What Modi said in

his letter to EC

Let there be a response from those who

are calling Modi as killer
90,000 of innocent citizens and security
personnel in the last 17 years to terror. In
the last four years, in India 5,619 innocents
have been killed by the muslim terrorists. In
Gujarat only one life has been lost in the last
four years through Islamic terror
Times of India has generated controversy in the whole nation.
Television Channels and News Papers have made comments to
the effect that Modi has stated that 'Sohrabuddin got what he
deserved', where as as per the video CD nothing like that was
said. The ownership of Times of India and other media explains
the control of media in India by the christian foreigners. The
result of what the idiot Haji Vajpayee, who increased the Hajj
subsidy of muslims by 16 times has resulted in the foreign
christian missionary ownership of Indian media.

Now it is necessary to look at the Times

Groups in India and its ownership. Times
Group is owned by Bennet & Coleman.
"World Christian Council" does 80 percent
of the Funding, and an Englishman and an
Italian equally share balance 20 percent.
The Italian Robertio Mindo is a close relative
of Sonia Gandhi. The group has the
following publications.
Times Of India,
Mid-Day,
Nav-Bharth Times,
Stardust,
Femina,
Vijaya Times,
Vijaya Karnataka,
Times now (24- hour news channel)
and many more.
Imagine it was the fool Vajpayee who had thrown open the vital
print media up to 26% to foreign ownership and control. The
decision to amend the cabinet resolution of 1955 prohibiting
foreign ownership of the print media has been taken despite
widespread opposition to the move from political parties,
professional media organisations and public opinion. Vajpayee
is no only was a fool but was being controlled by Sonia Gandhi
through Brajesh Mishra, with the result that at the end of the
day all Indian media is effectively being controlled by Christian
missionaries

FROM THE OWNERSHIP OF MEDIA WE CAN UNDERSTAND

WHY THE CHRISTIANS IN INDIA ARE VERY DANGEROUS TO
THE IDEA OF INDIA

NDTV: A very popular TV news media is funded by Gospels of

Charity in Spain. It supports Communism. Recently it has
developed a soft corner towards Pakistan because Pakistan
President has allowed only this channel to be aired in Pakistan.
Indian CEO Prannoy Roy is co-brother of Prakash Karat,
General Secretary of Communist party of India. India Today
was bought by NDTV and is a Hindu bashing set up. Hindustan
Times: was of Birla Group, but hands have changed since
Shobana Bhartiya took over. Presently it is working in
Collobration with Times Group.

CNN-IBN: This is 100 percent funded by Southern Baptist

Church with its branches in all over the world with HQ in US.
The Church annually allocates $800 million for promotion of its
channel. Its Indian head is Rajdeep Sardesai and his wife
Sagarika Ghosh.

Star TV: It is run by an Australian, who is supported by St.

Peters Pontificial Church Melbourne.

The Hindu: English daily, started over 125 years has been taken
over by Joshua Society, Berne, Switzerland.

The Indian Express: Acts Ministries has major stake in the

Indian Express

The new Indian Express (southern edition) is still with the Indian
counterpart.

Eeenadu: Still to date controlled by an Indian named Ramoji

Rao.

Andhra Jyothi: The Muslim party of Hyderabad known as MIM

along with a Congress Minister has purchased this Telgu daily
very recently.

The Statesman: It is controlled by Communist Party of India.

Kairal TV: It is controlled by Communist party of India (Marxist)

Mathrubhoomi: Leaders of Muslim League and Communist

leaders have major investment.

Asian Age and Deccan Chronicle: Is owned by a Saudi Arabian

Company with its chief Editor Mohammed Jalaluddin Akbar or
M.J. Akbar.

What Modi said in his letter to

EC
December 08, 2007

Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi [Images] on Saturday

replied to the notice issued to him by the Election Commission
over his remarks about the Sohrabuddin encounter killing case.
Here is the transcript of the letter.

Sir,
I am in receipt of your notice dated 6th December 2007 wherein
on the basis of the media reports and a complaint dated 5th
December 2007 filed by Teesta Setalvad,

I am alleged to have made an open exhortation to violence and

misused of religion for political ends. The Election Commission
has further stated that by linking the name of Sohrabuddin to
terrorism in my speech amounts to indulging in activity which
may aggravate existing differences, creating mutual hatred and
causing tension between different communities. I deny this
charge in its entirety.

1. The Commission has acted on the basis of a complaint which

alleges that my stand is contrary to what the State of Gujarat
has stated in its affidavit before the Supreme Court. The basis
of the complaint appears to be a report dated 5th December
2007 of the Times of India by one Shri Prashant Dayal. The
relevant extract in the Times of India reads as under:

Modi. ‘you tell what should be done to Sohrabuddin?’

People at the rally: Kill him, kill him.
Modi: ‘Well, that is what I did. And I did what was necessary’

The last sentence of the report of the Times of India has

generated controversy in the whole nation. Television Channels
and News Papers have made comments to the effect that I have
stated that 'Sohrabuddin got what he deserved', or that 'it is a
confessional statement by me' or that 'Modi has justified a
murder'. All other news papers cuttings which the Commission
has taken into account are dated 6th December 2007, which do
not report my speech delivered on 4th December, 2007 but are
comments inspired by false imputation in the Times of India.
This last sentence is not reflected in the CD as having been
used by me.

2. 'The Statesman' dated 6th December 2007 quoted me as

having said "he (Sohrabuddin) has got what he deserved": The
Hindustan Times of 6th December quoted me as saying "Well
then, that's it." I had on 6th December 2007, immediately after
receiving Election Commission's notice requested that I may be
supplied copy of the CD of the speech and also various inputs
which have influenced the issuance of the notice. I have since
received the copy of CD on the evening of 7th December 2007
at 5.45 p.m. I find none of the above statements are contained
in my speech as recorded in the CD. The E.C. notice is issued
on the basis of unverified and false media reports.

3 As I am also involved in a campaign I am sending this as a

preliminary reply, which I am sure would satisfy the Election
Commission with regard to the contents of my speech. Before I
answer specifics raised in the notice and the complaint, I wish
to state that India is governed by Rule of law and Constitution. I
am entitled to my right of free speech. Free and fair election
involves a debate on the political issues in the market place of
politics. When statements are made by political opponents,
others are entitled to reply to them. The tone and content of the
statement must necessarily adhere to the Model Code of
Conduct. I wish to categorically state that I regard the Election
Commission as a constitutional authority under an obligation to
ensure free and fair election which will also defend my right of
free speech against those who have started hate campaign
against me.
4. On 1st December 2007, AICC President Mrs. Sonia Gandhi
[Images] visited Gujarat and referred to me by
suggesting those who are ruling Gujarat are "liars,
dishonest and merchants of fear and death (Maut-ke-
Soudagar) ." On 3rd December 2007, AICC General
Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh visited Gujarat and
referred to it as a State which has unleashed "Hindu
terrorism." The newspapers reported these statements
extensively. Separate complaints with regard to the violation of
the Code of Conduct were sent to the Election Commission by
the Gujarat Unit of BJP. No action has been taken against those
responsible for these statements by the Election Commission. I
am sure the Election Commission would at least now proceed
to take action on those reports.

5. One of the critical issues in our country is the problem of

terrorism. India has lost the lives almost 90,000 of innocent
citizens and security personnel in the last 17 years to terror. In
the last four years, 5,619 innocents have been killed by the
terrorist. The Government of Gujarat has a strong policy
against terrorism. I believe that UPA and Congress party is
indulging in Vote Bank politics and have sent soft signals on
terrorism. My party and I have repeatedly made these charges
against the Congress Party. In Gujarat only one life has been
lost in the last four years through terror. This is a result of our
strong policy against terrorism. The Nation and the people of
Gujarat are entitled to witness a fair debate on terrorism. If any
of the view point is censored or not permitted it will be
interference in the right of free speech. Our Constitution and
the election commission's obligation to conduct free and fair
election will not extend to preventing me from expressing my
strong views against terrorism.

6 My speech, therefore, has to be read entirely in this context. It

was a political response to Mrs. Sonia Gandhi referring to
me as those who rule the Gujarat as a 'Mout-ke-
saudagar'. Surely it cannot be policy of the Election
commission first to ignore the violation of the Code of Conduct
in her statement and then censor my political response to that
statement. I have gone through my speech on the CD supplied.
It is merely a response to Mrs. Sonia Gandhi calling me "Mout-
ka-Saudagar".

