~*~ Marvelous Answer ~*~

Real story happened with famous Heart Surgeon Lt. Dr. Nitu Mandke.He had done many heart operations.A mechanic was removing the cylinder heads from the motor of a carwhen he spotted the famous heart surgeon in his shop, who was standingoff to the side, waiting for the service manager to come to take alook at his car.The mechanic shouted across the garage, “Hello Doctor! Please comeover here for a minute.”The famous surgeon, a bit surprised, walked over to the mechanic.The mechanic straightened up, wiped his hands on a rag and askedargumentatively, “So doctor, look at this. I also open hearts, takevalves out, grind ‘em, put in new parts, and when I finish this willwork as a new one. So how come you get the big money, when you and meis doing basically the same work?”The doctor leaned over and whispered to the mechanic…..

For Hard workers Only

A man came home from work late, tired and irritated, to find his 5-year old son waiting for him at the door.SON: "Daddy, may I ask you a question?"DAD: "Yeah sure, what is it?" replied the man.SON: "Daddy, how much do you make an hour?"DAD: "That's none of your business. Why do you ask such a thing?" the man said angrily.SON: "I just want to know. Please tell me, how much do you make an hour?"DAD: "If you must know, I make Rs.100 an hour.""Oh," the little boy replied, with his head down.Looking up, he said, "Daddy, may I please borrow Rs.50?"

The father was furious, "If the only reason you asked that is so you can borrow some money to buy a silly toy or some other nonsense, then you march yourself straight to your room and go to bed. Think about why you are being so selfish. I work hard everyday for such this childish behavior."The little boy quietly went to his room and shut the door. The man sat down and started to get even angrier about the little boy's questions. How dare he ask such questions only to get some money?After about an hour or so, the man had calmed down, and started to think: Maybe there was something he really needed to buy with that Rs.50 and he really didn't ask for money very often. The man went to the door of the little boy's room and opened the door."Are you asleep, son?" He asked.No daddy, I'm awake," replied the boy."I've been thinking, maybe I was too hard on you earlier," said the man."It's been a long day and I took out my aggravation on you. Here's the Rs.50 you asked for." The little boy sat straight up, smiling. "Oh, thank you daddy!" He yelled.Then, reaching under his pillow he pulled out some crumpled up bills. The man, seeing that the boy already had money, started to get angry again. The little boy slowly counted out his money, and then looked up at his father."Why do you want more money if you already have some?" the father grumbled."Because I didn't have enough, but now I do," the little boy replied."Daddy, I have Rs.100 now. Can I buy an hour of your time? Please come home early tomorrow. I would like to have dinner with you."Share this story with someone you like....But even better, share Rs.100 worth of time with someone you love. It's just a short reminder to all of you working so hard in life. We should not let time slip through our fingers without having spent some time with those who really matter to us, those close ! To our hearts.

Stolt Valor captain, crew members return home

The Indian crew members of the MT Stolt Valor, hijacked by Somali pirates two months ago, returned to Delhi early Tuesday with Captain Prabhat Kumar Goyal expressing relief that the "nightmare" was finally over.
The crew members reached the international airport here from Muscat at around 4 a.m. Five of the 18 Indians had reached Mumbai Monday.
“The experience was very bad. They tortured us mentally. But, at the end, we are happy to be back safe. I wish to extend my sincere thanks and gratitude to everyone," an emotional and tired Goyal told reporters here.
“It was not only an ordeal but also a nightmare for all of us on board the Stolt Valor,” he said.
It was an emotional reunion as family members of the crew members hugged each other with tears rolling down their eyes.
“I am really happy that all the members have returned home safely. I thank god for it. But I will never be able to forget these two months,” an ecstatic Seema Goyal, wife of Capt Prabhat Goyal, said.
Seema had been shell-shocked when her husband informed her over the satellite phone that his ship had been hijacked. She had left no stone unturned to contact the prime minister, the defence minister, external affairs minister as well as the shipping company that employed her husband.
Ayushi Goyal, their 11-year-old daughter, ran to greet her father the moment crew reached the airport lounge.
All of them expressed gratitude to the Indian government and the Indian Navy.
MT Stolt Valor, with 22 crewmembers including 18 Indians, was hijacked by a group of Somali pirates off the Yemen coast Sep 15 while it was bound for Mumbai from the Suez Canal.
The pirates took the Japanese-owned vessel to the Somali coast and demanded a ransom of $6 million. They released the ship Nov 16 after reportedly collecting $2.5 million from the ship's owners. The cargo vessel was managed by Fleet Marine Management Service Ltd, Mumbai.

