There is something inexplicably sad about honour killings; may be because of its very nature that the murders are carried out by the immediate families of the victims. I'd have thought that families that are supposed to protect, not kill!

Is there no one we can trust and turn to, when the whole world we grew up knowing turns into the faceless enemy? It should not be that way... not a bit, no; it’s such a betrayal of trust, such a violation of human rights.

Take, for example, the incident of Ahmet Yildiz from Turkey, who was killed by his father in an effort to save the family from shame when he came out as a homosexual; or the sister who was stabbed to death by her brother for ‘knowing too many men’; or Tuley Green who was killed by her gambler father because she wanted to marry a man of her own choice, who was not ‘honourable’ enough in his bizarre standards.

When will the whole group of brain-washed people start thinking with their brain and heart, and use logic other than what they perceive their religion and customs tell them... and those the crazy voices inside their heads?

I am not sure anymore that the day will ever come.

Lines, Borders and Human Rights

Natural Growth.

Well, what is natural growth? If you ask me however- I’d say it’s the way a child grows, or plants do... or kittens...It’s the way your life grows.... you grow- from child to teenager, teenager to adult, young to old. It’s the way your hair grows, thins and greys.

It’s also the way cities grow... the way they get more crowded, the way there are more roads, more cars, more sound... less trees. It’s the way they grow upwards, houses keep getting smaller and playgrounds less in number. It’s the way we are a little closer to the skies to make room for all of us.

Yes, that is natural growth; not what happens in West Bank, Gaza. Because only in West Bank, there exists a ‘unique’ phenomenon of uprooting the local Palestinians off the area because the ‘ever-growing Israeli population would need more room’ as a consequence of their ‘natural growth’.

Can you imagine India making room into Pakistan, Bangladesh making room into India, Iran into Afghanistan, or France into Germany, Spain into France, Italy into Austria... it does not work this way. This is not how it’s done, this is simply not fair.

You don’t grow naturally into another’s place, and much less in a place that’s not yours in any sense but religious. You believe that’s your place because some holy book says so.... you don’t move natural inhabitants off a land because the land you’ve taken from them needs to expand.... if anything, this is a blatant violation of human rights; don’t let any ‘holy’ book tell you anything different.

beep the beepers and honk the honkers

6:15am wake-up alarm goes off...

I force myself out of bed, brush my teeth and get my things ready for a dreadful drive to work....its not toooooo far but the insanely drivers around me make it a never ending journey, And a difficult one.

I don't have a clue why our side of the world hasn't learnt how to drive yet...oh no they know how to start a car, put it into gear and race off but do they know there are other people doing the same on the same route? All morality and ethic lessons are locked in the car boot, refusing to come out as I see the most educated(looking) people doing as bad on the roads as any other wagon driver, khota gaari wala and our very great motorcyslists...whoa I bow to them! If you have ever driven on these roads, you'd know the feeling AND its not a good one.

I struggle everyday amongst the never ending trail of insanely traffic honking the horns for no valid reason and my 5 years old asks everyday, why do they blow the horns too much!?!

We talk about changing the system but who is going to change it...these effing drivers who don't even want to drive in one lane!!!!

pardon me, if Ive stopped making sense...these are just the after effects!

No Greys, please!

Racism. I’d have thought we’ve come a long way, and this world is a better place now than it was about a decade back when it comes to human rights (unless, of course, you are a woman living in Mogadishu , or something similar to that somewhere else), that racism is predominantly a thing of the past- and whatever of it exists today is mostly limited to a disillusioned, uneducated, closed-minded minority.

In a way, it’s right. We humans have come a long way. We are now more aware and, I’d say, more sensitive- too; or so I thought- that was yesterday.

Today I’m asking the question- are we really much different now? A news has surfaced recently and I cannot help but wonder if I was giving these modern-day humans too much credit.

