Junto Boyz

BOOM TIME MEMORIES... MASAYOSHI SON WAS THE MAN

Recently, my friend Jimmy and I were talking about the wild times of the tech boom and some of the funny experiences we went through. Jimmy is one of my closest friends and we have been in the trenches of entrepreneurship along with our friend and colleague Peter. We've gone through starting a company on credit cards, savings, and the FM Fund (Father Mother Fund as we liked to call it); pitching hundreds of investors through two startups; dealing with the typical boom time dealmakers that can "wow" you one day and disappoint you the next; and the highs and lows of trying to establish partnerships and agreements. We've been blessed, or incredibly lucky, to have great chemistry between the three of us and I look forward to starting another venture with them in the near future. Of course, part of us likes to think it is also because all three of us are relatively easy to work with. Though we might even yell at each other in the board room, in the end the right decision is made and nothing is taken personal.

Anyway, one story we were talking about was when HeyAnita was securing its first round of financing from Softbank. Jimmy provided the initial introduction for the four ex-Microsoft guys, who founded HeyAnita, to Masayoshi Son. Though it was towards the tailend of the tech boom, Son's company, Softbank, was still flying high. At the time, Masayoshi Son was the second richest man in the world, after Bill Gates, with a value at more than US$60 billion (now he's around 10th with less than $10 billion).

Jimmy was in the meeting along with our colleague, who recruited us to HeyAnita, and the first member outside of the Microsoft guys. Our colleague was leading the pitch and asking for $30 million to startup this new voice technology company. After the demonstration, Son must have been impressed as he began to draw out a map of the world and continued to divide up the regions between HeyAnita and Softbank. When I heard this, I assumed this was something similar he did with Yahoo! when he made that investment that allowed the company to sky-rocket.

After some discussion of the terms, he said, "I will give you $5 million now and $25 million by the end of May."

Our colleague responded, "But we need the whole $30 million to start buying the necessary equipment."

"What type of equipment? And how much is it exactly?" Son asked.

"Servers, boards, etc. from Intel and some other companies. We definitely need at least $20 million."

"No. I will give you $5 million now. And then you tell Intel that Masayoshi Son backs your company and your credit and that will be good enough."

Our colleague couldn't say anything else but, "Ok."

Jimmy afterwards was saying, "Wow. He the man. He is the man!"

Our colleague just said, "I just got my ass whooped. Shut down and silenced."

Maybe it's sheer power. Maybe it's sheer arrogance, but at that time it was impressive the power and command people like Masayoshi Son had. Those outside of the business world might just see this has uneventful or silly idolatry, but I don't see it as either one. For me, it is plain respect in what the man built and amusing how lopsided it sometimes was at the negotiating table during those times.

posted by Bernard @ 10:45 PM

IDIOTIC MEDIA PRODUCERS & POLITICIANS
"The Politics of Mass Destruction"... Positioning Is Everything


Great viewpoint on the whole weapons of mass destruction issue below. It's annoying to watch the after-coverage of the war as much as the coverage during the war (written in prior blog). I don't need to hear a daily or even weekly update on the nation-building that is occurring in Iraq.

"Are you happy with the ways things are going after the war?" Idiotic journalist asks random Iraqi.

"No. Very unhappy."

(Three weeks later)

"Are you happy with the ways things are going after the war?" Idiotic journalist asks random Iraqi.

"Yes. Very happy. We now have running water."

It's nation rebuilding, people! Of course it's going to take over a year with many ups an downs. Happy and unhappy people. Conflicts and periods of quiet. I don't need the media to throw these silly stories at me. There has to be more newsworthy stories out there. I wish it just wasn't about the ratings or how to draw the masses, but about the quality of journalism.

Also it's annoying hearing these stupid Democratics criticize Bush about whether there was WMDs or not, and whether the war was justified. Definitely reaching for straws since they don't have anything else to harp on before the election. I hope they have something of more substance than this issue before the 2004 election. Logically, why would Saddam dodge the weapons inspections and related issues for over 10 years if there was no intent or activity in creating such weapons? Also how hard is it to hide or destroy the evidence? If you ask yourself these two questions and read the following quotes by Democrats since 1998, then you realize how political and stupid this whole issue is.