What makes India immune to US meltdown?

The collapse of the mighty global financial system has triggered a series of chain reactions in India, but the impact is not going to be as widespread as earlier imagined. The reasons are numerous.First, the subsidiaries of collapsed investment banks like Lehman are being bailed out by entities like Nomura of Japan. This includes the 2,500-strong back office operations in Mumbai, apart from the smaller securities set up. Similarly, American Insurance Group (AIG) in India has a tie-up with the ever reliable Tatas who have given a thumbs up to all consumers who were worried about their insurance carried out through this vehicle.Second, and even more significant, is the fact that the conservative approach to reforms in the financial services sector has ensured that the tremors of earthquakes in the US are being felt minimally in India.A meeting few days ago of the regulators for the pension, insurance and other similar sectors concluded with a sigh of relief and pronouncement that slow and steady opening up of the economy has helped in the long run. This is not to say that capital account convertibility - or making the rupee freely tradable - will not take place. But probably as the regulators have pointed out, this can happen when the economy is at a more mature stage.Infy, Wipro, TCS at lossUltimately, therefore, the big losers in the global financial crisis in this country are likely to be the iconic software firms like Infosys, Wipro and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS). Much of their business comes from the erstwhile giant investment banks and that could affect their profitability in the short term. In the medium-to-long term, however, these companies are likely to have greater resilience given their innovative approach in the past to hunting out new markets and customers.The other area where worries still remain is the pullout of funds by foreign institutional investors from the country's equities and debt markets. The bourses have been showing considerable volatility ever since the news came in about the failure of Lehman and the domino-like effect on other investment banks.Safety nets by Goldman, MorganWhile the Indian stock markets became volatile, they have not crashed as might have been expected initially. They now seem to be stabilizing as safety nets are being created for collapsed banks, like converting Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan into commercial banks while other banks are picking up some entities cheap like the takeover of Wachovia by Wells Fargo.As far as the US and even Europe are concerned, the ramifications appear to be unending as the scenario is unfolding into the biggest banking crisis in 100 years. Financial institutions considered to have a rock-like stability including Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and the Lehman Brothers collapsed within days of each.Some were rescued through various manoeuvres and only Lehman actually declared bankruptcy. Reports reaching here also indicate that many smaller banks are declaring insolvency in the US - a development not being taken note of by the international media which is focusing on the big fish. Thus average people in the US are facing severe hardship. No wonder then the battle is being described as one of Main Street vs Wall Street.Mortgage giants bailed outThe complex set of circumstances that created the crisis are a fascinating story of greed and over-reach at the highest level of the financial system in the US. The solutions being found are even more fascinating - at least in India. The US administration actually bailed out mortgage giants like Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and the world's biggest insurance company, AIG. The bailout has resulted in the government taking a majority stake in these institutions including an 80 percent equity share in AIG. In other words, the US is doing what we in India call nationalisation.The irony has not been lost on those in the banking industry in this country. Former prime minister Indira Gandhi was roundly condemned by the US and other Western powers when she nationalised banks in this country in order to ensure that credit reached the poor and powerless. Deemed to be a socialist - or communist-like measure -, it has now been adopted without any qualms by the avowed world leader of free market economies. It seems the US government had little choice, as otherwise widespread mayhem may have resulted for the average citizen both within America and abroad.AIG collapse could trigger havocIn the case of AIG especially, it was recognized that the sudden collapse of the largest insurer in the world would wreak havoc globally. Besides the timing of these events could not have been worse for the Bush administration as the presidential elections are just weeks away. It thus had little option but to carry out damage control as rapidly as possible.Clearly the rules of the game change for Western economies during crisis. Nationalisation can be resorted to when the American people need to be protected but the same measure can be decried when a developing economy needs to do so to similarly protect its far more impoverished citizenry.The nationalization of banks in India opened the way for ordinary people to use the financial system for small and tiny deposits. It paved the way for what is known as compulsory priority sector lending. In other words, banks had to provide a certain amount of credit for agriculture and rural areas. In the normal course, commercial banks only lend to sectors providing assured and fairly high returns. But Indian nationalised banks have a social obligation to fulfil and the directive to do so was made possible only by the drastic takeovers effected by Indira Gandhi in 1969.Apart from banks, many other industries had to be nationalized to prevent millions of workers from becoming jobless. The perennially loss-making National Textile Corp is one such case when the government had to step in as private mill owners were closing shop and leaving their workers in the lurch. Though the corporation and its regional subsidiaries have rarely made profits, the mills under its charge have also performed a social obligation by producing cheap cloth meant for weaker sections of society. No doubt the nationalization process was carried too far, but at the time it seemed the only way out to save jobs in a country without any social safety nets for the jobless.So there can be few tears shed in India for the plight of the US economy. Our focus should only be on how to deal with the fallout of the financial disaster that has overtaken the global bastion of free markets.

