Saif, Taimur & Name-Calling!

In an Indian Defence Review Blog it was mentioned that Pakistan is working on an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) named Taimur. India however has an Intercontinental Celebrity Baby Made (ICBM) in India with that name thanks to Saif! It is a sheer coincidence that Pakistani’s and Saif share the liking for that name. Pakistan chose it because of its visceral hostility towards India celebrating the Taimur’s invasion of Delhi and the brutal massacre which followed it. Saif however is the ultimate patriot – he has shown some Indians can do in India what Pakistan cannot from Pakistan!!

Then perhaps Saif chose the name because he is actually a Mongol. He wants to celebrate the Taimurian passion to restore and then expand the Mongolian Empire. It is a different matter that Ghengis Khan is credited with the largest contiguous Mongol Empire. The point Saif very intelligently notes is that Ghenghis’ military campaigns in India were not of the same ferocity for Saif’s son to proudly carry that name. Taimur is better! There is another reason; Ghengis was called “Great Khan” and Bollywood has too many great Khans to bother about that old chap!!

Or perhaps its got nothing to do with Mongols. In fact nothing at all to do with anyone. You see Saif, the eminent historian that he is, knows that in Taimur’s time everyone was fighting everyone else. Muslims fought Muslims too! Saif only likes the razing of cities and torturing and massacring of captives – the more cruel a person the better. And does Taimur not fit the bill. Come on the answer is an obvious YES!!

And are we not living in INTOLERANT times? The name should suit the times. Enough of secularism and tolerance – God its suffocating! The Sword of Islam is the answer. With whom is the Sword of Islam associated? Hehhehheh – Taimur!

Saif is just a loving parent choosing the best name for his son! No one from the Islamic Golden Age could be the right choice for him. Do you think we need to be bothered about Philosophy, Science, Mathematics or Art and Culture with whom have been associated very eminent Muslims? Not at all!

And now that Taimur is taken, Ghaznavi, Ghauri and Abdali remain as future choices. These are the names of the existing Pakistani missiles.

The supremely cultivated Rishi Kapur told everyone disapproving the choice to “shut the fuck up”! How will he respond to people like me who provide the justification for Saif’s choice?? ūüôā

OMAR ABDULLAH- THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL OF KASHMIR

Omar Abdullah is the Scarlet Pimpernel of Kashmir. His real identity is secret. He assumes the role of Omar during the day but keeps the experience of his secret identity muffled as he addresses the people during the day. His harebrained, imbecilic and witless comments are but a disguise. He remains the ultimate Indian.

Omar, as Scarlet Pimpernel, knows former President of Pakistan Musharraf who admitted that Pakistan trained Lashkar-e-Taiba and other organizations to carry out terrorist attacks in Kashmir was in fact an Indian Agent. This is the reason why he is condemning the Indian Government.

Hafiz Syed who wants war against India “until liberation of Kashmir” is actually mole of the Indian Government. He may be ranting to frenzied crowd repeatedly shouting “Jihad” near Minar-e-Pakistan but India Gate is where his heart is. The Scarlet Pimpernel knows it and is dropping hints but Indians are too silly to take the hint.

Nagrota, Uri, Chursoon and Udhampur attacks were staged by the Indian Army! They are tired of fighting the Pakistanis all the time and are inventing new war-games to keep themselves occupied. How does the Indian Government condemn or warn Pakistan. One has to believe Scarlet Pimpernel.

Terrorists exchanged for hostages in the IC 814 hijacking and included Masood Ashar. Scarlet Omar knows Ashar was never released. The man who in a speech at Karachi vowed to liberate Kashmir from “Indian rule”and identified generally as Masood Ashar was not him but a body double created by RAW.

Pakistan has no interest in Kashmir. Its 22 Special Envoys only wanted a pleasurable excursion out of the country – sponsored by India. And Nawaz Sharif’s interest in Burhan Wani who sought Hafis Syed’s blessings for Jihad against India aside from the repeated references to the UN Resolutions on Kashmir was so acting because the Indian Intelligence had changed the script of the speech otherwise Indian envoys would have had nothing to respond to and their presence at the UN would have been seen as waste of public money.

And the exodus of Pandits from Kashmir is a lie only to defame the Kashmir. Jagmohan did it. He was the agent of the Central Government.

