vol_18_no_11

STUDENTS WIN! MSA's Code Amendments Await Bollinger's Approval By

JACOB F.M. OSLlCK

OLLOWING MONTHS OF committee work, on Jan. 25 the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) formally proposed a series of amendments to the Code of Srudent Conduct. The amendments, if approved by University President Lee Bollinger, will be the first revisions to the Code since its ratification in November 1995. The tentative changes come after years of debate on the Code among members of the University community. With its revisions, MSA hopes to rectifY some prominent concerns surrounding the Code and its implementation.

While most of the proposed amendments focus on minor clarifications of

F

Code jurisdiction, some are more substantial. For exampie, in Section N: Scope of the Violations, MSA proposes to limit the Code's dominion to just University property, not the entire city of Ann l\rbor. -On a practical level, this means that an underage student caught drinking off campus would no longer be subject to Code charges - although they would still face regular criminal proceedings.

Under the revisions, students would also enjoy expanded legal rights at Code proceedings. Currently, the Code allows each student to have an "adviser," but not full counsel. Under one proposed amendment, the University would train students in Code law, allowing them to serve in a new Srudent Advocate Corps as a kind of public defender. In this way, MSA hopes

to promote students' rights by placing accused students on more equal footing with University prosecutors at Code hearings.

To make securing convictions more difficult, the Code revisions ban hearsay testimony as evidence, and demand a higher standard of proof. Thus, if endorsed by President Bollinger, no longer can the Office of Student Conflict Resolution convict students solely on the "preponderance of the evidence," a legal term meaning roughly 51 % certainty. Instead, to get a conviction for minor offenses the evidence must be "dear and convincing." Major offenses will fall under the even higher standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Like-

JAMES WIlSON

AND MATI FRANCZAK

B

IG CORPORATE COFFEE" has finally infested Ann Arbor with its moderately priced, stunningly chic, and amazingly tasty brew of oppression. That's right, Starbucks coffee has come to town. Of course if opponents had their way, they would rather have you calling it "Starfucks."

Realizing that it is already hard enough to find good coffee on State Street, Starbucks, a Seattle based corporate coffee house decided to colonize the U-M's once humble shopping district with its form of caff'einated assimilation. In response to this attack of cooperate hegemony, a small band

3

Letters to the Editor

Praise for Sackett and Oslick? Jesse Herzog graciously returns with yet another interestinK letter.

, -, • •..• _

. _ _ ""' _ _ _ _ _ _ _

4

of protesters, many of whom are members of SOLE (Srudents Organizing for Labor and Economic Equality), organized a demonstration on Friday, January 28.

Barring placards covered in vulgarities and such phrases as "Starfucks: the Walmart of Coffee," they stood on the street corner in front of the store. During the beginning of the protest they chanted the predictable "Hey Hey, Ho Ho, corporate coffee's got to go," but due to their lack of a megaphone and motivation, the protest quickly grew quiet.

The protesters explained that they were protesting a predatory monopolywhich controlled 33% of the coffee shop industry and destroyed the competition by the unthinkably heinous practice of charging less for their products. The protesters

From Suite One

6

A guest viewpoint from SPEED ... and surprisingly, we at the Review actually commend MSA. .. again!

u~uu uu ~ ....",T'<',~>' •••.,.,_,"_".

.

'u ...... _>~ .,,_

""·'.'w,~· -..,_,

By

MICHAEL AUSTIN

V

ICE PRESIDENT OF Student Affairs Royster Harper announced at an annual meeting with the University Board of Regents that the University will revise it's hazing policy_ The U-M took this action after finding that "the University of Michigan condemns • hazing practices as requirements for membership, advancement, or continued good standing in organizations," is too vague to be useful. While the University works on its new policy, the Intraftaternity Country (IFC) the Panhellenic Association, and the Black Greek Association are also looking

See HAZING, Page 3

See CODE, Page 3

Protesters Cry Foul at Starbucks's Chic and Tasty Brew of Oppression By

Hazing: On Its Way Out?

also expressed fears that the Starbucks in vasion could lead to Ann -Arbor beginnin to look like a suburb. As one protester explained "It made me feel like I was hom again, which I hate."

When it was suggested that, if peopI do not want another major coffee chain i town, they will not patronize Starbucks one protester commented that she had litd confidence in the public, stating tha "people are sheep ... they will go to the plao with the nicest signs."

Within the coffee shop, patrons ap peared to be largely unfazed. In fact, rathe than discouraging business, the protest at tracted a few patrons in the form of Stu dents Promoting Export-orientated Eco

Bojc.on 5til..f'*uck s,uf'tfAtf' IJXA L U~ES

See STARBUCKS, Page 8

Review Columnists

Jake whines about intellectual property theft. Matt sleeps at home instead of getting his column in.

9

Trouble in Arizona: Internet Censorship

Matt Franczak explores threats to personal freedom in Goldwater Country. Also, affirmative action yet again.

... ~ ...,,~""........ ..........,.,,~ .= """""".~._ . ~."'""'s••'''''''''"_'';~;:;__.,....,..",.,_= '':'',__::''.!:~;:;=_::::::_=~~~,.=~-:~ ....

''':''''_','::' ~,~,

,_,_ ... __ .. • '

10

Book Review

Rabeh Soofi reviews a book about how those damn ChiCorns are trying to take over the world. Right Pinky?

D SERPENT'S

TOOTH

Word has it that the College Libertar~ ians are surprised more campus Christian organizations aren't getting involved in there marijuana legalization drive. After all, doth in not say in the Christian Bible that St. Stephen got stoned?

"Now, students are given the oppertunity to defend themselves before being suspended, but they don't have to be told what they are defending themselves against." -Bram "Rhymes with Mom" Elias as quoted in the January 27th Daily. Serp~nts conclusion: either the Daily has been taking rather sloppy quotations or Bcam is enrolling in

o

TilL \IHIII(; \'\ RF\ IF\\

the Joseph Stalin School of Student Gov~ ernment and he left out the part about re~ quiring a show trial to publically confess their crimes before being shot in the back of the head. FYI, the "quote" does not acurately describe the Code amendments.

Mormon Utah Senator and presidential candidate Orrin Hatch ended his bid fot the Republican presidential nomination the other day, after getting only one percent of the vote in the Iowa caucuses. The one percent he got was even less significant though, once it was realized that all the votes only came from Hatch's wives and children.

The Campus Affairs JoumaJ of the University of Michigan "1'"hat waJ jwt • Ouh.·

The Don Bosco school in Santa Maria Di Licodia in Sicily will name their new 500 seat auditorium after Saddam Hussein, apparently because it was paid for by a group promoting ltalian~Iraqi relations.

The new auditorium will be connected to the Muammar Khadafi Gymnasium, the Yasser Arafat Library, and the Jessica Curtin Cafeteria.

Jacob F.M. Oslick Acting Editor-in-Chief

Justin Wilson Publisher

James Yeh National Affairs Editor

Matthew S. Schwartz

Serpent's Tooth has a new favorite website: www.freespeech.orglwaronracism Check it out! Cool stuff.

SERPENT'S SPECIAL: PRIMARY SEASON

Last week, GOP Presidential contender Alan Keyes tried to show himself to be a "man of the people" by riding a mosh-pit to Rage Against the Machine music. In response, Serpent's Tooth has caught other Oval Office hopefuls trying to show that they too are in touch with popular culture:

Editor-at-Large ARTS EDITOR: CONTRIBUTING ED.: ASSISTANT EDITOR: COPY EDrrOR: ILLUSTRATOR: ONLINE EDITOR: ONLINE STAFF: CORRESPONDENT: (LONDON)

David Guipe

R. Colin Painter Matt Franzak Netanya Weiss Astrid Phillips Rabeh Sooft Albert Feng Mike Rosen

Julie Jeschke

STAFF WRITERS: Mike Austin, , Dustin Lee, David SadreU, Kurt Radtmacher, Curt Robertson

EDITORS EMERITI:

Lee Bockhom

Benjamin Kepple The Michigan Review is the independent, student-run journal of conservative and libertarian opinion at the University of Michigan. We neither. solicit nor accept monetary donations from the U-M. Contributions to the Michigan Review are taxdeductible under Section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Review is not affiliated with ally political party or university political group.

Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the editorial board. Ergo, they are unequivocally correct and just. Signed articles, letters, and cartoons represennhe opinions of the author and not necessarily those of the Review. The Serpent's Tooth shall represent the opinion of individual anonymous contributors to the Review, and should not necessarily be taken as representative of the Review's editorial stance. The opinions presented in this publication are not necessarily those of the advertisers or of the University of Michigan. We welcome letters. articles, and comments about the journaL

oney

And here's Bradley and Gore competing for hypocrite of the year award. These two tried to blend in with the young crowd by starring in a re-make of Half-Baked. Of course these admitted ex-stoners never answer the question: Why do they think potheads from 20 years ago should go to the White House, while potheads ftom 20 minutes a.20 should 2 0 to the "iail house?"

Appealing to Atlanta voters in advance of the Georgia Primary, George W Bush decided to prove that he literally is a Coke Machine.

Proof that one does NOT need affirnlative action to succeed: Review Managing Editor Jacob F.M. Oslick was born in Mexico and was a Mexican citizen until age IS. Despite this, he did not declare himsclfto be a "Mexican-American" on his law school applications. This past week, Mr. Oslick was accepted to the University of Chicago's Law School (6th best in the country according to V,S. News and World Report) with a $54,000 scholarship. The editors e>.tend a hearty congratulations to Jacob, and cite this latest staff success story as one . more reason joining the Review.

Please address all advertising, subscription inquiries, and issue payments to Publisher cia the Michigan Review.

