Who watches
the Watchmen?
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
The Elephant has Died
I can see it in your eyes
Unfocused and half closed
The wrinkle in your smile says
You wouldn't have supposed
That anyone could figure out
Just how wrong it went
You think that you're deceiving us
That we're all off your scent
Clearly in your ragged breath
And lackluster take on life
A sickened song of sorrow tells
A Tale of Wasted Life
Somber self-inflicted self sufficiency
Is slipping through the cracks
You're nodding off in public
And you're more than just relaxed
Taste the guilt, swallow the shame
As it drips into your throat
Before you smother soul to death
Be sure to write a note
To tell us how we all have failed
There's nothing we could do
To say I know you loved me but, well,
Fuck you.
OBAMAS DISAPPOINTING SPEECH-HOW A MAN IS TRANSFORMED BY CONSERVATIVE FORCES
USA's NEW AFGHAN STRATEGY-OBAMA POLICY SPEECH OF 27 MARCH 2009-AN ANALYSIS
IS THIS THE MAN FROM WHOM THE OPRESSED HAD SOME HOPES
AGHA H AMIN
27 MARCH 2009
While tailor made and apparently or at least outwardly speaking neat and logical, President Obamas policy speech on Afghanistanis is vulnerable to many serious criticsms. The first criticism of the whole idea of US presence and success in Afghanistan is as follows:
1-The USA for many years was the mastermind in financing, directing and waging war through proxies in Afghanistan. A war waged against a de facto government of Afghanistan. A brutal and criminal war which left some 14,000 Red Army soldiers, many of whom were Muslims dead, and some 35,000 wounded and maimed for life. A war which destroyed most of the infra structure that had been built in Afghanistan since some 200 years. Now that the USA by a twist of fate is in a similar position in Afghanistan as was the USSR, how on earth does it expect Russia to just sit and watch the USA succeed in the same role which the USSR had embarked upon some 30 years ago. In terms of International law USA's position is far worse as compared to the USSR position. The USA invaded Afghanistan to displace a de facto regime. The USSR entered Afghanistan to save a leftist regime under threat of extinction by US paid mercenaries operating from Pakistan.
2-Another very serious contradiction is the fact that the moral authority of the Pakistani state has been severely eroded since 9/11. The basic reason for this is the fact that 30 years ago the Pakistani military junta was selling the idea that USSR is a non Muslim power which had occupied Afghanistan, so it must be repelled by fighting a holy war or Jihad. Ironically since October 2001 the Pakistani state became a shameless collaborator of a Christian power that occupied Afghanistan in November 2001! The motive being the same as in waging the Jihad of 1979! US Dollars!At least the balancing factor in favour of the Soviets was that they were not Christians!
I am not a religious man at all but my criticism is philosophical rather than religious. Having said that, it remains a hard fact that the above two contradictions are irreconcilable. When Obama says that 700 US soldiers were killed in Afghanistan he proves two facts. One, that the US soldier is hardly fighting a war because 700 soldiers killed in 8 years means a 100 soldiers per year, which proves that the enemy that the USA is facing in Afghanistan is hardly that dangerous an enemy as claimed by USA.
The second and more serious criticism of Obamas lamenting 700 over fed and over protected US lives is that 14,000 Red Army soldiers killed in Afghanistan were sub humans! It is hard to believe that non state forces alleged to have killed 3000 on 9/11 have killed a peanut 700 US soldiers. In any case it amply proves that the threat is almost non existent. Another grave issue, perhaps morally not as relevant is the dangerous precedent that US success in Afghanistan or Iraq would establish. Without sufficient proof that Afghanistan or the Taliban had anything to do with two aircraft ramming the Twin Trade Centres, the US invasion of Afghanistan introduced an element of rash albeit, whitewashed civility in international relations. I say whitewashed because the UN then was headed by one of the most opportunistic secretary generals in its history. Unfortunately one whose mediocrity has been eclipsed by another pathetic successor in the person of Ban ki Moon.
Any US success in Afghanistan or Iraq would vindicate the fact that might is right in a world which follows the law of jungle in which Tarzans like Adolf Bush occupy any Poland they like at whim! Nevertheless whatever international law was followed while attacking Afghanistan, all was violated when the USA without any International sanction occupied Iraq.
The central moral question now is that if the USA succeeds in Iraq and Afghanistan a new and dangerous precedent would be firmly established in intenational law. Hitory will go back to the time of Attilla the Hun and Genghis Khan. Although it would be below the military dignity of Mongols to compare them with the US Army, a far more bulky and clumsy outfit.The dangerous precedent that Adolf Bush's actions would set is that the stronger countries can occupy the weaker at whim and will. After all why were the First and Second World Wars fought? For the sanctity of neutrality and sovereignty of Belgium and Poland!
This third contradiction appears more cosmetic but is the most dangerous aspect of the whole issue. It is a tragedy of US history that mediocrity in decision making has remained the hallmark of US policy since 1945. Obamas Afghan strategy with a peanut 1.5 Billion US Dollars per annum to the Pakistani government printed at leisure and at no cost to USA, would severely divide Pakistan. 1.5 Billion US dollars straight into the gutter. Because these would not achieve any of USA's policy objectives.
Since these are linked to fighting Taliban, Pakistan would be severely weakened with the Pakistani forces crushed under the burden of carrying the US albatross of 1.5 Billion US Dollars, as shameless mercenaries of a Christian power! Russia and China perceive any US success in Afghanistan as a prelude to a US sponsored Phase Two Guerrilla war in Singkiang and later US encroachments into Central Asia as Phase Three.
It is hard to imagine why these two crucial regional players would allow the USA to succeed in Afghanistan. Russia is a key player in Afghanistan thanks to the brilliant intelligence appreciations done by Dr. Najeeb and General Yaqubi in 1980-1992. Any US success in Afghanistan would be a grave strategic failure for Russia. After all, what has the USA done for Russia except creating trouble for Russia by enlarging NATO, deploying missile shields in Poland and subverting Ukraine and Georgia?
Thus there is logic in Russia deciding to re-establish bases in Syria, Libya and Yemen and in deploying strategic bombers in Venezuela and Cuba! US policy makers forget the most important Clausewitzian concept of the indeoendent will of the enemy. How on earth do they expect this independent will not to sabotage the USA in Afghanistan!
