Happy Independence Day India! Its 67 Years of freedom!

Fellow Indians, 

We are Indians and nothing but Indian.

An Indian is an Indian is an Indian, period.

We are Adivasis, Atheists, Bahais, Bos, Buddhists, Chrsitians, Dalits, Hindus, Jains, Jewish, Muslim, Sikhs, Tribals, Zoroastrians and every possible grouping. We are Brown, Black, White, Yellow and green with envy and phir bhi dil hai Hindustani (our heart is Indian).

Our Motherland is represented by every race, nationality, ethnicity, language, culture and religion. We see God as one, none and many; and in every form; male, female, genderless and non-existent, being and non-being, nameless and with innumerable names.

We are proud of our heritage - a multi-faith, multi-cultural, multi-regional and multi-linguistic society, where we have come to accept and respect every which way people have lived their lives. For over 5000 years, India has been a beacon of pluralism - it has embraced Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Baha’i and Zoroastrianism to include in the array of the indigenous religions; Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism.  

We may want to consciously start thinking and acting as one people, one people within a nation and a community and one people globally. It’s like home when we are conflict free.  I do hope each one of us purges any bias towards the other, there is joy in being free from ill-will. Try to be free from it this day forward… free from anything that prevents you from being a part of the whole.

Our combined philosophies believe in one world ; Hinduism describes the world as Vasudaiva Kutumbukum, the whole world is one family, the idea of Ek Onkar(one) in Sikhism, you are all created from the same couple as Quraan puts it and Jesus embraced every one regardless of who any one is... similar philosophies are grounded in all our religions.

A few don't follow their own heritage and resort to theivary, loot, murder, terrorism, rioting, rapes, infanticide and other evils that destroy the fabric of the society,  but a majority of every group goes about their own way, living their life with struggles and ease and don't even bother others. We should build upon the 99% of population and not on the less than 1% that does not follow any principles.

On this day, and every day from here forward, make a pledge to yourselves to talk about in terms of we Indians - and not Malyalee, Gujarati, Bengali.... or Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Isaee. Don't expect others to jump and say the same, give them the time and if you are consistent for at least a year, you will see others emulating you.

India led the way to the freedom movement, since 1947 every country has been liberated from colonialism. Indian democracy is a shining example to the world, where the people have peacefully transferred the powers. Indians are inherently secular and economically capitalistic. They believe in "live-and-let-live" life style, which is the essence of capitalism.

Through the years we have expressed the highest degree of maturity on handling extreme situations; the more divergent opinions we hear, the larger our heart grows, the bigger our embrace would be and we can cushion more differences. Let’s continue to honor the concept that there is always another side to the story, as finding the truth is our own responsibility. I am proud of my heritage and am proud to be an Indian-American.

Click and enjoy:

Our National Anthem National Anthem 2 Twenty Patriotic songs 

Jai Hind

Mike Ghouse

Committed to cohesive societies
www.MikeGhouse.net
Please visit for more details about India. http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/

PATRIOTIC SONGS

• Vande Mataram - AR Rahman
• Vande Mataram
• Sarfaroshi ki Tamanna ab
• Saray jahan say achha -1
• Saray Jahan say achha - lata
• Mere Desh Ki Dharti
• Mera rangde basanti chola
• Kar chalay hum fida,
• Jahan Daal Daal par sone
• Hum laye hain toofan say kishti
• Hai preet jahan ki reet sada
• Ganga Meri Maa ka Naam
• Apni azadi ku hum hargiz
• Apni Azaadi ko hargiz hum
• ai watan ai watan, tujh ko
• Ai mere pyaare watan,
• Aao bachcho tumheien sire
• A jo des hai tera - Shahrukh
• A desh hai veer jawanon ka

MikeGhouse is committed to building a Cohesive Societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. He is a professional speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, civic affairs, Islam,India, Israel, peace and justice. Mike is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he writes weekly at Dallas Morning News and regularly atHuffington post, The Smirking Chimp and several other periodicals. His daily blog iswww.TheGhousediary.com

The Indosphere: Should we trust Made in India?

SHOULD WE TRUST INDIANS?
URL - http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-indosphere-should-we-trust-made-in.html


I have been planning to do my bypass surgery in India, one of the questions I am answering frequently is the expression of doubt about Indian Doctors. My head hangs in shame that my fellow Indians are expressing this.

