Our Neighbour and Why We Have to Kill Him

This appeared on Pajamas Media, and is worth bringing it here in its entirety.

Our Neighbor and Why We Have to Kill Him, By Leon de Winter, January 19, 2009

Our neighbor lives in the house in which our grandfather used to live. He claims he bought the first part of the house from a Turki, and later the second part from a British bank, but that doesn’t make the sale any less illegal: my family lived in that house for hundreds of years and we don’t accept the documents of sale. Now he’s living there. He is the son of monkeys and pigs.

The problem is that he’s not just brazen, he’s also strong, although he is a tiny guy. The whole neighborhood hates him. He’s a thief and possessed by the devil. But he seems to be able to beat everyone. We tried to force him out of the house together, but it didn’t work. He has bulletproof windows, and the roof is made of inflammable material.

All we think about is him. Our own home is in ruins because all our efforts, all our money and ideas and energy are devoted solely to destroying our neighbor’s house. We’re utterly convinced that we will be perfectly happy just as soon as we’ve killed him and his house is a heap of smoking rubble. We live for one thing only: our neighbor’s demise. It’s a noble ambition for which we’re all willing to die.

Sometimes our neighbor seems to forget we exist, then we throw a couple of pebbles at his windows. If we’re lucky, there’s a window open and we toss a Molotov cocktail inside to start a nasty fire. That makes our neighbor angry, and that’s good. We don’t want him to forget us. Life means nothing to us as long as our neighbor’s living in that house. So we make sure he remembers us, even though we can’t force him out and he sometimes beats the hell out of us.

Every now and then our neighbor gets fed up with our stone-throwing — those are the best moments. Then he storms out of our grandfather’s house and smashes our kitchen or bathroom or refrigerator to pieces. By doing so he proves that it’s right that we hate him. We provoke him until he reveals his true demonic character. That’s what we live for. We can’t beat him, but there’s something satisfying about watching him kick our old, worn-out, empty refrigerator to shreds after we have tried to ransack one of his freezers — he has several, all full of food which he bought with the wealth he found in our grandfather’s house. What he does to us is much worse than our provocations, but we keep provoking him because that’s the main thing we want in life.

Our neighbor, the dog, wants us to leave him alone. We can’t. His death is our ultimate ambition in life. We live in our hovel, we grow nothing in our garden, and we leave our schoolbooks on the shelf because we dream of returning to our grandfather’s house and work solely towards our neighbor’s collapse. Nothing is allowed to distract us from that.

Our neighbor claims that when he bought the house, it was just a wooden hut on a piece of barren land that he turned into a palace. He claims he planted a fertile vegetable garden — that’s a lie. It was an estate with fertile soil and the bathrooms had gold taps; our grandfather told us so himself, we even keep the key to his house in a sacred place. If we had still been living in our grandfather’s house then we would have had all those freezers in which our neighbor keeps his food. The family of monkeys and pigs never lived there before; our neighbor’s existence is based on clever lies and forgeries.

We keep challenging him and when we’ve insulted him enough and managed to wreck some part of his house, he marches angrily into our place. We can’t stop him and we have no idea how long he’ll stay in our hovel, until one day he leaves. Then we lick our wounds in satisfaction and survey in intense pleasure all the destruction he left behind, and we show it to the world. Our scars prove to us and to the world that our cause is just. We know he doesn’t harm us when we leave him alone, but we want him to harm us. If he wouldn’t, the world would think he is just an ordinary guy. Which he isn’t. That’s why we provoke him. Without him harming us, we wouldn’t exist.

We want to kill him, but we don’t have the right weapons. He has the means to kill us all, but he doesn’t, the coward. If we had the weaponry he has, we would have killed him long ago. And the fact that he doesn’t kill us, although he could, is a sign of his unbearable arrogance.

Some, who don’t live in our neighborhood and who don’t know how things work around here, occasionally ask us, “Why do you keep provoking him when you know that he’ll hit back so ferociously?”

This question proves they are ignorant about our neighborhood. We do it because that’s what our life is about. Our neighbor, who’s a murderer of prophets, humiliates us just because he is there. That’s why we can’t think about anything else. Our grandfather’s honor is worth risking our own lives and those of our children and grandchildren. We have no future as long as our neighbor lives in peace and plenty. None of us in the neighborhood can build as long as his house remains standing.

Strangers sometimes try to persuade us that we ought to build a viable house on our own lot. But nothing is viable beside our neighbor’s stolen property. He is the burning focus of our existence. He is rich, so we are poor. He is powerful, so we are weak. He has to disappear. A little further along in our neighborhood we have a friend who supplies us secretly with stones and Molotov cocktails. He’s working on a big bomb that will reduce our neighbor to a miserable pile of atoms in a fraction of a second. That bomb will kill us too — that hellish thought is almost erotic. Our neighbor will burn, and we will as well, but one thing is certain: we won’t feel inferior anymore; at last we’ll have beaten him, in death — which we don’t fear, but he does.

The neighborhood will be completely gone. And that’s how it should be. Death will free us of the son of monkeys and pigs, and of our infuriating obsession with him.

Voodoo Judaism - Continued

I have written before about voodoo Judaism, and since then things seem to be getting worse. The latest manifestation of this disease is the story about how Rachel Imenu (Rachel the matriarch) appeared as an old woman to IDF soldiers during the fighting in Gaza, warning them about traps the Hamas laid. She even told the soldiers who she was, probably to make sure they wouldn't confuse her with just some old Palestinian woman who happens to be a closet Zionist.

The story started circulating a few days ago, and today incredibly (or perhaps not so incredibly), it was given a boost by none other than Shmuel Eliyahu, chief rabbi of Tsfat, and son to previous chief rabbi of Israel, Mordechai Eliyahu. Appearing before students at Machon Meir, he recounted how his ailing father visited the tomb of Rachel Imenu to ask her to go to Gaza and help the soldiers there. This is the same rabbi (the father) that declared before the disengagement from Gaza in 2005: "it shall not come to pass!", assuring his gullible disciples to stay put because a last-minute miracle will cancel the plan. Evidently his divine powers have only increased since, as he is now capable of summoning Rachel Imenu at will.

If this were not so sad, it would be funny.

So Much Fuss

I don't watch news on TV and I don't read (paper) newspapers. And yet I cannot escape the hoopla around Obama's inauguration ceremony today. I understand "change is coming" and I understand "yes, we can" and all that. But for heaven's sake, it's only an inauguration ceremony! It's not as if Obama has done anything yet to justify all brouhaha. Let him first find a cure for cancer or achieve world peace, then we can celebrate so lavishly. Surely in these economic times a little humility on the expenses side would have been a welcome "change", no?

Deterrence - An Idea

So the war is over and Israel is pulling out of Gaza, having apparently won this round.

The following days and weeks will show whether Israel indeed succeeded in the main goal of this war: creating enough deterrence vis-a-vis the Hamas, to make the terrorists think twice, and three times, before launching rockets into Israeli cities. Within this context, I have an idea of a deterrence system that, whilst might seem a little harsh at first, might just do the job.

Israel set up an early warning system (EWS) so that every time a rocket is launched from the Gaza strip, a siren (known as "Red Colour") is sounded in the cities and villages of southern Israel where the rocket is likely to land. Depending on the distance from the Gaza strip, this warning gives people 15-60 seconds to find a shelter. I'm proposing that this automatic EWS be connected not only to the siren system but also to an unmanned, computer-operated, artillery battery that has its cannons aimed at the Gaza strip. Every time the "Red Colour" siren goes off, the computer will point the battery cannons to a random point in Gaza and fire a salvo of shells to that point.

