Melting Points and Cooperative Identification of Organic Solids Lab Report

Melting Points and Cooperative Identification of Organic Solids - Lab Report Example This is by deriving mixed melting point by obtaining that of the two compounds having a ratio of 1:1. This was instrumental in ascertaining mixture melting point that helped in identifying these compounds. In addition, comparing the already obtained data solid with dissimilar appearance has high melting points in its both mixed (1350C) and pure states (1870C). Hence, indicating its strong covalent bond where by in former state weakened due to dissimilar forces with the other component. The purpose of this experiment entails the determination of the given compound’s melting point. In this experiment, the melting point measurements they are for four organic solids. Hence, the ascertainment process encompasses utilizing the scientific premise that diverse compounds differ significantly in terms of their melting points. This is because of their respective structural bonds that have varying attraction strengths. Scientifically, ionic compounds are stronger in comparison to their covalent counterparts, which are weaker besides having diminished bond strength. From the obtained data, it is quite evident respective melting points across the groups of mixed substances are a bit low compared to pure solids. Probably, this is because of mixed and unequal attraction bonds/ Van der Waals amid the involved substances. This is evident whereby their pure state The experiment is somewhat an attempt of solving a puzzle. This is because for scientific discoveries, most scientists have to cooperate with each other. Great teamwork is crucial especially in the modern science. In several occasions, it is possible for diverse scientists to make the same discovery, at the same time, in different parts of the world. For the scientist to prove that they are using the same substances, they have to exchange their biological specimens or chemical samples and data. The melting points for the

History Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 12

History - Essay Example According to this treaty Germany forced to accept sole responsibility for causing the war and to disarm, make substantial territorial concessions and pay heavy reparations to certain countries. Around 132 billion Marks which are roughly equivalent to US$ 385 billion at present were levied upon Germany as the compensation amount which really hurt the Germans. Moreover, this treaty presented for German leaders to sign on May 7, 1919, forced Germany to concede territories to Belgium (Eupen-Malmà ©dy), Czechoslovakia (the Hultschin district), and Poland (Poznan [German: Posen], West Prussia and Upper Silesia)† (Treaty of Versailles, 1919). In short, "The Versailles Treaty system was intended to be a peace agreement between the Allies and a defeated Germany and the Central Powers, instead it created political and economic chaos, contributing directly to the rise of Mussolini and Hitler. This paper briefly analyses the role of The Versailles Treaty system in contributing to the rise of Hitler and Mussolini and the subsequent World War 2. One of the major aims of the peace treaty â€Å"The Treaty of Versailles† in 1919, which ended the World War 1 between Germany and allied forces, was the disarmament of Germany. However, Germans always had a feeling of superiority in their minds. The conditions they succumbed to accept as part of this treaty were intolerable to their pride and superiority feeling. When Hitler came into the power he has taken every step to regain the lost prides of the Germans. He deliberately started to violate the conditions of The Treaty of Versailles. In 1922, Benito Mussolini and his Fascist Party succeeded in capturing the power in Italy. Fascism and Nazism have more similarities than differences which helped Hitler and Mussolini to work together against the allied powers. Fascism and Nazism were entirely different from capitalism, communism and democracy. Fascism was driven by a sense of belligerent

The American Life Style and fast food Essay Example for Free

The American Life Style and fast food Essay How much fast food do you guess you eat a month? The average American eats about 50lbs worth, that’s more than most children in 3rd world countries eat in total in 3 monthsWill you follow everyone else or will you stray from the beaten path, and dare to be different? Dare to be your own person? Or will you crumple from the influences and pressures of society? The truth is no matter how much you tell yourself that you are going to be independent and make your own choices and decisions regardless of what other people thing, every choice and decision you make are influenced by the people around you and the experiences you have faced. It is for this reason that accomplishing this task can be very challenging, however it is possible. And when you finally figure out who you are and what your values and morals it is believed you have finally â€Å"come of age†. A prime example of this would be in the fiction novel written by Mark Twain, the main character Huckleberry, also referred to as Huck runs away from home because the confines of society proved to be too overwhelming for Huck. On the run Huck meets a runaway slave named Jim and decides to help Jim escape with him despite the fact that he was raised and taught to be believe that slavery was a good thing and it is especially forbidden to help one to escape. It was for this reason that Huck struggles to see the blurred line between right and wrong. As Huck and Jim venture down the Mississippi River, Huck is introduced to many new experiences and is forced to make decisions that make him question his very own ideals, however it is those very own