Use the field below to perform an advanced search of The Justice archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query.
Behind the barbed wires, one can see the image of something reminiscent of a former time—a concentration camp. Although today’s concentration camps do not condemn their prisoners to extermination, our minds travel back to images of Europe’s Holocaust, where we saw true evil waged based off of identity alone.
In response to the April 21, 2015 editorial “Reform sexual assault judicial practices” by the Justice Editorial Board: Brandeis Students Against Sexual Violence would like to correct the misinformation provided and speak to the harm this editorial poses to survivors and our community. This is not the first time the Justice has published false information. In November 2014, the Justice called for the creation of a task force on sexual violence which already existed at the time—an oversight B.SASV members informed the Board of and which resulted in an apology. Again, we will correct the misinformation from the most recent editorial, citing multiple credible sources, to show that the Special Examiner’s Process, while imperfect, is not skewed against accused students.
Students bared all last Tuesday night in the artistically unique and bold Liquid Latex performance. The show had Levin Ballroom overflowing, and the enormous crowd created a high level of energy before it even began.
“You, Europeans. You have eaten all your animals and now you ask us to turn our backs on our money the country desperately needs, the people desperately need, to protect animals,” expressed Joseph Pili Pili, a senior official from the Congolese Ministry of Hydrocarbons. To me, he seems like another party hack, one willing to compromise something truly beautiful in life—the humble and endangered mountain gorillas of Virunga National Park. This is in exchange for something so lucrative that has yet to make any opportunity for the Congolese people—more natural resources.
Last Tuesday night, the International Business School was bustling with students, faculty and community members from the greater Boston area who came to see the screening of Gett: The Trial of Viviane Amsalem with a special talk by human rights attorney Susan Weiss.
In 1939, during the siege of Poland, Adolph Hitler gave a speech expressing his right to exterminate the Polish. He justified mass murder thusly: “I have placed my death-head formations in readiness—for the present only in the East—with orders to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”
On Jan. 7, two gunmen, Chérif and Saïd Kouachi, attacked the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a French satirical magazine, in response to their cartoons that depicted the Prophet Muhammad. The attacks killed 12, including the magazine’s editor and cartoonists and a police officer.
A Brandeis doctoral candidate in Computer Science was among the Black Lives Matter protesters arrested on Interstate 93 on Thursday.
After relocating from the Shapiro Campus Center to Olin-Sang 101 and then to Olin-Sang 116, the weekly Senate meeting started off with an announcement from Senator-at-Large Naomi DePina ’16 that it would be kept informal in order to keep discussion as productive as possible.
Recently, the student body at Brandeis has been confronted by several protests aimed at the terrible reality of sexual assault in America, as well as protests targeting immigration laws and racial profiling in Ferguson, Mo. In September, scores of Brandeis students attended the People’s Climate March in Washington, D.C. Overall, this has been a key year for student protest. The acceptance and support of these protests has been strong at Brandeis, which has become a point of pride for many.
At an event on Wednesday evening, Brandeis alumnus, Arnie Reisman ’64, outlined the making of his Cold War documentary, When Red Was a Scary Color. The documnetary tells a story of the Hollywood blacklist of the late 1940s and early 1950s.
Various “challenges” have been circulating Facebook, including one for which I was recently nominated: list 10 books that have impacted me. Not much of a challenge, in my opinion, although choosing which books to include did take some serious consideration.
