Custom Search Engine - Scans Selected News Sites

Loading

Sunday, 21 September 2008

From Today's Papers - 21 Sep

Stop Press - PB 4 for Lt Cols approved







Terror is not the means, but the end in itself


Lt Gen NS Mallik PVSM, (Retd)

Delhi lived through another horrific evening on Saturday the 13th Septmber with yet another incident of jehadi terrorism. Series of bomb blasts at various locations of importance rocked the city from one end to the other. Every location chosen was crowded with children, young men and women, elderly people out on a Saturday evening. The very heart of Delhi was pierced with impunity and such accuracy that undoubtedly, it can not be an act of misguided or disgruntled youth, but of professional terrorists bent upon challenging the Indian state destroying India. This is terror at its most offensive. It aims at terrorising a nation into submission to the will of the jehadis. Repeated attacks without any retaliation in the form of deterrent punishment meted out to the perpetrators of such inhuman violence encourages them to more violence.

To correctly understand the aims and objectives behind the terror attacks, we need to understand the philosophy behind jehad. This is best explained and elaborated upon by Brig SK Malik, Pakistan Army in his book, “The Quranic Concept of War”. To the Islamic Jehadi, humanity is divided into two categories; the believers and the non-believers. And there can be no peace on this God’s earth till the non-believers are killed or converted into believers. The book was penned by Brig SK Malik under the tutelage of Gen Zia-Ul-Haq, the Islamic President of Pakistan, who was bent upon pursuing the ‘Thousand Years War’ declared on India by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Zia fell back on the concept of ‘thousand cuts’ after Pakistan failed to defeat India on the battlefield. And, these ‘thousand cuts’ are to be delivered by the Jehadis through acts of terror.

What Malik in the Quranic conept of war explains most forcefully, is the role of ‘terror’ in the implementation of war. And it isn't just confined to ‘combat’ as we understand that term today. Here's how he defines terror, “In war our main objective is the opponent’s heart or soul, our main weapon of offence against this objective is the strength of our own souls, and to launch such an attack, we have to keep terror away from our own hearts… Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision on the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose on him.” (p. 59)

This is a stunning and telling statement. His war doctrine states that terror is not a means, but an end, or the main objective of that operation. On the very next page, he describes the role of terror as a destroyer of faith, "It (terror) can be instilled only if the opponent's faith is destroyed...To instill terror into the hearts of the enemy, it is essential, in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his Faith" (p.60). This faith can be religious, patriotic, values and cultural, but his thrust is on religious faith.

And this is where we see in explict terms the religious dimension to terrorism. According to Malik, terror is designed to shake the faith of the enemy. Terror is a counter-religious attack. When Laskar-e-Tyabba targeted the Akshardham Mandir, Sankat Mochan and many other temples and mosques, Mumbai railway system, stock exchange, the Science Centre at Bangalore and the Indian Parliament, these were not military or economic targetsas done in war. Even the Kalu Chak attack on army camp in Jammu was a symbolic target. And what were they targeting? The core elements of the Indian democracy, socio-religious beliefs and: economic structures, military strength, and democratic values The terrorists understood that bringing the stock exchange down or hurting Mumbai railway system wasn't going to cause collapse of the Indian economy; destruction of the Kalu Chak base wasn't going to make military decisions and strikes impossible in J&K; and attacking the Indian Parliament wasn't going to end democracy in India. These were strikes designed to shake our faith in our values in our very nationhood, and our socio, cultural and religious beliefs.

How does he visualize it happening. Terror will instill fear into our hearts and create conditions of hatred towards a particular community The whole thrust is on creating conditions that will force the country to retaliate in harsh measures against the Muslim community, as it is not only believed but confirmed over and again that it is the elements from the Muslim community that are responsible for planting this mayhem in the midst of a crowded market. Public will look upon a Muslim with suspicion. The jehadi would have achieved his first aim, creating discord in the socio-cultural fabric of India. India will be turned into Darul Harb, shattering the dreams, aspirations and zest for life of millions of Indian youth in minutes by the disgusting act of few mindless, ruthless people in the name of Islam. One can not find any word suitable enough to condemn these acts of foolishness and cowardice, and very certain that in no way can the socio-cultural and religious harmony of India be made hostage to their diabolic designs.

