MOCK THE BIRD

MC Yogi Says Get Out There and Vote!

2008-10-18T21:03:00.000-04:00

Obama '08 - Vote For Hope from MC Yogi on Vimeo.

In Memoriam: Tim Russert

2008-06-14T00:31:00.006-04:00

Tonight, I retire a sadder man knowing of the tragic death of Meet the Press host and NBC News’ Washington Bureau Chief Tim Russert. Russert, who has hosted Meet the Press for over 16 years and provided commentary, insight and even moderation for a few recent presidential debates, collapsed and died today while at work for NBC News today, apparently due to a heart attack. He was 58 years old and is survived by his wife, his son, Luke, who recently graduated from Boston University, and his father, who Russert affectionately referred to as “Big Russ” and whom was the main subject of Tim’s two best-selling books, Big Russ and Me and Wisdom of our Fathers.

I learned this news a lot later than many, as I was taking a break from video gaming and went to my downstairs TV to see what the news of the day was, as I do every evening. I had switched my TIVO to Fox News earlier in the day and seeing as the primetime programs had already started, I rewound my TIVO to see what I had missed. As it was rewinding, I saw a lot of footage of Tim Russert and then noticed a brief flash of the dates 1950-2008 and I knew that something horrible had happened.

I quickly played the section and found out that Russert had died earlier in the day and was overcome with shock and disbelief. How could the man who turned Meet the Press, a show that was in dire straits upon his arrival in 1991, and whom I had seen reporting as recently as this week, have died so suddenly? It seemed so surreal, as it often feels when someone suddenly dies. I think Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace said it best when interviewed by Laura Ingraham; “As cliché as it may sound, I thought that I’d soon just wake up and it would all just be a terrible hoax.” But it wasn’t, and it was verified earlier today by none other than NBC News reporter, colleague and close friend of Russert’s, Tom Brokaw.

As an aspirant journalist, I have been following this year’s political campaign very closely, both in terms of the candidates, as well as the media coverage of said candidates. For months, I’ve been saying that the press, by and large, has been blatantly biased, particularly in terms of Barack Obama who, according to multiple independent media reports, has garnered around 85% favorable stories, compared to those of Hilary Clinton and John McCain, who booth found themselves in the 50% range. Ironically, it has been NBC News, particularly their cable branch, MSNBC, that has been criticized as the most slanted, and has recently come under fire by both Democrats like Hilary Clinton campaign chairman Terry McCullough (for unfair treatment and commentary of Mrs. Clinton during the campaign) and by Republicans like President Bush (for an interview he did with Richard Engel, which was reportedly edited to reflect negatively on the administration). However, Tim Russert was a breath of fresh air at NBC as well as in the entire media, or as ex-CBS News journalist Bernie Goldberg put it, “he was one of the good guys.”

To be honest, I wasn’t the kind of person who always watched Meet the Press religiously (despite him helping to turn it into an American Sunday staple alongside church, relaxation, and football), but I have seen Russert in the context of the show, as well as in his multiple appearances on NBC and MSNBC throughout the campaign, and based on what I saw, he brought something to political analysis and all of journalism that is still very unique to this very day; a complete lack of bias and an intense interest in every side of a story.

As I continued watching the cable news shows after finding of Russert’s passing, I remember one person, I think it was Jack Welch, the former head of General Electric, NBC’s parent company, and a long time mentor and friend of Russert’s, who talked about how he remembered Tim doing an interview on Meet the Press one time and saying something to the guest, along the lines of, “This is my opinion and what I believe, but that’s irrelevant.” With that one statement, it becomes apparent that Russert understood the fundamentals of journalism; honesty, integrity, balance, and the exploration, reportage and respect of multiple viewpoints. Those are the elements that truly benefit viewers, by arming them with the information needed to form their own identity and beliefs system on various issues, instead of merely listening to one side of a debate and then simply following the respective crowd. In his own way, Russert gave viewers more than hard-hitting and fair journalism; he provided them with a path to becoming the distinctive and unique individuals that each and every one of us is.

Furthermore, Russert was one of those journalists who did his homework. Whenever he was going to do an interview, he did exactly what great journalists needed to do; he did extensive research on all the relevant elements of a story and guests. Whenever I saw Meet the Press, I was amazed at all the paperwork he had next to him on the desk, as well as how his notebook was almost overflowing with written information. And it wasn’t necessarily just written elements he came up with, but also videos of his guests (particularly politicians) who had in the past, said something that was contradictive to their current positions.

One of the more memorable examples of this occurred this very year in the MSNBC presidential debate, which he co-moderated, when he pinned down Hillary Clinton on her stance on giving illegal immigrants drivers’ licenses (for the record, she had said during the campaign that she was against it, but Russert found evidence from her time as New York senator when she supported it). And when you moved over to Meet the Press or his own show on MSNBC (which will air its final new episode this weekend), Russert was exactly the same, to the point where guests of the show would certainly be treated fairly, but they’d have to be ready, because Tim wouldn’t back down if there were any incongruencies. Russert’s hard-hitting approach was praised by many who knew him, including conservative commentator Sean Hannity who, on his TV show, Hannity and Colmes, joked that whenever he got together with Tim, he always told him “I’m never going on your show, because I know that you’ll dig up some horrible thing of me from when I first got into radio in 1987 and I wouldn’t be able to hold my own with that.”

Of course, not being in the business, I did not personally know Russert, but as I watched interviews with many of his colleagues and those who had met him, I understood the more personal side of Tim Russert, as well as gained a greater understanding into the person we have lost today. As previously mentioned, he was a family man, with a wife and adult son, as well as his father, who dropped out of high school to fight in World War II, took two blue-collar jobs to raise and support his family, and is now in his late 80s. Also, in his two books, Russert explained just how much his father influenced the person that he became, particularly as he watched Big Russ work so hard for his family. The work ethic of Big Russ certainly passed onto Young Russ and, as he said in his books, Tim had three keys to having a happy life: “work hard, laugh often, and maintain your honor.” Of course, he also added that the people around you (friends and family) will also have a positive effect.

I continued to watch the news programs and heard personal accounts from those who knew Russert, including journalists like Mike Wallace, Brit Hume, Dan Rather, Geraldo Rivera and others. However, there was also something touching about hearing the reflection of politicians from both sides of the aisle on Russert’s life, many of whom had previously gone one-on-one with Russert on Meet the Press. One such person was Democratic Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia, who stated that “we lost a great man and an even greater journalist,” adding that he was one of the few who refused to “participate in gotcha tactics.” Both of the presumptive presidential candidates, Republican Senator John McCain and Democratic Senator Barack Obama, also had kind words to say about Russert when reached for comment on the campaign trail.

Hearing more and more about Russert, I have to be honest; it really caused me to reflect upon myself a great deal. To be frank, I’ve been pretty lazy this summer, having not sought any kind of a job, not taking any summer college classes (that will change soon) and have basically been waiting in limbo until the beginning of my four-year college experience at UMUC this fall. I haven’t really kept up on any writing at all for the past month and a half and I began to wonder if maybe my sloth-like lifestyle was beginning to have a negative effect on more than my social life and my transition into modern society as an adult, but on the passion for writing and journalism that I’ve had for so long.

After watching a bit of the coverage on Russert’s passing and when I became too depressed to watch anymore, I began thinking about what made me interested in writing and journalism in the first place, and who in the media were the true inspirations of not just hopeful journalists like me, but of every writer/journalist currently at work. Furthermore, who were the people who if we had more of, would be able to make the current and depressing journalistic air, complete with gotcha games and bias, finally dissipate. I could only come with two names; John Stossel of ABC News, and Tim Russert, both of whom are men who work hard and strive to achieve a sense of balance that the media today seems to lack.

It’s because of this reflection, combined with the media reminiscing about Russert, that drove me to run up to my computer and type this. For whatever reason, I felt my journalistic urges rushing back, and I felt an uncontrollable desire to write; namely about the loss of a great journalist who I aspire to emulate, both in my professional life, and now, my personal life. And I hope that everyone in and attempting to enter the business of journalism will reflect upon Russert’s life and one-of-a-kind techniques tonight and strive for success in the way that he did in his far too brief 58 years on this planet. This piece is dedicated to the memory of Russert and to easing the pain that his passing has caused to his family, friends, and viewers all across America. Good-bye, Tim; things just won’t be the same with you.

Give me Liberal or give me death

2008-05-16T13:43:00.003-04:00

Recently, a newspaper ran an editorial about colleges essentially being liberal propaganda instead of being learning institutions. Although there are many professors that in fact may be liberal(Kevin, cough cough), there are also many professors that are staunch conservatives. Sure we all have had that wacky liberal arts professor who couldn’t go two minutes into a class period without reminding you how much they dislike George W and his cronies. But we have also had the professor that is still convinced the confederacy won the civil war. The point is that there are two sides to the coin, it just depends which one you ask.

When that was done at Anne Arundel Community College, the responses from the teachers who were asked about the liberal propaganda situation, surprised me with their answers. My one teacher who I believed to be a liberal, gave me a very interesting answer, She said, “What do people expect when they go to a liberal arts school? If you go to a trade school or study more math oriented subjects, you’ll find conservative professors.” An answer that makes a lot of sense to some people, but obviously the people who wrote the editorial had different expectations.

The other professor who I asked to comment on the matter was someone who I believed to be a conservative. When he responded to the editorial it was much bigger surprise. Since he was conservative I figured he was going to attack liberal teaching styles and basically reciprocate the message made by the article. He said, “People at the college level need to be exposed to other trains of thought than the ones that they are accustomed to, regardless of how extreme.”

So before people go bashing the liberal regime, people might want to see what the conservative members of the academic community think about the situation. Then again according to the author of the editorial, there are none.

Shhh, It's A Secret

2008-05-16T11:07:00.012-04:00

Hot, Juicy, inspiring and shocking secrets for the whole world to see, don’t worry their anonymous, but that doesn’t make them any less intriguing. PostSecret is a community of collected secrets written down on artfully decorated postcards, mailed, and displayed for the public to see. PostSecret offers a safe environment for people to express their innermost thoughts, shocking realizations, and private recollections.

Some secrets are light hearted, some are dark, and many have never before been shared or spoken out loud. The secrets written are about life, nostalgia, and guilty confessions. they span from fears and successes to sex and sexuality, drugs, death, and even professions of love.

The project of PostSecret began in December of 2003 by founder Frank Warren. Since then postsecret has been responsible for the creation of books and the showing 0f exhibits around the nation in museums and colleges. Their exhibits and creations have attracted people of all ages, backgrounds, ethnicities, and histories.

This community is meant to inspire, share stories, and evoke emotions. It can act as a form of therapy, storytelling, or mark an accomplishment, goal, or memory. PostSecret knocks down barriers and encourages unity among people based on the sharing of their most personal thoughts and stories. It displays the way all people are connected through similar fears, wants, needs, and goals. Why take an interest in other people’s secrets? Because their secret might bring you hope, it might make you smile, or teach you a lesson. Their secret might be your secret.

Start reading now at http://postsecret.blogspot.com/ created by Frank Warren.

Miley Cyrus...seriously?

2008-05-14T13:57:00.002-04:00

"She looked like she is freshly f**ked in these photos," says a former fan. The recent photo of a topless Miley Cyrus in Vanity Fair has caused extreme reactions such as this. Although not many people over the age of 16 are into her, they most likely have younger siblings emulating Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montana. One can find plenty of Hannah Montana clothing and toys in almost any children's store. Young girls look up to her and enjoy her show and concerts. These girls lives are greatly affected by whom they admire. They adore her and pretend to be her even though she's living in a completely different world then they are. Maybe that's why.

Miley Cyrus has sold out shows all over the country. In Houston, TX, tickets for her concert sold out in just minutes. The arena held 73,500 people. According to People magazine, she is set to earn $1 billion in Hannah Montana related sales from 2007-08. Also, it is reported that she will receive $17.5 million from sold out concert tours, $65 million from her 3-D concert movie and 7-figures for her autobiography. At only 15, she makes more in one year than most will ever see in a lifetime. For girls all over the world, being Miley Cyrus would be a dream come true. So why would Miley do something to tarnish the innocent and sweet reputation for which girls love her?

Unfortunately, it seems that Miley has fallen into the same trap as nearly every other Hollywood teen. They have all started fun and moderately innocent and then spiraled out of control and ended up in all kinds of trouble. Kirsten Dunst, Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears and many more have led a more than privileged life and ended up with legal troubles, addiction problems, etc. More recently, Vanessa Hudgens and Jamie Lynn Spears have found themselves in the limelight for all the wrong reasons. Vanessa Hudgens, 18 at the time, send nude photos of herself to her boyfriend Zac Efron. Jamie Lynn, Britney's sister, is only 16 and she's pregnant. And now Miley Cyrus. Over the last couple of months, racy pictures of her have surfaced. While some seem harmless...

...others could be cause for concern. There is a picture with her midriff exposed while laying on a boy, one of her pulling her shirt down to show her bra and breast and the topless Vanity Fair photograph.

Some say it's not that big of a deal and that's it's just a bare back. Annie Leibovitz, the famous photographer who took the picture, has since apologized. "I'm sorry that my portrait of Miley has ben misinterpreted," said Leibovitz. Leibovitz understands many are offended, but she defends her work saying, "The photograph is a simple, classic portrait, shot with very little makeup, and I think it is very beautiful." There are those who agree with her, however, many of their statements begin with the words, "Maybe I'm just jaded, but..."

A number of parents of children who are fans are very upset because they hoped Miley would be someone their girls could look up to. The situation leads to a bigger issue today's teens struggle with. Teens today find it hard to figure out for themselves how to deal with the issue of sex. From the media, they see all of the hot and popular girls having sex and being intimate with their boyfriends. If they want to be like these girls, that's what they should do.

Parents need to be more involved in their children's lives and making sure they have appropriate role models. The people they look up to have such a strong influence on choices they make. Is Miley Cyrus is just another victim of Hollywood's early and over sexualization of young girls? Is it okay to allow, worse yet, encourage a 15-year old girl to be topless for an "artistic" purpose when it often attracts the wrong type of attention? Teens today are dressing sexier because that's what they see on T.V., and all of their favorite celebrities are doing it so why shouldn't they? After telling themselves it's alright and girls are jut growing up faster, America is shocked when things happen like the increase of girls with STD's or another teen is raped. These acts aren't justified or condoned. The girl is not at fault. She doesn't know any better; that's how all the cool girls dress on her favorite show. Not all rapes happen because of how a girl looks, but it does attract men who want their body because that's what their showing. Feeding into the fantasies of these degenerates doesn't help the problem or make young girls any safer. America needs to wake up and realize that allowing young girls to dress too sexy often hurts them in the long run. They may not be the victim of sexual abuse or murder, but they learn that dressing that way gets them certain attention and things which is no way to build self-confidence. Parents should be parents, not best friends. They need to monitor their child's dress in order to protect them which, some parents seem to have forgotten, is their job.

America's girls: Dying to be perfect

2008-05-13T08:58:00.000-04:00

“Right before I went in, I was like, what if I don’t wake up? Oh, this is scary. Then I thought, I don’t care. If I don’t wake up, it’s worth it. I just wanted it so badly.” these are the words of Heidi Montag, of the hit MTV show, The Hills. She was describing her feelings before getting breast implants. The Hills is targeted at the college-aged person. Every Monday night, the lives of extremely wealthy California kids are seen by many. It is a reality show that’s quite unrealistic, except for the plastic surgery aspect. When saying goodbye before the surgery, her boyfriend said, “I’m so proud of you.” This is the sad reality of what American teens have in front of them as an example today. How is that an “I’m proud of you” moment? What is she doing that’s so great or deserves admiration?

According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS), over the last decade, the number of women 18 and younger who have had breast enlargements has risen by nearly 500%. Living in a culture so engrossed in celebrity lifestyles, money and looks, makes it hard for a young girl to feel adequate if that’s the unrealistic standard upon which she’s measured. For that reason, there are so many girls today receiving plastic surgery. It used to be the ideal woman had curves and wasn’t pressured to starve herself to be accepted. So many of the Hollywood glamour girls were more normal looking. Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor and the infamous bond girl, Ursula Andress, all had meat on their bones. They looked healthy. Ow, in the days of Pam Anderson, Tori Spelling and Victoria Beckham, it’s all about being a size negative 2 with unbelievably out of proportion breasts. These women have also gone through a number of surgeries either due to problems with their breasts or being unsatisfied with how they look.

With the pressure to be “perfect”, young girls tend to ignore or downplay the dangers involved in cosmetic surgery. It is a surgery, not a game. As with all surgeries there is risk involved; a risk the parents of Stephanie Kuleba allowed her to take. 18-year old Stephanie was the captain of her Florida high school cheerleading team. She had a nearly perfect GPA and was accepted to the University of Florida. Her friends loved her and nicknamed her “sunshine”. They say she was “perfect”. Stephanie had apparently though differently. She was born with a defect that, her parents say, left her with asymmetrical breasts and inverted areolas. For this, she had been wanting to go through with a corrective procedure and implants. Not two hours after the procedure was finished, Stephanie was rushed to the hospital after, what her mother calls a “state of the art” clinic, did not have the appropriate preparations to deal with what was going on. 24-hours later, on March 22, 2008, Stephanie died from a rare genetic disorder called malignant hyperthermia. The disorder is a severe reaction to anesthesia that causes the body temperature to spike as high as 112 degrees. The families attorney, Roberto Stanziale, says that after talking with other experts in the field, her surgeon, Dr. Stephen Schuster, did “one-tenth of 1%” of what was needed to save her. Apparently he only offered 1 dose of Dantrolene when it was well-known that her situation required 8.

The issue, however, is not about who’s wrong. Did Stephanie Kuleba have such a bad defect that she desperately needed to go under the knife? These photos say otherwise. In the first she’s in white, the second she’s in the middle and the third she’s on the left.

If she was indeed so insecure she absolutely had to get the surgery, why did she expose so much of her breasts? The argument is not whether she was insecure or not. The question here is if she felt so strongly the need to be perfect that she would risk her life. Her father told Matt Lauer, “There’s such a lot of information that is provided to you when you get into this setting, but it’s more or less being handed a form and being told complacently that there’s a risk.” It is his duty as her father to not take it complacently. Being nonchalant in these situations can lead to exactly what happened.

Although this is a tragic story, it isn’t frequent because the number of 18-year olds and younger is a small percent compared to older women getting surgeries. The American Society for Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) notes that while a large portion of surgeries for girls under 18 was cosmetic (47.4%), that age range only accounts for 2% of the 400,000 who get procedures. However, Dr. Stephen Greenberg, a plastic surgeon from New York and author of “A Little Nip, A Little Tuck”, reports seeing a 20-30% rise in cosmetic procedures in young people. “Often a girl will come in with her parents, who are buying her a breast augmentation as a birthday or high school graduation gift,” said Greenberg.

Walking around on campus, one can see that there are plenty of different body shapes, each of them beautiful in their own way. Parents need to appreciate that beauty in their children and constantly affirm that they are perfect just the way they are. It is partially the parents’ faults for the constant rise in cosmetic plastic surgery. Mothers, especially, should be letting their daughters know that they don’t need to be what Hollywood dictates they should be to be considered beautiful. It is hard enough being a young woman and balancing school, life and bodily changes. The culture we live in, however, doesn’t help by shoving airbrushed, fake female images down their throat and making girls think if they don’t look as perfect as these girls, they need to change. The women on the covers of the magazines aren’t even as perfect as their pictures in real life. Hollywood needs to promote more positive and realistic role models and parents need to do the same.

The Fashion Industry to Blame for Anorexia?

2008-04-30T21:47:00.005-04:00

The French parliament's lower house adopted a prodigious bill last Tuesday that would make it illegal for anyone, including fashion magazines, advertisers and Web sites, to publicly promote extreme thinness.

