Custom Search Engine - Scans Selected News Sites

Loading

Saturday, 17 January 2009

From Today's Papers - 17 Jan 09

Army Chief shouldn’t speak in public

In a modern democratic state, the sovereignty of the people is delegated to the three wings of the state, namely the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The bureaucracy and the military, though extremely important, do not comment on matters of policy in public. So I feel it was not correct on the part of the Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor, while speaking on ‘Sena Divas’ to express his opinion that the military option against the neighbouring country was open even now. More alarming was his declaration, “We have kept all options open, if diplomatic and economic options fail, war is the last resort”.

I feel that the Army Chief has crossed the parameters of his role. May be, he was trying to copy the Home Minister, Mr P Chidambaram, who had made a similar provocative public statement. But then, Mr Chidambaram is a political animal and his indiscretions are not to be taken seriously.

But, the Army Chief should not make a comment on such a delicate and crucial matter. The government needs to convey a stern warning that the accepted parameters are not to be crossed. More so, because all the right thinking people believe that an Indo- Pak war is not a wise option.

Undoubtedly, the public is both respectful and grateful to the Army for its bravery and devotion. But even then the Army should not speak in public. May be a low-key retraction and regret on the part of the Army Chief would be a correct response.

RAJINDAR SACHAR, Chief Justice (retd), High Court of Delhi, New Delhi

Got nothing in defence, Army fails to woo talent

Vishal Thapar

CNN-IBN

TOUGH JOB: Having to stay away from the family is one of the biggest demoralisers.

New Delhi: It was a New Year shocker for the nation — a handful of terrorists holed up in a jungle at Poonch in Jammu and Kashmir held out against a battalion of the Indian Army for a week before slipping past the security cordon early January.

Is the motivation of the Army which has famously done battle from Flanders to Ferozpur finally getting frayed?

"We are of this belief that insurgents, even if they flee once, will return to the same area, to strike in a similar fashion," Chief of Army Staff General Deepak Kapoor said.

As the military challenge to India mounts, the number of men who were ready to stand up and defend India is diminishing.

While on one hand, men in uniform are queuing up to leave, on the other, enlistment at India's military academies is at an all-time low.

The number of officers from the Army's cutting-edge combat leadership wanting to quit has increased four-fold in the last five years.

In 2008, the number jumped up to a record 1,200, most of them high-performers. Not enough money and having to stay away from the family are one of the biggest demoralisers.

"After some time, you want to give the best to your family but where will the money for that come from," Former Army Officer Amar Kwatra said.

But it is the drying up of recruitment academies which has really stunned the defence establishment.

At courses in 2008, there were no takers for two-thirds of the slots at the Indian Military Academy.

Only 86 of the 250 vacancies at the 124th course were subscribed. At the National Defence Academy, cadet intake hit an all-time low of 190 against a training capacity of 300, and after only 11 recruits showed up for a course meant to train 107 engineers at the Officers Training Academy, the course was scrapped.

Islamic factor in Pakistan
Talk about the best possible relations
by Ashok Kapur

Pakistan is in trouble and so is India’s Pakistan diplomacy. India’s demand to return fugitives to Indian justice or to try them in Pakistan has been rebuffed. Indian claims that evidence exists of complicity of “elements in Pakistan” in the recent Mumbai attacks is considered vague and lacking as “firm evidence” by President Zardari.

New Delhi’s emphasis thus far has on diplomatic action to mobilise Pakistan and the international community but this approach is faulty because it does not address the character of the Pakistan problem which has spawned terrorism. Without dealing with the cause the symptom cannot be dealt with in a proper manner.

The problem of Pakistan is mainly India’s. It is not a major problem for the West or China because Pakistani terror disturbs the peace of mind of Europeans and Americans but it does not affect their economic and social wellbeing. If the Western mission fails in Iraq and Afghanistan and they walk away the Western powers will lose face, but their survival and security is not affected as long as they maintain their programmes for homeland security. The recent Mumbai attack, however, reveals that the Indian government cannot protect its citizens and foreign visitors; it cannot guarantee security for its economic assets.

