It's Common Sense!

Sacramento and Kings - Save this marriage, please!

2011-02-25T20:54:00.000-08:00

My dear Sacramento Kings are threatening to leave town! Reading about the Arena issue off and on for well over 5 years now, it would be an understatement to say things have escalated to full-fledged crisis mode right now. The iceberg tipped when the Maloofs filed (an extension) with the NBA this week to relocate.

To make a convoluted long story oversimplifiably short, you may say the Kings want a new arena, Sacramento wants the Kings, and it takes a new arena to keep the Kings in Sacramento. After several failed attempts - regardless whose blame it was - over the last 10+ years to get a new arena built in Sacramento, the Kings' owners Maloofs say they have had enough and have started looking down south towards Anaheim as a market they could move to. The City, led by Mayor Kevin Johnson, an ardent supporter of the Kings, has hired a top-notch developer group (Taylor/ICON group) to conduct a feasibility study to explore options to make an arena deal happen, but is just not in a position to make any guarantees at this time.

You may start to ask all kinds of technical questions here. Do the Kings just want a new arena, or do they really need a new arena? By the same token, does Sacramento just want to keep the Kings, or do they need to keep the Kings? If the Kings want/need a new arena, why don't they just go build it on their own? How would one justify a public-private partnership to build a sports and entertainment arena to save a sports franchise from relocation, when our governments have more pressing priorities - like say a frail economy, historically high unemployment, and home foreclosure crisis - to deal with? With all that asked, why is the City hitting panic mode today if they saw this day coming for some time now? Questions as basic as those remain convincingly unanswered this late in the day. The Kings say they will pony up some money proportionate to their use of the arena, but it makes no business sense for them to go build an arena all out of their pocket, especially when they can get a possibly better deal elsewhere. The City and the voting public say they just can not afford a public burden to pay for a $350 million arena, while among a host of other issues an outstanding City loan of $70 million is still pending settlement by the Kings.

Politics and economics aside, the intriguing point here is what the Kings mean to Sacramento and what Sacramento means to the Kings. After all, it was not too long ago that Arco Arena was seen as the home of the most rabid and loyal fan-base in the NBA and the toughest place for visiting teams to win in. And how our collective fortunes have changed in the blink of an eye? Yes, the naysaying general public could care less if the Kings leave town, and by the same token, the Kings will most-definitely find takers with a red-carpet elsewhere in the country. Neither will Sac remain the proverbial "cow town" forever, nor will the Kings play in an antiquated arena forever. Yes, when everything is said, done and forgotten, life will find a way to just move on. So that is not the point here. So what really is the problem? The problem is that Sacramento and Kings really love one and another, hate to lose each other because of this darn arena issue, but neither side is going to come out and admit that basic premise in this hour of crisis.

While both sides have some legitimate points to make, let us not forget that neither side is entirely not-at-fault here. The City lacked the proactive leadership and vision to make an arena deal happen when the economy was still doing good, while the Kings lacked the political savvy to explain why public dollars need to be invested in an arena deal. What we need from the public right now, in this eleventh hour, is not the grandstanding by City politicians, the negativity from the skeptics, or the indifferent media rhetoric that is doing its rounds right now. What we need from the Kings right now is not their posturing and hard-ball stance to somehow get what they want by black-mailing the threat of leaving town. The emotional cat-calls and outpouring of support from those wretched Kings faithfuls, yes those beleagured fans, will not help salvage the situation either. What we really need here is an honest sit-down for heart-to-heart talks by ALL concerned parties, pushing their hitherto bruised egos to the back-seat for a change, and discuss to weed out the real issues and come up with a game-plan to make this arena deal work here in Sacramento somehow. Engage with the Taylor group and give them one goddamn chance to come up with a magical solution. Yes, money is a problem, but let us make sure that it is our only problem. If at the end of the day, the arena money math does not pencil, then let us just part ways if that is what our destiny is. But just give staying here in Sacramento an honest chance! Just remember there will be no winners and only tears to shed on all sides if this thing falls apart.

So how's India different than North America?

2011-01-23T23:07:00.000-08:00

I recently read this path-breaking landmark judgment rendered by the Indian Supreme Court (SC) on an appeal case that involved hearing on a matter of alleged injustice committed against an Adivasi individual, wherein the SC took a dramatically insightful look into the origin of Indian people itself. Simply put, the SC basically declared that India, much like North America is today, should be regarded as a "land of immigrants". The archives of The Hindu newspaper contain (non-case specific) extracts from the judgment (and a link to the full original text as well), check out http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article1081343.ece

Contrary to widely-held views of India being an ancient home-grown civilization that grew by and large "from within", this SC judgment propounds a new paradigm wherein one would begin to believe that India is also essentially a country of "external settlers" who upon their ancient immigration to India basically obliterated the original native aborgine inhabitants in due course of time, in a fashion perhaps not too dissimilar to how, say, Australia evolved as a nation. While most of us are atleast partly familiar with this theory in the sense that the "Aryans" were regarded as the outsiders who colonized the "Dravidian" orginal inhabitants, the SC judgment elevates the older theory to a new level, wherein even the so-called Dravidians should be technically considered foreigners, leaving only the Adivasis as the original unadulterated native inhabitants of the land.

Firstly, you want to tip your hat to the SC judges who pronounced this judgment for the sheer depth of knowledge and courage of wisdom they chose to display in this case, that could well have far-reaching implications on how the identity and origin of all Indians is understood going forward. If a historian or an archaeologist had made such pronouncements the nay-sayers would have readily poked fun and marginalized the theory, but who other than the SC to wake up our ordinary minds to a new dawn of possibility that we had hitherto thought improbable? After reading the judgment, which reads like a lesson that could find its way into our kids' history textbooks, I do have one question - Should we then conclude that North America today, at least in terms of the diversity of immigrant populus that constitutes its society, is more or less similar to what India was, say, some 2,500 years ago? So is there essentially no evolutionary difference between North American and Indian societies other than their age? Food for thought.

