The Jan Lokpal Bill, Anna Hazare, and Baba Ramdev II

[ramana]

I agree fanne thats why I asked of poll stats and analysis.
I submit even that survey was false for if true the margin would be higher.
Any comparison of the vote shares in last two elections for that seat?

[Y I Patel]

I would imagine that Psephology, like any other branch of statistical prognostication, is still as much art as science. Especially in a dynamic society like India that is undergoing so much churn! So beyond a certain point it probably still reduces to gut instinct, which is why I actually admire politicians. Even the so called unpadh gavaar politicians have to operate with a sophisticated, abstract model of voter psychology.

And the thing about mass trends is that they become easier to discern when one has a larger base to extrapolate from - which is why it would paradoxically be much more difficult to project for one contest then it would be for a statewide or countrywide slate of contests.

That said, the first thing I know about Hissar is that it is a massive army base. I would imagine that for that one reason, the constituency would have a more cosmopolitan and middle class influence than one would assume of any other constituency in Haryana. Of course, I could be way wrong - I know, for example, that the so called Gandhinagar constituency in Gujarat actually comprised of a majority rural population from villages between Ahmedabad-Gandhinagar, besides having sections of the two cities. With the explosion in Ahmedabad, the constituency became increasingly urban. That should explain why it remains a bastion of BJP. Interestingly, Gandhinagar state assembly constituency is dominated by bureaucrats, which also explains why BJP has such a hard time in that one

The larger point behind this argument, of course, is that caste politics is the 800 pound gorilla of Indian politics. The powerful part of the whole story is that the poor and rural parts of India have been quick to learn the game and dominate it by numbers. ARoy was not wrong in dismissing AH movement as one from the middle class. But she is massively out of touch regarding the growing power of the emerging middle class, which is the real game changer.

[Aditya_V]

Did not clarify why I posted a seemingly political post in this thread - Because the fight against corruption is going nowhere. For congress to win, Corruption is not a factor.
Thanks,
Fanne

Because the Congress with its Media has convinced their key Voters that "Everybody is Corrupt, but we are only Secular forces who can save you'.

This has been the game plan all along and will never change unless the people of India say enough and force the key players in this shame game into retirement.

[Pranay]

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=739470

Amid sparring between Team Anna and Congress on the Lokpal issue, Law Minister Salman Khurshid today said there should be no encouragement for discord between civil society and government.

"Things will be said and people would think that they should say something. I don't think we should engage in a dialogue of this kind through the media," Khurshid said.

"Please don't try to create greater difference between civil society and the government... Whoever tries to create difference between civil society and the government is not working in the interest of the society," he said.

Noting that the two sides have enough channels for direct communication, he said, "I am sure we have a lot of channels by which we can talk directly. I don't think we should encourage discord and distance between civil society and government."

AICC General Secretary Digvijay Singh had yesterday ridiculed Kiran Bedi's statement that money she had overcharged from NGOs and other hosts would be returned, saying that by this yardstick if corrupt people give back money, they too should be absolved of their crimes.

Anna Hazare had yesterday defended Bedi from the allegations of "air travel corruption" and accused a "gang of four" in the government of being behind the campaign against his team.

[RamaY]

If Kiran Bedi has committed crime, hang her, but bring Lokpal: Kejriwal

Read more: If Kiran Bedi has committed crime, hang her, but bring Lokpal: Kejriwal - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... z1bnw2ksIq


Kiran Bedi is guilty. She admits that she charged her sponsors the actual prices while flying on discount tickets. If this is not corruption then what is?

Now she agrees to return the money. And our Diggi Raja fires his first logical salvo. He asks if one becomes clean by returning the money? If that is the case can we forgive the A.Rajas and Kanimozhis if they return the public money? There is lies the dilemma of GoI on swiss funds as well.

If they have to put all the people who had illegal swiss accounts in jails then we are talking about the purge of Indian elite, 20-50000 people, as we know.

I hope the anti-corruption team understands the strength of their opponents.

[fanne]

Patel Saheb
the otehr thing is to keep in mind why Thakurs? Thakurs were firmly with BJP when Kalyan Singh (a Lodh not Thakur) was around. Then came Raja Bhaia episode. A prominent Thakur Royality from Eastern UP humuliated by Mayawati and BJP would do nothing for him (he had won on BJP Ticket). Then Amar Singh happennned and Thakurs went to SP in some numbers. I believe they are back with a certain party now. Congress is targetting this group. They have seen this caste group has swung the most. I do hope that Anna movement puts spikes in 2G palns....we will have to wait and watch.
Thanks,
fanne

[VinayB]

Did not clarify why I posted a seemingly political post in this thread - Because the fight against corruption is going nowhere. For congress to win, Corruption is not a factor.
Thanks,
Fanne

Bang on target. PM MMS said so in the parliament (in reference to cash for vote - we won the next election didnt we?)

Before the 2009 elections, there were odd reports of a foul mouthed film director and some group touring UP on behalf of INC. I remember wondering WTF. Then came surveys in mainline media that INC was reviving in UP, followed up by spectacular results. ofcourse back then one did not know the importance of the international connections that this foul mouthed film director's family had.

This foul mouthed director was not holding mass rallies. Before that in 2007 assembly polls one read of how a brahmin lawyer was working through all of UP to bring brahmins to BSP. He was not holding mass rallies or yatras either.

There are vote marshals in India who can be touched with fairly limited effort, and in very different ways. These ways are not going to involve 'issues' the way we see them. As seen in UP, they have been very effective.

[Sushupti]

Patel Saheb
the otehr thing is to keep in mind why Thakurs? Thakurs were firmly with BJP when Kalyan Singh (a Lodh not Thakur) was around. Then came Raja Bhaia episode. A prominent Thakur Royality from Eastern UP humuliated by Mayawati and BJP would do nothing for him (he had won on BJP Ticket). Then Amar Singh happennned and Thakurs went to SP in some numbers. I believe they are back with a certain party now. Congress is targetting this group. They have seen this caste group has swung the most. I do hope that Anna movement puts spikes in 2G palns....we will have to wait and watch.
Thanks,
fanne

No body believes BJP for it claims of Hindu or whatever. After that caste identity and personal interests takes over. Real destroyer of the BJP in UP was "windbag" and his chamchas. Raja Bhaiya episode was just a side show. If Congress is not back yet thanks to Mayawati. Without 23% SC votes, Congress return in UP is impossible. No amount of Muslim and upper caste vote can revive Congress in UP.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 489397.cms

Very eloquent and to the point... does not believe in beating around the bush. Unlike the INC/Govt. combo...

