Rediff's most read articles of 2005 makes a sad comment on Indian readers choice.
Of the top 10 articles that were read almost 6 belong to "Entertainment" and only one or two concerns nation's situation.
And rediff.com being an online journal you would think it is read by "educated" , IT savy folks.
One fails to understand how (some chap) Abhjit Sawant's interview or the movie Salam Namaste's review could even be ranked amongst the most read ?
The "educated masses" of the nation truely suck. No wonder Times of India has the highest readership.
Duh !
Friday, December 30, 2005
Kings of Entertainment
Yesterday night on NBC's Jay Leno, i had a rare chance to see two of the finest entertainers come together. Jerry Seinfeld was on Jay Leno's show. Though Jerry might have been on this show several times before, i saw him for the first time.
There mutual respect was pretty palpable. I guess real talent commands respect even from a contemporary or even a competitor.
Jay Leno and Jerry Seinfeld may not be in direct competition with each other but are surely within the same domain of entertainment.
So as Jerry performed in front of the audience, Jay Leno quite gracefully took the back seat on his own show and let Jerry enjoy his moment. Truely a mark of a great entertainer. I guess Jay Leno is far to secured and confident about himself and thats what that proved.
There mutual respect was pretty palpable. I guess real talent commands respect even from a contemporary or even a competitor.
Jay Leno and Jerry Seinfeld may not be in direct competition with each other but are surely within the same domain of entertainment.
So as Jerry performed in front of the audience, Jay Leno quite gracefully took the back seat on his own show and let Jerry enjoy his moment. Truely a mark of a great entertainer. I guess Jay Leno is far to secured and confident about himself and thats what that proved.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Sonia Bhakti in style
Not sure if Sonia-Bhakt and editor of the Outlook magazine Vinod Mehta makes an effort to be obnoxious or is he truely gifted (in that)? In his year end op/ed he says that
"BJP will pin blame on troublesome italian. "
Now now Vinod ji, we know you can be a sucker. You still have that Debonair hangover. But spare us "Hindu, communal, right wing, nationalist rogues" some respect.
Anyways a qualified waitress who now lives as a queen with a Prime Minister under her service couldn't care less for your bhakti.
Go get a life !
"BJP will pin blame on troublesome italian. "
Now now Vinod ji, we know you can be a sucker. You still have that Debonair hangover. But spare us "Hindu, communal, right wing, nationalist rogues" some respect.
Anyways a qualified waitress who now lives as a queen with a Prime Minister under her service couldn't care less for your bhakti.
Go get a life !
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
That sinking feeling
Another day, another attack.
As IT/BPO guys prepare to shell thousands on partying for new year, one might want to ponder about the latest terrorist attack on IISC Banglore.
Institutes like IISC Banglore are not mere universities. They are the very temples of Intellect in the country. IITs and IISCs are the reason why Indians are (if at all) respected outside. The guys from these institutes prepared the groundwork in earlier days in the International arena for midgets like us to earn money in dollars. We (as in IT guys) owe atleast a part or our success, if not our entire success, to these institutes.
When IT/Software was not big, only people from such universities or researchers would land in US (unless off course you had other means and reasons to). They were young and bright graduates who created a positive image of India in international business and government houses. I am sure that most industries would have tested Indian waters with these guys before hiring others from India.
Nevertheless this latest attack is another reminder (as if we needed one) of the danger lurking within our country.
To expect anything from the current establishment will be stupid. It is too steeped in appeasing the perpetrators of the crime. I guess time has come when the nationalists of the nation need to device means and methods to independently defend ourselves. We cannot keep on arguing with bleeding hearts and "secularists" forever. Doesn't make sense any more. If need be, create private armies and get in touch with other victims of jehadis, like for instance Israelis and learn an art or two of tackling them.
IT industry will be in a soup if more such attacks are carried. Our so called economic boom is IT centric (services form 70% of GDP). If nations loose confidence in our security we will loose on important clients and business. And even before we realise we will be in a midst of a crisis.
Clearly the attack was symbolic more than it was meant to be violent. IISC and Banglore together represent a brand, if you will. The attack (by ISI) was on the brand more than on the unfortunate professors. ISI wants to create a fear psychosis within the nation. And one must say it is doing a good job at that.
The first thing UPA government did after coming to power was to remove the law of POTA just to garner a handful of muslim votes. While UPA and Sonia Gandhi are at luxury of playing vote-bank politics , same cannot be said of the nation. We cannot afford to loose this battle against ISI.
As IT/BPO guys prepare to shell thousands on partying for new year, one might want to ponder about the latest terrorist attack on IISC Banglore.
Institutes like IISC Banglore are not mere universities. They are the very temples of Intellect in the country. IITs and IISCs are the reason why Indians are (if at all) respected outside. The guys from these institutes prepared the groundwork in earlier days in the International arena for midgets like us to earn money in dollars. We (as in IT guys) owe atleast a part or our success, if not our entire success, to these institutes.
When IT/Software was not big, only people from such universities or researchers would land in US (unless off course you had other means and reasons to). They were young and bright graduates who created a positive image of India in international business and government houses. I am sure that most industries would have tested Indian waters with these guys before hiring others from India.
Nevertheless this latest attack is another reminder (as if we needed one) of the danger lurking within our country.
To expect anything from the current establishment will be stupid. It is too steeped in appeasing the perpetrators of the crime. I guess time has come when the nationalists of the nation need to device means and methods to independently defend ourselves. We cannot keep on arguing with bleeding hearts and "secularists" forever. Doesn't make sense any more. If need be, create private armies and get in touch with other victims of jehadis, like for instance Israelis and learn an art or two of tackling them.
IT industry will be in a soup if more such attacks are carried. Our so called economic boom is IT centric (services form 70% of GDP). If nations loose confidence in our security we will loose on important clients and business. And even before we realise we will be in a midst of a crisis.
Clearly the attack was symbolic more than it was meant to be violent. IISC and Banglore together represent a brand, if you will. The attack (by ISI) was on the brand more than on the unfortunate professors. ISI wants to create a fear psychosis within the nation. And one must say it is doing a good job at that.
The first thing UPA government did after coming to power was to remove the law of POTA just to garner a handful of muslim votes. While UPA and Sonia Gandhi are at luxury of playing vote-bank politics , same cannot be said of the nation. We cannot afford to loose this battle against ISI.
Curse of Populism
The UPA government may have gone by 2008. But not without doing infinite damage to the country.
Shankar Acharya, former Chief Economic Advisor and a professor at ICRIER explains this in his short but to the point article
There are still a few stable heads in Congress too. Wonder what Jairam Ramesh is still doing in Congress ? Anyways sooner or later he will move out, i am sure.
As for Manmohan Singh and Chidamabaram, i do not see them to be people of great authority. They are mere pygmies who flow along with the direction of their mentors (read Gandhi family). They may (or may not) possess skills as economists, but they lack the ability to force through with their ideas as they are totally dependent on one family for their survival in power.
Shankar Acharya, former Chief Economic Advisor and a professor at ICRIER explains this in his short but to the point article
There are still a few stable heads in Congress too. Wonder what Jairam Ramesh is still doing in Congress ? Anyways sooner or later he will move out, i am sure.
As for Manmohan Singh and Chidamabaram, i do not see them to be people of great authority. They are mere pygmies who flow along with the direction of their mentors (read Gandhi family). They may (or may not) possess skills as economists, but they lack the ability to force through with their ideas as they are totally dependent on one family for their survival in power.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Shameless Congress
Its a sad day for India. With reservations now coming to Private and un-aided institutes the rot has set in completely. Whats worse is that only institutes run by Hindus would be subjected to Reservations. The minority run institutes would enjoy the privilege of managing and admitting the way they want. Lol ! thats secularism for you Congressi ishtyle .
Minority institutes will be free to mint money money and no prizes for guessing what they will use that money to finance.
Jehad, Convserions any one ?
Gandhi family's lust for power notwithstanding, we are doomed eternally.
One shudders at the thought of imagining India 25 years from now.
Minority institutes will be free to mint money money and no prizes for guessing what they will use that money to finance.
Jehad, Convserions any one ?
Gandhi family's lust for power notwithstanding, we are doomed eternally.
One shudders at the thought of imagining India 25 years from now.
Whats with labelling?
Manoj's engagement date was almost coinciding with Sandeep's marriage date. This was some four years back. Both Manoj and Sandeep were my friends from my workplace. Both north Indians; Manoj being a marwari from Rajasthan and Sandeep a punjabi from Dehli. As i had never personally attended any north Indian wedding i thought it was an opportune time. I first went to Jaipur to attend Manoj's engagement and then attended Sandeep's wedding in Dehli. Both events were case of contrasting lifestyles.
"Kanjoos Marwari" has been a phrase that we have used since childhood. Anyone remotely stingy promptly acquired this label. And Punjab was always associated with spending and extravagance. If you have seen Mira Nair's movie "Monsoon Wedding" you'd realise what i just said.
So when we went to Jaipur i was expecting a simple ceremony with limited quests and stuff. And basically Manoj was a very simple guy and never flashy. So only when we saw his engagement ceremony we realised how (filthy) rich he really was. We (the guests) were checked in a 5 start hotel and the treatement was as royal as it gets.
On the other hand Sandeep's wedding was pretty simple and conducted in a very subdued environment.
After this event one small reality struck me. Never go by "labels". We generally associate pre-concieved notions with a cast or a race or a religion or a nationality or even a political party. Thats not always the case.
From my own personal experience i can tell you that i have never seen a kanjoos marwari or a kanjoos sindhi etc in my life. If at all, all the marwaris and sindhis i have befriended have been pretty benevolent if not extravagant. On the other hand i have seen the worst possible stinginess in some of my Maharshtrian friends and South Indian friends; both of whom have not been labelled so.
Point being, there's more to it then labels.
When we came to America we had pre-concived notions about its culture. We were bombarded with its 'liberal' image via TV and movies. When i started working here and got to know more about my colleagues i realised they were as conservative, and in certain areas even more, then Indians.
Also one of the more common myths i find amongst the desis staying in US is that Bush administration is anti-India and that Clinton administration was good for us. If you observe closely our ties with US improved with NDA at the center and Bush in US. Infact we hit a nadir in relationship when a certified anti-India hawk Madeleine Albright was at the helm of affairs under the Clinton Administration.
But people generally go by what is fashionable, isn't in? So i was not surprised when Massachusetts Democrat (and hence supposedly "pro-Indian") Ed Markey introduced a resoultion in Capitol opposing the Indo-US nuclear deal. Again a good example of the myth about Democrats in US.
We have Sardarji jokes in India (like how they have blonde jokes in US). But frankly i have seen more intelligent blonds and Sardars then not.
So whats really about all this labelling. I guess we as human beings enjoy judging and labelling others. We think its our divine right to sit on a higher pedestal and be judgemental.
Indian politics is a classic case of Labelling. Specially for people who take English media news on face value.
I had written an article on Bombay after it was hit by floods in last July. I made a mention about BJP/Sena's rule saying -
The BJP-Sena government ruled Maharashtra for only 5 years. But what they gave Bombay was priceless.Imagine, had it not been for the initiative taken by the dynamic PWD minister Nitin Gadkari during their rule, would we have seen Bandra-Borivili connected so well? Would we have seen those innumerable number of flyovers which now hang over the city landscape and which in effect removed so many traffic bottle necks.
Lot of anti-Sena people will argue that it was the previous Congress governments plan. The hard fact is, it requires political will and foresight to carry out such major investments in infrastructure,and not just plans on paper.
Sadly the anti-BJP media never focused on this achievement of that government and far more tragic is the fact that the same mumbaikars who should have been thankful to this government, voted them out.
Thanks to newspapers like TOI and channels like NDTV which most "educated" middle class follow, what Sena/BJP achieved in those 5 years was never putforth for public knowledge. Shiv Sena was labelled as a "fascist", "rogue" party who's only achievement (it seems) was changing names. (In the meantime Calcutta became Kolkatta and Madras became Chennai, but thats irrelevant, because according to The Times of India, Communists are "progressive,secular and educated")
So only Sena was associated with name changing sydrome while the "progressive seculars" had a ball with name changing elsewhere. It became a permanent label, like how BJP acquired a permanent label of being a "hindu communal party" - the fact notwithstanding that it was the best 6 years of governance India had ever seen in its political history - financially, administratively or other wise. Infact the word "Governance" became a routine phrase in India's political lingo after NDA's rule. It was unheard of before.
Take another example of Gujarat. Its NOT a common knowledge that Gujarat is doing great under Modi - who by the way is English media's bete noire . Apart from the fact that Gujaratis love him (BJP swipped all the elections in Panchayat and Municipal Corporations recently) it was also acknowledged by Rajiv Gandhi foundation as being the best governed state . Its a different story that one of its director Mr. Bibek Debroy was asked to resign under duress from (mother saint) Sonia Gandhi.
Thanks to the likes of Mahesh Bhatts and Teesta Setalvad and NDTV,TOI,IE et al Gujarat is still and will always be associated with riots.
I guess people who do not have the capacity to think or analyse beyond headlines and labels will be perpetually doomed in their limited knowledge and understanding of any subject. And that sadly is the majority of the readers i am talking of here. The masses, if you will.
Newspapers like TOI who target the young breed (yea that explains its semi-porn nature) cannot be taken infinitely seriously as far as real political analysis is concerned. Until the time it comes out of its obsession for India's longest running soap opera - The Gandhis - it will always play mischief with journalism.
Its not an irony that after the "progressive, secular" government of Congress came in Maharahstra, it got the worst power problems ever. The infrastructure development is at a stand still as power woes continue for once the most industrialised state of the country. Barring Bombay, there's power cut for as long as six hours every day in Maharashtra. Budget deficit is at an all time high. No significant highway was built in last 7 years of its rule after Pune-Bombay expressway was built almost 8 years ago under Sena-BJP govt.
But yea we will have to live with this. Because the collective intellectual bankruptcy of our country will always favour the wrong guys.
Communists are labelled as pro-poor , may be that explains why West Bengal is amongst the poorest of all States. Yea it does suit communists that it remains poor for ever.
Gandhi family is labelled as "secular", "sacrificing" band of people who would do anything for the country. Yea right - Bofors, Volcker et al explain that.
Yea right, Sena government "only" changed the names and Congress governement was reponsible for all the development in the state. Yea right :-) Power supply anyone ? Roads anyone? Bombay floods ? what was that ?
I should really bow down to the Indian "intellect" and its "mastheads" in journalism. I did not have to go too far to discover mediocrity of staggering proportions at one place. :-)
"Kanjoos Marwari" has been a phrase that we have used since childhood. Anyone remotely stingy promptly acquired this label. And Punjab was always associated with spending and extravagance. If you have seen Mira Nair's movie "Monsoon Wedding" you'd realise what i just said.
So when we went to Jaipur i was expecting a simple ceremony with limited quests and stuff. And basically Manoj was a very simple guy and never flashy. So only when we saw his engagement ceremony we realised how (filthy) rich he really was. We (the guests) were checked in a 5 start hotel and the treatement was as royal as it gets.
On the other hand Sandeep's wedding was pretty simple and conducted in a very subdued environment.
After this event one small reality struck me. Never go by "labels". We generally associate pre-concieved notions with a cast or a race or a religion or a nationality or even a political party. Thats not always the case.
From my own personal experience i can tell you that i have never seen a kanjoos marwari or a kanjoos sindhi etc in my life. If at all, all the marwaris and sindhis i have befriended have been pretty benevolent if not extravagant. On the other hand i have seen the worst possible stinginess in some of my Maharshtrian friends and South Indian friends; both of whom have not been labelled so.
Point being, there's more to it then labels.
When we came to America we had pre-concived notions about its culture. We were bombarded with its 'liberal' image via TV and movies. When i started working here and got to know more about my colleagues i realised they were as conservative, and in certain areas even more, then Indians.
Also one of the more common myths i find amongst the desis staying in US is that Bush administration is anti-India and that Clinton administration was good for us. If you observe closely our ties with US improved with NDA at the center and Bush in US. Infact we hit a nadir in relationship when a certified anti-India hawk Madeleine Albright was at the helm of affairs under the Clinton Administration.
But people generally go by what is fashionable, isn't in? So i was not surprised when Massachusetts Democrat (and hence supposedly "pro-Indian") Ed Markey introduced a resoultion in Capitol opposing the Indo-US nuclear deal. Again a good example of the myth about Democrats in US.
We have Sardarji jokes in India (like how they have blonde jokes in US). But frankly i have seen more intelligent blonds and Sardars then not.
So whats really about all this labelling. I guess we as human beings enjoy judging and labelling others. We think its our divine right to sit on a higher pedestal and be judgemental.
Indian politics is a classic case of Labelling. Specially for people who take English media news on face value.
I had written an article on Bombay after it was hit by floods in last July. I made a mention about BJP/Sena's rule saying -
The BJP-Sena government ruled Maharashtra for only 5 years. But what they gave Bombay was priceless.Imagine, had it not been for the initiative taken by the dynamic PWD minister Nitin Gadkari during their rule, would we have seen Bandra-Borivili connected so well? Would we have seen those innumerable number of flyovers which now hang over the city landscape and which in effect removed so many traffic bottle necks.
