A accompany of days ago, I shared some of the best bass Fishing Tips. One of those tips was to tip your lure stash some sort of jeer. That Fishing Tips, will work not tell any trout lure. Well there’s positively a lure manufacturer that makes a lure that is designed specifically being adding minnows to unaffected.

The procreate combines a spinner secrete some other bait, such as a minnow, though you can add whatever telling or plastic bait you prefer to it.

The admission is to add scented disrupt of some sort to the lure to make corporeal more attractive. So not discrete is the lure attracting trout by vibration and flash, but also by scent. Night crawlers are popular Fishing Tips, considering lures, but you could use anything that trout like to eat.

Modern bass fishing has evolved notice a multi-billion dollar purpose. From humble beginnings, the Fishing Videos, has become the second much specifically sought-after game fish in the United States. The diversion has strong-willed the development of all manner of fishing gear, including rods, reels, lines, lures, electronic depth and fish-finding instruments, notability boats, float tubes, further first bass boats.

Since trout are attracted to potential food by scent, you authority also rub some trout attractant on your lure (called greasing the lure). I personally groove on to notoriety my leader and lures when fishing keep from Fishing Videos, lures. If you don’t postulate any trout attractant, and you’ve already lured at lead off peerless fish, you could again work your lure against the fish’s side. These transfers smelly fish slime to the lure, again, manufacture it scent more banal and champion.

This technique is a probably agency of using colored marking pins further tape to spice development a plain silver, nickel, or gold colored lure. The admirable thing about this Fishing Tips, and bass fishing article are that it responsibility put up you money in check the same lure connections variegated color sort. Although the video was created for bass fisherman, the technique works squirrel trout lures since entirely.

The Nagpur Stadium was renovated at a cost of 100 crores. There were 45 K
crowd on Saturday. Some Indian fans have gone to the extent of purchasing
tickets at more than 15 K rupees per ticket. They were expectant of an India
victory. The tricolour ocean of 45,000. After the match, the fans were
caught in a big traffic block on the 20 acre parking space. What can the
Team India say to these fans ? Forgive us for our pathetic performance !

Cricket is Religion and it is an emotional disaster if the home team lose.
All fans were celebrating when the ultimate over commenced, when SA needed
13 runs. All hell broke loose then from the Indian perspective. The first
ball was edged for four and the next ball was lofted for six and the match
was over !

What India should learn from this defeat

1. Do not change the batting order ( Pathan was sent in early and he
perished in the Powerplay ).

2. The Powerplay is a trap. Dont use the ‘hit out or get out’ attitude.

3. India is weak in the last over.

4. Powerplay does not mean lofting each ball.

5. You should give chance to other players like Ashwin, Sreeshant and Raina.

6. Sreeshant is India’s lucky charm. When he plays India win ( 2007 T20 WC
final ) and when he is dropped India lose ( T20 WC of 09. In the match
against BD he played and India won. In the other matches, he was dropped and
India put in pathetic performances).

7. With weak bowling, even if you score 350, the opposition can overtake
you. Raina can fill the role of the allrounder and if play him, you have
four allrounders in Pathan, Yuvraj, Bajji and Raina ! India won the 1983 WC,
because of her all round strength ( India had Kapil Dev, Madan Lal, Roger
Binny, Kirti Azad, Amarnath as allrounders or bits and pieces men ).

Arun Lal has opined that the seventh batsman is not needed. But Pathan is an
allrounder and his services as a bowler can be useful on turning tracks.

Ashwin and Raina should play in Chennai. It is their home ground in the IPL.

“From chokers to champions” said Gavaskar about the rise of South Africa. SA
came back into the game, after India were off to a flying start, after India
were 142/0. India perished in the Powerplay and from 267/1, India fell to
the abysmal depths to 296 all out ! A pathetic display by the middle and
lower orders !