Endhiran raises the bar!

2010-10-03T00:49:00.000-07:00

Wow, what'd be a better excuse to blog after a long hiatus than to have the occassion of a Rajni blockbuster hit the silverscreens? Watched Endhiran last night with family here in Sac, the first day of release at 3,000 theaters worldwide! For a late night show, my two girls (three if you add the wife) sat through more or less the entire movie, so the movie grabbed their attention you would presume. But isn't that what Rajni movies do to kids anyway?

In all honesty, regardless of how you see it, Endhiran is indeed one literally mind-blowing brain-teaser of an unadulterated entertainment experience. First of all kudos to Shankar for directing a sci-fi theme at a level of technical splendor hitherto unseen in Indian cinema. The man's diligence and creativity is evident in every frame of the movie, and he has definitiely succeeded in reaching out to a broad multi-lingual audience on an esoteric theme, without (for the most part) compromising the intelligence of those tech-savvy movie-goers pampered by the proverbial hollywood-quality sci-fi movies. Shankar is definitely India's answer to James Cameron.

The underlying plot itself is pretty ordinary, and hinges on this well-known Frankenstein's monster story of the created-out-to-destroy-the-creator, with Rajni, the Scientist's, brain-child of a creation - a look-alike human android robot, with its newly-trained "emotion" capability, wanting to pursue his creator's lady-love and ultimately turning in to a monstrous villain of an unfathomable kind. The intriguing part is that Robot Rajni is in fact the hero of the movie for all practical purposes, not the scientist! Even more thrilling is the fact that when the Robot, after the bad red-chip gets planted in it, actually turns into the villain as well, and it is in this villain part that you see Rajni unleashing his classic mass-enthralling style of punchy dialogues and the stupendous body language that propelled him to a Superstar status in the first place. Rajni seems surreally comfortable with his villain demeanor, almost reminscent of the days he debuted in Tamil movies over 30 years ago!

Of course, the movie has that inevitable indulgence with the desi masala ingredient with two dream duet songs just to get Rajni fans see their thalaivar dance with the ethereal beauty that is Mrs.Bacchan. Undeniably, some scenes seem like a slant imitation of older hollywood releases - Terminator (Judgment Day) keeps coming to mind in several instances. How the Robot is brought back to life after the scientist dumps it in the garbage is not really explained convincingly either. The Robot's emotion programming also seems more like movie fantasy, rather than based on any scientific reference regards to such possibility. Why is a sexless Robot getting emotionally trained to "fall in love" with a woman, not a man? If you were a smart scientist would you not program your Robot to fall in love with yourself? Last, but not the least, does it not seem like this Robot arrived a little late, by say some 20 years, in this day and age where we talk about human clones, stem cell research, and biological warfare? Such criticisms, however, are trivial, and when you weigh in the movies' visual special effects grandeur that legitimately rival hollywood calibre, Shankar's smaller digressions are readily forgiven.

A pat on the back goes to Rajni Sir, for the amount of physical hard-work he must have put his almost 61-year old body to, be it from those eye-popping stunt scenes in the moving train, to the robotic dance moves besides Aiswarya Rai, to those slick villainous robot stunts through the climax. Yes, you can make a 60-year old look like a 20-year old, courtesy of the make-up specialist, but to get a 60-year old run and dance like a 20-year old? Indeed remarkable.

Rai does seduce us with her out-of-the-world beauty, but needless to say, some age is showing up on her pretty face these days. ARR has done the music score, did not find songs particularly remarkable, but perhaps some credit should go to his sound re-recording effects to reinforce the robotic theme. With about 160 crores (thankfully in rupees not dollars) shelled out from his pocket, you would not think Sun Pictures' Kalanidhi Maran became any poorer with this stellar business venture of his, a foray all set to reap box-office revenues worldwide.

What really blew my mind was the climax special-effects showing havoc wrecked by the villainous robot Rajni. You see not just one or two Rajnis here, but a duplicated army of robots perpetuated by the Robo Rajni. The mass colony of robot soldiers gang up to form all kinds of monstrous combinations - from a rolling giant machine-ball to a vertical machine-ladder reaching out to copters flying in the sky to a behemoth robot of robots walking the streets! Talk about a special-effects feast...

In all, a level of movie-making that has raised the bar for Indian cinema in terms of technical wizardry. Congrats to all involved, and especially my man Shankar. This act may be a difficult one to emulate, but do keep such movies coming...

The Blackberry Un-social Syndrome

2010-02-15T20:07:00.000-08:00

Just like that, I figured, I had been using my Blackberry device for well over three years now. Needless to say, this employer-sponsored aversion has been by-and-large a blessing for me for sure when it comes to all matters business-related. The e-mail and texting prowess of this machine seem unmatched, and the promptness with which this thing helps you respond to people (even to the ones you wanted to avoid!) gives true meaning to the adage "time is of the essence". What is pretty amazing to me is that the Blackberry addressbook feature is simply a front-end interface to a comprehensive remote database that sits on a secure server, so the data querying capability of this device seems essentially unlimited. You never seem not to have the contact information for the person you are looking to get a hold of. This device carries so many of my resources that these days I often refer it to as my "brain extension". The unit can be locked with a password, and you lose your Blackberry, you really lost nothing, just simply have to get a replacement unit.

