(11/11/03 5:00am)
Over 50 students, faculty and administrators gathered for a forum held in the North Quad A/B Lounge on Tuesday night to participate in a two hour discussion about the nature of diversity at Brandeis University.The discussion was inspired by the racially inflammatory comments that appeared in an Oct. 21 sports column printed by the Justice. "We're here not to talk about the Justice, but social justice," Community Advisor Rebecca Katz '06 said, who opened the forum. She said the purpose of the forum was to heal rather than open old wounds, stating that the goal was to address the needs of individuals.The first part of dialogue involved an activity in which participants were broken up into small groups. In the middle of each group stood ten rather ordinary cups, containing a different kind of bean. It was explained that each bean stood for a different label. A split pea was considered to represent wealth, while a chickpea was labeled hispanic. Other beans stood for Asian, black, Christian, international, Jewish, queer, wealthy, white and a blanket category of other.Participants were then asked to take a bean from a labeled cup every time the label described themselves, their families and finally their best friends. The numerous resulting combinations served to raise discussion about the underlying reasons people obtained their specific blends of beans.One topic highlighted was wether Brandeis fostered diversity. This lead into the round-circle discussion.Prof. Harleen Singh (ROCL) who had just participated as a speaker in the colloquium, "The History of the 'N' Word" less than an hour before.Singh said the mere act of using food was indicative of how at Brandeis not many people place much worth in a handful of beans, a striking contrast with much of the rest of the world. "What do you think you are going to do with these beans afterward?" Singh asked all present.Others said Brandeis students are too apt to discount controversy. "Why isn't Brandeis considered the real world?" a student asked.One participant answered by blaming the inherent culture at Brandeis for creating a student body too focused on ambition rather than society."To fit into the elite places of the oppressive culture, those who manage are the agents - whether willingly or unwillingly - of injustice," the participant said.The question of responsibility came to forefront as well."Is it the minority's job to educate the majority?" one student asked.In terms of the Justice, answers differed extensively. Out of those who believed that was the case, one said, "There are some real issues here. There are issues like who has the power to control the media." Others explained that minority students are too far and too few in between at the University to be expected to do everything. "If I hear one more person say that black people need to join the Justice, I'm going to scream. Look at how many black people we have," an undergraduate said.Others called for a change in the way the university is run.Prof. Gordie Fellman (SOC) said, "the faculty haven't done a creative critique of the curriculum for fifteen to twenty years.
(11/11/03 5:00am)
Why all the hype over Pipes?I strongly oppose the message Daniel Pipes's speaking engagement makes about Brandeis and the values of this campus. My opposition is not related to policy on Israel or the Middle East, but to the way this country and this community views and treats American-Muslims. Pipes has often purveyed a message of racism, hate, and intolerance, using his two organizations, the Middle East Forum and www.campuswatch.org, to attack public figures, academics, and institutions that support Islam. Pipes's fearful and simplistic view of Muslim beliefs does not help in "the war on terror," but serves to distract policy discussion, focusing attention on individuals and institutions that pose no threat. Pipes does indeed, as many have countered, draw a distinction between radical and moderate Islam, yet the distinction is undermined by his declaration that mainstream Muslim institutions such as the Islamic Society of Boston, are tainted by ties to terrorism. The manner in which Pipes makes unfounded assertions that various groups are extremist directly parallels the way he ostracizes those academics whom he defines as 'un-American" in their teaching style. Supporters of campuswatch.com have sent thousands of emails, much of it containing threats, to those academics that Pipes listed on his website. The actions of campuswatch supporters have gone so far as to drive one professor to leave the country, and have tormented untold others. Denise Katz claims that Pipes's detractors have created an "atmosphere of fear" by posting oppositional flyers: but where is concern for the fear Pipes has inspired in millions of American Muslims. Furthermore, the assertion that these actions in some way infringe Pipes's 1st amendment rights is flat-out wrong. None of the groups mobilizing against Daniel Pipes is opposing or limiting his ability to speak on campus. In rebutting his prior statements, and attempting to unite the Brandeis community in opposition to his views, we are simply exercising the same free speech rights as Daniel Pipes's supporters. Secondly, the 1st Amendment applies exclusively to governmental actions, not those of individuals, and thus cannot possibly be involved. Even though Daniel Pipes does not have a definitive legal right to speak on campus, the Brandeis Coalition for Tolerance, in a principled stance, has refrained from attempting to stop his scheduled talk: But we will not stand by silently, for while it is clear that not every word Pipes utters is hateful, he has generally demonstrated a level of racism and intolerance that Brandisians will unite opposing.Albert "button hat" Cahn '07
(11/04/03 5:00am)
Since college campus' heyday of political activism in the 1960s, groups of Brandeis University students have considered themselves to be among the most politically involved in the country. Brandeis, however, is not immune to the recent national decrease in voter turnout among college students. At Brandeis, clubs have shown a varied response to the upcoming presidential election, as not all political organizations are working to register students to vote. "(Students') votes are up for grabs," stated a recently released Harvard survey on the political involvement of college students. According to this report, the nation's nine million college students are a good source of votes for candidates in the 2004 elections. Released on October 23, results show unconventional trends concerning political orientations and activism of undergraduate students. The survey of 1202 college students nationwide shows that President George W. Bush has a much higher support rating among the college students than among the general public and that two-thirds of college students are registered to vote. Of these students, 82 percent reported that they will definitely or probably vote in the 2004 presidential elections. "The conventional wisdom that the majority of America's college students is Democratic and that they care little about politics is clearly disproved by this new poll," said Dan Glickman, director of Harvard University's Institute of Politics - which oversaw the poll - as quoted on the Institute of Politics' Web site. Within the past two weeks, two new political club supporting Democratic candidates have joined the ranks of campus political organizations: Brandeis for Dean and Brandeis for Clark.According to Carlos Lugo '04, president of Brandeis for Dean, and Justin Peck '07, president of Brandeis for Clark, the purpose of these new clubs is to raise campus awareness and support for their respective presidential candidates. "Generally the campus has a pretty high political awareness and this generally makes our job easier," Lugo said. "Basically, this is a forum for discussion on national and international affairs and we try to further Dean's candidacy," Lugo added. "We talk about community outreach and how to get people more involved. It is called Brandeis for Dean because it is not exclusively for students, rather for the entire community, including faculty."He added that students are receptive to Brandeis for Dean, and the club's e-mail list already has 76 members. The organization is currently encouraging students to register to vote in their home states through the Democratic National Committee's Web site (democrats.org). The club is not working to increase Massachusetts voter registration. According to Lugo, "the chances of winning in Massachusetts are pretty slim, and we really want to get people registered where their vote can make a difference."The Brandeis for Clark group has not started any form of voter registration because according to Peck, they were only recognized by the Student Union two weeks ago. Peck said that the group has a strong interest in coordinating voter registration as "a joint effort between any and all political clubs on campus."You need people to vote to get people elected," he said."We don't want people thinking that voter registration sponsored by students for Clark would be voting for just General Clark," Peck added. A similar sentiment was echoed by President of Zionists for Historical Veracity (ZaHaV), Mitch Balsam '05. "We don't want to sway anybody's opinions towards Democratic or Republican. We're not endorsing any candidate, but rather seeing who comes out the most pro-democratic, pro-peace, pro-Israel."Many Brandeis clubs are political in nature. Four groups directly represent the political parties - Brandeis Republicans, Brandeis Democrats (including Brandeis for Dean and Brandeis for Clark), Brandeis Green Party Club, the Brandeis Socialist Club; additionally, a myriad of political and activist organizations focus on more specific issues. Of all these, only three are currently sponsoring voter registration on campus. This year, the Federal Elections Committee released a new voter registration form that simplifies the process for college students trying to register to vote in their home states. The form is accepted by all but four states nationwide and consists of several questions on a postcard that students can mail in to their state of permanent residence.Many clubs believe that voter registration extends beyond the political parties or activist groups involved. Brandeis Democrats and Brandeis Republicans recently co-sponsored a three day voter registration drive for students to register in Massachusetts or in their home state using the new voter registration form. "Students are such a large block that candidates should be concerned about what they can do for them," Students for Environmental Action (SEA) coordinator Rebecca Horowitz '05 said. SEA recently worked to register students to vote through tabling in Usdan. Brandeis Israel Public Affairs Committee (BIPAC), a bipartisan, pro-Israel lobbying organization, has also taken an active role in registering students to vote trying by to make the process as convenient as possible. Tali Farahi '07, BIPAC liaison, said that students are responding well. "We don't take sides, but we encourage student to become involved on a more grassroots level and become more educated and aware of the issues involving the United States and Israel and to strengthen that relationship." BIPAC's methods of soliciting student registration include tabling in upper Usdan, going dorm to dorm, and stationing themselves in busy spots on campus. For now, BIPAC is the only club registering students to vote in the residence halls.BIPAC members are also distributing "I vote" pins with Jaffa oranges on them "to remind people of the feel, smell, touch, and sentiment of Israel as a symbol of how important electoral politics are in helping to strengthen the US-Israel alliance,"Farahi said. Additionally, BIPAC has distributed a survey with yes/no questions about the situation in the Middle East. According to Farahi, these surveys aim to foster discussion and measure the sentiment of Brandeis students towards the Middle East conflict, but do not serve as a "determinant of whether (BIPAC) will register (a student) to vote or not." According to BIPAC member Martine Katz-Rajmil '07, people are glad to participate in the registration because of its simplicity. "We send the forms in for them and that's definitely an added incentive."According to Farahi, BIPAC's year long initiative on voter registration on campus is geared towards getting "all pro-Israeli students to be registered to vote."Other clubs have plans in the works."The more clubs that are involved, the more people we can reach, and the more people we can get involved in voter registration,"said the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance (FMLA) President, Maggie Frye, '05 and added that the FMLA plans to sponsor voter registration with Triskelion.Though the Harvard study indicates that among college students, Bush beats a generic Democratic candidate by a five percent margin, 18 percent of college students still say they are undecided, a number much higher than in the general population. Thus according to this poll, college students are still open to make up their mind about the different presidential candidates. To help all students make informed voting decisions, political organizations at Brandeis place a priority on discussions. The clubs that currently register students to vote also answer students' questions about the candidates and issues at hand. ZaHaV plans to host a forum next semester to discuss different aspects of American foreign policy. According to Andrew Wiechert '06, outreach coordinator of Triskelion, the club hopes to bring representatives from civil rights organizations to speak on campus "to inspire members of the community to unite against politicians who see our lives as things to play with and our rights as things they can revoke."Triskelion's main push for voter registration will next semester to register students for the primary elections and the caucus state elections because "the only way to elect queer-friendly representatives is to vote for them,"Wiechart wrote in an email correspondence. Other politically active organizations are taking an active role in the elections by going to "Bird Dog"the candidates. This is a tactic whereby activists attend the public speeches of presidential candidates and ask questions in order to raise awareness of certain issues. According to Horowitz, members of SEA have gone to candidate speeches in New Hampshire in order to promote the Energy Campaign."There are so many countries in the world where people don't have the opportunity to vote. We live in a democracy. Kids should have a voice because we are the future,"Katz-Rajmil said.
