Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Bade Bhai Sahab




यह मेरी पहली हिन्दी की पोस्ट है| मैं आपको विकीसॉर्स से परिचय करवाना चाहता हूँ | उसपर प्रेमचंद की अनेक कहानियाँ है जो आप इस कडी पे पढ सकते हैं |

आइये आपके मनोरंजन के लिये प्रेमचंद की बडे भाईसाहब कहानी के चंद परिच्छेद प्रस्तुत करता हूँ | इसमे एक बडा भाई अपने छोटे भाई को समझा रहा है कि उसकी पढाई कितनी कठिन है और इसलिये छोटे को भी अपनी पढाई मे अभी से ही ज्यादा ध्यान देना चाहिये |

"मेरे फेल होने पर न जाओ। मेरे दरजे में आओगे, तो दाँतो पसीना आयगा। जब अलजबरा और जामेंट्री के लोहे के चने चबाने पड़ेंगे और इंगलिस्‍तान का इतिहास पढ़ना पड़ेंगा! बादशाहों के नाम याद रखना आसान नहीं। आठ-आठ हेनरी को गुजरे है कौन-सा कांड किस हेनरी के समय हुआ, क्‍या यह याद कर लेना आसान समझते हो? हेनरी सातवें की जगह हेनरी आठवां लिखा और सब नम्‍बर गायब! सफाचट। सिर्फ भी न मिलगा, सिफर भी! हो किस ख्‍याल में! दरजनो तो जेम्‍स हुए हैं, दरजनो विलियम, कोडियों चार्ल्‍स दिमाग चक्‍कर खाने लगता है। आंधी रोग हो जाता है। इन अभागो को नाम भी न जुडते थे। एक ही नाम के पीछे दोयम, तेयम, चहारम, पंचम नगाते चले गए। मुछसे पूछते, तो दस लाख नाम बता देता।

"और जामेट्री तो बस खुदा की पनाह! अ ब ज की जगह अ ज ब लिख दिया और सारे नम्‍बर कट गए। कोई इन निर्दयी मुमतहिनों से नहीं पूछता कि आखिर अ ब ज और अ ज ब में क्‍या फर्क है और व्‍यर्थकी बात के लिए क्‍यो छात्रो का खून करते हो दाल-भात-रोटी खायी या भात-दाल- रोटी खायी, इसमें क्‍या रखा है; मगर इन परीक्षको को क्‍या परवाह! वह तो वही देखते है, जो पुस्‍तक में लिखा है। चाहते हैं कि लडके अक्षर-अक्षर रट डाले। और इसी रटंत का नाम शिक्षा रख छोडा है और आखिर इन बे-सिर-पैर की बातो के पढ़ने से क्‍या फायदा?

"इस रेखा पर वह लम्‍ब गिरा दो, तो आधार लम्‍ब से दुगना होगा। पूछिए, इससे प्रयोजन? दुगना नही, चौगुना हो जाए, या आधा ही रहे, मेरी बला से, लेकिन परीक्षा में पास होना है, तो यह सब खुराफात याद करनी पड़ेगी। कह दिया-‘समय की पाबंदी’ पर एक निबन्‍ध लिखो, जो चार पन्‍नो से कम न हो। अब आप कापी सामने खोले, कलम हाथ में लिये, उसके नाम को रोइए।

