Media's sudden love for Advani

 

 

The following article was written for Niti Central a long time back. Pasting it here for reference.

 

In the past one week, two unthinkable events have happened. One is Mr. Advani resigning for all posts in BJP citing reasons that implied that he didn’t approve of Modi’s rise, and the other (which is more shocking) – the left-liberal dominated media which hated all things BJP – has suddenly found virtues and has sympathised with Mr. Advani.

 

For brevity's sake, we will discuss only two articles, which pretty much summarize the contrived thought process of the Indian mainstream media.

 

Editorial in The Hindu

 

One would have never imagined that a day would come wherein The Hindu would sympathize with L.K.Advani! Their editorial on the day after he resigned arrived at some bizzare conclusions - the first one being this:

 

Lumpen elements have long been part of the sangh parivar cadre. At the height of the Ayodhya movement, and with Mr. Advani in charge, they brought down the Babri Masjid. Twenty years later, a new generation of hecklers would turn up at Mr. Advani’s home, demanding that he accept Mr. Modi.

 

How can one possibly compare those who brought down the Babri Masjid to those who protested outside Advani’s house? And why is The Hindu calling them "hecklers" - why should protests against Advani invite such crude language in the first place? The BJP has disowned these protestors - maybe they were a political ploy too... but The Hindu is dead sure that these are "lumpen elements" from the Sangh Parivar.

 

And then comes a touching sympathy for Mr. Advani:

 

But even his critics will acknowledge his invaluable contribution to the growth of the BJP. For that reason alone, Mr. Advani, now 85 and at the fag end of a career of five decades, did not deserve being humiliated in the manner he has been.

 

Did not deserve to be humiliated? What exact "humiliation" has Mr. Advani been meted out? Is it The Hindu's contention that since Mr. Advani is absent or doesn't agree with the majority decision, the announcement of that decision has to be postponed? Going by that logic, The Hindu shouldn't have treated Ms. Malini Parthasarathy and N. Ravi the way it treated them during the appointment process of the current editor!

 

Speaking of Ms.Malini – she was one of the known vocal opponents of anything BJP. After nearly 2 decades of opposing BJP and all that it stood for, all of a sudden, she started finding virtues in Mr. Advani, merely because he is opposing Modi!

 

I am strongly wary of Hindutva as a doctrine but I think it's a mistake for BJP to sideline Advani. Like Vajpayee, he believes in tolerance.

 

If the BJP wants to remain in contention for power at the Centre, it can't afford to be polarising. That Advani and Vajpayee understand.

 

Their vision of a resurgent Hindutva still has space for other faiths but Modi's Hindutva has no room for the existence of other cultures

Coming back to The Hindu’s coverage, they go on to give some sagely advice:

 

The least the Gujarat Chief Minister himself could have done was to wait until Mr. Advani came around before going for the big prize.

 

Wait till when? Till the elections? And then go in leaderless into the election? The BJP is a political party and needs to prepare for imminent election - if the patriarch is in the way of planning, what should the party do then? Sulk along with him?

 

One of the many arguments that the anti-Modi brigade have espoused is that he is a deeply divisive figure. The Hindu reiterates the same:

 

Mr. Modi has so far been a deeply divisive figure and the Advani episode has revived all the doubts about his ability to lead an India distinguished by its diversity.

 

Suddenly, Mr. Advani’s opinion has become so sacrosant that his not accepting Mr. Modi’s elevation is further proof of diviseness! This whole concept of “being a deeply divisive figure” is in itself such a contrived argument, but that dicussion is for another time!

 

Op-Ed article in the Hindustan Times

 

This article represents the second model of reporting/analysing that followed this crisis. Use Advani's position to berate Narendra Modi further! The author, Sagarika Ghose, who is also the deputy editor of CNN-IBN, has used this space to vent out her frustration on Modi further.

 

What kind of politics does Modi represent? Narendra Modi's economic model in Gujarat may be admired as business-friendly market economics.

 

As mentioned in another article earlier, Sagarika Ghose steadfastly refuses to acknowledge that Mr. Narendra Modi has ushered in a new phase of development in various fields and not just "business". She continues to mislead her readers by classifying his governance as "business-friendly market economics". But that's not the shocker. The shocker is:

 

But his political model in Gujarat is vintage Indira Gandhi. Perhaps LK Advani, always a man of the party, anti- Emergency warrior against the Congress for decades, senses precisely this.

 

Vintage Indira Gandhi? Are you confused by what she means by that? Don't worry, she gives a clarity somewhere else in the article. But note how she uses this argument to call Advani the "anti-Emergency warrior". There is no denying that he was, but there's no denying that even Modi was.

 

His political opponents have been vanquished in true Indira style - she says citing examples of a few leaders who have been sidelined in the BJP because of their rift with Modi. Some leaders get sidelined at the cost of others, within all political parties because of rifts; what's so special about this? Going by her logic, many political leaders within the BJP (including Mr. Advani) fit the bill of "true Indira style". However, what's bizzarre is the choice of the word - "vanquished". It speaks volumes about their unreasonable hatred towards Mr. Modi.

