Raghav_12 Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Has she forged a degree or is it a case of misinformation? Also' date=' it does not matter whether it was BA or 12th as fighting election does not require a specific qualification unlike in case of Jitendra Tomar who forged degrees and became a lawyer which is a criminal offense. if anything, she will lose her seat at most.[/quote'] So no penal provisions for giving a false/misleading affidavit? That doesn't sound right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 MPs lobbying for pay hike' date=' that too almost 100%... while the govt dithers over army's OROP[/quote'] OPOP should certainly be passed. Shameful of the Govt to play politics over it. Regarding MPs salary hike - it is much needed. There are many MPs who have politics as their only source of income and the current salary is not at all adequate to meet the expenses in politics. Read this excellent article on the issue - http://m.khabar.ibnlive.com/blogs/umesh-upadhyay/mp-indian-parliament-387651.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 So no penal provisions for giving a false/misleading affidavit? That doesn't sound right.What is the definition of false? If there is a typo in the affidavit it does not warrant arrest. Similarly, stating B.A as B.Com does not warrant arrest. There was no material benefit to Irani due to this. There have been similar mistakes in other affidavits as well, including those of Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi. At most this could result in annulment of her election. This is quite unlike Tomar who forged a certificate so that he could practice law. Thats straightaway a criminal act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkt.india Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 So no penal provisions for giving a false/misleading affidavit? That doesn't sound right. There must be something like being declared ineligible for election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 I think since these were electoral affidavits' date=' the Election Commission is ultimately responsible for prosecution (if any). Such discrepancies (mentioning BA as B.Com etc) in affidavits does not warrant arrest - at most it will result in her election win to be vacated, i.e. losing her Rajya Sabha seat.[/quote'] I think atleast once her qualification has been misrepresented. 1. When she contested Delhi in 2004 she wrote BA from DU -1996 2. When she contested Amethi in 2014 she wrote BCOM part 1-School of Open Learning (Correspondence)-1994 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Most prabably she has done BCOM part 1 as thats the degree she wrote in her all Rajya Sabha lections. The one time she filled EC form incorrectly was in Delhi election 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khalpat Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 So no penal provisions for giving a false/misleading affidavit? That doesn't sound right. If police is going to take any action against Smriti for affidavit all hell will break loose. The reason being even Sonia and Rahul Gandhi have shown in their affidavit the name of colleges in Cambridge which do not exist even in 2004 election and later it was clarified by their office that it was typo error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 If police is going to take any action against Smriti for affidavit all hell will break loose. The reason being even Sonia and Rahul Gandhi have shown in their affidavit the name of colleges in Cambridge which do not exist even in 2004 election and later it was clarified by their office that it was typo error. :haha: As per the complainant Ahmer Khan and opposition, For BA degree row, Irani is liable to be prosecuted for the offence under Section 125 A of Representation of the People Act, 1951. This is what that section is. [125 A. Penalty for filing false affidavit, etc. – A candidate who himself of through his proposer, with intent to be elected in an election, - (i) fails to furnish information relating to sub-section (I) of section 33A; or (ii) give false information which he knows or has reason to believe to be false; or (iii) conceals any information, in his nomination paper delivered under sub-section (I) of section 33 or in his affidavit which is required to be delivered under sub-section (2) of section 33A, as the case may be shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G_B_ Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 did not know where you post this. but BJP gov abstained from voting against Israel. A step in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalia_Test Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 did not know where you post this. but BJP gov abstained from voting against Israel. A step in the right direction. Step was right but the reason was not. India abstained from voting as the resolution was based on a report that had direct reference to some International Court which India does not ratify. Voting either in support or not would have meant India acknowledging its existence. India always votes pro-Palestine in such resolutions ( for local reasons ) - we did it last year too but I am sure it would have taken Israel into confidence before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G_B_ Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 thats more of a technicality imo the general message is india want to officially recognise its growing ties with israel. if modi does visit israel next year as planned this lack of vote should be viewed in that context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalia_Test Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 thats more