Indian Army: News & Discussion

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 28 Jan 2010 19:05

This COAS tenure went as expected

Those who worked with him are not surprised.

Sigh hopefully the new COAS can flush the place out

negi · Post by **negi** » 28 Jan 2010 19:13

When someone is pretty high up in the chain of command and serving an institution as illustrious as the IA every small omission on his/her part will be highlighted , in this case why was this land in the vicinity of IA cantonment being pursued by 'Dilip Agarwal' who happens to be a family friend of Lt. Gen. Avadesh Prakash ? And there seems to be a case of 'conflict of interest' right there . This is simple common sense.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Jan 2010 19:48

The crux of the matter is that the COAS overruled the Eastern Army Commander's findings and recommendations on the issue.Lt.Gen.VKS,now the COAS designate naturally protested and stuck to his guns and the MOD/DM had no other choice but to support the incoming COAS.However,it is a sad commentary on the leadership of the Army that dirty linen is being washed in public which naturally stains its image,quite unneccessary.This is what Adm,Bhagwat meant when criticising the excessive media coverage in a talk show on the issue.

What would've been best though was for the DM,AKA,to have called the two generals and thrashed out the matter,and after listening to the viewpoints of both generals,given them his final view of the matter and indicated the decision that he would take and seen to it that his decision was implemented by the current COAS which would've then prevented this controversy from becoming public and damaging the image also of the incumbent COAS.It would've then appeared that the COAS was giving due consideration to the findings of his EACommander after due deliberation and consultation within the MOD.

Many years ago,another distinguished chief of one of the services personally told me how on a very ticklish issue regarding the promotion of an unsuitable officer to multi-starred rank,despite there being immense pressure on the issue from the PMO,he had a frank talk with the then PM,Mrs.G. and she abided by his decision after hearing him out.AKA's decision to overturn his COAS's decision now sadly ,though perhaps not intentional at all,appears to be a deliberate act of babudom showing the services who the boss is.We saw that in its worst moment when Adm.Bhagwat was turfed out unceremoniously by Uncle George.The Defence Minister must have the skills and diplomatic tact in daling with the senior heads of the services,as any act by the MOD/govt. that shows them up in a bad light damages their image and has a cascading effect upon the lower ranks who hold their leaders in the highest regard,who may perceive it as a slight upon the service as a whole.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 28 Jan 2010 23:13

Without prejudging the case, this is not really any defence..A statutory approval/NOC is as "valuable" as ownership of assets in commercial projects..The environment ministry for example, owns no land, never had any licensing (in the license permit days) authorities..But it has remained a milch cow ministry, thanks to its veto powers due to its NOC that is a sine qua non for any industrial project..But the media circus on the case is really something, and has to be a result of insiders playing out the game..

On a slightly different note, this COAS's tenure will go down in IA's history as one of the more undistinguished ones..The Gen Panag affair also had dirty fumes of suspected corruption, and they were uncomfortably close to the Chief..And now this..Gen Kapoor's tenure might not be IAF's ACM Sareen or IN's Adm Ramdas/Bhagwat, but its not really been a phase that the organisation will look back with fond memories..

Ok, but what exactly is the charge? Despite all the ruckus, noone seems to know what the scam is about!

I dont know about fumes, but something is very fishy in the East. Someone planted stories in the media about VK Singh last year, and his age being in doubt. Then this happened. What was it all about? I dont fault VKS or anyone else, all Im saying is that I just dont understand. Finally, someone has won, and someone has lost. But the army as an institution has taken such a dent, as will take quite a while to recover from. A better place could have been found for this fistfight.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Jan 2010 23:23

somnath wrote:On a slightly different note, this COAS's tenure will go down in IA's history as one of the more undistinguished ones..The Gen Panag affair also had dirty fumes of suspected corruption, and they were uncomfortably close to the Chief..And now this..Gen Kapoor's tenure might not be IAF's ACM Sareen or IN's Adm Ramdas/Bhagwat, but its not really been a phase that the organisation will look back with fond memories..

slightly OT, what was the problem with ACM Sareen's term ? or even Adm Ramdas' time at office ?

CalvinH · Post by **CalvinH** » 29 Jan 2010 00:54

Philip sir with all due respect the second sentence of your last post on the topic gives and impression that DM has to give up as VKS was the COAS designate. What if VKS was not a COAS designate. Will the decision be different than.