Editorial and Business Offices: The Michigan Review

911 N. Unlverslty Avenue, Snlle One Ann Arbor, MI 48109·1265

ApoIcv

letters@michiganreview.com http;//www.michiganreview.com Tel. (734) 647-8438 • Fax (734) 936-2505

The editors would like to apologize to Mr. Rubens for the picture that accompanied our n:ccnt flont-page story. "McCain Supponers Organize on Campus" Oan. 26. 2000). The piCtufC. a dose up (but undoetorcd) picture of his face, may have been appropriate for a parody but not for a hard news article.

C""yrlgbl <!':l 2000 The Michigan Review, Inc. All rights reserved.

The Michigan Revu,w Is • member of the Collegiale Network.

Love us or hate us, write us.

q,rifiqtiOQ

Also appearing on our Jan. 26 (Over was a photograph of a SOLE protater wearing a N"dcc hat. ·SIIItMS" prominendy displayed. Despite comments we have received from readers, we affirm that this was a rr.t. IINI«ttmrJ pborograph; not one of our Curtin-StYle hade jobs. :-) ________

~~~~~~~~~~.~

__

E-mail letters@michiganreview.com Proving that even the Reform Party is not immune to bug, candidate Serpent's Tooth noticed candidate Buchanan touring with the Village People this past week.

Buchanan, "I support village people, and will do to make sure filthy foreign invaders don't take their j construction workers, cowboys and Indians."

.~.c

-~"~~--'~~- " " -" ~'~----" "-~~---'-'-"""'-""-'-""-'~--'------

with subject, "Letter to the Editor" Or send mail to: The Michigan Review 911 N. University Ave. Ann Arbor, MI 48109

~' r' : ILETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Jesse Herzog Graciously Accepts Award LL, I MUST say I was quite honored when you presented me with the 'Worst Letter Writer oIThe Year' award, being that I have always admired your newspaper. However, I must accept this award on behalf of Professor J.L. Mackie, former professor of philosophy at Oxford.

You presented me the award for my poor logical reasoning in my letter concerning God and abortion, yet what I wrote was a direct synopsis of Mackie's work titled Evil and Omnipotence. If you are nor familiar with this piece, it is a philosophical proof that the concept of God is paradoxical, which is what my letter was intended to convey. While some of the greatest philosophers and theologists have spent years and years attempting to locate a flaw in Mackie's argument, none have succeeded, and the argument remains the only logically uncontested proof that God can not exist. However, when you presented me my award you stated that my letter, and thus Mackie's proof, contained the most flawed logic you had ever encountered. I always thought that the Review writers were quite sman, but I never imag-

ined your knowledge had reached this level.

My friends, you are suggesting that you have found the flaw in Mackie's proof that numerous scholars have toiled over for years. Being that the case, I must ask of you to enlighten me, and for that matter the rest of the world, as to what grand revelation you have had.

Oh, but that is not all. How could I ever forget the beloved hot dog stand letter. To that, all I can say is that I am still laughing over it. If you want to call me a jerk like all of the bad-ass feminists who have confronted me, please be my guest, it's funny.

I still like your newspaper.

CODE

HAZING

Continued From Page 1

Continued From Page 1

wise, another amendment prevents the University from pursuing Code charges against a student for an offense where the student was already acquitted by a criminal court, or not brought to trial due to lack of evidence. This, it is believed, will soothe some student concerns about Code proceedings constituting a form of "double jeopardy." In addition, students under investigation for the same offense may opt for separate, individual trials.

Still, all these changes remain tentative until approved by Bollinger himself.

Whether Bollinger will approve all or any of the changes is an open question. Trapani believes that "these are reasonable changes," and says that ifhe thought the amendments stood no chance of getting approved, he would not have "wasted [his] time."

Yet, MSA Rep. Joel Kinner took a more cynical view. "I don't think Bollinger is going to be too enthusiastic about changing anything.... He'll probably take the recommendations and shove them down the toilet." Kinner also points out that, despite the Code's importance on campus, few students or even MSA members know much or care about the Code. Thus, there is less pressure on the University to accede to MSA's recommendations. 1\-R

in to the issue of hazing on campus.

The hazing task force, formed by the IFC and the Panhellenic Council to look into the concept of hazing, is much like a different task force that examined alcohol issues two years ago. "The first issue of the task force is to look at the issue of hazing and what's driving it," said IFC advisor John Mountz in an interview with the Review. Following this analysis, the task force will issue a repon and give its recommendation to the council. After that, the Councils will probably implement new policies to wipe out or at least severely restrict hazing. In all likelihood, these new guidelines will probably resemble the pending U-M policy. "Greek Councils have always worked closely with the administration," said Mountz. In addition to collaborating with the University, the task force will pool opinions from the outside community regarding their analysis. Said Mountz, "You can't make your decision in a box. You've got to get feedback from people with different perspectives."

The task force will also seek to set a basic hazing standard to judge each case from a uniform baseline. This stems from the task force's belief that with a concrete definition of hazing, they can eliminate even minor hazing occurrences. In an at-

W

figure I gave of over 600,000 is the number of marijuana arrests - 682,000 in 1998, to be exact. Only some 60,000 people are now incarcerated for marijuana, because most arrested people end up getting less than 1 year of jail time. In my view, of course, that's 60,000 too many. It is our moral obligation to do what we can to combat injustice and needless suffering.

I believe that America's barbaric prohibition of marijuana is a major cause of both.

Therefore I call on all staffers and readers of the Review to help with the PRA 2000 and local petition campaigns. The time to fight marijuana prohibition is now.

Charles A. Goodman, &ckham

Jesse Herzog, LSA Freshman

Praise for Mr. Sackett's Pot Piece I'd like to thank Dave Sackett and the Michigan Review for a very positive and helpful article about our marijuana petition campaign. I have two comments. First, the local Ann Arbor petition drive is to allow marijuana for medical purposes only, not to decriminalize it fully. Second, the

Mr. Os lick' s Column "Thought Provoking' I just wanted to write to tell Jacob Oslick that his article, "Remove God from the Abortion Debate" was excellent. I almost didn't read it because I'm getting sick of the ongoing abortion debate, but I'm glad I did. It's been a long time since I've seen such a sensible and thought provok-

mosphere that does not tolerate even slight amounts of hazing, the task force hopes organizations would not even consider committing larger incidents that involve serious bodily harm. While recent events such as the shooting of a pledge with a BB gun at Alpha Epsilon Pi have put fraternities in the spotlight, hazing is not limited to the Greek system. Athletic teams and other organization have also been known to haze new members. And while no Greek Council governs these organizations, the University policy will cover every student group. Vice President Harper proposed a hazing hot-line to help enforce the new policy, but even by itself, the Administration's likely new zero-tolerance approach will be effective simply due to the extreme risks it would create for wannabe hazers.

Although neither the Greek Council, nor the U-M will make any decisions until n~t semester, it is most likely they will hold organizations, not individuals accountable for hazing. This derives from the recognition that while in some instances only one person administers hazing, it is usually a practice of the group as a whole.

Furthermore, the Administration can reinforce how serious hazing is by using severe punishments, such as removing an organization from campus, The IFC and Panhellenic Council will also probably hold entire houses responsible since all the fra-

ing piece on this worn out topic. My favorite part was his description of the "three humanitarians, one undistinguished heretic and his mother." I thought that was great. Thanks for the article, and keep up the good work.

Trevor Gunderson, Engineering

Mr. Schwartz's Views "Correct' and "Moral' I read your article in the Review today and I wanted to tell you that I really agreed with what you said. Despite being, as another Review writer put it, "just slighry to the left of Leon Trotsky," I feel your view is the correct one and the moral one. Well reasoned and well written.

Mark Buckles, LSA

A~n'l"! ()isa~rl'l"!

E-mail liS: I('tt(' r\ {[I III h'" ;~1I1l r(,1';l'lt', ('( JIll

ternities and sororities on campus have pledges against hazing, and any form of hazing violates those pledges. (no pun intended) While it is clear that the University has little tolerance for hazing, it is somewhat unclear why organizations feel hazing is needed in the first place. "Hazing is unnecessary to create a strong organization.

Absolutely unnecessary," said Mountz. He continued, "There is a large number of organizations that do not haze and are excellent models on how to incorporate new member in a a positive way and it makes them a stronger organization." These groups unmistakably demonstrate the popular viewpoint that hazing is not needed to form a closely-knit unit.

Still, even if hazing gets eliminated, it's legacy will continue to burden the Greek system's reputation both on and off campus. After all, changing public opinion of the Greek system, which has been tarnished by numerous alcohol and hazing scandals, not to mention stereotypical "Animal House" -type movies might take decades. Yet, Mountz remains optimistic and is confident that with enough effort, any undertaking will prove a success. "I have tremendous confidence in our student's ability to tackle a problem and make a substantive difference." rvR

wwwn*hipllreview.am

o

A Bit Oft !l~"ls~~~~n

GUEST VIEWPOINT

Don.'t Join the WRC

B

y PUBLICATION, SOLE will have embarked on an aggressive campaign to pres sure the U-M into adopting something called the WRC. They claim that the WRC is the best way for institutions such as Michigan to help workers in poor countries. But what exactly is the WRC? And will it really accomplish what SOLE claims it will?

Last year the University instituted a sweatshop code that forbids various unpleasant labor practices on the part of companies licensed to produce U-M athletic gear. However, the code is not yet enforced. The Worker Rights Consortium, or WRC, is an organization created by the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) to implement a very demanding sweatshop code and gather information about violations of that code.

The WRC's proposed code, unlike the one adopted by the U-M, requires that factories pay a "living wage," defined as a wage that enables workers and their families to meet their basic needs. But the WRC is not the only enforcement option. The Department of Labor is backing an organization called the Fair Labor Association (FLA) that would also monitor factories for code violations. Thus one choice the University faces is whether to join the WRC or the FLA. So far, some 131 colleges and universities have signed on to the FLA, including athletic powerhouses such as Duke, Notre Dame, Penn State, Florida, and Florida State.

Only three universities have joined the WRC, and none of them afe important in the sports world. This near-total lack of support means that theWRC is unlikely to accomplish anything. It also means that the U-M, if it joins the WRC, will most likely find itself footing a large part of the bill for the WRC's bureaucratic and enforcement activities. That means less money for our sports teams, and less money for U-M students.

Why have so many universities chosen the FLA over the WRC? Probably because the WRC represents extremism, whereas the FLA represents compromise. The FLA's Board of Directors has representatives from industry, labor, and human-rights groups.

The organization also has strong support from both universities and government. Since the FLA is based on a compromise among a number of different interests, none is powerful enough to gain total control over it. This structure insures that only moderate reforms get passed, reforms which can be supported by a consensus. Meanwhile, of the twelve members of the WRC's Governing Board, three are selected by the USAS, and six come from the Advisory Council, which is chosen by - guess who - the USAS! Thus, three-fourths of the WRC's governing board is dominated by an unrepresentative organization of American students. The board has no representatives from industry at all.

OLE's members do have a point when they criticize the FLA's structure. At best, the FLA could operate as a force for moderate and gradual change, driven by compromise among the various interests involved. But at worst, the organization could degenerate into an exercise in futility, as the industry representatives on its board block all substantive measures. Even a mechanism that doesn't do anything at all, though, is better than an organization whose misguided extremism leads to harm. The WRC has the potential to hurt poor workers by trying too hard ro help them.

