Margie Reedy's visit to campus yesterday to talk about bias in the media as it relates to Iraq was both timely and informative. In her talk, Reedy spoke of the popularity of Fox News and the danger of any news media outlets straying from an objective standard in their reporting.
Now that the fall movie season is rolling in, the filmgoer is left with less and less appealing choices as the studios reload for the holidays. It is in this period around the autumnal equinox when a movie like "Hero," originally released in China is 2002, can find the top slot in the U.S. box office charts. It is also in this interim when a movie like "Shaun of the Dead" can find the audience it deserves.
Cell phones. Computers. Appliances. Lamps. Without electricity, we would have none of these amenities that make life at Tufts more comfortable. But while scrambling to squeeze one last plug into the power strip, many of us may forget that electricity doesn't just come from the wall. Tufts University purchases a conventional mix of electricity originating mostly from nuclear, natural gas, oil and coal power plants. Although this electricity is the least expensive on the market, there are many implicit costs excluded in the monthly electric bill. Nuclear power results in the creation of radioactive byproducts that we still have not figured out how to dispose of, and nuclear facilities are huge terrorist targets. Natural gas is the cleanest of the fossil fuels, but we currently rely heavily on its limited supply. We also depend strongly on foreign sources of oil, resulting in spills during transport and the need for tax dollars, in addition to the price by the barrel, to go toward protecting our nation's oil interests. Finally, coal combustion, when done without the best control technology that many New England power plants lack, is largely responsible for acid rain, smog, increased frequencies of asthma (especially in young children) and mercury contamination that poses a hazard to women of our age who eat tuna and other fish on a regular basis. There are other options available now. Energy can be captured when the sun shines, the wind blows and water flows. Thanks to deregulation, many consumers can now choose where their power comes from. At the same time, the price of wind power, the most viable of the "clean," "green" or "renewable" energy options, has significantly decreased in the last few years, making it much more competitive with other sources of power. Universities are huge consumers of electricity, whether for good or for bad, and many are playing important roles in the demand for clean power. Over 50 universities, including Harvard, Yale, U. Penn, Penn State, Swarthmore, Duke and Carnegie Mellon have already purchased percentages of their electricity from renewable energy sources for ethical, health and environmental reasons. A few NESCAC schools already buy clean power as well. Colby gets 100 percent of its electricity from sources other than fossil fuels, Connecticut College is run on 44 percent wind power, and Trinity College powered its version of Spring Fling on wind power last year. Wind power still costs slightly more than conventional power, and in order to cover the extra cost, many students at other schools have picked up the tab voluntarily. A few schools have witnessed student-led initiatives to create a fee to go directly to clean energy, like Connecticut College, whose students voted to pay $25 per year for non-polluting wind power. Certainly nobody likes fees, but I believe that the climate of social responsibility and environmental stewardship on this campus is such that we are destined to make the shift. There are many reasons for Tufts to join these other institutions in buying clean energy. It's like instituting recycling programs was in the 1990s - any environmentally and socially responsible university will participate, it's just a question of who will be the leaders and who will be the followers. Tufts has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to seven percent below 1990 levels by 2010. We are far from achieving this goal, but a purchase of energy that doesn't involve fossil fuel combustion would dramatically decrease our contribution to global warming and help meet our commitment. A local purchase of clean energy could also benefit our neighboring communities by creating jobs and lessening air pollution by shifting demand away from fossil fuels. Finally, our nation seeks to decrease its dependence on foreign oil and diversify its energy sources, which our purchase would help achieve. I propose that we create a yearly fee of $20 per Tufts student (charged to our Bursar's bill) to obtain at least 20 percent of our electricity from sources other than fossil fuels or nuclear power. To put the cost in context, we would be giving up the equivalent of a pizza and a few bottles of soda from Domino's for cleaner air, water, a decreased contribution to global warming and a move toward energy independence. In my mind, there is no question of what the right move is. Perhaps you have some doubts. In collaboration with Tufts Climate Initiative and UCCPS, Environmental Consciousness Outreach (ECO) has put together a panel discussion this week to discuss the issue. Speakers will include representatives from a wind power company that has worked with several universities, an NGO that markets clean energy, a state agency responsible for developing renewable