Volume 121, Number 8 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 Friday, March 2, 2001

MIT’sOldest and Largest

Newspaper

The WeatherToday: Chance of flurries, 29°F (–2°C)Tonight: Clearing, cold, 21°F (–6°C)Tomorrow: Sunny, clear, 35°F ( 6°C)

Details, Page 2

Comics

Page 9

OPINION

The Tech’s opinion staffersreview the UAP/VP candidates’debate performances and offertheir election choices.

Page 15

World & Nation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4On the Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7On the Town . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Events Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . .11UA Election Guide . . . . . . . . . .14

By Naveen SunkavallyNEWS EDITOR

“I have been run over by an18,000 pound dump truck. Icrawled across the Infinite Corridor

for 78 laps continu-ously. No one’sgoing to stop mefrom becoming UApresident!”

So began Wednesday night’sUndergraduate Association debates,starting with the opening statementfrom presidential candidate RhettCreighton ’02 and covering a rangeof topics from athletics funding anddining to mental health and confi-dential medical transport.

Candidate team Jaime E. Dev-ereaux ’02 and Allison L. Neizmik’02, consisting of the UA speakerfrom MacGregor House and theUA’s publicity chair from Alpha ChiOmega, respectively, touted theirexperience and the accomplishmentsof the current administration, includ-ing their resistance to the placementof the Technology Enabled ActiveLearning physics program in theStudent Center and their involve-ment in searching for new deans.

Devereaux said their ticket’sgoals were to create a larger senseof community, increase activitiesfunding, and improve student-fac-ulty advising. With their experi-

ence they said they could hit theground running rather than spend-ing a term acquainting themselveswith administrators.

The UAP/UAVP ticket of Sanjay

K. Rao ’02 from Next House andJyoti Agarwal ’03 of Alpha Phifocused on their goal of increasing

By Diana S. ChengSTAFF REPORTER

Several off ices and researchgroups belonging to the Departmentof Physics may be on the move undera plan by thedepartment torenovate sever-al buildingsand create theGreen Centerfor Physics.

M I T ’ sDepar tmentsof Physicsand MaterialsScience andEnginee r ingare swapping spaces for headquar-ters and offices in buildings 4, 6,and 8 over the next few years, inan effort to consolidate depart-mental spaces.

Currently, the physics depart-ment occupies space in buildings4, 6, and 8, and the Materials Sci-ence department has off ices inbuildings 6, 8, 26, and along theInfinite Corridor.

Professor Marc A. Kastner, headof the physics department, said thepurpose of the renovations would beto bring the department’s academicand research offices together.

The divide between the depart-ment’s headquarters and educationoffice creates “a false separation ofeducation and research activities”that can be addressed by moving theoffices closer together in the newGreen Center, Kastner said.

Renovations include exchanging

SISIR BOTTA—THE TECH

Rhett Creighton ’02 and running mate Margaret V. Stringfellow ’03 join other UA presidential and vicepresidential candidates in a debate Wednesday night in the Student Center lobby.

By Matthew Palmer NEWS EDITOR

Six MacVicar Faculty Fellowswere named today to honor theircontributions to undergraduateteaching and to their respectivefields.

This year’s winners are Professorof Mechanical Engineering Mary C.Boyce PhD ’87, Associate Professorin Material Sciences and Engineer-

ing Anne Mayes ’86; Assistant Pro-fessor in the Program on Science,Technology, and Society David A.Mindell PhD ’96; Associate Profes-sor in Civil and Environmental Engi-neering Heidi M. Nepf; AssociateProfessor in Theater Arts JanetSonenberg; and Professor of OceanEngineering J. Kim Vandivir PhD ’75.

Marc A. Kastner,Head of the PhysicsDepartment

Professor Emeritus Claude E. Shannon PhD ’40 died last Saturdayat the Courtyard Nursing Care Center in Medford, Mass. after a longstruggle with Alzheimer’s disease. He was 84 years old.

Shannon was known by many as the father of digital communica-tion for his landmark 1948 publication “A Mathematical Theory ofCommunication.” In this revolutionary paper, he theorized that it waspossible to reduce all communications to strings of 0s and 1s and usethem to transfer messages without errors over long distances.

“Shannon was the person who saw that the binary digit was thefundamental element in all of communication,” said Professor Emeri-tus Robert G. Gallager ’57, who worked with Shannon, to The NewYork Times. “That was really his discovery, and from it the wholecommunications revolution has sprung.”

Shannon’s work has made today’s information age possible. Hiscommunications theory has been accepted worldwide. All of today’scommunication lines are measured in bits per second, a notion hecrystallized in his famous “channel capacity” theorem. His binarycode is central to the now-commonplace technology that delivers theInternet, complete with sound and pictures, to many homes aroundthe world.

In 1940, Shannon earned both an SM in Electrical Engineeringand Computer Science and a PhD in Mathematics. His Master’s the-sis, “A Symbolic Analysis of Real and Switching Circuits,” estab-lished the theoretical foundation for digital circuits using Booleanalgebra, in which problems are solved by manipulating 0s and 1s.

Professor Howard Gardner of Harvard University told Tech Talkthat Shannon’s thesis was “possibly the most important, and also themost famous, Master’s thesis of the century.”

While he was a graduate student at MIT, Shannon also workedwith Professor Vannevar Bush on his differential analyzer, an analogcomputer that used a complex system of shafts, wheels, and gears tosolve calculus equations.

A noted cryptographer, Shannon worked on secrecy systems atBell Laboratories during World War II. His team’s work on anti-air-craft directors was crucial in defending England from German rock-ets during Germany’s blitz of England. Many credit his 1949 paper,“Communication Theory of Secrecy Systems,” with transformingcryptography from an art to a science.

Shannon worked on a variety of other projects, including a device

UAP/VP Candidates Square Off in DebateThree Tickets ToutStrengths, BlastOpponents

PhysicsPlans NewCenterRenovations WillUnite Department

Ceremony Today HonorsNew MacVicar Fellows

SEPHIR HAMILTON—THE TECH

Gerry Bloustein answers questions after showing video clips during her talk “Ceci N’est Pas UneJeune Fille: Serious Play, Mimesis and Learning to Grow up Female.” The Australian feminist,ethnographer, and videomaker spoke in 2-105 yesterday as part of a series co-sponsored by theMIT Program in Women’s Studies and Comparative Media Studies. On Wednesday, March 7, thegroups will host “Tres Vidas,” a chamber music theater premiere, at 8 p.m. in Killian Hall.

Claude E. Shannon

Debate

UA Debate, Page 12

MacVicar, Page 19 Physics Center, Page 23

Shannon, Page 24

Administrators have agreed tomatch 2 to 1 Habitat forHumanity donations raised at the Naughty by Nature concert.

Page 20

By Janet HookLOS ANGELES TIMES

WASHINGTON

House Republicans gavePresident Bush’s domestic agenda itsfirst legislative victory Thursday, asthe House Ways and MeansCommittee approved a cut in incometax rates that is the crown jewel ofhis economic and budget policy.

But in a likely portent of thingsto come for him on Capitol Hill, thecommittee action reflected anabsence of the bipartisan spirit thatBush promised to build around hispresidency.

The tax cut was approved on astrict party-line vote, 23-15. HouseRepublicans rammed the bill through

the committee on short notice andvoted in lock step to crush aDemocratic alternative that wouldhave provided a smaller tax cut, moretargeted to middle-income people.

“The president talks all the timeabout having a bipartisan relation-ship,” said House DemocraticLeader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo). “What the House Republicansare doing is against everything hehas said we ought to be doing.”

Gephardt and other Democratsobjected to the speedy action on thetax cut bill, arguing that lawmakersshould not consider it until after theypass a budget agreement that bal-ances reductions in taxes againstother priorities.

Still, some Bush allies remainoptimistic that some Democrats willcome around to supporting the tax cutas it makes it way through Congress.

