Indian Army : News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Yayavar »

Shiv ji:As per published documents of MS branch the rank until Lt General was under 1951 DoB. The document itself has been published in multiple magazines/papers. It was a deliberate act to bring up 1950 and force the issue.
So it is expected that the beneficiary will be suspect in some eyes.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

viv wrote: So it is expected that the beneficiary will be suspect in some eyes.
That is quite OK. But what is it about him that is suspect? Let us see some documents, articles etc. Let us bring the bugger down no? For the good of the country. We are patriots. If we can't do that the alternative is to zip up our gobs and not gossip. I am deliberately provoking and challenging people to state why Bikram Singh is suspect. "Because his god father was criminal" is not such a convincing reply to me.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

Anyway the elections have put paid to any schemes.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Kanson »

Piskolog galore!
If we assume that Gen JJ Singh is guilty of getting his appointee in place for COAS why is everyone making allegations about Bikram Singh? Have I missed the reports showing that India's new COAS is a corrupt, non upright man or are people going idiotically apeshit here?
First line itself out of logic. BS is the only and the direct beneficiary of the of this Gen JJ move. If Gen JJ Singh is guilty then how come the beneficiary should be not considered as guilty? If A. Raja's action benefited Kanimozhi and her family, by your logic Kanimozhi and her family should not be brought to trial. ,

Similarly it is the B Singh coterie and his friends need to prove by whatever means, if they want to, that they are not part of this to public, not the other way. By association he is guilty, it will be seen that way. Only his duty to prove that he is clean.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

Kanson wrote:
First line itself out of logic. BS is the only and the direct beneficiary of the of this Gen JJ move. If Gen JJ Singh is guilty then how come the beneficiary should be not considered as guilty? If A. Raja's action benefited Kanimozhi and her family, by your logic Kanimozhi and her family should not be brought to trial. ,

Similarly it is the B Singh coterie and his friends need to prove by whatever means, if they want to, that they are not part of this to public, not the other way. By association he is guilty, it will be seen that way. Only his duty to prove that he is clean.
Ah! My mistake. You make the allegation and Bikram Singh has to prove he is innocent. Thanks. That is precisely what i have been saying. Guilt by association. Guilt by allegation. Guilt by convoluted logic. Guilt by suspicion etc.

But apart from that no substance. Only hot air. It is clearly his duty to stay clean. Proving that he is clean means that you (or someone) is saying he is dirty. I am asking if there is anything more than allegation to say that he is dirty and that he must prove that he is clean.

And we have, on this thread, soothsayers making predictions of future events that will prove that he is guilty. That is one step over and above claiming that he is dirty and that he must prove himself to be clean. Clearly the battle lines are being drawn on BRF to show that the next chief of Staff of the Indian army is a corrupt old bandicoot.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

shiv wrote:
chaanakya wrote: Unfair it may be but his actions would be critically judged each and every time.
<snip>
Shiv, Your missive is unnecessary and perhaps you are reading beyond what is intended by members here.
No my missive is not unnecessary and I am not reading more than I should.

Judgement of actions should come after such actions. Character assassination is the expectation of a certain action in future with the anticipated judgement that such an action would be indicative of corruption on the part of Bikram singh

The previous page has discussions where it is said that IF the AFSPA is repealed in Kashmir, it would be because Bikram Singh is a part of the GoI's plan to have a pliable COAS and that the GoI would achieve that through him. A hypothetical future act is already being attributed in anticipation to Bikram Singh's likely complicity. If it happens, it will be because of Bikram Singh and the corrupt GoI.
Repealing AFSPA would not make him corrupt, nor would it prove his complicity. It would be a political decision as and when it is taken. What role is played by individual actors would be seen only at that time. So it is quite irrelevant at this point.

So far I know, people have not raised questions about his honesty or integrity. The question is entirely different and he merely happens to be beneficiary of certain manipulations. Is he part of that. I would not think so nor hinted till now. Is this prove him corrupt or that he would take detrimental actions, that too can not be answered now. These are hypothetical and now you are raising it. His actions would certainly be closely watched and critically judged all the time and that would be unfortunate.