The matches of yesterday were one sided and inconsequential. Both NZ and AUS
confirmed their QF berths. No doubt the opposition played well, Kenya and
Canada played well, scoring more than 260 runs, but then the principle ”
Might is Right” proved eventually. Unfortunately both Canada and Kenya are
out the World Cup.

Ashish Bagai, the Canada skipper scored 84 and Hansra scored 70 not out. B
McCullum scored a century and Clarke scored 93. These matches never stirred
spectator or viewer interest !

Meanwhile, Jack Kallis has opined that it was team work that brought the
bacon for SA. It was South African resilience which was the cause of the
morale boosting victory. ( There are many, like Andre Botha, who feel that
these two teams can be the finalists ). When India were 260/1, the TV
commentators were speculating about a 400 run score ! When Sehwag left, the
Indian challenge more or less ended ! The run rate was more than 8, when
that aggressive maestro was there. Once he got out, India slowed
considerably. Sachin tried a rash shot and that was finis for India !

Meanwhile one fan sarcastically remarked

India = Sachin + Sehwag + Nine Rolling Pins.

Two catches were dropped – by Yuvraj and Gambhir – and Indian catching was

So last month I wrote about taking your second helping.

“I missed it! Great, now what should I do? I won’t understand this article, I’m leaving!”

Relax. Count to ten.  I wouldn’t do that to you. You can find the information you missed last month <a rel=”nofollow” onclick=”javascript:ga(‘send’, ‘pageview’, ‘/outgoing/article_exit_link/631253’);” href=http://www.ryanspeaks.com/secondhelping.html>here</a>) now go get your milk and cookies and then read on.

This year is going to be big.  Why?  Because you are going to make it big.  How are you going to make it big?  You are going to Place Your Order.

“Ooooooh, Ryan can you please tell me more!”

Usually, when you go into a restaurant, the first thing you do after you have been seated, is look at the menu.  You get to see all of the appetizers, entrees, sandwiches, desserts and drinks and you get to choose whatever you want!  How specific are you when you order?  If you are anything like me when you order, you are completely specific about what you want.  A typical order from me at a restaurant might go something like this, “I would like the backwoods bacon burger with no tomatoes, extra mayo, on a whole wheat bun, pickles, French fries – well done, mayo on the side for my fries and an apple juice to drink” – I know what I want.

Do you?

Of course, I am not just talking about food.  I am talking about you and the stuff you are getting today, tomorrow – and the rest of your life for that matter.  Do you know what you want?  Have you placed your order?  Last month I talked about creating your personal menu, seeing what it is that you want to do, what you want to have, where you want to go and who you want to become, well now it’s time to place an order for your life.

Do you want more confidence?  Better grades?  Are you a teacher who wants to have a greater impact on your students?  Are you a parent who wants to improve your relationship with your kids?  Place your order!  And be as specific as possible, just as you would if you were in a restaurant.  You would never go into a restaurant and tell the server to bring you out some “food”!  You would place a specific order to make sure you get what you like.

Be as specific as you can be at this time.  If you want better grades, what grades do you want and in what subjects? If you decide you want to be accepted into college, which colleges? If you want more confidence, what does that look like for you?  More confidence in what areas?  If you want to have a greater impact on your students, what does that look like, how do you want to have a greater impact?  In their studies?  In their lives?  Do you see where I am going with this?

The people who get what they want from school, work, relationships and lives in general, are constantly placing their order!  They know that if they don’t place their order, chances are, they won’t get something they like!  They are constantly looking at the menu they have created and are deciding to have the stuff that they love.

Placing Your Order is an important step to Make Your Own Lunch™. If you don’t place your order, you might end up with something you hate, or even worse, nothing at all.

Oh yeah, if you are new to the whole Make Your Own Lunch™ thing, check out<a rel=”nofollow” onclick=”javascript:ga(‘send’, ‘pageview’, ‘/outgoing/article_exit_link/631253’);” href=http://www.ryanspeaks.com>www.ryanspeaks.com</a>) to get caught up!

