Rigid laws

Wrong precedent

• The President’s Address has traditionally been used by the ruling party to define its policies while in power (IE, June 7). The president is meant to be neutral towards all political parties and hence the address must not degenerate into hatred-filled rhetoric. For the first time, the address has been used by the ruling coalition to spit venom against the Opposition. The Congress-Communist brigade has once again set a dangerous historical precedent, which inspires disgust. Especially so is the fact that the address chose to ignore the ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Kashmir and the forced conversions by Christians, while it singled out Gujarat, where the 1992 assembly elections have already brought the argument to an end. The UPA accuses the BJP of saffronisation, but they have painted the apex seat with their own colours.

— Rakesh Sarang On e-mail

• The UPA government has pledged in preserving, protecting and promoting secular values and enforcing the law. But how sincere is the government? On Kashmir, the UPA government wants to open up discussions with Pakistan, but there is nothing on the resettlement of Kashmiri Pandits, rotting away in refugee camps. If this is how much the government cares about people and their wellbeing, it’s doubtful if anything will change in the near future.

— Arvind Amin On e-mail

Good sign

• The steps taken by Tamil Nadu’s two major parties (AIDMK, DMK) to get Cauvery water for the state is good (‘Amma to sail with DMK on Cauvery, destination Delhi’, IE, June 7). At least after three years of severe water problems in the Cauvery delta, there is now some hope for TN farmers.

— Kandar Aditan On e-mail

Misquoted

• This is with regard to the article, ‘Friends and family’ (IE, May 23), by Vrinda Gopinath. She writes about my relationship with Shobhana Bhartia, saying that I have very fond memories of my association with her, but then goes on to say that we are no longer friends. Is that not a contradiction in terms? I had given this interview to Ms Gopinath on the phone and I do not recollect making such a statement. Mrs Bhartia occupies a special place in my life and will always be a friend. This letter is not for her, because we don’t really need a newspaper to express our feelings for each other and we know each other’s place in our respective lives, but I would like to clarify to your readers that this statement is erroneous and that I have been misquoted.

— Amar Singh, MP New Delhi