Listed in reverse
chronological order
Israel and Palestinians don't see eye
to eye
Editor -- To willfully, conscionably and methodically incarcerate and
dehydrate 1.8 million Palestinians over the kidnapping of a single Israeli
soldier equates to reaping a thousand eyes for an eye.
When will the cycle of sowing violence and terrorism cease? Has the legacy of
diplomacy been beheaded by the enraged adrenal of politics and lethal firepower?
Is the disproportionate use of force and destruction a proven catalyst in the
realization of lasting peace and coexistence? Has the international community
suddenly lost its axis and integrity as Israel calibrates its chokehold on the
entire civilian population of Gaza? Is God on an extended leave of absence or
has God been displaced by weapons of mass destruction?
Dom
Martin
San Francisco
Chronicle
June
30, 2006
MOAB Will Kill Civilian Population
The testing debut of the Massive
Ordinance Air Blast (MOAB) has soundly established America's devastating
omnipotence in the arena of conventional firepower. If the deployment of such
omnipotence were to swiftly result in Saddam Hussein scrambling for exile or
extinction, then, all glory to America's military objective.
Unfortunately, it will be the
civilian population -- 50% of whom, according to US Senator Robert Byrd, are
children -- who will be put to the harrowing test of this horrendous weapon,
which has been deliberately designed to send a cataclysmic wave of fire and
blast over an enormously enraging radius, and in the process, flatten trees,
knock over structures, collapse cave entrances, et al.. In brief, aside from
inflicting catastrophic death and destruction within the impact zone, it is
also intended to demoralize or subjugate all beings far beyond that zone.
Only the survivors of this
impending blitzkrieg will narrate if instant death would have been more preferable
to the psychological malignancy of the MOAB. And in their narration, America's
conscience will either stand trial or vindication.
Dom Martin
Coastal Post
March
2003
Playing God With Bombs And
Missiles
In the beginning of time, God was a manifestation without a face. Over the
millenniums, artists projected God through conflicting faces, color and gender.
At the dawn of the year 2003, the Gods of major religions still remain without
any admissible IDs.
In the realm of politics, however -- and
perhaps even overlapping into the religious -- we have one god whose face,
gender and color is indisputable: President George W. Bush. The fate of Iraq,
North Korea, Iran, Syria and other belligerent states and groups, are at the
mercy of his singular omnipotence.
It would seem that Judgment Day is finally
upon us when we stand face to face with god whose wrath is tangible, and whose
vengeance is not to be dared or taken lightly!
Dom Martin
Coastal Post
February 2003
Sowing
Hatred
Sir:
There's a moral distinction
to be made between righteousness coming from the barrel of a gun and that
coming from the core of human conscientiousness. One propagates
unimaginable bloodshed and civilian suffering; the other advocates hope through
the perseverance of goodwill.
If the
impending blitzkrieg results with Saddam Hussein's head on the platter of UN
Resolution 1441, it might be America which will have irreversibly sown and
tilled the soil of hatred in the Middle East.
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
December
25, 2002
Listening for God amid din of war
Sir:
While each
religion has enriched this world with its spiritual culture, it has also
indemnified us with uncondonable violence.
In the wake of the escalating crisis in the Middle East, where is
everyone's God? Is God only a myth,
made manifest by the material aspirations of the faithful? When will God's word finally become more
vocal and compelling than the sound of gunfire, bombs and missiles?
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
April
7, 2002
Peace Proposal
Sir:
Whether Saudi Crown Prince
Abdullah's peace proposal will succeed is secondary to the initiative to test
it out. In setting preconditions that are politically and logically untenable,
the Sharon government has not and will not successfully avert any violence in
the days to come. Violence, with or without Arafat, will continue to
proliferate as long as the cause that animates it, persist.
The path to a lasting peace is not
through overwhelming might but through the realization that all beings are
created equal, and that no people are so undignified as to be only worthy of
being held against their will. When people are forced down to their knees, they
only become fit to sign on the dotted line. Such a manner of effecting
negotiations seldom leads to a lasting peace.
In times such as these when
everyone's adrenalin is pumped up by war-rhetoric, we should engage in the
necessity to take a major step back and draw insight from the timeless wisdom
of General Omar Bradley:
"We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected
the Sermon on the Mount. The world has achieved brilliance without conscience.
Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war
than we do about peace, more about killing than we know about living."
Dom Martin
The
Star (Jordan)
March
31, 2002
Today's New World Order calls for the plucking
of too many eyes . . .
Sir:
J. M.
Seyfert and Jess Ghannam's letters (March 8) are timely eye-openers to today's
gun-toting politics that has gone center stage. Under the auspices of the New World Order, it is no longer an
‘eye for an eye', but more easily: A thousand eyes for an eye! The plucking of so many eyes not only makes
this world less habitable, but morally blind as well.
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
March
15, 2002
Terror and Power
Sir:
Might has
the same atrocious tyranny as terror.
After Afghanistan, terror will have a brand new territory, a whole new
countenance, and undoubtedly the same objective foe.
There is no
foreseeable solution to terror as there isn't to the abolition of the damning
might of power. Yet, only when all
beings and nations become one and equal, the power of might shall cease to
exist and by its auspicious absence, terror as well.
Dom Martin
San Francisco
Chronicle
November
14, 2001
Denial and Slavery
Sir:
In walking
out of the World Conference Against Racism ("Walkouts rock U.N. conference
on racism", Sept. 4), the United States has left the door to ethnic
prejudice further ajar. Whether the
dark issue of slavery is condemned or purged from the final declaration is
secondary to the bludgeoning fact that no other race has been so savagely
uprooted as the inhabitants of Africa, and that, the agony of that uprootal and
chains continue to subconsciously reverberate to this present day.
Thus, to
not effectively accommodate the reality and repercussions of this uprootal and
its corresponding agony is to demonstrate the scope of our cathartic
denial. Such denial makes an alarming
travesty of our purported claim to be more civilized in this century than any
before.
Dom Martin
San Francisco
Chronicle
September
5, 2001
Durban Conference
Sir:
In
threatening to boycott the Durban Conference Against Racism, the United States
will again assert itself as a gun-totting maverick on a bucking horse, and in
the process, further diminish its scoring prowess in the field of global good
and goodwill. If nothing else, the
Durban Conference ought to sanction compassion as the new order of racism
between people and nations. Through the
patronage of such tolerance, the ideals of peace, equality and justice would
become prevalent without the need and use of bombs, missiles and other deadly
initiatives.
Dom Martin
San Francisco Chronicle
August
5, 2001
Legal Killing
Sir:
The path to
death by lethal injection for condemned Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh,
is a celebration of neither justice nor righteousness. Killing in the name of law, politics or religion,
is no less violent and unethical than killing in the name of crime.
From time
immemorial, inflicting death by lawful decree has not been a deterrent to
heinous crimes. Nor has mass killings
in battlefields secured lasting peace, or deterred the resurgence of new
wars. Death is not a solution to
capital crimes or conflicts. Life is a
solution to life itself. Taking
another's life is a heinous crime, and no amount of remorse or death-chanting
can undo the crime. Where the
abominable act of one individual leads to the crime of murder, must we, as
members of a sane society, participate in weaving the spiteful web of death?
It is almost as if our retributive role in
accomplishing death is far more premeditated and conclusive than was the condemned
person's gruesome and thoughtless actions towards the victim.
Dom Martin
San Francisco
Chronicle
June
9, 2001
Spying and Mistrust
Sir:
The White House oratory of 'No
Apology' ("Bush writes to widow, but not an apology" - April 9), reorients the world's attention to
time's political pendulum, which has a tendency to swing rather haphazardly
between values and belligerence, material triumph and vanity, constitutional
privacy and invasive surveillance.
Human
surveillance is not infallible.
Instead, it is the arbiter of mistrust between people and nations.
If goodwill
is to endure between people and nations, it is indeed necessary to first undo
the very weapons of mass-surveillance.
Let trust be a non-territorial reservoir between people and nations, and
let surveillance be God's almighty means and domain!
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
April
10, 2001
Purge of Icons
Sir:
Regarding the Open Forum article by
Raymond Whitaker ("Real Victims Are the Afghan People," March 9): If
some can see God with their eyes shut while others see through sculptured
forms, let it be so. The path to God should not be restrained by human dictates
or cultural prejudice.
In purging Afghanistan of Buddhist statues,
no divine point is made or enacted. Only a human one -- the malevolent zeal to
destroy with unreasoning contempt that which was created with selfless love for
the divine benefit of all.
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
March
11, 2001
Gun-Toting Rhetoric
Sir:
Ariel
Sharon's gun-slinging rhetoric is the kind that enslaves a subjective ideology
to a national calamity. If there is to
be lasting peace in the Middle East, there should first be a franchise of
genuine hope. In the franchise of hope,
the sun never sets. Let there be such
hope so that peace may finally sprout amidst the sandstorms of time!
Dom Martin
USA
Today
February
12. 2001
Natural Calamities
Sir:
If natural
calamities have a frightening face, it is to remind us of our fragile place in
the unfathomable scope of existence.
Neither nature nor existence has been our blueprint. Yet, in the centuries gone by, we have dared
to singlehandedly alter this blueprint.
