Tuesday, December 31, 2013



Posted by Rajaram NS  /   December 31, 2013  /   Posted in Distortion WatchIntelligentsiaMediaPoliticsSlider  /   1 Comments
Note: This column is authored by Mohan Mahapatra with commentary by Dr. N.S. Rajaram.
Narendra Modi after Godhra and Mahatma Gandhi after the Khilafat were forced to deal with the violent aftermath. But there are striking differences between the way the two dealt with them. Also, Modi had nothing to do with the Godhra train burning that triggered the riots while Gandhi was the leader of the Khilafat that was the cause of the Moplah Rebellion.
Introduction: The author in his provocative but well-informed article poses an important question: can one be held responsible for something that one had not anticipated? To highlight this he compares Narendra Modi’s handling of the post-Godhra riots with Mahatma Gandhi’s (and Congress’s) conduct immediately following the collapse of his 1921 Khilafat Movement and its horrific aftermath of the Moplah Rebellion. The important point to note is how Modi and Gandhi handled the aftermath—Modi took firm and immediate steps while Gandhi fled from the scene and let the British deal with mess he had created. This contrasting response cannot be ignored whether one agrees with the author’s views or not. (NSR)
Modi’s handling of the post-Godhra riots
The media—in its persistent bias against the Sangh Parivar and the BJP—has written in a terribly irresponsible and biased manner about the Gujarat riots. Innocent well-meaning people have fallen prey to its motivated propaganda. The Gujarat riots were plain riots— not any ‘pogrom’ or ‘massacre’. The state government (under Modi) far from being involved in the riots handled the riots efficiently and controlled them within 3 days. In contrast, the Mahatma, in the face of a catastrophe that he himself had let loose had fled from the scene.
The first point to note is that Godhra has always been a communal tinderbox and the 2002 riots were only the latest in a long string. There were riots in 1969 that went on in Gujarat for 6 months, and again in 1985 in which close to 10,000 people were killed. Both these took place when Gujarat was under Congress rule. In 2002, some 700 people including Hindus and police personnel lost their lives. The difference was the lurid reporting by a highly biased media that turned it into a holocaust of Muslims at the hands of the Modi Government. By crossing all boundaries of truth and accuracy, the media became the mouthpiece of communal entrepreneurs like Teesta Setalvad and her ilk. Here are some facts:
1) On 28 February 2002, The Hindustan Times reported that the entire police force of 70,000 had been deployed in Gujarat in view of apprehensions that riots may break out.
2) On Feb 28 The Indian Express reported that “(On Feb 27) the state government had deployed the Rapid Action Force in Ahmedabad and other sensitive areas and the Centre sent in CRPF personnel.” Both these reports were published even before a single riot had taken place.
3) Riots began in Ahmedabad on Feb 28 at 11 AM. The weekly news magazine India Today (18 March 2002) reports that Modi informally requested the Centre for deployment of the Army at 12-00 noon i.e. within 1 hour. The same weekly also reports that one column of troops reached Ahmedabad at 2-30 AM on 1st March and staged a flag march the same morning at 9 AM.
4) The same weekly in the issue also says that the then Defence Minister George Fernandes was in Ahmedabad at 2-00 AM on 1 March on Modi’s request and was bravely on Ahmedabad’s streets that morning at great personal risk.
5) The Hindu reported on 1st March 2002 that, “The Army units, frantically called by the Chief Minister, Narendra Modi…started arriving in Ahmedabad…” This shows that some Army units reached Ahmedabad so quickly on Feb 28 that The Hindu had time to report their arrival on Feb 28 itself and publish it on 1st March!
6) Out of 18,600 villages, 240 towns and 25 district headquarters, hardly 60 places witnessed riotsOne-third of Gujarat, i.e. Saurashtra and Kutch were completely unaffected by riots even in the first 3 days. After the first three days, riots were limited to Ahmedabad, Vadodara and some places near Godhra— and almost all were started by Muslims.
