Eat less so we can drive our cars

The US Secretary of State, Condoleezza ‘Rice’, proving to be the rightful successor of the American President Bush, made ‘wheaty’ remarks about the appetites of India and China which are causing food crisis in the world.

Reacting to Rice’s statement, the Indian Government has said the U.S. Secretary of State has made a wrong assessment of the whole problem. Planning Commission Deputy Chairman, Montek Singh Alhuwalia said, “I don’t agree that there is a global food crisis because of India and China. There is an increase in food production too in both the countries.”

“The increase in production and use of biofuels might be the cause why cultivable area is limited,” he added.

Americans eat five times more than Indians

Secretary Rice Blames Growing Indian, Chinese Appetite For Global Food Crisis

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/rice-blames-india-for-global-food-crisis/64257-2.html

http://www.rediff.com/money/2008/may/02commod.htm

Nobel peace prize and why Gandhiji was not awarded one

Last night I was watching CNBC and heard about the Nobel prize committee admitting the mistake for never awarding Nobel prize for peace to the person who has become synonymous to non-violence.

Explanations by Nobel Prize Committee

However, back in 1999 the Nobel prize committee attempted to provide reasons for not awarding the prize to Gandhiji. The article states some reasons for not awarding the prize…

* During the first nomination, the committee’s adviser, professor Jacob Worm-Müller wrote “”sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. (…) He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician.”

* “Up to 1960, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded almost exclusively to Europeans and Americans. In retrospect, the horizon of the Norwegian Nobel Committee may seem too narrow. Gandhi was very different from earlier Laureates. He was no real politician or proponent of international law, not primarily a humanitarian relief worker and not an organiser of international peace congresses.”

*” There is no hint in the archives that the Norwegian Nobel Committee ever took into consideration the possibility of an adverse British reaction to an award to Gandhi. Thus it seems that the hypothesis that the Committee’s omission of Gandhi was due to its members’ not wanting to provoke British authorities, may be rejected.” (Which moron would leave such hint recorded in writings?)

Some interesting facts about Nobel prize.

* In 1918 the award Nobel for Chemistry was awarded to Fritz Haber of Germany and the decision was later became controversial as the chemical weapons were developed under the guidance of Haber which was to guide the development of chemical warfare in coming years.

* Leo Tolsoty, one of the all time greatest novelist, had been nominated for thirteen times for his master-piece “War and Peace”, but was never considered good enough for the prize.

*Paul Hermann Müller was awarded Nobel prize for Medicine in 1948 for discovery of the drug called Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane , or infamously known as DDT , which is responsible for the maximum damage to the environment of the earth.

* Mahatma Gandhi was finally shortlisted for the Nobel prize for Peace in 1948 but Gandhiji was assassinated on 3oth January. Hence, the committee did not give any prize for peace that year stating “no suitable living candidate”.

* However, Erik Axel Karlfeldt, a Swedish citizen and elected a member of the Nobel Institute of the Academy, and, in 1907, of the Nobel Committee. In 1912 he was elected permanent secretary of the Academy, was awarded posthumous Nobel prize in 1931.

* Similarly, Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld, a Swedish Diplomat and UN Secretary was also posthumously awarded Nobel prize for Peace after his death in 1961.

* In 1973, the Nobel prize committee awarded Henry A. Kissinger, then the Secretary of State, USA and Le Duc Tho, the Vietnamese General and Diplomat, for “Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam”. However, soon the war broke out and continued for two more years. Le Duc Tho had declined to accept the prize stating that his country was still not at peace.

* In 2006 Muhammad Yunus, the founder of Grameen(Rural) Bank of Bangladesh a deserving person, was given prize in the incorrect category. He was awarded the Nobel prize for Peace for ““for their efforts to create economic and social development from below”

* Up to 1960, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded almost exclusively to Europeans and Americans.

Conclusion

Nobel prizes for time and again have been remained controversial and accused of politically motivated, and Gandhiji did not need recognition , and I am confident even he had been been awarded , he would have refused it.

If now , the prize is awarded posthumously there must be some political ploy behind it. Pygmy politicians and mediocre media will make issues of the same to bake their bread and anyway , in India , today nobody is interested in walking on the Gandhi guided path. So, there is no sense of accepting the prize ,if awarded, as it is worthless.