We have emerged as the architects of change, turning nature into a
wasteland from our warring needs and material aspirations. The results continue to be catastrophically
disastrous. The earthquake in El
Salvador (‘Bay Area Salvadorans Await Word . . . ‘, Jan 14 ) comes as yet another reminder that our very
existence will continue to remain an unsettled issue if we do not instantly
halt the mass, unorganized grazing and bulldozing of our environment. The environment is the only nationality to
our survival. Protecting the
environment should be our collective and unfailing patriotism.
Dom Martin
USA
Today
January
16, 2001
The Curse of Occupation
Sir:
In a world
where existence is punctuated by ethnic rivalries, co- existence remains a
suspicious overture. This overture
becomes even more suspicious in a climate where occupation is the ongoing
forecast. Under such climate,
obviously, the will to persist becomes as resolute, fierce or defiant as the
will to resist.
Thus, Rev.
Robert Warren Cromey's letter (Dec. 31) and Jeff Saperstein's letter (Jan. 4) are
political reminders that occupation is a damning inheritance and cannot be
ratified through the edict of bullets.
And if we are to succeed as human beings, we must first mutually
dismember or eradicate our desire to defy or overpower the other's basic right
to exist in the common household of survival.
Dom Martin
San
Francisco Chronicle
January
5, 2001
AIDS and Profits
Sir:
The news report from the AIDS
conference in Durban, South Africa, that nearly 28 million African children are
expected to lose at least one parent to AIDS by 2010, is a universal reminder
that each new disease tests our resolve to survive for the benefit of
posterity.
It also underlines the alarming
disparity between the cost of AIDS-related drugs and the profit racked in by the
manufacturers.
To profit from disease is to
exploit human misery, and unless this franchise of greed is reversed with
unconditional humanism, the pain and suffering of the overwhelming majority
shall continue to be the caldron of unconscionable wealth for corporations and
the affluent and, in time, will equate their guilt to the very sins of the
Holocaust.
Dom Martin
San Francisco Examiner
July
17, 2000
Renaming Kala Academy
Sir:
Naming the
Kala Academy Complex after C. Alvares is good.
Naming it after Alfred Rose may be better. The best might be leaving it the way it is, as any change,
however well orchestrated, is likely to engender politics. And politics is the principal cause of our
inability to coexist on a cultural, social, therapeutic or intellectual level.
Recognition,
undoubtedly, is a universal need, and its occurrence in everyone's life is a
matter of fate. Recognition which comes
timely in one's lifetime is more endearing than that which comes posthumously,
or when one is so senile as not to understand it, or so crippled as to not be
bothered with.
As mortals,
it is in our natural inclination to seek immortality through recognition. Receiving an award during one's lifetime, or
naming an award after oneself, does not assure one's immortality. History is full of the cacophony of statues
erected and toppled, and of historical edifices named and renamed, and some
then left to the habitation of dogs and vermins.
For this
reason, recognition is not the same as immortality. Immortality is a faceless halo, and no amount of our immediate
trying, chanting or recanting can insert a face therein. When time, fate and reality are in perfect
synchronicity, a face shall find its resurrection therein In the meantime, there is no harm trying to
immortalize our renowned tiatrists, past and present, so long as we don't get
too carried away and end up renaming one another with obscenities!
Dom Martin
The Navhind Times
September
20, 2000
Playing God with Bombs and Missiles
Sir:
From the
dawn of intolerance, humanity has been besieged with ethnic-hatred and communal
wars. And on just about the same
parallel, we have been struck by natural calamities in the form of devastating
earthquakes, floods, hurricanes and tornadoes.
One wonders if there is a co-relation between suffering brought on as a
consequence of human intolerance, and suffering decreed by divine
intolerance. As one might have noted --
not too long after the Gulf war -- America was and continues to be pounded by a
strand of natural disasters. Recently,
in the midst of the unrelenting bombing of Yugoslavia, an F-5 category
hurricane has besieged the states of Kansas and Oklahoma in the U.S. with death
and catastrophic devastation. An F-5
category hurricane is considered the deadliest.
Again,
might there be a parallel between the devastation from the F-5 category
hurricane in Kansas and Oklahoma, and the devastation that the
U.S. F-15 bombers have wrought in Yugoslavia? Even more troubling are the images of the
hurricane-devastation which bear a rather uncanny resemblance to the images of
the devastation that NATO bombs have unleashed in Yugoslavia. If we can inflict mass terror and death from
unseen heights in the sky, can we possibly discern that there might similarly
just be another entity higher up, more omnipotent, and capable of retaliating
an eye for an eye? Perhaps, it is time
NATO takes a moral step back and question its proprietary-posture of playing
God with bombs, missiles and economic embargoes.