What does it mean to say that workers who are paid a "living wage" can meet their basic needs - say, for housing? Does it mean they can afford a shack? An apartment? A house in the suburbs? Certainly, it would be a good thing if workers in poor countries could be paid a higher wage. But if the wage is set roo high, it could make it unprofitable for companies to operate in poor countries. In fact, in many of the world's poorest nations, it may be impossible for any factory to operate profitably while paying its workers enough to meet the USAS's standards. Yet, because of the desperate poverty of the inhabitants of these nations, even a wage lower than the USAS's ideal would represent a dramatic improvement in their lifestyle. It's extremely unlikely that an organization dominated by the USAS will properly take into account the probable loss of jobs from setting wage standards too high. If we decide to appoint the USAS as wage bargaining agent for the poor world's textile workers, it may well "help" them right out of their jobs.

All things considered, the best option for the U-M is probably to wait, refusing to make a decision at this time. Maybe the FLA will turn out ro be the force for moderate and reasonable change that so many universities hope it will become. Or maybe the backers of the WRC will realize that their extremist stance has cost them too much support, and will abandon some of their demands, such as the living wage. In the meantime, of course, the gradual progress of development and industrialization in poor countries will spontaneously lead to slow improvements in wages and working conditions. Whatever we do, we must not interfere with that process, for it represents the best hope for poor people everywhere. Despite SOLE's angry slogans, the welfare of poor workers is too important to be sacrificed either to hasty decisipns or to irresponsible extremism.1vR - Charles Goodman, SPEED President

,_ _

~

,_,,," ,,,

..

o

FROM SUITE

ONE

MSA Does Well, But Could Do Better IMAGINE A LEGAL system where defendants have no right to legal representation.

Where the accused may be punished without ever facing their accuser, learning the charges against them, or having the opportunity to defend themselves. Where hearsay and conjecture get adInitted as solid evidence. Where proceedings remain closed ro the public. Where the rules and laws of the system exemplify vagueness, making practically anything an offe;'se-depending upon interpretation. You might think such jurisprudence finds its base in Stalin's Russia, Mobutu's Zaire, Mao's China, or Franz Kafka's The Trial. You'd be dght. Yet, scarily, the above description also conforms with the University of Michigan's Code of Student Conduct, the de facto legal system for handling student conflicts. Since its passage in November of 1995, the Code has brought Sovietstyle justice to the U-M, and a firestorm of controversy. Indeed, Code-hatred stands out as maybe the only issue unifying the entire campus body politic: from the Daily's Editorial Board, to the Review, to scores of left-wing to libertarian activists. Now finally, it seems some blocks of the Code's Berlin Wall are beginning to fall. Two weeks ago the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) recommended the University adopt a series of amendments to the Code, designed to expand student's rights. Yet, these changes, even if accepted by President Bollinger, fail to go far enough.

Perhaps the above statement is best illustrated by one of MSA's proposed recommendations which, on the surface, would grant students a hearing ro defend themselves against Code charges. This is a worthy improvement on the Code. Yet, even under MSA's proposed revisions, this hearing need not take place until two academic days after a student has been summarily suspended. Furthermore, according to the amendments, the U-M need not even inform students of their alleged offenses until the trial begins. How we ask, can anyone be expected to prepare a defense to unknown charges? Thus, the changes go at best part-way, eliminating some of the Code's excesses (lack of legal representation etc.) but failing to disturb its fundamental unfairness to the accused student. Considering the near uniform opposition to the Code, MSA's reforms going only part-way remains mysterious at best.

Still, on the whole, the proposed amendments remain sensible. For the first time, listed offenses such as sexual harassment will be specifically defined, eliminating much of the Code's famous vagueness. Similarly; the Code will no longer hold Ann Arbor residents to a higher standard of behavior than commuting students. Perhaps most importantly, the revised Code, if adopted, would begin to conform more with standard legaf procedures: Thus, it would no longer consider hearsay evidence. Convictions in serious cases must now pass the "beyond a reasonable doubt" test for evidence, not simply prepondarance of the evidence (i.e. 51 % certainty).

Yet, their remains one thing the amendments cannot change about the Code: its reputation. Afrer four years of misrule, the Code remains too sullied, roo suspicious, and too outright scary to tinker with. While the revised Code might deliver better justice, past history might create a bias for the appearance of injustice. Thus, we feel that in place of the current beast, the University should commission a truly new Code, one which basis its principles upon English Common Law, personal freedom, and the rights of the accused. In the words of numerous protestors these past four years, "Hey hey, ho ho, the Code of Conduct has got to go. ~

I

" <,,v~.<., _,,, ,,<",_~",~,,,,~ _,,,

.._ .,_

_ ",,,,"â&#x20AC;˘â&#x20AC;˘_

_

,_,_< ,"_ ._ "

m~

_____ ' _ _ _ _

~

_ _ <'<'

~brwuy

-

9. 2000

Debate Provides Dialog on Affirmative Action By

RABEH SOOFI

ROM THE ONGOING lawsuits against the university to t~e MLK . Day Symposium and endless BAMN rallies, it is apparent that U-M students are never allowed to forget affirmative action.

On Thursday, January 28, speakers representing Academics for Affirmative Action and Social Justice (AAASJ) and the Michigan Revei;; engaged in a formal debate held in front of approximately 125 people. This is the third year AAASJ has participated in such a debate, but this year the Review replaced the College Republicans as their opponent. Each side was given equal time to introduce their case, crossexamine the opponent, and conclude with a finishing statements.

The AAASJ was represented by perennial debater Nadia Kim, who spoke at both previous debates, and her partner, Micah Holmquist. Ms. Kim spoke at length about society's "institutionalized racism" and the need for corrective policies. The AAASJ team thus defended racial preferences in admissions.

The two speakers representing the Review, Managing Editor Jacob EM. Oslick

F

and Publisher Justin Wilson, described what they considered the difficulties of using race in admissions, proposing an alternative solution to the racial divide. Specifically, Messrs. Oslick and Wilson traced racial problems to a lack of opportunities for minorities, which they concluded was not best solved at the university level. Instead, they advocated equalizing primary and secondary education through a voucher system.

The debate was concluded by an hour's worth of audience questions. Ms. Kim responded to critics who asked her how fair it was to "use racism to fight racism" by telling them that they do not understand minority experiences. Perhaps the best question come from LSA Junior David Hodge, a student from a poor, 85% white high school, who questioned what he considered to be Ms. Kim's generalization of all whites as well-off suburbanites.

Unforrunetaly, perhaps the most pressing question to ask about last week's debate is: did it mean anything for anybody? The two groups featured on that Thursday in January were each knowledgeable and passionate about their stances.

The AAASJ delivered the same frustrations

Swimming in philosophical ponderings, Review Managing Ed. Jacob Os lick and Publisher Justin Wilson prepare their rebuttals. and the Review offered the same suggestions that were present at last year's debate-all of which fell upon deaf ears. The audience, which had coincidentally separated themselves into the left and right sides of the physical and metaphorical aisle, were not changed in their opinions. Rather, the debate largely consisted of four antagonists preaching to their flock. 1vR

â&#x20AC;˘â&#x20AC;˘

You Took My Spot!: The Proof By

DUSTIN LEE

~

A RECENT debate in the Michi gan League Ballroom between The ichigan Review and Academics for Affirmative Action and Social Justice (AAASJ) , the issue of race based affirmative action policies again came under careful scrutiny. Arguing the resolved that "race should be used as factor in college admissions," both parties debated with passion and eloquence-but only one could be "right."

As the debate ensued, The Michigan Review argued the point that university admissions are a "zero-sum" game; basically, that for every applicant who is accepted, another must be rejected. However, and much to the dismay of the race-blind ad- . missions camp, AAASJ, with a little help from the overwhelmingly liberal audience, incorrectly argued that the "zero-sum" game is merely a myth. In fact, Nadia Kim, a representative from AAASJ, went on to claim that opponents of affirmative action always assume that it was an underrepresented minority (e.g. African American, Latino/a, Native American, etc.) who "took the place" of a majority (Caucasian) or non-underrepresented minority (Asian, Jewish, etc.) candidate.

Not much later, an African American

male shouted from the audience (which, by the way was inappropriate, in that during the question and answer portion, people with questions were supposed to wait in line), "How do we know you didn't take his place?!" This was, of course, a question directed to Justin Wilson of The Michigan Review, who argued briefly that his friend from high school with a 3.5 GPA and 1370 SAT was denied admission to U-M-most likely on account of race based affirmative action policies.

However, as the math will surely prove, this claim is utterly false-a lie fabricated by the affirmative action camp to hide it's own folly-and a lie that undermines the logical reasoning behind U-M's point system.

The point system with raced based preferences and the "zero-sum" game in effect, that clearly states it is impossible for a potential majority student to "take the place" of another potential majority student. In other words, it is without a doubt, the underrepresented minorities who take away

It is mathematically impossible for a Caucasian, Asian, Jew, or any other nonunderrepresented minority to "take the place" of another student with a similar background Disappointed to say the least, one has to wonder how someone-two people in fact--could possibly argue a point that is mathematically impossible. Conveniently neglecting the mathematical reasoning behind race based affirmative action policies, advocates of racially biased admissions maintain their position that it is not necessarilyan underrepresented minority who "took the place" of a majority student. ."

the spots of more qualified majority applicants.

Now, for simplification purposes, we shall call this the "Zero-Sum Paradigm."

Note also, that the "Zero-Sum' Paradigm" works on the assumption, and fact, that for every student who is admitted, that is one less place for someone else. At selective universities, such as the University of Michigan, many more potential students

apply than can possibly be admitted. Many of these students surpass the admissions standards by far and therefore can be taken out of the equation. However, when universities start to approach that magic number, where they eventually have to start turning away qualified applicants on account oflimited space available and teaching resources, the "zero-sum" game comes to fruition.

Logically, there is some point where the University of Michigan must stop accepting applicants. In other words, someone here for every incoming class has the dubious distinction of being the "last one admitted." Moreover, someone else has the even more dubious distinction of being the "first student who would have been admitted had someone else not." In other words, "the last one admitted" receives a "plus one" score, while the "first student who would have been admitted had someone else not" receives a "minus one" score. Add these two students together and you get "zero."

Similarly, one might continue this process for the "second to last one admitted" and the "second student who would have been admitted had someone else not" -namely,

See Affirmative Action, Page 9

Page 6

o

THE ROAD FROM SERFDOM

The New Plague of Theft Why doesn't anyone respect intellectual property?

T

HE SCENE: A quiet May evening. I, alone in my inno cence, knocked on my friends' door. "Come in," they said, and I obliged.

Yet, as the first rays of light exuded from their room, my eyes were greeted with a horrifYing sight. On the television played a bootlegged copy of "Star Wars: the Phantom Menace." Enraged, I walked over to the VCR and removed the tape, promising to destroy this contraband. My friends did not see things the same way, "Give us back the tape, it's not yours."

"But it's not yours either, its stolen property," I reply. "Give us the tape or we'll Jacob F.M. kick your ass," they answered. RelucOslick tantly, I demurred and returned the profits of their thievery. This experience shocked me beyond belief My friends are generally good people. They would never think of say, walking into a Sears and walk-

o

ing off with a stereo purchased on a fivefingered discount. Nevertheless, they had no problem stealing other's intellectual property--the products of more hard work and creativity than any sound system.