7) In the first three days, Gujarat police shot dead 98 rioters, majority of whom were Hindus. On 1 March, The Hindu reported that- “At least 10 people have been killed in police firing in Ahmedabad alone by evening (of Feb 28).” Then on 2 March, The Indian Express reported that “Police shot dead 20 people in Gujarat, 12 in Ahmedabad, on 1st March.” Then on 3 March, the Indian Express reported: “77 more people have been killed in Police/ Army firing (on 2 March).” Then on 2 March The Hindu reported that “Unlike Feb 28 when one community was entirely at the receiving end, the minority backlash on 1st March has further worsened the situation.”
8) The Times of India dated 18 March 2002 devoted a complete report titled, “Riots hit all classes, people of all faith” on Hindu victims of the riots and says, “Contrary to popular belief that only Muslims have been affected in the recent riots more than 10,000 persons belonging to the Hindu community have also become homeless.”
9) The Indian Express devoted two full reports exclusively to Hindu victims in Ahmedabad in its issues dated 7 May 2002 and 10th May 2002. The victims were not only homeless, they did not even have relief camps to live in, and hence had to live in temples.
10)  India Today reports in its issue dated 20 May 2002, “A series of attacks by Muslims on policemen has further added to mutual lack of faith. Now strapped with the anti-Muslim label, the police has been slow in acting against Muslim fanatics.”
11)  India Today (20 May 2002) also gives details of attacks on Hindus by Muslims. The same weekly reports in its issue dated 15 April 2002 that- “A young Hindu went to Himmatnagar (Muslim) area of Ahmedabad to do business and was found dead, with his eyes gouged out.” This issue also gives details of Muslim aggression.
12) India Today dated 22 April 2002 also reports that ‘Gujarat police saved 2,500 Muslims from certain death in Sanjeli, North Gujarat on 1st March 2002‘. It also says,  ’Like Sanjeli, 5,000 Muslims were also saved in Bodeli town in Vadodara district by the police‘ and ‘thousands of Muslims were also saved in Viramgam town from 15,000 armed Hindus’ by police and the Army. The UPA government- staunchly anti-BJP, has given figures of 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus killed in the Gujarat riots, and 223 missing, in Rajya Sabha on 11 May 2005. A total of 790 Muslims were killed in the riots–more than thrice that number were saved on one day at a single place.
13) Throughout the Gujarat riots, there are only two instances of real anti-Muslim riots: the Ehsan Jafri case and the Naroda Patiya case. In the Ehsan Jafri case, the police shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house and saved the lives of more than 200 Muslims. There were 250 people inside Jafri’s house and the mob killed 39 with the police saving more than 200 despite being overwhelmingly numbered by the rioters who were more than 10,000.
14)  There have been 4 convictions of Muslims for rioting after Godhra and Muslims were given various sentences. 4 Muslims were convicted by a Vadodara fast track court on 16 October 2003 and given life imprisonment. Ex-Vadodara Deputy Mayor and Congress leader Nisar Bapu was acquitted, but his son and son-in-law were convicted. This was reported in at least three English dailies, including The Times of India dated 17 October 2003. 9 and 7 Muslims were convicted in two separate judgments on 18 and 28 March 2006 by fast track courts in Ahmedabad reported by all major English dailies the next day.
From all these incontrovertible facts it is clear that Muslims were hardly helpless cattle hiding from the slaughter house that the media makes them out to be. The conviction of Muslims proves that Muslims were equally on the offensive, in fact more so since they lit the fuse with the train burning. Like their participation in the Khilafat that led to the Moplah Rebellion the train burning was only a preliminary test; if they had gotten away with it, more violent acts would have followed as happened following the Khilafat.
Gandhi’s surrender
Almost all commentators begin their version denouncing Narendra Modi with the pious platitude that the riots took place in the state that gave the nation (and the world) Mahatma Gandhi, the Apostle of Nonviolence. They ignore the fact that Gandhi’s failures and the failure of his dogma of nonviolence has caused more bloodshed than many a war. More to the point, let us look at how Mahatma Gandhi reacted when he had to face the backlash of the collapse of his Khilafat Noncooperation Movement. We have already seen what Modi did to control the post-Godhra violence. Let us compare the two.
Most history books today mention the 1920 Non-Cooperation Movement, but barely note what it was for: the Khilafat Movement. As a result, most Indians believe that the Non-Cooperation Movement was the first great struggle for freedom launched by the Congress under Gandhi’s leadership. It was nothing of the sort. It was a movement in support of the theocratic goals of the Khilafat: in fact, it was called the ‘Khilafat Non-Cooperation Movement.’ Its aim was to persuade the British to restore the Sultan of Turkey who had lost his empire following the First World War.
