Monday, September 12, 2005

A Tangible Shift

Blogdai feels the winds changing in our little political stalemate. This week brought about some significant and telling events in our current drama.

Prachanda Pouts.....

The "Farce One" is crying to the UN now because the king is ignoring his unilateral ceasefire.
He says if the King doesn't reciprocate, he might be tempted to start attacking again. Seems our fearless terrorist leader is a bit steamed that ol' King G. won't take the bait this time. I guess the Maoists will have to find another tactic to help them re-group and re-arm themselves. Blogdai wonders what all the fuss is about; G is just honoring the spirit of a unilateral ceasefire.

India Flouts....

Showing the world they think Nepal is their private fiefdom, India refuses to allow the UN to intervene and help out the situation,
causing everyone in the diplomatic community to scratch their heads.

After meeting External Affairs Minister Singh, (UN rep) Brahimi seemed a “little puzzled” to know that India does not want UN’s involvement in the resolution of Nepal’s tri-polar conflict, the source who also discussed the situation in Nepal with Brahimi said. It was not immediately clear what kind of third party mediation, if at all, Delhi favoured for resolution of the bloody conflict, something it says has started to spill over into its territory...

Is this because India thinks it is doing such a damn fine job of containing the Maoists that they don't need any help?

China Shouts....

No lack of decision making skill from Nepal's northern Neighbor, however. China just inked a deal selling RS 1.6 billion worth of weapons to Nepal. No wonder Prachanda is worried. This dragon is shouting loud and clear to the world: India missed a beat and we're stepping into the vaccuum. To the bungling bureaucrats in Delhi: Say bye-bye to your little satellite now.

So, what do all of these things mean when taken together? Blogdai thinks that the Maoists are now in a panic and will form a last-gasp alliance with the 7 parties. Also, watch India get more and more anti-monarch as the days go on. Blogdai sees India throwing support behind the 7-party alliance and yes, the Maoists. It's an open secret anyway, but look for more Indian arms to find their way into party hands in the future. India has always used the Maoists to keep Nepal unstable and dependent (why do you think India doesn't want UN mediation?). The biggest problem is that now G. has let the rough and culturally incompatable Chinese right through his front door. Getting rid of them will be almost impossible.



At 1:19 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

After all India doesnot want Nepal to be a stable country, it is very transparent now. 7 parties and maoist are the puppet of India and following it's strategy. That is why KG's strategy should be focused on UN mediation and China's help or influence in addition to good relation with India. India wants king to bow the head infront of them like Bhutanese king. There are two alternatives and actions left to king right now to survive. Otherwise even this small mass of thousand in numbers in Kathmandu may bring great change and disaster in Nepal. Mass people still have good faith toward democracy and constitutional monarchy. 7 party alliance and maoist are trying to disturb the good faith of the people.

At 1:43 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

India wants Nepal to be republic for it's own interest, whatever it maybe the time will show. They are directly supporting the current movement of republic headed by maoist with the follower of 7 parties alliance. If UN mediation comes in front, India may not able to get its goal. That is why it is rejecting.

At 2:35 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Brit said...

The maoists will swallow the 7, given half a chance.

India sides this way in order to try to appease it's own maoists.

When will they ever learn?

At 3:12 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

..missed it..the tangible shift ya but the point that brit makes about' India sides this way in order to try to appease it's own maoists.

i dont quite understand this one could you please elaborate .
the chinese card..well its about time...hats of G at least you are taking a stand.

At 4:27 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes maoist swallow the king first and 7 stupids later on. Maybe after that India will swallow the Nepal.

Do not trust the lolly-pop, people should watch the steps of the parties movement and alliance with the maoist without supporting them.

At 8:13 AM, September 13, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

India is militarily lazy. They want to keep their Naxals and Biharis quiet. Leading a big offensive against Nepal's maoists might, India feels, trigger increased violence along the red corridor in eastern India.

typical of India: play all sides of an issue at once.


At 8:21 AM, September 13, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Speaking of that, how ironic and comically pathetic that Prachanda calls for a "unilateral" ceasefire, only to get upset when the King refuses to upgrade to "bilateral."

Hey Prachanda, you called it; we ignored it, ok? Unilateral means its your gesture and yours alone.


