by Peter H Frank | May 20, 2015 | Life in Romania |
I was walking home this evening and waiting for a green walk signal at the most dangerous intersection I encounter every day, where Calea Dorobantilor crosses Bulevardul Iancu de Hunedoara. Fooled by that sense of detached isolation that can occur behind the wheel and sucked in by the free-for-all feeling of a wide open intersection of six and eight lanes crossing, drivers there consistently display the most reckless and irrational acts of aggression and competition as they race against oncoming traffic and soar the wrong way along the empty tracks of trams. Just about every day I see children and women with baby carriages waiting to cross and can barely look at them as a cold fear strikes at me and tells me not to watch.
Today was no different. It was rush hour this evening and I was waiting in the median for the green light to walk north and watching the cars in front of me crowd to a stop. A tram was approaching from my left heading to the station and I watched as a man about 60, in a tan shirt and carrying a leather briefcase, was winding his way through three lanes of stopped traffic in front of me. As he peered up to his right and saw the tram coming, he suddenly darted forward and into the empty next lane just as a white car came along traveling quickly from his left. There was no time to shout. And just as the tram blocked the man from my view, I heard the unmistakable crunching sound that a car makes when it has hit something hard.
I turned my head away even though the tram still blocked my view. I did not want to see. In fact, I considered for a moment returning the other way and never looking back. The tram had not moved though I saw that the lane of traffic had stopped and a crowd of people were staring. And as the light changed to green and the tram slid away, I somehow against my wish found the courage to look. There I saw to great relief that the man was conscious and unbloodied, surrounded by two or three people who were wrapping his knee in some cloth and helping him sit upward on the ground. A young woman stood there and was talking on a phone.
I hesitated to move, debating several thoughts in my head, until finally the right one won out. I stayed, not to help, as there was nothing I knew to do, but to tell the police what happened and explain who had which lights and about the man dashing for the tram.
I waited several minutes. There was a woman about 65 standing next to me looking very worried and holding the hand of a small girl who had been crying. The woman’s husband, the driver, was still standing in the street with one or two men and the young woman on the phone. I got a bit of candy for the young girl to try to make her feel less worried and I went to the young woman to ask if she spoke English. It was clear she was in charge. She said yes, just a little, and I told her what I’d seen. I asked if she had been in the car and she said no, she had been waiting for a tram and had also witnessed the accident. We agreed I should stay and wait for the police and she said she would wait for the ambulance as she was the one who made the call.
As we waited, this young woman, who appeared to be in her mid-20s and was well-dressed in jeans, never left the street. She directed traffic to one side and comforted the man. She said a few things to one or two others who also remained there helping. And as other people stopped, including the next tram driver, she was the one everyone came to when they had a question or suggestion. It took about 15 minutes or so for the ambulance to arrive and the man, still fully conscious, was taken away.
This young woman stayed a bit longer and we talked for a few minutes. I thought she might have been a nurse and that’s why she helped, but she said no, she was not a nurse, her job involved doing some scientific research I didn’t quite understand. She waited about 20 minutes and then she apologized for the fact that she had to leave as she was already late for a meeting. She again waited for her tram and then went on her way.
It took another 30 minutes or so for the police to arrive and get the details from the driver. A gracious and pleasant policeman asked me a few questions and shook my hand in thanks.
And as I walked away, relieved that no one died or was too seriously injured, I must admit I found myself happy in a most unexpected way that the accident had occurred. Because for a moment today a refreshing example of humanity from a young woman named Ramona arrived on the streets of Bucharest and I was grateful I was there.
by Peter H Frank | May 11, 2015 | Business |
I love a good list. A list of rules, a list of crimes, a list for shopping, a list of favorite books, a list of favorite lists – to-do, wish, bucket, Franz. I love them all.
What I don’t love is when they are compiled by amateurs and then presented as if they are the wisdom of ages compacted and made sufficiently pithy for bumper stickers and tattoos. Or magazine articles.
Take, for example, this latest one from Forbes: The 10 Worst Body Language Mistakes. (Find it here.) I don’t know who this Travis Bradberry is, but clearly he doesn’t get out much. Or go to many business events. Or get invited to parties. Because if he did, he would have known better than to call these the “worst” mistakes. I’ve seen worse mistakes made by the Pope.
His list, in a nutshell, is: Don’t avoid eye contact, slouch, frown, have a weak handshake, fold your arms, look down, stand too far away, stand too close, look at a clock, or fidget with your hair.
Yep, amateur. (Although I like the last one as it apparently indicates you are feeling anxious or perhaps that you’re wearing a toupee.)