But of late, I noticed my obvious "addiction" to this creature as well. After all it is a "smartphone" that does everything that a traditional phone was and was not supposed to do, and more. My 3G model supports a very reliable internet browser, and a handful of other useful applications - including maps, music, camera, camcorder, addressbook, calendar, facebook, and other proprietary stuff. I even downloaded a "text to speech" application that simply verbally reads out loud e-mails to you when you are on the road driving behind a wheel. With so much slick power at your fingertips, it is only but natural that I cultivated a level of indulgence with this machine that I started suspecting if I was actually becoming un-social. The other day entering a restraurant, I was so immersed reading something on the device, that I did not open/yield the door to the elderly lady that was walking out from inside. Thankfully she understood and smiled me away, and I even pointed the finger at my blackberry and asked her to actually excuse the thing, not me. On a more recent occassion, I was caught indulging with the device at the Super-bowl party last weekend at a friend's place and leaving my hosts wondering if I was actually "on call" on some work-related matter. Somewhat embarrassed, I had to explain that this latest quirk of mine was more of a habit than anything else. I even helplessly cited that even Obama has the blackberry weakness that I do.

The larger point here is that digital indulgence seems to be a thing that is here to stay for most of us. If it is not a Blackberry, it is perhaps a laptop, or a cell phone, or an i-pod, or a big-screen TV, for most of us. Stats are coming out showing people spending more time with machines than with one and another. Whether one likes it or not, society's trend clearly seems to be headed in the "man+machine" direction when it comes to inter-personal interaction. It is no longer a question of whether one human being is better than another, it is fast-becoming a question of "are me and my machine better than you and your machine?" Hoping it all somehow stays good, we will wait and see what all our digital future has in store for us...

Telengana State? Kalaignar getting any ideas!?

2009-12-11T23:06:00.000-08:00

The past few days indian news media headlines have been hogged by the Telengana state issue, precipitated by KCR's "fast unto death" saga. Our good old Congress govt. at the Centre buckled to pressure caused by the local politician's failing health on account of his 11-day unnavritham, and perhaps correctly decided that this age-old demand can not but keep getting shoved under the carpet time and time again, and forced itself to act. Nevertheless, I could not but help crack up when I read this morning one senior congressman, when asked about his party's "midnight" decision to yield to the telengana concept, asserting - "... the congress makes the right decision at the right time."

As a tamil, outside observer of AP politics, I started wondering what our tamil political dudes were thinking with regards to happenings in our neighboring state. Of course one may recall our good friend Kalignar was at least at one time a big fan of secessionist politics perpetuated by his mentor Anna and ideologue Periyar, back in the 1950's when they had put forth the DK/DMK demand for creation of "Dravida Nadu" out of India. Current state of affairs does not afford Kalaignar any need or opportunities to play such divisive politics. But here is an idea (or fear?), now that he is a CM waiting for the right moment to relinquish his office to his offsprings. What if Kalignar decides to get really creative and carves Tamil Nadu into two states - Northern Tamil Nadu with Stalin as CM, and Southern Tamil Nadu with Azhagiri as CM? This way his soul could rest in peace convinced that he has done both of his illustrious political sons equal justice. Oh, I forgot all about his daughter Kanimozhi, who may also cry foul and demand a third piece of the pie, perhaps a Western Tamil Nadu with Ooty as the capital? This would be a perfect set-up for equitable family inheritance of the CM's chair, wouldn't it? If Kalignar goes with this idea, would someone put in a word for me for a suggestor's commission? Or may be at least a free color TV?

SRK "detained"... so what?

2009-08-16T22:44:00.000-07:00

I noticed I hadn't blogged for about 6 months now, and I was wondering how it can be, while this Shah Rukh Khan "detension" episode at Newark Airport yesterday (incidentally India's Independence Day) hit desi media headlines. While I did have several things to write about -including my trip to India and the Taj in April last - let me give the most honest excuse, I was plain lazy to catch up with this space. (I must admit I was otherwise active with my digital indulgence by signing up on facebook and twitter in the intervening timeframe.)

Needless to say, the SRK episode did not get a fraction of the coverage in US media that it got in desi media. If SRK is trully a "global" icon like some of us claim, why would this issue not find coverage here in the US or say even in a "neutral" country like Canada? After hearing a lot of the typical desi overreaction to such incidents, it was indeed refreshing to find a relatively more digestable editorial on the TOI blog site - http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/onefortheroad/entry/don-t-make-a-big

While such episodes are not unheard of - South Indian actors such as Mamooty, Sivakumar, etc. were treated in a similar fashion recently as well, not to mention our ex-President Kalam - what is intriguing to me is how the Indian media and mainstream public alike takes these things so personally these days. Yes, it does not speak much of the US immigration intelligence to do random security grilling on visitors based just on their muslim or muslim-sounding names. However, in this post 9-11 age, such profiling is a necessary evil and has to be taken on the stride as a necessary nuisance, and nothing more. (India does such random grilling on Pakistani visitors, by the way.) If say Tom Cruise stepped in at Mumbai immigration, what are the chances that the local immigration officer would recogonize him, let alone give him the "privileged" treatment that desis seem to be expecting for SRK? After all nobody is above the law (and the whims and fancies that law can manifest itself with) and the VIP worship culture that comes so naturally to us desis is not something that the international community is willing to entertain in this day and age dominated by terror anxiety. To paint the episode with race, religion and nationality bias, warranted as it may be to a limited extent, is just not appropriate in the larger context. The call by some desis for a tit-for-tat type retaliatory action by having US visitors to India be subjected to similar action is outright silly, classless and irresponsible.