At 10:53 AM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

india has always played all sides simultaneously. they used to call it the art of being non aligned!
ya that ceasefire smelt of an oxy'moron'

At 2:10 PM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Darshan Acharya said...

Wah..amount of India bashing here is amusing. Blogdai are you sure all these Anony Mouse are not posting from Pakistani Embassy LOL?

Back to the topic let us not forget we are already kind of basket case. We allowed IC-814 hijacking by allowing Pakistanis to exploit and forever tarnishing the name of Nepalis in India.

And then the silly Hrithik incident which was so typical of us Nepalis - we destroyed our own property based on imaginatory statements from the Indian actor.

Where I am trying to get is, inspite of all these public acts against India why should we still expect India to love and kiss us?

And on Chinese, it was expected anyway - was only matter of time.

Let us see how we are allowing countries to use Nepal as trashbin and basketcase banana republic:

* Pakistani spies openly running the show at key areas. Be it airport or instigating public.

* CIA has one of the most active Asian stations in Nepal trying to smuggle East European or Russian spies from India via Nepal (read all those books by ex-CIA officers on how they use Nepal as transit point)

..and now Chinese. I guess we are not happy being consumers of Chinese condom but rather be Chinese Condom itself!

"Tangible Shift" indeed!

At 3:23 PM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Brit said...

'..why should we ... expect India to love and kiss us?'

We don't! That's the point!

At 6:00 PM, September 13, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

No we don't. Our biggest wish is that India would at least stop sabotaging everything we're trying to do.

Yep, spooks use one of the most lax airports in the world for dirty work. But don't obsess over Pakistan; look farther west.


At 10:49 PM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anony mouse will continue to bash India .even if he happens to be an indian, incidentally thats what this is all about- what the policy making [?] jokers in south block perceive Nepal to be need not be reflected by individuals who have lived in nepal. and ya dont worry about the pakistan embassy they are too busy running counterfeit currency presses in Nepal to have time for blogs like this

At 10:52 PM, September 13, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Why worry with Pakistan. Pakistan maybe the problem for India, not for us. India is being problem to us. India is not controlling their illegal supplies of bullets and and ammunition to the maoist. Nepalese people are being killed by indian supplied and made bullets and ammunition. Parties are concerned with the supply to the RNA but not to the maoist. If the parties really love people then they should shout to India as well to control the illegal supplies and maoist free movement. It clearly picturise that party leaders are only for power not for the people and real democracy.

At 5:54 AM, September 14, 2005, Blogger Scott Allan Wallick said...

So much discussion about what I see as India's clearly feigned interest re: the political situation in Nepal. I mean, if India considered Nepal a millitary liability or of stategic importance, and with the situation degrading there as I write, I don't think India would have run off and maxed out its checkbook with French submarines. I mean, submarines.

At 6:46 AM, September 14, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Witness Sikkim and Bhutan to an small extent.

Harrassing Nepal is just India's method of "Buffer State Management." The Koirala and Maoists of the world are just their sub-contractors.

I'm not surprised about the submarine deal either. Throw enough baksheesh at an Indian official and you could sell them Hinduism.

We draw attention to India frequently here on blogdai. For many in the world, it was inconceivable that India had played such a role in Nepal's crisis. The word is out now and we feel oblidged to bash where bashing is appropriate.

They can keep out the UN but not the bloggers.


At 10:42 AM, September 14, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

b i just re read the article about chinese arm supply..and i think you may have just misread the situation.from what i gather from indian spooks this time round India is putting pressure on G big time and playing dirty, by telling china to back off...those arms from china may never come and if they do will be of minor value..i think 'democracy' as a new world order banner is going to throw Nepal to the wolves again.. think koirala/ maoists..the tangible shift i see unfolding is that India is finally making the mistake of considering a solution with G in exile. again a case of misreading the real political equation and what the man on the street faces

At 5:12 PM, September 14, 2005, Anonymous Darshan Acharya said...

Ah the good ol tired "India wants to make us subdued like Sikkim" argument. Nothing instigates masses more than that eh. Always the last resort of palace puppies or our politicians when they are cornered!