The moot question thus is, how do we fight this terror, and more than the terror, the philosophy of terror as ‘the end in itself’ as advocated by Brig SK Malik in his Quranic Concept of War and now widely practiced by the followers of LeT, HUJI, SIMI and the latest entrant IM (Indian Mujahidin). Unfortunately we have allowed the terrorists to attain the second stage of this war of terror, where now he gets recruits and trains them from within India, having imported the terror philosophy and training methods from abroad. They make their own bombs, carry out reconnaissance, gather intelligence and target soft and sensitive areas. The precision, timing and the practical demonstration of destructive power of the Indian Mujahidin is now on the rise, wherefrom they can start picking up more critical targets. They would aim at political ascendancy in the minds and hearts of the leaders of political parties and put forth one demand after another, escalating terror at each stage. Ethnic cleansing of the Hindus from the Kashmir valley was the first act of this political take over of India, now to be followed by the total alienation of the valley and its attempt at break away, where the writ of the government would stop running and the mujahidin or the taliban in disguise would rule the state. Hurriyat and PDP is the disguised form of this. Simultaneously the rest of the country will be paralysed with the ‘thousand cuts’ of terror.

But the Quranic concept also advocates ‘an eye for an eye’ and terror to fight terror. Could India adopt this method, or continue to adhere to the Gandhian philosophy of ‘turning the other cheek’ We have a government today at the centre that believes in appeasement of the minority communities, expecting their support in the electoral battle. Most of the time they are disappointed by the results. But failure only reinforces their belief, and more effort is put on the same axis with the more disappointing results. But in the bargain, the nation is left open to terror in the name of Islam. Government dithers and shies away from using any firm measures to tackle this menace. The only firm action taken after every attack is the enhanced compensation for the killed and maimed.. Worst of all, more than terror, statements by the guardians of our security shake our faith in the working of the system. "With every blast we are gaining experience. In each incident you learn, gain experiences" - Madhukar Gupta, Union Home Secretary. Then there is the often heard sounding of ‘Red Alert’ in all cities with the Home Minister, Shivraj Patil “reviews steps to fill gaps in security “ The last straw to break the public confidence in the system is "Gham ka pyala pee jayiye" - Shivraj Patil (quoted by Sidharth Mishra, in Daily Pioneer). How long will this drama go on, and when will the ‘Gham ka Piyala’ be empty? Are we getting too used to these clichés and accepting all this rubbish in the traditional Indian way. “What can we do, the government is bending to the whims and fancies of the jehadis for electoral politics”. Is this the last cry of a cowed down nation of over a billion? If so, the terrorist is getting near his goal of making terror the end in terrorizing the nation into submission..

Tough measures will alienate the minority, goes the argument.. But is not the minority a part of this nation and does not the terrorist acts hurt the minority as well. In fact, the projected Quranic concept visualizes the greatest danger to jehad from the Muslim if he does not adhere to the concept. So the terrorist’s first aim is to make the ‘believers’ believe. This then can also be called an assault on the ‘believers’ first, because once they are ready to fight for the cause of Islam as visualized by the jehadi, half the battle is won. The jehdi is not fighting for the cause of Indian Muslims, he is engaged in a bigger battle for the ‘Perceived Ummah’, and in that fight if a million or so Indian muslims get killed, so be it. So, the goal of fighting jehadi terror is then somewhat clear. We need to fight jehadi in a way that he is isolated and not able to make other members of the Muslim community infected by this terror. This can be done by rationally bringing home to them the dangers posed by jehad. At the same time, we have to keep the nation together by ensuring socio-religious harmony. Then alone the firm action against the perpetrators of jehad with no mercy shown towards those that help in these dastardly acts will be seen in the correct perspective. We need firm action all round. The nation must realize that it is every body’s war. Any person aiding, abetting or not actively supporting the war against terrorism is as much guilty of waging war against the State as a terrorist perse. Religion or ethnicity has no role in all this effort.

