perspectives

look in the mirror
do you see what I see?
do you see you seeing me
or do you see me?

perspectives, are they ever the same?
you wish i could know and see
seeing the reflections
see you for you and you as me

if we were the same
we would not be
if you want me to be you
than i cannot be me

the reflections blur
turn around and look in my eyes
you will see urself
the truth and the lies

i may not see the world
the way you do
but that doesn't make us distant
it brings me closer to you

in ur world and mine
the differences i see
as i get closer to u
u set me free

for i knw u like i knw myself
i wish u thought so too
i see u fr u
but i see me too

outer inner

the outer world
the inner world

the way we look
the way we are

the madness outside
the calm within

the right thing
the place of no wrong

the loud laughter
the slight smile

the endless chatter
the wordless talk

the outer world, growing
the inner world, knowing

inspiration

wonder what it takes
wonder what makes
the strength and resilience of those who win
those who can stop the spin
those who give their lives away
those who live their way
wonder sitting, looking for inspiration
tired of futile exhaustion
looking at the river flowing
and the running trains slowing
slowing down thoughts and heartbeat rising fast
looking to build a legacy to last
wonder sitting, looking for inspiration
inspired inside through the subtle sublimation
finding within the eternal place
running my own race

Wow Frenshps day

early morning i gt a message frm a fren. it said something abt frenshp. i wondered why suddenly he bothered and remembered that we were frenz. i mean we are frenz but sending frenshp messages is not something we believed in, till today.

then lazily i logged on. and there i noticed some status messages and a few random ppl pinging me to wish happy frenshp day. i wished them the same. moved on.

came in here. checking some posts by fella bloggers and what were they writing about. well no prizes for guessing that one right.

am thnkng when was the last time i ever gt excited abt frenshp day. if i ever did at all. anyway i didn't see any signs of it here in london. so where has this come from, why and for whom....ya ya ya...frenz...special days...blah blah...but seriously i dun knw if it does make any sense besides commercial sense. anyway nw that i have been reminded that it does happen to be frenshp day...like everyone else am glad fr my gang of chu...chums...lazy sunday ...yawn

and some of u who read this space...yeah i guess i cud wish u too... :)

but did george bush wish manmohan?

did sonia wish amar singh?

did mayawati wish.....?

did .....yawn sleep

in constant war

are we at peace or are we at constant war? the blasts in india are not in isolation. we do become incapable of seeing it unless it hits home. it is happening everywhere, everyday. this constant struggle where innocents get killed everywhere in the fight for power of those who call the shots but never get to the ground level, between the dominant and minorities striking back.

i am losing sense of right or wrong. i saw a story of a eight year old on telly pretty much with every part of his body plastered up. he ended up that way cos he had come to visit his dad, a worker at the hospital. he was there to learn riding a bike and his dad was to help him with it. his brother accompanied him. a blast happened. his brother ended up in ICU and he got all plastered up. am sure there are many more such horrific stories. but i am just failing to make sense of it all. to recall, recollect and blog this story after a week am still as ambivalent as i was then, wondering if i shud happy to see that he survived or be sad to see his plastered self.

has the myth to make the nuclear deal the most obvious naturalised choice been accepted? energy crisis. what abt solar energy? hw about an agreement with US for the transfer of technology in that area? wondering and pondering.

from 3...5 to 7 blasts...in bangalore....just another one of those incidents, who cares. everything goes. but for the lives of those dead. a moment of silence if there is nothing more we can do.

Nuclear Deal - Left's Objections to the deal...King Singh's Parliamentary Speech

As mentioned in my last post I had been talking but not doing much in terms of understanding the nuclear deal. I do agree making tall claims without adequate knowledge of the issue was not of any consequence but I also understand that it is through deliberation and debate that we gain an understanding of issues at hand. So here are some key issues that the Left had raised and for which it withdrew support from the 'king singh government' which haven't been answered, to my knowledge yet or have they? If anyone knows pls do let me knw. :)

• Despite the fact that there are fuel supply assurances in the agreement there had been No Concrete Fuel Supply Assurance in return for the IAEA Safeguards, which obviously is in Perpetuity. Till date these assurances that were made earlier on have also not been fulfilled.
• The key question therefore with respect to IAEA safeguards is: how to ensure that once India’s civilian reactors go under safeguards in perpetuity, the country would not be blackmailed by the withholding of nuclear fuel supplies, as the United States did in Tarapur following Pokhran-I?
• The preamble to the Safeguards Agreement notes that India is offering its civilian nuclear facilities for IAEA safeguards on the “essential basis” of “the conclusion of international cooperation arrangements creating the necessary conditions for India to obtain access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continuous access to fuel supplies from companies in several nations, as well as support for an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of India’s reactors.” The real point is that the preamble merely ‘notes’ India’s intentions in these respects. IAEA has neither any obligation regarding fuel supplies or building strategic reserves nor does this noting India’s basis for this offer give India any additional rights through this agreement.
• As against the vagueness of the “corrective measures” figuring in the preamble that India has, what is spelt out clearly in the body of the agreement (Paragraph 32) is that India can withdraw its facilities from safeguards only if it is (a) jointly agreed between India and IAEA, and (b) if these facilities are no longer usable for any nuclear activity. What does this mean? It can only mean that India can withdraw any facility it wants out of IAEA safeguards only if it strips it of all capability of producing nuclear energy and that too only after the IAEA determines that “the facility is no longer usable for any nuclear activity relevant from the point of view of safeguards.
• It is well established in international law that the preamble is a part of the treaty or international agreement and it can be used to give colour and tone to the interpretation of the operative part of the treaty/agreement. This does not however mean that it can be used to create additional rights or obligations that are not contained in the clauses of the Treaty/Agreement.

In response to the above, King Singh's reply for the parliament does not seem to be addressing any of these issues. It is more rhetorical than factual. It touches upon a range of issues from Advani to the number of IIMs and what not. On the issue of the deal he uses terms like Nuclear Aparthied and Nuclear Isolation. Just to clarify if it is about aparthied then it would need equal rights for all to end it and not just one country joining the so called priveleged camp. He does mention how there was a need to discuss the agreement, deliberate and negotiate the agreement but then the King Singh also contradicted himself by reaffirming his commitment to the deal at G8 with Bush. Had it not been for his Kingly Notions of ruling a democratic nation I wonder if the fiasco was avoidable?

So what happens next? Will IAEA be debated at all now??