Politics in India

In Support of Freedom of Speech.

2012-01-24T03:49:00.000-05:00

This is the original Piece written by Chyetanya Kunte but later on he had to retract because of legal pressure from NDTV. I have posted it here for posterity & preservation since Google Cache may clear it anytime. (http://cuntradiktion.blogspot.com/2009/02/chyetanya-kuntes-original-blog-post.html)
Shoddy journalism

This is the original Piece written by Chyetanya Kunte but later on he had to retract because of legal pressure from NDTV. I have posted it here for posterity & preservation since Google Cache may clear it anytime.

Shoddy journalism

Appalling journalism. Absolute blasphemy! As I watch the news from home, I am dumbfounded to see Barkha Dutt of NDTV break every rule of ethical journalism in reporting the Mumbai mayhem.

Take a couple of instances for example:
In one instance she asks a husband about his wife being stuck, or held as a hostage. The poor guy adds in the end about where she was last hiding. Aired! My dear friends with AK-47s, our national news is helping you. Go get those still in. And be sure to thank NDTV for not censoring this bit of information.

In another instance, a General sort of suggests that there were no hostages in Oberoi Trident. (Clever.) Then, our heroine of revelations calls the head of Oberoi, and the idiot confirms a possibility of 100 or more people still in the building. Hello! Guys with guns, you’ve got more goats to slay. But before you do, you’ve got to love NDTV and more precisely Ms. Dutt. She’s your official intelligence from Ground zero.

You do not need to be a journalist to understand the basic premise of ethics, which starts with protecting victims first; and that is done by avoiding key information from being aired publicly—such as but not limited to revealing the number of possible people still in, the hideouts of hostages and people stuck in buildings.

Imagine you’re one of those sorry souls holed-up in one of those bathrooms, or kitchens. A journalist pulls your kin outside and asks about your last contact on national television, and other prying details. In a bout of emotion, if they happen to reveal more details, you are sure going to hell. Remember these are hotels, where in all likelihood, every room has a television. All a terrorist needs to do is listen to Ms. Barkha Dutt’s latest achievement of extracting information from your relative, based on your last phone-call or SMS. And you’re shafted—courtesy NDTV.1
If the terrorists don’t manage to shove you in to your private hell, the journalists on national television will certainly help you get there. One of the criticisms about Barkha Dutt on Wikipedia reads thus:

During the Kargil conflict, Indian Army sources repeatedly complained to her channel that she was giving away locations in her broadcasts, thus causing Indian casualties.
Looks like the idiot journalist has not learned anything since then. I join a number of bloggers pleading her to shut the f⋅⋅⋅ up.
Update: In fact, I am willing to believe that Hemant Karkare died because these channels showed him prepare (wear helmet, wear bullet-proof vest.) in excruciating detail live on television. And they in turn targeted him where he was unprotected. The brave officer succumbed to bullets in the neck.

Update 2 [28.Nov.2300hrs]: Better sense appears to have prevailed in the latter half of today—either willfully, or by Government coercion2, and Live broadcasts are now being limited to non-action zones. Telecast of action troops and strategy is now not being aired live. Thank goodness for that.
Update 3 [30.Nov.1900hrs]: DNA India reports about a UK couple ask media to report carefully:
The terrorists were watching CNN and they came down from where they were in a lift after hearing about us on TV.
— Lynne Shaw in an interview.
1. Oh, they have a lame excuse pronouncing that the television connections in the hotel has been cut, and therefore it is okay to broadcast. Like hell!
2. I’m thinking coercion, since Government has just denied renewing CNN’s rights to air video today; must’ve have surely worked as a rude warning to the Indian domestic channels

Read more on the reactions on the Indian blogger being silenced at http://globalvoicesonline.org/2009/01/30/india-blogger-silenced/

Response to Seema Mustafa, a bleeding heart liberal.

2011-11-11T09:24:00.000-05:00

Seema Mustafa is one of those who run what Sandeep calls as the Gujarat Cottage Industry (please see www.sandeepweb.com for more on the GCI). She has written her usual lie filled drivel in DNAIndia and posted it as an 'analysis' article. Here is my rebuttal for the same:

Today, all it takes for being a journalist is to be one sided. The more senior you are, the more one sided you can be. It fact, it is your right to be a left-liberal and forget the core mandate of being a journalist.

As for this author: I want to take a few points that have been made, and give a rebuttal based on facts and not rhetoric.

"Despite the political system being compromised ..."

Is that unbiased reporting? when the right Hon'ble supreme court of India did not find any grounds of state government complicity and when the SIT did not find any state government complicity (yet), why is the author so sure that the state government is complicit? In fact, contrary to the authors demand for action based on facts, the author herself seems to peddle in only rhetoric.

"Rape and murder of thousands ..."

Is this a fact? The official SIT (supreme court appointed) report says the total number is close to a thousand - of which 250+ were Hindus themselves. This does not include those burned brutally in the train by Muslims in Godhara. Please, don't tell me "close to a thousand" is equal to "thousands".

"Teesta Setalvad says ..."

She has been lying and she was rapped on her knuckles by none other than the Hon'ble supreme court for perjury and falsifying witness affidavits. And you are still hailing her as a social activist? She is a plain criminal, and nothing else. Please don't tell us you didn't know she falsified the affidavits, and her key witness turned hostile OUTSIDE Gujarat, as did her OWN personal secretary (who happens to be a Muslim, himself).

"Meerut, Malliana, Kanpur, Aligarh, Bhagalpur, Delhi, Hubli, Bhopal ..."

Who were the instigators in all these riots? Why do you gloss over the fact that in most of THESE AND the GODHRA CARNAGE, the instigators belonged to the Muslim community. And, have you asked for the heads of any of the CMs in any of these states as being complicit in the riots? Ever? The reasons is - you are blinded by your hate for anything to do with Narendra Modi. Your fear is if he becomes the Indian premier, he will have the lying likes of you running with your tails between your legs.

"Gujarat Congress President Modhvadia says ..."

Is he not the same person who colluded with the tainted officer Sanjeev Bhatt? I mean, did the duo not force PC K.C. Pant to commit perjury? Why not talk about it?

"Too much rhetoric, .... left to the civil societies"

The reality is you (the Congress and the Civil Society) have been throwing a lot of crap at Modi, trying to vilify him - and nothing has stuck so far. For all the shrillery, the courts have seen through the rhetoric: both the civil societies, as well as that of the Congress.

"SIT reportedly has found no involvement ... (..., only media leaks)"

Well, you journos didn't hesitate to take leaks as facts when it suited you. For example, the NIA came up with one story everyday about "hindu terror" and you guys lapped it up. In fact, the NIA went to such absurd lengths recently to say that the "saffron terrorists" paid Muslims to plant the bombs in Malegaon (Indian Express printed this story). You didn't mind vilifying the majority then using 'leaks' - but now it is "only leaks" because it doesn't suit your version of the story. Who are you fooling?

"Senior police officer Sanjeev Bhatt ..."

Why don't you also talk about why the SIT didn't think his affidavit was worthy of consideration? His lies about being present in the meeting where he was not? What about his attempts to force a constable to commit perjury? Or his links with local Congress leader Modhvadia? Or his completely crappy track record with the state police and the cases that have been running against him for >10 yrs now? Shall we try the truth for a change please?

"Centre should ensure the security ..."

When did it become fashionable for the central government to interfere in the activities of a state? Isn't there something called a constitution? Or is your form of secularism more important than the Constitution itself?

The truth and the answer for your rant is this: you (and other like sickular minded journos / NGOs) were happily peddling lies with the overt and covert support of the Congress. Now that the judgements are being delivered, people realize that your version of the story is a plain, intentional and malicious lie. So, you are raving and ranting about all under the sun so that the attention will be diverted from you.

However, I have to ask you this: for all your rant, you did not find it pertinent to write about a) the godhra carnage, and b) the more gruesome Kashmiri pandit ethnic cleansing. I wonder if your faith has something to do with your apathy towards the majority religions.

I sincerely hope you fail in your endeavors. And may you live the rest of your life in absolute penury and ignominy.

SK

An open letter to Justice Katju

2011-11-07T09:39:00.002-05:00

Justice Katju,

I am writing to express my dismay and disappointment over the behavior of English Media in India. Their reporting is extremely biased against the majority - and lies are peddled as truths. Often, the media reports half truths thereby misinforming the gullible citizen. In many legal cases that are subjudice, the English media plays with sensationalism; without any substance and with malicious intent.

One can cite many cases where the media people refuse to answer pointed questions about their duplicity. They hide their contempt for the country, its culture and established legal procedures, under the garb of libertarianism and elitism.

They openly support people who clamour for the secession of the country, while claiming to uphold freedom of speech. On the other hand, people who demand responsibility from such secessionists and sensation mongers are belittled, scorned and labelled without inviting due explanations from all sides.

Summarily, I believe the English media today represents the biggest existential threat to our national integrity, and hope that you will be able to steer the ship that has gone vagabond in the past 15 years.

Yours truly,

Karthi Sivaraman.

Netanyahu's speech at UN HQ - transcript

2011-11-03T13:31:00.000-04:00

Ladies and gentlemen, Israel has extended its hand in peace from the moment it was established 63 years ago. On behalf of Israel and the Jewish people, I extend that hand again today. I extend it to the people of Egypt and Jordan, with renewed friendship for neighbors with whom we have made peace. I extend it to the people of Turkey, with respect and good will. I extend it to the people of Libya and Tunisia, with admiration for those trying to build a democratic future. I extend it to the other peoples of North Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, with whom we want to forge a new beginning. I extend it to the people of Syria, Lebanon and Iran, with awe at the courage of those fighting brutal repression.

But most especially, I extend my hand to the Palestinian people, with whom we seek a just and lasting peace.

Ladies and gentlemen, in Israel our hope for peace never wanes. Our scientists, doctors, innovators, apply their genius to improve the world of tomorrow. Our artists, our writers, enrich the heritage of humanity. Now, I know that this is not exactly the image of Israel that is often portrayed in this hall. After all, it was here in 1975 that the age-old yearning of my people to restore our national life in our ancient biblical homeland -- it was then that this was braided -- branded, rather -- shamefully, as racism. And it was here in 1980, right here, that the historic peace agreement between Israel and Egypt wasn't praised; it was denounced! And it's here year after year that Israel is unjustly singled out for condemnation. It's singled out for condemnation more often than all the nations of the world combined. Twenty-one out of the 27 General Assembly resolutions condemn Israel -- the one true democracy in the Middle East.

Well, this is an unfortunate part of the UN institution. It's the -- the theater of the absurd. It doesn't only cast Israel as the villain; it often casts real villains in leading roles: Gadhafi's Libya chaired the UN Commission on Human Rights; Saddam's Iraq headed the UN Committee on Disarmament.

You might say: That's the past. Well, here's what's happening now -- right now, today. Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon now presides over the UN Security Council. This means, in effect, that a terror organization presides over the body entrusted with guaranteeing the world's security.

You couldn't make this thing up. So here in the UN, automatic majorities can decide anything. They can decide that the sun sets in the west or rises in the west. I think the first has already been pre-ordained. But they can also decide -- they have decided that the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Judaism's holiest place, is occupied Palestinian territory.

And yet even here in the General Assembly, the truth can sometimes break through. In 1984 when I was appointed Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, I visited the great rabbi of Lubavich. He said to me -- and ladies and gentlemen, I don't want any of you to be offended because from personal experience of serving here, I know there are many honorable men and women, many capable and decent people serving their nations here. But here's what the rebbe said to me. He said to me, you'll be serving in a house of many lies. And then he said, remember that even in the darkest place, the light of a single candle can be seen far and wide.

Today I hope that the light of truth will shine, if only for a few minutes, in a hall that for too long has been a place of darkness for my country. So as Israel's prime minister, I didn't come here to win applause. I came here to speak the truth. (Cheers, applause.) The truth is -- the truth is that Israel wants peace. The truth is that I want peace. The truth is that in the Middle East at all times, but especially during these turbulent days, peace must be anchored in security. The truth is that we cannot achieve peace through UN resolutions, but only through direct negotiations between the parties. The truth is that so far the Palestinians have refused to negotiate. The truth is that Israel wants peace with a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians want a state without peace. And the truth is you shouldn't let that happen.

Ladies and gentlemen, when I first came here 27 years ago, the world was divided between East and West. Since then the Cold War ended, great civilizations have risen from centuries of slumber, hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty, countless more are poised to follow, and the remarkable thing is that so far this monumental historic shift has largely occurred peacefully. Yet a malignancy is now growing between East and West that threatens the peace of all. It seeks not to liberate, but to enslave, not to build, but to destroy.

That malignancy is militant Islam. It cloaks itself in the mantle of a great faith, yet it murders Jews, Christians and Muslims alike with unforgiving impartiality. On September 11th it killed thousands of Americans, and it left the twin towers in smoldering ruins. Last night I laid a wreath on the 9/11 memorial. It was deeply moving. But as I was going there, one thing echoed in my mind: the outrageous words of the president of Iran on this podium yesterday. He implied that 9/11 was an American conspiracy. Some of you left this hall. All of you should have. (Applause.)
Since 9/11, militant Islamists slaughtered countless other innocents -- in London and Madrid, in Baghdad and Mumbai, in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, in every part of Israel. I believe that the greatest danger facing our world is that this fanaticism will arm itself with nuclear weapons. And this is precisely what Iran is trying to do.

Can you imagine that man who ranted here yesterday -- can you imagine him armed with nuclear weapons? The international community must stop Iran before it's too late. If Iran is not stopped, we will all face the specter of nuclear terrorism, and the Arab Spring could soon become an Iranian winter. That would be a tragedy. Millions of Arabs have taken to the streets to replace tyranny with liberty, and no one would benefit more than Israel if those committed to freedom and peace would prevail.

This is my fervent hope. But as the prime minister of Israel, I cannot risk the future of the Jewish state on wishful thinking. Leaders must see reality as it is, not as it ought to be. We must do our best to shape the future, but we cannot wish away the dangers of the present.

And the world around Israel is definitely becoming more dangerous. Militant Islam has already taken over Lebanon and Gaza. It's determined to tear apart the peace treaties between Israel and Egypt and between Israel and Jordan. It's poisoned many Arab minds against Jews and Israel, against America and the West. It opposes not the policies of Israel but the existence of Israel.

Now, some argue that the spread of militant Islam, especially in these turbulent times -- if you want to slow it down, they argue, Israel must hurry to make concessions, to make territorial compromises. And this theory sounds simple. Basically it goes like this: Leave the territory, and peace will be advanced. The moderates will be strengthened, the radicals will be kept at bay. And don't worry about the pesky details of how Israel will actually defend itself; international troops will do the job.

These people say to me constantly: Just make a sweeping offer, and everything will work out. You know, there's only one problem with that theory. We've tried it and it hasn't worked. In 2000 Israel made a sweeping peace offer that met virtually all of the Palestinian demands. Arafat rejected it. The Palestinians then launched a terror attack that claimed a thousand Israeli lives.

Prime Minister Olmert afterwards made an even more sweeping offer, in 2008. President Abbas didn't even respond to it.

But Israel did more than just make sweeping offers. We actually left territory. We withdrew from Lebanon in 2000 and from every square inch of Gaza in 2005. That didn't calm the Islamic storm, the militant Islamic storm that threatens us. It only brought the storm closer and make it stronger.

Hezbollah and Hamas fired thousands of rockets against our cities from the very territories we vacated. See, when Israel left Lebanon and Gaza, the moderates didn't defeat the radicals, the moderates were devoured by the radicals. And I regret to say that international troops like UNIFIL in Lebanon and UBAM (ph) in Gaza didn't stop the radicals from attacking Israel.

We left Gaza hoping for peace. We didn't freeze the settlements in Gaza, we uprooted them. We did exactly what the theory says: Get out, go back to the 1967 borders, dismantle the settlements. And I don't think people remember how far we went to achieve this. We uprooted thousands of people from their homes. We pulled children out of -- out of their schools and their kindergartens. We bulldozed synagogues. We even -- we even moved loved ones from their graves. And then, having done all that, we gave the keys of Gaza to President Abbas.

Now the theory says it should all work out, and President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority now could build a peaceful state in Gaza. You can remember that the entire world applauded. They applauded our withdrawal as an act of great statesmanship. It was a bold act of peace.

But ladies and gentlemen, we didn't get peace. We got war. We got Iran, which through its proxy Hamas promptly kicked out the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority collapsed in a day -- in one day. President Abbas just said on this podium that the Palestinians are armed only with their hopes and dreams. Yeah, hopes, dreams and 10,000 missiles and Grad rockets supplied by Iran, not to mention the river of lethal weapons now flowing into Gaza from the Sinai, from Libya, and from elsewhere.

Thousands of missiles have already rained down on our cities. So you might understand that, given all this, Israelis rightly ask: What's to prevent this from happening again in the West Bank? See, most of our major cities in the south of the country are within a few dozen kilometers from Gaza. But in the center of the country, opposite the West Bank, our cities are a few hundred meters or at most a few kilometers away from the edge of the West Bank.
So I want to ask you. Would any of you -- would any of you bring danger so close to your cities, to your families? Would you act so recklessly with the lives of your citizens? Israel is prepared to have a Palestinian state in the West Bank, but we're not prepared to have another Gaza there. And that's why we need to have real security arrangements, which the Palestinians simply refuse to negotiate with us.

Israelis remember the bitter lessons of Gaza. Many of Israel's critics ignore them. They irresponsibly advise Israel to go down this same perilous path again. Your read what these people say and it's as if nothing happened -- just repeating the same advice, the same formulas as though none of this happened.

