Dowd gets it

A major fracas between Bibi’s government and Obama’s administration is a blessing in disguise. The administration is finally taking its gloves off. Using this latest folly as a pretext (laced, I’m assuming with some heartfelt anger), they may see ato ram through real change to the status quo, that Bibi and his immediate predecessors were happy to maintain . A shift that Bibi himself can’t muster on his own, even if he wanted to. It seems that Obama could potentially truly reengage (and now with a little gusto). I hope so. It’s been long due.

But this latest story also brings heightened attention by the American press, and along the way helps reveal a more fine grained truth about Israeli politics and culture that most, even politicaly astute writers like the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd – can’t always keep track of. And by doing so, from a distance, provides distilled insights that that can only come from those who’re involved enough, but are also removed from the heat of the situation.

Pundits like Dowd, while lambasting Bibi’s careless treatment of its American benefactor and main ally (echoing many Israeli opinionators), can now distinguish between the religious Shas party and its nationalistic wrapped religious motives on the one hand, and mainstream thinking in Israel. Her latest column is a revelation of sorts in its subtleties. Yet clear about options facing the state of Israel.

I wish many more Israelis could see the forest from the trees.

Haggard comes across as a decent fella. It seems that this man, an evangelist who ran a 14000 followers mega church, and represented 30 million others, fundamentally believed in making people’s life better. His transgressions, having sex with a male prostitute and allegedly smoking crack, suddenly seem minor in comparison to the punishment meted out by his church, the evangelical movement, and millions of people consuming this titillating story. Judging from Pelosi’s selection of old footage from his halcyon days, and juxtaposed to demonstrate, almost comically, his self denial, his is a story common to many other closeted family men of his generation and upbringing.

Tragically however, Haggard is trapped. While struggling to accept his sexuality, and trying to reconcile his long road of deceit with his otherwise sunny and positive disposition, it is clear that he’s not yet ready to conclude his torturous path, at least while Pelosi was busy chasing him and his family around. One hopes that Haggard and his beleaguered family will find solace. Alas, at the end of a documentary chronicling just over a year after his expulsion from Colorado, Haggard is moving back, after getting the nod from his church. Why would anyone want to do so is hard understand, and the documentary does little to explain his mind set in this regard.

It is also a puzzle why a man with such talent and knowledge, is pursuing ‘honest living’ in the form of life insurance sales, and is not attempting to build a new pulpit for himself. I have little doubt that his message will now carry the extra weight only repentant ‘sinners’ could muster. In fact, he could be the perfect counterweight to the Evangelical bias against anyone who does not believe in their family doctrine. Ted Haggard could preach and provide solace to all those who are casted aside by mainstream evangelical movement. Not a believer myself, I none the less see his gift as a win-win. I am a bit puzzled by his choice to continue and live with his wife, having clearly discovered that he’s gay. But that’s an entirely different post.

With its miniscule lens, no image controls, no zoom, and the most annoying ‘shutter’ button on this side of the hemisphere,  the iPhone’s camera is a (bad) joke. Even when compared to some of Nokia and Sony Ericson’s phones, with their multi megapixel chips and more thoughtful controls, the iPhone’s camera is rudimentary.  

The 5D, on the other hand, is a marvel of information and imaging technology packaged into the most tactile  and perfectly weighted magnesium alloy body. Anyone who owns one (I now own two generations of the 5D), feels that special bond and impossible love to this otherwise inanimate imaging device. Mount your choice of ‘L’ class lens, train it on a reasonably well lit object, compose a decent frame, and voila! Out comes an image worthy of a thoughtful 20″x17″ print with all its resolution, colors, and silky smooth glory. Shoot and stitch 6 or more photos, and you have a giant print that surpasses (at least in resolution), an 8×10 large format print.  Alas, you can’t put the 5D in your jacket’s inner pocket, pull it out at a moment’s notice, send your photo instantly to your mom, post it to Twitter, Facebook or Flickr, and do so after running it through a gauntlet of easily downloadable image processing software, the most expensive of which will set you back $4.95.

No you can’t!

With the iPhone on the other hand, you can. Easily. Which changes things a bit.

For those using its camera, the iPhone is a very flexible imaging platform. No other smart phone comes close to its plethora of available photography related software. There are hundreds of them available for easy download from Apple’s App Store. From point of shooting (Night Camera), through image processing (Tiffen’s Photo FX), to digital framing (Frame It), you’ve got an endlessly configurable workflow that augments this woefully inadequate camera in ways no other photography device on the market can come close to providing.  