(11/04/03 5:00am)
After almost four hours of debate over the recognition of the Organization for the Discussion of Greek Life in Popular Culture - commonly referred to as the Greek Life Council - a club dedicated to "educating the community of the diverse philanthropic, political and social efforts of local and national Greek letter organizations," according to its constitution, was granted recognition by the Senate on Sunday."We are seeking to educate the Brandeis community on common misconceptions about Greek life and to a greater enhance the community through means such as philanthropic events to benefit charities representing great causes," said Amy Tu '04, a member of Sigma Delta Tau. Josh Sugarman '05, representing the Greek Life Council and a member of Alpha Epsilon Pie at the Senate meeting said,, "our goal is simply to educate...we hope to dispel that Greek life isn't just about drinking. It's about education and philanthropy."The Greek Awareness Club, a club sharing many similarities with the Greek Life Council, appeared before the Senate May 5, 2002 seeking to become chartered. When the Senate rejected the motion to charter the Greek Awareness Club, its members sought recognition, only to be rejected once more. Sugarman said that the main difference between the attempt to get recognized in 2002 and this year's is that the Greek Life Council is now "dedicated to serving as a liaison between Brandeis University and off-campus Greek letter organizations," according to its constitution."There's a different purpose," Sugarman said. "The main thrust of the original was off-campus, and now it's more of a cultural goal."Sugarman explained the 2002 rejection of both becoming a chartered and recognized club might be attributed to misconceptions about Greek life as a whole."People don't understand what's at the root of these groups," Sugarman said.Sugarman claimed that most people base their opinions of Greek life off movies and hearsay, alluding to "National Lampoon's Animal House," a film highlighting the wild lifestyle of fraternities in the 60's. He stressed that misconceptions like these promote misinterpretations of Greek life, and that education and dialogue can help dispel some of these myths. "Without communication we're prolonging misunderstanding," Sugarman said. "I think it's time to change this, and I think (recognition of the Greek Life Council) is the first step."In a vote of 13 in favor, five against and three abstains, the Senate recognized IGC as a club. Those against shared several concerns of how the Greek Life Council would affect the Brandeis community.The Village Quad Senator, Peter Williams '05, expressed hesitancy to recognize the club for three reasons: "The Senate didn't recognize a very similar club last time in May 2002, also regardless of what anyone says, it will be used as a tool to increase Greek influence on campus, and the lack of recognized Greek life at Brandeis is something that makes Brandeis very unique."Castle Quad Senator Andrew Katz '06 disagreed, claiming that the Greek Life Council will be beneficial to the Brandeis community by expanding education on important issues. "I came in with an open mind on the issue, and after hearing the way it was presented I certainly made up my mind," Katz said. "As the meeting went on, I realized we educate people on everything that they may be ignorant about or uncomfortable with from racism, antitsemitism and homosexuality to being left-handed in a right-handed world; and I realized that educating about Greek life was no different - though to a much lesser degree in many people's eyes.""As soon as I was assured that this club was not a front for off-campus fraternities and felt comfortable that this club was interested in helping and improving both the social and philanthropic life at Brandeis University, I was pretty confident with voting yes to their recognition."Now that the Greek Life Council is recognized, Tu believes students will have a clearer idea of Greek life."As with any club on this campus, recognition provides an outlet for more opinions to be expressed and provides greater paths for students to experience new things," Tu said. "Recognition of the Greek Life Council proves that though we may not recognize specific Greek organizations on this campus, we certainly recognize that Greek life and its concepts are important in our overall community and should be a presence that is addressed."Kevin Skobac '04, a member of Phi Psi added that granting recognition to the Council indicates that Greek life has an acknowledged presence on campus."It's a pretty significant contribution to the Brandeis campus because for the first time there will be an active of what Greek life is, so I think this is a pretty significant step," Skobac said. Tu said that it has been difficult to give a greater voice to Greek life on campus in the past, and the recognition of the Greek Life Council will act as open forum for students in expressing questions and concerns about Greek life.Tu said, "As a senior at Brandeis I have found little to no campus help in addressing the issues of Greek Life that many students care about."Recognizing the concept of Greek life and educating the student body on Greek ideals provides a chance for students on all sides of the spectrum to come together and voice their opinions on this matter.
(11/04/03 5:00am)
To the Editor:Benjamin Freed's '06 Oct 31 Justice article, "Join the talking heads and criticize the media," was more of a diatribe as to why he hates conservatives than an analysis of current books criticizing the media. It was almost funny to read his article, considering he embodies the type of liberal journalism that authors like Coulter and O'Reilly criticize. The only thing Freed criticizes is that conservative authors are successful. He seems to believe that the New York Times and CNN are sacred institutions that would never present biased news. He denounces Dick Morris, a former Clinton staffer, for criticizing the liberal media. However, Freed does not mention that Morris helped Clinton find a middle ground between conservatives and liberals in the 1996 campaign. Even as a Republican, Morris has written columns critical of current Bush policies. Morris's "bloodlust" may be justified, considering Clinton almost punched him in the face. Freed's sole criticism here seems to be about the title: is that because he did not read this book either? Furthermore, Freed declares that only a "Washington parasite" like Morris would work for Fox News Channel (FNC). Considering that FNC has equaled and surpassed CNN's ratings, is Freed criticizing the millions of Americans that tune in? Maybe Freed has never watched FNC, as he did not even read the books he reviewed, but it is not "unabashedly right-wing." I was not aware that attempting to present news in the fairest way possible made you right-wing. Liberals must then be prejudiced in their reporting. Coulter be happy to hear that.Freed praises Al Franken as a "focused author" when there is nothing substantive about Franken's book. When Ann Coulter publicly called upon him to defend his claims against her, he could not do so. Franken was probably not aware that, unlike Saturday Night Live sketches, political criticism must be truthful. He enjoys misleading people; as Harvard University learned when, during Franken's fellowship there, he lied to John Ashcroft about an article he was writing and was forced to publicly apologize. Freed seems to think this type of writing is funny and effective; however, it merely supports humor based upon physical appearances and stereotypes. That is not political criticism.It is because of misleading and untruthful "journalists" like Freed that Coulter and O'Reilly have careers. While Brandeis does have a large liberal student body, I would hope that the Justice would not promote articles that attack people simply for being conservative. I support and encourage all forms of political debate here on campus, and hope that liberals and conservatives can have more opportunities to discuss issues in a proper forum. Political criticism is important and welcomed as long as it is based upon facts and issues, rather than name-calling and false truths.- Jordana Luks '04Co-Chair Brandeis Republicans
(11/04/03 5:00am)
The inflammatory comments that appeared in the Justice touched off a firestorm that divided this campus. Despite the high emotions that ran rampant, Assistant Dean of Student Life Alwina Bennett was able to maintain her composure while the rest of the campus was engaging in heated argument. As both a newspaper and a group of students enduring a difficult time, we needed a sympathetic ear to listen to us and help us through. We waited for the administration to approach us, but no one was forthcoming except for Bennett. She took it upon herself to attend all events, was the only administrator at the open forum we hosted and also came into our office to inquire as to our personal well-being. She remained respectfully neutral as she kept a close eye on both sides, making sure that everyone was mentally safe and sound. Much more than any other administrator, Alwina Bennett is truly part of Brandeis University life. She lives in the Foster Mods, spends her spare time talking to all the students around her and is genuinely concerned that we are happy and healthy. She works harder than anyone else to make sure that her students are getting what she considers to be the best Brandeis experience possible, and she is satisfied with nothing less.The Justice thanks Bennett for her tireless dedication and her unbiased and non-partisan counseling to all students on campus. More than just saying that she cares, she actually demonstrates her commitment, especially in difficult situations. She clearly sees that in situations like the one that happened last week, there are not just parties involved, but also people. We hope that more administrators will learn from her shining example and take a genuine interest in student affairs. The spirit that Bennett embodies helps create an environment that makes all of us feel like we belong.
