On allegations about Ambani brothers' Swiss bank accounts by Kejriwal UPA & Media on same wavelength

Allegations about Ambani brothers' Swiss bank accounts by Kejriwal

UPA & Media on same wavelength 

Arvind Kejriwal of the Aam Aadmi Party cannot just be dismissed as an irresponsible individual of no consequence. When he made allegations against BJP President Nitin Gadkari the Congress-led UPA government took these as gospel of truth immediately going into action, raiding certain concerns connected with him and demanding his resignation from the Party. In about two months, despite best efforts the government has, so far, failed to come out with any concrete evidence against him or arrive at any conclusion on the allegations. Obviously, keeping the issue hanging, in the long run, serves the Congress political and electoral interests.

But it is quite a different story as far as Kejriwal's disclosure of the account numbers of Ambani Brothers in Swiss banks is concerned. It must remain one of the rarest of the rare cases in which the matter ended just with the offices of the Ambani brothers, separately, denying the allegation and the Congress instead of going into the concrete details about the bank accounts asked, on the contrary, Kejriwal to present further evidence. One wonders is the account number not sufficient to initiate an inquiry?

More surprising is the attitude of the media which every now and then keeps alive the allegations, so far not proved, to demand Gadkari's resignation but has felt completely satisfied with the denial of the allegations by Ambani brothers. One has not heard anything about the matter from the day the allegations surfaced and instant denial by Ambanis. Media is now treating the matter as closed for all intents and purposes. Had it been some other individual or politician, media would have been in race to post-mortem the truth about the allegations as a part of what it claims to be its unchallenged right to 'investigative journalism'.

It is not the first of the case in which persons complained against have denied the allegations in so many words. But media has never taken such denials on their face value. It burns midnight oil to prove the denials wrong, as it had done, in the past, in a number of cases.

It remains beyond comprehension why has the media and the UPA government closed any inquiry into the serious Kejriwal disclosures about Ambani brothers' Swiss accounts just on their simple denials and not went ahead with investigations?

There is no gainsaying the fact that the ruling party is always not impartial and has its own political and electoral axe to grind, like in the cases against BSP chief Miss Mayawati and Samajwadi Party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav. But what has sent our media blind, deaf and dumb on the allegations against Ambani brothers because, otherwise, it claims to be free, fearless and impartial. But is it so in the case of Ambani brothers? The doubt persists. The media owes an explanation to the people.

ELECTION COMMISSION is the WARNING COMMISSION OF INDIA

ELECTION COMMISSION is the WARNING COMMISSION OF INDIA

It is not that the important functionaries of the political parties in India, particularly those ruling at the Centre and the States holding ministerial posts are unaware of the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct that is enforced by the Election Commission of India (EC) the moment it announces the election schedule for general elections to any State assembly or Parliament or by-elections. Yet they deliberately defy the EC diktat for political and electoral gains.

Now take the recent case of the Oil Minister Verappa Moily announcing the Union Government decision to increase the number of LPG gas cylinders on subsidized basis at the height of Gujarat assembly elections. As is the routine, the EC in a perfunctory manner immediately called for an explanation from the Minister concerned for violating the Code of Conduct. The Hon’ble Minister dutifully submitted his side of the story. The EC issued him a stern warning and the matter ended there.

Similarly, the Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde addressing an election rally in Gujarat told the electorate that it was only Congress President Sonia Gandhi who could appoint a Muslim as chief of the Intelligence Bureau. It was certainly a violation of the Model Code of Conduct and an appeal to the voters on communal lines. Yet, the EC preferred to keep its eyes and ears shut to its own defiance.

It is not that the violations took place only recently. During the UP assembly elections this year, there was spate of violations, mostly at the hands of Union Ministers, obviously with a definite design by Salman Khursheed, Beni Persad Verma, even Rahul Gandhi and the like, to quote only a few names. The other parties contesting the election too were not far behind. In all these cases, the old story was repeated. The EC was as quick to seek explanations and to bury the hatchet by issuing ‘stern warnings’. 

After the elections are over, it looks as if all these instances of deliberate violations are forgotten and forgiven.

The only instance worth mentioning is that of Shiv Sena chief late Bal Thackeray who was hauled up for making a communal speech and his voting rights were withdrawn.

Despite the Model Code of Conduct and the vigilant eye of the EC, the violators of the law and the Commission directives get away with attaining the objectives they have in view when they defy the EC. They make their message reach the constituency of voters intended. The EC warning is just a routine, useless because it cannot in any way undo the mischief that has been created by the action of any political party or its leader.

