Monday, October 20, 2014

ANTONIO MAINO AKA SONIA GANDHI'S UNDISCLOSED FIRST LOVE AFFAIR AND A CONTINUING FRIENDSHIP

Tuesday, 23 September 2014

Sonia Gandhi's First Love affair!

This is a Love Story that the Indians may not know! This had happened before Antonia Maino ever met Rajive Gandhi in England! So we wish to call this 'EXCLUSIVE' for our Indian Readers!

Franco Luison 
He was an Italian football player of 'Serie A'
Franco Luison.jpg

(aks. Sonia Gandhi)  

Franco Luison, recollects in this interview to an Italian magazine 'GENTE' of his four years of love story before she had met with Rajive.


My love affair with Antonia Maino 
"We were in love and happy everywhere"
Our family were very happy and eager to know that we were in love. Her parents uses to accommodate me with great pleasure at their home of Orbassano near Turin where they were transferred in the 60's.

She loved me and wanted to marry me, not the son of Indira.
We met for the first time at the see shore of Jesolo in the 60's, when she was 14.

I was 26 when I met her for the first time under the shade of my beach umbrella, then I was famous, not Sonia! It seemed like a summer flirt for the first time but lasted for four years and our respective families were happy to see us together. Every sunday, after match, I used to go to Orbasano to meet her.  Her family always received me with great pleasure and courtesy.   Will remain with her until tuesday, before return for the practice.
Antonia with Franco
Lusiana,1964
courtesy: Gente

Football was not her passion, though rarely turns up in stadium to see me in action. When finish the championship, during the summer, we used to go to Vicenza  for weekends!

I was the first great lover of Antonia. Our love story lasted for 4 years. She wanted me to promise her to marry, but I use to postponed each time. Then she went to England where she met Rajiv Gandhi.

In 1964 she made a decision to go to England. Though I wasn't happy, she made her trip. She narrated me in her letters everything she was doing. Once she came back for vacation and spoke of Rajive, son of Indira Gandhiand "I'm invited to meet his mother and will be going to Delhi soon", she added. When she came back from New Delhi, she was convinced that will marriage Rajive Gandhi.
Though it hurt me very much, farewell to our four years relation wasn't very tragic and our goodbye was in a very gentle manner.

He still keeps friendship with her family, and meets them at-least twice an year to exchange gifts during feasts. Nora, wife of Franco remember: "I was jealous of Sonia, for all his friends use to speak about her when I started our relation in the late 1964. "I was afraid one day Sonia would come back and I will loose Franco!" she added.

My Love Story With Sonia
(La mia storia d'amore con Sonia)
(This copy of the weekly is owned by the FB Investigation Team!)

So, Rajive Gandhi was her 'second' love at first sight!

Source
This is an interview published on GENTE, an Italian Magazine to Franco Luison by Luca Angelucci.
Cover story: 'La mia storia d'amore con Sonia'
(GENTE, Year XLVIII N.23, 2004 June 3)
________________________________
Antonia Maino
Born at Lusianaa small town in the province of Vicenza,  Veneto,  Italy,later transferred to Orbassano  in the Province of Turin, Piedmont region Italy. While studying English at a language school in Cambridge, England, she met Rajiv GandhiThe couple married in 1968 and knows as Sonia Gandhi.

****************************************************
References

Franco Luison (15July 1934 - 25 September 2012)
link
News
Luison the cat
Franco Luison died on 25 September 2012

Sonia Gandhi ( 9 December 1946)
Lusiana
Lusiana 
The twist tutor 
Encyclopaedia Britannica 
News 
Love at first sight
This is an interview published on GENTE, an Italian Magazine to Franco Luison by Luca Angelucci
(GENTE, Year XLVIII N.23, 2004 June 3)

12 comments:

  1. I don't find anything wrong in this. Nowadays most of the Indian girls are like this only. But the lovers don't reveal all these things here 
    Reply
    Replies
    Anonymous19 Oct 2014 07:55:00
    WTF!! You want every Indian girl to be a Bar Tender like Maino??
    Anonymous19 Oct 2014 18:33:00
    may be ur born of woman like that, not most of us Indians
    Anonymous20 Oct 2014 07:43:00
    most of us??? generalizing Indian who are probably the most diverse ppl is weird and the one who is doing that is an idiot ...
  2. SOME FACTS , BUT DAMAGE ALREADY DONE TO INDRA FAMILY
    Reply
    Replies
    1. she has done more damage to INDIA itself than to IndraFamily
  3. So what !!