A couple months ago, the NBC late-night talk show landscape was altered dramatically. Jay Leno retired back in February, leaving Jimmy Fallon to take over The Tonight Show. Then Saturday Night Live alum Seth Meyers took over Fallon's former hosting position on Late Night. In the weeks following, it looked like things were calming down on late-night shake up front. Well, folks, that's not the case. In fact, the epidemic of departure has spread to CBS. On the Thursday night broadcast of the Late Show with David Letterman, David Letterman broke the bombshell news that he plans to retire soon. People Magazine reports that Letterman's director only broke the news to the staff moments before he announced it to the cameras. Reportedly, many staff members were in tears as the host shared the announcement. Interestingly, Letterman, 66, led the revelation of his retirement with a humorous story about a fishing trip with his young son. Indeed, he emphasized spending time with his family as a primary motivation for his decision. He made it clear, though, that there is not an exact timeline for his departure from his late-night post. It will occur "sometime in the not-too-distant future 2015," he said. Letterman has been a staple of late-night television for over three decades. He began hosting the Late Show back in 1993, but previously hosted Late Night for 11 years. In 1992, when Johnny Carson retired from the The Tonight Show, fans expected Letterman to take over. However, NBC gave that position to Jay Leno and Letterman was then given his own Late Show on CBS. In addition, Letterman owns the production company Worldwide Pants Inc. It has produced primetime comedies like Everybody Loves Raymond in addition to producing The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson (which airs in the timeslot following Letterman's show). Now, media outlets are speculating about who will replace the television veteran, throwing around names like Ferguson, Stephen Colbert, Chelsea Handler and Ellen DeGeneres. One thing's for sure-Letterman's own brand of dry, sardonic humor will certainly be inimitable. Moving on from late-night chaos, on Friday Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies re-arrested a man who was arrested the previous Sunday on suspicion of trespassing in Selena Gomez's Calabasas, Calif. home. Che Cruz, 20, admitted on Wednesday to trespassing and was sentenced to 45 days in jail and ordered to stay away from Gomez. Yet, he apparently returned to the vicinity of Gomez's house, leading to his second arrest on Friday. The Associated Press reports that Cruz's jail records show that Friday's arrest just eight hours after he was released from an only seven-day stint in jail for the trespassing case. In other news-news I know all you pop-culturites were just so eager to hear-former Jersey Shore star Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi announced on Friday that she is pregnant with her second child with fianc?(c) Jionni LaValle. She revealed in a blog post on her website that she is due this fall. Snooki, 26, and LaValle, 26, were engaged in 2012 and are parents to 19-month-old son Lorenzo Dominic. Reportedly, the couple's wedding is still on for this upcoming fall as well. That's your pop-culture news for this week, Brandeis!
Brandeis Players staged 1984 this weekend, a play production of the classic George Orwell novel written by Michael Gene Sullivan. While the cast conveyed the intensity and emotion required for the serious material, the execution of the play at times left me baffled.
Permission to be Global/Pr??cticas Globales": Latin American Art from the Ella Fontanals-Cisneros Collection is the Museum of Fine Arts at Boston's first ever exhibition centered on contemporary Latin American art. The exhibition re-evaluates the idea of globalization through visual language. The show was jointly curated by MFA staff members Jen Mergel and Liz Munsell and Jes??s Fuenmayor of the Cisneros Fontanals Art Foundation.
