Honey, croc ate my wedding ring!

"He took my wedding ring, I suppose he ate it up," Abrahamse told Reuters by telephone from his hospital on Monday as he recounted his life-or-death struggle with a man-eating reptile.

The 47-year-old farm manager had the lower part of his left arm torn off in the attack last Thursday on a citrus plantation in South Africa's northern Limpopo province.

But he's counting his blessings as he could easily have lost his life.

"I took my horse for an evening swim in one of the farm dams. There are lots of crocs and hippos in the area, but they move around all the time, from dam to dam and into the river and out again," he said.

"I was on the lookout for hippos and didn't see any. It slipped my mind that there might be crocodiles," he said.

He was standing belly-deep in water about five meters from the shore when he felt a biting jolt in his left hip. He said thought it was a hippo but quickly realized it was a crocodile.

"I started to fight immediately. So I hit him with my left arm and then he went for my left forearm," Abrahamse said.

"It pulled me under the water for a few seconds, and I knew this was his biggest advantage. I realized if I didn't stand up my wife will never find me again," he said.

Somehow, he managed to stumble to his feet and then he felt the crocodile lose its grip.

"What I didn't realize at the time was that it had let go because it had taken part of my left arm off," he said.

With his right arm, Abrahamse then grabbed the rope of his horse, which fortunately for him chose that moment to take flight, dragging him to safety.

Abrahamse then walked 200 meters to his house and his wife drove him 60 kilometers (40 miles) to the nearest hospital.

"I'm lucky, I didn't lose too much blood ... The biggest problem with a croc bite is it can be septic. They never brush their teeth," Abrahamse said.

And when he gets out of the hospital does he plan to look for the culprit? "Oh yes, I'll be looking for him alright," he said with a laugh.

Rowing from a Six Sigma Lean perspective

A Japanese company and an American company decided to have a canoe race on the Mississippi River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management and internal Lost Race Analysts was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.

To validate their conclusions, the American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. The consultant advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Taking pride in quick action and to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. The American HR team devised an innovative incentive that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater rewards for working harder. It was called the "Six Sigma Lean - Pay for Rowing Performance - Total Quality Program", with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the American management team laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.

Doctors speaketh....

(What doctors say, and what they're really thinking : )

"Welllllll, what have we here...?"
I have no clue? would you mind giving me a clue.


"Let's see how it develops."
Maybe in a few days it will grow into something that can be cured.


"I'd like to prescribe a new drug."
I'm writing a paper and would like to use you for a guinea pig.


"Let me check your medical history."
I want to see if you've paid your last bill before spending any more time with you.


"This may smart a little."
Last week two patients bit off their tongues.


"Well, we're not feeling so well today, are we...?"
I'm stalling for time. Who are you and why are you here?


"This should fix you up."
The drug company slipped dropped off some samples Let?s see if they work.


"I'd like to run some more tests."
I can't figure out what's wrong. Maybe the kid in the lab can solve this one.


"There is a lot of that going around."
Wow, that's the third one this week. I'd better learn something about this.

Brain Tickler

What number when divided by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10 will always leave a remainder of ONE?

End the trash talk

There has been much innuendo about Tendulkar's batting in recent times, with many suggesting that the destroyer of old had given way to a nudger and accumulator. After the initial circumspection however, Tendulkar took out both bludgeon and rapier, driving, pulling and cutting with immense power with the cascade of boundaries that followed was all the more impressive for the fact that he was clearly struggling with cramps.


All such comments are worth nothing and are written by newbie journalists who have nothing better to write. The same journalists wrote Tendulkar off when he had a niggling back problem back in 1997-1998. They pledged their life savings when Tendulkar was absent from the game for 6 months after he had a problem with his left elbow.


Tendulkar's response in all the cases against him throughout his career has been exemplary. Rather than argue with journalists (who think they "know" cricket), he has quietly sidetracked the questions and let his willow do the talking.