There seems to be a pattern to the manner in which such things are seen in India these days. When a desi student in Australia gets attacked, our people go ga-ga without bothering to ask if that desi student did something wrong in the first place. When a West Indian umpire gives a couple of bad decisions on the field against Indian batsmen, the BCCI pressures ICC to sack him, and succeeds. If Dr. Kalam has to go thru routine security screening to board a Continental flight, our people cry foul. While such reactions are appropriate to some reasonable degree, this seems to be the symptom of a larger dynamic at work here - that India is now clearly displaying a changed body language when it comes to how she would like to be seen/treated by the rest of the world. To the extent the escalating superiority complex that Indians seem to flaunt these days is justifiable based on their economic standing as a reckoning superpower and the political maturity as a thriving democratic nation state, such nationalistic postures may be appreciated by the international community. But if this trend grows unabated beyond those limits of tolerance, India or Indians would very soon be seen as cocky, self-serving global citizens indifferent to the ground realities dominating international thought in the 21st century.

Slumdog Oscars - Is India proud or not?

2009-02-23T20:10:00.000-08:00

Last night our man AR Rahman bagged two Oscars at the Kodak theater and the desi world rejoiced. We had all the reasons to, so why not? After all it is not every year that Indian cine-world produces Oscar calibre stuff, not gets recognized at that level anyway. ARR was at his usual gracious and humble best with his acceptance. And he made me especially proud when he acknowledged in Tamil on stage - எல்லா புகழும் இறைவனுக்கே ("All glory goes to God"), perhaps the first time ever that Tamil was spoken on Oscar stage. The elusive Bollywood, Kollywood and Tollywood dreams of several years did come true on this occasion with the sight of a desi guy holding a solo (two of them by the way) oscars in his hand, kind of reminscent of the sight of Abinav Bindra donning the Olympic gold not too long ago. I could not help but notice the remarkable similarity between the two guys' demeanour - ARR and Abinav - both painfully shy under the limelight at a moment of global acheivement unfathomable even a few years ago.

With the dust settling down on the Oscars, let us talk some good-old desi politics and public opinion. A month or so ago (after Slumdog Millionaire had bagged Golden Globe but before the Oscars were announced) there was some controversy in parts of India with people staging street demonstrations (in Orissa I think) for what they found to be a derogatory inclusion of the "dog" suffix in association with the "slum" tag, as part of the movie's title. Today I read in Times of India (a day after the Oscars were announced) - "Gujarat Chief Justice bats for Slumdog" http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Slumdog-fan-judge-throws-out-petition-against-Boyle/articleshow/4178764.cms - a case of an Indian judge tossing out a lawsuit that raised the same issue. Several things perplex me about such things.. First of all, would Indian audience have really cared what the name of the movie was if this movie had not won the Golden Globe for ARR? Now that they find the name of the movie objectionable, are they really going to have ARR return his awards in protest? Why would Indian media/people yearn for Oscar recognition when really they have no respect or understanding for western society and perceive the vice-versa to be true as well? Why is it that making a habit out of perennially misunderstanding western society (and their colloquial language) a cottage industry in eastern cultures such as India? Why do we hypocritically bask in Oscar glory when we most of us desis really believe the movie that brought it to us was made by a bunch of Britishers and does not really portray an "insider" (and therefore more accurate!) perspective of Mumbai/India? Why is this "east-west divide" thing an unsurmountable barrier even at the dawn of the 21st century?

New Year, Taxes and more...

2009-02-10T21:16:00.000-08:00

Alright, my first post for the new year... Can't believe the so-called new year is already 41 days old when I sit down to write this. We have a new president (non-white I may add), an economy that is in the pits, and a personal "net worth" situation that is plummeting by the day. To make matters worse, my dear Sacramento Kings are scratching the bottom of the league with no end in sight for their travails. Ronald Reagan once famously said "recession is when your your neighbor loses his job, depression is when your friend loses his job, oppression is when you lose your job, and recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his job." We can normalize that quote for current times and hopefully cheer up ourselves for a protracted recovery process now that Dubya is out of a job.

Since Feb is already here, I sat down to figure out my taxes hoping for a silver lining somewhere, even before Barack's federal stimulus trickles down to me and starts filling my coffers. Believe it or not, 2008 is the first tax-year EVER that I will be filing taxes electronically. I finally got over my hump and decided to join the bandwagon of those technology-spoilt e-filers who perhaps helplessly place more trust in software than human comprehension of the federal tax code. I sat down with the online version of TurboTax and the software seemed slick on the things it did accomplish. It asked all the right questions and made a serious first-time user like me feel at home. The fact that the thing never lets you print/view tax worksheets in a traditional federal form format (until you cough up the money of course) did frustrate me several times, however, the thoroughness with which the questions were asked somehow convinced me the software was infact doing the right things. It did quite a few cool things that I liked - electronically downloaded W-2s and 1099's from a bunch of different online accounts, explained rental deductions, did a quick "audit risk" analysis, and came up with several, albeit trivial, ways to maximize deductions (although I did not benefit from any) . All in all, it was a worthwhile indulgence, one that saved me time if not money. My biggest dream these days is that I find that magic "bug" in Turbotax that will enable me to file a class-action on behalf of all those suckers who lost money using this wretched piece of software and thus get myself rich overnight!

வணக்கம் தமிழ் bloggers!!!

2008-12-19T23:31:00.001-08:00

என் நண்பர் ஒருவர் சமீபத்தில் என்னிடம் ஒரு கேள்வி கேட்டார் - உங்களுக்கு தமிழ் bloggers யாரையாவது தெரியுமான்னு... இந்த கேள்வி என்னை சிந்திக்க வைத்தது. நானே ஆங்கிலத்தில் ஒரு blog site எழுதி கொண்டிருந்த நேரத்தில் இப்படி ஒரு தமிழ் சிந்தனையை நண்பரின் கேள்வி தூண்ட, அப்புறம் பார்தால் நம்ப ஆங்கில blogsite-டே தமிழ் transliteration வசதியை கொடுப்பது எனக்கு ஒரு ஆச்சரியமான விஷயமாக பட்டது... சரி நம்ப தமிழ் எழுத்தறிவையும் கொஞ்சம் வளர்த்துக்கலாம்னு இந்தமுதல் blog எழுத உட்கார்ந்தேன். தமிழ்கூறும் நல்லுகை சார்ந்த மக்கள் என் எழுத்தில் தவறு இருந்தால் மன்னிப்பார்கள் என்ற ஒரு அசட்டு நம்பிக்கையோடு.... அது சரி, blog-க்கு தமிழ் சொல் என்னன்னு யாருக்காவது தெரிஞ்சா கொஞ்சம் சொல்லுங்களேன்?

