Archive for March 18th, 2014
The last wolves?
Posted on: March 18, 2014
Noted conservationist Jane Goodall says:
“State and federal government actions are threatening wolf packs in Denali, Yellowstone and elsewhere”.
Photographs by Thomas D. Mangelsen
I went to Denali in August in search of wild wolves. It was my first trip to the national park, and I was especially looking forward to seeing the descendants of the pack that biologist Adolph Murie had come to know so well.
Murie’s study, begun in 1939 and continuing today, is the source of much of what we know about wolves in their natural habitat.
(Pictured here: A gray wolf from the Grant Creek pack in Denali National Park, Alaska, in 2012.)
1 / 15
I went to Denali in August in search of wild wolves. It was my first trip to the national park, and I was especially looking forward to seeing the descendants of the pack that biologist Adolph Murie had come to know so well. Murie’s study, begun in 1939 and continuing today, is the source of much of what we know about wolves in their natural habitat. (Pictured here: A gray wolf from the Grant Creek pack in Denali National Park, Alaska, in 2012.)
Thomas D. Mangelsen / © Thomas D. Mangelsen
UN Declaration: “The people has the rights to Resist Occupation”?
The US occupation of Iraq for 8 years doesn’t make it less Illegal if the US enlisted 2 dozens States to “share” in the occupation.
The US occupation of Afghanistan for longer than the Soviet Union doesn’t make it less illegal if the US pressured 2 dozens States to commit illegal activities.
Is that an old story?
Israel occupation of “All of Palestine”, parts of south Lebanon, and the Syrian Golan Heights has been going on for over 65 years.
Is that an old story?
This is not directly the subject of this article.
I need to tell you of an insanity.
The current “State” of Lebanon managed to form a government after an entire year of waiting in limbo, while 1.5 Syrian refugees flocked to this tiny country of barely 4 million, and dozen of terrorist car explosions plagued the safety and security of the civilians, the economy totally grounded, and no projects and programs voted in a Parliament that extended its tenure for 2 more years and never met since then.
I need to tell you of a worst insanity.
For an entire month, the new government was discussing this “letter of intent” to be submitted to parliament in order to be voted in.
The main critical point was: “Has the Lebanese people the rights to resist Israel occupation“?
Apparently, Israel, the US, and Saudi Arabia are loath of including Israel as a “potential enemy”, even though Israel occupies several towns in Lebanon, had waged over 8 preemptive wars on Lebanon and destroyed its infrastructure, and has never stopped “infiltrating” and invading Lebanon airspace, water and land since 2008.
Apparently, the new minister of the interior Mashnouk (The hanged) consider Iran to be the main nemesis to Lebanon security, the same thesis consistently expounded by Israel.
Many of you are chuckling of the insane conditions that the Lebanese society are to submit to “peacefully”.
It is not funny for the Lebanese who have been feeling down on their luck for over 2 decades and who have been “humoring” the lame successive governments that claimed “Lebanon force is in his weakness” (meaning that Lebanon is better off with a weak army not endowed with proper weapons to resist occupations, invasions and terrorist attacks)
Another insanity is that this government was primarily formed in order to fill the gap in “legitimacy” if the Parliament fails to elect a new President to the Republic in May, which is highly probable since a President is meant to be also of the weak kind with no popular or political support base, like the current Michel Suleiman.
And this Parliament has no legitimacy in electing a president since it failed to be voted in by the citizens for a new term. Why? The people views and opinions have changed in the last 4 years and they demand more representative deputies.
Note 1: After the Syrian troops vacated Lebanon in 2005, and following the assassination of late and former PM Rafic Hariri, the only political movement that steadfastly confronted this occupation was the followers of General Michel Aoun who was in exile in France.
“Is Marriage for you?” It was not meant for me…
Marriage is Not for you
Sara Rosso interviewed Seth Adam Smith.
