Here Charitable Individualism is the key!… nothing less.

Archive for December, 2008


There has been a lot of debate as to whether the captured TERRORIST of the MUMBAI MASSACRE was entitled to the protection enshrined in ARTICLE 22 (1) & (2) of the CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. If the captured terrorist KASAB @ QASAB were to be both an ENEMY as well as an ALIEN, he would not be eligible for the following protections guaranteed in our CONSTITUTION:-

  • 1.information of the grounds of arrest;
  • 2.right to consult;
  • 3.right to be defended, by a legal practitioner of his choice;
  • 4.production before the Magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest &
  • 5. no detention beyond 24 hours without the authority of the Magistrate.

The Constitution of India does not define these terms and both these words i.e ALIEN and ENEMY concern not merely the guarantees to the individual but also the SECURITY OF INDIA. In any democracy PERCEPTION of the majority is important, but when the perception of the majority is perverse vis-a-vis the constitution of the land, that perception HAS TO BE OVER-RULED.

There is a perception that KASAB @ QASAB should not be given the GUARANTEES that are enshrined in ARTICLE 22 (1) &(2).

Upon examination, it is no doubt clear that Kasab is an ALIEN for three reasons:-

  • that he is not an Indian and he himself doesn’t make that claim;
  • that the country that he calls his own DENIES that he is from Pakistan;
  • that the country from where he claims to come from has NOT RECOGNIZED his statehood nor has any other state owned up.

He is not merely an ALIEN but also STATELESS in the eyes of the International Community. Therefore none can tomorrow claim any nationality to the terrorist and make requests based on a Nationhood for the terrorist. So we INDIANS ARE ABSOLUTELY GUILTLESS ON THIS COUNT.

But the news that the terrorist is a Pakistani, must be based on overwhelming evidence gathered from his person as well as the confessions made by the said kasab @ Qasab. However, since the confessions have come while he was in the custody of the police, the confessions cannot have the sanctity of evidence in the eyes of the Law.

Pakistan is an UNFRIENDLY NEIGHBOUR and we have had many aggressions from their end. In lay-man’s terms a person who claims that he hails from the territory of an UNFRIENDLY NEIGHBOUR can be classified as an ENEMY.

Further as per the Army Act 1950 and Air Force Act 1950 the definition of an Enemy is ONE THAT HATES AND WISHES OR SEEKS TO INJURE ANOTHER.

As per the Official Secrets Act 1923, THE TERM ‘ENEMY’ INCLUDES AN UNFRIENDLY STATE.

As per our own INDIAN PENAL CODE under section 121, Kasab @ Qasab has been waging war with India and he being an Alien, from the point of view of the Government, is an ENEMY ALIEN by his mere actions.

Therefore we do not need to have compunction on the grounds that his fatherland is disowning him and buckle under the fact that THEY ARE WATCHING. Who are they – a splintered state that has less than the population of Uttar Pradesh; has no credible INSTITUTION, whatsoever; which has been ruled by the Army and its cohorts?; and has shown no development whatsoever neither has kept its people happy and secure??- except for the fact that that country holds land mass where Punjabi, Sindhi and Kashmiri (all these are also our Schedules Languages) are spoken, we have no sympathy or connection.

The Chief Justice of India, has reiterated that if the said Kasab @ Qasab were not to be defended by an Advocate, the TRIAL PROCEEDINGS WOULD STAND VITIATED. That is true if one were to go by the existing precedent. But His Lordship must be also aware that the precedent could be distinguished on the mere ground that the precedent relates to a case where neither the facts were relating to an INIMICAL ALIEN, nor was the conduct of that person WITNESSED by so many eyes in India.

In many of our judicial decisions, when we came to sticky solutions, the HIGHER JUDICIARY had invented IDEAS like ABSOLUTE LIABILITY(in the matter of Oleum gas leak case), BASIC STRUCTURE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (in the Kesavananda Bharti case) etc., which have stood the test of TIME. Likewise, it is possible for the Judiciary to divest the protection of ARTICLE 22 (1) &(2), merely by interpreting that such loose canon balls like Kasab @ Qasab , who do not fall within the established hierarchy of a nation ( as Pak has already denied his citizenship), by their mere acts of revolting crime could be treated in law as INIMICAL which wud fall squarely within the meaning of ENEMY.

Further the Honourable CJI’s fears that he would be acquitted, seems unfounded, as even in the Jessica Lal Murder case, when the belligerent and astute Ram Jethmalani’s rational arguments were effectively rebutted by the appeal Justice, i’m sure that in Kasab’s case (which is of graver import) whoever the Judge might be, would issue a well reasoned order of conviction.



ASIF ALI ZARDARI , who by quirk of fate is the President of Pakistan, is the only political person in this world who has donned the mantle of an assassinated wife. He was known as 10%-er, for all the backroom support he was providing when his wife was holding office.

Had he stepped boldly, into the shoes of his assassinated wife, one cud atleast say that he wanted to carry on the democratic process initiated by his wife, but the slime-ball techniques that he exhibited by projecting their son as the heir and assuming power as a REGENT PRESIDENT, is to say the least pusillanimous.

Not only his mode of assumption of the President’s post is dubious, but his statements are PREPOSTEROUS. No Indian Prime Minister, nay even a Chief Minister of a state in India, would go public stating that a person, captured for any criminal activity, does not belong to the nation or the relevant state within 12 hours of the question arising. India has @ 600 districts and each is headed by a District Collector / District Magistrate and without their report, no Constitutionally appointed person would make a statement of fact, as time could reveal facts and also show that he was in the know of that fact. But our WIDOWER, makes a statement disowning Kasab @ Qasab, as not being a Pakistani, unmindful of the future possibility of him being exposed. At least he could have asked the Chief Minister of the province to make a statement and back it up as the president.


Dear Zardari, u r like the frog from the well which could not conceptualize an Ocean.

FIRSTLY, if one has a look at the map of Pakistan one can see that no part of Pakistan is more than 500 kms from the nearest territory of India. Whereas, India cannot be covered from Northern end to the Southern Tip by an overnight journey! Nor can the East to west be traversed by an overnight journey! 500kms is nothing but an overnight journey. And these distances are not filled by vacuum, but amazingly variegated culture.

SECONDLY, Mr.Zardari, out of all the languages spoken in your land Urdu, Punjabi and Sindhi are languages which are merely 3 of the 22 languages listed in Schedule 8 of The Constitution of India. These 3 languages form probably the mother tongue of less than 5% of the population of India. Yet Zardari has the AUDACITY TO TELL THAT THERE IS A PART OF PAKISTAN IN EVERY INDIAN.

THIRDLY, India is not a THEOCRATIC state- neither by its Constitution nor by its Practice. There are INSTITUTIONS that stand by the CONSTITUTION and HUMANITY. It is the land where the APEX JUDICIARY INVENTED THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE AND OVERCAME THE CONFLICT BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES, thereby had resolved conflicts thru fine judgments and refinement of thought and not thru crass force and muzzling!! The very composite nature of the society has brought a tolerance, which for a common Pakistani to appreciate might take ages.

FOURTHLY, if Zardari thinks that India is made up of the border districts abutting Pakistan, he is grossly mistaken. There are ethnicities that are diametrically different to his country’s ethnicity.

FIFTHLY, maybe India has been exporting Hindi Movies for the entertainment of the Pakistani people and Pakistanis might be influenced by those movies to such an extent, as to believe that, that was all India was about. If that were to be so they are grandly mistaken. There are movies made at a serious level in at least half a dozen more languages, which reflect cultures beyond their understanding!!

SIXTHLY, Pakistan has a population less than that of Uttar Pradesh (the most populous state of India) and India has more Muslim population than that of Pakistan. The dimensions that we are talking here are incomprehensible for a leader from Pakistan.

SEVENTHLY, at best a Zardari could qualify to be treated at par with some of the Chief Ministers of the major states of India, had it not been for the sovereignty of Pakistan.

Therefore, if he cannot get his facts right and be HUMBLE, the least he could do is to refrain from making those insidious statements, as if every Indian is carrying a part of Pakistan as a royal vestige!! The People’s power and the strength of the Institutions of India are incomparable, and its multi-culturalism, unparalleled.


The Christian Bible (ie. The King James’ Version) is complete in itself. The only book that a Christian is mandated to follow. But there are two major divisions of the Old Testament and the New Testament, and the total number of books are 66. So where do we place the emphasis of our Beliefs and how do we personally resolve the apparent contradictions, that arise in our minds?

The Bible is the WORD OF GOD. It is the word that was spoken thru Prophets, seers and priests to a particular generation, who found themselves in a particular social setting, and recorded for the future generations for edification, warning and promises.

So the Bible has the facts that were true to the setting of the past times but capable of being made relevant to the PRESENT, thru interpretation of the WORD.

The Old Testament was the identification of the Chosen people. They were not chosen because of their greatness or their skills or diligence but thru the Eternal GRACE of the Almighty. He knows why HE chose them. None can question the choice or His reasons, if at all any, for the choice of ABRAHAM and his seed forever. That was a prerogative and it cannot be questioned but we – as humble, time-bound mortals -will have to accept and move on. The alternative is to tilt at the wind-mills of the past, which would, without doubt, leave us tired and exhausted.

So the Choice of Abraham and his seed is a fait- accompli and leaves us in no uncertain position about God’s choice. Thru Moses, God revives His promise and He gives the basic tenets in the form of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, thereby defining the limits of human action without guilt. But man cannot, by his very nature be sinless, so he propitiates thru the priests for his sins and seeks reconciliation with God on a continual basis.

But man loses the spirit and gets stuck with the form. God knew that man was apt to get stuck with the form and abandon the spirit and therefore sends HIS OWN SON to be a PROPITIATION for our sins. JESUS, who was with God ( before Abraham was I AM), is sent in the human form and as a RESURRECTED JESUS stays in the human hearts as the WORD (cf. Gospel of JOHN) which had taken the form of flesh.

THE WORD that is put in the human heart, finds the expression in the human form in the Gospels and the Human understanding of THE WORD in the books subsequent to the Gospels. But let us make no mistake that the BIBLE has not been figured out, and human understanding is subject to human discoveries. For example The Epistle to the HEBREWS, according to the KJV was authored by St.Paul, till the subsequent discoveries have ruled out St.Paul’s authorship. Now most of the Newer versions have dropped the tag of St.Paul to The Hebrews. So that had left a few generations with a wrong belief of a fact that had turned out to be non-factual. But that hardly matters. There was a position held by the CHURCH that the Earth was the centre of the universe. Therefore the facts , as understood by humans, from the reading of the Bible has no certainty. So errors are likely to creep in if one were to read the Bible as a mere HISTORICAL DOCUMENT OR AS SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS.

So despite all these pitfalls in the interpretation of the Bible, where do we start?

Let me cite an anecdote before proceeding any further. Dr. Billy Graham in one of his sermons said, ” If the king Hezekiah had accepted God’s intimation of Hezekiah’s impending death, his son Mannaseh would not have been born to Hezekiah and Israel(Judah) would not have had the WICKEDEST king.”

The above is speculative and, similar lines of thought is against LIFE and for whatever REASON should be avoided. GOD gives LIFE and it cannot be denied. One could speculate, on similar lines, that if King David had killed Absalom upon him killing his half brother Amnon- who raped Tamar, Absalom’s sister- David would not have had to fight the battle with Absalom subsequently. These are speculative on the facts available in The Bible and is contrary to LIFE. LIFE comes from God and therefore LIFE, as we know it, has to be supported on the facts made available in THE BIBLE.