    Why these Indians are soo narrow minded. Digging something that is decades past and spilling hate. Disgusting people :(
    Reply
    Replies
    Anonymous19 Oct 2014 15:04:00
    It's not being narrow minded. It's exposing filthy liars like this one.
    Anonymous20 Oct 2014 07:45:00
    filthy liars ..... !!! what you did in a teenage years ?? was that so righteous ? lol .... people are so quick to criticize
  4. avlamman bevarsi munde
    Reply
  5. Take this bitch back to italy with her family. Bloody corrupt family
    Reply
  6. Indians have no problem with her affair with the Footballer - it's the things she has done in India that make us hate her.
    Reply

Sunday, October 19, 2014

EBOLA e-CONTROL vs EBOLA EBULLIENCE

Originally posted on Sunday October 19, 2014


Ebola e-Control vs. Ebola Ebullience: How to Implement Comprehensive Proactive Preventative Measures, Rather than Reactive Measures to Control the Ebola Epidemic and Avoid Law Suits from Potential Victims


By

Shree Vinekar, MD and A. V. Lakshminarayanan, PhD

First we should seriously acknowledge that Ebola infection is a terrible disease. We should not proclaim "we will stop Ebola in its tracks", which is a most vapid statement, to say the least. To say such things conveys an air of superiority over a mere virus and a sense of shortsightedness when dealing with a potential epidemic.

We do not have a full understanding of its lethal potential, virulent actions and preventive measures we should take, though the Center for Disease Control (CDC) is sincerely trying to gain some deeper understanding of these issues at the eleventh hour. However, as yet, we do not know its "tracks" – indeed, now the tracks are all over the US.

There are many assumptions being made about the spread of the disease. Some of the most important of these unknowns are:

·       One is that the affected person is not contagious until symptomatic.
·       Second it is not an air-borne infection.
·       Third, body temperature alone is taken as the determining criterion for who is symptomatic and who is not.

We fail to entertain the thought that fever levels and symptom levels can be vastly different,
particularly from continent to continent, race to race, and also individual to individual, leave
alone the complexity of differential diagnoses of mild pyrexia. Triaging all patients with elevated
body temperature unnecessarily burdens the front line health care workers with a major dilemma.
This burden arises when thousands of people all over the country present with fever in
front line medical clinics and emergency rooms. Therefore, there need to be more specific criteria with
bio markers, if at all possible, to promptly implement detection and facilitate correct diagnosis of Ebola infection on all frontiers of health care, including public and private health care facilities.

Have we forgotten the history of "Typhoid Mary" in dealing with Ebola? Many "contacts" could be infectious a few days before they manifest recognizable symptoms of the Ebola infection not to mention that not all contacts will become alert enough to the dangers of the infection in a timely fashion to present themselves in a clinic or medical emergency room. There very well could be carriers of Ebola like, "typhoid Mary," who could go undetected as carriers until it is too late. Such dangers speak against complacence in our current ability to "stop Ebola in its tracks." The fact that 50% of the exposed individuals do not manifest illness of "Ebola infection" is in itself a red flag indicating the likelihood that many infectious persons may be running loose in society since having been already exposed to this virus.

One can very well understand the politically correct attitude of the government in not wanting to spread
panic while simultaneously providing primary and secondary prevention as well as excellent tertiary prevention and tertiary treatment centers all around the country. Even in this effort, however, the public is not entirely trusting of the governmental agencies responsible for this task.

Many individuals who were unfortunate to be on the same airplane as the Ebola patients likely feel they are not properly and promptly identified, nor given adequate information, nor sufficiently protected from the ensuing harm. Indeed, this feeling will linger at least for 21days, which is now strongly believed to be the incubation period for this infectious disease.