"कौन नहीं जानता कि समय की पाबन्‍दी बहुत अच्‍छी बात है। इससे आदमी के जीवन में संयम आ जाता है, दूसरो का उस पर स्‍नेह होने लगता है और उसके करोबार में उन्‍नति होती है; जरा-सी बात पर चार पन्‍ने कैसे लिखें? जो बात एक वाक्‍य में कही जा सके, उसे चार पन्‍ने में लिखने की जरूरत? मैं तो इसे हिमाकत समझता हूं। यह तो समय की किफायत नही, बल्‍कि उसका दुरूपयोग है कि व्‍यर्थ में किसी बात को ठूंस दिया। हम चाहते है, आदमी को जो कुछ कहना हो, चटपट कह दे और अपनी राह ले। मगर नही, आपको चार पन्‍ने रंगने पडेंगे, चाहे जैसे लिखिए और पन्‍ने भी पूरे फुल्‍सकेप आकार के। यह छात्रो पर अत्‍याचार नहीं तो और क्‍या है? अनर्थ तो यह है कि कहा जाता है, संक्षेप में लिखो। समय की पाबन्‍दी पर संक्षेप में एक निबन्‍ध लिखो, जो चार पन्‍नो से कम न हो। ठीक! संक्षेप में चार पन्‍ने हुए, नही शायद सौ-दो सौ पन्‍ने लिखवाते। तेज भी दौडिए और धीरे-धीरे भी। है उल्‍टी बात या नही? बालक भी इतनी-सी बात समझ सकता है, लेकिन इन अध्‍यापको को इतनी तमीज भी नहीं। उस पर दावा है कि हम अध्‍यापक है। मेरे दरजे में आओगे लाला, तो ये सारे पापड बेलने पड़ेंगे और तब आटे-दाल का भाव मालूम होगा। इस दरजे में अव्‍वल आ गए हो, वो जमीन पर पांव नहीं रखते इसलिए मेरा कहना मानिए। लाख फेल हो गया हूँ, लेकिन तुमसे बड़ा हूं, संसार का मुझे तुमसे ज्‍यादा अनुभव है। जो कुछ कहता हूं, उसे ‍ गिरह बांधिए नही पछताएँगे।"


है ना मजेदार !

Tuesday, October 4, 2005

A Brief History of Nearly Everything


Just finished reading Bill Bryson's wonderful book, A Brief History of Nearly Everything. Experience, in brief, has been humbling.

A Brief History of Nearly Everything tells, well, a brief history of nearly everything. The author explains history of the most of the major sciences such as Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy, Geology, Paleontology, Oceanography, Biology, etc. in a very simple laymen's language since the dawn of the time until now. Journey of universe, earth, humanity and sciences, and discovery of what we know and how did we find them, from the biggest bang to 21st century penned in these 500 pages of gripping and amazing story! An unmatchable read. Truly.

My thoughts before starting the book were that perhaps book will introduce history of earth and life in a matter of fact manner, but Bill has dealt with variety of subjects from perspective of various scientists, researchers, discoverers and inventors making story not only pedantic but also heart touching. And in the end, the vastness of everything, and the significance of whole universe, and utter insignificance of our presence is unnerving. A little disappointing perhaps, for humans have always desired to find the purpose of life, which we are told in no explicit terms, is nothing. Nothing at all. We are here result of fluke of chance, and we will be just one of billions of billions of species in history of everything. We do not matter. Nada. No purpose. Except, perhaps, to propagate.

The book starts with the beginning of time at the Big Bang, and the formation of matter and universe and galaxies and earth. The narrative is not chronological, mostly because explorations in many branches of science move in parallel, but yet coherent and simple enough. Special feature of the narrative is not the order of things as they happened, but as they were discovered to have happened, interspersed with eccentricities of the people and societies then. The author recounts the history of geology and paleontology, biology and life, evolution and expansion of universe, and nearly everything and how it intervenes with everything else. We are led into old times into mind of those great thinkers, the hardships and jubilations they faced, the triumphs and defeats of mankind, and pretty and ugly face of human nature.

We learn that science is immensely difficult job. Much more than one can ever imagine. Much more than I ever though of. Much more than one is led to believe in this day or age. People spend their lifetime, literally, for doing something that will be disputed, ignored or even refuted as soon as they complete. They are hampered by political fallouts of wars and research funding, by fellow zealous scientists, by prevalent social views and stigma, and by their family. Many die unnoticed, unaccounted, ignored and discredited even for their best gift to mankind and sciences. Many rise from utter penury simply by their strong will, many are unimaginably brilliant to have thought of what they did then and many are utterly adventurous hardly caring for their own life in face of their curiosity! All we know is due to hard work of those, many of which we do not know even to thank for, and many we just simply cannot, ever. It would be injustice to pick one out of numerous examples in the book, but for sake of making a point, in one case a researcher spent 20 years calculating tables explaining motion of earth around the sun for occurrences of ice ages, which, by modern computers can be completed in less than 20 minutes.

