Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘bjp’

WHO HAS NOT APPLIED MIND …?

The elections of Karnataka state Assembly are over.

The election result produced a hung assembly

BJP got 104 Seats,

Indian Nehruvian Congress got 78 seats,

JDS+ got 38 seats

And

Others got 2 seats

Somehow it appears that there is a flaw somewhere in the process of calling for proving the majority.

Who are the parties?

(1) Governor of Karnataka

(2) Nehruvian Congress and JDS

(3) BJP

(4) Supreme Court Judges

SC at flaw

(1) Governor of Karnataka what was his role?

(1.1) to invite the leader of the First Single largest party, to take an oath as CM,

(1.2) to ask the CM to appoint the provisional temporary speaker from the elected members to swear in,   

(1.3) to ask the CM to prove his majority on the floor of the house

(1.4) the CM should prove the majority support within 15 days on the floor of the house, not elsewhere,

(1.5) the CM to form the government after proving the majority support on the floor

Is there any flaw at the end of the Governor?

No. There is no flaw in inviting the leader of the First Single largest party to take an oath as CM, because it was as per the guide line prescribed by the Sarkaria Commission in its report and it has been approved by the SC.   

Was there any flaw in the appointment of Mr. Bopiah as provisional speaker of the house?

No. There was no flaw in his appointment because he was the senior most under the criteria of length of service in a cadre. Allegation against him of being bias was set aside by the SC long back in some other case. He had also worked as provisional speaker previously too.

Is there any flaw in asking the CM to prove the majority on the floor of the house?

No. There was no any flaw in asking him to prove the majority on the floor of the house. This was in accordance to the Supreme Court ruling in some other case that the majority has to be proved on the floor of the house, not elsewhere.

Is there any flaw in asking to prove the said majority support within 15 days.

No. There was no flaw in giving a maximum period up to 15 days for the job entrusted to the leader of the First largest single party. 15 days period is the legal period.

Why 15 days period is termed as the legal period?

Something related with multiple subjects and objects to be dealt with, a time limit of minimum 15 days has to be given, to avoid injustice to person/persons/party/parties. If the time period has the relation with a single person with no gathering, searching the matter related document/documents i.e. documental studies, then 72 hours’ time limit is justified. Here in our subject matter, this was not the case. Here it is a policy matter where the whole party’s members have some SAY. These SAYs are to be compiled and needed to arrive to several decisions related with alliance including the alliance to me made or not, through discussion within the party and then through consensus an amicable solution with or without some terms and condition. The leader of a party cannot take decisions at his whims in a democratic country. Hence the 15 days’ time limit given was a well justified limit.

Therefore the decisions of the Governor was foul-less and flawless.

The further details on this justified time limit we would see later.

(2) Nehruvian Congress and JDS

These are the petitioners. We do not know whether Nehruvian Congress is the First Part of the petitioner or the Second Part. Similarly about the JDS. Irrespective of the First Part or Second Part, the BJP lawyer should have asked to clarify. Leave this aside, it is the right of any person/organization to submit a petition. It is up to the discretion of the SC to get convinced or not. We would examine this point further  under the actions of the SC.

(3) BJP, is off course the opposite party. Action of BJP and SC we would discuss together.

(4) Supreme Court:

Who has issued instructions?

Governor has issued the instructions.

If the governor’s instructions are challenged then the Governor becomes the defendant. BJP cannot become either an opposite party or a defending party. But here, BJP being the first largest single party, its interest is affected if the SC does not hear BJP.

As for the Governor, the Governor cannot be called before any court. When this is the position of the Governor, then, it implies that the Governor must have an unchallengeable power, to take the decision. But no authority is allowed to take arbitrary decision in a democratic country. The decision should be taken with discretion.  Discretion means reasonable and justifiable.

The task before SC was to decide whether the instructions issued by the Governor contained any flaw and to rule on:

(1) To entertain the petition or not, when the Governor has discretionary power.

(2) If yes, then whether any instruction of the Governor was discretionary or arbitrary? If the SC finds prima-facie in the petition that any instruction of the Governor contains flaw, then the SC can entertain the petition.

The SC has ruled that the 4th instruction of the Governor was arbitrary.  That is the time limit given for proving the majority within 15 days contains a flaw.

On this point, the SC has a flaw in its order.  SC changed the time limit from 15 days to two days.

The petitioner parties, viz. the  Nehruvian Congress and the  JDS or vice versa, can come with dirty hand, is understandable, through their record of history. But the legal matters are heard, point to point with its relevance.

e.g. Indira Gandhi had spoken fourteen lies on oath, before the Allahabad HC, when her election was challenged by Rajnarain. But at that time, the HC had not ruled, that all of her, rest of the statements were also false. Similarly here, if the petitioners have come with the dirty hands, then this was required to be proved in the court. If the Opposite party proves this, then the petitioners are liable to be punished.

How and why the matter was so urgent that it should be heard at mid night?

It is said that the appointment of Protem speaker, by the leader of the BJP, can play a foul game. But SC can say that this is hypothetical ground. Court cannot give its verdict on hypothetical assumption. Hence SC should have rejected the petition and could have asked the petitioners to come after the appointment of the Protem Speaker.

The pray for the reduction of time limit for the reason of horse trading.

This point is also hypothetical. Horse Trading applies to every party, and if the factor of horse trading is to be considered, then it is to be applied to all.

Otherwise also, the point of preventing Horse Trading cannot be entertained. Because the petitioner One and the petitioner 2 gets full liberty for Horse Trading and that to for indefinite period. They can do the horse trading during the forming of government and after word also while negotiating on terms and conditions of common minimum program.

The point of petitioner coming before the Court with dirty hands lies here:

To have an alliance among two or multiple parties is a policy matter of each party.

To have an alliance, there needs to have terms and conditions which are supposed to be in concurrence with the party principles. Whether these terms and conditions are in concurrence with party principles or not, there needs an expert opinion and the members of the party must have a SAY to it. All these things can be decided only by the General body meeting of the party. Even the Central Working Committee is not authorized to change the policy of the party without the concurrence of the general body.

What should be or what is the procedure to decide such “policy issue” in a democratic set up?

The party president can call for an emergency general body meeting. But political parties are having members in lakhs. Therefore there are state committees. State committees further dependent on district, tehsil and city committees. They have to give suggestions and to elect delegates for the general conference. These delegates will submit the SAYs of members in the general conference. Then the central working committee would compile the SAYs and take the decision as per the delegated power under the constitution of the party. If any member of any Committee inclusive of MLA, if does not agree with the decision/s of the central working committee, he/she has the right to leave the party if he is in minority. No question arises of he being in majority because in that case the proposal gets rejected.

