Irresponsible statements
As an aspiring candidate and the Republican Presidential frontrunner, Donald Trump’s stunning provocative remarks calling for a total shut-down on Muslims entering the United States may smack of rank intolerance, and rightly needs to be denounced as reprehensible, prejudiced and divisive. No doubt the dramatic utterances have drawn swift condemnations from rivals and the White House. But the fact remains that incidents like the ‘California massacre’ only goes to fortify an average American’s belief that radical Islam is the main threat that confronts the US today compelling a majority of them to subscribe to Trump’s proposition. Yet, it becomes increasingly difficult to perceive how the largest democracy in the world could put up with such a view that conjures up demons from fascism’s history. The ‘segregate and ostracize’ policy that the White House aspirant is so keen on propagating is a throwback to the Nazi years in Germany where the persecution of the Jews scaled unimaginable heights leading to one of the worst holocausts in world history. Clearly he has based his campaign on hate and hopes to capitalise on the sentiments of a nation plagued by the ills of terrorism.
Pachu Menon, Margao
Purposeful exercise?
The Sagar Kavach exercise happens every year and we see the authorities conducting searches across the state. While the inconvenience of traffic jams can be tolerated if the exercise is really beneficial for the state, the question is, what exactly does happen during the exercise? We read media reports that the exercise was successful and that the ‘fake’ terrorists have been caught, but will that translate into a successful exercise if, God forbid, something real happens in Goa? Or can there be better ways of conducting this exercise so as not to cause traffic jams and other holdups?
Sanjay Naik, Mapusa
Giving in to the taxi unions
The taxi unions have won the battle of time limits at the Dabolim airport. With their strong arm tactics that are so often used, they have managed to get the time limits extended from five to ten minutes. It seems so easy to get your way when you are an important vote bank. Can the government explain why this was done, and how different the taxis are as compared to the average person who drives a similar car and drops or picks up the same amount of people as the taxi driver? What then prompts a government to not charge a person who is charging people money to drop them at the airport? The taxi drivers call it a business. So, does this mean that a business is allowed to come and go as they please while the aam aadmi has to pay a charge if they fail to leave within five minutes? The hypocrisy is astounding!
Insia Mendonca, Fatorda
