Internet impotence

Once again, the Middle East and South-east Asia have come to a stand-still because of "technical difficulties" with the internet connections. Earlier this year, January of '08, marked the first of the two internet black-outs so far, where everything from top businesses to household PCs were left without any internet access for nearly two weeks. Once again, people's everyday affairs were abruptly interrupted because six underwater cables were apparently severed on Friday.

Just as bad news travels fast, theories as to why it happened travel faster. Ranging from the typical: " ship anchor getting caught between them..." to the infamous: "A fish ate them by mistake!" Whatever the cause, almost everyone was affected by the french-owned managing company's impotence, and its even more desperate attempts to solve the problem.

As I sit on the edge of my seat now, hoping that this brief breath of connectivity does not fail me before I finish this post, I cannot help but think of how incompetent everything around me seems to be. Everything from everyday ettiquette with my fellow man all the way to large-scale malfunctions such as the one we face now - AGAIN!

What amazes me more is not the fact that this happened for the second time, but those who were affected by it. One would be tempted to think that banks, stock markets, and other large and fundemental businesses would be the ones to complain about this incident, however, one would be misaken in thinking so. For the most part, it was the casual PC user who was affected, and not the large enterprises. People ceased to function because they couldn't log onto their facebook accounts to say "Happy Birthday" to their friends or check their notifications to see who had sent them an invitation to the 'Are you gay or lesbian?' quiz! Life as we know it will have to be put on hold till December 31st when the cables are finally 100% functional once more.

I leave you now in hope that Egyptians youth can hold themselves together just a little while longer before they can finally discover their true sexual orientation, or bid farewell or happy birthday to people they will probably never see face-to-face in their lives.

May God forgive the goldfish that was greedy enough to eat six internet cables...

talk about leaving with a BANG!

Yes, I'm referring to the pair of shoes that were thrown in president George Bush's face earlier this week!

Exactly how something like that can happen twice in a row without anyone doing anything about it until it was over is simply beyond me. If the simple fact that it actually happened is not baffling enough, the shoe that was thrown is now being auctioned with bids up to 10 million dollars!

Another thing that I've been wrapping my mind around since first seeing this on the news was why people kept saying that what the man did was "considered an insult in Arab culture..." In what culture is it not frowned upon to throw two shoes at the leader of the free world at a live, international press conference? Or am I over thinking it? But I'd assume that having a shoe thrown in your face would result in some sort of hurt feelings no matter what culture you're from. Sure, it's exceptionally insulting to Arabs because to be "hit with a shoe" is engraved in our culture as being the second most emasculating act to have done to you (after #1: Being hit on the back of your neck...)

Next on my mind was a moral dilemma. Was the young man within his rights to express himself (freedom of expression, etc...) or did he cross any line? Of course, this is a special case because the "victim" was the most powerful man on Earth, literally. However, in any other case, where the victim is a less authoritative figure who is disliked by the masses, would it be okay? Would the felon receive just a slap on he wrist or would there be criminal court and trals and so on...?

After prolonged contemplation, I can't say that the young man was wrong in what he did. Naturally, it was disrespectful and quite stupid to tell you the truth, but Bush pretty much had it coming! Sometimes words are not enough, and since actions speak louder than words, an action such as this was in order long before this moment in time. Unsurprisingly, the majority of the Arab World, as well as the rest of the world seem to think the same way as I.

President George W. Bush has now compiled the most elaborate list of goof-ups,

Has there been anyone in your life who simply annoyed the hell out of you? someone so dumb that every time he or she breathed, it struck a nerve and made you want to peel off your own skin and eat it! Of course no one is immune to the idiocy of his fellow man, but how much are some people wiling to put up with for certain perks that this irritating friendship has to offer?

Let us consider the figment of my imagination (derived from reality), Mark! Mark happens to have a gigantic belly, and smalls of something so bad at all hours of the day, they still haven't discovered a name for it. Mark is also very low in the IQ, annoying, and has nex to no sense of humor and/or intellect whatsoever! Despite his many flaws, Mark hapens to have the one thing that separates us from the primates - MONEY! Or a very comfy, and expensive set of wheels to be more precise. Now don't get me wrong; I try my best to walk he walk and not just talk the talk, so being friends with a guy just because he has a car is something I find apalling to een consider. However, this is my argument:

Despite the fact that his idea of a joke is so lame that I have to keep my genitals from falling off after hearing it, he's not a bad guy - he's kind and doesn't go out of his way to hurt anyone. So he's pretty decent, but sometimes that's just NOT enough. I find myself, and my friends included, calling him only because he has a car and we like to go to places that are pretty far away. And what makes me okay with the whole arrangement is the fact that he seems to be okay with it. He pretty much has a good idea of what's going on and doesn't object, and sometimes even begs us to go out with his saying: "Don't worry, I have the car today!"

I'm sure you can relate wo this situation, who hasn't been where I've been at one point or another?

First of all, allow me to apologize for the long absence. My internet connection hasn't been at its best lately, and I'm in the middle of midterms.

As always, the events of my life or events of those around me have always been the inspiration behind most of my posts...this post is no different.

