In it users can control a hand to slap a female model across the face. The more you hit her the worse her bruises get and your “Gangsta” rating keeps going up. Eventually you’ll reach “100% Gangsta,” at that point the words “100% Idiot” come up on the screen and the woman is seen on the floor crying in pain.

The United Nations Development Fund for Women estimates that at least one of every three women globally will be beaten, raped or otherwise abused during her lifetime and that in most cases the abuser is a member of their own family.

I’d be lying if I said I didn’t get it. It was a play on our desensitization to violence. Initially the Web site would be viewed the same way a video game, rap song or movie that promotes violence towards women would be viewed.

The creators hoped that in the end the user would feel guilty, but I doubt enough people will feel guilty enough to make the campaign a success. The campaign was a failure.

You have to also hit the model a lot to get to the point where the words “Idiot” flash on the screen. So it’s okay to hit her twice, but not ten times? I didn’t get past the first slap before I stopped. Even though I knew the site was fake it felt wrong.

It uses a real life model not a cartoon, which only adds to the effect.

It’s definitely something I haven’t seen before and it gets people discussing the issue, which is extremely taboo and hard to track.

Every year between 600,000 and 6 million women are victims of violence, according to the Domestic Violence Research Center. The statistic was compiled by using various studies and the spread is so wide because it’s hard to really track the total number of victims.

Before you rush to the computer the Web site is no longer available to users who live outside Denmark. Why? Because of high worldwide traffic, so many people wanted to “Hit the B****” that the site couldn’t handle the traffic.

So if you want to use it you’ll have to travel outside the country. In which case you have bigger problems than I thought. Maybe you can hitch a ride with Chris Brown?

“I’m six weeks away from delivering twins, and I couldn’t get the H1N1 vaccine from my obstetrician or the hospital where I plan to deliver,” said Regan. “Eventually, I did get the vaccine, but it was not through conventional means.”

On  Nov. 1, Army Maj. James Crabtree, a spokesman for the Guantanamo jail facility, said that doses of H1N1 vaccine should be arriving this month for guards first and then inmates.

The Centers for Disease Control reports that the group at highest risk for H1N1 flu is pregnant women. Some pregnant women have died in childbirth from H1N1. There is something askew with our priorities if stock brokers and terrorists get the H1N1 vaccine before a pregnant mother with twins.

President Obama declared H1N1 flu a “national emergency” on Oct. 24. Dr. Nancy Snyderman, chief medical editor for NBC News, said that we think of a “national emergency” like Hurricane Katrina. The sound of “national emergency” tends to make the outbreak sound more urgent than it is. She said that actually, the “national emergency” was declared so that emergency rooms all over the country could diagnose and treat H1N1 flu beyond the local hospital campuses.

There is so much confusion between seasonal flu and H1N1 flu. Seasonal flu symptoms are fever, cough, sore throat, headache, body aches, chills and fatigue. H1N1 flu has the same symptoms but are more severe.

Seasonal flu affects infants and children and people over 65. People between 20 and 60 years of age are the most affected group, with the highest risk being pregnant women.

The seasonal flu vaccine was available in early October, while H1N1 flu vaccine became available in early November. People over 65 may not need the H1N1 vaccine, but it’s available. They may need the seasonal flu vaccine, but it is less available.

Both seasonal flu and H1N1 flu vaccines seem to be coming in spurts, a little here and a lot there. The Wall Street Journal reported  Nov. 8, “The Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged health officials around the country to ensure swine flu is getting to high risk groups, after criticism erupted over distribution to some Wall Street firms…but criticism of the move showed how much tension has emerged as thousands of children and others considered at high risk of complications have waited hours in line to be inoculated.”

“There will be more than enough doses of the H1N1 in the United States…there will be plenty of vaccine for everyone who wants it,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Sept. 24. We are now into November, scrambling for priority in vaccine distribution.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was on a trip to Europe and the Middle East when she spoke  Nov. 8, from Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. She was more concerned about the possible backlash against Muslims in the U.S. because of the shootings at Fort Hood in Texas than she was of the inequitable distribution of H1N1 flu vaccine, which she never even mentioned.

This is a good run through. So far, the H1N1 epidemic is not out of control, but the distribution of vaccine is close to being out of control with its unfair distribution.
It causes one to wonder how we would handle a “national disaster” if this is the way we handle a “national emergency.”