If the alliance has been done before the declaration of the Assembly elections, all these procedure can be followed. And a member against any terms and conditions of alliance or even against the alliance itself, would not file his candidature in assembly election and even he could resign from the party.

If the alliance is proposed after the poll, how to follow the line of democratic spirit to have the alliance?      

It is mandatory to follow the aforesaid procedure to maintain the spirit of the democracy. On the plea of an urgency no party can overlook the basic characteristic of democracy. Further there is no urgency because if the matter is delayed even beyond 15 days, there was no scope of breakdown of the constitution.

Generally for calling any meeting, a notice of 15 days in advance is required for committee of any level with an agenda. In case of an urgency and a known single agenda, a notice of 72 hours is OK at lower level. But when the higher level committee is dependent on the suggestions of the lower level committees, inclusive of electing and sending delegates to the general body meeting at the Head Quarter, 72 days’ notice is not feasible. That is why 15 days’ time period was ok.

Democratic spirit is the transparency and accommodating every body’s SAY so that it can reflects the opinion of general members to the central working committee. Now, in case of post poll alliance even if all the above procedure is followed and accordingly the alliance to a party is approved by a party, an elected member of a party may not agree to the alliance. It is the liberty and the right of that elected member/s to disagree with the post-poll alliance.

Now it is matter of controversy, that in such a case the elected member/s should resign from the MLA-ship or not?

If he/she resigns from the party is understandable. The party can dismiss the member that can also be understandable.

But whether the MLA is the representative of the people of the constituency or the representative of the party? This point is controversial for some people.

Whether the party is superimposing on MLA or people of the constituency are superimposing on MLA?

In democracy the people are the supreme. Thereby in democracy, the MLA should act according to the desire of the people of the constituency.

If while canvassing the contestant of a party has not made mention about a could be alliance to a party, but on the contrary the contestant had abused and derogated the opponent party/parties and its contestant, in that case if that contestant wins the elections the contestant becomes the MLA, and that MLA is not supposed to resign from MLA-ship, because he has not lost the faith of his people.

It is on record that SC has ruled that the people are supreme even above the constitution in democratic countries, then a party cannot terminate any MLA on the ground of the MLA has lost the faith of the party. People are supreme not the party, not the SC, not the house and not the constitution. The burden of proof that the MLA has lost the faith  of the people, lies with party. If any law is not in concurrence with the aforesaid burden of proof, the law is null and void.  

The Supreme Court has not considered the characteristic of the democracy. The party leaders have no arbitrary power for having an alliance. The SC appears to have been taken for granted that the central working or its president enjoys the arbitrary power.  They cannot have such arbitrary power in democracy.

Further the SC has not cared to see or the SC appears to have been overlooked the mandatory procedure to be followed by the petitioner parties to have an alliance reflecting the approval of general body. This is the big flaw in the decision of SC.

The SC has not examined and it has overlooked the mandatory characteristic of parties in a democratic country in passing the order of curtailed time limit of to 72 hours.

We can conclude that it appears;

SC has not taken “ an alliance with another party” is a policy related matter.

SC over ruled that a party should maintain transparency in a democratic country,

SC has approved that non-democratic parties are allowed to function in politics of a democratic country.

SC found on hypothetical ground that there could be horse trading at the end of opposite party (BJP) without examining any past records of it.

SC found no scope for horse trading between two petitioning parties even though they have unlimited scope for indefinite period.

or the SC has not applied mind

As for the BJP, we do not know as to why it has not represented its own case in view of the democratic principles of transparency and mandatory procedures to compile the members’ voice.

If the party is already having its pre-planned strategy of dealing with the matter, it is ok.

Amit Shah is considered to be the modern Chanakya who followed the philosophy of Lord Krishna who had said “ShaTham Prati ShaThyam Samacharet” शठं प्रति शाठ्यम्‌ समाचरेत्‌”.

Shirish M. Dave

 

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

NEHRUVIANS INTOLERANCE AND DISRESPECT TOWARD HUMAN RIGHTS

Just to create fake controversies, and to divert the attention of the public from the achievements of BJP Government lead by Narendra Modi the pseudo seculars are making noise.

During this short period of 18 months the BJP government has gained a lot of prestige abroad. It has made remarkable changes on foreign policies and local governance.

Due to this reason the Anti-BJP leaders have become terribly upset. They feel politically insecure. However during the last Bihar Assembly election they could realize that the hope to remain politically alive has not become zero.

They have gained a confidence that they can manufacture even fake controversies and can very well create a negative atmosphere for BJP and Narendra Modi.

It is a matter of research as to how the middle level BJP leaders have not prepared themselves to hit back the controversy manufacturers.

Let us read the records of Nehruvians, as to how much had they tolerated opposite views and given respect to human rights !!

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU:

DISRESPECTS:
(1) 1946-47 None of the provincial Congress Committee had proposed the name of JL Nehru for the post of PM. Despite of this, JL Nehru did not withdraw his candidature. This matter was brought to his notice by Mahatma Gandhi. To avoid partition of Congress party, MK Gandhi had to take assurance from Sardar Patel that he would keep the Congress intact and he would not claim for the PM post.

(2) 1947-50 Nehru did not respect the advice of Sardar Patel on foreign policy with China.

(3) 1948 Nehru had abused Sardar Patel on his action on the matter of Hyderabad issue.

(4) 1948 Nehru did not like to respect democratic procedure of taking a decision only after discussing the matter in Cabinet. He took the issue of Kashmir with UNO, without discussing it with his cabinet.

(5) 1952-1962 Nehru never respected the oppositions’ point raised in the parliament on the military infiltration of China into Indian Territory.

(6) 1950s Nehru did not respect the moral aptitude on Jeep Scandal to protect his beloved VK Menan.

(7) 1956-1959 Nehru did not respect the Congress working committee’s decision on Bombay State.

(8) 1956 Nehru as a PM did not respect the neutrality on the dispute between two states. E.g. Maharashtra and Gujarat.

(9) 1962-64 Nehru did not like to respect the qualification, seniority and genuine right of others to succeed him on the post of PM. He acted, out of way and cunningly to see that Indira Gandhi who was less qualified, less dignified, less learned, less experienced, less honest … become his successor for the post of PM.

(10) 1962 Nehru had no respect towards parliament and towards his own oath. He had taken an oath before the parliament that he would not take any rest till he recapture the lost land of India to China. His oath was simply a fraud.

INTOLERANCE OF NEHRU

(1) 1956-1964 Nehru was highly intolerant towards his competitors. Due to stupid foreign policy and stupid defense policy of JL Nehru, China could achieve a cake walk victory over India. China captured 91000 square miles of Indian land. Nehru was solely responsible for the defeat of India. In respect of his failure and to owe the moral responsibility JL Nehru was supposed to resign. JL Nehru had not own his moral responsibility. Contrary to this when he noticed that Morarji Desai is trying to become his competitor for the post of PM, Nehru could not tolerate Morarji Desai. JL Nehru removed him from his Cabinet.