experiences and challenges that help him grow as a person and ultimately allows him to discover who he truly is as he himself comes of age. One of the many instances Huck is forced to make a difficult decision is when he encounters 3 murderers looting a shipwreck he and Jim came across while floating down the Mississippi. Huck overheard 2 of the murderers planning on stranding the other one on the wreck and taking his share of the loot, so he says â€Å"Quick, Jim, ain’t no time for fooling around and moaning;  there’s a gang of murderers in yonder, and if we don’t hunt up their boat and set her drifting down the river so these fellows can’t get away from the wreck, there’s one of’em going to be in a bad fix. But if we find their boat we can put all of’em in a bad fix† (pg.52) Huck originally plans to steal the murderer’s canoe so that none of them will be able to escape the wreck. However Huck starts to feel guilty as they start to float away from the wreck â€Å"Jim manned the oars, and we took out after our raft. Now was the first time that I begun to w orry about the men- I reckon I hadn’t had time to before. I begun to think how dreadful it was, even for murderers, to be in such a fix. I says to myself, there ain’t no telling but I might come to be a murderer myself, yet, and then how would I like it.†(pg.54) ,this is a crucial change in Huck because all his life he had wanted to be in a gang and kill people, but now that he felt he would be responsible for the murderer’s deaths he realized he was misguided and cannot handle the quilt if committing such an act. Finally Huck gives into his guilt and decides he could not live with himself if he left them there to die so he told Jim â€Å"At first light we will land and I’ll go fix up some kind of yarn and get somebody to go fetch that gang and get them out of their scrape.†(pg.55) Huck realizes that what they have done is wrong but if he had left them there he would be no better than they were. Huck learns something about himself on that wreck; he learns that the life he once wanted was not the life he was cut out for. Huck’s fight between his conscience and society greatens when he encounters a group of slave hunters. Huck feels guilty for helping Jim escape and starts to regret it, so Huck thinks things over in is head â€Å"Jim said it made him over trembly and feverish to be so close to freedom, well I can tell you it made me all trembly and feverish too, to hear that he was most free- and to blame for it? Why me! I couldn’t get that thought out of my conscience no how nor no way†(pg.66). It becomes obvious that Huck is torn between doing what is considered right and turning Jim in or what a part of him feels would be right and protect him. This conflict keeps eating away at Huck until he cannot take any more of it when he says â€Å"my conscience got to stirring me up hotter than ever†(pg.67) However the pressure of society finally get to Huck â€Å" until at last I say to it â€Å"let up on me- it ain’t too  late ill paddle ashore at first light, and te ll.† I felt easy, and happy and light as a feather; right off all my troubles was gone†. Huck convinces himself that turning in Jim is right thing to do. However as he approaches the slave hunters Huck realize he cannot do it. â€Å"What’s that yonder?† the slave hunters asked Huck. â€Å"Well there’s five niggers run off tonight, up yonder above the head of that bend. Is your man white or black?†(pg.68). Huck makes the conscious decision to lie to the slave hunters although it is not clear why â€Å"I didn’t answer up prompt I tried to, but the words wouldn’t come. I tried for a second or two, to brace up and out with it, but I warnt man- enough hadn’t the spunk of a rabbit. I see I was weakening; so I just give up trying, and up and says- â€Å"He’s white†(pg.68). Huck lies to protect Jim. Maybe he does this because he feels sympathetic for Jim and his family, or maybe Huck finally remembers that Jim has looked out for him and cared for him during their whole journey and realizes Jim is his only true friend, or it could be as simple as the fact that he made a promise to Jim not to betray him and Huck does not want to brake that promise. Whatever the reason this is a huge step for Huck when he decides not to turn Jim into the slave hunters and really allows him to slowly start to break loose from society and form his own morals. However despite Huck’s former breakthrough, Huck struggles to make peace with his conscience and the pressures of society get to him once again. To help ease himself Huck tries convince himself that it would just be for Jim if he was a slave. â€Å"Once I said to myself it would be better for Jim to be a slave at home where his family was as long as he got to be a slave and so I’d better write a letter to Tom Sawyer and tell him to tell Miss Watson where he was†(pg.160) Even though Huck is concerned that Jim might be punished for running away he still decides to write a letter hoping it will clear his conscience. Then Huck starts to think about what he’s done and what consequences he will face for his actions, â€Å"everybody naturally despises an ungrateful nigger and they’d make Jim feel it all the time and so he’d feel ornery and discouraged and then think of me! It would get all around that Huck Finn helped a nigger get his freedom and i f I was to ever see anybody from that town again id be ready to get down and lick his for shame†(pg.160), here starts to regret helping Jim escape and begins to worry  about what people will think of him when he returns home and hopes that he will be accepted into society again. With the hope that it will right the wrongs that he has done Huck decides to go on and write the letter here â€Å"I would do the right thing and the clean thing, and go and write to that niggers