It is what it is

An Ever Widening Gap

2012-01-20T15:50:00.000-08:00

It is another new year on a very old planet and some age old problems still haunt humanity. The greatest one of them being poverty. Through out human history there have always been those who have had more than most and a majority have gotten by with very little. Ever since the barter system of commerce moved to a system of currency and capital, the ill effects of poverty have only exacerbated. Centuries of colonialism and exploitation made sure poverty in parts of the world remained a growing phenomenon. Social experiments like communism tried to combat the problem but failed miserably, as the poverty of freedom turned out to be more dire than the poverty of resources. Poverty has many causes, and no simple cure. In today's world where the mantra of globalization dictates progress, poverty and its causes have become more complex. The deficiency of free speech, resources, capital, information and education have made it an almost impossible malady to solve. But there is no question that the root of all social upheaval now and in the near future will arise from the ever widening wealth gap between nations, peoples and neighbors.

If poverty could be solved directly by taking from the rich and giving to the poor, then to a large extent the problem would have been solved and the world would be a better place. It is in human nature to be exploitative and therefore the causes of poverty cannot be solved by just attacking it with economic solutions. Yet we try to respond with virtues of human rights and dignity. Those that we have collected as a conscious reaction to centuries of blood shed, famine and extermination.

The suffering of fellow human beings does not look good on television, and the consequences of mass poverty and destitution threatens the survival of those who have it good causing guilt and shame among the good natured. Even the bible contains more than 300 verses about god's concern for the poor. Therefore every one agrees that poverty needs to be eradicated for the very survival of the human species even though the human race does not seem threatened. Therefore the concept of the "poverty line" was devised to keep everyone's aspirations and desires in check. According to a 1995 United Nations declaration, absolute poverty is a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services.

As the global population reaches 7 billion and the struggle over finite resources reach desperate levels, the stark fallout of an unequal planet begins to show its ugly face in almost every part of the world. As the financial health of once mighty nations crumble there is a worry that the impact on the widening "Wealth Gap" will be even more devastating. The excesses in the past two decades in the western world have clearly brought the situation to a brink. The recent "Occupy Wall Street" street protests in America and other capitals of the west, brought the issue of the widening wealth gap to the forefront. In a recent BBC documentary titled The Wealth Gap an appalling piece of statistic was made apparent. The income disparity today in England has reached the levels of Edwardian and Victorian times, where the top 1% make 145 times the base wage of ordinary working citizens.

While more and more wealth gets concentrated at the top and less and less trickles down a situation begins to brew which through out human history has led to mass uprisings and ultimately revolution. In today's world it is a common belief that globalization and technology spreads prosperity and the trickle down effect can eradicate poverty in many deprived parts of the globe. In the recent past India and China have taken advantage of this fact and have declared them selves developing nations, and many experts have predicted that the age of American/European dominance is in decline. India and China are the next frontier, the virgin territory where the potential for growth and consumerism is limitless by virtue of their gigantic populations. While this may be true to some extent, what we are beginning to see is that prosperity is again becoming concentrated at the top. The economic insecurities of the many are still prevalent. Rural poverty in China is fast becoming urban poverty with human stress levels quadrupling. China recently declared that 51% of its population now lives in urban areas, which is a devastating trend for the planet as the demand for resources will increase pressure and pollution. This trend is being witnessed across all nations that are going through rapid transformation as a result of globalization.

Recently it was reported that the luxury car maker Rolls Royce sold more cars in 2011 than any year since 1978. And a bulk of them were bought in China. Other luxury brands like Bentley, Aston Martin and Lamborghini reported the same. In the last decade unprecedented wealth has been witnessed in India as well. From luxury yachts to private jets, India has produced a market of its own for extravagant goods and there has been no shortage of buyers.

In the midst of corruption scandals and a total dysfunction of his government, the Indian Prime Minister released an important survey conducted by a non-profit organization that made a known fact absolutely certain. The HUNGaMA (Hunger and Malnutrition) survey which was conducted across 112 rural districts in India covering almost 20% of all children sent shock waves through a booming nation. The report revealed that in the 100 or so focus villages, 40% of the children were underweight and 60% were stunted and 92% of the mothers had not heard the word "malnutrition". While India is a large nation with complex problems and a messy democracy, this report made one thing clear. India is broken and there is very little that is being done in the way of policy to fix it.

It is election season in America and the noise is getting louder. The economy and unemployment are the make or break issues in the race for the presidency. A nation which prides itself on being the economic engine of the world, where virtues of capitalism and profit are seen as markers of success and accomplishment, its recent economic woes are calling into question the core principles on which the economic engine operates. In America everyone grows up with the notion and mythology that if you work hard anything is possible. There are narratives that are relentlessly celebrated in popular culture making the point that the "American Dream" is still alive and all you have to do is work for it. Sportsmen, Steve Jobs, President Obama, Oprah and everyone in between are often sited as examples of that dream achieved. So everyone is asked to boot up and soldier on and everything will be alright.

As the Republicans rally their candidates to take on President Obama in the upcoming election, a constant accusation is made against the president. An indictment that in four years he has fundamentally changed the course for America. As a Democrat his entitlement programs and welfare policies such as universal health care are taking the work ethic away from the people and making the American dream a thing of the past. And therefore America needs a Republican CEO like Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich who will bring America back on track by lowering taxes for everyone, including the rich, and creating jobs. This narrative is gaining momentum among many, even though the economic problems America faces today are very much a result of an eight year Republican presidency that preceded Obama.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the Wall Street man who's net worth is close to a quarter of a billion dollars, is making the argument that his wealth is a mark of his success and he should not be called out on it. And if he were elected president he would bring America back to a time when anyone could become rich by chasing their dreams like he did. While he paid only 15% in taxes on his $49 million 2011 income, and most middle class Americans paid close to 35%, he still thinks that rich people create jobs when they are allowed to keep their money in offshore investments and pay low taxes using loopholes like he did. Therefore he wants to decrease everyone's taxes down to 15% when he is elected president. Everyone in their right mind knows that this is not possible. But the pipe dream becomes fodder for many in an election year and the political double speak becomes real for those who cannot see the truth.

Big money is playing a very destructive part in this upcoming presidential elections. Money funneled on both sides through Super PACs (Political Action Committees) is corrupting the electoral process like never before. Since the courts ruled that Super PACs could legally collect limitless amounts of money from anonymous donors as long as a presidential candidate or his campaign does not directly have any relationship with the committee, they have had a windfall. Money from all sorts of questionable sources has poured into Super PACs and with that they have been able to influence the electorate by buying indiscriminate amounts space in the media sphere. At a time when many in America are unemployed and sliding into poverty, a most shameless election awash with dirty money is taking shape. It is only bound to get worse as we get closer to November.

In hindsight big money has always decided elections in America. Obama's election campaign was one of the most expensive in US history reaching almost a billion dollars and most elections in most democracies are bank rolled by the wealthy. This years American election is estimated to cost almost 11 billion dollars. When big money gains access to political power, there is very little wiggle room for real comprehensive change that could level the economic plane. And when a political leader makes an attempt to move in the direction of real change he is branded a socialist, even when he is not. The only thing that can change the status-quo is campaign reform, where all candidates get the same resources to make their case to the electorate. As we have seen in America and elsewhere, the capitalist system that pulls the reigns of power will never allow that to happen.

What we see in the current economy of the globe is that even as things get desperate, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. It is very easy to stigmatize a person who is disenfranchised and poor by saying he or she is a failure because they did not work hard enough. The wealthy are better off because they earned it and therefore they should get to keep it with no shame. What one seldom fails to recognize is that when someone becomes successful, they do have a certain talent to make money, but more importantly they have an edge. Sometimes that edge is ones race, religion, caste, creed, tribe, gender and pedigree. More often it is a head start given to them by their ancestors or in the case of nations some sort of exploitation through colonization. On an individual level most often the edge comes through education, ancestral wealth or sometimes pure luck. Rarely is it a divine chain of events or pure industriousness that makes someone wealthy.

There are efforts being made all around the world today to narrow the wealth gap via social programs and policy. These efforts started at the dawn of the 20th century when colonialism ended, monarchies were abolished or overthrown and ideas of democracy, capitalism and communism were experimented with. While the west made tremendous progress in building a more or less economically homogeneous society, it never fully succeeded. Europe through its socialist programs made greater strides but its future hangs in the balance in this century. America on the other hand showed great promise after the great depression, but yet again seems to be slipping. Japan after the second world war almost succeeded with technological grit and dominance. In developing nations like India the struggle is barely beginning for many even though the technology fueled boom did bring a huge swathe into the consumerist middle class. Today another grand experiment is underway in India to account for a billion people by giving them unique identity cards with retinal scans. The UID (Unique Identity) scheme will utilize biometric data to log every individual and in the process give a real face to the poor so they can receive public services without being taken advantage of by middlemen who often skim away resources. The plan is to give the poor a real place in society so they can be more than a nondescript vote bank, but can actually demand their fair share of the pie. One small step towards stemming corruption and closing the ever widening gap.

The world is a place of imbalance. There is a serious imbalance across the spectrum. There is an acute imbalance of tolerance when Salman Rushdie cannot visit his own country for speaking his mind, Alexander Aan an Indonesian civil servant is imprisoned for being an atheist and women in Malawi are beaten for wearing pants. There is acute imbalance when war comes to those who are most vulnerable and unfortunate, there is imbalance when developed nations cause the earths atmosphere to heat up and the underdeveloped nations sink into the sea as a result. And there is imbalance when the rich get richer because they can and the poor get poorer because they cannot help it. Much like global warming everyone recognizes that the widening wealth gap is a pressing problem. In some places it is in your face, in others it is hidden but its effects always reverberate. Fixing it will always be humanities greatest challenge. It is what it is.

Protest Power

2011-12-24T08:39:00.001-08:00

Tunisia - December, 2010
Egypt - January, 2011
Yemen - January, 2011
Libya - February, 2011
Morocco - February, 2011
Bahrain - February, 2011
Syria - March, 2011
India - April, 2011
Greece - May, 2011
Spain - May, 2011
England - August, 2011
United States - September, 2011

Chile - September, 2011

Bolivia - October, 2011
Russia - December, 2011

2011 will go down in history as the year that people in large numbers demanded change and said enough is enough. With economies collapsing around the globe faith in governments both oppressive and otherwise was at an all time low. Corruption at all levels of business and government had become unbearable and openly pervasive. The widening wealth gap had reached its limit in many parts prompting people to take to the streets in defiance. Political and socioeconomic pressure in the middle east had run its course and the climate was ripe for agitation which spread instantaneously acquiring a label (most probably coined on facebook or CNN) - "The Arab Spring". There was nothing romantic about this spring. It should have been called "The Red Spring" as blood on the pavement was a common sight and the bleeding has not yet stopped.

As authoritarian violence and protests continue in Egypt and Syria and the Occupy Wall Street movement limps along and the anti-corruption movement in India reaches its whimpering end with political compromise and infighting, one does need to take stock of what did or did not change. A sadistic dictator in Libya met a brutal end, Egypt's dictator was replaced by a gang of others in army fatigue, America relished a temporary high from a relentless shopping spree on Black Friday and Christmas, the European Union band aided itself into next year and the climate talks yet again failed to achieve anything substantial for the planet to improve its cancerous state.

At the end of a year one is supposed to be hopeful and look towards the future with encouragement and positivity. And yes there is plenty of it in the offering, but it is measured. As American troops withdraw from Iraq there is a sigh of relief from those who have sacrificed much too much, but there is also a gnawing uncertainty of a wave of violence engulfing a battered nation yet again. On one hand America has given to the world Facebook and Twitter which have become the most powerful tools for spreading democracy. By providing an unstoppable medium to help organize and be heard, these virtual social networks have truly made the world a better place in some unspeakable terms. On the other hand America is on the verge of making multibillion dollar arms deals with Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Two nations where democracy has a complicated meaning and is often stifled by oppression and violence. The unholy relationship between war and business never seems to amaze even the most weary.

But nations like China and North Korea have successfully countered the liberating force of the Internet through censorship and brutality. By imprisoning bloggers and harassing their intelligentsia like Ai Weiwei, they have successfully maintained their oppressive grip on their people. Media censorship of the Arab uprisings in China did meet its limited goal. Yet there have been countless unreported protests across the nation almost every day against the autocratic rule. Burma on the other hand showed some progress by releasing Aung Sung Su Kyi and allowing her to rejoin the political process. How genuine and long lasting the change towards democracy in Burma will be, only time will tell.

While we lost a towering figure of democracy in Vaclav Havel we also gained many trail blazers around the world. Nobel peace prize winners Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee and Tawakkol Karman fought for women's rights in the darkest of times using non-violence as their chosen weapon. Many other nameless heroes around the world have died protecting and believing that "truth shall prevail" and "truth shall set them free". The latest casualty was Baqir Shah. A doctor in Quetta, Pakistan was gunned down because he refused to lie about the autopsies he carried out that implicated the security forces in open murder. He openly refused to tow the line of the establishment and paid with his life. Record number of journalists and human rights workers have been assassinated across the globe this year. The war crimes committed in Sri Lanka and Indian Kashmir are some of the most abhorrent and have largely gone unnoticed. A blatant example of two democratic nations with deplorable human rights records, where in the name of dealing with terrorism the state apparatus has become the terrorist.

The forecast for 2012 does not look or seem much different than 2011. From where we stand it seems like political and economic strife will continue to dominate the global sphere causing massive upheaval. Real wide ranging and long lasting solutions will remain elusive, as the impotency of the political class grows chaotic and severe. Yes there will be sporting events like the Olympics in London and other entertainment projects that will attempt to keep the human spirit high, but they will only be a temporary distraction. America will reelect or reject President Obama, and banks that have not changed their ways will continue to bankroll their gains on the backs of the dispossessed. The only thing that is certain to change is a real sense in 2012, is the earth's magnetic pole.

So as "Another Year" comes to an end and a new one begins, people power will again show its face on the streets of Moscow, London, New York, New Delhi and anywhere else where there is a sense of disenfranchisement and neglect. There is no way out of this bind without questioning the people who make decisions for us in our absence. So it is with the hope that there will be a demand for meaningful change in the year to come, I bid farewell to 2011. It is what it is.

OK Computer

2011-11-25T08:58:00.000-08:00

My first encounter with an Apple computer was when I arrived on an American campus in 1992. Rows of beige colored boxes with six inch screens stared at me in the student center. A keyboard with a strange looking thing attached to it called "the mouse" completed the device. The moment the machine came on, I was greeted by a logo which had a smiley face on it. Within minutes I was in love with this state of the art technology. The rainbow colored apple shaped logo embossed on the bottom right hand corner was elegant and the floppy drive was an act of genius. Printing crisp fonts on an Apple Laserwriter was heavenly. I could not wait to tell my father about this experience. A printer by profession back in India, he was still running a letter press. I announced to him that within a few years printing technology would be undergoing a revolution. A few months later I took a class on how to use the internet. We had to master a range of commands on a computer terminal to access the network. My first download was a set of Pink Floyd lyrics using a browser called Mosaic. It was an act of pure magic.

As I write this entry on my paper thin MacBook Air laptop sitting in my yard with no wires attached, it is astonishing how far we have come from those wired days. As I watch my five year old sit around a table with two of her friends working an iPad as though she was born with it, I can barely imagine what else is in store for her down the road. In two decades computers have come to fit my palm and can talk back, so it seems the future is only going to be incrementally transformational.

One man, Steve Jobs, has been credited to have fast tracked computers to become as essential and rudimentary a component of our lives as a tooth brush. Though Microsoft took computers to every corner of the world, it was Apple that took it from the desk into our palms. Computers today have come to define our very being in the urban landscape. The internet, while still unequal in its access, has changed the way we socialize and communicate. As forecasters predict whats round the corner, one thing is certain, computers will force human evolution into areas even science fiction could not have imagined.

Steve Jobs' death this year was a moment that reverberated across the globe. People did not stop short of comparing him to Edison and Einstein. Magazines, books, documentaries and even feature film scripts were in the offering in abundance to put his life under a microscope. For an intensely private quirky person that he was, to have his life dissected in every news outlet was something of an onslaught. Steve Jobs with all his controversial, erratic and sometimes ego-maniacal behavior did solidify his place in recent history as a visionary. He not only built a successful company and some classy gadgets, he pretty much transformed how we watch, listen and transport entertainment and information forever. But he was no Einstein, maybe he was more of an Edison, but then again Edison was an inventor and a businessman, Steve Jobs was a relentless facilitator. An exceptionally motivated, gifted and driven person who could see his way through technology and design and come up with a product that could blow your mind.

Steve Jobs' passing was felt so widely and so emotionally because he had turned himself into an enigmatic, seemingly self-effacing Rockstar. The myth that had grown around him aided by his lavish product launches, shoes, black T-Shit and jeans and early experimentation with hallucinogenics, had truly reached Elvis proportions. His cancer added another layer and his age made it even more heart wrenching. Much like other Rockstars who died before their time and became cult figures, Steve Jobs' story had all the makings of a quintessential "Made in America" appeal.

Two other important people died this year who largely went unnoticed. They did more for computers and defined the world we live in than anybody could have imagined. They envisioned today's world even before Steve Jobs was conceived, but they were no Rockstars in the way most would like to see them. Dennis Ritchie and John McCarthy created the building blocks or the DNA upon which all computers in the world function today. The digital devices that today have become fashion accessories, could not have existed without their seminal work. They in their unique respective way pictured our world decades ago that Steve Jobs in one sense made a reality.

Mathematicians by profession and passion both developed languages by which computers would talk to each other and perform complex calculations. McCarthy created a language called LISP, which is the second oldest high-level programming language that is still in use today. Ritchie created "C" which fundamentally changed the way computer programs are written. Much of all modern software is written in some modified version of that language. All Apple products run on a language called "Objective C" and Microsoft products co-opted C#. Ritchie then went on to create UNIX which forms the basis of all operating systems in all devices mobile or otherwise today.

Dennis Ritchie and John McCarthy even though on a basic level worked on creating the digital matter that breathed life into microchips and peripheral hardware, they both shared a very different vision for the future. While Ritchie believed that the microcomputers such as laptops and hand held devices would be the way of the future, McCarthy dreamed of world of terminals remotely hooked up to large mainframe computers. With Cloud computing fast becoming the way of the future, it seems that McCarthy's vision is the one that will prevail. McCarthy also coined the term "Artificial Intelligence" as he was obsessed with making machines talk back, which again seems to be becoming a reality quite rapidly. Recently when the IBM computer "Watson" out did humans and won the popular American quiz show "Jeopardy" a gist of that vision was realized.

The idea of a thinking machine though is far from reach. While we can teach machines to make associations and extrapolate inferences based on statistical data, it is inconceivable to make a machine understand humor and other nuances of human emotion. John McCarthy did attempt to make a thinking machine but later gave up, not because he thought the technology was not there, but he said " we understand human mental processes only slightly better than a fish understands swimming". There in lies a mystery. While humans could create devices that could talk back and perform rudimentary functions that could make our lives convenient and comfortable, to create a robot that could feel, will always be the terrain of fictional fantasy.

Steve Jobs, Dennis Ritchie and John McCarthy in their singular way left us a world that is both infinitely complex and simple at the same time. As a result of their work more and more intelligent machines are able to inhabit our world, and we are able to absorb technology and evolve with it quite effortlessly. We are only at the very beginning of that evolutionary process though. The unpredictable uncanny duplicitous nature of humanity to create beauty and cause calamity is ever present. Therefore as machines play significant roles in our lives, what will determine their influence is the extent to which we consciously allow them to intrude our lives. It is what it is.

99%

2011-10-16T08:22:00.000-07:00

"We are the 99%" said one sign. "Regulate Wall Street Now" said another. "Tax the rich" screamed a red one. The word "Revolution" was prominent on many placards and a red flag with Che Guevara's face unfurled in the wind. There was a broadsheet news paper being circulated called "The OCCUPY Wall Street Journal". There were many swaying in a loud drum circle drawing attention from everyone passing by. There was a make shift alter with an idol of Ganesh next to Jesus with people sitting around in seeming meditation. A half naked couple with paint on their body were moving intensely to the drumming. A concoction of cigarette smoke, marijuana, body odor and Halal chicken filled the air. Young men and women were strewn on the floor in sleeping bags and on tarpaulin as though this were the "Burning Man" gathering or a homeless people's convention. Policemen with enough hardware to take down any assault surrounded the park on all sides. Media trucks with their antennae high up against the shiny ornate skyscrapers kept busy. A makeshift kitchen serving donated pizza, wheat grass and vegan creations for the health conscious was active. A woman was talking to Amy Goodman from "Democracy Now" on camera about sustainable farming, eating and living. A group of native South American men and women were dancing to drumming performing what seemed like a Mayan ritual. Then there were men and women intensely locked in debate about the state of the world, America, Capitalism, Marxism, the war and everything in between. This was no carnival or Haight-Ashbury of the 60's, this was and is the "Occupy Wall Street" protest in downtown Manhattan.

The "Occupy Wall Street" protest which is almost two months in the making, has captured the attention of the world by refusing to budge. As it ebbs and flows in numbers, it has also sparked similar protests across the nation and the world. From New York to New Zealand, people have gathered in major capitals to protest against what they see is a failure of the system to deliver the basics. The people involved in the protest are essentially angry and disgusted by what they see is a nexus between government and corporations. What they hope to achieve is immaterial at the moment. What they have done is become an inconvenience that draws attention to a smorgasbord of issues, which are then discussed in the media when there is nothing else to cover in the 24/7 news cycle. From corporate greed, taxing the rich, health care for all, end to war and corruption, they want a return to a version of capitalism that is more equitable. With that message they have been able to galvanize the sentiments of young and old across a wide spectrum, who have seen America's treasures squandered in irresponsible ways at the expense of too many.

2011 will go down in history as the year of the protest. From the spontaneous revolution which overthrew a dictator in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, to the uprising in Yemen, Bahrain and Syria, there is unrest and rage in abundance. From the populist Anna Hazare anti-corruption movement in India that almost toppled the government, to the violent street protests in London, Milan, Madrid and Athens, anger against the establishment is real and palpable. From dictators to the corporate glitterati and the political establishment, as the disconnect grows ever so wide and capitalism looses its shine, and people are left with no future, anger rises to the surface. Much like what happened during the French and Russian revolution, there is a sense around the world that some people are getting away with more than their fair share.

As Europe deals with a financial crisis of epic proportion and turns to China (a communist country) for a life line, a long term solution seems elusive. With Spain reporting the highest unemployment rate of 21% in the developed world, it is evident that things are going to get worse for the west before they get any better. While the markets go through volatile fluctuations, it seems like all the parameters that measure economic stability are in a state of chaos. Unemployment is rising across the globe, inflation in a booming economy like India is out of control, housing markets are in a slump, yet Wall Street celebrates profits and big banks in America and elsewhere post quarterly gains, and top executives in England increase their salaries by 50%. The world seems to be operating on an upside down principle of economics. While there is never a shortage of resources to spawn wars, build military hardware and bail out banks, there never seems to be enough to meet the basic needs of the people the governments get elected to serve.

This month the worlds population will reach a record seven billion. By 2025 that number is predicted to increase to eight billion. With only one planet to live off of, the future does not look bright for the human race. Water and food shortages, unemployment, conflict and global warming are predicted to wreak havoc causing mass protests and migration. The strain on the planet is already being felt in Bangladesh, Sub-Saharan Africa, Pacific Island nation of Tuvalu and elsewhere. We as a species inhabit one sphere. But the imaginary borders that divide us and create an illusion that developed nations are immune to the ravages of poverty and destitution are now being challenged. What the present situation demonstrates is that the "third world" has successfully entered the developed world and the "Occupy Wall Street" protest in some manner channels the angst of that burgeoning world.

I think it is still premature to call the "Occupy Wall Street" a movement. Unlike the mass protests of the sixties, which brought civil rights to a nation and an end to a war in a far of land, this protest still struggles to find a singular demand. That is both its strength and its weakness. Much like the Egyptian revolution that overthrew a brutal dictator by largely staying apolitical, but with a clear sense for justice, the "Occupy Wall Street" protest at its core is demanding a level of fairness and accountability. This idea in itself gives it strength and legitimacy and motivates people to endure the bitter cold in the middle of the financial district in Manhattan. Whether this protest will actually evolve into a mass movement, drawing strong leaders and other vested interests, only time and weather will tell.

In the recent past the incestuous collusion between the media, political establishment and corporations has been revealed time and again. The Murdoch/News Corp. scandal is the most recent example. The conglomeration of big business made possible by that collusion threatens healthy competition and corrupts the true nature of capitalism. Capitalism and democracy are often considered to be synonymous. But what we learn from the recent financial collapse is that there is no room for democracy when unbridled capitalism reigns supreme. It is not ironic though that we have seen a form of capitalism thrive in a draconian communist society like China. Undoubtedly aided by a demand for cheap goods and services from the west.

"There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide" said John Adams the sixth president of America. In some ways the "Occupy Wall Street" protest brings to light the early signs of a system that is feeding on itself. When a comatose congress in Washington fails to serve its people in a time of crisis, that is a sign of a democracy failing. A healthy democracy is where through checks and balances and debate, solutions to big problems are arrived at no matter the political price. All they arrive at today in most governments around the world is grid lock and apathy.

To a large extent capitalism and democracy in the west has been a successful experiment. Wealth has been more equally distributed than in most places. But that equation seems to have shifted dramatically over the last two decades, and a kind of oligarchy seems to have emerged. The anger that we see in the streets today is in part a resentment of that fact. What protest movements do is push for change. And change always begins on a minuscule level and then mutates into something consequential. The suicide of a street vendor eventually lead to the overthrow of a dictator in Tunisia. What I noticed at Zuccotti Park in downtown Manhattan was a group of people coalesce around a spirit. A spirit to do something. Even if it just meant banging on a drum or annoying the police or thumbing a man walking in a suit, there was a real desire and a realization that this was an important moment in time. One could dismiss that commitment as youthful indulgence or call them a bunch of whining hippies jealous of the rich and successful, which many openly have. But there is no denying that it is youthful indulgence that motivated Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Fred Shuttlesworth, Nelson Mandela, Wangari Mathai and an old woman in a wheel chair in Oakland to march. It is what it is.

Meaning of 9/11

2011-09-13T10:37:00.001-07:00

This day in September does not pass lightly for a New Yorker. A decade ago a bright blue sky quickly turned black. Since then every September New Yorkers take pause and distinctly remember where they were on that day. They exchange stories year after year with fellow denizens and visitors who come to pay a visit to the gaping hole that is now rising again.

Ten years later the day was marked with the customary reading of the names of the dead at the site of the catastrophe. Grieving family members chanted names with tears and emotion. This year an impressive memorial appropriately titled "Reflecting Absence" was unveiled. 3,000 names of the men, women, and children killed in the attacks of September 11, 2001 and February 26, 1993 are inscribed in bronze on parapets surrounding twin memorial pools. The two pools are constructed on the footprint of the twin towers. People found the names of their loved ones on the panel and broke down all over again. The sudden and tragic loss of a family member never comes to pass, but for those who died in this horrific act of violence, the pain never seems to surpass.

After the reading of the names at the memorial site, the politicians began to appear on the dais eulogizing with poems and speeches. Past and present presidents, mayors, governors and senators were photographed with somber expressions. A "photo-op" too salient to be missed. As I watched Bush and Obama in the same frame, I wondered what the meaning of this day truly was. What does memorializing the departed mean to those who only bore witness from afar to this terrible tragedy and did not feel some tangible loss? What does it mean to drape oneself in the American flag and talk about patriotism, resilience and freedom, when all 9/11 did was spawn more death and violence? What does it mean to look at the world ten years from that day and observe its true nature? What does an impressive monument such as "Reflecting Absence" do to the human soul?

What most memorials of this nature inadvertently symbolize, is that the human appetite for violence is infinite. When one visits a holocaust memorial one is shaken at the deepest depths, for the evil that was engineered at that time was unfathomable. Then there are countless atrocities that have taken place before and since that have only been memorialized in history books. Millions died when India and Pakistan were separated, there is no memorial that marks that moment. Thousands died in the killing fields of Combodia, a memorial made of skulls reminds of that moment in history. The countless who died in the Gulags of Russia and China and in the forests and villages in Congo, still remain unknown.

The idea behind memorials it to remind generations to come, never to forget and never to repeat. But the human race never relents. A decade after that September day, the dead are still piling up in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Since then over thirty plots to attack America have been foiled. People are still willing to give up their lives in the name of violence and the military budgets of countries fighting this so called "war on terror" keep increasing exponentially with no end in sight. Even when the world grapples with the worst financial crisis in a generation.

For America, which is otherwise known as the "land of the free", 9/11 marked a defining moment. In the decade that has followed, the resources spent both human and monetary in the name of "keeping American safe", have reached a criminal level with little or no oversight. In a telling book titled Top Secret America- The Rise of the New American Security State, Washington Post reporters Dana Priest and William Arkin uncover a whole new security apparatus that has uncontrollably mushroomed in the guise of keeping America safe. In the book the authors reveal the enormous size, shape, mission, and consequences of this invisible universe. According to their investigation, over 1,300 government facilities in every state in America; nearly 2,000 outside companies used as contractors; and more than 850,000 people granted "Top Secret" security clearance, monitor Americans at home and the "enemy" abroad. The result is a system put in place engineered by the infamous "Patriot Act", that puts us in greater danger by creating a "Big Brother" society that is antithetical to the idea of the United States. Americans are living in a quasi police state without an inkling, thanks to 9/11. The notion of being safe has come at the cost of fear and freedom, while we are told it is to protect that very freedom we are at war.

The irrationality of the response to the nineteen individuals who caused mayhem on 9/11, has been disproportionate and misguided to say the least. Volumes have been written and countless have died in futile wars, to prove that fact. Yet the architects remain free to write books and go on talk shows still proclaiming their innocence and sound judgment with audacity. And now nations are bankrupt as a result of these excursions, yet they stay the course. The Jihadists who respond to nations who stay the course, also seem to get stronger and hardened about their ideology, as it has become a way of life. Each day, each side keeps score by killing. This cycle can only reach its natural end, when the will to kill diminishes. As a result risk of another 9/11 taking shape in some corner of the world has not diminished, and so the full purpose of the memorial remains to be materialized.

While New Yorkers grieve on this day every year, they also have moved on and come to accept the new reality they live in. As 9/11 is consigned to the history books, New Yorkers do not need a reminder of what happened here. Everyday they are told "If you see something, say something", and the occasional security alert does not faze anyone even for a moment. While 9/11 means many things to many people, for most New Yorkers who where here, it means one thing and one thing alone - a day of immeasurable loss. A feeling no different from what most people feel around the world, when they lose someone or something dear to a stray bullet or a drone attack. Yet we must live outside the fear that has been engineered as a result of 9/11. And only when - in the words of the rock band U2 "Where you live, does not decide whether you live or whether you die" - the true meaning of 9/11 will be realized.

It is what it is.

Tipping Point

2011-08-26T20:00:00.000-07:00

Bad weather is again headline news. As hurricane Irene threatens to batter the eastern coast of United States, the worse is being speculated. People are being asked to evacuate to higher ground, stocking up on emergency food supplies and other essentials is strongly being advised and the 24-hour news channels are conjuring up images of an hurricane Katrina like aftermath. A storm this size has not come up this far north in a hundred years. New York city is shutting down for the first time in its existence and people are preparing for the worst.

Is this mother nature serving us a reminder of its power or is there a human hand aiding her. There is enough research to show that "Global Warming" can lead to warming of the ocean, and even a fraction of an increase in ocean temperature can lead to the formation hurricanes that can pack more energy than usual. Is this a case in point? Only time will tell.

It is summer in the northern hemisphere and like summer should be, it has been hot. In New York city and most of north eastern United States the mercury has reached record heights. In July the temperatures in New York city reached 104˚F (40˚c). With humidity it felt more like 110˚F (43˚c). Highest recorded in 35 years. Temperatures across the country, especially in the mid-west and north-east have been more than extreme. Airports near Washington and Baltimore hit 105˚F. Philadelphia hit 103˚ degrees, as did Boston. In Abilene, Texas, temperatures have been at or above 100˚F degrees for 40 days this summer. It’s been a little cooler in Savannah, Georgia, where the mercury hit 90˚F for more than 56 days in a row. Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma are coping with their driest nine-month stretch since 1895. Weather has been extreme in other parts of the world as well. 75 mile an hour winds battered southern Australia causing waterfalls to flow skyward. Heavy rains in south-west China tore through villages and fields causing widespread destruction. Millions of people in Pakistan are still reeling from the effects of the mammoth flood that ravaged their nation last year. Extreme weather has become a norm and our parents would attest to that fact. Seasons are not what they used to be.

Every 10 years, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration recalculates what it calls climate “normals,” 30-year averages of temperature and precipitation for about 7,500 locations across the United States. The latest figures, released in July, show that the climate of the last 10 years was about 1.5 degrees warmer than the climate of the 1970s, and the warmest since the first decade of the last century. Temperatures were, on average, 0.5 degrees warmer from 1981 to 2010 than they were from 1971 to 2000, and the average annual temperatures for all of the lower 48 states have gone up.

Yet since it snows in the winter some people in this nation and all over the world, think "Global Warming" is still a myth.

Extreme weather patterns have always shaped and reshaped our planet ever since cosmic forces formed our solar system. But it is only now, for the very first time, the planet is being inhabited by 7 billion of us. In pursuit of happiness, life and liberty, an essential human right, the species produces heat trapping green house gases, which inadvertently leads us closer to the destruction of our dreams. The dream of living with all the amenities and comforts of the industrial age we have so skillfully created.

Shifting weather patterns affect a wide range of human activity. Spikes in weather exert energy demand, effect crop productivity, lead to weather-related disasters and cause fish in the ocean to disappear. Weather events like a hot day or a heavy downpour can cost the global economy billions of dollars in crop losses, construction delays, travel disruptions and loss of life. In other words fair weather is what makes us live on this planet in comfort. And if we were to tip that balance, adaptation will not be an option.

Having aspirations to better ones life is a natural instinct and is considered a human right. Pursuit of that human right has lead us away from living in harmony with the planet. High levels of immigration into Europe and America are a product of this desire to live the modern dream. Those who take on the treacherous journey to find another life at the cost of everything, weather can sometimes be the root cause. Food shortages caused by famine, as we are seeing in the horn of Africa today, can lead to mass migration. Bad weather has also been known to cause social unrest and war exacerbating migration as well. Therefore global warming is more than just having a bad day for out door sports, it can be that one thing that could change the course of humanity, like the Atom bomb did more than half a century ago.

While there is very little on the horizon that could arrest the slippery slope we are on, humanity always has faith in solving big problems with innovative solutions. Our technological prowess gives us confidence that any situation could be overcome. When the AIDS epidemic seemed like a deathly halo looming over us, two decades later we seemed to have crippled its spread, at least for the time being in nations that can afford it. This may not be the best comparison, but we seem to believe that we can slow down the process of global warming by changing light bulbs and driving electric cars. Unfortunately there are no big ideas out there to address this Goliath of a problem humanity faces. Very few nations even see this as a serious problem, as they are dealing with more pressing issues at hand. Those that do, are not able to do much due to the usual political bickering. United States and China the biggest polluters of the planet, are trying to shift gear, but the pace is not acceptable. And at a time when the global economy is in a state of free fall, very few nations want to curtail their polluting businesses in fear of cutting their bottom line. Mean while we keep pouring more heat into the atmosphere by fighting wars, having obscene fireworks displays, burning forests and causing explosions in movies for entertainment. So if we are to look for hope where do we begin?

As I post this entry, New Yorkers are bracing for hurricane Irene and taking as many precautions as minuscule humans can. I went to stock up on some essential supplies and found long lines outside grocery stores and empty shelves. Sliced bread was hard to find and batteries were in high demand. As the fury of the storm is speculated and evacuations in low lying areas become mandatory, a dooms day like scenario seems to be at hand. Even though I am outside the immediate flood zone, I am filling my bath tub with fresh water, have an urban survival kit ready and preparing for the phones, internet and power lines to go down for a while. As 65 million people on the eastern seaboard experience Irene's fury in some shape or form, I am hoping she will be kind to the city I live in and love. It is what it is.

Face of Terror

2011-07-26T13:49:00.000-07:00

While I was about to post my entry for July, news of a bomb exploding in the middle of Oslo, Norway caught my attention. The images that poured in brought back memories from 1995 when Oklahoma City met such a fate that claimed 168 lives, which included 19 children under the age of 6. I began to dread the reports filtering in. Having visited Oslo a few years ago, I could not bare to think that an act of this nature could occur in a country so homogeneous and peaceful. Like everyone, to my utter horror I soon realized that while the Oslo bombing was catastrophic, it was not all. There was more savagery unfolding on the island of Utoeya. Young boys and girls were being gunned down by a man who had gone mad. By the time it was over 76 people were dead. A delusional fantasist who thought he was changing the world had stopped shooting for reasons that are yet to be known.

Like all events of this nature, the 9/11 attack on Manhattan, the indiscriminate terrorist attacks on Bombay, the Oklahoma City explosion, the shooting of US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, the Virgina Tech massacre, they all stir us at our core as the insanity behind the crime is unfathomable and incomprehensible. Often they are committed out of extreme hatred for something, that is driven by a warped ideology that justifies the action. These crimes are most often carried out by young men who somehow stray and find themselves on the fringe of society, alone, devoid of love and messed up.

As we struggle to understand the "why" and the "how", instead of scrutinizing more about yet another somber moment in our lives, I would like to share a NPR interview that stirred me. This interview poignantly summed up what hatred can do, when it blinds us from our humanity. This is a remarkable story of a man who survived an attack on his life in Dallas, Texas after a stranger went on a rampage soon after the 9/11 attacks. Bangladeshi-born Rais Bhuyian was shot and blinded by a young American named Mark Stroman. Stroman killed 2 others on his 'anti-Arab' rampage that day. Rais went on to forgive Stroman, and even campaigned to have his death sentence commuted to life. Stroman was executed on July 20, 2011.

Listening to Rais on the radio was moving and uplifting. It said something about the human spirit that lies within all of us. When, how and whether we chose to act on it in the face of adversity, is what being human is all about. It is what it is.

Click here to see the NPR report.

America Hoodwinked

2011-06-20T14:59:00.000-07:00

In 2005, a part of my American dream was realized. I bought a house in Brownstone Brooklyn, New York City. I was an unlikely beneficiary of the "Subprime Lending" scam that was orchestrated on a massive scale by the banks in this country. The scheme that was meant to help Americans own their homes, brought the whole global financial system to its knees. For those who are still unfamiliar with the term "Subprime Lending", it basically means giving mortgages to people who may not have the financial strength to make the payments on the loan. These mortgages are also characterized by low down payments, higher interest rates and less favorable terms in order to compensate for higher credit risk. Many of these loans were handed to people with adjustable interest rates or ARMs. An ARM is where the interest rate would be low and locked for a short term, affording lower monthly payments towards interest only and not principal. After the initial period the interest rate would adjust to an exorbitant and prohibitive amount. And there in lay the devil that submerged homeowners across the country when the value in their homes vanished. Some were swept away and others are still clinging onto their roofs.

The essence of unbridled capitalism and free market is to make a profit most often by selling goods or services. In the real estate and financial industry, profit is made solely by the arbitrary business of speculation, manipulation, hedging and betting. Money is made and lost by exchanging assets that are valued by factors beyond an average persons understanding or control. These two industries brought the country and the world to a grinding halt by virtue of one important but essential nature that drives the business, greed.

Most banks do not lend to self employed people such as myself, as they see us as high risk vagrants, unless you can show you are making a large amount of money. In 2005 when we decided to buy a house, I struggled to get a loan. Most banks found me to be ineligible by a slight margin. Then finally a mortgage company called Countrywide Home Loans, which was the largest company of its kind at the time, came to my rescue. Just with a few phone calls and some faxed documents they decided to take the risk of putting me on their portfolio. My "Jumbo Loan" (a loan amount over $500,000) was approved and a few days later, after some unnerving discrepancies in the loan documents at the closing, I had my own home. By the time I completed the whole process, I had lost all joy of acquiring my very own domain. I had had a nervous breakdown.

The financial tsunami that was gathering steam right under my nose, with me on its back, crested in 2009. Major Wall Street firms such as Bear Sterns and Lehman Brothers collapsed. My mortgage company went belly up and was bought by Bank of America. The fraudulent mortgage loans had infected the market, threatening credit and destroying the confidence in the American system. Soon the American government headed by George Bush realized the severity of the problem and found themselves in a tight spot. Their philosophy of deregulation and allowing greed to thrive in the name of false prosperity had reached its logical conclusion. And so they appeared in front of the American public presenting a grave situation calling up visions of the Great Depression. An intoxicated populace that felt their "way of life" was under threat, felt even more nervous. To safeguard freedom and the American way of life the banks had to be injected with tax payer money, other wise there would be "Bread Lines" outside grocery stores within weeks. This was the story that was sold, and like always the "narrative of fear" worked.

Billions of dollars were funneled into Goldman Sachs, Citi Bank, AIG, Bank of America and their friends. The very people who had created this precarious situation had now been told to accept cash or perish. All to calm the market and send a signal that this would ease credit to businesses to resume growing and the economy would regain steam. There was no guarantee that the banks would lend the people's money back to the public, none was expected of them. It was just a charade to regain confidence.

It was quickly realized that the rescue package delivered by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and his friends Ben Bernenke and Tim Geithner (present Treasury Secretary) to the banks did not materialize into tangible benefits for the public at large. All they did was bolster the banks so that they would be flush with funds to restart Wall Street. And that they did with great success in the process managing to give themselves record bonuses while the rest of the nation was still struggling to surface from the slump. A reinvigorated Wall Street gave the government machinery good cause to proclaim that they had stalled a financial meltdown, that would otherwise have been catastrophic.

As the new President took charge, there was hope there would be drastic change, almost a reversal, but big slogans amounted to nothing. Ex-bankers continued the line of succession in the key financial posts. Most violators were let go with a slap on the wrist. Political bickering led to more spending and less tax cuts for the wealthy. President Obama enacted the "Stimulus Plan" to spur job growth and enacted the "Foreclosure Rescue Plan" which would help homeowners who were struggling to stay in their houses. The banks were requested to modify the terms of their mortgage loans. Most often a modification would mean lowering the interest rate and waiving all penalties for non-payment. All banks were required to assist applicants, but the standards by which they approved the modifications were arbitrary and lacked federal oversight.

Having voted President Obama into office I thought this was a fine program. Finally change he had promised was actually reaching the citizens in need. Socialism was not just for the capitalist banks, it was also for the people, hurrah. So I applied for a "Loan Modification" with Bank of America. My house was not in foreclosure and I had not defaulted on my payments, but I was struggling and I could use some breathing room to better my financial situation. The Obama program was publicized to help individuals like me as well. My interest rate was not low by any means, and I was hoping to lower it to make my mortgage payment affordable. I submitted my documentation to Bank of America as a self-employed person. My application was accepted. I was delighted.

After months of calling for a clear answer on the status of my application, I received a notice stating they needed additional information. That information was promptly sent. There was no response. After almost a year and a half I was told my application was turned down, because they determined I could afford my home. So I said, if I can afford my house let me at least refinance my loan to a lower interest rate. I was told my income did not qualify for a refinance as the guidelines had changed and the regulatory agencies had become unusually strict in overseeing standards for loan approvals. My outstanding mortgage amount was too big, and my income did not qualify. The agencies that were deregulated by Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and the soothsayer of global finance Alan Greenspan seemed to have woken up just in time to inspect my case. At least this is what I think I was told by Bank of America.

Today America carries a national debt of almost 14 trillion dollars, which breaks down to $45,000 per individual citizen. Greece's debt breaks down to about $44,000 per individual. The Congress is yet again raising the debt ceiling to function. Banks and other private enterprises are flush with funds and even bailed out firms such as GE are posting a profit. Wall Street is in a respectable place, but the middle class is rapidly shrinking. Unemployment is high, salaries are low and tax cuts have never been this low in fifty years.

While America was hoodwinked by the banks and their comrades in the government, it is the average person who has had to bear the brunt. Government has proven ineffectual again, squandering people's treasure in corrupt ways using wars and entitlements as an excuse. Democrats cannot bring themselves to consider serious spending reform, Republicans reject higher taxes for the wealthy, and right wing Tea party people would rather see the nation burn than compromise. While America calls out corruption around the world it fails to deal with the corruption that is eating away at its core. A nation that takes pride in its system of justice and demands honor of its public servants, has very few honorable men and women left who really care about the plight of the nation.

As a middle class tax paying citizen, my power is very limited. My American dream of one vote, one voice is a ruse. And time after time I am reminded that very little changes where true power lies. Even now we are told America is the wealthiest nation in the world, we have the largest military and yet more people become poorer everyday in every which way. In a nation born out of the worst excesses of racism and prejudice it becomes more and more unclear where and at what level discrimination takes place. Bias can never be articulated in a nation that is so weary about being sued, that it takes sophisticated steps to safeguard itself. By denying me the ability to refinance my loan, Bank of America can discriminate based on the fact that I am self-employed. But I can never prove it. Same as while America is Hoodwinked no one can prove it, one can only stand by watch and hope for hope. It is what it is.

"Justice has been done"

2011-05-12T13:13:00.000-07:00

In the cover of darkness four stealth helicopters descend on a compound 60 kilometers north of Islamabad, Pakistan in a garrison town called Abbotabad. Soon there is gun fire and a blaze. A continent away Americans are perturbed when their daily dose of television is interrupted by an imminent broadcast from the White House. Speculation begins and the media men and women begin to do what they do best, chatter. Soon the "Breaking News" headline turns to "Osama Bin Laden has been killed". Moments later a president walks down a red carpet to a microphone and addresses the world. He reveals that a covert CIA operation has borne fruit and Osama Bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda, is dead. And "Justice has been done." Within minutes a crowd gathers outside the White House gates. USA!, USA! the chanting gets louder and louder. Jubilation is in the air. In New York, where it all began, some people are ecstatic and others finally remove their countdown signs. The wait is over. America's "Public Enemy No:1", "The Face of Evil", is finally gunned down after 9 years and 232 days since 9/11. But his ghost lingers on.

As the details begin to leak through the news cycle, the story of how it went down begins to emerge. The Navy Seal team that descended on the compound made their way to the third floor of a bungalow where they found Osama Bin Laden. They shot him in the head and then carried him away to a waiting helicopter. On the way to him they killed two of his couriers, a son and a woman. A helicopter which was meant to carry Osama's family as hostages, had a malfunction so it had to be blown up. Before the military could be alerted, the Navy Seal team was out of Pakistani Airspace, the whole operation concluded in a precision 40 minutes. They had been training for this for more than a year. After a brief landing in Afghanistan the body of Osama Bin Laden was moved to the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson in the Arabian Sea. He was reportedly buried at sea mindful of Islamic religious customs.

The official White House report, which is the only report, first claimed Osama Bin Laden resisted and therefore had to be killed. They then revealed he was unarmed. What emerges from the operation details is that the Navy Seal team was there to carry out an assassination and they succeeded.

Osama Bin Laden for a long time has been the most reviled person in the west. His exploits attained global notoriety, when his suicide bombers attacked the American war ship USS Cole and bombed the US embassies in east Africa. In retaliation when president Clinton ordered a cruise missile strike on his camps in Afghanistan he openly wowed to bring the war to America's streets. His anger against the United States for its presence in his holy motherland of Mecca and Madina, galvanized extremists across the Islamic world to his cause. Even many moderate Muslims in the Arab world gravitated to his call for Jihad as they perceived America to be an imperial power that knew no boundaries and had no honor as it propped up despotic Arab regimes. On 9/11 the epic myth of Osama Bin Laden solidified as the greatest terrorist attack ever took place in downtown Manhattan. That t0wering act of violence and the chutzpah exhibited made him a larger than life figure. The soft spoken videos that appeared on Al Jazeera, painted him as an Islamic revolutionary. He had become Time magazine's most influential man of the year.

The grotesque crime that was committed on 9/11 unleashed a river of blood. America invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, causing thousands of deaths and Al Qaeda pushed back escalating the orgy of violence. Bin Laden successfully lured America into spending a trillion dollars on a misguided war that reportedly claimed a 150,000 lives. An extremely heavy reckoning for one mans fiendish mission for blood thirsty revenge and destruction.

The story of Osama Bin Laden is no different from that of any other extremist who is driven by a singular ideology. The ideology of seeing the world reconfigured, guided by an archaic and medieval code of mistrust and intolerance of the other. This ideology exists all around the world and some states like North Korea put it into practice very successfully. And every now and then comes an individual who puts it into action in their own psychotic but clever way. For Bin Laden that ideology took some time to form, but once it did, it had to be put into action by any means. Osama Bin Laden had the means, in the form of ancestral wealth, which he showered generously to gain respect and admiration from people from all walks from Afghanistan to Sudan. Politicians, spies, clerics, fanatics and men with guns all aligned themselves to him. He was then able to mobilize young men along with like minded partners such as Ayman Al-Zawahiri, to do his bidding, and that they did with their very lives.

Even though he was being watched closely way before 9/11, it was that monumental act that made him a formidable adversary. The CIA had a whole task force dedicated to tracking and killing Osama Bin Laden. For most he became the most evil man alive and for a sizable lot he became a hero, a man who finally hit back at the imperialists, and pulled it off from a cave.

In this so called "civil society" we live in, the word "Justice" is associated with the idea of laws, and justice is only done when all the evidence is presented for the world to see in the form of hard fact. That is what is done in a democratic society and democratic values know no geographic boundaries. They are the values of higher purpose, arrived at through centuries of injustice, wars, genocide and mass murder. They give credibility to those who uphold them no matter the circumstances.

While most people were elated by the extermination of Osama Bin Laden, there were those who felt that his capture and prosecution would have given American more credibility in the eyes of the world. There are numerous arguments for and against posing a person such as him in a western court of law such as the ICC (International Criminal Court). The primary one being, that putting him on trial would be a logistical nightmare and it would rally more people to his cause and would create an expensive spectacle which is not worthy. The other argument is that, the evidence against him would be very hard to bring to bear in a court of law. But I think putting him on trial would have been a much more worthwhile enterprise than spending a trillion dollars on a war that has brought nothing more than misery. There was also a sentiment expressed that his death brought "closure". Unfortunately "Bin-Ladenism" will be much harder to eradicate and closure will be only momentary.

Osama Bin Laden is certainly not the first fanatic to have walked the earth committed to mass murder. The recently arrested Serbian General Ratko Mladic, had been on the run for sixteen years, and will finally face justice at the Hague. When compared to the Nazis, Bin Laden's agenda is quite tame. Even though the Nazis were a state sponsored machinery, they had similar goals of establishing a society guided by a singular vision of absolute domination through violence and terror. Yet at the end of the war the Nazis were not exterminated in revenge killings. They were put on trial, to show to the world that what evil lies within needs to be examined and rooted out so it does not linger on and disease the human spirit. The Nuremberg trials brought credibility to the western allies and lead to the formation of laws that guide us to a higher mission. Ben Ferencz, US prosecutor during the Nuremberg trials has openly criticized the manner in which Osama Bin Laden was done away with. Not just because it was an assassination and assassinations are illegal under US law, but also because we lost credibility. We acted like one of them. Dealing a blow but also making sure that the cycle of violence would continue for generations to come.

President Obama came through on his campaign promise and emerged as the tough democrat. Heady from the global applause he no doubt has secured a second term in office. His Attorney General Eric Holder declared the disposal of Osama Bin Laden as an act of national "self defense". While we wait for Al Qaeda's next move, there is already a heightened sense disquiet in the world. The dubious and duplicitous nature of Pakistan's power centers are extremely worrisome. While complicit they feel violated and are carefully playing their chips seeking favor from China as plan B. While hunting down Osama Bin Laden may have been a popular thing to do, it is his ghost that will haunt us for some time to come.

Osama Bin Laden to the people who knew him dearly was "Sheik Osama Bin Laden". The word "Sheik" is used as an expression of deference and respect. His followers are many and that is a fact that cannot and should not be ignored. He is still a hero to many, even though he has killed and maimed thousands of his own kind. But in any Jihad there is collateral damage and people are willing to see it that way as America sees its killing of innocent people as collateral damage. Where and when the killing will end is anybody's guess. The Taliban it seems are coming around to talk peace, while they keep blowing up more and more people where and when they can. For "Justice" to truly be done there has to be equal justice for all. As long as that escapes us, wars and tit for tat killing will be the main stay and extremists will emerge to fill the vacuum. The turmoil shaking the Arab world, which some are calling the "Arab Spring" could be an antidote to extremism. But only if it is allowed to thrive and be nurtured as a long term investment and not a short term reprieve. It is what it is.

A Year Later

2011-04-20T12:55:00.000-07:00

A year ago on this very day, deep under the ocean a calamity unfolded. Before it was over millions of barrels of black, murky, thick oil had spewed into the Gulf Coast of the United States. An estimated 180 million (the number is still in dispute) gallons of it all had polluted the ocean as the world watched aghast. This was by far the worst industrial disaster engineered by mankind, under water. The unquenchable thirst for oil (which today is trading $180 a barrel) had led humans once again to desecrate the planet, hoping it will heal itself, and continue to be on their side.

A year later as the media casts a dim glare on the catastrophe, there is a sense that it never happened. There is a belief that what seemed so dire then was not after all that bad. Theories that the ocean performed a miracle and disintegrated all the oil with its magical bacteria, the ocean currents swept the oil away and unlike the Exxon Valdez spill twenty years ago, this was spread over a large area and there fore the impact was less, are gaining more acceptance. Only a few birds and fish died, and those that were seen on TV covered in oil were rescued and rehabilitated and not much oil really washed ashore so everyone can get back to fishing and drilling seems to be the direction that is being proposed. The apathy to this catastrophe is so blaring that some scientists and experts have even gone so far as to say that a "true calamity" was actually averted because nature was on our side. Having seen the heart wrenching images as they struggled to cap the well for almost three months, is reason enough to doubt the rosy picture that is emerging out of a carefully managed and disseminated story. Two decades later there is still evidence of oil on the shores of the Prince William sound in Alaska, and the oil that spilled there was a fraction of what gushed into the Gulf.

The impunity with which we pollute the only planet we have, reached a new milestone with this incident. The Bhopal gas tragedy, the Chernobyl disaster and the numerous oil spills in the Niger Delta and elsewhere, have shown us that this impunity we take as a "right" and carry on insensitively and unabashedly until the next disaster strikes. As nothing can come second to man's greed for natural resources.

BP and Haliburton the two companies on whose watch this catastrophe in the Gulf unfolded both posted a profit on Wall Street this year. Despite doling out billions of dollars in the clean up operation and other damages owed to the Gulf coast communities, they were able to make money thanks to rising oil prices. As always, the remuneration to the people most affected by no fault of theirs, has been slow coming, even though 20 billion dollars have been set aside at the insistence of the Obama administration. While all this has been unfolding things have gone back the way they were. Deep water drilling permits are again being issued to oil companies, with the promise of more stringent oversight by the government. Recently the Australian company BHP Billiton was awarded a permit to drill in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, not far from where the spill occurred. Rising oil prices due to the political unrest in the Middle East and North Africa led the Republicans to push congress to resume drilling in the Gulf coast. “We are encouraging offshore exploration and production,” President Barack Obama said during a press conference at the White House “We’re just doing it responsibly.”

As the calamity at the Fukushima Daichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan struggles to find an end, already things in the Nuclear industry seem to be returning to their "business as usual" state. A number of nuclear plants in the United States have had their permits extended by another twenty years, even though their safety records have been checkered. The oldest operating Nuclear power plant in Oyster Creek, New Jersey had its permits extended to 2029, even though it had leaked radioactive waste into the aquifer. The Oyster Creek plant is a boiling water reactor, much like the one in Fukushima, Japan. In February 2011 the Kawaunee Nuclear power plant in Wisconsin had its license extended till 2033. This plant had reported a leak in 2006. Other nuclear plants across the globe have resumed construction, and those who were put on hold are waiting for the dust to settle. India plans to build the worlds largest nuclear power plant on its western coast near a rural town called Jaitpur. Violent protests from the local villagers broke out this week. One protester was shot by the police. India's growing thirst for power to fuel its urban expansion will not relent.

The nexus between industry and government cannot be more evident as in the case of the oil and nuclear industry. On the one hand the Obama administration talks about conservation and moving away from an oil addicted society to a more "green" one and on the other allows oil companies to start drilling in places that is proven to be environmentally risky. The Nuclear industry with the promise of clean energy pushes its way through, expanding and thriving despite all of its apocalyptic failings. The hypocrisy could not be more blatant as the companies flex their muscle and manage to get what they want and the drilling never stops as the thirst for oil and power knows no end.

What we seem to learn from our mistakes, is that we never learn. Humanity's inability to sacrifice the conveniences it has gotten used to at the cost of great harm to the planet, is reprehensible. Politically it is something no government would want to risk, even if it means putting the very public that elected them at grave risk. The idea that by better and more stringent oversight and sophisticated technology we can create a "fail safe" world questions the short sighted audacity of the human spirit. Nature shows us time and again that if we cannot live in harmony with it, it will not allow us to live, but humanity does not seem to get the hint. So as we return to drilling and splitting atoms, the question to ask is at what cost is that acceptable? If the mission, knowing what we know today, is to create a better and safer world for future generations, it feels like that vision has become impaired. It is what it is.

A Nuclear Tsunami

2011-03-15T22:47:00.000-07:00

Since the moment the earth shook under the ocean off the coast of Japan, the world has been shocked, shaken and stirred by the images pouring out of the island nation. The names of places like Sendai, Fukushima, Tomioka, Narah have become familiar as the scale of the breathtaking carnage is revealed. Black murky water engulfing everything in its path, homes scraped from their foundations crumbling as though made of papier mache, massive ships parked on city streets, homes on top of homes and debris swung as far as the eye can see, a nightmare the Japanese had always prepared for had now come true. The 10 meter high Tsunami wave generated from a 9.0 magnitude earthquake was no ordinary occurrence. According to a leading seismologist Dr.Roger Musson, this was a once in a 1000 year event. What was certain though was that the force of nature was on full unabashed display, reminding us once again where we stand as a species.

In the last few years we have been inundated with images of immense devastation on a regular basis. From the earthquake in Haiti, the floods in Pakistan, the Asian Tsunami to the more recent earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, we have seen human misery on display on an unprecedented scale. What differentiates this calamity from the others is not only its epic scale but also the fact that a natural disaster gave way to the creation of a man made disaster which is proving to be deadlier than what nature had intended.

As we watch the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant descend into certain meltdown, the all too familiar feeling of a catastrophe unfolding causes extreme discomfort. Like watching another giant wave crest on the horizon, and not knowing which way to run, the people of Japan watch and wait as information about the situation gets hazier by the hour. As experts and pundits on television ponder worst case scenarios, mentioning Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, images of men in Hazmat suits screening people in plain clothes, conjure up unnerving visions of a nuclear apocalypse. Ever since the atomic bomb was dropped on this nation a generation ago, the Japanese have pondered a nuclear holocaust in all avenues of their popular culture. Now that vision seems to coming true with panic lurking just under the surface.

Since the moment humans began harnessing energy from splitting atoms, there has always been grave cause for concern. Ever since Enrico Fermi demonstrated the first self sustaining nuclear chain reaction there has been serious debate about its promise versus its danger. Much like the debate surrounding genetic technology and its far reaching impact in an ethical world, nuclear technology has had its strong critics who saw the monster that lay within. That monster was on full display when it scorched Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Everyone including Albert Einstein, who once championed nuclear technology, saw the sheer horror that lay within, when left to man's devious actions. After the savagery of an atomic explosion one would have expected a roll back on nuclear technology. But in direct contradiction to logic, human diabolical duplicity prevailed, and the technology leaped forward making giant strides. Sixty six years later, the planet is now over populated with nuclear bombs and power plants, with more and more nations thirsting to get their hands on this technology. The tiny earthquake prone island nation of Japan has 54 nuclear power plants on its back, the United States has 104, France has 58, Russia has 32, UK has 19, altogether 439 nuclear plants are in operation across the planet.

The proponents of nuclear technology claim it is safe, clean and cost effective and is the only way to feed the insatiable human apetite for energy. The situation unfolding in Fukushima disproves this idea outright, much like Chernobyl did in 1986. No matter how much the scientists and their sponsors prove to the public that nuclear technology is safe, and the advances that have been made in sixty years make it even safer, the nature of this creation is such that if it gets out of its containment the destruction it causes can in no shape or form counter the good it does. While this technology may be "green" by not emitting pollutants into the atmosphere, it makes up for it by producing deadly nuclear waste which has no sustainable way of disposing yet. For the last six or more decades the planet has been swallowing spent fuel rods into its crust as though it were an infinite reservoir. We all have come to know in recent years, that everything on this planet is finite and if we do not take that into account, we lay the foundation for our own doom.

As the vivid descriptions of what high dozes of nuclear radiation can do to the human body are contemplated, what no one is foreseeing are the long lasting effects of such a disaster. The nuclear Tsunami that invisibly washes over people, destroys the body at cellular level causing cancer. The area around the disaster site will not be habitable for hundreds of years to come. The area around Chernobyl two decades later is still a wasteland and anything that grows in its vicinity is poison. And the stories the walking dead of Kiev have told since that blast, are haunting. I dread hearing stories coming out of Japan, especially having seen what they have already been through with the earthquake and the tidal wave.

Watching what is taking place in Japan, I wanted to immediately know how close I was living to a nuclear power plant. I found out that I was just under fifty miles from an aging nuclear plant called Indian Point located in Buchanan, New York. 20 million people live in the vicinity of this plant which went online in 1962. With three reactor cores on location, this plant has had issues in the past, where it has leaked radiation into the atmosphere and water. The supporters of this plant, claim it is safe and has done a phenomenal job in keeping pollutants out of the air while meeting 30% of New York city's gluttonous appetite for electricity. They also say unlike the Japanese reactor this is not in an area of seismic activity or a Tsunami, therefore there is no cause for concern. Both Chernobyl and Three Mile Island incidents were not caused as a result of any natural disaster, but because of human error. So the reason to have a monster inside an aging shell, so close to such a densely populated region is inexcusable. I would rather have Times Square go dark few times a week, than contemplate what the Japanese are facing in my backyard. In contradiction some politicians like the New York governor are calling for the closure of Indian Point, but the nature of humanity is to live on borrowed time. So for the one hundred or so nuclear plants that feed the incessant and infinite need for electricity in the United States, a time of reckoning has come. For the people who live near these contained monsters, the time is here to ask, how safe do you feel and how much are you willing to sacrifice to get your energy via other means.

Yes nuclear power plants provide jobs and energy to millions of people. Seeing what is taking place at the Fukushima Daiichi powerplant one cannot help asking the fundamental question "is it worth it". More nations around the world want this technology. Either claiming to meet the growing need for energy or just as an excuse to build an atomic bomb. Ironically India recently signed a multi billion dollar deal with Japan to purchase nuclear fuel and technology. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are vying do build nuclear power plants, mostly to counter Iran's moves. Israel already possesses this demon as do India and Pakistan. The Germans and the Chinese have suspended their nuclear projects immediately as a result of the present disaster.

As the Japanese catastrophe forces us to examine a dooms day scenario, supporters of nuclear power plants, like Fareed Zakaria are asking us to look at the present disaster in context and not get usurped by the shock value the word "nuclear" conjures up. The age old argument, that more people die in car accidents and coal and oil kill more people than nuclear energy has been effectively used in a short sighted manner. What they do not address are the long lasting effects of a nuclear disaster. Those that linger on for generations, contaminating the food chain and causing ghastly genetic mutations and cancer.

Are we as a people willing and able to honestly look at what we have created in nuclear technology or are we going to continue to live in denial until the next big disaster. From my estimation, the Japanese situation will soon move off the headline. The harrowing stories of the aftermath will shake us to the bone. But we will go back to our old ways until the next disaster, basing the idea of "safety" on the death toll statistic. It is what we always do. It is what it is.

Walk like an EGYPTIAN

2011-02-14T09:18:00.000-08:00

"If there is no struggle, there is no progress...
Power concedes nothing without a demand.
It never did and never will."
- Frederick Douglass

On February 9, 2011 while 111 million Americans huddled around their TV sets taking part in the annual great American orgy called the "Superbowl", a continent away 80 million Egyptians were taking part in a different kind of Superbowl. Having spilled into the streets in record numbers for almost two weeks, they were involved in a battle of will against their decrepit leaders to relinquish their oppressive hold on power. They were determined not to die out in a whimper as their Iranian counterparts had in 2009.

While America, the chief sponsor of Hosni Mubarak and his army for the last thirty years stood on the fence, the people of Egypt were unrelenting. Television images sent a clear signal, there was no turning back. It was a moment that needed to be seized and anyone with any humanity could relate to the need for urgency without any ambiguity. Anyone with any moral conscience was one with the people on the street. People power was unequivocally on display. The draw was so strong that people from around the world, who could get away with it, flew into Cairo to be one with this Arab once in a lifetime "Woodstock"/ "Berlin Wall" moment. I for one, having not being able to physically be there, was virtually and psychologically transported to be one with the young and the old, the religious and secular, the male and the female, as they swept, sweat and slept in Tahrir Square, not allowing anything to shake their resolve.

There was a moment, when there was trepidation that the movement would lose momentum. There was doubt if the people would prevail the chess game that was being played by Mubarak and his honchos. Then there was a sudden burst of energy and on February 11th, Egypt was changed for ever. The euphoria was palpable through the radio and television screens all around the world as the dictator flew for cover. In a largely bloodless uprising, the people of Egypt, for the moment, had freed their nation of a criminal regime. As the gargantuan portraits and posters of the dictator came down, the jubilation spread through the streets of Cairo and beyond. So did the doubts of what would happen next, as the military took control.

Western journalists who had been plunging themselves into this story the moment the crowds gathered at Tahrir Square were also jubilant. Their high wire act of reporting from the scene had paid off and they somehow felt they had contributed to the demolition of the regime as well. Unlike their governments, in their professionally narcissistic delusional world, they may have felt one with the Egyptians by taking a beating, but there should be no mistake this was an Egyptian narrative and it is only they who deserved any credit.

When there is a moment in history of this nature, in an attempt to simplify it and understand the mechanics of such a feat, the world always looks for a poster child, such as a Mandela, a Gandhi or a King. In this case there was none and an explanation as to how such a mass uprising would come to pass, was puzzling even to the CIA. And so they called it the "Facebook" revolution, the "Internet" revolution and for a moment the Google boy Wael Ghonim revolution. While they may have all helped in sparking and fueling the movement, all revolutions happen because there is a ripe climate for it, and that climate gets worse because of an El Niño effect. For those who did not know that a climate of high unemployment, poverty, corruption and political repression was brewing for thirty years in Egypt they had to be in a coma. The El Niño this time was sparked by a 26 year old man who set himself ablaze in Tunisia, out of utter desperation. His desperation was very similar to those of countless others in the Arab world. And so the "contagion", as those in power and those who support these repressive regimes called it spread, leading to a Tsunami.

The big western democracies like the United States, United Kingdom and France have always had a double standard when truly pushing for democracy in the Middle East and Africa. They justify their support for the status-quo of repressive despicable regimes, as making calculated choices for opting for stability over democracy. The underlying arrogance that the Arabs and Africans are not evolved enough to enjoy the fruits of democracy and are not ready to handle freedom unless negotiated by the west, is also a deep seeded belief. In 1947 when India rose up against the British and demanded freedom, the western media painted a very bleak future for the fledgling nation. It almost assured that the Indians would not be able to handle their new found freedom without a total implosion. Similar predictions about Egypt were and are being made by some. Then of course there is the dreaded issue of oil and military bases which can never be taken out of any equation where there is conflict. As we see the price of oil shoot up these past few weeks, the short sighted foreign policies of propping up despotic regimes are exposed. During the height of the protests when Tony Blair still called for Mubarak to stay in power and hoped for an orderly transition to democracy, it was a blatant representation of that hypocrisy. When change of this nature is set in motion, there are only two outcomes. Brutality or benevolence. We saw some of both in Egypt, and to the world's surprise the benevolent means of protest espoused by Gandhi and King seemed to have borne fruit.

When in a surprise move Mubarak left Cairo for his luxurious residence built with looted money in the resort town of Sharm-El Sheik it was over. It caught many by surprise as he was known to be a stubborn man. With that launched speculation and fear mongering about the Muslim Brotherhood and other right wing Islamic groups hijacking the situation. Whether that will actually happen, one would have to wait and see. Egypt is not Iran, even if it is, if that is what the people want, then that is what will happen. It is their democratic choice that must be respected, if it happens in a transparent manner. But for once in many decades a fissure seems to have opened that could actually lead to real peace in Palestine and some real solutions for the middle east could emerge. With the sweeping winds of change, the morally corrupt Israeli and Palestinian leadership will have to heed to the demands of the people they have become so accustomed to oppress. Israel maintained its silence when the people over its borders rose up to over throw their dictator, as the dictator was Israel's friend. The only democracy in the region could not find it in its heart to support people power for fear of a collapse of a fraudulent peace treaty that oppresses a million people in Gaza and maintains a superficial balance. So much for a nation that was built out of the worst oppression unleashed on humanity. They decided to be the Switzerland to Germany, out of fear and prejudice, that has been at the core of all policy for the region.

In the euphoric crowd in Cairo, a man carried a sign which read "Two down twenty to go". Wishful thinking maybe, but already the so called "contagion" seems to be rapidly spreading. Bahrain, Libya, Algeria, Yemen, Iran, Jordan and even Iraq have all seen protests spawn as a direct reaction to Egypt and Tunisia. As the television channels Al Aribiya and Al Jazeera and online social networks add oxygen to the flame by showing the brutality of those in power, an "if they can, we can" attitude seems to be gathering momentum. This thirst for change is so infectious and liberating that fear has gripped regimes as far as China, forcing them to censor all their media. And for America, a migraine is developing as the Obama administration contends with how to frame its rhetoric without blatantly exposing its duplicity on issues of global power and influence, which it calls "interests".

How far and how fast this fresh oxygen will spread only time will tell. If the democracies of the world, who pride themselves for their history and openness, do not overtly recognize and encourage what lies at the heart of this yearning for freedom, they will come across as hypocrites. This moment that shatters all Muslim stereotypes of terrorism, long beards and crazy clerics, must be seized. Here is a moment to truly win "hearts and minds", and if we fail, we would have failed all those who brought us to this moment, which we in free nations today so joyously take for granted.

To walk like an Egyptian was to walk like a Russian, Frenchman, Chilean, Indian, Filipino, Cuban and all those who one day realized freedom for all was as essential as a breath of fresh air. Like those before them, the Egyptians got what they deserved, will they get what they want? Only time will tell. It is what it is.

Assasi-Nation

2011-01-15T15:11:00.000-08:00

Driving down fourth avenue in Brooklyn on a chilly January morning, I was shaken. The radio broke the news that a United States congresswoman was shot at point-blank range. Soon it was known that the congresswoman was from the Democratic Party and she was shot outside a supermarket in Tucson, Arizona, while holding a public gathering. That information alone was enough for me to arrive at my first conclusion. The toxic political climate that had been brewing over the recently concluded election cycle had claimed its first victim.

Four days earlier, a continent away, another politician was shot and killed. The Governor of Punjab in Pakistan was gunned down by his own twenty six year old bodyguard. The assassin later claimed that he killed the Governor because he was an outspoken liberal in a country that is slowly but steadily being eaten away by extremism and intolerance.

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords survived her head injury but six others lost their lives. A day later a mug shot of the assassin, twenty two year old Jared Lee Laughner, was released to the public. The expression on his bald face sent a chill and a picture began to emerge of a man who had supposedly gone insane, but not insane enough to not know his constitutional rights. A few months back Jared had exercised his second amendment right by purchasing a police issue Glock semi-automatic pistol, and then managed to acquire an unusually large amount of ammunition from a local Super Wal-Mart store without raising an alarm. He exercised his ultimate constitutional right guaranteed to every United States citizen by pleading the fifth when he was arrested by the police. The fifth amendment to the United States constitution protects all citizens from self incriminating themselves, when arrested for a crime.

A few days after Governor Salman Taseer was assassinated in Pakistan, a video of his assassin appeared on the Internet. It was recorded soon after the killing. A policeman keeping guard recorded it on his cell phone. In the video Malik Mumtaz Qadri is seen singing a hymn in praise of Allah, pleading him to look after those who work in his favor. The melodic and serene manner in which he recites the song as the policemen around him listen in devotion, is chilling.

Unlike Jared, Malik was hailed as a hero by many hardliners in Pakistan. He was showered with rose petals while a crowd cheered, as he was led away by the police.

While the murders in Arizona launched a debate in America about the need for civility in public discourse, the assassination in Pakistan seems to have had an opposite effect. It has deepened the divide between those who want to see an extreme version of Sharia law take root in Pakistan and those who want to forge a modern nation in the secular vision of their founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah. In America, only time will tell how long civility will withstand the onslaught of politics.

While there is no comparison between Pakistan and America as nations in terms of their evolution towards democracy, there is one thing they share in common. Both have had a long and checkered history of assassinations. Most assassinations in Pakistan have been politically motivated, while in America lone crazy gunmen looking for national attention, have mostly pulled the trigger.

From all that has been unearthed about Jared Laughner, it seems like he had no overpowering political motivation to attack the congresswoman. The profile that emerges of him, is that of a man who was lost, because he found himself rejected by society at all levels. His parents, friends and family could not fill the void that was left inside of him. The only way he could get every one's attention was to go commit an act that would put him in the spotlight once and for all. And so Jared Laughner joined the long list of assassins who left everyone puzzled and distraught when they resorted to committing a heinous act.

Every time there is an assassination or an attempted assassination, or a massacre, like the ones at Columbine High School in 1999 and at Virginia Tech in 2007, the subject of "gun control" enters the national debate, and soon vanishes as the news cycle about the tragedy ends. So yet again, the issue of "gun control" was raised and familiar words were uttered once again by some politicians "guns don't kill people, people kill people".

There is a bizarre and outdated constitutional amendment that rests inside the American constitution that guarantees every citizen the right to bear arms, soon after it grants them the right to free speech, expression and religion. The second amendment reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". This law was enshrined into the document in 1787 when people resolved disputes by drawing muskets that shot little metal marbles, one at a time reaching just a few yards from the gunman. Today America has one of the most efficient police forces in the world and a justice system that for the most part delivers, yet the right to bear arms is still held more sacred and dear, than the right to free speech by many. This strong desire to hold on to an arcane law makes America the most heavily armed society in the world, leading to some of the highest rates of gun violence in the world. In a bizarre turn of events, the sale of the particular gun and magazine extender Jared used in unleashing mayhem that morning, have skyrocketed across America since the incident.

Today the most sophisticated guns are manufactured in the United States and are easily available to buy at stores and online with an ID and a credit card. According to a recently published New York Times article, Federal agents found that about 90 percent of the 12,000 pistols and rifles the Mexican authorities recovered from drug dealers last year and asked to be traced came from dealers in the United States, most of them in Texas and Arizona. Arizona was where Jared Laughner grew up and later came into possession of a weapon with as much ease as a lollipop. This is something very telling about American society, a culture that has struggled to come to terms with its bloody past, and still struggles to keep violence out of civil society but fails again and again.

January 15th was the day Martin Luther King was born in this country. Every year he is remembered in the United States on this day, and this occasion is marked with a national holiday and a day of service and dedication. Dr. King was assassinated on April 4th, 1968 by a gunman. While the assassin's motivations were never clearly proven, one thing was sure that a bullet wound is what killed Dr. King. Once again it was the bullets that maimed Gabrielle Giffords and killed Salman Taseer. If you take the gun out of the equation, all you are left with is intent. And intent can always be tamed, but a gun can accelerate that intent into action without any hesitation in a heart beat. It is what it is.

Humanity at a Cusp

2010-12-21T11:25:00.000-08:00

As the human race wraps up another 365 days of its existence on planet earth, the usual questions about its future still hang in the balance. On the verge of becoming seven billion strong at the end of next year, it may seem that in numbers its future is robust and resilient. But the nature of its survival seems to have a dismal forecast. But there is one thing that keeps the human spirit alive, the idea of "hope". Hope that it can change the trajectory of things to come with ingenious technology and innovation. No matter the odds, the confidence that it can win back time by challenging nature itself is unrelenting. And then there is the arrogance that not much has changed and life will go on as it has for centuries. The inimitable faith that the planet is an infinite place and there is enough room for it to swallow all our refuse no matter what, is still a popular myth bought by many. So the struggle ensues and the battle rages on to keep the dreams for our children alive, so that they may enjoy the beauty mother ship has offered, to generations before.

Humanity is no monolith. It is but a sum of diverse flawed individuals. A smorgasbord of folly, fortitude and formidable tenacity. And so 2010 was not that much different from decades past. Natural and man made calamities, war, terrorism and other earth shattering phenomena made their mark like clockwork. Hunger, poverty, rape and mass murder reminded us yet again that the virtues of human conscience and humanity are never ever present and predictable.

An argument is made that as writers, thinkers, scientists and artists we often concentrate disproportionally on the negative or the dark side. The cynic trumps the pragmatist and the optimist. Especially at years end, one should focus on the strides humanity has made in tackling some of the colossal challenges that it faces and not just on the devastation its actions have befallen. Yes, humanity is on the verge of conquering malaria, the Internet is changing the very fabric of society in many positive ways, space exploration is being privatized, rich people are pledging more of their money to do good on a global scale, nations are beginning to show signs of early cooperation in tackling real climate issues, the rain forests of the amazon were conserved more this year than ever before. So while humanity does make strides and many individuals commit phenomenal acts to uplift the human spirit, they some how seem minuscule in comparison to the havoc it wreaks not just on its fellow citizen but also on species that share this lonely earth.

Humanity's penchant for greed and corruption always looms ever so large, and gets larger as some nations experience an uneven and artificial phenomenon known as "economic boom". The seduction of affluence can blind even the most informed and with unprecedented economic growth promised, consumption is reaching new highs hoodwinking nations and peoples to gamble their destiny. For nations that have always taken tomorrow's sunrise for granted, every day is a wake up call as unemployment runs rampant and a second car becomes a distant suburban dream. Governments looking to get reelected can pass policies and spend their way to the hilt, offering and deluding their citizens that the glory days will return, but what they do not seem to understand is that all resources are a finite commodity, and capitalism in its present form is unsustainable. Even knee jerk capitalism inside communism, with all its successes as in China is fundamentally unsustainable. 2010 in many ways was a year of fundamental change. A reformative year to remind us that the fountain of endless affluence and growth is but an illusion.

So when, where and how do we begin to appreciate the future and move away from the "end of days" scenario that is always present and is constantly reminded to us by the media. When do we begin to look at ourselves beyond the trappings of power, politics, greed, religion, dogma and division and think of ourselves as the ocean that we are. When do we begin to accept that our progress and problems are interconnected and that nations and people are all essentially the same, sharing the same destiny. When do we recognize that no nation is immune to the ebb and flow of economic and social upheaval, despite their historical make up, as globalization has erased certain walls.

And so heading into a new year full of unknowns, instead of making new resolutions, if we as a species can acknowledge the mistakes we have made in the past, that would be a huge step in the right direction. If nations were required to publish a report at the end of every year acknowledging and listing the mistakes they made that year, I think the world would be a better place. And if individuals did the same, they would be happier. Wishful thinking maybe, but to think and rethink the unthinkable is to be human.
It is what it is.

War Criminal

2010-11-14T07:29:00.001-08:00

War criminals like everything else in this world, come in all shapes, styles and sizes. Some wear military garb and parade them selves while they commit the worst crimes. There are those who hide behind the military in suits and pose as legitimate leaders while they oppress their own people. Others work within a functioning democracy and still commit crimes against humanity and get away with it.

As wars have been a ubiquitous part of human history so have war criminals. From the early tribal wars, the plundering conquests of Alexander, the Mongol and Viking invasions, Sherman's March to the monsters of the twentieth century, war criminals have defined the moral shape of humanity and how the balance of power ebbs and flows in the world.

"War is nothing but the continuation of politics by other means" said the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz in the 1800s. Since then it has been the mantra by which wars have been legitimized by the power elite.

During the Second World War humanity awoke to a Nazi nightmare. By pushing the limits of human insanity to its maximum, the Nazi's shook the world to its core. Wars before then had seen such brutality, but not in such an organized methodical fashion and that to some degree changed the human equation to the horrors of war. Hitler, Stalin and Mao redefined the notion of crimes against humanity leading to the formation of organizations with lofty goals to tame the evil that lay within man.

And so was formed the United Nations and all its subsidiary agencies with the sole purpose of keeping humanity's plans for war and mutual destruction under check. In the sixty five years of its tenure, the UN has made strides in spreading the virtues of a civil society, formulating the Geneva convention, conflict mediation and keeping the post war peace. But for the most part the United Nations failed miserably at enforcing and maintaining lasting global peace and curtailing the aggression of large and powerful nations. As a result war criminals have spawned across the planet since 1945, showing that keeping man's depraved monstrosity by creating a so called civil set of rules is impossible. The military industrial complexes of the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain have not helped either. They provide the tools needed for war criminals to achieve their goals undermining the very doctrine the UN was set up with. And so the trend continues unchanged, with parts of Africa, Asia, Middle East and South America still baring the brunt of human rights violators. And smaller nations bare the brunt of their land and people being used as "theaters" for military exercises.

In response to the ineptitude of the United Nations to prosecute war criminals, the International Criminal Court (ICC) was established in 1998. The ICC is a permanent tribunal that prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. While the ICC has been successful in indicting and prosecuting some African and East European perpetrators with great difficulty, it has fallen short in executing its mandate beyond all geographical boundaries, because all nations have not signed onto its jurisdiction. Prime among them, The United States of America. The United States is a signatory but has not ratified the agreement leaving its war criminals outside the purview of the ICC. India and China do not even recognize the existence of the court.

After two years of virtual anonymity the 43rd president of the United States George W. Bush surfaced to launch his customary presidential memoir titled "Decision Points". This book would set the record straight everyone hoped. It would be a meditation on his tumultuous eight years as commander-in-chief. He would lay it all out for his critics who saw him through a clouded lens. Two wars, the financial melt down, Patriot Act, Water-Boarding, Katrina and Kanye West, everything would be open for examination and introspection. This would be his redeeming moment, the man behind the president would be on display.

So he went on Oprah, spent an hour with Matt Lauer on NBC, gave ample face time to FOX news, returning the favor for staying faithful to him in his darkest hour. Ending on Jay Leno, the late-night comedy hour, where he giggled and gaffed. Any venue that would prompt serious questioning and cross-examination was avoided. Dismissing them as biased left leaning liberal media, he steered clear of any individual with genuine journalistic credentials.

What came through on television was in many ways telling of who George Bush is. In many ways it was no surprise. There was very little remorse or self examination on display. While he did concede that he could have done things better or different when it came to his response to Hurricane Katrina and the unabashed display of the "Mission Accomplished" banner on USS Lincoln, it seemed merely conciliatory. While he did feel bad about the wars that had claimed so many American lives, he still maintained that he would have arrived at the same decision today, if the same faulty intelligence was presented to him. He still maintains assertively the world is a better place without Saddam Hussain and history would someday redeem him. There was no acknowledgment of remorse for the countless Afghan and Iraqi men, women and children who had lost their lives and continue to die as a result of his initiated forced action. He once again defended torture, the secret CIA detentions and vehemently maintained that water-boarding had saved American lives. The one and only thing he seemed emotionally upset about was about an insignificant moment when an inconsequential rapper named Kanye West called him a racist, for his mishandling of the Katrina rescue effort.

To do the right deed for the wrong reason the great poet T.S. Elliot wrote is "the greatest treason". What do you call a president who plunges a nation into war, for the worst reasons possible, causing immeasurable loss of life, and still feels no self-reproach? "War Criminal" is a fitting title. While it may be a harsh characterization and ample conclusions could be drawn to prove otherwise, but when as the commander-in-chief of the world's most lethal military you ignore the recommendation of the United Nations and most of your allies, and just listen to your inner coterie, and your simplistic "Decision Points" devoid of any sense of history, it is hard to absolve you of that title.

George Bush is certainly not the first, nor will he be the last "War Criminal" America will produce. While America searches for reasons as to why the world loves its people, innovation, ideals and virtues and yet is repulsed to the point of harm by the double standards of its power elite, look no further. Any other leader who would cause such senseless loss of life on such a magnitude by use of force, would be indited for war crimes by the ICC. Slobodan Milošević of Serbia and Omar Al-Bashir of Sudan were indited by the ICC for war crimes. Even though they had an ethnic cleansing agenda to their killing, the end result was still the same. The use of excessive military force to kill with delusions of creating a better world for their people.

It is a sad day for America when not a single perpetrator of the immoral wars have been brought to justice or held to any measure of accountability. If George Bush claims the intelligence presented to him was wrong, and therefore that led him to a decision to go to war, then one way he could redeem himself is to hold those people who fed him that intelligence accountable. That never happened and will never happen. America has never prosecuted any of its officials for crimes against humanity. American does not believe in prosecuting its war criminals, as that would blow the lid on the virtues of democracy and justice it touts. In addition, in the quagmire of the American system of governance, it is hard to prove who actually pushed the button. The culpable characters of this war are all in plain sight, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney to name a few. Holding them accountable is too laborious a task, both physically and politically, which no administration will undertake fearful of its own continuity.

Henry Kissinger is a name that comes to mind from past dirty deeds. He has been sited by many as the man behind the button that launched the indiscriminate bombing of Laos and Cambodia during the Vietnam war. He was never held accountable for his role in that carnage. On the contrary he became an intellectual and a reputable adviser guiding many subsequent administrations, including George Bush's in world of diplomacy. Henry Kissinger was born to German Jewish parents and was a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Oliver North is the only individual that comes to mind in the recent past who was ever tried for war related indiscretions. He was given a tap on the wrist and let go. America will never ratify the ICC for its closet of "War Criminals" is much too large for comfort.

So when America celebrates its democracy and freedoms and applauds its justice system for being fair and impartial, when it comes to its war criminals, it has always been no different then most dictatorships. When George Bush says he would still take us into war given the circumstances he was in, he by default acknowledges that in the two years of hibernation he still has not regained any sense of history. He also by default admits that he lied to the American public and congress. Maybe for him a sense of history is too heavy a load to carry as it clouds his "simplistic" methods of arriving at his "Decision Points".

This week Jean-Pierre Bemba, former vice-president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, went on trial at the ICC. Bemba is charged with three counts of war crimes and two counts of crimes against humanity for the alleged atrocities committed by about 1,500 fighters of his Congolese Liberation Movement (MLC) in 2002-03. What is unprecedented about this trial is that, while it may seem like this is just another proverbial mad black man in the dock, for the first time in the history of international justice a military commander is on trial for indirect criminal responsibility for rape and murder committed by his fighters.

Many people in America refer to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as a "mistake". Any war that leads to the death of countless individuals can never be called a mistake. It is too frivolous a word to characterize the deaths of so many innocent people. In the real world one goes to jail or hangs for making such mistakes.

A mistake of this nature can only be called an "immoral war crime". It is what it is.

Lost in the Noise

2010-10-15T08:16:00.000-07:00

November 2nd is election day in America. All 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives and 38 seats in the Senate are up for re-election. The battle lines are drawn and half way into his term President Obama's influence hangs in the balance. Currently the Democratic party is in control of the House and the Senate with a narrow margin. The verdict is already out in the media. Come November it is predicted that the balance of power will shift, largely as a protest vote against the ruling party and the president.

Balance of power shifting midway through a presidency is not uncommon. The Democratic party under President Clinton lost control of both houses half way through his first term. Two years later he came back to win a second term with a resounding victory. While history could repeat itself, it must not be taken lightly, as the variables always matter. With the current president those variables are quite diverse and complicated.

American democracy, loudly proclaims it is "of the people, by the people and for the people", but gives very little choice to its citizens to exercise that right. With only two parties to chose from, there is only marginal diversity of opinion to be found. And that makes all the difference. Everything as a result gets defined in rather absolute terms as either left or right, liberal or conservative, FOX or MSNBC so on and so forth. While the diversity in human opinion is always gray, the opportunity to express that complexity seems to be diminishing drastically, especially in a world polarized by gut reaction and not informed thought. As a result, the notion of what is "right" in good conscience in relation to values of justice, life and liberty are pushed to the extremities.

Out of this aberration has spawned a group of people who like to call themselves a "movement" naming themselves after a seminal protest moment that took place in 1773, the Boston Tea Party. They call themselves the "Tea Party" and have emerged as a political force carved out within the Republican party. Helped along by some prominent TV and Radio talk show hosts, loaded financial backers and savvy campaigners they have garnered enough support among a certain class of American society to shake up this election. With President Obama as their pinata and a political ideology ranging from the absurd to the plain nonsensical they have captured the imagination of an electorate who find themselves having to make a choice as always between the devil and the deep blue sea.

As many as 138 Tea Party candidates are taking part in the election this year. Instead of forming their own political party, and being grass roots independent as they claim to be, they have decided to be part of the Republican party. Historically a third party in the United States has never been viable. Primarily due to an inability to raise money and influence on a national scale to take part in the mud slinging that has become so much a part of the debating arena. Also many of the views harbored by the Tea Party candidates resonate within the echelons of the Republican party. Those within the party that nurse those views are just too afraid to openly claim them for fear of a backlash. So it is only prudent for them to endorse Tea Party candidates and test the waters and capitalize on the malaise that has set into the voting population as a result of the way the country seems to be going. A perfect marriage of means.

The Tea Party on the surface seems to have mobilized in response to the government's policies of bail outs, stimulus spending, intrusion of individual freedoms by mandating health care, burdening the future generation with a massive debt and the high unemployment rate. All debatable issues which have been a symptom of almost every other administration since time began. But underneath the facade they stand for some radical policies. The obvious being anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-immigration, anti-global warming and pro-gun, and the rest that comes with the package. Then there are those on the fringe who want to get rid of entire federal departments including the Department of Education and the IRS, and want to privatize social security and repeal Obama's health care bill. While everyone criticizes spending by the current administration not a single candidate supports any cuts in the defense budget that has long been a source of financial drain. Everyone unanimously want the wealthiest Americans to keep getting wealthier at the cost of an even more expanding deficit. Then the candidates themselves are quite colorful in every way. Overwhelmingly white, they range from Nazi impersonators, to witch craft dabblers to just outright racists.

Another thing the Tea Party, the Republicans and commentators such as Anne Coulter and Glenn Beck have been very successful at, is phrasing inaccuracies and falsehoods as facts and denigrating the fact checkers by branding them the "liberal media". By blowing their horn on the airwaves and confidently speaking lies masked as facts they have been effective in subverting the debate and painting the Democrats as socialists turning America into a European style nation. Anne Coulter, a woman who has made a career out of being offensive and in your face, has gone so far as to calling the Iraq war the "just war" and applauding George Bush for it and calling the Afghan war Obama's Vietnam (which it might as well have defacto become) and blaming him for bungling it when George Bush had in fact got it right.

When the Tea Party supporters came out of the wood work and started gathering across the nation the Democrats did not pay much attention. They thought the screaming dogs would die their own death and responding to them was below ones dignity. When thousands showed up at the Washington mall heeding a call by the right wing talk show host on the Fox network Glenn Beck, people stood up and paid attention. And now with the media at large calling the Tea Party candidates a force to reckon with and the threat of them forming their own caucus within the Republican party in the House and the Senate becoming very real, everyone is running helter-skelter trying to do some last minute damage control. The President, his wife and his Vice-President have rolled up their sleeves and have hit the campaign trail hoping to revive some of their "Obama-08" magic two weeks before D-day. It may already be too late.

If this election is a referendum on the two years of Obama's presidency, it is a bit premature. Yes he inherited a mess for which he is being blamed, but two years in, he has no choice but to take ownership, and that he has. If there is one failure that could be attributed to his Presidency, it is his inability to connect with the nation at large like he did as a candidate. The great unifier seems to have fallen victim to the political forces of division. He was propelled into the stratosphere by an overblown romance between his persona and the media. He was wrongly portrayed as the Messiah who would lead us to the promised land with his professorial ability to work across the aisle. His preacher like speeches and slogans such as "Yes We Can" made us all heady with over optimism, but it was certain that he would be heading into some difficult terrain once inauguration day came. Yet on record he has fared better than most and got a significant amount done, but some how failed to drive his accomplishments home to the public. He even cut taxes for 95% of Americans which should make him and his party popular in an election year, but even that has largely gone unnoticed in the noise. There is no doubt he has left many who would rise again for him disenchanted. Guantanamo Bay still remains open for business, the wars rage on, civil liberties still have not been fully restored since they were compromised by the Patriot Act, War and Wall Street criminals who brought American to ruin still roam free while new ones join their ranks, the peace talks in the middle east have stalled- yet again and even though wall street seems to be having a field day and the recession is "officially over" the high unemployment rate stubbornly eats away at his statistical popularity.

If this election is a protest vote against President Obama it is highly misplaced. If it is a protest vote against his policies, we have not seen them bear fruit yet. If this is about the right rallying its forces to victory, with an element of prejudice at its core, then it is time to counter that force, and do the right thing come election day. The way democracy works around the world is, at the end of the day, one eventually gets what one deserves. It is what it is.

A September Pause

2010-09-19T10:58:00.000-07:00

Every year as the sun rises on September 11, as a New Yorker I take pause. I am sure every New Yorker who was here that ill fated day nine years ago does the same. We all look up to the sky and remember that clear blue brilliant day that quickly turned black and gray. This year as the images of that calamity spark and flash in my mind, I sadly find that the poison that spewed out of "ground zero" that horrendous day, continues to make its way through the world with no end in sight.

Nine years ago, almost three thousand lives were cut short in downtown New York City. Since then the killings have not stopped. Countless have perished in the unholy and unjust wars that erupted soon after, and untold more are exterminated everyday as the conflicts see no prospects of stalling. If there is one person who can fly a banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished" it is Osama Bin Laden.

If in fact Osama Bin Laden was behind the attack on the World Trade Center, and if his mission was to bring the west to its knees, his operation has been a tremendous success and continues to bear fruit. The mayhem that ensued after 9/11 successfully drew a mighty nation to squander its treasures and nine years later, more or less has brought it to its knees. The two wars have drawn a debt ridden America deeper into the abyss. The economies of other western nations are in deep recession struggling to rebuild from the verge of total collapse. Young men and women have given their lives to fight wars in response to a threat of a nebulous entity called Al Qaeda. The lives of Muslims and Non-Muslims in the hundreds of thousands around the world have been tragically cut short by drones, car bombs and IEDs questioning who the real terrorist is. The name Al Qaeda still strikes fear and justifies the continuation of conflict and human rights violations in impoverished corners of the world hardening young people to blow themselves up in the name of "God".

Nineteen men on a Kamikaze mission changed humanity like never before. They altered the way we live and perceive one another. The fact that they were of Muslim descent and from a Muslim nation launched a quasi battle between religions and faiths, which years later still poisons and clouds the way people view their fellow human being. The suspicion of the other is profound. The successful and failed violent attacks, by nations and terrorists make the situation worse, maintaining a high degree of mistrust that sees no border.

While the wars rage on, the west believes it lives by a higher code of ethics which are constantly tested. They feel that their most cherished freedoms and ideals of thought and expression are in jeopardy and under attack. Therefore the right wing elements in the west are taking on the militant Muslim world on their own terms. In the process not only demonizing a whole group by the actions of their most extreme but also projecting a narrow view of themselves. The recent irrational and misguided protests against the building of a legitimate Islamic center in lower Manhattan and the attention given to an insane individual by the name of Terry Jones who calls himself a pastor, who threatened to burn a few Korans to grab publicity, shows that the healing is far from over. Infact it has has barely begun, as the wedge of ignorance gets driven even deeper. And the response in the Muslim world was all too familiar. Burning of the American flag and calling for Jihad and death to America. Even in flood ravaged Pakistan some people found time to show their customary anger.

So where to we begin to think beyond hatred and suspicion and not play into what the media chooses to highlight? When do we truly honor the Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Jews, Atheists and the rest who want to just live and not bring their beliefs into the public sphere to cause friction? When do we recognize that sixty Muslims died in the twin tower mass destruction and their flesh and blood was no different and the grief of their loved ones is as real?

It is election season in America. It is that time of the year when candidates reveal their true nature or say things they don't really mean to speak to their base in an attempt to corner votes. It is also that time of the year when people in power suddenly restart dormant polices to grab attention. This month President Obama kick started the Middle East peace process. Something that has become customary for every President to give it a shot. Only to seem engaged and caring about something that is at the center of all hatred the Muslim world has for the west. "The Tea Party" supporters came out in big numbers to support an agenda that has an unnerving fascist underbelly, blaming President Obama for everything they could put their finger on.

As September drew near there came an overwhelming sense of perceived mistrust and hatred of Muslims in America. A fear of marginalization not seen since the Japanese Americans were subjected to internment camps in the 1940s. In the blaring noise of the media ramblings of the likes of Glenn Beck of Fox News and the polling by other media outlets things seemed like they were spinning out of control. The more disheartening aspect of the circus was the refusal of right minded people to come and vociferously speak out against the poison that was rapidly permeating. Even President Obama trotted guardedly on this issue buckling to misguided political advise. The main casualty was the character of a nation which despite all its failings had always spoken for the voiceless, and now had found itself cowering.

Was this recent whipping up of ethnic hatred only a minor blip in America's conscience, as it grapples with its declining prosperity, trying to find an answer when the response stares it in its face? Or was it a preview of things to come. One would only have to wait and see as the future unravels. Until then the wars rage on with words in this country and with bombs in other less fortunate ones.

This week peacemaker laureate President Obama's administration signed a historic arms deal with a despotic regime. The 90 billion dollar decade long arms deal is America's biggest ever weapons sale period. While we deplore Iran for following medieval methods, resorting to stoning its women as punishment for adultery, we shake hands with Saudi Arabia which delivers justice in the same draconian ways. And lest you forget the 19 Kamikaze who flew airplanes on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia and not Iraq or Afghanistan. One of the reasons Bin Laden presumably attacked the United States is because he detested its presence his nation and the unholy relationship it has with its ruling family. And so make no mistake. The end to this war nine years in the making, is no where close at hand. Even the blind can see the hypocrisy of power. It is what it is.

To Do the Right Thing

2010-08-26T11:20:00.000-07:00

For the past few months I have been directing a documentary film with my mentor and colleague about a remarkable individual by the name of John W. Jones. John was a product of two hundred years of free labor that gave America a head start in the world, "slavery". Born on a plantation in Leesburg, Virginia in 1817, John W. Jones sought freedom at the age of twenty seven when his owner Sarah Elzy, who took good care of him was in ill health. Instead of freeing him she decided to transfer him to a relative. For a slave this was reason enough to escape, as the future lay uncertain and the threat of being separated from family and being violently abused was great.

John's grandmother had always pointed at the geese flying north, and filled his imagination with stories of freedom and opportunity. So one night he decided to follow the geese. With four of his brothers in tow he made a run. With only a shirt on his back he took on a daunting journey north on foot. Traveling mostly by night guided by the stars, dodging bounty hunters, on rafts and freight trains, seeking shelter in safe houses that made up the Underground Railroad, he arrived three hundred miles later, in Elmira, New York. It was 1844 and Elmira was booming.

For most runaway slaves Canada was the final destination but for John, Elmira became home. With the help of some formidable white abolitionists of the time, John started his life as a sextant at the local First Baptist Church. He taught himself to read and write and established himself as an honorable black man in a white man's world.

A few years later civil war broke out and Elmira became a site for one of the largest prison camps of its time. The Elmira Prison Camp soon came to be known as "Helmira" and was the Abu Garaib of its time. Twelve thousand confederate soldiers were packed into a camp made for three thousand. They were made to live in squalor under canvas tents most often on paltry rations. Within a year three thousand prisoners died of disease, cold weather, poor medical attention and hunger. It so happened that since John was a sextant he was handed the job of burying the dead. While it was the norm to just discard the dead in unmarked ditches- as they were the enemy, John W. Jones out of his own christian kindness decided to give each soldier a proper burial. He gave each a coffin and a wooden gravestone on which he recorded their name, regiment and company. He maintained a meticulous log and enclosed the same information in a bottle and placed it inside the coffin. He received $2.50 for each body he buried. John became a wealthy man by giving a Christian burial to the very people who were fighting to keep the unchristian system of slavery alive.

John lived at a time when photography was in its early experimental stage and the magic of moving images was just being invented. As a black man his encounter with technology of this nature was highly unlikely. Yet there exists one photograph taken during his halcyon old days. What endure are stories and the three thousand marble pointed grave stones at the Woodlawn National Cemetery that speak of his great deeds. So when we decided to make a film about him, we knew there was not much to go with in terms of archival material. We knew he was no intellectual like Frederick Douglas who left behind great writings. And we were not interested in making a Ken Burns style opus. We wanted to catch John W. Jones' ghost blowing in the wind. We wanted to find out for ourselves if his spirit still inhabited the land that he traversed. We wanted to find out if anyone had ever heard of this man, who had helped more than 800 slaves escape to freedom through the Underground Railroad. The only way to find out was to walk in his steps.

So with a camera in hand we decided to take the journey from Leesburg to Elmira. Walking on foot was out of question. 300 miles was a long distance, time was of the essence and we were not brave enough to walk the woods by night. So we decided to do what Americans do. Rent an automobile and burn some fossil fuel.

From research we plotted the journey he possibly would have taken and the towns he must have touched along the way. Our plan was to spontaneously stop in these towns and ask people on the street, in cafes, churches, porches, farms and factories if they knew if the Underground Railroad passed through their town and if it did had anyone ever heard of a man called John W. Jones. Our mission was two fold. To find out if people in fact knew their place in history and if they didn't, we felt compelled to enlighten them with the tale of this great man who lived more than a century ago. A man who did the right thing strictly out of good conscience, when all that was expected of him was to stay alive.

We started in Leesburg, Virginia by just walking down a street and pointing a camera at a group of people lounging on a sunny porch. They were keenly aware of the role Virginia had played in the business of slavery. In 1860 one out of every four families in Virginia owned slaves. They also enlightened us with a lesser known fact that Leesburg was the capital of the nation for a day. But they had not heard of John W. Jones and were moved by his story. Then we met Dr. Deborah Lee who knew everything there was to know about this man. She had the journeys of slaves seeking freedom cataloged in her book titled Honoring Their Paths. A page in her book was dedicated to John W.Jones.

She drove us to the very plantation John had seen the geese fly north and then walked us to a thicket on a rolling meadow. Inside the overgrown bush lay grave stones which were hard to reach. The marked ones, which we could not see as they were deep in the bush, belonged to John W. Jones' owner Sally Elzy and her family. The unmarked ones which were on the outer rim of the site, Deborah said belonged to the slaves who served them. John. W. Jones' mother lay under one of the plain gray stones sticking out of the ground.

Next we stopped at a majestic mansion on the Oatlands Plantation a few miles from the grave site. The view from the verandah of the building was breathtaking. Perched on a hill the mansion looked down on lush green rolling meadows and ridges as far as the eyes could see. Deborah pointed in the distance and said John would have worked here and crossed those meadows on his way to freedom. The plantation grounds and the mansion today are a popular destination for lavish weddings. While I could appreciate the beauty of the place, the elegance was definitely undermined by the despicable history that lay beneath.

Our next stop was in another small historic town in Fauquier County a few miles from Leesburg. "The Plains" is a quaint little town on the Virginia Civil War trail. Surrounded by lush green farms and meadows the air there was certainly special. We stopped at the only local cafe which claimed the actor Robert Duvall as a neighbor and a regular. Speaking to the young men and women working there we were surprised to find how aware they were of their towns history, especially its relationship to the Underground Railroad. One of them directed us to a farm which had remnants of slave quarters. The bare walls made from irregular stones and mud, spoke volumes of the condition the people lived in and why seeking freedom was inevitable for some.

Outside the coffee shop we ran into a black man with a limp, who seemed like a permanent fixture of that street, and everyone knew him by his first name. He had lived there for fifty years or more and had worked on local farms and had experienced segregation. When we told him what we were doing he directed us to an old lady up the hill who knew a lot about that time. We walked into a cluttered modest house. A grand old slender lady in her nineties sat on a sofa in her nightgown. The smell of cigarette was thick and Oprah was on TV. Surrounded by a sickly overweight daughter in a wheel chair and a gaggle of grand and great grand children she listened to the John W. Jones tale. She nodded her head and refused to speak to the camera, for fear of her soul being snatched. She mentioned her parents being "share croppers" and you could tell she had a good idea what it was to be a child of a slave, but did not want to talk about it. And so we moved on.

We then visited Karen Hughs and Jane Butler down the road. They had created a museum in tribute of the Afro-American history in Faquier Country. From Africa to Obama the whole black experience was captured in their little museum with photographs, model recreations and framed artifacts. They had also assembled genealogical data on slave families and were successful in tracing their own roots back to some of the families that lived and worked in the area. Interviewing them in front of an actual cage that was used to transport slaves on ships from Africa was eyeopening. For them the emotions of what was done to their ancestors centuries ago was raw and very present.

We drove north along the Susquehanna river on route 15, which in the old days was known as the "Old Carolina Road". Slaves and others traveling north from Virginia took that road touching small towns, jumping on and off barges and trains leading them north where opportunity lay. The drive was picturesque with the river on the left and thick forests covering the landscape far and wide. Meandering through small towns and meeting town historians who all had something special to add to our quest, we arrived in Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania.

Not having a plan, we decided to walk down a street in a predominantly black neighbor hood and speak to residents lounging on stoops. We met a grand old lady reading a book on her porch. She was initially hesitant to speak to us, as we had caught her at a time when her hair was undone, but after some persuasion and listening to the John W. Jones story she opened up. Moments later her daughter entered the scene and enquired if she had told us the story of "George?". We wondered who this George was. We later found it was none other than the first president George Washington. She claimed he had fathered children in her ancestry. She certainly had some albumin in her pigment.

Next we arrived at a church down the road. It was seven in the evening and some parishioners were hobbling into the basement in time for bible reading. It was a mixed crowd, but the flavor was certainly black. A poster of President Obama in a cowboy hat hung on the bulletin board with the words "There's a New Sheriff in Town". When the sermon began you realized Jesus was certainly the only sheriff in this town and salvation was only guaranteed if you lead him into your heart. After bible business we gathered around for a tête-à-tête. No one had heard of John W. Jones but his story did strike a chord and the debate heated up when we posed the question "Have we come a long way from Africa to Obama?". The responses were as varied as the crowd. But there was a unified voice that said yes we had come a long way, but the culture of hate and racism had not gone far.

Through out our journey we posed the "Africa to Obama" question and we got some surprising answers. As John W. Jones in his way had conquered a frontier to freedom, there is no question that the election of Obama was a trailblazing moment not to be taken lightly. But what we have seen since his election is a meteoric rise in the divisive rhetoric of fear and hate. The forces of intolerance that dogged John W. Jones seem to be alive today in a different shade waiting for a moment to engulf us again. From the recent push to abolish the fourteenth amendment and the lynch mob pandemonium against the proposed construction of an Islamic center in lower Manhattan, it seems like the bullhorn is again in the hands of some lunatics who insist on leading the blind.

Our journey for the time being ended in Elmira at the final resting place of John W. Jones at the Woodlawn Cemetary. He and his family lie under a shady dogwood tree a few feet from Mark Twain and the three thousand soldiers he buried with kindness, civility and humanity. To appreciate the life of John W. Jones and draw inspiration, one only has to look within and question what it means "to do the right thing" when all that is expected of you is to only exist. It is what it is.

Dictator Dressing

2010-07-25T07:34:00.000-07:00

There was a time when nations stood for an ideal. There was a time when governments believed in the values of democracy. There was a time when politics was not only about self interest but about the common good. There was a time when nations around the world worked together to see that power was decentralized for the benefit of humanity. Or was there ever such a time? Was the gift of democracy ever delivered to us with transparency and promise?

As the world's largest democracy rolls out a red carpet to welcome one of the world's foremost violators of human rights and democracy, one wonders if there is hope for change. The President and Prime Minister of India play host this week to General Than Shwe, the head of the Military Junta that has ruled Burma with brutality for the past forty years. India has cultivated close diplomatic and military ties with Burma over the past decade to pursue economic and security interests and counterbalance China's growing clout in the country, which sits between the two Asian super powers.

Working with dictators has always been seen as a strategic move and has been rationalized by democracies through out history. The idea that isolation makes dictatorships dig in, there by punishing their citizenry even more has been a very valid argument. The people of Iraq during Saddam Hussein's regime had suffered a great deal due to sanctions. Most often dictatorships are measured by the rhetoric and policy of their leadership. If they are pro-western or pro-business they are often welcome. If they are hard line communist, left wing or overtly megalomaniacal they are shunned and isolated.

Being a beacon of democracy, America has had a very disturbing and complicated relationship with dictators all around the world. It has worked with the worst violators always justifying by using the phrase "national interest". Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet, Suharto, Mobutu, Papa Doc, Zai-Ul-Haq, Parvez Musharaf are just a few the American government has toyed with. There is also evidence that the United States business establishment had dealings with Nazi Germany, before they were dragged into the war. The problems America faces in Afghanistan and Pakistan are partly because of their policy of dictator dabbling. Through the past two centuries, European nations have propped up dictators through out Africa, Asia and the Middle East. The repercussion of those actions are felt even today with disastrous consequences.

Working with a dictator is always easier than working with a democracy as there is no approval process involved. There is no lag time. There is no congress, senate or opposition party to ratify agreements. All you need is to convince that one man at the top, lure him with either money or political support and he will get the job done. Or offer a cozy business relationship as in the case of China (a communist dictatorship) and lo and behold you have a win win situation. But as we have seen through out history any relationship based on pure selfish interest, comes at a great cost, most often a genocidal cost.

India sites three main reasons to be doing business with a despotic regime. It wants Burma's huge natural gas deposits to support its burgeoning middle class' hunger for an American lifestyle. It wants influence to counter China's unilateral push for dominance in the region. Political instability in its north western states are fueled from Burmese territory and India wants that stopped. For this India is willing to undermine its own history and character, and is willing to turn a blind eye to an individual it has given its highest civilian honor. The undisputed leader of the democratic movement, Aung Sung Suu Kyi, 14 years later, is still under house arrest and has been barred from taking part in a sham election that takes place this year. She has dissolved her party in protest as the world looks on.

By giving the Burmese dictator legitimacy, India compromises the very foundation it was built upon. By having a business/military relationship with a dictatorship India lowers its standing as a democracy. Apartheid ended in South Africa because nations around the world banded together and refused to do business with a repressive regime. Mahatma Gandhi brought the British regime to its knees by partly disrupting its business enterprise. And here is a nation founded on a legacy of fighting oppression, providing business opportunity to a Military Junta that grossly oppresses its own people.

The ruling party in India today, The Congress Party, was spearheaded during the freedom struggle by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, who are considered the founding fathers of the nation. It is their party that is appeasing this dictator today. With this decision India might as well abandon referring to Mahatma Gandhi as its founding father. As this desecrates the ubiquitous garlanded photo frame of Bapu, that dresses every government establishment across the nation. By rolling out a red carpet to a dictator, India dishonors all those who have sacrificed to uphold the one quality that defines us as humans "freedom". It is what it is.

Catastrophe

2010-06-07T19:10:00.000-07:00

As the Gulf of Mexico turns into a cesspool and the rainbow sheen on a once blue ocean enrages everyone with a conscience, what next- is the question on everyone's mind. The live video of oil gushing out and the discrepancies in the estimated volume polluting the pristine waters on a daily basis only make things more excruciating. As the disturbing images of birds imprisoned in brown goo remind us of the curse of oil, another monumental industrial catastrophe from the past is in the news once again.

Twenty five years ago on a dreadful December night in 1984, a deadly gas leaked into the air from an American owned chemical plant, in the city of Bhopal in northern India. The horror of what transpired that night can never be put into words. The nightmares are still fresh in the scorched eyes of its victims, and the memories never seem to fade and the pain is relentless. More than 20,000 people have perished since that night. Some died instantly, some over the years and some continue to die and others are yet to be born. The ghost that killed that night was Methyl Isocyanide (MIC) and some of the people who created it and stored it in a congested urban center were sentenced to two years in prison by a court in Bhopal this month. It took the system twenty three years to pin the blame on eight Indian men. As expected the CEO of Union Carbide, Warren Hastings, now an old man, was not among the eight. Union Carbide does not exist anymore. It was bought by Dow Chemicals thus absolving the American officials of some of the crime. There are cases pending against the American officials in US courts for the past twenty five years that have amounted to nothing. Extradition requests for Warren Anderson are still being perused. The Bhopal court fined the convicted members of the Indian unit of Union Carbide Rs 500,000 ($11,ooo) each. All the convicts applied for bail immediately after sentencing and their request was duly granted.

As oil gushes into the gulf, and marine and avian life is decimated, it is impossible to ignore the parallels between the two tragedies. In both cases multinational corporations are to blame. And failure of oversight is the primary recipe for disaster. Bhopal still haunts us two decades later and so will this disaster. We cannot even begin to comprehend the fall out of this new human engineered calamity. Another catastrophe stemming from greed and callousness, where profit trumps safety and the sanctity of life. In the Gulf the human toll is less direct. All that is lost so far is livelihood and the food that it produces for human consumption. The catastrophe in Bhopal questioned the way we live. The rape of the Gulf of Mexico will question the motives for our unending addiction to oil for generations to come.

As the pundits begin to estimate what the clean up will cost and whether BP will survive this calamity financially and as Wall Street predicts BP's buy out, the parallels between Bhopal and the Gulf become even more eerily similar. When Union Carbide realized what had happened in Bhopal, they figured they could throw money at the problem and cut their losses. And so they did. In 1989 they agreed on a settlement and paid out $490 million. The Indian government had asked for $3.3 billion. Unfortunately the settlement for the victims amounted to very little as the pool was too large. Each ended up getting as little as $1000 as compensation. In the present situation BP is doling out huge sums of money to help the fishermen and the coastal communities directly affected by the spill. The President has vowed to go after the company, and has launched a criminal investigation. Whether anyone will go to jail for this, is yet to be seen. The clean up costs are estimated to be close to $23 billion and BP has vowed to take on the expense. An escrow account of $20 billion dollars has been set up to handle all claims as long as they last.

Whether BP will survive this financial burden is to be seen. What is glaring is the disparity in the way this disaster is being handled. Since this tragedy is unfolding in the continental United States the pressure to take responsibility is immense. In Bhopal, twenty five years later, the dodging game still continues and the victims are still fighting for justice. If a disaster like Bhopal were to take place in the west, the outcomes would have been monumentally different. Life is cheap if you are poor. Partly to blame is the Indian government, that pushed for a lighter sentence as they were fearful of the negative impact it would have on foreign investment. A similar sentiment is being expressed by some congressmen and senators in the United States establishment.

What is astonishing is that the disaster unfolding in the Gulf is not the first of its kind. On 3rd June 1979 there was a similar explosion on the Ixtoc rig off the coast of Mexico. This explosion spilled three million barrels of oil into the ocean and its effects are still glaringly present in the ecosystem of the region. Some scientists beg to differ but fishermen have to travel far into the ocean to find their catch. They never had to do that before oil hit their shores. This rig was drilling only at a depth of 11,000 feet below sea level when disaster struck. The Deep Water Horizon was meddling a mile below the ocean surface and two miles below the sea bed. According to a recent New York Times article The Niger Delta in Africa has endured the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez spill every year for 50 years by some estimates. The oil pours out nearly every week, and the swamps are long since lifeless. Children play in oil soaked puddles and the ground water has turned to poison. The largest American company in the world Exxon-Mobil is the culprit here and does not payout compensations anywhere close to what BP is being asked to in the Gulf. So much for the double standards in the era of globalization.

Some 25 years after the gas leak in Bhopal, 390 tonnes of toxic chemicals abandoned at the plant continue to leak and pollute the groundwater in the region. Though there is some dispute as to whether the chemicals still stored at the site pose any continuing health hazard there is clear evidence that the violators got away without even cleaning up the mess. I don't think BP is going anywhere, and I don't think a thorough clean up is even possible.

What stands out from all of the above observations and all that is being unearthed about BP and its recklessness, is that big corporations care about one thing alone, PROFIT. When governments, whose job is to safeguard the public fail, we have a recipe for calamity. When there is collusion between corporations and governments, then all that are left are wastelands, making the citizenry impotent and emaciated. Whether this systemic problem can be fixed is questionable. Even as President Obama tries to salvage the situation the best he humanly can, he is being accused by the right of "shaking down" the corporations, which visa-vie is not good for America and Capitalism. It never seems to amaze me, that no matter the cost we pay for our kamikaze ways, politics always divides us in the face of adversity and trumps the severity of the situation at hand.

As the doomsday scenario unfolds in the Gulf, one cannot help question the validity of human addiction to oil. From wars to eco-disasters oil is the plague that spurs ruin, yet it touches us daily in the most innocuous ways. There are more than two hundred products in an average household that are directly derived from petroleum. So where and when do we begin to see that we are in quicksand and the rope that can pull us out is shredded. Humans tend to act when there is catastrophe, or they tend not to, no matter what. Already the oil industry is contesting the six month moratorium on deep water drilling with some success. Change is discomforting and as a result deadly slow. If we can think that we can conquer this latest catastrophe and go back to the ways of the past, think again. This time the genie is not going back into the bottle. It is what it is.

Smoking Bomb

2010-05-11T06:41:00.000-07:00

May 1, 2010, it is crowded in Times Square as usual. Wide eyed tourists all dazzled by the neon, whose glow is claimed to be visible from outer space, strain their necks upwards. At around 6:30 PM an unassuming T-Shirt vendor looks sideways and spots a smoking SUV parked on 45th street and alerts the police. And so begins an all to0 familiar chain of events. The 24/7 madness of the news media is put into motion. Soon live pictures of Times Square engulf TV screens across the nation. A robot is deployed from a distance. It becomes apparent it is a car bomb.

Within hours we find out the bomb is made up of a Nissan Pathfinder, gasoline, propane tanks, firecrackers, simple alarm clocks and eight bags of a granular substance, later determined to be nonexplosive grade of fertilizer, inside a 55-inch-tall metal gun locker. Enough to cause significant damage and put a city on edge which has seen the worst. And so begins a manhunt and media speculation runs amok. The usual suspects are all named. Al Qaeda, Taliban, Right wing militia, Home grown terrorists and everyone else in between. Without a shred of evidence at hand, everyone with two cents to add goes on the record on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC and FOX. Some say the target was the Viacom building because of a Mohammad joke on their comedy show "South Park" that did not go down well earlier that month. Others are trying to track down a man seen on close circuit TV taking off his shirt close to the bomb site. 53 hours later a man is pulled off an Emirates flight to Dubai. The "Times Square Bomber" is found and Attorney General Eric Holder announces with pride, that the man has confessed to the act.

The Muslim community cringes as the name Faisal Shahzad is announced. They were hoping for a Timothy McVeigh, but no such luck. Pictures of a fresh fair faced young man with a glowing smile are plastered across every TV screen and newspaper and an ominous sketch of a distraught man of Pakistani descent turned terrorist is painted. We find out he is a naturalized citizen, who like many immigrants from the subcontinent came as a student on an F1 visa. We find out about his prominent family roots, broken marriage, his financial distress, his trips to Pakistan, the possibility of the Pakistani Taliban getting to his head and his newly cultivated pencil thin beard. These days any facial hair on brown skin is enough to brand you as a possible suspect. Faisal is read his Miranda rights, much to the displeasure of Senator John McCain and his creed, and is locked away in a maximum security cell in Manhattan. What we learn from here on about Faisal, is through carefully managed official disclosures from the FBI and the Justice Department and weak media reporting based on hear say and interviews of people he supposedly knew here in Connecticut and in his hometown in Pakistan.

The bomb if ignited could have killed with deadly impact. The morbidity and seriousness of this act cannot be discounted. But since Times Square was not in Iraq or Afghanistan, where a failure to ignite would have gone unreported, the outcome had unintended consequences. It became rife material for comedy. From John Stewart, Saturday Night Live to David Letterman were all getting laughs making fun of the alleged bomber, his name, his looks and his failure to succeed. Secretary Hillary Clinton was on "60 Minutes" saying she would come down hard on Pakistan if any links were to be established. Senator Joe Lieberman proposed introducing a bill that would strip residents of their citizenship if any link to terrorists or organizations deemed dangerous by the United States government were to be found, and so on and so forth.

What emerged from mere observation as a lay person who is not swept by printed words or sound bytes, was that Faisal's actions- if indeed he is the man behind the bomb-were that of a distraught man who had lost his bearings and resorted to violence to make a point. A list of such people in recent American history runs long. His motivations could definitely have been influenced by Jihadist rhetoric and other anti-American propaganda which is unusually wide spread outside the continental United States. But whether he was a trained assassin, sent on a mission, seems highly unlikely. A person on a mission in today's world, would have sat in the SUV until it exploded or would have been a little more skilled at putting together an explosive device.

Faisal Shazad joins a long list of men with a Muslim name, who have been detained for either hatching terror plots or coming close to executing one, as in this case. Every time some one is put away by the FBI, politicians come out of the woodwork proclaiming that there is a very present threat of people attacking the United States because they are jealous of "our way of life". Even President Obama did not stop short of expressing this sentiment this time. I guess it resonates with the masses and helps demonize the unknown and the unfamiliar. I always wonder what they mean by "our way of life". The rationale that was given for illegally invading Iraq and Afghanistan was largely because "our way of life" was under threat. Does "our way of life" mean consuming to the point where we endanger the planet, does it mean dominating the planet with economic and military force or does it mean our cherished freedoms. Most often the word "freedom" is evoked in conjunction with this phrase. The terrorists hate our "freedom" and therefore we must protect it, even if it means going to war in far of lands destroying other's freedoms under the guise of bringing freedom and democracy. The people who actually threaten "our way of life" are the very politicians who do the fear mongering and shred the constitution when it is convenient. Under the Bush administration "our way of life" was grossly violated for eight years using the Patriot Act. Innocent people paid with their blood and continue to do so and these home grown suited terrorists are yet to be brought to justice. When Senator John McCain speaks out against Miranda rights and Joe Lieberman attempts to sign into law a bigoted bill and the state of Arizona passes a racist law, that is when "our way of life" is threatened. But that threat is never seen as dangerous by a majority as it is violent only to the powerless.

The Jihadist terrorists who attack the United States do so because they have a bone to pick with the United States government and its checkered history. They see the United States government's double standards to hold on to global power and influence undermining the very democracy it touts. They see the US making deals with dictators and illegitimate undemocratic regimes as it has done recently in the case of Afghanistan and Pakistan. They are keenly aware of the US and its relationship with Israel and how it never comes through in solving the Palestinian stalemate while millions live in sub-human conditions in the newest concentration camp called Gaza. While there is no excuse for the violence terrorists resort to, to make themselves noticed and heard, by the same token as Arundathi Roy says "there is no terrorism like state terrorism". While the extreme Jihadists given a chance would like the whole world governed by Sharia law, I think they are really not attacking us because of the freedoms we enjoy. They are attacking because they envision us to have criminally overstepped our boundaries, and they can find good reasoning and rhetoric to use that argument as a powerful message. A message people are willing to give their lives for. It is a battle of interpretations, of how they see the world, and the way the west wants the world to be.

As Faisal Shahzad gets his day in court, another terrorist with a Muslim name Mohammed Ajmal Kasab is sentenced to death in an Indian court for killing innocent civilians in Bombay in 2008. People in India are lining up to hang him, as if to take part in a noble cause. The cycle of violence continues, as more join the ranks of Jihad, motivated by violence and extreme ideology. The end of this battle is no where near as nations gear up for a response with even more violence. The "eye for an eye" method rages on while innocent people stand exposed in the line of fire. Where and when it will end no one knows.

Lance Orton the unassuming T-Shirt vendor was called on by the President and thanked for spotting the smoking bomb and alerting the police in Times Square. He was proclaimed a hero. To stop this scourge and the cycle of violence the President would also have to call on people who are on the opposite side of the divide, what he would say in that call, only he knows. As he is the peacemaker with the prize. The alternative is not working and will not work. It is what it is.

Screen Junkies

2010-04-12T08:15:00.000-07:00

After seeing my face in the mirror in the morning, the first thing I look at is my laptop screen. As the thermometer creeps along downloading twenty messages, anticipation of that one life altering set of words increases. Only to realize all I have received is junk. Then I visit the Times and BBC website for a cursory glance to catch up on the latest mass killing far from home, and then check my second email account. Then I look at my BlackBerry/iPhone to see if I missed that all important midnight call. I plug my ears with an iPod and am on my way to work. I enter the subway to join the seemingly growing population of headphone rigged fellow passengers, all staring at screens of different shapes and sizes, lost in a bubble of their own. Only programmed to jump off at their designated stop. At work I move onto to my desktop and start my all important routine, banging away at my keyboard as if conducting a symphony. Fifteen minutes later I check my Facebook page to see if an old friend dropped by. Then launch my IM window to see if anyone urgently wants to communicate. Before I know it, its lunch time and I am sitting at a table all by myself chewing down a healthy salad staring at CNN on a giant flat screen announcing the next great gadget to hit the streets, the iPad. People have been lining up since the day before to get this new mobile teat. I get back to work to see if my Apple stock went up. At the end of the day at the gym I am walking alongside people trying to keep their cholesterol in check, while typing on their Blackberry. I wonder, are we really communicating when we are communicating all the time?

I cannot remember the last time I put pen to paper to communicate in the form of a letter. Except for signing an odd check or scribbling a note on a hallmark card, pens seem to lie on my desk gathering dust. With an impressive array of gadgets to choose from to communicate, the most popular still seems to be the email. "Electronic Mail" a process by which with a tap of a key one can transmit words at lightning speed through an invisible network of computers across the world. Thus reaching someone just a few feet away or few thousand miles away. I remember engaging in this act in the early nineties in college and thinking the skies had opened up and god was speaking to me. Today email, Facebook, Instant Messaging (IM), Skype, Twitter and a host of other inter-phases glue us to screens of different sizes keeping us in a seeming state of constant contact.

The thought of being in constant contact makes us feel we are part of a community, but are we really a part of a village? Is the world really shrinking or are we fooling our selves and buying into the marketing campaigns of an electronic age. Yes the technology is trans-formative, much like a telephone was in its day, but has it now reached a point where its just becoming redundant and cluttered? Social networking sites catering to every subculture the human race can think of, crop up every second in cyberspace, beckoning people to plug in. As a result for many, privacy has become a thing of the past. To be naked is to be real. There is a bubble for everyone. There is room for the pornographer and there is space for the pious. All you need is a screen to stare into and digits to tap away. In the age of the wikipedia the world is at your finger tips, literally. What you do with it and how much you rely on it defines who you are as an individual.

Japan, South Korea and the United States are some of the most wired nations in the world. Does that mean they are communicating better than other nations therefore are they more productive? Has this proliferation of technology into every seeming aspect of life improved the way we live? Was the age of the telephone and telegram really the dark age, sort of a pre-industrial beginning to an information age? It is hard to decisively say so. While data is moving faster and therefore things are getting done at a more rapid pace, we are piling up mountains of e-waste and people are still getting lost despite their GPS. Since we can get things done faster there is an illusion that we have all this time to devote to other activities to better our lives. But when you pay close attention, it seems like things have become more frenetic round the clock. The screens have created the "working from home" phenomenon which has no boundaries. It seems like we have become slaves to screens, developing an attention deficit when we are not plugged into one. Therefore you must have a screen in the taxi, in the bar, at the gym, in every room in the house, so one feels safe, and one with the world, therefore productive.

Technology defines a generation and shapes the next that is to come. It is upto the individual to decide the role technology plays in their life and the extent to which it shapes them. But more and more it seems that choice is becoming limited giving rise to a lifestyle that is pervasive. It is okay to interrupt a conversation if the cellphone rings. It is okay to have the TV running at all times, even when you are not home. It is okay for your children to stay glued to movie screens in the car and ignore the landscape outside. It is okay to be in your bubble even when you are surrounded by humanity. As we find more and more screens introduced into our reality, and everyone is "online" all the time, finding that "offline" moment becomes more of a struggle.

My daughter who is twelve, has been trying to persuade me to get her an "iPhone", "Apple laptop" and or her own "Facebook" page. The usual her friends have one so she must have one logic is put into play. She already has a cell phone where she receives a text message every other minute from friends she sees everyday. She also has her own email account. When I ask, why "Facebook", is it not enough to be able to call, email, chat and text anytime, her response "well with "Facebook" I can always stay in touch, I can put up photos, I can make new friends and stay in touch with the old etc." While I know I can only hold out for so long before my rationale will be labeled old fashioned, in the age of "sexting" and free access to porn my fears run deep. But then again this generation will be shaped differently, with screens over riding all authority and conventional forms of knowledge in the social networking temple of the internet.

In the Disney/Pixar animated film "WALL-E", the human race in exile from planet earth are portrayed as an obese disconnected lot, plugged into an illusion of reality created by the constant presence of a screen in front of them. While it is true that for most of humanity, this is a distant vision, as their "underdevelopment" shuts them out from the benefits of the information age. But for the "developed" world it seems like we are fast approaching this vision in subtle ways. If to live means to unplug, if to stop and smell the roses means to consciously disconnect, then the question we must all ask is where are the "screens" taking us? So when you trade the tactile weight of a book to that of an iPad, don't be sold by the wonders of it, but ask do I really need another "screen" in my life? It is what it is.

The American War Movie

2010-03-13T08:27:00.000-08:00

All the wars America has been embroiled in, have brought pain, profit and global influence to a nation that does not seem to get enough. From the war against its land's natives, the Civil War to the present Iraq and Afghanistan war, conflict has defined and wounded the soul of this nation for more than two centuries. Yet America cannot relent. Always finding new ways to further its power and influence across the planet through the compelling use of its military might.

Wars have scarred the psyche of this nation by sacrificing its youth. The same wars have brought back huge profits to the military industrial complex, the bedrock of its economy. Another contribution the wars have made, is provide rich material for writers to spawn an impressive volume of books, movies, music, video games and television shows which have captivated the minds of a global audience. Cinema for one through its century long existence has shaped how the world sees America's wars and how America sees its men and women engaged in the act of war.

Movies made on the subject of war have brought us stories of heroism, horror, histrionics and angst in vivid detail. If one were to count the number of movies made in Hollywood on the subject of war since the silent era, the list would be grand. War contributes to the full range of human experience, from life unto death and all that comes in between. War brings out the monster and the hero in its participants. Therefore the "theater of war" is an obvious place to go to find stories that can sear the human imagination. But it is always the hero that is given more credence as it is complicated to confront the monster.

Charlie Chaplin's silent short film "Shoulder Arms" (1918) set in France during World War I is one of the earliest films to deal with the subject of war as a theme. From that to the recent Oscar winning "The Hurt Locker" the subject has been tackled in every incarnation possible. From comedy, drama, graphic horror to science fiction America's wars have rewarded film makers with rich material to make statements about the human condition and the insanity of its actions. Since the 1930 classic "All Quiet on the Western Front" movies about war have often been handsomely rewarded with Oscars, underscoring the importance given to movies about war and by creating a genre of its own.

Off all the wars, The Second World war and the Vietnam war have been the favorites of the Hollywood establishment. Partly because of their dramatic outcomes. The second world war was the "just war" which America won and saved the world from annihilation. The Vietnam war brought home the horrors that were much too real to bear and unpopular for the reasons we all know today. While films made on the Vietnam war by far were more honest and potent in their depiction ("Full Metal Jacket", "Apocalypse Now", "The Deer Hunter", "Platoon", "Tigerland") the ones made on the Second World War in general seemed embellished ("Casabalanca", "The Longest Day", "Kelly's Heroes", "Where Eagles Dare") even though the horrors were no different. As a result the second world war is still being milked for stories by filmmakers like Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg as they feel it was never explained in all its dimensions. Their latest epic television installment "The Pacific"- similar to their earlier contributions "Band of Brothers" and "Saving Private Ryan"- tries to set the record straight once again by showing the horror juxtaposed with heroism. The message here, lest you forget wars were and are a gruesome enterprise. There are heroes, but they are mostly dead ones and the ones who survive to tell the story become one by default.

While other warring nations such as Britain, Germany, France, Russia and Japan have made considerable number of films dealing with the subject of war they come nowhere close to America's obsession. In the last two years alone there were more than a dozen big and small films made dealing with the subject of war. Quinten Tarantino's "Inglorious Basterds" set during the second world war and Katharine Bigelow's "The Hurt Locker" set in Iraq, grabbed the most attention this year.

Almost all American films about their wars are always from an American point of view. And in most cases from the point of view of the white male soldier on the front line who is bearing the brunt of America's heroic or unjust dirty excursion. In any case the boot on the ground is most often the hero even if he is tormented by the dirty business he has to engage in to stay alive. If there is any villainy it is always attributed to secondary characters who are jealous or are plain evil and are trying to bring the good man down. The enemy most often is primitive or caricatured or is always the shadow we don't quite understand and simply don't care to. There are only a handful of films that have tried to see the war from the non-western point of view. "Letters from Iwo Jima" by Clint Eastwood, is one recent film set during the second world war that sees the war from the eyes of the Japanese. It was even made in the Japanese language.

The rationale for this is simple. It is the Americans who are making the films about their war so obviously it is going to be from their point of view, as it is only their point of view that is reported and therefore that is what they understand. But when these films drop on the rest of the world like a juggernaut, they seem to skew the way the world views America's wars. And there in lies the problem.

The recent academy award winning film "The Hurt Locker" attempts to a look at the Iraq war from a very personal American point of view but still succumbs to some conventional Hollywood cliches. It was clear right from the start that a decision was made by the storytellers to make subtle comments on the politics of war, by only focusing on its human toll. "The Hurt Locker" is a story about a soldier who's job is to disarm roadside bombs before they detonate and kill American soldiers and innocent Iraqis. So marches in our American hero putting his life on the line for the greater good of humanity. And he does it with no less flare than Rambo or Tom Cruise in Top Gun. He is macho, brash, fearless, determined, obstinate and damn right good at what he does. He has disarmed over eight hundred bombs in his short career. And that is what heroic Americans do in times of war, they put their life at risk to save the world and only they know how to do it best. And much like Rambo our bomb squad hero cannot function in the sane world so he must return to the insanity of war to get his adrenaline fix. As usual the enemy is a shadowy entity, every Iraqi on the street is suspect and no one can be trusted. While the film does capture the precariousness and unpredictability American soldiers face in Iraq, as they are an occupying force, the Iraqis just form an ever threatening backdrop. Much like Iraq and Afghanistan in reality has become to most Americans, a mere backdrop.

In many ways like the films that came before it, "The Hurt Locker" tries to capture the psychological toll wars take on its executors but falls way short in its impact. Films like "Full Metal Jacket", "Apocalypse Now" and the 2006 French film "Indigénes" did a far better job in capturing the damaging nature of war. "The Hurt Locker" has a thin plot and fails to justify adequately some of the motivations of its characters. Other than the fact that we get an exciting documentary style look into the world of a bomb squad on the front line. Gender politics aside, then why the critical acclaim? Is it another case of a movie being given credence as it embodies the angst of a war weary nation or was it just time to award a "war movie" to punctuate this generation while the wars are deeply unpopular and still in progress. As if there was ever a "popular" war.

It is a known fact that the military has always seen Hollywood as its propaganda partner. At the same time it has known to be less cooperative with films that are critical of the military establishment as in the case of the recent film "In the Valley of Elah". The military has always embraced Hollywood where it seemed fit by providing unfettered access to its hardware to be used as sets. The film"Top Gun" had a full airplane carrier at its disposal through the shoot. In 1999 Steven Spielberg received the military's highest civilian honor from the Pentagon for making "Saving Private Ryan". The very establishment that orchestrates the wars gave an award to a filmmaker who claims to make anti-war films. Can there be anything more ironic?

Wars will always be a treasure trove of subject matter. Stories of human suffering always make good entertainment, the only thing that deters Hollywood is the box office. "The Hurt Locker" was the lowest grossing Oscar winner ever. Hopefully one day in that treasure trove there will be a movie where the Americans will play the role of the backdrop and the misery and brutalization of the so called "enemy" will be the forefront. Only to show there is no such thing as a "just war" all there is just violence, death and mayhem. And I hope that film wins an Oscar and not in the foreign film category. It is what it is.

Where is the President we elected?

2010-02-21T07:03:00.000-08:00

A year in, if there is one thing President Obama can say he has categorically accomplished, is escalating the war in Afghanistan and increasing the controversial drone attacks in Pakistan ten fold. The drones seem to terrorize and kill more innocent people than the alleged terrorists they are supposedly meant to. Now with the "surge" and push into Taliban controlled territory underway the White House waits to declare the operation a success. On the domestic front lofty goals of passing a revolutionary Health Care reform bill, dealing with a record deficit, putting a stop to Wall Street's debauchery, closing down the abhorrent Guantanamo Bay prison camp, holding the past regime accountable for war crimes and criminal violation of the constitution all seem to have fallen by the wayside. Partly because of a corrupt, inefficient, impotent, partisan congress that puts politics before the good of its people, and also due to a lack luster performance by a leader who treads too softly in a jungle of wolves.

Historically the congress has always behaved the way it does today. There is nothing revealing about it. There have also been moments in the past when the country has been as polarized as it is today. The Civil Rights act of 1964 was filibustered a record 54 days before it was passed thanks to President Lyndon Johnson's legendary craft at maneuvering the congress. The only thing that is unprecedented today is that we have a black president in power. That definitely is an underlying factor for the stalemate we see in certain quarters of the congress. But what seems to be missing in President Obama, is his ability to navigate and manipulate the congress to get the people's work done. He seems to rely too heavily on his earnest, honest image to bring about a bipartisan solution to everything, which as we know has failed time after time. Or maybe he just does not have the metal that we so fervently were lead to believe that he did. The message that is being sent through all the noise and the anger being absorbed and propelled by Fox News and the Tea Party cult, is that the President is incapable, inept and bad for the country. The democratic party and the White House are not helping either. They are not able to capitalize on the gains the President has made on "keeping America safe". Under his presidency more terrorist threats have been foiled than in all the eight years under President Bush. 95% of Americans are enjoying tax cuts even in a time of financial crisis. These achievements are not cutting through due to the mismanagement of the message by the White House and the party. A historical symptomatic problem of the party and its inability to unify.

What is also appalling is that on matters of war and invading other nations the congress historically has always come together promptly without much debate or deliberation to give the President a go ahead . On the contrary on matters of real progress and change for its people on a fundamental level, the congress has always stalled and delayed. For example there is a dire immediacy to pass Health Care reform, as people are truly suffering as the economy continues to sour. If and when the Health Care bill passes it is only expected to take effect in 2014, while the decision to invade Iraq was arrived at in record time.

What essentially comes through as a result of the dastardly failings of the congress in a time of monumental crisis, is that this so called democracy is essentially being run by a single party and not two parties as we are lead to believe. The party in question is the "ruling-class" which predominantly rules from the center. Ralph Nader said "America is run by a single party with two wings" and that assessment seems to ring true today. We elect politicians hoping they would put our immediate needs at the top of their agenda, but their behavior time after time shows that they put the needs of the corporations first. Lobbyists from the big financial firms are storming Washington preventing congress from passing the tough legislation that is needed to curtail Wall Street and its risky behavior. And once again they have been stunningly successful. Goldman Sachs posted record profits even in this climate by engaging in the same risky behavior that brought the whole economy to its knees. Only this time from a position of competitive advantage. Things on Wall Street are business as usual. One year later, this is by far this administration's biggest failure. Obama's campaign pledge of keeping special interest groups out of reach seems to have failed miserably. And now he runs the risk of those same corporations not doling out the money needed for his party and its campaigns.

On the international front, in his first year President Obama spanned the globe dropping bouquets of peace and extending overtures of friendship to Iran, North Korea and the Islamic world, for which he was awarded a Nobel peace prize. He made impressive speeches asking nations to follow the ideals of democracy and respect human rights and the rule of law for everyone. He championed nuclear non-proliferation and has made it his priority to reduce and rid the planet of nuclear weapons. But in action he passed a record defense budget, escalated the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, refused to address issues of political freedom, human rights and democracy on his visit to China and snubbed his fellow Nobel colleague the Dalai Lama not once but twice. The first time he refused to meet him and the second time he did it in the most muted fashion possible, all to appease the Chinese who have the United States in a strangle hold, controlling 800 billion dollars of its debt. Even if it was a token gesture and did not mean much, in contrast President Bush awarded the Dalai Lama with a Congressional Gold Medal. Even in this equation it is obvious that China needs America as much as America needs China, so it is a mystery why America cannot substantially confront China on matters of human rights, aggression and political freedom. The sad truth is that in this new year of the Tiger, it is China's roar that is heard loudest around the globe, and it is to it's dominance that America clearly bows today.

Maybe it is premature to ask where is the president we elected? After all it took sixteen years to bring America to this state and so it might take as many to rise back up, or maybe there is no rising back up. What is expected though expeditiously, is a promise of strong steps taken in the right direction in a time of crisis. If the current trend persists a president that still enjoys popularity runs the risk of rapidly loosing all his capital. If we do not see a radical shift in the mood of this nation, if there is no glimmer of "hope" that was promised, then what little was gained is lost. One does wonder if the optimism candidate Obama embodied was just a projection of the hopes and fears of a disenfranchised and dejected populace or was it truly "change" that is yet to come. While President Obama has restored dignity, flare and poise to the office that has made him a poster boy for the planet, if he cannot deliver the radical change his supporters so desperately need and look to him for deliverance, November will stunt his presidency forever. It is what it is.

A Method to its Madness

2010-01-29T20:34:00.000-08:00

My last four weeks were spent in India, in a city down south called Hyderabad. This is the city I was born and raised in. I left Hyderabad eighteen years ago in search of America. Ever since, I have returned every couple of years from my current home in Brooklyn, to reconnect with my roots. My trips back are always complicated and conflicted with the inevitable question always posed, whether I could return to live here again-in urban India-and feel at home.

India is announced almost every other day in newspapers and on TV globally as "BOOM TOWN" nation. Even President Obama in his State of the Union address, highlighted India and China as two nations to watch as they transform into economic giants. While there is some truth to it and it is reflected in the rampant consumerism you see in the rapidly expanding urban middle class, there are other indicators that are far from being reached that would qualify India to be evolving into a "developed" nation. Clean air and drinking water for most is a luxury, poverty is sizable, corruption is ever present, social unrest is always round the corner, quality public services are in short supply and collective social responsibility is limited only to its expanding gated communities. Yet there is a method to this madness, and therefore India survives and thrives as a functioning democracy, decade after decade, falling, failing and rising to be reckoned with.

If one were to pick a metaphor to describe the state of affairs in this nation, any city roadway would paint an apt picture. The traffic in any urban city in India has always been in a state of complete chaos. It has steadily gotten worse with the astronomical growth in vehicular traffic, a reflection of the increase in purchasing power. People for some reason on the street do not see any purpose in obeying any rules, unless there is a policeman involved. Traffic lights seldom work, and when they do they are seen as an irritant. Then there are vehicles of all different speeds on the same road. From the rickshaw, mopeds, motorcycles to the buses, all fight for space on the same narrow street. While today you see, Benzes, BMWs, Bentleys and other gas guzzling mammoth machines shunned by the west, the fact of the matter is the roads have not changed at all. They are still bumpy, in disrepair and full of potholes and speed breakers. The new cars offer air-conditioning without which driving is an ordeal and injurious to health as the pollution is out of control. At every traffic stop one is stormed by destitute beggars and street vendors trying to eek out an existence selling tissue boxes and other cheap Chinese made knick-knacks. Sidewalks do not exist so people have to walk on the same street as the traffic. Having to cross a street as a pedestrian, is putting ones life at risk. And so the urban Indian street becomes a vivid representation of the struggle being waged inside the psyche of this great nation.

The person walking the street or riding a two-wheeler feels it is as much his/her street as the person driving a shiny Benz. And there in lies the problem. While India has achieved phenomenal growth since the economy liberalized two decades ago, certain fundamentals have not changed. And whether they will change is a question I ponder, every time I am here. I feel there is no cohesive vision for the future to level society in terms of basic human rights and dignity. It is a difficult proposition to fundamentally bring about change in the social and cultural behavior of a people, who have come to accept the apathy of the system as a constant companion. Navigating it is the only way to exisit. Class-ism, caste-ism, regionalism, ethnic division and disparity still seem to tear at the nation, and most people put up blinders to avoid confrontation in plain sight. A sense of collective social responsibility seems to be missing across all levels of society as a loss of sense of history seems to plague a people. On the other hand consumerism creates a greed that is insatiable, putting it in direct conflict with its spiritual foundations. It seems like there are two Indias that exist side by side. One that has money and aspires to afford an American lifestyle, and the other that struggles with inflation and just about makes ends meet. The India that wants to be America is the one that is celebrated and projected into the consciousness of the people via television, films, popular youth culture and everything else. All the while corruption becoming the mainstay and an ethical existence becoming harder to achieve as money becomes the only defining factor of ones success and status.

While corruption is not native only to India, it just happens to be in your face here. It runs from the bottom to the top touching every one in its path. While in America, the corruption seems to exist only at the highest levels. As America struggles to pass a Health Care bill and fails to fix Wall Street's debauchery, the cancer that grips its political and business establishment at this juncture, shows its devastating impact touching everyone in its path not just at home but around the globe. A nation that prides itself to be developed and wealthy, and a defender of democracy and freedom, in some ways is no different.

The over arching mood of any nation defines the people that live in it. One does get a skewed vision of reality when viewed through the eyes of the media, but the view one gets from one's car window sometimes is more telling. Hyderabad was a place I once loved, I am ambiguous about that love today. The people here are near and dear to me, but the city seems to be slipping away. Whether it is just the change I see that is not to my liking or whether it is the nostalgic self that yearns to see the past that is gone, in my eyes the corruption of the soul of the city is hard to escape from. Within one's four walls the culture is rich, irreplaceable and heart warming beyond compare. The generosity of its people is unmatched but why this does not translate out into the public sphere is a mystery. The Hyderabad of today is dotted with malls, hotels, fancy restaurants, trendy living spaces, software companies and multiplexes. What are gone are the wide open spaces, the culture of respect and the recognition of its rich history that made it a unique city. Every place has to change, and change is inevitable, but change that does not value the past is oppressive.

During my stay in Hyderabad, my father-in-law, to whom I was very close, met with a sudden end. He was an honorable professor who stood tall and believed in the dream Jawahar-Lal-Nehru envisioned in his youth. All his life he refused to bribe anyone and resisted all forms of corruption and lead an ethical life. It so happened that it became my responsibility to record his death at the local municipal office in order to receive his death certificate. The irony of it all is that I had to bribe an official to receive his death certificate in a hurry. Despite all of the above, despite all its flaws and frustrations there is something very present, tactile and sublime about this nation. Even if I don't physically live here, Hyderabad will always be home.
It is what it is.

A Year That Was

2009-12-19T11:21:00.000-08:00

Another 365 days in the life of our planet will be marked by a number around the world. The end of another decade will be dissected and discussed as humanity still finds itself grappling with the eternal questions of war, poverty, nuclear weapons, terrorism, hunger and the destruction of its home, planet earth, and the species that share that space with them. Yet we seem to hope and seek promise, even though the future seems much too worrisome to pass on to our children. As without "hope" humanity is left with nothing but its own demise.

It is customary this time of the year, for the press to scurry around highlighting the high and low moments of the past, notably mention famous people who have passed on, and pick their "person of the year". It is also a tradition for people to gather in the streets and living rooms around the world to welcome the sun as though it were brand new. All in the act of celebrating the obvious.

The essence of humanity is to believe in a better tomorrow, while all its actions and behavior are largely in contradiction to it, mostly clouded by greed, consumerism and the incessant need for self preservation at the detriment of what gives it sustenance. We still believe we can turn the clock around and control the environment we live in. The recent collapse of the Copenhagen Climate Summit was a glaring example of how humanity is still segregated by borders even when its own survival is at stake. While individual citizens recognize the futility in trusting their governments, and take action in as mundane ways as turning off the light when they leave the room, a daunting question stares us in the face, is it too late?

As history proves, individuals with lofty ideas have always changed the world in seismic ways. In this new year the question one should ask one self is, can I be that person in my own small way? It is what it is.

Obama's War of "Hope"

2009-12-02T17:12:00.000-08:00

On the eve of going to receive his much talked about Nobel Peace prize in Oslo, President Obama decides to send more young American men and women into war. Regardless of the circumstances that lead him to that decision, nothing can be more ironic.

The war in Afghanistan was always candidate Obama's war. He always proclaimed it as the war worth fighting with full force as Osama Bin Ladin was the prime target. He has always said the excursion into Iraq took the "eye off the ball" with devastating results. This rhetoric in part won him the election. Seven years later with a promise of hope, he still thinks the war in Afghanistan is the one we should be escalating. While it seemed he deliberated on this option with a heavy heart, the decision he ultimately arrived at seemed predictable. He heeded to his generals. To make his case to the public he resurrected the ghosts of 9/11 sounding too close to comfort like his predecessor.

What Obama is offering in this plan compared to the surge in Iraq (the success of which is overrated) is that he is bringing more nations to the table by emphasizing how important this conflict is to the security of not just America but the planet. Yet again there are no Islamic countries who have pledged any troops. Even the dictators America supports in Egypt and Saudi Arabia had nothing to offer. Russia, China and India stand at a distance, watching and waiting, and the contributions from the western nations are minuscule. He has also promised to start withdrawing from Afghanistan by 2011, calling it an exit strategy. That sounds improbable and absurd knowing the situation on the ground and America's past history. Once America invades a nation it does not leave gently. Even though President Obama has said the troops are there only to help, no one in the region believes him. There are still thousands of troops stationed in Japan, Korea, Germany and elsewhere, much to the displeasure of the locals, even though the wars have long ended. There must be no illusions of America's ambitions of policing the world with supremacy. Lately this is beginning to prove detrimental to its own economic and political standing in the world, but that has not deterred anyone. President after president there seems to be a reluctance to alter that course. As a result when ever there is a conflict anywhere in the world, lo and behold, America is implicitly expected to intervene and it does, sometimes with catastrophic results.

In a response to President Obama's West Point speech, Christian Amanpour, the CNN diva reporter, made a statement in support of his decision. She stated that the Afghans know the difference between the Russians, British, Taliban and the Americans. They know that the Americans are there to help them rebuild and bring hope to their decimated nation. While this may be what is being intended and perceived, when one sees a convoy of Hummers driving by, and bombs falling of the sky and the sound of gun fire becoming the norm, all perception is lost. They know they are in a war zone and that is all the distinction there is to be made. And for most Afghans, unlike most Americans oceans away, a war zone is all they have ever known.

While Obama made bold promises that he is going to hold the corrupt, despicable leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan accountable, by ending the practice of "handing out blank checks", everyone knows that corruption is a systemic cultural problem that cannot be banished by policy. If bold statements could eradicate corruption, the world would be a better place. The corruption that went on under the Bush administration in the name of war, in the US and abroad, is yet to be dealt with. Now Obama hopes to deal with corruption within the Afghan government that came to power as a result of corruption. You could maybe contain the Taliban, but curtailing corruption would be almost impossible, especially when the very government in charge of doing it is made up of two faced nefarious characters.

What is clear and has been expressed by many experts who live in the region openly, is that this war cannot be won militarily. It is a Pashtoon problem, not a Taliban or Al Qaeda problem. Unless we start approaching it as a geopolitical issue there is no positive outcome that will come out of this conflict. The Pashtoon are fiercely independent and now have become hardened as a result of being marginalized. We are made to imagine them as a backward, crazy, criminalized band of religious zealots. While there is an element of that, most are radicalized because there is a war going on and war is something they know how to engage in. They have been invaded by a foreign force and they have to push back. It is their religious duty. That is all they have known for forty years. Not all Pashtoon are Taliban, but most Afghan Taliban are Pashtoon.

If the mission is to contain Al Qaeda, the war we are escalating is misguided and completely out of proportion. If the goal is to stabilize Afghanistan and keep the Taliban out, this can be done only with the help of a neutral force, with serious partnerships with Islamic and regional powers and by negotiating with the moderate elders. Sending more troops sends a signal that we are not interested in negotiating. We just want to wipe them out, out of their own nation. If the secondary threat is the destabilization of Pakistan and its nuclear infrastructure, we are making the situation worse by escalating the war across the border. Even though the porous border between the two nations gives a sense that the problem is linked, the situation in Pakistan today is a result of successive failed governments supported by misguided American policy. The spillage and the establishment of terrorist groups within Pakistan's borders is a byproduct of a failed state with many power centers.There is no clear solution that can be brought about to this problem militarily. It can only be subdued for a short time. Pakistan's enemy is India, and now they are being told to fight their friends and they detest that. It is an open fact that Pakistan would like to see the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan. Pakistan has supported and given room to terrorist groups to fight their proxy war as a national policy. Without addressing these issues which span from Kashmir to the north west frontier, with a hard line, America will get no where with Pakistan. All they will get is deception.

If the hope is to rebuild Afghanistan into a nation, which is what seems to be the underlying plan and solution, then we need to listen to the Shura, the elder councils. As they are the ones who may hold the ultimate key to peace. This is what the celebrated author and social worker Greg Mortenson who has spent a lifetime working and living in this region has also proposed. Unfortunately Obama did not take them into account while making this decision. He only sought advice from some of the same people who in part are responsible for this mess eight years in the making.

So while Obama pitched this troop increase as a war of "hope", the so called "just war", the war that must be fought to make the planet a better place, the only "hope" that he should be concerned about is the "hope" that he would get re-elected, if and when this is over. The fact on the ground is that the American forces are battered and the morale is low. The cost of running a war at the expense of American blood and treasure seems misplaced, especially in the current climate. Some soldiers are being deployed for the sixth time in as many years. A broad section of Afghans and the Pakistanis detest the American presence and see it as the reason for the violence that is bleeding their land. The remote controlled CIA drone attacks are highly unpopular for the collateral damage that they cause in their aftermath. And there have been more drone attacks under Obama's administration than under Bush's. There is a high level of desertion within the Afghan National Army and police and fresh recruitment is a huge problem due to the corruption. The war is deeply unpopular across the board.

Even though this is not a war he started, with this current move President Obama has taken full ownership of it. And as a "war time president" he sure is acting like all those who have come before him. Showing that he can be tough and decisive when the chips are down. What is a fact, is that except George Bush, all who came before him did not get re-elected to office as a result of their experiments with war. If there is anyone who needs hope at this moment in time, it is the Commander-in-Chief. As there is nothing more intoxicating than to stand in front of a banner that screams "Mission Accomplished". It is what it is.

WALLS

2009-11-17T18:22:00.000-08:00

"Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall"- were famous words uttered by president Ronald Reagan in a speech on June 12, 1987 at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. These words were seen as a spark that would light the fuse that would bring the cold war to an end. The words were spoken meters away from the one structure that so profoundly symbolized the great divide, The Berlin Wall. It seemed like his words acted like dynamite in pushing a movement over the edge. Two years later a chain of events across eastern Europe caused the wall to breach uniting a divided people forever.

This month the twentieth anniversary of this defining moment was celebrated across Europe and the international media was abuzz reprising that moment and deciphering history and the sequence of events that changed the world. The true hero who lit the fuse was Mikhail Gorbachev who had come to the conclusion that the soviet union and its policies were unsustainable and counterproductive. He was rapidly putting into motion changes that even the so called democratic leaders of the west were openly afraid of. He was convinced in dismantling the status-quo for good. He was no longer interested in keeping the eastern block under the soviet shadow, as he was relinquishing to the will of its people. So when the moment came for the wall to be breached he stepped aside and let history take its course.

A united Germany to many brought back visions of the past they were uncomfortable with. According to records, Margaret Thatcher and George Bush Sr. were both not keen on seeing the wall come down. They were afraid of the balance of power shifting in the aftermath and how that would play out. And the famous Ronald Reagan speech, was more of a ruse, a distraction he was seeking from his domestic voes surrounding the Iran-contra scandal. But to his credit his Hollywood charisma bore fruit. He reclaimed some of his lost glory with the speech and achieved mythic status among many of his supporters. To some extent he even prodded the movement a little to gather steam.

The Berlin wall fell twenty years ago. In the decades since many walls have gone up and those that existed before have grown stronger and wider. India and Pakistan point nuclear warheads at each other, threatening to wipe out the one people that they are. North Korea seeks nuclear weapons to escalate its feud with the south. Israel builds a wall around Palestinians to keep suicide bombers at bay in the process confining a people much like they were in another part of the world. America builds a fence along the Mexican border to keep people away from seeking a better life. Humans have even managed to build walls on oceans. Countless electronic walls go up censoring expression and freedom of thought. Psychological walls seem to divide people more than ever on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, gender and sexual preference. Humans seem hell bent on devouring their humanity taking us to some dark places.

What is surprising is that while millions of words were generated and billions of bytes of information exchanged about the fall of the Berlin wall, no head of state took the opportunity to utter any Reaganesque words asking for all walls to be torn down in the interest of our very survival. We all know that when the Himalayan glaciers melt away and the polar ice caps seize to exist, no wall will be able to hold back people who will seek help from those spared. Nature sees no walls, all it sees is six billion ants digging theirs and their children's grave. It is what it is.

An ever elusive End Game

2009-11-01T15:16:00.000-08:00

In search of an end game Pakistan launches a massive military offensive against the Taliban (its own people) and America deliberates on its next move in Afghanistan. Once again all eyes are on the subcontinent. This is a region that has seen unprecedented upheaval in the last few decades, as armed conflicts have chewed up countless innocent lives and continue to do so at this very moment. From the Maoists in Nepal and India, separatists in Kashmir, Tamils in Sri Lanka, Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Uighars in north western China, one thing is clear. These are all uprisings against the establishment started by indigenous people centered around issues of land, self determination and in protest of lack of acceptable governance. Whether somewhere along the way these movements were hijacked by groups with more devious intentions, is as debatable as the establishment's claim that they have done everything to keep their citizens content and hopeful for a better future. It all depends on whose point of view you want to buy into.

The Talibanization of Afghanistan and Pakistan is a direct result of allowing a region and a group of people to descend into destitution and medieval standards of living. After the Soviets left Afghanistan the world turned its back and allowed it to take its natural course. Which was for the warlords to take control of a power vacuum and maintain a brutal status-quo with the help of a smorgasbord of nefarious groups all benefiting from the poppy trade. The drug trade flourished and formed the very backbone of the problem we face today. It took an attack on Manhattan for the world to wake up.

Suddenly the Taliban were in the news who were no different than the Saudis. They were as brutal and medieval in their ways in implementing the Sharia, its just that they did not have oil under them to gain global legitimacy. They were practicing a form of government which had gained popular support because it at least delivered security and a semblance of a nation. The only miscalculation they made was to give Osama Bin Ladin a place to pitch his tent. This as we know drew the wrath of America, which went after two nations in search of a small band of terrorists with all the force at its disposal, resulting in the murder of innocent lives on all sides, which goes on unabated to this date.

The Maoists in India and Nepal share some similarities in their genesis with the Taliban. First and foremost they grew out of some of the most impoverished, medieval and backward parts of the nation, where discrimination and neglect had pretty much pushed a population over the edge. The Maoist or Naxalite movement as it is popularly known in India, started in the late 60s with a peasant uprising in a small village called Naxalbari in northern West Bengal. The movement orchestrated by the communist party over the years evolved into a nexus between, armed guerrillas, political factions, ideologues and other power brokers who all had something to gain by undermining the establishment. One thing is indisputable, the movement gathered ground because it had formidable support from the rural and tribal folk of the region who were being victimized by a feudal system decades after independence. In the 80s the movement also had popular support from the ideological urban youth who had lost faith in their government and believed in a sense of justice. For long the establishment skirted the Maoist movement as a local law and order issue only to wake up recently to realize it is the most serious internal security threat facing the nation.

The Maoists have been waging a guerrilla war for nearly four decades now and are finally making international headlines. In Nepal they have been successful in taking over the government. As the Indian government prepares to tackle this problem head on, violence which is already a daily part of life in these backward areas has become more pronounced and will exacerbate. The Maoists and their political wing has been outlawed and the various factions are too far gone to enter into a political settlement. As the big guns take on the small guns, and extra judicial killings become the daily norm, India begins to go down the same slippery road Afghanistan and Pakistan are on at the moment.

In the south the Sri Lankan government declared victory over a three decade long guerrilla war by crushing the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam) with brute force and brutality. What went on during the final stages of the war was hidden as journalists were banned from the war zone by the Army. So the killing fields remain a mystery and the human loss and the nature of the war remains heavily disputed. More than 69,000 people lost their lives during the course of the long war which again started as an armed struggle for land, self determination and an end to ethnic discrimination. The Tamils for whom the guerrilla force LTTE said they fought for, have origins on the island nation which are as old as the majority Sinhalese. But they had been discriminated all along and so began their struggle for an independent piece of land they could call their own.

The LTTE started as a popular movement and somewhere along the way got hijacked by the megalomaniac misgivings of its leader and lost traction and direction. From a guerrilla group the LTTE became a terrorist group recruiting child soldiers and pioneering suicide bombings wreaking havoc amongst its own people and the nation. They were ultimately snuffed out early this year in a bloody battle. The aftermath of the war resulted in the creation of the largest internment camp for internally displaced Tamils fleeing the conflict. More than 40,000 Tamils languish in a camp imprisoned by the Sri Lankan government with the pretext that some of the LTTE members could be hiding within the refugee population. And so the Tamils suffer inhumane conditions on their own land prompting many to call it a deliberate act of slow genocide. Again the international community relinquishes its responsibility as there is no vested interest here. Another Darfur in the making, another armed conflict gone terribly wrong.

All these conflicts show that on a human moral level, they can never be justified, cause the casualties of war are always those who are at the lowest rung of the food chain. Armed conflicts on the other hand are always good for business, the arms business. All guerrilla groups are always well funded. They have easy access to weaponry. The LTTE had even managed to procure airplanes to fight the government. So someone is making money at the cost of wreaking mayhem. On the other hand the establishment always has an enemy they can use to scare their people into supporting their agenda. And so the battles rage on.

The reason why we do not have violent uprisings threatening to overthrow the establishment in the materially developed west, is because even in the most desperate situation a citizen can hope for a better future. They can still rely on their state and their legal system for some help. In most places where there is armed conflict, the people put their faith in who ever gives them immediate relief, and in most cases it is never the government. When the devastating earthquake hit Pakistan last year, it was the political wing of the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba that provided relief in the eyes of the people. In parts of India the Maoists have forcibly taken land from the feudal landlords and redistributed it among the landless Dalits (out castes), bringing a sense of Robin Hood style justice to centuries of oppression.

In the west poverty is more of an emotional state than a physical one. Where as in these impoverished regions of the world poverty and neglect is all that is left. When you have nothing to lose you have little concern in causing harm to those who have everything to lose. Using bigger guns in these regions in search of an end game, is making a situation that is dire even worse. In a recent poll in Pakistan people in the affected areas were asked who they considered a bigger threat, the Taliban or the US. Overwhelmingly people said the US. This goes to prove that a military solution can never be a solution, it can only be a band-aid that burns and leaves deep open wounds. Democracy at the barrel of a gun does not last long.

In todays world more than ever, where you live does decide whether you live or whether you die. This very aspect gives people clarity to understand where they stand in relation to the planet. It is what it is.

In the shadow of a Prize

2009-10-10T06:47:00.000-07:00

October 9 at 6 AM the telephone rang in President Obama's bedroom jolting him out of bed. So were the American listeners and readers on this side of the Atlantic when they heard he was the Nobel Peace Prize laureate for 2009. It should have been a cause for jubilation and celebration but the reaction was muted, ripe with ambiguity. Some wanted him to turn it down, others to ask the Nobel committee to hold it until he thought he was ready and others calling it a political nightmare. The right did not lose time in lashing out in a fashion that has become customary of them. Michael Steele, the Republican Party president was quick to denounce him by saying "he wont be receiving any awards from the American people" pointing to the fact that Obama has not delivered yet to deserve such a lofty prize. As expected this moment was ripe fodder for the rabid radio and TV talk show hosts to have a free for all. “Can you imagine, folks, how big Obama’s head is today?” Rush Limbaugh barked, “I think it’s getting so big that his ears actually fit.”

The Nobel most often is awarded to people who have spent a life time in the service of a mission. Just nine months into his presidency and at forty eight he joined the esteem company of his heroes Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela. That was a difficult picture for people to visualize and as the President acknowledged, it was difficult for him to grasp as well, as he genuinely felt humbled. In his acceptance speech he said that he viewed this recognition more a validation of his people by the world. Nobody can deny that 2009 was a groundbreaking year for America as the world turned its gaze to see a most unlikely candidate be inaugurated. This moment in history in itself was undeniably worthy of a prize.

There is a clear distinction in the way the world sees President Obama and the way Americans have come to see him in the recent past. The Nobel Prize was awarded to President Obama, as the citation reads "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". There is no question that the psychological impact his election has had on the people of the globe has been profound. His image, grace, civility and demeanor has sparked an uncompromising idealism and optimism in people of all races. The rhetoric in his lofty speeches from Cairo to Prague, has energized people across boundaries like never before. In the nine months he has traveled the world promising real change and cooperation in the way America behaves, and has called on nations to rise up and take responsibility for their actions. He has laid out a vision for a nuclear free globe and has engaged Iran and North Korea instead of isolating them even more with remarkable results. He has demanded the Pentagon to conduct a radical review of US nuclear weapons doctrine to prepare the way for deep cuts in the country's arsenal. He has restarted the middle east peace process which had come to a grinding halt under the previous administration. And to top it all he has set forth grand benchmarks to curb global warming.

While most of his ambitions in the global sphere have been expressed through rhetoric and oratory flare, not much has yet been achieved in the way of tangible results. But like never before his words have had a penetrating influence. And that does count for something.

On record, the process of pulling out of Iraq and closing down Guantanamo Bay has been slow, and his deliberations on the next move in Afghanistan causes confusion. While he has claimed victory in stalling America's financial descent, not many people buy it as job losses continue to take their toll. Health care reform, the success of which will define his leadership, hangs in a balance due to the sluggish, partisan and morally bankrupt nature of congress. People are beginning to show discontent with the pace of change he so dramatically promised during his campaign. In the light of all this Americans find this award confusing and struggle to make sense of it.

There is no doubt that in his first nine months President Obama has set out to take on more than any leader before. If this award is meant to give him a bump, if it is meant to be an investment in the future, there is no better place to make it, as there is no leader that can wield the kind of influence he can. That he has proven thus far with fortitude.

In his low key acceptance speech at the rose garden, where he declined to take questions from the press, he said he would accept the award as a "call to action". As he left the podium a reporter shouted "Mr. President what are you going to do with the award money?". Later in the day he revealed in a communique that he would be donating it to charity.

A few days ago President Obama passed on a meeting with fellow laureate the Dalai Lama in order to appease the Chinese, with whom he has a scheduled visit next month. It will be interesting to see what his "call to action" will entail. Will he be able to convince the Chinese to reduce their nuclear arsenal, will he be able to hold their feet to fire on issues of human rights and democracy as they strengthen their hold on more and more American debt. Will he be able to bring China and Russia on his side, without whom half the problems of the world can never be solved.

In my view, the peace protesters of Iran who gallantly fought for freedom shedding blood on the streets, deserved the prize this year. But unfortunately they did not have an Aung Song Su Kyi or Lech Walesa to put a face on their movement. But as a strategy maybe it was a more prudent choice to give it to a leader who can actually bring about effective change in a much larger sphere. In no means was this a controversial choice when compared with the likes of Yasser Arafat and Henry Kissinger. But without a doubt it has put more pressure on the President, something he could have done without at this moment in time. His presidency will be defined to the world in the shadow of this prize. And to a leader who has to make some of the toughest decisions on the planet, that would be a heavy cross to bear. It is what it is.

M.K.G at 140

2009-10-03T15:33:00.000-07:00

October 2nd went without notice here in the US. The only thing significant in the news was President Obama's epic journey to Copenhagen to bring the Olympics to Chicago. Which as we know was of no consequence. The only significant impression he left behind was his carbon footprint. Even in nuclear armed India, this day was low key as peace between Pakistan and India was more elusive than ever.

A child once asked President Obama to name one person that inspired him the most and his answer was Mahatma Gandhi. October 2nd was Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi's 140th birthday. He was one of the greatest men ever to walk the earth in the 20th century. Gandhi is the reason why phrases like peace, non-violence, human rights and equality truly make sense in our increasingly violent world. He defined what humanity meant and what it should mean if we were to live in peace in harmony.

"My life is my message" he said as he experimented with truth and all its complexities. His solution was simplicity. While his political life was controversial, for which he suffered a violent end, his philosophical and spiritual life without doubt was profound. He was a man beyond his time. Even though he was immersed in religiosity his outlook for the future was real and modern. He is as relevant today as Nietzsche, Marx, Kierkegaard, Plato or Sartre.

"Be the change you want to see in the world" he said and sparked the end of colonialism and launched the beginning of a new world order. Without him and his ideas there would be no King, Mandela or Aung Song Su Kyi. Without them there would be no end of apartheid, no desegregation and therefore no President Obama.

He was a man of action. An idea that could not be put into practice for human betterment held no interest to him. Seen from this moment in time not everything the Mahatma (the great one) wrote, said and did is acceptable. But what made him great, were not his monumental victories on the political front, but his humility to confront his flaws with moral strength. His moral courage was his strength.

So on this occasion I would like to put forth four of his ideas that profoundly impacted me and make more sense today than ever.

1. Control of the Palate. He believed the first place a human is seduced is on the palate. He believed eating is necessary only for sustaining a body and keeping it fit for service. It makes perfect sense as we find ourselves battling obesity as a global epidemic.

2. The concept of Swadeshi. One must purchase one's requirements as much as possible locally. He believed you could serve the world best by serving one's neighbor. He believed charity done close to home is most effective. Act locally think globally.

3. The doctrine of Ahmisa. Ahimsa literally means non-killing. He said it is not enough to just be non-violent in action. Harboring violent, negative and unpleasant thoughts was enough for you to depart from the idea of Ahimsa.

4. Sustainable living. He believed that with simple living the resources of the planet can sustain us comfortably and his famous words "earth provides us enough for our needs but not for our greed" is more true today than ever as we ponder the effects of climate change and the rape of the planet.

While many think Gandhi is passe, I think he is more relevant today than ever. While there is no shortage of rhetoric around ideas of peace, human rights, disarmament and equality, action is rare, measured or limited. He said "I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent". Something to contemplate as we deploy soldiers to keep the peace.

It is what it is.

Red Rain

2009-10-02T10:58:00.001-07:00

When speaking or thinking about unparalleled human atrocity against fellow human beings in the twentieth century, the names of three people instantly come to mind. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong. While for the most part Hitler and Stalin have found their rightful place in history, Mao continues to be revered and celebrated in China as a leader unsurpassed. The 60th anniversary celebrations that took place on October 1st - orchestrated to a jaw dropping gaudy spectacle - showed the Communist Party come of age, by wiping and reshaping its dirty past and consolidating its grip over a new generation with the seductive promise of capitalism.

The 60th anniversary celebrations of the Peoples Republic of China were very tightly managed. Only a select 30,000 were invited to see it in person, the rest were ordered to stay home and watch it on TV. All dissidents were arrested a few days before the event and media access was closely monitored. Apart from the impressive and wasteful fireworks display reminiscent of the recent Olympic orgy, Tiananmen Square looked more like North Korea than China. Military hardware was on glorious display, soldiers by the thousands marched in impeccable symmetry and hordes of carefully picked Chinese men, women and children sang nationalist songs as they marched down the boulevard in unison. The cult of personality of the party bosses and its past leaders was on full display, as gigantic portraits of Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, Jiang Zemin and others were paraded on floats. It seemed like there was a deliberate attempt to hark back to the glory days, to send a message that the Communist Party was still in charge and stronger than ever.

What was obviously missing were solemn pauses for the lives lost during the Communist Party’s rise to power — not for the estimated tens of millions who died during the civil war, nor the millions of landlords, Nationalist sympathizers and other perceived enemies who were exterminated during Mao’s drive to consolidate power. Not for the siege at Changchun where an estimated 160,000 civilians were deliberately starved to death by Mao's army. The 40,000 who survived did so by eating insects, leather belts and, in some cases, the bodies that littered the streets. And of course no mark of respect for the countless who died during the 1989 pro-democracy Tiananmen Square uprising. This incident has so successfully been wiped out of the Chinese consciousness that if one were to google the words " Tiananmen Square" in China, just a few images of the landmark would sift through while outside China all you would see are countless images of the anonymous brave lone man standing in front of a convoy of tanks.

History is always written by the victors for the victors, and often the vanquished are committed to oblivion. In the case of China a whole generation's memory has been successfully conditioned through censorship, to forget the moments in its recent history that truly made its red flag red with blood.

It is hard to believe that just twenty years ago one would risk severe punishment if not seen wearing a Moa suit. Today a few in China can afford to wear Gucci, Prada and Dolce & Gabbana. No country on earth has seen such a monumental change, in such a short time. At the same time somethings have not changed at all. China still puts more people to death than any nation in the world. Political dissent is not tolerated and human rights are ignored by giving enough of its people a chance to wear a western suit and a tie.

China will soon be the planets second largest economy and will solidify its unshakable influence on the globe and the Communist Party of China will take credit for it. So for this 60th celebration China showed its might by virtually controlling the weather. Clouds were artificially seeded and banished giving way to blue skies, the high command would not have it any other way. Rain was forbidden. As a sign of the times even the Empire State building in New York city, the erstwhile center of capitalism, turned its lights red on this day. It is what it is.

You Lie!

2009-09-17T05:56:00.000-07:00

September 7, 2003 a president stood at a podium, facing a room full of "distinguished gentlemen" and spoke the greatest lie ever spoken. Nobody shouted "you lie!", nobody showed disrespect by waving pamphlets and placards of protest, nobody asked how would we pay for it. The result, nations were dragged into war, countless innocent paid with their lives and a people were morally and financially bankrupt in the eyes of the world.

Six years later another president stands at that same podium and makes a speech, hoping to bring that same group of "distinguished gentlemen" to fix something that is broken to the core. He attempts to bring to the people of a so called "wealthy nation" health care that works for all and not a few. Quality care that everyone is entitled to as a human right. He attempts to unite the congress to work for a common good. He is heckled, shouted at, called a liar, socialist, Marxist, fascist, communist, terrorist and is compared by the right wing to the most hated man in history, Hitler. Never in the history of the United States has a president been heckled during a speech to the congress. This is a new dark stain and a sign of the times that will be recorded for posterity.

We have seen images on TV of absolute chaos and pandemonium on the assembly floor of South Korea, India, Iraq and other nations where congressmen come close to fist fights, smash furniture and show disrespect to their office. Now the United States has joined those ranks. In a vote 240 to 179, the House of Representatives officially rebuked Republican Joe Wilson for disgracing the office of the president by calling him out in the middle of his speech to the nation. The unfortunate aspect of that vote is that 179 members of congress did not find Joe Wilson's action objectionable. He got away with a slap on his wrist when he should have been firmly censured. The dignity of the congress which as it is, is at an all time low, has now fallen even further.

In a recent interview president Jimmy Carter acknowledged that the reason we are seeing such outbursts and rising opposition to President Obama and his policies is because he is not white. The color of his skin is causing deep seeded racism to surface in ways never seen before. His eloquence, intellect, dignity and poise is falling by the wayside for many, just because he is half black. Imagine what would have happened if he was full black.

The fact of the matter is that in politics, which is mostly "poli-tricks", the people are habitually lied to by their leaders. Be it Obama, Bush or Kennedy. In retrospect one has to gauge the impact of those lies and the larger context they were framed under. There is a lot to disagree, debate and discuss about what a president proposes. But to instinctively respond due to deep seeded prejudice is deplorable.

The right wing everywhere operates on the fringe. This time around the Republican party has been hijacked by the fringe as they see no other way to mount an opposition against a popular president. This in no means is a recent trend. Truman faced it from Senator Joseph McCarthy, Kennedy faced it from the religious right and Clinton faced it as they tried to pin the murder of Vince Foster on him, when in fact he had committed suicide. To understand how the right wing operates in America today, it is worth reading Max Blumenthal's carefully researched book Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement that Shattered the Party. He makes a crystal clear analysis of how the Republican party has transformed from being the "big tent party" to an entity that embodies only virtues of extremism, much like any fundamentalist group out there. He also talks about how radio disc jockeys and media ideologues like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity are deliberately painting the current president in a certain light, in order to serve the agenda of the extreme right.

As the battle lines are drawn in the murky world of politics and media, one thing is for sure, lies are transparent and can be concealed and camouflaged only for so long. Public display of one's prejudice is tolerated only by a few. And you cannot shape public debate on policy via deceit and deception. You have to come clean. It is what it is.

9/11

2009-09-11T06:08:00.000-07:00

It is that time of the year when we in New York look to the sky and remember that ill fated morning. A moment in time etched onto every New Yorker's being, like a hot brand seared onto the skin of an animal.

Today "nine-eleven" has become just a phrase which is often used and abused to define a turning point in the time line of our recent existence. An endless amount has been said about how the world changed since that September day in New York. Wars ignited, countless killed and incarcerated, countries turned into fortresses and a heightened mistrust of the other growing all over the world. Instead of revealing my thoughts about the obvious, I thought I would share my 9/11 story. A memorial to my memory. Here it is.

LOOKING FOR TWINS, AGE 28
September 11th 2001 6:30 AM: my plane took flight from Hancock Airport, Syracuse, on the dot. The previous night I was restless and stayed up flipping through mindless television until 2 AM. I was awake by 5 AM to catch my flight. As the Airbus soared over the clouds there was a sense of peace. The golden sun shone on the silver wings as the plane swayed to the left to go down on JFK airport. There in the far distance I saw the monolithic twins jutting out of the concrete jungle, bold indestructible and timeless. The sky was clear as far as I could see and below me the Atlantic’s ripples shone, speckled with boats leaving ribbons of surf. We touched down at 7:30 AM and within no time I was in a yellow taxi stuck in the middle of Atlantic avenue with the morning traffic reminding me I was back in chaotic, polluted, beautiful Brooklyn. There was still that sense of peace from being in the air and life seemed normal on the ground. By the time I completed my mildly frustrating taxi ride and rang the doorbell it was 8:15 AM and she was surprised to see me back home early. I wanted to surprise her and kept my arrival a secret. I had chosen the right day for it. My three-year-old daughter was delighted to see me. The lack of sleep was taking its toll; I was groggy and irritated. It was time for my daughter’s daily chariot ride to school. As I bent down to tie her shoelaces we heard a loud bang. She remarked, "Daddy I hear thunder" I said it must be a balloon popping. That was the first airborne missile made of jet fuel and bodies smashing into one of the twins. Having ignored the sound, the two of us started our routine journey to school. As we came out of the gate George, my friend from across the street stuck his head out of his window announcing that a plane had crashed into the twin towers. For a moment I was worried, but then I thought it must be an unfortunate accident, a Cessna must have lost its bearings.

As I reached the end of my street, I could sense there was something wrong. When I looked up at the sky, there it was the hideous remains of dead souls in the form of thick black murky smoke. All heads around me were looking skyward and I was walking in a rush unaware of the scale of the events to follow. A young lady walked up to me and said another plane had just crashed into the towers. I thought to myself "why is she telling me this?" When I looked around I noticed strangers talking to each other. I thought, "well, there goes the rumor factory." As we crossed Flatbush Avenue the city was already screaming of sirens. But when I saw an army of fire engines charge past me- that’s when I knew there was something seriously wrong.

We moved along and made our way to school. There was palpable tension in the air but nobody knew where it was coming from. As usual I led her into her classroom, packed away her stroller, and headed home. As I reached the main street, the chaos was tangible. Minutes later the New York skyline was engulfed in a thick gigantic white cloud, and I was back in no time to pick up my daughter from school. On our way back we saw streams of people covered in white powder pouring into Brooklyn. They walked like an army of zombies with their Kabuki faces expression less and dumb struck. In my mind they were walking in slow motion. They had seen the twins fall. Everybody else saw it on TV over and over again, but what I saw in their eyes was death, and what I saw on TV was concrete.

September 11th 2002; it’s a year since I flew from Syracuse, and I have seen the planes on TV go into the towers countless times from every angle possible. Much to the credit of the camera savvy American public. And every time I see it, there is no telling what goes through my being. As my train crossed the Manhattan Bridge today, meandering into the great metropolis, I took a moment to gaze in the direction where the twins once stood. I could not help but see the planes on their hellish journey once more in my mind.

9-11-2002 was a magical day much like the day I flew from Syracuse: clear blue sky, the balmy sun shining high in the sky. But this time there was a bright white cloud hanging over downtown. It was as if three thousand doves were looking down in reflection on a large hole surrounded by tall buildings a place where they once worked. Trailing behind the large white cloud were other smaller clouds forming a trail exactly in the direction the black smoke blew on that grisly day. Now all that remained was a large field of empty earth - a painful reminder of people dying saving people, people being vaporized into thin air in an orange mushroom and people jumping through blown out windows in hopes of flight. As we all watched the concrete fountain come crashing down, did anybody see faces of the three thousand or so reported missing? They said they were able to find the remains of only sixty people, where did the rest go? They all looked down today from that white cloud, as President Bush shook hands with their loved ones around a sacred circle of flowers. As tears came down their faces and as children tried to make sense of the gathering, the moment was lost in a media haze, as the shaking hands and the ritual took precedence. Then came speeches of patriotism, revenge and resolve.

And then came the war. It is what it is.

War is Peace

2009-08-27T11:44:00.000-07:00

It did not take a war, economic sanctions or diplomatic isolation to bring a reprehensible regime to its knees. It took a man to spend a lifetime in prison. "The struggle is my life", said Nelson Mandela as he fought quietly. Famous words that are not to be taken lightly, as that is what makes people prevail against all adversity. As Aung Sung Su Kyi goes back to her prison home with her elegance and dignity intact, she follows in the footsteps of Gandhi, Mandela and King. Her penance is the only thing that will break the monsters back and set the Burmese free. The world is too preoccupied to see her plight. While China and India prop up the military junta in utter shame, as America and Britain propped up Botha's South Africa, it is her humanity that will rise up to steal the thunder. And then everyone will rush to garland and celebrate her with pomp and song. But for now we wait, hoping she will conquer death and desolation. It is what it is.

Why does war come to those who have nothing? Why does war rain down on only the poor, disenfranchised and the miserable? Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Darfur, Iraq, Congo no matter where you turn, all you see are images of people who have nothing, now having to contend with bullets, mortars and drones. Running with their only possessions, their life and their children. The searing image of naked napalm burned children running down a tar road in agony, sent chills through the compassionate, bringing the Vietnam war to an end. Images of children in bandages are a common occurrence now, but it does not seem to do anything to a world desensitized to numbness.

While we sit in our arm-chairs professing about bringing wars to an end it becomes clear that like racism, regionalism and colonialism, war is an integral aspect of humanity. Ever since the World Wars ended and the United Nations was created to stop wars, there has never been a single moment in earth's history, when wars were not waged in some shape or form on its surface. It is clear that as an institution the United Nations is a miserable failure. It is a political and bureaucratic organization like any that feeds on itself. Decisions are made by a select group of nations who violate every principle there is of peace and democracy. It is time to abolish the United Nations or restructure it so it works. It has become a fat pig which gets very little done in the face of crisis after crisis facing the globe.

War is the most depraved economic engine that prospers one nation while decimating another. There will always be war maiming and killing people as long as it provides jobs and industry. There is no such thing as a "just war" there is only a "cost war". Some Taliban fighters bear arms as it provides a livelihood. A man gets into his car in an American suburb to go build a fighter jet or a nuclear bomb, as it provides him a means a buy another car. How are they any different? It is what it is.

My name is Khan. So what?

2009-08-20T20:03:00.000-07:00

On August 14th, an Indian movie actor named Shahrukh Khan was pulled aside by immigration officials at Newark Airport, in New Jersey. He was detained for ninety minutes and then let go. This common occurrence that happens to many travelers from all parts of the world at airports across America, became an international incident. Primarily because Shahrukh Khan is a Bollywood actor with a huge following and expected airport security officials to be his fans as well.

Ever since 19 mad men flew airplanes into buildings the world has been turned upside down and people have come to accept it as a fact of life. Secondary immigration checks at airports have become routine. Initially Shahrukh Khan alleged he was singled out because his name indicated he was a Muslim. Just a few months ago parents of a relative of mine, who are in their late seventies, were subjected to this same ordeal at a Seattle airport. They never made it to the news. The only thing they shared with Shahrukh Khan, was their Indian origin.

During his ninety minute ordeal, Shahrukh Khan with a single text message was able to activate the Indian government to come to his rescue. The Indian embassy in New York was alerted instantly about this incident and it was dealt with at the highest levels with a complaint officially lodged. Back in India, two government ministers reacted with anger stating “We will take up the issue with the United States government strongly. Such incidents involving Indians due to their religion or nationality should not happen ... we will not accept it.” There were many other angry protests from movie stars and everyone else who wanted to be heard. The Indian and American news media generously made room for this story, even John Stewart on The Daily Show devoted a whole segment. Shahrukh Khan had more to gain from this than lose. His name was now known across America. Even his blockbuster movies could not achieve this feat. If this was a publicity stunt, it was a gigantic success. His trip to the US in part, was to promote his new film My name is Khan which incidentally is about a Muslim man persecuted in post 9/11 America.

In the past many Indian movie stars and dignitaries have been subjected to treatment at the airports which in their mind they did not deserve because they were special. Even the former Indian President was frisked at the Delhi airport by the Continental Airline staff, causing an uproar. Anyone detained at airports feels the same. They always feel they have been singled out. The fact of the matter is we live in a world where shoes and belts have to come off before you board a plane. Its as simple as that. No matter who you are, you can be singled out for further questioning. There is no special pass that will get you past this line. And even though its overkill, I don't think anyone would like to take the slightest chance at 31,000 feet cruising altitude.

And why in our culture do we give movie actors so much importance, that they demand to be treated differently? Relentlessly their images are driven into our subconscious via pornographic billboards, magazines, gossip columns and the insatiable and infinite television/internet machine. Yes they have the talent to do things in front of a camera which most people wont. Mostly because they are exhibitionists by nature and for that reason alone they get paid more than they deserve. They shake their hips, lip sync to songs they don't sing, disrobe under bright lights and kill and maim people all in the service of entertainment. Sure that requires talent, talent to be schizophrenic without being schizophrenic. But for that should they be held in such high esteem? And should they represent the United Nations like some Hollywood actors do? Yes good acting is a talent. It is an art-form. A craft that needs to be honed to draw people into a fictitious world so they can forget the real one. That is all it is. The glamor and glitter is hogwash, a wrapping made to conceal flaws. Deifying mortals for the way they look and the expensive pretend games they play is sheer insanity.

If people think they are "stars" or "celebrities" (what ever that means) they have to realize that they are nothing more than members of the "meat market". The market that drives and pimps them for profits. The only stars that exist are the ones in the night sky. So lets not give Shahrukh Khan or Tom Cruise more than what they deserve. An occasional space on our television and movie screens and in our dinner conversations. Which are as disposable as cheap wine or chewing gum. It is what is.

When is it racisim?

2009-07-31T08:45:00.000-07:00

On my break from New York city, in a suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota, I was on my bicycle going uphill on an empty sidewalk which doubled for a bike lane. The manicured green and the gray and beige of prefab houses surrounded me, as I enjoyed the fresh breeze against my chest giving me a work out. A loud honk from a car behind me broke my mood violently. The next moment, I saw a young white boy with a boorish face sticking out of the front window of his car up to his waist glaringly showing me the finger. Before I could respond the car was out of sight over the hill leaving me to wonder what this unprovoked action was all about. In the early 90's I had experienced my fare share of racism as a foreign graduate student at Bowling Green, Ohio. So my only conclusion, here I was again in the mid-west and here was another one to add to my list.

While this incident could have been a random biased prank by an ignorant teenager or a frat boy, being on the receiving end, I could not take it any other way. And there in lies the problem. Racism is like pornography. You know it when you see it. Racism in all its forms is a global phenomenon, a product of man's tribal nature. In America we have been trying to move beyond it since the civil rights movement brought about desegregation. The laws have brought us a long way forward, but as a people we still have miles to go.

Most people I passed by in Minneapolis smiled or said hello and were generally courteous. But this one incident left a deep scar. While many in this country put up a front of not being racist as that is what is expected of a law abiding civil society, what lies beneath and how it manifests itself is any ones guess. Every now and then racism and ignorance surface in the form of patronizing behavior or as in this case just plain insensitivity and stupidity.

In this stolen nation of ours there is no singular creed or breed that owns anything. If power is to be measured by strength in numbers and economic prowess, so be it. But what defines America's true nature is that anyone can lay claim to this land as long as you abide by the laws and respect your neighbor. That's what makes this place special and like no other on the planet. And so to feel superior by the color of ones skin or creed and have disdain for another, is nothing but folly.

With Obama's election there is at least a sense that we are living in a post racial America. And that is true for people who want to derive strength from it and celebrate the true essence of this land and its people. And for those who want to live in the past, there is no shortage of Limbaughs, Savages, O'Rileys and Hannity's to rally around.

When Obama used the word "stupid" in response to the policeman's action in Cambridge, Massachusetts, he found himself in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. The White House beer fest was effective damage control to calm the nerves of a nation that had been incessantly buzzing with debate over the incident. But the true "teachable moment" coming out of all this I would hope would be that since the president had weighed in, the policemen around the country would respond in a more responsible way when dealing with people of "color" and hopefully the people on the receiving end would "cut the policemen some slack". Given the way of the world and the people at the receiving end the latter would be harder to come by. As for me I am willing to accept ignorance but there is no place for intolerance, not here not anywhere. It is what it is.

RACE/DISGRACE

2009-07-23T21:57:00.000-07:00

In 2002 the much celebrated Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. presented a mini-series on PBS titled America Beyond the Color Line. The series explored the status of prominent and not so prominent African-Americans in America today. From the projects of south side Chicago to the upscale golf courses of New Jersey, Professor Gates gave the viewer a fascinating account of the African American experience.

On July 16, 2009 professor Gates, a black man, found himself on the wrong side of the color line when a white police officer arrested him for breaking into his own home. Professor Gates, who has taught at Harvard for nearly two decades, arrived home from a trip to China to find his front door jammed. With the help of his taxi driver he managed to pry it open and entered his house. Minutes later a policeman came knocking at his door asking suspecting questions. A white female neighbor had called in the police thinking her neighbor's house was being burglarized. What transpired between Professor Gates and the policeman materialized into the arrest and disgrace of a scholar and the Boston police department.

Whether this was a case of "racial profiling" is a question that has been debated to death in the frenzy of the relentless media. Even President Obama, who in the past has stealthily walked on water when responding to questions on race, could not escape the onslaught. His answer in defense of a personal friend came across as less than presidential, but understandable. But what we all can agree, is that there was no reason for this to be played out the way it did. While the police by their action disgraced an eminent scholar, the media did its fare share by plastering the professor's mug shot across the screen over and over again. Another photograph that was relentlessly zoomed and panned across was that of the professor being lead away in handcuffs. The indignity Professor Gates suffered has been sobering in every sense of the word.

Then came the explanations from the very characters who were involved in this circus, in the same media that had earlier maligned them. Even the president had to clarify his position in the most overt sense, so as not to come across as biased. That goes to show how sensitive an issue "race" is, more so because Obama is president.

Despite the truth behind the details of what happened that night, one cannot resist wondering how this would have played out if the person breaking in was a white person dressed in a mint suit. Would the neighbor still have felt unsafe? Would the police at the scene have behaved differently? And if it was not a celebrated Harvard Professor and a friend of the president, would the media have paid any attention at all? What makes the situation complicated is not what happened that night, but what may have happened if the parameters were different.

The color line in America is always charged by the nature of this nation's past. Obama's presidency in many ways may have softened that line, but in other instances has also hardened it. The overt polarization in the views expressed on television and in politics these days, is a telling sign of the times. The color line always remains present. It is its manifestation that is hidden. It is what it is.

Azadi Square

2009-06-26T20:28:00.000-07:00

"Azadi" in Pharsi and Urdu means "Freedom". A word so quintessential to our identity and well being, that without it one would be less human in every possible way. To not know what it means to be "Free" in mind, body and spirit, is to be denied ones humanity. So as Iranians spilled into "Azadi Square" demanding their vote to be ratified, they were most certainly demanding more than that. They were demanding their freedom. Freedom from 30 years of control both in the personal and public sphere. Freedom from status quo.

Iran by far is the most free thinking democratic nation in the Muslim world. Being the most literate and educated population in the Muslim middle east, it is not a surprise as free thought resides in the notion of being self aware. Even under an Islamic regime that asserts itself in draconian ways, and where real power rests with the clerics, the fact that they elect a president via an act of plebiscite, is admirable. So when this minuscule expression of people power inside a virtual Sharia dictatorship was taken away, everything was bound to come crashing down, and it did.

