and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)
2010-04-27 07:21:59 UTC
Political espionage
Editorial
The Pioneer
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Congress resorts to dirty tricks
The Union Minister for Home Affairs is right when he says that the
National Technical Research Organisation, better known as NTRO, is an
authorised "technical organisation" of the Government of India which
was set up on the basis of a Group of Ministers' recommendation. But
what he has left unsaid in his statement in the Lok Sabha needs to be
stated unambiguously: The NTRO was set up to provide real-time,
actionable 'techint' -- or technical intelligence -- to deal with
terrorism, organised crime and similar grave offences that impinge on
national security. At no stage was the NTRO conceived as an
instrument of the state to snoop on politicians or individuals to
gather political intelligence or information that could compromise a
person's privacy and liberty. Yet, this is precisely what the NTRO
stands accused of today with damning details surfacing in the media
about how its state-of-the-art equipment, mounted on roving vehicles,
has been used to tap and tape telephone conversations of senior
politicians, including CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat, Bihar
Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, NCP leader Sharad Pawar and, amazingly,
Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh. The tapping of telephones,
it has been revealed, is not of recent vintage, but has been going on
since the Congress-led UPA Government came to power. It is anybody's
guess as to how many politicians' telephone conversations have been
thus taped. Mr P Chidambaram has sought to gloss over the charges
levelled by a justifiably incandescent Opposition, but that does not
necessarily put a lid on the scandal.
Given the Congress's penchant for misusing agencies of the state for
political purposes and the party's long tradition of seeking to
weaken the Opposition by resorting to dirty tricks, among them the
tapping of telephones, and gathering 'political intelligence' through
various means, including deploying IB agents for the task, it is not
entirely surprising that the NTRO and its snooping devices should
have been used in such a manner. What strengthens this perception is
Mr Chidambaram's assertion that "no telephone tapping or
eavesdropping on political leaders was authorised by the Government".
He has, interestingly, not denied that telephone tapping and
eavesdropping have taken place, which would mean they have been done
without Government's authorisation. Are we then to assume that the
directive came from somewhere else, an authority that wields greater
clout and more power than even the Prime Minister without formally
being a part of the Government which Mr Manmohan Singh heads and were
issued to NTRO spooks directly? In which event, the nation has the
right to know who issued the directive. Was it done bypassing those
authorised to sanction tapping of telephones and those who are
charged with oversight of electronic snooping? Or was an intermediary
used?
The law governing tapping of telephones is quite strict in this
country with adequate oversight provisions, as it should be in a
democracy. The problem, however, is not with the law but its gross
violation. In any other democracy if such shocking details of abuse
of state power by the ruling party were to come to light, the
Government would have been teetering by now. Tragically, in this
wondrous land of ours, the Government will just brazen it out.
Meanwhile, as NTRO occupies itself with picking up political chatter,
the chatter of terrorists will go untapped. Little wonder that we are
starved of real-time, actionable intelligence.
http://dailypioneer.com/251907/Political-espionage.html
More at:
http://www.dailypioneer.com
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
Editorial
The Pioneer
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Congress resorts to dirty tricks
The Union Minister for Home Affairs is right when he says that the
National Technical Research Organisation, better known as NTRO, is an
authorised "technical organisation" of the Government of India which
was set up on the basis of a Group of Ministers' recommendation. But
what he has left unsaid in his statement in the Lok Sabha needs to be
stated unambiguously: The NTRO was set up to provide real-time,
actionable 'techint' -- or technical intelligence -- to deal with
terrorism, organised crime and similar grave offences that impinge on
national security. At no stage was the NTRO conceived as an
instrument of the state to snoop on politicians or individuals to
gather political intelligence or information that could compromise a
person's privacy and liberty. Yet, this is precisely what the NTRO
stands accused of today with damning details surfacing in the media
about how its state-of-the-art equipment, mounted on roving vehicles,
has been used to tap and tape telephone conversations of senior
politicians, including CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat, Bihar
Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, NCP leader Sharad Pawar and, amazingly,
Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh. The tapping of telephones,
it has been revealed, is not of recent vintage, but has been going on
since the Congress-led UPA Government came to power. It is anybody's
guess as to how many politicians' telephone conversations have been
thus taped. Mr P Chidambaram has sought to gloss over the charges
levelled by a justifiably incandescent Opposition, but that does not
necessarily put a lid on the scandal.
Given the Congress's penchant for misusing agencies of the state for
political purposes and the party's long tradition of seeking to
weaken the Opposition by resorting to dirty tricks, among them the
tapping of telephones, and gathering 'political intelligence' through
various means, including deploying IB agents for the task, it is not
entirely surprising that the NTRO and its snooping devices should
have been used in such a manner. What strengthens this perception is
Mr Chidambaram's assertion that "no telephone tapping or
eavesdropping on political leaders was authorised by the Government".
He has, interestingly, not denied that telephone tapping and
eavesdropping have taken place, which would mean they have been done
without Government's authorisation. Are we then to assume that the
directive came from somewhere else, an authority that wields greater
clout and more power than even the Prime Minister without formally
being a part of the Government which Mr Manmohan Singh heads and were
issued to NTRO spooks directly? In which event, the nation has the
right to know who issued the directive. Was it done bypassing those
authorised to sanction tapping of telephones and those who are
charged with oversight of electronic snooping? Or was an intermediary
used?
The law governing tapping of telephones is quite strict in this
country with adequate oversight provisions, as it should be in a
democracy. The problem, however, is not with the law but its gross
violation. In any other democracy if such shocking details of abuse
of state power by the ruling party were to come to light, the
Government would have been teetering by now. Tragically, in this
wondrous land of ours, the Government will just brazen it out.
Meanwhile, as NTRO occupies itself with picking up political chatter,
the chatter of terrorists will go untapped. Little wonder that we are
starved of real-time, actionable intelligence.
http://dailypioneer.com/251907/Political-espionage.html
More at:
http://www.dailypioneer.com
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.