Of cats & meat

Periodically, I come across posts that attempt to shed some light or whitewash (since I’ve never read the Koran I really don’t know which one it is) Koran’s attitude toward women. The beautiful, the poetic, the condescending, the argumentative, all of them seem to agree on one thing: Koran’s view of women is loving, progressive, and respectful. Men?.. I guess it’s a given that the Allah is cool with them, since I’ve never heard a man touting the delights afforded to him by Koran (except for the 70 virgins, who might turn out to be raisins). My view of Islam is shaped entirely by what its holy men preach and practice. The stories from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Islamic states about women being condemned to stoning for being raped are, sadly, commonplace. This voice of feminism comes to us from Australia (The Sydney Morning Herald), hardly an Islamic stronghold:
Sheik al Hilaly's remarks were made during a Ramadan sermon to 500 worshippers in Sydney last month. …
"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat," the sheik asked.
"The uncovered meat is the problem."
"If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab (Muslim headscarf), no problem would have occurred."In this colorful simile, the uncovered meat represents “scantily dressed women”, and carnivorous cats are featured as men. "Who is this man, so utterly ignorant of the humanistic ideal that is real Islam?" you ask. “[Sheik Hilaly is] regarded by much of the Islamic community as the mufti [a Muslim scholar who interprets the sharia] of Australia.” Surely, Muslims of a civilized western nation wouldn’t stand for such vitiating umbrage? Wrong again. They asked the sheik to abstain from preaching for several months, and… nope, nothing else.
Loving, progressive, respectful.

Poor people to poor neighborhoods!

Poor people die sooner when living in higher-income neighborhoods than in poorer ones, a new report concludes. Researchers analyzed 17 years' worth of data on thousands of people from four mid-size northern California cities to determine the death rates among different socioeconomic groups residing in the same neighborhoods.

In neighborhoods with a top median income of $47,000, 19 of every 1,000 poor women had died after 17 years, compared with 11 per 1,000 in neighborhoods that had a top median income of $38,600; men fared similarly. Both groups tended to die from the same chronic diseases, and the pattern remained even after accounting for age, obesity, blood pressure and smoking status, the group reports in a paper to be published in the December American Journal of Public Health.
ScientificAmerican.com, Oct. 31, 2006

In a related story, the Republican leadership has proudly announced that they have heard and heeded the criticism from their liberal colleagues on such topics as healthcare, housing, quality of life for the low-income individuals, and the issue of social fairness in our society. In an attempt to extend the longevity of life for the more vulnerable segment of the population, the proposed legislature will enable landlords not only to refuse housing to applicants attempting to move to better neighborhoods, but also to evict the current tenants if the landlord feels that the tenants are “bringing the place down.” Other causes for refusal include the following:

• funny (or not funny enough) accents
  
• oversized jewelry and/or neon trimming on the automobile
  
• lack of a trust fund
  
• consumption of wine-coolers
  
• possession of a Men’s Warehouse suit
  
• income level lower than the landlord’s cat allowance
  
• scurvy
  
• a discount card from Family Dollar stores

In a closed press conference with the Homeless Herald, and the Newark Times, a spokesman for the White House has said that this community-focused piece of legislature also underscores the administration’s commitment to the scientific theory, which served as an impetus for this groundbreaking social policy.

A curtsy before barbarians

This episode reminded me of the inhabitants of Leningrad during the 900 day blockade in WWII. Shostakovich’s Seventh Symphony was written and performed there. After long days of backbreaking work of erecting the barricades or double shifts at the factories, in the besieged and bombarded city, in unfathomable conditions, literally fainting from starvation, the citizens came to the symphony. In that, they preserved their hope, their humanity, and their pride. It was also a way to send their fecund "Fuck you!" to the enemy.
Compare that to Miss Harms' choice.