And these critics continue to press Israel to make far-reaching concessions without first assuring Israel's security. They praise those who unwittingly feed the insatiable crocodile of militant Islam as bold statesmen. They cast as enemies of peace those of us who insist that we must first erect a sturdy barrier to keep the crocodile out, or at the very least jam an iron bar between its gaping jaws.

So in the face of the labels and the libels, Israel must heed better advice. Better a bad press than a good eulogy, and better still would be a fair press whose sense of history extends beyond breakfast, and which recognizes Israel's legitimate security concerns.

I believe that in serious peace negotiations, these needs and concerns can be properly addressed, but they will not be addressed without negotiations. And the needs are many, because Israel is such a tiny country. Without Judea and Samaria, the West Bank, Israel is all of 9 miles wide.

I want to put it for you in perspective, because you're all in the city. That's about two-thirds the length of Manhattan. It's the distance between Battery Park and Columbia University. And don't forget that the people who live in Brooklyn and New Jersey are considerably nicer than some of Israel's neighbors.

So how do you -- how do you protect such a tiny country, surrounded by people sworn to its destruction and armed to the teeth by Iran? Obviously you can't defend it from within that narrow space alone. Israel needs greater strategic depth, and that's exactly why Security Council Resolution 242 didn't require Israel to leave all the territories it captured in the Six-Day War. It talked about withdrawal from territories, to secure and defensible boundaries. And to defend itself, Israel must therefore maintain a long-term Israeli military presence in critical strategic areas in the West Bank.

I explained this to President Abbas. He answered that if a Palestinian state was to be a sovereign country, it could never accept such arrangements. Why not? America has had troops in Japan, Germany and South Korea for more than a half a century. Britain has had an airspace in Cyprus or rather an air base in Cyprus. France has forces in three independent African nations. None of these states claim that they're not sovereign countries.

And there are many other vital security issues that also must be addressed. Take the issue of airspace. Again, Israel's small dimensions create huge security problems. America can be crossed by jet airplane in six hours. To fly across Israel, it takes three minutes. So is Israel's tiny airspace to be chopped in half and given to a Palestinian state not at peace with Israel?

Our major international airport is a few kilometers away from the West Bank. Without peace, will our planes become targets for antiaircraft missiles placed in the adjacent Palestinian state? And how will we stop the smuggling into the West Bank? It's not merely the West Bank, it's the West Bank mountains. It just dominates the coastal plain where most of Israel's population sits below. How could we prevent the smuggling into these mountains of those missiles that could be fired on our cities?

I bring up these problems because they're not theoretical problems. They're very real. And for Israelis, they're life-and- death matters. All these potential cracks in Israel's security have to be sealed in a peace agreement before a Palestinian state is declared, not afterwards, because if you leave it afterwards, they won't be sealed. And these problems will explode in our face and explode the peace.

The Palestinians should first make peace with Israel and then get their state. But I also want to tell you this. After such a peace agreement is signed, Israel will not be the last country to welcome a Palestinian state as a new member of the United Nations. We will be the first. (Applause.)

And there's one more thing. Hamas has been violating international law by holding our soldier Gilad Shalit captive for five years. They haven't given even one Red Cross visit. He's held in a dungeon, in darkness, against all international norms. Gilad Shalit is the son of Aviva and Noam Shalit. He is the grandson of Zvi Shalit, who escaped the Holocaust by coming to the -- in the 1930s as a boy to the land of Israel. Gilad Shalit is the son of every Israeli family. Every nation represented here should demand his immediate release. (Applause.) If you want to -- if you want to pass a resolution about the Middle East today, that's the resolution you should pass. (Applause.)
Ladies and gentlemen, last year in Israel in Bar-Ilan University, this year in the Knesset and in the U.S. Congress, I laid out my vision for peace in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the Jewish state. Yes, the Jewish state. After all, this is the body that recognized the Jewish state 64 years ago. Now, don't you think it's about time that Palestinians did the same?

The Jewish state of Israel will always protect the rights of all its minorities, including the more than 1 million Arab citizens of Israel. I wish I could say the same thing about a future Palestinian state, for as Palestinian officials made clear the other day -- in fact, I think they made it right here in New York -- they said the Palestinian state won't allow any Jews in it. They'll be Jew-free -- Judenrein. That's ethnic cleansing. There are laws today in Ramallah that make the selling of land to Jews punishable by death. That's racism. And you know which laws this evokes.

Israel has no intention whatsoever to change the democratic character of our state. We just don't want the Palestinians to try to change the Jewish character of our state. (Applause.) We want to give up -- we want them to give up the fantasy of flooding Israel with millions of Palestinians.

President Abbas just stood here, and he said that the core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the settlements. Well, that's odd. Our conflict has been raging for -- was raging for nearly half a century before there was a single Israeli settlement in the West Bank. So if what President Abbas is saying was true, then the -- I guess that the settlements he's talking about are Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa, Be'er Sheva. Maybe that's what he meant the other day when he said that Israel has been occupying Palestinian land for 63 years. He didn't say from 1967; he said from 1948. I hope somebody will bother to ask him this question because it illustrates a simple truth: The core of the conflict is not the settlements. The settlements are a result of the conflict. (Applause.)

The settlements have to be -- it's an issue that has to be addressed and resolved in the course of negotiations. But the core of the conflict has always been and unfortunately remains the refusal of the Palestinians to recognize a Jewish state in any border.

I think it's time that the Palestinian leadership recognizes what every serious international leader has recognized, from Lord Balfour and Lloyd George in 1917, to President Truman in 1948, to President Obama just two days ago right here: Israel is the Jewish state. (Applause.)

President Abbas, stop walking around this issue. Recognize the Jewish state, and make peace with us. In such a genuine peace, Israel is prepared to make painful compromises. We believe that the Palestinians should be neither the citizens of Israel nor its subjects. They should live in a free state of their own. But they should be ready, like us, for compromise. And we will know that they're ready for compromise and for peace when they start taking Israel's security requirements seriously and when they stop denying our historical connection to our ancient homeland.

I often hear them accuse Israel of Judaizing Jerusalem. That's like accusing America of Americanizing Washington, or the British of Anglicizing London. You know why we're called "Jews"? Because we come from Judea.

In my office in Jerusalem, there's a -- there's an ancient seal. It's a signet ring of a Jewish official from the time of the Bible. The seal was found right next to the Western Wall, and it dates back 2,700 years, to the time of King Hezekiah. Now, there's a name of the Jewish official inscribed on the ring in Hebrew. His name was Netanyahu. That's my last name. My first name, Benjamin, dates back a thousand years earlier to Benjamin -- Binyamin -- the son of Jacob, who was also known as Israel. Jacob and his 12 sons roamed these same hills of Judea and Sumeria 4,000 years ago, and there's been a continuous Jewish presence in the land ever since.

And for those Jews who were exiled from our land, they never stopped dreaming of coming back: Jews in Spain, on the eve of their expulsion; Jews in the Ukraine, fleeing the pogroms; Jews fighting the Warsaw Ghetto, as the Nazis were circling around it. They never stopped praying, they never stopped yearning. They whispered: Next year in Jerusalem. Next year in the promised land.

As the prime minister of Israel, I speak for a hundred generations of Jews who were dispersed throughout the lands, who suffered every evil under the Sun, but who never gave up hope of restoring their national life in the one and only Jewish state.

Ladies and gentlemen, I continue to hope that President Abbas will be my partner in peace. I've worked hard to advance that peace. The day I came into office, I called for direct negotiations without preconditions. President Abbas didn't respond. I outlined a vision of peace of two states for two peoples. He still didn't respond. I removed hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints, to ease freedom of movement in the Palestinian areas; this facilitated a fantastic growth in the Palestinian economy. But again -- no response. I took the unprecedented step of freezing new buildings in the settlements for 10 months. No prime minister did that before, ever. (Scattered applause.) Once again -- you applaud, but there was no response. No response.

In the last few weeks, American officials have put forward ideas to restart peace talks. There were things in those ideas about borders that I didn't like. There were things there about the Jewish state that I'm sure the Palestinians didn't like.

But with all my reservations, I was willing to move forward on these American ideas.
President Abbas, why don't you join me? We have to stop negotiating about the negotiations. Let's just get on with it. Let's negotiate peace.

I spent years defending Israel on the battlefield. I spent decades defending Israel in the court of public opinion. President Abbas, you've dedicated your life to advancing the Palestinian cause. Must this conflict continue for generations, or will we enable our children and our grandchildren to speak in years ahead of how we found a way to end it? That's what we should aim for, and that's what I believe we can achieve.

In two and a half years, we met in Jerusalem only once, even though my door has always been open to you. If you wish, I'll come to Ramallah. Actually, I have a better suggestion. We've both just flown thousands of miles to New York. Now we're in the same city. We're in the same building. So let's meet here today in the United Nations. Who's there to stop us? What is there to stop us? If we genuinely want peace, what is there to stop us from meeting today and beginning peace negotiations?

And I suggest we talk openly and honestly. Let's listen to one another. Let's do as we say in the Middle East: Let's talk "doogri". That means straightforward. I'll tell you my needs and concerns. You'll tell me yours. And with God's help, we'll find the common ground of peace.

There's an old Arab saying that you cannot applaud with one hand. Well, the same is true of peace. I cannot make peace alone. I cannot make peace without you. President Abbas, I extend my hand -- the hand of Israel -- in peace. I hope that you will grasp that hand. We are both the sons of Abraham. My people call him Avraham. Your people call him Ibrahim. We share the same patriarch. We dwell in the same land. Our destinies are intertwined. Let us realize the vision of Isaiah -- (speaks in Hebrew) -- "The people who walk in darkness will see a great light." Let that light be the light of peace.

A Leader who cares for his Country.

2011-11-03T13:24:00.002-04:00

I got forwarded an email, which contained the talk delivered by Benjamin Netanyahu at the UN HQ (New York). Usually, I am not a great fan of forwards, but this one caught my attention.

The pertinent point being many lessons from his talk to our own country - India. It is amazing how only one country in the whole world talks about all the gritty details pertaining to militant islam and its effect on the countries that host it and that are attacked by it. Very insightful indeed. For the reading pleasure of others, I have bridged and paraphrased a key points that are relevant to us, and briefly described why (The whole speech as emailed to me is here). Many parts of the speech read perfectly well if we substitute Israel with Kashmir, and one only wishes our leaders would deliver one such speech in international fora. Also, equally apt is substituting UN with Left-liberal intelligenstia in India.

"Twenty-one out of the 27 General Assembly resolutions condemn Israel -- the one true democracy in the Middle East. Well, this is an unfortunate part of the UN institution. It's the -- the theater of the absurd. It doesn't only cast Israel as the villain; it often casts real villains in leading roles: Gadhafi's Libya chaired the UN Commission on Human Rights; Saddam's Iraq headed the UN Committee on Disarmament."

It is not very difficult to see how the same scenario applies to our army and the libtards. We will ask Dileep Padgoankar to be on a peace committee, we will talk about secession in the in the name of "Freedom of Speech", we will abuse our army and lower their morale at every instance just because they dare to keep the terrorists at bay. We need not forget how these libtards' hearts bleed only for the terrorists. Damn the dying jawan - he works for the country and its integrity and he deserves to die.

"Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon now presides over the UN Security Council. This means, in effect, that a terror organization presides over the body entrusted with guaranteeing the world's security."

In quite a disturbing parallel, we let patently anti-national factions such as Hurriyat talk sky high about Kashmiriyat. We don't question their tactics of using teen-age boys as cannon fodder. We do not ask hard questions about their loyalties (MFN Pakistan of course). We do not even dare to ask them to leave to PoK if they are so unhappy here. Yet, we put them on a pedestal and ask them to take care of our country. All this is presided by the Congress at the centre of course, with not so subtle support from our mass media.

"So here in the UN, automatic majorities can decide anything. [...] But they can also decide -- they have decided that the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Judaism's holiest place, is occupied Palestinian territory."

The libtards and the separatists have already decided that Kashmir, a part of our country and culture for longer than can be ascertained, is now not a part of our country at all. They now say "we need a plebiscite / referendum". This is shameful. Why can't the country claim what is rightfully its own?

For those advocating giving 'freedom' to Kashmir - Netanyahu has words of experience:

"But Israel did more than just make sweeping offers. We actually left territory. We withdrew from Lebanon in 2000 and from every square inch of Gaza in 2005. That didn't calm the Islamic storm, the militant Islamic storm that threatens us. It only brought the storm closer and make it stronger.

Hezbollah and Hamas fired thousands of rockets against our cities from the very territories we vacated. See, when Israel left Lebanon and Gaza, the moderates didn't defeat the radicals, the moderates were devoured by the radicals.

And I regret to say that international troops like UNIFIL in Lebanon and UBAM (ph) in Gaza didn't stop the radicals from attacking Israel."

Three lessons in that message for India:

1) Peace with terrorists will only bring them to you own home. If anyone has any doubts - please ask why Mohammad of Ghazni invaded Somnath so many times. He was defeated and allowed to go away peacefully more than once. He didn't stop until he bit the hand that freed him. Such is the history behind militant islam - such is the blood thirstiness. Peace doesn't wash - sorry.

2) Once the Army vacates Kashmir cities as per the wishes of our media and Kashmir politicians (Omar), the terrorists will use these cities to launch anti-India attacks and operations. Removing the armed forces doesn't wash either - sorry.

3) Finally - Kashmir is our problem and UN (or US or any other third party) will not lift a finger against Islamic militants killing innocents in Kashmir. They will talk sky high about morals and human rights but will not condemn the attacks. We have to deal with it - forcefully and decisively.

"We left Gaza hoping for peace. [...] We did exactly what the theory says: Get out, go back to the 1967 borders, dismantle the settlements. [...] Now the theory says it should all work out, and President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority now could build a peaceful state in Gaza. [...] But ladies and gentlemen, we didn't get peace. We got war. We got Iran, which through its proxy Hamas promptly kicked out the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority collapsed in a day -- in one day."

The important points are in bold. They did what we are being asked to do in Kashmir - to leave Kashmir, hoping for peace. History says we won't get peace; we will get war. We won't get an independent Kashmir - instead we will get a belligerent Pakistan - right at our borders. Only this time, our borders and our country would have shrunk quite a bit. And make no mistake - this will all happen in less than a year (optimistically), if not a day.

"Israelis remember the bitter lessons of Gaza. Many of Israel's critics ignore them. They irresponsibly advise Israel to go down this same perilous path again. [...] And these critics continue to press Israel to make far-reaching concessions without first assuring Israel's security. [...] They cast as enemies of peace those of us who insist that we must first erect a sturdy barrier to keep the crocodile out, or at the very least jam an iron bar between its gaping jaws."

I wish - no, I pray one of our leaders talk about Kashmiri militancy in this tone. Swap Gaza to Kashmir, and Israel to Indian Army / ASFPA - you get what the media is doing to us right now. This is not some right wing rant. It is, in their own words "they're not theoretical problems. They're very real. And for Israelis, they're life-and- death matters." Aren't our sovereignty and territorial integrity life and death problems for people who inhabit those areas? By that I mean the Kashmiri pundits who are rightfully the ancestral people in Kashmir.

And he has this to say about the rights of minorities in Israel and it sounds quite familiar: "The Jewish state of Israel will always protect the rights of all its minorities, including the more than 1 million Arab citizens of Israel. I wish I could say the same thing about a future Palestinian state ... [..] Palestinian state won't allow any Jews in it. They'll be Jew-free -- Judenrein. That's ethnic cleansing. There are laws today in Ramallah that make the selling of land to Jews punishable by death. That's racism. And you know which laws this evokes."

This is the last nail on the coffin:
"... peace would prevail. This is my fervent hope. But as the prime minister of Israel, I cannot risk the future of the Jewish state on wishful thinking. Leaders must see reality as it is, not as it ought to be. We must do our best to shape the future, but we cannot wish away the dangers of the present."

How many times have we heard our PM or President or the ruling family talk about present dangers to our country? They think a pluralistic culture is the biggest threat today to the secular fabric - while militant islam is the cure.

The reason for this post is not as much about supporting Israel's right for existence (which I do), as it is about how a leader should think and speak. I am still hoping that we will get one leader who will have the guts to talk what our most fuckentastic neighbor (MFN) is doing to us in Kashmir, without pussyfooting around it. When it is a matter of territorial integrity, political correctness should be rightly shoved out of the window.

k

A bad opinion and a Jaundiced vision

2011-10-15T06:04:00.001-04:00

A bad idea all dressed up and trussed up in beautiful elegant language is still a bad idea. Only thing worse is an opinion that justifies a bad idea, based on skewed comparisons. It only gets worse when the comparisons are made through the jaundiced vision of the author. Mayawati spends 2700 Crores of rupees for two parks, and the author has the temerity to say - "congress does it", and oh, by the way, "Modi does it one way".

This is about an opinion in First Post (Shiv Visvanathan's Wisdom) that gives a 'new' perspective to a megalomaniac's attitude towards public money.

First things first: does the author have any idea how many 'Dalit' only schools (if you wish that) can be built with 2700 Crores? I can give you an idea - a school (a very good one at that) costs 5 Crores to build, and take less than 50L to run every year. If we assume running the school for 10 years, we are talking about building and running 270 very good schools for even just Dalit Schools (since this is the season for crying for Dalits). These are not the run down, pathetic excuse for a school shanties that the Indian governments usually run for the poor - this will be top of the line school with all kinds of amenities. This simple line of thought clearly shows that 2700 Crores on two parks is a waste of public money. We won't even talk about the number of BPL families (many of whom are indeed Dalits) that can be supported with 2700 Crores at 6000 Rupees per month (the UPA's own poverty line).

