WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF ILLUSIONS. BELIEVE IN YOURSELF,THAT YOU CAN CHANGE THE COURSE OF THIS WORLD

Hello All, for the last few months i was a  little busy. i didn't realize what i was missing by not being with you all. but now i am back.
 
Also another news. I am also now on Twitter. Use the following link to find me.

http://twitter.com/justinsamthomas

Have to take leave now. Anyway this time i won't be abandoning mindsay. So remember I'll be back!!!!!

“Slumdog Millionaire” is the tale of an impoverished orphan’s improbable victory on India’s version of the game show “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” . The colorful drama cost just $15 million to make and has been collecting more than that & still going strong in the Box-Office throughout the world.

Danny Boyle's uplifting saga about a Mumbai slumkid's rags-to-riches journey reminds us why we go to the movies in the first place – not to find fault, but to be entertained, touched and inspired.



Slumdog Millionaire has hit a chord with people. This is the main reason for its phenomenal success. The acclaim comes 8 months after director Danny Boyle’s then-unreleased film was facing a possible route straight to DVD.

Wildly silly but entirely watchable, the film is best enjoyed when you aren't taking it too seriously, merely submitting yourself to its roller-coaster ride of exhilarating romance and heightened drama. It is after all a film with a big beating heart, a film that feels such affection for its characters.

Indeed Slumdog Millionaire is that rare foreign film that uses the Bollywood idiom to tell a simple, even clichéd underdog story with remarkable success.

18-year-old Jamal Malik (played by Dev Patel) is an orphan who has spent his life scavenging on the streets, until he lands a spot as a contestant on Kaun Banega Crorepati, where he makes a killing. The host of the show (played by a bullying, bellowing Anil Kapoor) mocks Jamal for his low-class roots, and has him arrested on suspicion of cheating.

Sitting there tied up and being thrashed around by the cops, Jamal reveals how each question corresponds to a specific life lesson from his tragic past. His is a horrific tale of watching his mother being killed in front of his eyes, narrowly escaping mutilation himself, and losing his childhood friend to a prostitution ring.

It's merely not the expositions of Mumbai and Vikas Swaroop's 'Q&A' that makes 'Slumdog Millionaire' an interesting film. Simon Beaufoy's gripping screenplay of continuous switching over times of past-and-present, keeps you edge-seated for every single second of the 120 minutes. A groovy narration with joy, pain, union, separation, tragedy and love doesn't get anyone's attentions scattered.

As icing on the cake, the Musical score by Rahman makes it big with the visual perception. Rahman's earnest involvement in getting along with creative thoughts of the cinematographer and Danny Boyle has yielded the best results. Doubtlessly, 'Jai Ho' and 'O...Saayo' are electrifying making you feel to watch it over again for many times.



In this film there's action, painful romance, a dash of humour, life in the slums and the underbelly of crime. Everything is neatly packaged and delivered to the viewer. Yes, some scenes are unpalatable, but then that's the reality of life. And Danny Boyle is pulling no punches... he just delivers them in style.

I can proudly say that this film is indeed very Indian. Certainly not because of its Indian star cast, music composer or  casting cum co-director but because of its Indian sensibility and aesthetics. In the very beginning of the film when you see two brothers conversing with each other, the elder one stresses on the fact that he is elder and thus the younger one needs to buy his point, irrespective of its consequences.

Incorporation of minute Indian nuances like these make Slumdog Millionaire one of the best English films set in India and revolving around the country’s most popular metropolis Mumbai. 



Dev Patel who plays the central character of Jamal is a fine actor. In fact, he overshadows Anil Kapoor and the rest of the cast. The younger actors who play Jamal and his brother Salim are simply awesome. They take you on their journey with such glee not knowing what's in store at the bend. Freida Pinto as Latika is a class act. She lets her eyes do most of the talking. Mahesh Manjrekar, Irrfan Khan and Saurabh Shukla all lend credible support. Ashutosh Lobo Gajiwala the boy who plays a slightly older Salim (Jamal's brother) is a revelation. Ditto the boy who plays the role of a slightly older Jamal.



On the whole, 'Slumdog Millionaire' has various reasons to capture everyone's attention. Probably, the most top-charting show of 'Who wants to be a Millionaire', 'Kaun Banega Crorepathi' should have earlier pulled everyone. Nevertheless, there's something more close to your hearts than these factors of emotional vistas. A beautifully portrayed romance bounded with lots of hurdles in the union till last moment is sure to melt down your hearts.