7. This part of my speech was entirely against terrorism. I

criticized the Congress President for calling me a 'Maut Ka
Saudagar:. I responded that the "Maut Ka Saudagar" are all
those who attacked parliament. It is the Congress party which
is delaying the execution of the guilty accused. I have made a
reference to the Sohrabuddin's case and mentioned the
allegations against him. I have accused the Congress of
suggesting that I have engineered a fake encounter. I said that I
am open for any action on this count. At no point of time I have
either justified the specific encounter of Sohrabuddin' s case,
nor have I used the specific inculpatery sentences used in the
Times of India Report. It is clear that my comment is a part of
my speech where on several occasions I have put questions to
the audience which the audience has answered. It is my
political response to Smt. Gandhi's allegation that I am
Maut-ka-Sodagar. I have replied back alleging that the
Congress party is helping those who have spread
terrorism in the country. It is clear that Times of
India's article which began this controversy,
invented my comment to the effect "Modi: Well
that is what I did. And I did what was necessary".
The CD clearly indicates that this sentence was
an invention of author and not the orator. The
comments in the media that 'Modi justified murder' or that 'he
made confessional statement' as being privy to murder or that
Modi declared in the meeting that 'Sohrabuddin got what he
deserved' do not find a mention in the CD. These are
journalistic inventions intended to engineer a 'Hate Modi'
campaign and not evidenced in the CD supplied by the Election
Commission. My criticism in the media was concocted and
engineered by this 'Hate Modi' Campaign. No where in my
speech have I explicitly referred to the religion of any person. I
have spoken against terrorism. It is not my speech but the
complaint which assumes terrorism is linked to a religion.

8. Am I to be prevented from giving my point that terrorism will

not be allowed on the soil of Gujarat or that Congress is soft on
the terrors and thereby helping "Maut-ka-Sodagar" If Election
Commission imposes any such regulation, it would offend our
constitutional values and my right of free speech. At no stage I
have controverted the affidavit filed by the Gujarat Government
in the Supreme Court of India. I have already clarified my
position that I do not support fake encounters. Encounters can
occur but there should be no fake encounters. I have nowhere
tried to prejudice any pending litigation. I am fully committed to
the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct by the Election
Commission and shall comply with it. I believe that the Election
Commission should not be misled by motivated media reports
which are based on falsehood.

I, therefore, request the Election Commission to withdraw this

notice.

Now we should know something about Election

Commission and Why Naveen Chawla was
appointed as EC by Sonia

The Election Commission failed initially to issue notices to the

two criminals Sonia Gandhi and Digvijay singh.

Christian Navin Chawla was appointed as Sonia could be jailed

even today for being a voter in India in 1980, while she was a
citizen of Italy. Election Commissioner Navin Chawla’s wife
Rupika Chawla not only helped Sonia, but has even supplied
Indian antiques to Sonia for smuggling in to Italy.
The other major reason is that Navin Chawla will become the
Chief Election Commissioner for the next parliamentary
election and Sonia can manipulate the election then using this
IAS thug of Emergency time.

On 1-8-02, smuggling of India’s antique artifacts by Sonia

Gandhi was brought up in the Indian Parliament by a Samata
Party member. Many Indians have visited Italy and had seen
the shops owned by Sonia Gandhi, alias Antonia Maino. . This
has never been a secret. There is an antique store called
Ganapathi in Orbassano, Italy, Sonia's native place. The shop is
owned by her relatives. Her smuggling activities began during
Indira Gandhi's premiership when Sonia was only Mrs. Rajiv
Gandhi. Sonia Gandhi an illiterate housemaid coming from a
poor Italian mason’s family, money making was the first
criteria, when she married Rajiv. She never had education, but
had herself certified as an art expert, which gave her the
opportunity to certify Indian artifacts, as to which were
museum pieces and which were not. Election Commissioner
Naveen Chawla’s wife Rupika Chawla not only helped Sonia,
but has even supplied Indian antiques to Sonia for smuggling in
to Italy. Sonia was close to Cultural Attaché at the Italian
Embassy and he used to smuggle artifacts via diplomatic
courier bags which escaped customs inspection. This Cultural
Attaché was later withdrawn by the Italian Government.