Omar Pimpernel knows Indians have got their heroes and villains mixed up. So he acts like a villain but he is actually the real hero. He has realised that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. And Omar has no intention of being a scoundrel!

US Presidential Elections: American Dream & Indian Reality

Terror became a serious problem to warrant launching of “war” against it ( the term was used for the first time only in September 2001 by then US President George Bush) only when the Twin Towers in New York City were attacked. India had been a victim of terror for decades prior but had to fend against it alone.

Majoritarianism was so illiberal and anti-democratic that India was lectured about its vice but becomes a legitimate basis of the claim to undermine the legal process to elect the President of United States despite the system being consciously so devised by the framers of the American Constitution and there being four earlier instances of such an event happening.

Illiteracy and consequent improbability of a functional democracy was often used to pillory India’s democratic credentials but the elite and the educated do not control the electoral results even in the United States.

Tolerance was taught to India,  a society far more diverse and multicultural than the United States, but extreme intolerance to an outcome is being celebrated in a manner which will shame the most intolerant of societies.

Nostalgia for a hoary past was denounced as regressive in India but invocation of that nostalgia propelled a candidate to be the President of the country.

The frustrations towards a system which denied majority of Indians both voice and rights became a communal issue in India despite the American experience showing it is just a secular reaction of sapient and sentient population to problems of every day life the religion of those suffering an inane element having no relevance to the reaction.

India was mocked for its elitism and derided as a feudal set-up masquerading as democracy but it are the privileged and the elite who are mocking democracy in the United States.

The unity of India was made subject of ridicule. But see the deep divisions in the so-called cohesion of an apparently well-integrated society.

And viability of Indian institutions was often doubted but there has never been an instance when the results of a national election, no matter how unfavourable, were ever demurred to, or contested or disregarded in this country.

Its a no-contest between and American Dream and the Indian Reality!

Salman Khan & Pakistani artistes…

“Ideal situation should have been of peace. But now reaction to an action has happened. It was a proper action because they were terrorists. But in this day and age I think if we lived in peace and harmony it would have been better for everyone especially for the common people.” Thus spoke Salman Khan protesting banning of Pakistani artistes.

For Salman Khan the Uri attack and killing of 19 Indians was merely “an action” – a physical fact to which one can be indifferent and which can carry not attribute of right or wrong! ¬†This is a flawed premise which cannot but doom the conclusion which follows.

India, according to him, did not respond¬†(that is did not act in a thoughtful or reasoned manner) but “reacted”¬†that is acted thoughtlessly and impulsively to the action which brings both countries at par with nothing to distinguish between them. India responded not reacted as it moved mindfully against specified targets to prevent infiltration into the country which Pakistan has no right to permit.

I presume what he called “proper action” actually implied “proper reaction” unless he feels that terrorist infiltration into India is proper with which point of view I cannot have a reasoned discourse. If however the reaction was “proper” then he cannot simultaneously rue the want of “peace and harmony” because a proper reaction is a restore a disturbed equilibrium and impose restraint to curb injuries of excess.

Peace and harmony can be an end in itself only if the intention is shared. It is always the preferred state of existence but in an interactive environment that goal can be achieved only when actions are conducive towards that end. The Pakistani track-record (to which Salman Khan does not allude) needs to take the blame for want of peace and harmony. Pakistan has to be condemned for Pakistani artistes losing work in India. Have any of the Pakistani artistes spoken? If they are not affected whose case is Salman Khan espousing?

Pakistani artistes may not be terrorists but who amongst them have called the terrorists terrorists? And will these artistes not endorse the official Pakistani line both on Kashmir and terrorism on which Pakistan justifies the repeated disturbances in India? How can Pakistan be defeated unless the mindset which drives Pakistan be vanquished? And how can that mindset be vanquished without quelling those who endorse it overtly or covertly? This is not a question of mere politics but survival of India as India and art cannot be the Trojan Horse for India’s defeat in its battle for existence. India wants its position to be accepted as that acceptance gives India the justification to resist Pakistan. If we host those who are not aligned with India’s interests how can we isolate those hostile to it and prove the seriousness of our intent to do it?

Salman Khan may feel sorry for Pakistani artistes friends. But he should also wonder whether his friends feel sorry India.

KAPIL SHARMA’S ACHHE DIN SHOW!

