A few days ago I heard something about a "devout" muslim being appointed to a high position in the Department of Homeland Security, so I decided to look it up. This article is what I found. What I had heard is now confirmed. Arif Alikhan was appointed by Obama as assistant secretary in the Office of Policy Development in the Department of Homeland Security.
Why would Obama give a "devout" muslim a high level job with significant influence over our country's safety, especially so soon after the Fort Hood Shooting? Major Hasan was a psyciatrist at Fort Hood and advocated suicide bombing during lectures. He was known to believe in a violent sect of Islam, yet he was allowed, as other majors are, to carry his own firearm. It is possible that Alikhan's situation is quite similar, and could be far more dangerous.
Also, many Americans still fear muslims in general, and, to some extent, that fear is justified (unfortunately). Putting a "devout" muslim, who, it would appear, is far more likely to be jihadist, in a position to control America's safety is more certainly not one of Obama's wisest decisions. He probably wanted to say that he has increased diversity. In that case, why not appoint a devout Christian or Jew? Obama has made a mistake and his popularity continues to fall.
You call tell what I think of Obama's decision, but what do you think? Good or bad idea? Or something in between?
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Soldiers versus Survivors
I suggest reading this article before reading my post.
Does compulsory army service, which demands responsibility on all levels and provides great opportunities for making connections for the future, really explain how successful Israel's hi-tech industry is compared to its size? I am sure serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) is great training for a huge number of different jobs and scenarios. In fact, I am fairly sure that nearly everything said in the above-linked-article is accurate.
But, just how much does serving in the army affect Israelis success?
What about the culture in general?
To quote one Israeli-American; "Necessity is the mother of innovation." In the case of Israel and Jews, "necessity" brings to mind the horrors of the Holocaust and how the inmates had, essentially, nothing. I would hazard a guess that a lot of Israel's success can be traced to the mentality of Holocaust survivors; "no one's going to help us, so we had better just help ourselves." People absorb most of their parents' opinoins, values, behaviors, and general mentality on how to deal with the world, so the idea of "I don't have something, so I'm going to make it myself" could easily pass beyond just the Holocaust generation.
Okay readers, your turn. Is the article right to say that the disproportionate size to hi-tech industry success ratio is due primarily to the draft and army system? Or am I right? Can this success actually be traced back to Holocaust survivors and their attitude towards life? Are we both wrong? Are we both right? To what degree? Lastly, any other theories?
Does compulsory army service, which demands responsibility on all levels and provides great opportunities for making connections for the future, really explain how successful Israel's hi-tech industry is compared to its size? I am sure serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) is great training for a huge number of different jobs and scenarios. In fact, I am fairly sure that nearly everything said in the above-linked-article is accurate.
But, just how much does serving in the army affect Israelis success?
What about the culture in general?
To quote one Israeli-American; "Necessity is the mother of innovation." In the case of Israel and Jews, "necessity" brings to mind the horrors of the Holocaust and how the inmates had, essentially, nothing. I would hazard a guess that a lot of Israel's success can be traced to the mentality of Holocaust survivors; "no one's going to help us, so we had better just help ourselves." People absorb most of their parents' opinoins, values, behaviors, and general mentality on how to deal with the world, so the idea of "I don't have something, so I'm going to make it myself" could easily pass beyond just the Holocaust generation.
Okay readers, your turn. Is the article right to say that the disproportionate size to hi-tech industry success ratio is due primarily to the draft and army system? Or am I right? Can this success actually be traced back to Holocaust survivors and their attitude towards life? Are we both wrong? Are we both right? To what degree? Lastly, any other theories?
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Smiles
Right now, I am reading a book called "Quirkology; How We Discover The Big Truths in Small Things" by Richard Wiseman, Ph.D.. In Chapter 2, one of the sections in titled "The Mona Lisa, Freshly Guillotined Heads, and the School Sisters of Notre Dame" and discusses smiles. It was a fascinating read.
Now, what's so fascinating about a simple facial expression? Well, I think we all know that there are different kinds of smiles and the main catigorization that can be made is between real and fake smiles. Wiseman demostrates something that I think all those who wish to deceive and those who wish not to be deceived should know. Chances are, you already know this. Genuine smiles go to the eyes, fake smiles are just the mouth. But it is not something in the eyes themselves, as some writers describe (ex. her eyes shone with joy). Looking only at the eyes, and not the skin around them, will tell you nothing. The real trick to deciphering a smile is the wrinkling around the eyes. (Maybe that's why the elderly seems happier to some people, their smiles look real.) A genuine smile gives the smiler crow's feet and often increased bagging/folding of the skin between the eyebrows and eyes as the eyebrows move lower.
There you have it. The simple and effective trick to know when a smile is genuine or fake. A great way to know if someone really likes you or is being nice to take advantage of you! Or maybe just to decipher someone's mood.
Are there other easy trick to knowing when a person is not being entirely honest?