Sadly, I've found this scene but highlights a growing spectre hauncingAmerica's moral conscience. Elsewhere I've seen friends "burn" CD's, copy MP3's,. watch illegal cable, and pirate computer games.

Even the Review, bastion of property rights, has not been immune to this disease. Just last year I had to fight multiple members of the Editorial Board to ensure we purchased legitimate computer sofrware. Most frightening to me, I've even seen self-professed "G-d fearing" people pirate religious audio tapes and computer sofrware-the virtual equivalent of shoplifting a Bible.

Nor are my experiences unique. According to research conducted by Computer Electronics Inc., intellectual property theft reached $1 trillion this year world-wide.

We would like to assume that most of us are more or less decent people. We assume that human beings hold certain moral values, and that even the staunchest atheist among us recognizes that steal-

ing is wrong. So why do all these so-called good people steal? The thieves themselves usually give a few justificatioiIs: "who am I stealing from," or "but I wasn't going to buy it anyway" or "come on, how much does it cost Bill Gates to build a CO, the dude is freakin' ripping us off man."

Their first statement perhaps crystallizes the differences people see berween stealing physical (i.e. a car) and intellectual (i.e. Microsoft Windows) property. In the case of the former, the thieves gain results directly from someone else's losssomeone steals a car, depriving someone else from using it. Yet, with intellectual property nobody seems to lose. At least not on the surface. My friend whose CD's I "burn" still has his collection in perfect working order, and now I have a new, "free" copy in addition. So what exactly am I stealing? Who exactly am I stealing from?

The answer is that, in a sense, I am stealing someone else's genius and hard work. After all, the true production cost of a CD-ROM rests not in silicone or fancy packaging (no, Bill Gates is not "ripping us off"), but in the dreams and ingenuity that created it. By pirating sofrware, cable,

movies, and music we deny the worth of another person's mind. It is irrelevant if"we weren't going to buy it later," by pirating intellectual property we "steal" the countless hours of hard work and creativity that designed the object of theft. We derive pleasure, and provide nothing in return.

Carried to the extreme, piracy also somewhat stifles the development of new intellectual property. For, as this thefr spreads and fewer people actually (gasp!) pay for what they want, artists and engineers have less incentive to keep designing new works of film, sound, and CD-ROM. All that money piracy costs Microsoft wouldn't just get buried under a mattress somewhere. Instead, it would get invested in new technologies, concepts, and products. Hence, piracy creates a new victim: the countless things never produced, never brought into the world for people to enjoy.

So, to all my faithful readers (thanks Mom), I'd like to make an impassioned plea: just say no. If you want a CD or COROM, buy it. If you want to watch the latest movie, go to the theater. If you want cable, pay for it. Anything less remains stealing plain and simple. Mt

PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION SATIRE

Where My Column Should Be HI, CRAZY RED here. Those of you reading this paper probably expect me to have a column. In fact, up until 2pm this Monday, all the editors thought I was going to have a colMatthew umn. In fact, so did Schwartz 1. But my voice recognition program couldn't understand me through my wired shut mouth, and I was too lazy to type the column out by hand. So instead of my column, I give you random gibberish-

-----

OK, this isn't really Matt, but the work ofa loyal and dedicated Editorial Board who doesn't mind covering for Matt at the last minute-

Matt's Liquid Diet: Blended China Gate Ensure Slim Fast

Jake's Recipe for Chulent: Four potatoes, diced small and fine Three celery sticks lots of barley and a tad of kasha 1 112 pounds beef stew meat 112 bottle hot curry powder 1/3 bottle cumin A healthy dash of pepper, garlic, and seasoned salt Spagetti sauce A sprinkle of red wine vinegar Mix in pot. Fill rest of pot with water Leave pot at approx. 235 degrees Farenheit for 20 hours. Serve.

Jim's Recipe for Ramen Noodles: 1 pack of Ramen Noodles A cup of water Instructions: Empty pack and ingrediants in a microwavable bowl. Pour in water, microwave for five minutes.

Jim's Top 10 Sequels ofAll Time: 10. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country 9. On Her Majesty's Secret Service 8. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan 7. Vatican II 6. The Empire Strikes Back 5. Aliens 3. The 1999 Michigan Men's Basketball Team 2. The Godfather, Part II 1. Reagan's Second Term

Justin's Idea This is one of the most unprintable stories ever to grace the pages of the Review. Translate for fun. Yes, we know that Morse code is a dead language, but then again, so it Latin and people learn that. We promise you will be entertained... -. / -- .-

-- ... / -.-- --- ..- -. -- ...-. / -.-- ..- .- .... / .... . / --. --- - / .- .-. --- .. - -. -.. / .- / .- .... - - ... . .-.-.- / . ,.. - .. -... -. - .- .. -.-- / ..... / .. -.

--- .. - -. -.. / .- / -.-- --- .. - -. --. / .- ... - ..... . / ......... / .. -..-......... -- .- -. / -.-- .. - .-. / .- -. -.. / --. --- - / .- / .-.... - - .- ... / .-- .....

-.-- ..... -.- ..- .- ...-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.- / .- -. -.-

.-- .- -.-- -- ..-- / - ...... -. -- .... / --. --- - / .. · - .. -..... - .. -. --. / .- -. -.. / --- -.. / -... -..... - / ........ / .. -... -..- .-... -.. -.-- / -- .....- . / .. -. - --- / - --- / ......... / .-- .. -.... - ...... / .- -. -.. / -- ..- ... - . / ...... -- / .....- · -.. -.... - .--- --- -....-.-.- / -.-- .... / - ........ . / ..... / - ..... / ..... -. -. -. - .... - / - .... --- .. - ..... - / .--. --- ........ -.... -... / .. -. / .- .... -.. / ......- -- .- -. / -.-. --- -- .-- ..-....... · ..... --- -..-.-.- / ........ / -- .. - ... - / ..... ... - . / - .... --- ..- -- ..... - / - ..... / ....- -- . / - ...... -. --. -- .. -- / -.... -.- .. - .. - .... / ...... . · / -... -.- ... -... -.. / - .. - .-. -. / ......-. / .-. .. -. -- .... / .- .-. --- .. - -. -.. -- .. -- / ..... -. -.· . / .-....- ... - .. -. --. / .-.. -..-- ... -... -.. -.': - .-.. -. / .- .. --- --- -.- .. -. --. / .- / .-.... - - .... / .-' --- .. --- ..... - / .- .-. --- ..- -. -.. / - .... · / . -.. -- ...... -.-.

If you are the perpatrator of the above, please email mreV@umich.edu. We would like to arrange an interview.

Number ofPS401lectures Matt woke up for before dropping it on the last day of drop/add: 3 out of7. (A True Fact.) Mt

,---------------------~,----'

Page

Those Racist 路Duke Boys .....

Confederate Battle Flag Is a Valiant Symbol By

JAMES YEH

4uthor's note: before you read the bulk of ~his artick, I think it must be noted that I'm ~ot a southerner. I'm a "yankee" from up wrth. I've lived in New Jersey the entire time f'm been in this country, and I still proudly 7arry a New Jersey drivers liceme. I have no 'oyalty to the South whatsoever. I call the Civil WIlr the Civil WIlr; not the WIlr of rvorthem Aggression and [ think General William Tecumseh Sherman was a brilliant 7lilitary commander, not a war criminal. I ;ay this because you, the reader; should know rhat this artick is not about emotion, re;ional loyalty. or ancestral loyalty, rather; it is about facts, and not allowing others to go iff half-cocked about what implies what.

E

YEN THOUGH THE American Civil War ended almost 135 years ago, remnants of the :onflict still wage on in some parts of the :ountry. Most noticeable is the issue about :he Confederate flag flying over the South ::::arolina state-house, in which the ~AACP has called for an economic boy:ott of the state until the flag is removed. ;;lmilarly, the song "Dixie" has also come .mder arrack, because like the Confederlte flag, groups claim that the song is a ;ymbol of slavery and oppression. Sup)oners of the flag and song claim that they ;ymbolize the South and the sacrifices that .ts citizens made. But what everyone fails :0 remember is that history is written by :he victors, and it is precisely that fact that las lead to the controversy today.

Today, if asked what caused the Civil War, most kids would say "slavery." That's :he adulterated history that has been force~ed to children across the nation since 1865, blanllng slaveowners for the bloodi!st conflict in American history. This runs ;mack into the facts and into logic. The United States at the time had 35 states. fhirteen of them eventually seceded from :he Union. That leaves 22 states, presumlbly states against slavery, left in the Union. That means that approximately 53% of the states in the Union stayed. Of :hose 22 states, with 2 senators each, is 14 senators, or 44 votes in the senate. fhose 44 votes, out of a total 70 votes, or !Yen 71 if one were to count the vice presijent, would also consist of only 63% of :he Union. Thus, according to the U.S. ::::onstitution, the northern states would fall far short of the two-thirds of the SenHe and three-quarters of the states needed :0 pass any amendments ending slavery. [f the South wanted to keep their slaves, ill they had to do was stay-put.

Notable Confederate generals, such

as Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson and Robert E. Lee did not own slaves, while Union Generals Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman did. Lee owned no slaves, was a hero in the Mexican-American war, lead the counter-arrack on Harper's Ferry against John Brown, and only reluctantly went over to the Confederacy because his home state of Virginia seceded.

Overall, only 7% of Southern Whites owned slaves. Would 93% of the South go to war over something only 7% had?

Of course not.

If the war was over slavery, then why did some 65,000 blacks, both slave and free, fight for the South during the Civil War? It's been estimated that 13,000 of them actually met and engaged the enemy, mostly in the defense of Richmond. And if the South was so enamored with slavery, why did President Jefferson Davis actually approve a plan for slave emancipation in return for official recognition by Britain and France?

This plan failed only because Britain wasn't interested, although France was.

In reality, the Civil War was about state's rights. The South didn't necessarily want slaves, rather, they wanted the right to have slaves if they wanted to, federal government be damned. If one were to read th'e Confederate Constitution, one would see the remarkable siniilarities it has with the original U .S. version. The only notable differences are the substitution for Confederacy, etc for United States, Union, etc, the inclusion of more references to God, the removal and clarification of some federal powers, and most interestingly, a ban on the importation of slaves and giving Congress the power to "prohibit the introduction of slaves from any State not a member of, or Territoty not belonging to, this Confederacy, " something the framers of the U.S. Constitution originally left out.

Indeed, the Civil War was like the American Revolution, leading some to call it the "Southern War for Independence."

In both wars, the side that revolted was smaller and less powerful than the mother country. Both the founding fathers and the Confederates sought freedom from oppressive laws. Both sought recognition from European powers, and both sought to even up the balance of sea power with commerce raiding. The difference, of course, is that the Confederates lost, and weren't able to tell their side of the stoty.

Some have claimed that even if the Confederate flag wasn't a symbol of hate and racism to start with, it. has become one due to its use at Ku Klux Klan rallies and other hate-group events. But the use of a symbol by a hate group cannot automatically mean that evetyone must stop using it. The Klan requires the flying of the American flag at all functions and demands

members recite the Pledge of Allegiance, but no group has attacked the Stars and Stripes and the Pledge of Allegiance solely because of that. The Klan burns crosses, yet no one has called for the removal of crosses from churches. The Nazis used the swastika, yet eastern religions, who used it originally, still use it. It's horrible that Klan members and skinheads use the Confederate flag, but why allow small fringe groups to determine whether or not states can or cannot show respect for their heritage. The very notion of associating hate groups with the South is also flawed. Many of the most prominent hate groups around are based up north, such as Matthew Hale's World Church of the Creator in Illinois and various Aryan Nation-type groups in the Northwest. Claiming that slavery itself is racist or localized in the south is also incorrect. The 1860 Census reponed the 10,000 free blacks owned 60,000 black slaves. Aside from the aforementioned Generals Grant and Sherman, the model of the cruel slave-owner, Simon Legree from Harriet Beecher Stowe's book Unck Tom's Cabin was not a Southerner, but a displaced Yankee.

Similarly, the song "Dixie" also lacks racist origins. Written in 1859 by New Yorker Daniel Decatur Emmett for a minstrel show, the lyrics were inspired by his Southern wife, who sometimes pined home. None of the lyrics make any reference to slavery or racism. The only things that could be misconstrued as racist is the word "Injun" in one of the stanzas, but only in the context of "Injun batter," and the fact that the lyrics were meant to be sung in<Ii'a black-faced minstrel show. Aside from that, the song is harmless. But just because