Lot of anti-Sena people will argue that it was the previous Congress governments plan. The hard fact is, it requires political will and foresight to carry out such major investments in infrastructure,and not just plans on paper.
Sadly the anti-BJP media never focused on this achievement of that government and far more tragic is the fact that the same mumbaikars who should have been thankful to this government, voted them out.
Thanks to newspapers like TOI and channels like NDTV which most "educated" middle class follow, what Sena/BJP achieved in those 5 years was never putforth for public knowledge. Shiv Sena was labelled as a "fascist", "rogue" party who's only achievement (it seems) was changing names. (In the meantime Calcutta became Kolkatta and Madras became Chennai, but thats irrelevant, because according to The Times of India, Communists are "progressive,secular and educated")
So only Sena was associated with name changing sydrome while the "progressive seculars" had a ball with name changing elsewhere. It became a permanent label, like how BJP acquired a permanent label of being a "hindu communal party" - the fact notwithstanding that it was the best 6 years of governance India had ever seen in its political history - financially, administratively or other wise. Infact the word "Governance" became a routine phrase in India's political lingo after NDA's rule. It was unheard of before.
Take another example of Gujarat. Its NOT a common knowledge that Gujarat is doing great under Modi - who by the way is English media's bete noire . Apart from the fact that Gujaratis love him (BJP swipped all the elections in Panchayat and Municipal Corporations recently) it was also acknowledged by Rajiv Gandhi foundation as being the best governed state . Its a different story that one of its director Mr. Bibek Debroy was asked to resign under duress from (mother saint) Sonia Gandhi.
Thanks to the likes of Mahesh Bhatts and Teesta Setalvad and NDTV,TOI,IE et al Gujarat is still and will always be associated with riots.
I guess people who do not have the capacity to think or analyse beyond headlines and labels will be perpetually doomed in their limited knowledge and understanding of any subject. And that sadly is the majority of the readers i am talking of here. The masses, if you will.
Newspapers like TOI who target the young breed (yea that explains its semi-porn nature) cannot be taken infinitely seriously as far as real political analysis is concerned. Until the time it comes out of its obsession for India's longest running soap opera - The Gandhis - it will always play mischief with journalism.
Its not an irony that after the "progressive, secular" government of Congress came in Maharahstra, it got the worst power problems ever. The infrastructure development is at a stand still as power woes continue for once the most industrialised state of the country. Barring Bombay, there's power cut for as long as six hours every day in Maharashtra. Budget deficit is at an all time high. No significant highway was built in last 7 years of its rule after Pune-Bombay expressway was built almost 8 years ago under Sena-BJP govt.
But yea we will have to live with this. Because the collective intellectual bankruptcy of our country will always favour the wrong guys.
Communists are labelled as pro-poor , may be that explains why West Bengal is amongst the poorest of all States. Yea it does suit communists that it remains poor for ever.
Gandhi family is labelled as "secular", "sacrificing" band of people who would do anything for the country. Yea right - Bofors, Volcker et al explain that.
Yea right, Sena government "only" changed the names and Congress governement was reponsible for all the development in the state. Yea right :-) Power supply anyone ? Roads anyone? Bombay floods ? what was that ?
I should really bow down to the Indian "intellect" and its "mastheads" in journalism. I did not have to go too far to discover mediocrity of staggering proportions at one place. :-)
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Point Taken
Are NDA ruled states better governed? Find answers on this nice article that appeared pseudosecularism blog.
Link...
Link...
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Dampening note
Devangshu Datta makes a dampening observation in rediff.com 's business news.
Our PM says we need $150 billion worth of investment to be made in next five years in infrastructure. Yea right ! And your partners will allow you to do that Mr. PM ?
Making grand statements has been customary in India as far as political parties and especially Congress is concerned. Congress has been plain lucky (or is it manipulative) that media buys its statements on face value, unlike the step-motherly way it treats the BJP.
Anyways one can only hope that Congress can do something about infrastructure development and take out sometime from its busy schedule of appeasing the minorities and demonising the BJP.
Our PM says we need $150 billion worth of investment to be made in next five years in infrastructure. Yea right ! And your partners will allow you to do that Mr. PM ?
Making grand statements has been customary in India as far as political parties and especially Congress is concerned. Congress has been plain lucky (or is it manipulative) that media buys its statements on face value, unlike the step-motherly way it treats the BJP.
Anyways one can only hope that Congress can do something about infrastructure development and take out sometime from its busy schedule of appeasing the minorities and demonising the BJP.
Friday, December 16, 2005
The difference is Rajeev.
The one thing i like of Rajeev Srinivasan's brand of articles is that they are almost never without backed up details. I think the reason might be his educational background. He comes from IIT and Stanford, both very sound institutions in their own right. Apart from that he is not a regular journalist like the one's who adorn the (semi-porn) Times of India or the shabby Indian Express. Most of the journalists that write articles in these two dailies have pure journalism knowledge that they generally get from instistutes like Jawaharlal Nehru University etc.
Rajeev gets into the skin of the issue and presents it in the most compelling form possible. There's no fickle argument here. It's almost always backed up to the core.
Let's take for example his latest article in rediff.com - The Value of Hindu Life
He formulates his position by giving step by step details of each component of the argument with proper dates and links and other details. While most journalists will write a story with heavy dose of high-handed vocabulary, they forget to back it up with substantial details. Rajeev on the other hand is precise and neat and one cannot doubt is vocabulary either.
I enjoy reading his articles and believe that people like him or Arun Shourie or Bramha Chellanney have set different standards in journalism , in India. And what more , they are not pure journalists. Its an irony today that the best articles and the most informative pieces come from people who are not professional journalists.
Rajeev gets into the skin of the issue and presents it in the most compelling form possible. There's no fickle argument here. It's almost always backed up to the core.
Let's take for example his latest article in rediff.com - The Value of Hindu Life
He formulates his position by giving step by step details of each component of the argument with proper dates and links and other details. While most journalists will write a story with heavy dose of high-handed vocabulary, they forget to back it up with substantial details. Rajeev on the other hand is precise and neat and one cannot doubt is vocabulary either.
I enjoy reading his articles and believe that people like him or Arun Shourie or Bramha Chellanney have set different standards in journalism , in India. And what more , they are not pure journalists. Its an irony today that the best articles and the most informative pieces come from people who are not professional journalists.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Pervert Minoritysm
Congressman Arjun Singh displays an exemplary lust for boot-licking minorities. As if it was not enough for a snub from HC in Andhra Pradesh and even SC for reserving seats in Aligarh University, our honourable minister now wants reservations in every private institute of the country for minorities.
So much for SECULARISM. ! Gosh Congress man will even convert to Islam and get their dicks sliced for one small smile from Imams.
Arjun Singh wants reservations in premium institutes like IIM and IITs for the minorities (read muslims) and our so called "economist" and "educated" PM sits comfortably on his seat while all this is happening right under his nose.
Or is it ?
Does Singh know who's really upto what in his team of ministers ? Or is it that every minister is an island.
As India moves further on capitalism these breaks applied by Congressmen can only be a cause for concern all the right thinking Indians (And trust me, there are'nt many of us)
Daily Pioneer carries an interesting report on Arjun (Mulla) Singh's latest histrionics.
Continued ....
So much for SECULARISM. ! Gosh Congress man will even convert to Islam and get their dicks sliced for one small smile from Imams.
Arjun Singh wants reservations in premium institutes like IIM and IITs for the minorities (read muslims) and our so called "economist" and "educated" PM sits comfortably on his seat while all this is happening right under his nose.
Or is it ?
Does Singh know who's really upto what in his team of ministers ? Or is it that every minister is an island.
As India moves further on capitalism these breaks applied by Congressmen can only be a cause for concern all the right thinking Indians (And trust me, there are'nt many of us)
Daily Pioneer carries an interesting report on Arjun (Mulla) Singh's latest histrionics.
| Arjun Singh's minority fixation has Govt in fix | |||
| |||
| After the Supreme Court struck down quota provisions in unaided minority and private institutions, an all-party consensus had emerged for amending the Constitution and the HRD Ministry was assigned the task to work out the nitty-gritty of a new legislation. | |||
| But the HRD Ministry sprung a surprise by sneaking in an exemption to the minority institutions, which was opposed by the law ministry, but ratified by the Union Cabinet. However, it opened a Pandora's box with the BJP and the Left sharply opposing the 'minority' clause and OBC MPs latching on to the opportunity to demand quota for their own castes. | |||
Continued ....
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Sachin surpasses Gavaskar
When Sachin hit the cricketing scene some 17 yrs ago, many had already predicted that he would surpass Gavaskar's century count. So when Sachin finally achieved this feat i am sure many were not surprised. To expect from Sachin is very much a norm in India. It is a granted assumption that he will deliver. In fact it becomes an issue when he doesn't.
Still one must say that by the standards that he set for himself, he took a wee bit longer to achieve what he finally achieved. Off course if you take a closer look at his career you might realise that it was not a cakewalk.
Comparison with Gavaskar would always be natural. Both were short, belonged to Mumbai and were openers. But the comparison should ideally end there.
What Sachin gave to India was priceless. He gave India the hope of winning every match. With Sachin stood the entire nation's desires. Its very purpose of watching a match.
Its one thing to deliver when you are not under focus and another thing to come up triumphant when you are carrying the extra baggage of a nation's hope. And a nation as big as India and as emotional as it is, with every Indian feeling his birth right to pass judgement on every thing Sachin does.
What amazes me about Sachin is his level head. There's never a tinge of arrogance or show of pompousness on this man. I think what carried Sachin through all these years inspite of sometimes nasty criticisms and at times even smear campaign by his baiters was that he truely loved his job.He was so involved in cricket that he never realised that people were making an issue out of every move of his.
Besides, Sachin's stature in world cricket had attained such great heights that he commanded respect from every team in world and every cricketer in the international arena. And when you get a compliment from a person as great as Sir Don , you have already got a certificate that every cricketer worth his salt can ever dream of. If Al Pacino tells you that you are one of the greatest actors you do not need an Oscar.
Compliment's are due to his wife Anjali and his family who, one presumes, provided the neccessary support of moral framework for his histrionics. As Sunny Gavasker wrote in his congratulationary note to Sachin - Congratulations are also due to his family who have helped him to stay focused. They deserve a big round of applause too for their part in his success
Someone said that when you love your job you do not have to work. That's what has happened with Sachin. He loved his game so much that he was always hungry to contribute. If not by bat then may be by getting some wickets or may be even on the field. I have always seen him 100% involved in the game at any point of time.
There will be many great articles written on this man as have been written in the past. And beyond doubt he deserves every bit of this praise. Critics be damned. They do not have to carry the load of one billion individuals everyday of their lives. Passing judgement on cricket, sitting on their arm chairs, in front of TV is the easiest thing to do. Anyways all great men have been criticized time and again.
It takes only a Sachin Tendulkar to keep on producing results continuously for 16 years non-stop. There won't be many like him and there weren't many like him either.
This great but humble character of Indian cricket will forever remain my all time favourite cricketer. For every time i will switch on my TV to watch India play, somewhere in my heart there will always be a call to God to let keep Sachin going. With so many prayers with him everytime he goes to the crease, even God will have to budge.
Sachin's records may not tell the full story, neither the staticians will never be able to do full justice to his contribution to the game. They will only tell part of the story. The other part of the story we all, i.e all of Sachin fans know. We do not care what critics blabber. We know and know it for sure that till Sachin's there we have hope. And that is what makes the game worth watching.
He is one cricketer from India who took the fight to the opposition's camp. Whether it was hammering Abdul Qadir for 3 sixes in a row in front of a bi-partisan crowd in Pakistan or taking poor Kasporowich out of attack or making Richard Hadlee wonder in pain what to bowl next, this man has done to others what most Indian cricketers did not. I see traces of Sachin in young Sehwag. But he has a long way to go. Let us talk after 16 years.
In the meantime our guy continues to torment the opposition, though not so regularly now. Lets grant him the age factor puleez... and the fact that he started so early. There's also something called fatigue. Ask Sampras and Graf !!
Thank you Sachin Tendulkar (hope one day you would be called Sir) for entertaining us for all these years. You gave something to look forward to every game of cricket for last decade and a half. If for nothing else, we thank you for just the pure pleaseure of watching you bat.
Still one must say that by the standards that he set for himself, he took a wee bit longer to achieve what he finally achieved. Off course if you take a closer look at his career you might realise that it was not a cakewalk.
Comparison with Gavaskar would always be natural. Both were short, belonged to Mumbai and were openers. But the comparison should ideally end there.
What Sachin gave to India was priceless. He gave India the hope of winning every match. With Sachin stood the entire nation's desires. Its very purpose of watching a match.
Its one thing to deliver when you are not under focus and another thing to come up triumphant when you are carrying the extra baggage of a nation's hope. And a nation as big as India and as emotional as it is, with every Indian feeling his birth right to pass judgement on every thing Sachin does.
What amazes me about Sachin is his level head. There's never a tinge of arrogance or show of pompousness on this man. I think what carried Sachin through all these years inspite of sometimes nasty criticisms and at times even smear campaign by his baiters was that he truely loved his job.He was so involved in cricket that he never realised that people were making an issue out of every move of his.
Besides, Sachin's stature in world cricket had attained such great heights that he commanded respect from every team in world and every cricketer in the international arena. And when you get a compliment from a person as great as Sir Don , you have already got a certificate that every cricketer worth his salt can ever dream of. If Al Pacino tells you that you are one of the greatest actors you do not need an Oscar.
Compliment's are due to his wife Anjali and his family who, one presumes, provided the neccessary support of moral framework for his histrionics. As Sunny Gavasker wrote in his congratulationary note to Sachin - Congratulations are also due to his family who have helped him to stay focused. They deserve a big round of applause too for their part in his success
Someone said that when you love your job you do not have to work. That's what has happened with Sachin. He loved his game so much that he was always hungry to contribute. If not by bat then may be by getting some wickets or may be even on the field. I have always seen him 100% involved in the game at any point of time.
There will be many great articles written on this man as have been written in the past. And beyond doubt he deserves every bit of this praise. Critics be damned. They do not have to carry the load of one billion individuals everyday of their lives. Passing judgement on cricket, sitting on their arm chairs, in front of TV is the easiest thing to do. Anyways all great men have been criticized time and again.
It takes only a Sachin Tendulkar to keep on producing results continuously for 16 years non-stop. There won't be many like him and there weren't many like him either.
This great but humble character of Indian cricket will forever remain my all time favourite cricketer. For every time i will switch on my TV to watch India play, somewhere in my heart there will always be a call to God to let keep Sachin going. With so many prayers with him everytime he goes to the crease, even God will have to budge.
Sachin's records may not tell the full story, neither the staticians will never be able to do full justice to his contribution to the game. They will only tell part of the story. The other part of the story we all, i.e all of Sachin fans know. We do not care what critics blabber. We know and know it for sure that till Sachin's there we have hope. And that is what makes the game worth watching.
He is one cricketer from India who took the fight to the opposition's camp. Whether it was hammering Abdul Qadir for 3 sixes in a row in front of a bi-partisan crowd in Pakistan or taking poor Kasporowich out of attack or making Richard Hadlee wonder in pain what to bowl next, this man has done to others what most Indian cricketers did not. I see traces of Sachin in young Sehwag. But he has a long way to go. Let us talk after 16 years.
In the meantime our guy continues to torment the opposition, though not so regularly now. Lets grant him the age factor puleez... and the fact that he started so early. There's also something called fatigue. Ask Sampras and Graf !!
Thank you Sachin Tendulkar (hope one day you would be called Sir) for entertaining us for all these years. You gave something to look forward to every game of cricket for last decade and a half. If for nothing else, we thank you for just the pure pleaseure of watching you bat.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Volcker Report
Some hard facts that come out in Vocker's damning report.
1] A Congress delegation headed by Natwar Singh visited Iraq in January 2001. Jagat, Singh's son accompanied them in the capacity of youth Congress party worker.
2] Four allocations of one million barrels each was made to the Congress but no individual is mentioned.
3] The delegation handed over a personal letter from Sonia Gandhi expressing solidarity with Iraq regime (get the drift here)
4] "Natwar Contract" as its called in the report made roughly around 12.05 crores profit. "Congress contract" made another 2.93 crores INR.
5] Andaleeb Sehgal a close friend of Jagat was present in the meeting and acted as middle man.
Source : India Today
From above it is clear that the smoke is not without the fire. It is not proved conclusively though and may not be even be proved considering that only limited privileges have been given to Justice RS Pathak committee which is inquring into this scandal.
But that is expected. As it should be expected of a Congress run regime. Congress and corruption have a very healthy relationship and this marriage is now generally accepted by the people of India. People actually expect Congress to be corrupt and such exposes have become more or less mundane in India.