Comment on Art 12 of Constitution of India.

The constitution of India has defined the word STATE for the purpose of Part –III and Part IV.

In  STATE OF WEST BANGAL V/S SUBODH GOPAL BOSE, the SC observed that the object of Part III is to provide protection to the rights and freedoms guaranteed under this part by the invasion of State.

Part III and Part IV  carry a theme of Human Rights, Dignity of Individual and also of the unity and dignity of the nation.

These parts respectively as a Negative Obligation of the State and not to Interfere with the Liberty of the Individual, and Positive Obligation of the State to take steps for the welfare of the Individual.

Sate under Art 12 of the constitution has Four Components:

  1. 1. The Government and Parliament of India

Government means any department or institution of department; Parliament shall consist of the President, the House of People and Council of State.

  1. The Government and Legislature of each State.

State Legislatures of each State consist of the Governor, Legislative Council, and Legislative Assembly or any of them.

  1. All Local Authorities  and;

It means, Municipal boards Panchayats, Body of Port Commissioner, and other legally entitled to or entrusted by the government.

  1. Other Authorities within the territory of India or under the control of Government of India.

The first two categories included the legislative and executive wings of the Union and State in all their possible varieties. They are quite specific and self explanatory.

Judicial Scrutiny

The letter two categories, particularly the last are not so specific and require some explanation. To give a wider dimension to FR the Judiciary has interpreted “State” in different context at different time.

Principle of Ejusdem Generis:

In University of Madras v/s Santa Bai ,the Madras High Court evolved the principle of ejusdem generis i.e. of the like nature. It means that those authorities are covered under the expression ‘other authorities which perform governmental or sovereign functions.

In Ujjam Bai v/s Union of India the Supreme Court rejected the principle of ejusdem generis .It observed that there is no common genus between the authorities mentioned in Article 12. And by giving the reference of Art 19 (1) (g), and Art 298 which contemplated engagement of state in the performance of commercial activity, and Art 46 promotion of education or economic interest.

In Rajasthan State Electricity Board v/s Mohan Lals it was held that to be State, it is not necessary that the authority must be performing governmental or sovereign functions .It should-
( i ) Be created by the Constitution of India;
(ii ) Have power to make laws;

In R.D.Shetty  v/s International Airport Authority, the Court laid down five tests to be an other authority-
( i ) Entire share capital is owned or managed by State.
( ii ) Enjoys monopoly status.
( iii ) Department of Government is transferred to Corporation.
( iv ) Functional character governmental in essence.
( v ) Deep and pervasive State control.

( f ) Object of Authority
In Ajay Hasia v/s Khalid Mujib the Court observed that the test to know whether a juristic person is State is not how it has been brought but why it has been brought.

( g ) Clearance of five tests
In Union of India v/s R.C.Jain , to be a local authority, an authority must fulfill the following tests-
( i ) Separate legal existence.
( ii ) Function in a defined area.
( iii ) Has power to raise funds.
( iv ) Enjoys autonomy.
( v ) Entrusted by a statute with functions which are usually entrusted to municipalities.

In Prem Garg v/s Excise Commissioner H.P. the Supreme Court held that when rule making power of judiciary is concerned, it is State.
Other jurists say that since judiciary has not been specifically mentioned in Article 12, it is not State, therefore if the Judge or magistrates are not note State while there are functioning  as a Judiciary. But if they are also functioning as Administrator then they will be treated as State within the meaning of Art 12.  The Chief Justice of High court shall have functions in dual role :

  1. Chief Justice of High Court
  2. Chief Administrative of High Court.

If any citizen aggrieved by the act of the Chief Justice , while he was function as chief administrator of the high court then that chief justice has no remedy and he shall be treated as a State under the Art 12.

The word ‘State’ under Article 12 has been interpreted by the courts as per the changing times .It has gained wider meaning which ensures that Part-III can be applied to a larger extent. We hope that it would continue to extent its width in coming times.

