• Media repeated UPA's claims that UPA merely followed NDA's policy of "First-Come-First-Served". Most talking heads on TV conveniently forgot to ask Kapil Sibal & other defenders of UPA a simple question as to who forced UPA to follow NDA's policy to begin with?
  
• What Aam Admi has never been told is that NDA defined "First-Come-First-Served" based on the date of filing an application. A Raja, with covert or overt approval of the cabinet changed the working definition of "First-Come-First-Served" to mean date of fulfilling ALL (rigged) requirements. Sometimes these requirements were not even known to the interested parties until AFTER the fact. This resulted in some favored applicants of 2007-2008 being placed ahead of those whose applications were submitted years in advance! But, did you hear that from the media in the past 4 years?
  
• At the time of spectrum allotment, some of these applicants were not even registered as Telecom Operators with the Telecom Department (a per-requisite) & hence were not qualified to even submit applications for allocation of spectrum! But, you did not hear that from the media!
  
• During the allocation of 1st generation licenses in 2001 by NDA, there were only 40 lakh mobile phone users and enough bandwidth available for everyone who wanted to offer mobile services. In 2007-2008, on the other hand, the market had increased about 90 fold (yes, to 35 crore users) AND was growing at 10% per MONTH (this is NOT a typo). Not a single TV commentator pointed out these facts to the Aam Admi they are supposed to be serving. Now, let's look at these facts in simple terms. If you have 10 toys & 4 kids, "First-Come-First-Served" works and there is no need for an auction. However, if you have 10 toys and 350 kids, you do not need a Nobel Laureate in Economics to tell you that "First-Come-First-Served" is NOT the appropriate mechanism. When it comes to a scarce national resource, the only way to address such issue is through an impartial auction. But you never heard these details from the media, did you?
  
• We also heard ridiculous claims on CNN-IBN that the fact that ALL 122 licenses were canceled (along with the false presumption of UPA having followed NDA's "First-Come-First-Served" policy) implies that the Supreme Court Judgement speaks against NDA's policy more than against UPA. Such blatant obfuscation of facts is, in fact, done at the behest of their masters in power. Kapil Sibal went so far as to suggest that NDA / BJP should apologize to the nation. These monkeys forgot to mention that NONE of the licenses alloted during NDA regime using the then current definition of "First-Come-First-Served" have been canceled by the Supreme Court.
  
• Some media folks tried their hand at fear mongering indicating that the rates for cell phone calls will go up significantly now that service providers have to pay much higher fees to purchase the canceled licenses in an open auction. They conveniently forgot that canceled licenses represent only 5% of 2G bandwidth & hence cannot have a significant impact on the existing pricing models.

• Fraud was committed,
• Cabinet had authorized Telecom & Finance ministers together to decide the pricing policy,
• The Finance ministry had expressed serious doubts (in writing) about the pricing policy before the issuance of licenses and
• The Finance Minister later agreed with the decisions made by A Raja

• Neither human-chauvinist - since it does not believe that human beings alone can reach heaven - after all a dog or a tree or a river do not know who any of our GODs are and yet keep giving without expecting anything in return and without asking what our religion is,
• Nor religion-chauvinist - since it does not believe that only Hindus can reach heaven,
• Nor male-chauvinist - since it does not believe only in the male incarnation of GOD.

• There are many ways to reach GOD and achieve enlightenment,
• My way can be as good for me as yours can be for you, and
• God is an immortal personal relationship within each of us rather than another single human being outside of us (and exclusive to only a select few).

• How will professed issues that matter to him & his supporters be resolved by joining Congress?
• Will Congress suddenly be the "secular" party & BJP the "communal" one if he joins Congress?
• Will he forget the "Nation First, Party Second & Self Last"motto and follow the "Dynasty First, Self Second and Nation Last" mantra from now on?
• Will everything he believed in and lived for all these decades suddenly become irrelevant in the pursuit of short-lived ego boost of a chair in Delhi?

