Skip to main content

Supreme Court Ban: Green Diwali my @$$

Recently Supreme Court banned sale of firecrackers for Diwali in NCR, stating pollution and some stupid reason. The decision, as it seems was backed by no or little data, and a lot by whims and fancies and probably lobbying by Sickulars and Pseudo-Liberals. When the nation and common man cries foul and calls the supreme court communal, the honourable dumb-asses say they are pained/anguished (https://goo.gl/9jPp3c). 

Does bursting crackers on Diwali only causes pollution? How about the Christmas and New Year. I have seen the Sydney Fireworks on New Year. On that one event at the harbour, they must be creating more pollution than the entire Delhi over the 2 days. Back home, there are other festivals where we see firecrackers. Come marriage season, across regions and religions, we see a huge display (read show off) of crackers.

Arguing on other points. What is the contribution of firecracker pollution? A rough calculation shows less than 0.01% annually. The firecracker pollution is mostly from gunpowder and low explosives. The automotive pollution is far more toxic with the additives. Let me not talk about the industrial pollution, the chemical plants, tanneries etc. towards which Supreme court turns a blind eye. Some cockeyed logic and a stupid emotional appeal for green Diwali. And for that you want to hurt an entire community, the Majority? Well Done Supreme Court Judges.

Note: Post Diwali, the air quality report and other indicators point the air quality wasn't much different in NCR compared to previous years or the neighbouring locations which did not have any cracker ban. 
Inference: Cracker ban is pointless. Supreme court should stop interfering with Hindu festivals and sentiments (Diwali, Holi, Jallikattu, temple rules ... well- it's a long list).
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

New Year Resolutions are for the Fickle Minded

It's good to make and keep resolutions. Today is 1st Jan 2018. More than half the world would make New Year Resolution (NYR). Most will fail. The very practice is conceptually flawed. The Tradition. The history goes back to the Babylonians & the Romans, who vowed on a day or during a specific period, to do something through the year. The vows were made to the Gods; entailed a much bigger commitment. The New Year Resolution. In Modern times, as part of NYR, we commit to ourselves (or family) to start or to stop doing something. The most common resolutions are:- Stay Healthy Lose weight Enjoy life to fullest Save more Spend more time with family/friend Few lesser talked NYRs; which constitute a high percentage; are giving up habits like Drinking, smoking, and other more dangerous substances. Simple Observation. I haven't made any NYR but do indulge in physical activity regularly. Mostly a sport or jog, sometimes both. I am in Abu Dhabi for a few day...
Post a Comment
Read more

Virtual Greeting, Social Celebration and Real Relations

Facebook greeted me with a message, as the year came to a close.  Do I care?  Obviously Not. My year ended pretty good, even with this note from Facebook.   But, Should you care? Real World Connections. I have close to 2000 friends on Facebook. All of whom I have met, most I fondly interact whenever I meet. (Few are mere acquaintances). The number would have been greater if all my friends were on Facebook and connected. I have made friends in real life and later connected with them on Facebook. The friends on my list are from my School days, College, Band of Brothers from the Armed Forces, Training academies, various courses I've attended, people with whom I've served in various tenures. My batch mates from MBA. Colleagues from the companies I've worked with. Neighbours from places I've stayed at. Friends with whom I've gone on trips. My students, participants and trainers- from the trainings I've attended and imparted. Friends I made on var...
1 comment
Read more

Journalism and Activism or Intellectual Terrorism

Sometime back- before the COVID-19 caught everybody's attention, I met an American journalist/activist at one of the premier education institute. Throughout the conversation (where I was on the sidelines- as I had gone to meet some faculty), the active participants - the faculty, research associates and PhD candidates were giving him inputs. Being a journalist, he was taking meticulous notes. He was visiting India and reporting a few things, supporting activists and causes. But what??? There were only 3 topics on which he was asking questions and seeking opinions. Ram Mandir verdict, Citizenship Amendment Act and Rafael deal. This may have been okay- had he been genuinely seeking opinions. He had visited Ayodhya the week before and was narrating his experiences. Within a few minutes, I understood that he was primarily seeking anti views only. He was out rightly rejecting/ignoring any views otherwise. Needless to say, the audience (maybe awed by white skin and accent- lot of us ...
Post a Comment
Read more