துக்ளக் கேள்வி பதில் (06 10 2011 இதழ்)
வாசகர் கருத்துக்களின் கோர்வை (ஒரு மறு இணையாக்கம், நண்பர்களின் பிற்கால வருகைக்காக).
உபயம்: திருவாளர்கள்:
அருண், நாராயணன், எஸ்.கே.எம், வெங்கட், ஷாகுல் ஹமீது, சிங்கை சிவாஸ் (சோலையூரான்), பார்த்தா, வாஹே குரு, கிருஷ்ணன், சீனு.
Page 4
வெங்கட்
Dear Shahul,
The SIT reports, two of them, and the amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran's report by now are leaked documents is more or less a fact. None of them indict Narendra Modi. This is vouchsafed by the near absence of any talk by our Televisions on them! If only there has been any indicting do you think our TVs would have kept quite? There are FIRs on sixty and odd accused but none on Modi. I know with all these Modi can not be cleared but I also know that the chances are very less that Modi would be guilty.
If we do not take sides either with Hindus or with Muslims we would find peace within us which would allow us to wait for the final outcome peacefully. That inner piece I have achieved. What about you?
SKM, USA
Dear Sri. NSMS,
My responses:
(1) The SC asked a lower court to conduct the inquiry because there was nothing so major against Modi that required the SC's attention. And yes, the SC heard ALL the involved parties before coming to this conclusion. I would also point to Sri. Venkat's response on this issue - about the SIT reports etc.
(2) I have not read the Supreme Court's verdict. I do not know about the leaked documents that Sri. Venkat mentions. But I know that Cho has read not only the Supreme Court's verdict but ALL supporting materials, perhaps evidence, statements from witnesses etc and that Cho has had conversations with decision makers from BOTH sides at some of the highest levels. If there is ANYTHING in the SC verdict that is against Modi, we would have known about it by now. We won't be having this conversation.
(3) Sri. NSMS...I am terribly sorry - but you DID compare Modi to Ediyurappa. You are calling it an example. But it is really a comparison.
I did not say that the victims and police officers are corrupt or must be rejected. So I don't know how you came to the conclusion contained in the last few lines of your post. Arun
Hmm - do people really don't know how to follow a URL or are they pretending , because they don't want to see the truth ?
Anyhow, I had given Cho's analysis of the Lokayktha issue as a URL to an archived Thuglak article. It clearly lists all the events , sorted by time, and why Modi had reservations about the sudden "interests" of the Governor. Here are the important points from that article --
* The Governor cannot act arbitarily on any appointments, without the consent of the State Cabinet. There are only 2 exceptions to the above rule. 1) Appointment of the CM 2) Imposing President's rule . The Lokayuktha doesn't fall under these two categories, so what the Governor did was constitutional terrorism.
* The State Cabinet proposed a judge's name for Lokayktha in 2006 itself - but the Governor did not approve it till 2009 - some deep slumber indeed.
* Once that judge was transfered to another State, the Governor woke up and asked for another name. The Modi Government sat down again and proposed 4 names to the Chief Justice, and picked one of them based on the CJ's recommendations. During this selection process, the Opposition leader didn't care to attend any of the selection meetings and keep dragging this appointment for some more time.
* The Chief justice then sent the candidates' name along with the list of people considered, to the Governor. But she returned it back saying - "I need one name only , not a list, so I will not approve this candidate". Don't ask what she was doing for 4 years when only one name was sent for her approval - according to some people, the Governor cannot be questioned - as long as he/she acts against Modi.
* Amidst all this tussle, one fine day the Governor announced the name of Mehta for the Lokayktha, WITHOUT consulting the State Cabinet. Infact , the totally disinterested Opposition leader was the first to know about this appointment even before the State Government. This appointee had already taken a stand against the Government in several issues - well that's what the Governor was waiting for anyways. Obviously Modi will fight against such blatant partisanship. The Lokayktha should not be used as a tool by the Center to threaten State governments and settle political scores, but this is what is happenning now.
Well well, I can go on and expose the blind hatred of these "intellectuals" towards Modi, in the case of the IPS officers also. But what is the point - தூங்குபவர்களை எழுப்பலாம் , ஆனால் தூங்குவதுபோல் நடிப்பவர்களை எழுப்ப முடியுமா. And this is not the first time I am seeing this phenomenon; in fact such hypocracy has been evident at several topics of discussion, such that we can smell it even before it starts.