Here is an important point: the Khilafat Non-Cooperation Movement had no national goals. When the First World War ended in 1918, Ottoman Turkey, which had fought on the same side as Germany, had suffered a massive defeat. The result was the breakup of the Ottoman Empire ruled by the Sultan of Turkey who had also pretensions to the title of the Caliph or the leader of all Muslims. Turkey’s defeat was seen as a major blow to the prestige of Islam, especially by many Muslims and their leaders in India. They formed committees to press the British Government to restore the Sultan in a movement known as the Khilafat. It failed.
Indian history books carefully leave out Gandhi’s misadventure with the Khilafat and its terrible aftermath. The reality is quite different. Its failure resulted in a massacre of tens of thousands of innocent Hindus all over India. It was particularly virulent in Kerala where a Jihad (Holy War against infidels) called the Mopla Rebellion erupted which took several months to put down. To make matters worse for Gandhi, Muslim leaders like the Ali brothers, whom Gandhi had sponsored and supported during the Khilafat, publicly humiliated him. Mohammed Ali said that a Muslim thief was better than Gandhi, simply because of the thief’s faith in Islam!
What was so terrible about the Mopla Rebellion to make Congress historians shy away from it? Sankaran Nair has this to say in his book Gandhi and Anarchy:
For sheer brutality on women, I do not remember anything in history to match the Malabar [Mopla] rebellion. … The atrocities committed more particularly on women are so horrible and unmentionable that I do not propose to refer to them in this book…
Gandhi goes into denial mode
More to the point, what was Gandhi’s reaction to the Mopla atrocities? At first he denied that the atrocities took place at all. But he could not keep up the denial in the face of overwhelming evidence including reports from his Muslim friends. He then rationalized. He called Moplas “God fearing” and said they “are fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a manner they consider as religious.” This was too much for Annie Beasant. That spirited Englishwoman wrote:
It would be well if Mr. Gandhi could be taken into Malabar to see with his own eyes the ghastly horrors which have been created by the preaching of himself and his ‘loved brothers’, Mohammed and Shaukat Ali [sponsored by Gandhi]. … Men who consider it ‘religious’ to murder, rape, loot, to kill women and little children, cutting down whole families, have to be put under restraint in any civilized society.
When we look at this dreadful chapter and how Gandhi behaved and contrast it with Modi’s quick response, we are forced to conclude that Narendra Modi saved the day with his prompt handling even though he had been in charge as CM for only three months, and the Godhra burning and the riots that followed came as a complete surprise. But the media and other propagandists twisted the story— ignoring and even erasing the conspiracy behind the train burning while charging Modi and the police with the conspiracy! So those at the receiving end of the conspiracy themselves are guilty of the original conspiracy!
The newspaper editors and others who call the Gujarat riots as a ‘holocaust’, ‘pogrom’, ‘genocide’ or ‘massacre’ should look at their own newspapers’ reports on these very things. Such wild charges trivialize true cases of monstrous crimes like the Jewish Holocaust in Nazi Germany. If you want to know what a real ‘pogrom’ is, look at what is happening to Hindus in Pakistan, and lately in Bangladesh. Look also at what happened to Hindus (Pundits) in Kashmir. In all these the Congress surrendered to terrorists.
Conclusions: responsibility vs surrender
Unlike Gandhi who sponsored and led the Khilafat, Modi had nothing to do with the Godhra train burning which was a pre-planned conspiracy as the courts have established. Without the train burning and the hysterical propaganda that tried to shift the blame on to the Hindu victims for the train burning, there might have been no riots. There were outlandish stories in the media— claiming that a kerosene stove in one of the compartments caused the fire, followed by the still more outlandish story that the arsonists (Muslims) were provoked into burning the bogies by the misbehaviour of the passengers (Hindu victims) with a Muslim girl running a tea stall. How the arsonists could come up with hundreds of liters of gasoline (petrol) needed to burn down the bogies in a matter of minutes was left unexplained.
