Some Sad Prince on my timeline has heckled at my directing a querist to refer to MHC case and he has also doubted the suthenticity of my seeing the "EVR atheist activists Chappal hitting competition in Salem in 1971.
My point was as to whether I saw naked effigies . Seriously?
My point was as to whether I saw naked effigies . Seriously?
In 1971 I was 17 years old and had no means of preserving the images.
And till date nobody recreates life like effigies.Only symbolic ones. What difference,whether symbolic effigy is naked or dressed up? I fail to understand the "rationalist atheist" views about dress codes
And till date nobody recreates life like effigies.Only symbolic ones. What difference,whether symbolic effigy is naked or dressed up? I fail to understand the "rationalist atheist" views about dress codes
And did I see naked pictures of Gods being beaten with chappals? Yes.
That's enough to haul the perpetrators up.
But Mu.Ka chose to protect these perps as he must have feared serious consequences from "not so secular" Madras HC
That's enough to haul the perpetrators up.
But Mu.Ka chose to protect these perps as he must have feared serious consequences from "not so secular" Madras HC
Essence of what Rajini said was such demeaning acts against Hindu Gods are forgettable but can't be denied having taken place.
I am in agreement with the statement and if ever there is a court case where a witness is required I am available.
No amount of derision dissuades me
I am in agreement with the statement and if ever there is a court case where a witness is required I am available.
No amount of derision dissuades me
"இந்த ஊர்வலத்தில் முருகக் கடவுளின் பிறப்பு, முனிவர்களின் தவம், மோகினி அவதாரம் பற்றிய ஆபாசமான படங்கள் இருந்தன. ராமரின் 10 அடி உயரப் படம் ஒரு வண்டியில் எடுத்துச்செல்லப்பட்டது. அதை பல பேர் செருப்பால் அடித்துக் கொண்டிருந்தனர்"
From The Hindu translated in Tamil edition.
From The Hindu translated in Tamil edition.
I don't need to be reminded those scenes. But the description here will clearly state the sad state of affairs prevailing in the procession.
Whether Mr.Lakshmanan says otherwise or not, it is immaterial as far as I am concerned.
What I saw, I will testify, if so required.
Whether Mr.Lakshmanan says otherwise or not, it is immaterial as far as I am concerned.
What I saw, I will testify, if so required.
Let us all wait for the day when Rajini is issued a summons by any court disregarding overwhelming evidence available on MHC records.Any court having sense of justice will seek direction from MHC as to all materials filed in Chinna Annamalai case and then issue summons if need be
If someone needs to know the truth the MHC order in that case will be sufficient to come to a conclusion.
If obfuscation is the objective then no amount of evidence will be sufficient.
Let them come to a conclusion all on their own.
Till then will read comments but not reply
If obfuscation is the objective then no amount of evidence will be sufficient.
Let them come to a conclusion all on their own.
Till then will read comments but not reply