Two thirds of Iran's population is under the age of thirty. A manifestation of the massive human loss (1 million) suffered during its decade long war with Iraq. This demographic is desperate for change. Even though the regime has been overtly anti-American, the youth has been pro-American more so after Obama mystified the globe. And so they rallied behind Mir-Hossein Mousavi and the reformists, inspired by Obama's Cairo overture, hoping they would heed their call. One must not forget that Mousavi is no saint. He is part of the establishment that rules Iran and presided over the bloody war as Prime Minister while Ayatollah Khomeini sent young men, wave after wave, into battle. At this point in time Mousavi is dissenting along with other powerful "reformists" asking for change in the way Iran is governed. And that is seen as a threat to the establishment who want the old boys club to rule forever. Hence the stolen election and the aftermath.

If you have never traveled to Iran and have not kept up with the evolution of that nation, to understand what it is like to live in Iran and be Iranian, I recommend watching two films. Abbas Kiarostami's masterpiece "Ten" and Marjane Satrapi's "Persepolis". In subtle ways both films explore the deep desires of a free thinking, modern society which is kept under wraps by an imposed regime which demands obedience to the limits of absurdity.

History has demonstrated time and again, when people rise up to reclaim what is theirs, blood stains the streets. Iranians have shed their fair share in these past weeks. The killing of Neda Soltani, a student whose gruesome last moments were captured on video and posted on "youtube" for the world to see, has transformed the nature of the uprising to more than just a stolen election. Her death has become a defining moment which will always symbolize this moment for posterity. Much like the image of the nameless Chinese man in front of a row of army tanks has come to visualize the Tienanmen Sqaure pro-democracy uprising. While a few foreign journalists with cameras were able to bring that image to the world in 1989, ten years later the uncontainable nature of the internet proved much more lethal. Demonstrating the true democratic power of this technology we have come to take for granted.

While the regime regains control and Iran drops out of the headlines overrun by Michael Jackson and Obama sets the tone for the world in dealing with Iran, one thing cannot be denied. A fissure has opened among the power brokers of Iran. While Ahmednijad blames Obama and the west for the chaos (his only defense), he cannot ignore the diversity of the demographic that filled the streets asking for the truth. When the dust settles my forecast is that Iran can go one of two ways. It can clamp down and become a militaristic reclusive regime like North Korea or transform into China. The power brokers could settle their disputes and offer just enough consumerism to their population so that their transgressions would be ignored. The question remains, if Iran begins to become China will the west sweep everything under the carpet and return to business as usual or will it still hold the regime accountable. So far Mousavi is not backing down and the world is waiting. My hope is for Iran to become the Poland of 1989 and not China. But, it is what it is.

Colbert in Baghdad

2009-06-12T15:58:00.000-07:00

This past week fans of the Comedy Central TV show Colbert Report, saw its protagonist Stephen Colbert orchestrate his daily dose of political comic commentary from one of Saddam Hussein's palaces in Baghdad. His live audience this time were the men and women of the United States armed forces. The show was sponsored by the USO (United Services Organization). The USO as their website states is a "private, nonprofit organization whose mission is to support the troops by providing morale, welfare and recreation-type services to the men and women in uniform." In its 67 years of service the USO has made America's warriors forget their killing, stress and drudgery for a moment and laugh it off with comedians, movie stars, rock stars and celebrities of every kind. The iconic actor/comedian Bob Hope, was a regular celebrity entertaining the troops since World War II till his death in 2003. This time it was Stephen Colbert's turn.

Being an ardent fan, I felt Colbert was an unlikely candidate as his edgy liberal political humor did not fit the bill. But to my surprise there he was on stage against a deliberate tacky set with a new opening graphic mocking the Army and Saddam Hussein's regime. He walked on stage dressed in a tailor made army camouflage suit and tie sporting a golf club on his shoulder. The golf club he revealed was an homage to Bob Hope who always appeared on stage before the troops with his trade mark golf club and cap.

So the jokes began in its trade mark fashion. Mini episodes packaged in the US showed Colbert at Army basic training camp and flying with the elite Thunderbirds. He poked fun at the Army and Airforce in subtle ways, and got the deserved laughs. General Ray Odierno was his first guest. He tickled him by saying he was intimidated by him not because he was a general, but because he looked like Shrek. Later the General got orders from none other than the Commander-In-Chief via satellite to shave Colbert's hair to make him look like a real soldier. This act spread like fire capturing headlines across America's ever hungry news media signaling the arrival of Colbert into the consciousness of the American public like never before. The next day he had John McCain via satellite saluting the troops and making a dig at Colbert. Wrapping it up on the last day of his stint in Iraq he had none other than George W. Bush via satellite applauding the troops for a job well done and poking fun at the time when he had to suffer through Colbert's much talked about and "youtubed" performance at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. I think this was Bush's first television appearance since we last saw him take off from the White House lawn. What a way to return, saluting the very troops he lied to before sending them into battle. And to my surprise Colbert did not take this opportunity to use his wit which he is known for.

All in all it felt like Colbert had sold out. His edgy humor was reserved to current affairs in the US. He did declare that the war was over and America had won but that was as far as he went in being edgy about the politics of war. He came across more as the "Patriot" he so often mocks on his shows. Imagine if he had done this while Bush was president. It would have had a whole different taste.

These days Obama seems to be on television all the time. Since he became president we have seen him have burgers with Biden, taking Michelle out on a date, sitting across Leno, giving Brian Williams a tour of his "Crib" and now on Colbert Report. He is a popular president. America still goes dreamy eyed whenever he or his family are seen. Shouldn't he get off the air and devote his time and precious image to noteworthy causes? He could fall victim to over exposure. The change that he so fervently promised is slow and much too measured. There is nothing radical about it. And where ever you turn, from climate change, health care and economic reform and the war, what we need are bold and profound steps. The time for measured responses is long passed. What is stopping him? I hope the "Hope" that was promised was not "more of the same" in a new package. The Republican party is making sure he will be reelected for another term. He has the power to pull the plugs. So why the muteness? We will have to wait and see. But for how long?

On another note the fact that Colbert did not venture out into Baghdad to do his shtick, goes to show that the war is far from over. He could have driven that point home more in addition to declaring victory that he did to loud applause, but he did not. Even though Saddam is gone and he was an "evil" tyrant and all that, it was arrogant on Colbert's part to choose one of his palaces filled with American soldiers as a setting for his show. It was just in poor taste. And in conclusion there are people in Iraq who are suffering the loss and pain of their loved ones. Life is still miserable and dismal there. War is no laughing matter. A bombing in Iraq these days finds very little coverage in the American media. As far as America is concerned the war is over and it is only a matter of time when the "war machinery" will return to its barracks. The fact that a show of this nature was aired across the US, is an indication that there is a strong shift in the mood of the nation. Yes war is dreadful and one should be able to distance oneself from it and seek humor in order to find sanity and survive. Especially for those who conduct it. But to do it in a fashion so skewed is arrogant. It is what it is.

Burmese Brouhaha

2009-05-14T14:16:00.000-07:00

On May 14, 2009, 63-year-old Nobel Peace laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, was moved from her home to Insien Prison. She was charged with violating the terms of her house arrest. Her arrest grew out of a bizarre event in which John Yettaw, a Vietnam veteran from Missouri, swam across the Inya lake and spent at least one night on the grounds of her home, where she has been confined for 13 of the past 19 years. For the past few years she has been in frail health and it is believed being incarcerated under harsh conditions could prove fatal.

Aung San Suu Kyi's house arrest was due to expire at the end of May. There is a legal requirement to charge her or else release her from detention. At this crucial juncture, this incident is being seen by critics as a pretext to put her behind bars. The charges against her of breaching the terms of her house arrest show that the military junta will not tolerate any challenge to its power and legitimacy. Despite international pressure and concern, the Burmese government seems intent on pursuing elections in 2010, which the generals think will legitimise their rule.

Once again there is outcry mostly from the west and not a sigh from the region. While US and UK contemplate sanctions India in the grips of an election does not seem to have even registered this major event. All the major media outlets and online publications are preoccupied with the "circus" known as the Indian election and Aishwarya Rai's red carpet strut at the Cannes film festival. BBC, New York Times and Al Jazeera have all given this event prime coverage, why this apathy from the region?

Aung San Suu Kyi embodies everything for our times that Mahatma Gandhi did for his. She is an inspiration to anyone who believes in the ideals of freedom and democracy. Her imposed silence is a powerful force for change and change is coming. Nations and governments who do not recognize this fail their people and the world. The 2007 mass uprising of the Burmese people (Burma VJ) against their oppressors could not turn the tide, lets hope this new development will. Lets hope good conscience and sense prevails in the region and the plight of the Burmese people triumphs over profit. It is what it is.

Impotent Superpower

2009-05-12T07:35:00.000-07:00

War rages on in the south in Sri Lanka. In the west Pakistan and Afghanistan are entering yet another bloody chapter in their war for survival. In the east non-violent mass democracy movements are thwarted over and over again by the military junta of Burma. Political instability is an ever present danger in the north in Nepal. Surrounded by chaos India prides itself to be a strong stable political democracy and sees itself as a "superpower". But is it really worthy of being one?

Quintessentially India is a regional "superpower" without a doubt. A nuclear arsenal, a large standing well equipped army, navy and air force, a space program, software, 9% growth rate etc. all make it a nation worthy of the label. But when it comes to real seismic political and diplomatic influence India falls way short in its behavior as a regional power. When it comes to real tangible action in keeping peace in the region and promoting values that form the skeleton of its very being, India comes across as an inward looking parochial nation.

In 2007 when the Burmese people spilled onto the streets in a mass non-violent protest against the junta, none seen like since the Indian uprising against the British, the Indian government stood in the sidelines and watched. As the military regime put down the movement with brutal force (Burma VJ) India's voice was barely heard on the international scene. On the contrary in 2008 India signed several agreements with the repressive regime to explore petroleum and natural gas in the region. Joining China, Korea and Japan in inadvertently propping up the military junta.

According to the Worldwatch Institute in the last two decades the civil war in Sri Lanka has killed more than 60,000 people with another 20,000 missing. One of them being the Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, who was assassinated by a suicide bomber from Sri Lanka in 1991.

For the past decade Norway has played the role of the peacemaker between the Sri Lankan government and the rebels, only with limited successes. In the late 80's Rajiv Gandhi unlike other past and present leaders had engaged with the warring parties in a hope to be the peacemaker. The Indian army was sent in on a peace keeping mission which failed miserably. The mission was dubbed India's Vietnam. The leader of the Tamil rebel movement LTTE was invited to New Delhi to broker a peace deal, that failed as well. The Indian prime minister paid for it with his life.

Today as the Sri Lankan army fights to the finish, thousands of Sri Lankan Tamil civilians have been caught in the cross fire. There is a compete media black out. Reports coming out of the region can never be authentically corroborated. The United Nations once again proves impotent and powerless in stopping the carnage and the battle rages on taking with it women, children, the old and the young as collateral damage. India once again watches from the side line as the Tamils, whose origins are from the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, face the brunt of this war. Demonstrations in Canada and London have reverberated on the international scene bringing the plight of the Tamils to the world, but the voice from India once again lies silent.

On the western front as Pakistan engages the Taliban in the Swat valley and beyond, civilians in the thousands have been displaced into rag tag tents. An estimated half a million people are on the run from the Taliban, the Pakistan army and the American drones. There is no end in sight to this war and prospects of it spilling into Kashmir and destabilizing the region are much too real. Once again India watches and waits from the sidelines.

What does this posture the Indian government takes decade after decade mean? On one hand India has many grave internal security problems that it has to contend with on a daily basis and an argument can be made that it does not need to pile on more on its back. Unlike the US, the only other sizable democratic superpower, India does not have aspirations of empire and does not make it its business to spread democracy around the world. America on the other hand sees itself as the "global police" and makes it a point to exert its influence on a global scale, with sometimes questionable motives. For better or worse America does engage and therefore can call itself a "superpower". There are a number of blunders America has made in the chess game of power but it has also had the reputation of finding solutions through diplomacy and engagement. To its own detriment, America often cleans up the mess when regional powers are not willing to step up to the plate.

While the American envoy Richard Holbrooke does damage control and trots around the region making deals, why cannot India take the lead for a change? Why cannot India behave like a "superpower" for the right reasons? There is only political and diplomatic capital to be gained. This is the time to work with Pakistan to build stronger bridges and mutual trust. This is time to stand up against repressive regimes and use the word "Gandhi" where we can. This is the time to help people. It is easy to say it is their problem and not ours. And look where that has brought us. It is what it is.

Behemoth Election

2009-04-23T11:00:00.000-07:00

The world's largest democracy started casting ballots last week. With an electorate of 714 million and a mind numbing thousand regional and national parties to choose from, the Indian election is undoubtedly the world's most complex and truly democratic plebiscite. It is also the world's longest election. It is unveiled in five phases starting on April 16th and ending on May 13th. The final results are announced on May 16th and then the wrangling for power begins.

Being a parliamentary system of democracy, the party that wins the most number of seats ushers in the Prime Minister. The people do not directly vote for the Prime Minister. Since there are so many parties and such a diverse electorate it is almost impossible for any one party to win the required two thirds majority. In this election the two major national parties The Congress (ruling party) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (sitting opposition) or BJP will vie to form a majority coalition by forming alliances with a whole range of smaller parties and independents to take control of the parliament.

While for the most part the Indian elections are largely free and fair by no means are they peaceful. They have not been so in a long time. Election violence, vote rigging, vote buying and machine tampering have become a common feature. But it is to be expected in a land that is so vast, diverse and sometimes impossible to govern. Many regional conflicts around the nation have a stake in undermining the state. But largely the Indian elections are free and fair enough to swear in a government with legitimacy and an election commission truly autonomous and powerful to implement their mandate.

The ruling class or the breed of characters who enter the arena and practice the art of Indian politics have long been maligned as they have preyed on the weakness, desperation and ignorance of the electorate and exploited them for their own benefit. The poor, illiterate, rural India has always been the vote bank that put people in and out of power. In this election the middle class disinterested youth could change that tide but the rural folk still hold the key. And therefore it is the village where candidates go making false promises and bribing voters with free TV's, electricity and cheap food, in a land where increasingly the poor keep falling of the bottom.

Largely the admiration and respect for the Indian politician died soon after the generation of freedom fighters began to fade from the scene. After Nehru and Lal Bahadur Shastri departed an era ended. Then entered Indira Gandhi, Nehru's daughter who dramatically changed the political culture the remnants of which still plague the system. She fostered nepotism and rewarded people based on their loyalty to her and her party. Merit and character came second or did not count at all. And so began the dynastic rule of a family within a democracy and the rise of the corrupt politician who could be bought and sold. To this day the Indian elections are shaped by the Nehru-Gandhi family. Indira Gandhi's widowed daughter-in-law, Sonia Gandhi wields immense power and is a king maker, and now her son and daughter have entered the arena, walking in the footsteps of their grandmother more than their great grand father or father. Like the Kennedy's in the US the Gandhi's see it as their destiny to be pulled into the ugly business of politics as their fabricated mystique draws voters to them. Their fair skin Kashmiri/Italian good looks adds another layer of celebrity which the masses are drawn to like people are drawn to movie stars. A history of assassinations plaguing the family does not deter them from immersing themselves into the ugly seedy world of Indian politics. Today Rahul Gandhi, son of ex-prime minister Rajiv Gandhi is being groomed for the throne. He is a few years away from it, but by all indications he is on track, as his cult of personality grows.

Indian politics has never been for the faint hearted. It has always been the bastion of seasoned criminals, movie stars, businessmen and groomed politicians risen through the ranks. Corruption, monetary and moral, has been one character trait that has defined the Indian politician. Into this gumbo, this year, have entered two most unlikely candidates, Shashi Tharoor and Mallika Sarabhai. Both artists with global flare and pizazz. Neither was groomed for politics but both certainly were born with pedigree which in Indian politics can offset certain deficiencies.

Both candidates are contesting for a seat in the parliament. Tharoor is running from the southern state of Kerala, the most literate state in the country and Sarabhai from the western state of Gujarat which is the strong hold of the Hindu right wing BJP.

Mallika Sarabhai was born to Vikram and Mrinalini Sarabhai. Vikram Sarabhai was an Indian physicist who became a national hero when under Nehru he pioneered the Indian space program. Mirnalini Sarabhai, an accomplished dancer, is credited with reviving some of India's dieing classical dance traditions. Mallika herself is an accomplished dancer and fashions herself as an activist and development worker. With her classic good looks, suave persona and an impeccable Gujarati and English diction she has forged an institution unto herself in her home state. With the support of the NGO community she has launched herself as an independent candidate and is going head to head with the leader of the BJP, the seasoned 81 year old L.K. Advani.

Shashi Tharoor was born in London and educated in India and the United States. With a PhD in Law and Diplomacy he spent his career writing books and working at the United Nations. With eleven books, both fiction and non-fiction, and countless articles, op-ed's, book reviews published in most major American, British and Indian publications, he established himself as a formidable literary figure. He had aspirations of becoming the next secretary general of the UN when Kofi Annan stepped aside, but did not make the cut. So he took early retirement from his UN post as Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information and jumped into Indian politics head on. Being an avid admirer of Nehru and having written a book about him and being a close confidant to the Nehru-Gandhi family, it was but natural for him to join the Congress party.

While both these candidates have launched their campaigns on the heals of Obama's sleek victory, using the word "CHANGE" where ever possible, it is Mallika Sarabhai who has charted a more independent path. Both have fancy websites and youtube videos clearly trying to appeal to the younger generation. Like Obama, Mallika Sarabhai has mobilized a grass roots fund raising movement to finance her campaign and has been extraordinarily successful. Shashi Tharoor in contrast has used the established gargantuan machinery of the Congress party to win an election in a traditionally communist state. He has dropped his suit and adorned the white shirt and dhoti (Indian sarong), the dress that epitomizes and denigrates the visual look of an Indian politician. While Mallika Sarabhai prances around the countryside in her designer Shalwars, these two candidates in a sense are trying to signal a change in the political psyche of the Indian electorate.

While they may bring their pedigree and a level of sophistication to the arena, it will have to be seen how this would play out in the minds of the savvy voter who at times is highly educated, if not literate, in their decision making. While to a young urban audience they both bring a certain level of integrity, they also bring ambiguity. How this will be parsed, will be seen on election day. It is what it is.

Psycholigical Partition

2009-04-13T09:08:00.000-07:00

As Pakistan descends into anarchy, its creation and evolution are under scrutiny for all to draw conclusions. From Tariq Ali, Ahmed Rashid to Zardari all have a rationale for the current state of affairs. The most popular ones being American intervention in Pakistani politics, the war in Afghanistan spilling over and the "War on Terror". All of these factors undoubtedly are contributing factors to the woes of Pakistan today, but the seed for the current crisis was sown long before Bin Laden came to these parts.

When India was cut up over the corpses of more then three million mostly innocent civilians, the evolution of Pakistan and India was off to a rocky start. Pakistan declared itself an Islamic Republic, and adopted a political system on shaky pillars. India under Nehru could have gone the same absolutist route, as Nehru after independence had absolute power and could easily have declared himself a dictator. But he chose to implement a secular democratic system of governance and was successful in steering a fledgling nation towards long term political stability. India prevailed against all predictions of that time which forewarned a bleak fractious future for the sub continent. Especially because of the internal ethnic and regional strife, which even today threatens to tear India.

The debate about the quality of India's democracy that ensued is endless and the flaws in its system are obvious, but one cannot deny that it has managed to develop institutions that uphold the constitution, when it comes to political democracy. Ironically, Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi is the only one till date, who managed to desecrate the constitution from 1975-77, a period known as "The Emergency".

In contrast Pakistan's evolution took a different path. It has spent most of its three decades of Independence under autocratic rule and its constitution has been periodically shredded. Pakistan's first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated in 1951, only four years after Independence. In 1958 the military general Ayub Khan took power in a military coup setting a treacherous and bloody precedence that continues to plague Pakistan till today. The seeds of today's instability were sown early on, with the inability to keep the military out of politics giving rise to a failed sate with many centers of power, with different agendas. When there should have been only one, the one put in place by its people.

The Islamic militancy, terrorism, the rise of the Taliban and the ungovernable north west frontier all came about and were spawned by the inconsistent policies of the ever changing regimes implementing their various corrupt and populist agendas. As a result of Pakistan's democracy so often being hijacked by nefarious characters, it fell victim to America's interests in the region. The American financing and arming of the Mujahedeen during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan was done via Pakistan which by default led to the creation of the Taliban. Pakistan till today is heavily dependent on American military and economic aid.

I was born in Hyderabad, India in 1969. By then Pakistan had fought a few wars with India and a few more were to come. I grew up steadily brainwashed by public opinion and the media that Pakistan was enemy number one. This animosity was played out most overtly during cricket tournaments between the two nations. My Muslim friends had to constantly prove their allegiance to India during these times by overtly supporting the home team even when they performed poorly. If not they would be viewed as traitors. Then there were always reports of those who rejoiced blatantly when India lost and those incidents were considered good reasons to start riots. Riots were a common occurrence in Hyderabad where Hindus and Muslims live side by side. Mostly inflamed by criminal elements within local political parties, these clashes would polarize the city poisoning peoples minds in the ugliest manner. The Hindu-Muslim conflict was directly translated to the India-Pakistan divide. This divide is constantly shoved into peoples psyche on both sides of the border by the media and propaganda, and most often it goes without much thought. The only time the countries exhibit a sense of unity is when there is a skirmish on the border, there is a cricket match to be played out or in recent times a terrorist attack. A culture of mistrust and animosity eats away at its people and it seems to be getting worse with every passing year.

India and Pakistan have now gone nuclear. The land that launched Mahatma Gandhi, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Yoga and countless spiritual movements who's core philosophy was non-violence in the most absolute sense, now stands to launch the most violent "Astra" (weapon) created by mankind. Both nations have an arsenal substantial enough to exterminate each other many times over. Both are reeling under terrorist attacks of the most heinous kind and tensions are at an all time high. New reports of the Afghan conflict spilling into Kashmir, which has already been battered by the Indian Army and a Pakistan fueled insurgency for twenty years, are disturbing. So where do we go from here?

Every time I catch a taxi in New York city, nine out of ten times the driver is from the sub- continent. And most often than not he turns out to be Pakistani. Within minutes as soon as I scan his I.D. which is prominently displayed on the "partition" and our origins are determined, our conversation moves from English to Urdu or Hindi. The camaraderie is more than apparent, when we start talking about the food, culture, language, poetry and everything that makes us similar than different. And when time comes for the driver to drop me at my door, he refuses to accept my money. As in our culture it is discourteous to accept money from a friend. This has happened to me more than a few times in New York. And as I wish him a safe working night, I ponder on the ludicrousness of the India-Pakistan divide. How can an invisible border keep the same people apart for so long? If the Germans and Vietnamese can reunite what is stopping us? Well some might call this is a naive and preposterous thought, but for how long will this animosity poison our people? It becomes more and more apparent that the forces that are tearing the two nations from within can only be dealt with mutual trust and honest cooperation. Which in itself is a monumental task to achieve. Accepting the statuscquo has never brought progress. We needed a person like Gandhi to mobilize and challenge the status quo for the British empire to end its global dominion. The deception and posturing has to end in the interest of the people. When there is no psychological partition there is need for a geographical one. It is what it is.

Make a REAL Difference

2009-03-25T18:21:00.000-07:00

More than $1 Trillion in developmental aid has gone to Africa over the past 50 years. So, what kinds of benefits has all that money provided for people who live on the continent? Not much, says former World Bank consultant Dambisa Moyo in her book Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How there Is a Better Way. Her thesis is that aid given as a hand out does not work and never will, as it does not hold the governments disbursing the aid accountable. A continent which is awash with dictators who preside over failed states, aid as a concept seems to have had very little long term impact. Present and past political regimes have used the bureaucracy of international aid to further their primary goal of maintaining a grip on power. Robert Mugabe is a great example for our times.

Institutional aid coming from governments, The World Bank, UN and IMF have proven to be ineffective. According to Dambisa Moyo there is a growing sentiment among experts and African leaders that aid does not foster entrepreneurship and therefore on the long run does not benefit the people of the receiving nation. Therefore she recommends African nations to decline aid and get off the wagon of panhandlers and foster entrepreneurship among its people.

One cannot deny the abject poverty that needs to be dealt with on a short term basis to bring about a level of stability. Non governmental organizations such as Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders and countless others are doing a phenomenal job in tackling poverty. What can you do, (other than writing a check to one of these organizations and not knowing how the money is being spent) where you can truly feel empowered ?

In her book Dambisa Moyo mentions an American Internet based not-for profit-organization called KIVA which is providing a commendable service by offering micro-credit to entrepreneurs in poor countries. I immediately went to www.kiva.org and was amazed by the brilliance of the idea. Within minutes I found an African woman in need of money to get her small store off the ground. Using my paypal account I donated $25. Hours later I found out she had received her money and she was able to raise the finance she needed from several individuals like me to start her business. The best part, the money I gave was a loan and not a hand out. She is supposed to pay it back when her business improves and there is a term limit on the loan.

I have given money to organizations which work with the poor many times. I am an Oxfam patron. But this is the first time I could genuinely see, almost in real time, my money at work.
It was truly empowering and satisfying and I felt I was contributing to more than one person or family. I urge everyone to go to www.kiva.org and make a REAL difference.

Even in these tough economic times we are better off than most people in the world. We can still give and giving is what will bring us back from the brink. It is what it is.

Larry plugs Gupta

2009-03-18T00:07:00.000-07:00

Flipping through mindless television in my nightly vegetative solitude I stumbled upon Larry King doing his shtick about the audacity of greedy AIG executives. Three fourths of the way into the show he takes a break to announce to the world that Dr. Sanjay Gupta (one of the other CNN super anchors) had become a father for the third time. Soon the fresh baby's picture was splashed across the screen and the doctor was on the phone giving us the medical details. I could almost hear the viewing audience go "aaahhhh". In the two minutes that followed the doctor told us that this was his third daughter. He did not know "if this was meant to be a punishment or a reward". While he had delivered his second daughter he did not perform the delivery this time. Despite his hectic schedule we learned he had been a good husband being present for every ultrasound except one. Then we found out that he was present in the OR for all his children's deliveries and this time the journalist in him had him flip the camera on in one hand while the other cut the umbilical chord. Interrupted by Larry he spared us the remaining details and we all found out what a stand up father, husband and doctor Sanjay Gupta really is.

Did we really need to know all this? Do we really care? He is not exactly a family friend, he is just a face on TV. He may be a dashing young accomplished surgeon with an angular chin, "ethnic" and articulate, but at the end of the day he is just another TV reporter, a ruse for a journalist, trying to transform himself into a celebrity by virtue of being on TV. And here was CNN taking part in that very process by shoving his personal life into our face.

There was a time when journalism was about the story and not the person bringing us the story. But with the advent of the Diane Sawyers and Barbra Walters' TV journalism has become as much about the face as the story. The cult of personality of TV reporters has become an acceptable aspect of TV news reporting. The respective networks that these personalities represent market them as faces of authenticity. If it is coming from the mouth of a Blitzer or a Brokow then the news has a certain element of gravitas, and therefore it is credible. If not it would be just dribble. And hence that cult of personality has to be shaped through promo spots and having absurd names for news programs like AC 360º. News has to be delivered in a constant state of climax, otherwise the 30 second sound byte would be lost in the air waves of an infinite TV universe.

So while TV networks conspire in creating the cult of personality for their anchormen and women, one should be aware that they are playing the role of paparazzi in a surreptitious way. There is only six degrees of separation between CNN, Fox News, ABC News and TMZ. The difference being Larry King will not take a break to reveal to the world if Dr. Sanjay Gupta was involved in a child custody battle or an extra marital affair. It is what it is.

Food for thought

2009-02-23T16:50:00.000-08:00

GENETICS LOADS THE GUN
AND THE ENVIRONMENT PULLS THE TRIGGER.

Not my words, heard it on the radio in a discussion about who lives, how long and in what state.

Made perfect sense.

We all live in a polluted world breathing lethal chemicals and digesting mercury without our knowledge. But every one responds differently to the pollutants based on their genetic make up. And that decides what diseases one would be prone to contract or develop in the course of ones life span. It is not just about the toxins that we come in physical contact with, but also ones mental state . People with high stress and discomfort will develop certain diseases in comparison to people who live like monks. It is what it is.

The Oscar Orgy

2009-02-22T08:10:00.000-08:00

This evening millions around the world will turn on their television sets to watch a red carpet orgy "Live". An annual showcase of pomp and pageantry that has become a global event purely because of the might of the American media to "shove it down" through the air waves. While movies and people who make them are pitted against each other and crowned in a run off, it is hard to ignore that the Oscars are primarily about American cinema and films made in the English language, overwhelmingly by a white community. The token black actor or the occasional surprise and the foreign film category attempt to give it an international flavor, but in no sense of the word is it an international affair. The only thing that makes it global is the viewing audience. At the end of the day the event is merely a network TV show with premium advertising, where you get to see your favorite actors outside of their screen persona, showing of their beautiful made up faces and clothes, like gods and goddesses descended from the heavens.

This year “Slumdog Millionaire” attempts to add international flavor to the Oscars even though it’s a British production with some Indian talent lucky to be nominated. Most often the majority of the awards are shared between the Americans, the British and recently the Australians.

The great American actor George C. Scott was nominated twice and won it once for his role as the war general Patton. He never attended the gala and declined to accept the award as he felt the whole process forced actors to become stars and the ceremony was little more than a "meat parade." He found the whole notion of pitting actors against each other to proclaim one a winner, absurd and obscene. He famously said "the ceremonies are a two-hour meat parade, a public display with contrived suspense for economic reasons." Unlike Marlon Brando who declined to accept the award for political reasons, George C. Scott had strong personal convictions about the hoopla and rightly so. But then he was George C. Scott a titan in his own right.

The Oscar podium provides a great forum for people to voice their opinion about what’s wrong with the world. But seldom do you find people taking advantage of that. For most people the award is a badge that furthers their career, so movie trailers can use the term “Academy Award Winner/Nominated” to sell their movies.

I have been guilty of watching the Oscar orgy many times. Partly because I am a filmmaker and have been a movie buff all my life. At the same time I am a documentary filmmaker and have always felt discriminated and am happy to have a documentary category at the Oscars. Even so like many in the biz and outside the biz I dream of making a feature film one day. Ironically the pain and glory of working with actors and telling a fictional story is rewarded more in the culture we live in. For all the criticism I would not mind having gold on my mantle someday.

At the back of my mind, I understand and am aware of the power of movie stars and the celebrity meat culture that poisons our world and pushes its way into our subconscious. Like many who live in a TV/internet infested world, I am a victim of this media incursion. At the same time I talk about movies all the time with great passion. Even though I find the cult of celebrity misplaced in the world we live in, most probably I will be watching the ceremony tonight rooting for “Slumdog Millionaire” and A.R.Rahman. It is what it is.

Dead BODIES

2009-02-13T08:02:00.000-08:00

“Bodies…The Exhibition” has become America’s biggest museum sensation and has been playing to full houses across the nation. The exhibition is a traveling spectacle of 20 real cadavers and more than 250 body parts, exhibited in a dark, black and gray sleekly lit display spanning eight large rooms. The show is produced by Premier Exhibitions Inc., an Atlanta-based company which specializes in creating mega-million dollar grossing exhibitions. The company is listed on the NASDAQ offering its investors handsome dividends.

Unlike its earlier exhibition like “Titanic”, “Bodies” has stirred debate just about everywhere it has shown for using unidentified bodies of Chinese citizens, who apparently did not document their consent for use of their remains. The bodies were allegedly obtained from the Dalian Medical University in China and were unclaimed bodies from their morgue.

From Miami to New York City this exhibition has educated, enthralled, fascinated and repulsed thousands. It has been showing in New York City since 2005, held over by popular demand. The New York exhibit has recorded remarkable ticket sales. With tickets priced at $25 per person, more than the admission fees charged by the MOMA and The Met, it has become one of the most popular destinations on the New York cultural scene. It has been showing at the South Street Seaport location a two minute walk from my office. For months I had been contemplating making a visit with my daughter but some how never managed just out of concern that it might repulse us. Recently a relative of mine visiting from Canada showed great interest in seeing the exhibit, so I finally caved in. Even though my wife had some valid arguments as to why we should not go, I decided that I could not judge something informed only with what others have written or said. I had to see it for myself to determine whether it was controversial enough to warrant disdain.

