The Great Indian Political Drama - 2 (Mar 2018 - Oct 2018)

[Sachin]

160 Crore Cash, 100 Kg Gold Seized In Raids On Tamil Nadu Contractor
"The searches were launched on the premises of Ms SPK and Company, a partnership firm engaged in road and highway construction, on contract from the government.". Any tips on the firm which was raided? This is said to be the biggest haul of unaccounted wealth in the recent times.

[RajaRaja]

All politicians are crooks, even though this lying fraud claimed exception with his self proclaimed honesty and extreme hypocrisy and is an agenda driven presstitute who attacks Modi perpetually.

Caught with his longot untied.

Yogendra Yadav family: IT dept seizes Rs 27 lakh cash; cash transactions receipts of about Rs 15 crore




https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... crore[/b]

The IT raid was not at his place but at his sister's place, who along with her husband and son are doctors and together run a private hospital. Rs 27 lakh cash and transactions receipts of about Rs 15 crore does not seem anything out of ordinary for a family of doctors running a private hospital, as long as tax was paid on the transactions.

[Pratyush]

That depends on the where the hospital is and what are the facilities available. In a family run hospital it is not possible to have that kind of transactions in a small town.

[Nandu]

All politicians are crooks, even though this lying fraud claimed exception with his self proclaimed honesty and extreme hypocrisy and is an agenda driven presstitute who attacks Modi perpetually.

Caught with his longot untied.

Yogendra Yadav family: IT dept seizes Rs 27 lakh cash; cash transactions receipts of about Rs 15 crore


If the IT dept seizes even 27 lakh at 5 pm in the evening, that is a lot of cash collection for a day's operation of a hospital. You would expect hospital receipts to be not mingled with day to day operating expenses to be met out of cash. Secondly at a Rs 27 lakh cash collection for the day, one is looking at a Rs 90 crore turnover in cash alone. If we assume a 1:4 ratio between cash and cheque (insurance payouts) and credit card transactions there aren't many hospitals in a single premises that generate that kind of turnover.


https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... crore[/b]

The IT raid was not at his place but at his sister's place, who along with her husband and son are doctors and together run a private hospital. Rs 27 lakh cash and transactions receipts of about Rs 15 crore does not seem anything out of ordinary for a family of doctors running a private hospital, as long as tax was paid on the transactions.

[Supratik]

Mr. Bhujiawala, IT dept is only going to seize unaccounted for cash. It is not like IT dept goes into every home and seizes other people's money. They work on tip-offs.

[Gus]

i missed this..

so ..what is yechury trying to achieve by jumping into kl commie politics..seems like the folks there are against him.

https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... m-4767260/

Sitaram Yechury will not return to the Rajya Sabha after his term ends next month. The CPM’s Central Committee, its highest decision-making body, Tuesday rejected the West Bengal party unit’s proposal for a third term for the CPM general secretary in Upper House. The proposal was voted upon and defeated, said sources.

The Bengal unit’s proposal came after the Congress leadership conveyed that it was willing to give up its claim for a Rajya Sabha seat from the state and back Yechury if the CPM fielded him.

Tuesday’s development will worsen the power struggle in the CPM ahead of the party’s triennial Party Congress next year. Many in the party had been viewing the episode as a virtual trial of strength for the pro- and anti-Yechury camps. The decision means that the anti-Yechury camp, which has come to be represented by the Kerala unit, continues to have an upper hand, both in the Politburo and the Central Committee.

[RamaY]

All politicians are crooks, even though this lying fraud claimed exception with his self proclaimed honesty and extreme hypocrisy and is an agenda driven presstitute who attacks Modi perpetually.

"All politicians are crooks" is what leftists and AAPtards want us to believe.

Not all politicians are crooks. Quite a few in Modi team are not crooks.