Why on earth India would want to "Sikkimize" us when they have their own problem dealing with basket cases like Bihar and problems in North East India is beyond me! As if India does not have its own problem dealing with its failed states. Why add Nepal -- country with lower per capita income than even poorest Indian states!

But hey, anything to get masses up in arms and divert the attention from royal misuse.

At 8:57 PM, September 14, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

The very fact that China releases a statement promising RS 1.6 billion in weaponry represents a major shift, delivery or not. Why? Gone now is the superpower courtesy regarding Nepal. China would have never made such inroads in the past; it would have upset a delicate balance with India. Consider the Nathu-la agreement. Would this have occurred after a Chinese weapons delivery? Never.

No, the Indians have bungled their handling of Nepal so thoroughly that they've left the door open for China to take it's shot..and China never misses an opportunity like this.

There's a new theory that China wants oil from the Terai, but this is only a theory. Stay tuned.

To suggest that India's handling of Nepal resembles its treatment of Sikkim is to call attention to a pattern, not suggest a takeover; so, who missed the point?


At 10:31 PM, September 14, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

well i mentioned about the terai oil many months back on this website, then i linked it with american intrest. yes it is a texan firm which prospected and found the oil reserves potential. and you know what the redneck texan is capable of doing when he smells oil. dear Nepal dude where is your country.

At 11:53 PM, September 14, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

this is the communist propoganda version of the oil exploration. all points raised are facts, even if i think the website spews garbage.

At 2:31 AM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Brit said...

Darshan - "Why on earth ..... is beyond me!"

OK, so you don't understand the scenario - it doesn't necessarily follow that there is none.

At 3:55 AM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Alison said...

Watch crisis group (lower case intentional!) has released its latest statement regarding Nepal. Apparently now it is up to the'international community', and there is apparently great potential for a dialogue between the Maoists and the political parties...presumably regardless of what might be best for Nepal.

Apologies for the cynicism.

At 8:24 AM, September 15, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

No need to apologize for the cynicism when i.c.g. is involved. (That lower-case is catchy, can I keep it?). They are breathlessly forshadowing maoist/party dialogue months behind the curve. We've skewered icg quite extensively here at blogdai. We even went after them on Samudaya a while back; those guys are phony, period.

It's been a while since I've visited the oil issue, but my original rememberences were as follows: Early in his presidency, bush sends old political hack James (or Howard?) Baker to Nepal on behalf of some petroleum company to scout drilling locations in the Terai. Why? It seems that India--which gets the bulk of its petroleum from Iraq--was getting cold feet at being one of Bush's "partners" in the war. So, Baker comes in and tries to calm India by giving them assurances that they can drill for oil in the Terai if they'll just come on board with the Iraq fiasco. I'll find the link if no one posts it here first.


At 8:30 AM, September 15, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Here's a link to the oil story; not the link I wanted, but it will do.

Anyway, it's James Baker, the company is Texana, and they want to drill in Chitwan on behalf of India.

At 11:36 AM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

texana is not indian owned. it is very much a houston company. the exploration has halted since 2002 due to the maoist problem.
the size of the reserves to my knowledge is not worth the international lobbying. texana has pulled out also if im not mistaken since they have not been able to explore further let alone drill.
i think at the end of the day this is very much a conspiracy theorey dead end

At 8:26 PM, September 15, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

No, "owned" was never implied: "on behalf of" was the nature of Texana's interests with India.

This was a very real trip to accomplish some very real things; basically, assuage India's phobia about joining Bush's "coalition" by offering them an oil partnership in Nepal.

If the reserves are nothing to crow about, then blogdai is happy to let this sleeping dog lay.


At 9:33 PM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not so exactly. You people described it in a wrong way. There is no interest of India to make Nepal unstable country.

At 10:33 PM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

there is no interest in the everyday indian for sure. but there is intrest in south block as well as in the kingdom of bihar

At 11:32 PM, September 15, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When Nepalis talk about India hurting Nepal, it is not the average Indian that they are talking about. It is the Indian Government's hegemonistic policies vis a vis their neighbors pushed through South Block that annoys us.

I may be speaking for a lot of Nepalis when I say this—I personally do not have any ill feelings towards individual Indians. In fact, some of my best friends are Indians. Yes, we have similar cultures and tastes. I might watch a Hindi movie on a Friday night and hum a Mohd. Rafi song in the shower a week later.

But the Big Brother Bully mentality of the Indian political circles and the double standard that goes with it is what I dislike tremendously. As examples, take the Bhutanese refugee crisis, Maoists’ public forays with Indian leaders, or India’s stand against UN involvement in resolving the crisis in Nepal. The motives look highly suspect.

If there is any shift we need, it should be in the form of a certain level of neutrality in India’s policies towards its smaller neighbors. The question, then, is—is it wishful thinking?

At 1:52 PM, September 16, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ni Hao Comrade Blogdai,

King G's strategy to balance India's influence by getting China involved sounds brilliant indeed. The only thing this poor soul is confused about is how this new equilibrium will work economically, politically, and socially.

Blogdai and many royalists may be fortunate enough that they do not depend on India unlike many other Nepalis do. For them India bashing or blaming India is their favorite past time. However, millions of Nepalese survive by working in India, and with the meager income they can only afford the cheap Indian goods.

Now tell me Blogdai, what do you plan to do about this economic dependence. Do you plan to teach them Chinese, make them eat Szechuan Chicken and send them to work in Sanghai. Blogdai, your comrades in the Chinese Communist Party may not like to be so cosy with you after all.

At 2:43 PM, September 16, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Read the following news from Kantipur from July.

UN involvement not necessary: Bista

KOL Report

KATHMANDU, July 13 - Vice-Chairman of Council of Ministers Kirtinidhi Bista Wednesday ruled out the possibility of the United Nations involvement in resolving the ongoing conflict in the country.
Talking to the journalists after an hour-long parley with the UN General Secretary Kofi Annan’s Special Adviser Lakhdar Brahimi, Bista today said that the government was competent enough to tackle the problem on its own.

“We have been saying that we don’t need the UN's mediations or that of India to resolve our problems,” Bista said. “We are capable of addressing the problem on our own and are working towards it.”

He said that the government will ask for the UN’s help only when it becomes necessary.

Brahimi, who is currently on a six-day tour to Nepal to assess the present political situation, had met with Vice-Chairman Tusli Giri and leaders of various political parties on Tuesday. (dds)

Blogdai, If the KG's government is not interested in UN meditation, why are you making so much hue and cry about India's opposition. Why didn't you speak when KG rejected Brahimi's proposal?

UN is ready to help us as they have indicated time and time again. And if Nepal is willing to accept UN's role, then there is no way India or any other non veto power countries can stop. So go first talk to your master KG before you start the tantrum here.

Fight for Right

At 1:13 AM, September 17, 2005, Anonymous Brit said...

Dear anonymous Comrade (and others),

I think we are getting off track here.

As I see it, this blog's argument against 'India' is in no way anti-India as such. The objections are to the portrayal of Nepal by the Indian Media, and related statements by Indian politicians (who seem to to be plugging their own and their political cronies' personal interests rather than those of the Nepali people as a whole).

My guess is that most Indians would share our skepticism. The problem is that more distant 'so-called' friends take it a face value.

At 2:07 AM, September 17, 2005, Anonymous Brit said...

...take it at face value.

(sorry! - typo)

At 9:35 AM, September 17, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

If Nepal as a sovereign nation decides it wants to try and solve the Maoist problem without the UN, fine. It is Nepal's problem and Nepal's choice: NOT India's; that's the big deal and the big point you missed.

Nepal's ties with India would never be replaced by Chinese ties. After observing those obnoxious Chinese cheap-watch sellers on the streets of Kathmandu and the puzzled contempt which Nepalis show for them, you would get the idea. The best thing China does is provide super cheap goods (yes, cheaper than India's) that poor Nepalis can afford. A 50 rupee winter coat might just be enought to keep a street-living Nepali from freezing, so it's a good thing. China can and will mass produce and mass ship such items to Nepal if allowed. Where was India's capacity in this regard?

I don't buy the economic dependency argument either. Nepal's "dependence," if you must, on India is cultural first and foremost. It is helped by and easy-crossing border system that often blurs the boundaries between India and Nepal. If China, say, opened up a series of new factories in Kathmandu, you'd see a rapid erosion of this Indian "dependence."