owner and tell where he was. I’ll go and write the letter then see if I can pray, why it was astonishing the way I felt as light as a feather right straight off and my troubles all gone, so I got a piece of paper and a pencil all glad and excited and set down and wrote. I felt all good and all washes clean of sin for the first time I had ever felt so in my life†(pg.161) This feeling of cleanliness helps assure Huck that he has done the right thing in the views of society. However Huck’s feeling of decency soon dissipates, â€Å"I happened to look around and see that paper, it was in a close place I took it in my hand, I was trembling because I got to forever betwixt two things, and I knowed it, I studied it a minute sort of holding my breath and then says to myself â₠¬Å"Alright then I’ll go to Hell† and tore it up†(pg.161) Huck finally decides he cannot bring himself to betray his only conscience and that he’d rather go to hell then do so. This is the point in Huck’s journey where he truly becomes his own person, where he breaks from the confines of society and decides to do what he in his heart feels is right not what other people think is right. This is an important decision for Huck and a crucial point in Huck’s life because growing up he was taught that slavery was a good thing and that African Americans were nothing but property as most boys were taught during that time period. However Huck discovers after meeting Jim that there is so much more to them, that they are a kind, and caring and sophisticated and loving people and that in turn helps Huck discover a little more about himself as well when he decides not to turn Jim in even though anyone else would have. Huck’s battles between his conscience and society force him to choose between being a part of society and becoming his own person, and while on his journey down the Mississippi with Jim he decides to be his own person and choose his own morals and values and by the end of his adventure he finally came of age with each experience along the way helping him grow as a person, whether it be near the beginning of the journey where he encounters a gang of murderers on a shipwreck and instead of leaving them there to die he decides to send help for them, or it be near half way through his journey where he comes  across a group of slave hunters and rather than turn Jim in, he lies to protect him even though the â€Å"right† thing to do would’ve been to turn him in. Or even near the end where he almost breaks his promise and betrays Jim when he writes a letter to Tom Sawyer telling him where Jim is, but instead of sending the letter he tears it up and decides to finish h elping Jim escape even if it means he’ll go to hell. All of these events are important in helping Huck create his own sense of right and wrong and in many ways, come of age.

The Historical background and current situation of the UAE-Iran dispute over three islands Essay Example for Free

The Historical background and current situation of the UAE-Iran dispute over three islands Essay The United Arab Emirates (UAE) dispute with Iran over the three islands is a historical conflict which relates to the ownership and sovereignty over of the islands. These three islands are the Abu Musa,the Greater Tunbs and the Lesser Tunbs . The islands are located in the Persian Gulf hence their strategic position in the Gulf can be very vital for a country that has sovereignty over them. For instance, the strategic importance of the three islands enables them to be used as a toll booth through which the passage of important regional commodities and oil can be controlled. Lack of adequate historical sources that point out clearly territorial boundaries in the Arabian Gulf has contributed to sovereignty conflicts, a good example being the UAE-Iran dispute. Although some recorded documents and historical events support UAE’s rightful ownership of the three Islands, Iran has constantly rejected those claims . The dispute has not yet been solved because as the United Arab Emirates maintain that it should have ownership over the three islands, Iran asserts that it should have sovereignty over the islands . This paper will discuss the historical background of the conflict as well as the current situation of dispute. Historical background of the dispute In the seventeenth century, Islamic conquests in the Arabian Gulf led to the Islamic caliphate decline in power. This had local powers such as Oman maintain sovereignty and control over the region. A close link of the Abu Musa, Greater Tunbs and Lesser Tunbs to the Southern Coast area remained until the presence of European colonial powers began to change leadership and governance issues in the Gulf. Historical records confirm that the fall of Ya’aruba state in Oman (1524-1741) paved way for the establishment of a new power in the Gulf referred to as Qawasin. Sharjah and Ra’s al -Khaimah were the two factions of Qawasin that had sovereignity over the Gulf islands. The first document to confirm the UAE legal title to the three islands is the official message that the Qawasin ruler sent to the British Resident. As a result, any form of interference with the sovereignty aroused protests. In the 1870s, Abu Musa served as a resort for the Qawasin rulers of Sharjah and also as an agricultural centre. The two Qawasin factions (Lingeh Qawasin and the Qawasin of the southern coast) were constantly involved in disputes about the Gulf islands. The dominant colonial power then (the British government of India) failed to interfere in the conflict because it considered it to be a local issue. However, efforts by a British political agent, Haji Abdurrahman to demonstrate that the Islands belonged to Lungeh Qawasin were disapproved. The Qawasin of the Southern Gulf continued to exercise