Lashkar terror camps still active in Pakistan
Mufti Islah Mufti Islah , CNN-IBN
Posted on Nov 27, 2010 at 16:03 |
Updated Nov 27, 2010 at 16:18
Srinagar: Confessions by a 20-year-old Lashkar-e-Toiba terrorist in Jammu has given the security forces a jitter. The captured terrorist, Mohammad Saleem Rehmani, reveled that terror camps in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, which were wound up after the November 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, have been relocated and not closed.
Rehmani is the lone survivor of an eight-member freshly launched group. He says that five Lashkar camp in PoK wound up after international pressure post 26/11 Mumbai attack, have been relocated and he underwent training there
"We were sent to India but all other terrorists died in encounters. The training camps are still operational," said Saleem.
Lashkar terror camps still active in Pakistan
Instances of involvement of Pakistan being active in Kashmir's insurgency have been replete but what is worrying the police and security forces are reports that two Chechen terrorists, who work under code names of Usman and Umar are active in North Kashmir.
Police sources say if Saleem’s claims are true, then terrorism in Kashmir will get a boost.
Also worrying is the fact that a few dozen youths who cheer-led stone-pelting during the summer unrest have joined a reinvigorated Lashkar and Hizbul Mujahideen.
Inspector General of Kashmir Police (IGP) SM Sahai said that Pakistan's terror infrastructure remained intact and Lashkar was busy motivating impressionable young men.
According to the police a number of terrorists have sneaked into Kashmir taking full advantage of the summer unrest.
Police even claim that a local separatist leader from Syed Ali Shah Geelani's group was in touch with Lashkar commander Furqan to abet agitation in north Kashmir. So the coming months could reveal more about the new dimensions of terrorism in the Valley.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
''अनिल अंबानी ज्यादा हरामी है'' :- प्रभु चावला-शनिवार, २७ नवम्बर २०१०
शनिवार, २७ नवम्बर २०१०
''अनिल अंबानी ज्यादा हरामी है'' :- प्रभु चावला
Posted by रजनीश के झा (Rajneesh K Jha) Saturday, November 27, 2010
पूरा देश जानता था कि प्रभु चावला दलाल हैं, उन्हें प्राथमिक कक्षा के बराबर अंग्रेजी आती हैं, पत्रकारिता के नाम पर वे पचास धंधे करते हैं मगर इंडिया टुडे के चेयरमैन अरुण पुरी को यह कहानी देर मे समझ में आई। सुपर दलाल नीरा राडिया और सफल दलाल प्रभु चावला के बीच बातचीत का एक टेप हमारे पास है जिसकी अंग्रेजी तो दुर्भाग्य से हम आपको नहीं सुनवा सकते मगर दलाली की पूरी कहानी आपके सामने पेश है। बातचीत सुनिए-
नीरा- कुछ खास बात नहीं, मैं तो तुम्हारे विचार जानना चाहती थी क्योंकि तुम काफी समझदार आदमी हो।
प्रभु चावला- हैं हैं हैं ऐसा तो कुछ नहीं, बस लोगों को जानता हूं, दोस्ती निभाता हूं और काम चलाता हूं।
नीरा- अभी तो मैं जानना चाहती हूं कि अंबानी बंधुओं के बीच झगड़े में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने जो फैसला दिया और देश के हित से ऊपर दो भाइयों का हित रखा इस पर तुम्हारी क्या राय है? तुम क्या सोचते हो?
प्रभु- जब ये दो भाई किसी चीज में शामिल हो तो देश तो अपने आप ही शामिल हो जाता है। समस्या यह है कि दोनों भाई आपस में बात नहीं करते और कोई ऐसा नहीं हैं जो उनमें बात करा सके। मैंने भी कोशिश की थी मगर कुछ हुआ नहीं। कभी अनिल पकड़ में नहीं आता तो कभी मुकेश लापता हो जाते। वैसे गलती मुकेश की ज्यादा है।
नीरा- मेरी आज ही सुबह मुकेश से बात हुई थी और वह कह रहा था कि अनिल को लगता है कि मीडिया खरीद कर और दैनिक भास्कर या जागरण या बिजिनेस स्टैंडर्ड में लेख छपवा कर कंपनी चला लेगा तो मुझे अफशोस होता है।
प्रभु- असल में मुकेश अपनी बीबी के कहने पर चलता है। अनिल से मेरी अच्छी दोस्ती है और उसकी बीबी कहीं टांग नहीं अड़ाती। अनिल तो राजनीति मीडिया नेता सबका इस्तेमाल कर लेता है और ये जो छोटा वाला हैं ना, वो ज्यादा हरामी है मगर हरामी बनना पड़ता है। मुकेश कहीं बाहर गए थे, वापस आ गए क्या?
नीरा- वो तो एक हप्ते से भारत में ही हैं और दिल्ली में ही हैं। कभी कभी शाम को बॉम्बे चले जाते है। तुम्हारी बात नहीं हो पा रही?
प्रभु- मैं दो तीन बार बॉम्बे गया। मुकेश ने मुझे खाने पर बुलाया था मगर अचानक गायब हो गया। कल भी बॉम्बे जा रहा हूं। कोशिश करूंगा। मैं तो दोनों का भला चाहता है। मुकेश की दिक्कत यह है कि धीरूभाई ने जो चमचे पाले थे वे अब किसी काम के नहीं रहे। जमाना बदल गया है मगर मुकेश ने अपने लोग नहीं बदले।
नीरा- मुकेश को तो तुम्हारे जैसे लोग चाहिए।
प्रभु- मैं तो सेवा करने को हमेशा तैयार हूं मगर मुकेश पूरा विश्वास किसी पर नहीं करता। मैंने दो तीन एसएमएस डाले उनका भी जवाब नहीं आया। मैंने तो उसे यह बताना चाहा था कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट का फैसला उसके खिलाफ आ रहा है मगर वो तो इतना घमंडी है कि मैं क्या कहूं। अब भुगतेगा। इस देश में सब कुछ फिक्स होता है और सुप्रीम कोर्ट का जजमेंट फिक्स करना कोई कठिन काम नहीं है। अनिल घूमता ज्यादा है, पैसे खर्च कम करता है। मुकेश तो धीरूभाई के जमाने से आगे बढ़ना ही नहीं चाहता। तुम समझ रही हो ना, मैं क्या कह रहा हूं? बेचारे मुकेश को तो सही जानकारी तक नहीं मिल पाती। मुझे पता है कि मुकेश सुप्रीम कोर्ट के लिए क्या कर रहा था और जो कर रहा था वो गलत कर रहा था। सबको पता था। आज कल तो सब फिक्स होता है। अब सुप्रीम कोर्ट के फैसले ने इसे खत्म कर दिया न।
नीरा- अभी तो सुप्रीम कोर्ट का फाइनलाइज नहीं हुआ है।
प्रभु- अब तो और बड़ी गड़बड़ होने वाली है। प्राइम मिनिस्टर मुरली देवड़ा के पीछे पड़े है। दुनिया में गैस के दाम बढ़ने वाले हैं। अगर भारत सरकार अपनी ही गैस नहीं खरीद सकती तो उसे अदालत जाना ही पड़ेगा। देश का हित पहले है, देश का नुकसान नहीं होना चाहिए।
नीरा- यही तो मुकेश ने अनिल से कहा कि तेरा जितना बनता है, तू ले ले, एनटीपीसी अगर नहीं लेता तो वो भी तू ले ले मगर फैसला तो सरकार को करना है। 328 पेज का एमओयू है और उसमें सब कुछ साफ लिखा है। मुझे तो लगता है कि इसी एमओयू को पेनड्राइव में डाल कर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के कंप्यूटर में लगा दिया गया होगा क्योंकि दोनों की भाषा भी एक जैसी है। एटॉर्नी जनरल गुलाम वाहनवती ने भी खेल किया है।
प्रभु- जब मैं इंडियन एक्सप्रेस में था तो वाहनवती हमारा वकील होता था। नुस्ली वाडिया उसे ले कर आया था। मेरा अच्छा दोस्त है मगर आज की तारीख में अनिल अंबानी का आदमी है। यह बात मुकेश को बता देना और कह देना कि मैंने बताई है। हंसराज भारद्वाज ने तो उसे कभी पसंद नहीं किया। जब अनिल का पावर प्लांट ही शुरू नहीं हुआ तो उसे गैस का क्या करना है? मगर मुकेश भी क्या करेगा? मुकेश भी किसी और को गैस नहीं बेच सकता। आनंद जैन था उसे हटा दिया गया। मनोज मोदी प्रोफेशनल हैं।
नीरा- प्रभु आनंद जैन आज भी वहीं हैं मगर आज भी इस मामले में मनोज मोदी ज्यादा काम कर रहा है।
प्रभु- अनिल ने फिर से सुप्रीम कोर्ट में रिट डाली है और उसे यह करना भी चाहिए। मगर मुकेश से कहना कि जो हो रहा है वह गलत हो रहा है। जो तरीके वो अपना रहा है वो गलत है। जिन पर भरोसा कर रहा है वे गड़बड़ हैं। लंदन मैं बैठ कर दिल्ली की दलाली होती है। वैसे दिल्ली में राजनैतिक सिस्टम भी बदल गया है। कमलनाथ फैसला करता है तो प्रणब मुखर्जी और जयराम रमेश या मोंटेक उसे टाल देते है। अनिल अंबानी डीएमके के जरिए चीफ जस्टिस को पटा रहे हैं, मुझे पता है कि मुकेश को किसको पटाना चाहिए मगर वो मुझसे बात तो करे।
नीरा- ये लंदन वाला चक्कर क्या है, तुम्हे ये कहां से पता लगता है?