Even when the script's loose, the characters hold you spellbound by their interactions, particularly the film's three protagonists – Jamal, his older brother Salim, and their childhood companion Latika. Three sets of actors are hired to play each of the three characters at different ages, but it's the youngest lot who leave a lasting impression.

The film has been nominated for ten Academy Awards. The only possible obstacle to a big Oscar night for the film is that none of its cast were nominated as observers have noted.

Corporate tycoons Anil Ambani & Sunil Bharti Mittal on Tuesday, January 13th at the valedictory session of the Fourth Vibrant Gujarat Global Investors Summit said that "MODI IS THE EXACT MATERIAL FOR INDIAN PRIME MINISTER POST".

Do you guys agree with this?



Should a guy (As Congress Party says) who has the blood stains of thousands of Gujarati Muslims & Christians should be made our next Prime Minister?



What do you guys out there think about Narendra Modi as Prime Minister?



Will his policies towards minorities in India be similar to what Hitler was to the Jews?



Give your thoughts by replying to this post......

Israel has far fewer restrictions

Over the last week, many are asking why India does not "do a Gaza" on Pakistan, referring, of course, to an emulation of Israel's use of force against Terrorists Hamas-run Palestine, a territory from which rockets rain down on Israeli soil with reliable frequency (if not reliable destructiveness ...).

The answer for this question comes always with a painful grip on reality, is simple: India does not because it cannot.

Here are five reasons why:

1. India is not a military goliath in relation to Pakistan in the way Israel is to the Palestinian territories. India does not have the immunity, the confidence and the military free hand that result from an overwhelming military superiority over an opponent. Israel's foe is a non-sovereign entity that enjoys the most precarious form of self-governance. Pakistan, for all its dysfunction, is a proper country with a proper army, superior by far to the tin-pot Arab forces that Israel has had to combat over time. Pakistan has nukes, to boot. Any assault on Pakistani territory carries with it an apocalyptic risk for India. This is, in fact, Pakistan's trump card. (This explains, also, why Israel is determined to prevent the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran.)

2. Even if India could attack Pakistan without fear of nuclear retaliation, the rationale for "doing a Gaza" is, arguably, not fully present: Israel had been attacked consistently by the very force--Hamas--that was in political control of the territory from which the attacks occurred. By contrast, terrorist attacks on India, while originating in Pakistan, are not authored by the Pakistani government. India can-- and does--contend that Pakistan's government should shut down the terrorist training camps on Pakistani soil. (In this insistence, India has unequivocal support from Washington.) Yet only a consistent and demonstrable pattern of dereliction by Pakistani authorities-- which would need to be dereliction verging on complicity with the terrorists--would furnish India with sufficient grounds to hold the Pakistani state culpable.

3. Israel enjoys impressive support from many countries especially from the Americans, in contrast to the Palestinians. No other state--apart, perhaps, from Britain--evokes as much favor in American public opinion as does Israel. This is not merely the result of the much-vaunted "Israel lobby" (to use a label deployed by its detractors), but also because of the very real depth of cultural interpenetration between American and Israeli society. This fraternal feeling buys Israel an enviable immunity in the conduct of its strategic defense. India, by contrast--while considerably more admired and favored in American public opinion than Pakistan--enjoys scarcely a fraction of Israel's "pull" in Washington when it comes to questions of the use of force beyond its borders. 

4. Pakistan is strategically significant to the United States; the Palestinians are not. This gives Washington scant incentive to rein in the Israelis, but a major incentive to rein in any Indian impulse to strike at Pakistan. However justified the Indian anger against Pakistan over the recent invasion of Mumbai by Pakistani terrorists, the last thing that the U.S. wants right now is an attack--no matter how surgical--by India against Pakistan-based terror camps. This would almost certainly result in a wholesale shift of Pakistani troops away from their western, Afghan front toward the eastern boundary with India--and would leave the American Afghan campaign in some considerable disarray, at least in the short term. So Washington has asked for, and received, the gift of Indian patience. And although India recognizes that it is not wholly without options to mobilize quickly for punitive, surgical strikes in a "strategic space," it would--right now--settle for a trial of the accused terrorist leaders in U.S. courts. (Seven U.S Citizens were killed in Mumbai: Under U.S. law, those responsible--and this should include Pakistani intelligence masterminds--have to be brought to justice.)