it was the favorite of Confederate troops, it has drawn the fire of those whom wish to stamp out the heritage of the south.

With the facts having been said, why would the NAACP still insist on bringing the flag down? In a Harris poll taken in 1994, 87% of all Americans, including 68% of black Americans, have no problem with the Confederate flag. To let the other 13% have their way would not only be unfair, but also undemocratic. Even if the Confederate flag was the flag of slavery, then the flying of the Stars and Stripes should also be banned, for slavery was legal for almost a hundred years in the country that it represents. If we were to erase all vestiges of slavery from society we must change most of the people on our money.

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Ulysses S. Grant all owned slaves. Was it because they were evil men? I doubt it. To drag "Dixie" into the fray is almost laughable. "Dixie" is a catchy tune, if nothing else. In terms of racial offense, Wagnerian operas were written by an anti-Semite and used at Nazi rallies, yet no one except the Israelis takes offense to them.

The facts refute the claims of Nelson Rivers III, the director of field operations for the NAACP, who said, "There is no single symbol more synonymous with hate and racism and slavery, and the abuse of people on the basis of their skin color, than that flag, nothing even comes close." It's interesting to note that the flag in question, the "Southern Cross," wasn't even the official Confederate flag. It was originally the flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, commanded by General Lee, and was later adopted as the battle flag of other Confederate armies as well, in addition to being adopted as the naval jack of the Confederate Navy. This emphasizes the fact that the flag doesn't even necessarily represent the Confederacy, rather the military men who fought and died under that banner.

The flag is about preserving the memory of those that died for what they thought was right: states rights. The flag is about the history of those states that fought for a lost cause. If the NAACP get rid of the flag and the song, then what else? Why not just desecrate the graves of Confederate war dead? Why not knock down all the monuments to Confederate heroes? Why not rename Washington and Lee University?

Or why not just dig up Lee and desecrate his body? The assault on Southern heritage, those men that fought for their country and indeed all American history by those that were only told one side of the story must stop. l\R

STARBUCKS Continued from Page 1 nomic Development members, who were in attendance to voice their support of capitalism in action. "This [the protest] doesn't even rise to the level of pointless, it's just plain silly," commented Charles Goodman, president of SPEED. Starbucks has not always been the personification of "corporate coffee" that it is today. Back in 1971, Starbucks was a small, locally owned Seattle coffee shop just like the shops it now competes with in Ann Arbor. Starbuck's big break came in 1984 when they opened a test location for the coffee bar idea. The company got this idea after their retail operations and marketing head visited Milan, where he observed the high concentration of espresso bars. The test franchise became an overwhelming success and Starbucks locations spread beyond Seattle to Vancouver and Chicago, beginning a cycle of expansion that would eventually lead to sites in China, Kuwait, and now State Street, Ann Arbor.

Starbucks is not a corporate hegemony, it is the embodiment of the basic tenants of capitalism. It started small and because it found a niche in the market, expanded. It didn't rout out the competition, instead it provided quality service at price that the market was willing to bear.

In all actuality, Starbucks should deserves a lot of the credit for starting the coffee craze across the country. In the mid-1980's the concept of coffee bars was wholly unknown. They weren't chic or fashionable until Starbucks spread across the country, instigating the trend. Perhaps paying an exuberant price for a small cup of coffee is not a "good" thing, but that is not what Starbucks is all about. It's about a comfortable place to relax; a place outside of hectic urban life.

The State Street Starbucks is a

Conservatives and Libertarians set aside their differences to partake in a toast to Capitalist Oppression (TM)! perfect example of the chain's mission. It's not a one-stop-coffee-shop, but instead a place to hang out and read a book or meet up with friends. It's a place where anyone can feel comfortable sipping a Double-javamocha-frapchino-Iatte-half-and-halfwhatcha-ma-call-it or cramming for a midterm. Its mission is not to colonize State Street and turn it into a strip mall, its just trying to give students a place to get away from their busy lives, and make a buck while doing that.

The protesters simply missed the boat. They want students to be "Drinking

local organically grown tea" and walking half way across the city to find a shop that is locally owned. This is not a battle over local businesses, but a senseless display of discontent with the status quo. It stems not from a particular problem with Starbucks, but an aversion to successfull capitalism, plain and simple.

The bottom line is simple, Starbucks offers a welcoming environment

where students can break during the day.

The protesters knew this: they themselves even partook in some complimentary coffee offered by Starbucks during the protest. They weren't standing there in an attempt to get people to boycott Starbucks, they just wanted to protest something.

Maybe next week it will be sweatshops again. Mt

Above: Protestors Display their Creative Vocabulary Left: Mmmm ... But don't you need a pesticide pickup in the morning? ,, , .

... .-~..-..--,,----..

-.-,,--..---,,-----

__

~~'m.'M""

~bruary

9.

-

~OOO

Arizona LaW's Threaten Basic Rights By

MATI'HEW FRANCZAK

I

N MID-JANUARY, AN Arizona state legislator, Rep. Jean McGrath, proposed legislation that would restrict the Internet access and visitation rights of students at Arizona universities.

The bills, originally accompanied by provisions mandating random monthly room searches and requiring that the course syllabi and catalogues include "accurate and complete" descriptions of the courses. The Internet access bill would have required that university computers be used solely for a "specific educational purpose" and that all university computers be installed with content fIlters. Computer site staff would have been expected to monitor the activities of students and prevent them from using the computers for personal purposes. The other bill would have prohibited students from having guest of the opposite gender in their dorm rooms except for members of their immediate family. Although recently defeated, the mere fact that these bills were proposed is an indicator of the precarious state of personal freedom in on the Internet and in higher education.

The restriction of the Internet, the most revolutionary development in the free spread of information and ideas since the

Affirmative Action Continued From Page 5 (no pun intended) the mathematical aggregation of all the "firsts," "seconds," "thirds," etc., equals "zero."

Now, back to the fallacious claims of AAASJ and the many advocates of race based affirmative action. In keeping with the "Zero-Sum Paradigm" and with the extension that makes it rather unique, take for example the admissions standards here at the University of Michigan. A point system that confers points to potential students for various academic (GPA, SAT/ ACT, strength of high school curriculum, etc.) and non-academic (race, socioeconomic background, alumni parents, etc.) factors, the goal of incoming students is obviously to reach a point total that crosses the veritable barrier-a barrier at U-M of 100 points. Once a student receives one hundred points, he is admitted.

As an example, let's consider four students: two of the "majority" (Caucasian and Asian) and two of the "underrepresented minority" (African American and Latino). Now, let's also assume that the African American and Latino

printing press, in whatever setting, is an affront to freedom. Afrer the defeat of the Communications Decency Act by the Supreme Court, the prospect of generalized restrictions on content was eliminated.

Instead, legislators have been trying to saddle as many computers as possible with censorware, software that supposedly blocks sites that contain inappropriate content. Since the content available on the World Wide Web is so large and rapidly changing, this sofrware relies on "blacklists" which are generated by context-insensitive keywords searches. The result is that these programs censor·many completely benign sites that just happen to have the right string in them (ex sites about Super Bowl XXX and the Quaker religion) or have the same URL that used to belong to a banned site (ex www.fascinations.com.asite which sells physics toys). These lists are rarely purged even when perfectly acceptable content is found to be blocked, since this would require humans to do the reviewing, which is quite difficult when the lists of banned sites range from 50,000 to over 200,000. Additionally, the censoring lists used by these programs are proprietary and encrypted, so it is impossible to know exactly what criteria these programs use.

Thus, this ultimately places control of the content received by users not in their own

sources are dedicated to non-educational hands, or even in the government's, but purposes in the first place, such as sports rather in the hands of a third-party corpoand social events. Thus, Internet access is ration. just a drop in the bucket. ~ The degree of control the bills would have called for over student actions is simply ludicrous.

The restriction on visA Bit Off "-1~t;:~n iting opposite gender ..------------~----------------------~------_.. e visitations in dorm ~7 rooms is prudish to the point of peing laugh3 ;) able. The bill doesn't ~. ;) even have the stock re! strictions of the members of the opposite sex being alone in the room or it having to occur after a certain hour that are encountered in summer camps. Thus, this restriction transcends the level of being an annoyance to the level of a major barrier to basic intergender interaction. The restriction of computer access to education use might. seem legitimate, but this sort of restriction is Nestled away in a secret hideout, Or. Simpkins ridiculous in light of would never be credited as the original how many campus reinventor of suoer olue

students come from Rochester, Michigan and therefore only receive the twenty points given for being an underrepresented minority. After a complete application review, the Office of Undergraduate Admissions (OUA) gives 100 points to the African American student and 119 points to the Latino student. Likewise, the Caucasian and Asian students (also from Rochester) receive a total of 99 points eachboth just missing the 100 point cut-off.

Now, let's add another student into the equation (a Jewish student from Rochester) who was admitted with 100 points.

Mathematically speaking, with the elimi-

Asian, along with the underrepresented Latino student, now all have 99 points.

And with two seats now available, the OUA would be indifferent about taking any two .of these three. However, at least one of the majority students, the Caucasian or Asian, will now be admitted whereas previously, both were excluded; a fact, not to be overlooked, that aside from their race, these students were more qualified on a point scale than the African American student.

Thus; any rational person can see that the elimination of race based preferences leads to a more equitable outcome-the

-t

Any rational person can see that the elimination of race based preferences leads to a more equitable outcome nation of race based preferences, the African American and Latino students' scores will drop to 80 and 99 respectivelythereby just eliminating them from admission. Thus, with a zero-sum game in ef· fect, two places are now available to be taken. Two majority students {presumably the two who would have been admitted had two others not}, the Caucasian and

students with more points are admitted in favor of the students with fewer points.

Moreover, and not to forget the Jewish student, it also becomes apparent that with the elimination of race based affirmative action policies, his score remains the same.

Therefore, it is mathematically impossible for a Caucasian, Asian, Jew, or any other majority or non-underrepresented

• · . · " .. •·· ... " .... ·w.. , , ·......

~·

__

minority to "take the place" of another student with a similar racial background when the zero-sum game is in effect. Furthermore, any underrepresented minority from a non-disadvantaged background with an admissions score of anywhere between 100 and 118, should no doubt be eliminated from consideration in admissions, while those with 119 after the elimination of such policies should gain acceptance based solely on the chance that the indifference pick goes in their favor. The reasoning must be, therefore, that underrepresented minorities are the ones responsible (via race based affirmative action policies) who take the places from more qualified applicants, and that mathematically, majority students cannot possibly be the cause, thereby disproving the argument and cause supported

by AAASJ and advocates of race based preferences. W -Dustin Lee is the President a/Voice, a moderate, race-blind group on U-M campus. Dustin may be reached at leedc@umich.edu.

pisagree with Dustin? Write us at:

etters@michiganreview.com

..

.~

...

_~

~~~···~.·_._

. ..... w . . ., . . . . ." ".............. , . . . . . . . ._ " . . . _ . _ _ _ _•

Febrwuy 9, 2000

A Bad Dragon Rising A Book Review

BY RABEH SooFI

D

ESPITE ITS SIZE and population, Red China has not spent too much time at the forefront of American concerns. Aside from the 1995 wild-goose-chase for Democratic campaign contributor Charlie Trie or the occasional debates featured on the Mclaughlin group, the activities of Red China have gone largely ignored in the American media. America has traditionally held a consistent attitude towards communist countries in the 20 th century: the Cold War, Cuban-missile crisis and two wars in small Asian countries are ample proof of this. It seems peculiar then, that the most populous country in the world-a Communist one at that-would be perceived the way it is in American culture today.

But America's relationship with Red China is a troubling one. The theft of sensitive nuclear and missile information coupled with charges of illegal campaign contributions would normally turn the hawkish gaze of the news media to any offender, instigating a myriad of investiga-

government's leaders, the nepotistic quality of the nomenklatura, and the frightening drug-trade that exists between. Lastly, accounts are given of the Red Chinese weapons proliferation to other countries, including North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Libya. In fact, in 1996, Red China was the leading supplier of weapons of mass destruction to foreign countries-most of which are hostile with the United States.

The Red Chinese government armed Iranian, Libyan and Syrian terrorist organizations in the Middle East, even giving offering to build Saddam Hussein a nuclear power reactor in Algeria.

Through all of this, the authors paint a very transparent picture of the Red Chinese government. Horrific pictures of human bodies crushed to a pulp by tanks operated by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) make up the centerfold of the work; in addition are pictures of the leading officials who directed the Tiananmen Square massacre shaking hands with President Clinton and Vice President Gore.

Timberlake and Triplett expose' in detail the exact nature of the Red Chinese gov-

"The Red Chinese government now constitutes an unseen threat to the security of the United States." tive reports and in-depth examinations.

But aside from the Cox report subrnitted to Congress last year, details of Red China's global intentions have too, been almost entirely ignored. In light of this, Edward Timberlake and William Triplett have assumed the role of scrutinizing Red China's activities in their book, Red Dragon Rising.