sovereignty over the three islands until the late nineteenth century when the imperial Iran’s influence began to spread to the northern Gulf . Persian armies in 1887 invasion of Lingeh led to the expulsion of Qawasin governors expelled from the island of Sirri. Since the offensive launched by Persia enabled it to occupy to Island of Sirri, the Qawasin of the Southern Coast developed fears about the territorial ambitions of Persia. Iran confirmed the fears when it set forth claims to other Islands. However, the British government was opposed to Iran’s occupation of Sirri Island and supported Qawasin title to the Islands. As a result, the British government demanded that Iran explain hoisting of its flag on the Sirri Island as well as provide evidence of its claims to the Island. Iran pointed out that the strongest evidence of its ownership to the Island was its â€Å"occupation† and â€Å"possession† of the island. In 1904, Iran’s territorial and political ambitions together with the economic interests of some influential elements in the government strengthened its claim to Abu Musa Island . This marked Iran’s intentions to challenge Sharjah about its sovereignty over Abu Musa. For instance, Iran was interested in the red oxide resource that was found in the island. In efforts to take over control of the island, Iran sent a mission that was led by a Belgian officer to hoist an Iranian flag on Abu Musa. Protests against this move by the ruler of Sharjah were supported by the British Resident, who demanded that Iran submit evidence of ownership to the island. The failure by Iran to provide evidence had it withdraw quietly from the conflict three months later. British presence in the Gulf emphasized on the ownership of Abu Musa and the Tunbs by the states of Sharjah and Ra’s al Khaimah . Good relations between the two led to a signing of an agreement between the ruler of Sharjah and the British government in 1912 which facilitated the establishment of a lighthouse on Greater Tunbs. This allowed Sharjah to grant a five year red oxide exploration concession to a British national known as Strick. Iran protested against this move. Following a verbal understanding between the Iranian government and Britain that the three islands were Arab territories, the British administration on 24 August 1928 issued a memorandum to confirm that the islands of Greater and Lesser Tunbs belonged to Ra’s al-Khaimah while Abu Musa belonged to Sharjah . The fact that Qawasin had title to the three Islands during the 1929-1930 negotiations between Iran and Britain confirmed the weakness of Iran’s claims of ownership over the islands. The Anglo-Iranian treaty which was signed affirmed that the three Islands (Abu Musa and the Tunbs) would remain under Arab territories and Iran would maintain the title to Island of Sirri . Iran’s desire to have control over the island motivated it to propose an offer to buy the Greater and Lesser Tunbs. This was strongly rejected by the rulers of Sharjah and R’as al-Khaimah. This was followed by Iran’s proposal to lease the two islands for a period of 50 years. The pressure by British officials on the ruler of Ra’s al-Khaimah to accept the offer on conditions that Iran refrain from inspecting Arab boats and ships as well as stop issuing order to them failed. This led the failure of Iran attempts to exercise sovereignty on the islands. Sharjah’s sovereignty over Abu Musa led to the issuing of red oxide concessions to the Golden Valley Ochre Oxide Company in 1935. On the other hand, Ra’s al-Khaimah gave an oil exploration concession to the Union Oil in 1964. The failure by Iran to annex Bahrain due to a United Nation’s endorsement of Bahrain’s independence in 1970 resulted to Iran’s emphatic claims to the three islands once again. Iran threatened to occupy the islands by force. To address the issue, intensive talks between Iran and the emirates of Ra’s al-Khaimah and Sharjah were held in 1970 and 1971. The talks did not prevent Iran from expressing its intentions to occupy the Islands by force. Pressure by Iran and Britain to have the rulers of Sharjah and Ra’s al-Khaimah hand over the islands to Iran peacefully did not succeed. This move aimed at preventing direct military occupation of the islands by Iran in a manner that would deprive the rulers’ sovereignty over the islands. Iran’s deadlines and threats that were issued to increase pressure on the rulers were unsuccessful. On 30 November 1971, Iran signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that allowed Iran to land on Northern part of Abu Musa. When Ra’s al-Khaimah rejected Iran’s concession to a title over Tunbs led to the launch of an offensive by Iran to occupy the islands. The offensive had some service men and civilians killed, a primary school and a police station, demolished and the citizens of the Greater Tunbs evicted. Since 1971 when it occupied the Tunbs, Iran has continued to claim ownership over the three islands despite the fact that it has failed to produce legal justification of its occupation under the international law. On the other hand, the United Arab Emirates has continually asserted that it has sovereignty over the islands . Current situation on the UAE-Iran dispute Since 1971, Iran and UAE have continually been engaged in the dispute over three Islands . After Iran’s occupation of the Tunbs, the UAE tried to win the title to the islands by resolving the dispute according to the international customs and laws. The UAE requested for assistance from the United Nations Security council to have the dispute solved peacefully. However, Iran continued to violate the MOU in relation to governance in Abu Musa and international boundaries in relation to the Tunbs. Iran had adopted an imperial arrogance approach during Shah’s’ reign