Dear all,
Welcome.
Mutual Funds: RBI had provided relief to Mutual Funds industry by providing Special loan window. RBI would provide three day Special repo amount through auction to Banks @ 10.25%, which could be given to Mutual Funds. The notification had been issued on Wednesday.
ADB: The ADB had reduced India's GDP growth from 6% to 5.8% during the current fiscal year. The recent outlook has GDP growth rate of 6.5% estimate. It had cited slow pace of reforms for business hindrances. Due to major economies, Asia's opportunities are affected.
Planning Commission: Dy. Chairman had stated that due to slower economies world wide, GDP rate of 6.5% would be unachievable. It feels that during 2013-14, the rate may not be possible to be achieved.
Fin. Minister had stated that due to poor global economic scenario, India would be attaining growth rate of 6%.
Supreme Court Rulings:
1. Juvenile Age: Supreme Court had rejected PIL regarding juvenile age limit thereby remaining it as same i.e. 18 years. The PIL sought the crime committed by Juvenile to be considered same as that of an adult. It is to note that after inclusion of a juvenile in Delhi's gangrape, eight PILs had been filed wherein it was demanded to have it lessened to 16 year. The Advocates had in their petition stated various juvenile acts 2(k), 10 & 17 to be illogical and demanded amendments. The CJI headed bench had kept the verdict safe for today. It is to note that during 2000, Juvenile Justice Act was amended for increasing the age limit to 18 years. Under it, accused could not be imprisoned for more than three years. The Delhi's gang rape accused juvenile's case is being heard by Juvenile Justice Board. If he is found guilty, he could not be given punishment beyond three years.
2. Sahara Group: Supreme Court had lashed at Sahara Group for not executing it's order. The apex court had stated that if Sahara group is not returning investors amount of 24,000 crores INR collected through OCDs, it would summon Sahara's Head & other Directors. The Court had passed orders for recovery of amount along with the interest. It had also lashed at Securities Appellate Tribunal. The group cos. Sahara India Real Estate Corp. and Sahara India Housing Corp. had collected this amount without issuing Debentures.
The Bench had heard the petition of SEBI stating that either the amount be returned by August 31 or the Directors/Heads should be ready for summon. The next hearing is scheduled to be held on July 24. The Court's order is to be implemented by SEBI. The group's counsel had demanded their petition to be heard too. SEBI as the market regulator had given order for confiscation of group's Director property and bank accounts. It had been sent for appeal before the SAT.
3. Marriage Act/ Property: Also, the Central govt. constituted GoM had accepted recommendations about marriage laws being made in favour of women. The right to ancenstral property had been discussed to be made in favour of women folks. The Defence minister headed GoM had recommended many things, which includes right being granted to Judge to take decision upon his own if other party doesn't apply for divorce. Also, the six months time period for getting decree of divorce had been considered for relaxation. If Ancestral property could not be separated, atleast women folks might be duly compensated under the provision 13(F).
CBI Autonomy: CBI had asked for more autonomy regarding its working. In an affidavit before the Supreme Court yesterday, it had cited various points in the govt. proposal that had been hindrance to the autonomy. CBI had stated that if any matter is being investigated, it should be given full independence. It had also asked for tenure of CBI Director to be having minimum period of three years. Also, it had requested for financial powers and it's director being allotted the Secretary level. Not only this, it had refuted govt.'s proposal of a Accountability Commission for investigating matters against it.
The fourteen paged affidavit mentions about how it could be made independent. It is to note that earlier, the Central govt. had given an affidavit of 44 pages wherein it was stated about CBI giving more autonomy. The govt. had asked for CBI Director's tenure to be of two years. The Director would be appointed by a three member committee. It would include PM, Opposition leader, & CJI. But the outgoing director's opinion should be also sought.
It had told about how it could be made independent from political control. CBI had asked for consideration of supervisory level experience with CBI for appointment of the post along with checking matters of corruption.
Just like approval is needed prior to Director's transfer, the removal of director should also be with the approval of appointment committee.
To prevent any sort of intervention, it should have more financial powers. It would be responsible for the minister but not ministry.
The approval for conducting trial within three months is also recommended by CBI. But for investigation above Joint Secretary level, it should have a committee presided by CVC, Cabinet Secretariat, & CBI Director. The agency had also suggested measures for appointment of Director (Prosecution) & his working.