You see- when in this ‘modern’ times a Louisiana justice of peace in Tangipahoa Parish, Keith Bardwell, denies to marry interracial couples on the grounds of... well... race- all I could successfully do is ‘gulp’.

To quote a few lines from the article:

Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.

"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."

"I try to treat everyone equally," he said.


Those children suffer, eh? Are you sure you did not mean that they become US Presidents when they grow up, Mr. Bardwell? You do seem like one of those who will not like a ‘mixed race’ president running your country!

Also… does he even ‘hear’ himself say those things?! Dude- first it was ‘inter-religion marriage, now you go ‘inter-race’?! Helloooo… Brotherhood! Where have YOU gone now?

To elaborate a little further- as if that wasn’t enough, he then goes:

“I’m not a racist. I just don’t believe in mixing the races that way,” Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. “I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else.”

That sounds ‘racist’ to me, Mr. Bardwell... ‘very racist’, actually.

Apparently, Mr Bardwell, you seem very smug about the things you ‘let them do’! Seems like you are keeping a list, too. Eh?

Well... all I can say on a positive note is that at least, what he was doing is considered ‘illegal’ in these modern times.

The Bra Boys of Islamic Extremism

Islamist hardliners have always gone out of their way to dictate how women should live, eat, drink, sleep and 'most importantly', how they should dress up; or dress down or wait, dress is for humans, women should just cover, yes, cover, cover, cover… head to toe, left to right, diagonally, horizontally, vertically… cover, cover, cover, cover… how dare they even be a three dimensional figure…

No wonder, pretty soon the cavemen were bound to be hit by boredom with their utterly monotonous and vapid vogue that is known as burqa, the sole outer garment option for women in their stone age. And yes, they have apparently gone bored… The next 'logical' step for them was to dictate undergarments and that's what they are doing now in Somalia.

Bra is the latest enemy in their egregious quest for male supremacy. But this time it is not about covering, it is rather about removing. They want all the bras gone. Bra is the latest tool of devil in their pea brains as those apparently 'violate Islam by constituting a deception' (yes it is confirmed, pea brains also produce signals, very weak nonetheless). Or it might be the case that the Captain Caveman got his lice infested beard stuck in a bra clip while trying to 'covet' one of his wives and hence the sudden rage against the brassiere.

Nevertheless, they had to do something to rid the society of this 'evil'. As usual, an age old proven idea does the trick even with this 'nouveau overture': lets harass some women…

Yes, they are now monitoring the firmness and movements of women's breasts in the streets. If those appear to be 'firmer' then those women are whipped by masked men. Then they are told to remove their bras and shake their breasts.

No, I am not talking about a fictional sadomasochistic porn flick, it is indeed happening in Mogadishu. Gone are the days when bra burning used to be a part of feminist movement. The boneheaded zealots have snatched it too from their utmost adversaries.

The donkey in convict’s suit

In a zoo in Gaza, two donkeys were given a dye job... ummm... to make them look like zebras. Well, look here for details, if you’d need some kind of proof.

Believe me now? You just can’t make this stuff up, can you?

What may be the reason for all this... err... fuss, you ask?

They wanted to show their children how a zebra looks like. You cannot get the animal in Asia, which is found mostly, if not only, in Africa. On top of that, they are expensive and Gaza’s Palestinians are impoverished. A genuine zebra would have been too expensive to bring into the Israel-blockaded Gaza via smuggling tunnels under the border with Egypt.

Rather sad, if you look at it this way, but- if you ask me- it STILL does not make it right.

Poverty is cruel and sad.... but I would still prefer you to not take the path of deceit. I understand that for the children, it was fun of sort sorts, but playing with their trust, saying that it was a zebra they were looking at while it was actually a donkey, is something I just could not justify.... maybe it’s just me.

And also did you think what those zebras went through being taped all over in masking tapes and dyed with a paint brush using women’s hair colour?

I think that there are some things that should be left to only the willing humans. Please spare the animals, will you?

What do you think?

