Dear Sri Gangadharan,
The
responses that came to the Chronicle, on your suggestion that all
stakeholders' representatives should meet, discuss and evolve a common
strategy before the Supreme Court Hearing on 12 Nov 2014, were totally
on predicted lines. You have even consciously (in my opinion)
interpreted one strong dissenting note (relayed through a surrogate
voice) as something positive because you are keen and convinced that a
meeting helps.
.................
Coming
to the point of a meeting, why are responses negative, cold or at least
not enthusiastic (not withstanding your attempt to see everything
positively)? As far as I could see, if they have to listen to others,
they fear a loss of their turf. Their importance may get reduced. Their
leadership may get threatened. They think they know everything and there
is nothing to learn from others. Well, there is a saying in my mother
tongue - (Mr Ganga Raju can immediately guess what I am referring to)
that an obstinate person is stronger than a king. I have come across
during the last few months, leaders whose obstinacy (they refuse to
agree 2 x 2 makes 4) knows no limits.
.................
My
desire to work, is still in tact.
WHY MEETING AT ALL?
Will revert in a few hours.