(10/31/03 5:00am)
These words are possible because a group of Brandeis students refused to say no, refused to lie down, refused to compromise and refused to accept anything short of success...On Oct. 21, many members of the Brandeis community felt betrayed by their school newspaper when the "N-word" was used in a sports column. The "N-word" is undoubtedly the most hateful word in American history, and it has absolutely no place in a university newspaper. For those who have never been called it or have never experienced racism, you cannot begin to imagine the pain nor determine what is or what isn't a "reasonable" solution. For that reason, members of Brandeis Black Student Organization (BBSO) approached the decision makers of the Justice with a list of demands that would allow the Justice to correct its gross error and begin to mend it relationship with the minority community. These demands included the resignation of those responsible for the article and an apology and response from us on the front page of the next issue. Unfortunately, we were met with resistance and the Justice refused to meet our demands. Their unwillingness to comply was a sign of disrespect and further action had to be taken.We staged a walkout on Thursday to make it very clear to the Justice and the entire campus that the forum was unacceptable and it was imperative that our demands were taken seriously. On Saturday, we attended a Justice Alumni event during Parents' Weekend and participated in a discussion with a professional reporter about "ethical journalism." We were happy to find that she condemned the irresponsibility of the Justice and shared many of our sentiments. Over the next couple of days, members of BBSO and the Editorial Board met several times and, although some of the demands were eventually met there was still conflict. On two occasions, we were under the impression that an agreement had been reached only to have the Justice renege on their end of the deal. Late Monday night however, it ended. After finding out that the Justice decided to ignore our demand - which called for a front-page response - by printing Tuesday instead of Friday, we held a demonstration outside of their office. For six hours, nearly fifty students rallied together to protest the printing of the Justice. At around 6 a.m., our voices were finally heard and our demands were finally met. When it was all said and done, the editor-in-chief, sports editor and columnist all resigned and we received our front-page apology and response.Now it's time that we begin the healing process. We have to come together and start to seriously combat the problem of racism on our campus. We plan to work along side the Justice to accomplish this goal. They will be enlisting a professional and independent adviser to give editors and writers the necessary training and guidance to handle their responsibility. They will also revamp their editorial process in order to increase efficiency and reduce mistakes. We will also work with and challenge the administration to take strong preventative measures and look out for the interests of the minority community. We are requesting that a mandatory University requirement be implemented that will force every Brandeis student to take a class about race relations and cultural sensitivity. In the near future many panels, forums and discussions will be held with the rest of the Brandeis community to increase awareness and actively attack the issues that have divided us for far too long. Apathy will no longer be tolerated. Racism affects us all and everyone must look within him or herself and do everything in his or her power to start making changes.Last Tuesday, the Justice fell asleep and allowed this disaster to occur. By today, everyone woke up. The editorial board woke up and realized that they must take their job more seriously and put in a conscious effort to maintain the highest level of journalistic integrity. The Brandeis administrators finally woke up. They now understand that it is not students' responsibility, but rather the administrators' responsibility to protect the minority community. They also know that if they fail to protect us, we will turn this university upside down. The greater Brandeis community woke up. Whether they agree or disagree with our cause, they cannot deny that we have a voice - a very powerful and undeniable voice. But most importantly, we woke up. We realized that it's not that actions speak louder than words, but actions are the only things that speak. We pushed ourselves to limits beyond what we ever thought possible and refused to stop until our demands were met. We are truly UNBREAKABLE.If this were to happen again at Brandeis, to any community, always remember the words that rang out at 2:30 in the morning and will forever echo throughout the halls of the Shapiro Campus Center... A People United, Will Never Be Defeated.Peace.Justin Moore '04, BBSO & Our Supporters
(10/31/03 5:00am)
These words are possible because a group of Brandeis students refused to say no, refused to lie down, refused to compromise and refused to accept anything short of success...On Oct. 21, many members of the Brandeis community felt betrayed by their school newspaper when the "N-word" was used in a sports column. The "N-word" is undoubtedly the most hateful word in American history, and it has absolutely no place in a university newspaper. For those who have never been called it or have never experienced racism, you cannot begin to imagine the pain nor determine what is or what isn't a "reasonable" solution. For that reason, members of Brandeis Black Student Organization (BBSO) approached the decision makers of the Justice with a list of demands that would allow the Justice to correct its gross error and begin to mend its relationship with the minority community. These demands included the resignation of those responsible for the article and an apology and response from us on the front page of the next issue. Unfortunately, we were met with resistance and the Justice refused to meet our demands. Their unwillingness to comply was a sign of disrespect and further action had to be taken.We staged a walkout on Thursday to make it very clear to the Justice and the entire campus that the forum was unacceptable and it was imperative that our demands were taken seriously. On Saturday, we attended a Justice Alumni event during Parents' Weekend and participated in a discussion with a professional reporter about "ethical journalism." We were happy to find that she condemned the irresponsibility of the Justice and shared many of our sentiments. Over the next couple of days, members of BBSO and the Editorial Board met several times and, although some of the demands were eventually met there was still conflict. On two occasions, we were under the impression that an agreement had been reached only to have the Justice renege on their end of the deal. Late Monday night however, it ended. After finding out that the Justicedecided to ignore our demand - which called for a front-page response - by printing Tuesday instead of Friday, we held a demonstration outside of their office. For six hours, nearly fifty students rallied together to protest the printing of the Justice. At around 6 a.m., our voices were finally heard and our demands were finally met. When it was all said and done, the editor-in-chief, sports editor and columnist all resigned and we received our front-page apology and response.Now it's time that we begin the healing process. We have to come together and start to seriously combat the problem of racism on our campus. We plan to work along side the Justice to accomplish this goal. They will be enlisting a professional and independent adviser to give editors and writers the necessary training and guidance to handle their responsibility. They will also revamp their editorial process in order to increase efficiency and reduce mistakes. We will also work with and challenge the administration to take strong preventative measures and look out for the interests of the minority community. We are requesting that a mandatory University requirement be implemented that will force every Brandeis student to take a class about race relations and cultural sensitivity. In the near future many panels, forums and discussions will be held with the rest of the Brandeis community to increase awareness and actively attack the issues that have divided us for far too long. Apathy will no longer be tolerated. Racism affects us all and everyone must look within him or herself and do everything in his or her power to start making changes.Last Tuesday, the Justice fell asleep and allowed this disaster to occur. By today, everyone woke up. The editorial board woke up and realized that they must take their job more seriously and put in a conscious effort to maintain the highest level of journalistic integrity. The Brandeis administrators finally woke up. They now understand that it is not students' responsibility, but rather the administrators' responsibility to protect the minority community. They also know that if they fail to protect us, we will turn this university upside down. The greater Brandeis community woke up. Whether they agree or disagree with our cause, they cannot deny that we have a voice - a very powerful and undeniable voice. But most importantly, we woke up. We realized that it's not that actions speak louder than words, but actions are the only things that speak. We pushed ourselves to limits beyond what we ever thought possible and refused to stop until our demands were met. We are truly UNBREAKABLE.If this were to happen again at Brandeis, to any community, always remember the words that rang out at 2:30 in the morning and will forever echo throughout the halls of the Shapiro Campus Center... A People United, Will Never Be Defeated.Peace.Justin Moore '04, BBSO & Our Supporters
(10/31/03 5:00am)
A controversial column printed in the Oct. 21 edition of the Justice sparked an uproar on campus last week, ultimately resulting in the resignation of three editors. According to a campus-wide e-mail University President Jehuda Reinharz sent on Oct. 22, the column contained, "what can only be interpreted as insensitive and racist remarks."Former columnist Daniel Passner '06, who declined to comment for this article, wrote the column in question, "Dusty Baker Exposed," in which he quoted a reference to Baker, manager of the Chicago Cubs baseball team, using derogatory language. "The only thing Baker has a Ph.D. in is something that starts with an N and rhymes with Tigger, the cheerful scamp who stole all of our hearts in the Winnie the Pooh series," the quote read.Passner attributed this quote to Joseph Shmulewitz '06. Passner's previous columns have cited Shmulewitz on other occasions.Shmulewitz said that he had not been interviewed for the Oct. 21 column, nor had he been interviewed by Passner for any previous article."My initial response was the same as everyone else's - surprise, shock," Shmulewitz said. "I was just as shocked to see those comments but even more so because my name was near them. I was shocked because my name preceded the quote."According to Student Union Executive Officer Adam Herman '04, the Union government first received word of the incident late last Tuesday evening after a prescheduled meeting with the Brandeis Black Student Organization (BBSO), held for an entirely separate reason. Shortly thereafter, at a regularly scheduled Union Executive Board meeting, Herman said that the Union "decided to get in touch with Dan (Passner) and to continue dialogue with the BBSO." At the time Passner was a Union senator representing Rosenthal Quad.Herman said Passner resigned from his position as Rosenthal Quad Senator at approximately 3:40 a.m. Wednesday after consulting with members of the Union government. By Wednesday evening, Passner had also resigned from his capacity as a columnist at the Justice.Over the course of the week, individuals, officials and members representing various Brandeis groups and organizations conducted a number of discussions and communications concerning the appropriate course of action. A post on the Student Union Web site dated Oct. 24 stated: "Throughout the past 72 hours, members of the Student Union Executive Office have engaged in dialogue with many concerned student groups, the Brandeis Black Students Organization, the Intercultural Center organizations, the Justice, Senior Vice President Jean