The National Assembly approved the bill last Tuesday and it goes to the senate in the next few weeks. If the law is passed, it would be the strongest of its kind anywhere, and it’s linked back to the 2006 death of a Brazilian model that died from anorexia.

An estimated 8 million Americans have suffered from an eating disorder and nearly half of them know someone who has struggled with the ever-growing issue. This law may not be as ridiculous as some may say it sounds, and the bill could possibly be promoted in the United States as well.

Anorexia is the 3rd most common chronic illness among adolescents and 95% of those who have eating disorders are between the ages of 12 and 25. During the ages of 11 and 13, half of them believe they are overweight.

Obesity may be a growing problem in the U.S. as well, but being thin has always been a struggle for many young girls, including AACC students, who are constantly pressured to maintain that size zero. Nobody glorifies obesity. We're bombarded with messages from all forms of media that say thin is in and anything else is deviant and ugly. Has a plus-sized model ever graced the cover of Vogue? Or modeled in a couture runway show? Are there pro-obesity Web sites akin to pro-anorexia Web sites where they try to get people to believe if they gain unhealthy amounts of weight, they'll be beautiful and it isn’t unhealthy?

"Never will we accept in our profession that a judge decides if a young girl is skinny or not skinny," Didier Grumbach, president of the influential French Federation of Couture, said, "That doesn't exist in the world, and it will certainly not exist in France."

He disagrees with the bill and states that the bill is way too broad. How is someone to determine who is too skinny? It’s nearly impossible to prove that the media causes eating disorders. There is no part of the dominant media promoting obesity. Smoking ads have been banned from television since 1971, smokeless tobacco ads have been banned from television since 1986, billboard advertisements were replaced with anti-smoking ads in 1999, and most ads, as of 2003, have been phased out of magazines and newspapers. Those that persist have a health warning on them. But, in the end, does that really matter?

“I smoke cigarettes, and I know it’s bad for me, but that doesn’t stop me or others from doing it. I see ads all the time telling me I’m going to die of lung cancer but, like I said, it doesn’t stop me,” Ashley Roughton, a student at AACC, stated. “I don’t think ‘banning’ anorexia will actually stop it.”

Maybe, they should simply put warnings on everything promoting a low body mass index for vanity’s sake. "Having a low BMI (under 18) can be a health risk and can cause hair loss, hormone imbalance, weak bones, infertility, and death."

It's "food" for thought!

Missing White Woman Syndrome: How To Rise Above the Obituaries

2008-04-28T19:44:00.013-04:00

An 18-year old American woman goes missing while on vacation in Aruba in May 2005, captivating the attention of Americans as they clung to the edges of their seats anticipating every new detail about the case. The case is eventually closed under the presumption that the woman is dead, but not before Natalee Holloway becomes a household name.

Two and a half years earlier in December 2002, 27-year old Laci Peterson went missing from her Modesto, CA home. The controversy surrounding her husband’s ultimate murder conviction and the fact that Peterson was eight months pregnant at the time of her death caught the nation’s attention the same as Holloway.

In 2005, only a couple months after the Holloway case first made headlines, 25-year old Latoyia Figueroa went missing from her home in Philadelphia, PA. Figueroa, like Peterson, was pregnant at the time of her disappearance and was eventually found dead. The father of Figueroa’s baby was ultimately convicted of the crime, much like Peterson's husband. But for all the similarities the Figueroa case had to Natalee Holloway and Laci Peterson, there is a glaring difference:

Very few people know who she was.

Figueroa was of mixed black and hispanic descent. This detail is what many people consider the root of her case's obscurity. Media critics have labeled this racial bias as Missing White Woman Syndrome (MWWS). For instance, the stories of Jessica Lynch and Jon Benet Ramsey are familiar to many Americans, both seeming to have benefited from the same bias Holloway and Peterson received.

MWWS generally translates to the media prioritizing a story by the gender, race, social class, and relative beauty of the missing or murdered person. In 2006 CNN correspondent Tom Foreman wrote in his blog that while he has never seen a case given more attention he has seen plenty of stories “fall by the wayside, pushed down and out of the show, because a consensus develops that says, ‘You know, I don't think our viewers are very interested in this case.’“

“I’ll be honest, the more attractive a victim is, the more sympathy I feel,” says AACC student Bryan Benson. “It’s not that I feel nothing for [other] victims, I just think it naturally pulls at your feelings more to see the epitome of the image of innocence destroyed.”

Could attraction be the main catalyst of MWWS? This is unlikely considering that many women who are known to society as beautiful are not white. Perhaps familiarity plays a significant role as well.

“I think a person’s ability to relate to the victim of a case is the main factor in how much sympathy and attention is given,” says 21 year-old University of Maryland student Casey Smith. “An affluent white male is just not going to be able to feel the same way for a young black woman brutally raped and murdered in the ghetto as he will for a pretty white high school girl suffering the same fate on vacation.”

None of this is to say that women of different ethnicities stand no chance at making headlines. Earlier this year, Arizona’s state government renamed Squaw Peak of the state’s Phoenix Mountains to Piestewa Peak, after late native american Lori Piestewa, who was killed when her convoy was ambushed in Iraq in 2003. However, even in this case Piestewa was known as the best friend of Jessica Lynch, a white soldier who became an internationally recognized war hero for her time spent in captivity and her daring rescue. Piestewa was killed in the same ambush Lynch was captured in.

The MWWS debate is usually followed by the blame game. While pointing the finger at the news media is a common choice, are they really to blame if they are simply pedaling the stories that will generate the most attention? News is a business, too. The stories that sell are the stories with legs. If the general audience is to blame for their fixation over pretty white girls, the reasons for the prevalence of Missing White Woman Syndrome run much deeper than a simple media bias.

"Yo this S^&#'s RETARDED!"

2008-04-28T13:55:00.003-04:00

It’s normal for students to surf the Internet when they have a break in between classes, or have a break for an extended period of time. Here at AACC we are fortunate to have enough computers where we can use our free time in frivolous ways. However there is a cost to our leisure, and can Inhibit your academic success when you need access to a working computer the most.
Bandwidth in computing is a term used in part to monitor the state of efficiency between networked computers. This state of efficiency is measured in Hertz, and offers the user access to monitor how efficiently the system is running. This service also allows many computers to run off of a single high-speed connection, which is linked, to a server. This server is what allows students here at AACC to have many computers and at the same time, share the same high-speed connection.
While both efficient and relatively secure, with the aid of certain types of filtering software, the high-speed access offered at AACC has its limitations. For example its basic limitation lies in the speed of the connection. Having a T3 or even a T1 server provides room for a large number of computers to function at high speeds. The limitation of even these powerful servers is that they are limited by the amount of traffic the server can handle. Increasing the amount of computers on a single network often affects the speed of the connection on the individual computer level. You may have noticed in one of your computer classes that while many people are logged on to the same network, the connection tends to slow down, that is because the overall bandwidth (efficiency) of the server is reduced due to the high traffic of information being forced through the server.
It is for this reason why when you have to print out an important paper in the library just before class, that the computer just so happens to take 20 minutes to log in, making it impossible to turn in that important paper on time.
There are many students at AACC who use the computers in the library and elsewhere on campus when they are free of class responsibilities, however oftentimes they do not realize the slow-downs they are causing the entire system, merely because they needed to check their facebook, because something so drastic as a friend request or another stupid group invitation might just have appeared, and you would otherwise have not seen it until ten minutes later when you need to check it again.
While one or two computers surfing the web leisurely is no cause for concern, and those working on projects surely have the right to take advantage of such services offered on campus. There is a risk that one day, when you need a big project turned in, or when you need to print out a large paper in a short period of time. When you yourself will more than likely to be angry that the computers are not running to speed.
Case in point, while I was trying to get an E-mail response on the issue from the IT people on campus, I found that it took me ten minutes just to get into windows, and then another similar round of waiting in order to get online. By this time I was already going to be late for my 11 o’clock class and was unable to send the E-mail.
While computers may work at high speeds and allow us to do things that have previously been unable to do, these high speed systems do also have their limitations, while traffic is expected to a certain extent, it is important not to hover on facebook for hours on end, see where Gwar, Slayer, Metallica, Megadeth, and Children Of Bodem is playing in your area, or show all ten billion of your Myspace friends that corny but somewhat ha-ha funny video that they need to see. It is important to realize that every student has the potential to be in a pinch and relies on the high speeds normally offered by a high-end, high-speed server.

Jesse Rifkin of The Wailing Wall

2008-04-28T00:09:00.004-04:00

Mock The Bird: How has tour been so far?
Jesse Rifkin: So far, its been generally pretty fun. Shows have been mixed from insanely good to insanely bad and everywhere in between. I've also eaten a lot of good diner food, which is my favorite part of being on tour, easily.
MTB: [laughs] Being a vegetarian on tour seems like it'd be a little rough. Is it?
JR: It's proven surprisingly easy this time around, actually. Mexican food and omelets have been staples. I've been managing to avoid easy pitfalls like pizza and mac and cheese, which I'm pretty happy about.
MTB: Yeah, you have stay with the high-protein foods.
JR: Definitely.
MTB: You're using new instrumentation for this this tour. How is it different that from your other solo shows?
JR: Well, It's different in that, by and large, for the past few years, I have very rarely played solo. When I did, it was usually just an acoustic thing. For this tour, and other recent shows, I've been playing my electric guitar through a looping pedal, and running a mic through it as well. It's very easy, when playing solo acoustic, to get "lost" in from of an audience, no matter how good your are, because they've all seen a million awkward guys with guitars before and just don't care. With a looping pedal, however, my live solo sets are more immediately interesting to people, I've found. It's also very certainly different from past full-band shows, and from the new record, which has the full-band on it. Some of those songs I just can't play solo, whereas I can play other songs solo that the band couldn't or wouldn't do. I can certainly take more liberties with the arrangements that way.
MTB: Yeah, there is definitely more of a psychedelic aspect to the music that most singer-songwriters.
JR: I would hope so!
MTB: Do your new songs lend themselves more this this than your earlier music would?
JR: Quite the opposite, actually. I've found myself playing a lot of older songs on this tour, and unable to play a lot of the the songs from the new record, simply because most of the older songs were written primarily for my own solo performance in mind , and some of the most prominent songs on the new record were written that the knowledge that I had a specific kind of band that would them. So there are some that I just can't play live without having, say, a drummer, you know?
MTB: Yeah, the new record is definitely more of a full band record. Certain influences shine through(the rhythmic intensity of Kokono No. 1, or, say, the vocal phrasing of Leonard Cohen on some songs), but, overall, the record seems to have more of an idiosyncratic personality than your earlier work(which had a very distinct Neutral Milk Hotel influence on the songwriting). What do you attribute this to?
JR: First off, thank you! I would attribute this to a number of things. The first, and I guess, the most obvious, being that I don't really listen to much Neutral Milk Hotel anymore. I kind of wore that record out; same with most of the other Elephant 6 records I was obsess with. My first few releases were definitely attempts at communicating the same feelings and ideas I got listening to those records. So yeah, I listened to different stuff, I guess, or at least I started trying to capture a different feeling. I was also playing with different musicians, who themselves had different interests and influences that those I played with earlier on. Things were a lot less "shambolic" and "collective"-like, and for a while there was a real set-in-stone band. I guess I also maybe felt a little more confident to try my "own thing," and to be honest I was getting kind of sick of everybody comparing me to NMH. Additionally, I wrote most of thise record when I was feeling really bad, whereas I was feeling pretty good when I wrote the earlier stuff. So I am sure that made a big influence.
MTB: Yeah, the record is definitely much darker. You've said in other interview(s) that it had a structure that, by the end of the record, gets more optimistic. Was that intentional in the writing process or did it just come out that way?
JR: It came out that way, but I was definitely conscious of what was going on to the extent that I knew I could only write songs about how I was feeling at the time, and when I felt bad, I wrote about feeling bad, whereas when I felt better, I wrote about feeling better. By the time I started feeling better, the record was starting to crystallize in my mind, and I could sort of see the direction things were heading in and what the general sound and structure of the album would be.
MTB: How rough of a time are we talking her? More or less than, say, Sea Changes-era Beck?
JR: [Laughs} Um, pretty awful. I wasn't in Beck's mind, so I can't really compare our experiences, you know?
MTB: Yeah. With a name like The Wailing Wall, and early songs like "Oh My Lord" and "Gated Community," how big of an influence does religion, and specifically, Judaism, play in your music?
JR: I would say religion plays a pretty big role in my life, so I guess that's reflected pretty heavily in the music. The name was adopted as kind of a joke, to be honest, but I took to it and feel very attached to it now. I've spent a lot of time in high school and college studying religion and the bible, and have a very mixed relationship with it all. I guess in terms of my music, I feel like the purpose of music, or at least the music I try to make, is to try and raise the big questions in people's minds, and maybe show them that its OK to think about and ask the big questions of life and maybe not have the answers. So, obviously, God is a pretty big questions. The new record is full of religion stuff: some of the lyrics are stolen directly from the bible, or refer directly to religious ideas and questions, by and large Jewish ones because that's what I was raised with. Still, I wouldn't consider myself a "Jewish musician" or a "religious musician", by any means, and I don't think(or at least, I would certainly hope) that you don't need to know anything about Judaism or religion to appreciate my music and get the point that I am trying to make. MY music is not preaching music by any means. I am not a particularly religious person. I just wonder what's out there, just like everybody does, and I write about what I'm wondering, you know? Also, "Wailing Wall" is the name of a song by The Cure. I just want to point that out, for what its worth.

Rights, Privileges, and the PATRIOT Act

2008-04-21T21:34:00.006-04:00

A cornerstone of the American dream is the freedom we enjoy to live our lives on our own terms. We speak what we want, we worship who we want, and we make our livelihood how we want. These are our rights as Americans and a focal point of many who emigrate from their homes to our country.

Of course, there are widely accepted aberrations to our rights. As attorney Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said nearly a century ago, no one should shout “fire” in a crowded theater. Those whose worship includes sexually exploiting and torturing humans and animals alike will be punished if caught. Those who choose to make their living off of illegal activities such as drug and human trafficking risk losing their livelihood if caught and convicted. These aberrations are completely necessary to preserve the rights of the greater population, but how clear is the line between what we are entitled to and what we are solely allowed?

In response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11, it became clear that it would be necessary to impede on the rights of individuals who may put the country’s safety at risk in order to stop them. Thus, on October 26, 2001, President Bush signed into law the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism). This act was lauded by many as completely necessary, but the only requirement for the government to invoke the act to turn anyone’s rights into privileges is simply if they feel like it.

“Probable cause” is a relative, loose term under the PATRIOT Act. Several controversies regarding the government’s use of the PATRIOT Act have surfaced since it was put into use. In 2005, the city of Summit, New Jersey was sued by a homeless man after being kicked out of the train station he lived in by city officials who said the action was protected by the PATRIOT Act. Later in the same year, Business Week reported that the FBI had used the PATRIOT Act to obtain the financial, credit, employee, and health records of approximately one million (!!!) people in Las Vegas, Nevada, tourists and residents alike. The flexibility of the PATRIOT Act did not only allow the FBI to obtain this information, but also to pick and choose which of the aforementioned records they picked for each individual.

The tourists’ information was even allowed to be transferred to third parties. The PATRIOT Act features 10 Titles, most of which deal somehow with increasing punishments for terrorist activity, national border protection, and protection for terrorist victims. Most of the controversy regarding the PATRIOT Act, such as the Las Vegas instance, is centered around Titles II and VII: Enhanced Surveillance Procedures and Increased Information Sharing for Critical Infrastructure Protection, respectively. Title II allowed the surveillance to occur and Title VII allowed the FBI to disclose the information.

The liberties of the PATRIOT Act have certainly not gone without opposition. Opponents also cite the ability of the government to hold onto seized records indefinitely under the act. While previously established legislation requires that law officials destroy obtained information for a closed case, information obtained under the PATRIOT Act is protected.

Are our rights under attack? Can you be convicted for an otherwise unrelated crime solely because evidence was indirectly gathered about you by the government probing another situation? While it’s paradoxical to determine if it is alright to convict a criminal if the evidence was obtained unlawfully (outside the PATRIOT Act, of course), it is fair to point out that oversight and tampering with “evidence” is made much easier when the information is that accessible. Illegal activities from identity theft that were once on your credit report can come back to haunt you. An unknowing purchase from an individual being probed under the PATRIOT Act could tie you to a plethora of different crimes. What you say in a text message could be intercepted and translated as a threat to America.

Is it really a conspiracy theory if all of those actions really are protected under the PATRIOT Act? I will appease Holmes, Jr. and not shout “fire” in a crowded theater. But if I text message “fire” to a friend, am I putting my rights at risk?

PSP, the new meaning= Pigs, Sperm & Plasma

2008-04-21T09:45:00.006-04:00

A university campus and a desert island are in several ways, very much alike. For most students, money is desolate, as is food and hope when on a desert island. As a survivor on an island, or similarly, a student on campus, they resort to desperate measures. On a university, some of the most absurd ways of making money is taken up as full on “careers” and pretty much supports students lives. The common motto going around is “If it pays, it stays”.
Maybe the most common off-the-wall job is donating plasma. This trend Is increasingly popular because health centers are located conveniently right near campuses, it pays $60 for one session, and provides a great scene for quiet studying time while waiting to be helped. Like other tests and odd ways to make money in hospitals, donating plasma is endless and doesn’t harm the body in any way. Not to mention its like making your own schedule, you can come and go when you please, and the money earned is always accessible. They give each student a credit card in which all the money earned is directly put onto it, therefore no crazy check and bank mix ups get in the way or the tremendously annoying: remembering to stop in on pay day. Kellie Dress, a freshman from James Madison University said, “ Its great, I practically get paid for studying. Only thing is, if you don’t like needles it could be a problem.” Going along with quick ways to make money within hospitals, the more serious, donating eggs and sperm are always an option. While this pays much more, it can be risky, and many feel uneasy knowing their little children are running around the world with some random parents. Although, there are many who do choose to partake in this easy cash-making. A student from Towson University, Jake Tomlinson, said “"I have no other way to make that kind of money other than to donate sperm. It's easy to do and as a student you don’t have too many options other than retail or waiting tables, which can be hard work, boring and conflicting with sports at the college.”

As far as on campus jobs, despite the obvious helping out in the library or cleaning up after the cafeteria, most kids, especially the lazy ones, choose rather to participate in their Professors’ study experiments. These are extremely popular because they pay well and are easily accessed, being close by and usually easy tasks, however it doesn’t provide a very stable flow of cash. Interestingly, University’s have recently been paying students for writing on blogs about their college experience. Supposedly this has boosted the colleges’ popularity and gives direct information to possible incoming freshman to see what the college is really like. Blogging has opened many windows for making money online. Companies like Adense provide fairly easy ways and non time consuming ways to get a buck. Also, sites like ReviewME, where students can review books and movies to earn money are not as popular but get the job done. As well as the always obvious, Tutoring programs, may also deem one a bit of cash.

As for a more rare and specialized job, a student from University of Maryland, Jenna Paefer, knowing her talents with hair, started up braiding and styling. Soon enough, tons of African Americans were lined up down the hall of her dorm and she was in serious business. Turned out she had to rent out a space and hire assistants to help her out.

As far as illegal money making, which, no question about it, takes place at any college, selling weed and writing papers for other students in exchange for cash, are the most popular. Though these underground ways are risky, kids can make a ton of money, however if caught, the punishments are severe, and will most likely result in a suspension or expulsion from the college. “ I’m really good at writing papers, so a lot of my friends come to me to help them write it, if not the whole thing, a few paragraphs or just get it started. I don’t cost them too much if their my friend but I do make decent money”, says an anonymous freshman of Anne Arundel Community College.

