Bathroom Ettiquette

Lately I've been noticing an ever increasing number of men from different floors of this office building coming to use the facilities on this floor. I think it's safe to say that if you're going to another floor (not your own) to use the restroom, you are not going to use the urinal.

Is this the new ettiquette for the office? Is this an offshoot of the "Not in my backyard" philosophy? Perhaps the pooper is worried about creating a stink and facing his coworkers at the sink as the malodorous vapors waft about creating much displeasure... Or perhaps it is an act of mercy by which this person chooses a different floor as to spare his comrades from the stench within.

Office bathroom ettiquette is hardly codified on this issue and more debate is needed I think.

After days of squabbling, the South Korean Parliament today passed a resolution condemning North Korea’s nuclear test. But some governing party lawmakers criticized the resolution because it did not mention American “responsibility” for the crisis.

This was taken from: www.nytimes.com

I think it's time we abandon South Korea to its own reality.

The following can be found at: http://www.bloggernews.net/179

What if U.S. responded like Amish to 9/11?

The response of the Amish to school shootings they themselves describe as “the Amish 9/11″ has been to turn the other cheek, to forgive the shooter and reach out to his family.

This made me think what would the world be like if the U.S. had responded to 9/11 the way the Amish did to the school shootings? What if the U.S. said “these people were troubled and clearly out of their minds. We should not think evil of them. We should forgive, and reach out to their families.”

One’s instinctive reaction is to think the terrorists would have just kept attacking. But would they? Such a pacifist response kind of takes the wind out of an attacker’s sails, makes the whole world say, “Look what you did to these peaceful people.” Kind of like that song by Coven, where one group of people attacked another, and the “treasure” they were seeking by force turned out to be nothing but the words “Peace on Earth.”

Of course, one can’t really imagine the U.S. responding in a pacifist way to 9/11. In fact, one can’t imagine any nation of the earth responding in this fashion to the equilvalent of 9/11. The natural response is to seek out the attackers and their support system and kill them.

And yet here you have the Amish, who have enough numbers to be, in effect, a small nation. And they respond with forgiveness. It makes a person wonder…is a world without war possible? Wouldn’t the first logical step toward such a world be to respond, as the Amish did, to an act of war like 9/11? Will we ever see a world where something like that might happen?

What if you had a situation where, say, a nation like Bhutan or Nepal were attacked by a terrorist group, and the leader of the nation said something like, “Because the majority of people in the nation embrace non-violent, pacifist beliefs in accordance with their religion, the response of the nation, like the response of the individuals who make up that nation, will be to forgive this attack and determine what we can do to provide help for the loved ones of the group which attacked us.”

I can’t imagine the U.S. responding to 9/11 in a pacifist way. My head can hardly get itself around a concept like that. But I can imagine a theoretical world where SOME OTHER nation might respond to a 9/11 act as the Amish did and, nation by nation, this might become the norm.

And it makes me think…isn’t that a better world? And what could be done to move toward a world like that? Or would evil, violent people just take over the world, because good people wouldn’t be willing to fight them?

Posted by John Hoff on October 5th, 2006 under Uncategorized.

An equally important question then would be: "What if Islam reponded to slights, insults and criticisms as the Amish do?"

It's unfair to only hold the United States, her people and government accountable to a standard that is not equally applied across the board. If Americans are expected to "turn the other cheek" then why not Islam?

Here we have a child-killer and abuser being forgiven and his family consoled byt he community he wrought destruction upon. Juxtapose that to the violent reactions to caricatures of Mohammed in Europe, an academic lecture by the Pope in Germany and the ongoing ugliness of trying people who insult "Turkishness" (whatever that is).

Maybe it's time that before an individual commits to an action or decision they should ask themselves, "What would the Amish do?"

From CNN.com:

MEXICO CITY, Mexico (AP) -- A spokesman for Mexican President Vincente Fox on Wednesday said the United States will likely never build 700 miles of new fencing along the border dividing the two nations.

The fence received final approval in the United States last week.

But Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar said the U.S. Congress is unlikely to approve enough funding to finish the project.

"There is no money to build it, so it won't be built," Aguilar told reporters. "Even though the wall was approved, there is no funding."

No one knows how much the 700-mile (1,125-kilometer) fence will cost, but Congress sent a bill to the White House making a $1.2 billion down payment. A 14-mile (23-kilometer) segment of fence under construction in San Diego is costing $126.5 million.

On Monday, the Mexican government sent a diplomatic note to Washington criticizing last week's U.S. Senate vote to authorize the new fencing as part of congressional efforts to combat illegal immigration. (Watch U.S. Congress debate border fence -- 1:45)

On Tuesday, all eight parties in Mexico's Congress joined forces to exhort Fox to use all the diplomatic means at his disposal to try to stop the construction of the fence.

The bill must still be signed into law by President Bush, but Mexico is lobbying Bush to veto it.

U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said Tuesday the U.S. was talking to Mexico about the issue of immigration, but he did not give details.

Aguilar said on Tuesday his country still wants comprehensive immigration reform that would allow more people to migrate to the United States legally.

"The wall will be useless and unworkable," Aguilar said, adding that it would adversely affect the environment, including the reproduction of some species.

Yes, I believe Mr. Aguilar is referring to the Mexican Species.

The other day while attending a get-together up in Hanover, PA I was shocked to hear people complaining that US Immigration and Citzenship forms were only in English! My initial reaction was, "Well, that's kinda the point isn't it?" The people in question were not hispanic, they are not in any way a minority. In fact, only one was an immigrant and he's a white from South Africa. They were noting the seemingly anachronistic questions US immigration officials pose on prior activity with either the Communist Party, Nazi Party or terrorist organizations. While they joked on these questions, the more pertinent question I thought would've been if this immigrant from South Africa had been involved in or benefited from Apartheid and the racist regime in Pretoria! I thought it best to be civil, as my views on immigration and society were decidedly in the minority, and didn't broach the subject...

Eine Ungelegene Wahrheit

Recently German security authorities held a meeting with the Berlin Opera Company to discuss the security ramifications of staging "Idomeno" - the controversial Mozart opera with the inclusion of a new scene depicting the severed heads of several god/prophets including Mohammed. The Berlin Opera has attracted much criticism from across Europe and the United States for kowtowing to fears of Islamic reprisal attacks/protests.

It is interesting that there is such widespread support for free speech and anti-censorship when German culture is anything but truly free nor is their political philosophy so self-confident enough that they can truly be free.

It remains today that several symbols, actions, and political affiliations are stricktly verbotten, illegal and punishable under German law. That of course are all things Nazi related. The fascist hand salute, various Nazi symbology, the Nazi Party, neo-Nazi movments, expressions, etc.

Not to say that Nazism and fascism are not abhorrent social and political movements, but if the German people truly belive in the open debate of ideas and that Western principles of civic responsibility, liberal political philosophies will carry the day on the basis of their political/philosophical merit, then why not move beyond the Nazi shadow and into the light of a truly free society?

Just as Europe is besieged by fears of a restive and hostile Islamic population both at home and camping outside the gates of Vienna, so too is Germany still beseiged by archaic fears of a disproved and defeated ideology.