Border Security Debated at BU

Border Security Debated at BU

By Andrew Benjamin




BOSTON - A somewhat sparse crowd gathered in the Tsai Center to hear six distinguished guests speak on the importance of border security.

Based on the Cambridge-Oxford debate rules, both sides had the chance to explain why they were right, and then there were audience comments and feelings on the issue, then rebuttals from the lead speakers.

In choosing this semester’s topic, moderator Bob Zelnick, a journalism professor, stated that it was chosen after having a discussion with a politically astute friend of his.

“It’s the defining issue about us and who we are, what we are,” Zelnick said, quoting his friend to the 250-plus audience members. “And it will decide the presidential race in more states than any other issue.”

The lead speaker on the side that called for stricter security, Mark Krikorian, executive director of the think-tank Center for Immigration Studies, explained the way to solve this problem was through attrition of businesses and the border through enforcement.

“In our studies, this would create a realistic, gradual reduction in the size of the problem,” he said.

Second-year law student Stephanie Hoffman agreed that securing the borders would quell the vigilante groups at the borders.

Louis J. Barletta, mayor of Hazelton, Pa., spoke of his city’s problems with illegal immigrants. He was also the only speaker on either side to use the term “illegal aliens” to describe illegal immigrants. He mentioned his city was the first to crackdown on businesses and landlords that hired and rented to illegals. He also complained about lack of help from the federal government in dealing with the issue.

“Hazelton was the first city to go after businesses that knowingly hired illegal aliens and fined the landlords who rented to them,” he said. “The government was doing nothing. The drain on our resources was destroying the quality of life in small town America.”
The other side started off with B. Lindsay Lowell, the director of policy studies at the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. He supported border enforcement, but said it has to go beyond that to guest worker problems. “Yes, there are criminals, yes there are bad components, there are a lot of
problems. But they aren’t the majority,” he said. “The majority of these people want to work, and that’s the human dimension we have in mind.”

The student speaker of the negative side, SMG senior Anuj Shelat, reasoned that America had to help the country of Mexico economically to stop the influx of illegal immigrants, citing NAFTA and farm subsidies as problems. “To us, subsidies mean slightly lower prices for food,” Shelat said. “To 15 million Mexican farmers, that means that their livelihoods are being wiped away.”

The last speaker was Shuya Ohno, the director of communications of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition (MIRA). He argued that America has been protecting the borders sufficiently. “Stricter border patrols and workplace enforcement are no longer needed,” he said.

The audience then got to chime in. The most striking speaker was Jim Rizoli of Framingham, Ma on the affirmative side. “The town where I live has been taken over, and no one does anything, including cops,” he said. “It’s a problem no matter what they [the negative side] say, and something must be done and it is not amnesty.”

In the end, Zelnick declared the winner the negative side. Not everyone agreed. “I thought the negative side made good points, but the affirmative side made even better points,” said COM junior Lyle Moran. “The negative side ran too much on emotion and not enough hard facts to back up their claims.”

Jerichoholics turn out to see wrestler - News

Jerichoholics turn out to see wrestler - News: "Jericho "

BOSTONIANS CELEBRATE CHAMPIONSHIP WITH CITYWIDE PARADE

BOSTONIANS CELEBRATE CHAMPIONSHIP WITH CITYWIDE PARADE
By Andrew Benjamin




BOSTON – A lively crowd of the thousands gathered near Fenway Park on a mild, sunny day to celebrate the Red Sox championship win against the Colorado Rockies with a parade.

The audience included people of all ages from babies to senior citizens. As well, blacks, whites, Asians, Indians, and other races mingled with one another with one common connection: to celebrate the win of the Red Sox.

The gatherers eagerly awaited the starting of the amphibious duck boats, which would not only be carrying the baseball players, but the Celtic punk band Dropkick Murphys.

Many people came out dressed for the occasion. Most dominant were Red Sox shirts and caps, however there was the occasional atypical style of clothing. One lady paraded around dressed up as a lobster, complete with antennae on her head and claws on her hands.

When the first duck boat started, the crowd went wild with excitement. People started cheering and taking pictures of the baseball players who were riding on the duck boat. As the other boats started to go, chants of “Red Sox” flooded the area.

“I’ve never been happier to be a Red Sox fan,” said Michael Kirzinger of Boston.

“It’s one thing to win once, but another to in a row with a sweep.”

When the boats had gotten through, a small amount of the crowd dispersed, but there were still hundreds who stayed and hundreds more who joined and continued to follow the duck boats up to City Hall Plaza.

At one point, left-fielder Manny Ramirez grabbed a microphone to thank the many Red Sox fans who came out to support the Red Sox.

"You guys are the best fans in the whole world," Ramirez said, which was followed by chants of “Manny.”

When the crowd reached City Hall Plaza, where it frew largest, Jonathan Papelbon, the closer for the Red Sox, slipped on a kilt and did his infamous jig, to the delight of Red Sox fans.

Compared to Sunday’s post-game celebration in Kenmore Square, which led to numerous arrests, today’s’ audience was much calmer and more respectful of the Boston Police Department’s presence. Notwithstanding that, a few arrests were made.

“There’s always going to be at least one out-of-control person who does something stupid and can possibly ruin it for everyone else,” one officer of the Boston Police Department said who asked not to be named.

One citizen of Boston, who came out with her 3-year-old son and 4-year-old daughter (the husband was at work), felt that the crowd was not as rowdy.

“I feel this one was much safer than Sunday’s celebration,” said Michelle, a resident of Boston.

“I made sure that my children were home then and didn’t go outside even though they begged me to.”

When the festivities were over, the crowd dispersed in an orderly fashion. There was no need for police to herd them back the other way. Not all Red Sox fans were done, though. There was another item on the agenda which many fans partook: Free tacos.

BOSTONIANS CELEBRATE RED SOX CHAMPIONSHIP

By Andrew Benjamin

BOSTON - Kenmore Square is reminiscent of those rock concerts with rowdy crowds, crowd surfing, and mass consumption of alcohol beverages. Except those are inside the confines of a building usually.

Hundreds and hundreds of jubilant Red Sox fans crowded Kenmore Square to celebrate the 2007 Red Sox Championship. People of all ages, races, and gender celebrated with one another.
Ear piercing chants of "Let's Go Red Sox!," "Yankees Suck!," and even "Joe Buck Suck!" Joe Buck is a sports broadcaster.

One stout girl goes around double palm slapping everyone yelling "YEAH RED SOX!," and even does so to this reporter among other strangers she encounters.

The crowds are fired up. Crowd surfing is rampant. The girls who crowd surf are even enocouraged to reveal their breasts. "Show your tits!," yells a bearded, burly man of about 2o years of age. "That's what baseball is all about!"

Even the cops, who are armed to prevent anything from getting really rowdy interact with the crowd. Numerous people with their digial cameras and cell phones take pictures of the armed guards, even with some regular citizens posing in the shot. One cop gives the peace symbol to one guard.

To commerate the excitment, unknown persons shoot off fireworks, which brighten the sky with their red and green colors.

Winston Posvar, a BU student who is a senior, is excited just like everyone else. "It isn't like 2004," he said. "But it's still exciting."

Three minutes after he spoke, a friend of his embraced him tightly and roared "We are the champions!"