“It may look a little less biparti-san than it should today,” said Rep.

Rob Portman (R-Ohio), a Ways andMeans member who is close to theBush administration. “I’m still veryhopeful that as the bill works its waythrough the process, it will becomemore bipartisan.”

Portman said he expected five to10 Democrats to support the mea-sure when it comes to a House votenext week. One Democrat Bush cancount on is Rep. Ralph M. Hall (D-Texas) — a conservative who wasthe only Democrat in Congress toendorse him for president. Hall’sspokeswoman said Thursday that hewould vote for the tax cut bill.

As approved by the committee,the bill would reduce taxes by $958billion over 10 years by cuttingincome tax rates across the board. Itwould go beyond Bush’s proposalby speeding up the cut in the lowesttax rate and applying the change to2001 tax bills, a year earlier thanBush proposed.

WORLD & NATIONPage 2 THE TECH March 2, 2001

Cheney Aide Had Worked On Rich’s Behalf

THE WASHINGTON POST

The person largely responsible for key legal arguments cited inMarc Rich’s successful pardon application is not Jack Quinn,President Clinton’s former White House counsel. It’s I. Lewis“Scooter” Libby, a longtime Rich lawyer who is now chief of staff forVice President Dick Cheney.

Since 1985, when he left the State Department and was recruitedby former Nixon White House counsel Leonard Garment, Libbyspent countless hours reviewing legal documents and interviewingwitnesses in a search for cracks in the government’s tax evasionindictment of Rich, according to sources. “He spent the next twoyears traveling around the world,” said a person familiar with hiswork.

“He’s the best lawyer of all the many lawyers who have workedwith me or for me,” Garment said. “On this case, he didn’t give in toanything. He was constantly skeptical and helped me reach the con-clusion that we had a meritorious case” to present to New York prose-cutors in attempts to negotiate a settlement.

Libby was convinced Rich was a victim of an overzealous prose-cution that inappropriately used federal racketeering statutes, knownas RICO, to squeeze him and his companies, sources said.

Between 1989 and 1993, Libby served in the Pentagon whenCheney was secretary of defense. As soon as he went back into pri-vate practice, he resumed his role as the specialist in the Rich case.

House Approves Bankruptcy BillTHE WASHINGTON POST

The House approved legislation Thursday that would revamp thenation’s bankruptcy laws by making it harder for consumers to wipeout their debt.

The bill, which was pushed by the credit card industry andopposed by consumer groups, is the first major piece of legislation tocome out of the House in the new Congress.

Lobbyists for the credit card industry expect the legislation to passquickly through the Senate, which will begin debating it Monday.Consumer groups hope to add amendments in the Senate that wouldmake the bill more consumer friendly but acknowledge there may belittle support for their efforts.

The bill passed on a 306 to 108 vote that included 93 Democratswho supported it.

President Bush has indicated he would sign the legislation — asharp contrast to his predecessor, Bill Clinton, who vetoed virtuallyidentical legislation at the end of last year, arguing it was too slantedin favor of big business and against consumers.

Report Says Power SuppliersOvercharged by $500 Million

LOS ANGELES TIMES

Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California’s utilitiesmore than $500 million during December and January, an amountthat the federal government should demand be refunded, according toa no-holds-barred state report released Thursday.

The report by the California Independent System Operator, whichoversees the flow of electricity in the state, said suppliers charged $11billion during those two months alone — more than they did for all of1999.

Studying various market dynamics, the agency concluded thatthere was a “prima facie case” that the unnamed generators and mar-keters had earned $562 million above “just and reasonable” prices.

The state report is the most accusatory of a number of studiesundertaken to determine why wholesale electricity prices have soaredin California since last summer, throwing the state’s biggest utilitiesinto financial crisis and dashing hopes for lower consumer rates.

Census Officials Back HeadCount, Undercount MillionsBy D’Vera CohnTHE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON

Census Bureau off icialsThursday urged against adjustingthe 2000 Census to compensate forpeople who were missed, dashingthe hopes of civil rights leaders thatsuch an adjustment could be used inredrawing political boundaries.

The recommendation was a sur-prise because census officials previ-ously have portrayed adjustment asa solution to chronic undercounts.But Thursday, they said they couldnot guarantee that adjusted censusnumbers would be more accuratethan results from mail-in question-naires and a door-to-door count lastyear.

A survey conducted after thehead count concluded that the cen-sus had missed 3 million people,including a disproportionate numberof minorities. But census officialssaid Thursday they had questionsabout the validity of that survey anduntil those questions are answered,which could be months, they couldnot recommend adjustment.

“We were afraid it would be lessaccurate,” said John H. Thompson,associate census director.

The recommendation from cen-

sus officials now goes to CommerceSecretary Donald Evans, who hassignalled his opposition to adjust-ment. Evans said Thursday he wouldannounce a decision early nextweek. Redistricting numbers arelegally due to states by the end ofMarch.

The issue of whether to adjustthe census has been so contentiousthat it produced lawsuits against theCensus Bureau in 1990 and endedup before the Supreme Court twoyears ago. With Republicans con-trolling the House ofRepresentatives by only a few seats,both sides have pushed hard fortheir preferred figures.

Disappointed Democrats andcivil rights groups argued thatThursday’s recommendation was notnecessarily a rejection of adjustednumbers, but reflected a lack of timeto weigh all the evidence. Someexpressed concern that the bureaumay have bowed to political pres-sure from the Bush administration .

“The bad news is that millions ofAmericans had the clock run out onthem,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney(D-N.Y.), until recently the rankingDemocrat on the House census sub-committee.

Some Democrats urged the

Census Bureau to release unadjustednumbers anyway, so states couldconsider using them for redistrictingeven if they were not the f iguresdeemed more accurate by thebureau. Representatives of theHispanic and Asian American cau-cuses, who are to meet with EvansFriday, are expected to press him onthat issue.

Census officials said they did nothave enough conf idence in theadjusted numbers to release themyet, though they expect to do soeventually.

“The issue is: Is it fit for use?”replied William Barron, acting cen-sus director. “And I don’t think wecan say that now.”

Republicans were gleeful.“Game. Set. Match,” read the head-line on a statement issued by theoffice of Rep. Dan Miller (R-Fla.),ranking Republican on the Housecensus subcommittee.

The 2000 Census said the coun-try had 281 million people last year.The survey said there were 284 mil-lion. But analysis using some of theother official documents said therewere 279 million, meaning the cen-sus may have overcounted the coun-try.

House Panel Passes Tax Cut

By Efren GutierrezSTAFF METEOROLOGIST

March has lived up to its reputation and entered like a lion.The recent high winds and gusts that have plagued the area are due to the

pressure gradient surrounding most of the New England and Mid-Atlanticarea. The gradient results from the interaction of a low pressure system inNova Scotia and a weak high pressure system in the Ohio Valley.

The two systems each feature their own wind circulation, and where thecurrents add vectorially the wind increases and becomes turbulent with aReynolds number (a nondimensional measure of turbulence) of around 107.

With such strong upper level winds, there is only a small possibility ofany precipitation, since cloud development is very limited.

The winds will continue into the weekend and the clouds present todaywill shift toward the east.

A low-level low pressure system now centered in Texas will starttrekking of to the east, and might move up the coast to impact Boston withshowers by the middle of next week.

Weekend Outlook

Today: Partly cloudy with a small chance of flurries. West wind of 15 mph.High of 29°F (-2°C).

Tonight: Clearing skies and cold. Low of 21°F (-6°C).Tomorrow: Sunny and clear. High in the mid-30s (1-3°C).Tomorrow Night: Cool with some cloudiness. Low in the low-20s. (-7 to -5°C).

Sunday: Scattered clouds. High in the upper 30s (3-4°C).

WEATHERSituation for Noon Eastern Standard Time, Friday, March 2, 2001

23-15 Vote IndicatesPartisan DivideFacing Bush on Hill

In Like a Lion

By John M. BerryTHE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON

The manufacturing sector of theeconomy remained weak last month,but the worst of its decline may beover, according to the monthly sur-vey of the National Association ofPurchasing Management releasedThursday.

The NAPM’s index that tracksconditions at manufacturing firmsrose slightly to 41.9 last month from41.2 in January, breaking a string of11 consecutive monthly declines.But the reading remained wellbelow 50, indicating that the sectoris continuing to contract. Still, someanalysts said, the break in theindex’s downward momentum couldbe a signal that the worst is over formanufacturing, the portion of theeconomy that has been hardest hitby the slowing of growth in recentmonths.

Meanwhile, other reports releasedThursday showed increases in person-al income, spending and constructionin January, causing some analysts tosuggest the U.S. economy will contin-ue to grow in the first three months ofthe year. Growth in the fourth quarterof last year was only 1.1 percent, andsome forecasters have predicted theeconomy will start shrinking and per-haps slide into a recession in the firsthalf of this year.

Personal income rose a strong0.6 percent in January, with the keywages and salaries portion up evenmore, 0.7 percent, the CommerceDepartment reported. The bigincrease in pay was the result ofboth a solid increase in the numberof workers on payrolls and the num-ber of hours worked. Both those fac-tors were influenced to some extentby a swing from unusually bitterwinter weather in December to morenormal weather in January.

Personal consumption expendi-tures, which include spending forgoods and services of all types, alsoincreased 0.7 percent, Commercesaid. However, after adjustment forinflation, particularly for energy ser-

vices such as natural gas, the realincrease was just 0.2 percent. Thatreal gain matched that of Decemberand was above the 0.1 percentincreases in both October andNovember.

In the other report, Commercesaid construction spending rose 1.5percent in January after increasing 1percent in December. Both privateand public spending rose, with resi-dential construction up 1.7 percentand nonresidential construction up avery large 5.8 percent, primarilybecause of increasing work on newindustrial and commercial build-ings.

The strength in housing andother construction should help theeconomy stay out of recession, ana-lysts said.

“However, consumer spendingshould carry substantially moremomentum into the second quarter”than it had when it entered the firstquarter, said economist Joe Liro ofStone & McCarthy. “If the f irstquarter marks the bottom of theconsumer retrenchment, then theeconomy will avoid a shallow reces-sion.”

By Molly MooreTHE WASHINGTON POST

ISTANBUL

Afghanistan’s ruling TalibanIslamic militia said Thursday that itstroops have begun destroying allstatues in the country, including theworld’s tallest standing Buddha,hewn from a rock cliff 1,600 yearsago.

Carrying out an edict thatstunned the world of archaeologyand cultural preservation andunleashed an outpouring of interna-tional protest, the radical Islamicgroup said tanks, rocket launchersand “any means available” would beemployed to demolish the statues,deemed to violate the tenets ofIslam. Some have stood sentry overhistory stretching from the con-quests of Genghis Khan to the GreatGames of the British and Russianempires to the intrigues of the ColdWar.

“All statues will be destroyed,”Qudratullah Jamal, the Taliban’sinformation and culture minister,told reporters Thursday in theAfghan capital, Kabul, saying thestatues did not conform to Islamicprohibitions against depicting the

human form in photographs, statuesor paintings. “The work began earlyduring the day. All of the statues areto be smashed.”

Jamal specifically identified as atarget Afghanistan’s most renownedhistoric site: a sandstone carving ofBuddha that towers 175 feet on theface of a cliff near the town ofBamiyan, 90 miles west of Kabul.That Buddha and a 120-foot one setin a nearby cliff were cut from solidrock between the third and fifth cen-turies A.D., when Afghanistan wasan important center of Buddhistteaching and pilgrimage.

Jamal’s assertion could not beindependently verified because theTaliban has refused to allow journal-ists or preservationists near any ofthe endangered sites.

“We do not understand whyeverybody is so worried,” theTaliban’s supreme leader,Mohammed Omar, said through theofficial Taliban news agency, brush-ing off worldwide appeals to aban-don the order he issued Monday.“All we are breaking are stones.”

Historians and archaeologistssaid the Taliban’s decree, whichthreatens not only antiquities andhistoric sites but hundreds of small-er relics in museums, could be thefatal blow to preserving a culturalheritage already decimated by war,looting and theft. A decade of guer-rilla warfare that drove Soviet troops

out of Afghanistan in 1989 was fol-lowed by bitter factional f ightingand widespread lawlessness. Evenafter the Taliban consolidated itscontrol over Afghanistan in the late1990s, fighting against oppositionforces has flared around Bamiyanand in the northeast.

The Taliban’s promised destruc-tion of antiquities drew condemna-tion worldwide. Other Muslimnations — including Pakistan, oneof the Taliban’s closest allies, andIran, one of its rivals — joined withWestern countries and Buddhist-dominated Far Eastern nations inurging that the statues be spared.

“Islam never preached thedestruction of objects that depict thebelief and history of millions ofpeople throughout the world,” theEnglish-language daily Iran Newssaid in an editorial. It accused theTaliban of trying “not only to erasethe past and present of Afghanistan,but also to strip the country of any-thing that may form a cultural basisfor its future.”

Cultural preservationists com-pared the Taliban’s actions to thoseof other intolerant regimes thatattempted to obliterate religious cul-tures. “It is absolutely sickening. Ican’t believe what I’m hearing,”Nancy Dupree,” a leading expert onAfghan history, said Thursday in atelephone interview from London.

Archaeologists,Historians OutragedOver Demolitions

February NumbersAccompany Rise InSalaries, Spending

March 2, 2001 WORLD & NATION THE TECH Page 3

NASA Told to Scale Back Station Plans

NEWSDAY

Faced with as much as $4 billion in cost overruns on the interna-tional space station, the Bush administration is ordering NASA toshift money away from such planned U.S. additions to the outpost asa living quarters and a crew rescue vehicle.

A top NASA official said the plan, outlined in the new WhiteHouse budget document, will allow completion of a core U.S. struc-ture to which Japanese and European modules can be attached. Butsome future American pieces, including the living quarters that wouldallow an increase in the crew size from three to seven, may be lost.

W. Michael Hawes, NASA’s deputy associate administrator forspace flight development, said the agency is assessing the impact ofthe Bush budget proposal. “There are a lot of options to look at andprice out,” Hawes said in a telephone interview this week withreporters.

While the White House’s budget plan for fiscal year 2002 seeks a2 percent increase overall for NASA — to $14.5 billion — it notesthat some recent estimates peg the cost overrun for the space stationat $1 billion for 2001 and 2002 and a total of $4 billion over the nextfive years.

To offset that cost growth, the Bush administration wants to “redi-rect” money away from a propulsion module scheduled for additionto the station in 2004, the habitation module that was to be deployedin 2005 and a crew escape vehicle, also slated for completion in2005.

Bush Budget Includes Appeal For Military Base Closings

LOS ANGELES TIMES

The Pentagon’s military base-closing program has returned withnew force.

The Bush administration, eager to find savings to finance militaryreform, included in its budget a strong appeal for several new roundsof base closings. The current inventory of about 500 bases, it said,“wastes money.”

Of the roughly 500 bases nationwide, about half are consideredmajor.

Advocates of base closings say the first four rounds saved the gov-ernment $20 billion through fiscal year 2000, and will save $5.5 bil-lion a year thereafter. They predict that new rounds could save anadditional $2 billion to $3 billion a year when fully implemented.

This week, two longtime advocates of closings, Sen. John McCain(R-Ariz.) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), introduced legislation call-ing for additional base closings in 2003 and 2005.

Agriculture Wants Quick ID Of Genetically Engineered Seed

THE WASHINGTON POST

Agriculture officials on Thursday told seed dealers to quicklydetermine how much of the nation’s corn seed stocks contain thegenetically engineered variety that prompted massive recalls of foodand corn crops last year.

