


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
A-77, NIZAMUDDIN EAST,
NEW DELHI-110013
PETITIONER
VERSUS
MR. SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN

THE HINDU NEWSPAPER
…RESPONDENTS
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR AN APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION CONFIRMING/LAYING DOWN /CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF EDITOR TO BRING IT IN CONSONANCE WITH THE CURRENT TIMES AND KEEPING IN MIND THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS OF INDIA
To the Chief Justice of Delhi and
His Companion Judges
of the Delhi High Court.

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS ABOVE NAMED MOST RESPECTFULLY STATES AS UNDER:
1. The instant Writ Petition seeks a direction from this Hon’ble Court as to the ambit of the definition of ‘Editor’ as given in the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (herein after referred to as the Act) which in its current form under Section 1 means a person who controls the selection of the matter that is published in a newspaper. Furthermore, proviso to Section 5(8) states that an Editor shall be ordinarily residing in India. However, it does not mention the citizenship requirement and on the plain reading of the Act and the definition any person regardless of him/her being a citizen or an alien can become the Editor of a newspaper in India.
The Petitioner wants to bring it to the notice of this Hon’ble court that the Act was first constituted in the year 1867, during the British Colonial rule in India. At the time of its conception, there was no concept of Citizen/Alien prevalent in the country as India was occupied and serving as one of the colonies of the British kingdom. Hence there was no democracy or any freedoms given to Indians. But, after India attained Independence in 1947, it introduced Democracy as well as the concept of Citizenship and fundamental rights. Although the Act has been amended time and again, the Legislature has in an over sight not amended the definition of Editor. This over sight comes into greater highlight as on DATE (24.04.2012) Mr. Siddharth Varadarajan, Respondent No. 1, became the Editor of the Chennai Branch of The Hindu Newspaper. It is important to point out that Respondent No. 1 is an American Citizen, temporarily residing in India on a Residential Permit and PIO Card. An Editor is responsible completely for the news/articles printed in the newspaper under his command and being the Editor of a highly respected and important newspaper is a very responsible job as it shapes the daily opinions of innumerable readers of the said newspaper. Such a job should not be handed over to a foreigner in the primary capacity of Editor.
2. The Petitioner No.1 is not an idle busybody. He is a nationally known public figure, active in politics and public affairs. He is deeply concerned with the protection of the Rule of Law and the enforcement of the statutory duties of the Government as well as purity in public life.
a. The Petitioner No.1 holds a doctorate in Economics from the world famous Harvard University in the U.S.A., where, before returning to India he had taught Economics – and he has continued to teach there for some decades in the summer semester; and he had also taught Economics at the Indian Institute of Technology in Delhi, as a full Professor. He is a senior politician, a Member of Parliament for five terms, who has been a senior Cabinet Minister in the Central Government, holding the portfolios of Commerce and Law & Justice, and later he was Chairman of the Commission for Labour Standards, a post of Cabinet Rank. Twice he has been elected to the Rajya Sabha from the State of Uttar Pradesh, to the Lok Sabha twice from Maharashtra and once from the State of Tamil Nadu. He has numerous books and articles to his credit. He has lectured both in India and abroad on national concerns as well as on Economics. He has initiated and conscientiously fought many public interest litigations. He regards this as a duty he owes his country.
b. In particular, Petitioner No.1 being a bonafide law abiding citizen believes that it is his duty to set into motion the legal process whenever instances of grave offences committed against human beings which affects the society at large are brought to his notice which ,in his opinion ,causes great miscarriage of justice. It is this duty he seeks to perform in the instant case, as set out herein below.
3. QUESTION OF LAW
The matter raises an important question of law of general public importance that arises out of the question of the status and rights of an Editor in a National Newspaper in not only safeguarding and upholding the rights of the citizens of this country and informing its readers with fairness and accuracy every important piece of information and news but also in accepting the duties of an Editor which include full responsibility for the news items presented by the newspaper. It is for this responsibility that Article 19 of the Constitution of India gives the Freedom of Press to the media. Enshrined under Article 19 (1) (a) is the freedom of the newspaper to report any news/article/story with complete truth and honesty without fear. The post of an Editor of a newspaper is one of the most important and powerful ones in modern times. An Editor is responsible for the printing of each and every article/story/opinion in the newspaper. Hence it is under the guidance and supervision of an Editor that the reader forms his/her opinions after reading the newspaper.
Therefore, the post of an Editor is without doubt one of the most important posts in a democracy. Furthermore, when this important position is given to a foreigner, who does not enjoy all the fundamental rights under the Constitution of India and does he have any moral sense of duty towards upholding the idea of democracy and the rights of its citizens, it can lead to a situation in which travesty of law and justice are the only outcome.
This matter of law also arises in India from the following facts and circumstances:
a. On 24.04.2012, The Hindu, one of the most read national newspaper appointed Mr. Siddharth Varadarajan, Respondent No. 1, as Editor of its Chennai Branch.
b. That the Petitioner found out that Respondent No. 1 is not a citizen of India rather he is an American born citizen, holding an American passport till date.
c. That although the Respondent No. 1 has been residing in India for the last 17 years and he is married to an Indian citizen and also has acquired property in India. But till date the Respondent No. 1 has extended his visa and works in India on the basis of a residential permit and PIO card.
d. That Respondent No.1 has never tried to acquire the citizenship of India even though he earns his bread and butter from employment in India, he is married to an Indian citizen and has acquired property in India and till date is granted rights and freedoms under the American Constitution. (KINDLY SEE ARTICLE 5 OF CONSTITUTION, IN CASE IT CAN BE INCLUDED)
e. That owing to the above mentioned facts and circumstances it is clear to the Petitioner that the Respondent No. 1 is an American citizen in his head and in his heart.
f. That the post of an Editor of an important national newspaper with wide coverage as its readers, who are primarily the citizens of India should not be given to a Foreigner.

4. That aggrieved from the present case and the circumstances relating to it, the Petitioner decided to do the following:
a. On 06.06.2012, the Petitioner had sent a complaint to the Press Registrar requesting to declare the appointment of Respondent No.1 as Editor of The Hindu as null and void as he is not a citizen of India. A copy of the same letter is appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-1.
b. Also on 06.06.2012, the Petitioner had sent a Complaint to the Press Council of India against the Editor of The Hindu. A copy of the same is appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-2. (DO NOT HAVE THIS LETTER WITH ME)
c. On 07.07.2012, the Press Registrar replied to the complaint vide letter D. O. No. R22/74/2012/R-III and rejected the request of the Petitioner stating that as the Respondent No.1 holds a valid residential permit and PIO Card which are the only requirements for being an Editor, i.e., ordinarily residing in India, under the proviso to Section 5(8) of the Act, the Press Registrar has issued a revised registration certificate to The Hindu. A copy of the reply is hereby appended as ANNEXURE P-3.
d. Aggrieved by the reply of the Press Registrar, the Petitioner wrote a letter to the Ministry of Law and Justice on 16.07.2012 seeking a clarification to the concept of ‘ordinarily resident’ as the Law Ministry had introduced an Amendment to the Act and stated in the new definition that an ‘Editor’ needs to be a citizen of India under Section 2 of the Amended Act. The Petitioner further requested the Law ministry to inform the Press Registrar of the said amendments and ask for withdrawal of Respondent No. 1 as Editor of The Hindu. A Copy of the said letter is appended as ANNEXURE P-4.
e. The Petitioner further seeked a clarification from the Prime Minister of India’s office regarding the Amendment to the Act and the definition of ‘Editor’ vide letter dated 21.08.2012. A copy of the letter is appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-5. DO NOT HAVE THE COPY OF THIS LETTER WITH ME.
f. The Petitioner received a reply on the Complaint against the Editor of The Hindu from the Press Registrar’s office vide Letter marked as File No.14/234/12-13-PCI in which the Council rejected the Complaint of the Petitioner stating that the same is outside the purview of its charter and closed the matter henceforth. A copy of the reply is appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-6.
g. The Petitioner received a reply from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on behalf of the Prime Minister’s office on 19.12.2012 vide a letter D. O. No. 2/15/2012-MUC. The letter explained the current scenario and the proposed amendment to the definition of ‘Editor’ which would include being a citizen of India as a pre-requisite. A copy of the reply is appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-7.
h. The Press Registrar and the Press Council of India are the 2 main bodies which deal with the rights, duties and conduct of journalists (including Editors) and newspapers. The Petitioner had tried to bring the current facts and scenario to the notice of both these bodies but to no avail. Hence, the current Writ Petition is filed in this Hon’ble Court.
5. It is the Petitioners contention that the post of an Editor of a newspaper, especially an important National newspaper like The Hindu, should not be given to a Foreigner on the following among other grounds, which grounds are taken in the alternate and without prejudice to one another.
GROUNDS
A. It is submitted that the definition of the term ‘Editor’ in the Act is as stated below:
i. Under Section 1, the Interpretation Clause, ‘Editor’ means the person who controls the selection of the matter that is published in a newspaper.
ii. The Proviso of Section 5 (8) states that no person who does not ordinarily reside in India …..nor shall any such person edit a newspaper.
A bare reading of the above sections shows that in order to become an Editor, one needs to ‘ordinarily reside in India’. The concept of ‘ordinary residence’ which was introduced in the Act of 1867 has become redundant in the modern times especially since 1950 when the Constitution came into effect, and now is only used for the purpose of taxation. Apart from tax laws, the term is no longer in “stand alone” use in any other statute. Furthermore, the concept of ‘ordinary residence’ does not entitle a person to become a citizen of India. A citizen of India should be ordinarily residing in India but an ‘ordinary resident’ does not become a citizen of India unless certain conditions encapsulated in the Citizenship Act, 1955 are fulfilled.
Moreover, an Indian citizen is dis-entitled from certain rights of citizenship if he or she is not ordinarily resident in India e.g., as a voter u/s….Representation of People’s Act (1951?).
In other words, the term “ordinarily resident” thus requires the person to be a citizen to have application. A person for example cannot become a voter merely because he or she is ordinarily resident in the country. That person has to be first an Indian citizen before the term ordinarily resident become applicable.
In 1867 when the Act was promulgated, there was no legal concept of citizen or passport. This concept was developed after World War I.
B. The lacunae in the definition of ‘Editor’ has already been noticed by the Legislature and the Press and Registration of Books and Publications Bill 2011, which is pending before the Parliament, defines an ‘Editor’ as:
“Section 2(c): ‘Editor’ means a person, whether called Editor, chief-Editor, sub-Editor, or by whatever name called, who is a citizen of India and ordinarily resides in India, who controls the selection of the matter that is brought out in a publication.”
A copy of the above mentioned Bill has been appended hereto as ANNEXURE P-8.
Hence, keeping in pace with the modern times, the Legislature has introduced this amendment to the definition of the Editor. However, as the Bill has yet not been passed in the Parliament. Therefore, on this ground and the Doctrine of Casus Omissus, it is submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to fill the lacunae in the law arising from the circumstances prevailing when the Act of 1867 was promulgated.
C. Further after attaining independence from the British rule in 1947, India introduced the system of Citizenship through the Citizenship Act, 1955. The citizens of India are provided with important freedoms and rights under the Constitution of India. One of the pillars of Fundamental rights is Article 19 which includes the Freedom of the Press. Through the various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme court and the various High courts of India this Freedom of Press has become an important milestone in achieving the independence of the Fourth estate in our democracy. This freedom is given to the Journalists and other members of the Press and Newspapers community to safeguard and secure the right to receive and give information in the form of news, articles, opinions etc. with complete honesty and without any fear of hostility from any member of the community. There are a catena of judgments stating that Article 19 is granted only to the citizens of India and foreigners’ rights are restricted to Article 21, i.e., Right to Life. Since Article 19 itself is not given to any foreigner, it means that the Freedom of Press under Article 19 (1) (a) cannot be ascertained by any foreigner in India. This contention is reinforced in the pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and other High Courts in India, a few of which are set out herein below:
i. A 9 Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State Trading Corporation of India vs. CTO AIR 1963 SC 1811 stated that Article 19 lays down that ‘all citizens’ shall have the rights to freedoms enumerated in Clauses (a) to (g)…the makers of the Constitution deliberately and advisedly made a clear distinction between fundamental rights available “to any persons and those guaranteed to all citizens”.
ii. In the case of Anwar vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1971) 3 SCC 104, the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that Article 19 is not available to a foreigner in India.
iii. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Loius De Raedt vs Union of India (1991) 3 SCC 554 stated that foreigners not acquiring citizenship under Article 5 are not entitled to claim rights under Article 19. They only have rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
6. The Petitioners have not filed any other Petition on the subject matter of this Petition, either in this Court or any other Court.
7. Due notice has been served on all parties affected, via the Respondents.


