Sunday, April 26, 2015

Kumar Sangakkara.

Stephen Brenkley pays tribute to a great player and person in Sri Lanka's humble hero Kumar Sangakkara, who, as he enjoys a last hurrah, is arguably the best bat since Donald Bradman


MONDAY 16 MARCH 2015
567
A A A
Towards the end of his great speech at Lord’s four years ago, Kumar Sangakkara offered an inkling of what drives him. By this time the audience was already rapt to the point of eating from his hand and soon, to a man and woman, it would be on its feet cheering.
“In our cricket we display a unique spirit, a spirit enriched by lessons learnt from a history spanning over two-and-a-half millennia,” Sangakkara said. “In our cricket you see the character of our people, our history, culture and tradition, our laughter, our joy, our tears and regrets.
“It is rich in emotion and talent. My responsibility as a Sri Lankan cricketer is to further enrich this beautiful sport, to add to it and enhance it and to leave a richer legacy for other cricketers to follow.”
At this World Cup, we are witnessing the final days of Sangakarra, the international cricketer. He has played with a fearless determination and freedom, as if impelled by those words he delivered in MCC’s annual Spirit of Cricket lecture in 2011.
This is his last hurrah (and what a hurrah) as a one-day player and later this year he will withdraw from Test match cricket. He will do so as the second heaviest international run scorer. Only Sachin Tendulkar’s combined total of 34,357 is greater than his 27,774.
Sangakkara has done this almost by stealth. Everyone has always known that he was a considerable run-getter because the scoreboards said so; few cottoned on quite how prodigious, even as it has been going on. Almost always prolific in the upper middle order, his batting has become routinely resplendent as he gone through his thirties. He is in that happy, indefinable state where the bowlers seem to yield to his will and can barely stop themselves feeding his strengths.
None did so more obligingly than England’s, who allowed him to cut and pull with abandon, which then opened up the way for his fierce driving. Sangakkara has become the first man to score hundreds in four consecutive one-day innings (and in the World Cup to boot), a sequence of three having been achieved six times before.
It will have to end some time but most supposedly neutral observers here are willing to drop that independence for a day or so to see Sanga and Sri Lanka reach the final. They play their quarter-final against South Africa on Wednesday. He will leave the game as one of its most eloquent contributors, in every sense.
Kumar Sangakkara has proven that old skills still have their place amid all the big shots 
Sangakkara first entered the English psyche in early 2001 during an ill-tempered Test series in which the young shaver, as he then was, played a full part. He regrets some (not all) of what he got up to then, but it set him apart immediately and retrospectively confirms that he will not see the Sri Lankan cricketer brow-beaten or cowed.
In the first Test of that series at Galle, Sangakkara was fined for excessive appealing. In the second at Kandy, his hometown, there were unwelcome scenes which involved Sangakkara and, of all people, Michael Atherton, on his last tour and the most temperate of big-time cricketers.
Sangakkara was young, anxious to make his mark as a cricketer and, as importantly, as a Sri Lankan cricketer and said some things both while keeping wicket and batting which should have been left unsaid. Atherton was probably surprised to be so ruffled. Both were fined.
Even then, Sangakkara was utterly charming, engaging with the English media lucidly and amiably. Under the stands at Kandy, before the match, it was less an interview, as this reporter recalls, than an audience.
What a cricketing life he has had, from being at Trinity College, Kandy, it was recounted by a teacher, “a rather naughty child,” though a high-achieving one in all aspects. He and his team-mates flew home from a tour of New Zealand in late 2004 after the tsunami struck their country.
Sangakkara, along with his friends and colleagues Muttiah Murilatharan and Mahela Jayawardene, toured the island visiting the distressed coastal villages and dispensing succour and food parcels.
In March 2009, the Sri Lanka team bus was attacked by gunmen as it went to the ground in Lahore for the third day of the second Test against Pakistan. Seven people died and several of the team were injured, including Sangakkara who had shrapnel embedded in his shoulder. The Test was abandoned, international cricket has not been played in Pakistan since.
Sangakkara has scored 38 Test hundreds, at least one against all Test-playing nations, and has a batting average of 58.67. In the 82 of the 130 Tests in which he has not kept wicket that rises to 69.35. Only Don Bradman, who never kept wicket in his 52 Tests, has a higher average in those terms. Sangakkara and Jayawardene share the record for the highest partnership in Tests, of 624, for the third wicket in Colombo in 2006.
Kumar Sangakkara of Sri Lanka 
As a one-day player Sangakkara has moved with the times. His overall scoring rate is 79.04 but that has moved up to 93.14 in the last two years. Now he is supplying the acceleration as well as the ballast.
It was always evident how proud he was to be Sri Lankan and to be a member of its national team. He is married to his childhood sweetheart and they have five-year-old  twins, a son and daughter. Never a press conference goes by when he fails to mention his great friend, Jayawardene, or pay tribute to the work of the kids in the team.
But that pride, that ingrained loyalty and faith, that honour, could be seen as the most important element of his life that night at Lord’s. He told of the history of the country and of its cricket. He told how everything changed the day Muralitharan was called for throwing in Australia in 1995 (“Murali was no longer alone. His pain, embarrassment and anger were shared by all.”)
He told of the significance of Arjuna Ranatunga in making the team play like Sri Lankans and not like colonial underlings. He told of returning to the country after the terrorist incident in Pakistan and being stopped at a checkpoint a week later. The soldier asked him how he was and Sangakkara said he was fine and that he, the soldier, put his life on the line every day.
“That soldier looked me in the eye,” Sangakkara said, “and replied: ‘It is OK if I die because it is my job and I am ready for it. But you are a hero and if you were to die it would be a great loss for our country.’
“I was taken aback. How can this man value his life less than mine? His sincerity was overwhelming. I felt humbled. This is the passion that cricket and cricketers evoke in Sri Lankans. This is the love that I strive every day of my career to be worthy of.”
It was humbling to hear, not least because it was a raison d’ĂȘtre for international sport, one that, for one reason or another, could not be delivered by half the England team. Of his 20 million compatriots, Sangakkara said: “They are my foundation, they are my family.
“I will play my cricket for them. Their spirit is the true spirit of cricket. With me are all my people. I am Tamil, Sinhalese, Muslim and Burgher. I am a Buddhist, a Hindu, a follower of Islam and Christianity. I am today, and always, proudly Sri Lankan.” 