5. Israel has the privilege of an international pariah to ignore international public opinion in its use of force against the Palestinians. A state with which few others have diplomatic relations can turn the tables on those that would anathematize it by saying, Hang diplomacy. India, by contrast, has no such luxury. It is a prisoner of its own global aspirations--and pretensions.

   


As Mumbai and the rest of India come to terms with the carnage in Colaba and count the long-term costs of the devastation, there are two small points of reassurance.

First, the prolonged 60-hour shot-by-shot, live TV coverage of the siege of two hotels and a Jewish community centre, has bluntly brought home to Indians — particularly the country's opinion-makers — the ugly face of terrorism. The threat to national security and the well-being of the country could not have been driven home more unequivocally. India is no stranger to terrorism and Mumbai in particular has suffered incessantly since March 1993. But the sheer audacity of this particular operation and the spectacular publicity surrounding it ensured that every Indian, with access to TV, lived through the horror. If there ever was a wake-up call to rouse a Kumbhakarna, this was it.

Second, this was one outrage which finally snapped the endurance and infinite generosity of India. In the past, every assault on Mumbai — where, at times, the death toll was higher — had produced a flicker of anger, followed by an astonishing display of fatalism. What was often flaunted by the angst-ridden section of the media as the ‘spirit of Mumbai' wasn't a display of the gritty, stiff upper lip resolve Londoners showed during the Blitz in 1940-41. It was actually a demonstration of lofty aloofness which very easily translated into indifference or, worse, denial.

The mood is different this week; it is palpably angry. It is one thing for the three Thackerays to spew indignation. That's habitual. But when pillars of Mumbai society such as Ajay Piramal and Shobhaa De say enough is enough and when Ratan Tata expresses his understated dissatisfaction with the administration's unpreparedness, it suggests that something has finally given way. Those Swami Vivekananda once caricatured as “the patient Hindu, the mild Hindu” may well have become angry Indians.

The transformation was waiting to happen. For more than a decade terrorists espousing unacceptable causes have blown up trains, bombed crowded markets, hijacked a plane and attacked places of worship. Indians have suffered stoically but left it to governments to take remedial action. Instead of building on that trust, the political class has approached terrorism as a game of political one-upmanship, stoked subliminal fears and then left India vulnerable. Every terrorist atrocity was followed by assurances of “tough” action, greater preparedness and continuing laxity. The fanatically motivated terrorists who held Mumbai to ransom for 48 hours have made a mockery of the state's ability to protect its citizens. They not only killed but made a whole country suffer.

The men in uniform did a wonderful and professional job under difficult and even adverse circumstances. They showed what the country is capable of achieving when driven by a common resolve. But India has been shamed by the incompetence of those it entrusted with running the country. Mumbai wasn't a victim of ordinary intelligence failure; the grim truth is that there was zero intelligence. India was caught napping.

It is important to vent our anger through the ballot box, to reject those who preened while our cities burned. Unfortunately, this isn't enough. The collective choice must be shaped by a candid realisation that India is no longer on a conventional flight path: it is at war. Another wrong turn and a Mumbai that is already suffering the burden of a government's mismanagement of public finance will end up as a Beirut, a Karachi.

India doesn't need to replace an uninspiring tweedledum with a dreary tweedledee. It needs someone inspirational, someone blessed with guts, imagination, energy, integrity and application. It yearns for a leader who has the self-assurance to prescribe a bitter dose of medicine. India doesn't need a leader to manage the peace; it needs a leader who can lead us in a war. We are through with a Chamberlain; it's time for a Churchill.

While initial reports suggested that Mumbai carnage was a localised attack by militant malcontents in India because of the "Deccan Mujaheddin" decoy that was used to claim responsibility, evidence cited by Indian army & security experts based on phone intercepts, nature of weaponry, mode of entry by sea etc., has quickly focused the attention on Pakistan.



The statement by India's normally cautious & restrained prime minister, Manmohan Singh, that groups based across the border, a thinly-disguised reference to Pakistan, has also galvanized the strategic and security community into examining Islamabad's role in the region that has already been subjected to scrutiny in the past.



