I think we can read very well and we can also use a little common sense.

1. The article is very one sided because it is reported from the Indian's perspective and from no one else's. The article makes it clear that it is an allegation from the "humiliated Indian". No one else has contributed to the article.

2. We all know that laborers/porters etc are not aggressive. They wouldn't last a second if they were, they would be deported if they acted aggressively or stepped out of line.

3. So the guy's medecines were in the baggage and it looks as if the porter accidently dropped the baggage. Nowhere does it say that the porter was deliberately careless with the baggage. The Indian must have shouted at or threatened the porter. Why else would there be a heated argument?

4. If you are transporting fragile goods you know that you have to pack them carefully because luggage at airports is routinely thrown around. If the Indian didn't know this, he is an idiot. If he did know this and did not pack his medecines sufficiently well, he has only himself to blame.

So can we read? Uh yes, I think we can.

Just call me Tigasin. That's what I'm talking about