This is a fight for survival of the nation. Co-lateral damage has to be accepted in terms of a few non-terrorists getting killed in the cross fire or by mistake. Besides, no mercy can be shown to the willing or forced supporters. Terrorist can not function without local logistics, intelligence and moral support. This is the crucial factor that needs to be denied to the terrorist. This can only be done by strict action without letting the human rights activists cow down the government machinery. Strict and fool proof legislative and judicial measures need to be enacted

Media plays an important role in this battle. Unfortunately, the present impression of most citizens is that media acts like a bystander, advocating even handed policy towards the victim and the murderers alike, thus adding to the terror effect. Otherwise the likes of Afzal Guru would have met the end of the rope long ago. Not that the media advocates his case or of any other terrorist, but it does not actively campaign for firm action, or else the nation would not have been found so unprepared to fight terror.

Here, I refer to an article written by an anguished writer from the scene of the bomb blasts in Delhi. He wrote, “My intention here is not only to condemn the terrorist attack but to bring to your notice another equally important point on behavior of our media and in particular the TV news channels. We all saw what was being shown immediately after the attacks, for example, the young woman in a yellow top and black trousers, hurt in the bombing of the Connaught Place's Central Park. She was shown being carried away, four persons holding a limb each to a police vehicle several yards away in Connaught Place. She was dripping blood, her head snapped back under its own weight and in agony. Several others were yelling for help, trying to figure out in vain what has happened to them. And here were our news men on their important job of covering this incidence giving live coverage and passing on every inch of information to people with the speed of light. Every one wanted to be faster than the other. In the process TV crew were more interested in getting the live footage of people lying down there waiting for help, the girl I mentioned above helplessly hoping that someone will give support to her head and the bleeding neck”

I have quoted the above not only to bring out the inhumanness in this kind of coverage, but another even more important point of ‘First Aid’. We all feel that our total role on the spot is to shift the injured and dying to the hospital. Yes, the victims must be rushed to the Trauma Centre at the earliest. But first and foremost they need first aid on the spot. This is the duty of us all, the bystanders there and those who survived the terrorist attack. In an action of this nature, the major cause of death is ‘bleeding’ and ’shock’ These are taken care of if we have learnt the basics of first aid. Shock is controlled by ‘the Helping Hand’ on victim’s head and encouraging him to fight the injury. Bleeding requires local pressure to control the same. The girl above was dripping blood and someone needed to put a heavy cloth turned into a bandage at the wound and press it hard. There are NGOs that are training youth in this simple art of saving lives. It needs to be introduced in all schools and made compulsory for all, particularly for the police force and those carrying driving license.

But coming back to fighting terror, I quote from an American journal, “An interesting point has been the success achieved by the US Government against the terror. In denying ANY terrorist successes, and by suppressing any knowledge or admission of terrorist success or of active planning in their operations - the U.S. federal government has effectively mitigated and outrightly denied the primary goal of the Islamists. Thus the U.S. government has prevented the terrorizing of the American population. It has been a resounding success and a significant defeat for the terrorists as relates to their Quranic concept of war”

The ways to fight this terror is not new or any innovative method. What is lacking is the national will to enforce the same. Here I will mention four points that need immediate implementation; vigilance, accountability of the law enforcement agencies, an effective legal regime and check on sources of terrorist funding.

Vigilance has various connotations, what I am referring to is the watchfulness by all citizens at all times. Terrorist can not survive in a vacuum. He needs logistics, intelligence, and resources support from the local area. A vigilant community can deny them this. Government takes certain security measures but unless we help in enforcing them, these measures will remain on paper only. Accountability of the law enforcing agencies, including the intelligence agencies is what gets results. Every failure to prevent terror, to bring to justice and persecute terrorists must be accounted for, both at the political and the executive level. Nation must demand action against those that are incompetent or unwilling to deliver. An effective legal regime with fast track courts to try cases of terrorism with adequate powers to impose exemplary punishment is the need of the day. These can not be treated as normal criminal cases and allowed to linger on for years as in the case of Mumbai railway blast. Legal system must strength hands of the law enforcement agencies and of the judiciary. The resource funding to the terrorist organizations must be effectively blocked. Most of these funds are either from abroad or of narco-terrorism. Block this and keep strict watch on the accounts of criminal and narco related personnel. Certain religious endowments and NGOs are also used for funding by the terrorists.