The system will not be operated by Israel. In fact, Israel will guarantee that there isn't a single soldier within a radius of one kilometer from the battery (except for routine, scheduled maintenance). The system will be operated de-facto by Hamas itself, every time a rocket is launched from Gaza. It will be Hamas' decision whether it wants to shell its own population.

Despite its harshness, I am confident that this Pavlovian contraption will serve as an effective deterrent against the cowardly bastards that hide among Palestinian innocent civilians to fire rockets at Israeli innocent civilians. It might take a while, as the Hamas' learning curve seems to be longer than that of a dog, but eventually they too will learn.

The only question is: will Israel have the guts to use such a deterrent? I think the answer is obvious.

Why Israel is Winning the War

In the modern age wars are seldom decisively won. Especially wars between unequal sides, like the current war between Israel and Hamas. To win a war against a terrorist organisation that masquerades itself as a legitimate governing body, nothing short of total destruction will suffice (something which the Sri Lankan government is close to achieving against the Tamil Tigers, but you don't hear much about that in the news, do you?). But such a total win would be a Pyrrhic victory, at a devastating cost to the winning side.

However, within the constraints of a limited war against para-military terrorist organisations such as the Hamas, Israel is actually winning this war. Just like, contrary to popular wisdom, it has won the war against Hezbollah in 2006. Here's why.

Both Hezbollah and Hamas are leading an ongoing war-by-proxy against Israel on behalf of Iran, whose declared policy is the destruction of the Jewish state. Iran does not wish to engage Israel directly (for obvious reasons), but the Iranian leadership is willing to fight Israel until the last Lebanese or Palestinian is left standing. So Israel must create an equilibrium against Hezbollah and Hamas similar to the equilibrium it has with Iran. This equilibrium is borne out of enough destruction and death on the other side to make it think twice, and three times, before initiating acts of hostility in the future.

The current war will end pretty much the same way as the 2006 war with Hezbollah did. Hamas will fire the last shots (or, rather, rockets) thus allowing its leaders - after they emerge from their hiding hole under Shifa hospital - to declare victory. Fair enough, no harm done. But it is Gaza that will need rebuilding, not Israel. It is Gazans who will bury more than 1,000 people, not Israelis. And it is the Hamas leadership that will face tough questions from within and without, not the Israeli government. So Hamas will think twice, and three times, before launching new rocket attacks against southern Israel.

Soom after the end of the 2006 war, Hezbollah's leader Nasrallah confessed that had he known the extent of Israel's response he would not have authorised the kidnapping of the two Israeli soldiers (an event that triggered the war). And despite his recent belligerent rhetoric, Nasrallah decided not to open a new front against Israel in the north, and hastened to deny that it was not Hezbollah that fired the few rockets against northern Israel. Why? Because Nasrallah spent the last couple of years acting more as a building contractor than a political leader, given that entire neighbourhoods were flattened during the 2006 war. His people will not readily accept a renewed destruction of their homes and lives, so he's being careful. He's thinking twice, and three times, before acting.

Israel is close to achieving the same equilibrium against Hamas. And this is why Israel is winning this war. True, every equilibrium in nature eventually disintegrates, requiring a new equilibrium to be found, but this is unfortunately the best Israel can hope for when dealing with a terrorist organisation that refuses to recognise its right to exist. One can only hope that when the time comes for the future equilibrium to be found, it will be an equilibrium achieved by diplomacy and negotiation, aimed at reaching some peaceful modus vivendi, and not another war.

A Proper Welcome

Hey, I want one of these!

VaYechi - The Blinding Light of Knowledge

ויחי יעקב בארץ מצרים שבע עשרה שנה, ויהי ימי יעקב שני חייו שבע שנים וארבעים ומאת שנה

(בראשית מ"ז, כ"ח)

Parashat VaYechi is a "parasha setuma", a closed paragraph, meaning there is no gap in the Torah scroll between the end of the previous parasha, VaYigash, and the beginning of our parasha, which opens with the words:

And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years; so the days of Jacob, the years of his life, were a hundred forty and seven years.

(Bereshit 47, 28)

In Hebrew, setuma means shut or unknown, and Rashi offers two explanations for VaYechi being a "parasha setuma". With the death of Ya'akov, the eyes and hearts of the people of Israel were "shut", and they didn't know that the Egyptians would soon enslave them. A second explanation is that Ya'akov, on his deathbed, wished to tell his sons what the future holds for them but God "shut" the future from him and blocked him from revealing the "end of days".

The death of Ya'akov marks the birth of the people of Israel, the moment a family turns into a nation. It is only natural for Ya'akov to want to tell his sons what the future holds, to prepare them for this journey. Such knowledge would have strengthened them in the hard times ahead, knowing that despite the hardships they will face in Egypt, redemption will come and they will be saved and taken to Israel.

But knowing the divine plan also has negative aspects. A person who knows what happens at the end is exempt from planning his life or thinking about his actions based on his interpretation of reality. Knowing for certain that the current situation is going to change is dangerous, as it might make us ignore the day-to-day life and lead us to immoral deeds in the name of the future redemption. The people of Israel might have given up all hope of trying to shape their destiny, relying instead on the prophecy of Ya'akov that redemption will arrive.

Rambam makes this point very clear in Hilkhot Melakhim. He states categorically that nobody knows what the future will bring and what life would be like in the days of the Mashiach. He urges us to spend very little time on the stories about the "end of days" and the coming of the Mashiach, and he quotes the Talmud to curse those who busy themselves trying to figure out when Mashiach will come. The sages teach us that redemption is a tricky matter, now you see it - now you don't, just like a deer running in the forest. We have nothing but our eyes and our brains to guide us in the world and we should not waste time trying to figure out the endgame.

A vivid illustration of this appears in our parasha. Yossef's brothers are afraid that he will punish them for having sold him away in his youth, but Yossef tells his brothers not to fear. He tells them that despite them having done harm to him, God turned it to good and he is now in a position to save his people. He teaches them that all their calculations were turned upside down because man cannot forecast the future and God's plan is what matters.

Knowing the future is a great source of light. But when one is exposed to a powerful light source, one is also blinded. God, in His mercy, stopped Ya'akov from revealing the great light of the future to his sons in order not to blind them, in order to enable them to lead meaningful lives by making their own decisions, dreaming their own dreams and having their own hopes for the future.

"Like Riding a Tiger"

I rarely write about business on my blog, but this one is simply too big to ignore.

Ramalinga Raju, the Chairman of Satyam Computer Services, one of India's biggest IT companies, admitted today that over 1 billion dollars of assets listed on the company's balance sheet are "non existent". To put it in proportion, the total assets are just above 1.1 billion dollars, so 94% of the company's assets were fraudulently reported. The resignation letter Mr. Raju sent to the board of directors is suprisingly frank and open. He describes the experience using these words: "It was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten." Very poetic. In the letter to the employees the new interim CEO writes about "a series of extremely unfortunate events", which reminded me of the wonderful books by Lemony Snicket.

Satyam as a company is finished. It will likely be sold to a competitor (Infosys, Wipro, and the like) for a pittance, and many of the 50,000-plus employees will find themselves out on the street. The entire episode is already being labelled as "India's Enron" and the repercussions on corporate governance in India will be harsh and long-lasting.

And now for the personal angle (without going into too many details). Last year I signed a contract with Satyam, which was signed on their side by the "other Raju", Satyam's CEO, Rama Raju. I met a couple of the people mentioned in Mr. Raju's letter to the board mentioned above. But this seven-figure contract was not honoured by Satyam and we never got the money from them, so the matter is now in legal proceedings. The news today does not add to my confidence about Satyam's business practices or those of Indian companies in general.