Facing allegations of financial misconduct, activist Arvind Kejriwal broke his silence on Tuesday daring the government to conduct a probe against him and other Team Anna members even as he questioned the motive behind the "smear campaign".

Defending himself and Kiran Bedi, who is under attack for inflating her travel bills, Kejriwal said, "If someone paid the ticket examiner in Railway because he needed a ticket, so that person cannot question Suresh Kalmadi? Is this the message being given out?

"Do you mean to say that out of 120 crore people, only saints can question UPA's corruption and government will keep on robbing people? If anybody questions then that person will be asked to look into his case first," he said and warned that if the current smear campaign continues, the next movement will be 10 times bigger.

Kejriwal, who was accused by Swami Agnivesh of depositing donations for Hazare agitation in a trust run by him, said if they have committed mistakes, then the government was free to probe and punish them by taking the strongest possible action.

"Dont forgive us. Give us twice the punishment given to common people. But bring Lokpal and you will have to," he said.

He lamented that the whole attention is being shifted from corruption movement and Lokpal to core committe which has "no importance".

"Whether Kiran Bedi paid bills or not has become national issue. It will not benefit nation. It will be useful when Lokpal will come. Government should understand that their ways and methods are increasing the anger among people," he said.

"If these smear campaign continues, then the people of this country are watching and the next movement will be 10 times bigger," he said.

[vijayk]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 489397.cms

Very eloquent and to the point... does not believe in beating around the bush. Unlike the INC/Govt. combo...

Facing allegations of financial misconduct, activist Arvind Kejriwal broke his silence on Tuesday daring the government to conduct a probe against him and other Team Anna members even as he questioned the motive behind the "smear campaign".

Defending himself and Kiran Bedi, who is under attack for inflating her travel bills, Kejriwal said, "If someone paid the ticket examiner in Railway because he needed a ticket, so that person cannot question Suresh Kalmadi? Is this the message being given out?

"Do you mean to say that out of 120 crore people, only saints can question UPA's corruption and government will keep on robbing people? If anybody questions then that person will be asked to look into his case first," he said and warned that if the current smear campaign continues, the next movement will be 10 times bigger.

Kejriwal, who was accused by Swami Agnivesh of depositing donations for Hazare agitation in a trust run by him, said if they have committed mistakes, then the government was free to probe and punish them by taking the strongest possible action.

"Dont forgive us. Give us twice the punishment given to common people. But bring Lokpal and you will have to," he said.

He lamented that the whole attention is being shifted from corruption movement and Lokpal to core committe which has "no importance".

"Whether Kiran Bedi paid bills or not has become national issue. It will not benefit nation. It will be useful when Lokpal will come. Government should understand that their ways and methods are increasing the anger among people," he said.

"If these smear campaign continues, then the people of this country are watching and the next movement will be 10 times bigger," he said.

He may be leftist and has to once in a while attack RSS and BJP to prove his sickular credentials to the scum, CON mafia media looters but boy... This guy is a straight shooter.. Not a a gimmick man or CON man like Dogvijay or Agnivesh...

[SBajwa]

by Fanne
Did not clarify why I posted a seemingly political post in this thread - Because the fight against corruption is going nowhere. For congress to win, Corruption is not a factor.
Thanks,
Fanne

I doubt that., From September 25 - October 14th I talked with majority of poor people in India in cities like Chandigarh, Ambala, Karnal, Delhi, Muzaffarnagar, Haridwar, Rishikesh, and Chamoli District in Uttarakhand.

Vast Majority of poor/low wage earners are in awe of Anna Hazare!! They totally support him!! But when it comes to elections they might value their short term goals of Rs 100 for vote (bribe by Congress and their goons). Thus the bigger issue in India still is corruption both ways.

Parliamentarians buy their votes through cash, alcohol, power and threat. and common people have to pay money to get the value of their service.

Mr. Anna Hazare should tell people to ignore for once the lure of Money, Alcohol and bollywood stars and vote the good people.

[Jarita]

^^^ Someone should tell these pple to take the money but vote for the right candidate

[ramana]

Even though this is a book about Bismarck and at first glance doesnt apply to India if we read on we find many similarities in how INC dealt with India and Bsmarck with Germany. And the ultimate fate of post Bismarck Germany and is causes.

The Leadership Secrets of Bismarck

Over the last two decades, a distinctive regime type has emerged across the developing world, one that scholars have come to call competitive authoritarianism. This sort of political system allows for the contestation of power among different social groups, but with so many violations of electoral fairness and so little regard for liberal norms that it cannot be called a true democracy. From Russia to Peru, Cambodia to Cameroon, such regimes are now located in almost every region of the world, and how they develop will determine the shape of the twenty-first century.

One of the best ways to gain insight into the future paths of these political systems, ironically, is to look backward rather than forward, because the past can be prologue. Wilhelmine Germany is a particularly interesting point of comparison, because it had many similar characteristics. Like many of these regimes, it, too, experienced late, rapid growth and social transformation. It, too, developed a competitive form of politics that fell short of full-blown democracy. And potentially like some of today's emerging powers, Germany had a domestic political crisis that was capable of shaking the world.

The larger-than-life figure who presided over Germany's rise was Otto von Bismarck, foreign minister and minister-president of Prussia during the 1860s, architect of German unification in 1871, and chancellor of a unified German empire from 1871 to 1890. Given Bismarck's role in German history, a vast amount has already been written about him, so one might question what more there is to say. However, in Bismarck: A Life, Jonathan Steinberg, a respected historian with a long career at Cambridge University and the University of Pennsylvania, has produced a first-rate biography that combines a standard historical narrative with an intriguing account of Bismarck as a personality.

Incorporating reflections from the man himself, as well as from his friends, enemies, and coworkers, Bismarck offers a fresh and compelling portrait of a fascinating character. Steinberg shows how the German political climate Bismarck fostered -- marked by deference to authoritarianism, an aversion to compromise, and reactionary antimodernism -- contributed to the country's disastrous course in the decades after Bismarck's fall from power. And in doing so, he indirectly sheds light on the prospects of competitive authoritarian regimes in the contemporary era. The thing to keep an eye on, it turns out, is less the character of the classes rising from below than the willingness of elites at the top to loosen their grip on power.