of a technicality imo the general message is india want to officially recognise its growing ties with israel. if modi does visit israel next year as planned this lack of vote should be viewed in that context. No shift. India was always pro-Israel but votes against it in UN. Israel knows it and it is OK with it. On this, the Govt clearly tells there is no shift and even gave precedents for it. Opposition is making noise for the sake of it. http://www.thehindu.com/news/india-abstains-from-unhrc-vote-against-israel/article7383796.ece The government on Friday denied what appeared to be a major shift in India’s policy on Israel, after it abstained from a vote against Israel at the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva. The resolution (A/HRC/29/L.35) had welcomed the U.N. Human Rights Council report, which found evidence of “alleged war crimes†committed by both Israel and Hamas during the Gaza conflict in 2014, particularly calling for accountability of Israeli officials. Significantly, India had voted against Israel and in favour of the UNHRC resolution in July 2014 that had instituted this very inquiry report into the Gaza violence in which more than 2,300 had been killed in Israeli airstrikes on Gaza. However, the government denied any policy shift, indicating that India had abstained from voting because the UNHRC resolution had included a reference to taking Israel to the International Criminal Court, which India considers “intrusiveâ€. 41 countries voted in favour of the resolution against Israel, while only the U.S. voted against it. India was one of five countries including Kenya and Macedonia that abstained. “In the past also, whenever a Human Rights Council resolution had made a direct reference to the ICC, as had happened in the Resolutions on Syria and North Korea, our general approach had been to abstain. We have followed the same principle in our voting on today’s Resolution,'' said the official spokesperson. However, the vote comes on the back of a number of decisions by the Narendra Modi government that have indicated a growing closeness to Israel and a shift away from past policy. While India did vote against Israel at the UNHRC last July, in parliament, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had refused to make a statement “condemning Israel†for the Gaza strikes. In September, Mr. Modi had met Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu on the sidelines of the UNGA, and last month the government announced that Mr. Modi would become the first Indian PM to visit Israel. In December 2014, The Hindu had reported that a reversal of Indian policy vis-à -vis Israel and Palestine at the U.N. was also being considered by the NDA government. Congress leader Manish Tewari said the government’s stand at the UNHRC lacked “transparencyâ€. “If the govt is carrying out a policy shift with regard to our traditional position then rather than doing it by stealth they need to take Parliament into confidence.†CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury condemned the vote as a “complete reversal,†saying the Opposition will take it up in Parliament. “Government should withdraw from this position and extend solidarity with Palestine,†he told The Hindu. At a press conference in May this year, Ms. Swaraj had denied any shift in India's policy on the issue. “To say that we are tilted towards Israel or we are making any changes in our policy is wrong… with regard to Palestine India’s foreign policy has not undergone any change,†she had said. With Friday’s vote, speculation about a change will grow louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gattaca Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 What is the reason for not voting against it. Why do we abstain from it and make these statements which are mid way ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhunaeh Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 Government readies comprehensive dossier on media coverage of events, prepares list of 'defaulters' NEW DELHI: International Yoga Day, Smart Cities, Digital India. The Narendra Modi government clearly takes events seriously. And, it's begun tracking the effectiveness of its communication strategy assiduously by keeping a close watch on coverage by television channels, print and social media. In the first time such an exercise has been conducted, the ministry of information and broadcasting (I&B) has prepared a comprehensive dossier on how the media reported International Yoga Day, reporting that social media took a mostly "neutral view," while a third of the comments were positive. When it came to TV, the 300-page document compiled by the ministry used the term "defaulters" to describe channels that ignored the event, among them Sun TV and Public TV. The report documents every activity undertaken by government media units in advance of the event and includes a study of how it was received nationally and internationally. Approved by the Prime Minister's Office, the document is being sent to ministers, an information ministry official said. The ministry has also sent a report comprising 900 news clippings to the PMO on what Indian and international media had to say on the government completing its first year in May. Aseparate 'Compliance Report' on International Yoga Day shows that more than 130 TV channels were monitored for five days leading up to the June 21 event, which included a recordbreaking demonstration of the discipline led by the PM in the capital. The list of "defaulters (poor show/ no show)" shows four channels that showed no spots on yoga day. It also listed 14 channels that carried "less number of spots than spots allocated them for airing." Urdu and