For you UPA ( or the current incumbents in GOI) may be epitome of honesty itegrity and incorruptible actions but for many storyis otherwise. Does that make every Individual in UPA corrupt. I would not think so. At least Some are not. But then everyone's action in UPA is judged/scrutinised closely inlc AKA or Pranab Da or MMS. It also does not make non UPA white as angels. I think that critically watching actions that affect public interest is good for Democracy and people should be at guard.
Last edited by chaanakya on 07 Mar 2012 21:19, edited 1 time in total.
nelson
BRFite
Posts: 988
Joined: 02 Mar 2008 21:10

Re: Background of Lt. Gen. Tejinder Singh

Post by nelson »

Jaybhatt wrote:Friends :

The Army's statement (in today's newspapers) directly charges Lt. Gen. Tejinder Singh (Retd.) with complicity in the plot against the COAS.

Any info. on this chap ? He seems to have been a beneficiary in the Adarsh rip-off, along with Deepak Kapoor et al.

He must be having many more skeletons in his cupboard. Contributors on this topic are requested to share their data banks.
http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investig ... nder-singh
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

X-posted from 2G thread 'Sushupti quoted ' Who is Lt-Gen Tejinder Singh?

Those involved in the making of purchases for security agencies under the Home Ministry or the PMO say that retired Lt-General Tejinder Singh,who has been explicitly accused by the Army of having floated reports that Chief of Army Staff General V K Singh spied on Defense Minister A K Antony, is not an unknown figure within the world of suppliers of equipment. One source said that Tejinder Singh "operates in tandem with a Major Hooda (retd) and his son, both of whom are well known to Karthik Chidambaram,the influential son of Home Minister P Chidambaram". The younger Hooda, a presumed relative of the Haryana Chief Minister, is alleged to be "active in promoting the products of certain agencies, including foreign entities". These sources claim that Tejinder Singh was very close to a former Chief of Army Staff and that he "knows the incoming Chief of Army Staff,Lt-General Bikramjit Singh, very well". None of these claims could be verified,especially suggestions that a such link "could influence procurement decisions by the Army in the future". General V K Singh is known to have had a series of battles with established cartels involved in military procurement,unlike some of his predecessors,who "played along with such elements". That the incoming Chief of Army Staff has very powerful support within the UPA was made clear by the government's decision to announce that he would succeed General V K Singh,even if the latter were to quit prematurely. It needs to be said that Lt-General Bikramjit Singh is widely regarded as a capable officer,with an excellent record in counter-insurgency operations.

Surprisingly,the CBI has thus far not shown any interest in investigating the many allegations that Lt-General Tejinder Singh,Major Hooda and others are involved in efforts to influence procurement decisions in the Home and Defense Ministries,besides those in NTRO,RAW and the Aviation Research Service. Reports of suspicious transactions in these agencies have been buried under a carpet of official indifference. By avoiding an enquiry, what has happened is that the miasma of suspicion that is hovering over the head of Karthik Chidambaram is continuing. Numerous sources allege "undue attention and interest" by the young politician in matters relating to equipment suggested as being needed for national security. There is every likelihood that such charges against Karthik are false, and motivated by jealously at his swift rise in business and politics. However, given the clout of the Home Minister in matters relating to promotions of IPS officers,the inaction of the CBI has given rise to speculation about the agency's motivation in rejecting an enquiry. Interestingly,a source claims that "one of the national security agencies of the Government of India recently asked for an enquiry into Hooda and Singh by both CBI and IB",but to no avail, "as high-level circles shield the two" . The Army has finally come out in the open about the mysterious retired armyman,who moves in very influential circles in Delhi,and directly tied him to the ongoing - and vicious - campaign against General Singh. It needs to be added that Defense Minister A K Antony has thus far kept himself scrupulously away from this campaign,although he has endorsed the view that Lt-General Bikramjit Singh is the fittest officer to be the new COAS.

Sources tracking procurement within the services are,in the words of a senior officer, afraid that "once the new Chief of Army Staff takes office,enquiries initiated by General Singh may get discontinued",thereby enabling officers guilty of graft and worse to escape. Hopefully,such a suspicion will be shown to be unfounded,come June 1,2012,and that the new Chief of Army Staff will continue the house-cleaning initiated by his predecessor. General Bikramjit Singh needs to show that he is in the tradition of those fighting graft,rather than in that of certain predecessors who are known to have done the opposite

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investig ... nder-singh
Jaybhatt
BRFite
Posts: 172
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Jaybhatt »

Information on Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Tejinder Singh

Nelson and chaanakya : many thanks for locating this article.

