>पटक्कै चिन्नु भा छैन भने, does it make any difference ? it does. त्यही भेर त सोधेको । anyways, that's that, i guess. भन्ने नै हो भने खासै चिनेको छैन तपाईंलाई । तर उत्तर दिनुभएन, त्यो पनि ठिकै छ । not a big deal. i agree my logic sounded like son-before-father. but yours does too. i agree there needs to be a central "unit" - just don't think a shadow govt. should be that unit. the easiest would be to have a person - one person. as you say, this "unit" has to be vetted by the people, so if it is one person, the vetting process becomes that much simpler. besides multiplicity at the highest level of leadership will create confusion - so i want, i call for, a leader who can listen and who can tell, who can welcome and who can talk, etc. etc. etc. i dismiss a full-blown "shadow government" because it is too clunky - and will be too slow to move, unsuitable for this "war". thus, my reasoning for a movement within the armed forces before a shadow govt. ani, i have no doubt that this can be accomplished. i have no doubt that this is the next thing to do. you see, i felt a little strange when i made that simplicity comment. i am a कट्टर believer of simplicity, too. but with regards to what you said - that the people will take care of [it] themselves - sounded "too" simple for me. why? because such a flippant comment may marginalize the actual difficulty and the sacrifice required in "taking care of [it]". in short, i love simplicity but wouldn't want to take away anything (e.g. credit) from the PEOPLE. ल, धेरै लामो भो, माफ पाम है ?