The approval of law ministry for appointment of lawyer is also refuted. It would only inform. In matters of disagreement amidst CBI Director & Director (Prosecution), it should not be sent to the Attorney General. The Attorney General should opine only in matters of appeal and reconsideration. The Accountability Commission is opposed citing it's own monitoring system & it's being successful. If any external authority is handling it, it would disrupt the present administration and control.
Tatra Truck/CBI closure: The Army's Ex-chief, V.K.Singh, charges regarding bribery in the Tatra Truck case were investigated by CBI and would be suitably closed after initial investigation. It is to note that during the one year period, he could not provide details to the agency. It is to note that he had alleged that Lt. Gen. T.Singh(Retired) had offered him bribe worth 14 crores INR during 2010 for completing the formalities regarding purchase of Tatra BEML trucks. Later, Defence minister had order for CBI investigation into the matter.
Following the scam, the purchase was stopped. Later Lt. Gen. T.Singh(Retd) had filed a defamation case against Ex-Army chief. Senior Officials state that during the Preliminary investigation, no evidence had been cited or produced after the complaiint being given on April 10, 2012. Ex-Army chief had claimed that he was offered bribe during 2010 but he had not told the reason for his silence.
Jantantra Rally: The veteran social activist and crusader against Anti-Corruption movement, Anna Hazare, had come in support of Gujarat CM, Modi, for his not being communal. At the end of final day of his Jantantra Rally, he stated that there is no such evidence found against him. He further stated that he is not in favour of either BJP or Congress. Both are not working upon quality. The Coal gate Scam is not opposed by BJP. The PM is also not clean. CBI's report had been changed. PM should have resigned on moral grounds.
If the Jan Parliament wakes up, the corrupt govt. could be targeted. Since the people had forgotten, the rally had been called for.
Mutual Funds: RBI had provided relief to Mutual Funds industry by providing Special loan window. RBI would provide three day Special repo amount through auction to Banks @ 10.25%, which could be given to Mutual Funds. The notification had been issued on Wednesday. It would be continued till further orders. During past few months, continuous profitmaking and other plans merging had caused reduction in MF portfolio. During 2012-13, MF investors had been reduced by 36 lakhs in number, which is fourth continuous year in succession. In the initial three years, investors had reduced by 15 lakhs.
As per SEBI, during April-June quarterly, 10 lakh investors are reduced. By June end, the investors amounted to 4.18 crores in various 44 funds. During past year, it had ben 4.28 crores. The Equity fund investors got reduced to 3.20 crores. The Date fund investors increased by 17 lakh and became 63 lakh investors. The ETF funds got additional 7.46 lakh investors.
With regards,
M.K.Pachraiya
Original_app_mssg(1) Food Inflation
The Food product inflation especially due to high prices of onion and other vegetable had been 4.86% during June. he WPI based inflation had been 4.70% during May and 7.58% during June 2012. As per Statistics, the WPI index during June on food commodities had been 9.74%. It is mostly due to increased price of Onion, grains, and rice. The WPI index had inflation of 8.25% during May, wherein food commodities have 14.34% stakes.
During June, the Onion price had seen 114% rise. It had been 97.40% higher during previous month. The vegetable's dearness rate had been 16.47% in June and 4.85% during may. Also during April, it declined by 9.05%. The infrastructure sector products dearness rate declined to 2.75% during June, which was 3.11% during May. The non-food products sector inflation had increased by 7.57% during June, which had been 4.88% during May. These include fibre, oilseed and minerals.
The amended data had made inflation during April to be 4.77%. Earlier, it was told to be 4.89%. During June, the eggs, meat and fish dearness rate had been 2.23% whereas during past month, it had been 11.21%. The other foodgrains and rice dearness rate been 17.18% & 19.11% during June which was 16.01% and 18.48% respectively during May.
Thr price of potato had reduced by 14.22% whereas it was reduced by 3.33% during May. Also, the pulses prices got reduced by 1.59% during June whereas during May, it was 5.95%. The inflation in fuel and Energy sector had been 7.12% during June which had been 7.32% during past month. The retail inflation had been 9.87% during June which was 9.31% previous month.
Original_app_mssg(2) FDI
UPA govt. had amidst general elections opened up FDI in nine sectors viz. telecon, Insurance, Oil, gas etc despite all objections. In some areas, it had been increased whereas in others, investment measures are made easier.