8. PRAYER
The Petitioner, therefore, prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the records of the case, and after hearings thereon and the law in the case, issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction,
a. Reading down into the current prevailing law the definition of ‘Editor’ to include being a citizen of India as a pre-requisite for being regarded as ordinarily resident in India, which is clearly the object and intention of the Union of India as expressed in the relevant clause in the Bill introduced in Parliament.
b. Direct the Press Registrar to remove Respondent No. 1 from the post of Editor of The Hindu.
c. Pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONERS SHALL AS IN DUTY BOUND EVER PRAY.
PETITIONER IN PERSON

Delhi
April 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW DELHI
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2013
IN RE:
DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY …PETITIONER
VERSUS
MR. SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
AND OTHERS …RESPONDENT

Not Ashwani, not Bansal, it is the PM who needs to go
by R Jagannathan May 9, 2013

 

The Supreme Court has come a long way from the time it wanted to give every benefit of doubt to the Prime Minister (in the 2G scam) to yesterday’s sharp tongue-lashing to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for becoming the government’s “caged parrot”.

In February 2011, the court blamed the PMO rather than the PM himself for not allowing Subramanian Swamy to prosecute A Raja in the 2G scam. “Unfortunately, those who were expected to give proper advice to Respondent No 1 (the PM) and place the full facts and legal position before him failed to do so. We have no doubt that if Respondent No 1 had been apprised of the true factual and legal position regarding the representation made by the appellant (i.e. Subramanian Swamy), he would surely have taken appropriate decision and would not have allowed the matter to linger for a period of more than one year.”

Yesterday, the Supreme Court gave PMO officials something to think about; but the message was probably meant for the PM as well. In allowing the PMO’s officials to have access to its status report on the coal blocks scam, and following the changes made in it at the instance of the law ministry, the court said the CBI had allowed the “heart of the report” to be changed.

The heart of the report that got changed is about protecting the heart of the government – the PM himself.

“The latest events show that the CBI has become a caged parrot, speaking in its masters’ voice. It is a sordid saga that it is one parrot with many masters. It is very strange that instead of interrogating them, it was busy interacting with the officers of the coal ministry and the Prime Minister’s Office. CBI should know how to stand up to all pulls and pressures. Yours was an act of indiscretion,” the bench told the CBI.

That the PMO would not do silly things unless it was trying to protect its boss is implied in this statement – though obviously the Supreme Court won’t say it.

However, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the court was willing to use hurtful words but was not really keen to drive the knife in and say the PM should have been investigated. In part, this reticence comes from natural caution about not straying into the executive’s domain. The court can act against illegalities and flouting of constitutional norms, but it cannot tell the government what to do with its ministers – whether it is an Ashwani Kumar, the Law Minister who tried lying to the court to protect the PM, or Pawan Kumar Bansal, the Railway Minister whose nephew has been busy promising people better jobs in the Railway Board for a little consideration.

To be sure, the targeting of Ashwani Kumar and Pawan Bansal is like shooting at decoys.

Both these ministers were given their posts at the instance of the Prime Minister, but that is not the reason the PM and the Congress party is still sticking to them. After the Supreme Court’s thundering observations about the CBI, neither minister has the moral authority to remain in office.

But the real issues are these:

The person Ashwani Kumar was trying to protect while doctoring the CBI’s Coalgate report was obviously the PM. The Supreme Court’s observation that the minister and law ministry officials had changed “the heart of the report” was essentially referring to the deletion of crucial paragraphs in the report that talked about the period 2006-09, the time during when the PM was himself Coal Minister.

The court said: “Everybody seems to be keen only on perusing and suggesting changes in PE-2 (preliminary enquiry-2). There could not be direct evidence in such matters and a large part would be based on inferences. But you accept changes suggested to you. It was an absolute mistake on your part and you should now admit your fault instead of justifying it that you had reasons to accept these changes,” reports The Indian Express quoting the bench’s stern advice to CBI.

This is the only reason why Ashwani Kumar himself is important.

Removing Ashwani Kumar means the finger will point directly at the PM in Coalgate. This is also the reason why the Joint Parliamentary Committee won’t even call A Raja to take the witness box. It would again lead to questioning the PM’s role in the earlier scam, the 2G one.

Another interesting dimension comes from a report, quoting sources, that says that Sonia Gandhi would like Bansal and Ashwani Kumar to quit.

Two points need to be made here:

If this is really what Sonia wants, why not make the statement in public? Or why not ask the two to quit in private? Action would work as well as words,

Or, is she trying to throw a hint to the PM, indirectly, that these two can go? And if this is so, why is the PM hesitating to take the hint?

The short answer maybe this. Letting Ashwani Kumar go leaves the PM directly in the line of fire. And leaving the PM in the line of fire means Sonia is immediately behind and vulnerable. After all, who believes that the PM does anything without keeping Sonia in the loop? This is why Sonia may want to hint indirectly to Manmohan Singh rather than directly.

Clearly, it is the PM who needs to go, and not only Ashwani Kumar. The Supreme Court came as close to making that call as constitutional propriety would allow it.

It is now for the PM to act – and make a graceful exit.

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/not-ashwani-not-bansal-it-is-the-pm-who-needs-to-go-766183.html

BJP needs to introspect and unite behind leaders with mass support

By Sandhya Jain on May 9, 2013

There’s maths and there’s chemistry; fusion brings victory. This is what makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts. When you break up the whole, it does not split back to its original parts. Fragmentation creates a new math, a new chemistry, a whole new sum.

This is the substance of the Karnataka 2013 Assembly election result. The BJP calculations were awry from the moment rootless but deeply factionalised leaders in New Delhi succeeded in forcing Chief Minister BS Yeddyurappa, architect of the 2008 victory, to quit in August 2011. The idea that political jugglery could neutralise the strongman’s formidable Lingayat votebank was laughable from the start. The subsequent failure to provide effective governance to check further erosion of public goodwill compounded the failure. The result, as anticipated, was the chronicle of a party decimated by its own sins of omission and commission.

Tactically, the BJP entered the electoral arena with multiple flanks exposed — it had to fight the Congress which had its core vote share intact and would benefit from the party’s mess and Yeddyruappa’s anger. It was contesting the Janata Dal (Secular) which too had worked to consolidate its support base. It was fighting to defeat Yeddyurappa who was invincible in the sense that he was there only to defeat the BJP and not to win the election. So while the party struggled with the math, others stole the chemistry.

Congress secured 36.5 per cent of the vote, just 1.8 per cent above its 2008 tally, but managed 121 seats out 223 (one elections was countermanded). The JDS also added only 1.1 per cent vote to its tally from 2008. But BJP’s vote share declined by a massive 13.9 per cent from 2008, to settle below JDS (20.1 per cent) at less than 20 per cent, though both managed to win 40 seats each. Yeddyurappa’s fledgling Karnataka Janata Paksha managed an impressive 9.8 per cent. The remaining 4.1 per cent of the original support of BJP-KJP went elsewhere.

The results show that the BJP never had a Plan B from the time Yeddyurappa was driven out of office, for the man who engineered the exit could not be made Chief Minister due to the political exigencies that rose due to the ouster.

It remains a mystery why, once the party bosses realised that Yeddyurappa’s ouster was a mistake, they failed to make a diplomatic retreat and reinstate him. Nitin Gadkari’s tenure was possibly the nadir of the party’s political acuity, though the continued stranglehold of leaders who cannot win elections without safe seats is a continuing problem.

Even more amazingly, the BJP did not see the writing on the wall even in April 2012 when the bells tolled loudly as Congress president Sonia Gandhi arrived at the influential Sri Siddaganga Mutt to felicitate Lingayat seer Sri Sri Shivakumara Swami in the community’s stronghold at Tumkur. Surely the BJP could not have forgotten that the Lingayats were traditionally loyal to the Congress and defected only after the party high command booted out then Congress Chief Minister Veerendra Patil in 1990. That is how Yeddyurappa eventually emerged as the community strongman and gifted the BJP its first ever victory in a southern State. Prior to this, the community facilitated the election of Janata Dal leader JH Patel, also a Lingayat, as Chief Minister.

The Lingayats comprise a formidable 21 per cent of the State’s population and do not take insults lightly. Sonia Gandhi sought political pardon for her party even as the BJP made the very same mistake that drove the Lingayats away from the Congress! It could hardly have helped the BJP that Yeddyurappa – who reportedly played a role in getting the seer to meet Sonia Gandhi – has clout with the heads of other Lingayat shrines. This was the last chance for the BJP to make up with Yeddyurappa, but it displayed inexplicable obduracy, and the rest is history.

This is the template on which the Karnataka election was fought. A BJP refusal to pass the Union Budget and force a vote-on-account could have shifted the national template and taken the sheen off the Congress victory in Karnataka. But the party is unable to handle simple equations and passed the Budget and kept Parliament alive but non-functional until the victory in Bangalore let Congress adjourn the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha sine-die.

This has enabled Congress to fence off demands for the resignation of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh over irregularities in the allocation of coal blocks, of Railways Minister PK Bansal in the Railway Board sale of posts scam, and of the Law Minister Ashwani Kumar for interfering in the working of the CBI. However, the Supreme Court’s strictures and the displeasure of the Supreme Court Bar Association may force the exit of Attorney General GE Vahanvati, though he is fighting to stay put.

For an honest introspection, the BJP must analyse its performance in the State in 2004, 2008, and 2013. In the 2004 Assembly election, the BJP emerged as the single largest party winning 79 out of the 224 seats. In 2008, it won 110 seats. Now, in 2013, it is reduced to a rump of 40 seats. A preliminary analysis shows that in 75 Constituencies, the combined BJP-KJP vote is higher than that of Congress.

In 2004, the Congress (64) and Janata Dal Secular (58) formed a coalition Government led by Congress with Dharam Singh as Chief Minister. In 2006, the JDS withdrew and joined hands with the BJP so that its leader HD Kumaraswamy could become Chief Minister. This arrangement fell in October 2007 after Kumaraswamy refused to give the chair to Yeddyurappa as agreed in 2006. In 2008, the BJP won 110 seats and formed the Government with support from independents.

The scam-ridden Congress played its cards well and triumphed thanks to the BJP’s persistent saga of errors. The BJP is back to 1994 status, with 40 seats.

The bad news for the party is that it will not be able to exploit Congress’s declining fortunes in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, where the Telangana issue and Jaganmohan factor are expected to batter the Congress.

Of course, as some observers point out, it would be premature to conclude that the local victory in Karnataka will translate into support for the Congress in the national election, whenever these are held. But things will improve for the BJP only if it undertakes serious introspection and avoids spurious tea parties in the homes of leaders with no mass base who persist in pushing it down the slope.

http://www.niticentral.com/2013/05/09/bjp-needs-to-introspect-and-unite-behind-leaders-with-mass-support-75846.html

Humans have thick skulls and dense bones - unlike modern apes, but in common with shallow diving mammals such as manatees and walrus

Full text of the program in Grange St. Paul's Hotel: Human origins reconsidered. 'Human evolution, past, present & future - anthropological, medical & nutritional considerations.'

Did humans come from the seas instead of the trees? Much-derided theory of evolution about aquatic apes is debated in London

Benjamin Mee

Wednesday, 8 May 2013

Scientists, academics and medics gather this week in a London hotel to discuss a topic that has been virtually unmentionable in academic circles for decades: are humans descended from “aquatic apes” that spent more time swimming than dragging their knuckles on the ground?

The last time this question was asked, at a conference in 1992, there was much scoffing and ridicule. Other academics sneered and Bernard Levin wrote a full-page article lampooning the idea in a national newspaper.

This week’s conference, Human Evolution Past, Present and Future – Anthropological, Medical and Nutritional Considerations, at the Grange St Paul’s Hotel, has also already been the subject of much derision. Followers of the conventional and overwhelmingly accepted belief that our ancestors were very much land-based are launching a parody campaign online to argue we evolved from “space monkeys”. Most scientists will openly scoff at the idea of us deriving from water-bound primates.

