Make Travel Agencies Great Again!

Dear Rust-Belt-Manufacturing-Industry Trump Voter,

There's some tough news for you. Your manufacturing job is not coming back. Period. Just like the horse carriage driver's, or the travel agent’s, or the photo film processor's job isn’t coming back. Unfortunate, yes. But no more unfortunate than every worker through history who has found his/her job rendered obsolete whether through a technology disruption or geographic one. Harsh, I know, but it must be said.

The promised 35% tariff on Carrier and Ford to keep manufacturing local? Retaliatory tariff wars, or eroded competitiveness, sales, margins, and marketshare, will lead us to mass layoffs that will decimate the remaining manufacturing jobs faster than we can say “Drain the Swamp”. You think China and Mexico have it made forever? Nope, only temporarily up until Artificial Intelligence and next gen Robotics replace their cheap labor with even cheaper labor. Countries with the sweat shops of today, will have to figure out how to stay competitive within the decade. Similarly truck and taxi drivers all over America better be preparing for the self driving vehicle tsunami headed their way, again within the decade.

There is a way out of this, but it’s not easy. It needs grit and hard-work, which I have to believe you have in spades. It involves retraining and re-educating yourself to compete in the service and technological innovation industries. “That’s a stupid elitist joke” you say because you can’t afford an indulgent meal let alone college. Well, one candidate had on her agenda “Free College Education”, paid for by that cardinal sin – “HIGHER TAXES” on folks that are upper middle income bracket and above. That was your ticket out. That was your children’s ticket out. You turned your back on it for snake oil.

I’m trying real hard to understand your vote because I know many of you are upright patriotic fellowmen, who didn't vote for bigotry, and are victims of a career bet gone bad which could happen to anyone. But I just can’t shake off the feeling that that’s not an excuse for a terribly thoughtless decision.

Oh, and the Hillary supporting Elitists you so hate? Implicit in their vote was the fact that they were willing to pay a higher tax rate to give everyone’s kids a better shot at a great education, not just their own. If that’s an elitist position, elitism is the new name for responsibility.

So while I give up on trying to understand your vote, I empathize with the challenges ahead. I hope that you don’t hold your breath for a full four years before realizing that you do indeed need to reinvent yourself, and that the promised land was just smoke and mirrors.


Reference links for a deeper look at why manufacturing jobs ain't coming back:

NPR - Bringing Back Manufacturing Jobs Would Be Harder Than It Sounds
Money-'Those jobs are gone and they're not coming back'
Techcrunch - Trump promises to bring back manufacturing jobs, but robots won’t let him

You didn't raise a terrorist, but did you set the stage for someone else to?

Going out on a limb to say that in the coming days, we’re going to see details emerge about some of the Paris terrorists that show a seemingly inexplicable disconnect - normal, loving families; friends that knew everyday teenagers that partied, drank, and chased skirts; neighbors that never noticed anything remarkable; and parents that are shell shocked that their offspring could commit such dastardly acts despite their loving, peaceful upbringing.

Then we'll hear from pundits that they are bewildered as to how something so evil could come out of something so “regular”. Fingers will be pointed at the mosque and preacher that "radicalized them", and to the trip to Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Pakistan, wherever, which served as the tipping point. Experts will talk about how we need to clamp down on mosques that evangelize radical Islam, and on travel to countries with known terrorist producing assembly lines.

All of this is on point, except for one tiny detail - it is only half the picture. We're not talking about one vital, indispensable, prerequisite for any of this to work - the early age indoctrination of tender minds to believe in a power higher than themselves, greater than their parents, trumping good sense, above the law, you name it.

That’s the first of two vital ingredients that go into the making of a religious Terrorist.

Ingredient 1. Instilling of an early-age belief system that teaches kids there is a man/men/women in the sky who created everything, oversee everything, judge and reward everything. Said man has a set of rules codified in a book (take your pick from religions around the world), and thou shalt follow those rules to serve your purpose in life. His is the supreme law, which by inference means that when there is a conflict between your common sense/man-made-law and his book, the supreme law wins. (Ok, most parents will not explicitly teach their kids this, but is it an inference hard to imagine? If you have ingrained unquestioning and ultimate obeisance in your child to a God and book, is it unbelievable that the kid would have internalized an inference that tells him – “if and when the day comes where your good sense goes against this book, believe the book”.

Ingredient 2. Radicalization through a catalytic event(s) in the teens or early adulthood, that guides towards taking action against a perceived threat to a religious cause.

The etymology of point two above is well know. It could come from a variety of means - it could be personal losses such as seeing a sister blown up by a drone, or it could be incidents far away that ring close to your value system – such as a hospital in Gaza being bombed and images of a bloodied infant being tweeted a thousand times per second. An empathetic irreligious mind is not likely to see such events as black-or-white calls to action, but rather will see them as a manifestation of a complex political reality of the world we live in. A deeply religious mind will evaluate these events differently. An unfair death of the infant continents away will be seen as a personal affront and a clarion call to action. Many will bristle with anger, spew venom, rant on social media and that will be it. Others though, with the unique combination of righteousness, stupidity, and a coach, will rise and bear arms.

In the case of Terrorism coming from radical Islam, world leaders and scholars such as Reza Aslan would have us believe that the actions of the terrorists have nothing to do with religion. “They are Evil and doing as Evil does”. Sure they are evil, but just like the tail does not wag the dog, evil is not driving the religious terrorist. Rather, the driving force is their religious interpretation of what their God wants them to do… “Evil” is then just a manifestation of their deeply held, incredibly motivating beliefs. And you have to believe that it takes super strong motivation for someone to strap bombs around their chest and blow themselves up to smithereens. “Just Evil” doesn’t even begin to explain that kind of motivation.

Let’s examine how early indoctrination plays a part in setting an indispensable foundation for later years. Ever pondered how kids determine who to fear/respect/be obedient to, in the circle around them? The same way dogs do – “observed obedience”. Kids and dogs observe the behavior of other family members/friends towards a subject, and make assessments around their fear/respect factor towards that subject. A dominant family patriarch who gets to boss over your mother, his siblings, the hired help, who all scurry to meet his wishes, will most likely inspire fear and obedience in the family dog as well as the children of the house. Now imagine a child processing how to evaluate the imaginary man in the sky, who even his Alpha dad bows to and speaks about in only hushed tones. Child is impressed. Next, said child travels to the place of worship every weekend and finds hundreds prostrate in reverence. Talk about “observed obedience” on steroids. “Surely so many people can’t be wrong. This IS the supreme being we’re kneeling in front of". Add to these signals the tales of mythology, magic, duty, power, war, good-vs-evil, all coming from the ultimate fountainhead of trustworthy information - the child’s mom, as a daily dose of fine upbringing.

