Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Rant


"Mr. Arnab Gowswamy,
I am writing this open letter regarding the show on 26.05.2017 at 10PM in which I too was a participant. During the course of that show you arrogantly told me “I have handled bigger leaders than you”. Perhaps that was the only truth you said in that entire show. This one sentence alone is enough to show your ego, arrogance and pettiness. I have never claimed that I am a big leader. Just as you have handled much bigger leaders than me, I have had the privilege of talking to anchors who are honest, gentle, decent, civilized and knowledgeable than you. You have every right to imagine that you have a larger than life image. But my impression about you is that you are not only biased and prejudiced but also that you lack substance, integrity, credibility and even confidence as a journalist. I am sure that you are well aware of your weaknesses and I have always felt that the screams and outbursts you often make are your frustrated attempts to cover up the confidence deficit.
You are the most unethical journalist I have ever seen. On 26.05.2017 I got a call from your channel requesting my time for a debate (!) “On Three Years of Modi Government” between 10 to 10.15PM. When I reached Asianet (with whom you have a tie up) studio as directed by your person by around 9.50 I saw Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad on screen and came to know that the discussion on Modi Government was about to conclude. Then I immediately asked the Asianet employees in Palakkad Studio to reconfirm the topic for which I had been invited. Aravind, an Asianet employee contacted your channel in my presence and reconfirmed the topic as ‘3 Years of Modi Government’. Then suddenly I came to know on air that you have changed the topic to the alleged “Kodiyeri’s Speech Against Army”. I could have boycotted the show at that moment but I chose to remain because in my absence you may repeatedly scream the lie that I ran away from the show. I wanted to avoid such a situation and tried to present my views on the fabricated story.
Whatever little time I got in between your uncivilized outbursts I repeatedly countered your biased statements that Com. Kodiyeri insulted Indian Army. I said that not a single TV Channel in Kerala including your own Asianet have taken this up as a topic of debate and this was not at all controversy in Kerala because everybody knew that his comments were only against the atrocities committed in the name of AFSPA and not against the army. Still you continued your accusations against the CPI(M) as part of your prepared screenplay. I drew your attention to the Supreme Court Order on 27.04.2016 to investigate all the 1528 murders in Manipur done by security forces under the AFSPA. You ignored that inconvenient fact, probably because you might not have keenly observed such issues related to AFSPA. (After all the sort of journalism, anchoring in your case, which depends more on the ability to make as much noise as possible does not require careful reading, updation, thorough knowledge of the topic and keen observation. People like you can survive with your voice alone and without your brain.) Then you, like a coward, safely surrounded by a Sangh brigade continued spitting venomous lies against CPI(M) without even giving me an opportunity to intervene. Despite my repeated statements that we have never insulted the Indian Army you deliberately put the subtitle “Against Army” with my picture on the screen. This can only be seen as the dirty act of a loyal servant to appease your immediate boss Rajeev Chandrasekhar and your ultimate masters the Sangh Parivar.
It was evident from your substandard and abusive remarks against the CPI(M) that your sense of history is poorer than that of a primary school child. Your teacher of history in school would have been much ashamed to see the shameless and naive expression of your ignorance on history. If you wish to learn the role of the communists in the Indian freedom struggle, I can suggest some pamphlets used for beginners because you may not be able to digest any serious work of history. When I told you that it is not the communists but VD Savarkar who betrayed the freedom struggle by sending repeated clemency petitions to the British Government it appeared as if you were hearing about it for the first time in your life. I can send the copies of those clemency petitions for your kind perusal so that the next time you can be better prepared to defend your ‘patriotic’ Hindutva masters. You can also think of arranging a tuition to help you in acquiring some basic facts about our history.
Any way, if you work hard to overcome your deficiencies you may be able to improve your understanding of various topics to some extent. But I am not sure, whether at this age you will be able to develop the basic norms of conduct, culture and civilized behavior. Many of these qualities owe much to the manner in which we were brought up in our childhood.
Here I must tell you that to me, the army is not simply a newsroom experience. I was born in a military hospital and my entire childhood was spent in an army environment. Arnab, I am the proud son of a father who served in the Indian army for long years. He fought in the 1971 war as well. As the ward of a veteran, I've also partaken in the sacrificial living of an army family, like several others. Now, tell me, apart from your highly hypocritic and extremely dramatic expressions in the name of army, only to raise ratings, what have you genuinely done for our army?
My last piece of suggestion to you, the self proclaimed ambassador of the army, is to find time to watch the recording of your “performances” at least once. Then you will realise how disgusting it is and will definitely search for some other career options. Till you find time to do that we will have no other option but to bear with the high levels of pollution created by your senseless utterances. 
I dare to write this to you because neither am I a big leader as you rightly said nor do I wish to become one. 
My best wishes and regards
M. B. RAJESH"

Sunday, May 28, 2017

Backing up on Redmi Note 3

So you went to settings > Additional Settings > Local Backups and performed a backup

Now you want to save that backup folder on your pc or external hard drive
Which folder do you copy?

