Thursday, September 23, 2010

Κάιρο τσιτσιρίζω! (That's Greek for "Cairo Tweetup!")



Hello, Cairo, we missed you too! Hopefully the next Tweetup will have been worth the wait!

When: Sunday 26 September. 7:30 PM.

Where: Greek Club, 21 Mohamed Bassiouni , Talaat Harb Square. That's right above Groppi - take the building's main stairs one floor up. We'll be on the terrace.

02-25750759. Ramy Adel is the nice manager who agreed to waive the minimum charge for us.


Suggested topics of conversation:
Your favourite Mubz photoshopped photo [extra points for bringing it with you!]. This week's demos. Laila ElBaradei's adorable wedding photos and the pathetic fucks who leaked them. Who gained weight during Ramadan.

Forbidden topic of conversation: Ramadan TV shows.


The 'Right to Climb' responds - message from Mr. Omar Samra

Omar Samra, owner of the company that managed the "Right To Climb" expedition to Kilimanjaro which I criticised here, left the following comment. Due to blogspot's infuriating comment system, his message came out truncated and its paragraphs a little garbled, sections of his response came to me but weren't published somehow, etc. (knowing that I do not moderate comments).

For this, and as I had promised, I'm re-posting it here as a standalone post - and I thank him for taking the time to respond. Out of respect and as this is not, after all, an inimical conversation - I harbour no ill-will to Mr. Samra whom I don't personally know - I tried to keep my comments to a bare minimum (nearly succeeded, too!) to correct or clarify facts, not going into a perspectives shouting match, tempted as I was to argue on many occasions. But my perspective was already made clear in the previous post so no point in repeating it. While many of Mr. Samra's comments are indeed clarifying, most of my criticism remains, I believe, appropriate. But that's up to you to judge.

I also have no intention to post a further response to this letter, but will respond to potential reader comments if any.
Thanks.
mt


-------- Mr. Samra's message --------------------------

Hello Mohamed,

My name is Omar Samra, the person I believe whose integrity is in question here . I tried to get your number off a common friend to explain the facts given that you are willing to be proven wrong. You were not willing to speak to me.

Indeed - a written debate needs not be made into a voice one. But I did promise said common friend that should you wish to respond by email I'd publish your message in its entirety, as I am doing here.

And so am reverting to this blog comment to clarify a few points. I hope everyone who read the first blog post reads it. Anyway, here goes:

First of all I write this response under the assumption that Mr. Mohamed (blog author) wrote this not in malice but because he cares about the cause of special needs in Egypt and felt bad that some wrongdoing was being made. Otherwise there would be no point in going on.

Yep.

I maintain that The Right To Climb (RTC) initiative was done first and foremost to raise funds and awareness for the charity. As a company we run regular trips to Kilimanjaro and it is infinitely easier to organize those than an entire charity campaign as well alongside. It is true that the RTC did receive a lot of PR as intended and this is as it should be because it is a novel approach to charity and a success on all counts. Let me explain all addressed points as much as I can. Please ask questions if you feel I have missed anything

My motivations are clear and have always been transparent:
1) Both my sisters are mentally challenged and securing funds for the organization indirectly secures their future
2) I care deeply about the cause and have regularly volunteered in the field since 1988
3) I sit on the board of the NGO (public info on the RTLA's website) since this year and the RTC is a way of contributing positively through my work (Wild Guanabana). Namely raising funds and awareness for the great work that is being done by the RTLA.

The climb costs $2650 not $5000 as mentioned in the blog.

Short of seeing the invoices, I obviously have no tangible way of proving otherwise. This said, the rough figure of $5000 was obtained by asking the friends/families of not one but two of the climbers on your trip, as well as a third party who's a seasoned climber. Therefore I fully stand by my figures.

The assumption that the RTLA would have been better off without the climb is flawed to the core. If we had reached out to those same people to donate $3600 each they would not have just handed over the cash. Most probably they have other ideas of how they want to use their money or other charities to give to. After all, philanthropy is a competitive field. What we did is give them the opportunity to embark on a unique journey they have always wanted to do, climbing Kilimanjaro, and use this as a vehicle to raise money and awareness for the cause, which they did successfully. With the idea presented in this way many were willing to do both things together. Also, this approach in terms of awareness is much more powerful than if they had simply donated money (assuming this was even possible in this magnitude) because then only those people would know about the RTLA and the great work they are doing as well as the cause itself. By getting over 20 people to prepare for one of the biggest challenges of their lives for 3 months they inevitably get to speak to tens if not hundreds of people and they spread the word this way. For them to raise money they need to be armed with answers about the cause and RTLA (most people don’t just hand over donations lightly) which means they do not become only donors but hopefully ambassadors which I am sure most will agree is infinitely more powerful especially in the medium and long term.