Even with an endless list of wacky jobs provided mainly for college students, the desert island still seems to be continuously dry. No question about it though, the MOST ridiculously absurd form of earning money in college took place at the University of Missouri, in which a student was to oversee the school’s hog farm. I can only imagine the overwhelming fun brought by watching pigs roll around in mud all day. Not to mention the reason for having a school hog farm in the first place? Hot dogs for lunch in the dining hall anyone?

Wild n' Out: Hip hop culture and the Breakdancing scene

2008-04-20T13:07:00.005-04:00

Seen Left: BDC(Break Dancing Club) President John Real
Seen Right: DJ Sickroc, resident emcee

Hundreds gathered in Harrisonburg Virginia last weekend for James Madison University's annual break-dancing competition. From humble beginnings in 1999 James Madison University has hosted 8 previous events, which have grown from a small local following to a national event. With all the proceeds going to charity, benefiting an assortment of groups ranging from the multiple sclerosis society to the hurricane Katrina relief fund. As a result James Madison University's break-dancing club was able to hang on to sponsorships for many years, including such prominent names as Scion and Red Bull to help put the event together, and to rent the massive arena. With their help the event was able to grow into a national phenomenon bringing crews from all over the United States to compete.

Knowing the president has its perks, as a personal friend of the break-dancing club's president, Mr. John Real (19) I was able to get a hands on view of what its like to put an event like this together. "Its not cheap" John states, claiming to have nearly emptied his own bank account as well as their treasurers in order to maintain their sponsors and hold the event, and sponsorships ran into the tens of thousands to support this unique form of self expression.

Hip hop culture, although mainstream today has much of its roots to owe to break-dancing, groups such as Run-Dmc, popularized in the 1980s gave the newly developed hip-hop scene a method of dance all its own. Since then however the dancing has ceased for the most part, but the attitude has remained.

Breakdancing has fallen out of favor however in recent years, and its decent can be traced in many ways, the advent of "Gangsta Rap" which discourages all forms of dancing whatsoever, except for a breakdancing style of dance called a "crip-walk", but with such far off physical activities such as parkour (or the sport of aerobatic free-running) becomes popular at AACC, it is hard to tell whether breakdancing will ever make a comeback here in Arnold MD.

In closing, Breakdancing has gone far from the humble roots which it came, from back alley turf wars to national competitions and thousands of dollars in sponsorships it is hard to see why the breakdancing trend never fully regained strength, only time will tell however if this aging form of both physical fitness and superb concentration and focus will ever be appreciated by a larger audience or it will remain only the passion of a select few.

420: Pot Holiday or Giant Buzzkill?

2008-04-20T00:35:00.002-04:00

Today, countless people, young and old, will meet up at their favorite spots and bond over the lighting of the peace pipe - or bong, or joint. So, what makes this any different from any other day in the life of thousands of college students? Well, it’s 420, the national counterculture holiday celebrated solely by consuming mass amounts of marijuana.

Last year alone, thousands of undergrads at the University of California Santa Cruz lined Porter Meadow to “Burn one” for their favorite holiday. Hundreds more lined City Hall in Victoria, British Columbia for its 10th annual 420 celebration. These were just two of dozens of 420 celebrations held nationwide, not to mention the countless amount of smokers who celebrated privately.

However, what many “celebrators” may not know is that though their holiday falls on the same week as Earth week (which seems like quite an obvious pair) the holiday coincides with many events that most people would not want to be connected to.

For starters, more Americans pay their taxes this week than any other week of the year. With the tax deadline (April 15th) occurring just a few days prior, the majority of Americans can not have a large amount of disposable income to spare. Having a day centered around smoking as much marijuana (which may be cheap, but as any smoker will tell you, still costs more than it should) as possible on a week where a lot of Americans are going to be strapped for cash just seems counterintuitive.

And, while tax day is a very serious matter for some, April 20th is related to matters that are much more serious. Serious enough that this weekend should be seen as a to mourn, not toke.

For starters, the birthday of arguably the most hated man to ever live, Adolph Hitler, is April 20th. But, really, who’s supposed to remember such a trivial little footnote? Surely, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, or as history will remember them, the perpetrators of the Columbine High School Massacre, which also took place on April 20th. But, Klebold and Harris weren’t trying to make their attack have anything to do with Hitler. They were much more interested in the Oklahoma City Bombing, and the buring of the Koresh ranch (where 80 members of a cult called the “Branch Davidians“ were killed) by the FBI. The shooters said they wished to “outdo both of these events", which both occurred on April 19th.

So, who’s idea was it to hold this holiday on a time so ripe with tragedy?

As the story goes, the root of the idea comes from a group of teenagers in San Rafael, California, around 1971. The teenagers would meet up after school let out, at 4:20 PM, to smoke by a statue at Bradner Elementary. They began saluting each other with 420 (e.g. “420 Raphael!”), and slowly but surely, it caught on, and snowballed into what is celebrated today.

Why no one has ran with the idea to change the date of celebration is anyone’s guess. Perhaps the tradition is now too big to be changed. Or, perhaps pot smokers want to take away the negative by replacing it with what they consider a positive.

What is certain is that because of its deeply rooted (if somewhat pointless) history, 420 will be sticking around for quite some time. If potheads can come together in such large numbers over an unofficial holiday, it reasons to believe that soon they will be strong enough to rally for much more widespread legalization.

But, maybe that’s just a pipe dream.

The Art of Cruising

2008-04-16T13:34:00.011-04:00

Straight men have an unfair advantage. They can walk into any place at any time, spot any girl and know that it’s well within their reach to ask any of them out on a date or openly flirt with them. While it may not go well for some straight men, depending on the type of guy, it’s an unspoken right. You have the right to hit on any girl you want, period. There’s also an unspoken rule for gay men: You can’t hit on any guy you want for two very important reasons. (1) Physical safety and (2) embarrassment. Thusly gay men have constructed a system for picking up other guys in public. That system is called cruising.

Made famous by Senator Larry Craig and a little known cult movie starring Al Pacino of the same name-sake, cruising is a surprisingly intricate arrangement of hand, foot and face signals. It relies solely on the mutual desire for sex and the signals that initiate it. This “secret language” of sorts varies, but it’s surprisingly easy to understand.

In terms of face signals, it’s like a game of Simon says. If one person winks and the other winks back, that’s grounds for initiating something more. It can be followed up by an upward nod. If that upward nod is returned, then you move on to another signal, such as licking of the lips, if that is returned, and eye contact is still maintained, then it’s safe to start something. This can be useful in a crowded room. All of this is mentioned in Michael Thomas Ford's 'Ultimate Gay Sex'.

When in private, in particular in a bathroom, the foot-tap is used. This cruising technique is notorious in that Senator Larry Craig was caught in a men’s bathroom using this exact technique to “pick up” an undercover cop. The routine is extremely easy, yet bold. You enter a bathroom, go up to a urinal next to where someone is, and slowly move the foot closest to the person towards him. This motion is followed by two taps. If the motion is returned by the person next to you, sex is immediately initiated, usually in a nearby stall.

Some of it is improvisation but mostly it all follows a model: one movement is made then a movement is returned. Like pig-Latin, anyone can learn these signals. The signals themselves usually stand out and unwavering eye contact is always a given. But in an age of networking technology such as facebook and myspace, has the great gay tradition of cruising lost its point? It’s so easy to organize sexual encounters these days that why would anyone risk being arrested? What gay men, ages 18-25 even know about cruising?

It’s no secret that with the onset of myspace and even the nearly endless list of on-line dating sites has brought about a new-age of cruising. Going beyond the normal ideas of logging into a chat-room and putting one’s self, “out there”, cruising online has a new feature. You look at the pictures of the people you are interested in, look at their interests and then send an email to them or an innocent friend request, announcing your interest. If the email is returned, then casual conversation in exchanged and eventually, as in the traditional idea of cruising, a rendezvous is organized for sex.

But in its bare form, one has to wonder whether or not cruising, albeit digitally or in it’s old fashion incarnation is healthy for the gay community. Not because of the activity’s blatant emphasis on indiscriminate sex, but rather for its emphasis on clandestine encounters, secrecy and hidden behavior. When Senator Larry Craig was apprehended in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for “lewd conduct”, as reported by DC based newspaper Roll Call, he immediately claimed that he was guilty of the charges to police, but later rescinded that plea and re-entered a plea of “not guilty”. Larry Craig was in the bathroom when he placed a hand underneath the stall he was occupying and tapped his foot a few times, indicating his desire for sex to the undercover agent in the stall adjacent. Craig was subsequently apprehended for his actions. Larry Craig is one of the gay rights movement’s strongest opponents. He opposes any same-sex marriage and adoption rights legislation and has supported Mitt Romney’s presidential bid to “protect the American Family” from the homosexual agenda.

Craig has said to the AP and other news outlets that he is not “gay”. He may not identify himself as a gay man, but his actions certainly indicated his desire for a secret homosexual encounter. In a society where homosexuality is classified as normal and healthy behavior by the preeminent minds of psychology, one must assume that hiding such behavior and even opposing such behavior legislatively is unhealthy in its own right. Cruising for some, seems to be a way to hide what might be seen as embarrassing and undesirable, but not in anyway unhealthy.

Thus remains a secret culture where gay men exchange looks and hand signals to operate their attractions underground. This silent culture is known to many in the gay community and held with reverence and part of a community’s past. To conservative elements and the law in general, it is viewed with scorn, contempt and even criminality. But one thing is certainly for sure; gay men cannot walk into a room and have their pick of any men they please. Perhaps gay men are cruising not for men, but for an even playing field.

Mom, The College is Lurking My Facebook Page!

2008-04-08T22:23:00.008-04:00

You can't keep a secret safe anymore. Especially not from your college.

Walking through the Center for Applied Learning and Technology building and/or the Andrew G. Truxal Library, those of us who are even slightly observant (or have simply been graced with the gift of vision) should be able to notice the high proximity of their peers surfing the Web. And you can bet that a good handful of them are on Facebook, MySpace, or some kind of on-line community.

Of course, this isn’t anything new. Ever since social networks started in the late 1990’s there has been some kind of buzz about them, and when Friendster hit the web pages in 2002 and Myspace exploded onto the scene in 2003 you can bet the buzz was deafening. Throw in Mark Zuckerberg’s 2004 production, Facebook, and there you have this generations “e-ddiction.”

However, what colleges across the country, including AACC, are worried about are students breaking codes of conduct in their Internet lives.

The impact of technology on higher education has multiplied faster than imaginable in recent years, and college’s concern for the student lie on both a moral and legal front. Their best solution to student misconduct on ground they can’t tread?: Tread on that ground.

Many colleges are now enforcing monitoring policies for websites such as those listed above, and treating violated codes of conduct such as hate speech, libel, harassment, theft, underage drinking, etc., as if the misconduct happened on the streets, on the campus, or in the classroom.

So what happens when you post photos from that triple kegger on frat row last weekend? Oh nothing big, just say goodbye to that ROTC scholarship, your on-campus housing, and your presumably clean record.

Okay, that could be an exaggeration. But campuses still aren’t fooling around, and not just in our star-spangled slice of North America. A Ryerson University (Toronto, Canada) student received a notice from his administration that he was facing 147 counts of academic misconduct for calling on a Facebook group of other students in his class to post solutions to a Chemistry assignment.

During a live nationwide audio conference on April 8, 2008 discussing the topic: “Facebook, MySpace, & Other On-Line Communities: What Your College Must Know” Assistant Dean at the Syracuse University School of Law, Tomás Gonzalez, explained to community college and university staff alike that: “Students obtain a false sense of security from these on-line communities, codes of etiquette disappear when they believe they have anonymity.”

Gonzalez went on saying that students don’t read the terms of usage when they sign up, nor do they review them regularly, without realizing the terms they agreed to may be subject to change at any moment and therefore the user may be liable for anything posted on their page whether it be an example of copyright infringement or inflammatory remarks towards another student, both of which put the student at risk with either the authorities or their school’s own administrative council.

The audio conference was available for AACC staff, under the organization of Lisa M. Starkey, Institutional Professional Development. According to Ms. Starkey: “This practical 60-minute audio conference, provided by Tomás Gonzalez…will provide participants with the framework a college needs in administering and monitoring standards for on-line campus networks.”

What does that mean for us still on campus? Not too much, simply the possibility. If a policy on monitoring social networking is to be initiated, the risk of the college regularly keeping an eye on all aspects of your life is still pretty low.

A regular system of monitoring students’ on-line activities comes with the price of being considered a guard tower. The college would assume a “Duty of Care” position, meaning it could be considered liable for on-line incidents and/or incidents that occur in real life due to an on-line confrontation.

So if Sally writes a derogatory message on Jill’s Facebook wall and Jill comes after Sally in the parking lot with a pair of hedge-clippers, the college may be considered at fault for not intervening after the message was initially posted.

It’s a safe bet that no campus would want to be on 60 Minutes for a hedge-clippers incident.

Sally and Jill aside, it’s safe to assume campuses will take the risk and initiate some kind of policy and intervene when considered necessary. The likely case will be public safety responding to complaints, rather than an around-the-clock Face/Space-Watch.

But the possibility is still there, at any given time someone official may be watching your information. The safest bet with or without a monitoring policy, is to maintain high privacy settings on your profile page. Or you could always just take down the partying pictures, hide all the stolen mp3s, and simply make your life a little less accessible.

Ms. Starkey made it very clear that Mr. Gonzalez’s conference was for nothing more than obtaining information, so this is not a call to arms to AACC students everywhere. Just remember: it may not be happening now, but someday Big Brother really could be watching you.

The Rise of the Whizzinator

2008-04-07T18:17:00.015-04:00

Urinalysis drug testing has long been a reliable method used to assure various institutions that individuals of concern are clean of banned or illegal substances. Many of the methods people use to avoid positive test results are far from a guarantee, but these days drug testers can be very easy to dupe.

Some people prefer consuming temporary detoxifying liquids that can be purchased at many alternative retail stores. However, these detox drinks can be risky—not to mention expensive—as body type, diet, and frequency of drug use varies. Furthermore, drug testers can counteract the popular method of using urine from a drug-free individual rather well by simply monitoring the individual while they urinate.

But what if the most reliable answer to evading detection lies in a fake penis?

Puck Technology, a company making themselves known by selling products meant to evade the procedures of drug testing facilities, has given just that answer.

The company is offering a device, known as the Whizzinator, which conceals clean urine under the camouflage of a fake penis. The fake penis contains a tube connected to a belt the user wears, which holds a vial of urine. The product even comes in 5 different colors to match skin tone. Puck Technology also has a “sister” product for women, named Number One.

“I have failed a drug test in the past,” comments AACC student Elizabeth Koch, “Had I known about this product before my drug test, I would have used it.”

The Whizzinator is operated by triggering a concealed switch on the belt of the apparatus. When triggered the fake penis will “urinate.” Puck Technology also sells dehydrated urine, which is activated with 80 milliliters of water. Equipped with a heating pack that maintains the temperature of the clean urine, the Whizzinator package supposedly offers everything an individual needs to pass a monitored drug test. The only perceived draw back is the charge of $150.00 for the Whizzinator, and $15.00 for three vials of dehydrated urine sold separately.

“I have used the Whizzinator repeatedly and I have never had a problem with it,” said 23 year-old Brian Laramie of Bowie, MD. “Considering it has worked everytime and continuous purchasing a detox will quickly run over $150, it is definitely worth the cost.”

Puck Technology received substantial exposure for the Whizzinator back in May 2005 when former Minnesota Vikings running back Onterrio Smith was detained at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport with a Whizzinator in his possession. This incident prompted the NFL to suspend Smith.

On top of the Smith incident, Congress held a hearing with Puck Technology and other companies in the same market a week later. However, without the ability to ban the Whizzinator, the congressional hearing simply turned into grilling the representatives present on the lack of morality in selling such infamous products.

The Whizzinator is still legal and easily trafficked through shipping companies like FedEx and UPS, and the product continues to remain evasive for drug testers to detect.

Can it be said that only the lazy and senseless are prone to testing positive now? Maybe, but unless institutions requiring drug testing are willing to pony up the cash for more expensive testing procedures such as DNA identification, the Whizzinator is likely to continue pissing off Congress and bosses worldwide.

Drunk Driving Doesn't Always Kill

2008-04-07T11:07:00.006-04:00

Every 31 minutes, someone dies because of a drunk driver. Every two minutes, a person is fatally injured, yet the mayhem continues every hour of every day. In 2006, 30 percent of all traffic fatalities in Maryland involved at least one driver with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08 or higher.

Alcohol is a product that has been a part of mankind's history, playing important roles in religion and worship as well as forms of medicine. It has been used to enhance ones social life and provide relaxation to those who may need it. Oral tradition recorded in the Old Testament (Genesis 9:20) states that Noah planted a vineyard on Mt. Ararat in what is now eastern Turkey, which could’ve been used in the first forms on winemaking. Therefore, a little bit of alcohol is not truly bad for you, in fact it may be beneficial to some. But when is time to draw the line?

Although it can be useful to you, it can also be extremely harmful if you don’t “drink with caution” and when you first begin drinking, you feel that bit of happiness but it really is a depressant which causes your mind to think in different ways. It’s also a cause of cirrhosis of the liver. People that drink very heavily tend to have a higher risk of getting esophageal cancer than people who do not drink, by what studies have shown to be about 75%. More than anything, it impairs your judgment.

Driving is described as having two major tasks, one being a central visual task and the other being a peripheral visual task. When those two activities are combined, alcohol impairs driving performance at blood alcohol concentration levels as low as 50-mg%. Drivers who are under the influence of alcohol tend to concentrate on one task and neglect the others. More often than not, alcohol will make a person’s self esteem shoot way up, and that includes someone feeling very self confident that he or she is “OK to drive” when in reality, they are not. They are also more likely to take on high-risk tasks that they may normally avoid.

It is true, however, that alcohol affects every person in different ways and while one may be fine to drive after a few drinks, another may be completely intoxicated and unable to stand. Even if you are one of those people who can “hold down your liquor,” there may be someone else who simply cannot and that is why there are laws regarding the highest blood alcohol level that you can be while behind the wheel, which is .008. As the alcohol level rises in the blood, muscular coordination is further affected and basic reflexes become progressively depressed. There is reduced hand steadiness, difficulty in standing and emotional outbursts as well aggressiveness or becoming hostile.

Drunk driving fatally injures people far more than it kills, which leaves the victim problems for the rest of their lives. Economic costs of alcohol-related crashes are estimated to be $114.3 billion yearly and are the nation’s most frequently committed crime. It is such an easy task to simply call yourself a cab and it remains questionable why everyone continues to do it. People will not be willing to change their ways until the unimaginable happens: death. Although, you must remember that drunk driving doesn’t always kill.

IVAW: Saying Their Peace

2008-04-06T07:47:00.003-04:00

In July 2004, Iraq war veterans founded Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW). At the annual convention of Veterans For Peace (VFP), IVAW was created so that service people and veterans would have an opportunity to be heard. Members come from every branch of the U.S. Military, and they have served since September 11, 2001. These men and women strongly oppose the Iraq war and continue to find ways to speak out against it. IVAW has had three points of unity they cling to from the beginning: immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces in Iraq, reparations for the human and structural damages Iraq has suffered, and full benefits, adequate healthcare, and other supports for returning servicemen and women.

The group gives a wealth of information on the it's website, IVAW.org. There are a number of Q&A's that give the public and their members a better understanding as to what they believe. For example, the question, "Why are veterans, active duty, and National Guard men and women opposed to the war in Iraq?", is answered with 10 different responses. Another answers the question of why there is a need for immediate troop removal. Also, on the website there are videos of the war-if you have a weak stomach, you will want to prepare yourself the best you can. There are photo galleries, member profiles, organization updates, and more. Those who want to join can find out if they are eligible through the website. The membership information section includes things like eligibility and things to expect. If a person is not eligible, they can subscribe to a mailing list for updates and such.