There are approximately 308 million people in the U.S. How we care for them and offer them help in a time of crisis is very important. Our mechanism for distributing help to 308 million people needs to be as well-oiled as it can be, and I don’t mean by fossil fuel.

Whether we are distributing medicine or food, we have to be more organized. We have to be more efficient. We saw glimpses of our modern organization in the last election with the utilization of the Internet.

We need to be as well-organized in our distribution as we are in our communication. At this time in our history, whether terrorists are imprisoned here or not, we have to be able to dispense goods and services equitably to all of our people in a short amount of time.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gives her resignation speech during a ceremony at Pioneer Park in Fairbanks, Alaska, on Sunday, July 26, 2009. (Bill Roth/Anchorage Daily News/MCT)

The GOP voted Friday, January 30, 2009, to make Michael Steele, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. In this 2006 photo, Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele and U.S. Senator John McCain spoke with the press about Steele's run for U.S. Senate in Baltimore, Maryland, June 16, 2006. (Monica Lopossay/Baltimore Sun/MCT)

Aaron Helmbrecht

What do the GOP and newspapers have in common? Young people consider them both relics and a waste of natural resources.

A recent Gallup poll shows the GOP has been bleeding supporters from almost every demographic group since 2001. But they are taking the biggest hit from college graduates and people 18 to 29 years old. Only 37 percent of college graduates identify themselves as Republican, a 10 point drop from 2001. Just behind them are the 18 to 29-year-olds at 32 percent, a nine point drop. Young people may make up one of the smallest voting demographics, but I know full well that the top Republican brass are taking these numbers very seriously.

As one of Michael Steele’s first acts as the Republican National Committee chairman he announced the GOP was going to become more relevant to, “urban – suburban hip-hop settings” and that he’ll, “take the party to the streets.” I’m not sure if this is more insulting to young people or black people.

I refuse to believe Newt Gingrich woke up one day and thought to himself, “This twitter thing is all the rage. I should start an account and tweet my serious political commentary using short-hand slang and emoticons.” And will someone please tell me why what very nearly could have been U.S. policy is now background information on Sarah Palin’s Facebook page.

These people want to lead our country and they’re acting like parents who get dressed up in baggy clothes and dance to rap music trying to relate to their teenage kids. They think they’re being cool. But they really look ridiculous and they’re embarrassing us, themselves and our country. If the GOP really wants to re-brand itself to be more relevant to the young and educated, here are some simple things they can do:

Show some common decency – There may be some young people out there who have the mentality of Biff from “Back to the Future,” but not many of them vote. Those of us whose parents raised us to be respectful adults don’t want to see grown men heckling the president or playing with their cell phones during a presidential address to a joint-secession of congress (I’m talking to you Eric Cantor). When our president meets with world leaders we want to see him (or her) lead. Or at least follow. But what we don’t want to see is our president uncomfortably rubbing Angela Merkel. She’s the German chancellor, not your prom date. If you don’t have anything constructive to say then just put your hands in your pockets and shut the hell up.

Give us solutions, not platitudes – “Lower taxes and less government,” may have been your ace-in-the-hole for some time, but not everything needs to fit on a bumper sticker. We may not read newspapers but we still consume a lot of media and we are hungry for solutions. The more platitudes we get the more we feel like you’re feeding plastic fruit to the starving public. Here’s a list of phrases I never want to hear again…

“Drill baby drill, freedom is the biggest tent of all, dead or alive, death panels, pull the plug on grandma, tax and spend, the American way, America is the greatest country in the history of the world, and any variation of a phrase which implies that you know what god wants and god is on our side.”

Stop using the fear card – The GOP may legitimately think that liberal policies are going to destroy America. But when Liz Cheney, Dick Armey, and Orly Taitz are all saying that the new liberal government is going to depress the economy, destroy health care, allow terrorists to roam free in the U.S. and that President Obama is a Hitleresque Manchurian candidate from Kenya (the last one may have just been Taitz), it makes you look more cartoonish and less like authority figures. Tone it down a notch or we’ll treat you like the crazy guy at the park and just keep on walking.

