(11/10/09 5:00am)
Rarely do I go to bed before 3 a.m-and this dent in my sleep is not the result of General Chemistry lab. Instead, it is because at 1:30 in the morning my hall will often burst into intense political and philosophical conversations. Why? Because my roommate and I both took a gap year. On nights not spent in the hallway hosting a spontaneous political forum, we stay awake and discuss from our beds the implications of what we learned that day on our worldviews. These late nights have been one of the most valuable aspects of my daily life at college. Brandeis students pursue their interests outside the classroom, which creates a great sense of tangible curiosity and appeal for outside knowledge to make its way onto campus. One way that students pursue their interests outside of class is by taking a gap year between high school and college. Students who choose to take a gap year before entering Brandeis have an entire year's worth of worldly experience and perspectives to bring to the campus. For this reason, it would seem to be in Brandeis' best interest to encourage its students to take gap years. However, the opposite is done. Students who are awarded merit scholarships and choose to take a gap year are deprived of the final year of their scholarship. In an e-mail interview with the Justice, Vice President of Students and Enrollment Jean Eddy said, "When a student is offered a merit award, the clock starts ticking because it is tied to a budget figure. If the student starts as expected then the scholarship will renew for the next three years. If a student defers, the funds are still tied to the year and budget that student should have started in. Thus they would only have 3 years left. Because these are real budget dollars we can only give out what we have." While this system for allocating merit scholarships seems to make sense, it could be improved to allow students choosing to take a gap year to retain their scholarships. Perhaps Brandeis should include a segment on the application to allow students to make note of their plans to take a gap year. This way, Brandeis can budget to allow for the scholarship dollars for these students to come from the next year's supply, and thus will carry through with them for all four years at Brandeis.Brandeis is an extremely expensive school, but it is worth every dollar paid. In an ideal world, everyone could afford to receive the incredible education and opportunities we receive here. However, money is a great factor for accepted students in making the final decision to attend Brandeis. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that many students at Brandeis do not qualify for financial aid, but covering the cost of such a costly education is still a great burden. Students awarded merit scholarships to Brandeis may be offered merit scholarships to many other schools. The fact that Brandeis refuses to extend the length of their scholarship to accommodate a gap year discourages worldly, curious students from either seizing the opportunity to take a gap year or from attending Brandeis.Gap years offer the incredible opportunity to sit back and philosophize for an entire year without the stress of a busy school schedule. In a busy college schedule, this is unheard of. What if, for example, a student travels to Djibouti for a year and stumbles upon the only vegetarian aardvark during their travels? Shouldn't that student be more highly sought after by colleges because of the unique and enriching experience he can share with his peers? Unintentionally, Brandeis is turning the gap year into a financial burden on gifted students. Perhaps, in addition to budgeting to allow gap year students to use the entirety of their scholarship, it would be in Brandeis' best interest to have a separate scholarship set aside for students who choose to take a gap year. After all, the gem that is Brandeis is a sum of its parts, and a fair percentage of the University chose to take a gap year before beginning their time here. It is important to realize that in Brandeis' short 61-year existance, it has become one of the most prestigious colleges in the country. This is partly due to a student body that takes a sincere interest in their studies. Perhaps by becoming "gap-year friendly," even more late-night political discussions, a staple of college life, would flourish.
(11/10/09 5:00am)
LAWSUIT AGAINST HARPER'S IS A WASTEIn response to your article "University criticizes Harper's article" (News, Nov. 3): Brandeis administrators should stop trying to prevent criticism of this type. The fiasco around the Rose Art Museum speaks for itself: Poor planning and an erosion of integrity toward the arts. Having received a Ph.D. in History in 1990 from this university-from an outstanding department with superb faculty-the latest developments at Brandeis are a great disappointment to me. And Harper's-to which I subscribe-is one of America's finest critical popular magazines, far more truthful than most of U.S. media, print or otherwise. A defamation lawsuit?! What a terrible waste of money and time. I'll stand by Harper's on that one.-David Palmer Ph.D. '90The writer is a senior lecturer in American Studies at Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.REQUEST LEGAL ADVICE BEFORE SUINGRegarding your article "University criticizes Harper's article" (News, Nov. 3): Are statements of opinions that are based on factual errors or that are insulting actionable as defamation in any jurisidiction where Harper's is distributed? I doubt it. The University has been in court enough lately over the Rose Art Museum controversy. As a lawyer as well as an alumnus, I hope the President gets sound legal advice before pursuing a libel case on the University's dime. -Gary Lander '67 BEHA'S ARTICLE IS POOR JOURNALISMIn response to your article "University criticizes Harper's article" (News, Nov. 3): As a Harper's subscriber, veteran journalist and long-ago Brandeis graduate, I was surprised and put off by Beha's article-not so much because it was highly critical of Brandeis but because it offers virtually no evidence to support its one-sided point of view. Beha may have a few points to make, but his piece is lazily prepared, too polemical and ultimately unconvincing to anyone who reads it closely. It simply doesn't pass muster as a reporting job. There is little evidence that he actually interviewed anyone at Brandeis or did any investigative