Kelesetan: January 2009

And the therapy continues....Coming Clean!

...Waiting for the doctor in the lobby, sitting beside an aging man, excused him if the smoke coming out of my cigarette is bothering him, and before I knew it, we had this conversation:
Him: No, not at all, let me smoke with u
Me offered him a cigarette and lit it: Here u go!
Him: The best thing in life is not to give a damn about anything (To7otaha ta7t reglak)
Me: U mean to stop smoking?
Him: No, am talking in general...we are so stressed, we should pause for a moment and breath
Me: Umm...yeah sure!
Him: So what's ur name?
Me: Nordine
Him: Nordine what? *Trying to see if am muslim or not lol*
Me: Nordine Mahmoud
Him: Are you here to visit someone or..
Me interrupting: Am here for a session
Him: With which Dr.? If i may ask
Me: It's okay, Dr.Emad
Him: He's such a nice person, so kind and decent
Me: Am sure he is! *Cursing the Dr for not appearing any faster to rescue me*
Him: But you are young, life is still having for you, what are u suffering from my dear?
Me: Just a psychological problem
Him: What? Are loving a girl that is screwing up ur life?
Me laughing and exhaling smoke: No, loving a GUY actually!!
Him looking surprised: are you joking?
Me: No am serious, you can't control your heart who to love and who not to love!
Him: it's just a phase don't worry..bla bla bla
Me: I'm not worried, am loving it!
Him: Come on! you are a medical students, you will meet plenty of women and vaginas(using the Egyptian slang)
Me: Unfort. I don't like Vagina!
Him: How u love rectum? it's full of shit..bla bla
Me: And how would you know? Did you try it before to go judge others actions??!
Me continuing and using the slang: And btw, Anus is way tighter than the vagina..am sure u'd love it!
Him: you know what will discipline you?
Me: What? lol
Him: When you'll do your army service!
Me: My dear, believe me, I'll TOTALLY enjoy "doing" my army service, dal shoghl kollo fil 7agat de
Him: *telling me a tale about an Army officer he knows, who picked a tanned muscled soldier from the South to be his own soldier and then started having sex with him*
Me: Ahh..Ummm...Okay!!
Him: Does your parents know about your problem?
Me: Yeah, they do and they are okay with it!
Him: Am like your grandfather, I wish you the best and be a decent Doctor
Me: Thank you...*Then my Dr. showed up and rescued me*

I made an intro about the "Doctor and patient" confidality and that I know that the Doctor would break it when it's about committing suicide or homicide, the Dr interrupted and said, also if the patient is pedophile or having a serious disease, I believe you are making this intro for something you want to say...
Me: I want to make sure that you don't directly or indirectly mention anything I say to my parents
Him: If it's not something from the above, then I shouldn't tell them...but you are not obliged to tell the naked truth though it's better if you say it!
Me laughing and felt like as if I'm throwing a bomb: Okay, I've been into men since 6-7 years ago, I had a boyfriend before, I've gay friends and I sleep with many guys!

I felt relieved, it's nice to come clean and then we discussed everything and I corrected to him the wrong answers to his questions in the previous sessions...we talked about a lot of things, god, religion, my life, my friends...etc and he really made me see and think about things I've never noticed before, am starting to love the whole therapy thing!

Anyway this was my 5th session and I didn't post about the 3rd and 4th ones because there was nothing interesting to talk about other than he asked to see my sister in the 4th session and we talked mostly about my parents and my relation to them in those sessions

He's having the next 2 weeks off because he's getting married and he assigned me to one of his colleagues! =)

Guidelines for posting Multimedia files to Blackboard

Here are some recommendations that can help in making your multimedia files easier for students to download and view in Blackboard.

Multimedia Guidelines

In an effort to maximize access to dynamic media content (images, video, audio, and Flash files) by students, we recommend that instructors posting multimedia files to a web page or Blackboard course adhere to these file size guidelines.

The diversity of internet connection types among students makes it important to pay attention to the size of files when uploading content. For example, a student using a broadband connection would be able to download a 10-megabyte file in approximately 1 minute or less, whereas a student using a 56k modem connection would spend about 30 minutes downloading the same file.

Images

Most images should only be around 60k-100k; however, larger sizes are acceptable when larger files are required (e.g., graphic design courses); in such special cases, the image size should be 500k or less. The best image formats are JPEG (.jpg) and GIF (.gif)

PowerPoint
PowerPoint slide shows can be added to a Blackboard site but should be limited to 5 mb. Care should be taken to compress all contained images (to keep file size small). In addition, PPT should be provided in an alternative format, such as PDF. When creating PDF files, it is recommended that the print setting be set for 3 slides per page. This will reduce the number of pages, should a student wish to print the PDF document. The best PowerPoint format is PowerPoint 97-2003 (.PPT) rather than the newer PowerPoint 2007 (.PPTX) format, which might require students using older versions of Microsoft Office to download a special viewer.

Another option for Slide Shows is to upload your file to the online streaming slide show service Slide Share. You can use the service to add more features to your slide show, such as audio, music, narration, and then embed it in your Blackboard course site using Slide Share's embedding feature.

Video
Video can be very tricky; it is very easy to create a video file that is too large to be delivered on the web. Consider that your students may not have access to a broadband connection. Some students are still on dial-up connections, making it impossible to access large video files uploaded to Blackboard.

These are the most acceptable streaming video formats: Quicktime (.MOV), Windows Media Video (.WMV), MPEG-4 (.MP4), Flash Video (. SWF or .FLV), and RealMedia (.RM).

Audio-Video Interleave (.AVI) container file format may also work, but is not recommended, as it is not optimized for the web, and can require "codec" software to view that students may need to download separately (such as the Divx codec and others). Certain newer formats, such as MKV (.mkv) will almost always require the students to download a separate viewer program to watch.