प्रभु- लीगल सोर्सेज से। अनिल ने तो मेरे बेटे अंकुर चावला को यानी उसकी कंपनी को रिटेनर रखा है मगर इस मामले में मेरा बेटा नहीं हैं। अब दोनों भाइयों से मेरी दोस्ती होने का नुकसान मेरे बेटे को भुगतना पड़ रहा है।
(यही अंकुर चावला पिता से प्रेरणा ले कर अमर उजाला के लिए लॉ बोर्ड रिश्वत कांड में अभियुक्त हैं)
---आलोक तोमर---
डेट लाइन इंडिया डाट कॉम
''अनिल अंबानी ज्यादा हरामी है'' :- प्रभु चावला
Posted by रजनीश के झा (Rajneesh K Jha) Saturday, November 27, 2010
पूरा देश जानता था कि प्रभु चावला दलाल हैं, उन्हें प्राथमिक कक्षा के बराबर अंग्रेजी आती हैं, पत्रकारिता के नाम पर वे पचास धंधे करते हैं मगर इंडिया टुडे के चेयरमैन अरुण पुरी को यह कहानी देर मे समझ में आई। सुपर दलाल नीरा राडिया और सफल दलाल प्रभु चावला के बीच बातचीत का एक टेप हमारे पास है जिसकी अंग्रेजी तो दुर्भाग्य से हम आपको नहीं सुनवा सकते मगर दलाली की पूरी कहानी आपके सामने पेश है। बातचीत सुनिए-
नीरा- कुछ खास बात नहीं, मैं तो तुम्हारे विचार जानना चाहती थी क्योंकि तुम काफी समझदार आदमी हो।
प्रभु चावला- हैं हैं हैं ऐसा तो कुछ नहीं, बस लोगों को जानता हूं, दोस्ती निभाता हूं और काम चलाता हूं।
नीरा- अभी तो मैं जानना चाहती हूं कि अंबानी बंधुओं के बीच झगड़े में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने जो फैसला दिया और देश के हित से ऊपर दो भाइयों का हित रखा इस पर तुम्हारी क्या राय है? तुम क्या सोचते हो?
प्रभु- जब ये दो भाई किसी चीज में शामिल हो तो देश तो अपने आप ही शामिल हो जाता है। समस्या यह है कि दोनों भाई आपस में बात नहीं करते और कोई ऐसा नहीं हैं जो उनमें बात करा सके। मैंने भी कोशिश की थी मगर कुछ हुआ नहीं। कभी अनिल पकड़ में नहीं आता तो कभी मुकेश लापता हो जाते। वैसे गलती मुकेश की ज्यादा है।
नीरा- मेरी आज ही सुबह मुकेश से बात हुई थी और वह कह रहा था कि अनिल को लगता है कि मीडिया खरीद कर और दैनिक भास्कर या जागरण या बिजिनेस स्टैंडर्ड में लेख छपवा कर कंपनी चला लेगा तो मुझे अफशोस होता है।
प्रभु- असल में मुकेश अपनी बीबी के कहने पर चलता है। अनिल से मेरी अच्छी दोस्ती है और उसकी बीबी कहीं टांग नहीं अड़ाती। अनिल तो राजनीति मीडिया नेता सबका इस्तेमाल कर लेता है और ये जो छोटा वाला हैं ना, वो ज्यादा हरामी है मगर हरामी बनना पड़ता है। मुकेश कहीं बाहर गए थे, वापस आ गए क्या?
नीरा- वो तो एक हप्ते से भारत में ही हैं और दिल्ली में ही हैं। कभी कभी शाम को बॉम्बे चले जाते है। तुम्हारी बात नहीं हो पा रही?
प्रभु- मैं दो तीन बार बॉम्बे गया। मुकेश ने मुझे खाने पर बुलाया था मगर अचानक गायब हो गया। कल भी बॉम्बे जा रहा हूं। कोशिश करूंगा। मैं तो दोनों का भला चाहता है। मुकेश की दिक्कत यह है कि धीरूभाई ने जो चमचे पाले थे वे अब किसी काम के नहीं रहे। जमाना बदल गया है मगर मुकेश ने अपने लोग नहीं बदले।
नीरा- मुकेश को तो तुम्हारे जैसे लोग चाहिए।
प्रभु- मैं तो सेवा करने को हमेशा तैयार हूं मगर मुकेश पूरा विश्वास किसी पर नहीं करता। मैंने दो तीन एसएमएस डाले उनका भी जवाब नहीं आया। मैंने तो उसे यह बताना चाहा था कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट का फैसला उसके खिलाफ आ रहा है मगर वो तो इतना घमंडी है कि मैं क्या कहूं। अब भुगतेगा। इस देश में सब कुछ फिक्स होता है और सुप्रीम कोर्ट का जजमेंट फिक्स करना कोई कठिन काम नहीं है। अनिल घूमता ज्यादा है, पैसे खर्च कम करता है। मुकेश तो धीरूभाई के जमाने से आगे बढ़ना ही नहीं चाहता। तुम समझ रही हो ना, मैं क्या कह रहा हूं? बेचारे मुकेश को तो सही जानकारी तक नहीं मिल पाती। मुझे पता है कि मुकेश सुप्रीम कोर्ट के लिए क्या कर रहा था और जो कर रहा था वो गलत कर रहा था। सबको पता था। आज कल तो सब फिक्स होता है। अब सुप्रीम कोर्ट के फैसले ने इसे खत्म कर दिया न।
नीरा- अभी तो सुप्रीम कोर्ट का फाइनलाइज नहीं हुआ है।
प्रभु- अब तो और बड़ी गड़बड़ होने वाली है। प्राइम मिनिस्टर मुरली देवड़ा के पीछे पड़े है। दुनिया में गैस के दाम बढ़ने वाले हैं। अगर भारत सरकार अपनी ही गैस नहीं खरीद सकती तो उसे अदालत जाना ही पड़ेगा। देश का हित पहले है, देश का नुकसान नहीं होना चाहिए।
नीरा- यही तो मुकेश ने अनिल से कहा कि तेरा जितना बनता है, तू ले ले, एनटीपीसी अगर नहीं लेता तो वो भी तू ले ले मगर फैसला तो सरकार को करना है। 328 पेज का एमओयू है और उसमें सब कुछ साफ लिखा है। मुझे तो लगता है कि इसी एमओयू को पेनड्राइव में डाल कर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के कंप्यूटर में लगा दिया गया होगा क्योंकि दोनों की भाषा भी एक जैसी है। एटॉर्नी जनरल गुलाम वाहनवती ने भी खेल किया है।
प्रभु- जब मैं इंडियन एक्सप्रेस में था तो वाहनवती हमारा वकील होता था। नुस्ली वाडिया उसे ले कर आया था। मेरा अच्छा दोस्त है मगर आज की तारीख में अनिल अंबानी का आदमी है। यह बात मुकेश को बता देना और कह देना कि मैंने बताई है। हंसराज भारद्वाज ने तो उसे कभी पसंद नहीं किया। जब अनिल का पावर प्लांट ही शुरू नहीं हुआ तो उसे गैस का क्या करना है? मगर मुकेश भी क्या करेगा? मुकेश भी किसी और को गैस नहीं बेच सकता। आनंद जैन था उसे हटा दिया गया। मनोज मोदी प्रोफेशनल हैं।
नीरा- प्रभु आनंद जैन आज भी वहीं हैं मगर आज भी इस मामले में मनोज मोदी ज्यादा काम कर रहा है।
प्रभु- अनिल ने फिर से सुप्रीम कोर्ट में रिट डाली है और उसे यह करना भी चाहिए। मगर मुकेश से कहना कि जो हो रहा है वह गलत हो रहा है। जो तरीके वो अपना रहा है वो गलत है। जिन पर भरोसा कर रहा है वे गड़बड़ हैं। लंदन मैं बैठ कर दिल्ली की दलाली होती है। वैसे दिल्ली में राजनैतिक सिस्टम भी बदल गया है। कमलनाथ फैसला करता है तो प्रणब मुखर्जी और जयराम रमेश या मोंटेक उसे टाल देते है। अनिल अंबानी डीएमके के जरिए चीफ जस्टिस को पटा रहे हैं, मुझे पता है कि मुकेश को किसको पटाना चाहिए मगर वो मुझसे बात तो करे।
नीरा- ये लंदन वाला चक्कर क्या है, तुम्हे ये कहां से पता लगता है?
