Dear Editor:
I’m sorry but I would like to challenge some of your Indian male readers. I am a White female who is engaged to an Indian male, good-looking, educated and loving. I just don’t understand a lot of Indian female’s attitudes about our relationship. My man decided he wanted me because the pickings amongst Indian women were slim to none. As he said they were either too fat, too loud, too mean, too argumentative, too needy, too materialistic or carrying too much excess baggage. Before I became engaged, whenever I went out I was constantly approached by Indian men, willing to wine and dine me and give me the world If Indian women are so up in arms about us being with their men, why don’t they look at themselves and make some changes. I am tired of the dirty looks I get and snide remarks when we’re out in public. I would like to hear from some Indian men about why we white women are so appealing and coveted by them. Bryant Gumbel just left his wife of 26 years for one of us. Charles Barkley, Scottie Pippen, the model Tyson Beckford, Montell Williams, Quincy Jones, James Earl Jones, Harry Belafonte, Sydney Poitier, Kofi Anan, Cuba Gooding Jr., Don Cornelius,Berry Gordy, BillyBlanks, Larry Fishburne, Jesley Snipes…I could go on and on. But,right now, I’m a little angry and that is why I wrote this so hurriedly. Don’t be mad with us White women because so many of your men want us. Get your acts together and learn from us and we may lead you to treat your men better. If I’m wrong, Indian men, let me know.
Disgusted White Girl, Somewhere in VA.
—————————————————————–

This is Courage

Technical Skill is the mastery of complexity, while Creativity is the
master of presence of mind

This is a famous paper written for an Oxford philosophy exam, normally
requiring an eight page essay answer and expected to be backed up with
source material, quotes and analytical reasoning.
This guy wrote the below answer and topped the exam!

*OXFORD EXAMINATION BOARD 1987*
*ESSAY QUESTION*

Question: What is courage? (50 Marks)

Answer: This is courage

Bastard !!!

Indians don't eat beef much (mainly Christians and Muslims - along with some Hindus eat). Americans - specially in South - love their steaks and beefs. No connection?

There is.

In 1849, Dr. James Bolton Davis of Fairfield County, South Carolina - first imported cattle from India. The 3 main breeds were "Guzerat" (or, I assume Gujarat); Nellore, and Gir. He had come to know of the Indian - Bos indicus - the Indian species - cattle while serving as agricultural advisor to the Sultan of Turkey. Since then, there were repeated imports into the US of the Indian variety - specially in the Southern states of the US.

The US breed that emerged out of this entire cross-breeding was called Brahma or Brahman bulls.

Through centuries of exposure to inadequate food supplies, insect pests, parasites, diseases and the weather extremes of tropical India, the native cattle developed some remarkable adaptations for survival.

CORPORATE LESSON # 1

A man is getting into the shower just as his wife is finishing up her
shower & the doorbell rings. After a few seconds of arguing over who should
go and answer the doorbell, the wife gives up, quickly wraps herself up in a
towel and runs downstairs.

When she opens the door, there stands Bob, the next door neighbor.

Before she says a word, Bob says, "I'll give you $ 800 just to drop that
towel that you have on". After thinking for a moment, the woman drops her towel
and stands naked in front of Bob. Bob has a close look at her for a few
seconds, hands over $800 and quietly leaves.
Confused, but excited about her good fortune, the woman wraps back up in
the towel and goes upstairs.

When she gets back to the bathroom, her husband asks from the shower "Who was
that?" "It was Bob the next door neighbor," she replies.
"Great,"
the husband says, "did he say anything about the $! 800 he owes me?"

MORAL OF THE STORY: Share critical credit information with your stakeholders
to prevent avoidable exposure!

CORPORATE LESSON # 2

A priest was driving along and saw a nun on the side of the road, he
stopped and offered her a lift which she gladly accepted. She got in and
crossed her legs,> forcing her gown to open and reveal a lovely leg. The
priest had a look and nearly had an accident. After controlling the car, he
stealthily slid his hand up her leg. The nun looked at him and immediately
said, "Father, remember psalm 129?" The priest was flustered and apologized
profusely. He forced himself to remove his hand. However, he was unable to
remove his eyes from her leg.

Further on, while changing gear, he let his hand slide up her leg again.

The nun once again said, "Father, remember psalm 129?" Once again the priest
apologized.

"Sorry sister, but the mind is weak." Arriving at the convent, the nun got
out, gave him a meaningful glance and went on her way. On his arrival at the
church, the priest rushed to retrieve a bible and looked up psalm 129. It Said,
"Go forth and seek; further up, you will find glory.">

MORAL OF THE STORY: Always be well informed in your job; or, you might miss
great opportunities!

Karma theory is very misunderstood paradigm. Most of the world is messed up in Moralistic pronoucements where if you do "good" you could reach salvation (whatever that means). Now, when you look at this urge to "do good" a little deeply you realize the nonsense of it all. What does mean by "doing good"? That I am going to take an Action that will yield a result that will be "good". So, is "Good" an adjective of the Action or the Result? Does the Action in itself have any qualification (or adjective)? If you look carefully, the answer is obviously.. NO! So, what am I saying by claiming I want to "do good". That I precisely and unequivocally know the Actionsthat will necessarily and definitely lead to good result! Now, this playing "God" flies in the face of the claims that most of us make of our "Gods" - creator, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient etc. Little do we realize that Morals are simply useless pegs that, on the one side, strengthen one's ego and on the other hand, they are relative based on context/space/time combinations.

What Karma theory does is to set one free one from the quagmire of arbitrary morals and codes of conduct. You can be a Bhishma who fights Krishna himself and YET be the hightest Karma-yogi of the century. You could be a butcher who kills animals everyday for meat honestly and without any ego and yet be celebrated by a Vyadha-Gita. All ways to tellingly bring forth the message that ACTION has NO COLOR! Action, in itself, has no qualificaton! So, if you just do your action honestly as a duty that you have to discharge without any judgments as to what is right or wrong, then things will take care of themself.

The letting go of playing "God" is what seems intriguing. That dissolution of the highest aspirations can give one actual shot at being "God" is what I find most ironic.