It was different with Gandhi— he sponsored, supported, led and even funded the Khilafat using the Tilak Swaraj Fund and promised “Swaraj within the Year” to the Ali Brothers. It failed and led to the Moplah Rebellion which was far worse than the post-Godhra riots. It took the army, British and Indian soldiers several months to put it down. So for the Congress, the media and the ‘Gandhians’ to hurl abuses at Modi is worse than the pot calling the kettle back. Modi was at the receiving end and his state, Gujarat was the victim of the Godhra train burning.
What did Gandhi do? Unlike Modi who stood firm and tried to bring order, Gandhi fled from the scene and let the British deal with the mess. It was Gandhi who had blood on his hands during the Khilafat and the Partition later where he and his party ran the election campaign on the promise of “No Partition” and “Partition over my dead body” and then went back on it and agreed to the Partition.
Please see Gandhi, Khilafat and the National Movement by N.S. Rajaram for details of Gandhi’s irresponsible and cowardly behaviour during the Khilafat and its bloody aftermath, which he was directly responsible for. Most importantly, while Gandhi fled from the scene of action, Modi took full charge and brought the situation under control. No one could have done a better job.
Imagine what might have happened had Akhilesh Yadav or Rahul Gandhi been the CM instead of Narendra Modi.
Dr. Rajaram’s comment on the sources
The author of this piece is kind enough to attribute his impulse to write this article to my book Gandhi, Khilafat and the National Movement, but the credit should really go to Sir C. Sankaran Nair’s Gandhi and Anarchy published in 1922 immediately following the Moplah Rebellion. Nair was from Malabar which bore the brunt of the Moplah Rebellion. As the subtitle of my book makes clear, Nair’s book was one of the ‘neglected sources’ I used in writing it. There is nothing original in my book while Nair was an eyewitness. An on-line version is available at http://members.tripod.com/nsrajaram/gandhi.html
The lesson to be drawn is that we cannot always control events and have to deal with unexpected consequences. How we deal with it is what really matters. The author has given a vivid account of contrasting behaviors.
Mohan Utkal Mahapatra is a retired financial planner living in New York. He lectures on history in his spare time.
- See more at: http://www.indiafacts.co.in/congress-crimes-3-surrender-to-terror/#sthash.lWCL0shl.hkxQzVBe.dpuf



Posted by Gautam Sen  /   December 30, 2013  /   Posted in CommentaryHeadline  /   18 Comments
A US decision has evidently reaffirmed that Narendra Modi cannot be allowed to become prime minister of India. This is similar to the verdict reached on the elected President of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi. The US simply did not trust him and the Muslim Brotherhood to keep their promises of good behaviour. It seems the conclusion was that Morsi had to be removed from power despite his firm crackdown on the interests of the Hamas in Egypt and emollient tone about other issues of concern to the US.
The Saudis had also weighed in because the Muslim Brotherhood has historically laid claim to leadership of the Islamic world. This was an intolerable threat to US influence over what has been State Department Islam, the best antidote to Arab nationalism and underpinning for anti-communism, in the context of the Cold War, through a supine Saudi monarchy, totally dependent on the US for survival. The US was also possibly aware of everything Morsi was saying in private through its comprehensive eavesdropping activities that leave little confidential. It is probable that Morsi was counselling his Muslim Brotherhood associates of the need to bide their time.
Narendra Modi’s case is not fundamentally different because it is feared that Modi and his supporters will curtail the huge incursions into India by US agencies the UPA has facilitated. It is assumed that once Modi forms the government and becomes aware that India’s is well on the way to becoming a US banana republic satellite–in the age-old Central American and Asian tradition, subject to indirect rule–he will move to end it. The US has evidently infiltrated India on a massive scale, blackmailing politicians with covertly acquired information, sponsoring countless secular and religious foundations and the purchase of a huge swathe of the Indian media.
However, the erstwhile BJP as such was not really a drawback for the US because some of its prominent leaders have been very close to the US, virtual spokesmen for it. Others bent over backwards during the tenure of the NDA to please. Two of the BJP’s most senior decision makers, including the late Brajesh Mishra, even made offers of sending Indian troops to join the coalition in Afghanistan. The Americans themselves had not made such a request to India because it would have sent their vital ally in the Afghan war into veritable frenzy. This idea was very wisely vetoed personally by Atal Behari Vajpayee himself!
The Muslim Brotherhood is now facing savage repression, with the US-backed Egyptian military embarked on a reign of terror. It has not hesitated to kill hundreds of civilian Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators, including many women, by the simple expedient of shooting them while they slept. It is also systematically decapitating the Muslim Brotherhood political leadership. The Egyptian military has effectively re-imposed a dictatorship that is a prelude to shepherding its own pliant creatures into power, but through a process that assures an outward democratic fig leaf. The Muslim Brotherhood has been denounced as a terrorist organisation and cannot contest elections.
An even harsher version of this model for maintaining US control was tried out successfully in Algeria during the 1990s. The US and French sponsored Algerian military dispensation killed anything up to 300,000 civilians to eliminate the radical Islamic Salvation Group. The free Fourth Estate of Europe and the US played its usual collaborationist role. It blamed the army of the Islamic Salvation Group for the widespread killings, often of their own supporters, in orgies of mindless bloodlust, however incredible and unlikely that might appear. The bloody conflict lasted a decade and ended with the total destruction of the Islamic radicals. The Western intervention, which has destroyed much of Syria, killing more than 150,000 people, to the approving clamour of the Western human rights lobby, is another variant for re-imposing imperial control over a country. The invasion and destruction of Iraq was another, the death toll approximately 2 million so far.
The Indo-US nuclear accord has puzzled many observers, especially the mostly ill-informed Indian public. Some insiders involved in the negotiation of the Indo-US Nuclear Accord were also mystified by the US decision to allow India to ascend, in effect, to the extraordinary status of a bona fide nuclear power. Even more apparently inexplicable was the direct efforts made by President George Bush Jnr. himself to ensure a favourable outcome at the IAEA negotiations. He made a personal phone call to the President of China at a crucial juncture of the negotiations, when the latter embarked on a discreet, last-minute manoeuvre to scupper the deal it had agreed earlier with the US.
An excellent, revealing account of China’s machinations, by a senior Indian journalist present in Vienna was buried by his editor, the owner of India’s most pro-Chinese daily. In the end, the most knowledgeable attributed this paramount political American decision, recognising India as a nuclear power, to President Bush supposedly becoming enamoured with the country on a visit during the 1990s. It is unconvincing, indeed inconceivable that such a decision of huge political import could have been the product of a sentimental whim.  Although it is possible Bush acquired an undue affection for India, however weird that might seem to even the most patriotic Indian.
The decision to accord India nuclear status occurred because of a US perception that it had finally managed to acquire a durable foothold in it and access to high level Indian decision-making during the tenure of the UPA. Indeed, it seems, the US was even able to determine appointments to the Union Cabinet, certainly in the case of the Commerce and the Environment portfolios and perhaps even the EAM’s selection is cleared now by the US ambassador in Delhi. The granting of nuclear status to India, which was well and truly an enormous gift was motivated by the US view of India as a new client satellite. The journey in this fateful direction began during the tenure of the NDA and has neared completion under a totally subverted UPA. To their credit, both Jawaharlal Nehru and India Gandhi had resisted this dire predicament during the first decades of Indian independence.
The UPA of course represents mainly the family, rather than India and is also deferential to the US, which is the fate of the family itself as well. Quite noticeably, the US has helpfully striven to conceal any embarrassing information on the likely UPA prime ministerial candidate. The purchase of untested Westinghouse nuclear reactors as quid pro quo for the Indo-US Accord was a less significant secondary understanding. One also begins to understand why the UPA became an agent WalMarts rather than representing the vital interests of millions of Indian retailers.
This does not mean India accedes to all US dictates, for example over the purchase of Iranian crude. However, a deeper subservience to US preferences has been established and is being institutionalised. The US has become the major shareholder in the equity of the GoI, much as it has been in Pakistan for decades.
Mohammed Morsi may have eventually brought its own divinely-sanctioned misfortune to Egypt, but his entrapment, after the preliminary honeyed effusions from Washington, is a lesson for Indians, themselves on the verge of losing control over their country. Morsi was never in full command of the Egyptian government and the affairs of the country, despite an overwhelming electoral mandate. The religious obsessions of the Muslim Brotherhood also constrained a calculated grasp of the harsh secular international realities lapping around them.