The second thing that I want to oppose in this article is the lack of supporting evidence for an accusation. "Narendra Modi does it one way" - can the author provide numbers for this? If the author states the 1.5 Crore spent on Sadhbavana Fast, then kindly note that 1.5 Crores is close to 0.05% of the cost of the two parks. If there are other projects, kindly give numbers. Of course, you will find a lot of takers if you give the true numbers: people already hate NaMo, thanks to journos like you.

The third thing I oppose is the prioritization of the author: "Na Mo does it one way", and the wasteful spending of Congress to shamelessly promote the first family goes on to become a footnote. It is clear that the Congress doesn't miss a chance to glorify the dynasty: every new thing gets named after a) Nehru, b) Indira Gandi, and c) Rajeev - soon we will have things and places named after Sonia / Raul / Priyanka.

Why is the media so biased? Every one is entitled their opinion - but that doesn't mean one has to pawn their intellectual integrity and exhibit this Ostrich tendency.

SK.

PS: the lesser said about people who endorse this article, the better.

Where do these guys come from???

2011-10-13T10:52:00.000-04:00

About a couple of years ago, when the BJP government started in Karnataka, we witnessed an despicable act of hooliganism. These guys, calling themselves 'Shri Ram Sene' went on to bash women in pubs because they wanted to protect the purity of our culture - what ever that crap might mean. More on this can be seen here.

Yesterday, another bunch of hooligans, calling themselves "Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena" went hammer and tongs, literally, against the supreme court lawyer Prashant Bhushan (of the Bhushan Duo in Anna's Team). The reason this time was his comment on plebiscite in Kashmir.

As much as I oppose Bhushan for suggesting a referendum on Kashmir - I strongly and unambiguously oppose the act of beating up a person because they won't agree to your point of view. Again I have to quote Voltaire: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

Having made my position clear on the incident, there are a few questions. Of course, this is India and this is politics, and there will be questions.

First and foremost is the timing of the attack. It was inside the supreme court and why were everyone twiddling their thumbs? The media, which went haywire after the incident, took its own sweet time to carefully capture the whole incident. It is unbelievable that three people can enter a room and 'teach a lesson' to someone without others being able to stop it.

Also, there is confusion about the organization involved. Some news channels (NDTV, CNN-IBN) claim that it is the Shri Ram Sena (SRS of Mangalore fame). Others like First Post and Times of India claim it is a new one called Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena (BSKS). Now, ToI says it is a mix of SRS and BSKS (note that CNN-IBN still maintains it is SRS). Minutes after the deplorable attack on Bhushan, BSKS claims responsibility for the attack on its Facebook page. However, in his interview Bhushan has asked for a ban on SRS. Why?

Other questions flow from this: are the SRS and BSKS colluding with each other? When did the SRS shed its Karnataka centric attitude and become national? Also, since SRS already has a police FIR against it, how come their spread to other states went unnoticed by the IB? If their movement was indeed being followed, why was there no heads up about their collusion with BSKS? Which also raises the question, why was not BSKS being monitored.

Given our government's penchant with right wing (read Hindu) communalism, these questions seem quite pertinent to ask, and be answered. However, these questions are not even on the air.

This gives rise to two scenarios: one is that the government is not serious about any kind of anti-social activity, and only spends its sweet time in bashing Modi and the RSS (one wikileaks cable says SRS is not linked to RSS or the BJP).

Second is more sinister: is the Congress behind these organisations? Political espionage is not a new thing, and the Congress is not a new party. Is it willingly misleading young men into committing atrocities against their own people, there by reaping electoral fruits? It would make dual sense to do so: 1. you deliberately create right wing extremism, so that you can consolidate islamic vote banks.
2. by creating and unleashing such elements, it becomes easy to tarnish the RSS, and by association, the BJP.

Going by the way the government has governed and handled terror, I would say both of these are quite possible scenarios - at the same time.

k

Damned if you do, damned if you don't - Part II

2011-09-20T06:02:00.000-04:00

Being Narendra Modi sure is a difficult business.

If he is strong, he is arrogant. If he is straight spoken, he is undiplomatic. If he takes action, he is a martinet. If he doesn't, then he is either a communalist (RSS) or a charlatan depending on who the offender is. If he gives economic improvement, he is trying to cover up blood on his hands. If there are villages without roads in Gujarat (only Gujarat), then he is cheating.

And the voice of the Gujarat NGO Cottage Industry (GNCI - thanks SandeepWeb) is heard over all other noises in India political arena. When the supreme court refused to intervene in the Gujarat riots case, they were contrite - in fact one went as far to say that the court should have delivered the justice on the basis of morals (Sagharika Ghose of course) and not the law. When NaMo tweeted "God is great", they were all righteous and pilloried him for diverting public opinion from his shortcomings.

One final feather in their caps is this: During his fast, one muslim cleric offered him a skull cap, and NaMo refused to wear it. This is the perfect catch 22 situation that GNCI has been waiting for. They all cried hoarse about how he hurt the sentiments of minority community. They said, he has not learned to be inclusive, yet. Of course, the usual complaint of being right wing not weeping for Godhra riot victims was also flying sky high in the air.

Of course, let us consider the alternative - if he had worn the cap, the GNCI will have gone haywire with news like this: "NaMo indulges in cheap publicity by wearing a skull cap". Or this: "If he is such a non-partisan leader, why does he have to prove his credentials by wearing a skull cap"? Of course, they would have equated him with all the other scum feeding politicians with a comment like this:"What right does NaMo have to speak about vote bank politics, when he himself indulges in it"?

Also speculations will be flying in the air about a rift between a) NaMo and RSS, b) NaMo and BJP, c) between Gujarat government and NaMo, d) NaMo and his ideology, e) NaMo and Joseph Stalin / Pervez Musharraf / my dead grandpa and f) NaMo and the bird that feeds on seeds etc.

As I said, if you are NaMo: damned if you do, and damned if you are not. If the antics of the secular brigade and the GNCI weren't so blatantly anti-majority, it would at least be quite amusing.

k

A tale of two Rahuls

2011-09-19T11:02:00.001-04:00

It is interesting how two people with the same first name (in India, it matters a lot), have led completely different lives: one in Cricket and one in Politics.

One was 'The Wall' - respected by both his team mates and his adversaries, always living in the shadow of another great contemporary, yet - doing his best. Another 'Amul Baby' was born with a golden spoon (up you know where), cherishing the limelight, and yet - doing his worst.

A look at their careers is a study in contrast. One was born in a normal India family - not deprived, but not privileged either, while the other inherited the 'right' to rule the country. While the former had to slog his youth and beyond to establish himself as a hero of test cricket, the latter slouched away his life in the limelight of his dynasty and still remains the 'future PM' of this country.

The former went to college and completed a degree in commerce, all the while honing his skills to climb up the ladder of international cricket. The latter of course says he holds a degree from a prestigious university, but without adequate proof. He has also worked tirelessly in the shadow of his mother, and the tutelage of his teachers such as Digvijay Singh, to learn the ropes of Indian politics.

The Wall is well known in the world of cricket having set a host of records and scaled the heights, and having earned every one of the accolades (and sometimes brickbats) showered on him in the past 15 yrs. Amul baby on the other hand has been politicizing every issue including internal security, has been the cynosure of media's eyes, and proudly touted as 'The Person' to lead India into the next electoral term (Shudder!!).

It is sad but true that all good things must come to an end: we witnessed the retirement of Rahul 'Wall' Dravid from ODIs last week. One wishes bad and useless things come to such decisive ends too. Am eagerly awaiting the day when the crown prince will abdicate the throne so gracefully.

Hey, no one said I can't dream .. OK.

cheers,
k

Why are we not the US or even the UK?

2011-09-13T00:29:00.001-04:00

"All the worlds a stage" ...

In India, we have one sickening play that successfully gives encores. Worse, we have millions of eyes stuck to the television to make the play devilishly successful. Yeah, I am talking about the Delhi blasts last week. It took me some time to shrug my reluctance off, to write yet another blog condemning a bomb blast in India. I am afraid I am becoming callous; worse, I am becoming an intellectual (pray.. god - spare me the fate).

This is not about the attack itself. Despite the fact that terrorists chose the same site to attack twice, in less than 6 months, talks little about their planning; and a lot more about the state of security in our country. (note for beginners: it is a cardinal rule in terrorism to not attack the same place in the same mode twice).

This is not even about the effete and spineless response of our government (do we have one?) to repeated violations of human life, rights and the sanctity of our constitution. The same government that has the audacity to crush popular demonstrations in the middle of the night, is absolutely impotent when it comes to real threats to national security.

This is about a certain debate that is flying around after the bomb blasts. There have been two lines of thought: both with respect to US and UK and the lack of terrorism on their soil. The first group argues that after 9/11 there are no terrorist attacks on US soil. Nor have been terrorist attacks on UK soil after the dreaded tube incident. Following the same logic, they ask, "why are we getting hit again and again, and how have the stopped being the victim"? So far, a considerable number of people have raised the same opinion through Editorials, Op-Ed pages, Blogs, and comments / posts on news items. It is reasonable to assume that this opinion reflects the thought in an average, middle class, literate urban Indian.

There is another counter point floating around (no prizes for guessing), from the 'literatti' of Indian media: the cream of opinion makers and ivory tower social scientists. As usual, they are all contempt for the mass opinion - "they are the masses and they deserve the contempt". They have multiple lines of counter arguments:

1. US lost a lot of lives in Afghanistan / Iraq, and is still losing them. The number of US lives lost in War on Terror is much larger than the casualties in India due to terror attacks.

2. US is not surrounded by the epicenter of terrorism. In one intelligent(?) person's view "what if Mexico, and not Pakistan, is the epicenter of Terror"? So, the loss of our lives should not be compared to the relative safety of US.

This is what these guys (second group) fail to tell us:

1. US' war on terror is, as the name suggests, a war. And people die in wars. The whole world knows that the prolonged (no exit strategy) WOT is a mistake, and the casualties are US' payment for its mistakes. On the other hand, their main land is still free of terror, and terrorists' plans are routinely foiled, in order to make their homeland safe. If one treats acts of terrorism & the WOT as two distinct group of events, it is not difficult to see that terrorism has not claimed American lives after 9/11. Let us not mix things up.

2. The most ridiculous argument I heard was about how there are Mexican immigrants in the US, despite their (US') best efforts and how if Mexico was the epicenter of terror, this would cause headaches to the US. Well, Mr. Writer, maybe we should give you a different example: Let us take Israel. They are surrounded by hostile states, and what did they do? They fenced the terrorists out.

Let us even assume for a moment that Mexico becomes the epicenter of terror. Would the US be twiddling its thumbs? For sure, they won't be talking peace with the Mexicans - or fawning over beautiful Latina women who become Foreign Ministers (a lá Rabbani Khar). For all the human rights hullaballoo that we can create, they would ruthlessly crush such a monster even before it arises. Like it or not, the US military is probably the mightiest weapon of destruction the world has seen, and they don't hesitate to use it.

So, these discussions leave us with a few questions. Why is our government lax about security? Why do we have such porous borders in a) Kashmir, b) West Bengal, c) North-East? Why is our government lax about the illegal immigrant problem? Is it due to humanitarian concerns? Hardly. Our government is least bothered about its own citizens spilling blood. More importantly, why do we extend our friendship / good will to countries that are decidedly inimical to our interests and survival?
Make no mistake, for all its posturing, Pakistan (the epicenter of terror) cannot maintain an army at red alert along its borders, for as long as we can. We can do that, and simply that, and break their back. Yes, it will cost us a few lives, but that is the payment that peace demands - in blood.

What then, might be the driving force behind our inertia?In a few words, it seems to be vote bank politics. Our current government is afraid of tackling jihadi terror because it is afraid of offending the muslim community in India. Such a line of thought is an insult to the Muslims in India, as well as to the idea of our country itself. In the name of secularism, this government follows vote bank politics and minority (read rabid extreme right wings) appeasement as a policy.

As I mentioned in the beginning, we are having hugely successful encores of a sickening plot, all over the country. The government has to wake up to reality, stop making half-assed noises about peace and integrity, and really start caring about those things. Hard times ask for hard measures, and the it is time for the government to get to work, and get its hands dirty.

k

Every Cloud has a Silver Lining - the good of Anna's fast.

2011-08-23T11:56:00.000-04:00

When you stand in a wave, love it or hate it, it will move you. Anna Hazare has been one such wave in India now. He managed to get the Indian middle class (the whole shebang from the twitterati to the lower middle classes that just get by in life) to actively participate in the anti-graft campaign. I may not completely agree with their version of the bill, but some good definitely has come out of this movement.
To lay the premise: much of India's cherished arm-chair critics and secularists have opened their valuable mouths in the past few days. Imam Buhari said "muslims are being marginalized in the fight against corruption", and then Aruna Roy - the eminent NAC member said "other (read my) versions of LokPal Bill has to be given weightage". Then some Dalit protector said "it is not an pan-India movement, it is just the middle class and the upper castes that run the movement". It is in the light of these recent articles that one should read the responses in the message board.

1. One muslim had written (thanks a ton) - "I reject Imam Buhari's comments. I support Anna Hazare's movement to remove corruption". The message in its entirety was quite a whiplash to the self-righteous Imam, and it would warm any sane person's heart.

2. One Dalit had written (thanks a ton too) - "This is not a time to divide the society along caste / religious lines. Corruption affects everyone and we should be united to fight this".

The mention of their religion / caste above was necessary to make a point - not to differentiate them from the others. In fact, they themselves made it proudly clear.

These messages are but a sample of similar toned messages from a broad spectrum of Indians. The last time I saw such messages was during the Kargil War. It is good that Anna has put the country on a war footing against corruption. After all, every cloud does have its silver lining.

k

The abomination that is death sentence.

2011-08-18T01:08:00.001-04:00

Is the government god? Can it decide when a person must die? Does it behoove a civilized government to give brutal punishments such as death penalty and still call itself civilized?

Very heavy questions indeed - despite the fact that really civilized governments following set laws, award the capital punishment only in the 'rarest of the rare' cases. There was an editorial in The Hindu today (link above) about abolishing the death penalty. They instead suggest a lifelong (until death does them apart) incarceration. I think the intentions are honorable, and in some cases, can actually be used.

However, there are glaring exceptions. Especially keeping the likes of Afzal Guru or Ajmal Kasab provides the terrorists to arm twist the government and ask for their release (remember Rubaiya Sayeed, 1989 or AI814 - Kandahar, 1999). Once released, they will perpetrate the same crime on many innocent people again.

Despicable as death penalty may be, it becomes necessary for the government to execute mass murderers with an ideological agenda in order to ensure the innocent public lives go on smoothly. It is in the mandate of a government, any government, to nurture its people, protect their interests and annihilate any forces that threatens the peace of the nation. Sometimes in course of this duty, the government will get its hands and soul dirty, for example by enacting death sentences. This, the government must do, so that its citizens may live in peace. This burden is for a government to bear.

k

What we miss as a country ....

2011-08-16T13:04:00.000-04:00

It is the time of the year again. The time when we owe our pledge to protect the sovereignty and integrity of our great country. The country that has a history of many millennia and yet has been existing for only 64 years. And it coincides with the legendary (whether one likes it or not) second agitation by Anna Hazare. Here is a man who left no one untouched - everyone has a passionate opinion about him. We hail him as the savior from the evil of political class.

But, this is what worries me about us as a nation about the whole thing: are we ready for democracy? After all these years of voting, we still gravitate towards individuals instead of institutions. We did that in the first war of independence (the sepoy mutiny) in 1853 by idolizing the Shah of Delhi / Rani of Jhansi. We did that with Bal Gangadhar Tilak and with Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi during the turn of 20th Century and in the 1930s respectively. We did that with Nehru after independence, Indira Gandy after Nehru, and Rajiv followed by Sonia in the 1990s (the person who came to rescue the congress without any politicaly ambition), and Sonia in the 2004 elections (the person who sacrificed the premiership). In 2004, we adulated MMS for being the gift from god (the embodiment of honesty and integrity) and now we are rallying behind Anna Hazare.

In every case, if we had gravitated around institutions or ideologies instead of individuals, would we have fared better? I concede the need for leaders, and still will argue this point.

Humans are mortal, even when they stand for a cause larger than themselves. However, institutions have a bit longer life than an average human. Take the case of reservations for instance: Dr. Ambedkar instituted the idea of reservations, and is long dead and decayed. However, the idea of reservation still lives on - in other words, institutionalizing reservation has made the idea much longer lived than its creator himself.

While I am happy that Anna is trying 'create an institute' of LokPal, are the people on the street fighting for that? From many of the posts, I see that people are on the streets not because they believe in an institution called Jan Lokpal, but because they believe in a man called Anna Hazare. This is short sighted, and if one removes Anna Hazare from the equation (or god forbid now, from the earth), I suspect this movement would just grind to a halt.

Throughout history, this has been our weakness - lack of succession planning. We are too noble to demand succession planning. We place our bets on hope, and hope that all will be good. This is not an effective way to run a government. Does the group of intelligentsia around Anna acknowledge this problem? Do they have a clear hierarchy within their coterie? In short, has the succession been planned?

Let us face it - Anna will not live for ever. On the other hand, corruption (which is an institution by itself) will outlive Anna. Have we got what it takes to create an institution that outlives, and out-perseveres corruption?

k

The heir for the Throne is being prepped

2011-08-10T12:01:00.000-04:00

... and so are the people of India ...