The ‘stern’ warnings issued each time by the EC to the habitual offenders can be compared to that of a policeman with a gun and lathi in his hand shouting at a thief eloping with the booty of his theft blaring out, “Don’t dare to do it again, otherwise……..”

Certainly, the EC is proving itself to be a toothless tiger which can certainly howl and growl but cannot bite.

LOBBYING IS CORRUPTION FOR BHARAT, FOR INDIA NOT

LOBBYING IS CORRUPTION FOR BHARAT, FOR INDIA NOT

A very fine, thin, and negligibly indistinguishable line not visible to the naked eye divides corruption and lobbying. It is like gambling which is considered as a crime, punishable when played in private or public places and an elite glamourous pastime, not punishable and in a way out of the purview of our criminal law when enjoyed in elite clubs.

The distinction between corruption and lobbying is as subtle and simple as between India and Bharat. It is a matter of how you try to look at it. The difference between the two pervades as much as it exists between the minuscule minority of those who feel proud to be Indians with a permissive, chalta hai, liberal and 'secular' attitude and those orthodox simpleton natives of Bharat for whom crime and corruption are nothing else but crime and corruption in whatever manifestation. For the former the splurge of gifts, their size and cost depending upon the clout one has in political and administrative circles, is a civilized way of rejuvenating lasting relationship with friends in need. For the latter, it is rank corruption. For the first the act of adultery is a consensual sex between two consenting adults and for the second it is a crime.

Lobbying, practiced with immunity in western democracies like USA and UK is known as "the practice of individuals and organisations trying to influence the opinions of MPs and Lords. Methods of lobbying vary and can range from sending letters, making presentations, providing briefing material to Members and organised rallies." (http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/have-your-say/lobbying/)

That money is used in this practice (or crime) of lobbying is proved by the admission of the Global retail giant Wal-Mart — waiting for years to open its supermarkets in India.
According to lobbying disclosure reports filed by Wal-Mart with the US Senate, the company has spent close to $25 million (about Rs 125 crore) since 2008 on its various lobbying activities, including on the issues related to "enhanced market access for investment in India". (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Wal-Mart-admits-spending-Rs-125-crore-on-lobbying-to-enter-India/articleshow/17549995.cms).

Under the Prevention of Corruption Act in India corruption means: "Taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act" or "Taking gratification in order to influence public servant, by corrupt or illegal means…..Taking gratification, for exercise of personal influence with public servant".

The colossal amount of Rs. 125 crores was spent by Wal-Mart for "various lobbying activities, including on the issue related to 'enhanced market access for investment in India" does fall, if not in full, in part, in the category of taking "gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act, and "taking gratification in order to influence public servant, by corrupt or illegal means" as per the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act in India.

Since huge money is involved, it clearly follows that it was used as a "gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act, and "taking gratification in order to influence public servant, by corrupt or illegal means". And it must be kept in mind that ministers in government have been declared as "public servants" by the Supreme Court of India. It is not equally unreasonable to infer that a part of this money was used to "influence" some political parties.

But Information Broadcasting Minister Mr. Manish Tiwari says: "How can you be certain that lobbying automatically translates into illegal gratification? There is nothing to suggest either in jurisprudence or otherwise that the term lobbying is synonymous with illegal gratification.

(http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/time-for-india-lobbying-law-us-manish-tewari-india-today/1/238087.html)

We can evade the real issue by taking a purely legalistic view that Indian law recognizes it as a crime or no crime. But what matter is the general perception of the people on an issue or act and not what our law may or may not provide.

It is just like trying to play down the act of adultery as consensual sex between two consenting adults, an act which for all intents and purposes is a sin in the eyes of the aam aadmi.

Satire: Chidambaram discovers Congress victory in defeat

Satire

Chidambaram discovers Congress victory in defeat

Son:                   Father!

Father:             Yes, my son.

Son:                   Home Minister P. Chidambaram has perceived

victory in Congress defeat in Gujarat and Himachal assembly elections.

Father:             Yes, my son. He is a very erudite gentleman.

Son:                   But father, Congress has miserably lost in Gujarat.

Father:             My son, Congress won in Himachal and Chidambaram claims that it succeeded   

                            in preventing BJP to even touch the figure of 117     

                            Modi won in 2007.

Son:                   Does that mean Congress won in Gujarat?

Father:             My son, these are the higher things of politics

                            which we ordinary people fail to understand.

Son:                   In that case BJP too can claim it has won in

                            Himachal.

Father:             How?

