Setu project: secret meeting and survey by Shipping Ministry and other officials

Review of alternative channel in Setusamudram
Tamil daily: Dinamalar, 18 Aug. 2008
A group of Delhi officials visited Dhanushkodi and nearby areas to review the alternative channel and alignment 4 for Setusamudram project. Supreme Court had ordered the review of dredging a channel through in Dhanushkodi sea waters without damaging the shoal banks forming the Rama Setu.
Accordingly, the Centre had ordered such a review by a committee. Many organizations had demanded that while selecting the alternative channel path protection of environment, of aquatic fauna, assurance of the livelihood of fisherfolk had to be ensured. In this context, Revenue and Land Survey department officials are already engaged for the last two days. to survey the land allotted by Tamil Nadu Government consisting of 2,500 acres starting from Rameshwaram temple to Arical (erosion point) Munai of Dhanukodi, for the Setusamudram Project,
To indicate that survey has been done, between Dhanushkodi and Arical Munai, flagposts have been erected. In this situation, officials led by the Secretary of Shipping Minister, Govt. of India, AP Sharma visited the areas from Mandapam using the helicopter of Navy Coast Guard. The areas visited were: Kodanda Ramar temple, Dhanushkodi, Arical Munai.
Later, the team reviewed with the officials the alternative channel 4. Subsequently, the team also visited the sandbanks of Rama Setu in Dhanushkodi sea waters. In this secretly conducted visit and review, Senior official of Setusamudram Corporation, Srinivasa Kannan, Ramanathapuram Collector Kirloshkumar and other officials of different departments participated.
சேது சமுத்திர கால்வாய் மாற்றுப்பாதைக்கு ஆய்வு
ஆகஸ்ட் 18,2008,00:00 IST (Dinamalar, 18 Aug. 2008)
http://img.dinamalar.com/data/images_news/tblSambavamnews_27872866393.jpg
ராமேஸ்வரம்: சேது சமுத்திர கால்வாய் மாற்றுப்பாதை மற்றும் நான்காவது வழித்தடம் குறித்து டெல்லி அதிகாரிகள் குழுவினர் நேற்று தனுஷ்கோடி உள்ளிட்ட பகுதிகளைப் பார்வையிட்டு ஆய்வு செய்தனர். சேது சமுத்திரத் திட்ட கால்வாய் தோண்ட தனுஷ்கோடி கடலில் அமைந்துள்ள ராமர் பாலம் மணல் திட்டுகளைச் சேதப்படுத்தாமல் மாற்று வழிகுறித்து ஆய்வு செய்ய சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் உத்தரவிட்டது.
அதன்படி மாற்றுவழியைத் தேர்வு செய்ய சேது சமுத்திரத் திட்ட கழகத்துக்கு மத்திய அரசு உத்தரவிட்டது. மாற்று வழி தேர்வு செய்யப்படும் போது சுற்றுசூழல், கடல் வாழ் உயிரினங்கள், மீனவர்கள் வாழ்நிலை பாதிக்காத வகையில் வழித்தடம் அமைய பல்வேறு அமைப்புகள் கோரிக்கை விடுத்துள்ளன. இதனிடையே ஏற்கனவே சேது சமுத்திர கால்வாய் திட்டத்துக்காக ராமேஸ்வரம் கோதண்டராமர் கோவில் முதல் தனுஷ்கோடி அரிச்சல்முனை வரை தமிழக அரசு வழங்கிய இரண்டாயிரத்து 500 ஏக்கர் நிலத்தை சர்வே செய்யும் பணியில் வருவாய் மற்றும் நில அளவீட்டுத் துறையினர் கடந்த இரண்டு நாட்களாக ஈடுபட்டு வருகின்றனர்.
சர்வே செய்த அடையாளத்துக்காக தனுஷ்கோடி முதல் அரிச்சல்முனை வரை கொடிகளை நட்டு வைத்துள்ளனர். இந்நிலையில், நேற்று டெல்லியிலிருந்து வந்த மத்திய அரசின் கப்பல் போக்குவரத்துத் துறைச் செயலர் ஏ.பி.சர்மா தலைமையிலான அதிகாரிகள் குழுவினர் மண்டபத்திலிருந்து கடலோரக்காவல் படைக்குச் சொந்தமான ஹோவர்கிராப்ட் கப்பலில் சென்று கோதண்டராமர் கோவில், தனுஷ்கோடி, அரிச்சல்முனை கடற்கரை ஆகிய பகுதிகளைப் பார்வையிட்டனர்.
பின் அதிகாரிகளுடன் சேதுக்கால்வாய் தோண்டுவதற்கு மாற்றுப்பாதையான நான்காவது வழித்தடம் குறித்து ஆய்வு செய்தனர். இதைத் தொடர்ந்து தனுஷ்கோடி கடலில் ராமர் பாலம் மணல்திட்டு பகுதிகளையும் பார்வையிட்டனர். ரகசியமாக நடத்தப்பட்ட இந்த ஆய்வில் சேது சமுத்திர கப்பல் கால்வாய் திட்ட கழக பொது மேலாளர் சீனிவாச கண்ணன், ராமநாதபுரம் கலெக்டர் கிர்லோஷ்குமார் உட்பட பல்துறை அதிகாரிகள் கலந்து கொண்டனர்.
http://dinamalar.com/Sambavamnewsdetail.asp?News_id=4113&cls=&ncat=TN

Scrap SSCP, a white elephant -- Vice Admiral Arun Kumar Singh.

SETHU PROJECT: A WHITE ELEPHANT IN THE MAKING
http://www.samachar.com/epaper/epaper.php?id=41
Arun Kumar Singh

THE GOVERNMENT'S recent decision to set up a panel of experts, headed by Dr RK Pachauri, to look at alternate routes for the Sethusamudram Shipping Channel Project (SSCP) is indeed welcome.

Given Dr Pachauri's experience and reputation, it can be expected that this six-member panel will take a holistic view of the project, which includes security concerns raised by the Director General Coast Guard recently.
These concerns have added a new dimension to the already complex issues ranging from inflamed religious beliefs to flawed comparisions with the Suez and Panama canals.
About the SSCP: It is an open sea channel that is 167 km long, 300 metre wide, with a 12 metre depth (to permit two-way transit by ships below 32,000 Dead Weight Tonnes). It has three legs — southern, central and northern — and dredging is to be carried out only in southern and northern legs. This will involve dumping 70 million cubic metres of dredged mud in dumping sites located in depths greater than 25 metre.

Let us assume that the SSCP is finally made "operational", as originally envisaged, and that the projected 3,055 ships, of which, 60 per cent ply international routes, use the channel in the first year itself. But what are the security threats these ships are likely to face?

The LTTE has shown enormous ingenuity and fanatical determination when employing its 3,000-strong "Sea Tigers" and the smaller but suicidal "Black Sea Tigers" in seaborne attacks not far from the proposed SSCP site. In addition, the LTTE has frequently used crude seamines to disrupt Sri Lankan shipping on its east coast.
LTTE's "Air Tigers" have modified Czech-made light aircraft to carry out reasonably-accurate night bombing attacks on Sri Lankan airports — SSCP area falls within strike range of these aircraft.

The Palk Bay area has dense fishing boat activity, with some 10,000 boats operating in a small area. This heavy traffic would provide the LTTE an ideal environment should it decide to carry out surprise attacks. A ship sunk in the channel would not only result in loss of life and marine pollution, but also block the channel for a prolonged period. In case of a ship being hit by a sea mine, the Navy would need to clear the channel by mine sweeping which takes days, sometimes weeks.
Another threat to SSCP would be hijacking of ships by the LTTE which could be used in terror attacks to block the SSCP or ports like Tuticorin, Colombo, Chennai by sinking a ship at strategic place. In all, such cases insurance rates will go up and ships will avoid the area, thus affecting the economies.

Can "reasonable" security be provided for the SSCP? The answer is yes, if (and this is a big "if") finances are made available to acquire additional patrol boats, maritime and fighter aircraft, helicopters, hover craft, mine warfare vessels and shore-based radars along with instant communications, data link and real-time intelligence.

And provided we accept the possibilty of collateral damage amongst the over 10,000 Indian fishing boats which operate in the restricted Palk Bay area. The cost of this security cover would exceed the Rs 2,400 crore capital cost of the SSCP. Given the long lead time required to recruit and train additional manpower, along with building security infrastructure, this activity should have started in 2005 so that security is in place when SSCP becomes operational — originally, the SSCP was to be commissioned in 2008. There is no indication that additional security requirements have been factored in the plans.

The security issue becomes relevant only if the SSCP is economically viable and poses no other major problems. Unfortunately, the SSCP is not economically viable for many reasons. It is designed to take ships below 32,000 DWT, while international shipping is heading for larger ships above 60,000 DWT .

Also, adding to the woes is the fact that the rapidly-growing Indian Coastal Shipping is reducing its ship size from 4,000 DWT to 1,900 DWT, and thus will contribute little by way of toll tax to the SSCP. Simple calculations show that international shipping from the Cape of Good Hope, Persian Gulf and the Red Sea areas will actually save time and money if it bypasses the SSCP (where it has to pay toll tax, use up time to embark and disembark a pilot, and proceed at very slow speed in the channel to avoid grounding damage due to "squatting effect") and goes around Sri Lanka. For the same reasons, even Indian coastal shipping will find it more economical to avoid the SSCP and go around Sri Lanka.
The Rs 2,400 crore SSCP may not earn enough profits to pay back its original capital cost.

