Search results

It doesn't really weaken this argument though. Cause, people realize that the reference to 'whole world' only means the world effected. The same way when you say to someone, 'hang on a second', you don't expect him to wait for exactly one second, 'hyperbole' is used to stress on a point. If 2-4...

You mean a PM visiting a foreign country to attend an international forum is like you backpacking from bedroom to drawing room? OK. Point noted.

Google for the word 'Hyperbole'. Since you probably won't, here is what an online dictionary defines it as: –noun Rhetoric . 1. obvious and intentional exaggeration. 2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.&#8221...

সমস্ত সদস্যকে জানাই নববর্ষের আন্তরিক শুভেচ্ছা &#2404...

Everything about this is bogus. Not going into the logistical angle of how compulsory voting shall be ensured in a country of 1.21 billion when Govt can't even reach out to all its citizens on much important issues, the idea of having a null vote in a compulsory voting system is just a travesty...

What difference does it really make? Countries effected by terrorism of Pak origin, will be the obvious ones making comments on this issue. Not the Eskimos. This argument, 'Hey, but its not the whole world' might make you feel comfortable, but in reality it is just downright fatuous.

I am guessing you have never heard of management control (acquired through acquisition of majority interest).

Bogus. What do you think is more important - a PM doing his job or a PM not doing his job just to cast his 'precious' vote.

While it is absolutely true that PVNR is the most underrated PM of India, you have to give credit where credit is due. MMS could have easily fallen for IMF's suggestions and gone the Argentina way and then get India broke within the a decade, just like Argentina. That however doesn't make him...

Regardless that MMS couldn't possibly vote because he was doing his job (irony?), are you, Mr Modi, aware of the fact that in democracy, not voting is also a right?

Actually if you pick up American newspapers from that era, e.g. Times, you will see that whenever India was mentioned, it was mentioned with a charitable dose of contempt. Pakistan, on the other hand, was always US's blue eyed boy, always willing to serve. Strange as it may sound today, but it...

During the Cold War era it made sense that Paks wanted US involvement. Today, it doesn't make any sense. But then again, US has always been the backroom player.

Nooooo. Not Sarmila Bose. Not again....

This is becoming repetitive. Anyway, Rana has been charged in 'three counts of a 12-count superseding indictment for providing material support to terrorists and foreign terrorist organizations....in connection with the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India by the Pakistan-based group Lashkar e...

I don't know what the exact structure of Suez transit toll is, but it includes Port disbursement fee, Port clearance fee, insurance, tug boat fee etc. All these are legitimate fees for service provided at a port. Additionally Suez Canal has a huge operating cost, which must also be recovered...

The story in brief is this: ISI engaged its agents, directly or indirectly, to do the groundwork in advance for the noble cause to be carried out in Mumbai. Geelani a.k.a Headley, for example, was engaged to carry out recce while Rana was engaged via Headley, to provide material support for the...

Rana was actually looking for Public Authority defense and not Diplomatic immunity. Public Authority defense entails that the defendant has committed a crime, knowingly or unkowingly, at the behest of a Government agency. The 'Government agency' has to be a US agency or an official representing...

Its from DAWN. All the other websites that are quoting this, are sourcing from the same DAWN article.

A very poor attempt at deflection. The question was why would infrastructure in BD be 'hardly' used by BDeshis and you are giving me a and bull story about opportunity cost. What has the later got to do with the former. Regarding opportunity cost, there is always more than one way of...

Can someone explain to me the sentence in bold. Who else will use infrastructure in BD if not the BDeshis. And how dense must a person be to say, investing in infrastructure is 'waste of money'. Am I reading it right or am I too stoned?