INDIRA GANDHI:
DISRESPECTS:

(1) 1968 she had no respect towards party’s constitutional procedure. The working committee of her party had approved and recommended the candidature of Sanjiv Reddy for Presidential election.

(2) 1968 she had no respect to her own oath. She signed the candidature form of presidential election in 1969, she made campaign for the opposite to party’s candidate.

(3) 1968 she had no respect for the dignity of her own colleagues. As an understanding with the working committee, Morarji Desai had to be absorbed in Cabinet. But without consulting the party president Indira Gandhi removed Morarji Desai from her cabinet.

(4) 1968 She had no respect towards moral values in politics. There were lot of allegations on her doubtful integrity. But she did not resign.

(5) 1975 She had no respect towards verdicts given by court of law. She ignored the verdict of HC on her disqualification.

(6) 1975-1977 She had no respect towards constitutional provisions, human values and democratic rights of others. She imposed emergency and suspended even natural rights of citizens. Her governments representative told on oath before the court of law that during emergency, government can even kill a person at government’s will.

(7) 1972-75 she had no respect towards truth. When she was making statements before the Allahabad High Court on a case against her unfair practice in election and abuse of power, she told 14 lies on oath before the court.

(8) 1975-1976 She had no respect towards humanity. She had put 60000+ citizens behind the bars even without existence of any offence.

(8.1) 1972 She had nullified the victory achieved through the sacrifice of Indian soldiers and people of India. She, under Simla pact, handed over even the land of POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) to Bhtto. This land was captured by India in the Pak-India war .

(8.2) 1972 She had disrespect towards her own promise of executing a packing deal with Pakistan to resolve all the issues with Pakistan. She had very good and full scope to execute “The Package Deal” with Pakistan. She willfully ignored it.

(8.3) 1972 Indira Gandhi disrespected even the constitution. To hand over a part of India, to the enemy or to any of the other countries, is against the constitution. That is our Indian cnstitutioin does not permit such transaction of land. POK is a part of India as per Indian Constitution, one cannot hand over a part of India to any other country even with an affirmation of the total MPs. To do like this India has to form a new constitution committee and a new parliament.

(8.4) 1980-83 Indira had disrespect towards the nation. She had joined hand with Bhinderanwale. She had supported terrorism and naxalite movement.

(9.1) 1968-1984 Indira had no respect towards her own words and oaths. She had promised to send back the 10000000+ (more than one crore), Bangladeshi infiltrators. But she did nothing. Her oath was simply a fraud.

(9.2) 1967-1984 Indira had no respect for truth. She floated a lot of fraudulent rumors to misguide mass with the help of her government owned media.

INTOLERANCE OF INDIRA GANDHI:

(1) 1968-69 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to accept the candidature of a person (Sanjiv Reddy), proposed by the working committee of her own party. Resultantly she put up her own candidate viz. VV Giri for presidential election in 1969.

(2) 1972 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to accept the leader elected by the state legislature party members for the post of CM. Indira always asking to accept a person of her own choice. Viz. 1972 Gujarat Assembly members had proposed Chimanbhai Patel with majority, as CM. But Indira Gandhi rejected him and imposed Ghanshyambhai Oza, who was not even an elected member of the assembly.

(3) 1972-1984 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance even if a leader of her own party, if he takes credit of his good work and good achievement. She can tolerate a leader only and only even if he/she gives credit to herself (Indira Gandhi), what had been achieved. E.g. VP Singh, Hemvatinandan Bahuguna and many others were removed by her from her cabinet for this reason only.

(4.1) 1968-77 Indira Gandhi had no tolerance to opposite view and opposite voice. She abused even veteran Gandhians like Jai Prakash Narain.

(4.2) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and therefore she had imposed emergency for indefinite period.

(4.3) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and Indira put 60000+ persons behind the bar for indefinite period.

(4.4) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and Indira impose censorship on private media too, to suppress them by force.

(4.5) 1975 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and she even suppress the High Court judgments which were against her government,

(4.6) 1975-1977 Indira had no tolerance to opposite voice and she asked every type of associations, to pass a resolution in its meeting, that the association had supported emergency.

(4.7) 1978 Indira had no tolerance to remain without political power. She instigated Charan Sing to topple democratically elected government of Morarji Desai. She supported Charan Sing and then she betrayed him.

RAJIV GANDHI

(1) 1984 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect towards democratic procedure. He, without looking into the propriety of the President invitation to take an oath as the PM, he took the oath, without the resolution of the working committee and the cabinet of the party and the government respectively. In fact he should have refused to take the oath in absence of such resolutions.

(2.1) 1984-1989 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for the human rights. He avoided action against his party lead carnage on Sikhs.

(2.2) 1984 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for human rights and humanity. He gave a smooth passage to Anderson to runaway safely from India. Anderson was the culprit of Bhopal Gas Hazard.

(3) 1984-89 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect for morality. He was involved in Boffors scam. He had written and forwarded an instruction chit through Madhav Singh Solanki a minister of his cabinet, to Swiss Government to go very slow on the matter of investigation related with Boffor Kickback.

(4) 1986-1988 Rajiv Gandhi had no respect towards nation. He gave a smooth passage to Ottavio Quatrochie to run away safely from India.

SONIA GANDHI, CONGI and ASSOCIATES
i.e. The PSEUDO SECULAR GANG

300

(1)The GANG does not like to respect anybody else as “Number One” in the party. Sitaram Kesri was manually lifted and driven out from the seat of the Congi-President.

(1.1) The GANG does not respect the personality of opposite party.

(1.2) The GANG does not respect the achievement of the government of opposite party,

(1.3) The GANG does not respect the constitutional provisions. The GANG paralyses the functioning of the parliament.

(1.4) The GANG does not respect the very purpose of the parliament which is to discuss the matters and exchange the views to arrive to a decision.

(1.5) The GANG disrespects the natural right of opposite party (BJP leaders) to present their side on the floor of the parliament on the allegations made by the GANG.

(2) The GANG disrespects BJP leaders.

(2.1) The GANG addresses opposite party leaders with abusive words. Like “Maut kaa Sodaagar”, “Godse’s progeny”, Communal, Manav Bhakshi, Pishaach, Chaay Waalaa, Intolerant …

(3) The GANG does not have tolerance to any opposite view to Congi’s governance.