I am writing such lenghty replies not to awaken such imposters, but to caution the others to be careful when they come in contact with such people. As I had said earlier - "It is imporant to separate the chaff from the wheat"
Krishnan
Dear All
"Yaam Petra inbam Peruga ivvaiyagam". I have been sending e-mails to Editor Thuklak regarding Thuklak in other languages. I haven't got a response yet. Probably Mr. Cho would respond if this is of everybody's interest. I have been asking Mr Cho to publish Thuglak in both English and Hindhi for wider audience. His information about Indian politics and religion would enlighten readers from all languages. People who support this idea please send your note to our Mr. Cho. My Apologies ahead of time as I am going to put this as one among the first few comments for the next few issues (on every article) - just to gain some support SKM, USA
Dear Sri. Krishnan,
I believe that Thuglak was indeed published in English as well a few decades ago but the English circulation was not as good as the Tamil one. I may be mistaken here. Those who may know more about this issue, please feel free to correct me. வெங்கட்
Dear Krishnan,
There was an English magazine by name Pickwick under the editorship of Cho during emergency. In order to escape the censor he published it, cleverly utilizing the provision that a newly started magazine would not be subjected to censor for a period of six months. It was a good magazine exhibiting Cho's witting skills in English. His English was/is a delight to read. I do not remember any thing about its circulation. But please remember magazines like Thuglak would never have phenomenal circulation. He is not interested in money. He wrote about it in one of the issues several years back. That was an occasion when JJ was accusing him of having amassed wealth. To run a English or Hindi magazine he needs to have a team who would be very alert and dependable and with no personal agenda. With such a team even, I think ,he would like to take utmost personal care before publishing any thing. How can he stretch so much at this age? Singai Sivas
//He had no qualms begging Gandhi for help to protect Indira's indiscretion with Feroze Khan. And subsequently letting his heirs adopt the Gandhi name// - quoting from SKM's prior post here, referring to Nehru's prerogative in favor of Indira.
Friends, With due respect to all forum contributors in this column specially, debating the pros and cons, or 'if's and 'buts' of Gujarat Saga concerning Modi, I don't want to dilute the main focus on this debate and exchange of facts and figures, points of view and counter-views, notwithstanding, I would like to just quote above inference by SKM, and here goes my thought:
நேருவின் இந்திரா பாசம், எந்த அளவுக்கு காந்தியிடம் (மகாத்மா) மண்டியிடத் தலைப்பட்டிருக்கும் என்று இப்போது புரிகிறது. தன் ஆதர்ச புத்திரி ஆசைப்பட்டார் என்ற ஒரே காரணத்தால், அவர்தம் ஆசை மணாளனை, கூடவே எத்தனைதான் அவர் தன் பார்வையில் ஒரு வேற்று சித்தாந்தக்காரர், அவரோடு தன் பெண்ணின் வாழ்க்கை எப்படி வெற்றிகரமாக அமையுமோ? என்ற தந்தைக்கே உரிய கவலை மிகுந்தாலும், தன் பெண்ணின் ஆசையை நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டி காந்தியிடம் அவர் இப்படிக்கூட கெஞ்சிக் கூத்தாடி தன் காரியத்தைச் சாதித்துக் கொண்டாரோ என்று தோன்றுகிறது.
"காந்தி ஐயா, என் மகள் பெரோஸை விரும்புகிறார், அவரும் ஒரு காந்தி வம்சத்தில் வந்தவர் (Gandhi vs Ghandy). தகப்பன் என்கிற ரீதியில் நான் முடிவெடுக்கத் தலைப்பட்டாலும், நமது கட்சி, கொள்கை ரீதியாக மாப்பிள்ளை சித்தாந்த ரீதியாக மாறுபடுகிறார். இந்தத் திருமணத்திற்கு தங்கள் ஆசியும் அன்பும் வேண்டும். தங்கள் ஆசி கிடைக்குமென்றால், நான் மட்டும் நன்றியுடையவனாக இருக்க மாட்டேன், என் மகள், மற்றும் என் பிந்தைய சந்ததியே தங்கள் பெயரை இப் பாரதம் தோறும் புகழ்பாடி வரவேற்கும், ஆதர்சமாகக் கொண்டிருக்கும்; என் பரம்பரையே இனிமேல் 'நேரு' என்னும் குடும்பப் பெயர் அல்லது பாரம்பரியப் பெயர் கொள்ளாது, 'காந்தி' என்கிற தங்கள் பெயரையே கொள்ளும்" என்று கேட்டாரோ என்னவோ?