and since 1980s, it continued to violate the MOU. Currently, Iran considers the Tunbs to be part of its territory and considers this issue undebatable . However, Iran agrees that negotiations over Abu Musa can be conducted based on an MOU that will ensure UAE sovereignty over the island does not compromise Iran’s economic, security and strategic interests in the Gulf region. The rights of sovereignty or ownership of the Abu Musa and the two Tunbs was transferred from the emirates of Ras al-Khaimah and Sharjah to the Federal state of the United Arab Emirates on 2 December 1971. The Arab states under the British protectorate were referred to as trucial states . The UAE constitution states clearly that the federation exercises sovereignty over all waters and lands that are encompassed by the international borders of the emirates. . This includes the three islands of Abu Musa and the two Tunbs. Ownership claims by UAE over the three Islands is considered to be based on historical events, legal documents and the actual exercise of territorial sovereignty . Scholars of the international law argue that the border treaties provide for succession where the obligations and rights are passed from the predecessor to the successor state in accordance with the Article 4 of 1969 Vienna convention on the law of treaties . Furthermore, the highest federal authority of the UAE, the supreme council of the UAE has declared that the agreements which were concluded by the individual emirates with the neighboring states are believed to be agreements between the UAE and the neighboring states. The UAE-Iran dispute over the legal status of the islands has continued to affect UAE-Iran diplomatic relations . In addition, the dispute strains the relationship between Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council Members (Kuwait, UAE, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia). These nations support UAE claims of ownership. For instance, in 2008, there was tension between Iran and the GCC over this long-standing issue. The UAE supports regional cooperation in the region hence it has managed to win the support of some of its neighbors over the issue. Although the UAE has recommended that the case be taken to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Iran objects this measure . Britain which played a major role in the Gulf region and efforts to solve the UAE-Iran dispute would be expected to be involved in the case if it was taken to the ICJ. Iran criticizes the involvement of a third party in resolving the dispute hence it rejects the UAE’s request to have the dispute resolved at the international court of justice in the Hague. The UAE demands that the three Islands which were seized by Iran form UAE in 1971 be returned back . In 1992, Iran declared sovereignty over the three islands and had foreigners who run UAE sponsored school and several organizations in Abu Musa expelled from the Island. Iran’s political and economic influence in the region makes it a hegemonic power . Over the years, Iran has been making efforts to increase its military presence on the Island of Abu Musa by building an airport on the island and stationing troops on the Island. This indicates that Iran intends to maintain rightful ownership of the Island. For Iran, the Islands are strategically positioned to allow interdictions and observations of the Strait of Hormuz. This is believed to offer Iran land support to support stations boats, military troops and radars in the region. Iran’s opening a naval base in the Strait Hormuz and reluctance to resolve the territorial dispute confirms it political influence in the region. There is no doubt that the islands have economic and geopolitical significance to Iran . For example, during the 53rd session of the United Nations General Assembly, the UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Zayed Al Nahayan stated that the UAE is still concerned about the continued occupation of Iran on the three islands . The UAE has been making efforts to resolve the dispute in a peacefully, either through bilateral talks of the ICJ . The UAE sovereignty over the three islands of Abu Musa, Greater and Lesser Tunbs relate to acquiescence and recognition due to the fact that the UAE has maintained possession of the islands for a long time. This has been recognized by Britain which has made a declaration that it recognizes the title of the Qawasin to the islands. As a result, Iran’s occupation of the Tunbs is viewed by the UAE to be a violation of the principles of border issues in the international law and inviolability of the states’ territorial integrity which are vital in international relations. The UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed when speaking during the Federal National Council recently stated that the occupation of the three Islands by Iran is painful to many UAE nationals and compared Iran’s occupation on the three Islands to the occupation of Palestinians territories by Israel. A Memorandum of Understanding that governs the status of Abu Musa does not define the status of the island. Although the bilateral agreement between UAE and Iran promotes understanding between the two, the Iranian government sees the agreement to be a temporary measure that postpones the restoration of Iran’s sovereignty over the Abu Musa . The dispute is considered to have negative impact on the relations between UAE and Iran . Efforts by other countries such as Turkey in resolving the dispute are expected to improve relations between the UAE and Iran . Turkey is expected to play a vital rile in talks between Iran and UAE in future . For instance, when speaking during the Parliamentary Union of the Islamic Conference, Bahaeddine Jabaji supported Turkey’s role in resolving the dispute.

