This may seem to have been taken straightway from a Bollywood cliché, but in reality it is a real incident that took place at Siliguri, a small town in eastern India and incidentally my birth place.
The accused couple – Anil Prakash Verma (a school teacher) and his wife Nilu Devi – are the residents of Khagra, another small town in eastern India. They are accused of (and they have admitted it themselves) of coming to Siliguri and boarding a hotel under false names, calling their Patna-based relative Ashoke Kumar Verma there under some pretext, and stabbing the latter to death in the night after dinner.
The couple have accused that the victim had visited their home in May, when Mr Anil was out of town. The victim, as per the couple’s version, had taken the advantage of Mr Anil’s absence and raped Nilu.
However, the couple had abstained from informing the police, as the victim, a successful contractor, was both rich and influential, and the couple were worried that police would fail to take any suitable step against him.
Thus the couple decided to take the law in their own hands. They planned for more than 3 months, and the ultimate result was the chilling incident that took place at a Siliguri hotel.
The commotion at the time of stabbing had alerted the hotel staff, who caught the couple red handed when they were already through with their “mission”. The couple are now in police custody, with the police officials themselves shocked with the incident.
I am an ordinary person, and I do not know whether my views at all matter to anybody. However, if the couple’s allegation against the deceased is true, them my full sympathy is with them.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Response Net May Be Your Trusted Medium For Helping The Flood Victims of Bihar And Assam
Just in my last posting I had appealed to every reader to do something for our hapless friends of Bihar and Assam, whose lives have been devastated by the recent floods.
However, this thought was very much in my mind that even if a person wants to help the victims, he might be confused about choosing the right partner, i.e. the right place to donate.
Yes, we all know about the relevant government agencies like Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. But there may be some who will like to go for a private organization, provided the latter has suitable credibility.
One of the names that I have gathered so far is that of Response Net. It is an organization that is really working hard for the flood victims. I feel one willing to do something for the flood victims may get in touch with this organization, and see for himself whether the organization is the right partner for the noble cause. I strongly feel he will not be disappointed.
However, this thought was very much in my mind that even if a person wants to help the victims, he might be confused about choosing the right partner, i.e. the right place to donate.
Yes, we all know about the relevant government agencies like Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. But there may be some who will like to go for a private organization, provided the latter has suitable credibility.
One of the names that I have gathered so far is that of Response Net. It is an organization that is really working hard for the flood victims. I feel one willing to do something for the flood victims may get in touch with this organization, and see for himself whether the organization is the right partner for the noble cause. I strongly feel he will not be disappointed.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Let’s Help The Flood Victims Of Bihar And Assam
The recent floods in Bihar and Assam have devastated the lives of a number of our fellow countrymen. I was regularly following all the relevant news and developments, and was feeling disturbed. However, very honestly speaking, the thought of doing something to help them did not strike to my mind.
It was only today that I came across a suggestion made by fellow blogger Mr. Sanjay Jha - from Delhi Bloggers Bloc – that something should be done for our hapless countrymen. Despite being short, Sanjay’s message was so powerful that it immediately touched my heart.
I humbly request to everybody who comes across this blog posting to do something for those star-crossed friends of ours. Little contributions from each of us may collectively turn into something substantial for them.
At the end, lots of thanks to Sanjay for inspiring me to at least think of doing something, instead of just tracking news through media and discuss the same with friends.
It was only today that I came across a suggestion made by fellow blogger Mr. Sanjay Jha - from Delhi Bloggers Bloc – that something should be done for our hapless countrymen. Despite being short, Sanjay’s message was so powerful that it immediately touched my heart.
I humbly request to everybody who comes across this blog posting to do something for those star-crossed friends of ours. Little contributions from each of us may collectively turn into something substantial for them.
At the end, lots of thanks to Sanjay for inspiring me to at least think of doing something, instead of just tracking news through media and discuss the same with friends.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Wikipedia - World's Knowledge At Your Finger Tip
It was in 2006 that I first came to know about Wikipedia.org, and the very first interaction made me fall in love with it, head over heels.