Since 2004, IVAW membership has continued to increase. The organization has members in 48 states, Washington, D.C., Canada, and also on a number of overseas bases, including Iraq. The members of IVAW say they love their country and feel it is their right and duty to protect it. "Although we are utterly opposed to the war, the occupation in Iraq, we're still here to stand up beside the American people to defend the constitution that we swore to protect," said Nick Morgan. Morgan served a year and a week mainly in Baghdad with in Alpha Company, 458th Engineering Battalion, 1st Calvary Division. He was there from February 2004 until February 2005. Proud of his involvement with the IVAW, Morgan also participated in a 25 mile march to Valley Forge. He has recently taken on the responsibilities as the Mid-Atlantic regional coordinator for IVAW.

Nick Morgan also had a part in Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan. Winter Soldier was a four-day even that brought veterans who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan together from all over the country. It took place Thrusday, March 13 to Sunday, March 16, 2008. The men and women gave their testimony about what they experienced. Panels of scholars, veterans, journalists, and other specialists were also in attendance. IVAW did over 300 interviews with numerous media outlets. Nick Morgan's stated that his testimony was recorded, "along with dozens of hours of additional testimony for Congressional archives." He spoke mainly on the "utter disregard for Iraq civillians, their homes, infrastructure, safety, and livelihoods." When asked about one of his experiences, he recalled a situation in which he was ordered to destroy a house "slowly...and to make a point." An entire neighborhood was sat down next to the house, and "basically, if not literally," told that anyone who wants to contribute to terrorist activities, this is what's going to happen to you. To this day, Morgan does not know who's house this was. "Were they a terrorist? Were they an insurgent? I'll never know," Morgan says, "but I sure as s**t leveled their house."

Students Armed Against.... Themselves?

2008-03-31T14:40:00.009-04:00

We hear in the news too often that there has been a school shooting somewhere in the United States. One demented individual who seeks to cause harm to his fellow classmates finally pulls the trigger and the result is death and serious injury. It is difficult to say how one is able to protect themselves when faced with the possibility that one of your own could suddenly turn on you and come after you with a gun. One answer is better law enforcement and stricter security while on campus, but even this has its negative results.

Stricter security leaves students feel like they are almost in prison and that they are not trusted while attending classes, and more law enforcement could detract from where it is currently needed most, another answer is to allow the students to carry their own protection.

Wait, what?

Although it may seem like an extreme measure there have been discussions in recent years regarding the legal use of concealed weapons nationwide.

Here in the United States we are used to being protected by law enforcement officials and laws enforced by the government. In third world countries which have little in the way of laws and state appointed law enforcement officials however, this is not the case.

So how are you are you supposed to keep yourself safe? In most cases concealed weapons are often used to ensure the safety of individuals who live or work in dangerous areas. Carrying a concealed weapon may be appropriate when faced with living day in and day out in an environment which offers little protection, but here in the United States it is a different matter.

Because of the attacks on September 11, 2001 the United States has gone through a renaissance in its security measures, we finally realize that our power and intimidating strength that we use as a nation makes us a target as well as a force to be reckoned with.

Arming students with the ability to protect themselves is a risky measure unto itself. While it may offer protection to an extent knowing that all students are able to protect themselves against a lone psychopath, putting the power of a weapon in the hands of your average student could create power struggles between rival groups of students and could result in more deaths overall, if the students could even effectively use a weapon.

A group known as the SCC is currently traveling from one university to another in light of the tragedy at Virginia Tech early last year stating that "While opponents may argue that guns have no place in institutions of higher learning, it is the rapes, the assaults, and the uncontested execution style massacres that have no place in Americas colleges".

While the use of automatic weapons may be out of the question, devices such as mace and tasers are quickly becoming widely available and sold throughout the United States, with limited regulations on the possession of such devices. They look like the technology we need to provide a safe environment for students while at the same time not giving the students the power to take the lives of others.

Weapons such as the ones used at Virginia Tech are those which can be stored and hid easily among a students other possessions so it is undeniably difficult to counter the concealment of weapons in our nations schools. At the same time however, it is our right to be able to protect ourselves if need be. Although there has been much discussion on the matter, there has not yet been results on what is to be done about the gun violence in schools. It seems that this difficult subject may go unresolved for some time.

Juicy Campus: Gossip for the MySpace Generation

2008-03-31T00:29:00.004-04:00

(image provided by Gossip Events)

Gossip has long been a staple of American college life, with students spreading salacious information about others to their closest friends and compatriots. The original formats of communicating gossip, namely, spoken and written word, are tried and true ways of spreading hearsay, yet in the current technologically advanced age, would-be gossipers have been deterred by the increasing frequency of their rumors being tracked directly back to them.

So, leave it to the internet to provide a simple and anonymous way for college students to get their juiciest details and secrets swirling around not only their respective campuses, but to the entire world. One such website is Juicy Campus, a free message board that promises gossip that is “always anonymous” and “always juicy.” However, it is this selling point that resulted in not only great controversy, but also legal trouble for the site and its founder.

Juicy Campus was founded on August 1st, 2007 by Matt Ivester, a graduate of Duke University. Initially, the site had dedicated networks for only 7 American colleges, including Mr. Ivester’s alma mater. However, Juicy Campus’s popularity has grown quickly in recent months and now, the site contains 62 networks for a variety of different colleges, which run the gamut from Ivy League institutions like Harvard and Yale, to smaller schools like Colgate and Pepperdine, and have even extended to the US Naval and Air Force Academies.

The site prides itself particularly on its anonymity. The sign-up process that is synonymous with other internet message boards is non-existent at Juicy Campus, and the site’s privacy policy and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) pages assure users that “it is not possible for anyone to use this website to find out who you are or where you are located.”

As far as the details that users can post, the site allows users to input whatever information they desire, but state on their Terms and Conditions page that some elements are not allowed, including “unlawful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, libelous or invasive” content. In addition, the same page states that although Juicy Campus doesn’t pre-screen the material that its users post, the site has “the right (but not the obligation) to access, re-arrange, modify and remove” uploaded content.

As is the case with any bastion of free-speech (digital or otherwise), there are always some who refuse to play by the rules and Juicy Campus certainly contains comments by such people. One comment in the Air Force section, posted on March 28th, has the heading of “Help Wanted: Slaves, Preferably Black Nigger Ones.” The message itself is a solicitation for sex with willing African American students on campus; Help wanted: nigger whores… we understand all nigger pussy smells.” The post continues by requesting that respondents “speak fluent Ebonics,” while referring to blacks as “cotton picking niggers” and concludes with the phrase “Power to the Whites, fly the Confederate flag high, God is White.”

On the Brown section of the site, a February 23rd post proposes that a student who plays basketball for the campus’s team is a homosexual, noting that “he shoots free throws one handed… what else do you think he does one handed?”

Although comments like these are constitutionally protected on grounds of free speech, they have not prevented Juicy Campus from getting into hot water with their critics, who claim that the site traffics in hatred and defamation and does not properly monitor the site in accordance with their posted terms of use. One such person is Anne Milgram, New Jersey’s Attorney General who, along with being offended by the content that appears on the site, believes that Juicy Campus is in violation of the state’s Consumer Fraud Act.

According to a March 18th Associated Press report by Brad Haynes, Milgram claims that Juicy Campus has failed to enforce their legal terms and conditions of use and “provides no way for users to report or dispute the material.” The report continues also explains how one college student reported to local authorities the harassment, invasion of privacy and threatening behavior inflicted upon her, courtesy of Juicy Campus users, some of whom posted personal information, including the student’s address, on the site.

In response to such reports, including the Friday arrest of a Colgate student who posted plans to attack his school on the site, Milgram has filed a subpoena against Juicy Campus, effectively opening a legal investigation into the site’s proceedings. Furthermore, Milgram has recently gained an ally in her cause in the form of Adbrite, Juicy Campus’s now former advertising agency.

When asked for comment, Matt Ivester told the AP that he believes his site is being censored and unfairly portrayed by its critics: “…there are always people who demand censorship. However, we believe that Juicy Campus can have a really positive impact on college campuses, as a place for both entertainment and free expression."

Despite Ivester’s public defense of his internet creation, it would seem that he is not pleased by some of the more hateful posts that have resulted in his site being viewed in the way that it has been. In a February 28th message on Juicy Campus's official blog, Ivester implored readers to “keep Juicy Campus the fun place that it was meant to be… juicy, not hateful.”

As Juicy Campus continues to gain more users and college networks, more controversy and possibly legal questions will undoubtedly follow. How Ivester will attempt to quell criticism remains to be seen, as does whether the site’s “juicy” nature will eventually become a “terminal” liability.

Lack of Cell Phone Policy Ruffles Feathers

2008-03-28T11:07:00.002-04:00

Frank Benjamin is a part time Physical Science professor at both Anne Arundel Community College and Chesapeake College. Recently, he issued a memo among his students at both colleges, detailing an anti cell phone policy in all of his classes.

The policy will forbid use of a cell phone in any length, for both texting and accepting calls, as Benjamin finds it “disrespectful to both the teacher and to the students sitting around the user.”

Second-year AACC student John Norman agrees with Professor Benjamin, stating: “Even something as harmless as texting can be distracting for other people. It ruins your concentration.”

Neither Chesapeake or AACC have an official policy on cell phone use inside the classroom. AACC’s official stance is that it is up to the teacher to inform the students of any such policy if they plan to establish one. They are free to establish any rules against cell phone use in their classroom.

Professor Benjamin stated that this fact “surprised and disappointed” him.

Norman thinks that such an all-out anti cell phone policy would be too rash. “students are entitled to mistakes and emergencies. I think teachers should be more stern about non-tolerance, but I think the second you make a full blown policy about the issue, AACC turns in to Anne Arundel Community High School.”

Professor Benjamin’s memo states that he will have an open-door policy about this, allowing students to leave the classroom to take a call or send a text, but that they are not to “re-enter the classroom until the matter involving the cell phone is taken care of.”

The memo does not state any sort of punishment for the infractions, but states that there will be no exceptions to the policy.

Baltimore Buying Better Grades

2008-03-24T00:07:00.009-04:00

What if you could get paid to do well in school? Every student’s dream may be coming true for Baltimore highschoolers. Students who do poorly on a previously taken exam may be paid to do better during their next attempt. A 5% improvement can earn $25, 15% can earn $35, and a 20% improvement on previously taken standardized testing scores earn a whopping $110!

The standardized tests are state graduation exams. These exams test students on basic skills in algebra, English, biology and government. Baltimore will be using public dollars in this $6.3 million plan to improve city scores. Each student will have the potential to earn up to $110 each. This idea has already been approved by State Superintendent Nancy Grasmick.

(Image by trancedmoogle via flickr)

Some view that payment for better test scores is a great motivation for students. Students will concentrate more on their studies and work harder to succeed with the potential for payment. They argue that adults get paid to go to work, so why shouldn’t students get paid to do well in school.

Others argue that the city widely nicknamed “Baltimurder” could find better use for that money; like getting violence and drugs off of its streets. In 2005, Baltimore was given the highest murder rate in the United States among cities with a population of 250,000 or higher. In 2007, CNN ranked Baltimore as the second most dangerous city in America, among cities with a population over 500,000. 2007 marked much higher than average rates of aggravated assault, burglary, robbery, and theft as well as 282 murders. Better standardized testing scores won’t matter if you’re killed.

If this program is successful in Baltimore, will the neighboring Anne Arundel County school system be next? Many residents have different and strong opinions on the program. Nineteen year old AACC student Christina Salyers voices her opinion;”I think it is wrong to pay kids to learn. I went to Broadneck high school, and I know that our standardized test scores were really good and none of our students were paid to do better on them. Students should want to learn and want to get better grades; they should not be driven by money to do well on a test.”

First year AACC student Chip Tamplin sees both sides of the argument; “I believe that students who can focus on school work have a better chance of succeeding in life and getting away from the downward spiral that's happening [in Baltimore] now. Considering most of the people in Baltimore County are middle to low income households, the obvious extra money should more than persuade the majority to change their ways. I think it could do some good. On the other hand, economic standings shouldn't dictate your charisma towards work, and it shouldn't dictate how you will turn out in the future. If there was a way to connect with the youth in a way non-economically, I think it would serve them best. But considering nothing has worked so far, I think we should try this if it works.”

Some students, like 20 year old Annemarie Stasny are skeptical of the system’s credibility; ”I think that the small increments of money for the small increase of test scores for some kids are a good idea. But only for those kids that really have no structure at home. On the contrary, it's not fair for kids that are doing well, and I'm almost positive kids that can easily pass are going to take advantage of this money system.”

(Image by Kid Korovyov via flickr)

Success or failure of this system will be closely watched and notably documented as it begins. Will writing checks for good grades be bribing students into a lessened state of morality, or could paying students for improvement be money well spent? Should Baltimore spend that money on improving public safety? Perhaps better test scores could bring Baltimore one step closer towards living up to its slogan as the greatest city in America.

Student Counter-Protesters Prepare For The Phelps Family

2008-03-22T16:04:00.005-04:00

“Thank God for Dead Soldiers, Fag Nation, America is Doomed”

Don’t be surprised when you see these signs while driving through downtown Annapolis on Monday morning. The controversial Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas is paying our area a visit within the next few days, with plans to picket the United States’ tolerance of homosexuality, in the Washington DC and Annapolis areas.

The WBC has been active since 1955 and has been publicly demonstrating their belief that all nations tolerating homosexuality will be destroyed by the wrath of God since 1991.

What can one expect from a WBC picket? Other than the signs promoting statements of hate against homosexuality, another notable sign is that most protesters are standing on American flags. Over the past 15 years, the churches public statements have “gotten more extreme” says BBC reporter Louis Theroux in this interview regarding his three weeks spent with the Church members while documenting The Most Hated Family in America (2007).

Keeping up with the trend of targeting US military efforts in the Middle East, Fred Phelps, pastor and founder, and his almost entirely family based Church plan to picket the United States Naval Academy at King George St. & Randall St., Annapolis, MD. In the nation’s capital the target is the Washington Navy Yard, planning to meet at M St. SE & 9th St. SE. for the hearing of a US Midshipman.

It is almost needless to say that the public actions of the church have not gone unopposed. In 2007, the family of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder was awarded a $10.9 million verdict for the Church’s protest of Snyder’s funeral, on the grounds of defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The amount has since been reduced to $5 million, noting constitutional concerns of appropriateness.

Legal action isn’t the only alternative some have taken in opposition to the Phelps Family. Holly Jackson, a student at the University of Maryland – College Park, decided to take matters into her own hands by organizing a counter protest for this Monday, the 24^th of March. Organization of this counter protest was conducted in a manner quite familiar to most college students: Facebook. “Almost 5,000 people had been invited [to the protest] via Facebook, however my event was shut down because it somehow protested hate” Ms. Jackson explained, who still plans to counter picket the WBC upon their arrival in Washington DC.

As two faces of activism arrive in our own backyard, we can only question as to what will happen when they collide. Play nice, kids.

School Power

2008-03-19T13:34:00.001-04:00

It seems school boards are fueled with power and making drastic changes to the system left and right. While many agree with these changes, a majority is thinking these changes will only bring more conflict rather than progress.

First, is the money being given to PG county inner city school students for simply getting honor roll grades. Many questions of opposition are being raised. What is this money going to be used towards? Certainly not being held for college funded futures. Will it be used for drugs? Quite possibly. Is this fair to other students who know it is their own future that depends on good school ethic, and are not swayed with money?
Second, Supervisors have distributed a test to High School seniors asking social studies questions, none too in depth. The test was given to determine just how well social study programs are, and if they need more requirements. The results were shocking, beginning with the sound majority of students answering incorrectly to the question, “What year did Christopher Columbus discover America?” While this knowledge is something all Americans should know about their culture, it is not, however, of detrimental importance to their careers and everyday life. High School seniors did, however know that The Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776. The school board intends on cracking down on history departments and enforcing more requirements, along with the previous changes made in the math department only a few years ago. Are the continuous tightening of the grips on school students increasing more drop outs, and if not, only adding more anxiety and stress on the lingering amount of students?
Finally, the health board seems to be playing a factor in this one. This year, students have been forbidden to drink coffee at school. If seen holding a mug of coffee, whether bought from a store or from home, it will be immediately taken from the students hands. The teacher then informs the student to come after lunch and pick it up. This logic is one no one understands. Not only are high school students forced to wake up at outrageous hours, but now they are not allowed to fuel their poorly energized bodies with a bit of coffee. Surely most teachers would like their students to be awake during class, and surely they would like them to actually participate and understand the lesson plan, right? Then why ban coffee? It brings no harm. If alcohol is the concern, simply sniff the coffee, but seeing that marijuana in school is much more an issue than drinking alcohol, this need not be the case.

No matter the reasons, schools are only getting stricter and students dreading every thought of school. Time will only tell whether restricting coffee from students will brighten their future.

Silent Death: The Wire's Quiet Finale

2008-03-19T01:26:00.003-04:00

Anyone who pays even the slightest bit of attention to entertainment news is aware that the greatest show in the history of television ended its illustrious reign on March 9th. OK, so maybe that’s a bit of an overstatement, but not because of the credit given to the artistic success of the HBO-drama The Wire. After five near-perfect seasons, the internet's most blogged about show died with ratings in the gutter (under two million viewers per week) and left only a mere blip on the major entertainment news media's radar. What does a show have to do to become popular? Forego amazing writing, beautiful cinematography, masterful acting, a cultish following AND critical acclaim? Jeez
Louise...

During its tenure, The Sopranos showed that an uncensored, hour-long drama on extended cable could become wildly popular and respected in
the fickle community that is Hollywood, something completely unprecedented, even for HBO. After receiving numerous Emmy awards and critical, as well as commercial , success, the show went off the air after six seasons. Where does The Wire fit into this, you ask? Well,
this is what David Simon & Co. had to live up to.

One of the many reasons for The Wire's lack of commercial success is
due to its relentless artfulness, usually manifested in some of the
most complex character sketches this side of Tolstoy. This complexity
resulted in poor reviews for the first two seasons, usually on the
basis of the show dragging and "trying to be a book", according to an
early Entertainment Weekly review. Though the critics eventually came
around to the show, it’s viewership remained small for the
remainder of the show's life. Though it brought in some of the most
creative writers in Hollywood, including Homicide's David Simon and
legendary fiction writers George Pelocanos and Richard Price, the show
only received one Emmy nomination in the five seasons it spent on TV.
HBO's inferior precursor, The Sopranos, won 21 in its lifetime.

Though the show is receiving more attention now than ever, and a few
cast and crewmembers are already working on follow-ups, it still is
covered sparingly in most media outlets, and its ratings are in the
toilet. How does this apply to you, you may ask? Well, without quality
television programs like The Wire or Deadwood to set examples, even the
more artful networks, like HBO, will be encouraged to produce more
commercial fare. But what is the point of HBO producing another Entorage?

Pride Muddling Logic: Who's Really Responsible For Student Engagement?

2008-03-10T23:48:00.005-04:00

Recently, a professor very close to this blog came to some of us with a story idea. Apparently he, like many other professors nation wide, thinks student disengagement is incredibly prevalent at community colleges, and that AACC is no different.

And, don’t get me wrong, this professor has a solid argument. I’m sure he (and many of his colleagues) have seen all the signs: showing up late to class/ not showing up at all, sleeping through lectures, not answering their questions and generally being “not there” throughout most class sessions. Not even a week ago the Student Association here set up a few video game consoles in the Student Union, and students were actually skipping class to play Halo.

Undoubtedly, the professor, and professors nationwide make a very compelling argument that is hard to shoot down. And, I’d like to take it upon myself to deliver a counterpoint for Community College students nation wide:

So?

I’m not going to back away by saying “Oh, our plates are full, with 16 credits and 40 hour work weeks, and maybe even a family” (Even though it’s true, and that’s a perfectly fair response to checking out of class.), because that’s too easy. I think there’s a whole story no one ever talks about, and it’s time to shed some light on that.