प्रभु- लीगल सोर्सेज से। अनिल ने तो मेरे बेटे अंकुर चावला को यानी उसकी कंपनी को रिटेनर रखा है मगर इस मामले में मेरा बेटा नहीं हैं। अब दोनों भाइयों से मेरी दोस्ती होने का नुकसान मेरे बेटे को भुगतना पड़ रहा है।
(यही अंकुर चावला पिता से प्रेरणा ले कर अमर उजाला के लिए लॉ बोर्ड रिश्वत कांड में अभियुक्त हैं)
---आलोक तोमर---
डेट लाइन इंडिया डाट कॉम
'6L dying of inhaling second-hand smoke annually'-Nov 27, 2010, (how bad is even passive smoking)
'6L dying of inhaling second-hand smoke annually'
Kounteya Sinha, TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.12am IST
NEW DELHI: Second-hand smoke (SHS) is killing six lakhs annually, including 1.65 lakh children before they reach their fifth birthday. A study by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 192 countries -- the first of its kind to assess all deaths caused by SHS has found that tobacco kills nearly 5.7 millions globally every year, including 5.1 millions who die from their own smoking. The rest perish, thanks to passive smoking.
Only 7.4% of global population live in countries that boast of laws to prevent smoking in public places. Though India has banned smoking in public places, its stringent implementation has left a lot to be desired.
India recently released its Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), which found that despite a ban on public smoking -- about five in 10 adults (52.3%) were exposed to SHS at home and 29% at public places -- mainly in public transport and restaurants.
The WHO study, published in British medical journal The Lancet on Friday, said passive smoking is estimated to have caused 3.79 lakh deaths from ischaemic heart condition, 1.65 lakh deaths from lower respiratory infections, 36,900 from asthma and 21,400 from lung cancer -- around 1% of global deaths.
Around 47% women, who actually smoke much lesser than men, perish by inhaling SHS. The corresponding figures for children and men are 28% and 26%, respectively.
"The combination of infectious diseases and tobacco could be lethal for children," said Dr Annette Pruss-Ustun of WHO's Tobacco-Free Initiative in Geneva. She and her colleagues concluded that 40% children, 33% male non-smokers and 35% female non-smokers are regularly exposed to SHS. The biggest impact on children is in the developing world. Two-thirds of these deaths occur in Africa and South Asia, the authors claim, adding that children's exposure to SHS most likely happens at home.
According to the study, the highest numbers of people exposed to SHS are in Europe and Asia, and the lowest rates are in the Americas, eastern Mediterranean and Africa.
As per GATS, in India, 34.6% adults use tobacco in any form -- of which men and women account for 47.9% and 20.3%, respectively.
Among daily tobacco users, 60.2% consume it within half an hour of waking up. Average age at initiation of tobacco use is 17.8. Around 25.8% women take to the pernicious habit before they turn 15 years.
There are more than 4,000 chemicals in tobacco smoke -- of which at least 250 are harmful, and more than 50 cause cancer.
Kounteya Sinha, TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.12am IST
NEW DELHI: Second-hand smoke (SHS) is killing six lakhs annually, including 1.65 lakh children before they reach their fifth birthday. A study by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 192 countries -- the first of its kind to assess all deaths caused by SHS has found that tobacco kills nearly 5.7 millions globally every year, including 5.1 millions who die from their own smoking. The rest perish, thanks to passive smoking.
Only 7.4% of global population live in countries that boast of laws to prevent smoking in public places. Though India has banned smoking in public places, its stringent implementation has left a lot to be desired.
India recently released its Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), which found that despite a ban on public smoking -- about five in 10 adults (52.3%) were exposed to SHS at home and 29% at public places -- mainly in public transport and restaurants.
The WHO study, published in British medical journal The Lancet on Friday, said passive smoking is estimated to have caused 3.79 lakh deaths from ischaemic heart condition, 1.65 lakh deaths from lower respiratory infections, 36,900 from asthma and 21,400 from lung cancer -- around 1% of global deaths.
Around 47% women, who actually smoke much lesser than men, perish by inhaling SHS. The corresponding figures for children and men are 28% and 26%, respectively.
"The combination of infectious diseases and tobacco could be lethal for children," said Dr Annette Pruss-Ustun of WHO's Tobacco-Free Initiative in Geneva. She and her colleagues concluded that 40% children, 33% male non-smokers and 35% female non-smokers are regularly exposed to SHS. The biggest impact on children is in the developing world. Two-thirds of these deaths occur in Africa and South Asia, the authors claim, adding that children's exposure to SHS most likely happens at home.
According to the study, the highest numbers of people exposed to SHS are in Europe and Asia, and the lowest rates are in the Americas, eastern Mediterranean and Africa.
As per GATS, in India, 34.6% adults use tobacco in any form -- of which men and women account for 47.9% and 20.3%, respectively.
Among daily tobacco users, 60.2% consume it within half an hour of waking up. Average age at initiation of tobacco use is 17.8. Around 25.8% women take to the pernicious habit before they turn 15 years.
There are more than 4,000 chemicals in tobacco smoke -- of which at least 250 are harmful, and more than 50 cause cancer.
Media-lobbyist nexus may go to House panel- TNN, Nov 27, 2010,
Media-lobbyist nexus may go to House panel
TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.09am IST
NEW DELHI: The government on Friday hinted at the possibility of the media-lobbyist nexus being examined by either the ethics or privileges committee of Parliament.
Senior sources dropped broad hints that either of the two committees could go into the whole gamut of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia's telephonic conversations with media personalities.
This was the first government response to the Opposition's demand that the media's role in corporate lobbying come under the JPC scrutiny. The timing, too, was significant -- before yet another meeting with the Opposition on Monday to end the current impasse in Parliament.
The previous two meetings called by Pranab Mukherjee had not yielded any results as the deadlock continued. According to sources, Mukherjee will hold yet another round of discussion with the BJP-led Opposition in an attempt to explore some fresh meeting ground.
While the matter needs to be referred to the privileges committee by the House, the ethics committee could take note of it on its own.