May 16, 1999
Gomantak Times
Gomantak Building, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa, India
Politics is a Contagious Illusion
Sir:
Politics is
a contagious illusion, and anyone contracting it seriously enough can rise to the
occasion of becoming a politician with unprecedented rhetoric. The downside, however, is that at any given
time a duly elected politician can -- against his mushrooming illusions -- be
rushed to the nearest intensive-care ward, injected with a massive antidote,
and left politically dead on the wayside.
But what keeps the contagion effectively going is the gullibility of the
masses. At its best, politics can
vocally fulfil the gullibility of the masses.
At its worst, it can resemble a chicken running about with its head cut
off. And with the controversy seething
over Mrs. Sonia Gandhi's place in Indian politics and the dangling fate of her
Congress party, the contagion is now widespread. Or equally divided between those who feel that Mrs. Gandhi is an
unfit head, and those who feel that without her, the Congress party will be
like a chicken running about with its head cut off. Consequentially, only time will manifest if the beheaded hen
would have laid golden eggs, ostrich eggs, or a colony of eggshells!
May
25, 1999
Gomantak
Times
Gomantak
Building, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa, India
If Only Bombs Eradicated Evil . . . .
Sir:
In the
vocabulary of civilization, bomb is not a synonym for peace. And no country or people deserve to be bombed,
even if the bombs are endorsed by the will of the international community. Nor is there such a rationale as good bombs
and bad bombs. All bombs have a
singular intent: Mass destruction! And while Kosovo may epitomize mass-evil,
there are countless others, of equal or greater propensity.
If bombs
have the power to eradicate evil and restore peace, then such catastrophic
means ought to be uniformly inflicted, without prejudice. Otherwise, the selective dropping of bombs
will only have a political echo, and vainly remind us that bombs bear the same
death-patent as evil and genocide itself.
March 25, 1999
San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission Street, San Francisco, California, USA
A Thousand Eyes for an Eye
Sir:
In the
realm of existence is an implied covenant that all life is sacred, and that no
one being is more worthy of life than the other. If the death penalty is a celebration of justice, then the rest
of us who are supposedly more righteous, ought to have been rewarded with a
life-term of eternity. We are not. Our lives, righteous or not, is overshadowed
by time's ticking clock. And by
wilfully sending a condemned person to death, we are only leaving our soiled
fingerprints on time's clock.
Killing in
the name of religion, politics or the law, is no less violent and unethical
than killing in the name of crime. To
impose a rationale that one mode of killing constitutes death and the other
murder, is to continue to glorify our moral dichotomy.
From time
immemorial, inflicting death has not been a deterrent to heinous crimes. Nor has mass killings in battlefields
secured lasting peace, or deterred the resurgence of new wars. Death is not a solution to capital crimes or
conflicts. Life is a solution to life
itself. Taking another's life is a
heinous crime, and no amount of remorse or death-chanting can undo the
crime. Yet, where the abominable act of
one individual leads to the crime of murder, must we, as members of a sane
society, participate in weaving the spiteful web of death? It is almost as if our retributive role in
accomplishing death is far more premeditated and conclusive than was the
condemned person's thoughtless actions towards the victim.
As human
beings, we have a moral obligation to preserve and extend life. It is not our place or prerogative to
immortalize capital guilt with death,
And if the Lord breathed life into us, let him take it away. Let vengeance be the Lord's. Let him soil his hands by taking an eye for
an eye, or if it pleaseth: A thousand
eyes for an eye!
February 19, 1999
Indian Express (website)
Express Towers, Nariman Pt.. Bombay, India
If we can't relate as humanbeings . . .
Sir:
The tidal
rift between Hindus and Christians in India, sadly dehumanizes the condition of
the human spirit. It also brings to
trial the divine attribute of human tolerance.
As human beings, none of us have had a conscious choice in determining
our place in existence, or the religion we would be reared into. Instead, we are sowed by fate onto the
grounds of existence to sprout and survive as seeds of hope, revelation,
fortune, despair, et al. From that
moment after, the burden of having to bear the consequences of being alive unto
ourselves or unto others, falls rigidly upon the mind and the conscience of
each individual.
Once born,
we cannot liberally unborn ourselves.
We must await death to liberate us from the rigors of life. Similarly, once reared into a particular
religion, we cannot undo it as we might undo a garment. Religion, for the fundamental part, bleaches
one's mind with certain prejudice. To
renounce one's religion is tantamount to asking one to bleach the color of
one's skin. Or to unring the bell. In the ensuing rift between Hindus and
Christians, neither side shall succeed in unringing the bell, or in truly
bleaching out the other.
In one
pre-historic form or the other, we have been proselytized by fate, hope, or
circumstances. The first man or woman
on earth was neither a Hindu, a Christian, a Muslim, or whatsoever else is out
there. He or she was merely an alien
being, upgraded with a productive mind.