What else is that child going to come out with through his formative years, except with an unwavering belief in a larger than life, do no wrong, close-your-eyes-suspend-your-belief-and-follow-me God?

What’s wrong with that you might ask?

Here’s what’s wrong. Every major world religion, is a case study in contradictions. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism… take your pick. There is usually plenty of “world peace”, “love thy neighbor”, “be generous”, kind of stuff. Chances are, those are the parts you selectively served up to your child in religious training. But there is also stuff in the holy books of these religions, that to any reasonable observer will seem afoul of modern law and societal standards. Punishment prescriptions that rarely befit the crime, stark inequality towards women, homosexuals, it’s all there. To be clear, many, if not all these religions were ahead of their times when penned. But then societies have evolved, but for some, religion hasn’t.

Parents, you covered pages 1, 2, 3 and 5 of your holy book with your child. You deliberately left out page 4 which covered the appropriate response to someone insulting a prophet/god of the religion, or committing adultery, or blasphemy. You left out Page 4 because that stuff was graphically violent, you didn’t subscribe to those specific teachings, and didn’t want your child to either. But did you tell your child to explicitly ignore these verses, now and into the future? Did you tell the kid that these verses could actually have been the result of a human being transcribing the word of your God incorrectly, and that the book is hence incontrovertible only in parts? You didn’t. Page 4 was relegated to a “don’t ask don’t tell” status along with sex education. That convenient decision ended up all fine and good with many kids growing up in your faith. In their adulthood, they never bothered to go back and ponder page 4. They got an education, jobs, friends, families… got busy with life and page 4 never really surfaced again. Then they hear of a suicide bombing that killed dozens… the bomber claimed to belong to their faith and claimed his actions were guided by the faith. Saddened and shocked, the peaceful followers of this faith tweet #NotInMyName and swear that this act has nothing to do with their religion. True, but only half true. Indeed, it has nothing to do with the parts of the religion that were taught to these kids who turned out fine. But it definitely has to do with parts that were left out.

Lucky kids ignored page 4 and page 4 ignored them through life, so they’re insulated from its effects. But that suicide bomber? He wasn’t so lucky, or smart. He was probably 10 points below average in IQ, but born with strong traits of loyalty and duty, and emotions. His mom didn’t teach him page 4 either, but when he was 17 and beginning to explore the world sans his parents, he met a charismatic philosopher who sat him down and discussed the Book all over again… ALL of it this time, especially page 4. How could that kid resist? Those verses that mom glossed over, were now smacking him across the head with the force only God could have summoned. Soon, he knew what his God wanted of him and it scared him at first. He longed to return to his family, play video games with his 13 yeah old brother, eat his mom’s special kababs and forget about this “newly found purpose”. But how could he ignore what the Almighty, the uber-Alpha through his formative years, wanted? 17 years of indoctrination weighed against the logical machinations of his teenage mind. Game over. Indoctrination won. Steely resolve took over. He prepared for the mission. Last minute jitters set in the night before. "Can I really kill so many? What if there are infants and women around?" He reaches for his go-to, his Book. The mind is stilled by reading page 5 that reminds him that this world is temporary, pain is temporary, the relationships including the one with his family are temporary, and that the only thing that matters is following what God wants him to do. He flips to Page 4 again for good measure.

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them".

His coach's interpretation of this page rings in his head. It is clear what God wants him to do. His mind is tranquil now. Thoughts are no longer wandering. Human laws and concepts of propriety rendered meaningless. He actually has a smile on his face as he squeezes the detonator the next day, expectantly extending his arms outward before the deed, as if to say “I’m ready my sweet God. I’m making the ultimate sacrifice on your command. Lift me into your arms.”

Sirens wails, bodies lay fallen all around and a shell shocked mother walking her seven year old son back from school, covers his eyes tight lest he be scarred by the macabre sight of strewn limbs and rivers of blood. She dodges the police barricades and rushes him home. “There is so much evil in the world. We need to pray and seek blessings, Son.” They sit in their prayer room and she has him read the holy book… page 1, 2, 3 and 5. Not 4. Never 4. She smiles looking at her devout son immersing himself in the good teachings of the book and thinks to herself… “if only all the Moms out there raised their boys like I’m raising mine, the world would be such a better place”. There is a bang outside. Irony just killed itself with a dynamite strapped vest.

"Not enough evidence to convict" is the new "Clean Chit"

Jeopardy question: 10,000 red flags pointing to murder but no smoking gun.
Answer: What is the going standard for a Prime Minister in India? (Clean chit baby!)

Let’s say you’re selecting a domestic worker for your home – a chef… a chauffeur… or a gardener perhaps for your backyard. Along comes Mr. Qualified with an impressive resume of achievements in cooking, driving, or spadework. Impressed as you are, you run a background check to see if he has a criminal history. You find that he has no convictions… but wait, what’s this you see? Dozens of criminal cases have been filed against this man for abetting murder of over a thousand human beings and other supporting offenses. Most have been dropped or dismissed for lack of evidence. Few are still pending in courts. Then there is the testimony of thousands that lays blame on him… realms upon realms of accusations, incriminatory blogs and journalistic pieces. There are secretly taped videos of folks confessing to first hand seeing his involvement in the murders. There are credible witnesses of his transgression that have mysteriously been killed.

You’re aghast and dazed absorbing this information when the door-bell rings. This man stops by again asking if his role is confirmed. You peer into his eyes incredulously. He is perceptive and realizes you’re on to him. He flashes back an assuring smile telling you to ignore all the noise, and to focus on the “clean chit”. He asks you to focus on the awesome Chicken Kadhai he makes or his driving skills that enable him to circle your building’s compound in reverse while brushing his teeth. “Your kitchen and your car are safe with me. You are safe with me. The negative information you may have heard about me is all a ploy of your previous worker who is jealous of me. You've had him for so many years, give me a chance…” You begin shutting the door and politely ask him to leave and make up an excuse about already having found someone (don’t want to anger him lest he come back at night to slit your throat”).

