Archives

News

On Sangria, Cruzcampo, Europe, and War

February 26

Spanish people have a unique ability to transform even the most solemn situations into celebration; their culture and everyday life pulsates with a ferocious festivity. The streets of Spanish cities stay alive until the wee hours of the morning. At peak times, bars and restaurants are a sight to behold. Even the Spanish word fiesta, is used to denote much more than what Americans consider a typical party. It indicates vacation, a gathering of friends, or a night out on the town. When I arrived abroad to study in Salamanca, Spain, last spring, I chuckled at my academic calendar _ it showed almost three full weeks of fiesta. But it didn't take me long to figure out why. I loved Spain. To me, the entire country epitomized a vibrancy I have yet to encounter elsewhere. And so it happened that I found myself enjoying a rare moment of spontaneity last week, as I boarded a plane for the south of Spain. I anticipated good food. I couldn't wait for Flamenco. I craved Sangria. And above all, I desired fiesta. But what I got was so much more. As protestors marched on Washington and made their case in San Francisco, Europe exploded with a unified voice tantamount to continental revolution. The protests dwarfed those here in the US. Not only in numbers, but also in spirit. In Spain, as Prime Minister Aznar made his way to the Bush ranch in Crawford, TX, close to 300,000 protestors in search of peace gathered in the streets of Sevilla _ a city of just over 700,000. Because of journalistic tendencies, because of a chance to watch history unfold, and because of a cloudless day, I found myself right smack in the middle of it all. Armed with a camera, a liter of Cruzcampo cerveza and a strategically placed anti-war sticker plastered to my American chest, I witnessed a gathering of voices I had never seen before. And like almost everything else Spanish, that same vibrancy, that feeling of merriment, that same sense of fiesta, ran through the mass of protestors with unrestrained gaiety. Amidst the defecation of our President's name and cries to end the killing of innocents for petrol (oil), I realized the parade was full of the same sense of festivity that makes me love Spain and its people so much. Only, on this occasion, they weren't celebrating a victory for a home f??tbol team or cheering on a local flamenco dancer. They were asking the leadership of the most powerful country in the world to slow down _ to look before it leaps. Despite Donald Rumsfeld's assertions that the "New Europe" is bent on ousting Saddam and following America's lead, one thing is for certain: the "New Europe's" leadership may be with us, but its people are not. As I faithfully followed my duties as the Travelling Lush by meandering in and out of bars for an occasional glass of sangria or a copa or a ca?±a of the brew on tap, I took note of my surroundings. Spanish people everywhere shouted signs of solidarity. Left and right (or, more accurately, left and center) joined young and old to voice their opposition to the looming war in Iraq. Some formulated their cries as insults, claiming that Prime Minister Aznar was groveling at the feet of a would-be emperor, an outright imperialist. Some even portrayed their leader as a homosexual subordinate to our President (a clear sign that Spain still has a long way to go to overcome age old stereotypes and a lingering euphoria of Machismo). Others, however, were less harsh. They carried signs and shouted slogans urging the United States and Great Britain to pause, to let the inspectors do their work _ to let conscience prevail over pride. No matter the form it took, Sevilla was united for one goal: stopping the coming war in Iraq. As I began to feel the cumulative effects of alcohol and the Spanish sun, I drifted off into thought about my column, about my responsibilities as the Travelling Lush. How could I document what I saw? I had woken up that morning with the intention of providing readers (if you're out there) with a humorous story of a day of bar hopping in Spain. Was it even appropriate to use my column to bring Sevilla and the protest a little bit closer to home? Without the creative genius of Norman Mailer, could I even remotely come close to portraying a sense of what I saw? As I pondered this, I caught sight of a two-year-old Spanish ni?±o crawling his way along a ten-foot high metal gate. His face partly covered by the thick black design of a bull, I could just make out a slight smile brightening up the little guy's face. Behind him a mass of Spaniards continued their parade through the center of the city. They shouted, the smiled, they drank, they sang and they marched, all the while carrying their signs and voicing their message. Smiling back, I snapped a photo and sipped my now warm litro of beer. I love the fiesta of Spain. And then I realized: if I really do have readers out there, I just had to let them know about it.

---

News

Sopranos star speaks about eating disorders

February 26

An audience of mostly female Tufts students filled Cohen Auditorium on Tuesday night when The Sopranos cast member Jamie-Lynn Sigler told the story of her experience with exercise bulimia. As the spokesperson for the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA), Sigler's program was highly anticipated and took place during the National Eating Disorders Awareness week, Feb. 23-Mar. 2. Michelle Bowdler, director of health services, said as she introduced Sigler, "it is extremely rare that someone who has gone through a battle with an eating disorder is willing to talk about it." As an exercise bulimic, Sigler exercised more than her calorie intake could compensate for. "I think it's great that someone in the media spotlight can come out with something so private in front of so many people," said Julia Tebor, a freshman. Sigler quickly gained the support of the crowd through her casual dialogue, and through the candid way in which she spoke and answered questions. Of her 15 years prior to the development of her eating disorder, Sigler said "I had never looked at the nutritional value of anything." After her friends had jokingly suggested that they all lose a few pounds, Sigler's response snowballed into an obsession with exercising for four hours before school each day, in addition to eating next to nothing. Hating the way she looked, seeing her grades drop, her friendships lost, and the pain she caused her family, Sigler still continued in the obsession that was the one thing she felt she could control in her life. "With any addiction, if you don't want to get better," Sigler stated, "you're never going to." "You're in such denial; you know something is not right," she continued, "you hurt the people who are closest to you and that's what makes it even harder." Sigler finally came to terms with her disorder during her junior year in high school. She was then taken to specialists by her parents, whom she called supportive. Sigler said that working on the set of the hit HBO series The Sopranos has in a sense, saved her life. When she returned to the set to film the second season, coworkers recognized her problem immediately. Sigler was told that her character would be recast if she didn't gain 15 pounds within three weeks. "I ate everything in sight," Sigler said. Even after she gained the weight back, she was determined to prove that her condition was improving she said that she "ate even when I wasn't hungry." When viewers who watched the second season sent Sigler mail that critiqued the way her character, Meadow, looked on the show, Sigler was faced with another difficult challenge. "Does this mean that to do what I wanted to do, I had to be unhappy and unhealthy, to go back to my old ways?" But Sigler chose to abandon her old ways, and instead admitted that she had a disorder. Eating disorders currently affect millions of American women, according to the NEDA. One in five girls will suffer from a full-blown eating disorder in her life, and nearly half of American woman are dieting on any given day. Four out of five ten year olds reportedly are also afraid of being fat. Overcoming the disorder Sigler said, was "the most uplifting, empowering experience of my life beyond any role I could ever get." "It's like a scar that will always be with me," Sigler said. "Even though I had a great family life, and I was a strong and confident girl, it still happened to me." Today, at 21 years old, Sigler has won numerous acting awards, debuted as Belle in Disney's Beauty and the Beast, written her own autobiography entitled Wise Girl, featured in her first film, and has become a recording artist as well. "It's very helpful to see a celebrity speak out about real problems," sophomore Lauren Thomas said, "because it shows that Hollywood is just an illusion, there are real people with real experiences." "As a woman in college, I think that almost every girl my age can relate to Jamie-Lynn in a way that we all face pressure to achieve perfection," freshman Sarah Samuelson said. Sigler also expressed that she is, "grateful, beyond success, that I can reach people."

