You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2007.
Hinduism is an intolerant religion, imposing social disabilities that are shocking to the modern mind. Islam and Chrisitianity are refreshingly egalitarian religions which treat all citizens as equal. Naturally, there is no caste in Christian or Muslim society. More groundbreaking evidence from The Pioneer (29th July 2007):
Dozens of Muslim students of a Government-run Urdu school in a Bihar village have refused to take mid-day meal cooked by a Dalit woman.
“We will not touch the food. There is no question of taking food cooked by a woman belonging to the Scheduled Caste,” said Nurjahan Bano, an eight-year-old student of Amri Urdu Middle School in Rohtas district, about 150 km from here.
Md Aslam Ansari, a teacher in the school, admitted that Muslim students were not eating mid-day meals for nearly a month. “It is an unfortunate thing,” he said.
“All the Muslim students of the school refused to eat food cooked by a Dalit woman,” villager Naushad Alam said. There are over 100 students in the school. Some parents of the school students are responsible for the decision, Alam said.
“Last month, only a few students refused to eat food cooked by a Dalit woman but later most of the students followed them,” he said.
Caste in Muslim society? You Islamophobe! You intolerant Hindutva fascist nut!
(The Pioneer link will expire. Use this link instead)
Have you been following the build up to the presidential poll?
Are you aware that the UPA-Left’s candidate for the president is a woman named Pratibha Patil?
Who’s Pratibha Patil, you ask?
That’s not a bad question at all. The whole nation has been asking that question. So it doesnt mean your general knowledge is poor.
However, did you ask: Why did the UPA (led by Sonia Gandhi), out of all Indians in a billion, zeroed in an Pratibha Patil for presidential candidature?
Before you read the rest, you are advised to familiarize with Pratibha Patil and the presidential poll by reading this post of mine.
Arun Shourie may have the answer. The BJP has published a booklet with two articles penned by Arun Shourie. In the articles, he uncovers the link between Sonia Gandhi and Pratibha Patil:
The Cooperative Bank Employees Union wrote one memorandum after another exposing how the directors of the Pratibha Mahila Sahakari Bank were systematically bankrupting the bank. They demanded dismissal of the family-controlled board. They demanded ‘a CBI inquiry against Pratibha Patil, former Deputy Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, for the irregularities in the bank’. They wrote these letters, in Marathi, to the relevant authorities in Maharashtra looking after the affairs of cooperative banks. They sent them to the then President, to the then Prime Minister, to among others, ‘Smt. Sonia Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition (Lok Sabha)…’
And:
A pattern
Memoranda of the Employees Union show that such enterprising sleights-of-account-books were part of a pattern. The memoranda and communications were sent to, among others, Pratibha Patil herself. For instance, in a letter to her on 13 March, 2002, the President, Vice-president and Secretary of the Union informed her that.
She had allowed her elder brother, Dilipsingh Patil, to use the bank’s telephone (no. 224672, which he had got installed at his residence) for running his stock exchange business. He ran up a bill of Rs. 20 lakh. Phone records showed that the calls were made to sharebrokers in Mumbai. These records were subsequently destroyed. But later the charge was found to be one of substance. It was one of the things that Amol Khairnar, who was appointed as the chief administrator of bank, asked P.D. Patil, manager of the bank, to explain in the show-cause notice that the former issued on 1 February, 2003.
The show-cause notice also mentioned that the Pratibha Mahil Sahakari Bank had extended unlawful loans to the Sant Muktabai Cooperative Sugar Factory from time to time. As you will recall, the sugar factory too was set up by Pratibha Patil herself to help rural youth! It was inaugurated by Sonia Gandhi in 1999. As The Asian Age has reported, like the Pratibha Mahila Sahakari Bank, the mill too has closed down – but only after running up a loan default of nearly Rs. 20 crore and without ever producing much sugar!
A little background to what follows:
15 August, 2005: nine office-bearers of the DCC issue a press release saying that G.N. Patil, the brother of Pratibha Patil, has not submitted accounts of funds that were collected by Congress workers for felicitating Pratibha Patil.
Vishram Patil commences an inquiry within the Congress into the misappropriation of the funds. He also commences an inquiry into financial dealings of Ulhas Patil and his NGOs. He brings the matter to the attention of the high-command of the Congress. (Which means the Congress or atleast one man in the Congress knows all this.)
He receives three anonymous letters. Written in hand, they state that a supari has been given out to kill him, that he should be careful. He persists with the inquiry.
