April 2009

April 2009

Truth and two staples Binghamton Review, April 2005

Table of Contents Founded 1987 o Volume XXII Number 7 o April 2009

Feature

Departments

10

Editorial 3

SA elections controversy analyzed

The Enemies List

Letters 4

Readers respond..

Presswatch 12

Prospect, Asian Outlook, but no Pipe Dream in this month’s Presswatch!

Articles Controversy 5

Robert Menje on Controversy and Conservatism.

Why I Ran for VPMA 6 Yadin Herzel tells all.

Don’t Question! 7

Rusty Shackleford unloads on the VPMA.

The Enemies 10 BR calls out all those who threaten liberty.

A Year in E.M.O. 14

Cowards 19

Alex Paolano calls out the College Democrats as the cowards they are.

Liberty’s End 21

BR’s spy reports on his findings Nick Valiando on Geert Wilders at CPAC

Covers designed by Adam Shamah Binghamton Review, April 2009

editorial

Deplorable? Yes, Very

S

tudent Association Executive Board elections are important. Maybe not to your average student, but certainly to those who spend a lot of their time and effort trying to make an SA that works for and benefits all students. That’s why it generally isn’t frowned upon when executive board members throw their support behind the candidate who they believe would do the best job the following year.

There is, however, a fine line between supporting candidates and what we all witnessed this year. Here is the general breakdown: Several center-right candidates decided to run (independently of each other, contrary to certain accusations) for e-board, as is the right of any undergraduate student. VPMA Maryam Belly and some of her cohorts viewed this as “Binghamton Review infiltrating the SA,” though it was anything but (Binghamton Review endorsed only two of the three alleged “BR” candidates, and supported at least one liberal candidate over a conservative in the EVP race), and shifted into battle-mode. After all, conservative students having a voice on the SA, especially in apolitical positions, probably means that all of the cultural groups are going to be de-chartered and all forms of liberalism are going to be banned from SA-sponsored events, right?

Step one for the VPMA was to recruit candidates of her own to run. Next was to do everything she could to get them elected, including publicly attacking Yadin Herzel, a VPMA candidate, at an elections debate which she moderated solely because she occupies the VPMA office. She was overheard in the SA office saying that she didn’t like the Asian Student Union’s endorsements, and that she wanted to “discuss” them with them, leading us to believe that she at least tried to influence them in some way. She aided an R.P.U. member in his smearing of a VPAA candidate and inserted a proxy of hers onto the elections committee.

These may sound like deplorable things for an executive board member to do, but honestly, I wouldn’t be writing this article if the VPMA had left it at just that. It’s what happened after most of her candidates lost that makes her actions inexcusable.

It started with Joseph Bansgopaul, the candidate for EVP, filing a grievance against the SA elections committee. Rather than affixing their signatures next to their names on a roster, as prescribed

by the SA bylaws, voters in Dickinson crossed out their names, or had the poll sitters do it for them. This, arguably, is a violation of the SA bylaws because technically no one in Dickinson signed his or her name so no one affixed his or her signature.

J-board, on the night before the scheduled presidential and VPF runoffs, ordered a rerun in Dickinson (the unconstitutionality of this decision itself deserves its own article). This gave Maryam’s candidates a second chance in a community in which they already had a strong organizational advantage, but more importantly, delayed the final election results by almost one month.

Meanwhile, Maryam went after the chair of the Elections Committee, Mary Leonardo, with baseless accusations of bias.

Shaun Hiller, the candidate Maryam supported for VPAA, filed two grievances with J-board. One claiming that Mary showed bias by joining candidates’ facebook groups (seriously), and another claiming she violated the bylaws by allowing a non-committee member to carry a ballot box from her car to place in which ballots were being counted, though he was in full supervision of several committee members. At the same time, Maryam filed similar grievances with the elections committee itself, requesting that Mary be removed as Chair. J-board unanimously rejected both grievances.

So, why did Maryam go through all of this, even after the voters rejected her candidates and their ideas? Well for one, I don’t know if she can accept the fact that students didn’t vote for her candidates. There are people on campus who think differently than her after all. But more importantly, once it became clear that many of her candidates lost, she did everything she could to disrupt the finalizing of next year’s eboard. It’s ironic because Alice Liou, Maryam’s close ally, has mentioned that she thinks this new eboard will lead to the administration taking over the SA’s whole operation. The one thing that would guarantee that is if there is no eboard elected come commencement, a real possibility if further grievances are filed. Perhaps she believes this to be a better option than students with whom she disagrees running things?

And she wonders why the voters rejected her ideas.

-Adam Shamah for the staff

Our Mission

Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, student-run periodical of con-

servative thought at Binghamton University. A true liberal arts education

expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent

perspectives. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free exchange of ideas and offer

an alternative viewpoint not normally found on our predominately liberal campus.

It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness that dominates

this university. We stand against tyranny in all its forms, both on campus and beyond.

We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence,

and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of western civilization. Finally, we un-

derstand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society. We

strive to inform, engage, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission.

Binghamton Review, April 2009

Binghamton Review

Letters

Volume XXII, No. 7 • April 2009 Founded 1987

F

Editors-in-Chief Adam Shamah Robert Edward Menje Managing Editor Randal Meyer Associate Editor Rachel Gordon Edmund Mays Copy Editor Yadin Herzel Samantha Mickle Business Manager Alex Paolano Treasurer Daniel Rabinowitz Contributors Nehemia Stern, Eugenio Campos, John Jensen, Theresa Juergens, Matthew Hassell, Stephen Herman, Ariel Levin Waldman, Nick Valiando, Jason Birriel Godfather of the Review Louis W. Leonini Friends of the Review Dr. Aldo S. Bernardo The Leonini Family The Powell Family Mr. Bob Soltis WA2VCS The Shamah Family The Grynheim Family The Menje Family The Leeds Family The Lombardi Family The Packer Family Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press, in Chenango Bridge.

We provide the truth; they provide the staples.

Binghamton Review Binghamton University PO Box 6000 4

To the Editor, Adam Shamah, writer of “The Campus Uniter”, I hope you are forwarded this message. The cultural groups want to find unity amongst themselves and not anyone else. There is nothing wrong within or behind this because they will not be weakened and separated by people and groups like yours. They are oppressed and through this oppression will become stronger so try as hard as you can because they will not leave, deal with it. Also the VPMA’s position is an important one, the e-board members do not know enough or will EVER begin to UNDERSTAND the stress and struggles of multicultural people to represent them.