It must also be noted that the SSCP, which reduces the distance by mere 340 to 434 nautical miles (nm), cannot be compared to "true inland canals" like the Suez and Panama which save thousands of nautical miles, and are not exposed to the vagaries of ocean currents, rough weather or seaborne attacks.

This means that the SSCP is located in one of the five known "high siltation" areas. This means that regular "maintenance dredging" would have to be carried out, perhaps every 1 to 3 years, to keep the channel open and safe for shipping.
Indeed, dredging is the primary reason for the high cost of SSCP. Add to this the fact that the Tamil Nadu coast is cyclone prone and, according to statistics, has been hit by 64 cyclones between 1891 and 2001, with 23 hitting the SSCP site.
To conclude, there are enough reasons to take a good hard look at the SSCP. There really is no point in first creating a target for the LTTE and then spending enormous amounts of time, money and effort to protect a white elephant.

VICE-ADMIRAL ARUN KUMAR SINGH retired as Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Naval Command, Visakhapatnam

Dancing dervishes of UPA vs. Rama and Rama Setu

Dancing dervishes of UPA vs Rama and Rama Sethu-I

V SUNDARAM | Fri, 01 Aug, 2008 , 03:18 PM
.
In these columns during the last four years I have been consistent in describing the UPA Government in New Delhi under the stranglehold of a Catholic lady from Italy as ‘Islam-embracing, Christianity-coveting and Hindu-hating’. Her main agenda, owing her allegiance to the Pope in Rome and not to the Indian Constitution, is to destroy Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma, by hook or by crook, in India and the world.
Active Image

Congress – DMK together in Ram Sethu Destruction Dance http://newstodaynet.com/images/stories/columns/sharpshot/2008-images/0108-sun.gif

Anti-Hindu Sonia-Congress Party and the equally anti-Hindu and atheistic DMK Party are working together to destroy the sacred Rama Sethu bridge in Rameshwaram using the political umbrella of Sethu-Samudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP). Both Sonia Gandhi and Karunanidhi are totally committed to the political marginalisation of Hindus, social debasement of Hindus, cultural devaluation of Hindus, religious decimation of Hindus and above all to the national de-recognition of Hindus as the main pith and core of our nation.

This patent fact has now become very clear because of the hardened criminal fashion in which the anti-national and anti-Hindu Sonia-directed UPA Government, filled with Sonia-chosen nincompoops, have been presenting the Rama-Sethu case of the government of India, not in a District Munsif’s Court, but in the Supreme Court of India. The recent stellar performance of Fali Nariman, the Chief Counsel for the government of India, would make any third grade mofussil lawyer in a District Munsif’s Court laugh with unconcealed contempt! Nariman stated that Lord Rama himself destroyed the Rama-Sethu Bridge and therefore the question of Government of India destroying it cannot arise. As an international authority of Tamil and Sanskrit Literature (apart from law!), he was quoting from Kamba Ramayana and Padma Puranam. He also arrogated to himself the Supreme legal wisdom and authority to question the timeless faith of more than 800 millions of Hindus of India in the timeless sacredness and sanctity of Rama Sethu. When he was reading out certain portions from an affidavit relating to Rama Sethu which was earlier filed in September 2007 by the government of India and which was later withdrawn by Gopal Subramaniam, the counsel for government of India, the Supreme Court Judges asked Fali Nariman as to whether he was stating the same facts from the same affidavit which was withdrawn earlier, Fali Nariman replied ‘Yes’. Government of India has somersaulted as many times as the Rama Sethu case has come up before the Supreme Court so far!

To begin with government of India said that there is no evidence regarding the existence of Ramayana, Lord Rama or the Rama Sethu Bridge. They said that Lord Rama is a fictitious character. Lord Rama is a mythological character. Rama Sethu Bridge is a natural formation and not a man-made Bridge etc. etc. The atheistic and anti-Hindu Karunanidhi went overboard and had the temerity to ask, ‘Where did Lord Rama get his Engineering Degree from?’ In its earlier affidavit government of India had said ‘There is no scientific or historical evidence to prove the existence of Lord Ram. Issues of faith cannot be resolved by taking recourse to science or scientific evidence. India is a secular state and respects all religions and religious faiths and beliefs. A secular state cannot espouse the cause of any religion, faith or belief. In a multi-religious, multi-cultural society, the state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith’. This callous anti-Hindu attitude led to widespread public protests and agitation throughout the country. Panicked by the political repercussions and the VHP’s move to go to the streets to mobilize public support, the central government in a knee-jerk response decided to withdraw the ‘offending remarks’. Gopal Subramanian, the Counsel for the government of India told the Supreme Court that government of India had withdrawn their earlier affidavit and that they would be filing a fresh affidavit. The Union Minister for Law (-lessness!) H.R.Bhardwaj shamelessly somersaulted from his earlier pseudo-secular, anti-Hindu position and said with calculated and diabolic dissimulation ‘Lord Rama is an integral part of Hindu faith and its existence can never be doubted. As Himalaya is Himalaya, and, Ganga is Ganga, Rama is Rama. It is a question of faith. There is no requirement of any proof to establish the existence of Lord Rama based on faith. The Government of India would be filing a supplementary affidavit on this issue before the Supreme Court and that would be cleansed of offending remarks that were noticed in the earlier affidavit which has been withdrawn’.

Accordingly Gopal Subramanian told the Supreme Court of India in September 2007, ‘The government will form a committee shortly, which will be entrusted with the task of hearing the grievances of the people including the petitioners on this issue. The government has total respect for all religions, and Hinduism in particular, in the context of the present case. The government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities, including the unique, ancient and holy text of Ramayana. The government is also keen that its decisions bind and bring the society together rather than cause any disruption in the religious and social psyche of one true India. The centre respects each and every individual within the parameters of the Constitution, and acknowledges every citizen’s fundamental right to feel a part of the composite cultural and religious heritage of the country’. Thus acting on behalf of government of India, Gopal Subramanian became a great legal somersault in India’s legal history. This distinguished record was squarely beaten by Fali Nariman through his resplendent performance of ‘secular’ somersault in the Supreme Court last week. Here are the laughable details of his unsurpassed performance.

In his arguments in Supreme Court on 23 July, 2008, (Wednesday), Fali Nariman had stirred a hornet’s nest by quoting from the scriptures like Kamba Ramayana and Padma Puranam. He said that these scriptures show how Lord Ram himself broke Ram Setu. The basis of objection by several petitioners in the Supreme Court (Individuals and NGO’s) stemmed from the fear of possible destruction of Ram Setu as it fell in the way of the projected alignment. With the existence of Rama Setu itself being a matter of doubt (or under cloud) as per the scriptures, Nariman wondered how anything that does not exist could be revered. Great Tamil scholars and Sanskrit scholars whom I have consulted have categorically confirmed that Nariman has misled the Supreme Court in a calculated manner as desired by the Government of India.

Government of India somersaulted shamelessly for the nth time in open Supreme Court last week by saying that Rama Sethu cannot be declared as a national monument and backed its stand by relying on an affidavit, which it had withdrawn earlier in September 2007, in the wake of a country-wide furore over its contents doubting the existence of Ramayana, Lord Rama and their link to Ram Sethu. Its Special Counsel Fali S Nariman read out portions of the withdrawn affidavit to show that the Centre had taken a consistent stand that ‘Rama Sethu does not fulfil the criteria to be declared as a national monument. The stand of the government is crystal clear on this all the time in Parliament and in courts.’

But it soon became a little awkward, especially for a counsel of Nariman’s standing, when a bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal, taking a cue from petitioner Subramanian Swamy, pointed out that the centre could not rely on an affidavit that had already been withdrawn. The Bench asked Nariman: ‘Are the paragraphs from the withdrawn affidavit, which you are reading in support of the centre’s stand, incorporated in the fresh affidavit?’ Mr. Nariman said: ‘we take the entire blame for the withdrawal. The affidavit was withdrawn because people reacted in a certain manner. The assertion of the Union government that it is not a monument does not get diluted by the withdrawal of the affidavit’. This did not impress the bench, which said: ‘Why did you not re-file the affidavit if you are relying on it except for the paragraph which was objected to by public on the issue of faith? You did not say you are withdrawing only the problematic paragraph, but you withdrew the entire affidavit. The problem is that it cannot be relied upon as it had been withdrawn’.

This was a moment of infamy in the chequered history of our Supreme Court after Independence. By reading out in open court from an earlier affidavit already withdrawn by the government of India in September 2007, Nariman indirectly showed that he has contempt for law, rule of law, rule of equality before the law and the overriding majesty of law. He also made it clear through his political somersault that the rule of law can be vetoed by the rule of men, depending upon the exigencies of the moment, from time to time!

The VHP General Secretary Pravin Togadia has rightly said: ‘The Centre’s affidavit in the Supreme Court is the result of a trade-off between Sonia Gandhi and Karunanidhi as part of which the latter agreed to support the confidence vote sought by Manmohan Singh (on 22 July, 2008) on the condition that the UPA government will ensure that the Rama Setu is brought down. The centre’s stand before the apex court is fraught with dangerous consequences for the country... The same people (the centre) who first questioned the very existence of Ramayana, Lord Ram and Ram Setu are now invoking Kamba Ramayana and Padma Purana to say that Lord Rama destroyed the Rama Setu, but are not willing to look at the original Valmiki Ramayana, which has no such mention. It is a clear case of conspiracy to divide the nation, which will go up in flames and Sonia Gandhi will be responsible for it. The VHP would launch a nation-wide protest against the ‘conspiracy’ to destroy the Ram Setu’.

