Teleporting with Foursquare is fun, but it's still creepy

Foursquare is extremely potent.

And Foursquare is seriously creepy.

Let's focus on the creepy. Take that one: A women checks-in at some restaurant - and some random stalker who read the tweet calls her up at the restaurant and says that "they should hang out".

"How I became a Foursquare cyberstalker" is a must-read: a journalist hunts down a Foursquare user.

And that was amateur stuff. This is what happens when a coder fucks with Foursquare: he harvest 875,000 check-ins in one city in the space of 3 weeks.

Then there was Please Rob Me, which aggregated 4sq and Gowalla check-ins and broadcasted a list of people who were, well, not at home. (they've removed the stream, unfortunately).

I seldom use Foursquare - but I plan on reconsidering my use.

But you can still use it to play with, because, fun fact: Foursquare can be easily cheated. Consider, if you may, those three tweets of mine where I checked in, 2 or 3 minutes apart, in Egypt, then in Massachusetts, then finally in Moscow [at the Kremlin, yeah, it's the only place I could think of.].

I think from now on, teleporting myself is probably going to be the only way I use Foursquare.
(or I can play at overthrowing Embee from the mayorship of the dozen places she rules over, and I won't even have to physically be there).

Come to think of it, I could be gaming the special offers that companies offer (looking at my foursquare page, which currently places me in Boston (hey, wasn't I just in Russia?), I am told that a sushi place offers 10% off if you check-in, a grocery store offers a reusable ecofriendly bag on the first check-in, and even a free coffee and tea every time I (hypothetically) check-in!


There are no businesses offering Foursquare freebies in Egypt, however, but it's only a matter of time.

I'll be waiting.

Al-Qaeda Publishing House, Inc. presents: "Inspire".

So the story is that Al-Qaeda is publishing a cool magazine in English, with graphics and all.

I'm guessing they print in the same hi-tech cave where Ben Laden shoots his videos, right? :)

Ridiculous. I cannot believe that some idiots are actually buying the story that this is a genuine story. Seriously. "Make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom"? Sure, very manly and inspiring indeed.




You can view the full magazine at said idiots' website, or download a PDF version here.

France: Where diversity goes to die

As France’s enduring self-image of a homogeneous nation is increasingly challenged a rising immigrant sub-class, its reactions are increasingly violent. An analysis the recent parliamentary vote on banning in the niqab in the context of French identity - it wasn't about Muslims in the first place.

On the French citizenship application is an entire section where they encourage you to change your name into something more ‘French-sounding’.
They even provide examples: if your name is "Haddad", for instance, which is Arabic for ‘ironsmith’, they suggest you change it into “Laforge” or “Forgeron”. If you use two last names - the example given is unequivocally hispanophone - you’re encouraged to drop one of them. Your identity be damned.

Welcome to France, where diversity goes to die.

I had no knowledge of being anything but French until I was probably seven or eight. At which point I barely spoke any Arabic and my parent’s African hometown was to me what Normandie was to my friends - where we spent a few weeks every summer. How I became aware of my identity as an ethnic and a religious minority was developed in equal parts thanks to my family, and to a few racists, a minority in our small university town. Things have changed over the past two decades - with the advent of conservative governments, first with Jacques Chirac in 1995, then, when he was appointed as Minister of Interior in 2002, Nicolas Sarkozy. The antagonistic policies that Minister Sarkozy carried on, and which worsened under President Sarkozy, have only helped exacerbate the tension between the “Frenchmen of roots” (Français de souche, as goes the expression) and the five million Muslims who call France their home, Europe largest Muslim community.


Under Sarko-France, racial profiling became a de facto police policy. The most blatant such example I was personally faced with took place a few years ago - my Vietnamese friend and I were held by police officers in plain clothes in the university district... because I handed him his laptop I had borrowed. A ‘Viet’ and a ‘Beur’ (Arab) with a laptop, then it must be stolen, went the policemen’s logic. We were split and spoke separately to the officers, who reluctantly let us go after we displayed our matching
university IDs - in one of France’s most prestigious Grandes Ecoles.

The latest vote on banning the Niqab in public was not unexpected, but is truly sad. France is increasingly going the Israeli way - equality for all, provided they’re not Arab. (or Black. Or Desi. Or Asian. You get the picture.)