Was the USA sending candies and doughnuts for the Red Army in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989! Afghanistan and Pakistani states are past masters in syphoning foreign aid in private accounts. Once again USA intends playing the same corruption game!
I am inclined to become a fan of Dr Eric Bernes book "Games People Play". The South Vietnamese Army was far better than the Afghan National Army. Yet it failed to defeat the NVA. So the outcome of war in Afghanistan in case of any US withdrawal remains a foregone conclusion. India, Russia, China and Iran, apart from lip service, have been largely ignored in the proposed strategy which means that US strategy lacks strategic vision.
The right thing from the USA should have been to incorporate these three players. The very concept that Al Qaeda needs some tribal areas to train is fallacious and incorrect. The boundaries of Al Qaeda are much wider, although at the same time the Al Qaeda has proved incapable of inflicting any substantial damage to USA in the last 8 years. So the whole theory that the Al Qaeda is a threat to USA's national security is a non seller.
At the same time insisting that Al Qaeda is in the tribal areas is absurd. Obama stated that the tribal areas are a vast expanse whereas these are a small strip of territory approximately 300 miles north to south and average 100 miles east to west.
The US Army has a far greater tail to teeth ratio than Red Army in Afghanistan. Seen in this context 17,000 US troops would be peanuts. I have yet to see any construction solicitation in the US Army Corps of Engineers website proving that 17,000 troops would be actually coming to Afghanistan! It's possible that this increase is more of rhetorical jugglery than anything actual. And in any case what would these 17,000 musketeers achieve. Would the US forces be able to seal Afghanistans 5000 Km plus borders and especially the 2400 Km border with Pakistan!
The most central part of the whole discussion is that the Afghan issue cannot be solved by USA and Pakistan alone. Especially the military and political effectiveness of the Pakistani government in achieving even a fraction of what the USA wants is highly questionable. The Pakistani military establishment has an institutional stake in ensuring that Pakistan remains vulnerable so that the military calls the shots.
They see the Talibans as useful allies and cheap cannonfodder in any war with India. The Saudis see the Taliban as useful allies against Shias. In the final summing up the bottom line is that the Pakistani politicians and generals will juggle with 1.5 Billion US Dollars per annum and deliver little or nothing at all. Even the US assertion that drone attacks have achieved great success is largely rhetorical and political.
Whereas the USA is facing the Taliban, the theory that Al Qaeda from tribal areas are controlling the war on terror is questionable and fallacious! The simple truth is that war in Afghanistan is about the presence of US and other Christian troops and not about Al Qaeda. Hardly 5% of USA's opponents in Afghanistan are Al Qaeda. What to conclude?
All one can say is that Obamas speech was a speech designed to win 2012 elections for Obama rather than the war on terror. Obama made a speech because it was a political requirement and not because any strategy was planned or evolved. Hillary Clinton is more suited as a civil attorney or on the board of Walmart than as a secretary of state!
The USA cannot win in Afghanistan because the equation involves many strong players. All it can do is mark time and ultimately withdraw without achieving much. After hearing the Obama speech one can safely conclude that the USA has no anti Al Qaeda strategy in Afghanistan. It's a case of either supreme strategic incompetence or the first phase of a secret war against Russia and China !
IS THIS THE MAN FROM WHOM THE OPRESSED HAD SOME HOPES
AGHA H AMIN
27 MARCH 2009
While tailor made and apparently or at least outwardly speaking neat and logical, President Obamas policy speech on Afghanistanis is vulnerable to many serious criticsms. The first criticism of the whole idea of US presence and success in Afghanistan is as follows:
1-The USA for many years was the mastermind in financing, directing and waging war through proxies in Afghanistan. A war waged against a de facto government of Afghanistan. A brutal and criminal war which left some 14,000 Red Army soldiers, many of whom were Muslims dead, and some 35,000 wounded and maimed for life. A war which destroyed most of the infra structure that had been built in Afghanistan since some 200 years. Now that the USA by a twist of fate is in a similar position in Afghanistan as was the USSR, how on earth does it expect Russia to just sit and watch the USA succeed in the same role which the USSR had embarked upon some 30 years ago. In terms of International law USA's position is far worse as compared to the USSR position. The USA invaded Afghanistan to displace a de facto regime. The USSR entered Afghanistan to save a leftist regime under threat of extinction by US paid mercenaries operating from Pakistan.
2-Another very serious contradiction is the fact that the moral authority of the Pakistani state has been severely eroded since 9/11. The basic reason for this is the fact that 30 years ago the Pakistani military junta was selling the idea that USSR is a non Muslim power which had occupied Afghanistan, so it must be repelled by fighting a holy war or Jihad. Ironically since October 2001 the Pakistani state became a shameless collaborator of a Christian power that occupied Afghanistan in November 2001! The motive being the same as in waging the Jihad of 1979! US Dollars!At least the balancing factor in favour of the Soviets was that they were not Christians!
I am not a religious man at all but my criticism is philosophical rather than religious. Having said that, it remains a hard fact that the above two contradictions are irreconcilable. When Obama says that 700 US soldiers were killed in Afghanistan he proves two facts. One, that the US soldier is hardly fighting a war because 700 soldiers killed in 8 years means a 100 soldiers per year, which proves that the enemy that the USA is facing in Afghanistan is hardly that dangerous an enemy as claimed by USA.
The second and more serious criticism of Obamas lamenting 700 over fed and over protected US lives is that 14,000 Red Army soldiers killed in Afghanistan were sub humans! It is hard to believe that non state forces alleged to have killed 3000 on 9/11 have killed a peanut 700 US soldiers. In any case it amply proves that the threat is almost non existent. Another grave issue, perhaps morally not as relevant is the dangerous precedent that US success in Afghanistan or Iraq would establish. Without sufficient proof that Afghanistan or the Taliban had anything to do with two aircraft ramming the Twin Trade Centres, the US invasion of Afghanistan introduced an element of rash albeit, whitewashed civility in international relations. I say whitewashed because the UN then was headed by one of the most opportunistic secretary generals in its history. Unfortunately one whose mediocrity has been eclipsed by another pathetic successor in the person of Ban ki Moon.
Any US success in Afghanistan or Iraq would vindicate the fact that might is right in a world which follows the law of jungle in which Tarzans like Adolf Bush occupy any Poland they like at whim! Nevertheless whatever international law was followed while attacking Afghanistan, all was violated when the USA without any International sanction occupied Iraq.
The central moral question now is that if the USA succeeds in Iraq and Afghanistan a new and dangerous precedent would be firmly established in intenational law. Hitory will go back to the time of Attilla the Hun and Genghis Khan. Although it would be below the military dignity of Mongols to compare them with the US Army, a far more bulky and clumsy outfit.The dangerous precedent that Adolf Bush's actions would set is that the stronger countries can occupy the weaker at whim and will. After all why were the First and Second World Wars fought? For the sanctity of neutrality and sovereignty of Belgium and Poland!
This third contradiction appears more cosmetic but is the most dangerous aspect of the whole issue. It is a tragedy of US history that mediocrity in decision making has remained the hallmark of US policy since 1945. Obamas Afghan strategy with a peanut 1.5 Billion US Dollars per annum to the Pakistani government printed at leisure and at no cost to USA, would severely divide Pakistan. 1.5 Billion US dollars straight into the gutter. Because these would not achieve any of USA's policy objectives.
Since these are linked to fighting Taliban, Pakistan would be severely weakened with the Pakistani forces crushed under the burden of carrying the US albatross of 1.5 Billion US Dollars, as shameless mercenaries of a Christian power! Russia and China perceive any US success in Afghanistan as a prelude to a US sponsored Phase Two Guerrilla war in Singkiang and later US encroachments into Central Asia as Phase Three.
It is hard to imagine why these two crucial regional players would allow the USA to succeed in Afghanistan. Russia is a key player in Afghanistan thanks to the brilliant intelligence appreciations done by Dr. Najeeb and General Yaqubi in 1980-1992. Any US success in Afghanistan would be a grave strategic failure for Russia. After all, what has the USA done for Russia except creating trouble for Russia by enlarging NATO, deploying missile shields in Poland and subverting Ukraine and Georgia?
Thus there is logic in Russia deciding to re-establish bases in Syria, Libya and Yemen and in deploying strategic bombers in Venezuela and Cuba! US policy makers forget the most important Clausewitzian concept of the indeoendent will of the enemy. How on earth do they expect this independent will not to sabotage the USA in Afghanistan!
Was the USA sending candies and doughnuts for the Red Army in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989! Afghanistan and Pakistani states are past masters in syphoning foreign aid in private accounts. Once again USA intends playing the same corruption game!
I am inclined to become a fan of Dr Eric Bernes book "Games People Play". The South Vietnamese Army was far better than the Afghan National Army. Yet it failed to defeat the NVA. So the outcome of war in Afghanistan in case of any US withdrawal remains a foregone conclusion. India, Russia, China and Iran, apart from lip service, have been largely ignored in the proposed strategy which means that US strategy lacks strategic vision.
The right thing from the USA should have been to incorporate these three players. The very concept that Al Qaeda needs some tribal areas to train is fallacious and incorrect. The boundaries of Al Qaeda are much wider, although at the same time the Al Qaeda has proved incapable of inflicting any substantial damage to USA in the last 8 years. So the whole theory that the Al Qaeda is a threat to USA's national security is a non seller.
At the same time insisting that Al Qaeda is in the tribal areas is absurd. Obama stated that the tribal areas are a vast expanse whereas these are a small strip of territory approximately 300 miles north to south and average 100 miles east to west.
The US Army has a far greater tail to teeth ratio than Red Army in Afghanistan. Seen in this context 17,000 US troops would be peanuts. I have yet to see any construction solicitation in the US Army Corps of Engineers website proving that 17,000 troops would be actually coming to Afghanistan! It's possible that this increase is more of rhetorical jugglery than anything actual. And in any case what would these 17,000 musketeers achieve. Would the US forces be able to seal Afghanistans 5000 Km plus borders and especially the 2400 Km border with Pakistan!
The most central part of the whole discussion is that the Afghan issue cannot be solved by USA and Pakistan alone. Especially the military and political effectiveness of the Pakistani government in achieving even a fraction of what the USA wants is highly questionable. The Pakistani military establishment has an institutional stake in ensuring that Pakistan remains vulnerable so that the military calls the shots.
They see the Talibans as useful allies and cheap cannonfodder in any war with India. The Saudis see the Taliban as useful allies against Shias. In the final summing up the bottom line is that the Pakistani politicians and generals will juggle with 1.5 Billion US Dollars per annum and deliver little or nothing at all. Even the US assertion that drone attacks have achieved great success is largely rhetorical and political.
Whereas the USA is facing the Taliban, the theory that Al Qaeda from tribal areas are controlling the war on terror is questionable and fallacious! The simple truth is that war in Afghanistan is about the presence of US and other Christian troops and not about Al Qaeda. Hardly 5% of USA's opponents in Afghanistan are Al Qaeda. What to conclude?
All one can say is that Obamas speech was a speech designed to win 2012 elections for Obama rather than the war on terror. Obama made a speech because it was a political requirement and not because any strategy was planned or evolved. Hillary Clinton is more suited as a civil attorney or on the board of Walmart than as a secretary of state!
The USA cannot win in Afghanistan because the equation involves many strong players. All it can do is mark time and ultimately withdraw without achieving much. After hearing the Obama speech one can safely conclude that the USA has no anti Al Qaeda strategy in Afghanistan. It's a case of either supreme strategic incompetence or the first phase of a secret war against Russia and China !
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Obscene Truth
The truth......
is kind of like pornography.......
I can't tell you what it is.......
but I know it when I see it.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Look in the mirror
The unexamined life
is not worth living
(Socrates said this at his trial for heresy)
What is Truth anyway??
Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it.
Andre Gide
Above I have uploaded a picture I took of the sunset on Donabate Beach, Co. Dublin, March, 2008.
Put People First
On 28th March thousands will march through London as part of a global campaign to challenge the G20, ahead of their 2nd April summit on the global financial crisis.
Even before the banking collapse, the world suffered poverty, inequality and the threat of climate chaos. The world has followed a financial model that has created an economy fuelled by ever-increasing debt, both financial and environmental.
Our future depends on creating an economy based on fair distribution of wealth, decent jobs for all and a low carbon future.
There can be no going back to business as usual.
People from all over the country will join the march on March 28.