BOSTON UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR DISCUSSES FAMILY’S IMMIGRATION

BOSTON UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR DISCUSSES FAMILY’S IMMIGRATION
By Andrew Benjamin




BOSTON- Professor Nina Silber of Boston University (no relation to former Boston University president John Silber) rarely ever gets to talk about immigration. As a Civil War professor, she spends her time talking every semester about why Abraham Lincoln was shot. Now it is different, as she is being given the opportunity to speak of how her family came to America and how she feels about the current immigration debate.
Dressed in a neatly ironed informal black jacket, along with a matching skirt, she spoke very clearly and openly about both topics.
“My grandmother on my mother’s side, who I never knew, was born in the country of Moldavia,” she said
“My grandfather on that side parents were born in Lithuania, which I believe borders Moldavia, and I believe emigrated to America when they were teenagers.”
Her grandmother’s family came to Ellis Island, then settled in New York in the late 1800s. Her grandfather was born in the United States.
She believes it was for purely economic reasons that her grandmother’s family came to the U.S. “They were a simple, poor family that just wanted to achieve the American dream just like so many other immigrants,” she said.

Her grandmother’s family eventually opened a bar that has since closed down.
Her family on her father’s side has a different story. “My father’s mother and father were both born in Germany,” she said. “I was told they came here to escape the anti-Semitism that was in Germany, even though it was before the rise of Hitler.”
As for her father’s family, they came to the U.S. and resided in New York, where the family opened a laundromat. That closed down after some time.
Silber, whose name comes from her father’s side, could not remember off the top of her head how her grandmother and grandfather met. “They met sometime in New York during the 1910’s, as far as I can remember.”
Concerning the current immigration situation, Silber considers herself “pretty liberal” on the issue.
“I understand why they come here illegally,” she said. “We have the jobs and opportunity that they don’t have and also don’t pay very well. That’s one of the reasons why my family wound up coming here.”
She also does not have a positive opinion on the new fence that is to be constructed on the Texas border. “I don’t see how a wall does anything. If you look at the history of walls, they just do not work,” she said.
Overall, she said she feels that while there should be border security, there should be no restriction on those who want to immigrate here. “Of course, we should have some type of security that dictates where the border between the countries starts,” she said. “But, we should not go the route of immigration quotas. If someone wants to come here, we should welcome them and give them a path to citizenship.”

BUSH DECLARES PROGRESS IN IRAQ SUCCESSFUL

BUSH DECLARES PROGRESS IN IRAQ SUCCESSFUL
By Andrew Benjamin




BOSTON— Speaking from the Oval Office Tuesday night President Bush gave a televised speech announcing dates to decrease troops in Iraq. The president also commented on the troop surge, proclaiming the “troop surge is working.”

The president cited Anbar province as the best example of progress in Iraq, echoing much of the same findings as General David Petraeus’ September report on the current situation in Iraq.

“I sent an additional 4,000 Marines to Anbar as part of the surge. Together, local sheiks, Iraqi forces, and Coalition troops drove the terrorists from the capital of Ramadi and other population centers,” the president said.

“Today, a city where al Qaeda once planted its flag is beginning to return to normal. Anbar citizens who once feared beheading for talking to an American or Iraqi soldier now come forward to tell us where the terrorists are hiding.”

Bush also revealed dates to start decreasing American troop levels in Iraq. These dates, which the president supported, were recommended by Petraeus

“It will soon be possible to bring home an Army combat brigade, for a total force reduction of 5,700 troops by Christmas,” the president stated.

“And he [Petraeus] expects that by July, we will be able to reduce our troop levels in Iraq from 20 combat brigades to 15.”

Bush, however, made clear that troop withdrawal depends on the success in Iraq.

“The more successful we are, the more American troops can return home,” the president declared.

The president also announced there would be a future report from Petraeus and United States Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker delivered to Congress next March.

Mr. Bean's Holiday Review

August is considered by box office analysts to be the deadest month for films. It's the month where studios release the clunkers that are not expected to make a good profit and won't go over with audiences. Both usually tend to happen about 70% of the time. Mr. Bean's Holiday doesn't do anything that will make the month of August a better month for films and it just keeps the trend going of bad movies coming out in August.

Mr. Bean (Rowan Atkinson) is back and causing trouble in France. After winning a raffle which grants him a vacation to Cannes, he takes his trusty digital video camera to document his trip from beginning to end. When Bean asks for a man to record him boarding a train, that man misses his train as well as leaving his son (Max Baldry) on the train. Bean becomes a guardian to the boy, all the while travelling to Cannes to reuinte the son with his father.

