# Bring Back Our Girls

A fundamentalist Muslim terrorist group, Boko Haram, kidnapped 276 schoolgirls this week in Nigeria. 

After torching their village market, killing more than 300 people, razing 100 houses, destroying 500 vehicles, and attacking their boarding school, Boko Haram is threatening to sell these innocent children. 

Please speak up for those who can't!

We need to defend human rights and support women's and children's rights.

No more abuse, no more discrimination, no more hurt. ;-)

(Source Comic: Andy Blumenthal)

# Bring Back Our Girls

Jewish is Super

So with the shooting at the Jewish Community Center in Oakland Park, Kansas this week right before Passover, and the near simultaneous "grotesque" targeting of Jews by pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, we are reminded that while Jews are no longer slaves in Egypt (thank G-d), we are still unfortunately targeted by evil people around the world. 

In the Kansas City incident, I read how the white supremacist shooter went right up to a lady visiting her mother at the old-age home and asked her "Are you Jewish?" And when she replied in the affirmative (even though she was not), he shoot her dead on the spot. 

It turns out this lady was an occupational therapist that helped blind children...what kind of monster would just murder someone (anyone) like this? 

Similarly in eastern Ukraine, leaflets are being handed out demanding that Jews register in the government office, pay special taxes, and declare their property or face deportation. Here too, we witness the devilish markings of some that are repetitive of their deplorable past as Nazi collaborators, concentration camp guards, and murders.  

I read yesterday, that not only Jews, but Christians are being targeted in the Middle East with churches burned, those of faith being driven from their homes and ruthlessly murdered, except in Israel where the Christian population is actually increasing and thriving. 

While Superman may not be Jewish (I know of no Jews on planet Krypton), being Jewish is super--and for that matter being any person of faith and dignity is super!  Hate mongers and murders of today, like the evil oppressors of yesteryear--know that truth and justice and the 10 plagues of Egypt are just a {pow!} and {bam!} away--believe it! ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Jewish is Super

Hey Abrham!

Thanks Starbucks for writing Abrham on my breakfast purchase this morning. 

Apparently, religious sterotypes are alive and well with you. 

How about a little sensitivity training for your staff or do you guess biblical names for all your customers?

Don't worry though, it turns out that is my Hebrew name (and I'm Jewish and proud of it), although it's spelled like this: Avraham. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Hey Abrham!

Not Bias, Just Plain Old Hatred

I read a book review in the Wall Street Journal on Profiles in Denial by William Storr about David Irving the notorious Holocaust denier. 

He is a "'revisionist' of all things World War II," but apparently is particularly keen on Holocaust denial, as someone who according to Wikipedia is an "anti-semite, and racist who...promotes neo-Nazism."

The Holocaust denial goes deep for Irving and even upon visiting Majdanek concentration camp, he tells his group "This is a mock-up of a gas chamber. Those cylinders are carbon dioxide not carbon monoxide...There are handles on the inside of these doors," so the prisoners could let themselves out. 

Actually, the door was locked with huge bolts right on the outside and was sealed airtight, but to Irving it's as if these didn't exist. 

The book discusses how cognitive biases such as confirmation biases help people "find confirming evidence for our beliefs, ignoring or rationalizing away all discriminating evidence."

But I think this is really beyond the point with someone like Irving, who according to The Guardian is a discredited British historian and Nazi apologist" and was actually jailed for a "three-year prison sentence in Vienna for denying the Holocaust and the gas chambers of Auschwitz."

The State Prosecutor said of Irving "He's not a historian, he's a falsifier of history...this is about abuse of freedom of speech."

Judge Peter Liebtreau called Irving "a racist, an anti-semite, and a liar."

So this is no simple bias or mind game for Irving, but apparently a convenient way for him to pursue his hatreds under the guise that everything was and is really okay. 

So rather than "Never forget," is is far more beneficial for those that would wish it to happen again that they lull people to believe that it never even was to begin with. 

Interesting that another famous Holocaust denier is no less than Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who claimed the Holocaust, in which six million Jews were murdered, was a "myth" (Washington Post). 