However, the government left no doubts that a JPC was out of question even if that meant the rest of Parliament's winter session being wasted away. "Their intention is to turn the JPC into a political battle which has to be fought politically," parliamentary affairs minister P K Bansal told reporters.
The ruling coalition sees the JPC demand as an attempt to target PM Manmohan Singh and made it clear that it would oppose the move precisely on that ground.
Bansal said if the Opposition was keen to engage the PM in a discussion and ask questions to him, they should agree to a House debate. He recalled that when Congress had been in Opposition, its demand for a JPC probe into the Tehelka expose and coffin scam had been turned down by the Vajpayee government.
TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.09am IST
NEW DELHI: The government on Friday hinted at the possibility of the media-lobbyist nexus being examined by either the ethics or privileges committee of Parliament.
Senior sources dropped broad hints that either of the two committees could go into the whole gamut of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia's telephonic conversations with media personalities.
This was the first government response to the Opposition's demand that the media's role in corporate lobbying come under the JPC scrutiny. The timing, too, was significant -- before yet another meeting with the Opposition on Monday to end the current impasse in Parliament.
The previous two meetings called by Pranab Mukherjee had not yielded any results as the deadlock continued. According to sources, Mukherjee will hold yet another round of discussion with the BJP-led Opposition in an attempt to explore some fresh meeting ground.
While the matter needs to be referred to the privileges committee by the House, the ethics committee could take note of it on its own.
However, the government left no doubts that a JPC was out of question even if that meant the rest of Parliament's winter session being wasted away. "Their intention is to turn the JPC into a political battle which has to be fought politically," parliamentary affairs minister P K Bansal told reporters.
The ruling coalition sees the JPC demand as an attempt to target PM Manmohan Singh and made it clear that it would oppose the move precisely on that ground.
Bansal said if the Opposition was keen to engage the PM in a discussion and ask questions to him, they should agree to a House debate. He recalled that when Congress had been in Opposition, its demand for a JPC probe into the Tehelka expose and coffin scam had been turned down by the Vajpayee government.
Barkha Dutt on the Allegations Against Her
Barkha Dutt on the Allegations Against Her
As a journalist, whose work has been consistently hard-hitting and scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister, I am astonished, angered and hurt to see the baseless allegations against me in sections of the media this week.
While there is no doubt that journalists must be held to the same exacting standards of accountability that we seek from others, the allegations in this instance, as they relate to me, are entirely slanderous and not backed by a shred of evidence. The edited conversations between PR Representative Nira Radia and me have been headlined to suggest that I misused my role as a journalist to "lobby" for A. Raja, a man I have never met.
While this is completely untrue, I can understand the anger and anguish that such a misrepresentation can create, among viewers who rely on me to report honestly and impartially. And I would like to address some of the questions raised by these edited transcripts.
The tapes seem to add up to hundreds of hours of conversations between Nira Radia and people from different backgrounds, including scores of well-known journalists and editors from all the major media organisations (TV and Print) in India. Despite this, much of the commentary has been strangely selective in its focus. And quite often, vindictively personal. Consider, for example, that online it is being dubbed "BarkhaGate."
I cannot speak on behalf of any other journalist on the tapes. Framed in the backdrop of a larger media debate, every journalist's conversation on these tapes must, of course, be evaluated on its own merit. So, speaking only for myself, the insinuation made by the magazines are preposterous.
By definition, the insinuation of "lobbying" implies either a quid-pro-quo of some kind or a compromise in how I have reported the story. As anyone who has watched my coverage of the ongoing 2G scam over the past year would know - to suggest either is entirely absurd. (ATTACHED BELOW ARE LINKS TO SEVERAL SHOWS HOSTED BY ME ON THE 2G SCAM OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS). In several different statements, I have already challenged two newsmagazines who first carried the allegations to establish any proof of a quid-pro quo or a bias in reportage. I know that neither charge stands the test of any scrutiny.
For those perplexed by the ongoing debate, it could be useful to understand the context in which these conversations took place. The few, short conversations took place in the backdrop of cabinet formation in 2009, when the DMK had stormed out of the UPA coalition over portfolio allocation.
In this instance, Nira Radia, was clearly plugged into the inner workings of the DMK, a fact we only discovered when she rang up to tell me that the news flashes running on different news channels were incorrect; the stalemate between the DMK and the Congress had not yet been resolved. She corroborated her claim by saying she was in direct contact with the DMK chief and was in fact with his daughter, Kanimozhi. We talked about news developments within the DMK and the Congress and nothing I said was different from what I was reporting on TV minute-by-minute.
Ironically, the one sentence being used to damn me, "Oh God, What should I tell them", is in fact two separate sentences, neither of which are related to A Raja or the telecom portfolio at all. When transcripts are edited and capture neither tone nor context, the message is severely distorted. The phrase "Oh God," was nothing more than a response to a long account by Nira Radia on a DMK leader, TR Baalu, speaking to the media without sanction from the party. The excerpt, "What should I tell them," was in response to her repeatedly saying to me over several different phone calls, that if I happened to talk to anyone in the Congress, I should ask them to talk the DMK chief directly.
As a matter of record, I never passed on any message to any Congress leader. But because she was a useful news source, and the message seemed innocuous, I told her I would. Ultimately, I did no more than humour a source who was providing me information during a rapidly changing news story.
AT NO STAGE WAS I EVER ASKED TO PASS ON ANY MESSAGE TO INTERCEDE ON BEHALF OF A PARTICULAR MINISTER OR PORTFOLIO. NOT ONCE, WAS I ASKED TO "LOBBY" FOR A. RAJA. NOT ONCE WAS I ASKED TO CARRY ANY MESSAGE REGARDING HIM OR ANY OTHER APPOINTMENT.
Anyone who has bothered to read the entire transcript of these conversations instead of just the headline, would notice that the conversation is essentially a journalist soliciting information from one of the many people plugged in - something all journalists do as part of newsgathering. And as journalists, we also often humour our sources without acting on their requests.
The only "benefit" I ever got from talking to Nira Radia was information; information I used to feed the news.
It is important to remember that at this point, in May 2009, none of us were aware of the present investigation against Nira Radia. Like most other journalists in India, I knew Nira Radia professionally as the main PR person for the Tata Group. In this instance, she clearly represented one side of the story. She was just one of many people I spoke to as is typical in such news stories. As journalists we deal with different kinds of people, who sometime solicit information and at other times, provide news leads. Unless we believe in only press-conference driven journalism, the need to tap into what's happening behind-the-scenes in the corridors of power involves dealing with a multitude of voices, and yes, we cannot always vouchsafe for the integrity of all those we use as news sources. We concern ourselves primarily with the accuracy of the information.
But, I must come back to my original objection to what the two magazines have implied. Strangely, when I complained to the editor of Open magazine about the smear campaign against me, he sent me a text saying , there was "not much remarkable" in my conversations and went on to even say that, "there is one bit in the strap where the word go-between is used that I don't like myself." I have to wonder then, with anger, why he did not pause before using such a defamatory description.
Are there learnings in this for me? Yes, of course there are. Looking back with the benefit of hindsight and with what we know now, I realise that when we talk to people who represent or belong to the power establishment, there can be a danger in sailing too close to the wind, even for those of us who are experienced and are driven purely by a deep passion for news.
The takeaway from this debate for me pertains to the everyday practice of journalism. I think of how different kinds of people, who could be potential sources of news, call me, and indeed all editors in this country every day, with different requests ranging from complaints about stories to requests for coverage and yes, sometimes we are also asked to pass on innocuous bits of information. Never have these requests - nor will they - dictate the agenda of my news decisions. But, the calls that we treat with polite friendliness, to keep our channels of news open, clearly need to be handled with more distance. This controversy has made me look at the need to re-draw the lines much more carefully.
There is also another learning. I have always operated by a code of ethics that holds me as accountable to the public as the politicians I grill on my show. The selective and malicious nature of some of the commentary against me has reinforced my awareness of how responsible we ought to be before we level an allegation against another.