Brandeis pop culture enthusiasts, you may have missed all the breaking Tinseltown news while caught up in your Purim costume preparations last week. Here is a roundup of some of this (admittedly rather slow) past week's celebrity headlines: This past week saw another Spears wedding take place. No, it wasn't Britney who walked down the aisle, but her younger sister, Jamie Lynn, 22. E! News confirms that on Friday, she wed 31-year-old businessman Jamie Watson in New Orleans. There were in fact not one, but three Jamies present at the wedding, as Spears' father, who is also named Jamie, walked her down the aisle. Spears and Watson dated on-and-off for three years before getting engaged last March. Reportedly, Britney attended the wedding with her boyfriend, David Lucado, who works at a Los Angeles legal firm. The younger Spears sibling gained fame in her own right while starring on the hit Nickelodeon show Zoey 101 in the early 2000s. She announced to stunned fans back in December 2007, at the age of 16, that she was expecting a baby with then-boyfriend Casey Aldridge. Her daughter Maddie, now 5, was the flower girl at the wedding ceremony this past Friday. Now, Spears is focusing on pursuing a country music career, having released her debut single this past November. People magazine reports that retired professional wrestler-turned-actress Stacy Keibler took the under-the-radar approach and wed tech entrepreneur Jared Pobre last Saturday in a quiet ceremony in Mexico. Keibler, 34, and Pobre, 39, had been friends for almost five years before they began dating this past fall. This is the first marriage for both of them. Keibler famously dated George Clooney, but she split with the actor last summer. Looks like it didn't take long for her to find her happily ever after! In other news, it was a bad week for two different celebrities named Chris. First, reports surfaced on Wednesday that actor Chris Pine was charged with driving under the influence in New Zealand back at the beginning of March. Pine, 33, was reportedly pulled over shortly after leaving the Blue Pub bar in Methven, a small town in the South Island of New Zealand, around 2:30 a.m. The actor was in the area filming Z is for Zachariah. Pine, who has starred as Captain James T. Kirk in the last two Star Trek movies, now must make his first court appearance this week. As for our second Chris, after allegedly getting kicked out of rehab, singer Chris Brown was arrested on Friday. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department confirmed to People Magazine that the 24-year-old was taken into custody for a probation violation that stems from his infamous 2009 assault on Rihanna, his then-girlfriend. Since being diagnosed with bipolar disorder as well as post-traumatic stress disorder back in February, Brown had been spending time in a Malibu rehab facility under court order before supposedly violating the program's rules and then getting the boot. The recording artist is now being held without bail at the Inmate Reception Center in the Los Angeles County jail. All in all, Brandeis, it was a quiet week for the celebrity gossip mill. Perhaps this next week the headlines (and the weather-wishful thinking?) will heat up!
As soon as Spain scored the winning goal of the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, I started to get excited for 2014. Brazil, home of one of the world's most talented soccer squads, would be the host country. For the first time in FIFA's history of 110 years, back-to-back World Cups will have been hosted by non-European countries. As a soccer fan and a supporter of the Brazilian team, I was thrilled. FIFA has a habit of giving tournaments to the highest bidder, and the fact that two developing countries got the hosting opportunity instead of Europe or the United States blew me away. And who wouldn't want to see soccer's most prestigious tournament played in the country that produced Ronaldo, Luis Fabiano, Robinho and Pele? However, as June approaches, my excitement over Brazil hosting has considerably subsided. The World Cup is supposed to serve as a celebration of the world's favorite sport and, especially for a country like Brazil, an opportunity for development and economic growth. The latter is most certainly not happening. The Brazilian World Cup is plagued by corruption, unsafe working conditions and skyrocketing costs. As of February 2014, the Brazilian government has spent nearly 15 billion dollars on the World Cup, as much as Germany and South Africa, the last two hosts, combined. Part of it could be due to Brazil's economic status, but South Africa is also a developing country and did not have these cost problems. There is currently no evidence that the current spending, which is already more than double projected costs, will actually positively impact tourism or international investment beyond the World Cup, unlike predictions made before Germany and South Africa hosted their respective World Cups. It is also unlikely that Brazilian teams will even use some of the new stadiums, which are in more remote locations that do not have elite teams. Due to these rising costs and the fear that some stadiums won't be finished in time, the government has been especially lax when it comes to safety standards. As of Feb. 8, three workers died building the controversial