BISMARCK'S POLITICAL GENIUS

Bismarck was born in 1815 to that stratum of Prussian nobility, the Junkers, that combined hardscrabble farming in the rye belt east of the Elbe River with an ethic of disciplined and often militarized service to the Hohenzollerns, Prussia's ruling family. He was educated, witty, and highly intelligent (although not an intellectual). Like many Junkers, his politics were reactionary; he was antidemocratic, antisocialist, anti-Catholic, and anti-Semitic.

Bismarck first rose to prominence during the revolutions of 1848, when nationalist and democratic uprisings challenged Europe's political status quo. As a new member of the Prussian legislature, he forcefully defended the monarchy's desire for unfettered executive power. Thanks in part to his maneuvering then and later, the dynasty survived the tumult and went on to rule for seven more decades -- a period during which Prussia unified Germany around it and blossomed into an industrial and military powerhouse.

Germany's economic development was relatively late by European standards. Social scientists such as Alexander Gerschenkron and Barrington Moore have noted that its embrace of capitalist modernity and rise to power were predicated on a new pattern of authoritarian development -- in Moore's words, a "revolution from above." This meant using industrial policy to push development in those sectors that enhanced state power and simultaneously suppressing or co-opting all political opposition. In order to catch up with the more advanced economies of the West, the government protected heavy industries essential to the nation's military strength, as well as Junker agriculture, with tariffs.

The transformation of a largely agrarian and rural society into an industrial and urban one always involves major changes in social structure. Social change, in turn, almost inevitably leads to the rise of new political actors demanding a voice and a share of power. Although Steinberg does not dwell on the larger socioeconomic or theoretical picture, he does a good job of presenting the specifics of how this story played out in the German case. The success of the German economy led to the expansion of three groups: the bourgeoisie, the middle class, and the working class. These groups challenged Junker dominance through the Catholic Center Party, various liberal parties, and the Social Democratic Party. Ultimately, following Germany's defeat in World War I, these parties would abolish the empire and declare a republic. But Bismarck, by playing these forces off one another and selectively granting policy concessions, managed to keep them at bay for decades.

Nondemocratic regimes that try to manage their publics by simulating democracy have to walk a fine line. Establishing a veneer of democratic institutions, such as elections, can allow traditional or dictatorial rulers to incorporate rising groups into the political process without fully empowering them, thus stabilizing an existing regime and giving it some popular legitimacy. If elections are too obviously a sham and legislatures too obviously impotent, however, their hollowness can spur demands for progress toward real democracy, increasing rather than decreasing the regime's political problems.

The imperial German political system grappled continuously with this tension. It featured a monarch, the kaiser, who appointed the chancellor, the head of government. But it also featured a bicameral parliament, with the powerful lower house, the Reichstag, elected competitively through universal male suffrage. It was here that new social forces in Germany could give voice to their concerns. During his two decades as chancellor, Bismarck reported directly to the sovereign rather than the public at large, but he needed the consent of a majority in the Reichstag in order to pass budgets and other legislation.

The politics that played out in the Reichstag were real. The monarchy could not count on automatic support for all of its policies. It lost battles from time to time, and it was forced to compromise with legislative factions. Despite these constraints, Bismarck outmatched all his competitors in domestic politics, as in foreign policy, by practicing a style of politics similar to that used in competitive authoritarian regimes today.

SUPPRESSION AND CO-OPTATION

Bismarck's strategy was to weaken his opponents through authoritarian suppression while building temporary political coalitions in order to enact his preferred legislation. The skillful execution of this strategy allowed him to keep control over the legislative agenda for 20 years, despite his lack of a natural parliamentary majority and the growing power of the middle and working classes.

His favorite move was to divide and conquer, turning his ire on the Catholics, the liberals, and the Social Democrats in turn. The first of these maneuvers, the Kulturkampf of the 1870s, was directed against the third of the Prussian population that was Catholic. Bismarck saw Catholics and the clergy as potential fifth columnists who could be manipulated by Catholic Austria (which he had kept out of the empire) and the Vatican. He was able to put strong anticlerical measures in place by securing the support of conservatives and liberals. This worked for a while, but in the long run, the Center Party's strength continued to grow, and many of its leaders came to believe that constitutional democracy would protect their interests better than the monarchy.

The Kulturkampf was followed by the Anti-Socialist Laws. After two failed assassination attempts on the kaiser in 1878, Bismarck was able to convince both conservatives and liberals to pass restrictions on the rapidly growing socialist movement, denying socialists the right to publish or assemble. Even as he pressured the working class' formal political representatives, however, Bismarck tried to gain the support of workers themselves by sponsoring an array of pioneering social welfare legislation -- health insurance (1883), accident insurance (1884), and retirement pensions (1889). He was among the first to understand, in other words, that authoritarian regimes can legitimize themselves by lifting their citizens out of poverty and providing some security against economic uncertainty. Here, too, the strategy worked in the short run but failed over time, as the Social Democrats continued to grow, becoming Germany's largest political party in 1912. In 1890, following Bismarck's dismissal, the Reichstag allowed the Anti-Socialist Laws to lapse.

As for the liberals, Bismarck repeatedly sought their help for his moves against the Catholics and workers, but his larger relationship with them blew hot and cold, particularly on the issue of free trade (which they supported and he did not). And toward the end of his term, he turned against them, too, using rising anti-Semitism as a weapon. Like many Junkers and conservatives, Bismarck rejected modernity and capitalism as a Jewish plot to gain power and upset the natural order of society. Over the course of the third quarter of the century, this sort of anti-Semitism gathered steam in Germany. Bismarck did not drive the movement, but he was happy to profit from it, permitting attacks on prominent Jewish liberals as a way of weakening and cowing liberalism as a political force.

Bismarck's success in domestic political combat enabled him to remain in control of the Reich and enact the foreign and industrial policies that ensured Germany's status as a great power. His example seemed to show that illiberal politics could achieve results that matched or exceeded the results of liberal political institutions elsewhere in the West -- and his contemporaries took note, making "revolution from above" an attractive option for other autocrats, not unlike the so-called China model today.

IS COMPETITIVE AUTHORITARIANISM SUSTAINABLE?