The Symbol Veil In Muslim Women Religion Essay

The Symbol Veil In Muslim Women Religion Essay This research paper aims to define the symbol veil in Muslim women. Aside from being a form of dress or hijab, it bears symbols of their oppression, social control, religious sanctions, invisibility and socio-political status, according to Watson. This has been an almost global concern for a sense of freedom. In Saudi Arabia and some parts of Asia alone as well as North Africa, countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt and Northern Cameroon practice Islam as a monotheistic religion with Quran as their religious text and Muslims as followers. Wherein, its women have been the part of a continuous discussion. Topics include the issue of the veil and how groups have been separated into account of maintaining its practice or not. Some admits a total ignorance of their religion and culture, while there are Islamic feminists who have shown a passion to reclaiming the emancipatory message of the Quran on using veils as part of the earliest traditions in Muslim communities. Such a scenario has attracted angers and frustrations in retort to the deliberate racism afflicted on Muslims especially in US colonies. Moreover, when Muslim women use veils showing a pictogram of ignorance and oppression, it has given fear to the younger population. Following patriarchy means having power over womens lives and in this lieu, these Muslim women wants to free themselves from its bonds. They want others to see themselves as an active part of the community vying for the same equal rights that allows them to be its members, workers as well as reformists. If the static colonial image of a Muslim woman wearing a veil does not improve in the future, they can deny their own culture and faith in religion. Chapters What is a Veil? A veil is a piece of loose, opaque, non-distinctive clothing wrapped around the body in modest to be able to hide a wearers head, torso and ankles, but leaving the face, hands and feet exposed (Hoodfar, 1992.) In Muslim women, it is called (Woodlock, 2000) hijab, a simple headscarf. Why should they wear a veil? It is part of their identity. On the other hand, Arab men are required to wear the keffiyeh, a traditional square cotton cloth that is use as a headdress. Other names are (ya)shmagh, ghutrah, hattah or mashadah (Kaitlin, 2008.) Importantly, a veil is worn as a religious item in the Islam faith, because members show demonstrates honor to an object or space. In Quranic verse, it means that there is a definition of separation in the sacred from the mundane. In the entire practice of Islam dress codes, its women members compete to gain a whole and complete image on being a pure and dedicated mother, sister, sister-in-law or daughter of their faith (Billaud, 2009.) Before, all members were asks to wear a veil, but with the entry of westernization and colonization there was a separation of responsibilities to wear one (Hoodfar, 1992.) Among the Arab urban elite, men began to copy new ways to dressing from their traditional keffiyeh. Yet, there are also a small percentage of Muslim women following the same pattern (Hoodfar, 1992.) The veil also underwent varied changes to fashions through out history. Some reasons entitle wearing a veil to show respect on conventional values or there are others who uses this to beautify their faces with make-up. Nevertheless, there have been other negative connotations to the symbol of a veil to which it can show a fundamentalist Islam in equal terms on extremism or terrorism (Van Santen, 2010.) Today, it bears a political meaning. Yet, Muslim women still continue to defend this choice. Its Origins and Language The practice of wearing a veil in seclusion of women comes from a pre-Islamic and non-Arab Middle Eastern and Mediterranean society tradition. If we trace along the history line, the first instance to veiling dates back to the 13th century BC in an Assyrian legal text. During that time, only respectable women are permitted to wear veils, wherein prostitutes are not allowed wear a veil (Hoodfar, 1992.) It was a sign of status and a part of the elite ways in ancient Greeco, Roman, pre-Islamic Iranian and Byzantine empires. After then, Muslims was able to seclude a life from the conquered regions and followed traditions in wearing veils. Nowadays, both non-Muslims and Muslims recognize this way as an Islamic phenomenon. Even if in the Quran, there are no specific mentions of the veil. Examples of descriptions, but not directly mentioning the use of veil, are Surah al Nur verses 30 31. This requires women to cover their chests and jewelry, which also means to wrap their whole body in clothing. Adding to this is Surah al Ahzab verse 59, that asks the Prophet wives to enveloped tightly their bodies, because they are should not be recognized, disturbed and molested outside. Though modern critics have rationalized that others also follow this form of dress, it was not until Safavids period of influence that the symbol status of veils was seen in the Muslim ruling class and urban elite. In 19th century, it was promoted as a major Muslim symbol, which members have fought for in the name of Islam and not for protecting culture practices. Honor, Veiling and Etiquette in Afghanistan No Muslim woman can embody the face of Islam. Any insight to wearing a veil does not account for a completely understanding on the faith of Muslim women. The point of discussing its purposes and symbolism is to keep an open-mind and listen (Kaitlin, 2008.) The veiling practices widely differ from regions, ethnics or social groups. In Afganistan, a veil is corresponds to