[Sachin]

All in a day's news at Karnataka
* Cong's gag orders on tearjerker episode

* Karnataka Congress asks spokespersons to defend CM. Why do that when Jr.Gowdru was just shedding tears of joy at a "family function" ?
* Tears don’t reflect my helplessness: HDK
. Yes they were tears of joy!
Centre to state: submit audit report for Rs 954-cr dues.The report reads..Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister Ram Vilas Paswan on Monday informed Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy that the Centre will clear the pending dues of Rs 954 crore only after the state government submits the final audit report on procurement of procurement of paddy and other crops at MSP. May be it is time to cry again.

so ..what is yechury trying to achieve by jumping into kl commie politics..seems like the folks there are against him

Yechuri is now really job-less and he has enough and more time to even visit temples in AP/TS . His fellow comrade Com. P.Karat is said to be the only "politician" who can be seen at the local Delhi markets during day time. Not because of his magnanimity, but because of the simple fact that he has nothing much to do.

CPI(M) though pretty much out of national politics do have various camps. It is said to be due to ideological differences, but could be on a persona basis also. Yechuri is said to be close to the Bengal comrades who after taking many beatings from the Trinamool Congress folks want to join hands with INC. Prakash Karat has the backing of all CPI(M) "leadership" (?) in Kerala. It could be because of the Malayali origins of Com. P Karat. The Kerala commies are not known for their debating skills in Hindi or English, so may be riding piggy-back on Karat's skills. Today all said and done it is the Kerala CPI(M) which is actually calling the shots in CPI(M). Yechuri trying to mess with them is only going to cause more embarassment to him (and more fun to others).

[Supratik]

SC is likely to give judgement in favour of total freedom for women to go to Sabarimala as it is an issue of gender equality. Before people start to howl it is upto the women to decide if they want to violate the rules of the temple. Most women who are devotees will follow the rule and women who are not are unlikely to go except for the camera purpose like in MH temple.

[Sachin]

SC is likely to give judgement in favour of total freedom for women to go to Sabarimala as it is an issue of gender equality. Before people start to howl it is upto the women to decide if they want to violate the rules of the temple. Most women who are devotees will follow the rule and women who are not are unlikely to go except for the camera purpose like in MH temple.

And this can also lead to a situation where any person can do any thing he wants in a Hindu temple as it is a public place. In KL, many temples have a dress code for men. The next case can be that it is a public place and no body can mandate a dress code. A Hindu temple is generally said to be the deity's home; it is not a place of people to just gather and pray (like a Church or a Mosque). So much so that each temple has its own unique traditions. If Sabari Mala temples have limitations on women, there is another temple at Aatukaal which has an exclusive festival for women alone. Any ways now what is going to happen is a "free for all" show. Women devotees may not go there, but KL and India is not short of women who have no devotion but are only trying prove their POV as correct.

[RamaY]

so ..what is yechury trying to achieve by jumping into kl commie politics..seems like the folks there are against him

Yechuri is now really job-less and he has enough and more time to even visit temples in AP/TS . His fellow comrade Com. P.Karat is said to be the only "politician" who can be seen at the local Delhi markets during day time. Not because of his magnanimity, but because of the simple fact that he has nothing much to do.

CPI(M) though pretty much out of national politics do have various camps. It is said to be due to ideological differences, but could be on a persona basis also. Yechuri is said to be close to the Bengal comrades who after taking many beatings from the Trinamool Congress folks want to join hands with INC. Prakash Karat has the backing of all CPI(M) "leadership" (?) in Kerala. It could be because of the Malayali origins of Com. P Karat. The Kerala commies are not known for their debating skills in Hindi or English, so may be riding piggy-back on Karat's skills. Today all said and done it is the Kerala CPI(M) which is actually calling the shots in CPI(M). Yechuri trying to mess with them is only going to cause more embarassment to him (and more fun to others).

Ji,

What is the possibility of Yechuri/Bengal-commies splitting ways with Karat/Kerala-commies and getting him a RS seat?

After all Kerala commies are in no great position looking into future.

West Bengal has 16 RS MP seats compared Kerala's 9.

[RamaY]

SC is likely to give judgement in favour of total freedom for women to go to Sabarimala as it is an issue of gender equality. Before people start to howl it is upto the women to decide if they want to violate the rules of the temple. Most women who are devotees will follow the rule and women who are not are unlikely to go except for the camera purpose like in MH temple.