TAILPIECE: Karunanidhi And T R Baalu To Sonia Gandhi:

‘Will you, won’t you, will you, won’t you, will you join, with gusto and enthusiasm, the Dravidian Ram Sethu Destruction dance?’

Sonia Gandhi: ‘Would not, could not, would not, could not, could not join your delightful Dravidian Ram Sethu Destruction dance. Let us secularly plot for broader lands and better days’.
Saturday, 02 August, 2008 , 03:32 PM

When the government of India through their Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam gave several assurances in writing and filed an application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 14-9-2007 seeking permission
Active Image

to withdraw their earlier affidavit, a reasonable public expectation was created throughout the country to the effect that the Government of India would not damage or defile the Rama Sethu while implementing the SSCP and that care would be taken to see that the time-honoured religious feelings and sentiments of the Hindus in absolute majority are not hurt in any manner whatsoever. The following assurances were given by Gopal Subramaniam before the Supreme Court;

First that, ‘The government of India is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique, ancient and holy text of Ramayana’. Second that, ‘The government of India is also keen that its decisions bind and bring the society together, rather than cause any disruption in the religious and social psyche of one true India’. Third that, ‘without any reservation, in a spirit of inclusiveness and high democratic tradition, to consider a different point of view, withdraw the present affidavit to re-examine the entire matter’.

It was based on these explicit assurances, and on trust, that the petitioners like Subramaniam Swamy and others did not object to the withdrawal of the said earlier counter-affidavit that contained some highly objectionable averments on Sri Rama, and Ramayana.

These assurances read together created a right for the petitioners to legitimately expect a different counter affidavit from the government of India at a later stage. Unfortunately when the government of India filed their revised counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court in the last week of February 2008, they stuck to their original position and said that the SSCP can be effectively implemented only by destroying the Rama Sethu Bridge. In other words they made it clear that Alignment No.6 (which involved the destruction of Rama Sethu) will not be given up. Thus the government of India showed indivisible contempt for the popular and widespread public sentiment and religious belief of reverence for the Rama Setu, and it’s age-old sacred status in Hindu society. Government of India in a shameless manner said that we are a secular country and that the government cannot take note of matters of faith. They left it to the Supreme Court of India to adjudicate on this aspect.

When the Rama Sethu case came up again before the Supreme Court last week, Fali Nariman, Special Counsel for the Government of India gave a death blow to the religious feelings, beliefs and sentiments of more than 800 million Hindus in India when he informed the Supreme Court that a decision has been taken not to declare Rama Sethu as a national monument since it does not meet the prescribed criteria. It is indeed a deliberate affront to the due process of law and tantamount to misleading the petitioners and the Honourable Supreme Court, apart from the public at large. After ten months of deliberation or no deliberation, the government of India have somersaulted full circle and completely gone back on the assurances given by the Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam in open Supreme Court on 14.9.2007.

The UPA is hell bent on hurting Hindu religious feelings. As part of its political deal to win the confidence vote with the help of the DMK Party, the UPA within 24 hours of winning the sham confidence vote, told the Supreme Court through its Special Counsel Nariman that Shri Ram himself destroyed the Sethu and therefore the broken Sethu has no spiritual sanctity and therefore there is no harm in demolishing it to complete the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP).

Fali S.Nariman quoted the scriptures of Padma Puranam and Kambha Ramayanam to show how Shri Rama himself destroyed the Sethu to ensure nobody else would cross over to Sri Lanka. He said, ‘we are not destroying any bridge, as there is no bridge. We believe it was not a man-made structure. It was a super man-made structure, which was broken by Lord Ram himself. If it was something that was destroyed by the same man who built it, we are dealing with only a belief’. In order to counter the arguments of Nariman, the petitioners quoted from another scripture, Skanda Puranam, in point of time anterior to the Padma Puranam and the Kambha Ramayanam. There is no reference to the destruction of Sethu by Sri Rama in Skanda Puranam.

Arguing in the Supreme Court, Subramanian Swamy reiterated that the SSCP should be scrapped altogether if the government could not proceed further without destroying Ram Sethu. It is not economically viable as has been pointed out by the Union Planning Commission. He said the centre is not complying with the Court directions to find out whether Ramar Sethu is an ancient monument or not. Subramaniam Swamy pointed out that the centre wrote to the UNESCO urging that the Majuli Island in Assam be declared an ancient monument. Similarly the Brahma Sarovar in Punjab was declared a national monument, as people believed that Lord Brahma had a bath there. The centre is now seeking to implement SSCP by demolishing Ramar Sethu. Subramaniam Swamy told the Court that Ramar Sethu couldn’t be destroyed, as it is a place of worship for countless centuries. Anyone who tries to damage it should be booked for criminal offence under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code. Swamy also told the Supreme Court that it should issue notice of contempt of Court to the Union Of India, particularly taking note of the way the courts’ directions and sentiments of millions of people are being toyed with by the government of India. Finally he said, ‘Scrap the SSCP; declare Rama Setu as a national monument and a world heritage centre; finally declare Rameshwaram as a divyakshetram’.

http://newstodaynet.com/images/stories/columns/sharpshot/2008-images/0208-sun2.gif Dr T N Ramachandran A great scholar and savant from Thanjavur

Let me now take up the flippant and casual observations of Nariman relating to Rama Sethu based upon his secondary knowledge of Kamba Ramayanam and Padma Puranam. Nariman has relied upon the following verse to reach his wrong and baseless conclusion that Bhagwan Rama himself destroyed Rama Sethu:

Marakkalam iyanga vendi,Varisilai kudayal keeri th

Tharukkiya idathhu,Pancha pdhagarenum saarin,

Perukkiya ezhu mundru piraviyum, pinikal neengi

Nerukuriya amararkku ellam nin needhi aavar anree (22.2)

I have consulted Dr T N Ramachandran of Thanjavur who is a great Tamil Scholar and savant on the point made by Nariman. I have it on his authority that the above verse upon which Nariman seems to have relied does not refer to the breaking of Rama Sethu by Lord Rama at all. Moreover the above verse is a verse which was later interpolated into the original text of Kambha Ramayana and which cannot be taken as either authentic or correct or reliable. This point relating to the fact of later interpolation has been clearly brought out in Murray Rajam’s edition of Kamba Ramayana published in 1959. The same point was also made by Prof.P.S.Sundaram who was commissioned by government of Tamil Nadu to translate Kamba Ramayana into English in 1992.

Dr.T.N.Ramachandarn says ‘How can Rama making a mark by scratching with his bow (‘keeri’ in Tamil) on the opening (mouth) of the Divine Bridge (causeway) be viewed as his breaking the Bridge?’ The scratching is done where the causeway begins. It is just an identification mark made on the causeway bridge. From there the cause way extends upto Ceylon. Lord Rama ordered that the Causeway Bridge should be guarded by Kappai and Siva. We should thank Fali. S.Nariman for citing the verse, though interpolated, which speaks about the careful safe guarding of the Bridge or Causeway by two divine Powers who were appointed by Bhagwan Rama to safeguard the Bridge. The information furnished to Nariman is by DMK Pundits. It is this DMK party which publicly burnt the Kamba Ramayana, the Periapurana and other puranams.

I fully endorse the assessment of Dr.T.N.Ramachandran: ‘The gubernatorial machinery of India, that is Bharath, pursues consistently a policy aimed at the accomplishment of impoverishment of Sanatana Dharma. India is today a paradise for the so-called Minority Communities. For the Hindus it is an inferno of ‘ever-burning sulphur unconsumed’. Ram Sethu is the greatest symbol of Indian integration. A pilgrimage to Kasi meets with its full fruition only when the pilgrim completes it by his visit to Rameswaram. To the Hindus the beckoning potency of Rameswaram is ineffably great. It is lofty, sacred and sublime. It is ecstatically hailed by the Hindus and it is here discriminations of caste, clan and the like stand subsumed traceless. The very thought of damaging Ram Sethu exceeds the combined and cumulative truculence of the pentad of all great sins (Panchamaha Pathakam ). It is an anathema pronounced on the unity of Bharath, which according to our Constitution shall be a Union of States. The suicidal policy pursued with crass obstinacy by our government is unexampled in the annals of the world. It was initially announced that Ram Sethu was but a natural formation and not one manually wrought. This stultifying proclamation perished the moment it was born. Then Bhagwan Rama stood condemned as one who had not graduated through a College of Engineering. This nefarious declaration received its fatal jolt when citizens, particularly women, debunked its utter untenability. Then was voiced forth the argument that Rama himself destroyed his bridge (the word ‘bridge’ is a misnomer. It is a causeway). The Senior Counsel who made bold to present this argument in the highest forum of India, alas, is only learned enough to misquote. Mahatma Gandhi dreamed of Rama Rajya. Lo! We are cursed to live in Congress Rajya!!’

To conclude with a beautiful and soul-stirring poem of PASUVAI UMA:

http://newstodaynet.com/images/stories/columns/sharpshot/2008-images/0208-sun3.gif

This beautiful poem gives a clarion call to all of us to join together on a pilgrimage to Rameshwaram to have the divine darshan of the sacred Rama Sethu. It motivates us to consider the pilgrimage as our sacred duty, and, the prayer as our penance. It encourages us to take on those who questioned the historicity of Bhagwan Rama and the existence of Rama Sethu and show them the divine reality, which has been existing for ages, protecting us. It advises us to continue our service to humanity by taking the Blessings of Bhagwan Rama at shores of Sethu.

http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=33

Rama Setu: world heritage

Rama Setu: UOI appoints 6 member Pachauri committee to reexamine channel project. Sri Rama and Sri Hanuman will protect Setu.