My counter is, I am an Indian, and I am on par if not excel than most people in my field (Pluralism discourse or Management Consulting) - how can I even underestimate my fellow Indians? Whether the Doctor is in India or here in the US, he or she will be the same doctor. We may have greater tools here, but the the care would be the same.

This is something we need to seriously think about, and ask fellow Indians - if they are good in what they do,  then we need to ask them, if they were to do the same job in Bangalore, should we discount them and their work because they are in India?

It is time for us to think about this.

Jai Hind



Mike Ghouse
http://MikeGhouseforIndia.blogspot.com

The Indosphere

Made outside India

As growth slows and reforms falter, economic activity is shifting out of India

Aug 10th 2013 | COLOMBO, DUBAI AND MUMBAI |From the print edition

INDIA’S diaspora of 25m people is something to behold. In colonial times Indian labourers and traders spread across the world, from Fiji to the Caribbean. A second wave of Indians left between the 1970s and mid-1990s, when the economy was in a semi-socialist rut. Migrant workers rushed to the Persian Gulf and South-East Asia, then booming. Educated folk and entrepreneurs fled to the rich world. Plenty struck gold, including engineers in Silicon Valley and Lakshmi Mittal, boss of ArcelorMittal, a giant steel firm. Often they now have little to do with India beyond sending cash to relatives and groaning as the once-vaunted economic miracle fades.

Yet alongside this distant diaspora, a network of people and places is more directly engaged with India’s economy. Its most conspicuous element is the plutocrat who owns firms in India, but like his Russian and Chinese peers shops in Paris, educates his children in America and Britain and sometimes has foreign citizenship: Cyrus Mistry, the boss of Tata Sons, India’s biggest firm, has an Irish passport. At the network’s core, however, is not the gilded elite but offshore hubs, including Dubai and Singapore, often with sizeable Indian populations and with their own economic strengths.

The idea that some things are better done abroad is hardly new. Hong Kong was a gateway to imperial and then Red China. In 1985 Yash Chopra, an Indian film-maker, led a trend of shooting Bollywood “dream sequences”—in which the hero and heroine sing amid meadows and snowy crags—in Switzerland. The Alps were easier, cheaper and safer than the more familiar location of Kashmir.

Film buffs now view Swiss dream-sequences as cheesy, but India’s big offshore hubs are more in fashion than ever. They present a mirror image of India’s red tape, weak infrastructure and graft. Dubai is a prime example. For long-haul flights Indians prefer its airline, Emirates, to their own. More than 40% of long-haul journeys from India go via a non-Indian hub, often in the Gulf. Indian airports no longer make grown men cry (Delhi’s is first rate), but few foreign airlines want to make them their base. Indian planes are usually serviced in Dubai, Malaysia and Singapore, reflecting a history of penal taxes in India and high customs duties on imported spare parts.

A stroll round Dubai’s gold souk, a glittering warren of shops and discreet offices, housing bullion worth $3 billion-4 billion, points to another specialism—trading jewellery as well as precious stones and metals. A third of demand is from India, reckons Chandu Siroya, one of the market’s big participants. Indians go to Dubai to avoid taxes at home and because they trust its certification and inspection regime.

Dubai’s ports, air links and immigration rules also make it a better logistical base than India. Dawood Ibrahim, a Mumbai mafia don, ruled from Dubai by “remote control” before eloping to Pakistan in 1994. Since those wild days legitimate Indian firms have thrived in Dubai. Dabur, which makes herbal soaps, oils and creams, runs its international arm from there. Dodsal, which spans oil exploration in Africa to Pizza Huts in Hyderabad, is based in the emirate. Its boss, Rajen Kilachand, moved from Mumbai in 2003. “Dubai is a good place to headquarter yourself,” he says, adding that a “Who’s Who” of Indian tycoons has a presence. Dubai is gaining traction in finance, too. Rikin Patel, the chief executive of Que Capital, an investment bank, says Indian firms are raising debt in Dubai to avoid sky-high interest rates at home.

Treasure Island

About 5,000km (3,000 miles) south of Dubai lies Mauritius, an island so beautiful that Mark Twain said God had modelled heaven on it. About half its people are descended from labourers brought from India when Britain ruled both places. It is the main conduit for foreign investment into India with 30-40% of the stock of foreign capital sitting in funds domiciled in the island. A 1982 tax treaty allows investors using Mauritius to pay tax at the island’s rate (which, in practice, is zero), not the Indian rate. Foreigners also like the stability of Mauritius’s rules and its army of book-keepers and administrators. Many investors also use “P-Notes”—a kind of derivative with banks that gives them exposure to Indian shares without having the hassle of directly owning them.