reporting. Or that he wanted to do any. He provides no quotes from the administration-or anyone else. Not even any off-the-record quotes, however misleading, to convince the reader, except one blind comment from a an unnamed "committee" involved in the Rose controversy. If Beha had really wanted to get the story, he would have interviewed several well-informed Brandeis sources and provided quotes from at least a few of them or at least quoted from one or two on 'deep background.' Beha damages his credibility further by implying that some students might actually have decided to attend Brandeis-despite its high tuition-because of the presence of the Rose Art Museum. Really? He provides no evidence for this absurd contention. Who would choose Brandeis over University of Massachusetts, Amherst, simply because of the art museum? He offers no anecdotal or survey data to support that notion. Beha even implies that Brandeis' tuition is significantly higher than that of other private institutions (he compares Brandeis with publicly funded UMass, not with comparable private universities)-so his comparison in that respect is utterly worthless. Rather than threaten a lawsuit against Beha, however, I believe the Brandeis administration should focus its rebuttals on the substance of the article. If, as President Reinharz has asserted, Brandeis has not been severely damaged by the Madoff debacle, then the administration might want to provide evidence that it is still in good health. Address the issues. Don't expect any apologies from the author, however. Remember that Beha would never have written this article in the first place if he had intended to make it a balanced one. Otherwise, he would not have overlooked the first rules of objective journalism in putting it together.-Alan FieldThe writer is an associate editor at the Journal of Commerce.POOR PICKS FOR SEARCH COMMITTEERegarding your article "Search committee appointed" (News, Nov. 3): Pray tell, how does buying a building with your name on it qualify you to make decisions for an entire university community that you're not even a part of? Malcolm Sherman seems to think that the expertise that comes from donating large piles of money far outweighs anything brought to the table by students or staff-that is, the people who live and work here, and the people who will be most affected by the selection of a new president. This leadership clearly hopes to model Brandeis on corporate structures and practices rather than on a community of learning, something I don't think Louis Brandeis would have appreciated. -Jon Sussman '11 BUILDING WOULD DO LITTLE FOR THE JEWSIn response to your op-ed "Scrap plans for chapel; erect a Hillel building" (Forum, Nov. 3): The writer's intentions are good, but his proposition would simply prove inconsequential. Putting a whole group of people in the same building will not magically solve all of the problems with our campus' Jewish community. The community here at Brandeis is fragmented because each denominational group (Brandeis Orthodox Organization, Brandeis University Conservative Organization, Brandeis Reform Chavurah and Brandeis Reconstructionist Organization) has its own social activities. What really needs to be done is more joint programming among the various demoninations, so that we (that's right-I'm including myself in this statement) can get to know each other on a more personal level. Two people merely walking in the same direction to and from services or Shabbat dinner means absolutely nothing. -Daniel Kasdan '13 GOLDSTONE AND GOLD FORUM WAS FAIRIn response to your op-ed "Accord speaker his own platform"?(Forum, Nov. 3): Several points are unclear in this article.First, the opinion writer refers to Thursday's forum as a "debate." A debate is an argument in which some arbiter determines a winner and a loser. A famous example might be the debates in which Douglas rhetorically defeated Lincoln. As much as I would like to demonstrate to the world that not everyone has gone off the deep end, I highly doubt the audience will be asked to select a winner at the end of Thursday's forum.Second, on what grounds does the opinion holder conclude that Dore Gold is "far to the right of the Israeli political spectrum?" It's impossible to be to the side of a spectrum; no matter where one is in relation to others, one is still on the spectrum. Also, the tactic of hawkifying or extremifying is a tactic we see from terrorism apologists everywhere. I ask again: what do you know about Gold that convinces you he is several standard deviations from the mean of Israeli political thought? Third, the assertion that "the Brandeis administration will not let a left-wing activist stand on his or her own" is patently ridiculous. If I recall correctly, we hosted American terrorist-gone-academe Bill Ayers last spring; certainly he was the loudest name, but Barney Frank and Carl Levin have spoken here, too. If anyone reading this believes left-wing speakers are shunned, they need to share a bit with the rest of us. Finally, this forum was balanced. On one side is the man who accepted the flawed mandate of the mission, failed to screen other panelists for prior prejudice and seriously entertained the testimonies of "civilians" living in an area that had recently experienced internal civil war, an area controlled by a vicious, uncompromising group dedicated to the destruction of any Jewish establishments between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. On the other side is a man standing up against the biases inherent in this mission and the prejudices in other U.N. work, a senior official in a government that saw the Mission's real colors from the outset, a man from a nation that has kept coming back to negotiate itself into oblivion, from Israel.-Gideon Klionsky '11
(11/03/09 5:00am)
An article in Forum last week incorrectly referred to an administrative body at Brandeis. Any current sustainability projects fall under the Campus Sustainablity Initiative, spearheaded by the Facilities Services department, not the Office of Sustainability. (Oct. 27, p. 11)An article in News last week mispelled the surname of a student. The student's name is Nicholas Hornstein, not Nicholas Horstein. (Oct. 27, p. 7)An article in Forum mispelled the surname of Haym Salomon. His name is Haym Salomon, not Haym Solomon. (Oct. 27, p. 10) The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail justeditor@brandeis.edu.