So the interpretation has to be firstly LIFE ORIENTED. Life in this world as well as in the next. JESUS says, “If u don’t love you brother , whom u have seen, how can u love the God whom u have not seen?” Therefore the LIFE that one is given has to be respected, as it is from GOD. The life hereafter is a HOPE built on FAITH in the WORD. But the LIFE of this LIFE, when in contradiction with the LIFE hereafter, this LIFE shall be sacrificed, if it has to be. But that is not to be taken lightly.

The only Apostle disciple of Jesus who had a natural Death was St. John. It was his belief that made him LIVE. Please confer the last few verses of the gospel of St. John, where Jesus is stated to have told Peter with reference to John that IF I WILL THAT HE TARRY TILL I COME, WHAT IS THAT TO THEE? Therefore if man ASKS GOD, he shall be granted. God is eager to answer the prayers of those who seek diligently.

LIFE is the most important gift of God. The same life is to be used for HIS GREATER GLORY. That is the purpose of man. But, never to CHOOSE THIS LIFE OVER THE NEXT. But even if one did it, there is still salvation and Hope. Otherwise, how can anyone explain the reconciliation of Manasseh, the king and the assurance of the thief/ robber who asked for Jesus’ grace while on the cross and obtained it?

THE IDEA IS THAT MAN SHUD BE RELIEVED OF HIS GUILT EVEN IN THE LAST MINUTE. But waiting for the last minute may not be wise, as one may not have the consciousness in the last minute. So man shud race towards his salvation, he may not obtain it immediately, but God in His due time shall grant it.

But CHRISTIANS have become negative and are under a mistaken belief that God wants man to suffer for HIM. God gives LIFE and gives it ABUNDANTLY. He doesn’t want man’s life. Man cannot make it his purpose to die for Christ- a kind of return favour!! God in the form of Jesus has died for us and He wants to give man life here and provide a MANSION there. A benign God cannot be portrayed a God who seeks your blood (Please do read Psalm 30, where the Psalmist asks God, verse no.9 What profit is there in my blood, when I go down to the pit? Shall the dust praise thee? shall it declare thy truth?). There are instances when Jesus hid and slunk away when the mob tried to lynch him. But when the TIME had come for HIM to lay down his life, he submitted to the will of God the Father. His mission, had DEATH as one of the components as HE had to overcome it thru DEATH itself and thereby secure for man the INNOCENCE LOST in the garden of EDEN. So that MAN CAN LIVE.


The second challenge, is to decide which side to stand for?

Abraham Lincoln once said, “We trust, sir, that God is on our side. It is more important to know that we are on God’s side.”

The beauty of this line is the contrast drawn unobtrusively to the words TRUST and KNOW.

TRUST is the Faith reposed, whereas KNOWLEDGE is the awareness of the existing reality and the interpretation thereof. Since it involves INTERPRETATION, the tools used have to bear the Christian mark and the PURPOSE has to be Christian too.

The ways are given in the Gospel itself. In the story of THE RICH MAN & LAZARUS. the Rich man asks Abraham to send Lazarus from the dead and enlighten the rich man’s brothers who, according to him, were still committing sins. Abraham says, THEY HAVE THEIR MOSES AND PROPHETS AND IF THEY DO NOT LISTEN TO THEM, EVEN IF ONE WERE TO GO FROM THE DEAD THEY WOULDN’T LISTEN.

So as a Christian, one has an option to STUDY the Bible and follow it according to the revelation he receives from ABOVE, or to follow the spiritual leader to whom God has led him in His Grace. Both are good options, but to make an effort to study THE BIBLE and follow it, would be preferable as it gives a certainty that is coupled with HUMILITY. After all it is desirable to be a HUMBLE & KNOWLEDGEABLE CHRISTIAN than to be a SHEEP OF SOMEBODY’S PASTURE.


It is not often that one gets to see the Prez of the USA duck! He is somebody who gets on to the front foot and deals with the issues- as he perceives them! But yesterday we saw Prez Bush (we Indians Love him- Dr.Manmohan Singh), while addressing a press conference at Baghdad ducking, while a shoe was missiled at him by one of the members of the accredited(!!) press corps.

