Double standards over the Covid-19 lockdown

Many people who had supported Jamaat, even in lockdown, where it is allegedly said that COVID-19 will not affect people coming here, have started criticizing Modi after he asked for to light up for a few minutes on a particular time and day. 

They argue that Modi is spreading blind faith as lighting up will kill coronavirus. When did Modi say so? Of course, coronavirus is a medical issue. 

I feel pity for their double standards; either they are a fool or showing cunningness. It's the poison of hatred for Modi rooted in their mind.

Lighting up is to feel a sense of inspiration and motivation in a situation when everyone is locked down. It's just as an army play patriotic songs and drum, knowing that a song and drum will not defeat an enemy. But it gives a boost to fight. 

We may have a disagreement with Modi on several issues, but in the current situation, we must show solidarity and follow guidelines.

Political drama on illegal immigrants in India

This is unfortunate that a very serious issue, which is related to national security, has become a matter of vote-bank politics among our politicians. There should be a national consensus on such a serious issue. But it is sad to see that the political parties and its leaders who were in support of the identification of illegal immigrants in India are now taking a reverse stand.

Mamta Banerjee, Chief Minister of West Bengal, who is very vocal on this issue and taking a very hard-line. She has said a few days ago that there will be a civil war in the country if illegal immigrants will not be included in NRC. She was once completely against these illegal immigrants and misbehaved to Lok Sabha Speaker in 2005 when UPA government was taking action against them. It's because those immigrants were considered a voter of the Communist Party of India (CPI), but now the situation has changed those are now voter of TMC and their presence suits Mamta Banerjee.

I am a strong believer that there should be an injustice to anyone. Those who are dropped from NRC for any reason, they should be a given a chance to validate their legal position. On the other hand, it's also possible that some names would have been included which should not be in NRC. Both angles should be investigated and re-verified. National security should be the utmost priority for everyone and every party. It should not be seen with Hindu and Muslim scanners. 

How a divided India fuelled the rise of the gurus

The followers of a popular Indian guru in northern India have rampaged through towns, vandalising property, setting railway stations on fire, smashing cars, setting media vans alight and clashing with security forces. Several lives have been lost in the violence.

They are angry because a court found Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh guilty of raping two women at the headquarters of his religious group, known as Dera Sacha Sauda, in 2002.

To his millions of supporters - mostly underprivileged, lower caste men and women - Singh is a protean leader of his flock. He mutates effortlessly from spiritual leader to flashy entertainer.

He talks about a life lived in "reasonable restraint", but himself lives opulently. The guru of bling - as some call him - is the main actor in garish, self-produced films and the lead singer in noisy open air concerts packed to the gills by a captive audience of devoted follower-fans. His first music album was curiously titled Highway Love Charger and apparently sold millions of copies.

The guru's social outreach is equally intriguing. Singh runs charities, and so-called movements to promote blood, eye and cadaver donations. He campaigns for vegetarianism. But he also makes gay men sign declarations vowing to "give up homosexual behaviour" under his "holy guidance", and was once accused of forcing followers to undergo castration to "get closer to god".

A journalist who visited the sprawling headquarters of Singh's dera - a religious group, Punjab has more than 100 of them - told me she was struck by buildings with human ear-shaped windows and high turquoise walls topped with multi-coloured fruit-shaped water tanks.

"It seemed to me," she told me, "that he's a guru who lives out his dreams and fantasies - movie star, rock singer, do-gooder, political influencer - through his group and his devotees. In the process, he also helps his followers to dream big."

India has always had gurus for as longer as one can remember. There are global gurus like the flamboyant Maharishi Mahesh Yogi to whom the Beatles turned to for spiritual salvation in the 1960s. And there are domestic gurus for rich and poor with huge followings.

The gurus count politicians, film and cricket stars, bureaucrats and ordinary people among their devotees. They run schools and hospitals. They peddle influence as superstitious politicians run to them for advice and votes of their devotees. Proximity to a guru legitimises a politician and adds to his power. Gurus like Singh virtually run parallel states, providing services to followers.

The 50-year-old Singh, who will be sentenced on Monday, is one of the more controversial ones. In the past, gurus - or "godmen" as they are called in India - have been accused of murder, rape, trafficking, assault, sexual abuse and fraud.

Singh himself has been accused of mocking Sikh and Hindu figures, and investigated for murder and rape. Although the bulk of his devotees are lower caste, poor and underprivileged, his core group include highly-educated professional followers.

Many believe that millions of people flock to the dozens of religious groups like Singh's because they feel that mainstream politics and religion have failed them. In what they feel is an increasingly inequitable world, they feel let down by their politicians and priests, and turn to gurus and shamans for succour.

"In many ways, the rise of gurus like Singh tells us something about how conventional politics and religion have been failing a large number of people. So they turn to unconventional religion to seek some dignity and quality. Such groups have arisen in many parts of the democratic, modern world. They find equality by sharing common spaces and ceremonies with millions of fellow followers," sociologist Shiv Visvanathan told me.

Not without reason, Singh's followers share a common invented surname, Insan (Human) - as opposed to an individual surname which reveals your caste and place in society.

Clearly, the rise of the gurus and religious groups tells us how deeply divided and hierarchical India remains. Friday's violence once again showed how such gurus can end up running a parallel state, and the seeming powerlessness of the state itself.

Source: BBC

Can English be a criteria to judge you?

Being an Indian, firstly two things are coming in my mind – education in mother tongue and the saving environment by stopping deforestation and planting more trees. 

There are many talents remain unnoticed and I would say a murder of talents just because of they are not being provided right platforms. Language becomes the major barrier. In India, it has become a mindset that knowing English is the only stair that can be used to achieve success. Instead of shaping up their talents, young minds start following the English, and at the end, they realize that their talent has been left far behind. In my opinion, English is just a language like many others in the world. It’s just to express your thought. Any language that one knows better can be used to express him/herself. Instead of wasting time or doing a futile exercise to learn a language, one should more focus on to improve the talent that they have. Judging a person with his/her English is just a foolish idea. How can one judge the capacity of a person by a language which is not his/her mother tongue? He/she learns it like other subjects in school. One can be very good in Mathematics, Economics etc without being very good in English. European countries are the very good example of this, where they are stick to their mother tongue and use the energy to improve natural interests.

Your opinion is well appreciated.

Thanks for reading my views!

Support demonetisation even if you cannot support Modi

कुछ लोग ऐसे हैं जो अपनी बात तक शुद्ध हिंदी में नहीं कर सकते, वो आजकल आर्थिक विशेषज्ञ बने हुए हैं। कुछ तो ऐसे भी हैं जो सरकार के विमुद्रिकरण की नीति का समर्थन करने वालों को व्यंगात्मक रूप से मोदी भक्त कहने लगते हैं। लेकिन खुद ये भूल जाते हैं को वे लोग मोदी विरोध में इतने अंधे हो चुके हैं कि अपने तर्क का समर्थन करने के लिए न जाने कहाँ-कहाँ से वेबसाइट्स का सन्दर्भ ले रहे हैं। जनतंत्र में असहमति एवं विरोध का उतना ही अधिकार है जितना की चुनी हुई सरकारों का, लेकिन दोनों की अपनी सीमायें होती हैं। बुरे का विरोध और अच्छे की सराहना होनी चाहिए, यही जनतंत्र की बुनियाद है। विमुद्रिकरण से समस्याएं बहुत हैं, लेकिन काले धन से मुक्त होना इन समस्याओं से ज़्यादा ज़रूरी है। देशहित में और आने वाली पीढ़ियों के बेहतर भविष्य के लिए इन समस्याओँ को ये सोचते हुए कि देशहित में योगदान कर रहे हैं, बर्दाश्त करें। लोग विरोध तो कर रहे हैं लेकिन विकल्प नहीं बता रहे, ऐसे लोगों पर ध्यान न दें। उनका उद्देश्य सिर्फ मोदी विरोध का तरीका ढूंढना है, आपसे उनका कुछ लेना-देना नहीं है। मोदी से बदला लेने के लिए आपके पास वोट का विकल्प है जो आप समय आने पर उपयोग करेंगे, लेकिन देशहित में विमुद्रिकरण का सहयोग करें।