 

And she says the inevitable:

 

The BJP cut its teeth in anti-Emergency protests, but Moditva retains within itself traces of the Emergency. Modi is known for his trenchant attacks on the media....."

 

In one stroke, she compares the *actual* emergency clamped by Indira Gandhi to an imaginary situation that might arise if Modi is made Prime Minister. "Known for his trenchant attacks" is Sagarika's (and her ilks) way of telling that us that *they* are beyond criticism and reproach. Near the end of the article, she poses an imaginary question

 

With Modi's constant targeting of the media as "biased" will there come a time when a "biased" media is sought to be tamed just as Indira Gandhi once clamped down on an "anti-national" Press?

 

Whilst this ilk has never questioned the UPA government's intention to clamp down on dissenting voices (through say, Sec#66A), here they wish to imagine if Modi will tame them! Naivety certainly reached new depths with this kind of questioning. With such kind of arguments, it is supreme irony that in an ad by CNN-IBN, Ms. Sagarika Ghose is supposed to represent "Sense over Sensationalism"!

 

 

Back in 1998 ...

Recently, I was clearing up stuff and stumbled across something I saved from 1998. I knew I saved these, but just couldn't recollect where! Luck has finally smiled upon me, and I could retrieve them! 

Swapan Das Gupta wrote a cover page feature titled, "The Ugly Indian" for India Today in 1998. I read it in a library - and was blown away by it. I read it atleast 3 times and was wondering how it is possible for someone to write so incisively and perhaps beautifully too! 

I wanted to experience for myself how someone can write like that - so I started writing down what Swapan wrote! And at the end of the article, I wanted to continue the flow and pen (literally :D) some of my thoughts and see if I can do it! 

Perhaps that is one of the first (or probably the first) articles that spurred me into a lot of political thinking too... I therefore wish to dedicate this to Swapan da (a bit wierd dedicating his own article to him, but I hope he understands the context :) ) - Thank you Swapan da for the inspiration :). 

The three images below are snapshots of what I wrote (replete with P.T.O and "contd." ;) ). Read and see how some issues are relevant even today :). 

The infighting in AP Congress...

 The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference.

The past one week witnessed another hotbed of political activity in Andhra Pradesh.

The below image is a full page advertisement that the Chief Minister put out in various newspapers last week. Various hoardings with a similar image are also seen all over the state.

These are the various schemes that the Chief Minister is taking credit for. These are the same schemes with which the Congress plans to fight the elections in 2014 on "development" plank.

As you can see, most of the schemes are either named after Rajiv or Indira. Some are tactically named as "mother" - any image can be convieniently used for those schemes!

Now, it is customary that the opposition parties oppose these schemes and continously berate them. It is also quite possible that second rung leaders of the ruling party might oppose the schemes for political survival. What's neither expected nor customary is this - cabinet ministers of this Chief Minister themselves opposing the manner in which the schemes are announced and implemented!

Sample two schemes: 1. Rajiv Yuva Kiranalu and 2. Bangaru Talli. The Chief Minister unilaterally announces these schemes without taking the ministers into confidence. Many ministers, including the PCC chief, were severely critical of the CM for announcing Rajiv Yuva Kiranalu. One minister, D.L.Ravindra was the most vocal of all. Over the past one year, he has openly berated the Chief Minister for his style of functioning. When "Bangaru Talli" was announced, DL again went to the press criticizing the program. When the PCC chief was asked about the program, his terse reply was "I will find out and tell you"!

DL also constantly complains that all that Kiran Kumar is doing is to rename schemes introduced by YSR and steal credit. Meanwhile, another minister Mr. C.Ramachandraih, a Chiranjeevi loyalist, constantly tells that Chiranjeevi will lead in 2014 elections. While the Chief Minister tom toms every scheme to be his brain child, the PCC chief and his coterie (which includes the Deputy CM) try to sell them as Congress party schemes! Nowhere are they seen crediting these schemes to the CM - a far cry from the days of YSR.

Unable to take all this criticism from within the cabinet, the Chief Minister sacked DL Ravindra Reddy from the cabinet, while DL was away holidaying in London. This set off another backlash - from other ministers! They were again severely critical of the manner in which he was sacked! Another flight journey to Delhi settled matters in favour of the Chief Minister. So bad was the backlash that the chief whip termed this decision as that of the "high command's" and not the CM alone!

In the last month, 2 ministers had to resign and 1 minister was sacked. Since the second half of the budget session is ongoing, any reshuffle will have to wait till the session is over and the CM makes a couple of trips to Delhi!

The disqualification of MLAs

On June 8th, the Speaker of the assembly announced his decision to disqualify 15 legislators - 9 from the Congress and 6 from the TDP. With this the total number of disqualifications in this assembly has gone upto 34. So why were these legislators disqualified. In March, the TRS and YSRCP introduced a no-confidence motion in the assembly. TDP decided to abstain, because they did not want to be seen as teaming up with YSRCP. So a whip was issued to it's legislators accordingly. 6 of them went against the whip. 9 of Congress MLAs too voted in favour, and hence attracted disqualification.