Why Bush won't ask Rummy to resign

The wisest elder was dying in a remote Armenian village. Other elders have gathered around his deathbed, and seeing how the end is near, decided to ask him for his final advice to them, “What will you leave us with?” The wise man drew his last breath, said, “Protect the Jews!”, and died. The elders were bewildered by his statement. They sat around trying to decipher what that meant and why he said it, but couldn’t find any meaningful explanation. Finally, they decided to seek counsel of another very old and wise Armenian, who lived far from them. They made their arduous journey to the wise man, and asked him to explain, “Tell, oh wise elder, why did our elder told us to, ‘Protect the Jews!’?” – “Oh, he was wise indeed”, said the elder. “For when they’ll finish with the Jews, they’ll start with us.

Those Wacky Hungarians

In an unsuccessful interview with "Fictitious Daily News" Mr. Gyurcsany, the current president of Hungary, said that he's preparing for a long and prosperous career in politics. "Honesty is the best policy!.. On top of it, do you know of any other president with balls as big as mine?!" At that point he pulled down his zipper and exposed a duplex of enormous testicles. According to our special correspondent, they looked healthy but somewhat unnatural. Just at that moment, a crowd of rioters had broken into his palace, and attempted to enter the room. Panicking, Mr. Gyurcsany had jammed the zipper, and had caught his prized possession on a rusty nail in an unfortunate attempt to flee his residence.

Meat of the Matter

My first reaction to this was to write some acrid remark and remind the rabbi that there are still Darfur, Sudan, and world poverty out there. Hand wringing and agonizing over geese seems misguided at best. Then I got curious about the rabbi and the synagogue. I've actually met the guy, and have been to that shul a few times a number of years ago. Not for me (then again, no shul is). Turns out the rabbi didn't just rally for the rights of overfed geese. They collect funds for Darfur, Sudan, Chad and some other places that I never heard of.

I'm an unapologetic carnivore. Just yesterday I chowed down on some beef tar-tar - one doesn't get more carnivorous than that. I like goose and duck liver. I like sweet breads, kidneys, beef tongue, pig's feet, and other "yucky" things. I grew up in a culture where vegetarians were about as common and normal as nudists. My background and habits don't predispose me to questioning meat consumption (not to mention that my wife would divorce me and my children would never speak to me again if I turned vegetarian). However, those who have ever looked into the general process of meat production, or foie gras in particular, will likely be put off meat products for at least a day. The undeniable truth is - animals suffer (the extent is debatable), and are killed to accommodate our dietary preferences. The site of it is far from appetizing. And while I doubt I'll ever become a vegetarian, I cannot simply dismiss those who urge us to abstain from meat based on their moral convictions either. In the end, I guess it's just another thing swept under the proverbial, and much treaded upon rug.

(I can't believe I just wrote this)

Beware of the Presbyterians!

And another one from WaPo:

However, the group [Council on American-Islamic Relations] said some post-Sept. 11 policy initiatives -- including the "infamous" Patriot Act, as the group described the law in announcing the report on its Web site -- have unfairly focused on Muslims. "Muslims take the brunt of it…"

I wholeheartedly agree! It’s high time we did something about Zoroastrians and Presbyterians. How long will we continue to ignore their explosive violence, and militant aspirations?!

The Great Literator

Our illustrious leader was at a literacy conference in NYC (reported by Washington Post):
"…the goals of this country are to help those who feel hopeless; the goals of this country are to spread liberty; the goals of this country is to enhance prosperity and peace."
"…One way to defeat hopelessness is through literacy, is to giving people the fantastic hope that comes by being able to read and realize dreams."

The president concluded the conference by saying that he too, intends to master the "subject-verb agreement" part of his native tongue, as well as to share with us the techniques he uses to achieve his Zen-like clarity of mind.

From Bad to Worse

And so it goes from bad to worse. Frankly, I didn't think much of the Pope's remarks regarding Islam for a couple of reasons. One, he happened to be right this time. Two, since when does anyone expect tolerance and pluralistic acceptance from the Catholic Pope? No, really, tell me, when was that a hallmark of the Catholic Church? That's right - never. This however, is one of the few issues that can be extended by generalizations without being compromised by inevitable exceptions. This is a religious head talking!.. Talking about another religion! Um… on what acid trip does anyone expect him to be anything but critical? The best one can hope for is "diplomatic". And he wasn't. So? At least it was ballsy. Not too many folks these days dare to speak the truth about Islam and majority of it followers. By sheer lucky accident, the usual religious bigotry yielded two unexpected and fine smelling fruits: truth, and courage. But no, they had to go and squash them in an obsequious (and completely false! - common, everyone knows it) nod to the religious tolerance.