Varun Pruthi - Don't bargain with poor vendors

किसानों को फसल का दाम लगाने का हक़ मिले

सोच कर बड़ा दुःख होता है कि हमारे देश में जहाँ पैसा पानी की तरह बहाया जाता है, जैसे कि आईपीएल हो, बड़े घरानों की शादियाँ हों, वहीँ बहुत से लोग भूख से मर जाते हैं, आत्महत्या के लिए मज़बूर हो जाते हैं और बेघर हैं। ग़रीब आदमी क़र्ज़ के बोझ से लदा हुआ है जिसकी परिणति उसकी आत्महत्या में होती है और बड़े व्यापारिक घरानों को कर में छूट दी जाती है। हमें पश्चिमी देशों से सीखना चाहिए जहाँ सोशल सिक्योरिटी होती है जिसे बड़े करदाताओं के पैसों से बड़ी आसानी से दिया जाता है। हमारे देश में लोग अक्सर ये सवाल पूछते हुए दिखाई देते हैं कि मैं इतना कर क्यों दूँ, मैं पूछता हूँ कि आपने जो पैसा कमाया है उसपे थोड़ा सा हक़ तो ग़रीब जनता का बनता ही है क्योंकि जिन संसाधनों से आपने पैसा कमाया है उसपे भारत का नागरिक होने के नाते ग़रीब का भी उतना ही हक़ है। 

एक पानी की बोतल २० रुपये में बिक जाती है, कोई नहीं कहता की पानी इतना महंगा है। आखिर ऐसा क्यों होता है कि किसान अपनी मेहनत और पसीने से जो फसल उगाता है उसकी कीमत वातानुकूलित कमरों में बैठे लोग लगाते हैं, और जो कीमत लगायी जाती है वो कौड़ियों के भाव होती है। इससे किसान के लिए अपनी लागत ही निकाल पाना मुश्किल होता है, क़र्ज़ चुका पाना, अपने बच्चों को अच्छी शिक्षा या परिवार की अच्छी देखभाल कर पाना तो दूर की बात होती है। जैसे बहुराष्ट्रीय कंपनियों को पानी की बोतल का दाम लगाने का हक़ है वैसे ही किसानों को भी अपनी फसल का सही दाम लगाने का हक़ होना ही चाहिए। ऐसा करके बेरोज़गार युवाओं को खेती के लिए आकर्षित किया जा सकता है, जो उनके रोज़गार की समस्या में भी बड़ी सहायक सिद्ध होगी। 

Kanhaiya Kumar of JNU, a crusader?

Kanhaiya Kumar was confined within the boundary of JNU before he was arrested. After the anti-national slogans raised in JNU (we still don't know who were those hooligans, but it was raised that everyone is admitting), he has become a crusader against casteism, manuwaad etc. What is the link between the incident for which he was arrested and the iconic role that he was being named (crusader as I said)? What is his contribution against poverty, casteism etc. I am not telling that he doesn't have that capacity but it's too early to be portrayed him as an icon. Right now he is just an student leader like many others in country.

Court didn't give him clean chit - he is on 6 months interim bail. We still don't know if he was involved or not - let the court decide. But we have to be careful the way we are portraying him now. If we start considering every accused as martyr based on his speech out of the jail, then what's the role of courts in our country. Many people who are involved in heinous crime can give very nice speech - are you ready to judge them based on their speeches. Then why do people question Narendra Modi for Gujarat riot even courts let him to go, he is also a good orator.

I wish that Kanhaiya come out with clean chit - but if in case he could not by court then what will you say? We know Nitish Kumar's U-turn after Ishrat Jahan as a 'Bihar ki Beti' case.

Malda and Purnia - going to be another Godhra turned Gujarat?

AIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi is alleged for the same case (same IPC sections of constitution in FIR) as Kamlesh Tiwari. Both statements are unfortunate and any sensible person cannot support. But the difference is that Kamlesh Tiwari is in jail and protestors are demanding death sentence which is against the Indian constitution while Asaduddin Owaisi is not even arrested. Everyone has right to protest but cannot break the law and attack other community as done in Malda and Purnia. Suppose, if it would have been done for Asaduddin Owaisi from other community then social media would have been populated with so called "Secular Preachers".

Owaisi holds responsible position while Kamlesh is a patient with mental disorder (psychosis) - once he declared himself Netaji Subhas Chand Bose and was wearing a dress like Netaji for one year and then went for treatment.

It's very unfortunate that no one is talking about. Are they waiting for Godhra (train burning) turned Gujarat? It should be condemned and should take strong action against those making hatred speeches.

Anna's Letter to PM Modi

दि. 01/01/2016

जा.क्र. भ्रविज- 46/2015-16

प्रति,

मा. नरेंद्र मोदी जी,

प्रधान मंत्री, भारत सरकार,

रायसीना हिल, नई दिल्ली

विषय- भ्रष्टाचार को कुछ हद तक रोकने के लिए लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त कानून का अमल करने हेतु और किसानों की खेती पैदावार के लिए सही दाम मिले, इस बारे में।

महोदय,

सस्नेह वंदे।

कांग्रेस की सरकार में भ्रष्टाचार बढ़ गया था। अपने काम के लिए किसी भी दफ़्तर में गए तो बिना पैसा दिए जनता का काम ही नहीं हो रहा था। बढ़ते भ्रष्टाचार के कारण महंगाई भी बढ़ गई थी। देश की जनता भ्रष्टाचार से त्रस्त हो गई थी। ग्राम-विकास किए बिना और भ्रष्टाचार को रोके बिना समाज और देश को उज्जवल भविष्य नहीं मिलेगा, ऐसा सोच कर विगत तीस सालों से मैं ग्राम विकास कार्य के साथ भ्रष्टाचार को रोकने के लिए आंदोलन करते आया हूं। मुझ जैसा एक फकीर आदमी, जिसके पास ना धन, ना दौलत, ना सत्ता, ना पैसा है, सिर्फ सोने का बिस्तर और खाने के लिए प्लेट है। लेकिन भ्रष्टाचार रोकने के लिए लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त कानून बने इस हेतु दिल्ली में रामलीला मैदान में 16 अगस्त से 28 अगस्त तक 13 दिन तक मैं अनशन पर बैठा था।

देश के बढते भ्रष्टाचार को रोकना जरूरी है। यह जनता की मन से इच्छा थी। जनता भ्रष्टाचार से बाज आ गई थी। इस लिए पूरे देश की जनता आंदोलन के लिए खड़ी हो गई थी। खास तौर पर युवा शक्ति बड़े पैमाने में रास्ते पर उतर आई थी। देश के हर राज्य में, जिला, तहसील, गांव स्तर पर यह आंदोलन फैल गया था। आजादी के बाद पहली बार देश में इतना बड़ा आंदोलन जनता ने किया था।