However, what's crucial to note is that the Speaker gave his decision after June 3 (after following "due" procedure). Since the life of the current assembly is now less than one year, no bye-elections will be held. This essentially means that the half way mark in the assembly is now 140 (as against 147). The Congress has 146 members and therefore is safe for the next one year!

A complete Deja Vu

Today's situation in the congress is remniscient of yesteryears, where infighting and frequent trips to Delhi ruled the roost. For every small decision (including appointments to PCC commitees), both the CM and PCC chief rush to New Delhi to hold parleys with Ghulam Nabi Azad first and madam next (provided she obliges to give an audience). Infact, Ghulam Nabi Azad can double up as the Chief Minister of AP too!

So bad is the confidence of those in power, that they have been postponing the local body elections for a long time, citing court rulings at first and administrative problems now. A whopping Rs. 1500 crore grant from the center has been withheld because of these postponements. The CM himself as announced that panchayat elections will be held in June. We are already half way into June and no notification yet!

It is in the blood of the congressmen to ignore those criticize the Gandhis. None of the government advertisements have the picture of YSR. Most of the posters that congress leaders put up also does not have his image. The open defiance by many ministers (including the Dy. CM and the PCC chief); the frequent trips to Delhi; and the time wasted in infighting is what led to the downfall of the congress many times earlier too, and 2014 will not be any exception. The ultimate loser in all this is the governance in the state, which no one seems to care about!

PS: For those interested in the programs mentioned in the ad, the below three images  will help. 

The kind of people that were at the helm...

The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference.

Normally, regular tripe needs to be ignored. However, if that regular tripe is dished out by folks who have held high positions in the government, it exposes the concerning state of affairs under this UPA regime.

We are talking about this latest tripe that Mr. Harish Khare, former press advisor to the Prime Minister of India, dished out. In this article titled "The Murthys and the Maoists", he seeks to draw a comparison between ... well, never mind - it's very difficult to decipher what he wants to say.

There are some things that are clearly evident though. Topmost amongst them is his contempt towards Mr. Narayana Murthy. Why? Because apparently Mr. Murthy demanded to be seated next to the Prime Minister in a dinner he hosted! Hawww - how cheap of Mr. Murthy to even dream of sitting beside the Prime Minister! 

But that's not his major grouse. Since Mr. Murthy dared to advise the government publicly on some matter a few months ago, Mr. Khare gets angry and points out to the nepotism that Mr. Murthy himself resorted to. Merely because Mr. Murthy suggested something to this government on a public platform, he ceases to exists as a private businessman. 

Earlier too, Mr. Khare has demonstrated extreme intolerance to people's movements that questioned the functioning of this UPA regime. In the exalted world of Harish Khare, the citizens and leaders from various fields rather shut up and suffer than demand/suggest/advise the awesome duo of Sonia Gandhi and Dr. Manmohan Singh. You think I am exaggerating? Sample this:

That (heyday of civil society triumphalism two years ago) was the time when India’s corporate leaders thought they had the ethical credentials to write open letters to the Prime Minister and preach virtues of good governance.

You know - you need to have "ethical credentials" to write an open letter to this Prime Minister! Such is the contempt with which the former advisor to the PM of this country, holds for feedback! 

And then suddenly and bizarrely, Mr. Khare moves on to praise Rahul Gandhi! Congress Vice President's Rahul Gandhi's trip to Chattisgarh after the murderous massacre of 27 Congress leaders is apparently a "commendable journey of political solidarity." It would have been political solidarity if Rahul Gandhi makes a similar visit when people from other parties are killed! And then Mr. Khare wonders if this attack "has helped Mr. Gandhi re-set his ideological compass."  He goes on to dedicate another paragraph to explain to us the greatness of Rahul. 

It has been proven beyond doubt that that the only thing that reigns supreme in Rahul Gandhi's thought process is confusion! Yet, without any provocation, commentators like Mr. Khare lose no opportunity to praise the congress leadership! 

You must be wondering by now - but where did Maoism come into picture when we are talking about Mr. Murthy? That's where the genius of Mr. Harish Khare stumps you. Mr. Murthy, and by extension, the corporate world, is very demanding of the government. The Maoists are also very demanding. Let's ignore that the only difference is that Corporate India provides employments and Maoists murder people - both of them make stringent demands on the government, that's it! 

The ilk of Mr. Harish Khare can't even summon the decency to call murderers as murderers. 

"The May 25 attack was the boldest ideological challenge that the Maoists have posed to the country’s political leadership."

The heinous killing of 27 political leaders is apparently the "boldest ideological challenge". This line is in the same article in which Mr. Murthy is derided for wanting to sit next to the Prime Minister. This is the depths to which the commentators can plunge to. 

His contempt towards criticism does not end here. Apparently, "the country has periodically been treated to a mock controversy over whether Sonia Gandhi’s National Advisory Council was usurping the government’s space and prerogatives, .."

Mock controversy? Sonia Gandhi's NAC is beyond reproach, huh? Now we cannot even peacefully criticize the NAC for usurping the government's space! Sample another line:

The UPA’s approach has been to let the corporate marauders run amok while salving its democratic conscience with a slew of pro-poor, aam aadmi -centric initiatives. 