Finally, there’s the iPhone’s specialty. Among the 22000 (last count) applications you can easily download and use, there are countless applications that make it possible for you to send, post, upload, tag, locate (via its GPS) and generally share your photos. And isn’t photography largely about sharing? This platform does it better than most others.  Which changes things a bit.

And what about the downside you ask? (did I already mention how bad the iPhone’s camera is?).

Quite frankly, there is none. Clearly, the iPhone, or any other phone with built in camera, are not suppose to replace our lovely D-SLRs. The two are meant for entirely different types of photography. I’m sure that Jobs’ successors will beef up the iPhone’s camera specs and functions. But that’s not my point. Instead, I dare all my kindred spirits, those of us who are meticulous, pixel peeping perfectionists, with our RAW image processing workflow, and hard won mastery of complex image processing and management tools like Photoshop and LightRoom, to pick up the iPhone from time to time, shoot a little, process a little, and then immediately post it for everyone to see. It’s a lot of fun, and the results are not half bad.

Historical comparisons are dangerous and could be inaccurate and out of specific context. They can lead to academic bickering and worse. This is especially true when comparing the strategies and tactics of bitter waring parties. In any ethnic or religious conflict, two sides will convince themselves that theirs is the one who holds the key to truth and therefore moral high ground. So much so, that both sides can justify horrendous acts of aggression that are otherwise incomprehensible. I was born in Israel, and as such, I’m thinking about the conflict quite often. I am usually torn between a sense of commitment to ‘my people’, belief in unique circumstances that lead to the formation of Israel, and the plight of Palestinians as a result.

I was reminded, after reading a small news item appearing on Israel’s Ha’aretz daily a week or so ago, of the nuances and the extreme sensitivity both sides have to any comparisons. The news item was about a recent discovery of a weapons and ammunition hideout in a Synagogue. Dating to the 1940′s. It was not uncommon for such hideouts to be found in private homes as well. The Jewish population had few options and was fighting for its independence, well before 1948, when Israel’s statehood was declared by the UN assembly. Reading about this discovery, I could not help but think about the much derided use of mosques and schools as places to hide weapons, munition and armed fighters, during the operation in Gaza. I can of course immediately find faults in my basis for comparison. One could argue that the conditions leading to use of civilian infrastructure, 60 years apart, are not on par. It could also be that in the final analysis (somehow conducted by an objective historian – if such a person exists) it could be shown that one side has a morale advantage over the other in their leverage of such tactics. But I also believe that there are enough common issues that at the very least justify soul searching and debate. Ideally on both sides.

I am not a neutral observer of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I was born in Israel 45 years ago, immigrated to Canada 24 years ago, and most of my family still lives there.  I’m a ‘centrist’ leaning liberal, and always believed in a 2 state solution. I have a great deal of sympathy to Palestinians and their desire for statehood and normal life. I also recognize the conditions that led Jews to resettle in this land. There are numerous precedents for division of lands and settlement of claims by international bodies (such as the UN) that therefore provides Israel and its Jewish population with a strong legal basis to exist as a legitimate country. Those who claim such imposed agreements are unacceptable, do not acknowledge the logical conclusion that sometimes could pull the rug from under their own existence. Fighting for Independence is therefore historically accepted. But so is the Palestinian fight. The argument in most cases, surrounds the tactics used.

For those of us who support Israel and are concerned for its future, it behooves us to consider some of the similarities, not only the differences between the much vilified Hamas and our own history of freedom fighting. It may be repulsive at first to do so. I vehemently oppose the fundamental tenets of the Hamas doctrine, at least the elements I’m familiar with, including their claim that Israel should not exist, that suicide bombing against civilian population is an acceptable act, and the deeply racist claim that Jews, not ulike vermin, be exterminated. I do consider their point of view infantile and simplistic, no less offensive than other extremists following the tenets of religions. I am after all an atheist.

But at the very least, comparison fosters a dialectic process of arguing and understating of facts, not simply the  emotional smoke screen those who are directly affected, their politicians and demagogues so readily employ. I am sure, however, that recognizing the complexity of a given situation, helps seeing it for what it is. This could, in turn, foster a logical dialogue and maybe negotiations backed by an informed populace less subjected to herd mentality. 