இன்னொரு விஷயம்... நான் பார்த்த வரைக்கும் பொதுவா NRI மக்கள் செந்ததமிழ்-ழிலேயே blog-கோ, கட்டுரையோ எழுத வேண்டும் என்று நினைக்கிறார்-களோ-ன்னு தோணுது. இப்பவே நான் சொல்லிட்டேன், நான் வசன நடையில தான் எழுத போறேன்... ஆனா இன்னிக்கு முதல் நாள் இத spelling தவறில்லாம அடிக்கரதுக்குள்ள நான் பட்ட அவஸ்தை... so குட் நைட் சொல்லி விடை பெர்ர்றேன்... நன்றி மீண்டும் சிந்திப்போம்...

Time for India to Decide

2008-11-27T16:28:00.001-08:00

After spending a good part of the last 24 hours or so exposing myself to all the media coverage of the latest "11/26" terror attacks in Mumbai, one thing is clear to me right off the bat - This time the international coverage of a terror event in India has been widespread, and genuinely concerned. The NY Times, LA Times and SF Chronicle have been consistently flashing top headline stories of the happenings over the last two days. I can understand a terrorist attack in Pakistan or Israel getting this extent of coverage in western media, but a hostage terror crisis in an Indian city getting this much western media attention tells me two things - that India has gained sufficient international clout as an emerging world power these days, and Mumbai is now seen as a truly international city with happenings there shaking the sentiments of Indian diaspora and foreigners alike worldwide.

I would like to think India (and Mumbai) has perhaps faced deadlier terror attacks than this in the past. I have no doubt in my mind citizens of a great City like Mumbai will quickly put this episode behind them, and recuperate to full normalcy within a matter of days. Again, what seems remarkable to me about the terror episode this time is not the extent of damage it caused, but the extent of global attention it is attracting in a post 9/11 world. Needless to say, there is widespread speculation that modern "islamic" terrorism may be at work here as well. Names such as Deccan Mujahudeen, Pakistan-based islamic groups, etc. have been mentioned. While the Indian and global intelligence agencies dig deep to unearth the real people behind the attack and their real motives, certain larger thoughts come to mind.

The history behind such terror attacks have now brought India to the threshold of a moment of truth and reckoning - having to make some critical decisions as to what path the country should take even as it stands at the doorstep of (re)emergence as a global power. On the one hand, there is modern India - the world's largest and thriving democracy, the IT superpower, the motherland of brilliant technical minds that prosper worldwide, the energy-hungry domestic economy keen to engage with global trading partners, a proud nation that recently launched its moon mission, and so on - and on the other hand is the India of old and the poor with all of its age-old social ills, a considerable muslim population always second-guessing India's nationhood and commitment to plurality, a communist-minded political and social mindset that is deeply suspicious of US influence in Indian politics, and the not-exactly-friendly immediate neighbors (China and Pakistan) who are envious of India's rising stature as a global power. A terror attack like this poses a sathya-sodhanai question to India's polity. Which direction is India going to go? Are we going to succumb to such sectarian, terrorist-driven hatred for western-style democracy and general rule of law, and embrace a path of retraction by distancing ourselves from globalization led by the western world, or are we going to put down with an iron fist such divisive ideology-driven radical elements from our secular society and continue with our march to international stature no matter who likes it? Are we going to keep appeasing fringe social elements that keep blackmailing us in the name of "respect for minorities" or are we going to stand up and put an end to this menace for good? The answer needs to be more than an all-too-familiar punch-line this time. It is time for India to put its foot down and take a stance so that there is no more fooling around as to what our future direction is.

India treading global waters!!?

2008-11-19T21:10:00.000-08:00

Now that Obama is deemed the "President-elect" (no offence to Dubya, who is technically still our "President"), and the election fever all but behind us, let us talk some global politics.

I read this headline "Indian frigate sinks pirate ship" in LA Times this morning and as the day progressed the same newsline seemed to appear everywhere - BBC, NY Times, Indian websites, Yahoo and other web portals. (In case you missed it, you can check it out at - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081119/ap_on_re_af/piracy). As I was reading the news item, I could not help but assume a smile of pride thinking about the further global clout a stunt like this will bring to India's already rising image as a true regional, if not a world, power. After all it takes a certain level of guts for a country to act unilaterally on international waters to take down another ship, albeit a pirate one. The fact that the Indian Navy was able to do it - without Manmohan Singh first having to pick up a phone and check with the UN or US or his Russian buddies - shows that India has come of age in taking on some international matters head-on. While I do want to pat the Indian Navy on the back for this remarkable show of valor, some after-thoughts popped up...

How come the Indian Navy that would protect and escort merchant vessels, both Indian and foreign, through the Gulf of Eden near Yemen - which, by the way, is over 1,000 nautical miles from Indian shores - not be able to drum up the same sense of duty and courage when it comes to protecting innocent Tamil (Indian) fishermen off the coast of Sri Lanka (hardly 50 miles from Tamilnadu coast) from indiscriminate firing by the Sri Lankan military? How come the Indian Government would not issue a word of condemnation of human rights abuses by China in Tibet, even when China is openly intruding into or claiming Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh? Why does India buy arms and intelligence from Israel while still saying it sympathizes with the Palestinian cause? Why is India's foreign policy fraught with so many hypocrisies? Anybody has answers?

