Better Than A Hallelujah

Caution: Joking Not Allowed!

On January 31, 2012, an Irish national arrived at the Los Angeles Airport to be sent back home after the US Department of Homeland Security read a post he had recently written about destroying America. Leigh Van Bryan was sent back to Ireland after posting "Free this week, for quick gossip/prep before I go and destroy America" on his Twitter. Bryan claimed the post was written to express "...simply having a good time." Bryan was questioned for five hours, saying Homeland Security was treating him "like some kind of terrorist." He had also previously tweeted that he would be "diggin' Marilyn Monroe up." 


Homeland Security takes any possible threats very seriously, especially since 9/11. Another man was fined for using the word "blow" when talking about an airport. The way I see it, the people who suffered the consequences for using threatening words deserve it. They could have seen the trouble coming. If the DHS did not take proper precautions when the USA is threatened, in any way, the US would be in all the more danger. The DHS does not take threats lightly. Anyone who is willing to say anything that is suspicious is bound to be in trouble. 9/11 made the USA very aware of everything people said, for they obviously do not want to risk another devastating event. The point is, people are asking for trouble when they say things that could, in any way, be threatening to a country, and it is their responsibility to keep themselves out of trouble. 


1. Construed
a. "Posting statements in a public forum which could be construed as threatening - in this case saying they are going to "destroy" somewhere - will not be viewed sympathetically by US authorities," it told the BBC.
b. interpret (a word or action) in a particular way
c. The students' idea was construed in the opposite


2. Apprehend
a. The Irish national told the Sun newspaper that he and his friend Emily Bunting were apprehended on arrival at Los Angeles International Airport before being sent home.
b. arrest (someone) for a crime 
c. The math teacher apprehended the 'culprit' who was disturbing his class.  


3. Suspicion 
a. Trade association Abta told the BBC that the case highlighted that holidaymakers should never do anything to raise "concern or suspicion in any way".
b. a feeling or belief that someone is guilty of an illegal, dishonest, or unpleasant action
c. There have been cases of students being under suspicion for dishonest behavior. 

Attack!

A recent suicide car bomb exploded in Bhagdad on January 27, 2012. It left at least 23 dead and around 60 injured. Since Obama started his removal of US troops from Iraq, the attack levels have risen. This particular suicide bomb went off during the funeral of a "Shia man shot dead the day before." A young doctor described it as "horrific but normal." He claimed that because of all the explosions mutilated bodies were just a part of living there.

With a family member currently in Bhagdad, any news of any activity grabs my interest. Because of his position, there are serious precautions taken before leaving the compound. The armored trucks are escorted by more armored trucks, as well as helicopters and dozens of police. Many attacks are aimed at government building because of rising tension. Safety is a large and rising concern in Iraq.

1. Shia
a. The suicide attacker struck as mourners, escorted by police cars, were carrying the body of a Shia man shot dead the day before, police said.
b. one of the two main branches of Islam, followed esp. in Iran, that rejects the first three Sunni caliphs and regards Ali, the fourth caliph, as Muhammad's first true successor.
c. The school does not have a large Shia community.  

2. Mutilated
a. Where the bomber's car had exploded, he saw "human flesh scattered around and several mutilated bodies in a pool of blood''.
b. inflict a violent and disfiguring injury
c. Woodstockers often see mutilated people in the streets when they travel.

3. Engulfed
a. One of Mr Hussein's employees was hurt and, as he took him to hospital, he saw cars engulfed in flames.
b. (of a natural force) sweep over (something) so as to surround or cover it completely : 
c. Woodstock students feel engulfed by all the activities that go on. 

Making A Small Difference

4. Select a creative work – a novel, a film, a poem, a musical piece, a painting or other work of art – that has influenced the way you view the world and the way you view yourself. Discuss the work and its effect on you. (New York University)


Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List was a film that effected my way of viewing the world and its people and, somewhat, how I view myself. The film is about a man who begins to realize the horror of the persecution of the Jews during the Holocaust and tries to make a difference for them.

The movie influenced how I view the world because of all the suffering that happens, and how most people do not respond. Living in India, we see hundreds of slums, we see homeless people sleeping in Metro tunnels, and most of us don't do anything to help them. Sitting in traffic in Delhi, you'll most likely be approached by a woman with a baby on her hip asking for money and she goes ignored. I usually roll up the window, or start talking to the person next to me; ignoring the needy.

After seeing the movie, I got to thinking how miserable other people are and how the smallest thing can make them happier. I realized that ignoring them only makes me look selfish. From then on, I dropped money into the outstretched hands or gave food to the kids.

There's little we as one person can do for the world's problems and suffering. Yet what we do does make a difference to the people we help, as well as ourselves. We have the satisfaction of the feeling that we have helped someone, made them happy.   

Clearing Questions

2. Imagine that you have the opportunity to travel back through time. At what point in history would you like to stop and why? (Swarthmore)

The Indian Partition was probably one of the most traumatic and disturbing times in India's history. The partition left thousands dead, both Hindus and Muslims, on both the Indian and the Pakistani sides. The only reason I would like to go back to that time period is because it was what divided the country and was the grounds for a seemingly endless dispute between India and Pakistan.