Sri Lanka has testy relations with India, but Colombo is a vital port. About 30% of containers bound for India go via intermediate hubs fed by small vessels, either because big shipping lines do not want to deal with India’s customs regime or because their ships are too big for the country’s ports. About half of this trans-shipment business happens in Colombo. Its importance could increase now that a big extension to the port there has just opened. The project was funded by a Chinese firm probably too polite to admit that its investment is partly based on the idea that India’s ports will never be world-class.

A roll of the dice

Sri Lanka also wants to develop a casino industry. Gambling is illegal in almost all India, so people use offshore bookies or the internet. James Packer, an Australian business dynast with a gambling empire in Macau, is said to be considering creating a casino resort in Colombo aimed at attracting Indian high rollers.

The largest hub for Indian trade is probably Singapore. It is the centre for investment banking, which thrives offshore, owing to the tight regulation of India’s banks and debt markets. Reflecting this, the global exposure to India of Citigroup and Standard Chartered, the two foreign banks busiest in India, is 1.9 times the size of their regulated Indian bank subsidiaries.

More: http://www.economist.com/news/international/21583285-growth-slows-and-reforms-falter-economic-activity-shifting-out-india-made-outside

Dr. Amartya Sen Won’t apologize for Modi remarks

URL- http://theghousediary.blogspot.com/2013/07/dr-amartya-sen-wont-apologize-for-modi.html

It was exciting to read a part of the interview of Dr. Sen about 10:30 PM tonight, Friday the 26^th of July 2013. The rest of the interview will be published by Times of India on Sunday. 

Dr. Amartya Sen and Mike Ghouse at SMU

Most people appreciate when some one speaks out against the atrocities of the majorities, powerful dictators, monarchs and bullies. The politically motivated Hindu, Muslim and Christian men and women in particular appreciate it,  if it favors them.

My Hindus friends have rejoiced every time I have routinely stood up for them (incomplete list at: http://standingupforothers.blogspot.com/2012/04/standing-with-hindus.html ), but won't appreciate if a Hindu Dr. Amartya Sen does the same. 

Let me assure you this,  the good people outnumber all others 95:5, eventually  some one or the other from the majority, be it in India, America, Bolivia or South Africa, and even from Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Christians and Buddhist speaks up for the rights of the deprived, disadvantaged, women, minorities and the weak. God of all creation makes sure his creation has boundaries and has enough peace makers to prevent the world from total annihilation. Bhagvad Gita is clear, "Whenever there is adharma, God will bring about some one to restore Dharma" and Quran beefs it up, "To every tribe, every community and every nation God sends his peace makers to keep peace."

The more people speak up, the better the world would be. So, please do your part.
This morning I defended Dr. Sen’s action with a few friends (appended below) and now, when I read the partial interview, it caused me to go searching on my blog of the similar thoughts I have struggled with. 

I have consistently advocated that the peace is the responsibility of the majority; indeed, the civility of a nation is determined by how it treats its women, children, disadvantage, the weak and the minorities. It is in the interest of the nation, particularly the responsible men and women from the political, civic or religious majorities to speak up. It is in everyone's interest for every one to walk well together and not limp.Two of the statements, I wrote resonate with Dr. Amartya Sen’s words

On March 15, 2013, a press release was sent and was published in Bangladeshi News papers and at www.WorldMuslimCongress.com , this was also a part of my speech at Bangladesh Human rights organization in Dallas.

 “The success of a nation depends when her citizens feel secure; in this case, it is   the duty of the state to ensure the safety of Hindus, Buddhist, Shia, Ahmadiyya, Christian and other minorities.

It is also the obligation of the Bangladeshi majority to continue to speak up against the brutal treatment of fellow Bangladeshis who are Hindu. Indeed, the safety of a community is the responsibility of the majority.”
(URL - http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2013/03/muslims-condemn-brutal-attacks-on.html )

The Daily Times of Pakistan published my piece on Imran Khan, and I wrote, “Humanity in general and Muslims in particular are guided to stand up for justice. Only the civility of majority can change things. Minorities do not have a voice in Pakistan and they live on with apprehensions. The Hindu parents worry when their daughter will be abducted and forced to convert or when the Ahmadiyya girl student will be kicked out of school or their graves are desecrated, Shias ordered out of the bus and shot point blank and Christians will be framed with blasphemy charges. Societies are judged by how they treat their minorities, women and children. Good Pakistanis are letting bad things happen in their names.”

(URL - http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2013%5C05%5C08%5Cstory_8-5-2013_pg3_5 )

A note came from a friend, “What irked me was his (Dr. Sen) comment on Modi not doing enough for the minorities.” And, “Sen does not address those issue but more interested in bad mouthing Modi on minority issues because it is a very popular and sophisticated issue.” 

My response was, “I must add that collectively different Indians have to speak on different topics - including far and against to bring different angles to the fore - Dr. Sen has picked one that he probably feels has not been given enough attention. Each one of us has to focus on many strands of democracy.”

Glad to see a positive response about democracy from my friend later.

Won’t apologize for Modi remarks, Amartya Sen says

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Wont-apologize-for-Modi-remarks-Amartya-Sen-says/articleshow/21380639.cms?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

MUMBAI: Even as the firestorm over Amartya Sen's remarks about Narendra Modi refuses to die down, the Nobel-winning economist said he had nothing to apologize for saying that he did not wish to see the Gujarat chief minister become India's next Prime Minister.

In an exclusive interview to TOI (read the full interview on Sunday), Sen pointed to his fundamental right to raise such issues and also clarified that it was his duty as a member of the majority community to speak up about the fears of minorities.

"I am not apologizing for the statement on Modi," he said, while explaining that "as an Indian citizen I am very worried that we're not doing enough on many things in public discourse, that we're not raising the right viewpoints on several issues."

'Gujarat model not good'

Defending his remarks on Gujarat CM, Nobel-winning economist Amartya Sen told TOI, "I've tried to point to this when it kept being brought up about why I made that statement about Modi. I felt that as a member of the majority community in India it is my duty, not merely my right, to speak up about the concerns of the minority. We often forget that as members of the majority," Sen said.

"Despite the fact that there are many things that Modi has done as CM which are interesting and important — and I've talked about them even though when held up as a model I don't think it makes for a very good one — there's still that scare, that sense of fear," he said.

Quoting 19th-century English philosopher John Stuart Mill, who wrote that the security of minority rights really depends on the majority, Sen also pointed to how debates in the US (where he spends some time teaching at Harvard University) often go on at great length about the need to better secure minority rights.

"I live there as part of a minority and you see how concerned they are about these issues. Here, I have to exercise my duty as part of the majority and bring up my concerns. This is essential to the practice of democracy, which, like liberty, must be vigorously defended. Eternal vigilance is the price you pay for that liberty," he said.

. . . . . 

EDITORIAL: Mr. Narendra Modi, you have a choice

http://www.indianmuslimobserver.com/2012/06/latest-editorial-mr-narendra-modi-you.html
. . . . .


Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly at Huffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links

World's 'most racially intolerant country is not India = the survey is flawed and must be questioned

I am outraged at this map about India. Not because I am an Indian, but because it is flawed. I have consistently stood up against wrong surveys and mis-representation of people, all people.  This is the second international survey that is so much out of the line this year. 

The first one was about the Sharia Survey by Pew on April 30, 2013 - and I have appeared on Fox News on May 1st to refute it and have written about it in Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ghouse/a-few-talking-points-about-sharia-after-losing-a-sean-hannity-shouting-match_b_3200730.html

 

India is pegged as the most racially intolerant country in the world, and this is not acceptable, off hand these are the questions; 

First of all, the question about race is flawed. To a typical Indian, there is only one race in India. However, the majority of Indians are not aware of the existence of all the anthropological races in India - Caucasian, Mongoloid, Negroid and the Brown, although the awareness has increased since globalization started. They may have colored the question differently or it was misunderstood.

Secondly, it is rather religion that is the cause of discrimination* than race in the subcontinent. Race, religion, language and caste are excuses to exploit the greed of humans. We should call it greed than race.  "Rang aur Nasl, Zaat aur Mazhab, Jo bhi aadmi say kamtar hai" (color, race, caste and religion are inferior to humanity) are all clubbed in many a songs as discriminating factor.  

Thirdly - depending on the strict race question, Pakistan has ranked as a tolerant nation, because in theory rarely a Muslim believes in superiority of one race over the other, as the Prophet had said in his last sermon**, but do they really follow the Prophet?  Had they followed, they would speak up against injustice and harassment of Hindu women, Sikhs and Christians, and stop the killing of Ahmadiyya and Shia Muslims. 
  
Pakistan is shown a higher degree of tolerance than India. No doubt, India does not have an impeccable record on religious discrimination, but it is much better than many of the other nations. India should realistically rank as more tolerant nation.

* Although discrimination is illegal in India as in the United States, but it is practiced widely where as in the US individuals have recourse with Law. India does not have anEqual Opportunity and Housing discrimination department to access. Urbanization is removing the barriers, but it would be the law on the side of the discriminated, that will change the society. 

** A survey is warranted here in the United States, a good percentage of Desi Americans (subcontinentians -south Asians of all religions) living in America are racist pigs, I am sick of their racist remarks. This needs to go, and I get stared at with contempt when I speak up against racism. 

I protest the survey and ask the Surveyors to reconsider the data and club the Rang aur Nasl, Zaat aur Mazhab, Color and race, caste and Religion as one item and redo the survey and rank the nations. 

May be the civility of nations index is warranted based on how they treat their minorities – race, religion, ethnicity, culture and language. 

The survey is flawed, and India does not deserve to be # 1 in negative way. This is my protest and if I get the support, I will take it further.

Mike Ghouse

The Book "Standing up for others" will be released on July 4th.  Mike Ghouse is committed to build cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day.

 
------------- ----------------

The Telegraph, UK
Saturday 22 June 2013
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/10061025/Worlds-most-racially-intolerant-countries-mapped.html

Swedish economists have stated that India, Jordan and Bangladesh are among the least tolerant countries in the world, while Britain is among the most accepting.

The World Values Survey asked respondents in more than 80 different countries to state the type of people they did not want as neighbours.

Over 40 per cent of respondents in India, Jordan, Bangladesh and Hong Kong said they would not want a neighbour of a different race.

The British were among the most tolerant, along with former colonies the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. People in Latin American counties were also prepared to embrace racially diverse neighbours.

The data from the survey by Niclas Berggren and Therese Nilsson wasmapped by the Washington Post by Max Fisher.

In India, 43.5 per cent said they did not want someone of a different race as their neighbour. In Jordan it was 51.4 per cent, while in Hong Kong and Bangladesh, over 70 per cent said someone of a different race was their biggest concern in a neighbour.

Europe showed widely varying results, with France coming out as notably racially intolerant at 22.7 per cent. Former Soviet states such as Belarus and Latvia proved to be more tolerant than many of their European neighbours, according to the study.

Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15/a-fascinating-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/

• Wide, interesting variation across Europe. Immigration and national identity are big, touchy issues in much of Europe, where racial make-ups are changing. Though you might expect the richer, better-educated Western European nations to be more tolerant than those in Eastern Europe, that’s not exactly the case. France appeared to be one of the least racially tolerant countries on the continent, with 22.7 percent saying they didn’t want a neighbor of another race. Former Soviet states such as Belarus and Latvia scored as more tolerant than much of Europe. Many in the Balkans, perhaps after years of ethnicity-tinged wars, expressed lower racial tolerance.

• The Middle East not so tolerant. Immigration is also a big issue in this region, particularly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which often absorb economic migrants from poorer neighbors.

• Racial tolerance low in diverse Asian countries. Nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines, where many racial groups often jockey for influence and have complicated histories with one another, showed more skepticism of diversity. This was also true, to a lesser extent, in China and Kyrgyzstan. There were similar trends in parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

• South Korea, not very tolerant, is an outlier. Although the country is rich, well-educated, peaceful and ethnically homogenous – all trends that appear to coincide with racial tolerance – more than one in three South Koreans said they do not want a neighbor of a different race. This may have to do with Korea’s particular view of its own racial-national identity as unique – studied by scholars such as B.R. Myers – and with the influx of Southeast Asian neighbors and the nation’s long-held tensions with Japan.

• Pakistan, remarkably tolerant, also an outlier. Although the country has a number of factors that coincide with racial intolerance – sectarian violence, its location in the least-tolerant region of the world, low economic and human development indices – only 6.5 percent of Pakistanis objected to a neighbor of a different race. This would appear to suggest Pakistanis are more racially tolerant than even the Germans or the Dutch.


Update: I’ve heard some version of one question from an overwhelming number of readers: “I’ve met lots of Indians and Americans and found the former more racially tolerant than the latter. How can these results possibly be correct?” I’d suggest three possible explanations for this, some combination of which may or may not be true. First, both India and the U.S. are enormous countries; anecdotal interactions are not representative of the whole, particularly given that people who are wealthy enough to travel internationally may be likely to encounter some subsets of these respective populations more than others.

Second, the survey question gets to internal, personal preferences; what the respondents want. One person’s experiences hanging out with Americans or Indians, in addition to being anecdotal, only tell you about their outward behavior. Both of those ways of observing racial attitudes might suggest something about racial tolerance, but they’re different indicators that measure different things, which could help explain how one might contradict the other.

Third, the survey question is a way of judging racial tolerance but, like many social science metrics, is indirect and imperfect. I cited the hypothetical about Swedes and Finns at the top of this post, noting that perhaps some people are just more honest about their racial tolerance than others. It’s entirely possible that we’re seeing some version of this effect in the U.S.-India comparison; maybe, for example, Americans are conditioned by their education and media to keep these sorts of racial preferences private, i.e. to lie about them on surveys, in a way that Indians might not be. That difference would be interesting in itself, but alas there is no survey question for honesty.

Correction: This post originally indicated that, according to the World Values Survey, 71.7 percent of Bangladeshis and 71.8 percent of Hong Kongers had said that they would not want a neighbor of a different race. In fact, those numbers appear to be substantially lower, 28.3 percent and 26.8 percent, respectively. In both cases, World Values appears to have erroneously posted the incorrect data on its Web site. Ashirul Amin, posting at the Tufts University Fletcher School’s emerging markets blog, looked into the data for Bangladesh and discovered the mistake. My thanks to Amin, who is Bangladeshi and was able to read the original questionnaire, for pointing this out. His analysis is worth reading in full, but here’s his conclusion:
The short answer is, yes, someone did fat finger this big time. “Yes” and “No” got swapped in the second round of the survey, which means that 28.3% of Bangladeshis said they wouldn’t want neighbors of a different race – not 71.7%.

Happy Fathers Day

One of my most affectionate moments with my Dad occurred, when I left home to work in Saudi Arabia in 1977, he hugged me and kissed on my forehead, that meant so much to me. I continue to dwell in that moment.  In the Indian society in the 50’s and 60’s affection was not expressed verbally, but the affection was part of every moment of the life.  

Once I refused to go to Ramadan Eid prayers as I was loosing interest in religion and becoming an Atheist, I was about 15 years old then. My father did not get angry or threw a fit over that, instead, he sat down and had a conversation with me – and offered me choices – that I lived in the society and to survive and live a fuller life, I have to get along with them and have a working relationship. I was expecting a boring lecture or anger – I got neither instead I was moved by his wisdom.   

M. Abdul Rahman

Everett A. Blauvelt

 
He never hit me except once – I was sitting at the porch of my house relaxing, and watched a man fell off from his bicycle with a big bag of rice. He was struggling to get back on it, and I was laughing… at a distance I saw my father coming… and then he sped, that sent a chill in my bones, had never seen him in that mode… I ran inside the home, he helped that guy and followed me. I hid on the heap of Paddy bags in the corner of my house. He went out and pulled the branch of a mulberry tree and bam – he got me and said something to this effect, “my son will not sit and do nothing when someone needs help. He got me brainwashed pretty well to stop and lend a hand to anyone in need.”
My father is my hero. He opened the windows of wisdom to me and led his life as an example. He was one of the most open minded persons I have known; he had prejudice towards none, indeed, if I pass that test and I am getting closer, I would like to have my head stone read "zero prejudice".  Thank you Dad!

Then I owe my gratitude to Dadski Everett Blauvelt. Since my father passed away in 1977, Dadski has been a great father figure to me, he always inquired about my family all his life and was very caring and helped me through the death of my father. He was instrumental in getting me here in the United States and he passed away on April 21, of this year.

The way I have learned to appreciate these men is by taking time. I will do my early morning prayers of gratitude for these two men. 

I am blessed to have so many great friends who are fatherly figures to me; Sri. D D Maini; Rev. Bill Mathews; Dr. Harbans Lal; and Dr. Qureshi. Happy father’s day to ya’ll. 