But, perhaps emboldened by the presence of Sir David Attenborough – who was booked to attend the conference for one session but asked at the last minute if he could attend both days – the aquatic ape theorists are back.

The conference is chaired by Professor Rhys Evans, an ear, nose and throat surgeon at the Royal Marsden Hospital, who is candid about the scope of the conference. “We are trying to discuss the pros and cons of the theory,” he said. “But many of the things which are unique to humans – such as a descended larynx, walking upright, fat beneath the skin, and most obviously an extremely large brain – it seems can best be accounted for as adaptations to extended periods in an aquatic environment.” The original aquatic ape theory, developed by Sir Alister Hardy and made public in 1960, posited that a population of early humans, or hominoids, was isolated during tectonic upheaval in a flooded forest environment, similar to that of parts of the Amazon. Our ancestors, it was argued, either adapted to water – and climbing in trees – or died out. Over many generations, mutations that made swimming and diving easier reproduced in the population at the expense of the more traditional, water-averse ape genes.

Modern-day apes do not like water. In zoos all around the world, apes are contained by moats of water. Even wadeable moats are sufficient: if you drop a baby orangutan into water, it sinks like a stone. A human baby, however, will close its larynx and automatically paddle its arms and legs, giving you a few precious seconds to retrieve it.

The aquatic ape theory would explain this ability – unlike the traditional savannah theory of human evolution. Widely accepted wisdom states that when humans came out of the woods and on to the savannah, walking upright gave them an increased field of vision and freed up hands to use tools. Bipedalsim also exposed less of the human body to the harsh sun and humans shed hair and increased sweat production to cope with the heat.

But, the aquatic ape proponents point out, deer and antelope kept their fur and their quadrapedal ways on the savannah. Our copious salty sweat production, and water consumption requirements, they argue, are far more indicative of life in the water. And lions co-operate in hunting without evolving significantly larger brains than other cats.

The key ingredients for growing a large brain, according to Professor Michael Crawford, from Imperial College London, are found in fish. “DHA, or Docosahexaenoic Acid, is essential for developing brain tissue, and in order for our brains to grow to the size we have now, our ancestors must have had to eat a lot of fish.”

This would have taken place over many hundreds of thousands if not millions of years, and is part of the reason that the aquatic ape theory has evolved since its last incarnation, into, tentatively, the waterside theory.

“Molluscs, crabs and snails would be available in abundance in coastal regions, flooded or swamp forests, lagoons and wetlands,” Professor Evans said. “Such lifestyles, climbing and hanging vertically, grasping branches above the water, wading on two legs, floating vertically collecting foods amid floating vegetation – might help explain hominoid body enlargement, tail loss, vertical spine, dorsal shoulder blades, wide thorax and pelvis, great ape tool use and thickening of enamel.” So waterside theorists are now proposing a prolonged exposure and adaptation towards coastal living, stretching over several million years. They argue that fossil evidence seems to back this up.

A sense of playful open-mindedness has made the aquatic theory attractive. Humans like water: waterfront property is more expensive; rich people buy swimming pools; we drive to the sea to eat sandwiches in our cars, just to look at it. No other ape likes water at all. Of course, as the space monkey satirists counter, no other apes have travelled into space, but it doesn’t mean we evolved from primates on Pluto.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/did-humans-come-from-the-seas-instead-of-the-trees-muchderided-theory-of-evolution-about-aquatic-apes-is-debated-in-london-8608288.html#

WE COULD BE GIVING UP TOO MUCH FOR TOO LITTLE
Friday, 10 May 2013 | G Parthasarathy | in Edit

Apologists for the Chinese have said the problem exists because the Line of Actual Control has not been determined. What they fail to mention is that Beijing has refused to exchange maps that define the LAC

China has a long history of Imperial arrogance, regarding itself as the centre of the earth, being labelled ‘The Middle Kingdom’. According to ancient Chinese diplomatic practice, ‘barbarians’, including rulers and diplomats representing European powers and neighbours like Korea, had to ‘kowtow’ while appearing before the Emperor, acknowledging the Emperor as the ‘son of heaven’. The Chinese practice of ‘kowtow’ required others to kneel and bow so low as to have one’s head touching the ground! As China’s power declined, this practice ended. But China is rising now and has used, or threatened to use, force in asserting its ever-expanding claims on its maritime frontiers, with countries ranging from Japan, South Korea and Vietnam to the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. As tensions between Japan and China grew over provocative Chinese naval manoeuvres in territorial waters surrounding the disputed Senkaku Islands, Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently issued a stark warning to China, asserting, “I have ordered the authorities to respond decisively to any attempt to enter territorial waters and land on the Islands”.

China had evidently calculated that with its leadership under siege while facing an economic downturn, India cannot respond in the robust manner that Japan has and that India would not be averse to kowtowing, when confronted by Chinese power. Union Minister for External Affairs Salman Khurshid had, after all, labelled the Chinese intrusion in Depsang, as “acne”. The Prime Minister had described the intrusion as a “localised problem”. Government spokespersons and sympathetic hacks have claimed that hundreds of such intrusions occur every year. They refuse to accept that, while routine intrusions involve troops moving in and out of contested areas, in the present case, the intruders had pitched tents and contested Indian sovereignty. Apologists for the Chinese assert the problem arises because the Line of Actual Control arising from the 1962 conflict has not been determined. What they fail to mention is that it is the Chinese who have refused to exchange maps defining the LAC, in order to enable them to intrude at a time and place of their choosing.

Worse still, the Chinese are guilty of violating their commitment to resolve the border issue in terms the ‘Guiding Principles’ that former Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and Mr Manmohan Singh agreed to in 2005. These principles stated that in resolving the border issue the boundary would be along “well-defined and easily identifiable natural geographical features” and that “interests of their settled populations” in the border areas should be safeguarded. This clearly indicates that there will be no change in the status of populated areas. Rather than abide by this agreement, the Chinese responded by declaring that the whole of Arunachal Pradesh is a part of “South Tibet”, thereby requiring that the entire “settled population” of Arunachal Pradesh should become Chinese citizens!

In the western sector in Ladakh, going by India’s definition of the LAC, the areas China intruded in Depsang are clearly on the Indian side of the Ladakh-Tibet border. The Macdonald-Macartney proposals, which China implicitly endorsed in 1899, were based on “well defined and easily identifiable geographical features”. India’s delineation of the LAC broadly conforms to the Macdonald-Macartney Line, which was tacitly accepted by China. The Ladakh-China border was then determined as lying along the Karakoram Mountains, up to the Indus River Watershed. Chinese official maps issued in 1853, 1917 and 1919 depicted the Ladakh-Tibet border accordingly. China has thus to accept this Indian definition of the LAC, as it has agreed that the boundary should be along “well- defined and easily identifiable natural geographical features”. What has transpired is not merely “acne”, but a violation of India’s territorial integrity. New Delhi has been so pusillanimous that it deliberately chooses not to articulate how China has refused to agree to the exchange of maps for determining the LAC and how it has gone back on the framework for a border settlement that Prime Minister Wen Jiabao agreed to in 2005.

The last time that a similar intrusion across the LAC occurred was in Sumdorong Chu near the McMahon Line in Arunachal Pradesh in 1986. Then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi did not describe the Chinese action as an “acne” or a “localised problem”. Indian forces were quietly mobilised and three Mountain Divisions were moved to the Sumdorong Chu area, occupying hilltops around the Chinese forces. In a message conveyed through then US Defence Secretary Caspar Weinberger, China’s Supreme leader Deng Xiaoping warned that China would have to “teach India a lesson” if it did not pull back. New Delhi refused to oblige. A beaming Deng Xiaoping received the Indian Prime Minister in Beijing in December 1988. The Joint Working Group set up after 1988 agreed in 1995 that there would be a simultaneous withdrawal of troops from two border posts, each by China and India, in the Sumdorong Chu valley.

The sudden decision on the latest infiltration, made public in the late hours of May 5 that both sides will withdraw from the positions assumed after the Chinese pitched tents in the Depsang area, raises more questions than it answers. As already explained, the area in question has been historically on India’s side of the Ladakh-Tibet border. By agreeing to a mutual pull-back from existing positions, has India not conceded that the area in question is disputed? Have we not put ourselves in a position of being unable to re-establish our presence in an area which is indisputably ours? If this is indeed the case, what is the status of the Indian presence in nearby Daulat Beg Oldi itself? Could the Chinese now not undertake a similar intrusion around Daulat Beg Oldi and demand our removal of the strategic airlift capabilities there? Have we tacitly agreed to quietly pull back from strategic positions of concern to China in Chumar and other areas?

Significantly, this is happening when India’s defence modernisation has been adversely affected by its economic downturn. The Chinese have noted India’s defence build up in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh over the past decade and evidently concluded that they need to act now on this build-up, before it is too late. This intrusion has come just after the Chinese have proposed freezing of troop levels on the border.

Now that we have agreed to pull back from the Depsang area, are we setting the stage for halting the build-up of our Lines of Communications and forward deployments across Ladakh, thus giving the Chinese military advantage? These are issues that we need to carefully monitor in the days ahead. There can be no compromise on the country’s territorial integrity.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/we-could-be-giving-up-too-much-for-too-little.html

SOME COUNTRIES JUST CANNOT BE TRUSTED
Thursday, 09 May 2013 | Claude Arpi | in Edit

The latest Chinese infiltration in Ladakh, even if the issue has been ‘successfully' resolved by both diplomacies, will remain for years a scar on the Sino-Indian relations



Hua Chunying, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, was at her elusive best when she announced ‘progress’ in the Sino-Indian ‘stand-off’ in Ladakh: “So far as I know, relevant departments of the two countries have made positive progress in their friendly consultations”, she stated

According to Xinhua, she said, “I believe that both sides have the will and capability to properly resolve this incident as soon as possible and jointly maintain the healthy and stable growth of China-India relations.” The ‘will to resolve’ the issue clearly means that it is not solved. Even if the troops’ withdrawal remains shrouded in vagueness, it is important to take an initial trial balance of the incident in the High Himalayas. A first point to be noticed: New Delhi was taken by surprise; was not ready to tackle the situation, whether militarily or even diplomatically.

There is no doubt that the terrain favours China; after months of being posted in Western Tibet, Chinese jawans and officers are usually well acclimatised and it is relatively easy for them to go on an outing, like at Daulat Beg Oldi.

In his memoirs, Colonel Chewang Rinchen, the brave Ladakhi soldier who was twice awarded the Maha Vir Chakra (in 1948 and 1971) for his exploits in the region, recounts: “The entire area between Murgo, which is known as ‘Gateway to Hell’, and DBO is notorious for treacherous weather and snow blizzards. …After crossing Saser La, we proceeded towards DBO. On the way, we came across skeletons of human beings and animals lying scattered all along the track.” Interestingly, he added, “On September 3, 1961, I proceeded with a patrol party, along the Chip Chap river… I noted the hoof marks of camels and horses and, a little further, tyre marks of a three-ton vehicle. It clearly indicated the possible presence of the Chinese in that area.”

While the toughest soldiers of the Indian Army took more than a week to reached DBO, the Chinese could drive in a three-tonner! And that was in 1961. The topography and the difficulty to survive in the area was obviously known to the Indian Army and intelligence agencies, but they did not envisage that the Chinese would plant tents in what Beijing considers to be its side of the Line of Actual Control.

From the Chinese side, everything seemed to have been programmed to the minutest details, including the ‘withdrawal’ — if withdrawal it really is.

For future bilateral relations, one worrying issue is that China is ready to break formal treaties or agreements when it suits its interests. On September 7, 1993, India and China signed an ‘Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas’. Amongst other things, the agreement stipulated: “Neither side shall use or threaten to use force against the other by any means. Pending an ultimate solution to the boundary question between the two countries, the two sides shall strictly respect and observe the line of actual control between the two sides. No activities of either side shall overstep the line of actual control.” The DBO episode is clearly a breach of the 1993 agreement. Delhi should remember this.