And this can also lead to a situation where any person can do any thing he wants in a Hindu temple as it is a public place. In KL, many temples have a dress code for men. The next case can be that it is a public place and no body can mandate a dress code. A Hindu temple is generally said to be the deity's home; it is not a place of people to just gather and pray (like a Church or a Mosque). So much so that each temple has its own unique traditions. If Sabari Mala temples have limitations on women, there is another temple at Aatukaal which has an exclusive festival for women alone. Any ways now what is going to happen is a "free for all" show. Women devotees may not go there, but KL and India is not short of women who have no devotion but are only trying prove their POV as correct.

+1.

Issue is not about women who respect the traditions of DEVA. Please note that they are/can-be different from traditions of society.

Issue is with women who willingly go there to desecrate Hindu Devas.

Lets see how honest and committed Ayyapa Bhaktas are to Ayyappa, the Commander In Chief of Deva Ganas.

[Primus]

I think this is a bad idea on the part of the SC. You can bet there will be a number of women who will go with cameras in tow just to prove a point.

Every place of worship has some written/unwritten rules of attendance and conduct within its premises. You cannot legislate these unless they are in gross violation of simple logic and human rights. For example you can say that only Christians are allowed into a church but you cannot then say only white Christians are permitted - although in practice this does happen but is not codified into law. Similarly, Hindu temples may at their discretion bar entry to non-Hindus or may allow entry but not allow 'puja' to be offered. You cannot pretend to be a worshipper of Shiva if you are not a Hindu and are only there to satisfy your curiosity. If the tradition in a Hindu temple is that the deity is only for women then there is nothing wrong with it being treated as such, there needs to be a certain respect for the culture and values of a place of worship. It is not a restaurant where you go to ease your appetite and can demand entry by right.

[Supratik]

One cannot blame the SC as it is just going to look at it from gender equality angle. It is going to be a judgement that will be only on paper. The only women who will violate the rules will be the urban naxal gangs and it is unlikely they will persist once the cameras are gone. After all you have to take the trouble of going there, standing in line with millions, enter the temple, offer worship, etc.

[shravanp]

The argument of SC interfering was that the temple is maintained by state (TDS board), and hence is subject to all non-discriminatory rules of the state. That's what Indira Jaising's petition states. Event though the women devotees may disregard SC ruling, and still abide by religious code/conduct, it's shocking that this is the beginning of "SC telling us what to do". We have no idea how this will end up with.

[Chandragupta]

If it was a Muslim issue, SC would have quietly slipped the file towards Center for 'recommendations', but since it is a Hindu issue, the lordships will deliver a judgement thumping their chests & shouting their lungs off. They would shit their pants the moment a Muslim issue comes to their table.

[Gus]

One cannot blame the SC as it is just going to look at it from gender equality angle. It is going to be a judgement that will be only on paper. The only women who will violate the rules will be the urban naxal gangs and it is unlikely they will persist once the cameras are gone. After all you have to take the trouble of going there, standing in line with millions, enter the temple, offer worship, etc.

well...the rabble rousers could then demand that facilities and arrangements be made for women ...form a committee and start messing around.

this is a complex issue. on one hand, there is gender equality issues, but is this the place where it needs to be enforced..overriding so many things..and for what benefit, other than some bragging in some quarters by people devoid of belief regarding the deity and temple practices.

this is like forcing a girl to play in a boys team in the street cricket..neither the boys, nor the girl will like it..and the cricket would suck.

[chetak]

chandan mitra seems to have resigned from the BJP and is likely to join the trinamul congress soon per TV news.

Talk about ungrateful, IIRC this guy was clamoring to be the Indian ambassador to the UK and Modi was none too happy with the greedy ways of the guy.

He was also given some directorship fetching him over a crore per year and the RS seat.

He is the editor of the Pioneer newspaper.

[Primus]

One cannot blame the SC as it is just going to look at it from gender equality angle. It is going to be a judgement that will be only on paper. The only women who will violate the rules will be the urban naxal gangs and it is unlikely they will persist once the cameras are gone. After all you have to take the trouble of going there, standing in line with millions, enter the temple, offer worship, etc.

well...the rabble rousers could then demand that facilities and arrangements be made for women ...form a committee and start messing around.

this is a complex issue. on one hand, there is gender equality issues, but is this the place where it needs to be enforced..overriding so many things..and for what benefit, other than some bragging in some quarters by people devoid of belief regarding the deity and temple practices.

this is like forcing a girl to play in a boys team in the street cricket..neither the boys, nor the girl will like it..and the cricket would suck.