energy technology, Medford's environmental manager working on related projects and a student from Temple University who led a successful campaign to create a clean energy fee for their student body, and will be followed by an open forum in which everyone can express concerns about renewable energy and the creation of a fee. Many people knock environmentalists for trying to make them feel guilty about their lifestyles. By voting yes on the clean energy fee later this year, have a clear mind when you use electricity. Just keep an eye out for a vote on the referendum and future educational events on clean energy. If you remain unconvinced, take a look at the tall smokestacks of the Mystic Generating Facility (a natural gas power plant) the next time you descend the Memorial Steps. Is that really better than wind turbines?Jennifer Baldwin is a senior majoring in Environmental Studies and Art History and is a co-chair of Environmental Consciousness Outreach@contpage:see ENVIRONMENT, page ????@conthead:Tufts should promote clean energy @contjump:ENVIRONMENT@contpage:continued from page ????@pullquote:A purchase of energy that doesn't involve fossil fuel combustion would dramatically decrease our contribution to global warming and help meet our commitment.altpullquote:We'd be giving up the equivalent of a pizza and a few bottles of soda from Domino's for cleaner air, water, a decreased contribution to global warming, and a move toward energy independence.eds: leah, jt
In a move aimed at protecting transgender and other members of the Tufts community, senior and Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senator Matthew Pohl spearheaded an initiative to update the school's nondiscrimination policy. In a unanimous 27-0-0 decision on Sunday, the TCU Senate passed Pohl's resolution, which "urges the University to add 'gender identity and expression' to the nondiscrimination policy," he said. Tufts Transgender, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Collective Community Representative Mario Cervantes, was delighted by Sunday's results. "I'm so glad we got to address this issue. It's pretty important for the Tufts community to discuss equality on campus," Cervantes said. The most impressive aspect of the resolution was the total support of the Senate, Pohl said. "This vote is extraordinary ... because issues like this can be contentious for many people." The resolution holds that "transgender students, faculty and staff at Tufts should not experience bias during application, employment, promotion and/or termination." The text also redefines the syntactical meaning of "gender" to be more inclusive to those who identify themselves as other than "male" or "female." The resolution reads, "the policy assumes that one can be identified as male or female when many students, faculty and staff, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and heterosexual people may not conform to conventional gender norms." The resolution also notes that "federal courts have ruled that 'gender' as included in nondiscrimination policies does not protect gender identity and expression," and that Tufts should institute these changes if it truly "is committed to the fundamental principle of equal opportunity and equal treatment." But Tufts' administration has the final word on whether the Senate's non-binding decision will ultimately be included in the University's nondiscrimination policy. Pohl has indicated his intention to "make sure the resolution is used in the process to finally get gender identity and expression into the policy." Tufts' adoption of the resolution's language would not be a pioneering move in the world of higher education. "We would not be the first school [to adopt the policy], and I certainly hope that we're not the last," Pohl said. Other schools throughout the country, including Middlebury College in Vermont, Ohio State University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have already implemented "gender identity and expression" into their nondiscrimination policies and have met with success. "Many of Tufts' peer institutions, both public and private, on principle, have ... included protections for gender identity and expression in their respective nondiscrimination policies," according to the resolution. Pohl considers this to be "a huge victory for the Tufts community," and noted that "people really need to know about this." Pohl wrote the resolution when "a number of different people really started discussing this since freshman year." While Pohl is the resolution's author, he got help from a number of people on campus, including Director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Center Dona Yarbrough. "I truly hope that this resolution will be used as a tool to create dialogue on campus," Pohl said. "What is so wonderful is how the Tufts students - through their representatives - have spoken on this issue."@jump:see SENATE, page X@conthead:Other universities have gender non-discrimination policies@contjump:SENATE@contpage:continued from page XXEdits: sld
Children from Somerville and other nearby communities boarded a Time Machine "on loan from the Tufts Engineering department" at the Tufts Symphony Orchestra's annual children's concert on Sunday. The "Travel Through Time" theme allowed families to go back hundreds of years and meet orchestra members in full costume, including such composers as Beethoven, Berlioz and Tchaikovsky.