That the Parliament would meet to discuss the dressing habits of a few hundred individuals - estimates of niqab-wearing women in France hover around 1900 - is eyebrow raising. That it would legislate on how this very small group of people should and should not dress may seem ridiculous; indeed, it is. That said legislation would decide that they are not allowed to dress freely as they walk about the street, do their grocery shopping or take their kids to the park, and then be greeted, with no irony, by the minister of Justice as “a victory for democracy and for French values” may seem to usher the end of France’s reputation as the land of Human Rights and the "Liberté, Egalité and Fraternité" - which have even disappeared from most money coins.


But it makes (some) sense once seen in the larger context of how France perceives itself - and how the French view it as the State’s role to preserve it.

Because the French self-image isn’t colourful. It is unequivocally white. The French cringe at the at their uber-caricatural image - the hardened blond and sturdy Gaulois of cartoons, or pretty-looking men wearing berets and riding bikes with a baguette as an accordion plays somewhere in the background - but secretly feel a hint of pride for the enduring idyllic image and would fight tooth and nail if it were to be
changed.

Above all, the French love the status quo.

From demonstration against a reform of the youth employment law - which would’ve developed hundreds of thousands of at least 2-year job opportunities to young graduates - to the Marseille bus drivers strikes when it was suggested their bathroom breaks be modified, the fiery French striking spirit strikes when its normalcy is upset.

The unease of many - most - Frenchmen at the presence of a growing number of immigrants is symptomatic of this impulse, and is increasingly reflected by the population and their politicians across the spectrum. Even a former French president, Valérie Giscard d’Estaing, felt the need to highlight “Europe’s Christian roots” in the introduction to the draft of the European Constitution he had been tasked to develop - which was viewed at the time as a direct message the immigrant population.

But we remember one day when France felt like it was ours, too.

July 1998, France wins the World Cup (3-nil against Brazil) in Paris. And parading down the Champs-Elysées was a very colourful but all shrouded in blue French national football squad, which included everything from a very white man actually named Blanc, to Arab, Armenian, Black, Caribbean, and Corsican players - all seemed to usher a more positive, more integrated “Black-Blanc-Beur” (“Black-White-Arab”) France.


But the hope was short-lived, and the joke rapidly turned bitter. “France can love an Arab”, quipped a famous stand-up comedian, “provided he scores two goals in a World Cup final” in reference to squad leader Zinedine Zidane. France went back to its white gallic self.


The first minority newscaster on prime-time television had to wait until 2006 - Harry Roselmack’s appointment to read the evening news on private network TF1 was little short of revolutionary, and not completely spontaneous with that - it followed then President Jacques Chirac’s recommendation for the media to hire more minority personnel. Two years before, another black newscaster was appointed in the regional Ile-de-France Channel 3; Audrey Pulvar recalls being told that“the French public was not ready” for a black news anchor. And that was circa 2004.

In late 2004, as the European Union expanded eastwards, the French foreign nightmare was given a name: the Polish Plumber. The assumption was that, the minute Warsaw raised a blue 12-starred flag besides its own, Poles would flood France. And Poles, in the French collective and xenophobic imaginary, are apparently all plumbers. What threatened to be an international crisis was only ingenuously - and humourously - diffused by Poland.


On the outside, one could’ve expected more from a country that voted the son of an immigrant to the Presidency: Nicolas Sarkozy, son of a Hungarian immigrant - Pál István Ernő Sárközy de Nagy-Bócsa - who moved to France a few years before the future president was born. Sarkozy, has from the onset taken an adversarial stand regarding the country’s large minority of Arab - primarily North African - descent, getting embroiled in one scandal after the other in which he was accused of uttering racially-motivated insults.


During the 2007 Presidential elections, gonzo posters appeared in Paris with Sarkozy’s picture, and the message underneath was “Votez Le Pen” - for Jean-Marie le Pen, leader of France’s infamous extreme right wing party Front National, were almost prophetic.

Sarkozy’s security perspective vis-à-vis integration, which he developed during his tenure as Minister of the Interior and carried on when he moved to the Elysée Palace, has meant that minorities were to be held at arm-length, but at fist-reach. His policy to increase police presence in the restive suburbs were met with
objections from both the inhabitants, but also from the more aware neighbourhood police who could foresee what tension the Robocop-like (the CRS now have those flexible thick plastic shoulder and arm covers) policemen would create. Sarkozy says he supports
the ban "as part of a wider debate on French identity" - but it isn't much of a debate when one party to the conversation is actively implementing its vision via the use of state coercion. It's not a debate at all, it's a monologue, dictated by the unwavering French self-image.