Simple
Go to MIUI> backup > AllBackup

The folder is saved as
timeofbackupinhrminsec_ day on which you took the backup ddmmyyyy
Example
For a backup created at 09:12:03 on 28 May 2017 the name will be
091203_28052017

Hope this helped. Comment if it helped. :)

Saturday, May 27, 2017

No country for old cattle

MoEFCC has issued a directive that cattle for slaughter cannot be traded in cattle market.

What should farmers do about cows that are old and no more milk producing?
Managing director of HSI says sell the cattle from farm for slaughter. So in a way government is seeking to destroy market for cattle slaughter. What will be the disadvantage to farmer? He won't have any idea for prices of cattle to be slaughtered. So in a way he has to either accept or reject whoever comes to his farm for purchasing cattle for slaughter. Aren't governments tasked to create market for ease of selling and purchase rather than destroy it?

It looks like government just wants to wash of its hands from the problem of cattle slaughter but burying your head in the sand does not solve the problem or does​ it?

What do farmers do?
If a farmer buys a bullock for Rs 25,000, it remains sellable at the same price for about two years. Once it becomes unproductive due to injury or illness, the farmer sells it for culling for about Rs 10,000. This 40% return on investment then allows the farmer to raise capital for a replacement animal. If this replacement cost is taken away from the farmer, it not only makes it harder to procure a new set of healthy bullocks for ploughing, it adds the additional burden of paying for the animal’s upkeep.
Since the average bovine consumes about 65 litres of water and 40 kg of fodder a day, estimates put the cost of taking care of a bull at nearly Rs 40,000 per year at 2015 prices. 
Now farmer will have to sell the bull at whatever price anyone who approaches the farmer is willing to pay because there is no market for selling unproductive bull. Expect more farmer suicides in this scenario.

Politically it will appease the lobby which opposes animal meat but practically it is killing the farmers.

Source
http://www.firstpost.com/india/centre-restricts-sale-of-cows-for-slaughter-through-live-animal-market-not-a-blanket-ban-provision-ensures-traceability-3485247.html
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/moefcc-rules-on-regulation-of-animal-markets-sparks-row-over-beef-ban/article18585516.ece
http://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis/beyond-bull-why-restriction-on-cow-slaughter-will-hurt-india/story-TDkKNbCzkgEFKIdYInkA4O.html

No to paying for statements made without connection to official duty



 Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain has said the statements made by Kejriwal on his personal Twitter account "have no connection" with his official or public duties and were "distinctly in his individual or personal capacity".

As per the opinion sent to the LG on April 6, Kejriwal had "opted to comment upon the affairs of a society (DDCA) and its erstwhile office bearer, which is not called upon to be so commented in the ordinary course of his executive or administrative functions".

The LG had sought the ASG's opinion after Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia had proposed engaging Jethmalani to defend Kejriwal after the civil and criminal defamation cases were filed against him.


Source : http://m.timesofindia.com/india/defamation-case-public-money-cant-be-used-to-defend-arvind-kejriwal-law-officer-tells-delhi-lg/articleshow/58871954.cms

Friday, May 26, 2017

RBI fighting RTI to avoid disclosing list of defaulters

RBI has given 2 arguments in front of Chief Information Commissioner

1. The provisions of Section 45-E of the RBI Act, 1934 which prohibits disclosure of credit information.
On December 16, 2015 the apex court had clearly rejected these arguments of the RBI, in a matter filed by another RTI applicant, and ordered disclosure of defaulters’ list, upholding a Central Information Commission (CIC) order.

2. RBI also said the Supreme Court is hearing a matter in which reports have been sought in a sealed envelop and hence any decision should be avoided.

A two-member CIC bench gave reprieve to the RBI as it agreed to not pass any order till the pending matter, where disclosure of defaulters having dues of over Rs 500 crore towards the banks, was decided by the apex court.