Battling sickness, heat, a tough course and one of the best teams in the country, the women's cross country team used grit and depth to place second at the Jumbo Invitational on Saturday in Grafton.
"Dirty South Memphis bit*h what! South Memphis what!" Simultaneously shaking her head and stomping her feet, the flushed and bright-eyed freshman shouted the lyrics to one of her favorite hometown songs. Hey, we all have to do something to remind us of home. The thing is, for some, home is farther than for others. For example, Melissa Shelby Deeney, the afore-described rapper, came to Tufts this year all the way from Memphis, Tennessee. In a school where 25 percent of the population hails from Massachusetts according to the Princeton Review, Deeney is clearly a minority among the throngs of students from the Northeast. However, she remains a member of a substantial part of the student body coming from regions all over the country and other nations altogether. Many students from the South report that one of the hardest things about adjusting to the New England culture is facing prejudice or dealing with general assumptions from their Yankee peers. Michelle Friedman, a senior from Dallas, Texas, said that some of her first encounters with Tufts students were difficult. "People did not take me seriously with my accent - I would be talking in class and they would laugh," she said. Such a reaction compelled Friedman to alter her speech so that when she is at school, hardly a trace remains. "I had to stop saying 'y'all' and now when I'm here, my accent is pretty much gone," she said. Both she and Deeney report that other students were shocked to learn that they considered themselves politically liberal. "People were incredulous of the fact that I was from Texas, proud of it and didn't love Bush," Friedman said. "Everyone always thinks that I'm a Republican," Deeney agreed. Other encounters were more comical. "One person asked me if I owned slaves," Friedman said, laughing. Students from other regions describe similar culture-shock situations. "When I tell people I'm from Alaska, I think they have this idea that it's totally uncivilized," said freshman Alyssa Walsh of Anchorage, Alaska. "They think we live in igloos and that there are Eskimos running around. They think it's so different, but it's really not. I come from a city and everything." Students from other cold climates are subject to the same reactions. "The first thing people ask me is, "Do you ski?" said sophomore Christine Gary of Colorado Springs, Colorado. "The answer is no. Well, I did for one season, but I was really bad." To students from other regions, differences in the general attitudes of New Englanders are obvious. "Many students are surprised by the fast pace here," said Julie Jampel, head counselor at the Tufts Counseling Center. "It's the little things, like people being more impatient for an elevator, or a general unfriendliness when they walk down the street." Deeney agreed. "At home, when you cross someone's path, you always smile and make eye contact," she said. "But here, everyone is in a hurry." Other students from farther-flung regions of the U.S. harbored prejudices about New Englanders as well. "I had my assumptions about them," Friedman said. "I thought that the men were scared of the women. It's true that women would get mad when men open the doors for them. It's a different atmosphere; they just don't want to offend." Other assumptions concerned fashion and style. "New Englanders are way more into trends, like those big obnoxious flowers," Gary said. "Colorado is more old-school, just jeans and a shirt." The adjustment from the home environment to the Tufts environment can be particularly strenuous on students from other countries. "Students often face issues relating to differences in culture, attitudes, even weather," Jampel said. "Yeah, I imagine the snow this winter will be a kick in the pants," said freshman Elliot Authendaugh, a native of Portland, Oregon. "I don't own a sweater yet, but I'm gonna get one this year, and a coat too," senior Friedman agreed. "Some people talk about having different values," Jampel added. "For example, not having curfews, or seeing other students talk back to their parents, it's startling to them." For many international students, the differences are overwhelming. Even the visual landscape is alien. "Here, everything is much bigger," said freshman Nicola Gortzounian, a native of Paris, France. "The first thing I notice when I get into a taxi is how huge the car is. In Paris, the streets are small." Junior Serena Fan, a native of Hong Kong, concurred, saying, "There is so much more space ... even the amount of trees and grass." Both agree, though, that the most obvious differences are cultural. "People are more polite in France, holding doors open and