Ramanisblog

Tag: new indian express

  • Boeing Paid $ 990,000 To Rajiv Gandhi

    I just posted an article detailing how Rajiv Gandhi was implicated in Viggen Aircraft deal.

    Now report indicates that Rajiv Gandhi was paid US $ 990,000 by Boeing.

    An article in the Michigan daily dated 10 September 1977 quoted a New Indian Express story to this effect.

    The article by the New Indian express is not available.

    Bribe received by Rajiv Gandhi from Boeing
    Rajiv Gandhi paid by Boeing

    Can someone find it?

    However I found some interesting information from the WSJ where in indicates that its expose of Boeing payouts might have delayed the signing of the Boeing deal and there is a mention of this amount.

    “On February 5, 1977, the Cabinet of then Prime MinisterIndira Gandhi approved the purchase of three Boeing 737 aircraft for Rs 30.55 crore, swiftly bringing to a close the deal in less than nine months of setting up a committee to recommend how the fleet capacity of Indian Airlines should be augmented.

    These nine months saw several controversies around the exercise, including a meeting in the room of Indian Airlines’ acting chairman A H Mehta, where “Indira Gandhi’s son”, Rajiv Gandhi (who was then an Avro commander with the airline), was ushered in and shown some “financial projections”, a procedure the J C Shah Commission later found “totally outside the ordinary course of business”. The Shah commission that probed excesses of the Emergency years (1975-77) also brought out how the Boeing deal was pushed by Indira Gandhi and rushed through after overruling the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Public Investment Board.

    However, soon after the Cabinet’s approval of the Boeing deal, Indira Gandhi had told the then civil aviation and tourism minister,

    K Raghuramaiah, about a WSJ report and advised him to wait before the purchase order was placed. On February 8, Indira Gandhi told Raghuramaiah to “go ahead” and “place the order”. The minister did just that: He informed the IA management about the Cabinet approval and the contract with Boeing was signed on February 9, 1977. (Please see Business Standard’s April 18 report: “Controversial Boeing Deal of 1976-77: Rajiv Gandhi met IA brass, was shown financial details against norms”, http://goo.gl/95yZI)

    A Business Standard investigation into what precisely led to the delay reveals that Indira Gandhi might have become cautious after the publication of the WSJ report in January 1977 referring to questionable payments made by US companies, including Boeing. On January 21, 1977, WSJ carried a report headlined “Questionable Payments Total Put at $412 Million”. It mentioned Boeing as “topping the list” of 288 companies which had made questionable payments.

    Quoting a study by a Washington concern, Charles E Simon and Co, the news report went on to state that Boeing had admitted to making payments of $70 million. The details were collated from information filed by the companies with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The list, according to the WSJ report, included other prominent American corporations (with the payment amounts in brackets): Exxon Corp ($46 million), Northrop Corp ($32 million), Lockheed Aircraft Corp ($25 million) and Armco Steel ($17.5 million). The report also carried a disclaimer that the summary of payments included commissions, agent fees, over-billings and other payments, “many of which may not be deemed improper”.

    Indira Gandhi’s caution over concluding the deal was understandable. The final go-ahead for signing the contract might have been given only after ensuring that nothing specifically controversial about the deal appeared in any foreign newspaper. Domestic politics might have also prompted the hasty decisions that drove the deal.

    http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/wsj-report-on-payment-may-have-delayed-signing-of-boeing-deal-113042000026_1.html

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2706&dat=19770911&id=PQFKAAAAIBAJ&sjid=QR4NAAAAIBAJ&pg=3207,500552

    Related Articles

     

  • Jayendra Saraswati Innocent View Examined

    I have been posting blogs on Jayendra Sarasvati and his involvement in the Sankararaman Murder case.

    My point has been there is enough evidence that he is guilty.

    Jayendra Sarswati
    Jayendra Saraswati Acquitted

    Lest people I am blindly attacking Jayendrar, I am posting excerpts from S.Gurumurthy‘s article in defence of Jayendrar.

    Why is it the arrest of Jayendrar construed as an attack on the Mutt?