The problem which Pakistan poses for India is that Pakistani survival and identity depend on an expansionist and interventionist ideology and policy, and all Pakistani institutions — political leaders, civil servants, military officers, intellectuals and public opinion — since 1947 have built themselves on this core consensus. Pakistan has repeatedly tried to expand its strategic space in its neighbourhood — in Kashmir since 1947-48, in Afghanistan since the 1980s, in India’s Punjab since the 1980s, but it has repeatedly failed. Still it keeps trying.

Pakistan’s consensus is to secure Indian concessions for Pakistan and its call for friendship is a tactical pose. The plea for friendly relations is an Indian mantra which is misplaced because it takes two to form a friendship. Most countries in the world seek the “best possible relations under the prevailing circumstances” and by all methods, including intervention (coercive measures short of war) and war if necessary.

What is the character of the core consensus? Pakistan’s geographical and cultural core is around the Indus river valley, the Punjab-Sind area. But to preserve the core, Pakistan had to strengthen its buffers in its frontier regions - the NWFP and Balochistan, which are hard to assimilate and manage by direct administration and military rule. The Baloch plateau moves towards Iran; and the NWFP and FATA blends into Afghanistan with a porous border and ethnic commonality, and Azad Kashmir blends into the geography and politics of Pakistan’s northwestern and northern areas. The clash between Indian and Pakistani political cultures is in the plains, around the Indus valley, although the public focus is on the Kashmir dispute.

Solving the Kashmir issue does not settle the war between Indian and Pakistan geo-cultural influences — either to restore Muslim glory in India or to extend Indian influence into the Pakistani heartland.

Pakistan’s core consensus is that to secure its frontiers as buffers — a hard task, given the problems of geography, ethnicity and Pakistani history — strategic space must be found beyond the buffer areas. This required the mobilisation of the Islamic factor to bring together the people in the frontier areas and the buffers and to shrink the Indian sphere of socio-economic-political action in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pakistan can consolidate its internal geo-cultural core either by building satisfactory internal political and economic arrangements and linkages or by diverting internal pressures to its neighbourhood. Islam has been the unifying element since 1947. It was meant to do double duty - to bring together all Pakistanis and to secure strategic space in Afghanistan and in India by mobilising Islamist intervention. But the project appears to have failed because the Islamists have killed but they have failed to expand Pakistan’s geo-cultural space and now they have turned against those who organised them in the 1980s.

What happened? The story begins in the early 1950s before Zia-ul-Haq’s rise as an Islamic warrior. After Jinnah’s death the Pakistan Army countered Pakistani secularism, ethnic nationalism in the frontier areas and checked those Pakistanis who flirted with ideas about democracy and neutralism in Pakistan. The Pakistan Army first encouraged the development of Islamists in the Pushtun area. With the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1978-89), the Pakistan Army promoted Islamist radicals like Hekmatyar, with US and Saudi support, to dislodge the Soviet forces. In 1989 Pakistan wanted an Islamic republic in Afghanistan, which would be responsive to Pakistani direction and opposed to Indian influences. The ISI was the agency to fight the Russians and to build an Islamist Afghanistan; the Taliban came out of this approach.

But the Pakistan Army-ISI approach did not go according to plan. After 1989 the Taliban rose from the ashes of an Intra-Islamist factional fight, Hekmatyar ( ISI’s man) lost, the ISI dropped him, joined with the Taliban and the Saudis. Arabs under Osama bin Laden too joined the Taliban and a new coalition emerged. The Pakistan Army-ISI-Taliban aim was to gain Kashmir, Al Qaeda-Taliban aim was to recreate the Caliphate and to bring democracy and secularism to an end in the Middle-East and South Asia.

Pakistan’s core consensus was to support the first line but now the second line threatens the control over Pakistani politics by its politicians, its Army and its ISI. The Mumbai attack is based on the second line in Pakistani politics and society. Mr Zardari’s speeches reflect the first line. It is for the Pakistanis, not for the Indians and Americans, to resolve the contradiction between the two lines of social and political behaviour.

In any case, against this formidable array of shifting allies that include Islamists, foreign supporters (Saudis) and the Pakistan Army-ISI-Taliban combination, and its Taliban-Al-Qaeda-frontier tribal alignments, Indian talk about friendly diplomatic relations and composite dialogue lacks leverage to turn Pakistan around to its point of view. Even if the ISI brass listens to the Pakistan Army brass, the ISI handlers are the movers and the allies of organisations like the Lashkar-e-Taiyaba and other such outfits. Only a micro-analysis could reveal such ties and sources of Pakistan-based actions. Thus, the Pakistan Army and the ISI brass have plausible deniability that it is not involved because it is the handlers at the border who get people across.