Aloe Vera

The Verdeja was a series of light tanks developed in Spain between 1938 and 1954 in an attempt to replace German Panzer I and Soviet T-26 tanks in Spanish service. The program was headed by Captain Félix Verdeja Bardales and led to the development of four prototype vehicles, including a self-propelled howitzer armed with a 75 mm gun. It was designed as an advanced light tank and was one of the first development programs which took into account survivability of the crew as opposed to the protection of the tank. The tank was influenced by several of the light tanks which it was intended to replace, including the Panzer I and T-26, both of which were originally used during the Spanish Civil War. The Verdeja was considered a superior tank to the T-26 after a lengthy testing period, yet was never put into mass production. Three light tank prototypes were manufactured between 1938 and 1942, including the Verdeja 1 and the Verdeja 2. Interest in the vehicle's development waned after the end of the Second World War. Despite attempts to fit a new engine in the Verdeja 2 and convert the Verdeja 1 into a self-propelled artillery piece, ultimately the program was unofficially canceled in favor of adopting the US M47 Patton Tank in 1954. A prototype of the 75 millimetre self-propelled howitzer and of the Verdeja 2 were put on display in the early 1990s.
Spain received its first tank in mid-1919, a French Renault FT-17 for testing purposes, and later received ten more tanks on 18 December 1921.[6] The use of these tanks during the Rif War, including the first amphibious landing with tanks,[7] offered valuable experience for Spain's first indigenous armor program, the Trubia A4. The Trubia tank program, based on the FT-17, led to the development of four prototypes, but ultimately the program failed due to lack of interest from the national government.[8] These prototypes influenced a subsequent indigenous attempt to produce a tank, named the Trubia-Naval.[9] This design also failed to get past the prototype type stage.[10] Due to the failure of Spanish efforts to produce a tank, and the ineffective attempts to procure foreign designs such as the Italian Fiat 3000,[11] by the start of the Spanish Civil War there were only ten working FT-17 light tanks available in the country.[12]
The lack of armor prompted the Soviet Union to supply the Popular Front and Nazi Germany and Italy to supply the Nationalist Front with light tanks. Between 1936 and 1939, the Germans provided the Nationalists with 122 Panzer Is[13] and the Italians 155 L-3-35s.[14] Meanwhile, the Soviets issued Republican Spain 281 T-26s and 50 BT-5s.[15] The Nationalists quickly found out the light machine guns on their tanks could not penetrate the T-26's armor at over 150 metres (160 yd), and Republican tankers could routinely knock out Pz Is and L-3-35s at ranges of up to 1,000 metres (1,100 yd).[16] In order to re-equip Nationalist armored forces with the T-26, German Major Ritter von Thoma offered Spanish troops 500 pesetas for each tank captured.[17] There were also attempts to up-gun the Panzer I with an Italian Breda 20mm Model 1935 anti-aircraft gun, due to its high velocity and low recoil. Despite four successfully converted vehicles, designated Pz I Breda, there was no widespread program to retrofit the gun into the Pz I.[18] Instead, the Nationalists began to press captured T-26s into service against their previous owners, with the first Nationalist T-26 unit formed in June 1937.[19]
On 6 September 1937, Captain Félix Verdeja, commanding the maintenance company of the Nationalist Batallón de Carros de Combate ("Tank Battalion"), began to privately develop a new light tank. His position, with direct access to Pz Is and T-26s, gave Verdeja direct evidence of the shortcomings of current tank models in terms of combat ability and maintenance issues. Verdeja established a future tank required the 45mm (1.77 in) gun fitted in the T-26; two coaxial light machine guns; a low profile, all-around armor greater than 15 mm (0.6 in), with a turret mantlet plate of at least 30 mm (1.2 in); road speed of 70 kilometres per hour (43 mph), combat range of 200 kilometres (120 mi), and a capable suspension and new track system. This latter requirement was based on experiences with existing light tanks, which frequently lost their tracks in combat. These requirements and solutions were presented in October 1938 to Colonel Díaz de la Lastra, commanding officer of the Agrupación de Carros de Combate. Although the project was approved, the program had to use scrap to build the first prototype due to a lack of resources and money.[20] Despite early obstacles, including criticism from von Thoma, the program continued and Verdeja was awarded a warehouse in Zaragoza to continue with the construction of the prototype. [21]