Our thrust thus has to be to move India from a soft state to a firm and active nationalist state that would brook no anti-national activity. Simultaneously, hesitancy and helplessness must find no place in our national polity.. My fellow citizens of India, rise and defend your home, hearth and country from the terrorist by firstly not getting terrorized, and actively fighting back. Remember each one of us is a soldier in the service of the nation, and secondly denying the terrorist the oxygen of publicity. Simultaneously, the road blocks of the politician - criminal - police nexus that allows terrorist to survive and the vote bank politics leading to minority appeasement, or at least exaggerated sensitivity to minority sentiments in dealing with terrorist suspects, must be demolished. A way has been shown by Gujarat in bringing the perpetrators of Ahmedabad terrorist attack to justice at the earliest. And so has Anupam Kher and Nasiruddin Shah duo challenged the Aam Admi to take on the terrorist and the government in their path breaking film, ”Wednesday”


VIEW: Pakistan on the brink —Ahmed Rashid

Zardari’s first tasks are to deal with the faltering economy and get a grip on the war against terrorism while satisfying international concerns. So far he has not much to show

For the past seven years, the Bush administration studiously ignored the Afghan Taliban and Al Qaeda leadership gathering in the tribal areas of Pakistan, and now scrambles to make up for lost time. US elections are looming, and facing the humiliating prospect of Osama bin Laden outlasting a two-term presidency and even expanding his reach, President Bush has pushed the Pentagon into a do-or die-hunt for bin Laden. Whether the search for an “October surprise” for the election succeeds or not, the radical threat is now beyond easy military solution.

It’s a sign of desperation that on September 16, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen was in Islamabad meeting the Pakistan army chief General Ashfaq Kayani, his boss Secretary of Defence Bob Gates was in Kabul, while Pakistan’s newly elected President Asif Ali Zardari was in London begging Prime Minister Gordon Brown to get the Americans off his back and deliver aid to a beleaguered country rather than angry ripostes.

Pakistan is at the centre of a gathering firestorm engulfing south and central Asia in the most volatile confrontation since 9/11. Pakistan, Afghanistan, the US and NATO all bear heavy responsibility for the crisis. President Bush had neither the inclination nor urge to do right by Afghanistan, despite pleas by President Hamid Karzai to eliminate cross-border terrorist strikes from Pakistan and effectively rebuild the country. Senior US officers serving in Afghanistan say they begged the White House and the State Department for action in 2006, but Bush was cosy with Pakistan’s former President Pervez Musharraf and Iraq occupied US attention. Meanwhile, veteran John McCain flails in effectively playing the national security card against Barack Obama because Republican policies failed to secure the homeland against future Al Qaeda attacks.

The Pakistan military and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) saw Bush’s lack of attention as a free pass to re-engage the Taliban as a Pakistani proxy force. As outlined in detail in my book, Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia, the army hedged its bets against possible US and NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan or danger of India becoming too influential in Kabul, by moving pro-Pakistan Afghan leaders into Kabul and carving out a dominating position in Afghan politics.

Until this year, Pakistan appeared to be winning the game. Then the Afghan Taliban launched an unprecedented offensive against US, NATO and Afghan security forces, attempting to paralyse the country by cutting all major roads to urban centres, thereby depriving the people of supplies and Western forces of fuel and ammunition — 80 percent of which is trucked through Pakistan — and killing aid workers so what little development work is taking place comes to a grinding halt.

Catching the Pakistan military off guard was dramatic growth of the Pakistani Taliban. Pakistani Pashtun tribesmen in the border region were quickly radicalised by their Al Qaeda guests. Last year, Pakistani Taliban militias developed their own political agenda — to Talibanise northern Pakistan and create a new “sharia state” that would lead to the balkanisation of Pakistan.

The Pakistani Taliban now control all seven tribal agencies that make up the autonomous region bordering Afghanistan called the Federal Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). They have spread across the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) through brutal terror tactics and threaten large towns. Poised on the borders of Punjab, the largest province, they’re joined by Punjabi and Kashmiri extremist groups.