While a genuine debate on media ethics is always welcome in the quest for self improvement, I hope this debate will also look at what amounts to character assassination.
Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/page/?type=barkha-statement&cp
a comment-
I think what she is saying is this: I am being victimised because I am
a woman; I am being victimised because I am a celebrity; I am being
victimised because I am a woman celebrity!! What she does not know is
how to react when people that is, journalists -- who are as powerful
and vindictive and every inch scorpions like her -- attack her. She is
trying to act like a victim when all along she has been very much the
aggressor. After all every journalist is not weak like the navy chief
and made to apologise!!
>
> - Live TV
> - Video
> - India
> - Cities
> - World
> - Tech
> - Sports
> - Trends
> - Photos
> - Polls
> - Forums
>
> *You are here:* Home
>
> *Services:*
> E-learning
> Classified
> City
> Guide
> Insurance
> Books
- Show quoted text -
> More »
> Barkha Dutt on the Allegations Against Her
>
> As a journalist, whose work has been consistently hard-hitting and
> scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister,
> I am astonished, angered and hurt to see the baseless allegations against me
> in sections of the media this week.
>
> While there is no doubt that journalists must be held to the same exacting
> standards of accountability that we seek from others, the allegations in
> this instance, as they relate to me, are entirely slanderous and not backed
> by a shred of evidence. The edited conversations between PR Representative
> Nira Radia and me have been headlined to suggest that I misused my role as a
> journalist to "lobby" for A. Raja, a man I have never met.
>
> While this is completely untrue, I can understand the anger and anguish that
> such a misrepresentation can create, among viewers who rely on me to report
> honestly and impartially. And I would like to address some of the questions
> raised by these edited transcripts.
>
> The tapes seem to add up to hundreds of hours of conversations between Nira
> Radia and people from different backgrounds, including scores of well-known
> journalists and editors from all the major media organisations (TV and
> Print) in India. Despite this, much of the commentary has been strangely
> selective in its focus. And quite often, vindictively personal. Consider,
> for example, that online it is being dubbed "BarkhaGate."
>
> I cannot speak on behalf of any other journalist on the tapes. Framed in the
> backdrop of a larger media debate, every journalist's conversation on these
> tapes must, of course, be evaluated on its own merit. So, speaking only for
> myself, the insinuation made by the magazines are preposterous.
>
> By definition, the insinuation of "lobbying" implies either a quid-pro-quo
> of some kind or a compromise in how I have reported the story. As anyone who
> has watched my coverage of the ongoing 2G scam over the past year would know
> - to suggest either is entirely absurd. (ATTACHED
> BELOWARE
- Show quoted text -
> LINKS TO SEVERAL SHOWS HOSTED BY ME ON THE 2G SCAM OVER THE LAST TWO
> YEARS). In several different statements, I have already challenged two
> newsmagazines who first carried the allegations to establish any proof of a
> quid-pro quo or a bias in reportage. I know that neither charge stands the
> test of any scrutiny.
>
> For those perplexed by the ongoing debate, it could be useful to understand
> the context in which these conversations took place. The few, short
> conversations took place in the backdrop of cabinet formation in 2009, when
> the DMK had stormed out of the UPA coalition over portfolio allocation.
>
> In this instance, Nira Radia, was clearly plugged into the inner workings of
> the DMK, a fact we only discovered when she rang up to tell me that the news
> flashes running on different news channels were incorrect; the stalemate
> between the DMK and the Congress had not yet been resolved. She corroborated
> her claim by saying she was in direct contact with the DMK chief and was in
> fact with his daughter, Kanimozhi. We talked about news developments within
> the DMK and the Congress and nothing I said was different from what I was
> reporting on TV minute-by-minute.
>
> Ironically, the one sentence being used to damn me, "Oh God, What should I
> tell them", is in fact two separate sentences, neither of which are related
> to A Raja or the telecom portfolio at all. When transcripts are edited and
> capture neither tone nor context, the message is severely distorted. The
> phrase "Oh God," was nothing more than a response to a long account by Nira
> Radia on a DMK leader, TR Baalu, speaking to the media without sanction from
> the party. The excerpt, "What should I tell them," was in response to her
> repeatedly saying to me over several different phone calls, that if I
> happened to talk to anyone in the Congress, I should ask them to talk the
> DMK chief directly.
>
> As a matter of record, I never passed on any message to any Congress leader.
> But because she was a useful news source, and the message seemed innocuous,
> I told her I would. Ultimately, I did no more than humour a source who was
> providing me information during a rapidly changing news story.
>
> *AT NO STAGE WAS I EVER ASKED TO PASS ON ANY MESSAGE TO INTERCEDE ON BEHALF
> OF A PARTICULAR MINISTER OR PORTFOLIO. NOT ONCE, WAS I ASKED TO "LOBBY" FOR
> A. RAJA. NOT ONCE WAS I ASKED TO CARRY ANY MESSAGE REGARDING HIM OR ANY
> OTHER APPOINTMENT. *
>
> Anyone who has bothered to read the entire transcript of these conversations
> instead of just the headline, would notice that the conversation is
> essentially a journalist soliciting information from one of the many people
> plugged in - something all journalists do as part of newsgathering. And as
> journalists, we also often humour our sources without acting on their
> requests.
>
> The only "benefit" I ever got from talking to Nira Radia was information;
> information I used to feed the news.
>
> It is important to remember that at this point, in May 2009, none of us were
> aware of the present investigation against Nira Radia. Like most other
> journalists in India, I knew Nira Radia professionally as the main PR person
> for the Tata Group. In this instance, she clearly represented one side of
> the story. She was just one of many people I spoke to as is typical in such
> news stories. As journalists we deal with different kinds of people, who
> sometime solicit information and at other times, provide news leads. Unless
> we believe in only press-conference driven journalism, the need to tap into
> what's happening behind-the-scenes in the corridors of power involves
> dealing with a multitude of voices, and yes, we cannot always vouchsafe for
> the integrity of all those we use as news sources. We concern ourselves
> primarily with the accuracy of the information.
>
> But, I must come back to my original objection to what the two magazines
> have implied. Strangely, when I complained to the editor of Open magazine
> about the smear campaign against me, he sent me a text saying , there was
> "not much remarkable" in my conversations and went on to even say that,
> "there is one bit in the strap where the word go-between is used that I
> don't like myself." I have to wonder then, with anger, why he did not pause
> before using such a defamatory description.
>
> Are there learnings in this for me? Yes, of course there are. Looking back
> with the benefit of hindsight and with what we know now, I realise that when
> we talk to people who represent or belong to the power establishment, there
> can be a danger in sailing too close to the wind, even for those of us who
> are experienced and are driven purely by a deep passion for news.
>
> The takeaway from this debate for me pertains to the everyday practice of
> journalism. I think of how different kinds of people, who could be potential
> sources of news, call me, and indeed all editors in this country every day,
> with different requests ranging from complaints about stories to requests
> for coverage and yes, sometimes we are also asked to pass on innocuous bits
> of information. Never have these requests - nor will they - dictate the
> agenda of my news decisions. But, the calls that we treat with polite
> friendliness, to keep our channels of news open, clearly need to be handled
> with more distance. This controversy has made me look at the need to re-draw
> the lines much more carefully.
>
> There is also another learning. I have always operated by a code of ethics
> that holds me as accountable to the public as the politicians I grill on my
> show. The selective and malicious nature of some of the commentary against
> me has reinforced my awareness of how responsible we ought to be before we
> level an allegation against another.
>
> While a genuine debate on media ethics is always welcome in the quest for
> self improvement, I hope this debate will also look at what amounts to
> character assassination.
>
>
>
> Links of several shows hosted by me on the 2G scam over the last two years:
>
> - Is it legitimate to hold up Parliament over 2G scam?
>
>|
> November 23, 2010
> - Congress' CVC conundrum, BJP's Karnataka compulsion
>
>|
> November 22, 2010
> - Centre cannot act on CAG report alone, says Kapil Sibal
>
>|
> November 19, 2010
> - 2G scam: Is PM's silence in Parliament counter-productive?