The figure of $51,990 you mentioned was not an up-to-date figure and it is wrong to measure the success of the initiative based on results that are not final.

That was the figure on your website the final day of your Kilimanjaro expedition - and the day of publication of the post.

Moreover, please bare in mind that there is no big corporation behind the RTC or Wild Guanabana for that matter. It is simply a handful of individuals including myself who were working round the clock those last 3 months to make this happen. So yes we did not update figures as efficiently as we wanted but we are working on this and everyone can rest assured that the full and accurate figures will be published at the end. We have updated the website recently and so far we have raised $121,000. We still hope there is more to come through. Whether the final figure lives up to Mohamed's expectations of success is a different story (in reference to the model UN pun) but we are trying our best and trust me these numbers are significant for the RTLA. Please bare in mind that LE20K is the cost of one kid there for one year so a rough calculation suggests we have funded the costs of 34 kids for a whole year, which is something. We hope to do more. You also make a remark that we could have done better. Assuming that you or someone else would have done a better job at this, is this really a case for such tone in your blog?

(Huh?)

Remember that big budgets and TV ad campaigns allow more mainstream charities to get the lion's share of funding from corporations and individuals so every person we convinced to donate something no matter how miniscule is a success. Sponsors that came on board to provide financial or in kind support were to a large extent driven by the originality of the initiative. Also consider that this is the first time we do this initiative, not everything we tried worked, we learn from our mistakes and will do better next time.

As you can see from the above, Omar Samra (me) is not the ONLY winner as you say. My company Wild Guanabana did gain exposure from this initiative but there is no shame in this and it would be hard to run and initiative like this and not gain exposure for the organizing company. The Right To Climb name was promoted aggressively because it is the charity initiative, so was the RTLA’s. The people at the RTLA themselves will tell you how much exposure this generated for them whether through phone enquiries, donations (some people after hearing about the RTC decided to donate to the NGO outside of our initiative and this we don’t count in our fundraising) and website hits. As a company we did get 26 out of 26 people to the top and this is a great achievement on a world scale. The expeditions unblemished success reflected positively on the whole charity initiative and allowed us to raise more awareness. An expedition where people get sick, hospitalized or a large percentage not make it to the summit fills people with less confidence about the entire endeavor. Moreover, as a company that is only over a year old we managed to create a successful CSR campaign that was wide reaching and helped the RTLA and shed light on a much neglected cause. How many young companies in Egypt do you see doing the same? You can also speak to the Special Olympics if you would like to assess the effectiveness of the campaign compared to other initiatives they see through their line of work. An awareness seminar we organized at Sawi Cultural Wheel alone attended by over 400 people made a big difference. In it we spoke about the cause, the issues faced and had one of the RTLA’s graduates talk about her success story with the organization.

When the idea of the RTC came about it was to take 1 down syndrome kid to the top with us to show their talents and prove that they are amazing individuals capable of so much more than most people think (hence the name The Right To Climb). As you can see on our website, the Special Olympics are our patrons and we went to them to pick the most appropriate special Olympian for this. After thorough consultation physicians advised us that this would be extremely dangerous because they typically have weak hearts (and at 5,500m your heart can beat at 120BPM at rest) and suffer from epilepsy, which might be aggravated by altitude. From here we decided that the risk is too high to do such a thing but we kept the name as it is symbolic

Your intentions I am in now way to guess. But I find keeping the name despite its actual irrelevance {as you explained yourself} is eyebrow-raising to say the least.

and still holds true that everyone does have a right to climb, climbing is also a metaphor for any challenging endeavor including some of the misunderstanding and stereotype these people have to go through throughout their lives. Having said this, if not for the remoteness of the location and ednon proximity to proper medical care and altitude hostility, I am sure that they would have made it despite its difficulty because most of these athletes are more fit than most of us even. So when we could not do this we organized a bowling evening where we all took the kids from the RTLA out so that everyone can meet them and for the climbers to know who are the people they are helping with this initiative. All the climbers now know many of the kids by name and have made lasting friendships.
We have plans to also go on a simple hike in wadi degla with the kids and hopefully maintain contact going forward.