The ban on the niqab then, which should be reviewed by the Senate in September, will be implemented. And past a few highly mediatised cases where women will be detained and fined 150 euros for braving the ban, it will, not unlike the ban on the hijab in public schools, be bitterly accepted by France’s Muslims as yet another inexplicable difficulty they have to endure to live in their home country - a country which, rather than reflecting its population, seeks to put them in an iron niqab of its own.

But for France’s 1900 or so niqabi women, few will remove the face veil permanently and go about their lives. For the rest, they will eventually bare their faces in public when they must, but will drastically minimize their ventures outside of their homes, logically choosing what they view as a religious requirement over an incomprehensible regulation.

The law would’ve served then to further ostracize those women, and consequently
their families, from the mainstream French society. They will avoid going out, will take their kids to the park less frequently, will no longer talk evening walks around with their husbands in a fresh spring evening. They will just stay home.

France would’ve purged its national image, at the expense of a few hundred women’s liberty of choice. Inconceivable from a human rights standpoint but, as the minister of justice eloquently put it, “a victory for French values” which seem to everyday drift further away from human rights, and from large segments of its own population.

The next idiot who tells me that the Palestinians should find a Gandhi, I will punch in the nose

The latest idiot who’s seriously competing for the top of my list: Nick Kristof, whom I used to respect - and was joyed to have as graduation speaker years ago - but have come to realize that he’s just another wannabe Friedman.

In his latest article, "Waiting for Gandhi”, he takes his family on a leisurely trip to Palestine where he took his kids to watch - yey, how fun! - a weekly demonstration in Bil’in, in the West Bank. In fact, his son’s photos illustrate the article on the NYTimes' website.

Kristof from the tip of his cigar, brushes of those weekly demonstrations that have been going on for years now in a vain attempt to pressure the Israelis into restoring the village’s control over its own land, and attract the attention of the pretentious observers like himself, as they were seemingly only a facsimile of peaceful:

“these protests, aside from the fact that they aren’t truly nonviolent...”

The violence he’s so disappointed at is the following:

“The Israeli forces fired volleys of tear gas at us, and then charged. The protesters fled, some throwing rocks backward as they ran. It’s a far cry from the heroism of Gandhi’s followers”

Right. Stones, in the face of heavily armed soldiers charging, makes it an armed confrontation. Clearly the problem lies in the unarmed protesters ‘throwing rocks backward’. And ergo, it isn’t really peaceful, ‘a far cry from heroism’, and does not deserve Kristof’s divine respect.

Never mind that Gandhi himself approved of active self-defense when non-violent self-defense fails. Back to Gandhi own writings. Quotes are from: Thomas Merton (ed), “Gandhi: on non violence: selected texts from Mohandas K. Gandhi's non-violence in peace and war” (New York: New directions, 1965):

“I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.” (p.50; first published in “Young India”, 10 November 1928)

Browsing further, in the book, I also enjoyed this quote:

" To allow crops to be eaten up by animals in the name of ahimsa (non violence) while there is famine in the land is certainly a sin.” (p.56)

Defending one’s crops is an honourable endeavour, says Gandhi-ji. And nowhere is this embodied further than in the struggle of villagers to regain control over their land, over the source of their pittance, from the hands of a violent army - especially when the little water they have is siphoned by Israeli settlers who consume 280 litres of water per day (compared to 86 litres for Palestinians, of which barely 60 are potable) and who regularly, in collaboration with the Israeli army, do their best - generally successfully - to violently deny Palestinian farmers access to their farming land and steal their crops [thus making them, in Gandhi metaphor, the animals].

Effectively, Kristof fields absolutely no objection on the Israeli army attacking peaceful demonstrators; he’s upset - and therefore blaming the failure of the entire Palestinian non-violence resistance movement on those few protestors “throwing rocks backward as they ran”. As they ran for cover from live ammunition or tear gas canisters deliberately shot straight into people, to cause maximum physical harm, rather than elliptically as they should.

Lest you be tempted to give Kristof the benefit of the doubt, he digs himself deeper in his blog.

After reveling in a tenet of Israeli propaganda, that there’s “No one to talk to” on the Palestinian side [“there is no unified entity that can deliver all Palestinians”] and then off-handedly giving away most Palestinian rights [“while we know what the final deal would look like — the Clinton parameters, or the Geneva accord”], he makes his final mistake:

The assumption that “the sight of peaceful men and women lining up to be clubbed [would] outrage the world” as it did for Ghandi.

Herein lies the real challenge: it’s the ignorance of the various Kristofs, Friedmans, and other ‘analysts’ of what really goes on the ground in Palestine. The assumption that, as he writes on his facebook page, that “Palestinians are beginning to dabble in Gandhian ideas of non-violent resistance”.

Because reality is that there are peaceful demonstrations daily. For years, if not decades. As I write on this Sunday morning I am following live incoming reports of a demonstration in Beit Jala. The army short sound bombs and tear gas at demonstrators. Will this demonstration be reported by Nick Kristof and his ilk?

Surely not.

Palestinian men and women ARE being clubbed daily. In its most visible forms, in the weekly peaceful demonstrations in Nil’in, Bil’in, Sheikh Jarrah. But more underhandedly,

As the children go to school in Hebron.

As workers try to cross a checkpoint,

And of course, the 10,000 Palestinian prisoners, including hundreds of minors, creeping in Israeli jails, and subjected to physical and psychological violence daily.

That the Palestinian society has been responding with self-control is nothing short of awe-inspiring, an deserves our admiration and respect.

That Nick Kristof is too blind to see it is to his own demerit, not Palestine’s.

# Khaled Said will not be Egypt’s # Neda

Khaled Mohamed Said and Neda Agha-Soltan were both murdered by their respective country’s security forces, a few days shy from a year apart. In both cases, their death has become an incomparable motivation, fueling activists to reclaim their civil and political rights from a brutal government, unfazed by what could’ve been a deterrent or a warning to whomever challenges the State. It gave a new breath, carried by thousands of young and old people, many of whom new activists motivated by the intolerable injustice and the realization that idleness is no longer a guarantee of safety. Weeks after, demonstrators have been chanting their names, defiantly carrying their portrait in the face of an oppressive - and impressive - force.

But the latter has become a global icon, a worldwide symbol for pro-justice activists; Neda’s story have helped galvanise a world opinion and gave a face to her cause, a transboundary, transidentity call - that’s what her first name means - against corruption and political oppression.

Activists - the real and the armchair variety - shared her story around the world. Tens of thousands of Tweets about the Iranian elections and demonstrations - mostly unrelated to her death - were double-hashtaged “#Iran #Neda” - implicit shorthand, perhaps, for “we’re doing it for her”.

Khaled Said’s death is probably one of the most defining events in recent Egyptian political activism. For the past three weeks, demonstrations have not quieted in Egypt’s main cities - and show no sign of abatement, with several more planned in the coming days. Repeated clashes with the police, with dozens of demonstrators arrested at every sit-in or demonstration have done nothing to break the spirits.

But there seems to be little to no interest whatsoever from the rest of the world. Despite the strong mobilization in Egypt and the apparent western interest in the democratization of the Middle East, Khaled’s death and the series of ensuing demonstrations have only been side-news on the global media watch.

Khaled Said - or, to use the hashtag used by activists in Egypt, #KhaledSaid, will not be Egypt’s Neda.

This article does not have the pretension of being a full political-media analysis, but focuses on a few particular characteristics that explain why my title is categorically negative.

1. Back story

Neda Agha-Soltan’s death, you may remember, was filmed as she marched in a demonstration, challenging the results of the 2009 president elections in Iran.

The story couldn’t be more straightforward - and really needed no explanation or subtitles.

Conversely, Khaled's story we were later told: he was sitting in an Alexandria Internet café when two police henchmen walking in, started checking people’s IDs, and beat Khaled up when he rejected their disrespectful and harsh manner of addressing people. He was dragged to the street, his head smashed against a staircase railing, then taken by a police car - then brought back to the street, dead, where an ambulance promptly whisked him away. It took several days until the information was widespread enough - and was accompanied by photos.

In both cases, the government attempted to smear the opposition - and the victims themselves. In Iran, the government accused the opposition of staging Neda’s murder to stoke popular anger. In Egypt, the government accused Khaled, posthumously, of dealing drugs - and published an autopsy report (actually, two) claiming that he had died by ‘chocking on wrap of drugs’ he tried to swallow as he saw the policemen approaching.

