DC., November 2004 (Sound of intercom buzzing)
(Remote voice) Mr. President, Condoleezza Rice is here to
†Good! Send her in.
(Sound of door opening)
‡Good morning, Mr. President.
(Sound of door closing)
†Oh Condoleezza, nice to see you, what's happening?
‡Well, Mr. President, I have the report here about the
new leader in China.
†Right Conda, lay it on me.
‡Mr. President, Hu is the new leader of China.
†Well, that's what I want to know.
‡Well, that's what I am telling you, Mr. President,
†Well, that's what I am asking you Condi, who is the
new leader of China.
†I mean the fellow's name.
†The guy in China.
†The new leader of China.
‡Hu is leading China, Mr. President
†What are you asking me for?
‡I am telling you, Hu is leading China.
†Well, I am asking you Condi, who is leading China?
‡That's the man's name.
†That's whose name?
†Will you or will you not tell me the name of the new
leader in China?
†Yasir? Yasir Arafat is in China? I thought he was in
the Middle East.
‡That's correct, sir.
†Then who is in China?
†Yasir is in China?
†Then who is?
you are starting to tick me off now. That's not because you
are black either. I need to know the name of the new leader
of China. So why don't you get me the Secretary-General of
the United Nations on the phone.
†No thanks; and Condi, call me George. Stop with that
‡You want Kofi?
‡You don't want Kofi?
†No. But now that you mention it, I could use a glass
of milk, and then get me the UN.
†Not Yasir, the guy at the United Nations.
†Milk! Will you please make that call?
‡And call who?
†Well, who is the guy at the UN?
‡No, Hu is the guy in China.
†Will you stay out of China?
†And stay out of the Middle East. Just get me the guy
at the UN.
†All right! With cream and two sugars... now get on
‡Hello! Rice here!
†Rice? Good idea, and get a couple of egg-rolls too,
Condi, maybe we should send some to the guy in China, and
the Middle East. Can you get Chinese food in the Middle East?
I had pleasure in transcribing the above year-old audio clip
whose author perhaps wanted the world to have a peep into
how the Bush admin went about its day-to-day business. Fascinating
in some sense but understandable because the most powerful
man in the world has been behaving like a bull in a china
shop. Fear not, Beijing, I have no indication that it is you
who is next.
on 12 November saw rivulets of tears, a sea of humankind,
an ocean of emotions, and yet the CNN commentator wondered
Live on TV how would the Palestinians ever be able to govern
a state if they could not organise the (simple) funeral of
their leader Yasser Arafat.
is the West has only one barometer with which they have always
wanted to fathom the world. It is simply not that simple.
we will never understand why despite US citizens having enjoyed
the highest material standards of living in the world through
most of the 20th century there should still be homeless people
sleeping in cardboard boxes on their footpaths, hungry and
is the US administration's opposition to religious bias, more
specifically Islam in countries like Afghanistan and Iran,
and garb them as 'fundamentalists' while Bush should go ahead
and win a second term because of the wholesale support of
evangelical voters. Are they not Christian 'fundamentalists'?
Or have you never heard such gibberish terminology? Now is
a good time as any to start facing facts.
to the Christian fundamentalist, a Muslim fundamentalist also
believes in certain values based on the religion Islam. Basically
any religious person of every form of belief has to be a fundamentalist.
That's elementary, Mr. Bush.
not Christian fundamentalists, those who believe in certain
values and are not open to changes; not that I personally
find anything wrong with people of either conviction. Nor
am I necessarily inclined to one or the other.
seriously objectionable here is Americans accepting Christian
fundamentalism as righteous while simultaneously opposing
vehemently Islamic governments because they are fundamentalists.
If that leaves a sick taste of oil in your tongue it means
you are an honourable person of good moral standing.
finds a crusade, reference his speech after 9/11, justifiable
and a vote-winner, what is wrong with Muslims declaring a
jihad? Both, one presumes, are holy wars.
now emerged that campaign for Bush was carried out in churches
and religious gatherings. Then how can Bush, his British boyfriend
and a section of the West look down on religious teachings
in masjids and madrashas? You can with a pail of oil in the
right hand and the holy book in another.
every person bearing a Christian name is not virtuous, every
Muslim is not a terrorist. Some are fighting for their motherland.
They are freedom fighters; just as an American would be if
he fought occupying external forces on American soil.
every person wearing a cross is not a Saint, every Muslim
warrior is not an insurgent. They rebel for their rights that
have been wrongfully snatched.
let me take you to an April day in 1861 when the American
Civil War between the Union and the Confederacy began. Five
years later an estimated 600,000 American lives were lost,
many of them freedom fighters, property worth $5 billion were
destroyed, but thankfully it brought liberty to four million
black slaves. But, even after 125 years the wounds of either
party have not completely healed. How long do you think it
will take to heal the wounds that you have opened between
the Christians and the Muslims? You can start a jihad, Mr.
President, but it shall take another crusade to bring back
On a brighter
note, an astrologer has assured us that the Bush regime shall
have a happy ending. Everyone will be happy when it ends.
(R) thedailystar.net 2004