Rameshwaram Rama Setu Raksha Manch has put forward the objective of the protection movement: Save Rama Setu, Declare Rama Setu a national monument and world heritage, Declare Rameshwaram divyakshetram as was done for Tirumala. The movement continues until these objectives are achieved. Our leaders have resolved: we shall save Rama Setu at all costs. This is our resolve.

With the blessings of Sri Rama and Sri Hanuman and the tireless, honest and patriotic efforts of many bandhu, advocacy teams consisting of dedicated aatman like Dr. Subramanian Swamy, Bhupender Yadav, Yogishwaran, Anish Gupta, Bharat Kumar, Parvatha Rao, Soli Sorabjee, Parasaran, KK Venugopal, Krishnan Venugopal, Vaidyanathan, D Kuppuramu and thousands of bharatiya and experts like Dr. CSP Iyer, Dr. Madhav Nalapat, Dr. Gopalakrishnan, Dr. Ramesh Athavale, Dr. Badrinarayanan, late Dr. Subramanian, Shri GP Srinivasan, Smt. Jayashree Saranathan, Sadagopan, Tarun Vijay, Kanchan Gupta, and millions of bharatiyas who demonstrated the sangha s'akti the rashtram shall prevail. We shall not allow the Rama Setu to be demolished the way Taliban destroyed Bamiyan Buddha calling the statue a mere stone. Veda Vyasa has said that it is Sri Rama's command to protect Rama Setu (raamasyaajnaa), he said. This is our guide post. I can't name them all, as tears roll down my cheeks, they are in millions who have shown us the way and guided us, many want to remain unnamed, because they are people who have sacrificed their entie lives for the glory of the rashtram.

Words of s'ubha kaamanaayen are enough to respond to the call of the millions of bandhu. They are our treasure. They have made sure that their collective voice is heard. Dharmo rakshati rakshitah.

The battle is still joined against the asuras. The final victory will be the celebration when the entire bharata varsha goes to Rama Setu to celebrate the world heritage, our privilege to be in the times of churning the ocean, samudra manthanam. This samudra manthanam has to become the moment of renaissance for Bharat mahaan. We shall get there, acknowledging again and again that we are only nimitta maatram. In this quest of the aatman for the paramaatman, Sri Rama, the maryada purushottama, the avatara purusha will show us the way. It is our duty to pray, with the blessings of pujya swamiji's like Dayananda ji, Pejawar ji, Sadhu-sant marga darshan mandali of the Manch, guidance of the people of 6.5 lakh villages of Hindusthana who have yearned for the protection of Rama Setu. The battle has just been joined. We have miles to go to serve this punya bhumi and restore dharma in the polity. The disconnect between the polity and the samajam has to be rectified. Sangha will lead us. We have to ensure the empowerment of every village, every aatman in every village. We have miles to go. Hey, paramaatman, show us the way. We shall tread the path shown by our pitru-s, our ancestors whom we remember on ashadha amavasya day as we dip in the Rama Setu dhanushkodi waters. The collective memory of our ancestors which we cherish is our strength, our beacon of hope, the guide for abhyudayam which is dharma according to Kapila muni's vais'eshika sutra.

dharmo rakshati rakshitah. Dharma protects those who protect dharma.

Namaskaram. Kalyanaraman

TN fishermen prefer fish than Sethu
Sam Daniel
Wednesday, July 30, 2008, (Chennai)

While the Sethusamudram channel is being fought in the Supreme Court, for over a lakh fishermen in Rameswaram it's the settlement of the Katchatheevu issue that matters most.

It's an island that the Indian government had gifted to Sri Lanka in 1974. But over the years their fishing area has shrunk. And over the last twenty years, around two hundred Indian fishermen from Tamil Nadu have fallen prey to bullets fired by the Lankan navy for trespassing into Lankan waters.

The Lankan government is accused of not honouring the agreement that allows Indian fishermen to fish around Katchatheevu and dry their nets in the island.

With a dwindling catch in Indian waters, fishermen want restoration of fishing rights around Katchatheevu. They suggest a long-term lease agreement to fish in Lankan waters.

"Many of us are struggling without proper food. The government could retrieve Katchatheevu in the interest of fishermen but it's focusing only on Sethusamudram channel project. They should stop it first," says one of the fishermen.

"It should be like an exchange. Indian fishermen should be able to fish in Lankan waters and vice versa," says Bose, President, TN fishermen's Association.

Successive state governments have done little to solve this crisis. Following criticism, the ruling DMK is now championing the cause and had even observed a hunger strike recently.

The Centre has promised to take up this issue with Sri Lanka in the forthcoming SAARC summit in the island.

There is anger among fishermen over government's indifference in resolving the Katchatheevu issue. They want the government to stop its undue interest in the Sethusamudram channel project and ensure their livelihood first.

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080059350&ch=7/30/2008%201:58:00%20PM

Government to examine shorter sea-route, sparing Ram Setu
July 30th, 2008 - 1:26 pm ICT by IANS

New Delhi, July 30 (IANS) The central government Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that it has decided to appoint an expert committee to examine the feasibility of an alternate alignment for a shorter sea-route around India's southern peninsula, sparing the Ram Setu. Senior government counsel Fali S. Nariman gave this information to a bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan.

The court had earlier suggested the government examine the feasibility of an alternate route for the Sethusamudram shipping channel.

The Adam's Bridge or Ram Setu is a 48-km long chain of limestone shoals that once linked Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu with Mannar in Sri Lanka's northwest. Many Hindus believe that it was the bridge Lord Ram's army built to cross over to Lanka to rescue his wife Sita.

The bridge faces some damage due to the dredging for the Setusamudram canal to create a navigable waterway between India's southern tip and Sri Lanka.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/government-to-examine-shorter-sea-route-sparing-ram-setu_10077630.html

Alternative alignment on Sethu being considered: Govt
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font
NEWSX
30 July, 2008 03:51:09
The Centre on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the possibility of pushing the Sethusamudram project through an alternative alignment to avoid any damage to Ram Sethu is being given serious consideration by the government.

The government's view was conveyed by senior advocate Fali S Nariman to a bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan hearing the issue.

Nariman told the bench that he had received a response from the Prime Minister to a letter written by him on the suggestion put forward by the apex court on the issue of exploring the possibility of an alternative alignment between Dhanushkodi and Rameshwaram island.

"The suggestion of Supreme Court for alternative alignment including a canal cutting through the portion between Dhanushkodi and Land End on Rameshwaram Island has been given serious consideration in the government," the response from PMO to Nariman's letter said.

The Court was informed that PMO has decided to set up an expert committee headed by noted scientist R K Pachauri, Director General of Tata Energy Research Institute, to look into the suggestion.

The Committee has been asked to submit its report as quickly as possible.

"The Committee will quickly examine the feasibility of the alternative alignment suggested by the Supreme Court for the Sethusamudram shipping canal project between Dhanushkodi and Land End on Rameshwaram island keeping in view the technical aspects, cost benefit analysis, social and cultural impact, environmental impact, law and order aspects and any other related matter," the PMO letter said.

The PMO's response placed before the bench said that the Committee may co-opt other experts and institutions to facilitate its work and decide its own procedure for conducting its proceedings.

Nariman had yesterday said that he would soon inform the court about the response of the government on his letter to the Prime Minister.

http://howrah.org/india_news/20581.html

R K Pachauri heads panel on Ram Sethu
(Raja Chaurasia) Publication Date 30/7/2008 12:10:30 PM(IST)

New Delhi: India Government has appointed a six-member committee to consider issue of alternative route to save Ram Sethu.

The Centre told the Supreme Court that the possibility of pushing the Sethusamudram project through an alternative alignment to avoid any damage to ''Ram Sethu' is being given serious consideration by the government.

The government's view was conveyed by senior advocate Fali S Nariman to a bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan hearing the issue.

The expert committee will be headed by noted scientist R K Pachauri, Director General of Tata Energy Research Institute. The Committee has been asked to submit its report as quickly as possible.

The Committee will quickly examine the feasibility of the alternative alignment suggested by the Supreme Court for the project between Dhanushkodi and Land End on Rameshwaram island keeping in view the technical aspects, cost-benefit analysis, social and cultural impact, environmental impact, law and order aspects and any other related matter.

http://mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=8177

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 (14:40:21)

Govt to examine shorter sea-route, sparing Ram Sethu

New Delhi: The central government today informed the Supreme Court that it has decided to appoint an expert committee to examine the feasibility of an alternate alignment for a shorter sea-route around India's southern peninsula, sparing the Ram Sethu. Senior government counsel Fali S Nariman gave this information to a bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan.

The court had earlier suggested the government to examine the feasibility of an alternate route for the Sethusamudram shipping channel.

The Adam's Bridge or Ram Sethu is a 48-kilometer long chain of limestone shoals that once linked Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu with Mannar in Sri Lanka's northwest. Many Hindus believe that it was the bridge Lord Ram's army built to cross over to Lanka to rescue his wife Sita.