(3.1) The GANG could not tolerate Anna’s agitation. Anna Hazare was abused and alleged by all spokespersons of the Congi

(3.2) The GANG could not tolerate Baba Ramdev’s agitation. Baba Ramdev was also abused and manhandled. A lot fraudulent allegations were made on him. Congi had executed investigations too, but found nothing against Ramdev. Despite of this, Congi never thought of submitting apology.

(3.3) The GANG could not tolerate participants’ personality. Kiran Bedi was also alleged and abused. The investigations were carried out but no guilt was found on making money by Kiran Bedi,

(3.4) The GANG had no tolerance to the functioning of the opposite party. The GANG is in habit to manufacture fake controversies.

(4) The GANG does not have any respect for the human rights of Hindus:

(4.1) The GANG willfully neglected the human rights of Hindus in Kashmir, North East and some pockets of South India.

(4.2) The GANG does not have respect towards the rule of law that everybody is equal before law.

(4.3) The GANG has willfully discriminated the Hindus’ human rights.

(4.4) Kashmiri Hindus had been threatened to be ready for the death unless they adopt Muslim religion. They were told either to adopt Muslim religion or to vacate their houses and leave Kashmir. The threat was announced through loud speakers, from Mosqs, pamphlets pasted on the doors, publications through the news paper, writing on the walls and through every means.

(4.5) The Muslims of Kashmir in joint venture with the GANG, had given a dead line date in advance about the carnage they were going to execute.

(4.6) The GANG had committed cognizable offences, as it kept mum, took no action, done no arrest, registered no FIR, initiated no investigation and no prosecution.

(4.7) The GANG kept total non-transparency on the prolonged carnage. It was a cognizable disrespect of protection of human rights of Hindus of Kashmir.

(4.8) The GANG happily watched the murders of 5000+ Hindus, and the migration of 50000000+ driven out Hindus from their houses.

(4.9) The GANG paid no heed on the issue of the rehabilitation of the Hindus. These Hindus are living in substandard living condition since last 25 years. This is nothing but a continued terrorist attack sponsored by the GANG.

What does this GANG want?

The GANG wants Hindus and pro-BJP inclusive of BJP persons should tolerate as under:

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE all the injustice and discrimination applied upon them inclusive of end of their lives and carnage executed by the GANG.

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE even if the GANG curtails suspends or dismisses their human rights.

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG abused them by any bad name

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG manufactures any fraudulent and fake controversy, rumor or allegation upon them,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE even if the GANG does not use its sense of proportion and or it does not use its sense of relevance while alleging

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG condemns the views of them on historical events even without material

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG terms the material conclusion of existence of some historical character as fake and fictitious and the GANG avoids discussion

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG insults your Gods and Goddesses,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG does not talk to the point

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG simply shouts while discussion on TV channels and consumes most of the time

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG simply shouts and disturbs them while they submit their replies

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG openly tries to divide society by caste, religion, language and region,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE Even if the GANG stops them and abuses them for speaking against Nehruvians’ frauds, blunders, scams, scandals, stupidity or whatsoever,

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE as the GANG persons are not supposed to tolerate any thing whatsoever against them, even if the allegations are proved in Court of Law. This is because the Gang has full liberty to express inclusive of anti-national, derogative to Indian culture or whatsoever.

HINDUS AND PRO-BJP INCLUSIVE OF BJP PERSONS SHOULD TOLERATE as the GANG persons are not supposed to respect any of their right inclusive of human rights or natural rights or constitutional rights whatsoever.

Shirish M. Dave

Tags:

Intolerance, Nehruvians, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv, Sonia, Congi, BJP, Narendra Modi, Emergency, Censorship, Media, Pseudo, Secular

Read Full Post »

GIVE HIM A TIME I have received an email from one of my learned friends, on some points which are generally being used to pass blame on BJP and Narendra Modi by many as a failure of BJP government.

MY RESPONSE TO THE POINTS IS AS UNDER:

1 why no difference appears because of Modi whom we feel connected with the soil of India whereas all formers were Muslim/Communists or Christian/Communists anti nationals ?

(1)What I feel that all the problems and issues arise out of negligence, ignorance and thereby failure of Government in the fields of education and employment.

The Nehruvian Congress has no vision right from Nehru. Its ideas on management of land and productions are not worth to debate. I have watched the making of Modi in Gujarat. He was quite an unknown person to the people of Gujarat till he was made a CM of Gujarat in 2001.

A very well established leader viz. Keshubhai Patel was The CM. He was a failure to the public expectation. BJP was losing ground in Gujarat. Ahmedabad Corp election was lost by the BJP. There was a severe earth quake in Gujarat on 26-01-2001. BJP CM was a failure. Media was making fun of Keshubhai.

Some how, by the grace of God, Narendra Modi was appointed as CM by Bajpai.

Narendra took hold of bureaucracy. He suspended several senior officers and set Gujarat to normalcy.

There was a lot of internal fights within BJP. Most leaders of BJP inclusive of Keshubhai where against Modi. They were trying to let him down. But Modi had achieved mass popularity. Media was also against Modi. Modi had discontinued the special treatment to media. A very senior writer of Gujarati literature, published an advertisement asking people to submit their opinion whether Modi should continue as CM or not. People had to use the advertised form to cast their opinion and to forward the opinion with their own postage charges. Modi got 87% votes in favor. However Keshubhai and others continued their fights. They were failed. Modi also won Ahmedabad Corp.

Then it was 2002 riot case. He handled it successfully despite of all odds. He defeated all his rivals without breaking BJP. How? Simply by encouraging education, cottage productions and infrastructure developments. Development brings employment. Infrastructure development brings developments in other fields. If there is a good governance then all these can happen if one has a will.

The changes would become visible by the time of next election. Because infrastructure projects are in pipe line. During Nehruvian Cong rule a tender used to take 3 years to get finalized. It is not the case with the BJP.

2  Indians have given Modi all supper powers still he has no media which speaks good about him expect Sudarshan who is not much known . NDTV is dead antinational . Others are owned by foreign powers . Why Modi failed to rescue  our media ?

(2) Modi has no super power as per constitution. BJP has no absolute majority in LS, and no majority in RS.

Nehruvian Congress knows how to misguide people and how to degrade those who oppose them. Nehruvian Congress has become expert in dividing people by religion, caste and language.

In 1956 Nehru himself had said that if Maharashtra would get Mumbai, he would be happy. By telling this, he gave a message to Marathi people that Gujaratis are the obstructions for Marathi people in getting Mumbai. In fact Gujarati and Marathi lived together for centuries. Narendra Modi has generated a parallel media of print and TV. This is social media. Hence those who love India have to be active on social media to defeat this paid media.

3 If Modi has power to change constitution why he has not put a ban on cow slaughter and free not guilty saints from prison ? . Now he has lost supports from Sadhus community .

(3) BJP has no absolute majority and has no power to change constitution. Modi might be not in favor to take risk.