As we entered the first room, a big sign screamed at us saying, PHOTOGRAPHY STRICTLY PROHIBITED. There were people in uniform making sure you did not use even your cell phone to take any pictures. This prohibition seemed a bit excessive to me. These were after all dead bodies, not ancient artifacts. The first room was dedicated to the muscular system. A skinless figure greeted me with his muscles flying out of his legs and arms. He was postured as though he was running a race and his muscles were separated as though they were flying like ribbons attached to his limbs. It looked like a sculpture at first glance, a work of art. There were others displayed in various sporting postures, swinging a baseball bat and holding a football. There were other smaller exhibits in the room, body parts enclosed in glass cases. On first glance it was fascinating to see the human body in this form. Exposed, with out skin, fat, muscles and veins- all revealed. It reminded me of a large piece of meat from an Asian village market hanging from a hook, but without the smell and the presence of flies on flesh. It was frozen in time and space. You could not help but wonder how it could have been preserved in this manner.

I found out that the preservation process is called Plastination. It involves carefully dissecting the skin from the human body, then immersing it in various chemicals and replacing all that is water in the body by a silicone rubber which effectively solidifies the body parts. It sounded simple but I am sure the process required great skill. From afar the figures looked dry, rubbery and extremely fragile. The preservation process, we were told, was painstaking work and it took approximately fifteen hundred hours to create a single specimen. The result was body parts mostly preserved in all their detail, texture and color.

I was fascinated and consumed by the science behind this exhibition until my eyes met the eyes of an anonymous body. In the eyes I could see an expression. Behind the eyes was a brain visible in all its intricate detail, and I could not stop to imagine that this person was once a living breathing creature with hopes and dreams and now, without his knowledge, was a skinless model in a room surrounded by strangers looking at him through his nakedness. This was a very disconcerting and uncomfortable feeling as I was a member of that crowd as well.

My eight year old, innocent and virgin in her thinking, devoid of the baggage of adults, was enjoying the museum with out any blinders or deep philosophical leanings. For her, it did not matter if the bodies were real or not. She was being a sponge, inquisitive and enamored by what she was seeing, completely fascinated by the detail and the textures. For her it was no different from going to the Museum of Natural History where stuffed African Elephants and other exotic animals were routinely displayed in still life. The art of taxidermy had finally come to the human specimen. But this was a reverse process. The shell was gone and the insides were frozen in time. These bodies were over 90% real and original in composition. The skin was skinned and the anatomy was the exhibit. Henry Gray’s classic book on the human anatomy was on view in three dimension. I am sure he would have been stunned by this exhibit.

As we walked through the endocrine system, nervous system, respiratory system, things began to get more and more complex. The human organs were displayed in every cross section possible. The intricate web of the human nervous system was suspended in a glass tank separated from skin, muscle and bone. Diseased lungs were displayed next to healthy ones. A smoker’s lung charred black by nicotine and other noxious substances lay there scaring the smoking audience. An obese body was displayed with yellow fat hanging from every side. That was a rare specimen. An obese Chinese is hard to come by. I had never seen one in motion in my lifetime, and here he was frozen in time.

And then finally, I saw a female in the reproductive section. This exhibition was another place where you felt it was a man’s world we lived in. This lonely woman stood there exposing herself as the bearer of life and all that comes with it. The exhibition in one sense was telling me that this was the only reason the woman was made, to bare children. I could see why some feminists have had a problem with the exhibit. But later I would find there was an explanation for it. Next to the woman, displayed in small glass containers were the different stages of the human fetus. My eight-year-old found this fascinating and disgusting at the same time, especially because her baby sister had been born only a few months ago and she was saddened to see babies lying there still and lifeless. We had to leave that room in a hurry.

Many interesting lesser known facts about the human body were displayed on the walls, on large placards. They made interesting reading even for my young one.

By the time we reached the last room of the exhibit, I had had my fill of dead bodies and the finer aspects of the construction of the machine known as the human body. I still could not get over the fact that this exhibition was racially homogeneous. Thoughts about why these were only Chinese specimens and not any other, bothered me, especially because China has a deplorable human rights record and is a nation that sends more people to death as a program of punishment than any other in the world. The United States is not far behind in that statistic. So, I wondered why I did not see American specimens – black and white - in the exhibit.

At the end of the exhibit was a perky man sitting behind a table with a button on his shirt with the words “ASK ME”. He, I assumed, was the spokesperson for the exhibit and answered questions that remained unanswered for many, and I sure had my share. When I approached the table, I realized he was there to entertain the children who were passing through the museum with some fun facts. This was the table where you could actually touch and feel body parts. You were not allowed to touch those in the exhibit as they were delicately supported and suspended. The children were having fun asking questions and answering those posed by him, while squeezing body parts. My eight-year-old, who wants to be a doctor when she grows up, had quite an impressive set of question to ask the man while he offered her a liver, heart, spleen and a lung to clasp. After the children had their fill, then came my turn to ask him some questions.

The first logical question in my mind was the one which was bothering me a lot:

“Why Chinese? Why not some Americans and some others from around the world?”

He said it was easier to acquire specimens from China than anywhere else. And all the specimens were unclaimed bodies from a morgue. And there was some other connection between the person who had pioneered this technique of preserving bodies and China, which I could not entirely understand from his explanation. Then, he added, if there were Caucasians in the exhibit, the audience (predominantly Caucasian) would have had a hard time looking at the bodies. Even though the exhibit showed, that under the skin we are all the same, the fact that the specimens were all Chinese, defeated that very purpose.

“Why mostly men”?

He responded by saying that most often it is the men who are reckless and disregard their families, get drunk and get killed. The women, on the other hand, stay close to their children and are programmed to put their wellbeing last and their children’s first and the chances of them going missing and ending up unclaimed in a morgue are rare. That, I thought, was an interesting hypothesis offered by a man who certainly did not seem like a social scientist with a PhD. I had a feeling, however, that it was his own hypothesis and not the company line. But then again, it could have been a company line fed to him in anticipation of such questions being raised by the general public.

As I walked away from the museum with an unsettling feeling, I could not help but think of the countless times humans have desecrated the dead in pursuit of science, history, curiosity and sometimes pure entertainment. These have ranged from the “body snatchers” of the 19th century, who stole dead bodies from burial sites to meet the growing demands of the medical establishment of the time, to the unearthing of mummies from Pyramids in Egypt and South America to be exhibited in museums in the west. Together with the display of the preserved bodies of Lenin, Mao and Stalin in glass enclosures and the reality TV show on the National Geographic Channel called “The Mummy Road Show,” dead bodies have always played to the curiosity of the human mind. And, now with this exhibition, new ground has been broken as a result of technological breakthroughs and humankind’s ingenuity. The art of preserving flesh and bone had reached a new level. The unending quest for humans to deal with their own mortality pushes them to look at our insides closer, than ever before.

While all these questions knocked around in my brain, one aspect of the exhibition that continued to cause me great concern: the racial homogeneity. I could not ignore the fact that these bodies come from the world’s most populous country already supplying the West with a vast array of cheap consumer goods. Now, members of the Chinese populace have, themselves, become a low-cost source of bodies and body parts. Even if they were acquired through legal channels, there is considerable evidence that China’s repressive regime does not value the lives of its citizens. With a growing worldwide illegal trade in human organs emerging as a growing business, and with China on the forefront, no matter how good the exhibits are, it was hard for me to walk away from there emotionally unscathed. The pain was even sharper when I realized how heavily my pocketbook was hit to pay to see this show. I have to console myself by observing that it at least generated this essay, for which I am grateful.

This exhibition probably will never travel to China. If it does, it would be fascinating to record the reaction of a predominantly Chinese audience. So, no matter how spectacular human endeavors are worth in my dictionary of any achievement, creative or otherwise, they are always measured by the ethics that define them. Everyone walks by one’s own code and so, this exhibition could have been a fascinating journey of spectacle for many and also had a great deal of educative value for some. For me, it was a troubling observation of ourselves, and the complex world we live in.

With more than a million viewers having passed through it, the exhibition in New York has been extended indefinitely by popular demand. It is what it is.

Republic Day

2009-01-26T08:14:00.000-08:00

It is the 26th of January. On this day India celebrates "Republic Day", marking the adoption of the constitution and the transition of India from a British Dominion to a republic. It is a day of great national pride. It is a national holiday and the country is awash in flags and all that symbolizes nationalism in the most overt way. Growing up as a boy in India in the 80's, what I remember most is waking up in the morning and turning on my Dyanora black and white TV (one of two brands sold in India in the 80's) to watch the live broadcast of the parade from Rajpath in Delhi. The muddy gray images of the crowds gathering on the bleachers in the cold Delhi winter waiting for the parade to begin are vivid in my mind. Then the presidential horse carriage gently drives down the majestic colonial road. The president descends and shakes hands with all the dignitaries and the celebrations begin. The whole event lasts for half the day with endless army, navy and air force battalions marching in unison and floats displaying India's vast cultural colorful diversity forming an impressive pageant.

Today marks the 60th anniversary of the Indian republic.The economic down turn and the terrorist attacks on Mumbai have not deterred the government from putting on an impressive show. Republic day is also the day the country shows off its military hardware. The tanks, the missiles, war planes and a plethora of killing machines are on grand display. This year the nuclear weapon carrying missile "Agni" was on display. The chief guest at this years celebration was the Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbaye. A controversial leader who has been in power since 1990 and has constantly undermined democracy in his nation. A dictator hiding behind a suit.

As a child the images on television always instilled a sense of pride. I always dreamt of being on those bleachers one day taking in the foggy Delhi morning. Much like dreaming of attending the Olympic games or the Wimbledon. But now as an adult I find those dreams misplaced. Even though America is the largest supplier of weapons to the world, the public display of military hardware is always shunned. A double standard, effectively managed for the world and the nation. The last time a presidential candidate was seen wearing a helmet in a tank, it ended his career. I do not understand why India, which is a democratic secular nation feels the need to present itself in this manner. It seems like a vestige from the time when it was aligned with the Soviets. I always associate military parades with repressive regimes. India feels the need to show its neighbors once a year that it has the fire power, so shoot at your own risk. The age old deterrent theory.

The most ironic aspect of the Republic Day parade is that the majestic road that it marches down is flanked by a statue of Mahatma Gandhi on one end. In fact from where he stands, he gets a clear unobstructed view of all the weaponry. I wonder what he must be thinking as he sees a nuclear warhead pointed at him. It is what it is.

The Obama Factor

2009-01-19T08:47:00.000-08:00

It was August, 15, 1992, I was speeding down an empty highway with a stranger at the wheel. All I can remember is a disorienting feeling looking down a dark highway lit by headlights and trying to have a conversation with the driver who was so gracious to give me a ride. We were driving through corn fields in the middle of Ohio. I had just got off a small plane at Toledo airport, and was being driven to a small town called Bowling Green. I was to start a graduate program in Mass Communication at the Bowling Green State University. This was the first time I had left my homeland, India, in search of change, I was 24.

The first few weeks at Bowling Green were extremely disorienting, foreign and stressful. While I settled down and dealt with my anxieties and inner demons, one thing I knew was certain, there was no turning back. I had come very far. I had two hundred dollars in my pocket and a promise of a scholarship and no return ticket. My parents had high hopes, they had mortgaged their house for this trip and the pressure was immense. There was no question of failure. Quitting was not an option.

For the first time in my life I was a foreigner in a foreign land. I was the "minority". I was one of the few people on campus whose skin color was not fair. Up until then I had grown up a part of the ruling class. The middle class educated Hindu. This new identity I had acquired made me grow up many fold and opened my eyes to the history of the American civil rights movement, and the sacrifice of Martin Luther King and all those who followed in his foot steps. With out them I would not be standing in America shoulder to shoulder.

For a campus town Bowling Green was unusually homogeneous. It was a small town with a mile long downtown surrounded by blue collar families. One night a couple of Indian friends and I were walking home from downtown. We saw a car drive by and saw something fly by and land on the grass next to us. It took us a moment to realize that someone had thrown an egg at us. We were shaken. A few days later, I was walking down main street and someone shouted out"Why don't you go back where you came from?". For a moment I could not understand what this young boy was trying to say. It did not take long to figure out what he meant. I was a victim of physical racism. I had never faced something of this nature ever before. Racism exists in India in the form of caste-ism, but as I had grown up in a city and belonged to the elite class, I was immunized. My parents made sure we were never subjected to it. Racism based on the color of ones skin is much more subtle in India as the shades are too many. Even though these were the only two racial epithets I ever faced, they did leave a deep scar. I could not bare to imagine what black America went through in the depths of segregation.

I met more people in Bowling Green who were nice, gracious, tolerant and understanding of me. Intolerance and ignorance can show its ugly face anywhere, but I truly believe it has become the exception than the norm in most parts of the country. At least there is a modicum of civility around race unless you are a black man driving down an interstate highway.

The phenomenon of Obama is being marked as a turning point in the ugly legacy of racism. It is truly an historical moment for many reasons, but in no way does it mean that racism has been banished. By the act of becoming president, Obama has given people of all races and origins the power to walk proudly with their head held high. By the nature of his progeny he has also asked us to have trust and faith in the humanity of all people. Today, I can walk into an upscale restaurant in Manhattan and expect to be treated like everybody else and not be judged by the color of my skin because Obama is president. I can make that argument in my mind, no matter what the reality is and feel good about myself. This is truly historical. America may not have turned the corner when it comes to race, but in its people's mind that corner is on the verge of being turned.

Tomorrow Obama becomes president. It also happens to be my birthday. I became a US citizen a few months ago. I had mixed feelings about it, but Obama's ascendancy gave me hope. I actually began to feel proud, and for the first time in my life made a campaign contribution to a political party and actually made phone calls for Obama. The alternative was just not acceptable to me.

And so we celebrate a change tomorrow. But I fear Obama's cult of personality is pushing its limits. He is being portrayed as "The Messiah" who is going to deliver us to the promised land. He is being compared to Martin Luther King and I am afraid that the bar is being set unreasonably high because of the historical nature of his presidency. If he falters, he runs the risk of being judged unfairly. Washington D.C. is a behemoth, and to move and shake it is going to be difficult. So let us treat him like one among us. A president is always a citizen first. He is a rock star lets not make him a rock god prematurely. He has the most difficult job at hand. Let us be fair and critical. That is what people do in a free country. It is what it is.

My Take on Slumdog Millionaire

2009-01-13T11:08:00.000-08:00

September 2008 was when I first heard about Danny Boyle's new film Slumdog Millionaire. It had clinched the best picture prize at the Toronto International Film Festival. Since then the film has been steadily gaining momentum steam rolling its way through the hearts of critics and audiences culminating with a big bang at the Golden Globes. Now it stands poised to make even more noise at the Oscars and I would be surprised if it does not bag some of the major awards.

What makes Slumdog stand out is the fact that it does not fit a mold. It is a genre bender that truly transcends categories mainstream cinema is so comfortable with. It is a comedy, documentary, art house film, serious social drama, suspense thriller, adventure, and straight out love story. Even though the film is partly subtitled, it does not fit the foreign film category as well, as for the most part it is an English language film. A movie like this comes around once in a while, when producers really take a risk with a small film and allow the magic of cinema to rise to new heights by pushing the envelope. As Simon Beaufoy, the screenplay writer put it, Danny Boyle took the script and really made it "fly" and that is why it resonates the way it does.

Slumdog Millionaire at its core is a straight out underdog story. A story about a boy who triumphs against all odds, making his way out of a dreadful and hostile Mumbai slum to become a "man" and win a TV game show all with a single purpose - to win his true love, his childhood sweet heart. The basic premise of the film seems to be plucked straight out of a Hindi film from the 70's. Two brothers are separated from their mother and left to fend for themselves, with a girl thrown into the mix. One grows up to be good and the other bad. The good one prevails, gets the girl and saves the day with an uplifting feel good ending. This theme was very common in the films of Amitabh Bachchan, who is paid homage to a few times in the film. One of the most unsettling scenes in the beginning of the film is built around Amitabh's helicopter landing by the slum, as a mob runs out to catch a glimpse of the super star. For those who do not know, Amitabh Bachchan is the biggest movie star Hindi cinema has ever produced. Bachchan topped a 1999 BBC News website poll to find the greatest star of the millennium, beating the likes of Marlon Brando and Charlie Chaplin. His influence on the popular culture of India is beautifully woven into the film, through dialog and visual juxtaposition.

What makes the film truly fly is its narrative structure. The film begins with Jamaal, the protagonist, being interrogated by the police as he is suspected of cheating on the popular game show, the Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Jamaal is the most unlikely candidate as he is a "Chai Walla" (a boy who serves tea at the office) from the slums and is on the verge of winning the highest prize ever. And so the story begins as Jamaal begins to explain to the police inspector how he came upon the correct answers. The explanation of how he was able to arrive at the answers reveals an episode in Jamaal’s life. The film is essentially a collection of incidents in Jamaal’s life all tied together and inter-cut with the progression of the game show. It follows the transformation of Jamaal from a feisty and industrious little boy in the slums to a young man on a game show. In that journey Danny Boyle drags us through the filth of the worlds largest slum to the high reaches of the underworld and modern India of game shows and call centers, deftly capturing the complexity, energy, intensity, vibrancy and humanity of Mumbai. The film exquisitely reveals the different layers on which India exists and thrives. An idea as an Indian I have always found hard to communicate to somebody who was not born there.

The gritty and intense world of the slums in Slumdog, is reminiscent of the Favelas of the 2002 Brazilian hit City of God. While City of God was mostly preoccupied with the violence and crime of the Favela's and the children caught up in it. In contrast Slumdog while showing the violence and the unforgiving nature of that world, tries to show the humanity of its characters, and how they are able to rise above the harsh world that is dealt to them. India has one of the most appalling human rights records when it comes to religious violence, its destitute children and poverty. More children in India go hungry every day, than in any other country in Asia. Child labor is out of control and the trafficking of children is at an alarming level. The film deals with these issues in a shocking way, but never to a point where it bogs you down. And that balance it strikes keeps the viewing experience fresh, energized, entertaining and thought provoking at the same time.

It is an often expressed view that films that deal with poverty and those that show the underbelly of India always do well with Hollywood and western audiences. These themes are provocative, challenging and foreign and therefore very engaging. Amitabh Bachchan, who ironically was the first host of the highly successful Indian franchise of Who Wants to be a Millionaire, levied a criticism of this nature on Slumdog. He later retracted his statement but this is not a new sentiment. Similar criticism was expressed about fifty years ago when Satyajit Ray, India's most celebrated filmmaker, made his master piece Pather Panchali. This film dealt with rural poverty and the abject nature of it. Which was too real for some Indians to digest as Slumdog in many ways is. Indian's are always irked when images of India's underbelly are portrayed on the world stage, especially by western filmmakers. It becomes a matter of pride.

While there is some truth to the fact that the "Third World" is always portrayed as being either exotic or downtrodden, when seen through the eyes of the "westerner", Slumdog defies that stereotype. I have seen many films that exoticise India all the time, through what I call the "National Geographic" POV. Where everything looks golden, colorful and bright all the time, with snake charmers and colorful village folk. Like putting Vaseline on the lens, the “orientalization” of India. Slumdog does the opposite. It shows India the way it is. Films like Gandhi, A Passage to India and the Merchant Ivory productions, all big award winners, have always been fascinated by "The Raj" element of India and as a result set a standard for how the west views India. Danny Boyle on the contrary is able to get into the skin of India and show it in the most frank and honest manner. Sometimes it takes an outsider to capture that essence as they bring a fresh and untainted point of view. Slumdog exposes India in a very non-judgmental way, almost saying this is the way life is here, but you can still rise above it.

In a recent BBC interview Danny Boyle was asked if Bollywood could ever make a film like Slumdog. And his response was, "They do not have the Balls". I could not agree with him more. Bollywood to a large extent is preoccupied with formulaic film making. A kind of film making whose sole purpose is to help the audience go to a place where people always look fair, dance on a drop of a hat and communicate in an unreal hybrid dialect which only people on the silver screen speak. Bollywood is not set up to take risks and is more preoccupied with kitsch than reality. Another reason Bollywood will never make a film like Slumdog, is because it is serving an audience that is trying to get away from the sort of things that are addressed in the film. The argument that people want to go to the cinema to escape from reality is a commonly held belief. There are filmmakers within the Bollywood system who make films that are a reflection of society, but they are too few. For the most part, in the Indian context reality has to be sugar coated that is the only way it’s going to go down well with a mass audience. India makes more films per year than any other country in the world. Hong Kong, China, South Korea and Japan are some Asian countries who make a fraction of what India puts out, but are able to create films that are far superior in production value and content. Slumdog at the end of the day is an entertaining film, and proves that a film can have both artistic and entertainment merit, if the right talent is put into motion.

Even though Slumdog is a British production, in the talent department it is truly a collaborative endeavor. Based on a book by an Indian writer Vikas Swarup it stars Bollywood veterans, Anil Kapoor as the host of the game show and Irfan Khan, who uncannily finds his way into every Ameircan or British film about India (The Namesake, The Darjeeling Limited, A Mighty Heart, to name a few), as the inspector. The co-director Lavoleen Tandan, is an Indian who has worked with Mira Niar on the casting of her films. The music is composed and scored by A.R. Rahman, the biggest and most prolific name in Indian pop and film music. In 2002 A.R.Rahman made his West End and subsequently Broadway debut with "Bombay Dreams". He became the first Indian ever to take home a Golden Globe. With his win the Indian media has co-opted the film as though it is a Bollywood production and has been singing high praise. Winning international accolades is a huge deal for a billion strong nation. Other than cricket, Indians seldom do well at the olympics and other international competitive events. Only two other Indian's have ever won an Oscar. Bhanu Athaiya shared for best costume for Gandhi and Satyajit Ray was give an Oscar for life time achievement on his death bed, thanks to the Martin Scorsese lobby. Slumdog releases in India in January. It will have to be seen how the Indian audience warms up to a film that is creating so much buzz on the international stage. It will also have to be seen what kind of a release the film gets. Being that it is in English and has a rather artsy unconventional structure it might find an audience only in urban India.

The success of Slumdog has had many people thinking that it will open doors to Indian talent on the international scene. Sharukh Khan, a top Bollywood star was a presenter at the Golden Globes this year. Ironically he was also the host who took over when Amitabh left the Indian Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Probably that was the reason he was chosen as one of the presenters. Many people saw his presence as another acknowledgement of Bollywood’s influence. I beg to differ. Like Yoga and Chicken Tikka Masala, Bollywood has made inroads into the psyche of Americans and also into its movies (Moulin Rouge, The Love Guru, Vanity Fair etc., the list is long) but it’s only a fad. Musicals are no longer made in Hollywood and in a sense people gravitate to Bollywood with a sense of nostalgia. The song and dance sequence in a Bollywood film has a completely different motivation and function than a song in a Hollywood musical, but it has come to brand it. Ask an America about a Bollywood film, the first image that comes to mind is the song and dance. As a result it is never taken seriously, and rightly so.

As long as Bollywood has its head in the sand and does not take the risk in making thematically poignant films, it will always be a bubble gum industry another aberration of India. The only reason Hollywood looks to India for the kitsch and the bucks that can be made marketing it. (Case in point Chandni Chowk to China, a Warner Brothers Bollywood co-production)

Slumdog for all the praise has its flaws. It is never substantially explained how the characters growing up in he slums of Mumbai, in some of the most despicable and desperate circumstances come to speak English with such flare and fluency. A privilege reserved only for the upper class who can afford an English education. As a viewer the strength of the film lets you buy into it and Danny Boyle gets away with some artistic license. The film has heart and humanity. Apply good craft and you have the makings of a great film. And that is what Slumdog Millionaire pulls off where many others fail. It is what it is.

Truth and Reconciliation

2009-01-09T22:27:00.001-08:00

I was born in 1969. The year man landed on the moon. It was the year the world was told, the sky was not the limit and the future looked brighter then ever even though Kennedy and King were assassinated and America was yet again, embroiled in a war half way around the world.

I was born in India. The land of Gandhi and the land that was split into two over the butchered bodies of three million people. Since then India has gone to war with Pakistan several times and I grew up being told by the press and the nation that Pakistan was our enemy.

In the life that I have lived, I do not recall a time on our planet when the human race was not at war with itself, in some part of the world. After the last great big one (World War II) we have had several big ones and small ones, all when added up would almost be as big as the last big one, in terms of the lives they have taken and scars they have left. This blog would not be sufficient if I were to list all the conflicts that have passed us by. Yet there is no shortage of new ones and the old ones keep coming back to haunt us like episodic horror movies. No animal on the plant goes to war with itself like we do. Its not surprising given the fact that we as a species are at war with the planet, unlike the animals who live in harmony with the planet.

Journalists, intellectuals and politicians can always propound theories and analyses in great detail about social and geo-political reasons behind every war. But few can explain coherently what drives people to hack and butcher each other for the sake of land. Especially in a world where we say the sky is not the limit. Unfortunately this saying is not true for most people in the world, and perhaps therefore there is war. Therefore there are more guns on the continent of Africa, than there are books or computers. Even though not a single gun is manufactured there.

Now that we have established that humans like to butcher each other, given the ripe conditions, the question then arises is if there is an opportunity for peace how does one arrive at it and sustain it for institution building. The only two words that come to mind are TRUTH and RECONCILIATION.

Once two nations, two tribes or two ideologies have gone so far as to exterminate each other, the only point of return is through each other. Once the insanity of killing cannot blind them anymore, they have to return to life and the sanctity of it even in the most direst of situations.
Then begins the process of coming out of denial and accepting the crimes that were committed under the guise of war. Killing is murder whether on a battle field, in a jungle or in an alleyway. It can never be justified no matter who pulls the trigger.

To accept the crimes that have been committed, takes a great heart. To look in the eye of the person who has committed the crimes and forgive them, takes an even greater heart. But that is the only path to peace. Between April and June 1994, an estimated 800,000 Rwandans were killed in the space of 100 days. Most of the dead were Tutsis - and most of those who perpetrated the violence were Hutus. This goes down in recent human history as one of the worst genocides ever committed. That conflict has ended and by most accounts Rwanda has made a come back from the brink through the process of Truth and Reconciliation. Victims and perpetrators have looked each other in the eyes acknowledged crimes, forgave and moved on to a better tomorrow.
It is not that Rwanda's problems have gone away for good, but they certainly have taken a step in the right direction and there is a lesson to be learned. South Africa has walked on this path and has achieved a civil society they can be proud of. They by no means have reached the promised land, they have just decided to give healing a chance out of fatigue and weariness.

In my last blog I talked about the horrors being unleashed on Gaza and how it had to stop. A report in the New York Times today (January 13, 2009) states that while the world opinion sees Israel's actions to be disproportionate their citizens overwhelmingly support this offensive. I find that hard to believe. No person in their right mind can support the killing of innocent civilians as "Collateral Damage". I find it hard to accept. And the only way I see out of this conflict is through the process of Truth and Reconciliation. That process has to begin now. I do not know how but it will have to begin for the sake of the children of Israel, Palestine, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Congo, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, North and South Korea, Iran, Georgia and the world.

We have to talk to everyone involved. No matter how hard it may seem. For the sake of our children common ground must be found. Diplomacy and compromise is the only way out. The alternative is just not acceptable. We have to talk to those we call terrorists and those we shun as dictators. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Some might call this a naive approach, the fact of the matter is the alternative is not working. It is what it is.

Collateral Damage

2009-01-09T12:03:00.000-08:00

Images of wounded old men and dead women and children on my screen reveal how perverse and pornographic the words "Collateral Damage" truly are. As the Israeli forces and Hamas continue their bloodletting in the most heinous manner, it is hard to stay silent. How can you support either? There is enough blame to go around on both sides. But the ones who have the bigger guns always cause the most damage and are given the most support. This is not the time to play politics. How long can we digest images of dead babies on our screens. It has to stop.

Any war zone is hell in the truest sense. Madness and evil hides behind the barrel of a gun. When the trigger is let go, humanity ceases to exist and insanity takes over. No nation knows this better than Israel, having been born out of an evil perpetrated on a people. As their past haunts them their present does not let them heal. How can a nation live in a constant state of war? How can one sip soda on a cool calm Tel Aviv beach while twenty minutes away a baby lies waling next to her dead mother. (http://waltzwithbashir.com/)

The mistrust and hatred between the two sides is deep and dark. Everyone talks about a two state solution. But it is evident that there is an immense lack of political will on all sides. While the US leans heavily on Israel's side they are seen as untrustworthy peacemakers. While there is always political will to go to war there is never enough to find a viable honest fair solution. While most Israelis and Palestinians in principal would happily live side by side devoid of violence it is clear that they have been hijacked by their governments and its hard line, much like we were when we went to war in Iraq and lost our moral standing becoming perpetrators of torture.

Israel and Palestine are like a divorced couple who refuse to patch up. In the process making the lives of their children a living hell. Israel is going no where and Palestine has been there before Israel arrived. While both have dealt with amputation, they just cant get over the fact that they are amputees and have to learn to live that way for the rest of their body to heal and survive. In the process they keep cutting themselves even more.

Peace disrupts status-quo and status-quo benefits the powers involved. It makes way for the commerce of weaponry and everything else that goes with it. The US has to support Israel no matter what as they are premium pentagon clients and share historical ties that are constantly bolstered. The argument that they live in a part of the world where they are surrounded by hostile Arab nations eager to eliminate them, therefore they need to have nuclear weapons and a strong defense force has been debated often. The old "deterrent theory" the arms business thrives by. The theory of true peace has become a mirage and is entertained only for the media it seems. It has become an idea powers play with to gain legitimacy but do not truly believe in.

During the so called six month "cease fire" Hamas launched rockets unabated into Israel while Israeli armed forces killed their share of Palestinians and pretty much reduced Gaza into a walled prison camp choking all its civilians. While this did decrease suicide bombings in Israel the consequences were devastating to the Gazans. The hope was that the civilians would boycott Hamas. That clearly did not happen. While it is known that civilians suffered terribly, it is also a fact that their support for Hamas grew stronger. Not because they held Hamas in high esteem, because they had no choice. Hamas facilitated relief that was desperately needed and used it as a tool to gain support. A very effective strategy used by many militant groups around the world.

The tunnels that run between Gaza and Egypt which Israel is using as one of the pretexts for this offensive, have been used to smuggle arms for the Hamas but have also been used to bring essential supplies like food and medicine which Israel has denied the Gazans. (http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=I7MmH8e4mX0) It does not matter if the west and its allies see Hamas as a terrorist organization. The fact is that the people of Palestine elected Hamas, in a free and fair election. They were elected as a reaction to the west and Israel and they could not stand to support a weak and corrupt Fatah party. When Hamas' legitimacy was undermined they violently hijacked Gaza and have since operated like a militant mafia government using their usual hard line rhetoric of denying Israel its legitimacy. Now the attempt is being made to eliminate them, at a cost that is unacceptable. Much like the cost of eliminating Saddam has been and continues to be unacceptable. At the end of 14 days, 800 Palestinians have died in this current Israeli offensive. 40% of them women and children. 13 Israelis have perished, 10 of them soldiers. Another grim tally, revealing an appalling dis proportionality. A life is a life and terrorism is terrorism whether it is committed by a suicide bomber, tank shell or a missile, if the dead are innocent civilians.

When Israel attacked Lebanon, they made Hezbollah more powerful and the same is going to be the end result of this incursion. When the ceasefire is declared, Hamas will provide the social relief and proclaim itself the benevolent patriot and regain its grip even more forcefully. Mahmoud Abbas has already been rendered impotent by being silent and soon will become irrelevant as a result. Any peace in the middle east has become more elusive then ever. Another monumental challenge for the Obama administration.

American politicians as expected have been largely mute or have predictably shown their unwavering support for Israel's actions by providing some reprehensible analogies. Rhetoric like "What if rockets were being launched from Tijuana into San Diego would we respond with restraint", "If Vancouver launched rockets into Seattle would we sit back and watch", "Israel has a right to defend itself". These absurd ideas unfortunately drive policy decisions. There is no regard for the human toll wars take. The UN has yet again proven to be defunct. When the US can ignore the UN and do what it pleases why can't we, is the sentiment. We have the right to a preemptive strike. What better time to do it, but before the guys who pioneered it leave the White House. This way they can be sure of their firm backing.

Hamas and Israel have both refused to respond to the Security Council's call for a truce. They will face no consequences as a result and people will continue to die.

This is not the first time we have seen disturbing images of bloody innocence on our screens. It always happens in far off places, in foreign lands to people who do not look like us. We have bigger fish to fry. The economy is in a tail spin and people are loosing their jobs. Those Israelis and Palestinians, they are at it again. It is what it is.