The last 17 years, Sachin has performed incredible feats while bearing the entire weight of the nation on his shoulders. Just imagine, that there are 100 crore people who are expecting the world from you EVERYTIME you are on the field and yes, Sachin Tendulkar has delivered time and again. He has rescued India out of hopeless situations. He has taken the bull by the horns with both bat and ball. Remember Hero cup 1993? Sachin volunteered to bowl the last over when SA needed 4 runs to win? He did and India denied SA those 4 runs and went on to win. A 19 year old youth carrying the burden of expectations of an entire nation had done it with nonchalant ease. He has taken on the other side all by himself. 1998 Sharjah: After losing to India in the final Steve Waugh remarked, "We did not lose to India today, we lost to Sachin Tendulkar"


The reason the "Endulkar" cartoon incensed me was that there was some journalist who thought that Tendulkar's time has come. Who is he to decide whether Tendulkar's time is up? The correct question is "Who is to decide whether Tendulkar's time is up"? The answer is simple: It is Sachin Tendulkar himself.


Sachin holds a special place in my heart. 1986: I was 10 years old and used to play cricket under the tutelage of Anna Vaidya. Cricket for me was purely a hobby and I knew then that I was not cut out to make a career out of it. Anna, having seen some talent in me, was grooming me to be a wicketkeeper and batsman. I used to have difficulty in playing the pull shot. After many unsuccessful tries in the nets, Anna told me to go and watch a certain Sachin Tendulkar in the Achrekar sir' nets, a few hundred feet next to Anna's. So I went, wondering who this "Sachin Tendulkar" was. There was a kid, short in stature, who was padding up and I politely went and stood behind the nets. Achrekar sir put 1 Re coin on the top of the stumps and then handed out brand new balls to the fastest bowlers in the nets. The 1 rupee coins were up for grabs and would go to the bowler who would shatter the stumps. I said to myself that this little fella is toast. These guys were about 21-22. They were huge. Since I was a wicketkeeper, I was accustomed to rising behind the stumps with the bounce of the ball. Mentally I prepared to do the same. The fast bowler started his run up. The kid lifted his bat and as soon as the bowl was released from the bowlers hand, the kid stepped out and smashed the bowler long-on's head. I swear I did not even see the bowl, while the 13 year old kid not only anticipated the pace, swing and bounce of the ball but he also selected a shot from his armory and executed it to perfection. The thing that had happened in fast forward for me had happened in slow motion for the kid in front of me. It was like he had all the time in the world to play that shot. I was stunned. That kid was Sachin Tendulkar. That day, Achrekar sir pocketed the coins which he kept on the stumps. The bowlers were found wanting. I knew that the little kid was destined for greater things and he has vindicated the faith that everyone has had in him. Sachin gave me ample examples of the pull shot needless to say, since I have not had any difficulty after that. After all, I was taught by the master!


Sad as it may seem, there will come a day when the razor sharp reflexes will start to dull, the hand to eye coordination will start dropping, and Sachin will have difficulty in keeping up with youngsters. But then, Sachin knows about it and will retire long before any thing happens which will prevent him from performing at 100%. He will bid adieu when he is at his peak. It is just not in Sachin's character to be an "also ran".


Sachin does not play international cricket for fame and fortune. He plays, for he truly loves the game. He has been playing international cricket for more than half of his life and consistency is his key. He has adapted his game to the changing circumstances. There are times when he will fight with a rapier and there are times when he will bludgeon the opposition into submission. Even after smashing all records in both variations of the game, he still is a student of the game and above all, he is humble and down to earth. He celebrates India's victory in a final and Mumbai's win in a Ranji trophy match with equal zest.


Endulkar? Time to end such trash talk...


From Cricinfo: 2/13/06
One can pull out the thesaurus and combine different adjectives to describe Sachin Tendulkar's 95 at the Gaddafi Stadium at Lahore, but nothing may convey the influence it had on the course of the run-chase. A buoyant Rahul Dravid, speaking at the post-match press conference, described Tendulkar's effort as "absolutely incredible" and went on to add that it was "one of his best innings".

"I think he assessed the situation beautifully," he said. "He realised there was something happening with the ball, realised we needed to keep wickets. The way he controlled the game, played positively without doing anything risky, was great to watch. He scored at a great pace on a difficult wicket in difficult conditions. I thought it was one of his best. There are so many he has played but this was really a special one."

Tendulkar's knock was one of the three main components of India's run-chase, with Yuvraj Singh and Mahendra Singh Dhoni complementing him admirably. "Sachin, Yuvraj and Dhoni all played critical parts in this win," he continued. "All three played different kinds of knocks in different stages. Yuvraj's maturity in stepping back, after playing positively initially, when he realised he needed to be there till the end shows that he's a very good cricketer. He's always been one and has had a lot of success in the one-day game. This tour has taken him to another level.

