Friends, Once again I thank you for your responsible voices by which not only I felt my rightful place in Sajha defended but also Sajha forum itself protected to the extent possible from degrading more than it's fair share as an open-for-all-anonymous-posters forum. I think enough has been said already. So we probably should put this matter to rest now. And it is also a waste to speculate who Nita is. And it is definitely dishonor to Kamala Sarup ji to make a speculation with her. For those who are not aware, Kamala ji is a responsible Sajhaites and she has been posting in this forum with her nick 'Sarup'. *************************** Houston ji, Altough that particular email's salutation was addressed to Kamalaji , it was a mass email meant to be for whom it may concern. In any case, on my personal judgement, Kamaji's view (those from her mass emails, which I do not want to post here. But I think it's fair to say she was basically elaborating what you can find in "About Us" section of the Peace Media homepage, if you are interested to know) represents pure innocence rather than informed chicanery as displayed by likes of Dipta Shah to defend the Gyanendraism in Nepal. So I would not be too harsh to her. On couple of occasions in Sajha, I have taken liberty to suggest that there are room for improvements in professionalism of Kamala ji's writings. Apart from that, I have remained a big fan of her activism in areas of Human rights, Women's right, Conflict resolution and even democracy- well until her recent re-interpretation of democracy came out. ************************** Ashu, Of course we agree on cultural matters. Even for political matters, I am not sure what and how much we disagree. You have chosen to keep your political views vehemently in obscurity and ambivalence. This hardly helps one to know the extent of disagreement between us. I can only deduce, although this is risky one, from reading between your lines, from your body language, from your depressed or cheerful reaction to the news and data of partisan significance and things like that. Take for example, your position on the royal takeover. Once you said 'no comment'. At another time you were ambivalent. Still at another time you were owning it. While this is confusing ta chaadainchha, it also forces me to speculate a sense of opportunism in you. And this has been behind my disrespectful prediction about you that you are going to present yourself as a staunch supporter of republican democracy when signals of it's inevitability start to come. Now to your quick remarks on the strength of republican democracy with the King's participation in it to do all those wonders I have listed. Before I defend my points and arguments, I ask you a simple question for clarity's sake. Are you saying the current monarchy as it is and as it is doing has more strength in ending the Maoist insurgency and teaching the internal democracy to our political parties than a republican democracy with King's participation would have ?