Son:                   In 2007 in Himachal BJP had returned to power with 42 seats and in 2003 Congress had won 43 seats. This time Congress has won just 36.  By the Chidambaram logic BJP too can claim it is Congress defeat and BJP victory.

Father:             These are matter of higher political punditry, my

son. Ask, Chidambaramji.

IS IT NOT COMMUNALISM MR SHINDE & ELECTION COMMISSION?

IS IT NOT COMMUNALISM?

Does it not attract rod of election law?

Who calls the shots in Manmohan government?

Addressing an election meeting in a communally sensitive city of Vadodra in Gujarat, Union Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, according to BBC Hindi (December 11, 2012), gave credit to Congress President, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, for the appointment of first-ever Muslim as the chief of the Intelligence Bureau. This only Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and no other person (even in Congress?) could do so, he claimed. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/india/2012/12/121211_shinde_ibchief_akd.shtml?print=1

)

It raises many questions. It establishes the fact that it is the writ of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi which runs in the administration and Prime Minister (for for that matter, Home Minister) are just puppets whose strings are in her hands. It also proves that the Manmohan government is functioning under some extra-constitutional authority like the Congress President who can have full powers in the organization but has no ostensive role in government.

Shinde's claim that it is only Mrs. Sonia Gandhi is a humiliation of the person selected. It gives the impression that he had no merit except the fact that he belonged to the Muslim community.  It is also a fact that he has superseded three-four officers senior to him.

It also raises a question whether any person can be selected/appointed to a post solely on the basis of his belonging to a particular religion/community?

Since Mr. Shinde has made this claim during election campaign in Gujarat, he is not only guilty of indulging in communalism and making a communal appeal to the electorate to vote for Congress, he has also violated the election law.

It remains surprising that the Election Commission has, so far, not taken note of this grave violation of law by a person none other than the Home Minister of India himself.

If the Election Commission could take action against late Bal Thackery for making a communal appeal during elections, why can't it against Mr. Shinde? 

KEJRIWAL – A CONGRESS MOLE IN OPPOSITION?

KEJRIWAL – A CONGRESS MOLE IN OPPOSITION?

How is Gadkari 'guilty' and Vadra 'innocent'?

It is normal in our kind of politics that whenever a person makes allegations we brand him our opposite political party's agent. Therefore, when, initially, Arvind Kejriwal of Nation Against Corruption (NAC) made certain allegations against Congressmen and ministers, he was branded as BJP agent by the party.

To erase this tage, Kejriwal on October 18, 2012 leveled certain serious allegations against BJP president Nitin Gadkari alleging wrongdoings in companies owned or managed by the latter. Gadkari was quick to respond with his readiness to face any inquiry by any agency. Despite the Manmohan government having acted in right earnest to undertake Income Tax raids on certain companies run by Gadkari, government appears, so far, to have failed to rake up any criminal case against him.

Allegations against Vadra

A week earlier on October 11, Kejriwal had made almost similar allegations against Congress President Mrs. Sonia Gandhi's son-in-law Robert Vadra. It was the Congress and Manmohan government which came out with instant denial of the serious charges against Vadra as if it was not Vadra but Congress and Manmohan government which was running his business that they readily knew the ins and outs of the functioning of his companies. Vadra came out to deny the charges later calling his accusers as "orange boys" and branding our democracy of which we all, citizens, Congress leaders and government alike, are all proud of. The same democracy which has showered on Vadra the privileges and perks not available to people's representatives and people holding public offices. Vadra did not dare to expose his business doings to public scrutiny to let anybody peep into the facts. Manmohan government did dismiss any demands for any independent and impartial inquiry.

Vadra 'innocent'

Even to a notice to the office of Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, PMO  on November 28 gave a clean chit to Robert Vadra in an alleged land scam involving realty major DLF and told the Allahabad High Court that that the allegation against him (Vadra) "appear to be false, vexatious and based on hearsay". () In the affidavit, filed by Dheeraj Gupta, joint secretary in the PMO, it was stated that the case of Vadra and DLF was a matter between two individuals and a purely business transaction. It was also said that both parties have already explained their positions and hence the allegations made seem to be "false, vexatious and based on hearsay."  As per report, the PMO affidavit nowhere states that its contents are based on any examination of the allegations and the documents with Robert Vadra on the basis of which the PMO has come to this conclusion.  

On the contrary, in the matter of allegations against Nitin Gadkari the PMO or the Congress were not as gracious, as they were in the case of Vadra, that allegations against Gadkari too are ”a matter between two individuals and a purely business transaction". For them Vadra remains 'innocent' without inquiry and Gadkari 'tainted' and even 'guilty' of unexplained corruption, again, without proof and inquiry.