The Verdeja was heavily influenced by the T-26.
The prototype was manufactured from spare parts and equipment scavenged from other light tanks, and featured a rectangular turret with 16 mm (0.63 in) basic armor. The chassis was divided into four quarters, with the forward right half occupied by the engine, gear box, clutch and final drive, beside the driver. The rear half of the vehicle was taken up mostly by the turret basket and forty-six 45mm rounds, as well as two 60 liter (13 Imp gal) fuel tanks.[22] Turret space was used by the tank commander-gunner and the loader, as well as the 45mm model 1932 anti-tank gun and two MG-13 machine guns. The main gun was originally commissioned as the Soviet 45mm 19K anti-tank gun in March 1932, and featured heavier ammunition and a faster rate of fire than older anti-tank guns. Starting in 1934, a newer model began to be fitted into newly assembled T-26s.[23] Apart from the gun, the tank commander's model 1932 panoramic periscope was also scavenged from a T-26. The vehicle was powered by a Ford Model 48 engine taken from a civilian automobile, displacing 3,622 cc (221in3) and producing 85 hp (63 kW) at 2,000 revolutions per minute. The engine was paired with a brand-new radiator and exhaust system. The Verdeja prototype used the Panzer I's Aphon PG-31 gearbox, although this worked at excessive revolutions for the engine, offering less torque which made slopes greater than 40º difficult. Possibly the most unusual features of the Verdeja were the suspension and tracks. To prevent the tank's tracks slipping off the roadwheels, two track pieces were fitted together to create a central groove for the roadwheel to travel in.[24] With a weight of under 5 tonnes (5.5 short tons) the Verdeja had a maximum velocity of 70 kilometres per hour (43 mph) and a combat radius of 120 kilometres (75 mi).[25] Following the prototype's success in testing between 10 January and 20 January 1939, Captain Verdeja was ordered to begin construction of the definitive model of the light tank.