---

News

Intramural basketball kicks off in blow-out fashion

February 26

While most of last week's press went to the upcoming playoff games for the men's and women's basketball teams, many people knew that the real basketball season was just beginning--the season of intramural co-ed basketball. That's right. Dozens of star athletes who chose the fame, glory, and possible illegal money to play intramural basketball at Tufts University rather than fulfill their expectations at Div. I programs like Duke or Kentucky converged on the courts to bring some of the most intense action around. "I do it for the ladies, the late nights, the limousines, and the jets," Senior Matt Berlin said. "I turned down offers at Alabama and LSU to come to where the real action was at Tufts University." After months of anticipating this exciting season, the teams tipped off Sunday for the start of their six-week schedule. After a lengthy opening ceremony, which included a speech by Phil Jackson who got his coaching start many years ago during Tufts intramurals, the games began with the Demo Catchers battling the Grizzlies. While the game showed promise early, the Demo Catchers pulled away late, winning 38-26. The one o'clock time slot was designated for routs as all four games involved losses by more than 20 points. DU, Illest, and the Hill Hallstars had little trouble pounding away at high school-esque squads the Ballers, Special Sauce and the Funktronics respectively. The game featuring the Big Guns and Diplomacy was riveting in the beginning as the teams were knotted up at two for a bit before Big Guns pulled away with a 40-19 win. Leading the shellacking was Senior Mark Olowinski, a blue chip recruit from the basketball hot-bed of Idaho, who chipped in 22 points for the Big Guns. They were happy to come away with a win, especially considering the large crowd on hand. "I enjoyed the gauntlet of autograph seekers as I exited the building," Senior Jeff Malbasa said. That's right, he used the word 'gauntlet' in a sentence, proof that these athletes not only hit the boards during the games, but the classrooms afterwards. While other routes proved to be just as uninteresting, there were a few marquee match-ups that formed a playoff-like atmosphere. Ill Sauce, coming off weeks of intense pre-season workouts, brought everything to the table going down to the wire with BIU. With the score sea-sawing back and forth, Ill Sauce squeaked out a 55-52 victory with players collapsing to the floor in exhaustion as the buzzer sounded. The opening night ended in embarrassing fashion as Noise Game squared off against defending champion Nematoda. The game did, however, feature some ESPN quality dunks by players like senior Brandon Brodeur. Noise Game ended up losing by over 40 points. "At one point we went on an unbelievable 4-0 run," said senior Kenny Berlin, a member of Noise Game. "I thought we had worn them out. Turns out they were just resting so they could dunk over us, which they did on the very next possession." Among the many difficulties that teams faced in their first match-ups of the season were the environments, especially down at the cage. "It felt like prison ball out there," senior Jeremy Schloser said. "Thousands of people clinging onto the nets around The Cage. People may think that the Cameron Crazies are hard to deal with at Duke, but this place is impossible." The schedules are being given out a week in advance with the next games being scheduled for Sunday, Mar. 2, starting at noon. It is advised to get their days early as tents have already been seen lined up against the gym.

---

News

A muted welcome for elder Bush

February 26

Former President George H.W. Bush stressed the importance of choosing "hope over hate" yesterday to resolve tensions in the Middle East. The 41st president was delivering the annual Fares Lecture -- his second in less than ten years -- before a near-record crowd of 4,800 in the Gantcher Center. The audience's welcome was mixed: while students protested both before and during the speech, others applauded, sometimes at his insights, but mostly at his jokes. Many, however, believed the speech lacked substance, especially considering the current tension in the Middle East. Between jokes about his wife Barbara and jibes at the protesters, an affable Bush Sr. offered an optimistic outlook on eventually achieving peace in the region. "I believe that in the longer run," Bush said, "the 21st century will offer leaders throughout the Eastern Mediterranean a real chance to emerge from their current conflict. "If only for a time, I've seen hope surmount hate in the Middle East itself." The former president recalled the 1991 Madrid peace conference, where he saw "a room full of Arabs and Israelis sitting across from each other and beginning to talk about peace." "It made a profound impression on me," he said, "and I believe it can happen again." Bush explained that problems in the Middle East and tension between the United States and the region were the result of false stereotypes. He mentioned negative perceptions of Saudi Arabia which had developed in the United States since Sept. 11, 2001 and said that such stereotypes offended him. Bush was on the verge of tears as he recalled a conversation with a young Arab-American girl after the terrorist attacks. "Does this mean they are going to knock down my school?" the girl asked. Bush said that Americans must remain tolerant. "We've got to continue to strive to be a kinder and gentler nation." The same, he said, goes for people Middle East with negative perceptions of America. In his speech, Bush also defended Operation Desert Storm, which he said had directly resulted in the Madrid meetings between Israeli and Palestinian officials, and dismissed the idea that military interventions in Iraq -- past or proposed -- were about oil. "It was about liberating a sovereign nation back then," he said. "The United States wants to see all the people in the eastern Mediterranean and indeed throughout the Arab world live in peace and security." Today, a war would be about making Saddam Hussein "give up his insane quest for weapons of mass destruction." "Our goal there is not regional hegemony," he said. "We want [people in the Middle East] to have the freedom to determine their own destiny." Bush also defended his decision to halt the war against Iraq in 1991 and not remove Saddam Hussein from power because the American-led coalition had achieved the goals of the United Nations' mandate -- to evict Iraq from Kuwait. Had the US continued into Baghdad, Bush said, "the coalition would have instantly shattered and the political capital we had gained as a result of our principled restraint to jump-start the peace process would have been lost." Twelve years later, with Hussein once again an American foreign policy priority, Bush resisted offering insight into what actions his son's administration might take against Iraq. "We only have one president," he said. But he said that perceptions that George W. Bush wanted to "go it alone, rush into war" were false. "We've got to keep the pressure on," he said. "The more united that pressure is, the more chance there is that this matter will be resolved in a peaceful manner." But he said that war could eventually be the right option, and that there was such a concept as a "just war." Many students were unimpressed by the former president's remarks. "I felt like a lot of what Bush said sort of came out of nowhere," said sophomore Rebecca Aguirre. "His stories didn't make much sense in relation to the lecture topic." David Cades, a senior, said Bush was funny "but didn't say much." Bush delivered the speech after introductions by University President Larry Bacow, Leila Fawaz, the director of the Fares Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies, and Issam M. Fares, the Deputy Prime Minister of Lebanon and the lecture series' sponsor. He also answered six questions, which were chosen from ones submitted online beforehand. The mood was noticeably different from last year, when Bush's successor, former President Bill Clinton, delivered the Fares Lecture. Then, students could hardly contain their applause; yesterday, protestors interrupted the speech at least twice, and many students decided it wasn't worth clapping. At Bush's first mention of Desert Storm, one group of about six protestors blew a whistle, raised banners and sang anti-war chants. As police officers escorted the protesters out of Gantcher, Bush joked that "we've now found another really good reason to use duct tape." The audience burst out in laughter. But the reaction to Bush's quips was mixed. "I found some of his comments about the protesters very offensive," sophomore Leah Rogers said, "but I also thought that some of the techniques of protest were offensive as well." Dianna Darsney, a senior, said that his comments were funny and appropriate, given the circumstances. "If you are going to throw yourself out there and disrupt a speech like that you have to know that you are going to be subject to scrutiny and or being mocked. It was no doubt tense. And when Bush made jokes, he eased that tension." Before Bush's speech began, a group of 51 students and professors from Fletcher, Tufts' school of international affairs, expressed opposition to war in Iraq by distributing a letter to the media outlining the possible risks of military intervention. "We believe that a war of prevention against Iraq now is both strategically and morally unjustifiable and will set a dangerous international precedent that this country will eventually come to regret," the letter read.

---

News

Why the Cuban embargo should be lifted

February 26

Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) have introduced a bill to Congress to end the Cuban embargo, named the "United States-Cuba Trade Act of 2003." All I have to say is: It's about time. For the last forty years, the Cuban embargo has been an eyesore of US Foreign Policy on numerous levels. First and foremost, it has accomplished few of its goals. President John F. Kennedy began the embargo in October 1962 in order to punish Fidel Castro's regime for allowing the storage of Soviet nuclear arms in Cuba. Today, Castro is a billionaire and looks as though he will dictate Cuba until his deathbed. The embargo was supposed to place pressure on Castro to eventually reform the communist system in Cuba, promote democracy, and improve human rights. Today, Castro has a complete stronghold on all aspects of human life, the communist system still reigns, and the Cuban people have suffered immensely. One would think that after so many years of failure, politicians would rethink this ridiculous policy towards Cuba. The embargo did have a national security rationale during the Cold War, as America was trying to contain communism and prevent a nuclear catastrophe. However, the Cold War ended in 1991 when the Soviet Union ceased to exist. There is no more communist threat and the United States is the lone superpower of the world. So the embargo does not make sense in the post-Cold War world as it has outlived one of its main objectives by twelve years, quarantining countries allied with the Soviet Union. What is worse than the failure and illogicality of the embargo is that Cubans have suffered from it. For most of the past forty years, Cubans have been denied essential American food products and medical supplies, creating incredible hardships for the people. The Cuban economy has lost billions in potential revenue from being restricted from trading freely with the United States. Cuba is poor, dysfunctional country of 11 million people that poses absolutely no threat to us. So why continue these harsh sanctions that simply hurt innocent people? Americans have been hurt by the embargo as well, as a potential US multibillion dollar export industry in Cuba has been squandered to foreign firms and companies. The embargo restricts Americans' right to travel, a restriction that resembles the former Soviet Union's efforts to prevent their citizens from traveling to "problematic" countries. Proponents of the embargo argue that lifting the embargo would boost Castro's regime by giving him more access to money and power. On the contrary, Castro relies on the embargo as it gives him something to blame his country's problems on, even though most of Cuba's problems are the result of Castro's own failed past and present policies and alliances. Allowing free trade with and travel to Cuba would undermine Castro by preventing him from tacking his country's woes on the United States. In an age when the United States needs as many allies as possible, this embargo contributes to the way that many countries look at us scornfully as a bully who is unnecessarily harming his poor neighbor. We have far greater problems to deal with than worrying about whether US citizens are spending money in Cuba. It has taken far too long for the leaders of this country to rethink our policy towards Cuba and propose an end to the embargo. Although dealing with Iraq and terrorism is currently the priority of our government, a decision to lift the Cuban embargo in the near future would be a monumental change in the lives of Cubans, Cuban-Americans, and Americans. It would be a win-win situation for Cubans and Americans: cheap, high quality American goods such as food and medicine would circulate throughout Cuba and unique, cultural Cuban goods like cigars, clothing, and coffee would circulate throughout the United States. Both economies would improve, the quality of life would improve in Cuba, and Americans will benefit from being able to freely visit Cuba, a culturally rich, beautiful country with friendly, enthusiastic people. It is time, finally, to end this counterproductive, nonsensical, and immoral policy towards Cuba. Normalizing relations with Cuba will not perfect life on the island, yet it is an important departure from the failure of the embargo and a step towards a more sound United States foreign policy. Stephan Vitvitsky is a freshmen majoring in Political Science and enrolled in the five year-dual degree program with the Museum School.