US forces in Afghanistan launch almost daily attacks against suspected Al Qaeda hideouts in FATA and also target Afghan Taliban leaders such as Jalaluddin Haqqani. Pakistan’s military first denied the strikes, then virulently protested them. However on September 3, US Navy Seals put boots on the ground in FATA to demonstrate US seriousness and perhaps to also blackmail Pakistan to own up to US missile strikes and gain greater cooperation from the army. As a result, the army now says it allows US missile strikes despite public anger over Pakistan losing its sovereignty.

The army’s policies over the past fateful seven years led to Pakistan losing much of its territorial sovereignty. Heavily armed militant groups run wild, crime is rampant, paramilitary and police morale has plummeted with a stream of desertions. The country is in the throes of an economic meltdown. Foreign exchange reserves have halved in the past three months to less than US$8 billion, inflation runs at 25 percent, power shortages cripple industry and agriculture, and massive unemployment fuels a resentful populace.

Musharraf resigned, replaced by the ever-controversial Asif Ali Zardari, widower of Benazir Bhutto and leader of the country’s only national party in the country, the Pakistan People’s Party, winning elections with overwhelming support from the three smaller provinces of NWFP, Balochistan and Sindh. But Punjab, with 65 percent of the country’s 160 million people, remains out of his hands, run by rival Nawaz Sharif, who refuses to take the terrorist threat seriously and befriends right-wing Islamic parties. Cleavage between the smaller provinces and Punjab has never been greater.

Zardari’s first tasks are to deal with the faltering economy and get a grip on the war against terrorism while satisfying international concerns. So far he has not much to show. Since the new PPP-led coalition government took office in February, it’s been locked in interminable battles with Sharif. If Zardari continues on those lines, Pakistan is sunk. Promising economic aid and demanding ISI reforms, a lame-duck Bush administration cannot rescue Zardari.

Zardari needs to develop a partnership with the army to fight the terrorists, but so far the army lacks strategy or coherence — one day bombing villages in FATA, the next day announcing ceasefires and offering compensation to militants. It has failed to protect the people of FATA — some 800,000 of a population of just 3.5 million have fled the region since 2006 — terrified of both the army and the Taliban.

The army has still not made the necessary strategic U-turn, giving up on the Afghan Taliban leadership who live in Balochistan. The ISI still attempts to separate the favoured Afghan Taliban from the disfavoured Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda. But the truth is that all operate under a common strategy and guidelines set by Al Qaeda. The aim for Al Qaeda is to use the coming months to take serious territory in the NWFP where it can re-establish safe bases and training camps it once had in Afghanistan.

The American answer is to send more troops to Afghanistan — 4500 are due to arrive soon and another 10,000 by next year — and pressure Pakistan. However the solution no longer lies in a single country. The Taliban are now a regional problem and the next US administration must generate a regional strategy that encompasses Iran, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and the five Central Asian republics.

Western forces cannot win in Afghanistan without dealing with Pakistan, but the military will only change its colours when it feels more secure vis-à-vis India, which has warm relations with President Karzai and the Tajiks in northern Afghanistan. Likewise Iran, now arming groups in Afghanistan, needs to be addressed directly by the Americans. Going back to the UN Security Council to get a new mandate for a major regional diplomatic initiative, coupled with a massive regional aid programme and widespread public information campaign that portrays the Western coalition as a regional problem-solver rather than a warmonger, are the needs of the hour.

However, the issue is whether the next US president, Europe and NATO will have the courage and the will to take the bull by the horns and attempt something new rather than continue with a policy that has clearly failed.

Ahmed Rashid is the author of Descent Into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia, and a correspondent for the Daily Telegraph. This article originally appeared in the Yale Global magazine and is reprinted with permission. Copyright 2008, Yale Centre for the Study of Globalisation



Govt to ‘consider’ 49 pc FDI in defence sector
Ajay Banerjee
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, September 20
Signalling a shift in the Indian government’s mindset, defence minister A.K. Antony today said the government would consider allowing 49 per cent foreign direct investment (FDI) in the defence sector. However, this will be examined on a case-to-case basis, said the minister.

Antony’s remarks assume significance as he has in the past expressed anguish at how India continued to rely on imports to meet its defence equipment needs.