Verdeja 1
The appearance of the resulting Verdeja 1 prototype was close to that originally envisioned in Captain Verdeja's first designs. The vehicle's hull was elongated and the rear plate sloped, while the fuel capacity, and thus combat range, ammunition capacity, and base armor thickness were all increased. The vehicle was fabricated in Bilbao, the only city in Spain with a heavy vehicle assembly line. Due to the end of the Spanish Civil War and a shortage of funds, construction was postponed until May 1940. The prototype was completed three months later and delivered to the proving grounds in Carabanchel, Madrid.[26] A major external difference between the previous model and this prototype was the new, low-profile turret which allowed the 45mm gun to depress and elevate from 8º to 70º. The original 45 mm model 1932 gun was exchanged with a new 45mm Mark I tank gun fabricated by S.A. Placencia de las Armas, in Spain. Suspension and tracks were unchanged. In essence, the majority of the advantages of the new prototype were relevant to its low-profile, high elevation of the main gun and the increased sloping of the armor from 12º to 45º.[27] It should be noted that the Verdeja 1 retained the original configuration by placing the engine in the front, to increase crew survivability.[28]
On arrival at Carabanchel, the vehicle was tested against the T-26 in mobility over different terrain types and in firepower. The vehicles were graded based upon a five-point scale for each test, which would be multiplied by a coefficient of importance for each test.[29] During the testing the Verdeja traveled for some 500 kilometre without any maintenance problems, the only issue being the large consumption of water by the gasoline engine, due to the lack of an efficient radiator, and the loss of a rubber liner of one of the roadwheels. It was found that the maximum velocity of the Verdeja was either on par with similar vehicles in foreign service or superior, while the Verdeja proved itself capable of going over trenches almost 2 m wide and climbing slopes of 40º. In regards of firepower, it was proved that the vehicle could withstand the recoil of the 45 millimetre high-velocity tank gun. One of the vehicle's disadvantages was that the tank commander's aiming device was designed for a 37 millimetre anti-tank cannon, adapted into the Verdeja due to the lack of time to manufacture one for the 45 millimetre Mark I. Testing concluded with the Verdeja receiving a total of 243 points, compared to the 205 points awarded to the T-26B.[30] Testing completed, the prototype was returned and several problems were fixed, including engine deficiencies, the elevation of the sprocket and an increase to 10 millimetre of armor on all areas that had less. These changes made, the Verdeja returned to testing, this time scoring 261.98 points.[31]

The Panzer I heavily influenced the Verdeja's turret design
Plans to produce one thousand Verdeja tanks were approved on 2 December 1940, divided into ten batches of one hundred tanks each. The Verdeja production prototype was to adopt the 120 horsepower (89 kW) Lincoln-Zephyr gasoline V12 engine, requiring a contract between the Spanish government and Ford Motor Ibérica, Ford's Spanish subsidiary. Simultaneously, in case of failure of talks between Ford and Spain, the government also began to contact a number of German companies, including Maybach. In order to begin production, the Tank Workshop in Zaragoza was to be expanded to allow final assembly of at least five tanks per month. Despite funding and two years of construction alloted, the factory construction and expansion was never completed. Other problems arose, including the failure reach agreement wtih ford or Maybach. These factors, the poor economic situation in Spain, the lack of clients other than the Spanish Army and the lack of incentives for Spanish companies to partake in the construction program, led to the abandonment of the attempt to fabricate the Verdeja 1. Another attempt was undertaken at contracting the company ADESA (Armamento de Aviación, S.A.) to manufacture two Verdeja light tanks for experimental purposes. Despite the failure to procure an engine, ADESA offered to construct 300 units, but these attempts concluded fruitlessly and the program was abandoned by 1941.[32]