You’re comparing him to the previous gardener who was kinda slow and rambled when you asked him pointed questions, and whose uncles and cousins stole a thousand bucks from your unattended wallet, but god what a no contest when comparing the two?

Surely we all agree on this hypothetical scenario and surely we all would feel relieved at having dodged a bullet. “God knows if he is really guilty, but no fucking way I’m taking a chance with all those allegations”.

By now you know where I’m going with this.

To folks who will elect BJP and Narendra Modi to Indian premiership this year:

Dear NaMo supporter, 
You wouldn't hire a bloody yard boy if there were red flags of murder around him even if he was acquitted by every court in the land, and yet you are ready to elect a man in exactly that situation as the Prime Minister of the country! Does this make sense to you? It’s utterly inexplicable to me and many others. 

Assuming we all believe in NaMo’s economic talent (debatable but out of scope for this piece) there can be only two reasons why you think it is OK to elect him as Prime Minister.

Reason 1
You don’t believe that there are enough red flags,or that they amount to any consequence. This is an easy problem to solve. I've tried to condense most of the relevant ones here. Read on and find more online.What you cannot do after reading this piece is deny the presence of a plethora of red flags.

OR 

Reason 2 

You don’t believe this person is any threat to you because his alleged murderous rage has been only directed at a sub-sect of your country, and you are fortunate enough to have been a race-winning sperm incubated in the testicle of a man from outside that sect. You’re safe. 15% of your countrymen are not, but you could care less, or worse, it actually gives you a kick.

If you subscribe to reason 2, there is nothing I can or anyone else can say to you to change your mind. You my friend suffer from bigotry, irrespective of how you may have justified it to yourself (they deserve it, they started it, their ancestors killed so many Hindus in the 1600 and 1700s, why don’t they move to Pakistan…). It’s best you stop reading this article cause nothing I say here even attempts to address bigotry. That’s your battle to fight, or not.

After the Godhra train incident in which 59 Hindu pilgrims were killed, Modi is accused of sanctioning a state sponsored pogrom targeting Muslims. Specifically, he is alleged to have asked the state police machinery to stand down and allow the Hindus to vent their anger. He is accused of sending his henchmen to lead the massacres first hand and then providing support in subverting the judicial process when they were arrested and prosecuted. VHP, BD, RSS, and BJP cadre led mobs collectively massacred over a thousand Muslims over two days while being supported by the police and administrators. Almost all of them including Modi have stayed safe from convictions, thanks likely to the most massive cover up operation in our lifetimes.

This piece is focused on laying out the red flags that are most egregious and hoping that those that are leaning his way because of reason 1, have a chance to re-evaluate. I make no claims about the certainty of his guilt. Perhaps he is innocent and this is a massive conspiracy. But any reasonable observer, having researched all the red flags, cannot but walk away with enough doubt of his innocence. That in and of itself should be a disqualification against Modi's candidacy.

Red Flag 1: Haren Pandya, murdered BJP minister who was going to testify against Modi 

 


If you believe NaMo is innocent, surely you have evaluated the gargantuan red flag that is the murder of Haren Pandya, ex-revenue minister of Gujrat and part of NaMo’s government in 2002? Going by anecdotal evidence, I’m guessing many haven’t even heard of him and that in and of itself is a testament to the successful cover-up game orchestrated here. Haren Pandya was a senior BJP politician and in 2002 was Gujarat’s minister of revenue serving under Modi. 2 months after the riot, Pandya deposed before a retired Supreme Court Judge PB Sawant and a retired Bombay High court judge Hosbert Suresh, on the condition of anonymity, stating that Modi held a meeting on Feb 27th and asked the police to stand down and let the Hindus vent their anger. This is noted by the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) on page 18 of their report. This was the smoking gun if there ever was one. Pandya was ready to testify when the case came to trial and this testimony alone could have nailed Modi. Sadly, he never got to. He was mysteriously murdered less than year after he confided in the two judges. Since his deposition was never recorded, it is now hearsay since it was made before“retired” judges and not sitting judges. NaMo will have you believe that this is a clean chit. In fact, this is straight out of a Bollywood 80s movie. No evidence to convict, but does this look anything like a clean chit to you?

Image of Page 18 of the SIT report. "Deposition not being recorded" is a technicality that allows an accused to evade prosecution. What excuse does the informed voter have?

Red flag 2 - Mayaben Kodnani, life sentence serving convicted mass murderer and Modi’s minister.

Dr. Mayaben Kodnani, ex BJP MLA from Gujarat, a trained gynecologist, was part of NaMo’s ruling BJP government in 2002, and was subsequently elevated by him to Minister for Women and Child development for Gujarat in 2007. The testimonies against her started pouring in soon after the 2002 riots. It was alleged that she directly led a mob, handed out swords, shot a gun, and marshaled a 5,000 strong Hindu mob into massacring 100+ Muslims. The violence she led in Naroda Patiya lasted over 10 hours, during which Muslims were raped, shot, stabbed, and burned alive. Naroda Patiya was an abjectly poor slum-like society comprising of mainly day-laborers. Many were hacked to death and about 70 were chased into a large pit where kerosene was poured on them and the group burned alive in a macabre mass-extermination. Images of charred families clinging to one another in desperate hope are the kind that haunt you long after you see them.

Consider this:

1. Do we really think that a BJP MLA carried out this genocide in defiance to her boss, or without his knowledge? In a country where hierarchy and approval pervades all walks of life from school to corporate offices, and is never more stark than in politics, is it really possible that Mayaben got off her couch,wore battle fatigues, consulted no one in her leadership and went out on the streets and picked up 5,000 men along the way? If you believe that, do you also believe that Kim Jong Un is a boy scout with the misfortune of being surrounded by evil administrators? Of course her actions were blessed up and down the food-chain.  
2. Despite the myriad voices calling Mayaben a murderer, Modi rewarded her in 2007 with a ministerial position in his government. What can a reasonable person make of that other than the fact that Modi liked her record? Most importantly, in 2012 Mayaben was convicted for her role in the 2002 riots, and sentenced to 28 years in prison. While the facts were validated by the court in 2012, do we really think Modi didn't know these facts in 2007? Is Mayaben’s power such that she could keep her boss in the dark for 10 years about the details of an action that took 5,000 men, countless phone calls, and countless witnesses in orchestrating? Surely, if Modi was innocent as he claims, and if he had his heart in the right place as he claims,he would have made a few phone calls and found out the truth about Mayaben in a matter of days after the riots. The fact that he rewarded her in 2007 is a strong indication that he approved of her actions. Again, this line of reasoning is probably not enough to convict, but does it look like a clean chit to you? 