If Asharam is falling under Sadhu, then most Sadhus must not fall under that category. Shri Shri Ravishankar, Ramdev, and many others are true Sadhus. They do favor Modi. Rest too, would extend favor when they would generate a sense of proportion and sense of priority.

BJP ruled states are doing progress on the ban on cow slaughter.

4 Modi had promised to get black money back in 100 days and every body will be much better . now when he could not do it was not his responsibility to explain poor Indians who are still eagerly waiting . Now they feel cheated .

(4) We have to think with sense of proportion. Nehruvian Congress willfully failed to constitute SIT, despite of the order of SC for 3 years.

Narendra Modi constituted SIT within 3 days. SIT is headed by SC judge. We should have faith in SC and SIT.

Since BJP has no absolute majority it cannot make drastic changes. If ordinance is issued, it can be challenged in SC. Modi does not want to take a risk to give a chance to the media. Media belongs to the pseudo secular gang. It is always ready to abuse Modi by twisting the matters.

Nehruvian Congress and its allies want to create controversy on every matter. Nehruvian Congress has avoided black money issue for six decades, despite of this, Anti-Modi gangs have become able to confuse the learned people on black money issue. They have become successful to create negative image for Narendra Modi and BJP to some extent. Most learned people have lost the sense of proportion. Should we become a part of it?

Please go through my blog “क्या आप भारतके होतैषी है? और फिर भी क्या आप इनमेंसे कोई एक  वर्गमें भी आते हैं?” at https://treenetram.wordpress.com/2015/01/04/%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE-%E0%A4%86%E0%A4%AA-%E0%A4%AD%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%87-%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%88%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%80-%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%88-%E0%A4%94/

5 Because of these blunders Modi will lose in next election. It is not a blunder at all.

(5) To term it a blunder and to create a negative atmosphere for BJP, is the strategy and trap made by Nehruvian Congress and Anti-Modi (BJP) gangs.

How to tackle this strategy, the way out to it, depends upon us and our sense of proportion to understand and to realize the same.

The pseudo secular gangs are no way better than BJP and Narendra Modi.

We have to remember that Nehruvian Congress has ruled for six decades with majority period of absolute majority.

BJP has never ruled with an absolute majority. Now also, it is ruling with normal majority that too in LS only.

6 So , how India will save herself from wicked Congies and  Muslim/Christian powers to hijack our country ?

(6) As and when Hindus are attacked intellectually, Hindus have to hit them back.

Hindus have good weapons to fight. It is easy for Hindus to hit them back as these Muslim and Christian leaders have basic falsehood and cunningness in their philosophy and actions respectively.

When they attack on us physically, we should take legal action and to expose them, to give wide publicity. We must make such events as  international issue. There is no shortage of weapon to fight intellectually against Nehruvian Congress, pseudo secular, Christian priests and decisive forces of Muslims.

The nationalists should always hit them back repeatedly on their culture, character and their evil actions. They have no defense at all.

e.g. Nehruvian Congress:

Nehru’s Blunders on policy with China, Kashmir, Pakistan, Tibet, Burma, Ceylon etc… no end, including telling lies before parliament.

Indira’s blunders, scams, cunningness for power, negligence on the issue of sending back the Bangadeshi infiltrators, Introduction of Vote bank politics, telling lies before court of law, Simla pact, Union Carbide deal, Emergency, antisocial activities, generating cross border terrorism and what not?

Rajiv Gandhi’s inaction and improper handling of Bhopal gas hazard, making smooth pass for Anderson.

Sonia’s anti-national activities, giving smooth path to Daud to run away, allowing his gang to do all the anti-social activities, unconstitutional actions and a lot scams executed openly. Besides this, her party’s willful failure of reinstatement of Kashmiri Hindus. Denial of natural rights, Human  rights and constitutional rights of Hindus, her negligence on securities of Hindus’ rights everywhere.

Pseudo secular and media: Spreading rumors against Hindus, neglecting Kashmiri Hindus for 25+ years. This is a grave offence of keeping mum on massacre of 3000+ Kashmiri Hindus and keeping them in exile from their own state and houses. They are living in tents from 1990, till date. Hindus should make continuous, wide spread and big noise on this criminal negligence. All the leaders like Nehruvians, Kashmiri leaders like Omar, Farukh, Mufti, separatist leaders IAS officers etc… should be arrested on unbailable warrant, put to jail and convicted for willful negligence of human rights.

Christian priests: An investigation team should be constituted in each state to see as to how the Hindus were converted to Christianity.

Muslim separatists and caste politics: Most Nehruvian Congi leaders and whosoever have played or encouraged vote bank politics to divide India on the basis of caste, religion, so called race and language, should be prosecuted.

E.g.  Akabaruddin, Azamkhan, Mamata, Nitish, Laloo, Karuna, MMS, Sonia … Even without creating any controversy the Nationalist lot of India can hit these virtually anti-nationals, very hard and continuously.

As and when any of the above leaders speaks against BJP government and otherwise also, they should be bombarded by us through print media and social media. Media should be flooded with our attack.

At this stage, when the anti-national elements are alive and making efforts to derogate BJP to create a negative atmosphere, the people who think themselves nationalists, should not touch any non-issues like as to who was responsible for partition or like that…

We must also know that an enemy is never a small. National enemy can never be pardoned.

BJP has to follow Kautilya. BJP has not to follow Prithviraj Chauhan.

Kautilya has said wisely that it is better to have an intelligent enemy than to have a foolish friend.

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Nehruvian Cong, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv, Sonia, blunder, scam, lies, SIT, BJP, Narendra Modi, Negative atmosphere, Anti-Modi gangs, pseudo secular gangs

Read Full Post »

Reflection of People’s voice: HITTING IN THE BUSH

To implement the terminology of People’s Representative in its real sense and spirit, it is not possible under present system of voting and set up of Election Commission to nominate, select and then elect people’s representative.

VOTERS COUNCIL

We are supposed to have voters’ council under constitution. This voters’ council is supposed to be a workable council. Workable means, a voters’ council should be a booth-wise council so that the people can attend meeting conveniently, communicate their views and the proceeding can be put to records including their opinion and verdict.  The circulars, agenda, minutes etc…  of the meetings of a voters’ council should be authentic.  Everything  has to be conducted under a designated government officer. If this is not done then it could be termed to be improper, irregular and unlawful.

INDEPENDENT OFFICE UNDER A DESIGNATED DEPARTMENT

Not only this, the voters’ council should have an independent office associated with a hall so that voters of a geographical area can be addressed and their opinion can be recorded.  As and when needed voting can be executed.