I think it would answer one of the biggest questions I have about the two countries: why are they still so mad at each other? Other then some of the surface reasons, like Pakistan being much smaller than India and the religious differences, I think there are are underlying reasons. It could also have to do with the fact that the partition really was not a 'people's choice.' The decision was made by the political rulers and influential people, like Gandhi and Jinnah, while the people really didn't have a say in the matter. However, at the time, the divide was probably more welcome than it is thought about now, because they people wanted an end to the fighting that seemed almost impossible to stop.

Even so, I find it hard to accept that the two countries are still so angry with each other. It seems that because the partition was a while ago, the people would lean back and accept the terms of the divide, and not send people into the opposite side and attack it's people. It also goes to say that the other side cannot always automatically point fingers at the other side when anything bad happens.

Clearing up, or at least finding out the real reasons behind the current accusations would probably help a lot of people stop the violence or at least set up a truce between India and Pakistan. The easiest way to succeed in that is by going back in time.  

My Thoughts: Access Denied

Paul Root Wolpe wants his privacy, and so do most of us. Wolpe wrote an opinion piece on new technology, and how it might, in a short time, completely take away our privacy. "Neuroscience is advancing so rapidly that, under certain conditions, scientists can use sophisticated brain imaging technology to scan your brain and determine whether you can read a particular language, what word you are thinking of, even what you are dreaming about while you are asleep," says Wolpe. He argues that our dreams and our thoughts are completely personal, and a machine reading them takes away the last bit of privacy in the world. He talks about the fact that although technology now is not as advanced as to actually read minds, the technology has developed far enough that, through machines, what people are thinking about can be read. That's a different level of mind reading. He suggests that eventually, as technology comes up to reading all the way into peoples minds, the machine will be used at airports, and other travel places, as a fool-proof security gadget.


I am afraid of flying on an airplane. It just so happens that any time I have a flight, I hear about a plane crash a few days earlier. I start thinking about whether someone on my flight has explosives with them and will send the plane down to a fatal crash. How does anyone know they don't have something that could kill the people on board, or that they don't have the intention of wrecking the plane. 


What does this have to do with Wolpe's article? Everyone has to go through scanners; at an airport, or at a government building, a train station, lots of places. A few years ago, new technology introduced a security machine that would take an x-ray of people as they stood in a cubicle-type-thing, while someone in another part of the airport is looking at you, making sure you have nothing on you. An uproar occurred when this machine was put in a few airports, because people felt their privacy was being invaded. If that was privacy being invaded, then what is a machine reading your mind? Definite privacy invasion. Mind readers should not be placed anywhere, because although they could bring a very accurate conclusion in, say, a court case, the general public do not need to have their minds read. 
   
1. Decipher 
a. In fact, the idea of being able to decipher what is going on in that three pounds of grey mush between our ears seemed an impossible task even a couple of decades ago.
b.  succeed in understanding, interpreting, or identifying (something)
c. The teacher tried to decipher the language the two students were using in their notes.  


2. Labyrinth
a. Now, for the first time in human history, we are peering into the labyrinth of the mind and pulling out information, perhaps even information you would rather we did not know.
b. a complicated irregular network of passages or paths in which it is difficult to find one's way; a maze
c. The new students had difficulty finding their way through the labyrinth of hallways. 


3. Inviolable
a. My mind must remain mine alone, and my skull an inviolable zone of privacy.
b. never to be broken, infringed, or dishonored
c. The honor pledge is said to be an inviolable promise, but the council still has to deal with new cases. 

Watch It. I'm Reading It.

21. If you had the gift of telepathy, the ability to read other people’s minds, would you use this gift or not? Explain. (Middle East Technical University/93)

Who doesn't wish they could read someone else's mind at least once? You pass someone you don't like very much, and you want to know what they're thinking about you. You're talking to someone and lying about everything you're saying, and you want to know if they know that or not. If a teacher is reading your essay, you could know what they're really thinking about the thing. That would all be possible if we had the gift of telepathy.

If I had this gift, I would definitely use it. My humanitarian use for telepathy would be to see what was really going through some of our leaders heads, and then using that fix things, or make aware what was being thought about in by those great people, and I would try to make the world a better place.

Yet, what I would have the most fun doing with the gift of telepathy, would be getting the grounds for making fun of people, and for bothering them in round-about ways because I knew what they were really thinking. That would be a blast.

Although, there is a big disadvantage. You might speak too soon and ask someone why they're thinking that what you wrote was so bad it could be put in a paper shredder and never thought of again. Or you might yell out that it is indeed a very good piece of art even though it doesn't have perfect lines, which you get you in perfectly good trouble because you're teacher wasn't saying anything at all. The world would think that there was something rather wrong with you.

Assuming you can't choose who's mind you want to read and who's you don't, you'd probably find out a lot of things you don't really want to know. You don't want to find out that the person who you thought was your best friend really thinks you're the most annoying person in the world. That would be a bummer.