Red Flag 3 – Babu Bajrangi, convicted murderer and Bajrang Dal leader implicates Modi on camera

Another one of the convicted murderers, Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi was in lock step with Mayaben in Naroda Patiya. He has left us with probably the most chilling and damning evidence against Modi on tape, thanks to the fearless journalist Ashish Khetan. Worth noting here that on the behest of the NHRC, the CBI has examined all the tehelka tapes and declared them genuine. The SIT didn't think they had the evidentiary value needed to convict in court, but again, miles from the Clean Chit Modi will have you believe. Key points made by Bajrangi in his sting tape: 

1. Narendrabhai made it all possible. If he hadn't controlled the police, they would have fucked us. For two days he was in control and then pressure from the center came. 
2. Narendrabhai came to the places where we had rioted and showed his support 
3. When the police was trying to arrest me, Narendrabhai hid me in Gujarat Bhavan in mount abu. 
4. Narendrabhai changed judges 5 times to help me. 

Red flag 4 – Arvind Pandya, Modi’s Government counsel to the Nanavati Commission 

One of the most telling Tehelka stings was against Modi’s lawyer to the Nanavati Commission, Arvind Pandya. Gist of what he said: 

1. This would have never happened with a congress government. They pander to the muslims. We are fortunate to have a strong leader who let us take revenge. 
2. Modi gave the orders to the police to stand down 
3. When Modi first heard of the train incident, his blood was boiling. He wanted revenge. If he was not Chief Minister, he would have burst bombs with us in Juhapura. 

Red flag 5 – BJP MLA and Bajrang Dal leader Haresh Bhatt 

Another stellar sting. Here’s what he said on camera: 

1. Modi gave us three days to do what we want. Then he told us to stop and we did. 
2. He has done what no chief minister can do. 

Video link to all these sting operations and more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsfgqb8972g 

Red flag 6: DIG Sanjeev Bhatt, intrepid whistle blower. 

Against the tide of yes-men feigning loss of memory of the meeting Modi held on 27th Feb 2002, Sanjeev Bhatt has displayed exemplary courage in speaking the truth. He was the ranking Intelligence Bureau officer in Gujarat at the time (Deputy Commissioner). He has stated several times that Modi unequivocally asked the police to stand down in that meeting. In front of the SIT he said that he will testify his position in court if the need arose. The BJP has tried to paint him as a congress crony and unreliable. He was even framed and arrested on false charges. The Supreme court recently dismissed those charges against him. Now it is possible that this man was fame hungry and a sensationalist but point me to one incident in his past that would indicate that he was prone to such reckless grandiose. His family and he have been subjected to relentless threats and have round the clock security protecting them. Does that sound like the kind of life someone would willingly pick just to fabricate a story and get famous? The reasonable observer can only draw the conclusion that Bhatt chose to swim upstream and has had the kitchen sink of retribution thrown at him. Clean chit indeed. 

Red flag 7: Police Commissioner Sreekumar, another fearless whistle blower. 

SB Sreekumar took over as top cop of the Intelligence Bureau post Godhra. He immediately began digging around and created a mountain of complaints and concerns against Modi and the BJP. Among his complaints: 

1. Modi gave him a verbal order to illegally tap phones of several politicians including Haren Pandya who was murdered a few months later. 
2. Modi gave him verbal orders to eliminate certain Muslims. 
3. Modi and his team tried to coach him into giving false testimony to the Nanavati commission. 
4. Many members of the police force were intimidating witnesses to not testify against Modi and BJP. 
5. The rank and file of the police force was taking orders directly from the BJP government and disobeying their own leaders including him. 

Sreekumar was transferred out within four months of joining. Another case of a grandeur driven megalomaniac taking on the innocent Modi, or another brave soul who was crushed? Sreekumar was transferred to inconsequential roles and his post-retirement benefits held back due to a technicality. He only recently got relief from the Supreme court in terms of retirement benefits. What kind of petty mentality stoops to blocking pension due to a police officer? 

Red flag 8: VHP/RSS appointed public prosecutors 

The SIT observes in its report that an unusual amount of VHP/RSS affiliated public prosecutors were assigned to cases against those accused of conducting the riots. Understandably, most of the accused were acquitted scot-free given that the ones tasked with convicting them were actually their drinking buddies. This is text book subversion of the law by the government and yet the BJP will have us believe that the accused got a clean chit. 

On page 157, the SIT report records that a pro-VHP advocate named Raghuvir Pandya was appointed as government pleader in the Vadodara District and Sessions Court in 2002. Pandya conducted the trial of the infamous Best Bakery case which resulted in the acquittal of all the accused. The SIT further writes that the “Supreme Court of India had passed serious strictures on the role played by Pandya in this trial which deserves to be brought to the notice of the Bar Association for suitable action as deemed fit.” SIT lists five more instances of VHP or RSS leaders being appointed as public prosecutors. The report mentions that ‘political consideration and affiliation of the advocates weighed heavily with the government’ in these appointments. Then it contradicts itself by saying that ‘no specific allegation of professional misconduct on the part of any of the public prosecutors has come to light.’ 

Red flag 9 – Plum postings for police officers accused of abetting the riots. 

MK Tandon, joint commissioner responsible for the Gulberg Society area and Naroda Patiya, was found to have “deliberately not responded to distress calls” by the SIT. Instead the SIT observes, he registered bogus cases in other neighborhoods to justify his presence there. The SIT has also found that Tandon was in telephonic contact with Jaideep Patel and Mayaben Kodnani — the architect of massacres at Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya. How was this police officer treated by Modi post Godhra? He was double promoted in short time and given super powerful posts up until he retired. Given that the complaints against him started right away, and given that the SIT found evidence of his complicity, do we really believe that Modi was oblivious of his guilt when he promoted him twice? Like Tandon, there are at least 20 other officers and bureaucrats with suspicious promotions as noted by the SIT.Obviously hard to prove a crime here, especially against Modi, but surely an observer unburdened by the legal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” will harbor enough doubt to disqualify this man from the top post? 