39 Steps (Israel)

A couple of years ago I watched the play 39 Steps at the Criterion theatre in the West End. It was a brilliant production, with four actors playing dozens of roles in a comic rendering of the 1935 Hitchcock movie (which, in turn, was loosely based on the 1915 novel by John Buchan). I enjoyed it very much. So last night I decided to take my wife to see the Israeli version of 39 Steps at Bet HaChayal in Tel Aviv (originally, it played in HaBima).

The Israeli version is an almost exact copy of the British version. Same set, same clothes, same mannerisms. But not everything can be successfully duplicated. The play takes place in Scotland, so the Scottish accent and dialect of some characters in the British version played a major role in the story (the farmer going to tend to his "coos" was particularly funny). This was completely lost in the Hebrew version, even though the actors did their best to put on different accents. Disappointingly, even the relatively "translateable" German accent of the Annabella Smith character was lost in Hebrew.

Two of the actors are Moni Moshonov and Avi Kushnir (top two in the picture), who are famous comedians here. However, I felt this played against them. Both are strongly associated with the successful long-running TV comedy sitcom Zehu Ze of the 70s and 80s, which was a funny show but mostly used shallow and noisy humour. At times it seemed like the play risked degenerating a re-run of Zehu Ze with Moshonov and Kushnir cracking up at their own funny jokes.

In short, I was quite disappointed with the Israeli version of the play, but I guess it isn't entirely fair to compare it to the award-winning British version. I would still recommend it to friends, especially if a trip to London isn't something they're planning in the near future.

1,100 Books and Growing

A few months ago I started cataloguing my library, in the hope of having an online catalog of all the books I possess. I've now passed the 1,100-book mark and I estimate I still have 200-300 books to go, most of them sifrei kodesh (religious books), which will probably need to go in manually as these publishers aren't big on ISBN... I realise that it would be impossible to upload every single volume in my house, but I'm hoping to get close.

I tried to rate most the books I remember reading. I have given 3 stars to most books, as they are just "a good read". I gave 4 stars to really good books, and 5 stars to books I think are a must read (very few of those). I don't have many 1-star and 2-star books for the simple reason that it's unlikely for me to buy a book without knowing something about it first, so the chances of me really not liking the book are slim. But there are some notable exceptions.

Although the statistics are not 100% accurate, I learnt that I have roughly the same number of books in English and in Hebrew (although with the sifrei kodesh the balance will go in favour of Hebrew). I also have only a handful of books in Italian and French; even though I read more in these languages, I don't actually own these books.

Israel's Achilles' Heel

Again Israel is fighting. The Gaza operation, which started five days ago, is still ongoing and two questions are being asked today: whether ground forces will enter Gaza, and whether a temporary truce should be considered. Both questions are a reflection of another, unspoken question: how many soldier casualties will this operation cause?

Fear of casualties in war is Israel's Achilles' heel. The process started in the first Lebanon war in 1982, or rather during the prolonged presence of Israeli troops in Lebanon after that war (Israel withdrew from Lebanon only in 2000). The continuous toll of casualties in Lebanon gave rise to various protest movements, most notably "Four Mothers". This decades-long process brought about a paradoxical shift in the attitude towards war casualties: we fear more the death of a soldier than the death of a civilian.

This is a paradox because the primary role of the army, in any democratic society, is to protect the civilian population. A soldier is supposed to risk his or her life in order to avoid casualties to civilians. And yet most Israelis will be more tolerant of civilian casulaties than of military ones. Not one soldier has lost his life in the past five days, but several civilians died as a result of the Hamas rockets fired indiscriminately into Israeli cities. There is not one word of protest against this situation.

The expected toll of soldier casualties is the hidden barometer by which decision makers operate here, in both the government and the IDF, although few will admit it. The Winograd commission, set up after the second Lebanon war, pointed this out very clearly. Our enemies know by now that Israel is unwilling to risk the lifes of its soldiers in order to protect itself. It will fight mostly from the air or using technological means, thus minimising the risk of casualties. This respect for life is very commendable on one hand, but in the long run it works against the interests of Israel. No country, especially one that is threatened on a daily basis by its neighbours, can survive if it is not willing to use its army to protect itself.

This is not saying anything about the current operation, about which I have mixed feelings. It is a general comment on our warped national psyche.

God, Man and History, by Eliezer Berkovits

This is the second time I'm reading God, Man and History. I read it a few years ago but felt that it deserved a second, much slower, read. So I left it on my desk at the synagogue, and for the past few weeks I've been reading a few pages at a time every shabbat, trying to absorb this masterpiece of Jewish thought more thoroughly.

Eliezer Berkovits is one of the less-known Jewish thinkers of the past century, and the Shalem Institute in Jerusalem should be commended for publishing several of his works in new editions. This edition of God, Man and History was the first book to be published in this series, and rightly so, as it is considered Berkovits' keystone work. It is a small volume (just over 150 pages) and yet it manages to explain in clear language some of the most fundmental questions of Jewish theology.

The book has three sections, corresponding to the title of the book. The first, and most detailed section, deals with the encounter with God which is the core of Berkovits' philosophy. It lays the foundations for the rest of the book. The second section deals with ethics, that is the practical translation of the encounter into Jewish law and deeds (mitzvot). The last, and shortest section, is about the manifestation of God in history (or rather, lack thereof), particularly the history of the people of Israel. As Berkovits himself states in the introduction, the book follows the footsteps of that "most Jewish of Jewish philosophers", Yehudah HaLevi, the 12th-century Spanish philosopher and poet who sought to define Judaism from within (particularly in The Kuzari).

I will not even attempt to summarise Berkovits' philosophy here. But I will highlight one theme that permeates throughout the whole book, that of man's responsibility for his actions. Berkovits solves the paradox of the encounter between God and man by ultimately demonstrating that God cares for His creation and is engaged in its progress and survival. God is not an indifferent supreme being that leaves the world to its own devices (Aristotle), nor is He the pantheistic "God of nature" (Spinoza). However, there exists, and must exist, a separation between God and man, as such separation is vital for man.

The doubts about the existence of God, which derive from the fact that the encounters between God and man in history were extremely rare and brief, are essential for safeguarding man's freedom. God hides from man in order to enable man to believe in Him without compulsion. There can be no intellectual proof of God's existence as such proof would "put the human intellect in chains". We would have no choice but to believe in God; faith would be redundant. For the same reason, there can be no evident and continuous intervention by God in the world (e.g. by preventing evil) as such intervention would crush man's responsibilities and he would be nothing more than a puppet.

This is a most profound idea. We all know to repeat the mantra of man's "freedom of choice". Yet most of us wish for God to be more present, for Him to resolve the problem of theodicy and to govern the world through miracles. Understanding the concept of the "hidden God" and why it is vital for our existence as human beings, is an important step forward in accepting our reponsibilities in this world.

If I were ever asked to make the impossible choice of recommending one book, and one book only, on Jewish thought, God, Man and History would most definitely make it to the short list.

Time to Reboot America

This op-ed piece from Thomas Friedman doesn't say anything new, but it says it well.

For quite some time now, I've been telling my American colleagues that their country's infrastructure and services are below par, always to be greeted with puzzled looks. Perhaps now they'll understand better what I'm on about.

The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years, by Chingiz Aitmatov

Aitmatov is a Kyrgyz writer who passed away this year. I have never heard of him or his books, but a friend recommended this book to me recently. As is usually the case with friends' recommendations, this book turned out to be a real gem.