बढ़ते भ्रष्टाचार के कारण देश की जनता उस सरकार पर नाराज हो गई थी। ऐसी स्थिति में जब देश में अप्रेल-मई 2014 में लोकसभा का चुनाव आ गया, और आपने जनता को आश्वासन दिया कि, हमारी पार्टी सत्ता में आती है तो, हम भ्रष्टाचार के विरोध की लडाई को प्राथमिकता देंगे। जनता ने आपके शब्दों पर विश्वास किया कि आपकी सरकार सत्ता में आने पर भ्रष्टाचार मुक्त भारत निर्माण होगा। लेकिन आज भी कहीं पर भी अपने काम के लिए जाने पर बिना पैसा दिए जनता का काम नहीं होता है। न ही महंगाई कम हुई है। उस सरकार और आपकी सरकार में विशेष तौर पर भ्रष्टाचार के बारे में कोई फर्क दिखाई नहीं देता है। जब आप लोकसभा में पहली बार जा रहे थे तब लोकसभा की सीढियों पर नमन करते हुए आपने देशवासियों से कहा था कि, मैं लोकसभा के एक पवित्र मंदिर में प्रवेश कर रहा हूं, उस मंदिर को पवित्र रखने का प्रयास करुंगा। लेकिन ऐसा चित्र कहीं भी नजर नहीं आ रहा है। लोकसभा का पूरा का पूरा सत्र झगड़े-टण्टे में जा रहा है। जनता का करोडों रुपया बर्बाद हो रहा है।

आपने जनता को यह भी आश्वासन दिया था कि, हमारे देश का काला धन जो विदेशों में छुपा है, उसको हमारी पार्टी के सत्ता में आने पर 100 दिन के अंदर देश में वापस लाएंगे और हर व्यक्ति के बैंक अकाउंट में 15 लाख रुपया जमा करेंगे। उस से देश का भ्रष्टाचार कम होगा। लेकिन आज तक किसी व्यक्ती के बँक अकाउँट में 15 लाख तो क्या 15 रुपया भी जमा नहीं हुआ है।

आप की सरकार को सत्ता में आ कर डेढ साल से ज़्यादा समय हो चुका है। लेकिन भ्रष्टाचार को रोकने के लिए जो लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त कानून बना है, उस पर न तो आप कुछ बोलते हैं और न ही उस पर अमल करते हैं। हम उम्मीद लगाए हुए थे कि मन की बात में कभी लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त के विषय पर आप कुछ ना कुछ बोलेंगे। क्यों कि भ्रष्टाचार के विरोध की लडाई को प्राथमिकता देने की बात देश की जनता से आपने जो कही थी।

हो सकता है, उन बातों का शायद आपको विस्मरण हो गया हो, इसलिए आपको फिर से याद दिलाने के लिए यह पत्र लिख रहा हूं। मुझे यह पता है कि, आज तक आपको लिखे मेरे कई पत्र आपकी कचरे की टोकरी में डल चुके हैं। इस पत्र की भी शायद वही गति होने वाली है, फिर भी समाज और देश की भलाई के लिए मेरी कोशिश जारी रहेगी। देश की जनता ने करोड़ों की संख्या में लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त के लिए देश में आंदोलन किया था। आश्वासन दे कर उस पर  अमल नहीं करना यह, मैं मानता हूं, जिन देशवासियों ने इतना बड़ा आंदोलन किया था उनका अपमान है।

जैसा कि, आप अपने आपको प्रधान सेवक मानते हैं, और वास्तविकता में यह सही भी है कि जनता इस देश की मालिक है। जनता की सनद का कानून बनवाने का आश्वासन न केवल तत्कालीन सरकार ने, बल्कि विरोधी दल के नाते आपके पार्टी के श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज जी, मा. अरुण जेटली जी इन्होंने भी दिया था।

भ्रष्टाचार को मिटाने के लिए और भी कई आश्वासन दिए थे। लेकिन उनकी आपूर्ति नहीं हुई है। कृषि-प्रधान भारत देश के किसानों को आप ने आश्वासन दिया था कि, किसान खेती में पैदावारी के लिए जो खर्चा करता है, उसका डेढ़ गुना मूल्य किसानों को अपनी खेती की पैदावारी से मिलेगा। लेकिन आज भी खेती माल को सही दाम ना मिलने के कारण देश का किसान आत्महत्या करने पर मजबूर है। सच बोलने पर तो सगी मां को भी गुस्सा आता है। मैं तो देश की जनता की भलाई के लिए और देश के उज्जवल भविष्य, देश के विकास के लिए सच बोलते आया हूं। इसी वजह से आपको भी शायद गुस्सा आता होगा और सम्भवत: इसी कारण मेरे पत्र आप कूड़ादान में डालते होंगे।

एक प्रधान मंत्री नरसिंह राव जी, थे जो कभी-कभार फोन पर बातचीत किया करते थे। समाज और देश के भलाई की बात किया करते थे। मा. अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी जी कभी पुणे में आने पर जरूर पूछताछ किया करते थे। मुलाकात होने पर देश के विकास और खास कर ग्रामविकास की बातें करते थे। एक प्रधान मंत्री मनमोहन सिंह जिनके विरोध में मैं खूब बोलता था, आंदोलन करता था। उनकी तरफ से भी मेरे पत्र का जवाब मिलता था। श्री शेषाद्री जी जो आर.एस.एस. के जानेमाने नेता थे, उनका और मेरा कोई प्रत्यक्ष संबंध नहीं था लेकिन हमारा काम देखने वे रालेगण सिद्धी गांव में आए थे और एक कर्मयोगी का गांव नाम की छोटी किताब उन्होंने लिखी थी। कितने बडे मन के लोग थे।

मेरी यह बिलकुल अपेक्षा नहीं है कि मेरे पत्र का आप मुझे जवाब दें। मेरा हर कर्म निष्काम कर्म है। मुझे आपसे न कुछ लेना न ही कुछ मांगना है। मेरी 25 साल की उम्र में मैंने व्रत ले लिया कि जब तक जीऊंगा तब तक मेरा गांव, समाज और देश की सेवा करूंगा। और जिस दिन मैं मरूंगा, देश की सेवा करते मरूंगा। देश और देश की जनता की भलाई के लिए जनता की ओर से जो पत्र आप के पास आते हैं, मैं मानता हूं कि देश के प्रधान सेवक होने के नाते आपने उनका जवाब देना जरुरी है। यह भी मैं समझ सकता हूं कि, देश की जनता में से हर एक को जवाब देना आपके लिए सम्भव नहीं है। लेकिन समाज और देश के भलाई के लिए समर्पित भाव से देश में कार्य करने वाले कार्यकर्ता को पत्र का जवाब मिलना चाहिए। आपके जवाब न देने से ऐसे कार्यकर्ताओं का कार्य रुकता तो नहीं है। वह चलते ही रहता है।

लम्बे अंतराल के बाद मैंने लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त कानून पर अमल करने के लिए और किसानों के खेती माल के लिए सही दाम मिले ताकि किसान आत्महत्या ना करें, इन बातों की याद दिलाने के लिए पत्र लिखा है। सत्ता तो आखिर आपके हाथों में है। यूं लगता है कि सत्ता की भी एक नशा होती है। सत्ता के आगे मुझ जैसे एक फकीर आदमी का क्या बस चलेगा? किया तो आखिर कार वह आंदोलन ही कर सकता है, जो अधिकार संविधान ने हर नागरिक को दे रखा है।

नए साल की शुभकामनाएं। नए साल के अवसर पर हम सब एक साथ मिलकर भ्रष्टाचार मुक्त भारत निर्माण करने का संकल्प करे।