But thats not the point at all. If i recollect correctly , during the NDA rule, the media went out of the way to put the Government on the mat whenever a scandal was discovered. Indian Express carried a seperate link on its website for several days ( i believe more than a year) for what it called the "petroleum scandal". (Which btw pales in comparison)
The Times of India carried editorials after editorials demonising NDA and George Fernandes. The Hindu , off course , as one would expect was hitting Vajpayee below the belt at every opportunity.
Apparently they were doing their duty as a vigilant entity of the society and democracy. Fine.
But where has that virtue of the fourth estate vanished all of a sudden. No hard hitting article, no dedicated links on website, no nothing ! No one barring India Today dared to question the government on this ?
Volcker Report is another classic example of how badly the media in India is skewed in Congress and Left's favour. Unless we have a balance in the media there will never be a possibility of objective analysis of nation's problems. Congress will always be spared and BJP will always be the villian.
Sadly most readers take the journalists on their face value. Whatever is written or spoken by TOI/NDTV is taken as a gospel truth.
As educated individuals we should have the ability to recognise the bias in the media reporting. Sadly even people with good education lack the ability to look beyond the obvious. Most actually do not care and go along with what is fashionable.
Newspapers like TOI and organisations like NDTV are according to me the biggest culprits of our generation. Sadly they also are the market leaders. But India always had wrong heros, didn't we?
1] A Congress delegation headed by Natwar Singh visited Iraq in January 2001. Jagat, Singh's son accompanied them in the capacity of youth Congress party worker.
2] Four allocations of one million barrels each was made to the Congress but no individual is mentioned.
3] The delegation handed over a personal letter from Sonia Gandhi expressing solidarity with Iraq regime (get the drift here)
4] "Natwar Contract" as its called in the report made roughly around 12.05 crores profit. "Congress contract" made another 2.93 crores INR.
5] Andaleeb Sehgal a close friend of Jagat was present in the meeting and acted as middle man.
Source : India Today
From above it is clear that the smoke is not without the fire. It is not proved conclusively though and may not be even be proved considering that only limited privileges have been given to Justice RS Pathak committee which is inquring into this scandal.
But that is expected. As it should be expected of a Congress run regime. Congress and corruption have a very healthy relationship and this marriage is now generally accepted by the people of India. People actually expect Congress to be corrupt and such exposes have become more or less mundane in India.
But thats not the point at all. If i recollect correctly , during the NDA rule, the media went out of the way to put the Government on the mat whenever a scandal was discovered. Indian Express carried a seperate link on its website for several days ( i believe more than a year) for what it called the "petroleum scandal". (Which btw pales in comparison)
The Times of India carried editorials after editorials demonising NDA and George Fernandes. The Hindu , off course , as one would expect was hitting Vajpayee below the belt at every opportunity.
Apparently they were doing their duty as a vigilant entity of the society and democracy. Fine.
But where has that virtue of the fourth estate vanished all of a sudden. No hard hitting article, no dedicated links on website, no nothing ! No one barring India Today dared to question the government on this ?
Volcker Report is another classic example of how badly the media in India is skewed in Congress and Left's favour. Unless we have a balance in the media there will never be a possibility of objective analysis of nation's problems. Congress will always be spared and BJP will always be the villian.
Sadly most readers take the journalists on their face value. Whatever is written or spoken by TOI/NDTV is taken as a gospel truth.
As educated individuals we should have the ability to recognise the bias in the media reporting. Sadly even people with good education lack the ability to look beyond the obvious. Most actually do not care and go along with what is fashionable.
Newspapers like TOI and organisations like NDTV are according to me the biggest culprits of our generation. Sadly they also are the market leaders. But India always had wrong heros, didn't we?
The burden of Left
India Today carried a very interesting report last week, on how the Left is constraining the growth of the country.
I cannot recreate that article here but there's a small little information in tabular format that tells the big picture.
[..]COST OF LEFT
What does loss of 1% of GDP growth add up to? For instance, in 2004-5 the GDP in nominal terms was Rs 28,38,000 crore. If it had grown by 1% more, it would have been Rs 31,80,700 crore. That's a loss of Rs 3,42,690 crore, over 10 times the money spent by the Centre on health, education.[..]
WHAT'S ON HOLD UNDER LEFT PRESSURE
-BHEL disinvestments
-49% FDI in insurance
-Interest rate cut on EPF
-Labour reforms
-FDI in retail sector
-PSU disinvestments
-Pension reforms
Can you do the math for the number of years lost and are expected to be lost because of the "curse" called Left policies?
I cannot recreate that article here but there's a small little information in tabular format that tells the big picture.
[..]COST OF LEFT
What does loss of 1% of GDP growth add up to? For instance, in 2004-5 the GDP in nominal terms was Rs 28,38,000 crore. If it had grown by 1% more, it would have been Rs 31,80,700 crore. That's a loss of Rs 3,42,690 crore, over 10 times the money spent by the Centre on health, education.[..]
WHAT'S ON HOLD UNDER LEFT PRESSURE
-BHEL disinvestments
-49% FDI in insurance
-Interest rate cut on EPF
-Labour reforms
-FDI in retail sector
-PSU disinvestments
-Pension reforms
Can you do the math for the number of years lost and are expected to be lost because of the "curse" called Left policies?
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
10% Growth
The rediff.com headlines reads in bold - PM pitches for 10% growth.
There's this comic character in India called Shikari Shambu. Now this hunter (shikari) is actually a nervous reck who bumbles and fumbles but somehow becomes the hero in the end because some of his mistakes actually cause the wild beast to die or being captured.
He invariably becomes the hero in the eyes of unsuspecting villagers by default. And then Shikari Shambu smartly carasses his moustache in the end of each comic strip and conviniently claims the honour and badge of a hero.
When i see Sonia Gandhi's clerk , Manmohan Singh give sermons on economics i remember Shikari Shambu.
This was the man who became our FM in 1991/92. The country had by then mortgaged gold to World Bank against loan. There was this brilliant man called Narsimha Rao running a government. And there was this weak opposition. There was also a huge pressure from IMF and other external bodies to liberalise (or good word is liberate) our economy. In fact it was a precondition for the loan that could bring India out of the mess it was in.
A great PM, a weak opposition and a huge pressure-nah condition- from IMF to free the economoy. And what the FM did? Yea you guessed it. Take the first steps to liberate.
And bang. The entire Indian media, the entire indian middle class hails this fella as the Hero of Free Markets. Bang !. One shot this shikari shambhu is branded the saviour of our nation's economy.
Much like how Gandhi/Nehru are attributed for our independence from Britishers. This Sardar has become the icon amongst the Economic Times readers. That the British left the country on their own will and because ruling India was no longer profitable to them after the WWII is lost on many innocent souls; similarly no one realises that irrespective of whoever would have been the FM at that point of time would have done the same darn thing i.e free our economy from the prison of Nehruvian socialism and license quota raj of Indira Gandhi.
Nevertheless this man today stands as the father of modern economy. Its his brand. Like Gandhi or a Nehru... this guy is now married to a brand now. You just have to live with it.
I have this thing about brands. For example i never liked Sunil Gavaskar as a batsman. I know his brand was bigger than him. But no. Somehow i am rebellious in nature. I think he was not a team man. I do not recollect him coming at crucial times and winning a match for the country.
OK so now our alleged PM says that we must target 10% growth. Thanks a lot ! Tell us something new Mr. PM. You inherit the best possible economy from your predecessors and than talk like a champion.
And how does our "economist" PM plan to achieve this ? Well don't ask that ? Don't even bother.
He says there won't be any dis-investments in PSU (navratnas), he comes up with an economic blood bath called "social spending" (free jobs and stuff) , he does not have time to invest in infrastructure and make a compelling case for FDI, he cannot stop pinkos from unionising the two most promising sectors in service industry viz IT and BPO and yet he comes up with grand statements.
But you know what? He's right. Actually India is on an economic juggernaut now, and that is unstoppable. So not because, but INSPITE of this rag-tag government at the centre India will hit the 10% growth rate. And Mr. Singh our own Shikari Shambu will be crowned for the second time by the Economic Times and its lesser siblings in the media as the baadshah of Indian economy.
Singh may be a good man. I do not abhor him. He's a good man. My problem is with the undue credit he gets all the time. His lovers either portray him as a "simple", "honest" person at one end or the champion of free economy at the other.
He's neither. He's the king of defaults.
Sonia chose him as PM because he was the most harmless of em all. He does not have a mass following that can challenge Gandhi family's dominance. Neither does he have connections within the party. He was the best bet to keep the PM's seat warm until Rahul saheb was ready to take on. And Sonia the great "sacrificing" bahu of the biggest melodrama in India called Congress party has hit the bull's eye by making him PM. She need not worry of a rebel as a faithful dog will never bark at his masters. Singh will never grow beyond his madam's shadow. He cannot dare to.
So now as the queen prepares her son and prince for the much coveted crown the rest of the media simply waits for this lame duck to deliver.
India is at a threshhold of becoming a super-power. If not super, atleast a very formidible force in world politics. If we miss this chance we will never know when it will come. We have been mere pushovers till now. But we have a chance; if only like an opportunist we encash it.
Sadly with the current disposition i do not see it happening. Our policies are too much tilted on the Left to make considerable progress. There's no substatial backing to PM's optimism. His roar lacks bite.
With Left as your partners you can only go a certain distance. You can only push so much. Alas if keeping BJP away from power was not the only glue holding our parties together we could have achieved a whole lot.
Right wing politics has its own problems no doubt. But atleast on economics front right wing is great. The Soviets were constantly put on their toes by the conservative Reagan regime during the cold war; a great steam was lost by Russia during that period. Similarly Margaret Thatcher years of rightwing policies was a golden period in UK's history, economically.
By ousting NDA, the people of India deprived them of an extended conservative regime and broke the cycle mid-way of a potentially healthy period of stability and growth. With policies now taking a left turn again or in due course likely to take a left turn again, it will be back to square one.
There's this comic character in India called Shikari Shambu. Now this hunter (shikari) is actually a nervous reck who bumbles and fumbles but somehow becomes the hero in the end because some of his mistakes actually cause the wild beast to die or being captured.
He invariably becomes the hero in the eyes of unsuspecting villagers by default. And then Shikari Shambu smartly carasses his moustache in the end of each comic strip and conviniently claims the honour and badge of a hero.
When i see Sonia Gandhi's clerk , Manmohan Singh give sermons on economics i remember Shikari Shambu.
This was the man who became our FM in 1991/92. The country had by then mortgaged gold to World Bank against loan. There was this brilliant man called Narsimha Rao running a government. And there was this weak opposition. There was also a huge pressure from IMF and other external bodies to liberalise (or good word is liberate) our economy. In fact it was a precondition for the loan that could bring India out of the mess it was in.
A great PM, a weak opposition and a huge pressure-nah condition- from IMF to free the economoy. And what the FM did? Yea you guessed it. Take the first steps to liberate.
And bang. The entire Indian media, the entire indian middle class hails this fella as the Hero of Free Markets. Bang !. One shot this shikari shambhu is branded the saviour of our nation's economy.
Much like how Gandhi/Nehru are attributed for our independence from Britishers. This Sardar has become the icon amongst the Economic Times readers. That the British left the country on their own will and because ruling India was no longer profitable to them after the WWII is lost on many innocent souls; similarly no one realises that irrespective of whoever would have been the FM at that point of time would have done the same darn thing i.e free our economy from the prison of Nehruvian socialism and license quota raj of Indira Gandhi.
Nevertheless this man today stands as the father of modern economy. Its his brand. Like Gandhi or a Nehru... this guy is now married to a brand now. You just have to live with it.
I have this thing about brands. For example i never liked Sunil Gavaskar as a batsman. I know his brand was bigger than him. But no. Somehow i am rebellious in nature. I think he was not a team man. I do not recollect him coming at crucial times and winning a match for the country.
OK so now our alleged PM says that we must target 10% growth. Thanks a lot ! Tell us something new Mr. PM. You inherit the best possible economy from your predecessors and than talk like a champion.
And how does our "economist" PM plan to achieve this ? Well don't ask that ? Don't even bother.
He says there won't be any dis-investments in PSU (navratnas), he comes up with an economic blood bath called "social spending" (free jobs and stuff) , he does not have time to invest in infrastructure and make a compelling case for FDI, he cannot stop pinkos from unionising the two most promising sectors in service industry viz IT and BPO and yet he comes up with grand statements.
But you know what? He's right. Actually India is on an economic juggernaut now, and that is unstoppable. So not because, but INSPITE of this rag-tag government at the centre India will hit the 10% growth rate. And Mr. Singh our own Shikari Shambu will be crowned for the second time by the Economic Times and its lesser siblings in the media as the baadshah of Indian economy.
Singh may be a good man. I do not abhor him. He's a good man. My problem is with the undue credit he gets all the time. His lovers either portray him as a "simple", "honest" person at one end or the champion of free economy at the other.
He's neither. He's the king of defaults.
Sonia chose him as PM because he was the most harmless of em all. He does not have a mass following that can challenge Gandhi family's dominance. Neither does he have connections within the party. He was the best bet to keep the PM's seat warm until Rahul saheb was ready to take on. And Sonia the great "sacrificing" bahu of the biggest melodrama in India called Congress party has hit the bull's eye by making him PM. She need not worry of a rebel as a faithful dog will never bark at his masters. Singh will never grow beyond his madam's shadow. He cannot dare to.
So now as the queen prepares her son and prince for the much coveted crown the rest of the media simply waits for this lame duck to deliver.
India is at a threshhold of becoming a super-power. If not super, atleast a very formidible force in world politics. If we miss this chance we will never know when it will come. We have been mere pushovers till now. But we have a chance; if only like an opportunist we encash it.
Sadly with the current disposition i do not see it happening. Our policies are too much tilted on the Left to make considerable progress. There's no substatial backing to PM's optimism. His roar lacks bite.
With Left as your partners you can only go a certain distance. You can only push so much. Alas if keeping BJP away from power was not the only glue holding our parties together we could have achieved a whole lot.
Right wing politics has its own problems no doubt. But atleast on economics front right wing is great. The Soviets were constantly put on their toes by the conservative Reagan regime during the cold war; a great steam was lost by Russia during that period. Similarly Margaret Thatcher years of rightwing policies was a golden period in UK's history, economically.
By ousting NDA, the people of India deprived them of an extended conservative regime and broke the cycle mid-way of a potentially healthy period of stability and growth. With policies now taking a left turn again or in due course likely to take a left turn again, it will be back to square one.
Good take by Bhalla
Surjit Bhalla has a good take on relations between economic performance of a state and subsequent elections, in India.
You guessed it. There's no relation at all. No surprises here.
Check this out....
http://us.rediff.com/money/2005/nov/26guest1.htm
You guessed it. There's no relation at all. No surprises here.
Check this out....
http://us.rediff.com/money/2005/nov/26guest1.htm
NDA finally conquers Bihar
After the 1999 general elections Arun Jaitely of the BJP had this to say of Lalu after the huge RJD debacle-
"You can fool all the people sometimes; You can fool some people all the time; But you cannot fool all the people all the time"
This quote stuck with me for long. Arun Jaitely has been working hard ever since. Arun Jaitely is the smartest of em' all as far as BJP goes and sadly he's in minority in that party. There are some real dumb asses in BJP.
Nevertheless Jaitely and Co managed to pull up something improbable this election season in Bihar. They actually were able to route out this sick man (read Lalu). And emphatically.
Our lame duck Cabinate Secretary, oops! sorry Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had the balls to call Lalu a "Vikas Purush". just before elections. :-)
Well we know Mr. Singh, you are just warming the PM's seat for "laadla" Rahul to take over and you are a stop gap arrangement at best, till Rahul "jee" is packaged completely by Congress and Messrs TOI, NDTV et al as our next PM. But don't you Mr. Singh as an educated, "honest" man
have the minimum sense of understanding vis-a-vis Lalu's reputation?
Lalu Prasad Yadav is anything but Vikas Purush. He has often scoffed at journalists for raising the issue of vikas or development, bluntly letting them know that Vikas is not an issue at all.
A free and fair election in Bihar has atleast undone this myth that Lalu created - that of Biharis not wanting development. Hopefully the Election Commission can someday conduct a fair election in West Bengal too and destroy the myth that Bengalis are a great fan of Communism.
Coming back to Lalu. Lot of people feel that Bihar was already at its pit bottom. It couldn't have gone worse. Under Lalu it was at the bottom of most surveys conducted by India Today. Whether it was education, health, infrastructure etc. Bihar probably epitomised everything that was wrong with India. Whether castism, corruption, terrorism etc. Hence hopefully from hereon it will only be upward movement for this sad state. And Nitish Kumar, a qualified engineer, is just the right person , i feel, for this job.
The real winner of these elections has been the Judiciary who very rightly castigated the UPA government in general and Buta Singh in particular for playing mischief with the system after the last election results. That was a classic example of the amount of vulgarity and crudeness accompanying this current establishment.