honor (Billaud, 2009.) In here, a woman shows a devotion to the honor system through doing a pardah5 that can comprise of wrapping her head and hiding from unrelated men. When she does this, there is also a proud bearance to the honor of her male relatives or namus. Hence, in this region, a veil is symbolizing of a male-female connection in terms of relationships and balance in natural inclinations or nafs. Furthermore, the multitude of veil chadari colors is also another thing to interpret. On top this variations, a veil is also a way in the isolation of unrelated men and women in Afghanistan. Examples of these persons are the ones not affiliated with the same korwal or the inhabitants sharing a home. The society puts a difference between its private and public members, wherein a dakhili (the private sphere or home) is secluded and the biruni (outside world) is permitted to recognition. Moreover, the practice of namus allows a certain power from men that allow them to control women, which confine their manners when seen outside. If you are there, you can here men saying: Zan namus e mas (The woman is our honour) (Billaud, 2009.) Similar to soldiers saying: Watan namus e mas (The nation is our honour.) During the time that a woman steps outside of her home, she wears a veil and go with a mahram or a male relative to be able to defend her honor as part of the Afghanistan etiquette. Veiled Performance and Politics In modern times, the Islamic feminists have shown great efforts to reclaiming the emancipatory message of their Quran. They also want to gain back the rights that were bestowed upon them in the earliest Muslim communities (Falah Nagel, 2005.) Islamic regions have shared their own stories for this matter. Here are some of them: Politics in Afghanistan the new Islamic Republic has allowed its clothing and veiling practices to be under political category, which are mandatory to women to reach out to the public. Now, there are similarities between the image of parliamentary women and female university students that are Muslims in Afghanistan and whom displays a modern yet Muslim persona. The latter renounce the womens issues just to protect the practice of wearing their veils. Hence, Afghanistan women are divided into 2 categories: the conservative or nationalist and liberal women (Billaud, 2009.) 2. Irans De-veiling Law this was promulgated during the taking place of a rapid social change from a mayhem on its national economy; results of negative impact on the public, social, and leisure activities of its urban women; going to weekly ablutions in an offending feeling of nakedness; and a social implication bestowed on young women students when not wearing a scarf in public wherein parents hindered entry to schools (Hoodfar, 1992.) 3. Struggles in Northern Cameroon this shows an account to an image seen on Muslim women that they are a homogeneous category. To which, in public schools, wearing of a headgear is asked to be taken off inside the premises as required by the laic prescriptions of Cameroons constitution. Though there is no buzz on this matter. In this lieu, men choose to enter schools were veiling is allowed, while women opt for education (van Santen, 2010.) Womens Rights Activists Situations The Revolutionary Association of the Women in Afghanistan In the manner, a lot of womens rights activists, while opposing the need in veiling of women under chadari, used the practice to enjoy freedom of movement while carrying out tasks. The chadari was a symbol of womens oppression, but now in cultural norms, they were able to be active citizens fighting for a change in the community. The said hadari was a guarantee of womens protection in Afghanistan, wherein they need the veil during travelling to remote areas where security was often tight. In this lieu, the Revolutionary Association of the Women in Afghanistan is a very good example of a group with an instrumental nature of the chadari in inline with the goals of being politically engaged women (Billaud, 2009.) For certain their records are part of history under the human and womens rights. The Taliban realizes this under the chadari. When working in rural areas, this was worn for security reasons, during times that people tended to be suspicious on persons from the outside world. This was a strategy used by Rahela6, who is a member of the Afghan Womens Network, when she taught mullahs on womens rights in rural areas. She said, At first, it was difficult for us, women, to approach mullahs. They were reluctant to talk to us. But they gradually got used to us. By wearing chadari, we eventually gained their respect. Egyptian Feminist Movement in the 1920s Disobedience of the patriarchy can be seen in the de veiling act started by the Egyptian feminist movement during the 1920s and to the same situation resistance happening for a call to compulsory veiling in Iran. In here, we can see that aside from being a part of culture and religion, the veil can also be a form and symbol of resistance, for example in the case of the anti Shah movement that took place in Iran. In the same context, there were a number of Islam feminists Muslim women in Canada who have used the veil and reference to Islam during their stay in the country, because they wanted to resist some of the cultural practices that their forefathers have believed, like arranged marriages or far away educations from home without secluding from their parents and communities. Though, in Egypt, a lot veiled Muslim women use it as an instrument of mediation significantly seen from Muslim minority cultures and those of host cultures. Strangely enough, Western colonies reactions to