ஒரு தேசத்தின் முக்கியமான காலக்கட்டத்தில் முக்கியத் தலைவனின் புத்திரப்பாசம் எந்த அளவுக்கு அந்தத் தேசத்தையே ஒரு குடும்பத்தின்பால் அடிமைப்படுத்தி வைத்துள்ளது என்று 63 ஆண்டுகளுக்குப் பின் என்று அலசி ஆராய்ந்தால்,
இந்தத் தேசம் அந்தக் குடும்பத்தின் இரும்புப்பிடியிலிருந்து எப்படி விடுதலை பெறப்போகிறது? மாற்றி மாற்றி அந்தக் குடும்பத்தையே தலைமைத்துவத்துக்கு நாடும் அப்பாவி, கையாலாகாத காங்கிரஸ்காரனை என்ன சொல்வது?
கூடவே, வேறு ஒருமாதிரி புத்திரபாசத்தில் தமிழகம் தத்தளிக்கிறது? என்று ஆராய்ந்தால்:
மத்தியில் ஒரு குடும்பம், மாநிலத்தில் ஒரு குடும்பம் என்று நாம் ஒரு வகையில் சிறைப்படுத்த
Dear Sri. SS,
நான் சொல்ல மறந்து போனவைகளில் இன்னொரு விஷயமும் இப்போது ஞாபகம் வருகிறது.
And that is, Nehur's affair with Lady Mountbatten.
I cannot understand how, inspite of being so close to a Mahatma like Gandhi, inspite of winning enough respect from Gandhi to be considered (and eventually become) India's first PM he had affairs with various women, one of the most prominent being Lady Mountbatten.
In fact, the situation is supposed to have gotten so bad that many important people in London knew about it and Lord Mountbatten found himself in an ugly, embarrassing personal situation at a time when he was getting ready to sign the Indian Declaration of Independence.
My sense is that, the affair never garnered much attention because Indians got really busy with the biggest celebration in their civic lives - the celebration of Independence. N.S.M. Shahul Hameed
Dears
We are just repeating the same stories again and again. My point is very clear that until the case is closed by the court, I will not conclude either side as victorious. Though I can understand all your supports towards Modi, I can not agree for myself to be the one among your until the verdict is coming out. Though I respect CHO or certain other media persons analytical skills, I do have the similar respect of certain other persons analytical skills and the one in me. I welcome you to support Modi and leave me to support yet another good one, at least he would sit in the opposition when Modi would rule India, if all your wishes comes true.
No one would dare to say that Modi would require no strong opposition; if said then I do not bother about them and they cannot be correct for some time. I do not want to repeat and write the whole stories again and again. And I do not buy the assumptions of many of your postings. But I respect your intention and expectation, for which my wishes are there always. Arun
WG saar
I agree 2000% on the following equation ....
நாட்டுப்பற்று= மதவாதம் N.S.M. Shahul Hameed
Dear Narayanan,
You are very true!. Just think about this. If all the people of India, including the victims of an incident and the people who have sympathy on them, and their advocates also think that this rule applies to them, then there will be no case on the court of law. At least for Modi, the power is with him and lots of support of people like you are with him. So, let at least one voice in this forum talks about reminding that the court case is not yet over and let the verdict come before grooming some one as PM. As the matter of fact, the election days are also not near. In fact, I am willing to be ashamed of by getting the result coming in favour of Modi so that the case is over in his favour. But until then, let me speak what the law says and not what the lawers (like CHO and some of our friends here) speak on the case. I will bow down to the truth and justice but never to a majority's voice if that comes by few peoples interpretation without waiting for the right authority to pronounce the result.
Nobody here have ever responded to my preference of Advani instead of Modi and what is the problem here?. I do not believe in people's consideration of someone is indispensable for a post of PM. SKM, USA
Dear Sri. NSMS,
This post is with regard to your reference to preferring Advani over Modi.
Speaking for myself (others may have the same or different reason) - I did not respond to it because we were discussing the case against Modi. There were enough details generated by readers like Sri. Arun and Sri. Venkat - to make for an exhuastive reading.
We can pick up the Advani case another time too.