Let me ask you a question: What line must someone cross in order for his behaviour to be considered sexual harrassment? Is there an acceptable limit to physical contact or not? if so, what is it?

I ask this because I didn't actually witness the following situation happen and would like a second oppinion. In short, a professor walked past a female student (note that this particular professor is both incredibly horny and sexually deprived - a dangerous combination of course) and slapped her on the thigh saying: "hey there pretty lady!" or anything similar...it's difficult to translate :)

Naturally, the dumbfounded young student burst into tears and ran out of the classroom screaming. After we calmed her down, I asked why she didn't take any official action against him, and was surprised to hear this: "He's my professor and controls my grades! I can't do that!"
Of course, we are all used to the whole concept of 'the college professor is God', but aren't there limits even for an all powerful God? In any other country, would this even be an issue?

Another common instance is when a man can grope any random woman on a bus with the excuse of "she wanted it! Look at how she's dressed!" and have everyone actually agree with his point of view and congratulate him for his act!
Or for instance, when a man can grab a woman by the crotch and recieve a standing ovation from the people sitting at the nearby coffeeshop.

All of the previous examples clearly exemplify sexual harrassment, but my question is quite simple: Why is it so common and accepted and what is the limit at which you have to stop and say to yourself: "that was inappropriate."?

I love when someone has the courage to admit something embarrassing about him/herself infront of the whole world. But sometimes there are certian things left that should be left unsaid. Sometimes that thing can be common knowledge yet people choose not to speak of it because it's just not discussion material.
One such insance is the things that American new anchors seem compelled to say...
It was two days after Obama was announced the new president of the free world, after America's image had just stared to improve in the eyes of the international community and the prospect of change began to flood the minds of millions that a news anchor on CBS News decided to speak:

"Now matter how hard she tries and how much she talks about serious stuff like poverty, war, and human rights, all people really care about the first lady Michelle Obama, is what she's wearing!!"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but despite the fact that the statement is perfectly true, is that something you have to spell out so bluntly to the entire world on international television like that? Am I over-reacting to the unbeleivably stupid remark that the nice anchor made?

The eloquent young woman went on to run a nicely edited reportage of all the first lady's clothes throughout the two years of campaigning.
After the world had finally begun to take the American public seriously, she has to go say something as stupid as that! What is a regular person watching CBS supposed to think about the general American public after watching a "news" report such as that?

Another similar situation is the fact that ALL channels, satellite or otherwise, are talking about nothing but The Obamas' new puppy for the white house...picking out the perfect breed and color all the way down to the length of its nose hair! Forget the crumbling economy, forget Iraq and Palestine/Israel, all that doesn't even compare to the gravity of the choice of dog that the Obama family is now faced with!

Is it too much to ask that people at least try to pretend that they're even the slightest bit intellectual? It doesn't hurt to pretend that you care about something of meaning, really!

He who has never made a mistake, has never done anything new...

How many times have you encountered a person who thinks s/he's better than you are? Someone who mocks your efforts and sugarcoats it as brotherly advice? ...Especially when the critisizm happens to be in one particular subject.

The Muslim Brotherhood (a political party in Egypt, and more considered to be some peole's lifestyle - which is the aspect discussed in this post) represents that annoying individual that no one seems to like, but tolerates because there is no way to get rid of them. My argument concern those who folow an overly religious and sometimes downright exstreme lifestyle only - not the political party or anything to do with it.

Simply put, the bearded young men have a bird's eye view of all those who choose not to follow in their path. Every once in a while one may approach you and try to save you from eternal damnation which will be the result of your blasphemous behavior in life. When it is your misfortune to encounter such an individual, it's not uncommon to realize that the brotherly advice you're being given is actually critisizm of your satanic behavior and more of a condescending glance of pitty upon your lost soul. Whether the subject of your defiance is mingling with the opposite sex, use of lousy language, or simply making mistakes during the ritual prayers, you shall never escape the all-seeing eye of the 'Ikhwanjy'.

My mistake was the last of the three. I was approached by such an individual who seemed to derive pleasure from telling me how I've wroged. Try as I might, I couldn't shake him off despite all my attempts. Finally I said: "He who has never made a mistake, has never tried something new!" and politely excused myself, still feeling uneasy because of the demeaningly condescending glances he gave me even as I left the mosque.

What should come first? Friendship or your reputation?...A trick question that I was faced with today. Briefly as possible, this is what happened:

The reputation of one particular female member of our group of friends is under fire. Meaning that she was seen simply standing with members of the opposite sex, including myself. Her parents found out and made a huge deal out of the issue after the entire campus starting to talk about her blasphemous behavior.
The solution to this problem to savw what's left of her reputation is to sever all connections with her male aquantances.

My question is this: despite the obvious fact that the problem from its core is rediculous and should not even be an issue, what should be done. It is the unfortunate fact of life that girls are under this kind of pressure from society, however, should they put their reputations before their friendships with the people they are about to ignore? Of course, a person's reputation amoung his or her peers is of utmost importance, but is it so wrong for people to defy the norm and simply continue with their actions despite the horrible things that would be aid about them behind their backs or even to their very faces?

