Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Dear Mr. TATA,
You are becoming annoying now!! Your 7 page reply with attachments from 2002 is Irrelevent and you sound desperate! And your defending a spineless man is even more annoying!
How do u explain this which is on the CAG report!!!
Tata Group is a beneficiary of out-of-turn spectrum. In fact, one of the biggest of them all.
It is a fact admitted by the Government on affidavit that 575 applications were received for 2G spectrum by 01 October, 2007. Using an illegal and arbitrary cutoff date, Mr Raja processed only 122 applications received till 25 September, 2007. 110 were rejected and 343 applications were put in abeyance. Given the fact that there is no 2G spectrum available, these applications received till 01 October, 2007 (within the date represented by the Government) have now been put in the dustbin. In fact, the TRAI had already recommended on 11 May 2010 that no more UASL license with bundled spectrum can be given. This means that these 343 applications will never be processed and will never see spectrum.
In the meantime, 19 days after these 575 applications were received, the dual technology policy was announced through a press release by Mr Raja. The Tatas put in their dual technology applications around 22 October. So, in effect, their application went in three weeks after the 575 2G applications were received.
Today, Tatas already have GSM spectrum allocated and GSM service launched in most of the circles - But the 343 applications submitted three weeks before the Tata Group have neither been processed nor have any chance of ever being processed - so much for First Come, First Serve.
There is nothing more to embarrass the Prime Minister. He has already been too embarrassed by all that has been happening in the 2G front. There is nothing embarrassing to the PM in what Rajeev Chandrashekar has written about. The supreme court's observation on the PM's silence has already done enough embarrassment. More than that the people of this country have asked the PM enough number of questions which had been damn embarrassing - if not for the congress party, at least to a person like the PM's stature.
Everybody is trying to come across as pure, pristine, virgin-like, washed in milk. As soon as that happens, my antennas go up. What can I do - I consider myself a realist, some would say cynical - so I don't buy anyone is washed in milk and squeaky clean (teflon coated may be). Some may be more clean than others (or less dirty than others depending on how you want to look at it) but please don't insult our intelligence by coming across as squeaky clean (with no teflon coating).
Business in India cannot be conducted without greasing .... whether in small quantums or big. All that has happened with time is businesses have become smart in greasing using levels of indirection (middlemen who charge a service fee and do the dirty work) - consultants, lobbyists, PR companies, etc. Keeps our consience clean - we all know what most of the service fee being charged goes for - but like the US military - don't ask/don't tell works.
However, my view is this high corruption for me is less of an issue. It is the small, everyday, low-level, niggling, irritating and de-humanizing corruption faced by the aam-admi (and more so by the really poor workers in the unorganized sector so as to earn enough to eat) that is a major problem. It makes us all less human and lesser as a people and a nation.
Specifically, for Telecom irrespective of all the potential corruption, for the aam-admi it has been a good thing. Who could have imagined the telecom revolution we have gone thru - who could have imagined affordable access to phone to the lowest of the low. The extra money in the government exchequer would have been wasted anyways - may be this money in private hands has produced more benefits for the aam-admi.
INDIAN SCHOOL OF INTERNATIOAL STUDIES
ANNUAL EXAM: November, 2020
How did India become a super power nation from a Kama-Sutra Country?
By / before 16th Century, Indian Kings were busy in coupling by reading Kamasutra, then invaded the Eureopeans and the British to gather the sexually dispersed community as a country.
By 21st Century, Indian politicians and businesses were busy in corrupting, then came Chinese to attack culturally-financially-lignuistically-religiously-regionally-imbalanced-India from North East (by their own), North West (with Pakistan), and South (with Sri Lanka).
However, this time India buckled up forgetting all the differences fought the enemies to death and captured Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and part of China to have become the first super power in Asia.
Spectrum is a scarce natural resource and the best way of alloting it is auction/ tender process. This ensures that national exchequer derives best possible revenue and the bidders whether new players or existing ones get fair chance.Raja had the choice of auction for 2G which would have seen the new players and existing ones like Tata bidding on level playing field. Instead Raja favoured some new entrants by arbitrarily advancing the cust off date for application while Tata and Rel comm got spectrum at 2001 prices in 2008 on basis of so called USL policy which was a charade to sell spectrum at 2001 prices.
Hence Rajiv Chandrashekhar is right that Tata paid only Rs 1651 crore for something which should have costed much more . The loser, the tax payers of India.
Raja's misdeeds were widely known by Jan 2008 still in May 2009 , Mr Tata's advisors were hectically lobbying for Raja to be reappointed as telecom minister. Fact remains that Tata did benefit at the cost of tax payers of India irrespective of whether Rajeev Chandrashekar is BJP agent or not.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT