Does a politically sensible honest opinion exist?

I was in the United States in November to attend a conference in Texas. I traveled around Austin with my colleagues. The group consists of three Indians and a guy from Cameroon.  To elaborate on us: I am very frank in my opinions. Politeness leaves by itself when honesty comes in. I am not bothered about to whom am I making a comment as long as I am to deliver an honest thought. It is always a negative in me.

All others, unlike me, would like to please others. No matter how wrong it is or how much does it deviate from their opinions, their intentions are to please those who are good to them. I wonder, how can you not be honest at least to those who are nice to you?? May be it is something beyond my knowledge and I am never going to understand.

Before getting in to the actual scenario, let me give my honest opinion on them. Oh, no! When I say honest I'm going to be impolite. So please excuse, let me move on to the scenario itself.

Along with one of them I was traveling to Wal-mart by taxi. The taxi driver was an American. He met all criteria to be an American: accent, polite, friendly, and most importantly obese. I would like to clarify here that I am not someone who makes fun of obesity.

On our way, the driver was engaging us in a lively conversation on our whereabouts. He suddenly said "I think there are no fat people in India; all are like you; slim and fit; I have never seen a fat Indian". One could sense at that time that he really means what he says. It may be because of the fact that he couldn't be one.

My good Indian colleague stepped in to his rescue. Trying to be polite to the American, he said, "it's a sign of wealth". By "it" he meant "obesity".  The driver vaguely agreed with him. I was puzzled. What? May be, Obesity is a sign of wealth in planet-X. Why would anyone make a comment that is least suited during the economic crisis? Instead of being nice and polite now you are indirectly making fun of his wealth during the crisis. 

Trying to step down the issue, I wanted to be honest and of course impolite by pointing the root cause. I said, "No... may be it's a sign of McDonald's". The driver understood and accepted the comment I made. He started laughing and said twice.. "huh, it's a sign of McDonald's". He couldn't cease his laughter until we got down.

Soon after we are in to Wal-mart's, my polite friend came to me and murmured. You know, everyone knows it's a sign of McDonald's but you shouldn't have been rude to him by saying it. He was so nice to us. I replied him, it was my honest opinion and I should be honest to those who are nice to me.

The news spread to my other "polite" Indian colleague. I was told by him that even a joke must be politically sensible and my comment wasn't. I stand by my comment. No honest opinion is politically sensible or correct. If you know or find a politically sensible yet honest opinion, please do let me know. 

Until then I go with Mark Twain's quote,

"It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense."

I won the Euro 2008!!!

"What?? You must be joking, Arun. Are you OK?" would be your response to the title. But, I really did. Sorry, I forgot to mention the word 'bid'. Yes, I won the bid for Euro 2008. You know, the teams I guessed were exactly those who played the final on June 29, Germany and Spain. I still ask myself how. How did I choose those teams that exactly got through all other qualifiers to reach the final? I should confess that I had no idea what the teams are when I had to bid them.

Germany is always my favorite. I have no reason why. Germany, as a team, I considered them to be a better choice for the Euro cup. They may not have any star players. But somehow I am much inclined to bid on Germany irrespective of their capacity needless to mention not just in Euro. Still I was not sure about them as they do not always win. Hence I'm forced to pick another. Now which one to pick. There were only few teams to choose from making my life easier: Portugal, France, Italy and Spain.

Portugal and France, though having good track records, did not convince me to be the winners of the Euro cup. I would have blindly gone with France if Zidane plays for them still. But now, I'm left with just two to choose from. No doubt Italy was a good team and they never lost to Spain in Euro at least as far as I know. They strongly believed in this Superstition which could have been seen from their quarterfinals against Spain. It was the same day, June 22 in every Euro cup in the past, that Spain was defeated in the Penalties, irrespective of whether Italy deserved the victory or not. I do not like Italy for many reasons: one of them being the superstitious beliefs. Moreover I wanted a team that do not play against Germany until the final, if at all Germany reaches.

Germany reached the final after defeating Turkey in not-so-professional yet not-so-unprofessional way. This semifinal was very tense that no one believed Turkey giving-up until the final whistle is blown. They portrayed their never give-up mentality through-out the tournament. Still my favorites won adding not-so-much to my surprise. In fact I expected it well-in-advance.

I was in a dilemma on the final day of Euro cup. Though both of my teams are in and I'm going to win the bid anyhow, whom to support now. My favorites or ever-unluckies. I couldn't decide till the end. But I was happy to see, the unlucky, unfortunate, forbidden, forsaken team in spite of their tremendous potential, the Spanish, lifting the Euro cup after their spectacular performance through-out the tournament.

I pocketed a decent amount in winning the bid.
But,
How did I choose the teams correctly even before the tournament, still I wonder!

Can you CORNER the World??

The title might puzzle you. But I mean it. Yes, every country tries to corner the globe with the power of their boundaries. It has been happening all the time somewhere around the world. I always wonder how can someone be cornered in a meeting over a round table. Why I wonder? Because how can you find a corner in a round table??? :-)

I play badminton with a Bangladeshi couple, needless to mention my neighbors geographically. India always has border issues with Bangladesh and Pakistan from the day of Independence of these countries. While we discuss political issues, or even otherwise, I always mention the border issues we have with them considering that Bangladesh was after all a part of India. They always bounce back with the severe famine/flood/arsenic poisoning that was/is being created by India in Bangladesh. Yes, of course they are right. India showed its superpower over the small country, once a part of its own state by constructing controversial barrages that counts to at least seventeen over the rivers that flow in to Bangladesh, one of them being the famous Farakka barrage. Though known in history as a country never waged a war or wanted to capture its neighbors, India, failed to establish its reputation in Bangladesh. It even made me think of as a "trademark Indian non-violent concentration camp". Many of my countrymen wouldn't like me for this phrase.

Back to the subject. I always wonder about the infiltration and the related or unrelated terrorist attacks especially in India. India seems to be very special as the country itself has potential threats as his neighbors mostly indirect. Their pusillanimous brutal slaughtering of common people in India, with increasing head counts every month, has not been paused. Such neutered terrorists die for no reason after leaving the entire country agitated and panicked. If at all their mission was to isolate the country from its neighbors, YES they have done it, without mistakes.

Now terror stricken countries close their borders. The borders are indeed not so visible even to their neighbors. The nations have coined a common terminology to justify themselves.

Security threat is that very fancy, man-made, every nation's favorite terminology that keeps the boundaries safer than the countries themselves. For how much did every country buy their lands? From whom did they buy and when? Is Columbus a sole owner of America Or Vasco-da-gama owns India still?

We build our houses and erect walls around it to define boundaries. No doubt they enhance our privacy but at the same time isolate us from our neighbors which in fact ourselves. This is similar to the story about a lion cub in a herd of lambs. On isolation, eventually we forget our nature and become walls with no more love and humanity left in our hearts. We bother much about the external elements that cross our boundaries as we see them as security threats. Hence we are no more lions but lambs. By this I don't mean building houses without boundaries. It is merely to understand that these boundaries doesn't mean everything to us. Security would always remain as a primary concern to any nation that do not live in harmony at least with its neighbors. India is no exception.