Northeast channels were special categories by themselves and were almost in 100% compliance. "Most of the monitored channels gave wide coverage to the event with most showing more promotional spots than promised," the report said. The document said the TV debates on June 21 night mostly centred around the controversy sparked by BJP member Ram Madhav tweeting about Vice-President Hamid Ansari not attending the event. It even listed the panelists in the debates and what they said. The 80-page compliance report includes headlines and contents of newspaper articles about yoga day. It suggested that the response to the event, especially on social media blogs, was high but slightly lower than what it was for Swachh Bharat. In its social analytics report, the ministry listed "top influencers"- those who tweeted content that influenced internet users on the event. The impact, it said, was 33% positive with most "appreciating Modi for taking yoga to the world and for creating a world record." Sixty percent remained neutral while posting pictures but 5% of posts were negative, it said, adding, "Some people commented that it is a mere publicity gesture and government should focus on governance." The analysis started a day before and ended a day after the event to arrive at a broad picture. "When the social media analytics was done on yoga rehearsal day, 23% posts were encouraging, while some said the government was trying to steal limelight from important issues," a senior official said. "But slowly the momentum picked up and we have over 2 lakh posts on yoga day alone and the sentiment was largely positive or neutral." A special section looked at how international bodies and the media praised the event with organisations such as the United Nations, Al Jazeera and the Wall Street Journal commending the PM for his efforts to globalise an Indian tradition. This exhaustive documentation of how government events were relayed and received is being done to "build a brand and maintain a record for posterity," said a senior official, who added that the idea for this came from information minister Arun Jaitley, who's also the finance minister, and minister of state Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore. The minutes of more than 10 meetings chaired by information and broadcasting secretary Bimal Julka in the approach to yoga day have also been recorded in the document, along with the contributions of all ministers and bureaucrats. "This government takes its communication seriously," a senior official said. "There has been a proper revamp of every media unit in the I&B ministry under the new government and this kind of an exercise only sets more accountability and challenge in reaching out to as many people as we can." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shivaji bhonsle Posted July 5, 2015 Share Posted July 5, 2015 So no penal provisions for giving a false/misleading affidavit? That doesn't sound right. Sonia Gandhi should have been arrested if that's the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amiret Posted July 5, 2015 Share Posted July 5, 2015 Great Snooper must be incredibly insecure to waste Taxpayer's money to analyze the success of his own self-glorification and Govt Propaganda . He probably wastes most of his work day Googling himself. the ministry of information and broadcasting (I&B) has prepared a comprehensive dossier on how the media reported International Yoga Day, reporting that social media took a mostly "neutral view," while a third of the comments were positive. A separate 'Compliance Report' on International Yoga Day shows that more than 130 TV channels were monitored for five days leading up to the June 21 event, which included a record breaking demonstration of the discipline led by the PM in the capital. The list of "defaulters (poor show/ no show)" shows four channels that showed no spots on yoga day. Preparing a list of media groups that do not assiduously disseminate Govt propaganda. :facepalm: In its social analytics report, the ministry listed "top influencers"- those who tweeted content that influenced internet users on the event. At last we have a Govt that has it's priorities right and is willing to spend sufficient resources on analyzing Toots on Tooter. I&B should be renamed to Ministry of Truth . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diga Posted July 5, 2015 Share Posted July 5, 2015 http://www.newindianexpress.com/thesundaystandard/Ford-Foundation-Had-Infiltrated-Nehru-Government-to-the-Core/2015/07/05/article2902513.ece Sunday standard says the Ford and Rockefeller foundations had penetrated the Indian establishment without any government oversight. It gave junkets and scholarships to senior government officials in the Nehru administration without clearance from the Indian government. These officials were directly selected by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations without the knowledge of the government. Can anyone tell what was the charter of Ford foundation in the 50s? Was it trying to curb Soviet influence? http://www.newindianexpress.com/thesundaystandard/Americans-Dictated-Stipend-Agenda-in-Nehru-Government/2015/07/05/article2902440.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 These are achche din..!! Can't even read artciles on Tennis :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diga Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 not sure who took the decision to introduce Asaram in the textbooks... :wall: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Sant Asaram Bapu! He will inform his followers about how to rape and get away with it by eliminating dissenters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts