For those that noticed, a current hot topic is on clubs. So here's one on some of the biggest clubs in history (notice how the British always setup their own exclusive clubs wherever they go):
http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/todaystake/tt050503.htm1
(copy provided below)
If a macro example is too much for some to contemplate, a more micro one is attached for convenience ("Why Maids Are Not Allowed in Cricket Club") :
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2000_10_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
So which and whose club are you in? Why did they let you in? In what way does it make you or them feel good?
By the way, the mighty British (some say great) once famously posted signs at a Shanghai park that said 'No Dogs or Chinese Allowed' (presumably it was grounds for one of their clubs).
That was after the Opium War gave them Hong Kong, MFN status, extra-terrestrial legal rights for British, the right to sell more opium to Chinamen, and China agreed not to call them barbarians anymore. The other powers quickly got the same soon after (may be out of admiration or respect for greatness of the British).
p.s. today got half-day off lah. Going to setup a teh tarik club tonite at Bedok Road with Benny Chin. Anyone care to join? Entrance fee only 70 cents - no need to sell anything for that.
History Lessons for Pax Americana
by Arthur Jones, NCR editor at large
Current political buzz equates President Bush's globalization with the dawn of Pax Americana. Doonesbury has already given Dubbya a centurion's helmet.
This fits nicely with the rehabilitation of Pax Britannica, (see Niall Ferguson's slightly fawning "Empire: Queen Victoria's Secret" (Basic Books) enamoured of pro-British Indians and other former serfs, and Ferguson's own nostalgia for English free trade and military and capitalist domination.
Edward Gibbon held the same views of heyday Rome. His "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", opens as Pax Romana, those two centuries of peace from the reign of Augustus (beginning in 31 BC) to around 180 A.D. Pax Britannica had a shorter run. Arguably from 1865 to the Japanese destruction of the Russian fleet in 1904-05.
Gibbon: "In the second century of the Christian era the empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth and the most civilized portion of mankind. … Their peaceful inhabitants enjoyed and abused the advantages of wealth and luxury. The image of a free constitution was preserved with decent reverence." Free constitution for Romans, but Rome's holdings were "provinces," not free states.
Pax Romana and Pax Britannica contain parallels and warnings for a United States that aims at Empire, with Bush a latter-day Queen Victoria.
The Roman Empire was an economic domination - there was no enemy worthy of the name. The British Empire was the same: in "India Britannica" (1983) Godfrey Moorhouse reminds that England's major rush to augment its India presence came because the supply of raw cotton to England's cotton mills was cut off by the American Civil War. For Britain, "King Cotton" was the oil of its day.
Empire created the mess that is today's colonial-era divided Africa, and military-coup-prone Fiji, where the British imported Indians -- who today nearly outnumber native Fijians. Empire is the Amritsar massacre, plus everything Gandhi opposed. That's the underbelly of Pax Britannica, just as condoning torture is the underbelly of the new Pax Americana.
Rome wanted an Empire of Roman citizens. And those who became such were well satisfied. The English operated differently. The first thing they did in a new colony was found a club and a race course and exclude the locals. The English wanted to be envied. Those locals admitted under sufferance to further the iron grip were well satisfied to be included.
The Americans want to be loved. Let's see how that plays with the Iraqis, the Arabs and Muslims.
Arthur's Daily Ditty
Pax Americana: Bush locuta est
Carpe diem, seize the dime,
Tempus fugit, fuggedabout the Times,
O quo vadis? Osama who?
Caveat emptor, caves' empty, too.
Pater Nosterv, thank you, Dad,
Iraq's oil's ours, pax, your lad.
(PS, Postscriptum:
Our motto's certain:
E pluribus unum et Halliburton.)
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Date to Respect
http://www.afp.com/english/news/stories/050420053609.nnix7s4b.html
http://www.snapnetwork.org/news/otherstates/ri_filmmaker_holywatergate.htm
(see previous blog entry and extracts of above links in comments)
Let us note this date
To some a sacred mandate
New head a divine dictate
Enlightened ones celebrate
Fools like me contemplate
How come a noble state
Despite all that ingratiate
Low its guardians degenerate
Harbingers of great faith
Prone to such mistake.
Those who dissect
Do not demand respect
Nor only what delect
Otherwise reject
But take in perspect
Like why those young so perfect
Abused by nearer God prefect?
They say man is imperfect
Let’s forgive and forget
Great generosity of neglect
Not likely so if the same theirs beget.
Such detestable palate
Even me who seem inanimate
and soul-less would not imitate
Haunts me inordinate
Excuses used to placate
Reasons indeterminate
No insult intended mate
Just cannot appreciate
Won’t submit to such fate
Or those quotes you gyrate.
Greatest gift Nature bequeathed
That of the intellect
Should make us all suspect
That such man-made sect
Are also used by insects
But somehow I don’t expect
Some to come clean with circumspect
To all Gods I willingly subject
But cannot put this with respect…..(CCK 05:4:20)
(CCK 05:4:20 - Nice numerals & ditty to quote, divinity it does not denote)
http://www.snapnetwork.org/news/otherstates/ri_filmmaker_holywatergate.htm
(see previous blog entry and extracts of above links in comments)
Let us note this date
To some a sacred mandate
New head a divine dictate
Enlightened ones celebrate
Fools like me contemplate
How come a noble state
Despite all that ingratiate
Low its guardians degenerate
Harbingers of great faith
Prone to such mistake.
Those who dissect
Do not demand respect
Nor only what delect
Otherwise reject
But take in perspect
Like why those young so perfect
Abused by nearer God prefect?
They say man is imperfect
Let’s forgive and forget
Great generosity of neglect
Not likely so if the same theirs beget.
Such detestable palate
Even me who seem inanimate
and soul-less would not imitate
Haunts me inordinate
Excuses used to placate
Reasons indeterminate
No insult intended mate
Just cannot appreciate
Won’t submit to such fate
Or those quotes you gyrate.
Greatest gift Nature bequeathed
That of the intellect
Should make us all suspect
That such man-made sect
Are also used by insects
But somehow I don’t expect
Some to come clean with circumspect
To all Gods I willingly subject
But cannot put this with respect…..(CCK 05:4:20)
(CCK 05:4:20 - Nice numerals & ditty to quote, divinity it does not denote)
Monday, April 18, 2005
Pope Trivia
The morning the last Pope died a few weeks ago, a local fella suggested we have a minute silence. Thinking it was some joke, I broke into laughter. Until, of course, I saw that the fella was quite serious. That was the day I decided to pen this little piece of 'memoria' of the Popes.
I then received 'feedback' from one of the more 'sensitive' ones (exchange at bottom) whose past exchanges with me had been quite 'amazing' to say the least e.g.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2001_06_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
See also comments for subsequent private exchange and see how such people can completely miss the point (in that case, my friend was trying to 'prove me wrong' by saying there was possibly one black Pope from Ethiopia, when I was trying to show something else i.e. it is just another man-made institution exhibiting all the common traits of one).
The other thing was our friend did not bother to check his facts again - I could not find record of a black Pope for the Roman Catholic Church. Again, I had to remind our friend that I was talking about that particular Catholic church, and he should not mix it up with others. (Phew! You see what I mean?)
Trivia Questions:
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
2. How is the Pope selected?
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
4. How many Popes were white?
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare that Galileo and Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
9. How old is the state of Vatican City?
Trivial Answers:
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
This institution owes its existence to the Romans who were the ‘greatest and most benevolent’ super-power of their time (hey, if not how else would we have known such a great ‘book’). The most prominent players were a Roman emperor called Constantine, and a goyok seller by the name of Paul.
2. How is the Pope selected?
Over time, the Pope was selected in a number of different ways (no one formula is prescribed by the ‘book’ what). If you think that is a sign of Vatican dynamism, read on.
As democracy was not mentioned in the great ‘book’, that was not the selection approach for a long time – may be, this ‘greatest thing’ the world had ever discovered was not known to the Romans (never mind the Greeks were just next door).
So it was left to the heavens to reveal its choice to the world in its ‘own mysterious ways’. But this is a free world to which each enlightened ones read their own unique holy signs. But mostly, all those signs are so holey that the only one method that holds water was the one based on who holds the most swords or guns. And so it was that when the Romans were masters, influential Roman families will ‘compete to put their guy up for the job’ (if it sounds like the Republicans and Democrats, you are not wrong). If you are as powerful as the likes of Napoleon, you can afford to march all the way to Rome and install one of yours (if that sounds like present day Iraq, you are also not incorrect).
If you are desperate but not powerful enough to subdue the other guy trying to do the same, you can always have your own pope. In fact, once there were 4 of these fellas at the same time (installed by 4 different fellas, of course). Can you imagine that? The world having 4-times the holiness – you can’t get enough of those blessings, I tell you!
If you think that lacked class, you can always setup your own church like what the English did. In fact, you can as well re-write the bloody book to suit your needs, like what the English did. (“Who say cannot? Whack you, you know” was how the English got their new church and new set of books)
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
As many as you like if you dare, or one which is his who is powerful (see 2).
4. How many Popes were white?
All. What do you expect? Go read answers to 1 and 2.
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
As the Vatican was losing its influence in ‘old Europe’ about 400 years ago (and too many people telling them what to do), the Jesuits were formed by the Vatican to spread its teachings to the newly colonized parts of the world (they called it the ‘new world’). To do that the Jesuits had to firstly include the non-Europeans into the ranks of humans or gentiles in their lingo (how to sell goyok if the new skin cannot stick?) But that position was totally opposite to that of the Spanish and Portugese (the ‘super colonialists’ then) whose justification for widespread extermination of the ‘natives’ was because those ‘natives’ were sub-humans. So those powers pressured the Vatican to disband this group of nuisance and the Pope gave in. (This should be illuminating for pop-era clowns that think the ‘book’ has great positive effects on humans)
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
Depending on the situation: the Pope can be celibate or not (where the ‘book’ said he must be one or the other?) So it depends on how much earthly power the Pope has at that point in time. In medieval times, when they enjoyed relatively greater influence, they were not (hey, who dare ask such questions when the fella is all powerful?) So, we had cases like that of one Pope that had a few illegitimate kids and arranged to have them married to influential Roman families in a sort of ‘gene laundering’. In fact, it was all just about power, money and sex (see also 1, 2 and 3). In fact, some of these fellas would make Clinton look like a saint!
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
Depends on when you are talking about. None in Roman times. Either Chinamen were not considered humans (only their later day descendants are so), or they did not exist. Whatever the case, Chinaman cardinals are nowadays appointed by some council controlled by some mainly white men (who are they and who decides they are what they are? You mean you dare to ask? Whack you, you know. OK, let’s be more civilized. Go read 2 above again and go back to your corner.)
Today there are 10 Asians among the 115 cardinals. If this sounds like the ratio of Asian jurists in the war crimes tribunal for Japan’s WWII crimes, it is not a coincidence. Bit players in somebody else’s show.
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare Galileo & Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
The last Pope John Paul II was the one who ‘set the record straight’ by declaring that Galileo was right after all and that the Earth does go round the sun. So the result of 1633’s Roman Inquisition on Galileo was overturned and Galileo was found ‘not guilty’ in 1992 (don’t know what happened lah. May be Galileo was intially crowded out by the others in the Mecca-like frenzies 'to be with Him' but finally got his audience with the Gods and they agreed with him. The Gods then SMS the obviously slower Popes who only got the message after the advent of the handphone. Thank you Motorola, Amen).
John Paul II was also the one who in 1996 said that Darwin’s theory of evolution (published in 1871) was ‘more than a hypothesis’ (hah, this time Darwin took his turn with the Gods much faster than his less fortunate predecessor. May be the Gods figured out the need of a ‘fast lane’ for the ones with brains. Too bad, the other retards dying ‘to be with the Lord’ will just have to wait a little longer).
Please don’t ask how come the Gods don’t just give those damn theories to the Popes (or the popey ones) and let them have the glory and save them all the embarrassments. Hey, the Popes have more important things to do (see 2, 5 & 6) and the Gods work in mysterious ways, okay?
8. How old is the state of Vatican City?
You go find out yourself lah. Everything also must tell you meh?
{Exchange with 'sensitive' one}
Hi CCK,
Once again we are very saddened to receive such an email from you as it is very disrespectful of the Church and in addition showing disrespect to us (Catholics) who we thought you had considered as your friends since we are on your mailing list. I think one should refrain from criticising any religion for that matter. You may find fault with any religion because humans have been appointed by God to bring the faith to other humans and because humans are prone to making mistakes, there will be the inevitable faults. This should nevertheless not detract from the fact that there is a God who created all of us and hence we should show reverence and respect to our creator.
Because of this, I am asking all those who are on your mailing list to pray for a conversion of your heart. Jesus said that we should forgive those who insult us and so we are praying for you the same prayer that Jesus prayed for those who tortured him and nailed him to the cross....Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.....(Luke 23:34)
Also, pls remove us from your mailing list to save us from further insults.
God Bless You
LP
Hi Liang Perng,
I am sorry you took the writing as an insult. It was not meant to be personal. Since that was the way you took it, pls do accept my apology (I still want to be your friend).
I recognise that the way the historical facts were presented was a bit crude but it was nevertheless intended to be light-hearted. I recognise that although it highlighted the fallacies of one man-made institution, the same apply to all man-made institutions of power. We should therefore exercise as much degree of wariness as respect.
The choice of this topic was merely a result of circumstances and had to do with the current publicity around this topic which I felt some people took incorrectly as having universal interest, applicability and truth (pls refer to my original introduction).
I have since re-drafted the historical findings below, and hope you find them more acceptable and enlightening.
Thanks for all your kind wishes too. Following your advice, I will try to be inclusive out of respect for the others: So may the Lord Krishna, Allah, Buddha, Mishtra, Et Cetera Et Cetera Bless Ya (just too many Gods to call upon lah)
Da Da.
CCK
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
This institution owes its existence to the Romans who were the super-power of their time. The most prominent players were a Roman emperor called Constantine, and a great influencer by the name of Paul.
2. How is the Pope selected?
Over time, the Pope was selected in a number of different ways but democracy was not the common approach. But generally, who got to be the Pope was determined by who ruled Rome or Europe. At times when there existed more than one competing powers, there existed multiple candidates co-existing at the same time under the patronage of their own political rulers. Once there were 4 Popes at the same time. Hey, you can imagine how exciting those times can get.
History also recorded that the more powerful rulers like Napoleon always want to have their own candidates installed as Pope - if all else fail, they would do so by sending their armies into Rome.
It may be worthwhile to also note that it was recorded in history that once England decided to setup its own Church when it could not get the Vatican to agree to some of its wishes. It also re-drafted the Bible for the same purpose. It was likely that no one dared do anything about it because England was quite powerful then.
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
It varies depending on the political situation of the time (see 2).
4. How many Popes were white?
Some Europeans have darker skin than others – so they are not all fully white. But they were all Europeans nevertheless. This is understandable because the Church is a European institution.
