Post Truth or "Chunavi Joomla"? - UID / "Aadhaar" Robust says Minister

In the interview to 'The Hindu' published today, Shri. Ravi Shankar Prasad, minister for IT, said many things, all of which fall under the category of "post truth" a modern euphemism for blunt lies, or if one wants to "make in India", it is "Chunavi Joomla". 

The honorable minister claims that "Aadhaar" has saved Rs. 49,000/- under various schemes pluggig "leakages". 

The entire interview responses are a tissue of lies, haf-truths and brazen lies. 

Take the word "leakages" for instance. Why term theft of subsidies as "leakages"? It is just to avoid investigation into theft. If such huge sums of subsidies or subsidiesed goods are stolen, that would call for an investigation. Calling it "leakages" absolves the government of the responsibility to investigate. 

Without investigating how the crime of subsidy theft is committed, how does the government decide that "Aadhaar" is the solution?

Would the minister like to say whether the contracts UIDAI has with Biometric Solution Providers violate Section 29 (2) of the Act ("Aadhaar" Targeted Deliveries Act), since he claims "no core biometric information shall be shared with anyone  for any reason whatsoever"?

Since, Shri Prasad is also a lawyer, can he say that if a law is passed by Parliament, during the pendency of a case in the Supreme Court, wherein the Court has issued interim stay orders directing the government not to make UID / "Aadhaar" mandatory, the government may go ahead and violate the stay orders of the Court?

Shri. Prasad does not explain how his assertions before the 2014 elections that the UID / "Aadhaar" scheme is a threat to national security, since illegal immigrants are getting "Aadhaar cards" have now vanished. If he were honest, he should have explained his before and after (2014) stand, when asked why his government is advocating the scheme he opposed earlier. 

He says in another answer in the interview, "Till date there is no leakage of data from the system. We have blacklisted 34,000 (enrolling) agencies." What were these agencies blacklisted for? (The minister is conveniently silent.) Does he think such ommissions will go unnoticed? Does he not know that many FIRs have been filed for fraudulent enrolments by these agencies? How can he deny knowledge of this? He participated in a panel discussion of 'Headlines Today' TV wherein he congratulated the channel for exposing the frauds in the UID enrollments. Political and ministerial amenisia endangers the Nation. Shri Prasad should refresh his memory and not kowtow to whoever is pushing this nefarious scheme. 

He should explain how PM Modi, who opposed the UID / "Aadhaar" scheme has become its fan. In fact, Modi himself should tell the Nation what made him change. 

Watch the video of the 'U' Turn of Shri Prasad and the PM by following the 'You Tube' link below 

The Sadism of UIDAI

While our honorable Supreme Court is busy setting right the management of cricket in the country, here is the sad story of Manjunath’s long wait for a ration card, yet not received.

This is the real life story of the kind of cruelty that the charlatans masquerading as technology gurus and their political admirers inflict on the hapless poor.

Have you noticed that in spite of the information available about the failure of biometrics from all states, the government (of the party which, opposed it tooth and nail during the and before the 2014 elections) is now implementing it with a vengeance.

What drives such madness?

Marquis de Sade would smile at the ability of some now here who can be more sadistic than he could ever imagine.

If you missed the irony, this is the “inclusive agenda” of those who propagate the UID Scheme.  

 

 

 

Prohibition - The New Fad

It all started with election gimmicks, leading to electoral promises. It is premised on the rather foolish notion that women don't want the husbands to drink and hence parties that subscribe to prohibition will garner women's votes.

Prohibition has never worked anywhere except in fundamentalist religious countries, largely dictatorships of varying kinds. 

USA tried prohibition from 1920 (even amending the Constitution) to 1933 when the amendment was repealed. Prohibition was introduced in USA under pressure from relegious (pietist protestant groups). It was discarded as a result of the realisation that it led to large scale organised crime. (Who has not heard of Al Capone?). In general all types of crimes showed increased rates. Not only there was huge loss of government revenue, but also, additional cost of enforcing prohibition. 

Bismarck said, "Fools learn from experience. I learn from other's experience."

When Indian became independent many states introduced prohibition. It resulted in illicit liquor and deaths due to "hooch tragedies". Already such deaths have occured in Bihar. 

What would one call fools who refuse to learn from their own experiences? 

Instead of prohibition, The Fifth Estate would suggest that government legislate for companies engaged in the liquor business compulsorily set apart a specified sum of money, to be spent as part of their CSR activities in promoting responsible drinking, orgainse family counselling and de-addiction clinics. All liquor bottles may by law ordered to carry pictorial advertisements on the evils of drinking as in the case of ciggarettes.

In this context one may look at the irony of the juxtaposition of two news reports in the same newspaper today. 

'The Hindu' (22 Sep 2016, Bangalore edition) carried a news report on page 7, headlined, "Dance bars without liquor is absurd: Supreme Court"

The link to the article is here.

Just below it was another headline, "Plea in SC for nationwide ban on liquor"  

The link to the second news report is here.

Will good sense prevail?