(11/03/09 5:00am)
To the Editor:In light of the article "Despite flaws in programming, Eco-Reps benefit campus," (Forum, Oct. 27), we as current eco-reps just wanted to let you know what we're up to. For the past couple of weeks, we've been in intensive training and are now armed with knowledge about environmental issues and peer education techniques, and we are ready to dedicate our time fully to engaging the student body. Here are a couple of projects we are working on and welcome you all to join. Green Room: An environmentally friendly certification program aimed at commending those who are taking steps to reduce their carbon footprint and encouraging their peers to do the same. We are not only acknowledging current behaviors but also educatingstudents regarding alternative behaviors they may take. Recycling Grades: Brandeis students in particular are responsive to grades! As eco-reps, we wanted to play on that sentiment, and thus we implemented a "recycling grade" program. In just one semester last year, recycling grades in East Quad improved from an average of C to A-, which is quite a significant jump. Recycling grades have been proven to work and get people thinking about what they put in a trash can. While both of these initiatives seem simple, we've found that they are effective ways of reaching out to average Brandeis students and making them aware of their simply mundane behaviors and how these behaviors affect the world at large. As always, we welcome questions, comments and concerns and are looking forward to meeting and working with you all.-Aka Kovacikova '11 and Jenna Brofsky '10
(11/03/09 5:00am)
In response to "Seven semesters of residency not necessary" (Forum, Oct. 27): I disagree with the overall opinion and the reasons you list. If someone is bright enough to get into Brandeis and possibly finish in three years, wouldn't we expect him or her to have enough financial aid for that final year? Furthermore, who can afford to go to Brandeis for six semesters but not seven? This is why we have such generous financial aid programs (from which I also benefited): to make sure these bright students are able to stay here as long as they need to complete their degree. Also, the crux of a liberal arts education is that you must have a broad-based education in a wide range of courses. It is true that some people know they want to be doctors, so what's the harm if they take a few extra English classes and learn how to write well also, or take more foreign language classes? Since many people don't find jobs in their field (especially now), it is to their advantage to have a broad base of knowledge and flexibility. This is the advantage that a true liberal arts education gives to you. Lastly, as the cliché goes, college is about more than book learning. Having an extra year to develop personally and socially with your peers before moving on is an advantage. Plus, as a recent graduate now working full-time, what's the hurry?-Eli Harrington '09
(11/03/09 5:00am)
The Constitutional Review Committee, a group composed of students and alumni to evaluate the Student Union Constitution, is in the process of being formed, according to Union Director of Communications Sydney Reuben '10. Most of the committee members have been selected, but last Friday's deadline, by which constituencies had to select their representatives for the committee, has been pushed back to give groups more time.Ryan Fanning '11 will represent the Senate, Jenna Brofsky '10 the Senate Executive Board and Julia Cohen '10 the Financial Board. Andrea Fineman '10 will represent secured media on the committee, Jessie Steinberg '10 secured nonmedia, Matthew Feinberg '10 religious organizations, Andrew Litwin '11 artistic and performance organizations, Benjy Cooper '11 club sports, Nipun Marwaha '12 nonsports competition organizations, Kenta Yamamoto '10 the intercultural community and Tamar Brown '12 community advisors. Sahar Massachi '11 and Alex Schneider '12 will represent the student body at large. The spots on the committee reserved for three alumni of the School of Arts and Sciences have yet to be filled. According to an e-mail from Reuben, "Many [alumni] have said they'd love to be a resource, but that they live too far away to be a rep." As a result, it has been difficult to find alumni to serve, she wrote.According to Article 13, Section 1 of the Student Union Constitution, "Every four years there shall be established an independent Constitutional Review Task Force charged with conducting a full review of all aspects of the Union, including the operation of clubs, Secured Organizations, and Union Government." "The task force shall not be subject to review or oversight by the President, Senate, or Finance Board. Disputes regarding the actions of the task force may be brought before the Union Judiciary," as stated in Article 13, Section 8 of the Constitution.Reuben said in an interview with the Justice that representatives from the Student Union met with leaders of the represented constituencies to explain the purpose of the Constitutional Review Committee. Those constituencies were then allowed to choose their representatives to the committee, and members of the Student Union interviewed candidates for the committee. "Everything will be finalized this week," Reuben said. She said that if any constituencies failed to choose representatives, the Union would appoint students for these groups. "I want to work with the other members of the committee to take a critical look at the constitution, see what's working [and] what's not working and try to improve on those areas if we can and try to get as much student input into the process as possible," said Brofsky about her goals for the committee. Massachi said his goals include "creating a constitution for the Union that is more accountable and democratic and . creating a Union constitution that structures the Union to be more effective." He continued, "We don't have a Student Union right now; we have a student government, and I've been exploring the idea of actually having a Student Union."Schneider said that as a member-at-large, "I am one of the representatives that represents the whole student body instead of a club." He was selected for the position after filling out an application sent to the student body and was interviewed by members of the Senate.Several of the committee members expressed interests in including student input in the review process. "Each month the committee must hold . an open forum that's open to the public. . I want to reach out to constituents, and I hope that other people on the committee do the same," said Brofsky. "One thing I'm interested in is using polls and other methods to get student input," said Schneider. Another one of his goals is to "finish the discussion about the Racial Minority Senator that was started last year at the Union Judiciary. . I think that the Union Judiciary trial last year was not the best way to deal with that issue." Massachi also discussed the role he envisioned students would have in the Union in the future, saying, "Some of the ideas that have been tossed around are running the Union more like a co-op or more like democratic government. I am really interested in the idea of, whenever something big goes down on campus, . we just call a general meeting, and everyone who shows up has a voice."Editor's note: Andrea Fineman is managing editor of the Justice.-Harry Shipps contributed reporting.