>
>|
> November 18, 2010
> - Does the 2G scam go well beyond Raja?
>
>|
> November 16, 2010
> - CAG report: Is telecom giant Telenor alarmed?
>
>|
> November 16, 2010
> - Does India live in a Scam Raj?
>
>|
> November 15, 2010
> - Is corruption in our roots?
>
>|
> November 14, 2010
> - Raja and the Congress crown of thorns
>
>|
> May 4, 2010
> - The phone-tapping debate in Lok Sabha
>
>|
> April 29, 2010
> - Is phone tapping India's worst kept
> secret?|
> April 26, 2010
> - Can Congress dump Raja?
>
>|
> October 26, 2009
> - Sunil Mittal 's call for transparency
>
>|
> October 14, 2009
> - Team Manmohan gets to work
>
>|
> May 28, 2009
> - Scindia: 'It is a very important assignment'
>
>|
> May 28, 2009
> - Team Manmohan: Suspense over
>
>|
> May 27, 2009
> - Portfolios distributed: Team Manmohan ready
>
>|
> May 27, 2009
> - Clear mandate, unclear portfolios
>
>|
> May 26, 2009
> - Does the new Cabinet offer hope?
>
>|
> May 23, 2009
> - Battle for portfolis: Cong-DMK talks fail
>
>|
> May 21, 2009
> - New Team Manmohan: Who'll be in?
>
>|
> May 20, 2009
> - Allies Vs Congress: Jostling begins
>
>|
> May 20, 2009
> - Mamata's Left hook
>
>|
> May 20, 2009
> - The Cabinet Buzz
>
>|
> May 19, 2009
>
>
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>|
> May 26, 2009
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>|
> May 21, 2009
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>|
- Show quoted text -
> May 21, 2009
>
>
>
> Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/page/?type=barkha-statement&cp
>
Reply
Forward
As a journalist, whose work has been consistently hard-hitting and scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister, I am astonished, angered and hurt to see the baseless allegations against me in sections of the media this week.
While there is no doubt that journalists must be held to the same exacting standards of accountability that we seek from others, the allegations in this instance, as they relate to me, are entirely slanderous and not backed by a shred of evidence. The edited conversations between PR Representative Nira Radia and me have been headlined to suggest that I misused my role as a journalist to "lobby" for A. Raja, a man I have never met.
While this is completely untrue, I can understand the anger and anguish that such a misrepresentation can create, among viewers who rely on me to report honestly and impartially. And I would like to address some of the questions raised by these edited transcripts.
The tapes seem to add up to hundreds of hours of conversations between Nira Radia and people from different backgrounds, including scores of well-known journalists and editors from all the major media organisations (TV and Print) in India. Despite this, much of the commentary has been strangely selective in its focus. And quite often, vindictively personal. Consider, for example, that online it is being dubbed "BarkhaGate."
I cannot speak on behalf of any other journalist on the tapes. Framed in the backdrop of a larger media debate, every journalist's conversation on these tapes must, of course, be evaluated on its own merit. So, speaking only for myself, the insinuation made by the magazines are preposterous.
By definition, the insinuation of "lobbying" implies either a quid-pro-quo of some kind or a compromise in how I have reported the story. As anyone who has watched my coverage of the ongoing 2G scam over the past year would know - to suggest either is entirely absurd. (ATTACHED BELOW ARE LINKS TO SEVERAL SHOWS HOSTED BY ME ON THE 2G SCAM OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS). In several different statements, I have already challenged two newsmagazines who first carried the allegations to establish any proof of a quid-pro quo or a bias in reportage. I know that neither charge stands the test of any scrutiny.
For those perplexed by the ongoing debate, it could be useful to understand the context in which these conversations took place. The few, short conversations took place in the backdrop of cabinet formation in 2009, when the DMK had stormed out of the UPA coalition over portfolio allocation.
In this instance, Nira Radia, was clearly plugged into the inner workings of the DMK, a fact we only discovered when she rang up to tell me that the news flashes running on different news channels were incorrect; the stalemate between the DMK and the Congress had not yet been resolved. She corroborated her claim by saying she was in direct contact with the DMK chief and was in fact with his daughter, Kanimozhi. We talked about news developments within the DMK and the Congress and nothing I said was different from what I was reporting on TV minute-by-minute.
Ironically, the one sentence being used to damn me, "Oh God, What should I tell them", is in fact two separate sentences, neither of which are related to A Raja or the telecom portfolio at all. When transcripts are edited and capture neither tone nor context, the message is severely distorted. The phrase "Oh God," was nothing more than a response to a long account by Nira Radia on a DMK leader, TR Baalu, speaking to the media without sanction from the party. The excerpt, "What should I tell them," was in response to her repeatedly saying to me over several different phone calls, that if I happened to talk to anyone in the Congress, I should ask them to talk the DMK chief directly.
As a matter of record, I never passed on any message to any Congress leader. But because she was a useful news source, and the message seemed innocuous, I told her I would. Ultimately, I did no more than humour a source who was providing me information during a rapidly changing news story.
AT NO STAGE WAS I EVER ASKED TO PASS ON ANY MESSAGE TO INTERCEDE ON BEHALF OF A PARTICULAR MINISTER OR PORTFOLIO. NOT ONCE, WAS I ASKED TO "LOBBY" FOR A. RAJA. NOT ONCE WAS I ASKED TO CARRY ANY MESSAGE REGARDING HIM OR ANY OTHER APPOINTMENT.
Anyone who has bothered to read the entire transcript of these conversations instead of just the headline, would notice that the conversation is essentially a journalist soliciting information from one of the many people plugged in - something all journalists do as part of newsgathering. And as journalists, we also often humour our sources without acting on their requests.
The only "benefit" I ever got from talking to Nira Radia was information; information I used to feed the news.
It is important to remember that at this point, in May 2009, none of us were aware of the present investigation against Nira Radia. Like most other journalists in India, I knew Nira Radia professionally as the main PR person for the Tata Group. In this instance, she clearly represented one side of the story. She was just one of many people I spoke to as is typical in such news stories. As journalists we deal with different kinds of people, who sometime solicit information and at other times, provide news leads. Unless we believe in only press-conference driven journalism, the need to tap into what's happening behind-the-scenes in the corridors of power involves dealing with a multitude of voices, and yes, we cannot always vouchsafe for the integrity of all those we use as news sources. We concern ourselves primarily with the accuracy of the information.
But, I must come back to my original objection to what the two magazines have implied. Strangely, when I complained to the editor of Open magazine about the smear campaign against me, he sent me a text saying , there was "not much remarkable" in my conversations and went on to even say that, "there is one bit in the strap where the word go-between is used that I don't like myself." I have to wonder then, with anger, why he did not pause before using such a defamatory description.
Are there learnings in this for me? Yes, of course there are. Looking back with the benefit of hindsight and with what we know now, I realise that when we talk to people who represent or belong to the power establishment, there can be a danger in sailing too close to the wind, even for those of us who are experienced and are driven purely by a deep passion for news.
The takeaway from this debate for me pertains to the everyday practice of journalism. I think of how different kinds of people, who could be potential sources of news, call me, and indeed all editors in this country every day, with different requests ranging from complaints about stories to requests for coverage and yes, sometimes we are also asked to pass on innocuous bits of information. Never have these requests - nor will they - dictate the agenda of my news decisions. But, the calls that we treat with polite friendliness, to keep our channels of news open, clearly need to be handled with more distance. This controversy has made me look at the need to re-draw the lines much more carefully.
There is also another learning. I have always operated by a code of ethics that holds me as accountable to the public as the politicians I grill on my show. The selective and malicious nature of some of the commentary against me has reinforced my awareness of how responsible we ought to be before we level an allegation against another.
While a genuine debate on media ethics is always welcome in the quest for self improvement, I hope this debate will also look at what amounts to character assassination.
Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/page/?type=barkha-statement&cp
a comment-
I think what she is saying is this: I am being victimised because I am
a woman; I am being victimised because I am a celebrity; I am being
victimised because I am a woman celebrity!! What she does not know is
how to react when people that is, journalists -- who are as powerful
and vindictive and every inch scorpions like her -- attack her. She is
trying to act like a victim when all along she has been very much the
aggressor. After all every journalist is not weak like the navy chief
and made to apologise!!
>
> - Live TV
> - Video
> - India
> - Cities
> - World
> - Tech
> - Sports
> - Trends
> - Photos
> - Polls
> - Forums
>
> *You are here:* Home
>
> *Services:*
> E-learning
> Classified
> City
> Guide
> Insurance
> Books
- Show quoted text -
> More »
> Barkha Dutt on the Allegations Against Her
>
> As a journalist, whose work has been consistently hard-hitting and
> scathingly critical of the ongoing 2G scam and the former Telecom Minister,
> I am astonished, angered and hurt to see the baseless allegations against me
> in sections of the media this week.
>
> While there is no doubt that journalists must be held to the same exacting
> standards of accountability that we seek from others, the allegations in
> this instance, as they relate to me, are entirely slanderous and not backed
> by a shred of evidence. The edited conversations between PR Representative
> Nira Radia and me have been headlined to suggest that I misused my role as a
> journalist to "lobby" for A. Raja, a man I have never met.
>
> While this is completely untrue, I can understand the anger and anguish that
> such a misrepresentation can create, among viewers who rely on me to report
> honestly and impartially. And I would like to address some of the questions
> raised by these edited transcripts.
>
> The tapes seem to add up to hundreds of hours of conversations between Nira
> Radia and people from different backgrounds, including scores of well-known
> journalists and editors from all the major media organisations (TV and
> Print) in India. Despite this, much of the commentary has been strangely
> selective in its focus. And quite often, vindictively personal. Consider,
> for example, that online it is being dubbed "BarkhaGate."
>
> I cannot speak on behalf of any other journalist on the tapes. Framed in the
> backdrop of a larger media debate, every journalist's conversation on these
> tapes must, of course, be evaluated on its own merit. So, speaking only for
> myself, the insinuation made by the magazines are preposterous.
>
> By definition, the insinuation of "lobbying" implies either a quid-pro-quo
> of some kind or a compromise in how I have reported the story. As anyone who
> has watched my coverage of the ongoing 2G scam over the past year would know
> - to suggest either is entirely absurd. (ATTACHED
> BELOW
- Show quoted text -
> LINKS TO SEVERAL SHOWS HOSTED BY ME ON THE 2G SCAM OVER THE LAST TWO
> YEARS). In several different statements, I have already challenged two
> newsmagazines who first carried the allegations to establish any proof of a
> quid-pro quo or a bias in reportage. I know that neither charge stands the
> test of any scrutiny.
>
> For those perplexed by the ongoing debate, it could be useful to understand
> the context in which these conversations took place. The few, short
> conversations took place in the backdrop of cabinet formation in 2009, when
> the DMK had stormed out of the UPA coalition over portfolio allocation.
>
> In this instance, Nira Radia, was clearly plugged into the inner workings of
> the DMK, a fact we only discovered when she rang up to tell me that the news
> flashes running on different news channels were incorrect; the stalemate
> between the DMK and the Congress had not yet been resolved. She corroborated
> her claim by saying she was in direct contact with the DMK chief and was in
> fact with his daughter, Kanimozhi. We talked about news developments within
> the DMK and the Congress and nothing I said was different from what I was
> reporting on TV minute-by-minute.
>
> Ironically, the one sentence being used to damn me, "Oh God, What should I
> tell them", is in fact two separate sentences, neither of which are related
> to A Raja or the telecom portfolio at all. When transcripts are edited and
> capture neither tone nor context, the message is severely distorted. The
> phrase "Oh God," was nothing more than a response to a long account by Nira
> Radia on a DMK leader, TR Baalu, speaking to the media without sanction from
> the party. The excerpt, "What should I tell them," was in response to her
> repeatedly saying to me over several different phone calls, that if I
> happened to talk to anyone in the Congress, I should ask them to talk the
> DMK chief directly.
>
> As a matter of record, I never passed on any message to any Congress leader.
> But because she was a useful news source, and the message seemed innocuous,
> I told her I would. Ultimately, I did no more than humour a source who was
> providing me information during a rapidly changing news story.
>
> *AT NO STAGE WAS I EVER ASKED TO PASS ON ANY MESSAGE TO INTERCEDE ON BEHALF
> OF A PARTICULAR MINISTER OR PORTFOLIO. NOT ONCE, WAS I ASKED TO "LOBBY" FOR
> A. RAJA. NOT ONCE WAS I ASKED TO CARRY ANY MESSAGE REGARDING HIM OR ANY
> OTHER APPOINTMENT. *
>
> Anyone who has bothered to read the entire transcript of these conversations
> instead of just the headline, would notice that the conversation is
> essentially a journalist soliciting information from one of the many people
> plugged in - something all journalists do as part of newsgathering. And as
> journalists, we also often humour our sources without acting on their
> requests.
>
> The only "benefit" I ever got from talking to Nira Radia was information;
> information I used to feed the news.
>
> It is important to remember that at this point, in May 2009, none of us were
> aware of the present investigation against Nira Radia. Like most other
> journalists in India, I knew Nira Radia professionally as the main PR person
> for the Tata Group. In this instance, she clearly represented one side of
> the story. She was just one of many people I spoke to as is typical in such
> news stories. As journalists we deal with different kinds of people, who
> sometime solicit information and at other times, provide news leads. Unless
> we believe in only press-conference driven journalism, the need to tap into
> what's happening behind-the-scenes in the corridors of power involves
> dealing with a multitude of voices, and yes, we cannot always vouchsafe for
> the integrity of all those we use as news sources. We concern ourselves
> primarily with the accuracy of the information.
>
> But, I must come back to my original objection to what the two magazines
> have implied. Strangely, when I complained to the editor of Open magazine
> about the smear campaign against me, he sent me a text saying , there was
> "not much remarkable" in my conversations and went on to even say that,
> "there is one bit in the strap where the word go-between is used that I
> don't like myself." I have to wonder then, with anger, why he did not pause
> before using such a defamatory description.
>
> Are there learnings in this for me? Yes, of course there are. Looking back
> with the benefit of hindsight and with what we know now, I realise that when
> we talk to people who represent or belong to the power establishment, there
> can be a danger in sailing too close to the wind, even for those of us who
> are experienced and are driven purely by a deep passion for news.
>
> The takeaway from this debate for me pertains to the everyday practice of
> journalism. I think of how different kinds of people, who could be potential
> sources of news, call me, and indeed all editors in this country every day,
> with different requests ranging from complaints about stories to requests
> for coverage and yes, sometimes we are also asked to pass on innocuous bits
> of information. Never have these requests - nor will they - dictate the
> agenda of my news decisions. But, the calls that we treat with polite
> friendliness, to keep our channels of news open, clearly need to be handled
> with more distance. This controversy has made me look at the need to re-draw
> the lines much more carefully.
>
> There is also another learning. I have always operated by a code of ethics
> that holds me as accountable to the public as the politicians I grill on my
> show. The selective and malicious nature of some of the commentary against
> me has reinforced my awareness of how responsible we ought to be before we
> level an allegation against another.
>
> While a genuine debate on media ethics is always welcome in the quest for
> self improvement, I hope this debate will also look at what amounts to
> character assassination.
>
>
>
> Links of several shows hosted by me on the 2G scam over the last two years:
>
> - Is it legitimate to hold up Parliament over 2G scam?
>
>
> November 23, 2010
> - Congress' CVC conundrum, BJP's Karnataka compulsion
>
>
> November 22, 2010
> - Centre cannot act on CAG report alone, says Kapil Sibal
>
>
> November 19, 2010
> - 2G scam: Is PM's silence in Parliament counter-productive?
>
>
> November 18, 2010
> - Does the 2G scam go well beyond Raja?
>
>
> November 16, 2010
> - CAG report: Is telecom giant Telenor alarmed?
>
>
> November 16, 2010
> - Does India live in a Scam Raj?