Tale of sacrificial goats

An Indian man has recently taken it to a whole new level by marrying a dog. Apparently, he did this to redeem himself for stoning two dogs to death 15 years back.


I guess this newly developed ‘conscience’ was heightened by yet another little fact that he was suffering from some sort of paralysis and loss of hearing in one ear; and the local pundits ‘prescribed’ that he was still carrying the ‘curse’ of brutally killing those animals and it needed to be ‘made right’ by ‘marrying’ another animal of the same species.

Firstly- how do these two incidents compensate each other? I mean- by what logic you can make a heartless ‘murder’ of two innocent animals okay- by ‘marrying’ another?! What has happened to you? Have you forgotten that you have a ‘brain’? Apparently so!

Secondly- I bet he was thinking that he was doing that poor dog a favour by marrying her despite her being a ‘lower rank’ animal than himself. I mean, what is it with humans and their (sometimes religious) belief that all the animals on this earth were ‘created’ to ‘serve’ them?! Really, what is it with this crap?

Superstitions prevail in different levels in all cultures, I am sure; and India- like many- is oftentimes crossing the limit of sanity or common sense. Unfortunately, this is not limited to the poor and illiterate, as one might assume. This creeps into the lives of the educated, urbanized, rich and famous just the same.

Example? Well... take the Aishwarya Rai incident for one- where Ms Rai, a prominent Bollywood actress and former Miss World was made to marry a tree in order to cleanse herself of the curse (of being born 'under the influence of the planet Mars') that brings some sort of bad luck or possible death to the first man she marries.

After all- by this action the tree will bear the consequences of the 'curse' (the ‘sacrificial goat’) and her future ‘human’ husband would be safe. Yet again, obviously, wronging the mute and innocent trees is not deemed as a ‘sin’; in fact, it is even permissible. And c’mon- marrying a tree??!! So much for the 21st Century crap! Looks like Stone Age to me.

One last word before I go today- I think it is time these pundits/ those clergymen and mullahs are made responsible for the sermons they produce while playing with the brains of the illiterate trusting idiots. They hold far too much power in their hands than it is safe. I truly think they are like arsonists- mentally ill, power hungry and destructive- and by no means deserves the feverish obedience they receive.

Who is with me on this?
Sex. Calling it an anathema to the religions will not be much of an exaggeration. The religious lot has always demonstrated an incessant need to curb and control human sexuality. In a religious society, they can turn blind eye to terrorism, abysmal corruption, hunger, poverty etc… but one should not be able to have sex freely. Who cares if hundreds die in an act of terrorism or thousands perish of hunger; but people having non-marital (I have reservations in using 'pre-marital' as a general term as it fallaciously presumes marriage as an inevitable and necessary eventuality in one's life) sex must be kept in chains, if not killed. It comes hardly as a surprise that in the epitome of a theocratic hegemony called Saudi Arabia, a man has been sentenced to five years of incarceration and a thousand lashes for merely boasting about his sex life in public. How is it even remotely justified to take 5 whole years of life out of a 'braggart' (along with this inhuman corporal punishment) who at the very most is just a nuisance? His actual 'crime' was that he had some sex and was stupid enough to brag about it.

Well, what is there to expect really from this country? This is a kingdom where sexual segregation is a way of life, women are deemed inferior, human rights are every so often abused. Some megalomaniacal God rules this petroleum fuelled monarchy via proxy of some obscenely rich 'royal' nitwits. This is where human rationality is often regarded as an alien concept. They would rather read, reread and reread and then read again a 1400 years old book than give their brains a chance to think rationally. They would have no qualms about funding a medieval madrassah to preach their intolerant agenda where students would only learn to hate and kill, but they would do their utmost to control and subvert someone’s wish to have consensual sex freely. And yes, then they would read the book again.

I do not want to generalise and I am sure there is a significant number of sane and progressive individuals in Saudi Arabia. And I do empathise with their agony and frustration.