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
As their influence waned for various reasons about 400 years ago, the Jesuits were formed by the Vatican to spread its teachings to the newly colonized parts of the world (they called it the ‘new world’). To do that the Jesuits had to firstly include non-Europeans into the ranks of humans or gentiles (the reason is because the Bible was meant for 'man'). But that position was totally opposite to that of the Spanish and Portugese (the most powerful nations in Europe then) whose justification for widespread extermination of the ‘natives’ was because those ‘natives’ were sub-humans. So those powers pressured the Vatican to disband this group of nice people who tried to go against the powerful Spanish & Portugese, and the Pope gave in. We can understand why that was the case - any human would have done the same under threat of force.
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
Depending on the prevailing situation: the Pope can be celibate or not (the Bible is silent on this). It depends on how much influence the Pope has at that point in time. In medieval times, when they enjoyed relatively greater influence, they were not. In one case, one Pope reportedly had a few illegitimate kids whom he arranged to have married to influential Roman families. Because the institution was not free from human fallacies, the figures involved in this institution (like all other man-made institutions around the world) are not immune to the usual dynamics of human politics: power, money and sex. And what this particular Pope did was understandable. Likely, he was only trying to strengthen the relationship between the Vatican and the various political forces.
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
Depends on when you are talking about. None in Roman times. It is best left to individual conjectures why there were no Chinese Cardinals then. For different fully understandable reasons, many people do not want to discuss that.
Today there are 10 Asians among the 115 cardinals. This ratio is very unrepresentative of the number of Asians in the world. May be this is because Asians traditionally play less important roles in the institution or are considered less able to contribute.
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare Galileo & Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
The last Pope John Paul II was the one who ‘set the record straight’ by declaring that Galileo was right after all and that the Earth does go round the sun. So the result of the 1633 Roman Inquisition on Galileo was overturned and Galileo was found ‘not guilty’ in 1992 (we don’t really know what happened. What we do know is that some one realized it was a mistake a long time after it happened. It happens).
John Paul II was also the one who in 1996 said that Darwin’s theory of evolution (published in 1871) was ‘more than a hypothesis’ (history recorded that this delay was much shorter than the other one. We also do not fully understand why that was the case but it happens. It is just humans).
Some people may ask why incidents like above happened, and why the Vatican did not do more thorough and fair investigations before declaring that these bright people were ‘guilty’. We do not fully know why but suffice to say that all man-made institutions are prone to making mistakes, and, like all nice people, we should just accept them as they are.
8. How old is the state of Vatican City?
I suggest you try to find this out yourself. Having some understanding of the history behind all man-made events or institutions can be helpful in putting things in perspective.
I then received 'feedback' from one of the more 'sensitive' ones (exchange at bottom) whose past exchanges with me had been quite 'amazing' to say the least e.g.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2001_06_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
See also comments for subsequent private exchange and see how such people can completely miss the point (in that case, my friend was trying to 'prove me wrong' by saying there was possibly one black Pope from Ethiopia, when I was trying to show something else i.e. it is just another man-made institution exhibiting all the common traits of one).
The other thing was our friend did not bother to check his facts again - I could not find record of a black Pope for the Roman Catholic Church. Again, I had to remind our friend that I was talking about that particular Catholic church, and he should not mix it up with others. (Phew! You see what I mean?)
Trivia Questions:
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
2. How is the Pope selected?
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
4. How many Popes were white?
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare that Galileo and Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
9. How old is the state of Vatican City?
Trivial Answers:
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
This institution owes its existence to the Romans who were the ‘greatest and most benevolent’ super-power of their time (hey, if not how else would we have known such a great ‘book’). The most prominent players were a Roman emperor called Constantine, and a goyok seller by the name of Paul.
2. How is the Pope selected?
Over time, the Pope was selected in a number of different ways (no one formula is prescribed by the ‘book’ what). If you think that is a sign of Vatican dynamism, read on.
As democracy was not mentioned in the great ‘book’, that was not the selection approach for a long time – may be, this ‘greatest thing’ the world had ever discovered was not known to the Romans (never mind the Greeks were just next door).
So it was left to the heavens to reveal its choice to the world in its ‘own mysterious ways’. But this is a free world to which each enlightened ones read their own unique holy signs. But mostly, all those signs are so holey that the only one method that holds water was the one based on who holds the most swords or guns. And so it was that when the Romans were masters, influential Roman families will ‘compete to put their guy up for the job’ (if it sounds like the Republicans and Democrats, you are not wrong). If you are as powerful as the likes of Napoleon, you can afford to march all the way to Rome and install one of yours (if that sounds like present day Iraq, you are also not incorrect).
If you are desperate but not powerful enough to subdue the other guy trying to do the same, you can always have your own pope. In fact, once there were 4 of these fellas at the same time (installed by 4 different fellas, of course). Can you imagine that? The world having 4-times the holiness – you can’t get enough of those blessings, I tell you!
If you think that lacked class, you can always setup your own church like what the English did. In fact, you can as well re-write the bloody book to suit your needs, like what the English did. (“Who say cannot? Whack you, you know” was how the English got their new church and new set of books)
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
As many as you like if you dare, or one which is his who is powerful (see 2).
4. How many Popes were white?
All. What do you expect? Go read answers to 1 and 2.
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
As the Vatican was losing its influence in ‘old Europe’ about 400 years ago (and too many people telling them what to do), the Jesuits were formed by the Vatican to spread its teachings to the newly colonized parts of the world (they called it the ‘new world’). To do that the Jesuits had to firstly include the non-Europeans into the ranks of humans or gentiles in their lingo (how to sell goyok if the new skin cannot stick?) But that position was totally opposite to that of the Spanish and Portugese (the ‘super colonialists’ then) whose justification for widespread extermination of the ‘natives’ was because those ‘natives’ were sub-humans. So those powers pressured the Vatican to disband this group of nuisance and the Pope gave in. (This should be illuminating for pop-era clowns that think the ‘book’ has great positive effects on humans)
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
Depending on the situation: the Pope can be celibate or not (where the ‘book’ said he must be one or the other?) So it depends on how much earthly power the Pope has at that point in time. In medieval times, when they enjoyed relatively greater influence, they were not (hey, who dare ask such questions when the fella is all powerful?) So, we had cases like that of one Pope that had a few illegitimate kids and arranged to have them married to influential Roman families in a sort of ‘gene laundering’. In fact, it was all just about power, money and sex (see also 1, 2 and 3). In fact, some of these fellas would make Clinton look like a saint!
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
Depends on when you are talking about. None in Roman times. Either Chinamen were not considered humans (only their later day descendants are so), or they did not exist. Whatever the case, Chinaman cardinals are nowadays appointed by some council controlled by some mainly white men (who are they and who decides they are what they are? You mean you dare to ask? Whack you, you know. OK, let’s be more civilized. Go read 2 above again and go back to your corner.)
Today there are 10 Asians among the 115 cardinals. If this sounds like the ratio of Asian jurists in the war crimes tribunal for Japan’s WWII crimes, it is not a coincidence. Bit players in somebody else’s show.
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare Galileo & Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
The last Pope John Paul II was the one who ‘set the record straight’ by declaring that Galileo was right after all and that the Earth does go round the sun. So the result of 1633’s Roman Inquisition on Galileo was overturned and Galileo was found ‘not guilty’ in 1992 (don’t know what happened lah. May be Galileo was intially crowded out by the others in the Mecca-like frenzies 'to be with Him' but finally got his audience with the Gods and they agreed with him. The Gods then SMS the obviously slower Popes who only got the message after the advent of the handphone. Thank you Motorola, Amen).
John Paul II was also the one who in 1996 said that Darwin’s theory of evolution (published in 1871) was ‘more than a hypothesis’ (hah, this time Darwin took his turn with the Gods much faster than his less fortunate predecessor. May be the Gods figured out the need of a ‘fast lane’ for the ones with brains. Too bad, the other retards dying ‘to be with the Lord’ will just have to wait a little longer).
Please don’t ask how come the Gods don’t just give those damn theories to the Popes (or the popey ones) and let them have the glory and save them all the embarrassments. Hey, the Popes have more important things to do (see 2, 5 & 6) and the Gods work in mysterious ways, okay?
8. How old is the state of Vatican City?
You go find out yourself lah. Everything also must tell you meh?
{Exchange with 'sensitive' one}
Hi CCK,
Once again we are very saddened to receive such an email from you as it is very disrespectful of the Church and in addition showing disrespect to us (Catholics) who we thought you had considered as your friends since we are on your mailing list. I think one should refrain from criticising any religion for that matter. You may find fault with any religion because humans have been appointed by God to bring the faith to other humans and because humans are prone to making mistakes, there will be the inevitable faults. This should nevertheless not detract from the fact that there is a God who created all of us and hence we should show reverence and respect to our creator.
Because of this, I am asking all those who are on your mailing list to pray for a conversion of your heart. Jesus said that we should forgive those who insult us and so we are praying for you the same prayer that Jesus prayed for those who tortured him and nailed him to the cross....Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.....(Luke 23:34)
Also, pls remove us from your mailing list to save us from further insults.
God Bless You
LP
Hi Liang Perng,
I am sorry you took the writing as an insult. It was not meant to be personal. Since that was the way you took it, pls do accept my apology (I still want to be your friend).
I recognise that the way the historical facts were presented was a bit crude but it was nevertheless intended to be light-hearted. I recognise that although it highlighted the fallacies of one man-made institution, the same apply to all man-made institutions of power. We should therefore exercise as much degree of wariness as respect.
The choice of this topic was merely a result of circumstances and had to do with the current publicity around this topic which I felt some people took incorrectly as having universal interest, applicability and truth (pls refer to my original introduction).
I have since re-drafted the historical findings below, and hope you find them more acceptable and enlightening.
Thanks for all your kind wishes too. Following your advice, I will try to be inclusive out of respect for the others: So may the Lord Krishna, Allah, Buddha, Mishtra, Et Cetera Et Cetera Bless Ya (just too many Gods to call upon lah)
Da Da.
CCK
1. Why is the institution headed by the Pope known as the Roman Catholic Church?
This institution owes its existence to the Romans who were the super-power of their time. The most prominent players were a Roman emperor called Constantine, and a great influencer by the name of Paul.
2. How is the Pope selected?
Over time, the Pope was selected in a number of different ways but democracy was not the common approach. But generally, who got to be the Pope was determined by who ruled Rome or Europe. At times when there existed more than one competing powers, there existed multiple candidates co-existing at the same time under the patronage of their own political rulers. Once there were 4 Popes at the same time. Hey, you can imagine how exciting those times can get.
History also recorded that the more powerful rulers like Napoleon always want to have their own candidates installed as Pope - if all else fail, they would do so by sending their armies into Rome.
It may be worthwhile to also note that it was recorded in history that once England decided to setup its own Church when it could not get the Vatican to agree to some of its wishes. It also re-drafted the Bible for the same purpose. It was likely that no one dared do anything about it because England was quite powerful then.
3. How many Popes are there at any one time?
It varies depending on the political situation of the time (see 2).
4. How many Popes were white?
Some Europeans have darker skin than others – so they are not all fully white. But they were all Europeans nevertheless. This is understandable because the Church is a European institution.
5. Who are the Jesuits and why were they once disbanded soon after formation?
As their influence waned for various reasons about 400 years ago, the Jesuits were formed by the Vatican to spread its teachings to the newly colonized parts of the world (they called it the ‘new world’). To do that the Jesuits had to firstly include non-Europeans into the ranks of humans or gentiles (the reason is because the Bible was meant for 'man'). But that position was totally opposite to that of the Spanish and Portugese (the most powerful nations in Europe then) whose justification for widespread extermination of the ‘natives’ was because those ‘natives’ were sub-humans. So those powers pressured the Vatican to disband this group of nice people who tried to go against the powerful Spanish & Portugese, and the Pope gave in. We can understand why that was the case - any human would have done the same under threat of force.
6. Is the Pope a celibate?
Depending on the prevailing situation: the Pope can be celibate or not (the Bible is silent on this). It depends on how much influence the Pope has at that point in time. In medieval times, when they enjoyed relatively greater influence, they were not. In one case, one Pope reportedly had a few illegitimate kids whom he arranged to have married to influential Roman families. Because the institution was not free from human fallacies, the figures involved in this institution (like all other man-made institutions around the world) are not immune to the usual dynamics of human politics: power, money and sex. And what this particular Pope did was understandable. Likely, he was only trying to strengthen the relationship between the Vatican and the various political forces.
7. How many Asian Cardinals are there and who decides on that?
Depends on when you are talking about. None in Roman times. It is best left to individual conjectures why there were no Chinese Cardinals then. For different fully understandable reasons, many people do not want to discuss that.
Today there are 10 Asians among the 115 cardinals. This ratio is very unrepresentative of the number of Asians in the world. May be this is because Asians traditionally play less important roles in the institution or are considered less able to contribute.
8. How long does it take the Vatican to declare Galileo & Darwin were right and which Pope was behind it?
The last Pope John Paul II was the one who ‘set the record straight’ by declaring that Galileo was right after all and that the Earth does go round the sun. So the result of the 1633 Roman Inquisition on Galileo was overturned and Galileo was found ‘not guilty’ in 1992 (we don’t really know what happened. What we do know is that some one realized it was a mistake a long time after it happened. It happens).
John Paul II was also the one who in 1996 said that Darwin’s theory of evolution (published in 1871) was ‘more than a hypothesis’ (history recorded that this delay was much shorter than the other one. We also do not fully understand why that was the case but it happens. It is just humans).
Some people may ask why incidents like above happened, and why the Vatican did not do more thorough and fair investigations before declaring that these bright people were ‘guilty’. We do not fully know why but suffice to say that all man-made institutions are prone to making mistakes, and, like all nice people, we should just accept them as they are.
8. How old is the state of Vatican City?
I suggest you try to find this out yourself. Having some understanding of the history behind all man-made events or institutions can be helpful in putting things in perspective.
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Why is Japan Demanding Apology for Some Demos?
http://guywong.home.netcom.com/html/IvyRecon.htm
http://japaneseamnesia.blogspot.com/
Above for those that want to understand why the Chinese and Koreans are still unhappy with Japan's WWII legacy.
It should also be enlightening to those that foolishly parrot after the likes of Times. They claim "the US is the most benevolent great power in history. For example, who else would have allowed the vanquished like Germany and Japan to re-develop into great nations?".
Of course, those that quote above does not know that these nations WERE great powers (that was the reason why they fought in the first place), and were then needed to stand against another great power, Russia.
If you don't believe, go ask the Germans (or Charlemagne)
See 'Short History of the Great Wars': http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2005_04_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
At the start of WWII when Japan declared war on the British, the latter revoked the Order of the Garter previously conferred to the Japanese god-king Hirohito. Considered as the 'world's highest order of chivalry' it was formed when the British and likes joined together to whack their opposition in what they called the Crusades.
The Americans were so happy with Japan's role in the new order that a few decades later Nixon arranged for Hirohito's award to be restored by the British. Now, you know why the Americans are such nice people?
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jellytree/seekingjustice.html
http://japaneseamnesia.blogspot.com/
Above for those that want to understand why the Chinese and Koreans are still unhappy with Japan's WWII legacy.
It should also be enlightening to those that foolishly parrot after the likes of Times. They claim "the US is the most benevolent great power in history. For example, who else would have allowed the vanquished like Germany and Japan to re-develop into great nations?".
Of course, those that quote above does not know that these nations WERE great powers (that was the reason why they fought in the first place), and were then needed to stand against another great power, Russia.