Verdeja 2
As the Verdeja 1 program dissolved, Captain Verdeja began to design a successor, taking into consideration lessons learned during the opening campaigns of the Second World War. The new design featured a reorganized engine bay at the rear of the chassis, which allowed for better cooling of the vehicle's motor and the fighting compartment, as well as allowing the turret to be moved forward. In addition, the drive sprocket moved to the rear. The vehicle's armor was also increased by between five and ten millimetres (0.2-0.4").[33] This new tank was not approved for production or further development due to continued postponement of the production of the Verdeja 1 for reasons which included offers by the German government to supply the Panzer IV's engine for the Verdeja 1. Although production of the new vehicle finally began in 1942, it was not until August 1944 that the Verdeja 2 prototype was delivered.[34] The program was delayed by the incorporation of twenty Panzer IV Ausf. H's and ten Sturmgeschütz IIIs into the Spanish Army in late 1943,[35] as well as failed attempts to procure one hundred more Pz IVs and even Panthers and Tigers during 1944.[36] With these new vehicles integrated into the army and the fiscal problems which plagued the Verdeja 1, the Verdeja 2 remained relatively untouched until 1950, when there was an attempt to fit a Pegaso Z-202 engine.[37] Despite this, the Verdeja remained on factory grounds until 1973, when it was transferred to the Infantry Academy of Toledo.[38]

Comparative data
The Verdeja series compared to the T-26 and Panzer I
Verdeja 1
Verdeja 2
Verdeja 75 mm
T-26B[39]
Panzer I Ausf. B[40]
Weight
6.5 t (7.16 tons)
10.9 t (12.01 tons)
6.5 t (7.16 tons)
9.4 t (10.36 tons)
5.4 t (5.95 tons)
Gun
45 mm cannon (1.77 inches)
45 mm cannon
75 mm howitzer (2.95 in)
45 mm cannon
7.92 mm machine gun (0.312 in)
Ammunition
72 rounds
146 rounds
32 rounds
122 rounds
2,250 rounds
Road range
220 km (136 miles)
220 km
220 km
175 km (108.74 mi)
200 km (124.27 mi)
Maximum velocity
44 km/h (27.34 mph)
46 km/h (28.58 mph)
44 km/h (27.35 mph)
31.1 km/h (19.32 mph)
50 km/h (31.07 mph)
Armor
7–25 mm (.28–.98 in)
10–40 mm (.39–1.57 in)
7–25 mm (.28–.98 in)
7–16 mm (.28–.63 in)
7–13 mm (.28–.51 in)

Self-propelled howitzer
Between the late 1940s and early 1950s there were a number of programs in Spain to develop a self-propelled howitzer based on an existing chassis. For example, during the early 1950s Spanish engineers attempted to retrofit a R-43 105mm (4.1 in) L/26 howitzer into a StuG III. This required reconstruction of the turret's casemate, in a fashion similar to the Verdeja 75mm self-propelled howitzer. Although one vehicle began conversion, the program was never finalized. There were similar programs to fit an 88mm L/56 and a 122mm L/46 howitzer thereafter, but these did not advance beyond the planning stage, either.[41] One of the most successful programs was the attempt to produce a 75mm self-propelled howitzer based on the chassis of the Verdeja 1 prototype. Beginning in 1945, [42] now-Major Verdeja was ordered to begin designing this piece using a rapid-firing 75mm L/40 howitzer designed by Sociedad Española de Construcción Naval.[43] The availability of the required parts and the lack of complicated changes meant that the vehicle was quickly prepared and tested extensively. The fate of the self-propelled piece was much the same as that of the Verdeja 2, and the vehicle was left untouched at the proving grounds in Carabanchel until 1973, when it was moved to the Spanish base Alfonso XIII, housing the then Mechanized Infantry Regiment Wad Rass nº 55. It was soon moved to another base, and finally delivered to the base of El Goloso, outside of Madrid, as a part of an armored vehicles museum.[44]