Now, what's so fascinating about a simple facial expression? Well, I think we all know that there are different kinds of smiles and the main catigorization that can be made is between real and fake smiles. Wiseman demostrates something that I think all those who wish to deceive and those who wish not to be deceived should know. Chances are, you already know this. Genuine smiles go to the eyes, fake smiles are just the mouth. But it is not something in the eyes themselves, as some writers describe (ex. her eyes shone with joy). Looking only at the eyes, and not the skin around them, will tell you nothing. The real trick to deciphering a smile is the wrinkling around the eyes. (Maybe that's why the elderly seems happier to some people, their smiles look real.) A genuine smile gives the smiler crow's feet and often increased bagging/folding of the skin between the eyebrows and eyes as the eyebrows move lower.
There you have it. The simple and effective trick to know when a smile is genuine or fake. A great way to know if someone really likes you or is being nice to take advantage of you! Or maybe just to decipher someone's mood.
Are there other easy trick to knowing when a person is not being entirely honest?
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Racism against Arabs
Hmm...why would an Israeli Jewish American be talking about racism against Arabs?
Good question.
I'm not entirely sure how the conversation came up, but, just like many of my previous posts, this post originates from a conversation with my dad.
It has died down a bit, but, ever since 9/11, many American residents became anti-Muslim, especially Arab-Muslim. This is a very unreasonable, if understandable (not justifiable), prejudice; even more so because, to my knowledge, more sects of Islam have preached peace longer than sects of Christianity.
But I said the prejudice is understandable, and so it is. All forms of prejudice can be understood, if taken from the proper prespective. Extreme Jihadists destroyed the Twin Towers and humans have a tendency to generalize and a need to lay blame. This combined led to rasicm against Arabs in the United States.
What of the other country I name as a part of my identity, Israel? If American racism is understandable, than Israeli racism should be even easier to comprehend. But to what extent? Jews, as favored scapegoats of many civilizations and eras, should hesitate to discriminate so widely.
Allow me to clarify my point. I do not disagree with the safety measures and laws put in place by the Israeli government that may discriminate. The vast majority of those truly do add to the safety of many Israeli citizens and I want my family to be safe. I, however, believe that discrimination against individual Arabs by individual Jews may be just a tad much. For example, Israelis (and Palestinians) treat a Palestinian's life as being worth less than an Israelis life. Now, to explain why I added the paraentheses to the previous sentence. The belief in the unequal value of lives probably comes from how the different cultures value being alive and the bodies of loved ones. Islam does celebrate martyrdom, so being alive is not quite as important. Therefore, the value of an individual palistinian life is seen as less by the Palistinians as a whole compared to an Israeli life as seen by Israelis as a whole. Also, a repeat occurrence that may continually enforce this inequality in value is the prison-trade. Israel will regularly trade over a hundred Palistinian prisoners to get back a soldier whom they are not even sure is alive. Both sides can, from this, be seen as equating ~100 Palistinians to a possibly already dead Israeli.
I, being Israeli, am likely to be a bit biased. Please let me know if you think it overly impacted my interpretations. Also, a question: what do you think of the unequal valuing of life? Are my assumptions right? Do both sides see a Israeli life as more valuable? Or am I totally off base?
Good question.
I'm not entirely sure how the conversation came up, but, just like many of my previous posts, this post originates from a conversation with my dad.
It has died down a bit, but, ever since 9/11, many American residents became anti-Muslim, especially Arab-Muslim. This is a very unreasonable, if understandable (not justifiable), prejudice; even more so because, to my knowledge, more sects of Islam have preached peace longer than sects of Christianity.
But I said the prejudice is understandable, and so it is. All forms of prejudice can be understood, if taken from the proper prespective. Extreme Jihadists destroyed the Twin Towers and humans have a tendency to generalize and a need to lay blame. This combined led to rasicm against Arabs in the United States.
What of the other country I name as a part of my identity, Israel? If American racism is understandable, than Israeli racism should be even easier to comprehend. But to what extent? Jews, as favored scapegoats of many civilizations and eras, should hesitate to discriminate so widely.
Allow me to clarify my point. I do not disagree with the safety measures and laws put in place by the Israeli government that may discriminate. The vast majority of those truly do add to the safety of many Israeli citizens and I want my family to be safe. I, however, believe that discrimination against individual Arabs by individual Jews may be just a tad much. For example, Israelis (and Palestinians) treat a Palestinian's life as being worth less than an Israelis life. Now, to explain why I added the paraentheses to the previous sentence. The belief in the unequal value of lives probably comes from how the different cultures value being alive and the bodies of loved ones. Islam does celebrate martyrdom, so being alive is not quite as important. Therefore, the value of an individual palistinian life is seen as less by the Palistinians as a whole compared to an Israeli life as seen by Israelis as a whole. Also, a repeat occurrence that may continually enforce this inequality in value is the prison-trade. Israel will regularly trade over a hundred Palistinian prisoners to get back a soldier whom they are not even sure is alive. Both sides can, from this, be seen as equating ~100 Palistinians to a possibly already dead Israeli.
I, being Israeli, am likely to be a bit biased. Please let me know if you think it overly impacted my interpretations. Also, a question: what do you think of the unequal valuing of life? Are my assumptions right? Do both sides see a Israeli life as more valuable? Or am I totally off base?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)