>
>
> November 15, 2010
> - Is corruption in our roots?
>
>
> November 14, 2010
> - Raja and the Congress crown of thorns
>
>
> May 4, 2010
> - The phone-tapping debate in Lok Sabha
>
>
> April 29, 2010
> - Is phone tapping India's worst kept
> secret?
> April 26, 2010
> - Can Congress dump Raja?
>
>
> October 26, 2009
> - Sunil Mittal 's call for transparency
>
>
> October 14, 2009
> - Team Manmohan gets to work
>
>
> May 28, 2009
> - Scindia: 'It is a very important assignment'
>
>
> May 28, 2009
> - Team Manmohan: Suspense over
>
>
> May 27, 2009
> - Portfolios distributed: Team Manmohan ready
>
>
> May 27, 2009
> - Clear mandate, unclear portfolios
>
>
> May 26, 2009
> - Does the new Cabinet offer hope?
>
>
> May 23, 2009
> - Battle for portfolis: Cong-DMK talks fail
>
>
> May 21, 2009
> - New Team Manmohan: Who'll be in?
>
>
> May 20, 2009
> - Allies Vs Congress: Jostling begins
>
>
> May 20, 2009
> - Mamata's Left hook
>
>
> May 20, 2009
> - The Cabinet Buzz
>
>
> May 19, 2009
>
>
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>
> May 26, 2009
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>
> May 21, 2009
> - Barkha Dutt on the political developments of cabinet formation
>
>
- Show quoted text -
> May 21, 2009
>
>
>
> Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/page/?type=barkha-statement&cp
>
Reply
Forward
Friday, November 26, 2010
Bring in an auditor and probe 2G scam, says Ratan Tata-PTI, Nov 26, 2010,
Bring in an auditor and probe 2G scam, says Ratan Tata
PTI, Nov 26, 2010, 10.36pm IST
NEW DELHI: Tata Group chairman Ratan Tata on Friday said action should be taken against anyone found guilty of wrong-doing in 2G spectrum scam for which the government should bring in an auditor and have an investigation.
However, he expressed concern over unsubstantiated media attacks being made apparently on the basis of unauthorised tapes.
"So, I think these are bad times. I wish the government would take a stand, bring in an auditor and have an investigation. Book people who are guilty of something," he told private television channel NDTV.
Tata said it was murky and confusing for him now. "Because just a couple of weeks ago, we were a sort of sitting on top of the summit or mountain top with President Obama showering praises talking about the maturity of having emerged and not an emerging force.
"And then we have somewhat slipped into a morass of series of allegations, unauthorised tapes being flooded, the media going crazy on alleging, convicting, executing. You are literally character assassinating."
The whole thing, he said, in so doing, there has been a smokescreen behind the so-called scam which really is out of turn allocation of spectrum, hoarding of spectrum by important players for free and things of this nature.
"Stop this sort of banana republic kind of attacks on whoever one chooses to attack on a basis unsubstantiated, even before the person has in, what I consider, every Indian's right namely to be considered innocent, until found guilty in a court of law, not on the street, not in this way."
PTI, Nov 26, 2010, 10.36pm IST
NEW DELHI: Tata Group chairman Ratan Tata on Friday said action should be taken against anyone found guilty of wrong-doing in 2G spectrum scam for which the government should bring in an auditor and have an investigation.
However, he expressed concern over unsubstantiated media attacks being made apparently on the basis of unauthorised tapes.
"So, I think these are bad times. I wish the government would take a stand, bring in an auditor and have an investigation. Book people who are guilty of something," he told private television channel NDTV.
Tata said it was murky and confusing for him now. "Because just a couple of weeks ago, we were a sort of sitting on top of the summit or mountain top with President Obama showering praises talking about the maturity of having emerged and not an emerging force.
"And then we have somewhat slipped into a morass of series of allegations, unauthorised tapes being flooded, the media going crazy on alleging, convicting, executing. You are literally character assassinating."
The whole thing, he said, in so doing, there has been a smokescreen behind the so-called scam which really is out of turn allocation of spectrum, hoarding of spectrum by important players for free and things of this nature.
"Stop this sort of banana republic kind of attacks on whoever one chooses to attack on a basis unsubstantiated, even before the person has in, what I consider, every Indian's right namely to be considered innocent, until found guilty in a court of law, not on the street, not in this way."
Govt unveils Rs 3,300 cr plan for naxal districts- PTI, Nov 26, 2010,
Govt unveils Rs 3,300 cr plan for naxal districts
PTI, Nov 26, 2010, 07.30pm IST
(I WISH IT SHOULDN'T GET SYPHONED BY CORRUPT PEOPLE AND CHANGE IT INTO ANOTHER BIG SCAM!!!I WISH THINGS EVOLVE IN RIGHT DIRECTION!!! ....VIBHA)
NEW DELHI: With an aim of tackling naxalism through development, the government has unveiled a special Rs 3300 crore action plan in 60 affected tribal and backward districts across nine states.
The Integrated Action Plan (IAP) is intended to provide immediate redressal to problems of the people in tribal and backward districts in the sector like healthcare, drinking water, education and roads.
The IAP would be given as an additional central assistance scheme on 100 per cent grant basis to be implemented in two years, Home Minister P Chidambaram said about the decision taken at the meeting of Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs held last evening.
"In the current year (2010-11), a block grant of Rs 25 crore will be made available to each of the 60 districts for which the schemes will be decided by a committee headed by the distrcit collector with district SP and district forest officer as members," Chidambaram said here.
The projects would have to be completed by March in a "concrete" and "visible" manner, he said.
The works would be taken up by district collectors by December 1, he said, adding the block amount of Rs 25 crore will have to be utilised in the remaining four months of the current fiscal.
Elaborating on the action plan, he said the grant would be utilised by a committee headed by district collectors of the state to undertake doable projects like construction of link roads, Panchayat Ghar (office building) etc.
The government, he added, proposes to call a meeting of the collectors of the 60 districts shortly to apprise them about the scheme and also the urgency to complete projects within the stipulated time frame.
During the financial year 2011-12, the block grant will be raised to Rs 30 crore per district and it will be reviewed for implementation in the 12th Plan at a later stage.
"Construction of roads and schools and proper implementation of public distribution system will take place in all these Maoist-hit areas," Chidambaram said.
PTI, Nov 26, 2010, 07.30pm IST
(I WISH IT SHOULDN'T GET SYPHONED BY CORRUPT PEOPLE AND CHANGE IT INTO ANOTHER BIG SCAM!!!I WISH THINGS EVOLVE IN RIGHT DIRECTION!!! ....VIBHA)
NEW DELHI: With an aim of tackling naxalism through development, the government has unveiled a special Rs 3300 crore action plan in 60 affected tribal and backward districts across nine states.
The Integrated Action Plan (IAP) is intended to provide immediate redressal to problems of the people in tribal and backward districts in the sector like healthcare, drinking water, education and roads.
The IAP would be given as an additional central assistance scheme on 100 per cent grant basis to be implemented in two years, Home Minister P Chidambaram said about the decision taken at the meeting of Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs held last evening.
"In the current year (2010-11), a block grant of Rs 25 crore will be made available to each of the 60 districts for which the schemes will be decided by a committee headed by the distrcit collector with district SP and district forest officer as members," Chidambaram said here.
The projects would have to be completed by March in a "concrete" and "visible" manner, he said.
The works would be taken up by district collectors by December 1, he said, adding the block amount of Rs 25 crore will have to be utilised in the remaining four months of the current fiscal.
Elaborating on the action plan, he said the grant would be utilised by a committee headed by district collectors of the state to undertake doable projects like construction of link roads, Panchayat Ghar (office building) etc.
The government, he added, proposes to call a meeting of the collectors of the 60 districts shortly to apprise them about the scheme and also the urgency to complete projects within the stipulated time frame.
During the financial year 2011-12, the block grant will be raised to Rs 30 crore per district and it will be reviewed for implementation in the 12th Plan at a later stage.
"Construction of roads and schools and proper implementation of public distribution system will take place in all these Maoist-hit areas," Chidambaram said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
