The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RajeshA wrote:Considering that this thread has a little or much to do with the Italian Sonia Maino, is it known what kind of religious ceremony Rajiv and Sonia had? Was it Catholic, Hindu, Parsee, Muslim, Civil?
Publicly it was a Hindu marriage, their marriage pictures are all over internet. No one knows what they practice at home.
but what is heartening to hear is, priyanka gandhi is a follower of Buddhism(atleast one member of Rajiv family believes in native faith). She has named her daughter Miraya (a sanskrit word, "a devotee of Lord Krishna") Unlike that elder idiot, who one day says Hinduism is a threat to India and do a flip flop later to say he is a "Brahmin".
I am aware only of "reception photos" but no mandap or saat phere! Anyway, if people have more to say, one can do so in off-topic thread, otherwise this thread may take a "radical" turn!
kish wrote:but what is heartening to hear is, priyanka gandhi is a follower of Buddhism(atleast one member of Rajiv family believes in native faith). She has named her daughter Miraya (a sanskrit word, "a devotee of Lord Krishna")
And all this makes her a Hindu culture loving Gandhi ???
Same thing can be said about black men and white women. A very good percentage of black men always hang around with white women, case in point is Tiger Woods.
habal wrote:Same thing can be said about black men and white women. A very good percentage of black men always hang around with white women, case in point is Tiger Woods.
But I would like to know of one African country, where a White Woman is the Empress!
One or two variables have to coincide for that possibility to happen. One variable is missing in that matrix. Resource poor countries do not attract White women in large numbers.
Dark men have lusted after white women for ages, whether we like to admit or not. Only civilization + prosperity can change that attitude. Muslim men also for some reason prefer to marry/sleep with white women. In fact that is one of their main goals when the set out to the west. And they are unashamed of admitting that fact. Some people say Jawaharlal has the genes of some Ghiyazuddin Ghazi despite the brahmincal name and thus the flings with Edwina, and so on. He passed on his genes to his grandson too.
We need to explore in depth the honey-trap angle to children of Indian bureaucrats & politicians who are sent to study in Western countries.
In the West, the Muslim Men are often directed to have many affairs with white women, so that they get over the "mystery of the white women", and thus do not remain 'corruptible'. So little chance of honey trap succeeding there. Of course we Indians are sentimental types onlee. Also nothing wrong with that. So there are only three ways of getting over this - demystify the white woman, develop a different taste, or develop some self-confidence.
“And Caesar’s spirit, ranging for revenge, With Ate by his side come hot from hell, Shall in these confines with a monarch’s voice, Cry ‘Havoc,’ and let slip the dogs of war.”
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - India would be breaking international law if it stops Italy's ambassador from leaving the country in a dispute over two Italian marines charged with killing two Indian fishermen, the European Union said on Tuesday.The statement was the bloc's most forceful intervention yet in the festering dispute over the marines which has soured relations between India and EU member Italy.India's top court last week temporarily barred the envoy, Daniele Mancini, from leaving after Rome refused to send the marines ack to India to face trial following a home visit.he marines Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone, part of a security team protecting a tanker from pirates, are accused of shooting the two Indian fishermen off the coast of Kerala in February last year.EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton noted the Indian court's ruling about the ambassador "with concern", Ashton's spokesman said.Ashton regarded the 1961 Vienna Convention, which sets rules for diplomatic relations, as a cornerstone of the international legal order that should be respected at all times, he said in a statement."Any limitations to the freedom of movement of the ambassador of Italy to India would be contrary to the international obligations established under this convention," he added."(Ashton) continues to hope that a mutually acceptable solution can be found through dialogue and in respect of international rules and encourages the parties to explore all avenues to that effect," the statement said.The EU statement echoed comments by Italy's Foreign Ministry on Monday that the Indian court's decision violated diplomatic immunity law.India's Supreme Court had allowed the marines to go home for four weeks to vote in last month's parliamentary election, provided they returned.They have not done so, and Italy's Foreign Ministry said the incident had become a formal dispute over U.N. laws.India's Supreme Court said in a long-awaited ruling in January that India had jurisdiction to try the marines, but Italy has challenged that decision, arguing that the shooting took place in international waters.
Italy's announcement that the sailors would not return caused an uproar in India' parliament and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government is under pressure to respond forcefully.