---

News

Bush to deliver Fares Lecture today

February 25

Today's controversial second visit of 41st president George H.W. Bush for the Issam M. Fares Lecture will proceed regardless of protests, according to Tom Frechette, the former president's press and personal aid. "President Bush is coming. He will be there," Frechette said. Bush's arrival has sparked activists to plan demonstrations in protest of his actions as president and director of the Central Intelligence Agency. As many as 1,000 protestors from both Tufts and the Medford-Somerville community are expected to gather in Davis Square and march to the Gantcher Center, the site of Bush's speech. Bush has met with protests before and he may even address the protesters in today's speech, Frechette said. "He may make a comment on that or two, [about] how it's great that in America you can voice your opinion," he said. University administrators will also accept non-disruptive protests. "No one will be stopped from peacefully demonstrating outside of Gantcher, provided access to the facility is not restricted," University President Larry Bacow said in an e-mail to the student body last night. The e-mail also announced that there will be an open discussion about Bush's speech at 8 p.m. tonight in the Asean Auditorium in the Cabot Center. The discussion will be a "civil dialogue" for members of the Tufts community, moderated by University Chaplain David O'Leary, the e-mail said. Bush's speech, titled "Perspectives on the Middle East" will focus on issues of leadership, specifically dealing with Bush's experience as president, Frechette said. Bush will also speak about the Fares Center, the cause of his return to Tufts. Since Fares lecturers are invited to speak on issues related to public policy and the Middle East, Bush's speech will also touch on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the situation with Iraq. Bush's visit has incited controversy amongst both students and faculty. At a recent faculty meeting, some professors expressed dismay with the selection of Bush for the Fares Lecture. Others on campus have questioned why Bush was asked to speak for a second time. According to Frechette, Bush is "coming back to do the lecture series for his good friend, Mr. Fares, who Mr. Bush is very close with." Fares, the Deputy Prime Minister of Lebanon and a trustee emeritus of the University, financially supports the Fares Lecture every year. Though neither Bush's aides nor University administrators would comment on Bush's compensation for his appearance at Tufts, the former president was paid $80,000 for a similar speech at the University of Florida at Gainesville, according to the Independent Florida Alligator, the University of Florida's student daily. Security will be tight at the Gantcher Center tomorrow and though the Secret Service could not comment on specific protection efforts, a protection team will visit the site in advance and "determine manpower, equipment, hospitals, and evacuation routes for emergencies," according to the Secret Service's website. The Secret Service has established a command center and will work with local law enforcement to protect the former president. All members of the Tufts University Police Department (TUPD) will also be on hand to provide security for the event, according to TUPD Captain Mark Keith. The Medford Police Department has also blocked off all parking spaces in Gantcher's vicinity. Inside the building, attendees will be subject to metal detectors and any handbags may be searched. Backpacks, briefcases, containers, cameras, and signs will not be allowed. Stephen Liebowitz contributed to this article

---

---

News

Students paid to send spam e-mail

February 25

Spamming companies have been paying Tufts students to send unsolicited junk mail through their computers and the administration is beginning to consider taking disciplinary action against involved students. Companies "essentially tunnel into university networks by paying students $15 to $20 to $25 a month," explained Doug Herrick, the associate director of Data Network Operations for Tufts Computing and Communication Services (TCCS). The students downloaded programs to their computers that spammers used to relay mail. Early reports indicate that the students actively sought out the company and were not individually targeted. "Somehow these students found this sort of offer -- somewhere on the Internet," said John Fontana of the online magazine NetworkWorldFusion. "They just decided to sign on to this thing and see what... would happen." Use of the relaying software violates the University's Information Technology Responsible Use Policy. One student is currently in the beginning stages of the disciplinary process, and several others are suspected of participating in the scheme as well. The identities of all of the involved students are being kept confidential and a detailed account of the case will not be available until the process is over. Dean of Judicial Affairs Veronica Carter is handling the case for the Dean of Students Office. No decisions have been made as to the direction of the disciplinary process. "It has been referred to me but it has not been finalized," Carter said. Though only one student is currently under review, "other students have engaged in a similar arrangement" with spam companies to a lesser extent, said Lesley Tolman, TCCS's Director of Networks and Telecommunications. Aside from the possible disciplinary consequences, giving spamming companies access to their computers entails other dangers. The most frequently used program to spread spam, Mailsafe.exe, gives the company almost total access to the student's computer. "It really puts the student in jeopardy not knowing how their computer is being used," Herrick said. Relaying spam through university computers is "still a fairly new scam," Herrick said, and the scheme is hard to detect for a number of reasons. Since spamming companies go through electronic avenues not usually used for sending mail, the e-mails can be hard to track. Another difficulty in detecting the spam programs is the small size of the messages they send. Spam is often "small messages that point to a URL or have a graphic," Herrick said. These e-mails are also "not heavy enough volume to be detected" by TCCS's anti-spam techniques, Herrick said. The scheme was ultimately discovered at Tufts because the spamming company increased the volume of its messages. Given the small size of these spam e-mails, the University's high-speed Internet connection is probably not what attracted spammers to solicit students. Instead, spam companies seek out "groups that they know need the money, like students who will spread the word to their friends," Herrick said. The spamming scheme was fairly simple to shut down once it was detected, however. "We had complaints from people saying our domain was the source of spam," Tolman said in an article in NetworkWorldFusion. "We checked the logs, identified the IP address the spam was coming from, matched that with a [media access control] address and went to the kid's dorm room," she said. Herrick stressed the importance of identifying the source of the schemes because they "hide [the company's] identity and puts the focus on [Tufts]." TCCS is currently working to address the issue by improving search techniques. Even now, spam relayers are "not impossible to catch," Herrick said. "There will come a time fairly soon where we'll be able to anticipate it," he said. "We do a pretty good job of protecting our network."