They were determined to achieve, in short order, some of their Shariah-ordained goals on personal conduct, especially pertaining to women’s dress codes and sexual behaviour, a central pillar in the history of Islam, imperial expansion apart. The desire to impose curbs on other supposedly un-Islamic liberal freedoms was also accorded high priority. Yet, he was never in full control of critical economic issues like food and petroleum prices, which rose inexorably. As a result, a myriad of voluntary organisations and media outlets, blatantly sponsored by the US, had tens of thousands of the religiously less observant on the streets, baying for his blood. Within days of his brutal overthrow prices and other shortages mitigated and the Saudis and Kuwaitis extended huge loans to the beleaguered Egyptian economy.
The virtually instant announcement, after the swearing-in of Arvind Kejriwal and his juvenile crew, following their inept, comic preening for the media, was a hunger-strike in Bhopal and the decision to contest elections in Gujarat. The goal of AAP is now blindingly obvious. The intention is to split the anti-Congress vote to prevent Modi and the BJP winning enough seats in 2014 to form a viable government. The other alternative outcome would be to reduce their number sufficiently to facilitate the barely-concealed claim of his implacable opponents inside the BJP to propose an alternative candidate for prime minister, ostensibly to help form a governing coalition. The Indian domestic political support for the AAP intervention is from the counterparts of the so-called young and liberal in Cairo’s Tahir Square. They are really all a product of India’s manipulative and manipulated English language media, much of it in hock to banks and foreign conglomerate owners.
How the AAP originated and their personal international ties are indeed a matter of interest, but not the only issue. The Magasaysay award is a known instrument for affording recognition to Asians sensitive to the US portrayal of the world. Volunteering to work for Mother Teresa is also an agreeable item on a CV, indicating desirable political impulses to Western governments.  At the very least, the US has intervened in a dynamically unstable Indian polity to affect outcomes. Funding a useful political or voluntary local entity through an Indian business house is standard practice for foreign countries. They reimburse the business house by engaging with it in an unrelated profitable transaction. The Saudis regularly employ such business deals in India on behalf of Pakistan and the US does so as well in scores of countries. It offers complete anonymity and its legality hard to question.
The final solution to a difficult and high stakes political standoff will be to assassinate Narendra Modi. The attempt already made in Patna is almost certain to have had foreign participation and the background to it presents a truly shocking picture of high level local complicity. Attempts to assassinate Modi are likely to occur again. Determined efforts continue to incite Islamic radicals to make such an attempt, by funding endless court proceedings to ensure the accusations over the 2002 Gujarat riots remain alive.
The logistical backup for any plan to murder Narendra Modi will likely originate in Pakistan, already rejoicing at the colossal damage to Indian intelligence the UPA attempt to curb him has inflicted. It is also extremely suspect that invitations to Narendra Modi to visit came from three close US allies, two of them with little compelling reason for extending them. The US itself persists in using the issue of his visa to cause him whatever negative publicity possible. Quite clearly, assassinating him abroad might have been considered more logistically feasible and less damaging politically than in India. The intention is to end the career of the most popular Indian politician since independence and one that threatens to assert it.
Dr Gautam Sen taught international political economy at the London School of Economics.


  1. Srikanth December 30, 2013 11:45 am Reply
    I understand totally why US has deep interests in India. But why are we so easily sold out? To Russians in 80s (mitrokhin achives) and now to U$A?
    • inquisitive indian December 30, 2013 12:48 pm Reply
      Good question . Actually Indians are suffering from STOCKHOLM SYNDROME. You can know more about Indian Mentality , Forces trying to Break India, & how Indian Faultlines are being exploited in a single book called “Breaking India” written by Rajiv Malhotra. plz google search “BreakingIndia” you can find it easily.
  2. Ankit December 30, 2013 12:43 pm Reply
    Sounds more like a good plot for a fiction novel to me.
  3. ohm December 30, 2013 6:39 pm Reply
    excellent analysis. this is the truth. modi too seems to be aware of this reality. please read the india today interview with nambi narayanan, ex isro scientist. nambi says he was surprised by the fact that modi did not ask him anything about former Gujarat dgp sreekumar who has been on the payrolls of the teesta gang. modi just wanted to know about the role of the American intelligence in the spy scandal.