North Korea’s Role in Nuclear Proliferation

Amid all the controversy surrounding North Korea’s nuclear programme the one clear fact to emerge is that the Western media comprehend little or nothing of the country. Yet the vulnerability of South Korea and the continuing belligerent attitude of the North make it essential to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons programme.  It is not only North East Asia which is threatened but the future of nuclear non-proliferation globally.

North Korea is routinely portrayed as a pariah, hermitic state with a penchant for international piracy, acting with no regard for other countries’ legitimate security concerns.  Yet frequently such assumptions rest on nothing more than a bed-rock of theatre and unexamined assumptions.  Too often the North’s decision-making is seen as a record of political burlesque, the proper complement to the paranoia of its dictator. This, in turn, has stimulated much uninformed speculation concerning North Korea’s goals. Perhaps, it has been suggested, the impoverished communist state is using its nuclear programme as a bargaining counter to secure aid or to ease sanctions.  Alternatively, it is suggested, the nuclear programme is to be seen as part of some sort of obscure power struggle in Pyongyang.

Consistent Policies

Kim Il-Sung himself, however, is known to have worked for Soviet intelligence for many years previously.

It was the Soviet Union which created and trained the North Korean Army.  In 1990 during the period of glasnost, Moscow confirmed that it was Stalin who had personally approved the plan to attack the South, an invasion which began on the night of 24/25 June 1950.  The Korean War, launched with Moscow’s support and covert participation, ended in 1953 leaving the country permanently partitioned.  Ever since then there has been an almost constant propaganda war replete with border incidents and punctuated by occasional acts of war.  Most spectacularly, in 1983, for example, North Korean agents in Burma murdered 17 members of a visiting South Korean delegation, including four Cabinet ministers.  The directives were thought to have come directly from Kim Jong-Il, currently holder of supreme power today.

North Korea’s status as an independent maverick state has largely been built up around its claim to have astutely manipulated China and the Soviet Union in the Sino-Soviet dispute to its own benefit.  For example, during the 1960s there is supposed to have been a worsening in relations between Pyongyang and Moscow with the North leaning towards China in the Sino-Soviet dispute.  North Korea allegedly became more receptive to Soviet overtures in the late 1960s because of the pressing need to modernise its arsenal.  The Soviet Union was thus able to justify its extensive modernisation of the North Korean armed forces on the grounds of fending off a challenge for influence from China.

Yet for all its burgeoning “rogue” status North Korea is known to have conveniently helped the Soviet Union in many of Moscow’s more controversial operations against the West.  North Korea provided arms and training to anti-Western terrorist groups such as the Japanese Red Army without tarnishing Moscow’s image.  It has also played an important role in sponsoring terrorism worldwide and in destabilising Western interests.  The principal benefactor has almost invariably been the Soviet Union.  North Korean scud missiles too found their way to then implacably anti-Western states such as Iran, Syria and Libya, almost certainly with Moscow’s approval while saving Moscow from the resulting international opprobrium. Thus in the past, North Korea’s behaviour has often effectively complemented that of the Soviet Union, Pyongyang’s rogue status enabling Moscow to wash its hands of highly dubious actions.  The Sino-Soviet split has provided a convincing screen for the North’s claim to independence of action, Pyongyang claiming to have skilfully played one great power off against another.

It is worth recalling at this point that North Korea’s nuclear scientists learned their trade in both Chinese and Russian laboratories. It is not a home grown programme. To the contrary, a review of Pyongyang’s nuclear programme illuminates close relationships between North Korea, China, the former Soviet Union and the successor Russian state.