A couple of days ago, CNN-IBN released a poll survey taken across 40000 people in India reported that Rahul Gandhi was the most preferred candidate for PM in India, being far ahead of all contenders including Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi. The article claimed that his candidature was supported by 34% of the people polled. Of course, it didn't talk about the 35% who said either he is not ready (25%) or is not qualified to become the PM of India ever (10%).

However, this poll is a sampling survey and I did my own survey across the various fora, and counted the number of people supporting him nationwide. I really wanted to know if the poll was true. Given that he is projected as the 'youth icon (at 42?!!)" and has captured the imagination of young vibrant India (urban) - it was reasonable for me to expect at least some support for the heir apparent in the internet fora.

So far, I spent some of my precious evening time (yes, I am jobless in the evenings) to scour over 4 different news websites where this news has been published. In each website, I counted up to 200 comments (some had less and the comments section was closed), making a total of at least 500 comments. It is not much, but it is as much a mixed response as one would get from our country. Also, the support for his candidature was 35% - which is more than a third of the respondents.

My contention was, if it was true, then I should see at least a 20% support for his candidature in the internet too. In reality, I was able to totally count about 20 comments that supported the article. that is 20 of at least 500 (4%). If I assume the total number of comments were close to 700 and not 500 (it was) then the support for the icon falls to close to 3% - which is an order of magnitude less than what was reported.

My own polls revealed this: we can for now rest assured that heir apparent youth icon is not anywhere near becoming the PM of our country by just our votes.

Of course, the immense power of media in our country (a pestilence upon them) might change the game based on the Goebbelian theory of truth and falsehood.

k

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

2011-08-07T02:55:00.000-04:00

The title says almost all ... the addendum is "if you are BJP in India".

There was this famed Karnataka CM Yeddyurappa controversy, where Lokayukta (Ombudsman) Santhosh Hegde has named him (the CM) in his voluminous report as being a beneficiary of a multimillion dollar mining scam. Then the media was on fire - they asked the BJP "what locus standi do you have to question the corrupt practices of the central government, when one of you is corrupt himself"? A valid question, if I may add - even though the charges against Yeddy were only on the report and a chargesheet has yet to be filed.

However, the BJP asked Yeddy to resign and the obstinate man did, after a bit of media furore of course and amidst considerable drama. Then there as this question of succession to the CMs chair. There were few aspirants, and the question was put to a secret ballot. Not much different from what we do to elect these worthies. After the ballot, one Mr. Gowda was selected to lead the state: and he happened to have a) the majority support of all the MLAs as well as b) the support of Mr. Yeddy.

Now, in any other case, this would seem a natural succession of events - not here. The news papers first cried shrill over how the party couldn't control Yeddy (true to quite an extent). Then it was how Yeddy was defying the party by asking how a person of his choice should become the successor. Finally now, it is about how exercising democratic means (secret ballot) to select a CM is a show of weakness of the party.

Let us just contrast this with the Congress for a moment: If one of them is charged for scams then their first response is denial - "we did no such thing". The second response is to question the authority that produced the report - "CAG is wrong - no basis for such numbers"; "Judicial over reach"; "politically motivated" etc. After a long drawn battle of one or two wasted parliamentary sessions (remember 2G) the tainted person resigns, and the party high command (read Sonia) chooses a person to fill the post.

Do the worthies who cry foul whatever the BJP does, agree with a monopoly replacing a democracy? The same worthies who don't mind autocracy in the congress high command (the level of cronyism and 'chamchagiri' is sickening), rue the fact that Narendra Modi rules Gujarat with a iron fist. Oh! yes, he belongs to BJP right - development and efficiency of governance be damned, along with the BJP itself.

k

Needed - class in discourse

2011-08-05T11:54:00.000-04:00

" I have a respect for manners as such, they are a way of dealing with people you don't agree with or like." - Margaret Mead.

The media went over the top, as usual, with Mrs. Gandhi's treatment in the USA. It is not anyone's business and it is everyone's business at the same time. Whether one likes her or hates her (and for those inimitable group in between), one has to accept that she is a leading political figure in our country.

However, the blog is not about Mrs. Gandhi or her illness (which we hope she recovers soon). It is about the lack of class in the public discourse that follows her ailment. I am not asking people to 'pray' that she gets well soon and rules over my motherland soon. Quite the contrary. On the other hand, I believe in acting with some class above all else.

The discourse in public fora reeks of a lack of class - it is like listening to the chatter inside a disreputable public house in a disreputable part of a disreputable town. It may be an expression of anger, but aren't we, the people, morally and ethically better than those who rule us? Shouldn't we set an example as to how to treat some one, lest the ruling class mocks at us?

The world might hate him, but Shri Narendra Modi did the right thing by wishing Mrs. Gandhi a speedy recovery. Of all the politicians in India, he was the first outsider (to congress) to issue a statement - and this is despite her calling him the "merchant of death" in the previous election.

As they say in cricket - "form is temporary, but class is permanent". It is true not only in politics, but also in public discourse.

k

The genie that is the Lokpal Committee

2011-06-20T02:00:00.000-04:00

Every day there are reports on the tussle between the government and the Fellowship of the Lokpal.

Today, one such Op-Ed in The Hindu (link above) raised some important questions. I was / am a staunch supporter of the Anna Hazare movement, simply because it was one of the few times that the people of India forced the government to blink in a face-off. It served the government to wake up, and know that the people of India were not sleeping while they loot the country.

However, there are concerns about the way the Fellowship is going about the bill. Here are mine:

The Fellowship has to be elected from nominations. Who makes the nominations, the people of India?

If so, will it be everyone saying "I want to be on the LokPal" or will it be like "These people are contesting to be a part of The 11, and people may vote on them". If it is the latter, how is it any different from Elections? Is it feasible to hold one election for the legislature / cabinet, and another for The 11. Even assuming this is feasible, won't this fall into the same trap as our elections? The same trap where money and connections prove useful.

Going back to the original question: if it is not the people of India who nominates The 11 through an election, how else will they be selected? How can we be sure such selection is not prone to favoritism (a lã kith and kin of current members), elitist policy lobbying (say, human rights activists who cry for terrorists) and simply limelight hogging (like Arundati Roy)?

A follow-up on FES.

2010-10-11T07:14:00.001-04:00

Seems like someone just beat me to the idea of a website :)

I suggest everyone take a look at this one: http://ipaidabribe.com
Also, look at this: http://india.5thpillar.org/ZRN

Very informative sites. Excellent work - kudos are due to the site designers / volunteers. Still, I am disappointed that I am not the first one.

I guess it is too much for me to think I am the only one having alternative ideas. :)

cheers,
k

## Here is the first one: FES ###

We often joked about this, whenever we had to visit a government office in India. We always knew one had to 'pay' his due - in both fees and in kickbacks, to get a job done back home.

The real government-approved 'fee' is quite small, few hundreds of rupees at most, and affordable. Some times it is even as low as 40 - 50 rupees. However, the kickbacks, and other payments to middlemen often are 100 fold as much. If you want a license, pay 2500 - 5000 rupees (depending on how easily you want it, and how comfortable you want the experience to be) to a middleman, out of which only 50 rupees will go to the government. In my living memory, there used to be a time when one can get a license without even attending the test, if you paid enough.

What is the best way to tackle this corruption? We used to muse whether legalizing it as "fee for expedited services" (FES) would reduce it? "At the least", we thought, "they should have a 'menu' card for bribes at government offices, printed in their usual dirty ton-a-penny paper they use for all our important forms". This way, an unwary citizen entering the dungeons will know what the dragons will expect.

Now, in an interesting turn of events, the supreme court of India has suggested the same. In fact, the coincidence is so close, that we wonder if the hon'ble judges have been eavesdropping on our (and countless other millions') conversations in government offices.

More ridiculous is the following conversation between the judges and the "senior counsel" K K Venugopal.

"The Bench then sought the views of senior counsel K K Venugopal on its suggestion to legalise corruption in the country.

However, the senior counsel said that it would be better if good moral values are imparted in every school of the country as part of their curriculum so that at least the future generation is free from the menace of corruption."

One can imagine how this conversation would have proceeded. However the point to note is the right counsel's response. -- as a wrong thinking citizen, I would say:

Screw teaching moral values in school - children are moral when in school. It is only the moment they step into one of the government offices do they become corrupt and cynical. If anyone has to get 'moral' education, it is these government officers.

It is clear that 60 years of having M.K. Gandhi behind their desks has not led them to learn morals. If anything, the morals have depreciated from bad to worse. It is indignant that the supreme court sounds helpless and toothless against corrupt bureaucrats in our country. However, as people who dwell in reality, we know the supreme court is in fact helpless and toothless. Also, as pragmatic people, we know it is not possible to hang these corrupt government officers in bleeding yard arms and throw their bodies to the sharks.

So, going by the adage "if you are not a part of the solution, you are the problem", we have to suggest a solution. We believe that "to take out a thorn with a thorn" might be the best solution for this problem.

The first step in solving a problem is understanding it. Why is there corruption in government offices? Surely, not because of the office buildings - but because of its officers. Government officers are corrupt because they are greedy. Maybe the solution to the problem lies in the public being greedy too. Maybe the letting the market forces run loose might resolve this issue amicably for both the people and the government officers.

We propose to have a blackboard (or in sophisticated offices, something like in airport terminals) where the current rates and rates in the previous weeks are written for each file type. In order to justify sudden fluctuations in bribery rates, they (the government officers) can also give the inflation rate for the preceding week. This way, the hapless citizen knows what is expected of him / her (at least a ball park figure) and what timelines one can expect to face. Also, enterprising citizens may come back and leave 'customer reviews' about the value for money they received with each officer.

In fact, if an officer asks for too much money, the customer can take him to the board and show him the prevailing rates. This way, the need for swindling public money by the government officers will be effectively countered by the public's greed to keep their honest-to-god hard-earned blood-sweat money. Of course, premium services for customers who can pay more than the median FES should also be allowed. We do not want the poor government officers to toil under the shackles of their small earnings, do we?

Another interesting fall out of the system will be that, it allows enforcement agencies (read CVC / CBI / Police etc.) to immediately reach a 'minimum' ball-park figure for corruption in a given office. The vigilance teams do not have to go in and interrogate officers / public to know how much corrupt money is running around. This is simply a waste of time, and only frustrates well-meaning citizens visiting the office. Anyway, the government offices are slow, and inefficient - why trouble them with vigilance visits too?

Instead, the enforcement agencies just have to stake out the office for a week and check the numbers every 3 hrs or so. In fact, they can post a jobless graduate and ask him / her to record the numbers on the blackboard. That way, they can pay this person a pittance (and no bribes) and use their considerable man power to tackle the current government's political opponents. One stone - two Mangoes : you get time to pursue important cases (like political ones) and a jobless graduate earns his / her livelihood.

In a month or even a week, provided they know how many files have been cleared, the enforcement agency can confidently say "at least so much money has gone into this office - apart from the government fees".

Last but not least, this will also help the public have an idea of whom to hold responsible for what. Recording bribe amounts will actually provide the citizen some hold over the corrupt officers. For example, one cannot take 5000 rupees and then deny it. This way, the public can hold them responsible for the personal service fee (FES - as we call it) they took.

In fact, I can envision this system working nicely, only if people would come out in the open and say "I paid XXX to YYY officer (designation only - we don't want to name names) for ZZZ file".

Antibiotic resistance: are we being "tarred"?

2010-08-18T12:40:00.001-04:00

Ah!! after a long time, I found (i) some time to write, and (ii) some thing worthy of writing. It is more of a former than of the latter: changing two countries and three jobs within 1 year does put a damper on all the other 'extra' activities.

I have decided not to rant about politics this time. But of course, this blog starts with our government's bumbling last week regarding a widespread antibiotic resistance gene in Indian hospitals.

An international collaboration including doctors from Apollo New Delhi, characterized a gene in E. coli, from Indian city hospitals and reported it in a very respected medical journal - The Lancet. They found that bacteria with this gene can break down the carbapenems. According to conventions, they named it NDM-1 (New Delhi (place) Metallo-beta-lactamase (something that depends on metal ions and degrades carbapenems)).

Then the whole hullabaloo started. Forgetting the fact that it was (i) a nation wide phenomenon, (ii) first reported by a totally Indian group of doctors and (iii) Indian doctors were a part of the study reported in The Lancet (which itself tells a lot about the study), the government did what it does best: denied the report. It said "there is no scientific basis for the study". The best part is when they said "it is an attempt by the western world to tarnish our medical facilities".

This is foolish. Even by the standards of our governments, politicians and 'babu's, this is foolish. We are once again acting like the ostrich and burying our heads inside the sand. This will not resolve anything. Instead the government should advice the common citizens about the dangers of indiscriminate antibiotic use. It should make sure antibiotics are not available over the counter. It should regulate the spread of such drugs, and more importantly be "not corrupt" to protect our people from this emerging phenomenon.

As usual, our government will not do anything necessary or substantial. Yet, our people would vote it again because they are secular(!!) and they have the blessings of the royal family.

Mera Bharath Mahaan.

cheers, k

Fools and Conspiracies

2009-02-01T21:31:00.002-05:00

I will keep it short and sweet.

1. A bunch of fools in Mangalore decided they are going to uphold the Indian tradition (what the heck) by raiding pubs and bars where women were working (dancing for their livelihood). None of the raiders really managed to offer a constructive solution for the women to move into a more decent(??!!) job.

Boys - If you are not a part of the solution, you are the problem.

2. As if that was not ridiculous enough, the Mumbai ATS (God - here we go again) wants to now question the leader of this ridiculous outfit in relation to the Malegaon blasts. The reason, the army officer under police treatment (torture) conceded that "this person is very dedicated in whatever he does, and works towards goals single-mindedly". Well that was the quotation to the press from the ATS.

I wonder, from when on did dedication in the country become a punishable offence? May be our babudom is so plagued by inefficiency / lack of dedication that the word itself has become anathema to our government agencies.

Man o man - dedicated to destroy dedication, aren't they?!!

Well, given that the first family still rules the roost, such 'efficient' enquiries are indeed expected. Any one in the government remember Afzal Guru?

cheers,
k

Media, grow a pair. I won't lend you mine.

2008-11-22T21:19:00.009-05:00

We always read in our history books that the British deployed a divide and rule strategy. We remember how our freedom fighters struggled to unite this country. The Brits did not just divide and rule, they brought us down to our knees by bringing in unjustifiable parity. Thieves, knaves and scoundrels were treated on par with or better than freedom fighters, who were honest and righteous men / women. Fools and people with little or no vision like E. V. Ramaswamy were treated on par with statesmen and intellectual giants like Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and Shri Rajagopalachari. Countries / rouge states like Pakistan were treated on par with India.

Such unjustifiable parity between two parties in a conflict, more often than not, brings about illegitimization of respectable principles. Rarely, with much propaganda, it may also elevate the status of the unrighteous. Such ill advised treatment of problems, both social and political, have managed to send our nation into a death spiral of corruption, mediocrity and of late, terror. It is a shame that the ruling Congress has stuck on to the same principles to handle important issues facing the country. Of course I am talking about terrorism. They wanted to prove a parity between Hindus and terrorists and so started this story about how a sadhvi, a retired military officer and other citizens were involved in a bomb blast outside a Mosque.

I had hoped that this would be false, but wanted to wait for some evidence before writing on it. Lest, I be branded as a firebrand (I don't care) or a supporter of mindless terrorism (which I am not). About a month after all this hullaboo started, we now know the stories were mainly fabricated towards the kind of parity that I mentioned. There were stories about how the Officer had smuggled 60Kgs (Oops!!) of RDX from the Army cache. This is the kicker, people - our Army doesn't even use RDX - it is a signature of Pakistan army. Second, equally important, is the denial of the army against such a charge. Third, the so called involvement of "rest of RDX" in Samjhauta express, in which the ATS tried to tie up the ex-officer was fiction too. Forensic reports say that it was incendiaries like kerosene and petrol bombs which caused the "Samjhauta express" incident. (Man, I get tired of keeping track of all these bomb blasts). Since their fabricated story was falling apart at its seams, the ATS resorted to the manner of investigation best known and used by the Indian police - torture.

Also, there was this love affair between the ATS and the english media, where the ATS would release sensitive(??) details about an ongoing investigation to the media on a daily basis. I pray, aren't the details of a case under investigation entail some secrecy in the Indian Penal Code? I am sure, it does, because in several cases, the court has intervened to keep the media out of a case. It did happen in the Parliamentary attack case (Mohammad Afzal Guru - in case one had forgotten; and yes, he is still hale and healthy). However, in this case, the media, as is their prime duty, took pride in identifying the new terror force in the country - the majority. The same media which made a hue and cry over the term "Islamic Terror" or "Jihadi Terror" wasted no time in shouting "Hindu Terror" and "Saffron Terror". So much for their even-handedness in handling sensitive issues.

All their fabrications notwithstanding, the ATS were happy feeding fiction to the media, which lapped it up like a hungry dog having a go at a plate of milk. However, the real jolt from the blue came up in the form of an affidavit filed by Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur against the torture meted out to her under ATS custody. Please find a full text of the affidavit here. I received the affidavit through email a week ago, yet had to wait until she filed it in a court. My first thought on seeing that affidavit was, if a woman (Sadhvi) had to go through all that, what would have the ex-officer gone through in the hands of the ATS. The recent news reports in select news agencies show that he was also, indeed tortured and handled in inhuman conditions. The best part is, our National Human Rights Commission, which cries for minority rights at the drop of the hat, had asked the ATS for a report on the affidavit. I would like to remind the readers that the same NHRC went on overdrive everytime a real terrorist was captured. They would take the pains to visit the home town of the terrorist and assure them all the support that they won't get.