Notwithstanding the fact that the person was from the press; notwithstanding the fact that the missiler was a shiite; notwithstanding the fact that no matter what they say, the Iraqis resent the American presence in their soil,- it is to the credit of the American Prez that he had razor sharp reaction to duck the shoe. I must say that the missiler’s marksmanship was excellent. Had it not been for the Texan’s ranch-y reaction, it would have been all over his face.

I’m sure many would have liked it to have been that way. At least, the majority Iraqi population would have been delighted to see their aggressor being hit by the basest of all missiles.

Bush wanted to export his brand of democracy to Iraq- besides securing for the the local guzzlers  gas in abundance and at a rate that would support him at the gallups. Not only did he export it, but shoehorned it by eliminating President Saddam Hussain for the supposed WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION that the then President was possessing/manufacturing. But democracy cannot survive in an atmosphere where there is no basic postulate which presupposes democracy:-

Which are

1. that all men are created equal  &

2.that it is legitimate for anyone to aspire and compete for the top most political post in the country- subject to such limitations as laid down by the constitution or practice.

Iraqis are divided not only ethnically, but organized into groups merely on grounds of their ethnicity. It is, at best,  a feudal set up muzzled into a democratic form. The content is feudal. There are no issues or ideology distinguishing the representative groups. They at best see the Government as a tool that empowers the rulers to have unlimited access to the resources of the country and the right to suppress the rest. Political dissensions are settled not thru debate but thru coercion, might and elimination. In a way the Iraqis themselves have invited this doom on themselves. It is a pity that one of the regions where the Mesopotamian civilization once flourished, had to become a vassal state of another country from another CONTINENT on dubious pretexts.

When the Iraqi press wallah had the opportunity to save his own family thru toil during  these troubled times in Iraq, he blew it all up by flinging a shoe at the most powerful man on the Earth. The US security agencies after securing an assurance from the host nation, that an exemplary punishment would be meted out, may hand him over to the local police for jurisdictional reasons.

The look of George W.Bush Jr. after ducking and rising was interesting. It had the bemused  askance as to why an Iraqi would fling a shoe at his SAVIOUR? I think, that the Prez seriously believes that he had saved the Iraqis from the hands of the DICTATOR. Some self-redeeming BELIEF!!



Two men walked the road of Sympathy.

At the fork they parted,

on grounds of identification.

One wanted to bring the deprived to his home,

the other wanted to reach the deprived’s home.

As such, they parted ways.

Many decades later they met at a wedding.

The former had thankful friends – for the support lent,

the latter came with a choir of paupers- glorifying Poverty.

The parted friends hugged each other.

The former PITIED the other,

And the other SCORNED his riches.

Each stood for the Road of Sympathy!!


In this world of immense possibilities, even within the stratum of society in which one finds himself, it has become necessary to acquire the power to say NO.

If we see the evolution of man, as a child he could only state his discomfort thru crying when found in unpleasant circumstances or with unpleasant feelings/sensations. But this crying does not automatically turn to the power of saying NO.

It needs a certain conviction of the self to utter NO, notwithstanding the feelings and thoughts lying within. A NO, in legal parlance is the DECLARATION OF REFUSAL. It is a statement made in personam or in rem or to one’s God or to oneself. But what is visible is what is known to the other beings, and therefore here i wish to explore the outward import of the POWER OF NO.

First and foremost is that, a person who doesn’t have a choice needs to say no NOES. Therefore there must be other possibilities of fact before one chooses the option of a  NO.

Secondly, it is a higher power than YES, because it is NEGATIVE. A YES is an affirmation without any exclusion, but the moment a NO comes in something is carved out and taken away from the whole- which has already an existence or has already been envisaged.