Eddy, Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer and the student representatives to the Board of Trustees."Reinharz's response to the incident on Wednesday afternoon came in the form of a community wide e-mail. "I expect the highest level of student journalism and commentary from our paper," Reinharz wrote, "and knowing that at least three student editors found no concern with the offensive lines presented by the author stuns me."Justice Editor-in-Chief Stephen Heyman '06 said he deeply regretted the "tragic error" of the editorial board in failing to recognize the inappropriate content of Passner's column. Heyman said he would resign as editor-in-chief with the completion of this issue.Heyman traced the events of Oct. 20, during which the newspaper was produced electronically for the following day."The sports editor received a column by Dan Passner late Monday night. He neglected to read it," Heyman said. "He put it into layout. He printed out a proof which was then given to a copy editor-in-training. The copy editor-in-training then identified the inflammatory comments in the column ... but he neglected to inform either the sports editor or the editor-in-chief about it, and he handed the proof back to the sports editor, (who) gave it to his assistant, who overlooked the note (the copy editor-in-training) made, and it went to press."Heyman said that he himself did not read the column in question.Rob Siegel '04, who had been sports editor, submitted a letter of resignation to the Justice last Saturday. Siegel, too, said he felt remorse for the incident and its consequences at a public forum organized by the paper's editorial board last Thursday night.Siegel spoke before the several hundred in attendance. "What happened on Monday night was a tragedy," he said. "It was horrible ... it was insensitive. It was racist. I'm sorry, it was a horrible mistake."At the time of the forum, Siegel said he would not resign from his position.Later, in an interview, Siegel offered an explanation for the printing of the column in its entirety."That Monday night we had eight to nine articles in the sports section," Siegel said. "Dan (Passner) sent his article in late and it wasn't read till about 10 or 11. It was the last one to be read of the sports articles and I remember reading at least half of it."The point I want to make is that I didn't consciously want to leave it in," Siegel added. "It went to the copy editor and all the comments made were given to my assistant because at that point, my role was kind of finished. Maybe because Dan has written for so long or because it wasn't made a big deal of when my assistant read it."Passner's quotation was identified as inflammatory by the paper's copy editor-in-training, Ben Freed '06. Freed said his role in the editorial system is to read articles and submissions after they have been read by the section editors and Heyman. In his review of articles and columns, Freed said he edited for grammar, punctuation, style, form and clarity, and would at times make layout notes. After reading Passner's column, Freed said he "immediately realized the potential gravity of (Passner's comments), circled the column, and wrote a note to Rob Siegel ... I had no idea that he or his assistant or that eventually Steve (Heyman) would miss my comment.""I've been kicking myself all week for not being more vocal ... about Passner's comment," Freed added. "I realize I should have said something."BBSO DEMANDS FOR THE JUSTICEBBSO made a list of demands with which it said the editorial staff was to comply in order to confirm the Justice's accountability for its actions.Heyman said the demands consisted of Passner and Siegel either resigning or being fired, the printing of a front-page apology from the Justice and a front-page response letter from BBSO in the issue directly following Oct. 21. According to a representative from BBSO at last Sunday's regularly scheduled senate meeting, BBSO set a deadline of Oct. 22 at 8:00 p.m. for the meeting of these demands. The Justice did not meet any of BBSO's demands by the deadline. After the initial deadline had passed, BBSO additionally demanded the resignation of Heyman as editor-in-chief.Concerning Heyman and the other editors' resignations, Alana Hamlett, president of BBSO, said, "The people in the Justice were irresponsible for what was published, and these are people who I don't feel should be running our school newspaper because they don't represent us."Heyman and the editorial board initially resisted the demand for Heyman's resignation, stating publicly Heyman was the best-qualified student for the position and that there had been no other student willing to pursue his role. At last Sunday night's senate meeting, Andrew Meyerson '04, co-photography editor of the Justice, defended the editorial board's desire for Heyman to retain his position, fearing the future of the newspaper otherwise."Because this was done with no malicious intent whatsoever, it should not be taken further," Meyerson said. "It's counterproductive."The editorial board additionally stated that it would extend the deadline for BBSO letter submission to Thursday if BBSO would drop its demand for Heyman to step down.Heyman and Siegel met with Reinharz last Friday to discuss the situation at hand and possible courses of action. Heyman said Reinharz encouraged them both to resign at that point."The president was very understanding, and he urged us to do what was best for the community," Heyman said. He stressed that the Justice is an independent student newspaper and that he had no control over what we did, that he's not going to attempt to implement any of our decisions as to what we thought the appropriate response was."Heyman resigned from his position as editor-in-chief at approximately 9:00 p.m. Thursday evening, to go into effect immediately following the publication of today's issue. "I resigned only to appease the forces in the community that were besieging the Justice," Heyman said. "Hopefully with my resignation, the community will begin to heal." "I think people are angry not because these reprehensible sentiments were printed by mistake in the Justice but because they exist in our community," Heyman said just prior to his resignation. "And while the Justice can atone for screwing up and printing something that should have never been printed, we should not be held accountable for any kind of greater racial tension in the University."As no agreement had been reached, the editorial board began preparing to go to press last Monday night to print on Tuesday. At approximately 1 a.m, BBSO staged a demonstration outside the Justice's office. Representatives of the group said they took this action because the production date had not been changed, and their statement would not have been included."I was proud of the fact that students came together to get what they want," Hamlett said. "We didn't want the newspaper printed until Friday."The COMMUNITY'S REACTIONPassner's column sparked debates and protests all over campus, and people began pointing fingers at who was to blame.Shmulewitz was enraged by the column's appearance in the Justice. "I am upset ... at Passner and shocked at his bastardization of a line taken completely out of context," Shmulewitz said. "Being interviewed is part of journalistic integrity, and I was never interviewed ... I am really sorry that this whole thing happened and I am very sorry that people were hurt. I honestly didn't want to hurt anyone by having been badly misquoted like this.""I am not a racist in the slightest," Shmulewitz added. "To see this quote butchered and misquoted so inaccurately in what is a big issue is completely shocking."The editorial board held a panel on Oct. 23 in order for the Brandeis community to communicate its questions and concerns regarding the incident, according to various editorial board members."We have to realize that a forum like this is meant to bring the campus together," Paul Kandel '06 said at the forum.As a statement of protest, when Siegel stood up to speak, members of BBSO and their supporters staged a walkout.In light of this action, Class of 2007 senator Mark Sandburg '07 said, "I ask that the Brandeis community recognize that there is a large enough rift that these four rows of people felt the need to walk out tonight.""There was a severe breach in the trust that is put into our school newspaper, and that caused a group of students to walk out because they were uncomfortable," said Union President Joshua Brandfon '05. "I want the students to feel like they can comfortably engage in dialogue.""I think these forums should continue on a regular basis and there has to be a lot more self-initiative on both sides," Jocelyn Berger '04 said. "This has to go beyond tokenism. This has to be a legitimate change."This incident was not the first time students complained of racist speech in campus media. Two years ago, "The Men's Room," a show on WBRS, offended many on campus. A controversy erupted when the hosts of the show sang an "Ode to Asian Strippers" on air."It's an interesting pattern that the biggest hate incidents have been through the campus media, so something structurally has to be done," Berger said.Passner himself has a long history of including racist remarks in his columns. A case in point is his column in the Sept. 16 issue of the Justice, titled "The Art of Selig Bashing," in which, according to Professor Jacob Cohen (AMST), "he used the same language as the Nazis did when they referred to Jews in terms of diseases as a way of describing Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, who himself is a Jew." In that issue, Passner continued further to say that "if the Third Reich were making Der Sturmer today, there is no doubt that Allen 'Bud' Selig would be on the cover." He followed this comment in the next paragraph by comparing Selig to Yasser Arafat."Upon reading the article and after reading a letter of apology to community members, in which the writer told what his intentions were not, I am left wondering what his intentions were," Professor Georgiary McElveen (MUS) said. "And that is the crux of my reaction to the column - questions about intentionality. This column leaves me wondering what I am to make of the intentions of the writer, the newspaper and, by extension, the University. What am I being asked to swallow in the name of community at Brandeis? Without a doubt, every member of this community is being asked to swallow a lot.""This article went beyond bad taste and entered the territory of politicized prejudice," Professor Ibrahim Sundiata (HIST) said. "I am glad that the administration, the student government and the Justice have taken action."JUSTICE ALUMNI EVENTThe Brandeis University Justice Alumni Organization held an event Saturday that served as a second forum for students to speak about the column. The keynote speaker for the Fall Fest Justice Reunion was Merry Firschein '87, a Brandeis alumna and former Justice staff member. Firschein, who has served in numerous journalistic editorial and reporting capacities since her graduation, currently resides in New Jersey and writes features for The Record, a newspaper based in Hackensack, N.J.Firschein spoke about "Ethics in Journalism" to an audience of more than 100 students, parents and other community members.Many members of BBSO attended the event and occupied much of the first few rows.One student commented on how the failure to identify and prevent the use of language such as what was employed in Passner's column results in a complete loss of faith and trust in the Justice as a newspaper.In terms of how similar situations would be approached in the professional arena, Firschein said, "I can't imagine that happening at a newspaper. I really can't. There are words that don't go in newspapers, and that is one of them."Firschein added, "(The editor-in-chief is) the one who has to take responsibility. If I make a mistake ... he would have to take the fall."STUDENT GOVERNMENT RESPONDSAs soon as its leaders had received word of the inflammatory comments printed in the Justice, the Union government got involved in the situation.Following the forum coordinated by the Justice last Thursday, the senate held a special five-hour meeting in order to draft a resolution that would be presented and approved at its regular meeting on Sunday. After nearly five hours of "Communications" on Sunday, during which members of BBSO, the Justice editorial board, senators, concerned representatives of other