Narasimha Rao’s time, Sonia would not meet any one but
Rupika Chawla who supplied the Indian antique to Sonia for
smuggling to Italy, was a regular visitor to Sonia. As per
petition filed in the Delhi High Court Rs 10,000 crores worth of
Antiques was smuggled out of India, by Sonia to Italy. Sonia's
umbilical cord is strongly tied to Italy. . Sonia Maino was very
often in touch with Pope John Paul II since she has entered into
Indian Politics. Chawla wrote two books on Mother Teresa and
that is another reason for the elevation of this emergency time
IAS thug. Naveen Chawla, a 1969 batch IAS officer was the
sub-divisional magistrate in Delhi, when Sanjay Gandhi wed
Maneka Anand in 1974 at a civil ceremony held at Sanjay
Gandhi’s real father Mohammad Yunus' residence. Their
association began on that day and continued through the
Emergency, when Chawla was secretary to the Lt Governor of
Delhi Kishan Chand, who later committed suicide. Shah
Commission report, probing the Emergency, indicted Chawla
as one of the four thugs of that time. Chawla, V C Shukla,
Ambika Soni, Jagmohan, Rukhsana Sultana and Jagdish Tytler,
was a part of Sanjay’s inner circle. Sonia Maino Gandhi is
taking Indians for a ride.

Antique smuggling and money laundering by Sonia with LTTE

help was going on since 1984. Boyfriend Quattrocchi, wanted in
Bofors, was buying arms from Phuket, Thailand for LTTE. Rajiv
killing by LTTE if probed further by CBI-led MDMA, of Jain
Commission would have revealed the conspiracy with LTTE in
the assassination of Rajiv killing. Sonia systematically
plundered and exported the ancient treasures of India,
especially temple sculptures of Tamil Nadu, Andhra, Orissa and
Madhya Pradesh, Mughal paintings and precious gems in Indian
Museums, all protected and banned from export under the
Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 and this is one reason
why she is putting Chawla as an EC and christians as IGs in
various states. The CBI had in 1993 registered cases on such
illegal exports from a Chennai suburb to an identified person in
Italy. Festival of India was used as a ploy to smuggle out
treasures. In this Sonia took the help Arjun Singh while he was
MP, CM, art expert Martand Singh, a Pakistani couple Muneer
and Farida Attaullah, London based Pakistani ISI fixer Salman
Thassir, a prince of Kuwait, and even the LTTE.

Pawan Kumar Bansal, Chairman of the committee that probed

the ‘cash-for-question scam’ gave MPLAD money to
Chandigarh Golf Club to become honorary member. Narasimha
Rao, who bribed MPs for votes, introduced the MPLAD fund so
that his colleagues in politics can collect kickback. Karnataka
politicians and the bureaucracy collect 30% of the amount each
and the project will see only 40% of the amount for
implementation. When it comes to Tamil Nadu, ministers ask
the Engineers to collect 5% of the contract amount the instant a
major state contract is awarded. The whole sale theft starts
then. Central ministers setup shell companies in Dubai to
collect bribe for major GOI orders. The four MPs who
demanded the kickback on camera is very recent. But some
MPs have perfected this art to charity donation to the trusted
NGOs. Here the money is donated as charity and the NGO
route it back in kind or black money to the MPs. Chawla and
his wife Rupika Chawla had set up social welfare trusts that
cater to this need of the MPs and have received funds from
congress MPs. Chawla an IAS fellow cannot run such thing, but
got special waiver of rules from the Union Government
pertaining to civil servants

Chawla was appointed as Sonia could be jailed even today if an

EC follows it up

Chawla was appointed as Sonia could be jailed even today for

being a voter in India in 1980, while she was a citizen of Italy if
the EC follows it up. Sonia married Rajiv Gandhi in 1968. But
applied for Indian citizenship 15 years later on 7-4-83 and was
granted it on 30-4-83. The electoral rolls of the New Delhi
constituency were revised in 1980, with January 1 of that year
as the qualifying date Sonia lived in 1, Safdarjung Road and
until then there were four voters there, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv
Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi and Ms Maneka Gandhi. In 1980, there
was an addition to the list - Ms Sonia Gandhi. She was listed as
a voter at serial number 388 in polling station 145 of the
constituency. Yet Sonia Gandhi was not at that time an Indian
citizen, a fundamental qualification for anyone. This was a
blatant violation of rules. The Pioneer dated 11-5-99 reported
this. No wonder that the three crore illegal Bangladeshi
muslims are allowed to vote in India by Sonia overcoming the
Supreme court ruling now. Sonia became a citizen of India only
in 1983. Following an outcry in 1982, Sonia’s name was
deleted only to be reinstated in 1983. But even the
reinstatement is questionable as Sonia was conferred Indian
citizenship by the Government on 30-4-83 and the qualifying
date for registering as a voter was January 1 that year.