Kapil Sharma before demolition of illegal structures:

Talking to a friend: These are Achhe Din! I am burning trees every night to make extension of my building. I am also making unauthorised construction on the 9th floor of my apartment. One Chaubal has made a complaint and BMC has issued me a Stop Work Notice but I do not care. I am paying Rs 15 crore as tax so forget how much I am declaring and just imagine how much I am making. All celebrities host me in my own show and I just pretend I am hosting them. I will be movie star in my own right soon. Modi ji is great. These are really Achhe Din!

Kapil Sharma after demolition of illegal structures:

Tweet: Yeh hai apke achhe din?? I am paying 15 crore as income tax for the last 5 years and have to pay 5 lakh bribe to BMC officials for making my office!

BMC:

He pays 15 crore as income tax? And bribe just 5 lakhs?? Ab hamare Acche din aaenge

Politicians other than BJP:

He tagged Modi! Good. Now we will target him. Hamare Achhe Din shuru! Congress and BSP join the chorus.

BJP:

These ARE Achhe Din. Why is Kapil Sharma thinking only of himself. All he needed to do was file a complaint. Law would have taken its course. Name the culprit.

Kapil in a spin…Broods. When I said yeh hain AAPKE achhe din I was only complaining about mine not handing OTHERS any opportunity for achhe din. That is Mr Modi’s business!Now everyone is happy aside from ME!!

Mr Modi:

This is bringing a bad name to Achhe Din. Take action immediately.

BMC:

There are many more illegalities both in Goregaon and Versova! We will take action against all of them. Bribes may have kept some of us quiet earlier but we will take stern action now. Achhe Din Modi Style for BMC with respect to Kapil Sharma!

Politicians other than BJP:

Got them on the mat! These are Achhe Din.

BJP:

See action has been taken immediately. Who can deny these are Achhe Din?

Kapil Sharma:

Demolition Notices received. Complaint against me contemplated. Bribes not working anymore. System is functional. Politicians are not obliging by intervening. I cannot complain to Modi anymore. My next tweet: Mujhe apni shakal bilkul achhi nahin lagti.  Yeh hain MERE achhe din?!

LOUD NOISE in the background! Siddhu laughing. He laughs at every Kapil Sharma Show…

 

SCOOP or PARODY?-Nawaz Sharif’s interview on 22 Kashmir Envoys!

Nawaz Sharif talking to a reporter:

Sharif: We will send 22 Special Envoys for Kashmir to different countries

Reporter: There are 196 countries. And you have 342 seats in the National assembly and 104 Senators. Why not send all the Senators and the remaining from the National Assembly to the 196 countries? Will that not show you are serious about the issue?

Sharif: Number 22 in numerology is the number of Spiritual Master Builder and when the number senses its full capacity ¬†it can achieve what is hardly imaginable… Besides someone has to remain in Pakistan lest there is coup!!

Reporter: Considering your choice of the Spiritual Master Number you think Kashmir as you contemplate is not imaginable?

Sharif: (Angrily) No…I mean not imaginable to India!

Reporter: But its Pakistan which is sending the envoys!

Sharif: Yes. But Pakistan wants India to get the message.

Reporter: Why not send the message directly to India?

Sharif: India has got the message from my statement…

Reporter: If India has already got the message why send the envoys?

Sharif: (In a huff) You have another question?

Reporter: You said the measure is to send “prayers of Kashmiri people across Line of Control.” There is Kashmir on both sides of Line of Control. Whose prayers are you sending.

Sharif: Those on the Indian side ofcourse.

Reporter: What about the prayers of those on the Pakistani side?

Sharif: China is agnostic.

Reporter: (Confused)…

Sharif: Its not Pakistan alone but Pakistan and China on the other side. Even Pakistanis cant pray there.

Reporter: Oh! And who conveyed the prayers to you to be sent through the envoys?

Sharif: (Angrily) Convey prayers!!! Though Amanullah Khan of JKLF passed away recently Hafiz Saeed and Zaki ur-Rehman Lakhvi are in Pakistan. All those who sincerely pray for Kashmir are Pakistan only. Their prayers will be conveyed. Even indians prefer to be in Pakistan. Look at Dawood. His prayers will also be sent.

Reporter: What about your Embassies and Ambassadors? Why Special Envoys

Sharif: You see Pakistan Independence day was celebrated as Freedom for Kashmir. That was the first step. Pakistanis becoming Kashmir Envoys is the second. In due course the Embassies of Pakistan will become Kashmir Embassies. We will also rename Pakistan and change the flag too.