Madhav Nalapat is a very respected and serious columnist - I have known him for many years.

Therefore, it is a credible analysis and assessment that MN has done on Tejinder Singh.

Expect more dirty tricks from the babu - neta - JJ Singh - Deepak Kapoor cabal.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by chetak »

chaanakya wrote:X-posted from 2G thread 'Sushupti quoted ' Who is Lt-Gen Tejinder Singh?


Sources tracking procurement within the services are,in the words of a senior officer, afraid that "once the new Chief of Army Staff takes office,enquiries initiated by General Singh may get discontinued",thereby enabling officers guilty of graft and worse to escape. Hopefully,such a suspicion will be shown to be unfounded,come June 1,2012,and that the new Chief of Army Staff will continue the house-cleaning initiated by his predecessor. General Bikramjit Singh needs to show that he is in the tradition of those fighting graft,rather than in that of certain predecessors who are known to have done the opposite

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investig ... nder-singh
His stand on siachen, sir creek, paki papi jhappi a la MMS and AFSPA needs to be ascertained. That is what this "deep selection" is all about.
BijuShet
BRFite
Posts: 1587
Joined: 09 Jan 2008 23:14
Location: under my tin foil hat

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by BijuShet »

Ajatshatru wrote:BijuShet wrote:
Many are apprehensive of the next COAS because of the manner in which he was chosen by the current govt in power and also in your words his association with a previous COAS. The principal of "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion" (or "Sita's Agni pariksha" if you are a hindu fundamentalist)....
What the f*** does this mean?

Mr. BijuShet, this quote by you is, perhaps, somewhat akin to a certain gentleman coming up with a new term 'saffron aantakwaad'.

Moreover, how was this mischievous quote directly relevant to the topic under discussion?

Unless you have a really valid reason for this dishonest stealthy quote, why shouldn't I assume you coming here with a preconceived agenda by such highly objectionable quotes (not only bring Ramayan somehow into the discussion, but try to then indirectly associate your so called Hindu fundamentalist image also with it i.e. intent of a deliberate "double whammy" defamation aimed at a particular community).
OT Alert:
Looks like my attempt at black comedy has failed. Based on my opinions posted on the forum and outside, I would be counted as a hindu fundamentalist by those who provide such labels to others not fitting in their psuedo secular grouping. No offence was intended at any fellow hindu fundamentalist of which you are one too, I assume. My last post on this.

Ps: Please ignore the striked out portion as the poster to whom I responded took this seriously when I intended it to be funny. Apologies to the poster for any miscommunication on my part.
Last edited by BijuShet on 08 Mar 2012 20:56, edited 2 times in total.
SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1163
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by SagarAg »

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/vide ... 175837.cms
This is an interesting watch on how the police officer grabs the ak 47 gun from the barrel from behind the jawan and overpowers him.
aditp
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by aditp »

Not directly linked to the army, but posting as very relevant to the current situation

When the dead speak
AND Haksar in Hindustan Times editorial wrote:Delhi is a city of many memories. Some of its anniversaries are still observed, some just remembered, and others fully forgotten. A grim one belonging to the last category falls on March 22. On that date, over two centuries ago, the national capital witnessed a human carnage of unparalleled


intensity and scale.
This was the notorious qatle-aam of Delhi, a general massacre ordered by the invading king Nadir Shah of Persia. His soldiers slaughtered a staggering 20,000 men, women and children in the city on March 22, 1739, within a spell of six hours. It is almost unbelievable that such a large number could be killed in such a short time. It would have been a difficult feat even with modern weapons. But there are independent eye-witness accounts of this horrific happening.

There are contemporary chronicles like Tarikh-e-Hindi of Rustam Ali, Bayan-e-Waqai of Abdul Karim and Tazkira of Anand Ram Mukhlis. The Mughal empire had been weakened by wars of succession and secession in the three decades since the death of Aurangzeb. The regime was corrupt and disunited, but the country was still extremely rich and Delhi’s prosperity and prestige unblemished. Nadir Shah came in to grab a piece of the pie, like so many before and after him in India’s history.

The invaders defeated the imperial army near Karnal on February 25. Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah then twice visited the Persian king at his camp for negotiations after which both rulers headed for Delhi. The keys of the capital were surrendered to Nadir Shah who entered the city on March 20, occupying Shah Jehan’s imperial suite in the Red Fort. Coins were struck and the royal khutba read in his name in the Jama Masjid and other Delhi mosques. On the following day, he held a great durbar in the capital.