Muslim women, as seen through the eyes of an Orientalist and colonialist frame, sets barricades on the customs and traditions of Muslim women to be difficult and opposite to their usual way of lives (Hoodfar, 1992.) Conclusion In conclusion, the veil is not so significant, after all, but it is who wears it that lies in importance. When in public, a Muslim woman shows people who see her in the outside world a marginal status that is of respect and honor. Not for culture and religion causes or even fashion. The series of incidents mentioned this paper have made me apprehend why a lot of young Muslim women today are so angry and have decided to fight for their rights together with other believers of Islam. This research paper aims define the symbol veil in Muslim women. According Watson in 1994, OR NON-MUSLIM WRITERS, THE VEIL IS VARIOUSLY DESCRIBED AS A TANGIBLE SYMBOL OF WOMENS OPPRESSION, A CONSTRAINING AND CONSTRICTING FORM OF DRESS, AND A FORM OF SOCIAL CONTROL, RELIGIOUSLY SANCTIONING WOMENS INVISIBILITY AND SUBORDINATE SOCILA-POLITICAL STATUS. I did not want to diminish or question the religious beliefs of the Muslim women in Islamic communities, but rather to underline and put emphasis on the possibilities that can be resulting through the reiteration of these feminine ceremonials. Since, it would be like a forever burden or mistake if the veil is lessened in reputation and disrespected in symbolism, which are its instrumental functions to the women, especially the young students in schools. Though, talking about the topic of veil, it was enough to see in it a pure religious expression. Reverence and dissimulation for it were indeed political gestures in my side that place defense on it as the necessary social make-up for women to be seen and heard through the public scenario. Moreover, if the Western colonies will only have a deeper analysis of Muslim womens motives and actions in their practicing their beliefs, efforts by these women can be recognized as strategies and adaption in relationship with them, displaying diff erent roles in the foreign community that should be basing on to the different Western citizen they wished to address themselves.

COP 3530, Discrete Data Structures and Algorithms, Summer 1999, Homework 2 :: UFL Florida Computer Programming Homework

Class Notes: Data Structures and Algorithms Summer-C Semester 1999 - M WRF 2nd Period CSE/E119, Section 7344 Homework #2 -- Due Fri 28 May 1999 : 09.30am * Question 1. Assume that an n-element array (vector) a contains distinct integers arranged in no particular order. Write an algorithm to find the value and location of (a) the mean of a and (b) the value v in a closest to the mean. Note: If v equals the mean, then v is the value closest to the mean. Example. If a = (1,2,3,5,4,6,7,9), then the mean equals 37/8 = 4.625. The value 5, which is in the fourth location (i = 4), happens to be the value closest to the mean. Answer: FindMean(a : array [1..n] of int): { sum = 0; posmean = -1, posclose = -1 for i = 1 to n do: sum = sum + a[i] endfor mean = float(sum) / n mdif = 9E13 for i = 1 to n do: dif = abs(a[i] - mean) if (dif if (dif = 0) then

Comparing Relationships in Raymond Carver’s Cathedral and Langston Hughes Mother To Son :: Comparison Compare Contrast Essays

Relationships in Raymond Carver’s Cathedral and Langston Hughes' Mother To Son My Idea of family honestly didn't begin until I agreed to marriage and children. Until that moment, in my laxity, I hadn't even considered the many aspects and values a family should consist of. My experience needless to say, laid in shattered pieces long before I took over the reins of raising myself and built a blockade fortress of stoicism. In all seriousness, I often considered never having a relationship, thinking I was incapable of possessing the experience it would take to pursue such an endeavor. Needless to say, I didn't say 'yes' the first time. In spite of this, I did marry; yet my idea of family was built without preconceived ideologies. I've done what I felt was nurturing and beneficial for my children both environmentally and educationally. All in all, my family is successful though we are a work in progress. I'm often overly diligent in their wellbeing out of my heightened need for them what I never had; the experience of a wonderful family that sets the basis for a su ccessful life when life beyond the days of a dreamy child are a hardship all their own. Family relationships, be it any form, is as always a work in progress, yet, with the fiction work of Cathedral by Raymond Carver and with Langston Hughes' poem Mother To Son, we see those with steadfast nerves and unwavering determination can succeed in this precious and challenging undertaking. When concentrating on the foundation of a promising family, being that of love in marriage in reference to the fiction "Cathedral," I come to see some semblance between my idea of an assuring affinity told by the husband, only referred to as "Bub." Although not blatantly apparent is the husband's love for his wife, he does show it with a bit of a jealous disposition. When referring to his wife's ex-husband, he purposely neglects to even give the guy a name as a result of his envious attitude jeering, "Her officer-why should he have a name? He was the childhood sweetheart, and what more does he want? (818). Besides jealousy, he also expresses many other emotions of a typical loving husband such as: protection, affection, consideration and hurt, with regards to his wife's relationship with her friend Robert, he pouts, I didn't want him (Robert) to think I'd left the room, and I didn't want her to think I was feeling left out.