The bridge faces some damage due to the dredging for the Sethusamudram canal to create a navigable waterway between India's southern tip and Sri Lanka. (IANS)

http://www.headlinesindia.com/archive_html/30July2008_79909.html

Ram Sethu controversy IANS
Centre to examine shorter route for Sethu project
Wednesday, 30 July , 2008, 13:14
Last Updated: Wednesday, 30 July , 2008, 15:03


Adam bridgeNew Delhi: The Centre of Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that it has decided to appoint an expert committee to examine the feasibility of an alternate alignment for a shorter sea-route around India's southern peninsula, sparing the Adam's Bridge (Ram Sethu).

Full coverage: Ram Sethu row

Senior government counsel Fali S Nariman gave this information to a bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan.

The court had earlier suggested the government examine the feasibility of an alternate route for the Sethusamudram shipping channel.

The Adam's Bridge or Ram Sethu is a 48-km long chain of limestone shoals that once linked Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu with Mannar in Sri Lanka's northwest. Many Hindus believe that it was the bridge Lord Ram's army built to cross over to Lanka to rescue his wife Sita.

The bridge faces some damage due to the dredging for the Sethusamudram canal to create a navigable waterway between India's southern tip and Sri Lanka.

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14727183

'Murasoli' accpets Ram-Sethu as a holy place!




http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=2&theme=&usrsess=1&id=216003



Sethu: DMK quotes Ramayana

N Ravikumar


Chennai, July 29: Rushing to the defence of the Centre's stand in the Supreme Court that Lord Ram himself had destroyed Ram Sethu after crossing over to the home territory, the DMK has come out with exact quotes from Kambaramayana which supports the Centre's contention.


Countering a report in an English daily quoting pro-Hindutva journalist Mr Cho Ramasamy who had asserted that no such verses were found in any part of Kambaramayana, an article published in DMK organ `Murasoli' quoted the stanza from Kambaramayana which says "Lord Ram destroyed the bridge using an arrow so that the bridge should not be an obstacle to passage of ships".

The exact Tamil verse given is "Marakkalam Iyakka Vendi Varisilai Pudhaiyal Keeri".


The next three lines of the stanza says "those who travel near the place where the demolished bridge lies will be absolved of their sins and will be equivalent to the Gods".
The article written by a senior advocate Mr M S Venkatachalam asked "If Lord Ram himself has destroyed the Ram Sethu saying that it should not be an obstacle to ships, why some people are opposing it in the name of Ram himself".


"Lord Ram himself had said that those who pass near the demolished bridge would be absolved of their sins. If a canal is dredged, several ships can pass near the demolished bridge and the people travelling in them will be absolved of their sins", the article said quoting Kambaramayana.


The writer also gave the details about the chapter and the stanza's number in Kambaramayana. The article also questioned Mr Cho Ramasamy's knowledge in Tamil literature and asked if he was an expert in Kambaramayana. The article has also used ironical epithets like `great scholar' and `great poet', while referring to Mr Cho Ramasamy since most of the Tamil scholars have ridiculed Mr Cho Ramasamy's knowledge of Tamil as he cannot write a single sentence in proper Tamil without mixing Sanskrit words.







From Jayasree





Evam Ethath puraa vruththam aakhyaanam bhadhram asthu va: |

pravyaaharatha visrabdham balam vishNO: pravardhathaam ||
(6-131-121)


Let this story that happened in an olden time be of good to you.

Let the power of Vishnu grow in all worlds.


So saying Kavi Valimiki concludes his epic.

This verse, being said everyday by thousands of people

at the end of their parayana of Ramayana / Sundara khanda

is supposed to increase the power of presence of Vishnu in this world.

Rama does not come by himself to defend or destroy someone,

every time dharma is challenged.


The recital of his name or his story itself is taking care of the needs of the times.

Now this miracle has happened with the die-hard haters of Rama and his fame.


With all the outbursts and ridicules on Rama and his historicity,

the DMK Chief and his party's mouth-piece,

are in effect giving credence to the existence of Rama.


By saying that Rama broke the Sethu,

they accept that Sethu existed.

By accepting Ram Sethu,

they accept that Ram existed!


But in quoting a verse from Kamba Ramayan

(this is not found in many olden editions

but only an interpolation as shown in this link

http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2008/07/sethu-in-kamba-ramayanam.html)

they have also demonstrated that knowledge and intelligence

do not always go hand in hand.

Mere knowledge of Tamil is not enough,

if one lacks the intellect to interpret the verses in Tamil.

Such intellect is not possible in the absence of knowledge

of the root texts which are in Sanskrit.

Thus their diatribe against Cho also is flawed.



Let us look at how their interpretation is false.

The verse quoted by them is this:

Marakkalam iyanga vendi,Varisilai pudaiyal keeri th

Tharukkiya idathhu,Pancha pdhagarenum saarin,

Perukkiya ezhu mundru piraviyum, pinikal neengi

Nerukuriya amararkku ellam nin needhi aavar anree.


The same verse also has appeared in some quotes

with 'pudhaiyaal' as 'kudhaiyaal'.

'Kudhai' is the bottom part of the arrow.

'Pudhai' is the bunch of arrows.

First let them make it clear whether it is kudhai or pudhai.

I am saying this to show that the verse had been mutated/

with respect to some letters.



The other place where I find such mutation is

the very first word – 'marakkalam' (ship)

which they are relying on to 'blast' Ram sethu.


The 'marakkalam' (ship) seems to be

the mutated form of 'marukkaamal' (means 'without objection').

Look at the 'yedugai'

(the 2nd letter of the first words in each line rhyming with each other)

of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines.

The 'ru' in all these 3 lines do not go well with 'ra' of marakkalam in the first line.

It will be appropriate to have 'ru' yedugai in the first line too

and it does not result in 'thaLAi thattudhal' (adheres to the grammar of the words)

It must be

"marukkamal iyanga vEndi".

That is, in order to make the rule of Rama-neeti be adhered to

without any objection or opposition,

the 'kudhai' of Rama made a mark on Ram Sethu to declare

that those who worship there will be relieved of sins of 21 births.



If we analyse the verse deeply,

we see the purpose of 'breaking' (keeri).

This verse gives 2 reasons for this.

One is for making the ships sail (marakkalam iyanga vendi)

and another is for removing the sins accumulated in 21 births.


What Rama really intended to do?

To help people get their sins removed?

Or to make way for ships?

If ships could cross that stretch,

a question comes why Rama didn't think of crossing the sea by ships.

Even catamarans would do to cross this stretch.

When he was able to get his huge army to build a bridge across the ocean in just 5 days,

he could have easily constructed catamarans or

even sailable ships in record numbers in record time

with the help of the vanaras.



But he didn't.

Or it didn't occur to him to cross the ocean in ships or catamarans.

Why?

One reason we can deduce is that

this part of the ocean was not a navigable one in his times.

The sea had been rough,

and this can be made out from the description in Valmiki Ramayana.

The description of the sea after they reached the shore,

is indicative of rough waters and rough weather.

(Yuddha khanda – chapter -4)


Based on this line of reasoning, we can say that

making a way for ships was not in the agenda of Rama.



Now about 'kudhai'.

Kudhai is the bottom portion of the arrow.

(Senthamizh agaraathi by NC Kandaiya pillai, 1950 edition).

It is not the sharp piercing tip.

When will someone do the 'keeral' with the bottom of the arrow?

to mark the area for some purpose.

The purpose is told in the next lines

which is about the sanctity of the place for propitiation.



If the word is 'pudhai', which means a bunch of arrows,

it would mean that a bathing ghat was made

by means of shooting arrows on the ground.

The ensuing lines on propitiation make it known that what was done

was creation of a place for taking holy dip!



The verse seems to be a declaration

that those who take a dip there

would be relieved of the results of 'pancha maha paadhakam,

and the sins accumulated over 21 births

and would be disease free.



By quoting this verse,

the DMK has accepted that Ram sethu is a holy theertham.

The verse also indicates that Ram sethu has been once used by people.

Then what prevents them from declaring it as a monument?


Foot note:-

The verse quoted by Murasoli is the succeeding verse of this:-

ஆவினை, குரவரோடும் அருமறை முனிவர்தம்மை,
பாவையர் குழுவை, இன் சொல் பாலரை, பயந்து தம் இல்
மேவின அவரை, செற்றோர், விரி கடல் சேது வந்து
தோய்வரேல், அவர்கள் கண்டாய், சுரர் தொழும் சுரர்கள் ஆவார்.


From this context it is deduced, that the 'keeral' was done

only for propitiation and not for movement of ships.

The 2 verses read together make this clear.

ஆவினை, குரவரோடும் அருமறை முனிவர்தம்மை,
பாவையர் குழுவை, இன் சொல் பாலரை, பயந்து தம் இல்
மேவின அவரை, செற்றோர், விரி கடல் சேது வந்து
தோய்வரேல், அவர்கள் கண்டாய், சுரர் தொழும் சுரர்கள் ஆவார்.


மரக்கலம் இயங்கவேண்டி, வரி சிலைக் குதையால் கீறித்
தருக்கிய இடத்து, பஞ்ச பாதகரேனும் சாரின்,
பெருக்கிய ஏழு மூன்று பிறவியும் பிணிகள் நீங்கி,
நெருக்கிய அமரர்க்கு எல்லாம் நீள் நிதி ஆவர் அன்றே.

http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2008/07/murasoli-accpets-ram-sethu-as-holy.html

Comment by Dr. K. Gopalakrishnan (30 July 2008, personal communication):

This is in continuation of my earlier comments on the recent Kamba Ramayan controversy, in view of the submissions by counsel Mohan on behalf of Govt.