For example, the poor nurse who later tested positive for the Ebola infection, but who had been cleared for air travel by the CDC was sitting in the aisle in the airplane. Many other passengers could have rubbed against her if she was sitting in the aisle. Indeed, had she been sitting in a window or middle seat, it would have been nearly impossible to not come in contact with her fellow seatmates. Regardless, it was an act of commission with full knowledge that she was a participant in providing care for an Ebola victim.

And, yet, to isolate, quarantine, and monitor only those who sat close to the stricken nurse in the plane is very near-sighted. If she went to the toilet facilities, in the airplane or at the airports, very many more should be watched. Also what happened to the cups or utensils used by the person, either in the aircraft or at the airports? There are many more aspects to this specific public health expertise related skills that are simply dictated by common sense, that the people involved in guarding the public health in this country seem to be direly lacking in them or have not demonstrated that they possess these. One does not have to be a medical doctor or a public health professional to clearly think of measures, consequences, and adequacy of efforts in this arena.

Both the acts of commission and acts of omission in this domain will come to haunt us in the long run. History will tell if we were successful or not.

If the unfortunate nurse, the second to contract Ebola, had been given sufficient and correct knowledge of the potential risks for herself and others by her infectious disease specialists under whose supervision she had worked in that capacity, most likely she would not have engaged in such risky behavior. If she was indeed given such knowledge, her foolhardiness in undertaking air travel would be likely looked upon as an irresponsible act. It is clear that this brave woman was clearly misled by the CDC, therefore. Yet, no one can predict how many there are like her, who might unknowingly present danger of spreading Ebola virus by simply innocently not being aware of their being contagious. Of course, at the same time, we should leave room for some irresponsible or careless individuals who are in denial or simply throwing caution to the wind. With all that said, we are extremely grateful to the two nurses
who placed their life on line to treat the Ebola victims in Dallas and they will go down in the history
for their courage and sacrifice. Nothing said here should be interpreted as diminishing their
importance and in recognizing their stellar dedication to their profession.

However, if such is the case of an educated and trained nurse in a reputable high-tech hospital in Dallas, one should worry that CDC and infectious disease specialists have failed in educating
health care professionals even in the premier tertiary health care centers. Furthermore, blaming the late
Mr. Duncan, a layperson with no medical background, for all the problems the U.S. now faces, and as mainstream media have taken it upon themselves to do, is out of place and unjustified.

All of the above prompted the following list of steps the US (and other countries) can and should be taking to ensure the proper and most efficient containment of the rapidly spreading Ebola virus, before it reaches pandemic stages.

I. So, what can be done to better ensure the safety of the healthcare providers and others who may come into contact with, or be treating patients with, Ebola? How can the US provide better information and awareness to the general public, to arm them with the information they need, consistently and up-to-date, to allow them to better protect themselves?

Are we doing enough to enable the unfortunate health care workers that could come in
contact with Ebola, as well as the general public? Are the current public and electronic media channels such as PBS and other TV channels, YouTube, Facebook, e-mail list-serves, etc., being utilized
effectively to educate the health professionals, and even the public, proactively without causing
unnecessary panic
, while still providing adequate information about the disease and all the proper measures people can take to not catch this disease or spread it if they were to come in contact with it? Such knowledge needs to be disseminated from one official credible site and must be vigilantly updated every day. Only in this manner can the population of the U.S. be alerted and educated widely.

Electronic media is obviously the best way to disseminate this knowledge, but the outlets must be brought online immediately and officially by the appropriate monitoring body, whether that is the CDC or some other agency charged with this most important mission. And, the clock is ticking.


II. How can the US better protect healthcare providers treating Ebola, especially with regards to protective gear being issued (e.g., hazmat suits) and safe working environments?

Protective Gear

1.  The protective gear issued to healthcare workers treating the possibility or actual existence of Ebola should be standardized, uniformly manufactured at one facility or more accredited facilities, and distributed by one approved agency. This should not become a commercial vested interest enterprise to be exploited by profit mongers. This is not something the U.S. can afford to outsource to China or India.

2.  Until a complete control over this virulent viral disease is attained, protective gear should not be left to the choice of the "hospital." Moreover, as is becoming more prevalent, any “CYA” operations or practices on the part of hospitals to blackmail potential contacts among their health care professionals to extract a legal promise from them to continue to work in high risk areas such as emergency rooms or ICU’s under the threat of lay off if they were to not sign on the dotted line saying they have been furnished (non-standardized) protective gears should be banned immediately.

3.  For such bio-protective gears, the term “hazmat" is a misnomer, as this term refers to protection from hazardous chemicals and chemical gases, fumes and vapors. Viruses are distinctly different in that they grow and multiply once in contact with living host, which chemicals do not do. Therefore,
bio-contamination is different from chemical contamination.

Each country and each facility should compare their protective gear being utilized in prevention and must be required to use the most effective gears that have evidence based effectiveness in prevention. There should be efforts to clearly list all similarities and differences among such gears and make them uniformly secure. For, indeed, these gears will soon need mass production for use all over the world, and targeted research done now to design the most effective and safest gear will payoff one-hundred fold in the long-run.

4.  In all facilities in the tertiary treatment areas, namely in the emergency treatment areas and intensive care units, the staff must be screened by Homeland Security or other responsible governmental agency such as the FBI to prevent any deliberate mistakes or mischief in violating the rules for prevention, and under penalty of law to prevent acts of terrorism. Such individuals motivated to spread the disease,
hence sacrificing their own lives, would be akin to suicide bombers. Conversely, the brave honest staff who are cleared to provide treatment, and who do so selflessly, need to be handsomely rewarded for their willingness to work in the Ebola-hazardous areas, rather than be threatened with lay off as a punishment if they refuse to work in those areas.

5.  The wearing and removing of the bio-protective suits should be video recorded at the Ebola treatment facilities in W. Africa, Nigeria, etc. and if technically correct, their techniques need to be used as training videos to be publicized through official sites on the Internet, such as CDC site. These videos and other CDC approved videos should be continually played in the areas where health-care professionals prepare themselves for caring for the sick persons who may be Ebola victims. In this age of e-education they need to be publicized on the Internet also for the entire population to watch so they feel secure that all safety measures are undertaken on their behalf by the government and CDC.

6.  The wearing and removing of the protective gear should be captured by multiple video cameras at the treatment facilities (like NIH or Emory) and reviewed immediately afterwards by experts (if necessary around the country) to catch any mistakes or possible contamination points and events.
If such video monitoring were to be available, it would have caught the two nurses in their act and would have quickly prevented an expensive nightmare. The CDC did not take advantage of this
readily available resource. Hopefully the attorneys did not advise the CDC to not use such monitoring.
It can be seen as the intrusion in the privacy of the health care professional but could be in place with
previously obtained informed consent.

Creating Safe Working Environments

Starting with the basics, in order to create safe working environments that will ensure that the virus will not spread while being Ebola victims are treated, here are a few policies that must be implemented.

1.  The rules for prevention need to be at least openly exhibited for all intensive care staff including the doctors, nurses and other health care professionals, janitors and custodians who can come in contact with contaminated materials and who are trained to discard and dispose of Ebola containing bio-waste in a secure manner, and sterilize or fumigate the entire real estate or at least the facilities.

2.  There need to be engineering consultants who can ensure secure air circulation, both pressurized air currents and exhausts in areas that house Ebola infected persons. Micro-droplets of water or body fluids can contaminate air in the treatment areas and the contention that Ebola is not an airborne disease is a dogma that is not yet evidence based nor rigorously and unequivocally proven with certainty.
All of these above mentioned techniques and more of them need to be publicized as the "standard of care" to be followed by all health care facilities that may get recruited to treat Ebola patients.

3.  Disaster prevention nurses will need to be appointed like infection control nurses already are in every hospital. Not much is known about the psychological trauma from this biological disaster victimizing the Ebola patients and their contacts, as well as their bereaved relatives. They will need to be treated in the University departments of psychiatry by professionals trained to treat trauma victims and traumatic bereavement. Such specialized treatment resources need to be in place all over the country. Ebola is potentially a major disaster. Moreover, even the mental health workers who treat the potential Ebola patients will need to be trained in the handling of protective gears.