From this productivity came reasoning and prejudice, and the likes of
politics and religions. The rest, has
since evolved or deteriorated into what we presently bear witness to.
God, on the
other hand, is an abstract thought, made manifest through the presence of
places of worship as well as through the allegiance of the faithful. We don't see God eye to eye. We attempt or endeavor to see him through
the eyes of our fellow beings. Between
God and the hierarchy of fellow beings, is the divine attribute of human
tolerance. If we cannot relate to or
tolerate one another as human beings, how can we possibly succeed as Hindus,
Christians, Muslims, et al?
February 18, 1999
Gomantak Times
Gomantak Building, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa, India
Political Orphans
Sir:
The droning
demise of the Luizinho leadership, would appear to forebode the scenario that
politics in Goa is on the fast track to another gun-toting finale. The problem with politics is that you can't
let your frustrations chase it down the block with a gun and pull the
trigger. The reason? Politics is a lurking gun. In a dictatorial environment, the gun is
single-barrelled. In a democratic
environment, the gun is double-barrelled, with the ruling party constituting
one part of the barrel, and the opposition the other. The major drawback in a democratically- patented gun is that the
barrels end up being alarmingly disproportionate. As a result, it's firing range is sometimes either off the wall
or inadvertently deadly. Or at times,
simply going off for no apparent reflex.
Secondly,
the firepower between the two guns are as contrasting as night and day. While a dictatorial gun uses live bullets, a
democratic gun comes pre-loaded with promises.
Unconditional promises! And
finally, the respective manifestos are as prejudicial as racism. Under a dictatorial gun, the manifesto is
usually shoot on sight. Under a
democratic gun, the manifesto is a moving target, and the objective of the
target is to provide the poor and the needy with a much better future. Thus, when time pulls the trigger, it is not
uncommon for a democratic gun to miss the target by a good mile or two. And when the gun starts falling apart from
rust, misuse, or faulty components, it is not uncommon for the overseer of the
democratic gun to summon the electorate to patent another gun.
And so it
goes. Each time a gun goes off, some
one is either democratically elected or laid to rest, belly-down. And history is full of political alliances,
coffins, hearses, charlatans and fools.
It is not by chance or addiction that we become political or
politicians. It has to do with our
uncanny ability to march in utterly opposing political strides while listening
to the same hypocritical tune. It is
only when the gun suddenly goes off that we become terribly alarmed, and scurry
about as political orphans!
February 14, 1999
Indian Express
Express Towers, Nariman Pt.. Bombay, India
Peace Blue Print
Sir:
Death is an
awful thought. Lachrymose indeed. Yet,
only death is without prejudice. Kings,
popes, heads of state, paupers, commoners, inmates on death row . . . . it
doesn't matter who or where. When it is
our given day in time, it is the moment to go. It is an inevitable need.
We enter existence through the discriminating doors of life, and exit
out the common door marked 'death'. What
we achieve or contribute in the evolving walk between these two doors,
determines our place in history.
In this regard,
one can adequately say that King Hussein of Jordan left an indelible mark on
the ever illusive parchment called "peace". He might not have succeeded in bringing about peace to the entire
world, but he left a humanitarian
blueprint by which other leaders could enlarge the Scope of World Peace.
February 12, 1999
San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission Street, San Francisco, California, USA
Politics on Trial
Sir:
The trial
of William Jefferson Clinton, is not so much the trial of a man who finds
himself as a reluctant spectacle on the world's super-pedestal, but the trial
of politics itself. Politics is a
sleek, ubiquitous coin. Heads up, you
win. Tails, you lose! Or vice versa. And opinion polls aside, only time will tell which sleek side of
the ubiquituous coin truth had so virtuously chanced upon to pick. Or for that matter, altogether bypass!
January 28, 1999
San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission Street, San Francisco, California, USA
The Dark Moments
Sir:
Pope John Paul II's condescending stand on the crimes of
the Holocaust and the Inquisition, is a stark reminder that from the inception
of time, our ideals have been impulsively scripted by the dictates of good and
evil. Obviously, Pope John Paul had no
personal part in either of the two dark events in our history. Therefore, in proffering an apology on
behalf of the Catholic Church, he is
neither going to absolve nor halt the modern-day crimes of ethnic cleansing
perpetrated in Hercegovina, Cambodia, Kosovo, Somalia, Rwanda and Burundi. Nor will his apology bring about a cessation
of hostilities and ethnic hate in other parts of the world. Nor will it shed a greater light on the
senseless bombing of Iraq, or liberate the people of Tibet from the Chinese
inquisition.
In retrospect, it is crudely apparent that humanity's
fate has not dramatically edified when the dark deeds of the past were finally
accounted for and/or intoned. The
reason being is that apologies are mere rhetorical absurdities in the face of
reality. And reality is not the past,
but the harsh, living presence of the present.
How can we thus sensibly point a damning finger to the crimes of the
past while being oblivious to the crimes of the present, to the extent as to
allow the present to replicate some of the very same dark deeds, i.e., crimes
of ethnic cleansing and the annihilation of Tibet's spiritualism?
Indeed, the past should have no less a significant,
revered or guiltful place in our conscience than the present. But if we are to make this world a better
place, we need to exit ourselves from being overly obsessed in the past and
live manifestly in the present, and in so doing, conscientiously endeavor to
prevent the present from sowing or replicating the very same dark deeds of the
past. Otherwise, we shall only evolve
to inherit apologies and in the process, draw no closer to the moral equator
today than where we found ourselves on the first day of existence.
November 10, 1998
The Navhind Times
Navhind Bhavan, Rua Ismael de Gracias, Panaji, Goa,
India
You must surely reap the whirlwind . . .
Sir:
The
congressional trial of President Bill Clinton once again affirms that no one is
above the dictates of the law. It also
casts a monumental light on our vulnerability as human beings, in that, we have
the resourceful potential to become mortal victims of our own vices and
follies. But most importantly, it
adjudicates the proverbial wisdom that if you sow the wind, you will most
surely reap the whirlwind and have none other than yourself to thank!
When all is
said and done, it is obvious that neither Kenneth Starr nor Bill Clinton will
have themselves or the other to thank.
Nor will it leave too much to the imagination as to who was the wind and
who the whirlwind in the saga involving three of the most unnatural elements in
the Lewinsky-Flowers-Jones galaxy.
All these
dramatically chaotic events no doubt, will give renewed hope to present and
would-be defendants. Because somewhere
along the line, truth finally begins to matter and becomes indelible. And if the question of God's whereabouts
still persist, then events such as these continue to painstaking map the
contours of his Infinite wisdom and justice.
September 16, 1998
San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission Street, San Francisco, California, USA
Of fate and fleeting fame
Sir:
Truth takes
an epic leap into reality when it has hypocrisy as its spokesperson. This phenomena is no more glaringly apparent
then in the presently heightened melodrama following Princess Diana's
death. While the paparazzi has been
held in contempt and ridicule for contributing to her death, it was, assuredly
after all, the might and sheer will of the paparazzi that gave Princess Diana
an unparalleled legacy in life and death.
This legacy is now further enshrined in the public's show of emotion the
world over. And in the midst of this
unprecedented extravaganza of flowers, tears, bitterness and remorse, Mother
Teresa passes away among the very 'People of the Gutter' in India for whom she
had selflessly toiled these past 50 years!
Rarely
before, have two great individuals, mutually known and respected, passed within
such emotionally-charged proximity of each other, albeit, from vastly
contrasting circumstances. Such mind-numbing
events only occur to remind us of our own fragility as humanbeings. Perhaps more poignantly, to reassure us that
in this amphitheater of existence, only a few are destined to take centerstage. The rest are mere statistics, and their
death, singly or otherwise, is without any greater impact or grief.
It also
points to the oddity of coming into existence rather empty-handed, without any
blue prints, stocks or bonds. Or not
knowing when if ever at all, one's life is to chance upon that moment of
fitting precisely square within the world's most illusive lens to fame and
fortune. To the contrary, what remains
eternally predominant are two distinct realities to which we stand condemned to
from the first moment of existence: Death
is an awful thought, and, Life is a terminal disease! And somewhere, imminently between this
moment and the next, we progressively die.
There are no exceptions, except for eternity. Only eternity is deathless.
And only death has a glimpse of eternity.
In the
final perspective, the paparazzi is about as guilty in bringing about Princess
Diana's end as we, the public. The
paparazzi projected Princess Diana through the lenses of our own insatiable
curiosity. Sadly yet, without the
media, Princess Diana might simply have gone about her business to become the
Queen of England on her given day, live all the years of her life and
thereafter, quietly slip into oblivion.
By the same token, without the media, Mother Teresa might just have been
another nun working along with a handful of other nuns for the betterment of
the poor, the homeless, the downtrodden, the sick and the dying!
September 9, 1997
Marin Independent Journal
150 Alameda del Prado
Novato, California 94949, USA
Stop the Ping-Pong!
Sir:
Existence is sadly tinged with the
pains of realism. The realism that some
are more privileged than others. The
realism that some are more fair skinned than others. The realism that some become only fit to remain poor,
unimpressive, or unversed. Yet, all
these veins of realism lead to the heartbeat of existence, around which life
revolves to engender, sustain and foster the scope of survival.
In Goa,
however, a new genre of realism is intensely brewing. The realism of provoking intolerance towards the other's
inherited beliefs and cultural attributes.