I endorse...

2008-10-16T20:59:00.000-07:00

It's election time, and the countdown has started... about 18 days to go. I was reading the newspapers and see that every Tom, Dick and Harry is coming out with their "endorsements" of candidates. What the heck, I am going to endorse my candidate as well. I guess I could spend considerable space endorsing my position on every contest/proposition on the ballot, but I will save you the grief of having to read through all that boring stuff. Let me limit myself to the big cake - the Presidential Election.

Having followed a good deal of Campaign 2008 from it start over 20 months ago, one could not help but notice the obvious dynamic - this is a democratic election year. Barack Obama came in from nowhere as a breath of fresh air, energized the democratic base and inspired a new breed of young first-time voters, and even upset the then more-established frontrunner - Hillary Clinton - in ultimately securing his party's nomination. Obama's run did not just stop there. With the precarious economy in the backdrop appearing to validate practically every single one of his political positions, Obama is now trumping John McCain debate after debate, and convincingly leading in a poll of polls. After all the gaffe traps and false accusations and cheap shots that his detractors threw at him in the hope something would stick and destroy him, Barack has weathered the political mudstorm at every instance and has stayed the course on his march to the White House in the most dignified fashion possible. As Bill Clinton said recently, history does seem to be on Obama's side and by all accounts he is the man who is going to win in November.

Obama's voice seems to the one voice of sanity that we hear on TV these days after years of Bush-orchestrated stupidities. Obama has pledged his message of "change" not merely in words but with concrete proposals he has put on the table to address our floundering economy and real estate situation. His tax and healthcare plans are refreshing. He says he will bring the Iraq war to an end and devote attention to Afghanistan and Pakistan instead, and correctly acknowledges that withdrawing from a self-inflicted useless war should not be considered a "defeat" but rather a "correction" of senseless policies pursued by an inept prior administration. Obama has refuted claims of his lack of political experience by surrounding himself with the right people - like Joe Biden - who could be trusted to offer Obama sound advice on matters that he may be lacking in experience. Obama has been calling for making earnest efforts to repair America's foreign image that has been greatly damaged by Bush policies - by re-engaging with our allies, joining forces with Europe against global terrorism, and showing more respect for world opinion. Obama also seems like someone who could be trusted on global warming issues and diversification of our energy use and supplies. In all, Obama seems to be best choice to lead America at this critical juncture of uncertainty for us.

In contrast, McCain, for all proclamations to the contrary, has done nothing to get us to believe he will change the status quo perpetuated by George Bush. They are both from the same party after all, aren't they? Clearly on Iraq McCain is confusing common-sense with self-pride, and childishly thinks that withdrawing is paramount to conceding "defeat." Such jingoistic approach to military matters is only bound to bring further disaster to us at a time when our economy is reeling domestically and our foreign image is already tarnished. With the Republican blood in him, McCain is bound to bring a similar nationalistic right-wing attitude towards taxes and the economy as well. At age 72, McCain's age is an issue - not because he is old, but because he seems incapable of exercising good judgment. A classic case of McCain's recent poor judgment is his choice of VP running mate. Palin seems to be an absolute "deer in a headlight" when it comes to practically every matter that is of national importance at this time, and her negative pronouncements against Obama ("palling with terrorists," etc.) clearly indicates she has a very long way to go before she is ready for decent politics. (PS: No, I didn't say she is not beautiful.)

Let us just assume for a minute Obama does become President. And a hundred years from now, the country and the rest of mankind is probably not going to remember Obama for what he did to retrieve our economy or the Iraq war or this or that... There is one thing and one thing only that he will be remembered for - that he was the first black man ever to become President of this country. For all its greatness as a nation, America does seem to have this stinging stigma that no man of color has ever become President, doesn't it? May be if Barack becomes President, the next time we teach our kids that "anyone can grow up to become President someday" we may really start feeling that there is some truth to it.

So no prize this time for guessing whom I am endorsing for President.

Is this Obama versus Palin?

2008-09-10T23:20:00.000-07:00

If you have been following Campaign 2008 closely - and just when you thought our man Obama was firmly entrenched in the driver's seat after his speech at the Denver Convention, you could not help but notice the change in poll dynamics after this gal Sarah Palin was announced as the veep running mate by our old buddy McCain. After ogling at a good deal of Palin visuals that the media forced my way over the last two weeks - I will give Palin this much - she would easily qualify as the "most beautiful veep" we ever had if the Republican ticket wins this time, but that is about all I think of her.

What intrigues me is the level of attention this lady attracts - almost to the point that this is becoming more of an Obama-Palin contest. They both are in their fourties and both seem to have movie-star type ability to pull crowds. They both obviously have limited political resumes, but seem to make up for it by what they do bring to the table - Obama impresses with his oratorial substance, and Palin impresses with her... let's say good looks. And of course they both represent history in the making - If Obama wins we will have the first black man ever in the oval office, else we will get to see our first female veep's pretty face on TV everyday.

But let me say this as well... When push comes to shove - In a Presidential election, Americans are known to vote for the candidate who runs for President, not the one who runs for veep. So I would like to think the voters will see through the Palin stunt for what it really is - McCain's negative posturing to attract those Hillary-sympathizing disgruntled democrats. Unless Obama ends up blowing this completely (with gaffes like the "lipstick on pig" comment he made today), it is still his race to lose. Having said that, I can not wait for the presidential debates to start - that is one place where Obama can run roughshod over McCain with his brilliant speech-making skills. Until then, I suspect the polls would continue to show a statistical dead-heat race. Let's wait and see - politics is a fun game after all, isn't it?

Return to India? It is your choice!