The story takes place over the course of one day, and includes one major plot and one short sub-plot. Yedigei, a railroad worker in remote Kazakhstan, sets out to bury his old friend, Kazangap, in an old cemetery. Throughout the long journey to the cemetery, Yedigei recounts his personal history and that of the few other souls that live with him at the remote railroad station. The shorter sub-plot involves the discovery of extraterrestrial life by an American astronaut and a Soviet cosmonaut. The location of the Soviet launch site near Yedigei's station serves as the background for this science-fiction background story.

I will not go into the plot itself; it is far too elaborate and clever for me to try to summarise it in a few short paragraphs. Aitmatov paints an achingly beautiful picture of hardships of life in the remote steppes of central Asia under Soviet rule. He succeeds in describing the rich tradition and history of the local people and how their culture and practices are challenged by the laws of the Communist regime. The animal world plays a major role in the story, with Yedigei's camel, Karanar, being one of the main characters in the book. There is an ever-present criticism of the Soviet regime, but it is so subtle that the book does not become an anti-government manifest.

The sub-plot about the extraterrestrials seems, at first, to be entirely disconnected from the main story. However, as details about the discovery become more apparent, and especially the reaction of the leaders of the USA and the USSR to the discovery, it all comes together. Yedigei's earthly worries and dealings are interwoven with galactic events, to make a strong statement about the human condition. The past, present and future are interwoven in an intricately designed masterpiece.

It's hard to do justice to this book by attempting to review it. I learnt a lot about Kazakh culture and the hard-working rural inhabitants of the Sarozek desert. But mostly I learnt that one can tackle the big questions in life through a simple story. In two words, my recommendation is: read it.

Perspective

In these tough times, a little perspective doesn't hurt.

Korean Air and the "Korean Mindset"

Following up on my previous post about Gladwell's Outliers:

I was visiting Korean Air headquarters in Seoul yesterday and had dinner with some managers from the Maintenance & Engineering group. After the proper level of inebriation was attained, I brought up Gladwell's theory about the link between Korean culture and KAL's crashes in the 1990s. I was somewhat apprehensive about broaching this topic as you never know what might be considered offensive when talking about national culture. But the KAL people immediately agreed that one of the main problems that plagued their company was indeed the "mindset" of the pilots, as they put it. They readily agreed that changing this mindset and training the first officer to speak up more directly to the captain was indeed helpful in solving the problem.

However, when I asked them why Asiana Airlines, whose pilots are also Korean, did not experience a similar problem, they were stumped for an answer. After some furious debate between themselves, the explanation offered was that the Korean "mindset" was only part of the problem, and that other issues - such as faulty or missing safety regulations - also needed to be fixed at KAL.

Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell

In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell purports to explore the root causes for success: what is it that makes people successful. Not just ordinary people, but outliers, those who are so accomplished that they lie outside normal experience. His basic claim is that the characteristics and personality of the individual are not the main explanation for their success. Rather, it is their environment which is the determining factor: when they were born, what culture and values they grew up with and how their family and community shaped them.

Here are a couple of examples:

• Forty percent of successful Canadian hockey players were born in January, February or March. Reason: the cut-off date for selecting players to the children teams is January 1st, so the older the child the more likely he is to be fitter and stronger than his classmates and be selected to the hockey team.


• Successful corporate lawyers in New York will have a similar profile: born in the mid-1930s to Jewish immigrant garment workers. Reason: they went to underpopulated public schools, received inexpensive college education and were barred from mainstream law firms, leading them to specialise in takeover disputes which later became all the rage in corporate America.

By far the most interesting story in the book is the chapter about the relationship between national culture and plane crashes. Gladwell analyses the example of Korean Air, who had a terrible crash record in the 1990s. Reason: the deferential, hierarchical culture of Koreans prevented first officers from challenging the captain's decisions in the cockpit even when these decisions were tragically wrong. (No chance of that happening in an EL AL cockpit, I guess). The same is true, apparently, also in Colombian culture.

Outliers is a very entertaining book, and Gladwell is a gifted writer. But as with his previous books - The Tipping Point and Blink - I was left with a feeling that this is more of a collection of anecdotes rather than a rigorously researched study. It is almost impossible not to be captivated by Gladwell's narrative, but after the initial "wow" effect, one finds several holes in his "theory of success". If Korean Air planes crashed because of Korean culture, why does Asiana (the 2nd airline in Korea) have a good safety record? And if working in the rice paddies shaped the champions of mathematics and science among Asian immigrants, why did the same not happen to West African immigrants, who also grow rice for a living?

It seems at times that Gladwell shot the arrow then painted the target. He had a theory and then looked for examples that support this theory. Not to mention the fact that if you believe Gladwell, then it really doesn't matter how smart you are and how hard you work. If you were born in the wrong generation or to the wrong parents, your chances of becoming exceptionally successful are very small. That is a very discouraging thought, especially in the prevalent American culture, so my guess is not many will like this book.

Zero-Star Hotel

With companies cutting down on travel budgets and asking employees to use cheaper hotels, one can only hope things will not get as bad as this.

Bluetoothless Japan

Japan leads the technology gadget world. Japanese hardware manufacturers release their latest products in the domestic market first, and some advanced models are available only domestically. Whilst living in Tokyo, I was accessing the internet using iMode on my DoCoMo phone years before the introduction of 3G phones in the West. I always took it for granted that use of technology in Japan, especially in the domain of mobile/wireless communications, would be ahead and more advanced than anywhere else.

So I was unprepared for the strange experience I had walking the streets of Tokyo this week: I was the only one using a Bluetooth headset for my mobile phone (the H700 pictured on the left). It took me a while to notice it, but nobody except me had a Bluetooth headset. I noticed that on my first or second day here, and all week I looked around for somebody else using one. Nothing. Not even one person.

This being Japan, the reason for this strange "Bluetoothless" phenomenon is obviously not slow or late technology adoption. I believe the answer to this puzzle lies in the social and behavioural rules of mobile phone etiquette here.

A strong emphasis is placed on proper manners - manna-a to locals - when using a mobile phone. For example, it is very rare to see a Japanese person use a mobile phone to speak on the train (texting though is OK; it is actually the most common activity next to reading manga). In the rare occasions this happens, the entire body language is one of apology and self-minimisation: a hand cupped over the phone, the head bowed, and a look of real consternation on the face of the caller, who usually ends the call immediately explaining he/she is on the train. When in meetings or in public places, if the phone rings, more often that not the person taking the call will step out of the room. The all-too-familiar picture of two Israelis sitting at a restaurant or coffee shop, both talking loudly into their phones, is nonexistent in Japan.

So I think that Bluetooth use goes against this social etiquette. Speaking with a Bluetooth headset means the person is basically talking into thin air, seemingly to nobody (a familiar picture in airports). This is unacceptable behaviour here, as it is not obvious to others around you that you are on the phone. It is too embrassing and definitely too impolite to be talking this way. It's almost like being caught eating in public, God forbid!

TV Shows and a Fat Pig

In London again last week. Got in Monday with the most dreary weather imaginable; we didn't see the ground until we were practically on the runway. Most unpleasant.

Zapping through the TV channels here (jet lag or just from boredom) I am always suprised by the fact that almost every day one can watch a game show centered around general knowledge questions. And not only during the day but also during evening prime time. How come the UK has so many of these shows? I am not certain (as I am not connected to TV at home), but I'm pretty sure there are no such shows in Israel. I don't hear about them on the news. All I read about are reality shows and song/dance contest shows. The last one I remember being on TV was "Who wants to be a millionaire", but I don't think it's been on for a while now.