Beyond the strategic and tactical folly of lobbing thousands of  (ineffectual but terrorizing) rockets at the Israeli populace, I do believe that some decisions made by guerrilla fighters, in this case Palestinians locked in a tiny civilian enclave called Gaza, could not have been avoided and would have been pursued (and indeed, were) by Jewish freedom fighters of 60 years ago.

Lack of credit and dramatic uncertainty (now coupled with meltdown in the financial markets – a large source of revenues for law firms) is hurting ‘big law’. Here in Canada we had a grace period. We’ve managed to avoid some of the pain. But commodities and energy markets, the under-pining of the Canadian economy, are now facing the prospect of a recession, and therefore lower demand. Gravity takes its toll everywhere. From my vantage point as a  consultant to large law firm, I see troubling issues as well as a dawn of new opportunities. Unlike some who see a silver lining in the form of mounting bankruptcy work, I doubt that troubled times related work will completely replace the ultra lucrative ‘deal making’ side of corporate law. When a very large multi-national is about to be bought or merged, there’s little choice but to employ a large team of lawyers in order to manage risk, paper legalities and perform complex due diligence. It’s a fiduciary responsibility at the highest levels of management and directorship. Spending (or investing) 10 million in legal fees is therefore considered a ‘no brainer’. while there’s little doubt that bankruptcy work increases in hard times I doubt that it will increase enough to compensate for the revenue shortfall from the shrinking deal flow. Recent resesarch indicates as much:

…The conventional wisdom has been that litigation work, which represents nearly a quarter of the revenue generated by the legal industry, increases in economic downturns. But the West Peer Monitor Economic Index, a survey of law firms around the nation, shows that while demand for bankruptcy and regulatory work grew, litigation declined 2 to 5 percent in each of the past 10 months. Mark Medice, who oversees the survey, attributed the decrease to cost-conscious corporations curtailing their legal filings…

–Law Firms Tightening Belts — By Request. By V. Dion Haynes. Washington Post Staff Writer

In contrast with this less than happy situation, my humble prediction is that the market is starting a build-up towards a crescendo in corporate legal services and It’s about 6-18 months away. There’s a strong probability that the credit crunch, the very issue that stemmed the tide of corporate acquisitions, will be resolved due to global efforts now under way. Flow of capital and credit, some of which is sitting on the sidelines, will come back into the market. Hungry, opportunity seeking buyers will be looking for great deals. The financial work WILL sort itself out. The vacum created by the demise of venerable names like Lehman Bothers and AIG is palpable. As a result, things will heat up again in corporate law. In fact, I also predict that for some firms, residual business from downturn related activities (as an example, legal work related to government funding now made available to large financial institutions all over the world) could result in a lucrative overlap between the two types of legal activities.

Warren Buffet’s weekend op-ed in the New York Times expressed confidence in the future of the American economy and specifically, equities as a source of growth and wealth. Not withstanding his role as an American patriot and cheerleader for its ailing economy, his quote of Wayne Gretzky’s adage: “skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been” was indeeed timely. While some firms cut back on ‘nice to have’ expenses like premium cookies and Starbucks coffee, or more serious fire lawyers and associates, others are hunting for merger opportunities. Judging from recent history of downturn cycles,  those with vision and fortitude will be better positioned for the next upswing. As always, it’ll come quicker then most think.

But its the story that got spun in the media which provided this new human adventure its most poignant symbolism. So much so, that ‘turning on the switch’ at LHC was simply anti climactic. A titillating story of possible annihilation caused by a black hole, created in the bowels of its donut shaped accelerator where particles will travel close to the speed of light. Suddenly, both our hopes and fears were in perfect symmetry. Diametrically opposed. While scientists who glimpsed the possibilities wildly cheered, others were gripped by an archaic fear of the worst monsters science can create. A black drain sized hole who will suck life out of our universe, leaving little behind except for a faint ‘pop!’ sound no one will be around to hear. Or so they thought, and therefore pleaded with everyone on their speed dial to stop this insane experiment immediately. Cease and Desist!

One could say that it’s a legitimate concern. The creation of tiny black holes are a real and likely possibility. But scratch the surface and this theory was debunked. So no: this was not a logical concern. Just your run-of-the-mill, basic human fear of mad scientists and their machinations. What a perfect encapsulation. A mini-drama about our relationship with science and ‘progress’. And like a soap opera, this plot-line is resolved within a few episodes. Science wins. We conquer our worst fears. LHC is now a household name (well almost).