---

News

Drug use on campus: a higher education

February 25

"[The drug scene] is not visible, and not nearly as visible as the drinking, for obvious reasons, but it's definitely present whether you see it or not," one sophomore said. According to the Tufts Police Department's (TUPD) Police Blotters for the past few months, many calls relate to loud parties and alcohol, but just as often, the department receives a call about illegal drug use. In fact, it is just as likely that the TUPD will file a complaint relating to "a strong smell of marijuana emanating from a dorm room" as they will about a group of drunk students being disruptive. More surprising to many others is the less visible, but active, drug scene on campus, involving the use of harder drugs, such as cocaine. Marijuana is the most frequently used illicit drug for college-aged students. According to the 2000 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, the 18-20 year old age group has the highest rate of current illegal drug use, with marijuana at the top of the list. Tufts students who use marijuana can find themselves in an increasing national percentage. A Harvard School of Public Health study of US college students concluded that marijuana use is rising. As of 1999, 15.7 percent of students claimed to have used marijuana in the previous month. According to a 2001 study by the Core Institute on Alcohol and Drug studies, that number went up, with about 20 percent of those students surveyed reporting having used marijuana at least once within the 30 days prior to the survey, while one to three percent of those surveyed had used another drug, be it cocaine, an amphetamines, a sedative, or a "designer drug." Marijuana use is reportedly highest at competitive northeastern colleges, such as Tufts, according to the survey. "I've never had any trouble getting weed. It is by far the most accessible drug on campus," one freshman said. "I think it's easier to get pot here [at Tufts] than on a lot of other campuses; the rules seem more lax, but it is difficult getting the harder stuff if you don't know the right people." The administration and Health Services see things slightly differently. "I would have no reason to believe that Tufts would be any different than any other institution relating to illegal drug use on campus," Health Services Director Michelle Bowlder said. "If you asked me which drugs were out there, I would probably say, we know that there's pot, and ecstasy, and other kinds of club drugs. And that there might be small amounts of other drugs used but I couldn't give you any numbers." Many students claim that marijuana serves as an alternative to alcohol, and is often more easily accessible on regular nights when there is not a party due to age restrictions on alcohol. Other students commented that it leaves them more in control of their actions than alcohol does. However, although marijuana seems to be the most popular and widespread drug on campus, there are a significant number of students who use other "harder" drugs, whether on an experimental basis or habitually. "Many students also use [cocaine] as a drug of choice, although less than weed. Coke is more for parties on campus et cetera, than it is for daily usage," one junior girl reported. Others agree that cocaine, though less commonly used than marijuana, is not hard to come by at Tufts. "Coke does have a larger presence than people realize, and it kind of goes along with the school because people here have money [and can afford to buy expensive drugs]," one sophomore said. Although Health Services declined to release statistics for confidentiality reasons, there have been reported cocaine-related incidents among students. "I have friends at [one fraternity] who have had pretty big problems with coke," one sophomore girl said. "I have seen people get pretty sick and they have to call TEMS. People will do [cocaine] before they go out and then drink and the combination is just not good." However, other students commented that cocaine is only popular among certain students, many freshman having never seen it used on campus. "We don't all have the money to indulge a cocaine habit. It's very expensive and even though a lot of people here have money, only a certain number have that kind of money," one student exclaimed. When asked about other drugs, the most popular response related to prescription drugs, such as Aderol and Ritalin -- two drugs that are commonly used to treat Attention Deficit Disorder by controlling hyperactivity. With the recent growth in prescription medications given to young adults, some students on campus sell or give their prescription drugs to friends, who proceed to mix it with alcohol. This combination greatly increases a student's chances of losing consciousness and can be deadly. One student said that he has given out his prescription drugs when he and his friends were drunk or when they needed to stay awake to study for an exam or write a paper. "Prescription [drugs] are used far too often on campus. From Ritalin, to Aderol to Vikadin," one junior said. "People use these drugs to concentrate when they're studying, or to enhance the effects of alcohol in their system. Either way it's stupid." One conception among university administrators, students, and parents is that fraternities are the sites of the most extensive and risky drug use and drug induced behavior, a controversial accusation that often upsets members of the Greek system. Some students, including members of the fraternities on campus, reported that drug use is just as likely to found in off-campus houses or dorm rooms. However, others reported that certain fraternities are notorious for their extensive drug use. "There is one fraternity that always has obscene amounts of [cocaine]. If you want to buy, you go there," one sophomore reported. The notion that drug use is widespread in the Greek system is may have some truth, but is limited. "Drugs are for sure used in frats on a weekly basis, but I don't think it's fair to lay the blame solely on the Greek system," one student said. "I know a fair share of students who are not affiliated with the Greek system and do drugs. Drugs on this campus are [very common] and everywhere." When asked if she has been a witness to or a participant in using drugs, the same student said, "I do come into contact with drugs quite often. Many times it's at off-campus parties. People smoke freely at parties, and do coke more in secret in bathrooms." According to the National Survey on Drug Abuse from the US Department of Health and Human Services, the percentage for annual usage of any type of illicit drug for full time college students is 36.1 percent, while any illicit drug besides marijuana is 15.6 percent. These percentages are slightly lower than those of people aged 18-21 who have not attended college, at 40.9 and 22.0 percent. "Any given night you can get a hold of drugs...usually you know someone who sells or your friends know someone. There's no central location but you can always get some," one freshman stated. A junior agreed that "If you don't have a friend that sells weed or coke, your friends do. There are a large amount of suppliers in our midst. But people like to keep their selling low-key." For students who wish to change their drug habits, Tufts does provide services to anyone who might need them. In addition, due to the recent departure of the Drug and Alcohol Abuse Counselor, Health Services is currently searching for someone to replace him. "Tufts has historically had a drug and alcohol counselor but I think that we would like to feel like our mental health professionals at Health Services and the Counseling Center are skilled enough to work with people with substance abuse problems," Bowdler said. "It's pretty rare that someone wants a referral for in-patient treatment but we know the available resources. We feel likes the best way to provide students with help is to assure them that their problems will be kept confidential, and that the most important thing is that they get help if they need it."

---

News

Zeta Psi closed temporarily

February 25

The University closed the Zeta Psi fraternity house to everyone except residents, in an agreement between the Dean of Students Office and Zeta Psi President Peter Schaefer, according to a press release from the Dean of Students Office. The closing comes after two intoxicated Zeta Psi pledges sustained head injuries after a party at the fraternity last Thursday night. Freshman Mark Phillips had only minor injuries, but freshman Sebastian Gonzalez suffered serious injuries, requiring him to spend four days in the intensive care unit of the Tufts New England Medical Center. Both Schaefer and Inter-Greek Council President Jessica Grasso declined to comment on the events surrounding the closing. Gonzalez is still in the hospital, but his father -- who flew into Boston from London following his son's injury -- said that there has been recent improvement in his condition and he has been moved out of intensive care. "The last several hours have been very encouraging," he said yesterday evening. Gonzalez, who suffered minor brain damage from his fall, is having trouble talking and will likely need speech therapy. Taking off the rest of the semester is an option, but Gonzalez's father said that they are waiting to see how the younger Gonzalez recovers. "We're not absolutely sure of [taking a semester off], but it's very possible," he said. "We're going to take it one day at a time." Zeta Psi will remain closed while the Dean of Students Office investigates "issues of possible underage drinking and possible hazing," Dean of Students Bruce Reitman said in the press release sent out yesterday afternoon. Reitman also said he will be working with the Tufts Police Department to "ask a lot of questions of those who attended the party." Gonzalez's father said that he feels mistakes were made, and that underage drinking is not acceptable. "There are some problems here, and we'll try to sort them out with the fraternity and try to make sure they don't happen again," he said. He also said that he had had "an open and frank discussion" with Reitman about the issue. In the meantime, no Zeta Psi brothers, pledges, and visitors will be allowed in the fraternity house at 80 Professors Row except for its 17 residents, and all alcohol on the premises has been removed. The Universities' policies have become much stricter since MIT and Phi Gamma Delta (PhiG) were forced to pay millions of dollars to the family of Scott Krueger, an MIT freshman pledge who died from alcohol poisoning after a PhiG party. PhiG settled with the Krueger family last November for $1.75 million. President Larry Bacow, and administrator at MIT at the time of the incident, said in the Daily last week that Krueger's death has "affected every university" and their policies. Several students have already visited the hospital this year for injuries sustained while intoxicated during the Naked Quad Run last semester. The injuries ranged from cuts and abrasions to a broken ankle and a chin laceration, and one sophomore remained unconscious until 7 a.m. the day after the run due to acute alcohol poisoning. Bacow also said last week that instances such as this year's Naked Quad Run show that alcohol use on campus needs to be managed to keep students safe.

---

News

Afro Cuban jazz festival leaves crowd tapping

February 25

On the same stage where proud Tufts actresses had given their impassioned Vagina Monologues one week earlier, stately Afro-Cuban women in colorful dresses and headscarves danced and shimmied last weekend to an audience full of Tufts students and Latin Americans from the surrounding area. The women were part of a Puerto Rican Bomba group called Celia Ayala y su Ballet Folklorico Cultural, one of Boston's leading exponents of Puerto Rican bomba, and its members span three generations of lead singer Celia Ayala's family. Ballet Folklorico was the first of a three-part music festival that featured Cuban and West African traditions. This first performance proved the most outstanding of the three, despite the fact that the group is based in Boston. Three drummers and four vocalists accompanied Ayala as she sashayed about the stage, barefoot as the women dancers around her. Her seven and a half year old granddaughter could shimmy and wiggle her hips as well as any of the other women onstage, and was often given the spotlight. While I was struck by how quickly Cohen's stage was transformed into the site of a street festival, thanks to the bright costumes and the lighting, the atmosphere would have been greatly enhanced were the audience allowed to dance along. Despite encouragement to clap from the dancers onstage, the house lacked energy and the darkness wasn't helping. A fellow audience member remarked that this festival was to appreciate the culture added to our music by West African slaves, and the audience was not able to participate in the dancing. This dancing, which involved holding water jugs at some points; told stories at other points; and was geared visually toward fellow dancers as well as to the audience, seemed out of its element -- even exploitative -- on an auditorium stage. The second two acts were easier to watch without my feet or idealism itching. The first was called Joel Larue Smith and Mambo Libre, a combination of Cuban music and New York jazz that had the perkiness of Salsa and the muffled smoothness of a Manhattan jazz club. Smith is an accomplished and talented piano player, who happens to be lecturer of Music/Jazz and Jazz Theory in the Music Department music faculty here at tufts. He led his band in an energizing performance. Feeling a little less inhibited now that the fantastic shimmiers were no longer onstage, a few friends and I decided to be our cultured selves and dance at the back of Cohen. No one joined in, but hey, at least we tried. And these musicians, particularly the electric bass-player Smith, certainly deserved our most valiant efforts at expression. The third set was Tango from Argentina, sung by the Katie Viqueira Group. Katie Viqueira is a prominent Argentinian figure in the Boston Latin music scene, but her deep voice, impeccable expressions, and suggestive pelvic activity weighed more heavily than the Globe review quotes listed in the program. Her love for performing was obvious, not only during the songs but in her descriptions of each song before she sang it. Unlike most of the other performers, she did not speak all in Spanish, and so I was able to appreciate the song introduction in which she claimed the lyricist was telling her own story because the song was about "a South American who fell in love with New England." She paused for effect, then emphasized, "New England." The audience chuckled appreciatively while she took another sip of her Dasani and flipped the page of her music. The concert's attendance was impressive, due most likely to the fair number of flyers that advertised the event around campus. The event was organized by Joel Larue Smith, and was sponsored by a broad range of departments as well as the president, provost, and various deans of the university. I would declare the event a success, but my toes are still a bit itchy. Next year, perhaps, it should be in Jackson Gym.