How come we are all associating it with a foul play, conspiracy theory and babudom. Its a simple matter of principle. As somnath ji has already pointed out NOC is very valuable for any project. In this case the only significant NOC lies with IA and the officer in charge did a 180 on the previous decision. In fact its very clear the COAS has tried to side with an officer he is in friendly terms with and tried to block a judgement by a COI. Instead of babus it throws a very bad light on COAS. How can one justify nepotism at junior levels when the COAS himself is trying to shield someone he likes against a legitimate COI decision.

If DM is now tigheting screws on COAS I think its because COAS has shown ambivalence (clearly showing his partisan attitude) which doesnt fit well with the officer of his stature.

CalvinH · Post by **CalvinH** » 29 Jan 2010 01:02

Philip wrote: What would've been best though was for the DM,AKA,to have called the two generals and thrashed out the matter,and after listening to the viewpoints of both generals,given them his final view of the matter and indicated the decision that he would take and seen to it that his decision was implemented by the current COAS which would've then prevented this controversy from becoming public and damaging the image also of the incumbent COAS.

Sir, why should DM do this when COI and the vigilance inquiry has clearly pointed out culprits. Why should DM be an extra judicial authority and try to settle the case in his chambers by listening to the viewpoints of the both Generals. Since when things are decided based on viewpoints of generals and not on the detailed inquiry reports/decisions. As per media he has gone through all the papers and report himself and taken a decision based on something that Army/reports recommended. He has to come in the picture because COAS was shielding an officer clearly. The whole issue would have been a no issue if COAS has not acted in a partisan manner and decided to implement the findings of a court set under Army rules in a non partisan manner . Its the COAS who has done the most damage and not the DM.

I think DM is doing a great service to the Nation and Army by coming out clearly that no one in IA can hide or shield "his people" from a legitimate COI decision even if the person is a COAS.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2010 01:08

Lot of brickbats in this Deccan Herlad editorial

Anthony's Dictat

Antony’s dictat

'This is the time to clean up the armed forces.'

The recommendation by defence minister A K Antony to court martial two Army generals and to punish two other generals for their alleged involvement in a land scam is clearly aimed at taking the sting out of a corruption case that could potentially prove embarrassing for the UPA government.

But Antony’s act of deliverance may not in itself redeem the Army from a growing public perception that all is not well with the institution. The virus of corruption has crept deep into the institution and superior officers have come under the corruption cloud from time to time, including in contracts for hardware acquisitions. The land scam, for which three lieutenant generals and a major general will face disciplinary and administrative actions, is a rare opportunity for the UPA government to clean up the armed forces which are extremely reluctant to make any earnest commitment to free themselves from corrupt practices.

The barren stretch of land spread over an area of 72 acres in Sukna in West Bengal’s Darjeeling district was in the process of being handed over to the Army by the state government. Technically, therefore, the Army had a say in any privately-driven development project on the land in question. The generals, primarily Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash, allegedly bent rules and procedures to ensure that a realtor, believed to be his relative, got possession of the land close to the headquarters of the 33rd Corps. They also allegedly lobbied hard for the Mayo college brand name for a school which the realtor wanted to set up. On the face of it, this might appear to be a chicken-feed scam when compared to some of the highly controversial deals made during the Kargil war and sundry other tainted acquisitions the three defence services have made in the past. These have tarnished the image of a fighting force, reputed to be one of the meanest on the battlefield.

A minister of impeccable integrity, Antony’s attempt to clean up the Augean stables is a signal to the three armed services that the government will not allow corruption to wreck the defence forces, especially a bloated Army, which must have competent and professional leadership. India’s military management has a poor track record. Successive governments have erred on the side of caution over the desirability of seeking transparency and accountability in the armed forces. Time has come to address these issues.

Will he show same expedititous action in armed forces procurements or ban the suppliers and keep force preparedness at risk?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2010 01:38

Seems ex-servicemen associations are irked at the shortcut of the procedures by the RM.

Could have more fallout.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Jan 2010 02:34

if he can't pin point and find them, he can't remove them.

when corruption itself is transparent then, he will find only good afsaars.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 07:31

Rahul M wrote: slightly OT, what was the problem with ACM Sareen's term ? or even Adm Ramdas' time at office ?

Well, ACM Sareen presided over the first "mini mutiny" of any service arm in post independence history (not counting the desertions by some Sikh soldiers in the aftermath of Bluestar). Adm Ramdas, his actions durign the unfortunate INS Andaman incident (he was the ENC commander) was quite unseemly. Dont know how much is available in open source, any old time Navy officer remembers his term with horror..