The verse quoted by Mr.Mohan is the one on Sl.No. 171 in V.M. Gopalakrishnamachariyar's (VMG) version of Kamba Ramayana (given as annexure-VMG2 in my earlier communication).

It can be seen from the explanatory notes to that verse by VMG himself states that " villin nuniyal sethuvai keeri udaithu vazhivitta varalatrai 'vidhi muhatrath kooraathu anuvadhamuhatrath koori' peravaithaar".


In normal Tamil, the words 'vidhi muhatrath kooraathu anuvadhamuhatrath koori' mean 'nermuhamaha kooraamal oru uthesamaha koori'.

The English translation the entire explanatory comment of VMG will be as follows:

"Ram,a while traveling on board of Pushpaka Vimaana, told the incident of making incision with his bow on Rama Sethu for the purposes of easy passage for wooden crafts (wooden ships) not directly but in a circumstantial and circumspect way".


This would otherwise indicate that even VMG had doubts about the authenticity of this verse being an original one by Kamban. That was the reason why VMG stated in the explanatory comments that Rama told about this incident not directly but in a circumstantial and circumspect manner.

The main reason for this will be that this important event of breaking the bridge built with great perfection by the vanara sena was made as only as a passing reference by Rama on board of the aircraft. Even in the first verse describing the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu (No.166), describes only the building of the bridge and not the breaking of it. No mention is made anywhere in Kamba Ramayana or in any other version, about the breaking of bridge in the narration of events between the actual building of Rama Sethu and Rama boarding the pushpaka Vimaana.


Also the more authenticated version of Kamba Ramayanam is the one published by the "Kamban Kazhagam: edited by 15 Tamil Scholars, who had identified the later inserted verses (migaipaadalgal) and removed them, and the quoted verse is not included in the corrected version published by them.

Note from GP Srinivasan dated 30 July 2008:

Clarification offered after Consulting Dr.T.N.Ramachandran on Kamba Ramayana



* The virgin named Kappai and the father of Skanda (Lord Siva) are entrusted with the safeguarding of the Divine Bridge by Rama. These two are posted there for the purpose. With his ineffably great bow Rama makes a mark on the opening (mouth) of the divine bridge. Then he moves away with the incomparable Sita and his ocean like Army.



* Note: The above is an interpolated one included at page 59 of the section related to the interpolated verses in Murray edition, 1959.Preceding this verses there are also many other interpolated verses celebrating the glory of the Divine Bridge or Cause way.



* Why should Rama appoint these two divine powers?



* The scratching is done where the causeway begins. It is just an identification mark made on the bridge. From there the cause way extends upto Ceylon. From the marked place the Bridge should be guarded by Kappai and Siva.



* We should thank Fali. S.Nariman for citing the verse, though interpolated, which speaks to the careful safe guarding of the Bridge or Cause way by two divine Powers who were appointed by Lord Rama to safeguard the Bridge.



* The information furnished to Nariman is by DMK Pundits. It is this DMK party which publicly burnt the Kamba Ramayana, the Periapurana and other puranams.


How to understand Puranic interpretations?

Yes, we have seen the available Padma , Skanda puranas etc. indeed Padma Purana does have the statments, and hence we have to approach it in the following manner.



Details relating to Geography at the time when the Sethu was constructed must be remembered. There were not in existence then Rameswaram, Danushkodi etc. The great Sea divided India from Ceylon. Rama chose then a place from where the cause was to be constructed. This causeway connected the southern end of India with Ceylon. Completing his mission when Rama returned some places came into existences which were known as Rameswaram, Danushkodi, etc. These places were ushered into existence by Rama for the benefit of mankind. The puranas say that for carving out these places a small portion marking the beginning of Sethu was utilized by Rama. The word "Keeri", speaks to the slicing as well as identifying by Scratching or Marking. These are ideas developed by the puranas not found in Valmiki Ramayana or the Kamba Ramayana, which came into existence thousands of years after Valmiki's Ramayana. Adopting the view of the puranas a few verses stand interpolated in the Kamba Ramayana.

Rama Setu: Centre says not a monument; agitations, demonstrations -- VHP

In an extraordinary travesty of justice and utter delinquency of executive responsibility under the Constitution, UOI Counsel tells the SC that UOI has decided that Rama Setu does not meet the criteria for declaring the Setu as a national monument under 1958 Act. I hope SC will go into the arbitrariness involved and double-standards used by UOI in coming to such conclusions without adherance to due process.

Every monument connected with the memory of Sri Rama is a national monument because Sri Rama is the very embodiment of national unity and identity. He is vigrahavaan dharmah. Setu is the living monument reminding everyone about the role it played in protecting dharma in one of the momentous events in human civilizational history.

If Majuli island, the larger river island of the world in Brahmaputra river can be deemed to be a World Heritage monument and proposal sent to UNESCO, why not a similar treatment to Rama Setu?

Madras HC judgement of 19 June 2007 in 11 pages elaborates on the string of evidences which led it to ask if ASI has conducted any studies on declaring Rama Setu as a monument. In the affidavit submitted earlier by UOI it was clearly stated that ASI has NOT conducted any such studies. Now, the learned counsel says that a determination has been made. It is remarkable that within a short period of time, without any transparency and consultation with the experts, such a determination has been made. This smacks of utter hypocrisy, utter disdain for due process under the rule of law and high-handedness on the part of the administrative machinery of the state. SC will hopefully call the UOI for contempt for court disregarding both Madras HC and SC directions.

UOI seems to think that sentiments of millions of people can be toyed with. VHP and Rameshwaram Rama Setu Raksha Manch have repeatedly declared that the protection movement will continue until the Rama Setu is declared an ancient monument and Rameshwaram a divyakshetram.

Hopefully, SC will take the same stand it took in jallikattu case and ensure that the state does not indulge in activities which hurt the sentiments of the community and result in an avoidable social upheaval. Hopefully, SC will appoint an advocate commission while declaring that the Rama Setu should be deemed a national monument analogous to the declaration made by Punjab High Court for Brahmasarovar.

Contempt with which UOI treats the Court directions and hindu sentiments is shocking, beyond belief. UPA may think that it can stay in satta by hook or crook. Not for long, UPA whose days are numbered as the citizens will awaken to render justice in this land of dharma.

Dharmo rakshati rakshitah.

Kalyanaraman

Ramar Sethu doesn't fulfil criteria of national monument: Centre
New Delhi (PTI): The Centre on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that it had already come to a conclusion that Ramar Sethu does not fulfil the criteria for being declared a national monument.
"As far as we are concerned, the stand of the Government is very clear that Rama Setu could not fulfil the criteria of national monument," senior advocate Fali S Nariman, appearing for the Centre, told a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan.
Further, on the issue of alternative alignment to avoid destruction of Ramar Sethu for the Sethusamudram project, he said, so far, he has not received any instruction from the Government.
Nariman said that would, most probably by evening or tomorrow, receive some instructions.
A day after making a strident argument that Ramar Sethu was destroyed by Lord Rama himself, the Centre had on July 24 changed tack and said that the viability of going ahead with the Sethusamudram project through an alternative alignment has been taken up at the "highest level".
"The suggestion for alternative alignment to avoid Ramar Sethu route has been taken as a special case. I have personally taken it at the highest level. It is being scientifically examined. I will come back to you by Tuesday or Wednesday," Nariman had told the Bench.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/000200807291441.htm

Centre’s bid to appease MK, says VHP
Tuesday July 29 2008 09:29 IST
Express News Service
COIMBATORE: The Centre’s assertion before the Supreme Court on July 22 that Lord Ram himself had destroyed the Ramar Sethu was to appease DMK leader M Karunanidhi whose party is a partner in the UPA coalition, said VHP international president Ashok Singhal, while talking to reporters here on Monday.

“Nowhere in the Kamba Ramayanam it is mentioned that Lord Rama himself destroyed the bridge,” Ashok Singhal said while replying to questions on the Union Government’s stand on the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP).

“Ramar Sethu will be protected at any cost,” VHP general secretary Pravin Togadia asserted.He informed that saints and Hindu leaders met at Hardwar recently to demand that the Sethu be declared a historical monument.

Singhal warned that if the Centre failed to declare Ramar Sethu as a national monument, VHP would launch a series of agitations and demonstrations.

On Ram temple

Singhal said construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya, the birthplace of Ram, was not possible through negotiations or the court of law.

Passing a legislation alone would be a solution to this issue, Singal said, and added, “In the event of BJP coming to power, the VHP would stress this matter.”

On this issue Togadia’s take was: “The temple will come up and we will see to it that such an Act is brought in the next Lok Sabha,” he said. (with inputs from PTI)
http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IET20080728230820&Page=T&Title=Southern+News+-+Tamil+Nadu&Topic=0

Government to clarify its stand on Ram Setu today
7/29/2008
The Union Government will clarify its stand today before the Supreme Court on the fate of Ram Setu.

Senior Counsel F S Nariman had last week informed the three judge bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal that the Union Government was actively considering the suggestion of the Supreme Court to explore the possibility of taking some other route/alignment to save Ram Setu, also known as Adam's Bridge from being demolished.

The apex court had told the government that in-all eight alignments are there, which can be used to complete Rs 2500 crore Sethusamudram Canal Project without touching the 35 km long Ram Setu.

Justice Raveendran had also told the Government that little deviation from alignment six and a small damage to biosphere was desirable if it was necessary to protect the faith of millions of people.