What should the Indian government do in these circumstances? Its options include the following. One, create a security architecture to prevent security lapses and infiltration of terrorist groups into India. As a matter of transparency and credibility it should explain why the lapses occurred and what the corrective actions are. Two, stop the composite dialogue but, in the fine tradition of Indian hospitability, provide endless cups of tea for talks, not serious discourse ( Darjeeling and Upper Assam for the guests, please!). Three, encourage the External Affairs Minister to stop talking about what Mr Zardari should do when he cannot. Four, rollback the Gujral doctrine which talked about Pakistan friendship and which rolledback the RAW operations in Pakistan. Spying is an honourable profession if it is conducted professionally, if it prevents nasty surprises, and if it is not used for domestic political purposes.

Five, encourage the build-up of internal pressures within Pakistan through Balochistan and Afghanistan and cut down the release of internal pressures through bilateral talks until it is clear that Pakistanis seek a political settlement with India that rejects its historical core consensus.

Just as Wall Street has to unwind its toxic portfolios, the Pakistanis need to do the same with their baggage. Treat the Pakistanis in a cool, detached manner until they work out their internal arrangements with toxic elements in Pakistan. Six, stop talking about ‘friendly relations; talk instead about the best possible relations-good or bad.

The writer is Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Waterloo, Canada.

Hamas rejects Israel's terms for truce

NDTV Correspondent

Saturday, January 17, 2009, (New Delhi)

As the war in Gaza continues for the 21st day, ceasefire still looks like a longshot. A top exiled leader of the Palestinian militant group Hamas has rejected Israel's terms for a cease-fire and urged Arab states to support the group's resistance.

Hamas has hardened its stance even as Israeli diplomats are in the United States and Egypt for discussions on cease-fire terms.

Rift in Pak govt widens, army may take charge

Surya Gangadharan

CNN-IBN

UNREST WITHIN: Opposition parties are moving multiple bills in Parliament to repeal the 17th amendment.

Islamabad: In Pakistan, the rift between President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is widening.

The president-prime minister face off in Pakistan has the military's attention and the warnings from the army's retired proxies have not been long in coming.

Lieutenant General of the Pakistani Army Hamid Gul said, “Nobody can predict what will happen in the long term. If there is a collapse, that is another matter.

There are some politicians who believe the army is all but home and dry.

Cricketer-turned politician Imran Khan said, “The army is already back. Given what is happening between the president and prime minister, this is the weakest government in Pakistan's history. There is no government in Pakistan."

The fractures within the civilian government could deepen in the days ahead. Opposition parties are moving multiple bills in Parliament to repeal the 17th amendment.

The amendments threaten to strip President Zardari of his powers to sack the prime minister and dissolve parliament.

Opposition leader Nawaz Sharif is ready to throw his party's weight behind Prime Minister Gilani if Zardari tries to block the amendment.

As the politicians divide and maneuver, it appears there's nobody to tend the country's multiple fires from the economy to the Taliban surge on the western frontier and increasingly in Pakistan's heartland. Add to that the war hysteria with India which has revived familiar tensions.

The generals are acutely aware that public sentiment is firmly against any military takeover but are also confident that faced with political strife and state collapse, the public will turn to the army – the only institution they believe that is capable of holding the country together at least until some other alternative emerges.

Finally, Pakistan shares information about 26/11 probe

Rezaul H Laskar in Islamabad | PTI | January 16, 2009 | 17:59 IST

In its first formal response to India with regard to the Mumbai attacks, Pakistan on Friday said it had initiated a 'series of actions' in connection with the probe into the terror strikes.

Pakistan's response was conveyed by Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir to Indian High Commissioner Satyabrata Pal, a day after External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said Islamabad should inform New Delhi through diplomatic channels about steps it had taken in the wake of the Mumbai strikes.

During the meeting at the Foreign Office in Islamabad, Bashir discussed with the Indian envoy the ongoing probe and other measures, including actions initiated by Pakistan to implement sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council on the banned Jamaat-ud-Dawa and leaders of Lashkar-e-Taiyba.