धन्यवाद।

भवदीय,

कि. बा. तथा अण्णा हजारे

जलाओ दिये पर रहे ध्यान इतना… Happy New Year 2016

जलाओ दिये पर रहे ध्यान इतना

अँधेरा धरा पर कहीं रह न जाये।

नयी ज्योति के धर नये पंख झिलमिल,

उडे मर्त्य मिट्टी गगन-स्वर्ग छू ले,

लगे रोशनी की झड़ी झूम ऐसी,

निशा की गली में तिमिर राह भूले,

खुले मुक्ति का वह किरण-द्वार जगमग,

ऊषा जा न पाये, निशा आ ना पाये।

जलाओ दिये पर रहे ध्यान इतना

अन्धेरा धरा पर कहीं रह न जाये।

सृजन है अधूरा अगर विश्व भर में,

कहीं भी किसी द्वार पर है उदासी,

मनुजता नहीं पूर्ण तब तक बनेगी,

कि जब तक लहू के लिए भूमि प्यासी,

चलेगा सदा नाश का खेल यूँ ही,

भले ही दिवाली यहां रोज आये |

जलाओ दिये पर रहे ध्यान इतना

अन्धेरा धरा पर कहीं रह न जाये।

मगर दीप की दीप्ति से सिर्फ जग में,

नहीं मिट सका है धरा का अँधेरा,

उतर क्यों न आयें नखत सब नयन के,

नहीं कर सकेंगे हृदय में उजेरा,

कटेंगे तभी यह अँधरे घिरे अब,

स्वयं धर मनुज दीप का रूप आये।

जलाओ दिये पर रहे ध्यान इतना

अँधेरा धरा पर कहीं रह न जाये।

                                       - गोपालदास ‚नीरज

कविवर नीरज जी की इस कविता के सन्देश के साथ 

आप सभी को नव वर्ष की हार्दिक शुभकामनाएँ !!

Where we stand in the World?

आजकल हमारे देश में इस बात की चिंता कम है कि कई लोग भूख से मर रहें हैं, इस बात की चिंता ज़्यादा है कि कोई क्या खा रहा है। हम बात तो विकास की करते हैं, लेकिन चुनाव के मुद्दे विकास के नहीं होते, और होते भी हैं तो सिर्फ घोषणा पत्रों में। दुनिया कहाँ से कहाँ पहुंच रही है, और हमारे राजनेता आज भी देश की जनता को २४ घंटे बिजली आएगी और सबके रहने के लिए घर होगा का चुनावी वादा करते हैं, ये अपने आप में देश के हालात बयां करती हैं।

मैं यूरोप में रहता हूँ, २०१४ के शुरुआत में यहाँ आया, यहाँ से जब अपने देश के हालात की तुलना करता हूँ तो पाता हूँ कि हम तो कहीं टिकते भी नहीं। भारत का आर्थिक हालत कुछ भी हो, भले ही हम दुनिया की बड़ी अर्थव्यवस्थाओं में खुद को शुमार करने का दम्भ भरते हों, लेकिन आमजनता के रहने का जो मापदंड है उसकी तो कोई तुलना भी नहीं की जा सकती। यहाँ पर जीवन मूल्य का उच्चत्तम मापदंड है, सबको सारी सुविधाएँ मिल रही हैं, वहीँ हमारे देश में क्या है, लोग सड़कों पर भूखे सोने को मज़बूर हैं और फिर कोई अतिविशिष्ट उनको रौंद कर चला जाता है, और होता कुछ भी नहीं है। सुविधाएँ तो सिर्फ राजनेताओं को मिल रही हैं, लोग पार्टी के नाम पर पारिवारिक कंपनी चला रहे हैं, जहाँ उनके बच्चे एक के बाद एक खप रहे हैं, ऐसी पार्टियां खुद का जनाधार बढ़ाने या उसका वज़ूद बचाये रखने के लिए आमजनता के मन में जाति एवं धर्म के नाम पे ज़हर घोलती रहती हैं।

मेरी मेरे देशवासियों से निवेदन है कि ऐसे राजनेताओं को अपना आदर्श न बनायें और खुद भी ऐसी भ्रामक बातों से बचें और ऐसे लोगों को सबक सिखाएं। इनके मुद्दे चुनाव में बिकते हैं तभी ये ऐसे मुद्दे लेकर आते हैं, जब हम इन मुद्देों को खरीदना या जवाब देना बंद कर देंगे तब ये खुद-ब-खुद सुधर जायेंगे। 

Open Letter to Arvind Kejriwal by Prashant Bhushan

I agree, every person should be given a chance to put forward his/her points- one sided decision can't be justified in any means. Even Kasab, who was clearly seen in video footage firing on the people, was provided legal help. If Prashant Bhushan really wanted AAP to loose assembly election, he could have resigned from the party at the beginning when these issues were raised but he did not choose to. He was against the unethical decision of Arvind Kejriwal not the party.

Below is the letter from Prashant Bhushan to Arvind Kejriwal:

Dear Arvind,

In the National Council meeting held on the March 28, in your Convenor's address, instead of giving a review of the party's situation and the path ahead, you chose to launch an attack on Yogendra Ji, my father and me, making all sorts of false and inflammatory allegations against us. Your speech incited several Delhi MLAs- (who were invited despite not being members of the NC) to scream that we were "gaddars" who should be thrown out, and behave in the manner of hooligans. Such was the ferocity of the mob of these MLAs and others as they rushed towards my father, that he felt that he may not get out of this alive.

You did not even allow us to respond to your allegations. Immediately after your speech, in the middle of shouting and screaming by MLAs and others, Manish read out a resolution for our removal (without any chair, and without anyone allowing him to do so). He then proceeded to call for vote by show of hands without allowing any discussion, forcing us to walk out of what had clearly become a farce.

It was farcical for many reasons: Many members of the NC had not been invited or allowed to attend; more than half the people inside the meeting hall were non-members, which included MLAs, district and State convenors of four states, volunteers and bouncers; there was no orderly conduct of the proceedings for many reasons, including the hooliganism displayed by many people there; no independent videography was allowed, the party's Lokpal was not allowed, etc.

What has happened subsequent to the 28th, however, has taken the farce to a level where it seems as if a Stalinist purge is taking place in the party. The party's internal Lokpal, a person of immense stature and independence, has been removed unconstitutionally, merely because he expressed his wish to attend the National Council meeting and was seen to be fair; other members of the National Executive are being suspended, again unconstitutionally, only because they had attended a press conference held by us after the hooliganism in the National Council meeting.

Thereafter, you have ordered the release of a carefully-edited version of your speech at the National Council meeting, containing various false charges against us, and carefully editing out the portions showing the hooliganism of the mob. It is in such circumstances that I am having to write this open letter to you.

In order to respond to your charges, I would need to go back a bit to see where my serious differences started with you.  If you will remember, my differences started after the Lok Sabha elections, when a series of things happened which began to show two serious defects in your character and personality. Firstly, you wanted  to push through your decisions at any cost in the party, despite the majority of the PAC or the National Executive disagreeing with you. This included  decisions that would have undoubtedly been very harmful for the party and against public interest. And secondly, you were  willing to use some very highly unethical and even criminal means to achieve your ends.
 
After the Lok Sabha elections, you felt that the party was  finished, and could only be revived if it were  able to form the government again in Delhi. So immediately after the elections, you started talking to the Congress party for taking its support again to  form the government in Delhi. When news of this came out, a large number of important  people in the party including Prithvi Reddy, Mayank Gandhi and Anjali Damania called me up saying this would be disastrous, and if this happens, they would have to quit the party. I was in Shimla at that time, I called you up, and I said that you should not go ahead with this unless there is a proper discussion in the Political Action Committee (PAC).
 
I immediately came back and we had a meeting of the PAC at  your residence. And at that meeting, a majority of the members - 5:4 - felt that we should not go ahead with forming the government with Congress' support. I had pointed out that this would seem extremely opportunistic, since there was no logical reason for us to change our publicly stated position. I also added that such a government would not last, as the Congress will withdraw support soon, and thereafter, for us to revive the party would become even more difficult.