Many ambitious politicians in developing countries today, such as Vladimir Putin in Russia and Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, have adopted some aspects of democratic political systems, allowing parties, elections, constitutions, and the like, while harassing their opponents and finding ways to keep power in their own hands. This might well end up being the outcome of the political turmoil in many of the countries that experienced the Arab Spring, such as Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. And even some democracies have slid backward in their practices, with leaders such as Viktor Orbán in Hungary and Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey using their power to throw unfair obstacles in the way of their political rivals. Some relatively stable authoritarian regimes, meanwhile, such as China, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam, owe their success in part to their ability to enhance the welfare of their populations. Whether they realize it or not, all these regimes are following in Bismarck's footsteps.

Lifting populations out of poverty is clearly a good thing. In the second half of the nineteenth century, as Germany became an economic and military powerhouse, the country's standard of living rose appreciably, and it became a world leader in science, the arts, technology, and education. But in creating a powerful and authoritarian state to attain his goals, Bismarck retarded the political development of the society around it. Through his continuous and contemptuous manipulation of parliament, suppression of dynamic new political forces, and intolerance of all independent sources of intelligence and authority, he denied Germany exactly what it needed to govern itself successfully over the long term: a well-developed parliamentary tradition and robust political parties capable of providing effective leadership. The sociologist Max Weber's classic analysis of Germany's limited democratic prospects at the end of the empire, which Steinberg appropriately highlights and appreciates, should be sobering reading for fans of competitive authoritarians in the developing world today.

To be sure, there are also some grounds for optimism. In her important study Practicing Democracy, the historian Margaret Anderson offers a significantly less gloomy interpretation of imperial Germany's ultimate political trajectory. She paints a picture of a country in which 40 years of competitive politics produced a thriving civil society, a well-established party system, and a vibrant public sphere. Anderson argues that Germany may well have evolved naturally in the direction of real democracy were it not for World War I and the Carthaginian peace that followed. And other scholars have made similar points about less than fully democratic political development in mid-nineteenth-century France and contemporary Africa and other cases with similar features.

The crux of this debate is whether competitive authoritarianism can serve as a useful halfway house toward a better political future -- whether institutions that offer some form of open contestation, even if seriously flawed, inculcate good habits that eventually facilitate the emergence of liberal democracy or whether they constitute a detour away from it.

Here, too, the German case has lessons to teach, if one extends the discussion from Bismarck's era to the decades that followed, and particularly to World War I itself. Anderson, for example, may be correct that Germany was on a path to evolve in a democratic direction in the early decades of the twentieth century. But many would argue that it was precisely in order to head off such an outcome that conservative German elites were prepared to act so aggressively during the run-up to war and accept the terrible risks of an expansionist foreign policy. Bismarck's wars of German unification had helped stymie the reformist impulses of the liberals, after all, so it was not crazy to think that a new round of expansionism might cause the opposing parties to fall into line this time around -- which, in fact, they did for the first three years of the war, until the full economic brunt of failure began to be felt.

Competitive authoritarian political systems, like imperial Germany's hybrid of monarchy and parliamentary rule, might contain the seeds of future democracies. However, for this to occur, the elites that benefit from competitive authoritarianism need to be willing to let the electoral process play out to its conclusion. They have to accept a loss of control over the outcome of elections, the need to compete fairly with newly empowered political forces, and the prospect of ultimately sharing or even losing power. The willingness of local elites to cope with the uncertainty of fully competitive politics will thus be the ultimate factor in determining whether competitive authoritarianism proves a way station in democratic development or a safe house for autocrats.

See how INC doesnt want to allow reforms or loss of control. Its going to lead to bad outcomes for India.

[chaanakya]

Mr. Anna Hazare should tell people to ignore for once the lure of Money, Alcohol and bollywood stars and vote the good people.

Provided there are good people contesting election on a common platform, with common vision to lead the country. Else we get a miss mess of thing

AH is more like safety valve of scam cooker called INC

[RamaY]

Some more notes on "competitive Authoritarianism".

http://scholar.harvard.edu/levitsky/fil ... ctions.pdf

Four Arenas of Democratic Contestation
Due to the persistence of meaningful democratic institutions in competitive authoritarian regimes, arenas of contestation exist through which opposition forces may periodically challenge, weaken, and occasionally even defeat autocratic incumbents. Four such arenas are of particular importance: 1) the electoral arena; 2) the legislature; 3) the judiciary; and 4) the media.

1) The electoral arena. The first and most important arena of contestation is the electoral arena. In authoritarian regimes, elections either do not exist or are not seriously contested. Electoral competition is eliminated either de jure, as in Cuba and China, or de facto, as in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. In the latter, opposition parties are routinely banned or disqualified from electoral competition, and opposition leaders are often jailed. In addition, independent or outside observers are prevented from verifying results via parallel vote counts, which creates widespread opportunities for vote stealing. As a result, opposition forces do not present a serious electoral threat to incumbents, and elections are, for all intents and purposes, noncompetitive. Thus Kazakhstani president
Nursultan Nazarbayev was reelected in 1999 with 80 percent of the vote, and in Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov was reelected in 2000 with 92 percent of the vote. (As a rule of thumb, regimes in which presidents are reelected with more than 70 percent of the vote can generally be considered noncompetitive.) In such cases, the death or violent overthrow of the president is often viewed as a more likely means of succession than his electoral defeat.

In competitive authoritarian regimes, by contrast, elections are often bitterly fought. Although the electoral process may be characterized by large-scale abuses of state power, biased media coverage, (often violent) harassment of opposition candidates and activists, 10 and an overall lack of transparency, elections are regularly held, competitive (in that major opposition parties and candidates usually participate), and generally free of massive fraud. In many cases, the presence of international observers or the existence of parallel vote-counting procedures limits the capacity of incumbents to engage in large-scale fraud. As a result, elections may generate considerable uncertainty, and autocratic incumbents must therefore take them seriously. For example, Russian president Boris Yeltsin in 1996 and Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma in 1999 faced strong electoral challenges from former communist parties. Despite
concerted efforts to use blackmail and other techniques to secure votes,11 Kuchma won only 35 percent of the vote in the first round of the 1999 presidential elections and 56 percent in the second round. In Kenya, longtime autocrat Daniel arap Moi won reelection with bare pluralities in 1992 and 1997, and in Zimbabwe, the opposition Movement for Democratic Change nearly won the 2000 parliamentary elections. In several cases, opposition forces have managed to defeat autocratic incumbents or their hand-picked candidates, as occurred in Nicaragua in 1990, Zambia in 1991, Malawi and Ukraine in 1994, Albania
in 1997, and Ghana in 2000.