He is killed. Local dailies are full of the murder. They surmise that it is the result of political rivalries in the District Congress Committee.
Because of the enormous commotion among the local people, the Police act. Within a few days, they nab the killers.
They make swift progress in the investigation. They tell Rajani Patil, the widow, that 90 per cent of the investigation is over, that they will soon get the ones who instigated the murder also.
Suddenly, the investigation goes off the rails. The police now put out a story that the murder actually took place because of a dispute over money that Raju Mali had borrowed from Vishram Patil. Rajani Patil strongly refutes the insinuation. Local papers puncture holes in this new concoction of the Police. As suddenly as the concoction had been put out, the investigation is taken out of the hands of the local police entirely, and turned over to the CID of the state Government.
Then, Rajni goes to Sonia Maino for help!
26 September, 2005: alarmed at the way the investigation is being derailed, the widow, Rajani Patil writes to Sonia Gandhi. She says, ‘The brain behind the crime is pressurizing the investigation process.’
Rajni also meets Sonia Gandhi personally and Sonia doesnt do anything about it! Forget doing anything, even the FIR is dropped!
Rajani Patil travels to Delhi. She meets Sonia Gandhi personally in January 2006. She narrates the sequence of the case. She also meets other Congress bigwigs – Ahmed Patel, Sushil Kumar Shinde, Margaret Alva and others.
They move not a finger. Instead, the FIR against the two who are said to have financed the murder is dropped. Having first snatched the investigation away from the local police and transferred it to the state CID, the Government now decides that the investigation is best done by the CBI!Three months pass – ostensibly waiting for the CBI to respond. Eventually, the CBI informs the state Government that it is overwhelmed with work, that as the case has no ‘inter-state or international ramifications’, it is not a fit case for the agency.
Desperate, Rajni writes yet again to Sonia Maino:
5 March, 2007: disheartened and broken, Rajani Patil again writes to Sonia Gandhi. As you also lost your husband, you are the one person who will understand my wound, she writes. She recalls the anonymous letters that her husband had received warning him to desist from the inquiry, warning that ‘a supari to murder my husband had been given by Dr. Ulhas Patil and Dr. G.N. Patil, the brother of Smt. Pratibha Patil, Governor of Rajasthan. On the morning of 21.9.2005, my husband was brutally murdered…’ ‘I fear that my whole family is likely to get liquidated by these brutal murderers if they continue to get politically patronized by the party,’ she concludes.
She receives no reply.
Impressive resume? Clean candidate? Did great service to empowerment of women? What nonsense! Sonia Gandhi, the chairman of the UPA, KNOWS Pratibha Patil, she knows about the murder of Rajni’s husband. There’s something very very dirty here and we, the people of India, demand answers!
Arun nails it in the conclusion:
The politics
Could it be that the Congress high-ups, in particular Sonia Gandhi, did not know about these associations of Pratibha Patil? I was at first inclined to think so. After all, Pratibha Patil’s name had been picked out of a hat at the last minute. There might have been no time for a background check.
But on going through these letters after letters, these memoranda after memoranda – one and all of them written and sent by Congressmen, one and all of them sent to Congressmen; after reading Rajani Patil’s account of her meeting with Sonia Gandhi and other Congress leaders in Delhi; after going through the proceedings in courts; after seeing the screaming headlines of the local papers, I just can not believe that neither Sonia Gandhi nor her immediate colleagues remembered nothing of the case. After all, the head of their own party in the district, the very man who had been thrice elected to the post, had been killed. After all, all concerned in the party unit had been pointing to an ex-MP of the Congress and the brother of the Governor of Rajasthan… how could everyone have forgotten? Murders of district Congress chiefs are still not that common.
So, the only inference is that they knew of the antecedents of Pratibha Patil and for the very antecedents selected her.
And that stands to reason. A person who is weak and dutifully submissive is already Prime Minister. But he has one defect – being financially honest, he is not vulnerable. There is always the danger, inconceivable though it seems at present, that at some point, he may throw up his hands…
So, what is needed is not just a weak person. What is needed is a person who is weak and vulnerable…
Precisely. Do read the two articles if you are really concerned about the future of this country. They can be found here.