Ramana, Caroline Ashton's role as EU foreign affairs supremo is derided by the Brits who feel she is in search of a role. Most folks in the UK and Germany are dismissive of her position, assuming they can recognise her, and with Germany and Russia calling the shots in the present financial meltdown she has been very much sidelined by events. She beats Khurshid hands down for anonymity.
Interesting quote that the 1961 Vienna Convention is a cornerstone...Where have we heard that one before? Oh yes the NPT, CTBT, and the rest were cornerstones.
With the EU trying to get involved, this is a perfect moment for MMS to burnish his credentials to create a lasting legacy and it might be good to point out that if ambassadors can deceive the courts, then the Vienna Convention needs to be reassessed as it is open to abuse.
Last edited by rgosain on 20 Mar 2013 00:39, edited 2 times in total.
And also some Satyagraha is also the need of the hour to show the Italian ambassador that his situation is similar to him being dipped in liquid Oxygen. No latrine cleaning for him and his Italian ofsars. No milk for him, No barber will cut his hair, no clipper will pluck his nail, no petrol for his cars, no cab guy should ferry his sorry a$$ around. And of course he can stay in India as many years as he pleases.
By absconding they have admitted the guilt. Providing material help in escape is crime. I suggest a neutral avenue. Let these Marines and Ambassador be tried in Kabul in Afghan court.
@VarunKumar ^^: This is very strange indeed. I distinctly remember corresponding with Jay Solomon (WSJ) to correct his piece on SG where he wrote she attended a college AT Oxford (I told him it was IN Oxford) and he checked with her office and corrected his piece and told me her aides' had made the mistake. This was a ~2005/6. At that time it was all about Oxford. Now it's Cambridge and BTW, the Bell's Educational Trust is not it either, it's the Leonard Cook School of English which she (or her aides) claimed was affiliated with Cambridge University.
What's the mystery? I mean it's not like anyone in the JLN-Gandhi family except for Motilal ever got a degree.
Rahul is said to have a Bachelor's from U of South Florida except it was under an 'assumed name' for 'security reasons'. He also claims a MPhil from Cambridge (those are given out like gumdrops) even if you did not attend undergraduate forwhom they are automatic after x years if you turn up.
Cosmo, Rahul's MPhil from Cambs was anointed upon him so that the West would have a pliant non-entity with the imprimatur of Cambridge, who would do their bidding when the time came. Why do you think Miliband and the rest are forever praising him to the skies.
Not sure who paid for the course - it was never revealed by the registry. Cambridge and Oxford have these meaningless courses for Rugby players, rowers, and potentates, and development falls into that bracket along with land economics.
On the question whether the order restraining the Italian Ambassador from leaving India amounts to detention under Article 29, the judgment of the International Court of Justice in Congo v. Belgium (2002) is instructive. The ICJ noted that measures that raise the fear of arrest even if they do not in fact interfere with the actual fulfilment of diplomatic activities would go against the guarantee of personal inviolability under Article 29. The order of the Supreme Court restraining the Italian Ambassador from leaving India and the subsequent alert issued to all airports by the Ministry of Home Affairs goes against this fundamental protection granted to diplomatic agents.
The argument has also been raised that this position on waiver has been altered by the legislation Parliament introduced to enforce the Vienna Convention. That claim is true to the extent that the 1972 Act recognises that, along with the sending state, the Head of the Mission can also waive immunity. However, what the 1972 Act does not alter is the requirement that there must be an express waiver of immunity. There has been no express waiver of immunity in the current case either by the Republic of Italy or its Ambassador to India.
By restraining the Italian Ambassador and contemplating contempt proceedings, the Supreme Court and the Government of India are seeking legal solutions where none is available.
How is immunity in peril when it was violated by giving sureties for criminals who absconded? Its like forfeiting bail. The diplomat should not have ventured into areas that negate the immunity. See the Japanese consulate official's case in San Fransicso.
Is immunity waved only for third world countries!
First, an allegation of contempt, while it may be incidental to the original proceedings before the court, is not in a nature of a counter-claim. Unlike a counter-claim where the respondent in a case raises a claim against the original claimant seeking to enforce its own rights, contempt proceedings seek to remedy certain kinds of behaviour directed at the courts.