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright (1998)

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton (1998)

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle (1998)

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others (October 9, 1998)

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection rocess." -- Nancy Pelosi (December 16, 1998)

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore (2002)

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd (October 2002)

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton (October 10, 2002)

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac (October 16, 2002)

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt (September 2002)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy (September 27, 2002)

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen (April 2003)


The Politics of Mass Destruction
Of course Iraq had forbidden weapons.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
BY RICHARD SPERTZEL
Sunday, June 29, 2003

Even as evidence is uncovered that Saddam Hussein was planning to revive his nuclear-weapons program at the earliest possible date, politicians and pundits alike lament the failure of coalition forces to find a "smoking gun." Despite the recent discovery of plans and parts for a uranium-enrichment centrifuge, some presidential candidates have accused the Bush administration of lying about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to justify the war with Iraq.

Such assertions ignore all that has been learned and has transpired during the past 12-plus years. As I've said time and again, expecting any inspection regime to find a massive cache of WMDs is a lesson in self-delusion. Such folly can only bring cheer to those who opposed the war in the first place and to those who simply oppose the Bush administration.

Recall that during the first Gulf War, Iraq stored its biological-agent-filled munitions in pits dug in the sand or in abandoned railroad tunnels. Such sites are not easily found. Good intelligence emanating from those Iraqi personnel responsible for the deployment, protection and control of such storage sites will be required. Indeed, it was an Iraqi scientist who last week led coalition forces to the site where the uranium-enrichment equipment was buried. But many WMD personnel were part of the Special Security Organization under Saddam's younger son, Qusay. The information is not likely to be obtained easily.

Some pundits question, if Iraq had WMDs, why did it not use them? Iraq learned from the first Gulf War that coalition forces headed by the U.S. could advance very rapidly. Iraq also indicated in testimony to the U.N. Special Commission, or Unscom, that biological weapons would have little effect in stopping an advancing military force. Rather, their interest was to use biological weapons to intimidate their neighbors and cause them to "see things Iraq's way." Thus its failure to use biological WMDs should not be a surprise to anyone. The failure to use chemical WMDs is also not surprising considering the apparent confusion within the Iraqi command structure during the race to Baghdad.

Then, why have such weapons not been found? The answer may lie in the training and experience of the inspectors. The initial team looking for WMDs in Iraq was more reminiscent of site exploiters than inspectors. True, if they found a bomb or missile warhead, they were capable of further exploitation of the find to determine its contents. But they apparently did not have testing instruments capable of detecting trace amounts of biological-weapons agents.

The next iteration of the coalition inspectors was supposed to have a number of inspectors that had extensive experience in Iraq and has been so misrepresented in the media. I was asked in February to propose a list of Unscom experienced biological inspectors (a so-called A team) that had multiple inspection trips to Iraq. These were to be from the U.S., the U.K. and Australia. In March, after the concept was approved, I was asked to contact those on my list to assure they were willing and able to devote the time. All but one agreed to the deployment. None of the individuals on that list ever made it to Iraq.

A few weeks ago David Albright, writing in the Washington Post, stated that he had been contacted by several Iraqi nuclear scientists who asserted that they were afraid to talk to the coalition inspectors because of the way they were being treated by the inspectors--interrogation, threats, etc., rather than with any degree of respect. The interviewing of Iraqi scientists is where extensive experience would have been most valuable. One doesn't need to like what was done or the individual scientist to treat them with respect. Experienced inspectors knew this. Furthermore, experienced inspectors knew what, when, and how to pursue a subject that is unlikely to occur to a neophyte.

There is nothing that the U.S. could threaten the Iraqi scientists with that could approach what they've endured these past 30 to 40 years. A scientist I remain in contact with had been imprisoned by Iraq for 17 months in the 1990s. In early March this year, with tensions building, he was again arrested for fear he would disclose information Iraq did not want disclosed.

It is encouraging that the third and current iteration under the CIA is headed by David Kay, which may account for the recent breakthrough in uncovering the uranium-enrichment plans. In regard to other WMDs, Iraq imported or retained over the last several years key pieces of equipment that could not readily be carried off by looters. If located, extensive intrusive sampling with the right test system might tell wonders about Iraq's biological-weapons programs.