The CIA has declassified a series of documents relating to CIA’s activities during the 1950s to 70s dealing “extensively with the communist regimes in the former Soviet Union and China, and the American reading of their policies.” The Times of India (link), DNA (link) and IBNLive (link) carried news reports about these documents, emphasizing how Nehru’s naivete and romanticism influenced his foreign policy vis-a-vis Communist China. That’s not the point however.
Yossarin, who has got hold of the documents and reviewed them writes:
…Of particular interest to India is a 3 part series on the border dispute with China but more juicy document is 12 MB dossier on the Indian Communist Party, this should stir up politics in India at a time when the Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi lead Congress has accorded unprecedented leverage to the Communists who are celebrating 30 years of rule in Bengal.
Offstumped has reviewed the documents and was amazed to learn the extent to which the Communists looked for direction from Russia and China, sought support and approval and pretty much sub-ordinated national interest at the altar of a dubious ideology and subservience to the Chinese.
(link)
It confirms the suspicion that Indians always had about the loyalty of Indian communist parties. That India’s communists, like communists elsewhere, are a highly treacherous lot is well known. Please do go through the entire post by Yossarin. It has a detailed review of the documents with emphasis on the murky dealings of the Indian communists during the late 50s and the early 60s.
Now, go and read the news reports on TOI, DNA and IBNLive. How many references do the reports have to the activities of the Indian communists during those times? Not one!
Yossarin lists these on Offstumped. These included plans to setup a secret underground organization within the Indian Army by infiltrating its ranks, radio sets installed in a Chinese newspaper office in Kolkata to receive broadcasts from Peking, Chinese financial assistance to Left factions in Bengal etc. However, the most shocking are these:
letter asking for collaboration in Indian underground organization work aimed at an eventual revolution, because China has a border with India and can provide arms and supplies
Also Jaipal Singh, head of the illegal organization within the Indian Army decided to reactivate his organization in May 1961 following the hard left faction gaining control of the party
There is an entire document (12MB and 185 pages) relating to the Indian communists named “The Indian Communist Party and Sino-Soviet Dispute” (link, PDF document) and somehow, most newspapers have missed it. In fact, there are only FOUR documents that concern India and the document “The Indian Communist Party and Sino-Soviet Dispute” is one of them.
An Indian journalist reading a CIA declassification, looking specifically for documents which concern India, misses one out of four documents. Considering that the same communist parties are sharing power at the Centre (with a role and weight grossly disproportionate to the number of their seats in Parliament), influencing India’s foreign/economic/social policy, this should have been breaking news. But for some reason, it isnt. Himesh Reshammiya being spotted in a burkha is! Some obscure letter written by Mahatma Gandhi 60 years ago is getting all the attention.The question to ask: the silence, is it all deliberate?
Two popular English dailies, The Hindu and The Indian Express have been completely silent on this.
What’s going on here? Why didnt even a single newspaper bother to bring this to light?
The documents relating to Sino-Indian dispute:
1. The Sino-Indian Border Dispute Section 1: 1950-59 (link, PDF)
2. The Sino-Indian Border Dispute Section 2: 1959-61 (link, PDF)
3. The Sino-Indian Border Dispute Section 3: 1961-62 (link, PDF)
All the other documents can be found here: http://www.foia.cia.gov/cpe.asp
A person who doesnt know her history well.
A person who has shielded her brother in a murder case.
A person who is involved in a sugar scam.
A person who is involved in a bank scam.
A person who believes in ghosts and claimed that a man dead 38 years ago spoke to her.
She’s going to become the president, if the United “Progressive” Alliance and the Communists, who claim sympathy with the aam aadmi, have their way. Is that what we, the people, deserve in the 60th year of our independance? A criminal politician as president backed by a criminal government with an overwhelmingly criminal history?
Pranab Mukherjee claims that the people of India dont elect the President. The elected representatives (politicians) do.
And the aam aadmi is bewildered. Yet again, he’s reminded of his aamness. He’s shown how aam he is compared to our powerful politicians.
Dont we, the people, deserve better? Raise your voice! Paste the above poster on your blog/website. Spread the word.
(The banner comes from here.
I saw it first here.)
Update:
Pratibha believes in astrology and feels that Pluto’s demotion may upset astrological calucations. The Hindu reports:
Rajasthan Governor Pratibha Patil has urged Indian scholars to study and assess the possible impact of recent changes in the status of Pluto as a planet on the astrological calculations. “There could be a better use and application of traditional knowledge with serious research,” she said.