That apart, it is lucky that the court actually kept them (the three accused in malegoan blasts) under judicial custody. This act reinforces a common man's faith in the only pillar of our democracy that still hasn't crumbled. After all this, the Officer Incharge of Maharashtra ATS, Hemant Karkare, who had under political pressure performed so many acts of omission and commission and acted hand in glove with the media to p(t)aint the majority with acts of terror received a death threat. This was again promptly released to the media and termed the act of "hindu terror network".

Sadly, a recurring theme about terrorism is soft-pedalling the issue leads to more terror attacks. One keeps wondering how hard the ATS was on those who bombed the trains, the markets and innumerable different places. Were they as hard as they were on a Sadhvi against whom they don't even have a charge? Were they as hard as they were on a ex-military officer, against whom their charges beg for clarification? The plain answer is an emphatic, big NO. I had read somewhere that life keeps presenting a test, until one passes it. We are being presented the question of "terrorist attack" while the government tries side-stepping it, soft-pedalling it, and equating it with a bunch of people who had preached and practised peace (sadhvi), with people who had stood on the streets against extremists and seccessionists (the ex-officer) in Amarnath. Their acts of religion and nationality was held up against them by the same government that has a constitutional duty to protect them.

Worse, we were attacked again. Yesterday, in an audacious display of meticulous planning and blood-thirstiness, the fidayeen (they call themselves Deccan Mujahideen) struck across the financial capital of our country. In the worst ever attack, the fidayeen used AK-47 fire to injure people, knowing well that it would attract the ATS and public to the spot as would fire, moths. As and when the ATS reached that place, the real attack begun, with guns as well as grenades. More than 80 people were killed, and scores more injured in the best (worst) planned terrorist attack yet. Sadly enough, one of the "highlight" victims of the attack was the ATS chief, Hemant Karkare. He might have been the puppet in the hands of the ruling Congress government at the state and centre, and acted upon the will of his lords. The bitter truth though, is that if he had done his job properly, he would have been alive, and so would 100 other people.

The headlines screamed "Terror Strikes Mumbai" ... and in silence, screaming of the disparity and the lack of justice as a quality in our media. The Sadhvi was arrested because a motorcycle that she sold in 2004 to someone else (who had been murdered), was used in the Malegoan bomb blast. The media immediately called it "Saffron terror" and "Hindu terror". Now, when the terrorists take out 100 lives, and injure twice as many, the media doesn't have the guts to call it Islam terror. It is a shame that not just our governments, but also our media are run by eunuchs.

To end a sad story on a funny note, I would like to borrow a quip from Amy Poehler of SNL. Media, grow a pair. I won't lend you mine.

My worries about going to India

2008-10-01T14:50:00.020-04:00

Looks like I might afterall visit India soon. After a span of almost 3 yrs, I am looking forward to it. Or am I? I live in one of the busiest areas in the city, where incessant running of engines and vehicles rent the silent 24 / 7. Is that my concern? No. I have lived with that ever since my childhood and infact have come to love it. My city never sleeps :-)

My concern is not about these silly issues when there are bigger ones to contend. It appears that someone somewhere has given a free hand to the terrorist organizations in India. I am not joking, somewhere behind the smokescreen of what we are shown and what we are told about the government's efforts to curb terrorism, someone very high up in the ladder has given carte blanche' to the terrorist organizations. Eventually, I am forced to ask, is it one person? Or is it a whole system that has given the terrorists a white charter to use the country as a death field.

Despite what my politically correct friends and acquaintances think or say, Islamic terrorism is a reality in India. The whole cliched sentence "terrorists are not even humans and hence one should not ascribe a religion to them" does not seem to hold any water. Those who do it, do it in the name of their religion, and proudly so. They say they are holding up the will of Allah and thump their chests in pride, all the while killing innocent people. Yes, killing people in the name of religion is obscene, but is that the nadir? One look at the Indian media and any sane person with an iota of reasoning can say an emphatic no. What is worse than terrorism is a bunch of people, professedly representing the nation on the global dias, supporting it covertly or worst overtly. Few incidents come to my mind. The vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia University has offered to provide financial and legal support for suspected terrorists, and has offered to provide the same from the university coffers. When contended with the legal implication, the vice-chancellor says he will collect money from the students for that particular purpose.

His reasoning is the students have been implicated in terrorist activities and hence need the financial support. How lame? I remember that even in my school, any student accused of wrong doing is guilty until proven innocent. In some universities, students have been thrown out for ragging their juniors and asked to prove their innocence. The bottom line is this - in an educational institute, it is the students prerogative as well as responsibility to keep himself / herself out of trouble. Their concern should be on learning and not on anything else. Yes, I use the word prerogative in its right sense. Many of the people at my age would definitely concur, if my teacher blames me of something at school, I have to doubly prove my innocence, at school and at home. However, here is the vice-chancellor of a university - not a idiotic layman, who says it is the right and responsibility of an academic institution to protect its students from legal recourse. And remember, these are not people who are blamed of petty theft or eve-teasing or even ragging. These are men accused of high-treason (against the country) and terrorism (against humanity).

What a freaking incentive to become a terrorist?I think this is the logic amongst these guys, if you have decided to go off track in your life, you might as well blast away a few humans - so that the vice-chancellor of your university would come for your support. Wonder what these guys will study, given a chance to do a Ph.D at the same institute?

To say that these men turn into terrorists because of unequal opportunity and poverty is to insult several muslims who have been through poverty in their childhood and have turned to be doctors, engineers, scientists, managers, entrepreuners and administrative officials. More so since all of those muslims successful in their lives today built their lives starting almost 30 years ago when they did not even have as much opportunity as now glares on the face of today's youth. Another equally stupid argument always forwarded to the terrorists is "they turned into terrorists because of Narendra Modi / Babri Masjid / what ever". Ask oneself this question: If Babri Masjid was the root cause of your problems, why not target those who were responsible? Leave alone the leaders, if your anger is at the people who demolished it - take the fight to them. If Narendra Modi is your menace, why not restrict your activities in only his state?

On the contrary, they bomb markets, trains, places of worship. They kill - no matter if it is hindu or muslim or christian. Such is their taste for revenge. They kill to make a point - won't rest until India is a islamic country. Of course, after that they will kill each other to make it either a Sunni country or a Shia country, but that is besides the point.

They just need a reason to kill and in a nation of a billion people, anything is a reason to get disgruntled. First, Kashmir was a reason - they massacred, plundered, raped the pundits and their families. Then Babri Masjid was a reason, they blew innocents in Bombay - god knows why. Then Godhra riots were a reason, forget that they were the ones who started it all by burning innocents in a train (yes, the judicial report is out and that is the truth). Facts don't matter to them, only their perception of realities. One can imagine the perceptive power of a person who believes that 70 women will remain eternal virgins in heaven.

If one can plant a bomb in a market and maul people just because he / she is disgruntled with a political set up, trust me we will be living in a grave. Everyone has grudges - since 1992, all the educational institutes in India are discriminating against forward castes citing historic reasons. Kashmiri Pandits have been living as refugees in their own country for the past 20 years and not a single bomb blast has been ascribed to them. Indian Hindus have been treated as slaves or worse by the Islamic rulers and the British and yet have strived to stay sane. Having grudges is not a reason, never.

The reality is, these are not misled men as the government of today would like us to believe. These are hardened psychopaths who don't mind mass murdering men, women and children using improvised explosive devices, and do it because their sacred book asks them to. No remorse, no qualms. Just Jihad for them, with the worldly dream of Dar-ul-Islam and a heavenly prize of 70 virgins till eternity.

Finally, what has this long post and ranting about terrorism to do with my upcoming India visit? As I mentioned, I live in the busiest market area in my metropolitan city and I am afraid some lunatic, for the sheer pleasure of his whim and to satisfy his religious duty might maim me or worse - so save me god.

k

VHP, this is not just illegal; it is plain wrong!!

2008-08-28T17:47:00.013-04:00

It was shocking to see Swami Laxmanananda being shot to death by a group of people armed with AK47. It was even more gruesome to see people take that as a cause to riot and kill other people.

Yes, the Swami was murdered, may be even assassinated. The official perpetrators according to the government (albeit announced without a proper enquiry) are the maoists. Apart from the fact that the style is not that of maoists, there is sufficient reason to believe a group of converted tribals had a grudge against the Swamiji and have committed this outrageous murder. Yes, it is true that the government has not acted upon the Swamiji's reports to the police regarding the death threats he received last week. Yes, it is true that the missionaries in many parts of India employ less than admirable means to increase their census; to paraphrase their pope - "harvesting the souls". This especially leaves a bad taste when the government doesn't act per the law, to stop illegal and immoral "soul harvesting".

However dastardly the act may be, it does not behoove us as a society to retaliate in kind. The Swamiji's murder is a criminal act and as such falls under the ambit of Indian Law. No matter what the intention is, the act per se can be and will be dealt with, by the existing legal system.

For all we know, VHP may not even be in the scene. This is entirely possible as the Indian media has a propensity to cast VHP into any turmoil to prove their 'secular' credentials (vide: Graham Staines case - Dhara Singh was proven in the court to be not a member of Bajrang Dal or VHP), and conveniently forget to clear muddied waters after the facts are out. In fact, they are more intent on muddying the waters in absence of any evidence. However, given the Swamiji's association with VHP, it is likely that they are involved.

Assuming they are involved, the oranization and its activists will explain their actions using these exact arguments:
1. The legal system is not fair in India, especially towards the majority.
2. The missionaries in India have money power, which can and will be used to subvert justice.
3. This is not the first time a Hindu monk has been attacked / assassinated to stop his services to the society, and the government has done nothing.
4. Hindus and their rights are trampled upon in the name of secularism by both the government and the national media.
5. The biased coverage of the Swamiji's murder by the "secular" media will lead to miscarriage of justice.
6. Those who committed the act must pay for it. Since the government or the legal system would not do it, VHP did it.

All these reasons and more may be perfectly true. Still, it does not give a citizen of the country, or a group of citizens of this country, a right to take the law unto their own hands. If they had certain information on the identity of the perpetrators, they should have (1) gone to the police, (b) government and or (c) approached the Supreme court in case (1) and (2) failed. Finally, they have the option of taking their grievances out to the streets: more on that later.

What they have done now, is to create a bad precedent for social retribution. What they have done now is to tell everyone in the country that might is right and the law doesn't mean anything. What they have done now is to effectively undo every bit of trust, however little, that people have cast upon them. Finally, what they have done now is completely ruin all chances of a trial against the perpetrators and their prosecution. From being the victims, they have become the villains. Forget that the perpetrators carried highly illegal arms; or they shot a social worker and a religious leader in his own ashram: now all that the media will blare about is how the "Hindu Fundamentalists" attacked Christian missionaries. Hereafter, it wouldn't matter who sponsored the assassination or how a group of tribals procured and used a high end armament (AK-47) in a civilian setting.

All the rational and legal fallouts notwithstanding, what they did was plain wrong. It is wrong to kill, but worse to kill for retribution, especially when the case in point is civilian. The Swamiji was an Indian, but so were those killed in riots. Why would one kill a woman or destroy the lives of a child, in retribution? What would the child grow up to be? All those affected in the riots, what would their attitude towards the Indian legal system be? Would one be surprised if they resort to the gun again? Who is to blame?

Finally, if VHP was involved in the riots, they have taken the wrong route to resolve anything, much less the problem of illegal conversions. If they had strong evidence against the perpetrators, stage an agitation. Bring the government to its knees by showing solidarity, not by violating the laws. Two months ago this might seem to be a hypothetical situation in India, but now we have a real life example. See the state of Jammu, and their fight for their rights and for what is right. They are standing between an unified India and a group of seccessionist, radical islamist, anti-national terrorists in the Kashmir valley. And they are doing it without resorting to arms or killing.

It is time for the people to respect the law. And it is time for the government and the media to shed it's pseudo-secular stance and enforce the law in an impartial manner without an eye on the vote banks. Both sides in this problem have cold blooded murderers and they should be punished, no matter who they are.

k

Why is it important?

2008-08-26T13:09:00.002-04:00

A lot of political posts have been created and commented upon.
Now, I am entering a different kind of controversy -

Why is science important? Why is scientific research important? Are we humans, as a race, pursuing science with the right questions?

I don't want rhetoric answers like "Science has enabled you to write this over the internet". That, while is nice to have, is not a necessity. If not for kind of explosive "progress" that we have had, most of us will be cooped up in the same place and hence the same question could have been presented to all of you in person. Remember, Darwin did not have the internet to publicize his theory. Nor did Newton, Copernicus, Aryabhatta, or many others who did science before us.

I am asking this question in the deeper meanings as to why we are doing science! I think I have my own version of the answer, but as usual, a discussion is encouraged.

Thanks,
k

Let there be fire

2008-08-04T22:57:00.002-04:00

At last, we are seeing some spine in Hindus. Of course, I am not talking of that educated group that keeps wondering if the intelligentsia will accept them in their circle for being Hindus. I am talking about a group of people who have tolerated terrorism, seccessionism and jihadi intolerance right at their door step. I am talking about a group of people who have witnessed their kith and kin in Kashmir being massacred in name of Holy War and Kashmiriyat.

The Hindus of Jammu have taken to the streets and are braving the bullets. The young and the old, the men and the women all have started another satyagraha, this time against their own country. They are being shot at and they are being beaten up, because they are emphasising their own rights. Their right to have land allocated to their religious purposes. For all that, they are fighting in support of the very same country and that is trying to shoot them down.

Consider this for a second - many would have you believe that it is not the government's job to meddle in religious issues. If it is so true - why is the central government providing subsidies for Haj pilgrimage, to 1000's of people, every year? This government is neck deep in their religious bigotry, and for once, a committed group of people have called its bluff.

Let us extend these men and women of honor our support. Just letting them that we are here to support them will keep their fire burning. We are not brave enough to face the police or the army when all is lost. Are we at least brave enough to support men and women who are brave enough to face the enemy within?

Friends, let there be fire.

Countering the holy war in India

2008-06-27T14:23:00.010-04:00

Several things have happened since I wrote my last blog. Amongst them, the Jaipur blasts have already gone out of mind and cricket has taken its place in the Indian media. A particular group of muslims - Ahmedias - have been refused permission to hold a public meeting in Hyderabad because the government has neither the spine to be just nor the conviction to protect the constitution. No wonder, since both the state involved (AP) and the centre are governed by the Congress - or are they? Looking at the way things happen, I won't be surprised if some Wahabi cleric from Saudi Arabia starts dictating our rules / laws.

Along the way, in one of the many conversations with my friend, we entered a discussion about the resilience of India as a country and that of the Hindu culture. Like many elders with whom I have had the same discussion, he asserted that the latest bout of Jihad is not the first that we, as a culture, are facing and we will come out of it with flying colours - so to say.

However, for some unexplainable reason, I told him it is not to be so. I was and am under the impression that the current wave of Jihad on India is vastly different from the ones we have ever faced, including that led by Aurangazeb. However, as it was a refutation borne out of instinct, I was not able to provide a reason for the same at that point of time. Hence, some time was spent on introspection.

Why the current Jihad in India is vastly different from the previous attempts towards Dar-ul-Islam?

As mentioned earlier, India is not a stranger to Islamic wars. Quite a lot has been lost in the barbaric invasion of India by the arabs and the mughals: lives of men, dignity of women, hopes of children and most importantly records of knowledge of an ancient culture. We still survive as a culture, thanks to several kings and soldiers who died to protect their Hindu / Sikh Identity.

According to many, the dark age is being replayed in India - only it is much darker. However, for me - not only are the barbarians attacking us and our way of life, they are doing so in a coordinated manner. I have listed below the reasons why I feel this bout of Jihad is more dangerous than the previous ones. (Of course comments and criticisms are welcome.)

For one, Jihad of today is not led by a single venomous head like Aurangazeb. In the birthplace of civilization and the last bastion of universal fraternity that is India, terrorist attacks are no longer the handiwork of single organization. The terrorist outfit has become a poly-headed hydra with several venomous heads and each rearing its ugly head upon the severence of others. Case in point is the latest attack on civilization in Jaipur - where people of all hues and beliefs were massacred. Till now, the spineless central government is clueless about the perpetrators - or worse, it doesn't want to inflict pain on the perpetrators - true Gandhiians indeed. The terrorists thus are successfully attacking the body of our culture with their savagery.

Second, the barbarians have learnt civilization by being in India for several centuries, not enough to value human life but just enough to play politics with it. They still use their time tested way of terrorizing people but they do so with overt and covert support from the elected government. Case in point is the current problem over transfer of land to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB). For the uninitiated, the government of Gulam Nabhi Azad in Kashmir wanted to donate 40 Acres of land to SASB for construction of shelters for the pilgrims. The whole valley is burning for the past 4 days for this act of benevolence. While I am genuinely surprised at Mr. Azad bringing out this plan of action, the response of Mr. Mufti Mohammad Sayeed (the guy whose daughter was traded for some arrested terrorists way back in VP singh rule) was more than expected. He has fanned religious extremism and associated terrorism in the valley: all because they are afraid of hindus changing the demography of the region. One ought to listen to them since it was the extremists and terrorist who, in the first place, carried out the genocide of Kashmiri Pandits by using public executions and massacres as tools. Oh! yes, they know all about changing the demography of a state - they are the masters of it. By raising hue and cry about their apparent helplessness the politicians are attacking and numbing the mind of the Indian to ground realities.

