India future-Non Immigration

F

feb12rd

Registered Users (C)
All,

Mostly readers from Boston area must have already read this news came in yesterday's Boston Globe. See our GREAT CONSTITUTION, people having corruption charges worth of thousands of crores of rupees are ministers in Center.

"Laloo Prasad Yadav, the former chief minister of impoverished Bihar state, is expected to get a senior Cabinet post even though he is still fighting criminal charges stemming from the alleged theft of $280 million from the state treasury that was supposed to help farmers feed their livestock.
Yadav, the fifth minister sworn in yesterday, has gone to jail at least five times, and spent more than 200 days behind bars in connection with the investigation into what Indians call the 1996 ''fodder scam case."

Interested in full story, go to

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/144/nation/Singh_takes_reins_as_leader_of_India+.shtml

Also, Newly appointed filmstars (headed by Dynamic GOVINDA) will show their new Bollywood Show in LokSabha in a next month or so.

Moderator, take this thread away in a day or two after forum members enjoy this news.

GOOD LUCK to my GREAT INDIA.

P.S. regarding politicians : har 100 mein se 99 BEIMAAN, mera BHARAT MAHAAN.
 
I was hoping that someone will post this news. To say the least, I'm shocked and dismayed to hear that Laloo Prasad Yadav is the Railway Minister. If the Congress (read Sonia/Manmohan) had any sense they would not let the country's top criminal become a minister. It happens only in India!!!

I guess this calls for a bigger cause to have a petition to oust Laloo as the Railway Minister. The only place fit for him is a jail cell.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As much as I hate it, there is little we ordinary Indians can do about it. Economic improvement is the only way to fight corruption. I have immense confidence on Manmohan and Chidambaram to do that.

Who knows, someday maybe they will convince us all to go back. Then we won't have to suffer the CIS blues.
 
WheresMahGreen said:
It happens even in the US: Dick Cheney
Click to expand...

Well, there's a subtle difference, Laloo is for all practical purposes a convicted criminal, whereas Cheney is not.
 
WheresMahGreen said:
It happens even in the US: Dick Cheney
Click to expand...
We cannot compare US with India (at least in this case). If things were so similar, I would rather be sitting in India and not deal with this INS crap.
 
This Government

Is it not funny that we have a prime minister who has never won an election and a home minister who has lost this election :cool: ? The number one and number two in the government are both just rubber stamps of Madam Spy(Sonya) :D . Mr Laloo will now rob all india property :eek: . There is no money left in Bihar , courtesy his 10 year non stop looting :mad: .
Well, as some one said, we really can't do anything. It's the indian democracy. There are just too many loop holes in our constitution and laws. If they are fixed, most of our problems will be solved. But these laws will change only if congress and BJP agree on it because none of these parties will have enough seats to amend the constitution. Since these two parties rarely agree on anything, things will not change.
 
And the Mr Clean PM is too busy with portfolio allocation (read in the kitchen cabinet) with the allies, he had no time in conveying his condolences to those killed in the IED blast. It has to be read by the PIO.

The over 30 martyrs of the BSF left this world, unwept, unsung, unhonoured by the political class, so it reads the article by B Raman

Who will mourn our martyrs?
http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/may/28raman.htm
 
"Secularism" at its best

http://www.gurumurthy.net/display.asp?id=175

The summary of the article:

They feel justified to do what they are doing for the noble cause of secularism. But do they realise the harm they are causing to India? What the world, the Muslim world, will think of about India, and Hindus? Will they not think we are a barbaric society and a tribal state like many Muslim states? The ISI spends millions to convince the Muslims in Pakistan, in India and elsewhere that those who identify and assert themselves as Hindus are violent and India is anti-Muslim. The seculars in the media are doing the ISI work more credibly. Yes, they accomplish this by lying, suppressing the truth. They have no qualms or guilt doing that. Shame, indeed.
 
Is hoisting the flag a crime?

By Gurumurthy
http://www.gurumurthy.net/display.asp?id=183
Published Date : 24/8/2004

What happened in Hubli between January 26, 1992 and August 15, 1994, is a shame which the people of India would like to forget.

Even the most meticulous readers might not remember what happened then. But the non-bailable warrant against Uma Bharti and her resignation bring back the shameful memories.

The Hubli case captured simply is this. The dispute is about a public ground that originally belonged to the Basil Mission of Switzerland. The Hubli-Dharwad municipality acquired it for public purposes. This ground was also known as the Kittur Rani Chennamma Maidan. Anjuman-e-Islam, an Islamist outfit, had filed a case claiming that the maidan had been leased to it from 1930 for 999 years for religious worship. It lost the case all the way from the munsif court to the district court and the High Court. All three courts dismissed the Anjuman case and held that it was a public place. The courts permitted the use of the place for prayers by Muslims twice a year, but ordered the demolition of the structure put up by Anjuman. Anjuman appealed to the Supreme Court. The SC first refused to grant leave to appeal. But Anjuman said its structure would go. So the SC stayed the demolition. However, it left the High Court's decision that the ground was a public place and that Anjuman could offer prayers twice, just twice a year, undisturbed. These legal cases started in 1973 and went on till 1992. The ground is being used for selling vegetables, for jatras and for holding public meetings.

On January 26, 1992, the Republic Day, the citizens of Hubli decided to hoist the national flag. But Bangarappa, Karnataka Chief Minister then, ordered the police to thwart anyone from hoisting the national flag. Reason, it would hurt the religious feelings of the minorities! The police thwarted all attempts. From then on it became an issue. Most people in the country may not be aware that in 1971 Indira Gandhi had passed a law to punish anyone preventing the hoisting of the national flag on Republic and Independence days with imprisonment for three years. But the government instead of enforcing the right to hoist the national flag actually prevented the national flag from being hoisted. From January 26, 1992, on every Republic Day and Independence Day attempts would be made to hoist the national flag at the maidan, the Muslims would object and the government would prevent them. It was then that on August 15, 1994, Uma Bharti sneaked into the maidan at Hubli, defied prohibitory orders and hoisted the national flag. Afterwards criminals rioted. There was curfew. Not the criminals, but Uma was charged with inciting the criminals and murder.

Subsequent developments proved Uma right. Deendar Anjuman, an off-shoot of Anjuman-e-Islam, was found to be a violent organisation, linked to SIMI, a banned Islamist outfit. It was charged with bombing and torching churches in Andhra and in Karnataka to foment Hindu-Christian clashes and to defame India at the global level. Also a settlement was reached at Hubli permitting the State government to hoist the national flag at the maidan on Republic Day and Independence Day. But the state government is not hoisting the national flag lest it would hurt the religious sentiments of minorities. The Karnataka Government also confessed to the court that it did not have evidence to prove the case against Uma Bharti and wanted the case closed. As late as June 2004, the Dharam Singh Government also reiterated this plea. But once the Sibu Soren and Taslimuddin cases erupted, the Karnataka government withdrew its application to close the case, a clear political counter blast. This activated the case against Uma Bharti.

For hoisting the national flag in a public place, declared as such, Uma Bharti stands charged with crime.

But by preventing the national flag from being hoisted the State Government claims to have served the cause of secularism.

The Islamic extremists who caused riots are not the offenders. Nor is the government which prevented the national flag being hoisted.

But Uma Bharti who hoisted the national flag is the offender.

This is not just being `pseudo-secular'. It means promoting a dangerous trend among minorities, a trend that led to partition in 1947.
 
For this Arjuna, Krishna is communal and anti-'secular'

By Gurumurthy
http://www.gurumurthy.net/display.asp?id=182

A convention was held on August 8, 2004, on the eve of the 52nd anniversary of the `Quit India' movement. It was a National Convention on Secularism, not about the Quit India movement.

Secularism had not even entered India's political dictionary when Mahatma Gandhi called for the Quit India movement. So what its relevance was for the Quit India anniversary is not clear. But one thing is clear. Two high profile persons, E Ahmed and A B Bardhan, who were on the dais at the convention had nothing to do with the Quit India movement and one of them, E Ahmed, additionally, had nothing to do with secularism.

The All-India Muslim League, which was the mother of the Indian Union Muslim League to which Minister E Ahmed belongs, had actually opposed the Quit India movement. And so did Bardhan's party, the Communist Party of India which called Mahatma Gandhi names and spied for the British against the 1942 movement. Again, no one can seriously contend except the `seculars' keen on Muslim votes that E Ahmed's Muslim League is a protector of secularism in India. So much for the mismatch in the cocktail of the convention on secularism on the Quit India anniversary day.

Go further and see what Arjun Singh, the HRD Minister of India, said at the meeting. He charged that the RSS had assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, a charge repeatedly proved as a complete lie. Just months back, the 'Statesman' newspaper had to apologise to the RSS for alleging that the RSS was involved in the assassination of the Mahatma in an editorial. But Arjun Singh knows that in politics, repeating a proven lie makes it the truth. Any way, Arjun Singh's words would have been music to the secularists' ears. Their respect for him would have gone up for targeting the RSS, the eyesore of the secularists. Those who know politics and Arjun Singh, however, would know that his target was not the RSS, but Manmohan Singh. Manmohan Singh! Yes. See what Arjun actually did beyond abusing the RSS. He hoped that `the Prime Minister will take definitive action' against the RSS. Poor Manmohan Singh. He has to deal with the very products of the RSS, Vajpayee and Advani as opposition leaders and over a hundred of them in Parliament.

So Arjun has got the applause of the secularists for demanding action against the RSS. It is Manmohan who will get the flak for not acting against the RSS. Arjun Singh has already made it plain that he couldn't care less for Manmohan. He does not even report to him. Like Natwar Singh who openly disregards the Prime Minister.

Let us come back to Arjun. If secularism means discarding all that ancient India is known and respected for, Arjun Singh is eminently `secular'. For, to him, anything that is special to India, be it the Upanishads or the Gita, or the Ramayana or the Thirukkural, is anathema. To save secularism he has banned the Upanishads, the Gita, the Thirukkural and the like from the sight of our children in schools. For, to him, they are pollutants which will debilitate `secular' India. The Indian children are to be saved from the rishis and sages of India.

This Hindu-allergic secularism, Arjun knows, will fetch votes. Mere pampering of minorities will not do. But as compared to Veda Vyasa and Krishna, Thiruvalluvar was lucky. The Thirukkural authored by Thiruvalluvar, a great literature of ancient India, too had been banned to protect secularism. But luckily the DMK intervened to save the honour of Thiruvalluvar and along with it, its own honour. However, Vyasa and Krishna were not so lucky. No one would dare intervene on their behalf. In `secular' India's eyes they are communal, dangerous to the minorities.

Krishna may be the legendary Arjuna's preceptor. But for this Arjuna he is communal and anti-secular. Arjun Singh is `secular' precisely because he regards Krishna and his teachings as anti-secular. But what Arjun Singh and the seculars forget is that the very author of the Quit India movement was inspired by the teachings of Krishna in the Gita. But what is useful to Arjun Singh is the name of Gandhi, not what inspired him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top