The President of the USA has the VETO power, it is the power to say NO. The big five in the UN Security Council have the power to say NO. It is that power that sets them apart from the rest, whether as an individual to over-rule the Congress or as a nation to over-rule the non-permanent members of the council. Politics is the ultimate power, as it decides for others, but my scope is much less ambitious and it shall hereafter deal with the POWER OF NO at a personal level.

In the first statement to be made by any CHRISTIAN, in his own personal capacity, endowed with a power to say NO is during his CONFIRMATION. Confirmation is the taking of the vows to be a Christian and to abjure and depart from devilish ways. The candidate reconfirms the vows taken by his guardians during his baptism. During the confirmation he is asked:-

DO ye here, in the presence of God, and of this congregation, renounce the devil and all his works, the pomps and vanity of this wicked world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh, so that ye will not follow nor be led by them?”

The question is affirmatively worded, but the contents reflect that the candidate shall say NO to the Devil and all his works.

So the FIRST NO, is ironically uttered as an AFFIRMATION of his FAITH.

Most of the world religions do have the TABOO practices. A taboo is a NO, NO and NO to certain beliefs, practices and acts.

Therefore the power of NO, not only keeps one within the bounds of what is right as prescribed by the society, but also gives one a certainty of the guiltlessness to one’s actions and thoughts.

Notwithstanding all the above, the power of NO, reflects the choice a man makes for himself, which ultimately shapes his personality and the perception of others.

There are moments in a man’s life when he can’t say NO. To follow what is gonna be narrated below, one shud have a decent memory of the movie CASABLANCA, where in the salon RICK’S, Ingrid Bergman meets Sam , the piano player and requests him to play and sing AS TIME GOES BY. Sam’s boss, Rick (@ Richard)- played by Humphrey Bogart-, had instructed Sam never to play AS TIME GOES BY. The lady- played by Ingrid (i wish i had been in first name terms with her- what bone structure!!)- uses her feminine charms to make Sam play AS TIME GOES BY, and succeeds. Sam, the piano player, finds himself in a situation where it would be his DUTY to say NO, but since his boss’ emotions were involved and further the request was made by the lady who could have been his master’s wife, he finds himself powerless and plays AS TIME GOES BY.


Macbeth found himself in a position to say NO, when the proposition of murdering Duncan was put forth to him, but he couldn’t.If only had he said NO, we’d have been less critical of Lady Macbeth. That NO would have smothered an evil idea at its infancy.

A NO is the mental brake. That might seem to delay progress, but it also provides the TIME to take a turn from the undesirable destination.

If one recalls the MARSHMALLOW TESTS, one could see that delay in appeasing one’s immediate sensual desires could lead to better rewards. That also is the power to say NO for the immediate gains and postponement of smaller satisfaction for greater REWARDS. With every NO uttered to an attractive thing or proposition, the person increases the HOPE component of his consciousness.



The Word is the Originator. The word organizes the unintegrated mass of sounds that signify many emotions, thoughts, feelings & ideas into coherent words that more or less carry the same meaning to the knowers of a particular language, of a particular generation.

The Word arises out of these four elements above-mentioned and remains in the sub-conscious level. That is why there are times in a person’s life  when he hears a word that carried a meaning, that he had always conceived but inadequately expressed by him, he gets into a delirium with that particular WORD.

That is the moment when the CONSCIOUSNESS of that person gets ACQUAINTED with that word and posits that WORD with the COMBINATION OF THE ELEMENTS mentioned above. His THOUGHT gains ACCURACY and RICHNESS.

He gains a level parity with those who have been deploying that WORD in apt circumstances. A LINGUISTIC status is achieved.

But the knowledge of the WORD equips him with the ability to understand but not to immediately EXPRESS. If he expresses it, it becomes VOICE. But the WORD lies DORMANT, that dormant word is the touchstone of his understanding. It is that GODHOOD that unites HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS.

But the WORD can be corrupted like any pristine DIE or a DISC, thru indoctrination. The VOICE that is exposed to the inner WORD shud be kept POSITIVE & LIFE-ORIENTED with GROWTH PROSPECTS. But, not always is man subject to such benign forces. They are outside his control. Therefore he has to purge himself CONTINUALLY of the Negative voices that impinge on him. Failing which, he runs the risk of corrupting the inner WORD.