"The Foreign Secretary has conveyed today to the Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad the sequence and series of actions initiated by the government of Pakistan in pursuance of its international obligations as well as those relating to the Mumbai terrorist attacks," a Foreign Office spokesman said in a statement.

Bashir "mentioned that an official inquiry has already been launched as announced by the Prime Minister of Pakistan in his address to the National Assembly (lower house of parliament) on January 13", the statement said.

Bashir also said "it was important for Pakistan and India to chart the way forward on anti-terrorism cooperation" and highlighted "the imperative need for an across-the-board constructive bilateral engagement".

The statement did not give details about the various steps that had been initiated by the Pakistan government.

Mukherjee called for sharing of information through diplomatic channels after Pakistan's Interior Ministry chief Rehman Malik held a news conference on Thursday and detailed the action taken against the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Lashkar-e-Taiyba, including the detention of 124 members of banned groups and the closure of five terrorist training camps.

During his meeting with the Indian High Commissioner, Bashir also "transmitted a letter addressed by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, in response to the New Year's greetings received from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh," the statement said.

Greeting cards sent by Singh to President Asif Ali Zardari and Gilani were seen by the Pakistan government as an indication of India's desire for better relations, following the tensions sparked by the Mumbai attacks.

The Indian High Commissioner's visit to the Foreign Office coincided with a meeting there between British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mahmood Qureshi.

Miliband is in Pakistan after a visit to India to help defuse regional tensions.

ISI recruits 10-year-olds for jihad: IB

Vicky Nanjappa | January 16, 2009 | 06:25 IST

Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence has instructed terror modules in India to begin recruiting boys for the cause of jihad from the time they are 10 years old, claims an Intelligence Bureau report.

These groups are called the White Falcons.

Intelligence sources told rediff.com that according to the indoctrination process, these boys are not trained in using arms, but gradually conditioned to follow the path of jihad.

The modules are instructed to look for preachers and educationists who approve of the ISI's agenda to train these boys.

The sources say at least 5,000 Indian boys are part of the White Falcons. The IB report also details how the ISI has structured its operations in India.

If the White Falcon groups are the lowest rung, the other groups are named the Tauqeers, Call of Jihad, Ikhwans and Ansars.

Tauqeers are the 12 people who form the core group that reports directly to the ISI. These people are usually leaders of various terrorist outfits floated and backed by the ISI like the Jaish-e-Mohammed. Sources said Students Islamic Movement of India chief Safdar Nagori was one of the Tauqeers.

Below the Tauqueers is a group called the Call of Jihad. This group has around 15,000 to 20,000 members who are concentrated mostly in Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal and Kerala.

Members of the Call of Jihad group identify people who can be recruited and collect funds. This group reports to the Tauqueers who direct their efforts.

The members, who are appointed by members of the Call of Jihad group and are approved by a Tauqueer, are part of a group known as the Ikhwans.

IB sources believe the Ikhwans number 6,000. Fahim Ansari, the man who surveyed likely targets in Mumbai for the 26/11 attacks, was an Ikhwan.

These men generally constitute sleeper cells and become active just before terror attacks. The Ikhwans take instructions from a group called the Ansars.

The Ansars are mainly involved in the execution part of a terror strike. The men who plant the bombs or undertake a suicide missions are usually Ansars.

After 36 years, 'Arjun' gets ready for induction

PTI | January 16, 2009 | 11:00 IST

The Army and the Defence Research Development Organisation will jointly carry out comparative trials of indigenous 'Arjun' tanks with Russian-made T-90s this June, increasing prospects of the former's induction in the force soon.

The trials will pave the way for the Army to finally accept Arjun tanks for induction, over 36 years after the project was commissioned by the government, defence ministry sources told PTI here today.

"The comparative trials of Arjun tanks with the Russian-made T-90s will take place this summer in June, before the Army gets to induct the indigenously developed tanks," a defence ministry source said.

These trials will come exactly a year after the summer trials of Arjun tanks in the Rajasthan deserts had "failed", compelling Minister of State for Defence Production Rao Inderjit Singh to suspect "sabotage" to be behind the tanks performing below expectations during the trials.

The trial in June, sources said, would be the first of the series under which the army and the DRDO would test and compare technologies and capabilities of the two tanks. "During the summer trials of the two tanks in June, they will be subjected to various other comparative tests in the following months and it is likely to be completed by June 2010," the source said.