The author quotes one of the scientists that scientific discoveries follow three-stage process. First, they are denied of being true. Second, they are denied of being important. And third, they are credited to wrong person. A profound and very true statement. After reading, we realize that so much talented minds are lost because of utter carelessness of fellow human beings, that so much advancement has been hampered by religious zealots and dogmatic society, including, fellow scientists.

One the simple yet effective technique adopted by the author to make the readers realize the unimaginable dimensions of the world is to compare it with ordinary matter. By repeated comparison of atoms/bacteria with a cricket ball or universe with United States area, unimaginable vastness of the beyond and meaningless smallness of atomic world dawns on us.

Though opinions of evolution vs. Intelligent Design are aplenty. After reading this book, one can refute ID option by its very postulate. World is utterly complex place, and anything like what we have to happen by itself, perhaps is ridiculously absurd. However, to have like what we have to be designed intentionally by superior being is even more ridiculously absurd. If you trusts the depths of the oceans, expansion of the universe, black matter, innumerable bacterial life which is omnipresent and omnipotent (at least, when combined), and utter meaningless (to us, and in fact to everything) and complexity of everything (for example, quarks, or DNA), then one can only question the intelligence of the designing entity. I am sure you would agree, that is if you are proponents of ID "theory", that world could have been designed trillionth time simpler than what it is now, and it would make sense to do so, if you were to contemplate designing something of similar nature now. One may argue that humans cannot fathom the depths and intentions of the God, yet still, even when I am staunch theist, I would have to question the sanity and intelligence of the God, if He/She indeed did design something like this.

All in all, an wonderful read which raises millions of unsolved problems, for answers to which we have to wait for science to progress sufficiently forward, which, unfortunately, may not happen within our lifetime. After all, when history of everything, and progress of science from 1600 AD until now is compressed into a 500 page book and read within less than a day, brain is overwhelmed by the amount of information and eagerly seeks answer to unfinished queries, which, alas, will not be answered in next 50 pages, as it has been so far.

Sunday, May 29, 2005

India Progressing?


Developement and progress have their side effects. This holds true for almost all developed societies/economies/nations. Lawsuits and sueing is one of such cases in hand here. Not quite long ago, Indians often found incidents of sueing for the bizzare (to Indians, at least) reasons hilarious which was (and is) common in developed nations. For example, you can sue your government if airport near your home makes noise which disturbs your sleep, or even better, lowers the fertility of chickens you farm! Or that a daughter, who was apparently conceived in test-tube, sued her parents because they could not afford to pay higher for better quality of chromosomes/hormones which would have made her more beautiful and intelligent! These are true cases. Infact, in my recently concluded training for First-Aid by American Red Cross, my instructor emphasized the need to obtain consent of victim before you provide him any first-aid, for you never know if he really wanted to die and could sue you for saving him! Apparently, they even have this law in US, called Good Samaritan Law, which nullifies any case charged on person providing First-Aid or other help by victim in case victim was not in position to give informed consent when help was needed.

Recent reports of sueing of Indian filmmakers from all and sundry seems to indicate that trend in starting in India too! Well, these are, perhaps, signs of liberal democracy and progress! Note that all major (bollywood) movies released in last one month have been dragged in court.