those kind of manners, but here they are really more friendly," Gortzounian said. In contrast, students from other regions of the world view New England to be less friendly. "In New Zealand, people are much more affectionate," said freshman Amanda Sung, a native of Taiwan who went to high school in New Zealand. "But here people are more polite." The more relaxed academic atmosphere available at Tufts is one thing Gortzounian really appreciates. "In France, when a teacher enters the room, everyone stands up," he said. "Here, it seems that we have more respect from the teachers. It makes the learning environment much more stimulating as a result, because it is easier to learn from someone who respects you." Students have different approaches to adjusting to such differences in the Tufts environment. "The day my mom dropped me off, she looked at me and said, 'Now Shelby, don't turn into a Yank,'" Deeney said. In order to comply with her mom's request, Deeney brought with her a treasured book: "GRITS: A Guide to Life for Girls Raised in the South." It includes such important reminders as how to talk, laugh and flirt Southern style. "Here's my favorite," Deeney said, reading aloud: "'If anyone tries to tell you a Southern girl shouldn't drink, just tell them the truth: we don't drink, we sip ... a lot.'"
Now that Week Three of the NFL season is complete, teams around the league are beginning to display the tendencies that will characterize them in the coming months. Some have played great defense, some have lit up the scoreboards. Some have over-achieved, while others have left us just scratching our heads.
While its three opening matches might have felt like foregone conclusions, the women's tennis team had work to do this past weekend to solidify its position as one of the teams to fear in the northeast.
When former Celtics star Danny Ainge was appointed as the team's Executive Director of Basketball Operations last summer, expectations were understandably high.
Unfortunately, week five of the college football season didn't have as many marquee match-ups as last weekend. Nevertheless, there was plenty of quality football played.
After losing a tough five-game match against Springfield College in the second round of the 2003 MIT Invitational Tournament, the Jumbos were hungry for revenge.
A recent poll, published in The Primary Source, found that an astonishing 83 percent of Tufts students want John Kerry to be their next president, while only six percent plan to vote for George W. Bush. On the national scene, however, things are not looking nearly as good for the Democrats - a TIME Magazine poll of "likely voters," published Sept. 20, shows Bush ahead of Kerry 52 percent to 41 percent. The poll reveals that many Americans see John Kerry for what he is: an ambiguous politician who has accomplished little in his 20 years in the Senate, a man with no vision for what America can or should be and an unpredictable candidate whose voting is inconsistent and whose positions are ill-defined. Despite all of this, the vast majority of students here support Kerry, so what are Americans across the country seeing that is seemingly invisible here at Tufts? In deciding whether a presidential candidate is fit to lead the country, examining his record would be a natural first step. This may frighten John Kerry, however, because his record highlights just how schizophrenic his voting has been. The list of his "flip-flops" is staggering. On Oct. 10, 2002, John Kerry voted to authorize military operations in Iraq. Now, as Bush's opponent, Kerry decries the war: "I would not have taken the country into war the way he did ... Americans are paying ... because this president rushed to war." The lunacy does not end there. On Oct. 25, 2001, Kerry voted in support of the PATRIOT Act. He also voted to kill a proposal to restrict wiretapping and give the attorney general the power to detain foreigners suspected of terrorism. Given his votes to expand Ashcroft's authority, it is understandable why the thoughtful listener was confused when Kerry, in a speech at Iowa State University in December of last year, stated, "We are a nation of laws and liberties ... so it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the PATRIOT Act." But the list goes on. On Dec. 18, 2001, Kerry voted in support of the "No Child Left Behind" education act, yet in April, 2003, he was humming a different tune: "Between now and the time I'm sworn in, in January 2005, I'm going to use every day to make this president accountable for making a mockery of the words 'No Child Left Behind,'" he said. This constant waffling is not a new phenomenon for Kerry. On Jan. 22, 1991, John Kerry told a constituent of his, "I share your concerns [about the use of force in Iraq. I voted in favor of a resolution that ... insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war. Nine days later, he wrote, "From the outset of the invasion [of Kuwait by Iraq], I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf." If John Kerry does not know where John Kerry stands on an issue, how can the American people know where he stands? On July 29, 2004, John Kerry accepted the Democrats' nomination for president in a speech at the DNC. This was his chance to speak directly to America and explain why he should be our 44th president. In his 5,161 word speech, he devoted a grand total of four sentences to his senate history. It is not in the least bit surprising. John Kerry's record is one characterized by indecisiveness, dishonesty and ambiguity. His inability to make conclusions and decisions has left him wholly unqualified to lead America, especially at this critical time. Indeed, his speech was riddled with broad statements and loose ends: "I know what we have to do in Iraq," he claimed, offering no further explanation. "I will fight a smarter, more effective war," he said, sharing no ideas about how to do it. Kerry has failed miserably to show us his vision for America, not because of a poor campaign or bad speechwriting, but because he simply has none. Twenty years of flip-flops, lies and inconsistencies is certainly enough to prove that we elect Kerry at our own peril.Bruce Hamilton is a freshman who is undeclared and a member of Tufts Republicans
Vigorous debate is the cornerstone of a healthy democratic society. The presidential debate that will occur on Thursday, however, will be anything but vigorous due to the insistence of both presidential candidates. Concern for image-making (and selling) means that we, the people, will end up seeing less a candid exchange of views on policy and more a series of canned stump positions.
Perhaps it will not be to the full Orwellian extent of Peter Weir's 1998 film, but I honestly believe that the conceit of one man unwittingly living out his life in front of television cameras will be the next step in reality programming. The sad part is, we're already half way there.
Once one of the most overlooked intrastate conflicts, the Russian-Chechen conflict is finally making headlines throughout the world. For centuries, Chechnya has bitterly fought Russia for independence, resulting in innumerable deaths and human rights atrocities. In the past few years, Chechen terrorists have hijacked a Moscow theater, set off bombs in Moscow subways, hijacked Russian planes, and most recently took over an elementary school in Beslan, all of which have resulted in thousands of innocent deaths. Russian soldiers have murdered and raped Chechen civilians, as well as turned Chechnya into an Palestinian-like atmosphere, with constant checkpoints and random searches. Now in the midst of a second brutal Russo-Chechen war, one must wonder why Russia is so vehement in preventing such a tiny, insignificant region from becoming independent. Unfortunately, pride is the answer. The Soviet Union, 50 years ago, as well as the great Russian empires of Peter and Catherine the Great, were, during their respective times, some of the great superpowers of the world. The Soviet Union competed with the United States following World War II and was a industrial and technological giant. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia lost one-third of its land mass, falling from its place alongside the U.S. as one of the two world superpowers. Today, Russia is struggling to keep pace with America, the European Union and other emerging countries such as China. In other words, the last 15 years have seen Russia significantly decline in world status. As a result, the idea of losing more land is absolutely unacceptable to President Vladimir Putin, even if relinquishing control of Chechnya could stop such horrible bloodshed. Overzealous pride has fed the Russian desire to control Chechnya at any cost. Putin will argue that Chechnya is one of the most vital strategic and economic regions in the federation, as Chechnya is home to oil and natural resources. Pipelines also carry oil through Chechnya from Caspian Sea reserves to various European nations. Yet the size of Chechnya relative to Russia shows how trite the region is in comparison to its motherland. Chechnya is roughly the size of Connecticut and is home to one million people. Russia is almost twice the size of the United States and is home to 145 million people. Chechnya's five thousand square miles is about 1/1300th of Russia's 6.6 million square miles! These mind-boggling numbers signify how incredibly tragic the crisis in Chechnya has become - how such turmoil and death have resulted from such a tiny region. Yet the bottom line is that the tighter Russia's grip gets on Chechnya, the worse off both Russians and Chechens will be. More