Now, I’ve been in a lot of meetings and often stayed awake so I can tell you, from personal experience, what we professionals consider the REAL 10 Worst Body Language Mistakes. (Don’t believe me? Just give them a try. I have.)
1. Do not double over in silent mock laughter while listening to someone, or in any way practice other mime exercises, including being trapped in a box.
2. Do not begin jumping up and down while speaking as that can suggest you are feeling too excited, which can indicate anxiety and insecurity.
3. Do not yawn repeatedly or lie down on the floor for more than three minutes when someone is speaking as that can indicate you are feeling too relaxed, which can also indicate anxiety and insecurity.
4. Do not pick your teeth while speaking as it can indicate you just finished a lunch to which the other person was not invited, which in some cultures is considered selfish.
5. In general, when making a presentation, do not suddenly point at a woman in the audience and give her a thumbs-up.
6. Do not pick your nose excessively as it can indicate you are suggesting the other person should give you a tissue, which can be considered aggressive in some cultures.
7. Do not repetitively wrinkle your nose and stick out your tongue when someone is speaking as that can indicate you’re an idiot.
8. If you do feel the need to stand inordinately close to someone, either because it’s culturally more comfortable for you or because the two of you are whispering and pointing at others in the room, be sure to refrain from any excessive scratching below the waist.
9. Unless you don’t know the person, avoid putting your finger in your mouth like you are making yourself gag after pointing at the person speaking to you.
10. When a woman is speaking to you and you are staring at her breasts, do not create a puzzled expression on your face and tilt your head to one side as that in some cultures can be considered excessively humorous.
by Peter H Frank | Apr 23, 2015 | Culture |
Source: http://play.tojsiab.com/c3hlWHN6Rkw5OWsz
Being roughly twice the age of the internet, I believe I have the right to render some judgment on this latest flash in the pan. (I mean, what are today’s tablets if not essentially the equivalent of Kenner’s Close ‘n Play, maybe version 143.2?)
My conclusion: there are no more than five defensible reasons why the internet’s existence does anyone any good (well, actually only two if you remove the topics of sex, our desire to endlessly and pointlessly proclaim our over-self-esteemed opinions, and our irrational need to inform everyone of our infatuation for running, jumping, biting, hanging and sleeping warm sources of litter-box droppings and free-floating, nose-clogging hair).
No, in the 25 years that we’ve been surfing and stalking and spying and searching and engaging in other acts of self-hypnosis, there are only two reasons why the internet is of any productive use (well, ok, come to think of it, there’s actually only one if you exclude EVERYTHING related to sex).
And what is that one thing? To do meaningless spontaneous searches on topics that are suddenly of paramount importance in the middle of the night.
And that’s how we get from Hickory Dickory Dock to George Enescu.
Very recently, I was singing (some might call it destroying) the nursery rhyme Hickory Dickory Dock to my young son, and when we reached “the clock struck one,” I unexpectedly thought of The Late Show, that 1 a.m. movie that would come on after The Tonight Show on CBS-TV (Channel 2) in New York while I was growing up.
Why? Well, read on.
For those of you not of a certain age or location, for at least two generations of New Yorkers (and as I now read, Angelenos also) beginning in 1950, The Late Show on those local CBS stations was a staple (actually THE staple in our household) of late night entertainment. Many nights, it was the only thing on TV past 1 or 2 a.m. And on Friday and Saturdays, it was succeeded by The Late Late Show, which made them very special nights for us insomniacs in that we had company to almost sunrise, or to the religiously related programming that would start at 5:30 or 6 a.m. on Sundays. (Anyone else remember the old Davey & Goliath stop motion cartoons?)
While the movies were generally old and (if memory is correct) generally good, the one thing that is unforgettable is the theme song to the show. Taken from the light concert piece, The Syncopated Clock (get it? Hickory Dickory Dock….the clock struck one?) the 10-20 seconds of repeated percussive melody are indelibly impressed on our memories and (as with anything indelibly impressed on our memories) tends to pop up unexpectedly, like when we sing nursery rhymes or sit for hours waiting to see the doctor.
So I went not just “googling” but also “youtubing” to hear it once more. And there it was. Did you know it was written in 1945 by Leroy Anderson while he was serving at the Pentagon as Chief of the Scandinavian Desk of Military Intelligence? No, neither did I. And until the other night, I didn’t really care. [Listen to it, here.]
And hey! Look at that! Did you know he also wrote The Typewriter!? One of my other favorites. No, neither did I. [Listen to that, here.]