    In the soundbytes Vijayendrar’s implications are left unanswered.

    The article speaks of framing, by the Political Parties, without specifying the party except saying Dravidian.

    Jayendrar was arrested during Jayalalithaa‘s tenure as CM.

    Jayalalithaa as every one knows is very devout and has been admirer of the Kanchi Mutt and the Maha Periyava,

    She had also attended Poojas with Jayendrar present.

    She, being a Brahmin, what axe she has to grind against a Brahmin Mutt?

    One can understand if it is Kaunanidhi, with his pathological hatred of Hindus, Brahmins in particular.

    New Indian Has declared that’The Case is Dead’ says Gurumurthy.

    On what grounds?

    I am unable to locate the article in the web.

    Can someone forward me the news item?

    People can not simply say ‘I am framed’ without saying , at least why?

    Who stands to benefit?

    Jayalalithaa?

    Ridiculous.

    On the contrary she lost Kanchi Mutt Brahmin Votes and provided Karunanidhi to pose as beacon of Brahmins!

    Nobody bothers to ask the questions I have asked in my post’ Jayendra Saraswati Acquittal, Baffling”

    ”

    The first article titled “As the Sankaracharya stands like Abhimanyu” [NIE 23.11.2004] captured the Dravidian political and secular media theatre in the state which were hounding the hapless Acharya stung and stunned by the heinous charge against him.

    The Acharya was damaged more by the false news items planted by the police which the willing secular media and Dravidian megaphones lapped up to defame and discredit the Acharya. Another article titled “Unless the Case is Reinvestigated, Justice will not be Done” [26.11.2004] detailed how on the procured testimonies of hardened criminals the state was telling the judiciary that the Sankaracharya was “the worst criminal”. The fourth article dated 3.12.2004 was on how the case had ceased to be an investigation into a crime and had become a vicious campaign to demolish the Acharya himself. The article ended thus: “Even if, at the end, I am entirely proved wrong, I cannot shirk my duty to alert the public and sensitise the authorities about the destruction of too many values involved in this investigation which is gradually turning into a battle between the silent and silenced Kanchi Mutt on the one hand and police and its associate, the media megaphones on the other. It is no more an investigation into crime….it is now a larger design to defame and discredit the Mutt itself.” The final article titled “Will the Secular Media Heed Justice Reddy’s Warning?” appeared on January 14, 2005. This article was on the judgment of Justice Narasimha Reddy of the Andhra Pradesh High Court before whom a frivolous writ had been filed by some labour union on the basis of media reports linking some deaths [which had taken place six years ago on the premises of a mill, from where the Acharya had been arrested] to the Acharya.

    Disposing of the writ, the judge said the petitioner swayed by the media did not want to lag behind in the unprecedented process of denigration of the Kanchi Mutt, an ancient, prestigious and glorious institution with almost a 2,500-year history. He added that it was sad that an institution of such glory was targeted and persecuted in an organised manner in an independent country, by “not only individuals, but also a section of the institutions, such as the State and the Press”. He also noted that the proponents of human rights, fair play and dignity to individuals and institutions have maintained stoic silence, adding “a powerful section is celebrating or watching it with indifference” the “perfidy against the Mutt” that had shocked the nation and beyond”. He noted that the “amount of disrepute and sacrilege inflicted on Sri Jayendra Saraswathi has no comparables adding that harshest possible words were used directly or in innuendo against him” and “today he is subjected to similar treatment as was Draupati in the Court of Kauravas”. That was the state of the Acharya and the Mutt when The New Indian Express stood for truth against tsunami of vicious campaign against the Acharya…

    The reward for these articles was an arrest warrant against me and almost a search on The New Indian Express and even the Thuglak magazine, which had carried the Tamil version of the articles. As usual the judiciary came to the rescue and passed orders restraining the state. I was questioned by the Superintendent of Police who led the investigation. When I asked him why he was suspecting the Acharya to be the offender, he said that the victim had been sending highly offensive letters to the Acharya and therefore he had a motive to eliminate him. I asked him whether he thought of the possibility of someone inimical to the Acharya eliminating the victim to put the blame on the Acharya. He was blank.

    http://newindianexpress.com/nation/Recalling-the-Kanchi-Sankaracharya-Case/2013/11/28/article1915161.ece

    Related Articles

  • Maran Had 323 Telephone Lines,Laid cables to SUNTV-Document.

