data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b3422/b34226d9da24043f66cf008702457a800ba99fce" alt=""
What does not make sense to me here is Mr. Parrikar who says he saw a politician’s son with Atala and on the other hand he refuses to name the politician or his son. I just cannot guess what game is Parrikar upto. It looks like either he is trying to extort a handsome reward from the politician or that he is just bluffing the public. I think this is the right time to own up who he saw with Atala, so that case would get stronger grounds to be handed over to the CBI or NIA. Everybody is eager to know from Parrikar the name of the politician. Mr. Parrikar why are you so hesitant and reluctant to disclose the name? are you afraid of a defamation suite against you? Do not worry because of that as Radharao and Aires are busy to do that these days. Mr. Manohar Parrikar please make the case stronger by openly dislosing the name of the politician’s son otherwise don’t talk about it. Just keep mum.
When one confronts an opponent or say anybody for instance for something wrong doing, one should be ready with the necessary evidence to act accordingly when required. Just bragging about saying “I know that a son of a politician is involved” does not make any sense, to me at least no. It is like a madman playing a trumpet that obviously will be out of tune. If a citizen including the MLAs do talk, they should have supporting evidence with them. But here in this case it is null and void as there is a feeling that Mr. Parrikar, I am afraid, is just firing rounds blindfolded which may accidentally hit the bulls eye.
No Parrikar, if you say something you must stand up to it. Not play in the air the songs that have no tune. You resemble Calvert Gonsalves who has no evidence to provide before the readers and yet goes on accusing a priest and the whole catholic Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.