Lovely sentiment. But whether the 'friendships' are 'lasting' or not, is complete speculation.

About creating awareness and using the right channels and saying that Nile FM doesn’t talk to the masses. As far as I know twitter does not reach the 80 million of Egypt Mohamed but you use it nonetheless. Does that make your message any less important? Or dishonest as you called ours?

I didn't call the message 'dishonest'. I called the claim that trekking in Tanzania will raise awareness about mental disabilities within the Egyptian society, dishonest.
And why I use Twitter is utterly irrelevant to this conversation, don't you think?

Sure there are more people out there but we do what we can and so should everyone. Going on TV, mass newspapers and reaching the 80m costs money we do not have so we start small and hope to get bigger one day. If every company in Egypt did their part in CSR no matter how small this would definitely be a step in the right direction.

It may be true that some of the people on the trip did not have a primary objective of charity on this trip, at least to begin with, but there is nothing wrong with that.

I actually found it laudable.


Did they not get off their sofas and raise money from friends and family? Did they not talk about what they are doing for weeks and months to everyone they came across? Surely you cannot discredit people’s efforts no matter how small they are. Moreover, if it started this way I can tell you confidently that after interacting with the kids at the RTLA and living this journey together for the last 3 months, every single one of the climbers are passionate about the cause, can talk intelligently about it and will forever be ambassadors for it. In their lifetime they will hopefully inspire many other people to do good in any way they can.


Your 2.4:1 point is completely wrong. The trip costs much less and raised much more than you said (figures above). This again is an irrelevant calculation because once again you cannot count money people are willing to pay for a trip as money that could have gone to the charity. What we’ve done is effectively include people into this effort that would have otherwise not participated. I am sorry if you are only familiar with marathons as challenges to raise money for charity.

That was merely the example I used.


You might want to search Kilimanjaro and charity and see how many times this model been used to great success around the world and yes these trips cost money. I can also site many other successful initiatives to raise charity money that are way more costly than a climb to Kilimanjaro. There are many highly respected for profit companies out there who do charity challenges as their core business. They make money off organizing the events but through the work they do raise thousands of dollars for good causes.
If good intentions are only useful as long as they translate into something tangible (according to you) then we have definitely achieved something we can all be proud of. We are in the process of gathering the last pieces of donations and will announce our results shortly. However, for the benefit of everyone out there in the world who tries to do good but is not successful, please keep trying and not let anyone put you down.

Thank you for your attention.

Omar

Friday, September 17, 2010

The Right to Climb on the Back of Children with Mental Disability [w/ addendum]

Some 25 people went to climb Mount Kilimanjaro, reaching the top earlier today.
Bravo: awesome athletic feat. Congratulations.

But for the organizers to pretend that they're doing it for charity is shameless, and rather despicable, self-aggrandizement.

"Climbing Kilimanjaro for Special Needs", the travel company officially titled the expedition.

How do you say bullshit in Swahili?

Consider this:
- Each climber paid for their own trip; while supposedly attempted to fund-raise 20,000 EGP ($3600) each.
Good.

But the climb cost about $5000 per climber [according to friends/siblings of climbers on this expedition] - which means that, had they donated the climbing money to the organization - the Right to Live - the organization would've gotten more money out of it.

How much did they raise so far? $51,990, from the expedition's own webpage. If there were 11 climbers, their climbing money would've been greater than that. (remember, there were 25 - so a total expense of $125,000).

Yep. Do the math.

As a friend rightly says, "احا، كانوا دفعوهم للمنظمة و راحوا يتسلقوا الهرم"...


And they claim they got corporate sponsorship. Seriously, your fundraising people are... Well the kids who did fundraising for our model UN in college consistently did a better job, for fuck's sake.

With the amount of coverage they got - and with a famous radio host on board - they could've done infinitely better.


The big winner? The leader of the expedition, one Omar Samra, "the first Egyptian to climb Mount Everest" says the FB page; who, not surprisingly, owns the travel company that organized the expedition.

[Do you hear what I hear? param pam pishhh....:]


I'm very much willing to be proven wrong - when I see the financials of this trip. Expenses, income, donations, how much money the company made, corporate sponsorship receipts, etc.

Until then, I'll consider this expedition as a shameful attempt to make a few dollars off the backs of children with mental disabilities.

Whom, as someone pointed out, were not included in the trip; as far as I know, there are no people with mental disabilities on the climb, are there?