Rethink the way you promote conservative Christian values – Heed the words of John McCain who said, “Let’s remember that those on the other side of the isle are our opponents, not our enemies.” You can still be the party of values without labeling those on the other side as baby killers, anti-family, or un-American. People tend to take offense to these kinds of things. And what are the chances of someone listening to your economic or health care plans after you’ve just called them an un-American anti-family baby killer?

I am a young man and a recent Republican Party defector. I don’t have much money and I don’t own much property. All I have in this world is freedom and time and I get nervous when I see politicians chipping away at that. So find a less abrasive way to promote your values. I am straight, single, and I have no idea what the inside of an abortion clinic looks like. But if I get the feeling that you’re coming after my freedom for the greater glory of your Christian values, it’s something you’ll have to pry from my cold, dead hands.

Whitman is smart (having graduated from Princeton and Harvard), driven, tough and has an excellent record of making things happen. She led eBay from 1998 to 2008, and according to Whitman’s Web site, she helped the company grow from 30 employees and a little more than $4 million in revenue to more than 15,000 employees and nearly $8 billion in revenue, with a network of 12 million users in California alone. Under Whitman’s leadership, eBay expanded globally and developed a culture and infrastructure that turned the company into an unparalleled business success story.

Whitman has the experience, the dedication and the drive to save California from furthering itself into higher deficit. We need someone who will not crawl into a little ball or give in to Sacramento, but instead stand up for Californians wants and needs. Gov. Schwarzenegger broke his campaign promise not to raise taxes. With this kind of economy, Schwarzenegger still has the heart to raise taxes. Californians are losing their jobs and homes left and right. Has he lost his mind?

Whitman, on the other hand, has signed a taxpayer protection pledge promising not to raise taxes. According to Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, “By signing the Pledge, Whitman makes clear that if elected she will stand up for taxpayers and not the tenured bureaucrats, coercive utopians, and union bosses that currently run Sacramento. In a state with one of the highest tax burdens in the country, a dismal business tax climate, rampant overspending, and a government that is so costly that Californians had to work 235 days this year, well over half the year, just to pay for it, higher taxes should be a non-starter for all elected officials and candidates. In signing the Pledge, Whitman has made clear that she recognizes this.”

I am so tired of empty promises, higher taxes, higher registration fees and underfunded education.  I am sure many students like myself are tired and frustrated with the state cutting back on education spending. Don’t they understand we are the future of America? Students are piled into overcrowded classrooms. Tuition and parking continue to rise every year, and students are being turned down left and right because there isn’t enough adequate space for them.

According to Whitman’s Web site, she plans to set up a grading system for our schools that go from A to F, so parents can easily go online and determine how well their children’s schools are performing. This in turn, gives parents the ability to move their children out of failing schools and into better ones. She also plans to reward outstanding teachers, including those in the key areas of math and science. I believe this creates more drive and competition to perform better in schools. After all, what’s the point of success when you’re not getting rewarded and most importantly a raise?

California has increased spending, but things around here haven’t been better. I drive around every day and still notice the same big potholes on the freeways and roads that were around since last year. The freeways have little to no landscaping and there is always so much garbage in the emergency lanes. I’ve seen mattresses, basketballs, a baby stroller, and couches since the beginning of this year.

Whitman states on her Web site, “California politicians need a new attitude when it comes to government spending. The cost of California government has grown an amazing 80 percent over the past ten years, but is government serving the people 80 percent better? Are California’s schools and roads 80 percent better than they were a decade ago? For 30 years in business, I was held accountable to meet the bottom line.”

Whitman is in tune with the future and needs of California. We need better roads, schools and government.

With her strength and toughness, she can save California.

Vote for Meg Whitman for governor of California in 2010.

Twitter and other social networking services are paving the way for an evolution of citizen journalism, facilitating the rapid dissemination of information to a vast audience, but it comes at the expense of the usual filters and vetting associated with reporting done by trained and experienced journalists. This is word of mouth at its finest; one only needs to click a few buttons to broadcast a 140-or-fewer character tweet to their followers, who might then spread it to their own followers. Repeat this just a few times, and the news could spread like wildfire, informing a worldwide audience about an important and ongoing event within minutes—possibly beating major news organizations to the punch.

But let’s backtrack for a second and see where this might go horribly wrong. What if 100 people—each with followers and readers they know and trust—got together and tweeted something they all know to be plausible but completely false? The actions of a relative few could easily cause panic and undue harm to everyone who receives the information—the digital equivalent of yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater when there really is no imminent threat.