Robert E. Menje, author of “Collective Racism”, I hope you are forwarded this message. Cultural groups unite because they have something in common that no one else has. Hispanic students have a completely different culture from Asian students and these cultural differences unite them respectively. White is not a cultural group, it is a skin color, and this is why it is racist. There can be an American group, but sorry technically “whites” will not be the only ones allowed to join because anyone can be American as long as they are born in America and live by the American CULTURAL, which is essentially made up of multiple peoples and cultures anyway. The VietnameseAmerican students sit together not solely because they are Vietnamese but because they have more in common than anyone else. It is the same as a person from Long Island being friends with a fellow Long Islander because they have more in common. Do not try to separate cultural groups in order to make them weaker. “Collective Racism” is constantly being committed by this magazine towards Multicultural groups by constantly attacking them. Let them be.

Beatriz Grullon We’ll just say to those of you who disagree with us at BR, please start writing us letters so we can print coherent critiques of our ideas rather than nonsensical ranting. Thanks.

Letters should be sent to editor@binghamtonreview.com and be less than 300 words.

Binghamton Review, April 2009

vote no

Conservatism and Controversy

by Robert Menje ‘09

C

ontroversy.

Everyone loves a little bit of it every now and then. We at Binghamton Review love controversy so much that if we had to choose between it and Ann Coulter holding a shotgun in one hand and a bible in the other, we’d pick the controversy. Binghamton Review has always been known for stirring up controversy. It’s our forte. (For the record, nowadays, anything that makes liberals unhappy is considered “controversial,” so for a conservative newsmagazine, there can be no greater compliment).

Groups like EMO/SAC used to protest our publication. They would burn effigies of Review editors on what seemed like a weekly basis. Where has this gone?

The left on campus has gone soft. Rarely, here at Binghamton, do us normal students get to witness the hilarity that is a hippie protest, an event that is a fixture on most other college campuses. Has the left at Binghamton become less passionate about its plight? Have they realized that no matter how many anti-war protests they hold, or how many days they go without showering (because we all know that good hygiene is an oppressive

tool of the capitalist swine), nothing will be changed by their actions?

We at Binghamton Review on the other hand, are still alive and stronger than ever. We are already in our 22nd year of existence and we still bring to the students of Binghamton an alternative to the crap that can be found in Pipe Dream, Prospect, and now Asian Outlook. Maybe you’re reading this publication because you’re a conservative and we’re the alternative to the socialist venom that your professors spew out on a daily basis. Maybe you’re reading this publication because you’re a flaming liberal and being pissed off gets you off.

Either way, we know what you want… controversy, and we have the balls to bring it to you.

Binghamton Review will be alive and well so long as there are people on this campus who are willing to stand up for freedom, capitalism, liberty, and individualism (and as long as SUNY-B exists, though, judging by the state budget, this might not be much longer). We will always provide our readers with insightful conservative thought so long as us conservatives are not in jail for being “rightwing extremists” and “domestic

terrorists” (as we are classified in a recent report by the Department of Homeland Security and confirmed by DHS Secretary Napolitano).

The conservative movement is far from being on the ash heap of history. Not only is it active here on campus through Binghamton Review and College Republicans, but it is alive and well throughout the nation. In Binghamton, on April 15th (tax day), there was a tea party that drew over 150 people. This tea party coincided with the over 800 other tea parties nationwide in both major cities and small towns. These tea parties protested the wasteful spending of the big-government Congress and Obama administration. They also drew crowds of over 500,000, another sign that conservatives are not only alive and well, but pissed off and ready to do something about it. Conservatives are ready to stir up controversy. President Obama will have a tough time come 2012 if he wants another term in office.

Robert Menje is a senior majoring in History. DHS has classified him a “redlevel threat.”

Agree with us? Disagree?

Write us!

Email letters to the editor to editor@binghamtonreview.com Binghamton Review, April 2009

VPMA

Why I Ran for VPMA

by Yadin Herzel ‘10

T

he 1960s was the decade that ran from January 1, 1960 to December 31, 1969, and is no longer the decade in which we live. However, it is easily understandable why a student at Binghamton University may be confused and still think that we live in the 1960s, given that the executive board of our Student Association actually includes a position called “Vice President for Multicultural Affairs.”

Yes, in 2009, our school still has a VPMA. What a primitive concept, what a backward idea, and what a waste of $6800.

Essentially, the SA maintains a VPMA in order to give an appearance of being über-politically correct, a relic of the 1960s. Such a position is not only entirely unnecessary, but, as already mentioned, comes with a hefty price tag as well – approximately $6800 in stipends paid for by you and me. And what do we get for our money? Nothing but divisiveness, illogical rants, and unnecessary controversy.

The responsibilities of the VPMA are to coordinate the events of all cultural student groups and residential communities, to ensure that the SA follows all affirmative action guidelines, and to chair the Intercultural Awareness Committee.

The first task is a form of PCspecial treatment for cultural groups, as there is no Vice President for Political Affairs or Vice President for Religious Affairs to coordinate events of all political and religious student groups respectively. The second task is also entirely unnecessary, as no such guidelines exist. The third task could be accomplished more effectively if cultural groups were given the opportunity to elect their own chair.

This may sound shocking coming from 6

me. After all, less than a month ago I was a candidate for the very position that here I am trashing.

Before we get into why I chose to run for VPMA, we need to examine a more intrinsic flaw in the position that is much more harmful and offensive than the $6800 that gets flushed down the toilet every time we elect a new student to the position.

In the past, we’ve heard that the VPMA is supposed to represent only those involved in cultural groups. VPMAs of the past who have acted that way have done the students who elected them a great disservice. I ran on the platform that I would be a “VPMA for Everyone.” That means I would represent those involved in cultural groups, those involved in non-cultural groups, and those involved in no groups at all.

I was also attacked by members of the media and members of the SA. Why? Simply for RVPMAWC—Running for VPMA While Conservative. Yes, I am a conservative-leaning libertarian, and it is apparently taboo for anyone who is not a diehard leftist to run the position that is supposed to bring people of all backgrounds and viewpoints together. Do you see the problem when someone of a certain background cannot even run for the position without being looked at by the position’s supporters as a joke?

Why then did I run for a position of which I would support the elimination?

Simply put, if we must have a VPMA, it might as well be one who would bring everyone to the table. I would not, as the current VPMA has done all too often, attack those with whom I disagree as “racist,” or being against diversity. I recognize that there is more than one way Binghamton Review, April 2009

to view culture and multiculturalism and that true multiculturalism brings together people of different viewpoints for discussion, rather than alienating some and embracing others.