Second, the expressions ‘claim’ and ‘counter-claim’ used in Article 32 of the Vienna Convention suggest that the waiver of immunity under that provision applies only to civil proceedings. Contempt of court, given its penal consequences, is ‘quasi-criminal’ in nature [Bijay Kumar Mahanty vs Jadu Ram Chandra Sahoo, (2003) 1 SCC 644].
According to legal experts, consular officials do not have full-fledged diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. They generally only qualify for immunity for acts performed while exercising their official duties.
US authorities said that his vice-consul status does not afford him immunity from prosecution for crimes unrelated to his diplomatic work, such as the domestic violence charges against him.
Article 37
1. The members of the family of a diplomatic agent forming part of his household shall, if they are not nationals of the receiving State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in articles 29 to 36.
2. Members of the administrative and technical staff of the mission, together with members of
their families forming part of their respective households, shall, if they are not nationals of or permanently resident in the receiving State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in articles 29 to 35, except that the immunity from civil and administrative jurisdiction of the receiving State specified in paragraph 1 of article 31 shall not extend to acts performed outside the course of their duties. They shall also enjoy the privileges specified in article 36, paragraph 1, in respect of articles imported at the time of first installation.
3. Members of the service staff of the mission who are not nationals of or permanently resident in the receiving State shall enjoy immunity in respect of acts performed in the course of their duties, exemption from dues and taxes on the emoluments they receive by reason of their employment and the exemption contained in article 33.
4. Private servants of members of the mission shall, if they are not nationals of or permanently resident in the receiving State, be exempt from dues and taxes on the emoluments they receive by reason of their employment. In other respects, they may enjoy privileges and immunities only to the extent admitted by the receiving State. However, the receiving State must exercise its jurisdiction over those persons in such a manner as not to interfere unduly with the performance of the functions of the mission.
They were at/in Oxford not Cambridge. Makes this narrative a bit suspect IMHO.
Pandit Nehru: Trinity College, Cambridge
Indira Gandhi (nee Nehru): Somerville College, Oxford (an all women's college at the time)
Rajiv Gandhi: Trinity College, Cambridge
Here is the Trinity College, Cambridge website:
Trinity College Cambridge - Famous Alumni
Finally, politicians and public figures who have been educated at Trinity include: Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex and ill-starred favourite of Elizabeth I; Earl Grey (1764-1845) Whig Prime Minister (1830-1834) and architect of the Great Reform Act; Viscount Melbourne (1779-1848) Whig Prime Minister (1834, 1835-1841); William Waddington (1826-1894) French Prime Minister in 1879; Henry Campbell-Bannerman (1836-1908) Liberal Prime Minister (1905-1908); Arthur Balfour (1848-1930) Conservative Prime Minister (1902-1905); Stanley Baldwin (1867-1947) Conservative Prime Minister (1923-24, 1924-29, 1935-37); Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1964), the first Prime Minister of independent India (1949-1964); Erskine Childers (1905-1974), President of the Irish Republic (1973-74); Willie Whitelaw (1918-1999), Conservative politician; Home Secretary, (1979-83); and Rajiv Gandhi (1944-1991), Prime Minister of India, (1984-1989). R.A. ('Rab') Butler was Master from (1965-1978).
Here is the Somerville College, Oxford website:
Indira Gandhi - Somerville College
Indira Nehru (1937) was the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru, a major figure in the Indian independence movement and the first Prime Minister of Independent India. Educated in India, Switzerland and England, she came up to Somerville in 1937 (soon after her mother's death) to read Modern History. She did not finish her degree due to ill health but while she was here she established lifelong friendships as well as important political contacts. She returned to India in 1941 and married Feroze Gandhi in 1942.
pentaiah wrote:Going to college is different from earning a degree no?
its Like MABF degree
It looks like Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi did not get degrees, whereas Pandit Nehru was awarded a 2nd Class degree in Natural Sciences by Cambridge University.
Jawaharlal Nehru
Nehru’s father Motilal sent him to England for his further education. Here he spent seven largely undistinguished, if privileged years, as described in the Autobiography: 1905-7 at Harrow, the public school; 1907-10 at Trinity College, Cambridge (Natural sciences tripos, 2nd class), and then ‘hovering about’ London studying for his Bar examinations (p. 25). He was called to the Bar in 1912 and returned to India where he eventually embarked on a successful political career through Congress.