Is this the start of such a shift? We'll see.


At 8:13 AM, September 18, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogdai: "If Nepal as a sovereign nation decides it wants to try and solve the Maoist problem without the UN, fine. It is Nepal's problem and Nepal's choice: NOT India's; that's the big deal and the big point you missed."

Blogdai, you were going ballistic over India not agreeing to UN mediation in Nepal. I pointed out to you that KG's government itself rejected UN's role in Nepali conflict and said that if Nepal and UN wanted to resolve the crisis together, India without a veto power cannot stop the deal. Now, what is the big point that I missed?

Blogdai: “The best thing China does is provide super cheap goods (yes, cheaper than India's) that poor Nepalis can afford. A 50 rupee winter coat might just be enough to keep a street-living Nepali from freezing, so it's a good thing. China can and will mass produce and mass ship such items to Nepal if allowed. Where was India's capacity in this regard?”

I agree with you and I think this is happening right now. There is no one stopping China from shipping mass quantity of goods. The only obstacle in shipping mass quantity of goods is transportation.

Blogdai; “I don't buy the economic dependency argument either. Nepal's "dependence," if you must, on India is cultural first and foremost. It is helped by and easy-crossing border system that often blurs the boundaries between India and Nepal. If China, say, opened up a series of new factories in Kathmandu, you'd see a rapid erosion of this Indian "dependence."

No, it is economic as well. Where do most Nepalis get money to buy Chinese goods? Besides those working within Nepal, people who can afford to pay off the evil manpower agencies go to gulf countries or Malaysia, but vast majority of Nepalis still work in India in military, police, security guards, or other menial jobs to survive. They are also the biggest consumer of cheap Chinese goods in Nepal. Also, if you want to export Nepali carpets, garments, or pashmina to their major market i.e. US, or Europe, what is the closest port? Is Shanghai closer or Calcutta? And which port makes the most economic sense? I think we are economically dependent on India to a large extent.

If China invests in factories in Nepal, that would be awesome for Nepal. But before I get too excited, I would like to think if it makes economic sense for the Chinese. Although labor wages are lower in Nepal than in China, Chinese workers are more efficient and hence the Chinese goods are cheaper. Also, I doubt that you can reach the maximum economies of scale that you can achieve in China, in Nepal given the small market and so I do not know if this rationale holds. Even, Unilever and P&G, which came to Nepal after liberalization in the Democratic era, are shutting down, citing cheaper cost of production in India due to tax breaks and Nepali market being too small to reach economies of scale to make business sense. So we are dependent on Indian economy to a large extent.

Is this the start of such a shift? We'll see.b

Well, I will not be too excited so soon. Improving trade with China is always good news more in an economic sense than in a political sense. More trade will help alleviate poverty in Nepal, which I believe is also one of the key driving forces for the present conflict. Politically, I do not think Chinese, being as shrewd as they are, will risk India’s goodwill to help Nepal. Believe it or not, China-India trade is expected to reach $17 billion this year and money talks.

- Fight for Right

At 12:19 PM, September 18, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Yes. But the trouble with China is that you always have to get past the political before you can get to the economic: the legacy of Zeng Zhiamin and Deng Xiaoping dies hard.

China would open factories in Nepal just for the political foothold, if nothing else.


At 12:28 PM, September 18, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

You are also telling me that Nepal's dependence on India can be distilled down to a lack of choices. Aside from your valid point on Seaports, what would China not be able to provide?

This is reinforced by the new giddy enthusiasm for the proposed Birgunj-Tatopani rail link. If it actually materializes in a timely, Non-Nepali manner, you can bet China's involvement would be substantial. A northern export route, via rail, would take a little bit of the sting out of our Indian dependence.

I can't help but think this railway to be a turning point for Nepali commerce. Even though it was not designed with Nepal in mind--simply as a throughway for Indian goods--Nepal businesses would be affected.


At 12:35 PM, September 18, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Last time:

You just made the point that you missed.

India has no power over anything so what level of Indian arrogance tells them that they can refuse or accept anything on behalf of Nepal?

The fact that the King does not want UN mediation is not the point either.

THE point is: UN or no UN the CHOICE is Nepal's, period. India should exercise no public sway or influence over the process.