Chechens will turn to violence and martyrdom in response to Russian aggression in Chechnya and as a result, innocent Russians will continue to die in subways, theaters, and schools. Chechen villages will continue to be pillaged by Russian soldiers and the already desperate conditions in Chechnya will worsen. In the name of fighting terrorism, President Putin recently proposed measures that would allow him to appoint regional governors instead of the leaders being elected by popular vote, completely undermining the development of democracy in Russia. Now the Russian government is beginning to resemble a Stalin-esque authoritarian government. The tragic events that occur daily in Chechnya and Russia seem to be a vicious cycle that have no end in sight. As Putin continues to make his decisions on the basis of fighting terrorism, he will get the support of the United States which will, in turn, make it very unlikely for Russia's actions in Chechnya to change. Russia simply needs a leader who can put aside the deep pride that exists in his country and relinquish control of Chechnya. What will result will not completely solve the conflict, but significantly fewer innocent people will lose their lives and a hope for peace can be established.
The long-awaited second groundbreaking of Sophia Gordon Hall will take place in June 2005, after fears of destroying historical buildings were allayed by a new architectural design. The residence hall, which will house 150 students, will be built between Stratton Hall and 11 Talbot Ave. The two structures currently on that parcel of land are being prepared for demolition through the removal of door knockers and other hardware. The building plans have been redesigned to confine the new dorm to the property along Talbot Ave. Previous plans called for an L-shaped building that would extend to Professors Row, requiring the demolition of the house at 20 Professors Row, which once housed Tufts' first president, Hosea Ballou. Doug Johnston, the principal of William Rawn Associates who is designing the new University Master Plan and the redesign of Gordon Hall, said that the dorm's design changes took into account the historical significance of Professors Row. "We have worked with a much more limited site area for the building that does not encroach on the building at 20 Professors Row, and I think our recommendation would be along the lines of preservation of those buildings, not trying to fold them into a new residence hall," Johnston said. Johnston wants Gordon Hall to be a connector between uphill and downhill, contributing to the Master Plan's effort to facilitate the ease of crossing campus. "Rather than [Professors Row] being a barrier between uphill and downhill," Johnston said, it has potential to "create better connections." Johnston said that he wanted to find a way to create a bridge between upper campus and lower campus via Gordon Hall. Ground was first broken for Gordon Hall in May 2003. The building was originally supposed to open in 2004, but controversy over the demolition of 20 Professors Row postponed construction. The Somerville Historical Preservation Commission (SHPC) vocally objected to the destruction of 20 Professors Row and refused to approve building permits needed for construction. The SHPC "saw the entrance [at Professors Row] as having significance to the campus as an entity; it was the right feel for the campus," University Vice President of Operations John Roberto said. "The buildings were handsome, of the appropriate scale, and it made a nice symbolic entrance." But it wasn't just pressure from the SHPC that caused the relocation of Gordon Hall, Roberto said. Rawn Associates was "aware of the Historical Commission's concerns, but it's safe to say that Rawn came to their evaluation on their own," he said. "Clearly the [SHPC] did not like the fact that the dorm as previously designed would have impacted Professors Row. It has to be a consideration in the new site of the dorm. I don't think that the Historical Commission's objection impacted Rawn's view, or Rawn's analysis," Roberto said. But progress on the dorm was held up last spring when talks stalled between Tufts and the City of Somerville. The city refused to budge on preserving buildings of historical significance and Tufts was unable to proceed without obtaining permits that required the SHPC's approval. Mark Horan, spokesman for Somerville Mayor Joe Curtatone, said the mayor was pleased with the new plans. "We always try to balance economic growth with preservation at all times, and try to preserve the historic quality of Somerville," Horan said. "Tufts is a really important part of the community, so we want to make sure that Tufts can grow in a reasonable fashion but at the same time try to preserve the historic quality of the city of Somerville."