Its quite confusing as to who is "getting back" at whom in this saga..But it is important that gievn the story has come out in the media, the govt deals with it transparently. there is no upside in keeping it under wraps and creating more apprehensive innuendos.

ASPuar, to my understanding, the "charges" are simple. Someone was looking to build a private school on land adjacnet to Army land in Sukhna. Due to its proximity, NOC from the Army commander was required...It was given, and seems that the promoter/builder is an acquintance of the commander..It was subsequently rescinded once the story broke..

These are tricky situations, and especially for public (as also private) servants, these situations arise all the time - conflicts of interest, or seeming favouritism..Most public servants learn to deal with them in a manner that is fair and seen to be fair...At the same time, genuine mistakes too happen, often by experienced officers..

therefore it is aboslutely necessary for the govt to deal with this is the most transparent manner possible, including exemplary action taken against anyone guilty..

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 29 Jan 2010 07:46

A minister of impeccable integrity, Antony’s attempt to clean up the Augean stables is a signal to the three armed services that the government will not allow corruption to wreck the defence forces, especially a bloated Army, which must have competent and professional leadership. India’s military management has a poor track record. Successive governments have erred on the side of caution over the desirability of seeking transparency and accountability in the armed forces. Time has come to address these issues.

All fine and dandy, how about Mr. Integrity clean up the byzantine labryinth called the MOD while he is at it as well? Not so easy is it?

Corruption in Armed Forces = Daal mein kala.
Corruption in MOD/GOI = Saar Daal kaali!

CM.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 29 Jan 2010 10:02

Anyone has any more information on Lt Gen Swamy's Uttam Yudh Seva medal? I believe they are not handed out for leadership of CI OPs, even on LOC. So was there any minor action on LoC or LC? Were things with China hotter than we are aware of?

Answering my own question partially, but still no clarity. Turns out he was GOC 16 Corps.

Link

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Jan 2010 10:31

somnath wrote:
Rahul M wrote: slightly OT, what was the problem with ACM Sareen's term ? or even Adm Ramdas' time at office ?
Well, ACM Sareen presided over the first "mini mutiny" of any service arm in post independence history (not counting the desertions by some Sikh soldiers in the aftermath of Bluestar). Adm Ramdas, his actions durign the unfortunate INS Andaman incident (he was the ENC commander) was quite unseemly. Dont know how much is available in open source, any old time Navy officer remembers his term with horror.

Err, you forgot to mention the very grasping and sticky fingers

Georgie boy actually had sareen dead to rights in his sight when bhagwat blundered into the line of fire and took the fatal hit.

Verily, a closed mouth gathers no feet. bhagwat has all the time in the world now to ponder over the feet aplenty stuck in his mouth.
His wantonly litigious past also contributed to the sinking of his little boat. His precipitous departure was also deservedly un mourned.

Followed immediately thereafter by another disaster of greater proportions.

negi · Post by **negi** » 29 Jan 2010 11:00

--deleted OT and risky--

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 11:33

chetak wrote:Followed immediately thereafter by another disaster of greater proportions

Adm Sushil Kumar? Havent picked up anything really negative about him ever, at least in open source..But really, ACM Sareen was probably the WORST service chief we ever had, worse than even Gen Thapar or Adm Ramdas..He ought to have been sacked...OT..

BAck to the Army "scam" here, we would be doing a disservice by blowing it up more than is necessary..Even if the allegations are true, it only means that a vigilant media has done its job, and the guilty have been taken to task..There is no "shame" in this. If untrue, people who created a ruckus will have eggs on their collective faces..Any organisation, especially a large govt organisation, is bound to be facing such issues.they arent the end of the world at all, and is not reflective of anything systemic..

If anything, the only systemic take away from the affair is how much media savvy the services, and its officers have gotten over the years..It will be extremely unfair for anyone to complain anymore that the media has a negative bias or ignorance about the services - if the services cannot put through their message with this level of "expertise", its no one's but their own fault of commission..

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jan 2010 11:36

The reason these things are settled quietly, is because the government should not be seen to be humiliating the office of COAS. Imagine if the government "ORdered" the cabinet secretary to take action against a secretary to the GoI? Its unseemly, and tarnishes the image of an otherwise much cleaner and better and fairer service than most of our govt services, in public.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jan 2010 11:40

somnath wrote: If untrue, people who created a ruckus will have eggs on their collective faces..Any organisation, especially a large govt organisation, is bound to be facing such issues.they arent the end of the world at all, and is not reflective of anything systemic..

Does the truth really matter, in an era where everything the media reports, is taken as gospel?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Jan 2010 11:42

somnath wrote:
BAck to the Army "scam" here, we would be doing a disservice by blowing it up more than is necessary..Even if the allegations are true, it only means that a vigilant media has done its job, and the guilty have been taken to task..There is no "shame" in this. If untrue, people who created a ruckus will have eggs on their collective faces..Any organisation, especially a large govt organisation, is bound to be facing such issues.they arent the end of the world at all, and is not reflective of anything systemic..

100% agreement.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jan 2010 11:42

somnath wrote:
chetak wrote:Followed immediately thereafter by another disaster of greater proportions
...<SNIP>
BAck to the Army "scam" here, we would be doing a disservice by blowing it up more than is necessary..Even if the allegations are true, it only means that a vigilant media has done its job, and the guilty have been taken to task........<SNIP>

wrt the bolded part, the media never picked up the case. These things cannot appear in public unless someone shares the details with the media. A COI and subsequent recording of Summary of Evidence(SOE) is not something which you can pick from the chatter rooms and start digging.It is this aspect that stinks to high heavens.

How on god's earth is it possible for media to know the reccomendations of the COI

unless someone shares the same with the them?

And whosoever be the winner in this slugfest, the biggest loser is the institution of the Indian Army. I'm waiting for the last day if Deepak Kapoor's service when he hands over the reign to VKS.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2010 11:43

ASPuar wrote:The reason these things are settled quietly, is because the government should not be seen to be humiliating the office of COAS. Imagine if the government "ORdered" the cabinet secretary to take action against a secretary to the GoI? Its unseemly, and tarnishes the image of an otherwise much cleaner and better and fairer service than most of our govt services, in public.

A few years ago I said that the old Curzon-Kitchner fight is still going on and people wondered.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jan 2010 11:46

ramana wrote:
ASPuar wrote:The reason these things are settled quietly, is because the government should not be seen to be humiliating the office of COAS. Imagine if the government "ORdered" the cabinet secretary to take action against a secretary to the GoI? Its unseemly, and tarnishes the image of an otherwise much cleaner and better and fairer service than most of our govt services, in public.

A few years ago I said that the old Curzon-Kitchner fight is still going on and people wondered.

True words. It seems that in this fight amongst the monkeys, its the cat which has walked away with most spoils.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Jan 2010 12:03

somnath wrote:
chetak wrote:Followed immediately thereafter by another disaster of greater proportions
Adm Sushil Kumar? Havent picked up anything really negative about him ever, at least in open source..But really, ACM Sareen was probably the WORST service chief we ever had, worse than even Gen Thapar or Adm Ramdas..He ought to have been sacked...OT..

georgie boy and gang had zeroed in on the COAS for quite a long while before for his non COAS like activities. Rock solid and indisputable evidence, enough to satisfy even a finicky paki court.

georgie boy has already taken pressure on the trigger finger when he was spooked by bhagwat. The frequent visits to Siachen's low oxygen atmosphere curdled his already addled brains.

Imagine sacking a service chief in independent India. The blighters could have been sent home in any number of ways without affecting the services' morale. The earlier apathy between the services and the babus has been replaced now by implacable distrust. And yet, on demand, they required to die for their country. Only one lot demands and the other lot has to die.

The elected government would not have survived the sacking of two service chiefs in quick succession. The big bad wolf escaped and georgie boy ended up bagging the garrulous rabbit.

ramdas is a magsaysay "award winner", auto urine therapy evangilist and ardent track two activist(?), what more does one need to say?

sushil kumar? I am not even going there.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 12:04

rohitvats wrote:wrt the bolded part, the media never picked up the case. These things cannot appear in public unless someone shares the details with the media. A COI and subsequent recording of Summary of Evidence(SOE) is not something which you can pick from the chatter rooms and start digging.It is this aspect that stinks to high heavens.

By definition, all media "scoops" are leaks by an "insider"..From Bofors to Fertilizer to ND Tiwari(!), these are always triggered off by a whistleblower, with or without vested interests..But really, taking it to be a slur on the institution is taking it too far...Isolated incidents like these happen in any organisation, and govt organisations typically get blown up in the media..

The blow to the insttituion will be if the thing is sought to be, or seen to be "hushed up"...Transparency is key..

ASPuar, I agree that in these cases the best case scenario would be to quietly settle it internally and take approrpiate action..But in a media age, its almost never possible, not in a democracy..The next best option is to be honest and transparent, and being seen top be fair..

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jan 2010 12:05

OT ALERT:

Y I Patel wrote:.........<SNIP>....

Need some help:

1. Your views on something I have posted in the Paksitan thread in Mil Forum
2. If you can share the TOE for PA Armored Division/(I) Armored Bde/Mechanized Bde?

Thanks.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Jan 2010 12:07

somnath wrote:
By definition, all media "scoops" are leaks by an "insider"..From Bofors to Fertilizer to ND Tiwari(!),

ND Tiwari's activities has always been in the public domain as has been the case with some PMs' CMs' and Presidents and countless MPs.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 12:13

ASPuar wrote:Imagine if the government "ORdered" the cabinet secretary to take action against a secretary to the GoI?

Happens all the time..At various levels, but most of the incidents are not newsworthy as the RM "ordering" the COAS to take action against an officer with an alleged corruption case..Ina famous insident, Rajiv Gandhi dismissed the Foreign Secretary in a press conference!

Of course its quite graceless, but really in this case the RM did not do any "public ordering"..All of this are media scoops, so obviously there are enough insiders leaking stories to the media..

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jan 2010 12:14

ramana wrote:
A few years ago I said that the old Curzon-Kitchner fight is still going on and people wondered.

Very true.

The difference being, that the Curzon-Kitchener fight lasted only a year and half, and that when London saw what was happening, at least it made a decision swiftly, and with finality. When the viceroy (Lord Curzon) saw that the commander and chief (FM Lord Kitchener) had the backing of the government, he resigned.

Contrast this with this slow, and painful wrangling continuing over the last 62 years in our nation, and you understand how it is destroying our defence capability and preparedness, and morale.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jan 2010 12:14

somnath wrote:
rohitvats wrote:wrt the bolded part, the media never picked up the case. These things cannot appear in public unless someone shares the details with the media. A COI and subsequent recording of Summary of Evidence(SOE) is not something which you can pick from the chatter rooms and start digging.It is this aspect that stinks to high heavens.
By definition, all media "scoops" are leaks by an "insider"..From Bofors to Fertilizer to ND Tiwari(!), these are always triggered off by a whistleblower, with or without vested interests..But really, taking it to be a slur on the institution is taking it too far...Isolated incidents like these happen in any organisation, and govt organisations typically get blown up in the media..

..............<snip>

When was the last time you heard of insiders from IA or Defence Services and in which cases? The big problem is that insider in this case happens to be serving army officer(s) who could not have leaked the information with out the powers that be informed about it. If any one was interested in stemming the media leaks, it would not have taken more than a week to find the so called whisteblower. But the fact is no one was interested. It was a deliberate hit job and there is no moral intent associated with it. The COI details and subsequent reccomendations were leaked to put pressure on the COAS and bring out the drama that subsequently unfolded.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jan 2010 12:16

somnath wrote:
ASPuar wrote:Imagine if the government "ORdered" the cabinet secretary to take action against a secretary to the GoI?
Happens all the time..At various levels, but most of the incidents are not newsworthy as the RM "ordering" the COAS to take action against an officer with an alleged corruption case..Ina famous insident, Rajiv Gandhi dismissed the Foreign Secretary in a press conference!

Of course its quite graceless, but really in this case the RM did not do any "public ordering"..All of this are media scoops, so obviously there are enough insiders leaking stories to the media..

The foreign secretary had resigned after the incident, so he wasnt exactly fired, but yes, it was an embarassment.

Of course the CabSec is asked to do various things, but usually not in a public media forum. And of course, the same is true of the COAS, but the point is, someone is, as you say, obviously feeding an always rapacious and frequently gutter minded media exactly what they want.

The danger is, the precedent being set, and of course, the fact that he who lives by the yellow press, dies by the yellow press.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Jan 2010 12:18

rohitvats wrote:

When was the last time you heard of insiders from IA or Defence Services and in which cases? The big problem is that insider in this case happens to be serving army officer(s) who could not have leaked the information with out the powers that be informed about it. If any one was interested in stemming the media leaks, it would not have taken more than a week to find the so called whisteblower. But the fact is no one was interested. It was a deliberate hit job and there is no moral intent associated with it. The COI details and subsequent reccomendations were leaked to put pressure on the COAS and bring out the drama that subsequently unfolded.