The Agriculture Department told the American Seed TradeAssociation to have the results by noon Friday so officials will knowhow much seed corn will have to be destroyed and can begin deter-mining how much that will cost and who will pay for it.

Off icials said Thursday that the amount of seed corn withdetectable amounts of a protein from the genetically modified corn isexpected to be small, less than 5 percent of the total. They also saidthat precautions are in place to ensure farmers don’t plant the taintedcorn, known as StarLink.

Federal officials met for two hours Thursday at the Department ofAgriculture with about 50 representatives from the seed, corn andfood industry officials. Agriculture Department spokesman KevinHerglotz said the meeting focused on testing procedures and how fed-eral agencies could help the seed industry deal with the StarLinkissue.

“Our goal is to do what we can to prevent it from being planted,”he said.

StarLink, developed by Aventis CropScience and approved onlyfor animal feed, has caused regulatory and economic trouble sincebiotechnology critics found it last fall in taco shells. Federal agencieshad approved StarLink only for animal consumption because of con-cerns that it might cause dangerous allergic reactions in people,though they have said the human health risks likely are quite limited.

The discovery of the corn in the human food supply prompted amassive recall of corn and food products made with corn in this coun-try. It was detected in seed by dealers this year as they checked theirstocks before selling to farmers for the upcoming growing season.

Combs, On Stand, Denies Gun,Bribery Charges

NEWSDAY

Hip-hop mogul Sean “Puffy” Combs told jurors in his gun andbribery case Thursday that he believed he was the target of an assassi-nation attempt when gunfire erupted in a Times Square nightclub in1999.

In a soft voice with a hint of a Southern drawl, Combs, 31, repudi-ated every charge leveled against him.

Combs said he did not possess a weapon on Dec. 27, 1999, neverfired inside the club and never tried to bribe his driver, WardelFenderson.

Combs, who could face up to 15 years in prison if convicted ofgun and bribery charges, also testified that he never faced off withMatthew Allen, a former convict who other witnesses called “Scar.”

Combs said he saw a man “mouthing off ” and apparently glaringin his direction as he left the club. He said that he heard one shot ashe walked away and that he initially crouched down and covered hishead with his hands.

Prosecutors say Combs and Barrow both drew guns, with Combsfiring into the ceiling and Barrow firing into the crowd.

Marine Osprey Coverup ProbeReaches Top Pentagon BrassBy Mary Pat Flaherty and Thomas E. RicksTHE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON

The Defense Department’sinspector general has seized datafrom the computers of two Marinegenerals as an investigation into analleged coverup of problems withthe troubled V-22 Osprey aircraft isreaching into the top ranks at thePentagon.

The investigation began inJanuary with allegations that a lieu-tenant colonel who commanded theOsprey squadron in North Carolinaencouraged crews to falsify mainte-nance records. Investigators are nowlooking into whether the squadroncommander was pressured by supe-riors to hide the shortcomings of theOsprey, an innovative aircraft thattakes off like a helicopter but flieslike a plane.

In a late October meeting withthe Osprey squadron, one Marinegeneral urged subordinates to “fig-ure out how to manage and mini-mize the impact” of a rigid record-

keeping system that had shown theaircraft were often grounded oravailable only for limited flights,according to notes on the meetingobtained by The Washington Post.

The Marine Corps has steadfast-ly defended the tilt-rotor aircraftagainst critics who charge that it istoo expensive and unreliable. TheCorps wants to buy 360 Ospreys ata total cost of $40 billion and hasstuck with those plans despite threecrashes, since 1992, that killed 26Marines and four civilians.

Investigators working for theDefense Department’s actinginspector general, RobertLieberman, recently took data fromthe computer hard drives of Lt. Gen.Fred McCorkle, the head of Marineaviation, and McCorkle’s assistant,Brig. Gen. James F. Amos, severalMarines and a Pentagon off icialsaid.

“It’s all about the e-mail trail, aspart of the search to f igure outwhat’s there,” said a Marine officerfamiliar with the Osprey program.

Investigators are also looking

into the actions of Maj. Gen. DennisT. Krupp, commanding general ofthe aircraft wing that includes theOsprey squadron in New River,N.C. Krupp met with the squadronin October and emphasized thatcomputerized maintenance recordswere making the Osprey look bad,according to a summary written byan officer in training as an Ospreypilot.

“Skin this cat,” Krupp said,according to the officer’s notes.

Krupp also noted the importanceof guarding the Osprey’s image,advising squadron members thatwhenever they allow photographs ofthe aircraft to be taken, they should“make sure that they look goodand/or are doing something,” thenotes on the meeting say.

The Osprey program faced acritical juncture at the end of 2000,with a change of administration inthe White House. The change ofadministration was importantbecause then Secretary of DefenseDick Cheney had halted the Ospreyprogram in 1989, citing cost.

Manufacturing Sector Halts Decline

Taliban Orders Statues Destroyed

OPINIONPage 4 THE TECH March 2, 2001

As an editorial board, we have struggled with the choice ofpresidential and vice presidential candidates available to studentsin this year’s Undergraduate Association elections. Unfortunately,

we have concluded that none of thetickets in this year’s elections arewhat we desire in a UA presiden-

tial/vice-presidential team.That is not to say the candidates are without their strengths.

Several of the candidates have strong talents which would con-tribute positively to the UA. But the current teams of candidatesdo not present these skills in a package we are able to embraceenthusiastically.

The team of Jaime E. Devereaux ’02 and Allison L.Neizmik ’02 has the asset of experience. Devereaux is currentlyUA Council Speaker and Neizmik is UA Public Relations Chair,and this ticket has the best understanding of the issues facing theUA and the processes governing the UA. But both are commensu-rate insiders, and have a history of pursuing their plans of action inways that inhibit meaningful contributions by the average student.At a time when the UA is increasingly governed by its own inter-nal subculture, we hesitate to embrace such an insider candidacy.

In contrast, the ticket of Sanjay K. Rao ’02 and JyotiAgarwal ’03 presents a fresh perspective — a new outlookwhich the UA desperately needs. Rao is especially able to con-nect the student body. However, Rao’s evasiveness in answer-ing a straightforward question about his petition from RhettCreighton ’02 presented him as a waffling politician, not thestraight-shooter that students need. Regarding this and otherissues, it appears that the Rao/Agarwal ticket has wilfully mis-led the student body. Additionally, we doubt the level of com-

mitment to student affairs shown by Rao’s running mateAgarwal. By her own admission, she rarely makes meetings ofgroups to which she claims membership. These factors give usserious concerns about the integrity of the Rao/Agarwal ticket.

Creighton and Margaret V. Stringfellow ’03 bring a level ofenergy and excitement not found in the other candidates. And asTau Epsilon Phi and Senior House residents, respectively, theyrepresent constituencies that feel shut out of the UA. However,the goals of their campaign, such as bringing back Heart-to-Heart and the Millennium Ball, are issues below the scope ofthose we would like our UA leaders to address. At first glance,their eccentric style struck us as possibly awkward for UA lead-ership. Had the time available for campaigning been longer, wemay have felt differently. In the limited time we have had tolearn about the candidates, we do not yet feel comfortable thatthe individuals on this ticket understand the responsibilitiesinvolved with UA executive office.

The process has been additionally complicated by the deci-sion of the UA Judicial Review Board to remove the team ofCreighton and Stringfellow from the ballot because of an insuf-ficient number of signatures. We hope that Creighton andStringfellow are allowed the option cited by JudBoard to gathermore signatures quickly, and that the other candidates supporttheir restoration to the ballot.

Even if Creighton and Stringfellow are restored to the bal-lot, though, the overall quality of this candidate field will remaindisappointing. All of the tickets have had the chance to impress,yet none have stood out as the students’ clear choice. We canonly hope that this underwhelming slate does not portend anunderwhelming year in student government.

By Jordan Rubin, Eric J. Cholankeril,Naveen Sunkavally, and Matthew Palmer

While we agree with the opinion of the editorial board thatnew blood is needed in the UA government, we do not believethat Sanjay K. Rao ’02 is the best choice for President. Despite

our reservations about the the abili-ty of the ticket of Jaime E.Devereaux and Allison L. Neizmik

to involve and represent all students, we believe their experienceand dedication to the organization outweighs their drawbacks.

For example, Devereaux was instrumental in the relocation ofTEAL from the Student Center to Building 26, preserving studentspace on campus and fighting for the separation between academicsand social life. In advocating this relocation, the UA was able toreverse a decision passed down by the Chancellor, Provost, Dean ofthe School of Science, and the head of the physics department,along with a host of other administrators and faculty members — anotable accomplishment. We think that their experience will givethem a notable advantage over the other candidates in being able towork with the administration to implement new ideas.

If elected, however, this ticket must search for new initia-tives to gather student opinion and garner student support forinvolvement in the UA; a web form is not sufficient. They needto make a concerted effort to defeat the insider culture in the UA.

Since last year’s failed election bid, Rao has taken a year offfrom the Undergraduate Association, despite his statement last year

that he would stay involved should he lose the election. While hemay appear more charismatic and well spoken, he and his runningmate have no clear direction and sense of purpose. His platformcalls for activity on a laundry list of issues including anonymousmedical transport, mental health, online learning, the freshman pro-gram, and student representation in the UA without providing spe-cific solutions besides the creation of several committees. We feelthat the Devereaux/Neizmik ticket better understands the con-straints in coming up with solutions for these problems.

In addition, the UA President must find qualified individu-als to fill Cabinet posts. We have not received adequate assur-ance that, in a Rao administration, such positions would befilled by individuals representing various interests on campus.

The ticket of Rhett Creighton ’02 and Margaret V.Stringfellow ’03 offers a refreshing point of view and sense ofenthusiasm. We feel that these two candidates were handcuffedby the insufficient amount length of the campaign period andthe time that they spent in a bureaucratic web due to complaintsabout their candidacy. We are concerned, however, that withtheir lack of experience Creighton and Stringfellow might notfully understand the range of responsibilities of the UAPresident and Vice President.

The student body needs a pair of qualified, committed, trust-worthy individuals to serve as UA President and VP. These con-cerns trump the desire to find an outsider candidate. In this electionit is not necessary to vote for a split ticket. Therefore, we encourageyou to cast your vote for Jaime Devereaux and Allison Neizmik.

Given that each of the candidate teams presents serious weak-nesses, the majority of us believe the only way to fashion an accept-able ticket is to exercise our right to write in a candidate team. We

endorse Sanjay K. Rao for UAPresident and Jaime E. Devereaux forUA Vice President. We choose Rao

for president because of his ability to connect with students andserve as a strong spokesman for the UA. We like Devereaux asvice-president because her experience with the UA allows her toadminister the UA and serve as a “behind-the-scenes” leader.

In order to make this partnership work, each candidate mustacknowledge the skills the other candidate brings to the table.Devereaux must recognize that Rao’s vigor and student perspec-tive makes him the ideal choice for the UA’s most public posi-

tion. Likewise, Rao must recognize Devereaux’s wealth of expe-rience within government and give her independent authority tomanage the internal affairs of the UA.

To vote for this ticket, students must choose the option of“write-in” from the list available on the UA voting software.Voters should then write in the full names of Rao andDevereaux for president and vice president, respectively.

We realize that the action we urge is highly unusual; howeverwe believe that all three tickets have flaws so serious they precludeus from endorsing them. It is our right as students to write in a can-didate team, and we believe that combining Rao and Devereauxbrings the right combination of perspective and experience to theUA. We reach reluctantly the conclusion that this is the best choicestudents can make from a field of imperfect candidates.

Editorial

Editorial

Dissent

UAP/VP — A Reluctant Decision

Opinion PolicyEditorials are the official opinion of The Tech. They are

written by the editorial board, which consists of thechairman, editor in chief, managing editor, news editors,and opinion editors.

Dissents are the opinions of the signed members of theeditorial board choosing to publish their disagreement withthe editorial.

Columns and editorial cartoons are written byindividuals and represent the opinion of the author, notnecessarily that of the newspaper.

Letters to the editor are welcome. Electronicsubmissions are encouraged and should be sent toletters@the-tech.mit.edu. Hard copy submissions shouldbe addressed to The Tech, P.O. Box 397029, Cambridge,Mass. 02139-7029, or sent by interdepartmental mail toRoom W20-483. All submissions are due by 4:30 p.m. twodays before the date of publication.

Letters and cartoons must bear the authors’ signatures,

addresses, and phone numbers. Unsigned letters will not beaccepted. No letter or cartoon will be printed anonymouslywithout the express prior approval of The Tech. The Techreserves the right to edit or condense letters; shorter letterswill be given higher priority. Once submitted, all lettersbecome property of The Tech, and will not be returned. TheTech makes no commitment to publish all the letters received.

The Tech’s Ombudsman, reachable by e-mail atombudsman@the-tech.mit.edu, serves as the liaisonbetween The Tech and its readers. From time to time, theOmbudsman writes an independent column reflecting thecomplaints, questions, and concerns of the readership.

To Reach UsThe Tech’s telephone number is (617) 253-1541. E-mail

is the easiest way to reach any member of our staff. If youare unsure who to contact, send mail to general@the-tech.mit.edu, and it will be directed to the appropriateperson. The Tech can be found on the World-Wide Web athttp://the-tech.mit.edu.

ChairmanJordan Rubin ’02Editor in Chief

Michael J. Ring ’01Business Manager

Huanne T. Thomas ’02Managing Editor

Eric J. Cholankeril ’02Executive EditorDana Levine ’02

NEWS STAFF

Editors: Naveen Sunkavally ’01, RimaArnaout ’02, Matthew Palmer ’03;Associate Editors: Nancy L. Keuss ’04,Jennifer Krishnan ’04, Brian Loux ’04,Shankar Mukherji ’04; Staff: Daniel C.Stevenson G, Frank Dabek ’00, Sanjay Basu’02, Kevin R. Lang ’02, Efren Gutierrez ’03,Vicky Hsu ’04, Pey-Hua Hwang ’04, PallaviNaresh ‘04, W.S. Wang ’04; Meteorologists:Véronique Bugnion G, Rob Korty G, PeterHuybers G, Greg Lawson G, Bill Ramstrom G.

PRODUCTION STAFF

Editor: Satwiksai Seshasai ’01; AssociateEditors: Stacia Swanson ’03, GayaniTillekeratne ’03, Joel Corbo ’04, Joy Forsythe’04, Tao Yue ’04; Staff: Mary Obelnicki ’98,Ryan Ochylski ’01, Ian Lai ’02, VimalBhalodia ’04, Anju Kanumalla ’04, KartikLamba ’04, Andy Leiserson ’04, AndrewMamo ’04, Shefali Oza ’04, Eric Tung ’04.

OPINION STAFF

Editors: Kris Schnee ’02, Mike Hall ’03;Associate Editor: Veena Thomas ’02;Columnists: Philip Burrowes ’04, Roy Esaki’04, Ken Nesmith ’04, Jyoti Tibrewala ’04;Staff: Matthew L. McGann ’00, Michael Bo-rucke ’01, Kevin Choi ’01, Christopher D.Smith ’01, Jason H. Wasfy ’01, Philippe C.Larochelle ’03.

SPORTS STAFF

Editor: Aaron D. Mihalik ’02; Staff: AlvanEric P. Loreto ’01, Jeffrey Colton ’02, Brian K.Richter ’02, Jennifer C. Lee ’03.