India has discovered that, while it has many experts on China, so far nobody has been able to explain why Beijing took the risk of provoking a clash at this particular point in time. If China had some grievance against India (which may or may not be valid), it could have first taken the issue up at one of the scheduled bilateral meetings (Mr Salman Khurshid in Beijing or Mr Li Keqiang in Delhi). A visit of Mr AK Antony to China is also planned for later this year. There were at least three forthcoming occasions to resolve pending issues and make ‘positive progress’.

By the way, did you notice that China had only one speaker for the issue? The Central Military Commission, the PLA, the State Council, the Party — all kept quiet. Apart from the spokeswoman, the websites of The PLA Daily, The People's Daily, The Global Times, etc remained extremely discreet.

Interestingly, some experts in India seem to regret the Indian ‘open’ system. The Global Times in one rare comment said: “Some Indian officials caution that China should pay no heed to the radical voices among some Indian media which sensationalise news.”

Still, living in an open society does not mean that the Indian public is well-informed. In fact, it appears that even ‘experts’ are abysmally lacking in the basic understanding of the situation on the ground, particularly the respective claims of both India and China. The present incident and the subsequent flurry of articles/programmes may help the general public to understand better the actual stakes. It is time that the Government of India starts publishing White Papers like it had done between 1959 and 1965 (15 White Papers disclosed the correspondence between Delhi and Beijing on the border issue).

China is bound to object, but India does not need to follow Beijing’s diktat when those go against New Delhi’s professed principles of transparency and openness. If India has a case — and I believe that it has a strong one — it should be known to and understood by the common man.

Now, what has China gained from its DBO excursion? Many theories have been propounded: Some say that the Chinese leadership wanted to show its displeasure on the new proximity between New Delhi and Tokyo. But such Himalayan happenings are bound to draw the US, Japan and India closer, not the other way around.

What about China’s displeasure at the infrastructure that India has been building on this side of the LAC? Was it worth this drama? Was it not possible to discuss this issue at the already scheduled ministerial meets? ‘Experts’ will argue that according to the Art of War, it is the Chinese way to get what they want. This is not certain, because the issue has serious negative collaterals for Beijing. This incident, even if it has been ‘successfully’ resolved by both diplomacies, will remain for years a scar on the Sino-Indian relations which had just started to look up.

When Chinese scholars visit India, they like to say that both countries should sincerely work on the mutual trust deficit. It is clear the Chinese ‘camping’ in DBO has pushed back for years the earlier progress in closing the ‘trust’ gap.

A last issue: Since he came on the Middle Kingdom’s throne, the new Emperor has proclaimed the Great Dream of China: “The China Dream will bring blessings and goodness to not only the Chinese people but also people in other countries.”

Where do the last intrusions fit in the Chinese Dream? It is clear from the recent development that President Xi Jinping’s pet slogan has taken a beating in the process. But there is always the possibility that the stand-off has made some PLA Generals dream, and this without the blessings of the Emperor. Who knows?

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/some-countries-just-cannot-be-trusted.html


Let’s prepare for the inevitable


Pravin Sawhney

09 May 2013


[Once China made the desired gains at the strategic, operational and tactical levels, it stepped back, in true Chinese style of ‘confrontation and cooperation' diplomacy. At the strategic level, it brought India's political leadership under enormous psychological pressure]

Clarity on the disputed border between India and China will help us better understand the recent Depsang occupation by Chinese border guards, which ended as dramatically as it had started.

This may also help us crystal-gaze into what lies ahead.

During my July 2012 trip to Beijing, when I had a week-long opportunity to meet with officers of the People’s Liberation Army and visit the Army’s installations, I asked them how they defined China’s border with India.

Colonel Guo Hongtao, Staff Officer of the Asian Affairs Bureau, Foreign Office, Ministry of National Defence, who had participated in special representative talks on border resolution, said: “The border question is about four lines. The first is China’s traditional claim line, which is 2,000km long. The second is the line claimed by India, the so-called McMahon line, which is longer. The third line is the line presently held by both sides (Line of Actual Control). Because of these three lines we can say that India has done more transgressions than the Chinese side. The fourth line is about Sikkim.”

The Colonel implied three important things. First, China has unilaterally shrunk the disputed border by half, from 4,056km that India believes to a mere 2,000km that Beijing accepts today. The discounted portion is the entire Western sector (Jammu & Kashmir) which runs from the tri-junction of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir-Afghanistan-Xinjiang, along the K2 mountain, Shaskgam valley, Daulat Beg Oldi till Demchok. Second, the LAC, though 4,056km, is mutually accepted neither on ground nor on maps. Moreover, being a military-held line, it can be shifted at will by force. And third, the 90,000 sq km Indian State of Arunachal Pradesh (Eastern sector), called South Tibet by Beijing since 2006, belongs to China.

So, on the one hand, China does not have a border with India in PoK and Ladakh, on the other hand, India has occupied the Eastern sector which belongs to China.

Contrast this with China’s border-settlement formula that was offered by its Premier Zhou Enlai in 1959 and 1960 and by Deng Xiaoping in 1980.

The then proposed land swap was: Karakoram (Western sector) for China, and the Himalayas (Eastern sector) for India, with Tawang tract in the Eastern sector to go to China. Thus, in 33 years from 1980 onwards, China built excellent border infrastructure, impressive military capability, and through various bilateral treaties, visits and protocols, and made a legal case to have its cake and eat it too. Forget a land-for-peace swap, China has done the unprecedented in history: Laid claims on both Western and Eastern sectors legally, without firing a shot.

So why did Depsang start and end suddenly?

Once China made the desired gains at the strategic, operational and tactical levels, it stepped back, in Chinese style of ‘confrontation and cooperation’ diplomacy. At the strategic level, it brought India’s political leadership under enormous psychological pressure for 20 days. Like Tibet is China’s ‘core concern’, where Beijing will never tolerate outside interference, the border issue is India’s ‘core concern’, where, unfortunately, a deal has been struck to buy peace. New Delhi’s appeasement at whatever level will spur China to boldly unfold its grand strategy of encircling India, both from land and sea, in the years ahead.

At the operational level, the Chinese move has made the Siachen Glacier extremely vulnerable with a two-front war situation staring India in the face.

With China showing disregard for the LAC on the eastern side of the glacier, and Pakistan treating the western side as no-man’s land, the stage is set to cut off logistics supplies for 4,000 Indian soldiers on the glacier (which they have been occupying since May 1984) at the time of the enemy’s choosing.

It is no coincidence that Pakistan’s interpretation of the Line of Control beyond mutually-agreed map point NJ 9842 runs eastwards and joins at the Karakoram Pass, just 30km north of where Chinese troops had pitched their tents. In a broader sense, India’s claims over north Ladakh stands diluted, and Leh, the capital of Ladakh, is militarily vulnerable.

At the tactical level, the morale of Indian forces (regular Army and Indo-Tibetan Border Police) manning the LAC would plummet. What use is holding posts round the year at heights of 18,000 feet and above, if the higher leadership lacks the determination to push intruders back, is what the soldiers would ask.

Against this backdrop, Union Minister for Defence AK Antony’s remarks made to the media that “the situation is not of our making”, sounds outlandish. To be sure, if India was politically strong-willed and militarily capable, China would not have acted so brazenly. Mr Antony, the longest serving Defence Minister, cannot absolve himself of his responsibility. It needs to be remembered that the disputed border is India’s Achilles Heel, which China will regularly exploit.

Despite having a 13-lakh standing Army, a large Air Force and Navy, and an annual defence budget of $49 billion, India has given little importance to its national security.

Political will can be assessed by recalling the November 26, 2008, Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack in Mumbai, where 164 lives were lost. India did nothing in retaliation.

Moreover, the country lacks a military strategy roadmap to match the PLA, as it would require a matrix which synergises five domains of war: Land, air, sea, space and cyber. Unlike China, Indian defence services, namely, the Army, the Air Force and the Navy, have neither jointly assessed the Chinese threat nor do they have a single war doctrine to match the PLA’s conventional war prowess.

In specific terms, there are at least seven Chinese military capabilities for land warfare that the Indian military (Army and Air Force) will find difficult to match without help from the Defence Minister.

These are: Desired border infrastructure, preponderance of accurate conventional ballistic missiles, massive air lift capabilities, hardened special forces, unity of command exemplified by Chinese Military Area Command concept, space and anti-satellite capabilities, and offensive cyber prowess.

Without these, and given the known critical deficiencies of equipment and ammunition in the Army, brave words from the Army Chief to take on the Chinese do not amount to much. The Depsang incident should be a wake-up call for India.

(The writer is a former Indian Army officer and now Editor, FORCE, a newsmagazine on national security)

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/lets-prepare-for-the-inevitable.html

To start with, will SoniaG UPA and RBI ban PNotes, the principal conduit for illicit financial flows?

Kalyan

100 of UK's richest people concealing billions in offshore tax havens
Global investigation gets under way as HM Revenue and Customs acts on leaked data
Rupert Neate and James Ball
The Guardian, Thursday 9 May 2013 21.17 BST

HMRC has warned alleged tax evaders they may face 'criminal prosecution or significant penalties' Photograph: Michael Kemp/Alamy
More than 100 of Britain's richest people have been caught hiding billions of pounds in secretive offshore havens, sparking an unprecedented global tax evasion investigation.

George Osborne, the chancellor, warned the alleged tax evaders, and a further 200 accountants and advisers accused of helping them cheat the taxman: "The message is simple: if you evade tax, we're coming after you."

HM Revenue & Customs warned those involved, who were named in offshore data first offered to the authorities by a whistleblower in 2009, that they will face "criminal prosecution or significant penalties" if they do not voluntarily disclose their tax irregularities, as the UK steps up its efforts to clamp down on avoidance ahead of the G8 summit in June.

The 400-gigabyte cache of data leaked to the authorities is understood to be the same information seen by the Guardian in its Offshore Secrets series in November 2012 and March this year. It reveals complicated financial structures using companies and trusts stretching from Singapore and the British Virgin Islands to the Cayman Islands and the Cook Islands.

The Treasury is working in collaboration with American and Australian tax authorities in the biggest ever cross-border tax evasion investigation, and warned that the alleged evaders may be publicly named and shamed if they fail to come clean and explain their tax affairs.

Osborne described the data as "another weapon in HMRC's arsenal" in the fight against global tax evasion. HMRC added it "reveals extensive use of complex offshore structures to conceal assets by wealthy individuals and companies".

The Revenue said it was continuing to analyse the material, the equivalent of more than 200 lorry-loads of printed A4 sheets, but it has already "identified over 100 people who benefit from these structures". A number of those "had already been identified and are under investigation for offshore tax evasion".

It urged those who use offshore tax structures to urgently review their taxation arrangements to ensure they comply with the law, and encouraged those that don't to ensure "early disclosure of tax irregularities. Failure to do so may result in a criminal prosecution or significant financial penalties and the possibility of their identities being published," HMRC warned.

It is also investigating more than 200 UK accountants, lawyers and other professional advisers named in the data as advising the wealthy on setting up the elaborate offshore tax arrangements. HMRC declined to name any of the individuals, advisers or companies it is investigating.

An HMRC source said it was first offered a "taster" of the cache in 2009, but received the bulk in late 2010. A spokesman declined to state if it paid a reward to the whistleblower.

The Guardian, BBC Panorama and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) have been releasing details of UK citizens and companies acting as offshore middlemen.

Gerard Ryle, director of the ICIJ, said he expected the collaboration between taxmen in the UK, US and Australia to lead to "the largest tax investigation in history".

He added: "We know from the data we obtained there are names of people from more than 170 countries. Some are prominent citizens – politicians, celebrities, businessmen, the elite of some societies.

"To have three major tax agencies collaborating – with the possibility of many more doing the same – is potentially a major blow to the secrecy of offshore jurisdictions."

Among those identified by ICIJ data in the joint investigation was James Turner of York-based company formation agents Turner Little, who told undercover reporters how to set up a foundation in Belize: "It doesn't link back to you, it doesn't link back to your family. So it gives you complete confidentiality."

A representative of Atlas Corporate Services, another company run by Britons but operating from Mauritius, explained to reporters how to avoid tax on a hypothetical £6m sitting in a Swiss bank account. He suggested, "off the record", that they use an offshore entity in Panama. "If there's a tax issue … they won't disclose any information on that foundation under Panamanian law," he said.