4.  The threat of frivolous lawsuits must be removed. Facilities need to be rewarded for coming forward to face this challenge, rather than allowed to be punished with threats of liability suits by “ambulance chasing” attorneys who are, themselves, creating a major threat and impeding the implementation of preventive measures in the containment of this epidemic. These shysters need to be kept out of the game statutorily or by executive order of the President in the cause of National Emergency, lest they cause even greater setbacks to the containment process of this dangerous virus.

Having said that, the usual forensic, legal and medico-legal mentality will need drastic change while facing the dangers of Ebola. Society cannot afford to be distracted and disorganized by millions of lawsuits. Remember the "plague" of attorneys on every block of the country profiting from liability suits was not of an epidemic proportion with the power block of trial attorneys in the days of "Typhoid Mary,” nor during the devastating epidemics of influenza and plague in the remote past. This "plague" is likely to compound the plague (Ebola epidemic) when the attorneys start flapping their wings in the administration of health measures rather than take a back seat and be benevolent consultants to health care professionals. They should not be allowed to aggressively drive the public health departments and their policies merely from the viewpoint of liability. Liability and preventing law suits is their paramount interests rather than the true safety of the public at large.

5. Taking into account numbers 3 and 4, above, if the situation worsens, it could be entirely possible that martial law and emergency laws may have to be initiated in order to keep these liability- and liberty-interest protecting attorneys out of the game, so that quarantines can be prompt and effective without the hindrance of legal obstacles and impediments.

Indeed, the lack of intrusive and interfering attorneys, and the low cost of quarantines are behind the success of the Nigerian government and ridding its country of the threat of Ebola. Nigeria was superior to the United States in this area recently, and it may be that there is a lot to learn from Nigeria.

Therefore, the US must be careful to not approach the Nigerians with its typical air of arrogance or superiority, and communications must remain respectful and humble, in light of their exceptional success in spite of meager means compared to the U.S.’s CDC fumbling of the situation, thus far.
The US should learn exactly how the Nigerian government so effectively and quickly controlled and contained the threat of Ebola in that county, as well as how to scale their efforts to suit the US health care machine. Indeed, even if the U.S. comes up with a suitable bio-protective gear capable of being standardized, the gear should be compared to the ones used in W. Africa and Nigeria where effective containment of Ebola was demonstrated at least in the initial stages of this epidemic.

III. The Big Picture

While all of the above policy suggestions should be deemed imperative, a rapid response team and emergency measures are only half the answer; the team only reacts. What we need is also something more like a dedicated think tank - not a lethargic organization, but a dynamic pool of brainpower. The President did make efforts in this direction by appointing single competent administrator, i.e., Ebola Czar Ron Klain, to guide and direct all the public health measures, but more effort must be put forth, and on a grander scale.

Indeed, of all that is discussed in this article the key is awareness. The public's right to information would require that this new agency also become the information clearing-house to widely publish a daily official newsletter easily accessible to all to inform the citizens of the U.S. regarding daily updates. Taking full advantage of the e-media, TV channels, radio, etc. for general education of the public
and health care professionals needs to be given priority rather than making sweeping misleading
statements on air until all of us know all the tracks of the Ebola virus. Let us not be sufficiently content
with the rhetoric to prevent public panic and/or outrage, not at least until the disease is globally eradicated entirely like smallpox and polio.

Information should be readily available in the form of the following: (Preferably, on a readily accessible website like www.cdc.gov.org/ebola )

1) Currently identified Ebola patients who are receiving treatment and in what facilities
2) Number of Ebola exposed potential persons at risk and their geographic locations
and what is being offered to them to prevent their becoming symptomatic and/or
their becoming contagious presenting future risk to public in their incubation period.
3) All the individuals, their numbers and locations currently in isolation or quarantine
4) Updated treatment guidelines for the treatment of Ebola patients with guidelines
implemented for the protection of caregivers and potential contacts and their locations
5) Travel restrictions if any imposed on any of the ports of entry, daily updates of such measures
or their absence
6) Guidelines for public to prevent exposure to Ebola
7) Guidelines for those suspected to have been exposed to seek prompt services from
experts at all levels of care without health insurance related restrictions or obstacles
for receiving appropriate care.

