Date: 28 Apr 2011


PLESAE SPREAD THIS FAR AND WIDE, IN EMAILS, IN SMS, IN WHATEVER COMMUNICATION ONE CAN POSSIBLY DO. \\\\\\\\\\\\ WE EITHER FIGHT OR WE PERISH. ======================================\\\\\\\\\\\\ April 28, 2011 PRESS RELEASE \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ New Delhi, India: Activists and Experts working to address rampant corruption issues in India are extremely concerned on the recent announcements by Government of India to curb freedom of speech and expression. If the recent NY Times article (given below) is an indication, Indians seem to have in store draconian measures similar to that of Emergency without formal declaration of Emergency. What is of deep concern is this announcement came after a meeting of intelligence officials at the home of Union Minister P Chidambaram home and it is mainly geared towards protecting Sonia Gandhi and her family. While international media is taking attention to the fast moving developments in India, we sincerely hope Indian media which withstood the exingencies of the Governance in the past will stand up and expose this assault on freedom of speech of all Indians. \\\\\\\\\\\\ The recent ruling, covered in NY Times Ad is targeted towards internet particularly to stifle the information to the youth who are forefront in the struggle against corruption. If this movement of Government succeeds, India is surely heading towards autocracy bordering on fascism. \\\\\\\\\\\ Truth About India Corruption Email: \\\\\\\\\\\\ NY TIMES AD, April 27, 2011 \\\\\\\\\\\\ >>India Feels a Chill Over New Rules on Web Speech >> >> By Vikas Bajaj >> The New York Times >> Wednesday, April 27, 2011 >>\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> Mumbai -- Free speech advocates and Internet users are protesting new Indian regulations that seek to restrict Web content that, among other things, could be considered "disparaging," "harassing," "blasphemous" or "hateful." >>\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> The new rules [1], issued by the Indian Department of Information Technology this month without much publicity, allow officials and private citizens to demand that Internet sites and service providers remove content that they consider objectionable by drawing from a long list of reasons. >>\\\\\\\\\\\ >> Critics say that the new regulations could severely curtail debate and discussion on the Internet, use of which has been growing quickly in India. The list of objectionable content is sweeping and, for instance, includes anything that "threatens the unity, integrity, defense, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states or public order." >>\\\\\\\\\\\ >> The rules highlight the ambivalence with which Indian officials have long treated freedom of expression. The countryís Constitution allows "reasonable restrictions" on free speech, but lawmakers have periodically stretched that definition to ban books, movies and other material about sensitive subjects like sex, politics and religion.\\\\\\\\\ >> >> An Indian state recently banned a new book [2] by an American author on the Indian freedom fighter Mohandas K. Gandhi [3] that critics have argued disparages the leader by describing his relationship with another man.\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> Fewer than 10 percent of Indians have access to the Internet, but that number has been growing quickly, especially on mobile devices. There are more than 700 million cellphone accounts in India. The country has also established a thriving technology industry that writes software and creates Web services, primarily for Western clients.\\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> Even before the new rules -- known as the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011 -- India has periodically tried to restrict speech on the Internet. In 2009, the government banned a popular and graphic online comic strip, "Savita Bhabhi," about a housewife with an active sex life. Indian officials have also forced social networking sites like Orkut to take down posts that offended ethnic and religious groups.\\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> Using a freedom of information law, the Center for Internet and Society, a Bangalore-based research and advocacy group, recently obtained and published a list of 11 Web sites [4] banned by the Department of Information Technology. Other government agencies have probably blocked more sites, the group said. >>\\\\\\\\\\\ >> The new Internet rules go further than existing Indian laws and restrictions, said Sunil Abraham, the executive director for the Center for Internet and Society. The rules require Internet "intermediaries" -- an all-encompassing group that includes sites like YouTube and Facebook and companies that are host to Web sites or that provide Internet connections -- to respond to any demand to take down offensive content within 36 hours. The rules do not offer a way for content producers to defend their work. >>\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> "These rules overly favor those who want to clamp down on freedom of expression," Mr. Abraham said. "Whenever there are limits of freedom of expression, in order for those limits to be considered constitutionally valid, those limits have to be clear and not be very vague. Many of these rules that seek to place limits are very, very vague." >>\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> An official for the Peopleís Union for Civil Liberties, an advocacy group based in New Delhi, said Wednesday that it was considering a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the new rules. >>\\\\\\\\\\\ >> "What are we, Saudi Arabia?" said Pushkar Raj, the groupís general secretary. "We donít expect this from India. This is something very serious."