--- On Sun, 3/8/09, Frederick [FN] Noronha * फ्रेडरिक न <fredericknoro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > We may debate over whether anyone at all "justified" the > Orissa violence, and how such "justifications" can at all be undertaken. > But, as I argued earlier, one would expect much more unambiguous stands >from > people like Santosh, who have a long-standing reputation of fair-mindedness > and neutrality. >
Please note the devious insinuation in the above quote, which Frederick slips in in the midst of the soggy feel good equivocating mush that he has written. He is trying to set the stage in order to fool you that the bogus libelous charge that I justified the violence against Christians in this public forum, need not be backed by evidence. His insinuation that I did not have an unambiguous stance on the Orissa violence is equally dishonest. My statements on it could not have been more clear. Here is the link to one such statement: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg40638.html It is Frederick who has been ambiguous on this issue, and others, including the Mumbai terror attacks. He has used these issues to launch stealth attacks against people who do not conform to his ideology, without paying any attention to the substance of their arguments, and without bearing the ethical journalistic burden of clarifying his own stance or providing evidence to back his sweeping generalizations and fabrications. I challenge him to show me one clear statement (in his own words, not copy and paste crap) he has made as to what his unambiguous stance is in each of the three issues he has belched out about in his frivolous Herald article. Cheers, Santosh