The other claim is, huh 'creating awareness'? Oh peu-lease. Climbing Mount Kilimanjaro to raise awareness in a country where a majority of the population depends on food subsidies is completely outlandish, irrelevant to most, and simply dishonest. And has an unmistakable Marie-Antoinette-ish ("They want bread? Let them eat cake!") feel to it.
Most of the Egyptian public doesn't listen to NileFM, son.


I will give them a little credit for not towing the bullshit line all the way: after all, and to quote Mr. Samra,
the goal is to allow people to discover more about themselves and the world
while benefiting the society that we live in.”

See the first half of the quote, that works for me. It's an amazing trip indeed and I truly hope the participants had the adventure of a lifetime - a truly perspective-altering experience that will leave them better men and women.

Indeed, I know for a fact that some of the participants went on this expedition for the pleasure and challenge of the climb, with no claims or pretense of saving the world.

Let me reiterate: I have no problems with going on a good adventure, quite on the contrary: I'd love to climb Kili one day. [Definitely not with that company though!]

But I do have a problem when some people - namely, the organizers - piggyback on an important cause for their advertisement purposes. That is disgusting.


Oh, and let's not play the 'I have relatives with mental disabilities so you can't doubt my sincerity' game:

a. I fully respect that, and sympathize with the families of mentally disabled children. I also have close relatives with mental disabilities and I know how difficult it is sometimes, particularly for the parents and siblings.

b.
It's completely irrelevant. Good intentions are only useful insofar as they translate into something tangible.

The 'Right to Climb' expedition has not.



To sum up:


- This was either a charitable venture: in which case, it's a failure. When for every $1 raised for charity, $2.4 were spent on the trip (that's 125K/51.99K), then it was better off donating the participation expenses w khalas.
Charity sports events are by definition cheap - such as a race or a half-marathon, for instance, like that one which a friend ran recently. This way, sunk costs are very low; nearly all the money involved goes to the charitable organization of choice.
Having a 'charitable event' which needs to carry participants 4000 kilometres to climb a mountain just to raise money - if that is indeed the claim - is ludicrous.

- This is not a charitable venture but a trip, the climbers were going anyway, and they took the opportunity to raise some money 3al ganb: very well. Then the trip should NOT have been marketed as "Climbing Kilimanjaro for Special Needs" because obviously it isn't. You do NOT call it "The Right to Climb" because the trip wasn't advocating for disabled kids' right to climb anything, given that they were nowhere near the climb. And you do NOT pretend you're going to save the world because that's pure hypocrisy, and a shameful, shameful PR stunt.


Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Karaite Synagogue, Cairo: 2 photos, 55 years apart



At the (now closed) Karaite synagogue, Abbasiya, Cairo...


President Mohamed Naguib, 1955


Some random blogger, 2010, at the very same spot.


Friends (you know who you are) - Happy 5771.

(more photos of the Jewish sites of Cairo may be found here.)


[I mistakenly wrote earlier that was the Bassatine synagogue - sorry for the mix-up.]

Saturday, September 04, 2010

Private photos of El Baradei’s family spark controversy online

Hmm, a family man. I could vote for that fellow.

The Egyptian electoral race just got a notch dirtier. Well, it just started to look like an electoral race - with the online publication of private photos lifted from the Facebook profile of Laila El Baradei, daughter of opposition leading figure and former IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei.

It's seemingly common practice to dig into the opponent’s family’s private life when it comes to US elections - if you recognize the names Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston for example, then you know what I mean. On the opposite extreme lies the French electorate - the public sale of old topless photos of their first lady, for instance, leaves the French remarkably impassible.

But this kind of dirt-digging - for lack of a better word - is brand new for the Egyptian public.
(Perhaps because we’ve actually never had real elections?)

A Facebook group whose title can be translated as “ElBaradei’s family secrets - How shameless are they” has been lifting private photographs from Laila El Baradei’s Facebook page, whose security settings are in order - meaning that the photo thief is either a Facebook “friend” or a hacker.

The group owner claims to be “a longtime friend of Laila, Mohamed ElBaradei’s daughter who was shocked by his praying and visits to mosques, knowing that neither or his family follow any religion” - and decided to ‘expose’ him. (why it took 'her' close to a year to find out that ElBaradei was slated as a presidential contender is anyone's guess).