You can also put your video on Blackboard by uploading it to a streaming video site and then "embedding" the video right in your Blackboard course site. It is always better to stream the video from sites such as YouTube, Vimeo, or Picasaweb than to upload the file just to Blackboard. If you choose to upload a video files directly into Blackboard, that file should be no larger than 10-15 mb. Larger files should be uploaded to a streaming video site and then embedded in Blackboard (this makes them appear to be contained in Blackboard, but they are actually streamed from the streaming video site).

Audio

Audio files uploaded to Blackboard should be no larger than 5 mb. Acceptable formats are .MP3, .M4A, .M4B, .AAC, and .WMA. The best way to post an audio file to Blackboard is to make it a Podcast episode - that way the player for the audio is shown right in Blackboard and the student does not have to download the audio before listening to it.

Note: .WAV is a legacy format for which the file size is too large and is therefore not recommended.

Flash

For Flash files (.SWF), size is not typically an issue. Flash is intended for web delivery, and takes download time into consideration. Flash file size should be less than 5 mb.

Guidelines for posting Multimedia files to Blackboard

What Must Our Enemies Think?

Barack Obama has made it to the White House despite a dearth of international experience by saying moderate-sounding things on security issues, making reassuring statements regarding Israel, and by gathering some retired military men around him to voice their support.

And Colin Powell has now stated that Obama is "qualified" to be US Commander-in-Chief. But by what, or whom? Given the new President's comprehensive lack of experience in foreign policy, let alone defense issues, one has to wonder if the nominally-Republican Powell's endorsements have more to do with some sort of revenge on the Bush Administration in which he served- or perhaps a desire for some perceived redemption. And it also begs the question: why hasn't Colin Powell previously endorsed any liberal, inexperienced white candidates?

Obama currently expounds an internationalist, multilateralist, pacifist, one-world approach, clearly fashioned as a rubuke to the neocons- one that will supposedly restore our credibility in the world after the "dark days" of the Bush Administration. And while he appears to believe in what he says, he's far from a pure idealogue- because with Obama, political expediency always trumps all other considerations. His flip-flopping stances, refusal to answer questions, and serial opportunism all point to a man who's main goal has always been getting elected to the next-higher office. As one of his earlier associates had noted, "he was always running for something."

This week, in a cynical gesture, Obama signed orders for withdrawal from Iraq, apparently to fufull his now-extraneous campaign promise. As with his first-day Executive Order to shut-down Gauntamino Bay, he and his staff had almost no details sorted-out... it was just "the beginning of the process." Team Obama apparently felt the need politically to get something in the newspapers that looked like "action" on these touchstones of his campaign, but in the end, the actual results might take only slightly different form than could have been expected under a Republican administration.

Obama is not above trying to take credit for "ending" the war in Iraq, even though the only reason he is not being handed a civil-war infested with Al Qaida is the dramatic success of "The Surge" strategy, which actually won the war... and which both Obama and Biden opposed vehemently. During the campaign, when it became obvious that Bush and McCain were right, and Obama wrong, he simply changed the subject. While his advisors felt that Iraq was no longer a useful talking point once General Petreus had won it, they now see an opportunity to put Obama's face on the withdrawal... and lend a facade of legitimacy to his previous, ill-advised cut-and-run proposals. And didn't Bush's Status-of-Forces Agreement with the Maliki government in Baghdad already set the timetable for the withdrawal over the next three years? Obama's little skit here is simply fodder for the ill-informed.

Our new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has announced that the US will be implementing an "intelligent" approach to the Middle East, and has big plans for the region. But obviously, Israel has already made the decision to deal with Hamas as they saw fit, rather than cast their lot with Team Obama. The Israelis have too much at stake to put any trust in Obama's pollyanna world-view, as they are facing aggressive enemies sworn to their destruction. US and Israeli policy is now headed in completely opposite directions, with the pugnacious nationalist Benjamin Netanyahu favored to win the February 10th election. Bibi will not be forced into nonsensical, dangerous deals with the Palestinians, nor acquiesce to an Iranian Bomb... regardless of what Barack thinks is an "intellectual" or "cool" foreign policy.

Team Obama's plans to place diplomats in Iran for the first time since 1979, and to hold "talks" is clearly not what the Israelis, who face an existential threat, are looking to hear. These same Iranians that are frantically developing a nuclear weapon to point at us and Israel are the ones who stirred-up maximum trouble in Iraq, sponsor, train, and arm the bloodthirsty terrorists of Hezbollah and Hamas, and boast publicly of plans to "wipe Israel off the map."

So the IDF will go-it-alone if they must, bombing Tehran's nuclear facilites into the ground. The Israelis took-out Saddam's Osirak reactor in 1983, while enduring the world's condemnation... so they are used to doing the right thing while being shunned by those lacking the same strategic and moral clarity. While it is good that tiny Israel can handle what Obama lacks the sense and courage to do, sadly America will end-up looking irrelevent and powerless as the result.

The Kremlin seems to think that there's opportunity for Russian gains in Obama's election... and is already challenging him with a flurry of threats and daunting pronouncements. Starting on the day he was elected, the Russians announced major weapon programs and new-generation ICBMs, then threatened to point nuclear missiles at Poland and the Czech Republic. Ex-KGB Kremlin thugs vs. our Yes-We-Can community activist, striving to make the world like us... yeah, that's how the Russians see it, too.

Obama has also expressed a desire to form a new relationship with Communist Cuba. This week had Fidel Castro stating publicly that he "trusts" Obama to be "truthful". But only a fool would trust the Machiavellian Castro, given his record of deceit and inflexible Communist dogma. Jimmy Carter reached-out to Castro in the 1970s, but later KGB archives revealed that Fidel was laughing behind his back to whole time, calling Carter a "useful idiot". And the popular, clever, and charming JFK was comprehensively outwitted by Castro in the Bay-of-Pigs debacle. This error by the young President opened the door for the USSR to install missiles 90 miles from US shores... bringing the world to the precipice of WWIII.

Regarding the Pentagon budget, Obama was, of course, vague on the campaign trail... but he has now signaled that cuts are on the way. Unsettlingly, Obama has attacked our greatest practical technology asset, missile defense- by stating that "unproven" systems will be cancelled. This comes at a time in history when missile shields seem like an idea who's time has come, given Al Qaida's quest for nuclear weapons, the instability of nuclear Pakistan, continued North Korean instragence, Russian beligerence, and of course an apocolyptic Iran.

Disturbingly, there is also a widespread suspicion in the US military that Obama's election has emboldened radical Islam. There is a fear of a new terror attack being put into action to test Obama, who generally faces a skeptical rank-in-file. The Military Times found in a recent poll that 68% of active and retired service personnel backed John McCain in the Presidential race... while only 28% supported Obama.

The last time war-weary Americans elected an inexperienced, liberal "peacemaker" with issues regarding our "morals" abroad was 1976, with the ill-fated Jimmy Carter... and other parallels between his and Barack Obama's policies/rhetoric are indeed alarming. While Carter somehow still feels his opinions are relevant, calling his Presidential legacy an "unmitigated disaster" would actually be mighty charitable.

In words that sound a lot like Obama's, Carter's national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote that the tasks of foreign policy lay not with the "political" issues of war and peace, but with the "human issues" of poverty and development... and that America's "preoccupation" with "national supremacy" should yield to a more global perspective. And also like today, Carter sought a "more equitable" international order, and saw the world in terms of an emerging division between rich and poor.

Like Obama, Carter has in recent times made it clear he thinks that George W Bush's calling evil by it's name, and confronting it, was actually the cause of our problems. But apparently neither Carter, Obama, nor "foreign-policy expert" Joe Biden have learned a thing from the myriad foreign policy failures of the Carter Administration.

Upon his election in 1976, Carter enjoyed enormous Democratic legislative majorities, and a broken and demorilized GOP... much like the situation in Washington today. And Carter was determined to refurbish America's image abroad after Vietnam, but not through strength- like today's Democrats, Carter felt that America's "arrogance of power" was the primary source of international tension, and that the time was ripe for a new, more humble United States... to better fit a diminished, defeatist role in the world.

Underlying Carter's approach was an over-arching focus on human rights issues. He felt that we had betrayed our own democratic principles in Vietnam and elsewhere, and the time had come for "change". Governments that violated their own citizens' rights would therefore no longer receive support- but instead would become our opponents. Carter thought that this would encourage indigenous democratic movements at the expense of more radical ideologies.

But in reality, just the opposite happened. The withdrawal of support from petty dictators in Latin America and elsewhere instead meant significant losses of American interests to the USSR and Cuba, with damaging Marxist systems ruled by even worse dictatorships. These events already had a clear precedent that should have been heeded, in Cuba in 1959- but it happened again, repeatedly, to the misguided Carter. In Nicaragua, he cut-off aid to the corrupt and often-brutal Somoza regime, only to see it replaced by a Soviet/Cuban/East German proxy, the Communist Sandinistas. And Carter was quite anxious to see Samoza fall; he wanted to show the world America's new, honorable "post-Vietnam intent." Sadly, his myopic and ineffectual human rights focus instead cost millions their freedom. And worse, Nicaragua would go-on to become a key hub for the export of Castro's influence, including support for Communist insurgencies in El Salvador and Guatemala.

Regarding America's primary adversary at that time, the USSR- Carter actually scolded Americans that they harbored an "inordinate fear of Communism". He planned to reach-out to Moscow, reasoning that when they saw his sincerity, lack of 'imperial designs", and good-will, they eventually would learn to like us.

Carter cancelled B-1 Bomber production, the first move in a direction that allowed the Soviets to gain real military superiority, while hiding behind the SALT treaty. And after Brezhnev met with him and saw what he was dealing with, the Red Army promptly invaded Afghanistan —just six months after Carter had embraced and kissed the Soviet president, publicly praising his cooperativeness in the conduct of world affairs.

On his watch, the USSR went on an unrestrained rampage in which the Communists took over not only Afghanistan, but also Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Cambodia (Pol Pot), Mozambique, Grenada, and Nicaragua. In spite of all this, Carter's last defense budget proposed spending 45% below pre-Vietnam levels for fighter-aircraft, -75% for ships, -83% for attack submarines, and -90% for helicopters. And the Russians had a field day... until they were finally confronted by Ronald Reagan in 1981.

Another high priority for Carter was giving-up control of the Panama Canal- to him, a symbol of the bad-old-days of American imperialism. The agreement, it was said, would bring a bright new future for Panama, and for Latin American relations in general. Unfortunately, nearly as soon as the Americans left, Panama descended into a cesspool of corruption and violence, and then became a center for the international drug trade. Ruthless Panamanian dictators spent Canal revenue to entrench their power, while brutally oppressing the population that Carter thought he was freeing from Yanqui imperialism. Eventually, under GHW Bush, America toppled the last and worst of them, Manuel Noriega- thus providing and ironic, and what should have been educational, ending to the Carter-era's non-interventionism. And today, the canal is freely utilized by Russian warships on the way to Venezuela... thanks to Jimmy Carter.

While focusing on the supposed "split" between developed and developing nations -as Barack Obama proposes as well- Carter turned the United States into an impotent spectator as a global shift of power unfolded... to the great advantage of the Soviet Union.