Reporter: But there is more to Pakistan than Kashmir. There are eight administrative units in Pakistan.

Sharif: Yes. But you see there is unrest in Balochistan. We are facing problem in Gilgit. There is also problem in Azad Kashmir. The Pashtuns are not integrated in FATA. And there is militancy in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. These together make up majority of the territory of Pakistan. We need a place to rest outside Pakistan as we are always fighting within the Pakistani territory. Kashmir fits the bill.

Reporter: And what about prayers of Pakistanis?

Sharif: Hahaha! We run the government. And we prefer to PREY!

 

Digvijay’s Dream AND “India Occupied Kashmir” remark!

The REAL story behind Digvijay’s retraction of “India Occupied Kashmir” remark. Digvijay “had a dream” of a conversation with a Pakistani. Our sources have the transcript:

Digvijay: I am disappointed with the Prime Minister

Pakistani: Yes Modi is bellicose…

Digvijay: No No!!! I am talking of Nawaz Sharif

Pakistani: Oh? OUR Prime Minster

Digvijay: Yes! He is the only PM I recognize.

Pakistani: But why?

Digvijay: When he talks of Kashmir he uses complicated expressions like “indigenous ¬†freedom struggle” more than “India occupied Kashmir.” You see “Indi” is a town in the State of Karnataka in India. INDIgenous freedom struggle would suggest Sharif supports India’s struggle to rid Kashmir of Pakistani elements.

Pakistani: (Angrily) What do you “Pakistani elements”? Pakistan only supports Kashmiri aspirations.

Digvijay: Kashmiri aspirations? But it is India occupied Kashmir…

Pakistani: Yes! that is why Kashmiri aspirations are suppressed.

Digvijay: But where are the Indians?

Pakistani: In Kashmir ofcourse…

Digvijay: (Confused)If Indians are occupying Kashmir where are the Kashmiris?

Pakistani: (Annoyed)In Kashmir!!!

Digvijay: (Doubly confused) If Kashmiris are in Kashmir where are the Indians??

Pakistani: With Indians…(mulling using the word dim-wit) Dont u DIG it?

Digvijay: But then if Kashmiris are with the Indians how does Sharif talk of Kashmiri aspirations? I thought Kashmir should be with Pakistan.

Pakistani: (Gleefully) Yes!

Digvijay: But now that you have brought Kashmiris in where will they go?

Pakistani: Kashmir!

Digvijay: But are they not already in Kashmir?

Pakistani: Yes.

Digvijay: So why does Pakistan want Kashmiris in Kashmir when they are already in Kashmir with the Indians?

Pakistani: Because Pakistan wants to be with Kashmiris!!!

Digvijay: Oh. But I thought you named the northern part of Kashmir Gilgit-Baltistan??

Pakistani: Yes…Only because India could not cannot call it “Pakistan Occupied Kashmir”

Digvijay: But you just said Pakistan wants to occupy Kashmir. So why the objection?

Pakistani: (Starting to pull his beard) Gilgit is part of Pakistan…

Digvijay: (Hesitantly…not having hair to pull) But Gilgit was part of Kashmir…

Pakistani: (Getting ferocious) There is only Azad Kashmir!!

Digvijay: Azad Kashmir?? If Kashmir is azad how can Kashmiri aspirations not be fulfilled?

Pakistani: (Showing a map) Azad Kashmir is also part of Pakistan. It south of Gilgit…

Digvijay: (Pausing…Brooding)…NOW I GET IT! Gilgit is not Kashmir anymore. Kashmir is azad south of Gilgit. Pakistan wants India occupied Kashmir. Nothing will remain of Kashmir but Pakistan! FANTASTIC! You people are brilliant. We must learn from you.

Pakistani: (Exhausted but relieved) Now you get it?

Digvijay: Yes…But then why did the PM call it “indigenous freedom struggle”?

Pakistani: ENOUGH. Behead him!!

Digvijay got up perspiring and issued the clarification! Lets only talk of “India’s Kashmir” he said.

Some dreams fortunately or unfortunately never come true. Pakistani dream of Kashmir and Digvijay’s dream about Pakistan being cases in point!