These events seemed to signify a change of government, leading to public confusion and agitation. One result was that prices shot up. The new city administrator set a price ceiling and sent a military contingent of Persian troops to the Pahar Ganj grain market to enforce the decree. The merchants refused, leading to violence which soon spread to other areas, also assuming a xenophobic anti-Persian orientation. Persians moving about the city were waylaid and killed. The underworld joined in the mayhem. Rumours spread that Nadir Shah himself had been assassinated by a woman guard in the Red Fort. The warlike Turani population of the Mughalpura area fell upon the Persian soldiery. A large number of them seem to have perished in the rioting which went on through the night of March 21.

At first incredulous, Nadir Shah was later furious when told of these casualties. Also needing to reassert power, he retaliated by ordering the qatle-aam. The next morning, March 22, he rode out in full armour from the Red Fort and took a seat at the Sunehri Masjid of Roshan-ud-dowla near the Kotwali Chabutra in the middle of Chandni Chowk. Around 9 am, he unsheathed his sword as a signal to commence the public slaughter.

Soon the pathways of areas like Chandni Chowk and Dariba Kalan, Fatehpuri and Faiz Bazar, Lahori, Ajmeri and Kabuli gates, Hauz Kazi and Johri Bazar — densely populated by Hindus and Muslims alike — were littered with bodies. Shops were looted and nobles’ mansions set ablaze. Women were ravished and abducted, many committing suicide. Even Muslim citizens were reported as resorting to jauhar, killing their own women and children.

“Here and there some opposition was offered,” says Tazkira, “but in most places people were butchered unresistingly. The Persians laid violent hands on everything and everybody. For a long time, streets remained strewn with corpses, as the walks of a garden with dead leaves and flowers. The town was reduced to ashes.”

After numerous pleas for mercy by Mughal ministers, Nadir Shah ordered the bloodshed halted around 2 pm. But the plunder continued for some days. A then enormous fine of R2 crore was extracted from the people of Delhi. The contents of the imperial treasury, including the Peacock Throne, jewels and gold were seized. “The accumulated wealth of centuries changed masters in a moment,” says a contemporary writer. The Persian ruler returned with the loot to his country where he was murdered some years later. The Mughal emperors lingered on for another century but increasingly as puppets of other powers.

Anniversaries occasion reflection besides recollection. First, disunity, corruption and weak government has always made this land a prey to foreign depredation. Second, the 1739 massacre was neither the last nor the first Delhi has suffered. Three centuries earlier it had been sacked by Timur. Later, there was the 1857 uprising and its armed suppression, the 1947 partition riots and the 1984 Sikh pogrom. The last two had very different causes but still displayed the disastrous consequences of government paralysis at critical moments. Such breakdowns have recurred in the country from time to time, though at smaller scales and levels, even in the more recent past. Third, law and order obviously depends on respect and fear for the power meant to maintain it, and to ensure them with due care is the prime business of a government.

AND Haksar is a former diplomat and occasional writer on history, literature and foreign affairs

The views expressed by the author are personal
anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by anjan »

shiv wrote:That is quite OK. But what is it about him that is suspect? Let us see some documents, articles etc. Let us bring the bugger down no? For the good of the country. We are patriots. If we can't do that the alternative is to zip up our gobs and not gossip. I am deliberately provoking and challenging people to state why Bikram Singh is suspect. "Because his god father was criminal" is not such a convincing reply to me.
People feel free to abuse and accuse everyone and their uncle when arms deals are concerned. Because hey, everyone is an expert. That General has been bought out by women, This one by liquor, what not. Mafia this. Mafia that. Since most of the Armour and any arms acquisition discussion consists primarily of accusations without evidence, if these are reportable offences I'd like to know too.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

anjan wrote:
People feel free to abuse and accuse everyone and their uncle when arms deals are concerned. Because hey, everyone is an expert. That General has been bought out by women, This one by liquor, what not. Mafia this. Mafia that. Since most of the Armour and any arms acquisition discussion consists primarily of accusations without evidence, if these are reportable offences I'd like to know too.
Yes. They are reportable. If you feel that the accusations are baseless you should ask for some supporting material and failing that you report them. Or report if you are uncomfortable.