Anyways. Everything happens for a reason. Had Congress and Sonia not shown so much of lust for power the people of Bihar would not have rejected them so strongly. In a way the people of Bihar have answered in the best possible manner.
The Bihar elections are likely to have an impact on the working of UPA government at the centre. Frustrated Lalu and Communists would make life more difficult for the Congress, i feel.
I was reading a piece by TVR Shenoy in rediff.com and realised one very crucial thing. Congress is a spent force in two of the most crucial states in the country today. UP and Bihar. Both together sending more than 100 MPs. If Congress is (day) dreaming of making it alone the next election i think it has its work cut out. The Sonia/Rahul/Priyanka charishma may be limited to a few pockets aftter all.
I think in a way it is sad. A weak Congress is not good for the nation. Ideally we should have a two party system like, lets say, in US or UK, with Congress representing the left and BJP representing the right. That would stabalise the nation to a very large extent. Unforntunately the Communists and the Mulayams and Lalus are quite a force and have a high nuisance value.
They can go to any extent to destroy a system. Best example being West Bengal and UP.
We can just live with hope that these elements will cease to exist someday. I know that is being too optimistic. But whats wrong with hoping.
Meanwhile some anti-nationals like Praful Bidwai have already started blaming the EC for conducting a free poll. Apparently, and this is what Mr. Bidwai feels, conducting a free and fair elections caused the so called weaker sections (read muslims) of the society to remain away from booths and hence he feels Lalu lost so massively. If you want to have some comic relief read his column on rediff.com
Most of us know by now that West Bengal elections are rigged scientifically. If that does not explain single establishment ruling that state for over three decades, nothing does. I know Bidwai wouldn't like a free poll in West Bengal as well, going by his argument above.
In the meantime its time for rejoice for all the right thinking individuals in the country. Bihar sans Lalu is good news. For Bihar and for the nation. Here's hoping that India can someday free itself of Monarchy (read Gandhi family) , passivism (read pseudo-secularism) and terrorism (read Communists).
"You can fool all the people sometimes; You can fool some people all the time; But you cannot fool all the people all the time"
This quote stuck with me for long. Arun Jaitely has been working hard ever since. Arun Jaitely is the smartest of em' all as far as BJP goes and sadly he's in minority in that party. There are some real dumb asses in BJP.
Nevertheless Jaitely and Co managed to pull up something improbable this election season in Bihar. They actually were able to route out this sick man (read Lalu). And emphatically.
Our lame duck Cabinate Secretary, oops! sorry Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had the balls to call Lalu a "Vikas Purush". just before elections. :-)
Well we know Mr. Singh, you are just warming the PM's seat for "laadla" Rahul to take over and you are a stop gap arrangement at best, till Rahul "jee" is packaged completely by Congress and Messrs TOI, NDTV et al as our next PM. But don't you Mr. Singh as an educated, "honest" man
have the minimum sense of understanding vis-a-vis Lalu's reputation?
Lalu Prasad Yadav is anything but Vikas Purush. He has often scoffed at journalists for raising the issue of vikas or development, bluntly letting them know that Vikas is not an issue at all.
A free and fair election in Bihar has atleast undone this myth that Lalu created - that of Biharis not wanting development. Hopefully the Election Commission can someday conduct a fair election in West Bengal too and destroy the myth that Bengalis are a great fan of Communism.
Coming back to Lalu. Lot of people feel that Bihar was already at its pit bottom. It couldn't have gone worse. Under Lalu it was at the bottom of most surveys conducted by India Today. Whether it was education, health, infrastructure etc. Bihar probably epitomised everything that was wrong with India. Whether castism, corruption, terrorism etc. Hence hopefully from hereon it will only be upward movement for this sad state. And Nitish Kumar, a qualified engineer, is just the right person , i feel, for this job.
The real winner of these elections has been the Judiciary who very rightly castigated the UPA government in general and Buta Singh in particular for playing mischief with the system after the last election results. That was a classic example of the amount of vulgarity and crudeness accompanying this current establishment.
Anyways. Everything happens for a reason. Had Congress and Sonia not shown so much of lust for power the people of Bihar would not have rejected them so strongly. In a way the people of Bihar have answered in the best possible manner.
The Bihar elections are likely to have an impact on the working of UPA government at the centre. Frustrated Lalu and Communists would make life more difficult for the Congress, i feel.
I was reading a piece by TVR Shenoy in rediff.com and realised one very crucial thing. Congress is a spent force in two of the most crucial states in the country today. UP and Bihar. Both together sending more than 100 MPs. If Congress is (day) dreaming of making it alone the next election i think it has its work cut out. The Sonia/Rahul/Priyanka charishma may be limited to a few pockets aftter all.
I think in a way it is sad. A weak Congress is not good for the nation. Ideally we should have a two party system like, lets say, in US or UK, with Congress representing the left and BJP representing the right. That would stabalise the nation to a very large extent. Unforntunately the Communists and the Mulayams and Lalus are quite a force and have a high nuisance value.
They can go to any extent to destroy a system. Best example being West Bengal and UP.
We can just live with hope that these elements will cease to exist someday. I know that is being too optimistic. But whats wrong with hoping.
Meanwhile some anti-nationals like Praful Bidwai have already started blaming the EC for conducting a free poll. Apparently, and this is what Mr. Bidwai feels, conducting a free and fair elections caused the so called weaker sections (read muslims) of the society to remain away from booths and hence he feels Lalu lost so massively. If you want to have some comic relief read his column on rediff.com
Most of us know by now that West Bengal elections are rigged scientifically. If that does not explain single establishment ruling that state for over three decades, nothing does. I know Bidwai wouldn't like a free poll in West Bengal as well, going by his argument above.
In the meantime its time for rejoice for all the right thinking individuals in the country. Bihar sans Lalu is good news. For Bihar and for the nation. Here's hoping that India can someday free itself of Monarchy (read Gandhi family) , passivism (read pseudo-secularism) and terrorism (read Communists).
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Railway accidents in 2005
This is straight from dailypioneer.com
2005's 11th mishap
November 9: Six persons killed and 25 others injured when a coal-laden goods train rammed into the middle of the Gomoh-Shaktinagar passenger train as it was pulling out from a loop line at the Barwadih station in Jharkhand's Lathehar district.
October 29: About 125 killed when bogies of a Secunderabad bound passenger train is washed away in a flash flood at Valigonda near Hyderabad.
October 3: 17 killed as Varanasi-Gwalior Bundelkhand Express derailed and crashed into a railway cabin near Datia station in Madhya Pradesh.
August 18: Two Toy trains collide at the stretch between Gayabari and Tindharia near Darjeeling denting the records of 125 year old history near Darjeeling.
July 28: 12 killed in a blast aboard the New Delhi bound Shramjeevi Express near Jaunpur in UP.
June 19: 32 passengers injured when the Puri bound Purushottam Express collided with a light engine on the same track near Gamharia in Jharkhand.
June 6: Two persons were killed and 30 injured when the engine and four bogies of Chittod-Mhow Shuttle derailed near Ratlam station in Madhya Pradesh.
April 21: 17persons died and 92 others injured when the Ahmedabad bound Sabarmati Express collided with a stationary goods train at the Samlaya railway station.
April 4: Several injured in a major fire in three coaches of the running Udayan Abha Toofan Express near Darauli station on Mughalsarai-Buxar section.
February 3: 52 people killed and several injured when a tractor-trolley carrying a marriage party was hit by a passenger train at an unmanned railway crossing at Kanhan near Nagpur.
January 23: Five persons were killed when they were pushed out of stationary Farakka Express by troops of Rajputana Rifles, near Shikohabad in UP.
Compiled by: Deepak Kumar Jha
2005's 11th mishap
November 9: Six persons killed and 25 others injured when a coal-laden goods train rammed into the middle of the Gomoh-Shaktinagar passenger train as it was pulling out from a loop line at the Barwadih station in Jharkhand's Lathehar district.
October 29: About 125 killed when bogies of a Secunderabad bound passenger train is washed away in a flash flood at Valigonda near Hyderabad.
October 3: 17 killed as Varanasi-Gwalior Bundelkhand Express derailed and crashed into a railway cabin near Datia station in Madhya Pradesh.
August 18: Two Toy trains collide at the stretch between Gayabari and Tindharia near Darjeeling denting the records of 125 year old history near Darjeeling.
July 28: 12 killed in a blast aboard the New Delhi bound Shramjeevi Express near Jaunpur in UP.
June 19: 32 passengers injured when the Puri bound Purushottam Express collided with a light engine on the same track near Gamharia in Jharkhand.
June 6: Two persons were killed and 30 injured when the engine and four bogies of Chittod-Mhow Shuttle derailed near Ratlam station in Madhya Pradesh.
April 21: 17persons died and 92 others injured when the Ahmedabad bound Sabarmati Express collided with a stationary goods train at the Samlaya railway station.
April 4: Several injured in a major fire in three coaches of the running Udayan Abha Toofan Express near Darauli station on Mughalsarai-Buxar section.
February 3: 52 people killed and several injured when a tractor-trolley carrying a marriage party was hit by a passenger train at an unmanned railway crossing at Kanhan near Nagpur.
January 23: Five persons were killed when they were pushed out of stationary Farakka Express by troops of Rajputana Rifles, near Shikohabad in UP.
Compiled by: Deepak Kumar Jha
11 accidents in as many months. Lalu Prasad Yadav, whom our "Economist Prime Minister" calls "Vikas Purush" :-) , is the railway minister.
Lalu is going to be the railway minister for atleast next 4 years, ie nearly 50 months. You do the math.
Amen !
Monday, October 17, 2005
Radical Tourism
Swapan Das Gupta is a commentator par excellence. In this OP/ED in daily Pioneer he deals with the bleeding heart types of the country with an in-your-face punch.
The bleeding hearts industry in India is replete with the pseudo-liberals who warm the chairs of NDTV studios in Dehli. They're always up on the roof tops proclaiming there undivided love for Pakistan. For them every indian should leave his work and commit to "loving pakistan", full time.
Kuldeep Nayar, Mani Shankar Iyer, Mahesh Bhatt are the leading lights of this movement. They claim to represent the majority of Indians, who it seems, are dying to hold the Pakistani hand.
For them massacre of Hindus by tacit or at times even direct support of Pakistani establishment and also its people is irrelevant. All they want is to keep 'loving' Pakistan. And if we do not concur with their views we are at best communal and at worst fanatics.
And off course for them NDTV happens to be haven. A god send gift where they can preach and blabber endless on their love for Pakistan.
Read on this wonderful OP/ED by Gupta in his own words...
- link here -
Post-quake tips for radical tourists
Till the mid-seventies, it was routine to encounter a breed of humans who went all gush-gush and gooey-eyed at the mere mention of either China or the Soviet Union. They were not all Communists.
Indeed some of them would balk at the very idea of living in dreary Moscow or spending more than a day in some make-believe Fanshen. They were the Fellow Travellers, the noble intellectuals who worshipped socialism from a discreet distance. Leon Trotsky had an even better description for these deeply gullible souls who saw salvation in evil. He called them the "radical tourists".
The Berlin Wall has crumbled and the mythology surrounding Chairman Mao has been well and truly demolished, but the fellow traveller and the radical tourist have not been put out of business. In India, they have been reborn and reinvented to further another trendy cause and propitiate another ugly icon.
"It is such an unnecessary controversy", rued NDTV's star reporter from Uri last week, after the earthquake. She was referring to the wave of indignation in both India and Pakistan at a report that Indian soldiers crossed the Line of Control to rescue Pakistani soldiers who were trapped under the debris of a collapsed bunker. It was suggested that the Indian jawans subsequently helped the Pakistanis rebuild the bunker.
The story was subsequently denied by Islamabad and modified in New Delhi. The Indian Army says its jawans did cross the LoC in response to an SOS and rescued trapped Pakistani soldiers. There was, however, no question of helping reconstruct a Pakistani bunker.
To the radical tourists nurtured by the sadbhavna industry, it was an "unnecessary" controversy because Indians rebuilding a Pakistani military bunker seemed the most natural thing. To them, last Sunday's earthquake was not merely a natural disaster; it presented an opportunity to embrace Pakistan even more tightly. For them, it was not merely a case of contiguous regions being united in grief; it was an earthquake of peace. Their body language, their lachrymose tone said it all: This tragedy was special because it also touched Pakistan.
We have all decried the tendency of politicians to feast on human suffering. What the media-driven sadbhavna groupies have been attempting over the past week is more despicable. Under the smokescreen of human compassion, they have attempted to exacerbate capitulationist tendencies within India. The argument that Kashmir is a contrived dispute and that what matters is human suffering is calculated to whittle down Indian determination. It is a tacit encouragement to our Kashmiri separatists. The humanitarian agenda of the bleeding hearts conceals a deeply political agenda.
Let us never forget that neither Pakistan nor their sponsored terrorists have been taken in by this sentimental drivel. The throat-slitting of Hindu families in Jammu remained uninterrupted by the tremors on the ground. Worse, Pakistan took advantage of the Indian Army's preoccupation with rescue work to push in armed infiltrators across the LoC. President Pervez Musharraf cited "political sensitivities" for keeping Indian assistance at token level. There is no evidence to suggest that the earthquake forced a mindset change in either the Pakistan establishment or society. The hatred of India still determines Pakistani existence. We can pity this perversion; to deny its existence would be dangerous.
India must continue to offer all possible humanitarian assistance with absolutely no strings attached. If Pakistan is not interested in our help, it is no skin off our back. This is no time to get wistful over the destruction of terrorist camps at the epicentre of the earthquake. Musharraf will attempt to leverage the natural disaster to secure international advantage. There will be pressure on India to be more accommodating but it will be in national interest to let Musharraf stew, like Yahya Khan stewed in the aftermath of the 1970 cyclone in East Pakistan. To assist the process, our radical tourists must be encouraged to travel to Muzaffarabad, report the mess and devastate the enemy.
The bleeding hearts industry in India is replete with the pseudo-liberals who warm the chairs of NDTV studios in Dehli. They're always up on the roof tops proclaiming there undivided love for Pakistan. For them every indian should leave his work and commit to "loving pakistan", full time.
Kuldeep Nayar, Mani Shankar Iyer, Mahesh Bhatt are the leading lights of this movement. They claim to represent the majority of Indians, who it seems, are dying to hold the Pakistani hand.
For them massacre of Hindus by tacit or at times even direct support of Pakistani establishment and also its people is irrelevant. All they want is to keep 'loving' Pakistan. And if we do not concur with their views we are at best communal and at worst fanatics.
And off course for them NDTV happens to be haven. A god send gift where they can preach and blabber endless on their love for Pakistan.
Read on this wonderful OP/ED by Gupta in his own words...
- link here -
Post-quake tips for radical tourists
Till the mid-seventies, it was routine to encounter a breed of humans who went all gush-gush and gooey-eyed at the mere mention of either China or the Soviet Union. They were not all Communists.
Indeed some of them would balk at the very idea of living in dreary Moscow or spending more than a day in some make-believe Fanshen. They were the Fellow Travellers, the noble intellectuals who worshipped socialism from a discreet distance. Leon Trotsky had an even better description for these deeply gullible souls who saw salvation in evil. He called them the "radical tourists".
The Berlin Wall has crumbled and the mythology surrounding Chairman Mao has been well and truly demolished, but the fellow traveller and the radical tourist have not been put out of business. In India, they have been reborn and reinvented to further another trendy cause and propitiate another ugly icon.
"It is such an unnecessary controversy", rued NDTV's star reporter from Uri last week, after the earthquake. She was referring to the wave of indignation in both India and Pakistan at a report that Indian soldiers crossed the Line of Control to rescue Pakistani soldiers who were trapped under the debris of a collapsed bunker. It was suggested that the Indian jawans subsequently helped the Pakistanis rebuild the bunker.
The story was subsequently denied by Islamabad and modified in New Delhi. The Indian Army says its jawans did cross the LoC in response to an SOS and rescued trapped Pakistani soldiers. There was, however, no question of helping reconstruct a Pakistani bunker.
To the radical tourists nurtured by the sadbhavna industry, it was an "unnecessary" controversy because Indians rebuilding a Pakistani military bunker seemed the most natural thing. To them, last Sunday's earthquake was not merely a natural disaster; it presented an opportunity to embrace Pakistan even more tightly. For them, it was not merely a case of contiguous regions being united in grief; it was an earthquake of peace. Their body language, their lachrymose tone said it all: This tragedy was special because it also touched Pakistan.
We have all decried the tendency of politicians to feast on human suffering. What the media-driven sadbhavna groupies have been attempting over the past week is more despicable. Under the smokescreen of human compassion, they have attempted to exacerbate capitulationist tendencies within India. The argument that Kashmir is a contrived dispute and that what matters is human suffering is calculated to whittle down Indian determination. It is a tacit encouragement to our Kashmiri separatists. The humanitarian agenda of the bleeding hearts conceals a deeply political agenda.