Intelligence experts have zeroed in on Pakistan's role in the terrorist activities in Indian Sub-Continent. "There have been reports from credible sources for years that Pakistani intelligence has used terrorist groups to conduct war-by-proxy against traditional rival India. With the latest horrific attacks throughout Mumbai, evidence continues to accumulate that may add new substance to such reports," the website Washington Examiner noted.



What has added potency to the latest charges against Islamabad is the Bush administration's own assessment - leaked to the US media - that Pakistan's intelligence agency ISI was linked to the bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul some weeks back that killed nearly 60 people including a much-admired Indian diplomat and a respected senior defense official.



This time, the US scrutiny is more intense because American, Israeli & other western nationals appear to have been singled out during the carnage. 100's of Indians have died in dozens of terrorist attacks in India in the past two decades without Washington losing too much sleep over it. In fact, Indian officials have often complained in private that successive US administrations have been incredibly indulgent about Pakistan's brazen involvement in fomenting terror in India, believing it would not touch the US.



Part of the coddling goes back to US patronage of the ISI during the Afghan war. As a result, Washington has done little to bring to book Dawood Ibrahim, a terrorist charged with masterminding the serial bomb blasts in Mumbai in 1993 that took 258 lives, although Indian intelligence agencies have identified him as living in Karachi under ISI protection.



While all major terror attacks in India are typically accompanied by knee-jerk charges from India & shrill denials by Pakistan, analysts point to mounting evidence Pakistan, especially under its military, has done little to combat the scourge of terrorism. Several terrorist and extremist leaders such as Masood Azhar & "Prof" Hafeez Mohammed Saeed, continue to thrive in Pakistan, often under official patronage. Extremists openly preach terrorism in jihadi gatherings overseen by ISI.



The Pakistani establishment has also dragged its feet on prosecuting Omar Saeed Sheikh, an accused in the Daniel Pearl murder because of his influential connections in the higher echelons of the ISI. Another terrorist Rashid Rauf, also known as the shoe-bomber, was killed last week in a US predator strike, months after he 'escaped' from Pakistani police custody while being escorted for a hearing. Western & Indian intelligence communities believe men like Sheikh and Rauf are protected by the ISI or rogue elements in the ISI.



The Pakistani military, which controls the ISI, has resisted any attempt to make it subservient to the civilian government because the army uses it both as a fighting arm for its proxy war against India & also to spy on its own civilian government.



Among the several question that security experts are grappling is the motive behind the latest attack & who stands to gain by it. The terrorists have notably not even raised the Kashmir issue for their action to be linked to the separatist cause. Nor did they attempt to extract any specific concession in exchange for hostages, other than to demand the release of "all mujaheddin".



They seemed intent on causing mayhem & dying in the same suicidal jihadi manner that was evident in the attack on India’s parliament & on the Akshardham temple earlier in this decade. Their victims, besides the scores of people who died, included India’s booming economy and tourism, both of which was the envy of a troubled neighbourhood.

At least 101 killed, hundreds injured in a series of synchronised attacks in Mumbai around midnight on Wednesday. Three top Mumbai Police officials also killed in encounter.

The reactions and the main points of the Terror attack are the following:

01. Mumbai attacks: 6 foreigners among 125 dead



02. Coast Guard finds suspected terror ship M V Alpha by which terrorists arrived



03. Top Mumbai City Police Officials killed in action. Army, Navy & SPG Commandos called in



04. At Oberoi Trident, five blasts in 15 minutes



05. India-England ODIs postponed, Test Series will continue



06. Fresh blasts at Taj Hotel, hostages rescued



07. Cricket Australia suspends India travel of various Australian Cricket teams



08. Indian markets shut; attack raises risk premium



09. Twenty20 Champions League postponed



10. Markets to take time bouncing back from attacks

Why should any one try to kill Obama?



Was there really a plot by neo-Nazis to assassinate him?



Why Nazism is still spreading after their lose in the Second World War?



What is it in Hitler that our generation is attracted to?

Is it SADISM or infatuation for a FALLEN HERO

Who is going to win US Presidential Election?

Barack Obama or John McCain ?

What is the factor that may contribute to the win of the winner?