Let there be no doubt, Iraq retained an active biological-weapons program. Unscom had adequate evidence of such. In 1998, presented with the evidence, the leading biological-weapons experts from the U.S., U.K., Russia, France, Sweden, Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Ukraine, Romania and Canada all agreed with the Unscom findings and observations. Incredibly, U.S. and British politicians with little or no knowledge of biological weapons and biological warfare are choosing to believe otherwise.

Mr. Spertzel was head of the biological-weapons section of Unscom from 1994-99.

posted by Bernard @ 12:00 AM

U.N. BETRAYS KOREAN REFUGEES

Good viewpoint on North Korean Refugees from this Wall Street Journal columnist.

Two Refugee Stories
A Turkish hero vs. U.N. goats.

BY CLAUDIA ROSETT
WALL STREET JOURNAL
Wednesday, June 25, 2003

Today, I have two stories to tell. The second concerns refugees from North Korea. But first -- and this is no digression -- let's pause to honor a brave man who almost 60 years ago answered the call not of practicality but of principle, to save the lives of some 200 human beings on the island of Rhodes, then under Nazi occupation.

The year was 1944, and Selahattin Ulkumen was the Turkish consul-general in Rhodes. That July, the Nazis began rounding up all Jews on the island for
deportation to Auschwitz. Ulkumen could have simply stood by and watched. But he did not. And though he could not save them all, he saved all he could. He confronted the German general in charge, told him that some of these Jews were Turkish citizens, and demanded they be released.

One of the people he saved, Bernard Turiel, now a 68 year-old lawyer in New Jersey, recalls with gratitude how Ulkumen "took it on himself to confront the German authorities" -- parlaying the Turkish citizenship of Mr. Turiel's mother into salvation for the entire family, including Bernard, his younger brother, and their non-Turkish father. In response to Ulkumen's demand, the Nazis released 42 Jewish families, totaling some 200 souls. He himself paid a high price for his courage. The Germans took their reprisal with a bombing raid on the Turkish consulate, injuring Ulkumen's wife, who died of those injuries after giving birth to a son.

On June 7, in Istanbul, at the age of 90, Ulkumen died. His son, Mehmet Ulkumen, told me that when his father talked about the events of 1944, he would say: "I listened to my conscience. Any decent human being would have done what I have done."

Which brings me to the promised story of North Korean refugees, who are today fleeing a holocaust in their own country. The totalitarian regime of Kim Jong Il has in recent years presided over the deaths by starvation, exposure and outright execution of some two million North Koreans. Many North Koreans have fled to the only place they can reach -- China. But of the 100,000-300,000 estimated to be now hiding in China, Beijing has refused to recognize any as refugees. Not one. Instead, calling them criminals and economic migrants, Chinese security agents have been hunting them down, sending them back to likely punishment or even death, and jailing private individuals who try to help them.

On the part of private individuals, especially a small network of ethnic Koreans from both South Korea and the U.S., there has been astounding generosity and courage. Among the heroes is the Rev. Chun Ki Won, a South Korean jailed in China for more than seven months last year for trying to smuggle a group of North Koreans to safety in Mongolia. There is South Korean Choi Yong-hun, now in a Chinese prison, making his final appeal against a five-year sentence for trying to help a small group of North Koreans escape China last January aboard two fishing boats. Jailed for the same "crime" are ethnic-Korean Chinese Park Yong-ho, sentenced to three years, and South Korean photojournalist Seok Jae-Hyun, sentenced to two years. And waging a campaign world-wide to save the North Korean refugees and end the holocaust is the now-famous German doctor, Norbert Vollertsen.

But among the United Nations officials specifically tasked, paid and protected to serve as frontline defenders of the rights of the North Korean refugees, there are no heroes. For years, the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has deferred to China's abuse of the U.N.'s own refugee convention. Last Friday, the head of the UNHCR's Beijing office, Colin Mitchell, celebrated World Refugee Day by giving an interview to China's official People's Daily, in which he praised China for a 20-year partnership with the UNHCR, saying: "China has set a good example for many countries in this respect." Mr. Mitchell did not respond to my requests that he explain this comment.

But Mr. Mitchell's budget, which according to a spokesman in the UNHCR's headquarters would cover all dealings with North Korean refugees, speaks volumes. Of the UNHCR's total annual budget of $881 million, $3.37 million goes to the Beijing office, of which 70% is spent in Hong Kong, another 27% on salaries for international and local staff in Beijing, and the remaining $100,000 or so on Macau and Mongolia. There is nothing for the North Koreans. They do not even turn up in the UNHCR refugee statistics.

To be fair, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Ruud Lubbers, last week made a small nod to decency, offering up the understatement that with regard to North Korean refugees, China's authorities have been "falling short of their obligations." But so has Mr. Lubbers. The UNHCR has a 1995 treaty with China that allows it to invoke binding arbitration in a dispute over refugee policy. But the UNHCR hasn't even tried. A spokesman tells me there would be no point, because China might not comply.

By that logic, Ulkumen would never have confronted the Nazis. And, unlike the brave private individuals now doing prison time in China, none of the UNHCR officials need put their lives, or their freedom on the line. Should any one of these bureaucrats find the courage to stand up and demand that China's rulers honor their signed commitment to the value of human life, the most they'd be risking is their jobs. It is way past time to wonder if we should have people running the UNHCR who consider their own jobs more important than the lives of the refugees they are supposed to be helping.


Ms. Rosett is a columnist for The Wall Street Journal Europe and OpinionJournal.com.

posted by Bernard @ 11:29 PM

BIG GUYS... EATING STORIES III

Taken and edited from an email from one of my good friends and close friend of Joe and Joong:

"I remember one warm & muggy night back in Chicago when I was roaming the streets of the vicious north side with my good friend Joong... when Joong said, "I'M HUNGRY". Now people, there are very few things that strike fear in my heart (i.e. KKK rally, extreme heights, great white sharks, a stampede of buffalos). But when Joong says he's hungry, take cover. I literally trembled. From there he proceeded to go on a flurry of inhalation that still astounds me. First, we stopped at Arby's where Joong quickly downed 5 out of 5 roast beef sandwiches and a large order of curly fries. Then, we stopped at Taco Bell where Joong gulped down 2 burrito supremes, 4 hard tacos, and a nachos bellgrande. I think he might have even had a bag of cinnamon twists. I know. It's amazing isn't it? I mean only a Silverback Gorilla could eat that much right?

Well Joong ain't no ordinary Silverback, cause he wasn't done. From Taco Hell, we drove north to our compadre Jimmy's house (Lake Forest). There, Jimmy's mom proceeded to feed us duk-mandoo gook. I guess she aportioned the servings according to our size, because Joong's bowl was seriously the size of a toilet bowl. He ate every last drop. He likes to say that he was trying to be polite, but we all know that JoongBae eats what he wants to eat. At the end of it all, he wasn't even phased. I'm pretty sure he could've eaten Wisconsin that night if he wanted to. Let me recap. In the span of approximately 1 hour, Joong ate 5 roast beef sandwiches, a large order of curly fries, 2 burrito supremes, 4 hard tacos, nachos bell grande, and a giant (and I mean giant) bowl of duk-mandoo gook.

I kid you not. The legend is real. All that you have heard is true. Don't doubt anything anyone ever tells you. Because our dear friend can truly eat."

posted by Bernard @ 7:15 PM

DRUNKEN MONKEYS OR RABID PUPPY DOGS
"Drunken Thirty Year Olds Create Havoc in Korean BBQ House"

This past Saturday was a surreal night out with some of my friends (names changed to protect the innocent). At one moment I was eating some Korean BBQ, then I looked up at my friend, Limmy, briefly placing a choke-hold on our friend Mongs (who is twice his size and could crush Limmy like a cheap tin can) and biting his neck like a vampire. It wasn't just a nibble, but a full bite with the head movement of an attacking pitbull.

Taking a step back, you would see in front of me Mongs in a choke-hold getting bit by Limmy, to the left our friend Sal clapping like a toy monkey and seemingly encouraging Limmy on to his death, and to the right Willy violently laughing. In the background there was a run down building with piles of metal sheets and pipes in front for the beginning of a new construction. We were all in a Gogi (meat) restaurant in a back alley of Seoul. The irrational laughter mixed with the violence in the air could have easily placed us in some Stanley Kubrick movie.