Said ‘exposure’ is effectively a couple of photos of the Baradeis with what may or may not be wine on the table (with no indication that it’s even theirs, if you care to know), photos of Laila El Baradei’s wedding in a city hall - an indignant group administrator writes deliberately erroneously that it’s a “church” - as well as holiday photos of her and husband in a swimsuit. Added to those is a screenshot of the young woman’s Facebook profile where she states her religious views as ‘agnostic’ - with a caption by the administrator calling her an ‘emo’.

The photos are incredibly normal by any standards. The wedding photos are endearing. The smear attempt - focusing, you may have guessed, on the alcohol on the table and the holiday photos in a swimsuit - is feeble and mediocre.

And the breach of privacy is infuriating beyond measure.

Online responses on the publication of those photos have been immediate - and overwhelmingly indignant. As users responded to the specific ‘accusations’ that they are fully unrelated to the man's political skills or ability to serve as a public official, the most vociferous response were directed at the deliberate, shameless incursion in a young woman’s private life.
"None of your business" seems to be the new rallying cry against this peak - abyss, rather - of ethically condemnable political gimmicks.

Egyptians are extremely private when it comes to their families - to the extent of refraining from referring to their partner’s name in a conversation or even calling their wife’s first name in public, using instead a generic ‘hajja’ or, more amusingly, the elder’s child name).

The Egyptian first family itself is also quite discreet in its private life. Save for the odd Mubarak photo with a grandchild to respond to rumours of bad health or the like, no holiday family photos are ever published, for instance. No photos were made available when Gamal Mubarak, himself a politician and contender for the succession his father, got married in 2007.

ElBaradei, who is yet to comment on the issue, has found defenders in the Muslim Brotherhood, with whom he shares an unlikely alliance via the National Committee for Change, a loose coalition of anti-Mubarak opponents. The Muslim Brotherhood's website published an article today on its official website aptly titled "Killing Khaled Saeed more fatal than Laila ElBaradei's bikini", in reference to the death of a 28-year old Egyptian at the hand of the police in June, and condemns the 'foul play'.


Coupled with news of the creation of a 45-man, 24/7 “Facebook police squad’’ by the Egyptian Ministry of Interior, which was established on July 1st but divulged only on Sunday [Ar.] and whose job is to monitor opposition discussions on the website; alongside reports that the ruling National Democratic Party houses a ‘hasbara’ group whose task is to defend and respond to online criticism to President Mubarak and his son Gamal, is it hard not to wonder whether this Facebook group is an individual act or rather a calculated state-backed move.

As it currently stands, this anti-Baradei online campaign seems to be an utter fiasco. Regular facebook users know well enough not to take what’s on the website at face value; and know that, for example, “Agnostic” as an answer to the “Religion” question is nothing to scream wolf about. (My own answer is an unexplained “yes”, if someone cares to misinterpret that, be my guest). Also knowing that the photos weren’t leaked, as those often are, because of low security settings shortcoming but were ‘stolen’ and made public wholly shifts the indecency accusations on the group administrator.

It’s only a matter of time before a government newspaper picks up the photos, and with Facebook’s shamelessly lax rules of privacy they will have no qualms or legal deterrent to publishing them with negative comments. But I suspect that the reaction of the Egyptian public at large will be no different, and will be quick to condemn the privacy breachers, not the Baradeis.


Personally, I am yet to be convinced by ElBaradei’s political statements, which drastically fall short of my expectations. Nevertheless, after having seen those private photos - I think the Baradeis would make a charming First Family.

------

Update 1
: Mohamed ElBaradei is pissed: He is quoted saying that the government is "waging a campaign of sheer lies... This is typical and the only way the regime responds to those calling for democracy, political reforms, social justice and preserving people's human rights"

Update 2: IkhwanWeb republished this article, in its entirety, without permission.

My new favourite street vendor




- "7.5 pounds, mister", says the 8 year old street vendor in Al-Hussein.

- For this silly toy? Are you trying to rob be? You're not getting more than 5 pounds.

- Six?

- No, five. [me giving him a stern and serious look.]. Here's a 10, give me change.

[He gives me four, then five pounds of change].

- Thank you.

- Hey mister, mister! [Hands me some other plastic toy]. Take this too. [He giggles - a perfect, luminous, crystalline child's giggle. A kid's laugh.]

- What is that for?

- It's for you - because I made you pay too much for the other one!

More giggles.
I give him back the second toy and leave.


Street vendor honesty, Ramadan style? Well, the kid had a good laugh. And I'll admit, so did I.

Ramadan Kareem, everyone.