2008-08-23T22:06:00.000-07:00

There was this interesting topic thrown up for open discussion in our community picnic event at the park this evening.. A group of Indian, mostly tamil-speaking, expatriates (i.e. NRIs) settled in the US got together at the picnic table and started chatting about the pros and cons of what a return to India would mean to them. (The stated intention of the mediators was to mimic the SunTV arattai arangam discussion format, but of course the interaction wandered off into your typically lively mottaimaadi arattai that you indulge in with your old school buddies.)

What caught my attention was practically the very first point made at the session - the mediator made a mention that it seemed as though the women folks are the ones that are more in love with this country (the US) and they are the reason why the men would not force the decision to relocate back to India. I could not help but notice that neither the women or men in attendance particularly complained about this observation, so there must be a whole lot of merit to this contention. All the usual discussion stuff then followed - the optimists saying how Indian economy and such are now booming, and how the salary and standard of life there was appearing to catch up with US standards, and how nice it would be to be back home and close to parents, family and friends... and the naysayers rebutting essentially saying that things are never as good in reality as they seem on paper, and that India from a practical standpoint has a long long way to go in terms of progress if or before most of us will want to go back.

I did pitch in with my two cents every now and then at the session (btw, my better half did better than me), but I did not really feel like I was able to share my full take on the topic. If you care for my opinion - I would start by saying this is the same old "pattikaada pattanama" question that has evolved and taken global proportions. True, India is becoming more like US in certain obvious aspects- the IT-industry driven change in modern Indian standard of life and culture comes to mind right away. But the more subtle and interesting and almost-going-unnoticed change is the one that is occuring here in the US - that America is becoming more like India in many ways - that you now get that healthy dose of indian family, culture, language and other intangibles that you did not think was possible here even say 5 years ago. In my estimate, in less than 20 years from now there will be very little to choose between the two countries in terms of professional careers and rewards, but public infrastructure in India will continue to lag for 50+ years, so for lifestyle reasons we will continue to see a net braindrain from India to US through the later part of the 21st century. Although I largely subscribe to this theory that India will never ever be what US was or is or will be (in both positives and negatives), I see that the differences will become pretty blurry in about 100 years, obviously beyond a timespan that my generation will live to see. For our generation, as it will be for all generations to come, I see that the decision which country to live in will ultimately be purely a matter of personal choice.

On a somewhat different note, I must say this - From what I have seen, only a small proportion (I would say less than 5%) of the desi folks who came to the US have ever permanently gone back to desh. Now be that as it may, I seriously question the sincerity of those who have consistently said for several years that they want to go back and have never been able to make that big decision. I wonder if all of their stated intentions is only a matter of old-fashioned homesickness and wishful thinking and not really any sort of genuine soul-searching. Have you ever seen a barking dog bite? I have noticed that it is these same people who deep down in their hearts do like the things that this country (the US) offers but never really are openly appreciative about such things because of their sense of personal-guilt stemming from years of indecision when it comes to which country to call home. While such hypocrites have every right to dwell in and glorify the things they like in their motherland, they have no right to trash the country that they made a conscious and willing choice to come live in for career and lifestyle reasons. I would just say if you want to go back home please feel free to do so, but bear in mind America could not have treated you any better while you were here. More soon.

Bindra spells a Beginning?

2008-08-17T01:05:00.000-07:00

Well, of late some of my predictions have been falling flat on their faces. For one, this Abhinav Bindra dude pleasantly shocked many a million folks like me by racking up a gold medal for India at the Bejing Olympics. (The second, albeit a more trivial one, was Rajini's Kuselan seemingly bombing at the box-office, negating my pre-release prediction.)

Going back to Bindra, this non-assuming kid with an introverted persona did the very unthinkable- won India's first ever "solo" gold in a Olympic sport (shooting) that is relatively obscure in India. In my opinion, what is phenomenal about such an acheivement is the escalation in belief-level that a feat like this would instill in those faceless, nameless (and some even unborn) youngsters that may be toiling in their quests for opportunities, support, success and recognition. Now that Bindra has done it, we have someone who has earned the right to utter these famous words - If I can do it, you can do it. After all wasn't it in the same year that Roger Bannister broke the four-minute-mile "mental" barrier that like a dozen other runners broke that same record? (The nay-sayers at the that time had propagated this theory that your lungs would explode if you tried to run a mile under 4 minutes!)

Now comes the interesting part - if you thought Bindra would be reaping an overnight windfall after the golden performance, you will find yourselves surprised. Yes the Punjab State Govt announced INR 1 crore, and several state governments (BCCI joined the benefactor list as well!) followed suit and may have pitched in another crore or two in reward and appreciation. Even our man Lallu announced a lifetime rail pass of free first-class a/c coach-class tickets to Bindra and his significant other. In my estimation, all the monetary rewards Bindra received may not exceed say INR 3-4 crores in value - say about US $1 million in a stretch... Now you would figure a late first-round or early second-round draft pick rookie player in a professional league like the NBA makes that kind of money in his first year as a pro, here in the US. You are now left wondering is it worth moneywise even to be a gold-winning Olympian in such a non-rewarding country like India?

Be that as it may, you wish India does not end up forgetting a guy like Bindra two weeks after the event (as India's former golden girl P.T.Usha had forewarned us in her felicitation comment on Bindra) and the country goes back to this historical rut of Olympic futility. Let us hope this is just the beginning and will encourage all those unknown Bindras of India waiting in the wings to come make a splash and conquer our imaginations.

India's Olympic Pipedream

2008-08-07T21:51:00.000-07:00

It is not everyday that you see India and Olympics mentioned in the same sentence... Just a couple of weeks ago, I was interested in knowing more about the Indian contingent being sent to Beijing and I had tough luck - The Indian Olympic Association's (IOA) website was NON-EXISTENT, or if the site did exist it was dysfunctional anyway. Now you get the point. I saw some interesting lowlights of India's history of Olympic non-performance at this site - http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/news?slug=ap-olympiclaggard&prov=ap&type=lgns. If you have not cracked up in a while, don't forget to read IOA Chairman Suresh Kalmadi's comment - "India should not expect too many medals in China”. If you asked " is one too many", join the club.