---

News

A liberal's case for war in Iraq

February 25

I would like to take this opportunity to offer a general response to the many Viewpoints of late that have been decidedly "anti-war." First I want to make clear that the argument that I am about to put forth is not one that came to me overnight. I have gone back and forth on this complex question for the past six months and I'll be the first to admit that this is not a cut and dry issue. I will, however, offer the two major reasons that I think that war is in fact necessary. In 1945, the nations of the world came together to create the United Nations. This organization was to exist for the primary purpose of preventing world conflicts and keeping the peace. All member nations joined this organization willingly and agreed to abide by its mandates -- this goes for the United States as well as Iraq. And while I know that many critics will be quick to announce that the United States isn't exactly perfect in following the mandates of the United Nations, the United States, to the best of my knowledge, did not invade Mexico 13 years ago whereas Iraq did invade Kuwait 13 years ago. And at that time the United Nations agreed -- amidst worldwide protests from some -- that a coalition was needed to use military force to oust Iraq from Kuwait. The United Nations (this even includes France, Germany, Belgium, China, and Russia) agreed following the Gulf War that Iraq needed to disarm and that a group of UN selected scientists should verify Iraq's disarmament. That, at its most basic, was the last that the UN had to say about Iraq. Since the end of the Gulf War in 1991, Saddam Hussein has offered token cooperation here and there. He's destroyed this stockpile and that stockpile while giving the UN verifiers the run around at countless other sites. If you own 50 guns when you're supposed to own none, does destroying 2 of them mean that you've destroyed all your guns? Of course not. Saddam has never come clean. The UN knew what weapon stockpiles he had at the end of the Gulf War and they know that he has not been able, even to this day, to account for many of these. The United Nations, the organization that every member has joined willingly, demanded that Saddam Hussein disarm and they have passed resolution after resolution reiterating this demand over the past decade. Yet he has still refused to disarm. If you don't think there is a need for him to disarm in the first place, then your complaint is not with President Bush but is with the United Nations. For it was the latter that demanded this, President Bush is simply looking at the situation and quite reasonably asking the United Nations, where's the beef? What good are the resolutions of the United Nations if they cannot enforce them? It would be like having speed limit signs on American highways without any cops to pull people over. And to those who argue that more time and more verifiers are necessary, I ask: what good would either do? Secretary Powell made an airtight case before the Security Council two weeks ago that more verifiers and more time would do no good without more cooperation from Saddam Hussein. Imagine 100 UN scientists searching Boston for weapons hidden in basements and underground bunkers. They wouldn't find a thing -- and let's not forget that these verifiers aren't even checking basements and bunkers, they're looking at factories, warehouses, military bases, and former weapons sites and Saddam Hussein knows this. They couldn't possibly search every basement. Now imagine those same 100 inspectors searching all of Massachusetts or all of California (a state that is roughly equal in size to Iraq). Without Saddam Hussein voluntarily disclosing the location of these weapons, it is clear that 100 verifiers could not find the weapons if given 1,000 years. I see no reason why 200, 300, or even 50,000 verifiers would fair any better. Still, I'm sure that many would say: so what? Who cares if Iraq has weapons? Well, first, I think Kuwait would care. And Syria. And Iran. And Israel. And Turkey. But we should also care, not because Iraq poses an imminent threat to the United States -- and I wholly believe that it does not pose such a threat, no matter how much President Bush tries to convince me otherwise-but because we should all support the noble experiment that is the United Nations. The United Nations truly represents a new liberal world order but it has been proving itself ineffective and impotent in the face of crisis. If it does not act soon regarding Iraq, I fear that it may be signing onto its own demise. For the League of Nations eventually disintegrated for the same reason: it was incapable of dealing with crisis. I will also contend that apart from the "legal" argument as supported by Iraq's non-compliance with UN resolutions, there is clearly and without a doubt a humanitarian crisis in Iraq. Some will argue that the United States is somehow responsible for the economic sanctions on Iraq and thus for the starvation of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. But let us not forget that these sanctions are mandated by the United Nations, not the United States. And if the rest of the world community recognized a need to lift sanctions and resume normal trade with Iraq, then it would do so. A clear example of this is Cuba. The United States is virtually isolated in its continued sanctions of Cuba and has been rightly condemned for that by many. The United Nations agrees to continue sanctions against Iraq until it disarms, again, until it complies with the UN mandates issued at the end of the Gulf War. And while this policy of economic strangulation has not been a success, Saddam Hussein could have put an end to this many years ago. He has not, and only he should be held responsible. He was the one, after all, that invaded his neighbor. Moreover, Saddam Hussein has executed tens of thousands of political dissidents and prisoners over the past twenty years that he's been in power. So if you will discount my argument that Saddam Hussein needs to go to alleviate the starvation of the Iraqi people, then at least I hope that you will recognize the need for Saddam Hussein to go to alleviate the torture and cold-blooded murder of Iraqi political dissidents. I think that it is a moral imperative for all nations of the world to put an end to the suffering of the Iraqi people. I do not profess to know what the Iraqi people desire. But I will take it upon myself to make the assumption that under Saddam Hussein's regime they have no choice as to realizing their desires, whatever they may be. It is my hope that an invasion of Iraq will swiftly remove Saddam Hussein and the loyal members of his regime. I hope that with the world's support the Iraqi people can then once again reclaim the country that is rightfully theirs. Only then can they even dream of having what they want. And this should have been the goal a decade ago. I do question the timing of President Bush "bringing Iraq to the table" and I discount his two main arguments for going to war (that Iraq is an imminent threat and that it is linked to al-Qaeda). I also have found his cowboy diplomacy over the past six months or more to be abhorrent. But I think that it is time to stop quibbling and time to unite in our support of the liberation of the Iraqi people. The United Nations has before them the chance to do just that, and I think it is clear, albeit unfortunate, that only by way of military force can the world community dislodge Saddam Hussein. Adam Schultz is a junior majoring in History and Political Science.