Instead of abiding by the majority decision, you said that while that may be the majority view, as the Convenor of the party, you have the right to take the final decision, and that you would go ahead with seeking Congress' support. At that point, I had a verbal argument with you. I said the party can't be run in this manner, and it has to be run by some democratic means. So it was decided to refer this issue to the National Executive which had many more people. This reference was made by email, and people were expected to vote by next morning. By next morning, again a majority of people opposed this decision in the National Executive and yet, a letter was secretly sent by you to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi saying that he should not dissolve the Assembly for another week because AAP wants to seek the opinion of the people on whether to form the government again.
 
Immediately after the letter came out, Congress said they were not ready to support AAP and that left us with egg on our face with the result that you had to backtrack the next day and apologize. But despite that, the attempt to form the government with Congress' support or with the support of breakaway MLAs from the Congress continued, as is clear from the sting tape of Rajesh Garg which shows you were wanting to form the government with the support of those MLAs whom you had yourself accused of having being bought over by the BJP for Rs. 4 crore each. How could you even think of forming a government with the support of such people! And this went on till as late as November, just before the dissolution of the Assembly. In November, you called Nikhil Dey and asked him to speak to Rahul Gandhi to convince him to get the Congress party to support. But Nikhil told you that he can't talk to Rahul Gandhi on this issue.

Can you deny any of these facts? All this, showed your willingness to go against majority opinion, break all democratic rules of the party, and seek unethical support of MLAs whom you yourself had accused of being corrupt, all in the pursuit of power at any cost.

Then came the issue of AVAM or Aam Aadmi Volunteer Action Manch, which was a group of volunteers who wanted their voices heard in the party. Because this was threatening to brew into a rebellion amongst volunteers who felt that they were being used only like slave labour, and because you felt that it was necessary to crush this, it appears that the party got an SMS sent in the name of AVAM, saying that volunteers should join the BJP - the idea was to  suggest  that AVAM had become an agent of the BJP, though the SMS was  fabricated by the party itself in the name of AVAM. And using this, you announced in a Google Hangout that these people had become traitors because of that SMS. And on that basis, Karan Singh, who was the leader of AVAM, was suspended and removed from the party. He appealed to the national disciplinary committee, which I was heading, and he said 'I had been saying that this is not sent by me, please have this investigated'. So I asked you and Dilip Pandey and others to get this investigated, but you steadfastly refused.

Eventually, Karan Singh had to lodge an FIR, and the police investigated the matter and it was found that a volunteer of the party, not of AVAM, called Deepak Chaudhary, created this identity in the name of AAVAAM and used that to send that SMS. You should know Arvind, that impersonating an organisation or persons in order to defame them, is a serious criminal offence. Unfortunately young volunteers in the party under your tutelage are being taught that use of such means is OK in politics, since any means used to defeat a "Bigger evil" is OK.
 
Then came the issue of whether the party should contest Assembly elections in Haryana and Maharashtra. Again the matter was put to the National Executive by email, and the majority - 15 is to 4 - said that that should be left to state units to decide in accordance with our principle of Swaraj. But you did not allow that decision to be implemented. And eventually, it was rendered infructuous, because elections came too close and finally in that National Executive meet in Sangrur it was decided that there's no point, and one should forget about contesting those elections.

When the Delhi elections were announced and campaigning started, you instructed volunteers to start a campaign 'Modi for PM, Kejriwal for CM'. I said this is totally unprincipled. It means that our party has gone down on its knees before Modi at a time when it was positioning itself as the main opposition to Modi.

When the process of candidate selection for the Delhi Assembly election of 2015 started, I found there was no transparency. Contrary to earlier practice, we were not posting candidates' names on the website. Even the PAC, which was meant to approve the candidate, was not being sent the bio-data or names of the candidates in advance to enable us to check the records of the candidates. In the second meeting of the PAC to discuss candidate selection, because I had received complaints about two of the candidates who were being proposed in that meeting, I pointed this out. You got very angry saying, "Why do you think we will be selecting crooked people?" I said that is not the point - we need to have some transparency and due diligence. That led to an argument between you and me, and I walked out of that meeting and wrote an email on November 27, that I cannot be a rubber stamp for non-transparent and questionable selection of candidates. That email is now in the public domain.

After that, in the next list, again there were at least four questionable candidates among the 10 names proposed. Yogendra Yadav and I wrote a letter to the PAC on 10th December, detailing the objections against these four and pointing out that this time, the process of candidate selection was very different from the last time. This time, we were giving tickets to a large number of political entrepreneurs who had joined the party only for opportunism, who had jumped  ship from Congress, BJP or BSP at the last moment,  who had no ideological commitment to our party, had no record of public service, and whose sources of wealth weren't explained.

Some of them were people against whom our party had itself complained that they were distributing money or liquor or had beaten up our volunteers. One of them (our initial choice from Wazirpur), went back to the BJP within 4 hours of us announcing his candidature. Your initial choice for the Mehrauli seat, Gandas, had to be dropped at the last moment only because his photographs were circulated with him showing off, with a glass of liquor in one hand and a revolver in the other. Yet, while he was dropped, his brother was given the ticket. Eventually, even he had to be changed because our Lokpal, Admiral Ramdas gave a strong report against him.

Thereafter, AAP stopped having meetings of the PAC or sending names for the approval of the PAC, and started announcing names on their own. When all this happened, I said "Now enough is enough. If this does not stop, and if there is no credible scrutiny of these candidates, I will have to resign from the party and make public the reasons for my resignation." On that, an emergency meeting was called at my residence on January 4, by Yogendra Yadav, Prithvi Reddy etc which had 16-17 people from all over the country, important functionaries of the party. All of them felt that the party's campaign would be ruined if I resigned at that stage.
 
In that meeting I said, "Look, all these kinds of compromises are being made, various ethical corners are being cut and now you are selecting these kind of candidates without proper transparency or scrutiny. If you go with these kinds of candidates, then even if you win, the further compromises that you will have to make, will be such that they will completely destroy the USP of the party, which is of being a clean, transparent party, wedded to alternative politics. And instead of winning by using these kinds of candidates, it would be better to lose the elections by going with clean and honourable candidates". That statement is being twisted around to claim that I said that I wanted the party to lose.

I had said that rather than winning by these kinds of candidates and means, it's better to go with honourable candidates and run the risk of a possible loss. Because winning with these kinds of candidates and means destroys the founding principles of the party in the short run, and will destroy the party itself in the long run.

If I had wanted the party to lose the elections, I would have resigned and gone public with my reasons at that very time. If Yogendra Yadav wanted the party to lose, he would not have convened that meeting and stopped me from going public. Instead, he worked his heart out for this campaign, defended the party on innumerable occasions on TV. And yet you have the temerity to accuse even him, along with me, of working for the defeat of the party!

At the end of that meeting, an arrangement was worked out with your express consent, that: We would immediately refer all the complaints against candidates who had been selected to the Lokpal of the party and his decision would be final. And the rest of the issues of institutional reforms about transparency in the party, accountability, swaraj, inner party democracy - those issues will be taken up immediately after the elections. So those complaints against 12 candidates were referred to the Lokpal. In the 4 days that he had to do this exercise, he recommended the  removal of two against whom there was clear evidence, recommended the issuance of warnings against six against whom there was some evidence, and allowed four to continue. Two were thus removed.
 