Several weeks ago, as campaigning was going on, BTV hosted a debate between the candidates. This debate was moderated by Maryam Belly, the current VPMA who helped recruit, and endorsed, my opponent. I left that debate in protest of the tactics Maryam used against me during the campaign. After, she used the facilities of her office to publicize her disdain towards me. All because I do not come from one of the groups that traditionally produces VPMA candidates. I’ll say it again, because it is so important; supporters of the VPMA say that the reason we need the position is because the VPMA is supposed to bring everyone on campus together. Is this actually true, or have past VPMAs just brought together those who already agree? Is there any better example of someone the VPMA should not be alienating than someone who is politically conservative, since we are a sizable minority on campus? If she really wanted to foster unity, as she penned in last month’s Asian Outlook, shouldn’t she be embracing someone who is traditionally “underrepresented” in the VPMA office?

I ran for VPMA to give all students a chance to benefit from the resources of the office. We all pay the activity fee; we should not be paying for it to be used against us simply because we don’t think a certain way.

I leave you with the following question to ask yourself. If the VPMA is supposed to represent the underrepresented, should not the candidate who received the fewest votes be the winner?

vpma

Don’t Question Me! Exactly what’s wrong with this year’s VPMA office

by Rusty Shackleford

A

t a recent meeting of the Student Assembly, an Off-Campus SA Representative asked the Vice President for Multicultural Affairs (VPMA) a question about the “inefficiencies” of her office. From the way in which Maryam Belly (current VPMA) responded, you would think that someone had made a credible threat of violence interspersed with a series of racial epithets. Belly went on a several-minute tirade about her office being overly criticized, and of course, the fact that there could be no such inefficiencies.

Fast-forward just 3 days later to the VPMA’s first independently-run event of the semester: The presentation of speaker Meredith LeVande on the topic of how our society is impacted by the pornography industry. The event cost several thousand dollars to put on, with cosponsorship coming from several cultural groups. For all these thousands of dollars spent by the VPMA out of your student activity fee, how many students were in attendance at the event’s start time? Exactly 2 – including our BR staff writer.

About 3-4 more students (not including

us) filtered in and out for the remainder of the program.

We here at BR have been accused of having some eccentric views with regard to how SA money should be spent, but I think you’d have a hard time finding a single student who would find it worthwhile for the VPMA to spend thousands on a program attended by 3-4 students.

Heck, even the $4.50 cost of the poster hung up to publicize the event would barely have been worth it. Remember that tirade by the VPMA against the suggestion of inefficiencies in her office?

Nope, no inefficiencies found there.

Back to last week’s Assembly meeting, the issue being discussed when Belly’s efficiency was questioned was the existence of a position at SUNY SA (The SUNYwide equivalent of the Student Association) which partially mirrors the duties of the VPMA on this campus. The minor details of the debate are not relevant – there were legitimate points to be made on either side.

What is important rather, is that this open debate on the merits of the question was never fully realized due to the VPMA’s unwillingness to engage on the

issues, opting instead to publicly rebuke the assembly representative who had asked her a simple question. (For what it’s worth, the Assembly was at least intelligent enough to see through these tactics, as they voted against Belly – quite overwhelmingly – on the underlying issue.) Is this the environment in which we want our elected representatives to formulate policy? One in which Assembly representatives must hesitate to make honest inquiries on behalf of their constituents, lest they be publicly admonished by an E-Board member in an open Assembly meeting?

My purpose in this column is not to contest the existence of the VPMA position as a whole, notwithstanding my own views on the topic. My purpose, rather, is to question the underlying problem of the culture in the current VPMA office, where a Student Assembly representative cannot even ask a simple question about efficiency, without being attacked and chastised by an overly-antagonistic E-Board member. Apparently, Ms. Belly runs a “VPMA office for everyone,” except for those with whom she disagrees.

An empty Lecture VPMA Program that looks like an Another year of Hall: $0 uselessness: Priceless empty lecture hall: $3000 Binghamton Review, April 2009

Pr esswatch Asian Outlook Spring 2009

Asian Outlook Spring 2009

After reading the following quote, we at BR realized that the authors have never once read an issue of BR and have signed them each up for a free, lifetime subscription to their home addresses...

AO attempts to educate political radicals.

Indeed, not only does Binghamton Review contain no original content of its own, it consists of, essentially, summaries of articles from the National Review, the granddaddy of conservative rags.

“A major problem with many activists is instead of personalizing the political they politicize the personal. Instead of identifying and deconstructing the institutions that are the source of violence against humans, animals, and the environment, many progressive –types make a hobby out of finding flaws in other peoples’ lifestyles. It is an easy way out of making real change happen by just attacking this or that consumption pattern.”

that hilarious back cover. Yes, we are fully aware that we just presswatched ourselves.

Prospect Magazine March 2009 Another case of rival publications not reading BR before they write about it...

It used to be that we would pick up a fresh issue of Binghamton Review just for the usual dose of fanatical conservative ranting. The headlines would beckon with ludicrous charges; “Obama is the Next Hitler”, “Nancy Pelosi Appears in Porno,” “Multicultural Affairs to Stage Biracial, Gay Orgy”, and the like. The accusations would be That’s what we’ve been trying to tell completely untrue, but that was you for 21 years when we say “please not the point. don’t scream at our speakers and call us names, it only makes you [liber- Those headlines are pretty good. If als/Will To at the VPMA amend- you play your cards right you can ment vote] looks like a group of stray write for our publication some day. howler monkeys. Good to see you guys have seen the light.

But now you guys are trying to publish a real magazine with real Binghamton Review stories, and its boring. We don’t March 2009 care about your take on the proposed SA budget, we just want you to call Matt Landau an ass-kissing panderer.

Unfortunately, there was no National Review quote we could use to respond to this. So, we will not reply, but rather continue printing 21 years of National Review back covers, articles on Binghamton SA Elections, Failure to Cooperate 3, the Binghamton University code of conduct, the Binghamton housing Issue, corruption in the Binghamton Mayor’s office, OCCT, SA Corruption, the abuses against liberal BU MSW student Andre Massena, Binghamton administrative abuses, Binghamton Judicial Affairs, BU Greek Life, Binghamton’s West Side Neighborhood Association, the BU Student Activity Fee, biases of professors on campus, censorship, Islamofacism Awareness Week at BU, political discrimination by LASU, Matt Landau is an ass-kissing panthe ABCs of Binghamton University derer.

There. Happy? (for freshmen), campus women who want to be housewives rather than the empowered businesswomen, the Arming of BU’s UPD with TASERs, Killer-Coke protests on campus, and much more!

You forgot to include Shaun Hiller, Phil Calderon, and Alice Liou on 8

Binghamton Review, April 2009

Help BR Grow For 21 years, Binghamton Review has been the voice of the campus right at Binghamton University. Now, more than ever, BR needs your help.