groups and individuals spoke out about the proper approach to remedying the situation and addressing racism on campus. Much of the debate revolved around what steps the Justice should take in order to satisfy the needs of BBSO and the entire community."It is important to have a student newspaper that represents all groups and people on campus," Hamlett said. "There must be a new bridge built between the Justice and the ICC."According to representatives from BBSO, a compromise was nearly reached between the former organization and former Justice senior editor Matthew Bettinger '05, who resigned for personal reasons later Sunday nightThe compromise would have allowed for the resigning of Heyman for the duration of one year, after which he would be able to return as editor-in-chief. BBSO would then resume fostering a working relationship with the Justice. Bettinger said he ultimately did not have the authority to make this kind of decision, while others said the failure of possible compromise jeopardized renewed possibility for trust and cooperation with the Justice.Following a closed executive session, the senate passed its resolution by a vote of 15 to 6 in favor. The resolution acknowledged the insensitivity and wrongfulness of the column's remarks, recognizing them as "a direct attack upon the black community at Brandeis University" and as an "indirect attack on all racial minority students, the Intercultural Center, and the general student body, and recognizes the full right of students to react." It also acknowledged the measures members of the Justice said the organization was prepared to take in order to improve its editorial process and resolve the situation.Among a number of recommendations, the resolution resolved that the senate request the resignation of editorial board members responsible for the situation and additionally advocate actions taken to "regain a high level of journalistic integrity." It also encouraged the establishment of a "liaison" and the fostering of a strong relationship between the Justice and the ICC. It also cited parts of the "Rights and Responsibilities" handbook that pertained to the issue.Class of 2005 Senator Mitchel Balsam participated in the original drafting of the resolution, yet voted against it in its finality because of the resignation clause."Stephen (Heyman) is just a guy who was at the wrong place at the wrong time," Balsam said.Class of 2007 Senator Chris Allison '07 voted in favor of the resolution. "The Justice editorial staff, they screwed up," Allison said. "When they are put in charge of a paper read by 3,100 undergraduate students ... that's a great responsibility, and when something goes wrong, there should be a show of responsibility."THE FUTURE OF THE JUSTICEVarious groups and individuals on campus said they foresee different solutions to what the community has recently encountered. Changes proposed are those of hierarchical proportions as well as structural changes in the Justice's editorial process.Students addressed possible solutions to the situation at the Sunday's senate meeting. Some suggested that measures be taken to taper funding for the Justice through constitutional amendments. Others recommended that outside advisers oversee the actions of the Justice's editorial board on a regular basis.Alan Tannenwald '05 said the Justice should hire a professional external adviser. He also recommended that there be several editors reviewing the articles so that in the end, each article would be read. Tannenwald's said also that the editorial board should "undergo serious training for all your editors and staff members."Justice Associate Editor Jeremy Hamburgh '04 enumerated the following steps that the Justice will consider as a means of reform. First, he announced the coming "codification of the chain of command" in which each article would be read six times before it went into print. It would go before the section editor, the copy editor, the editor-in-chief, and a second time in the same sequence.Second, the Justice would implement office hours following every editor's last class on Monday.Third, the Justice would appoint an ombudsman to act as a "liaison" between the student body and the newspaper.Fourth, if a writer misses a deadline, the writer's article would be cut from that week's issue.According to Hamburgh, these possible measures would begin to repair the relationship between the students and their newspaper as well as a means to prevent oversights from happening again.Former Union president Ben Brandzel '03 attended Sunday's senate meeting. "The issue here is that there has been a phenomenal breach of trust that has been experienced deeply and personally as a betrayal," he said. "So no resolution will ever be sufficient until all parties believe or see that it will be sufficient.
(10/31/03 5:00am)
Be it a witch-hunt or neo-McCarthyism, over the past ten days the Justice has been victimized at the hands of heated students and a political administration. Anger, hurt and disbelief have intensified the emotionally charged response to last week's racist article far beyond intelligent, sensible and civil behavior. While the consequences of the article were dreadful, they were grossly disproportionate to the culpability of the editors involved. As an editorial board, we have rooted out the source of our error, repented for our breach of trust and responsibility and envisioned potent and long-lasting reparations to both ourselves as a newspaper and the community we represent. As student journalists our responsibilities end here. We, however, have not been treated as journalists, but rather as muses for social justice. In addition to our anger at ourselves and at the issue at hand - not a journalistic error, but racism - we have absorbed and internalized the anger of our peers, and we have been forced to concede to demands far beyond our call of duty. Insofar as the demands have contorted our journalistic standards and duties, we have let the student body step on our necks to reach new heights of social action. But forcing the resignation of our editor-in-chief has broken that neck and perverted the integrity of the Justice as an independent medium for all Brandeis students. Sacrificing the editor-in-chief is a punitive measure, devoid of reason and potency. By sabotaging the Justice as a vital disseminator of student opinion, it is a gratuitous, ineffective and detrimental gesture, not unlike the Brandeis Black Student Organization's forum walkout. Far more importantly, it is pragmatically absurd, as the shattered trust and respect for the Justice does not reflect the editor's incompetence. As I see it, the Justice had rightly lost its credibility, but now it will lose its spine. By offering ourselves as a whipping post for racism, a parasite which we allowed to infect our pages and consequently the whole school, we have become the enemy and the main target of demands, threats and personal insults. When the Justice was all but held hostage by an all-night hostile protest, the victimized party had become the aggressor, and the administration intervened as their main advocate. Those who have used us as a trigger for a social agenda, be it laudable and unanimously shared, have drained me of my desire to repent and have shaken my faith in the existence of lucid and rational thought that should guide even the most justifiable emotion. The editor-in-chief is resigning as a response to insurmountable and unrelenting animosity that we feel has wildly exceeded the appropriate punitive measures. I am resigning because I cannot represent a community where such animosity exists. - Yana Litovsky '05
(10/31/03 5:00am)
A few weeks ago, I had the privilege of listening to an educated, intelligent and well-respected man speak about modern society. I was excited at the beginning of the talk when he called for people to wake up to reality and realize how much we have advanced. But a sudden change in rhetoric slapped me squarely in the face. I sat up in my chair, shocked at what I was hearing. This man, who I thought was going to speak about society's progression to a better existence, instead fell into the badly beaten rut of condemning our generation.This man was neither subtle nor creative. He spoke about the gruesome violence on television, today's horrible video games, the foul language used in music, the revealing clothes today's youth wear - he went down the list of any and every issue people have ever had with our generation. As he continued to rant, I became increasingly frustrated with what I was hearing. I could feel the respect draining from my body as I listened to him more. How someone could be so blind boggled my mind.I do not believe that our society is perfect and I am not claiming that we do not live in troubled times; society could stand many improvements. At the same time, I feel it is very easy for people to condemn everything they see because their minds are locked by stagnant values. One can listen to the music on the radio and discount it all as garbage - a deluge of curse words, slang and sexual references. Ignoring the fact that only a small portion of music falls into such a category, it's important to realize something greater: The fact that such music exists is a tribute to how much our society has progressed. Freedom of speech has empowered people who had no previous way to express themselves. More importantly, the fact that it is acceptable to discuss such issues in public forums (such as music) is an indication that society has advanced, not receded. If anything, such progress should be promoted and fostered, not quieted and condemned.The issue arises when one is unable to thresh the chaff from the grain. Such people take an issue, beat it to the ground and throw out everything, both the good and the bad. Because they were raised on "old fashion, American values," they assume anything other than meatloaf, potatoes and "Leave it to Beaver" is proof of society's decay.This terrifies me. I'm afraid because society is not meant to stagnate, rather it is meant to develop, branch and blossom. Sometimes it yields delicious fruit; other times, we are left with withered husks. But it is impossible to order values to halt and to command civilization to remain constant. Humanity cannot be held at the status quo. Our task is to, as objectively as possible, evaluate where we now stand. We must look at how we've changed both for better and for worse. It is too easy to respond with the knee-jerk reaction and lash out against a group with which we can't identify. We see a group as alien, so we pigeonhole it, stereotyping it to fit preconceived images and notions. It is this automated response against which we must struggle. We have the daunting task of showing the world that their first impressions are incorrect. This is not an easy task, and perhaps that's why I was so frustrated with the speaker. We were not given the benefit of the doubt. In his speech, all people between the ages of 15 and 25 were delinquents contributing to society's decline. I understand, however, that it is human nature to lump people together. I can forgive the systematism of our peer group. It was his solution that sent me over the edge.The speaker called for parents to, "take a stand to their kids," and not to be afraid to say "no." While I agree this is good parenting advice, I am pained that this is his answer to society's faults. I agree that parents' roles are to impart to their children knowledge and values. But the values a parent professes should be solid ones, ones that are grounded on strong principles and beliefs. If a parent truly believes that societal standards are wrong, then I understand why a parent would want to impart those values onto a child. But if a parent also values other ideals, such as liberty, individuality, free thought or self-determination, then I would strongly advise the parent to imbue those principles instead. Teach your children morals; show them what's right and wrong, how to live decently and be a good person. But then realize that they are at that age where they are nearly adults. Soon the parents won't have any control over their children, and the child will only have his wits and knowledge to save him in the real world. The child would be far better suited if he could think for himself and make good decisions than if he can only recall what is permissible and what is taboo. The answer is not harsher judgment, not swifter consequence, but stronger, better reason.