We start with Karan Johar's Kaal. This was charged by animal right activists for alleged ill treatments of Tigers in Orbit National Park. Next was Jo Bole So Nihaal which are charged by Shrimani Gurudwara Prabandhan Committee, the committee which maintains Golden Temple in Amritsar, and is major body representing Sikhs, that the title of movie is a religious phrase which should not be used for a commercial movies showing women in skimpy clothes! They further add, and with quite a mean and disgusting blow to Indian nationhood, that roles of Sikhs in movies must be played by Sikhs only! Next in line is Shahrukh Khan starrer Paheli, where animal rights activists again sue producer/director for alleged whipping of camels during a race scene in movie. I am not very fan of these "rights activists" be it animal, women, or human. Most of times their efforts and energies are directed towards publicity than making any real difference to either animal, woman or human. Okay, whipping camels is bad, but comm'on, they are not being tortured, and who doesn't whip his animal once in a while. And there are millions of serious issues involving brutal and torturous murder of cows and tigers and elephants in country but perhaps they are not good enough for publicity. And then Rashtriya Swamsevak Sangh disputed recently released Bunty Aur Bubbly for its potrayel of woman in Akhada (local wrestling rings) because supposedly women can't enter Akhadas!

Now none of these issues deserve a lawsuits, except Kaal case where I don't know details enough to decide. But then ...

Saturday, April 16, 2005

Mian Musharraf, Grow up


http://in.rediff.com/movies/2005/apr/15veer.htm

Looks like Musharraf Ji is upset about story of Veer-Zaara, cause "[p]akistan had never arrested or kept in confinement any IAF officer"!

Pakistan and Pakistanis have always been hysterical about supposedly bad projection of image of Pakistan and Pakistani Army in Indian movies. Some Indians, and specifically "top" class people in bollywood industry also talk about not making Indo-Pak hatred oriented movies for commercial gains. They claim that such movies, specially during time when relations are improving (I don't agree to that either, but let me leave that aside for now), will only hamper the peace process. Nevertheless such movies are made, and they go hit as well. But even the producers of such movies tend to play down and do not want to be quoted as making a movie based on Indo-Pak animosity. I am amused at the industry and media for this hypocrisy, and on Pakistanis for their inane objections.

Whether of not Pakistani Govt. permits formal screening of Indian movies, they are no doubt seen by one and all thanks to exploding piracy industry. Lollywood doesn't stand a chance in front of Bollywood, and even Pakistanis admit that. Now given that they see our movies and then cry foul, is something very amusing to me. Furthermore I have following reasons for opposing external ban or pressure on making of such movies - note that I do not necessarily want these kind of movies but they should not be not made because it will supposedly hamper the peace process. These are directed towards any Pakistani or Indian who supports such ban.
  1. Please understand they are JUST MOVIES. Don't use too much of your brain in interpreting what good or bad they imply about Pakistan. Movies are stories, sometimes based on real life, but nevertheless, stories. They are not supposed to depict "truth" but entertain the audience. If Indian audiences enjoy seeing Indian Army win and Indian soldier do impossible stunts, movies will portray that. Don't see logic here. Without doubt, Indian movies are directed to Indian audiences, simply because of official ban in Pakistan producers hardly expect any money. If you don't like Indian movie, don't watch. Hollywood continues to make movies based on Cold War and I didn't hear Russians complaining!
  2. Pakistan is foreign country to India and bollywood is indigenous industry. What makes Pakistanis think that we will care about what they think about our films. They, in first place, have no business forming official opinions on Indian movies - personal views, published or unpublished, are acceptable - and lesser so in conveying those opinions to India or Indians. Interestingly, since Pakistanis leagally cannot see Indian movies in Pakistan, those who comment on bollywood, indirectly admit violating the law in their country. I will leave Pakistan Govt. to handle that.
  3. However warped or concocted it may be depicted in motion pictures, the fact is Pakistani attacked India THREE times and LOST all the time. That's what our movies show. Why do they even expect that we will portray tales of bravery of Pak soldiers in Indian movie so as to be "realistic". After all they are just movies, that is Indian movies. Refer Point 1.
  4. Even if relation with Pakistan is improving, it doesn't change the past. Past will live with us, and must so, as history. Society has duty to make future generations (of India) be aware of this history, be it good or bad. If movies helps in partially, let them. Bitter truth must be divulged, and it doesn't mean that we want to start hatred again. Movies on British oppressions and freedom struggle are common in India, but did I hear Britain complaining? And it has not been affecting our relations with United Kingdom as well.
  5. Number and intensity of Lollywood movies showing India in poor light are much more and much higher. We don't hear much about them because a) they hardly ever make to Indian cinemas - not because of ban by Indian Govt. but because of their poor quality, and b) Indians are far more tolerant than Pakistanis on such issues. Don't you believe me here? Check human rights and world rights records yourself - but based on fact and not on PTV's propaganda - and the entire world acknowledges the democratic & secular credentials of India. I wouldn't comment on their sovereign right to make movies on whatever subject they like, but shouldn't one look into his own home before criticizing others'?
  6. This is last and perhaps least powerful of all points but still a valid point. Even good attempts like Veer-Zaara which portray Pakistani in very good light (compared to previous movies) are not met with goodwill from Pakistanis. Apart from unhappiness expressed by Mr. President himself, a simple look over various discussion boards involving Pakistanis discussing this movie will certify that (try Orkut or IMDB). So what is going to please Pakistanis? Are they expecting "Pakistan is Great" message from Indians? It may be, but we wound't say that, not because we have any problems with Pakistan, but because we haven't said that to any other country as well. Simple.
I think it is about time for Pakistanis and Indians to grow up a little. Do we expect any solution to decades old Kashmir imbroglio when Musharraf thinks that Veer-Zaara was bad because...!!