Please consider donating to our cause. Every penny counts towards advancing the conservative movement on BU’s liberal campus.

Donate now and get Binghamton Review delivered to your home free of charge.

Fill out this form and return it to: Binghamton Review Include a check P.O. Box 6000 made out to Binghamton, NY 13902 Binghamton Review Mailing Address:

______________________________

______________________________

______________________________ Enclosed is: ______ $30 ______ $100 ______ $1000 ______ $50 ______ $500 ______ Other

enemies of br

The Enemies List Check and see if you’ve been denounced! by the Editors Libertarian humorist P.J. O’Rourke once suggested the institution of a modern McCarthyism—one which would expose the “fuzzy-minded one-worlders, pasty-faced peace creeps, and bleedingheart bed wetters” in our midst. Binghamton Review is happy to implement O’Rourke’s vision at BU—minus the censorship of course.

Ken Kamlet As Review readers are well aware, Ken Kamlet holds a seat on the mayor’s Commission on Housing and Home Development. This is the commission that will make recommendations to the Mayor regarding housing policy in the city. Its original purpose was to look at ways to

10

increase Binghamton’s dwindling home ownership rate, but Ken Kamlet has tried to use it as a facility to further his anti-student agenda.

When the commission began its work, Kamlet submitted to it a report titled “Need for Tighter Zoning to Control Student and Other Rental Housing.” In it, he recommended that the city adopt tighter zoning laws that would functionally eliminate student housing in the city’s residential districts, which account for 2/3 of the city and much of Binghamton students’ off-campus housing options. He further recommends the implementation of new enforcement procedures that would allow the city to begin eviction immediately if more than three unrelated renters are found living together in the residential districts.

Meanwhile, Kamlet also heads the legal department of the Newman Development Group, the same company that has plans to build a downtown student apartment complex called Campus Suites. In the past, various Binghamton politicians and certain individuals have suggested zoning laws as a way of spurring student economic activity downtown. The idea is as follows: Since student housing downtown has not in the past been economically feasible—students prefer cheaper residential housing than the more expensive downtown housing—the city should use zoning laws to force students Binghamton Review, April 2009

out of the residential districts and into downtown housing. Sounds borderline criminal, doesn’t it?

Newman, Kamlet’s employer, stands to profit directly from the actions of the commission. This blatant conflict of interest plus Kamlet’s disdain for students living on the west side earn Ken Kamlet the top spot on this year’s list.

Brian Rose A relative newcomer to Binghamton University, Vice President for Student Affairs Brian Rose oversees the entire division of Student Affairs including Campus Life, Residential Life, Judicial Affairs, Late Nite, Greek Life, the Multicultural Resource Center, EOP Program, Off Campus College, University Union, Campus Recreational Services, CDC, ISSS, Services for Students With Disabilities, Health Services, and the Discovery Center.

Most administrators are fairly subtle when they try to butt their noses into the students’ business. Brian Rose, on the other hand, is entirely open about it.

In December, he spoke at a Student Assembly meeting in support of the Vice President for Multicultural Affairs, an issue that has nothing to do with the administration. We didn’t actually think anyone in the administration would be against the position. We can’t picture an official from a public university speaking out against multiculturalism in this politically correct day in age, but an administrator speaking in favor of the VPMA at a student meeting, especially when everyone already knew what his position

would be, was entirely inappropriate.

Butting his head in where it doesn’t belong is the least of Vice President Rose’s offenses. Rose remained silent throughout the Andre Massena affair when Judicial Affairs, a department that he oversees, and the social work department were going after him in what the Foundation for Individual Rights called a free-speech rights violation. Additionally, he was one of the pushers of the “Failure to Cooperate-3” policy, which requires students to exit their dorm rooms at the request of a university official, that was added to the student conduct code last year. When asked at a student assembly meeting very early in the year about the off-campus housing issue, he essentially responded with “what the hell do you expect me to do?” But the VPMA, that’s an issue on which he needs to take a stand, right?

Shaun Hiller Not even Norm Coleman has filed as many grievances against the State of Minnesota as Shaun has against his VPAA opponents and the SA elections committee. The slimeball tactics used by Shaun to try to win his VPAA race even disgusted Matt Landau. That’s tough to do.

Maryam Belly Ladies and gentlemen, we’d love to go on for pages about everything the VPMA has done wrong this year, but when it comes down to it, the VPMA lacks generally in the power category. She’s pretty unimportant. Nevertheless, here is a list of the many offenses committed by Maryam and her office this year: Well, for almost the entire fall semester, we’re not quite sure if we actually had a VPMA. Until her position was threatened, Maryam did absolutely nothing within the capacity of her office.

It’s not that she’s done much more since, but at least now she holds Inter-Cultural Awareness committee meetings, as constitutionally required, and can be seen in the SA office once in a while.

In fact, the one thing to which she points when called out on her lack of accomplishments was her response to September’s “gay-bashing” incident, when Jim Deferio of Syracuse, along with his daughter Michelle Deferio, stood outside the union with signs condemning homosexuality. Rather than using the incident to open a discussion on campus between both sides of the homosexuality debate, she took a piece of paper, wrote on it ‘I disagree with this man,’ and asked people to sign it. Great effort, Maryam.

Then her position was threatened with elimination. In front of the assembly, over one hundred students, campus and local media, and even some faculty and administration, our Vice President for Multicultural Affairs decided to reduce the debate concerning the practicality of her position not to its merits, but to racism. Instead of making the debate about how the position benefits this campus, or how her office is essential in spreading and continuing multiculturalism, she chose to be petty and spiteful by attacking the people behind the proposed referendum for being racists. During the debate, a fellow supporter of the position, Aaron Butler, did something quite impressive by publicly dismissing the notion that being against the VPMA is racist. Rather than join Aaron, Maryam kept bringing up her accusations, in accordance with her mantra: if you can’t attack the issue, attack the person.

This semester, she’s decided to become more active. Not more active in spreading culture on campus, but more active in adding to the petty politics and infighting that infects the SA. She started by recruiting candidates for just about every executive board office race (after pretending that she herself was running for EVP to intimidate others out of the race). She wrote much of Joe Bansgopaul’s EVP platform, planted questioners during sweeps in an attempt to embarrass Yadin Herzel, a VPMA candidate, and wrote Shaun Hiller’s condescending and factually inaccurate sweeps speech.