What does that say about Israelis? Is the generations-long Jewish quest for knowledge, a result of the priority placed by parents on education, coming to an end in the Holy Land of all places? I don't know, but I would definitely prefer to hear that TV audiences in Israel are watching "The Weakest Link" rather than vegetating in front of "Big Brother".

I also managed to catch a play this time: "Fat Pig" at the Comedy Theatre. It's a small story about a guy (Nick Burns) who starts to go out with a fat girl (Katie Kerr) but doesn't manage to come to terms with his friends' criticism of his new love. Kerr and Burns do a great job, but the ex-girlfriend (played by Kelly Brook) is seriously annoying and seemed to "over play" her part. Cute play, but nothing much to write home about. It's worth watching for Kevin Bishop, who does a great job as the rude and "in your face" friend.

Obama It Is

Well, Obama it is. Hard to say what this means for the US and for the world. As The Guardian put it this morning: "it is hard to know whether to week or to shout for joy". Most of the local commentary, driven by US-born Israelis, is that this is a historic mistake, the magnitude of which will be clear soon enough. Others are more cautious and ask to give Obama a chance.

If I were to try and take a high-level view of recent events (a risk, given the lack of proper historical perspective), I would frame everything in the context of the power shift from the US to the East, particulary to China. The US is steadily losing its hegemony as the world leader, a position it has held for almost a century, most recently as the sole world leader. The US is not going away any time soon; empires usually do not crash in a single bang, they fade out over a long period of time. But the trend is clear. This fading out has always carried with it tumultous events in world history, as the world seeks a new balance. The war against terrorism, the economic turmoil, the general sense of hopeleseness, the apathy of Europeans - everything can be attributed to this shift. The thirst for change in America, manifested in this Presidential election is yet another symptom of this global readjustment. The US is struggling to come to terms with the fact that it has peaked and it's mostly downhill from here.

We live in a world best described by the old Chinese curse as "interesting times".

Obama or McCain?

So the race is finally over, and tomorrow is the big day. Obama or McCain?

Truth is, I haven't been following the US Presidential election much (the disillusionment with Israeli politics is clearly spilling over) so I can't say I have a firm opinion either way. My guts tell me McCain will be better for Israel, but frankly I'm not too sure my guts are right this time. Who knows?

Chabad of Tokyo

Three years after leaving Tokyo, the whole family is back in Japan for a short visit this week. There are obviously many experiences and memories to write about, but I wanted to write a few words about a dear family and an invaluable organisation - Chabad of Tokyo.

During the 4.5 years we were living in Tokyo, Chabad was for us - as it is for many Jews around the world - the main focus of Jewish life here. The Sudakevitch family have become our friends. They arrived in Tokyo a year or so before we did, so they've been here for almost 9 years now. Recently the Chabad House moved to a new building, which is going to be renovated in the near future and become the centre of Jewish life in the Japanese capital.

We just spent shabbat and chag with the Sudakevitch family (we are staying in a hotel nearby). It was lovely to see them again and to have meals in their sukkah. We had "hakafot" last night with a group of tourists from Israel that really livened the place up; I'm sure the Japanese neighbours were asking themselves what the loud singing and raucous dancing was all about. Rabbi Mendi told me that on Yom Kippur they had about 200 people for the end of the day, with only about 60 chairs available. This is surely a great sign for the new Chabad house in Tokyo.

So if you're visiting Tokyo, be sure to pay Chabad a visit!

Singapore and Israel

I'm sat at Singapore Changi airport, waiting for a red eye to Tokyo, after having spent 3 days in this wonderful city-state. I've been to Singapore several times in the past, and it's a great place: "Asia for beginners".

Every time I'm here I'm struck by the fact of how much Israel would benefit by adopting some of the practices of the Singaporeans. I agree that, strictly speaking, Singapore is not a "true" democracy; in fact, it has been described as an "illiberal democracy" or even a "benign dictatorship". But my argument is that this is exactly the type of democracy Israel needs.

Here are some examples of Singaporean practices that I think would do wonders if applied in the Holy Land:

• Freedom of speech is moderated, to protect minorities and to prevent "disharmony". Oh, if someone would only put a leash on the Israeli media!
• You kill someone (first-degree murder), you die. You traffic in drugs, you die. Simple and effective.
• OK, so perhaps capital punishment is a little harsh, so how about this: you don't flush the toilet, you chew gum in public, you litter, you jay-walk, you trade in pornography - you are a criminal.

I think the idea is clear. Compare Singapore to other "Chinese" countries in Asia and note the difference in wealth, law and order, cleanliness, manners, etc. Certain populations need taming, for want of a better term. Israelis could do with a little taming themselves. Things would look much better if heavy fines were imposed every time someone threw litter from his car or cut in line at "kupat cholim". I say: hit the Israeli where it hurts most: his pocket!

It's a well-known secret that Israel helped Singapore build its military. It's time Israel also learns a thing or two from Singapore.

Prozac and Home-Equity Loans

The financial crisis gripping the world right now started with the bursting of the sub-prime mortgage bubble in the US last year (explanation here). Naturally, the financial industry players - banks, brokers, insurers, etc. - took most of the rap for creating this crisis, and rightfully so.

But what about the people who actually borrowed the money? Aren't they at least partly to blame for taking these risky loans?

Adam Hanft has an interesting theory: Americans have been medicated with anti-depressant drugs to a level that caused them to accept irrational levels of risk. Not sure about that $500,000 loan for the new house you want so much? No worries, just pop a Prozac into your mouth and suddenly the loan doesn't look so risky. Drug-induced confidence might indeed be partly responsible for the irrational behaviour of many of these home-equity borrowers.

Now, isn't that a depressing thought?

Melachim Gimmel, by Yochi Brandes

Yochi Brandes grew up in an ultra-orthodox charedi religious family. Now she does not follow halacha but is "religious in her own way", whatever that means. And, faithful to the turnaround, she wrote a book that will probably make many religious people angry. Not me; the story isn't gripping enough to make me angry...

The presumptuously named Melachim Gimmel ("King III", i.e. a continuation of the books of Kings, no less) is not Brandes' first book, but it is her first "Biblical novel". This relatively new and recently blossoming genre, concerns books based on Biblical figures that go to extreme lengths to disfigure the Biblical narrative and present a "new way of looking at things". The authors will obviously studiously tell their readers that the new narrative is all based on apocryphal literature or midrashim, and they merely uncovered the truth behind the Biblical story. Because the Bible, as we all know (wink, wink) is just one big conspiracy story to hid the real history from us gullible believers.

Melachim Gimmel is basically the life story of Yerov'am (Jeroboam) son of Navat, the fourth king of Israel (first king after the split between Yehuda and rest of the tribes). The book has three parts. The first tells the story of Yerov'am's childhood and young adulthood, and lays the foundation for the "secrets" to be revealed later in the story. Mind you, at this stage we the readers are not really supposed to know that it's Yerov'am the story is about; he is called Shlom'am in his youth (altough it beats me how anyone with cursory knowledge of the Bible can miss it). The second part moves to Michal, daughter of King Sha'ul and wife of King David, who is following her husband's steps (upon his visit to Achish, the Philistine king) by acting as if she's crazy in order to fool everyone around her. In reality, the screaming and the lighting of thousands of candles at night are a ruse to hide her conspiracy with Hadad the Edomite to fell her husband and restore the kingdom to her father's family (you guessed right: Yerov'am). The third and final part is the part where it all comes together and Yerov'am becomes king of Israel, thus fulfilling the true prophecy of Elisha.

The Biblical story is turned on its head by Brandes. The King David dynasty and the tribe of Yehuda are depicted as the evil ones, whereas the King Saul dinasty and the tribes of Binyamin and Efraim are the good guys. The only reason the Bible says it differently is because the scribes of the time were ordered by the palace to write false stories. For example, David never really killed Goliath, Saul never really persecuted David (quite the contrary) and God never stripped the kingdom away from Saul to give it to David.

Brandes is not the first to write a "revolutionary" narrative of the Bible. Anita Diamant did it years ago with the story of Dinah. Shlomit Avramson did it recently with the story of Tamar and Yehuda. Even the story of the generations-long struggle between the dynasties of Saul and David was rendered into a (much better, futuristic, novel) by Chagai Dagan. But Brandes writes pretty well, so at least the shalowness of the "new narrative" and the "hidden secrets" are not all that tedious, and the book can be read and be done with in a few hours. Good riddance.

The Lion's Muffled Roar

The District Court in Jerusalem refused yesterday to overturn the moral turpitude clause in Aryeh Deri's 1999 verdict. This means that Deri will not be able to run for mayor of Jerusalem. This is good news.

Deri is considering to appeal to the High Court of Justice. I hope he does, so that the last nail goes into the coffin and the lion is buried for good (or at least for these elections).

Financial Crisis: Explained (Again)

A day before Congress decides on the bailout plan for the financial markets (and for all of us), is a perfect day to be reminded of this video from about a year ago. How sadly prescient it was:

The Amnesiac, by Sam Taylor

The Amnesiac is a strange book. I bought it following a recommendation on VSL, that called the book "unputdownable". Well, it took me a few days to get through it, so I wouldn't define it quite as such. But it is an intriguing book, as one would expect from a book about amnesia.

James Purdew is a 30-year-old Briton that leads a more or less contented, easy-going life in Amsterdam with his girlfriend, Ingrid. A leg injury has him confined to the apartment for a while, which gets him thinking about life in general and his in particular (lesson for life: do not think too much!) He gradually realises he has this blank about three years in his past, and when he checks his diaries he finds out those relating to that period are locked in a box to which he has conveniently lost the key. As his relationship with Ingrid hits a dead-end anyway, he decides to head back to England to retrace his past.

So far so good, and up until this part the book was indeed "unputdownable". A great start. But this is where things get more complicated. James starts his detective work by going back to the house he lived in during his university days. The plot goes back and forth in time and various clues come together, pieces of the past. James starts feeling this is all part of a bigger picture that keeps eluding him. He also gets the feeling he is being manipulated by greater forces.

The story is hard to follow, not only because of the obvious "holes" of James' missing past, but also because of the writing style. Narration switches between James and a mysterious narrator, that claims at times to be in the same room as James. Excerpts of other works are inserted alongside the main story. There are several characters, in different times, whose names or initials are similar. Taylor also switches between genres: science fiction, mystery and drama. This is partly why this book is slow to read; the reader is curious to find out what is going on, but the style is such that it slows down the reading pace.

The end is rather disappointing, as one suspects what happened quite early on in the story. Nevertheless, this is a book I would recommend and certainly a great debut book for Sam Taylor.

PS - I was reminded of the movie Memento while reading this book (note to self: must watch that movie again).

History in the Making

These days most of us are going about their lives as usual: work, school, family... And yet the events of the past few months, and especially of this week, are probably nothing short of history in the making.

The American government bails out the two largest mortgage companies. Three out of the five leading banks in Wall Street are no longer with us. The largest insurance company is asking the government to throw it a lifeline. And the world stockmarkets are in a freefall.

We are all immediately affected by this "financial tsunami", through our mortgages, our savings, our pension funds and the value of our home. Yet these are merely the immediate effects and there is a much bigger picture to consider here. In the words of Alan Greenspan, this is a "once-in-a-century" crisis.

The banking system, unlike other parts of the economy, is built on trust and that trust has been eroded to a dangerous degree. The US government made a courageous decision by not saving Lehman Brothers at the last minute, preferring to send out a message that this mess needs to sort itself out with market forces. But this is a huge gamble, one that places the entire market-based economy approach to the test, the results of which may alter our lives in ways unimaginable (some say unthinkable) at this point in time.

By definition, it is not easy to discern clearly when history is being made. History is a hindsight business. But I'm paying close attention, as years from now I might find myself telling my grandchildren what life was like during the turnpoint year of 2008.

43.7%

The primaries for the new leader of the ruling political party, Kadima, are taking place this week. One of the candidates, Shaul Mofaz (currently the Transport Minister) called a press conference yesterday and predicted he will win. So far - no news; typical candidate behaviour.

The interesting, and mildly disturbing, piece of news is that Mofaz confidently predicted to one and all that he will win with exactly 43.7% of the vote. Not 40% or 45%, mind you, but exactly 43.7%.

My first reaction was that I probably misheard (or rather misread, as I get my news from the Web). How can anyone possibly predict an election outcome with such precision? Surely even the most secular political candidate in Israel is aware of the saying of Rabbi Yochanan in the Talmud: since the destruction of the Temple, prophecy was taken from the Prophets and given to fools and children. Who in his right mind, i.e. not a fool or a child, would want to make such a prediction?

But then I remembered it is Mofaz we are talking about, and everything became clear. Mofaz, who has a lengthy military career behind him, was head of the IDF Officer School (Bahad 1) when I was there all those years ago. And even though as a cadet I did not bump into him that often, the impression that stuck in my mind from those few occasions I did hear him speak was that of a bumbling fool. I still remember all the jokes officers used to make about him behind his back. No wonder then that he, of all people, should be blessed with the gift of prophecy.

Do we Deserve Gaydamak? - A Year Later

On the eve of the current new Jewish year, I asked whether we Israelis deserved Gaydamak, the Russian-born billionaire with the questionable background that decided to run for mayor of Jerusalem. I added that if indeed we did deserve him, then we had some serious repenting to do.

A year on, it seems our repenting is starting to work and there are signs this particularly odious phenomenon may be starting its exit from the Israeli public arena. May this be the beginning of a wonderful fade out.

The Return of the Lion

Aryeh Deri, former minister, MK and leader of the ultra-orthodox party Shas, announced today he has decided to run for mayor of Jerusalem. Small problem: he was convicted and sent to prison 9 years ago, and the offences carried moral turpitude which prevent him from running for public office until next year. So he's asking, nicely, to let him run anyway and if that won't work, he will likely go to the President to ask for pardon.

Reminder: Deri was found guilty of corruption, breach of trust and taking bribes. He waged a campaign against the legal system for years, procrastinating at every possible junction while blaming the "ashkenazi elites" for political and racial persecution. He has never admitted guilt.

The Israeli public has a very short memory and an astonishing tolerance for chutzpah. Whilst this criminal has paid his debt to society, his asking for leniency on the ban to run for public office is unacceptable. It is inevitable (almost a law of nature) for Deri to come back to politics eventually, but he should not be allowed back by using the same old mixture of an attitude of self-entitlement coupled with shady dealings behind the scenes. Some humility and integrity are in order.

Hamei Yoav, Israel

For our wedding anniversary yesterday, my wife and I spent a day and a night at Hamei Yoav, a natural baths and spa complex in southern Israel. We've never been and as it's a relatively short drive away nowadays, with route 6, why not?