MEDIA AND KEJRIWAL SHOULD SHOW SENSIBILITY

Now here, Mr. Kejriwal and the electronic media are of the affirmative opinion on the members elected under the banner of AaP, are people’s representatives. In support to this belief they say that Kejriwal had gone in different areas and he has discussed with the people on the selection of the candidates for nominating for election as representative of people in Assembly. Based on the merit (which they had formulated), the contesters  were selected as the candidates to file nomination.

Who is Kejriwal?

But who is Kejriwal to take decision on procedure, selection criteria, selection for consultation and then final selection of a candidate to term him/her as people’s approved nominated candidate to contest the Assembly election?

Since the method adopted by Kejriwal is not supported by constitution, it is unconstitutional. Elected candidate under the banner of his party cannot be legally or morally termed as peoples’ representative as argued by Mr. Kejriwal .

Now any way, in case of a person declared elected under the constitutional provision has to be accepted as people’s representative.

 

REFLECTION OF PEOPLE’S OPINION

As for reflection of people’s opinion in its true spirit and sense, an elected member is supposed to meet  people of his constituency to seek opinion on every matter. He is not answerable to his party. He is answerable to the people who have elected him.

Now in the present situation of forming a government, the party AaP or BJP whatsoever, is not supposed to impose their opinion on the elected members.

WHAT IS THE TRUE SPIRIT OF PEOPLE REPRESENTATIVE?

It is that the legislature to be put before the legislative assembly in the case if he/she get elected. The draft of the legislature has to be circulated among the people and discussed,  then it has to be finalized and then it has to be got approved by the people. This procedure has to be made mandatory for every candidate. If he/she does not follow this procedure then there is no existence of transparency and  reflection of peoples’ opinion in genuine, true and lawful spirit.

PEOPLE’S REPRESENTATIVE

 A people’s representative is supposed to be people’s representative in its sense and spirit. In that case a member should go to the voters who have elected him/her, to seek their opinion on “Yes” or “No” or for modification in the draft as the case may be.

He/she should go to the party to convey the opinion given by his/her voters. In every case/event he/she is supposed ask for the opinion as to what he/she should do?

PEOPLE DO NOT RECOGNIZE ANY PARTY

The people’s representative is supposed to support a legislature/verdict related to an issue on merits. He/she is not supposed to act as per party’s decision. This is because, the people don’t recognize party.

People recognize only a candidate.

However there is no such system to collect such opinion from public on every point.  Further if the party is of the opinion that it will not give support or it will not take support. This type of approach is useless. Because a member of a party who is also a representative of people, is people’s representative first. He is supposed act on merits of an issue at his own will or his voters’ will. His/her party neither can dictate nor can direct.

BASELESS ALLEGATION ON OTHERS

People’s representative is answerable to his voters. First of all, there supposed to be a system for an elected member to seek a quantified opinion. In absence of such system, Kejriwal cannot believe with discrimination that all the elected members of other party are corrupted and thereby they are not worthy to extend support. To discard the support without any sustainable, logical and lawful ground and that to without going through any recognized procedure, Kejriwal cannot ask their elected members to follow him arbitrarily.

ALL ARE EQUAL PEOPLE’S REPRESENTATIVE

All the elected members through a single and same system are equal in all respect.  One cannot discriminate them on any ground.

Kejriwal should know that as a principle Anna as well as MK Gandhi, did not believe in party politics. Besides this there is no provision for voters to recognize a candidate by its party when they cast their votes.  There is a name against which a voter has to press the button. How can Kejriwal  take such decision that every voter who has voted for a candidate of other party has voted for that party and not for that candidate?

If Kejriwal is of the opinion that his elected candidates are the only people’s representative and BJP’s elected candidates are not the representative of people, then Kejriwal’s opinion is erroneous and not sustainable. Kejriwal can not apply double standards.

Once the persons are elected they are all equal. They should decide on every matter/issue/case/ event only on merits. This is the correct way to work in public interest.

Read more on constitutional reforms related with elections at

https://treenetram.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0-%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%80-%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%AC-%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A8-%E0%A4%AE/

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: people, voice, representative, selected, candidate, nominated, elected, party, member, answerable, responsible, recognize, Kejrival, AaP, BJP, Anna, MK Gandhi, principle, assembly, legislature, opinion, Yes, No, Modification, Draft 

Read Full Post »

Nehruvian Congress is a GONE CASE

PRIME MINISTERIAL CANDIDATE

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has projected Narendra Modi as the Prime Ministerial candidate of the party. Narendra Modi was otherwise also very much active. After his selection as the Prime Ministerial candidate, he has become very much active and he has floated several issue base questions before ruling parties at center and at the relevant states associated with  Nehruvian Congress.

 The land side success and victory of Narendra Modi and BJP in all the Hindi speaking four states, has wiped out Nehruvian Congress.

What is the present mindset of Nehruvian Congress leaders and its allies?

MODI-EFFECT

Modi is Now the Lion of India

The allies of Nehruvian Congress were not much in the picture significantly but they too are wiped out and most of them have lost their deposit. They have not received any coverage due to their insignificance in the fight. They have kept mum on the efforts and success of Narendra Modi.

But the all level failure in all the fields has posed before the Nehruvian Congress a big problem.

However look at the excuses of its leaders. Somehow they are not ready to accept the Modi-Effect in the election. They are still trying to negate Modi-Effect.

Why Nehruvian Congress is not worried for its failure in performance?

This is because:

Still money plays a big role in winning elections,

Still caste, religion, language and can play a role in dividing voters,

Media too can play a big role to mislead common mass and learned people.

This is because poor mass is looking for short term and immediate attention of its problems of starving. Let it be a short term effect.

Media and learned persons are purchasable. They can use philosophical meaningless language for hiding the failure of Nehruvian Congress to misguide the mass. It can also prevent mass by hiding the facts, related with failures, scams and frauds of Anti-BJP parties.

Why the media and Nehruvian Congress leaders are concentrating on rejection Modi-Effect?

Modi is becoming popular all over India in a big way. Thereby Nehruvian Congress is more interested in nullifying Modi-Effect. At moment, media is not helping Nehruvian Congress much, because of the recent success of Modi-Effect in the four State Assembly elections. This is because media does not want to be unauthentic and untrustworthy. It cannot hide the reflection of people’s voice immediately. But media cannot hide its inherent culture. Media has already shown some symptoms of its hidden and likely approach of its future trend.

 Nehruvian Congress can hide its failures very easily.

This is because; it has a very long experience of 60+ years as to how to win elections. There is no scope for opposition to beat the Congress in his game.

