Appeal to plagiarist

(Warning: Spoilers)

Dear Sanjay Gupta,

You are a movie director. You are bereft of any creativity, or neurons for that matter. I have no problem with that. Unable to conceive of something original, you lift foreign movies, again I approve of this subversion of capitalism.

However you have this rather annoying habit of poor judgement at getting inspired. You simply pick the wrong movie/copy the wrong part


Examples

1. You copied Reservoir Dogs. Now Reservoir Dogs has not much of story to speak. Its strength or USP is non linear narrative (typical of Quentin Tarantino), and dialogues. But being idiot you copy its story ! Result Kaante, Hey Bhagwan !

2. You lifted Oldboy. While it is highly stylized and full of violence (sort of heroic bloodshed), it is in no way its USP, which is its story which pushes the social norms.
Yet you copy the style and decaffeinate the story, of course it was nearly impossible to use the original story in a Indian film.

But still the punch of the story was

"Your gravest mistake wasn't failing to find the answer. You can't find the right answer if you ask the wrong questions. " [*].

Result Zinda, Hey Bhagwan, again !

A sad news

Ingmar Bergman is dead. For your information, he was the man behind berger paints and Iceberg lettuce. My prayers with his family.

PS. Many people think that he was the one who invented Burger. This is wrong. Burger was invented by Ingrid Bergman.

Two things..

The trivial one: Rationalism, atheism, morality. Pick any two.

The important one: I absolutely hate excessive use of emoticons. When I am benevolent dictator, I will ration the use of emoticon. The usage will depend on the relevance, and my discretion.

Power behind the throne

The question, "Is gentle Doctor a disgrace", is embarrassingly simple. Of course he is, and of course in an ideal world he would have been booted out. However his dismissal is not the point.

Truth (and blindingly obvious at that) is he is a political nobody. Which means he isn't threat to influence of Gandhi dynasty , which is one of the reason he is occupying the top post. The other reason is that behind his garb of respectability, Sonia Gandhi is attempting to lift her family to the "commanding heights" of her mother-in-law era.

It is cynical, but not out of character of Gandhi family. But the most important question is how is Sonia Gandhi, and her stooge of PM getting away with mockery of India and her people ?

The answer is, complicity of liberal establishment. Liberal media and intellectual have been more than charitable to the disgraceful duo.
It is the Shekhar Guptas and Rajdeep Sardesais who have consistently evaded holding either Gandhi or PM to account for their incompetence and subversion of institutions under their watch.
It is them who have done everything possible to avoid reporting on utter moral bankruptcy of UPA government, also to deflect public attention from innumerable failures.
It is them who tried to disgenuouly suggeted that divesting post of PM of any authority was actually a good thing.

In other words, it is they who are responsible for this travesty of republic.
And the reason behid their action is not unscrutable either. Their priority is not national interest, their allegiance is not to this nation, they do not love India, they are at best indifferent and at worst contemptous for the motherland. They covet power and for that they want to retain their monopoly on the intellectual space of the country. From this monopoly they can control institutions, adjudge the value systems and control the dissemination of information.

What we have is army of Tooheys.*

And we are witnessing is battle for soul of India. Liberal establishment must be destroyed.

* Citing Ayn Rand. What has become of me.

Boots in Hogwarts

OMG, what happened to Hermione !

Obama, Obama !

Update: I have changed my mind. I heart Obama. Reason.

Related posts [1],[2]

This one is too good to pass. It seems black jesus is getting spanked.

Exhibit [A] oops
Exhibit [B] ouch
Exhibit [C] oooouch

1. Now I will admit this first point does have some merit. American government is obliged to protect only American citizens and her national interest.It is, no way, obliged to save world, especially if one considers that no matter what America does, it ends up as the default excuse for each and every misfortune that any random dude may suffer. As much as one can wish, and I wish it as much as the next man, to be humanitarian, matter of fact is , there are too few resources and too many conflicts of interest, to enforce order all over the world. You may call it "dog eat dog" world, or "might is right" world, but that is the way it is. However this policy, essentially isolationism is based only upon the partial picture. True America is not obliged to maintain world order, but being the only super power and having a globalized economy, it is in American self interest to promote "peace" (as opposed to democracy).

2. This sex education bidness is the one of the most dear of liberal hobbies. Now I have no idea what sex education exactly means, wiki is vague. But I find it unbelievable that some one thinks it is possible to teach kinder-garden kids about sex. On a related note, one of the arguments for sex education is to prevent sex abuse. I know it may sound hard but it is very difficult to effectively prevent child abuse. Best measure is family, worst, as is usually the case, government.

3. This diplamcy argument is the silliest one can find. Diplomatic negotiations is a complicated business, and its success depend on far too many things to reduce it to soundbites. Unfortunately that is what happening.

Now the most important question is how does Obama lover feel ? Does it hurt to be paddled by Hillary Auntie ?

A tribute to the fallen

Related posts [1],[2],[3]

I have a problem. The problem is getting around, or getting a hook upon this absolute insistence or obsession of otherwise sensible and intelligent people to commemorate anniversaries of terror attacks as period of mourning.

What exactly is this going to accomplish ? And if the idea is to grieve over terror attacks, why stop at one attack. Let us also grieve for Varanasi, Delhi, Malegaon, Ayodhya, Jama Masjid, Akshardham, Ghatakopar, Mulund, Hyderabad, not to mention too many to enumerate, butchering of Kashmiris. It doesn't end here. Should we not grieve for Naxal attacks. What about Godhra? What about Bhagalpur? What is the thresh hold beyond which a terror attack is upgraded from plain vanilla flavour to occasion for breast beating?

Am I being a callous bastard by pointing this out? That is a possibility. But as I said earlier in related context, it is impossible for humans to sincerely grieve for long without losing sanity. Life is tough shit, and we get over it, it is a defence mechanism of mind.

Wouldn't our time be better utilized and our endeavour result in better returns, if we were to direct our efforts to identify cause(s) responsible for breakdown of law and order, and resulting strife in country.

That this exercise of seeking solution for terror attacks is hardly a priority either of polity or public, is due to the fact that while we may elect a government on basis of universal adult franchise, we are far from being republic. Result is a mind boggling admixture of feudalism, socialism, and outright anarchy.

We have consistently refused to consider questions relating to foundations of republic. We have neglected political philosophy as a subject worth attention, instead opting for rhetoric and grandstanding.Our flawed policies and institutions have so grievously fractured our society that for all purposes it is dysfunctional.Even worse instead of formulating a coherent world view we have installed grandstanding and banal for our moral compass. Which is why our first reaction is to commemorate Muharram.

I believe that this inability to form a strong republic goes beyond our inability to create functional institutions, or even a world view. Rohit in a recent post argued that in west governments place (or probably used to place) a high premium on safety and life of their citizens.But that is because citizens themselves place a very high premium on life of fellow citizens.

It is this regard for the life of compatriot which is paramount in a republic, and supersedes over any other political or social disagreement, howsoever vehement it may be. Injury to a citizen, and violation of law and order is the most grievous offence in a republic, and if the perpetrator is outside agency unarguably a causus belli.

It is this arguably very basic alliance of people which precedes any political theory as basis for republic.

In this it differs from present India, which at best is tyranny of innumerable vested interests with liberal fantasy and rhetoric serving as hollowed foundation.

If India has to survive as a nation, let alone prosper,we should learn to place an enormous premium on life of Indian citizen, if even one Indian dead is one too many. To our foes, we should pay back in Mosaic way and then some.

That, and only that, could be real tribute to those who have perished over the years as a result of terror attacks.