If you don't believe, go ask the Germans (or Charlemagne)
See 'Short History of the Great Wars': http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2005_04_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
At the start of WWII when Japan declared war on the British, the latter revoked the Order of the Garter previously conferred to the Japanese god-king Hirohito. Considered as the 'world's highest order of chivalry' it was formed when the British and likes joined together to whack their opposition in what they called the Crusades.
The Americans were so happy with Japan's role in the new order that a few decades later Nixon arranged for Hirohito's award to be restored by the British. Now, you know why the Americans are such nice people?
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jellytree/seekingjustice.html
Short History of the 'Great Wars'
Took me a long time to write this (always in my head). And always remember this: Lee Kuan Yew related in his biography a conversation with Indira Gandhi about why India could not change some of its old customs. Indira Gandhi said something like this 'we are all covered by the dust of history'. With that, here is what I keep for my little 'tryst with destiny'.
Since the time of Charlemagne (about 800 AD), the Franks (present day French and Germans) were the lords of Western Europe. They were the ‘heirs’ to the Western Roman Empire (guess who had the East?), and took turns to claim it in the form of the Holy Roman Empire till the 18th century.
That was a long time and not so long ago.
One of the many people ‘super-power’ and Catholic Charlemagne whacked was the then paganish Saxons, and his offer to them upon victory was baptism or death. So the other fella gave in.
Always on the fringe of Europe, the other fella nevertheless remained a constant thorn on the side belly of Europe (the history surrounding the Spanish Armada is a good example). But full reversal of fortunes was only to be played out many centuries later.
At the end of the 19th century, Prussia (present day Germany) was catching up with the Industrial Revolution and fast developing. Together with the US it was considered 2nd only to Britain. Good quality and cheap Prussian goods were beginning to flood the European markets.
Credited largely to Bismark, this period was proudly known to the Germans as the 2nd Reich (the 1st Reich being the Holy Roman Empire - should be obvious but have to be explicit for the less endowed readers).
Prussia attracted and had a huge pool of talented scientific minds from the likes of Planck to Einstein, and consequentially had the most Nobel prize laureates of that period. This long history and technological prowess were the source of Teutonic pride and arrogance (that later showed its worst in Hitler’s ‘Aryan Supremacy’).
It was also the height of the industrial age, and automobiles and the likes raised the importance of oil and the desire to control it. These factors combine to drive Prussia’s desire for a bigger share of the colonial pie, and were cause for concern for the other European powers surrounding it like Britain, France & Russia.
These other powers therefore took concerted effort to limit the growth of Prussian influence and starve Prussia of both raw materials especially oil and market (which the other powers’ colonies amply provided).
See an example of how they piss Prussia off here - http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html.
As the other powers of Europe were for various reasons relatively weaker (the French for example relied on Britain as ‘king maker’ and guarantor of security) the real antagonists at that time were Britain aided by the US (a.k.a. Anglo-Saxons) and Prussia.
So the British got the French and Russians together in a ‘Triple Entente’ against Prussia and Bismark's 'Triple Alliance' which included Austria-Hungary and Italy (Italy as centre of the old Roman Empire should know who the big brothers of Western Europe are).
The US, already harboring ambitions of its own, was not a bystander.
An example of the deliberate attempt to ‘keep the lid’ on Prussia was an exchange in 1910 (years before WW I) between British politician Arthur Balfour and the American ambassador to Britain where the former explicitly suggested that a war with Prussia be started so that their countries’ ‘standard of living’ will not be lowered by the lost of trade (which of course were highest by virtue of the size of the empire they were milking), and to keep their supremacy.
Japan after being insulted by an American fella by the name of Commodore Perry in the mid 19th century, embarked on a modernisation period commonly known as the Meiji Restoration. The insult arose because the Americans wanted a safe base from which they ‘cover’ northeast Asia, and an island off the coast of China was ideal.
By start of the 20th century, Japan considered itself a world power with rights to ‘Asia’ (a name popularized by them for that purpose), and promptly demonstrated that by defeating the Russians and occupying chunks of northeast Asia.
When WWI started, they joined on the side of the ‘Allies’ hoping to get into the good books of the ‘greatest power’ then (Britain and its then deputy sheriff the US). Always safer to bet on the biggest bully! Their weakening of the Russians earlier (which the British appreciated) also helped them gain entry to the ‘club’.
WW I started largely with this back drop, and resulted in about 8 million casualties with Russia, France, Prussia, and Austria-Hungary having more than 1 million casualties each, and the ‘British Empire’ just a tad below 1 million.
The result of this war was the weakening of all powers involved (except the US which officially stayed out till 1917 which was towards the end), and effectively started the beginning of the end of the European powers, and (luckily for many of us) the colonial era.
Towards the later part of WW I, the Balfour Declaration was one of the excuses used by Britain to occupy the Middle East and control the area. That and conflicting agreements with the French and Arabs to gain their support against the Ottoman Empire (fighting on the side of Prussia) were behind some of the biggest problems our world witness today – the Palestinian problem and the politics/wars of Middle East oil exemplified by the occupation of Iraq today.
The Balfour Declaration, openly addressed to Jewish financier Lord Rothschild was intended to draw the support of Jewish financiers around the world in the war against Prussia in exchange for carving a piece of land in Palestine for the creation of a state for the Jewish people. For those with less imagination, the Balfour Declaration is akin to Britain giving an undertaking to Wee Cho Yaw to occupy a piece of China so that the Wee clan in Singapore can return to stay there.
A Rothschild once said “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply”.
Such arrogance and perceived Jewish support of the ‘Allies’ coupled with the fact that Balfour was part Jew were likely reasons for the German’s utter dislike/suspicion of Jews after that (anti-Semitism in Europe was common from before Charlemagne and not likely to be the only reason).
After Prussia surrendered, the Versailles Treaty subjected Prussia to among others punitive war reparations of such unreasonable magnitude and doubtlessly intended to continue to keep the lid on Prussia, that John Maynard Keynes (famous economist whose views present day text-book academics only know selectively) representing the British Treasury in the treaty negotiations, resigned publicly in protest and predicted ominously that it would result in great dissatisfaction on the part of the vanquished (the same observations were made by others).
That plus the Great Depression of the 1930s formed the background for the next and greatest of all wars - WW II.
Hitler and Nazism were as much a result of WW I as cause of WW II. If the use of ‘I’ and ‘II’ is not telling enough, then Hitler’s use of 3rd Reich should.
To make things worse, before starting negotiations for the surrender, Prussia had thought that terms of no annexations and indemnities previously offered by the US as peace brokers would be kept. This is was not to be the case after they surrendered and it is not likely the Germans would have forgotten that till today.
The strategic and geopolitical context of WW II was no different for every key participant – control of markets and source of oil & raw materials critical for further growth and prosperity (Balfour’s so-called maintaining of ‘standard of living’).
This time, Japan joined the Germans. The reason: they were pissed they did not get their fair share of spoils in Asia after WWI.
This time America (with the 'smarter' British this time) again let the others fight it out and exhaust themselves before they joined in as ‘victors’ when the beginning of the end had already begun. For the most part of WW II and to the chagrin of the desperate East Europeans, they used various excuses to remain on the fringes and entered the ‘European theater’ only after the tide had turned on Germany in mid-1944. By then, the brunt of the war and casualties had already been borne by the East Europeans and Germans – about 40 million casualties (the British & Americans suffered less than 1 million casualties in the entire war).
Likewise, Asians were left to their own devices during the Japanese occupation until the atom bomb was deployed – by then more than 10 million Chinese and countless other Asians had died in the hands of Japan which thanks to the ‘bomb’ had close to 2 million casualties.
This approach combined with the resulting exodus of wealth & talent from everywhere to the US safe haven as result of the various conflicts elsewhere over the centuries resulted in the single super power order we have today.
We also see this ‘fomenting of conflict every where else but my own home’ approach in recent times in the Korean peninsula, Taiwan Straits, Middle East, Central Asia and Central Europe.
A reversal of this approach was also cited by Osama bin Ladin as a reason for his Sept 11 attacks - Osama's opinion is that the US should not be left to live comfortably at home while they sow turmoil elsewhere.
At the end of WW II, America and a weakened Britain needed Germany and Japan to stand in between them and Russia.
Unlike what some historical fools think, Russia was the one that won the war in Europe and therefore the new threat to the British & Americans.
For that reason and perhaps realizing the disastrous effects of Versailles that Keynes warned about, Germany got off this time with much smaller war reparation and the Marshall Plan.
Japan had better ‘luck’. It got away without needing to account seriously for its actions nor return stolen wealth and, according to some, for a share of the stolen wealth with the British/Americans.
Perhaps, like the Japanese, the Americans & British thought the other Asians are lesser beings for them to be bothered with that. Which is why Japan (unlike Germany) to this day remains arrogant and refuses to acknowledge its WW II misdeeds including the Nanking massacre where its soldiers raped and murdered an estimated quarter of a million Chinese in a 6 weeks frenzy, in many instances merely for fun or show of bravado as can be seen in photographs.
This ‘indebtedness’ and fear of Russia and the communist threat (real or otherwise), and not to mention their total lack of control of oil (have you heard of a Japanese or German oil company?) resulted in these nations remaining quietly subservient to the US and its interest throughout the ensuing Cold War.
Before the end of WW II, because of his economic insights and perhaps his ominous prediction the last time around (another indication why both wars were essentially one war), Keynes was asked to help draft a new economic world order on the part of the British.
Keynes suggested the setup of a global currency (to be known as Bancor) so that no country can be unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged.
It was an ideal the victorious politicians and their backers understood but would not accept. This resulted in Bretton Woods, and the use of the US Dollar as ‘de facto global reserve’ currency for the last 50 years.
Unlike Keynes, many present day half-baked economists seriously think today’s financial system is a perfect & fair system where all currencies are equally subject to the same rules which they think they understand (until you ask them to explain the likes of the Asian Financial Crisis and ‘irrational exuberance’).
This less than fair system was also the reason for Western Europe’s 40 year effort to create firstly the EU and then the Euro whose global effect we are seeing today.
France and Germany as big brothers of continental Europe since Charlemagme must surely be aware of the above history, and that they were at the short end of the stick for the turmoils of the last century.
The Euro and EU with Germany and France at its core now poses a new challenge to the Anglo-Saxon’s supremacy. We begin to see that recently with their opposition to the attack on Iraq. Bush’s people did not call Germany and France ‘Old Europe’ for no reason – he and his people are well aware of the history of the great wars and the heritage of Charlemagne.
Some quotes to contemplate with respect to the above:
If you will permit us to sacrifice your sons on the European battlegrounds, I promise you that this will be the final war — the war to end all wars — the war to make the world safe for democracy once and for all. – Woodrow Wilson before US joined WWI
I have said this before, but I will say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent to any foreign wars. – Franklin Roosevelt, campaign speech 1940.
"I have always said that I hoped if Great Britain were beaten in a war we should find a Hitler who would lead us back to our rightful place among nations." – Winston Churchill, letter to the Times
When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader. - Plato
CCK note: Plato was not incomplete. Some tyrants stir up wars in other people's home so that the latter will never get to grow peacefully and threaten their dominance.
Since the time of Charlemagne (about 800 AD), the Franks (present day French and Germans) were the lords of Western Europe. They were the ‘heirs’ to the Western Roman Empire (guess who had the East?), and took turns to claim it in the form of the Holy Roman Empire till the 18th century.
That was a long time and not so long ago.
One of the many people ‘super-power’ and Catholic Charlemagne whacked was the then paganish Saxons, and his offer to them upon victory was baptism or death. So the other fella gave in.
Always on the fringe of Europe, the other fella nevertheless remained a constant thorn on the side belly of Europe (the history surrounding the Spanish Armada is a good example). But full reversal of fortunes was only to be played out many centuries later.
At the end of the 19th century, Prussia (present day Germany) was catching up with the Industrial Revolution and fast developing. Together with the US it was considered 2nd only to Britain. Good quality and cheap Prussian goods were beginning to flood the European markets.
Credited largely to Bismark, this period was proudly known to the Germans as the 2nd Reich (the 1st Reich being the Holy Roman Empire - should be obvious but have to be explicit for the less endowed readers).
Prussia attracted and had a huge pool of talented scientific minds from the likes of Planck to Einstein, and consequentially had the most Nobel prize laureates of that period. This long history and technological prowess were the source of Teutonic pride and arrogance (that later showed its worst in Hitler’s ‘Aryan Supremacy’).
It was also the height of the industrial age, and automobiles and the likes raised the importance of oil and the desire to control it. These factors combine to drive Prussia’s desire for a bigger share of the colonial pie, and were cause for concern for the other European powers surrounding it like Britain, France & Russia.
These other powers therefore took concerted effort to limit the growth of Prussian influence and starve Prussia of both raw materials especially oil and market (which the other powers’ colonies amply provided).
See an example of how they piss Prussia off here - http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html.
As the other powers of Europe were for various reasons relatively weaker (the French for example relied on Britain as ‘king maker’ and guarantor of security) the real antagonists at that time were Britain aided by the US (a.k.a. Anglo-Saxons) and Prussia.
So the British got the French and Russians together in a ‘Triple Entente’ against Prussia and Bismark's 'Triple Alliance' which included Austria-Hungary and Italy (Italy as centre of the old Roman Empire should know who the big brothers of Western Europe are).
The US, already harboring ambitions of its own, was not a bystander.
An example of the deliberate attempt to ‘keep the lid’ on Prussia was an exchange in 1910 (years before WW I) between British politician Arthur Balfour and the American ambassador to Britain where the former explicitly suggested that a war with Prussia be started so that their countries’ ‘standard of living’ will not be lowered by the lost of trade (which of course were highest by virtue of the size of the empire they were milking), and to keep their supremacy.
Japan after being insulted by an American fella by the name of Commodore Perry in the mid 19th century, embarked on a modernisation period commonly known as the Meiji Restoration. The insult arose because the Americans wanted a safe base from which they ‘cover’ northeast Asia, and an island off the coast of China was ideal.
By start of the 20th century, Japan considered itself a world power with rights to ‘Asia’ (a name popularized by them for that purpose), and promptly demonstrated that by defeating the Russians and occupying chunks of northeast Asia.
When WWI started, they joined on the side of the ‘Allies’ hoping to get into the good books of the ‘greatest power’ then (Britain and its then deputy sheriff the US). Always safer to bet on the biggest bully! Their weakening of the Russians earlier (which the British appreciated) also helped them gain entry to the ‘club’.
WW I started largely with this back drop, and resulted in about 8 million casualties with Russia, France, Prussia, and Austria-Hungary having more than 1 million casualties each, and the ‘British Empire’ just a tad below 1 million.
The result of this war was the weakening of all powers involved (except the US which officially stayed out till 1917 which was towards the end), and effectively started the beginning of the end of the European powers, and (luckily for many of us) the colonial era.
Towards the later part of WW I, the Balfour Declaration was one of the excuses used by Britain to occupy the Middle East and control the area. That and conflicting agreements with the French and Arabs to gain their support against the Ottoman Empire (fighting on the side of Prussia) were behind some of the biggest problems our world witness today – the Palestinian problem and the politics/wars of Middle East oil exemplified by the occupation of Iraq today.