When BTV hosted a VPMA debate moderated by Maryam, Yadin Herzel walked out in protest of having a modBinghamton Review, April 2009

erator who had openly endorsed a candidate in his race. She responded to this by stating that Ricky would make a better VPMA, using a facility of her office to publicize her endorsement, a violation of the SA bylaws. She was even overheard in the SA office mentioning that she did not like the Asian Student Union’s endorsements, and that she wanted to “discuss” it with them. Then, when most of her candidates lost, she pushed them to file grievances to overturn the election, or at least delay it long enough that a new eboard might not be elected. In the meantime, she went after the elections chair, Mary Leonardo, with baseless assertions of bias, and even introduced articles of impeachment against her, in another attempt to disrupt the election of her political opponents. Democracy, Maryam.

You lost, get over it.

Alice Liou Kicking SA reps out of Financial Council meetings for no good reason, consistently speaking out of turn at student assembly meetings, and being the right hand girl of Maryam Belly earns Alice a spot on this list.

The West Side Neighborhood Association WSNA’s stated goal is the removal of student housing from the west side of Binghamton. Its website instructs its followers to check the mailboxes and license plates of students to see if more than the allowed number are living together and provides instructions for initiating the eviction process. Along with people like Ken Kamlet, they represent the biggest threat to students and the free market when it comes to off-campus housing.

Off Campus College Council With poster-filled halls, bombardments of email, and packed event schedules, dormitory residents cannot escape their community governments. Students living off campus, however, do not even know that theirs exists. The Off Cam11

Enemies continued pus College Council (OC3) purports to represent the interests of the 7,000 B.U. students living off campus, just like the Hinman College Council and CIW Council represent their respective communities. With an activity fee-backed budget of well over $100,000 of and the power to fill over one-half of the Student Assembly’s seats, one would expect OC3 to have a higher profile among, at least, its own constituents. Unfortunately, OC3 has failed to meet the most minimal criteria set for community government.

Without even a whisper of shame, the current OC3 e x ecutive b o a r d willfully violated obligatory constitutional stipulations meant to regulate spending and keep the council on task.

Among these obligations is the appointment of a City Council representative, an OC3 member tasked with representing the needs of students to local city councils and keeping OC3 abreast of relevant issues. A dedicated city council representative would have been a crucial impediment to the ongoing effort to drive students out of their West Side homes. Better yet, perhaps the mere presence of an involved student voice at City Council meetings would compel locals to come to—like—their student neighbors.

The Review reported in depth on the housing issue in October 2008, well before OC3 was even aware of the problem, and a full three months before the issue was flaccidly entertained for the first and only time at a community council meeting. To date, being entertained by the issue is all the council has done to address what is perhaps the largest threat to the OC3 constituency in the council’s 12

history. With the Binghamton Housing Commission’s official report on the matter due out in the coming weeks, it looks as though the only parties to have a say in re-zoning Binghamton, aside from the Review, will be the Newman Development Group and the West Side Neighborhood Association.

OC3’s constitutional infidelities extend beyond a missed appointment. This year, OC3 has outsourced over $65,000 of its event-creation responsibilities to other student groups, a clear breach of restrictions limiting these contributions to 15% of the council’s budget. In several cases, these funds were requested by groups to supplement budgetary deficiencies, benefitting only a select few student group members. These supplements have reached up to $5,000 for a single group and have earned the council the nickname “Bank OC3” among SA insiders.

Pipe Dream What is supposed to be the pinnacle of campus journalism has turned into nothing more than a collection of university press releases and anti-Israel editorials. And a note to whoever came up with the brilliant idea of “Weekend Warrior;” there’s a reason Facebook exists.

Q-Magazine If we wanted to look at gay pictures interspersed between shitty articles, we’d pick up an issue of Pipe Dream.

NYPIRG Without a doubt the most wasteful group on this campus.

Their budget allocated for this year was $14,200. They have spent none of it. They plan on spending none Binghamton Review, April 2009

of it. Yet they came to Financial Council asking for more money. Brilliant. For a bunch of hippies they sure love to keep as much money as possible for themselves.

Luckily, their budget allocation for next year stands at $200, so we won’t be seeing much more of them in the future.

Prospect We don’t mind the numerous grammatical mistakes, the painfully boring articles, or even the unbridled pompousness in their editorial writing, but when they attacked BR, they not only hurt our feelings, but sunk to our level. They should be ashamed of themselves. Seriously we’re the ones who sling the mud around here. Get off your high horse and leave the personal attacks to the professionals.

Laura Bronstein and the Social Work Department Free speech and open academic inquiry is supposed to be the foundation of an academic institution. That isn’t how things work in Binghamton’s Social Work department. Andre Massena was the student who put up posters criticizing the department’s hiring of David Tanenaus,

a man Andre believes is responsible for social injustice. The department decided to suspend him for it. He was ordered to not only apologize, but to denounce his previous views, and was not given a guarantee of return after his suspension.

All for exercising his First Amendment rights. The University only backed down after the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education got involved, but nevertheless, earned itself a spot on our list for not protecting its students’ constitutional liberties.

Matt Allwood I know what you’re thinking; how the hell could Matt Allwood be on this list? It’s Matt Allwood. He’s an innocent young man with child-like wonder. No one hates Matt Allwood. You just want to go up to him and touch his fro. He’s adorable. But there is a dark side (and we

don’t mean his skin color). First of all, we don’t really know if Allwood has ever spoken without checking with Matt Landau first. I mean this is a kid who needs a permission slip to take a dump. He’s a nice person but he has no backbone. We love you Matt but grow a pair.

Duke Fans What kind of fans only start cheering for their team when they are up by 20 points against a major underdog? Seriously, you have one of the best basketball teams in the country and you can’t muster a couple of fans to cheer unless everyone’s about to make money off the point spread?

Adam Amit We decided to put Adam on the en-

emies list when he was in 11th grade, right about the time he started running for SA president.

Judicial Board We have come to the conclusion that Matt Landau might as well have appointed a Magic 8 Ball to serve as the judge for the grievances heard this year. While Judicial Board has a habit of making up definitions and spinning laws to suit their decisions, with an 8 ball you at least have a 50-50 chance getting it right.

WHRW It’s not “reporting” when you break into the building.

Ed Mays For costing Rod his election.

“Only white people can be racist.”

“C.I.A. + K.G.B. = A.I.D.S.”

Professor Charise Cheney Africana Studies Dept.

Professor William Martin Sociology Department

Do you know a professor crazy enough to join this elite bunch?

Nominate him or her for BR’s Annual Worst Professor Award!

(We’re Also looking for best) email editor@binghamtonreview.com Binghamton Review, April 2009

13

Fresh from the Spy Network ...