It's been ten years since the last Bean film came out and perhaps the studio instead of waiting for so long to make a new one, shouldn't have made it in the first place. What doesn't work with this film is the obvious and its the same reason why almost all comedy skits don't translate well to film. To take a sketch that works great in 30 minutes and stretch it out to a feature length time will not work. That's specific with the genre of short skit comedy. Even though director Steven Bendelack has an extensive resume in television, he can't bring that many original physical and sight gags to this film. It gets tiring seeing Bean repeat himself over and over with the same childish gags.

The film does not work also, because of the change in character of Mr. Bean. Atkinson describes Bean as "a child in a grown man's body." In this movie however, he's just stupid at times. Not that he was incredibly intelligent in the original show it should be pointed out. His inteptness is quite irritating rather than comical and I almost feel sorry for him, but alas I do not.

Another aspect that really irked me about this film was the plot surrounding Mr. Bean becoming the guardian of this young boy. The boy is not an American but Russian. Perhaps Russians view strangers with different eyes than Americans. Regardless, I could not buy that this young boy took a liking so quick to Bean. Bean was the reason that this kid got separated from his father and I couldn't belive he would warm up to this fifty year old, six foot tall man so fast. I could be watching too much To Catch a Predator, but it's just really something that didn't do it for me.

The film has a few laughs but I will not give these away. I will say a good bucket of them comes courtesy of Willem Dafoe who plays a self-absorbed filmmaker whose having his latest fillm screened at Cannes. Look at the credits closely to that film and you'll see what I mean.

It's unfortunate that Bean has to go out with a bomb. What was a great character that reminded us of such classic physical comedians as Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton has been relagated to a bumbling fool with little comedic value.

Final Grade: C-

Rush Hour 3 Review

The saying "Three's a Charm" is tossed around often many times. Very rarely can it be applied to a film of any genre. Return of the Jedi for example, is not better than the other two films of the original trilogy, however, it is still a great film. In the case of Rush Hour 3, unfortunatly it is more suffice to say its suffering from the "the Terrible Threes."

Detective James Carter (Chris Tucker) and Inspector Lee (Jackie Chan) are teaming up once again to investigate Triads, a Chinese equivalent of the American Mafia. It brings them to France where a French dancer (Noémie Lenoir) is believed to have the evidence that is connected to the criminals. As a result of this, all three are becoming targets of the Triads.

It should be stated on the record that I did enjoy both Rush Hour and Rush Hour 2. I found both to be great comedy films with a classic straight man and comedic foil for a contempory audience. Another fact that should be pointed out is that Rush Hour 2 made a good amount of its money right after 9/11 (the movie was released on August 3rd 2001), considering the state of America at that time. With Rush Hour 3, its the same gags with Chris Tucker being the stereotypical loudmouth black man, who always says something in a high-pitched yelp. It's as if the writers watched the first two films and copied everything that was good about it, yet something happened on the way to the forum and it turned out the opposite. The film is quite funny in some parts, other parts will are nothing more than a chuckle. But it's Chris Tucker who is responsible for both some of the funny parts and immensely unfunny parts. Chris Tucker becomess more and more of a caricature of himself in this film its almost at times sad to watch. This movie has other stereotypes as well that are particullary not funny. One of them being a Frenchman who is anti-American and believes that all Americans are nothing but war mongers.

If there is another thing disappointing about this movie, its Max von Sydow. He does absolutly nothing to further the story of the film. He seems to be more window dressing than an actual purpose of the film. He's good but something tells me the casting director needed a great actor merely to try to lend this film credibility. It's quite unfortunate he is not used properly.