It is a long shot and New Zealand remain the emotional favourites to win this World Cup – but a Sri Lanka victory would be fine. Just fine.

How A Nephew Of Tun Mahathir's (former Malaysian Prime Minister )Sees "Lee Kuan Yew" .

This was written 6 years ago when LKY is still alive. This article is still very relevant today after the recent passing of LKY.
How a nephew of Tun Mahathir's sees Lee Kuan Yew
IF ONLY THEY ABSORB WHAT IS WRITTEN, MALAYSIA WILL PROSPER BY 2020!
LEE KUAN YEW : AT 85 , THE FIRE STILL BURNS   
BY *AHMAD MUSTAPHA
*The writer is a nephew of Dr Mahathir.

Singapore's Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, 
who was Singapore's founding father, 
has always been very direct in his 
comments. This was the man who 
outsmarted the communists in Singapore 
(with the innocent help of Malaya then 
and the willing help of the British) 
and who later outwitted the British 
and outpaced Malaysia in all spheres.

Singapore practices corrupt-free 
meritocracy and Malaysia affirmative
action. The former attracted all the 
best brains and the latter chased
out all the brains. The Singapore 
cabinet consists of dedicated and
intelligent technocrats whereas Malaysia 
has one of the most unwieldy
cabinets. 
Not only that, brain wise it was below 
par not even good for the kampong.

With that kind of composition, one 
that is very brainy, naturally
Singapore, 
with no natural resources could 
outstrip Malaysia in every
aspect of development.

Malaysia, on the other hand, was 
too much preoccupied with its Malayness 
and the illusory 'Ketuanan Melayu' 
and was also more interested in 
useless mega iconic development rather
than real social and economic development.

Whenever Kuan Yew utters anything 
that was deemed to be a slight on
Malaysia, voices were raised admonishing 
him. Malaysia would never dare to 
face reality. That Singapore had 
shown that it could survive was a 
slap on those who believed that 
Singapore would fold up once it
left Malaysia. Therefore it was natural 
that these doomsayers would
try to rationalise their utterances to be in 
their favour to combat on whatever 
Kuan Yew commented.It's political jealousy.