As people are finding ways to receive news more efficiently in their increasingly busy lives, it’s becoming easier to take falsities as gospel. One might not have the time or the know how to verify what might be flashing on their cell phone or computer screen. The integrity of citizen journalism could potentially slip out of the hands of the media organizations that have played the role of keeping it in check.

There is no denying the power of citizen journalism, Web sites and social networking services to shed light on a situation in which the mainstream media have limited or no access. One recent example is Twitter’s prominence during protests stemming from the last presidential election in Iran.

But individuals and large organizations alike can also fall victim from postings on citizen journalism sites owned and operated by legitimate entities. As reported by InformationWeek in 2008, CNN dealt with a false report on its iReport service that Apple CEO Steve Jobs had suffered a heart attack. The false news had an immediate negative impact on Apple stock, which was eventually reversed after Katie Cotton, Apple’s vice president of worldwide communications, declared that the report was not true.

One could easily believe that, because the CNN name was plastered onto this report, this event was true and would be followed up on (as the original post cited an anonymous source who was “quite reliable”). Although CNN makes it clear that posts on iReport are the responsibility of their contributors and that CNN’s name is attached only to stories vetted by the organization, any of its posts are still subject to propagation on other media.

The Huffington Post, an online news organization, asks of its contributors much of what other organizations ask of their trained staff reporters: objectivity, the avoidance of hearsay, attributing information obtained from sources, and conducting fact-checking whenever possible.

This could be difficult in the spur of the moment when one pulls out their phone and tweets, but the Huffington Post’s standards can and should be applied in all types of citizen reporting, regardless of the medium.

As the news landscape continues to be reshaped by the adoption of new technologies, citizen journalists continue to play a valuable role in filling the gaps left in the media by offering their reporting and opinions on the stories that matter to them. But with this evolution comes new responsibilities: for consumers, the responsibility to take what they hear from questionable sources with a grain of salt, and for citizen reporters, the responsibility to use their new tools for disseminating news wisely.

“It’s hard to stay interested in the uninteresting,” said Ron Nielsen a former airline pilot for 30 years. With so many of the tasks being taken away with automation, it’s hard for pilots to stay focused or engaged. Many rely on books, I Pods, I Phones and even laptops that were used by the Northwest pilots.

We all remember the tragedy of the Metrolink collision last year, when 25 people including the Metrolink train engineer were killed. The engineer was texting right up until 22 seconds before the train crashed into a Union Pacific train.

In October of 2009, the North Carolina Highway Patrol, as a part of their “Operation Drive to Live,” program reported that a teen can create and send a text in 10 – 15 seconds. If he were driving 60 miles an hour that would be the equivalent of 80 feet per second, one tenth of a mile or nearly 30 yards of a football field. One can only imagine what damage could be done in that short time and at that distance.

Today we are so used to multitasking that we forget how to focus on the task at hand. We have so many items of convenience and yet we are busier than ever.

Whether it’s flying an airplane, steering a train or driving a car, everyday thousands of people are operating heavy machinery. When one buys antihistamine, the bottle says, do not operate heavy machinery while taking this medicine. Operating heavy machinery is a big responsibility, and should not be operated if one is drowsy or preoccupied. It carries the risk of harm and possible death because of the symptoms of the medicine.

With all of our technology and automation, it has relieved many of us from our daily chores, but it has made us complacent. It has also made us more dependent on human contact and less sensitive to our responsibilities. It has made us less aware of limits and boundaries. We have forgotten how to compartmentalize and to focus on the tasks at hand. We try and multi-task, without being engaged in the current task.

Even with all our conveniences we are still bored and lonely. I see people on cell phones all the time. I see students that can hardly go between classes without using their smart phone or ipod. I see people in the market that can hardly shop an aisle without using their mobile device. What did we do when the phone had to be left at home and plugged into the wall?

I understand the need for human contact and human warmth, but we don’t need it 24/7. We can set limits and boundaries, so that we have a certain time and a certain place for cell phones and laptops.

It all comes down to individual responsibility. We have to be responsible for our actions and how they impact those around us. Although we have fun new toys and abilities to contact the outside world or those closest to us, we don’t have to contact them when we are operating heavy machinery, for example: trains, planes and automobiles. We still need to focus on the task at hand, even though we can do three things at once. We still need to set limits and boundaries.