In perhaps Jimmy Carter's greatest blunder, he basically handed Iran to the Ayatollah Khomeini. After supporting the Shah early in his Presidency, Carter abruptly abandonded this staunch US ally over human rights issues alone. Carter was said to have thought that the Mullahs would be more "moral" leaders, since they were "men-of-religion"(!)

In the event, the revolution was resolutely anti-American in tone, the US embassy invaded by radical students, and the entire staff taken hostage. One of the leaders of this takeover was none other than Iran's current vengeful, holocaust-denying President Ahmedinijad. Through it all, Carter rufused to consider any stronger military action against the Iranian hostage-takers; he even expressed disgust when Ronald Reagan called them "barbarians" and "criminals" in the 1980 campaign.

Thirty years later, Iran stands on the verge of attaining a nuclear weapon... but also of being bombed by Israel before they can aim the missile at Tel Aviv. Inexplicably, Obama still plans to hold "talks without preconditions" and send dipolomats to Tehran as they continue to flaunt their weapons programs in our face. This valuable time wasted while talking in circles with Tehran would provide them just the weeks they need to get their first bomb screwed-together. Obama last month stated that he plans to extend the American "nuclear umbrella" to Israel... a defensive, deterrent strategy that sounds like willingness to meekly accept a nuclear Iran.

Jimmy Carter had also made it a priority to clean-up what he saw as dirty business at the CIA, and bring a new openess to the agency... as Obama has appointed the Leon Panetta to do today. The priority is, once again, anything but an aggressive and effective focus on defending the United States and her interests.

Except for sheer arrogance, why exactly does Barack Obama think that he can lead the US to a secure, yet respected and admired place in the world? His proposals are largely based on the failed ideas of the past- like a pacifist foreign-policy steeped in appeasement, coupled to a new "modesty" abroad, none of which has any precedent of success in this, or any other, country.

Such false hope for an "intelligent" approach purported to be "new", while disregarding history's lessons and almost identical past policy mistakes, guarantees us nothing but failure... and decreased security for Americans. Any other expectations are purely wishful thinking.

The number you've dialled is not in service, ANYMORE!

When was the last time you starred at your mobile screen for moments that felt like hours just waiting or hoping to receive a call or even a message from someone? and you run like a slender deer when your mobile rings while you were not paying attention and you get melancholily disappointed when it wasn't him who was calling? How many times you read his messages and your replies over & over to see if you missed something he said or if you didn't pick on something of his words or to check if there is something you misinterpreted or to check if you said the wrong words in a bad sentence in a hideous timing? How many times you refreshed your e-mail & facebook inbox to check in a desperate hope if he sent anything or replied to your last message?...What pisses you off more, to call and he doesn't pick up or to call and find his mobile is switched off?
What if most of this happened to you with someone you haven't even met yet?!!

"Urban" is a guy I chatted with 2 years ago for a short time but we couldn't meet up before he suddenly disappeared. Then few weeks ago(out of the blue) a lousy "Urban has just signed in" notification popped up, I immediatly clicked on it and started talking to him, he vaguely remembered me, I mentioned some info about him and his mobile number, he was surprised by my elephant-like memory, so I told him that I rarely erase any contact and then he took my number again in order to meet that guy who came out of pandora's box before he(urban) travels back to N.Y by mid feb.
A week later I was bored and wanted to meet that sexy mystérieux(as far as I remember his pics when displayed them 2 years ago) who appeared to be a good catch for me; well-educated, decent, classy, Egyptian American, 30 years old(I never remember people's age), I guess he's a good catch for anyone! So I called him and there was no answer, I texted him but in vain too! I forgot about the whole matter for another week until I've met him online again last Friday and started talking back so I asked him why he haven't return my call/msg? He answered that he didn't get anything from me but he'll make it up by calling me Now!...an anonymous number was calling, I picked up, it was him(logically lol), I told him that this is not the number I had, he told me that he guessed I was calling a wrong number all that time! So I quickly remembered our last online conversation and told him that It's weired cuz when I'd typed your number you said that it's yours, then I continued saying that I know I sound dramatic & childish about the whole issue but I really hate games!
I quickly got over it after he kept flirting by his sexy voice, he was so into me and said jockingly that I must be a good kisser if I'm Scorpio, I told him that he'll have to inspect that by himself so he said let's meet now/tonight, I told him that he's a Leo cuz you sound like one! I then looked at the time and knew that I couldn't meet him tonight, he asked for the reason so I told im that it's kinda late and I'm so lazy to go all the distance from Maadi to Zamalek, he quickly said that he'll come to Maadi just to meet me for a while, I told him that I really can't make it tonight and that I've a curfew aswell! he then wondered why everything is difficult with me? and accused me of being a player! I told him that reverse-psychology never work with me and promised to meet him the next day.
I then continued my online session, showed him more pics and hooked-up for a sex date with a Palestinian hottie staying in an Intercontinental suite, so I thought of showing some "support" the next day to Gaza in my very own "way"!
While after going offline, I thought of calling Urban back, so I called him...No answer!,
texted him: "See? you don't pick up!"
he replied: "This time I'm not sure I want to."
Me: "Why?! I told you that I'd meet you if I can! Why wouldn't I ya3ni?! I'll call you tomorrow when I wake up anyway"

Next day(Saturday), I woke up around 5PM, didn't call him cuz my mom was pissed off at me for not praying(How boring and lame!), so I wasn't sure if I'll be able to meet him and didn't want to set a date and then take a rain check so then I'll sound a 100% player!
Anyway I've called him around 8PM, he didn't pick up, I thought maybe he's busy or sleeping or whatever(I hate it when I give excuses to ppl) so I left him a msg asking whether we will meet tonight or not, the I thought of passing some time by going to the barber shop, so I texted him again: "Am cutting my hair now 4 u lol" (I was going to cut it anyway so I thought to flirt about it as he already mentioned that he likes me with shorter hair), but he didn't reply to my msg. So I totally blocked thinking about him for the rest of the day and cursing myself inside!

1AM I was back home, called him and again no answer, so I texted him "What's wrong?"
him: "Nuthin's wrong."
Me: Well if nothing's wrong then you should pick up when I'll call you now!
I called him but again no answer, texted him "Ummm.....?!"

Next day(Sunday)
called him and was answered by the lady's recorded voice message: "The mobile you have called maybe switched off, plz try again LATER!", I called several times to check if he switched it on but in vain!

Next day(Monday)
called again, but the lady voice msg was: "The number you have dialled is not in service" @#*^%$^?!!!111!

What To Do About Russia?

Winston Churchill once said in referrence to then-martial and imperial Germany "The Hun is either at your throat... or at your knees." From the perspective of the west, it would be difficult to find a more appropriate summary for the last 90 years of Russia's history, as well.

Recently, we all saw how the Russians behaved once they got a few bucks. This Kremlin desperately wants attention, influence, and respect, and was drawing a line in the sand to mark it's "sphere of influence" with the brutal molestation of Georgia last year... a signal to the United States, Ukraine, and others who dare to disrespect Putin's New Russia. Clearly, they haven't forgot the humiliation felt by Ronald Reagan's liberating their empire and driving the USSR into the ground, which brought-on an embarassing wasted decade.

And those in the Kremlin surely meant for someone to be intimidated by the destroyer Admiral Chabanenko and two other ships holding naval excercises with Venezuela's navy in the Caribbean, and then steaming-on to a port-call in Cuba. In reality, these creaking, Soviet-era hulks were about as threatening as a barge full of scap metal, and no practical threat to anyone... except maybe the sailors on-board. The fact is that Russia's navy remains severely weakened following years of post-Soviet neglect, with mantainance marginal at best, and fatal accidents frequent. But, these manoeuvres close to US waters were an obvious riposte to American support of Georgia and Ukraine, which ran contrary to the Kremlin's desire to re-establish their influence in former-Soviet possesions.

What is clear is that the Russians think they see an opportunity for additional strategic and diplomatic gains in the election of liberal pacifist Barack Obama... and are moving in haste to put this tyro-strategist back on his heels, with new threats and maneuvers reminiscent of the Cold War.

President Clinton lacked a genuine interest in foreign affairs, and was largely pragmatic in his diplomacy. Clinton also inherited a fortunate situation where the Russian bear's teeth had just fallen out, and the country was in financial ruins... so it is difficult to draw any relevent lessons from his dealings with the often-enebriated Boris Yeltsin.

But one only needs to revisit the Jimmy Carter era of the late 1970s to see just how ineffectual misguided "engagement" and attempts at appeasement are when dealing with aggressive, zero-sum regimes like the USSR... and by extension, today's ex-KGB-run Russia. And calling Carter's well-intended foreign policy legacy an "unmitigated disaster" would be mighty charitable.

This naive and incompetent man actually scolded Americans, telling them they harbored an "inordinate" fear of communism in general, and the Soviet Union in particular. He stopped vital B-1 production cold, then gave away the strategic Panama Canal (utilized last month by Russian warships on the way to Venezuela). Carter pardoned draft-dodgers, and reached out to Fidel Castro... who KGB archives show considered him no more than a "useful idiot".

Carter allowed the Soviets to gain military superiority while hiding behind the SALT treaty, and when Brezhnev met with him and saw what he was dealing with, the Kremlin promptly invaded Afghanistan. On Carter's watch, the Soviet Union went on an unrestrained rampage in which it took over not only Afghanistan, but also Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Cambodia, Mozambique, Grenada and Nicaragua. In spite of all this, Carter's last defense budget proposed spending -45% below pre-Vietnam levels for fighter aircraft, -75% for ships, -83% for attack submarines and -90% for helicopters.

The only US President who enjoyed comprehensive success in dealing with the Russians was, of course, Ronald Reagan. He was once quoted as saying ""We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent". But we have a President in Obama who seems to think that if we placate our enemies, perhaps they'll give up their evil ways, and eventually learn to like us. Also again, we have a world loaded with aggressive, insatiable rivals who tend to see good-faith gestures as weaknesses to be manipulated. There is certainly a reason the Kremlin put out stealthy propaganda for Obama, and statements detrimental to McCain. On a BBC World radio program, the Russians were basically given a free half-hour info-mercial last fall, in which a Russian "journalist" left no doubt as to who the former KGB agent Vladimir Putin and his apprentice Dmitry Medvedev preferred to deal with... and it wasn't John McCain, who famously said that he "looked in Putin's eyes, and saw a "K", a "G", and a "B". Now that Obama has been elected, we are seeing why... and it has nothing to do with a new, positive cooperative direction between Russia and the US.

In a clear message to President-elect Obama, and on the very day he was elected, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev announced plans to station short-range Iskander missiles in Russia's Kaliningrad exclave as a counter to American installation of its missile defence system in eastern Europe.... and that they would be targeting these missiles upon the EU's Poland and the Czech Republic if the US anti-missile defenses were installed there as planned by the Bush Administration.

Next, the Russians announced plans to commission 70 strategic missiles over the next three years, as part of a massive rearmament program also to include shorter-range missiles, 300 tanks, 14 warships and 50 planes. The arsenal will include a new-generation, multiple-warhead ICBM called the RS-24, which was first tested in 2007, accompanied by the boast that it was "capable of overcoming any existing or future missile defence systems". The new ICBM's will be part of a a planned 28% increase in Russians arms spending for 2009-11. This production of 70 long-range nuclear missiles over the next three years represents a Russian attempt to strengthen its bargaining position with Washington, specifically in the upcoming talks on new nuclear weapons cuts when the current treaty in force, START I, expires in December 2009.

Moscow's strategy appears to be to challenge Obama's new administration from the day it takes office, probing for weakness in the very same way the USSR did with the idealistic and inexperienced JFK in 1962. Putin has shown that he knows how to play a weak hand well, as did Khrushchev in the Cuban Missile Crisis. In fact, the USSR only employed such an aggressive gamble because at the time they were trailing far-behind the United States in the arms race. In 1962, Soviet missiles could only reach European targets, but American ICBMs were capable of striking anywhere in the Soviet Union. Today, with Russian technology again uncompetitive with the US's rapidly-evolving anti-missile defense capabilites and unanswered stealth aircraft technology, and outspent by the Americans 10-to-1, the Russians again see it to their benefit to employ bluster and brinkmanship to intimidate the EU, US, and NATO into respecting their wishes. As in the 1980s, they cannot compete in an all-out arms race, so they certainly don't want one... it didn't work out so well the last time.

The Kremlin's unscrupulous energy supply games are no more reassuring. State-controlled Gazprom employed ruthless hardball tactics with Ukraine, first in 2006 and again now over subsidized pricing and transfer fees, with the special kind of contempt reserved for wayward family members. The uninvolved European third-parties who suffered gas cut-offs in the middle of this winter's devastating cold spell are extremely dissappointed with those in the EU who argued for the Russians as a reliable energy supplier. Try telling the shivering Bulgarians and Slovaks that Moscow is the "dependable partner" portrayed by Vladimir Putin and the energy-hungry nations of western Europe. And the monopolistic control of state-controlled Gazprom over natural gas resources in Russia and elsewhere offers additional reason for concern. The Kremlin's strategy regarding the EU is to "divide-and-conquer", doing direct deals with energy companies, and working outside the EU framework to torpedo their unity, like the planned South Stream pipeline with Italy's Eni. Eni is already Gazprom's largest customer, and Europe's largest gas company in terms of sales. With this deal, the possibility of Gazprom commiting supplies and capital to the EU's own more independent plans, like the similar Nabucco pipline, is highly unlikely

Has it occurred to anyone that George W Bush was seen as an enemy by such regimes as Venezuela, Iran, Syria, and Russia because he and Dick Cheney were simply wise to their tricks and agenda, and called them on it? Both recent and longer-term history suggests they were, and the Bush Administration did indeed effectively check Russian ambition in a variety of ways.

While they still can claim to be an (imperfect) democracy, Russian liberty is an endangered species after Putin's remaking of the country in his image. Moscow has muzzled the press, skeptical journalists are murdered, peaceful demonstrations squashed, courts are used to nationalize companies, and political opponents are jailed and harrassed. Now, Medvedev has stopped his occasional democratic noises, and the Duma recently passed a bill extending the terms of the president from 4 to 6 years... all ready for Vlad's comeback term. This move also provides the requisite political stability for the current Putin/Medvedev-regime to last-out the present financial crisis.

And the recent seemingly good-faith Russian offer to halt their planned and well-publicized ICBM upgrades if the US will simply cancel missle defense in Europe is just a specious olive-branch- it's offered for the same reason they wanted a deal with Reagan, to save money, and they know their technology is can't compete with the United States. And they're not giving up anything they don't want to, these missiles were always intended as a bargaining chip, anyway... and now they are looking to derive benefit from simply announcing the plans, but saving the expenditure.

While no one on either side wants a revival of the Cold War, it is surely not wise nor effective over the long-term for the United States to offer concessions to a boisterous and bluffing Kremlin. If you expected any good-faith diplomacy from today's Russia, you must have been thinking of someone else. Rewarding such behavior can only encourage an emboldened Moscow, increasing the likelyhood of a Russian land-grab in Ukraine... now that they've had South Ossetia for an appetizer. How to defend against Russia taking further military adventures, or otherwise abusing their neighbors, while trying to convert them into a more principled world citizen is the complex challenge we face.

Although there have recently been some cracks in the Putin-Medvedev alliance, they involved apparent dissagreement over Putin's handling of the economic crisis. It is unlikely Medvedev enjoys any significant independent power in the Kremlin, and the two leaders still seem to be on the same page regarding making lots of weapons and throwing their weight around. Medvedev owes his rise to Putin and Putin alone, and nobody in the west now expects a liberalization of Russia by him, or anyone else, for the forseeable future.

Moscow does have the capability to menace all former Soviet Republics in their "near-aboad"... none of whom pose serious threat to the Russians militarily. The Kremlin will also likely continue, or increase, support and military supply/contracts with enemies of the United States like Iran, Venezeula, Cuba, and perhaps even North Korea... while steadily assisting the troubling military ascendancy of China. How can the west even begin to trust Putin's Russia, when Moscow has coddled the pugnacious terrorist-sponsor Iran, supplied their Nanantz nuclear plant and fuel...doing almost anything to poke the United States in the eye, distress Israel, and make a buck in the process... regardless of the consequences of a nuclear-armed and apocolyptic Tehran. Such a comprehensive lack of pragmatism and scruples makes it hard to do understand why the Russians think they deserve respect, trust, and admission to elite western clubs like the G-8. Moscow has now promised nuclear technology to Comrade Chavez in Venezuela... a country, like Iran, that's floating on oil... and has little use for this technology, other than to develop nuclear weapons to point at the United States.

