Wednesday, March 26, 2008

What does india want?

Everybody has impression that there will be election this time, but according to Janaastha, a vernacular weekly, India has really sent truck full of arms. The question here is does India want election like it is giving the impression or it does not want the CA election in Nepal.
One school of thought suggested that it wants the election like in Bhutan. Other said India doesnot want election nither it wants peace in Nepal. It wants to make Nepal its playground, and capture all the biggest river. So, in future Nepal will be dependent on India for Nepal's own rivers' produced electricity and irrigation.
Is there any Nepali leader, who has vision for this country or all are enjoying becoming Lendup Dorje ?

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Is there anyone who wants to be president?

After Ram Dev baba, the new face in the town is Shyam Sharan.
Shyam Sharan is here. He is special envoy of India and is engaged to finalise US-India nuclear deal. But why did he come to Kathmandu at a time when in India the deal is drawing much more critism from the left parties and the Indian government is under tremendious pressure. But Sharan, a busy diplomate came to Kathmandu.
Because, India wants to kick king. Why does India wants to kick the king, because the king did coup witout consulting them. If he had consulted India, India would have supported his move and till date king would have been ruling like Bhutani dictator and Burmese dictator. India doesnot want democracy in Bhutan and in Burma but India wants Nepal to be democratic and republic also. It should be very clear to Nepalese and the world that India doesnot want democracy anywhere in the world. If you have any doubt, ask Shiv Shanker Mukheerje.
Now, Shyam Sharan is in search of president. Yes, you heard it right, president. Is there anyone who wants to be president? Contact Indian embassy. You can sms to Indian embassy or Indian ambassador and apply. Shyam Sharan will choose president like Nepalese choose Indian idol last month. Now, its his turn.
The only criteria to be president is that you must inform Indian embassy, before you fart, shit, pee, do anything. Isn't it true Shyam or Shiv or Ram or Hanuman?

Sunday, September 30, 2007

India urged to take a stand on Myanmar

Though its not from Nepal and for Nepal but we support democratic struggle anywhere in the world. But some quaters remain quite. They claim to be democratic nation and try to interfare in other countries internal matters but in some cases they don't, isn't it diplomacy?

New Delhi: Hundreds of refugees from Myanmar on Friday took out a march in New Delhi to protest against the military crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in the neighbouring country and sought India's intervention in stopping the bloodshed. The protesters, including a large number of women and children, carried posters and photographs of jailed pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and shouted slogans against Myanmar's ruling junta.
"The movement for restoration of democracy in Myanmar needs the solidarity of people across the globe," Neng Boi, a spokesperson for the refugees, told reporters after the peaceful march.
After the September 26 crackdown in Rangoon, India's external affairs ministry gave a guarded statement earlier this week, expressing concern over the recent turmoil in Myanmar at a time when people all over the globe are condemning the brutal attacks on the protesting monks.
"As a close and friendly neighbour, India hopes to see a peaceful, stable and prosperous Myanmar, where all sections of people will be included in a broad-based process of national reconciliation and political reform," an Indian foreign office statement had said.
The Myanmar refugees are disappointed with India's lukewarm response to the developments in their homeland.
"It is indeed shocking to find one of the world's largest democracies adopting a nuanced approach although we still expect India to take a bold stand," said Min Maung, an exiled Burmese student leader, who is now a correspondent for the BBS (Burmese Service) in New Delhi. He pointed out that even Communist China had come down heavily on the military crackdown on the pro-democracy movement.
New Delhi's diplomatic tightrope walking on the issue has been criticised by civil rights activists in India as well. "We cannot have democracy at home and support military tyrants in the neighbourhood. India must do all it can for the restoration of democracy in Burma," said Nandita Haksar, a prominent human rights lawyer.
Asian Centre for Human Rights, a New Delhi-based rights body, came out with an official statement that the Burmese junta deserved more denigration and the UN must not remain a mute spectator to the recent developments in Burma.
In separate statements, a group of Parliamentarians and religious leaders condemned the violence unleashed by the Myanmar government on protestors there and asked them to immediately release political prisoners, including Suu Kyi.
Political observers said India's cautious approach was dictated by its economic and strategic interests but conceded that this was bound to evoke criticism.
Until the mid-1990s, India was openly supporting pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. It was only in 2004 that New Delhi changed track and welcomed military strongman Gen Than Shwe during his visit to the Indian capital.
India invited criticism from international communities recently when Petroleum Minister Murli Deora visited Myanmar on September 23 — the day that there were massive protests against the junta in the country — and signed three bilateral agreements for oil exploration.
India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee also found himself in an awkward position during an interactive session with the diplomats and intellectuals in Bangkok a week earlier when he was asked what India was doing to restore democracy in Burma. Mukherjee reiterated New Delhi's foreign policy of "non-interference in the internal matters of any country."
(By Sify Correspondent Saturday, 29 September , 2007, 19:21)

Friday, September 21, 2007

Two jokers in Nepali politics

In current Nepali politics there are two prominent jockers; staright from the pack of cards. Though they both differ in ideology, cast, class and community. They have striking similarities.

