So the number  one tennis player of India is asked (as per TOI dt. 20/06/2012 Bangalore edition) as to why he did not practice with Bopanna, if Leander was keen on playing doubles in 2012 London Olympics?  Leander’s explanation is that Leander was not sure if Boppanna was “UPTO THAT LEVEL” .

So when Leander was asked why he did not talk to Mahesh and fix him up to be Leander’s partner, Leander says that he was not sure whether Mahesh Bhupathi would be fit, as Leander thought that Mahesh had “FITNESS ISSUES”.

So. in effect Leander was neither sure of Boppanna’s “ABILITY” nor Bhupathi’s “FITNESS”  8 months back, but now that Mahesh and Boppanna TOOK THE RISK and are battle fit, Leander is trying to break (through the ‘good’ offices of AITA) the partnership nurtured through HOPE and EFFORT ! What a SISSY Leander has ended up being! Is he the same player, who upon winning a point used to go chest clashing with Mahesh and celebrate the point? Nay – Leander is behaving like a sissy and wants to choose the best at all times! (except Mahima!!)

The lesson one should learn in an INDIVIDUAL SPORT like tennis is that, in the ‘apology’ doubles, if one doesn’t stand by one’s peers, one’s peers would never ever stand by him.  Period. Running to the Association management and invoking “jingoism” to turn public opinion against 2 players who have sacrificed their cosy existence, is sissiness at its height.

Look at what AITA says: Leander has qualified to participate on his own ! WOW ! that is great! But why did the AITA fail to show that Bhupathi and Boppanna are 7th seeded Doubles’ team and thereby had qualified also? Well. that is intriguing. Is it because AITA is ‘patriotic’ that they are indulging in such suppression?

Next, when 2 teams could be sent, why not ask the players’ choice and if there are irreconcilable differences, considering that Tennis is an INDIVIDUAL SPORT, why not let the players decide? Supposing, if Boppanna says yes now and is forced to play (fearing disciplinary proceedings) and then pulls out citing “fitness” reasons, where would that leave INDIAN TENNIS?  Tennis is not like football or volley ball where one man’s performance could get diluted by the other players’ super performance. Further, there can be SUBSTITUTIONS in team games, whereas in Tennis there is no possibility. Essentially, TENNIS is an INDIVIDUAL GAME and EMOTIONS do play a very great part in the play.

I hope BHUPATHI and BOPPANNA play the doubles and hope LEANDER is allowed to play with whomsoever is willing to play with LEANDER the SISSY! By the way, i mean the second meaning ascribed to “sissy” in one of the dictionaries mentioned below:-

  1. A boy or man regarded as effeminate.
  2. A person regarded as timid or cowardly.
  3. Informal. Sister.
I think, Leander is influenced by the mercurial (unstable) nature of Didi! Leander, take a chance and TRUST peers………that helps, not the sports administrators! And after all Leander is no bigger singles player than Ramanathan or Ramesh or Vijay………… why this bratism?


Diesel fumes are carcinogenic!

Socialism has many manifestations, and the underlying principle is that if anyone is benefiting too much from the existing policies of the state, then the state should be compelled to legislate or make rules so that those beneficiaries are penalized and a perceived part of those gains should be recouped to the state SOMEHOW.

Recently there has been a lot of debate about whether passenger Diesel car owners should be allowed to have the benefit of the subsidy granted to Diesel.  A subsidy is a payment made by the State to the producer of the goods so as to sell the goods at a concessional rate to the public. In the case of Diesel, the refining companies are all State owned companies and therefore there is no specific allocation of funds for the losses incurred by the refining companies, instead the refining companies are showing their shortfall as UNDER RECOVERIES.

So what is the percentage consumption of such “subsidized” diesel by the passenger car segment? It is 15% of the total sale of such subsidized diesel. So if the passenger car owners are to bear the subsidy which causes the under recoveries, then the diesel car owners should be made to bear only 15% of the under recoveries. But the proposal seems to be to exact more from the diesel passenger car owners, as they CAN AFFORD TO PAY! This is the second LIE of SOCIALISM.

Socialism is nowhere defined in the constitution, yet the word has been inserted in the Preamble to our constitution without any debate. This word, SOCIALISM has assumed different meanings in the hands of different legislative interpretations. While this AMORPHOUSNESS is allowed to continue in the interpretation of SOCIALISM, various measures are being taken in its name which is beyond logic and reason.

The first point to be noted is what is the difference between the Central excise duty on Diesel engines for cars and Petrol engines? If there is an existing difference, what is the reason for such difference? I am sure the Excise on Diesel cars would be definitely higher as the cost of Diesel cars are higher. Consequently, at the time of registration, the State government collects more money from such diesel cars as the Road Tax leviable by most states, are Ad valorem. So the principle of SOCIALISM starts right from the production of Diesel engines.

Why is that so? Because, diesel is cheaper to produce (as the impurities are more compared to petrol) and diesel engines give a better mileage. So penalize people who buy diesel cars. That is the SKIMMING which takes place at the time of purchase of the car. This is CAPITAL ACCOUNT SKIMMING. Then comes the CURRENT ACCOUNT SKIMMING, after all the diesel vehicles need diesel to run, so take more money for a litre of diesel under the head of  excise on diesel and the various levies which go towards it.

Leave the state, what do the garages of diesel engines do? They charge you more for the labour component which is the same for both petrol and diesel cars. The components are already over-priced as the excise is not on par with petrol engine components. The garage fellow (including volkswagen, skoda, maruti,  mahindra & mahindras etc.) indexes the cost benefit of your owning a diesel car and he does his own fleecing!

How is all this justified? Because in the name of the omnibus SOCIALISM, everyone is having a field day!

Now let us look at who suffers the most because of dieselization of the Indian economy- as some prefer to call it? HONDA car company, as they produce no diesel cars in India. So i am sure HONDA must have taken the maximum hit, especially because of the hike in petrol prices. They do not have a mechanism to off-set the losses for falling sales of petrol cars, unlike Maruti, Volkawagen, Skoda etc..

And why should today’s TIMES OF INDIA (dt. 14/06/2012 Bangalore edition) suddenly bring a report of  WHO and  say that Diesel causes cancer? Have they done a comparative study study among the different fuels and arrived at it? I suppose not. It must be like one of those skewed surveys conducted by AC-Nielsen which went on to publish that WOMEN PREFER CLEAN  SHAVEN MEN, for GILLETTE!

Marketing techniques have entered policy domain.

Democracy is all about doing the greater good to the greater number of people. If the diesel prices are kept low, then an average Indian family would be able to take the car out and travel the length and breadth of the country and get better integrated as a nation. Look at the states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu where there is a greater movement of people within the state. This is because of the subsidization of public transport, in the long run people should meet and interact so that their LIBERTY transforms into some profitable activity and development takes place in the long run.

As Margaret Thatcher once said, “THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIALISM IS THAT SOONER OR LATER THE OTHER PERSON RUNS OUT OF HIS MONEY!” We as a nation cannot find excuses for others to pay for our IDLENESS!

TAMARIND CITY – the book.

Bishwanath Ghosh, a print media person originally from Uttar Pradesh with Bengali ethnicity, has written a book called TAMARIND CITY, which he goes on to add as MAKING OF THE MODERN INDIA. The book deals with the city of CHENNAI, since its formation in 1640 and the various cultural, political threads which have woven the city into what it is today.

I enjoyed reading the book, maybe because i am familiar with the places and the people’s attitude that he enumerates in the book.

His research into the historical FACTS to put together this book is praiseworthy.

Since, Bishwanath Ghosh had not been steeped in the Madrasi culture and originally hails from Uttar Pradesh his presentation, therefore,  is fresh and has a certain innocence to it.  He had interviewed many people including Saroja Devi (former Tamil actress), Dr Kamala Selvaraj (gynaecologist), Mr. Muthaiah (the Chennai historian), Ms. Meena Kandasamy (dalit activist and a poetess) etc., which lend credibility to his presentation.

But it is his personal experiences in Chennai which stamps the hallmark of authenticity to the book. When he discovers a heap of condoms in the Marina beach and when his lady friend says, “KAIKKU ANJU, VAAIKKU PATHTHU” there is an IMMEDIACY to his averment that Chennai beneath the thick layer of tradition is nothing but a molten lava of all kinds of activity!

The interview based presentations are too bland, especially Bishwanath Ghosh’s meeting with Saroja Devi and her statements about herself are very self-redeeming! I wish Bishwanath Ghosh had put in a lot more effort to pull out the sleaze which , probably, lies hidden under the mount of self redeeming interviews and media management. In any case, Bishwanath Ghosh would not have been in any position to write like our good old Kushwant Singh, as Mr. Ghosh wangled most of the interviews based on his credibility as a person working for THE HINDU or as a media person.

But his effort to ferret out history accurately and show that Modern India was built on the foundations laid at Madras is laudable. That Madras was the first centre for the East India Company and that their stability in Chennai helped the British to capture Bengal or  create Mumbai are FACTS; but to say that Madras was the starting point of Modern India is an INFERENCE, which he may still have to fortify with facts for people to accept!

His dilated presentation of the ‘TAMBRAM’ (shortened for for TAMIL BRAHMIN)  with reference to  the existing divisions of IYERS and IYENGARS,  should definitely help my North Indian brethren and sisters to have clarity over the unbridgeable divide!

The book is definitely worth reading.

The two historical inputs which have shaken me to my bones are the inputs relating to Arthur Wellesley (Duke of Wellington) and Elihu Yale.

Duke of Wellington is ascribed the quote , ” THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO WAS DECIDED ON THE PLAYGROUNDS OF ETON AND HARROW”, thereby implying that the discipline shown by the sailors/ navy men in the Battle of Waterloo was inculcated in the public schools of London and that led to the victory. But after going through the book, it seems that the DUKE of WELLINGTON honed his ability as a future Admiral by knowing how to keep accounts from the Chettiars and Pillais of Chennai’ and also developing the skill to be an able admiral by building his skills in COMMUNICATIONS from Fort St. George!

The second one relating to Elihu Yale, in even more intriguing. Elihu while he was the Governor of Madras, had abolished a system for procurement and thereby enriched himself. A part of the ill-gotten money seems to have been DONATED by the said Yale to the University which had been subsequently named after him. If the naming was because of his donation, then it is WORSE, but if it was because of his eminence as an Administrator, it is BAD.

Anyway, as my senior said, don’t worry, after all YALE UNIVERSITY discharged its obligation by conferring a Doctorate degree on C N ANNADURAI, while he was the CM of Tamil Nadu.  Some repayment of debt for all the looting Elihu Yale did.