By the way, Ahmadinejad also said "9/11 was an inside job."

People like Irving and Ahmadinejad are not about confirmation bias, but rather about distortion of truth to further their own evil destructive aims.

In the case of Ahmadinejad, it's that he wishes to see Israel be "wiped off the map" (New York Times).

And in the case of Irving, he has said, "there will...probably be another holocaust in the next thirty years...oh, and if the Jews are lucky, there will be a David Irving or Adolf Hitler [may their names be obliterated] to protect them" (The Independent).

Oh, G-d forbid! 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Not Bias, Just Plain Old Hatred

Academic Assignments In Hate

According to the New York Times (12 April 2013) a high school English teacher in Albany, New York on Monday asked students to write a persuasive essay on why Jews are evil and the source of our problems. 

The assignment stated: "You do not have a choice in your position: you must argue that Jews are evil, and...convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich!"

This assignment echoed a similar assignment given to students in Georgia and New York City earlier this year instructing students to calculate math problems by using number of slave whippings and killings. 

Yes, these school assignments--to our children--are shocking and appalling. 

Although they call these teachers giving these assignments, these are not real educators, but rather bigots given a classroom pulpit.

Marguerite Vanden Wyngaard, the school district superintendent, said: "Obviously, we have a severe lack of judgement and a horrible level of insensitivity."

But this "apology" does not go far enough--in fact, there is no apology--just excuses and calls for sensitivity training. 

Wyngaard should've called this behavior for what it is--discrimination, anti-Semitism, bigotry, and hatred, and announced the firing of the teacher--who shouldn't be teaching anyone, anything!

With the Holocaust Remembrance Day this past Monday, April 8--this teacher added insult to injury in making such an assignment.

While teaching students how to write persuasively and argue different points of view can mean that sometimes you have to argue "the other side"; it crosses the line to assign students to write about why a whole race of people are evil, and on top of it to force them all to take that position.

According to CNews, a third of the students stood up and refused to complete the assignment--thankfully, there are some good and decent people left in this world.

Excuses are not apologies. Sensitivity training is not removal of a hateful bigot. And this school superintendent should've had the ethical backbone and courage to join the students who stood against this wrong. 

These "teachers" and school superintendent have at least six million reasons to do better, much better.

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Academic Assignments In Hate

We Don't Accept You Here

A number of years ago I had received an interesting job offer--not actually for a job I had applied to, but for "something else", and apparently the job was supposed to come without any questions asked. 

Because when I asked about the typical things that you like to agree on before you start a job, I found that it wasn't going to work out then for this executive because of "cultural fit."

At the time, it was quite clear that cultural fit was just another term used to discriminate not those that could do the job well from those that couldn't, but rather those who would be too thoughtful, innovative, or even challenging to the (failing) status quo. 

In this particular case, the leadership was highly corrupt (in more ways than one) and it came out in front-page investigations and findings not long after, with the actual sacking of many of the head honcho bunch.

When it comes to hiring, it is challenging for many leaders to not just punch the checklist for diversity, but too really embrace it, and this stems from many reasons including fear, bias and hatred of cultures that are different than our own, but also the need for highly insecure leaders to singularly "rule the roost" without any challenge of opinion. 

These leaders think that if everyone fits their mold and subordinates themselves to them alone, then they are by default always right--regardless of the actual consequences of their decision-making.

The problem is that there is no one to vet issues with, play devil's advocate or give an alternate viewpoint--and the insecure leadership with their minion of look-alike, think-alike followers will often drive the train over the cliff--without anyone so much as saying a boo. 

This last week, when a record number of women Senators (20) and congresswomen (82)--were sworn in to the 113th Congress, there was hope of their bringing to the old political mix a new sense and style of collaboration that could help the nation resolve the many issues that we are embroiled in heated negotiation and impasse (e.g. the debt ceiling, the national deficit, the budget, immigration, and more).

Similarly, Bloomberg BusinessWeek (3 January 2013) published an article called "Only BFFs Need Apply"--about how job applicant's cultural fit often trumps their actual qualifications.

