While I do agree with Dr. Anand Virgincar’s
contentions that Parrikar did not make contradictory
statements, Parrikar’s intentions were definitely
contradictory.

On day 1, i.e. on the night of 19th February,
Parrikar, in his typical chest-thumping fashion, came
out heavily in favour of the Police, mincing no words
to hit out at those who had brutally attacked the
Police station. I however don’t recollect him having
named Babush directly though.

On day 2, believing in the maxim that you can fool
some of the people sometimes, Parrikar pretended to
use the balanced approach, criticizing both the Police
and the Mob in his Press Conference. But his tilt
towards Babush was quite evident to those who could
put two and two together. While a large part of his
ire was directed at the Police, he downplayed the
previous night statements he had made against Babush
and the mob. A text- book case of Parrikar trying to
wriggle himself out of the political mess he had
managed to land himself in, since Babush is much
needed in his scheme of things to unseat the Digambar
Kamat Government.

On day 3, Parrikar completely forgot about the
violence unleashed against the Police force, thereby
making it amply clear what his intentions actually
were. This incident was, after all, just what the
doctor had ordered, an opportunity to embarrass the
Government. In another Press Conference, Damu Naik,
the Party spokesperson went hammer and tongs at
thePolice for their role in this whole black episode,
more particularly for attacking the Monserrate
Mansion, Jennifer and Amit. The BJP Mahila wing too
flayed the Police for their role in attacking the
Monserrate family while even the whispers of attacks
against the Police force had gone missing from the BJP
camp.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to state
the obvious. Parrikar statements were, as Dr.
Virgincar rightly puts it, not contradictory, but his
intentions, as one can see from above, were definitely
contradictory.

While Parrikar gained a lot of brownie points on night
one with his bold stand and he could have gained a lot
more if he had acted more consistently, his subsequent
approach to this whole issue has shown him in
extremely poor light. In fact, I am today inclined to
believe Ravi Naik when he calls Parrikar two-faced and
two-tongued. Perhaps the only thing that goes in his
favour is that those sitting on the other side of the
fence are worse than him!

Cheers
Sandeep Heble
Panjim


----------------------
Dr. Anand Virgincar wrote:

I shall make 1 last desperate attempt to clarify the
facts before this gets added to the long list of
fictitious facts Manohar Parrikar is blamed for ( to
add to the long list factual facts that he does
deserve to be castigated for )

Manohar Parrikar did not ....repeat DID NOT make
contradictory statements.His comments on 19th and 20th
February 2008 were entirely appropriate for the point
in time they were made. And at no stage did he
criticise the arrest of Babush Monseratte and other
troublemakers.



PLEASE read my lips. And if you do not believe me ,
read Manohar Parrikar's lips in the clip below that I
have posted before ( Do not read the newsreaders lips
as she is saying one thing while Manohar Parrikar in
the background is saying something else )

http://youtube.com/watch?v=wDtRcgGkDIE

regards, anand

( Dr Anand Virgincar )




      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Reply via email to