I feel the pain of those who did not have a good father, or had an abusive father or did not even know a thing about him. I am proud of you for making it in life despite not having a father, and respect and understand your pain and struggles. I pray for the well being of all those how feel sad today,  that is the least we can do in a cohesive society. If any one of you considers me a fatherly figure, please feel free to call and talk to me for a few minutes. 

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net 
(214) 325-1916

The Indian Ocean remain virtually untouched by modern civilization

Three years ago, in February 2010, Bo died, she was the last speaker of the Bo language, with her died a language of the world. She belonged to one of the oldest tribes on the earth, nearly 5000 years old tribe. A press release was issued then at http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2010/02/press-release-in-behalf-of-indians-of.html
I wrote a statement about India, that we are a nation of all races,  ethnicities, cultures and religions, some one had objected that we do not have the black race. Here is another proof and the Bo tribe is another.  India is really a very diverse nation, as I call America and India, are God's own countries, a cosmic representation of the universe.

Mike Ghouse

Mike Ghouse

Lost Tribe On Small Island In The Indian Ocean remain virtually untouched by modern civilization.

Monday, June 10, 2013 22:44

(Before It's News)

Anything and everything anytime

The Sentinelese (also Sentineli, Senteneli, Sentenelese, North Sentinel Islanders) are one of the Andamanese indigenous peoples and one of the most uncontacted peoples of the Andaman Islands, located in India in the Bay of Bengal. They inhabit North Sentinel Island which lies westward off the southern tip of the Great Andaman archipelago. They are noted for vigorously resisting attempts at contact by outsiders. The Sentinelese maintain an essentially hunter-gatherer society subsisting through hunting, fishing, and collecting wild plants; there is no evidence of either agricultural practices or methods of producing fire. Their language remains unclassified.

*

*

The present population of the Sentinelese is not known with any great degree of accuracy. Estimates have been produced ranging from lower than 40, through a median of around 250, and up to a maximum of 500. In the year 2001, the Census of India officials recorded 39 individuals (21 males and 18 females); however, out of necessity this survey was conducted from a distance and almost certainly does not represent an accurate figure for the population who range over the 72 km² (17,800 acres) island. Any medium- or long-term impact on the Sentinelese population arising from the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and resulting tsunami remains unknown, other than the confirmation obtained that they had survived the immediate aftermath.

On previous visits, groups of some 20–40 individuals were encountered regularly. Habitations of 40–60 individuals were found on two occasions. As some individuals are almost certainly hiding, a better approximation of group size cannot be determined. This would suggest that some 2–6 groups occupy the island. The rule of thumb population density of 1.5 km² (370 acres)/individuals in comparable hunter-gatherer societies indicates that one such group could live off the land alone. A significant amount of food is derived from the sea. It seems that the groups encountered, at any one time, could only have come from a rather small part of the island. There appear to be slightly more males than females. At any given time, about half of the couples seemed to have dependent children or the women were pregnant.

North Sentinel Island

The Sentinelese and other indigenous Andamanese peoples are frequently described as negritos, a term which has been applied to various widely separated peoples in Southeast Asia, such as the Semang of the Malay archipelago and the Aeta of the Philippines, as well as to other peoples as far afield as Australia (notably former populations of Tasmania). The defining characteristics of these “negrito” peoples (who are not a monophyletic group) include a comparatively short stature, dark skin and “peppercorn” hair, qualities also found commonly across the continent of Africa. No close contacts have been established, but the author Heinrich Harrer described one man as being 1.6 m (5′ 4″) tall and apparently left handed.

From 1967 onwards, the Indian authorities in Port Blair embarked on a limited programme of attempts at contacting the Sentinelese, under the management of the Director of Tribal Welfare and anthropologist T. N. Pandit. These “Contact Expeditions” consisted of a series of planned visits which would progressively leave “gifts”, such as coconuts, on the shores, in an attempt to coax the Sentinelese from their hostile reception of outsiders. For a while, these seemed to have some limited success; however, the programme was discontinued in the late 1990s following a series of hostile encounters resulting in several deaths.

In 2006, Sentinelese archers killed two fishermen who were fishing illegally within range of the island. The archers later drove off, with a hail of arrows, the helicopter that was sent to retrieve the bodies.  To this date, the bodies remain unrecovered, although the downdraught from the helicopter’s rotors at the time exposed the two fishermen’s corpses, which had been buried in shallow graves by the Sentinelese.