UNIFORM CIVIL CODE, A PERSPECTIVE

While I do not feel there is any legal bar to the enactment of the Uniform Civil Code I yet think the exercise is undesirable in the manner it is sought to be implemented. The undesirability, however, has nothing to do with the “fears” of any section opposing the Code nor with any inherent illegality in the exercise and is based only on what Karl Popper referred to in¬†The Open Society and Its Enemies¬†as the need to fight the more urgent evils in society than the greatest ultimate good.

Uniform Civil Code will not violate any law nor transgress any bar on its enactment. Under¬†Article 372 “existing laws” can be “altered” or “amended” by competent legislatures. I am aware of some judgments to the contrary but Personal Law cannot but be “existing law” as term “law”cannot be confined to statutory enactments and will encompass “everything acceptable as law to modern jurisprudence.” As existing laws, Personal Laws would not only be “subject to the Constitution” (even if Article 13 does not apply although I feel it does) but both the central and state legislatures would be competent to legislate on them in terms of Entry 5 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. Such legislation can effectuate the mandate of Article 44 of the Constitution. This exercise will achieve the objectives both of cohesion and equality which are the basic attributes of constitutional polity and are also concepts underpinning to every religion. In fact the Supreme Court itself (even while holding Part III does not touch upon Personal Laws – an observation which passed¬†sub-silentio) recognized that Personal Law could be “altered or modified” by statute. Article 26 will not be a bar because Article 44 is as much an integral part of the Constitution and enacted along with the former. In any event freedom of religion under Article 25 itself contemplates the State “making law providing for social welfare and reform” – the professed objective behind Uniform Civil Code. In fact there is historical precedent for such enactments even under the British Rule with statutes enforcing reform applied to different religious communities. While admittedly no religion can be reformed out of existence, its practices are “subject to public order and morality”. No religion can sanction anything inherently unjust and that which is unjust is not immune from scrutiny and modification. This will conform to the mandate of Part III (Article 15(3) of the Constitution requires the State to make special provision for women and children ) and also fulfil the objectives of Part IV of the Constitution which requires the creation of a just social order. The substance of such action would have nothing to do with religion even if it may be incidentally affected. Any step to alleviate and improve their condition will only create a just social order with which no religion can have any objection.

I, however, do not feel Uniform Civil Code is necessary to enhance unity. This argument itself will disenchant a sizeable section of the population against the Code for reasons having nothing to do with the Code itself. Differences coexisting in a society is a more mature sign of unity of the society than uniformity in it. An enforced uniformity will be dangerous to unity as rejection of volition (which such enforcement will entail) will generate aversion not cohesion moving towards rejection of the compact itself. A mosaic of people can be as cohesive as a melting-pot and a vibrant pluralism of a multi-cultural society ¬†will enhance the resilience of unity not diminish it. In any event we have uniform penal laws. Matters concerning contract, securities, banking, labour, electricity, acquisition, intellectual property, environment, consumers and transfer of property are also uniform. The procedural laws are uniform too. Almost every aspect of inter-personal relationship in the country is governed by uniform laws. In fact there is an option for uniform law even for marriage, divorce and maintenance under the Special Marriage¬†Act, 1954. The use of this Act can be popularised and the recommendation of the Law Commission that “Special” be deleted from its title to read “Marriage Act” and all inter-religious marriages be mandatorily performed under the said Act will facilitate national integration even without a Uniform Civil Code. We definitely do not need Uniform Civil Code for our unity.

But unity is not the only objective of Uniform Civil Code. It deals also with liberty and with equality. I am surprised objection is being taken to the enactment of Uniform Civil Code as there is already much uniformity in the enforcement of laws across all religious communities. Dowry, a social evil and prevalent across communities, is punishable under a statute which applies to all. The Supreme Court has granted maintenance even to a divorced Muslim woman under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Domestic violence, a problem across all religious communities, is again governed by a statute which makes no distinction on the basis of religion. And recently the Gujarat High Court applied the Child Marriage Restraint Act to a Muslim. Building on the consensus around that which prevails we can move incrementally in this direction by supplementing them on subjects of pressing importance like adoption and succession. The Adoption Bill was opposed by Muslims but adoption is a voluntary act of the parents and as child can only be benefited from the care and affection any law facilitating the same cannot be condemned by any reasonable individual recognising as it does freedom of choice and compassion for life. Similarly succession to property is more a means of gender empowerment than a mere religious edict. Once consensus is built on such issues the laws can be consolidated into a Code.