Red flag 10 – Swift punishment for police officers that did dare to stand up 

Per the SIT report: SP Rahul Sharma protected a mosque full of people from a marauding mob. He was given transfer orders to an inconsequential far away post 3 days after that incident. 3 days! Surely transferring police officers during a communal riot cannot be blamed on standard protocol, can it? SP Vivek Srivastava arrested a BJP leader for assaulting a muslim family. Right after the arrest he got calls from the chief minister’s office probing him about the evidence in the case. One month later, he got transfer orders to become a glorified mall cop for practical purposes. The SIT notes four other cases of police officers getting suspicious and unusual transfers after combating the riots.Routine? Clean chit? 

Red flag 11 - Modi’s henchmen illegally in the police control room 

During the thick of the riots, against all acceptable protocol, two of Modi’s cabinet ministers were stationed inside the police control room, monitoring all deployments and police action. It can be argued that they were there to help in the crisis. Two problems with that argument–first, they held portfolios of health and housing between them so were hardly the right men for the job, and second, they were also ex-RSS and ex-Sangh members. Natural choices to aid the police during riots? Add to that the fact that police didn't respond to repeated calls for help. What’s more likely – police did not react despite the presence of two well-intentioned ministers, or that the police did not react because of the presence of two ill-intentioned ministers there to do their master’s bidding? Making the story even fishier is the fact that initially the top cops denied their presence in the control room till it was proven out by other interviews and finally a confession from the ministers. What was the need to deny their presence initially if they were really helping? 

Red flag 12 – Amit Shah, Modi’s right hand man, out on bail for murder 

We are the company we keep, right? Then what do the shenanigans of Modi’s right hand man Amit Shah tell us about Modi? This man is facing multiple cases and trials for murder, extortion, encounter killings, and illegal surveillance. He is currently out on bail, and had to resign from Modi’s Home Minister position in 2010 after being arrested. The Supreme Court has barred him from entering Gujarat lest he interfere with the investigation. Modi however has found ways to keep Shah entertained outside of Gujarat. He is the BJP’s election manager in UP for 2014, which keeps him close to his “sahib” since Modi is contesting from U.P. Throughout the history of the world, the right-hand man of the ruler/President/PM has occupied a place of immense power often without responsibility and accountability. Often times right hand men are contributing equally to policies and decisions as their masters do. What kind of country will India be with Amit Shah as the right hand man of the premier? Take a look beyond the roads and highways of Gujarat and see what you’re really signing up for by voting BJP. 

Red flag 13 – Atal Bihari’s Vajpayee’s disdain towards Modi 

We would be hard pressed to find an Indian Prime Minister more respected than Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Vajpayee was the serving PM during Godhra and made his displeasure towards Modi known in no uncertain terms. He wrote Modi an official letter that has been made available through RTI. In it, he asks Modi to “adhere to Raj dharma and not discriminate on the basis of caste, creed or religion.” Why would the leader of the BJP need to do that if Modi was indeed the impartial CM striving to control the situation? In the aftermath of the lok sabha rout of 2004, Vajpayee said “We lost because of Gujarat.I should have removed Modi”. Certainly Vajpayee would have known a thing or two that you and I don’t about the truth in Gujarat. It is uncommon for a PM to chastise a CM from his own party, and add a dent to the party’s image. Even so,one of the most respected PMs of all time did exactly that. What does that tell us? 

Red flag 14 - Complete destruction of police records from the riots 

On page 13 of its report, the SIT says “The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots.” It adds, “No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been kept.” Sudden urge to recycle paper and save the planet or massive cover-up? 

There’s more than this baker’s dozen plus one of red flags. I’ve heard people try and explain away one or two of these flags, and that’s reasonable. Can you really explain away all of them? Can you really look at all this evidence, and turn the other way finding solace in the“not enough evidence to prosecute” position the SIT has taken? Is that the going standard for a Prime Minister today? Another author summed it up well when he said that India will cross the moral boundary of no return should they decide to elect Modi as PM knowing in their hearts that he could be guilty. If you support him, really your only excuse should be that you truly believe that all of this is a major conspiracy and you’re certain that he is innocent. If not, you just destroyed the fundamental value system any decent society is established on. The argument that it is somehow OK to accept the likelihood of Modi’s guilt and still elect him because the incumbents ran a few scams and because Modi has led economic growth defies all standards of humanity. 

I leave you with a hypothetical situation. 

Imagine yourself and your family as immigrants to the United States of America, prosperously ensconced in the heart of the country in say Knoxville, Tennessee. Imagine that a growing “anti-indian” wave is fueled by Indians being perceived as immigrants who have stolen jobs from Americans. Perhaps a flash point incident occurs in which a white family is driven to suicide after the mother and father lose their jobs to Indians. Mobs bay for Indian blood. Imagine a 5,000 strong mob of White Americans gathering outside a community known to have several Indian families. You, your family,your neighbors, all incessantly call 911 and are given copy book answers or worse there is no response. Meanwhile the Governor of the state summons the police chiefs and asks them to stand down and let the people vent their anger. You see cops standing on the periphery of the complex, armed to the teeth but not moving a muscle to control the mob. A few young Indian men from the Gupta house two doors down try and mount a defense using their Dad’s shot-gun. You see the police finally step into action but to your horror they gun down the Gupta boys and retreat to their squad cars. The police action gives the mob validation and free reign. The dam is breached and the mob runs amok. You see the community's Indian women raped, children hacked, men burned, and unborn fetuses pulled out with swords and thrown to the ground. The horror lasts 10 hours and over a thousand Indians are brutally massacred in cold blood. 

This incident is followed by a period of great economic growth for Tennessee. Witnesses murdered, officials bribed and punished, the cases against the governor and other accused dropped for lack of evidence and because members of the KKK are appointed as District Attorneys prosecuting the accused. Then imagine that the United States elects this man to President of the country 12 years later. This made possible by a combination of old timers that secretly admire the governor for “teaching the Indians a lesson”, and young adults in their early 20s that have little or no memory of the genocide and are filled with misdirected nationalistic pride fueled by hormones that program them to rebel and that by definition means “anti-establishment and anti-incumbent”. 

You tell me how history and the world will judge USA if that governor was to be elected President. You tell me if his economic gains will make any difference. To the world and certainly to all Indians, that man and by association USA will always be the epitome of what is wrong with this world. India is on the edge of that precipice. It doesn't matter if we think Rahul Gandhi is slow or if Kejriwal is a drama queen. A civilized society cannot cannot cannot elect anyone it believes might be a mass murderer. We will lose our claim to civilization if that happens, and a few successful industries and roads will never offset that.