(10/31/03 5:00am)
Brandeis students have a well-worn routine: an uphill struggle with work and errands during the week, a Friday night release, a Saturday climax of festivities and a well-earned Sunday morning in bed. In fact, pre-brunch Sunday might be their one source of refuge and energizing before waking to the jarring buzz, beep, blast or bell of the alarm clock again on Monday. But one small group of Brandeis undergraduates is not saved from the bell. About 45 Brandeis students break the routine, waking up early Sunday morning to go to class. Only this time, you won't hear them complaining, as their role has been reversed from student to teacher. These students work for the Brandeis Jewish Education Program (BJEP), a program for families with children in grades one through seven. Independent from the University and self-financed, BJEP rents space from Brandeis and along with other programs, provides a Sunday school for primarily unaffiliated Jewish children in the area. In fact, about 95 percent of the school's more than 200 students are unaffiliated Jews from many different backgrounds. Amy Sands, the religious school's director, said, "In many cases, (BJEP) is their first Jewish educational experience."The program was founded more than 35 years ago by Rabbi Axelrad - a Brandeis Jewish chaplain at the time - and was designed originally for the children of Brandeis academics, according to Sands.BJEP has evolved significantly since this original conception. Before, children came straight from the Brandeis community, out of the hands of one group of teachers (Brandeis faculty) directly into the hands of another - the BJEP religious school teacher. Now, they come not from Brandeis but from miles beyond its front gates. In fact, some parents drive 40 minutes each way just to get their children to BJEP.There are a number of religious schools in areas throughout Massachusetts. So what is it exactly that motivates these parents to wake up early on a Sunday morning to drive their children to a distant college campus?Julie Dobrow, a parent of three children enrolled at BJEP and chairperson of its educational board, said that the quality of BJEP teachers sets the program apart from others. "We've found that BJEP is really a wonderful experience for our kids, and one of our greatest assets at BJEP is our teachers," Dobrow said. "They bring an energy and enthusiasm (to teaching) that I think is really unparalleled."Almost all of the approximately 45 teachers and aides at BJEP are Brandeis undergraduate students. In addition, many other Brandeis students contribute to the program as tutors or substitutes and in other capacities. Teachers for each grade have separate curriculums, each going into the particular areas of focus in depth. The quality attributed to the teaching at Brandeis derives substantially from small details of the work. For instance, Sands said that every teacher writes a lesson plan each week, in addition to sending a letter home to every child's parents concerning what is being taught in class. Classroom topics include biblical Jewish texts and history, Israel, holidays, life cycles and the Holocaust. In addition, all students have Hebrew, art and music programs."The curriculum is very untraditional," Sands said. "It's experiential. It's interactive. We operate on the premise that children are going to learn based on what they experience, (and) kids for the most part are very happy being here, which is unusual for a Sunday school."The depth of study in each curriculum area, particularly the Hebrew program, is unique. In addition to learning the words and tunes of prayers, Sands said that BJEP aims to provide every child with a real understanding of the meanings behind them."In the greater Boston area, there are three or four other (unaffiliated) programs, but they don't teach Hebrew. It's very singular," Sands said. At the end of their studies, about 90 percent of BJEP students are able to read Torah for the Jewish coming-of-age ceremony, a Bar or Bat Mitzvah, according to Sands. Between a third and a half of every graduating class also proceeds to study at a prominent afternoon Hebrew high school for about 750 Boston-area children - an especially meaningful statistic considering most of the students' prior religious background.Sands said, "We have a very heterogeneous group. We have interracial families. We have mixed marriages and adopted children from Asia, South America ... and families that come from over a dozen communities."Amy Schneider '04 is in her second year teaching at BJEP. Her class consists of third grade children who, like the others attending BJEP, come from many different kinds of families."You get a great cross section of kids. Because it's not affiliated with some specific group, you get kids from all kinds of backgrounds. And it's interesting because there are so many backgrounds," Shneider said.The diversity which makes BJEP stand apart can also create significant challenges for BJEP staff and faculty. Teachers must deal not only with the differing degrees of knowledge among students, but also with the parents' various degrees of knowledge and the differing priority that parents place on their children's religious school education. Adena Kemper '06, who teaches another third grade class, said, "We get a whole range of students and so sometimes it's really frustrating because ... (they can get) rowdy and sometimes one of the parents may not want their child to be there."In addressing this issue, Sands noted that there are many programs geared toward the education of the whole family, including parents. Some days, parents attend Sunday school with their children so that "the parents and children learn something together," as Sands said.Each parent is obligated to help out with certain projects throughout the year, said Rachel Present '06, who teaches first grade at BJEP. "The commitment level of parents is a lot higher than it was for the parents at home," she added. Even so, the lack of a synagogue tied to the program creates obstacles for BJEP."It's the most supportive environment I've ever worked in, but at the same time, we don't have a synagogue to back us up or a congregation, so it's hard. We're trying to be the sort of nondenominational Judaism (program) and we have a lot of resources, but it's difficult because we're lacking a lot of resources that a regular synagogue would have," Kemper said.Nonetheless, the BJEP curriculum and educators manage with their available courses, and most people involved agree that their experiences at BJEP have been overwhelmingly positive.According to Sands, most Brandeis students become interested in BJEP through word of mouth. Many teachers started out as substitutes for the program. Others, like Kemper, learned about it through the Hillel office or other sources. Sands mentioned that BJEP is also welcome to graduate students who could provide administrative support or act as assistant directors.For many Brandeis student teachers, graduation does not mark the end of their teaching careers. Dobrow has seen a trend over the years of many Brandeis students continuing to take up teaching roles, whether at BJEP, in Jewish education or in other forums.Schneider plans on becoming an English teacher after graduating with her B.A. in English this spring.Kemper, working toward a degree in Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, plans on becoming a rabbi.Present, a philosophy major, said she might pursue a career in Jewish education, but is not yet sure.Regardless of future plans, both teachers and students at BJEP will continue to learn and benefit from the educational programs BJEP offers.
(10/31/03 5:00am)
A protest organized by the Brandeis Black Student Organization (BBSO) to postpone Tuesday's regular release of the Justice until Friday began outside of the Justice office in the Shapiro Campus Center at approximately 1 a.m. and continued until around 6 a.m. Tuesday morning.The protesters, some of whom were also Intercultural Center (ICC) members, wanted more time to respond to last issue's racist remark by former sports columnist Dan Passner '06. "BBSO's issue with the Justice coming out was that we would not be able to get our statement in on time," one of the co-presidents of BBSO Alana Hamlett '06 said. The Justice Editorial Board eventually complied with the demand to postpone Tuesday's issue until today and allowed BBSO's response to be placed on the front page."We were under the impression that if we didn't comply, there would be steps taken by the administration to stop press," Justice Forum Editor Samantha Slater '05 said. The Justice Editorial Board said they were saddened by the protest."It started as just chanting. They were calling for Steve," Arts Editor Sara Tenenbaum '06 said.Tenenbaum said protesters banged on the windows and walls, screaming taunts and hitting pot lids together. The window banging did not stop until Assistant Dean of Student Life Alwina Bennett intervened at around 2 a.m. "We had a peaceful protest," Hamlett said. She declined to elaborate further on what occurred. "They were teasing Steve (editor-in-chief) in very hostile ways," Features Editor Yana Litovsky '05 said. "Any time the door opened there was a torrent of screams." "I think the hate was what scared me the most out there," Slater said. "The pure hate directed at us was very scary. I was upset that they pinned us all as racists when they don't even know us as individuals. They grouped us together just as they don't like to be grouped." The Justice Editorial Board said they did not believe the protesters would resort to violence. But editors said they felt somewhat threatened."I knew rationally that I would not be hurt," Litovsky said. "Their point was to intimidate us as people, not as a newspaper, and there is no way to do that without threatening your person." Director of the ICC Suzie Talukdar wrote an e-mail to the ICC expressing pride for the students who protested."From my understanding, some BBSO members and concerned students chose to protest because they wanted to stop printing of the Justice so they could include a statement on the next issue's front cover," Talukdar said. "They believed earlier in the day that the paper was not planned to be printed that night, and then found out otherwise later." "We always told them that they could write their op-ed," Tenenbaum said. "We were just not sure if it could go on the front page." Litovsky said the placement of editorials on the front page does not comply with typical journalistic standards, leading the Editorial Board to have reservations about placing BBSO's statement on the front page. Justice Editorial Board members said they had told BBSO they would comply and allow their editorial to be printed on the front page. But when Heyman '06 chose not to comply to BBSO's demand that he resign, Litovsky said BBSO terminated communication with the Justice."If they gave us the letter, we would wait until Friday," Litovsky said. "When they found out that Steve was resigning, we gave them the next ten hours (to write the editorial). They were at full capacity to write the editorial that they were protesting for. It was all or nothing for them. They were still waiting for their regularly scheduled meeting." Hamlett said the Justice Editorial board told BBSO that they could place a statement on the front page on Sunday night. Hamlett said BBSO would not have been able to write an accurate statement including the opinions of all concerned members by Monday night because BBSO meetings are on Wednesdays. "We had told them several times that we would not be able to get the statement to them by then," Hamlett said. "We wanted any BBSO members to be able to tell what they had to say within the statement." While Litovsky said the Justice would wait until Friday to print the newspaper if BBSO chose to write the response for Tuesday's release, Hamlett said the Justice chose to proceed with production without BBSO's statement. The protest ended around 6:00 a.m.when Senior Vice President of Students and Enrollment Jean Eddy convinced the Justice Editorial Board to postpone publication until Friday. "Jean Eddy coerced us into not printing. She said that it's the best for the Brandeis community," Associate Editor Igor Pedan '05 said. "She wanted to appease BBSO so that Brandeis' image in supporting diversity doesn't falter. She said that they were the injured party so we should succumb to them." Members of the Justice Editorial said BBSO is being perceived as the only injured party. "However hurt any student was (by the racial slur printed in the Justice), I guarantee that the editors on this editorial board are ten times as hurt by their fellow students at the protest," Heyman said. Each member of the Justice editorial board expressed a sense of sadness, feeling as though their journalistic integrity has been sacrificed. This has caused many of the members of the board to resign. "I no longer believe that the Justice is a student newspaper," Pedan said. When the administration can force and choose the members of your board, you are no longer independent. When they can force you not to print, you are no longer independent. The administration has made us violate every single journalistic ideal that we have. This is why I am resigning." Other editors have chosen to resign for similar reasons, including Litovsky. But Heyman says he had no choice but to resign. "I was forced to resign," Heyman said. "It was made very clear to me by members of the administration that there would be no more, that the president (of the university) had an expectation that not another Justice would print with me as editor-in-chief and he would take whatever steps necessary to see to that. To preserve a 54-year-old publication - that means more than any one person on the editorial board." Despite lingering emotions, Hamlett says she has hope for the future."I want to see that there be better ties between the Justice and the ICC in terms or representing students who are in the ICC and in terms of better coverage of events," Hamlett said.