IV. Final Point


Finally, any euphoria about the technical superiority of our medical profession or apparent short-term victory over the sneaky but powerful Ebola virus is only "ebullience" and not a balanced approach to the challenge ahead of us. This short article deliberately stays away from the consequences of lack
of Universal Health Care coverage and uninsured potential victims of Ebola showing up in health care facilities operating at conscious and unconscious level by denying or simply not providing adequate care for the uninsured. This makes it imperative that special funding for selected tertiary care centers needs to be considered.
                                                          ---------0---0---0---------

Dr. Shree Vinekar, MD, is Professor Emeritus at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine
Dr. A. V. Lakshminarayanan is a Retired Professor of Radiological Sciences and Biophysics at
                                                   the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 



Monday, October 13, 2014

KAILASH SATYARTHI'S NOBEL PRIZE DECODED

Courtesy: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2014/10/kailash-satyarthis-nobel-prize-decoded.html

Kailash Satyarthi’s Nobel Prize decoded

SANKRANT SANU | OCT 12, 2014 
Kailash Satyarthi seems deeply involved in Western evengelical institutional structures.
Kailash Satyarthi seems deeply involved in Western evengelical institutional structures.
The announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize for Kailash Satyarthi was somewhat of a shock. Firstly he was practically unknown within India with journalists and others all shaking their heads and asking “Satyarthi who?” Secondly, the announcement from the Norwegian Nobel Committee was both politically charged and condescending:
The Nobel Committee regards it as an important point for a Hindu and a Muslim, an Indian and a Pakistani, to join in a common struggle for education and against extremism. Many other individuals and institutions in the international community have also contributed. It has been calculated that there are 168 million child labourers around the world today. In 2000 the figure was 78 million higher. The world has come closer to the goal of eliminating child labour.
The announcement draws on the old theme of Western “parity” between India and Pakistan, and then calls out the purportedly “Hindu” and “Muslim” affiliations of the awardees. Now, going back at least 10 years we did not find the religion of the awardees mentioned in the Nobel Peace Prize announcement. Barack Obama is not called out as a Christian, nor are the affiliations of Marti Ahtisaari, Al Gore, Mohammad Yunus, or any of the other awardees called out. Why the necessity to call out Satyarthi as a Hindu?
Not that Satyarthi is, by any stretch, a Hindu leader. In fact,Ellen Barry, writing in the New York Times, explicitly points out that he is a Marxist. Here is my exchange with her:
The long-standing friend and colleague that Barry cites is Simon Steyne. Simon Steyne, according to a report in the Telegraph was a Marxist and “A former militant schoolboy who was once considered so dangerous that his activities were investigated by MI5 is working as a senior official for the Trades Union Congress.” Steyne was vice-chairman of the Schools Action Union, an organisation of militants, “An extreme Maoist group” that Steyne himself described as a “”Marxist-Leninist-Liberal broad front”. In any case, all this Steyne says, is in the past.
Would the Nobel Prize Committee call out a Marxist in the West as a “Christian” just as it calls Satyarthi as a “Hindu.” It appears on the lines of “thou protesteth too much”, unusually calling out a religious affiliation of someone who is clearly not properly identified with that label. What exactly are they trying to hide?
Speaking of religious affiliation, it looks like there is another nexus at play.  Of the congratulations Satyarthi got, one came from World Vision who identified him as a “partner.”
Representational image
Representational image
World Vision is powerful evangelical organisation that makes no secret of its Christian affiliation and agenda. Satyarthi partnering with World Vision brings the classic Breaking India nexus into play—using Indian Leftists to pave the way for evangelism mission in India. World Vision declined to provide additional details of their relationship. “Project Rescue:” that aims to bring trafficked children “to Jesus” is another potential link. Other Christian evangelical websites such as “Rivers of Hope”, referenced Satyarthi’s  Bachpan Bachao Andolan rescues, though their exact relationship remained unclear.