Medieval-justice soup for the enraged Indian soul

As a society, are we really seeking implementation of medieval laws in India? Surely the calls for barbaric punishment are just a venting of anger and we don’t really want “public castration” to appear anywhere in our books of law, right? Surely we don’t want to join the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran, do we? What sense does adding a stiffer punishment make, when we don’t even enforce punishment available with our current laws?

The gruesome rape and assault on a 23 year old woman in Delhi, has sparked unprecedented anger and outrage in citizens across wide spectrums of age, gender, and socioeconomic background in India. It might be safe to say that Delhi hasn’t seen this kind of on-the-streets-outpouring-of-anger since the “Mandal Commission” mania of 1990.

The crime is reprehensible beyond words and I choke up more often than I’d like every time the details of the injuries are described on television and the mind is forced to contemplate and visualize the brutality that caused them. The last time I felt this way was when the news of young Captain Saurabh Kalia being mutilated by his Pakistani captors broke in 1999. The thought of one of our finest being subjected to unimaginable torture by Pakistanis, and somehow still managing to uphold his IMA code of honor and loyalty to his motherland, invoked anger and emotion in me at a hitherto unknown level. This incident is right up there on the anger-emotion scale.

The public anger in response to this rape, which might be the proverbial “straw that broke the camel’s back”, is justified and it serves a finite purpose – bringing the gravity of the situation to bear on the government, and increasing the probability of corrective measures being put in place. Many outraged citizens will understandably call for grisly medieval acts of execution being passed into law as a means of satisfying the need-for-retribution. This too serves a finite purpose – it quantifies the scale of the public anger, and pushes the government and administration towards reasonable action.

Options put forth via television, social media, blogs…

1.Behead them 2.Hang them publically and leave the bodies suspended for the world to see 3.Castrate them 4.Chop off their limbs 5.Blind them, cut their tongues off, shove hot rods in their ears. 6.Fast track and execute them in 2 weeks.

I have no problem with a few outraged citizens making these suggestions. What I do have a problem with is elected officials, politicians, television anchors, and other thought leaders toeing this line.

Medieval Law fails even a simple sanity check.

Whats the problem with medieval law? Well, for starters – it’s Medieval (extinct, outdated, civilized society tried it and then discarded it)! These laws are medieval because they existed universally up until a few hundred years back, and civilized society found problems with them and upgraded them to become… well… more civilized. If they truly were the best laws around, it stands to reason that civilized society would have persisted with them and they would still be around. Pretty much the only few nations that follow such laws today are those that constitutionally believe that the only set of laws that are relevant for all of eternity, were penned in the 7th century. That’s the model we want for India?

The “Deterrent” argument: chop the bloody rapist’s head off in public view, and others will not dare rape.

I think it is reasonable that instilling chilling fear will deter some from committing a rape in the first place. Then again, for those that will rape anyway, a fatal deterrent to rape may actually spur the rapist towards committing homicide after the rape. Having committed a rape, the rapist may reason “I face the death penalty now, in super barbaric fashion no less…. so why don’t I minimize my chances of getting caught and kill her now? It's not like they can kill me twice. I got nothing to lose by killing her.“ This is not an outlandish hypothesis, but in fact one substantiated by behavioral economics research. Research shows that instilling the ultimate punishment (execution) for anything other than the ultimate crime (murder), actually increases the likelihood of the lesser crime being upgraded to murder by the perpetrator. There is also plenty of statistical research that shows that capital punishment is not a deterrent to violent crime. So what net-net effect capital punishment, or even barbaric capital punishment will have to the overall violent crime rate, is questionable, and quite likely it may even be counter-productive.

There is also the concern around causing irreparable damage to innocents. Anyone want to venture a guess on the rate of false arrests, and false sentencing in India? I think we can all agree that it’s pretty high. As an example, recently the Delhi High Court acquitted 2 alleged terrorists, who were on death row for the 1996 Lajpat Nagar blasts. The court observed that it appears that the police deliberately and callously framed and charged the 2, most likely to “show results” to their bosses. Want to bet that some politicians were involved in pressurizing the police to “show results”, so that they can hold on to their seats at the next election? Thankfully, we as a society were able to reverse this travesty, to some extent, by giving those men their lives and freedom back. Who will give back a limb, testicles, eyes, ears, tongues, and lives of those wrongfully convicted and bestowed with medieval justice? Acceptable collateral damage you say? I vehemently disagree. The collective blood lust of a nation pales in importance when compared to the right of an innocent to receive a fair trial and judgment. The authors of our judiciary agree, as do the authors of judiciaries around the world in observing the maxim of “let 100 guilty go free, but no innocent should be punished”.

The “expedited justice” argument:

Yes, our country needs serious reinforcements to the judicial system, so that the overwhelming backlog is worked through. Yes, our country needs a system to “fast track” certain kinds of cases, wherein the crime is so heinous that they deserve to bypass the backlog. However the “fast tracking” should be limited to these cases cutting ahead in line in getting resources and hearing dates, not in abdicating due process in investigation and legal deliberation. The notion that for some cases the entire process should be rushed, and “instant” punishment delivered, belongs to the annals of a banana republic. I question the sanity of the Times Now TV anchors who shriek themselves hoarse - “Why are the faces of those rapists covered” (in the police arrest videos)…. “Will our government wake up and try, sentence and execute them in months, not decades”. The faces of the rapists are covered because who is to say that the police has not arrested your Dad instead of the real rapists, Mr. Arnab Goswami? And yes, it will take more than a few months to try and sentence them, as it should, because again, who is to say that it isn't your Dad who has been wrongly identified from the line-up? It’s not rocket science that a rushed trial and rushed sentencing will dramatically increase the probability of false outcomes. Forensics, discovery, interviews, interrogation, searching for legal precedents, are all time consuming activities. The idea that a judicial system can effectively do all of those things in a rushed fashion, and still maintain a reasonable degree of accuracy, belongs in fiction.

If not medieval justice, or capital punishment for rape, what should be done?