I One year inside the Experimental Media Organization

I

t is said that hell is the absence of reason. If that is true, then this is hell. Due to the sensitive nature of my assignment, I cannot reveal my name to you; however, what I can tell you is that I am a member of Binghamton Review who has been acting as a spy in EMO/SAC for the past year. It’s a dangerous assignment, and I could well lose my life, or even worse, my conservative point of view, but I’ve accepted that my sacrifice is worth revealing the inner workings of one of the last bastions of extreme liberalism on campus.

As I first entered the EMO/SAC office nearly a year ago for the general interest meeting, the strong and almost sickly sweet scent of pot and sticky buns entered my nostrils (not a joke), and it was at that point that I realized I wasn’t in Reagan Country any14

more. Doubt entered my mind during the first few minutes, surrounded by so many beards and tie-dye shirts (also not a joke); the room was soon full of people blocking my exit, and it was now all or nothing. As EMO/ SAC members began to describe their group and mission, they mentioned the access list for the meeting room and how one could get on it. In response to that comment, a member of EMO/SAC mentioned that that was how they were infiltrated in the past, and a cold sweat broke out on the back of my neck (again, not a joke).

The rest of the meeting went on without incident, however, and I was free to live another day. Since then, I have spent a year in EMO/SAC, reporting on their activities while attempting to maintain my sanity. This is my story.

I’m two months in, and I find it Binghamton Review, April 2009

difficult to go to each meeting, but I soldier on as I find that it’s becoming easier to fit in. I still need to shower after every meeting, but as my beard starts to grow in, I slowly work my way into the fold (once again, not a joke; nearly every male EMO/SAC member has a full beard, as do several female members). Everyone generally knows EMO/SAC’s philosophy and political leanings; however, one of the most interesting aspects of the club is its strange system of organization. EMO/SAC is a collective; that is, there is no central leadership. Every member of EMO/SAC has the same power in determining the club’s direction. The best thing to compare it to is the democracy of Athens, except that instead of every person having a say in the government, every member is effectively the president of the club.

inside emo/sac

For example, a Student Association e-board member once asked Andrew Epstein, the de facto leader of EMO/ SAC, if he could use their megaphone for a Student Association event. However, despite how simple and innocent

bers consisted of using copy paper signs on cardboard boxes, indicating a blanket drive of the homeless, by the homeless, and for the homeless. Therefore, BR generally doesn’t even have to worry about EMO/SAC that much as,

University of Rochester students occupied an academic building in solidarity with the Palestinian people, a message was sent out to all EMO/SAC members advocating the Rochester students’ actions and saying that the

When University of Rochester students occupied an academic building in solidarity with the Palestinian people, a message was sent out to all EMO/SAC members advocating the Rochester students’ actions and saying that the

same action should be taken here.” a request this was, due to the fact that a few members didn’t feel comfortable with the idea of dealing with the SA, Andrew could not allow the SA to use the megaphone. Not too long ago, as SA elections were going on, I received an apologetic email from Andrew asking forgiveness for allowing SA candidate Abid Hossain to speak at an EMO/SAC meeting without first asking everyone’s opinion. EMO/ SAC had decided not to endorse any candidates, however, but apparently for Abid to even simply talk about his views and his plans for the SA, the entire organization had to agree to it.

The biggest problem with such a lack of leadership and organization comes to light when EMO/SAC has to deal with the SA and money, although they don’t have to handle the latter that often. The treasurer would actually joke about how bad of a treasurer he is and about how he doesn’t work with the SA, which is evidenced by the fact that they are around $280 in debt and, despite the fact that they raised around one hundred dollars for one issue of the Zine, they lost their entire budget this year.

EMO/SAC also once had a radio show, but due to swearing on air they lost it, and a blanket drive for the homeless put on by one of the mem-

through their collective government and lack of organization and accountability, they have become much more effective at destroying themselves than BR could ever be.

My time in EMO/SAC is starting to affect me. Last night, I gave some change to a homeless person instead of calling the police on him. I’m scared. One of things that EMO/SAC is most known for is their radical political positions, and generally this stereotype is true. However, some of the more radical and more hilarious parts of their philosophy are hidden behind closed doors, but that’s why I’m here. Most people think that the members of EMO/SAC are all radical eco-terrorists making bombs in a back room while smoking marijuana.

Fortunately, though, this is not true.

Many in EMO/SAC are responsible, logical people who simply care about their world and are passionate about their positions. In fact, they refused several protests and endorsements throughout the year because they were too dangerous or, because they were put on by groups that were too radical and unpredictable.

However, just as in all groups, despite the fact that most are sane, there are a few insane people who tend to define the group. For example, when Binghamton Review, April 2009

same action should be taken here: “We should take cues from our compass at Rochester and New School and start to think about what it would look like to have this sort of student power at Binghamton.” Another message was sent out when Kimmel Marketplace at NYU was taken over by students, saying “Us next!” In another email, there was actually a suggestion that direct contact was to be made with the NYU students despite the police cordon around the area, asking to “Please make it to the building if you can or email … and demand [NYU] negotiate with the students.”

Such behavior is relatively tame though, when compared to some of the other things that occurred in that office. For example, there was someone who came in every so often always wearing camouflage clothing who once handed out riot police manuals and gave instructions on how to counteract police forces. A similar seminar was given at the SUNY Social Justice Conference earlier this year, and there was even a speaker who wouldn’t let himself be photographed due to how many enemies he had made over the years. At the same conference, they discussed secret government programs and even advocated creating “security names” to use with the police and oth15

EMO/SAC

er authorities.

Of course, the most hilarious aspect of EMO/SAC’s philosophy is the sometimesmisguided ideas that they have (okay, this time that is a joke).

One of the best things that I received this year was a message with a link to the song An Open Letter to Barack Obama, a song by the radical hip hop group Rebel Diaz, which apparently “expresses a bunch of complicated feelings super eloquently.” In the song, there are so many lines that are simply so incredibly stupid that they bear repetition here and demonstrate how mistaken some of EMO/SAC’s ideas can be. For example, one of the lines in the song says “It’s crazy you from Hawaii I was born in Chertsey, England, I’m an immigrant too dawg.” Evidently Hawaii recently seceded from the United States. Despite Obama’s positive support throughout the country, Rebel Diaz is a little suspicious, as they accuse him of spending “50 million dollars on these midget turtle police officers to keep the people under control,” thereby demonstrating that Obama “ain’t part of our set homey [he] aint down with the hood [he] ain’t part of our set.” Of course, Rebel Diaz didn’t leave his foreign policy experience alone either, expressing great concern about “the situation of [their] peeps in Palestine.” The best line in the song though is the one that sums up the political philosophy of EMO/SAC so “super” eloquently: “Seein’ people that’s really talkin’ ‘bout change, and I’m just, sometimes I’m just confused about these things, you know what I mean?”