Hit job by a serving General officer no less.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jan 2010 12:20

chetak wrote: Hit job by a serving General officer no less.

That is what I'm saying...the biggest loser is the IA.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 12:40

rohitvats wrote:When was the last time you heard of insiders from IA or Defence Services and in which cases? The big problem is that insider in this case happens to be serving army officer(s) who could not have leaked the information with out the powers that be informed about it. If any one was interested in stemming the media leaks, it would not have taken more than a week to find the so called whisteblower. But the fact is no one was interested. It was a deliberate hit job and there is no moral intent associated with it. The COI details and subsequent reccomendations were leaked to put pressure on the COAS and bring out the drama that subsequently unfolded.

Of course it was/is an insider job. Just as there was insider jobs on the "ketchup colonel" incident..Or the canteen scams...Or the tons of insider jobs on ACM Sareen, or even Adm Ramdas...There have been many of these sort....

Its graceless, reflects badly on any organisation, but it is the nature of the beast - we had the RAF and RN chiefs bickering publicly on strategy recently! The trick therefore will always be in being super transparent abou the process and demonstrate credibility..

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 12:50

^^^BTW, this COAS has received his due share of support..When Gen Panag decided to kick up a bit of fuss, the dust was settling dangerously close to Gen Kapoor.But the govt went along with the COAS's recommendation to shift Gen Panag..Even the unseemly contorversy over the appointment of the VCOAS - the govt backed the COAS..I guess someone up there has exhausted the rope being extended..

Rajput · Post by **Rajput** » 29 Jan 2010 13:02

Speaking of Panag: Gul Panag tweets on Army chief, calls him spineless

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 29 Jan 2010 13:12

I sure you all watched General's Shame on NewsX.

In the IA we sniff out frauds and then take action and Gen Roychowdury said - the IA takes savage action against wrongdoers.

I congratulate Capt Bharat Verma on the programme who was stopped from explaining the rules. Since Avdesh's military reputation was at stake, as per the rules and law, he should have been present at the C of I. If he was not there, then the C of I is bad in law.

I am not aware of the case and so I won't comment.

However, I would like all to realise that the Armed Forces sniff out the frauds and takes action.

Any other department does that?

Take a look at Tehelka. How many politicians and bureaucrats booked? Gen Roychowdhury enumerated for bureaucrats of fraud, how many booked?

I am not saying that the Armed Forces is pure, but we get our man! Does India get their man? Quatrocchii, Rajiv, the HDW deal and all that?

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jan 2010 13:13

^^ True. And I say again, it is not the Chief, or anyone else that Im disturbed about, but the institution, and the office.

And of course, the IA always does take action.

Whats all this about Bharat Varma being stopped from explaining rules?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 29 Jan 2010 13:17

ASPuar wrote:^^ True. And I say again, it is not the Chief, or anyone else that Im disturbed about, but the institution, and the office.

And of course, the IA always does take action.

What's all this about Bharat Varma being stopped from explaining rules?

In the programme, Jhhujar Singh interrupted and did not allow him to explain the rules of the AA and DSR wherein it was all in the air!

Bharat was explaining point by point and he was stopped!

In fact, he was the clearest of them all while Tahialiani seemed cold in the head! And Saikut Dutta quite ridiculous at sea!

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 Jan 2010 13:19

I think now the RM has to really come to the party and take visible charge..the best plan of action would be for him to call a press conference and announce - "these are the facts in front of us, this is what we are doing, this is the timeline..anything else is innuendo and therefore unacceptable and unreliable.." That will really stop the media circus in its tracks, in fact the news will simply vanish from the pages and screens..

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 29 Jan 2010 13:34

The Defence Minister is entitled to advise, but can be go beyond the Army Act and the Defence Services Regulations?

I would like all crooks, be they politicians, bureaucrats or military men booked, but within the boundaries of law and propriety. A dhoti does not add to honesty and cleanliness.

Now let us look at the crooks mentioned by Gen Raychowdury.

And the crooked politicians!

Any takers?

Read this:

INFLUENCING PEOPLE
- Money speaks, as it also silences
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100129/j ... 988528.jsp