Anyhow, this sort of close-mindedness isn't really limited to Saudi Arabia (although no other can surpass the Kingdom in the severity of it). Sex without marriage is a taboo that dwells the religious mind in every part of this planet. Fornication is the pet-word that the religious orthodoxy has been using to denote sex without marriage; the reason behind obviously is to give it a pejorative connotation which doesn't really effect a liberal mind; if Jack wants to have sex with his girlfriend Shelly and she with him, they wouldn't really care whether it is being called love-making, having sex or fornication; while the local clergyman may bump up his blood pressure, condemning them to hell with a pale blue shuddering face, ruminating over the 'diabolical ills of fornication.'

This brings me to a discussion thread entry by someone obviously pious that I've read few days back. And it is not the first time I came across this, “Fornication is a root of evil in the society!!!”

Really? Care to elaborate? How does an unmarried couple having consensual sex construes as evil? Do people explode while having sex? Do they die of hunger because of too much sex? How exactly? No seriously, tell me?

Forget sex out of wedlock. This sanctimonious bunch even shudders at the mere mention of the word 'sex'. Try uttering the words like 'sex education', 'safe sex' etc. on their face; they'd jump like they are stung by a jellyfish, some might leave your presence and immediately perform an ablution in order to cleanse their ears of the 'sinful' utterance. I guess if one sadistic individual is to torture them, one of the most effective ways would be to record the word 'sex' and play it in an infinite loop (hence one must never do that). Then comes the clergymen, the most pernicious and the most sly of the bunch across all religions; they wouldn't talk about sex education or the necessity of having a good sexual health, but rather exert their repressed desires on the weak by the means of rape and paedophilia.

This makes me think, why? Why such dread of sex in religions, especially non marital? In my opinion it comes from the chauvinistic patriarchal misogynistic attitude of old times (which is unfortunately residing in the mental psyche of many even to date) when these religions were in their inceptions. Needless to say that all religions have been engineered by men. In their own narcissistic chauvinism, men have considered women vile, unclean and villainous. And the union with women have been considered a treacherous act that men couldn't abstain from. In this sordid guilt-ridden affair of men, sex has become a matter of angst along with women. It would be fair to mention here that the status of women has improved with each subsequent religions but it has never been even close to be good enough, let alone rightful. Same can be said about sex.

The Christian concept of ‘Original Sin’ is another revolting piece. Saying that human birth comes with company-manufactured-box-packed-sins is very disturbing. In a multitude of religions many of the ‘pures’ were needed to be born by virgins or non sexual means: the most popular one being Jesus who was born from the ‘Immaculate Conception’ of Virgin Mary, Krishna (ironically, who himself was a philanderer) was born of Devika via some sort of ‘mental transmission’ as Bhagavad Purana recounts. All the Pandavas of Mahabharata were essentially gods’ children by Kunti and Madri as their husband Pandu was cursed to death if he ever had sex with his aforementioned wives. Even Buddha was also of a miraculous birth who is said to have been conceived sans coitus. Seems like in order to be great, one must not be a product of sex.

Abrahamic religions do their best to regulate sexuality more than anyone else. Setting aside their vociferous prohibition of sex out of wedlock, they even go on to prescribe on how to have sex as a married couple. I wonder why these sort of explicitly detailed diktat isn’t given in matters of abolition of slavery, poverty alleviation, corruption etc. All these come to me as telltale signs of anthropomorphic roots of these religious texts that demonstrate the attribution of significant ‘real estate’ to typical human psyche within the confines of our human imagination. Even the prized heavens of Islam are filled with promises of debauchery and indulgence that are so heftily prohibited on earth. So essentially you get a cookie for not eating the cookie. I often wonder what is the use of these bodily, earthly, material indulgence for the ‘pure souls’ that would ramble around in those opulent heavens? Couldn’t God come up with a bit more out of the box originality? Well, of course not…

Human is a sexual being. Sex is a perfectly natural and normal process. There is nothing to be ashamed of it, no reason to dread it or feel guilty about it. Other than serving as the instrument of our survival as a species, it is also an important tool for our mental, physical, emotional wellbeing. Repressing this completely natural biological drive is unhealthy and immoral. The prevailing hush-hush and obscurantism (and many a times unabashed sophistry) with regards to sex and sexual topics is risky, detrimental and utterly imbecilic.

So a request (in all likelihood a futile one) to the exemplars of piety: Please, please, please, do away with those shudders, broaden your outlook, educate your children about sex (please don't read 'abstinence' here; that doesn't work), discuss sex freely just as you'd discuss the weather. And while you never miss a chance to utter how great your God is, it wouldn’t hurt to let one talk about how great sex is…

This era of Facebook-ators...

Facebook; a modern day tool for keeping in touch with everyone who may or may not be interested in every minute detail of our lives. It’s good... really, except perhaps for the second by second status updates.

I’m not a fan of that. Not at all, no.

But then tolerance and a little extra knowledge cannot hurt. After all, it does not hurt to know that Sammy went to Vegas on a vacation, or that Timmy there is having coffee, or that Stevie is drunk.

Useless information that you’d give a rat’s ass for, true, but still okay. I decide to chill out, take a deep breath and tell myself that it’s all good, worse things have happened after all.

That’s when Liz goes personal... say... she brings the bedroom to her status update. Ummm... okay. Liz, did you just write... umm... THAT..!!

I laugh... and life goes on. I laugh a bit more. I decide Facebook has good entertainment value sometimes and is a ‘keep’!

That’s until Nelly poses a question in form of yet another status update: Do I have stop being a daughter when I am a wife?

Since you asked- no Nelly- you do not. No, and no, not even when you are the sicko who is the daughter and wife for the same man! Eww... lets draw the line at incest, shall we?

But of course, I don’t say that. Mommy taught me to be civil, after all. I fail miserably at times. This post is a burning example of that fail- as you see. Instead, I check Nelly’s number of friends.



It does seem too many to be receiving this question. Hell, even 5 seem too many! But, is it just me?

It does not stop there unfortunately. Sometimes Nelly, sometimes Stevie, sometimes Nikilesh- a page full of personal stuffs look at me in form of status updates, and I keep feeling like the proverbial fish-out-of-water:

“I have hernia”
“Am I the sacrificial goat in this relationship?”
“I pine for Sally. I love you so much, Sally-kins. Ummmmmmah...”

Hmm... these seem personal, more personal than what Liz shared- to be honest. And I wonder what am I missing?!!

I guess these are shouts for attention.... ‘LOUD’ shouts! And, it seems like I am not alone in this thought, others are having similar thoughts too. Some experts say that Facebook statuses say a lot about who you are as a person. I think I agree. I think Nelly is obsessed with herself and a miserable whiney attention freak, so is Liz- less whiney and just as miserable .... and Stevie, Timmy and Sammy are just plain boring....

I guess that makes me a judgement passing stalker.

May be it’s time the FB-world should look up the word ‘Personal’ in the dictionary? And while that happens- I can give a good ‘once over’ to my list of friends.

And you? You, meanwhile, can have a look at this. I thought it was a good read.

Faith and Knowledge

I like Richard Dawkins.

I know it comes as hardly a surprise.

Even though I think it needs clarification that I have been an atheist since much much before I read Dawkins, Dawkins just gave me some answers that I can give to the theists when they ask questions that they think proves that there is a God.

Questions like:

‘How can a creation as complex as this universe be created without a creator?’
‘How can something come from nothing?’
‘How could humans have evolved from apes?’

It surely helps that Dawkins is a zoologist... and a damn fine writer. It helps me to grasp what I find more believable- ‘science’... something testable, provable, solid, and believable.

Yes. As I said, I like Dawkins. Very much.

But, I have very strong objection in him being referred to as the high priest for atheists.