The VOICES are either MASCULINE or FEMININE. The Masculine is that which is Aggressive or reaching out or destroying  or  intruding.  The Feminine voice  is  mollifying or  deviant or  perverse or  caring.  To simplify the understanding, the Masculine is the CONTENT and the Feminine is  the FORM.

The DEEDS of the person will depend on the VOICE he HEEDS.

But his response may be coloured with his own temperament. His temperament may have the outer feminine but the deeds may be masculine in purpose. For example, in HUSKING A COCONUT, the objective is to get at the kernel. Therefore one needs to remove the husk. It could be done by using a sickle, but that isn’t efficient, so bury a crowbar upside down and bring the whole coconut  hard on to the sharp-end of the crowbar and twist it to remove the husk. In two to three blows the coconut is husked.

This example, clarifies how the masculine CONTENT is BURIED and the FEMININE content is MADE to perform the masculine aggression. But the objective – Which is masculine -is met . Because the purpose is to get the kernel for man’s consumption for nourishment.

Therefore, THE WORD is the originator , THE VOICE is the intermediary and  THE DEED is the CULMINATION of PURPOSE.



THE DEED IS DONE (always in the past).

The Deed recedes into the past, irrevocably. It cannot be altered but it can be hid or propitiated for.

The WORD springs again and again in the HUMAN heart to replenish life.

The VOICE SPREADS it to those who have not discovered the WORD.

HE who has  the WORD spreads it, he who has the VOICE carries it and he who is convinced  DOES carry out the word & makes himself a landmark in the human history, as his deed shall irrevocably become a etched in the pastness of TIME.







So here we have a classic case of a de jure President of Pakistan TAKING LESS THAN A DAY TO DENY THAT THE TERRORIST CAUGHT, WAS NOT A PAKISTANI.

There is a provision that if my neighbour’s house is burning, and I fear that the fire might spread to my house, I NEED NOT TAKE HIS PERMISSION TO PUT OUT THE FIRE. This is no International Law, but common sense, because it involves the lives of the people and the property, at my home. It needs no Einsteinian brains to figure this out.

When the MARRIOT in Pakistan was subject to terror attack, none put the blame in our door step. It was acknowledged by the Pakistani media to be the work of the chicken which had come home to roost from the Afghan ghats. When Benezir Bhutto was assassinated, none dared to lay the blame at our door step. That was also the handiwork of the chickens which had come home to roost!!

Now that our neighbour’s house is on fire, despite the cost involved, I hope to God that India wud send its forces and destroy and decapitate the terror camps that are stated to be within the territory of Pakistan. Let us convince them that we are helping them to eliminate those forces that are destroying the very fabric of their society.

Let us request Pakistan to allow us to liquidate those camps. If they don’t allow, then let us give a new name by our action to the INTERNATIONAL LAW called TERROR SPREAD PREVENTION STRIKES (hereinafter called TSPS). It is to be done as sanctimoniously as the announcement of the prez’  (of Pakistan) disclaimer.




She never said NO.

She couldn’t say NO.

She would say no YES either.

She worked day and she worked night.

The men folk were flabbergasted.

There was a callow youth,

Who was fascinated with the prospects of encountering no NOES!

Wooed he the lady, successfully- she didn’t say no.

Years rolled by- he heard no NOES.

But she learnt the art of making his man demand less and less,

Now the man’s joy of hearing no NOES,

Had turned to the fear of hearing the FIRST NO!


There are those Rhetts of the society, who don’t really give a damn.

These Rhetts resist “powdered and lip-stick-ed women holding candles” and showing solidarity.

These Rhetts blabber a lot about India living in the villages and the elite not knowing anything about the poor.

These Rhetts take their sons to the place of tragedy, and give them a first hand account of the tragedy!

