For you information, the wealth of the land is not from Hindus but from Indians. The collective responsibility of Indians to protect the Sethu Bridge should be for the welfare of the nation and Indians as a whole. The writers reasoning of bringing in religion and to paint all others as anti national shows how little minded he is.
RE:Reply to Editor
by r patil on Aug 02, 2008 06:20 AM Permalink
It is not about being anti-national but about UPA being anti-hindu ,which you seem to deny.
RE:RE:Reply to Editor
by deepak on Aug 02, 2008 07:29 AM Permalink
Rice converts should know that Hindu is a geographical name... Rice converts like Mathew Mathews should think twice before playing with sentiments of majority ON their ancestoral land...
RE:Reply to Editor
by raj on Aug 02, 2008 09:15 AM Permalink
you are squarely wrong. this nationa has absorbed all faiths and also has let them practice their faith freely. but, but, hindus were here for a very long time. and its more or less - by the virtue of numbers - their to claim - the temples, vast properties, kingdoms, the achievements. we have pride in claiming that it belongs to india and indians. but when it comes to talking about religion why should hindus shy away ? christians and muslims have zero tolerance towards hindus, why shoul hindus be any different ? why shy away from protecting whats an important momument.
the religious debate aside - this deal is only and ONLY to please dmk who own their dredging business. we lose a lot evironmentally. sri lanka has been crying horse about the environment being affected. its a security mess for them too as much as it effects us. practically this is a dead idea - and yet we have no debate, and i'd dare you - not one congress person will ever say anything about christian gods or muslims - its only the hindus they seek to wound with glee - and say expressing oneself as hindus is fundamentalism.