This consideration of allowing more foreign stake in India-based companies will not mean a blanket permission. Antony said they will stick to the policy of allowing 26 per cent FDI in Indian defence sector. “We will consider allowing 49 per cent FDI only on a case-to-case basis, if the industry is able to convince us,” he said in a seminar organised by the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) on the subject of the new defence procurement policy (DPP) here.

Almost all major companies of Europe and the US are vying for a share in the huge and fast growing Indian defence equipment market. In the next five years it is believed that the Indian defence outlay will be to the tune of $130 billion, of which over $45 billion will be for defence acquisitions.

However, some of these foreign companies have openly expressed that they were not finding Indian partners to match the scale of investment, besides facing shortage of skilled manpower. The ASSOCHAM was one of the bodies that had demanded 49 per cent FDI as this would aid absorption of latest technologies.

The new DPP came into force from September 1. Assuring transparency in the new DPP, Antony said every industry will get the tender details.

He told assembled top-bosses of the industry that the new DPP contained significant changes from the earlier one promulgated in 2006. This included broad details of the trial methodology forming part of the request for proposals. The suppliers (called vendors in the defence parlance) will now be aware at the outset of the modalities by which their products would be evaluated.

The results of the evaluations, along with the reasons if any, for the disqualifications, will now be communicated in writing.

Under the “offset policy” of the DPP, foreign suppliers getting a defence contract worth over Rs 300 crore, will have to plough back 30 per cent of the deal back into Indian defence industry. Indian firms need to just meet the relevant guidelines specified by the government.

Vivek Lall, chairman, ASSOCHAM defence committee and Sajjan Jindal, ASSOCHAM chairman, were among those who spoke at the meet.


India urged to support arms trade treaty

MEMBERS OF Amnesty International and People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), have jointly appealed to the Government of India to support the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in United Nations (UN) to save people’s lives and protect their livelihoods worldwide. They deplored the attempts of some governments, including India, China, Russia and USA to block the process in the UN.

In the ’Global Arms Trade Treaty Week of Action’ organised in Hyderabad, by Amnesty International and PUCL on September 19, 2008, the officials alleged that along with some other countries, India too, is attempting to delay the process in the UN.

Civil society activist, Prof Keshav Rao Jadhav, launching the Amnesty International Report ’Blood at the Crossroads: Making the case for a global Arms Trade Treaty,’ at a programme held in Press Club, appealed to the civil society to pressurise the Indian government to support ATT.

Speaking on this occasion, Amnesty International local coordinator Ch Narendra told that every year, more than three lakh people are being killed with conventional weapons. Millions more are injured, abused, forcibly displaced and bereaved as a result of armed violence. Many of the weapons used to commit these violations are sourced from the poorly regulated international arms market.

The failure of over 80 per cent of states to establish laws to control arms brokering and arms transportation makes this problem worse. Narendra also told that it was strategically necessary for the international human rights movement to bring in an effective ATT. “In the UN General Assembly deliberations, that is starting in the First Committee during October, we must come up with a solution that enables continuing the progress towards an early negotiation of an effective ATT”, added Narendra.

He told that Amnesty International India has successfully launched ‘The Global Arms Trade Treaty Week of Action’ in 25 states at 30 locations in India on September 13, 2008. The ’week of Action’ was marked by different campaign activities.

Amnesty International’s new report detailed nine case studies of the catastrophic human rights consequences of unrestrained arms trading. The report says that world leaders should adopt a ’Golden Rule’ to help protect human rights when arms are transferred from one country to another.

From the ongoing conflict in Darfur, military crackdowns in Myanmar and Guinea to the proliferation of sectarian violence in Iraq, weapons are used every where. The report shows how and why the current variations and loopholes in national arms legislations allow massive violations of human rights.
It also demonstrates that without an effective human rights provision, a global Arms Trade Treaty could fail to protect the most vulnerable. Governments must prevent arms transfers where there is a substantial risk of human rights violations. PUCL state general secretary, Jaya Vindhyala and High Court advocate, K Chandrasekhar, were also present.




1 comment:

 

Mail your comments, suggestions and ideas to me

Template created by Rohit Agarwal