In our society we have pushed limits as far as they will go. We have tried to get away with as much as we can without being caught. One doesn’t go through life without taking a shower or brushing one’s teeth. There are some boundaries we just don’t cross. We need to reevaluate our lives, and look at where we can set limits, where we can focus and become engaged with the task at hand. Maybe then, we’ll have fewer major accidents.

Marijuana legalization is an issue that has been present in California politics for years. Just now, however, it is coming to a head, as the possibility of its full legalization looms before us in 2010.

Until recently, those politicians who outwardly supported marijuana legalization have been ignored or even discounted as “potheads” who then faded into obscurity. Three hundred thousand signatures have been gathered in the last month alone, however, which means that the legislation could easily be on the November 2010 ballot for all of California’s voters to decide on.

Though still illegal federally, medical marijuana has been legal in California since 1996, and President Obama recently declared federal raids on legal state cannabis dispensaries unlawful. On the heels of this declaration and the increasing acceptance of marijuana use by the general California public, there is now developing legislation that could fully legalize cannabis in California. Some reports state that this legalization could mean selling it at liquor stores to those 21 and over, but there is nothing definite as of yet.

When used medically, marijuana boasts a number of significant benefits, such as giving cancer patients a renewed appetite, curing insomnia, reducing anxiety, and relieving chronic pain. Having recognized these benefits, 56 percent of those who voted on Proposition 215 (which eventually legalized medical marijuana) opted to decriminalize the drug.

Following the limited legalization of cannabis, it cannot be denied that California’s relatively lax stand on the drug was taken advantage of. We all know one or two or 10 people who have medical marijuana cards who aren’t actually in medical need of it, and some of us know people who have entered or even worked in a clinic without proper authorization. This could indicate to some that fully legalizing marijuana would be disadvantageous, spurning a lazy and dissociated population.

It is beneficial, however, to recognize the facts in the situation before forming an opinion.

Already earning California about $14 billion a year, it has been estimated that legalizing marijuana could generate anywhere between $1.5 and $4 billion (from taxing the drug) in revenue for California, a boost that we most undeniably need.

Additionally, our country as a whole spends $68 billion a year on its prisoners, one-third of which are imprisoned for nonviolent drug crimes. About half of these criminals are marijuana offenders, which means one-sixth of our country’s prisoners are in jail for marijuana-related charges. Legalizing the drug would mean spending $11.3 billion less a year on prisons (that’s your tax money).

Monetary gain is not the only advantage to marijuana being legalized, however. It is important to understand the medical benefits of the drug, even if it is already lawful when used with a prescription. Marijuana, unlike most other legal drugs, is not physically addictive. It can be argued that it is psychologically addictive, of course, just as substances like food are addictive. There is a difference, though, between food and marijuana. When used incorrectly, food is much worse for a person’s health than cannabis is.

The abuse of food intake is directly linked to more than half of the top 10 leading causes of death in our country—the same cannot be said of marijuana. The total death toll of those users and abusers of cannabis: zero. Contrary to popular belief, evidence shows that smoking marijuana does not actually lead to health problems like cancer and heart disease. Of course it is not harmless, as prolonged usage (more than 15 years at more than one marijuana cigarette a day) can possibly increase risks of damage, although it is not entirely clear of what exactly that damage could be.

Among its other legal drug counterparts, marijuana is by far the least physically harmful. Cigarettes, alcohol, prescription painkillers, and even sleep aids are all highly addictive, and all can lead to death. Even Tylenol is so damaging that Vicodin and Percocet are being considered to be illegalized because of the Tylenol, not the opiates, in them. So I must ask, why is there such opposition to a drug whose primary use is to alleviate symptoms of the ill, when many other legal drugs only contribute to or even cause those symptoms?

It is a social standard. Because marijuana has been socially unacceptable in our country for so long, many are not ready to accept its legalization. We must attempt to overcome these social blocks, however, so we can see the substantially beneficial properties of marijuana.

To combat those who argue that our country will be walking zombies in the wake of marijuana legalization, I say this: If a person has not already chosen to partake in smoking marijuana, it is highly unlikely that they will do so simply because they cannot be arrested for it. In California especially, the legal system is already quite flexible on marijuana use. If found with small amounts of the drug, one will almost never be arrested unless another, more serious, crime is also committed.