Next scene you see Limmy and Sal bitch-slapping each other and then standing up and wrestling while the restaurant staff tries to ignore us and sits at a far table washing their lettuce. Mongs who isn't drunk at this point is standing up and making sure these overgrown puppy dogs don't hurt each other. Limmy already fell backwards on his own in slow motion due to his drunken state trying to grab some side railing that wasn't there. Then Ralph, one of our other friends, starts yelling at people as they walk by trying to instigate a fight.

Half of the group was drunk and violent, the restaurant was our battleground, and the world was oblivious to us. Anybody that passed by this restaurant at 2am that evening must have briefly seen an odd sight but turned away for fear of being attacked.

After this weekend, I have decided to call Limmy "Lestat", the vampire that Tom Cruise played in "Interview With a Vampire". Recently on his Friendster site I wrote a flattering quote and compared him to Kane from Kungfu. While that comparison still might apply, Lestat is more appropriate now. He will probably think it's because I'm comparing him to Tom Cruise since he thinks he's "GQ Limmy", but after witnessing four neck attacks I cannot call him anything else.

posted by Bernard @ 6:46 PM

EARLY MID-LIFE CRISIS... SIGN OF TIMES OR AGE?
Duppies, Duds, Successes, Failures,... Where Does This All Lead To?

For a few weeks now I have been reflecting on the recent times, ups and downs of friends around me, and various social and political events that have impacted our world today. Especially how many of my friends are reevaluating or rethinking their lives and what they want to accomplish. I was wondering if this is more an effect of the depressed economy, age of my friends going through such thoughts (i.e. 30-35 yrs.), or turmoil of worldwide events. Obviously, it's some combination of these factors and depends on other influences (e.g. married vs. single, children or no children, type of profession, etc.), but to simpify this discussion I want to focus on the segment of my friends who are generally more focused on their careers.

So the typical profile might be a single male or female in a professional service industry (i.e. finance, consulting, law), entertainment, or a technology company. All have met relative success over the past several years. Some have been blessed with tremendous financial success from the boom times while others have worthless stock options (me!) and the sorrow of poor timing. Some stayed on their professional track and have moved up in the ranks of a major investment bank or consulting firms. Others have taken different types of risks and gave up their Ph.D. studies to pursue a dream on Broadway and succeeding. Whatever the story, most of these friends have gone through the ups of downs of the economy before the boom times (i.e. 1992 and 1993, when I graduated from college, were tough job markets). They survived the boom and bust cycles and for the most part have faired well in terms of financial success or professional rewards.

Due to their own decisions or the depressed economy, a large percentage find themselves transitioning into a new industry, taking some time off, or starting their own thing. Some were in business school and faced a different reality of not finding the 99% job placement rate typical for top ten business schools over the previous decade, but 50%-70% from schools such as Harvard, Kellogg, Stanford, and MIT over the past couple years. Some are still holding out until they get the job that they want or others had to settle for a "lesser" position with the hopes that the economy will soon pick up.

Life still moves at 100 mph for most of these people, but now a different thought has crept into their minds. Where does all this hardwork lead to? What does it mean at the end of my life? Maybe it was reaching financial security at a young age (most probably trust fund babies or wealthy parents that like to spoil their children though. some beneficiaries of the boom times), the realization that life is too short in the wake of 9/11 or personal family situations, or reaching a point of exhaustion after working 80-100 hrs. weeks and wondering "where is this taking me?"

My good friend who recently left the banking industry to start his own hedge fund told me he was reading about a study on death bed regrets. The two most prominent regrets of people at the end of their lives is a poor relationship between the person and a loved one (e.g. wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father), and the lack of contributing to the greater society around them (e.g. volunteering within the community, giving more to charity). So for the vast majority of people in this world, it is not money, fame, or sex that is on their minds when they are passing away, but people and a sense of community or belonging that they had or wish they had. I don't believe my friend's motivation or drive will change, but the balancing of his priorities and time might. Instead of working 80 hrs. a week, it will be 70 hrs. with some time for reading or an increased involvement in his church. For others it might be writing poetry on the side, volunteering at a local soup kitchen, or more time spent with family. Or maybe more drinking and partying and wandering the earth... depends on the person but vast majority of my friends over 30 yrs. old have gotten it out of their systems.