What professors and administrators don’t seem to realize is that as diverse as a place like AACC is, we’re have one thing that unites us. For whatever reason, we have either been forsaken by, or become disenchanted with, the typical beaten path of “Go to school, get good grades, go to a higher school, get good grades, pay a ton of money for a slip of paper permitting you for a job you hate.”

Some of us are here because we goofed off and couldn’t make it into a four year. Some of us our here because it’s low maintenance and easy. Some are here because we just can’t afford $25,000 a year to get a “quality education.” But, for whatever reason, we’re here because we tried to do things the way we were always told, and it didn’t work.

Maybe we “fell through the cracks.” But, it’s probably just as likely that we sought out the cracks. Maybe we failed at doing it their way. Maybe we just wanted to do it out own way.

As students, we’re faced with so many speed bumps through the road to our education that it’s easy to swerve left or right. Maybe the problem isn’t with us, but with the institution of higher education itself. Ridiculously inflated tuition fees, professors who have had the joy of teaching sucked out of them, or can’t keep track of the thousand or so students they see on a weekly basis, sub par facilities, all for a bachelor’s degree that just means serving under a baby boomer until they are gracious enough to retire, and leave you their position so you can finally pay off the student loans that you incurred while getting that slip of paper.

Perhaps I‘m being unfair. There are plenty of individuals who are taking AACC for what it can be: a lovely opportunity. They realize they’ve done something they probably would’ve done differently given the chance, and are now making up for lost time by studying hard, involving themselves and generally being the type of student that will thrive at a four year school. And, there are just as many professors who are trying desperately to do whatever they can to force every ounce they can out of every student who lets them.

But, for every student or professor that is busting their hump, there’s a student who’s just here because they can live at home rent free if they take a few classes, or a professor who just couldn’t make it at a four year school, and is now bitter that all that hard work and money spent earning a doctorate only got them a part time job teaching the ‘13th grade.”

The slacker’s money is no different than the 4.0 student. So, don’t they have every right to spend it as they wish in a capitalist society? If they wish to spend the 300 or so dollars it takes to sign on for a class, to do nothing but sleep through it, don’t they have every right to? If they want to skip class, not do assignments on time, and show up for the final and try to ace it just to even think about passing, isn’t that their choice?

I know this piece pretty much amounts to a bitter, aggravated freshman using a straw man argument to play devil’s advocate, but hear me out.

If every professor spent less time complaining about how disconnected their students are, and more time planning interesting class periods centered around discussion, instead of just using the same lecture for every class, maybe they’d be able to win their students back.

And, before I get a bunch of hate back, I know it goes both ways. If students would just take a little extra step to do the work, and discuss how they feel about it, they’d be a lot more successful.

As long as we’re pointing fingers, things are never going to change. Both sides have to recognize that they don’t understand each other as much as they think they do, and build from that.

The time will likely come when college is rendered obsolete, but for now it’s an inevitability for most careers. So, as long as we’re paying someone’s hard earned money to be stuck here, why not make the most of it? If both sides could put just a little more effort in, imagine what both sides could get out.

How The Internet Continues To Affect the Music Industry

2008-03-09T23:31:00.002-04:00

Music has always been looked upon as an art form that anybody can enjoy and can interpret in any way they’d like. There is no right or wrong type of music to listen to and that is a freedom that simply can’t be argued. It’s been a way to express feelings for many years all over the globe and always seems to inspire mankind and, in some shape or form, bring people together. Music has naturally evolved throughout the years and began developing rapidly when vinyl records hit the scene in the 1940’s and we have since seen the use of 8-track’s, audio cassette players, and compact discs which have all led up to the current use of the ever growing “business” of Mp3 players.

When the internet became widely available to regular households in the early 1990’s, a new revolution was soon underway: downloading of music. The idea was never really thought of until the 1997 release of “Napster,” a program in which allowed people to digitally download music to their computers. Up until this point, you had to go to the store and buy the physical cassette tape or CD in order to listen to your music. There are now thousands of these types of stores available online, including the most popular program iTunes, as well as sites like Rhapsody. iTunes is available to any computer user, as the program itself is free and you can very simply click into your iTunes store to purchase a 99 cent song, rather than a $14 CD which may only include a few songs of your liking. It also has readily available other entertainment such as television shows, movies, podcasts and games. In these cases, music has never been so accessible before in our convenience obsessed world that we seem to live in, where we can get what we want when we want it at the drop of a dime.

However, iTunes is a legal way of downloading music and not everybody wants to dish out 99 cents for a song that they can very simply get on a free program. They are programs such as LimeWire, Kazaa and BearShare which can be installed by the click of a button and by typing in a song title; hundreds of choices of free songs come up. It’s not legal, and it’s not right, but it doesn’t stop people from finding the loopholes and disobeying the law. “I have over 2000 songs on my iPod but I don’t have $2000 to spend on songs. Limewire is just so easy to use,” says Carly Thorn, a teenager from Maryland who, like thousands of others, gets her music in other ways. Easy, free music just seems too good to be true, right? For the music listeners, it is, of course, a dream come true. The convenience of free songs in your own home that are always available is something to cheer about. For the music artists, however, it may cause some inconvenience.

Most music artists still find it difficult to accept the concept of internet downloading. After all, what is the point of creating music videos, making album covers and spending so much of your time doing so if nobody is going to go and buy the physical copy? A lot of artists have tried to embrace the idea for the simple fact that it’s not going to stop. They are forced into the world of downloading as a musician in the 21^st century. That’s not to say that CD’s are completely on the back burner. There still are those loyal fans out there who will be the first one in line to buy their favorite singers CD but the fact of the matter is that record sales are just not what they used to be. Even as little as seven years ago, there were certain artists who could and would sell over 1 million copies in the first week of release. Now, in the year of 2008, that’s nearly unheard of. There is only a select few who have the power to do such a thing. Making a record costs big bucks and record labels make, distribute and market CD’s in order to do one thing: make their money plus more. With the option to now download only one song, rather than buying a whole album, sales seem to be plummeting daily.

In order for music downloading to work as a successful business, there needs to be stricter laws on illegal downloading. The Federation of Phonographic Industries (IFPI) has already taken legal action in stopping illegal file sharing and currently, the entire industry is in the adaptation stage where they’re finally figuring out how to work together. At this point, the only thing that should happen is getting the record labels on good terms with this “new” music industry that has gradually taken over and will only continue to move forward as the decades continue to go on.

The Forever 27 Club: The Names and the Numbers Don't Add Up!

2008-03-08T17:03:00.007-05:00

The number 27: no, this isn’t a Jim Carrey sequel! For musicians, the 27^th birthday must mean the gift of 365 days of paranoia (366 if it’s a leap year!). The past century has seen a statistical spike in the deaths of musicians at the young age of 27 years. Is it really unlucky, or is it just superstition that surrounds the deaths of musicians at this infamous age? Regardless, those influential persons who have passed too young have been dubbed members of the “Forever 27 Club.”

In a club where the only known criteria is to die early, the memberships is noticeably exclusive, as only five names stand out: Brian Jones (Rolling Stones), Jimi Hendrix (The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Band of Gypsys), Janis Joplin (Big Brother & The Holding Company), Jim Morrison (The Doors), and Kurt Cobain (Nirvana).

However, in reality the list is much longer. Many famous names have passed on at 27, most with similar causes of death to those listed above. Despite this, the Forever 27 Club remains narrowed to those five.

Although I understand an artist is largely defined by their fan base, talent should not be glorified just as it should not under a veil. Why should the suicide of Kurt Cobain or the heroin overdose of Janis Joplin be considered any more important than those of Peter Ham (Badfinger) or Jeremy Ward (The Mars Volta, De Facto)?

Obscurity is not what prevents these other artists from another spot in history as an ill-fated member of an ill-fated club. Badfinger produced seven full-length albums before Hams death in 1975, and six others to follow; while Ward only saw the birth of the Tremulant EP and was found dead while touring for De-Loused in the Comatorium, but The Mars Volta has since seen great success and is currently producing their fifth album.

So if fame isn’t criteria for being Forever 27, what is? Who decides who is put on the posters and the merchandise glorifying these musicians as saints? And when will the ignored names and faces be given credit for their misfortune?

The Final Solution: American Conservatives and the link to HIV

2008-03-05T20:06:00.005-05:00

In 1932 the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama began a little experiment. The doctors involved in the study were baffled as to why white males infected with the STD called syphilis experienced neurological effects compared to infected African American’s who were experiencing cardiovascular effects. The medical staff came up with an idea. They would offer a clinical research program with 399 black men, under the guise of Syphilis Treatment. In reality, the doctors just wanted to watch them slowly die. In the end, 28 men died directly from the disease. Another 100 would die from related effects, 40 wives were infected and 19 of the subject’s children had been born with congenital syphilis. All believed they were receiving treatment.

The US Public Health Service funded this project. Its details were well known to authorities. All cases were in the early stages, and easily curable by the doctors with whom these African American men dealt. In fact, when World War 2 rolled around and the Medical Draft Doctors detected syphilis in these men, they requested they receive treatment. Tuskegee denied it to them in the interests of the study, leaving a total of 128 dead.

In 1997 President Clinton apologized to the African American community. “The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male” was conducted from between 1932-1972. The New York Times finally unearthed its 40 years of terror in ‘72. Forty years later, Clinton arrived in Alabama. Of the horrible atrocity, Clinton said this: "What was done cannot be undone, but we can end the silence," Clinton said. "We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye, and finally say, on behalf of the American people, what the United States government did was shameful and I am sorry."

But is history doomed to repeat itself? Perhaps it already has. And perhaps it has done so in a way that is unthinkable to the American public. What if the most destructive illness to hit planet Earth since the Bubonic Plague wasn’t bred in monkeys? What if HIV was created in a laboratory by none other than conservative politicians bent on the eradication of the ethnic and sexual minorities that oppose them? Before you read any further or stop reading, ask yourself this question: Is America above it? They certainly weren’t in Tuskegee.

The Republican Party and American Conservatives have always been the party of “morality”, “family values”, “conformity”, “god”, and “money”. It’s hard to find where the gays and historically lower-income, blue collar African Americans had ever fit into the Grand Old Party. They never did. And in fact, they had always been regarded as enemies. When the late 1960’s rolled around, the Counter Culture had arrived. Free Love had made its way into society. Promiscuity and experimentation had permeated every level of American culture, including the conservative republican middle class. The Counter Culture, with their radical views on drugs, sex and politics seemed poised to create a revolution. The after-math of the 1968 convention confirmed this fear. Many conservatives perceived the Counter-Culture as a threat. African Americans were becoming militant and advocating revolution as a means of change. Gay Rioters in Stonewall violently clashed with the police and successfully made their voices heard. But Conservatives had a white knight in the form of Richard Nixon and an odd hearing before congress.

On Tuesday, July 1st 1969 a man named Dr. Donald Macarthur appeared before the Committee of Appropriations, a subcomittee of the DOD (Department of Defense). The hearing’s subject was on the development of “Synthetic Biological Agents”. Dr. MacArthur opened with this statement.

“There are two things about the biological agent field I would
like to mention. One is the possibility of technological
surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing
very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a
period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a
synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally
exist and for which no natural immunity could have been
acquired.”

What the Doctor goes on to claim is stunning, that the US government is in fact planning to develop a biological agent that is genetically engineered and nearly invulnerable to all treatment. And further, the doctor actually claimed what the primary function of this disease would actually be in section two of his four-part proposal to the appropriations committee.

2. “Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be
possible to make a new infective microorganism which could
differ in certain important aspects from any known disease
causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might
be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes
upon when we depend to maintain our relative freedom from
infectious disease.”

The implications of this transcript are stunning. The desired symptoms are exactly the effect of HIV/AIDS, which attacks the immunity of the human body directly. Dr. Macarthur added that research on this could be completed within 5 years. Five years after 1969 would be 1974. HIV takes at least 5 years to manifest symptoms. The first case was reported in 1980. Five years after the projected date of completion. Needless to say, Dr. Macarthur got his funding, got approval from his boss Richard Nixon and went back to Fort Dietrick to begin his research. The transcript of the discussion is short, easily readable and the link is available not only here but can be acquired through the library of congress and the senate library of records. It’s for the whole world to see.
http://www.skepticfiles.org/socialis/dod1970.htm

Dr. Wolf Szumness was a defected Russian who had fled to America. Szumness was a man with interesting connections. He had once been a roommate with a man known as Karol Wojtyla. This man was vehemently anti-homosexual and supported a dangerous religious cult known as Opus Dei. Wojtyla would later become Pope John Paul II, A man with considerable connections in the religious world. The two would remain close friends. Wolf would land a research job at Columbia University and would at an astounding rate of speed climb the ranks until he was given his own lab. One day he decided to conduct a little experiment. Specializing in blood and plasma work, Szumness planned trials of Hepatitis B vaccines to be administered in the cities of New York, Chicago, Denver, St. Louis, San Francisco and Los Angeles. The subjects had to be of a specific background: homosexual males. Dr. Allen Cantwell, Author of the book AIDS and the Doctors of Death: an Inquiry into the AIDS Epidemic interpolates that Dr. Szumness was merely a pawn in the government’s plan to administer a new and destructive form of control; the AIDS virus which would effectively cripple the tiny gay community and control their hideous sexual practices. Dr. Szumness would die a year after the experiment had been administered from natural causes. But many who survived his vaccinations would continue to suspect foul play. Wolf Szumness’s connections to anti-gay elements and the powerful Vatican cannot go unnoticed.

In 1981 AIDS exploded into America. Although it was not originally called AIDS. The virus was originally called GRID (Gay Related Immune Deficiency) or “Gay Cancer”. Ineptitude can only describe what happens next. The CDC (under the conservative Reagan administration no less) claimed that “sexual” inhalants like PCP could cause GRID. Further, "Exposure to some substance (rather than an infectious agent) may eventually lead to immunodeficiency among a subset of the homosexual male population that shares a particular style of life. [Cited by a formal CDC public announcement, 1981].” The CDC eventually renamed the virus AIDS in 1982 and within a few years Dr. Robert Gallo discovered the anatomy of the virus. Such progress was made in the study of the virus that a vaccine was promised in two years. The vaccine never came. But in 1998 something else did.

The “drug cocktail” as it has been commonly referred to is medically designated as HAART (Highly Active Anti- Retroviral Therapy). These are very powerful prescribed drugs used to treat HIV. In 1998, the FDA passed the approval of this amazing “cocktail” of sorts with fantastic results in inhibiting the spread of HIV within the body and the onset of AIDS. The producer and primary developer of this smorgasbord of anti-viral medication is a ‘mega-drug’ corporation known as Gillead Pharmaceutical. And who should sit on the board of directors but none other than Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It should seem odd that a military brain-child should show any modicum of interest in the inner-workings of the medical community; or is it? Rumsfeld began his career in the Nixon Administration. He worked in economics and diplomacy. Under the Ford Administration Rumsfeld became head of the Department of Defense. The same branch of government that headed Dr. Donald Macarthur’s program during the 1970’s. Rumsfeld was undoubtedly aware that a virus was being developed under his tenure attacking immunity. Should it therefore be strange that the man who oversaw the development of an anti-immunity virus also oversee its antidote? Gillead has made billions world-wide off of the AIDS/HIV virus and its vaccine. In turn, so has Donald Rumsfeld. The idiosyncrasy of Donald Rumsfeld’s position on a Pharmaceutical Company’s board of director’s, where no prior medical experience exists makes one wonder. Off of Gilead Pharmaceutical and HAART, Rumsfeld has made millions. Further it was determined by an article on the front of the London Financial Times in 1986 that Smallpox Vaccine administered by the World Health Organization was responsible for further spreading AIDS through contamination. This organization is linked directly to the World Bank which since the outbreak has invested heavily in Africa. This has benefited American Corporations, in particular pharmaceutical companies.

The connections can leave a lump in one’s throat. It seems almost unfathomable to imagine that our own government could possibly perpetrate something like this upon its own people. But the trial patients of Tuskegee would disagree. As would the victims of a “genetic purity” program in North Carolina. According to an ABC News.com (http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Health/story?id=708780) article thousands of African American men and women were sterilized in the state of North Carolina between 1929 and 1972. Almost all of them were castrated or sterilized against their will. The program was part of a Eugenics program that aimed at “purifying” society by not allowing mothers who had pre-marital children to ever have children again. Convict African American men suffered the same fate. In many cases they were often tricked into receiving the treatment, under the guise of some other procedure, only to discover they could no longer have children afterwards. The program in North Carolina was headed by Jim Crowe segregationists, who had no interest in applying this mandate evenly among the races.

Why do governments do this kind of thing to their own people? The clear cut answer is the view that the people that the acts are being perpetrated on are somehow inferior creatures. It'ss widespread knowlege that the Nazi's in Germany experimented on Jews in the 1940's and 1930's because they believed the jewish people were inferior to the "white" race or Aryan race. The same kind of racism reigns true in the American South where African Americans were (and to some extent still are) viewed as inferior and unworthy. This kind of philosophy is not ancient. It still continues to this day. The Jena Six incident, the murder of a gay boy just a few weeks ago in California... sentiments of hatred are still very much alive. One of the director's of the Tuskegee program stated in defense of the program, "The men's status did not warrant ethical debate. They were subjects, not patients; clinical material, not sick people."

This subject brings up a lot of interesting points. There is truly no smoking gun in this article. There is no mountain of evidence pointing to any particular individual or instance. There is however a virus, out there somewhere that looks smells and acts an awful lot like HIV, born on July 1st 1969. The only way to figure out what truly happened is to ask the question as to what the yielded results were of that experiment. Until then, all the evidence that remains is twenty-five million dead people, and just as many unanswered questions. Of gays at the 1992 Republican Convention, Pat Buchanan, a former presidential nominee stood before the delegates on stage and said this: “They [gays] have declared war on human nature. And human nature has exacted an awful retribution.”

-CG

The AACC Film Club: A Dark Past, but a Bright Future

2008-03-05T14:03:00.002-05:00

If you were to ask college students from any American campus what some of their favorite entertainment activities were, one of their answers would likely be watching movies. Predictably, AACC’s students are no different, even if their tastes in and reasons for watching films noticeably vary. For some students, movies are not merely a leisure activity, but a prime focus of their academic careers.

Margaret Henry, a 19 year old AACC student and film buff, has noticed a recent growth in students that are genuinely interested in cinema. With the blessing of Dr. Daryl Gonder, Associate Professor of Film Study, Margaret has taken it upon herself to propose that a film club be added to the Student Association’s list of campus recognized clubs, a task in which she recently succeeded.

When asked what AACC’s new film club would entail, Margaret explained that it will be tailored towards serious film fans who love watching and analyzing all genres of movies. However, Margaret claims that the ultimate goal of the club will be to enhance the skills and knowledge of those who aspire to a career in film. “We’re focusing particularly on production,” Margaret said, but she continued by promising the upcoming club will also “help [potential] writers, people who want to shoot films, edit and act.”

Margaret’s approach and aspirations for the film club are indeed promising, but it faces the very significant impediment of longevity, an obstacle that past film clubs on campus have not been able to overcome. The aforementioned Daryl Gonder has witnessed the collapse of every prior club, the first of which goes back as far as the late 1990s. “I’ve actually lost track of how many there were,” Gonder admits, but he roughly estimates that the school has gone through about 4 to 8 film clubs.

So, what went wrong? Although each past club took their own unique approaches (whether by focusing on production or film analysis), Gonder believes that they all failed because they had “no institutional memory,” whether due to a lack of commitment by members, a lack of interest, or both. Most of the time, however, Gonder noticed that AACC’s status as a 2 year college stymied the club’s growth, even when determined students were involved: “People who are interested [in the club] graduate and they don’t transfer information [to the other members].”

Like Dr. Gonder, Margaret is quite familiar with the film club’s tumultuous past, but she is taking her leadership role seriously and vows to succeed where her predecessors failed. Along with filling out all the necessary Student Association paperwork (an action which Gonder claims was rarely, if ever, taken by past film club leaders), Margaret gained support from other film majors and film admirers. By doing so, she hopes that after her AACC education ends two years from now, the remaining members and supporters of the club will take the necessary actions that will allow it to thrive and endure.

Celebrities Cashing In On Their Kids

2008-03-01T23:58:00.004-05:00

For a long time, Hollywood has been a place of fantasy and an escape from reality. Celebrities seem to be able to get away with anything, they're worshipped by adoring fans, and now the newest fad, they can get millions for the first pictures of their children. In the past couple years, this aspect of Hollywood has become extremely interesting to the "normal" people of the world. Due to the overwhelming fascination with celebrity and being famous, there is apparently a pressing need to see someone's kid. The amount of money magazines and websites are throwing at the rich and famous is increasing by every new birth.

In 2005, People magazine paid Britney Spears for the first pictures of her son. In May of 2006, it was People magazine again to pay Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt an estimated $4.1 million. People magazine has also paid Nicole Ritchie, Christina Aguilera, and Jennifer Lopez for the pictures. Ritchie received over $1 million, Aguilera got around $1.5 million, and recently Lopez has just been awarded a staggering $4 to $6 million for pictures of her twins. In Touch magazine bought pictures of Dannielynn and Anna Nicole's son, Daniel, together hours before his death, for $375,000.

The only celebrities who have been reported to give away any of the money they received are Jolie and Pitt. They gave $2 million to Global Action for Children and Doctors Without Borders. The organization helps orphans and other children struggling with HIV/AIDS and other diseases, and the communities and families around them. Marc Anthony, Lopez's husband, was questioned about whether they were going to donate to charity, to which he responded, "We will discuss that and make that public when we're ready to do so."

Although celebrities may have good reasons for getting cash for their baby's pictures, there are some who feel it is unethical. Dr. Bruce Weinstein asks, "If your own parents are selling you out, where can one feel safe?" Even if these celebrities are putting the money away for the child, there is a question of whether or not it's fair to give out the pictures when the child has no say. It may sound a bit silly to say that the child may be negatively affected by this later on in life, seeing as though parents outside of the limelight do it all the time, but it is occuring on a completely different level where their privacy is invaded constantly. These children are not left alone after these pictures are released. They are born into a life of where they are often observed to a point that could sometimes be considered stalking. Some celebrities have refused payment for their baby's pictures. Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes were not paid for the release of the pictures of their daughter, Suri. However, some say that the reason for this is that Cruise was trying to get too much and eventually the bidders gave up. In situations such as this, going back and forth to sell your child's pictures to the highest bidder, it seems to be unethical. How could one work to find a price tag they are satisfied with for such a precious moment only to get more for themselves?

There are also those who think that celebrities earning money for their children's pictures is just like a non-celebrity sharing photos with others around them. The one difference between the two is the millions of dollars being offered. When celebrities put the pictures out there, they are allowing everyone to see into their lives and then they turn around and ask for privacy and respect. Granted, they are just people and shouldn't be hounded and stalked, but when they do something like this, they should realize that they've refused that privacy.

One would think that the magazines would have something better to do with their money than to buy photos of newborns. There are starving and poor people all over. It would seem that a publication known to have so much money would do involve themselves in an action that is more positive and beneficial to others. That, however, is how Hollywood works. Celebrities are like royalty, and the photographers and magazines want the glory of getting those priceless, yet rather pricey, shots.

With Halle Berry and Jessica Alba being pregnant with their first children, and Angelina Jolie carrying her second (possibly twins), who knows how much more money will be spent on those ever coveted first pictures. The public needs to realize that celebrities are normal people who have had the opportunity to break into the entertainment business. If one were to take that out of the equation, one would see that they are no better or worse than anyone else. Until society takes celebrities off the pedestal they've been unnecessarily placed on, there will continue to be magazines paying outrageous sums of money just for a picture.

How Much Privacy do you Really Have?

2008-03-01T19:18:00.005-05:00

As I walked through the familiar security lines at B.W.I. Airport, I noticed a small sign that indicated that the United States is currently in an "orange," or high, level of a terror threat. My question is, should America be worried that the alert will soon rise to an even higher level of "red" since the expiration of the Protect America Act of 2007 last week?

The Protect America Act of 2007 was an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and it made it so that the government no longer needed a warrant for surveillance of targets that were believed to be outside of the United States. In 2002, the Bush Administration, along with the National Security Agency, were accused of being of assistance to the major phone companies, and many claim that it goes against the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution in which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. But are they really completely unreasonable?

Since September 11th, 2001, how many terrorist attacks on United States soil have occurred? The answer is zero. We've been protected for nearly seven years now and that didn't come without some hard work. The bill requires that only phones can be tapped into if government officials have a reasonable belief that someone is outside of the United States as well as a known or suspected terrorist. In any other situation, a warrant is required. If someone needs to listen in to my phone calls in order for me to be protected, I am completely willing. If you're not doing anything wrong, then you have absolutely nothing to worry about.

I can also understand the other side of the spectrum. Basically, the government is trying to protect us from those who are jealous of our freedoms. By allowing phone tapping, they are, in a sense, taking away one of our freedoms at the same time. No, we don't want to become a nation that is so controlled by our government that we can't even live our day to day lives without being completely stripped of our privacy rights. I get that, but as I said above, why should you be worried about it unless you're causing a threat to our country?

When you really look into it, how much is truly kept private in American's everyday lives anyways? You turn on the television to find the latest reality shows, starring people who willingly give up their right to privacy for a few minutes of fame. You start up your computer to log in to MySpace or Facebook and find out what everyone is up to at any minute of the day. You can simply Google your name and probably find something about yourself or a family member. How much privacy are you honestly giving up by allowing the government to listen in on select, suspicious phone calls placed from foreign countries into the United States? I believe it is a sacrifice that should and can be made in order to live in a protected country.

Pale and Pretty? More like Bronzed and Beautiful!

2008-02-28T17:06:00.006-05:00

We all get a good chuckle seeing our style change drastically over the years. With each year, we assume this is the year we look the best, while still, two years later, regretting every which way we wore our hair and those leggings underneath our jean shorts. But it seems this beauty trend hasn’t only affected women and their make up box, but has re sculpted the definition of healthy and sexy while tagging along men with it. This trend would be tanning. Big surprise? Probably, seeing that most have become accustomed to waking up, going to school, hitting the tanning beds after lunch, off to the gym, then home for dinner. With tanning salons conveniently located within a mile of each destination, it’s not hard for AACC students to make their appointments. It’s odd to me that laying in a bed for 20 minutes, soaking up cancer rays is such a popular past time, and nowadays, a necessity for good looks. It seems the more cancer waiting to happen bubbling under your skin, the better looking you get! Society is shouting out a message, and we can all hear it clear. “Pale people, step aside, luxurious glowing brown beauties, welcome!” While decades ago, pale was a sign of wealth, beauty, youth, and good health, funny how things flip in reverse so quickly. Then, girls and guys who had darker skin were regarded as inferior and unacceptable for a betrothal, let alone an acquaintance. Now, it’s quite the contrary. If one is pale, they are outcasted as ugly, and lacking the healthy glow everyone else seems to be shining in our faces.

Another puzzling concept is, if being fat, and therefore, unhealthy, is considered ugly and unattractive, then why is being clad in dark, baked skin, also extremely unhealthy, considered transforming a once ugly pale person into a beautiful being? Fashion has always incorporated unhealthiness into “the look”, you know, the look everyone strives to have. However, it’s very underlying, and therefore people don’t pay much attention to it. Anorexia would be one major example. The message fashionista’s send is that skinny is the best look, thus most models are outrageously thin. Once again, this is another report of something extremely life endangering posing as a fashion symbol of beauty.

If someone were to tell you that if you were to jump off that bridge, you would die, would you do it? This is the same concept here with tanning. It’s easy to draw a parallel to smoking in the 50’s. When cigarettes came out, nobody knew the dangers, so almost everyone did it. Once it was linked to cancer and people were dropping like flies, everyone ran to trash their cigs. Every other magazine I read has an article entailing all the risks of tanning, including eventual death, and yet 28 million Americans are still tanning in indoor salons annually. Tanning salon goers continue to brush off their future and ignore health issues while they still can. Stephanie Ruggiero, a part time AACC student and senior of South River High school claims, “I know its bad for me, but I can’t stand being so ugly and pale! They have stuff to take care of wrinkles now anyway.” This seems to be a common belief. The truth is, melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and skin aging are severe diseases and health impairments these rebellions have to look forward to. Lotions, creams and botox can only do so much for their skin when they finally face their karma. Experts know this trend won’t be stopping anytime soon, and decide they need to take matters into their own hands. Teams of Doctors and scientists attempt to regulate salons with specific time limits and UV light severities; however, it proved to be unsuccessful when visiting the salons showed they have been blatantly ignoring the regulation requirements. They seem to have come to a consensus: Banning tanning salons is the only answer.

As we continue to fight for our lives in Iraq, back at home we have men and women willingly giving their life for tanned skin, thus finally giving Americans an improved reputation.

A Party To Go Ape For

2008-02-27T08:15:00.008-05:00

The lights are low and the music’s loud, this birthday event is complete with dancing, glow sticks… and a monkey? This was no ordinary sweet sixteen; it’s a late night party for a good cause. This unique fundraiser was not directed towards a charity most people are familiar with. The goal of this event was to raise enough money for a service monkey.

A service monkey can be seen as the advanced form of the Seeing-Eye dog. While Seeing-Eye dogs are trained for the blind, Service monkeys are trained for those with limited mobility. A service monkey can start a DVD, turn a page of a book, get a snack out of a cupboard, and fetch a wheel chair. Now before you get all excited and rush out to buy your own service monkey, the cost to keep one of these animals is between $25,000 and $35,000.

The Capuchin monkeys, commonly known as the “organ grinder” monkey, or perhaps the monkey you saw while watching Night at the Museum (shown above), are the type of monkeys trained as service animals.

To help alleviate this cost for someone in need, the birthday girl, Lane Greer, a student at AACC, came up with the idea to turn her birthday party into a unique fundraising event. With the help of her family and friends, with contributions from local businesses she turned this idea into a positive and memorable night. The family-friendly event was held at the Jing Ying institute of Kung Fu, located in Arnold. Lane only asked for a small contribution to the fund as her birthday present from those who attended. People of all ages came to celebrate with food, dancing, free massages, games, a DJ, and good friends.

Community college student, Arlene Barrow, puts her contribution into a donation box reading, "please feed the monkey!". Pictured here with Jennifer Izquierdo and an excited Glen Greer.

Don’t think you can make a difference? One night of fun managed to raise $1,500!, with only $3,500 still remaining in need. This is a prime example of how one person with an idea can make a difference. People came together right here in our community for someone in need. Craving a little monkey-see-monkey-do? Want to get involved and learn more about the cause? You can donate and read more about the recipient of the service monkey here: http://www.jingying.org/special_events/2008/A_Monkey_for_Al.htm Or even better, why not turn your next party into an influential occasion to remember!

What’s up with the Weather?

2008-02-25T23:06:00.001-05:00

What do you remember from the beginning of last week? Short sleeves, open car windows, unusually warm temperatures? If so you’re probably wondering what’s going on. It is unusual that AACC students are seen in t-shirts with highs in the 70’s in the beginning of the week only to be matched with lows in the 30’s and snow and ice to top it all off at the end of the week. This is not the first time in recent history where unusual climate has influenced our lives, while some members of the college are privileged to live within biking or even walking distance from campus, most are forced to commute and in winter are affected by climate daily. While some welcome the new warm spurts in winter, others are uneasy about the fluctuating weather, Gian Miamone (19) a former AACC student says “If I wanted it to be warm all year around I would move to Florida”, Gian was pleased to see at the end of the week that the weather he was used to had returned in a big way with both snow and ice to boot. Fluctuations in climate have the subject of much discussion recently, subjects such as global warming and increasing Co2 levels in the atmosphere suggest that the cause of these fluctuations is caused by human interaction with the composition with the atmosphere, and recent studies by the scientific community say that it’s only going to get worse.

Climate change is something we must contend with in the coming years according to the majority of the scientific community in fact a study done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that a mere 6 degree change in climate could dramatically effect where we live with everything from more unpredictable weather to catastrophic weather patterns that could cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage, and the unusual patterns that we have seen this week are only a reflection of what scientists say is only getting worse. Warmer and more unpredictable weather is nothing new however, it would be foolish to think that in the entire 3.5 billion years of earth’s history that we know of, that the earth managed to sustain the same form of climate and atmosphere composition as it exists today, climate change can be caused by many things from human interactions, natural disasters such as earthquakes and volcano’s, but can also be caused by overactive seismic activity and even interference from outer space, in fact it is commonly known that the eruption of the volcano Tamboro in 1815 caused what was known as “the year without a summer” and caused a massive drop in temperature which caused famine, disease, and a surge in global conflict worldwide due to a shortage of available crops.

It’s difficult to say whether the recent fluctuation in temperature and weather this past week was due to a natural fluctuation in the climate or is part of the impending threat of global warming and the start of a wave of unpredictable weather and climate which AACC students who would like to pursue a career in everything from environmental science to engineering will have to address in the future for generations to come. For the time being however there may be little we can do except use the media to get up to date information about weather conditions and to be prepared when they change. If this is truly the start of things to come perhaps it will seem normal wear a T-shirt one day, but be scraping ice off your windshield the next.

Anonymous vs. Scientology: Can Guerilla Warfare Pose a Threat to Modern Religion?

2008-02-24T23:39:00.011-05:00

Disorganized, leaderless, and sometimes illiterate; some may wonder why advocates of Scientology would fret about a group riddled with these qualities.

The truth is the Church of Scientology issued a $5k reward to anyone with information leading to the identification of whom they define as “persons making threats against [religiousfreedomwatch.org; a Scientology related website] and/or persons associated with it.”

You wouldn’t think they were talking about a couple of kids hiding behind their keyboards, but ‘Anonymous’ is alive in more than just a couple of IP addresses. And they are sure pissing someone off.

So what makes Anonymous so threatening to 20^th century Church of Scientology? Could it be the prank phone calls and the blackfaxing? Or perhaps it's the distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on a number of Scientology websites?

All this petty harassment is indeed entertaining, but will it lead Anonymous to victory? In an organization that claims no leader and works in the dark, it's difficult to say what their next move is, and how effective it will be.

What forces these ‘Anons’ into such a state of hiding? : The Church’s quick trigger finger when it comes to lawsuits. Many critics of Scientology have felt unbearable legal pressure and some have claimed to have been victim of personal attacks by church members and officials, even as far as claiming to be framed in making bomb threats against the Church.

However, Anonymous remains vigilant as long as they stand by their hit-and-run tactics. Along with their harassment of Scientology websites and locations, Anonymous holds conspiracy theories as propaganda. Recent “raids” or the open pickets of Scientology locations have featured many supporters of Anonymous donned in masks and dark sunglasses to further their name. Protesters have also been seen with signs parading the Internet address: http://www.whyaretheydead.net/, an Anonymous run website which questions Scientology in its involvement in the deaths of a number of former church members.

But is there a better way for Anonymous to fight their war? A long time critic of Scientology, Mark Bunker; producer of the anti-Scientology site Xenu TV, urges members of Anonymous to tone down their actions or face serious consequences:

Bunker goes on urging young members of Anonymous to instead target the Church of Scientology’s tax exempt status among other actions that will cause more serious damage than downed websites and prank phone calls.

Regardless of how excited Bunker is about this vital army against Scientology, Anonymous still has yet to get the attention and certainty of everyone. When asked if they would feel threatened by an anonymous group of hackers attacking their religion, most on campus found the notion laughable. One AACC student in particular, Joe Shum, 18 of Columbia, MD, provided this insight: “There’s no way a bunch of hackers can do that.” he said. “I know my right to religion is protected, I doubt a bunch of kids on the Internet are going to do anything about that.”

Anonymous has a good start, but to pose a serious threat to Scientology it seems they may have to step up their game. According to Project Chanology, an Anonymous website detailing their past, present, and future actions, on March 15^th, they’ll take another chance to prove what Anons are made of on the birthday of none other than Church of Scientology founder, L. Ron Hubbard.

I know that I’ll be watching on March 15^th. Let’s see what you’ve got, Anonymous.

Casting Call

2008-02-24T18:33:00.005-05:00

So last Friday my two friends, Robert and Andrew, and I went to a casting call in D.C. I was the one to find the listing, as usual, and we decided we'd go just for fun. It was tough enough to make it there in one piece to begin with. The weather was gross and the roads were slippery. Anyways, we got there and there was such a long line. There were a lot of people with a lot of different looks. It's funny though because you can see everybody looking around and wondering if the person next to you is going to get picked or if you will. We had to fill out these little questionnaires, but we forgot to bring out pens so Robert had to go downstairs to the concierge and ask to borrow one. We weren't the only ones. We could hear people asking to borrow someone else's pen and some of them had that look in their eye like they didn't want to give it to them because that would be helping the "competition."

While waiting in the line, this guy came out and began to explain the process and that girls needed yellow slips and guys needed blue ones. Some of the people weren't really listening because he went around and a couple guys had yellow slips. Then after he tells us what we need to know, he goes on talking about how he's going to be in town for 6 weeks and he needs a place to stay! What? Yeah, he tells us he'll be working on a film and he's a chain smoker, but he could really use a place to stay. Andrew thought about letting him stay at his place so we would get the part, but he was creepy and it's only an extra role. The line is continuing to lengthen and we are starting to make our way near the room we meet with the casting directors in. Just then, a man comes out and tells us that he's the man we're all waiting to see inside the room and he wanted to come out and see who was out here. He started talking to people and telling them they could go or asking them to stay. We felt really bad for the people asked to go because that was really embarrassing to walk past that line of all those people. He walks up to the guy next to us and asks him to stay. He was pretty good looking, not as good looking as us though, so we assumed we'd be asked to stay too. That man came up to us, took our pictures and said, "OK you can go now. We'll call you later this week. We'll find something for you." Shock! We were devastated. Not really, it was just embarrassing. Realizing we had just been politely shot down, we came up with reasons why we weren't picked. Most of the reasons included something along the lines of us being too good for it. Ha. Well, we'll see if he calls us later this week or not. Hopefully he will, it will be another credit to add to our resumes. If he doesn't, it's ok. We're troopers and we'll be back!

Planned Parenthood and its Racist Beginnings

2008-02-24T16:27:00.010-05:00

Kimberly is 16 years old. One day Billy walks over to her and asks her out. Billy is also 16. They begin to date and develop a close relationship. They spend every waking moment together and still can't seem to get enough of each other. A couple months pass and they tell each other "I love you". Young love is so cute. So Billy tells Kimberly that he's ready to have sex and she should be too because they're in love. Being naive, Kimberly goes along with the whole idea and they have sex and live happily ever after... Uh oh, little Kimberly just found out she is pregnant! No worries though because that's where Planned Parenthood comes in. Planned Parenthood is the place females who haven't thought about cause and effect go to take care of their problems and "mistakes". In many states, they don't even have to tell anyone or have any parental consent if they're under 18. They just need money. Even if they do talk to a parent, and they don't like their answer, they can go to a judge to decide if they're mature enough.

People all over have different feelings on abortion. Whether you condone it or not, you can't ignore some of the questions brought up about the history of Planned Parenthood. Founded by Margaret Sanger, the American Birth Control League, became the Planned Parenthood Confederation of America in 1942. Before that, she wrote a number of articles for which she was indicted for "mailing obscenities" and faced severe criminal penalties. She fled to England to avoid the charges and punishment. This is only one of the aspects of her life which showed she was a shady person.