And if you want to make accusations and innuendoes, you surely must have strong grounds for doing so, in which case anyone who questions your motives or reports to admin should really be no sweat - as you may well be correct in all your accusations. No issue at all.

By all means paint the future chief of staff of the Indian Army Gen. Bikram Singh as a corrupt sycophant, but no need to get upset if someone asks why you say that. Or else cock up if you are not cock sure.
SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by SivaVijay »

Ajatshatru wrote:BijuShet wrote:
No offence was intended at any fellow hindu fundamentalist of which you are one too, I assume.
I warned you that you are committing an offence (Section 153A and Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code). And furthermore, when I pointed out your defamatory post, you have resorted to a personal attack on me in your next post.

This is your final opportunity to cease such unwarranted posts, as well as remove your previous post before I draw your actions to the attention of the police and consider pursuing measures available to me at law.
Sir, you may be wiser and learned than most of us , but your post above is not only against the spirit of free expression but also is making a mockery of the existing redressal mechanism available with in this forum.

I may/may not agree with Bijushet, but I certainly do not agree with your response.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Pranav »

shiv wrote: By all means paint the future chief of staff of the Indian Army Gen. Bikram Singh as a corrupt sycophant, but no need to get upset if someone asks why you say that. Or else cock up if you are not cock sure.
How about we just call him a hand-picked beneficiary of a corrupt mafia and leave it at that.
Last edited by Rahul M on 08 Mar 2012 11:28, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: how about we ban you and leave it at that ? 1st warning.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by merlin »

shiv wrote:
anjan wrote:
People feel free to abuse and accuse everyone and their uncle when arms deals are concerned. Because hey, everyone is an expert. That General has been bought out by women, This one by liquor, what not. Mafia this. Mafia that. Since most of the Armour and any arms acquisition discussion consists primarily of accusations without evidence, if these are reportable offences I'd like to know too.
Yes. They are reportable. If you feel that the accusations are baseless you should ask for some supporting material and failing that you report them. Or report if you are uncomfortable.

And if you want to make accusations and innuendoes, you surely must have strong grounds for doing so, in which case anyone who questions your motives or reports to admin should really be no sweat - as you may well be correct in all your accusations. No issue at all.

By all means paint the future chief of staff of the Indian Army Gen. Bikram Singh as a corrupt sycophant, but no need to get upset if someone asks why you say that. Or else cock up if you are not cock sure.
There is nothing for the new general (to be) to prove (or disprove). His actions (or lack of it) in time will say all that there is to say.
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Yayavar »

shiv wrote:
I am deliberately provoking and challenging people to state why Bikram Singh is suspect. "Because his god father was criminal" is not such a convincing reply to me.
That is quite ok. You dont have to be convinced or not convinced. You are deliberately provoking and someone will get banned on getting provoked. That is not ok.

Regarding BKS - you said it yourself. The association is not convincing to you, it seems to be more convincing to others. That is quite ok too.

The deliberate action to get VKS to retire 1 year earlier could be out of mailce, or to favour BKS. Who knows? Time will tell maybe.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Pranav »

Hmm ... some people having takleef.

There may be an argument for not criticizing Bikram Singh, but the position taken by Shiv ji is deficient.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

viv wrote:
shiv wrote:
I am deliberately provoking and challenging people to state why Bikram Singh is suspect. "Because his god father was criminal" is not such a convincing reply to me.
That is quite ok. You dont have to be convinced or not convinced. You are deliberately provoking and someone will get banned on getting provoked. That is not ok.
I am not stopping anyone from being critical of Gen Bikram Singh, but I promise to ask for some basis to that criticism. Surely a critic should be able to defend his statement? Absolutely nobody should have any takleef with that hain?

Getting banned/not getting banned is something that is always in your own hands. It has nothing to do with me. It is between you and admins.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

Pranav wrote: There may be an argument for not criticizing Bikram Singh, but the position taken by Shiv ji is deficient.
My argument is for not criticizing Bikram Singh without some evidence that the criticism is not mere gossip/speculation. You may think my position is deficient. But there's not a lot you can do about it. :lol:
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Pranav »

shiv wrote:
Pranav wrote: There may be an argument for not criticizing Bikram Singh, but the position taken by Shiv ji is deficient.
My argument is for not criticizing Bikram Singh without some evidence that the criticism is not mere gossip/speculation.
... which my post, notwithstanding the warning, is quite consistent with.
Last edited by Rahul M on 08 Mar 2012 21:35, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: warning #2 for not getting the msg.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Pranav »

A retired Army Lieutenant General who is being suspected of fabricating the story on the bugging of Defence Minister A K Antony’s South Block office had earlier tried to influence Army chief General V K Singh to secure the import order of 100 Tatra trucks that are to be used to military purposes.

The officer, Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh, met Gen Singh in his Army headquarter office last year and sought to influence the Army chief. A furious Gen Singh is understood to have asked the former to leave his office.


http://www.deccanherald.com/content/232 ... uence.html
One source said that Tejinder Singh "operates in tandem with a Major Hooda (retd) and his son, both of whom are well known to Karthik Chidambaram,the influential son of Home Minister P Chidambaram". The younger Hooda, a presumed relative of the Haryana Chief Minister, is alleged to be "active in promoting the products of certain agencies, including foreign entities". These sources claim that Tejinder Singh was very close to a former Chief of Army Staff and that he "knows the incoming Chief of Army Staff,Lt-General Bikramjit Singh, very well".

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investig ... nder-singh
It is learnt that a parliamentarian of UPA coalition, has written a letter to the Prime Minister on 07 Jul 2011 raising serious allegations against Lt Gen Bikram Singh. ... The parliamentarian has also raised allegations of bribery against Lt Gen Bikram Singh in allotment of shops while he was Corps Commander of 15 Corps. ... The media has reported that he has allegations of fake encounter of a 65 year old person in J and K and also in the killing of five persons in Pathribal after the incident in Chattisinghpura during Bill Clinton’s visit to India in which 36 Sikhs were killed. It is reported that the CBI filed the report after three years and Army HQ vide its Letter Number A/38240/MO/3A dt 30 Dec 2004 took protection under the garb of AFSPA.

http://www.legalera.in/Front-Page/is-ou ... ecure.html
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

^^^

I am not sure if the above constitute "evidence"; but there is way too much smoke, and in this case we can not even say that Man mohan or UPA is feeding a media campaign against an officer (like what was the situation is Gen VKS case)
Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Boreas »

Ajatshatru wrote:BijuShet wrote:
No offence was intended at any fellow hindu fundamentalist of which you are one too, I assume.
I warned you that you are committing an offence (Section 153A and Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code). And furthermore, when I pointed out your defamatory post, you have resorted to a personal attack on me in your next post.
Section 153-A is not applicable here as there has been no attempt of "promoting enmity among groups".
Section 295-A is not applicable as there has been no act of "insulting religion or religious beliefs".

PS - Just expressing my opinion, not intended to take sides.
BijuShet
BRFite
Posts: 1587
Joined: 09 Jan 2008 23:14
Location: under my tin foil hat

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by BijuShet »

Ajatshatru wrote:BijuShet wrote:
No offence was intended at any fellow hindu fundamentalist of which you are one too, I assume.
I warned you that you are committing an offence (Section 153A and Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code). And furthermore, when I pointed out your defamatory post, you have resorted to a personal attack on me in your next post.

This is your final opportunity to cease such unwarranted posts, as well as remove your previous post before I draw your actions to the attention of the police and consider pursuing measures available to me at law.
OT Alert: Mods, I need to respond to the post above as a threat of Police action has been made directly at me. I gracefully accept any warnings from you for this OT post.

:roll: :roll:

Ajatshatruji, I was not making any personal attack on you. Based on my memory of your previous posts, I made an assumption that like me, you too may be mislabeled a hindu fundamentalist by the so called psuedo secularists of India. That post was supposed to be satirical. I admit I was wrong and you clearly are not humored by my mislabelling you as a hindu fundamentalist. As for the rest of the post, it will remain as is and you are free to take police action against me or report me to admins.

If the post crosses any red lines then I will have to face its consequences. I think it is best you put me on your foe list as my humor (black or white) seems to draw friendly fire from you. I remain a saffron-waadi regardless of whatever you or anyone else feels, threatens me with.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Kanson »

Sanku wrote:^^^

I am not sure if the above constitute "evidence"; but there is way too much smoke, and in this case we can not even say that Man mohan or UPA is feeding a media campaign against an officer (like what was the situation is Gen VKS case)
:D you mean, you fear, similar to hinting made at this news item, this could be used to keep the Gen in "line"? :lol:

Anything is possible..... :mrgreen:
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Kanson »

shiv wrote: You make the allegation and Bikram Singh has to prove he is innocent. Thanks. That is precisely what i have been saying. Guilt by association. Guilt by allegation. Guilt by convoluted logic. Guilt by suspicion etc.

