The national security ramification of this 'annoyance' is now
significant: The President of Russia today is Putin, a former dyed-in-the-wool
KGB officer. Upon Dr. Manmohan Singh's government taking office, Russia called
back it's career diplomat Ambassador in New Delhi and immediately posted as the
new Ambassador a person who was the KGB station chief in New Delhi during the
1970s. In view of Dr.
Albats confirmed revelation, it stands to reason that the new Ambassador would
have known first hand about Sonia's connections with the KGB. He may have in
fact been her "controller". The new
Indian government which is defacto Sonia's, cannot afford to annoy him or even
disregard Russian demands coming from him? They will obviously placate him so
as not to risk exposure. Is this
not a major national security risk and a delicate matter for the nation?
Of course, all Indians would like good normal and healthy relations with
Russia. Who can forget their assistance to us in times of need?
Today's Russia is the residual legatee of that Soviet Union which helped India.
But just because of that, should we tolerate those in our government set up
having clandestine links with a foreign spy agency? In the United States, the
government did not tolerate an American spying for Israel even though the two
countries are as close as any two countries can be. National security and
friendship are as different as chalk and
cheese.
In December 2001, I had filed a Writ Petition in the Delhi High Court with the
photocopies of the KGB documents, and sought a CBI investigation, which the
Vajpayee Government was refusing. Earlier, Minister of State for CBI, Vasundara
Raje [now Rajasthan CM], on my letter dated March 3, 2001, had ordered the CBI
to investigate. But after Sonia Gandhi and her party stalled the proceedings of
Parliament on this issue, the then Prime Minister Vajpayee cancelled
Vasundara's direction to the CBI.
The Delhi High Court issued a direction to the CBI to ascertain from Russia the
truth of my charges. The CBI procrastinated for three years, and finally told
the Court without an FIR registered the Russians will not entertain any such
query. But who stopped the CBI from registering an FIR? The next hearing of the
case is on September 8th.
After Sonia married Rajiv, she went about minting money with scant regard for
Indian laws and treasures. Within a few years the Mainos went from utter
poverty to billionaires. There was no area that was left out for the rip-off.
On November 19, 1974, as fresh entrant to Parliament, I asked the then Prime
Minister Ms. Indira Gandhi on the floor of the House if her daughter-in-law,
Sonia Gandhi was acting
as an insurance agent of a public sector insurance company [Oriental Fire &
Insurance], giving the Prime Minister's official residence as her business
address, and using undue influence to insure all the officers of the PMO while
remaining an Italian citizen [thus violating FERA]? There was uproar in
Parliament, but Mrs. Indira Gandhi had no alternative but to cut her losses.
She made a rare admission that it was so, and that it was by mistake, but that
Sonia had resigned from her insurance agent status [after my question]. But
Sonia was incorrigible. Her contempt for Indian law continued tomanifest.
The Justice A.C. Gupta Commission set up by the Janata Party government in 1977
came out with a voluminous report on the Maruti Company then owned by the
Gandhi family, and has listed eight
violations of FERA, Companies Act, and Foreigners Registration Act by Sonia
Gandhi. She was never prosecuted, but can be still prosecuted because under
Indian law, economic crimes not subject to
the statute of limitation.
In January 1980, Indira Gandhi returned as Prime Minister. The first thing
Sonia did was to enroll herself as a voter. This was a gross violation of the
law, enough to cause cancellation of her visa [since she was admittedly an
Italian citizen then]. There was some hullabaloo in the press about it, so the
Delhi Chief Electoral Officer got her name deleted in 1982. But in January
1983, she again enrolled herself as a voter! Such is her revealed disdain for
Indian laws and that is her mindset even today.
The bottom line observed in Sonia's mindset is that she can always run back to
Italy if she becomes vulnerable at anytime. In Peru, President Fujimori who all
along claimed to be "born Peruvian",
faced with a corruption charge fled to Japan with his loot and reclaimed his
Japanese citizenship.
In 1977, when the Janata Party defeated the Congress at the polls, and formed
the government, Sonia with her two children, abandoned Indira Gandhi and ran to
the Italian Embassy in New Delhi and hid
there. Rajiv Gandhi was a government servant then [as an Indian Airlines
pilot], but he too tagged along and hid in that foreign embassy ! Such was her
baneful influence on him. Rajiv did snap out
Sonia's influence after 1989, but alas he was assassinated before he could
rectify it. Those close to Rajiv knew that he was planning set things right
about Sonia after the 1991 elections. She did too know
of it because he had told her. Ever wonder why Sonia's closest advisers are
those whom Rajiv literally hated? Ambika Soni is one such name. Ever wonder why
she asked the President of India to set
aside, on a mercy petition, the Supreme Court judgment directing that Rajiv
Gandhi's LTTE killers be hanged to death, when she was not similarly moved for
Satwant Singh who killed Indira Gandhi or
recently for Dhanajoy Chattopadhyaya? The explanation for this special
consideration for the LTTE lies in what Rajiv had told her in 1990.