(11/03/09 5:00am)
Daniel Terris, director of the International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life, and Prof. Ilan Troen (NEJS) led a discussion last Sunday about the controversial report by the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which was presented to the U.N. Human Rights Council on Sept. 29.Sunday's forum was a pre-event held in the lead-up to Thursday's event, "The Challenge of the UN Gaza Report," at which Justice Richard Goldstone, who led the U.N.'s fact-finding mission, will discuss the final report with former Israeli ambassador to the United States Dore Gold. Attended by around 30 Brandeis students and community members, the open-ended discussion focused on providing a basic understanding of the 600-page U.N. mission's report and the reasons it has engendered so much controversy in the international community. In an interview with the Justice after the event, Terris said that he thought it was good to have as many opportunities as possible for Brandeis students to explore the issues involved in the Goldstone report."Having an opportunity in a quiet setting to exchange ideas and exchange information is valuable in itself," he said. When Goldstone, who has a long-standing relationship with Brandeis and is currently on the advisory board of the International Center for Ethics, Justice and Public Life, first agreed to head the U.N.'s mission to investigate the state of human rights in the midst of the Gaza conflict, he refused to operate under the original U.N. mandate, Terris said at the event. The original mandate called for an investigation focused solely on Israel's actions regarding the conflict in Gaza; Goldstone articulated his desire to investigate human rights violations on both sides of the conflict. Despite this initial ideology, according to Troen, when the final report of the four-member mission was published, Israel took issue with the "astounding" one-sidedness of the report, which details 36 individual incidents of Israeli violations agains the Palestinians. Terris said that he has heard the full range of opinions regarding the report and thinks that the entire spectrum is represented on the Brandeis campus, from those who strongly support Israel and think that the report is "out of line" to those who are "harshly critical of Israel and have a variety of different opinions on the report."Troen said that the Brandeis community finds itself in a unique situation because, until now, Israel has steadfastly refused to engage Goldstone regarding the report. Thursday night will be the first time that Goldstone will discuss the report with someone, Dore Gold, who, even if he no longer represents official Israeli policy, has worked in Israeli government and represents an educated and informed Israeli opinion on the matter, Troen said."I think that students are very curious, want to know and have yet to engage themselves with the massive material, except second- and third-hand," said Troen when discussing the importance of Sunday's discussion in a later interview. "So how does one cope with the mass of contradictory opinions that people bring to this event without having engaged in the material oneself?" Troen asked. When asked why he thought it was important that people who planned on attending the event on Thursday had an understanding of the report and its effects, Troen said, "I think that issues are so complex for everybody because they also reflect on the role America plays in the world, not only just in terms of the Arab-Israeli conflict but how America conducts itself in conflicts where there are civilians proximate. [The Arab-Israeli conflict] may be the issue that illuminates much else."Terris said that if people want to get a true sense of the methodology and ideology behind the report they should read some of the report's observations and conclusions regarding specific instances of human rights violations. He said that these will give a good sense of how the mission went about conducting research and what kind of conclusions it drew based on that research.Asher Bublick '12 said that he had attended the event on Sunday because "both [Terris and Troen] are known to be well educated on the topic, and . I thought it would be a really good opportunity to learn more about the report and hear the opposing opinions.""It was a really good format of speaking on the topic because you were able to see both sides and go back and forth," said Bublick.- Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.
(10/27/09 4:00am)
When the Heller School for Social Policy and Management opened in 1959, the building was not Wi-Fi enabled. It did not have a Dell computer system sitting in every classroom nor a projector that would slowly unroll with the touch of a button. It did not have elevators for all three floors of the building. What it did have were professors, its first three graduate students and a vision of social justice. "While we have physically gotten larger, the basis of the vision has really stayed the same," said Dean of the Heller School Lisa M. Lynch, who opened the ceremony for the Heller School's 50th Anniversary. As a testament to the Heller School's progress over the last half century, Lynch mentioned the school's 2,300 alumni and the current class of 500 students from 59 different countries.On a breezy evening at the Irving Schneider and Family Building last Friday, over a hundred guests, alumni, students and professors gathered at the Zinner Forum to celebrate the Heller School's 50th anniversary. Many of the attendees were retired, but the desire for social improvement was still alive in them 40 years after graduating from the school. The Heller School was founded in 1959 as Brandeis' first professional school with the aid of philanthropist Florence G. Heller. The School's founders were committed to the field of social policy as well as health and human services management. The Heller School offers degrees that range from doctorates in social policy to master's degrees in business administration and social policy and began offering a joint degree in Women's and Gender Studies this year. At the weekend-long event, Brandeis alumni who graduated in the 1960s alongside current students attended lectures and workshops. Most of the events were panels of speakers who presented social and community policy issues such as "Transforming the Practice of Development" and "Philanthropy, Social Justice and the Recession." All panels were relevant to recent political changes, such as Barack Obama's health reform. The commemoration was as much a celebration of the Heller School as a commemoration of the memories and friendships that it has created. Mary Laverne '76, who arrived early, stood up to keep a careful watch of the stairs in the hopes of spotting a friend of 30 years. After waiting 20 minutes with fixed eyes, she broke into a bright smile at the sight of her friend. During the reception, Lynch spoke to the audience of alumni about the development of the Heller School's mission. "The original founders wanted to train new leaders to face challenges. Intellectual curiosity, flexibility, adaptability-these characteristics are included in the faculty," Lynch said. She looked at the audience of alumni, students and faculty and ended with, "Welcome home." Lynch, an Economics professor, was appointed the Heller School's fourth dean and first female dean, in 2008. Former deans include Charles Schottland, Arnold Gurin, Jack P. Shonkoff and the twice-appointed Stuart Altman. Altman was also involved in the 50th Anniversary Advisory Board. Marian Wright Edelman, a public interest lawyer and activist, was the keynote speaker Friday evening. "I see so many old faces here tonight," said Edelman. "I don't mean 'old' faces," she joked. Edelman's works have been used in social policy classes and her advocacy symbolizes many of the Heller School's aims. Originally from South Carolina, Edelman earned a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School and worked as a lawyer until she became connected with the civil rights movement in the 1960s. She founded the Children's Defense Fund in 1973 and works closely with Congress to lobby causes for children's education and development. Edelman spoke quickly but with deep introspection: "No nation should allow their children to be born in poverty. There is something wrong with this picture. ... We [U.S.] love being number one, but we don't mind being number 16 in lowest maternal mortality rates." She emphasized the necessary shift in American and international policy from politics and war to child development and education. "I would invest the trillions of resources for the poor, hungry children on our shared Earth .We know what to do but we must build a movement to make it happen. I submit the facts that I am about to share: the American social Achilles heel is that a child drops out of school every ten seconds," she said. Tom Glynn, Ph.D. '77, chairman of the Heller School's Board of Overseers, described Edelman as "the most effective advocate in every area." "Her cause, social justice for children and families, is our case and our mission. She never misses an opportunity to advocate her cause," Glynn said in a speech. He paused briefly to show the audience Edelman's sign-up sheets for the Children's Defense Fund. The audience laughed warmly and applauded. The speech was followed by a commemoration for Prof. David Gil (HELLER), a University of Pennsylvania graduate and Holocaust survivor. As a professor, he specialized in the dynamics of violence and oppression. He has fostered close relationships with Heller School students and staff and has taught courses such as "Work and Individual and Social Development," as well as "Theories in Social Policy." While Gil sat quietly in the front row with his wife during the reception, the panel of speakers emphasized his international influence and his dedication over the years. "He did not give grades; you had to grade yourself. The external reward forces you to go deeper [into the subject]," said Kathleen Kantzer '88, who earned a master's and doctorate in human services management from the Heller School. She currently teaches at Regis College in the Sociology department. Kantzer said of Gil's unconventional grading style, "He was a fierce and eloquent advocate that I admire very much." For some of the younger attendees, Sunday was an opportunity to network and polish job-finding skills. The event, "Career Networking and Career Building Session: Well Rounded in a Flat World: The Secret to Successful Career Development in the Global Economy," was held Sunday morning for anyone who wanted to prepare themselves in a recession. Stacyann Gabbidon, a first-year Heller School student from Jamaica pursuing a dual degree in Sustainable International Development and Coexistence and Conflict, said that the 50th anniversary provided a chance to begin career networking. "I came to the Heller School event because I was interested in behavioral health and enhancing people's capabilities for development. The events are relevant whatever you study," she said. "I won't necessarily find a job, but it is a good way of meeting people casually," she said.
(10/27/09 4:00am)
On Nov. 5, Richard Goldstone, a former judge in his native South Africa and the chair of the advisory board for the International Center for Ethics, will debate Dore Gold, a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations. This event is part of a forum regarding the merits and implications of the report produced by the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which was headed by Goldstone. A large part of the report's significance lies in the fact that it criticized both Palestine and Israel for human rights violations, drawing approbation from some and praise from others. While this board does not take any position regarding the report's virtues, we recognize the incontestability of this report's ramifications for the standards and processes of modern international justice and the subsequent importance of holding such a forum at this University.Serious open discussion over contentious and politicized issues is a fundamental attribute of any university. As students, we should pride ourselves in the fact that such discussion occurs within the bounds of our campus and at such distinguished levels. With that in mind, we urge all members of the Brandeis community, irrespective of their stances or impassivity on the report, to attend this significant event. This first opportunity to witness a debate between the author of the report and a major Israeli figure should serve as a stepping-stone for our own increased awareness and involvement in matters of international importance. We encourage students not simply to attend this forum but to attend it with an open mind. Goldstone serves as the chair of the advisory board for the University's International Center for Ethics and has worked toward achieving justice in numerous parts of the world over the course of his legal career. His words cannot be disregarded. Likewise, Gold has been a key diplomatic player on behalf of Israel, crafting foreign policy and negotiating peace. He cannot be ignored either. As students, it is our responsibility to give heed to all sides of this discussion and to be attentive to all arguments. Students should be prepared to challenge both speakers with effective questions based on the content of the forum rather than loosely connected and divisive political motivations. And to that end, we encourage those planning the forum to ensure a period for questions from the audience of a sufficient length.
(10/27/09 4:00am)
You pulled yet another all-nighter. This constant college studying is getting tough, and the only thing that will get you through that dreaded morning class is that one glorious (and very much awaited) cup of coffee; nothing else is capable of uplifting your spirit and giving you energy to survive the rest of the day. Given that you live in Massell Quad, you run to the closest eating locality: Einstein Bros. Bagels. You buy that steaming hot cup of coffee and run to class. Your friend, who lives in East Quad, pulls the same all-nighter, but instead of running to Einstein to buy that cup of coffee, she runs to the Provisions On Demand Market. The only difference is that you paid $1.99, and she paid $1.59 for that same cup of coffee. If you have the same morning class three times a week, in the course of only one month you will have spent approximately six more dollars on coffee than your friend. It might sound ludicrous to hear that there is such a significant price discrepancy between two almost identical items bought on campus, but the truth is that it happens a lot. Not only can we see it in items such as coffee but also in the two main dining halls, Sherman and Usdan. A meal's worth in Sherman is unlimited, but in Usdan you better think twice when serving yourself every additional ounce, because it will cost you. Even if you decide to use up your meal at the P.O.D. Market or Quiznos, you will have certain specific options regarding what you can buy with a meal, and ordering something insignificant like a Coke to go with your sandwich costs extra. Not only are the prices inconsistent and expensive at different localities on campus, but there are also various limitations as what one can get. Why is it that at Quiznos you can buy some sandwiches but not others and at Einstein some salads and not others? The answer I got at the Dining Services Forum last Thursday from Alex Schneider '12, Dining Services committee representative, was that each firm establishes what is C-Meal approved based on what is convenient for the individual firm. However, from the student point of view, the options they give us are extremely illogical and unhealthy. For instance, for the equivalence of one meal at Einstein you can get up to six bagels, but you can't get so much as a single fruit cup. The reason for this is that it costs the firm much more to make a fruit cup than to make a bagel or sell a piece of fruit.Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that after eating six bagels for lunch, you should head directly to the gym and stay there for a good long while. But seriously speaking, with all the advertisements and information about eating right and staying healthy, these localities aren't doing much of a job to help us. Let's face it, as college students, a) we're broke and b) we have newfound liberty that allows us to do whatever we want. Thus, as a form of rebellion, students will stop focusing on eating healthy meals and eat what is most convenient, or in other words, whatever is cheapest. In the long run, this practice can bring about various health-related consequences that will certainly disturb our lives. One of the most commonly heard of consequences of unhealthy eating in college is the freshman 15. This "myth" was recently proven to be more of a reality than you might expect. A study by Utah State University found that one in four freshmen gains an average of 10 pounds during the first semester of college. And as it appears, the dining options we have here at Brandeis are ideal to help make our population a perfect model of these statistics. All in all, if Brandeis Dining Services were to standardize the price inconsistencies around campus and reconsider adding healthier options as part of meals, people would be much better off. To begin with, students and faculty would be able to buy products anywhere without having to commute to the other end of campus looking for more affordable prices. Secondly, if the meal plans enhanced their options, people in general would be healthier and lead more contented lives. Moreover this change would help those dreaded freshman 15 become only a "myth" here at Brandeis.
(10/13/09 4:00am)
In response to "J Street U?opens doors for Israel conversation"?(Forum, Oct. 6): We at J Street U have facts and figures, and our members have a strong knowledge of the complexities of the Palestinian-Israeli and Arab-Israeli conflicts. Many of us also have deep personal connections to the state of Israel. We have started this organization at Brandeis in order to combat the idea that a person must support all of Israel's policies to be a Zionist-a proposition paramount to the idea that we all needed to support President Bush's war in Iraq in order to be true Americans. We understand that there are many perspectives in this issue and that yours is valid. But we interpret policies differently, and J Street U was not created at Brandeis in order to sling facts and figures back and forth between groups of different opinions. J Street U was started so that all students on this campus understand that Zionism is a movement derived from individuals with a personal belief system, and within that movement we find that there are all types of Zionism. Jeremy Sherer, like all the other members of J Street U at Brandeis, wants more than anything to see the state of Israel prosper peacefully. We also don't want to allow ourselves or any other student at Brandeis to be told we aren't real Zionists or to be told we don't support the same cause because we don't approach the issue from the exact same perspective. As Jeremy pointed out, multiple voices and varied interpretations have always been and always will be central to the culture of Judaism. I hope everyone will realize that Jeremy's op-ed was not an argument about our positions on specific issues with the Israeli-Palestinian debate but rather a commentary on the refusal of some American Jews to recognize the growing number of voices who do not feel adequately represented in the American Israel lobby, and the quickness with which people are willing to dismiss a legitimate point of view because it is not the one that so many have hung tenuously to for so long with obscure results.-Jeremy Konar '10
(10/13/09 4:00am)
In response to "J Street U?opens doors for Israel conversation"?(Forum, Oct. 6): Mr. Sherer suggests a "brand of Zionism, which advocates an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and subsequent creation of two states for two peoples. It holds that the eventual boundaries of the state of Israel must respect the Green Line (Israel's pre-1967 borders) and that both Israelis and Palestinians, as well as the Jews, Muslims and Christians among them must enjoy equal access to the holy city of Jerusalem." May I suggest that this is not quite Zionism but a personal belief system based on a political orientation that is far left of center. I hasten to add that it is legitimate to express such views, but it would seem to be a precarious position. Take the last point: Under no other control in the past 1800 years has there been more equal access to Jerusalem, so much so that Jews are the only ones permanently banned from praying at the site they consider their holiest. How's that for backbending for peace?Moreover, the Green Line was never Israel's border but a cease-fire line that had no international recognition. If we're adjusting lines on the map, and Sherer supports territorial compromise, what territory will the Arabs yield to Israel for all its aggressive terror in the 1950s (from "militant" refugees acting as fedayeen before the Fatah took control) and of the Fatah which began operations in 1965, incidentally, two years before the Six-Day War when Israel assumed administration of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, areas which international law had decreed to be Jewish land back in 1922. One last issue: the two states for two peoples? Why are the so-called "Palestinians" a different people from the Jordanians or vice versa? Both live in the area of the former Palestine Mandate. Why are there to be two Arab states in the former Mandate territory (although it seems there may be a third one, Hamastan, in Gaza) both uni-ethnic in which no Jews can live but there can only be one Jewish state which must share itself with a 20-percent Arab minority? Cannot a 20-percent Jewish minority live in the area of the Palestine Authority? Why must there be an ethnic cleansing of Jews, especially after the last one in 2005 from Gaza proved a disaster?-Yisrael MedadShiloh, Israel
(10/06/09 4:00am)
University President Jehuda Reinharz revealed plans to install 1,383 individual solar panels on the roof of the Gosman Sports and Convocation Center that will help avoid 122 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year at the Great Green Ideas for Brandeis and Beyond event last Wednesday.The announcement coincided with the introduction of the Brandeis University Climate Action Plan. The plan was released and submitted to the American College & University Presidents' Climate Commitment Sept. 15.The Climate Action Plan was compiled by the Brandeis Environmental Sustainability Team, the advisory committee of the Campus Sustainability Initiative, which consists of members of the Brandeis faculty, staff and student body. Highlights from the plan include a goal to reduce carbon emissions by 15 percent by 2015 and to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions on campus completely by 2050. Other components of the Climate Action Plan stress the University's goal to promote energy efficiency on campus. The University will work with the renewable energy company Alteris Renewables to build the 277-kilowatt solar panel array and will begin installation in November 2009. After its completion, the solar panel array will be one of the largest in Massachusetts. The University has signed a contract with EOS Ventures, a renewable energy company that will finance the up-front cost of the installation. The University will then buy the electricity produced by the solar panels and use it as an alternative source of energy. "The system didn't cost us anything," said Sustainability Coordinator Janna Cohen-Rosenthal '03. "We are using a power purchase agreement, where another company owns the system. We just pay for the power. I believe that the solar panels could cost $1.5 to $2.5 million dollars." "This development is highly worthwhile both for its energy production and for its educational value," Reinharz said at the presentation.Reinharz also stressed individual action and student education in his speech. "We are committed to educating Brandeis students to be sustainability leaders," he said.Prof. Sabine von Mering (GRALL), who also spoke at the event, introduced the new Web site affiliated with the Brandeis Forum on Environmental Crisis. "The number-one goal of the site is very simple: We want to better educate the campus and each other about climate change, including the basic issues, the threats to biodiversity and to clean food and water," von Mering said.Student Union President Andy Hogan '11 reviewed past campus involvement in promoting environmental sustainability at the event.He discussed the new course "Greening the Ivory Tower: Improving Environmental Sustainability of Brandeis and Community," which helps initiate student-led sustainability projects on campus. Under the Climate Action Plan, students will be able to receive a "Green Room Certification" from the Eco-Rep in their quad by following a list of eco-friendly guidelines, Hogan said. The Eco-Rep program seeks to encourage environmental education in residence halls and has been adopted by over 30 colleges and universities, according to the Office of Facilities Services. "We as a community are committed to this green movement, and I know that through our cooperation with each facet of the Brandeis community, we can move mountains," Hogan said."I am proud of the success that we have achieved so far, but I also readily acknowledge that there is much more that can be done [to promote environmental sustainability on campus]," Reinharz said. He added, "It is through such efforts that we maintain our university's proud traditions of social consciousness and responsibility.""I thought the event was really exciting," Ellen Abramowitz '11 told the Justice after the event. "I thought there was a really good turnout. If everything goes well, Brandeis will be ahead of the curve [in promoting environmental sustainability projects]," she said. "I think the thing that really stood out to me was the Web site. I think it's a great way to get students involved." Yale Spector '11 told the Justice.