வாசகர் கருத்துக்களின் கோர்வை (ஒரு மறு இணையாக்கம், நண்பர்களின் பிற்கால வருகைக்காக).
உபயம்: திருவாளர்கள்:
அருண், நாராயணன், எஸ்.கே.எம், வெங்கட், ஷாகுல் ஹமீது, சிங்கை சிவாஸ் (சோலையூரான்), பார்த்தா, வாஹே குரு, கிருஷ்ணன், சீனு.
Page 4
வெங்கட்
Dear Shahul,
The SIT reports, two of them, and the amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran's report by now are leaked documents is more or less a fact. None of them indict Narendra Modi. This is vouchsafed by the near absence of any talk by our Televisions on them! If only there has been any indicting do you think our TVs would have kept quite? There are FIRs on sixty and odd accused but none on Modi. I know with all these Modi can not be cleared but I also know that the chances are very less that Modi would be guilty.
If we do not take sides either with Hindus or with Muslims we would find peace within us which would allow us to wait for the final outcome peacefully. That inner piece I have achieved. What about you?
SKM, USA Dear Sri. NSMS,
My responses:
(1) The SC asked a lower court to conduct the inquiry because there was nothing so major against Modi that required the SC's attention. And yes, the SC heard ALL the involved parties before coming to this conclusion. I would also point to Sri. Venkat's response on this issue - about the SIT reports etc.
(2) I have not read the Supreme Court's verdict. I do not know about the leaked documents that Sri. Venkat mentions. But I know that Cho has read not only the Supreme Court's verdict but ALL supporting materials, perhaps evidence, statements from witnesses etc and that Cho has had conversations with decision makers from BOTH sides at some of the highest levels. If there is ANYTHING in the SC verdict that is against Modi, we would have known about it by now. We won't be having this conversation.
(3) Sri. NSMS...I am terribly sorry - but you DID compare Modi to Ediyurappa. You are calling it an example. But it is really a comparison.
I did not say that the victims and police officers are corrupt or must be rejected. So I don't know how you came to the conclusion contained in the last few lines of your post.
Arun Hmm - do people really don't know how to follow a URL or are they pretending , because they don't want to see the truth ?
Anyhow, I had given Cho's analysis of the Lokayktha issue as a URL to an archived Thuglak article. It clearly lists all the events , sorted by time, and why Modi had reservations about the sudden "interests" of the Governor. Here are the important points from that article --
* The Governor cannot act arbitarily on any appointments, without the consent of the State Cabinet. There are only 2 exceptions to the above rule. 1) Appointment of the CM 2) Imposing President's rule . The Lokayuktha doesn't fall under these two categories, so what the Governor did was constitutional terrorism.
* The State Cabinet proposed a judge's name for Lokayktha in 2006 itself - but the Governor did not approve it till 2009 - some deep slumber indeed.
* Once that judge was transfered to another State, the Governor woke up and asked for another name. The Modi Government sat down again and proposed 4 names to the Chief Justice, and picked one of them based on the CJ's recommendations. During this selection process, the Opposition leader didn't care to attend any of the selection meetings and keep dragging this appointment for some more time.
* The Chief justice then sent the candidates' name along with the list of people considered, to the Governor. But she returned it back saying - "I need one name only , not a list, so I will not approve this candidate". Don't ask what she was doing for 4 years when only one name was sent for her approval - according to some people, the Governor cannot be questioned - as long as he/she acts against Modi.
* Amidst all this tussle, one fine day the Governor announced the name of Mehta for the Lokayktha, WITHOUT consulting the State Cabinet. Infact , the totally disinterested Opposition leader was the first to know about this appointment even before the State Government. This appointee had already taken a stand against the Government in several issues - well that's what the Governor was waiting for anyways. Obviously Modi will fight against such blatant partisanship. The Lokayktha should not be used as a tool by the Center to threaten State governments and settle political scores, but this is what is happenning now.
Well well, I can go on and expose the blind hatred of these "intellectuals" towards Modi, in the case of the IPS officers also. But what is the point - தூங்குபவர்களை எழுப்பலாம் , ஆனால் தூங்குவதுபோல் நடிப்பவர்களை எழுப்ப முடியுமா. And this is not the first time I am seeing this phenomenon; in fact such hypocracy has been evident at several topics of discussion, such that we can smell it even before it starts.
