|
|
Death in Pune
It’s khap terror |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jails or guest houses?
Islamabad’s blinkered vision
A gaping interview!
India-Pakistan relations
Oil: An unclear future A challenge to Google’s supremacy
|
Death in Pune
Till
now, India has been taking comfort in the fact that while swine flu was spreading, the patients were responding well to the treatment and there were no fatalities whatsoever. However, with the nation reporting its first swine flu death on Monday, there is cause for worry, particularly because this is an indigenous case. Several others have contracted the disease due to “indigenous transmission with no history of travel”. The death of a 14-year-old teenager in Pune has also disproved that the H1N1 virus in India was a mild strain. The teenager’s death has stirred the Union Health Ministry into action. It has issued new guidelines on treating cases of swine flu across the country, particularly providing that such cases must be reported to government
hospitals for treatment. The nation had woken up to the deadly H1N1 virus threat, right from the time the WHO issued a global alert in April. The travel advisory and the screening of passengers from abroad have been found effective in containing the pandemic. It is reassuring to know from the official statement that there are enough stocks of Tamiflu with the government. The public needs to be educated further on the urgency of early detection as well as quarantine measures. Both play a crucial role in the treatment and containment of the virus. While the WHO has been repeatedly warning that the second wave could be more serious, treatment-resistant virus has been detected in the United States, Canada, Denmark, Hong Kong and Japan. The worst is clearly not over and the threat is for real and serious. The medical authorities, right from the district to the Central level, need to be extra-vigilant.
|
|
It’s khap terror
Unmindful
of the nationwide condemnation and concern, caste panchayats of Haryana have not seen reason and are up to their usual mischief. They have refused to let a couple which married within the gotra to live in peace in Jhajjar district and even refused to take back their fatwa against the family members of the “erring couple”. Leaders of other khap panchayats tried to broker a compromise by letting the ire of the panchayat fall only on the couple surviving under heavy security but the self-styled keepers of gotra morality are hell bent on haunting the entire family. Obviously, they are trying to run a parallel judicial system, challenging the authority of the state. Such caste panchayats are having an inflated impression about their own role only because some politicians kowtow to them. The belief is that they can manipulate a significant number of votes. That is why they have been given such a long rope that they force husband and wife to live like brother and sister and have even killed those who dared to defy their diktat. The controversy has brought such a bad name to Haryana that the Chief Minister has no choice except to pick up courage and cut the illegal entities to size. He must ensure that the authority of law prevails in his state and not that of the khaps. Whatever their personal opinion about the varna system, the khaps cannot force it on unwilling members of the community, that too in defiance of the law of the land. Coercing anybody to leave his or her home is a criminal act and needs to be punished as such. Not to do so will amount to dereliction of duty.
|
|
|
Jails or guest houses?
Ordinary
jail inmates may complain of lack of amenities, bad food or poor hygiene, but for moneyed and VIP prisoners a jail is no less than a rest and recreation centre. In a report to the Punjab and Haryana High Court the Bathinda SSP has confirmed what is widely known. It is common knowledge that mobile phones, drugs and liquor are freely available to prisoners in Punjab jails for a consideration. In Bathinda jail up to 150 under-trials had cell phones and drugs were available at a hefty price, says the SSP’s report. Some criminals enjoyed B-class facilities, which had been withdrawn on paper. Making a mockery of the regulatory mechanism, jail inmates elsewhere in Punjab too can bribe their way to get an easy access to whatever they need. Searches in the crowded jail in Jalandhar yielded five consignments of drugs and some mobile phones in March this year. Earlier, this 19th century jail had seen inmates rioting for better amenities. A major reason for the shady goings-on in jails is rampant corruption among jail officials and guards. Nothing can happen in a jail without their connivance. Why it has been so difficult for the higher authorities to check corruption among officials or stop inmates from buying VIP treatment is not clear. Courts have frequently intervened to stop malpractices, but with limited success. As far back as 2005 the Supreme Court had asked the mobile phone companies to instal jammers in all jails across the country, but nothing has happened, at least in this part of the country. In Punjab cash crunch is one excuse dished out for every act of non-governance. How far the fresh efforts of the high court to clean up the jails will succeed remains to be seen.