As Barack Obama announced his new national security team, they must have been popping-open a bottle of Stolichnaya in the Kremlin. And it would be mighty entertaining to read what Russian intelligence files have to say about Obama's dubious Chicago connections and misguided ideas, or regarding Hillary Clinton- and how best to exploit her personality flaws at the negotiating table. Obama has spoken of "pragmatism about the use of power" in foreign policy. This hesitancy is surely music to Kremlin ears, as they will be using their growing military power as much as they possibly can get away with. And it is indeed doubtful that Russian KGB veterans like Putin, and the other Sivili that run Russia today are intimidated by bespectacled bereaucrat Leon Panetta at the CIA, either.

There is surely a reason America's very own 21st-century Neville Chamberlain was all-but endorsed by Russia, Venezuela, Hamas, Iran, and Syria... and this is what they've been waiting for. And don't be fooled by the retention of Robert Gates as Defence Secretary; he was simply kept aboard to tend to Afghanistan and wind-down the Iraq occupation- not to collude with Team Obama on a plan to effectively confront Russia, or even Iran... that job will likely fall to Israel now.

Thanks to $40-50 oil and the end of the commodities boom in general, we are now perhaps recieving a reprieve from the Russian advance, providing the west an opportunity to unite and construct a policy for dealing with Russian assertiveness and expansion. This has not only thrown cold water on the Kremlin's aggressive use of power, but the Russian economy is taking a serious hit now from the financial crisis... early signs of civil unrest and cracks in the Kremlin establishment are becoming public.

What are the lessons to be drawn from Russian energy-supply brinkmanship, military aggression, and dubious alliances? Basically, what needs to be done, likely won't be done... judging by the past and continuing behaviour of the EU, and from the rhetoric of the incoming Obama administration. What is actually needed is a principled and brave stand against any injustice or aggression coming from Moscow... forcing them to deal in good-faith, to act responsibly, and to honor their agreements. And perhaps instead of employing mafia-style tactics in their international business plans and machiavellian foriegn policy, they could begin to focus on the sad state of Russian manufacturing, productivity, and innovation... or the other myriad ills of their society in general. The Russians like to think of themselves as an "equal" to the United States, and Putin is skilled at playing to that for public consumption... when in reality, all they are at this point is a Saudi Arabia with trees... and a whole lot of vodka.

Barack Obama had issued an unsettling statement at the onset of the Georgian conflict encouraging "both sides to excercise restraint"... while in contrast, McCain -displaying moral clarity- saw the Russian aggression and opportunism for what it was... a view quietly adopted by the Obama campaign a few days later. While the serial opportunist and political chameleon Obama is always willing to make adjustments in policy to please pollsters, this is hardly a display of re-assuring leadership skills for dealing with upcoming crises.

In Europe, there is some hope now that the EU will do a prudent rethink it's energy and security policy. Perhaps the major western European powers like France and Germany, who were so keen to let their guard down and establish strong ties to Russia, will finally listen to the warnings of those in the EU who know them better... like the Poles, Czechs, and Slovaks. In the wake of such unpredictable, hectoring behavior from the Kremlin, it would be reckless indeed for the EU to not embark upon a significant diversification of natural gas supplies, including LNG facilities that would allow them to import from suppliers worldwide. There's nothing wrong with buying Russian gas... provided you've got a "plan B" to counterbalance the unreliable and monopolistic Gazprom, which is blatantly being used as a tool in the Kremlin's beligerent foreign policy agenda.

An appropriate strategy for dealing with a rival who consistently employs instragence and browbeating to gain advantage should be primarily based upon not letting them get what they want... you simply can't reinforce such behavior, unless you want to see a lot more of it. The west should be prepared for the Russians, and expect them to employ obstinance, daunting martial threats, and disruption of energy supplies because they know that's pretty much all they've got... while they aspire to take and/or control things that don't belong to them. The Kremlin expects that eventually the the US and EU will tire of wrestling with them, and the less principled/historically ignorant half of the electorate can be scared into doing bargains on Moscow's terms. And the new American administration displays inexperience, misguided idealism, and tendency towards appeasement that plays right into the Russians' hands.

Yes We Can... invade Ukraine- and what are you going to do about it, Barack?

Therapy session #2

My session was around 3PM, so I woke up at 12PM as I had to do some bank errands for my father before I go, my parents weren't home when I woke up, I called my mother to inform me about a bank-related thing, she told me that they called the psychiatrist to confirm today's session and he told her that he wants them with me this session and the next one, I paused for a while donno why, exhaled the smoke, told her Okay and changed the subject.
3PM, Me & my parents were parking in front of Dr.Yehia El Rakhawi's private hospital(the first private psychiatry hospital in Egypt), we waited for the doctor in the reception/lobby, I quickly checked out the place, 2 hot guys there, a rebellious-like dressed young lady smoking a cigarette around the corner and some bourgeoisie parents! I loved this place and felt very comfortable, unlike the fugly downtown's clinic which was packed of weird people and veiled girls!

We were shortly inside the Dr's room, I noticed a ring on his right hand, got more turned on, he took the regular date from and then asked me if I want to talk in front of my parents, I kindly disagreed as they've nothing to do with my issue, so he let them talk and say everything happened from the beginnings, when they started to suspect me...etc, so they kept talking & talking, I was very silent, got busy in my own world until I was awaken up by his mobile ringtone, he had to pick-up and talked with the caller about a 19 years old patient who is suffering from a post-psychotic depression, he told him to involve the young guy into art, drawing and music group therapy. I went back to my own world but this time I was thinking about this young patient. I donno why I had a huge urge to know more about thim, see how he looks like, how he thinks, know what's depressing him and help him. There was something sexy about him that I can't explain or even understand! Is it Mr.B's deep scar inside me? Was that unknown patient replacing Mr.B in my subconscious? Is it true that the conscious mind may be compared to a fountain playing in the sun and falling back into the great subterranean pool of subconscious from which it rises? Do I miss B and all his mental problems?!
....."So Nordine, Do you have anything to talk about before your parents leave the room?", I was awaken up again and quickly nodded with a No.