The men's cross country team lived up to its potential when it raced at full strength last weekend.
Given the talk of swift boats, draft dodging and Purple Hearts that has permeated recent American political discourse, a visitor to the U.S. over the past several months could be forgiven for thinking he'd been transported back in time by 30 years. But though he would have heard all about John Kerry and George W. Bush's Vietnam-era activities, that visitor probably wouldn't have heard something else: a substantive discussion about the broader issues raised by America's involvement in the Vietnam War. "From my standpoint, I think we do need a very thorough discussion on Vietnam," said sociology Professor Paul Joseph, one of 12 professors to travel through Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia in January 1986 in a trip sponsored by the US-Indochina Reconciliation Project. "But I'm disappointed that, so far, the discussion seems to be only about the individual roles Kerry and Bush played during that time frame." There's a reason for Americans' heightened interest in the two candidates' Vietnam histories, said Joseph, who is also the director of Tufts' Peace and Justice Studies department. "I think the fact that we're at war makes us more likely to raise questions about the president as commander in chief," he said. "I think there is something about being involved in a war now that makes us want to look at what happened back then." But unfortunately, Joseph added, the current discussion of "what happened back then" is largely limited to individual activities, and is not as broad or in-depth as it should be. "There are lots of things in Vietnam that have implications for foreign policy and our use of military force now," Joseph said. "But we really haven't processed them as a society as deeply and as fully as I think we should." For example, he said, the discussion of war crimes that was once raised by the Vietnam War appears to have receded in the public consciousness, despite that discussion's relevance to the current situation in Iraq. "There was a record in Vietnam which includes war crimes committed by Americans, as there is in every war - there are rules about war, and those rules are always violated," Joseph said. One of the individuals raising the issue of those violations following his involvement in the Vietnam War was Kerry. "Senator Kerry, when he testified after his service in Vietnam, talked about U.S. atrocities - not that every American or most Americans participated, but some did," he said. "It was possible to say that in 1972, but it doesn't seem to be possible to say that now, even though we have soldiers who are complicit in abuse and torture and the killing of civilians," Joseph said. A Friday Knight Ridder report confirmed Joseph's concerns, stating that between April 5 and Sept. 19, according to the Iraqi interim government's records, twice as many civilians have been killed by U.S. and Iraqi government forces than by insurgents and terrorists. 328 of those 3,487 civilian deaths were women and children. That discussion of this issue is stifled is unfortunate, Joseph added. "If we were free to look at what the conduct of American soldiers - and all soldiers - was in war, that would also shed light on what's going on now," he said. "But the reluctance now to look at what went on then also makes it more difficult to look at what's going on now." Another one of Vietnam's legacies - wariness of American military invention abroad for fear of becoming stuck in a prolonged quagmire of instability and insurgency - can also be applied to the current situation in Iraq. Only 138 of the 1,048 U.S. troop deaths in Iraq so far occurred during major combat operations; the other 910 took place after May 2, 2003, when President Bush declared an end to major combat. Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sunday that the insurgency in Iraq "is getting worse." Powell's statement followed Reuters, Associated Press, Knight Ridder and other news organizations' reports that an increasing number of areas in Iraq are now considered too dangerous for U.S. troops to enter. Such American involvement would have been unlikely in the immediate aftermath of the Vietnam War. "In '75, when the war was over, there was a long cloud - the so-called Vietnam Syndrome - placed over the possibility of the U.S. intervening again, especially with ground troops," Joseph said. "The lesson learned from Vietnam - don't use ground troops in missions overseas - persisted for a while." "But since then, many of the Republican administrations have tried to chip away at the Vietnam Syndrome," he added. "Now, a generation later; the United States can intervene abroad, and has many times. But the question of whether ground troops are used, and the cost and the casualties, is still in the shadow of the Vietnam War." For example, the question in the public's mind of how many American lives can be "acceptably" lost in a war is rooted in Vietnam - and also thanks to Vietnam, Joseph said, the answer to that question has dwindled. "We've lost a thousand troops now in Iraq - a big number, but only 1/58 of the troops we lost in Vietnam," he said. "So our perception of costs, I think, is one of the legacies from Vietnam." Another one of those legacies is the public's skepticism towards its leaders' justifications for war. "The memories of Vietnam potentially have a lot of positives in terms of constraining the U.S. military for the future," Joseph said. "The rhetoric defending Vietnam, a lot of it had to do with the domino theory ... I don't think that kind of rhetoric works as easily now." "There are much more narrow boundaries for justifying war; it has to be our self-defense," he added. "A lot of the self-defense is alleged in this particular situation, but the terrain for justifying the war is more restrained than it was during the Vietnam era." Media coverage of the Iraq war reflects another aspect of the Vietnam War's impact: the Pentagon's resultant desire to "change the face of combat that was being shown back in America" by setting "the rules of what reporters are allowed to do and see and file." "In Vietnam, it was possible many times for journalists to accompany troops to the field," Joseph said. "There's a famous report from 1965, where Morley Safer films troops who are setting fire to a South Vietnamese village. That was shown on television back in the United States." "But when the U.S. intervened in the Gulf War and then again in Panama, reporters could only go where the Pentagon let them, and the Pentagon controlled their vision of the field," Joseph said. After the Gulf War, however, that arrangement no longer sat well with reporters, who, Joseph said, would not have agreed to the same terms for the current Iraq conflict. "So the Pentagon tried to make the best of that by allowing reporters to embed with troops in Iraq," Joseph said. "Some public relations experts said you could actually generate a sympathetic view [of American soldiers] by doing this, and at least in the short run, they were right. It was a successful strategy."
A little-known computer program at Tufts that allows professors to view photos of students in their classes before the start of each semester is raising privacy concerns among students. The program, MyAdvisee, runs over the University-wide online network BlackBoard and allows professors to gain access to all of their students' University ID photos, according to Dean of Students Bruce Reitman. Professors use the photograph database primarily to familiarize themselves with new students and to match faces with names. "I find [MyAdvisee] very helpful when, early in class, I want to be accurate about names," said English lecturer Joe Hurka, who has used the program since last spring. Student opinion on the availability of their photos is mixed. Some think that MyAdvisee streamlines student-professor relations, and others fear a breach of privacy. "I think it's fine [for MyAdvisee to be implemented], and if it keeps them from doing roll-call style attendance in every class, I'm all for it," junior Preston Dickey said. But junior Qhoa Truong said that he was never made aware that his picture would be available to his professors. "I don't think this is right," he said. "I don't want my picture being distributed to anyone without my knowledge." Truong said that he and other students had never been given permission for their pictures to be included in the program. "We should be notified before a picture is given out to anyone, and as far as I know, I was never asked if it was OK for professors to see my ID photo," he said. Reitman said that, because of the security measures used in MyAdvisee, students need not worry about personal information falling into the wrong hands. "I'd only worry about this system if there weren't so many controls," he said. "It's done through a very controlled system that allows professors access only to the photos of students in their particular classes." Hurka said that, originally, he too was curious about a possible infringement on students' rights, but he thought that students were generally aware of its existence. "I assumed ... that they signed off on the use of their ID's," he said. Even some professors are unaware that the program exists, however. "In a political science course last year, my professor had us all photocopy our ID's so that he could remember our names and faces," Dickey said. Tufts professor and Director of the Center of Eastern Mediterranean Studies Leila Fawaz is another professor who was not aware of the program's existence. "I really did not know about this, and I use BlackBoard for my courses regularly," Fawaz said. Hurka was also unaware that students had not been notified of the resource's presence. "I was a little surprised that [students] were surprised the photographs were being used," he said.