|
|
|
Classical quotation is the parole of literary men all over the world. — Samuel Johnson
|
|
Corrections and clarifications Despite our earnest endeavour to keep The Tribune error-free, some errors do creep in at times. We are always eager to correct them. This column will now appear thrice a week — every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. We request our readers to write or e-mail to us whenever they find any error. Readers in such cases can write to Mr Kamlendra Kanwar, Senior Associate Editor, The Tribune, Chandigarh, with the word “Corrections”
on the envelope. His e-mail ID is kanwar@tribunemail.com. H.K. Dua |
||
Islamabad’s blinkered vision
If
ever there was any doubt about Pakistan having realised the folly of using medieval and barbaric Islamists for the fulfilment of strategic designs, it now needs to be put to rest. For the Pakistan Army, the real enemy is India; the Taliban remain a strategic asset. The interview given by the Pakistan military spokesman, Maj-Gen Athar Abbas, to the CNN a couple of weeks back had the first open acknowledgement of this immutable reality. The subsequent denial by his office of the deep links and continuing contacts between the Pakistan Army and the Taliban leadership turned out to be hollow, especially after senior ISI officials briefed New York Times reporters that they “consider India their top priority and the Taliban militants a problem that can be negotiated.” Yet some people in India continue to live in cuckoo land, insisting that “Pakistan is changing”. Yes, indeed, Pakistan is changing, but the problem is that the more it changes, the more it stays the same. It had become clear long ago that Pakistan's real government (read military) had kept the Taliban card up its sleeve even after it publicly broke its association with the Taliban after 9/11. At that time, Gen Pervez Musharraf tried very hard to sell to the Americans the concept of “moderate” Taliban; only, the Bush administration didn’t bite. Today, the nomenclature has changed from the “moderate Taliban” to the “reconcilable Taliban”. Not surprisingly, there are enough woolly-headed liberals in the Obama administration who are receptive to the idea of opening a dialogue with this strange and rather elusive entity. No one has, however, bothered to ask what the basis will be of reconciliation with the “reconcilable Taliban”. If reconciliation is to be the result not of capitulation but negotiation, then the question arises as to what the Taliban will want and what will they concede. At the very minimum, any reconciliation with the Taliban will tantamount to an acceptance of their worldview. While the US can probably afford to walk away from the region by declaring victory after “reconciling” with the Taliban, Pakistan and the rest of the region will have to contend with the devastating fallout of a radical Islamist regime in the neighbourhood. But, perhaps, the Pakistanis won’t be too averse to living in a Talibanised environment. Right from day one of the so-called war on terror, the Pakistani policy was “don’t touch the Taliban, don’t spare Al-Qaeda”. As a result, while Pakistan flaunted the arrest of quite a few high-profile Al-Qaeda operatives, not a single Taliban commander of any significance was ever apprehended by the Pakistani authorities. Clearly, the Pakistanis were playing the waiting game. They had correctly calculated that it was only a matter of time before the Americans would pack up and quit Afghanistan, outsourcing it to the Pakistanis, who in turn would get the best of both worlds - enormous amounts of money plus the “strategic depth” that they always sought inside Afghanistan. The icing on the cake is, of course, what General Abbas told the CNN: in return for any role as a broker between the United States and the Taliban, Pakistan wants concessions from Washington over Islamabad's concerns with long-time rival India. The strategy that the Pakistan Army has adopted on Afghanistan - keeping the Taliban option alive even as it participated as an ally in the US war on terror - has obvious dualities because of which Pakistan's allies cannot seem to decide whether the Pakistan Army is part of the problem or part of the solution. While hardly anyone disagrees that Pakistan has legitimate interests in Afghanistan, the question that confounds everyone is that if Pakistan's interests are served by keeping the Taliban option alive, then what sort of a war Islamabad is fighting against the Taliban. On the one hand, the Pakistan Army is engaged in military operations against the Pakistani Taliban and is classifying them as the biggest threat to the Pakistani state and society. But, on the other hand, the same army is providing support and sanctuary to the Afghan Taliban using the disingenuous argument that there is a difference between the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban. If anything, the Pakistani Taliban are clones of the Afghan Taliban and they both stand for the same thing - a medieval, brutal, tribal interpretation of Islam that is incapable of tolerating any dissent or living in peace with any other people who don’t subscribe to their worldview. The question is: how come the Taliban is acceptable to the Pakistanis in Afghanistan, but not in their own country? A simple answer to this question is that the Pakistan Army doesn’t really have any problem with what the Taliban stands for. In fact, many in the Pakistan Army subscribe to the Taliban worldview. The reason why the Pakistan Army is fighting the Pakistani Taliban, rather a section of it, is because it is no longer playing the role assigned to it by its military