Be one of them.
Even before the banking collapse, the world suffered poverty, inequality and the threat of climate chaos. The world has followed a financial model that has created an economy fuelled by ever-increasing debt, both financial and environmental.
Our future depends on creating an economy based on fair distribution of wealth, decent jobs for all and a low carbon future.
There can be no going back to business as usual.
People from all over the country will join the march on March 28.
Be one of them.
Friday, March 27, 2009
sick of people...
who... psychologicaly captive of the system, using that fucking illusion veil they've bought and... in (an also) self inflicted blindness, keep lying hard to themselves, using to: think A, say B and act C ...thinking, pretending, playing or feeling as... independent, rebel, crazy, cool, special, better, smarter, different... only dumping out from their consciences all the shitness WE are causing to our world by being, at least, indiferent and/or silent to it, even if it's to keep some feeling of sanity or something like that but in fact as simple excuse to take part on their own illusion, not bothering themselves on thinking to much about what is quite clear and evident to everyone who wants to see, to understand, and if a good one, try to really grow a beautiful flower in the mud. to say the less! ...and no matter how this delusion came to their lives, nowadays deluded people just piss me off! as if they were so just because of their own mind lazyness, and this kind of lazyness is becoming, to me, not even possible to forgive. people would better actually be lazy to obey the masters, and get angry about this absolutely wrong system we live in. and make some good use of this beautiful anger! well...
i know how thinking can be painfull, however, it should hurt a lot more when i feel that something is quite wrong and, just to keep in shape my own protection mask (the so called ego) well enough to go thoroughly unharmed throughout this life, to pretend everything is alright... come on, it's all wrong! ...but anyone can know that this system is designed to, somehow, work like this: for every time i use my debit/credit card to buy any stupid thing, at least a hundred childrem is dying by starvation and ameneable diseases. period! and it's simple like that! but we are mind manipulated, controlled and well encouraged to think that it's not our problem, we are not the saviours of our world, we can do nothing to change it ...and, in the end, i'm just one person and i can't go against the system, it's not my business and, no matter how bad it seems, the system is working as it is, and people have their own destiny, it's in the good hands of god, that's the way it is! those are the facts of life, c'est la vie!p.s. well, ...despite my childrem swimming pretty happy in their pool, and all the happiness that my loved ones and i can have and achieve by our own means, ...as human beings we're all already fucked! and there are no heroes coming up to save us, and neither will any mercifull god show up to save the poor deluded souls on earth, and even exactly those who are pissing me off! so... it must be the duty of any good human being, barely or well aware of those facts, to wake any other good one up, at least wake them up, to step out of the box, think about and get aware of what actually MUST BE CHANGED, ...even if (at first) it can brings us to any chaotic situation... but then we will see what we can do! and i'm pretty sure it will be better to everyone, ...and to this beautiful planet we live on as well!
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Anonymous
But still,
it really doesn't matter what may be,
things are as they are,
and they aren't as they should be.
something about freedom
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Get the Balance Right
There's a certain balance for each of us,
and that balance determines who we are,
our personality and behavior,
as well as our survival.
Society has a like balance...
and that balance determines who we are,
our personality and behavior,
as well as our survival.
Society has a like balance...
Friday, March 20, 2009
Plant a vegetable garden
Michelle Obama is planning the first vegetable garden at the White House since Eleanor Roosevelt’s victory garden in World War II.It's about time we resurrect the old fashion notion of a vegetable "victory" garden in every backyard or patio in America.
I think everyone should plant a vegetable garden. It's hours of family fun and exercise, not to mention all the great fresh vegetables you'll be enjoying.
Kiss my ass
On a flight to Cameroon, beginning a weeklong trip through Africa, Pope Benedict XVI said, "you can't resolve [the AIDS epidemic] with the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, it increases the problem."
That the Pope would question the value of condoms in fighting the spread of HIV/AIDS is truly disturbing.
Troubled by the Pope's comments, the French Foreign Ministry said, "We consider that these statements are a threat to public health policies and the imperative to protect human life."
The International AIDS Society on Friday condemned Pope Benedict XVI's denunciation of condoms as outrageous and insulting, warning that his comments could fuel HIV infection in devout Africa.
You've all been wondering
Okay,
you've all been wondering...
so here's the answer...
...God created evolution...
everybody happy now?
Hair, Hairs and Sikhs
I wrote this for my personal blog, sometimes - 2, and then I got to thinking. We as Sikhs are a little known and often misunderstood group. What better place to get to know us a little than on this blog that's all about GlobaLove? This is a rather light-hearted look at our attitude toward hair.
My husband is again annoyed at all the money I spend on my hair. I think this is normal. Women do tend to spend a lot of money on their hair.
I was discussing this with a friend online. What are the things most women do to their hair? Straightening, I mean, relaxing, perming, weaves, cornrows (where did that name come from?), braids, extensions, all kinds of styling and, of course, cuts.
She said that she spends about $100.00 a month at the salon, in addition to home care products, such as shampoo, conditioner, gels, mousse, sprays and a weekly deep conditioner. That can easily add up to another $50.00 per month. Then there are brushes, combs, ties, and ornaments. I am going to disregard them, as I have no way to approximate that.
My expenses are somewhat less. In twenty years of marriage, I have been to a salon - not even one time. Wait, I was in a salon once. I'll tell about that later. I have never used or paid for the services of a salon even once. Well, once...I'll tell that story, too..
Given those figures, the average American woman would have spent about $36,000.00 over twenty years.
My expenses are somewhat less. I buy only three products for my hair: shampoo, conditioner and hair oil. Although I refuse to use that hair garbage from the dollar store - it makes my hair, which is very dry, break off and my scalp itch - I do not use the expensive salon items. I buy what is on sale at the local grocery/drug store. Shampoo and conditioner cost about $7.00 each for a bottle. One bottle will last me about a month. Hair oil, even imported from India is not expensive. The kind I usually use costs about $6.00 a bottle and lasts a couple of months. But let's say, I use a bottle a month. That all adds up to to $20.00 per month. Over twenty years, that adds up to a grand total of $4,800.
That means I have saved us about $31,200 over the twenty years of our marriage. I'd say I'm quite a bargain!