    In his Press meet Dayanidhi Maran stated  that the GM -Telephones had issued him a letter way back that he(Maran) had only one line.

    Funnily, it has been alleged that Maran got these phone lines listed in the name of the chief general manager (CGM) of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Chennai.http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/story/maran-has-telephone-exchange-at-chennai-home-with-323-lines-cbi/1/140147.html

    He also argued that there has been a systematic campaign to tarnish the image of him,his Family and his Party( DMK) in that order.

    Injured innocence like Raja!

    Raja,his party Minister in the central government is in Jail,his  Great Uncle‘s daughter in Jail(Kanimozhi),his brother’s company MD in Jail,his great Uncle’s legal wife escaped  because of age and illiteracy in English(I hope this is a temporary reprieve for her),his party defends him through third rung leaders like Muthuramalingam, whom no body knows

    What else he has left to be tarnished!

    For Details on Maran’s role in SUN DTH _Aircell read my blog 2G scam trail leads to Maran ,SUNTV DTH.

    Ink in the pen of his lawyer had not dried after issuing legal notice to Tehelka yesterday in connection with the expose on Maxi-SUN DTH-Aircell,he has issued legal notice to new Indian express for this expose.

    At this rate he can have xeroxes of the legal notice ,fill up the names and serve!

    Legal notices served so far are just legal nonsense with no arguments to disprove the expose.

    Best for Tehelka and New Indian Express  is to meet him in court where he has to face cross examination and many more skeletons might come tumbling down.

    A telecom central minister from Tamil Nadu got the BSNL to connect 323 telephone lines to his home, not in Delhi where he had work, but in Chennai where he had none. He got all the 323 home lines listed not in his name but in the name of the Chief General Manager BSNL Chennai. These lines virtually constituted a telephone exchange in the minister’s home. It was exclusively used for his family business by laying 3.4 km long secret cable along public roads to connect the lines to the business premises. This had caused huge loss to BSNL. Who was that enterprising minister? The infamous A Raja? No. It is the famous Dayanidhi Maran; Raja’s predecessor, now the central Textile Minister. The CBI, which probed the fraud, wrote to the Secretary Telecom on 10.9.2007 recommending action against Maran for the fraud….

    Dayanidhi Maran was obviously not playing marbles with 323 telephones. He got the BSNL to lay separate and exclusive underground cable from his Boat Club home to the SUN TV office at Anna Arivalayam in Anna Salai and fraudulently linked the 323 home lines to his brother Kalanidhi’s SUN TV network. The first 23 of the 323 lines bore numbers ‘243722 11’ to ‘24372301’ and the next 300 lines bore numbers ‘24371500’ to ‘24371799’. Since the first four digits ‘2437’ were common for all 323 lines, the lines constituted a home telephone exchange. The Dayanidhi home exchange was operational in the SUN TV establishment for at least months from January 2007 through the fraudulent cable connection from Dayanidhi’s Boat Club home. They were no ordinary telephone lines, but costly ISDN lines, which could carry tons and tons of TV news and programmes faster than satellites to any part of the world. These lines, the CBI says in its report, are “normally used by medium to large commercial enterprises to meet special needs such as video conferencing, transmission of huge volume of digital data of audio and video” – precisely the facility that SUN TV would need for its telecasting operations. For this, the SUN TV would have paid huge cost. But it got it all free, at government’s cost…..

    The Maran home exchange, says the CBI, was “programmed in such a way that no one other than the authorised BSNL staff were aware of the existence of such an Exchange created for his [minister’s] exclusive use”. It added that by linking the minister’s home and SUN TV office by the stealthy cables, “it would appear as if the lines were used in the residence of the former minister, but actually the cables laid facilitated SUN TV network to utilise the services of BSNL provided at his residence”.  Google map shows the distance to SUN TV as 3.4 kms along the main artery roads of the area, which were dug up to bury the illegal underground cables from Maran home to SUN TV office! It was not one of those secret White Collar frauds, but a crime committed in the open roads.