I am writing such lenghty replies not to awaken such imposters, but to caution the others to be careful when they come in contact with such people. As I had said earlier - "It is imporant to separate the chaff from the wheat"
Krishnan Dear All
"Yaam Petra inbam Peruga ivvaiyagam". I have been sending e-mails to Editor Thuklak regarding Thuklak in other languages. I haven't got a response yet. Probably Mr. Cho would respond if this is of everybody's interest. I have been asking Mr Cho to publish Thuglak in both English and Hindhi for wider audience. His information about Indian politics and religion would enlighten readers from all languages. People who support this idea please send your note to our Mr. Cho. My Apologies ahead of time as I am going to put this as one among the first few comments for the next few issues (on every article) - just to gain some support
SKM, USA Dear Sri. Krishnan,
I believe that Thuglak was indeed published in English as well a few decades ago but the English circulation was not as good as the Tamil one. I may be mistaken here. Those who may know more about this issue, please feel free to correct me.
வெங்கட் Dear Krishnan,
There was an English magazine by name Pickwick under the editorship of Cho during emergency. In order to escape the censor he published it, cleverly utilizing the provision that a newly started magazine would not be subjected to censor for a period of six months. It was a good magazine exhibiting Cho's witting skills in English. His English was/is a delight to read. I do not remember any thing about its circulation. But please remember magazines like Thuglak would never have phenomenal circulation. He is not interested in money. He wrote about it in one of the issues several years back. That was an occasion when JJ was accusing him of having amassed wealth. To run a English or Hindi magazine he needs to have a team who would be very alert and dependable and with no personal agenda. With such a team even, I think ,he would like to take utmost personal care before publishing any thing. How can he stretch so much at this age?
Singai Sivas //He had no qualms begging Gandhi for help to protect Indira's indiscretion with Feroze Khan. And subsequently letting his heirs adopt the Gandhi name// - quoting from SKM's prior post here, referring to Nehru's prerogative in favor of Indira.
Friends, With due respect to all forum contributors in this column specially, debating the pros and cons, or 'if's and 'buts' of Gujarat Saga concerning Modi, I don't want to dilute the main focus on this debate and exchange of facts and figures, points of view and counter-views, notwithstanding, I would like to just quote above inference by SKM, and here goes my thought:
நேருவின் இந்திரா பாசம், எந்த அளவுக்கு காந்தியிடம் (மகாத்மா) மண்டியிடத் தலைப்பட்டிருக்கும் என்று இப்போது புரிகிறது. தன் ஆதர்ச புத்திரி ஆசைப்பட்டார் என்ற ஒரே காரணத்தால், அவர்தம் ஆசை மணாளனை, கூடவே எத்தனைதான் அவர் தன் பார்வையில் ஒரு வேற்று சித்தாந்தக்காரர், அவரோடு தன் பெண்ணின் வாழ்க்கை எப்படி வெற்றிகரமாக அமையுமோ? என்ற தந்தைக்கே உரிய கவலை மிகுந்தாலும், தன் பெண்ணின் ஆசையை நிறைவேற்ற வேண்டி காந்தியிடம் அவர் இப்படிக்கூட கெஞ்சிக் கூத்தாடி தன் காரியத்தைச் சாதித்துக் கொண்டாரோ என்று தோன்றுகிறது.
"காந்தி ஐயா, என் மகள் பெரோஸை விரும்புகிறார், அவரும் ஒரு காந்தி வம்சத்தில் வந்தவர் (Gandhi vs Ghandy). தகப்பன் என்கிற ரீதியில் நான் முடிவெடுக்கத் தலைப்பட்டாலும், நமது கட்சி, கொள்கை ரீதியாக மாப்பிள்ளை சித்தாந்த ரீதியாக மாறுபடுகிறார். இந்தத் திருமணத்திற்கு தங்கள் ஆசியும் அன்பும் வேண்டும். தங்கள் ஆசி கிடைக்குமென்றால், நான் மட்டும் நன்றியுடையவனாக இருக்க மாட்டேன், என் மகள், மற்றும் என் பிந்தைய சந்ததியே தங்கள் பெயரை இப் பாரதம் தோறும் புகழ்பாடி வரவேற்கும், ஆதர்சமாகக் கொண்டிருக்கும்; என் பரம்பரையே இனிமேல் 'நேரு' என்னும் குடும்பப் பெயர் அல்லது பாரம்பரியப் பெயர் கொள்ளாது, 'காந்தி' என்கிற தங்கள் பெயரையே கொள்ளும்" என்று கேட்டாரோ என்னவோ?