masters. Not only did the Pakistani Taliban start to disobey orders, it went even further by carving out its own emirates and displacing the Pakistani state in areas it controlled. It is this, and not its barbarism, that the Pakistan Army could not tolerate. Indeed, if the Pakistan Army had a problem with the Taliban version of Islam, it wouldn’t have propped up groups like the Abdullah Mehsud group to take on Baitullah Mehsud. Nor would the Pakistan Army tolerate a terrorist “ideologue” like Hafiz Saeed. According to the ISI officials who spoke to The New York Times, “there would be no effort to imprison (Hafiz) Saeed again, in part because he was just an ideologue who did not have an anti-Pakistan agenda”. Clearly, Saeed’s handlers in the ISI don’t consider his efforts to impose on the people of Pakistan the hardline and barbaric Wahabi version of Islam to be “anti-Pakistan”! By all accounts, the diabolical policy that Pakistan has followed on Afghanistan has been motivated in large measure by its unrelenting enmity towards India. It is a different matter that in its quest for attaining “strategic depth”, Pakistan has ended up creating a “strategic black hole” that could one day devour it. Even today, the Pakistani strategic thinking is centred on what General Abbas called “an over-involvement of Indians in Afghanistan”. According to him, “an over-ingress of the Indians into...(the Afghan) government, their ministries, their army. The fear is, tomorrow what happens if these Americans move out and they're replaced by Indians as military trainers? That becomes a serious concern.” Ergo, the Taliban, an instrument that the Pakistanis were confident will always be antagonistic towards India. The bankruptcy of Pakistan’s blinkered strategic vision, however, becomes evident from two simple facts: first, regardless of the inroads India makes in Afghanistan, it can never replace the natural influence that Pakistan will always exercise in that country. And yet, while India is spending enormous amounts of money to build social and economic infrastructure in Afghanistan, all that Pakistan has given to the Afghans is death, destruction and a dreadful version of Islam. Second, after all, the investment Pakistan has made and all the cost it has borne in raising and nurturing the Islamist militia in Afghanistan and allowing it to operate with impunity inside Pakistan, today Pakistan is reduced into making a spectacle of itself by accusing India of backing the Taliban! The irony of it all is both funny and tragic.n The writer is a consultant to the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis.
|
||
A gaping interview! Here is an exclusive interview we had with a winner and a loser in the recent elections. Q: So sir, how come you lost the election? LOSER: Bhai, it’s simple. I got less number of votes than him. WINNER: I agree entirely, no quarrel about it. LOSER: See, I am committed to giving him constructive cooperation. Also, I have conceded defeat. Q: Concede? You couldn’t have claimed victory anyway. What were the crucial issues you both took up? WINNER: The late arrival of the monsoon last year. I promised to get it earlier this year. Why are you gaping like a fish in the bucket? Oh, in case I fail? Friend, a politician never fails! We will find a credible explanation – like the Opposition’s negative role while the clouds begin to gather…You are gaping again! You see, the bright janata that believed such promises in the first place would remain bright enough to appreciate our explanations also! No worry at all. LOSER: Yes, you had stolen my monsoon idea, ha,ha! So, I promised technology by which housewives would not have to cook. Every thing readymade. It was meant to reduce their workload. WINNER: That’s where we scored. We turned your own campaign against you. That you were against housewives, you were taking away their greatest privilege, their birthright, their instrument of home control. We reminded housewives of the adage – the way to man’s heart lies through the stomach. Q: What are your plans? LOSER: Of course, constructive cooperation. Like trying new methods of conducting strikes, arranging roadblocks, collecting crowds for protest marches…You see, democracy is incomplete without them. Even our most gentle-hearted voters expect the losing parties to fulfil this role — very gracefully, of course. No hospitalisation. WINNER: I will devote all my time to bringing down prices. Oh, you are gaping again, this time like a dog that has dropped a bone into the drain! I know it’s a difficult task. I will promote detachment, an aversion in people’s minds towards shopping, buying worldly things… When demand falls in the market, prices too will fall automatically! After all, price control was one of my main promises. Q: Any message to our masses? LOSER: It’s not necessary to be in power to serve them. Now, I have all the time to establish good contacts while studying the underworld, investment agencies, etc. Also I will get to know legal nuances while facing the charges and inquiries about my wealth. My language skills will also improve while levelling allegations of all kinds against the ruling party. A very constructive phase, in a way, you see. WINNER: First of all, I want to thank from the very deep bottom of my heart my revered leader who gave me the ticket to fight the election. Am grateful to his respected parents for bringing such a noble one into this world. Our masses should be grateful to bhabhi ji also for keeping him fit to serve them. Above all, they should be prepared to make bigger sacrifices than ever before in the long- term interests of our great
nation..