About that trip to the salon. A friend asked me to meet her there. With some misgivings, I agreed. I do not think any keshdhari Sikh could possibly feel comfortable in such a place. (For my nonSikh readers, being keshdhari means following the distinctively Sikh practice of leaving the hair unshorn and in its natural state.)
I am keshdhari. Going to a hair salon felt a little like going to a brothel. Interesting, a bit disgusting, quite daring and very uncomfortable. I was very much out of place, rather like a lioness at a dog show.
I first noticed the smell. A hair salon smells a bit like a chemistry lab without fume hoods. Ammonia seemed to predominate, along with some smells I couldn't identify. Someone had lit some incense, I suppose to cover up the noxious odours. It didn't work. Both my nostrils and my eyes were assaulted and I felt vaguely sick to my stomach.
The sights that met my eyes were a bit shocking. I mean, I know what goes on in these places, but to actually witness it! Here were all these women, all seemingly having a good time, mutilating their hair in various ways with these toxic chemicals. I could almost hear their tortured hairs screaming out in agony. And on the floor lay strands and strings of amputated hairs of all sorts of colours, some natural, most dyed. All dead.
My friend was in another room, but the receptionist recognised her name when I asked her. I left a note asking her to meet me at a near-by coffee shop and got out of that chamber of horrors. That was maybe 15 years ago; I have not been in one since.
I will be honest. Many years ago, while married to Mani, I did go to a hair salon for a service. I took it into my head that I wanted to get my hair professionally conditioned. I think mostly I was curious at exactly what went on in there. I found out.
I explained that I just wanted a deep conditioning. As this was in Montreal, of course it was all in French. I'll spare you and write in English. The young woman who was to serve me had bright blonde hair of an improbable shade puffed around her face to make her head look very round. She approached me. saw my neat bun and reached up to take out my kangha. I let out a yelp and fastened it to a sort of string around my neck. Jeanette - I don't remember her name, but that seems appropriate - loosened my hair which fell and fell and fell. She actually let out a little gasp and said she'd never seen such long hair. There was no approval in her voice; in fact her tone was accusatory. She picked up the ends of it and with several hmm, hmm, hmms, examined them closely "Virgin hair," she murmured.. "You have split ends. I'll have to trim them off before it can be properly conditioned."
"You'll do no such thing. Cut a single hair and I'll have your," I caught my breath and choked back the obscenity that had been on my lips, "cosmetology licence."
"Do you belong to some weird religious cult or something that won't let women cut their hair?"
"Or something," I growled. "And men don't cut their hair either."
"Well, you should break free and become your own woman." She picked up her scissors. "Long hair is really not becoming on you with that long neck. You have such a high forehead, you really need some cute bangs. You really need a sexy new hair style. Let me help you get free from all " - she held up my precious kesh - "this."
I admit that I sprang out of the chair and got out of there fast. I suppose she still thinks that I came from some strange cult and had inadvertently wandered into the Twentieth Century.
After that I conditioned my own hair - or rather Mani and I did each other's hair, which was not only safer, but also a lot more pleasant.
I have one more thought about long hair. I once watched on The Oprah Winfrey Show, an episode that greatly disturbed me. A bunch of women - and one man - with very long hair were to get makeovers. The main point was to cut off that awful, old-fashioned, ugly, long hair. Give these people a modern, "sexy" look. I admit they did look very different, but BETTER? Not in my opinion. I had the same reaction I have when someone suggests I'd look better if I wore make-up. I always respond,"Better? No, just different." The man went from a strong, masculine man with a full beard and mustache, and hair as long as - although not as healthy - as a keshdhari Sikh to a somewhat girlish metrosexual. I did not like at all.
At least the shorn hair was donated to Locks of Love, a charity that makes human hair wigs for children who have lost their hair, usually as the result of cancer treatments. A worthy cause.
Now, in case you are thinking that these Sikhs are a bit daft with this whole hair thing, allow me a brief explanation. We believe that our Creator knew what it was doing when it made us and we couldn't be more perfectly made. We have hair for a reason, in fact, several practical reasons which I am not going into right now. Even if we could find no practical reason for hair, the fact is that Akaal Purakh (God) gave us a gift of our hair and it is for us to gratefully accept and cherish this gift. (Of course, there's more to it than that, but I think that'll be enough for a start, eh?)
If we still seem a bit daft to you, that's OK. We don't mind. Most of us anyway.
WHY TRY TO FIT IN? YOU WERE BORN TO STAND OUT!
My husband is again annoyed at all the money I spend on my hair. I think this is normal. Women do tend to spend a lot of money on their hair.
I was discussing this with a friend online. What are the things most women do to their hair? Straightening, I mean, relaxing, perming, weaves, cornrows (where did that name come from?), braids, extensions, all kinds of styling and, of course, cuts.
She said that she spends about $100.00 a month at the salon, in addition to home care products, such as shampoo, conditioner, gels, mousse, sprays and a weekly deep conditioner. That can easily add up to another $50.00 per month. Then there are brushes, combs, ties, and ornaments. I am going to disregard them, as I have no way to approximate that.
My expenses are somewhat less. In twenty years of marriage, I have been to a salon - not even one time. Wait, I was in a salon once. I'll tell about that later. I have never used or paid for the services of a salon even once. Well, once...I'll tell that story, too..
Given those figures, the average American woman would have spent about $36,000.00 over twenty years.
My expenses are somewhat less. I buy only three products for my hair: shampoo, conditioner and hair oil. Although I refuse to use that hair garbage from the dollar store - it makes my hair, which is very dry, break off and my scalp itch - I do not use the expensive salon items. I buy what is on sale at the local grocery/drug store. Shampoo and conditioner cost about $7.00 each for a bottle. One bottle will last me about a month. Hair oil, even imported from India is not expensive. The kind I usually use costs about $6.00 a bottle and lasts a couple of months. But let's say, I use a bottle a month. That all adds up to to $20.00 per month. Over twenty years, that adds up to a grand total of $4,800.
That means I have saved us about $31,200 over the twenty years of our marriage. I'd say I'm quite a bargain!
About that trip to the salon. A friend asked me to meet her there. With some misgivings, I agreed. I do not think any keshdhari Sikh could possibly feel comfortable in such a place. (For my nonSikh readers, being keshdhari means following the distinctively Sikh practice of leaving the hair unshorn and in its natural state.)
I am keshdhari. Going to a hair salon felt a little like going to a brothel. Interesting, a bit disgusting, quite daring and very uncomfortable. I was very much out of place, rather like a lioness at a dog show.
I first noticed the smell. A hair salon smells a bit like a chemistry lab without fume hoods. Ammonia seemed to predominate, along with some smells I couldn't identify. Someone had lit some incense, I suppose to cover up the noxious odours. It didn't work. Both my nostrils and my eyes were assaulted and I felt vaguely sick to my stomach.
The sights that met my eyes were a bit shocking. I mean, I know what goes on in these places, but to actually witness it! Here were all these women, all seemingly having a good time, mutilating their hair in various ways with these toxic chemicals. I could almost hear their tortured hairs screaming out in agony. And on the floor lay strands and strings of amputated hairs of all sorts of colours, some natural, most dyed. All dead.
My friend was in another room, but the receptionist recognised her name when I asked her. I left a note asking her to meet me at a near-by coffee shop and got out of that chamber of horrors. That was maybe 15 years ago; I have not been in one since.
I will be honest. Many years ago, while married to Mani, I did go to a hair salon for a service. I took it into my head that I wanted to get my hair professionally conditioned. I think mostly I was curious at exactly what went on in there. I found out.
I explained that I just wanted a deep conditioning. As this was in Montreal, of course it was all in French. I'll spare you and write in English. The young woman who was to serve me had bright blonde hair of an improbable shade puffed around her face to make her head look very round. She approached me. saw my neat bun and reached up to take out my kangha. I let out a yelp and fastened it to a sort of string around my neck. Jeanette - I don't remember her name, but that seems appropriate - loosened my hair which fell and fell and fell. She actually let out a little gasp and said she'd never seen such long hair. There was no approval in her voice; in fact her tone was accusatory. She picked up the ends of it and with several hmm, hmm, hmms, examined them closely "Virgin hair," she murmured.. "You have split ends. I'll have to trim them off before it can be properly conditioned."
"You'll do no such thing. Cut a single hair and I'll have your," I caught my breath and choked back the obscenity that had been on my lips, "cosmetology licence."
"Do you belong to some weird religious cult or something that won't let women cut their hair?"
"Or something," I growled. "And men don't cut their hair either."
"Well, you should break free and become your own woman." She picked up her scissors. "Long hair is really not becoming on you with that long neck. You have such a high forehead, you really need some cute bangs. You really need a sexy new hair style. Let me help you get free from all " - she held up my precious kesh - "this."
I admit that I sprang out of the chair and got out of there fast. I suppose she still thinks that I came from some strange cult and had inadvertently wandered into the Twentieth Century.
After that I conditioned my own hair - or rather Mani and I did each other's hair, which was not only safer, but also a lot more pleasant.
I have one more thought about long hair. I once watched on The Oprah Winfrey Show, an episode that greatly disturbed me. A bunch of women - and one man - with very long hair were to get makeovers. The main point was to cut off that awful, old-fashioned, ugly, long hair. Give these people a modern, "sexy" look. I admit they did look very different, but BETTER? Not in my opinion. I had the same reaction I have when someone suggests I'd look better if I wore make-up. I always respond,"Better? No, just different." The man went from a strong, masculine man with a full beard and mustache, and hair as long as - although not as healthy - as a keshdhari Sikh to a somewhat girlish metrosexual. I did not like at all.
At least the shorn hair was donated to Locks of Love, a charity that makes human hair wigs for children who have lost their hair, usually as the result of cancer treatments. A worthy cause.
Now, in case you are thinking that these Sikhs are a bit daft with this whole hair thing, allow me a brief explanation. We believe that our Creator knew what it was doing when it made us and we couldn't be more perfectly made. We have hair for a reason, in fact, several practical reasons which I am not going into right now. Even if we could find no practical reason for hair, the fact is that Akaal Purakh (God) gave us a gift of our hair and it is for us to gratefully accept and cherish this gift. (Of course, there's more to it than that, but I think that'll be enough for a start, eh?)
If we still seem a bit daft to you, that's OK. We don't mind. Most of us anyway.
WHY TRY TO FIT IN? YOU WERE BORN TO STAND OUT!
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Civilization - We Take it for Granted
Civilization is a state of social existence that we take for granted. We assume that the world that humans have created is a force of nature and that it will be there for us in perpetuity. We assume that every morning we will awaken to the same order, and structure, technology and culture, effort and progress that we regard as being synonymous with civilization. We assume that the complexity and subtleties of the social contract that bind us together will continue and be sustained by continued human effort. We do not see, however, the fragility of this social contract; we fail to comprehend the flaws in its structure and the vulnerability to its dissolution. There is a certain and undeniable proclivity towards anarchy and rebellion within the human makeup. There are destructive impulses that periodically break out of captivity and wreck havoc on the state of civilization. It is convenient to call upon evil to explain the ascendency of someone like Adolph Hitler, for example. No one person can be responsible for a behavior that requires the participation of an entire people to forge a crazed idea from a theoretical conception into reality. The urge to raze what has been made; to undermine the framework of an ordered world, lies within all of us. The past has shown repeatedly that what we assume as a given will ultimately collide with forces that will tend to tear it apart. The power of unforeseen events and the cumulative consequences of all that has gone before is what constitute history at any given moment. We are the benefactors and victims of history often at the same time. To be completely sane, it is essential to take nothing for granted and accept that the shadow of death is always with us.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
True Believers - Part I
In all honesty, who can really proclaim what is the correct way to live? The righteous among us and the True Believers certainly have no problem in declaring what they know to be true. They are not satisfied, however, with simply living according to their own principles; they feel driven to judge everyone through their own myopic lens and feel perfectly justified in coercing others to adhere to their ideals no matter how bizarre and distorted. In their eyes, reality itself can not be trusted and must be dutifully reshaped to fit their own ends – a preposterous and impossible task reminiscent of Sisyphus and his benighted rock. To some practitioners of the truly absurd, the world is only six thousand years old and everything was created in one blinding instance by the Master Builder who had such a fine and uncompromising eye for details. In order to maintain this preposterous notion, evolution must therefore be a grand lie; the proponents of science and the scientific method are nothing more than wily conspirators whose only purpose is to disdain the glorious deeds of the Creator and progressive ideas are the work of the Devil. The Devil, now there is truly magnificent creation of the human imagination. All the bleak, morbid, sadistic and chaotic urges of human nature have been judiciously melded together and poured into the singular conception that is the devil. Humans are therefore not responsible for the evil that humans do; it is the nothing more than the workings of the Devil, who is intent on undermining and besmirching our infinite souls.