Instead of name-dropping and luncheon meetings, people are now being
rebuked for their acquired names and culinary traits.
As insecure
humanbeings, we are entitled to our dramatic opinions and concerns. Opinions, after all, are by-products of
prevailing truths and are innocuous until they become assertive. From that point on, they only serve and
uphold the subjective values of the assertor.
To be opinionated is to be arrogant.
Arrogance is emotional, and appeals to fanatics. Wisdom has a more gentle demeanor, and draws
a gradually more lasting and expanding an audience.
In times as
muddled as ours, it is edifying to recall the profound adage: "When a man points a finger at
someone else, he should remember that three of his fingers are pointing at
himself". Enough said already
on matters that appease some at the expense of antagonizing others! The past has its assured place in museums
and archives. The present burdens us
with the obligation to do better.
Essentially, on how to make this world ecologically and culturally more
habitable. These are the real issues
that warrant our time, intellect and emotions.
The rest is an eroding game of Ping-Pong!
March 24, 1995
Herald
Opp. Municipal Garden, Panaji, Goa, India
A Gargantuan Grease-ball
Sir:
Politics is
a jugglery of political balls, put forth by political parties and endorsed by
the electorate. Eventually, one
political juggler reigns supreme. But
his/her position in the political hierarchy is not without contemptuous
envy. There are, after all, always
those who feel they lost because they had been maliciously sent to the podium
to juggle with worn-out, dubious, or worthless balls. And there are others who simply cannot live to the fact that they
have once again been juggled-out of juggling the most prestigious political
ball!
There is a
time-held saying: "When the
going gets tough, the tough get going.". In politics, I guess, when the going gets tough, the ball gets
more slick. It is no surprise then that in these last
four-and-half years, the Chief Minister's ball in Goa has slipped a total of
six times.
What's
wrong with Goan politics? It is any
one's wild guess. Perhaps not! Perhaps, from the inception, Goa's political
manifesto has been one Gargantuan grease-ball!
March 1, 1995
Gomantak Times
Gomantak Building, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa, India
Sanctity on Trial?
Sir:
The recent
report, "Seminar on the Life of St. Francis Xavier" (HERALD 19/11/94),
left me feeling rather perplexed, and somewhat amused. According to the report, the seminar was
polarized by a miscellany of assenting and some dissenting opinions on St.
Francis Xavier's credibility as a missionary, and as a saint. My question now is: When did we become so virtuous as to
evaluate those whom our ancestors have accredited as saints, or so much as even
to sit in judgement of their sanctity, or put their sanctity on public trial?
Sainthood
is not a matter of political proclamation, or a media hype. Nor is faith an academic attribute. Vested interests may elevate an individual
to the status of a saint, but what assures that individual's place in the
sacred hierarchy is the latitude of public faith. Such latitude cannot be acquired, or propagated. It can only be felt, inexplicably.
Christianity,
no doubt, brought its share of pain to the inhabitants of Goa. So did Islam before Christianity. So did Hinduism before other beliefs, and so
forth, until we find ourselves where origin began. In reality, neither the world nor humanity was intended to be an
absolute and undeviating entity. If in
the process of evolution, change makes saints of some and enemies of others, it
is simply in the nature of things. To
appreciate these changes, to benefit from the good and steer away from the
evil, is to gracefully accept the challenges of being a realized being.
In
retrospect, no religion or culture is without some idle resentment or
irreverence towards other religions and cultures. History is full of such resentment and irreverence. Sadly, however, history cannot be reversed
or rewritten by activating resentment or irreverence towards other religions
and cultures. Nor can the present be
improved upon by invoking the bitter past.
If harmony prevails, why agitate
it and make co-existence more troubled for those to come? As mortals, we are not here for ever. Only saints continue to earn the dignity and
immortality that the majority have been slotted to be unworthy of. Let us, therefore, not pine in wishful
resentment, grief or envy. Leave the
saints where they are. As lay people
and commoners, we have our work to do . . . to sit in judgement of our own deeds
and vested aspirations. Let us
conscientiously work on that in order to make this world more resourceful in
tolerance than resentment!
January 3, 1995
The Navhind Times
Navhind Bhavan, Rua Ismael de Gracias, Panaji, Goa,
India
What is a Hindu?
Sir:
For some
time now, I have been reading letters
questioning or seeking definitions on "Who is a Goanese?". Or, on "Who is a Hindu?". Better yet, on "What is a Hindu?". I could, conveniently enough, join the ranks
of these inquisitors and perhaps, only succeed in stirring communal hatred!