Singapore achieved its development 
status without any fanfare. But
here in Malaysia, a development that 
was deceptive was proclaimed as
having achieved development status. 
It was trumpeted as an achievement 
that befits first world status. This
was self delusion.Malaysians are led 
to believe into a make believe
world, a dream world. The leaders who 
themselves tend to believe in
their own fabricated world did not realise 
the people were not taken in by 
this kind of illusion.

Lee Kuan Yew believed in calling 
a spade a spade. I was there in
Singapore when the People's Action Party won 
the elections in 1959. He was forthright 
in his briefing to party members 
as to what was expected of them 
and what Singapore would face 
in the future.

Ideologically, I did not agree with 
him. We in the University of Malaya 
Socialist Club had a different interpretation 
of socialist reconstruction. But he 
was a pragmatist and wanted to bring
development and welfare to the 
Singaporeans. Well! He succeeded.

Malaysia was so much embroiled 
in racial politics and due to the fear
of losing political power, all actions 
taken by the main party in power 
was never targeted towards bringing 
wealth to all. Wealth was distributed 
to the chosen few only. They were 
the cronies and the backers of the 
party leadership to perpetuate their 
own selfish ends.

Seeing the efficiency and the progress 
achieved by Singapore caused the 
Malaysian leadership to suffer from 
an inferiority complex.That Malaysia 
should suffer from this complex 
was of its own making.

In a recent interview, Kuan Yew 
said that Malaysia could have done
better if only it treated its minority 
Chinese and Indian population
fairly. 
Instead they were completely marginalised 
and many of the best brains left 
the country in droves. He added 
that Singapore was a standing indictment 
to what Malaysia could have done 
differently. He just hit the nail right 
there on the head.

Malaysia recently celebrated its 
50th year of independence with a
bagful of uncertainties. The racial 
divide has become more acute. 
The number of Malay graduates 
unemployed is on the increase. And 
this aspect can be very explosive. 
But sad to see that no positive actions
have been taken to address these 
social ills.

Various excuses were given by Malaysia 
leaders why Singapore had far outstripped 
Malaysia in all aspects of social 
and economic advancement. Singapore was small, they rationalised 
and therefore easy to manage. Singapore 
was not a state but merely an island.

There was one other aspect that 
Malaysia practises and that is to
politicise all aspects of life. All government 
organs and machinery were
'UMNO-ised'. This was to ensure 
that the party will remain in power. 
Thus there was this misconception 
by the instruments of government as 
to what national interest is and what UMNO vested interest is.

UMNO vested interest only benefited 
a few and not the whole nation.

But due to the UMNO-isation of 
the various instruments of government,
the country under the present administration 
had equated UMNO vested interest 
as being that of national interest. 
Thus development became an avenue 
of making money and not for the 
benefit of the people.The fight against 
corruption took a back seat.
Transparency was put on
hold. 
And the instruments of government 
took it to be of national interest 
to cater to the vested interest of 
UMNO. Enforcement of various enactments 
and laws was selective. Thus a 
'palace' in Kelang, APs cronies and 
close-one-eye Umno MPs could 
exist without proper procedure. 
Corruption infested all govt departments, 
the worst is the police and lately 
even in the judiciary.

Singapore did not politicise its instruments 
of government. If ever politicisation 
took place, it is guided by national 
interest. To be efficient and to be 
the best in the region was of paramount
importance. Thus all the elements 
like corruption, lackadaisical attitude 
towards work and other black elements, 
which would retard such an aim, 
were eliminated.

Singapore naturally had placed 
the right priority in it's pursuit to 
achieve what is best for its people. 
This is the major difference between 
these two independent countries.

Malaysia in its various attempts 
to cover up its failures embarked on
several diversions. It wanted its 
citizens to be proud that the country 
had the tallest twin-tower in the 
world, although the structure was 
designed and built by foreigners. 
It's now a white-elephant wasting 
away. It achieved in sending a man 
into space at an exorbitant price. 
For what purpose? These are what 
the Malays of old would say "menang 
sorak" (hollow victories).

It should be realised that administering 
a country can be likened to managing 
a corporate entity. If the management 
is efficient and dedicated and know 
what they are doing, the company 
will prosper. The reverse will be 
if the management is poor and bad. 
The company will go bust.