Share this post:

Who will be the next president of India?

144089th person I was, when I signed the petition to increase the tenure of our present President Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam at http://www.petitiononline.com/apj/ . I like his simplicity and love for children. He can really dream , and has power to bring the dreams into reality. He is more interested in the children, students in whom he sees the future of India. He has vowed to address at least 1,00,000 students every year during his tenure, and probably he has always exceeded the number.

There are other possible contenders for the post of President. Other then political favourites, one name is of N R Narayana Murthy, the Mentor and one of the founder of Infosys. He is also undeniably one of the most competen and desired person along with APJ Abdul Kalam for the President. APJ is scientist and visionary , NR is intellectual and entrepreneur and that too with ethical practice.

In last rumour I read name of Amitabh Bachhan for the ‘hot-seat’ . Now, Amitabh is popular , infact more then the first two , because of his powerful presence in the bollywood, which he deserves well. But for the seat of President? Because he has neither become successful politician nor businessman, he is master entertainer that’s it.

Painfully, we are entitled to elect the goons as MP/MLA but not the president but thankfully the post is not election based , otherwise it would be easy for any politician to become the President of India, the most graceful seat.

All I can do is to express my desire. However, APJ has already declared that he believes that he should not run for the president seat for second time, therefore he will not.

---

Site Search Tags: Politiics, India

Is signing petition to free someone is Contempt of Court?

Recently, Zafar commented one of my post on the sentence to Sanjay Dutt, and also requested to sign petition at http://www.freesanjaydutt.com to free Sanjay Dutt.

As I have cleared to Zafar and I reiterate, I have no interestet that Sanjay Dutt or any other Celebrity/politician get convicted just for the sake of it, but only the justice must prevail.

But it made me to think , whether sigining of such public petition to set free someone is contempt of court or not?

Contempt of Court Act,1971 defines contempt as under

2. Definitions

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) ‘Contempt of court’ means civil contempt or criminal contempt.
(b) ‘Civil contempt’ means willful disobedience to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
(c) ‘Criminal contempt’ means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which:

(i) Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court, or
(ii) Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceeding, or
(iii) Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.
(a) ‘High Court’ means the high court for a state or a union territory and includes the court of the judicial commissioner in any union territory.

Appeal to free SanjayDutt at www.freesanjaydutt.com reads as under :

Appeal to Petitioners:
Please let us not sit on the fence while Sanjay Dutt is sent back to prison. Clemency is a basic human right. Sanjay may have erred, we all do. None of us are perfect. But leniency should be shown keeping his conduct and contribution in mind. He is an Indian patriot and will always be that. He is a good human being. Imagine how his daughter feels who sits helpless thousands of miles away about to lose her father to another prison term.
If you can, please improve this petition by adding facts that support Sanjays case. I will edit this version to accommodate a more passionate plea. If your content is included in the petition I will add your name to the list of master petitioners.
If you are a politician, movie star, a human rights advocate, a business man your voice may carry more weight than the rest of us. Please support this worthy cause by signing this petition and forward this address to all the people you know.
May God help us all do good things.

Again I say, that I have no grudge against Sanjay Dutt, but I am just discussing the method, so no offence is intended (so , please don’t comment about it).

Now, when any person is charged with any offence s/eh may be tried according the procedure provided by the law and the judiciary is to decide the matter looking to the merits and provisions of law. Any person against whom the order is passed has right to move higher court and again the higher court decide the order of the lower court in the light of the legal provision.

Article 14 of Indian Constituion provides :

14.Equality before law.-The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

So every citizen of India has equal right before law , and the courts have to consider every case within the ambit of the law. Courts cannot consider any extronous matter while deciding.

The abovesaid appeal to set free, appears without any substance. It simply states that he may have erred, lenincy should be shown considering he is patriot, and he has daugher, and also his contribution should be considered and he should be released.