Let us never forget that neither Pakistan nor their sponsored terrorists have been taken in by this sentimental drivel. The throat-slitting of Hindu families in Jammu remained uninterrupted by the tremors on the ground. Worse, Pakistan took advantage of the Indian Army's preoccupation with rescue work to push in armed infiltrators across the LoC. President Pervez Musharraf cited "political sensitivities" for keeping Indian assistance at token level. There is no evidence to suggest that the earthquake forced a mindset change in either the Pakistan establishment or society. The hatred of India still determines Pakistani existence. We can pity this perversion; to deny its existence would be dangerous.
India must continue to offer all possible humanitarian assistance with absolutely no strings attached. If Pakistan is not interested in our help, it is no skin off our back. This is no time to get wistful over the destruction of terrorist camps at the epicentre of the earthquake. Musharraf will attempt to leverage the natural disaster to secure international advantage. There will be pressure on India to be more accommodating but it will be in national interest to let Musharraf stew, like Yahya Khan stewed in the aftermath of the 1970 cyclone in East Pakistan. To assist the process, our radical tourists must be encouraged to travel to Muzaffarabad, report the mess and devastate the enemy.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Money and Happiness
Was reading an article on CNN money today morning. There was a survey carried out in which a group of people was asked the following question.
Option A] You are given a salary package of 100K but your contemporaries get a salary of 120K.
Option B] You are paid 90K but your colleagues get 70K,
what option will you choose?
What option would we have chosen? It is interesting to note that most of us, as in the survey , will choose option B even though it is almost 10K less than option A.
The point that article was trying to prove was the relation between happiness and money. If money was directly related to happiness most of us would have chosen option A.
Bottom line- We are not looking for happiness. We are actually looking for relative happiness. We are not looking for salary. We are looking for relative salary. We are not looking for careers. We are looking for relative careers.
Most of us chose IT (Information Technology) as a career not because we were interested in IT. But because we did not want to be left behind others. Hence there was a factor of relative unease.
I guess one of the greatest needs of a modern man is to be better than others- not better in absolute ways.
Why men? Even countries. They are not happy enough if they are self-sufficient. They want always to be ahead on all fronts than other or neigbouring countries.
May be that's what drives a man. Always to be ahead. Not happy but ahead. So next time anyone asks me, do I want to be happy, my answer should be NO. N,O No. Because I do not want to be happy. I want to be ahead. And if I am ahead of others I will be happy.
How difficult is it to detach ourselves from the rat-race? I would say very difficult. In fact impossible. If we want to remain socially acceptable we need to be on our toes constantly.
I really appreciate those who stay committed to their convictions. Not follow the herd. And stick back with what they really want to do. It takes guts, trust me.
I think most of the success stories of this world will tell you one common thing. The hero never followed the masses. He followed what he believed was the right and the only route. But it is easier said than done.
We can't help but constantly compare ourselves with others. We even sometimes get vicarious pleasure out of others failures and often get uneasy with others success.
The last time I was really happy was when I got a better offer than my colleague's in my previous company. But soon that happiness fizzled out when I came to this new company. I realised I had not negotiated well enough to compare my salary with my new colleagues. So my happiness was short lived.
So if you want to be happy , make friends who earn less or are likely to remain below you as far as career, knowledge and money go. Or keep yourself updated all the time and remain in the rat race for ever. -:)
Option A] You are given a salary package of 100K but your contemporaries get a salary of 120K.
Option B] You are paid 90K but your colleagues get 70K,
what option will you choose?
What option would we have chosen? It is interesting to note that most of us, as in the survey , will choose option B even though it is almost 10K less than option A.
The point that article was trying to prove was the relation between happiness and money. If money was directly related to happiness most of us would have chosen option A.
Bottom line- We are not looking for happiness. We are actually looking for relative happiness. We are not looking for salary. We are looking for relative salary. We are not looking for careers. We are looking for relative careers.
Most of us chose IT (Information Technology) as a career not because we were interested in IT. But because we did not want to be left behind others. Hence there was a factor of relative unease.
I guess one of the greatest needs of a modern man is to be better than others- not better in absolute ways.
Why men? Even countries. They are not happy enough if they are self-sufficient. They want always to be ahead on all fronts than other or neigbouring countries.
May be that's what drives a man. Always to be ahead. Not happy but ahead. So next time anyone asks me, do I want to be happy, my answer should be NO. N,O No. Because I do not want to be happy. I want to be ahead. And if I am ahead of others I will be happy.
How difficult is it to detach ourselves from the rat-race? I would say very difficult. In fact impossible. If we want to remain socially acceptable we need to be on our toes constantly.
I really appreciate those who stay committed to their convictions. Not follow the herd. And stick back with what they really want to do. It takes guts, trust me.
I think most of the success stories of this world will tell you one common thing. The hero never followed the masses. He followed what he believed was the right and the only route. But it is easier said than done.
We can't help but constantly compare ourselves with others. We even sometimes get vicarious pleasure out of others failures and often get uneasy with others success.
The last time I was really happy was when I got a better offer than my colleague's in my previous company. But soon that happiness fizzled out when I came to this new company. I realised I had not negotiated well enough to compare my salary with my new colleagues. So my happiness was short lived.
So if you want to be happy , make friends who earn less or are likely to remain below you as far as career, knowledge and money go. Or keep yourself updated all the time and remain in the rat race for ever. -:)
Monday, October 03, 2005
Awesome Bhonsale
This article is a cracker. I have been in awe of Varsha Bhonsale's writings since long. This aricle that appeared two years back in rediff.com is awesome.
I have no idea why she stopped writing for rediff.com May be she's was too hot to handle for the "politically correct" management and also the readers of India.
I still have a reply to my email that i sent to Varsha two years back, that i have kept as a precious piece of byte in my hotmail inbox.
Read on.
http://im.rediff.com/news/2003/may/12varsha.htm
My country, periodMay 12, 2003
I want to tell you a story about a British woman called Melita Sirnis. Melita was born in 1912 to an English mother and a Latvian father, a bookbinder who had once been part of the Leo Tolstoy-inspired anarchist/egalitarian movement. Politics was in the family's blood: Her mother was a member of the Co-operative Party; an aunt was one of the first female trade unionists of Britain. Naturally, they all were advocates of Peace. As Melita later said, "Ah yes, they were anti-war all along, the pair of them, father and mother. I suppose I absorbed some of that too."
When Melita finished school, her mother, a staunch advocate of women's education, urged her towards university. She attended Southampton University, where she studied Latin and Logic. But we're talking about a Britain under the Slump of 1929-1932, when more than 3 million people were unemployed: Melita had to leave the university after a year because the family was forced to move to London in search of work. There, she was radicalised by her "poor end" experiences and joined the Communist Party. She also got married to Hilary Norwood, a comrade who'd been commended for his work in the trade union movement as a member of the National Union of Teachers.
In 1932, Melita Norwood got a secretarial job at the British Non-Ferrous Metals Research Association in London and thereafter lived a completely unremarkable suburban life – till 1999. That was the year when Vasili Nikitich Mitrokhin, the former chief archivist of the KGB's foreign intelligence section, published The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB. After decades of passing on State secrets to the Soviet Union, and 54 years of living a clandestine life, Mrs Norwood was finally outed.
Actually, the MI6 had known about her treason since 1992, when Mr Mitrokhin had defected to Britain with six trunks of KGB archival material, but had chosen not to confront the octogenarian spy. Perhaps, the secrets weren't vital enough to invite prosecution...? Correct! Mrs Norwood only gave away information that enabled the Soviet Union to build the atom bomb...
David Rose, the first reporter to locate and interview her, obtained "a full-blown confession within approximately 15 minutes." He writes: "The material she supplied was literally earth-shattering: crucial information which fuelled the Soviet ENORMOSZ nuclear espionage programme. By the beginning of 1945, the non-Ferrous Metals Association director, GJ Bailey, had joined the coordinating committee of the top-secret tube alloys project – the British project to design and build an atomic bomb. Most of this research was pooled with the parallel US project based at Los Alamos... [KGB] documents suggest they regarded her contribution as of the highest value, and that it played a significant part in enabling the USSR to detonate its own bomb in 1949 – a few months before a CIA assessment claimed it would not be ready to do so until 1954."
Which explains why Mrs Norwood was awarded the KGB's highest decoration, the Order of the Red Banner. Though supplying the A-bomb plans was the highlight of her espionage career, she continued for 27 years more, providing a steady stream of secrets to her handlers, and recruited at least one more spy...
But, why did Mrs Norwood spy for the USSR?
She says: "I did what I did because I expected them [Soviets] to be attacked again once the war was over. Chamberlain had wanted them attacked in 1939: he certainly expected Hitler to go east. I thought they should somehow be adequately defended because everyone was against them, against this experiment [Communism], and they had been through such hardship from the Germans. In the war, the Russians were on our side, and it was unfair to them that they shouldn't be able to develop their weaponry." Mrs Norwood said that, if she could, she'd do it all over again because "The various countries of this rotten capitalist system with its unemployment, its wars, and making money – I hope it will come to an end."
Ok, forget the espionage thing and focus on Mrs Norwood and her family: A pacifist, liberal, educated, hard-working, progressive people with nothing but the good of their compatriots in their hearts. They fought for the exploited workers and actively worked for an egalitarian world order. And, of course, they were dead set against war. Like most of the "secular," liberal Indian saints we know, they did everything without an eye on personal gain. As Mrs Norwood told a BBC television interviewer, "I did what I did not to make money, but to help prevent the defeat of a new system which had at great cost given ordinary people food and fares which they could afford, good education and a health service."
Ideology, pure and simple. A belief system that postulates that the good of the "ordinary people" is supranational; that the needs of the "ordinary people" are paramount to national security; that sabotaging one's government at the behest of another is acceptable; that revolt against one's government during an external attack could constitute patriotism. That's why Stauffenberg was a German patriot. That's why Mrs Norwood is a patriot. Think of this: It's only because she didn't adhere to the crumbling wasteland of "my country, right or wrong" could she enable the USSR to stand up against the Imperialists and deliver the ordinary... WHOOPS! But that system now exists only in Cuba and West Bengal!
Oh shoot, I've to look for another analogy...
Ok. Read the following excerpts, from the deposition of a man who was hanged in the early hours of a cold November morning of 1948 in Ambala prison. Clutching a map of undivided India in one hand and the saffron flag in another, he walked to the gallows chanting an invocation to his motherland. A few hours later, his body was cremated outside the prison walls and, immediately afterwards, the whole area was ploughed and planted with grass so that no one could identify the spot and build a shrine:
On January 13, 1948, I learnt that Gandhiji had decided to go on fast unto death. The reason given was that he wanted an assurance of Hindu-Muslim Unity... But I and many others could easily see that the real motive... [was] to compel the Dominion Government to pay the sum of Rs 55 crores to Pakistan, the payment of which was emphatically refused by the Government.... But this decision of the people's Government was reversed to suit the tune of Gandhiji's fast. It was evident to my mind that the force of public opinion was nothing but a trifle when compared with the leanings of Gandhiji favourable to Pakistan.
...In 1946 or thereabout, Muslim atrocities perpetrated on Hindus under the Government patronage of Surhawardy in Noakhali made our blood boil. Our shame and indignation knew no bounds when we saw that Gandhiji had come forward to shield that very Surhawardy and began to style him as 'Shaheed Saheb' – a martyr – even in his prayer meetings...
...Gandhiji's influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogans of truth and non-violence which he ostentatiously paraded before the country... I could never conceive that an armed resistance to the aggressor is unjust... Ram killed Ravan in a tumultuous fight... Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness... In condemning Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Govind as 'misguided patriots,' Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit... Gandhiji was, paradoxically, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and nonviolence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever...
...By 1919, Gandhiji had become desperate in his endeavours to get the Muslims to trust him and went from one absurd promise to another... He backed the Khilafat movement in this country and was able to enlist the full support of the National Congress in that policy... very soon the Moplah Rebellion showed that the Muslims had not the slightest idea of national unity... There followed a huge slaughter of Hindus... The British Government, entirely unmoved by the rebellion, suppressed it in a few months and left to Gandhiji the joy of his Hindu-Muslim Unity... British Imperialism emerged stronger, the Muslims became more fanatical, and the consequences were visited on the Hindus...
The accumulating provocation of 32 years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhiji should be brought to an end immediately... he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was the final judge of what was right or wrong... Either Congress had to surrender its will to him and play second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality... or it had to carry on without him... He was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement... The movement may succeed or fail; it may bring untold disasters and political reverses, but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility... These childish inanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character, made Gandhiji formidable and irresistible... In a position of such absolute irresponsibility, Gandhiji was guilty of blunder after blunder...
...The Mahatma even supported the separation of Sindh from the Bombay Presidency and threw the Hindus of Sindh to the communal wolves. Numerous riots took place in Karachi, Sukkur, Shikarpur and other places in which the Hindus were the only sufferers...
...From August 1946 onwards, the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus... Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with mild reactions in the Deccan... The Interim government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi's infatuation for them...
...The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism, secretly accepted Pakistan and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us... This is what Gandhiji had achieved after 30 years of undisputed dictatorship, and this is what Congress party calls 'freedom'...
...One of the conditions imposed by Gandhiji for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan government...
Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it... The people of this country were eager and vehement in their opposition to Pakistan. But Gandhiji played false with the people...
...I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred... if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time, I felt that Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan...
...I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus... There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book, and for this reason I fired those fatal shots...
...I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me... I did fire shots at Gandhiji in open daylight. I did not make any attempt to run away; in fact I never entertained any idea of running away. I did not try to shoot myself... for, it was my ardent desire to give vent to my thoughts in an open Court. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled of against it on all sides. I have no doubt, honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.
Absorbed all that? Now consider this:
Stauffenberg died because he sought to rid his country of the disease of Nazism; recognised the mortal danger of defeat into which Hitler had led Germany; anticipated the disgrace and punishment that the iniquity of Nazism would bring to his countrymen in its wake. Stauffenberg's motives, therefore, were patriotic.
Nathuram Godse died because he sought to rid his country of the disease of Appeasement; recognised the dangers inherent in Gandhiji's Ahimsa-cloaked despotism; anticipated the capitulation to the whims of Pakistan that Gandhiji would force upon an elected Indian government, against the wishes of the people. Godse's motives, however, were vile...
Vile because the ideology espoused by the likes of Mrs Norwood deems so. The same ideology championed by her contemporaries Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean, Kim Philby, John Cairncross, Klaus Fuchs - all of whom sold their country down the Moskva River...
Stauffenberg and Godse targeted the leader of their respective countries. Both were infuriated by the deaths of thousands of their countrymen. Both did it only to strengthen their countries... So who decides when the sabotage of one's government is justified? The Opposition parties? The historians of the conquering countries? The "ordinary people" who pour into the streets to kick at fallen statues and celebrate by looting museums? Or the people who become "the rabble" during communal strife...? Oh puh-lease, spare me the lecture on patriotism: You wouldn't know it if it bit off your nose.
I have no idea why she stopped writing for rediff.com May be she's was too hot to handle for the "politically correct" management and also the readers of India.
I still have a reply to my email that i sent to Varsha two years back, that i have kept as a precious piece of byte in my hotmail inbox.
Read on.
http://im.rediff.com/news/2003/may/12varsha.htm
My country, periodMay 12, 2003
I want to tell you a story about a British woman called Melita Sirnis. Melita was born in 1912 to an English mother and a Latvian father, a bookbinder who had once been part of the Leo Tolstoy-inspired anarchist/egalitarian movement. Politics was in the family's blood: Her mother was a member of the Co-operative Party; an aunt was one of the first female trade unionists of Britain. Naturally, they all were advocates of Peace. As Melita later said, "Ah yes, they were anti-war all along, the pair of them, father and mother. I suppose I absorbed some of that too."
When Melita finished school, her mother, a staunch advocate of women's education, urged her towards university. She attended Southampton University, where she studied Latin and Logic. But we're talking about a Britain under the Slump of 1929-1932, when more than 3 million people were unemployed: Melita had to leave the university after a year because the family was forced to move to London in search of work. There, she was radicalised by her "poor end" experiences and joined the Communist Party. She also got married to Hilary Norwood, a comrade who'd been commended for his work in the trade union movement as a member of the National Union of Teachers.
In 1932, Melita Norwood got a secretarial job at the British Non-Ferrous Metals Research Association in London and thereafter lived a completely unremarkable suburban life – till 1999. That was the year when Vasili Nikitich Mitrokhin, the former chief archivist of the KGB's foreign intelligence section, published The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB. After decades of passing on State secrets to the Soviet Union, and 54 years of living a clandestine life, Mrs Norwood was finally outed.
Actually, the MI6 had known about her treason since 1992, when Mr Mitrokhin had defected to Britain with six trunks of KGB archival material, but had chosen not to confront the octogenarian spy. Perhaps, the secrets weren't vital enough to invite prosecution...? Correct! Mrs Norwood only gave away information that enabled the Soviet Union to build the atom bomb...
