I for one never believed that they actually killed their only child Aarushi and the domestic help Hemraj.  These were a couple of murders most foul, that practically mesmerized the whole nation nine years ago.  After so many trials and tribulations, which not only questioned the ability or lack thereof of our criminal justice system, but also the patently dishonest and cynical role played by a section of the media, especially the Hindi news channels, that directly contributed to the horrible miscarriage of justice in the wrongful conviction of the parents.  Finally, after a four-year ordeal, there is light at the end of the tunnel.  The High Court has acquitted Rajesh and Noopur Talwar.  I am so happy for them.

To all those who are in the habit of dissing the mainstream media, please remember that it was this very 'mainstream' media like the New York Times and the New Yorker, who through their painstaking background work and diligent reporting, have managed to nail the powerful Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein for the kind of sexual predator that he's been over the years.  So much so that you got to wonder how powerless the likes of Angelina Jolie, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ashley Judd and many others would have felt to spurn his advances?

PM Modi is never tired of reminding us how as a child, he used to sell tea (chaiwala) in front of the Vadanagar railway station in Gujarat. Well, it turns out that the Vadanagar station was constructed in 1973 when Mr. Modi would have been around 22 or 23. So, how come he was selling tea as a kid at that particular station? Not only in this instance, but the fact of the matter is that this prime minister, on many other occasions in the past, has resorted to bluff, exaggeration and outright lies to bolster his standing as some kind of renaissance man, who has been divinely ordained to alter the destiny of India in the 21st century.

After such a bizarre choice of Bob Dylan last year, I am so happy that this year's Nobel Prize for literature has gone to one of the most deserving writers in the last few years.  Unfortunately, I am not quite familiar with the actual craft of his writing; but I am most definitely going to correct this anomaly sooner rather than later.  It is not that Kazuo Ishiguro has been an unknown quantity for me.  He can't be.  After all, this 64 years old Japanese born British author has always made his presence felt among other luminaries on the literary horizon in the last 30 odd years.  Some years ago, I saw a movie from the Merchant-Ivory production ''The Remains of The Day''.  It was an exquisite movie, receiving eight Academy Awards nominations in 1994.  Afterwards, I discovered that this film was adapted from a 1989 Booker Prize-winning novel of the same title by Kazuo Ishiguro.  And at that time, I thought if somebody could fashion out such a fine movie out of that book, it really speaks volumes about the talent of the author.  Now Mr. Ishiguro has found validation from the Nobel Committee itself, not that he needs any validation.  What is also quite a praiseworthy effort by the Committee is that this time, the honor has been bestowed upon a genuinely popular mainstream writer, and not on somebody so obscure that few people have heard of, and much less have actually read.  I think nobody's going to grudge this hour of glory to this quiet and unassuming man who has worked diligently over the years and established his reputation.  Considering the fact that Mr. Ishiguro is in his mid-sixties, you would hope that there are still a couple of books left in him, and I believe he is currently deep into his next book.  Now he must be feeling the added pressure of living up to the reputation of a Nobel Laureate.

Las Vegas, in the state of Nevada, has one of the laxest gun laws in the western world, never mind the United States.  Not only is it easy to own a military issue semi-automatic assault rifle with minimal of background checks, but once you own the thing, it is even easier to trade it with somebody else.  We have seen, mass shootings after mass shootings, the lawmakers will come out with mealy-mouthed condemnation of the atrocity.  But when it comes to the outlawing of so many private weapons in the country, most of them would be easily swayed by the malign influence of the National Rifle Association, one of the most powerful interest groups in America.  To argue that the individuals are the problem and not guns, and take refuge behind the second amendment is simply not good enough.  Because when the second amendment was incorporated into the Constitution in the 18th century, there was no organized law and order machinery.  Bandits and highwaymen were ruling the roost.  slave owners employed private militias to prevent rebellion and to also deter other slave owners from poaching.  Chaos and anarchy was the order of the day.  It was literally each man for himself.  So, what I mean to say is that when the right to bear arms was recognized as a fundamental right under the Constitution, has no relevance whatsoever with the kind of situation prevailing today.  Even in such a chaotic democracy like India, it is not that easy to own a gun.  The mind boggles, as to how pig-headed the lawmakers in the U.S. could be that they would frustrate even the smallest effort in the direction of outlawing private firearms and weapons in the country.  Every time something like this happens, not only the killers, but also the Congressmen, Senators, and the NRA have got blood on their hands.