To begin
with, no race or religion is a curse upon the other until we allow it to
be. Or putting it in a nutshell: We are all here to exist, disproportionately! So why must we suspect the other's purpose
in our midst. If God exists, does it
matter whoever else exists? The problem
with our existence stems from an overwhelming sense of uncertainty. In this regard, uncertainty is our true
religion, for if we could have liberated God from being accountable for our
failures, we would just as easily as well liberate our neighbors from being
accountable for our material failures.
For
centuries, our minds have been structured by the deeds and ideologies of those
who preceded us. Saints, seers, the
natural and the supernatural, all these have become the footprints to our survival.
In the ultimate sense, no religion or God has completely liberated one
group of faithful from the other. To
the contrary, religions have fragmented the core of human existence.
Essentially,
we are all humanbeings, bounded by beliefs and territories. If we can't relate as humanbeings,
obviously, we can't succeed as Hindus, Muslims, Christians, et al. The question becomes: Must one be accepted or revered for the
color of one's skin, or the name of one's God? Seemingly not! All this disorientation
takes us back to religion. And
religion, of course, is a psychological choice. It provides us with a belief system that keeps us subconsciously
together, or consciously apart.
Christians have fought with non-Christians and Christians alike. Hindus have fought with Muslims and Hindus
alike. And so forth. The fact still stands: Religions of the world have not perfected
mankind. Only Truth has. But Truth is as illusive as "Who is
a Goanese?". Or "Who
is a Hindu?" Or for that matter, "What is a
Hindu?". And if Hinduism -- arguably speaking -- is not a religion,
is it the conformity of a nationalistic ideal to survival?
March 3, 1994
The Navhind Times
Navhind Bhavan, Rua Ismael de Gracias, Panaji, Goa,
India
Mundkar Act
Sir:
On the
anvil of politics, often times, social values are either edified for the
benefit of posterity or likewise retrogressed.
The Mundkar Act, unquestionably, belongs in the latter
category. While purporting to be
"an agrarian step for the welfare of the poor sections of the community
...", the Act in essence, has largely sanctified the assets of the rich
and reduced the middle class to a classless entity.
Whether the
Mundkar Act is an agrarian landmark - as politically claimed -- remains
to be seen in the light of constitutional wisdom. The Constitution of India, was founded on the democratic
principles of Freedom, Justice and Equality to all. The Constitution does not endorse the Concept of Equality on the
basis of depriving one party in order to improve the status of the second
party, and thereupon, leaving the aggrieved party worse off than where it found
the now much benefitted second party.
Nor does the Constitution endorse the Concept of Justice to one party
where injustice becomes the obvious consequence to the other party. The Mundkar
Act, therefore, is unconstitutional from the moral standpoint, as it makes
the very values of existence -- which are disproportionate by nature -- even
more disproportionate.
Indeed,
politics does not reform society; politicians do. As human beings, it is in our disposition to err. It is also in our gracefulness to undo our
errors as much as it also is in our arrogance not to. In this regard, the Mundkar Act is not a crime against
humanity, but a villainy against the moral distinction between good and
evil. Good heals, evil festers. An act that finds its essence in what is
unrighteous and injurious, can never heal.
It is a permanent sore on society!
Understandably,
the Mundkar Act is not the progeny of the present administration. But unless the Act is reversed, or justly
amended, it will only continue to cultivate hatred among fellow beings, who are
otherwise sane and civilized enough to comprehend the distinction between good
and evil. The onus, as such, is now
upon this administration to exercise judicial wisdom in undoing a political
wrong, lest it be judged in no less an incriminating light than the signatories
to the Mundkar Act!
November
27, 1993
Gomantak
Times
Gomantak
Building, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa, India
There is only One God . . .
Sir:
As a retired-failure, living on the streets of optimism,
I have the added benefit of occasionally going on some idle excursions. Recently, while cruising through the
internet highway, I overheard some rumblings relating to God's places of
worship. In the agenda of the rumblings
was the issue of whether a church could be referred to as a "temple, or
for that matter, listed under "temples" and vice versa.
If God was available for comment, what might have been
His (or Her) preferences? Enter a
church with his shoes on, or leave them at the entrances of temples and
mosques? Would He be interested in
thumbing through or editing our Encyclopedia of Civilization, amassed through
centuries of fighting bitterly in His name, and for His Glory? And thirdly, could he possibly have
formullated faith as a common glue, bonding us into humanity rather than
dividing us into theological islands?
Unfortunately, God is not
readily available for comment and on my part, I lack the spiritual faculty to
commune directly with Him in the manner Moses and other spiritually evolved
beings are able to. However, when I
stepped off the rather congested internet highway and meandered through the
wide-open alley of silence, it finally dawned on me that there is only one God
and that churches, temples, mosques, synagogues, pagodas . . . are eloquent manifestations of our
subconscious prejudice towards Him!
Gomantak Times
Gomantak Building, St.
Inez, Panaji, Goa, India