OK, I have NO problem with people enjoying Khagendra Sangraula's writings. That's fine. He writes extremely well. It's just that -- as a reader and as a minor columnist in a newspaper -- I have a MAJOR problem when Nepali columnists/journalists: a) misquote people, b) twist facts, c) do not give credit where credit's due, and c) exaggerate certain things to serve their own agenda. My attitude is this: Unless you are writing fiction (which allows you to take all sort of liberties with facts), writing newspaper columns on contemporary events is a SERIOUS responsibility and is act of great trust, which should NOT be violated. Sure, the readers might forgive occasional honest mistakes so long as those get corrected in the "corrections" section. But the moment your reader sees you as a provable deliberate liar -- and it does not matter whether you are a righteous liar fighting for all the "right causes" -- then, your authority as a columnist (as an arbiter of what issues are worth discussing in public) is FINISHED. In Sangraula's case, what genuinely PUZZLES me is that he is such a respected writer (not to mention, a great human being) that he need NOT lie or exaggerate or repeatedly misquote his way to readers' hearts. Tetto ho. oohi ashu