The differences had been made clear directly by PM. Under him, a meeting was held for reviewing the foreign investment.
As per Commerce minister, a total of 12 decisions were made. The FDI in telecon. sector had been increased to 100% from existing 74%. Automatic approval for 49% is being made. The remaining sectors would have to take permission from Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB). It had already been 100% in Single brand retail. The tea estate and plantation would have exclusion of clause regarding selling of 26% stakes to Indian company. But it would need approval for this proposal from Parliament. Oil and Natural gas would have 49% FDI. Defence sector has no such changes. CCS would discuss upon FDI proposals. Only those proposals, which would have modernised techniques would be discussed. Related note in this regard would be made.
Original_app_mssg(3) IMF
The International Monetary Fund today warned China that it must quickly enact critical reforms if it is to avoid further economic problems. The success or failure of these efforts will likely have a large impact on the U.S. economy.
In a report issued today, the IMF said there is an increasing risk that China's growth will fall short of the agency's 7.75 percent growth estimate. The Washington-based fund said the danger of a rapid slowdown grew following reports last month that the nation's manufacturing output was shrinking. Beijing announced that economic expansion slowed to 7.5 percent in the second quarter on Monday, too late to be included in the IMF report.
According to the IMF, China is increasingly at risk from nontraditional sources of credit -- the so-called shadow banking system -- which is being used to fund a real estate bubble and excessive borrowing by local governments.
"Since the global crisis, a mix of investment, credit and fiscal stimulus has underpinned activity," the report says. "This pattern of growth is not sustainable and is raising vulnerabilities. While China still has significant buffers to weather shocks, the margins of safety are diminishing."
While Beijing's huge reserves of foreign currency would let it protect the entire economic system from any sudden shifts, these might spur discontent among a population already unhappy about government corruption, debilitating levels of pollution and a widening wealth gap.
For decades the nation has relied on cheap currency and labor, as well as a huge amount of government spending on infrastructure, to fuel its phenomenal economic growth. Premier Li Keqiang has acknowledged this is unsustainable and has taken steps to move China to an economy fueled by demand from its own consumers. Domestic consumer demand currently accounts for about 30 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. In the U.S. that number is around 70 percent.
China's domestic consumption rate is close to the same as it was last year, but spending on physical assets like roads, airports and commercial buildings has increased as a share of the economy. This increase has come even though there is little demand for any of these items.
Local borrowing has paid for much of the new infrastructure despite the fact that a huge number of regional and municipal governments do not have the tax base to support that borrowing. "Further rapid growth of debts would raise the risk of a disorderly adjustment in local government spending," the IMF warns. Earlier this month Xinhua, the official government news agency, reported that Ordos -- a city famous for its empty skyscrapers and housing developments -- has had to borrow money from private companies to make its payroll.
If China fails to manage the transformation to a consumer-based economy, it would cause huge problems for an already-shrinking world economy and have a significant impact on the U.S. However, if there is more consumer demand from China, then U.S. companies would benefit from the creation of giant middle-class seeking American goods and services.
Original_app_mssg(4) Naxalites
Editors note: This interview was originally run in April 2010 by CNN-IBN. Given the context of the recent attack in Chhattisgarh on a Congress convoy, we have republished the interview as it resurfaces some interesting points of view.
In that interview, Arundhati Roy says that the Maoists have no choice but to indulge in ‘counter-violence’. Here is Roy’s interview with CNN-IBN Deputy Editor Sagarika Ghosh:
Sagarika Ghose: You wrote your article ‘Walking with the comrades’ in The Outlook before Dantewada happened. In the aftermath of the Dantewada (incident of 2010), do you still stand by the tone of sympathy that you had with the Maoist cause in that essay?
Arundhati Roy: Well, this is a odd way to frame before and after Dantewada happened, because actually you know this cycle of violence has been building on and on. This is not the first time that a large number of security personnel have been killed by the Maoists. I have written about it and the other attacks that took place between the years 2005-07. The way I look at is, people make it sound that, ‘oh, on this side are people, who are celebrating the killing of CRPF jawans, and that side of the people who are asking for the Maoists to be wiped out.’ This is not the case. I think that you got to look at the every death as a terrible tragedy in a system, in a war that’s been pushed on the people and that unfortunately is becoming a war of the rich against the poor. In which rich put forward the poorest of the poor to fight the poor. CRPF are terrible victims but they are not just victims of the Maoists. They are victims of a system of structural violence that is taking place, that sort to be drowned in this empty condemnation industry that goes on. This is entirely meaningless because most of the time people who condemn them have really no sympathy for them. They are just using them as pawns.