Corporate marauders? Why does this ilk have so much contempt to people who provide employment to the people of India? Why do they talk of this as a crime? What possible damage has Mr. Murthy done to the economy of this country that Mr. Harish Khare reserves such words for him? The more we try to understand this thought process, the more confused we get. Is this really the quality of people that this Prime Minister has "allowed himself" to be surrounded by? 

PS: Notice how Mr. Khare uses the phrase "allowed himself to be persuaded" three times to describe various decisions of the PM, Mr. Murthy and Rahul Gandhi. He could have merely said "agreed", but then that would make matters too simple I guess! 

The ranting continues....

The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference.

Within the BJP, if Modi is India then Chouhan is decidedly Bharat.

This amazing assertion by deputy editor of CNN-IBN in her long rant on the RSS, BJP and Modi merely reconfirms how distant her ilk is, from reality on the ground. 

She arrives at this conclusion, by citing a few examples of how Mr. Modi is very pro-industralist and how Mr. Chouhan is "rooted" to RSS (and therefore introduced Surya Namaskar etc). Sagarika Ghose and most of her ilk, have steadfastly refused to accept or even look at Mr. Modi's achievements outside the the "Vibrat Gujarat Summit".

In Gujarat, there is a Krishi Mahotsav held every year. Would this come under India or Bharat Ms. Sagarika? There is 24/7 three phase power supply to villages in Gujarat. Is this benefitting India or Bharat, Ms. Sagarika? Gujarat focusses a lot of women empowerment, girl child etc - again, where do these beneficiaries belong to? India or Bharat? Most importantly, those who voted for Narendra Modi - are they from India or Bharat?

Not to miss another point - this naive story of "two Indias"  that is being peddled needs to be stopped urgently. How is it even possible to reduce the multi-faceted complexity of India to just two points? And even while splitting it up as India and Bharat, why does this ilk look down upon "India" as if this people are not their citizens? 

A personality cult threatens to overturn the sangh’s prized principle of “collective leadership”  and later she says that the 1998 and 1999 victories  "have been hard for the sangh to stomach but which it was forced to accept."

I am totally confused - the BJP as a political party has to be led by a person. It at all it endorses, the Sangh will have to endorse a "personality" to lead the elections in 2014. So why does this ilk keep bringing up this personality cult issue again and again into the picture?

"Chouhan does not project himself in social media, or through rock concerts, or at FICCI, but is far more ostensibly committed to sangh ideology "

What does "projecting" in social media have to do anything with Sangh ideology? If a Chief Minister is invited by FICCI, he should refuse saying he believes in "Sangh Ideology"? And Modi never projected himself through rock concerts - another mis-leading comment by Ms. Ghose. How does Chouhan become better than Modi (or vice versa) because of the above three mentioned points?

An endorsement of Modi would also mean that the sangh swallow its ideological commitments on hindutva, for more innocuous slogans of “development”, “nationalist progress” and secularism defined as “India first.” 

Is she suggesting that the Sangh's ideology prioritizes hindutva over others? How does she know this? Has she attended their Shakhas? Or any of their other gatherings? Or does she have an insight into their thought process through magical powers of telepathy?

Forces loosely allied to the sangh have engaged in moral policing actions against women visiting bars in coastal Karnataka.

Sri Ram Sene is loosely allied to the Sangh? How does Sagarika Ghose get away with such open lies in today's day and age?

In fact, it is the undertow of the sangh that has prevented the BJP from developing a modern approach to Muslims, 

A "modern approach" to Muslims?? Would a slogan like "Sabka saath sabka vikaas" constitute a "modern approach”? Why should there be a "special positive agenda" towards Muslims? Because the Congress party screwed them up? If so, what is stopping this ilk from demanding answers from Congress? Instead, they eulogize congress for being pro-minority! And why fetish for a special approach towards Muslims only? What about the other sections that come under the classification of minorities? It still beats how “equal” importance to all citizens tantamounts to discrimination against minority groups!

Most of the article meanders around such sundry arguments. At times, the Sangh is criticized; at times, the BJP is criticized; and at times, Mr Modi is criticized. Sagarika Ghose's perpetual hatred towards the Sangh is well known, given her rants on twitter. 

It is still unclear as to what the agenda of this ilk is - what else explains their reluctance to discuss the social work of the RSS? What else explains their reluctance to view Narendra Modi's governance in totality? Why cherry pick points that suit your slant? The article is a repetitive rant to just further their agenda of stopping Narendra Modi at any cost, and asserting that the Sangh has lost it's relevance (we have been hearing this from the past 60 years). If that involves spreading mis-information or half information, so be it. 

The AP resignation saga

The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference.

The resignation drama of two chargesheeted ministers in Andhra Pradesh has not just set off a flurry of political activity in the state, but has also set off a flurry of news activity on the “national” media. However, in a tearing hurry to come up with a 5-10 minutes slot, most of them presented poorly researched news bits on this issue (which includes trying to credit high command for this resignation).

