Bharat Rakshak

RamaY wrote:There is nothing wrong in BR getting whatever education he wanted to and got access to. There is also nothing wrong in him becoming a convenient tool in Anglo-Saxon social engineering project against Indian interests, perhaps it is his prerogative. There is also nothing wrong in him writing a constitution that is in line with his worldview and suitable to his or his masters' agendas.

It is similar to what Shekar Guptas, Sachars, Kuldeep Nayars etc doing to Bharatiya interests today. Pls look at the post I made in Indian Intersts thread with BR's quote after his 2nd marriage to a Brahmin woman (very convinient for him to uplift poor Brahmin woman and not a Dalit)

Carl wrote:<SNIP>As for his becoming a tool in Anglo-Saxon hands, the fact is that the core of the Hindu nationalist movement has always reached out to lower castes only in response to active conversion attempts and the risk of being marginalized. They have never been pro-active, forceful and radical. They still work within the same rigid, broken and misunderstood ideas of varNa and ashrama and purushaartha.

rohitvats wrote:

Carl wrote:<SNIP>As for his becoming a tool in Anglo-Saxon hands, the fact is that the core of the Hindu nationalist movement has always reached out to lower castes only in response to active conversion attempts and the risk of being marginalized. They have never been pro-active, forceful and radical. They still work within the same rigid, broken and misunderstood ideas of varNa and ashrama and purushaartha.

+1.

Letter From London
Memory Loss: Ghajini Strikes More CEOs
Sudeshna Sen

I’ve always been rather embarrassed about the fact that I have a memory like a sieve. Remembering names, faces, critical events, key facts, even arcane figures on spreadsheets, I was brought up to believe, is an essential for workplace success. Corporate-coach types would always tell you to be sure to have the essential facts at your fingertips. Teachers would tell you to be prepared for presentations. Even in the media, both as a writer, but far more as an editor, I have heard innumerable complaints from companies and dignitaries. “Oh, your reporter didn’t know all the details. This is the CEO. How can you send someone like that for an interview?”

Till now, I’ve usually apologised, never mind if the incident in question featured a CEO or company completely obscure. After listening to Bob Diamond at the parliamentary committee last week, where he sounded like an eerie replay of James and Rupert Murdoch a few months ago, I am going to stop saying sorry for being badly prepared or forgetting key facts. My new management mantra is: amnesia is the secret ingredient for success. It seems to be the key to become the boss of a multizillion-dollar organisation, and take home $20-million salary.

No wonder most of us don’t make it to those hallowed levels, we were all taught the wrong values. Bob Diamond saw no evil, he heard no evil, he spoke no evil. In fact, it seems, he didn’t know anything that was going on inside his bank at all, never mind systemic fixing of a universal benchmark interest rate. Rebekah Brooks, former editor of News International, apparently knew nothing about where her reporters were getting their lethal stories from, and James Murdoch knew nothing about anything either. If I’d won even a tenner for the number of times we got the response “I don’t recall that,” I’d have a nice little nest egg.

It’s an interesting performance from these folks, because they weren’t talking to media, when we all know dignitaries get selective amnesia if we ask uncomfortable questions. They were deposing before an enquiry committee of Parliament, a quasi-legal situation. Sure things happen in large organisations, and bosses can’t be expected to know every little misdemeanour, like who nicked the staplers from the office pool. But things that could snowball into headline court cases?

The approach throws up serious questions about management responsibility and legal procedures, which ought to keep B-school academics busy for some time, if they bother to address the issue. I’m not sure but I am assuming — and so are most other commentators here — that the selective amnesia is a legally-defensible position. We’re assuming that since these people are advised by seriously heavyweight lawyers. But everyone on the street can then see the contradiction. If they didn’t know what was happening in their companies, what were they doing as bosses? Like an acquaintance asked me, “If Barclays is so badly run that its CEO knows nothing, is my money safe there?”

As I mentioned last week, this is the wrong time to go into a long-drawn-out navel-gazing exercise about the casino culture of global banks. Not when the global economy is so shaky. Frankly, if Barclays collapses under the weight of its heavyweights leaving, my taxpayer money will be on the line again, and we’ll end up bailing them out too.

It might be legally sensible to appear as innocent and unaware as some Disney princess. But what everyone here is talking about — from government to industry associations to bankers — is restoring trust in the financial services industry. Trust is not just about your clients knowing you won’t indulge in dodgy practices. Trust is also that your clients and shareholders can be assured you are at least competent, if not good, at your job.

It’s this balance that none of the CEOs — including the ones who sat before committees in the US and UK in the aftermath of Lehman — are able to maintain. The public ends up even more outraged, politicians follow, and the vicious cycle of CEO-bashing starts again.

