EDITORIAL

In the lion’s den

Some times the signals and gestures in politics speak much more eloquently than the words. That is why only the naive will ignore the significance of the venue chosen by Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed to celebrate his one year in office. Gandarbal, about 20 km from Srinagar, is not just like any other town where the Mufti would have gone to address a public meeting. It was a carefully selected venue to diligently wind up a week-long mass-contact programme on a day which was also planned to coincide with the Mufti’s first anniversary as the elected head of..........more

Probe all aspects

Every day we come across one new scandal or the other involving some of the country’s top artistes in the illegal immigration rackets. Now there comes another disquieting report. A fraud has come to light in Britain in which a few officials of the Indian High Commission are said to be involved in human trafficking. They have exposed themselves to the charge of forging travel documents, particularly visas. A case has been registered by that country’s Immigration Department. Naturally the Ministry of External Affairs has felt concerned and, on its request, the Union...more

Will Musharraf respond to optimist Vajpayee?

By Ghazanfar Butt

With the State Assembly elections in the offing in four States of the country, it was accepted that there was no possibility of any initiative being taken to improve relations between India and Pakistan. The Indian Army recorded an increase in the number of infiltration attempts along the Line of Control in ........more

Indian Technology

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

India is said to be a ‘mercantile’ civilization. We have excelled in trade since times immemorial. While we may pride ourselves on this trait, it is also a limitation. The Mongols developed gunpowder and the Mughals conquered us easily. Englishmen ......more

Indians obsession
with dynasties

By Kedar Nath Pandey

The one person who outshone Ravi Shankar when the 78 year old sitar maestro performed at the packed Barbican Hall in London was his 17-year old daughter Anoushka. The hall rang .........more

EDITORIAL

In the lion’s den

Some times the signals and gestures in politics speak much more eloquently than the words. That is why only the naive will ignore the significance of the venue chosen by Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed to celebrate his one year in office. Gandarbal, about 20 km from Srinagar, is not just like any other town where the Mufti would have gone to address a public meeting. It was a carefully selected venue to diligently wind up a week-long mass-contact programme on a day which was also planned to coincide with the Mufti’s first anniversary as the elected head of the State. He could not have been attracted by the milky waters of the Sind river on the picturesque banks of which Gandarbal was located. He himself has grown up in no less a beautiful place in the midst of the mighty Chinars on the banks of the Jhelum in Bijbehara in the south of the Valley. So the natural beauty could not have the reason for him to feel attracted to Gandarbal. The fact is that Gandarbal alone would have given him the vicarious pleasure he seldom wants to miss. It provided the perfect platform for him to effectively convey a couple of home truths to his arch political enemy, Dr Farooq Abdullah, and his National Conference. That he has finally arrived on the turbulent scene of the Jammu and Kashmir politics. That he has done it on his own steam. That he has won recognition as the leader of a fledgling regional outfit and not as the one of the Congress Party which could have, given the past record in such instances, exposed him to the charge of having acquired the high office with the blessings of New Delhi. Most importantly, he has survived in power for one year. That, too, as a widely accepted leader of a coalition. His presence in Gandarbal this Sunday was meant to ruthlessly turn knives in the wounds of the NC. For nearly three decades, Gandarbal has, after all, been known as the Sheikhdom; it has been considered virtually an impregnable fortress of the late Sheikh Abdullah, the Lion of Kashmir, and his successors. The Sheikh himself had represented the area in the State Assembly. So had his political heir, Dr Abdullah. It was only in 2002 that the Mufti had stopped the victory run of the State’s premier political family. One of his closest colleagues, Qazi Mohammad Afzal, presently one of his ministers, had last year humbled the NC chief, Mr Omar Abdullah, representing the third generation of his family. The Qazi himself feels ever grateful to the local electorate for having ushered in ‘political change’ in J&K. Unable to hide his own glee, the Chief Minister himself does not get tired of expressing his gratitude. As if to return a compliment, he has minced no words this Sunday in describing Gandarbal as ‘a crown to be preserved and adorned’ by his government. He has given the town the ‘credit of turning tables in State politics’. He has accused the NC of having neglected the overall development of the area despite having represented it for 27 years. Of course, he has followed it up by announcing a number of projects for the development of Gandarbal.