It makes atheism sound so much like a religion- any religion- whereas what it actually is- is a ‘way of thinking’. Logical thinking. I will be much dismayed if atheists, of all people, start to look up to someone or something, for idolizing or for believing blindly.

I will hate to see it happen.

I will hate to see atheism turn into a ‘religion’.

Mannequins with hijab to curb some hormonal bubble-dance

Let’s not kid around. Women do get a tough time on this planet that we call earth. One might think, how hard would it be to be a female wooden/fibreglass doll? Well think twice… it isn’t a rosy path either. Say for example, in Iran, now mannequins are being forced by the authorities to wear hijab.

There’s this growing tendency in the Muslim world to categorise everything in just two mutually exclusive categories: ‘Islamic’ or ‘Un-Islamic’. It is the latest good/evil, yin/yang, light/dark in the current Islamic zeitgeist. Just a while back in Pakistan some so called top Islamic clerics issued a decree stating theft of electricity a sin; funny that there was felt a need to issue such decree where common law and above all common sense sufficiently covers. Nowadays, every debate tends to float around this very branding with every sect, denomination or authority coming up with their ‘highly investigated’ arguments (of course within their self imposed constraint of Quranic injunctions). The ever-growing shroud of this utterly myopic and vacuous branding is like a voracious monster that doesn’t know where to stop.

Keeping true to this latest vogue, now in Iran (if not in some other countries), mannequins without hijab over the head are branded as ‘Un-Islamic’ by the authorities. Ironically, mannequins without a head are spared, even though they are still not allowed to show their bodily female curves (how uncannily similar to what is often expected from the human females).

I wonder why? Were those inanimate mannequins donning those artificial locks and curls giving the males in the Islamic regime some hormone infused bubble-dance (I didn't mention females as Ahmadinejad claims that there are no homosexuals in Iran :p, while the truth lies somewhere here)? Or, have they taken the tacky 1987 Kim Cattrall movie ‘Mannequin’ (where Kim is a mannequin that comes alive) too seriously and are afraid that hundreds of cheesily dancing Kim Cattralls would be too much handle in the cities that forbid any affiliation with sex? Apologies for my lame attempt of a pun at 'Sex and the City'. However, Let’s take a glimpse:

If this video is what prompted their decision, I wouldn’t hold it against them.

Religion, Sex and a hell lot of (holy) Smoke!


Yup. It is that taboo word, especially if you are a member of the clergy! Religion teaches you to ‘control and curb’ your sexual desires and thus, in the process, to ‘please thy God’.

Hmmmm... Okay!

Anyways, as Wiki observes and I quote:

... most religions have seen a need to address the question of a "proper" role for sexuality in human interactions. Different religions have different codes of sexual morality, which regulate sexual activity or assign normative values to certain sexually charged actions or thoughts.

Now... I wonder why there are so many cases of rape and paedophilia among the clergies though. Aren’t clergies the ‘men of God’ and thus expected to practice some amount of ... err... ‘decency’ and ‘virtue’?

Are you denying my claims that clergies turn out to be rapists and paedophiles much too often? Well... look at this, if you like. Mojoey, there, has taken up an effort of compiling the news (of abuse, mistrust and hypocrisy by the said ‘men of God’) that he has collected in the month of September alone. The number is 37. That’s more than 1 A DAY! And it’s not limited to those 37 instances- there’s definitely more.... much much more.

... and that is what got me thinking.

Why is it that so many clergymen seem to have a double life and standard? Does it stem from the impossible sexual suppressions that most religions promote or is it something else?

Did you answer ‘something else?’

Then, next question- WHAT IS THAT SOMETHING ELSE?

Enlighten me, s'il vous plait?

Do tremors happen when God slaps the earth on her butt-cheeks?

The earth has shaken again, quite a few times in last couple of weeks. Not so surprisingly, as an eventuality many of the uber-religious, ever faithful children of God are moving around wide eyed, anxiously palpitating for an imminent apocalypse.