By coincidence – and more by design – the allegations against Gadkari were hurled 17 days before Himachal was to go to the polls on November 4. Kejriwal was sanguine to the fact that allegations against Vadra were not likely to have any adverse impact on Congress fortunes in Himachal polling.

Similarly, on December 4 Arvind Kejriwal again came out with some allegations against the Gujarat chief minister Narinder Modi at the height of electioneering to the State assembly going to polls on December 13 and 17. By coincidence these allegations were also made about 17 days (and 21 days for the second phase of polling) before Gujarat polls. According to Press reports, the allegations against Modi are a repeat and rehash of the allegations made by Congress against Modi in a memorandum submitted to the President of India a year back.

Kejriwal's choice of timing to make allegations against Gadkari and Modi clearly indicates a political design with an electoral punch. In both cases if there could be any beneficiary of Kejriwal's diatribes it could only be Congress and Congress alone because both in Himachal and Gujarat no other party matters. Since Kejriwal's own political outfit was not in fray in Himachal as also in Gujarat, the obvious conclusion is that he is just trying to make Congress derive as much electoral benefit as it can. The same Congress whom Kejriwal and party have been targeting as the fountain of corruption. With their conduct Kejriwal's Nation Against Corruption is only promoting corruption and helping the 'corrupt' Congress reap the bumper crop of electoral benefits.

Is then Kejriwal a Congress mole in the opposition camp? 

HILLARY CLINTON AS NEXT US PRESIDENT?

 HILLARY CLINTON AS NEXT US PRESIDENT?

"Run, Hillary, run" is the majority choice and voice of the people of United States of America (USA) for the 2016 presidential election. According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll. (http://www.itvnewsindia.com/hillary-clinton-usa’s-2016-election-people’s-choice?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ItvNewsIndia+(Itvnewsindia) 65 year-old Clinton's popularity at an all-time high, and that 57 % of Americans want her to run for the White House.

"Among all women, 66 % say they would support Clinton as a candidate for president in 2016; it is 75 % among those under 50 and 54 % among those aged 50 and up.

49 % of men back a Clinton bid, regardless of what side of 50 they are on. Support for a Clinton candidacy is high among both Democratic men and women (80 and 84 percent, respectively).

Republicans are far less supportive of a presidential bid from the former first lady: in the poll, 23 % of Republicans would support a run in 2016; 73 % would oppose it. Some 82 % of Democrats would back her candidacy, with most saying they would do so "strongly".

A majority of independents, 59 per cent, also support another Clinton run. Some of this support stems from her high overall popularity--- 66 % of all Americans express favourable views of the soon-to-be-former Secretary of State, the most doing so in more than 20 years of polling.

Fully 68 % approve of the way she is handling her current job, as top diplomat. On both scores, personal popularity and job performance, Democrats are overwhelmingly supportive of the long-time party leader, as are around two-thirds of independents.

Even sizable numbers of Republicans are on board here, particularly when it comes to rating how she is doing as secretary of state: 40 % approve and 50 % disapprove. At 66 % favourable, Clinton is as high as she has ever been in terms of public perceptions.

The survey ignited intense new speculation about Clinton's future after she steps down as the nation's top diplomat early next year. She has said she wants to rest after four years heading the State Department, and visiting more than 100 countries, but key Democrats expect her to take a serious look at running for the White House." 

She deserves the best

Mrs. Clinton has all these years been the darling of the US people for her poise, performance and conduct. She has always risen to the occasion whenever it demands.

At the height of her husband's Lewinski affair and the impeachment proceedings against him, she stood by him like a rock. Any other woman in these circumstances would have thought of none other than seeking a divorce and splitting the family. But with her foresight and cool, she saved the family. This has only raised her high in the esteem not only of her people but of the world over.

She did run for the nomination of her Democratic Party to contest the presidential election 2008. She did campaign for herself but when she visualized that the party opinion was overwhelmingly in favour of Barak Obama, she gracefully bowed out. She and her husband turned out to be Obama's best supporters. They campaigned for Obama win as they should have done if Hillary was the candidate.

President Obama too proved equally gracious. He gave his one-time rival the topmost position he could give: He made her the Secretary of State. a post that needed not only a person of intelligence, foresight and vision but also his utmost confidence. She proved true to the confidence reposed in her by the President. In her dealings with foreign countries, she kept the interests of the nation and of the President at the top. That earned her the praise of the President and applaud of the nation.

She certainly deserves all the best – to be the first-ever woman President of her country. She will certainly make a name for herself and for the nation.