Blessed both by the Mufti and the Qazi, Gandarbal could continue to see better days ahead as a privileged constituency. What is interesting, however, is the manner in which the Mufti is itching to provoke the NC into a political confrontation. As long as he was in the opposition, it was an open secret that he was an eyesore to first the Sheikh and then his immediate successor. Except for once when at the peak of militancy there was a meeting of J&K leaders at the Mufti’s residence in New Delhi and at which Dr Abdullah was also present, it is doubtful whether there has ever been any serious political dialogue between him and any member of the Sheikh family. Proceedings of this meeting, selectively released to only one newspaper in the national capital, had sought return to the pre-1953 dispensation in J&K. So irked Dr Abdullah actually was by the barbs of the Mufti’s daughter, Ms Mehbooba Mufti, at one time that he had vowed that he would ensure that ‘the little girl’ lost her security deposit in the Pahalgam constituency. Now that the Mufti’s gamble to acquire a regional profile has paid off, he apparently thinks that he has already built a political organisation which would give the NC a close run on their common home turf in the Valley. He has already wrested, among other things, the Muslim Auqaf Trust (MAT), one of the oldest religious and philanthropic institutions in the State, from the control of the Sheikh family.

Undoubtedly, the emergence of the two parallel nationalist forces — the PDP and the NC — augurs well for the State. Surprisingly, however, the NC has not been able to muster popular protest on any issue during the last one year. For instance, not many beyond the party spectrum have resented the MAT changing hands. The party leadership is grossly mistaken if it thinks that any extraneous force would come to its help. Such a possibility is completely ruled out in the present circumstances. It would do well to gear itself up and assume the role of a sensitive and responsible opposition. It runs the risk, otherwise, that it would be bearded in its own den. The Mufti has shown the capacity to do so by hoisting his coalition Government’s standard in Gandarbal.

Probe all aspects

Every day we come across one new scandal or the other involving some of the country’s top artistes in the illegal immigration rackets. Now there comes another disquieting report. A fraud has come to light in Britain in which a few officials of the Indian High Commission are said to be involved in human trafficking. They have exposed themselves to the charge of forging travel documents, particularly visas. A case has been registered by that country’s Immigration Department. Naturally the Ministry of External Affairs has felt concerned and, on its request, the Union Government has ordered the CBI to probe the matter thoroughly. This is the second such instance concerning the officials posted in the Indian missions abroad. Two officials in the embassy in Trinidad and Tobago had earlier been booked by the CBI for stealing passports meant for emergency purposes. Such dirty tricks are obviously resorted with a view to exploiting the people’s urge to go abroad by hook or by crook. Thousands of illegal immigrants from India are said to be languishing in jails and refugee homes in several European countries. Off and on one keeps hearing of major tragedies in which Indian citizens are the sufferers. Since they can’t go by the prescribed routes, they risk their lives by travelling under cover. As many as 170 illegal immigrants from Punjab were drowned near Malta when their boat had sunk in December 1996. Similar tragedy had befallen another 17 immigrants from Punjab in Moravia river between Czech and Slovak republics in 2001. Earlier this year, 33 Indians hidden in a truck heading for Germany had been arrested by the Czech police. The CBI should complete its investigations soon. If possible, it should closely look into the role of the touts irrespective of their status. Its final report should be widely publicised. That would dissuade lakhs of young persons in the country from becoming the victims of an illegal practice.

Will Musharraf respond to optimist Vajpayee?

By Ghazanfar Butt

With the State Assembly elections in the offing in four States of the country, it was accepted that there was no possibility of any initiative being taken to improve relations between India and Pakistan. The Indian Army recorded an increase in the number of infiltration attempts along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir in recent weeks, and the number of terrorist attacks on the Security Forces have shown an upward trend. More terrorists have been killed – with the increase in firepower and surveillance capability of the Security Forces in the State.

The talks between the Central Interlocutor, Mr N. N. Vohra, and the different groups in the State had ground to a halt as he was unable to get a direction as to how he should proceed. The State Chief Minister Mufti Sayeed had recently appreciated the work done by Mr Vohra, but felt that a ‘political leader’ should now take the initiative.