David Rose, the first reporter to locate and interview her, obtained "a full-blown confession within approximately 15 minutes." He writes: "The material she supplied was literally earth-shattering: crucial information which fuelled the Soviet ENORMOSZ nuclear espionage programme. By the beginning of 1945, the non-Ferrous Metals Association director, GJ Bailey, had joined the coordinating committee of the top-secret tube alloys project – the British project to design and build an atomic bomb. Most of this research was pooled with the parallel US project based at Los Alamos... [KGB] documents suggest they regarded her contribution as of the highest value, and that it played a significant part in enabling the USSR to detonate its own bomb in 1949 – a few months before a CIA assessment claimed it would not be ready to do so until 1954."
Which explains why Mrs Norwood was awarded the KGB's highest decoration, the Order of the Red Banner. Though supplying the A-bomb plans was the highlight of her espionage career, she continued for 27 years more, providing a steady stream of secrets to her handlers, and recruited at least one more spy...
But, why did Mrs Norwood spy for the USSR?
She says: "I did what I did because I expected them [Soviets] to be attacked again once the war was over. Chamberlain had wanted them attacked in 1939: he certainly expected Hitler to go east. I thought they should somehow be adequately defended because everyone was against them, against this experiment [Communism], and they had been through such hardship from the Germans. In the war, the Russians were on our side, and it was unfair to them that they shouldn't be able to develop their weaponry." Mrs Norwood said that, if she could, she'd do it all over again because "The various countries of this rotten capitalist system with its unemployment, its wars, and making money – I hope it will come to an end."
Ok, forget the espionage thing and focus on Mrs Norwood and her family: A pacifist, liberal, educated, hard-working, progressive people with nothing but the good of their compatriots in their hearts. They fought for the exploited workers and actively worked for an egalitarian world order. And, of course, they were dead set against war. Like most of the "secular," liberal Indian saints we know, they did everything without an eye on personal gain. As Mrs Norwood told a BBC television interviewer, "I did what I did not to make money, but to help prevent the defeat of a new system which had at great cost given ordinary people food and fares which they could afford, good education and a health service."
Ideology, pure and simple. A belief system that postulates that the good of the "ordinary people" is supranational; that the needs of the "ordinary people" are paramount to national security; that sabotaging one's government at the behest of another is acceptable; that revolt against one's government during an external attack could constitute patriotism. That's why Stauffenberg was a German patriot. That's why Mrs Norwood is a patriot. Think of this: It's only because she didn't adhere to the crumbling wasteland of "my country, right or wrong" could she enable the USSR to stand up against the Imperialists and deliver the ordinary... WHOOPS! But that system now exists only in Cuba and West Bengal!
Oh shoot, I've to look for another analogy...
Ok. Read the following excerpts, from the deposition of a man who was hanged in the early hours of a cold November morning of 1948 in Ambala prison. Clutching a map of undivided India in one hand and the saffron flag in another, he walked to the gallows chanting an invocation to his motherland. A few hours later, his body was cremated outside the prison walls and, immediately afterwards, the whole area was ploughed and planted with grass so that no one could identify the spot and build a shrine:
On January 13, 1948, I learnt that Gandhiji had decided to go on fast unto death. The reason given was that he wanted an assurance of Hindu-Muslim Unity... But I and many others could easily see that the real motive... [was] to compel the Dominion Government to pay the sum of Rs 55 crores to Pakistan, the payment of which was emphatically refused by the Government.... But this decision of the people's Government was reversed to suit the tune of Gandhiji's fast. It was evident to my mind that the force of public opinion was nothing but a trifle when compared with the leanings of Gandhiji favourable to Pakistan.
...In 1946 or thereabout, Muslim atrocities perpetrated on Hindus under the Government patronage of Surhawardy in Noakhali made our blood boil. Our shame and indignation knew no bounds when we saw that Gandhiji had come forward to shield that very Surhawardy and began to style him as 'Shaheed Saheb' – a martyr – even in his prayer meetings...
...Gandhiji's influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogans of truth and non-violence which he ostentatiously paraded before the country... I could never conceive that an armed resistance to the aggressor is unjust... Ram killed Ravan in a tumultuous fight... Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness... In condemning Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Govind as 'misguided patriots,' Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit... Gandhiji was, paradoxically, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and nonviolence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever...
...By 1919, Gandhiji had become desperate in his endeavours to get the Muslims to trust him and went from one absurd promise to another... He backed the Khilafat movement in this country and was able to enlist the full support of the National Congress in that policy... very soon the Moplah Rebellion showed that the Muslims had not the slightest idea of national unity... There followed a huge slaughter of Hindus... The British Government, entirely unmoved by the rebellion, suppressed it in a few months and left to Gandhiji the joy of his Hindu-Muslim Unity... British Imperialism emerged stronger, the Muslims became more fanatical, and the consequences were visited on the Hindus...
The accumulating provocation of 32 years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhiji should be brought to an end immediately... he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was the final judge of what was right or wrong... Either Congress had to surrender its will to him and play second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality... or it had to carry on without him... He was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement... The movement may succeed or fail; it may bring untold disasters and political reverses, but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility... These childish inanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character, made Gandhiji formidable and irresistible... In a position of such absolute irresponsibility, Gandhiji was guilty of blunder after blunder...
...The Mahatma even supported the separation of Sindh from the Bombay Presidency and threw the Hindus of Sindh to the communal wolves. Numerous riots took place in Karachi, Sukkur, Shikarpur and other places in which the Hindus were the only sufferers...
...From August 1946 onwards, the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus... Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with mild reactions in the Deccan... The Interim government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi's infatuation for them...
...The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism, secretly accepted Pakistan and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us... This is what Gandhiji had achieved after 30 years of undisputed dictatorship, and this is what Congress party calls 'freedom'...
...One of the conditions imposed by Gandhiji for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan government...
Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it... The people of this country were eager and vehement in their opposition to Pakistan. But Gandhiji played false with the people...
...I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred... if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time, I felt that Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan...
...I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus... There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book, and for this reason I fired those fatal shots...
...I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me... I did fire shots at Gandhiji in open daylight. I did not make any attempt to run away; in fact I never entertained any idea of running away. I did not try to shoot myself... for, it was my ardent desire to give vent to my thoughts in an open Court. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled of against it on all sides. I have no doubt, honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.
Absorbed all that? Now consider this:
Stauffenberg died because he sought to rid his country of the disease of Nazism; recognised the mortal danger of defeat into which Hitler had led Germany; anticipated the disgrace and punishment that the iniquity of Nazism would bring to his countrymen in its wake. Stauffenberg's motives, therefore, were patriotic.
Nathuram Godse died because he sought to rid his country of the disease of Appeasement; recognised the dangers inherent in Gandhiji's Ahimsa-cloaked despotism; anticipated the capitulation to the whims of Pakistan that Gandhiji would force upon an elected Indian government, against the wishes of the people. Godse's motives, however, were vile...
Vile because the ideology espoused by the likes of Mrs Norwood deems so. The same ideology championed by her contemporaries Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean, Kim Philby, John Cairncross, Klaus Fuchs - all of whom sold their country down the Moskva River...
Stauffenberg and Godse targeted the leader of their respective countries. Both were infuriated by the deaths of thousands of their countrymen. Both did it only to strengthen their countries... So who decides when the sabotage of one's government is justified? The Opposition parties? The historians of the conquering countries? The "ordinary people" who pour into the streets to kick at fallen statues and celebrate by looting museums? Or the people who become "the rabble" during communal strife...? Oh puh-lease, spare me the lecture on patriotism: You wouldn't know it if it bit off your nose.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Costner's JFK
I don't take my knowledge of English movies too seriously. I am at best a casual watcher and at worst a nominal self appointed analyst/critic.
There isn't a particular genre of movies that i have an affinity for. Yes i love comedies and spoofs. Action thrillers are great. Sometimes dramas are fine.Sci-Fis are great if made well. Can't say that about all Sci-Fis though.Romantics ... mmm.. not sure.
But four Hollywood movies which shook me from my core and which affected me for some time were 1] Pulp Fiction 2]Godfather I and II 3] Shwashank's Redemption and 4] JFK. And not necessarily in that order.
Pulp Fiction for its "casual" violence and style, Godfather off course for its grand setting and almost intoxicating story line, Shwashank's.. for its brilliant ending and JFK for its absolute commitment to details.I have not seen a movie script more glued to details than JFK. It was an epic made to depict a monumental event in the American history. That Oliver Stone would have walked a very tight rope making that movie shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
I am not sure if many republicans would have hated that movie. If you make efforts to separate the movie's political overtones, you get , what i should call a Master-Piece.The story is based on Kennedy's murder and follow up on its investigation. Its a period movie based in the 60s.The film is an essay on how the vigour and dedication of one man and his team of associates can rise above the highest powers. For me nothing symbolizes this film's excellence more than Kevin Costner's closing speech to the Jury. It was spotless. Almost impeccable work of fine acting. You just stop and listen to this man speak, endlessly.
Apart from Costner's acting, the Director's brilliance in gradually building up the story and along with that the emotion, is an education in film-making itself.Writes a critic."The subject matter is incredibly controversial and subjective but Stone's delivers it with such emotion and raw power that his alternate myth to the Warren Report seems factual."
The movie is also a salute to this nation's true democracy. A democracy where a politically uncomfortable film is allowed to not only be produced but released without hiccups even during the rule of the government which is at odds with the movie's views. In India especially, politically incorrect movies have little or no place at all.
(A point in case, "Aandhi"-which was banned)
When Americans talk of liberty and freedom of speech they mean it. But in some ways the movie's story tells a paradoxical situation regarding exactly that. That is , freedom of views.
Kennedy was a liberal at heart. He had already made enemies within the CIA because of his diametrically opposite views apart from others,on Cuban Missile issue and racial tolerance. His views were not in synch with the higher ups in the most feared Intelligence office of the world.
As the movie shows at the start, Kennedy had it coming.
Kennedy had snatched an improbable victory in elections. He with his wife had grown into iconic figures in a very short span of time. The Kennedy's symbolized power,glamour and style for the 60s America which was flushed with money and power.The Kennedy's lifestyle, their hollywood connections, their good looks was what would qualify as the "talk of the country".
The conservatives surely were'nt impressed. And Kennedy might have 'crossed the line' a few times on a few issues for CIA to take the extreme step of eliminating him. (The movie without naming CIA, makes it more than obvious that CIA was behind his murder).
The best part of the movie is that it is very subtle in its presentation. There's an understated aggression but the blame is not squarely pushed in CIA's direction. A lot of questions are kept hanging intentionally, i feel, to keep the viewer in state of perennial intrigue.
But as i mentioned earlier, Costner's closing speech is a class act. An act of a helpless lawyer who is too small to fight a huge system by himself. Costner looses the case, but makes the point. He does not loose without a fight and thats what the movie is all about. That Costner is going to loose the case is known all along, but his effectual verbal advocacy of what he stands for and case itself is the movie's highlight.
JFK for me remains a collector's item. I have seen this movie a couple of times and may watch it some more times (probably when it flashes back on the cable). I haven't seen Kevin Costner's other movies except for "Bull Durham". But doesn't matter. JFK proves his acting credentials way beyond anybody's doubt.
All in all, JFK takes the cake for story-telling and presentation. If you got 5 hours to spare on a week-end, one of the ways to use it would be to get this DVD. You won't be sorry.
There isn't a particular genre of movies that i have an affinity for. Yes i love comedies and spoofs. Action thrillers are great. Sometimes dramas are fine.Sci-Fis are great if made well. Can't say that about all Sci-Fis though.Romantics ... mmm.. not sure.
But four Hollywood movies which shook me from my core and which affected me for some time were 1] Pulp Fiction 2]Godfather I and II 3] Shwashank's Redemption and 4] JFK. And not necessarily in that order.
Pulp Fiction for its "casual" violence and style, Godfather off course for its grand setting and almost intoxicating story line, Shwashank's.. for its brilliant ending and JFK for its absolute commitment to details.I have not seen a movie script more glued to details than JFK. It was an epic made to depict a monumental event in the American history. That Oliver Stone would have walked a very tight rope making that movie shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
I am not sure if many republicans would have hated that movie. If you make efforts to separate the movie's political overtones, you get , what i should call a Master-Piece.The story is based on Kennedy's murder and follow up on its investigation. Its a period movie based in the 60s.The film is an essay on how the vigour and dedication of one man and his team of associates can rise above the highest powers. For me nothing symbolizes this film's excellence more than Kevin Costner's closing speech to the Jury. It was spotless. Almost impeccable work of fine acting. You just stop and listen to this man speak, endlessly.
Apart from Costner's acting, the Director's brilliance in gradually building up the story and along with that the emotion, is an education in film-making itself.Writes a critic."The subject matter is incredibly controversial and subjective but Stone's delivers it with such emotion and raw power that his alternate myth to the Warren Report seems factual."
The movie is also a salute to this nation's true democracy. A democracy where a politically uncomfortable film is allowed to not only be produced but released without hiccups even during the rule of the government which is at odds with the movie's views. In India especially, politically incorrect movies have little or no place at all.
(A point in case, "Aandhi"-which was banned)
When Americans talk of liberty and freedom of speech they mean it. But in some ways the movie's story tells a paradoxical situation regarding exactly that. That is , freedom of views.
Kennedy was a liberal at heart. He had already made enemies within the CIA because of his diametrically opposite views apart from others,on Cuban Missile issue and racial tolerance. His views were not in synch with the higher ups in the most feared Intelligence office of the world.
As the movie shows at the start, Kennedy had it coming.
Kennedy had snatched an improbable victory in elections. He with his wife had grown into iconic figures in a very short span of time. The Kennedy's symbolized power,glamour and style for the 60s America which was flushed with money and power.The Kennedy's lifestyle, their hollywood connections, their good looks was what would qualify as the "talk of the country".
The conservatives surely were'nt impressed. And Kennedy might have 'crossed the line' a few times on a few issues for CIA to take the extreme step of eliminating him. (The movie without naming CIA, makes it more than obvious that CIA was behind his murder).
The best part of the movie is that it is very subtle in its presentation. There's an understated aggression but the blame is not squarely pushed in CIA's direction. A lot of questions are kept hanging intentionally, i feel, to keep the viewer in state of perennial intrigue.
But as i mentioned earlier, Costner's closing speech is a class act. An act of a helpless lawyer who is too small to fight a huge system by himself. Costner looses the case, but makes the point. He does not loose without a fight and thats what the movie is all about. That Costner is going to loose the case is known all along, but his effectual verbal advocacy of what he stands for and case itself is the movie's highlight.
JFK for me remains a collector's item. I have seen this movie a couple of times and may watch it some more times (probably when it flashes back on the cable). I haven't seen Kevin Costner's other movies except for "Bull Durham". But doesn't matter. JFK proves his acting credentials way beyond anybody's doubt.
All in all, JFK takes the cake for story-telling and presentation. If you got 5 hours to spare on a week-end, one of the ways to use it would be to get this DVD. You won't be sorry.
Friday, September 23, 2005
O'Reilly has some explaination to do
Phil Donnahue stumped Bill O'Reilly totally on the anti-war debate on "The Factor" program, day before yesterday.
When he asked O'Reilly - "whether he will send his own kids to die" for the Iraq war, Bill lost his cool and what followed was not what we can call a Television debate. It turned into an acrimonious name calling, free-for-all cacophony.
To start with, the question itself was not correct. How can Bill decide whether to send his children for war or not? In a country where the child leaves his house as soon as he is a teenager , how much control does the Father really have on his sons/daughters career decision?
Bill's best answer could have been - "If he wishes to go i won't stop him. But i cannot force him or for that matter anyone to go for war". That would have been the best answer. This would have taken some steam out from Donnahue's verbal onslaught.
Anyways Bill lost it yesterday. He has tried to do some post-match anyalsis on his column at
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170223,00.html
Not convinced Bill !
When he asked O'Reilly - "whether he will send his own kids to die" for the Iraq war, Bill lost his cool and what followed was not what we can call a Television debate. It turned into an acrimonious name calling, free-for-all cacophony.
To start with, the question itself was not correct. How can Bill decide whether to send his children for war or not? In a country where the child leaves his house as soon as he is a teenager , how much control does the Father really have on his sons/daughters career decision?
Bill's best answer could have been - "If he wishes to go i won't stop him. But i cannot force him or for that matter anyone to go for war". That would have been the best answer. This would have taken some steam out from Donnahue's verbal onslaught.
Anyways Bill lost it yesterday. He has tried to do some post-match anyalsis on his column at
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170223,00.html
Not convinced Bill !
Sycophancy Unlimited
And you thought only Jim Carrey was crazeeeee...
Some 300 Congress workers in Tamil Nadu to show their unflinching loyalty towards the Gandhi family have tattooed Rahul Gandhi's name on their hands.
The reason being - ""Sonia Gandhi is our supreme leader, but Rahul represents emerging youth leadership of the country. That is why we have tattooed his name".
Oh my Gawd!!! The emerging leader ? The Supreme leader ?
God ? How do these people live with themselves ? Ain't this really sickening?
You even have temples of leaders. (I guess J Jayalalitha has a temple in her name).