“Considering the fact that there is so much interest as well as faith in astrology in India, there is need for in-depth study of the possible impact of the recent astronomical findings about the planets. Sometimes we read about 12 planets instead of nine earlier,” she said.
Darn darn! My intuition tells me the new planetary configuration may screw her nomination as a presidential candidate. If Pratibha loses the election, the UPA-Left should condemn the International Astronomical Union for having done a great disservice to the cause of women empowerment in male-dominated Indian society.
The Times of India reports:
Thirteen people, including six women and three children, were kidnapped by Maoists from Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh, police said on Sunday.
While two women and a child were released later, ten people are still in the custody of Maoists, they said.
Those abducted were coming back from Bangagudem village of Khammam district in Andhra Pradesh after attending a marriage, they said.
Delightful. I’m sure that will please Arundhati Roy, Praful Bidwai, Gaddar and other Maoist monkeys, cheerleaders and front organisations of the Maoist movement. Of course, there are no human rights involved here as thirteen innocent people, most of them women and children, have been kidnapped while returning from a marriage. In fact, it is simply a response to state sponsored oppression and should be understood. When naxalites kidnap innocent women and children, it will deliver them from state sponsored oppression and bring about a paradise of a country in which everybody would be equal.
These people were living in the state government-run relief camp at Maraiguda in the Naxal-infested Dantewada district, they said.
Expect the Maoist monkeys, cheerleaders, human rights organisations, NGOs and magazines like Frontline to accuse the government of being responsible for the kidnapping. The government is displacing people from their homes (to take them on picnics I suppose?) and so is responsible for whatever attack that is made on the people who populate refugee camps. The naxalites who are the actual killers are innocent. Of course, there are no human rights involved when naxalites attack, kill innocent and helpless civilians. Such noble actions will bring about a paradise in which every human being would be equal and there shall be no oppressed classes. Remember the paradise that the USSR was turned into after Stalin took over, those torture camps and all? Ah, social justice and paradise!
For too long before and after independance, Indian politics, public and intellectual discourse has been dominated by leftist thinking. Socialism, Fabianism, Nehruvianism, Stalinism, Marxism were the dominant ideologies on which government policy, social and economic, was based. There is a widely accepted view that these utopian, impractical, outdated, obscurantist and fraudulent ideologies have largely failed India. The evidence is there to see in the poverty levels that existed before 1991, when India broke out of its self imposed socialist shackles and decided to give its citizens more economic freedom by pursuing a liberal economic policy, and the rate at which it has declined post 1991.
However, economic reforms are still viewed as a great evil, especially in constituencies dominated by the pseudo leftist or left leaning Congress party, the pucca leftist CPI(Marxist) and other parties with leftist leanings. These parties thrive because of the numerous falsehoods that are spread deliberately by them and their counterparts in the intelligentsia via fabrication, sophistry, outright lies and sensationalist statements to the media. The common man, especially the uneducated one, falls too easily for these and continues to vote for these parties, which have anything except India’s real development on their agendas once they come to power.
There are a number of people in India who believe in the power of a liberal economy, its ability to bring people out of poverty and take the nation down the path of progress. Whatever measly reforms the Indian government has taken post 1991 have yielded net gains. They have generally increased the standard of life of the common man, rescued hundreds of millions from poverty and unleashed a mean economic machine that now threatens to compete with the best of the world. Why then do people still vote for parties which do not favour these reforms and spend considerable pastime in criticizing them, giving us nightmares of a possible return to the old socialist days during which economic intolerance was considered progressive.
It is because of the absence of a distinctively rightist, secular, libertarian national party which can equal the other national parties, the Congress and the BJP, in size and influence. This absence, in fact, is really surprising. You would expect that with the kind of gains that India made through economic reforms, there would exist a strong voice (there are very few today and only three in the UPA) that is proreform in India’s polity. The BJP promised to be that party, the party with a difference, the party which would espouse rightist economic policy among other things. It seemed that the long awaited right-of-centre party had finally arrived.
Though it was reform friendly during the five years of its rule at the centre in the NDA, the BJP couldnt make too many gains, the sort of gains that every rightist was expecting it to make. The BJP has too many controversies around its neck and too many groups dragging it in different directions. It had to cut short its economic reform agenda because of heavy criticism from the RSS. This way, it missed many reform opportunities. On the social and political front, it did not pursue what it promised to. Its main agendas, the Uniform Civil Code, Art. 370 etc. were never pursued. As expected, a frustrated electorate kicked it out of power in 2004 and transferred power into the hitherto hated Congress and the ragbag bunch of political friends that make the UPA.