As the subtitle suggests, the book takes a close examination at the background of Red China's recent involvements in the global landscape and explains the ways that the Red Chinese government now constitutes an unseen threat to the security of the United States. Timberlake and Triplett do not generally discuss recommendations for foreign policy in Red Dragon Rising. Instead, the book serves as a window that peers into the Red Chinese government's deepest recesses-in all of its gruesome horror. In this sense, the book attempts to dispel myths commonly held by Americans about Red China by recounting its historical record. Red China's brutal assault on demonstrators at TIananmen Square as well as the its perennial attacks on its neighbors compose individual chapters of the book. Furthermore, the book gives a detailed description of the Red Chinese

ernment: an aggressive, violent regime led by corrupt leaders lining their pockets with wealth as they trade with terrorists and wage silent wars upon their enemies.

What is worse, in Timberlake's and Triplett's opinion, the United States has simply stood back twiddling its thumbs, seeking to forge a "strategic partnership" with the Red Chinese government. They point out the hypocrisy in the ClintonGore administration's frequent "humanitarian" ventures by drawing attention to the thousands of forced abortions, persecutions of religious dissidents, and murders of Tibetan natives by Red Chinese officials. A government willing to kill its own people, Timberlake and Triplett say, is more than willing to kill others. Most importantly, the book shows the how the Clinton-Gore Administration actually collaborated with the Communist government in Red China to help it achieve its military ambitions.

For example, in January of 1996, the Clinton Administration changed export control regulations to allow the trade of sensitive information technology to Red China. Since then, the PLA has developed the largest information warfare program in

----,,--..

... ...,

-~.- ,

the world after the United States and has acquired 600 American supercomputers capable of critically damaging everyday life in the U.S. These supercomputers, for example have the ability to: -Change dose levels in prescription medicines at pharmaceutical plants, poisoning thousands of people -Inftltrate the manufacturing process for baby food so that levels of components are increased 400

, --

times to toxic I~els Ii '~"t -Change aIrport radar signals so air traffic controllers unknowingly put passenger planes on the same flight path -Open electronic gates and fences at a numEDWARD TJMPERLAKE & WlUJAM C. TRlPLE'lT It ber of jails and prisons Audlcn of the New 'Ibrlr Jmes htlMIr., YNr of 11M R.-t around the country simultaneously -Contaminate city All this has led to a crisis in Sinowater systems, turning the valves backward American relations, as the authors argue. on sewer systems, shutting down the elecThe United States seems to be a nation tric power grid, overloading the pipeline hoodwinked by the rising Red Chinese system dragon in the east. The authors' solution -Looting bank accounts, transferring is multifaceted: most importantly, to have all funds overseas an American administration that realizes -Eliminating social security records, Red China for the threat it is; additionally, driver's license numbers, bank accounts, to disallow Red China any further advances credit card numbers, etc. in aggression, weapon development, or To ice the cake, Timberlake and nuclear capability. This is the only area of Triplett gloomily mention that all of these the book that a reader would beg of more. forms of "information warfare" have been For all their talk of the menace posed by successfully tried. After all, as a society the Red Chinese government, it would heavily dependent on computer systems to have been more ideal for the reader to learn regulate nearly every aspect of our lives, of specific ways the United States can dewe leave ourselves tremendously vulnerable ter Red Chinese ambitions. to attacks on those inf;"mation systems.

For the time being, however, the auIn addition to the trade of hunthors urge Americans to recognize Red dreds of these dangerous supercomputers, China to be the new danger to American Timberlake and Triplett blame the values and way of life. They believe that Clinton-Gore Administration for idly Americans have been misled to believe that watching a Red Chinese company take the Red Chinese are a nation largely comcontrol of the Panama Canal, threaten the posed of poor peasants who are led by Spratly Islands, Japan, India, and now Taifair-albeit communist-leaders. Furtherwan. When the Cornell University-edumore, that Americans are totally unaware cated democraticly elected president ofTaiof the ramifications of the Clinton-Gore's wan needed to refuel his plane in Hawaii, appeasement of the Red Chinese governhe was not allowed to land by the State ment. Red China's answer to Timberlake's Department. However, Communist leadand Triplett's accusations? Perhaps the aners with a history of activities detrimental swer is found in Sun Tzu's Art of the War, to American interests were welcomed with written 2,400 hundred years ago: "All warred carpets in the White House and allowed fare is deception.".tvR to buy influence by the current administration.'

...

,- ----.-.,,-~.--.~

..-.

~,---.---

---..

----~,~~-~~.-----

o STOP ME IF

YOU'VE

HEARD

THIS

ONE•..

Guipe's Guide to Coolness lJ!

I

T SEEMS THAT no matter where I go, people are always coming up to me and saying "El Senor Guipe; how can I be cool?" Yes, the art of being cooL probably one of the most difficult but rewarding things you'll ever learn.

Remember high ' school, when all the cool people made fun of you, El Sefior stole your lunch Guipe money, and caused you to lose control of your bladder at least twice a month? Maybe that was just me. You probably couldn't wait to graduate, because then you could go on to college, where you'd be cool. Well guess what, you were wrong!

The truth is, it doesn't matter which stage of life you are currently going through, there are always going to be two basic groups: the "cool" people and everyone else. The sad part is, people never seem to grow out of this way of thinking. Why, not too long ago I was invited to a faculty luncheon by one of my favorite professors, we'll juSt call him "Professor X." After being in the room for about two minutes, I

'I):

,,»,

~

could tell which professors were "cool" and which of them were loser, nerd professors who always get picked on. Yes, friends, this type of social strucrure has been in existence for thousands of years and it won't go away until Bill Gates completes his plan of world conquest, so get used to it!

If you're one of the not so cool people, you're probably pretty depressed about now. I mean, if what I said is true, you have nothing to look forward to other than a life of loneliness, chastity, and shame. You probably just want to crawl into a hole and die. But before you do, ask yourself this question: do you really want to be cool?

Seriously, do you really want to be like all of the cool people that we know and love? Perhaps you should think about just what the traits of coolness are before you jump to the conclusion that you want to be one. So, in order to help you in your quest for identity, I've outlined the four basic traits of the coo( person.

1. Lack of a personality. As evetyone knows , all cool people have that same "cool" personality. The kind of personality that is characterized by greetings such as "Sup?"luld "How's it goin?" Yes, this is the personality that you've always wanted to have. Or is it? As you may have already figured out, the "cool" personality is not a personality at all. As a matter of fact, it is the antithesis of personality! If you don't

~ ;.

I • .'

believe me, just try carrying on a conversation with a cool person sometime.

beer, liquor, and other "perfectly legal" substances, but the use of such things is a prerequisite for being a true cool person. I Cool Person: "Dude, Christina mean, when was the last time you went to a party on camAguilera is pus where the hot!" . ,. I You : primary pur"Do you like pose of those in her music?" attendance wasn't to get Coo I Person: wasted and "Dude! She's maybe get some booty" in hot.I" You : the process?

4. Cool "Somebody clothes. Fitold you that, didn't nally, if you Some things never change for the GUipemeister wan't to 'be th ey.," cool, you'd better look cool, which means Cool Person: "Yeah." that you'll be sure to wear only the coolest, 2. An interest in sports. The next hippest, trendy clothing. Just go to the mall characteristic of cool people is their intersometime and watch tht: cool people flock est in sports. To be cool, you have to love to stores with names like "The Nap" and sports, and not weenie sports like golf, but "Abercrombie and Bitch" or whatever those the cool sports, like football, basketball, places are called. Yep, trendy clothing is a and hockey. They sit around watching "the game" with all of their friends, making sure must for any cool person because, as we all know, conformity is cool. to hoot, holler, and bump chests whenever Well, there you have it. A complete their team "scores." I don't know about guide to being cool. So what are you waityou, but bumping chests with another guy ing for? Head down to the mall, turn on just doesn't turn me on, ya know?

ESPN , and start decreasing your vocabu3. Consumption of mind altering lary. You'll be cool in no time! lvR substances. Now don't get me wrong, cool and uncool people alike enjoy the use of

Jesse Herzog: The Campus Spunk By

JAMES JUSTIN WILSON

ROM ALL OUTWARD appear ances, Jesse Herzog seems to be just your typical freshman Fratboy. The quintessential "Abercrombie-messed-uphair-in-the front-thing" and North Face ' toting kind of guy. What people don't see is his devious side.

For those unfamiliar with Jesse's notoriety, he is the guy who insists on filling the Daily and Review's Letters Sections with inane and seemingly illogical arguments. His first letter appeared in the October 6 th edition of the Review. In response to an article about funding for women's spotts, he wrote that he's rather have more hot dog stands around campus than funding for women's athletics. Why? Because he likes hot dogs just that much.

"One dollar for a tube of meat, there must be a God, " he mused in our interview.

After "spicing things up a bit" he wrote a letter to the Daily denouncing the North Campus bell tower for disturbing

F

him while he tries to. study. Needless to say, he was looking for trouble and he found it. Music students came out of the woodwork proclaiming the enjoyment thOlt the bell tower music provides. So this was not Jesse's shining moment. He attacked an inanimate object. It is not like it could defend itself. He was "kind of just making fun of myself."

Jesse's reasoning is somewhat basic, in that it reverts to the Transitive Theory of Mathematics to explain a lot of life's idiosyncracies. For instance, here is how he explains 8:00 am classes: "8 AM. = bad.

Class = bad. 8 A.M. + class = really bad."

After his somewhat lackluster letter, Jesse decided that it was time to stir-up a hornet's nest. Mike Lopez, the Daily's token pseudoconservative, wrote a column about God

and abortion. Using the Transitive Theory again, he trie~ to explain Gods take on abortion. "i. God created everything (Revelation 10:6). 2. Therefore, God created abortion." He asserted that God wouldn't have created anything that he did not like and therefore, pretty much argued that God was prochoice. It's all just simple math in Jesse's opinion. Bad move.