ஒரு தேசத்தின் முக்கியமான காலக்கட்டத்தில் முக்கியத் தலைவனின் புத்திரப்பாசம் எந்த அளவுக்கு அந்தத் தேசத்தையே ஒரு குடும்பத்தின்பால் அடிமைப்படுத்தி வைத்துள்ளது என்று 63 ஆண்டுகளுக்குப் பின் என்று அலசி ஆராய்ந்தால்,
இந்தத் தேசம் அந்தக் குடும்பத்தின் இரும்புப்பிடியிலிருந்து எப்படி விடுதலை பெறப்போகிறது? மாற்றி மாற்றி அந்தக் குடும்பத்தையே தலைமைத்துவத்துக்கு நாடும் அப்பாவி, கையாலாகாத காங்கிரஸ்காரனை என்ன சொல்வது?
கூடவே, வேறு ஒருமாதிரி புத்திரபாசத்தில் தமிழகம் தத்தளிக்கிறது? என்று ஆராய்ந்தால்:
மத்தியில் ஒரு குடும்பம், மாநிலத்தில் ஒரு குடும்பம் என்று நாம் ஒரு வகையில் சிறைப்படுத்த
SKM, USA Dear Sri. SS,
நான் சொல்ல மறந்து போனவைகளில் இன்னொரு விஷயமும் இப்போது ஞாபகம் வருகிறது.
And that is, Nehur's affair with Lady Mountbatten.
I cannot understand how, inspite of being so close to a Mahatma like Gandhi, inspite of winning enough respect from Gandhi to be considered (and eventually become) India's first PM he had affairs with various women, one of the most prominent being Lady Mountbatten.
In fact, the situation is supposed to have gotten so bad that many important people in London knew about it and Lord Mountbatten found himself in an ugly, embarrassing personal situation at a time when he was getting ready to sign the Indian Declaration of Independence.
My sense is that, the affair never garnered much attention because Indians got really busy with the biggest celebration in their civic lives - the celebration of Independence.
N.S.M. Shahul Hameed Dears
We are just repeating the same stories again and again. My point is very clear that until the case is closed by the court, I will not conclude either side as victorious. Though I can understand all your supports towards Modi, I can not agree for myself to be the one among your until the verdict is coming out. Though I respect CHO or certain other media persons analytical skills, I do have the similar respect of certain other persons analytical skills and the one in me. I welcome you to support Modi and leave me to support yet another good one, at least he would sit in the opposition when Modi would rule India, if all your wishes comes true.
No one would dare to say that Modi would require no strong opposition; if said then I do not bother about them and they cannot be correct for some time. I do not want to repeat and write the whole stories again and again. And I do not buy the assumptions of many of your postings. But I respect your intention and expectation, for which my wishes are there always.
Arun WG saar
I agree 2000% on the following equation ....
நாட்டுப்பற்று= மதவாதம்
N.S.M. Shahul Hameed Dear Narayanan,
You are very true!. Just think about this. If all the people of India, including the victims of an incident and the people who have sympathy on them, and their advocates also think that this rule applies to them, then there will be no case on the court of law. At least for Modi, the power is with him and lots of support of people like you are with him. So, let at least one voice in this forum talks about reminding that the court case is not yet over and let the verdict come before grooming some one as PM. As the matter of fact, the election days are also not near. In fact, I am willing to be ashamed of by getting the result coming in favour of Modi so that the case is over in his favour. But until then, let me speak what the law says and not what the lawers (like CHO and some of our friends here) speak on the case. I will bow down to the truth and justice but never to a majority's voice if that comes by few peoples interpretation without waiting for the right authority to pronounce the result.
Nobody here have ever responded to my preference of Advani instead of Modi and what is the problem here?. I do not believe in people's consideration of someone is indispensable for a post of PM.
SKM, USA Dear Sri. NSMS,
This post is with regard to your reference to preferring Advani over Modi.
Speaking for myself (others may have the same or different reason) - I did not respond to it because we were discussing the case against Modi. There were enough details generated by readers like Sri. Arun and Sri. Venkat - to make for an exhuastive reading.
We can pick up the Advani case another time too.
No comments:
Post a Comment