But apart from that no substance. Only hot air. It is clearly his duty to stay clean. Proving that he is clean means that you (or someone) is saying he is dirty. I am asking if there is anything more than allegation to say that he is dirty and that he must prove that he is clean.

And we have, on this thread, soothsayers making predictions of future events that will prove that he is guilty. That is one step over and above claiming that he is dirty and that he must prove himself to be clean. Clearly the battle lines are being drawn on BRF to show that the next chief of Staff of the Indian army is a corrupt old bandicoot.
My allegation? Am I responsible for shortening VKS service by one year so BKS can become COAS? Am i responsible for the media onslaught for several months? Am I the only person talking about this?

Do I take this as innocent mistake or purposefully disruptive?

"no substance. Only hot air" : You are not getting it, don't you? If there is thievery, though you are not directly involved in it and it happens that you are the direct & sole beneficiary of that thievery. From the point of law, you will be considered as an accomplice unless you can produce convincing alibi.

If suppose Gen JJ is guilty, by association Gen BKS is considered guilty unless he can have a convincing alibi. This is by default. No one has to make a separate allegation at BKS.

Of course, I don't expect you to understand this...becoz though you hide yourself under the claim of "My argument is for not criticizing Bikram Singh without some evidence that the criticism is not mere gossip/speculation", you real purpose is to be disruptive, as you mentioned, "You may think my position is deficient. But there's not a lot you can do about it. :lol:", don't you? :wink:

"Some evidence": you mean, twitter feed, some anonymous blog, unattributable source quoted by page 3 reporters? :lol:

"battle lines are being drawn on BRF": I don't know about BRF. But it was already drawn at some other place.
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Yayavar »

shiv wrote: ... I promise to ask for some basis to that criticism.
Of course you should. Both ask and answer. Shouldn't have any takleef at either end.
Getting banned/not getting banned is something that is always in your own hands. It has nothing to do with me. It is between you and admins.
Nothing to do with me either. Am benign commenter onlee. It is possibly between provoker, provoked, and the admins.

Coming to the point at hand - some masaala was cooked up to deny current incumbent his legitimate tenure. Instead it was cut short by 1 year. It has resulted in a favourable situation to another. The question then is whether the beneficiary is unintentional or deliberate.

So one could take the stand that nothing is known, and since it is the position of COAS let us give full respect and full trust to the position. And this is a good position to take. I am all for it.

At the same time swinging at others who see the deliberate wrong perpetrated, of an earlier COAS being lobbied for on communal lines (you mentioned that), and further it was in his tenure that the wrong was initiated etc., is also being disingenuous. One also see reports of the current COAS taking on corruption and hence there is speculation if that has something to do with all this effort to meddle in Army's succession line.
anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by anjan »

shiv wrote:Yes. They are reportable. If you feel that the accusations are baseless you should ask for some supporting material and failing that you report them. Or report if you are uncomfortable.

And if you want to make accusations and innuendoes, you surely must have strong grounds for doing so, in which case anyone who questions your motives or reports to admin should really be no sweat - as you may well be correct in all your accusations. No issue at all.

By all means paint the future chief of staff of the Indian Army Gen. Bikram Singh as a corrupt sycophant, but no need to get upset if someone asks why you say that. Or else cock up if you are not cock sure.
I was actually genuinely curious. Sometimes it seems to me that most of what gets said here is speculation and accusations. At any rate I think the issue is complex and very grey. Accusing without proof a senior serving officer seems detrimental but as the end beneficiary of, what many articles/interviews by retired officers seem to affirm, is a politically engineered selection process there is still reasonable cause for caution. No free lunches and all that. Still Gen JJ Singh, if I recall correctly, opposed the Siachen plan without on-map demarcation and we can hope Gen. Bikram Singh goes with sane military advice too. If not I'd hope the Army commanders will turn in their papers.

I really don't know where we go from here. Civilian supremacy really needs a separate powerful branch of government if professionalism is not to be victim to the executives political ambitions. Sadly in our system the legislature and the executive move in lockstep by design and our judiciary believes in moving with the prevailing political winds. So much for checks and balances. This ad-hoc system we've jury-rigged on the back of a British system that is the result of a different historical narrative and perspective is doomed to failure. The currents of parliamentary vs royal control were more important to them and meaningless to us.

It's a difficult question historically but I don't see how any country with any ambition of power can hope to succeed while wishing away it's soldiers and hoping to ignore them. It's probably symbolic of the state of our civil-military relations that a country that's fought so many wars since independence relies on a war memorial that our Colonial masters built to honour our war dead. This while we allocate acres and acres of prime land for memorials for every politician who dies(and parks to honour for those who live). Then again we're people who riot for the natural deaths of actors so perhaps we get the system we deserve.

Personally I see it going downhill very fast unless we reform our system entirely. On the bright side our Chinese overlords will probably bring over the road building behemoths.
Last edited by anjan on 09 Mar 2012 03:01, edited 1 time in total.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7101
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shyamd »

Frankly, the same accusations were made against JJ Singh, the paki's today are blaming him for spoiling Siachen negotiations.

The only report we have so far on Lt Gen B Singh is that J&K govt wish to negotiate on AFSPA with him. When he was Corps Commander in Northern Command he was seen as hardline on the issue. J&K govt might be just playing politics too. Northern Command is still against removing it.
We don't know anything until the man opens his mouth, so lets wait and watch. any more comments on the subject is just time wasting
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

NC is playing politics by claiming to be on better terms with Lt Gen Bikram Singh.

Its the godfather strategy of talking to the later Don when they make no headway with the current Don.

As the Don he cant make his troops vulnerable to courts litigatioin to appease politicians.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by arnab »

Kanson wrote: "no substance. Only hot air" : You are not getting it, don't you? If there is thievery, though you are not directly involved in it and it happens that you are the direct & sole beneficiary of that thievery. From the point of law, you will be considered as an accomplice unless you can produce convincing alibi.

.
Wow!! one learns new things every day on BRF :) Which legal system does this saar? Can you provide any links? Because your legal premise appears to suggest - guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around.
saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4231
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by saip »

Kanson Sir: Do you know the meaning of 'alibi'? You are guilty of giving legal opinon without being an attorney :D
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by shiv »

Kanson wrote: "Some evidence": you mean, twitter feed, some anonymous blog, unattributable source quoted by page 3 reporters?
Yes. Why not? The quality of support that anyone demonstrates for his opinions could indicate whether it is gossip or substance. BRF and the opinions of people on here IMO rank along with page 3 and Twitter. At least the people who write on Page 3 and Twitter don't take themselves so seriously and don't get upset when asked for more information which is certainly a laugh as far as I am concerned.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Viv S »

Pranav wrote: One source said that Tejinder Singh "operates in tandem with a Major Hooda (retd) and his son, both of whom are well known to Karthik Chidambaram,the influential son of Home Minister P Chidambaram". The younger Hooda, a presumed relative of the Haryana Chief Minister, is alleged to be "active in promoting the products of certain agencies, including foreign entities". These sources claim that Tejinder Singh was very close to a former Chief of Army Staff and that he "knows the incoming Chief of Army Staff,Lt-General Bikramjit Singh, very well".

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investig ... nder-singh
How come you didn't include the next line in your excerpt?

These sources claim that Tejinder Singh was very close to a former Chief of Army Staff and that he "knows the incoming Chief of Army Staff,Lt-General Bikramjit Singh, very well". None of these claims could be verified,especially suggestions that a such link "could influence procurement decisions by the Army in the future".

Also from your article -

It needs to be said that Lt-General Bikramjit Singh is widely regarded as a capable officer,with an excellent record in counter-insurgency operations.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Pranav »

Viv S wrote: How come you didn't include the next line in your excerpt?
That quote relies on the credibility of Madhav Nalapat's journalism. Nobody is saying that the information has been proven in a court of law.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Army : News and Discussion

Post by Viv S »

Pranav wrote:
Viv S wrote: How come you didn't include the next line in your excerpt?
That quote relies on the credibility of Madhav Nalapat's journalism. Nobody is saying that the information has been proven in a court of law.
On the contrary, it appears Madhav Nalapat was relating allegations in his article, while at the same time clarifying that he could not personally verify those claims.
Post Reply