On 2 August 1981, the ship Primrose grounded on the North Sentinel Island reef. A few days later, crewmen on the immobile vessel observed that small black men were carrying spears and arrows and building boats on the beach. The captain of the Primrose radioed for an urgent airdrop of firearms so the crew could defend themselves, but did not receive them. Heavy seas kept the islanders away from the ship. After a week, the crew were rescued by a helicopter working under contract to the Indian Oil And Natural Gas Commission (ONGC).

The Sentinelese apparently survived the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and its after-effects, including the tsunami and the uplifting of the island. Three days after the event, an Indian government helicopter observed several of them, who shot arrows and threw stones at the hovering aircraft with the apparent intent of repelling it. Although the fishing grounds of the Sentinelese were disturbed, they appear to have adapted to the island’s current conditions.

Amazing that in 2013 there is still a tribe that has had virtually no contact with the outside world.  To resist contact in such a vigilant way.  Reminds me of the scene from Mutiny On The Bounty with Anthony Hopkins.
 
Source: http://markosun.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/lost-tribe-on-small-island-in-the-indian-ocean-remain-virtually-untouched-by-modern-civilization/

Salman Rushdie’s movie scares film distributors in India

Although I have stood up for the freedom of speech for Salman Rushdie and will continue to do that for every one,  I would like to see him clarify his position, he is perceived as a self-hating Muslim (borrowed from Jewish expression - self-hating Jew) and continues with that, that is of course his choice.

Film must be shown India, those who want to see can see.

Meera Nair's film Water met similar troubles in India by the Hindutva extremists, the sets were burn and they had to shoot the movie in Sri Lanka! When it was Premiered in Dallas, I was asked to introduce the movie to the audience and respond to the Q&A following the film. Even in Dallas, a few of my fellow Indians were belligerent towards the movie.

I might see if I can see the movie previews and introduce it here in Dallas.

Mike Ghouse
......

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/salman-rushdies-movie-scares-film-distributors-in-india/2012/09/17/2692b1b8-00c1-11e2-b257-e1c2b3548a4a_blog.html

By Rama Lakshmi

NEY DELHI — “At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom,” said India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1947 when the nation gained independence from British colonial rule.
Sixty three years later, the Indians who inherited that freedom appear to be losing their nerve to defend it.


Screenshot of movie title from YouTube.

The new movie version of the epochal, Booker Prize-winning novel “Midnight’s Children” by the controversial India-born writer Salman Rushdie is scaring away movie distributors. The historical fiction novel traces the journey from the heady days of independence to the turbulent politics of the nation-building decades that followed.

Watch the official trailer of “Midnight’s Children.”

There is no official ban on the film. But the reluctance to receive the film points not just to the rising intolerance and threat to free speech in India in recent months, but also to how Indians have begun to self-censor themselves proactively because of fear of attacks or their distrust in the government’s ability to deter attacks.

In the past year, authorities locked horns with Google, Twitter, Facebook and the blogger community here over screening of content that it found offensive.
The reason for the fear is that anything to do with Rushdie will provoke Muslim anger here. His book “Satanic Verses” is banned in India, and earlier this year the writer canceled his visit to a literary festival after the government warned him of a possible threat to his life.
In March, Rushdie attended a conference in New Delhi, only to find that many of the politicians and Muslim speakers boycotted it.
The movie, which was released last week at the Toronto International Film Festival, has many prominent Bollywood actors.
”People are getting scared that a movie based on Rushdie’s book may create a problem here,” said Sunil Bohra, a movie producer and distributor, who said he had not seen the film.
“The producers of the movie must think if it makes sense to attach Rushdie’s name to the movie in India. It worked around the world, but may not here.”

Writer Salman Rushdie arrives at the premiere for "Midnight's Children" at the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival in Toronto. (Jemal Countess - GETTY IMAGES)
The movie features another hot-button issue. The story includes critical descriptions of former Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi, who suspended civil rights and free speech during a two-year period in the 1970s called the “Emergency.” Gandhi’s daughter-in-law, the Italian-born Sonia Gandhi, now heads the ruling Congress party, and any negative portrayal of the family is frowned upon.
The director of the film, Deepa Mehta, told the Hindustan Times newspaper that it would be a “pity” if the film didn’t release in India because of “insecure politicians”.