CK Lal's pathological hatred for Americans is difficult to understand ("Oh, say, can you see Osama and Omar?", #68). Why does he not realise that Nepal gets nothing by supporting countries like Afghanistan, Iraq or Sudan? But if we support the US, Nepal can benefit-look how Pakistan has benefited. It is possible that Sher Bahadur Deuba has some understanding with the Americans, who after all were his lami (matchmaker). Maybe we will get American help to fight the Maoists in Nepal. CK Lal should be happy that Deuba supported the USA immediately in its war with Afghanistan. The fundamentalists are helping set up madrasas in Nepal, spreading Islam in a Hindu country.

Naresh Adhikary
Anamnagar

C K Lal has done it again. He criticises the Taleban and al-Qaeda, but unleashes his full wrath, with no stones left unturned, upon his favorite target-the Big Bad Wolf of the planet, in his view, the United States of America. Buoyed by hot air from such Blame America icons as the ever-apologetic Bill Clinton and Noam Chomsky, he is more than happy once again to ride the jet-stream of anti-American hatred. The whole point of his article can be summarized in two words: "America... Bad".
If CK Lal were to tune out of Al Jazeera for a moment or two, maybe he would not be making such a ridiculous statement as America is responsible for the Taleban and the al-Qaeda. If CK Lal's point is that America only acts in her own self-interest-then the natural question, is which country doesn't? The solutions to the struggle in Afghanistan is "so elementary" to him that he gets frustrated that the folks at Langley "don't get it". But what does our boy wonder have to offer... well, nothing, of course! He would rather wallow in guilt, self-pity, introspection and soul-searching than provide concrete ways of liberating the Afghan people, and ridding the world of terror.
Roughly fifty years ago, an evil not unlike the al-Qaeda and the Taleban was visited upon this world in the name of Nazism. Their leader was Hitler. There were people then, like Neville Chamberlain, who thought that a civilised dialogue mixed with a gentle dose of appeasement would be enough to melt Hitler's heart and save civilisation from ruin. But in the end, it took force to defeat this evil. Already in Kabul, with the initial success of the allied forces, the Taleban are on the run, there is music on the streets, the women have started to unveil their burkhas in defiance, men are lining up outside barber shops to get rid of their Taleban-mandated beards, and children are flying kites again, and people are shouting "America America" in utter expression of gratitude. And CK Lal has either missed it all, or has selective amnesia.

Bishwa Basnet
by email

Finally Daniel Lak has shown his true colours ("Two months after", #68). He pretends to sympathise with the objects that he covers for the western media, but his loyalty remains with his subject-furthering western interests in developing countries. Lak should read his fellow columnist CK Lal ("Oh, say, can you see Osama and Omar", #68) to understand why US policies in these parts of the world are despised so much. If the United States practiced what it preaches, there would have been no Taliban, no al-Qaeda, and no bin Laden, and 9-11 would not have taken place at all. America needs to correct itself rather than keep bombing Iraq, Sudan or Afghanistan at its whims and fancies. Instead of writing western propaganda in his widely read column, it would be better for Mr Lak to expose the hypocrisy of Britain and America.

Satyendra Shakya
Bhanimandal