Cosmo_R wrote:@VarunKumar ^^: This is very strange indeed. I distinctly remember corresponding with Jay Solomon (WSJ) to correct his piece on SG where he wrote she attended a college AT Oxford (I told him it was IN Oxford) and he checked with her office and corrected his piece and told me her aides' had made the mistake. This was a ~2005/6. At that time it was all about Oxford. Now it's Cambridge and BTW, the Bell's Educational Trust is not it either, it's the Leonard Cook School of English which she (or her aides) claimed was affiliated with Cambridge University.
What's the mystery? I mean it's not like anyone in the JLN-Gandhi family except for Motilal ever got a degree.
Rahul is said to have a Bachelor's from U of South Florida except it was under an 'assumed name' for 'security reasons'. He also claims a MPhil from Cambridge (those are given out like gumdrops) even if you did not attend undergraduate forwhom they are automatic after x years if you turn up.
This is getting really weird.
As an alumini from the same times, I can say with certainty that Rahul G did not go to Univ of South Florida.
pentaiah wrote:Going to college is different from earning a degree no?
its Like MABF degree
It looks like Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi did not get degrees, whereas Pandit Nehru was awarded a 2nd Class degree in Natural Sciences by Cambridge University.
Jawaharlal Nehru
Nehru’s father Motilal sent him to England for his further education. Here he spent seven largely undistinguished, if privileged years, as described in the Autobiography: 1905-7 at Harrow, the public school; 1907-10 at Trinity College, Cambridge (Natural sciences tripos, 2nd class), and then ‘hovering about’ London studying for his Bar examinations (p. 25). He was called to the Bar in 1912 and returned to India where he eventually embarked on a successful political career through Congress.
Maneka Gandhi openly said that her son Varun Gandhi is first graduate after Nehru in the family.
Gents,whether the N-G dynasty are literate,semi-literate or are over-qualified for their leading role in Indian politics,this thread has its core issues to be debated.So let's get back on track and speculate on the middle and end-game being played out on the board.
There is no way that the dishonourable Italian mafioso will give up his "immunity" to our Hon.SC. He will wait to be expelled or try and escape,adding further indignity and humiliation upon India.Our govts. have excellent track records of terrorists and criminals "escaping" while being transferred from place to place.Even if we sever relations and expel all the diplomats,how can the ambassador remain behind? He must either be booted out (which he wants),or be slapped with a "state guest" voucher by the Hon.SC for contempt of court,aiding and abetting murder suspects to escape,and should get a sentence that that crime deserves under Indian law!
The EU is now jumping into the act on behalf of its member state,and the GOI will use this pressure to effectively release (expel) the envoy.This is the likeliest scenario,played out on a Friday evening,when the courts can do bugger all over the weekend.The ambassador will return in triumph to Italy and receive the "Bunga-Bunga" award for outstanding services to the neo-Roman empire, in showing a "turd-world" nation the upturned finger! Indian politicos will hurl words and weild blows at each other as to who is to blame,the SC will be held up to ridicule,and just like the mythical story quoted by Ramana earlier,about the super-warriors killing themselves when a "stone" was thrown at them,in like manner will we do so,and entertain the global community-another example of darkie "natives" being unable to best the white man.
For all the people citing Vienna convention. You can debunk their argument with these two clauses.
According to Article 32 (3) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, "The INITIATION of proceedings by a diplomatic agent or by a person enjoying immunity from jurisdiction under article 37 shall PRECLUDE him from invoking immunity from jurisdiction in respect of any counterclaim directly connected with the principal claim"
Once again, the ambassador gave up his immunity by surrendering to the court's jurisdiction being the personal guarantee of the court. An ambassador is only allowed to engage the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Any other legal engagement is personal.
Article 41(2) All official business with the receiving State entrusted to the mission by the sending State shall be conducted with or through the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the receiving State or such other ministry as may be agreed.
Which means that this engagement is not official according to the Vienna Convention for diplomatic relations but a personal guarantee.
Sravan wrote:For all the people citing Vienna convention. You can debunk their argument with these two clauses.