So now it was my turn to talk, to steam out everything and most important to ask someone all of those answer-less questions I've always had! I already decided after the last session that I'll stick to "I'm virgin" & "I only kissed/knew two gay guys" lies until I meet the Dr and feel very secured to let go everything! A lot of my friends and readers told me to just say the truth from the 1st session but I just't can't! I'm secretive by nature, I need to feel comfortable and secure around the Dr. to speak up and also I needed to be 100% sure that he won't directly or indirectly mention anything I say to my parents! I just need time, it's not that easy and I don't want anything to screw my parent's reaction toward the whole issue so far!
Dr: Hey, how are you?
Me: Am good!
Dr: So why you were so silent when your parents were talking?
Me: Well, they said nothing new either about my gay aspect or my other normal life aspects and I disagree about many things they said but I just didn't have the energy to argue, sometimes on the long run you love apathy, no?
The Dr, smiling: Well, I was waiting for you to say something so I can take the chance and interfer and discuss anything you want with/infront of your parents
I laughed
The Dr, smiling: so what do you disagree about?
Me: Being gay was never by clothes or haircuts, I wasn't dyeing my hair acidic yellow for god's sake!
Dr: I agree with you, what else?
Me: Well, they say that I used to get very high marks in school and now my level is going down, but I always tell them that they shouldn't compare school study to college one, they are making me that I failed a year or something! I got "Good" degree in the past 2 years though I had like 11 medical subjects per semester!
Dr: What else?
Me: No girls call me at home that doesn't mean that I don't have gfs, we are in 2009! there are way more ways to communicate other than home phone!
Dr: So you have female friends?
Me: Yes!
Me continuing: also about not going to family gatherings, I've no relatives around my age so I get bored from the grown up lame talk u know?!
Dr: What else bothers you?
Me: They are being over protective! They get angry at me when I go back home late and breaking my lame curfew, They don't know what I was feeling! I wanted to feel like all my normal friends, I was already feeling different from them so I wanted this feeling to diminish! [Yes, that was bitchy of me]
Dr: I understand, I'll talk with them about that.

N.B: you will feel lost somehow and that there is a disturbance in the sequence of the questions but it was a long session and I can't remember all the questions or their sequence.
The Dr: When did you start feeling that you like guys?
Me: around 13, I understood my feeling around 14-15 but now when I remember my childhood, I figure out that I was doing gay things that I didn't understand back then!
Dr: like what?
Me: loving my close friends in a different way, very jealous about them and care the most about them...etc
Dr: your feelings toward guys, are they sexual or emotional or both?
Me: both
Dr: so you would love someone even though you are not sexually attracted to and vice versa?
Me: Yeah, I guess
Dr: what about girls?
Me: same, but I like guys more and I've never been sexually with a girl before so I simply can't judge!
Dr: So you have been sexually with guys before?
Me: Yes but not all the way, just kissing in the car
Dr: Did you enjoy it?
Me: Yes
Dr: So you didn't go all the way then?
Me: I was afraid someone might see us, afraid that my parents would know and afraid of god [and the Oscar goes to?]
Dr: Do you masturbate?
Me: Yes
Dr: Do you think about guys or girls or what porn movies you watch?
Me: it depends on my mood!
The Dr, laughing: How?
Me: sometimes I feel like wathcing heterosexual porn & sometimes not, but I'm not that into porn movies anyway!

The Dr: How you describe what you are feeling, abnormal or gay?
Me: Different! (hehe I felt like I was like a big movie star who was being interviewed about her new role and picking up the interesting & diplomatic words to say to the press)
Me, continuing: I believe that God created me like that so he just can't punish me on what he had created, I went through a long big self-struggle to reach self-acceptance and self-satisfcation!
Dr: So why you are here if you believe that & accepting yourself? Because of your parents?
Me: They didn't obligate me and I wanted to see what would you(psychology) have for me as it's not a disease, it's not contaminating or cured by drugs or even has an aetiology!
Dr: good that you know that but not all disease affect you physical or mental status, some dysfuntions you social life
Me: but I'm a normal social person, I've a lot of friends and many people love me!
Dr: but most of gays don't get married
Me: who said that I won't marry anyone? It's too early to talk about something like that!

The Dr: Are you religious?
Me: No, not into religion, I don't pray cuz I don't feel any kind of connection with God when I pray and also I don't like to go pray just because I've to or when I hear the prayers. I only pray when I feel that I want to pray to God!

These were the most interesting questions that I've remembered, he then asked me if I want to ask him about anything but I had nothing to ask so I let my parents in and left to the lobby, lighting a cigarette, dieing to know what is going on between the Dr and my parents, checked out some guys, laughed when I felt like I'm a milf who cruises stallion drug addicts in a private hospital to sleep with her in front of their daily drug supply! (3an El 3esh2 Wal Hawa movie anyone? =P )

P.S: Check the top right of my blog page to find collection of links to posts written by other blogger(s) about me, and also check the latest post "Kiki Jr. Busted?" which talks about me coming out to my parents! =)

Kelesetan

And the therapy continues....Coming Clean!

Guidelines for posting Multimedia files to Blackboard

Guidelines for posting Multimedia files to Blackboard

What Must Our Enemies Think?

The number you've dialled is not in service, ANYMORE!

What To Do About Russia?

Therapy session #2

Followers

Blog Archive