(10/06/09 4:00am)
After reading two articles on the course that the University should take in regard to Greek life (Forum, Sept. 22), I felt compelled to respond. First, let me introduce who I am as it is pertinent to this issue. I am a proud brother of the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity. I also have visible cerebral palsy, which affects both my speech and walk. The issue of Greek life here has been exhausted and void of the voice of Greek life itself. I find remarkable the number of people I hear vehemently criticizing the Greek system that would probably have nothing to do on weekends without it. It's easy to hold us up as an example of depravity, but we do not hurt anyone. With friends in all seven of Brandeis' organizations, I can safely say that if someone would benefit from being involved in Greek life, he or she is able to enter. The exclusivity of our organizations has been unfairly demonized. It is the nature of groups to accept complementary people. I felt an obligation to write this because I feel that I am a prime example of the depth our Greek system has. Will everyone fit in? No. But that is the nature of human social practices. There are social groups on campus where I would not fit in and might be excluded from because of my beliefs and interests. I have found a group of people I share the connection of social norms with, and I think it is unfair that we are under attack for that. In a school that prides itself on accepting students that come from all walks of life, people should not be insulting and accusing institutions that provide a number of students a safe and comfortable zone to be themselves. -David Wayne '12
(10/06/09 4:00am)
The Justice Brandeis Semester committee expects to fill the position of JBS manager within the next three weeks to coincide with the approval process for summer 2010 JBS proposals, which were due last Thursday, according to Director of Study Abroad and JBS committee member J. Scott Van Der Meid. According to the JBS Web site, four proposals for summer 2010 have been submitted by the deadline: "Collaborative Theater and the Theatrical Essay," "Environmental Health and Justice," "Ethnographic Fieldwork" and "Web and Mobile Application Development." "All JBS proposals will be submitted first to a subcommittee for 'preapproval,' before submission to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and dean of arts and sciences for final approval," according to the JBS Web site. Criteria for proposals include academic coherence, excellence and feasibility, expected appeal to undergraduates, and financial viability, as stated on the Web site"[The proposals] should be going through, so by the end of the month we should know more concretely what the product is and our hope is to have a program manager on board at a similar time," Van Der Meid said. The Brandeis employment Web site lists the responsibilities of the JBS manager, which include "managing the logistics of the program, including developing publicity, the application process, budget monitoring, logistical arrangements for students and faculty, and the implementation of the program evaluation rubric."Van Der Meid said that the JBS committee had conducted phone interviews with a large number of candidates two weeks ago and then invited a smaller number of applicants to interview on-campus throughout the past week. He was unwilling to comment on the number of candidates interviewed, a policy he said was in keeping with similar situations in the past. Applicants for the position of JBS manager who interviewed on campus talked with several different groups, including a "subset of the larger JBS committee," students, faculty and staff, according to Van Der Meid. Most of the applicants for the post had previous experience with experiential learning either in their professional or academic careers, he said.Member of the JBS committee Prof. Laura Goldin (AMST) said that faculty who had submitted proposals for JBS programs held a forum for other faculty members and certain students on Thursday, Sept. 24. The forum aimed to generate discussion about the JBS programs and to inform other faculty members who might submit proposals. The forum was attended by faculty members and invited members of the Student Union, including Union President Andy Hogan '11, Vice President Amanda Hecker '10 and the two student members of the JBS overview committee, Sofya Bronshvayg '11 and Danielle Wolfson '11. Hogan said that at the meeting, "We spoke about students' needs in the JBS process. . Those were student life concerns as well as definitely encouraging the faculty to follow through with the proposals because the JBS is a good solution for overcrowding." Hogan said that he does not expect there to be any more programs for summer 2010 because the deadline for proposals has already passed. "I think [the forum] was instructive; I think people got a chance to see what [the proposed JBS programs] might look like. . I've heard some ideas around the table that I had not heard before, . and it was very exciting to hear that," said Goldin.