After the trials, the Army and the DRDO would carry out a detailed analysis of the tests to determine which of the two tanks was better, sources said.

The Army had already placed an order for 124 of the Arjun tanks from the Avadi-based Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) in Tamil Nadu, but the DRDO has sought that the indent be increased to over 300 tanks, and had been working in the recent years towards improving the tank's capabilities.

However, Army has continued with its search for a Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT), organising technical seminars and seeking information and expertise from foreign manufacturers, including from the US, UK, France, Russia, Germany, South Korea and Israel.

"The Army is now looking 20 years ahead and wants a futuristic MBT," top Army officers had said recently voicing the aspirations of the force. In fact, Arjun tanks had also failed the winter trails in December 2007, according to a Parliamentary report submitted in 2008.

With the comparative trials of Arjun with T-90s still to come, army had already increased its orders for Russian T-90 tanks by another 330 in 2007, over and above the 1,000 it had ordered in 2006, clearly indicating that T-90s would be the MBT of Indian Army for the next decade.

The first Indian order for 310 T-90s tanks from Russia was placed in 2001 from which India bought 124 tanks off the shelf and contracted for licensed production of the rest 186 at the HVF.

Chennai-based Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE) had in 2007 handed over 14 Arjuns to the army for trials, but they were returned with a list of defects in its fire control systems, inaccuracy of guns, low speeds in tactical areas such as deserts and inability to operate in temperatures beyond 50 degrees Celsius.

To provide the Army another with option for battle tanks, the DRDO has recently developed 'Tank-Ex', a hybrid of the T-72 'Ajeya' tank's chassis and Arjun's turret. The new DRDO project -- Tank-Ex -- too did not find favour with the Army. "Tank-Ex is a hybrid of T-90 and T-72, which are both contemporary technology tanks. There is no point in having a technologically obsolete tanks for warfare two decades hence," an Army officer said.

India army parade bans elephants

India has broken a three-decade-long tradition by banning the use of elephants at its yearly military parade in the capital, Delhi.

Authorities decided to do away with the tradition of parading colourfully decorated elephants following protests from animal rights activists.

There have also been security concerns after a near stampede by two elephants at last year's parade.

Children feted for acts of bravery usually ride elephants at the parade.

Jeeps

Defence ministry spokesman D Mohanty told the BBC that "serious" security concerns had been raised after two elephants almost stampeded as they neared the dais where the president was sitting last year.

He added: "Besides, for four years now animal activists have demanded a ban on the use of elephants. These two reasons forced the government to decide against their use from this year."

Elephants for the parade were usually hired from private handlers for 2,000 rupees ($40) by the defence ministry.

Authorities say the children at the parade will now been taken on open military jeeps.

Elephants are commonly used in India for transporting cargo and during religious festivals.

There have been a number of occasions, particularly in the southern state of Kerala, where elephants have stampeded at festivals, causing fatalities.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/7832506.stm

EDITORIAL: Delimiting responses in South Asia

The British Foreign Secretary, Mr David Miliband, urged the world community on Wednesday to “help Pakistan fight the war on terror”. Britain is next to the United States in tracing its incidents of terrorism to Pakistani soil. Its intelligence about the spread of international terrorism inside Pakistan is perhaps as good as that of the United States, if not better. Yet, the UK’s policy is that of getting Pakistan to “cooperate”, not to threaten it with war. This is why some of Pakistan’s premier counter-terrorism agencies are working closely with the UK.

As if addressing India, Mr Miliband says Pakistan has to “bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attacks to justice”, but there is no obligation on it to extradite the suspects arrested in Pakistan to India. He explains there is no extradition treaty “between the South Asian rivals allowing suspects to be handed over for prosecution in India”. Clearly, the statement is telling India that its policy on the Mumbai attack is flawed and will lead to more conflict. It also describes the limits of Pakistani response to India’s current policy of pressure-building.

The “help” Mr Miliband wishes to accord to Pakistan is conditional to Pakistan bringing the culprits to justice. It is not about finding out whether there are any culprits in Pakistan to be punished. His position is: “We have absolutely no doubt about the origin of the attacks...the origins are in Pakistan.” Another delimitation that the international community has placed on any probe taking place inside Pakistan is that the Pakistan government or its agencies are not involved in terrorism. Will India and Pakistan accept these limits?