So it happens with many other accussed, they are first time offender, they are also patriot (it is easy to make statement like this, no proof required) , they have also son and daughter , fathe and mother and probably a whole Indian family to look after.So will court consider them on equal footing with Sanjay Dutt. Who will sign public petition for such millons of accussed. This will amount to discrimination and violation of the article 14.
If anybody is interested in signing public petition that should be about to bring law and order in the country

Therefore, in my view , signing such public petition is apparently interference and causing prejudices in the judicial proceeding.

Justice ruleth in India!?!

Illuminating Supreme Court of India

Last week was amusing for ordinary Indians. Series of sentences to Sanjay Dutt, Shibu Soren, Navjotsingh Sidhu is something average Indian could not expect. Indian judicial system is infamous to let loose any accused who could pull some strings here and there. I am not dwelling upon the merits of each case, but as an ordinary Indian I find it refreshingly hopeful.

All the accused are granted bail to file appeal against the verdict, and probably they will be granted further bail till the appeals come for hearing and finally decided. Almost all cases took more than 13 to 19 years for trial with lower courts, and probably same duration will be at appeal courts, and further appeal thereupon , if available.

Now I am eagerly await for the trials of some more high staus accused. Probably 90 % of active politiican , and retired politician, must have been charged for one or more than one charges (to add feather in the crown as politician).

From Bollywood I can recollect names of Salman Khan, Aamir Khan and few other actors , producers and directors. Recently Aishwarya Rai is also under the cloud by the Custom for money laundring scam.

I am not wishing for the conviction for all of them. But I want to realise everyone that being in power is not to be above the law.

Published through performancing firefox

Technorati Cosmos: other blogs commenting on this post

Vote for ‘none of above’ in next election!!

After posting last post about voters should have right to reject all the candidates. I found this material which tries to provide the said aciton. Check this article.

Guide to Voters proivdes (in PDF format , 201 kb)

“11. Can you decline to cast your vote at the last stage?
11.1 The law enables a voter to decline casting his vote at the last stage. If you decide not to cast your vote after having signed on the Register of Voters and after having received the voters’ slip from the Second Polling Officer, you must inform the Presiding Officer immediately. He will then take back the voters’ slip from you and proceed to record in the remarks column of the Register of Voters that you have declined to exercise your franchise and you will be required to put your signature under such entry. After this is done, you can leave the polling station without proceeding to the Voting Compartment.”

But this provisions has some lacuna as observed by the Election Commissions in Proposed Electoral Reforms  (PDF format, 165 kb) :

“7. NEGATIVE / NEUTRAL VOTING
The Commission has received proposals from a very large number of individuals and organizations that there should be a provision enabling a voter to reject all the candidates in the constituency if he does not find them suitable. In the voting using the conventional ballot paper and ballot boxes, an elector can drop the ballot paper without marking his vote against any of the candidates, if he chooses so. However, in the voting using the Electronic Voting Machines, such a facility is not available to the voter. Although, Rule 49 O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 provides that an elector may refuse to vote after he has been identified and necessary entries made in the Register of Electors and the marked copy of the electoral roll, the secrecy of voting is not protected here inasmuch as the polling officials and the polling agents in the polling station get to know about the decision of such a voter.”

Then the commission has recommended :

“The Commission recommends that the law should be amended to specifically provide for negative / neutral voting. For this purpose, Rules 22 and 49B of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 may be suitably amended adding a proviso that in the ballot paper and the particulars on the ballot unit, in the column relating to names of candidates, after the entry relating to the last candidate, there shall be a column ioNone of the abovela, to enable a voter to reject all the candidates, if he chooses so. Such a proposal was earlier made by the Commission in 2001 (vide letter dated 10.12.2001).
(A petition by the People™s Union for Civil Liberties seeking such a provision filed at the time of the recent general elections is pending before the Hon™ble Supreme Court)”

Now, it is not clear that what is proposed effect of such “vote of rejection”. What if a candidate gets more or same rejection votes then election ?  In more interesting scenario ,what if a candidate get higest vote for election among all the candidate but (un)fortunately , and he also get more/same rejection votes?

If this amendment is made applicable, it will be the biggest nightmare for all the parties. All the formula of winning any elections which are being applied presently will be overturned.