BusinessWeek sums up the dilemma with hiring based on cultural fit: While it "may summon up obnoxious images of old boys clubs and social connections...a cooperative, creative atmosphere can make workdays more tolerable and head off problems before they begin." Put another way: the "American ideals about team diversity collide with the reality of building a cohesive, practical staff."

However, the problem with relying on cultural fit is not only that you don't often get the best candidates, but that it is used not just to describe common values and work ethics, but rather inappropriately "as an excuse for feelings interviewers aren't comfortable expressing" such as not being able to accept a person's accent or that they cover they head for religious reasons. 

While hiring lackeys may have a short-term benefit of cohesion, in the long-term, the lack of diversity may result in groupthink and even that "the one person who has a different thought could have saved a business."

Of course, there is also legal prohibitions against discrimination in hiring and personnel management, as well as the ethical issue of hiring unfairly and what that does to the moral fiber of the organization and its people--it's corrosive to their values and capabilities and will lead to the revulsion and loss of good employees, customers, stockholders, and others over time.

Here's the enterprise architecture slant on this topic: "you have to decide if you're hiring for the culture you have or the culture you want." ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Tobucil and Klabs)

We Don't Accept You Here

First They Came For...

This was a short film/music video that my daughter brought to my attention. 

It reminded me of the famous quote about how anyone can be targeted and if we do not speak out, who will be there to speak for us. 

"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me."

- Martin Niemoller

Warning: Graphic images--nudity and violence.

First They Came For...

One Hand Washes The Other

This week the House overwhelming approved an notable ethics reform package to ban insider trading on the hill and in the executive branch. (Washington Post) 

However, ethics and conflict of interest in government decision-making is something that affects politicians and civil servants alike.

Two specific areas come to mind, including employment decisions and acquisitions awards, where there is probably no greater area of public trust. 

Because personnel and contracting decisions affect livelihoods and pocketbooks, they are ripe for corruption and undue influence, favors, and other mitigating factors such as preference or tit for tat arrangements. 

To safeguard these actions by public officials, the Federal government has set out rules that govern personnel practices and acquisitions.  

On the personnel side, there is an exemplary set of rules commonly referred to as the " Prohibited Personnel Practices" (Title 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)).

For example, they set out rules against such things as: 

- Discrimination against employees or applicants and even for off duty conduct

- Preference in personnel decisions

- Soliciting or considering recommendations not based on personal knowledge

- Retaliation against whistleblowers or those filing appeals

- Coercion of political activity

Similarly, there are laws in government that govern federal acquisitions such as the Federal Acquisitions Regulations.

Included in this are are specific rules that mandate ethics and integrity in procurements, and these for example bar activities such as:

- Conflicts of interest in making acquisition decisions

- Soliciting and accepting gifts

- Seeking employment with a bidder

- Disclosure of protected information

Of course, these guidelines are only as good as those following them. When these rules are bypassed with winks, excuses, or even outright deceit, the system and the ethical principles embodied in them are doomed by backroom politics. 

As the same time, the specifics of the rules and regulations, and the interpretations of these to each situation is critical, and officials should regularly consult with their ethics officers and legal counsel to ensure that they are not only doing the right thing, but doing things right. 

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) for each department and agency plays a vital role in ensuring that officials are managing in such as way as to avoid fraud, waste, and abuse, and the OIG can usually be contacted both by phone or email and is available to assist the public in investigations, inspections, and evaluations. 

To ensure the integrity of government at the highest level, the rule-makers (Legislative Branch), the implementers (Executive Branch ), and the interpreters (Judicial Branch) are all involved in ensuring the ethical foundations of our government.  

On the ground, day-to-day, senior executives, human resource and procurement officials, ethics and legal officers, internal affairs and the OIG play important roles in guiding the process and hopefully weeding out the "bad apples."