---

News

Coffee buzz

February 25

"Every time you buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks, two people are getting screwed: you and the coffee farmer." It went on to state that even though coffee prices are currently very low, Starbucks has kept its prices sky high. To qualify as Fair Trade coffee, its buyer must: 1) pay a minimum price per pound of $1.26, 2) provide credit to farmers, and 3) provide technical assistance such as help transitioning to organic farming (to read more, go to http://www.globalexchange.org/economy/coffee/). The market price for a pound of coffee is more like 50 cents. So Fair Trade coffee costs much more. The buyer pays more and has to provide benefits to the farmers in addition. What should this do to demand for Fair Trade coffee? Not surprisingly, supply curves are upward sloping (in almost all cases). That is to say, when something costs more, people buy less of it. Is coffee any different? I didn't have any reason to assume so, so I went digging deeper into the website. Sure enough, I found this piece of information: The Fair Trade Labeling Organizations International recently released figures that show a total production by groups on the Fair Trade Coffee Register of 165,000,000 pounds in year 2000, whereas total sales were only 30,000,000 pounds. This leaves an additional 135,000,000 pounds of Fair Trade coffee produced by cooperatives that are not receiving a Fair Trade price. That is to say, there is not enough demand to buy up the supply of Fair Trade coffee at the Fair Trade price. There is a surplus of Fair Trade coffee. The result is either that coffee farmers hold on to this coffee without selling it, which would be very costly, or sell it at a lower price, bringing their price closer to the market price. This is in fact why the price of coffee is so low right now. Supply has been increasing for some years, because coffee farms have raised their productivity. Again, demand curves are downward sloping. When a good is less scarce (the quantity supplied goes up), the price goes down. This is what has been happening in the coffee industry. The Oxfam website admits as much: "The underlying cause of the crisis in world coffee prices is readily apparent. Coffee production is consistently outstripping consumption, with the result that excess stocks are driving down prices," (http://www.oxfam.org.hk/english/news/previous/coffee_paper.doc). Eventually, prices will go down far enough that growing coffee isn't profitable anymore. What happens then? Well then it's time to find something else to do. If there isn't demand for what you're supplying, supply something else. The same story explains why agriculture has been declining as a portion of US GDP for the last two hundred years. It's not because we're bad at it _ it's because we're so good at it. Productivity growth has been such that using new capital and technology, one worker today can produce many times more than that same worker 25 years ago. So we can either produce the same amount with far fewer workers, produce much more with the same amount of workers, or somewhere in between. And we have fallen somewhere in between -- we produce more agricultural goods, but with fewer workers (and less land). The remaining workers have moved on, first to the manufacturing sector, which for a long while was growing as a portion of US GDP, but now is declining because of the same type of productivity growth, then to the service economy, which is growing as a portion of US GDP. The problem is that these transitions, while necessary in the long run, are painful in the short run. They are painful to US farmers who can't pay off their debts and have to change their way of life, move to the city, and acquire new skills. They are even more painful to Kenyan or Columbian coffee farmers who have no welfare system to rely on, no savings because they didn't make very much in the first place when coffee prices were higher, and fewer avenues through which to acquire new skills and new employment. What's the solution? In the US, we have an elaborate safety net to help cushion this blow. Part of the New Deal was a system of production quotas for farmers, so that many farmers leave large tracts of land unplanted and receive a check from the government for doing so. This is intended to limit supply to keep the price up. The US government also buys large supplies of grain each year and distributes it through USAID and PL 480. This may keep the price of grain up, but it's fighting a battle against history. It is no long term solution. In addition, it distorts the allocation of resources and creates glaring inefficiencies -- such as perfectly good, fertile land, left unplanted. This is the kind of solution that Oxfam proposes -- "The obvious solution is to bring supply back into line with demand and to stabilise prices at more remunerative levels." But Kenya and Columbia probably don't have the political and economic resources to maintain such a system. It is also undesirable and untenable in the long run. The only long run solution is to provide new opportunities for employment, and that takes more than a 1000 word article, especially in countries like Kenya and Columbia where the problems are so deep and vast. Fighting against supply and demand is a tough battle to wage. Supply and demand are big bullies and never take no for an answer. In the end, you'll have to work with them and not against them.

---

News

Protein shakes are a useful workout aid

February 25

I get picked on a lot at school because of my diminutive stature. I want to start bulking up, and Big Dave in the gym said I should start taking protein shakes. What kind should I get? Do they all taste terrible, or can I find on that I actually wouldn't mind drinking? -- Ian S. in Lewis Hall I ran a column on protein shakes last year, so I will reprint it again for your benefit. Here it is: Protein shakes should be a stable supplement to any aspiring bodybuilder/fitness buffs program. While I will not get into the individual types of protein (casein, whey, soy, etc.), there are definitely different types of protein shakes, each designed to do different things. The first type is the simple protein shake. By this I mean a shake that is almost exclusively protein, with few or no carbohydrates, and little or no fat. While this shake is great to keep muscle from breaking down, it is not necessarily for the building of muscle. Because of its low carb content, these shakes are often very low in calories. Therefore, a straight protein shake should be taken either between meals to keep your protein intake up during the day or at night when you are trying to cut carbs. My favorite brand of this type is Iso-Pur. The protein is very bioavailable, and each shake is fat free and carbohydrate free. In one serving, you can take in 40 grams of protein. The taste of these shakes is also really good. I had an "Icy Orange" the other day and was thoroughly impressed with the fact that it actually tasted orangey. The second type of protein shake is one designed to add mass. This is the type I would recommend for you. Usually, these types of shakes will come in huge tubs, sometimes up to ten pounds or more. The caloric content of these shakes is much higher than a regular protein shake. In one serving you can take in as much as 50g protein, 80g carbohydrates, and only 8g of fat. One serving (usually four scoops) can dump as many as 600 calories into your system. These types of shakes are usually pretty difficult to drink. The richness makes the shake itself incredibly thick. One brand that I tried recently, MyoMass, was so thick that I almost had to eat it with a spoon. Combine a protein shake that is as thick as paste with a terrible taste, and you truly have an unpleasant mass-building experience. My personal choice for this type of protein shake is N-Large, by Prolab. Both vanilla and chocolate are palatable, and the shake itself is relatively thin, enabling you to drink it fairly rapidly without having to take a breather after every gulp. These types of shakes can be taken in place of meals, but are designed to be taken in between meals, as well as prior to bed in order to increase mass. The third type of protein shake is meant specifically for meal replacement (MRP). These shakes tend to have a specific balance of carbs and protein, and are usually low in fat. A typical MRP might have 35g or so of protein, maybe 50g of carbs, and 5-10g of fat. These tend to have a fairly high caloric content, from 400-500 calories per serving. The main difference between these shakes and the other two are the extra vitamins and minerals that are added in order to make sure you get all the benefits of a well-rounded meal. That is not to say that other protein shakes are lacking in vitamins; if you look on most labels you'll find all sorts of exotic vitamins and minerals that are supposed to help you build muscle. MRPs just have the more essential and less exotic vitamins and minerals such as riboflavin and calcium. As far as personal recommendations, sorry, but I don't really have any. I have never used MRPs because I enjoy eating real food too much. I couldn't bear skipping a good meal in favor of a drinkable one. In the search for a protein shake that fits your personal needs, I have this to say -- make sure that it tastes okay; drinking some nauseating mixture every day will not be conducive to further pursuit of your fitness goals. Also make sure that the shakes aren't too expensive. After all, you will probably be consuming one or two a day, if you are serious about it. That may come out to be three or four dollars per day, if you buy one of the more expensive shakes. And lastly, buy in bulk. Not only does this save trips back and forth to the local supplement store, but it also saves money. With that said, good luck in your quest to find your own perfect protein powder.

---

News

It's fantasy baseball time

February 25

On Feb. 13 pitchers and catchers reported to spring training. The regular season is almost two months away, but it is almost time to draft your fantasy team. And baseball is the king of fantasy sports. With unparalleled statistical categories and positional depths, it is the most complicated fantasy competition out there. What is fantasy? It's every sports fan's dream. You enter a league with your buddies, you draft your own teams out of a pool of all the players, and then you have six months to negotiate trades, talk smack, and lead your team to victory. Competition in rotisserie leagues involves the stats your team accrues based upon the real time performance of your players. For instance, let's say Barry Bonds is on my team and I'm playing him in the outfield tonight, when he hits two homeruns I get to add those to my fantasy totals. The best team will have the highest combined fantasy totals across the board. Basically, you are given the powers of the GM for your very own team. You think you know better than Theo Epstein? Show it with your fantasy team. Go ahead, propose a trade for Bartolo Colon that his team owner can't refuse. To win your league, you must really know baseball: who's on a hot streak, who will benefit from a real-life trade, who is headed towards injury, and most importantly, who should be drafted at the beginning of the season. Today, I'll be focusing on position players. The key to any team's offense this year will be its infield. While many outfielders can contribute to the traditional offensive categories (HR, RBI, AVG., SB, R), good offensive infielders, particularly second basemen and shortstops, are hard to get your hands on. For this reason, Alex Rodriguez and Alfonso Soriano should go first and second in every draft. A-Rod's numbers are ridiculous (57 HR-142 RBI-.300 AVG in 2002), and he does it all from shortstop. And Soriano? He's not a fluke. This guy may swing at everything, but he's got tons of protection and will get the green light from the Yankees to steal tons of bases. With consistent power and improved discipline, Soriano, as a second baseman, will be every fantasy manager's dream. Another great middle infielder is Miguel Tejada (34-131-.308), last year's American League MVP, who is without a fantasy weakness and I think is worthy of being a first-round pick. The top of the draft has a lot of great players available, but what you want from your first pick is an edge. That's why I'd take Jeff Kent ahead of Vladimir Guerrero, Sammy Sosa, and Bonds. While Barry and Sammy may hit 10 to 25 more home runs than Kent, no second baseman (other than Soriano) will come close to his production. This will give you a tremendous advantage over the other players in your league at second base. Plus, Kent is now hitting in a Houston Astros lineup between Lance Berkman and Jeff Bagwell. Also, Minute Maid Park in Houston is a launching pad for hitters. My exception to this pick is if walks or OBP count in your league, you have to take Bonds if you get the chance. Other position players worth mentioning -- Albert Pujols is still eligible at third in most leagues, so he should be an early second round pick. Fellow third basemen Troy Glaus and Eric Chavez will have big power, but will annoy you with inconsistency and poor average. Do not waste a good draft pick on Shea Hillenbrand, but do believe in the fantasy value of shortstops Scott Rolen; Nomar Garciaparra and Derek Jeter. Edgar Renteria in St. Louis will rise in value with more steals and RBI to go with his high average, and the Rockies' Jose Hernandez could hit 30 HRs at Coors. At second base, look for Ray Durham, who will be scoring tons of runs in San Francisco, and Florida's Luis Castillo, who may steal 50. A sleeper could be Todd Walker hitting doubles into the Fenway gap. At first base, Todd Helton won't be going long anymore, but still could win a batting title. Paul Konerko will never see fantasy stardom like he did in the first half of 2002, and the king at first is still Jason Giambi. Rising stars Raul Ibanez, Derrek Lee, or Josh Phelps could be valuable late draft picks. As far as catcher, let the token Mets fan in your league waste an early pick on Mike Piazza, and then get yourself a hyped rookie like Toby Hall or minor league phenom Victor Martinez and hope for the best. I almost busted-a-gut when Benito Santiago ended up fantasy's fifth best catcher.