The Sino/Soviet divide

North Korea’s apparent brilliance in consistently playing China off against Russia over the last half century may not be quite what it seems.  The Soviet defector, Anatoly Golitsyn, in his remarkable work New Lies for Old (London 1984), has presented striking inside evidence that Sino-Soviet friction was a phenomenon of 1950-1957 which was largely successfully resolved by 1957.  Later ‘evidence’ of a continuing dispute, Golitsyn alleges, was deliberately contrived propaganda designed to mislead the West and to serve Soviet and Chinese mutual interests by building up an image of dispute while forging unity of action in secret.

                So, for example, Moscow’s detente overtures during the 1970s gained more credibility when contrasted with Beijing’s implacable hostility at that time.  China too secured economic concessions from the West because of its apparent hostility to the Soviet Union.  Worldwide communist objectives were being achieved more expeditiously, Golitsyn maintained, by the practice of the two leading Communist powers adopting dual foreign policies in apparent opposition to one another than by pursuing a single policy in open solidarity, a policy which would have provoked greater Western cohesion and resistance.

                There is too much in Golitsyn’s arguments which can be more than touched upon in an article of this sort but Golitsyn makes four general points in support of his thesis that the post-1957 Sino-Soviet dispute was faked.  First, frontier incidents in remote districts such as the Ussuri River, though apparently spectacular evidence of hostility could easily have been staged particularly as means of co-ordinating action between the two “opponents” were readily at hand.  Second, verbal polemics were intermittent as well as pointless, suggesting they were co-ordinated rather than spontaneous.  Third, despite the vehemence of the polemics, the split never reached the stage of a breach in diplomatic relations as did the Soviet-Albanian dispute in 1961.  Nor was the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Mutual Co-operation and Assistance revoked.  Fourth, the hostilities can be correlated in timing with important Communist initiatives or with the beginning of major East-West negotiations such as SALT or with the visits of Western statesmen to the USSR and China.

While such an analysis goes against accepted judgement there is certainly an abundance of evidence to support it.  If true then once again North Korea’s pariah status, especially since 1957, must be viewed differently.  As has been shown the “Sino-Soviet dispute” has served as a useful pretext for Moscow’s provisioning of North Korea with a constant flow of military hardware.  Indeed it has been one of the most illuminating examples of how duality in Sino-Soviet polemics has been used to conceal the nature of their shared goals and the extent of co-ordination in the Communist world while re-assuring the West. 

                It may be objected that such issues can no longer be relevant following the demise of the old Soviet Union and China’s opening to the West.  Yet there are many signs that Moscow’s foreign policy is being conducted along similar lines to those of the old Soviet Union.  China too still brooks no challenge to the ascendancy of the Communist party.  Moscow has continued to supply North Korea with important weaponry in violation of its much publicised pledge of 1992 not to do so.  Strangely, efforts to isolate North Korea at the UN have effectively been stymied by Russia and China, preventing the formation of a united international front against North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. Rightly, several observers have remarked that sanctions against North Korea can not work because China would ensure they are circumnavigated.  Indeed the Chinese representative at the United Nations has called for more tolerance and understanding towards North Korea, a particularly arresting call in view of Beijing’s usually wholly intolerant, even brutal, attitude towards dissent.

The End of Nuclear Non-Proliferation

North Korea’s pariah and maverick status can therefore be validly re-examined for the possible relevance they have to Moscow’s and Beijing’s long term political and strategic aims.  North Korea is threatening to wreck the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  This is an especial concern of the United States.  Washington’s principal concern is not a direct nuclear attack from the North but that the country will export its nuclear technology to other rogue states or terrorist networks, a very real possibility.  After all, North Korea has already acquired billions of dollars by covertly exporting its missile technology to the Middle East. Pyongyang holds terrorism to be consistent with North Korea’s revolutionary role and so it can not be ruled out that Pyongyang will take an equally irresponsible attitude to the risk of spreading nuclear destruction.  They have certainly behaved as if they were ready to take their country to the brink of war as was evidenced recently with their unilateral abrogation of the 1953 armistice.  It is hard to see what can be done about this in view of the tacit practical support given Pyongyang by both Moscow and Beijing whatever their public statements may say to the contrary.