9/11 Reflection and Rage by Dyre

Dyre Portents: 9/11 Reflection and Rage

Well said, Dyre42!
Tip my hat to you.

It's the parents' fault!

The 7-year-old girl died at Lincolnwood's Todd Hall School because the teachers were umm... busy?

They're, of course, only teachers, not doctors; how could they possibly know there was anything wrong with her?

Multiple times that April morning she told teachers she felt bad -- and signs of her illness were glaring, according to a negligence lawsuit her family filed Tuesday.

She couldn't stand up. She was having trouble breathing, suffering chest and stomach pain, and had urinated on herself.

She was shuttled from gym class to her classroom to the office, handed off from teacher to teacher, repeatedly sent down hallways unescorted... left alone in an office bathroom, where she remained for up to 15 minutes, until school officials found she'd collapsed...
Paramedics were then called, but Katina was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Here's the full article.

I've always said that I can't understand this kind of things. I can't understand the teachers who allow their students to graduate from HS without being able to read; and I sure as hell don't understand not giving a flying fuck about the 1st grader on the verge of death! The 1st grader! What the fuck?! I have a few friends whose wives are teachers in Chicago, and they keep telling me, "There's nothing we can do... It's all about the atmosphere at home,.. It's all about the environment..." I have a feeling I'll be enlightened as to how this is not the school's fault either.

I'm no specialist on the early ed (or any ed for that matter), but I remember that when I was in school, and a student felt sick, the teacher would take that student by the hand, and take him to the school nurse, who would call the ambulance if she found it was necessary. My teachers cared, though. Frequently, it seemed that they cared more than the students' parents. Why? They were probably raised that way. You see, it's all about the atmosphere at home.

Regarding the eeeveel, eeeveel oil companies

The Q&A:

Q: Why are the prices so f*cking high?
A: The oil companies don't set the prices that you're seeing at the pump, nor do they set the prices of crude oil. The prices are set by the market, which is not controlled by anyone, just like the rest of the FREE MARKETS aren't.

The factors contributing to such high prices include increased demand (China & India) with limited capacity for production and refining, lack of spare capacity (the reason why even Venezuela and Iran can level threats against the US), unstable Middle East, taxes and government regulations, and perhaps the heaviest of all - speculation. Paper trading accounts for as much as the third of the crude's price these days. So much so, that the usual chain of physical commodity driving the paper trading has been turned upside down, and with companies like Goldman Sachs, Merill Lynch, and other financial giants doing most of the paper trading, the prices on crude oil rise in response to heavy speculation on paper derivatives by these players, and not due to the inherent lack of supply.

Q: You're saying that the oil companies aren't deserving of the blame, but they're the ones responsible for building the refineries, increasing the capacity, and they're the ones posting record profits! Explain that!
A: Yep, they ARE the ones responsible for building the refineries. Here's a question for you: did you leave a tip for Exxon or BP eight years ago, when the price of crude was less than $20/barrel? No? Hm… How odd. I'm sure the news did, mention that they were loosing money in refining and production. Was the $.70 / gallon gasoline acceptable then? Well, guess what, refining wasn't profitable, and they didn't invest in a failing enterprise. Would you have stopped at Exxon's gas station to pay $1.50 if they explained that their gas is more expensive because they're investing in refining, which is loosing money for them at the moment, but it might pay off in the future, while Shell, across the street was selling same exact gas for half the price? No again?!. - Most perplexing.

And regarding the profits - yep, they are making good money now. In case it did not occur to you earlier, they are actually in business in order to make money (no, they're not altruists). So when the return on their investments (let me repeat that - THEIR INVESTMENTS) was negative, that was alright by you, but when the profits have started to roll in, that's not cool anymore; is that right?