Arenada Amazonia. Since 2013, Brazilians have been protesting and rioting about many of the government's plans for the World Cup, especially plans about infrastructure and transportation costs. The current infrastructure projects mainly focus on hotels, which would only benefit tourists, and would raise the cost of bus and train fares for normal Brazilians. At least 10 billion dollars have been spent on these infrastructure changes, but very little of that money is benefiting Brazilians. While Brazil is an emerging economic power, an estimated 11.5 million citizens live in favelas, urban shanty towns characterized by drugs, gang violence, police brutality and poverty. Citing safety concerns, the Brazilian government has authorized police raids in Rio de Janeiro and S??o Paulo to relocate nearly 15,000 families. There is little rhyme or reason over which neighborhoods get to remain in place and which stay: some favelas are offering themselves as cheap housing for tourists, while others face deadly riots and brutalities. The government claims that there is a policy of gentrification in place, but in reality, given that there is no sort of payment system for favela families, this gentrification is just another name for forced eviction. Unfortunately, Brazil is not the only World Cup host to be less than ideal when it comes to government policy and work practice. Russia and Qatar were controversially selected to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, respectively. Russia has a pretty weak human rights record, as demonstrated by the jailing of Pussy Riot, continual abuse of the country's Muslim minority and the anti-gay propaganda law that effectively criminalized being openly gay. Qatar is not much better. The 2022 World Cup is nearly a decade away, but there have already been reports of laborers, many of whom were illegally brought over from Southeast Asia and the Philippines, being underpaid or not paid at all. As a soccer fan, I want to celebrate the best teams in the world playing each other. As someone who identifies as a progressive, I am more than troubled. It is wrong that countries with abusive labor practices or egregious human rights violations are rewarded by the international community and get to host these extravaganzas. Obviously, as an American, it is easy to decry the actions of Brazil and wonder why the government hasn't been better about safety and corruption. The United States and Western Europe can afford certain protections that a country like Brazil simply cannot. It is also easy to forget that the World Cup is giving Brazil a major chance to prove itself as an international player. But this doesn't mean American soccer fans should idly sit by and not be critical about the running of their favorite sport. Sports fans must become more aware of the situation in many of these host countries. While it is hard to control a group like FIFA, and raising awareness is not going to solve every single problem Brazil, Russia and Qatar are facing, it might put pressure on domestic and international lawmakers to change policy. A country like Brazil that wants to be a major world player may be more open to reforms if it is clear Americans are paying attention. It is fine to cheer yourself hoarse for your favorite team, but if fans are ignorant or choose not to acknowledge the problematic elements of a host country, it is unlikely that FIFA or host countries will have any incentive to improve how World Cups are hosted. *
It finally happened. Justin Bieber was arrested. Early Thursday morning, the "Beauty and a Beat" singer was drag racing down a residential street in Miami, when police officers intervened, after hearing engines revving. According to the police report, the 19-year-old pop star had been driving a rented yellow Lamborghini while racing his friend, rhythm and blues singer Khalil Sharieff, also 19, who was driving a red Ferrari (as if those cars wouldn't attract any attention). Apparently, the two artists had been driving upward of 60 mph on a 30 mph stretch of road. The Miami Beach Police allegedly smelled alcohol on Bieber's breath, and the young singer was uncooperative during the arrest, hurling a string of expletive-laden statements. Bieber was taken in for driving under the influence, drag racing, driving with an invalid license and resisting arrest. In a statement, Bieber admitted to smoking marijuana throughout the day, consuming alcohol and taking prescription medication. The police report also indicates that Bieber was in a stupor and that he failed a field sobriety test. Later Thursday, Bieber appeared before a judge through a video link with his attorney, Roy Black (who has represented a slew of celebrity clients) and his bond was set at $2,500 dollars -nothing compared to the $75,000 he threw down at a Miami strip club a couple nights prior. An hour after his bond was set, the singer was released from the Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center, and he was photographed wearing dark sunglasses and a hoodie, waving to fans while perched on top of a black SUV. Of course, social media is playing a big role in this on going saga. The following day, Bieber took to Instagram to post a photo of this now-infamous post-jail wave of his, juxtaposed next to a photo of the late Michael Jackson in which the King of Pop stands on top of a car, wearing sunglasses and waving to his fans outside of a Santa Monica courtroom after his "not guilty" plea to child molestation charges. Below the photo pairing, Bieber referenced a lyric from a 2003 Jay-Z song, writing "What more can they say." His Instagram post hasn't been the only photo that has garnered attention. Bieber's mug shot has been the source of folly for many media outlets, with comparisons of the entertainer's bouffant blonde hairdo and wide smile to photos of Miley Cyrus sporting a similar look. Bieber's Miami arrest came after a much more minor brush with the law earlier this month, when he allegedly threw eggs at an estranged neighbor's house in Calabasas, Calif. Equipped with a search warrant, the Los Angeles Sherriff's Department raided the star's house after this vandalism accusation, and during the search officers arrested someone in the house-not Bieber-for felony drug possession. Wild antics seem to be the name of the game for Bieber lately. The singer's recent behavior begs the question: Will all the Beliebers out there keep on beliebing? Judging by the swarms of fans who awaited him as he left the Miami jail, the answer still looks like "yes." But, at the end of the day, there's nothing funny about Bieber's DUI arrest. Here's hoping that he can get back on the straight and narrow. *
John J. Geoghan was a Catholic priest who molested nearly 150 boys over the course of 30 years. He was exiled from the Roman Catholic Church in 1998 in the face of numerous allegations, and was found guilty of indecent assault and battery in 2002 when a college student testified that he had been molested by Geoghan in a swimming pool at the Waltham Boys and Girls Club in 1991. Because he was only found guilty of the one charge, Geoghan was sentenced to nine to 10 years in prison. On Feb. 23, 2004, Geoghan was murdered in his cell by Joseph L. Druce. "Justice" was served. Druce was serving a life-without-parole sentence for a 1998 murder. He had been picked up as a hitchhiker by 51-year-old George Rollo. After realizing Rollo was gay, Druce attacked him, stuffed him in the trunk of his own car, drove him to a wooded area and strangled him. Druce is a reputed member of the Aryan Nations neo-Nazi group. Geoghan's murder had been meticulously planned months in advance. At 11:48 a.m. on Feb. 23, 2004, all 22 cells on the block were opened for prisoners to return food trays to a common area. There were supposed to be two correctional officers on guard by the tray return area, but one of them was pulled off to escort another inmate to the nurse's station. Druce snuck into Geoghan's cell and used a book, nail clipper, and toothbrush to jam the cell door so that it could not be opened electronically. He then gagged Geoghan, threw him to the ground, repeatedly stomped on him and jumped on him from the bed, then strangled him with a pair of socks. Guards weren't able to get the door open for seven to eight minutes. Geoghan was pronounced dead at 1:17 p.m. with the cause of death as ligature strangulation, blunt chest trauma, broken ribs and a punctured lung. While there's no direct evidence to suggest that the prison facilitated the murder, many questions remain unanswered. Was it really coincidental that Geoghan was kept on the same block as Joseph Druce, a known homophobe who was serving a life sentence for strangling a homosexual man? Was it really coincidental that only one correctional officer was on guard at the time? Was it really coincidental that the guards were unable to intervene for seven to eight minutes? I'm not suggesting a systemic conspiracy, but it's no hidden fact that pedophiles and rapists are not treated well in prisons. Was Druce a lone vigilante or a soldier? And if the latter, who issued his orders? Regardless of how it was done, the reaction to the murder was almost as atrocious as the act itself. One of Geoghan's victims, Michael Linscott, said of the murder, "I thought about the victims that are still here that he would have to face had he lived. ... In my opinion, he got off the easy way." Mitchell Garabedian, an attorney for more than 200 alleged victims of Geoghan, added, "Many victims are disappointed. ... They wish Father John Geoghan had time to be in prison to reflect." While this sentiment is understandable, and could even be sympathized with, it is not just. Geoghan's murder was not the righteous end to his story, but not because it was easier than life in prison. Geoghan molested children. But if you, me or the state issues an execution, directly or indirectly, and feels no remorse, we're no better than Druce. Some see Geoghan's murder as justice-he was a pedophile, so he deserved it. Some see it as injustice that Druce wasn't murdered-he was a murdering homophobe, so he deserved it. But both of those views are oversimplified. There are no heroes or villains, no winners or losers, only tragedy. Killing Geoghan did not take away what he did to the countless boys. Killing Druce would not bring back George Rollo or even John J. Geoghan. We as a people should not cheer on murder-we should vehemently protest it. We as a people should not sit silent to the atrocities of our brothers in jail-we should scream in their defense. Everyone has certain unalienable human rights. We as a people need to recognize that.