---

News

Student believes Bush protest will embarrass University

February 25

I am afraid that this week will mark the first time I am embarrassed to say I attend Tufts University. When I chose Tufts, what appealed to me the most was the seeming open-mindedness of the faculty and student body. However, I have seen through this year's Fares lecture that much of the Tufts campus has lost its ability to value diversity and alternative views. The planned protests surrounding this year's Fares lecture are going to be an embarrassment to us all. We are fortunate to have any past president willing to speak at our school, and no matter how one feels about Bush's politics, we owe him the respect to listen and learn from what he has to say. At an intellectual institution like Tufts, I would expect that those who disagree with Bush's views would submit a challenging question forcing him to defend his opinions or simply not attend the lecture at all. As the president of Tufts Republicans, I think it is fair to say that I am not a huge Bill Clinton fan. However, I attended his lecture last year, and though I didn't agree with much of what he said, I learned a lot and have used what I disagreed with constructively to support my opinions. I am ashamed that so many other members of the Tufts campus do not have the decency and intellectual ability to see the importance of respect and appreciation for alternative opinions. As for the faculty, I can't imagine why they are unable to see this year's lecturer as "intellectual diversity." Clearly these professors are liberal-minded, so we are not getting such political diversity in the classroom, and considering last year's lecturer, students are surely bound to hear a different voice on the Middle East this year. So what's not diverse about George Bush, Sr. coming to Tufts? I think it is fair to recognize that conservative viewpoints are the least heard and encouraged at Tufts, and it is surely diversity to have a conservative speaker as the Fares lecturer, regardless of anyone's opinion on what he might say. I beg anyone, faculty or student, who is planning to tarnish the reputation of Tufts this year at the Fares lecture to spare us the embarrassment and stay home. Anne Siarnacki (LA '05) President of Tufts Republicans

---

News

Speech isn't a debate

February 25

Though there will undoubtedly be protests today voicing displeasure with the selection of former President Bush as this year's Fares lecturer, many of these detractors are missing the point. An open dialogue with Bush would certainly be desirable, but it cannot be accomplished with the size of the Gantcher audience. Any kind of rigorous "democratic debate" would have to take place with a much smaller group, which would preclude many from attending the event. The University is not and cannot make political endorsements of any kind. It is simply not political favoritism to expose students to one of most influential individuals in recent US history. But consider if Tufts did cancel the lecture. Could that just as easily be construed as an anti-war stance by the University? If students feel the annual lecture series often leans too far toward those affiliated with the past two Republican presidencies, then they need to convince the University to re-examine its role both in selecting Fares lectures and hosting the event each year. This is not necessarily a task to be undertaken during the weeks leading up to the lecture, only to be forgotten about until the next controversial speaker is chosen. Those opposed to the Fares series should be continually committed to changing the traditional selection process. The TCOWI is right, however, to challenge the University's limited question session following the lecture. It is not worth having questions at all if they are pre-screened for political content. Tufts students should be trusted to ask questions of Bush at the event and give him the respect due a former President, but they should also be able to ask pointed questions about policies under his administration. If there remain those who would use the opportunity to present their own political positions, however, Tufts should simply discontinue the format. President Bacow is to be commended for providing an opportunity for open debate among students and faculty of Tufts following Bush's lecture as well as indicating that he will not try to stop protests outside Gantcher. Freedom of expression and exchange of ideas is critical to put Bush's lecture in perspective. Whether you question his motives or not, the truth is that Bush was the main player in the previous skirmish with Saddam Hussein. His lecture may be a one-sided affair, but his experience and insights cannot be discounted. Listening to the speech does not make anyone anti-war, pro-war, Republican, or Democrat. But it may make some of us think a bit more.

---

News

Let's think harder about (not) canceling classes

February 25

I know it's a bit late in the game, but I'd like to propose a new mission for the Task Force on the Undergraduate Experience. Before reorganizing Tufts into a series of residential colleges, expanding the writing requirements, or otherwise improving the scholarly interaction between students and faculty, I suggest the Task Force set its sights lower. How much lower? Let's start here: we need to dispel the notion that "education" happens only in the classroom, and only when time in the classroom is devoted to whatever happens to be on the syllabus for that day. To read the recent punditry addressing the call for faculty to cancel classes the day after a US military invasion of Iraq, one might think a Tufts education is a very limited (and limiting) thing. If that's not an idea worth debunking -- via Task Force if necessary -- I don't know what is. Let me be clear. The question of canceling classes in response to a US military action is plenty complicated, and I make no claim to having sorted out the issues. But, really, there have to be better arguments against it than the notion that students' tuition is wasted if professors stray from the lesson plan for a day. Somehow, though, that claim seems to have floated to the top of the recent op-ed and editorial criticisms in the Daily. Indeed, if most Tufts students take such a narrow view of what their money and time here buys them, then I suggest we cancel classes for a day to discuss that dire state of affairs, war in Iraq be damned! Before the obsession over costs-per-class becomes the defining way to think about the wisdom of an action like that proposed by the Tufts Coalition to Oppose War on Iraq (TCOWI), let's pause to think through some implicit assumptions of this perspective and their implications. We can start with a suggestion, one I admit is a bit selfish, or at least faculty-centric: be careful what you wish for. Many faculty (the vast majority, I'd hazard to guess) see class-time as a small fraction of their responsibilities to students. My calendar and my days, at least, are dominated by other interactions with students, and I'm quite sure I'm no outlier on this front. To reduce the faculty's educational role to only the time spent in class demeans the efforts we expend in other settings. Should we instead close our doors (literally and figuratively)? Decline to talk about career plans, suggestions for internships, ways to navigate the road ahead? Or, how about those letters of recommendation? There's something to think about, for all you reductionists out there. Does anyone think those tuition dollars are going to get you the kind of letters that help you, if all that matters -- and, hence, all you get -- is face-time with a professor in a classroom setting? Posing the issue in these terms risks being misread as just another self-pitying (and tired) assistant professor. Do not misunderstand me. The problem, from my view, is not the many interactions and commitments outside the classroom. Truth be told (we can tell the truth here, right?), these are the things that sustain many of us. Rather, the problem is how easily -- and wrongly -- these other facets of life here are discounted (OK, ignored) by those who want to reduce their education to terms captured by the simple-minded calculation of tuition dollars per class. At its core, that sort of reductionist mindset begs a question seldom made explicit, but one that deserves to be laid bare: if the returns on students' tuition dollars are reducible solely to time spent book-learnin' in the classroom, then should it ever be OK to depart from the regularly scheduled programming during class time? The true-believers, with fingers poised on their calculator buttons, always at the ready to translate their tuition bills into cost-per-class terms, may well say "No." They may even see that as a principled response. Principles, though, tend to be easiest to cling to in the abstract. So, let's get specific. Should Tufts' faculty have gone on with business as usual in the immediate aftermath of 9/11? It's a point worth considering, no? I don't recall much outrage over the wasted tuition dollars when many professors (rightly, in my opinion) chose to depart from regular lesson plans in the first hours and days after the tragedies of 9/11. If memory serves, in fact, such ad-libs were encouraged by the Tufts administration. So what, exactly, are the differences between the two cases in question, and what makes these differences meaningful, at least to those among us at peace with the 9/11 response but at odds with the TCOWI proposal? Just a few questions, framed, I hope, to help folks think about the issues in broader terms (we don't really want to divert the Task Force from its already ambitious work, do we?). Now, please, discuss. And if you want to do that during class time, it's fine by me. Gary McKissick is an assistant professor in the Political Science Department and Community Health Program.