\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> Gulshan Rai, an official at the Department of Information Technology, did not return calls and messages. >> >> The rules are based on a 2008 information technology law that the Indian Parliament passed shortly after a three-day battle in Mumbai with Pakistan-based terrorists in which more than 160 people were killed. Among other things, that law granted the authorities more expansive powers to monitor electronic communications on national security grounds. It also granted privacy protections to consumers. >>\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> While advocates for free speech and civil liberties have complained that the 2008 law goes too far in violating the rights of Indians, Internet firms have expressed support for it. The law removed liability from Internet intermediaries as long as they were not active participants in creating content that was later deemed to be offensive.\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> Subho Ray, the president of the Internet and Mobile Association of India, which represents companies like Google and eBay, said that change had been a big improvement over a previous law that had been used to hold intermediaries liable for being host to content created by others. In 2004, for instance, the police arrested eBayís top India executive because a user of the companyís Indian auction site had offered to sell a video clip of a teenage couple having sex. >>\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> "The new I.T. Act (2008) is, in fact, a large improvement on the old one," Mr. Ray said in an e-mail response to questions. He said his association had not taken a stance on the new regulations. >>\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> An India-based spokeswoman for Google declined to comment on the new rules, saying the company needed more time to respond. >>\\\\\\\\\\ >> Along with the new content regulations, the government also issued rules <> -- \\\\\\\\\\ >SECRET MEETING DETAILS (Is India Heading for a Dictator Rule)\\\\\\\\\ ---------- IS INDIA HEADING FOR A DICTATOR RULE? \\\\\\\\\ If the sources within the intelligence are believed, it may be true. Very recently, a high level meeting was called at the residence of Union Home Minister P.Chidambaram, which was attended by loyal confidants of Sonia Gandhi which included Digvijay Singh, Ahmed Patel, Jayanth Natarajan, Ambika Soni, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Manish Tiwari , Veerapan moily etc. Surprisingly top officials from IB, NIA, CBI, Cyber Cell, DRI, IT dept and few Media magnets close to congress leaders were invited for the close door meeting. \\\\\\\\\\\\ One officer, who wished not to be named, made some startling revelations about the outcome of the meeting. The High profile people present at the meeting, discussed about 2G Spectrum scam and other scams which is haunting the government from time to time A vitriolic Congress General Secretary Digvijay Singh raised the issue of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi been targeted frequently by many sections of the society terming as unscrupulous forces. In contrast to this the Home Minister quoted "He in is individualy capacity has committed to protect the integrity of Gandhi family and directed the officials present their to deal mercilessly who target their leaders. He instructed the intelligence officials to keep a vigilant track of emails, sms and other modes of communication exchanged between people in India. With a strong worded signal to officials, he directed that if any individual/organization (including religious institutions) are involved in speaking/distributing/propagating which hurts the interest of the Gandhi's, Congress, to a larger extent even to minorities, such people should be fixed in a case where procuring bail is impossible something equating with terrorism case or depending upon the gravity of the issue, (quoting the example of Sadhvi Praga). Manish Tiwari Quickly retorted and reminded the officials about their predecessor who was sacked after UPA came into Power. The sacked official was instrumental in stalling Mrs. Gandhi from becoming the Prime Minister of India who had presented certain confidential documents before former President of India. Dr.APJ Abdul Kalam \\\\\\\\\\ Digvijay Singh demanded a really stringent tough law to tackle people who would even dare to speak against Sonia, Rahul or Priyanka, something on the lines of martial law, which other leaders did not react. Subsequently, Jayanthi Natarajan, was satisified with the decision taken by the Home Ministers direction. Few Media barons present at meeting pledged to extend all help in every manner. \\\\\\\\\\ The Officer stated, that all this officials are helpless and are forced to doing something which they do not like, they become scapegoats in the eyes of people and media by the act of this beasts. He further quoted that few opposition leaders are also bought by congress leaders to suppress them from speaking anything against Rahul and Soniaji. One name which is popularly doing rounds is that of Ranjan Bhatacharya who plays a mediator role between Congress and BJP leaders. It is at his disposal, he fixes meetings between them at some undisclosed places. \\\\\\\\\\\\ ---------------- I am sure many would agree with me that the above outcome of the meeting clearly signifies a Dictator rule for the blank future of India. Are Gandhi family above the Law in India, it definitely seems so, we have a weak judiciary which is scared to prosecute them in even Multi billion dollar corruption scam. \\\\\\\\\\\\ If we do not protest or challenge the same, our Country will turn into another Afghanistan, Libya, with atrocity on streets of India by the so called leaders. \\\\\\ Only the Judiciary and the Defence Personnel can save the country from the clutches of this Greedy politicians of our country. \\\\\\\\\\ We have made a big mistake by extending our faith in BJP, which in course of time has proved to be a frontier organization of the Congress.\\\\\\\\\\ Wikileaks rightly proved about Arun Jaitley "Who admitted that Hindutva is just a political issue" on similar lines of minorities are just vote bank for congress.\\\\\\\ Think before it is too late, I am forwarding this message to all Indians, I am sure, you too would do in the interest of FREE DEMOCRATIC BHARAT. \\\\\\\\ JAI HIND. Retired Intelligence Officer \\\\\\\\\\ NEW GOVERNMENT RULES CURBING FREEDOM OF SPEECH\\\\\\\\\\ See link below:\\\\\\\\ =========================== 000000000