I feel myself slowly slipping into the 16

darkness. I have recurring dreams that I’m trying to climb a ladder out of a deep hole but getting nowhere, despite all of the affirmative action rungs. The only way that I can remember myself is by walking downtown and punching a minority in the face. After spending so long as a part of both Binghamton Review and EMO/SAC, which must be a campus first, I have exposed much of EMO/ SAC and what many consider to be what is wrong with them; however, it is not without learning a powerful lesson. Indeed, the strangest thing that I encountered as a member of both organizations is the striking similarities between the two. Honestly, both Binghamton Review and EMO/SAC want the same thing, the security of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. They just disagree on how to get there. Binghamton Review thinks that all members of EMO/ SAC are extremely stupid and liberal eco-terrorists bent on creating the ultimate communist state in America, and EMO/SAC believes that every member of Binghamton Review is an extremely stupid and conservative Binghamton Review, April 2009

cult member who drinks baby blood on weekends and who wants to return to the Confederacy. Obviously (to some), this is not the case, and members of both organizations are fairly intelligent human beings that care about the freedom and opportunity of every American. Therefore, EMO/ SAC has some very serious flaws in their organization and philosophy; however, they are far from a plotting a successful hippie revolution.

In fact, now that I think about it, Obama’s not that bad of a president, and the rich do have too much money. Why not increase corporate taxes? And why stop there? Why not give every homeless person a living wage, and give minorities super rights, and make…

The reporter who submitted this story, whose name has been omitted for security reasons, disappeared around the time of the writing of this article. We can only assume that he has gone native and turned to the dark side. If any member of BR encounters him, they will not hesitate; a clean death is the only honor he has left.

democrats

The Cowardice of the College Democrats

by Alex Paolano ‘09

T

he Democrats are still fresh off of what must seem like a very satisfying victory. This victory last November saw Democrat wunderkind Barack Obama gallantly take the oath of office. Along with Barack Obama, this nation saw a flood of Democratic senators and congressmen invade Washington with ideas of European socialism in their minds. It didn’t take long for the true agenda of the Democratic Party to be seen. They began to spend our grandchildren’s money like drunken sailors, passing the $1,000,000,000,000 (that’s a trillion, by the way) stimulus bill that no one had time to read, without considering the alternatives that the Republican Party proposed.

The Obama administration has decided to close the prison in Guantanamo Bay, and has contemplated setting some of the detainees there free, to the horror of the families of 9/11 victims. (See the February 2009 of BR for more information.) Obama has appointed underqualified people to government positions, and people whose moral hygiene is as bad as a member of EMO’s regular hygiene. (Once again, see the February 2009 issue of BR for more information.) In more recent developments, the North Koreans have decided to test the

audacity of an Obama government by launching an ICBM, a move that the Obama administration allowed with no resistance. The Obama administration no longer allows us to use terms such as terrorist, or terrorism, or war on terror. Instead he likes to hide behind liberal political correct nonsense to disguise the real dangers.

In short, the first few months of the Obama administration have been mediocre to say the best, and

abominable to say the worst. It has gotten so bad at times that we have European leaders giving us lessons on free market capitalism.

Here in New York, the budget crisis has caused tuition hikes for SUNY students, and the problems go much farther than that. New York has seen Binghamton Review, April 2009

years of liberal spending and entitlement programs bankrupt this state of not just current wealth but of future wealth. Governor Paterson is now working to try to fix the mess, but old liberal ways die hard, and nothing he is doing is working.

With all of these things going on, it is important for political groups to come out and hold debates and exchange ideas about the many problems facing our nation. The Binghamton University College Republicans offered to organize a debate against the College Democrats as a way of giving the students at BU a chance to hear both sides. With the Democrats in power in Albany and Washington, and them overreaching and overspending, we only feel it is fair to give the Democrats a chance to defend what they do.

The Chairman of Binghamton University College Republicans proposed to College Democrat President Brian Young a chance to debate, saying that two members of BUCR would debate the two best that the BUCD could put forth, but he was denied.

The Democrats have denied the request to take part in a debate, instead wanting to bring in politicians to come and spin their policies to try and sell it to the students. The reasons for this are twofold. The first reason is that 19

college dems the Democrats, after only a few short months, have done things that are so indefensible, and have overreached so much, that the College Democrats realistically cannot defend their polticians’ actions. In the past, when Republicans were in power and Democrats contested that they had overreached, College

they like to say that they win the debates, anyone with ears and common sense knows the truth. Past issues of Pipe Dream crowned Republicans the winner, and students who would like to remain unnamed because they are members of the College Democrats have told me that the Republicans

no factual legs to stand on, and simply do not have the guts to come out and get stomped on again. Even in the most difficult times to debate, especially in 2008, when we were in the last year of an unpopular Republican president, and in the midst of the Messianic figure that was B.H. Obama, the

In the past, when Republicans were in power and Democrats contested that they had overreached, College Republicans stood up, explained their side, and debated their points. The College Democrats seem unwilling to do the same.

Republicans stood up, explained their side, and debated their points. The College Democrats seem unwilling to do the same. The Democrats need to learn that with power comes responsibility, and that responsibility means answering for the actions of the party.

The second reason why the Democrats won’t debate is out of fear. The Democrats have been generally embarrassed in debates in the past. While

have won. If you would like to see the last major debate held at Binghamton to make your own decision, go to youtube.com, type in “Binghamton University Debate,” and view all of the “Road to the White House” clips. The clips show the truth; the Republicans won the debate.

The Democrats simply cannot justify to themselves or their group members debating again. They have

Republicans had the courage to stand on principle and defended their ideals.

The Democrats have neither the courage nor the principles.

Alex Paolano is a junior majoring in History. If the College Democrats disagree with the contents of this article, they are welcome to challenge him to a debate, though we don’t think this is likely to happen.

Words of Wisdom: “Giving money and power to

government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.”

-P. J. O’Rourke 20

Binghamton Review, April 2009

Political correctness

The Death of Liberty in Europe Geert Wilders at CPAC 2009

by Nick Valiando ‘11 If I asked you to think of a politician, you probably would not think of Geert Wilders. First off, he is surprisingly tall – over six feet – and has bright platinum-blond hair. In fact, if you didn’t know better, you would probably think that he is some sort of flamboyant filmmaker. Actually, you wouldn’t be far off. However his film isn’t some sort of avant-garde artistic expression, it is deadly serious.