As far as the All Party Hurriyat Conference is concerned, many have voiced the futility of having any talks with them. The APHC had no representative character at any time. It was a group of disparate elements – and was a front for Pakistan. It had received some support from the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Community in the nineties, but had lost all credibility since the Assembly Elections last year. The APHC was asked to establish its representative character by participating in the Assembly elections, but it did not have the courage to do so. Even those who wanted to establish their representative character, like Abdul Gani Lone, were assassinated and the rest went into their shell. The sons of Abdul Gani Lone of the Peoples’ Conference were accused of putting up proxy candidates, and Syed Ali Shah Geelani refused to attend any meeting of the APHC in which the Lone brothers were present. Maulana Abbas Ansari, who was elected as the Chairman of the APHC, refused to take directions from Syed Ali Shah Geelani and a division of the APHC became inevitable.

The break-up of the APHC was an argument for those who said that the Prime Minister need not follow up the offer that he had made to the separatist groups in Srinagar during the Inter-State Council meeting that he was ready to meet them. The statements made by General Musharraf at the United Nations and also on the eve of the meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Countries only hardened the views of those who wanted India to take a tough line towards Pakistan. The constant refrain was that Pakistan should not expect any positive development so long as cross-border terrorism does not cease.

The decision of the Government of India to take fresh initiatives towards improvement of relations with Pakistan as also the announcement that the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Lal Krishen Advani, will meet the leaders of the Hurriyat Conference came as a bolt from the blue. Among the dozen or so steps announced to improve relations with Pakistan was the offer to start a new bus service from Srinagar to Muzaffarabad, a new rail link between Khokrapar in Rajasthan to Munabao in Sind and the restart of the ferry between Mumbai and Karachi. There was also an offer to increase the capacity of the bus service between New Delhi and Lahore and step up the strength of the High Commission staff in New Delhi and Islamabad.

The Centre’s decision that the Deputy Prime Minister would meet the representatives of the APHC has been cautiously welcomed, but Moulvi Abbas Ansari would like to build public opinion in favour of a dialogue with Mr L. K. Advani. He would like Hurriyat members like Yaseen Malik and former member Shabir Shah to join in the talks. Syed Ali Shah Geelani considers the Centre’s offer unrealistic and wants Pakistan to be included in the talks.

There has been much discussion over the remark made by Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishen Advani that the agenda for the talks would be decentralization of powers. Mirwaiz Umer Farooq feels that the talks should be on the future of Kashmir and not on the decentralization of power. Whatever be the perceptions of Mr Advani or those of leaders of the Hurriyat Conference, there cannot be a fixed agenda for the talks. To start with they will be mostly exploratory. No one accepts that the Hurriyat Conference is representative of all sections of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, or even the Kashmir Valley. If the Centre’s decision does give the APHC and its Chairman, Moulvi Abbas Ansari a certain status, they deserve it. Abbas Ansari, Umer Farooq and the Lone brothers have had the courage to stand up for the people whom they represent in the State – and it is only fair that the Centre should talk to them without any reservation.

The Centre’s announcement has been cautiously welcomed by the media in the State. The Alsafa News (Srinagar, 23/10) said: "Although Government of India offered dialogue to the Abbas group of APHC, it will be very risky for the Government of India to talk with the group in isolation. There are forces led by Syed Ali Geelani, Mohammed Yasin Malik, Shabir Ahmad Shah and others. Pakistan also will not be comfortable with the decision. A new dimension to the Kashmir dispute is in the pipeline."

In Pakistan too, there is a strong feeling that there should be a positive response to India’s offer. Writing in the Dawn (Karachi – 24/10), the noted columnist Ayaz Amir cautioned those who believe that Jihad can wrest Kashmir from India’s control. He said "Jihad can embarrass India and to some extent bleed it in Kashmir. Those would be worthwhile aims if Jihad were also not a two-way enterprise bringing more harm than good in the wake. For more than any victories gained, it has caused problems for Pakistan, arousing international suspicion and at home acting as a spur to religious extremism."