Sagarika Ghose: Who then will break the cycle of violence? The state argues that the reason why the state has to cleanse the area or sanitise the area is because whenever it initiates development work on bridges or starts a school, those are blown up by the Maoists. Is it that the cycle of violence, according to you, can only be broken by the state, and if the state pulls back, is that what you believe?
Arundhati Roy: There is some simple sort of litmus test for that: is it the case that there are hospitals, schools and a lot of development in poor areas where there aren’t any Maoists? That’s not the case. The fact is even if you look at the studies that have been done by doctors in a place like Bilaspur, what Binayak Sen describes as nutritional aids, is happening. When you go into the schools, you see that they are used as barracks. They are built as barracks. So to say that Maoists blow up schools and they are against development is a bit ridiculous.
Sagarika Ghose: But you condemn state violence and the charge against you is that you don’t condemn Naxal violence. In fact you rationalise it and are even romaticising violence. That is a charge made against you and in fact if I can read from your essay where you have written that, “I feel I want to say something about the futility of violence but what should I suggest they do? Go to court, a rally, and a hunger strike that sounds ridiculous; which party they should vote for, which democratic institution they should approach?” You seem to be saying that non-violence is futile?
Arundhati Roy: This is a strange charge on someone who has been writing about non-violence and non-violence movements for 10 years now. But what I saw when I went into the forests was this – that non-violent resistance has actually not worked; not in the ‘Narmada Bachao Andolan’ and not even in many other non-violent movements and not even in the militant movements. It has worked in some parts of the movement. But inside the forests it’s a different story because non-violence, and particularly, Gandhian non-violence in some ways needs an audience. It’s a theatre that needs an audience. But inside the forests there is no audience. When a thousand police come and surround the forest village in the middle of the night, what are they to do? How are the hungry to go on a hunger strike? How are the people with no money to boycott taxes or foreign goods or do consumer boycotts?
They have nothing. I do see the violence inside the forest as a ‘counter-violence’. As a ‘violence of resistance’. I do feel terrible about the fact that there is this increasing cycle of violence – that the more weapons the government arms the police with, those weapons end up with the Maoist PLA. It’s a terrible thing to do to any society. I don’t think that there is any romance in it. However, I’m not against romance. I do feel it’s incredible that these poor people are standing up against this mighty state that is sending thousands and thousands of para-military. I mean, what they are doing in those forests against those people with AK-47s and grenades?
Sagarika Ghose: But Maoists have AK-47s too? They have pressure bombs too?
Arundhati Roy: They snatched it from cops.
Sagarika Ghose: Should people like you not be raising their voices against the cycle of violence or should you actually been trying to find out a rationalisation for it because you’ve been called an ‘apologist for Maoists’. BJP has called you the “sophisticated face of Naxalism’. If you don’t raise your voice against their violence and simply say it morally acceptable, as a morally legitimate counter to the state, then are you not actually failing as member of a civil society?
Arundhati Roy: No, I’m not. Because I think it suits the status-quo to have everybody saying…this is terrible and all. So just let’s just keep on without taking it into account the terrible structural violence that actually is creating a ‘genocidal situation’ in those tribal areas. If you look at the levels of malnutrition, if you look at the levels of absolute desperation there; any responsible person has to say that the violence will stop when you stop pushing those people. When you have a whole community of tribals; which by the way, is a population larger than the population of most countries, is actually on the brink of survival, fighting against its own annihilation. I can’t equate their reactions, their resistance to the violence of the state. I think it’s immoral to equate the two.
Sagarika Ghose: Let’s bring you to the other point in your essay, where you are particularly harsh on Gandhi. You said party founder Charu Majumder has kept the dream of revolution real and present in India. Imagine a society without that dream, for that alone we can’t judge him too harshly. Especially not while we swaddle ourselves with Gandhi’s pious humbug about the superiority of the non-violent way and its notion of trusteeship. You also say do you know what to do if we come under fire….Do you think Gandhi is a figure to be mocked?