Well, look at it this way, for now, building refineries and looking for more oil is a very profitable business. So more likely than not, if the prices remain reasonably high, we'll see more refining capacity and more new accessible oil fields. In time, the prices will level off. And if not, being the entrepreneurial creatures that we are, we'll find other, cheaper sources of energy (All of a sudden, the R&D for alternative fuels has become a good investment too. Then again, you might be disappointed to find out that this research, too, is done by the eeeveel, eeeveel oil companies.)

If you have other questions, objections or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask.

Brits brought it on themselves!

"Yo, Brits, maybe if you considered converting to Islam, following Sharia, enshrining Quran, wearing burkas, breaking it off with the Yankees, and the Jews; who knows, maybe you'd be safer!.. Then again, maybe not. Most of you can't seem to grow decent beards."
The fucking gall! Why the West won't round up these "peacemakers" and airdrop them in Iran is completely beyond me.

Ka-Boom! and no more Basayev

I'll admit, I took some guilt-free pleasure in this news. Alas, it appears that he did not suffer – a pity. Now, if only we could do the same with a few (hundred) more of these fuckers, I'd be elated.

However, for now, let’s be “cautiously optimistic”, and wait for the confirmation from the genetics lab; apparently he was “killed” a few times before

Best, but far from ideal

OK, clearly, I'm not disciplined enough to keep a blog of full-fledged stories going. Then again, I do, have a fulltime job (that requires way more than 40 hours a week), and a family (to which I'm grateful for continuing to put up with my bullshit).
So, I've decided to flog some of my random thoughts (as I originally intended) out there, and see what develops.

Here's one that has been stewing on the backburner (now brace yourself, as you'll undoubtedly recognize the decaying smell of heresy): the unbridled capitalism, much like the lofty ideal of communism, or any other "pure" political system doesn't work. It doesn't work for the same reasons, too. It's the people who are the clogs of this beautifully conceived (and in fairness, best-executed) system. And people tend to fall short of the ideal. Even the best among us. Rand however, makes no provisions for such developments. Her heroes never stumble, her villains are barely human, and the weather forecasters are always right. Her heroes' austere adherence to The Ideal is inspiring alright. But it's the inspiration, whose ugly cousin used to move a son to betray his father in pursuit of the collectivist ideal. Surely, not what she had in mind.

Specifically, Rand assumes that it is the unadulterated pursuit of his/her creative expression that moves the Capitalist. And those who're hounding the money without realizing its essence will fall away on their own, taken care by the inevitably just hand of the free commerce. The reality however, can be seen on the daily news. The nauseating, Kozlowski-style excesses, Lay / Skillings claimed ignorance while bloating fat with money siphoned away from the consumers, and the list goes on and on. "The fact that the list goes on and on, is the proof that the system works! They lied, stole, cheated, pledged allegiance to Marx's ghost, and they got what they deserved!" a true Randian would say. But that's as naïve as to say that there are no crooks in the society. All the crooks are behind the bars. No, the truth of it is - a good number, perhaps even the majority of those who propel our society on its rightful pursuit of wealth, and "self-making" are not seeking the nirvana of self-realization, but a much more prosaic goal - the security and freedom that only large amounts of money can afford. Not all! Luckily, and thankfully, not all.
---

This is a somewhat uncharacteristic thought for me, since I'm generally a very enthusiastic supporter of Rand. But as I think of a society that would be based strictly on Rand's principles of laissez-fair capitalism and Natural Law, I don't see a place that would be much more desirable than the quagmire of communism or the tyranny of a benevolent dictator.

Tell me how I'm (hopefully) wrong.

A Day Without Illegal Immigrants is a good day!

Let's get one thing out of the way first, I'm pro-immigration. I think it's good for the country, and for business. My support however, only extends to legal immigration. I'm vehemently opposed to the illegal one. I'm also unclear as to what's being debated when the issue of illegal immigrants is discussed. It is still against the law to enter or remain in this country without proper authorization, right? (And as laws go, this isn't a bad one, in fact, it's vital) So since when is it that law enforcement became optional?