Indian ethos in all sincerity does not seem to particularly care about Olympic glory despite the occasional proclamations to the contrary that you get to hear from a few frustrated souls... You can't really expect much from a nation of spectators whose favorite sports delusions begin and end with cricket for all practical purposes. Now someone could argue if cricket were an Olympic sport, India would win a medal or two. There may be some merit to that contention - India is after all the current 20/20 world champion and a one-time (1983) one-day cricket world champion.. But cricket is a team sport and they don't give 11 medals when a team with as many players wins something... So that takes us back to the issue of India's well-chronicled history of Olympic futility that spans several decades - Why does a nation of 1.1 billion people (and counting) struggle to produce one genuine Olympic gold-medal-calibre sportsperson? How come a country that has no trouble producing successful doctors and engineers and technocrats diaspored to all over the planet, not be able to translate such success when it comes to producing world-class sportspersons? How can a civilization that boasts of centuries-old ithihasas and grandmom-narrated bedtime stories embellishing the cosmic valor of mythological kings and princes domineering celestial worlds, not be able to produce a single warm-body in modern times capable of winning a piece of metal competing against international mortals here on this planet? At what point in history did India's sensational past morph into present-day mediocrity when it comes to sporting acheivement? Can anyone see the light of day on this conundrum?

Kuselan and the Rajini Circus

2008-07-31T20:14:00.000-07:00

So Rajini's Kuselan, his latest blockbuster-to-be is set to hit the silverscreens this weekend worldwide... Needless to say the dude is an acknowledged larger-than-life Superstar and his movies are what Kodambakkam producers regard as the closest thing to a "minimum guarantee" in terms of return on investment in an industry that is not necessarily known for it.

His screen charisma aside, what intrigues me about Rajini is his personality off-screen and the bunch of contradictions his overall persona effuses. Despite his massive fan-base, the guy has spurned many a chance and enticements to enter TN politics, for reasons best known to him. A self-acclaimed theist and spiritualist, he seems to fall back on his religious beliefs when he says he does not get any kick out of politics. He however likes to leave all doors open with punch-line screen pronouncements like these - "nethu naan conductor, inniku naan nadigan, nallaikku naan yaaro?" (yesterday I was a coductor, today I am an actor, who knows what I will be tomorrow?). He says money does not thrill him either, but is continuing to collect more in terms of salary than any actor in the history of South Asia, and is continuing to beat his own salary records with every new film. He says he diets and meditates to maintain his "ilamai" or youth (never mind the role of the make-up man) but continues to smoke in private and on the screen (when political parties don't object). He has undescribable level of public appeal (especially with kids), but instead chooses to retreat to the himalayas every year to visit his spiritual gurus. He is probably the only star who thinks nationally on river-water issues (thank god!) in an industry dominated by stars known for their tamil-centric chest-beating. He portrays great screen courage and valor (even stops bullets with his eyeballs) but in real life buckles to local politicians when they attack his political stances (he "apologized" today to Kannada activists for his pro-TN stance on the hogenakkal issue - so that he can get his Kuselan released in Bengaluru!). That is about all I can think of when I come to think of the man's confusing personality. Does anyone who knows him better explain to us laymen please?

Olympics - The Chinese style!!!

2008-07-30T22:07:00.000-07:00

Alright we all know Beijing is all set to host the Olympics starting next week... Just a few things I saw/heard in the media in the run-up to the Beijing event...

1. China has banned BBC Chinese and its coverage of the olympics.
2. China has imposed visa policies/restrictions on international visitors to the olympics to a level unheard of by any country for any prior olympic event.
3. China has allowed "legal protests" against the olympics at specially dedicated zones only. For those who don't know, a protest by chinese definition is almost always illegal. In other words, a legal protest against Government is practically impossible per Chinese law.
4. After all this, China still believes terrorist or anti-national (i.e. pro-Tibet) strikes are totally possible at Olympic venues. This is their reasoning for escalating security measures to unprecedented levels.

If you read all this, you wonder why in the first place this wretched country was chosen to host the olympics. A country that unleashed force on people it call its own citizens (Tibetans) has no moral right to host any international event of stature. If the communist regime running the show in Beijing had an iota of shame, they would invite the Dalai Lama to attend the olympics and would at the Olympic opening ceremony tender an apology to the Tibetans for all the human right atrocities that China unleashed against them.

Ron-Ron is gone-gone?

2008-07-30T20:55:00.000-07:00

Now if you are a die-hard Kings fan, and you just heard the (upcoming) Ron Artest deal to Houston, you are wondering what to think... If you are like me, you probably have a mixed feeling - a sense of relief that a lingering headache of a character on your favorite ball club is leaving town, and a sense of failure that your team could no longer afford to sustain the hope that Ron's maverick talents would outweigh the off-the-court baggage he brings. As a courteous fan, you wish Ron good luck in Houston, while you still hope and pray that our beloved Kings are headed in the right direction with this move in laying the ground for a "distraction"-less team that can rebuild around Kevin Martin and the young, unproven pieces that surround him.

My thoughts aside, I could not help but be irked by a sense of jubiliation on the Ron deal that the jokers on KHTK sportstalk 1140 - you know who I mean - Grant Napear and Mike Lamb - were effusing in their daily on-the-air rant. These pro-establishment Maloof hired-guns did not have the professionalism to say a good word about Ron and the good things he did bring to this team when he was here, but instead did their childish "sour grapes" commentary trashing the guy. It is time we saw some professionalism in radio commentary, because Sacramento fans deserve better than these buffoons.