E.g. Nehruvian Congress had miserably failed in its Central Intelligence. It failed to prevent terrorists attack in Mumbai. Its failure caused several terrorist blasts in 2008 just before elections of 2009. But Nehruvian Congress was able to just generalized the issue with the blessing of media, learned people and Bollywood celebrities. It is said that the activities of Bollywood is controlled by Daud. Daud has close links with Nehruvian Congress and some of its allies.  Nehruvian Congress also tackles the issue of its corruptions, scandals and scams in similar way.

Media can dilute the success stories of BJP in performance of development by not giving any coverage. Media can highlight the so-called good performance of Nehruvian Congress by providing repeated coverage.

TO NULLIFY THE MODI-EFFECT IS A NEW FACTOR

Nehruvian Congress has been clean bawled and wiped out in recent four assembly elections by Modi-Effect.

What could be the “would be approach” of Nehruvian Congress and its allies on Modi-Effect.

Deny the Modi-Effect.

There is No Modi Effect in India at all.

1                    The development, that Modi carried out in Gujarat is false. This has now been proved.

2                    Gujarat was a developed state from the very beginning.

3                    Modi is a liar on his claims of achievements about development. This has been also proved by the several independent reports.

4                    Modi’s Modal of development cannot be applied all over India because geography is not the same in India.

5                    Modi is communal and not acceptable to minorities. Nobody can forget and forgive him on his 2002 communal riots.

6                    There was no Modi-Effect in any elections.

7                    Had there been any Modi-Effect, how had he been a failure in Karnatak state assembly elections in last year?

8                    There was no Modi-Effect in recent four state assembly elections

9                    In MP State, Congress lost because we have not made adequate efforts at grass root level.

10                Narendra Modi had organized shows at so many places, where the BJP candidates were otherwise also very strong.

11                In Rajasthan State, we lost power and could get only few seats due to the factor of anti-incumbency in the state and in the center. In fact we could not take our message of our success story and programs to grassroots level. Here also Modi-Effect was nil. Because Modi had organized his shows at so many places where the BJP candidates were otherwise also strong.

12                Defeat in Delhi, the reason is also the same. (Repeat whatsoever said for Rajasthan State).

13                As for the question “But how has been your party ranked third in Delhi State Assembly elections? How have been gone below the newly formed party AaP? The answer is “We had under estimated AaP. AaP had approached mass at grass root level. But our defeat was not due to Modi-Effect. Narendra Modi had organized shows at so many places, where the BJP candidates were otherwise also very strong. We are defeated due to anti-incumbency effect.

14                As for Zarkhand state, how could you not get the benefit of anti-incumbency effect of BJP? Reply of Nehruvian Congress; “We have improved our position. We have won two more seats in the assembly. Here also there was no Modi-Effect. Narendra Modi had organized shows at so many places, where the BJP candidates were otherwise also very strong.

15                Question: What would you do in forthcoming Parliamentarians Elections due in 2014?

Reply by Nehruvian Congress. “The issues of state assembly elections and parliamentarian elections are quite different. In 2008 we had lost assembly elections in some states. But we had won parliament elections.

 

“Our leaders, are now determined to go to grass root level, as directly by Rahul (the Nehruvian progeny). He is a person of determination. He has decided to change the program and system of canvassing. We are going to plan a revised program. You know Rahul is now Vice President of our party. Earlier in 2008 assembly elections he was not given a big role. In view of his great influence on mass, we had given him a big role of Vice President in our party. Off course we agree that in these recent elections we could not take sufficient advantage of his influence. But now Rahul has decided to change the plan of Election Champaign. We are firm on our success in forthcoming elections. We totally deny the Modi-Effect.

Modi is uncultured. Modi uses abusive language. Modi does not know how to talk respectfully to opponents. Modi is shameless. Modi is a rat. Modi is a worm. Modi is a liar. Modi is a cockroach. Modi is monkey. Modi is vulgar. Modi is illiterate. Modi does not know history and geography. Modi is communal. Modi is killer.

Can you expect that Nehruvian Congress can correct and improve its approach? Not at all. It is next to impossible. What JL Nehru could not do, what Indira Gandhi could not do, what Rajiv Could not do, how can one expect from these cunning people who are interested only in making money through Coalgate scam, 2G Frequency scam, Common Wealth Game bundle of scams, Adarsh Scam, Fake currency printing scam, Oil and gold smuggling and what not? Leave aside scams and scandals of their predecessors related with terrorism.

Minorities have adopted attitude and set their mind to join mainstream. But to expect Nehruvians and their allies to embrace morals is next to impossible.

Let them die as per the Hindu Law of Karma.    

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Nehruvian, Congress, failure, hide, highlight, success, anti, incumbency, deny, Modi, Effect 

Read Full Post »

“I WANT YOU TO SUFFER MISERABLY EVEN AT THE COST OF MY OWN DEATH (hun marun pan tane raand karun = હું મરું પણ તને રાંડ કરું)” SAYS ADVANI

It is hardly possible that somebody can agree to the stand taken by Advani.

Discipline in Party is irrespective of post

The contents of the resignation letter which has been made public by Advani, contradicts his own advice which he had given to other leaders long back. This advice was that internal matter should not be made public to prevent harming situation to the party. Otherwise also, Advani is mature enough to understand that what he has mentioned in his letter is an internal matter of BJP. This is because he has not resigned from BJP.

Had Advani resigned from BJP, he had liberty to make his letter public.

Double standards

Now the message is that Advani has no value of his words. Or he wants double standards. One is for himself. Other is for other leaders. One for himself means he has full liberty to make anything public irrespective of that could be harmful to BJP or not. The other standard for other leaders is that, that the others should to be disciplined in the party and not to disclose internal matters. Advani has given this message only.

Baseless Allegations on members

Now Advani says that he has noticed that some leaders are working for personal interest. To glorify and emphasize his point, he has further linked the names of other founder leaders of Jan Sangh to his statement. Shyama Prasad Mukharjee, Din Dayal Upadhyay and many others.

Advani’s statement looks not only funny but also ridiculous to even common mass. Advani is doing emotional blackmailing. Advani has linked great names in specific but the alleged persons without specifying the names.

It is also not clear as to how old his observations are. It must be not old but be very recent.

Is it that is, he did not like Modi and he did like those leaders who favored Modi?

Now suppose this is not true. Advani’s observations are older than the last three days, then what had he done so far to prevent alleged leaders for not becoming self centered?

There is a rumor that all this happened because Advani does not like Modi.

Advani had praised the CM of Madhya Pradesh. He had said that Gujarat was OK from the beginning and Modi had made it better, but MP had been a sick state. Shivraj Sinh Chauhan has made it healthy.

A message was concluded by many that Advani wanted Shivraj Sinh Chauhan to be promoted as PM for next Lok Sabha election campaign. Had he discussed this matter with his executive colleagues before making such announcement provided he really wanted so? Because this is a matter of policy of party. Advani or no body enjoys power to make arbitrary announcement on party’s policy unless the party’s authorized body has taken such decision.