Today, the BJP comes across as a confused party with no firm leadership and no focussed agenda. It came to power in Punjab with a practical agenda, based on good governance rather than Hindutva. Just a few months later, one of its members was caught circulating a CD allegedly containing not so pleasant references to Muslims. This shows that there is a lack of focussed agenda. Even considering that some of the contents of the CD are true, the BJP still deserves the harsh criticism that it got for resorting to such cheap tactics. The BJP is in a state of crisis. Even if it would have a strong leadership, it would still be burdened by its links to RSS and will not be able to pursue its agenda freely. In any case, the BJP is not supported by all rightists because it is perceived to be a communal party, “diving the country on religious lines for votes” as they say.
What is needed is party with more difference. A party which is truly rightist – an unflinching supporter of liberal economic reforms, economic freedom, consumer rights and consumer benefit, over the benefit of MPs, bureaucrats and other interest groups. A party which is secular in the true sense of the word – one which avoids the fraud that has been pursued in the name of secularism and minority rights by the “secular” parties of today, one which seeks to make India secular both on paper and in practice (today’s India is secular on paper and multireligious and favouritist in practice) by strict separation of state and religion. A party which is libertarian – one which would espouse individual freedom in the true sense, one which would avoid bans at the drop of a hat both to please itself and please the minorities, one which would understand that society, culture and religion are not the state’s business.
We had only one party that comes close – the Swatantra Party. However, it couldnt make much headway. Who’s next?
Further reading:
1. Amit Varma laments that it is frustrating being a libertarian in India. “Where’s the Freedom Party?“, he asks.
2. Nitin Pai argues in Waiting for the Free Market Mahatma that India needs someone who can popularise the free market among India’s masses, by cogent articulation of its benefits, making the analogy of Mahatma Gandhi who realized that real power lay in the masses and popularised the freedom struggle among them. He asks:
If Gandhi could crystallize the idea of political freedom and simplify its practice, then surely, the same could be done for the idea of economic freedom. But with many parts of India suffering from a socialist hangover (and indeed renewal) can it find one in time?
3. Jaithirth Rao says in Tired of Socialists that even though the Swatantra Party did not win many votes and did not win elections, it did have a considerable impact on the public discourse over economic freedom during those times. He says:
Even if it is not a formal party, only a society, it is important that the argument for economic and political freedoms (which are intertwined) must be made loudly, clearly and cogently.
4. Most recently, Tavleen Singh argues in Such a dismal front that:
These ideas will get the support of voters if they can be certain that their lives will improve. But, to articulate this total shift away from the policies we have followed so far we need a new political party. A post-modern version of the old Swatantra Party if you will. A party that will have the courage to admit why our socialist policies have failed and articulate what needs to be done for ordinary Indians to share the benefits of an economy that is supposedly the second fastest growing economy in the world.
What we do not need is a revival of a Third Front that stands for the very socialist ideas that we should have junked long ago.
Mihir Bholey, writing in the Indian Express (“Art for whose sake?” 8th June 2007) has a refreshing take on the MS University – Chandramohan art controversy. Most newspapers except The Pioneer had the same boring articles on artistic freedom, fascism and other blah blah blah. Mihir, at the risk of losing his secular credentials in a country where public discourse has become increasingly perverted and too politically correct, writes:
Caste is often defined as a ‘closed class’. It is considered closed, not only due to the lack of upward-downward mobility, but also because of the lack of acceptance, assimilation and tolerance inherent in the system. Today, it is amazing to find similar traits gripping a growing number of professional communities in India: art, film, media, trade, industry, NGOs. Self-obsession, aggressive assertion for rights, demand for unrestrained freedom, intolerance to criticism are making them similar to a ‘closed class’.
What follows is a comment that I have written in response to the article on the IE website. I thought I should post it here:
At last, someone dares to take a different view at risk of being branded “backward”, “conservative”, “communal” and other pet names by the socalled liberal and secular media and civil society. The author has rightly pointed out that the issue is not of rights and freedom. Most of those who were arguing for Chandramohan tried to make it look as an issue of rights and artistic freedom.
However, the issue is not of rights and freedom. It is about morality and ethics. There is morality in the universe and it is worth preserving. If someone calls us a nasty word in public, say a bus, will we go out of our way to support him invoking the freedom of
expression and the freedom to offend? We would construe such an act as immoral and unethical and condemn it in strong terms, then and there. Maybe even give him a tight slap.