Earlier the government had contended that according to Padma Purana and Kamban Ramayana, the Tamil version of Ramayana, have mentioned that Ram Setu was destroyed by Lord Ram himself while returning from Sri Lanka.

The claim of the government has been hotly contested and denied by religious scholars that there is no such mention in any of the holy scriptures.

Petitioners, which include former Union Minister Subramanium Swamy and former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa, are however, seeking declaration from the apex court that Ram Setu is a monument of national heritage and therefore cannot be destroyed.

The apex court has already restrained the authorities from damaging Ram Setu in any manner while carrying out the dredging activity.

Union Shipping and Road Transport Minister T R Baalu and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi are facing contempt of court proceedings for backing Tamil Nadu bandh on October 1 last year, in violation of the Supreme Court order.

UNI http://www.indlawnews.com/Newsdisplay.aspx?56e3c65c-adf0-49af-b27d-6956accd75ec

Ram Sethu: Centre walks on tightrope
Sam Daniel
Tuesday, July 29, 2008, (Chennai)
The Union government is now considering the Supreme Court's advice to choose a different route for Sethusamudram project in a bid to save the Ram Sethu. And the environmentalists say that this may spell disaster.

The Ram the bridge is believed to have been built by Lord Ram's vanar sena on the Bay of Bengal. If the centre has its way, the stretch behind will be cut across to allow ships to sail through.

Devotees call it an outrage on their faith. They want the government to choose another route that will leave the bridge of faith intact. In fact, five of the six original proposals have left this bridge intact.

The devotees visiting Danushkodi are hopeful that Ram Sethu would be saved. The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to consider a new route, between the fourth and fifth alignments for the Sethusamudram channel.

According to the plan, the channel will be cut across the land near the famous Kodandaramar temple, leaving Ram Sethu intact. The Centre is expected to give its reply in a few days.

"Destroying Ram Sethu is like piercing the hearts of Ram devotees. Even if the project is economically profitable, the right thing is to take the other route," said a devotee.

It was the Ram Sethu that saved us from the tsunami.

Devotees believe that the chain of limestone shoals was built by Ram's army of monkeys to rescue his wife Sita from Ravana in Sri Lanka.

The Sethusamudram channel is worth Rs 2400 crore. It aims to connect the east and west coast of India for ships that go around Sri Lanka.

But environmentalists are up in arms. They say the route will be an ecological disaster due to its proximity to the Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park.

This national biosphere is home to over 3000 marine species including corals and is just 10 km away from the new alignment. Activists say this would threaten the very survival of this reserve.

"Corals are schedule one. It means that they have the same status as that of a tiger," said Sudarshan Rodriguez, an environmentalist.

With the ruling DMK determined to see the project through, if accepted the proposed change in alignment, may almost double the cost and delay it by a few years. For the Centre, it is a tightrope walk.

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080059201&ch=7/29/2008%2010:15:00%20AM

Replies to comments of UOI Counsel Nariman on destruction of Setu by Rama himself

Comments on the remarks of Mr. Nariman regarding destruction of Rama Setu by Lord Rama himself

By K.Gopalakrishnan (28 July 2008)

Mr.Nariman submitted on behalf of the Govt. of India to the Supreme Court on 24th July, 2008 that “As per Kamba Ramayana, the Superman Rama himself destroyed the bridge Rama Sethu that was earlier constructed by him and anything that was broken is not a bridge, and we can not worship something that has been destroyed”.

Mr. Nariman also said”Kamba Ramayana also expressly says the bridge was destroyed by Lord Ram so that no one can cross over to Sri Lanka and ships can sail through”.

Kamba Ramayana is one of the many vernacular versions of the original Ramayana by Valmiki in sanskrit language. Kamba Ramayana itself has got many versions in its publications.

The verse in question being quoted by Mr. Narman is verse No. 171 in yudda kanda published in a version edited and published by one Sri, V.M.Gopalakrishnamachariyar.

Rama, after killing Ravana and other rakshasas in the battle and after rescuing his wife Sita, was returning from Lanka to Ayodhya by Pushpaka vimaana (an aero-plane) with Sita. It is described that from the plane, Rama was showing Sita and giving details about various places en-route. The above verse in Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s version forms one of the seven verses (166 to 172) describing the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu.

It is obvious that Rama could not have broken the bridge from the aero-plane. That means that Rama should have destroyed the bridge after winning the war and before boarding his vimaana/plane. There was no mention of such activity during this specific period anywhere in Kamba Ramayana. When Rama describes the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu in so many verses, it is not rational that he himself would have destroyed it. Besides, Goplakrishnamachariyar himself says in the explanatory notes for this verse that the break-up of this bridge was done from the western side and because of that reason, that place is known as Dhanushkodi. If that was the case, then Rama would have had to swim back to Lanka crossing the ship-sailable channel. Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s text does not talk about breakage in three places (see the annexured text); but Mr. Nariman says that as per Kamba Ramayana, the bridge was broken in three places. Then Rama would have to swim not one channel but three to get back to Sri Lanka to board the plane with Sita and all others.

Another aspect of many versions of Kamba Ramayana is that at many places, many later insertions have been made to the original text of Kamban. Even in his version of Kamba Ramayana, Gopalakrishnamachariyar himself had cited 43 such insertions between the above verses 166 and 172 (see enclosed annexures). Also, between verses 173 and 174, two more insertions are cited.

In another version of Kamba Ramayana edited by Poovannan, Srichandran and Manikkam, and published by Varthamanan publishers, there are only five verses describing the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu instead of the seven given in Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s version (see annexures). The verses 170, and 171 quoted by Mr. Nariman are not found in the latter’s version. It is therefore more likely that the verse under question regarding the destruction of Sethu by Rama himself as well as the one preceding it (no.170) in the former’s version may also be insertions.

The other contention of Mr.Nariman that we can not worship some thing that has been broken is also incorrect. This type of argument may hold good for idols, but not for kshetrams and thirthasthanams. It is to be noted that even in the quoted verse, in the later part, Rama talks about the virtue of Rama Sethu stating that one who takes bath in the Sethu thirtham will be absolved of all his sins and will live like Devas for the next 21 births. Thus, even if one accepts the above verse as original for arguments’ sake, the Sethu will still be a place of worship, contrary to the assertion of Mr. Nariman.

ANNEXURES (Tamil texts with translations into English of relevant Tamil verses/comments)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202841/VMG1 Annexure 1: From VMG’s version – 1

Translation of Verse 167: Rama tells Sita: Lady wearing golden bangles! To talk of the purity of the Setu is an impossibility for even Brahma, what can I say? Yet, listen to what I have to say: even those who have harmed parents, guru, and relatives will attain purity and become deva-s by the mere sight of the Setu.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202896/VMG2 Annexure 2: From VMG’s version – 2

Translation of Verse 168: There are some who say that the purity of Setu is because of the association with Gandhamadana mountain. The legend is that when Indra broke the mountain slopes, some mountains feared Indra and hid under the ocean.

Comment of Verse 171: When Rama traveled on the Pushpaka Vimana, to move amidst wooden trawlers smoothly, it is incorrect to state that he tore the Setu. It is an incorrect translation. Here criminals who have committed panchamahapatakas (five grievous misdeeds) took a dip. Even in 21 births, they will be healthy without illnesses and will attain the appreciation of deva-s. (Thus, it is explained that the tearing of the Setu was to facilitate the samudra snaanam).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202953/VMG3 Annexure 3: From VMG’s version - 3
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203003/VMG4 Annexure 4: From VMG’s version - 4
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203153/VMG5 Annexure 5 From VMG’s version – 5
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203689/VMG6 Annexure 6: From VMG’s version – 6
The three annexes – VMG3 to VMG6 explain Poojai padalam, that is, chapter of Setu worship. (Note: The accent on the entire chapter on the sacredness of Setu and the procedures of worship).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203247/Poovannan1Annexure 7: From Poovannan et al –1
Trans. Verse 4058 is titled: Showing Setu, explaining its greatness (cirappu) Translation of the verse: Rama said: ‘Lady with an exquisite countenance! After many days lapsed after I got separated from you, after I gained the friendship of Sugriva, the monarch of vaanara, after Hanuman met you in Lanka in the Ashokavana where you were held captive and relieved your anguish, after he informed us of your presence, to join battle with Ravana, to get you released from captivity, vaanarasena constructed this Setu to cross over the ocean. See this Setu.’
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203379/Poovannan2 Annexure 8: From Poovannan et al – 2
Trans. of verse 4059 (same as verse 167 in VMG1): Rama tells Sita: Lady wearing golden bangles! To talk of the purity of the Setu is an impossibility for even Brahma, what can I say? Yet, listen to what I have to say: even those who have harmed parents, guru, and relatives will attain purity and become deva-s by the mere sight of the Setu.

Trans. of verse 4061: If one immerses in sacred snaanam in Ganga river, Yamuna river, Godavari river, Narmada river, Kaveri river, evils will not be eliminated. By merely seeing the sacred waters of the Setu which takes on the incessant waves which throw the s’ankha onto the shore, all sins will be removed.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203435/Poovannan3 Annexure 9: From Poovannan et al – 3
Trans of verse 4063. Rama carrying the powerful kodanda bow which vanquishes evil people explained to Sita while traveling on the Pushpaka Vimana, showed the specific spot where Varuna had s’aranaagati (adaikkalam or surrender).