What is wrong with these chaps ?
I dread the day this college drop out, stinking rich and good-for-nothing Gandhi becomes the PM; who by the way has nothing to show for his credentials other than Venezulean/Columbian girlfriends.
When will just being born in a powerful family be enough for any one to become PM? When will we have a PM who has earned his position by his hard work, talent and leadership qualities?
With His Highness Mr. Rahul G waiting in the wings to take his "rightful" place as the PM of the nation, it seems unlikey for atleast next decade or so.
Anyways read on for more nausea at http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/sep/23tattoo.htm?q=np&file=.htm
Some 300 Congress workers in Tamil Nadu to show their unflinching loyalty towards the Gandhi family have tattooed Rahul Gandhi's name on their hands.
The reason being - ""Sonia Gandhi is our supreme leader, but Rahul represents emerging youth leadership of the country. That is why we have tattooed his name".
Oh my Gawd!!! The emerging leader ? The Supreme leader ?
God ? How do these people live with themselves ? Ain't this really sickening?
You even have temples of leaders. (I guess J Jayalalitha has a temple in her name).
What is wrong with these chaps ?
I dread the day this college drop out, stinking rich and good-for-nothing Gandhi becomes the PM; who by the way has nothing to show for his credentials other than Venezulean/Columbian girlfriends.
When will just being born in a powerful family be enough for any one to become PM? When will we have a PM who has earned his position by his hard work, talent and leadership qualities?
With His Highness Mr. Rahul G waiting in the wings to take his "rightful" place as the PM of the nation, it seems unlikey for atleast next decade or so.
Anyways read on for more nausea at http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/sep/23tattoo.htm?q=np&file=.htm
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Aryans who never invaded
Before i begin, i must confess that i have not been a very good student of biology. I almost hated that subject in my schooling days; so much so that after my Xth grade the moment i got a choice of excluding it from my courseware, i gladly took that option.
Hence when i read a paper by Dr. Chandrakant Panse titled - "DNA, genetics and population dynamics", i kinda found it tough in relating to the excruciatingly difficult jargons and "chromosomal" language so to speak.
But what really intrigued me about his paper - (which i found from Rajeev Srinivasan's blog) was the title. The relationship between genetics and population dynamics.
Since our childhood we have been taught the 'Aryan Invasion Theory'. Lets call it AIT. Lot of proponents of AIT use the colour of skin analogy to back their argument. It is often claimed that people who reside in the North of the country and are "fairer" in complexion than their southern counterparts have Aryans as their ancestors. Also we have been made to believe by the proponents of AIT that the people from south who are a little darker in complexion have their roots in their Dravidian legacy.
Obviously this theory was first proposed by the British historians (for their own reasons) and later lapped up by their Indian counter-parts without much ado. This AIT theory went unchallenged for so long that it became a part of the regular history syllabus in our school books. (Ramola Thapar and her ilk and the other "famous" historians of our country still continue to breathe this theory down our necks)
One of the important thing to note of AIT was that it was never a theory based on any scientific finding. It was never really backed up by any concrete evidence. It was more of a hypothesis and conclusions were loosely based on the probability of some Europeans having travelled to India thousands of years ago via the north gate.
I have read three papers in recent past which debunk the Aryan theory. If not categorically; atleast provide a counter argument and much more rational argument against the AIT.
Thankfully bio-technology has made great strides in the human DNA and genetics to come up with some really solid propositions on population dynamics.
The first paper/article on this subject that caught my eyes was the one by Subash Kak on rediff.com. (Subhash Kak is a professor at Louisiana State University. He is also a commentator par excellence and his columns routinely appear on rediff.com)
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/mar/08kak.htm
Professor Kak goes on to say in this article ...
[..] in recent years, the work of archaeologists and historians of science concluded that there is no material evidence for any large scale migrations into India over the period of 4500 to 800 BC [..]
...thus debunking the Aryan theory at the very root. But more importantly he refers to Oxford University scholar Stephen Oppenheimer's theory and book - The Real Eve: Modern Man's Journey out of Africa (New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers, 2003),
[..]recent advances in studies of mitochondrial DNA, inherited through the mother, and Y chromosomes, inherited by males from the father; Oppenheimer makes the case that whereas Africa is the cradle of all mankind; India is the cradle of all non-African peoples. [..]
Oppenheimer makes some "extraordinary conclusions" according to the author that are more interesting when you read the article completely.
In author's own words... [..] This synthesis of genetic evidence makes it possible to understand the divide between the north and the south Indian languages. It appears that the Dravidian languages are more ancient, and the Aryan languages evolved in India over thousands of years before migrations took them to central Asia and westward to Europe. The proto-Dravidian languages had also, through the ocean route, reached northeast Asia, explaining the connections between the Dravidian family and the Korean and the Japanese [..]
There was a second article that i read that again threw some light on this subject, and the link to which i lost. It appeared in NYTimes recently. I still have the link but it does not work. (It is lost in the NYTimes archive)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/13/science/13migrate.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1116180255-HCwNSux1xetEdoSaH/eLpA&pagewanted=print
Basically this is what the article wrote...
[..]The geneticists say there was only one migration of modern humans out of Africa; that it took a southern route to India,Southeast Asia [..]
[..]
Because these events occurred in the last Ice Age, when Europe was at first too cold for human habitation, the researchers say, it was populated only later, not directly from Africa but as an offshoot of the southern migration. The people of this offshoot would presumably have trekked back through the lands that are now India and Iran to reach the Near East and Europe.
The findings depend on analysis of mitochondrial DNA, a type of genetic material inherited solely through the female line.
They are reported today in Science by a team of geneticists led by Dr. Vincent Macaulay of the University of Glasgow.
[..]
In effect telling us that the reverse of Aryan theory was true and more likely.
And finally Dr. Chandrakant Panse's paper recently presented at the Third Annual Human Empowerment Conference at Houston, Texas between Sept. 16 to 18, 2005
Dr. Panse says "Science now conclusively rejects any notion of any Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent."
He goes on to say that.."Extensive sequencing and statistical analysis of a part of mtDNA which has sustained mutations (the mitochondrial hypervariable region I, HVR I), from reasonable sample sizes, has shown that certain sequences dominant in Europe are uncommon in India, and when found, are almost equally divided amongst the North and South Indians. Conversely,there are sequences common to both the North and South Indians which are uncommon in Europe"
He concludes with this.
"The stark lack of similarities in the gene pools of the Indian subcontinent and Europe, vividly evident in the mtDNA and the MHC complex, destroys any Aryan invasion notions, and confirms the genetic uniformity of peoples of the Indian subcontinent."
His presentation is based yet again on the mtDNA based research referred earlier and the full text of that research can be found at http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/7/1607
All the three articles comprehensively undermine the AIT. All the three are based on pure science and very limited probability.
It will take time for Indians to grown on this new concept; soaked as we are in the Aryan Invasion Theory.
As for the colour of the skin, well, I have seen some very fair coloured south Indians and some very dark coloured North Indians. And as they say color is only skin deep.It should certainly be. The "skin colour" argument for backing the Aryan Theory is really very fickle, even idiotic so to say.
Whenever a new theory gains currency the people who follow old school get a little uncomfortable. A classic example being that of Galelio.Galileo was put under house arrest for coming up with the Copernican System (Sun is at the center and other planets revolve around it) more than five centuries ago.
The great progress being made in Bio-Technologies will certainly go a long way in once and for all shutting up the Romila Thapar factory of lies.
Hence when i read a paper by Dr. Chandrakant Panse titled - "DNA, genetics and population dynamics", i kinda found it tough in relating to the excruciatingly difficult jargons and "chromosomal" language so to speak.
But what really intrigued me about his paper - (which i found from Rajeev Srinivasan's blog) was the title. The relationship between genetics and population dynamics.
Since our childhood we have been taught the 'Aryan Invasion Theory'. Lets call it AIT. Lot of proponents of AIT use the colour of skin analogy to back their argument. It is often claimed that people who reside in the North of the country and are "fairer" in complexion than their southern counterparts have Aryans as their ancestors. Also we have been made to believe by the proponents of AIT that the people from south who are a little darker in complexion have their roots in their Dravidian legacy.
Obviously this theory was first proposed by the British historians (for their own reasons) and later lapped up by their Indian counter-parts without much ado. This AIT theory went unchallenged for so long that it became a part of the regular history syllabus in our school books. (Ramola Thapar and her ilk and the other "famous" historians of our country still continue to breathe this theory down our necks)
One of the important thing to note of AIT was that it was never a theory based on any scientific finding. It was never really backed up by any concrete evidence. It was more of a hypothesis and conclusions were loosely based on the probability of some Europeans having travelled to India thousands of years ago via the north gate.
I have read three papers in recent past which debunk the Aryan theory. If not categorically; atleast provide a counter argument and much more rational argument against the AIT.
Thankfully bio-technology has made great strides in the human DNA and genetics to come up with some really solid propositions on population dynamics.
The first paper/article on this subject that caught my eyes was the one by Subash Kak on rediff.com. (Subhash Kak is a professor at Louisiana State University. He is also a commentator par excellence and his columns routinely appear on rediff.com)
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/mar/08kak.htm
Professor Kak goes on to say in this article ...
[..] in recent years, the work of archaeologists and historians of science concluded that there is no material evidence for any large scale migrations into India over the period of 4500 to 800 BC [..]
...thus debunking the Aryan theory at the very root. But more importantly he refers to Oxford University scholar Stephen Oppenheimer's theory and book - The Real Eve: Modern Man's Journey out of Africa (New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers, 2003),
[..]recent advances in studies of mitochondrial DNA, inherited through the mother, and Y chromosomes, inherited by males from the father; Oppenheimer makes the case that whereas Africa is the cradle of all mankind; India is the cradle of all non-African peoples. [..]
Oppenheimer makes some "extraordinary conclusions" according to the author that are more interesting when you read the article completely.
In author's own words... [..] This synthesis of genetic evidence makes it possible to understand the divide between the north and the south Indian languages. It appears that the Dravidian languages are more ancient, and the Aryan languages evolved in India over thousands of years before migrations took them to central Asia and westward to Europe. The proto-Dravidian languages had also, through the ocean route, reached northeast Asia, explaining the connections between the Dravidian family and the Korean and the Japanese [..]
There was a second article that i read that again threw some light on this subject, and the link to which i lost. It appeared in NYTimes recently. I still have the link but it does not work. (It is lost in the NYTimes archive)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/13/science/13migrate.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1116180255-HCwNSux1xetEdoSaH/eLpA&pagewanted=print
Basically this is what the article wrote...
[..]The geneticists say there was only one migration of modern humans out of Africa; that it took a southern route to India,Southeast Asia [..]
[..]
Because these events occurred in the last Ice Age, when Europe was at first too cold for human habitation, the researchers say, it was populated only later, not directly from Africa but as an offshoot of the southern migration. The people of this offshoot would presumably have trekked back through the lands that are now India and Iran to reach the Near East and Europe.
The findings depend on analysis of mitochondrial DNA, a type of genetic material inherited solely through the female line.
They are reported today in Science by a team of geneticists led by Dr. Vincent Macaulay of the University of Glasgow.
[..]
In effect telling us that the reverse of Aryan theory was true and more likely.
And finally Dr. Chandrakant Panse's paper recently presented at the Third Annual Human Empowerment Conference at Houston, Texas between Sept. 16 to 18, 2005
Dr. Panse says "Science now conclusively rejects any notion of any Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent."
He goes on to say that.."Extensive sequencing and statistical analysis of a part of mtDNA which has sustained mutations (the mitochondrial hypervariable region I, HVR I), from reasonable sample sizes, has shown that certain sequences dominant in Europe are uncommon in India, and when found, are almost equally divided amongst the North and South Indians. Conversely,there are sequences common to both the North and South Indians which are uncommon in Europe"
He concludes with this.
"The stark lack of similarities in the gene pools of the Indian subcontinent and Europe, vividly evident in the mtDNA and the MHC complex, destroys any Aryan invasion notions, and confirms the genetic uniformity of peoples of the Indian subcontinent."
His presentation is based yet again on the mtDNA based research referred earlier and the full text of that research can be found at http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/7/1607
All the three articles comprehensively undermine the AIT. All the three are based on pure science and very limited probability.
It will take time for Indians to grown on this new concept; soaked as we are in the Aryan Invasion Theory.
As for the colour of the skin, well, I have seen some very fair coloured south Indians and some very dark coloured North Indians. And as they say color is only skin deep.It should certainly be. The "skin colour" argument for backing the Aryan Theory is really very fickle, even idiotic so to say.
Whenever a new theory gains currency the people who follow old school get a little uncomfortable. A classic example being that of Galelio.Galileo was put under house arrest for coming up with the Copernican System (Sun is at the center and other planets revolve around it) more than five centuries ago.
The great progress being made in Bio-Technologies will certainly go a long way in once and for all shutting up the Romila Thapar factory of lies.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Chatterjee is unstoppable
Leaving aside all his work, Speaker Somnath Chatterjee and his cronies in the Parliament are busy passing 'privilege motions' against some article that appeared in the newspaper Daily Pioneer.
Tells us how busy this speaker really is !!! In my last post i mentioned Swapan Das Gupta's brilliant article which teared down the current Speaker's deeds. Chatterjee is oh-so sensitive to criticism. The hindi saying 'Chor kay daadi mein tinka' sounds apt for this situation. (One who's guilty will always be sensitive to criticism)
Read On.. how a small OP/ED can be such a big deal for these intolerant pinkos... who by the way do not leave anything for imagination when criticising others.
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/18somnath.htm
Tells us how busy this speaker really is !!! In my last post i mentioned Swapan Das Gupta's brilliant article which teared down the current Speaker's deeds. Chatterjee is oh-so sensitive to criticism. The hindi saying 'Chor kay daadi mein tinka' sounds apt for this situation. (One who's guilty will always be sensitive to criticism)
Read On.. how a small OP/ED can be such a big deal for these intolerant pinkos... who by the way do not leave anything for imagination when criticising others.
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/18somnath.htm
Friday, August 12, 2005
Speaker Chattttttttttterjeee
Unsuspecting Indians,some 20 years ago, went to play a cricket series in Pakistan where they were not only welcomed by unruly and partisan audience, they had a blatantly partisan umpire called Shakur Rana to reckon with. Later Shakur Rana became singularly responsible for International Cricket Council to propose a neutral match refree for international Test matches.
His name became synonomous with brazenly partisan decisions. By the end of his career he had already maligned the "Gentlemen's game" by some of the most horrendous decisions ever given in cricket.
It's a miracle that the then Indian cricket team returned without loosing a Test match in that series.
The Indian Parliament today has its own Shakur Rana. His name is Somnath Chatterjee. Such has been the conduct of this mercural bengali, he can even put a Shakur Rana to shame. As a parliamentarian his frequent heckling of the opposite benches was legendary. He was also known to use the most venomous attacks on his opposing sides.
But now as a Speaker conducting the proceeding of the Parliament of the World's biggest democracy, he was expected to stand aside on politics. As a match refree or as a monitor of a class he was expected to stay above petty party politics. But the Comrade has shown his true colours, which is different shades of Red. His "Red" affiliations are starkingly visible even in
his role as a Speaker.
As Swapan Das Gupta put in his column recently in the Daily Pioneer-
"Certainly, Speaker Chatterjee has done nothing to foster the belief that he is economical with his opinions. A great heckler during his distinguished tenure as the leader of the CPI(M) in the Lok Sabha, the Speaker hasn't lost his facility with interjections. What the Leader of the Opposition called the "running commentary" has become a feature of Lok Sabha
proceedings. In the thrust and parry of partisan exchange, the Speaker does not share the conventional belief that it is his job to listen."
Not only has he played mischief inside the house, he has taken liberty with the Indian Judicial system as well which goes far beyond his jurisdiction as a Speaker of Lok Sabha. For example he had no compelling reason to join issues with Supreme Court judgement on governor of Bihar or passing unsolicitated advice on IDMT judgement of Supreme Court.But like the other systems in India's democracy, even the Parliament is a farce.
This whole big drama enacted every few months in Lower House has become a nauseating routine. The Speaker has more than once tried to brow-beat the NDA/BJP members and tried to corner them.
Last week Somnath Chaterjee played the same game with Mamta Banerjee who herself is quit temparamental. His partisan conduct forced her to resign in disgust.
The growing domination of the Left in various areas of the country does not augur well for the country's future. With a leftist speaker at the helm of parliamentary affairs the day to day parliament activities have become meaningless. The media is as usual blaming the opposition for the ruckus and shielding the deeds of Congress and Left and their man on the Chair.
A crushing defeat of the Communists in Bengal, from where they really gain all the false strength and confidence, is the need of the hour. For the sake of India and West Bengal all the parties need to come together and not only expose these Communists but beat them at their own game.
Even if that requires backing Mamta Banerjee who is fighting a lonely battle on the East front.
Not many people know that the combined vote share of all the communist parties in India is barely 6%. Almost quarter of the BJP's share. Its unbelievable though, how much clout these leftists have over the key estates of the country. Whether its media or parliament or judiciary, their say is disproportionate to their popularity in the country.
They have always been master hijackers. They hijacked the education system right from Nehru days. We were made to believe that Akbar and Aurangazeb were great rulers thanks to them. Today our children are being taught that Shivaji Maharaj and Prithviraj Chauhan were no great warriors.
Media has been traditionally on their side and always portrayed the right-wing parties such as BJP and RSS in bad light. RSS today is youth's object of contempt, thanks largely to media (mis) reporting.First Judiciary and now Parliament has been totally pollutted by the leftist hue.
Somnath Chatterjee is from the old school of Left, who are probably the most intolerant ideologes.Mr. Chatterjee has given a bad name to a Speaker's position, a much decorated positon held by greatest of thinkers and statesmen.
Alas, Somnath Chatterjee is only a reflection of the sad polity of Indian Parliament today.If we can have Lalu Prasad Yadav as a Railway Minister and Taslimuddin as a Cabinate Rank minister, why should Somnath Chatterjee be a problem?
His name became synonomous with brazenly partisan decisions. By the end of his career he had already maligned the "Gentlemen's game" by some of the most horrendous decisions ever given in cricket.
It's a miracle that the then Indian cricket team returned without loosing a Test match in that series.
The Indian Parliament today has its own Shakur Rana. His name is Somnath Chatterjee. Such has been the conduct of this mercural bengali, he can even put a Shakur Rana to shame. As a parliamentarian his frequent heckling of the opposite benches was legendary. He was also known to use the most venomous attacks on his opposing sides.
But now as a Speaker conducting the proceeding of the Parliament of the World's biggest democracy, he was expected to stand aside on politics. As a match refree or as a monitor of a class he was expected to stay above petty party politics. But the Comrade has shown his true colours, which is different shades of Red. His "Red" affiliations are starkingly visible even in
his role as a Speaker.
As Swapan Das Gupta put in his column recently in the Daily Pioneer-
"Certainly, Speaker Chatterjee has done nothing to foster the belief that he is economical with his opinions. A great heckler during his distinguished tenure as the leader of the CPI(M) in the Lok Sabha, the Speaker hasn't lost his facility with interjections. What the Leader of the Opposition called the "running commentary" has become a feature of Lok Sabha
proceedings. In the thrust and parry of partisan exchange, the Speaker does not share the conventional belief that it is his job to listen."
Not only has he played mischief inside the house, he has taken liberty with the Indian Judicial system as well which goes far beyond his jurisdiction as a Speaker of Lok Sabha. For example he had no compelling reason to join issues with Supreme Court judgement on governor of Bihar or passing unsolicitated advice on IDMT judgement of Supreme Court.But like the other systems in India's democracy, even the Parliament is a farce.
This whole big drama enacted every few months in Lower House has become a nauseating routine. The Speaker has more than once tried to brow-beat the NDA/BJP members and tried to corner them.
Last week Somnath Chaterjee played the same game with Mamta Banerjee who herself is quit temparamental. His partisan conduct forced her to resign in disgust.
The growing domination of the Left in various areas of the country does not augur well for the country's future. With a leftist speaker at the helm of parliamentary affairs the day to day parliament activities have become meaningless. The media is as usual blaming the opposition for the ruckus and shielding the deeds of Congress and Left and their man on the Chair.
A crushing defeat of the Communists in Bengal, from where they really gain all the false strength and confidence, is the need of the hour. For the sake of India and West Bengal all the parties need to come together and not only expose these Communists but beat them at their own game.
Even if that requires backing Mamta Banerjee who is fighting a lonely battle on the East front.
Not many people know that the combined vote share of all the communist parties in India is barely 6%. Almost quarter of the BJP's share. Its unbelievable though, how much clout these leftists have over the key estates of the country. Whether its media or parliament or judiciary, their say is disproportionate to their popularity in the country.
They have always been master hijackers. They hijacked the education system right from Nehru days. We were made to believe that Akbar and Aurangazeb were great rulers thanks to them. Today our children are being taught that Shivaji Maharaj and Prithviraj Chauhan were no great warriors.
Media has been traditionally on their side and always portrayed the right-wing parties such as BJP and RSS in bad light. RSS today is youth's object of contempt, thanks largely to media (mis) reporting.First Judiciary and now Parliament has been totally pollutted by the leftist hue.
Somnath Chatterjee is from the old school of Left, who are probably the most intolerant ideologes.Mr. Chatterjee has given a bad name to a Speaker's position, a much decorated positon held by greatest of thinkers and statesmen.
Alas, Somnath Chatterjee is only a reflection of the sad polity of Indian Parliament today.If we can have Lalu Prasad Yadav as a Railway Minister and Taslimuddin as a Cabinate Rank minister, why should Somnath Chatterjee be a problem?
Monday, August 08, 2005
Aussie Rock
England beat Australia in the second test match last Sunday.
You cannot but praise the Aussies for bringing the match to that stage. How many teams in the world would have actually even bothered to think of a win with just 2 wickets in hands and more than 100 runs required for a win? Surely not India.Neither of the other test playing nations would have come close of that chase.
Whatever ! England's win has opened the Ashes wide open. More importantly it has brought a new lease of life to cricket whose fans all over the world had become habitual to mundane Australian victory over England and thus were becoming dis-interested in England-Australia series. England's victory this Sunday has opened the flood gates of interest for cricket lovers all over.
As the gutsy Australian opener Justin Langer wrote in his column in BBC.com...
[..] in the bigger scheme of things it is one of the best things that has happened in
international cricket for a long time[..]
No kidding. It takes a lot of self-confidence to say so, Justin !
As a cricket lover i have seen the Australia rise from 'ashes' (literally). I guess it was Bob Simpson and Alan border who built that formidable Australian side of 1987 which went on to win the Reliance World Cup in India. Thereafter there was no looking back. There was off course a minor dip in Australia's fortunes when Australia failed to reach even the last four of 1992 world , which incidently was played in Australia. Barring that brief period Australia never looked easily beatable. I guess except for South Africa under Hansie Cronje, none of the teams really stood up to Australia's professionalism on the field. There mental toughness has been un-matched ever since.
It takes a lot of foresight and planning to build such a temparament and attitude. Bob Simpson almost redefined the way one-day cricket was played. He gave a lot of weightage to fielding and physical fitness and discipline.No wonder teams like Windies,Pak and India who depended largely on just the batting and bowling skills of their players started looking increasingly inadequate .
The Australians ooze a silent confidence with their body language. Aggression is their second name. They play hard. But all this was not procured overnight. They actually build this step by step.
Remember the tied match at Chennai when Ravi Shastri almost gave us victory. That word "ALMOST" has been our bane. The same word was applicable when we "ALMOST" beat Australia in 1992 world cup; when Steve Waugh even after dropping a catch of last ball had the cools to make an accurate throw at the keeper and run the sloppy lazy out.
But to be fair to India, we have given Australia a run for their money from time to time. Whether the famous VVS Laxman series where he turned around a lost match into a win or when Tendulkar bull dozed Wagh's team out of Sharjah.
Neverthless the Aussies have seldom failed to live upto their reputation. They have the last two world cups in their pockets and are likely to be the favourites for 2007 with their current form.
But as like in every sport and every team the downfall of Australia will come. The West Indies seemed indomitable and unbeatable not so long ago. They were the kings and rest all the other teams competed amongst themselves to come distant second. Their domination over the game was absolute. It was complete. I always argue that Clive Lloyd's team of late 1970s and early 1980s was the best cricketing side ever.
But as with Lloyds team when the key players started retiring one by one leaving a vaccum, the same fate is likely to hit Australia. The key might be a gradual phase out.Warne and McGrath are likely to retire sooner than later and Australia might need to build a second-rung of players who will fit in their shoes. Thats easier said than done. Off course Ricky Ponting is still young and very able skipper.
I am happy with the result of second test purely because it has kept the interest alive in series. Also since cricket is dying a slow death in the country of its birth, it is heartening to see England beat its arch rival at home. This will,God willing, give the required filip to English cricket.
I would like to see England,South Africa and West Indies build up a formidable challenge to the Asians to see a balance in cricketing world. Cricket was much better when these teams were playing well. Today somehow it has become more asian and lost some of its lustre.
Not sure what affect the new rules will have on its popularity. Hope it manages to raise the sagging interest in cricket overall.
Great games and great sports are always marked by great rivalries. I lost interest in watching tennis when every year a new face came to centre court of Wimbledon finals. Tennis was great when McNroe fought Bjon Borg and Becker fought Edberg and Sampras fought Aggassi each year. It was great when Chris Evert and Martina or Steffi Graf and Monica Seles were arch-rivals and each of us had their prejudices and favourites to back up.
Similarly soccer is fun to watch as long as Latinos have a serious competition from Europe or even amongst the latinos, Brazil and Argentina have a India-Pak like rivalry.
Arch-rivalries bring out the best and the most exciting games.
Thankfully English cricket is reviving and Ashes still has some meaning. Hope Andrew Flintoff can do an Ian Botham on Ashes for the sake of English cricket :)
You cannot but praise the Aussies for bringing the match to that stage. How many teams in the world would have actually even bothered to think of a win with just 2 wickets in hands and more than 100 runs required for a win? Surely not India.Neither of the other test playing nations would have come close of that chase.
Whatever ! England's win has opened the Ashes wide open. More importantly it has brought a new lease of life to cricket whose fans all over the world had become habitual to mundane Australian victory over England and thus were becoming dis-interested in England-Australia series. England's victory this Sunday has opened the flood gates of interest for cricket lovers all over.
As the gutsy Australian opener Justin Langer wrote in his column in BBC.com...
[..] in the bigger scheme of things it is one of the best things that has happened in
international cricket for a long time[..]
No kidding. It takes a lot of self-confidence to say so, Justin !
As a cricket lover i have seen the Australia rise from 'ashes' (literally). I guess it was Bob Simpson and Alan border who built that formidable Australian side of 1987 which went on to win the Reliance World Cup in India. Thereafter there was no looking back. There was off course a minor dip in Australia's fortunes when Australia failed to reach even the last four of 1992 world , which incidently was played in Australia. Barring that brief period Australia never looked easily beatable. I guess except for South Africa under Hansie Cronje, none of the teams really stood up to Australia's professionalism on the field. There mental toughness has been un-matched ever since.
It takes a lot of foresight and planning to build such a temparament and attitude. Bob Simpson almost redefined the way one-day cricket was played. He gave a lot of weightage to fielding and physical fitness and discipline.No wonder teams like Windies,Pak and India who depended largely on just the batting and bowling skills of their players started looking increasingly inadequate .
The Australians ooze a silent confidence with their body language. Aggression is their second name. They play hard. But all this was not procured overnight. They actually build this step by step.
Remember the tied match at Chennai when Ravi Shastri almost gave us victory. That word "ALMOST" has been our bane. The same word was applicable when we "ALMOST" beat Australia in 1992 world cup; when Steve Waugh even after dropping a catch of last ball had the cools to make an accurate throw at the keeper and run the sloppy lazy out.
But to be fair to India, we have given Australia a run for their money from time to time. Whether the famous VVS Laxman series where he turned around a lost match into a win or when Tendulkar bull dozed Wagh's team out of Sharjah.
Neverthless the Aussies have seldom failed to live upto their reputation. They have the last two world cups in their pockets and are likely to be the favourites for 2007 with their current form.
But as like in every sport and every team the downfall of Australia will come. The West Indies seemed indomitable and unbeatable not so long ago. They were the kings and rest all the other teams competed amongst themselves to come distant second. Their domination over the game was absolute. It was complete. I always argue that Clive Lloyd's team of late 1970s and early 1980s was the best cricketing side ever.
But as with Lloyds team when the key players started retiring one by one leaving a vaccum, the same fate is likely to hit Australia. The key might be a gradual phase out.Warne and McGrath are likely to retire sooner than later and Australia might need to build a second-rung of players who will fit in their shoes. Thats easier said than done. Off course Ricky Ponting is still young and very able skipper.
I am happy with the result of second test purely because it has kept the interest alive in series. Also since cricket is dying a slow death in the country of its birth, it is heartening to see England beat its arch rival at home. This will,God willing, give the required filip to English cricket.
I would like to see England,South Africa and West Indies build up a formidable challenge to the Asians to see a balance in cricketing world. Cricket was much better when these teams were playing well. Today somehow it has become more asian and lost some of its lustre.
Not sure what affect the new rules will have on its popularity. Hope it manages to raise the sagging interest in cricket overall.
Great games and great sports are always marked by great rivalries. I lost interest in watching tennis when every year a new face came to centre court of Wimbledon finals. Tennis was great when McNroe fought Bjon Borg and Becker fought Edberg and Sampras fought Aggassi each year. It was great when Chris Evert and Martina or Steffi Graf and Monica Seles were arch-rivals and each of us had their prejudices and favourites to back up.
Similarly soccer is fun to watch as long as Latinos have a serious competition from Europe or even amongst the latinos, Brazil and Argentina have a India-Pak like rivalry.
Arch-rivalries bring out the best and the most exciting games.
Thankfully English cricket is reviving and Ashes still has some meaning. Hope Andrew Flintoff can do an Ian Botham on Ashes for the sake of English cricket :)
Friday, August 05, 2005
Analyse That
This is a good analysis by Sushan Sareen in rediff.com.
http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/06guest1.htm
Its a fact that no muslim in the world has ever come out strongly against islamic terror. There's always a tacit justification provided after whatever cosmetic condemnation is,if at all, done by any muslim leader.
Sareen goes on to say
[...] the implicit justification offered by the so-called moderate Muslims to acts
of Islamic terrorism by pointing out at the 'root causes' begs the question: does
the 'root cause' of Islamic terrorism lie in social, political and economic
conditions in Muslim societies or do they lie in the religion itself? Do the root
causes lie in 'grievances' of Muslims or do they lie in the way Islam is
perceived, taught and imbibed by its followers?
Terror apologists like Sayeed Naqvi,Arundati Roy, Praful Bidwai invariable point the fingers to Israel or Afghanistan or Iraq or somewhere in the middle east whenever a terror strikes , as if to tell us that 'root-cause' lies there.
Every time they mention 'root causes' in the same breath as they condemn an act
of terrorism they effectively end up providing a tacit justification for
terrorism. What is more, this state of denial prevents a deeper soul searching
within the community on the direction the religion is taking and prevents any
course correction.
How very true.
The moderates want us to look the other way and i believe they want us like them to run away from the problem. The only way to end terror is to crush it. No amount of "peace talks" and reasoning can be of any good. You cannot reason with someone who says he's doing it under God's command. What possible argument can you provide to counter it.
The great bleeding hearts and the liberals like Arundati Roys and Kuldeep Nayars seldom shed a tear for Hindus,Jews,Christians killed by these jihadis on a daily basis. But always remind us of Palestine and Iraq as the 'root-cause'.
The hard fact is, these jihadis, will always find a 'root-cause', if not in Israel than in Somalia, if not in Somalia than in may be Kashmir to justify all their actions. There's no limit to their 'root-causes'. Even if you give them Kashmir and Palestine away, peace will not return. Because they will invent new roots and causes.
http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/06guest1.htm
Its a fact that no muslim in the world has ever come out strongly against islamic terror. There's always a tacit justification provided after whatever cosmetic condemnation is,if at all, done by any muslim leader.
Sareen goes on to say
[...] the implicit justification offered by the so-called moderate Muslims to acts
of Islamic terrorism by pointing out at the 'root causes' begs the question: does
the 'root cause' of Islamic terrorism lie in social, political and economic
conditions in Muslim societies or do they lie in the religion itself? Do the root
causes lie in 'grievances' of Muslims or do they lie in the way Islam is
perceived, taught and imbibed by its followers?
Terror apologists like Sayeed Naqvi,Arundati Roy, Praful Bidwai invariable point the fingers to Israel or Afghanistan or Iraq or somewhere in the middle east whenever a terror strikes , as if to tell us that 'root-cause' lies there.
Every time they mention 'root causes' in the same breath as they condemn an act
of terrorism they effectively end up providing a tacit justification for
terrorism. What is more, this state of denial prevents a deeper soul searching
within the community on the direction the religion is taking and prevents any
course correction.
How very true.
The moderates want us to look the other way and i believe they want us like them to run away from the problem. The only way to end terror is to crush it. No amount of "peace talks" and reasoning can be of any good. You cannot reason with someone who says he's doing it under God's command. What possible argument can you provide to counter it.
The great bleeding hearts and the liberals like Arundati Roys and Kuldeep Nayars seldom shed a tear for Hindus,Jews,Christians killed by these jihadis on a daily basis. But always remind us of Palestine and Iraq as the 'root-cause'.
The hard fact is, these jihadis, will always find a 'root-cause', if not in Israel than in Somalia, if not in Somalia than in may be Kashmir to justify all their actions. There's no limit to their 'root-causes'. Even if you give them Kashmir and Palestine away, peace will not return. Because they will invent new roots and causes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)