There are five countries around 
this region. There is Malaysia and
then Indonesia. To the east there 
is the Philippines and then there is
that small enclave called the Sultanate 
of Brunei. All these four countries 
have abundance of natural resources 
but none can lay claim to have used 
all these resources to benefit the 
people. Poverty was rampant and 
independence had not brought in 
any significant benefits to the people.

But tiny Singapore without any resources 
at all managed to bring development 
to its citizens. It had one of the best 
public MRT transport systems and 
airlines in the world and it is a very 
clean City State. Their universities, 
health care, ports are among the 
best in the world.

It is impossible to compare what 
Singapore has achieved to what 
all these four countries had so far 
achieved. It was actually poor
management and corruption, and nothing more. 
Everything is done for the vested 
interest of the few.

Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines 
and the Sultanate of Brunei
need good management teams.


They would not be able to do this 
on their own steam. I would advise 
that they call on Kuan Yew to show 
them what good governance is. 
Why look East to Japan when it 
is just next door across the causeway.

R Sivasubramaniam
Attach yourself to Him who is free from all attachments. Bind yourself to that bond so all other bonds may be broken. - Tirukkural 350 

Saturday, April 25, 2015

Yellow Bird - Kingston Trio


Please click on each of the web-links below with your speakers on :-



Lyrics


Yellow bird, 
Up high in banana tree, 
Yellow bird, 
You sit all alone like me

Did your lady frien', 
Leave de nest again?
Dat is very sad, 
Make me feel so bad, 
You can fly away, 
In the sky away, 
You're more lucky dan me.

Yellow bird, 
Up high in banana tree, 
Yellow bird, 
You sit all alone like me

I also have a pretty gal, 
She not with me today, 
Dey all de same
De pretty gal, 
Make dem de nest, 
Den dey fly away.

Yellow bird, 
Up high in banana tree, 
Yellow bird, 
You sit all alone like me

Wish dat I were a yellow bird, 
I fly away wid you, 
But I am not a yellow bird, 
So here I sit, 
Nothin' else to do.

Yellow bird, 
Up high in banana tree, 
Yellow bird, 
You sit all alone like me

Let her fly away, 
On de sky away, 
Picker coming soon, 
Pick from night to noon, 
Black and yellow you, 
Like banana too, 
He might pick you someday.

Yellow bird, 
Up high in banana tree, 
Yellow bird, 
You sit all alone like me

Hang Down Your Head Tom Dooley


Please click on each of the web-links below with speakers on :-

"Tom Dooley" is an old North Carolina folk song based on the 1866 murder of a woman named Laura Foster in Wilkes County, North Carolina. It is best known today because of a hit version recorded in 1958 by The Kingston Trio. This version was a multi-format hit, reaching #1 in Billboard, the Billboard R&B listing, and appearing in the Cashbox country music top 20. It fits within the wider genre of Appalachian "sweetheart murder ballads".

The song was selected as one of the American Songs of the Century by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the National Endowment for the Arts, and Scholastic Inc. Members of the Western Writers of America chose it as one of the Top 100 Western songs of all time.[1]

In the documentary Appalachian Journey (1991), folklorist Alan Lomax describes Frank Proffitt as the "original source" for the song. Although there are several earlier known recordings, notably the one by Grayson and Whitter made in 1929, approximately 10 years before Proffitt cut his own recording, the Kingston Trio took their version from Frank Warner's singing. Warner had learned the song from Proffitt, who learned it from his Aunt Nancy Prather, whose parents had known both Laura Foster and Tom Dula

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Murder of Laura Foster
Before the war, Ann Foster, a local beauty, married an older man, James Melton, who was a farmer, cobbler, and neighbor of both Ann and Tom. Melton also served in the Civil War, fighting in the battle of Gettysburg.[6] Both men were taken prisoner and at the end of the war returned home. Shortly after arriving home, Dula resumed his relationship with Ann. Given his reputation as a libertine,[2][9] it did not take Dula long to also begin an intimate relationship with Ann's cousin, Laura Foster. Folklore suggest Laura became pregnant shortly thereafter, and she and Dula decided to elope.[6] On the morning she was to meet Dula, about May 25, 1866,[9] Laura quietly left her home where she lived with her father, Wilson Foster, and took off on his horse, Belle. Laura was never seen alive again.[1]