ARTS STAFF

Editors: Devdoot Majumdar ’04, Annie S.Choi; Associate Editor: Fred Choi ’02; Staff:Erik Blankinship G, Bence P. Olveczky G, RoyRodenstein G, Vladimir V. Zelevinsky ’95,Seth Bisen-Hersh ’01, Katie Jeffreys ’01,Rebecca Loh ’01, Bogdan Fedeles ’03, LianneHabinek ’02, Jumaane Jeffries ’02, JacobBeniflah ’03, Daniel J. Katz ’03, JaneMaduram ’03, Amy Meadows ’03, RyanKlimczak ’04, Izzat Jarudi ’04.

PHOTOGRAPHY STAFF

Editors: Nathan Collins G, Sephir Hamilton G;Associate Editors: Roshan Baliga ’03, WendyGu ’03; Staff: Erika Brown G, Krzysztof GajosG, Garry Maskaly G, Karlene R. Maskaly G,Wan Yusof Wan Morshidi G, Michelle PovinelliG, Bob Sumner G, Samudra Vijay G, GregoryF. Kuhnen ’00, Charles Boatin ’01, Nii Dodoo’01, James Snyder ’01, Yi Xie ’02, LeonidDrozhinin ’03, Ekaterina Ossikine ’03, Pedro L.Arrechea ’04, Sasir Botta ’04, Brian Hemond’04, Max Planck ’04, Jacqueline T. Yen ’04.

FEATURES STAFF

Associate Editors: Melissa S. Cain ’04, EunLee ’04; Staff: Diana S. Cheng ’04, SonaliMukherjee ’03; Cartoonists: Aaron Isaksen G,Kenneth Lu G, Solar Olugebefola G, JenniferDimase ’01, Grace H. Wang ’01, Bao-YiChang ’02, David Ngo ’02, Lara Kirkham’03, Alison Wong ’03, Guan-Jong Chen ’04.

BUSINESS STAFF

Advertising Manager: Rachel Johnson ’02;Operations Manager: Jasmine Richards ’02;Staff: Kedra Newsom ’02, Dashonn Graves’03, Joey Plum ’03.

EDITORS AT LARGE

Senior Editor: Eric J. Plosky ’99;Contributing Editor: James Camp G.

ADVISORY BOARD

Paul E. Schindler, Jr. ’74, V. Michael Bove ’83,Barry Surman ’84, Diana ben-Aaron ’85,Robert E. Malchman ’85, Simson Garfinkel ’87,Jonathan Richmond PhD ’91, Reuven M.Lerner ’92, Josh Hartmann ’93, Jeremy Hylton’94, Anders Hove ’96, Saul Blumenthal ’98,Indranath Neogy ’98, Joel Rosenberg ’99, B. D.Colen.

PRODUCTION STAFF FOR THIS ISSUE

Night Editors: Eric J. Cholankeril ’02, Ian Lai’02, Joy Forsythe ’04, Tao Yue ’04; Staff:Jordan Rubin ’02, Shefali Oza ’04.

The Tech (ISSN 0148-9607) is published on Tuesdays and Fridays duringthe academic year (except during MIT vacations), Wednesdays duringJanuary and monthly during the summer for $45.00 per year Third Class byThe Tech, Room W20-483, 84 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Mass.02139. Third Class postage paid at Boston, Mass. Permit No. 1. POST-MASTER: Please send all address changes to our mailing address: TheTech, P.O. Box 397029, Cambridge, Mass. 02139-7029. Telephone: (617)253-1541, editorial; (617) 258-8324, business; (617) 258-8226, facsimile.Advertising, subscription, and typesetting rates available. Entire contents ©2001 The Tech. Printed on recycled paper by Charles River Publishing.

Devereaux/Neizmik for UA President/VP

Rao/Devereaux for UA President/VP

ErratumIn Tuesday’s issue,

Ken Nesmith’s col-umn [“Ugly EnoughFor You?”] states thatSimmons Hall willhouse all incomingfreshmen. In fact,Simmons will nothouse all freshmen,but will house mem-bers of all undergrad-uate classes.

Letters To The Editorcan be found on page 6.

March 2, 2001 OPINION THE TECH Page 5

Michael J. Borucke

Liberals and conservatives alike oftenargue that the problems of other countries arejust that — their own problems. Corrupt dicta-tors and civil wars may ravage foreign coun-tries, causing poverty, starvation and geno-cide, but we as America can hardly be blamed,much less called upon to help others, whenwe’ve got so many problems to deal with inour own country. Of course, we have no prob-lem using the same facts to argue an oppositeview when we say, “Well, at least we’re betteroff than some other countries.”

When the U.S. government does getinvolved in another country’s affairs, it isassumed to be for the good of all concerned.To maintain this helpful assumption in thepublic’s mind, officials tend to mask true moti-vations with pleasant-sounding words like“humanitarianism” and “national interest.”

If you recall, both Iraq and Vietnam werehumanitarian ventures — the former to rescuethe Kuwaiti people from Saddam’s hands, thelatter to save the nascent democracy in Saigonfrom the barbarous regime in North Vietnam.But not even the government pretended theseinterventions were purely altruistic. In fact, itwas a matter of national interests that con-tributed to the interventions. We needed tocontain the threats of communism in Vietnamand high gas prices in the Middle East toensure the security of the American people.

Today, the U.S. government has decidedthat drugs are the threat. The best strategy ourleaders have devised to contain that threat is togive massive military aid to the source coun-try. But former President Clinton’s $1.3 billionaid package to the Colombian government isonly fueling the 30-year-old civil war betweenthe leftist rebels and the Colombian army.Moreover, everyone knows it.

This “War on Drugs” is an interesting par-adigm shift in the rhetoric spewed by the newmasters of war. Unlike in Iraq or Vietnam,there don’t seem to be any humanitarian goalsto be achieved in Colombia, any noble pur-suits that the U.S. government claims to pro-mote with the lending of the aid. In the UnitedStates, the judicial system continues to con-demn and imprison drug offenders for as longas possible. In addition, there is currently asevere lack of federal funds for drug treat-ment, and there may be even less if certaincongressmen get their way. Further, schoolprograms such as DARE have failed to curbteen drug use. Given this, it’s difficult to seehow the Drug War is benefiting the public.

In Colombia, the situation is undoubtedlyworse. If people in this country are becomingweary of the Drug War, people in Colombiahave never doubted its motives. Massacres of

civilians and labor leaders abound.Environments are polluted or blown up out-right. Chemical defoliants are falling on thelegitimate crops and on the heads of innocentColombian farmers, making children sick.Humanitarian objectives have never been con-sidered in Colombia, much less acted upon.And both the U.S. and Colombian governmentshave done their best to make sure human rightsdon’t exist in debt-ridden Colombia.

Last August, after the aid package hadbeen approved by Congress, Clinton sent thefirst installment ($781 million) by waivingfour out of the five human-rights criteria thatCongress attached to the aid. That wasn’t all.Clinton’s administration sent the secondinstallment without any human-rights condi-tions attached to the aid at all. In a maneuverthat would have made Reagan proud, theClinton administration marked the installmentas “Emergency Funds” rather than regularfunds, thus evading annoying human-rightsconditions. One administration representativeexplained, “We don’t believe legislationrequires that kind of formal certification.”

Congress never seemed too distraught overClinton’s refusal to acknowledge the human-rights conditions, though. The Senate beatback one proposal to redirect $225 millionfrom the Colombian aid package to U.S. drugtreatment programs by a vote of 89–11.Another proposal to reduce the aid packagefrom $1 billion to $200 million was defeatedin the Senate, 79–19.

The Colombian president, AndresPastrana, is doing little better than Clinton orCongress. In a gesture of goodwill, Pastranatraveled to rebel territory to meet with therebel group, Revolutionary Armed Forces ofColombia (FARC). His gesture stopped shortof offering peace terms to the guerrillas.Pastrana also vetoed a “Heinous Crimes Act”which would have required that soldiersinvolved in human-rights cases be tried bymilitary and not civilian courts.