    What could be the probable loss to the exchequer by this fraud? On “a sample study”, the CBI says, “it is learnt that 48,72,027 units of calls have emanated from [just] one Telephone No 24371515 in the month of March 2007 alone, which is indicative of the massive multimedia transfer in the underlying connections”. Just one of the 323 lines accounted for over 48 lakh call units in March 2007 alone – Yes almost 49 lakh call units in one month, through one of the 323 phones! Assume that each of the 323 connections was put to use as efficiently as Marans had operated the Number 24371515; the total number of call units SUN TV would have unlawfully robbed the BSNL during January 2007 to April 2007 [Maran resigned on May 13] could be as high as 629.5 crore call units. With the prevailing rate of 70 paise per call unit could the loss to BSNL be as high as `440 crore? Only a thorough investigation can reveal the true loot. But, the story does not end here. SUN TV’s print cousin ‘Dinakaran’, too has got its share of the loot. Says the CBI: “It is also learnt that similar service connections with ISDN facilities have been provided at the office of Dinakaran, a Tamil Daily, belonging to the group of SUN TV Network at Madurai, though specific phone numbers are not available”. But how did the CBI get to investigate the fraud and where is its report now? It calls for a brief flash back…..

    The CBI had recommended action against Maran as early as in September 2007.

    But the CBI letter is obviously sleeping somewhere since then, and for the last 44 months. The CBI letter had specifically asked the Telecom Secretary to bring the matter “to the notice of” Raja. So the case against Maran of DMK was to be approved by Raja also of DMK….

    http://expressbuzz.com/nation/centre-sat-on-cbi-report-against-dayanidhi-maran/280258.html

  • What is Perception?

    It is not merely interpretation of Data that poses problems.The act of perception itself is difficult to understand.Perception, at the rudimentary level,is the process by which the stimulii are received and interpreted by the brain.We are aware of the brain/brain’s existence only by its receipt and interpretation of stimulii.So, we need brain to perceive and the things perceived to prove the existence of brain.
    The interplay of senses and objects to be perceived,interplay of senses and brain determine Perception.We are aware of the senses because of brain and brain because of senses and objects perceived.
    At the external level, what constitutes a whole object is difficult to fathom.Is it because of a particular trait we perceive a thing as we see it or an integtrated traits /qualities that makes us aware of an object as a whole?
    How do we recognise objects as such?
    Is it only through senses? In that case , how did we recognise it as a particular object at the first instance?If it is because we have been told so, how did the first individual recognise it as such?
    Further, things change continuously and same thing or event presents a different picture from a different angle in case of vision(ex:see different angles from the camera in a game, say cricket or foot ball) and different interpretation when we perceive at different times the same thing /event.
    The answer is in Indian Philosophical treatises.

  • Hinduism-Least known facts.

    1.Religion is individualistic.Indian Philosophy ia a way of living.It does not contain mere abstract principles,nor does it have dogma.It is characterised by the following facts.
    1.Religion is individualistic..Allows Freedom of Choice.
    2.No community worshipping is sanctioned.
    3.Unbelievers are not doomed to hell.
    4.Every one of its premises may be questioned.
    5You need not believe in God to achieve salvation.
    6.Admits Freewill as well as Determinism.
    7.There is no Heaven or hell.
    8.None can escape the consequences of their actions
    9.God can not interfere in your day to day affairs.
    10.Concept of Time is non-linear.It is cyclic.
    11.There is no separate entity in charge of Evil.
    12.There is nothing called Good or Evil.
    13.You can lead a normal life amidst the process of realising Godhood.
    14.Family as the fundamental unit.
    15.Duty of parents,children.
    16.Duty of husband/Wife.
    17.Social reponsibility
    18.Accountability to other living Beings
    19.Live in Harmony aith Nature
    20.Performance of Action.
    21.Practice of Sex.
    21.Contentment.