|
||
India-Pakistan relations
The
worst fears of some of us have now been confirmed. Pakistani society, politicians and media have always been talking about the involvement of Indian intelligence agency RAW in fomenting trouble inside Pakistan. First it was in Sindh, particularly Karachi. Now people say there is no doubt about the Indian involvement in Balochistan and some say that RAW is also supporting Baitullah Mehsud in the NWFP. Questions are being raised on the unusually high number of consulate offices opened by India in Afghanistan. The involvement of the CIA and Mossa is also not ruled out. There is speculation that Baitullah Mehsud could not have survived for so long since the US drone attacks began if it was not for the support of one or more of foreign intelligence agencies and/or military help. Asif Ali Zardari has now openly admitted that the Taliban are the creation of Pakistan. The terror that Pakistan exported has now come back to it. Earlier, it was limited to the NWFP and was not seen as a major problem. But now that it has the potential of taking over Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Lahore, even the military and intelligence have been forced, partly because of the US pressure, but primarily due to the threat it poses to them, reluctantly but decisively to come around to confront them. When Zardari makes a bold statement, he obviously has the approval of the military and intelligence. The terrorist groups in the Af-Pak region — be it al-Qaeda, Taliban or Lashkar-e-Toiba — were propped up by the US and Pakistani governments. They received arms and ammunition, money and training from military professionals. The association of terrorist groups with the Pakistani government during the military regime was so close that some former military officials are part of terrorist set-ups and terrorists have infiltrated the Pakistani establishment. One reason why the governments, whether Punjab or Federal, in Pakistan is reluctant to take action against Hafiz Saeed, the LeT founder, is that he can become a cause of much embarrassment for the establishment there if he decides to open his mouth. But the question is after the present Pakistani establishment has made up its mind to confront the terrorist groups and the US has relentlessly pursued the terrorists, even going to the extent of launching attacks inside the sovereign territory of Pakistan, how are the terrorists holding fort? One would assume that the lot which was trained to fight the Russians would be old enough to be combatants now. So, even if there is supply of money from Saudi Arabia or somewhere or plenty of drug trafficking money is available, and there are youth from central Asia, southern Punjab (Pakistani) and from all around the world ready to be trained as jehadis, who is providing them training in the use of modern methods of warfare? Is the CIA playing a double game? Peace in the area would make the justification of the US military presence in the region untenable. And it is no secret that the US wants to be involved not only in the Af-Pak region but also in Kashmir. We’re not talking about George Bush. We’re talking about Barack Obama. Even before Obama’s victory results became public, he had announced his intention of appointing a Kashmir aide. Why on earth is an uninitiated US President interested more in Kashmir than his own country? But what is disturbing for most educated, self-righteous middle class Indians, who have always seen India as a peaceful country and Pakistan as source of all trouble, is the revelation that India could have a role in instigating violence inside Pakistan. The joint bilateral statement issued from Sharm el-Sheikh has a reference to Pakistan having information on threats to Balochistan. Pakistan sees it as a diplomatic victory. The response in India is that of shock, especially from the hawks. But Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has displayed rare courage and insight in saying that he is willing to discuss any issue with Pakistan. He has also encouraged Pakistan to take action against the perpetrators of the November 26, 2008, incident in Mumbai without linking it to the resumption of composite dialogue. As a leader of the senior (in terms of experience with democracy) and bigger nation, only he could have been expected to be magnanimous. And he has lived up to his role. He has breached the parochial approach which constrains progress on India-Pakistan official relations. Manmohan Singh has merely acknowledged something which is common knowledge in Pakistan. But Pakistan will have to provide concrete proof of RAW’s involvement in Balochistan or elsewhere in Pakistan just like India has done in the case of the Mumbai incident. But this is only a trivial matter. It is an open secret that the ISI and RAW have been working at cross purposes. What Manmohan Singh has achieved as a statesman is that he has set out to define a new paradigm in which India-Pakistan relations will be discussed. For the first time in the history of the two nations, he has laid the grounds for India and Pakistan to work together to solve the common