Meanwhile, Diamond senior ended up being so completely forgettable in his amnesiac deposition that the star of the week is his 23-year-old daughter, Nell Diamond. She hit the headlines for tweeting in aggressive defence of her father, including one which told Osborne (as in George) and Cameron (as in David) to go do some hideously-obscene thing I can’t write about. Since then, she’s been splashed on all tabloids and society papers, giving more interviews about her precious nightclub memberships and fashion ideas than Paris Hilton or Peaches Geldof. She reportedly works in a Wall Street bank herself. I wonder what her bosses think of her sudden notoriety? Oh, well. That’s life. One Diamond hits the dust, another rises. She’ll probably end up with a book or movie contract by the end of this.

[email protected]

Carl wrote:As for his becoming a tool in Anglo-Saxon hands, the fact is that the core of the Hindu nationalist movement has always reached out to lower castes only in response to active conversion attempts and the risk of being marginalized. They have never been pro-active, forceful and radical. They still work within the same rigid, broken and misunderstood ideas of varNa and ashrama and purushaartha.

Lalmohan wrote:no indian newspaper picking up stories of olympic unpreparedness and/or chaos in londonistan?

There have been plenty of reformers who have come from within Hindu society without the pressure of soul stealers being there.

Police charge four men with abducting and sexually assaulting a teenage girl in Suffolk

Four men have been charged for abducting and sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. Mohamed Sheikh, a 31-year-old of Seaton Point, London, has been charged with a child abduction offence and possession of a controlled drug.

Surin Uddin, a 28-year-old of St Matthews Row, London, has been charged with two counts of rape against a girl under the age of 16 and one child abduction offence.


http://europenews.dk/en/node/56546

Executives with Europe's biggest bank, HSBC, were subjected to a humiliating onslaught from US senators on Tuesday over revelations that staff at its global subsidiaries laundered billions of dollars for drug cartels, terrorists and pariah states.

Lawmakers hammered the British-based bank over the scandal, demanding to know how and why its affiliates had exposed it to the proceeds of drug trafficking and terrorist financing in a "pervasively polluted" culture that persisted for years.

A report compiled for the committee detailed how HSBC's subsidiaries transported billions of dollars of cash in armoured vehicles, cleared suspicious travellers' cheques worth billions, and allowed Mexican drug lords buy to planes with money laundered through Cayman Islands accounts.

Other subsidiaries moved money from Iran, Syria and other countries on US sanctions lists, and helped a Saudi bank linked to al-Qaida to shift money to the US.

The head of compliance at British banking giant HSBC resigned in front of a US Senate subcommittee today after it emerged the bank had exposed the US to billions of dollars worth of money laundering, drug trafficking, and terrorist financing.

Comment is free

Libor scandal: gunfight on Threadneedle Street

This is not just some common or garden mishap or even misbehaviour at a big business. This is 'fraud'

Editorial
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 17 July 2012

Only two weeks into the market-rigging scandal and already the economic-policy establishment resembles the final scene of Reservoir Dogs: a bunch of men in suits all blindly shooting at each other.

Former Barclays boss Bob Diamond has landed the Bank of England's Paul Tucker in deep trouble, with a note implying that he encouraged the misreporting of money-market rates. Barclays' ex-chief operating officer Jerry del Missier told MPs this week that Mr Diamond ordered him to fiddle Libor rates. And Barclays was accused by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) on Monday of a "culture of gaming – and gaming us". The FSA has been dumped in it by Mervyn King, who argued on Tuesday that it was not the Bank's job to regulate Libor – the implication being that it was the FSA's fault. Both the FSA and the Bank agree that prime responsibility for monitoring Libor lay with the British Bankers' Association. And then there is George Osborne, whose main contribution to the chaos has been to suggest to a magazine interviewer that Gordon Brown and his lieutenants are somehow to blame.

This is the British economic-policy establishment under unprecedented pressure – and what an unseemly, blame-ducking, buck-passing panic it presents. Not just the humbling of some of our most senior and respected officials but also the erraticism with which they have been making policy. Take, for instance, the ousting of Bob Diamond. The FSA's Adair Turner told MPs this week that when he spoke to the Barclays chairman Marcus Agius after the Libor scandal, he had expected Mr Diamond to walk the plank. Something was obviously lost in translation, however, because Mr Agius stood down instead. It took the intercession of Mervyn King to force out the Barclays chief executive. And why exactly was Mr Diamond pushed out? Not for any direct involvement in the Libor scandal but, in the words of Mr King yesterday: "They [the bank] have been sailing too close to the wind across a wide number of areas." No actual infraction; just a general sense of having gone too far for too long. This raises the question of why no regulator seriously intervened in Barclays before the Libor scandal. Bob Diamond has been head of one of Britain's biggest banks since January 2011, yet no official has brought up a previous incident where they told the board to change their behaviour or their personnel. The impression left is of rather rough justice. As Andrew Tyrie, head of the Treasury select committee, drily observed in the same session, by that measure every chief executive in the land is "only a couple of bad dinners" away from being forced out of a post.