Here's why not. The place is in dire need of a facelift. A new coat of paint will be a nice start. My masseuse told me the place is run by the adjacent two kibbutzim, which explains the poor management of the facility. It's a shame to see such a beautiful place deteriorate through neglect. It can become a real gem with proper attention.

On the bright side, what can be wrong with a day spent lounging in various smelly pools, enjoying a massage and eating in an Indian restaurant in suprisingly well-developed and clean-looking Ashdod? But next time I'll probably choose another spa.

Transparently Pointless

I was in Boston this week and naturally could not avoid getting exposed to the Democratic Convention taking place in Denver. I was meaning to write about my impressions from this vacuous event, but after reading The Economist's correspondent's post on IntelligentLife.com about the American talent for "creating transparently pointless political rituals", I don't have much to add.

There is one other remarkable American talent I wonder about: the ability to stomach cheesiness and fake emotions without puking (or hurling some heavy object at the TV). Michelle Obama's address was a masterpiece of fake emotions; how can anyone possibly believe the her voice genuinely hang, every so precisely, during critical moments in her speech? And when Hillary Clinton got to the "No way! No How! No McCain!" part, the camera showed Bill smiling and shaking his head, as if amazed to hear this gem come out of his wife's mouth; how can anyone possibly believe he has not heard this before?

I keep asking myself whether most Americans believe this blatantly fake nonsense or if this entire charade is just a perpetuum mobile that nobody can stop.

LibraryThing.com - My Library Online

For years I've had this dream to create an electronic catalogue of all the books I own. I looked at various software packages but all of them required too much effort and too much time. The improvised solution I use for cataloguing my movie collection (using an Excel spreadsheet...) works well for a few hundred DVDs, but is inefficient for all my books.

So you can imagine the "Eureka!" scream I let out last week when I stumbled upon LibraryThing.com. I kicked myself hard when I saw the site/service has been around for more than two years. And then I kicked myself even harder for not thinking about such a service myself.

The idea is very simple: you enter the book's ISBN (or, if you don't have it, some key words like title or author) and the site searches for the book in hundreds of databases worldwide. One click on the book's title adds it to your online library, including the cover image and various details about the book. The site has several other nifty features, making the entire experience quite enjoyable.

I've only just started adding my books to my LibraryThing.com library (a permanent link is on the right sidebar of the blog), so it's going to take a while before they are all online. I can't wait.

Uniqlock

Uniqlo is a clothing retail chain from Japan. They came up with a brilliant branding idea: Uniqlock. Explanation here. I'm hypnotised.

Nachamu - Zion and Jerusalem

על הר גבוה עלי לך מבשרת ציון, הרימי בכח קולך מבשרת ירושלים, הרימי אל תיראי, אמרי לערי יהודה הנה אלהיכם

(ישעיה מ', ט')

This shabbat we read the first of the seven haftarot of consolation (sheva de'nechamata), the first one being from chapter 40 of Yeshayahu, known also as nachamu, nachamu ami ("comfort ye, comfort ye, My people"). The prophet calls upon Zion and Jerusaem to comfort the people of Israel:

"O thou that tells good tidings to Zion, get up into the high mountain; O thou that tells good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah: 'Behold your God!'"

(Yeshayahu 40, 9)

So who is the one that brings good tidings to Zion? And who is the one that brings good tidings to Jerusalem? And what is the difference between Zion and Jerusalem?

Some commentators explain that the verse refers to the prophets themselves, those who bring good tidings to the people. Most of the prophets were men, and the Hebrew word for "brings good tidings" here is mevasseret which is in the female form; this is explained in several ways, one of which is that the verse refers to the congregration of prophets, rather than to a single prophet, and whe word congregation in Hebrew - eda - is indeed in the female form.

But more interestingly, other commentators explain that Zion and Jerusalem are themselves the bringers of good tidings. And from this explanation we can try and understand the difference between the two.

Zion and Jerusalem are mentioned earlier in Yeshayahu (chapter 2), a verse we read every time we open the ark: "For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from Jerusalem." The Malbim writes that Zion is a name given to the seat of the Sanhedrin, the high court of 71 sages that sat in a designated room in the Temple (lishkat ha'gazit), and hence "the law" goes forth from Zion. Jerusalem, on the other hand, is the city itself, from which the words of the prophets, "word of God", goes forth to the rest of the land, the cities of Judah. This distinction holds also in our case. Zion, a symbol of the Temple, needs to "get up into the high mountain", as befits the Temple Mount and the high place reserved for kings, sages and priests. Jerusalem, a symbol of the prophets of the city, needs to "lift up its voice in strength", so that God's message is heard all over the world.

The same idea is further expounded by R. Avraham Kook. The double consolation of the prophet (nachamu, nachamu) refers to two types of redemption: an earthly redemption - Jerusalem - which is similar in nature to the national aspirations of all people on earth. And a spiritual redemption - Zion - which is unique to Israel and will come with the restoration of the Temple and the kingdom of Israel.

Our generation has been blessed to have witnessed the first redemption, that of Jerusalem. God willing, we shall also be blessed to witness the second redemption, that of Zion, soon in our times.

This idea for this week's thought is from R. Avraham Rivlin.

No Short-Nosed Dogs Allowed

I connected to the internet in the ANA lounge at Narita airport this morning. After connecting, the browser is automatically directed to the ANA home page. Just before closing the browser window, I spotted the following headline under "ANA News": Resumption of Carriage of Short-nosed Dog. Obviously, I couldn't resist the temptation to click on this intriguing piece of news.

And here's the full story, copied here for posterity (the Japlish is ANA's, not mine):

Thank you for choosing ANA flight.

W accept a pet particularly carefully during the traveling. ANA will suspend carriage of certain breeds of short-nosed dog from July 1st to September 30th. In accordance with professional veterinarian viewpoint, Short-nosed dogs are vulnerable to environmental health condition in the summer season compare to other breeds, ANA decides that, at the current moment, we can not confirm to provide safe carriage of pet.

We apologize for any inconvenience and appreciate your understanding and patience.

1. The term for effective: July 1st- September 30th,2008

2. Applicable Flight: All ANA Group operating flights (Domestic and International)

3. Applicable Breeds: Bulldog, French Bulldog, Boxer, Shih Tzu, Boston Terrier, Bull Terrier, King Charles Spaniel*, Tibetan Spaniel, Brussels Griffon, Chow Chow, Pug, Chin, Pekingese

* Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is NOT same as King Charles Spaniel, ANA can accept Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

It's a shame I didn't bring my Cavalier King Charles Spaniel with me on this trip, as it would have been allowed on board!

Coolest City in the World

If anyone is still wondering which is the coolest city in the world, yesterday's New York Times put all doubts to rest.

Unlawful Order

One of the oft-quoted military laws in Israel is the one of the "clear and evident unlawful order" (פקודה בלתי חוקית בעליל). A soldier must obey orders, but if he is given an order that is clearly unlawful, he is allowed to disobey the order. Many, on either side of the political fence, quote this law to serve and further their agenda. More often than not, the debate is what exactly constitutes an unlawful order and how is the soldier supposed to recognize one.

Yesterday, the human rights group B'Tselem released a video showing an Israeli soldier shooting a blindfolded and bound Palestinian in the foot at short range. The soldier claimed in his interrogation today that he received a direct order from the Lieutenant Colonel holding the Palestinian. If indeed this claim is true, then this video and the soldier's actions should be used in military academies as an example of what an unlawful order is. The soldier should have refused to execute on this order, if indeed this was the order he received.