problems, including that of terrorism. The US has already given an indication of this by asking India to provide help to Pakistan. And why not? If India can develop close ties with Afghanistan and provide financial help to it and Pakistan can derive help from the US, India and Pakistan, if they can shed their historical baggage, can cooperate as friendly neighbours. Pakistan, where receiving US aid is a government policy now, can enjoy a more democratic relationship with India. Can we conceive of RAW and the ISI working together, like both of them have a working relationship with the CIA, to root out terrorism from the region? Pakistan, being the smaller and more insecure of the two nations, would warm up to India only if it feels comfortable. The long adversarial relationship between the two has dried up all the trust. Manmohan Singh has certainly made Yousuf Raza Gilani and Pakistan feel that they can do business with India.n The writer, a Ramon Magsaysay awardee, has just returned from a week-long trip to Pakistan.
|
|
Oil: An unclear future The
world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their peak production, a leading energy economist has warned. Higher oil prices brought on by a rapid increase in demand and a stagnation, or even decline, in supply could blow any recovery off course, said Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the respected International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, which is charged with the task of assessing future energy supplies by OECD countries. In an interview with The Independent, Dr Birol said that the public and many governments appeared to be oblivious to the fact that the oil on which modern civilisation depends is running out far faster than previously predicted and that global production is likely to peak in about 10 years – at least a decade earlier than most governments had estimated. But the first detailed assessment of more than 800 oil fields in the world, covering three quarters of global reserves, has found that most of the biggest fields have already peaked and that the rate of decline in oil production is now running at nearly twice the pace as calculated just two years ago. On top of this, there is a problem of chronic under-investment by oil-producing countries, a feature that is set to result in an “oil crunch” within the next five years which will jeopardise any hope of a recovery from the present global economic recession, he said. In a stark warning to Britain and the other Western powers, Dr Birol said that the market power of the very few oil-producing countries that hold substantial reserves of oil – mostly in the Middle East – would increase rapidly as the oil crisis begins to grip after 2010. “One day we will run out of oil, it is not today or tomorrow, but one day we will run out of oil and we have to leave oil before oil leaves us, and we have to prepare ourselves for that day,” Dr Birol said. “The earlier we start, the better, because all of our economic and social system is based on oil, so to change from that will take a lot of time and a lot of money and we should take this issue very seriously,” he said. “The market power of the very few oil-producing countries, mainly in the Middle East, will increase very quickly. They already have about 40 per cent share of the oil market and this will increase much more strongly in the future,” he said. There is now a real risk of a crunch in the oil supply after next year when demand picks up because not enough is being done to build up new supplies of oil to compensate for the rapid decline in existing fields. The IEA estimates that the decline in oil production in existing fields is now running at 6.7 per cent a year compared to the 3.7 per cent decline it had estimated in 2007, which it now acknowledges to be wrong. “If we see a tightness of the markets, people in the street will see it in terms of higher prices, much higher than we see now. It will have an impact on the economy, definitely, especially if we see this tightness in the markets in the next few years,” Dr Birol said. “It will be especially important because the global economy will still be very fragile, very vulnerable. Many people think there will be a recovery in a few years’ time but it will be a slow recovery and a fragile recovery and we will have the risk that the recovery will be strangled with higher oil prices,” he told The Independent. In its first-ever assessment of the world’s major oil fields, the IEA concluded that the global energy system was at a crossroads and that consumption of oil was “patently unsustainable”, with expected demand far outstripping supply. Oil production has already peaked in non-Opec countries and the era of cheap oil has come to an end, it warned. In most fields, oil production has now peaked, which means that other sources of supply have to be found to meet existing demand. Even if demand remained steady, the world would have to find the equivalent of four Saudi Arabias to maintain production, and six Saudi Arabias if it is to keep up with the expected increase in demand between now and 2030, Dr Birol said. “It’s a