However, when people involved are lax, derelict, or intentionally overlook corruption and endemic bad behavior as part of a one hand washes the other culture, everyone loses in terms of not only the smooth and efficient running government, but in the underlying principles of integrity for which it stands. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to "Brain Malfunction")

One Hand Washes The Other

Raise Your Glass To Great Bosses

It's a funny time of year. Folks are celebrating the holidays, and for some of them the traditional office party is full of cheer, while for others it’s a nightmare.

In a way it's a paradox for some that they have a holiday party with the same bosses that treat them otherwise badly the rest of year!

This reminds of some of the worst traits a boss can exhibit--here's a “top 10”:

1) Selfishness: Every day it's all about the boss--their power trip, their ego, their next promotion--instead of about the mission and the customers.

2) Amoral: To some, integrity and business do not go together.

3) Discrimination: They tolerate or in too many cases, even exhibit blatant discrimination themselves.

4) Disrespect: This can be overtly or implicitly, hurting the employee professionally and personally as well.

5) Inconsistency: Flip-flopping is not just something that bothers people about politics, but it makes for a bipolar work environment, where employees are damned if they do and if they don't, but the boss can always say, “I told you so (and the opposite).”

6) Favoritism: Plays favorites instead of judging employees only on the true factor, merit. This causes workers to become demoralized as they see people hired and promoted for all the wrong reasons.

7) Insecurity: They are threatened by seemingly everyone and everything--can't give anyone else credit or recognize the good around them--a one-person team who sees anybody else’s success as implying their own failure.

8) Competitive: They have to be the smartest person in the room, and innovation and objectivity is squelched--no risk is worth the wrath of “boss Khan.”

9) Stealing: If someone else does have something of value to contribute, this boss just steals it and presents it as their own (attribution or recognition, what for?)

10) Micromanagement: Looking over your shoulder every minute, redoing your work, not trusting you, they are control freaks, a complete nightmare to work for.

Bosses come in all shapes and sizes. I’ve been fortunate to work for some of the best, and I hope that I do them justice with my own employees over the course of my career.

Here’s hoping that at your holiday party, you were able to raise your glass with a boss who makes you feel valued and respected--that's a holiday party to really celebrate!

(Source Photo: here)

Raise Your Glass To Great Bosses

Under "The Thicker Skin"

Yesterday, I heard Pastor Robert Jeffress of a mega church in Dallas get on national television and tell Christians not to vote for a presidential candidate--Mitt Romney--because he's a Mormon and went on to describe Mormonism as a cult.

What was so shocking was that there was no basis for the decision to vote or not to vote for someone based on political issues driving the discussion, it was purely one of religious intolerance.

I imagined how candidate Mitt Romney (and the Mormon establishment) must feel like to be subjected to a form of discrimination and stereotypical name calling just because of their religious faith.

Unfortunately, religious and other forms of bigotry and hatred are not new, but they are invective and undermining.

I personally remember a situation at a organization, where I was treated religiously unfairly.

There was a planned offsite meeting at the agency, and the meeting was going to run through lunch, so lunch was being ordered.

Being Jewish, I asked if a salad or tuna sandwich or anything Kosher or vegetarian could be made available so that I could participate.

I was told by email that if I wanted anything special, I could bring it from home.

Not a problem--I didn't want to be a "Jewish problem"--I can certainly bring my own food and I did.

However, when I got to the meeting and saw the lunch spread, the agency had ordered a special meal for someone else who was vegan--not a religious preference, just a dietary one.

Try imagining just for a second how it felt to be told that you could not be accommodated for anything kosher, but someone else would be "just because."

I brought this to the attention of the "powers that be," but was told that I should go "develop a thicker skin."

Well if the thicker skin means to become part of a group that practices intolerance and bigotry, it's time to peel away that callous!

How people vote and how we treat our fellow man should not depend on their religion, where they come from, or the color of the skin.

In a year, when the memorial for Martin Luther King, Jr. was unveiled on the National Mall, the dream for tolerance and freedom still has considerable room to blossom.

Hopefully, society wil continue to develop not a thicker skin, but a gentler kinder heart that embraces each, for what they can bring to the table.

(Source Photo: here)

Under "The Thicker Skin"