"Dhoni was outstanding too. It's terrific for someone new in international cricket to handle the pressure so well. He can adapt his game to the situation, knows what his team requires, and has got a good head on his shoulders. His performance over the last 6-8 months has been critical in our success."

Dhoni himself admitted felt that this was one of his best innings, putting it above his whirlwind maiden hundred at Vishakapatnam. "My 148 helped my team to win and it was at a crucial time. It was an opportunity to grab for me but the amount of pressure here was much more. This was a much better innings that way."

Dravid was candid when speaking about his decision at the toss and felt it didn't matter at the end of the day. "Even I was unsure about the toss because we're not used to the 11:00am start," he added. "Playing in the evening, we had doubts about the twilight period and whether we could sight the ball then. I don't think toss was that important. We were chasing well so we decided to field. The new ball helped in both innings so it didn't make too much of a difference."

While refusing to find fault with Pakistan, he thought his side had been the better on on the day. "I don't think there was any problem with Pakistan. They played well and their batsmen put on 288. I don't think there was any fault. We need to be given the credit for doing well."

What really heartened Dravid, though, was the improvement his side had shown in the last few months, winning 10 of their last 14 games. "Every game is different and we need to keep performing. Pakistan are not an easy team to beat at home and we need to play well to win. We're leading 2-1 and a couple of games to go. Irrespective of the results, the strides and progress we're taking as a ODI team is really heartening."

GPS darts

The car chase capital of the world is going high-tech to end dangerous pursuits across Southern California.

Police Chief William J. Bratton unveiled a strange new weapon in the police department's strategy to halt high-speed pursuits -- adhesive darts with a global positioning system that are fired at fleeing cars by police.

Once fired from a patrol car, the GPS dart is designed to stick to a fleeing car, allowing squad cars to back off the chase.

"Instead of us pushing them doing 70 or 80 miles an hour," Bratton said, "this device allows us not to have to pursue after the car. It allows us to start vectoring where the car is."

U.S. Department of Justice officials suggested testing the StarChase system in Los Angeles. A small number of patrol cars will be equipped with the compressed air launchers, which fire the miniature GPS receivers in a sticky compound resembling a golf ball.

There were more than 600 pursuits in Los Angeles and more than 100,000 nationwide last year. Critics have long questioned the wisdom of police pursuits because they can endanger bystanders and officers.

Bratton, who often calls the city the car chase capital of the world, was asked why there are so many pursuits in Los Angeles: "There are a lot of nuts here," he said.

Munich / "Vengeance" by George Jonas

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/540mmouk.asp

Munich Syndrome


Are George Jonas's "Vengeance" and Steven Spielberg's "Munich" really soft on terrorism?

At the 1972 Olympics, 11 Israeli athletes were murdered in cold blood by Palestinian terrorists. As the rest of the world continued playing their games, Israel mourned. In the coming years Israel would set out to kill those responsible for the attacks and individuals who would plan, supply, and commit such atrocities in the future.


Steven Spielberg's Munich and George Jonas's Vengeance, the book on which it is based, are purportedly accounts of the Israeli hit team that set out to conduct these executions. The story of those two works is also countered by a new book, Striking Back by Aaron Klein, a correspondent for Time magazine and a captain in the Israeli Defense Force's intelligence unit. And although the two sides of the story seem to conflict, they are, at a deeper level, of a piece.


First published in May, 1984, Vengeance caused immediate controversy. The book, which reads more like a novel than a historical or journalistic work, relies on "Avner," a single, pseudonymous source for its narrative. While Jonas may have trusted his source, it is ultimately up to the reader to decide if Avner should be believed. Portions of the book were labeled as either false or unprovable by both the New York Times and Maclean's magazine.


Whether or not all the specifics of Vengeance are true, one thing can certainly be said about it: Vengeance is not a piece of mindless moral relativism. In fact, the author explicitly denounces moral relativism in his epilogue. "One can," Jonas writes, "in terms of moral justification, distinguish between counter-terrorism and terrorism in the same way one distinguishes between acts of war and war crimes. There are standards; terrorism is on the wrong side of them; counter-terrorism is not."