The following timeline explains why it is entirely wrong to credit the high command; how the “collective responsibility” of the cabinet has been abused; and how the state is the ultimate sufferer in this fiasco under the leadership of Sonia Gandhi’s congress party.

March – May, 2012

The Supreme Court of India has issued notices to 6  ministers and 8 IAS officers in Andhra Pradesh, asking them to explain why they should not be interrogated by the CBI in GO's issued by them, that purpotedly favoured Jagan. The details of these 26 GO’s are appended at the end of this article.

The names of the six ministers are: Sabitha Indra Reddy, Geetha Reddy, Dharmana Prasada Rao, Ponnala Lakshmaih, Kanna Lakshminarayana and Mopidevi Venkataramana.

The state government agreed to provide legal assistance to all these 6 ministers and 8 IAS officers, primarily because it believed no wrong-doing was resorted to, by the ministers.

Mr. Venkataramana meanwhile got ensconed into a excise scam too and had resigned. Immediately after that, the CBI arrested him in the Jagan dispropotionate assets case. In his resignation letter, the minister clearly mentioned that he merely followed the orders of the then congress CM, YSR. Many ministerial colleagues echoed the same sentiment directly on TV.

May – August 2012

The CBI continued it’s investigations, and in August filed another set of chargesheets. In this, it named Mr. Dharmana Prasada Rao as an accused. Since he was chargesheeted, Mr. Dharmana Prasada Rao submitted his resignation to the Chief Minister. The CBI also applied for permission from the CM to allow for prosecution of Mr. Prasada Rao. Please note that Mr. Prasada Rao submitted his resignation in August 2012.

August, 2012 to March, 2013

Because he submitted his resignation, Mr. Prasada Rao stayed away from office. There was immense pressure on the Chief Minister and the Congress high command to not accept this resignation and also to not grant permission to the CBI for prosecuting Mr. Prasada Rao. The CBI permission has to be granted within 3 months. Just a few days before the 3 months was ending, in an extraordinary move, the CM placed the CBI request before the cabinet! The Cabinet in its entirety (barring a dissent note by one minister) has decided to reject permission to the CBI. This is perhaps the first and only time in the history of our country that the cabinet had to take a decision on granting permission to the CBI !

Mr. Prasada Rao’s resignation was never accepted nor was it rejected. He purposely stayed away from attending his office in the Secretariat for a whopping 7 months. With the Chief Minsiter suggesting to him that he start attending office and cabinet meetings, Mr. Prasada Rao resumed normal duties in March 2013.

It is very important to not that all this while, all these moves had the explicit support of this very high command of the Congress.

March – May 2013

Meanwhile, the CBI filed another chargesheet and this time named Ms. Sabita Indra Reddy as an accused. Ms. Sabita followed the same script as Mr. Prasada Rao. She submitted her resignation in April. It was neither accepted nor rejected. The Chief Minister stood behind both these ministers, with the explicit support of the high command. Ms. Sabita also did not attend office for 19 days (peanuts compared to the 7 months absence by Mr. Prasada Rao) and recently resumed duties. It is again very important to note that the high command did not raise an alarm of having two chargesheeted ministers in the cabinet.

May 2013

As is the norm, a couple of scandals rocked the UPA government. Sonia Gandhi was forced to drop 2 central ministers. This sparked off a voiceferous demand, not just from opposition parties, but from congress leaders too! How can we have one standard for Delhi and one for AP? The CM of AP went to Delhi (folks in AP lost count on the number of visits he made to Delhi!) and the culmination of this fiasco was supposed to be the resignation of these two ministers.

Now, the two ministers have reminded the press that they had already submitted their resignations (in August and April ) and yet no decision has been taken. Instead of accepting it then, a picture is being painted now that the high command has asked them to resign (again!). PC.Chacko in his press conference hoped that the ministers will resign “voluntarily”. Guess what – they already did and the high command didn’t accept them! It is a pity that none of the journalists present there did not question him on this. Mr. Prasada Rao is deeply upset that he was forced to stay on and is now being forced to go away – justifiable anger but is helpless! Both ministers have announced that they haven’t presented any new letters and have told the CM to act on their earlier letters itself. Please note, that as of now, the resignations have not yet been accepted!

The 26 GO’s pertain to allocation of land/exemption on levy of duties etc to various companies that have reportedly helped YSR/Jagan companies. Any decision to allot even a small piece of land has to be approved by the Cabinet – which implies that all these decisions have gone through the cabinet. How then can one minister be blamed for this? What exactly is the extent of this corruption scam in Andhra Pradesh? CBI has spoken to the remaining 3 ministers too but is yet to name them as accused.

The “national” media suddenly woke up yesterday and started posing some questions without a clear background of the entire issue – perhaps it is now naïve to expect them to be fully aware of happenings in congress ruled AP! One anchor was astonished in his show last night when he mentioned that there is a “litany” of scams in AP. Wonder what stopped him and others from debating these much earlier?

Details of the 26 GOs and what the CBI says about them is here. 

Three birds at one shot!