Saturday, April 9, 2005

News commentary


Following are short commentaries on various news pieces...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To see the extent of buying-selling of the public "trust" by BJP and Congress soon after Jharkhand state election, read this. I am not sure if this is most despicable consequence of a democracy?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rape is no doubt most heinous of crime on earth. Much more than murder. Its ghastliness arise from the very fact that women are the victim only by virtue of being women. Often no reason or motives are involved. And to live under omnipresent lustful male gazes all through life without nervous breakdown is an act worth deserving respect and reverence towards womankind. Even capital punishment is not apt for perpetrator of such crime. And to those, human rights activists against death penalty, I have just this to say: A rapists committs such unpardonable act that he should be killed even if it gives nothing more than mental satisfaction and a feeling of justice to victim or victim's family. Forget deterrence theory of punishment, he is not worth the life he is living. What would you say to incident of such grotesque nature? Cry your heart out for her.

Update (May 28): Apparently link is down. However, in brief, incident refers to a nurse rape and disabled 30 years ago still struggling in coma with occassional outburst of panic reactions.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
An interesting graphics of human migration across the globe from 100,000 years ago! If you can find, watch documentary titled The Real Eve.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I have utmost respect for Supreme Court of India. Amidst currept politicians, irresponsible media, bureacratic administration and self-serving public, it stands out with its remarkable and landmark decisions time to time. Unfortunate as it may sound, Supreme Court has to intervene what should normally be in perview of government or media, as they fail to shoulder their responsibilities. However this news comes a surprise. I personally don't favour the directive to delete "Sindh" from national anthem as it would disfigure whole anthem, and start disgusting competetion among states to include/exclude their names. After all, feelings for the anthem are not associated with its literal meaning.

Update (May 28): Thank God, Supreme Court of India has discarded petition to change National Anthem and restored my faith in it! Infact, the court fined, aptly so, the petitionar for wasting court's time and termed the petition as Publicity Interest Litigation.

Wednesday, April 6, 2005

Hopitality - the American way


"Sorry Sir, we provide water to only Hilton Honors members", answered the desk worker in response to my question why there is no water in my room.