And regarding this whole boycott thing… Heard a good question from a guy on some news show, "Are they going to boycott our emergency rooms too?" Hey, I don't mind mowing my own lawn (to be honest, I don't have one, but if I did, I wouldn't mind it), or having an American cabdriver (wouldn't it be refreshing if he actually understood what the hell I'm saying?) I have a feeling that most doctors, cops, teachers, and other professionals will be working today. Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying - illegal immigrants don't matter much. This boycott is a good thing. If we as a nation find it painful, and can't do without the illegals, then we need to address it via legislature. Deciding to only legalize them would be a mistake though. It will encourage further influx of illegal immigrants, and will not address absolutely anything. They say that they perform an important role within this society, and hold jobs that most Americans don't want. Well, here's a question, once they become legal here, will they still want to work for the minimum wage or less? And if not, who is going to fill those spots? I know, I know! Other illegal immigrants. Yipppeee! Problem solved. We might have to start paying more for lettuce, and increase the wages of construction workers, but that's a different issue. Caving in to any criminal segment within a society is a stupid, stupid thing to do; but to foreign criminals?! That's just insane.

A Comment on Disclosure of Exec's Comp

I didn’t make it clear that I was advocating a wiser approach for the boards of directors, not legislature. In fact, if anything, I’d get rid of Sarbanes-Oxley and other such idiocy. An entire industry of a special breed of consultants has sprung up in the wake of corporate scandals. What do they consult on? – How to properly navigate the latest round of idiotic legislature that seeks to control the activity of those who actually produce. The legislature that was created by and for the benefit of those who couldn’t make something worthy of human consumption if their lives depended on it. Everyone has heard the cliché that those who can’t do, teach. Well, these good folks do even better. They charge exorbitant amounts of money to advise corporations on how to abide by the regulations, some of which seem to have been lifted directly from Alice in Wonderland. Happy Unbirthday to ya’all!

HAMAS' Victory

Enough commentary has been written on this victory of democracy without my two cents. One however (and unfortunately, I forgot where I read it), had a particularly interesting insight. It tied the results of the Palestinian's democratic elections to Bush's view of democracy. The article highlighted Bush's black-and-white perception of the world, where liberty inevitably leads to democracy (the post-nukes argument for going into Iraq). This election should hammer the last nail into the coffin of that argument, but I'm not holding my breath. (I just came across a quote by Schiller that rang so true: "With stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.") And no, I don't hate saying, "I told you so." - I told you so. And I don't mind repeating myself, for any state to be democratic, and for any people to be free, THEY GOTTA WANT IT! Neither liberty nor democracy can be received as gifts, they can only be won. And neither Iraqis nor the Palestinians wanted them. Why anyone would be surprised by the results of this election is a mystery to me.

Another noteworthy aspect of this election was Kremlin's (official statement from the ministry of foreign affairs) prompt response to the will of Palestinian people. It comes to us by way of gazeta.ru:

«В Москве рассматривают выборы в палестинский законодательный совет как крупное событие на пути дальнейшей демократизации палестинского общества, создания институтов будущего государства. Мы всегда уважали и будем уважать демократический выбор палестинского народа, на основе которого предстоит формирование нового состава палестинской законодательной и исполнительной власти…”

27 ЯНВАРЯ 10:24

Roughly translated:

Moscow sees the elections of Palestinian governing body as a significant event on the path of further democratization of Palestinian society, and creation of institutions for the future state. We have always respected and will always respect the democratic choice of the Palestinian people, which will serve as a basis for creation of new constituency for Palestinian legislative and executive branches.

January 27, 10:24 AM

Kremlin's blatant disregard for the fact that HAMAS is a self-avowed terrorist organization with a clearly stated objective of eliminating Israel from the face of the earth highlights Russian duplicity in dealing with terrorists, as well as their undying commitment to state-sponsored anti-Semitism.

Well, as the saying goes, what's good for the goose… When the Beslan tragedy occurred, like any normal westerner, I unequivocally condemned it as an act of beastly brutality by the group that deserves to be eliminated. I also fully supported Russian efforts in quelling the Chechen rebellion and eliminating the terrorists. In light of Kremlin's statement, I have come to reconsider my position. Perhaps they're not "terrorists" after all, but freedom fighters, which deserve to have democratic elections in their pursuit of autonomy and statehood. And once they elect Basayev and his thugs, um, I mean democratically elected officials; they will be equally entitled to creation of various institutions necessary for the formation of their democratic state.