Ayaz Amir argued that it was in the interest of Pakistan if "we stop defining Pakistan nationhood in terms of India hostility". Pakistan could then aspire to become an economic success story. "So let us not shy away from meeting India halfway on the road to reconciliation. We are not a cardboard nation and no nation on earth can swamp us. If we get rid of our fears and phobias, and stop allowing old prejudices to dictate present policy, there is really nothing to be afraid of." Will saner counsels prevail? Will the Pakistan Army feel threatened if it has to climb down the bandwagon of Kashmir? – (adni)

Indian Technology

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

India is said to be a ‘mercantile’ civilization. We have excelled in trade since times immemorial. While we may pride ourselves on this trait, it is also a limitation. The Mongols developed gunpowder and the Mughals conquered us easily. Englishmen developed the canon and pistols and our Nawabs fell to them. America has developed the patriot missiles and advanced military systems and can disable the defense system of its enemies with precision. Therefore, it will not do to leave development of technology to others. The challenge before us is to do both—technology development and its commercialization for trade.

It is strange that India has produced virtually no scientist of eminence after independence. We have not produced another C V Raman or J C Bose. One would have expected that India would do better after Independence. But our hopes have been belied. Scientists like Hargovind Khurana have, in the main, made their contributions while in foreign countries. J C Bose worked as an individual in his laboratory. The nature of science and technology has changed fundamentally since then. Scientific advance now requires a critical mass that is beyond the capability of an individual. It needs collective intelligence. Teams of scientists have to pursue a problem and keep going deeper into it before they hit upon a new discovery. An eminent scientist from one of our Universities narrated this experience of his. He wanted some equipment for his experiments. He wanted to substantiate his ideas. His would have been the first published paper in that area. He made a proposal to the authorities for funding it. His proposal was accepted but with the condition that he should first publish some papers on the subject in the next six months. He would get funding for the equipment thereafter. The professor was stumped. If he could publish the papers then there would remain no need for the equipment. Left with no alternative, he borrowed the equipment from other fellow scientists and did make those experiments and also published the papers. But scientists from other countries had already published almost the same findings before he could. He, and India, was deprived of that honour because of such bureaucratic procrastination.

The question is why the senior scientists and bureaucrats impose such silly conditions? It was individualism, he felt. Indians are extremely individualistic. They are good workers individually but they do not like to cooperate and make a team. They do not like to see others progressing. Thus they imposed conditions that cannot be fulfilled.

This trait appears to emerge from a misunderstanding of our tradition. Chanakaya gave the following advice to the king: "Give up one for the family, the family for the village, the village for the country and the whole world for salvation." The teaching was to give primacy to collective good in social matters but to individual gain in spiritual matters. One family should be sacrificed where the material interests of the village could be secured. Thus we do not decry the fact that the Pandavas burnt a family of six innocent villagers in the House of Lac so that they could survive and wage war against the evil Kauravas. The good of an innocent family was sacrificed for the good of the country. But the tables are turned where spiritual matters are concerned. Lord Buddha abandoned his family without any reason for his spiritual salvation. He followed the dictum ‘give up the whole world for salvation’. The material good of the collective was sacrificed for the spiritual good of the individual. The collective was primary in material issues but the individual was primary in spiritual matters.

We have reversed this teaching in our daily observances. Our practice is as follows: "Give up family for the individual, the village for the family, the country for the village; and salvation for the whole world." Thus our bureaucrats impose silly conditions that prevent the development of indigenous technologies. They are thinking of what gain can be made to them individually. In material matters they think of the self rather than the collective. And our spiritual leaders build massive ashrams and attract devotees with TV advertisements!

We need to restate the idea of ‘Give up one for the family’ strongly once again. Then alone we would be able to build an environment of collaboration that is necessary for scientific advance today. Scientific and material advance is not opposed to spiritual growth rather it is the foundation of the same. Our ability lies in holding on to our mercantile traits while also developing scientific and technological excellence. Otherwise we may be once again conquered by technological advance made by the West as it has happened in the past.

Indians obsession with dynasties

By Kedar Nath Pandey

The one person who outshone Ravi Shankar when the 78 year old sitar maestro performed at the packed Barbican Hall in London was his 17-year old daughter Anoushka. The hall rang with thunderous applause after she played raga Tilak Shyam, one of her father’s creations… judging from Anoushka’s performance, Ravi Shankar has much to be proud of–the family musical tradition seems safe in his daughter’s nimble fingers.