What we are sitting on is an “enforcement” problem, not a problem necessarily with the laws. A large majority of actual rapists do not get convicted at all, because of a biased police, and because of shoddy police and prosecution work. Adding capital punishment, or any barbaric punishment, is not going to change enforcement rates. If we enforce our current rape laws well, that in and of itself is enough to be an effective deterrent. Do we really think that would be rapists would want to spend between 7 and 14 years in an Indian jail for a five minute power trip? If they knew that committing a rape meant a high likelihood of spending a decade or more in jail, it would very likely deter the vast majority. First thing that needs to happen top-down is a strict edict to every police boot on the ground – if you slack on your duty in handling a rape case, you can go back to kheti-baadi. If you refuse to lodge an FIR, harass the victim, or handle the case maliciously, you’re going to jail.

Of course, the biggest move we can make as a society, towards combating this problem, is to do whatever we can to combat the mindsets that disadvantage women. We need to eradicate mindsets that deny a daughter an education while offering it to the son, mindsets that treat as given the sole right of the son on inheritance and treat daughters as "paraya dhan", and mindsets that accept that the burden of a wedding and “continual hospitality of the ladke waale” rests with the parents of the bride. Whether this entails someone like Aamir Khan leveraging his fame for the cause, or it involves one of us talking to our relatives about not “bending over backwards” to “serve” the groom’s side of the family during a family wedding… every chip will add up. Empower and respect the women in your life, and use whatever influence you have to propagate the same behavior in others around you. It will not be inconsequential.

How an Economist might view the Women's Reservation Bill

Assuming that the goal of "electing a legislator that's best for the constituency/country" is unquestionable and paramount, and the idea "best man/woman for the job" is congruent to this goal, I am baffled with regards to the rationale behind the Women's reservation bill.

Help me out here by selecting one of the possible 4 options (or add some that I may have missed out)

33% Parliamentary reservation for Women in India is a good idea because:

1. Women are better legislators than men 33% of the time more often than you would expect by random chance alone, and all voters are too dumb to figure that out themselves.

2. Women are always better legislators than men, and 33% of the voters are too dumb to figure that out themselves.

3. 33% of the time, a "superior woman legislator" loses to an "inferior male legislator" because of sexist biases in the Indian psyche, and the reverse never occurs. Also, there exists a magical method through which you can identify the 33% of the constituencies that sport this bias, which then allows you to implement a fair "bias countering" mechanism (aka quota).

4. Congress hopes to corner 50% of the vote bank (women - who see them as their champions) without necessarily alienating the other 50% (men, who are afraid of being labeled sexist for opposing this bill). Smartly, BJP doesn’t want to miss out on the action.

Between Reality and Perception

In 1971, when the cold war was at its frigid worst, Pakistan and India went to war. Pakistan was an ally of the United States of America for obvious reasons – the friendship accord of 1965 architected by the RMMB (Red Masjid Mullah Brotherhood) of Lahore and the DCCA (Dallas Cowboys Cheerleader Association). With so much in common between the two cultures, it is no wonder that the two nations were allies. When the American President at the time, a curious man called Richard Nixon, found time off from filling up the prison system with marijuana smokers, he found some time to hate India and the woman at its helm – Indira Gandhi. He is known to have referred to her as an “Old Witch” and “Bitch”. His man-at-arms Henry Kissinger, was on the same page as Nixon when it came to India. He is attributed with a gem too - “the Indians are bastards anyway”.

Nixon found the need to get behind his natural ally – the Islamic republic of Pakistan – and let India know the potential consequence of messing with a US partner. On the one hand India had to respond to the Pakistani nuisance and on the other it knew it could not face up to a meddling superpower. There was only one way out – befriending the big red machine. Thus began the Soviet-Indian affair. With the counter-weight firmly in place, India could now proceed to do some ass-kicking and ass-kicking it certainly did. Pakistan was beaten down to its knees, in under a fortnight. Just as it looked like India would bring down the hammer and finish the job, the nuclear armed USS Enterprise paid a surprise visit to the Indian waters. The Soviets responded by dispatching their own nuclear carriers, but India did the prudent thing – ended the war by allowing Pakistan to surrender. General Niazi of Pakistan symbolically lay down his sword in front of the Indian General, and signed the surrender treaty.


This piece is not meant to be a history lesson. It’s more of an observation on the power of situation on young minds, and how that shapes reality as they know it.

Years went by after the war. The Indian-Soviet friendship grew stronger. Russians watched our movies and loved our stars. Some of our movies starred their people. They took one of our astronauts up into space with them. Rakesh Sharma spoke live from a Russian space station, to his largely impoverished nation, and we sat glued to the TV sets watching this monumental moment in Indian history. Soviet made air craft carriers, fighter planes and submarines became the mainstay of our military even as American planes were strengthening the neighboring Islamic army. For a generation of young Indians growing up in the seventies and eighties, the Soviet Union was the Big Brother - the kind that watched out for you, the kind that made you do cool things, showed you stuff you did not dream of. Sure, the Soviets had a pretty bad record of upholding human rights and dignity at home and abroad, but not much of that information made its way into mainstream thought pools in India. The reason was that as far as India was concerned, there was only good stuff coming its way. Yes, most Indians had a narrow and convenient view of all things Russian, but more often than not, that’s how perceptions and relations work in humans and countries alike.

What of America? Nothing much really, other than Hollywood and that Big Brother was its sworn enemy. There was no anti-US propaganda in the media, anti US sentiment was not common “grown-up” talk at dinner parties. None of that happened. Even so, the knowledge that the world was polar, and that one of the poles is our brother, made the other pole disliked by association.

So, when the US attacked Iraq in 1991, I will not be exaggerating when I say that more than half the grown ups and almost all the kids in India, were rooting for Saddam’s army to deliver on his promise of staging the “mother of all battles”.

Why was it so? Why were so many Indians unable or unwilling to weigh the situational facts on their merit while deciding to support or oppose a US action? The simple answer lies in a truth that behavioral scientists are well aware of – its rarely the merit of the argument that sways the target, it’s the likeability and the pre-formed opinions of the arguer that tip the scales before a word is said. No matter how justified a US response to the invasion of Kuwait was, for Indians that had grown up in a world where Pakistan sought everyday to kill their fellow citizens with US made artillery, there was enough bad blood to make it hard to be objective about things.

So when celebrations sparked off in places like Palestine after 9/11, shocking as the thought of revelry in response to unspeakable horror is, it is still in the realm of the explainable. Several generations of Palestinians have grown up to the sounds and sights of war. When innocent eyes ask why cousin Rashid was blown up by a mortar, the adult fingers point to Israel and from there to America. Of course, that’s only one side of the story, but then how many people living in the shadow of war and horror find the moral objectivity to be neutral in their accounts? If a young Palestinian manages to reach adulthood through the mine field he calls home, through the numerous funeral processions of friends and family members, through countless evenings of anti Israeli and anti American propaganda, he cannot possibly retain an objective mind about America.

The same applies to young minds in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Cuba etc. When Americans try to understand why no love is generated in the general populace of these countries after America donates millions in international relief and charity, it needs to look back several decades to figure out what polarizing information and situations were minds in these countries subjected to.

It wasn’t until the presidency of Bill Clinton that the US behaved like it understood that India was a natural ally and Pakistan wasn’t quite. Bill made some overtures at the Indians and snubbed the Pakistanis. The media would periodically report on Indo-US accords, trade agreements, mutual visits by dignitaries etc. In due course of time, most young Indians began holding the US and Russia on an even keel of admiration and respect. Decades of suspicion had been undone by the acts of one charismatic leader and his foreign office. Charisma and suave notwithstanding, what is the one thing that worked most effectively in endearing the US to India? It was the very public and very forthright display of rebuking Pakistan for the things it had done wrong – Kargil intrusion, Dictatorship, not cracking down on cross border militancy. This act showed India that the US was no longer judging based on past relations, but rather based on ground realities. This was the game-changing move that completely altered the equation. Bill Clinton isn’t president anymore, but another charismatic leader may soon hold the seat, and maybe he can take the lessons of India and apply them to the Middle East.

They say that there is no magic bullet for solving the problems of the middle-east. Maybe there isn’t. But there certainly is a contender for that honor – the US displaying neutrality between Israel and Palestine and equally rebuking and applauding both sides for negative and positive actions. Imagine that! Imagine a US president getting on the microphone at the next UN meeting and taking a strong stance at Israeli tanks taking down Palestinian civilian vehicles and ambulances in Gaza. Imagine that! Imagine him saying the words “Repeating such actions will invite sanctions and other punitive actions on Israel from the world community.”! Imagine that! From that point, even if the US were to use similar words to condemn a Hamas suicide bomber, I think a major major victory will be won for the US. Palestinians will rub their eyes in disbelief, and in all likelihood, a crack will form on their long held wall of animosity. Just a crack…but a step in the right direction. Hell, I predict that it will not crack just the Palestinian wall of animosity, but shake up the order of things all over the Arab world and beyond.

If the US were to do this, the justification would not only be Arab PR. In fact, the real justification would be to do the right thing. The history of the region and the dubious claiming of Israeli land 50 odd years back is a story for another day. The bottom-line is that every neutral observer acknowledges that there are atrocities and transgressions committed by both sides. That the US – the only world super-power - chooses to condemn only one side of the equation, is unquestionably the cause of a lot of the hatred. There is no good reason, other than pandering to the Jewish lobby, for the US to continually adopt a biased stance in the conflict. We need to do what is right – call a spade a spade. The Jewish lobby doesn’t do enough good to offset the ill-will of the entire Arab world and by consequence the specter of terrorism.

To sum up, the US can reverse the hatred it encounters in several parts of the world. To do so, it needs to find the analysis and the will. The analysis is the simple part – find the historical cause for hatred in each situation, and find a way to reverse that cause. However, finding the will to take action is not so easy. In such pursuit, lobbies, religious alliances and pre-formed notions should be challenged if they need to be. We live in a new world that suffers from actions taken in the old world. The solutions to age old problems have to be game-changing, bold, strategic and honest. Till such solutions come about, the blinds of indoctrination will prevent several eyes from perceiving and appreciating the good coming out of the US.

Murali shot-puts past Warne

“Murali is the best shot-putter in the history of the game of cricket!”

This is the latest gem from the Bishen Singh Bedi arsenal. The statement is sharp, sarcastic, witty and hits its mark like an arrow from hell. The same archer, Murali’s tormentor-in-chief, has fired similarly stringing and accurate barbs at Murali in the past – “Javelin Thrower, Dacoit”!

Oh, and another one – “even if Murali takes 1000 wickets, I will count them as run-outs.”

Of course the latest remarks ruffled Lankan feathers. Of course everyone from the President to the chief justice of the country was offended. And of course, Murali got some more sympathy generating fodder, apart from his deformed arm that is.

I really don’t blame them. If I was Lankan, and Murali was pretty much my country’s only claim to fame, hell yeah I would be up in arms too, baying for Bedi’s blood.

My views on the subject are fairly clear. Murali’s action should be illegal. It doesn’t matter if he managed to chuck less than15 degrees under laboratory conditions. Matches are not played in labs, they are played on the field. Biometric experts do not adjudicate in matches, umpires do. Judging a chuck with the naked eye when the bowler keeps his arm straight and next to his ear is hard enough. Judging a chuck with the naked eye when an arm is bent to begin with, is near impossible in my opinion. This is why Murali’s action should be banned. This is what Bedi meant when he said “The ICC has created a monster by allowing this action”. He did not mean that Muttiah has one eye and horns growing out of his monstrous ass. He meant that this legitimacy granted to the action will open the floodgates to similar actions which will create a monster size problem down the road.

So say the Lankan cricket officials and even the Lankan media - “Bedi called Murali a Monster…..waaaan waaaan waaaan… !“.
Aaargh!!! Will someone please proof read their thoughts before they vomit their ignorance through their pie holes?

Well anyway, Murali’s posse got major-ly pissed off and threatened to file a $ 8 million law-suit against Bedi. I reckon they figure that this is a great opportunity to double Lanka’s GDP. And why not? Patriotism is a most noble emotion.

Not all Lankans are on the path of vengeance though. There are some voicing restraint – take for example Murali’s old pal Ranatunga (who has curiously managed to maintain a state of being “eight months pregnant” for the last 15 years). He eloquently advised – “When a dog bites, you don’t bite him back”. Yes, nice try with the one-liner Arjuna, now go back to school and try and figure out how to back up your punch-line with some reasoning (Bedi sure did). And good luck with the baby shower.

Meanwhile the inevitable has transpired. Murali and his slingshot arm have overtaken the retired master - Warne - as the highest wicket taker in history. I leave you with images of the new champion, the new King, shortly after achieving this momentous milestone. Surely you see the same grace, poise and class exuded by the new title holder, that I can so clearly see. Or is it an electric eel that has crawled into his arse and is now ferociously electrocuting the bejeebers out of his insides that has him so contorted?