I am not a supporter of KLB but I object to the twisting of facts and figures being done in the ongoing discussions. Let us have a more factual and logical discussion to arrive at some better conclusion. I would like to point out the following aspects of the Bill; Imran Khan, General Hameed Gul and many others are suggesting that remittances from overseas Pakistanis can be a substitute for the American aid. They fail to realise the obvious fallacy of their argument. The government of Pakistan has a huge budget deficit. Any remittances from overseas Pakistanis can improve the forex reserves but those funds would not be an income for the government and would not reduce the budget deficit even by a penny. The KL Bill has two components i.e. the civilian aid and military assistance. The civilian component of 7.5 billion dollars is unconditional. The conditions being criticized apply to military assistance only, which is in addition to the sum of $7.5 billion. Why is this aspect not being considered in our discussions? It is obvious that we can accept the civilian aid without any adverse conditions. Why do we enjoy falling on our swords in a fit of fury? In the current nation-wide debate, nobody has actually grasped the fact that the Bill is offering 'aid rather than a 'loan. There is no re-payment of the principal or interest. If we go to IMF instead, a loan of the same sum would add a painful bit to our debt burden. Let us have a cool-headed debate and try to negotiate a more reasonable deal with USA, rather than tearing away the document we have on the table. -KHALID A. London, October 16.