Kremlin's statement is a spit in the face of the entire western block. Their willingness to embrace an organization that can be seen as a very definition of a terrorist group is indicative of their general indifference to the issue of international terrorism, and their commitment to peace and democracy is nothing more than another cheap slogan

Disclosure Of Executives' Compensation

Suddenly, everyone’s concern with executives’ pay has surfaced. It has always been a fun subject at the water coolers and union-sponsored events, but now it’s making inroads into legislature. Should executives’ compensation packages be publicly disclosed? – No. Why? Because it’s a matter of basic privacy. It is simply nobody’s (except the shareholder’s) business. Executives are entitled to the same level of privacy as anyone else. Luckily, it’s not just my opinion, it’s the law.

Having said all this, I think it’s the wrong question. The reason for this question is the apparent lack of correspondence between their pay and the company’s performance. By no means does this apply to all executives. Ellison, Gates, Jobs are some of the notable exceptions. But what about the likes of Wagoner, Ford Jr. or other executives whose companies have been consistently in the red, show complete lack of strategy, and the only way they know how to narrow the losses is by downsizing or outsourcing? Should their compensation packages be made public? – No. However poor their performance is, they’re still entitled to the same privacy as the rest of us. Additionally though, whatever that package is, it’s too much. There’s no justification for any pay increase to an executive whose company does not consistently outperform the market. Why? – If it’s unclear to you, you should not participate in this discussion.

Furthermore, executive packages should be completely restructured to reflect the difference in job requirements. They’re hired for a single purpose: make the company profitable. Um, if you’ve just agreed with this, and have nothing to add, you’re missing the same key component as the boards of directors of GM and Ford. No, they’re not hired to simply make the company profitable. Their job is to ensure that the company is profitable now AND in the long term. It’s not a subtle difference. The Wall Street is in the business of making money this quarter; next quarter they can invest elsewhere. The executive’s job is to ensure the company’s success LONG TERM (tip my hat to Costco). Their compensation packages should reflect that. I don’t understand how an executive can leave a failing company within a year or two after having stolen, I mean received, millions of dollars (and the board of directors just let them!). There are only two potential reasons for that: utter incompetence or corruption.

Here’s what I would propose: executives should be required to manage the company for a term of at least six years. During this term, their salary should be in the same range as their well-qualified professionals (engineers, accountants, etc.). A part of their salary should be put in an escrow account (let’s say 20%). They should not be allowed to make extra money off the company in any way during the first term. By the end of the first term, the company’s performance, and its strategic position should be evaluated, and based on the findings the executives should receive a percentage of the profits (I don't think anyone is going to argue about their salaries if the company is consistently profitable and growing). If the company’s health is found wanting, their escrowed salary should be reinvested back into the business (since they’re clearly not as well-qualified as they claimed). The numbers might be off, but the basic principle behind this is very sound. Executives are hired for their strategic vision and their ability to implement it. Neither one can be appropriately evaluated in the short term. Thus their compensation should be commensurate with the company’s performance over some reasonable period of time.

Russia’s March toward Freedom

Excerpts translated from www.gazeta.ru:

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, under mysterious circumstances, has signed a scandalous law regarding non-governmental agencies. Although Putin made the decision on January 10, Kremlin has made it public only today - right after the departure of German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, from Russia.
…
In summarizing the new law, Gazeta said the following: Russian Registration (a government institution) will track activities of foreign and Russian non-government organizations. Under this law, chapters and filial offices of foreign organizations will have to register (with RR). Besides the registration, affiliates of the foreign non-commercial organizations will have to disclose to RR their planned activities, as well as the amounts of financing, and other agencies, with which they intend to cooperate on the territory of Russia. The infusions of foreign financing and the goals they seek to achieve, will have to be disclosed by Russian organizations as well as the foreign.