Those who have no love for India will not hesitate to plunder her treasures.
Mohammed Ghori, Nadir Shah, and the British scum in the East India Company made
no secret of it. But Sonia Gandhi has been
more discreet, but as greedy, in her looting of Indian treasures. When Indira
Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi were Prime Ministers, not a day passed when the PM's
security did not go to the New Delhi, or
Chennai international airport to send crates and crates unchecked by customs to
Rome. Air India and Alitalia were the carriers. Mr. Arjun Singh first as CM,
later as Union Minister in charge of Culture was
her hatchet man. Indian temple sculpture of gods and goddesses, antiques,
pichwai paintings, shatoosh shawls, coins, and you name it, were transported to
Italy to be first displayed in two shops owned by her sister [i.e., Anuskha
alias Alessandra]. These shops located in blue-collar areas of Rivolta [shop
name: Etnica] and Orbassano [shop name:Ganpati] did little business because
which blue collar Italian wants Indian antiques? The shops were to make false
bills, and thereafter these treasures were taken to London for auction by
Sotheby's and Christies. Some of this ill-gotten money from auction went into
Rahul Gandhi's National Westminister Bank and Hongkong & Shanghai Bank,
London accounts, but most of it found it's way into the Gandhi family account
in the Bank of America in Cayman Islands.
Rahul's expenses and tuition fees for the one-year he was at Harvard, was paid
from the Cayman Island account. What kind of people are these Gandhi-Mainos
that bite the very hand of Bharat Mata that fed them and gave them a good life?
How can the nation trust such greedy thieves?
Since I failed to persuade the Vajpayee government to defend India's treasures
from plunder by the Mainos, I approached the Delhi High Court in a PIL. The
first Bench of the court issued notice to the
Government, but since the Indian government dragged it's feet, the Court
directed the CBI to seek Interpol's and Italian government's help. The Italian
government justifiably asked for a Letter Rogatory
for which a FIR is a pre-requisite. But the Interpol did oblige and submitted
two voluminous reports, which the Court directed the CBI to hand over to me.
But CBI has refused, and has claimed privilege!
The CBI has also been caught lying in court by telling the judges that
Alessandra Maino is a name of a man, and Via Bellini 14, Orbassano is a name of
a village [not the street address of the Maino's residence]. Although the CBI
counsel had to apologise to the court stating he made a mistake, he has been
promoted to Additional Solicitor General by the new government! The
Vajpayee-Sonia mutual assistance pact is in full view. The case now comes up on
September 8th. But the most sinister aspect of Sonia Gandhi's character is her
connection with terrorists. I am still working on it, but she has had long
connection with the Habash group of Palestinian, and has funded Palestinian
families that lost their kith and kin in a suicide bombing or hijacking episode.
This, Rajiv Gandhi himself told me and was confirmed to me [the funding] by
Yassir Arafat when I met him in Tunis on October 17, 1990 at the request of
Rajiv Gandhi. Rajiv Gandhi and I were good friends from 1978, but became very
close buddies after V.P. Singh had betrayed him in 1987. We met practically
every day, mostly in the early hours from 1AM to 4AM. It was at my suggestion
that he made Chandrashekhar the PM. And contrary to public impression, he was
not mainly responsible for the fall of Chandrashekar government in which I was
a Minister.
Besides the Palestinian extremists, the Maino family have had extensive
business dealings with Saddam Hussein, and surprisingly with the LTTE
["the Tamil Tigers"] since 1984. Sonia's mother Paola
Predebon Maino, and businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi were the main contacts with
the Tigers. The mother used the LTTE for money laundering and Quattrocchi for
selling weapons to earn commissions.
Sonia's conduit to the LTTE has been and is through Arjun Singh who uses
Bangalore as the nodal point for contact.
There is a string of circumstantial evidence pointing to the prima facie
possibility that the Maino family may have contracted the LTTE to kill Rajiv
Gandhi. The family may have assured the LTTE that nothing would happen to them
because they would ensure it is blamed on the Sikhs or the evidence so much
fudged that no court would convict them. But D.R. Karthikeyan of the CBI who
led the SIT
investigation got the support of Narasimha Rao and cracked the case, and got
the LTTE convicted in the trial court, and which conviction was upheld in the
Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment