Ideal Cabinet

Then the Nation should stay away from INC as well. Picking INC ignoring 1983 is no better than picking BJP ignoring 2002. People like Jagdish Tytler continue to a part of the N-G family coultry.

My point is your "Modi is a Muslim blood-drinker" argument is moot, especially if you pick the Nehru-Gandhi family over him. Both entities have a history sheet, and if you choose to ignore one's history and merely look at their administrative merits, then be prepared to do the same for the other, too.

As far as administrative qualities go, Modi is arguably the best CM the country ever produced, while Rahul Gandhi continues to be the Justin Bieber of Indian politics.

Maximum riots happened during the Congress rule, and yet.

www.outlookindia.com | Secular Fatwas

Democracy is always the choice of the people whomever the people like will cast his precious vote for and it is also the duty of every citizen to be politically aware of the situation of the nation, so to be very short I am pointing out what might be right to do or what might not be right to do, or say whom we should we elect and whom we should reject.

Maybe for some people Mr. Modi was politically correct. But my point is was he ethically correct? should we elect some one who donot respect ethical values of life? Will the law of the nation forgive him if tomorrow he is found guilty of? It is a different subject that his crimes were never proved. But knowingly should we support such criminals?

Is it correct to justify that since Rajiv did human rights violation, another human right violator fits in office? Should we not learn for the past?

I would have been more happy if you would have challenged me that what Modi did was in fact not wrong instead of supporting the cause that since Rajiv can do it to Sikhs, Modi can do it to Muslims and thus he can become the PM of the nation, where are our secular values?

BTW I am not contesting for or against INC or BJP or any x y z political party, I am politically neutral and cast my vote without any favourism towards any political party. And what we are discussing is not INC or BJP in particular, if you have a point for or against some other political leader feel free to point it out so we can move ahead in our discussion.

But personally I believe that being a responsible citizen we should not encourage things that are ethically not correct to happen in our political system, a long way to go but every journey starts with a small step.

peace out.

I don't think the false allegations of secular-fascists such as Teesta Setalvad and others that actually were caught and found guilty of defamation against Modi, matters much. If Congress continues to have any legitimacy in Indian politics today, such that despite its overt anti-Hindu, anti-Sikh and at times anti-Buddhist actions are overlooked and in today's context where national wealth and jihadic terrorism have become a common issue for all Indians; they still get elected not once but TWICE to power.

Then Modi has all the legitimacy on the planet and in the universe to become Indian PM.

I care two hoots about what the rights bodies or US body Human Rights say when they themselves are the biggest sponsors of terrorism in Kashmir during 90s through passive funding, in Israel through "aid" to Palestine, in Korea through ignoring north Korean madness and in China through supporting the Uyighurs against the Chinese.

These bodies always scream and howl if India, Israel, Russia and other significant countries fight back against their threats (NOT related to Modi here but another example), but they vanish all of a sudden when situation in places like Africa etc are pointed out. What makes these hypocrites run away then? let's see: strategic goals are not met because controlling war-torn African countries serves no interest to these extensions of foreign offices of foreign powers?

Well, let's not convert this thread into another secular communal thing.

Just another point to make after observing the natak in karnatak, BJP is a party with no difference. Nepotism of the highest order publicly displayed by Yeddy. So much for principled democratic selection of a CM. talk about SG wanting to be a remote. None of the politicians are different. They want to drive either overt or covert back seat driving.
People also forget the open "remote control" promoted by Bal Thackeray long before SG became the remote. In fact this term was coined by BT himself when the SS, BJP combine was in power in Maharashtra.

BJP itself has been RCd by the RSS. even in the present Karnatak crisis they ran to the RSS for advice.

Point being, in politics "sub ek hi thaali ke chatte batte hai". No one is different. The effin culture in politics itself is bad. Root cause of many problems in the country.

Oracle,

what you say might be correct and the odds here are pretty much stacked against me, and even knowing that, one would say i am out of my mind to suggest his name.

there are two things that interest me about him, which prompt me to say what i did.

he was assigned a job and he was up to the task, a rarity to be found in our ministers. the credential here is, he is a man who will deliver, assuming he was not there to set any personal agendas in place, which he was not. the down side, he was non-cooperative with other ministries, he lacks the team spirit, but then that could well be because he doesnt want to bend the rules for any, not even for the PM, good i say, again a rarity, otherwise we are a country full of people busy obliging others, a man of principles we see here.

the other, which is a bigger eye catcher, he has acted as an advisor to chidu back in late 90's when the third front was there and chidu was the fm, he has also acted as an advisor to commerce minister or was he a MoS commerce ministry, either way he has been closely associated with the two ministries. then he has worked with international financial institutions/global lending bodies so he would have a good hands on experience of both micro/macro economics and that too at a global stage.

credentials are good the way i see, but i could well be horribly wrong, but just the perception that he could be a horribly wrong choice shouldnt deter the PM to try him out once for the job, may he could well be interviewed on how he sees things and how would he get going and then he certainly wont be as bad as the current fm, and he hasn't have grown so much for his shoes that if he was not to perform to the mark, then he couldn't be replaced as is the case with pranab babu.

Very unfortunate fact that you care only a hoot (BTW what is a hoot?) or two about our Human Rights Commission, do you know what is the value of human rights in a democracy? if you really don't care about human rights it defeats my point of discussion and India being a democracy. A democracy stands void and null if their is no human rights guarantee in the country.