A candidate will have to be more watchful and alert towards the public sentiments. One will be not be able to get votes by pleaseing buttering the voters. Politician will not be able to purchase the vote for their election. There will be laughable situations, when candidates will be requesting most voters not to vote at all so their selected voter can go and vote postively. It will be difficult to purchase vote as it is done now. There are many hilarious possiblities. Good governence will be sole key for re-election.

 I hope that this amendment is allowed, let the politician see , who rules.

With credit to Elise for research and her concern.

Vote for nobody!!

I got this email from my friend. I m curious to know whether its true or not?
If true from where can i get detailed info about it?

****
Did you know that there is a system in our
constitution, as per the 1969 act, in section “49-O”
that a person can go to the polling booth, confirm his
identity, get his finger marked and convey the
presiding election officer that he doesn’t want to
vote anyone!

Yes such a feature is available, but obviously these
seemingly notorious leaders have never disclosed it.
this is called 49-O… why should you go and say “i
vote nobody”… because, in a ward, if a candidate
wins, say by 123 votes, and that particular ward has
received 49-O votes more than 123, then that polling
will be cancelled and will have to be re-polled. Not
only that, but the candidature of the contestants will
be removed and he cannot contest the re-polling, since
people had already expressed their decision on him.

This would bring fear into parties and hence look for
genuine candidates for their parties for election.
This would change the way, of our whole political
system… it is seemingly surprising why, and election
commission has not revealed such a feature to the
public….

please spread this news to as many as you know…
Seems to be a wonderful weapon against corrupt parties
in India… show your power, expressing your desire
not to vote anybody, is even more powerful than
voting… so don’t miss your chance.

So either vote, or vote not to vote (vote 49-O) and
pass this info on…
****

I have always agrued about this point with my friends. I dont like to vote in elections. Some of my friends always insisted that it is the duty of every law abiding citizen to vote.  But I always maintain my stand, that if I dont like any of the candidates then why should I vote for anyone. To vote for someone means that I have faith, trust on that person that he would do proper things, which nobody does. So why I am forced to select out many dirty politiciation to select one to rule over me. So I always argue that if you want my opinion , let me decide who is most suitable, and if I dont find any one suitable than I MUST HAVE choice to say that NONE OF THESE GOONS are competent for governance.

It is known fact that most of people ,with little intelligence and understanding ,do not vote, and all the votes which are casted are from selected classes of people and therefore a COMMON man has no value becuase s/he dosent vote. Politician wants to please the people who using their power of vote.

So if it is true that I HAVE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR NOBODY I will vote in next election, to let realise the those silly people about power of people’s vote and their opinion.

How can I find this is true or not. So if you are having blog please do blog about this and try to get answer.

Thank you.

Dividing India ?

I received an email forward from a freind about the discremation displayed by the Kerala Government to offer assistance to Malayalis victims of 11/7 Mumbai Blast. I did not believe it and made search on the net.

I found an article at Indiatimes about this  discrimnation. I was surprised and annoyed too
about the behaviour of the Kerala Government. How  any state government can
propose to help a selected group of people. I wonder what happens if any calamity happens in Kerala. It can be easily left to anyone’s imgaination what the state government would do? Offering helps only to Malyali of the Kerala State?

Such action widens the gape between the communities and people.
It is hard to believe that a goverment can think selfishly and shortsightedly and propose such suggestions.

Budhia Singh’s running - into troubles

I cant help thinking how funny, rather ridiculous , to make an issue of Budhia’s running. What is so much ho-hum about a kid running a marathon. In India millions of under-privileged children do everything , do unthinkable jobs. But running of Budhia is hot issue for government and people. While the kid is wondering about his achievement , everybody is rushing to the Courts with their own say. Orissa government has brought petition for stay against running of Budhia fearing burn out for the government. Biranchi das, the coach, has also filed case against the officials of Women and Child Development Department for contempt of court.

Now, here is an interesting question, should Budhia run? . How to use his skill? Had he been working in some tea cabin running for supplying hot tea and cofeee , he would not have been in controversey. But instead he run marathon and made issue out of it.

Student dies during hunger strike - media not covering the event

I just received SMS from a friend informing me that today (21/05/2006) at 6:44 pm (indian standard time) a student of AIIMS dies due to hunger strikes agsint reservation policy of Indian government annd media fais OR neglect to cover the event so I should pass the message on.