As others have said and so many of us have observed in other areas, this was easy for the SC to do because it is Hindus at the receiving end. It would be much harder if it was an issue related to Islam - witness the furore over triple talaq and Nikah Halala.

[crams]

chandan mitra seems to have resigned from the BJP and is likely to join the trinamul congress soon per TV news.

Talk about ungrateful, IIRC this guy was clamoring to be the Indian ambassador to the UK and Modi was none too happy with the greedy ways of the guy.

He was also given some directorship fetching him over a crore per year and the RS seat.

He is the editor of the Pioneer newspaper.

Guys, this is shocking. I cannot bear now to watch this guy join the likes of Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha on Lutyen media to verbally gang rape BJP and ModiJi,

Till recently, all his op-eds were quite well researched and were passionate defense of BJP against all kinds of garbage and mud thrown at BJP.

What were his reasons? News reports say he was unhappy with Modi Shah style of leadership. What worries me is that if a seemingly loyal BJP stalwart is unhappy with the party to resign, are there other internal dissenters who will also jump ship?

I am putting 2 and 2 toghether, but 2 episodes of him I saw are now ringing a bell:

1. That angry BJP hating chic Mahua Moitra was all effusive praise for him on one show while spewing venom against BJP. He was pretty weak in defending BJP that surprised me

2. He was sounding woefully pessimistic on BJP’s reelection prospects in 2019 after the UP and other bypoll losses. Could it be that he has given up on BJP returning to power and is now hedging his bets with thugbandhan? If so, I am all the more disappointed that I cannot trust anyone’s public pronouncements, because they will jump ship at the slightest hint of downfall

[shravanp]

Big deal. The way he talked in studios was simply pathetic. As if he was choking on breathing.

I think there's way too many supporters to BJP and there will be some attrition. Nothing to fret about.

[chetak]

This was discussed earlier too. Here are some more details.

The lust for power now makes him forget stalin and lenin and he has never remembered Bharat Mata at any time in his life.

He has long ago taken commie oath of hypocrisy.

twitter

Opiated Commie spotted in Telangana! Beef festival-fame @SitaramYechury celebrating Bonalu festival, at which Goddess Mahakali is worshipped. @cpimspeak political refugees who once made fun of Hindu customs and practices are now celebrating festivals, observing Ramayana month

[chetak]

Here is what is in store for us, if 2019 goes the wrong way.

twitter

A Maulana Amir Kasmi who is a member of AIMPLB hit a woman on a live TV debate. If he does ths on TV, imagine what these people would be doing behind closed doors. The Maulana even used abusive words for women on the panel... Shamefull !!!!




Also video here

https://twitter.com/i/status/1019232632779882497

[chetak]

Another perspective on Trump and his impact on the world.

This is more realistic and credible than all the breast beating and wailing that is usually the bane of "liberals".

India should also be more realistic in its expectations, even though we are relatively more insulated from ameriki dictates than most others.

An Ally Sizes Up Donald Trump

An Ally Sizes Up Donald Trump

When he says something consistently, it will happen. And his message is that America will remain a reliable partner, but don’t expect too much.

By Tony Abbott, July 13, 2018


Eighteen months into Donald Trump’s term, the world is having trouble coming to grips with the most unconventional American president ever. Still, he is neither a bad dream from which the U.S. will soon wake up, nor a fool to be ridiculed.

For someone his critics say is a compulsive liar, Mr. Trump has been remarkably true to his word. Especially compared with his predecessor, he doesn’t moralize. It’s classic Trump to be openly exasperated by the Group of 7’s hand-wringing hypocrisy. Unlike almost every other democratic leader, Mr. Trump doesn’t try to placate critics. He knows it’s more important to get things done than to be loved.

The holder of the world’s most significant office should always be taken seriously. Erratic and ill-disciplined though Mr. Trump often seems, there’s little doubt that he is proving a consequential president. On the evidence so far, when he says something, he means it—and when he says something consistently, it will happen.