It is not a difficult drug to locate—those who will choose to smoke legally, already do so illegally. Legalizing the drug would only serve to increase California’s income, downsize crime, and benefit the mood of already recreational and medical users.

Photo Illustration by Sami Eshaghi / Assistant Photo Editor

California is finally taking the constant abuse of disabled placards more seriously as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law implementing higher consequences for violators. This is only the first step toward eliminating the problem though.

The truth is, searching for an open disabled parking spot takes patience and persistence today as so many people abuse this privilege on a regular basis. The problem has not improved in many areas of Los Angeles County. It is right in front of us, yet no one takes notice.

Pull into Target and not one space will be available, yet it is beyond difficult to find a disabled person anywhere. The truly disabled have to circle around the parking lot waiting for that much needed space to become available. The problem stems from doctors writing prescriptions for people who don’t need them and from people stealing placards.

Currently, the fine for misusing a disabled placard starts at $250. The new law, which will be enforced starting Jan. 1, 2010 increases the fine to $1,000 for people who are repeat offenders. This move is key simply because it will make people think twice.

CSUN is no exception to this issue as healthy students and teachers pull their cars into these spots, but this semester there has been a noticeable shift. There seems to be a bit of relief as there are open disabled parking spaces within the many parking structures at CSUN.

This is quite a difference compared to the last three years when not one disabled parking spot was available in the B3 Parking Structure at 9 a.m. or 2 p.m. or any other time during the day. This trend is something we can only hope will continue for those in need of disabled parking on our campus.

CSUN’s Department of Parking Services did take a stand when they teamed up with the Department of Motor Vehicles in 2007, ticketing drivers in a sting operation. Such an operation brings relief and there should be more planned on our campus.

Most of the disabled parking spaces are still full throughout the day, but up to five spots are open at any given time. A few open spots might not seem like a big deal, but it really is. These spots give the disabled a chance to function like the rest of society.

There needs to be more awareness and a willingness to take on this issue if it is ever going to get better. It starts with tougher laws, and local parking officials willing to question drivers and ticket those who abuse the blue placard. But a one-week sting operation just isn’t enough.

There should be an active team on the lookout for people using a family member’s placard or using an expired temporary placard.

The same amount of focus that is put on ticketing people at CSUN for a missing parking pass should be devoted to this much bigger issue affecting disabled students who can’t get to class because they can’t find a spot.

More awareness from police officers is needed because it can help one disabled person if one abuser is ticketed and loses the placard he/she stole.

Another side of the issue is that there doesn’t seem to be an understanding as to why these parking spaces are so sacred to the disabled. And so many people just don’t think twice anymore. Without these wide spaces someone who uses a wheelchair would be stuck in his/her car.

The close proximity of these spaces to classrooms, for example, allows someone who has weak legs due to muscular dystrophy or any other disease to make it to class. Less people would abuse these spots if they had this in mind.

California has been in desperate need of this law. The struggle it takes able-bodied people to find a parking spot is magnified 10 times for the disabled because people don’t think twice.

From the calm and measured intelligent discourse of cable news to the hard hitting in-depth stories of the Associated Press, the debate is raging.  Should we send more troops to Afghanistan?

The debate is usually very narrowly defined: “Are there enough troops in Afghanistan to win?” or “If we send more troops is winning possible?” Assuming that the war is “winnable,” does that make it right to wage it?

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot for a moment.  If Afghanistan invaded the U.S., and Afghan TV debated about whether the war against the American terrorists was winnable, how would we feel about it?

If Pashtun and Tajik pundits callously debated how many more troops it would take to pacify Washington, D.C., would Americans just accept occupation and greet the invaders as liberators?  Or would we fight to defend our homeland?  The Afghan people are no different than us. No one likes being occupied.

Whether most Afghans agree with the Taliban’s ultra-strict version of Islam or not is irrelevant.  When your country is under attack, you join up with whoever can expel the occupiers.  Find this hard to believe?  Don’t forget how we gave Bush a blank check to do whatever he wanted when our country was under attack.