(Now, try telling that to Bush)


At 1:35 PM, September 18, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogdai: "China would open factories in Nepal just for the political foothold, if nothing else."

What political foothold? Are you trying to imply that China wants Nepal under its influence? Many people will have problem with that just like many people have problem with India.

If the railway project materializes, more power to Nepal. But China will not go out of its way to strain relationship with India to help Nepal due to their huge economic and trade interests.

- Fight for Right

At 1:39 PM, September 18, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"THE point is: UN or no UN the CHOICE is Nepal's, period. India should exercise no public sway or influence over the process."

I was saying this from the beginning. This is between Nepal and UN. India being a member of UN has a say in UN but it stops there, without a veto power.

- Fight for Right

At 6:35 PM, September 18, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

I will not be dragged into this death spiral of missed perceptions and nit-picking.

Save it for Samudaya, FreeNepal or one of the othr tripe-fests.

Yes, China wants a foothold. India will allow it the same way they allowed Yatung in 1962. Meaning: there's nothing they can do about it. China has timed this perfectly.


At 6:59 PM, September 18, 2005, Anonymous Santosh said...

Not being an instigator or anything, but what does China gain by having influence in Nepal. I never could understand this.

At 7:47 PM, September 18, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Actually, an excellent question, Santosh. Truthfully, all I can tell you is that China wants this, but the reasons are murky. I'll throw out some ideas.

China's philosophy has been one of hedgemonistic expansion. They fight tooth-and-nail for little islands and shipping rights in the south pacific, they constantly squabble with Taiwain; they actively subvert reforms in a now returned Hong Kong; supress uprisings in Xizang and obliterate Tibetan culture. Why? China feels that the best defense is a good offense. They move forward whenever and wherever they can lest another power leaps in and fills the void. This might be the case in Nepal.

For all the nicey-nicey trade talk between India and China, strategic positioning and buffering wins out at the end of the day. China saw India stumble on Nepal and capitalized on the opening.

Buffer states mean strategic states and China would love to put some more arms and distance between itself and India.

I mentioned months ago in this blog that China couldn't care a hoot about Nepal's economy. The only thing China wants out of Nepal is a buffer state against India and a neutral site suitable for harrassing Tibetans.

The Tibetan question is pesky. China absolutely cannot stand any independent expression from Tibetans in any country whatsoever. Their frothing anti-Dalai Lama rhetoric borders on the comic. So, controlling Nepal gives China a freer hand to monitor and detain those loose and loud Tibetans. Might be necessary since their big Beijing Olymic showcase is comming up. Wouldn't want Nepal based Tibetans disrupting things by bringing out Chinese torture instruments for all to see now, would we?

Those are two ideas, any others?


At 2:58 PM, September 21, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is something completely unrelated:

Help2educate is a small charity that raises money to fund the education of child labourers in Nepal . We make it possible to move children from dangerous working conditions and place them in a hostel where they can live and study.

We fund the education of former child labourers by arranging for volunteers to teach in Nepal throughout the year.

For as little as £700, we can arrange for you to volunteer in either a school or a hostel for three months. This is just £7.78 for every day that you are in Nepal and it even includes a free flight over Everest!!!

If you are looking to do something challenging, adventurous and worthwhile -why not go and teach in a Nepali school or help deprived children in a hostel?

Hope you don't mind Blogdai.

At 7:17 PM, September 21, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

Usually it is an instant delete, but help2educate is a worthy site.

Are you a friend of Jeffrey's?


At 2:22 PM, September 22, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do know a Jeffrey. We shared a Surya light and a Chya from time to time in Bunga

It has been some time since i last spoke to him. I hope that he is well and it is my expectation that we shall meet again since we both frequent the same place for a good cup of chya!

I suppose we could both be talking about a different Jeffrey; but how often does that happen in Nepal?

I am glad that you chose not to delete the post. I will refrain from shameless promotion in the future -although i would like to add that much of the content of the website is produced with the assistance of Nepali children and former child labourers.

Any way, I suppose it is a small diversion from the real issues of this website.

Thanks Blogdai

At 4:12 PM, September 22, 2005, Blogger blogdai said...

happy to be of service.



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home