Now there was everything that I could imagine in my room at Hilton Garden Inn hotel in Calabasas, California where I stayed last weekend in course of a job interview. Apart from basics of bed, TV, table, closet and furnished toilets; it had fridge, microwave, coffee maker, free internet, iron and access to pool, spa, gym and two newspapers every morning. These amenities may be minimum any hotel would provide in U.S. but were more than sufficient for me. Nevertheless I didn't expect that a no-cost commodity like water would only be for exclusive members from such a well reputed hotel! I am still at loss to comprehend his statement!

What do I make out of it? American way of hospotality? Or that water is the costliest among all amenities?

Thursday, March 31, 2005

Why I continue to be believe in God


The neighbourhood I grew up in never required me to think about atheism. Indeed I never knew about existence of such dis-belief untill I came to college. I always thought that everybody believes in the God irrespective of the means they chose to achieve Him. But as I matured as scintific rational individual my opinion and definition of theism were modified. I not only happened to come across numerous atheists but I also participated in unending debates over this with them. I found that most of atheists are well-educated well-to-do intellectuals who have plenty of scietific and rational reasons to be an atheist. This post is not an attempt to pursuade - which would be futile even if it were to - or diatribe against atheists but explantion of why I continue to be theist even after being an logical thinker.

Many atheists believe that theism is same as being religious. This is downright incorrect as belief in the God does not require you being the religious. This simply rules out any rituals, superstitions or traditions of any religion that you might disagree with. I will spare religions like Islam where following prescribed practices is mandatory to belief in the God.

If you noticed, then you would have realised that I did not use phrase "belief in existence of God" since definition of existence is simply controversial in this context. One critical point that many atheists miss is that they argue about "existence" of God based on postulates of modern science and logic. Being myself an engineer I am not averse to these propositions but it must be understood that there may exist other branches of philosophy - as the science is one of them - where these laws do not hold and without any knowledge of them we cannot define existence of such entities in scientific manner. God may "exist" without being proven to exist with modern science. On an hypothetical note, what if we are all part of grand experimental setup by some God? Will we ever know? May be not, since "knowing" based on observation, interpretation, knowledge, reasoning may not be what you percieve it to be. In one of the science fiction book, Issac Asimov postulates that universe is as much test setup for some other entity(ies) as bacterial cultures are for us. Do we know that bacteria themselves might be forming scientific theories about their existence and changes in their environment (planned by human scientists)? This is may sound too far fetched but is there a way to disprove it? We may never know. And I for one, don't even care.

One of the famous argument against omnipotent God is weather He (or She) can create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift. I would say, why not? You may consider me irrational or point out inconsitency in the act as implied by the statement. But hey, who says that God has to be cosistent as your science defines it?

Given that our definition of modern science are inadequate and perhaps inapplicable to Him, how do we go about dealing with this issue? You cannot prove or disprove Him. Thus you end up being agnostic. But then as someone wisely said, an agnostic is simply an atheist who doesn't has courage to accept so. I tend to agree.

Given this, there are aplenty of reasons in believing in Him.

Believing in God makes you explicitly aware of your acts which would please Him and which would not. You subconscioucly try to follow these and live a good life. You can be good of course, and have your own set of rights or wrongs, but then you are knowingly leaving a margin for wrong since, first - rights-wrongs are relative and subjective terms when you define them yourself, and second - you don't belive that you are answerable to anybody which means that you may change positions. Of course, many people commit most heinous of acts in name of God, but that is wrong interpretation by them and is out of scope of this discussion.

Believing in God gives your life hope, aspirations and faith which are necessary for a person throughout his life. It also gives you little margin for making errors since you are not exactly and sole maker of your life. You may consider this as 'blaming failures on destiny' but done with reasonable faith and not always, I percieve this to be okay as it lets you live happily instead of in constant worry. As a well-to-do professional you may not believe in destiny but for millions of poor people in India who sleep empty stomach everyday with only one faith, it is only thing they can relate to.

Believing in God also gives you company in despair and adversities. It also makes you humble in your successes since you are not lone doer of everything. While atheist has to express ignorance on occurance of scientifically-yet-unexplained events and observations, a theist has opportunity to depend on the divine explanation. It has a very subtle influence on mental feelings of human which faith supports.