This omission of human-rights issues is

very disconcerting when one considers thescale of state-sponsored terror in Colombia.According to reports by Amnesty Internationaland Human Rights Watch, there is mountingevidence that links the paramilitary operatingin Colombia to the Colombian army. The para-military is responsible for at least three-quar-ters of the human-rights violations. While it istrue that the other quarter of human rights vio-lations are committed by the rebels, it isimportant to note several points. For one thing,the United States can do much to lessen theviolations committed by the paramilitary (stopthe aid). For another, the media reports givethe impression that violations are shared equal-ly between the rebels and paramilitary.

The media also have the tendency toemphasize the connection between the rebelsand the drug lords, and at the same time todownplay the connection between the druglords and the paramilitary. The DEA hasfound that a paramilitary leader, CarlosCastao, is a trafficker himself, with connec-tions to a Colombian cartel. It’s good to knowthat the drug lords are contributing to theefforts to win the Drug War.

But even with the help of the drug lords,the cost-efficiency of the Drug War is verydubious. According to a report from theRAND think tank, fighting the War on Drugsthrough drug treatment is 23 times more cost-efficient than fighting the Drug War at thesource, which is what “we” are currentlyattempting. Other alternatives include fundingmore interdiction programs at the border anddomestic enforcement programs, both ofwhich are two or three times more cost-effec-tive than funding the Colombian Civil War.

With the amount of discussion about thesealternatives (none), I get the feeling that per-haps cost-effectiveness is not top priority inU.S. drug policy. The reasons for this can befound in the list of organizations whichpushed for the Colombian aid. Among thosenoble bodies were Occidental Petroleum, BPAmoco, Enron Corp., United Technologies,and Bell Helicopter Textron Incorporated. Thecompassion that these oil and defense compa-nies have in ridding our country of the drugblight is truly touching.

Even though the aid has already been sent,the helicopters bought and paid for, this doesnot mean the public cannot influence our lead-ers in future policy. Americans have rights andfreedoms denied to most Colombians. Amongthese are the freedom to assemble and theright to influence our representatives, or atleast to try. The protest at Park Street onSaturday will address issues about the DrugWar in addition to making some noise in theCommon. The problem will not go away if thepublic remains uneducated and silent aboutU.S. complicity in Colombia.

Philip Burrowes

So you spent every waking moment thisFebruary thinking of events in the context ofblack history. The Grammys underlined thepervasiveness of “black” culture in the main-stream, Colombian President AndresPastrana’s request for increased American aidreminded you of the idiosyncratically debili-tating “crack epidemic” of the African-American community, and Secretary of StateColin Powell’s current role in the Middle Eastcontrasts with decades of segregation in theAmerican armed services. Now, with Marchf inally here, you can go back to viewingevents through normal, unbiased eyes.Unfortunately, by regressing, you’ve not onlymissed the entire point of Black HistoryMonth, but you’ve exacerbated the conditionsit sought to mitigate.

All the insights you’ve undoubtedly madeduring your intense internal and externalscrutiny of racial biases are invaluable. Theyshould not, however, be regarded as some sortof seasonal eye-opening exercise. What shouldbe grasped is a fuller picture of the worldaround us, not the fractured one we are usedto. The reality is that by untangling the seem-ingly solely black conceptualization from anyoccurrence, we are unlocking the human expe-rience.

Convention holds that there are distinctlyblack elements to American society, that thereis a black experience that cannot be compre-hended through mere historical analysis. Thisis true insofar as nobody else’s life can be

understood without living it. African-Americans — as the term is meant — haveshared features but yet are born to live indi-vidual lives. Each ethnicity in this countrycould say the same of its members when obvi-ously not each one demands segregated study.It is illogical, then, to contend that African-American issues could, let alone should, bereserved for specified discussion.

Clearly, there is merit to in-depth analysisof specific issues. That merit, however, lies notwith possible racial or ethnic confusion; itemerges from the natural impossibility ofabsolutely comprehensive description. Still,the question remains how, exactly, so-calledblack issues benefit from incorporation intoother discussions. Is there something addedbeyond greater perspective?

The advantage is twofold. First, specifical-

ly black studies tend to build on an assumedknowledge of “mainstream” studies that mayor may not exist. Richard Wright, for exam-ple, makes sense with an understanding of thestratified white social hierarchy of the mid-20th century, yet becomes merely unduly frus-trated and impractical within the more or lessuniform black caste of the same time period.Comprehension of multiple facets ofAmerican society is necessary to best under-stand the circumstances of the often epiphe-nomenal nature of the black community.

Such effects were not merely one-way, andthis leads to the second boon. “Mainstream”culture is hardly static and in fact was highlyaffected by the effects it had on African-Americans. In all honesty, does the growth ofthe suburbs, the current Republican hegemonyin the south, or the perpetuity of Ivy Leagueschools’ reputations exist independently of thechanges African-Americans have experiencedresidentially, politically, and academically? Alittle more candor about the dependence ofboth segments of the country on the otherwould likely highlight unforeseen truths.

By faithfully adding black studies to his-torical curricula, the truth does not becomeblindingly obvious to the entire population.That there are several other ethnicities largelyexcluded from such studies makes theprospect all the more difficult. This neitherprovides an excuse to schedule token appreci-ation for African-Americans nor allow it todegenerate to an auxiliary field. No, not everymonth can be Black History Month, but peo-ple of this country should not go about blindto their own educational inadequacies.

Race and the TruthEducation, Culture Miss the Point of Black History Month

Vietnam in the MakingKilling Colombia with Shiny Bell Helicopters

Roy Esaki

As humans, we’re all social animals, but atMIT, we’re really really busy social animals— if we’re even still human. Consequently,the logistics of our schedules often deprive usof many opportunities for social interaction.And among the most tragic, but often neces-sary, casualties of a hectic life is mealtime.Though not without its pensive sadness,there’s something rather therapeutic and valu-able about the process, and lifestyle, of diningalone.

Granted, many students with convenientliving and dining situations have never had aneed, let alone inclination, to eat alone.Actually, because there are enough of suchpeople, both here and in larger society, there’sa strong stigma associated with eating alone.It’s the habit of a lonely, antisocial, extra-nerdy, friendless recluse, a sad and silent testi-mony to one’s loneliness in a chaotic andobscure world — sort of like the life of anMIT student.

But this stigma, like most stereotypes, ishardly universally or consistently true, thoughit has a clear basis in reality. The scatteredschedules and physical distribution of diningestablishments, let alone one’s schedule,makes solitary dining much more likely thaneating in groups. It’s a lot more convenientand efficient, if not necessary, to eat alone, beit for lunch bought at the food truck or fordinner at Lobdell. You’re completely free andindependent, untethered by any social obliga-tion whatsoever — free to do problem setswhile eating, at liberty to ignore table eti-quette and put your elbows on the table,allowed to stand up and leave at your own dis-cretion. There’s always the tendency for con-tinual isolation to cause one to ignore diningmanners, but otherwise, the freedom is quiteuseful during hectic times.

And with this freedom comes a really valu-able mental freedom, something that’s oftenneglected in the routine cycle of classworkand active avoidance thereof. Dining inLobdell during dinner hours, you look aroundand see so many solitary individuals, sittingthere like weather-worn rafts drifting along adarkened sea. Perhaps you’re a raft yourself,wordlessly floating, reading this paper per-haps, while unknown conversations drone onall around you. If you really want to, youcould even think about how alone you are, butyou can think about anything you want. Fretabout that test if you wish, but you can alsoquietly reflect on where you are in life, whereyou want to be, and what you need to do to getthere. Or chew over what could be done toimprove yourself, your life, and the lives ofthose around you.