That is not to say that "Avner" feels nothing about killing Palestinian terrorists. Indeed, in Vengeance he and the rest of the Israeli team are, for the most part, happy with their work. The team was "for the first time in millennia [making] slaughtering Jewish men, women and children an expensive proposition. Avner saw nothing wrong with that. If anything, he continued to be proud of being one of the swords that cut off the hands of the enemies of Israel." However, the deeper question raised by Vengeance is whether or not the Israeli squads were doing any long-term good. "Beyond vengeance, their mission was supposed to weaken and diminish anti-Israel terror in the world. Not stop it all together . . . but at least slow it down," Jonas writes. And at the end of the day, Avner comes to the conclusion that his mission did not cause terrorists to hit the brakes.


This is a country mile from moral relativism.


Nonetheless, Aaron Klein disagrees with Avner's conclusion. For Striking Back Klein interviewed more than 50 current and ex-Mossad agents about the post-Munich attacks. And he agrees with Jonas that deterrence was at least a part of the mission: "The Mossad's aim was to create a permanent threat in the minds of Palestinian operatives and potential inductees, a violent persuasion to cease, or shy away from, all activity on the behalf of terrorists," Klein notes.


Klein admits that it is tough to measure the efficaciousness of preemptive strikes, but says that the Mossad is certain that terrorist activities were at least hindered by the post-Munich killings. "Deterrence is something you cannot measure. Things happen because of your deterrence. You can't count the numbers because it is impossible to say who didn't do something for this specific reason, but it's there," he said in an interview.


Consider the assassination of Wadi Haddad, one of the leaders of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. "The faction under [Haddad's] command collapsed after his death," Klein reports in Striking Back. "Dry statistics indicate that the number of attacks against Israeli targets abroad plummeted with his passing. Israeli intelligence and, in particular, the Mossad, viewed them as further proof of the effectiveness of their assassination program." Or take the killing of Zuhir Mokhsan, the leader of the terrorist group A-Tzika: "Mokhsan's sudden death led to the dissolution of the A-Tzaika organization--another veritable well of terrorism gone dry."


Deterrence has its limits, however. "Deterrence helps on a tactical level," Klein said in the interview, but he added that "it doesn't solve conflicts. It won't solve the conflict between the west and extreme Islam. It helps to prevent the next terrorist attack, so you can use it."


Which is the point of Steven Spielberg's oft-maligned Munich. Much has been made of Spielberg's movie, with many worrying that the director sees no difference between Palestinian terrorists and Israeli soldiers. That simply isn't the case.


The film has its problems. As has been pointed out elsewhere, its devotion to reality is sorely lacking. While not a docudrama (the film opens by claiming only to be inspired by real events, not to be an actual portrayal of real events), some scenes are pure inventions of Spielberg and writer Tony Kushner. Yet, issues of factual fidelity aside, it is a misunderstanding of Munich to view the film as a work of moral equivalence.


For instance, much has been made of a scene near the beginning of the film in which photos of the Palestinian terrorists being targeted by the Mossad, and images of the dead Israeli athletes are juxtaposed. Some have suggested that this is a clear case of moral equivocation, that Spielberg is trying to imply that there is no difference between the two groups of "victims." But if anything, it seems as though Spielberg is trying to help the audience understand the motivations of the Israeli government. In actuality, he seems to be highlighting the fact that the murders at Munich forced Israel to pursue these terrorists.


On the whole, Munich is a finely-wrought character study of the effects of war on those who have to fight it--not an apologia for terrorism. By the movie's end Avner--gaunt, pale, and aged--is sleeping in a closet because he is afraid of retribution from Palestinian operatives. His fellow agents have been killed one by one and he now lives in fear, both for himself and his family.


Again, this may or may not be factually accurate. For his part, Klein says that of the 50 officers he spoke with "nobody knows some kind of figure who had remorse. And it's a close circle of people. The people who were actually involved are not a lot." One place where Klein and Spielberg would agree, however, is that, unlike the Palestinian terrorists, the Israelis took extreme lengths to ensure that innocents were not injured in their strikes. In the film, the team risks missing a target and blowing its cover to save the life of a little girl. Compare this to the Palestinian terrorists who have no problem with turning AK-47s on hogtied hostages. And then there is the deeper question of humanity: Avner understand the justness of his mission, but still struggles with the taking of life. The terrorists show no such qualms.


So even if it's inaccurate, Spielberg's characterization of a conflicted Avner is, in its own way, flattering to the Israelis. Indeed, it says more good than bad about the quality of the Israeli men who accepted the job of protecting their country by hunting down the terrorists who would do it harm. We should not want those tasked with defending us to be as remorseless as the sociopath terrorists who are so evil that they take delight in murder.

Homework