An Unbalanced Deal

Yesterday, Israel and the Hezbollah executed an "hostage swap" deal. Hezbollah returned two dead soldiers - Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser - whose kidnapping two years ago triggered the Second Lebanon War). Israel released five terrorists from jail and almost 200 bodies of dead terrorists. There are no right or wrong answers to the difficult questions surrounding the issue of such deals but here are some observations:

1. The debate in Israel around the return of living or dead soldiers from captivity is an irrational debate. The decisions of the government are influenced to an unhealthy degree by the families and the press.

2. Paradoxically, Israeli society is more vulnerable to loss of soldiers compared with civilian losses. During the last war, every injury and every casualty were reported almost in real time, with dramatic and overblown coverage. Terrorist attacks against civilians receive much less attention.

3. The media coverage of yesterday's events (and today's funerals) is nauseating. The need to fill hours of live coverage with nothing much to report led to total disrespect for privacy and an unrelenting stream of hyperbole. Three soldiers died in the kidnapping attack; four more died shortly thereafter in the tank that pursued the kidnappers; and more than a 100 died in the Second Lebanon War. None received the media attention of these two dead soldiers.

4. Given the history of such deals, the price paid for the two dead bodies (and remains of other casualties from the war) is more than reasonable. Those who cry foul that this deal sets a dangerous precedent - releasing living terrorists in exchange for bodies - are conveniently ignoring the fact that ten years ago Israel released 60 terrorists (and 40 bodies) for the body of one Israeli soldier: Itamar Ilya. So the precedent has already been set.

5. Having said that, the practice of releasing living terrorists for bodies must stop. It is a recipe for getting back only dead bodies, as the other side has no incentive to keep kidnapees alive.

6. These deals will forever be unfair and Israel will always end up paying a higher price. This is an inevitable outcome of the fundamental differences between the two sides: a democratic country vs. a terrorist organization, and a life-loving culture vs. a death-sanctifying one. Fairness will never be part of the equation when dealing with people who make a hero out of a terrorist that killed a 4-year-old girl by smashing her head in with the butt of his rifle.

The Fall

One day, some historian will make use of today's story about the fall of Miss USA at the Miss Universe pageant (for the second year in a row!) as a metaphor for the beginning of the decline of the United States in the early 21st century.

Brief Visit to India

I'm never going to get around to writing the posts I've been meaning to write in past weeks, so here is a collection of random thoughts about my recent visit to India.

India is a fascinating country. Although I was there only for three days and most of the time I was either travelling or in meetings, my first encounter with this country left me wanting to go back for more. I have avoided India for years, partly because I never travel to third-world countries for holiday. Why suffer when you're on vacation? And business never brought me there until last month.

The first impressions of New Delhi, where I landed late on Sunday evening, were exactly what I expected. Tons of people everywhere; the airport looked like it had been built a century ago; the "deluxe taxi" that was waiting for me was a battered Hyundai Accent; when the driver wanted to switch on the lights while driving, he opened the door and held it open; traffic laws, if any indeed existes, were a mystery to me; and so on and so forth. And the constant horning! Everybody drives with one hand on the horn.

But although I expected New Delhi to be dirty, I was completely unprepared for what I saw. It was as if the city was built in a huge garbage dump, with paths cleared through the garbage to make way for houses and streets. People were sleeping on the streets, inches away from the cars and motorcycles passing by at breakneck pace. Even the plastic tents of the homeless (if that's what they were) looked as if they were erected inside the garbage mountains. Few streets were properly paved; most were simply dirt roads.

The following day I visited two companies: Oracle and IBM. One was located in the "high tech" area of New Delhi. The contrast between the inside and the outside of the buildings could not have been starker. The streets were the same as the rest around the city: unpaved, muddy from the first monsoon rains with gutters overflowing. Cows were strolling between the hooting cars. But the moment you enter one of the buildings, it's as if you're in Israel or the US, both in terms of the building facilities and the way people dresss and talk. A couple of hours later you leave the bubble and you're once again surrounded by cows, tents, barefoot children and beggars. Astounding.

In the evening we were taken for dinner to a restaurant located in a shopping street that was described to us as being a trendy night spot, situated in the middle of the diplomatic quarter. Frankly, it looked marginally more modern than a commercial centre in a provincial town in Israel in the 1970s... And there was a bull taking a dump in the middle of the pedestrian mall, right in front of the Reebok shop.

I also visited Bangalore and Chennai. Both cities looked marginally better than New Delhi. The streets looked more modern and I even spotted a couple of green spots that were relatively clean. The "high tech corridor" in Chennai is an impressive stretch of high-rise modern buildings, but once again the street itself was partly paved, with open gutters flowing on both sides. The train stations on the new line servicing this part of town looked like they'd just been bombed. And I saw a bus struggling along at a precarious angle due to a couple dozen of people hanging out of its left side. Just what one expects to see in India , I guess.

Strangely, all this "third worldliness" didn't disgust me as much as I feared it would. It all seemed so removed from the world, so much out-of-touch with what the modern world looks like, so unbelievably different - that somehow I found myself detached from it, looking at everything from afar. I am typically very critical of unclean cities, but I don't think I will complain any time soon about Israeli cities being not clean enough. Not after New Delhi.

Hopefully, business will bring me back to India in the future, so that I have an opportunity to start to understand this country a bit better.

In My Name

Last night I watched the play "In My Name" at the Trafalgar Studios theatre in London. I didn't know what to expect as I bought a last-minute ticket in Leicester Square. I came out after one and a half hours with mixed feelings.

The play is set in a dirty and untidy flat (appropriately referred to as "shit hole" throughout the play), shared by two young and unmarried youngsters in London, on the day of the terrorist attacks on the London Underground and bus - July 7, 2005. Outside, the city is in turmoil, but inside the flat Grim is more concerned with his personal life: his girlfriend left him, he slept with a colleague from work the night before and she also disappeared, his phone doesn't work, there is no hot water, etc. His new flatmate, Egg, only adds to his troubles as he is mostly silent and keeps hearing these voices speaking in Arabic. He condemns Grim from his lifestyle and self-centred approach to life. Then an acquaintance from Grim's workplace, Royal, pops in for an announced visit. The tension between Egg and Royal only add to the general tension in the room. Grim and Royal order an Indian takeaway and the man who delivers the food completes the cast.

The play starts off with a comic note (and tons of foul language) but very quickly this things turn into a nightmare. Egg is actually an ex-soldier who was involved in the rape of an 11-year-old girl when on duty. Images from this event haunt him. He takes the Indian food delivery man as hostage because he suspects he is a terrorist, and forces Grim and Royal to tie him up. He preaches to them about duty to the country and Britishness and constantly points to the Union Jack flag hanging on the wall. He demands them to set a clear line between "us" and "them", especially in light of what is happening outside. He produces a gun and leaves the flat to take care of the landlord, Mohamed, who lives upstairs. Upon his return, he finds out that the prisoner was let free and breaks down. Grim calms him down and Egg's past comes flooding out. The play ends in a tragedy which I won't disclose here.

The acting was superb. The four young actors did an excellent job in a very small theatre (less than 100 seats, arranged in a semi-circle around the "stage"), and I found myself gripped by their emotions throughout the second half of the play. So why mixed feelings? Because of the obvious message of self-blame conveyed by the story. The focus is not on the terrorists, and that's understandable. But the play conveys that general "European attitude", if I may it call it so, of "we are to blame for everything". It is not the terrorists who blew up innocent people on the streets of London who are to blame, but the right-wing fanatic ex-soldier who sees everything in black and white and raped a muslim girl. Perhaps I'm reading too much into the message of this play, but I did come out of the theatre with an uneasy feeling.