The Balfour Declaration, openly addressed to Jewish financier Lord Rothschild was intended to draw the support of Jewish financiers around the world in the war against Prussia in exchange for carving a piece of land in Palestine for the creation of a state for the Jewish people. For those with less imagination, the Balfour Declaration is akin to Britain giving an undertaking to Wee Cho Yaw to occupy a piece of China so that the Wee clan in Singapore can return to stay there.
A Rothschild once said “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply”.
Such arrogance and perceived Jewish support of the ‘Allies’ coupled with the fact that Balfour was part Jew were likely reasons for the German’s utter dislike/suspicion of Jews after that (anti-Semitism in Europe was common from before Charlemagne and not likely to be the only reason).
After Prussia surrendered, the Versailles Treaty subjected Prussia to among others punitive war reparations of such unreasonable magnitude and doubtlessly intended to continue to keep the lid on Prussia, that John Maynard Keynes (famous economist whose views present day text-book academics only know selectively) representing the British Treasury in the treaty negotiations, resigned publicly in protest and predicted ominously that it would result in great dissatisfaction on the part of the vanquished (the same observations were made by others).
That plus the Great Depression of the 1930s formed the background for the next and greatest of all wars - WW II.
Hitler and Nazism were as much a result of WW I as cause of WW II. If the use of ‘I’ and ‘II’ is not telling enough, then Hitler’s use of 3rd Reich should.
To make things worse, before starting negotiations for the surrender, Prussia had thought that terms of no annexations and indemnities previously offered by the US as peace brokers would be kept. This is was not to be the case after they surrendered and it is not likely the Germans would have forgotten that till today.
The strategic and geopolitical context of WW II was no different for every key participant – control of markets and source of oil & raw materials critical for further growth and prosperity (Balfour’s so-called maintaining of ‘standard of living’).
This time, Japan joined the Germans. The reason: they were pissed they did not get their fair share of spoils in Asia after WWI.
This time America (with the 'smarter' British this time) again let the others fight it out and exhaust themselves before they joined in as ‘victors’ when the beginning of the end had already begun. For the most part of WW II and to the chagrin of the desperate East Europeans, they used various excuses to remain on the fringes and entered the ‘European theater’ only after the tide had turned on Germany in mid-1944. By then, the brunt of the war and casualties had already been borne by the East Europeans and Germans – about 40 million casualties (the British & Americans suffered less than 1 million casualties in the entire war).
Likewise, Asians were left to their own devices during the Japanese occupation until the atom bomb was deployed – by then more than 10 million Chinese and countless other Asians had died in the hands of Japan which thanks to the ‘bomb’ had close to 2 million casualties.
This approach combined with the resulting exodus of wealth & talent from everywhere to the US safe haven as result of the various conflicts elsewhere over the centuries resulted in the single super power order we have today.
We also see this ‘fomenting of conflict every where else but my own home’ approach in recent times in the Korean peninsula, Taiwan Straits, Middle East, Central Asia and Central Europe.
A reversal of this approach was also cited by Osama bin Ladin as a reason for his Sept 11 attacks - Osama's opinion is that the US should not be left to live comfortably at home while they sow turmoil elsewhere.
At the end of WW II, America and a weakened Britain needed Germany and Japan to stand in between them and Russia.
Unlike what some historical fools think, Russia was the one that won the war in Europe and therefore the new threat to the British & Americans.
For that reason and perhaps realizing the disastrous effects of Versailles that Keynes warned about, Germany got off this time with much smaller war reparation and the Marshall Plan.
Japan had better ‘luck’. It got away without needing to account seriously for its actions nor return stolen wealth and, according to some, for a share of the stolen wealth with the British/Americans.
Perhaps, like the Japanese, the Americans & British thought the other Asians are lesser beings for them to be bothered with that. Which is why Japan (unlike Germany) to this day remains arrogant and refuses to acknowledge its WW II misdeeds including the Nanking massacre where its soldiers raped and murdered an estimated quarter of a million Chinese in a 6 weeks frenzy, in many instances merely for fun or show of bravado as can be seen in photographs.
This ‘indebtedness’ and fear of Russia and the communist threat (real or otherwise), and not to mention their total lack of control of oil (have you heard of a Japanese or German oil company?) resulted in these nations remaining quietly subservient to the US and its interest throughout the ensuing Cold War.
Before the end of WW II, because of his economic insights and perhaps his ominous prediction the last time around (another indication why both wars were essentially one war), Keynes was asked to help draft a new economic world order on the part of the British.
Keynes suggested the setup of a global currency (to be known as Bancor) so that no country can be unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged.
It was an ideal the victorious politicians and their backers understood but would not accept. This resulted in Bretton Woods, and the use of the US Dollar as ‘de facto global reserve’ currency for the last 50 years.
Unlike Keynes, many present day half-baked economists seriously think today’s financial system is a perfect & fair system where all currencies are equally subject to the same rules which they think they understand (until you ask them to explain the likes of the Asian Financial Crisis and ‘irrational exuberance’).
This less than fair system was also the reason for Western Europe’s 40 year effort to create firstly the EU and then the Euro whose global effect we are seeing today.
France and Germany as big brothers of continental Europe since Charlemagme must surely be aware of the above history, and that they were at the short end of the stick for the turmoils of the last century.
The Euro and EU with Germany and France at its core now poses a new challenge to the Anglo-Saxon’s supremacy. We begin to see that recently with their opposition to the attack on Iraq. Bush’s people did not call Germany and France ‘Old Europe’ for no reason – he and his people are well aware of the history of the great wars and the heritage of Charlemagne.
Some quotes to contemplate with respect to the above:
If you will permit us to sacrifice your sons on the European battlegrounds, I promise you that this will be the final war — the war to end all wars — the war to make the world safe for democracy once and for all. – Woodrow Wilson before US joined WWI
I have said this before, but I will say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent to any foreign wars. – Franklin Roosevelt, campaign speech 1940.
"I have always said that I hoped if Great Britain were beaten in a war we should find a Hitler who would lead us back to our rightful place among nations." – Winston Churchill, letter to the Times
When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader. - Plato
CCK note: Plato was not incomplete. Some tyrants stir up wars in other people's home so that the latter will never get to grow peacefully and threaten their dominance.
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Support Kofi Annan
For those of us aware of world history/dynamics and events of the last few years, what the Americans and their mostly Anglo-Saxon allies are doing in Iraq is a throw back to times where the worst of human greed & selfishness were satisfied through a combination of the following:
- the bestial killing and subjugation of others to rob them of their wealth under various pretences as was common throughout history and exemplified by the last 500 years of colonial history. (Try guessing how many Iraqis had been killed by them this time around)
- the refusal to share and fomenting of conflicts among others while supplying/financing arms and keeping themselves a safe distance away with the aim of draining others of their wealth and resources before they can challenge their supremacy as exemplified by the 2 'world wars'.
The utter exhaustion of all the other nations while they remain relatively unscathed is what created the 'single super-power' world order they brag about today and which many present day fools believe is due to the greatness of their democratic or capitalist systems.
We can also witness similar workings today in the Korean peninsula, the Middle East, Taiwan Straits, central Europe and around the world.
As we all know, there is no great power today that can openly challenge their actions in Iraq. The world has few men with the combination of historical/global perspective and moral authority to call upon to bring some semblance of pressure to bear on these supremely greedy, arrogant and armed people.
Kofi Annan is perhaps the only one who can truly speak for the conscience of the entire world by virtue of his elected position as head of the United Nations which was indeed what he did.
For that reason, political machines in the United States are undertaking a concerted effort to discredit Kofi Annan, among others, blaming him for complicity in abusing the UN administered Iraqi Oil-for-Food program.
Aware of this campaign to erode Kofi Annan's moral authority, many nations and important people around the world had openly expressed their support for Kofi Annan.
Recent expressions of such support came from 2,700 UN staff and 70 Nobel Laureates. These people are telling us that the world should stand up for its lone moral voice.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4214401.stm)
So please forward this plea for like-minded people around the world to do the same by sending their e-mails supporting Kofi Annan to the United Nations at pubboard@un.org or add their support to this blog http://supportkofiannan.blogspot.com/
Historical notes:
1. Years before the start of World War I, a British politician by the name of Balfour was recorded to have suggested to an American official that their countries should start a war with Germany before it overtakes their countries for no reason other than 'to maintain their standard of living'!
During WWI, this same man was responsible for the so-called 'Balfour Declaration' that carved a piece of the Ottoman empire, which was fighting on the side of Germany, for the creation of the state of Israel and the plight of the Palestinians today.
2. 50 million lives perished in the 2 World Wars (this is the real holocaust) but Anglo-Saxon casualty was less than 1 million.
3. During World War II, Britain and the US stayed out of the main battlegrounds of Europe through most of the war by which time the Germans and East Europeans had already been exhausted by more than 30 million casualties. Only after that did the American & British 'heroes' went in to pick up the pieces.
4. By the time America 'saved' Asia from Japan on the cheap by way of the atomic bomb, China mostly and other Asian countries had lost well in excess of 10 million lives.
In WWI, Japan fought on the side of the 'Allies' but switched sides in WWII because the 'Allies' refused to give it what it wanted in Asia. So to ensure sufficient reward for Japan for joining its 'Cold War club', America accorded it favourable surrender terms that gave Japan the gall till today to refuse to apologize for any of its actions in Asia including indiscrimate massacres like that in Nanking where in excess of a quarter million Chinese were cold bloodedly slaughtered in 6 weeks. Today, Japan wants to sit in the UN Security Council as permanent member.
- the bestial killing and subjugation of others to rob them of their wealth under various pretences as was common throughout history and exemplified by the last 500 years of colonial history. (Try guessing how many Iraqis had been killed by them this time around)
- the refusal to share and fomenting of conflicts among others while supplying/financing arms and keeping themselves a safe distance away with the aim of draining others of their wealth and resources before they can challenge their supremacy as exemplified by the 2 'world wars'.
The utter exhaustion of all the other nations while they remain relatively unscathed is what created the 'single super-power' world order they brag about today and which many present day fools believe is due to the greatness of their democratic or capitalist systems.
We can also witness similar workings today in the Korean peninsula, the Middle East, Taiwan Straits, central Europe and around the world.
As we all know, there is no great power today that can openly challenge their actions in Iraq. The world has few men with the combination of historical/global perspective and moral authority to call upon to bring some semblance of pressure to bear on these supremely greedy, arrogant and armed people.
Kofi Annan is perhaps the only one who can truly speak for the conscience of the entire world by virtue of his elected position as head of the United Nations which was indeed what he did.
For that reason, political machines in the United States are undertaking a concerted effort to discredit Kofi Annan, among others, blaming him for complicity in abusing the UN administered Iraqi Oil-for-Food program.
Aware of this campaign to erode Kofi Annan's moral authority, many nations and important people around the world had openly expressed their support for Kofi Annan.
Recent expressions of such support came from 2,700 UN staff and 70 Nobel Laureates. These people are telling us that the world should stand up for its lone moral voice.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4214401.stm)
So please forward this plea for like-minded people around the world to do the same by sending their e-mails supporting Kofi Annan to the United Nations at pubboard@un.org or add their support to this blog http://supportkofiannan.blogspot.com/
Historical notes:
1. Years before the start of World War I, a British politician by the name of Balfour was recorded to have suggested to an American official that their countries should start a war with Germany before it overtakes their countries for no reason other than 'to maintain their standard of living'!
During WWI, this same man was responsible for the so-called 'Balfour Declaration' that carved a piece of the Ottoman empire, which was fighting on the side of Germany, for the creation of the state of Israel and the plight of the Palestinians today.
2. 50 million lives perished in the 2 World Wars (this is the real holocaust) but Anglo-Saxon casualty was less than 1 million.
3. During World War II, Britain and the US stayed out of the main battlegrounds of Europe through most of the war by which time the Germans and East Europeans had already been exhausted by more than 30 million casualties. Only after that did the American & British 'heroes' went in to pick up the pieces.
4. By the time America 'saved' Asia from Japan on the cheap by way of the atomic bomb, China mostly and other Asian countries had lost well in excess of 10 million lives.
In WWI, Japan fought on the side of the 'Allies' but switched sides in WWII because the 'Allies' refused to give it what it wanted in Asia. So to ensure sufficient reward for Japan for joining its 'Cold War club', America accorded it favourable surrender terms that gave Japan the gall till today to refuse to apologize for any of its actions in Asia including indiscrimate massacres like that in Nanking where in excess of a quarter million Chinese were cold bloodedly slaughtered in 6 weeks. Today, Japan wants to sit in the UN Security Council as permanent member.
Monday, March 14, 2005
A Funny Old World
(A poem from Letters to Editor dated 13 March 2005 in Khaleej Times.
Don't know this man but is quite sure he is a helluva man.
With him I gladly stand)
It’s a funny old world that we live in
Where its children keep sitting in the dirt
And the flies from the skies
Drink the tears in their eyes
The tears of their hunger and hurt
It’s a funny old world that we live in
When relief sent in thousands of tonnes
Goes in dribbles to those
Near to death’s last repose
And the rest to the men with the guns
It’s a funny old world that we live in
When the most powerful nations by far
Send men to the moon
Yet can’t fill the spoons
That will keep those in need where they are
So, how to resolve the position?
What cure can our leaders all seek?
One thing’s for sure
They’d soon find a cure
If they went without food for a week
Nothing to eat for a fortnight
A cup of stale water a day
If they went without food
Without being rude
They’d bloody well soon find a way
But it’s not only down to our leaders
It’s no use just making a fuss,
Their hands they may wring
But they won’t do a thing
Unless they are made to, by us.
— Jack Broom, Enfield, Middlesex, UK
Don't know this man but is quite sure he is a helluva man.
With him I gladly stand)
It’s a funny old world that we live in
Where its children keep sitting in the dirt
And the flies from the skies
Drink the tears in their eyes
The tears of their hunger and hurt
It’s a funny old world that we live in
When relief sent in thousands of tonnes
Goes in dribbles to those
Near to death’s last repose
And the rest to the men with the guns
It’s a funny old world that we live in
When the most powerful nations by far
Send men to the moon
Yet can’t fill the spoons
That will keep those in need where they are
So, how to resolve the position?
What cure can our leaders all seek?
One thing’s for sure
They’d soon find a cure
If they went without food for a week
Nothing to eat for a fortnight
A cup of stale water a day
If they went without food
Without being rude
They’d bloody well soon find a way
But it’s not only down to our leaders
It’s no use just making a fuss,
Their hands they may wring
But they won’t do a thing
Unless they are made to, by us.
— Jack Broom, Enfield, Middlesex, UK
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
All Politics is Local
Letter to Editor of Khaleej Times in response to article attached at bottom
All politics is local
9 March 2005
I REFER to the article ‘What Bush Got Right’ By Fareed Zakaria (KT, March 7). The writer may be right in saying that ‘All politics is local’ and it is the same for whichever part of the world we talk about. He, however, went on to attribute the exact opposite about the US and George Bush who he claims is out to do the entire world a favour with his various acts, thereby implying that Americans are a totally different set of people from the rest of the world, and whose interest is somehow above the ‘locals’.
The writer should perhaps apply the same rule he believes in for the US too. Perhaps, the various US actions around the world are really ‘local politics’ at play. In the case of Iraq, the US action was more to satisfy their local thirst for oil and local desire to control its supply and to line the wallets of their ‘local’ oil and arms companies.