In her own autobiography (the clip above), she tells of when she went to speak at a KKK meeting. There are many who defend her and say she had no link to the KKK simply because they are pro-choice and they are okay with abortion. These people need to take a step outside that little box and face reality. Even though they refuse to believe it and say it's pro-life lies doesn't mean it didn't happen. In another excerpt from a letter she wrote to a man named Clarence Gamble, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of
their more rebellious members." How could someone who many claim was not racist, and wanted only to help mothers who were poor and sick say something like this?If you look today at the location of Planned Parenthoods many are in predominantly poor and black or hispanic areas. This makes you question if it was true that she was racist and prejudice and believed the same as Hitler and Marx. "At the World Population Congress held in Berlin during the summer of 1935 Dr. Clarence Campbell, president of the American Eugenics Research Association" (the same man she wrote the letter to), "gave what Time magazine termed a 'warm, approving speech' in support of Nazi policies."

Whether one condones abortion or not, it would be wise to take a look at the underlying ideas that founded an organization who supported and facilitated hate. There are also those who disagree with abortion and just use Planned Parenthood for birth control or think it's a good place because they give birth control. Again, know the history behind the reason for creating such a thing. Many will say it was for safety and to give women a choice. However, Margaret Sanger wrote in The Birth Control Review, the purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds." Take a look at http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm for quotes from Margaret Sanger and quotes from employees and heads of Planned Parenthoods today. You also might want to take a look at http://www.ewtn.com/library/prolife/pphistry.txt to get a better look into the history as well.

Public Tolerance for Street Racing Is Red-Lining

2008-02-21T22:56:00.010-05:00

Have you ever taken a good look at the cars in a high school parking lot? You'll see a few cars drowning in bumper stickers, some so dilapidated you wonder if they're street legal, and the cars so customized and souped up you know they're not street legal. Nabbing one of the latter has been a goal for many teenagers and young adults for decades.

However, within the last two decades, purchasing these cars has taken on more justification than toting around the hot blonde from English class: street racing. It used to be that kids who were able to get there hands on these cars went for cars that did not require any after-market upgrades to move fast. Today you're just as likely to see a Honda Civic taking on a Ford Mustang as you would see a Chevrolet Camaro.

I should know, as a former owner of a Camaro I have been challenged at a nighttime red light on more than a few occasions by kids in heavily customized imports. Obviously, parents and law enforcement agencies are heavily against such an unsanctioned activity with an even more obvious safety hazard.

The trend is still growing. Although one group that may not appreciate the attention amateurs are grabbing might be the very people who influenced them to begin with. Illegal street racing has been around for generations and is even considered by many to be the direct influence of drag racing.

The original culture of street racing does not regulate itself by the same standards as amateur street racing. While amateurs are known for being easy busts, veterans of the sport take every precaution conceivable from after-market safety upgrades, road selection, and of course scouts on the lookout for police.

Laws against street racing have become so strict even watching a street race could land you a misdemeanor in some cities.

The future does not look so bright, either, especially with the number of accidents and fatalities street racing causes every year. Just last week, 8 people were killed in a street racing related event in Accokeek, MD. A car that drove into the area two street racers had just peeled out from did not see the crowd that assembled on the road to watch the cars drive off. There had been too much smoke in the spot for the driver to react in time.

Those who consider themselves veterans of street racing are certainly easy targets for blame, but take a closer look at this example from Accokeek. Neither car involved in the race were involved in the accident. The accident was a direct result of people from the group on the side of the road assembling in the street after the race had begun. That act is not uncommon, however there are usually scouts who look for oncoming cars as a safety precaution. How can such a ridiculously avoidable goof be used to categorize the entire culture of street racing?

Less than a week later, Prince George's County and the state of Maryland have begun processes on passing stricter laws on street racing. The Washington Post quoted Sen. C. Anthony Muse (D) as saying the current penalties are so weak they are essentially "just something you laugh at."

It's hard for myself to gauge an opinion on where I stand with street racers. While amateurs often display why they are considered amateurs, shouldn't the more organized groups take some sort of responsibility for the influence they create? Or is this another situation in which Hollywood should take a big hit with consideration to movies such as The Fast and the Furious? This new story out of Accokeek certainly has legs, and it will be interesting to see where the public decides to lay the finger of blame in the end.

Aaron Waesche of Defective Bat Records

2008-02-20T00:36:00.003-05:00

Aaron Waesche started Defective Bat Records(originally Peace Records) as a middle school student in Annapolis, Md. The label has released records by many local acts, from his first bands Zen and School to his current bands Birthing Nets and The Herman Melville Experience, along with those of Baltimore's psychedelic shoegazers Passiou, the avant-punk band Thinking Toys, electronica artist Newagehillbilly, and plethora of others. For more information regarding the label and it's bands, visit www.Freewebs.com/DefectiveBatRecords.

Mock The Bird: When and why did you start Defbat?

Aaron Waesche: Originally as Peace Records around 2001. I started it to release music my friends and i made.

MTB: How did the label stylistically develop?

AW: I guess it was impacted by the music I was listening to at the time, because when I would start a new band or something that had new influences I would eventually found people who enjoyed similar types of music, and become friends and more music was made.

MTB: How has being based in Annapolis effected how you run the label?

AW: I have been wanting to live closer to Baltimore, because that is were most of the things happen(musically). maybe being in annapolis hasnt affected the music that much, but I do most of the label things, so I guess its harder here.

MTB: How did you get tied in with the noise/punk community in baltimore and how has that affected your music?

AW: Mmm, I dont know. I think we just started playing more frequently in the baltimore area when we got a little older and could drive and stuff, and we met people though just playing shows. If a person booking a show gets similar sounding bands or something. and i guess we are now somewhat assosiated with the noise/punk type scene stuff, which is cool, there are a lot of good bands. Hearing cool bands from the area affects the music, I suppose.

MTB: What influenced you to take a DIY ethos in running, or creating, Defbat?

AW: Dischord records initially, and then other labels, local labels mainly. Seeing what other poeple do, especially using a homemade aesthetic.

MTB: How has your music developed since your first band Zen?

AW: Its now more noisey and aggressive. The others in Zen did not really enjoy punk music except for myself, and I didnt write the songs in zen. I think most of my bands after that, I contributed more to the songs.

MTB: What are you plans for Birthing Nets, or any of your other current bands?

AW: Birthing nets is finishing a 4 song ep cd-r , and hopefully next will do a split cd with Whoarfrost(from Boston), and maybe do a little bit of touring with them. The Herman Melville Experience will continue to record things, and im working on a few other projects, as well.

Dude! You can grow that?!

2008-02-19T14:43:00.006-05:00

Disclaimer: Although questioned, some contributers did not wish to give personal information, there names have therefore been omitted from this article.

Drugs have been a problem in the United States since before the beetles were smoking weed with Bob Dylan. Drugs like Heroin, Cocaine and marijuana have been engrained in this countries history since its inception, whether they were used for medicine or for recreational purposes they have had an incredible impact on our nation’s history. It is only until the 1960’s that the use of certain psychedelic drugs became a mainstream practice. The use of hallucinogenic or psychedelic drugs, specifically LSD and certain species of mushrooms or “Shrooms” which contain the chemical psilocybin, which causes over activity in certain parts of the brain causing everything from a euphoria to an intense feeling of paranoia known as a “trip”. Though much has been done concerning the use and containment of drugs in the United States there are areas of “grey” which act as loopholes in the legal system for those who wish to take advantage of them, the use of mushrooms specifically, these loopholes are those such as regulations on the possession of certain amounts of the drug (to prevent distribution) and laws which only permit the use of the drug for certain religious and historical ceremonies among certain people. Here in Maryland however there have been those who have tried to test the legal system and have failed. Recently “Record and Tape Traders” a prominent music store in the heart of Annapolis went out of business due to a lack of sales, however they took a hold of one of the area’s of grey in the use and distribution of shrooms in Maryland, while the possession of such mushrooms are illegal (even if found in nature), It is in fact legal to possess the spores able to produce the psychedelic drug. “Record and Tape Traders” used this knowledge to sell “do it yourself” kits where you could in fact grow the mushrooms in the comfort and relative safety of your own home, these kids can be found in all but 3 states in the U.S and kits like it are available widely on the internet . Although they have been available for quite some time recent years have made it harder for citizens, and particularly minors to be able to possess however due to stricter fines and new laws passed to prevent anyone under the age of eighteen to even enter locations where the spores are sold and the elimination of many online head shops.

It has been proven that although non-addictive, shrooms may carry the potential to lift impending mental illnesses to the surface and may cause “bad trips” which cause the user to feel an overwhelming sense of paranoia and loss of reality; dangers like these keep the legalization of such drugs from becoming legal in many states. Though it may not be legal to grow, consume or distribute the drug there are many who do from reasons such as simply needing to get out of credit card debt, to personal consumption, when asked for there own personal reasons Elijah McCarthy of Harwood Maryland says “There really fun, not something to do at like a party or anything, but if your hanging out with a few friends doing shrooms your not going to like go out and commit crimes or anything, in fact you cant do anything at all”, Michael Barthalow of Shady-Side replied “Shrooms are awesome”.

Though the legal distribution of shroom spores has been available for quite some time it would not be easy to make the point that the growing of mushrooms has gone main-stream, although the spores are legal to purchase it is not legal to grow the shrooms the spores are made to produce nonetheless consume or distribute them, this combined with the daunting difficulty of actually cultivating the mushrooms yourself makes the aspect of actually growing your own pointless and idiotic.

Our government has done much to make what happened during the 1960’s a thing of the past, due to laws passed during the stricter years of the 1980’s it seems that the widespread use of hallucinogenic drugs has become a dying practice. Whether you “trip-balls”, or are angered by the mere thought of taking mushrooms. Shrooms have made a point of great debate in America, whether future legislation will eventually make the sale of such kits as were available at “Record and Tape Traders” obsolete, or new radical movements will change the way we think about the use of psychedelic drugs the future is unclear. New movements suggest that there will be stricter scrutiny in the future of the possession of such spores and possible legal action against those cultivating the drug, leaving the future of Shrooms seem rather bleak.

Crackheads, Hockey, and Booze: What we should take from the NIU Massacre.

2008-02-19T13:11:00.008-05:00

Now that we've had proper time to gather and digest all the facts from the Northern Illinois University shooting, we can start to (respectfully, of course) discuss what it really means. Or, can we? Have we really seen enough to formulate an opinion, or even at the very least, be affected by this tragedy?

It's eerie, and perhaps even a little fitting that there were numerous references to the Virginia Tech shootings permeating the NIU campus in the months preceding the incident. And, like the aftermath of VT, there is a pretty large outpouring of sympathy from the university, local organizations (The NHL's Chicago Blackhawks have been one of many to make very visible tributes, as seen above), and even President Bush. However, the stark contrast between the two tragedies is the effect they've had on a national scale, with everyday people. They of people who don't have an invested interested in this situation don't seem to care at all. You don't see tens of thousands nationwide wearing black as a show of solidarity. There aren't dozens of candlelight vigils to mourn and pay tribute to those lost. Hell, you don't even see "Today, we are all Huskies" images flooding all of your friend's Facebooks.

Why? The easy answer is body count. The VT massacre was the most deadly school shooting in American history, claiming 32 lives. The shootings at NIU claimed only six. So, that is a fair response. The numbers don't add up, and that is why NIU isn't getting nearly as much coverage, right? But, let's be really fair. It's a slow news month. We won't be hearing any more about the primaries until March, when voters in Texas get their say. Sports have hit their late winter lull, and won't pick up for a few more weeks. We haven't even heard of what trouble our favorite (ex) pop princess is getting into, now. So, why can't we hear more about this? Why is a very intriguing tidbit about the shooter calling his girlfriend hours before committing the act given a brief 50 word piece that is burrowed deep in the muck of yesterday's Capital, but a story about school lunches in Chicago (right down the block from the NIU campus, ironically) making the front page? I could see it being put on the back burner in favor of the large meat recall, or the street racing incident over the weekend, or independence in Kosovo, but middle school lunches? In Chicago? Is this really the hard hitting news we want to read about?

We've got to find the real reason that this is not getting the coverage is more than likely deserves. Is it because NIU isn't a perennial competitor in Division I sports, like VT? Is it because, with apologies to Robert Zemeckis, NIU isn't seen as producing the best and brightest of our nation, and is more seen as a fall back plan for locals who don't get into Urbana-Champaign? Is the media too busy with other endeavors to bring back the "tighten campus security" crusade?

Joseph Conway, a 1st year student at AACC, has another idea. "It really boils down to the idea that people don't want to be brought down every time they turn on the news." Though bad news sells, Conway believes that most people genuinely want to maintain a more positive view of the world. "We want to think the world is a lot better place than it is, sometimes.", Conway adds.

While this is a completely understandable mindset to have, it is damaging for a myriad of reasons. First, viewing the world through "rose-colored glasses" can be a lot more damaging to one's psyche then seeing what's really happening in the world that surrounds them. The shock that comes with waking up from seeing things in such a way could drive a person mad.

But, the real issue with this kind of thinking lies in how unconstructive it can be. The more that we try to ignore or "forget" that these things happen every day, and could happen at any campus, including our very own, the more likely it is to happen. It's different in this case in that we aren't people who know that a decision that we've made could kill us. These weren't soldiers, or drug dealers, or any of the other kinds of deaths that the media often turns the other cheek to. These students, no different than me or you. They eat, slept, studied (probably not as much as they should), skipped class, pulled all nighters, probably drank more than they should, thought, laughed, loved, and lived, and just wanted to get to the next stage of their life, like the rest of us. They didn't walk out of their dorms knowing that this could be the last day of their life.

If it hearing about innocent people dying makes you sad or upset, that's perfectly ok. If hearing about innocent people dying makes you angry, or hate people just a little bit more, that's ok, too. These are natural human emotions. These are the reactions you should be having. And, we as a society need to know that it's perfectly acceptable to feel them for any senseless death. Whether it's because of a shooting, or because of starvation. Wheter it's in northern Illinois, or in Darfur. Whether it's a bright young student, full of potential, or a homeless crackhead, ODing a gutter. While we as individuals probably can't directly change this, if enough of us shed a tear, or hold candlelight vigils and wear black armbands, or enough of us get just a little too pissed off, we can be the catalyst for a realistic change.

Call me selfish, but I know if someone were to march into the campus library, like they easily could, and splatter my brains across this computer screen, I would like to rest assured that the last thing on people's minds is Yanira Gomez's pizza and french fries.

Maybe is she had gone with the chicken tenders, I'd think differently.

Lifeguards... saving lives?

2008-02-18T10:41:00.003-05:00

Connor Freed was two weeks shy of his sixth birthday when he tragically lost his life on June 22^nd, 2006. Around 4:30 in the afternoon, he was found floating underneath an unoccupied lifeguard chair at the Crofton Country Club. On that day, there was one lifeguard raised in her stand and an estimated 30 children in the pool. One person can simply not watch 30 patrons in a pool, hence why day cares have staff-child ratio laws pertaining to them. It seems to me that water safety would be taken more seriously, considering in 2003 alone there were 3,306 unintentional drownings in the United States, averaging nine people per day and currently, it is the second leading cause of death in children 14 and under.

A weeklong trial took place in September of 2007 and six members of a jury unanimously found DRD Pool Services Inc. guilty of gross negligence in the case of Connor. The jury awarded $2,000,076 to each parent. The $76 was the jury’s way of honoring Connor, whose birthday was July 6. However, caps in Maryland caused that number to shrink down. The owner of the company bluntly stated that they had no responsibility for the lives of children in the pool, and that it is strictly the parent or guardians job to do that.

Connor was at the pool for approximately 2 ½ hours that day, recreationally swimming with two other children and a guardian. There is no evidence as to how Connor fell into the pool, but it was proven that in order for a body to float to the surface, you would have to be under water for three minutes or more. Obviously, he went unnoticed by the 16-year old rookie lifeguard on duty, who did not even pull him out of the water when there was an emergency whistle blown. They claimed, as played on the 911 tapes, that they were not allowed to use the defibulator.

The Connor Cares Foundation was founded in September, 2006 as a non-profit organization dedicated to furthering the education of water safety as well as introducing legislation to promote uniformity at all pools nationwide. The “Connor bill” was introduced to the state of Maryland in January of 2008, stating that there should be two lifeguards on duty at all times in a pool that is 2500 square feet or larger. The people who opposed the bill were mainly concerned with financial issues and the shortages of lifeguards.

Studies commissioned by Poseidon Technologies show that, on average, it took one minute and 14 seconds for a lifeguard to spot a manikin on the bottom of a pool. It took more than three minutes in 14% of the tests. That is simply not acceptable in a life or death situation when every second counts.

Wafa Sultan: Bringing Down the House

2008-02-14T11:23:00.007-05:00

"Muslim girl found dead on the sidewalk", this is simply a daily occurrence in the Middle East.

With each day we dwell on mistakes in history, the making of new unjust history is growing, that is, the Muslim culture. The men’s endless wedding to multiple wives goes on unnoticed and girls are beaten and shunned. While we continue to fret with concerns of compensation to African Americans for their troubles during slavery, which may I add was more than a hundred years ago, the rise of a new dominating and powerful cult is hovering in the shadows.
The life Muslim women are forced into is unbearable and completely incomprehensive for women in America, who truly know what freedom and independence tastes like. They live in fear, of their peers, teachers, nobody is trusted to be your friend in Islam. To be confined to your house on hours on end, clothing covering every inch of skin in sweltering hot weather simply because God forbid a man might “lust” at you and you are inferior. No woman will dare roam the streets alone or without proper attire, for the actuality that they will be shot. It takes a strong woman to live in these circumstances, and an even stronger woman to have the courage to escape this life and not rest until all Muslim women are saved. Wafa Sultan is the portrait of this rare character. She immigrated to America in 1989, has become a naturalized citizen along with her husband and is now known to be an Arab-American Psychologist. Since the September 11 attacks in 2001 Wafa has rose to the surface with an unmistakable force. She is responsible for numerous Arabic essays, public interviews and news appearances, reaching out to Americans, and really, anyone who will truly listen, preaching that Islam must be stopped. She argues that not just parts of Islam must be controlled, but “Islam itself”.

Wafa holds no mercy for Muslims, with her claim: “they only have two choices; to change or to be crushed.” In 1979, Sultan witnessed a tragedy. She was a medical student at the University of Aleppo, and the Muslim brotherhood, who is known to kill innocent Syrians, shot machine gun bullets repeatedly into her professor, Yusef al Yusef. Sultan says it was this tragedy that changed her life and beliefs. She then questioned all that the Muslims drilled into her head, and the God in which they praise. Since then she has believed in Secularism and has truly opened her eyes to the alarming abuse in Islam. The only justification Muslims have for the much too common events of killing innocents, incest, marrying 7 year old girls to a 50 year old man, and polygamy are the rules made from one Mohammad Ali. This is a man who made laws and religious beliefs legally accepted, not caring of the consequences, but for his own selfish desires. He ordained himself a prophet and preached of killing and superiority of men, the shunning of women. Like young puppies, followers came wagging their tails behind him, and now we have terrorists and extreme Islamic fundamentalists.
Sultan has publicly argued Ali’s and Muslim altogether hypocritical and demoralizing behaviors on The Opposite Direction, Al Jazeera’s 90 minute show, from her home in California. She stood firmly when the host, Faisal al-Qassem disputed with her.

It is this amazingly inspiring nature Wafa Sultan inhabits that has Times Magazine deeming her one of the world’s 100 most influential people in 2006. Although American’s might find her forceful and intimidating, it is only because the amount of disgust she holds for Muslim is unbearable. She realizes how corrupt the Muslim culture is and knows there MUST be action. She understands the consequences and humbly takes the offensive harassment. Sultan has a work in progress book to be named The Escaped Prisoner: When God is a Monster. Wafa Sultan has started a revolution and will not stop until the Muslims stop.