(10/31/03 5:00am)
While it is understandable that people's opinions on the racist comments in the Oct. 21 issue of the Justice and the aftermath to it will differ, some of the comments in the Oct. 31 letters section of the Justice didn't result from differing opinions, but rather came from a stunningly thoughtless mindset.Paul Kandel '06 says that, in an open forum held in the Intercultural Center, "Other students made blatantly bigoted comments, saying they 'wish the whole school looked like the ICC room'." This comment was made in reference to the fact that there were both many students of color and many white students in the same room, both working toward confronting the issue of racism on the Brandeis campus. Given the context of the quote, it is completely inconceivable that Mr. Kandel could have reasonably interpreted the comment in any other way, and, thus, his claim that the comment was "blatantly bigoted" is both disingenuous and offensive.Even more shocking is Martin Lieberman '96's claim that the column in question would have been "fine" had the last paragraph not been included. In the eighth paragraph of the article, Dusty Baker, the black manager of the Chicago Cubs, and Kenny Lofton, the Cubs' centerfielder, who is also black, are compared to Amos and Andy. "Amos & Andy" was an incredibly offensive minstrel radio and television show depicting white actors in "blackface" as nonsensical fools. Comparing two men to Amos and Andy is extremely insulting--there is nothing "fine" about it. --Daniel Mauer '06
(10/21/03 4:00am)
On Oct. 16, the Beehive Collective- a political grassroots organization based out of the small-town of Machias, Maine- made a stop at Brandeis University on their cross-country tour to campaign against war, colonialism and globalization. Several Brandeis clubs including the Radical Student Alliance invited the Beehive Collective to this campus to educate the students about the Beehive Collective's political views.The two hour presentation took place in the Shapiro Campus Center Atrium, and the two centerpieces were sixteen foot cloth banners printed with representational art entitled "Plan Colombia" and "Free Trade of the Americas." Plan Colombia is the United States' $1.3 billion package of assistance to help Colombians overcome their national drug problem, human rights violations and ailing economy. The other banner was "Free Trade Area of the Americas," which is an attempt started in 1994 at the Summit of the Americas to unite all the economies of the Americas in trade without barriers.The Beehive Collective uses anthropomorphic collages to express their views. "The Free Trade of the Americas" banner's focal point was the world totally covered by three mechanical industrial spiders representing development, militarization, and corporation. The development spider had chainsaw fangs and oil drilling legs, the militarization spider was covered in hypodermic needles, and the corporation spider had television eyes and corporate logo skin. Among their victims was a howler monkey, both entangled in the general web of the spiders and sewing machine threads which represented the plight of the sweat-shop workers, and also gas-mask wearing monarch butterflies.The "Plan Colombia" banner was based on interviews with South Americans. They stressed that America's involvement in their country had its roots in European colonization. At the top of the banner loomed a wasp nest shaped like Europe, out of which burst another nest shaped like the United States, imitating the principal in nature that when a wasp nest gets too heavy, a second one grows out of it. The American nest contained complacent wasps (a visual pun on the rich American WASP class) watching televisions, all the while oblivious to the plight of the South American ants below.Underneath the nests were airplanes spraying cocoa fields, because one facet of Plan Colombia is to abolish the cocaine problem. The Beehive Collective states that since the American airplanes spray the fields so inaccurately civilians 100 miles away are affected by the poisonous fumes. The South Americans interviewed thought that this was an American strategy to displace citizens.These fields were attached to an earth which was split into a "nightmare" side and a "life" side. One example of this juxtaposition was on the "life" side there were South American minor ants unionizing, and on the "nightmare" side there were American ants training at the School of the Americas about how to destabilize unions.Since there was a limited amount of time, and the Beehive Collective didn't have one central theme, they were not able to speak in depth about any one topic. The presentation was rushed because the presenters simultaneously tried to educate the audience, engage the audience in discussion and explain their elaborate banners in only two hours. Because they tried to cover too much, their messages were reduced to statistics and anecdotes with little time for analysis or discussion.Still, the presenters encouraged discussion and debate, although the seating arrangement was not conducive to it. With 40 people in the audience sitting in rows, if someone in the back row wanted to rebut a statement of someone in the front row, the presenters were running back and forth with their microphones. The logistics of getting each participant enough volume to be heard was more noticeable than what was being said. By combining art and information, the Beehive Collective provided an interesting and fun forum for students to familiarize themselves with topics that are at the center of many political debates. With the next presidential election approaching, presentations such as this are important as students begin to investigate and form their own political beliefs.
(10/21/03 4:00am)
Evan edited it and sent back this:To the Editor:The current situation going on with The Justice and the racist remark in the sports section strikes a chord of tremendous dismay.It is shocking that such a remark could ever appear in the pages of the newspaper. How is it possible that a student at as enlightened a school as Brandeis could make such a comment? How could a columnist ever think it was OK to put that in his article? How could any editor let that comment into the paper? Hell, how is it possible that he didn't on the spot fire anyone who wrote such a thing or anyone who knew about it?Any editor at The Justice who either saw that comment or who should have seen it, and didn't get furious that such a thing could ever even make it as far as onto a computer screen in the Bowels of Usdan should resign from The Justice immediately, no questions asked. At a minimum, this means the Sports Editor and Editor In Chief.Lack of experience is no excuse. If you weren't horrified by the statement, then you shouldn't be on the newspaper.That said, some perspective as to the history of The Justice may be in order.Over the years, The Justice has been one of the primary tools towards bettering racial harmony and helping racial minorities feel more comfortable at Brandeis. In the early 1990s, the newspaper's op/ed section was a primary tool used to urge a boycott of the school bookstore for racial profiling, ultimately leading to a change in management at the store. It also took a strong stand in favor of the multicultural center. And this was in the apathetic early 1990s. Go back more years and see how the newspaper was involved in the shantytown protests, or how the newspaper publicized the death sentence given to a Brandeis alumnae who was one of the leaders of the Grenada revolution.In the early 90's, we fought hard (admittedly with only some success) to bring a more diverse staff onto the newspaper, and we made a point to cover more issues related to minority students on campus.Whether or not the current Justice staff has been proactive in encouraging diversity on the newspaper, it would be a mistake to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Only those directly responsible shouldresign their positions. Please consider how important The Justice is to every walk of Brandeis life, and how it can be used to heal those wounds it has now inflicted. The newspaper has too much positive history to tear it down.Any individual who truly cares about the future direction of the newspaper should join it. The newspaper's coverage and tone can best reflect the diversity of the campus only when the entire campus joins its ranks. The colors of the faces at the newspaper can only change if the colors of the faces willing to join the newspaper change. Don't let the actions of one columnist and the mind-bogglingly irresponsible editors lead to an end to a good institution.Reuben Kantor '92, Forum Editor, 1990-91Evan Berland '92, Editor-in-Chief 1990-92
(10/21/03 4:00am)
To the Editors of the Justice- I will keep this letter brief, as I'm sure you are utterly swamped in responses to the offensive article, and also to the forum held in the Shapiro Center on Thursday. I attended the forum and stayed for the entire two hour event, and a few things stood out to me that I felt the need to respond to. Firstly, a great many people in our community seem to think that Brandeis as a whole and the Justice specifically would best be served by a change in leadership at the Justice, in order to guarantee that this kind of terrible mistake never happens again. To those people, I would say this: Who better to lead the Justice than the current board of editors who have just gone through this experience? Is there anyone on our campus who is now more keenly aware of the need for more editorial oversight than they are? I think that, having just been brought face to face with the results of their own error, the current editorial board is ideally suited to provide the kind of vigilance and leadership we want to see from the people who run our newspaper. Secondly, there are also a great many people out there who feel that the Justice does not represent them, or cover items of interest to them. This sentiment was expressed time and time again during the forum, by people whose credo seems to be this: Complain, but don't take action. If you feel that the Justice doesn't represent you, join the Justice. It is an open student organization that regularly reminds us through ads and recruitment nights that it can always use more enthusiastic, talented writers. If you don't think the Justice properly represents your view of life at Brandeis, contribute your view to the Justice. Write articles, get a column, get involved. The only way you are going to be represented is if you take the action to ensure it, and the only reason the current staff of the Justice has the opportunity to share their views with us every week is because they have done exactly that. Lastly, a sentiment I heard expressed many times last night was the need for "someone to be held accountable." Certainly, this is a reasonable request, but I felt that the subtext last night was less about accountability and more about blame; This is a natural human reaction, to look for someone to blame, for someone to be angry at, for a scapegoat, but this is an urge we must resist. What good would it do the Brandeis community and the Justice to run the editor-in-chief or sports editor out of town on a rail? One of them is quite new to his job, the other has served the Justice well for a very long time, and taking one, the other, or both as a blood offering to appease the injured parties here will do nothing but ruin two people whose error was one of oversight, not malice, and replace them with people who are not intimately familiar with the consequences of a mistake like this, as the current E-board of the justice undoubtably are.