I came to notice this ever so banal phenomenon first on Facebook (where else?) this time. It was in the form of a status update from a friend that somewhat goes like: "is this the beginning of the end?"

Hmm… such cryptic query bounds you to inquire further into it; you scratch your head in confusion and curiosity: "what's this 'this' that she is talking about?"

Fortunately, Facebook has answer to that too, in the form of comments that follow of course. By further probing into a plethora of comments that she has received and made, I came to realise that it is the recent earthquakes that she was talking about… and my brain immediately went like 'tingggggg', voilà, déjà vu, this has happened once again (take, for example, similar vacuous cerebrations in the wake of the 'swine flu' pandemic just a while back). I guess at this point it is rather redundant to mention that she is one of those many who attribute everything including their own achievements to some ectoplasmic hand of God.

It gets better from here (sarcastically speaking of course), the comment thread in question now shows the latent paranoia of God's children that is full of befuddlement (on my part) and contradiction (on their part). One sanctimonious fellow comes up with the evergreen (or should I say 'everyellow') statement, "God always does whatever is best for us; it may or may not be a sign (for apocalypse) but we have to keep the faith".

'Tadaaaa'… problem solved then; we can now merrily go back to whatever insignificant earthly task we were doing… but no, then he adds, "God willing, He will answer our prayers and keep us safe…" errr… you've lost me there buddy, utterly bemused… didn't you just utter a dictum that God always does the best for you; then why are you praying to God to protect you from sky falling onto you? Buddy, did you just decide all by yourself that staying alive is the best thing for you? What if, for some uncanny megalomaniacal reason, God finds devastation as best recourse for you? What if God just loves to say 'Muhahahah' and thinks it's sweet for you? Did you just use your earthly human brain to make a decision? Make up your mind mate and save me from this daze...

Nevertheless, the comment thread continued (and most probably is still continuing) with lots of prayers and may be with some materialistic offerings to God that often present themselves in the form of delicious sweetmeats.

Anyhow, this was a part of my eclectic circle of acquaintances. But this phenomenon of cerebrating over the 'mystic' earthquakes is certainly not limited to them. The whole lot of the uber-faithfuls all over the world are seriously pondering upon it. Some are even coming up with some reverse dictum, like this Aussie nun. Indeed, what a matter to ponder upon...

And I ask, WHY!?!

I am not sure if that qualifies as an irrational itch for anyone else but it has been itching me since I came into my REAL senses. what bothers me is that some people just cannot understand why and how will it matter to me if they have the best things in the world because that will have no effect, good or bad, on my life and not to mention the level of competition they have on a personal level by putting someone and in my case ME down to go up...Ah!

I can only sympathesize with people with such low standard of mind because they probably dont know they waste more than half of their limited mental energies in such useless activity...guys please get a life and go ahead with it.

PS: It’s all for God...

After much pondering and re-pondering Malaysian authority decided to go ahead with Kartika’s ‘caning’ after all.

What was the crime? Drinking beer despite being a Muslim. Quran says ‘no’ to alcohol and hence she gets to get caned.

I thought religion should be a personal matter and what one does or does not do, is something between the God and that person. May be I thought wrong... or maybe I’m just one of those exceptionally insightful people... and I just don’t GET them!

Blah. Don’t mind me. I flatter myself on a regular basis! After all who will do it if I don’t?!

Jokes apart though.... I thought a little further... and further...

Here’s what I concluded when I was finally able to take a peek in those zealot’s heads- they do these to make God’s job easy or to play God. Your pick, you choose either. As for me, the difference between the two is almost as much as ‘tomato’ and ‘tomah-to’... or well... ‘tometo’... as ‘some’ parts of the world know it as.


After all, I get it (or DO I really?), if YOU punish a human in THIS life, God will not have to- in AFTER life. Or does it not work this way?

Thoughts, perhaps?