BLOGS Dow Shalt Pay For Bhopal Just for the record, and those who missed it earlier, thanks to a revival on Twitter -- and perhaps because of that the resulting emails today -- of the old Yes Men hoax/prank on BBC. The Yes Men explain the background: Dow claims the company inherited no liabilities for the Bhopal disaster, but the victims aren't buying it, and have continued to fight Dow just as hard as they fought Union Carbide. That's a heavy cross to bear for a multinational company; perhaps it's no wonder Dow can't quite face the truth. The Yes Men decided, in November 2002, to help them do so by explaining exactly why Dow can't do anything for the Bhopalis: they aren't shareholders. Dow responded in a masterfully clumsy way, resulting in a flurry of press. Two years later, in late November 2004, an invitation arrived at the 2002 website, neglected since. On the 20th anniversary of the Bhopal disaster, "Dow representative" "Jude Finisterra" went on BBC World TV to announce that the company was finally going to compensate the victims and clean up the mess in Bhopal. The story shot around the world, much to the chagrin of Dow, who briefly disavowed any responsibility as per policy. The Yes Men again helped Dow be clearer about their feelings. (See also this account, complete with a story of censorship.) Only months after Andy's face had been on most UK tellies, he appeared at a London banking conference as Dow rep "Erastus Hamm," this time to explain how Dow considers death acceptable so long as profits still roll in. A life-sized golden skeleton named Gilda helped explain to the bankers that just because something like Bhopal is a "skeleton in the closet," it isn't necessarily a bad one: it may be quite lucrative, i.e. "golden." The bankers applauded and swarmed "Gilda" for free keychains and licenses for the Acceptable Risk Calculator. Finally, on May 12, 2005, at Dow's annual shareholder meeting, "Jude Finisterra" addressed the Dow board to suggest the same thing he had on the BBC. Two minutes later, Mike addressed the board as if he were furious that Dow wasn't clamping down sufficiently on activists - not nuns and victims, maybe, but at least scoundrels like "Jude Finisterra." Asked if Dow would pursue him, Dow Chairman Stavropoulos answered, "If you help me to find him." As Channel 4 reported: Yet The Learner Driver Remains An Enigma Rahul Gandhi recently turned 40, but has he come of age? The Economist notes the sycophancy with which his birthday was celebrated by sections of the media: Today Congress stands ready to do the family¶s bidding, like a well-upholstered Ambassador car always at the front door. A second, even more impressive vehicle, known simply as India, boasts wheels of state, and its chauffeur is respectfully called ³prime minister´. It offers an exhilarating if often erratic ride (it belches smoke and lurches in unexpected directions, when it is not stuck in traffic). It is currently on loan to a loyal and honest retainer, Manmohan Singh, no mean driver for a man of his years. But this car is Rahul¶s heirloom. It is just a question of time before he asks for the keys back. A second troubling point has to do with all the recent references to Rahul¶s youthful age. Forty, after all, is not really that young. By then a man might be expected to have made his mark in the world, rather than be celebrating his coming-of-age. By the time they were Rahul¶s age, Mozart and Alexander the Great had both been dead for several years. At 33 Jesus Christ had preached, healed, died and risen. The comparison is not wholly unfair, since Rahul¶s disciples talk of him as India¶s saviour. Read on at the Economist: The mysterious Mr Gandhi (via Dilip D'Souza on Twitter) Read Full Post | 3 comments FILED IN: Congress|Rahul Gandhi POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 30, 2010 AT 15:00 IST, Edited At: Jun 30, 2010 15:00 IST Is The UPA Suddenly Turning Reformist? The Prime Minister insists that the decision to hike fuel prices "was much needed reforms" not taken under any pressure Writing in the Telegraph, Ashok V. Desai* tells us not to believe any such thing: The timing of the decision suggests a connection with the meeting of the Group of 20 last Sunday. The recent camaraderie between the government and Reliance is relevant here. The Ambani brothers entered an agreement to divide up the Reliance empire in 2005. Soon they quarrelled, and their rows ended up in courts. The Central government quite gratuitously asked the courts to allow it to intervene, and did so systematically in favour of Mukesh¶s Reliance. Such uncalled-for and inappropriate favours are generally not made out of a generosity of heart; interests and influence are usually involved. The government¶s concern did not confine itself to the fraternal conflict; it spilled over, as will be seen, to the decision on pricing Read the full piece *Please note he is not a "leftist". Nor is he a Hindutwit, as he always delights in describing the Hindutva-walas. He in fact was the chief consultant in the finance ministry from 1991 till 1993, when he helped Manmohan Singh with the reforms. Read Full Post | 0 comments FILED IN: G-Summits|Oil-Gas-Fuel Prices|Reforms|Reliance Industries|UPA|Mukesh Ambani POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 29, 2010 AT 23:59 IST, Edited At: Jun 29, 2010 23:59 IST Before The Indians Came Joel Stein's article in the latest issue of Time magazine is being criticised in most circles as at least latently, if not patently and overtly, racist: I am very much in favor of immigration everywhere in the U.S. except Edison, N.J. The mostly white suburban town I left when I graduated from high school in 1989 ² the town that was called Menlo Park when Thomas Alva Edison set up shop there and was later renamed in his honor ² has become home to one of the biggest Indian communities in the U.S., as familiar to people in India as how to instruct stupid Americans to reboot their Internet routers. Read on here Do you think he is just being nostalgic and perhaps a bit irreverent, with the humour not quite coming off, or do you sense shades of racism or at least a mild case of Raj Thackerayism masquearading as satire? Would it be equally kosher to be similarly 'jokey' about, say, the American Blacks or American Indians? Have people lost their sense of humour or is it really just not funny? And what is this about Indians and the amount of cologne they wear that seems to be cropping up all over the place? PS: And, oh, I am informed @thejoelstein has since clarified on Twitter: ³Didn¶t meant to insult Indians with my column this week. Also stupidly assumed their emails would follow that Gandhi non-violence thing.´ Clearly, he has not heard of the other Gandhians who have been in the news lately... Read Full Post | 6 comments FILED IN: Indian-Americans|Indians Abroad|Migration-Immigration- Emigration|USA POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 29, 2010 AT 13:17 IST, Edited At: Jun 29, 2010 13:17 IST A Clumsy Attempt At A Cover Up Not that there was an iota of any doubt on Congress's complicity in l'affaire Anderson, but because the party continues to brazen it out, the sideshow carries on and on. First they said ³the immigration/emigration records of 1984 are not available´ and the government was dependent on ³contemporary media reports´ for its knowledge of that controversial visit. More than enough "contemporary media reports" had already been documented recently, and only the previous day the readers¶ editor of The Hindu had dredged up old files to reveal G.K. Reddy¶s reporting from 1984 on the story. But the Group of Ministers report continued with the charade, forcing The Hindu to once again point out on its front page today: The Group of Ministers report claims ³contemporary media reports also indicate that the Prime Minister, Shri Rajiv Gandhi, was briefed on the matter [of the UCC chief's arrival, arrest and departure] after Anderson left the country.´ But on December 7, 1984, TheHindu's New Delhi bureau chief G.K. Reddy filed a report, saying the Prime Minister's ³Principal Secretary Dr. P. C. Alexander brought the facts to his notice today while he was still in Madhya Pradesh, before the Centre intervened to secure Mr. Anderson's release and arrange for his flight to Delhi later that night.´ Clearly, TheHindu's ³contemporary´ report indicates that Rajiv Gandhi was informed even before Mr. Anderson left the guest house in Bhopal, and certainly before he left India, in direct contradiction of the GoM claim. Not only that, The Hindu has also pulled out its issues of December 8 and 9, 1984 to show that the GOM¶s conclusions is ³either a careless misreading of the reports or, more likely, a clumsy attempt at a cover-up´: The irony is that in attempting to provide Rajiv Gandhi with an unnecessary alibi for one of the many sideshows of the gas tragedy ² how Union Carbide Corporation chief Warren Anderson came toExclusive: Text of Group of Ministers report on issues relating to Bhopal Gas Leak Calamity be arrested and released so quickly on December 7, 1984 ² the GoM will likely ensure the late Congress leader and Prime Minister remains at the centre of political controversy.