newuser-jee, I have had utmost respect for your relentless efforts to make the democratic voices heard -- especially at times when many seem to be blindly supporting repression, voices like yours and mine are precious and direly needed. Our first encounter of differences (and it is only very mild this time, may I add) -- which is only normal in a truly democratic process -- does nothing to alter my respect and sincere admiration for you democratic stance. You suggested that I probably should have deleted the "Sujata" part from the Washington Post report. I beg to be alarmed! If any truly democratic person chose to hide the facts, or lie about them, then how would he be any different from KingG who has chosen to rule by the decree of lies, propaganda, and the suppression of the press to abet his such evil methods of ruling? All in all, I think these whole exchanges in this thread is a classic example of how democracy should/must work. I presented the report as it was. There were many who disliked parts of what they read. They made their voices heard. Now, the organizers know exactly what the ramifications are of letting Sujata assume a higher profile at the rally. This puts tremendous pressure on the organizers to give in to the public demands that Sujata not be allowed on the stage at all. And I trust that they will not. Voila! Perfect democracy at work! However, given the slightest chance of grave error, if any of the speakers turns out to be a jerk, and wishes to acknowledge the presence of Sujata in any form whatsoever, or if she is called upon the stage, believe me, I will be the first one to boo her out of the scene. I am sure everyone else who rightly wishes to express their loathe for Sujata or what she represents -- a truly dysfunctional and loathesome political leaders -- will join me in doing so too. All the more reason for the likes of you and others who have expressed disgust at the mention of Sujata to join the rally! Now, about banning her totally from being at the rally at all. Once again, preventing ANYONE -- be it a hated political figure, a Maoist, or even a staunch royalist for that matter -- would be as undemocratic as what you and I have been standing against. We are the proponents of democracy, and we shoudl not even entertain the idea of forcefully preventing someone from participating at a rally that is advocating principles of personal liberty and freedom. Having said that, the organizers, by the virtue of them being in charge of the show, do have a huge leverage over who to let/not let on the stage. Sujata MAY be attending the rally as an ordinary Nepali citizen, but she will in NO WAY be given any prominence at all. If she is, as I said earlier, we willl boo her out of the stage and let her know how exactly we detest her and what she represents. Another thing that has disppointed me about your statements is that you introduced the notion of Sujata being a "guest of honor" at the rally. The report clearly does not suggest that Sujata will be a "guest of honor." If anything, she has focused more on Dinesh Prasain, a human rights activist, than on Sujata. I understand your intentions were benign and you've already explained what you meant, but this does little to prevent our opponents from picking on it against us -- not that they will not pick on anything at all no matter what, but it's rather self destructive to give them anymore ammunition than they already might think they have. Regardless of benign intentions, newuser-jee, it always does good if we steadfastly stick to the truth, openness, and not let unnecessary emotions take over rationality in a difficult process of democracy. My intentions were to discuss with you freely and frankly some of the aspects of our differences with all due respect to our common goal of achieving freer society in Nepal. I hope you will not take it otherwise. :)