Perhaps, we should be careful of people who apply one rule for some people, and another for others.
Or perhaps the fact that the writer is paid by a US company did make a difference.
Along the lines he quoted, ‘All writings are local’ too. In Fareed Zakaria’s case, he was perhaps writing to please his ‘local’ employers.
We fail our own ‘locals’ if we do not highlight the flaws in such selective ‘We are holier than thou’ opinions.
— CCK, Singapore
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/opinion/2005/March/opinion_March16.xml§ion=opinion&col=
What Bush got right
BY FAREED ZAKARIA
7 March 2005
EVENTS in the Middle East over the past few weeks have confirmed the theories of that great scholar of the region, Thomas (Tip) O’Neill. The late speaker of the House’s most memorable aphorism was "All politics is local." It’s true even of the politics of rage. As long-repressed societies in the Middle East open up, we are discovering that their core concerns are not global but local.
Most ordinary Arabs, it turns out, are not consumed by grand theories about the clash between Islam and the West, or the imperialism of American culture, or even the Palestinian cause. When you let the Lebanese speak, they want to talk about Syria’s occupation of their country. When Iraqis got a chance to congregate, they voted for a government, not an insurgency. When a majority of Palestinians were heard from, they endorsed not holy terror to throw Israel into the sea, but practical diplomacy to get a state.
Tomorrow, were the Egyptian Street to voice its views — I mean the real Egyptian Street, not President Mubarak’s state-controlled media — we would probably discover that its deepest discontent is directed not at the president of the United States, but at the president of Egypt. Perhaps Arabs and Muslims are not some strange species after all. It is their rulers who are strange.
The other noted political scientist who has been vindicated in recent weeks is George W. Bush. Across New York, Los Angeles and Chicago — and probably Europe and Asia as well — people are nervously asking themselves a question: "Could he possibly have been right?" The short answer is yes. Whether or not Bush deserves credit for everything that is happening in the Middle East, he has been fundamentally right about some big things.
Bush never accepted the view that Muslim extremism had its roots in religion or culture or the Arab-Israeli conflict. Instead he veered toward the analysis that the region was breeding terror because it had developed deep dysfunctions caused by decades of repression and an almost total lack of political, economic and social modernisation. The Arab world, in this analysis, was almost unique in that over the past three decades it had become increasingly un-free, even as the rest of the world was opening up. His solution, therefore, was to push for reform in these lands.
The theory did not originate with Bush’s administration. Others had made this case: scholars like Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, Thomas Friedman of The New York Times, the Arab intellectuals who wrote the United Nations’ now famous Arab Human Development Report and even this writer. (Three weeks after 9/11 I wrote an essay titled "Why Do They Hate Us?" that made this case.) These ideas were gaining some ground in the Arab world, especially after 9/11. But Bush’s adoption of them was absolutely crucial because he had the power to pressure the region’s regimes. Efforts to change the dynamics of the Middle East had always collapsed in the past as its wily rulers would delay, obstruct and obfuscate. Bush has pushed them with persistence and, increasingly, he is trying to build a broader international effort. The results might surprise.
Repressive regimes are often extremely fragile. Syria is the perfect example. Bashar al-Assad’s rule rests on the narrowest base of fear and coercion. His ruling clique, mostly coming from the country’s small Alawite sect, is well aware that it lacks support in their society. That’s why it is so easily rattled and why the events in Lebanon could snowball into something much, much bigger. The other Arab regimes are less fragile. Mubarak, while unpopular, is not despised. The Saudi royal family is more stable than many think. It uses money, marriage and connections-and yet more money-to create an elaborate patronage network that sustains it. But everywhere, there is pressure to change.
The Middle East would do well with incremental but persistent reform, as is taking place in Jordan, Qatar and Dubai. But in too many places, small, gradual reforms have been a smoke screen for doing nothing. Economic reforms are the most crucial because they modernise the whole society. But they are also the most difficult because they threaten the power and wealth of the oligarchies that run these countries. So far there has been more talk than action on this front.
People have often wished that the president had travelled more over the years. But Bush’s capacity to imagine a different Middle East may actually be related to his relative ignorance of the region. Had he travelled to the Middle East and seen its many dysfunctions, he might have been disheartened. Freed from looking at the day-to-day realities, Bush maintained a vision of what the region could look like.
But therein lies the danger. It is easier to imagine liberal democracy than to achieve it. Ronald Reagan imagined a Soviet Union that was politically and economically free. Twenty years later, except for the Baltic states, not one country of the former Soviet Union has achieved that. There have been more than 50 elections in Africa in the past 15 years-some as moving as those in Iraq, had we bothered to notice them-but only a few of those countries can be described as free. Haiti has had elections and American intervention, and still has foreign troops stationed there. Yet only a few of these elections have led to successful and free societies.
Every country, culture and people yearns for freedom. But building real, sustainable democracy with rights and protections is complex. In Lebanon, for example, the absence of Syria will not mean the presence of a stable democracy. It was the collapse of Lebanon’s internal political order that triggered the Syrian intervention in 1976. That problem will have to be solved, even after Syrian forces go home. In Iraq, the end of the old order has produced growing tendencies toward separatism and intolerance. Building democracy takes patience, deep and specific knowledge and, most important, the ability to partner with the locals.
If Bush is to be credited for the benefits of his policies, he must also take responsibility for their costs. Over the past three years, his administration has racked up enormous costs, many of which could easily have been lowered or avoided altogether. The pointless snubbing of allies, the brusque manner in which it went to war in Iraq, the undermanned occupation and the stubborn insistence (until last summer) on pursuing policies that were fuelling both an insurgency and anti-Americanism in Iraq-all have taken their toll in thousands of American and Iraqi lives and almost $300 billion.
Perhaps an even more lasting cost is the broad and deep shifts in public opinion against America around the world. Look at countries as disparate as Britain, Poland, Turkey and Japan, all allies of the United States. In every one of them, public views have changed significantly in the past few years, and being pro-American is now a political liability. Tony Blair, once the most popular British leader in decades, has fallen far in public esteem, largely because of his unflinching support for the Bush administration.
For most countries, the debate over Iraq was not really about Iraq. It was about how America would wield its enormous global power. And to many countries, it seemed that the Bush administration was doing it irresponsibly. On this front, the signs from Bush’s second term are heartening. In the Middle East, however, everything will depend on success on the ground. If, five years from now, Iraq, Afghanistan and perhaps an independent Palestine and a democratic Lebanon are thriving countries with modern political and economic systems, America will be honoured and respected-and the talk of anti-American terror will have dissipated considerably. If, on the other hand, these countries are chaotic and troubled-more like Central Asia than Central Europe-people there will blame America. Remember, all politics is local.
Fareed Zakaria is the Editor of Newsweek International ©2005 Newsweek, Inc.
All politics is local
9 March 2005
I REFER to the article ‘What Bush Got Right’ By Fareed Zakaria (KT, March 7). The writer may be right in saying that ‘All politics is local’ and it is the same for whichever part of the world we talk about. He, however, went on to attribute the exact opposite about the US and George Bush who he claims is out to do the entire world a favour with his various acts, thereby implying that Americans are a totally different set of people from the rest of the world, and whose interest is somehow above the ‘locals’.
The writer should perhaps apply the same rule he believes in for the US too. Perhaps, the various US actions around the world are really ‘local politics’ at play. In the case of Iraq, the US action was more to satisfy their local thirst for oil and local desire to control its supply and to line the wallets of their ‘local’ oil and arms companies.
Perhaps, we should be careful of people who apply one rule for some people, and another for others.
Or perhaps the fact that the writer is paid by a US company did make a difference.
Along the lines he quoted, ‘All writings are local’ too. In Fareed Zakaria’s case, he was perhaps writing to please his ‘local’ employers.
We fail our own ‘locals’ if we do not highlight the flaws in such selective ‘We are holier than thou’ opinions.
— CCK, Singapore
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/opinion/2005/March/opinion_March16.xml§ion=opinion&col=
What Bush got right
BY FAREED ZAKARIA
7 March 2005
EVENTS in the Middle East over the past few weeks have confirmed the theories of that great scholar of the region, Thomas (Tip) O’Neill. The late speaker of the House’s most memorable aphorism was "All politics is local." It’s true even of the politics of rage. As long-repressed societies in the Middle East open up, we are discovering that their core concerns are not global but local.
Most ordinary Arabs, it turns out, are not consumed by grand theories about the clash between Islam and the West, or the imperialism of American culture, or even the Palestinian cause. When you let the Lebanese speak, they want to talk about Syria’s occupation of their country. When Iraqis got a chance to congregate, they voted for a government, not an insurgency. When a majority of Palestinians were heard from, they endorsed not holy terror to throw Israel into the sea, but practical diplomacy to get a state.
Tomorrow, were the Egyptian Street to voice its views — I mean the real Egyptian Street, not President Mubarak’s state-controlled media — we would probably discover that its deepest discontent is directed not at the president of the United States, but at the president of Egypt. Perhaps Arabs and Muslims are not some strange species after all. It is their rulers who are strange.
The other noted political scientist who has been vindicated in recent weeks is George W. Bush. Across New York, Los Angeles and Chicago — and probably Europe and Asia as well — people are nervously asking themselves a question: "Could he possibly have been right?" The short answer is yes. Whether or not Bush deserves credit for everything that is happening in the Middle East, he has been fundamentally right about some big things.
Bush never accepted the view that Muslim extremism had its roots in religion or culture or the Arab-Israeli conflict. Instead he veered toward the analysis that the region was breeding terror because it had developed deep dysfunctions caused by decades of repression and an almost total lack of political, economic and social modernisation. The Arab world, in this analysis, was almost unique in that over the past three decades it had become increasingly un-free, even as the rest of the world was opening up. His solution, therefore, was to push for reform in these lands.
The theory did not originate with Bush’s administration. Others had made this case: scholars like Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, Thomas Friedman of The New York Times, the Arab intellectuals who wrote the United Nations’ now famous Arab Human Development Report and even this writer. (Three weeks after 9/11 I wrote an essay titled "Why Do They Hate Us?" that made this case.) These ideas were gaining some ground in the Arab world, especially after 9/11. But Bush’s adoption of them was absolutely crucial because he had the power to pressure the region’s regimes. Efforts to change the dynamics of the Middle East had always collapsed in the past as its wily rulers would delay, obstruct and obfuscate. Bush has pushed them with persistence and, increasingly, he is trying to build a broader international effort. The results might surprise.
Repressive regimes are often extremely fragile. Syria is the perfect example. Bashar al-Assad’s rule rests on the narrowest base of fear and coercion. His ruling clique, mostly coming from the country’s small Alawite sect, is well aware that it lacks support in their society. That’s why it is so easily rattled and why the events in Lebanon could snowball into something much, much bigger. The other Arab regimes are less fragile. Mubarak, while unpopular, is not despised. The Saudi royal family is more stable than many think. It uses money, marriage and connections-and yet more money-to create an elaborate patronage network that sustains it. But everywhere, there is pressure to change.
The Middle East would do well with incremental but persistent reform, as is taking place in Jordan, Qatar and Dubai. But in too many places, small, gradual reforms have been a smoke screen for doing nothing. Economic reforms are the most crucial because they modernise the whole society. But they are also the most difficult because they threaten the power and wealth of the oligarchies that run these countries. So far there has been more talk than action on this front.
People have often wished that the president had travelled more over the years. But Bush’s capacity to imagine a different Middle East may actually be related to his relative ignorance of the region. Had he travelled to the Middle East and seen its many dysfunctions, he might have been disheartened. Freed from looking at the day-to-day realities, Bush maintained a vision of what the region could look like.
But therein lies the danger. It is easier to imagine liberal democracy than to achieve it. Ronald Reagan imagined a Soviet Union that was politically and economically free. Twenty years later, except for the Baltic states, not one country of the former Soviet Union has achieved that. There have been more than 50 elections in Africa in the past 15 years-some as moving as those in Iraq, had we bothered to notice them-but only a few of those countries can be described as free. Haiti has had elections and American intervention, and still has foreign troops stationed there. Yet only a few of these elections have led to successful and free societies.
Every country, culture and people yearns for freedom. But building real, sustainable democracy with rights and protections is complex. In Lebanon, for example, the absence of Syria will not mean the presence of a stable democracy. It was the collapse of Lebanon’s internal political order that triggered the Syrian intervention in 1976. That problem will have to be solved, even after Syrian forces go home. In Iraq, the end of the old order has produced growing tendencies toward separatism and intolerance. Building democracy takes patience, deep and specific knowledge and, most important, the ability to partner with the locals.
If Bush is to be credited for the benefits of his policies, he must also take responsibility for their costs. Over the past three years, his administration has racked up enormous costs, many of which could easily have been lowered or avoided altogether. The pointless snubbing of allies, the brusque manner in which it went to war in Iraq, the undermanned occupation and the stubborn insistence (until last summer) on pursuing policies that were fuelling both an insurgency and anti-Americanism in Iraq-all have taken their toll in thousands of American and Iraqi lives and almost $300 billion.
Perhaps an even more lasting cost is the broad and deep shifts in public opinion against America around the world. Look at countries as disparate as Britain, Poland, Turkey and Japan, all allies of the United States. In every one of them, public views have changed significantly in the past few years, and being pro-American is now a political liability. Tony Blair, once the most popular British leader in decades, has fallen far in public esteem, largely because of his unflinching support for the Bush administration.
For most countries, the debate over Iraq was not really about Iraq. It was about how America would wield its enormous global power. And to many countries, it seemed that the Bush administration was doing it irresponsibly. On this front, the signs from Bush’s second term are heartening. In the Middle East, however, everything will depend on success on the ground. If, five years from now, Iraq, Afghanistan and perhaps an independent Palestine and a democratic Lebanon are thriving countries with modern political and economic systems, America will be honoured and respected-and the talk of anti-American terror will have dissipated considerably. If, on the other hand, these countries are chaotic and troubled-more like Central Asia than Central Europe-people there will blame America. Remember, all politics is local.
Fareed Zakaria is the Editor of Newsweek International ©2005 Newsweek, Inc.
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Petition Against Casino in Singapore
A minister said that whether Singapore will have a casino is a sign of its people's maturity. So if I disagree, he may say I am not mature enough. Does that mean I am really not mature?
But since really mature people don't really gamble (they have better things to do in life, no?), the minister probably imply that Singapore wants to take advantage of the less mature in Singapore and in the region (if not, then how to make money?).
Then imagine getting the majority (which should include the mature ones, by way of the minister's logic) to agree to take advantage of the less mature ones when they should be doing the exact opposite! What would that mean to mature me if I agree? What would that do to a country's soul if its mature people agree?
And if Singaporeans are mature enough to have a casino, wouldn't they be mature enough to manage the other more important aspects of their lives like their own wealth (and not be sucked up by high property prices & CPF) & sort out the liars from the not (without the tight control of the media & political arena)?
Perhaps people like me are not mature enough to figure out such contradictions. In that case, I am totally against anyone (mature or otherwise) agreeing to take advantage of people like me!
But since really mature people don't really gamble (they have better things to do in life, no?), the minister probably imply that Singapore wants to take advantage of the less mature in Singapore and in the region (if not, then how to make money?).