Consider all the humans who have killed each other over conflicting religious beliefs; beliefs that are equally ludicrous no matter what side of the argument anyone is on. It is like taking two children, with highly charged imaginations, who have concocted opposing word views and placing them in an arena in which they are encouraged, with their followers watching, to bludgeon each other; until, one is victorious. Whoever wins has the right to declare his view to be the right one, regardless of what the real world may suggest. Within the marvelously fanciful stories of gods and their exploits, of saints and angels and prophets, there lies the incessant hunger of humans for immortality and superhuman capabilities. These stories, regardless of where they originated, are obviously the direct product of the human imagination. To assume otherwise is to essentially believe that the living world and its many manifestations are somehow irrelevant. And yet, billions of individuals not only take these incredible beliefs seriously, but are willing to kill and die for them.
True Believers are in a category that is distinct and uniquely their own. A True Believer holds on to a set of principles so strongly and so convincingly that there is no science or exercise of reasoned judgment that can pry the believer from his conclusions no matter how daft they appear to be. We’ve already had a look at religious belief that encompasses the real existence of an immortal demonic creature, spiritual in origin, who prowls about the human world looking for susceptible souls so that he might convince them to join him in hell, that place of eternal damnation. Tell me that this characterization could not have easily been concocted as a full-blown comic book hero. Hell, that’s a concept that deserves some attention. In this particular world there is no guarantee once an individual comes into this world about what how his life will unfold. There is no guarantee about the quality of his genome, the sanity of his family, the historic context in which he is born, the hardships he will endure, the diseases he will contract. To many humans born on planet earth, the sojourn of living could easily be described as hell. Need I elaborate, but I will, nonetheless: men women and children napalmed in Vietnam, Iraqis exposed to depleted uranium, children maimed by land mines, the agony of starvation, women sold into prostitution and slavery, children orphaned by the scourge of AIDS, the intentional maiming of children so that they might be more productive beggars, the Japanese victims of the nuclear holocaust visited on the unsuspecting cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the unimaginable plight of the Jews under the crazed reign of Adolf Hitler, the countless humans who have suffered from chronic devastating diseases, the real toll of mental illness on those unlucky enough to suffer it and etc.. This is a list produced from what has transpired in the human world during my brief stay. It does not include, of course, all that has transpired during the entire course of human history. And yet, given all of this unavoidable evidence, many humans believe that there is a caring God who looks over them and who has crafted a place of eternal damnation for his unruly charges just in case they have not suffered enough. Under the guise of religion, there are those who are convinced that if they sacrifice themselves for their God and bring others along with them in their fiery and suicidal ride to oblivion those who they perceive as God’s enemies, they will subsequently be rewarded with eternal bliss. Amazing! More about True Believers later.
Consider all the humans who have killed each other over conflicting religious beliefs; beliefs that are equally ludicrous no matter what side of the argument anyone is on. It is like taking two children, with highly charged imaginations, who have concocted opposing word views and placing them in an arena in which they are encouraged, with their followers watching, to bludgeon each other; until, one is victorious. Whoever wins has the right to declare his view to be the right one, regardless of what the real world may suggest. Within the marvelously fanciful stories of gods and their exploits, of saints and angels and prophets, there lies the incessant hunger of humans for immortality and superhuman capabilities. These stories, regardless of where they originated, are obviously the direct product of the human imagination. To assume otherwise is to essentially believe that the living world and its many manifestations are somehow irrelevant. And yet, billions of individuals not only take these incredible beliefs seriously, but are willing to kill and die for them.
True Believers are in a category that is distinct and uniquely their own. A True Believer holds on to a set of principles so strongly and so convincingly that there is no science or exercise of reasoned judgment that can pry the believer from his conclusions no matter how daft they appear to be. We’ve already had a look at religious belief that encompasses the real existence of an immortal demonic creature, spiritual in origin, who prowls about the human world looking for susceptible souls so that he might convince them to join him in hell, that place of eternal damnation. Tell me that this characterization could not have easily been concocted as a full-blown comic book hero. Hell, that’s a concept that deserves some attention. In this particular world there is no guarantee once an individual comes into this world about what how his life will unfold. There is no guarantee about the quality of his genome, the sanity of his family, the historic context in which he is born, the hardships he will endure, the diseases he will contract. To many humans born on planet earth, the sojourn of living could easily be described as hell. Need I elaborate, but I will, nonetheless: men women and children napalmed in Vietnam, Iraqis exposed to depleted uranium, children maimed by land mines, the agony of starvation, women sold into prostitution and slavery, children orphaned by the scourge of AIDS, the intentional maiming of children so that they might be more productive beggars, the Japanese victims of the nuclear holocaust visited on the unsuspecting cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the unimaginable plight of the Jews under the crazed reign of Adolf Hitler, the countless humans who have suffered from chronic devastating diseases, the real toll of mental illness on those unlucky enough to suffer it and etc.. This is a list produced from what has transpired in the human world during my brief stay. It does not include, of course, all that has transpired during the entire course of human history. And yet, given all of this unavoidable evidence, many humans believe that there is a caring God who looks over them and who has crafted a place of eternal damnation for his unruly charges just in case they have not suffered enough. Under the guise of religion, there are those who are convinced that if they sacrifice themselves for their God and bring others along with them in their fiery and suicidal ride to oblivion those who they perceive as God’s enemies, they will subsequently be rewarded with eternal bliss. Amazing! More about True Believers later.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Freewill doesn't exist (aftershock)
You are a product of influence and chance, nothing more, nothing less.
(Debate needed, score a victory, click title)
War and Peace - Love and Hate - Man and Rape
"(They) took me to an area beyond the village where they raped me. Once they had finished they half strangled me but the left. Other girls were also raped. After the rape, we all fled to Goma. We had to walk for two days and nights through the forest."
This is one case of many hundreds of thousands. Women who have been raped by soldiers and not in some distant dark corner of history but now in this 'enlightened century; this the twenty first century.