And holy cow!! Did you know that he ALSO wrote Sleigh Ride!!?? Now there’s a song you WILL actually know. [Listen and sing along, here.] (Lyrics were added later.) [And for those, click here.] See how this works?
So I wondered, who is this guy? [Find him on Wikipedia, here.] Or find his official website , here.] And yes, indeed, he’s pretty interesting. He wasn’t THE most interesting guy I’ve ever read about, but at least he seems to have had a very good life. That’s nice.
And he was smart as well as musically gifted. Fluent in nine languages, he attended Harvard University and studied with some of the most famous people around at that time. And you know who one of them was? That’s right. While earning his Master’s degree at Harvard in the 1920s, he studied composition with George Enescu. That’s right. THAT George Enescu. The Romanian. [For him, go here.] Unless you’re actually also Romanian. [In that case, go here.]
So there you go: a Romanian connection I already had in my childhood that never existed until Google was invented. My favorite excuse for watching the sun rise and sleeping through high school and your favorite excuse for a great music festival knew each other.
Now I think I’ll go look up the name of that Lithuanian guy I can never remember who used the recipe of a Romanian friend to introduce pastrami to New York in the 1880s.
(Oh, and just in case you don’t know the nursery rhyme, you can find that here. Or for those of you who weren’t paying attention in 1967, find Kenner’s Close ‘n Play here.)
by Peter H Frank | Jan 14, 2015 | Literature |
What a gift it would be to have a friend like this – or better yet, to be a friend like this.
A very short excerpt from Zorba the Greek:
“Things we are accustomed to, and which we pass by indifferently, suddenly rise up in front of Zorba like fearful enigmas. Seeing a woman pass by, he stops in consternation.
“‘What is that mystery?’ he asks. ‘What is a woman, and why does she turn our heads? Just tell me, I ask you, what’s the meaning of that?’
“He interrogates himself with the same amazement when he sees a man, a tree in blossom, a glass of cold water. Zorba sees everything every day as if for the first time.
“We were sitting yesterday in front of the hut. When he had drunk a glass of wine, he turned to me in alarm:
“‘Now whatever is this red water, boss, just tell me! An old stock grows branches, and at first there’s nothing but a sour bunch of beads hanging down. Time passes, the sun ripens them, they become as sweet as honey, and then they’re called grapes. We trample on them; we extract the juice and put it into casks; it ferments on its own, we open it on the feast-day of St. John-the-Drinker, it’s become wine! It’s a miracle! You drink the red juice and, lo and behold, your soul grows big, too big for the old carcass, it challenges God to a fight. Now tell me, boss, how does it happen?’
“I did not answer. I felt, as I listened to Zorba, that the world was recovering its pristine freshness. All the dulled daily things regained the brightness they had in the beginning, when we came out of the hands of God. Water, women, the stars, bread, returned to their mysterious, primitive origin and the divine whirlwind burst once more upon the air.”
Image source.
by Peter H Frank | Nov 12, 2014 | Journalism, Politics |
“Criticism by politicians and politically motivated media attacks on individual judges, prosecutors and members of their families, and on judicial and prosecutorial institutions, have been a particular concern…”
European Commission (Jan. 22, 2014)
By Peter H. Frank and Roxana-Maria Gaina
(Nov. 12, 2014) The arrests keep coming. New allegations every week. Hundreds of politicians and the politically connected, from the powerful and famous to little-known officials, are being investigated, indicted, or imprisoned for money laundering, bribe-taking, influence peddling, abuse of power and more.
This year alone, more than 100 of Romania’s political elite have been indicted, including eight members of parliament, six county presidents, and 21 mayors, newly released data show. That does not include the more than 120 others who have been publicly accused by prosecutors, arrested, or announced as suspects, or the dozens more who were convicted.
In all sectors and industries, DNA investigations led to the indictment of 834 people through October this year, according to new figures, while more than 1000 people have been convicted.
Where the prosecutions will end and what lasting impact they will have is not yet clear. What is clear, though, is that much of the country’s political foundation is being ruptured, leading some to allege it is a conspiracy against certain political parties while others plainly claim it is a much-needed cleansing of systemic corruption that is destroying this country.
While an analysis of the available data cannot support either side’s claim with any certainty, it is clear from an extensive review of public data that one political party consistently accounts for the preponderance of corruption cases: the PSD.
Number of politically connected individuals named as subjects of accusation, indictment, arrest or conviction by the DNA in the first 10 months of 2014 sorted by political affiliation.