NOTE: At the following blogspot post, verses from another Kamba Ramayanam edition have been analysed, again pointing out the comments made by the editors about interpolations. This edition is: Setu in Kamba Ramayana (First edition, 1976, published by Kamban Kazhagam, Chennai).
http://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/07/rama-setu-hindu-cosmolog-sea-level.html

The interpolated verse for example iss 170-23.

kappai enum kanniyaiyum, kandanaar taataiyaiyum
appozhude tiruvanaikku kaavalaraay angu irutti
ceppa ariya cilaiyaale tiruvanaiyai vaay keeri
oppu ariyaal tannudane uyar cenai kkadaludane

Appointing a lady-warrior called Kappai and a warrior named Kandanaar to guard the Setu, using an arrow (cilai) marking a line (vaay keeri -- line on the end of the Setu). This verse does NOT indicate that Rama destroyed the Setu. (Note: The word keeri has many meanings. In this context of engaging guards to guard the Setu, the line is drawn only as a demarcation of their zone of responsibility).

In the original verses of Kamban, and in Valimki Ramayana, Setu's beauty is described which makes Sita devi wonderstruck. The verses also extol the fact that pilgrms who see the Setu become blessed. It is clear that even during the periods when the interpolations were made, Setu continued to be a place of pilgrimage and worship. (Sriram continues to cite verses which are interpolations pointing to the use of later-day Tamil words and poetry-styles not in tune with the original version of Kamban, citing verses from 162-6 to 162-8, 169-1 to 169-2, 170-1 to 170-12.)

Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on geotechnical, oceanographic, environmental studies

Setu project: replies to arguments of Counsel Nariman on geotechnical, oceanographic, environmental studies

Geological Survey of India, the premier earthsciences organisation together with National Institute of Oceanography, Goa, the premier oceanography organisation should be involved in any study as was done in Tehri dam case by appointing an advocates' commission.

It is surprising that for the Setu channel, these organisations were not involved as consultants for geo-scientific studies including oceanographic investigations before approving the channel project.

Some arguments were made by UOI counsel Nariman on 24 and 25 July about geo-scientific studides related to SSCP. Replies to these arguments are submitted. Former Directors of Geological Survey of India Dr. K. Gopalakrishnan, Dr. S. Badrinarayanan and Dr. K Subramanian had made the following submissions which are also made available to the SC:

1. Geological and Geo-tectonic Setting of the Palk Bay – Gulf of mannar area – Their relevance to SSCP
2. Rama Sethu – Geographical, Geological, Historical and Geo-Archaeological Perspectives (These two reports are submitted personally to CEP)
3. Ocean Current Movements in Palk Bay – Gulf of Mannar region and their significance in relation to SSCP
4. Comments on the report of the committee of Eminent Persons on SSCP(Presented as a separate volume entitled "Geological Aspects of SSCP".

References to these documents are made in the following point-wise comments made by Dr. K.S. Gopalakrishnan
.
Mr. Nariman has stated that 'a geological survwey in the area had not thrown up any evidence to suggest that Rama Sethu was a man-made structure'
Mr.Nariman has cleverly not mentioned what geological evidences were searched for to suggest a man-made structure at Rama Sethu, which were not found.
On the other hand our report under reference-2 above clearly brings about evidences for the occurrence of a Boulder-Conglomerate bed having different rock types such as calcareous sandstone, fossiliferous limestone and corals, between a loose beach sand horizon at the top and another loose sand formation below the boulder bed. Such boulder beds are nowhere reported along the southern Tamil Nadu coast. Also this boulder bed occurs perpendicular to the coast. This type of boulder beds can not be formed by any marine sedimentary process. It is significant that Valmiki Ramayana describes that the Rama Sethi was built by using huge rocks and trees available on the coast. As such occurrence of this type of boulder bed at Rama Sethu proves it to be not by normal sedimentary process by only by a human hand.
Elsewhere Mr. Nariman is reported to have said that "we believe that the bridge is not man-made structure but a super-man made structure".
Does this mean that the Govt. accepts that there is a bridge structure on Rama Sethu that is not by sedimentary process and that it was built by the super-man Rama who is an avatar of God?
Nariman has also stated that the project was not rushed through and that each and every aspect was considered in depth at various levels by expert committees and only after all requirements were required (acquired?), was clearance given.
In the reports submitted to CEP, we had clearly brought out that the three geo-scientific aspects, viz., Geotechnical Evaluation Studies, Geo-Environmental Assessment Studies and the Nature of Current Movements in the entire Project area and its environs, have not been studied at all in depth, covering all aspects in each of the above three spheres, by any competent agencies.
The geo-technical studies restricted only to the canals and channels of SSCP were done by NIOT, but not for the whole project area. Also these studies did not take into account the important aspects such as recent fault movements, earth- tremors, higher heat flow in the area and possible volcanic activity etc. Neo-tectonic activities (recent earth movements) associated with faulting during 1948-49 had caused submergence and subsidence of southern parts of Dhanushkodi town ship was brought out by GSI's studies. Recurrence of such activities will affect the Rama Sethu canal's stability. Similarly, the neo-tectonic activity with subsidence in the Palk Bay along the extensions of the Vellar river fault as brought out by GSI may affect the ENE trending section of channel/canal. This aspect has also not been studied by NIOT or any other agency. These aspects have been cited in our report under Reference-1 above.
No detailed Geo-environmental studies for the entire project area and its environ was carried out by NEERI. Whatever geo-scientific studies carried out by NEERI, and that too only in Palk Bay relates to rates of sedimentation. Actually, NEERI does not possess the expertise to carry out any GEO-Environmental Studies. Only GSI has got the core competence for study of six geological parameters, viz., geology, geo-morphology, soil, land-use, surface water and ground water, out of the specified 12 parameters earmarked by the Dept. of Environment, Govt. of India, for the purpose of environmental clearance (See p.44 of GSI pamphlet entitled 'Annals and Antiquity of GSI,2002, included in Refence-4 above).
No studies on current movements for the project area as a whole were carried out by competent agency like, NIO, NIOT or the Marine Wing of GSI. Our paper under reference 3, derived from Google Earth photos, clearly brings out the fact that in the western sector, the currents from Palk Bay converge on the Pamban channel (about 2.5 km wide and about 5m deep) and move with force to Gulf of Mannar side, where they are deflected by the coralline islands to west and SW towards the southern Tamil Nadu coast. On the other hand, in the central sector, the currents stopped somewhat by the Rama Sethu , overflow into Gulf of Mannar and produce a swirling structure with sediments. If the proposed narrow and deep SSCP canal (300m x 12m) across Rama Sethu is cut, it will bring in erosion and destabilization of the canal itself, besides further heavy devastations in the Gulf destroying the marine life in those parts. Also, due this activity, the orientation and force of current movements will change drastically in the gulf, which will prevent deposition of future heavy mineral placer sands with monazite, rutile, ilmenite etc along our southern coast. They may even destroy and remove the already existing deposits of such minerals from our shores to the deep ocean back.
Mr.Nariman is reported to have said that 'each and every aspect was considered in depth at various levels by expert committees and only after all requirements were acquired, was clearance given'.
It is not known whether any geo-scientific and marine experts were included in these expert committees.
It can be seen that the Final Detailed Project Report by L&T Ramboll Consulting Engineers have submitted their report in Feb. 2005 itself, before the receipt of or data from such important reports such as (i) Marine geophysical surveys carried out for the Proposed Sethusamudram Navigational Channel by NIOT (Feb.2005), (ii) Geological and Geo-technical Assessment of the sub-sea strata for the proposed Sethusamudram Navigational Channel by NIOT (April, 2005), and (iii) Final report on conducting Bore-hole investigations along SSC alignment at Adam's Bridge by Fugro Geo-tech Ltd, April, 2007).
Environmental clearance letter from MoE&F has been issued on 31.03. 2005 itself without the Geotechnical report from NIOT (April, 2005) and the report form Fugro Geo-tech Ltd (April, 2007).
Similarly many other important reports such as (a) Report on Geological Studies and Sub-surface strata conditions at the site of Sethusamudram canal in the vicinity of Rameswaram and Dhanushkodi by Dr. S.P.Subramaiam, Dept. of Ocean Engineering, IIT, Madras (no date), (b) A Report on the feasibility of underwater drilling and controlled blasting of SSCP by Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad (No date), and (c) Study of Rock Mechanics Properties of sandstone samples collected from SSCP (Name of author or organization not mentioned; letter dated 30 August, 2007) are received very recently after the commissioning of the project.
(The details regarding the dates of receipt s of various reports stated above are taken from the report of ECP. Please also see the reference -4 above; part-1, letter to Dr. Kalyana Raman).
The major doubts and apprehensions raised by Dr. Tad. S. Murthy, the international "Tsunami Expert" regarding the orientations of SSCP canals vis-à-vis the future tsunami waves, which were forwarded by PM's Office to SSCP authorities were brushes aside by the Tuticorin Port Trust that has no expertise in the field of tsunamis without any technical explanations.
Contrary to the submission of Mr. Nariman to the court, it can be seen from the above facts that the project was rushed through without even waiting for many of the reports commissioned by SSCP authorities themselves. No renowned geo-scientific, oceanographic or tsunami experts were included in the various expert committees. Many scientific aspects were not considered and tackled by SSCP authorities before starting the project.
The contention of Mr. Nariman that the proposal of Alignment No.6 was the result of a comprehensive and careful examination of all relevant considerations, backed by sound environmental, navigational, engineering and trans-boundary considerations etc., does not also stand to reason, without proper geo-technical, geo-environmental and ocean current studies supported by mathematical, scle and computer generated modeling studies by competent agencies.