On November 2, 2013, Seth Smith published an article entitled “Marriage Isn’t For You” and was an instant hit.
Within a few hours, his self-hosted WordPress site couldn’t handle the tens of thousands of visitors reading the post.
He moved his article and his entire site over to WordPress.com, where the WordPress.com team did some additional tweaks to keep his site up and ready for the 10 million visitors who would end up visiting his site in a single day.
The article has since received 26 million total views. Here is a re-post.
“Having been married only a year and a half, I’ve recently come to the conclusion that marriage isn’t for me.
Now before you start making assumptions, keep reading.
I met my wife in high school when we were 15 years old. We were friends for 10 years until…until we decided we no longer wanted to be just friends. I strongly recommend that best friends fall in love. Good times will be had by all.
Nevertheless, falling in love with my best friend did not prevent me from having certain fears and anxieties about getting married.
The nearer Kim and I approached the decision to marry, the more I was filled with a paralyzing fear. Was I ready?
Was I making the right choice? Was Kim the right person to marry? Would she make me happy?
One fateful night, I shared these thoughts and concerns with my dad.
Perhaps each of us have moments in our lives when it feels like time slows down or the air becomes still and everything around us seems to draw in, marking that moment as one we will never forget.
My dad giving his response to my concerns was such a moment for me.
With a knowing smile dad said, “Seth, you’re being totally selfish. So I’m going to make this really simple: marriage isn’t for you. You don’t marry to make yourself happy, you marry to make someone else happy. More than that, your marriage isn’t for yourself, you’re marrying for a family. Not just for the in-laws and all of that nonsense, but for your future children. Who do you want to help you raise them? Who do you want to influence them? Marriage isn’t for you. It’s not about you. Marriage is about the person you married.”
It was in that very moment that I knew that Kim was the right person to marry.
I realized that I wanted to make her happy; to see her smile every day, to make her laugh every day.
I wanted to be a part of her family, and my family wanted her to be a part of ours.
And thinking back on all the times I had seen her play with my nieces, I knew that she was the one with whom I wanted to build our own family.
My father’s advice was both shocking and revelatory. It went against the grain of today’s “Walmart philosophy”, which is if it doesn’t make you happy, you can take it back and get a new one.
No, a true marriage (and true love) is never about you. It’s about the person you love—their wants, their needs, their hopes, and their dreams.
Selfishness demands, “What’s in it for me?”, while Love asks, “What can I give?”
Some time ago, my wife showed me what it means to love selflessly.
For many months, my heart had been hardening with a mixture of fear and resentment. Then, after the pressure had built up to where neither of us could stand it, emotions erupted. I was callous.
I was selfish.
But instead of matching my selfishness, Kim did something beyond wonderful—she showed an outpouring of love.
Laying aside all of the pain and anguish I had caused her, she lovingly took me in her arms and soothed my soul.
Marriage is about family.
I realized that I had forgotten my dad’s advice. While Kim’s side of the marriage had been to love me, my side of the marriage had become all about me.
This awful realization brought me to tears, and I promised my wife that I would try to be better.
To all who are reading this article—married, almost married, single, or even the sworn bachelor or bachelorette—I want you to know that marriage isn’t for you.
No true relationship of love is for you. Love is about the person you love.
And, paradoxically, the more you truly love that person, the more love you receive.
And not just from your significant other, but from their friends and their family and thousands of others you never would have met had your love remained self-centered.
Truly, love and marriage isn’t for you. It’s for others.
This post originally appeared on ForwardWalking.com, a website dedicated to helping people move forward in life.
Note 1: And intercourse is not for men: It is to satisfy the partner you want her to feel happy and fulfilled. Man is supposed to be the passive partner and let the one who can really enjoy sex lead.
Note 2: “Marriage is Not for you” applies to both genders. Sort of complementing the abilities, shortcomings and inclinations of the genders in the ways they can feel fulfilled.
Adonis Diaries 