The common justification for the occupation of Afghanistan has been the Sept. 11 attacks.  We had a responsibility to bring the hijackers and those that supported them to justice, to bring peace to the families of the victims.  We haven’t caught bin Laden in eight years. All we’ve done is kill more innocent people.

Do Americans even know who we are fighting in Afghanistan?  When the Russians invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the U.S. sent hundreds of millions of dollars to train and equip the most radical jihadists it could find.  We funded these radicals through Pakistan’s ISI, and one of our star subjects was Osama bin Laden.  All of these fundamentalists, who we armed and trained 30 years ago are now our “enemies.”

Ronald Reagan called them “the freedom fighters of Afghanistan.”  Now, they are “terrorists.” This is the monster we’ve created with our arrogance and ignorance.  Every time the U.S. sticks its nose where it doesn’t belong, it makes the situation worse.

Now we’re arming and training warlords, drug lords, and criminals to fight the fundamentalists.  But who are we going to pay to fight the warlords 20 to 30 years from now?  When does the cycle of violence end?  Do we ever learn our lesson?

The central government of Hamid Karzai, who just stole an election, only controls 20 percent of the country.  So, if this is the status after eight years, the only thing more troops will do is lead to more deaths of US soldiers and Afghan civilians.  This of course leads to more recruits for the Taliban, and the U.S. has to send more troops.  This bloodshed can go on forever if we don’t put a stop to it right now.

Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979, and the mujahideen bled their empire dry. President Carter’s National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, came up with the idea of funding Afghan rebels to draw the Soviets in to defend their proxy government.

Brzezinski describes the game, “We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would … That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap…”  Russia spent 10 years there, and it bled their empire dry.

Now it appears that bin Laden is laying the trap for us, and we fell for it: hook, line, and sinker.  Will we be the next empire to die in Afghanistan?

As Jeremy Scahill, author of “Blackwater” and an expert on military affairs, said, “The United States occupation is the single greatest recruitment tool for the insurgency in Afghanistan, including the Taliban.”  Does bombing Afghan wedding parties, killing dozens of civilians instantly and suddenly make Afghans want to sing the Star Spangled Banner?  Of course not.  It justifiably makes them want to kill us.

The truth is this: The fewer troops we have there, the less power and appeal the Taliban will have.  Let’s get the hell out of the Land of the Pashtuns as soon as possible, which would give the Afghan people a real chance to sort out their own affairs, and find their own democratic voice.

Photo's by: William Herbe

Yesterday students gathered outside of the Oviatt Library to raise awareness about the Deaf community and audism. Audism is “the hearing way of dominating, restructuring, and exercising authority over the Deaf community.” Students and faculty got together to inform the CSUN community of the deaf culture around the world and that American Sign Language (ASL) should be treated as any other language. The overall attitude of those that gathered was hopeful that the Deaf community will be treated and understood with educational demonstrations like this. The following is what students, alumni and faculty had to say about the demonstration and the misconceptions people have about the deaf community:

“It’s going to have to take people to want to take the time to understand rather than throwing the cold shoulder.”
-Jordan Danz,
Junior, Deaf Studies

“We are trying to enhance awareness. Audism is a prejudice against hard of hearing and the Deaf community. There are those in the speaking culture who see sign language as an inferior language. We are here now to raise awareness about the culture and deaf studies.”
-Drew Tolson,
Junior, Deaf Studies, VP of Deaf Studies Association (DSA)

“The biggest problem is people don’t have an education. They need exposure to other cultures. We are all here to get out and inform the mainstream.”
-Michele Smith,
CSUN alumnus, Class of 2005

“Everyone needs to respect linguistic diversity. Sign language is equal to every other language in the world and we all need to respect it. It’s important for people to understand and get to know ASL. Both the Deaf studies dept. and the National Center on Deafness (NCOD) are meeting in the middle of campus to fight for a cause that has sadly not seen as much exposure as it should. We are here because it’s our responsibility to educate the rest of the community.”
-Laura Schrenk,
Junior, Deaf Studies, President of DSA

“Before I came here I never met a deaf person in my life. But now all of my roommates sign and I decided to learn ASL to be an active member of the community. The big problem is that audism is a worldwide issue that is swept under the rug too much. I think it’s because some people are scared to learn about what they didn’t know before. The community is so happy and welcoming. They accept all with open arms.”
-Briana Kramer,
Junior, English Studies