Semper Fi

2008-02-13T14:09:00.014-05:00

Do you have a daily routine? Most of us do. In the case of one man, he heads to the office where he makes phone calls to potential clientele, finishes loads of paperwork, goes to the gym, and goes home to sleep in his own bed. Fast forward to the next morning; where he’s packing his bags, putting on his all-too-familiar uniform and heading to BWI.

This is the transition to active duty, the transition that most of us, including myself, will never know: the life of a Marine.

One morning in 2006, I answered the phone to a man, who, for the sake of his privacy, I will refer to as Sgt. G. He asked me if I had ever considered joining the military. For just a moment, time stopped. I had been considering the Marines as an alternative to college; I just hadn’t put effort into the thought. This was my chance to make a move towards the rest of my life. At 16 years young, that’s an exciting idea. I agreed to meet at his office to talk about the possibility of enlisting. I figured I wasn’t making any commitments and there was no harm in that. Two days later I had myself figured out; I was going to be a Marine, and there was no other thought so clear in my mind. At least that’s what I told my parents, and it almost goes without saying that they weren’t nearly as thrilled.

Thankfully, a home visit from Sgt. G seemed to have them convinced to the point where I could look in the mirror and just barely make out a midnight blue uniform, already beaming with medals and stripes. Days slip by faster when you have your life mapped out for you. I was spending weekends playing football with the Marines and other recruits, school was easier than ever without having to stress about what to do when graduation hit. Sgt G had me looking at everyone in sight, as well as believing that my enlisting would help all of them. I hate to look back and see how short-lived those dreams turned out to be. The night before I was to be sworn in, before I would spend a year in wait for Parris Island, my mother had a nervous breakdown. I couldn’t understand why my enlisting bothered her so much. As far as I knew, I was only setting course for my life. Either way, it ended in me promising I wouldn’t enlist. I can’t describe in words the shame I felt when I called Sgt. G and told him I wasn’t going to show up. But he encouraged me to stand by my stricken mother, and I could try again when I was 18 and the only consent I needed was my own.

From then on, the occasional phone call from Sgt G was all I could look forward too. He was no great prophet, but feeling betrayed by my own parents made his advice seem invaluable. That is, until I learned what I had almost gotten myself into.

A heads up to anyone: joining the Marines is easy; as long as you go into it not knowing any feeling of loss.

Months later, I remember sitting around my friend’s (who I will refer to as M) poker table with him and some friends when the doorbell rang. He went to answer it, but didn’t come back for a few minutes; we could still hear him and two others talking. Those two others turned out to be Marines as well, but specifically the ones known for delivering the worst news possible. They wouldn’t tell him what was wrong, because his mother wasn’t home, but we all knew. M’s brother, Eric, an active duty Marine, was killed in Iraq the previous day. The combination of shock and silence thickened the air. Eric was a brother to M, but a friend to all of us. He was the only person I knew fighting overseas, and for so long I couldn’t wait to join him.

I felt like Sgt. G was at fault for not telling me this would happen. I should have known, should have expected it, and should have done a lot more thinking than what I had done en route to swearing in. All I could do was be selfish, I wouldn’t stop thinking that it could have been me.

Sgt. G kept in touch with me over time, but I never had much to say. Here I am two years later, and I recently got another familiar call, but this time it was from a Sgt. R. He told me that he was taking over for Sgt. G and would like to give him my regards, if I had anything to say.

Sgt. G is now in active duty, and as far as I know I may never speak to him again. At the time Sgt. R called, I didn’t have much to say. It hadn’t hit me that Sgt. G may not come back, so all I said was good luck. Now that I think about it, I’d like to tell him that although I have lost faith in this war, and although I'm not as strong as Eric or Sgt. G, I know that they are more human than anyone I’ve ever met. I thank both of them for giving me a life experience I’ve been able to learn from. With the next Presidential Election coming up, a lot could happen to these heroes. Whatever does happen, I feel we must always support the men in action even if we don’t support the cause they’re in action for.

Jim Zorn: Is Half-Hearted Hire Really The Answer?

2008-02-12T14:53:00.002-05:00

As you’ve probably heard, the Washington Redskins have named Jim Zorn, the man they had tagged to replace dismissed Assistant Head Coach – Offense Al Saunders, as their new head coach. Zorn, who has been a fan favorite as Quarterbacks Coach with the Seattle Seahawks, accepted a 5 year contract (with team options for the 4th and 5th years) worth approximately $15 million. Many believe Zorn, in his first opportunity as a head coach, will take a hands off approach on defense, leaving most of those decisions to newly promoted Coordinator Greg Blache. Zorn will also likely establish a more West Coast style attack on offense, opening up a passing game that was seen by many as “overly conservative” during the Gibbs/Saunders tenure.

Though the Redskins are taking a large risk hiring a rookie head coach, it is definitely a smart risk to take. A west coast offense will take off the restrictions Al Saunders’ offense placed on young quarterback Jason Campbell. In a west coast offense, there is a lot more room for deep passes, which is one of the former Auburn star’s biggest strengths. It will also take pressure off of an aging, injury prone offensive line, and open up many more running lanes for running back Clinton Portis. A hands-off approach on defense will give the reigns of a very talented, young squad to an established defensive mind, who already has a report with the players. The Redskins' defense has finished in the top ten twice in the past three seasons, finished 3rd in 2005.

All in all, Jim Zorn is a quality hire. He, despite pushing 55, still has a lot of the youthful exuberance he was known for in his 7 years of starting a quarterback for the Seahawks. Zorn finally gives the Redskins a simple, but effective system that fits perfectly with their talent (The west coast offense is known to favor the type of smaller, speedier skill players that the fill the Redskins roster). Finally, he forces coaches to expect the unexpected, as he has never called plays at the NFL level before, and will add a good amount of mystery to the Redskins offense. Sure, there were better choices on the marker (Great arguments could be made for Steve Spagnoulo or Russ Grimm), but It’s easy to see that Zorn is a good coaching hire, but is he really a good Redskin coaching hire?

Zorn, by all accounts, is more noted for his ability to coach a football team then to lead a group of men, a noted strength of the Redskins last coach, Joe Gibbs. Gibbs, while not considered a “great X and Os” guy, was highly respected for being a strong leader, with an uncanny ability to motivate and get the best out of his players, even in a time of tragedy, as made evident by the team’s willing itself to win four straight to make the playoffs after burying their best player (Free Safety Sean Taylor, who was killed by a gunshot wound in a botched home invasion.)
It is widely known that Gibbs, who brought the Redskins 3 Lombardi trophies, set up a cot inside his office, so he could work on the team’s game plan until very early in the morning. He may not have been the smartest football mind, but he proved that you don’t have to be to be a great coach. His hard work, drive, and unreal ability to inspire players made him the most successful Redskins head coach, despite being in the bottom tier when it came to “football smarts”.

So, how have the Redskins done in recent history with “football smart” head coaches? Between Gibbs first and second tenure, the Redskins have had 5 head coaches, three of whom (Norv Turner, Marty Schottenheimer, and Steve Spurrier) were considered among the top of the list of coaches who knew all the ins and outs of football. Together, they compiled a dismal, below .500 record, and only reached the playoffs once in ten seasons. Each coach found their own special way of leaving the team worse then he found it, with Turner and Schottenheimer being chagrined for not taking enough risks, and Spurrier severely hindering the development of most of his players, most notably Patrick Ramsey, a young quarterback into whom the Redskins had invested a great deal (sound familiar?).

While a lot of respect is rightfully placed on coaches who “know football”, one can not underestimate the power of quality leadership, and the ability to turn football players into good men, for which Joe Gibbs deserves every amount of respect he gets. Over the last three decades, it’s hard to find any coach who has been able to motivate his players, and get every last ounce of effort from them, every time they step on the field. If Jim Zorn can learn from this, he will be a success, with the current talent in place, the Redskins become a strong contender in a mediocre NFC. If he sticks to his “Xs and Os”, don’t be surprised to see 3 years of subpar seasons, and much more half hearted attempts by Dan Snyder to replace the best fit the Redskins have ever had at head coach.

Reality TV? Get Real!

2008-02-11T18:34:00.000-05:00

Strippers, hot tubs, and drunken fights; no this is not your weekend house party, its reality TV. We’ve all noticed the increasing number of reality shows on television. The effect of the writer’s strike left even more open spots for unscripted reality TV. With shows like Wife Swap, The Real World, Dancing with the Stars, and America’s Next Top Model, there’s something out there for everyone.

Why reveal your life and forfeit your privacy on the small screen? Reality TV has opened the doors of 15 minutes of fame to any young starry eyed or attention-craving American. But it’s not just for the laymen; well known celebrities like Paris Hilton, who actually coined the phrase “that’s hot” from her reality show The Simple Life, wrestler Hulk Hogan, and even the Osborne’s have at one time found a home on the TV screen of your living room. D list celebrities flock to shows like The Surreal Life and Celebrity Rehab with Dr Drew to grab a bit of attention in what’s left of their should-be-expired time in the limelight. Whoever the focus of attention is, each show is sculpted and cut to reveal the most shocking, dramatic, and risqué scenes possible.

While cameras and slogans promise to show authentically; “what happens when people stop being polite and start being real”, the lives shown on TV might not be the everyday reality for most of us, unless your house is equipped with a “hell room” (A shot at Love with Tila Tequila) or you’ve ever woken up to find Mini Me urinating in your hallway (The Surreal Life). Many reality TV shows, like The Hills, have been accused of scripting their spontaneity, where everyday fights and hookups are allegedly dramatized to be something worth watching. An increasing number of shows flaunt the goal of finding true love in the midst of rock parties and cat fights. It puts ordinary events into extraordinary circumstances.

A Shot At Love With Tila Tequila
(MTV)

So what’s the fascination with reality TV? It’s throwing people in unusual or extreme situations and documenting their reactions. It’s putting selectively attractive, drama-loving strangers in close quarters, equipping these people with indoor pools and alcohol and filming the mishaps. It’s a glimpse into somebody else’s life or a different way of living, a chance to be a part of someone else’s trials and take a look into their private thoughts. It’s being able to relate, or watching for something shocking. But what does the rise in this kind of entertainment say about American society? Could our late night viewing habits be evidence of a declining sense of morality and values? Possibly, but as long as people are willing to publicly air their dirty laundry, viewer’s won’t be able to look away, and the trend that turned MTV into reality television won’t be ending anytime soon.

The Rise of UFC

2008-02-11T15:01:00.000-05:00

A man named Dana White purchased the Ultimate Fighting Championship, or better known as the UFC for 2 million dollars in the early 1990's. At the time the sport was being marketed as a blood sport and not a sport of skill and martial arts expertise. This was seen as a foolish investment as the former owners were on the verge of bankrupcy due to the lack of success.

Fast forward roughly a decade and your looking at a sport that is thriving and showing no signs of going anywhere near bankrupcy. In 2006 UFC grossed more pay-per-view annually than any other event ever. UFC 66 alone in 2006 featuring two of the sports top fighters Tito Ortiz and Chuck Liddell, grossed 5.1 million dollars at the gate alone. This wan't the only fight that drew viewers in 2006, as UFC grossed over 222 million dollars in 2006 strictly through pay-per-view purchases.

Another reason for the sudden interest in a sport such as UFC might have alot to do with the lack of a true heavyweight champion in a similiar sport in boxing. In the 70's and 80's all-time great fighters like Ali, Frazier, Holmes, and Foreman were contending for the heavyweight belt. Currently the World Boxing Commission named an 'interim' champion, Samuel Peter from Nigeria, because they feel he is the best boxer in the world, although he has never fought and won in a sanctioned heavyweight championship of the world.

UFC events are also undercarded alot better than boxing matches. No one wants to see two featherweight boxers weighing 140 pounds slap each other like 8th grade boys. In a UFC event there are roughly a half dozen fights in a night three, 3 minute rounds in a regular fight and three, 5 minute rounds in a championship fight. The general idea of UFC is to see which fighter has the better array of fighitng techniques in order to adapt and beat his opponent. Fighters use everything from a street fighting style to highly concentrated martial arts styles from all around the world. The winner is determined by knockout or a stoppage of the fight by the referee due to one of the fighters not being able to protect themselves. The difference between this and boxing besides for the fact that you can kick is that you can use submission moves to defeat your opponent. You might see a fighter choke his opponent until he passes out or you could find them putting the opponent in an arm bar until the fighter taps out or gets his arm snapped.

When it comes down to what the everyday sports viewer would find more appealling between boxing and UFC it's a no brainer. The non-stop action inside of the cage shaped like an octagon is much more entertaining than seeing those same two guys through punches with heavy gloves that ultimately don't knockout there opponent. Unless boxing can somehow bring the fighters of the past back to life, goodbye boxing, hello Ultimate Fighting.

Prospero's Books: Do Nudity and Urinating Children improve William Shakespeare's The Tempest?

2008-02-11T14:00:00.003-05:00

(image provided by http://www.floornature.com/worldaround/img_magazine/wr76_2_popup.jpg)

Very few pre-20th century authors’ works have inspired as many film adaptations as William Shakespeare, whether it be an authentic re-creation (such as Richard Loncraine’s Richard III and Lawrence Olivier’s Hamlet) or a modern update of one of his famous plays (including 10 Things I Hate About You, based on The Taming of the Shrew, or She’s the Man, based on Twelfth Night). However, even if you’ve seen every Shakespeare-related film ever made, it’s a pretty safe bet that none of them contain the copious levels of nudity and urinating children that are on display in Prospero’s Books (more on that later).

The film, released in 1991, is closely based on Shakespeare’s The Tempest. Like the play, the film’s title character, Prospero (played by the late John Gielgud) is a sorcerer whose daughter, Miranda, has fallen in love with Ferdinand, the once thought deceased son of Alonso, the king of Naples. Prospero is upset by Miranda’s romance, seeing as Alonso was responsible for aiding Prospero’s conniving brother, Antonio, in seizing his position as the rightful duke of Milan. Even worse, a murder plot against Prospero is formed by his enemies, lead primarily by Caliban, a slave owned by Prospero. Being a powerful wizard, however, Prospero is not helpless against the attempts on his life, and he is aided by Ariel, a spirit who helps him exact revenge on his enemies.

In terms of its narrative, Prospero’s Books is a pretty faithful recreation of Shakespeare’s play. However, director Peter Greenaway (of The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover fame) differentiates his film by infusing the film with a plethora of stylistic choices that are unique, to say the least.

In particular, the film exhibits elements and themes synonymous with 14th and 15th century Renaissance-era art, especially via the use of vibrant colors. The film is awash in vibrant shades of green, blue, gold and red, each of which effectively emphasize the passion of its characters and their situations, as well as the lavish aura that modern audiences have come to associate with the time period, as evidenced by paintings and other artistic creations.

The appliance of multiple Renaissance-era elements would also explain why the film displays such a high level of nudity. A large amount of the artwork (particularly paintings and sculptures) that originated from the time period portrayed men, women, and even children in their naked form, a trait that is reflected by Prospero’s Books. In addition, much like the aforementioned paintings, the nudity in the film does not serve a sexual purpose, but showcases the characters’ natural human forms as they bathe, dance, or engage in religious ceremonies surrounding the film’s protagonists.

Despite the film’s close adherence to its source material, it still sees fit to alter the portrayals of some of its characters to fit within the context of its distinctive vision of The Tempest. Perhaps the most notable change is to the role of Ariel, Prospero’s spirit ally who, in this movie, is portrayed by three different actors, each of which represents specific elemental components that the spirit has control of. As a young child, for example, the film represents Ariel’s manipulation of water, particularly in terms of how it results in the shipwreck that separates Ferdinand from Alonso, by showing the nude boy swinging from a swing and urinating on a wooden model ship afloat in a Roman-style bath, eventually causing it to capsize.

On the basis of the previous paragraph alone, readers will either be appalled by the idea of or techniques used in Prospero’s Books, or they will want to rush out to their closest video store to see the film for themselves, in the hopes of determining that such a film does indeed exist and that this descriptive article is not an elaborate hoax.

For the former group, they may be pleased to know that the film has come under scrutiny from outspoken film critic Michael Medved (whose recent targets have been Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby and Steven Spielberg’s Munich). In fact, in his book, Hollywood Vs. America, he cited Prospero’s Books (with its urinating child scene, in particular) as an example of Hollywood’s “urge to offend” audiences.

For the latter group, the film is indeed real, and its cast and crew are quite proud of their achievements. One such person is John Gielgud who, in his autobiography, Sir John Gielgud: A Life in Letters, explained his lifelong dream to cinematically portray The Tempest’s Prospero, despite his extensive background in Shakespeare performances both on stage and in film. In fact, Gielgud’s desire was so great that he approached a group of notable film directors to direct a film version of Shakespeare’s work, including Akira Kurosawa (The Seven Samurai), Ingmar Bergman (The Seventh Seal), and Orson Welles (Citizen Kane).

However one may look upon Prospero’s Books, one thing is for certain; it is certainly one of the more ambitious and stylistically unique film versions of a Shakespeare work to ever grace the silver screen, and the possibility exists that no future adaptation could possibly match it on that level.

As of now, Prospero’s Books is out of print, so interested parties will have to search high and low for a VHS copy (or you can visit the AACC library and watch it there). Furthermore, the film is unavailable on DVD in the US and no plans currently exist for an American release, perhaps because it would be difficult to market a film with a naked and urinating child, regardless of the image’s legitimacy, in a post-Michael Jackson, post-R. Kelly America.

Is Heavy Metal Dead?

2008-02-11T13:36:00.003-05:00

If you have never heard it you have probably heard of it, loud mean and rough, heavy metal is rock and roll in its loudest and most intense form. The heavy metal scene of the 1980’s hit big with bands such as Iron Maiden and Black Sabbath, these and others exploded in popularity and eventually gave rise to Metallica, Slayer, and Megadeth, except Metallica, many bands in the genre of heavy metal never reached the unbelievable popularity and international acclaim that Black Sabbath enjoyed, but does this mean metal is dead? Could such a widespread fan-base simply disappeared or just lost interest? Here in our area there are metal shows that go virtually unnoticed by the majority of people and venue’s that cater to this kind of music are swiftly being relocated or shut down. With bands left with no one to play for, so what’s the deal? Metal fans are known for being devoted to the bands they listen to, In fact Jon Wiederhorn of MTV news said that “There are music fans and then there are metal fans. . . Metal fans are not a crowd that loves one band this year and another next. Their loyalty — to their favorite bands and the genre itself — is intense and usually lifelong”. The point can be made that there loyalty is merely a delusion and that there devotion is a reflection of their anger at the world around them, yes there have been exceptions such as the shooting of Pantera’s guitarist “Dime-bag Darrel”, and other random cases of violence by almost fanatically devoted fans, this has not lured fans away from this style of music however. MTV, although cutting out a lot of the music in recent years still has a stranglehold on the youth of America, thereby making them an authority in entertainment, they list the most popular artists today as follows,
“1. Lil Wayne”
“2. Brittany Spears”
“3. Chris Brown”
“4. Soulja Boy (Tell em)”
“5. T-Pain”
“6. Akon”
“7. 50 Cent”
“8. Alicia Keys”
“9. Paramore”
“10. Beyonce”
It is clear that on terms of the majority that the American people have found a new type of music that speaks to them, and left metal back in the 80’s, this is untrue however, the United States has given up heavy metal in the mainstream and northern Europe has taken up the call and is now the home of the majority of new metal bands, in fact Scandinavia has become the new capital of metal in the world giving way to new “Black Metal” bands such as Dimmu Borgir and Cradle of Filth, holding festivals such as the Bloodstock festival held in Britain, and countless festivals being held in Germany, a full list is available http://www.metal-coven.dk/ . Metal although hitting big in the United States during the late 1980’s has lost much of its fan-base, the music however lives on in other parts of the world and still holds a very strong and loyal selection of fans that will hold true until the last head stops banging and the last fist stopped shaking.