Call it dynasty, parivar, khaandaan or gharana. Lesser mortals lay claim to it in matrimonial negotiations; legends are meant to be born into it. Primarily because India as a nation passionately guards its dynastic legends and legendary dynasties, be it in politics, popular culture or the arts. Towards this end, democratic and independent India–once the land of pedigree rajas and maharajas–has planted and nurtured a unique substitute for those royal "family trees" of yore. Commoners’ dynasties have mushroomed in popular imagination, dynasties that have replaced the mythical golden spoon with a silver one, whetting a nation’s unique curiosity about the family trees of public personalities outside royalty. Such has been this obsession that popular icons of the Indian masses appear somewhat inadequate without a legacy, past or projected, to recommend them.

Take for instance politics. The "royal" political dynasty, which has easily dominated mass consciousness in the 56-years of India’s independent journey, is the Nehru-Gandhi parivar. Motilal Nehru’s sophisticated city-bred son was independent India’s natural choice as Prime Minister. The fledgling nation required a vision and he best could articulate that vision. However, by the time Jawaharlal Nehru’s young daughter stepped into her father’s political shoes, it was evident that here was dynasty in the making. As a zealous guardian of dynasties, the nation facilitated the transformation of Nehru’s gungi guria into a political force to be reckoned with. However, entirely to Indira Gandhi’s credit, she proved to the world that political dynasties couldn’t be a one-generation wonder, that it was not enough to be born into a privileged family. As she furthered the Nehru legacy, Indira Gandhi loomed large over India’s political destiny as much as her father had dominated its nascent vision.

When this awesome figure, referred to as Durga by none other than Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, lay bloodied at the hands of her security guards, the nation mourned as much for the individual as for the Gandhi parivar. The Congress knew that the nation would accept none but her son as her successor. Riding the dynastic wave crest, when the politically inexperienced Rajiv Gandhi reached out to the people for support, the nation predictably obliged. Today, the tears have nearly dried for Rajiv Gandhi, a tragic and unnecessary victim of a politics he barely understood. The nation has since fondly buried this politically vulnerable yet socially disarming son of one of India’s most astute politicians. Yet, somewhere the nation awaits his successor.

There are two contenders for the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty. The widow of Rajiv Gandhi–Sonia and daughter Priyanka. Sonia’s foreign origin has been a talking point for the opposition, as she is not considered to be a real inheritor of Nehru-Gandhi mantle. She heads the Congress party, but she lacks total support of the cadre. The 2004 parliamentary elections will decide her fate whether she truly belongs to the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty.

Amidst all the uncertainty within the Congress, even detractors of the party crystal gaze at Priyanka Gandhi. Attempts, conscious or spontaneous, are made to trace the facial features, the gestures, the mass appeal, the smile, the oratory, the class, back to her legacy. Understandable, because after all this young lady’s family tree boasts of three Prime Ministers. Therefore, even as the media captures her party hopping with her socialite husband, Priyanka Gandhi continues to engage the Indian mind: Could she possibly be the Gandhi dynasty’s fourth representative to the country’s highest political chair? Can any other country in the world claim such fascinating, albeit debatable, obsession with a dynasty of commoners?

Arguably, political dynasties are a unique subcontinental phenomenon with the entire region replete with sons and daughters treading the political path of their mothers or fathers. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir in Pakistan; Bandaranaike and Chandrika Kumaratunga in Sri Lanka; Sheikh Mujbur Rehman and Sheikh Haseena and Zia-ur-Rehman and Begum Khaleda Zia in Bangladesh. The Gandhi family’s roots in the public imagination however remain unmatched.

Lesser political mortals in India have in their own way tried to perpetuate this tradition. So overwhelming has been the dynastic influence that India politicians today naturally look to their off springs as successors. Be it Farooq Abdullah and son Omar or Gegong Apang with son Omak, Mulayam Singh Yadav too can eventually trust his political legacy only in the hands of his son as much as Laloo Prasad Yadav realises that he must keep the reins of power within the family. It would, however, take each at least a couple of generations more to replicate the Gandhi tree complete with Nehru’s sophistication, Indira Gandhi’s poise and Rajiv Gandhi’s boyish adventurism.