Third reason why I think the current Jihad is different from the previous ones is the reach of information machinery and mass media. Misinformation and false propaganda by political parties with vested interest, or by the lap dogs (read media houses) of political parties with a vested interest have driven people to a point where they doubt their own culture. Again, it is not only the Hindu religion that is under attack by these intellectuals, they are attacking the whole Hindu way of peaceful and meaningful life. A major role in this plan is being planned by the communists who hate any kind of pluralism and or democracy.

On the aside, there is a reason why communists hate Hinduism more than they do any other religion. For all their talk about a godless society, communism too is a monotheistic and prophet led religion. In fact, it is the most bigoted religion of all. There is an adage "you shall become what you hate" and communism has hated religion since its birth. It has become a religion that promises utopia, wealth without hardwork, zameen pe jannath (paradise on earth), and power without responsibility. In the name of social welfare, they incite corruption, favoritism, suspicion on fellow citizens, treachery and treason. They too follow a book with religious fervour and the words of their prophet - Karl Marx. Like the terrorists, they too wallow in their own history - sacrificing peace, welfare and human lives so that their lost days of glory can be brought back to reality. Sounds similar? Instead of Dar-ul-Islam, the communists want India to be Dar-ul-Communism; a never been age of communism in India.

It is this bane of following a single book and prophet that leads communists to denigrate Hinduism at all possible chances. Why? Hinduism and its plurality are the only things that stand between India and a repitition of its dark ages.

The communists, being the people responsible for school education curricula, have been for a large part successful in making Indians ashamed of their own glorious past. By making the average Indian ignorant of his / her culture, they have forced us to look upon outsiders for everything from help to approval. By denying the much needed self respect borne out of pride, they have made sure we as a country would always be sub-standard in our approach and slavish in our demeanor. This explains our boot-licking when it comes to bullies like China and our pacifist approach to terrorists and terror abetting nations. This lack of self respect has converted us to a bunch of thoughtless zombies. Due to the communists' incessant attack, our culture is losing its respect and hence its soul.

This fearsome troika of forces, attacking India and her culture, in her body mind and soul is the reason why India has to be wary of the current Jihad. Yes, we have weathered many a storm - but this is different and this will break the only ship that we have unless we fortify it. The subsequent question of how to fortify it will be the subject of another blog. Till then, Jai Hind.

k

Peace at the cost of peace?

2008-05-13T17:48:00.002-04:00

It has happened yet again ... one more time the savages have blown apart a market in India in the name of the holy war. One more time the terrorists have shown that they have little or no fear of retribution from the Indian government. Once more, our intelligence agencies have shown that we are incapable of any intelligence, or worse, incapable of acting on it. Worst of all, once again the government of India has asked its citizens to keep peace and maintain law and order.

All this for what? Why would one keep peace with his / her neighbor when he / she is being blown to pieces? Why would one want peace within a society when one section repeatedly wants blood bath of the other? Why would one want equality when the so called keepers of equality give a free hand to terrorists, pseudo-secularists and the terrorist human-rights commission of India?

Who will pay for all this blood? On whose hands will this blood settle? Will it be on the hands of the terrorist supporter Mufti Muhammad Sayeed who wants Kashmir to be opened to pakistan? Will it be on the hands of the inimitable Sonia Gandhi, whose life knows no good other than her own? Will it be on the hands of the NHRC who weep blood every time a terrorist is killed but otherwise are nowhere to be found? Will it be on the hands of the Indian intelligentsia who claim to be on the moral high ground? Or will it fall on the hands of communists who cry hoarse every time a strong legislation opposing terrorism is brought into play and do their best to ruin the deeds?

No!! It will all fall on the hands of innocent people who had nothing but hope in their minds. Hopes of going back home, hopes of feeding their children, hopes of going to college, earning their livelihood, hopes of a fair and fearless life. Every Indian who hears this must think it is his own kin that has been slaughtered - his own blood that has been spilled. Cry my country, for no one else in power will do that for you. Cry for your own brethren, your children, your men and women who lost their lives for no reason but trusting their fates in the hands of incapacitated men and women.

All this brings back to one basic question: When there was an act of terror in Russia, they replied swiftly, lethally - at the cost of some Russian lives - but stopping the menace right away. When the USA was a victim, they went all the way to demolish, destroy and annihilate the persons responsible for the attack. When Britain was a victim, the enacted severe laws protecting their citizens at the cost of few privileges. But, when India is a victim, the government asks the afflicted to keep peace! Why? Is the Indian government run by a bunch of eunuchs?

Why is that India is always soft of terrorism? Why is that our people never see to that the perpetrator is punished? Maybe something is wrong with the way we earned our freedom! Wait a minute, we never earned our freedom - we were given that. That is where the problem is. If we had made the British bleed for occupying our nation, today we will have the guts to punish these faceless traitors and take them out to the gallows. On the other hand, we were beaten and beaten and forbidden to strike back. The English gave us our freedom because they were bored of beating us to death and more importantly, the world war II had taken a huge toll on their resources.

Let us hope and wait. Let us hope against hope that Indians will get the nerve to strike back. Strike back in a manner that would make every traitor, every terrorist, every politician to think twice before besmirching this holy land. Hang them by the lamp posts. Throw them in cages hung on branches and starve them to death. After they die, let the dogs and vultures eat their carcass. Stone them to death. Let them die such a gory death that even the most gruesome terrorist should think twice before stepping into this country. Teach them a lesson that no act of impunity against an Indian citizen will ever go unpunished.

We don't need eunuchs and spineless worms at this moment. This moment we need to strike back. In a manner that befits all the massacre that has happened in our country. In reply to Kashmir, Delhi, Jaipur, Coimbatore, Bangalore, Madras, everywhere. Kill ten terrorists for every Indian life lost. May be then, there won't be any more terrorists left on earth.

Jai Hind.
k

On Hinduism - Part III

2008-03-29T08:04:00.009-04:00

Please read the previous parts and their comments Part I and Part II - It might really help understand the Part III. As much as I want to keep them separate stand alone entities, I am not able to do that and hence this request.

Disclaimer: Any views expressed here are mine and my own. For any good things that may come out of it; I thank the countless people whose association over my lifetime has taught me important lessons. Obviously, the mistakes are mine to own.

Honestly, I didn't want to get into a discussion of Karma this early in the series due to my ignorance and the depth of the subject. Thanks to the readers for prodding my thoughts in the right direction. KJ, thanks for writing some of what I should have written - especially regarding the fact that Karma extends to all living beings and is not restricted to humans. I completely accept your views.

Kaushik raised a couple of important points; both intertwined closely. Before answering those, I must first correct a mistake of mine. In the previous post, I had mentioned how it won't deplete your balance if you do it out of need / necessity. I had also mentioned how, if done with minimum amount of pain to that being killed, even butchery will not deplete your karma palan balance. This is incorrect. No matter what your necessity is, your balance will be depleted. However, what mitigates the depletion is the use you put the killing to. For example, if a butcher / hunter feeds his family, by killing one being, he is feeding many more beings. This, to an extent offsets the negative withdrawal but never cancels it out. It is for the same reasons that kings donated for a lot of religious and social causes, hoping that their deeds would protect them from all the wars and punishments that they impose on people.

Another question that Kaushik asked was about ignorance and karma palan. My answer is no. Ignorance is not bliss and it doesn't protect one from the effects of their actions. To give a scientific example, human beings did not deforest earth wantonly. They did it because of their needs and more due to ignorance. However, we face the song (global warming) today. There is a story about how "dharma devadhai" punished a rishi in his later life, because he tortured an insect while he was a child. This goes on to prove that no action, even those arising out of ignorance, is not exempt from Karma.

Regarding Madhumita's comment - I would like to side with KJ and Sri on this. It is their Karma to die, and yours to kill. Still, killing does take a toll on your balance. It depletes it. No evil deed, however insignificant, goes unpunished.

Regarding what Sri noted: True, it is very difficult to define what is dharma - but it is not very difficult to realize you are causing pain to another being. If one would refrain from causing pain to other living beings, he / she can be thought of having lived a dharmic life. To quote thiruvalluvar

"kollAn pulAlai uNNAnai kaikUppi ellA uyirum thozhum" - translated crudely as
"all living beings will worship a person who doesn't kill and refuses to eat meat".

Basically, it all boils down to "less pain to others = more balance in your account", which subsequently leads to spritiual enlightenment.

On another example that Sri made, I have to note: I remember reading in arthashastra that in medieval India at least, the rules were exactly the opposite. Chanakya suggests that a brahmin should receive 1/16th part, a Kshathriya 1/4th, a vaisya 1/2 the punishment that a Shudra would receive. The exact reasons for this is beyond me. However, it does push us into the next realm of discussion in Hinduism - the caste system, which I will deal with in my next post.

C&C welcome

k
Ekam sath| vipra bahutha vadhathi||

On Hinduism - part II

2008-03-27T07:02:00.011-04:00

Thanks to all who read it and all who left a comment / question etc on the Part I. I have tried to answer the questions to the best of my knowledge in this one. I will address specific replies to the person who asked a question: Please see the comments of my previous posts for exact questions.

Archana:

why use the term fanatic? In India, something weird is happening now a days. When Taslima Nasreen writes a book, a small group of muslims throw stones at her, call for her execution and what not - and the Indian government supports their views saying they are minorities and their sentiments ought to be respected. A similar stance is taken by the government when Christians in Orissa and other tribal areas in India are stopped from converting using money. However, a chief minister of a state, made of 80% Hindus makes a statement like 'Ram is a myth" and when someone question him - the government says they are fanatics. There is a visible double standard in India when it comes to religious issues and people tend to be more biased towards anything not-Hindu. Hence my opening statement.

Can a religion change because of people?

I think yes. If it doesn't then the religion ceases to exist. At the very least, it becomes a burden on the very people practicing it and the whole world. This is common-sense. However, I am abstaining from examples to prove my point due to my intent of keeping realpolitik out of this blog.

Could one say that the hinduism we see today is not true hinduism, because it has deviated from the original vedic religion?

In scientific terms it is similar to the question: are humans the same humans from the stone age or even prior to that? True, we all belong to the same species Homo sapiens. Does it mean that we are the same? Similarly, hinduism is the same - but only in the overall tenets. The microdetails have to evolve. It is a law of nature.

First of all, I had made it clear that Hinduism is not a religion. It is a way of life. As with cultures, civilizations, way of life evolves. There is no wonder that Hinduism is not what it used to be before few thousand years (the vedic religion - so to say). As a poet once remarked - it is a river if it runs, else it is a ditch. I will remark specifically on a particular example as to how tolerant Hinduism is about changes:

Three years ago, during vinayagar chathurthi, I saw a pillaiyar idol in anantha sayanam holding a cell phone in one of his hands and a laptop before him. People were happy to buy that idol for pooja purposes. It is an extreme example of how accommodative our religion is about changes. Of course there is a set of people (purists) who think it is wrong to depict a god that way - but we didn't have bloodshed because of that. The purists expressed their concerns and that is it. This is why Hinduism is no religion. It is a way of life that allows you to adapt the rules of religion to whatever the times demand.

Bala:

Yes. It is my take on Hinduism. However, my knowledge on Hinduism is not totally experiential. I am sure most of the deeper points are the real idea of Hinduism - for example dharma and karma. However, having said that, I must say, the real essence of hinduism is that it allows you to have a completely different, even radical take on the religion as it conforms to your dharma. In short, it is my take - and if your take on it is totally different, it still means both are valid.

Sri and Madhumita:

Sri, first off - thanks for that example of mechanics and a free body diagram. I believe it accurately describes Idol worship, better than my own example.

The real explanation of Karma is too deep for an amateur like me to go all the way and explain it. In fact, the exact question that Madhumita posted "why do people who do sins get away with it?" is a subject of intense discussion in Indian philosophy. So much so that many of the Vedantas and Upanishads discuss this in great detail. Not being the learned that I ought to be to answer this question, I would again present my views of this issue as I understand it. "Karma Palan" or "the fruits of karma", is like a bank balance. It is both a credit and debit card account at once. All the good deeds that one does goes on to add "fruits" to the balance and evil deeds remove the "fruits" thereby reducing the balance.

This account is active until you free yourselves from worldly desires and your account balance is at least zero, if not positive. The theory is that the "atman" (crudely put 'the soul') of a living being will be bound to earthly (mortal) forms until it loses desire to do so. Such desire also makes sure there is rebirth. The logical question is, what if I don't hold earthly desires but have a negative balance. The definition of evil deeds and desires makes it impossible for one to hold a negative balance when he loses earthly desires. Having said that, what people enjoy / suffer in this life is a combination of two things. 1) what is your balance when you came into this world? and 2) what have you accrued over your life? Here is where, Sriram, your view comes into play. It is not entirely true (at least I think so) that "karma palan" doesn't carry over to the next birth in Kali Yuga - but it is true that more or less in the same birth you see your deeds turning on you.

After all this convoluted explanation, it must be made clear again, that there is no one set of good or bad deeds. If your life destines you to be a butcher, killing animals is not evil for you. But dharma does prescribe that you feel for the animals you kill and not kill for pleasure. Similarly, each person can form his own good and evil and if he / she has not done wanton harm on anyone / anything, then his / her account balance remains untouched.

As usual, comments are welcome. I would be especially grateful if someone can correct me (if needed) on the part of "Karma Palan".

k
Ekam Sath. Vipra Bahuthaa Vadathi

On hinduism - part I

2008-03-26T12:59:00.003-04:00

I have been born a Hindu, lived my life as a hindu - not perfectly - but satisfactorily enough. It is exactly because of these two reasons, it hurts when someone calls this religion fanatic. To do my small part to clear some misconceptions, I am starting to write on certain well known (controversial points) problems about my religion.

I invoke the supreme being to help me in my endeavor. I also request readers to post questions about whatever issue they feel are important. I will do my best to attend to the same at the earliest.

Disclaimer: I don't claim myself to be exceptionally good at religious affairs - I am writing it based on living my entire life as a Hindu

What exactly is Hinduism?

Whatever it is, it is not a religion. Many people get either confused or startled when I tell them this. I know this needs an explanation. Here it goes:

Hinduism is not a religion. Not by any meaning. It is a way of life. That is why it is called Dharma. It is a set of guidelines for a person to lead his life. Where all does it differ from a religion? In a host of places though I will elaborate on a few important parts.

1. One rule doesn't fit all:

There is no one rule for living one's life as a Hindu. You can be monotheistic (rare), polytheistic (very common), agnostic, or even an atheist to be a Hindu. Yes, you can deny / defy the existence of god and still be a Hindu. This leads to the next question, if god is out of the equation, what exactly does Hinduism preach?

The answer is, it doesn't preach anything. It prescribes a set of rules for a fulfilling life. Whether or not you live by it is left to your own choice(s). Here, in Hinduism, god need not be the ultimate goal of your life. Your goal may be simply to provide good food and shelter to your family and hinduism prescribes that you do it in an ethically acceptable manner, causing minimal damage / pain to others and other living beings along the way.

Such reasoning brings an important question: If god is not the end, and if god is not even needed - why do Hindus worship so many gods?

To answer this question, I need to digress a little bit. I am by profession a scientist. We do several experiments and collate all the results in the form of figures. Seldom do we go back to the original data (only in case of problems) and most of what we need is present in the figures. In other words, the figure allows us concentrate on salient features of the raw data and focus our faculties on what is being shown.

In the same note, it is my belief that a form for god in hinduism is to keep our minds focused. Since every person is different and everyone needs a different kind of mental courage from this entity called god - we hindus personify gods in different forms: forms that best fit our purposes.

The next question would be: if the intent of idolatry is to focus the mind, what, if any, is the purpose of god / religion / scriptures in Hinduism

This is one place where hinduism differs from others. I may be wrong and would be happy to be corrected. In hinduism, there is a concept called karma. This means, as far as I have realized, one is responsible for the consequences of one's own actions. It doesn't mean that one will be dealt with fairly in life - no. It simply means that, all things being equal, one who is creating less trouble, will have less trouble unto himself.

Here Karma is the driving force. Such logical consequentiality removes a lot of powers vested with god: for one - there is no "forgive and forget" - it is rather - do it, face it. Hinduism puts a person at the captian's seat of one's own life. When one steers his ship across the ocean of life (that is exactly how Hinduism describes life) god and religion merely serves as a guiding star in the ocean. Now, with this explanation, another facet of hinduism is immediately apparent.

What if I am not in an ocean and I am in a forest? What if my rules of life are different? What would happen if I choose to use a compass or the sun instead of a star? What if my skies are cloudy?

This is another reason why Hinduism has many gods, many equally venerable religious scripts and several philosophies - including atheism.

I believe, it is long enough for one post. I would write more on other issues that immediately strike me as being controversial. Of course, keeping in stride with my religion / dharma, I would want to encourage knowledgeable criticism. If anyone wants to debate a point or several points - please post them with reasons as to why you don't accept my views. "Just because my scripture says so" is NOT a valid reason - it is a stricture. We are logical beings and let us discuss. Everyone is welcome.

k
Ekam Sath. Vipra Bahuthaa Vadhathi.

Adding Proof to posts - 2

2008-02-12T11:27:00.000-05:00

I read an article by Arun Shourie (the link above) about what China is doing (real stuff - not some expert opinion) in Arunachal Pradesh.

It makes a compelling read and I urge visitors of this blog to read the article and spread the word. Of course, pacifists and communists don't care about our country. They would rather have India in a million pieces. The others, however, have a duty.