It will be prudent to keep in mind what Karl Popper said was “the difference between a method which can be applied at any moment, and a method whose advocacy may easily become a means of continually postponing action until a later date.” We have to ensure that insistence on Uniform Civil Code does not lead to the abandonment of such a Code altogether.

THE SKILL INDIA AD – A POSER

The SKILL INDIA advertisement featuring Sachin Tendulkar credits skill at the expense of dignity.

One sees Sachin sit on a chair while the carpenter sits on the floor as they talk and have tea. Why could both not be shown sitting on a chair and talking?

Apart from skill, personhood carries value too. Why hold anyone down whether skilled or not?

A patronising attitude carries an arrogance of superiority  which shifts attention to the symbolic generosity of a patron from the worth of the patronised and re-enforces the very inequality which it pretends to redress.

And if an ascribed status will continue despite achievement, as the advertisement suggests, what merit will inculcation of skill attain?

The advertisement presents status as an entrenched power and fails to present skill as being versatile.

Skill is meant to be assertive and itinerant unlike status which is inhibitive and immobile. The advertisement focusses on the status of the carpenter not his skill.

Skill is dynamic unlike status which is sterile and moribund. Yet it is precisely that which the last shot of the advertisement displays.

Skill has to be achieved but any effort in this direction will be futile unless there is a corresponding correction in attitude.

It is the right attitude (Tendulkar making the other sit on the chair) alone which can facilitate social mobility (symbolised in the carpenter also so sitting) to improve our cultural capital (recognition of the innate worth of a human being aside from skill trumping status) and unravel the social stratification which the advertisement puts on display.

 

Prince William, Kate, Diana Bench & Taj Mahal

I wonder why a request was made to remove the scaffolding from the pillars of Taj Mahal for Prince William-Kate Middleton photograph. The scaffolding was as much a symbol of love as the monument itself. After all the sentiment behind fixing what needs repairs (whether a monument or a relationship) can be love only!

But it seems those making the request had a different sense of both history and love.

William’s advice to the royal photographer who took their picture thus was, “I hope you got the symmetry right”! So symmetry can prevail over chemistry and can still be love. It is interesting to know, as has been written by Anant Kumar in Case Reports in Women’s Health (Volume 1-2, January-June 2014), that Mumtaz Mahal died of complications from repeated child-birth from what are preventable causes of maternal mortality many of which continue till today. Shah Jahan chose not to spend money to address those problems but built the monument instead. I doubt William was aware of it but in a way Taj can be symbolised in symmetry even after the chemistry is over!

Perhaps thats why there is a Diana Bench at Taj. The solitary figure of Diana sitting on the bench hinted loneliness and isolation and Diana separated from Charles just a few months later. I am sure Mumtaz Mahal would squirm in her grave when she sees that bench. Appropriately(?) a photoshoot on it is with one’s back to the Taj Mahal. In any case the dead are history. Why bother about them! The monument stands and symmetry counts.

Lord William Bentinck apparently felt the same way much before the Diana Bench. If he had had his way the Taj Mahal would have been dismantled in 1835 and its marble auctioned. Besides nothing that is native is important. Just like the 50 million lives lost to famines under British Raj. Bentinck had no qualms about dismantling the whole edifice. So William’s generation’s lack of concern for the minarets should not be much of a surprise.

In any event history does not necessarily mean going back in time! Surely not when you are a Royal.

A possible explanation  for the request is the distortion of the time-space continuum. It presumed we are still in colonial times and the Queen of England is the Empress of India. Or perhaps there was movement forward in time with Prince William becoming not only King but the ruler of India. After all Royals can do no wrong and in fact can do anything Рtime travel included.

There can be however another charitable explanation. Buckingham Palace, which is about 300 years old itself, was requiring urgent repairs for a long time but the the same were being deferred. It was reported that when a plumber entered the Queen’s bathroom to repair to the old-fashioned chain-pulled cistern he while trying to fix the problem leaned against the lavatory and part of the structure came away from the wall.¬†If the former imperialist government can go slow on repair of the Palace why cannot the former colony do the same with Taj Mahal?

I wonder if the Diana Bench will be re-named now. Let Mumtaz Mahal ponder while we await the next generation of royals and another photo-shoot.