These Rhetts take Film Directors , to tragic scenes to lend a script.

These Rhetts stay indoors and make no statements of solidarity during troubled times.

These Rhetts say that in a big city like Mumbai a few deaths are inevitable!

These Rhetts pay homage to martyred policemen by bribing a crore!

These Rhetts arrogate to themselves knowledge of people’s feelings, but seldom feel!

These Rhetts do a detailed demographic study and incite people on linguistic grounds.

These Rhetts rush to the Martyred Major’s house the day after the funeral, to feed the masses back home.

These Rhetts did not wait outside the theatre of tragedy when common folk kept vigil.

These Rhetts come singing the same old song to steal your votes.







The aftermath of the terrorist attack in Mumbai has spawned a whole lot of angry Indians. One Mrs. Meera Isaacs makes an appearance on a TV channel and says that one of her friends (?) said that SHE DOESN’T WANT TO BE NOT ANGRY.

Angry against whom?

Angry for what?

The anger that all the Indians have directed against are the politicians. In India we have three types of politicians:




It may be amusing, that i am distinguishing the politician and thereby taking away the focus of the ire that is engulfing the politician as a genus. But, i reiterate that we have to distinguish the genus as the functions performed by each of the three specie is distinct and unless we charge the right politician we wud be addressing the wrong person.

The first category indulges in parochial issues and projects his/her pet notions as scientific truths based on statistics. His purpose is to coalesce the disgruntled, idle elements under an umbrella of fear, and use it during elections for bargaining positions, and at non-election times to spread rumours and disturbances in the society.

The second category are the blessed lot. They had already floated an agenda and have successfully built their base that they have become bigger than any post that the Constitution could offer and therefore put puppets on the constitutional posts and run governments remotely and are consummate manipulators. They are still the FEUDAL FORCES of India. They have the popularity, resources and power thru minions. They are the QUEEN BEES of the system and all the worker bees wud rally around them in the event of any threat perceived to the Queen bee. (It is merely a simile and not gender specific)

The third category are the true politicians. They have to debate issues, explain their stance to public and seek for positions in the constitutional order of things. It is the toughest. Edmund Burke, who was a Member of Parliament of the UK for the constituency of Bristol, tried his level best to explain to them in the clearest of logical terms his functions and his judgement on political issues. But miserably failed. So much for the electorate. If Edmund Burke cud not make it clear, who can? The denseness and impatience of the electorate is self-defeating.

The fist category is not dangerous. He is an irritant, he has not got into his hands the constitutional power. He can be reined in thru strict executive action.

The most dangerous is the THIRD CATEGORY POLITICIAN, UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE SECOND CATEGORY. Functionally if one sees that combo, it is power in the hands of the second without accountability. The constitutional politician is at the bidding of the king-maker. The king-maker politician is removed from the epicentre of the issue. The constitutional politician when he fails, is made to resign and made a scape goat for all the failures. But behind the apparent constitutional system, was in reality running the writ of the Feudal politician, who goes scot-free. But if there is success, the constitutional politician surrenders all the credit to the king maker politician- that is the least he cud do for the favour of position bestowed on him, by the king maker politician.

INDIANS have to become more discerning in identifying that second category and wield the vote collectively to diminish their political power. In India the political power is not gathered thru open declarations of policy by the individual- like in the USA. The largest group vests the power in the hands of an individual mostly, subsequent to the elections.

As Indians, we shud insist that the person who is more likely to lead, shud be in constant communication with the people during crisis and at peace times. Reassuring the common man of the steps being taken and sometimes even his helplessness like what Winston Churchill did in his BLOOD,SWEAT and TEARS speech during the II World War.

So far as the Mumbai attack is concerned, it was the executive action which salvaged whatever was left. The politicians shud do their LEGISLATIVE JOBS and leave the running of the Government to the cabinet. The Government shud not interfere with the initiatives of the EXECUTIVE and shud encourage them to equip themselves for eventualities. So that we have a safer and productive country.



Tag Cloud