This is not just some common or garden mishap or even misbehaviour at a big business. As Mr King observed on Tuesday, this is "fraud". And it has not just been carried out by Barclays, but by a string of other financial institutions – who between them fiddled the benchmark interest rates that are used as reference for hundreds of billions of pounds' worth of transactions. Some of the commentary about this scandal has brought up the fact that this occurred during the credit crunch in 2008, when it would apparently have been in everyone's interests to pretend that all was normal in money markets. Maybe, except that this scamming took place over at least four years – and the kindest interpretation of the evidence to date is that officials asked barely any questions. In place of supervision there was what looks like worrying chumminess. "Well done, man. I am really, really proud of you," Mr Diamond emailed the number two at the Bank on his promotion in December 2008. Mr Tucker replied: "You've been an absolute brick."

This story has so far revolved around one bank rigging one set of interest rates, involving emails and letters and committee hearings. Imagine what a serious, wide-ranging inquiry could uncover. Britain certainly needs one, because this blossoming scandal threatens not just the reputation of an industry but the regulators and ministers who let it run riot.

Acharya wrote:This is a uncle vs Uropeans shadow war going on

Hari Seldon wrote:...a hangover of having heard of colonization's ill effects in Kenya among other places...

^^I had researched this bank for an undergrad thesis on Asymmetric Information in markets - the BCCI was not just scamming money out of illiterate Gulf laborers, they were laundering Colombian cartel money, as well as funneling the CIA's monies to fund the Afghan War. Internally, the bank was structured like an Intelligence Agency.

Acharya wrote:This is a uncle vs Uropeans shadow war going on

Crescent Investment Management LLC was founded and chaired by Mansoor Ijaz in 1991. Crescent Investment Management,
"a New York investment [is] partnership between Ijaz, Lt. Gen. James Alan Abrahamson (USAF Ret),
former director of President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, and Turkey's Global Group.
Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, Jr. serves as vice chairman of Crescent's Board of Governors.
"Crescent specializes in the use of quantitative modeling techniques to manage investment portfolios.
Crescent's MENARA family of funds, currently in formation, will focus on five strategic investment sectors:
high technology, telecommunications, oil and gas investments, real estate acquisitions and infrastructure development.
The firm is headquartered in New York with partner offices in London and Ankara." --Benador Associates' biography for Ijaz.

Bank of Credit and Commerce International Scandal (BCCI). UK Government Forced to Publish the
Sandstorm Report (posted 9 September 2011)
Return to Main AABA WEBSITE
Background
After a five-year legal battle the UK government has finally released most of the Sandstorm Report on 7 September 2011. According
to the Bank of England this report was the basis for the closure of BCCI in July 1991.
The report was prepared by Price Waterhouse (BCCI auditors) for the Bank of England though it was never finalized.
BCCI was the biggest banking fraud of the twentieth century.
Some 1.4 million depositors lost $11bn. Unlike many other large corporate frauds and banking scandals
the UK government did not appoint inspectors to prepare a report. No parliamentary committee has ever been given
sight of the Sandstorm Report. UK legislators pass laws without knowledge of the facts or opportunity to interrogate wrongdoers.

The UK government was ordered to release the information to Prem Sikka by
the unanimous decision of three judges ( click here for court judgment) .
This is the first time that the UK government has been forced to release hitherto secret information
about a banking collapse. It is the first time that it has been forced to name wrongdoers and those implicated in the scandal.
the government could not hide behind the Data Protection Act and claim that it has to protect the identity of the culprits

Prem Sikka had first requested the information in March 2006 and after refusal by the UK Treasury
and the Information Commissioner he pursued the matter through the courts.
Throughout the case, he represented himself, incurred his own costs and did not have
the benefit of any legal advisers. The government used taxpayers' resources in a
futile attempt to conceal identity of many people, including convicted criminals.

Ever since 1991, most of the Sandstorm Report has been publicly available in the US
though it has been considered to be a state secret in the UK.
This censored version was obtained by AABA and made publicly available in UK in 1999 (click here).
With the digitization of the US Congress Library archives the same is now available worldwide (click here).
The missing information is shown either as a blank or a dark rectangle.

Prem Sikka's request was for the missing information. It primarily concealed the names of the wrongdoers and those implicated in the scandal. The background to the issues and the public interest arguments for publication of the missing information are
contained in an affidavit filed with the court by Prem Sikka and is available here.
The document shows that the UK government has erected a wall of secrecy around the BCCI frauds.

Forty-eight tonnes of silver bullion that spent more than 70 years at the bottom of the North Atlantic have been hauled to the surface and returned to its rightful owner, the British government

The silver was recovered from the SS Gairsoppa, which was carrying the riches to England from India in 1941 when a Nazi torpedo struck

lakshmikanth wrote:^^^ I am not worried about the loot. I am more worried about the lackadaisical and nonchalant way it was published in the Hindu.

There is nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing in "The Hindu"'s conscience that says "Hey, that ship was carrying illegal loot from India.". Not only that it published an article verbatim which is written by an American who obviously sees nothing wrong with the UK looting wealth from India.

I used to be ashamed for being Indian before. I am still ashamed of being Indian, but for completely different reasons!!!!