 

Now another controversy has begun regarding the Catholic Church & the Jews. Some sections of Jewish community has started the protests against Vatican's move to elevate Pope Pius XII to sainthood. On Sunday, Italian newspapers carried front-page interviews with a former leader of Italian Jewish community, Amos Luzzatto, who said beatifying the pope would open up a wound that will be difficult to heal. They are arguing that the pope was silent while Nazi's were persecuting Jews in Europe.They claim that being the single largest influential personality in the world the pope should have taken strong actions against Nazi's.

By far as a result of the Jewish protests Pope Benedict XVI has halted beatification of Pius XII. Tensions are heightening between Vatican & Israel. According to Rev. Peter Gumpel, a Jesuit priest who is directing beatification efforts the pope would not visit Israel until a plaque criticizing Pius XII is removed from Israel’s Yad Vashem Holocaust museum.



Halting the beatification of Pius XII doesn't mean that Vatican is abonding the Pope's legacy. Last year, the Vatican passed a decree recognizing Pius’s heroic virtues, a key step toward sainthood, but Pope Benedict XVI has not yet approved the decree. Earlier this month, Pope Benedict XVI said Pope Pius XII had worked secretly & silently to save Jews & that he hoped the beatification can proceed happily.

Can now some one tell me why the people are making unnecessary controversies when the world needs whichever peace that is needed - whether between Nations or between Religions?

What is the real cause for the current economic problems that is occuring through out the world?

Is the war in IRAQ & AFGANISTAN the real cause of it?

Exclusive First Look 'Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi'

Get ready to experience another magic experience after 8 years from Aditya Chopra, Aditya who enthralled the masses with his captivating direction in the film Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge is back with Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi after 8 years.

This film is a beautiful romantic movie with Shahrukh Khan in the lead. Anushka Sharma is debuting in this film and is pairing with Shahrukh. This film is all set to mesmerize the audiences.This film has been produced by Yash Chopra & Aditya Chopra. Aditya Chopra has penned the story apart from directing this film. Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi will hit the screens on 12 December 2008.

Find out how popular your first name has been over the past 100 years, just click below and enter your first name.

           
CLICK HERE
                 

The Indian "James Bond" - The Real Lion : 'Vijayakanth'

pep87 

jijeesh 

jasicom 

jyothish 

shaheer 

shyam 

sanal 

musheer 

crazyram 

reshma86 

prasya 

shonimakk 

reshma87 

rauf 

abi87 

amith 

Stationary Warning : If anyone dies watching this video ; I am not responsible........ 

here is the latest hero of indian cricket "S.Sreesanth" from 'Gods Own Country' "KERALA"

01. The Female always makes THE RULES.

02. THE RULES are subject to change without notice.

03. No Male can possibly know all THE RULES.

04. If the Female suspects the Male knows all THE RULES,she must immediately change some of THE RULES.

05. The Female is never wrong.

06. If it appears the Female is wrong, it is because of a flagrant misunderstanding caused by something the Male did or said wrong.

07. If Rule #6 applies, the Male must apologize immediately for causing the misunderstanding.

08. The Female can change her mind at any time.

09. The Male must never change his mind without the express written consent of The Female.

10. The Female has every right to be angry or upset at any time.

11. The Male must remain calm at all times, unless the Female wants him to be angry or upset.

12. The Female must, under no circumstances, let the Male know whether she wants him to be angry or upset. 13. The Male is expected to read the mind of the Female at all times.

14. At all times, what is important is what the Female meant, not what she said.

15. If the Male doesn't abide by THE RULES, it is because he can't take the heat, lacks backbone, and is a wimp.

16. If the Female has PMS, all THE RULES are null and void and the Male must cater to her every whim.

17. If the Male, at any time, believes he is right, he must refer to Rule #5

Vat 2 say.
luk at him.
he is so coooooooooool.
the latest film "DON" is breaking all the bollywood records &
also a straight hit in overseas

Professional tennis just bid adieu to Andre Agassi. I'm writing this piece shortly after hearing that the
36-year-old superstar lost to future trivia question Benjamin Becker in the 2006 US Open.

Agassi is nearly the last of the tennis-playing Boomers that included Chris Evert, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors
and (reluctantly mentioned) John McEnroe. Indeed, Martina Navratilova's retirement from doubles play this last
summer signaled an end of an era that Agassi's parting simply confirms.

Alas, the world belongs to the young.