As it is known, this film is directed by Brett Ratner. Now he can make movies that general audiences will like, but he can't make movies that will stand the test of time. Audiences are going to like this for the simplistic, annoying, and stereotypical characteristics of this film, overlooking that much of the comedy is nothing that is worth laughing much about. It is quite a disappointing film

Final Grade: C+

Cop Pushes Reporter...

I think it's a fact that most people do not like reporters. Oh yes, there are those of you who adore Katie Couric and others who masquerade as journalists but that's beside the point. The point of this blog post is to show this video that I've gotten from YouTube. Personally, for me it is absolute disgusting to watch.

Now to put a little backstory behind this. Mayor of Los Angeles Antonio Villaraigosa is currently caught up in a scandal involving in an extra marital affair and just like any politician who's caught in a scandal they don't really want to talk about it. Well to make a long story short, the mayor was at an event at the Port of Los Angeles where understandably, he was hounded by reporters asking questions about the affair. Unfortunatly, one of the reporters, Alicia Unger of KAZA-TV, tried to run ahead of the pack and as you can see, one of the planiclothes police officers pushed her against a steel cargo container.

What was the response by the police? According to the LA Times: "Port Police Chief Ronald Boyd declined to comment on whether [the office] violated department policy by pushing the reporter against a cargo container." Interesting response. I had no idea that it was a policeman's job to push an unarmed female reporter against a steel object. And its quite obvious the gentleman enjoyed doing what he did. He's smiling after the fact. The sad thing is this didn't have to happen the way it did. This woman was trying to do her job which is asks questions. The police officer could've just held his ground to prevent her and the other reporters from going past whatever invisible line the mayor wished to be keep the reporters from crossing. It would be a bad day day for journalists if this police officer got away with what he did.

The Transformers: The Movie Review

The Transformers series has survived in the entertainment market for over twenty years. With countless TV series, down your throat merchandising of toys, and a recent live action film to boot, this exercise in mass marketing a toy is probably not going to die that soon. However, without saying anymore that is possibly making Transformer fans cry, the 1986 animation film is a fun and energetic film that will not disappoint its fan base and even might make new ones.

The film starts fast and with only a narration to backup those who don't know a thing about the TV series which this film follows. The Autobots (the good robots) are planning to strike the Decepticons (the bad robots) whom now control Cybertron. However, the Autobots do not have it easy as a gigantic planet that destroys everything in its path is targeting a powerful object that the Autobots possess. The film features the voices of Leonard Nimoy, Eric Idle, Judd Nelson and Orson Welles (in his final film).

First to air some laundry. I am not familiar with anything that happens before this movie, as in what happens in the TV series. Going into this, I only know what I've learned from the live action movie, which I felt was good enough to know. However there is a narration that helps clear up the back story that will satisfy most viewers. It's necessary to point out this movie is a product of the 80's and to many, will seem dated. The most prominent being the heavy rock soundtrack playing in the background playing in battle scenes. Speaking of the battle scenes, they are very well edited and crafted. It is very easy to tell who is fighting who (a problem the live action film had). The animation is done in the classic, hand drawn fashion and it looks very good, even after twenty years. The voice acting has to be given the most praise though. The voices are all done by well-esteemed actors (from Robert Stack to Orson Welles) and their voices fit well with their characters and helps bring life to them as well.

To point out only the good of this movie would be disingenuous as the thing separating it from very good to great is the lack of character development. Save for a narration, there is none on the individual robots or the two human characters in the film. It maybe Transformers but it's also Transformers: The Movie and the writers shouldn't have skipped that point. Alas, it is also not a Merchant-Ivory production so if you're watching it only because it has robots killing each other in it, you probably will not come out disappointed.

Final Grade: B+

The Debut of the Best Damn Blog in the Universe

Well, this is Andrew Benjamin and I have broke my blog virginity. In this blog of mine, you will be reading about my various views on different aspects of modern culture. Everything from movies to politics to simple rants. I hope that the person who reads this blog comes away with my insightful comments and decides to come back again. Enjoy and live long and prosper.

Andrew Benjamin