Personally, I think that her course of action is the easy way out. To simply comply with society's demands without a fight to preserve her reputation as a respectable girl. On the other hand, to defy society is to sign your own death dertificate - meaning that if she does so, she could kiss marriage and a normal life goodbye!

So what is to be done in this situation? Put yourself in her shoes and think of what your course of action would be.

It's a GLOBAL economic crisis!

Just the other day I took a taxi to the medical campus because I was running late. As is the habit of most drivers, this one struck a conversation with me out of thin air. Therefore I decided to write this post as a response to his nonsense because I know better than to start a debate with someone as uneducated and as small minded as an Egyptian taxi driver.

The first putrid breath he uttered was: "America's gonna be broke! niahahaha!" which I later learned was a reference to the economic crisis, the 'great bailout' and whatnot. Ahmed the taxi driver has a theory saying that the 700 million dollars (I decided not to correct the sum) of the bailout would do nothing to save the American economy and that the treasury would become depleted and America would cease to be a world power, etc...

What is the appropriate response to a theory as ridiculous as that? Seeing it best not to aggravate the situation, I simply agreed with the theory while my insides boiled with anger and disgust. Has hunger driven people to become THAT stupid? What is this person's excuse to actually believe beyond any reasonable doubt that the lunacy that is his economic theory is anywhere near reality? What he, as well as flocks of Egyptians, seem to have missed is that this is a GLOBAL economic crisis which has affected and will continue to effect all corners of the globe. This young unsuspecting taxi driver doesn't seem to comprehend that as the situation continues to deteriorate in the US, the already on-the-verge-of-crumbling Egyptian economy will be directly affected as a result.

Instead of arguing I simply nodded and agreed with how "what goes around comes around" and comforted myself with the fact that his idiocy would eventually get the better of him. And sure it did...

Yesterday, the world witnessed a 27% increase in prices. Everything from the wheat we plant to the coca cola cans have increased in price. That includes, as I was kind enough to point out to the taxi I took, gas prices! To my surprise, I was not at all upset that the fare from my house to the campus had almost doubled. All I wanted was to see the look on that driver's face when he went to fill his tank at the gas station. Apparently, America wasn't the only one affected by the crisis :)

Catching the wrong train.

This post was inspired by a comment I received for a previous post on my blog, because I thought this was an issue worth mentioning.

Globalization has come to hold so many meanings in today's society. For most it means modernization of a country's industrial projects, or even switching from an agricultural economy to an industrial one. In many cases it may mean the transfer of different technological advances from their place of origin to the rest of the world. However, for the third world, and Egypt in particular, globalization holds a whole new meaning for its people.

The introduction of satellite television, courtesy of France, in Egypt in 1998 marked the beginning of a new era for Egyptian society. Music channels exploded into the public eye; celebrity fashion, gossip, and propaganda became the very center of people's lives. All that was new in the world of nothing was on the minds and tongues of the entire population...
If you walk in the streets of Cairo or Alexandria today, you will be amazed how low a waistline can go. With boy's crotches at their knees and girls skirts lifted as high as their necks, the influence of western Civilization becomes crystal clear. Nowadays, a celebrity's single whim can in a few days become the latest fad - like our very own Tamer Hosny and his barnyard chest hair, or Mekki and his mushroom-cloud haircut.
As far as I'm concerned, there has not been a single worthwhile achievement in the third world as a result of their so-called globalization. People today know more about Britney Spears' anti-psychotic medication than they do about the global economic crisis.

So as I continue to be forced to look at people's boxers and panties wherever I go in the street, and listen to the never ending fads, I bid farewell to any glimmer of hope of modernization, if there really ever was one to speak of. As a fitting end to this post, I'd like to say that I leave my computer now under a cloud of shame to go watch "Match the celeb to their cellulite!" since the TV has nothing of value to offer me!

With the month of Ramadan over, things seem to be coming back to what they were 30 days ago. The spiritual cloud which had hovered so obviously above our heads for this long month has suddenly vanished. Mosques have been deserted, as well as good manners and decency. The utopia which this Islamic World becomes in this short time every year has quickly dwindles into what it is so accustomed to being.

I was beginning to miss the sound of swearing in the early morning traffic, the stench of cigarettes burning away the fresh morning air, and last but not least, the sight of my fellow man gluttonously engulfing insane amounts of food in an unhealthy amount of time. There is one thing I will NOT miss, however. The infuriating nucance of having some comlete stranger come up to me and tell me to listen to verses of the Qu'ran rather than music, or to wear jockies instead of boxers, or to simply give away religious advice which I would personally rather do without.

Once again, women have removed their veils and wide dresses and exchanged them for miniskirts and push-up-bras. Personally, I don't see how this makes a person religious, but it's not for me to judge how people act - even though I think they should stick to one type of clothing instead of swtiching around in that hypocritical fashion.

When I look back, I find that I haven't made use of the Holy Month as well as I would have liked, while others did, and other pretended to do so. However, all in all, I don't think I'll be losing any sleep over the matter. In short, all is well and back to its old self again...