It is fitting to have this initiative annouced during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF), a wildly successful initiative founded in 1976 (Variety magazine acknowledged that “the Festival is second only to Cannes in terms of high-profile pics, stars and market activity). Michael Levine, the ubiquitous entertainment lawyer who is also the executor for the late Linehan’s estate said that “It’s not enough to train people. You have to train them, you have to give them good work, and you have to promote the hell out of them”. Brian Linehan’s genial style was (and still is) unique to an industry that’s mostly about fluff and glitz. The man who interviewed untold number of celebrities is (virtually) investing in a worthwhile venture. It’s what ‘smart money’ does.

In doing some reading about the term and concept of spirituality, I see an attempt to identify and codify an intuitive sense of connection we have to everything around us. This in contrast to a pervasive sense of alienation afflicting many societies. Spiritualism seems to be preoccupied with the existence of a metaphysical realm, one that does not necessarily adhere to our preconceptions of reality. Its governing rules, according to some, do not necessarily adhere to known scientific models. In Wikipedia’s entry on spiritualism (challenged as incomplete by a bright iconic disclaimer), it is said that “..as such spiritual disciplines (which are often part of an established religious tradition) enjoin practitioners (trainees or disciples) to cultivate those higher potentialities of the human being that are more noble and refined (wisdom and virtue)…”.

What makes some of us suspicious of sprituality is that many who follow and believe in its sprawling theories, are explicitly seeking the path to self improvement, self realization and what they term ‘enlightenment’. What some derisively call New Age concepts. Those of us who believe in science, logic, and rationality, want to distance and contrast our way of doing the same (path to knowledge and self realization), from that which we perceive as being prone to self delusion. The concept of spiritualism makes scientists and those adhering to ‘rationale’ methods of investigation and proof, very uncomfortable. Spiritualism is this earnest, truth seeking distant relative we occasionally meet in family events, which has the capacity to be infuriating and smug. The ’I know something you don’t’ kind of person.

But going back to my conversation with said ‘spritualist’ (who was not smug, nor the least infuriating). What stopped me dead on my track, was her curiosity and open minded approach to our topic of conversation. This made our discussion less argumentative and more exploratory. There were two topics that intertwined into one: the illusive concepts of good and evil was the first, and we both of agreed, coming from our respective starting points, that on certain scales this moral construct is relative and therefore flawed. The other related idea that certain human acts could be absolutely defined as either ‘natural’ or ‘un-natural’ is at least problematic. As is my habit to get a rise out of my interlocutors in such arguments, I went as far as say that there is no such thing as ‘un-natural’ human act, no matter how deplorable on certain relative scales of human morality. To my surprise, this did not get as much of a rise as I hoped for. So I may have to think twice about my credo: that godlessness is the only way to let the mind journey and explore un-interrupted.

Rationale thinking, the basis for scientific methods of proof, can contain “uncertain but sensible arguments based on probability, expectation, personal experience and the like”. In fact, some of the greatest scientific discoveries which were ultimately proved using scientific methods of proof, started in the minds of their authors as ideas. It took years to prove that their “intuition’ was right. Einstein’s theory of relativity is a good example. Intuition is therefore at the basis of both methods of thinking about the world around us, and both should not be discounted as a result. Where the two approaches diverge, is the methods, logical and otherwise, that the two world views take (or not, as the case may be) – to support and prove their theories.

I can’t say that this conversation changed my mind in any significant way. I will not ditch Ray Kurzweil for Deepk Chopra, but the dialogue raised questions worth considering.

Decartes would have seen blogging for what it is: a natural human act. An expression of both individualism as well as collectivism.

Technology helps liberate and democratize means of personal and collective expression. Making music, creating movies, doing photography, and writing bloggs are all examples of how information technology, becoming cheap and pervasive, unleashed a wave of creativity that may be un-paralleled in the history of human kind.

To paraphrase Decartes: I communicate Therefore I am. We crave our 15 minutes of fame (Warhol’s prescience was merely the ability to see himself for what he was – a media slut). The fittest will thrive also by trying to rise above the throngs, projecting their memes through whatever means of efficient propagation. Decartes is a living proof – 350 years later his ‘memes’ persist.

We place the individual at the centre of our universe, some say to a fault. But bloggers, most of us anyway, are a collective, made of hopeful Leviathans, but mostly We help create a sea of thoughts on which to surf. The bigger the population of Krill, the more Leviathans like Decartes will come to be. So the act of blogging, is both selfish and selfless. Long live the Krill!