I can't remember but I believe it was in Ecclesiastes in the Bible where it states, "Naked you're born and naked you die." The material possessions a person gathers really doesn't mean much nor will it give a person true satisfaction. What will give a person true satisfaction? What is true satisfaction? Peace and comfort in life? Confidence and security? Being loved by a spouse or family? A lot of soul-searching going on around me lately.

posted by Bernard @ 5:02 AM

SUGAR MOMMAS... R U OLD SCHOOL OR NEW SCHOOL?
Korea Needs More Sugar Mommas

Going through Fortune Online I came across an older article on Trophy Husbands. It was about the husbands of very successful corporate executives who decided to take time off their career, retire early, or work part-time so their wives could continue the success they created within their careers. This is probably an old topic for some, as with me, but while being in Korea there has been some cultural twists.

Since college, I believed I would not have a problem being a "mr. mom" for a few years if my future wife wanted to focus on her career or studies for a period of time. Though I have my own ambitions and goals, I knew there would have to be some trade-offs or compromises for an equal partnership to succeed. I still believe this, but have run into more counter opinions while in Korea than in the U.S.

It's amusing since some of native Korean males I run into sometimes even have difficulties in accepting the first stage of a woman even working at all. Some are still very traditional and believe a woman's only role is bearing children and raising them "properly". These types can get very uncomfortable and almost combative when they meet women that are professionally or financially more accomplished than themselves. The threatening of their values and household is right before them and it can create an emotional stir within their bowels.

I don't disagree with this approach as long as the woman has her personal choice in the matter. Some of my close women friends already planned to work for a few years, take a few years off to raise the kids, and than go back to work when we were in college. After a few years of our graduation, sometimes they just decided not to go back while they were raising their kids, but it was their choice.

Then you have the practical matter which many modern couples have accepted that you need a two-income household. So the Korean husband willing or not has accepted this situation. But I have have yet to encounter a native Korean male to even consider the situation of not being the primary breadwinner within a household. This intense patriarchal pride is evident in many men.

I would say the typical Korean male is insecure and uses many social structures as a crutch (asking for some hate email right here). Whether the Confucian hierarchy to be one-up on someone based on age or using gender to gain an edge, the insecurity seems so thick and tangible to me during my three years here. In this society, women are objectified, categorized, and minimized to such a degree that the average woman, even college-educated, do not have stronger ambitions than to get married to a "good family" and husband.

This is where Korea hurts itself as a nation and developing economy. There can be so many more ambitious and impactful women within this society if the short-sighted barriers and stigmas are lifted. If women with ambition aren't scorned by the weak and young girls open to new avenues of success, the increased competition within the workforce and diversity would greatly benefit this society as a whole.

posted by Bernard @ 1:33 AM

LIMITS... THERE ARE NONE
Human Potential, Personal Achievements, Body Weight,...

The quote I posted this week reveals how Charles H. Duell in 1899 mistakenly stated that "everything that can be invented has been invented", and proves that human ingenuity and innovation cannot be limited or ignored. From his unique position as the head of the governing body that approves inventions and innovations, he could not foresee the unlimited potential that science, the search for truth in our universe, and a bunch of bored couch potatoes would provide and add millions of more patents during the following century.

This past week I had a very similar experience to Mr. Duell, so I cannot easily write him off as being foolish or losing his common sense. Overall, it was a very lazy week for me since I got back from the U.S. No blogging, no project work, no partying,... just seeing a few friends, reading, watching TV, and playing Starcraft. Finally, on the third day, I went to work out. At the health club, I stepped on the scale and to my amazement I gained 7 lbs. or about 3 kgs.

This might not seem like a big deal, but you have to understand that I honestly thought the physical limit of my body weight was 220lbs, or 100 kgs. At my age and with my eating habits, I just didn't think that I could gain any more weight. I was stunned. I stood in front of the weight scale and stepped back on to make sure. Now I was pushing 230 lbs. From my unique position of being myself, I underestimated the potential that grease, the search for the best Italian beef, and multiple pizza puffs would add to my body during my month long trip in the U.S.

In response, I increased my average cardio workout from 25 minutes to 35-40 minutes, cut down on my carbo intake, and played soccer and basketball throughout the weekend. By today, I lost about 4 lbs. and hopefully I can continue and get down under 220 lbs.