Then imagine getting the majority (which should include the mature ones, by way of the minister's logic) to agree to take advantage of the less mature ones when they should be doing the exact opposite! What would that mean to mature me if I agree? What would that do to a country's soul if its mature people agree?
And if Singaporeans are mature enough to have a casino, wouldn't they be mature enough to manage the other more important aspects of their lives like their own wealth (and not be sucked up by high property prices & CPF) & sort out the liars from the not (without the tight control of the media & political arena)?
Perhaps people like me are not mature enough to figure out such contradictions. In that case, I am totally against anyone (mature or otherwise) agreeing to take advantage of people like me!
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
The Best and the Worst of China
Comment in response to article
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/comment/2005/January/comment_January19.xml§ion=comment
Hi,
I refer to the article "The best and the worst of China" by Mohammed A. R. Galadari published a day after the death of Zhao Ziyang, and the following passage:
“China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record.”
This passage implied that China's present day economic growth was started by Jiang Zemin which is totally inaccurate. Of all the key actors you noted above and Zhao Ziyang, present China owes Deng Xiaoping the most. Zhao Ziyang, Jiang Zemin & Hu Jin Tao are nothing but a legacy of Deng and is noted as such by most analysts. In fact, Deng hand picked these men himself.
Credit for China’s opening since the early 80s is commonly attibuted to Deng and this is plain to anyone with an understanding of the history of this man & his country. His faculties had clearly deteriorated by the time of Tiananmen, and he made a not so good decision which he might not have made if he was younger.
But we should also appreciate the considerations that Deng had & the context that he was in.
Noted for his practical skills and sharp mind, Deng went through one of the most challenging periods of his country's 6,000 year old history and was closely involved in it.
In that period of his country’s history, the most important events & decisions had implications of life and death for many hundreds of thousands of Chinese, and the welfare of the bigger group must be foremost on his mind.
Deng was a big picture man whose strategic objective was to develop the country he loved & for which he sacrificed almost his entire life & family (he joined politics when he was a teenager and many of his family members were killed by the Kuomintang).
To Deng, as long as his strategic objective was in line, other issues were subservient to it. To him 50 years is nothing.
To him China was ready to accept the humiliation of being poor and back ward but will strive for the day they made good on his hope.
To him, the fate of a billion fellow citizens was not to be decided by the demands of a few thousand young kids who had not yet done anything for their country.
To him bending to the demands of a few thousand people all the time (or interest groups in western democratic jargon), a country of a billion mouths to feed will not stand.
To him a few thousand sacrifices for the good of the other billion is a small price to pay.
Today, half a billion Chinese enjoy a standard of living none of their forefathers had seen for hundreds of years - something that "free-wheeling democratic" Russia or India are not able to do. It was largely due to Deng Xiaoping.
That was and will always be the context and scale of things that Deng and all Chinese leaders deal with.
That must also be the scale on which they should be judged.
xxx
The best and the worst of China
By Mohammed A. R. Galadari
19 January 2005
DEAR readers, China often evokes mixed feelings. On the positive side, its growth in the past few decades is amazing, while on the negative side, its human rights record is reckoned as being one of the worst. Can development be at the expense of people's rights, is a pertinent question.
That China has no serious intention to change its negative image in respect of freedom and rights is clear from the assertion by Beijing yesterday that it has no regrets over the 1989 crackdown at Tiananmen Square. It was widely seen as one of the worst uncivilized acts by a government in living memory, when hundreds, even thousands, of youths had been crushed to death by rolling tanks on that fateful night on June 3-4. That was the way the government responded to a peaceful campaign for democracy and freedom by students. Ousted party leader, Zaho Ziyang, who died a day ago, had put the blame for the crackdown squarely on Deng Xiaoping, the top leader of the time.
Beijing's position is that it would not change its stand that the 1989 crackdown was correct. "Over the past 15 years since the incident, China's development has proved that this final judgment is correct", is how it explains the logic behind its clearly dictatorial stand. The argument is also that China's focus is more on economic development, and less on political reforms.
I do not ignore the fact that, in recent times, there were some half-hearted attempts to build a new image for China. One was the release of a set of new edicts on religious affairs, saying it would help better protect religious freedom. It gave protection to religious freedom and stressed that no one should be discriminated against for his or her religious beliefs. But, those who looked closely at the new edicts didn't see any serious improvements on the existing regulations. Another move was to grant more freedom to the media, a small step forward from a somewhat non-existent state. It wants the media to open up; but open up to the extent that it exposed business corruption, not political corruption. Who doesn't know political corruption is at the root of all corruptions?
China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record. But, change in respect of human rights and freedom is painfully slow, as is evident from the government's ham-handed approach to the Falungong religious sect, or to the large number of cases of capital punishment that are meted out often on not-very-strong grounds.
In Hu's scheme of things, it is "people first". He has placed renewed emphasis on the uplift of rural population who number some 800 million. He has also pledged to rein in corruption, but insists that western-style democracy will be a "dead end" for his country. He is ready to allow elections, but within his own party, and does not envisage a multi-party system.
Dear readers, China is seen as a counter-weight to the United States, for the future. That is the way it is growing; that is the way it is building its economic clout, not to speak of its military muscle. But, it has reached a stage in development — some 300 million people, matching the size of the United States, are middle class there — in which it should sincerely and seriously uphold Hu's own slogan, "People first". It essentially means it must set aside its mechanisms that trample on human rights and individual freedom. China has a great civilizational past. It has to have a great future as well, especially in terms of human freedom and liberty, the ideals of the modern world.
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/comment/2005/January/comment_January19.xml§ion=comment
Hi,
I refer to the article "The best and the worst of China" by Mohammed A. R. Galadari published a day after the death of Zhao Ziyang, and the following passage:
“China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record.”
This passage implied that China's present day economic growth was started by Jiang Zemin which is totally inaccurate. Of all the key actors you noted above and Zhao Ziyang, present China owes Deng Xiaoping the most. Zhao Ziyang, Jiang Zemin & Hu Jin Tao are nothing but a legacy of Deng and is noted as such by most analysts. In fact, Deng hand picked these men himself.
Credit for China’s opening since the early 80s is commonly attibuted to Deng and this is plain to anyone with an understanding of the history of this man & his country. His faculties had clearly deteriorated by the time of Tiananmen, and he made a not so good decision which he might not have made if he was younger.
But we should also appreciate the considerations that Deng had & the context that he was in.
Noted for his practical skills and sharp mind, Deng went through one of the most challenging periods of his country's 6,000 year old history and was closely involved in it.
In that period of his country’s history, the most important events & decisions had implications of life and death for many hundreds of thousands of Chinese, and the welfare of the bigger group must be foremost on his mind.
Deng was a big picture man whose strategic objective was to develop the country he loved & for which he sacrificed almost his entire life & family (he joined politics when he was a teenager and many of his family members were killed by the Kuomintang).
To Deng, as long as his strategic objective was in line, other issues were subservient to it. To him 50 years is nothing.
To him China was ready to accept the humiliation of being poor and back ward but will strive for the day they made good on his hope.
To him, the fate of a billion fellow citizens was not to be decided by the demands of a few thousand young kids who had not yet done anything for their country.
To him bending to the demands of a few thousand people all the time (or interest groups in western democratic jargon), a country of a billion mouths to feed will not stand.
To him a few thousand sacrifices for the good of the other billion is a small price to pay.
Today, half a billion Chinese enjoy a standard of living none of their forefathers had seen for hundreds of years - something that "free-wheeling democratic" Russia or India are not able to do. It was largely due to Deng Xiaoping.
That was and will always be the context and scale of things that Deng and all Chinese leaders deal with.
That must also be the scale on which they should be judged.
xxx
The best and the worst of China
By Mohammed A. R. Galadari
19 January 2005
DEAR readers, China often evokes mixed feelings. On the positive side, its growth in the past few decades is amazing, while on the negative side, its human rights record is reckoned as being one of the worst. Can development be at the expense of people's rights, is a pertinent question.
That China has no serious intention to change its negative image in respect of freedom and rights is clear from the assertion by Beijing yesterday that it has no regrets over the 1989 crackdown at Tiananmen Square. It was widely seen as one of the worst uncivilized acts by a government in living memory, when hundreds, even thousands, of youths had been crushed to death by rolling tanks on that fateful night on June 3-4. That was the way the government responded to a peaceful campaign for democracy and freedom by students. Ousted party leader, Zaho Ziyang, who died a day ago, had put the blame for the crackdown squarely on Deng Xiaoping, the top leader of the time.
Beijing's position is that it would not change its stand that the 1989 crackdown was correct. "Over the past 15 years since the incident, China's development has proved that this final judgment is correct", is how it explains the logic behind its clearly dictatorial stand. The argument is also that China's focus is more on economic development, and less on political reforms.
I do not ignore the fact that, in recent times, there were some half-hearted attempts to build a new image for China. One was the release of a set of new edicts on religious affairs, saying it would help better protect religious freedom. It gave protection to religious freedom and stressed that no one should be discriminated against for his or her religious beliefs. But, those who looked closely at the new edicts didn't see any serious improvements on the existing regulations. Another move was to grant more freedom to the media, a small step forward from a somewhat non-existent state. It wants the media to open up; but open up to the extent that it exposed business corruption, not political corruption. Who doesn't know political corruption is at the root of all corruptions?
China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record. But, change in respect of human rights and freedom is painfully slow, as is evident from the government's ham-handed approach to the Falungong religious sect, or to the large number of cases of capital punishment that are meted out often on not-very-strong grounds.
In Hu's scheme of things, it is "people first". He has placed renewed emphasis on the uplift of rural population who number some 800 million. He has also pledged to rein in corruption, but insists that western-style democracy will be a "dead end" for his country. He is ready to allow elections, but within his own party, and does not envisage a multi-party system.
Dear readers, China is seen as a counter-weight to the United States, for the future. That is the way it is growing; that is the way it is building its economic clout, not to speak of its military muscle. But, it has reached a stage in development — some 300 million people, matching the size of the United States, are middle class there — in which it should sincerely and seriously uphold Hu's own slogan, "People first". It essentially means it must set aside its mechanisms that trample on human rights and individual freedom. China has a great civilizational past. It has to have a great future as well, especially in terms of human freedom and liberty, the ideals of the modern world.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
The Wrath of the Idiots
Pls read report attached.
http://www.straitstimes.com.sg/sub/topstories/story/0,5562,294142,00.html?
According to some people 'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.' Whoever wrote that might have been thinking of places like Phuket. Clearly, the people that wrote such things are ignorant of the fact that the majority of the people that died in this disaster were poor and disadvantaged people living in villages in the poorest parts of Asia eeking out a living in the most honourable way I know of – hard work.
Further more, like our little critique in the Story of Nolah, a ‘Big Flood’ or in this case a ‘Big Wave’ is a rather crude and shot-gun approach to punish the immoral or the unjust given the limitless might often attached to the Gods by these idiots.
(Story of Nolah: http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html)
Such theories are what I call Idiot’s Theories. It is also proof that idiots also think alike – not only do great minds. So how do we tell the 2 groups apart? We do know that one group tends to enlighten and enrich, while the other tends to shock & awe us by doing the exact opposite.
I also wonder how come these idiots who call themselves ‘believers’ did not get any special instruction from the Gods (like our fella Nolah) to go save the good ones before the disaster struck. The fact that they were not ‘chosen’ to do such feats gives us reason to believe that they are not really in the Gods’ ‘good books’. Or may be the Gods did send them messages. Just that these people were just too stupid to be able to interpret those holy messages.
Either way, you believe the things these idiots say?
xxx
The wrath of god?
CAIRO - THE view that man provoked the quake with wanton behaviour was the subject of Friday sermons in Saudi Arabia and other religious commentaries.
'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity,' one commentator said on an Islamist Web site, 'is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.'
Mr Walid Tabtabai, a member of the Kuwaiti Parliament, said the earthquake was a message. 'We believe that what occurs in terms of disasters and afflictions is a test for believers and punishment for the unjust,' he wrote in a column in the newspaper Al Watan.
He was only one among clerics from all religions trying to make sense of Asia's tsunami disaster and its massive toll on humanity.
To many, the question uppermost on their minds was - How could God let this happen?
The earthquake and tsunami showed no favour. But whatever their religion, people throughout Asia's affected areas turned to their respective God to help them through the crisis. -- NEW YORK TIMES
http://www.straitstimes.com.sg/sub/topstories/story/0,5562,294142,00.html?
According to some people 'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.' Whoever wrote that might have been thinking of places like Phuket. Clearly, the people that wrote such things are ignorant of the fact that the majority of the people that died in this disaster were poor and disadvantaged people living in villages in the poorest parts of Asia eeking out a living in the most honourable way I know of – hard work.
Further more, like our little critique in the Story of Nolah, a ‘Big Flood’ or in this case a ‘Big Wave’ is a rather crude and shot-gun approach to punish the immoral or the unjust given the limitless might often attached to the Gods by these idiots.
(Story of Nolah: http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html)
Such theories are what I call Idiot’s Theories. It is also proof that idiots also think alike – not only do great minds. So how do we tell the 2 groups apart? We do know that one group tends to enlighten and enrich, while the other tends to shock & awe us by doing the exact opposite.
I also wonder how come these idiots who call themselves ‘believers’ did not get any special instruction from the Gods (like our fella Nolah) to go save the good ones before the disaster struck. The fact that they were not ‘chosen’ to do such feats gives us reason to believe that they are not really in the Gods’ ‘good books’. Or may be the Gods did send them messages. Just that these people were just too stupid to be able to interpret those holy messages.
Either way, you believe the things these idiots say?
xxx
The wrath of god?
CAIRO - THE view that man provoked the quake with wanton behaviour was the subject of Friday sermons in Saudi Arabia and other religious commentaries.
'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity,' one commentator said on an Islamist Web site, 'is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.'
Mr Walid Tabtabai, a member of the Kuwaiti Parliament, said the earthquake was a message. 'We believe that what occurs in terms of disasters and afflictions is a test for believers and punishment for the unjust,' he wrote in a column in the newspaper Al Watan.
He was only one among clerics from all religions trying to make sense of Asia's tsunami disaster and its massive toll on humanity.
To many, the question uppermost on their minds was - How could God let this happen?
The earthquake and tsunami showed no favour. But whatever their religion, people throughout Asia's affected areas turned to their respective God to help them through the crisis. -- NEW YORK TIMES
Monday, January 03, 2005
We See Them Everywhere .....
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-prisoners3jan03.story
A friend once told me that one key reason he adopted his 'new' religion was because people he knew who follow a particular book 'seem to turn out to be better'. I did not bother to say anything because of the following:
1. there were so many reported cases of paedophile by leaders of his religion. Apparently, 90% of places where such people 'practice' in the US is known to have such cases. Statistically, this cannot be considered normal or acceptable (for e.g. do you find 90% of homes in your neighbourhood where 'leaders' of the homes sexually abuse innocent kids under them?). It was obvious to me that my friend did not 'know' of such people.