Collective Security Arrangements

  1. One need look no further than the cynical polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in December 2006, an action which must have required high level clearance in Moscow, to see how cynically the Russian leadership views the use of nuclear materials.

Co-incidentally it is precisely in the area of nuclear proliferation where Russian spokespeople highlight the failure of existing international policies.  Natalya Timakova, chief spokeswoman for Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said of North Korea’s latest nuclear test: “(it) deals a blow to international efforts to strengthen the global regime of nuclear non-proliferation.”  Medvedev himself said recently: “Non-proliferation is one of the most important areas where Russia and America can work together.”

North Korea’s cynical assault on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty threatens to subvert nuclear arms control at a critical moment.  It is taking place at a time when Moscow is pressing the West to accede to elaborate “collective security” arrangements which Moscow holds are now essential to prevent chaos breaking out with the wholesale proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.  Yet, as we have seen, there is significant evidence to suggest that it is Moscow itself and its satellites who are behind this proliferation.  The likely regional solutions, which are being canvassed by Moscow, involve a significantly changed new world order.  In Europe itself it may spell the end of the British and French deterrents with the passing of power to Eurasia’s sole military superpower, its strength based firmly on nuclear blackmail.

Distracted by the North Korea’s maverick status, it has been hard for Western analysts to see that much of North Korea’s behaviour is part of a planned and cumulative international strategy aimed at the steady incremental expansion of Moscow’s and Beijing’s influence in their respective regions.  Until the West abandons its simplistic thinking about developments in the former Soviet Union and North East Asia; and faces the very real probability that these events are not random coincidences but part of an unfolding strategy, the misinterpretation of events will continue with potentially highly damaging consequences for the world’s democracies.


2,177 words

14 June 2009.


Trust Mark after Goble Background Check by AuthBridgeOnline


Time and again, we hear about how small little steps can contribute towards a big success. Substantial knowledge about a candidate’s background can help in their further pursuance. But evidently enough, employers either do not have the awareness or owing to negligence, fail to pin down robust screening practices. As an employer, the responsibility lies with him to check and verify the background of their prospective hires and save consequences of hiring mistakes.


The number of jobs available to the number of candidates is small anyway, clearly meaning candidates will turn to anything to have a job in hand. This is why, pre-employment background checks are critical in a volatile hiring scenario, keeping in view fairness and honesty required to perform in a job.


Think it over on how much time effort and money goes into hiring a person! This decision cannot be ordinarily taken, without the right screening mechanism in place.


An employer inevitably needs to ask oneself the following set of questions:

  • Is the candidate the right fit for the organization?
  • Does he/she have a criminal background or any past convictions?
  • What are his/her qualifications and credentials?


It is always difficult to gauge whether a person will have the motive to commit a crime in the future, but a person’s past can unveil different layers of his character. Pre-employment background check is more or less, an honesty check on the candidate to find out if the resume has been fudged. There should not be any scope for suspicion, confusion or wrong treatment later on. Background screening helps to take legally responsible and fairly straightforward decisions as a good practice, at the time of hiring.


Let us have a quick glance at the a few reasons that make background screening, a mandate for companies:


1.      Protect the company and promote safe working environment- A bad candidate could be harmful to the organizational safety and security. In addition, it could also spoil co-workers.

2.      Enhance the organizational repute- An organization with good quality candidates has a better market reputation over others.

3.      Protect the candidate- Background screening works in the favour of the candidate itself. It will test and ensure genuineness of their degrees and other credentials too.

4.      Fail to hit/ bypass good candidates- With thorough background screening, the wrong candidates are filtered out and the right ones are kept.



As known already, the ripple effect of corporate fraud runs down the whole organizational structure with an overarching impact on company goals. Hence, remember one bad apple rots the whole bunch.


Stay alert and protected with robust background screening processes.