CLICK HERE to view the pdf file.
In fact, in the first 10 months of this year, 44 percent of individuals who could be identified with clear political affiliations and were named by the Direcţia Naţională Anticorupţie (DNA) as subjects of accusation, indictment, arrest or conviction were affiliated with the PSD. In all, through October, 105 of the 237 individuals in this category were associated with the PSD. And its representation among those suspected, accused or arrested is increasing as the cases grow in complexity and scope. The PDL and PNL each accounted for 19 percent of the total.
A general impression that DNA activities involving politicians are increasing also proves correct. In the past three years alone, nearly 400 politicians and the politically connected have been the subject of prosecutors here while many of the most powerful and wealthy, seemingly untouchable a few years ago, have ended up in prison.
Indeed, this year’s spate of DNA announcements has arguably reached such a level that specific cases and names and cash amounts and crimes have created a foreground of details that can become increasingly blurred in the overwhelming landscape of corruption. And ironically, as the number of serious crimes being uncovered is on the rise, it often appears the media’s attention and the public’s interest merely slides the other way.
For that reason, we decided to look at all the indictments and investigations announced by the DNA since the agency’s founding in 2002, try to determine whether the people involved were politically connected, and if so, what might be deduced from an analysis of the data. In all, we reviewed nearly 4000 press releases in the DNA’s database and attempted to identify those individuals who had, at the time of announcement or previously, strong political associations.
* * *
[NOTE: The judgment that some people did or did not have political associations was not scientific. We could establish no firm and incontestable criteria. In other words, we do not claim that we used a pure measure, merely approximate based on our best judgment. We focused primarily on those we identified as politically involved and their families. There are also some names that appear more than once on this list. For statistical purposes, we included them each time and did not limit them to only one appearance in our calculations. There are also several politicians who have changed political parties, sometimes more than once. We have done our best to identify these individuals and we either used our best judgment as to which party to assign them or we placed them in the “Other” category. Also, we have attempted to proofread ourselves. But errors can occur and we encourage readers to bring any such errors to our immediate attention.]
* * *
Number of politically connected individuals named as subjects in DNA press releases from its inception in 2002 through October 2014 sorted by political affiliation.
To our knowledge, this is the only such database that exists, which we find regrettable. It is important to note that the details here cannot disclose any political motivations on the part of investigators, however much some parties might try. There is nothing self-evident except for the names and numbers. Importantly, there are no political conclusions that can be made – except by those who specialize more in propaganda than in facts.
What the evidence can support, however, is the belief that this is clearly a critical time in the modern history of Romania, long considered one of the most corrupt nations in the European Union. And it increasingly appears that much of the economic success of Romania, and with it the country’s accession into the EU, was based on a foundation of endemic corruption from the time society here found its capitalistic footing in the 1990s through the booming first 10 years of the 21st century.
Because of the overwhelming involvement of the political class in these investigations and prosecutions, the battles, of course, have been used as political weapons by both sides. And because of such attempts [see, for example, an Oct. 22 headline in Jurnalul National, controlled by Dan Voiculescu, a PSD-friendly politician who is currently in prison: “DNA’s goal: Destroy the PSD”] it appeared to us as a self-evident necessity to try to measure such claims.
From outside, it is impossible to know and unfair to say whether the recent acceleration of prosecutions have had a political motive or whether they are a natural consequence of one investigation leading to others, or one conviction leading to more confessions.
Perhaps it’s a consequence of an increasing number of investigators being hired by the DNA. Or an increased aggressiveness that comes from a heightened morale as prosecutors begin to see more convictions and prison sentences meted out in recent years. Perhaps it also has to do with an increased expertise among investigators in uncovering and understanding complex conspiracies. And perhaps it’s an outcome of a 2010 provision that provides for leniency to people who confess and collaborate with prosecutors.
Number of politically connected individuals named as subjects in DNA press releases in 2013 sorted by political affiliation.
(For its part, the DNA insists that there are no political considerations in any of its investigations. It is, for example, why party affiliation is never mentioned in their press releases. It does not matter, a spokeswoman said.)
So whether it’s a political conspiracy or a much-needed cleansing cannot be determined merely by looking at the data. Yet, no matter the numbers, the extent of corruption is not likely to surprise Romanians. People in this country already know well the pervasiveness of corruption whether in politics, in education, in health care, and beyond. According to a survey in early 2013 by the European Commission, a full 93 percent of Romanians believe corruption here is either very or fairly widespread with two-thirds of respondents saying it had gotten worse in the previous three years.