The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it below for reference :) 

It was touted as a "two birds with one shot" master stroke by the Congress party. 

The nuisance of Jagan Mohan Reddy was becoming an unbearable headache to the Congress party high command. He was consistently challenging and was criticising the congress government on a daily basis. High command did not want to directly expel him - so they came up with this "two birds with one shot" plan. 

Investigation agencies swooped in on the famous "Reddy brothers" of Karnataka! They were members of the BJP and were also ministers in the then BJP led government. But how does this affect Jagan Mohan Reddy? Because the "Reddy brothers" family and the YSR family are the thickest of friends! Want proof? Brief summary is below, but you can read in detail here and here. 

The Reddy brothers first went to jail for Illegal mining in Obulapuram, a place in Anantapur district, Andhra Pradesh! This license was granted to them by the YSR led congress government. Not happy with this dole, YSR government allotted a massive 10,000 acres to Brahmani Steels in Cuddapah, to setup a steel plant. The Reddy brothers own Brahmani. YSR himself laid the foundation at a pompous ceremony and more than 10,000 jobs were promised within a few years.  

All these were *before* the BJP led government took oath in 2008 in Karnataka. Until the point the congress high command was fed up with Jagan Mohan Reddy, the spectre of corruption was never witnessed by agencies in either Karnataka or AP. 

The downfall began ever since for the BJP in Karnataka. More corruption cases were foisted directly on the BJP CM too. It is important to notice how YSR was never touched. The infighting in BJP led to their disastrous performance in the recent elections - proof enough of how one bird was shot. 

The second bird was Jagan Mohan Reddy. The attack on Reddy brothers did not stop him. Congress party tried to use his YSR's brother to create a split in the family, and Jagan finally left the party. A Cong MLA (who later went on to become a minister and subsequently was dropped) filed a case in High Court seeking investigations into the Jagan's assets. The result - CBI is carrying out investigations under the direction of High Court and Jagan has been in jail since the last 1 year. 

But the high command did not foresee that a third bird will also get injured - the congress party itself! 

How can you run a investigation on corruption on YSR's son when YSR was CM, and not have  ministers and functionaries of the congress not involved? The CBI first interrogated some ministers and then started filing chargesheets against one minister after the other. Now this saga of ministers being interrogated/summoned/chargesheeted/arrested has so many twists that it will put our daily serials to shame! 

6 ministers were sent notices by none other than the Supreme Court of India, asking them to explain about 26 GO's issued when they were ministers in the YSR led congress government. CBI questioned/interrogated them. The first serving minister to be arrested was Mr. Mopidevi Venkataramana. He resigned as a minister on the evening that he was arrested - and in the letter he said that he merely followed the instructions of YSR in issuing orders. This may have been the first time that a serving minister was arrested by the CBI. 

Everyone assumed that it is just a matter of time before the other 5 ministers followed suit. CBI named a second minister, Mr. Dharmana Prasada Rao (was revenue minister in YSR's cabinet, is now now R&B minister), in it's chargesheet and sought permission for his prosecution. Mr. Prasada Rao resigned, but his resignation was never accepted. 

And here's where Congress party stumped the people again! Mr. Dharmana Prasada Rao was shielded with all the government's might. In an unprecedented move, the CM bought the proposal before the cabinet that the Cabinet (and not the CM) reject the CBI's request. With this, any move by the CBI to prosecute and arrest Mr. Prasada Rao was prevented. 

Mr. Prasada Rao is a very powerful congress leader from the district of Srikakulam. Mr. Venkataramana rao is not as powerful as Prasada Rao. Congress leaders themselves mentioned that because Mr. Venkataramana Rao is a BC leader, he was made the scapegoat in this entire sordid saga - what else explains the government's determination to shield one minister whilst letting go of another when the crime they are accused of is more or less the same?!

The saga doesn't end here. Next to be chargesheeted was Ms. Sabita Indira Reddy. She was the minister for mines in the 1st YSR government. So much was YSR happy with her performance, he promoted her to the Home Minister of the state. Now, the CBI has filed a chargesheet against her under many sections, including the famed Section 420! What an irony - the custodian of the law and order in the state is chargesheeted by the CBI under Section 420! 

The AP congress government, with guidance from the high command continued to brazen this out too. She resigned and her resignation was promptly rejected. The Home Minister is now scheduled to appear before a CBI special court in June. Many ministers themselves started speaking out openly - "this is not our paap. We merely followed instructions from the then CM, YSR. What else will ministers do other than following CM's orders? We are innocent to the core, because we did not benefit." The Finance minister even went a step further and proclaimed - "For the misery that Jagan has inflicted on many families, there is nothing wrong even if he is hanged". He was appreciated by many congress leaders for this brave statement! 

And today again, the debate on corrupt ministers is revived in AP. The reason? Sonia Gandhi's "tough" action in sacking two cabinet ministers from the union cabinet. Why is Sonia Gandhi not taking a similar action against ministers in AP, who have equally charges foisted against them? Apart from the opposition, leaders of the Congress party themselves are questioning the undue delay in acting against these ministers. 