Jaya Jaitley, in an NDTV interview after the Nobel was announced, also gave a less-than-glowing review of Satyarthi. Apparently she was quite familiar with his work from the 1980s before he got the Nobel, but she “found the selection of awards rather strange.”
She also mentioned that “we hadn’t heard much about his work lately. He has gotten a lot of international awards and there are some cynical comments on how these awards are selected.” There were many people working on the issue of child labour and Satyarthi’s work was not particularly notable. She called out Swami Agnivesh, who Satyarthi“trained with” as the one who brought this issue to the fore and was the prime mover. It is unlikely a saffron-clad “Hindu” would be given the Nobel, however.
If we take a look at the list of awards that Satyarthi has received, Jaitley’s contention is certainly borne out.
– Defenders of Democracy Award (2009-USA)
– Alfonso Comin International Award (2008-Spain)
– Medal of the Italian Senate (2007-Italy)
– Heroes Acting to End Modern Day Slavey by US State Department (2007-USA)
– Freedom Award (2006-USA)
– In October 2002, Satyarthi was awarded the Wallenberg Medal from the University of Michigan in recognition of his courageous humanitarian work against the exploitation of child labor.
– Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Award (1999-Germany)
– La Hospitalet Award (1999-Spain)
– De Gouden Wimpel Award (1998-Netherlands)
– Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award (1995-USA)
– The Trumpeter Award (1995-USA)
– The Aachener International Peace Award (1994-Germany)
Germany, USA, Spain and Italy are certainly prominent among the countries from which these awards originate. Also the US State Deparment has both awarded Satyarthi and funded his Bachpan Bachao Andolan (BBA) during the Bush era.
Finally, Megha Bahree writes in Forbes that her experience with Satyarthi’s Bachpan Bachao Andolan was “Anything But Nobel-Worthy.”  She mentions being taken by a BBA representative on a “tour” to show her child labour for a story she was doing. But none of the places she took her had child labor, till he finally asked her to wait and presented a situation with looked fake to her journalistic eyes. As she pointed out “the problem is that the more children you show “rescued”, the more funds you get from foreign donors.” On that account BBA appeared to be doing rather well. According to Madhu Kishwar, as far back as 12 years ago, he was funded $2 million dollars by US and German foundations.
Representational image
Representational image
Kailash Satyarthi has no doubt done some good work.  At the same time he also appears to be deeply embedded in Western institutional structures and sources of funding for a long time.  But he also has his local supporters.  He has received an endorsement from Dr. Vaidik, who also claims to know him for long.  Dr. Vaidik says that Satyarthi is not self-promotional and keep a simple lifestyle. On the other hand it is difficult to reconcile the slew of largely foreign awards, criticism of peers and charges of inflating numbers with the endorsement of lack of self-promotion.
The verdict is still out on Satyarthi and the Nobel on whether he is a hero manufactured by Western institutions for their own interests or a simple, unassuming human rights worker. Given the pattern of funds, the less than stellar endorsement from peers, his Marxist leanings coming with a “Hindu” tag and relationships with evangelical organizations such as World Vision, we should take our newly minted hero with a grain of salt.
Share via emailShare

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this article are the author's personal opinions. Information, facts or opinions shared by the Author do not reflect the views of Niti Central and Niti Central is not responsible or liable for the same. The Author is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

             
ABOUT AUTHOR
Sankrant Sanu is an entrepreneur, writer and researcher based in Seattle and Gurgaon. His essays were published in the book "Invading the Sacred" that contested Western academic writing on Hinduism and is a popular writer and blogs at sankrant.org. He is a graduate of IIT Kanpur and the University of Texas and holds six technology patents.
  • A S dash  9 minutes ago
    This award appears to be politically motivated. The Noble foundation is not above board. Like some years back Indians were the most beautiful people in the world, because the cosmetics multinationals wanted to penetrate into Indian market. Having done that the Indians have stopped producing beauties. Now it is the turn of Myanmar to be penetrated. Noble peace prizes have been a hoodwink in the past also. I do not know Satyarthi, nor the work he does, but it is surprising to know that he has been awarded so often by foreign countries and given so many dollars. Appears intriguing
    •  
    • Reply
    • Share ›