And while some of those under attack by prosecutors would cast the DNA as a villain, much of the public here apparently trust in its actions. In fact, in Romania, where far fewer people than the European average trust the police or the courts to deal with corruption, more than three times the average trust their local anti-corruption agency, in this case the DNA. In fact, the DNA is trusted more here than any political body, the central bank, and yes, the media.
Even so, attacks on the DNA continue, giving rise to worries from the European Commission.
“Criticism by politicians and politically motivated media attacks on individual judges, prosecutors and members of their families, and on judicial and prosecutorial institutions, have been a particular concern …” an EC report stated earlier this year.
Number of politically connected individuals indicted by the DNA in the first 10 months of 2014 sorted by political affiliation.
And recent attempts by the PSD-led government to sidestep certain procedures involving the DNA or Parliament’s passage a year ago of amendments that could effectively remove those in Parliament from laws against bribe taking, trading in influence and abuse of office – a move that was found unconstitutional in Romania and attracted heavy criticism from the EU – are also reasons for concern.
In many ways, corruption, it seems, remains an accepted practice in business and politics. As another EC report concluded in January this year: “Whilst investigations, indictment and convictions are taking place, there is evidence that corruption is not always treated as a serious crime. Within the judicial system, the high percentage of suspended sentences seems to illustrate a reluctance by judges to carry through the consequences of a guilty verdict – in contradiction of the sentencing guidelines of the High Court itself.”
(In the first 288 days of last year, the report said, there were 853 defendants convicted in cases brought by the DNA. Nearly 80 percent of them were given suspended sentences.)
Then there is the money – the reason for most of the crimes to begin with. Perhaps more than prison, the threat of losing one’s wealth can potentially be the strongest deterrent available. But not here.
“Another important issue in this respect will be to improve track records in confiscation of assets and asset recovery. Extended confiscation, to allow for assets to be confiscated from relatives, still remains a scant and relatively rarely-used procedure,” the report said.
“This reluctance is underlined when Romanian politicians make statements which express sympathy for those convicted of corruption.”
In all, less than 10 percent of court-specified damages are recovered by the Romanian Asset Recovery Office, the EC report stated, adding that “it seems that the public authorities responsible for recovering these damages only rarely pursue the cases.”
Number of politically connected individuals named by the DNA as suspected, accused, or arrested for alleged criminal activity in the first 10 months of 2014.
While these additional issues deserve more attention and creative ways of bringing them alive to the public, they are not the primary concern of this database.
It is our desire that this spreadsheet is a beginning, not a final document. It has been posted less to answer questions than to provide details to the landscape. It is our belief that it is long overdue for this publicly available information to be compiled in one place to help shed light on the environment of corruption in this country. We hope it leads to someone providing periodic updates, more informative stories, more balanced articles, and more detailed studies by the press at large. We know it might be purposefully misconstrued by those with an obvious, or not-so-obvious, agenda, but we have no control over that. Only solid and responsible journalism can counter those attempts.
Given the political atmosphere in this country, other salient facts include:
• Of the 725 individuals we identified as politically connected and subjects of the DNA and named in their press releases since the agency’s founding in 2002, more than 95 percent occurred since Oct. 2, 2006 when Laura Codruta Kovesi became general prosecutor.
• Of all politically related announcements since 2002, 35 percent involved people with PSD affiliations, 22 percent with PDL and 17 percent with the PNL.
• The number of politically related persons who were subjects of DNA announcements has increased significantly in the past two years, climbing roughly 50 percent from previous years to 100 individuals in 2013 and to 237 in just the first 10 months of this year.
• In 2013, the percentage of PSD affiliated persons who were named in DNA press releases was 26 percent of the total compared with 18 percent for the PNL and 14 percent for the PDL.
• Of those individuals named more specifically as suspects or were accused or arrested in the first 10 months this year, 57 percent were associated with the PSD, while the PNL accounted for only 17 percent and the PDL for 16 percent. Much of the increase in PSD representation stemmed from the presence of several large cases.
• Of those individuals indicted through October this year, PSD-associated individuals accounted for 29 percent while the PDL represented 24 percent and the PNL was at 19 percent.
• Importantly, much of the overall increase in the number of people named in 2014 came as the scope and apparent complexities of the investigations also increased. Nearly 40 percent more individuals were involved on average in each of the cases listed on this database than in 2013.
[Editor’s note: This article and database were amended on Nov. 27, 2014, to incorporate reader suggestions and reflect minor adjustments to some party affiliations. While some statistics changed, no significant differences resulted.]
###