You would not be knowing most of this information if you follow the Delhi TV media that masquerades itself as "national media". In essence, somehow the AP story successfully gets killed before it reaches the TV studios. The brazenness with which the Congress party is trying to play out this saga will eventually spell doom for it -it's just a matter of time! 

Bizzare anti-Modi arguments!

The following article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it here for reference :)

There was a bizarre article in the op-ed page of The Hindu  - "Narendra Modi's Patel test". While it is still difficult to fathom what exactly the article wanted to convey, there are 2 very key takeaway points from that article. 

1. Why Congress functions the way it does?

Any Congress Legislature Party meet in the country passes a single line resolution that authorises the "high command" (Sonia Gandhi for the last 15 years) to choose it's leader. And then the "high command" appoints a leader who will then proceed to either become the CM or LoP and just a floor leader. It always baffled many analysts as to why this outdated practice is still carried out. Today's article shows us the foundation of this practice. 

The author first rues that "A little reminder from history seems to be in order here because most people remain blissfully unaware of it throughout their lives."

Most people are blisfully unaware because these things are *not* put in our textbooks. We are only taught the viritues of certain leaders; not their shortcomings. And then we get blamed for remaining "blissfully unaware". 

The "reminder from history" that the author talks about is this - When the time came to choose the Congress president who will eventually become the Prime Minister, the onus fell on the 15 PCC chiefs. 12 out of the 15 voted for Sardar Vallabhai Patel. The author says no one knows who the other 3 voted for, but they definetely did not vote for Nehru! Common sense would suggest that Sardar Patel would become the Congress President. But for reasons best known to him, Gandhi *desperately* wanted Nehru to lead the Congress and imposed his choice on the party (when clearly the mandate was for Sardar). That Sardar Patel accepted Gandhi's machinations is testimony to the greatness of the man. The "high command" culture of the Congress party began with the machinations of Gandhi to make Nehru the Prime Minister. From that day onwards, barring a very few exceptions - there was a single power command centre for the Congress - The Nehru-Gandhi family. But since both Nehru and Gandhi are supposed to beyond criticism, we should merely accept this turn of events and blame somebody else for the evils our country faces on account of this choice! 

2. The bankruptcy of ideas of those who oppose Narendra Modi

This article has blatantly exposed the bankruptcy of ideas the anti-Modi industry faces right now! The article seeks to tell us that should such a situation arise, will Modi step aside for a person that the party chooses. There is a key difference in this hypothetical question - Sardar Patel was chosen by the party but rejected by one individual. In the hypothetical situation that the author discusses, he asks that if the party (not an individual) chooses a leader other than Modi, will Modi oblige? Surely, comparing chalk and cheese comes very easily to left liberal publications! 

The amusing arguments that the critics of Modi come up have started to become very boring - with the riot-industry out of job now, they fell back on mal-nutrition. When countered with hard facts; they fell back on "dictatorial attitude". And then they moved on to some imaginary intolerance in taking questions. With nothing succeeding they came up with "is not acceptable to all allies". And with today's analysis of a hypothetical situation just to potray him as a selfish guy longing for power, they have plumbed into further depths.

Sample this conclusion: The problem, however, is that there is no one in the BJP with the moral authority of Gandhiji. This means that if the party has to choose between Mr. Modi and someone else, Mr. Modi will have to show a degree of selflessness not usually seen in politics.

The "moral authority" does not exist in any party - leave alone BJP. And more importantly, any leader will have to fall in line with the party's choice - there is no option here, unlike in the Congress where any leader has to fall in line with the Gandhi's choice.

The last line of the article is supremely baffling - That, truly, will be his real test, the one thing that will truly set him apart, and make him an even bigger and unstoppable force to reckon with the next time around.

What exactly does the author mean by "next time around"? He should give up the post now and make a case for it at a later point of time? And what exactly would change in that period of time? Or is the author setting up a ground to start blaming Modi for making a case while someone else is in power? Truly amazing as to how such formulations are printed in widely circulated newspapers! 

NDTV's double standards on twitter abuse

This article was written for Niti Central. Pasting it below for reference.

  

Those who tweet regularly are quite familiar with the common complaints of the media folks - I am being abused. NDTV's group editor, Barkha Dutt, always goes a step further. At every available opportunity, she talks about the need to regulate social media to contain this abuse and how "online venom" is dangerous etc. Given her strong position this, one would imagine that NDTV will never give a platform for known abusers. And here's where NDTV stumped everyone - twice in a week! 

The topic for their weekly show, The Big Fight, was "Twitter wars" - alluding to the recent hashtag "war" on twitter between supporters of Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi. And quite expectedly, the moderator of this show, Mr. Vikram Chandra (who is also CEO, NDTV) bought in the topic of "abuse". So far, so good. 

One of the panelists on this show was Mr. Sanjay Jha, known quite well for his abuse and a regular face of the Congress on many TV channels (including NDTV). A newslandry journalist pointed this out on the show itself - he read out an abusive tweet in which Mr. Sanjay Jha calls Mr. Narendra Modi as "badmaash". This was just a sample. Mr. Sanjay Jha is capable of far worse (even makes wierd, unwanted references to Mr. Modi's personal life). Mr. Sanjay Jha proudly agreed to this - that he strongly stands by that tweet. He says that it is the "truth" that Mr. Modi is a "badmaash".