"What makes a good leader?" This question is asked a lot in today's competitive world. Each of us college students entering the job market has thought extensively about leadership and has a different perception of what it is relative to our strengths. But what truly is an objectively good leader, and how do we, as Brandeis students looking to leave the world a better place than when we entered it, become one? When looking around the world we see all different types of leaders, each with his or her strengths and weaknesses. President Barack Obama has a once in a generation ability to orate and motivate through words. Yet, his approval rating is at the lowest it's ever been according to polls by Gallup, Business Week and others. Does his low approval rating therefore categorize him as a poor leader? To judge a leader by their approval ratings, though, would be nearsighted. For the indefinite future, we will be hearing stories about one of the greatest leaders the world has ever seen: Nelson Mandela. Vigils, memorials, speeches and press releases will be made to honor the man who dedicated his life to fighting for the causes that he deemed more valuable than life itself. But what discernible quality made Mandela into what he was? How was he able to achieve the immense success and respect that he carried to his grave? One of Mandela's shining moments was the decision to negotiate with the National Party government that controlled South Africa through the apartheid, the same white government that held him in jail for 27 years. Moreover, Mandela made the decision to negotiate in secrecy, behind the backs of his own African National Congress, the entity that led the revolutionary charge against the apartheid regime, for he knew they would not approve of such a maneuver. Without that monumental decision, Mandela would not have brought an end to the apartheid state. Yet, we can only imagine what his 'approval rating' would have been among the African National Congress had the negotiations been publicized early on. Mandela had a firm understanding of what he was fighting for, and how he was going to achieve that goal. He did not bend under the pressure of his enemies nor his allies. He knew the best chance he had to end apartheid was to progress with these secret negotiations-and so he did. Mandela once said, "When a man has done what he considers to be his duty to his people and his country, he can rest in peace." Mandela knew his duty, and would not let anyone deter his path. And that is what made him the leader he was-his perseverance toward his goals. His subsequent global recognition came only as a response to his success; no respect was handed to him. Ultimately, we trust the people we choose as our leaders to make the right decisions, not necessarily the popular ones. Francesca Gino, a professor of psychology at Harvard University and author of the book, Sidetracked: Why Our Decisions Get Derailed and How We Can Stick to the Plan, studies how people make decisions. She wonders why so often we decide to proceed a certain way, and end up acting on seemingly the exact opposite motivation. External desires, outside pressure and irrelevant motivations all cloud our judgment of fundamental right or wrong, good or bad, yes or no. Leadership, then, is the ability to persevere through the external factors and make decisions on strictly the relevant motivations. We live in a world where releasing convicted murderers is a means toward peace in the Middle East, where known terrorist regimes are rewarded for pausing a nuclear program, where the single most powerful government in the world is shut down in opposition to a bill that has passed Congress over 50 times, and where a traditional family holiday becomes a free-for-all celebration of pure materialism and consumerism. Yet, all of these things have a stated greater purpose: the release of Palestinian prisoners will bring the Palestinian Authority to the negotiating table, a six-month window of non-progress will lead toward a true halt of Iran's nuclear program, a government shutdown will lead toward bipartisanship, and at a most basic level, we sacrifice Thanksgiving for a happier Christmas, Hanukkah, or Kwanzaa. True leadership is the ability to obtain the universally accepted goals through the most appropriate means, from the leader's perspective. We as citizens, stakeholders and shareholders choose our leaders to be able to make these decisions, and outline courses of action-not simply to listen to what we think should occur. Approval ratings and public outcry are part of any leader's life; no leader has ever been universally popular while still in office. Courses of action can therefore only be judged after the fact, with the advantage of hindsight. Until then we must trust the leaders in place to make the correct decisions. I only hope those same leaders don't abuse that power of leadership and have their judgment clouded by us. *