(09/22/09 4:00am)
In response to your article "Klausen's cartoon book exceeded the bounds of freedom of speech"?(Forum, Sept. 15): I applaud Yale's decision; the images were not necessary as they could be described. While they are merely supplements, they could have caused serious damage. The cons definitely outweigh the pros. These aren't merely feelings that could be hurt, but lives taken.-Rinita Zanzerkia '13
(09/22/09 4:00am)
In response to your article "Klausen's cartoon book exceeded the bounds of freedom of speech"?(Forum, Sept. 15): It is a wonder that anyone would find a reason to dispute the decision to remove the cartoons; allowing them to be published would only have increased the risk of tension or worse.-Stephan TrahanThe writer is a student at University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
(09/22/09 4:00am)
In response to your article "University chapels to be renovated" (Forum, Sept. 15): It seems to me that just as the University paved the way for multireligiosity in the '50s, the time has come for Brandeis, as the first Jewish-sponsored, nonsectarian University, to show the way by building a brand-new mosque for those who regard Islam as their focus, regardless of the number of users. In the '50s, the vast bulk of users of the Catholic chapel were the members of the recruited football team! If we no longer actively recruit a more diverse student body, perhaps we should. It would be a wonderful way of showing the world that we still believe in religious equality as well as religious freedom. Vice President for Capital Projects Daniel Feldman and University President Jehuda Reinharz ought to see the need and instead of financing rehabs and make-dos, find the funds to build the fourth chapel. It can be financed in much the same way as most other institutions do-by issuance of bonds. America financed the construction of Israel through bonds. It was a good idea back then. It still is right now. And on a local level makes a great PR as well. -Ed Hamada '59
(09/22/09 4:00am)
In response to your article "Klausen's cartoon book exceeded the bounds of freedom of speech"?(Forum, Sept. 15): Censorship in its true form is really only the action of a government. The choice not to depict the cartoons is a mutual decision by publisher and author. Obviously, the weight of the decision comes overwhelmingly from the publisher, but the book, with or without the cartoons, belongs to the author. The cartoons appeared in a nation of just over 5 million people, fewer than reside in Massachusetts, and I imagine not many more speak Danish, yet these cartoons inspired craziness and death worldwide. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic tract long ago exposed as a fraud, are produced in the millions of copies year in and year out in many languages, though Arabic and English are probably the most popular, and are even endorsed by leaders of many Arab and Muslim states and yet do not evoke any violence or killing. Being offended or having your feelings hurt are not suffient grounds for violence and neither Yale nor Brandeis nor Dr. Klausen should have to make a decision about an academic publication over fear of violence or terrorism. I've never known of an academic book to sell millions of copies for decades, if not a century.-Robert BrennanThe writer is a data analyst at the Harvard School of Public Health.
(09/22/09 4:00am)
Harvard Law School Prof. Charles Ogletree discussed the ways in which race, gender and religious issues played into the 2008 presidential election of his former student, President Barack Obama, last Wednesday. Ogletree's speech was the first in the ongoing lecture series "Social Justice and the Obama Administration," sponsored by the Heller School for Social Policy and Mangament in honor of its 50th anniversary. Ogletree is also the founding and executive director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, an organization based at Harvard Law School that organizes forums and conferences to promote civil rights legislation, according to its Web site. He taught Obama during his years at Harvard Law School and is currently writing a biography of the president.Ogletree showed media coverage of the race, gender and religious issues that arose during the campaign. Among the topics he discussed were the controversy over Obama's relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the debate over Obama's religious affiliation and fears of a "Bradley effect" in the voting booth. During the campaign, news media released excerpts from sermons delivered by Wright, the pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, of which Obama had been a member. The excerpts were highly critical of the American government and of the history of race relations in the United States. Obama's critics at the time used both the Wright controversy and the speculation about his Muslim heritage to suggest that Obama harbored anti-American sentiments. The Bradley effect debate arose before voting took place last November when some analysts predicted that Obama would win fewer votes than expected. This was the case when Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley lost the 1982 gubernatorial race despite his lead in opinion polls, possibly because he was African-American.Ogletree also spoke about how, in his opinion, President Obama has helped promote civil rights and equality through his cabinet and high government appointments. "He did [appoint Secretary of State Hilary Clinton], but he did more than that in terms of social justice," Ogletree said in his speech. Obama's appointment of Eric Holder, the first African-American attorney general, and of Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic and third female Supreme Court justice, were "symbolic for the country to see that everybody should have that opportunity." Ogletree believes Obama's appointment of Elena Kagan, the first female solicitor general, was especially progressive. "It's sort of extraordinary that . we've missed gender as a factor when over half our law students are women and half the population is female," he said. "It was, to me, probably the most important appointment symbolically because it said, 'This is a job everyone can do.'"Included in his lecture were several anecdotes about Ogletree's relationship with Obama. For instance, when Ogletree discussed the controversial July 16 arrest of fellow Harvard professor Henry Gates, he also described the experience of personally attending the infamous White House "beer summit" between Gates, Obama and Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department on July 30.In a question-and-answer session following the lecture, Ogletree predicted that Obama would have to balance and address both the specific needs of the African-American community and Americans in general. "We cannot think of him as 'the black president,' but rather the president who happens to be black," he said. Ogletree argued that this is because the president is elected to represent the entire country, even though Obama's appointments and support for legislation like the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act suggest his support for civil rights. "What would transform America," Ogletree concluded, "is not just [Obama] getting elected, but young people saying, 'I can, too: I can become senator, I can become governor.' If the young people who came out enthusiastic about this campaign became enthusiastic about democracy, about changing the way we face the issues, we can move forward on these issues and begin a real transformation in this country." In an interview with the Justice, Prof. Anita Hill (Heller) who introduced the speaker, said, "This is really such a complex issue with so many things to consider." "We can think about not only the role that race, gender and religion played in the campaign but how they impact where we need to go now as we look at health policy, education policy and economic policy," Hill said. "This was the first time I had seen these images and news clips since 2008. I never realized how large a role they played in swaying public opinion," Benjamin Huh '13 said in an interview with Justice after the event"It was clear from the videos [Ogletree showed] how during the election the news media hyped up superfluous things like whether Obama is a Muslim," said Huh."It was fascinating to hear from someone who knows Barack Obama personally and has sort of an insider's perspective into his presidency," said Madelyn Katz '13.