(10/14/03 4:00am)
Watch out! The Justice is out to get you! It would like nothing more than to make each and everyone of you look bad. Its goal is to constantly get facts wrong, slander you in every possible way and misrepresent everything that happens on campus. Our mission is to be as offensive as possible. In fact, news reporters are instructed to only portray one side of each story and to openly express their views while writing their stories - making their opinions vivid in everything they write. The writers deliberately attempt, although not always successfully, to misquote their sources, mix up their facts and lie to the Brandeis community (in the most Fair and Balanced way possible of course!)Our bias doesn't stop with our writers. The editorial board is actively placing self-interest ahead of journalistic principals. If there is a cause that the Justice supports, the articles are purposely edited to reflect that view. If there are no hot news stories for the week, the Justice invents scandals, sees villains where none exist and makes good people look bad and smart people sound dumb. It sincerely hopes to accomplish those goals, each and every issue. And justInCase you have been unaffected by this, don't worry, we will target you next!To this effect, justRecently, the board even voted to no longer hide its not-so-secret agenda and to change the name of the news section to justPropaganda and the forum section to justShutUp. (We are also phasing in our new letter to the editor writing policy as some of you have noticed justGetLost).If you really think any of that is true, than not only are you more paranoid than Tom Ridge and John Ashcroft put together, but you are also very wrong.In the newspaper business it is a given that someone will always be unhappy with the coverage. No matter how hard the paper works at maintaining neutrality, keeping bias out of articles, double-checking its information, verifying quotes, getting all sides of the story and editing its articles, there will always be people who are upset. During my term as News Editor (which by the way ends with this issue), it has become evident that most of the complaints can be grouped into relatively few categories.The biggest criticism that people have is that the Justice gets facts wrong or just shouldn't have written the article based on the information provided. However, most of the time, the people complaining are the ones at fault. A recent example is a group's leader telling its members not to talk to the Justice in an effort to squelch an article. What ended up happening was the Justice published the article with only one side of the story making the silent group appear unfavorably. They were not very pleased and complained that we shouldn't have printed without their side of the story-yet maintaining that they still won't provide it. Here is a quick rule of thumb: Not giving us information usually doesn't help making a story more accurate or favorable toward you. The second most prevalent complaint is that the Justice is biased. Most people who say this, though, are usually upset because the Justice included the opinion of not just their side but of the opposition as well. My e-mail is often clogged up with people asking how I could let someone give his opinion in a particular news article. These people are usually self-interested demagogues who don't care about journalism, but only care about spreading their propaganda and portraying it in the most favorable light possible. It's not our job to actively promote any one cause. Instead, the Justice's role is to cover all sides of an issue, provided it's relevant to the community and is actively making news.Finally, there are those who get upset when their own personal cause, political event, or cultural awareness event is not on the front page. Considering it is impossible to place every event as front page news, it's up to the editors to decide whether a story is important to the Brandeis community and what impact it bears on our readership. Our goal is to portray as accurately and fairly as possible what goes on. And granted we don't always get things right. But we try hard - with editors spending nearly 40 hours per week in the newsroom.And if you really dislike the way we do things, maybe its time you stop complaining and come write for us yourself. Only after you do the job for yourself - instead of just participating in Brandeis' favorite pastime of complaining or crying foul about everything - are you truly qualified to play toilet-can critic and criticize the paper. In the meantime, instead of griping about what we do wrong, as an alternative try suggesting how we can improve in a productive manner. You'll be surprised how open everyone is to suggestions.In the end, I have enjoyed the honor of being News Editor for the past year, but I am glad to be getting my life back. Maybe with the 40 or so hours per week back I will now have free time, I can finally do some homework, get some sleep and finally find out where my friends live.
(10/14/03 4:00am)
The club Scandalous was recognized. The mission of Scandalous is to bring choreographed hip hop dance performances to the Brandeis Community to experience and enjoy hip hop dance.The Club Brandeis for Dean was chartered. The purpose of Brandeis for Dean is to provide a forum for discussion about the current national and international events as well as to serve as a meeting place for students interested in the politics of presidential candidate Howard Dean.After heavy debate about whether Chabad should be recognized, the executive board discovered Chabad was never de-chartered. The mission of the Chabad of Brandeis Club is to teach, learn and increase awareness of a philosophy which guides a person to refine and govern his and her every act and feeling through wisdom, comprehension and knowledge.The Brandeis University Student Union Senate granted up to $300 toward the creation of the Mark Chopelas Memorial Tree Site in front of the Village. Chopelas was killed building the village.The Korean Student Association requested $350 for a traditional garb used for "Sa Mool Nol Ree," a Korean drum performance group founded recently by a Korean Student Association member. The group performed at last year's Asian Awareness Month Closing Ceremony and the Culture X Spectacle. The request was tabled until next week.The Activist Resource Center said they will be hosting an event sponsored by the National Labor Committee and the Coalition to Abolish Sweatshops to bring two fired women maquila workers from Honduras and union leader Fabia Gutierrez to speak at Brandeis. The Activist Resource Center requested $750 from the Union Senate to sponsor these speakers to stop at Brandeis during their tour of the United States. Students Talking About Relationships (STAR) was granted $603 to complete a training in accordance with the Massachusetts peer-counseling mandated requirement, STAR counselors complete a 35-hour training.- Compiled by David Cutler and Igor Pedan
(10/14/03 4:00am)
A new wave of discussion has hit the Brandeis campus with stunning effects. The fall of 2002 marked the beginning for a group on campus that hopes to continue "as long as Brandeis is here." Founded by Ali Nabi, Mohammed Ashraf, and Omar Haq, the India-Pakistani Dialogue Group boasts approximately 65 members and holds meetings every Monday night at 8 p.m.During the summer of 2002 the idea was hatched for a new group, similar to the Arab-Jewish Dialogue Group, that would provide Indian and Pakistani students a forum for discussion. Haq explained, "We were friends who felt that some sort of dialogue group would be a really interesting idea. We met over that summer and planned it out under the direction of the Ethics Center. We were the founding members of this dialogue group."According to the purpose stated on the club's Web site, the India-Pakistani group provides "a comfortable environment to discuss sensitive issues related to India and Pakistan." These include topics such as women in South Asia, Hindu-Muslim relations, Kashmir, stereotypes, gender relations, and conflict between the countries. Offering students a chance to meet others with similar ethnic backgrounds, this discussion group attempts to "strengthen relationships between members of the group."In its founding year, the Dialogue Group organized several monumental events on campus. Haq summarized the club's successful year when he stated, "in three short semesters, we made our mark on campus." The largest event by far was the organization of a free peace concert starring the internationally acclaimed rock group from Junoon. This single event raised $1600 for charity and had an attendance of over six hundred people. In addition to inviting Junoon to perform at Brandeis, the club cosponsored the award-winning documentary "Promises" with the Arab-Jewish Dialogue Group. Following the film showing was a panel discussion from members of the group and a presentation by one of the main figures in the movie - Faraj Faraj from West Bank. The group also invited acclaimed Indian documentary film director Summa Josson to campus for a screening of her controversial film, "Gujarat: A Laboratory of Hindu Rastra." The inaugural year of the India-Pakistani Dialogue Group provided the campus with some huge events.As a recognized club on campus, the group's purpose states that it increases "co-existence and tolerance between members of the Brandeis community." Following a long-standing tradition of exploring ethnic diversity on campus, the India-Pakistani Dialogue Group adds to Brandeis's development of diverse cultures. When asked about the future of the club, Haq responded, "Every semester, we have a new group and dynamics so we have to work out and include the new members so that they feel comfortable enough." With an optimistic future, the India-Pakistani Dialogue Group is guaranteed to succeed in its goal to "learn to appreciate and understand positions and sensitivities of both groups.
