"> is it meant that anybody who disagrees is provoking...?!!!
> and one should be worried as the person in question is enforcer at the
> group?
>
> kindly clarify your stand on this.
>
> also, then, should the 'babus' be blamed for not being just,
> transparent,
> unbiased, open, or everything that RTI protects us against?"
No, everybody who disagrees is not provocative. Healthy disagreement is
a good sign of a vibrant democracy. Forums which allow disagreement
and channel/limit it so that this "goodness" flourishes are healthy forums.
I understand this very well S.D.Sharma and PMK also understand this.
On all the "RTI_India" family of egroups - members are free to speak
openly, heatedly, occasionally abusively BUT at the end of the day/
argument we all remain friends and retain a faith/respect for the integrity
of our "opponents".
Unfortunately, there are some (actually many) RTI haramis. They cannot
afford to be on groups like this. They cannot indulge in debate for they are
hollow and (more importantly) plagiarists. They steal ideas and knowledge
from those others who openly share knowledge on these groups and pass
it off as their own and take credit for it.
So if you are an honest, decent, ordinary citizen interested in RTI, good
governance, anti-corruption etc etc I don't think you should have any
worries if SDS, or I on anyone else is an "enforcer". We are like very
honest and fair policemen who keep the streets (groups) free of
badmashes.
For your final query, as SDS has written, there will be attempts to
paint ALL babus as black. This is not correct. We have many honest
public servants for whom RTI, transparency, good governance is equally
in their interests.
If I have left out anything please feel free to post a supplementary.
Sarbajit
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 1:10 PM, nilesh suchdev
<
nilesh.suchdev@gmail.com> wrote:
> dear sarbajit
>
> you have dodged the question very well...
> if that was not the intention, please read my mail again
>
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 8:09 AM, sroy1947 <
sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Nilesh
>>
>> Disagreement is good and encouraged. With regard to the second
>> statement, 'babu's are here to give us government. You can either be
>> "open" or you can have "government". The terms are mutually
>> exclusive. So in that sense RTI is an anti governance law. You are
>> free to disagree.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Dec 18, 1:39 am, nilesh suchdev <
nilesh.such...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > dear sarbajit,
>> >
>> > is it meant that anybody who disagrees is provoking...?!!!
>> > and one should be worried as the person in question is enforcer at the
>> > group?
>> >
>> > kindly clarify your stand on this.
>> >
>> > also, then, should the 'babus' be blamed for not being just,
>> > transparent,
>> > unbiased, open, or everything that RTI protects us against?
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 10:24 PM, sroy1947 <
sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Unfortunately only "eminent" people can be appointed. (At least in
>> > > theory)
>> >
>> > > PS: I wouldn't provoke Mr Sharma if I were you. He is now an enforcer
>> > > at this group (which automatically makes him an enforcer at all the 3
>> > > RTI google groups).
>> >
>> > > Sarbajit
>> >
>> > > Ravindran P M wrote:
>> > > > I do not agree with the proposal to make S N Mishra as CIC. His
>> > > appointment
>> > > > itself was corrupt as documents obtaind by PCRF had revealed.
>> > > > Somebody
>> > > like
>> > > > Krishnaraj Rao from Mumbai or Mahendra Gaur from Jaipur or Urvashi
>> > > > Sharma
>> > > > from Lucknow should be made CIC.
>> >
>> > > > regards n bw
>> >
>> > > > ravi
>> > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 9:41 AM, S.D. Sharma <
anonsha...@yahoo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > Dear frends
>> >
>> > > > > Many thanks are due to Shri P.M.K for making me a moderator of
>> > > > > this
>> > > group
>> > > > > also.
>> >
>> > > > > All decent citizens support and welcome move of Prime Minister
>> > > > > with
>> > > support
>> > > > > of
>> > > > > Leader of Opposition and law Minister to recommend appointment of
>> > > > > Shri
>> > > > > Satya
>> > > > > Nand Mishra as next Chief Information Commissioner.
>> >
>> > > > > He is very honest and upright officer and well respected in
>> > > > > Personnel
>> > > > > Ministry
>> > > > > where he has had long innings as Establishment Officer, Special
>> > > Secretary
>> > > > > and
>> > > > > then as Secretary. He is a Navratan from progressive state of
>> > > > > Odishha
>> > > where
>> > > > > state level RTI is in very bad way.
>> >
>> > > > > There will be lot of pressure on S.N.Mishra from all quarters to
>> > > preside
>> > > > > over
>> > > > > weakening and dilution of the Act. There will be attempts by NGO
>> > > persons
>> > > > > and professional agitator class to attack 'babus' and 'judges' and
>> > > paint
>> > > > > them
>> > > > > all as corrupt and anti transparency. There shall be attempts by
>> > > > > sadak
>> > > chap
>> > > > > people to challenge his appointment by Writ Petition to blackmail
>> > > > > him
>> >
>> > > > > This is the time for all RTI users to publicly support Shri
>> > > > > S.N.Mishra
>> > > > > against
>> > > > > the antiRTI forces.
>> >
>> > > > > I am so grateful to Shri P.M.K who has tasked me with mandate of
>> > > weeding
>> > > > > out all antiRTI forces from Humjanenge group. I beg to assure all
>> > > Honble
>> > > > > members that I shall discharge my duty with utmost devotion,
>> > > > > humility
>> > > and
>> > > > > transparency..
>> >
>> > > > > S D Sharma
>
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.