Although incumbents may manipulate election results, this often costs them dearly and can even bring them down. In Peru, for example, Fujimori was able to gain reelection in 2000 but was forced to resign amid scandal months later. Similarly, efforts by Miloševiæ to falsify Serbian election results in 2000 led to a regime crisis and the president’s removal. Regime crises resulting from electoral fraud also occurred in Mexico in 1988 and Armenia in 1996.

2) The legislative arena. A second arena of contestation is the legislature. In most full-scale authoritarian regimes, legislatures either do not exist or are so thoroughly controlled by the ruling party that conflict between the legislature and the executive branch is virtually unthinkable. In competitive authoritarian regimes, legislatures tend to be relatively weak, but they occasionally become focal points of opposition activity. This is particularly likely in cases in which incumbents lack strong majority parties. In both Ukraine and Russia in the 1990s, for example, presidents were faced with recalcitrant parliaments dominated
by former communist and other left-wing parties. The Ukrainian parliament repeatedly blocked or watered down economic reform legislation proposed by President Kuchma, and in 2000–2001, despite Kuchma’s threats to take “appropriate” measures if it did not cooperate, parliament blocked the president’s effort to call a referendum aimed at reducing the powers of the legislature. Although incumbents may attempt to circumvent or even shut down the legislature (as in Peru in 1992 and Russia in 1993), such actions tend to be costly, particularly in the international arena. Thus both Fujimori and Yeltsin held new legislative
elections within three years of their “self-coups,” and Yeltsin continued to face opposition from the post-1993-coup parliament. Even where incumbent executives enjoy large legislative majorities, opposition forces may use the legislature as a place for meeting and organizing and (to the extent that an independent media exists) as a public platform from which to denounce the regime. In Peru, despite the fact that opposition parties exerted little influence over the legislative process between 1995 and 2000, anti-Fujimori legislators used congress (and media coverage of it) as a place to air their views. In Ukraine in November 2000, opposition deputy Aleksandr Moroz used parliament to accuse the president of murder and to distribute damaging tapes of the president to the press.

3) The judicial arena. A third arena of potential contestation is the judiciary. Governments in competitive authoritarian regimes routinely attempt to subordinate the judiciary, often via impeachment, or, more subtly, through bribery, extortion, and other mechanisms of co-optation. In Peru, for example, scores of judges—including several Supreme Court justices—were entwined in the web of patronage, corruption, and blackmail constructed by Fujimori’s intelligence chief, Vladimiro Montesinos. In Russia, when the Constitutional Court declared Yeltsin’s 1993 decree disbanding parliament to be unconstitutional, Yeltsin cut off the Court’s phone lines and took away its guards. In some cases, governments resort to threats and violence. In Zimbabwe, after the Supreme
Court ruled that occupations of white-owned farmland—part of the Mugabe government’s land-redistribution policy—were illegal, independent justices received a wave of violent threats from pro-government “war veterans.” Four justices, including Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay, opted for early retirement in 2001 and were replaced by justices with closer ties to the government.

Yet the combination of formal judicial independence and incomplete control by the executive can give maverick judges an opening. In Ukraine, for example, the Constitutional Court stipulated that President Kuchma’s referendum to reduce the powers of the legislature was not binding. In Slovakia, the Constitutional Court prevented Vladimír Meèiar’s government from denying the opposition seats in parliament in 1994, and in Serbia, the courts legitimized local opposition electoral victories in 1996. Courts have also protected media and opposition figures from state persecution. In Croatia, the courts acquitted an opposition
weekly that had been charged with falsely accusing President Tudjman of being a devotee of Spain’s Francisco Franco. Similarly, in Malaysia in 2001, a High Court judge released two dissidents who had been jailed under the regime’s Internal Security Act and publicly questioned the need for such a draconian law.12

Although competitive authoritarian governments may subsequently punish judges who rule against them, such acts against formally independent judiciaries may generate important costs in terms of domestic and international legitimacy. In Peru, for example, the pro-Fujimori congress sacked three members of the Constitutional Tribunal in 1997 after they attempted to block Fujimori’s constitutionally dubious bid for a third presidential term. The move generated sharp criticism both domestically and abroad, however, and the case remained a thorn in the regime’s side for the rest of the decade.

4) The media. Finally, the media are often a central point of contention in competitive authoritarian regimes. In most full-blown autocracies, the media are entirely state-owned, heavily censored, or systematically repressed. Leading television and radio stations are controlled by the government (or its close allies), and major independent newspapers and magazines are either prohibited by law (as in Cuba) or de facto eliminated (as in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan). Journalists who provoke the ire of the government risk arrest, deportation, and even assassination. In competitive authoritarian regimes, by contrast, independent media outlets are not only legal but often quite influential, and journalists— though frequently threatened and periodically attacked—often
emerge as important opposition figures. In Peru, for example, independent newspapers such as La República and El Comercio and weekly magazines such as Sí and Caretas operated freely throughout the 1990s. In Ukraine, newspapers such as Zerkalo nedeli, Den, and, more recently, Vicherni visti functioned as important sources of independent views on the Kuchma government.

Independent media outlets often play a critical watchdog role by investigating and exposing government malfeasance. The Peruvian media uncovered a range of government abuses, including the 1992 massacre of students at La Cantuta University and the forgery of the signatures needed for Fujimori’s party to qualify for the 2000 elections. In Russia, Vladimir Gusinsky’s Independent TV was an important source of criticism of the Yeltsin government, particularly with respect to its actions in Chechnya. In Zimbabwe, the Daily News played an important role in exposing the abuses of the Mugabe government. Media outlets may also serve as mouthpieces for opposition forces. In Serbia, the Belgrade radio station B-92 served as a key center of opposition to Miloševiæ in the
second half of the 1990s. Newspapers played an important role in supporting opposition forces in Panama and Nicaragua in the late 1980s. Executives in competitive authoritarian regimes often actively seek to suppress the independent media, using more subtle mechanisms of repression than their counterparts in authoritarian regimes. These methods often include bribery, the selective allocation of state advertising, the manipulation of debts and taxes owed by media outlets, the fomentation of conflicts among stockholders, and restrictive press laws that facilitate the prosecution of independent and opposition journalists. In
Russia, the government took advantage of Independent TV’s debts to the main gas company, Gazprom, to engineer a takeover by government- friendly forces. In Peru, the Fujimori government gained de facto control over all of the country’s privately owned television stations through a combination of bribery and legal shenanigans, such as the invalidation of Channel 2 owner Baruch Ivcher’s citizenship. Governments also make extensive use of libel laws to harass or persecute
independent newspapers “legally.” In Ghana, for example, the Jerry Rawlings government used colonial-era libel statutes to imprison several newspaper editors and columnists in the 1990s, and in Croatia, the Open Society Institute reported in 1997 that major independent newspapers had been hit by more than 230 libel suits. Similarly, Armenia’s government used libel suits to quiet press criticism after the country’s controversial 1996 elections.

Yet efforts to repress the media may be costly to incumbents in competitive authoritarian regimes. For example, when in 1996 the Tudjman government in Croatia tried to revoke the license of Radio 101, a popular independent station in the capital, the massive protests that broke out both galvanized the opposition and temporarily split the ruling party. In Ukraine in 2000, charges that President Kuchma had sought the killing of an opposition journalist led to large domestic protests and partial isolation from the West. In Peru, the persecution and exiling of Ivcher provoked substantial protest at home and became a focal point of criticism
abroad.

[Pranay]

http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=739582

With his team under attack and facing questions of probity, Anna Hazare today said he will extend his vow of silence as verbal communication with people is leaving him "very weak".

His decision to continue his 'maun vrat' (vow of silence), which he started on October 16, will mean that he will not attend the Core Committee meeting in the national capital on Saturday which is expected to discuss controversies engulfing some of Team Anna's key members.

Hazare's announcement came on a day when Congress leader Digvijay Singh stepped up his offensive against the Gandhian alleging that his anti-corruption agitation as well as that of yoga guru Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravisankar were part of an over-all plan of RSS-BJP to divert attention from right-wing terror.

"My health still does not permit me to give up my 'maun vrat'. There is still some swelling on my feet and the knee troubles me a lot," 74-year-old Hazare, who is in Ralegan Siddhi which is 200 km from Mumbai, said in his blog.

"Maun vrat helps me heal my body from within and outside. Verbal communication with people is an exertion for me leaving me very weak. Hence, keeping my physical condition in mind I have taken the decision to go on with maun vrat," he said.

Team Anna has been on the backfoot with Kiran Bedi battling charges of overcharging her hosts by inflating travel bills and another team member Arvind Kejriwal being accused of depositing donations collected for Hazare agitation against corruption in a trust run by him.

Lawyer Prashant Bhushan also triggered a controversy by advocating plebiscite in Kashmir, evoking strong opposition from Hazare and other team members.

The Core Committee meeting comes on the heels of resignation of two prominent activists P V Rajagopal and Rajinder Singh, apparently unhappy over the movement moving towards party politics.

Renewing his attack on Team Anna, Singh said that while Ramdev and Hazare were plan A and B of the Sangh-BJP, Sri Sri Ravishankar is Plan C and asked the latter to be "wary of the two organizations".

Singh remarked on the microblogging site Twitter "Plan A, B and C are of Sangh/BJP to divert the minds of the people from their involvement in terror activities to corruption."

Later talking to reporters, he said that Plan A of this over-all plan has been Baba Ramdev, B is Hazare and C is Sri Sri Ravishankar.

"I hold Sri Sri Ravi Shankarji in high esteem and have done a course in the Art of Living as Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh in 2001. He should be wary of Sangh/BJP," Singh remarked.

Singh said that the anti-corruption movement was part of over-all plan of RSS-BJP combine to "divert" attention from the issue of "involvement of Sangh activists in terror activities in Malegaon, Modasa, Hyderabad, Ajmersharif and Samjhauta Express."

Reacting to the allegations, Sri Sri said, "people write so many things. I do not react to every comment. Everybody is entitled to their views."

Hitting back at Singh, BJP spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad said the Congress leader was attempting to "demonize" all those who are fighting against corruption.

"I complement Digvijay Singh for his important plan of almost shameless way of demonising all those who are fighting against corruption. Good luck to him. The more he speaks, more the Congress will lose its credibility," Prasad said.

[csaurabh]

I can't help getting angry whenever I see doggy raja spouting venom on TV. If it were some BJP guy using such abusive language the media would fry them alive.

[RamaY]

doggyraja is doing people a favor. He is pushing anyone who doesn't submit to die-nasty into RSS camp.

[Prem]

doggyraja is doing people a favor. He is pushing anyone who doesn't submit to die-nasty into RSS camp.

Paap orr Punya require clear distinctive marking line . Nature way of using usless creature like him for the added benefit of sane people. Thanks Lord, no curse of Pinnochio on him otherwise neighboring states will be accusing India of boundary violations on daily basis just because of this man's nose.

[vijayk]

http://www.newsinsight.net/archivedebat ... recno=2211

Big anti-CON news site. was attacked by CON gang. The site is back.

In the battle between good versus evil, the forces of darkness may occasionally seem to gain the upper hand. But they will lose in the end. This is as true for the Anna Hazare movement as for NewsInsight's sustained and steadfast campaign against corruption.
Readers will know that www.newsinsight.net crashed early on Monday. That day's commentary had been written but could not be published. It turned out that NewsInsight's server had been systematically and brutally hacked.
It was no ordinary hacking. Investigations showed that there had been a concerted attempt over many months to break into the server. Eventually, the hackers succeeded.
It is clear who did the hacking.
But if anybody believes this will daunt or deter NewsInsight, they have another thing coming.
Thrice is he armed, it is said, who hath his quarrel just.
The same thing holds true for Team Anna.
When Prashant Bhushan was attacked by a so-called "right-wing" group for supporting plebiscite in Kashmir, this writer was immediately suspicious. The attack came in the middle of Team Anna's campaign in Hissar lead by Arvind Kejriwal. The attack looked just the sort that a covert agency would arrange.
Insiders in the Congress party confirmed the suspicions. Then Kejriwal gave voice to them. Subsequently, Kejriwal was attacked by a slipper by a Congress activist in Lucknow. A second attack on Team Anna on their Uttar Pradesh tour was thwarted. Then came the nasty campaign against Kiran Bedi facilitated by the government with leaks to a newspaper which has, unfortunately, become an establishment mouthpiece.

Every day since, Team Anna has been attacked. There is Digvijay Singh with his mindless accusations. There are former Team Anna members who are being primed to speak against the anti-corruption campaign. Clearly, what's enraged the Congress establishment is the Team Anna campaign in the Hissar poll that resulted in humiliating defeat for the party candidate.

If in this background, Team Anna further spoils the UP game for the Congress, the party can never raise its head again. Hence the no-holds-barred attack on Team Anna. Thus, dissentions are being sought to be created in Team Anna. And a small section of the media that refuses to tow the establishment line, like NewsInsight, is being targeted.
But despair not. The good will triumph. Truth will prevail. Justice will be done. Anybody who believes that UPA-2 attempts to slander Team Anna members have succeeded knows little to nothing about the Indian people.
It is because of the wisdom and forbearance of the Indian people that Indian democracy survives. The truth can never be hidden for long from the Indian people. The Indian people know the identities of the "gang of four" that is targeting Team Anna. The people have seen Anna Hazare from up close. They trust him implicitly. They won't let him down.
The more the UPA-2 establishment tries to destabilize the anti-corruption movement, the worse upheavals it will face in power. UPA-2 is tottering. It cannot carry the burden of its corruption longer. Its defeat in UP will be decisive for its fall.

[gakakkad]

apparently Doggy cited the example of Rajat Gupta's bail and now wants SC to grant bail to Kalmadi and all his under-trial friends...(that might include KASAB even)....

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 62129.aspx

Hopefully he will NOT cease and desist from making such comments in the future . The more own goals he scores the better it is for the opposition.....

[Narad]

Shri Pigvijay Uvachh

Just email me on [email protected]

[RamaY]

apparently Doggy cited the example of Rajat Gupta's bail and now wants SC to grant bail to Kalmadi and all his under-trial friends...(that might include KASAB even)....

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 62129.aspx

Hopefully he will NOT cease and desist from making such comments in the future . The more own goals he scores the better it is for the opposition.....

digvijaya_28 digvijaya singh
What a sad news. Rajat Gupta our Icon arrested. I am sure he would prove his innocense. I am his admirer . May God be with him.

digvijaya_28 digvijaya singh
Good to know Rajat Gupta got bail. Would our Judiciary also take a cue and not keep under trials in lock up once they are charge sheeted.

[joshvajohn]

India's Congress Party and Corruption
http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... Itemid=164

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 526097.cms

The Vendetta against Team Anna expands...

The department of revenue in the finance ministry has written to the Corporate Affairs ministry seeking clarification as to how it has unilaterally extended the tenure of Sunita Kejriwal, a senior Income Tax official on deputation to the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). Sunita is the wife of Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal.

Her tenure at SFIO, a revenue department official said, was complete a few months ago and she was given extension without concurrence from her parent organization, the Income Tax. As per service rules, tenure can be extended only after seeking approval of the revenue department.

The Income Tax is itself facing shortage of officers and had some time ago written to the Department of Personnel and Training ( DoPT) for recruitment of 18,000 more officials.

More than 10,000 pieces of information on black money parked by Indians abroad had been received by the government in the last one year. To deal with them, the finance ministry had expanded investigation units of Income Tax and created new departments, including Directorate of Criminal Investigation. The new I-T investigation unit also has been given the mandate of creating an armed and a marine unit for special operations to deal with tax evaders and criminals. The staff strength of DCI alone is proposed to be 500, all drawn from Income Tax.

This comes at a time when Arvind Kejriwal is facing a notice from his cadre demanding dues of Rs 9.2 lakh. Kejriwal is still to respond to the notice and technically continues to be a government official in the Indian Revenue Service.

[joshvajohn]

So Congressi government is at war with poor Anna Team! As I mentioned earlier this govt is ready to fight anyone and everyone to protect their corrupt bandits who are either their ministers or their relatives or those who fund the party.
Anna should go to fast to death again I suppose!

[chetak]

So Congressi government is at war with poor Anna Team! As I mentioned earlier this govt is ready to fight anyone and everyone to protect their corrupt bandits who are either their ministers or their relatives or those who fund the party.
Anna should go to fast to death again I suppose!

For the betterment of the movement may be kejriwal and bedi should fast unto death and get it over with.

Why are such morons in the "team"??

[joshvajohn]

I agree! the poor old man. But he only has the crowd with him! He can only wake up Indian people unfortunately.

[Pratyush]

Team Anna member Qasmi: Core committee will not be dissolved

[Pranay]

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278790

In retrospect, virtually no one in the movement has been spared. In April, Congress troubleshooter Digvijay Singh launched a salvo against Justice Santosh Hegde, raising doubts about his ability as the Lokayukta of Karnataka to check corruption under the Yediyurappa government. Hegde had offered to quit. Many believe Digvijay’s ire goes back to when he was chief minister of Madhya Pradesh and Hegde was a Supreme Court judge. Corruption charges had been levelled against two of Digvijay’s ministers and Hegde had given adverse rulings.

The systematic targeting is not lost on political scientist Yogendra Yadav. He says, “There’s no doubt the campaigners are being targeted not only by the political establishment but also by elements in the media. People will be judged not by the source of information but by the nature of the disclosures. Kejriwal is not hiding anything. As for Bedi, she won’t be put on par with those she targets, but she has to explain her actions.”

All this raises the question: Has the movement lost its shine? No, says Nandy emphatically. And former attorney-general Soli Sorabjee says, “It’s very unfortunate these setbacks have occurred to a movement that started off so well. I see them as counter-attacks. In the eyes of the public, whose disgust with corruption is linked to Hazare being an apolitical man, it is important that politics be kept out of the movement.”

That the movement is undergoing a subtle change is evident from the issues it espoused to the political causes it now seeks to embrace. And, as Yadav says, when a movement succeeds, certain alignments are bound to take place. But the goal does not appear to have changed—those in power should be made accountable. As crusaders who draw strength from the moral power they wield, it would only be appropriate for members of Team Anna to take the first step of making themselves accountable.

[Pranay]

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278789

BJP President Nitin Gadkari, on Anna Hazare, corruption, BJP, RSS, etc...

You had given a letter of support to Anna Hazare. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has said that the RSS supported the movement. Yet Anna Hazare himself wants to distance himself from the Sangh. Does that hurt?