Another middleman, Russell Lebe of Readymade Companies Worldwide, advising a reporter posing as an Indian businessman, assured his client that "If we were approached by the Indian tax authority … and they're doing tax evasion, we wouldn't give a monkey's."

The Guardian, in its investigation, identified 28 individuals with ties to the UK acting as "sham" directors for more than 21,000 companies across the world, keeping the true owners of the companies off official paperwork and thus making them invisible to authorities.

However, there is no suggestion that any of the individuals identified in the Guardian/ICIJ investigation are among those being examined by HMRC.

Jenny Granger, HMRC's director general for enforcement and compliance, cautioned that not all the individuals using offshore accounts were seeking to evade tax. "There is nothing illegal about an international structure, especially in a globally integrated economy and these arrangements may be perfectly legitimate and may have already been declared to HMRC," she said. "However, they may involve tax evasion, avoidance or other serious offences by taxpayers. What has got to stop is using offshore structures to illegally hide assets and income."

David Cameron has pledged to make tackling the "staggering" levels of tax evasion a key priority of the UK's presidency of the G8 this year. The EU will hold a summit on tax evasion on 22 May. It will be followed by a G8 summit under British chairmanship in June.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/09/100-richest-uk-billions-offshore-tax-havens

Kalam’s letter damning Amartya Sen out in public

Government had tried to suppress the July 2011 letter to Krishna
GN BUREAU | NEW DELHI | JUNE 19 2012

Former president APJ Abdul Kalam’s last July letter to foreign minister SM Krishna kept under wraps has come into public domain, slamming Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen for forcing him out of his brainchild project of the Nalanda University in Bihar, as its first visitor.

He chose not to create a public controversy even while writing to Krishna on July 4 that he was upset by the way the project was being handled and hence he could not remain associated with it any longer. He wrote how sad he was at everything going wrong in reviving a great seat of learning in Buddhist philosophy and statecraft. Revival of the first residential international educational institution which flourished between 5th and 12th centuries near Patna is in controversies even before it starts any academic courses.

The letter reads: “Having (been) involved in various academic and administrative proceedings of Nalanda University since August 2007, I believe that the candidates to be selected/appointed to the post of chancellor and vice-chancellor should be of extraordinary intellect with academic and management expertise. Both have to personally involve themselves full-time in Bihar so that a robust and strong international institution is built.”

The ministry of external affairs had taken over the project since it was conceptualised as an international university involving the 16 ASEAN countries like China, Japan, Australia, Korea and Thailand, even while Dr Kalam kept insisting that it should better be handled by the human resources development ministry as it has the required experience in the field of education.

The government tried to suppress Dr Kalam’s damning letter as it was taken on record in the governing board meeting of the university but not made public until a Patna journalist wrote to him to know the truth.

Dr Kalam felt frustrated with the people at the helm of affairs and his resignation was a rebuff to prof Amartya Sen and his protégé Dr Gopa Sabharwal, who was brought in as the vice-chancellor designate, without Kalam’s knowledge. Being chairman of the governing board, Sen’s position is equivalent to chancellor’s (the university officially has none as yet). Neither Sen nor Sabharwal could inspire the confidence of Kalam.

Kalam and Sen represent the opposite ends of the spectrum. While Kalam is rooted in the Indian traditions and has worked for India's self-reliance in defence sector, Sen is one of the “runaway” success stories in academics abroad.

With a mind besotted with Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard, Sen viewed Nalanda University through that prism, while Kalam felt sad at finding no efforts to re-enact the glory of ancient Nalanda University in which students from all over East Asia came and had the tutelage of Arya Dev, Silabhadra, Dharmapala, Santarakshita and Chandragomin who spent their lives here.

The academics say the fault lies in the government for entrusting the task of reviving the university to Amartya Sen as a testimony of India’s obsequiousness despite Kalam repeatedly warning the Indians against it.

Kalam’s letter is also an indictment of Sabharwal, just a sociology reader from Lady Sri Ram College of Delhi University, who was made the rector/vice-chancellor designate by Sen despite protest that she has nothing to do with the Buddhist studies for which the university is to be set up and was running it while sitting in Delhi.

http://governancenow.com/news/regular-story/kalam-s-letter-damning-amartya-sen-out-public

BJP’s Karnataka tally would dip to 2 in Lok Sabha on assembly vote

TNN | May 10, 2013, 12.54 AM IST

NEW DELHI: If voting patterns from the Karnataka assembly polls were to be replicated in the next Lok Sabha elections, the BJP would face an even gloomier scenario, winning just 2 of the state's 28 seats. The Congress would win 22 and the JD(S) the remaining 4.

An analysis of votes by Lok Sabha seats shows that even if the votes gathered by the B S Yedyurappa-led KJP and the G Sriramulu-led BSRCP were added to the BJP's tally, the combined entity would only get another 7 seats, taking the saffron party's tally to 9, a huge drop from the 19 it won in 2009. Considering that Karnataka contributed the largest chunk of MPs to the BJP's Lok Sabha tally in 2009, that is truly alarming news for the party.

Of course, voting patterns are never quite replicated in such a mechanical fashion, with voters often making a distinction between who they want in power in the state and who they prefer at the Centre, but such an analysis does help put the task before different parties in perspective.

Assuming the votes are replicated, the BJP would win just Belgaum and Chikkodi, the JD(S) would pick up Hassan, Mandya, Kolar and Tumkur and the Congress would win the rest. Apart from the two it would win, the BJP would come second in only 10 other seats. In short, it wouldn't even be one of the two main contenders in a majority of the state's Lok Sabha seats, finishing fourth in several.

The reason the JD(S) would do better than the BJP despite having exactly the same number of assembly seats and almost exactly the same vote share is because its votes are more concentrated in some pockets, largely in the southern parts of the state.

The KJP would be unable to win any seats, but would finish second in Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davanagere and Haveri and a close third to the JD(S) in Shimoga, Yedyurappa's home turf. Sriramulu's BSRCP would be second to the Congress in Bellary.

Given this scenario, the pressure on BJP, KJP and BSRCP to merge or join hands is clear. But even if they were able to pool their votes, it would be enough to get past the post only in Bellary, Bidar, Dharwad, Gulbarga, Koppal, Shimoga and Tumkur. In that event, the Congress would be restricted to 16 seats, the combined saffron entity would get 9 and the JD(S) 3.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/specials/news/BJPs-Karnataka-tally-would-dip-to-2-in-Lok-Sabha-on-assembly-vote/articleshow/19977915.cms?

Cobrapost stings again- Exposes money laundering racket in 10 more banks including IndusInd, BoB and ING Vyasa

MONEYLIFE DIGITAL TEAM | 09/05/2013 03:07 PM |

Cobrapost has alleged that RBI is acting as a protector, and not as a regulator or enforcer. The RBI is loath to admit that there exists a massive money laundering racket in our financial institutions across the board, because if it were to admit, it would strip the RBI of its halo as a 'one of the best banking regulators in the world', Cobrapost says

Cobrapost.com continues with its exposure of money laundering taking place in banking system. In its latest episode, Cobrapost has named 10 banks, IndusInd Bank, Bank of Baroda, ING Vysya Bank, Allahabad Bank, Bank of India, Central Bank of India, Bank of Maharashtra, HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and Axis Bank involved in money laundering.

"In this edition, codenamed Operation Red Spider Part III, we bring you 10 banking institutions and the murky world that exists within their walls, with junior to top level officials at dozens of branches admitting on camera their complicity in crime. The videos, across the large spectrum of such illegal activity, clearly prove that this is not simply the design of some criminally oriented officers, or for that matter, some young, and front office executive succumbing to performance pressures. It proves without doubt that this corruption is endemic, and spread through the Indian banking and insurance system," Cobrapost said in a release.

Earlier on 14 March 2013, Cobrapost named private sector lenders ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank and Axis Bank as facilitating money laundering. Later on 6th May, it named 23 entities including Life Insurance Corp of India (LIC), State Bank of India (SBI), Bank of Baroda (BoB), Punjab National Bank (PNB), Canara Bank, Indian Bank, IDBI Bank, Yes Bank, Federal Bank, Reliance Capital, Birla Sunlife and many others, who together manage assets worth thousands of crores of rupees and have equally staggering deposits at their disposal.

Cobrapost said today, "The RBI continues to act as a protector, and not as a regulator or enforcer. The RBI is loath to admit that there exists a massive money-laundering racket in our financial institutions across the board, flourishing under its very nose, simply because if it were to admit to this deep-rooted malaise, it would strip the RBI of its halo as a “one of the best banking regulators in the world.”

All banks have been asked to strictly adhere to KYC norms. Even older account holders’ antecedents are being verified. The banks involved in money laundering have punished their staff members – 50 so far – with suspension. The Finance Ministry has asked the Banking Association of India to launch a thorough probe into the functioning of all banks, while individual banks have announced their own probe, and punishing the staff involved with suspension.

"Whether such inquiries are followed up with visible and effective action on ground or not, only time will tell. However, if the RBI and the Finance Ministry are waiting for more clinching evidence to finally act on it, we here present yet more shocking videos that should normally awaken any law enforcement authority. We hope that the authorities wake up to the ground realities and start the requisite legal procedures," Cobrapost said.

Here are the snippets from Cobrapost's latest Operation Red Spider III...

IndusInd Bank
Ironically, its motto is: We make you feel richer. Now let us tell you what lessons our reporter learnt at this bank:

At one of the branches of IndusInd Bank in an upscale area of South Delhi, its personal banking head N Anand customizes the family income builder scheme, in tie-up with AVIVA – a maximum yearly deposit of Rs5 lakh – which means Rs15 lakh for three investors and Rs1.5 crore in 10 years. It also means that you are depositing less than Rs10 lakh a year in an account. Cash in lockers is okay, and you can count your money ‘araam se’ (in comfort) inside the branch.

At the bank’s branch in Hyderabad, Branch Manager S Mishra and operations manager Amita are bolder. It is the same family income builder scheme, and when we talk about how to put in cash, they say “woh to hum baad me karenge (We will do that part later).” She has full co-operation of the bank: “Hum bank ke through kuch na kuch alternative bana sakte (We can arrange for some alternative through the bank).”

She actually solves the Rs5 lakh investment limit issue. Take out another policy a month later, without PAN card.

She throws light on the 7-year life of an Income Tax notice. She also advises the reporter on the Streedhan clause that can move a large portion of the black money out of the reach of the law for good.

At another branch of the bank in Hyderabad branch manager TJ Reddy and customer services manager Srikanth K offer great ideas.

Srikanth explains the ‘pattadar passbook’ or a passbook for agricultural income. The bank will do that. In this way we can get away even after we provide the PAN. When we want more accounts and more account holders, the bank offers to make these ‘benami’ accounts for us, with only us having the authority to withdraw. The bank even provides these faceless people for the accounts.

Bank of Baroda
The bank calls itself ‘India’s international bank’. Now let us tell you what lessons our reporter learnt at this bank:

For RC Verma, senior manager and S Kamran, manager at its Gurgaon branch, slow and steady wins the race. But be sure: they do win. Kamran says: “Aur toh aap humare touch mein aaoge toh aapka sub number ek mein aise hi convert kara denge … aapko pata bhi nahin chalega (If you keep in touch with us, we will convert all your money into white … you will not even know it).”

The hubris is amazing. Both managers are okay with cash in lockers. In fact, they want it that way, so they can slowly route the cash to investments.

D Singh, senior manager at BB’s South Delhi branch gives us a fine idea: “Aise aadmi ke naamdaal doonga jo return file na karta ho (I will put in the name of a person who doesn’t file the return).”

Or, “Joint account kar lo, pahla naam uska rakhlo jiska tax nahin hoti hai, doosra apna rakh lo jo monitoring karni hai … monitoring karenge to woh nikal hi nahin payega … paper bhi apne paas rakhna…. bagair papare ke waise hi nahin niklega (Do it through joint account. Put his name first, then for the second account holder put the name of the one who will be monitoring it. If you are monitoring then he won’t be able to withdraw money … keep the papers with you … without papers it won’t be withdrawn ).”

RR Bhaskar, Senior Branch Manager of BoB, South Delhi, says: “Actually ikkatthe nahin karna chahenge... ekdum se light mein aa jate hain [Actually, it has not to be done in one shot… (it) may bring it to light immediately].”