But the other issue of institutional reforms, which was agreed to be taken up within two days of the election results, were not discussed. Instead, the National Executive meeting of February 26, which you chose not to attend, started with Vishwas announcing your resignation and a no holds barred attack on Yogendra Yadav and myself by members of your coterie. The message conveyed by them on your behalf was clear: That the price for your continuing as Convenor was our removal from the PAC and NE. I then responded and pointed out the things I have mentioned above, and the issues of institutional reforms, but those were not discussed. The only issue that was discussed that day was whether you should continue as Convenor.

We all agreed that you should continue, but thereafter, some people went to your residence to meet you, and you made it clear that it's either you or us, and that we have to be removed. And therefore, that is what happened in the next meeting which was held on March 4.

A charge that is made against me is that I did not campaign for the party during this election. I had said that I can't campaign for many of these candidates, and given the manner in which these candidates had been selected, I was willing to campaign only for those candidates about whom I was fairly certain that they were the kind of people who would take the ideology of clean politics forward and work in public interest if they win. I had in fact given a list of five people that I thought were decent. But the party did not send me any programme for addressing public meetings. I therefore went for Pankaj Pushkar's public meetings who had personally invited me.

The other charge made against me is that I stopped people from donating to AAP. When other people asked me whether they should donate etc, I'd said, "Look, you should donate to those candidates who appear to be decent and honest to you". You and your coterie have made the same charge against my sister Shalini Gupta. She also said the same thing that I had said to a closed circle of friends. In fact she strenuously encouraged the Global group to donate to deserving candidates, which is why several candidates got so much funds from NRIs.

Your coterie have also accused my father, my sister and myself of trying to capture the party. Arvind, you know very well that none of us have even wanted any executive positions or tickets for ourselves or any friends or family members. We have only tried to contribute and help in every way that we could to see the party grow into a powerful and credible vehicle for alternative politics in the country. My father, apart from donating more than 2 crores as seed money to the party, has spent an enormous amount of time in giving selfless advice, legal and otherwise to the party. He played a major role in the draft of the Jan Lokpal bill. He worked for the well being of the party with his "tan, man and dhan". Yes, when he felt that you, for various reasons were not the right person to lead the party organisation, he frankly told you so. Apart from the reasons of ethical compromises mentioned above, he also saw that you were violating the constitution and rules of the party repeatedly, not allowing any working structure of the party organisation to be created (other than a coterie), and were not interested in formulating the policies of the party.

For two years, the elaborate reports of the 34 policy committees that we had set up, have been gathering dust because you havent found the time or have the inclination to look at those reports and apply your mind to them. You accuse my father of having stated that you were his third choice for CM after Kiran Bedi and Ajay Maken. That was his honest view after seeing all the shorcomings in your character that he had been observing. I had immediately publicly disagreed with his opinion, but in the light of what has transpired subsequently, particularly the stage managed lumpenism that you got unleashed in the NC meeting, I regretfully wonder if he was right.

My sister Shalini Gupta, as well as many other highly qualified persons, left their lucrative jobs abroad to help you build credible and efficient systems which would have proper cells and expertise so that it could function as a world class organisation. On repeated occasions you had yourself asked Shalini to give up her job for the sake of the country and said that her role as Organization Development Advisor was only an advisory role and not a formal position with any power in the party as discussed in the PAC before she was appointed.  However it became clear over time that you did not want any professional advice in this matter. Instead you asked Ashutosh who has no such professional expertise to come up with an alternative plan to make each cell of the party organisation an appendage to your coterie and accountable only to you.

It is true Arvind that I have not contributed as much as you for the party. I have not fasted, nor gone to jail. I have been mostly involved in my various PILs against various scams, 2G, Coalgate, the CBI director, 4G, the Reliance Gas robbery, against GM foods, Nuclear Power Plants, destructive Hydel projects, Section 66A, Tobacco and Gutka, etc. I have spent the rest of my time giving legal and other advice to the party and fighting its cases in court. I have never been interested in any executive posts and I have seen my role in the party mainly as a person who will try and ensure that it remains true to its founding principles. And it is for this reason that I have raised my voice whenever I have found it to be slipping from its path.

Arvind, this party was founded with a lot of idealism by thousands of people, especially young people, who came out and spent a lot of their time, effort, energy, money, sweat and blood in order to create a vehicle for alternative politics, in order to create a party that would practice clean and transparent politics. But unfortunately, all those principles are being betrayed by you and your coterie, who are currently in control of the party. And it has become a supremo-oriented, high-command culture kind of party.

You feel that you can rectify everything by running the Delhi government well in the 5 years that you have. You think that if you deliver on governance, people will forget what you have done to the party. I wish you well in that endeavour. Even traditional political parties like Congress, BJP have done some governance.  But the dream that we started with for clean and principled politics and corruption free governance was much much bigger.  The fear that I have, is that after how you have behaved and the character traits that you have showed, this dream of clean and principled politics that the Aam Aadmi party was founded on may well turn into a nightmare. But still, I wish you well.

Goodbye and good luck,

Prashant

Source: Prashant Bhushan's letter to NDTV (click here)

Few questions to Kiran Bedi, new face of Delhi BJP

आखिरकार किरण बेदी जी भारतीय जनता पार्टी में आधिकारिक रूप से शामिल हो ही गयीं, हालाँकि ये उनका निजी मसला है जिसपे मैं कोई टिप्पणी नहीं करना चाहूंगा। लेकिन उनके विचार भारतीय जनता पार्टी के लिए कैसे बदल गए, मैं इसपे ज़रूर कुछ कहना चाहता हूँ। मैं नहीं मानता कि भारतीय जनता पार्टी में उनका आना अचानक हुआ है, वह अपनी आस्था गाहे बेगाहे जताती रही हैं। जनलोकपाल आंदोलन से ले कर आजतक अगर उनके वैचारिक सफर को देखा जाये तो ये अंदाज़ा लगाना कोई मुश्किल नहीं है कि उनका हृदय परिवर्तन एक चरणबद्ध तरीके से होता आया है, कम से कम उनके अपने स्तर पर, बस इंतज़ार था सही मौके की तलाश में। इससे अच्छा मौका उनके लिए और क्या हो सकता था कि जब दिल्ली भारतीय जनता पार्टी नेतृत्व संकट से गुजर रही हो और उसके सामने अरविन्द केजरीवाल जैसी लोकप्रिय शख्सियत खड़ी हो। किरण जी तो बेक़रार थीं ही, नरेंद्र मोदी जी की असफ़ल रैली ने बीजेपी को भी सोचने पर मज़बूर कर दिया कि अब अपने खपे खपाए नेताओं की मर्ज़ी के खिलाफ जाकर किरण जी को बीजेपी में लेना ही होगा।
किरण जी को दिल्ली की जनता को जवाब देना ही होगा कि बीजेपी को दिन रात कोसने वाली वो अब उसकी तारीफ के क़सीदे कैसे पढ़ेंगी। मेरे कुछ सवाल हैं किरण जी से:

1. मोदी जी से गोधरा नरसंहार का हिसाब मांगने वाली किरण जी को अब मोदी जी की किस अदा से प्रेरणा मिल गयी? 
2. क्या वह अब RTI में ना आने वाली बीजेपी और कांग्रेस की आलोचना करने के बाद अब उसी बीजेपी की गोद में खुश हैं? 
3. क्या नितिन गडकरी की तुलना रॉबर्ट वाड्रा से करने वाली किरण जी नितिन गडकरी के साथ मंच साझा करेंगी? और अगर करेंगी तो क्या गडकरी पवित्र हो गए?
4. अपनी महात्वाकांक्षा के लिए अन्ना जी को जनलोकपाल के मुद्दे पर बरगलाने वाली किरण जो को अवसरवादी न कहा जाये?
5. फर्जी प्रमाणपत्र के लिए सजा काट रहे कांग्रेसी नेता रशीद मसूद की तरह क्या किरण जी ने अपनी बेटी के मेडिकल में एडमिशन के लिए फर्जी प्रमाणपत्र नहीं दिया, क्या उनको भी ऐसी ही सजा नहीं मिलनी चाहिए?
6. किस मुँह से अब वह अरविन्द केजरीवाल से मुकाबला करेंगी, अरविन्द ने जनलोकपाल के लिए मुख्यमंत्री की कुर्सी छोड़ दी लेकिन किरण जी ने मुख्यमंत्री की कुर्सी के लिए जनलोकपाल जैसे मुद्दे को हमेशा के लिए दफ़न कर दिया?
7. क्या ये सच नहीं कि आप एक महत्वाकांक्षी हैं (हालाँकि होना बुरा नहीं, लेकिन सही दिशा में रह कर), और इसके लिए आपने मौके की नज़ाकत को देखते हुए विचारों को नहीं अपनाया?
8. आपने आईपीएस से इस्तीफा क्यों दिया, आपके खिलाफ बहुत पहले टाइम्स ऑफ़ इंडिया में एक लेख प्रकाशित हुआ था, उसपे आप का क्या कहना? 

अभी तो आप आयीं हैं, सवालों का जवाब तो देना ही होगा। 

जय हिन्द !!!

Happy New Year!!!

I have something to think, could be a New Year resolution (although everyone says, no one seriously follows but I am serious), to welcome New Year 2015. I need you friends and your contributions for what I am going to say. Everyone says that India has a great potential having its 1.25 billion people and thus huge human resource. Of this population, if I say conventionally that 50% population is shared by our women, but the question is how many of them get an opportunity for education, to work and thus their contribution for nation building programs. Everyone can imagine- it’s very less. Therefore, we make them inefficient by depriving them to explore the opportunities. And thus, we make 40% of our population (I consider 10% women get opportunities) inefficient, just because of our thinking that women should not go out to work. This is the real situation, then why do we count 1.25 billion Indians- the effective population (whom we count human resource) is just half. Just imagine, our inhumane thinking is making our nation inefficient- there may be more Kiran Bedis, more Sumitra Mahajans, more Pratibha Patils, more Mary Koms, and many others to whom we stop at certain stages.

I appeal you my dear friends, at least we can contribute a lot by taking an initiative starting from our home by supporting our sisters, daughters, friends and others deprived in our surroundings. In my opinion, this is the best way to make the coming years better for everyone.

Wish you all a very Happy New Year!! God bless you all with your dreams to come true!!

Image of Narendra Modi and role of media

Our PM Narendra Modi ji is emerging a mass leader day by day. He is very good in packaging and marketing, and he catches the mind of common people. He is being successful in managing his image building by reflecting only positive issues (only verbal not in execution), I would like to question media also for its role being a tool of Modi ji's quiver. Here are some facts.

1. When Arvind Kejriwal questioned Nitin Gadkari and pronounced him as a corrupt, media started questioning Kejriwal as he is charging with fake allegations, instead of asking question to Gadkari. In my view, along with Kejriwal, Nitin Gadkari should have also been questioned.
2. In the same case, when Kejriwal was asked by the court to take bail and then Kejriwal refused to take it saying that if he is right why should he demand for bail- he wanted not to give a walk-over to Gadkari. Then media started criticising Kejriwal without questioning the role of Gadkari.
3. Now, few days ago Gadkari was fined Rs. 10,000.00 by the court for not providing the papers to support his defamation case on Kejriwal. None of the media houses broadcasted 'Breaking News' or conducted prime time debate.
4. Today also, Somnath Bharti, who was a minister in Kejriwal's government and alleged by Human Right Commission, and also badly criticised by media, is exonerated by the Delhi High Court. Now there is no noise in media.
5. BJP president Amit Shah headed extortion gang told by CBI to Supreme Court in 2011. But now the news is coming that CBI is trying to make this case weaker so that Amit Shah can make a easy escape. Now this is not a misuse of CBI, as BJP was alleging UPA government- another U-turn.

My question is why do not media houses raise the issues impartially?

Please think and then respond!

Narendra Modi: Following the Congress or Outdating it

Black money has become the issue of nation-wide debate. Unfortunately, an issue of economic concerns has now been trivialized by making it a tool of opportunistic politics. Narendra Modi, now Prime Minister of India, has been continuously saying in every electoral rally during the parliamentary election that if he will come in power, he will bring black money to India within 100 days without saying it complications to the people. Now, around 150 days of his incumbency have been passed but not a single penny is brought to the country. In reverse of his statements, it appears that NDA government is hiding the names of the alleged fishes. Honorable Supreme Court of India has to say that government is acting like a protecting umbrella for the alleged, and also commented that if this will be the way of investigation this money cannot be brought in our life time. I think people should consider these comments and force this government to respect the saying of its Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
During his campaign, Narendra Modi was strongly saying and also gave a slogan "Congress Mukt Bharat". If I look his way of decisions, he is following the same way as Congress was walking on. He is adapting the policies of the previous UPA government be it black money issue or Arun Jately´s comment on CAG. Therefore, I would say Narendra Modi is eradicating Congress party by following it, not by outdating it. He has the same stand on black money saying we cannot reveal the names as we have treaty with other countries, then why he or his party agitated on road and disturbed the parliament during UPA time? All the allegations BJP has made on Congress should be read by PM Modi, and if he cannot do anything then all the allegations made will fit to BJP and Modi´s government- it just needs to replace the name of Congress and Manmohan Singh with BJP and Narendra Modi, respectively, from it.
Once again people of India are feeling helpless. But, I think the younger generation is more aware and cannot be fooled, after all it has the power of ballet. I wish people will teach this government like as they did to Congress.

Higher-yielding crop plants? Plant hormone has dual role in triggering flower formation

Summary: A plant hormone once believed to promote flower formation in annual plants also plays a role in inhibiting flowers from forming. The dual role of this hormone, gibberellin, could be exploited to produce higher-yielding crop plants.

A new paper by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania published in the journal Science has revealed that a plant hormone once believed to promote flower formation in annual plants also plays a role in inhibiting flowers from forming. The dual role of this hormone, gibberellin, could be exploited to produce higher-yielding crop plants.

The study was led by Nobutoshi Yamaguchi and Doris Wagner of the School of Arts and Sciences' Department of Biology. Wagner is professor and graduate chair, and Yamaguchi is a postdoctoral researcher. Department co-authors included Cara M. Winter, Miin-Feng Wu and Ayako Yamaguchi. The Penn team collaborated with Yuri Kanno and Mitsunori Seo of RIKEN Center for Sustainable Resource Science in Japan.

Plant scientists used to think that short-lived plants, annuals or bi-annuals, use a different strategy from long-lived plants, perennials, to regulate flower production.

"Anecdotal evidence was that the hormone gibberellin promoted the switch to flower formation in short-lived plants, along with other cues such as temperature, season and photoperiod," Wagner said. "But in the long-lived plants, like in fruit trees, people have known that if you sprayed them with the hormone it inhibited flower production. So it was a big puzzle: why would the same hormone do one thing in short-lived plants and another in long-lived plants?"

To address this paradox, the Penn team began by looking for new genes important to the flower-forming process. Specifically, they performed a genome-wide search of the plant species Arabidopsis thaliana to find direct targets of the protein LEAFY, which is known to promote flower formation.

One gene that turned up was called ELA1, which produces a cytochrome enzyme and has been shown to play a role in breaking down gibberellin. Further experiments showed that in plants that lost ELA1 function, flowers formed much later than normal.

The researchers also found that plants that lacked LEAFY had high levels of gibberellin, and plants engineered to produce high levels of LEAFY had lower levels of the hormone and were also shorter with greater levels of chlorophyll -- characteristics of gibberellin deficiency.

"At first we were confused because gibberellin was supposed to promote all of this activity that leads to flower formation," Wagner said. "Then when we found a direct target of LEAFY that is linked to gibberellin catabolism, that gave us the clue that gibberellin must have a role in inhibiting flower formation as well."

Plants that were genetically modified to not produce gibberellin properly and plants that were treated with a gibberellin inhibitor showed signs of a delayed first transition to inflorescence but accelerated signs of flower formation. Spraying the plants with gibberellin had the opposite effect.

The results suggested that the two transition steps that lead plants to produce flowers might be regulated distinctly, both involving gibberellin. While gibberellin promotes the first transition, in which plants stop producing stems and leaves and produce an inflorescence, it inhibited the second stage, in which flowers were formed.

The mechanism, the Penn team showed, involves rising and then falling levels of gibberellin. High levels cause the plant to end the vegetative phase of development. At that point, LEAFY and ELA1 activity cause gibberellin to break down. Freed from the inhibitory effects of the hormone, a suite of proteins are activated that trigger flower formation.

"When it comes to determining the number of flowers formed and when they are formed, we think this pathway is at the forefront," Wagner said.

Farmers already use gibberellin-deficient breeds of rice to produce more compact plants that don't topple over in wind and rain. The new understanding of gibberellin's role gained from this study could help create plant breeds that are even more productive

"We think it can be used to enhance yield," Wagner said. "Seeds are the product of a flower so if you want more seed you want more flowers. Being able to modulate the accumulation or degradation of gibberellin could allow one to optimize or enhance the seed set and yield in crop plants."

The Penn team plans to explore other plants to see if gibberellin operates the same way across species and in perennials as well and to further explore how different levels of the hormone trigger regulatory events that either inhibit or promote flower production.

The National Science Foundation supported the research.

Story Source: Science Daily

My Review Article: Natural killer T cell anergy, co-stimulatory molecules and immunotherapeutic interventions

Available online 25 December 2013

Avadhesh Kumar Singh | Poonam Gaur | Satya N. Das

Abstract:
Natural killer T (NKT) cells are a unique subset of glycolipid reactive T lymphocytes that share properties with natural killer (NK) cells. These lymphocytes can produce array of cytokines and chemokines that modulate the immune response, and play a pivotal role in cancer, autoimmunity, infection and inflammation. Owing to these properties, NKT cells have gained attentions for its potential use in antitumor immunotherapies. To date several NKT cell-based clinical trials have been performed in patients with cancer using its potent ligand α-galactosylceramide (α-GalCer). However, inconsistent therapeutic benefit, and inevitable health risks associated with drug dose and NKT cell activation have been observed. α-GalCer-activated NKT cells become anergic and produce both Th1 and Th2 cytokines that may function antagonistically, limiting the desired effector functions. Besides, various co-stimulatory and signaling molecules such as programmed death-1 (PD-1; CD279), casitas B-cell lymphoma-b (Cbl-b) and CARMA1 have been shown to be implicated in the induction of NKT cell anergy. In this review, we discuss the role of such key regulators and their functional mechanisms that may facilitate the development of improved approaches to overcome NKT cell anergy. In addition, we describe the evidences indicating that tailored-ligands can optimally activate NKT cells to obtain desired immune responses. 

Click below to read full article:

Natural killer T cell anergy, co-stimulatory molecules and immunotherapeutic interventions

Nobel winner boycotts top science journals like Nature, Cell and Science

Randy Schekman, professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

Randy Schekman says his lab will no longer send papers to Nature, Cell and Science as they distort scientific process

 

Leading academic journals are distorting the scientific process and represent a "tyranny" that must be broken, according to a Nobel prize winner who has declared a boycott on the publications.

Randy Schekman, a US biologist who won the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine this year and receives his prize in Stockholm on Tuesday, said his lab would no longer send research papers to the top-tier journals, Nature, Cell and Science.

Dr. Schekman said pressure to publish in "luxury" journals encouraged researchers to cut corners and pursue trendy fields of science instead of doing more important work. The problem was exacerbated, he said, by editors who were not active scientists but professionals who favoured studies that were likely to make a splash.

The prestige of appearing in the major journals has led the Chinese Academy of Sciences to pay successful authors the equivalent of $30,000. Some researchers made half of their income through such "bribes", Dr. Schekman said in an interview.

Writing in the Guardian, Dr. Schekman raises serious concerns over the journals' practices and calls on others in the scientific community to take action.

"I have published in the big brands, including papers that won me a Nobel Prize. But no longer," he writes. "Just as Wall Street needs to break the hold of bonus culture, so science must break the tyranny of the luxury journals."

Dr. Schekman is the editor of eLife, an online journal set up by the Wellcome Trust. Articles submitted to the journal - a competitor to Nature, Cell and Science - are discussed by reviewers who are working scientists and accepted if all agree. The papers are free for anyone to read.

Dr. Schekman criticises Nature, Cell and Science for artificially restricting the number of papers they accept, a policy he says stokes demand "like fashion designers who create limited-edition handbags." He also attacks a widespread metric called an "impact factor", used by many top-tier journals in their marketing.

A journal's impact factor is a measure of how often its papers are cited, and is used as a proxy for quality. But Schekman said it was "toxic influence" on science that "introduced a distortion". He writes: "A paper can become highly cited because it is good science - or because it is eye-catching, provocative, or wrong."

Daniel Sirkis, a post doctoral researcher in Schekman's lab, said many scientists wasted a lot of time trying to get their work into Cell, Science and Nature. "It's true I could have a harder time getting my foot in the door of certain elite institutions without papers in these journals during my post doctoral researcher, but I don't think I'd want to do science at a place that had this as one of their most important criteria for hiring anyway," he told the Guardian.

Sebastian Springer, a biochemist at Jacobs University in Bremen, who worked with Dr. Schekman at the University of California, Berkeley, said he agreed there were major problems in scientific publishing, but no better model yet existed. "The system is not meritocratic. You don't necessarily see the best papers published in those journals. The editors are not professional scientists, they are journalists, which isn't necessarily the greatest problem, but they emphasise novelty over solid work," he said.

Mr. Springer said it was not enough for individual scientists to take a stand. Scientists are hired and awarded grants and fellowships on the basis of which journals they publish in. "The hiring committees all around the world need to acknowledge this issue," he said.

Philip Campbell, editor-in-chief at Nature, said the journal had worked with the scientific community for more than 140 years and the support it had from authors and reviewers was validation that it served their needs.

"We select research for publication in Nature on the basis of scientific significance. That in turn may lead to citation impact and media coverage, but Nature editors aren't driven by those considerations, and couldn't predict them even if they wished to do so," he said.

"The research community tends towards an over-reliance in assessing research by the journal in which it appears, or the impact factor of that journal. In a survey Nature Publishing Group conducted this year of over 20,000 scientists, the three most important factors in choosing a journal to submit to were: the reputation of the journal; the relevance of the journal content to their discipline; and the journal's impact factor. My colleagues and I have expressed concerns about over-reliance on impact factors many times over the years, both in the pages of Nature and elsewhere."

Monica Bradford, executive editor at Science, said: "We have a large circulation and printing additional papers has a real economic cost . . . Our editorial staff is dedicated to ensuring a thorough and professional peer review upon which they determine which papers to select for inclusion in our journal. There is nothing artificial about the acceptance rate. It reflects the scope and mission of our journal."

Source: The Hindu