AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

VOICE MAIL

        Sir,

        The artiocle by V Sundaram titled 'Sonia Cong's blitzkrieg evangelisation through RBI' (News Today, 23 May) was thought-provking. Sundaram has yet again exposed the creeping hand of the Church in diverse ways into the public life of this nation, this time through the RBI.

        Sundaram's expose of the cross on the new 2 rupee coin minted in 2005-2006 in an earlier column was an eye-opener and the latest expose of the RBI in planting the cross on the newly minted one rupee coin in the same year outrages me even more because the cross on the one rupee coin is a straight forward cross and dispenses with the stylish representation of the cross as in the two rupee coin. Practise they say makes for perfection and the one rupee coin bears the perfect and unapologetic image of the cross. I found the response of the Chief General Manager of the RBI, US Paliwal even more appalling. WWhat I gather is that he is supposed to have replied as follows -

        'The reverse of the coin contains the visuals showing stylized representation of 'Unity in diversity' a defining characteristic of our country. The symbol shall be seen as four heads sharing a common body. It shall be thought of as people from all parts of the country coming together under one banner and identifying with one nation. The visual code helps the user connect with an individual denomination, which makes the process of identification quicker.'

        The RBI must also inform us about when and how it was established by mutual consensus or general understanding in the country that the design which I call the cross, is according to the RBI, a symbol of unity in diversity. Was Parliament taken into confidence on the issue? I for one have never seen this symbol anywhere before it appeared on our coins as representing unity in diversity. And one may question further, why four heads? Four heads of what entity?

        It is obvious that the RBI has been caught with its pants down on the issue and has nothing but this puerile explanation to offer in its justification. May I request News Today to carry another column on the coin issue and reproduce for the benefit of all your readers the different designs of the cross, the specific cross in question which has been chosen to adorn our one rupee and two rupee coins and the coins in question too - all side by side so that readers may see and judge for themselves the motives and agenda of the UPA government and the RBI.

        Radha Rajan,

        joint secretary, Vigil Public Opinion Forum Chennai.

        Sir

        A lot of noise is being made about the efficacy of wearing helmet by two wheelers and making it compulsory. The emphasis should be prevention of accidents for which the remedy is elsewhere. The way our lorrys, autos, share-autos and cars are driven recklessly and the way others like cyclists, cart-wallahs are misusing the roads with scant respect for traffic rules, accidents are bound to happen.

        While a head injury may take away the life from the rider, the helmet can at best convert it into a fracture of other limbs and in the process, changing a bread winner into a liability for life. If helmets are a must, the same logic should extend to cyclists also, since they also use the same thoroughfare alongwith faster killer vehicles. The logic can be stretched still further making life insurance compulsory for all pedestrians since they also run the risk of getting knocked down by the speeding demons!

        The focus should therefore be to ensure better roads, separate pavements for pedestrains without encroachments, stricter punishment system for erring drivers. Cumpulsory helmet is not the answer.

        R Venkatasubramanian, Chennai