Bhaskar also sees the agricultural income route: “Usme kya hai ki you can justify … agriculture land pakka hogi inki … agriculture land ka paisa is mein dekhayenge … income tax walon se bachne ka ek ye tarika hai (The thing is that you can justify … I am sure he owns agriculture land … we can show agricultural income… this is one method to stave off the Income Tax people).”

ING Vysya Bank
The following are the lessons our reporter learnt at this bank:

A Bhaskar, Deputy Manager of the bank in Chandigarh, is not exactly in the category of a serious banker, but is still conversant with most underhand dealings that the system incorporates. In bringing cash from the minister’s house, he is careful to take his own car, not the bank’s, and though he has not been to see the lockers, he can surely arrange for cash to be stashed there.

Manager P Saha and Relationship Manager S Das of the bank’s Kolkata branch have been there, done it. Saha explains the goodness of insurance policies: “This is the only product jahan par government haat nahin laga sakta... Yeh government bond debenture me jaata hai... aur 10 saal, 12 saal baad jo maturity hota hai, government has no right to touch LICs. Because it’s related to the life of an individual... (This is the only product that the government cannot touch. These are invested in government bonds and debentures that mature in 10-12 years... The government has no right to touch LICs, because it’s related to the life of an individual).”

SS Sudhir, the Branch Head at the bank’s another branch in Hyderabad explains when an account is tracked by authorities: “Cash aap... dal sakte.. isme tracing nahin ata. Tracing ap ko tab hoga jab agar aap ko ... kuch transactions hua. Matlab aapko transactions ka track kahin pe hua... Matlab yeh Hyderabad mein aap transaction kar rahe hain... if you do any transaction with anybody... that particular account is called for any explanation, then you check from there where it has been routed... In that sense if they to track all that then it comes... (You can put in cash. There is no tracing in this. Tracing happens when you have some transactions. That means any of your transactions are tracked anywhere. Say, this is Hyderabad, you are doing transactions...if you do any transaction with anybody... that particular account is called for any explanation, then you check from there where it has been routed... In that sense if they to track all that then it comes...)”

Basically the probability is low, she says.

Regarding transferring money out of the country, she sheds light on certain dealings: “Most of the people are doing, you know, they are taking out the money and sending it ... and then setting up the business...” And banks are complicit in this.

Allahabad Bank
This is one of the leading public sector banks of the country. Established in 1865, it prides itself in its ‘Tradition of Trust’. This trust, however, is now in doubt.

Chief Manager A Sharma and Senior Manager RM Ahuja of the bank’s South Delhi branch form a cozy coterie within the bank, greasing paths for all the black money available.

Even a retired officer, Khanna, is among the coterie. Says he about a benami account: “Account khologe aap ... agar uske naam pe jama karna hai toh usko mat lao ... aap khud jama kar do uske naam pe (If you want to deposit money in his name, don’t bring him, you deposit).”

Central Bank of India
Another leading public sector banking behemoth, this bank has more to hide despite its glorious past.

SK Garg, Chief Manager of the bank’s upscale branch in Central Delhi provides a way out to move cash into accounts. “Main aapko ek cheez sahi bata deta hoon ... jo LIC karwani hai wo toh cheque se karwaiye ... aur baaki jo main aapko jo hai ... ya toh alag alag bank pe jo hai ... pachaas pachaas hazar rupaye ki DD bana dijiye ... naam mein jismein bhi account aap kholte hain ... baad mein wo clearing mein daal ke ... wo jama ho jayega (Let me tell you one thing ... do the LIC [policy] by cheque ... and with the rest of the cash ... get several DDs for Rs. 50,000 each from other banks in the names you will open the accounts here ... later on you can put them all into clearing ... that [money] will be credited [in those accounts]).”

Here are some excerpts of confessions of past criminality:

Allahabad Bank
Chief Manager A. Sharma of the bank’s Defence Colony branch in New Delhi makes his apathy for the system clear: “Pehle kahte ki jisko TDS katata hai unke naam do ... ab jinka bhi tax katta hai, TDS kate ya na kate ... unka naam mangne lag gaye department ... pehle to hum log kaafi manage karte the (Earlier they [the Income Tax Department] used to ask for the names of people whose TDS is deducted ... nowadays, they have started asking names of all who are taxable, no matter if there is TDS or not ... earlier we could manage a lot).”

RM Ahuja: “Abhi to proof aur ye sab hone lag gaye hain ... humare paas ... humne ... benami humne ... kitne hi customers ka lakhon rupaya ... aaj se bees saal pehle, jis samay lakh ... aaj ka crore se bhi jyada hoga unke keemat ... wo de jaate the ... humne apne driver ke naam account khole ... yun hi sign mar diye (Now they have started asking for proofs and all that ... 20 years ago ... we had many customers who will just give us lakhs of rupees ... a lakh on those days is worth more than a crore today ... we used benami accounts ... in the name of our own drivers ... we signed for them just like that).”

National security threat

On 17 December 2012, Parliament gave its nod to a bill, which seeks to enlarge the definition of Money Laundering offences that could help the funding of terrorist operations. The Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha by voice vote.

It may be pointed out that the Cobrapost undercover reporter was never grilled about the origin of the money, or what it was intended for, by any banker. The bankers were simply not interested. Methods adopted in Operation Red Spider could easily be utilized by any terror organization to move huge amounts of money. This, thus, becomes a case of National Security, and the perfunctory and dismissive nature with which the RBI, the Finance Ministry and the banks have been treating this only makes the situation extremely dangerous.

Cobrapost reiterates India’s responsibility as a signatory to FATF (Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering), because the republic has treaty obligations to block precisely the kind of money laundering that the Cobrapost expose shows as rampant in the 10 banks mentioned. Operation Red Spider Part III again conclusively shows that the RBI and the Financial Intelligence Unit of the Finance Ministry have failed in stemming the systemic rot in the banks.

The gold and insurance connections
The other surprising thing observed in this huge undercover investigation by operation is the incredible urgency with which officials are pushing the sales of the banks’ gold coins/ biscuits. While the coins/ biscuits present an easy option for laundering black money, this policy could have certainly helped in triggering the huge spike in retail gold prices in the country before the worldwide slump in this metal happened – not to mention, be the cause behind India’s ballooning Current Account Deficit (CAD).

Yet another unholy alliance that has come unstuck is the liaison or tie-ups these banks have with the insurance companies, including the public sector behemoth Life Insurance Corporation of India. When the banks fail to provide a smooth channel to launder the cash, they quickly call upon their insurance company ‘buddies’ and fix a deal that suits our objective the most.

It is imperative to point out here that the financial institutions of the country, as a whole, are answerable to the people of the Republic of India. They need to explain to the average tax-payer and even to the daily wage earner, who deem these behemoth institutions as upholders of the trust they place in them, how such brazen acts of crime have been perpetuated for so long.

Our modus operandi
We used the same method as before. Our undercover reporter, Associate Editor Syed Masroor Hasan simply walks into a bank, armed with a fabricated story of a fictitious minister’s ill-gotten wealth, in cash. He asks the officials for a way to ‘invest’ this imaginary unaccounted money – starting with amounts as large as Rs50–Rs60 lakh or even Rs1 crore, leading up to amounts often as huge as Rs37 crore – in legal schemes in the long term, with not only the sole purpose of laundering the black money but also to get handsome returns on that.

Logically, any official of any established bank should immediately distance himself/ herself from such a story and its blatantly illegal consequences. These set of bankers and insurers, as in those we exposed in our last two episodes, welcomed our reporter and offered several innovative ways to channelize the cash. They were eager to accommodate the offer at any cost.

The following were the methods suggested most frequently by the banks:

• Open account and mention PAN, but always deposit just under Rs10 lakh in cash in one financial year. So no ‘automatic’ reporting.

• Open ‘benami’ accounts in the names of people who might not even have any knowledge its existence. Route your black money through them.

• Buy gold coins/biscuits in small amounts, totally avoiding the use of PAN, then sell to get payment in cheques.

• Route cash through insurance schemes from your many accounts. Make small investments at a time, use many schemes and many policies.

• Have several DDs drawn by other people in the names in which you open accounts.

• Create a ‘pattadar’ pass book, or a pass book for farm income. Farm income is not taxable. The bank will create documents showing your ownership of farm land. Pour your black money into your account using this pass book. Technically, you are paying in white money.

• Personally come to the residence of the client to take the black money deal forward and collect the cash.

Bankers are at pains to remind you of three very important aspects of underhand dealings:

(a) The government does not have the right to touch insurance policies, because these deal with the life of an individual.

(b) If the women in a family have insurance policies bought with black money, they can sign a form that labels this as Stree dhan or Women’s Wealth. As a banker helpfully put it, even if there is an Income Tax raid at your home, they will not be able to touch this particular policy.

(c) Nobody can question the source of income for gain from an insurance policy after seven years.

Be informed that the above is not even an exhaustive list.

What the Law of the Land has to Say on Money Laundering?

The videos, through Cobrapost’s undercover investigation in Operation Red Spider Part III, clearly show the gross violation of rules and regulations, framed under various laws of the land, namely, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act of 2002, the Income Tax Act and the Indian Penal Code, among others.

The first exposure from Cobrapost triggered a series of muted reactions actions from banks, the finance ministry and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), although committees have been set up to investigate the sting operation and a few bank managers and junior officials were suspended. Reacting to Cobrapost exposure on 21 March 2013, RBI's deputy governor Dr KC Chakrabarty said, “No scam has happened... Allegations don’t mean that KYC norms have been flouted... If KYC is made more stringent then the opening of bank accounts for the finally excluded may become tough... Allegations do not mean flouting norms. There is not a single transaction (of money laundering as alleged by the exposé)...These are transactional issues that have nothing to do with money laundering (!)... I am not saying that there is no problem. I know there is a problem in the system... RBI’s Financial Statement Reports highlight serious concerns over bank branches selling gold coins, mutual fund instruments, and insurance. RBI has undertaken thematic studies of banks that are active in selling gold coins and wealth management products… We cannot take action on allegations. We go by evidence.”

http://www.moneylife.in/article/cobrapost-stings-again--exposes-money-laundering-racket-in-10-more-banks-including-indusind-bob-and-ing-vyasa/32621.html?utm_source=PoweRelayEDM&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=Subscriber%2384530&utm_campaign=Today%27s%20Exclusives

See: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/05/appointment-of-foreigner-as-editor.html
Appointment of Foreigner as Editor, The Hindu, challenged in Delhi HC -- Dr. Subramanian Swamy.

SWAMY AGAINST THE HINDU
POSTED BY SOMI DAS | MAY 10, 2013 IN CHEAT SHEET | 22 COMMENTS

Congress President Sonia Gandhi is not the only “non-Indian” who Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy is trying to get ousted from her post. He now wants the appointment of – to quote him – an “anti-nation Naxalite” declared null and void as the editor of an esteemed newspaper. And no, the person concerned doesn’t live in Jangalmahal or Gadchiroli district. His official address is Kasturi Building, Anna Salai, Chennai. If you still haven’t got it, the canker in Swamy’s eyes is the editor of The Hindu, Siddharth Varadarajan.

So, what’s Swamy’s bone of contention? It’s Varadarajan’s US citizenship. Subramanian Swamy has filed a plea in the Delhi High Court saying editors of news organisations in India “must be Indian citizens and residents of India” and not foreign citizens. The court in turn, on May 8, 2013, issued a notice to the Centre asking whether the citizenship of editors of publications in India should be a criteria for their appointment. The court has decided to hear the matter on July 24, 2013.

What does the rule book say? The Press And Registration of Books Act (PRB Act) 1867, which is a pre-Independence legislation for publications, states that a person who does not ordinarily reside in India would not be permitted to edit a newspaper. However, the Act doesn’t comment on the matter of citizenship. In 2011, the Cabinet approved the Press & Registration of Books and Publication Bill, which would replace the antiquated 1867 Act. According to Section 2(C) of the Bill, “an editor is a person, whether called editor, chief-editor, sub-editor or by whatever name called, who is a citizen of India and ordinarily resides in India, who controls the selection of the matter that is brought out in a publication”. The Bill, though, is pending in Parliament.

Why has Subramanian Swamy filed this petition? Speaking to Newslaundry, Subramanian Swamy said, “The Cable Act says that the editor of a news channel has to be an Indian citizen. The 2002 Cabinet decision on FDI in print media said that the editor of any print organisation receiving foreign funds should be an Indian. So, why should an Indian print organisation funded by Indians have an editor without an Indian citizenship?”