---

News

Swimmers take sixth at NESCAC Championships

February 25

It had been a year in coming for junior Mika Sumiysoshi. Last year at the NESCAC Championships, the junior swimmer was ill, but still managed to qualify for three events at Nationals, taking third in the 200 IM, second in the 400 IM, and fifth in the 200-yard backstroke. While she acheived personal bests in each race, she was still not satisfied. "My goal for the year is to make Nationals, but place better than i did last year," Sumiyoshi said at the beginning of the year. "I was sick and injured for much of the season last year." Sumiyoshi not only achieved her goal, but accomplished something no Tufts swimmer had done since 1998 -- winning a NESCAC Individual Championship. At the end of the weekend she took home two individual titles in the 200 and 400 IM races. She also took fourth in the 200-yard backstroke, thus improving in every event. On Friday, Sumiyoshi took the 200 IM in 2:08.09. She swam to victory almost a second faster than anyone else in the conference, and her time was over two seconds faster than last year's time. In the 400 IM the following day Sumiyoshi again almost bested her nearest opponent by two seconds, finishing in 4:32.62. Her times also qualified her for the NCAA Championships in both events. Sumiyoshi will again have company at nationals thanks to sophomore Erica Weitz. Weitz qualified for the second straight year in the 400 IM, taking eighth over the weekend. Her time, 4:40.39, was not the fastest time she ever clocked in the event, but it was good enough to qualify. The 400 IM had one of the most talented group of competitors amongst all the races, with a total of ten swimmers qualifying for a berth at Nationals in the race. Weitz also took sixth in the 200-yard butterfly, but did not qualify for the event at Nationals, missing the mark by less than half a second. Electing not to swim in the 200 IM this year, an event in which she qualified for Nationals last year, Weitz instead took to the waters in the 500 yard freestyle on Friday. There she swam for sixth, and again just missed a qualifying time. Throughout the weekend the Jumbos found themselves in a dogfight with Bates and Colby for fifth through seventh places. With two events left to go on Sunday the teams were separated by less than ten points, an incredibly small margin considering that a first place individual finish is awarded 32 points. Bates was leading Tufts by one point, 806 to 805, while Colby was ready to pounce if either team slipped up, standing at 798.5 points. In the end it was Bates who won the battle, finishing with 927 points. Tufts took sixth for the second straight year with 875 points, ahead of Colby's 857.5 points. Williams won its third NESCAC Championship by well over 300 points, keeping the title for the third straight year. Taking second through fourth were Middlebury, Amherst, and Hamilton, respectively. For the most part the standings were similar to last year's. "We had unbelievable efforts from the whole team," coach Nancy Bigelow said. "Although swimming is largely an individual sport, we had a really exciting battle with both Bates and Colby till the end." Competing in her first NESCAC Championship, freshman Meghan Wallach made an immediate impact with a fourth place finish on Friday in the 50 yard butterfly. Then, on Saturday, she took sixth in the 100 yard butterfly in a personal best 1:00.36. All news was not good for Wallach, however, as she just missed out on her ticket to the NCAA Championships. In order to qualify for the event Wallach had to swim 1:00.29 or better. To finish the weekend she competed in the 100 yard IM and took fourth place once more.

---

News

Speechwriter speaks on UN's treatment of Israel

February 25

When it comes to Israel, "We don't expect that the UN can act fairly and impartially" Ben Harris told an audience of Tufts students Monday. It may seem a pretty grim view, considering Harris is the current speechwriter and assistant spokesperson for the Israeli Mission to the United Nations. Harris, who contributes to all the speeches given by Israel's representatives to the UN, delivered a predictably pro-Israel viewpoint, although he expressed some empathy for the Arab point of view. Harris theorized that what he called unfair treatment of Israel by the UN stemmed from Israel being blocked from membership in the Asian regional group by nearby Arab states. Israel is the only UN member that does not belong to one of five geographic groups. Harris said the UN has been unable to impose peace in the Middle East. He explained that the organization's main function must be to grant legitimacy to peace proposals between the state of Israeli and the Palestinian Authority. According to Harris, part of the problem between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is that the Palestinian agenda consists of trying to "make trouble for Israel." He said "the Palestinians continue to view themselves as the sole victims and Israel as the sole aggressor." He also said the Arab community has yet to accept Israel's claim to territory acquired from the Israeli-Arab wars. "Israel is not going to give back land to gain legitimacy," Harris said. "Both of us have rights, both of us have grievances," he said. "The only way to solve the problem is to sit down at a table and talk." Despite the limited role he sees for the UN in solving the problem with the Palestinians, Harris explained that Israel has maintained a relationship with the United Nations in part because international perception of UN approval is so positive. He mentioned the Bush administration, which has had to make an attempt -- or at least a pretense of one -- to gain the organization's support before mobilizing in Iraq. Harris believes Israel can improve its treatment by the UN by becoming more active in non-political, uncontroversial areas. "It would be helpful for Israel to build relations in forums that are not bitter," he said. Harris' speech, entitled "Israel and the UN: A Voice from Inside," was sponsored by Friends of Israel, in cooperation with the University Student Division of the Hagshama Department of the World Zionist Organization. Harris addressed the peculiarity of talking about peace at a time when terrorism is prominently on the national conscience, war with Iraq is a very real possibility, and there is diminished hope for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. In addition to his speechwriting, Harris is the former editor-in-chief of It Magazine, a Jerusalem-based English language publication, and he has written for The Jerusalem Post.

---

News

Administrators say profs shouldn't participate in moratorium

February 25

The administration recently urged professors to rethink plans to suspend classes for a day if the United States wages war against Iraq. In a memo sent to all faculty members, Dean of Arts & Sciences Susan Ernst and Dean of Engineering Vincent Manno wrote: "We write to remind all faculty of your obligation to offer your regularly scheduled classes." Though Ernst and Manno stressed that missing class was not appropriate, they encouraged professors' participation in discussions outside of class and said they should find other ways to protest the war if they were opposed to it. The organizers of the moratorium, members of the Tufts Coalition to Oppose War on Iraq (TCOWI), are also planning a teach-in at Goddard Chapel, which administrators have encouraged. "A teach-in is perfectly within professors' rights and responsibilities as a faculty member," Ernst and Manno said in the memo. Though at least 12 professors have agreed to suspend classes the day after war is declared, many professors will choose to discuss current events without canceling class. "I did want to do something to respond to war," history professor Steven Marrone said. "If war comes up I plan on taking the time in class to talk about it. My students and I have already scheduled discussion time outside of class." Originally, there was some concern that professors might try to impress their ideas on unwilling students. The memo from administrators reminds professors that "members of the Tufts community will have differing views that should be respected within the classroom." Although the administration has now specifically asked professors to remain in class in the event of a teach-in, it is unclear how they would respond if professors ignore that request. "I think that it is inappropriate to talk about punishment before anything has happened," Ernst said. "Just as with students, we remind the faculty of their responsibilities but don't talk about any sort of punishment." But one of the benefits of tenure is that professors can act in ways they deem reasonable without having to worry about a backlash from the administration. "With tenure comes academic freedom -- the academic freedom to conduct curriculum in a scholarly fashion," Manno said. "We really don't view this as a confrontational issue." Many professors have planned time for special consideration of the war without canceling class to participate in the teach-in. "If war started, I'd hold a discussion in class," sociology professor Matt Gregory said. "I agree with the idea of the walkout, but I also understand that all students don't have the same beliefs." However, Gregory said he would not penalize students who participate in the moratorium. Professors who feel strongly about the potential war still believe a moratorium is important. "My feeling is when war breaks out, faculty opposed to the war should indicate that to their students and take part in the planned gathering in the chapel," history professor Gary Leupp said. "Something like suspending classes and indicating to students that we don't think it is business as usual, that is appropriate." The last time classes at Tufts were affected by world events was on Sept. 11, 2001. That day, many professors jettisoned their syllabi in favor of a discussion about the day's events. Others cancelled class entirely. "When 9/11 happened, instead of teaching my class I wheeled in a TV and we watched," said physics professor Gary Goldstein, one of the leading faculty members on TCOWI. "I allowed people who wanted to leave to leave and we discussed the events that were unfolding. One can hold class at the usual time but turn the discussion to the events in the world." Though the theme of the moratorium is "no business as usual," administrators stress that universities occupy a place outside of the norm. "I ask, what is our business?" said Charles Inouye, Dean of the Colleges. "I think our business is to prevent war, and have free discussions. It doesn't make sense to stop our business. We should choose a time to discuss when we aren't teaching, and I say this as a professor."

---