Arundhati Roy: I think there are some things about Gandhi, which do deserve to be mocked and I think there are some things about him which deserve a great deal of respect. Particularly, his (Gandhi’s) ideas of consumption, minimalist and sustainable living. However, let me read what he said in his thing of trusteeship. This is a quote of his notion of trusteeship, “the rich man will be left in possession of his wealth of which he will use what he reasonably requires for his personal needs and will act as a trustee for the remainder to be used for the good of the society”. I think that is one statement which can be mocked. I have no problem mocking it.
Sagarika Ghose: In a lecture in US in March at the Left forum you said ‘India is a fake democracy’ that ties in with your justification or your quasi-justification of violence to some extent. Do you feel that because Indian democracy is ‘fake’ there is no hope that Indian democracy can hold out to the Maoists?
Arundhati Roy: No, certainly I feel that India is an oligarchy where it does work as a democracy for the middle classes and the upper classes.
Sagarika Ghose: But it’s a fake democracy?
Arundhati Roy: Yeah, because (when) it doesn’t work for the mass of the people it’s a fake democracy. So you have an institution which has been hollowed out, you have institutions to which the poor have no access. When you look at the institution of democracy, look at the elections, at the courts, at the media and you look at the judiciary. You have a very dangerous system building. If you are increasingly excluding a vast section of the poorer people in this country, that’s why I say it fake. It works for some and it doesn’t work for others depending on where you want to place your feet; your politics is defined. If you stand in Greater Kailash; sure it’s a great and vibrant democracy, but if you stand in Dantewada – it is no democracy at all. You have a Chief Minister who basically said that those who don’t come out of the forests and live in Salwa Judum camps are terrorists. So looking after your chickens and tending to your fields is a terrorist act? Is that democracy?
Sagarika Ghose: If you have to come up with a solution to this. What would your solution be? What would be your way to break the deadlock?
Arundhati Roy: Well there are two things. First, on a philosophical level, I would say that I don’t believe that the imagination that has brought the planet to this crisis is going to come up with an alternative. So the least we can do is to stop and enlighten those who we think of as keepers of our past but could be people who have the wisdom for the future.
But on “Operation Greenhunt”, I would like to say three things, I think government should come clean on all these MoUs, infrastructure projects; declare them and tell us what they are and freeze them for now. Insist that all the villagers that have been pushed out, we are talking of hundreds and thousands of people, be rehabilitated. Guns need to be pulled back.
Sagarika Ghose: Every country uses mineral resources to grow. Growth is something our country needs. The present dispensation in Maoists, earlier they used to deal with Posco; the rate of compensation was Rs 30 Lakh per year that they used to pay to the Maoists. Now its no deals, all bets are off. Are you advocating that all projects from all those areas should wind up and go?
Arundhati Roy: You see what’s happening now with the privatisation of the mining industry. There is a very false sort of understanding that mining is going to push up growth. It will push it up in a strange way which has nothing to do with real development. But if you look at the royalties that the government gets, e.g for iron ores, Rs 27 for 5,000 tonnes of profit for the private company, we are paying without (keeping) the ecology of other people’s economy (in mind). So it’s a myth this thing called growth.
Sagarika Ghose: Are you willing to mediate between the Maoists and the government because they have put your name as well as Kabir Suman to mediate. But you declined. What are you afraid of? Why don’t you go ahead and mediate?
Arundhati Roy: I’m afraid of myself. These are not my skills. I don’t trust myself. If you are a basketball player you can’t be a swimmer. So I think there are people who would do a good job but I don’t think I’m one of them. But I think one question we have to ask is whom do we mean when we say Maoist? Who does ‘Operation Green Hunt’ want to target? Because for this there has been a discrete separation been made that here are the Maoists and here are the tribals. On the other hand, some people say Maoists represent the tribal. Neither of which is true. The fact is that about 99 per cent of Maoists are tribals. But all tribals are not Maoists, still the numbers turn into tens and thousands of people who would officially call themselves Maoists. Among them 90,000 women belong to women’s organisations. Some 10,000 belong to the cultural organisation. So are they all going to be wiped out?
Sagarika Ghose: What is your message to Home Minister P Chidambaram? What kind of message would you like to give him? Do you think he is fighting this war for ego?