What is The Hindu’s stand? Former Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu and Director of Kasturi & Sons Limited, publishers of The Hindu, N Ram over a long email commented, “The PRB Act does NOT stipulate that only Indian citizens can be the editor of a newspaper. The requirement is that the editor be ordinarily resident in India. Siddharth Varadarajan has been continuously resident in India since September 1995. We were fully aware of the requirements of the PRB Act and that in appointing Siddharth as the Editor of The Hindu we were in full compliance with the provisions of the Act”.

Should citizenship be seen as one of the credentials of an editor before appointment? According to Ram, “No, there is no need to take the citizenship of someone into account before appointing him or her as Editor. What is important is the editor’s commitment to the philosophy, values and ethos of the newspaper and his or her willingness and ability to uphold those values”.

Swamy disagreed and emphasised that newspapers play a vital role in forming public opinion and, therefore, citizenship of the editor should be taken into consideration. In a letter to the Press registrar dated June 6,2012 Swamy wrote, “An editor of a newspaper as part of the Fourth Estate is in a particularly important position to influence the democratic processes including elections in India. It will adversely impact national security and go against public interest if a foreigner is allowed to become editor of a newspaper like The Hindu”.

Is Swamy targeting Varadarajan in particular? According to N Ram, there have been other, well-known instances where publications have had editors with foreign citizenship – although he did not name any. He wrote, “I have no comment on why Dr Swamy raised this particular objection. We do what we think and know to be the right and legal thing”. Swamy on his part says that he has known Varadarajan for long and he is not targeting him in particular. He said that he is seeking more clarity in the press laws and the criteria to appoint editors. He also added that it is Varadarajan who is spreading rumours about Swamy seeking vendetta as Swamy is perceived to be “anti-Communist”.
Swamy’s repeated insistence and mentions of Varadarajan and his own perceived political leanings makes us wonder what Swamy has taken umbrage to in regard to Varadarajan’s eligibility as editor of an Indian newspaper. Is it his citizenship or his political ideology?


venkat • 9 hours ago −
Why question Dr Swamy's political leanings and ideology. He has raised a pertinent point. The very same news paper opposes FDI in print media clarity is required
17 •Reply•Share ›

TheHobbit venkat • 4 hours ago
Without loss of generality, Dr Swamy is a powerful force that needs to be heard. But, I have to disagree here. If Varadharajan can do a good job, then questions over his nationality are pointless. I think Jonathan Shainin does a commendable job at Caravan as do many Indian Editors at media outlets that are worth their salt. The merit of the person should be questioned. His neutrality should be questioned. Not his citizenship.
2 •Reply•Share ›

Vasista TheHobbit • 3 hours ago
Law must be framed as universally applicably. Case-by-case, person-by-person based judgement takes us to kingship and his courtroom
•Reply•Share ›

TheHobbit Vasista • 2 hours ago
I'm trying to make a universally applicable point about establishing a meritocratic system.
•Reply•Share ›

Sonam Agrawal • 9 hours ago
What does the author has to say about the questions raised by Dr Swamy, regarding formation of public opinion and its effects on foreign policy, etc.?
5 •Reply•Share ›

Shankar • 4 hours ago
i'm in total agreement with swamy. if sid wants to become the editor, he should give up his US citizenship. he must show the public where his loyalties lie. and if you must know, things like this would never be tolerated in the US, the so called 'free country', where many of the jobs here would not even consider permanent residents.
3 •Reply•Share ›

Vasista • 4 hours ago
Does any country in this world allow foreign nationals to be holding key positions in print and media. Everybody failing to read Swamy's intention. We must have a strong, nationalistic laws that govern key entities of our democracy and must clean up all the anti-nationalistic precedents everywhere. The main point Swamy is enlightening is this - You cannot have any strong legal action taken against foreign citizens with our existing Laws. So in order to stop them from fleeing or enjoying any sort of immunity after committing any unlawful acts and to bring them squarely under IPC, CrPC and have them legally accountable - the 'citizenship' is mandatory !
I'm no blind follower of Swamy. neither may agree to all of his, but a clarity and precedent on this from the judiciary will be looked ahead and much appreciated !
3 •Reply•Share ›

Constructive Inquiry • 2 hours ago
Somi Ji, Thanks for bringing this issue on the center stage for debate for constructive inquiry.

There are certain things which need to be understood before commenting or judging the intentions of both the parties (Mr Swamy’s and The Hindu) in the above mentioned case.

The influx of FDI in media and its after wards affect, both in short term and long term keeping in view of maintaining editorial freedom and sustainability of Media outlet in the Indian context is must be a issue of main stream media house.
The Information & Broadcast Ministry need to be questioned and Government proactively come forward to insure timely clarity in such issues.

Now, let’s understand the Mr Swamy's Intention, which are based on the short term and long term effect which Editorial freedom of News Papers in India. The issue can be split into sub issues.

1: Why ‘The Hindu’? : The famous, renowned news paper, so it can give him a fair chance to collect factual information and subsequently challenging ‘The Hindu’ and come up with case and so on and so forth. Let assume that Mr Swamy could have filled case against 'Dainaik Jagran', I expect no one is going to give any emphasis. Although, one can carefully analyse and observe the growth story of Jagran group and end up encountering with one of the India's biggest 'live' case of crony capitalism. The so called media wathdog can’t even run a single story about the continuous presence of such irregularities in Jagran group media.

I am happy that the case is against ‘The Hindu’ because still ‘The Hindu’ consider to be a fair and freely on the relative scale with the counter running commercial media outlet.

It is relatively easy to understand that Mr Swamy is doing what he can do best. Isn’t? ‘The Hindu’ will also do, what they can do to uphold the true spirit of values and ethos coupled with freedom of expression under the prevailing PRB act. But what if government decided to come up with new act and delaying it with conscious efforts? This is because Indian government is running on ‘Trust deficit’.

2: The FDI Dilemma: The Indian Government has recently announced the raising of limits on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the broadcast distribution sector to 74 percent. This is a significant step that will allow majority foreign interest in cable companies, Direct To Home (DTH) companies and other broadcast distribution entities.

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs’ (CCEA) approval of the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion’s (DIPP) proposal for review of the policy on FDI in the broadcasting sector is a favourable sign at a time when the industry requires huge doses of capital to fund its digitization. Just do a bit of thoughtful analysis seeing penetration of Telecom Services’ in Indian society. I bet we can’t assume that such success story of telecom can also be witnessed in media arena. The underlying assumption while coming up with FDI in broadcast is to increase the penetration level and ensuring the information penetration to the grass roots. But what happened is complete opposite as the debate over the ‘command and control’ of Reliance group in certain media outlet is still not all set. This is good step ensuring the importance of issue at highest level.

We can witness the familiar jargon on the electronics media as 'National Media'. We won’t find any media group or associated prominent journalist, sitting in New Delhi's or some other location can challenge the perception based on
rational understanding that the FDI influx won’t have any adverse effect on the editorial freedom. There are visible signs of trade offs between ‘The Management approach’ and ‘The Editorial approach’ for successful running a news paper. Since, In India, main stream media has been controlled by some old school of thought, so lets get it go and only those who can actually think beyond the Ideological barrier can understood the true essence.

3: PRB Act: The Press and Registration of Books Act (PRB Act) 1867, which is a pre-Independence legislation for publications is prevailing act. Apart from this act, one can easily understand the long list of colonial rules and regulations
that are still relevant and which by their slightest of change have lost any significant in the 21st century in the making of modern India. Let’s debate the upcoming act, gives suggestion and make this happened so to with hold accountability of the Government and other active stakeholder for benefit of people.

4: Ideology vs Idea: Being a student, I tried not to mix Ideology with Idea and this must be the conscious efforts for any independent voice media group with first at the individual level. I do and it’s time for all of us to understand it. Every time, we can’t see all this from the frame of Ideology and dilute the very true essence of vibrant democracy.

Let’s see what will be the outcome of hearing on 24th July 2013, but one thing is sure that Newslaundry is doing a wonderful job for proactive stakeholder like me.

Lets constructive Inquiry be continued….

-Harsh
see more
2 •Reply•Share ›

Abhijith Verma • 5 hours ago
Swamy is very right. The PRB Act is made on 1867, when there was no concept of citizenship. So many SC rulings say editor should be a person who should be under CrPC and IPC. That means he should be an Indian citizen. The Hindu and N ram talks loud on others illegalities and when they are caught with sheer violation, they are now talking nonsense or like innocent kids. Why Siddharth Varadarajan maintains his US citizenship? Why can't he apply for Indian citizenship? Reason is simple - he wanted to enjoy the benefits of US citizenship. As he exhibits his Naxal-Left-Secular-dalit - Minority cards, the so called pseudo secularists keep silence. As this case involves media houses and editors, so many politicians are keeping quiet as they want favours from media houses. This is the same case like when Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi caught and those who wanted to show their face in NDTV kept criminal silence. I admire Subramanian Swamy's courage and will to take on the wrong doings in dubious media world of India. Hope one day he would take on the illegal private treaties of big media houses with corporate world, which is a sheer violation of SEBI and RBI norms. I wish all success to Swamy's venture in cleaning the dirt in media houses
2 •Reply•Share ›

Sanatan Dharmi • 9 hours ago
Does anyone, except Internet hindutva khaki chaddis on the Internet who are not known to be the sharpest knives in the drawer, take Swami seriously?
6 6 •Reply•Share ›

Abhudai Singh Sanatan Dharmi • 7 hours ago
Wait for the S.C opinion , no point in sounding like the Italian Roma , jesuit. BTW lot many Indians hold him in quite high regards.I don't know if u'd recall one of our EX Election Commissioners of India,T.N Seshan. Well this man wud hold him as his guru due to his sheer brilliant academic credentials, unlike people who fake their qualifications at the Harvard..Would you want to believe who is being referred here.
8 •Reply•Share ›

Prasad Abhudai Singh • 6 hours ago
Well,no one is against Swamy in person. Its just against his anti-secular ideas. It should not be forgotten that, Swamy himself is EXTREMELY pro-American (and pro-Israeli), perhaps even America's puppet in India. Then why is he so against Varadarajan's American citizenship inspite of him being very much anti-imperialist?
3 2 •Reply•Share ›

Abhijith Verma Prasad • 5 hours ago
what is the problem in pro-american, while people took proud on pro-LTTE, pro-Jihadi. Siddharth should go and Ram should be booked for illegal activity. The Hindu newspaper should obey Indian laws. They only obey the dictums of dravidain parties, otherwise they know their bones should be broken.
3 •Reply•Share ›

Prasad Abhijith Verma • 5 hours ago
Haha! What is the problem in being pro-American? I think you have been brainwashed by the mainstream media! Most of the problems in this world are due to the imperialist policies of America and its puppets in the world. The economic crisis, wars, hunger, poverty, everything is the creation of the Zionist entity.
2 2 •Reply•Share ›

Abhijith Verma Sanatan Dharmi • 4 hours ago
you may take sibal,manish tewari, digvijay and Rashid Alwi seriously...or the Delhi Imaam who never cared to appear in Court for the past 25 years of summoning.
2 •Reply•Share ›

One • 5 hours ago
Let's consider two aspects. First, is editorship of a big newspaper
critical for democracy and nation? Yes, no one should doubt that.
Second, citizenship means what? Among other things, it implies you have
pledged your primary allegiance to the country of which you are a
citizen. Considering these two aspects, we cannot have a person whose
loyalty is to another country for a post so crucial for our country.

Someone
might say, until something anti-national is done by a person, we should
not disallow him or her to be an editor. The problem is how do we find
out anti-national activities. In this information and cerebral era, it
is not that straight forward. Anti-national activities can be done like a
slow poisoning - by publication, suppression, editing of series of news
articles which fall in grey area of anti-national news or differences
of opinions. Rarely, one will publish articles which in-your-face are
anti-national. Intelligent work is done slowly and in subtle manner. So
we should select those who are committed to our country; citizenship is
one crucial flag of this. Citizenship doesn't guarantee
absence of anti-national intentions or acts, but at least it reduces the
chances.

