Oh Brave New World!

Thursday, March 2, 1995 may well be the most important date of the last decade of the 20th Century. Often has it been said that our young people are the future the nation. With their idealism, industry, and intelligence they will forge the entry into a bright and shining 21st Century. Away with cynical politicians and slimy lobbyists, away with incompetent judges and sleazy lawyers, away with corrupt police; away with biased, agenda driven news media. Our young people are speaking out. They are providing leadership. It will be a dream fulfilled when they take charge. Even now they manifest the insight and sen­sitivity needed to accomplish the daunting task of shaping our future.

Recently, in Patterson, New Jersey, Lawrence Meyers, a 16 year old student at Eastside High was killed by a rookie housing police officer while attempting to arrest him during an undercover narcotics operation. Mr. Meyers was killed by a shot in the head and the matter is now under formal investi­gation. Twenty three grams of crack cocaine were recovered at the scene. Mr. Meyers had a police record for drug dealing. His death was followed by several days of sometimes violent and felonious behavior by fellow students. This included incidents of vandalism and looting. Public officials and community leaders including the always helpful Reverend Al Sharpton managed to bring a measure of calm to the situation.

To generate a more reasoned approach to the students' grievances an assembly of Eastside High was called. Among the suggestions made by students were those by:

Angel Gonzalez: "Thursday [March, 2] will be a drug free day in memory of Lawrence. The streets will be quiet in memory of Lawrence to show we care."

Skeeter Warren said that the ideal would be for all drug dealers and students to impose a ban on sales and use for the day.

Wesley Thomas, with broader vision, suggested a wider area for the moratorium on dealing and usage, "Maybe it can be a nationwide drug-free day."

UNESCO

The United Nations

The June 24th New York Sun reports that "Bowing to pressure from Palestinian Arab activists in America, the United Nations Children Fund is cutting ties with an Israeli billionaire donor, Lev Leviev, in response to allegations that one of his companies is financing the constructions of settlements in the West Bank." UNICEF acceded fully to the request.

That the Palestinians and their supporters have a legitimate complaint concerning West Bank settlements is not to be gainsaid and they have a right, even a duty, to do everything they can to have new ones stopped and old ones removed. But, how can UNICEF possibly be a suitable vehicle for this crusade. UNICEF, in statement on its website says it is an organization that is the "driving force that helps build a world where the rights of every child are realized. We have the global authority to influence decision-makers, and the variety of partners at grassroots level to turn the most innovative ideas into reality. That makes us unique among world organizations, and unique among those working with the young." One of the principal functions of UNICEF is to provide food to hungry children.

That reducing the financial base of UNICEF will punish Israel for the settlements is obvious nonsense. Perhaps the whole point of the decision of UNICEF is less the issue of the settlements and more the aim of delegitimizing Israel. If dying children can be useful pawns in the game - why not?

In the following day’s mail was a solicitation from UNESCO. It contained the sentence: “We invite you to join with UNESCO to do whatever it takes to save children’s lives”. [Unless, of course, you are Israeli.]

A Hawke

Some years back in the course of work I met a man whose family name was Hawke. When our business was completed I asked him, if he were related in some way to Horatio Hawke the distinguished British naval officer of the early 19th century. Mr. Hawke responded in the negative and told me that the name was that of his paternal grandfather, a Native American. I was puzzled and asked about the final 'e'. He answered that his grandfather had added the 'e' in the belief that this would make his name more American.

An Exaltation of Larks

One of the glories of the English language is its seemingly endless plasticity of style and felicity of phraseology. Among many examples are such usages as "an exaltation of larks", "a pride of lions", “a pod of whales”, or "a gaggle of geese". Experience in a university setting suggests the following:

A byzantine of chancellors.
An evasion of deans.
A timidity of professors.
An opacity of students.
A deviousness of trustees.

From a wider domain, one might add:
A corruption of lobbyists, and
A sty of congressmen.

Flotsam

A dirty old man is a normal young man grown somewhat long in the tooth.

The vacuity of much of Philosophy of Science is manifest in its irrelevance to the practice of science.

A frustacean is a mateless lobster.

People who live in Klein bottles may throw stones.

Any academic discipline with science in its title is probably not.

The difference between a glitsch and a transient is that the latter does have an explanation.

Someone once characterized psychoanalysis as surgery without anesthesia. Quite appropriate. What should be noted is that the patient wields the scalpel.

The difference between a gizmo and a gizmoid is that latter has no moving parts.

Any problem can be solved promptly provided one can determine which variant of Murphy's Law is operating to frustrate a successful resolution.

The reason an old dog can't be taught new tricks is that he has acquired a dense, impervious crust of too many preconceptions.

An activist is a person who, for whatever reason, is incapable of controlling his own life, and thus devotes himself to controlling other people’s lives.

The process which begins with the conception of a human infant and terminates with its birth was not provided by the Lord with a warranty as to the workmanship of the final product.

Should a Jew forget who he is, someone will remind him.