For days to come a maelstrom of malicious letters flooded the Daily and Jesse's mailbox.

People thought that he was living proof that the U-M admissions system was horribly inadequate.

The Review even awarded him with the "Dumbest letter of the year award." Essentially he accomplished his goal in shaking things up. He is not serious with his letter, he is just "testing the waters" and

"mixing it up a bit." He is not ttying to make a point, just waste time. And if the door to his room, which is covered in hate mail, is any indication, he likes the attention. Disturbing you ask? Perhaps.

After the torrent ofletters in the Daily, he responded with a well-organized and thoughtful response, but they made the choice not to publish it. In actuality, he was ttying to make a valid argument, unfortunately it was lost in his oversimplification of logic. He was attempting to explain J.L. Mackie's philosophy regarding the divine paradox. That is, if God is allpowerful and created everything, why did he create evil? It's a good question that was trivialized some by his presentation, oversimplification of logic, and complete ignorance of Christian doctrine.

Jesse is just trying to have a little fun screwing with out heads, even it he seems like a complete idiot while doing it. Ml

• "

l

\,

,

. _

.~

.,. ,"

( 7 3 4 ) 669~6973 (7 3 4 )669~NYPD F~:66g ... a 7 0 Delivery chal'ge

rn~

apply in some areas.

CA~ • EAT..1rt • T.AKE-OlJr TAX NOT JrIICIAJDED

OPEN DAILY

~

Monday - saturday Sunday

Df;i"

@)

........

eIIdI itmI

~

__

c.dI leal

. 7~

$1.l5

$1.750

1/2

.50~

1l1 . 7~

SpedaJty fIuas (FuMIaII)

{IIICcIiIa)

~)

SiclIaD

$12.~

$7 . ~

$ll.~O

$16.00

sw.oo

~. ~pclU!l. ~ f,(dlr

rmaCItuR

I'CpptlQli

I'RU QartIc l'eppet$

OlOlIIId l!eeI Hen!

IIacon Me:atbd$

=

PmbTonmo

.'$

BIDtMlcue ~ f'iua...

I!ggpIIII& r.IaI_ Spi.mIc;b. ......

....!MkD.,

Cbeae._

o.ticl Bnlad...

ldUcL 1~0!1ws,. I'.edOI'>bt, (.MOIS, ~Iit~

........hnefgleDl...

~ (ldtuce. 1'onIto. c.; f'eppr,T. 'I_100m) wIIIa"'or~

$2.50 utIa

S!&YED COLD $5.50

.... IIQ8e'80..

SalamI a P'ro¥cIIoIIe...

".50 '; 61: 50'.'~ ~• • 'Ii

1btIIea~

$ 2.50

$:i$ ~

1'.- •.•

::~

ft'eIIll'aladD. ClIk.km rtaa._ iI'tIII ro.itQ, 0I1dir:11III tlvUll!da'

edna.

SldecllIIaIt P'Ia8... ...... f'tlIoCnInL~~ 0f.aIt)

SbIIItd \Icgd:IIbIc I'b:a.u 1IirOCCOII. 5i*adL I'ItIoUalr Hoanla)

\J'IqIt'To<nM 0ItItIP. c:.ti<; ~!IpIl;ol

"

r......... hIaItoPbu

$20.00

"*Il1ollllrto s.ce_

$6.00 I:, '"'

. . . . . . . . Snc:e.••

$12,50

. . OIIIic .011._ tMIIll5nICcGI. GarlIc a ....

$6.00: Q $6.00 :i r,)

~«"alITOIUIII.I'tta«o.ora

stdIIIII JIIuIun 1I'Boa:t CIlMM

AD specialty rtaa 8eftled by tile SLK:J!. for $1.35

@

$20.00

~ DD'IRRAGES

$20.00

!}DLlJlLi

$6.50

]1IiIIIl...... \IUIlNeaUNIIIH'

MUaMelds-oe...

tr4I*lt.I\IC:oImTIlINlO SiIIct ~ ~II(,

$20.00

1olCIed ........, 1lDImIlIlti ......... Hcdtn!1l>m.l

All Stuffed Piu.a ISCrWd by tile sua for n.60

LIIf9C 124 (Iol: , AJlmDaIced Tea-

I

@

eo.

BaJr.edDU...

$7.00

BaI5ed'-"ShcIs-

$7.00

IIMdPlllllcoai."

BII8eCI Kmo1I.

$1.00 $7 00 . $ 7 00

_

BIiII8td JIeat 1..

-_ _ _ n.

•

BIlked Ytgeblble lAMgn&..

-

98.50

NeatbaII........igiana_

S6.50 $6~O • All :served "'Ih l'IZiiii 8reu1 It cnolCe or

~ ~...

ZII. Sp~ 01 Salad

WIIh meatball, sausage or meat sauc:e... $1.50 f.ldra

~""'s.!aml~rmvo~

$6.00:

GnatSalad..: CInOii. ~.

(1dtIt.'C. TOIIIIIW. CIAIIIIIIlo'.

fdaQlme.B«b~1'.«I0IDi

. ISBQ c:akken5llllld_

$7.50 n uuu u

__ u

nnn _

i:

$6.25

:

,

.•

.

wtth 1 topping

$15.99

"-------::..-~------'

- - - -- -- - - -- - - - -- -- -- - - - - - - - •II:

':• c eo.

2 10· Small

• C>

__

_

ge

=

Q r.I

_

2 14" Lafi

u.~ i:~ tt.7S : 0

In SaIIIII5-

_ __ _ , _",."""""W_ -....._'''''''',.._.___''_ ,''''''.____

$6.~O

~5.(JO

CacsaI' Sal.....

~ _~_".".

2CALZoNES ~ ~ RIcotta O\~ MPI'l"1I 2 1.9. OIink 50. ea.

:: :

o.-..adcMn...

_.. ,....... _... ~ ..." .•.~_ .., ~,,_. ..... ....."..~ " •.~...... _ .......... " _~ ... ....,.,...~'"._."'_,_,.,.,..,,,..- _ _ "'_,,_ __ _ _

.. ... - - -- - - - - - -

=

i::_:__ $3.00 ,!

~ 'IlnItD.. klI ()I1(III1l Y4 tMdIM)

$7 .00

$9.99

'- - - - : IE: :Q

0IItu1l~

~P'InIfgIaaa...S6,50 ~~~~u"'OmIa, ~C~U'8PJ11"&o"

i;:= :

zrn

Salad at 1 Lg. Drink

' ...

~\ @~-; ITALlAN 1 A.lI~SeneTwol'eople 0 ) OVEN·6AKED DISHES F1P)SPECIALTIES =,S::;-~rum~~ -

:----~=-=~~--

BAKED

0

$6.00 $6.00 $6.00

$1.50 $1.00 $ 1.25 $1.50

...

E

$6.00

AI set\I01 wlJ1 Pizza Bread or Oark ~ots

SbI.ft'c:d I!ggpIaDt.M

.

To..aIol'oa.

Ci) SJInD'

'0

DIIidIaI ....IgimL•• <idled 0IktIir& ..

BIId %iii PiuL..

IDd.b:GIa. ~l!JIfumall)~1

1IIRra~

Regular SLI('Z Is .1.60 flU SOf ada toppIas (,,5.00

. ...

...-............

$6.00 .; $6.00 ' $6.00 . $6.00 $6.00 $6.!IQ $5.00

.. lilt,.,........

$1.50 $l.50 $4.00

GaItic KIlots.H(5)

IfIud SI:ka.....

IIIIoc<DI. _ _ !JtdInI(.WJ. ~"~ PIal! QIIIk Ilr 0ftIcIl 8iIIad I'lzII...

$4.00

$2,00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00

N

Qudu Dc/Ja;IIt rb:a .•

tCllidla

• AttIcnokU

• Rkotta

CIlickcat haini...

I8IQ SiMlcc.1IimIRIII. lied OIIIoaa .BtQ 0tIdie'l1

Red onon Ancho'MA 5plnidt 00vf.s WlIieOnlon

l'inapple

rlzziI Bnrad Ir MadaulI &uH:e...

WbHe l'IIra...

SfJMI) IlOl' SI y . P'I:JIpcn ,.,.....""-

. $4.00

c""'ppa-rs IoL.

r.nw

$:5.50 $4.00 $4.00 $•.00

~1laU._ P1o &n.ge frfi

~ 1'toaaIt1la. ()Ibd 01_& ad;]

~bdow:

I'twlnonl:s

SpjlUldllr QMSe CIIb::one. •• llama Oteese CMmne ••• akIiel1 KoD...

I'Dur IIIal OMnbo rI __

qdJ . .

$1.75 l/2 $1.0() lIl$lJ)(

s.WJDge

Qeese CaJzcree._

a\'iIiIabJe in three

SkIIu

Nakc yo.. fa~ pima from tile

* f'elio

.e

mes « Sic:iimr.

• __ Inch la.4ndt

JD.iKIt

1a.1IId! ·

(Pk4IuDa) (ll.-IMpl $8.50 $IO.:w

$5.50

605 East 1iI1IIIIlaJDtl!Jr ADD A wboI:. I'll 48104 we J\~oept.

· ' @lS~TY1@)~~1 @)=~ I.

PIZZA

rhr.u .-e available ID three si.t..e& a Sk.iliam

lo.bK:h (I'awoul)

10;00 AM - 4:00 AM 11:00 AM - 4:00 AM

~_ ,'" .~...-.-'<" '--' - -- . . . . --

wJtb 1 topping

$9.99

" - '- - - -. -