2. People like me have met/heard of so much goodness around the world involving people of so many different followings that I see no statistical reason to believe that that particular book is any different from any other sources of human inspiration. The 'criminals' in the above report is one such inspiring example.....
xxx
A friend once told me that one key reason he adopted his 'new' religion was because people he knew who follow a particular book 'seem to turn out to be better'. I did not bother to say anything because of the following:
1. there were so many reported cases of paedophile by leaders of his religion. Apparently, 90% of places where such people 'practice' in the US is known to have such cases. Statistically, this cannot be considered normal or acceptable (for e.g. do you find 90% of homes in your neighbourhood where 'leaders' of the homes sexually abuse innocent kids under them?). It was obvious to me that my friend did not 'know' of such people.
2. People like me have met/heard of so much goodness around the world involving people of so many different followings that I see no statistical reason to believe that that particular book is any different from any other sources of human inspiration. The 'criminals' in the above report is one such inspiring example.....
xxx
Friday, December 31, 2004
Roll of the Asia Tsunami 2004
[People of Singapore]
(31 Dec) The Red Cross Society had received total donations of $4 million in cash and cheques.
The Singapore Heart Foundation (SHF), which successfully raised $2.2 million through its "Affairs of the Heart" charity show on Dec 26, now aims to raise more money for the tsunami victims with a repeat telecast of the show on Jan 1.
[Akira]
(31 Dec) Electronics and home appliance company, Akira, is donating about $300,000 worth of items, including 1,000 portable generators and 5,000 emergency lamps, to help rescue efforts in Sri Lanka.
[Eu Yan Sang]
(31 Dec) Chinese medicine company, Eu Yan Sang, is donating 24,000 large bottles of drinking water and 1,500 boxes of chicken essence to aid victims and rescuers through Mercy Relief
[StarHub]
(31 Dec) StarHub is donating $200,000 to help buy water purification tablets, surgical and sanitation supplies. Half of the money will be used to help Indonesian tsunami victims.
[Telcom United]
(31 Dec) Local telecommunications company Telcom United is providing $50,000 worth of IDD talk time for foreign workers to call home to Aceh, Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka.
[ComfortDelgro]
(31 Dec) Besides raising $50,000, taxi drivers and staff at ComfortDelGro Group yesterday helped deliver more than 300 boxes of food, clothing and medical supplies to various collection centres.
[US Government]
(31 Dec) US$35 million after UN officer Jan Egeland criticized western countries for being 'stingy'. The US quickly took that to mean them & promptly went into offensive by adding $20 mil to their original miserly US$15 million.
(1 Jan) When it was known that small Netherland (with 5% of US population) contributed $34 mil, the US increased theirs to $350 mil to avoid further embarassment. The Dutch was probably careful not to 'out-do' the US by crossing the $35 mil mark.
Contributions from round the world (as of 31 Dec):
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/124964/1/.html
Death toll (as of 31 Dec) :
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/124988/1/.html
Lie detector results:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tsunami/story/0,15671,1382457,00.html
(one of the reasons why you have to be careful with what governments say)
(31 Dec) The Red Cross Society had received total donations of $4 million in cash and cheques.
The Singapore Heart Foundation (SHF), which successfully raised $2.2 million through its "Affairs of the Heart" charity show on Dec 26, now aims to raise more money for the tsunami victims with a repeat telecast of the show on Jan 1.
[Akira]
(31 Dec) Electronics and home appliance company, Akira, is donating about $300,000 worth of items, including 1,000 portable generators and 5,000 emergency lamps, to help rescue efforts in Sri Lanka.
[Eu Yan Sang]
(31 Dec) Chinese medicine company, Eu Yan Sang, is donating 24,000 large bottles of drinking water and 1,500 boxes of chicken essence to aid victims and rescuers through Mercy Relief
[StarHub]
(31 Dec) StarHub is donating $200,000 to help buy water purification tablets, surgical and sanitation supplies. Half of the money will be used to help Indonesian tsunami victims.
[Telcom United]
(31 Dec) Local telecommunications company Telcom United is providing $50,000 worth of IDD talk time for foreign workers to call home to Aceh, Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka.
[ComfortDelgro]
(31 Dec) Besides raising $50,000, taxi drivers and staff at ComfortDelGro Group yesterday helped deliver more than 300 boxes of food, clothing and medical supplies to various collection centres.
[US Government]
(31 Dec) US$35 million after UN officer Jan Egeland criticized western countries for being 'stingy'. The US quickly took that to mean them & promptly went into offensive by adding $20 mil to their original miserly US$15 million.
(1 Jan) When it was known that small Netherland (with 5% of US population) contributed $34 mil, the US increased theirs to $350 mil to avoid further embarassment. The Dutch was probably careful not to 'out-do' the US by crossing the $35 mil mark.
Contributions from round the world (as of 31 Dec):
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/124964/1/.html
Death toll (as of 31 Dec) :
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/124988/1/.html
Lie detector results:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tsunami/story/0,15671,1382457,00.html
(one of the reasons why you have to be careful with what governments say)
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Help For Tsunami Victims
Hi all,
Here are the various pleas & efforts various people had forwarded to me the last hour. If you wish to help in collection or need us to collect from your place kindly include your contact details as comments to this blog, or contact me at 65-9731-6795.
1. Morgan FC member Stanley said:
Kavin & I will provide logistics to pick up as much as we can in our cars, you're invited to join us and help collect from those near your location, if you're free tonight.
2. E-mail from my ex-NUS mate Chi Keung:
Hi,
If you feel that you can do something to help the Tsunami victims, read on. If you are donating items required, I can help to transport the items to the collection point. I heard that Ananda Travel is one of the collection point, but I can't find any info on that.
Donations in Kind
They need:
1. Tents
2. Food (Pre-cooked or ready-to-eat meal packs)
3. Water Purification Tablets
4. Wheat Flour, rice, other staples
5. Drugs: Paracetamol, anti-biotics, wound dressing, suture material,disposable syringes, vitamins, and vaccinations for diarrhea, cholera andmalaria.
6. Intravenous infusions (saline and dextrose)
7. Portable generators
8. Clothes and blankets (sort into boxes or piles within box according toadult male, female, and children, infant). Please only include appropriateclothing. Nothing sleeveless, no impractical cast-offs as well (e.g.evening gowns, fur-lined jackets are not appropriate!)
What to do:
1. Pack the items into boxes clearly labeled FOOD, CLOTHES, BLANKETS,MEDICAL supplies etc.
2. Tell your friends to send items to COLLECTION POINTS (CP) listed below.
Sri Lanka High Commission
13th Floor Goldhill Plaza
Phone: 62544595 (Mr Ranjit)
***The items to be sent during 8.30am-7pm. They will open for at least ONEMONTH.
Sri Lanka Air
133 Cecil Street #13-02
Phone: 62236026 (Shyla from Sales Dept)
*** They are stopping collection by Thursday, and now only want FOOD &Medicine now.
Tisarana Buddhist Association
(has Welfare Service in Sri Lanka providingfree ambulance among other things, and a vocational center)
[Prefer clothes,blankets, tent, medicinal supplies].
90 Duku Road
Phone: 63456741 (Temple), 97884486 (Christopher Lim)
*** The items to be sent during 9.30am-6pm. Please send down within ONEWEEK, for they are sending out a container as soon as it fills.
Ananda Travel Agencies
Many locations, so more convenient. Also, since this is going to more than one country, may be better.
***Please do so by THIS SUNDAY.
Important! Pls CALL before going down to make sure they are open.
NTUC Fairprice
Supermarket retailer NTUC FairPrice invites all shoppers to chip in by buying S$10 food relief packagesto help tsunami victims in the region. These packages will be air flown by partner airline Cathay Pacific to Colombo later in the week. As of January 1, shoppers can also purchase food relief packages that will be sent to Aceh. Shoppers can also donate cash in donation tins placed at all NTUC outlets .
Donations in Cash
1. Customers of DBS Singapore can make their contribution via Internet Banking or DBS/POSB ATM
2. You can also write a cheque to Singapore Red Cross Society, 15 PenangLane, Singapore 2384863.
Please indicate 'Tidal Waves Asia' behind the cheque and include yourname, address and telephone number. The Singapore Red Cross Society will send you a receipt.
4. Donors can also go to the Singapore Red Cross Society to make adonation personally at the above address (from 9.30am to 5.45 pm onweekdays and 9.30 am to noon on Saturday)
More on http://www.channelnewsasia.com/killerwaves/donations.htm#sg
Pass the Message The POINT is to do something. Every little effort counts towards something. Start a positive chain of events, in addition to what the big govt organizations & NGOs are doing. The world is weeping, and we have the responsibility to lessen that suffering.
Here are the various pleas & efforts various people had forwarded to me the last hour. If you wish to help in collection or need us to collect from your place kindly include your contact details as comments to this blog, or contact me at 65-9731-6795.
1. Morgan FC member Stanley said:
Kavin & I will provide logistics to pick up as much as we can in our cars, you're invited to join us and help collect from those near your location, if you're free tonight.
2. E-mail from my ex-NUS mate Chi Keung:
Hi,
If you feel that you can do something to help the Tsunami victims, read on. If you are donating items required, I can help to transport the items to the collection point. I heard that Ananda Travel is one of the collection point, but I can't find any info on that.
Donations in Kind
They need:
1. Tents
2. Food (Pre-cooked or ready-to-eat meal packs)
3. Water Purification Tablets
4. Wheat Flour, rice, other staples
5. Drugs: Paracetamol, anti-biotics, wound dressing, suture material,disposable syringes, vitamins, and vaccinations for diarrhea, cholera andmalaria.
6. Intravenous infusions (saline and dextrose)
7. Portable generators
8. Clothes and blankets (sort into boxes or piles within box according toadult male, female, and children, infant). Please only include appropriateclothing. Nothing sleeveless, no impractical cast-offs as well (e.g.evening gowns, fur-lined jackets are not appropriate!)
What to do:
1. Pack the items into boxes clearly labeled FOOD, CLOTHES, BLANKETS,MEDICAL supplies etc.
2. Tell your friends to send items to COLLECTION POINTS (CP) listed below.
Sri Lanka High Commission
13th Floor Goldhill Plaza
Phone: 62544595 (Mr Ranjit)
***The items to be sent during 8.30am-7pm. They will open for at least ONEMONTH.
Sri Lanka Air
133 Cecil Street #13-02
Phone: 62236026 (Shyla from Sales Dept)
*** They are stopping collection by Thursday, and now only want FOOD &Medicine now.
Tisarana Buddhist Association
(has Welfare Service in Sri Lanka providingfree ambulance among other things, and a vocational center)
[Prefer clothes,blankets, tent, medicinal supplies].
90 Duku Road
Phone: 63456741 (Temple), 97884486 (Christopher Lim)
*** The items to be sent during 9.30am-6pm. Please send down within ONEWEEK, for they are sending out a container as soon as it fills.
Ananda Travel Agencies
Many locations, so more convenient. Also, since this is going to more than one country, may be better.
***Please do so by THIS SUNDAY.
Important! Pls CALL before going down to make sure they are open.
NTUC Fairprice
Supermarket retailer NTUC FairPrice invites all shoppers to chip in by buying S$10 food relief packagesto help tsunami victims in the region. These packages will be air flown by partner airline Cathay Pacific to Colombo later in the week. As of January 1, shoppers can also purchase food relief packages that will be sent to Aceh. Shoppers can also donate cash in donation tins placed at all NTUC outlets .
Donations in Cash
1. Customers of DBS Singapore can make their contribution via Internet Banking or DBS/POSB ATM
2. You can also write a cheque to Singapore Red Cross Society, 15 PenangLane, Singapore 2384863.
Please indicate 'Tidal Waves Asia' behind the cheque and include yourname, address and telephone number. The Singapore Red Cross Society will send you a receipt.
4. Donors can also go to the Singapore Red Cross Society to make adonation personally at the above address (from 9.30am to 5.45 pm onweekdays and 9.30 am to noon on Saturday)
More on http://www.channelnewsasia.com/killerwaves/donations.htm#sg
Pass the Message The POINT is to do something. Every little effort counts towards something. Start a positive chain of events, in addition to what the big govt organizations & NGOs are doing. The world is weeping, and we have the responsibility to lessen that suffering.
How I got Enblogged
This blog was created at the behest of my friend Christopher Lim without whose instigation I would not have bothered.
All postings before this are post-dated items from my writings before the start of this blog.
xxx
Chris said:
CCK, you can reach a wider audience by starting your own BLOG.
Go to this site to start your blog: http://www.blogger.com/start
Some examples of Malaysian blog can be found here:http://www.mycen.com.my/search/blog.html
All postings before this are post-dated items from my writings before the start of this blog.
xxx
Chris said:
CCK, you can reach a wider audience by starting your own BLOG.
Go to this site to start your blog: http://www.blogger.com/start
Some examples of Malaysian blog can be found here:http://www.mycen.com.my/search/blog.html
Reflections of Disaster
The happenings of the last few days are worth us spending some time to ponder and try to put things in perspective. If not anything else, some of us see them as lessons for and on humanity. A bit more comparison between the 2 phenomena in my previous mail below would hopefully be enlightening especially for those who a few years back thought that people warning them of the pending American, British and Australian designs to rob Iraq/Afghanistan were mere conspiracy theorists.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004/12/mobile-disaster-in-perspective.html
Like the African story on the ‘Hour of the Idiots’, it always come a time when idiots, no matter how much they try to avoid it, will have to face the truth. We should and must do that for we owe it not only to those before us who had helped build a better place for us but to those after us who can justifiably expect us to leave it no less than we found it. The 2 things we all should strive to leave behind in a state no worse off than we have are the environment and human ignorance. The latter is included only because of human’s capacity for supreme greed, arrogance and destruction that only awareness (the ‘other side’ of ignorance) can ameliorate. So here’s for the fools in us to think about.
Shock & Awe – Embedded Differently
When one event happened, early TV pictures showed the massive power of tidal waves sweeping everything aside or flinging people and things against anything firm enough to stand its ground. We watched in shock but strangely we felt no anger but renewed respect for the great powers of Nature. Later pictures of people crying and dead bodies strewn all over tugged on the sinews of our hearts and only the most insensitive ones can hold back those tears and shared sense of grieve for our fellow humans. In this event, there was nothing to hide, nothing can or need be hidden. As Nature made clear who is boss few dared to question.
When the other event happened, we were fed pictures provided by so-called embedded reporters who showed us awesome American & British firepower in what they arrogantly named Operation Shock & Awe, but none of the actual destruction to properties and lives they can only be intended for. They made not attempt to hide the fact that non-embedded reporters like those from Al Jazeera are taken care of surgically. Thus many of the less foolish among us had to rely on our powers of imagination to visualise the destruction and sufferings surrounding the deaths of the hundred of thousands of Iraqis. But instead of the shock & awe those Bush-like idiots intended, we had only anger and disgust for these people. Now we are told that those that dare to stand their ground against these idiots are mere terrorists.
Intelligence of Men of Science versus Men of War/Deceit
When one event happened, programs were shown explaining the workings of Nature, the tectonic plates behind the quakes & waves, and how only in June 2004, seismologists were warning governments in the region of the impending calamities that only the last few hundred years or so of modern science and our recognition of the powers of the logical and rational mind could have produced. Despite the lack of action by the governments involved to the warnings from the scientists, we felt enlightened and grateful for the work and intelligence of such men, and saw a chance that humanity can perhaps better survive such future disasters through the help of technology.