This was definitely a lesson in life from me. Though I know not to underestimate the human spirit, the capabilities of anyone, and the effects of random chance, I've really learned not to ignore the unlimited potential of my body.

posted by Bernard @ 5:14 AM

THE POWER OF WORDS AND LANGUAGE
Parents, Teachers, Pastors,... All Should Take Responsibility

I got back into Seoul Saturday night after an uncomfortable flight from Chicago. During my sixteen hour ride to Korea, I had a lot of time to reflect upon my various encounters and discussions during my month long trip in the U.S. One topic was the power of words and the influence words have on human behavior, life perspectives, and the general impact upon a person. This was interesting to me because part of my professional training through the Coro Fellowship was based on the importance of words, how a person communicates, and how to incorporate other views outside of your own life experience and comfort zones. To simpify even further, probably the two most important statements I could draw from this leadership program were:

"Everything is done through relationships."

"You can create the future through language."

The latter statement emphasizes the impact words have in the world around us, but many people do not realize the direct importance of their words. If you do, I am not saying you're in an elite group since about a third of the U.S. population believe professional wrestling is real. This is just something people might know, but don't actually make the direct correlation. Words can create or change the environment around a person.

Even looking in the Bible, the importance of "words" is stated by Jesus Christ being called "the Word" in John 1:1-14.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."

As one commentator states, "God was a mystery until he broke silence. He spoke once, and all creation sprang to life, quasars, oceans, whales, giraffes, orchids, and beetles. He spoke again, says John, and this time the Word took the form of a man, Jesus Christ."

Going down several levels of the abstraction ladder, if during my initial meeting with a person I said, "You are an idiot and the ugliest mother I have ever seen. (pause) I'm just joking."

No matter how I apologize, I can safely assume that I and almost anything associated with me will be seen in a negative manner for a long time, if not forever, from that person. Along the same lines, my close friend, who's a pastor, was telling me that his neighbors were turned off from organized religion after attending a church that ostracized their daugther who came out of the closet during high school and stated her homosexuality. What was the purpose of ostracizing this young girl? If the purpose of that church and its leaders were to "save" that girl's soul, shouldn't they seek to provide comfort and understanding? Being an outcast would only create bitterness or negative feelings. Self-righteousness sometimes creates the stupidest and most selfish forms of human behavior.

I assume at the least it was a snide remark here or trails of gossip there, which led to bitterness being created and emotional scars formed within this family. Looking towards another institution, schools, you can find how important words are. In the manner in which they are spoken and what is stated is very important to students. What can be the difference in a student's life? A good and caring teacher. What makes a good teacher?

As you probably know, teacher's expectations of students can greatly effect their performance. Decades ago and probably even now, many African American children were automatically viewed as lesser students, so their performance was poor. They were talked to as lesser students and taught as "slow learners." A simple change in perspective by teachers have created dramatic improvements in student performance, and this was proven in numerous studies and programs.

But these experiences are not only limited to institutions, such as churches and schools, but in the homes of families. Parents' words can hugely affect a child's growth and development. If a parent routinely calls his or her child "stupid" or uses harsh tones frequently, would these methods not have a negative effect on that child's personality, happiness, or development? How bitter, insecure, or under-achieving might this child become?

I was strong, brash leader during my high school and college years. At times, I wouldn't care for what other people thought or felt. It made me cringe, and it still does, when I heard people blame "society" for an individual's actions, crimes, or misdeeds. If someone was offended in the manner in which I spoke, I would discount it as "being too sensitive" or "not being able to hear the core message" of whatever I said. I realize now that I lacked insight into the power of my words or words in general. In the same manner in which I believed people should take responsibility for their actions, I now realize how people should take responsibility for what they say and how they say it. It is not as tangible as a hit to the cheek or the stealing of money, but words have more of an impact than I could ever measure or conceive.

So it does matter how parents speak with their children, what a teacher says to his or her student, or the manner in which a pastor presents the gospel to his congregation. The power of words should not be ignored or taken for granted. It is a continual exercise in life to improve upon how you speak and what you say, and your words and language are some reflection of your heart, soul, and mind.

"And while I thus spoke, did there not cross your mind some thought of the physical power of words? Is not every word an impulse on the air?" - Agathos, The Power of Words by Edgar Allan Poe

posted by Bernard @ 7:29 PM