In peacetime rape is a crime and is punishable as such. Why is it that during wars this detestable horror is being overlooked?
"It is now more dangerous to be a woman than to be a soldier in modern conflict."
This is the age of satellite TV, home computers, qualifications to make Einstein blink. And still men are allowed to rape during war with impunity.
The United Nations have passed a Resolution (1820) that outlaws rape and makes rape a war crime. This is not enough. All governments throughout the world must recognise this law and act upon it now.
"An officer ordered five of his men to take her to a nearby cowshed. Three shots were heard. Villagers found her naked body after the security forces left the village. Bloodstains on her discarded clothes and underwear indicated that she had been raped before she was killed."
This is one case of many hundreds of thousands. Women who have been raped by soldiers and not in some distant dark corner of history but now in this 'enlightened century; this the twenty first century.
In peacetime rape is a crime and is punishable as such. Why is it that during wars this detestable horror is being overlooked?
"It is now more dangerous to be a woman than to be a soldier in modern conflict."
This is the age of satellite TV, home computers, qualifications to make Einstein blink. And still men are allowed to rape during war with impunity.
The United Nations have passed a Resolution (1820) that outlaws rape and makes rape a war crime. This is not enough. All governments throughout the world must recognise this law and act upon it now.
"An officer ordered five of his men to take her to a nearby cowshed. Three shots were heard. Villagers found her naked body after the security forces left the village. Bloodstains on her discarded clothes and underwear indicated that she had been raped before she was killed."
Monday, March 16, 2009
Reality Rag - Excerpt from A Monumental Screed
It’s become an entire universe of vapid communication that can be executed without much effort. Text spawned without regard for the majesty of words. Chatter, twitter, texting all wrapped around a core of banal and titillating gossip. The airways are permeated with topics managed, produced and engineered by complete and utter boneheads. Adolescents, so engrossed with all the myriad details of self, are quite literally impaled upon their mobile devices. That reminds me of the prevalent idea of accomplishing things without effort, of achieving untold wealth without ever having to do anything. This concept, often promoted by parents and educators, is a great disservice to the reality principle that will prevail regardless of the many efforts to undermine its supremacy. The ancillary idea of borrowing one’s way to success is one of the hallmarks of the economic malaise that seems to be gripping the nation.
The universe is not tilting towards us; it barely recognizes our separate existence on a planet encircling a rather ordinary yellow star among billions in a galaxy that is itself one among billions within the vast stretches of the cosmos. The idea that we are somehow especially cared for by some omnipotent creature responsible for all of creation is bizarre by a modest evaluation and downright crazy in relation to the startling and wondrous reality that envelops us. We are a unique species on earth in terms of some aspects of our intellect, and the degree to which we take ourselves so seriously. We are extraordinary in some endearing ways, however, where we particularly excel is in our willingness to obliterate members of our own species and the degree to which we are capable of undermining the biological infrastructure that sustains life on this world. We are capable of great promise, but it is a promise that we have, as yet, failed to fully identify.
Scientists have done everything except hurl their fragile bodies in front of buses or burn themselves alive to warn us of the dangers of polluting our air and water and soil with the excrements of our industrial and technological age. They’ve used charts and graphs; they’ve collaborated on the details in numerous publications; they have implored politicians in order to convince everyone of the gravity of the situation. They’ve given numerous talks, appeared on talk shows, appealed, cajoled and even, in some cases, threatened reluctant listeners with the obvious consequences of crazed human activity. Some have begun to listen and there is even somewhat muted talk of action in an attempt, although feeble, to derail the inevitable. What is all of this in comparison to accruing profit? Isn’t the possibility of making profit the real reason for being? It was something that Jesus Christ and the Buddha somehow overlooked, disgraceful as they may sound. Love and compassion can not replace the euphoria that flows outward from a balance sheet that is massively in the black. An appreciation of human suffering and caring for those who suffer can run counter to material productivity and, therefore, needs to be shunned; unless, it can somehow be turned into profit. One can not allow the maintenance of life’s essentials such as breathable air, drinkable water and a non-toxic world obscure or retard the onward rush of profitable endeavor. Let the future be damned – that is the pillar upon which the much of modern world now rests. It is, alas, a pillar of sand.
The universe is not tilting towards us; it barely recognizes our separate existence on a planet encircling a rather ordinary yellow star among billions in a galaxy that is itself one among billions within the vast stretches of the cosmos. The idea that we are somehow especially cared for by some omnipotent creature responsible for all of creation is bizarre by a modest evaluation and downright crazy in relation to the startling and wondrous reality that envelops us. We are a unique species on earth in terms of some aspects of our intellect, and the degree to which we take ourselves so seriously. We are extraordinary in some endearing ways, however, where we particularly excel is in our willingness to obliterate members of our own species and the degree to which we are capable of undermining the biological infrastructure that sustains life on this world. We are capable of great promise, but it is a promise that we have, as yet, failed to fully identify.
Scientists have done everything except hurl their fragile bodies in front of buses or burn themselves alive to warn us of the dangers of polluting our air and water and soil with the excrements of our industrial and technological age. They’ve used charts and graphs; they’ve collaborated on the details in numerous publications; they have implored politicians in order to convince everyone of the gravity of the situation. They’ve given numerous talks, appeared on talk shows, appealed, cajoled and even, in some cases, threatened reluctant listeners with the obvious consequences of crazed human activity. Some have begun to listen and there is even somewhat muted talk of action in an attempt, although feeble, to derail the inevitable. What is all of this in comparison to accruing profit? Isn’t the possibility of making profit the real reason for being? It was something that Jesus Christ and the Buddha somehow overlooked, disgraceful as they may sound. Love and compassion can not replace the euphoria that flows outward from a balance sheet that is massively in the black. An appreciation of human suffering and caring for those who suffer can run counter to material productivity and, therefore, needs to be shunned; unless, it can somehow be turned into profit. One can not allow the maintenance of life’s essentials such as breathable air, drinkable water and a non-toxic world obscure or retard the onward rush of profitable endeavor. Let the future be damned – that is the pillar upon which the much of modern world now rests. It is, alas, a pillar of sand.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Education: Influence and Personality
Say you make a sand castle on the beach.
Then you get mad at it for it being too small,
or maybe that it's only too wet or dry.
Well is it the castles fault or is it your fault?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)