In the other event, despite years of ‘preparing world opinion’ the reasons for war were so lame that the whole non-Anglo-Saxon and non-Christian world, and America’s own weapons inspectors went against them. But they went ahead anyway, and pictures of great fireworks and demonstration of American/British technology were explained with much fanfare (as if it was some game show) by men in fatigue whose profession revolved around the art of war. Many governments went along with it. Some did it so quietly it was like walking around with their own face covered in self-conscious shame. Others supported loudly and with enthusiasm - like the Australians, a living proof of the theories of genetic inheritance (from the loud mouth hooligans that their criminal forefathers were). Despite that, millions of informed people around the globe went up ‘in arms’ in our little way and through the Internet and other un-embeddable media made sure that these liars do not get off scot-free. When the force of scrutiny and the world’s conscience were brought to bear on the Bush-like idiots, the excuse to kill & rob so many fellow humans was embedded lamely on faulty intelligence of men whose profession is the art of deception and deceit.
Mother of It All
One event created tidal waves of such magnitude that people had never seen anything like it before. An Indian man quoted by Los Angeles Times described what he heard and saw before his eyes as ‘they came like possessed beasts’.
The other event had the Americans proudly deploying a new bomb they created for Afghanistan & called ‘the mother of all bombs’ and promptly showed us the beast that possessed them.
Taunts & Contributions All Round
For one event, no government in the world had qualms extending their aid & help to the affected countries. But we do not see at its forefront the ‘greatest’ nation in the world. Without prodding, people from all walks of life instinctively came together to contribute in whatever way they could thus making the work of local governments and people from aid organizations like the Red Cross/Crescent just a little bit easier. Enemies left their animosities aside to help those in need as did Pakistan and India, and the Indonesian military and Aceh rebels. Few men will walk out of this event as lesser beings.
In the other event, the Bush-like idiots proudly pronounced that the world needed leadership against global terror that only it can provide but had to cajole, bribe and threaten others into joining them. They even used taunts like ‘you are either with us or you are against us’ and ‘those not in belong to the old world’. To rally their fellow idiots they even revived the millennia old idea of a crusade so entrancing to such idiots. If they had the gall to ask common folks on the ground in many parts of the world for contributions, they will likely get an earful. Many walked into this event as men and will walk out unable to exorcise the devil that will forever haunt them.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004/12/mobile-disaster-in-perspective.html
Like the African story on the ‘Hour of the Idiots’, it always come a time when idiots, no matter how much they try to avoid it, will have to face the truth. We should and must do that for we owe it not only to those before us who had helped build a better place for us but to those after us who can justifiably expect us to leave it no less than we found it. The 2 things we all should strive to leave behind in a state no worse off than we have are the environment and human ignorance. The latter is included only because of human’s capacity for supreme greed, arrogance and destruction that only awareness (the ‘other side’ of ignorance) can ameliorate. So here’s for the fools in us to think about.
Shock & Awe – Embedded Differently
When one event happened, early TV pictures showed the massive power of tidal waves sweeping everything aside or flinging people and things against anything firm enough to stand its ground. We watched in shock but strangely we felt no anger but renewed respect for the great powers of Nature. Later pictures of people crying and dead bodies strewn all over tugged on the sinews of our hearts and only the most insensitive ones can hold back those tears and shared sense of grieve for our fellow humans. In this event, there was nothing to hide, nothing can or need be hidden. As Nature made clear who is boss few dared to question.
When the other event happened, we were fed pictures provided by so-called embedded reporters who showed us awesome American & British firepower in what they arrogantly named Operation Shock & Awe, but none of the actual destruction to properties and lives they can only be intended for. They made not attempt to hide the fact that non-embedded reporters like those from Al Jazeera are taken care of surgically. Thus many of the less foolish among us had to rely on our powers of imagination to visualise the destruction and sufferings surrounding the deaths of the hundred of thousands of Iraqis. But instead of the shock & awe those Bush-like idiots intended, we had only anger and disgust for these people. Now we are told that those that dare to stand their ground against these idiots are mere terrorists.
Intelligence of Men of Science versus Men of War/Deceit
When one event happened, programs were shown explaining the workings of Nature, the tectonic plates behind the quakes & waves, and how only in June 2004, seismologists were warning governments in the region of the impending calamities that only the last few hundred years or so of modern science and our recognition of the powers of the logical and rational mind could have produced. Despite the lack of action by the governments involved to the warnings from the scientists, we felt enlightened and grateful for the work and intelligence of such men, and saw a chance that humanity can perhaps better survive such future disasters through the help of technology.
In the other event, despite years of ‘preparing world opinion’ the reasons for war were so lame that the whole non-Anglo-Saxon and non-Christian world, and America’s own weapons inspectors went against them. But they went ahead anyway, and pictures of great fireworks and demonstration of American/British technology were explained with much fanfare (as if it was some game show) by men in fatigue whose profession revolved around the art of war. Many governments went along with it. Some did it so quietly it was like walking around with their own face covered in self-conscious shame. Others supported loudly and with enthusiasm - like the Australians, a living proof of the theories of genetic inheritance (from the loud mouth hooligans that their criminal forefathers were). Despite that, millions of informed people around the globe went up ‘in arms’ in our little way and through the Internet and other un-embeddable media made sure that these liars do not get off scot-free. When the force of scrutiny and the world’s conscience were brought to bear on the Bush-like idiots, the excuse to kill & rob so many fellow humans was embedded lamely on faulty intelligence of men whose profession is the art of deception and deceit.
Mother of It All
One event created tidal waves of such magnitude that people had never seen anything like it before. An Indian man quoted by Los Angeles Times described what he heard and saw before his eyes as ‘they came like possessed beasts’.
The other event had the Americans proudly deploying a new bomb they created for Afghanistan & called ‘the mother of all bombs’ and promptly showed us the beast that possessed them.
Taunts & Contributions All Round
For one event, no government in the world had qualms extending their aid & help to the affected countries. But we do not see at its forefront the ‘greatest’ nation in the world. Without prodding, people from all walks of life instinctively came together to contribute in whatever way they could thus making the work of local governments and people from aid organizations like the Red Cross/Crescent just a little bit easier. Enemies left their animosities aside to help those in need as did Pakistan and India, and the Indonesian military and Aceh rebels. Few men will walk out of this event as lesser beings.
In the other event, the Bush-like idiots proudly pronounced that the world needed leadership against global terror that only it can provide but had to cajole, bribe and threaten others into joining them. They even used taunts like ‘you are either with us or you are against us’ and ‘those not in belong to the old world’. To rally their fellow idiots they even revived the millennia old idea of a crusade so entrancing to such idiots. If they had the gall to ask common folks on the ground in many parts of the world for contributions, they will likely get an earful. Many walked into this event as men and will walk out unable to exorcise the devil that will forever haunt them.
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Mobile Disaster in Perspective
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4126971.stm
25 December was supposedly the 'day of birth' of the Indo-Persian Sun-God Mithra (at least as celebrated in that area) for more than 1,000 years before it was ‘co-opted’ less than 2,000 years ago as Christmas day by the then 'new' Roman Church for their ‘new’ idol. Of course their current ‘fans’ are usually unaware of that and call Mithra’s worshippers derogatorily as ‘pagans’. In historic term, it was just a ‘new dog old trick’ thing.
This year, a few hours after that day, a massive quake the size of 9 on the Richter scale caused massive destruction & death around the Bay of Bengal.
US President George W Bush (my favorite 21st century idiot) offered aid to affected nations and expressed sorrow for the "terrible loss of life and suffering". To see if he is really sincere, I’ll like to see if Haliburton rushes to help ‘re-construct’ the affected places. If 10,000 dead is a ‘terrible loss of life & suffering’ to even a Bush-like idiot, we can imagine what they think of themselves once we make the following comparison:
Death toll from the biggest quake in the last 40 years: upwards of 10,000
Death toll in Iraq involving the most 'powerful' nation in the last 40 years: upwards of 200,000 (from the last 2 ‘outings’).
Any difficulty seeing why those Bush-like idiots are so arrogant? They think they can out-whack Nature and thus deserve a place almost on par with the Gods. Perhaps they accept to be a tad lower only because they compare their actions to that in the story of 'Nolah'.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
To me they are all disasters of Nature except that some of them walk on legs and are mobile disaster generating machines. What great 'creations' those Bush-like idiots!
25 December was supposedly the 'day of birth' of the Indo-Persian Sun-God Mithra (at least as celebrated in that area) for more than 1,000 years before it was ‘co-opted’ less than 2,000 years ago as Christmas day by the then 'new' Roman Church for their ‘new’ idol. Of course their current ‘fans’ are usually unaware of that and call Mithra’s worshippers derogatorily as ‘pagans’. In historic term, it was just a ‘new dog old trick’ thing.
This year, a few hours after that day, a massive quake the size of 9 on the Richter scale caused massive destruction & death around the Bay of Bengal.
US President George W Bush (my favorite 21st century idiot) offered aid to affected nations and expressed sorrow for the "terrible loss of life and suffering". To see if he is really sincere, I’ll like to see if Haliburton rushes to help ‘re-construct’ the affected places. If 10,000 dead is a ‘terrible loss of life & suffering’ to even a Bush-like idiot, we can imagine what they think of themselves once we make the following comparison:
Death toll from the biggest quake in the last 40 years: upwards of 10,000
Death toll in Iraq involving the most 'powerful' nation in the last 40 years: upwards of 200,000 (from the last 2 ‘outings’).
Any difficulty seeing why those Bush-like idiots are so arrogant? They think they can out-whack Nature and thus deserve a place almost on par with the Gods. Perhaps they accept to be a tad lower only because they compare their actions to that in the story of 'Nolah'.
http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html
To me they are all disasters of Nature except that some of them walk on legs and are mobile disaster generating machines. What great 'creations' those Bush-like idiots!
Monday, December 27, 2004
Jingle Bells
I received a mail from a site asking people to 'turn on their creative juices' and create/submit their own Christmas jingles. I did not submit the below to the site as it required another round of registration.
This is in Hanyu Pin Yin & to be sung to the tune of ‘Jingle Bells'.
Note: in Mandarin Christmas is known as 'Sheng Dan' which also sounds like 'laying eggs'.
(chorus)
Wo sheng dan, ni sheng dan
Wo men lai sheng dan
Ni yi li, wo yi li, da jia sheng ji li
Ren ni bu yao sheng, fan er yao sheng dan
Ni shuo hao xiao bu hao xiao?
Tong, tong yao sheng dan…
Hey! (chorus again)
This is in Hanyu Pin Yin & to be sung to the tune of ‘Jingle Bells'.
Note: in Mandarin Christmas is known as 'Sheng Dan' which also sounds like 'laying eggs'.
(chorus)
Wo sheng dan, ni sheng dan
Wo men lai sheng dan
Ni yi li, wo yi li, da jia sheng ji li
Ren ni bu yao sheng, fan er yao sheng dan
Ni shuo hao xiao bu hao xiao?
Tong, tong yao sheng dan…
Hey! (chorus again)
Thursday, December 23, 2004
Amazing!
Hi,
(The mail below is) Amazing! Before anyone thinks there's anything special with number 6, try the same with numbers 3, 8, or 9, or if with your left hand/leg. The morale of this is.... may be the below may help.
Happy Dong Zhi, Happy Diwali, Happy Saturnalia, Happy Novo Hel, Happy Yule, Happy Christmas. They all sound so different but you know what's common among them and which event is merely a 'hitch hiker'?
While you ponder, I will be short & simple: happy winter solstice to all.
As if it matters to people like me who stays near the Equator. But what the heck…
This is a series of quiz questions I gave my young nieces a week ago:
1. Why is polar bear white? I got the answer straight away.
2. Why is arctic fox white? Another fast reply
3. Why is Santa white? They kept quiet.
That’s the logical mind at work. Of course, that’s until some adult fools start mucking around with them in the name of ‘teachings’.
Rgds
CCK
xxx
Dear Friends
Wishing you a wonderful Holiday Seasons and Blessed Chistmas.
Right Brain vs. Left Brain
While sitting at your desk, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles. Now, while doing this, draw the number "6" in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction and there's nothing you can do about it. This WILL drive you crazy. Enjoy!
Warmest regards,
Christopher Leong
(The mail below is) Amazing! Before anyone thinks there's anything special with number 6, try the same with numbers 3, 8, or 9, or if with your left hand/leg. The morale of this is.... may be the below may help.
Happy Dong Zhi, Happy Diwali, Happy Saturnalia, Happy Novo Hel, Happy Yule, Happy Christmas. They all sound so different but you know what's common among them and which event is merely a 'hitch hiker'?
While you ponder, I will be short & simple: happy winter solstice to all.
As if it matters to people like me who stays near the Equator. But what the heck…
This is a series of quiz questions I gave my young nieces a week ago:
1. Why is polar bear white? I got the answer straight away.
2. Why is arctic fox white? Another fast reply
3. Why is Santa white? They kept quiet.
That’s the logical mind at work. Of course, that’s until some adult fools start mucking around with them in the name of ‘teachings’.
Rgds
CCK
xxx
Dear Friends
Wishing you a wonderful Holiday Seasons and Blessed Chistmas.
Right Brain vs. Left Brain
While sitting at your desk, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles. Now, while doing this, draw the number "6" in the air with your right hand. Your foot will change direction and there's nothing you can do about it. This WILL drive you crazy. Enjoy!
Warmest regards,
Christopher Leong
Thursday, December 02, 2004
Where Heroes Cometh...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4051755.stm
Forgotten hero of Bhopal's tragedy
By Faisal Mohammad Ali
BBC Hindi service, in Bhopal
Twenty years after the toxic gas leak at Bhopal in central India, BBC News reports on how casualties could have been much worse.
The daily express had been seen off from Bhopal and deputy station superintendent Ghulam Dastagir took charge of the night shift.
----
This 'forgotten hero' was created by the greed of an American company called Union Carbide. Of course, it was people and not a company that was involved but no one knows who/where the people that profited from the 'low cost' operation or caused the event are. That's the beauty of capitalism and the free market.
Heroes often rise out of great natural disasters or actions of supreme idiots (at the expense of many/other's innocent lives). And it seems a lot 'nicer' to talk about them than those sacrificed. Perhaps it is better to numb the fools among us than to enlighten them.
The same goes with the American 'heroes' fighting for Iraqi freedom you read about in some papers nowaday...
Forgotten hero of Bhopal's tragedy
By Faisal Mohammad Ali
BBC Hindi service, in Bhopal
Twenty years after the toxic gas leak at Bhopal in central India, BBC News reports on how casualties could have been much worse.
The daily express had been seen off from Bhopal and deputy station superintendent Ghulam Dastagir took charge of the night shift.
----
This 'forgotten hero' was created by the greed of an American company called Union Carbide. Of course, it was people and not a company that was involved but no one knows who/where the people that profited from the 'low cost' operation or caused the event are. That's the beauty of capitalism and the free market.
Heroes often rise out of great natural disasters or actions of supreme idiots (at the expense of many/other's innocent lives). And it seems a lot 'nicer' to talk about them than those sacrificed. Perhaps it is better to numb the fools among us than to enlighten them.
The same goes with the American 'heroes' fighting for Iraqi freedom you read about in some papers nowaday...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)