Cheers
k

Talk about freedom

2008-02-06T20:15:00.000-05:00

I am angry.

Our country has gone down the drain so badly that a tennis player says she is considering retirement due to "controversies surrounding her dress code".

This is shameful to say the least. Few bearded mullahs who don't even have the support of majority in my country issue fatwas against a player who is actually making a name for herself and the country in a much neglected game - tennis. Is it India or is it Iran? And what did the government do to these idiots? precious nothing.

The problem with these guys and other protesters in beauty pageants is the same. They want women for themselves - as possessions. According to these guys, women are not humans who deserve to decide their life. They are things that have to possessed, disciplined and kept in dark.

Two eminent men, one a great person with whose policies I don't necessarily agree (no rewards for guessing) and another a great poet whom I revere, stated that our country is truly free when its women are. Am still waiting for our freedom. Are you with me?

Cheers,
K

PM's Positive Action

2008-02-02T09:22:00.000-05:00

As much as I am a critic of Dr. Manmohan Singh, fair play demands that both sides be represented properly.

In a move totally unexpected of Dr. Singh and absolutely unprecedented in Indian politics, the PM has announced a hefty amount (several thousand crore rupees) for development of Arunachal Pradesh. At last, it seems the GoI is taking care of one its much neglected border states.

However, if the PMs NREG plan is any precedent to go by, the money may just end up somewhere between Delhi and Arunachal Pradesh without the intended development taking place.

In any case, any step away from inactivity is a good step. Good Luck Mr. Singh - Good luck India.

k

Intolerant India

2008-02-01T15:37:00.000-05:00

Do I care about bullies and cowards criticizing my actions? No. Do I keep quiet about it? Certainly not - I write. Below, I have discussed two of my online experiences, one with a religious police and another with (I suspect) a communist. The second person, if not a communist is one of India's several thousand intelligentsia whose sun rises either in the History Department of JNU or the editorial room of The Hindu or the newsroom of NDTV.

The first one happened in Orkut. It was during my early days in Orkut and I started a community called "Muslims in RSS". Within a short time of starting that community (within a week I guess), a muslim gentleman messaged me online (scrapped me) and the message went thus: "brother!!! delete your community". The tone of the message, if it were to be delivered in person, wouldn't be very different from that of a goonda threatening me. I still believed in freedom of speech and sent a reply asking "Why? brother!!!". He asked me twice more in different messages to delete my community since it hurt his feelings. I asked him to report the community to the moderators in Orkut if he found any messages in the community hurtful. In fact, the community had zero messages. He stopped messaging me.

The second incident happened yesterday. I had written an article, wherein I had argued the need for leadership qualities and the lack of these in MK Gandhi. I had a comment from a person who is more of a coward than a bully. He wrote a comment which goes thus:

"This is the dumbest post I have come across in the Indian blogosphere. I strongly suggest that you burn your degrees because the education hasn't had any impact on you. Shameful."

I mistook this person for a sincere friend of mine who later clarified that he would never provide a subjective / ambiguous comment. Any attempts to trace such a great commentator was lost since he didn't even make his profile public.

There is a thread uniting both these persona. It is intolerance, religious in the former and ideological in the latter. The former tries to intimidate gullible citizens / netizens, does religious policing, and thinks he is right in doing so. This is the same mentality that one finds amongst religious extremists in India. The government sucks up all this for a vote bank and treats them as just that. Due to such preferential treatment in the real world, these guys forget the rules of the internet. There are no votebanks, no politicians who would appease at the drop of a hat. At least, we can be happy that this religious bigot doesn't have any hidden agenda.

On the other hand, let us spare a moment to think about this guy - I would call him Mr. ABC.
He is a true believer. He believes in what he believes and hence is convinced that it is a fact. From the two sentences he typed, I would present my observations and inferences about that person.

Observations:

1. He wants to put down the other's point of view by using abusive language and scorn.

This shows lack of knowledge and a very weak vocabulary. Either this person is so filled with hatred or this is the end of his language skills. Any able and knowledgeable person would communicate his / her ideas or even hate with more reason. Lack of civility and knowledge.

2. He thinks that any other point of view, even if supported by facts is not admissible.
3. He thinks his opinion is the only one that matters.
4. He thinks his judgment is necessary and sufficient proof of validity of any issue there is.

Simply put - his idea / ideology, however ill-formed and ill-informed, is the only truth according to this person. He has no interest in expanding his horizons and more importantly learning. Closed mindedness.

5. In case of difference of opinion, he chooses to be ambiguous, subjective, judgmental and certainly not rational.

Most probably this person is ingrained with a deep sense of fidelity to the cause. He has been taught, but not taught to think. This is a typical case of indoctrination of ideas. When ideas are learned, one is open to improvisation and even radical changes in the face of proof. However, when ideas are indoctrined, the reaction to contrary proof is usually to go into a denial mode and a spate of abusive judgments begins without any regards to intellectual validity. brainwashed agent of a cause.

6. This person doesn't have the guts to come out in the open to face their adversary. He hides his identity under the warp of personal space.

In a word: Cowardice

These signs are oft repeated in dealing with one particular group of people. Communists.

If he is not a communist or a coward, let Mr. ABC come out in open and provide facts, and face the same. Let him create a counter argument as to why this post is the "dumbest" that he has seen.

Finally, Mr. ABC, If you are not willing to come out and talk with conviction and courage and more importantly facts - then I request you - go do what your comrades do - stick your head in the sand and say the world is dark.

Cheers,
k

PS: You maybe really nice in person krish, but that doesn't provide you the right to pass abusive judgments without stating facts. I guess you realize that your ideology is wrong. That is why you are taking it out on others. Pity you krish.

Adding proof to blogs!!!

2008-02-01T06:41:00.000-05:00

Some of my posts have been looked upon as overreaching and a lot of speculation.
People have personally conveyed me the message that some of what I talk may not be as serious as I make it out to be.

As a person who believes in substantiating a claim - here I go.

There are news articles (1) and a column (2) in two newspapers that support / paraphrase my concerns. Worth noting each of them have been published at least a week later than my blog itself. He he he ... I hold the IPR ;)

1. Deccan Herald - 31 Jan 2008

Sethusamudram project has security implications: says Indian Coast Guard Chief.

He has said
"If the seaway is opened up, there could be issues of piracy. ...in a narrow channel, if a ship has problems (while crossing), this has to be addressed."

To quote from my blog:

"The total width is approximately 40 miles, of which 24 miles on either side is lost on territorial waters leaving only 16 nautical miles of shared waterways. Such a narrow water passage provides a haven for piracy in these regions by the LTTE."

Only, the vice admiral of ICG doesn't name the LTTE in fear of political castigation.

The second blog is regarding China:

I had written in my other blog

"I don't understand what major advantage we get by opening bilateral trade with China when our commodity (services) is for most part useless in the Dragon's land."

B Raman, a political Analyst in Daily Pioneer (will post the date as soon as i get it) says

"India's gains in Bilateral trade have plateaued over the years since our major imports are in raw materials. China, on the other hand, does not use Indian employees / engineers for its projects even in India. Our strength, the IT sector, is virtually useless in providing services in China".

2008-01-30T19:43:00.001-05:00

Remembering the father of our nation:

I would like to pay homage to the memories of one of most finest famous men ever to live on earth. He had done a great deal to revive the Indian Identity. He had inspired several great men across the world, who like him brought about changes in several million lives that would live well after their times. Personally I respect him for the human being he was. In fact, he was a epitome of ideals and personification hinduism at a personal level.

He never thought any work was inferior and instilled certain level of self respect amongst the country men. He was instrumental in raising the social stature and quality of life of much maligned, least understood group of people in India called the Harijans (In fact, Harijans was a term that the Father of the Nation coined. The earlier name of that group is an illegal word according to government of India and hence I am not using it). He brought about certain equality amongst Indians and following his lead, many Indian freedom fighters, including many Brahmins would seek social justice as their goal in life.

However, a man isn't but for his follies and Mr.Gandhi was no exception. In fact he didn't try very hard to make an exception. For all his piety and philosophies on personal life (non-violence) he knew next to nothing about the making of countries. While he was well versed in his knowledge of sattvik dharma pertaining to an individual, his knowledge of raj needhi or the art of realpolitik was woefully short sighted. These maybe argued to be my personal opinions but I will provide some examples from our own shabby history to support my claims.

I will talk about three different sets of circumstances, each of which presented itself more than once to Shri Gandhi as if a student was given a test to complete. In each of these tests, the decisions made by Shri Gandhi were along the same lines, with little or no respect for "the greater good for greater populace".

The first and foremost of the instances that come to my mind when someone eulogizes Gandhiji was the horrendous mopla revolt. The story goes thus: The erstwhile Ottoman empire in Turkey was the headquarter of sorts (Turkey Caliphate in English) of all Muslims in the world. At the end of World War I, Turkey was devastated (defeated) and the Caliphate was overthrown. This created a wave of terror in only one part of the world - India. It is chronicled that several Hindus were massacred, Hindu women raped - Children burnt alive, all because England defeated Turkey in a war and dismantled the caliphate. The worst part of all this was Shri Gandhi's response to such heinous crime within our country when he had the powers to stop it. He supported it. He said, the Muslim bretheren had a right to express their feelings of helplessness and the Hindus have to bear it for the greater good of the country.

On the other hand, this is what Dr. Besant (Annie Besant) had to say about it "They murdered and plundered abundantly, and killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatise. Somewhere about a lakh (100,000) of people were driven from their homes with nothing but their clothes they had on, stripped of everything...Malabar has taught us what Islamic rule still means". - The Future Of Indian Politics: A Contribution To The Understanding Of Present-Day Problems P252 (Annie Besant)

It was essentially a Jihad, a replay of Ghazni's and Ghouri's barbaric attacks against Hindus and Gandhiji unabashedly supported the Muslim rioters. He didn't know that personal philosophies
do not work on national scales. One would have expected him to have learned a lesson from the spilled blood. But soon, it was clear that it was not to be the case. Twice during the tumultous partition times in India, most importantly in NaokhaLi in Bengal, Gandhiji made the same decision of supporting the barbaric acts of Muslims in the name of Ahimsa and Satyagraha. Today, our governments don't even talk about all the blood that was spilled in the name of ahimsa. The reason seems very simple, all that was Hindu blood, a valueless commodity in today's world and especially in India.

The second set of events relate to his intolerance towards people who might challenge his authority in the INC (Indian National Congress). The first such person was Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Yes, the same Jinnah who plotted for the separation of this country. It may be surprising to many, but Mr. Jinnah was one of the most secular personalities in the INC at that point of time. During the first world war, congress was going through a difficult time - Lokmanya Tilak and Shri Ghokale had passed away within a short span of 4 years and hence Shri Gandhi was the only senior apart from leaders like Jinnah. In a spite over separate constituencies for muslims in elections (Jinnah opposed it), Jinnah was forced to resign from the INC after being humiliated publicly. (Some knowledgeable accounts state partition of India was Jinnah's revenge on INC's intolerance and stupidity).

The next scenario was regarding our own Subhash Chandra Bose, the founder of INA. He found that the non-cooperative movement and Quit India movement had not garnered enough results, unless one were to count dead Indians as results. He demanded that India skip the non-violence route and talk the same language as the British did - an eye for an eye. Predictably, he too was shown the boot and Nehru was given the mantle of INC. Well, as we all know, the story didn't end here.

The third set of circumstances are equally stupid but still had a much more serious import for the present and future of newly born India. He favored, and in fact threw his weight around to have JN Nehru as Independent India's first prime minister. The other choice was the Sardar Vallabhai Patel. It was no secret that Gandhi favored JN Nehru over the others - but to put personal preferences over a nation's priority is something that future generations would rue. We now do. After all this, one is left wondering if the father of the nation had a foresight at all.

Finally, there are a few things that we need to clarify.

"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind"

No. Game theory and evolution show that this principle will leave one generation half blind and the consequent generations healthy and peaceful.

"Ahimsa (Non-violence) is the best way for India forward".

The concept of Ahimsa needs clarification. Ahimsa is best practised from a position of strength. According Bhagavad Gita, from which Shri Gandhi picked most of his philosophies, Ahimsa is not an option for Kings / Rulers. It is an option for people whose job is to teach and seek knowledge. If the government refuses to rule with an strong will and a clear mind, its citizens will be left to fend for themselves. This certainly will not pave a way for Ahimsa in a country. India’s blood spill in the last two decades is a due to terrorism is a standing example.

In summary, a call to Indian government and politicians who always try and learn the worst of all things. Try to live like MK Ghandi, and try not to rule like him.

Jai Hind.

Of Vaccines, Montagu, Jenner and Hindostan

2008-01-27T08:29:00.001-05:00

Several times, we come across few forward emails which tout on India's supremacy in the world of Mathematics: like - Indian's invented the zero, the concept of abstract algebra, used calculus like tools to calculate precisely the movement of planets and natural satellites etc. Even in the field of medicine, we gave the world Yoga, Ayurveda, and several other things.

Besides all this, the scientific world has always been partial to the western world (now) and in particular Europe (then in the earlier times). The other civilizations were, well, not civilized enough to have anything of worth. Unfortunately, there is no way Indians can prove that they had enough scientific prowess to bolster their argument of a civilized and scientific society. Thanks to hordes of barbaric invaders from 12th - 15th centuries, Indian centers of learning were looted, burned and ruined systematically.

However, knowledge goes on. In one of the rare moments of discovery on the web, I found an article - linked to by a wonderful website. The site is known as SABHA (http://www.sabha.info) and had several interesting links. One of them was about inoculation against small pox in India (http://www.sabha.info/docs/news/civilization/InoculationTimes7Oct1789.html). This was published (as the link says) on 7th October 1789, a time when India didn't even exist. It was known as Hindostan. The Times article claims that a particular group of brahmins go from home to home inoculating people with pox-viridae. Only people who have strictly adhered to a prescribed dietary regime were inoculated. The article goes on to say, the method of inoculation is similar to that being practiced by us (Europeans) and the dosage was never higher or lower than was required.

This is interesting: If Lady Montague had introduced the practice of inoculation (in Europe indeed), who introduced it to Hindustan, a land of barbarians? If indeed someone had introduced it to India, how did it become a social, regular practice in some obscure village in India in just 60 years while it was not even that popular in the civilized Europe. More interesting is the timing of Edward Jenner's invention of vaccination. This article comes out in 1789. Edward Jenner says he thought of vaccination during the outbreak of 1788, and waited until 1796 to test his theories.

I leave the conclusion to the readers now. However, it sure felt good to have some hard proof that we were pioneers in some thing, than just touting our unsupported beliefs (it is not a fact until the western world acknowledges it - is it?).

When you see a spade

2008-01-26T06:14:00.000-05:00

Several things happen in a day, especially in a happening place like India. Most of them, invariably irritates me to no end. This isn't to mean no good ever happens in mera baarath mahaan.

I would like to bring out two related things that I found recently on the net. They are regarding terrorism in our country. One recent news article in IE (Indian Express) explained how a Sufi movement has started acting across the country against terrorism. Second is the GoI's decision to provide monetary aid to families of terrorists killed in encounters.

For non-starters, Sufism is one of the milder forms of Islam that was butchered along with Hindus in India during the Mughal Invasion (read Wahabi invasion) of India in the middle part of 2nd millenia. Sufism was brought to India by its early practitioners and they mixed the tenets of Islam with the ancient and time tested Indian philosophy to bring about evolution in the religion. This meant open discussion of certain tenets of course. No wonder Wahabi Islam (again for non-starters, Wahabi Islam is practiced in Saudi Arabia, by Taliban, JeM, LeT etc.) routed Sufism from India since they did not want their actions / ideals questioned.

Coming back to the news article itself, practitioners of Sufism had tolerance of other religions around them and an understanding of higher philosophies in life. Now, they have done something that no other muslim organisation has ever done in the past 20 years of terrorism in Kashmir. They have spoken against terrorism. Understandably, not many of the major secular newspapers carried this article. Arguably, they are afraid of the more influential sections of Islam in the country which sadly, do not represent the majority of muslims in India. The Maulana of some famous Masjid has released a press statement that goes that "this movement is wrong and it gives the impression that muslims are involved in terrorism". The maulana's statement, with due respect to sentiments of well meaning Muslims in India, is politically correct but the world is at a point where political correctness is not going to solve anything.

In a related development, the Indian government (heck they might as well be the Pakistani government), has announced that it will provide monetary relief to a) kashmiri pandits who were affected by terrorism and b) to immediate kin of terrorists who were killed by security forces. This seemingly innocuous act is, to say the least, atrocious. This policy by the central government puts both the victim and the perpetrator on the same scale and depicts the protectors as criminals by rewarding the terrorists. I wonder, if the same money was provided to the Sufis who are out to protect the identity of Indian muslims, won't it be spent better. Mark my words, in due course, the Sufis will be targeted as frequently as, or more than Kashmiri pandits because they are, according to the hardliners, traitors. It is the government's prerogative to protect well meaning citizens and well, the UPA government panders to only one overriding prerogative - Staying in power.

The Indian Premier's Chinese trip

2008-01-16T13:58:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, a lot of reason gets lost amidst shouting, fanfare and media publicity. One such thing happened in our country's politics last week, The prime minister's China visit: A lot of hype was created of this trip: especially and understandably by the English press in India. NDTV 24x7 tried to project the trip itself as a major achievement. Let us go through what has been achieved versus what has been lost. All that written in bold are the so called achievements.