Why then we sell ourselves to dry reasoning, specially if denying that would do more good or atleast no harm than accepting it, and deprieve ourselves from spiritual bliss that one encounters in faith. Remember that your don't have to be religious or perform any rituals to be theist. After all, not believing in God is itself a belief of one kind. Just for this, I prefer to be scientifically irrational for my own good, and for the good of the mankind. Which I think, is more rational than rationally adamant stand of being worldly irrational of an atheist.

I refuse to prove that I exist since demand of proof implies lack of belief and without belief I am nothing.
- God

For me as theist, reasoning starts with existence of God. How can I then question the postulate that is the beginning and end of all other postulates? On what independent frame I stand and in what words I chose to question the very entity that is reason of existence of those instruments in first place?

Browse these interesting links too ...
God, Arguments for God, Arguments against God

Update (April 14):

What is atheist's equivalent to praying to God? You may argue, there needn't be any. But consider this. You are about to take most important examination of your life - or so you think - and you work extremely hard. A theist would, parallelly pray to Almighty for success. This does not mean that theist will rely on God to clear his exam for him. He understands that God helps those who help themselves. He will work as hard as he can. But then, there is alway uncertainity, and genuine apprehension about "what if" factors. A theist would usually overcome those by praying to God. I am not able to figure out what would atheist do? He will work as hard as he can, of course, but is there nothing else? Okay, consider that exam has been taken, and one is loosing sleeps over results. There is nothing you can do now. A believer would still pray to God. What would non-believer do? I can't think of anything, but guess that he would fridget, get itchy, worry etc. How does a atheist counter eternal "what if" fear? For this reason itself, to keep your sanity under stress, I think belief in God helps. After all, even if you are 100% confident about results, there is still legitimate uncertainity untill you are confirmed.

Update (16 September, 2009)
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2009/09/15/logos/

Sunday, March 20, 2005

Mother commits suicide for kids!


Mother commits suicide to donate her eyes to her blind children!

An utmost and heart wrenching example of sacrifice, only a mother can do on this earth. How many of us can ever understand this avtaar of a woman? Or still, can we ever?

Imagine the agony of inability to get eye donors before one thinks of taking such extreme step! And how many of us have registered our/relative's organs for donation, or donated in the past?

Saturday, March 19, 2005

Visa denial to Modi: Outrageous!


For those secular out there in India who think that denial of Visa to Narendra Modi by US Govt is an apt punishment, here is exact definition of "secularism" by current Indian standards, which unfortunately is not implied by our Constitution, but perhaps suits you:

"For 'secular' India, secularism is not divorced between the State and the religion. For them secularism is exclusively for the benefit of the minorities. Extend it, secularism means pampering the minorities. Go further, it includes being allergic to the majority. That, unless one explicitly appeases the minorities and is overtly allergic to Hindus, one is not 'secular' enough. In Indian politics, uniting a minority for votes is 'secular.' Consequently, uniting the majority is anti-'secular.' And organising the majority is fundamentalist. In contrast, protecting organised minority is a 'secular' duty. This is the high point of 'secular' India." (Full Story)

This unwarranted and unjustified act of US is insult to Indian sovereignity, and very obviously so, if one can rise above the petty personal/political issues and see. Mr. Narendra Modi has not been convicted by any court of Law in India. Irrespective of how much I hate him for his complicity in Gujarat riots, he is still head of the state of the free, fair and democratically elected government of the Union of India. Even if he is guilty, United States has no right to meddle into domestic matters of India. We, the people of India, can and will punish him. And for the record again, he is not proven guilty. I am not trying to play down the massacre in Gujarat, but to tell Indians, on our face, by an outside nation who has no business nosing in internal affairs of India, specially so when its own hands are dripping from blood, and expect us to listen? No way!

Indication of his support in riots are no more than the indications of Bush's war for no reason in Iraq. And this press conference by Modi pretty much sums up what I wanted to say. Rallies and protests that were planned in US in the cities where Narendra Modi was going, that lead to "reasoning" behind the denial, are no way compared to what happened during Republican National Convention in New York. Perhaps Mr. Bush should also be denied US citizenship (and, of course, Indian visa)? Why does US keeps reminding us again and again of its hypocritical policies? And, interestingly, some people claim that by doing so, United States have upheld the "deep commitment to human rights" once again. Human rights. Hmm, remember Abu Ghraib?

Central Govt.'s request for reconsideration of visa is sure a very positive and unexpected reaction. UPA Govt.'s nonpartisan stand on this issue must be lauded. People seems to think that Gujarat riots are only riots where interests of minority were hurt (in India), under "communal" regime of BJP. After all, Sikhs, which were killed in much larger number during Congress rule in Capital after murder of then prime minister Indira Gandhi, and riots of Bombay after bomb blasts in early nineties wouldn't count, as "secular" Congress was in power. One fact that everyone chose to overlook is that one-third of those killed during Gujarat riots were Hindus, apart from the live carnage that started it off in the first place.

And need I mention the Honb'le President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan where minorities are completely wiped out (There are many other examples of such noble religiously tolerant people which are welcomed on red-carpet by the US and, in few cases, made 'most favoured ally', read this)? But again, oh pardon me, I am communal for I am championing rights of Hindu minorities.

Update: (Mar 20) One more nice article
Update: (Mar 21) Final nail in the head!

If this article is to be believed than US has an egg on its face. It deliberately and blatantly LIED, irrespective of Modi was responsible or not for Gujarat riots. Some snippets follows:

"Just because American soldiers have murdered, raped and pillaged in My Lai, ... indulged in ghastly torture and denial of human dignity at Abu Ghreib; simply because CIA operatives have subverted democracy in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala ... only because US foreign policy has fathered monsters like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the commander-in-chief of the US army, the president of the USA, cannot be held responsible."

"...casual application of a dubious American law...Section 212(a)(2)(G) of the US Immigration and Nationality Act...hides more than it reveals."

"Any alien who, while serving as a foreign government official, was responsible for or directly carried out, at any time during the preceding 24-month period, particularly severe violations of religious freedom, as defined..."

There are many more strong points in this interesting read! Must read if you think I am wrong.

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

My India Visit


January 24 - February 20, 2005
Pictures Here

I visited India last month first time after coming here. It was, surprisingly, not as surprising experience, as I had expected it to be. Looks like I am still Indian enough! Except that for first week there I had pretty hard time crossing roads. Being accustomed to cars stopping before me, when I so desire in US, I had difficulty finding gapes in the continuous trafffic stream. My risk threshold has perhaps decreased.

I also had this wonderful opportunity to visit my communty fair, a once-in-a-twelve-year rare event, where all my family members and all relatives and everybody from my community gathered in a village for full eight days and seven nights. We stayed under tents and cooked food on chulhas and slepts on sheets on farmland and bathed at local well and had great time together. The purpose of this kind of gathering is to meet all your acquaintances at one place and thats what happened all the time. You just go to tents and meet people and they offer you snacks and you eat & chat. There were various rides, more specifically Indian jhula, and vendors as typical in any fair.

Staying among village people, who would not be tired geting too excited on being weighed on a talking (taped) weighing machine was nice opportunity too see rural India from so close. I liked this so much, and I didn't even make fuss about poor quality of drinking water even after being NRI, that I enjoyed every moment of my stay. I had chance to meet my numerous relatives, and see lots of new bhabhis and neices and nephews and friends, and pretty girls! Only part I didn't like in this whole affair was where I had to fill up a jug in the morning and look for ....

Indian Passport Renewal from USA - A Step by Step Guide [Feb-2026]

This post is intended as working guide for renewing Indian Passport while you are overseas. I had relied extensively on NRI sub-reddit , bes...