big challenge in terms of the geology, in terms of the investment and in terms of the geopolitics. So this is a big risk and it’s mainly because of the rates of the declining oil fields,” he said. “Many governments now are more and more aware that at least the day of cheap and easy oil is over... [however] I’m not very optimistic about governments being aware of the difficulties we may face in the oil supply,” he said. Environmentalists fear that as supplies of conventional oil run out, governments will be forced to exploit even dirtier alternatives, such as the massive reserves of tar sands in Alberta, Canada, which would be immensely damaging to the environment because of the amount of energy needed to recover a barrel of tar-sand oil compared to the energy needed to collect the same amount of crude oil. “Just because oil is running out faster than we have collectively assumed, does not mean the pressure is off on climate change,” said Jeremy Leggett, a former oil-industry consultant and now a green entrepreneur with Solar Century. “Shell and others want to turn to tar, and extract oil from coal. But these are very carbon-intensive processes, and will deepen the climate problem,” Dr Leggett said. “What we need to do is accelerate the mobilisation of renewables, energy efficiency and alternative transport. We have to do this for global warming reasons anyway, but the imminent energy crisis redoubles the imperative,” he
said. — By arrangement with The Independent
|
|
A challenge to Google’s supremacy Internet
search operations are dominated by Google, so much so that Googling is now a verb and a synonym for searching for information on the Internet, much as Dalda is for hydrogenated vegetable fat. Search is one of the most frequent online activities of most Internet users and in this Google dominated the field soon after it was originally developed by Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 1997. Within a year, by the end of 1998, Google had an index of about 60 million pages, and it was widely held that it gave better search results than those of competitors like Hotbot or Excite.com. At that time, portal sites, including Yahoo!, Excite.com, Lycos and MSN.com were seen to be “the future of the Web,” but they were all to fall behind, often because they became bloated. Yahoo! became a distant number two and Microsoft’s search engine, through its various avatars and brands, was a tiny blip. The two also-rans have been exploring various options, including an outright purchase of Yahoo! by Microsoft, but now they have signed a deal through which all the search enquiries to Yahoo! will be served by the new and improved Microsoft search engine Bing. Together they hope to mount a challenge, and get a share of the advertisement pie that is now practically monopolised by Google. Rightly so, many would suggest. The numbers are revealing, and they show that Google is at the top by a huge margin that varies from country to country. It percentage share is 90 in the UK, 92 in India and 67 globally. In the all-important US market, which yields the top advertising dollars, Google rules—77.54 per cent share in July, according to analysis conducted by web analytics firm Stat Counter. The analysis, published on August 3, showed an increase in Microsoft’s search engine, Bing, in July to 9.41 per cent from 8.23 per cent in June. Microsoft and Yahoo! combined took 20.36 per cent of the market, up slightly from 19.27 per cent in June. Bing is moving up, but Yahoo!+Bing is hardy taking the cyber world by a storm. Bing is a fine product; it has many ease-of-use features and a touch of elegance which is truly alluring. I have been using it religiously every day since it was unveiled, but often find myself going to Google after a while—the search results there have more depth and give me what I want sooner rather than later. This is hardly surprisingly, because Google has a tremendous advantage in the number of web pages it has indexed. According to one study, roughly speaking, that the number of pages indexed by Google doubles every 16 months or so, although the growth seems to be sometimes sudden. Last year, it crossed one trillion (10,00,00,00,00,000) unique websites on the web. No one else comes even remotely close. The Yahoo! Bing combination has already made a difference in presenting a viable competition to the monolith. The new features on Bing show that much thought has gone into the user interface and in presenting information in the right context. Here it scores over Google and that’s the reason it is making an impact. When we search a cyber world of over a trillion websites, we have no use for how many results are available, or how many pages have been indexed. Technical superiority becomes humbug if the user is not presented with the answers relevant to his or her query. Google has handled the burgeoning of information on the cyber world very well, how it will adapt to the challenges thrown its way will well decide whether it retains its monopoly over cyber consumers. We are still searching for answers on that
one.
|
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