I asked Vikram Chandra if he believed this amounted to abuse. He agreed. I asked him why he didn't do anything about it when this happened on his show. I am yet to receive a logical and satisfactory answer. 

Not to be left behind, almost parallely, another high profile journalist of NDTV, Sreenivasan Jain did a program on the exact same topic. This was not a debate but just a 20 minute show, bizarrely titled, "Truth vs Hype". Sreenivasan Jain went a step further and interviewed the worst ever serial abuser the net has ever seen - Amaresh Mishra. 

Amaresh Mishra has threatened to kill people. He even threated to kill the Gujarat CM, Mr. Narendra Modi. He is a known Congress leader. There have been news items on him before his advent on twitter. He claims that he met Digvijay Singh and Rahul Gandhi recently and discussed with them! 

Infact, in their show, NDTV clearly shows a tweet in which Amaresh Mishra wishes that "sanghis" are raped and killed. And they very mildly ask him "is this not abuse?". The mild tone is difficult to miss - one should contrast this to the posture NDTV anchors adopt to "abuse" on twitter. Amaresh Mishra then goes on to explain how they worked as a team to make sure one hashtag was trending. 

Despite such clinching evidence, NDTV merrily airs the 2 minute segment on Amaresh with not even a mild rebuke. And suddenly one day we see, that the 2 minute clip on the program is edited out! Many tweeple have persistently questioned Sreenivasan Jain on why this clip was removed - was it because of Amaresh's reference to meeting Rahul Gandhi? Sreenivasan Jain replies back saying they took that clip out because a tweeter alerted them about Amaresh's death threat to her! 

The explanation is bizarre to say the least! Does he mean to say that if the said tweeter hadn't alerted, he (and NDTV) had no qualms in giving platform to such a blatant abuser? NDTV itself has aired his abusive tweets and has tried to equate them with non-descript abuse from independent tweeters. Why has NDTV decided to be a platform for helping Amaresh Mishra spread abuse and hatred? Why does NDTV not have any reservations on airing abuse by Sanjay Jha?

Day in and day out, many anchors rant about being abused. And merrily and happily, they provide a platform to known abusers from the Congress side. "Twitter war" is not a new phenomenon. Over the past 3-4 years, the monopoly of the english TV media was being challenged on social media. The "war" has been happening since 3-4 years, but the media chose to ignore it because it exposes them! But curiously (and perhaps conveniently) today, the media wakes up to a BJP vs Cong "war" and tries to further their agenda of "rampant abuse" on twitter! And in doing this, NDTV takes the help of known abusers! The irony can't get anymore amusing. 

Sagarika's open lies ...

The Gujarat Chief Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi gave two speeches in Delhi yesterday. Both were laced with content, and the reaction of the usual suspects was on predictable lines. In the morning, he spoke at a FICCI event and addressed women entrepreneurs. In the evening, he spoke at a Network 18 event, Think India. 

Since the reactions of the "national media" was going on predictable lines, I thought there was no point writing a blog deriding their illogical arguments. But they upped the ante this time. 

The Deputy Editor of CNN-IBN, whose parent company Network 18 organised this event tweets this:

Why didn't Modi stay and take any questions? Was he afraid of another India Today conclave situation? Not fair, Modiji! #thinkindia

This is shocking beyond belief. She is resorting to blatant lies in today's day and age. And she holds the position of Deputy Editor in the channel! 

Mr. Narendra spoke at the event for about an hour. He took multiple questions for nearly 35 minutes. He took questions on a range of topics - centre-state relations; FDI; Trade with other countries; privitisation; labour reforms; land acquisition; defence equipment; message to the youth - he took questions from Raghav Bahl who is the MD of Network18. He took some questions from the audience too. All this on Live TV. LIVE even on CNN-IBN. And yet the deputy editor has blatantly decided to lie to her followers by asking "Why didn't Modi stay and take any questions?"

And what does she mean by "Was he afraid of another India Today conclave situation?" 

Editor-in-Chief on CNN-IBN, Rajdeep Sardesai had this to say (amongst other things):

#thinkIndia Modi did speak well on the subject given: 'Less govt, more governance'. But shld have been ready to take more qs.

These folks are never happy I guess! There has to be a "but" just for the sake of it! Anyways, while that is a matter of opinion on whether he "should have taken more questions" despite having a flight to catch, the open and blatant mis-information by the deputy editor is shameful to say the least. Worst part is that none of the CNN-IBN journos even felt it right to correct her. I guess the hatred runs very deep. 

I have asked Rajdeep Sardesai for a clarification on this and he replied. Sagarika Ghose is yet to make any attempt to correct her tweet. 

@ssudhirkumar would have been more accurate to say: should have taken more questions.

On a side note, while Mr. Modi was busy detailing many ideas, news anchors were busy deriding the “war of hashtags” on twitter. Speaks volumes about their priorities!