According to Article 32 (3) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961, "The INITIATION of proceedings by a diplomatic agent or by a person enjoying immunity from jurisdiction under article 37 shall PRECLUDE him from invoking immunity from jurisdiction in respect of any counterclaim directly connected with the principal claim"
Once again, the ambassador gave up his immunity by surrendering to the court's jurisdiction being the personal guarantee of the court. An ambassador is only allowed to engage the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Any other legal engagement is personal.
Article 41(2) All official business with the receiving State entrusted to the mission by the sending State shall be conducted with or through the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the receiving State or such other ministry as may be agreed.
Which means that this engagement is not official according to the Vienna Convention for diplomatic relations but a personal guarantee.
This has been already mentioned in this thread. SO brf knows.
And who is pointing to point this out to SC or GOI when they feigned ignorance about postal ballot.
The noise aside, I'm waiting to see him in jail. That is the bottom line.
If the guy is let free, India will be seen as a weak & spineless nation who's citizen's lives are worthless.
NRIs would never want to carry an Indian citizenship\passport nor leave their money in India because in times of emergency, they would know the country can do nothing for them.
Bravo to Italy. They even defend the lines of their citizens who are murderers and treat them like celebrities on their return. They must think those guys are the Roman legions who went around killing barbarians and returned as conquering heros.
This is what Ashton's peers in the EU think of her. The SC and the GOI should stare her down as this could be the UPA's smiling buddha moment if they choose to make a stand.
rgosain wrote:This is what Ashton's peers in the EU think of her. The SC and the GOI should stare her down as this could be the UPA's smiling buddha moment if they choose to make a stand.
The UPA madam will just send the ITALIAN SCUM as soon as she can win the election. She will send PM and every servant minister at her disposal to royal send-off for the envoy.
I can believe reports that SG is connected to Vatican/Opus Dei & all that, & have some proof for the same from personal experience. But it is also highly possible that SG & son are being used as tools by some powerful behind-the-scenes congis who wish to use the Gandhi name & image coupled with SG's relative inexperience and lack of influence in Indic matters and Rahul's bachpana and immaturity when it comes to matters of key decisions. I wish forumites would desist from taking easy way out by villifying a single person as a key object of hate and promoting a single individual as key figure of all virtue. Though there might be truth to it, though it is not desirable in practice because reality is rarely as simple as that. IOW lets not over-simplify a complex problem but let not the problem itself inhibit one from any decisive action.
Fact of the matter is that there is an entire middle-rung and top-level advisory leadership who are simply intent to be on the gravy train whatever be the means possible. They need an iconic image in front, and they can switch loyalties to UPA or NDA just as easily, but intent is the same. The icon themselves are douchebags, for that is how they prefer it to be. A certain Gujarati leader may not be suitable for them because of his track record shows that he sidelines such mediocrity. Apart from that there is genuine fear that he will be polarising and it would be difficult to get things done by the gravy-train wallas in his administration.
Cosmo_R wrote:RE Francois Gautier etc. He's entitled to his opinion.
Let me just observe that this whole white chickie thing is overdone. OK. Rajiv Gandhi went to the UK to get an 'education' one more of the Nehru-Gandhis who did not graduate from college but wanted a brush with Oxbridge. So he met an eyetalian chick who went to A college in the town of Oxford to learn English, and later dressed that up to be a college IN Oxford with the implication that it was a college OF Oxford University.
So what's surprising? INC has had this white chick thing from Annie Besant to Edwina Mountbatten and now the fair Antonia.
The point is that I'm not going to get my chaddis in a twist because the INC and its spawn like white wimmenz.
The problem is not us but the INC mentality and I know it well having grown up amongst them @ 7 Jantar Mantar circa 1952-57
When you fill up all kinds of details for applying for a visa, this details are accessible to all manner of foreign agencies and they can use this for various purposes. For example, during the intro programs, a very good looking girl can suddenly begin to show interest in you and only make enquiries regarding you and talk only to you, this particular person though may show minimal interest in her regular curriculum, and spend more time researching about your habits and offer to drive you home etc. Ofcourse an ordinary Indian boy will be flattered with such attention.
I think such things happen all the time. And many fall for it as well.
even if what you think is true, that SG is simply a makhauta for other powerful people, it doesn't change the need to target her politically. Looking for "powerful people" simply becomes an intellectual exercise otherwise.
Unlike that elder idiot, who one day says Hinduism is a threat to India and do a flip flop later to say he is a "Brahmin".