Pakistan began by denying that the Mumbai attack was traceable to Pakistan, but finally thought it prudent to accept that “non-state actors” were involved by allowing that Ajmal Kasab was Pakistani. There is no doubt, after the National Security Adviser Major-General (Retd) Mahmud Durrani was fired by the prime minister, that there were domestic difficulties in making this crucial alignment with the international community in order to stand up to India’s escalating pressure. That pressure even led the initially cautious Pakistani media to become hostile. Public opinion has become anti-India in response to the war hysteria characterising public opinion in India.

The Indian dossier, while it allows further movement to get evidence that can stand in a court of law, is not sufficient at this stage to pin down the named people. The UK knows this because its own intelligence agencies are geared towards gathering evidence until the culprits can be nabbed and indicted in a manner commensurate with the legal requirements in that country. Also, as Mr Miliband too has noted, Pakistanis cannot be extradited to India because there is neither a bilateral arrangement to that end nor does the SAARC anti-terrorism convention provide for such extradition. There is no doubt that the government in Islamabad wants to “satisfy” India, but it can do so only within the limits described by the British foreign secretary.

Those who are carried away by anti-Pakistan passions in India will realise what this limit means. It means that Pakistan has to investigate the case earnestly and prosecute the culprits to the satisfaction of due process as well as the international community. There is no running away from this obligation. India has to realise additionally that terrorism is a spreading menace and is rooted in historical and geopolitical contexts. The inability of the world community to create conditions of normality in Afghanistan has had its fall-out in the tribal areas of Pakistan. The situation is complex and the international community realises that.

War is not an option, not because the world is biased in favour of Pakistan but because war is what the terrorists want and it also distracts from the larger project of which Mumbai was just one manifestation. Unfortunately, India’s army chief managed to please the terrorists on Wednesday by threatening war as one of the options open to India, even if that means that the subcontinent is subjected to nuclear conflict. This is the sequence of policy that the Indian leadership has decided to follow. One can repeat endlessly that this policy of escalation is linked to national politics, but the fact is that it arouses equally negative reactions in Pakistan. Every time a threat materialises, opinion in Pakistan stiffens and the “obligation” of investigating and punishing “the culprits” is put in jeopardy.

Pakistan is seen to be moving in the right direction. The movement may be slow but a rapid pace may actually yield results that no one wants. What is important is to concentrate on the job of eliminating the elements that threaten peace in South Asia. But for this to happen, India and Pakistan must be seen to cooperate. Public opinion in Pakistan will be moulded in favour of bringing the terrorists to justice if India is seen not in the posture of war but working in tandem with Pakistan against a common enemy. *

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\01\16\story_16-1-2009_pg3_1

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR, THE TIMES OF INDIA

WANTED: INFORMATIVE IMPARTIAL INDIAN MEDIA (W:IIIM)

To:

The Editor

The Times of India

Sir:

Indian Army Day was celebrated on January 15. It was marked by a ceremonial parade reviewed and addressed by the Chief of the Army Staff. The event along with photographs of troops was reported on January 16 in many sections of the media in the country.

In The Times of India on January 16, however, not only there was no visual of our jawans or any other event associated with the Army Day Parade, a photograph of Pakistani soldiers was splashed instead on the top of the 'NATION' section of the newspaper. A visual, we are told, is more eloquent than a thousand words. No wonder.

Such instances of flawed coverage, Sir, are far too common in The Times of India to be ignored.

What a selection of priorities!

What an affront to the readers!

Most shameful, to say the least!

In this context a friend of mine asks me: Is The Times of India published from Delhi or Islamabad?

Mr. Editor, you may like to respond to this query. Thanks in advance for the clarification.

O, Freedom of Expression (read Freedom of the Press), "what all crimes are committed in thy name" in India!

Kindly confirm receipt of this letter.

Warm regards.

Sincerely,

SC Kapoor

Wing Commander (retd)

E-145, Sector 21

Noida-201 301

TEL: 0120-2536068/9810515424

1 comment:

  1. Hey I really liked your article.It's an interesting topic. I have also tried to write same thing on Indian Republic Day, 26th Jan hope you will approve it and your comment will be really appreciated.
    I would be also glad to exchange link with your blog.

    Regards,
    Varun

    ReplyDelete

 

Mail your comments, suggestions and ideas to me

Template created by Rohit Agarwal