  5. adarsh December 30, 2013 8:35 pm Reply
    no words to describe the article…. the ppl of INDIA r drowned with MC d , dominoes like stuff and they hv become materialistic and they don want to hear any lectures… they want money n money ….and we have already been divided…hats off to the man who have written the article…please shed some light why INDIANS have gone GAGA over AAP SUCCESS….
  7. Prashant Kumar December 31, 2013 9:18 am Reply
    High profile thought. This time Indian will understand their tricks
    And will give their mandate with narendra modi ji
  9. Hemen Parekh December 31, 2013 10:57 am Reply
    Overwhelming Demands ?
    You bet !
    Looking at the crowds shouting their demands outside Arvind Kejriwal’s residence , you would think , people of Delhi have unlimited arrears of problems
    Individuals and groups are trooping in from far and wide , demanding :
    > Better physical services ( Power / Water / Homes / Transport )
    > Jobs ( Permanency / Removal of Contract System / New jobs )
    > Reservations / Abolitions / Implementations / Resignations
    > Admissions / Legalizations / Transfers / Rise in Auto fares
    > Roll back of CNG Prices / Reduction of Vegetable prices
    > Security / Loans / Pensions
    The list goes on and on
    Only problem
    Whereas demands are ” Unlimited ” , resources ( Manpower + Money + Systems ) are ” Limited ” !
    Hence Arvind will need to evolve a simple method to evaluate the ” IMPORTANCE ” and the ” URGENCY ” of these demands
    He may want to devise an online form or , like last time , print and distribute 50 lakh forms , which only need to be ticked , as in a multiple choice questionnaire
    Then , on a scale of 1- 5 , invite people of Delhi to score each demand on the following criteria :
    How does this problem affect ?
    > Economic Status ( Rich / Middle Class / Poor )
    > Geographic Coverage ( Posh Area / Middle class locality / Slums )
    > Gender ( Male / Female / Both )
    > Age ( Old people / Middle Age / Children )
    > Coverage ( Entire population / Majority / One Community only )
    > Nature ( Political / Social / Economic )
    > Character ( Establish Equity / Reduce Disparity / Speed up Justice )
    > Scope ( Job Creation / Health / Education / Corruption Removal )
    > Time Frame ( Crisis Situation / Urgent / Can wait )
    Then display the demands in the descending order of ” PERCENTILE SCORES ” – so people get to know what will get attended to and when
    For AAP , with its inclination for seeking people’s opinion through ” STRUCTURED STATISTICAL SURVEYS ” , devising such a transparent and easily understood ” PROCESS ” , cannot be a big deal
    Incidentally , no individual problem / demand should be included in the survey
    Carrying out such a pilot , ” SOCIO – ECONOMIC – POLITICAL ” experiment can take our democracy to the grass-root level and give the people a sense of participation in solving their own problems
    At the same time , people will be made aware that ,
    > Resources are limited
    > All demands cannot be attended simultaneously
    > Injustice of past 15 years cannot be undone in the next 15 days
    * hemen parekh ( 31 Dec 2013 / Mumbai )
  10. Pranav December 31, 2013 11:51 am Reply
    It is possible that the blocking of Modi will be accomplished through managing EVMs. I thjnk the BJP has no objection to that, since they have no objection to non-verifiable, non-transparent EVMs
  13. Param Krishna December 31, 2013 5:51 pm Reply
    this is why we need Narendra Modi, not ppl like Manmohan or Rahul, they will sell the country to the highest bidder and store swiss bank accounts
  14. bharatjohnson December 31, 2013 6:59 pm Reply
    Amazing insights and research! I salute the author for informing us about the various issues and in solidarity with the author let me share a few of my own thoughts I felt compelled to express on this issue> the so called Indo-US partnership.