He said he’d cut taxes and regulation. He did, and the American economy is at its strongest in at least a decade. He said he’d pull out of the Paris climate-change agreement and he did, to the usual obloquy but no discernible environmental damage. He said he’d scrap the Iranian deal, and he did. If Tehran gets nuclear weapons, at least it won’t be with American connivance. He said he’d move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, and he did, without catastrophe. He said he’d boost defense spending. That’s happening too, and adversaries no longer think that they can cross American red lines with impunity.

In Mr. Trump’s first year, he acted on 64% of the policy ideas proposed in the Heritage Foundation’s “Mandate for Leadership” agenda—not bad compared with Ronald Reagan’s 49%.

It’s a pity that he kept his promise to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But his concerns about that deal shouldn’t be dismissed. In the short term, freer trade can be better for rich people in poor countries than for poor people in rich ones.

Mr. Trump thinks that the effect of freer trade has been to make America’s rivals stronger. But as the Harley-Davidson example shows, global supply chains mean that even “all-American products” are made all over the world. The consequence of taxing imports can be losing exports, too, as other countries retaliate. So far, though, Mr. Trump’s strong rhetoric and tough action haven’t triggered a full-scale trade war, but have forced other countries to address America’s concerns about technology theft and predatory pricing.

Then there’s the nuclear diplomacy with North Korea. Maybe a hitherto brutal dictator is looking for the survival strategy that Mr. Trump has offered. On the other hand, it could turn into a latter-day version of the Iran deal, in which pressure is eased on the basis of promises that are never fully kept, while leaving allies unsure of American support. That’s the trouble with one-on-one meetings. They may be good for building trust, but they’re bad for making decisions, because each participant has his own version of what was meant.

Still, whatever your judgment on Mr. Trump’s presidency so far, he has 2½ more years in the world’s biggest job and every chance of being re-elected. He is the reality we have to work with.

For Australia, Mr. Trump has so far been a good president. Despite his testy initial conversation with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, he has honored the “very bad deal” that President Obama made to take boat people from Nauru and Manus Island to settle in the U.S.

Mr. Trump seems to appreciate that Australia is the only ally that has been with America, side by side, in every conflict since World War I. He has exempted our steel and aluminum from the tariffs slapped on many others. As a country that’s paid its dues, so to speak, on the American alliance, we have been treated with courtesy and respect. Still, that’s no grounds for complacency in dealing with a transactional president.

As weightier allies found at the NATO summit this week, Mr. Trump is reluctant to help those who don’t pull their weight, and who can blame him? America has been the world’s policeman, the guarantor of a modicum of restraint from the world’s despots and fanatics. No other country has had both the strength and the goodwill for this essential task.

And America’s thanks for its seven decades of watchfulness and its prodigious expenditure of blood and treasure? Condescension from the intellectuals whose freedom the U.S. has protected, and commercial exploitation by the competitors that the American-led global order has created. It’s little wonder that Mr. Trump wants trade that’s fair as well as free, or that he’s tired of allies who give sermons from the sidelines while America keeps them safe.

The truth is that the rest of the world needs America much more than America needs us. The U.S. has no threatening neighbors. It’s about as remote from the globe’s trouble spots as is possible to be. It’s richly endowed with resources, including energy and an almost boundless agricultural capacity. Its technology is second to none. Its manufacturing base is vast. Its people are entrepreneurial in their bones. From diversity, it has built unity and an enviable pride in country.

In many respects, America is the world in one country, only a better world than the one outside. If it decided to live in splendid isolation from troubles across the sea, it would lose little and perhaps gain much, at least in the beginning. A fortress America would be as impregnable as any country could be.

Mr. Trump is clearly impatient with the liberal internationalism that has shaped American policy for 70 years, which he worries has been better for others than for the U.S. There are two possible versions of the evolving Trump doctrine. One goes something like this: America may help those who help themselves, but it will be likelier to help those who help America. The other, kinder version: They’re your values too, so don’t expect us to be the only ones fighting for them.

President Obama spoke beautifully about American values but was always cautious and sometimes slow to stand up for them. On his watch, the rules-based order was already unraveling. Mr. Trump is much more honest about the limits of American power. For all Mr. Obama’s high-mindedness on fringe issues like climate change, Mr. Trump’s America is more robust. It’s certainly less apologetic and readier to use force. So at least for those allies that don’t shirk their responsibilities, Mr. Trump’s America should remain a reliable partner. Just don’t expect too much.

A new age is coming. The legions are going home. American values can be relied upon but American help less so. This need not presage a darker time, like Rome’s withdrawal from Britain, but more will be required of the world’s other free countries. Will they step up? That’s the test.


I was prime minister when Mr. Obama declared at West Point in 2014 that America could not be the world’s policeman on its own. My response was that America need never be alone, and that while it would have more important and occasionally more useful allies, it would never have a more dependable one than Australia. As prime minister, I wanted to be a welcome contrast to those White House visitors asking America to do things for them—asking instead what we could do for America.

When the WikiLeaks spying scandal broke, there was nothing but strong support from Australia. When Islamic State stormed to the gates of Baghdad, Australian special forces, military training teams and strike fighters were there almost as quickly as American ones, because the U.S. should never have to take on the world’s fight solo.

Being America’s partner, as well as its friend, is even more important now, given Mr. Trump’s obsession with reciprocity. It may be the only hope of keeping America engaged in troubles that aren’t already its own.

In my judgment, Australia should have upgraded its Iraq mission to “advise, assist and accompany” as soon as America did, and extended it into Syria. Australia should have mounted freedom-of-navigation operations in the South China Sea. And Australia should have not only welcomed the move of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem but moved ours, too.

The rise of China means that Australia can no longer take for granted a benign strategic environment. For the first extended period in my country’s settled existence, the strongest power in our part of the world is unlikely to share our values. We can no longer be sure that a friendly nation will be the first to respond to a new challenge to peace, stability and decency in our region.

I fear there will have to be a much greater focus on strategic deterrence, especially if a rogue state like North Korea has long-range nuclear weapons—and especially if the American nuclear shield becomes less reliable.

My government increased Australia’s defense spending from a historical low of 1.6% of gross domestic product to 2%. I made the commitment to continuous construction of major surface ships and began the process of acquiring new submarines.

To its credit, the Turnbull government has continued this work. But I fear that dramatically increased military spending in our region overall—up 60% in the past decade—means that rather more now needs to be done. Can Australia’s ships be expected to operate without the air cover that an overstretched America may no longer provide? Can we afford to wait at least 15 years before the first of the next generation of submarines becomes operational? Does it really make sense for Australia to take a French nuclear submarine and redesign it for conventional power, making it less potent than it currently is?

My instinct is that acquiring a capacity to strike harder and further, while giving our country and our armed forces greater protection, could soon require military spending well beyond 2% of GDP. Our armed forces need to be more capable of operating independently against even a substantial adversary, because that is what a truly sovereign nation must be prepared to do.

America spends more than 3% of the world’s biggest GDP on its armed forces, and the rest of the Western world scarcely breaks 2%. It’s hard to dispute Mr. Trump’s view that most of us have been keeping safe on the cheap. The U.S. can’t be expected to fight harder for Australia than we are prepared to fight for ourselves. What Mr. Trump is making clear—to us and to others—is what should always have been screamingly obvious: that each nation’s safety now rests in its own hands far more than in anyone else’s.

Mr. Abbott served as prime minister of Australia, 2013-15. This is adapted from a speech he delivered Wednesday at the Heritage Foundation in Washington

[JohnTitor]

One cannot blame the SC as it is just going to look at it from gender equality angle. It is going to be a judgement that will be only on paper. The only women who will violate the rules will be the urban naxal gangs and it is unlikely they will persist once the cameras are gone. After all you have to take the trouble of going there, standing in line with millions, enter the temple, offer worship, etc.

Except you can blame the SC because all these secular and equality rules only apply to Hindus, their traditions and their places of worship. It is not whether only those who will violate the rules are Naxals or whatever, but the fact that the SC is hand in glove when it comes to being anti Hindu and promoting Hinduphobia

So yeah, don't split a blood vessel when I say the SC is a joke and needs to be put on it's place, ack thoo!