His short, sixteen minute film Fitna

that instruct followers of Muhammad to kill all those who do not believe in the word of Allah. This threat comes at us in two waves. The first, militant Islam, the terrorists who seek to kill all westerners, we know well. The second is a sort of stealth Jihad that seeks to infiltrate and subvert the governments of western countries. At first, these infiltrations seem innocent, like the demand of some Muslim students in the UK that their university set times

America Alone that criticized Islam. If you think that these Jihadists’ intentions are peaceful, I need only point you to the case of Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker related to the famous painter Vincent van Gogh. In 2004, he was shot several times and then nearly beheaded by Mohammed Bouyeri because of his film Submission, which detailed the violence against women that is prevalent in many Muslim societies.

Geert Wilders devotes the beginning of

Many have come here seeking economic opportunity, so we must always remember that economic opportunity in America is related directly to the freedoms we hold dear. We must stand united against the Jihadist threat, or, like much of Europe, we will be subverted and destroyed from within. has drawn much flak in Europe, as of late, over its controversial subject matter. You see, Wilders simply interposed verses of the Quran over the destruction caused by radical Islamists that those verses inspire. In February, I had the opportunity to meet Geert Wilders at the Conservative Political Action Conference and view his film Fitna.

Radical Muslims want to impose and enforce Islamic law called Sharia onto the entire world. These Jihadists harp on passages of the Quran

where Muslim women would have the gym all to themselves. However this leads us down a dangerous and slippery slope.

Much of the stealth Jihad’s new offensive is aimed at targeting politically incorrect critics who would expose their plans. They do so by way of the many “hate speech” laws that exist in many European countries and Canada.

Just last year, a Muslim group took an American author Mark Steyn to court in Canada over an excerpt of his book Binghamton Review, April 2009

his film to van Gogh and his murder.

It is in this dangerous climate that the Dutch politician produced his own film on much the same subject matter of Van Gogh’s Submission. Wilders, in Fitna, attempts to connect violent Islam to the Islamic texts which bring about, or, at the very least, are used as a pretext for the virulent violence of the Jihadists. As soon as his film was completed, he came under fire from many within his own country. Some viewed him as a danger to the peace, others 21

accused him of being “Islamophobic” and hateful towards Muslims. When Wilders was recently invited by several members of the House of Lords of the British parliament to screen Fitna, there was a tremendous outcry by the Muslim community. Lord Ahmed, the only Muslim member of the House of Lords, said that he would fill the streets with ten thousand Muslims to stop Wilders from getting into the House of Lords. The British government refused Wilders entry to Britain. He was detained and then deported back to the Netherlands. He has since tried to gather support for a European “First Amendment,” modeled after the one we Americans take for granted.

Recently, at the behest of a bloc of Islamic countries, the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution calling on countries to stop people from defaming Islam. It is only a matter of time before you will start hearing similar calls here in the US. We must recognize that our liberties are already under attack as the example of Geert Wilders clearly shows.

It is only a matter of time before these very same things begin to cross over from Canada and Europe. We stand to lose everything that we hold dear here in America. We need to understand the threat we face, and comprehend where it comes from. Likewise, we should not alienate those members of the Muslim

community who see the tremendous promise that America brings to those who live here. Many have come here seeking economic opportunity, so we must always remember that economic opportunity in America is related directly to the freedoms we hold dear.

I call on any Muslims reading this to spread the message of freedom to their friends and family and to fight those who would see that harsh Islamic law is applied to American society. We must stand united against the Jihadist threat, or, like much of Europe, we will be subverted and destroyed from within.

We already control campus...soon it will be the world.

Join us before it’s too late.

Binghamton Review We’re still looking for foot soldiers.

Meetings every Thursday at 7:30pm in the BR office.

Email editor@binghamtonreview.com to get involved.

22

Binghamton Review, April 2009

in memory of the victims of the 4/3/09 binghamton tragedy

Parveen Nln Ali 26, Pakistan Dolores Yigal, 53, Philippines Marc Henry Bernard 44, Haiti Maria Sonia Bernard 46, Haiti

Li Guo 47, China Hong Xiu Mao 35, China Lan Ho 39, Vietnam Hai Hong Zhong 54, China

Maria Zobniw 60, U.S. Roberta Bobby King 72, U.S. Almir O. Alves 43, Brazil Jiang Ling 22, China Layla Khalil 57, Iraq

Binghamton Review is a monthly, independent journal of news, analysis, commentary, and controversy. Students at Binghamton University receive two copies of the Review free of charge (non-transferrable). Additional copies cost $1 each. Letters to the Editor are welcome; they must be accompanied by the author’s current address and phone number. All submissions become the property of the Review. The Review reserves the right to edit and print any submission. Copyright © 2009 Binghamton Review. All rights reserved. Binghamton Review is distributed on campus under the authority of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Binghamton Review is a member of the Collegiate Network and is a Student Association-chartered organization. Binghamton University is not responsible for the content of the Review; the Review is not responsible for the content of Binghamton University. Binghamton Review thanks the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.

Past Editors of Binghamton Review: John Guardiano, Yan Rusanovsky, Kathryn Doherty, Ephriam Bernstein, Michael Malloy, Paul

Schnier, Adam Bromberg, Bernadette Malone, Michael Darcy, Nathan Wurtzel, Amy Gardner, John Carney, Paul Torres, Jason Kovacs, Robert Zoch, Matthew Pecorino, Michael O’Connell, Louis W. Leonini, Joseph Carlone, Christopher Powell, Nathaniel Sugarman 23 Binghamton Review, April 2009

PrOTesT Racism THE PIRATE CLUB was recently chartered by the SA rules committee as a cultural group and will have a seat on the Intercultural Awareness Committee (ICA), with the purpose of “bring[ing] together those who share a common interest in pirate culture and history.”

Unfortunately, the club’s first month has been interrupted by a series of racist, bigoted attacks by the right wing media and certain monoculturalists on campus. We as students must band together in support of this latest oppressed minority group! Join us in solidarity!

April 25th by the Library Fountain!

Bring your own eye patches (peg legs provided).

“We cannot let the warmongering U.S. Navy impede on the sovereignty of the Pirate people. Say no to imperialism!”

-Andrew Epstein

EMO/SAC

“This is exactly why we need the VPMA. If I weren’t here, who would be around to call people racist?”

-Maryam Belly

VPMA

“In a unanimous decision, we have determined that this protest may or may not be subject to the open meetings law.”

-Jon Cogan

Judicial Board Sponsored by the Pirate Club, the Anti-Pirate-Defamation League, Matt Landau (so, by default, Matt Allwood), EMO/SAC, the GSO, the Committee to Elect Adam Amit, RPU (The Rainbow Pirate Union)