They both are mentally ill. They cannot see anything, feel anything and accept anything. They are a remote operated robots and have the same remote control. They both blame unidentified groups for everything that is happening and happens.

Ask one of them about the petrol shortage, he claims that the unidentified groups are selling Nepali petrol in the borders and sending him hefty cheques. He has no clue why there is queue in Kathmandu for petrol. Enough petrol has been sent by the Indian Oil Corporation but where does that all oil leaks, he doesnot know. He even doesnot know who changed the Goyal and sent Jha as a director (?) in Nepal Oil Corporation. Why is Goyal changed, he doesnot know that either. He is a supply minister, a national jocker, who is interrested only in money-supply in his bank accounts.
He is supposed to be a leader of Terai and he doesnot know who are killing his own voters in Kapilvastu. He claims that unidentified groups killed people in hundreds in Kapilvastu.

Another jocker is yet more humourous. He is supposed to be the home minister. But he doesnot know who blasted bombs in Kathmandu and killed three. Who killed more than 100 people in Kapilvastu. Unidentified groups - is all his answers.

I suggest the government to sent these jockers to mental assylum. But they should be ministers, all the way: The ministers of mentally retartded.

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Diktat: Constituent Assembly election

If anyone has any doubt about the Constituent Assembly election, now they better so not have it. Because our friend has dictated that CA election must happen and no excuses will be accepted.
Any take the nationalist parties, Who is ruling this country? Is this intervention in the internal politics or not? i am far so, please loudly, I don't hear. Is this intervention in the internal politics or not?

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Good News, Bad News

One Good News:
ADB backed off, which a lots of high ranking politicians didnot accepted earlier. The Seven trent is gone. Now Nepalese should themselves manage the valley water supple. Lets not bring any foreigner to play in this peaceful country. They want to make it piece-ful not peaceful. Let's work for Nepal by Nepal to Nepal.

One Bad News:
Why is UNMIN conspiring against Maoists? and why James F Moriarty dropped a bombshell on the day he was leaving? The answer is simple. It's all Shyam Sharan syndrom. Who is this veteran Shyam Sharan? - Every Nepal knows.
He visited last week to Kathmandu and convinced Moriarty on Baby King, which is Indian agenda. And from Girija Koirala to Madhav Nepal they are all giving voice to Indian agenda. Moriarty joined this league, its no surprise.
The UNMIN also started conspiracy at the same time, which proves the Shyam Sharam syndrom more strongly. Shyam Sharan convinced the UNIMN chief, Ian Martin and he organised press conference accusing the Moists.
Lets be aware. The Indian agenda should not be successful.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

US and India are dictators

James Morairty is the US ambassador or India's ambassador?
This is a million dollar question people are asking after
reading the newspapers today.
Moriarty met the Bhutanese refugee leaders and forced them
to sign the already preapred statement. But the Bhutanese refugee
leaders, who had a great respect for the US and its democracy
were surprised, and not only surprised, they were let down by
the US ambassodor's behaviour. Is he acting on his own,
on his government's behalf, or on Indian government's behalf.
He wants to breed terrorists in Bhutan by making them desparate.
In this way they can blame the terrorists for not setteling the refugee issue.
But why?
Is the US a communist nation? NO
Is Moriarty himself a communist? NO
Who will gain from lengthening of Bhutanese refugee issue?
On whose behalf Mr US ambassador working?
The US ambassador said that the resettlement offer was based
on humanitarian concern for the well-being of the
Bhutanese refugees not for political reasons. But why can't the US pressure Bhutan to take
its people back? Who is standing in between
the synonynm of democracy and a dictator?

At the meeting yesterday, which was held on the backdrop
of growing criticism by refugee leaders that the
US was pushing for resettlement without adequately
pressuring the Bhutan government on repatriation,
Moriarty said that the US continues to support the
right of 'eligible refugees' to repatriate to Bhutan,
but why this new term 'eligible refugees', now?

He also called on all refugees to reject violence.
He himself is pushing the Bhutanese refugees to the violence
by ignoring their right ot freely return homeland through India,
from the way they came.

Is Moriarty Indian ambassador or US?
No soner the Bhutanes refugee leaders refused the US (Indian) diktatIndia
sealed eastern border to thwart refugees' home return drive. In what appears to be a preemptive move, India has sealed
its border with Nepal at three locations from Friday
citing the possibility of Bhutanese refugees going to
Bhutan by crossing over its territory.
While the Pashupatinagar checkpoint of eastern Ilam
has posted a notice stating the border has been sealed,
in Manebhanjyang and Chabbise checkpoint, however,
India has prohibited free cross-border movement of people
without a notice, according to reports.
This is the India democracy. Hail dictator India.

Although the return-home drive of the Bhutanese
refuges living in Jhapa and Morang
camps have been postponed for the time being,
the Indian side has sealed its border with Nepal
at some checkpoints citing the possibility of them
going to Bhutan by taking the Indian route singly or in pairs.