• "There is little doubt Sir of your personal integrity,"

  Such declarative sentences assume a false definition of "personal integrity". Wikipedia says this about "integrity" - "Integrity is a concept of consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcomes." To me, "personal integrity" then adds a "personal" aspect to integrity depending on the roles that the "person" plays (of a parent, a friend, a professional etc.). Hence the criteria for "personal integrity" of a powerless citizen are different from the criterial for "personal integrity" of a leader, let alone the Prime Minister of a billion plus population. While being honest and non-corrupt may be necessary and sufficient for the personal integrity of an individual, they are hopelessly insufficient qualities for a Prime Minister, the leader of a cabinet, who lets others engage in Unprecedented Plundering of Assets (UPA) in magnitudes never heard of before and fails to act proactively even when he becomes aware of such activities harmful to the nation.

• "... may I ask that if the CBI had been investigating a Congress minister and not an ally like A Raja of the DMK, would you have shown the same leniency?".

  This implies that Manmohan Singh has been tough on Ministers of his own party. Really? Which party does Suresh Kalmadi (of CWG fame) belong to? Which party do some other "15% cut" ATMs belong to? Besides, "integrity" requires "consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcomes" as seen above. So, how can a person who (presumably) treats a DMK minister differently than a Congress minister be an apostle of "integrity"? You are proving your own claim of Manmohan Singh's integrity as false with your own claim of party-based leniency!

• "When you became prime minister, we rejoiced in the belief that at last we had found a leader we could identify with, someone who wasn't a spoilt dynast, but a genuine representative of the great Indian middle class dream.".

  Really? What do you mean by "at last"? What about PV Narsinha Rao & Atal Bihari Vajpayee? Were they not genuine representatives of the middle class without having been born in the Gandhi family? Or do you prefer not to mention PVN Rao since he did not let the authority of the Prime Minister's office be subverted by Sonia Gandhi & Atalji because he belongs to BJP?

• "The average Indian citizen is not interested in knowing who is more corrupt - the Congress-NCP government in Maharashtra or the BJP government in Karnataka."

  Really? Why not? I am not defending corruption anywhere by anyone in any shape or form. However, since corruption cannot be wiped out overnight, the average Indian citizen DOES need to know who is less corrupt so that we can elect them to power. By repeating this process in each election, corruption can be reduced and eventually eliminated. So, why this vailed attempt of calling all shades of gray black? Is that because you know that this comparison is a no-brainer with Congress Party being the world champions of corruption?

• "Here's a concrete suggestion: why don't you amend the Prevention of Corruption act to ensure that all corruption cases involving public servants, be they officials or politicians, are put on fast track?"

  While you are at it, Rajdeep, why not apply similar standards to corruption in the mainstream media? Why not explain your inexplicable silence and proactive supression of the news for several days when the Radia tapes were leaked? Isn't lack of transparency in the media's dealings with business houses and politicians a form of corruption? After all, corruption need not involve only misuse, abuse and theft of public money. It can and does also involve misuse, abuse and theft of public trust by your ilk in the fourth pillar of democracy, called, the "vibrant media". So, while offering advice to the PM, why not look in the mirror and apply it to yourself? Why not declare the real owners and their stakes in CNN IBN (not just in India but in the parent, sibling and subordinate holding companies abroad), irrespective of whether that is required by Indian laws? Why not explain if & how CNN IBN suppresses comments by its own readership that are critical of views expressed by you? If you are not willing to live by the same standards that you recommend to the Prime Minister, is that not hypocrisy?

• Only Congressmen visit and comment on our website
• Only Congress opponents visit and comment on Hindustan Times
• Hindustan Times added comments critical of my views. Real readers only praise my comments
• Comments on Hindustan Times were manipulated by saffron extremists in an international conspiracy to malign CNN IBN & India
• After the initial comment critical of my article, other readers of Hindustan Times were just "stringing along" the first critique (like Barkha Dutt & Vir Sanghvi were while conversing with Niira Radia)