Just try to think of a single web site like Wikipedia.org, and you will fail. Because there is none. After all, where will you get a single point source of information on everything under the Sun, ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney"? Just ask for the information on anything, and Wikipedia.org is there at your service. It is very very very rare that you will fail to locate the information that you are seeking. Yes, sometimes it happens. It has happenned for a couple of times with my humble self, as well. But as I said, it is very very very rare.
Some of my friends compare the web site with Encyclopedia. Well, while I accept that Encyclopedia does come very close to Wikipedia, I do not consider the former to be exactly at par with the latter. Why? Well, mainly for 3 reasons.
No. 1, the range of Encyclopedia is not as widespread as that of Wikipedia.org. As I have already said that Wikipedia.org contains information on everything ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney". This is something you cannot expect from Encyclopedia. For example, right now I typed "Michelle" in the "search box" of Wikipedia.org. And it is showing the names of various people named Michelle, quite a number of whom will certainly not feature in Encyclopedia.
No. 2, the regular updating of Wikipedia.org. The information found in a particular series of Encyclopedia are restricted to the information considered valuable at the time of publication of that series. But that is not the case with Wikipedia.org It is regularly updated. In fact, you can even find the Website containing a detailed information about a person who has become famous just 1 hour back. A notable example of that sort is that of Abhinav Bindra. Within days of his winning the Olympics gold medal I searched for his name in the Wikipedia, and found the same to be present there.
No. 3, Wikipedia gives you the liberty to add/modify content. In case you feel the web site should have displayed information about a particular person/topic/country, etc, you can create content on the same and submit to the site.
You can also add content (and thus add value) to an already existing content, provided you have something valuable to add.
And yes, you also have the opportunity to rectify a particular bit of information if you find it to be wrong.
Needless to say, like the benefits mentioned in points no. 1 and 2, the opportunities mentioned in point no. 3 are not to be found in Encyclopedia.
Yes, Wikipedia.org does have its own shares of draw backs. For example, the information found in it are sometimes not accurate. And it is widely suggsted not to have blind faith on Wikipedia.org. Nevertheless, the web site is a golden feather in the cap of Internet in general and Web 2.0 in particular.
Just try to think of a single web site like Wikipedia.org, and you will fail. Because there is none. After all, where will you get a single point source of information on everything under the Sun, ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney"? Just ask for the information on anything, and Wikipedia.org is there at your service. It is very very very rare that you will fail to locate the information that you are seeking. Yes, sometimes it happens. It has happenned for a couple of times with my humble self, as well. But as I said, it is very very very rare.
Some of my friends compare the web site with Encyclopedia. Well, while I accept that Encyclopedia does come very close to Wikipedia, I do not consider the former to be exactly at par with the latter. Why? Well, mainly for 3 reasons.
No. 1, the range of Encyclopedia is not as widespread as that of Wikipedia.org. As I have already said that Wikipedia.org contains information on everything ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney". This is something you cannot expect from Encyclopedia. For example, right now I typed "Michelle" in the "search box" of Wikipedia.org. And it is showing the names of various people named Michelle, quite a number of whom will certainly not feature in Encyclopedia.
No. 2, the regular updating of Wikipedia.org. The information found in a particular series of Encyclopedia are restricted to the information considered valuable at the time of publication of that series. But that is not the case with Wikipedia.org It is regularly updated. In fact, you can even find the Website containing a detailed information about a person who has become famous just 1 hour back. A notable example of that sort is that of Abhinav Bindra. Within days of his winning the Olympics gold medal I searched for his name in the Wikipedia, and found the same to be present there.
No. 3, Wikipedia gives you the liberty to add/modify content. In case you feel the web site should have displayed information about a particular person/topic/country, etc, you can create content on the same and submit to the site.
You can also add content (and thus add value) to an already existing content, provided you have something valuable to add.
And yes, you also have the opportunity to rectify a particular bit of information if you find it to be wrong.
Needless to say, like the benefits mentioned in points no. 1 and 2, the opportunities mentioned in point no. 3 are not to be found in Encyclopedia.
Yes, Wikipedia.org does have its own shares of draw backs. For example, the information found in it are sometimes not accurate. And it is widely suggsted not to have blind faith on Wikipedia.org. Nevertheless, the web site is a golden feather in the cap of Internet in general and Web 2.0 in particular.
Ruling Coalition in Pakistan Suffers Crack
Just the other day – in my last posting – I had written that now Musharraf was out, it was the time for real test for the sustainability of the ruling coalition in Pakistan. Some political watchers had already started saying that the common objective of ousting Musharraf was the only binding force between the two major constituents of the ruling coalition, and now it was time for the coalition leaders to prove those political watchers wrong.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
Friday, August 22, 2008
End For The Musharraf Regime
He had tried his best to avoid it, and had successfully delayed it for quite some time. But at last Musharraf had to accept the inevitable – his ouster. With the threat of a disgraceful impeachment looming over his head, the embattled President announced his resignation in a press conference on 18th August, 2008.
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
Photo Courtesy: www.apna.tv
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Terrorism Makes India Bleed Again
The “Trust Vote” drama was just over, with the people of India convinced that it was going to be the only hot topic of discussion for some time now. And soon they were proved to be wrong. There arrived another hot topic of discussion, so hot that the Indian people would have been happy if it did not appear.
A bunch of “committed” and “dedicated” terrorists, “determined” to achieve objectives that only they can understand, came up with the “heroic” deed of carrying out blasts in the two cities located in two different parts of India, one being Bangalore in the southern India and the other being Ahmedabad in western India. The natural end result was the loss of several innocent lives, along with lots of injured people going through a traumatic experience in various hospitals and nursing homes.
As usual the government has suddenly become hyper active, with the police forces of different states, intelligence agencies, etc. working overtime to catch the culprits. Our honourable ministers from the Union Home Ministry are visiting the affected areas “to take stock of the situation” (does a person overnight become an expert after becoming a minister?), and then briefing the media about their “carefully structured” course and plan of action. The media has now concentrated its entire focus on this issue, with enthusiastic and hard working correspondents of various TV channels tracking all the relevant developments round-the-clock. The former heads of police, intelligence agencies, self-styled defence experts, etc are appearing in various TV shows to share their “rich experience” in fighting terrorism, with “valuable suggestions” about how the menace can be curbed. There are innumerable articles in various newspapers, offering “in-depth” discussion on the exact nature of the problem, highlighting various socio-economic-political factors behind it and ways to address the latter.
However, we all know that all these will go on only for few days. Very soon everything will be “back to normalcy”, with the unfortunate incidents completely out of people’s mind. We will get back to our callous and indifferent attitude towards terrorism and other disruptive activities, waiting to be shaken up by another repetition of such heinous acts.
A bunch of “committed” and “dedicated” terrorists, “determined” to achieve objectives that only they can understand, came up with the “heroic” deed of carrying out blasts in the two cities located in two different parts of India, one being Bangalore in the southern India and the other being Ahmedabad in western India. The natural end result was the loss of several innocent lives, along with lots of injured people going through a traumatic experience in various hospitals and nursing homes.
As usual the government has suddenly become hyper active, with the police forces of different states, intelligence agencies, etc. working overtime to catch the culprits. Our honourable ministers from the Union Home Ministry are visiting the affected areas “to take stock of the situation” (does a person overnight become an expert after becoming a minister?), and then briefing the media about their “carefully structured” course and plan of action. The media has now concentrated its entire focus on this issue, with enthusiastic and hard working correspondents of various TV channels tracking all the relevant developments round-the-clock. The former heads of police, intelligence agencies, self-styled defence experts, etc are appearing in various TV shows to share their “rich experience” in fighting terrorism, with “valuable suggestions” about how the menace can be curbed. There are innumerable articles in various newspapers, offering “in-depth” discussion on the exact nature of the problem, highlighting various socio-economic-political factors behind it and ways to address the latter.
However, we all know that all these will go on only for few days. Very soon everything will be “back to normalcy”, with the unfortunate incidents completely out of people’s mind. We will get back to our callous and indifferent attitude towards terrorism and other disruptive activities, waiting to be shaken up by another repetition of such heinous acts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