Look, I have also heard Mohanji’s bhashan. We are not at the mercy of anyone that we see a crowd and then someone calls us and we appear. We don’t want to take any advantage from Anna or any movement. I will, we will never go anywhere uninvited. We will never do that. The question is that in the interest of the society and the nation, if Anna, Ramdev maharaj or anyone else, if they do something or try something then our principles tell us that we must support it. Mohanji in Nagpur said that same thing. I will just say I am a very self respecting worker (karyakarta), whether it is Anna’s movement or Baba Ramdev’s, we will not go anywhere without being called. If they will ask for support, we will give it. If they don’t want it, we will not give it.

So does it hurt when Anna says that he doesn’t want RSS support?

We are not saying that. Did we go to Anna to ask for something? Did RSS go to Anna? I reiterate that we will not go anywhere without being invited. We don’t want credit for any movement. We are not in the business of getting a photograph clicked wherever there is a crowd. We are doing our party’s work. Whoever will do good work for the society, we will support them. If they want our support we will support them, if they don’t we will stay away. We are not upset with anyone over anything.

You speak about a corruption free India but your leaders, your own chief minister Yeddyurappa has corruption charges. Hasn’t the party suffered because of these allegations?

I believe that ours is an organisation of people. We take good and bad people from the society in our organisation with their strengths and flaws.

But I have been telling my cadre that to earn money is not a sin. But politics can’t be a business of making money (Rajneeti yeh paisa kamaaney ka dhanda nahi ho sakta) If you are going to come into politics then come into politics to serve the people and the society. Come into politics to serve the poor. Politics is an instrument of economic reform and I say it every time that politics is not the business of earning money. And those who want to do that, those who think politics is a means to earn money, then those people must not get into the BJP. That kind of person has no chance and no opportunities in the BJP. Having said that there are lakhs of people working for the BJP and out of that one or two people have some flaws. But that doesn’t mean that the entire party is like that.

You said that those who want to make money through politics have no place in the BJP. Does that apply to your top leaders, your ministers, your chief ministers?

Look, politics is not a business of earning money and this applies to all the leaders in the BJP. Politics is the means to serve and develop the nation. Politics is a mission of socio-economic reform. There is no place for the corrupt in the BJP.

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 535596.cms

Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal has decided to pay his dues to the income tax department in a bid to ensure that his application seeking voluntary retirement from the Indian Revenue Service ( IRS) is finally accepted.

The I-T department, where Kejriwal worked, has turned down his application, insisting he first clear the Rs 9.27 lakh he owes the department. "I have decided to pay the dues claimed by the I-T department. I will take a loan from a friend to pay the amount," Kejriwal said.

[Y I Patel]

BRFies may remember the exchange between fanne and me a few days ago on caste politics and the disruptive role of an emerging middle class. Today, New York Times has a first class article on the same subject - how the AH movement is driven by the rising expectations of this rapidly burgeoning group whose interests cut across caste and regional dividing lines.


This phenomenon is by no means unique to India, and Marx in particular had a lot to say about how middle class values shape the culture of any society. In India, this class was never big enough to have political clout commensurate with that enjoyed by the middle class in other more developed countries. And this lack of clout translates into the frustration that is so visible even in posts right here on BRF. At the same time, the policies that lead to the formation and growth of middle class are largely irreversible, and the class itself will continue to grow and transform the cultural face of India with its own cosmopolitan character.

This is the gestation phase that Caroll Quigley talks about in the e-book recommended by ramana on page 13 of the distorted history thread. Once India is past the gestation period that leads to the maturity of middle class, it will enter an unstoppable expansion phase. So if we want to understand what India will become and how it will react, we would do well to understand the values the current school age generation in India is growing up with. My generation is the Sunrise Generation, one that follows the generation of Midnight's Children. My childrens' generation will be the generation of high noon.

[Dipanker]

Hazare ungrateful to RSS: Digvijay


My question is people belonging to RSS do not have the right to protest against corruption?

[Pratyush]

^^^

Well any one who is a hindu has not right to protest any thing in this country. That is the definition of of secularism for the sicklurists in this country.

So please live with it.

[CRamS]

^^^

Well any one who is a hindu has not right to protest any thing in this country. That is the definition of of secularism for the sicklurists in this country.

So please live with it.

What gives DogV the kind of arrogance and confidence to insult Hindus and get away with it?

[Pranay]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 542287.cms

RALEGAN SIDDHI: Under allround attack over allegations of financial misconduct and demands for its disbanding, Team Anna today decided to formulate a constitution for its anti-corruption movement and revamp the core committee after that.

The decision was taken at a meeting here chaired by Anna Hazare and attended by prominent team members Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan and Kiran Bedi, a day after the core committee meeting in Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh decided against disbanding the present team and going for a revamp.

Hazare, in a written communication which was read out by Kejriwal at a press conference, said he did not find it right the clamour for disbanding the core committee.

"Team Anna is very strong and no one can break it. There were talks about disbanding the core committee. I don't think it is right. If we flee the ground due to some allegations, then it will erode the credibility of the movement and it is not good for the movement. Don't bother about allegations. The core committee members will unitedly face the challenges and fight back. Our fight will be on till Jan Lokpal Bill is passed. In future, a constitution will be framed for the movement... After framing the constitution, the core committee will be revamped," Hazare said.

The Constitution will have provisions on who can be the members of the core committee and working committee of the team and their character. Whoever, Hazare said, indulges in wrongdoing will be dealt with according to the constitution.

Emphasising that his movement was not against any party, Hazare claimed that the Hisar bypolls results had frightened the Congress though he does not view the winner as one who is against corruption.

[chetak]

^^^

Well any one who is a hindu has not right to protest any thing in this country. That is the definition of of secularism for the sicklurists in this country.

So please live with it.

What gives DogV the kind of arrogance and confidence to insult Hindus and get away with it?

There are rumblings that he may be a convert.

No one else can do what he is doing and get away with it because he has italian brand support and suspenders.

[Singha]

digV is a window into the mind of the queen bee and yuvaraj. he is a mouthpiece and has the full approval of the queen bee. its a good insight into the thought process and its ugly , sad and scary.

[chetak]

digV is a window into the mind of the queen bee and yuvaraj. he is a mouthpiece and has the full approval of the queen bee. its a good insight into the thought process and its ugly , sad and scary.

mouthpiece?

Why saar, I had a much lower opinion of him