Details of 2015 Supreme Court Decision:
In 2015, the apex court had stated that the RBI is supposed to uphold public interest and not the interest of individual banks. The RBI is clearly not in any fiduciary relationship with any bank, it had said.
“The RBI has a statutory duty to uphold the interest of the public at large, the depositors, the country’s economy and the banking sector,” it had said while directing the RBI to disclose the list of defaulters. The court had said that the RBI is duty bound to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act.
“The baseless and unsubstantiated argument of the RBI that the disclosure would hurt the economic interest of the country is totally misconceived,” the court had said.
The apex court had said that the facts reveal that banks were trying to cover up their underhand actions, they are even more liable to be subjected to public scrutiny. It had passed the order of disclosure after hearing the arguments of the RBI which had sought refuge under the Section 45E of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 which says disclosure of any information relating to credit information submitted by banking company is confidential.
It had said the RTI Act, 2005 is a general provision which cannot override specific provisions relating to confidentiality in earlier legislation in accordance with the principle that where there are general words in a later statute it cannot be held that the earlier statutes are repealed altered or discarded.
Rejecting these arguments, the apex court had ordered the disclosure of information relating to loan default and other such details sought by various applicants. Some of these arguments, rejected by the Supreme Court, were put by the RBI before the CIC during the hearing of Agrawal’s case.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/rbi-refuses-to-disclose-list-of-loan-defaulters/

Decision Change on CBI investigation



On 25 Mar 2017: 

Newly elected Uttarakhand Chief Minister Trivendra Singh Rawat in a press conference announced decision to handover investigation from SIT to CBI into a major scam in land acquisition where lands had been classified as non agricultural land to increase compensation by 20 times to beneficiariess.

On 25 May 2017: 

The same Chief Minister has announced that his government would now seek legal opinion on the scope of such a probe.

What caused this change in heart? Did the Chief Minister forget something in March and realize in May? 

Trivendra Singh explains - The NHAI chief, however, explained to me that the Authority’s role in land acquisition is only as a fund-disbursing agency. So, we will seek legal opinion — from the attorney general, if necessary — on the scope of the CBI probe,” said Rawat.

During the intervening period an important event that has happened is
On April 5: Union Minister of Road Transport & Highways and Shipping Nitin Gadkari had warned in a letter to the newly elected Chief Minister that a CBI probe into the alleged scam “would have an adverse impact on the morale of the officers” and the ministry “would have to re-examine the usefulness for taking up more projects in the state”.

Gadkari wrote in the letter that he was “greatly concerned about recent developments in the state”.

“Firstly, an FIR was launched by the district administration of Udham Singh Nagar in the matter of awards finalised by CALA (SLAO), who is a revenue functionary of the state government. Not only that, a CBI inquiry has also been ordered by the government of Uttarakhand on the mater in which the NHAI officers are being investigated,” Gadkari wrote.

The Union Minister underlined in the letter that these “actions by the government of Uttarakhand are bound to have adverse impact on the morale of the officers and would impede implementation of projects”.

Concluding the letter with a veiled warning, Gadkari wrote: “In this background, we would have to re-examine the usefulness for taking up more projects in the state. I am certain you will appreciate the significance of the issues that I have pointed out and take immediate corrective measures to resolve the impasse.”

Gadkari did not respond to queries from The Indian Express on whether his letter amounted to arm-twisting the state government.

Sources in Gadkari’s office said that the Minister “had to make the point since NHAI top brass had informed him that key officials had left the state after being summoned repeatedly by state police and project work was being affected”.

Looking at the data it seems
1. Either CM was not aware of consequences at the time in March of handing over SIT investigation to CBI
2. NHAI seems to have overruled state government by getting CM to backtrack on swift CBI enquiry. And now government is looking to put the CBI investigation on back burner by calling it seeking legal opinion.

One thing is for sure, the decision to proceed with CBI enquiry made in the excitement seems to have lost its importance now. 

Kya hua tera vaada
Woh kasam woh Iraada ...

Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/uttarakhand-govt-unearths-land-acquisition-scam-writes-for-cbi-probe/articleshow/57832055.cms
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/nh-74-land-acquisition-nitin-gadkari-warns-uttarakhand-govt-against-cbi-probe-into-road-projects-4674098/

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

2 sides of Gogoi Story

Mr. Gogoi said
1. He received a call that election officials were trapped at a polling center.
2. Petrol bomb was thrown on his jeep but did not explode.
3. Farooq Ahmad Dar was trying to get away on a motorcycle but was somehow apprehended by them.
4. He did it to save the lives of 10-12 people with him.
 Source:


Farooq Ahmad Dar has claimed
1. He was beaten and paraded around for 4-5 hours on bonnet of jeep.
2. He had come to vote. He has his slip number 612  as proof.
3. He was released after a lot of requests that he was not a stone pelter.

Further
J&K Police has submitted the report contradicting army saying that Farooq Ahmed Dar had gone to vote and was wrongfully detained.


Source: https://thewire.in/124465/kashmir-farooq-ahmad-dar-army/
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/farooq-ahmad-dar-tied-to-army-jeep-by-major-was-a-voter-confirms-kashmir-police/1/1055481.html