Why then should an artist, who is as much Homo Sapiens and as much a citizen as the rest of us, be treated differently, as if he enjoys a set of rights completely different from the lesser mortals that are his/her fellow citizens? Why then is condemning what one feels is a cheap, immoral and unethical piece of art considered “retrograde” or “communal”?
The moment we extend priveleges to a section of society citing whatever reasons, we sow the seeds of division and hierarchy. Supporters of special rights and priveleges for artists will do well to remember that it is only because Brahmins were thought to have more value to society, by way of their intellect and knowledge, that they came to occupy the highest hierarchical position in the Indian society. Numerous privelges were extended to the Brahmin and we all know how the Brahmins and other upper castes began claiming these priveleges as a birth right and the varna system, otherwise a properly working system, degenerated into what it is today.
The author is completely correct in saying that numerous professions – art, media, NGOs etc. – are becoming “closed classes”, intolerant of criticism, selfrighteous and closed to ideas from lesser mortals, like us critics.
It is hoped that amid the senseless demands for unrestrained freedom, supporters of Chandramohan realize why we, as a society, discourage tendencies like passing lewd comments at passing females or making obscene gestures like showing the middle finger in public or mocking old people walking with crutches. Both these actions can be defended by invoking the freedom to offend (from the freedom of expression) but are not. Why?
Maybe I should go around abusing people in public, calling them the choicest names, mocking physically disadvantaged people (my freedom to offend); call a few journalists and artists and get it named as a new form of art; and defend it in the name of artistic freedom and the freedom to offend. Cool no? Dont tell me no you fascists! You conservative, retrograde and communal buffoons!
(…the following wasnt part of the comment…)
Summary:
1. You are completely free. You are free to draw the most obscene paintings of Durga Maata or prophet Muhammad. So are those who dislike your art and express it (short of violence.) When someone expresses negative opinions about your art, dont start calling him/her names. There is freedom to offend but there’s also freedom to express offence. Such expression should not be construed as an attack on your artistic freedom but merely as an opinion on the content of your art.
2. Nobody can claim special priveleges in a democratic society. We are all equal.
3. Intolerance to criticism and selfrighteousness are increasingly affecting our artists, NGOs, civil society and the media, so much so that they are becoming “closed class”es, demanding special rights and priveleges while not extending the same to their critics.
4. Demands on rights shouldnt reach ridiculous levels. Mocking an old man walking with crutches is defendable theoretically, by the freedom to offend, but dont we usually draw the line?
The Atlantean Mysteries: Marriage
A long time ago, on the 8th day of the month of April in the year 1984 AD, in the city of Hyderabad, was born a rather unimportant individual, who used to call himself, a little undeservedly, Atlantean.
[...]
Around April-May, circa 2007 AD, he disappeared mysteriously. There was only one blog entry on April 27, which indicated that he was not completely off contact with the world. Investigators…
[...]
… it appears his grandparents had a serious discussion with him sometime around the end of May and the beginning of June, about his marriage…
[...]
… seem to have insisted on marriage within the same caste. There is no evidence to prove conclusively that Atlantean resisted this proposal. For the purpose of investigation, the investigators assumed that Atlantean indeed accepted it.
[...]
… on the 5th of June, Atlantean is believed to have returned to Hyderabad. On the evening of that day, incidentally, he opened one of the many matrimonial websites of those days, for reasons unknown to the investigators. Most simply speculated that it had something to do with the marriage proposals put by his grandparents. It is believed that he entered the name of his caste among other parameters and ran a search for prospective brides. What happened next was a mystery in the beginning to the investigators. Later, as the investigators unravelled more evidence, everything pointed conclusively to one thing: Atlantean was terrified by what he saw.
[...]
… began praying that he would get a good wife. Investigators found a blog entry “Hello!” dated March 15, 2007, in which Atlantean expressed apprehensions about marriage. And, in fact, the day he returned to Hyderabad, Atlantean had visited a hill shrine at Yadagiri Gutta, probably seeking blessings from the deity Lord Lakshmi Narasimhan for a good wife. All this points…
[...]
… and to this day, there’s no telling…
[...]
… many questions remain unanswered…
[...]
… remains one of the most critically investigated cases of…
[...]
The documentary ends here.
A Recovery Channel presentation.
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Recent Comments