Is it that Advani wanted to give a message to the public that this was his personal opinion and he wanted to make it public? Off course this line of action cannot be considered as a fair one. This is because he had not even discussed this point with Shivraj Sinh Chauhan. Because when message taken as a view point of Advani and it spread out and Shivraj Sinh had been taken as substitute of Modi, Shivraj Sinh Chauhan clarified and said “ I amnot a candidate of PM’s post. I do not stand even for number third”.

What action had been taken by Advani? He is not supposed to be mum like a Nehruvian, because he is not supposed to adopt a well condemned practice of Nehruvians.

Now suppose Advani does not like Modi. If this is true, then what are the points? Had he discussed those points with Modi? Had he conveyed such points to Modi? Had he conveyed such points to his colleagues?

Further why had Advani not clarified that since when had he made his dislike for Modi functional?  Off course it must be only long after 2002 riots. This is because on explanation from Narendra Modi about his roll which he had played to discharge his duties, all the people and the members in the conference wanted Narendra Modi to continue as CM of Gujarat.   

Now suppose Advani likes Modi, but he does not like Modi as a candidate for PM post. Has Advani discussed this matter along with its ground with his Colleagues?

Now suppose Advani wants to give a message to his colleagues those have favored Modi by accepting him as the chief of election council, are all self centered because they favored Narendra Modi for the reason that Narendra Modi can fetch votes and power for BJP.  What is wrong if somebody desire to gain power with democratic means within his own party, when he/she is not aware of any points even not conveyed by a leader like Advani? How can Advani allege his colleagues arbitrarily?

There is also a rumor that Advani wants to be a candidate of BJP for the post of PM. If this is correct he should have conveyed to his colleagues. Why should Advani play unfair games within his own party?

Wherever you put your figure, you find fault with Advani in this matter.

In Gujarati there is a proverb I want you to suffer even at the cost of my death.

In democracy the people’s voice has to be honored. Advani failed miserably to honor people’s desire.

Shirish M. Dave

Tags: Advani, resignation, Modi, BJP, Lok Sabha, elections, Committee, chairman, great names, unfair, game, self centered, members

Read Full Post »

 There is no general solution to tackle the issues and problems of India.

Discussion on nonviolent way or violent way or dialog or no dialog, democratic way or non-democratic way, communistic way or capitalistic way etc… All humbug.

All the problems should be tackled individually. Every problem and issue has its own way out.

 DON’T GET CONFUSED:

Decide whether we are satisfied with the present state of affairs or not?

The answer must be a “BIG NO”.

Then go ahead hereunder.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR STATE OF AFFAIRS?

Nehruvian Congress only.

WHO HAS ALLOWED THEM TO CONTINUE FOR 6 DECADES?

Policy of Nehruvian Congress and its paid, unpaid, vested interest and confused media resulted in the continuance of illiteracy, unemployment and thereby their sole dependence on the ruler which is mainly Nehruvian Congress.

WHAT IS THE FIRST PRIORITY?

The first priority is to remove Nehruvian Congress and their all types of allies (former, current and likely).

Why their all types of allies of Nehruvian Congress?

Because they too have the same character and this they have confirmed by supporting this retched party.

 WHO ARE THE ALLIES AND LIKELY ALLIES OF NEHRUVIAN CONGRESS?

Maya, Mamata, Jaya, Karunanidhi, Lalloo, Pasvan, Mulayam, Ajit, Farukh, CPM, CPI, Bal Thakare, Jagannath, Agnivesh, all members of Team Anna, Keshubhai Patel and his allied parties, etc… who are not reliable and trustworthy because they are ready to support Nehruvian Congress at any time. They are not trustworthy.

Why Team Anna Members are not trustworthy?

Because they are pseudo secular and having soft corners towards terrorists. They have double standards. No argument is required. They have proved it.

WHAT IS THE SUBSTITUTE?

Substitute is only BJP and Team Baba Ramdev. Team Baba Ramdev should have an alliance with BJP. If Team Baba Ramdev will go alone, it would be a suicidal act.

How to support them? 

Concentrate only on the shortcoming of Nehruvian

Congress. It is a big mine of blunders, scandals and frauds.

Do not create, float and highlight any controversy against BJP and Baba Ramdev.

What do you want from BJP and Baba Ramdev?

1   Nationalization of foreign bank accounts where the holder of the account or the beneficiary are Indian citizens. 

In the case of where the account holder is foreign national and a beneficiary is an Indian citizen, freeze its accounts in India.

Collect his/her passport and cancel it.

Do not grant any VISA to such foreign nationals to enter into India.

2   Prosecute Naheruvian Congress leaders and their allies for their corruption, scams, scandals, defective deals and pact, unconstitutional acts. Investigate their links with Daud, ISI, fake stamp papers, currency notes, inaction on the infiltration of Bangladeshi, inaction on reinstatement of Hindus driven out of their homeland. Regain Shah Commission Report and take action against those who had not taken action or associated with destroying it,

3   Disqualify the above leaders those who are found guilty. Punish them maximum, De-recognize their parties,

4   Merge Election Commission with census, for all types of elections of registered bodies like co-operative societies, labor unions and whatsoever. All types of canvassing would be on common platform only. This will eliminate money and muscle power in the election. All proceedings will be chaired by the E & C Commission. E & C can keep watch on infiltrators also, Voting should be compulsory,

5   Frame national realty construction policy for building and township constructions, 

6   Restructure Information Commission with wide power. All the NGOs and political parties should fall under the purview under Information Commission. Make all information Officers independent of any Government Department, (At present the Information Officers belong to concern department), Information officers shall be zone-wise,

7   Restructure local bodies for making them to public oriented,

8   As for development the policy should be

Development = Technology + Humanity (Jai Prakash Narayan)

9   Restructure water, land (Desert, waste land and fertile land), mine, forest, saline water, Solar, wind and hydro energy policy for exploration of all natural and human resources for green power at any cost.

10  Restructure health policy and make it people oriented

11   Restructure education policy linked with the aptitude of pupil, teacher with a human approach.

12  Restructure judiciary to make it effective and prompt. Make lawyers and judges responsible and answerable.

BJP and Baba Ramdev should jointly prepare a detail election manifesto with time bound program precisely. There’s no power in the world which can prevent BJP and Baba Ramdev to coming to power.

Shrish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Nehruvian Congress, Allies, Lalloo, Maya, Mamata, Jaya, Karuna, Mulayam, Farukh, Thakare, Keshu, Ajit, Narendra Modi, Anna, Team, BJP, Scandal, Scam, Fraud, Pact, Deal, Hindus, infiltrators, Daud, ISI

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: