Forum for Preserving Gandhi's Heritage

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-11 Contribution towards India

2007-09-19T17:51:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi's life and philosophy of Satyagraha are a major contribution to mankind

Sonia: Except for scandals, scams and intolerance primarily towards Hindu institutions she has no positive contribution to lay claim to.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-10 Scams & Scandals

2007-09-19T17:50:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Scams & Scandals and Gandhi are perfect enemies. Gandhi was never involved in any scam. His life, nay his every thought is an open book where he expressed in his voluminous writings.

Sonia: Sonia was almost and always in news due to some scandal or scam. Maruti Scam, Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, Indian Artifacts smuggling, Bofors kickbacks, Indira/Rajiv Trusts and Indira Arts Center usurpation, political manipulations are some of the popular scandals she was involved in.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-9 Moral principles vs. political Gains

2007-09-19T17:49:00.002-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi never compromised on moral principles and stood by them even during grave crisis.

Sonia: In 1997, Sonia pulled down United Front Government at centre because a political party DMK, a constituent of United Front Government was found to be close to her husband's killers i.e., LTTE. Every election costs Indian tax payer thousands of crores of rupees. But in 2004, she joined hands with DMK to gain power.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-8 Nationalism and confidence in India

2007-09-19T17:49:00.001-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi and India were synonymous. Gandhi was the first person to be arrested in any independence movement. He stood for independent India.

Sonia: Sonia abandoned India during 1971 war and in 1977 when Indira Gandhi lost elections she hid herself in Italian embassy. She did not even apply for Indian citizenship for 16 years though living in Prime Minister's house.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-7 Feelings towards enemies/detractors

2007-09-19T17:48:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi treated all Indians as his children. He was very compassionate even towards his detractors. He won his enemies by love and understanding.

Sonia: Sonia is known for her vindictive nature. She is known not to spare even her party men and routinely humiliates them. She even humiliated the dead body of former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao who did not encourage Sonia's political growth.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-6 Self-Sacrifice and Wealth

2007-09-19T17:47:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi, who otherwise was a prosperous lawyer, donated everything he has for the nation. His only possessions were walking stick, chappals, eye glasses and a watch.

Sonia: According to the respected Swiss magazine (published in 1991), Schweitzer Illustrate, Rajiv Gandhi has secret Swiss accounts worth $ 2 billion. Sonia is known for her close association with Quattrocchi. Sonia and her family is believed to have looted country wealth worth billions of dollars.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-5 Foreign Missionaries & conversion

2007-09-19T17:45:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi, a great visionary had a clear foresight about missionaries. On numerous occassions he condemned missionary activity. He said "If I had the power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytising.". He further said "The effect of Christianity upon India in general...has been disastrous.". Regarding conversion Gandhi said "The idea of conversion, I assure you is the deadliest poison that ever sapped the fountain of truth.". He also said “Conversion is like a drop of poison which fouls the whole food” and that “poverty does not justify conversion”.
Sonia: Sonia is known for her sympathy and support to proselytization. Her party granted the high-security Air Force field to Benny Hinn to hold his healing charade whom even Christian Trinity Foundation declared as a fraud.. A leader of seventh day adventist church, Ron Watts was ordered deportation by courts for his illegal activities. He seems to have been blessed by Sonia and continues to live in

India

. The state Governers she appointed have been consistently rejecting State laws to enact anti-conversion laws to prevent conversion of poor people by allurement.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-4 Truth Alone Triumphs (Satyameva Jayathe)

2007-09-19T17:29:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Guided by Hinduism (Mundaka Upanishad), Gandhi and India's founding fathers made the slogan the national motto of India and printed on every Government document

Sonia: Under her rule 'Satyameva jayathe' has been replaced by a Christian cross used by Louis The Pious (778-840) on currency coins.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-3 Opinion on Hinduism

2007-09-19T17:28:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: He had the highest respect for Hinduism. All his prayers were devoted to Lord Ram and he wanted to establish 'Ram Rajya'. (Lord Rama's kingdom which is a symbol of perfect Government). His strength is Bhagavad-Gita Gita which he translated into his life. He constantly chanted Rama Nama and died with that name on his lips.

Sonia: In her opinion and according to the affidavit submitted in Supreme Court, Ram is a fictional character and Ramayana never happened. Under her rule Rama Sethu (Rama's bridge) is being blown up just like Taliban blew up Buddha Statues. Her protégé Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister have attempted to take over 5 out of 7 Tirumala Hills for building Churches and Tourism. This is akin to non-Christians taking over Vatican for building their worship places. Her reasons for not taking firm action against terrorism are two fold. One is the sense that investigation would hurt vote bank and another is that the overwhelming of those who were killed in the terrorism are Hindus who are not from the vote bank. As recently as few weeks she visited Andhra Pradesh that witness the brutal terrorist attack that killed more than 50 people and she did not go visit the city where attack occurred (Hyderabad) because those who affected are not her vote banks.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-2 Non- Violence

2007-09-19T17:27:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Gandhi never justified violence under any circumstances. His definition of Non-Violence comes from his reading of Hindu Scriptures that declares Non-Violence in thought, word and deed as the most important principle (Ahimso Paramo Dharma).

Sonia: Sonia is violent and her violence spans Political, Spritual and Physical spheres. The way she installed herself to become congress president, the way she treats congressmen and opponents speaks volumes in Political Sphere. Her crusade against Hinduism such as Rama Sethu speaks of spiritual violence. In the Physical sphere, Sonia was sympathetic in Congress party and in Government to the killers of 3000 Sikhs, where innocent Sikhs on streets of New Delhi were lynched to death. Jagdish Tytler who was one of the instigators of the lynching was rewarded with a Government ministry. Central Government provided a weak defence in courts and no congressmen was ever punished for the anti-Sikh pogrom. Rajiv Gandhi whose wife is Sonia even justified the killings by saying "When a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shake". She is pursuing pro-terrorist policies for vote banks that resulted in number of killings in last three years she was in power just next to Iraq.

Gandhi vs Sonia: Discussion-1 Truth and Honesty

2007-09-19T17:19:00.000-07:00

Gandhi: Mahatma Gandhi was an apostle of truth, honesty and humility

Sonia: She lied from President of India to a common man. She lied to the President about the number of MPs supporting her and to a common man on a trivial issue such as her educational qualification. She says that she is outside Government but controls every move Government makes and there is no record of she ever admitting or apologizing for any lies and mistakes

Sister Sonia, he Wanted a Total Ban on Conversions!

2007-09-01T15:29:00.000-07:00

Courtesy: http://gurumurthy.net, August 11, 2006

"The Congress party's views on this are well known," Sonia says. 'This' means laws banning forcible religious conversions. She goes on: "They are enactments passed by state legislatures where the Congress is in opposition." She adds, "The Congress party has opposed (them) strongly in the assembly and through demonstrations." She made these profound remarks in a letter she wrote to Dr John Dayal. Who is he? He has a respectable visiting card, as member of the National Integration Council. But he has other visiting cards too like President of All India Catholic Union, Secretary General of All India Christian Council, President of United Christian Action, and Member of Justice and Peace commission Archdiocese of Delhi.

But these cards do not exhaust his definition. In the assessment of a responsible Christian scholar, PN Benjamin, who runs the Bangalore Initiative for Religious Dialogue, "John Dayal opens his mouth and wields his pen only to spew venom on the Hindu community." This completes his profile. He had written to Sonia complaining about the laws banning religious conversions in different states. To which she replied implying that the BJP is the author of anti-conversion laws.

But is that - that is, it is the BJP, not the Congress, which passed the anti-conversion laws and the Congress had actually opposed them - a fact? Only a novice in political history post freedom would say something like what Sonia says. On the contrary, it was the Congress Party, which had still some traces of the Mahatma Gandhi left in it, that had passed the anti-conversion laws.

That Congress, which still had some respect for the Mahatma, took his words on religious conversions seriously. Mahatma Gandhi had written extensively against conversions by Christians. He wrote, "I hold that proselytisation under the cloak of human work is unhealthy to say the least." This was in Young India on April 23, 1931. Later, he went one step further and wrote, "If I had the power to legislate, I should stop all proselytisation work" (Young India 5.11.1935). He told the missionaries, "He is ashamed of them" (Young India 8.8.1925), disputed their claim that theirs "is the only true religion" (Harijan 3.6.1937), warned that "conversion should not mean denationalisation" (8.8.1925), and pointed out that it means just that, as many converts are "ashamed of their birth" and of their ancestry (20.8.1925).

Gandhiji's ideas were still influencing the Congress when the Madhya Pradesh government constituted the Neogi Committee to study missionary activities in tribal areas. This was in 1954. S.K George, 'a devout Christian and a nationalist belonging to the oldest church in India - the Syrian Christian Church' was a member of the Committee. The Committee exposed the massive, fraudulent conversions of tribal people and recommended that a law be enacted to ban such fraudulent practices. The MP government, led by the Congress Party, enacted the Neogi-recommended law banning conversions in the year 1968. The Orissa government, again a Congress-led government, did so even earlier in 1967. And Arunachal Pradesh under the central rule of the government headed by another Gandhi, unrelated to the Mahatma, Indira Gandhi, also passed a similar law.

This is the origin and history of anti-conversion laws in India. So these laws owe their origin in Mahatma Gandhi's wish. He actually wanted a ban on all religious conversions. These laws fall far short of his wish. But she would not know that Gandhiji wanted a total, not partial, ban on conversions. She would not know that it was the Congress in which Gandhi's views were respected which passed these laws first. One can also dismiss her ignorance of the history of a country she is totally unfamiliar as natural. But the tragedy is that, by design, not by accident, this nation itself has kept its people and polity so ignorant of the views of that Gandhi that many today think that this Gandhi's views are also that Gandhi's views!

His statues in lakhs are all over the country from small village panchayat offices to Parliament. Roads running to hundreds of thousands of miles bear his name in every small town. His name is alive through his statues and roads but his ideas are nowhere. That is why the later Gandhis saw the political gain in appropriating his name but rejecting his ideas. Just like the name Gandhi is all over but his ideas are nowhere, the name Congress is all over but Gandhi's ideas are nowhere in the Congress. So, while Mahatma Gandhi had commended a ban on conversions, the Congress led by Sonia Gandhi is opposing even a ban on fraudulent conversions. The difference between the two Congresses is as much as the difference between the two Gandhis - today's Sonia Gandhi and yesterday's Mahatma Gandhi.

OCCULTISM AND SONIA GANDHI

2007-08-30T20:45:00.000-07:00

http://www.francoisgautier.com/Written%20Material/SONIA-%20occult.doc

The consequences of Sonia Gandhi becoming the “Eminence Grise”, as the French say, of India, that is the one who controls everything from behind the scenes, are not only visible for all those who care to look, but also occult, subtle, invisible, yet having far reaching and maybe irreversible consequences. Occultism, in the ancient sense, was the manipulation of forces which cannot be seen, but which constantly clash in the world. In fact one could say that politics is the art of controlling these forces, overtly and covertly. At the top, great leaders create their own occultism: their very presence generates certain atmospheres which make or unmake revolutions.

At the outset, one should first say that the world is not Black & White, Good and Evil, Superman versus the bad guys, as the Americans would like us to believe. Hindu groups need not demonize Sonia. She probably was a good wife to Rajiv, a good daughter in law to Indira - and by all accounts, she is a good mother to her children, judging by the way they dote on her. One also hears first-hand reports about her concern for smaller people, her dignity in the suffering that befell her when her husband was blown to pieces, and her courtesy with visitors.

This said, what is happening in India at the moment, makes me profoundly uneasy. I am a Westerner and a born Christian. Yet I find it absurd that in a country of one billion people, one of the most ancient civilizations of this world, Indians cannot find an Indian to govern themselves. There are many good and talented people within the Congress and one wonders what is this unconscious, occult urge, which makes them look-up to someone, who however good-willing, is alien - if not hostile - to their own culture.

Let’s first look at the visible, overt consequences of Sonia Gandhi’s supreme leadership. There is of course the Iraqi oil-for-food scam. I know Anil Maitrani well: he is a somehow likeable, highly ambitious man, who got caught in his own web of intrigues. Yet, it is an open secret that the go ahead for the Iraqi trip of Natwar Singh, his son and his acolyte came directly from Sonia through her trusted aides. There is also a strong speculation that Sonia Gandhi controls today so much money through the various Gandhi trusts, on top of slush funds nobody knows about, that there lies her ultimate power. And what about Kashmir? Experts says that Islamic militants do not need anymore to risk crossing from Pakistan over dangerous mountain ranges and being shot at by Indian soldiers, they only have to board the Muzaffarabad-Srinagar bus, or cross the LOC under false identities and papers with the connivance of the Pakistani Rangers ! Mr Musharraf has dazzled the West, who laid everywhere a red carpet for him. Is the man who conceived Kargil sincere ? Pervez is a clever magician: nobody in India has found anything to say that he is actually holding talks with the Hurryat leaders, who want Kashmir to separate from India – and most likely go to Pakistan ! There is in India an obsession and a fear of Pakistan, a small country who has lost the four wars it initiated with India.

Let’s come to the covert, occult signs. I am a little uneasy when I see how much Christianity is taking over India under the reign of Sonia Gandhi†: according to a 2001 census, there are about 2.34 million Christians in India†; not even 2,5% of the nation, a negligible amount. Yet there are today five Christian chief ministers in Nagaland, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. One should add that the majority of politicians in Sonia Gandhi’s closed circle are either Christians or Muslims. She seems to have no confidence in Hindus. Ambika Soni, a Christian, is General Secretary of the Congress and a very powerful person, with close access to Sonia Gandhi. Oscar Fernandes is Union Programme Implementation Minister. Margaret Alwa is the eminence grise of Maharasthra. Karnataka is virtually controlled by AK Anthony, whose secretaries are all from the Southern Christian association. Valson Thampu, a Hindu hater, is Chairman NCERT curriculum Review Committee, John Dayal, another known Hindu baiter, has been named by Sonia Gandhi in the National Integration Council†; and Kancha Ilaya, who hates Hindus, is being allowed by the Indian Government to lobby with the UN and US Congress so that caste discrimination in India is taken-up by these bodies.

I share with Sonia a love for India, like her I have lived in this country for over 30 years and like her I have married an Indian. But nevertheless, since she is at the top, Christian conversions in India seem to have gone in overdrive. More than 4,000 foreign Christian missionaries are involved in conversion activities across different states. In Tripura, there were no Christians at independence, there are 120.000 today, a 90% increase since 1991. The figures are even more striking in Arunachal Pradesh, where there were only 1710 Christians in 1961, but 1,2 million today, as well as 780 churches! In Andhra Pradesh, churches are coming-up every day in far flung villages and there was even an attempt to set-up one near Tirupati. Many of the North-East separatist movements, such as the Mizo or the Bodos, are not only Christian dominated, but also sometimes function with the covert backing of the missionaries. In Kerala, particularly in the poor coastal districts, you find “miracle boxes” put in local churches: the gullible villager writes out a paper mentioning his wish: a fishing boat, a loan for a pukka house, fees for the son’s schooling… And lo, a few weeks later, the miracle happens ! And of course the whole family converts, making others in the village follow suit. During the Tsunami, entire dalit villages in Tamil Nadu were converted to Christianity with the lure of money

Then there is this rapid Westernization of India. There are good things in the West: its material consciousness, care for Nature, logical Mind, but it is nevertheless in crisis, its Church is in disarray, three marriages out of five end in divorce and even some children need to go to psychiatrists before they start shooting other children. Yet, if you have a look at most of the mainstream English-speaking Indian magazines and newspapers today, you will notice that all their cover stories deal with western concepts, that they are looking at India from a Western point of view, such as talking about ‘New Age’ spirituality, as if spirituality is new to India, that there is never any reference to India’s great past, or to India’s philosophy, or medicine (which is by the way becoming fashionable in the West). Notice also that when the Pope of Hinduism, the Shankaracharya of Kanchi, is arrested - and it could not have been done without Sonia’s knowledge - the entire Indian intelligentsia claps, though he still has not be proved guilty more than one year later. And that when a new Pope is elected in Rome, we gets in India hours of live coverage and countless cover stories.

Islamization, Westernization, Christianization, anti-Hinduism and Marxisation are the five forces which Sonia has marshaled to subdue India. The occult effect of it is that nobody realizes that in a country of 850 million Hindus, you have now a Sikh Prime Minister - when Sikhs constitute only 2% of the country’s population; a Muslim President - when Muslims are only 10% in India; a communist leader of Parliament – when communism is moribund the world over; and a Western and Christian supreme leader, when Westerners constitute only 0,0001% of India and Christians 3%. Where are the poor Hindus ?

What will happen if India becomes enough westernized at the social level, Christianized and Islamized at the religious level and taken over by the Marxists at the intellectual level ? Not only will India lose its unique soul and just become another western clone in the developing world, but the earth will lose something very precious: an ancient knowledge, a irreplaceable way of being, which makes even the most ordinary farmer or coolie carry something unique in his or her genes: a tolerance, an acceptance that God can take many forms, an innate philosophical mind, an understanding that there is something beyond us, beyond death. Even Indian Christians are different from any Christians in the world, Indian Muslims different from any Muslims in the world. They would also lose.

Maybe it is thus necessary for Indians to see for themselves the harmful effects of Sonia’s queenship : the oil for food scam, the mistrust of Hindus, the bomb blasts, the deteriorating situation in Kashmir, the proliferation of madrasas, the frenzied globalization, the Christian conversion drive... Then only will they realize that is important to have an Indian at the top, someone who is in touch with India’s ideals and spirituality and not someone who is sold the West and these alien western concepts which are Marxism and Christianity.

Francois Gautier

*The author is the correspondent in South Asia for Marianne, one of France’s leading political magazines, as well as the editor of ‘La Revue de l’Inde’ in Paris.

BJP seeks inquiry into `fraud' in Sonia's trust

2007-08-30T20:42:00.001-07:00

http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19990925/ipo25091.html
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE

NEW DELHI, SEPT 24: Elated at the Delhi High Court verdict allowing the Centre to take action against people responsible for converting the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts and Culture into a private trust, the BJP today demanded an inquiry ``into fraud through which public money had been usurped''.

``We have no objection to somebody running a trust to promote art and culture in the country. But why use government land and money for instituting a private trust? A public trust should be controlled by the Government and if it was a private one, trustees should return the Government land and money,'' said BJP general secretary M Venkaiah Naidu.He also demanded immediate action by the Government to retrieve the public property of such enormous value from the trustees.

The original deed of the trust was surreptitiously amended in 1995 when Sonia Gandhi was president of the trust, to convert it into a private trust with control vested in her. Besides, the amendments also enabled her to become its lifepresident and the other trustees to become life trustees.In addition, the President of India's power to appoint a committee to look after the activities of the trust was also done away with, he said.

Naidu said the BJP government had written several letters to the trust seeking details but none of the letters was answered. The IGNCAC is one of the three institutions Sonia Gandhi has taken control of. The other two are the Nehru Memorial Library and the Jawahar Bhavan, land for which had been allocated to house the AICC headquarters.

The party has lodged an official protest with the Election Commission today about the brutal killing of Pannalal Oswal, the BJP candidate from Dhubri constituency in Assam, by ULFA extremists. Oswal is the second BJP candidate to have been killed during electioneering.

Sonia's truth vs Swamy's blasphemy-II

2007-08-30T20:32:00.000-07:00

http://newstodaynet.com/2007sud/jun07/160607.htm

V SUNDARAM

All the enlightened and patriotic people in India committed to the sacred cause of survival of consideration of the ideals of equity and natural justice in our Courts of Law, have been shattered by the manner in which a Bench of the Supreme Court of India, headed by its Chief Justice, cast aside a writ petition presented by Dr Subramanian Swami against the false affidavit filed by Sonia Gandhi in Rae Barelli Parliamentary Constituency relating to her fraudulent educational qualifications in the University of Cambridge. Dr Swami, the former Union Law and Commerce Minister and an elected member of the Lok Sabha from Bombay and Madurai, and later an elected member of the Rajya Sabha was indeed 'treated' as a stateless citizen, if not a refugee from Bangladesh, when the Supreme Court callously used the adjective 'STALE' while dismissing his petition. All that Dr Swami was seeking was SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE in letter and spirit under the SUBSTANTIVE LAW of the Indian Constitution and the Representation of People Act. Likewise he was seeking ADJECTIVE JUSTICE in letter and spirit under the ADJECTIVAL LAW of the India Constitution. Statutory law or written law governs rights and obligations of those who are subject to it. Substantive law defines the legal relationship of people with other people or between them and the state. Substantive law stands in contrast to adjective law (Procedural law), which comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in civil or criminal proceedings. Procedural law deals with the method and means by which substantive law is made and administered. It means the rules according to which the SUBSTANTIVE LAW is administered, e.g., Rules of CIVIL PROCEDURE. In short it is that part of the Law that provides a method for enforcing or maintaining rights, or obtaining redress for their invasion. Adjectival law (Procedural Law) pertains to and prescribes the practice, method, procedure, or legal machinery by which Substantive Law is enforced or made effective. Both the Rule of Substantive Law and the Rule of Adjective Law in India received a lethal death blow when the Supreme Court dismissed Dr Swami's petition as STALE. By doing so in so brash a manner, the Supreme Court of India indeed behaved like Mughal Emperor Akbar. I am only reminded about the words of the eminent Historian Vincent Smith who viewed Akbar's DIN ILAHI �as an outcome of ridiculous vanity, a monstrous growth of unrestrained autocracy�.

In the India of today thanks to the perverted functioning of our political democracy, we have an unchallenged reign and rule of ignorance at all levels. There is a total parity of self- chosen enthusiastic ignorance at all levels of the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Top men in the Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary compete with one another with pseudo-secular gusto in their unquenchable quest or thirst for Himalayan ignorance. I am not therefore surprised that our Courts of Law are just not concerned about the sacred 'Knowledge and Wisdom Traditions' in their own field of endeavour. When the Supreme Court used the adjective STALE in Dr. Subramanian Swami's case, it clearly violated the underlying spirit (if not letter!!) of the following words of wisdom of Justice William O Douglas (1898-1980) of the US Supreme Court, who as a very great Judge with a term lasting 36 years and 7 months, remained the longest-serving justice in the history of the American Supreme Court as of 2007. To quote his words from his Judgment in �Craig Vs Harney, 331 U.S. 367, 374 (1947)�:

�There is no special perquisite of the Judiciary which enables it, as distinguished from other institutions of democratic Government, to suppress, edit or censor events which transpire in proceedings before it�. The Supreme Court of India did precisely that in Dr. Subramanian Swami's Case.

LORD BRIDGE

As a freelance Journalist, I prefer the folly of enthusiasm to the indifference of judicial wisdom. IQ means intelligence quotient. IQ at many levels of our Judiciary in India today, including the highest level of the Supreme Court of India, has come to mean not Intelligence Quotient but Ignorance Quotient, Influence Quotient, Inertia Quotient, Illegality Quotient, Immorality Quotient, Impotence Quotient and Insolence Quotient. IQ can never mean Inspiration Quotient or Illumination Quotient or Integrity Quotient. What should be viewed as scandalous, sacrilegious and nauseating in any civilized society, has become noble, sacred and sacrosanct in today's India. Am I not proclaiming that irony is the gaiety of reflection and the joy of freedom, even if not wisdom?

In a similar sarcastic diction, Anatole France (1844-1924) wrote with great feeling and passion:

�To disarm the strong and arm the weak would be to change the social order which it's my job to preserve.

Justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned

The majestic egalitarianism of the law, which forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.�

Seeing the helpless deathly fate of the writ petition of Dr Subramanian Swami, founded on absolutely legal and reasonable grounds,

I am reminded of what Oscar Wilde said in beautiful verse when he was in Jail:

�Something was dead in each of us,

And what was dead was HOPE�

The unfortunate fate of Dr Subramanian Swami's Writ Petition, should make all of us aware of the fact that we are heading for another dark emergency of the kind that Indira Gandhi�Mother-in-Law of Sonia Gandhi�clamped down upon our nation in 1975. We are indeed heading for an Age of Serfdom, with Supreme Court's finally supreme declaration of Super Sonia Gandhi as the Mighty Mahatma Gandhi of today's India. Here again we the helpless masses of India, whatever might be the callous and cavalier contempt of the Supreme Court of India towards us all, I mean �WE THE PEOPLE�, we should all derive our strength from the following inspiring words� words aflame with fire and aglow with light�of Justice William O Douglas: �As night-fall does not come at once, neither does oppression...It is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air�however slight�lest we become victims of the darkness�. I wish to declare on behalf of all the freedom loving citizens of India that the struggle today is between the helpless individual and his sacred power to express himself and the unabashed power structure of an irresponsible, discriminatory and dictatorial State and Government which seeks conformity, suppression and obedience, not through trial and error but through error and terror. This great and ancient nation, thanks to our wicked Government, is identified today more and more with material things and less and less with spiritual standards derived from our tradition of Sanathana Dharma. We have become an arrogant, selfish and greedy nation interested only in US Dollars, British Sterling and Euro Dollars. We are not interested in people and their hopes, urges and aspirations. We need a faith that dedicates us to something bigger and more important than ourselves or our possessions. Today's establishment in the UPA Government is like that of Genghis Khan (1162-1227) or that of George III (1738-1820). If the State and the Government continue to adhere to the tactics of Genghis Khan or George III, the only redress for the masses of India, honoured in tradition, will be an open and armed revolution. To accomplish great things, we must not only act but also dream, not only plan but also believe. Here again I cannot help quoting Anatole France: �For every monarchy overthrown the sky becomes less brilliant, because it loses a star. A republic is ugliness set free.'

Now it can be asked: �Do academic writers and Journalists have any role to play in all these matters and affairs?� I would like to give an answer to this question from an article by Prof. Glanville Williams in the CAMBRIDGE LAW JOURNAL entitled �The Lords and Impossible Attempts, or Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?�. His sharp argument in this article led to the overruling by the House of Lords of 'Anderton Vs Ryan'.

The effect of Prof. Glanville Williams's article was best expressed in the following words of Lord Bridge: �I cannot conclude this opinion without disclosing that I have had the advantage, since the conclusion of the arguments in this appeal, of reading an article by Prof. Glanville Williams entitled �The Lords and Impossible Attempts, or Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?� (1986) in Cambridge Law Journal. The language in which he criticizes the decision in Anderton Vs Ryan is not conspicuous by its moderation but it would be foolish on that account, not to recognise the force of the criticism and churlish not to acknowledge the assistance I have derived from it.�

The common man in the street in India will feel free and relaxed only on that day when India becomes capable of producing humble, knowledgeable, wise, courageous, straight-forward, impartial, unfettered, undaunted and public spirited Judges, devoted to the letter and spirit of the Law of our Constitution, in our High Courts and our Supreme Court like Lord Bridge of England.

(Concluded)

(The writer is a retired IAS officer)

Sonia's truth vs Swamy's blasphemy-I

2007-08-30T20:30:00.000-07:00

http://newstodaynet.com/2007sud/jun07/150607.htm

V SUNDARAM

As an insignificant freelance journalist and a maverick private citizen, as an anti-establishment individualist, with no claim to fame, no title to distinction, no high office as incumbent and no party politics or other organisations to back or boost me to notice by the pseudo-secular mafia of mass media, I derive my simple moral sanction to pen this article from the following inspiring words of George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950):

'I am and have always been, and shall now always be, a revolutionary writer, because our laws make law impossible; our liberties destroy all freedom: our property is organised robbery; our morality is an impudent hypocrisy; our wisdom administered by inexperienced or mal-experienced dupes, our power wielded by cowards and weaklings, and our honour false in all its points. I am an enemy of the existing order.'

Sonia Gandhi

This is the only way in which I can react to the wayward and lawless ways of our 'noble' judiciary in India. In these columns last month, in an article titled 'The Darkest Day in our Legal History,' I had expressed my shock and concern about the authoritarian manner bordering on medieval judicial (Injudicious!) despotism, totally divorced from the letter and spirit of all known canons of Equity and Natural Justice, in which the Supreme Court of India had summarily dismissed the writ petition of Dr Subramaniam Swamy on the fundamental issue of Sonia Gandhi's (the spiritual and moral heir of Mahatma Gandhi according to our Judiciary!!) false affidavit in 2004 before the Returning Officer of Rae Barelli Parliamentary constituency regarding her non-existent and bogus educational qualifications from the University of Cambridge in England.

Subramaniam Swamy

A three-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices B P Singh and G P Mathur asked Dr Swamy: 'Should the Supreme Court go into all the affidavits to find out they are false or not. Further investigation is not possible into a STALE ISSUE and it should be dropped.' It was a disastrous and disgraceful moment of deliberate dethronement of the Rule of Law, the Rule of Equality before the Law and the Rule of Monarchical Majesty of Law, not at the level of a III Class Magistrate in a remote village in Arunachal Pradesh but at the highest judicial level of the Supreme Court of India in New Delhi. Indeed it was a 'Moment of Nadir' in the tortured and chequered history of the march of Indian law towards the dark valley of judicial death.

However, for the Supreme Court of India at that moment, Sonia Gandhi shone pure as a crystal of virtue and public morality, apart from setting a supreme example of snow white transcendental truth. Applying these standards of TRUTH set and defined by the Supreme Court of India, the Madras High Court, in a historic judgement delivered on 13 June, 2007 and which will get quoted and re-quoted for centuries to come, directed the Chief Election Commissioner and Tamilnadu Chief Electoral Officer to initiate within six weeks action against AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa for filing false declarations in her nominations for four constituencies during the 2001 Assembly elections. All that the Supreme Court of India and our High Courts have to do to dethrone eternal Euclid in the realm of Geometry, is to declare that according to the noblest traditions of our convoluted judicial arithmetic and geometry, 2004 preceded 2001 and not vice versa! Then it will become easier for our Parliament to incorporate this mathematical judicial axiom into our sinking Constitution by amending it. The fact that Jayalalithaa was thrown out by the people of Tamilnadu in the 2006 Assembly Elections is not a 'Stale Issue,' applying the supremely solemn declaration founded on sanctimonious humbug, emanating from the humming sighs of our Men In Robes at the highest levels of our judiciary in our degraded and debauched land today. A Division Bench of Justices Dharmarao Elipe and S Palanivelu gave the directive while passing orders on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by DMK MP C Kuppusamy in 2002. In a Non-Stale Manner the High Court of Madras declared: 'Persons holding high offices/positions should be role models to the general public and if they venture to commit flagrant violation of rule and laws and that too knowingly, that should not be taken lightly as it would send wrong signals that laws are meant only for general public and not for bigwigs who can go scot free.' Applying this sterling and judicially cast-iron yard stick, DMK MP C Kuppuswamy is a small wig and Jayalalithaa is a big wig. Viewing the whole issue in a sedately and suavely 'stale manner,' perhaps applying the same yardstick pari passu at the level of the Supreme Court of India may be (!!!) neither 'legally feasible' nor 'morally desirable' or 'officially pardonable'! The moral of the Supreme Court story is that Sonia Gandhi is a small wig and the renegade Dr. Subramaniam Swamy is a big wig and he is also guilty of avoidable blasphemy.

As an irrepressible and indomitable fighter for several public causes, at all costs, in spite of all terror and however long and hard the road may be, Subramaniam Swamy has issued the following statement which graphically presents to the public the 'acts' and 'deeds', 'puerile pronouncements' and 'gaseous effusions' of injustice emanating from our judiciary on vital matters affecting the life of our nation: 'I am moving a Review Petition in the Supreme Court to seek Sonia Gandhi's prosecution for perjury, based on the perceptive observations made yesterday (13 June, 2007) by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court consisting of Justices Dharmarao Elipe and S Palanivelu. The Learned Judges held that the alleged perjury of Jayalalithaa need to be proceeded with because................'

Applauding the Madras High Court Bench, I want the Supreme Court to review their order of 17 May dismissing my SLP against Sonia Gandhi's false declaration in affidavit on her educational qualification filed in 2004. The First Bench had held that the matter was 'STALE' and that I should be 'large hearted' while pursuing such cases.

However by comparison with Jayalalithaa, Sonia Gandhi's commission of the offence of perjury is far more serious because Sonia had lied about her educational qualifications. Jayalalithaa had merely furnished wrong and false details relating to the number of nominations filed by her in the 2001 Assembly elections in Tamilnadu. It is also much less 'STALE' since Sonia Gandhi filed a false affidavit in 2004, while Jayalalithaa's false averment was in 2001.

Hence, there cannot be two standards of justice, one for Sonia Gandhi and another for Jayalalithaa. It violates Article 14 of the Constitution. Otherwise a wrong signal will, to borrow the Madras High Court Bench's words, be sent to the general public that Sonia Gandhi is above the law, and can go scot free. The only contrived 'difference' between Sonia Gandhi and Jayalalithaa is that the latter is from an Indian family background, and has no dynasty to boast.�

Dr Subramaniam Swamy's brilliant and unassailable expose of the goings on in the decadent judiciary in India, brings to my mind the delightful account by Lord Dunning of the barbaric origin of fiat justitta in Rome in the days of the Roman Empire:

''Let justice be done

As done in Rome''

'In my coat of arms, I took as my motto, Fiat justitia' Let justice be done believing it to have a respectable origin. I have since discovered that it was first used to excuse the most outrageous injustice. It comes from a story told in Seneca. Pisco sentenced a soldier to death for the murder of Gaius. He ordered a centurion (a Roman official) to execute the sentence. When the soldier was about to be executed, Gaius came forward himself alive and well. The centurion reported it to Piso. He sentenced all three to death. The soldier because he had already been sentenced. The centurion for disobeying orders. And Gaius for being the cause of the death of two innocent men. Pisco excused it by the plea- Fiat justitia, ruat coelum - Let justice be done, though the heavens should fall.'

Our national misfortune is that we have had very few men of the judicial and moral stature of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935) in our judiciary in our country after our independence. In his famous dissent in the LOCHNER CASE, he said that a judge should be trained to summarily disregard his personal likes and dislikes. He said: 'The correct question to ask is not : 'Do I consider the restriction reasonable but would a reasonable man necessarily consider it unreasonable?' The test therefore is not the subjective view of the judge as to reasonableness but the objective test of the reasonable man which is applied in several branches of the law. We in our country have not realised that if a Judge's social, political and economic theories and views were casually permitted to intrude in his decision on constitutional questions, we will be creating an unmanageable and uncontrollable jungle of POLITICAL JUDICIARY, letting loose an avalanche of unanswerable questions relating to the method of appointment of Judges to the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India. Besides, our Courts are Courts of general jurisdiction and are not limited to the determination of constitutional questions alone. In view of this, if the politics of a Judge becomes material for his appointment to the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India as indeed it has become in all parts of India during the last three decades and more particularly in 'highly communal' Tamilnadu, fair and impartial decision of cases would become impossible by virtue of the fact that the personal views of the judge may often obtrude in his judicial pronouncements. Criminalisation of politics may be disastrous for our nation; but even more disastrous is the politicisation of our judiciary which has kept an even pace, shoulder to shoulder, arm upon arm, along with criminalisation of politics.

(To be contd...)

(The writer is a retired IAS officer)

Sonia returns and decides to open secret files on communist leaders of India to quickly shut them up

2007-08-30T19:20:00.000-07:00

http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/17971.asp
Balaji Reddy
Aug. 25, 2007

Notwithstanding CPI(M) politburo member Sitaram Yechuri denying any crisis or threat to the UPA Government, Congress President Sonia Gandhi got into the firefighting mode immediately after arriving here Friday evening from abroad, telling the party leaders that she sees the crisis still simmering and will have to be tackled completely. Even while on the flight, she sent out instructions to convene a meeting of the Congress core group to take stock of the situation since she left India four days ago and she was chairing the meeting in less than two hours of landing at the Indira Gandhi International Airport here.

India's super PM Sonia Gandhi maintains a set of secret corruption files on every Indian politician. These files are used to shut the mouth these people when they start talking against her and her party. She is now showing these files to the communists and threatening to expose them completely.

The Congress sources said Sonia Gandhi was happy to note CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat's comment on Thursday while releasing his central committee's resolution that the left was not at all interested in pulling down the government. She wanted the government to reciprocate by holding free and frank discussions, inviting the left leaders to understand their requirements regarding the Indo-US nuclear deal.