While it is not certain what happened that day, many of the stories that have grown out of the folklore implicate Ann Melton. Some believe Ann murdered Laura Foster because she was still in love with Dula and was jealous of Laura because Tula was marrying her. Others believe that Dula knew or suspected that Ann had murdered Laura, but because he still loved Ann he refused to implicate her after he was arrested and took the blame for the murder. Ultimately, it was Ann's word that led to the discovery of Laura's body, leading to further speculation as to Ann's guilt. Ann's cousin, Pauline Foster, testified that Ann had led her to the site of the grave one night to check that it was still well hidden.[6]

Witnesses testified in court that Dula made the incriminating statement he was going to "do in" whoever gave him "the pock" (syphilis). Testimony indicated Dula believed Laura had given him syphilis, which he had unknowingly passed on to Ann. The local doctor testified that he had treated both Tom and Ann for syphilis with Blue Mass, as he did Pauline Foster, who was in fact the first to be treated. Many believe that Dula may have caught the disease from Pauline Foster and passed it on to Ann and Laura.[citation needed]

Laura's decomposed body was found with her legs drawn up in order to fit in a shallow grave. She had been stabbed once in the chest. The gruesome murder, combined with the low murder rate, and numerous rumors that circulated in the small back-woods town, captured the public's attention and led to the enduring notoriety of the crime.[1]

Dula's role in the murder is unclear.[9] He fled the area before Laura's body was found after locals accused him of murdering Laura. Under the assumed name of Tom Hall, he worked for about a week for Colonel James Grayson, across the state line in Trade, Tennessee. Grayson would enter folklore as a romantic rival of Dula's, but this was not true. It was simply an incorrect inference drawn from the lyrics of the song, and became more widespread as the facts of the case were largely forgotten.[9] Grayson did, however, help the Wilkes County posse bring Dula in, once his identity was discovered.[1]

Trial[edit]

Following Dula's arrest, former North Carolina Governor Zebulon Vance represented him pro bono, and always maintained Dula's innocence. He succeeded in having the trial moved from Wilkesboro to Statesville, as it was widely believed that Dula would not receive a fair trial in Wilkes County. Dula was convicted and, although given a new trial on appeal, he was convicted again. His supposed accomplice, Jack Keaton, was set free and, on Dula's word, Ann Melton was acquitted. As he stood on the gallows facing death, he is reported to have said, “Gentlemen, do you see this hand? I didn’t harm a hair on the girl’s head”.[9] On 1 May 1868 he was executed nearly two years after the murder of Laura Foster.[6] His younger sister and her husband retrieved his body for burial.[1]

Friday, April 24, 2015

Sloop John B

Please click on each of the web-links below with your speakers on :-

 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Sloop John B" is a song by the Beach Boys and the seventh track on their 1966 album Pet Sounds. It was originally a traditional West Indies folk song, "The John B. Sails", taken from Carl Sandburg's 1927 collection of folk songs, The American Songbag. Brian Wilson sang, produced, and arranged the Beach Boys' recording. Released as an A-sided single two months before Pet Sounds, it peaked at number 3 in the US and number 2 in the UK. In several other countries, the single was a number one hit.

The group's folk rock[1] adaptation of "Sloop John B" was ranked #271 on Rolling Stone's list of The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time.[2]

Sloop John B Lyrics

We come on the Sloop John B
My grandfather and me
Around Nassau town we did roam
Drinking all night
Got into a fight
Well I feel so broke up
I want to go home

So hoist up the John B's sail
See how the main sail sets
Call for the Captain ashore
Let me go home, let me go home
I want to go home, yeah yeah
Well I feel so broke up
I want to go home

The first mate he got drunk
And broke in the Cap'n's trunk
The constable had to come and take him away
Sheriff John Stone
Why don't you leave me alone, yeah yeah
Well I feel so broke up, I want to go home

So hoist up the John B's sail
See how the main sail sets
Call for the Captain ashore
Let me go home, let me go home
I want to go home, let me go home
Why don't you let me go home

The poor cook he caught the fits
And threw away all my grits
And then he took and he ate up all of my corn
Let me go home
Why don't they let me go home
This is the worst trip I've ever been on

So hoist up the John B's sail
See how the main sail sets
Call for the Captain ashore
Let me go home, let me go home
I want to go home, let me go home
Why don't you let me go home.

Songwriters: Edwards, Nole / Wilson, Don / Bogle, Bob / Taylor, Melvin

Sloop John B lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

PS
A very popular group song during our medical 
 student days 1960-65