Both set of claims are infuriatingly bogus, of course, but in the second case the Egyptian state seems to have managed to partially muddle the story in people’s minds.

2. Visuals

We watched Neda’s death live. We quivered as her blood spilled on the asphalt, we shivered as we looked into her wide, surprised eyes which silently screamed for a help that was beyond offer. And we sat, in disbelief, in silent as we realised that ‘this young woman has just been killed’ - a disbelief which transformed into the purest anger against those who dared to kill the young woman, whose name we didn’t know yet.

Khaled Said’s death brought a very different visual shock to the viewers. Several days after the events, post-autopsy photos surfaced featuring a badly beaten, barely-human version of the Khaled. The photo is one so unsettling people look away from - simply wish to forget it.

For the average viewer, a live video simply has far more impact than a gruesome photograph; it also stands the chance of being replayed time and again on television - assuming the entire topic falls within the editorial priorities, and interests of the audience.

3. Editorial priorities and audience predisposition

In an era where news aren’t newsworthy unless they’re repeated enough, and by the right people, the “value” of news is obeys opaque rules and measurements.

This is why, for instance, the resignation of an American commander in Afghanistan - whose name, one can assume, was unknown to most of the planet - takes large precedence over the death of a dozen Afghanis his own soldiers mistakenly killed earlier during the week.

I do not lay all the blame at the feet of editorial decisions -though they do carry a large segment - but also of the audience.

International news coverage of the Iranian demonstrations simply left democracy and human rights activists in less ‘interesting’ countries very jealous. I am not saying it wasn’t undeserved - on the contrary. Every struggle must be thoroughly documented, reported, and supported. Unfortunately, every struggle isn’t.

Post-electoral unrest in 2009’s Iran - and a year prior, in Zimbabwe - were the selective target of the Western media; it is no secret that regimes in both those countries, embodied in the long-deviled leaders Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Robert Mugabe - were extremely unsavoury to many G-20 governments and heavily vilified in their media. The official, media, and eventually popular eagerness to watch them fall was largely responsible for the coverage of the anti-Ahmedinejad/ anti-Mugabe demonstrations on news-setting outlets globally.

Conversely, the corrupt and brutal Egyptian regime remains in the good books of every Western leader - save for a few years during George W. Bush’s administration, whose attempt to impose democracy was so clumsy and heavy-handed it could only backfire into anti-American sentiments. The general human rights situation in Egypt - as opposed to, say, minority rights - also garners overall little interest abroad. The mainstream media, the government, and the people care quite little about the topic, about the people demanding, sometimes at the peril of their lives, their basic rights in Egypt.

News coverage of the Khaled Said case and the silent upsurge will continue to be raw and sporadic. And surely no one abroad will be changing their twitter location to “Alexandria, Egypt” and changing their Facebook profile photo into Khaled’s. There probably won't be a documentary about him either.

But if Khaled won’t be Egypt’s Neda to the rest of the world, but for activists here in Egypt, his death will remain a symbol of what should no longer be allowed to take place in this country.

#WorldCup Double #CairoTweetup Part 2 - Zamalek!

You've had Saturday night reserved for the 2nd installment of the World Cup DOUBLE Tweetup for the past two weeks, right? RIGHT?
Here are all the details you need.

When: Tomorrow, Saturday 3 July, 2010.

Time: 8:30 PM. The game is at 9:30 but it was obvious last time that many people were more interested in socializing than watching football; hence the 8:30. Be there!

Where: Café de Paris, Zamalek.
10 Mohamed Thakeb Pacha St. (off El Marashly St.). Zamalek. By the AUC Dorms.
Tel: 27353739. The friendly manager in charge of our reservation is Bishoy, in case you get there first/are looking for us.
(yes, it's where we went a few months back. Good memory, you!)

What: See your friends. Plus we'll watch Spain go all conquistador on Paraguay's ass. Neocolonialism has never looked so good.
Plus somebody got engaged, and that calls for celebration!! :) Mabrouk Mahmoud!

Deep down inside, this is what Casillas looks like.

What to bring: Yourself, your friends, your vuvuzela.

Carpooling: Random thought. I'm in an eco-friendly mood. If you need a lift from Helio, let me know.