Arundhati Roy: I think he is fighting with an imagination that is chained to the corporate companies that he wants served – from Enron to Vedanta, to all the companies that he has represented. I’m not necessarily accusing him of being corrupt but I’m accusing him of having an imagination that is driving this country into a very serious situation and it’s going to affect all of us.
Sagarika Ghose: Are you worried about the case that has been filed against you? There has been a complaint filed against you under the Chhattisgarh Special Powers Act (CSPA) and police are investigating about lending your support to the Maoists after your article. Are you worried about state prosecution?
Arundhati Roy: Obviously, I would be a goon not to be worried. But I won’t be the first one they have gone after. I think what they are trying to do is send out a warning to the people because I feel they want to intensify this war. I think we are going to see drone attacks on the poorest people of this country. Moreover they want to cordon off the theatre of war and try to warn people who might have a different view from that of the government not to go in the air.
Sagarika Ghose: Why do you think your writings are as controversial as they are? Why does India love to hate Arundhati Roy? Why is there are so much hate mail directed at you? Why do people think you say things that people don’t agree with? Why are you the writer that India loves to hate?
Arundhati Roy: I think it is very presumptuous of you to represent India. I feel the opposite. Like somebody, who is embraced wherever I go, whether it is to Orissa or Narmada; it is just the people with the voice, the people with a huge stake in the things I’m writing about where that stake is threatened – that hate me. But if I did feel that whole of India hated me, I have been doing something terribly wrong, as a political writer would I be crazy to carry on what I’m doing? The fact is I feel very deeply loved, that’s the real issue.
Sagarika Ghose: But do you think there is a problem? Do you think the government, the media, the kind of dominant culture that is targeting intellectuals, is targeting people like human right activists? Is this dangerous?
Arundhati Roy: Of course this is very dangerous. I read one article that says Dantewada comes to Delhi in the charge against Kobad Ghandy. People’s Union for Democratic Rights….all institutions are being called front organisations.
There is this manic barricade-like accusation to any one who has a different view that they are Maoists. Hundreds of people who are not known have been picked up and jailed. There is a whole bandwidth of people’s movements from the non-violent ones outside the forests to the armed struggle inside the forests which have actually held off this corporate assault, which I have to say has not happened anywhere else in the world.
Sagarika Ghose: Let me just ask you what a viewer wrote to me, “when I see a 16-year-old with a gun, I would feel scared and mourn that. Why would Arundhati Roy, when she looks at a 16-year-old with a gun, celebrate and say she is so beautiful, she has a lovely smile”?
Arundhati Roy: Because if I saw a 16-year-old being raped by a CRPF man and watching her village being burnt and watching her parents being killed and submit to it, I would mourn that. When I see one standing up and say I ‘m going to fight this, I would feel terrible. I think it’s a terrible thing to come to that. But it’s better than having her accept her annihilation.
Sagarika Ghose: Let me read out some of the criticisms that have been made against your fellow thinkers and activists, who said “ she equates their cynical quest for power with genuine demands, rights and concern of the people who live in the forests. She gives new meaning to the binary logic, something which she ridiculed George W Bush for. She is at the moment a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome. And another parlance is that she would be described as an embedded journalist”. How do you react to this criticism?
Arundhati Roy: I think embedded is not in itself a bad thing, it depends on who you are embedded with, whether you are embedded with the media or with the corporate? Or are you embedded with the side that sees itself in resisting this. Here I don’t refer to the Maoists. Who are the Maoists? Of course, the Maoist ideologues – (we say) their aim is to overthrow the Indian state when people who form there fighting forces don’t know what the Indian state is? But surely there is a coincidence of aims and the movement; both are using each other. I want to say that Maoists are not the only people who are trying to overthrow the Indian state; whereas the Indian state has been thrown already by the ‘Hindutva’ project and by the corporate project.
Sagarika Ghose: So you believe that the Constitution has ceased to exist?
Arundhati Roy: I believe it’s been deeply weakened.
Sagarika Ghose: Do you think of ever giving up on India and living somewhere else?
Arundhati Roy: Absolutely not. For me that’s the challenge, that’s the beauty, that’s the wonder because the people in this country are staging India’s most difficult struggle anywhere in the world. I feel so proud. I really salute them on what’s going on here. As I belong here, even if CSPA wants to put me into jail I’m not going to live in Switzerland.
M.K.Pachraiya
No comments:
Post a Comment