M.P. wrote: "I mean, common, people are not dumb here - they get who you are pointing your fingers to!" M.P.-ji You saying the above statment is like -- to draw an analogy ONLY (and this analogy is taken from a Mark Tully book called "No full Stops in India" -- accusing the BBC for allegedly spreading rumours and then asking BBC to retract those rumours to protect its own reputation!! The BBC's response, as written up in that book's chapter on Kumbha Mela -- was something like: "We are not in the business of retracting the content of news broadcasts we did NOT create in the first place." Likewise, I made those general remarks . . . and I feel quite comfortable to use my name and knowledge to stand behind the validity of those remarks. As a reader, it's one thing to say one of the following: 1) "No, you are wrong, Ashu, and here's why" 2) "Yes, you are right" 3) "I am not sure what your point is, Ashu" 4) "I need more information to believe you" Any one of those remarks would have been open-ended enough to keep a kura-kani going forward positively. BUT it does take a certain ABSURDITY and a sense of very amusing SELF-IMPORTANCE on your part to rightously keep on insisting that my remarks -- aimed at 2000-plus various shades of human rights-wallahs in Nepal -- must have been aimed ONLY and ONLY and ONLY at your friend (?) with whom you seem to have shared -- NOT professional relationships -- but only a high school. As a result, your whole jhagada, which I have been humouring for some time, emotionally boils down to: "Who the hell are you, Ashu, to say anything against the work of my Dai who's doing all this wonderful thing?' ESPECIALLY when I have NOTHING to remark upon your particular dai and his particular work. As third-graders thorought history have taught us: Suspicion of wrong-doing does NOT equal provable guilt. oohi ashu