Isolated ji, First I have always respected your comments, you are one of the top commentators of sajha and I have learnt many aspects of international affairs from your posts. I have already stated long time ago that you are a better read person than me.Therefore, I couldn't understand what the jeers concerning well read, analysis etc are all about. There is no need of picking up the points that I have used to discuss with somebody else, which do not have relevance to be quoted in a discussion you want to have with me. When I reject some staunch disciples of King Gyanendra's dictatorial enterprise, kindly do not take it personal; as you know that you do not support dictatorship. The problem with other guys is also the same. I criticise the Kings undemocratic moves and they take it as something that is directed at them. When you are clear that you do not stand for a tyrannycal regime in Nepal, why should you feel pricked from my comments? You aren't feeling pricked though, are you? You were just urging me to ''take notes of their valid, legitimate questions and concerns''. I got it sir. Again 'my angreji is khattam': Don't worry, more khattam is my angreji.As I did my schooling from a 'sarkari school' and sarkari college, I don't think my angreji will ever improve to a basic standard. Hence, I prefer to use Nepali, time and again. Honestly, I dont understand top-notch sarcasm so could you do a favour to me by not using them when you are discussing with me? Regarding your concerns about Nepal not being ready to embrace democracy, transplanting European democratic ideals in Nepal do not work etc. , I am trying to start a new thread in Nepali (as my Angreji is below par), I hope I will address your concerns in there. To say the least, I do not think that Nepal will/can be as stable and prosperous as Europe or America by adopting their style of political system/democracy overnight. Europe has exercised democratic values (civili liberties, press freedom and freedom of expression,sovereignity and state-power in the hand of the public etc.) for centuries to arrive at this point. They started the process in the 12th century. So when do we start if not now? Thats my point. And will our democratic endeavours be realized when some basic freedoms that we had achieved are also robbed? Does these backward steps help you to move forward?? You have a very valid point here which I couldn't have agreed more:''To have a fully functioning democracy, you have to create the institutions necessary to sustain democracy'' . But the fundamental difference between you and me is, you think King G is going to create institutions necessary to sustain democracy and I think he is resolved to create the institutions necessary to repel democracy. ALthough I am NOT a student of international relation, I have read the success story of some authoritarian regimes in the world. But lets try to make some rational comparisions. Do you want me to believe that Gyanendra is a statesman comparable to Lee Kuan Yew or even General Musharraf? I am a big fan of Musharraf. Once upon a time, I had the oppurtunity to have a very short conversation with him (in Kathmandu during SAARC summit) and I have been his admirer ever since. For me, he is one of the capable and charismatic leaders ever born in South Asia. And he has done very well in Pakistan in both domestic and diplomatic fronts. He said borders in disputed Kashmir should be made irrelevant some months ago and now ManMohan Singh has gone one step ahead to opine that India wants a 'borderless' Kashmir. For a Pakistani leader, would there be any bigger success than this? Musharraf idolise Kemal Ataturk, perhaps the most moderate muslim leader of all time. King G idolise his own father Mahendra and Tulsi Giri, who are the resolute opponents of democracy. How can we compare Musharraf and Gyanendra? Musharraf has not ascended to power by inheritence, by mysterious/default succession of throne. Musharraf's Pakistan has not imposed restrictions on civil liberties, press freedom. Musharraf's Pakistan has nothing to do with communist insurgency. Sectorial violence and political insurgency are two different things as fas as I understand. So forgive me, I can't agree with you that he is doing in Nepal what Musharraf has been doing in Pakistan. Here, let me emphasize that although I admire Musharraf for being able to improve the situations in Pakistan, I do not agree with all of his political maneuvering. Thanks for your referral on books. I shall try to read them. And I have many interests- in politics, in literature, in sports, in showbiz etc. So I tend to comment /discuss in various threads with different individuals. I may express some views that you may not agree, but don't take them as personal or idiosyncratic. Isolated freak is not a subject of my discussion unless otherwise stated. Sorry for this long reply and forgive me if you got bored. I appreciate your thoughtful arguments and welcome you to participate in my thread when ever you feel like having your say. :)