    I’ve been having the same set of concerns about USA’s sinister motives against India. Indeed I’ve been tweeting on it for the past few months (http://www.twitlonger.com/account/index/5). A developed, strong and proud India is a competitor to USA and it prefers a failed India. Who else can deliver a failed India on a platter to the USA than the dynasty directly or if that’s not possible as is the case now via an intermediary called AAP and Kejriwal. The Magsasay as well as the India International Center is crawling with ultra leftist anti-Indians of Indian birth besides foreigners. The Magsasay and India International Center are primarily funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. I had my feelings towards America’s approach to the Egyptian regime and even commented that if America wants India to be another Egypt it will be their informed decision which we Indians will oppose and defeat through a second Quit India struggle if necessary including against US companies who fund US charities who in turn fund the Indian charities who loathe the idea of Bharat and work against the national interests of India. No self-respecting country can afford to allow such games to succeed. The AAP’s claim that they are anti-corruption is not convincing and if it were the case AAP would not have accepted the outside support of the dynastic Congress Party which is the fountain head of corruption in India. Similarly AAP’s purge of Anna Hazare and Baba Ramdev too is circumspect and could not have been without foreign in puts. If we look at the cover story of the Indian dailies and watch TV it seems there is nothing else happening in India other than the day to functioning of a minority government in Delhi headed by the AAP.
    In a geo-political concept of Checks&Balances a weaker India could become a host of one of the two super powers compromising Indian independence, integrity and we the people of India don’t want that to happen. It’s also time the BJP and Shri Modi reached out to the Non Aligned Movement so that they too are briefed about the concerns we have today and which could confront them tomorrow if we are all careless. This could very well be a coalition of the willing to stop or checkmate American excesses and evil designs in the world and applies to other world powers too who have a similar inclination.
    There are no untouchables in geo-politics or diplomacy and it’s high time India’s BJP opened a comprehensive dialogue with America, China, Russia, the EU so that the serious concerns Indians have about the sinister American games are notified to them and duly flagged. There is no mileage in keeping quiet about these concerns anymore or hushing it up as it will only afford the USA a free run and plausible deniability in India and abroad with the best secrecy/privacy settings and thus protection from detection. Expose the USA before the people and the companies who fund these anti-Indian charities so that the people of India can make an informed decision.
  15. Vijay December 31, 2013 8:11 pm Reply
    Such a beautiful and detail oriented article. Indian people need to be educated on such things so they will vote for right candidate.
    Even when one watch the “Pradhanmantri” series by Shekhar Kapoor and you will learn how India is already sold to western countries.
  16. kapil December 31, 2013 9:02 pm Reply
    As per me; most likely kejriwal will resign after his speech on trust vote. He will try to play Mr Vajpayee ji. After this media will make a new God of Sacrifice and everyone will discuss on Kejriwal till general election. It will be the smartest ploy of all forces which wanted to stop Mr Modi to become next PM.
  17. Sam January 1, 2014 1:13 am Reply
    There is no equivalence between Morsi and Modi. Morsi is an Islamist whose aim is to impose barbaric sharia law and take Egypt back to the middle ages. He was a poor and ineffective administrator. The only reason that he is at odds with the Saudis is that they are a corrupt dynasty seeking to cling onto power by wearing the same mantle as protectors of Islam. They, however, both share the same ultimate goal of imposing retrograde Islamic rule. This is no different from the clash between the corrupt Nehru/Gandhi dynasty, seeking to hold onto power by acting as protectors of leftist socialism, and Kejriwal’s equally delusional leftist populism, which is guaranteed to destroy whatever that remains after the dynasty crumbles.
    Modi on the other hand is a proven administrator and a promoter of business-friendly capitalism; which is the only way from India to grow – even the Chinese communists understand this, but not our leftist jholawallahs. His brand of Hindu nationalism has nothing in common with Morsi’s Islamic ideology, despite left liberals trying so hard to manufacture a false equivalency between the two. Hinduism is not like the Abrahamic religions. It does not seek to rule the state or impose social strictures on its citizens like Abrahamic-dominated nations. And this is why China, Pakistan and the US fear his ascendence. They realize that India will not continue to be a pushover and that it could rapidly develop once the socialist handicaps and dynastic corruption are removed. Thus their attempt to sabotage Modi’s rise.
- See more at: COURTESY : http://www.indiafacts.co.in/stopping-modi-at-all-costs/#sthash.ZiORTaLQ.DWKFAlOE.dpuf