Just ask, can we allow a citizen of another country
which is hostile to our country to be an editor here? We should not,
even if he or she has not done any anti-national activity. It's like we
cannot allow foreigner to be in military here. Military is in physical
space, Media is in cerebral space. I think for crucial posts and roles,
we should allow only Indian citizens. Not only in press, in other
important sphere too.
see more
•Reply•Share ›

Prasad One • 5 hours ago
Listen to or read Varadarajan and you will immediately find that he is anti-imperialist and anti-American inspite of his citizenship. Swamy on the other hand is openly pro-American. So what is more important here-a clear ideology or citizenship? Swamy is OK with the foreign MNCs exploit the land belonging to poor tribals and reap profits but he is not ready to accept an Indian to be editor just because he has some other citizenship? What about the corporate media like CNN-IBN, CNBC-TV18, Bloomberg etc. who are openly owned and controlled by the Zionist Americans and spreading their own propaganda in India? Also news papers like Dainik Jagran who has directors on the board who are real Americans? Watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

1 1 •Reply•Share ›

Vasista Prasad • 4 hours ago
If you go by what all people say in front of rolling camera, you would never have any anti nationalistic events in this country !
2 •Reply•Share ›

Prasad Vasista • 3 hours ago
LOL! You need to read more of P. Sainath. He can be called the Noam Chomsky of India.
1 •Reply•Share ›

Abhijith Verma Prasad • 4 hours ago
don't be slave or blind fan of sid varadarajan. if you know him, tell him to apply for Indian citizenship...all problems solved. For people like you terrorist jehadi Osama is Osma Bin Laden ji....ask siddharth to throw away his US citzenship and take our Indian citizenship...he won't do..becoz he want to enjoy the benfits of US citizenship...He is foolings Buddhus like you
1 •Reply•Share ›

Prasad Abhijith Verma • 3 hours ago
Haha. You guys always have the same hate story. Why don't you give a sensible reply to the comments I made? Do you think the foreign citizenship of the editor of a newspaper is more destructive than the direct foreign ownership of multiple mainstream TV news channels and news papers? You say CNN owned CNN_IBN gives you real news and The Hindu's news are manipulated because it has an editor with other citizenship although he has live in India since last 20 odd years? I am sorry, but you are the BUDDHU here.
1 •Reply•Share ›

hardcorenews Abhijith Verma • 3 hours ago
guys you are the same ppl who if Modi would get an american visa would claim it as a victory. Take a chill pill. Mark Tully was not an Indian but he understood India. Ibn Batuta and many other foreign account writer and historians provided fresh perspective to Indian history and made India a global story. so, please don't go after someone's citizenship. He might have applied for it and would soon get it.

http://www.newslaundry.com/2013/05/swamy-against-the-hindu/

CHINESE ASPIRATIONS AND INDIAN INTERESTS
Saturday, 11 May 2013 | Pioneer | in Oped Dr. Subramanian Swamy

The growing opaqueness in India’s relations with China is contributing heavily to the possibility of the outbreak of war by miscalculation of each other’s intentions. The time has come for induction of some fresh air into the rancid corridors of South Block

What is really happening on the Sino-Indian front? What is significant is that influential persons in China and in India are itching for a confrontation. Why? In China, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which was in the forefront of Chinese affairs from 1937 to 1979, was asked to take the back seat by Deng Xiao ping when he launched his programme of economic modernisation and the opening up of China’s economy to the West. Today, the PLA is modernised as a consequence of economic progress, and wants a say in foreign affairs.

Therefore it is safe to say that the 40 soldiers driving 19 Km across the as yet notional Line of Actual Control, and setting up tents and kitchen, was without the knowledge of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party.

In India even before the Cabinet Committee for Political Affairs could assess the situation, TV anchors were spitting dragon fire, screaming Chinese invasion without pointing out that 40 soldiers cannot invade India. Moreover, by then the Indian troops surrounded the Chinese soldiers and to keep boredom at bay kept singing Hindi film songs to the Chinese soldiers.

Had the politicians on both sides succumbed to the storm in the tea cup, a major war would have resulted. In China the new leader, Xi Jinping, would have been destabilised, and in India the scamsters would have been delighted. The Army lobby headquartered in London would have celebrated and commission agents engulfed South Block.



Historical truths

Alarming? Yes. But the growing opaqueness in our relation with China is contributing heavily to the possibility of a war by miscalculation of the other side’s intentions Time has come for us to bring some fresh air to the rancid corridors of power. We Indians must inform ourselves of some historical truths:

For more than two and a half thousand years, India and China have had good and peaceful relations based on mutual respect and exchange, and in fact never had gone to war till 1962. During the two millenniums of India-China relations, these two countries

mattered because both together accounted till 1750 AD for over 55% of the world GDP. Today it is not so, but could again be so by 2050 AD.

1) But our two peoples’ aspirations in the 21st century will lead to some competitive animosity, or peer jealousy, which is to be expected between the two nations even in peacetimes, and even if it is held by some that there is no fundamental conflict of strategic interests between the two countries.

2) The events leading to 1962 was as much as due to Nehru’s placing his personal image above the nation’s interest as it was due to Chinese duplicity. What else would the

nationalist Chinese think of a Prime Minister who gives up a UN Security Council veto — holding permanent seat handed on a platter by the US, for the benefit of China? What else should the Chinese think when Nehru signs away Tibet without a border settlement on favourable terms, except that they can help themselves to Indian territory that they need ?

3) Today many Chinese intellectuals and PLA personnel feign contempt for India, especially because of India’s 1962 comprehensive military, political and psychological debacle — even though the Chinese strategists realize that 1962 cannot be repeated ever again. But the the debacle of 1962 however had ended for the historical China-India hyphenation that had existed for centuries.

4) But three decades after 1962, thanks to Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao, liberalisation, and the Y2K problem which launched the software revolution, put India on high growth rate path, and also as a quality leader on the electronics map globally. In an era of globalisation in which economics dominates, the India-China hyphenation has

therefore re-appeared again with gusto, especially in the USA, and hence kindling the intensity of the peer competition in China. Unfortunately, in India the return of Nehruvian smugness on defence issues has returned too. The smugness that this hyphenation is a settled fact can be again rudely exploded if our military capability continues for long to remain inadequate to sustain the hyphenation.

5) Due to this smugness, India defence expenditure has steadily fallen to a dangerously low of 2.3% of GDP, with attendant debilitating corruption, whereas China has

maintained a steady expenditure of 6 percent of GDP throughout the last five decades. We should never forget that defence policy has to be based on the presumed adversary’s military capacity, while foreign policy has to be based on revealed intentions. It has been Indian failure in policy making that we tailor our defence preparedness to silly foreign gestures like Mao’s smile. Therefore, today we fluctuate between being panicky when threatened by an editorial in Chinese press, to being complacent when there is bonhomie during a visit of a Chinese dignatory making goody goody speeches. Media coverage reflects this dysfunctional dissonance.



Need for sobreity

India must now graduate from oscillating between smugness to neurotically reacting to China on a daily basis, feeding the media with our 1962 psychosis, and instead get down to dealing with China rationally on the various dimensions of threats, and soberly examine how to structure our national security architecture and enhance our military capability.

China’s intention today may not be to go to war with India but merely to needle us to commit foolish acts or behave stupidly by trivial provocative acts to either do something rash as Nehru did in 1962 to declare “I have asked the troops to throw the Chinese out” without any preparations, or worse like a headless chicken run hither and thither seeking help from other countries, notably the USA.

But even if the Chinese intention is of not wanting to provoke a war, we should not relax in defence preparedness because China’s military capacity to wage war with India, which has vastly increased in recent years, empowers it to do so especially if we are not a match on the battleground. We cannot therefore rely on any country’s stated intentions since it could be a deception to fool us. Intentions are subjective and cannot be easily measured for its reliability and accuracy. But the capacity to wage war is objective since it can be physically quantified in terms of missiles, tanks, battleships, fighter aircraft, troop divisional strength, naval bases, etc.

We thus should never be complacent about China’s capacity to inflict damage to us nor should we, as a large mature and civilised population exhibit a fevered imagination about China’s assumed evil intentions to harm us, at least not to vocalize it as we are doing today.

If we do so it will encourage and raise the morale of all our potential adversaries, and thus in a self-fulfilling prophesy could knee jerk our nation into bad decisions.

We should never go to war by miscalculation because war causes much misery to societies. Hence, let us begin now to sweat in peace by first enumerating the dimensions of China’s threat. In my cost-benefit analysis of India-China relations I would say that, when the risk has been properly factored in, India and China should be strategic partners, not jealous adversaries.

Ideally, if a Sino-Indian understanding can come about, then a global triumvirate of India-China-US can propel world peace and be the cutting edge in United Nations. We should strive for that, but without letting down our guard.

Subramanian Swamy | (Subramanian Swamy, a former Minister, is a Harvard-educated scholar on China, a former Professor of Economics who has made significant contribution in promoting India-China relations since 1978)

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/oped/chinese-aspirations-and-indian-interests.html

Truth about Rahul’s MPhil
By Express News Service 07th April 2009 02:55 AM

CHENNAI: Rahul Gandhi appears to have been economical with the truth on his affidavit while filing his election nomination papers in Amethi this weekend.

In the affidavit, he states that he obtained an MPhil from Trinity College of the University of Cambridge, UK, in 1995, in Developmental Economics. A certificate from the University shows that not only has he got dates wrong, he has even got the name of the course he took incorrect.

Worse, the man touted as a future prime minister failed one of his four papers.

Rahul got 58 per cent in “National Economic Planning and Policy” (according to the grading scale given in the certificate, 60 per cent is the minimum for a pass).

The certificate, shown alongside, was issued a year ago by Diana Kazemi, the secretary of the department of Development Studies (and not Developmental Economics) in which Rahul Gandhi studied.

He enrolled under the name ‘Raul Vinci’, a pseudonym given by the British authorities in a common practice as there are a good number of VVIP wards from around the world enrolled at British educational institutions. The pseudonym came to light during the 2004 elections in the Telegraph and the Hindu.

According to the University, Rahul read for the MPhil in 2004- 05, and not in 1994-95, as stated in his affidavit.

His affidavit’s other claim, to have obtained his Bachelors from Rollins College in Florida, USA, is true (and is a departure from earlier claims by ‘supporters’ that he graduated from Harvard). He also briefly attended St Stephen’s College in Delhi, gaining admission through the sports quota.

His mother (and Congress president) Sonia Gandhi was also in a minor controversy in 2004 over her educational qualifications.

Her nomination papers’ affidavit claimed she obtained a certificate in English from Lennox Cook School, University of Cambridge, in 1965. After it was revealed that the school had no affiliation to the University, Sonia claimed that the error on the affidavit was the result of a secretarial typing mistake.

Comments(2)
Excellent from non paid media like others paidmedia.
Posted by Thakur Naveen Salaria at 04/09/2013 15:47 Reply to this Report abuse

Both mother and son to be disqualified due to false affidavit.Is the election commission has not have any machinary to verify the truth?
Posted by anilkumar at 04/09/2013 23:12 Reply to this Report abuse

http://newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/article55419.ece

May 13, 2013.

Mr. Pranab Mukherjee,
President of India,
Rashtrapati Bhavan,
New Delhi.

Dear Mr. President,

I am enclosing with this letter a copy of the news item which had appeared in the Indian Express sometime ago. It carries a facsimile of a certificate issued by the Secretary of the Development Studies Committee, University of Cambridge. While I was on a visit to the University two years ago, I had visited this Department as also spoke with the concerned authority in the University. I was informed in confidence that an individual by name Mr. Raul Vinci was the pseudonym of Mr. Rahul Gandhi (now MP) and that he had taken this pseudonym for his personal security. The enclosed news item from New Indian Express, Chennai states the same. Hence the matter requires investigation since Mr. Gandhi is a MP. Question also arises how Mr. Gandhi had paid the necessary fees for being a student in the University and from which bank account (Pictet Bank, Zurich or from India with RBI permission)? Was he also, for the sake of his security, traveling abroad to and fro UK on an Italian passport in the name of Rahul Vinci?

In view of the fact that Mr. Rahul Gandhi is a Member of Parliament, this would attract proceedings for disqualification under Article 103 of the Constitution. Hence I urge you to have this matter probed into in a comprehensive way by the Election Commission.

Yours sincerely,



( SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY )

Encl: a/a