The Verdeja 75 mm Self-Propelled Howitzer, with the gun system visible
Major changes to the original Verdeja 1 included removing the turret and replacing it with a gun shield with 10 millimetre thick steel armor. This meant that much of the chassis' roof and rear wall was eliminated. The howitzer was designed as a monoblock steel tube, using a double-baffle muzzle brake, with twelve twists completing a full turn every forty calibers. As mounted, the howitzer could fire between .5º and 25º, and move 4.5º either left or right. The crew could stow eight pieces of ammunition in a ready-round stowage area near the walls of the gun shield on each side of the breech, allowing easy access to projectiles. Otherwise, the vehicle could store another 24 rounds in an auxiliary carriage. The carriage was based on the axles and wheels of a PaK 36 anti-tank gun. A unique feature of this prototype was a mechanical brake built into the idler wheel to the rear of the chassis, guaranteeing the vehicle's stability when firing and avoiding damage to the transmission.[45]

Conclusions
Ultimately the Verdeja program's end came with the arrival of military equipment from the United States, beginning in 1953. From 1954, the Spanish Army received 389 M47 Patton tanks, replacing the T-26s, Panzer Is, and Panzer IVs then in service.[46] The Verdeja had become obsolete when compared to larger, relatively more potent tanks such as the German Panther, the Soviet T-54, and the US M47. The T-54 had 200 millimetre of steel armor on the turret mantlet, far greater than the Verdeja 2's maximum armor thickness of 40 mm.[47] The Soviet 45mm Model 1932 gun was replaced by the T-34's 76.2mm gun, while the Germans adopted the 75mm L/70 in the Panther. By 1950, Soviet tanks such as the T-54 were armed with the 100mm D-10T, and American tanks adopted a 90mm. Although the Verdeja was Spain's most successful indigenous design,[48] it was outclassed as foreign tank producing countries produced superior products. Furthermore, the need for self-propelled artillery was soon eliminated as the United States offered Spain M37 and M44 self-propelled howitzers.[49] As a result, interest in the Verdeja dried up after 1954. Spain would not attempt another indigenous tank until the advent of the Lince main battle tank in the late 1980s.

I won't contest elections: Raj Thackeray

Amravati: Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray has said that his party would contest all the 48 Lok Sabha seats in the state, but he would not be one of the candidates.
"Due to the kind of family environment I have come from, I believe in giving leadership and not in contesting polls. So, it is very much clear that I will not fight any election. But, MNS will definitely contest coming Lok Sabha elections," Raj, who is touring Vidarbha, said at a press conference in Amravati on Monday.
Police ask Raj Thackeray aides to leave Mumbai
"We are raising various issues but changes we want in the state cannot be done without power," he said.
On whether he would forge an alliance with any party, the youth leader asked if there was any political outfit ready to join hands with him.
"MNS will contest polls on its own."
Sonali Bendre defends Jaya Bachchan
”MNS has given exposure to the emotions of every Marathi manoos. The Jaya Bachchan episode is now closed, but hereafter nobody will dare to 'insult' Maharashtra,” he said.
"I am against people coming to Maharashtra from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, their aggression on our culture and socio-political life. They are causing loss to our culture and increasing the problem of unemployment," the MNS chief said.
Raj barred from addressing public rallies

Delhi serial blasts: Suspected aide of militants held

A suspected aide of the militants allegedly involved in the serial blasts here was taken into custody while he was giving an interview to a news channel.
Zeeshan, believed to be an aide of Atif who is alleged to have played a "key role" in the recent Delhi blasts, was taken into custody from the studio of a news channel on Friday night, a senior police official said.
"We had information that a person will be going to the studio to give an interview on behalf of the militants. We picked him up from the TV studio for interrogation," the official said.
Asked whether Zeeshan was one of the two militants who escaped from Friday's encounter site, the official refused to provide details but said he could be one of those who arranged logistics like a house or car or other things.
Delhi Police had on Friday killed two militants, who allegedly had "crucial" links to the Delhi blasts, in a fierce gun battle in Jamia Nagar of south Delhi.
While one militant, Mohd Saif, was arrested, two others managed to escape from the scene.