1. India and China will open up their respective markets for bilateral trade:
Let us see where this leads to. India is knowledge and service economy. A major part of this distinction is due to our population density. All western nations (read english speaking countries) outsource their jobs because our running costs are low. Basically, for the English speaking countries, India provides cheap labour from within. Now, compare this situation with China. Their population is much higher than ours and they are a non-English speaking country. Most of their transactions are in their own traditional languages (dialects). And we Indians are proud enough of our English skills and do not care a rat's arse about learning other languages. Worse, our politicians would make us believe that even learning another Indian language is a sin. I don't understand what major advantage we get by opening bilateral trade with China when our commodity (services) is for most part useless in the Dragon's land.

On the other hand, think of the advantage the Chinese have. Who doesn't love toys especially when these are sold for 10 rupees? And we have that legendary "adimaiyin mOgam - the lust for everything slavish" - whether it be pens from Japan, or silk from china or gifts from USA. So, a toy, available for 10 rupees and stamped "made in China QC Passed" immediately makes our day. The Chinese are, unlike Indians, specialists in manufacturing rather than service. A Chinese toy doesn't need to learn Hindi in order to work in India. They will flood our markets with their cheap labor and their manufacturing prowess. When faced with this reality, Intelligent people in India would take this stance "competition is good. It will enable our industries to grow strong". What they don't tell you is "ethical competition is good". Chinese manufacturing processes are not anywhere close to ethical (not that we rank high on the ethics list either but we are a shade better). In fact, they are not even close to safe. Recently Chinese toys were banned in most of europe and USA because the paint that they used contains lead. Thanks to the bilateral trade agreement, a lot of unsafe / cancer causing plastic toys painted with lead will be dumped in India (oh! yes we have our own share of such toys made from within). Most people in India are not even aware of the health hazards that lead poses. It may be possible that most of our water pipes still are lead lined. However, isn't it the prerogative of the government, erstwhile and future, to assure that the people are taken care of - even the ignorant ones?

2: China will support India in the UNSC and will support India's claim for civilian nuclear energy:

Come on. Either one should be absolutely naive or a pathological idiot to believe this. Or, you can be one of the Indian Intelligenstia. Oh! yes. Then, not only will you be able to assert this over every mass media available on earth (Magazines, newspapers, radio, TV and internet) but you will also get a lot of fanfare for suggesting this. In fact, most of the literati in this country, for whom the unifying factor is an emphasis on English, will believe you. Wait a moment, what about the statement itself.

How many promises have our neighbors made, and broken? It is not just China, it is everyone of our neighbors. China , however is exceptional in giving us a bloody nose in calling us brothers and invading our territory (remember 1962 and hindi-chini bhai bhai guys?!!!). Only this time, they are calling us friends. I wonder, if one would waylay his brother, what would become of his friend? And incidentally the friend was once a proclaimed brother. The reality is guys, a fool would know this "once bitten twice shy". We have been bitten several times by the dragon and still we are enamored. For all that we know, China may not accept our status as a UNSC member when the time comes, nor will it support our civilian nuclear initiative.

3: India recognizes Taiwan as a part of China:
Chinese have obviously welcome this gesture from their friend and did nothing to reciprocate. The implications of this gesture may be absolutely lost on many of our people who are always good at heart and deal fair. Our intelligentsia, who know the full import of such a declaration doesn't care to clarify. I am novice at international relationships, but something struck me as very odd. Isn't India in a territorial problem with China - No I am not talking about Aksin Chin ladies and gentlemen, I am talking about our own Arunachal Pradesh. China has been constantly claiming that Arunachal Pradesh is their territory and India is illegally occupying it. In a bid to acquire their territory, they have strengthened their infrastructure and army on the other side of the border. There are regular incursions by the Chinese army that are, thankfully, rebuffed by the Indian army. After all this, the Indian Premier states that India recognizes the idea of one china without prompting or reciprocation from the other side. Now one needs to think of what will happen when China invades Arunachal Pradesh and takes it over. China will assert its "One China"idea and will say India had already recognized it (citing our PM).

Finally, cooperation between neighbors, especially between neighboring countries is essential for peaceful existence and prosperity in today's world. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we have been blessed with neighbors that incite terrorism, neighbors that sponsor terrorism, neighbors that help terrorist states, neighbors that backbite and invade and do all that with a smile on their lips. Are we the only nation that has all this in the world? No. Some others have it worse. Think Israel, and think India. At least we are fortunate enough in that our neighbors undermine us only in covert ways. The wise learn from the selves' past and other's present. The normal learn from their selves' past. Only fools refuse to learn and will be - bitten twice. Let us decide, as a nation if we are wise, normal or fools.

2007-11-03T21:58:00.000-04:00

Some days, as a geek i am happier than many of the others.
Yesterday was one such day. I got my new camera delivered. It was a Nikon D-SLR and I bought with a basic lens (18-55mm). As with any new gadget that i buy, the next step is taking it through a field test. What better way to test a D-SLR than to photograph fast moving animals?

Am not talking about my neighbor's dog trotting around. I decided to take it up a notch and really test it ... so took it to Sea World. As a trivia, Sea world happens to be an economic option for me. Several months back, i bought an annual pass to Sea World and it cost me only as much as a normal ticket. However, back to the topic - I took it to Sea World for testing.

On the way, I got a chance to see why people go gaga over SLRs.

shown beside is a crop from the full sized (3872x2592) picture measuring only 404x285.
This was a plane that was flying at least a mile away from us.

Coming to Sea World, the first and foremost subjects were dolphins. I love shooting dolphins and there is this intangible yet unmistakable human like quality in them. This is despite the fact that they are much stronger and swifter than what we can ever be. So, without much ado, here we go. Yes, I noticed that the pictures are not as sharp as one would like to be. I believe it is because of a) a very dirty water and b_ a very thick glass with a lot of dirt on it. Of course, the dolphins don't wait for me to take a snap.

Specs for this shot are as follows : F= 50mm; Aperture = F/4; T= 1/60 sec; ISO = 100
There are many more like this - please find them at my picasaweb album: http://picasaweb.google.com/k.sivan/

The next stop was to a indoor (really dark) stage performance by abandoned pets. It was kind of really nice. However, a combination of fast moving pets and low lighting made it very very hard to take good snaps. There are a few though and find below one of better ones.

What you see above is crop from a bigger picture (approx 500 x 500 from 3800 x 2600 pic).
The specs are: F=55; Aperture = F/5.6; Shutter = 1/40 sec; ISO = 400.
the last bit is the best part. In ISO 400, low light - I did not see any grains. No noise either. It was good. Yes, I had several photos that did shake - but those were not the camera's mistake - it was either coz the subjects were moving fast or because i shook it (beyond 0.5 secs i can't keep it solid).

An analysis of the Sethusamudram Project

2007-10-02T13:59:00.000-04:00

The Sethusamudram Project and the socio-economic and political fallouts.

The sethu samudram canal project was proposed by the Indian government in early 21st century and was inaugurated in 2005. There are several standing controversies in this project, ranging from purely religious to purely scientific, notwithstanding the political ones. All the controversies apart, the region also is home to one of the few last surviving coral reefs in India. I am writing this article to add strength to the movement that opposes the Sethusamudram canal project. This article is divided into 3 sections: economic, biological and security. This article does not discuss, for good reason, the religious and social fallouts of this project since there are several others who discuss the same.

Economical Fallouts:

Coral reefs are home to rich diversity of organisms, including a wide variety of fish that help small fishermen lead their lives. The system is in a balance, with the reefs supporting the fish, the fish supporting the fishermen and the reefs asking nothing but a right to survive and flourish in the shallow areas of the shoreline. When reefs are destroyed, so are all the different fishes that live within the reefs. As a chain reaction, such destruction also devastates the lives of many fishermen, mostly living in unorganized settlements along the cost. In strictly economic terms, reefs are important in at least two ways. Coastline fishing sustains several villages, if not cities and districts, in India, providing them with self-sufficiency. Such self sufficiency is hard to come by if they are deprived of their livelihoods. Another important factor, recently of increasing economic value is tourism. Coral reefs are some of the most beautiful natural formations on earth and many tourists from world over flock to reef destinations annually. India, falling in the tropical latitudes provides a year long opportunity for tourists to view reefs. Even if for other environmental reasons fishing is limited in the villages lining the reefs, protecting the reefs will augment their economical well being by increasing tourism. These are two tangible (economic) reasons why the Palk strait should not be disturbed.

Biological Fallout:

The argument of economical fallouts can be countered by the government by its promises of enhanced monetary aid to the affected villages, however short-lived the aids may be. On the other hand, it will be foolish to forget the more intangible ecological and biological consequences of reef destruction. While the same concerns of depletion of marine resources apply here as in economic concerns, the perspective is totally different. We should not be concerned only about the depletion of resources that are usable by humans. In reality, we should be really concerned about the disturbance of the delicate balance that exists in reef eco-systems. There are several organisms in the sea, many of which are detrimental to many other advanced life forms, including humans. These organisms are kept in check by the intricately balanced coral reef ecosystems with it’s horde of microscopic and macroscopic organisms. When reefs are destroyed, many of these beneficial organisms lose their habitat and are eventually pushed to the brink of extinction. This shift of balance results in the proliferation of other relatively unknown, primitive forms of life those are almost always detrimental to life in and around the shoreline. A case in point is the proliferation of fireweed Lyngbya majuscula along the southern Indian Ocean covering coastal regions of Australia and New Zealand. Further, such a shift in balance also increases the proliferation of less harmful, nonetheless troublesome jelly fishes. In fact, increase in jelly fish swarms have been always connected to dying or dead coral reefs. Jelly fishes, though not as poisonous as the fire weed, can adversely affect economies dependent on fishing by killing higher life forms using their poison.

One might argue that the canal can be constructed without destroying the reefs. In this scenario, the death of coral reefs may not be immediate but is imminent. Large scale shipping in such narrow waters releases a large amount of petrochemical wastes that are detrimental to coral health and life. Furthermore, shipping in shallow waters creates a lot of silt and turbidity in the sea water which again is detrimental to corals, since corals require clear and clean water for their survival. There are several scientific studies which show that introduction of industrial waste, sewerage or increasing turbidity in any other way leads to destruction of coral reefs.

Thus, killing or destruction of reefs is akin to destroying a fertile tropical forest and replacing it with an arid desert that swarms with harmful diseases. It would do well to remember that not many tropical rain forests exist in the world, nor do many of its marine counterparts.

Security concerns:

In several discussions, almost always the economic concerns and to some extent the ecological concerns are voiced. However, very few people if any are concerned about the security concerns of destroying the Palk strait to make a shipping canal. When we talk about security, we can think of it in either short term or long term. In either case, removal of the reefs, especially at the Palk strait area is a bad idea. In the long term, it has been shown that reefs can mitigate the effects of tidal waves. They also help stabilize the coastal geography by considerably slowing down existent currents. If the reefs are destroyed, another tsunami might do intensive damage to the coastline villages. This line of reasoning, though seemingly far-fetched is imminently possible. Tectonically, the Indian plate is one of the most active, the reason why Mt. Everest still keeps growing every passing year. The fault line along the Indonesian islands has also not lost all its strain and hence is a disaster waiting to happen. Apart from the fact that lives can be saved with an advance warning system that has been put in place, a strong tidal wave in a coastline without reefs can remove considerable amount of soil from the coastal regions in India. This seemingly innocuous happening would mean that the coastal soil that is rich in thorium may be lost in large quantities. In the current geo-political scenario, having vast amounts of thorium means energy security in the long term and we should not be chancing it for few nickels and dimes.

While the long term scenario seems to be dependent on un-fortuitous sequence of events, the short term security picture is clearer. It is known that the rebellious faction in Sri-Lanka, the LTTE, has been strengthening their naval capabilities. Though they are no where near building a carrier fleet capable of threatening Indian Naval security in the open seas, they have strong attack and flee capability as demonstrated by several acts of piracy in the regions surrounding Rameshwaram and Dhanushkodi. The Indian government, due to the pressure of coalition politics has remained a mute spectator to the growing menace in its neighborhood. Let us consider a scenario where the proposed canal is indeed built. The total width is approximately 40 miles, of which 24 miles on either side is lost on territorial waters leaving only 16 nautical miles of shared waterways. Such a narrow water passage provides a haven for piracy in these regions by the LTTE. In fact, it is not surprising to note that the current DMK government is pushing this project against the wishes of the state people, the central government and now the court. The northern part of Sri Lanka, covering Thalai Mannar, Mullaitivu, Kilinochi and Jaffna are under the control of LTTE and this canal if constructed may enhance their activities in both the Palk Strait and in the Mannar gulf. (See adjoining map - ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LTTE_ACTIVE_AREAS_31AUG2007_MAP.jpg)This will also provide them safe haven to run larger boats and small ships to transfer people and other dubious resources to India and back for terrorist activities if this way is cleared.

The sympathy of DMK / DK for LTTE is well known. It is also known that since the advent of the current government in TamilNadu, the LTTE have grown bold and strong, both in numbers and psyche. Their activities in and around the Indian peninsula have become more audacious than before. Thus, religious reasons apart, if we analyze the project any way, the SSCP seems to be harmful to the society and the country, in both short and long terms. It does not matter if one assesses the impact of the project in either economical, biological or security terms – it does not pass the test of viability.

Not all dream projects are good enough to put into reality. Sometimes, dreams should allow to be just that, lest they become real nightmares. In this case, DMK wants to realize its dreams and create a nightmare for India. It is high time every one including the DMK realized that the SSCP is not just inviable, but plain dangerous.
Since the DMK government is enamored with the LTTE and does not recognize them for what they are, a terrorist group, the onus falls on the people, the fifth pillar of democracy and finally on the Supreme court to put a full stop to this project in the interest of national security.

2007-08-02T14:55:00.000-04:00

few of you had a tough time with the tamizh verse(s) posted yesterday.
to those who wanted a taste but were unable to due to language barriers, here is a rough translation ..

i spilt two tears, one from each eye.
they blurred the ink (on the paper), shook my physique
(*it can also mean, blur my reality*)
my writings became as blurred as my thoughts / mind itself
in my eyes shrunk with dispair, ur form (@) alone fell as a ray of light.
(may also mean: your image still lingers in my eye / your memories still linger in my eyes)

neither were you the first, nor the primary,
but stay like a small lamp in the corner of my mind
neither were you my destiny, nor does your memories leave me,
you live as a shade of a tree in the path of my life
(*can also mean - will provide shade to me in the path of my life*)

i could see times flying by, dissolving into oblivion,
as a speck of dust in wind, as a drop of rain in the ocean
knew weren't destined to be together even before we met,
why all the waiting, pray i knew!!

i have looked into your eyes, by the sea, by your side,
have sat, without touching
i have listened to your words, floating in the breeze,
and let the time fly along ...

i know we are parallel lines,
with an illusion of joining hands in the distant future
even then, i am happy to give you
a place in my heart, my mind.

don't know how long i would remember you,
nor do i know when and how this will end.
all i know is this feeling will live with me,
since this too is a kind of love.

k

kanneer ...

2007-08-01T09:45:00.000-04:00

Kanneer:

Iru thuli kanneer, vizhikku onru.
Therithu vizhundhu, mai kalakkiyadhu, mei kalakkiyadhu
Kuzhaindha maiyum, kalangiya manamum onraai therindhadhu
Kurugiya vizhigaLil un bimbam mattum oLiyaai vizhundhadhu

mudhalum illai, mudhanmaiyum illai nee,
manadhin Orathil oru agal vilakkaai,
vidhiyum illai, viduvadhum illai nee
vaazhvin payanathil oru nizhal tharuvaai

karaindhu dhaan pOnadhu kaalangaL kan munnae,
kaatrilae parandha dhoosaai, kadalilae vizhundha mazhaiyaai
kaanum munbe theriyum, saerumidam vaerendru,
kaathirundhadhu mattum edharkendru theriyavillai.

unnirendu vizhi paarthu ulagai marandhu
kadalarugil arugamarndhu kaipadadhu kanpaarthu
sillendru kaatradikka sila varthai nee pesi
sirippondru udhirthu sila mani thuligaL kazhindhana

ippodhum theriyum, inai kOdugal naam endru
idhO, kan munnae saervadhu pOl oru maayai
irundhaalum manadhil Orathil eppOdhum
idamondru unakkendru undu

ethanai naal ninaivu irukkum, eppOdhu idhu mudiyum
enakkonrum theriyavillai. aenendru puriyavillai
kaatradhanai naan swaasikkum varaiyilum irukkum idhu
kaadhalil oru vagai.

2007-05-16T18:19:00.000-04:00

For a moment ...

let us sit on the sands,
let time and distance dissolve into eternity.
let us do a silent discussion -
let our minds do the talking and
let the waves play in harmony

let us live those days bygone
for a moment - let us live those days bygone.
heavy is the heart with untold stories.
the mind is heavy too - with unshared memories.
let our minds do the talking and
let the waves play in harmony.

let the rain soothe our faces,
let the drizzle awaken our soul.
let the wind sing us a song
let the moon watch over us
let our minds do the talking and
let the waves play in harmony

wake up my friend, let us catch up with lost time
let us chat to our hearts content, without uttering a word.
let the friendship bloom with more splendour
like a lilly under the moon and
like a lotus under the sun ...

2007-05-15T18:07:00.000-04:00

today i ran after a long long time ...
i felt good. after that i also did some stair-master for 10 mins.

here are the stats for the running
Distance: 2.5 Miles
Time: 35 minutes
average speed: 4.3 Miles / Hr (not great - but will try and improve)
Total calories burnt today was 290 on the treadmill + 80 on the stepper -> 370 cals.
here i come :D

k