About

Canary Trap was launched by me as a personal blog in 2008. Since then it has evolved into a platform for exclusive, well-researched, and objective information relating to corruption, human rights, intelligence, terrorism, and politico-security matters.
Canary Trap Documents
-
Latest Pins
CT’s Twitter Trends
Archives
Guest Blogs
Get CT Alerts
-
Sponsored Links
UPA government Archive
-
Justice Verma, Kiran Bedi, DA and TA
Posted on October 28, 2011 | 7 CommentsThe trivialization of the debate on the anti-corruption Jan Lokpal bill involving Kiran Bedi in which even the former Chief Justice of India got involved should sadden every Indian whose expectation of strong anti corruption law is receding with each passing day. -
Suggestions for changes in Jan Lokpal Bill
Posted on August 31, 2011 | No CommentsThe following changes are suggested in the Jan Lokpal Bill version 2.3. The reasons for the changes have also been stated. A copy is being marked to the Parliamentary Standing Committee and to members of Team Anna too. -
2G Scam and Sibal’s strange arguments
Posted on January 17, 2011 | 1 CommentLast week, one was dumbfounded when Union Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal tried to insult the intelligence of the entire nation while stating that the 2G scam did not cause any loss to the nation. Though his arguments seemed convincing, they were heavily flawed. -
Telecom Scam: Is Swan Telecom being let off?
Posted on December 30, 2010 | 3 CommentsNone of the people involved in the cover up have answered the question as to who was the owner of Tiger Trustee from 2/3/07, the date on which the application was filed to 18/10/07, the date on which pan-India license was given to Reliance Communication and on which date the company Tiger Trustee was transferred to Balwa and Goenka for a paltry investment of 4.99 crores? -
‘Ratan Tata should have ignored Chandrasekhar’s letter’
Posted on December 10, 2010 | No CommentsIt is for some strange reason that Mr Chandrasekhar does not find anything wrong in Anil Ambani’s RCom being given a GSM license on 18/10/2007 when there was no notification for applying for a GSM license under dual technology but finds fault with the Tata's application of 22/10/07 for GSM after the notification for dual technology was made on 19/10/2007.
















