Time for another exile?

Israeli rocket attack on a residential building on Sunday killed close to sixty people, thirty seven of them being children. The explanation from Israel - "It was a mistake" they said something similar to this when the UN post was attacked last week where six aid workers were killed. A mistake indeed and mistakes like these go on for ever. Yesterday I watched a report on TV about the double standards of media reports. Some people feel that the media is biased and is supporting the Lebanese when Israelis are suffering because of the rocket attacks from across the border in the north. The report showed Israeli people, grown ups and kids alike inside under ground bomb shelters living the best life they could given the present circumstances and the participants said that the Israelis are suffering a lot because of this crisis. Let us look for a moment on the plight of the Lebanese. If the Israelis are living in shelters, the Lebanese are living in their own apartments not protected but in a very vulnerable situation. One Lebanese man spoke about the Qana incident that he could not find help at the hospitals because the authorities could not do anything because of such attacks.

What the western world has not realized so far is that this action of Israel that has support from USA and Britain, is brewing hatred towards them among people not just in the Arab world but also among people all over the world. I personally have started losing the respect that I had for the United Nations. It has been more than two weeks since the crisis started and the UN has not done anything to stop it. People have called for restraint and ceasefire but it has not happened till now. What is the purpose of an organization if just a couple of its member nations are dictating the way it should act?

If this attitude of the Israelis continues and if the western countries continue to support them in such actions, it won't be too late before another Israeli exile and believe me, they will not have many to sympathize.

The world has given permission to ... attack and kill?

Fifteen hundred rockets and still counting. Four hundred civilian casualties, thousands of refugees, Ninety percent of the bridges and eighty percent of the roads and the only major international airport - all destroyed. All these in the name of cleansing a terrorist organization. The Israeli ambassador to the UN told his Lebanese counterpart in the first couple of days of the crisis that his country was helping the latter's. Excuse me, did he say helping? The powerful countries of the world met together in Rome to discuss a solution but could not reach an agreement on enforcing a ceasefire on both sides. Why? Because Uncle Sam would not cooperate!

Those who have been following the progress (wrong word) of the crisis must have noticed that the media, especially American, blows it out of proportion when, say, three Israeli civilians die when at the same time when hundreds of Lebanese die, it is just a piece of news. Why does America support Israel so blindly? The partiality is so obvious that it makes it looks like a mother showing favoritism to one of her children.

The irony is that the UN is not able to do anything about it. Tony Blair wanted ceasefire and so did leaders from all over the world and there she is - Condoleezza Rice, the angel of peace, the dare devil who flew right in to the Lebanon, into war zone to show that America cares. She says that there can not be a ceasefire until there is a permanent solution and the rest of the world does nothing about it. Where is the UN? Too bad one of their own posts was hit by Israeli rockets. The truth is the UN can not do anything. The way the UN is set up, unless there is unanimity, they can not pass a resolution because some one can veto. What is going to happen is that the fighting will come to end when Israel feels that it has destroyed much of Lebanon and tells the world that it has destroyed Hezbollah. By then at least a thousand civilians would have died and the life will just go on in the rest of the world.

Will the US do something at least now that Israel has said that it got the permission from the countries of the world to keep attacking the Lebanese territory?

"Shove it" or tough "s***"

It was during the 2004 presidential election campaign that Teresa Heinz Kerry, the wife of candidate John Kerry, told a reporter from the Tribune-Review "Understandable. You said something I didn't say -- now shove it." That kind of a reaction is not befitting a potential first lady, is it? A couple of weeks ago I read an article in one of the prominent web sites about Hillary Clinton, a former first lady and a potential "first lady" of the country being rude in her choice of words when it comes to dealing with people who work for her and that made some people wonder if they would vote for her in the event of her contesting in the presidential election in 2008. Are we so particular about the choice of our future presidents and first ladies that we care so much for the way they talk? Of course yes, they are supposed to be the highest forms of life on earth and they set examples to fellow human beings all of the country (if not the world) in the way the walk, talk and what not! But, when it comes to GWB, there seem to be exceptions to everything. He is "the president" you see, the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the savior of democracy in the world (read one in charge of protecting oil fields in the world) and in deed, the most powerful man. Those who saw the clip from the recently held G8 summit would know how his mannerisms are in public. Some of his gestures are so dirty that I couldn't stop myself from writing about it.

Here are some of his actions that irked me:
1. The number of times GWB interrupted Tony Blair while he was speaking. Excuse me but isn't that something that they teach you when you are in Kindergarten?
2. Talking while his mouth was full. Again, kids who go to elementary school know better.
3. Open mouth chewing. I hate that noise.
4. The funniest of all "Yo Blair" greeting. What did he think? Blair is his buddy from the hood? What do you know, the next time he might say "Blair, what up dawg?"
5. Last but not the least using the four-letter word in an audience where many of the world's leaders are present. I don't even want to go there.
Is that what they teach in schools in Texas? Where is the standard that America has set for its presidents? Does GWB enjoy a unique privilege where he can do and say what his mind tells? His actions make me feel that we have a punk for a president.

Among other things, as of today 14,000 Iraqis have died in since the beginning of the year. Isn't that "one of the reasons" why we went to Iraq for a war - to stop genocide?

Build a nation's pillars deep.

Response to an article by Saisuresh on rediff.com
( http://us.rediff.com/news/2006/jul/12sai.htm?q=tp&file=.htm)

While it is true that the reactions to terrorist attacks by India and the US of A are poles apart, there is merit in the way India reacted to the recent incident and has been reacting in the past. One might wonder why instead of pointing fingers at Pakistan, Dr. Singh noted that this was a cowardly act of terrorists. The underlying fact is that India has been a nation that stood for principles and will continue to stand for it. Yes America went after the terrorists in Afghanistan and in doing so they knew what they were doing and they almost put an end to the menace and Laden is probably inside a hole. But look what happened when they went after Iraq? Look at what is happening to Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria who believe in an "eye for an eye" tactic? They are losing their own people. Even if India were to go after Pakistan, what should India do? Bomb Karachi to ashes? How will that help? Will killing innocent people of that country bring peace or for that matter any solution to the problem? Diplomatic and peaceful efforts are always the best way to approach such issues. We cannot expect a solution to these issues overnight. It will take a long time. Unless the situation is something like what happened in Punjab where the terrorists took refuge in one place - the Golden Temple in the 80s. Mrs. Gandhi took the right move at that time because the target was consolidated and it was easier to eliminate the enemy unlike today when the enemy is all over the world and is getting financial and material support from different agencies including those supported by some governments. Also, if you were concerned about the PM not addressing the country, I think you aired your concern a little too soon.

India will stand tall among the nations of the world for its dealing with enemies in a peaceful and diplomatic way.

Football - One World

Viva Italie!

Italy won the FIFA world cup football championship 2006 in German grounds at the famous (or rather infamous) Olympiastadion where Adolf Hitler watched an man of inferior skin color win four gold medals decades ago. I will spare the details of the match but the best part of the match, in fact, the the best part of the championship is the fact that it brought the entire world together. According to the commentators an estimated one billion people watched the match live. Unlike the sport called football in this part of the world, where it is more mud wrestling than anything else, this event is watched by people of all kind. The Boston City Center ground was packed with at least a thousand people watching the match on a wide screen TV. "Is that Boston? I'm didn't know that Boston had that many football fans" said one of the men who waatched the match with me. I was a bit surprised when another gentleman made this remark "This is the real championship. This is much bigger than super bowl or world series". I felt that there are people who recognize the fact that there are events outside the borders of this country that not only stand for a great sporting event but also a great cause for human unity. I felt very good about it. The broadcasters did a wonderful job by playing a song from U2's "One game changes everything" campaign. From Africa to Russia and Australia to Argentina, this event united the entire world for at least a brief period of time.

Of course, there are some elements of shame in any great event. One man's stupidity led not only to his disqualification but also to a sever blow in the face of a team, a country that palyed so well that it might have won otherwise. I guess any coin will always have two faces. But the true spirit of sportsmanship and world unity stood out during the past few days.

Bill Clinton was at the game with his daughter!

Disinvestment - not good in my backyard; everywhere else - the best thing to happen in today's world.

Employees a of Neyveli Lignite Corporation, NLC, went on an indefinite strike on July 6 protesting the Indian government's decision to hive off ten percent of its share in the company. The bus and taxi operators expressed their support to the employees by staying away from the roads or "observed a bandh" and the educational institutions in the township declared a holiday. The thermal power generation stations were shut off bringing the production down to zero. There was one exception though - a small unit operated with a few people to meet in-house demand. Isn't that hypocrisy? Why work to meet in-house demand? Let everyone live in darkness. People have decided not to work, they don't deserve light, do they?

I was told that the NLC management has started observing performance of the employees and the trade unions do not enjoy the power to influence the decisions made by the management any more. Are these some of the reasons why they are concerned about the idea of disinvestment? The employees were extended an offer in which they could buy shares themselves but that did not please them in any way. What exactly are they worried about? Are they worried about the security of their jobs?

This is purely a political drama. The ruling party threatened the union government that it would withdraw its support if the government went ahead with its decision and the union government simply put a hold on its decision. The politicians want to remain in power rather than think about the development of the country.

Disinvestment is good. India has been realizing that for the past few years but when it comes to someone's very personal interest, disinvestment is the last thing to be considered. I have a few questions to the striking employees. Do they not have any sons or daughters in their families who work for private companies in India and other countries around the world? If the management is more particular about performance why does it hurt the employees? Why would the company lay off people if there are projects to be executed? People should get over the idea of getting a job after graduating from college, stay in that line, be promoted every few years, retire and live happily ever after. How boring is that? Perform well, impress your manager and try to climb up the organizational structure and excel in life - shouldn't these be the goals?

A majority doesn't think so, I believe.

Perhaps I wouldn't have written this post unless I have someone very dear to me work for NLC.