So do you know what democracy is with context of human rights?
-The very silver lining of the government of fools and corruption is that no other known form of governance other then Democracy guarantees more rights to the people, democracy is not only about parliamentary and election system. It is the saviour for you and me and to the mankind at large as a minimum guarantee to live life like how a human is suppose to. The entire concept of democracy is based upon this rights to the people with the inclusion of basic human rights.

Human Right commission are like temples of democracy and they are not political system itself but they provide a check for the operation of the system regarding human rights, which is the very basis of democracy, so this organisation needs to be very vigilant and impartial and outside the sphere of political influence, and is the way it has been designed, a human rights vigilance body is literally an integral part of modern democratic society.

And an international cooperation for accepting standards of human rights issues stands as a quality measurement tools and also acts as an external assurance of modern democratic practices.

Democracy without Human rights is a void democracy.


-And what do you mean by US body Human Rights in the above context? our Human Right Commission is a puppet of the US? Let me tell you that a Human Rights watchdog organisation of any independent country is never a foreign assisted/funded or controlled body.

So what makes democracy so different?
-in the other form of governance system, a credible tool to check the rights of the people has been found missing as in communism, military rule or absolute monarchy.

I am keeping the international expect of democracy aside while we discuss our domestic affairs.

Oh please, don't lecture us on democracy. Been there, heard that. If you're not picking Modi based on what happened in 2002 and yet picking INC despite what happened in 1983, it reeks of hypocrisy of the worst kind.



Flip it:

"Maybe for some people the Nehru Gandhi family was politically correct. But my point is was it ethically correct? should we elect some one who donot respect ethical values of life?

Will the law of the nation forgive it if tomorrow it is found guilty of Anti-Sikh persecution? It is a different subject that its crimes were never proved. But knowingly should we support such criminals?"



I'm not justifying Modi. If you hate Modi for what he did in 2002, then equally hate the Nehru-Gandhi family for what it did in 1982, how it let Warren Anderson get away after massacring scores of people in Bhopal, how it helped orchestrate some of the biggest scams in the history of the World.

My challenge to you is simple: You hate Modi for 2002. Fair enough. Are you willing to hate Nehru-Gandhi family equally for everything it's culpable of? No? Then your Congress-BJP comparison should be purely on the grounds of administrative-merit, and not some bullshit half-baked pseudo-sympathy for the victims of 2002, completely ignoring the victims of 1983.

1. First of all let me be clear that I am not favouring INC

2. All I did put forward a crazy idea of Ratan Tata being a contestant with a major political party say INC but need not be INC.

3. please stop the comparison between BJP vs Congress. Modi is neither the whole of BJP, nor INC is the sole property of Nehru-Gandhi family. BJP can do without Modi and Congress can do without Gandhis

1. First of all let me be clear that I am not favouring INC.

2. honestly speaking I don't have enough Idea other then a few news release about the Sikh riot to bear a fruit full discussion, so I have left that discussion open to knowledgeable people around.

3. The law of the nation will not forgive any one performing act beyond his legal capacity. Knowingly electing people who do not care for human rights and violated it using power in excess to his legal capacity! if people elect such a leader he is doing nothing but deterring his own basic rights being a human, at his capacity.

but you did asked me this..........
1. First of all let me be clear that I am not favouring INC.

2. I might not feel to hate any one! 'plus' who said you that I hate Mr. Modi?

3. I need not have to hate some one for political reason, self justification is enough to caste a vote.


1. First of all let me be clear that I am not favouring INC.
2. Second of all I need not hate neither Modi with sons and family nor Nehru-Gandhi family for making a decision of casting a vote.
3. I never compared among Congress Vs BJP or and x y z political parties (please be sure you read it this time)

4. You better not call the NHRC of India a half-baked pseudo-sympathy propaganda.


.................................................. .................................................. ............

Now if I have satisfied you quarries, I request you not to make a BJP Vs Congress debate when I am asking about the credibility of Mr. N. Modi, considering Nehru-Gandhi family be guilty doesn't make any rooms for consideration for Modi.

the previous post stands again.......

and if you don't want to answer then don't but please atleast try to read the whole post especially the bold and underlined part so that I dont have to repeat the same answer again and again.


peace out.

Oh don't worry about people. They elected Rajiv Gandhi after 1983, they elected Congress after Bhopal Gas Tragedy, and guess what, people of Gujarat elected Modi not once, but twice after 2002. Want to know why? Because people care a little more about quality of governance. In the words of the Supreme Court, "corruption is the worst form of human rights violation". It makes Congress a much greater human rights violator after their brilliant spell of scams than BJP, or even Modi.

People of Gujarat saw more merit in Modi's work as an administrator than his demerit as being communal, which is as much sub judice as Carnivorous Congaroos' case after 1984.

Absolute morality, truth and ethics don't exist in the real world. It's all relative, spiced up with propaganda to make it look absolute.

International relations are not built on morality and ethics, but on hard power (military and economic). The world may lecture China on human rights etc etc but reality is quite different.

I will go off on a different tangent here ..

A wise man once said "Desh ka Shashan karnay ke liye Anushashan hona sabsay zaroori hai" aka "If you cannot rule your mind you cannot rule a nation".

Looking at the calibre of serving politicians and apathy of my fellow citizens, I can say that we are never going to get an ideal cabinet nor should we hope for one.

So, Bengali for PM!

I would support his candidature for PM any day as long as he is not controlled by the N-G Family.
Maybe he should also lead the Congress party.

Pranav mukherji would have been a natural choice in 2004 instead of MMS. But he left congress and formed his own party "Rashtriya Samajwadi Congress". He didnt approved Rajiv Gandhi taking over after Indira Gandhi's demise...Due to this crime, he will never become a PM from congress.