India has a unique ability to celebrate dynasties outside politics as well. Mumbai’s tinsel world continues to fete its very own "royal" dynasty–the Kapoor khaandaan. So firmly has this dynasty taken roots in the cinema industry that its documentation would be impossible without the history of the near-regal Kapoor family tree. When the fourth generation of Prithviraj Kapoor’s family, Karisma and Kareena, stepped out to hug the arc lights, the film industry and its patrons fondly recalled her grandfather’s vintage motto: The show must go on. Yes, the family had to continue–in violation of the showman’s strong disapproval of the Kapoor khaandaan women associating with films.

While the daughters-in-law dutifully obeyed, the daughter assumed the Kapoor mantle, perpetuating, in her own way, the cinematic legacy of Bollywood’s uncrowned king, Raj Kapoor. Karishma’s commercial success more than made up for the relatively lean career of her father, all in the family name.

So strong is this dynastic sentiment in the public mind that when the legendary Sachin Dev Burman’s equally legendary son Rahul Dev Burman passed away, the one regret that was universally expressed was the fact that Panchamda did not have an offspring to perpetuate the family vocation. That day Tripura’s Burman family appeared that wee bit poorer. Royal by birth, the Burman name had stopped just short of growing into yet another dynastic tree in the tinsel world.

In fact, today even as Bollywood’s living legend Amitabh Bachchan is declared the superstar of the millennium, he finds a new generation’s eyes firmly set on his son. On Abhishek Bachchan’s contribution to the industry depends the transformation of Amitabh Bachchan the phenomenon into Amitabh Bachchan the patriarch of a dynasty-in-the-making. To that extent, Dharmendra has already established the roots of the Deol dynasty in Bollywood, his sons as committed to the profession and as successful as the father.

More recently, when a proud Rakesh Roshan’s eyes turned moist on watching his son Hrithik perform to an ecstatic audience on Bollywood’s big night – the Filmfare awards function – a thought was spared for the rising star’s grandfather, Roshan. Admittedly, the family had travelled a long way from the time Roshan struggled his way to emerge as a successful music director in Mumbai. His vocation was perpetuated by son Rajesh even as his other son Rakesh Roshan branched off to experiment with acting. Today his grandson is setting the silver screen on fire, accounting for the third generation of the Roshan dynasty’s dedication to the film industry. And much like Karisma, Hrithik is adequately making up for his father’s modest career, as a tribute to the family’s stakes in the industry.

Defying the logic of patriarchal dynasties in this male-dominated industry is the all-woman family tree of Shobhna Samarth. When Shobhna Samarth’s impish granddaughter Kajol walked up to receive her first Filmfare award, the older generation looked back nostalgically to a time when this young star’s mother Tanuja and aunt Nutan ruled the hearts of millions. Although married into yet another well-established filmi khandaan, the Mukherjees, Tanuja through her daughter established the Shobhna Samarth family line, comprising women of substance taking on a man’s world. On its part, the Mukherjee khandaan sent out its own representatives to the film industry through Joy and Deb Mukherjee. Yet the successful granddaughter of that khandaan today clearly traces her lineage to her maternal grandmother.

India has created its own share of impressive family trees in that world of arts as well. Even as pedigree matters for the inimitable gharanas of the classical world, the process of establishing new dynastic trees continues. When Pandit Ravi Shankar played with his daughter at a live concert in the United States in 1996, New York News paid a touching tribute to a father, a legend: "If indeed the torch was being passed to a younger generation, there was none more proud in Carnegie Hall than the father and Guru of twentieth century India music". Admittedly, his daughter can best carry the sitar maestro’s legacy forward.

Yet, it is for Anoushka Shankar, the legend’s natural heir, to go beyond merely perpetuating her father’s contribution to music, beyond being called the offspring of a legend who turned an entire Beatles generation crazy. As much as Zakir Hussain, a master in his own right, needed to move beyond the impressive legacy of Ustad Alla Rakha to establish his dynasty’s relevance to the world of music.

India has also had a fair share of corporate khaandaans like Tatas, Birlas, Modis, Ambanis, Singhanias and many more in the making. However, while these dynasties have been traditionally bound by the economic stakes of the respective families, perpetuation of a dynasty in politics, arts or popular culture has happened through a conscious choice by the younger generations to pursue the family vocation, success often a great casualty in the exercise of that choice. INAV

 
 



|
home | state | national | business | editorial | advertisement | sports |
|
international | weather | mailbag | suggestions | search |
subscribe | send mail |