You could also look around at the othersolitary diners (don’t stare too long, lest itmakes them feel uncomfortable), and ponderabout what they’re could be thinking of asthey solemnly sip their minestrone. Thoughthe specifics may differ, they probably haveconcerns analogous to yours: the upcomingtournament, how to raise your grade in thatone class, how in the world all that absurdamount of crud is going to get done by Friday.Or maybe, if they read this column, they’relooking at you, contemplating what you’rethinking about.

These pensive, almost meditative, reflec-tions aren’t possible when you’re busy banter-ing and chaffing with others during the meal.Social interaction should be encouraged, ofcourse, and lunch or dinner can, and should,provide occasions to bring people together.For those who are, by choice or circum-stances, forced to enjoy their own company attimes, though, it’s nice to remember that it’s anopportunity to digest our lives and that onereally isn’t alone in dining alone.

DiningAlone,

Together

By regressing, you’ve not onlymissed the entire point of Black

History Month, but you’veexacerbated the conditions itsought to mitigate.Americansshould not go about blind to

their educational inadequacies.

Eating alone is the habit of alonely, antisocial, extra-nerdy,friendless recluse, a sad and silent testimony to one’s

aloneness in a chaotic andobscure world — sort of likethe life of an MIT student.

Humanitarian objectives havenever been considered in

Colombia.And both the U.S.and Colombian governmentshave done their best to makesure that human rights don’t

exist in debt-ridden Colombia.

Page 6 THE TECH OPINION March 2, 2001

Matthew L. McGann

I often hear derogatory phrases like“entrenched in the system” or “junior admin-istrators” to describe student government-types who enjoy their advocacy work anddevote signif icant amounts of time to thatwork. Just what do terms like this mean? Arethe characterizations fair? What does this sayabout the work that they do? These questionsare particularly interesting to consider duringthis election season.

There is a select group of students on cam-pus who spend a good portion of their waking,non-class hours doing advocacy work. Youwill most often find these people in groupssuch as the Undergraduate Association,Interfraternity Council, Dormitory Council,Association of Student Activities andGraduate Student Council. Part of their MITeducation is this on-the-ground public service.Often, though, that service is discountedbecause the students are too “insider,” they are“junior administrators,” they are “not in touchwith students.”

Advocates take their role as servants seri-ously. Public service is a calling. Those whoare true public servants don’t see it as a“career,” a way to stroke their ego, or a chanceto be well-known. To answer the call of publicservice is be devoted to the welfare of others.

In national politics, being a dedicated pub-lic servant is seen as negative. In this past

year’s presidential race, Al Gore was chidedby many in the media for being in politics allof his professional life (aside from a brief stintas a reporter). At the same time, George W.Bush was praised for his business experience,even though he was not very successful. As anaside, I’m not sure how much owning a base-ball team counts as business experience,though the oil company certainly counts.

Having little-to-no public service experi-ence is often seen as a positive factor. When H.Ross Perot ran for president in 1992, he hadnever worked in public service. Most of hisprofessional life was spent with two very suc-cessful companies which he founded and ran:Electronic Data Systems (EDS) and PerotSystems. He received 19 percent of the coun-try's popular vote, partially because of his sig-nificant business experience and status of notbeing an “insider.” This past year, another non-insider saw victory. New Jersey’s freshmanSen. Jon Corzine had spent his entire workinglife working through the ranks of GoldmanSachs, eventually becoming CEO and chair-man.

Don’t get me wrong — business experi-ence can be extremely useful in public ser-vice, especially as it pertains to finance andmanagement. But the ultimate goals are com-pletely different: business is profit-driven,while service is done for the good of the peo-ple. For Perot and Corzine, money factoredheavily in their political ambitions, bothspending exorbitant amounts of their person-

al fortunes in hopes to attain a position.Ironically, their campaign f inance indul-gences may serve to bring about meaningfulchange in the role of money in federal races.

Other public service arenas are not held tothe same scrutiny. We don’t expect the clergyto have previously served in a 9-5 job, yet we

still believe that they can relate to problems ofthe common person. It’s rarely questioned ifthey are “entrenched in the system.” Our min-isters, rabbis, priests and others can still relatecompassionately to our problems even whilecommitting their lives to service.

Students who serve in student advocacyare, in fact, just that: students. They live in the

MIT residence system. They attend classes,have advisors, do problem sets. They havefriends, go out, have fun.

Sure, a disproportionate number of studentadvocates hail from departments likeManagement, Urban Studies, PoliticalScience, Economics: the departments to whichone might expect people interested in publicservice to flock. And yes, not all student advo-cates are in politics for the right reasons. Buttaken on the whole, student advocates are stu-dents just like you: passionate, intellectuallycurious, and hosed.

My suspicion is that phrases like“entrenched in the system” largely refer toissues of compromise. Student advocates dotheir best to represent the larger student pointof view; that point of view often conflictswith the administrative viewpoint. When acompromise is reached, and the original stu-dent goal is not completely fulfilled, the rea-son is seen by some to be because the advo-cates are “entrenched in the system” or aren’t“in touch with students.” By finding commonground with staff, the students become“junior administrators,” in the minds of some.

In reality, student advocates are just fol-lowing the call to public service. They do theirbest to represent students, and the interests ofthe constituents are always foremost in theirminds. And while their long-term professionalinterests and current pursuits at the Institutemay be different from yours, they always haveyour best interests at heart.

A Call to Public Service

Letters To The EditorKeep Rhett on Ballot;

Open UA to AllThis past Wednesday, just hours after the

Tech-sponsored Undergraduate AssociationPresident/Vice President debate, the wordwent out that Rhett Creighton ’02 andMargaret V. Stringfellow ’03 were no longerconsidered off icial candidates. The UAJudicial Board ruled that Creighton andStringfellow did not collect the required num-ber of signatures by the deadline.

One wonders if there’s such a thing as asmooth UA presidential election at MIT.Compounded with the harsh criticisms of theUA Election Commission last week, manywould probably take a dim view of this year’selections.

However, events are not as bad as theywould seem. The ruling leaves it up to theelection commission to decide Creighton andStringfellow’s candidacy if they submit therequired number of signatures after the dead-line. Both other candidates have publiclyexpressed support for keeping Creighton andStringfellow on the ballot if the proper paper-work is completed. This would then seem tobe a mere technicality whose ill-effects can beavoided.

And yet things are worse than they wouldseem. Rumors abound concerning politicalmaneuvering and favoritism in the UA for its“own people.” Creighton appeared to blameSanjay K. Rao ’02 for the challenge to hiscandidacy. It is alarming how few people fromthe demographic that Creighton and

Stringfellow represent, the east side of cam-pus, take part in the leadership of theUndergraduate Association. One wonders howrepresentative the UA truly is, and whether itperhaps inadvertently contributes to the socialdivides on campus.

If perhaps the UA is to west campus whatLSC/SIPB is to east campus; then the UA isn’trepresenting all undergraduates, despite itsappeals to the entire community.

Should Creighton and Stringfellow be onthe ballot? Well, they certainly would bringrepresentation from a social demographiclacking in the other candidates. So long asno rules are broken, they would bring a freshperspective to the UA: how it appears tothose on the “outside.” Because so manyMIT students are cynical about what exactlythe UA can do for them, perhaps such afresh perspective is exactly what is needed inour next Undergraduate AssociationPresident.

Bradley T. Ito ’01

No Need forClass Council Debate

[Ed.: The following letter was sent to theUndergraduate Association ElectionCommission on Monday, February 26.]

As the only two candidates running forClass of 2003 Vice President, we would liketo request that the scheduled TransitionsDebate for our position be changed to a study

break for all of the 2003 class council candi-dates.

We feel that this is a much better use of theallotted time and space, and more beneficialfor our class. A debate would accomplish verylittle, as our race does not contain the policyissues found in a race for UAP/VP. It is moreimportant for the members of our class to getto know their officers in a social setting, as thebulk of the responsibility of the class councilis to provide social programming for the class.The environment created by a study break is amuch better format for this form of interac-tion.

Additionally, this would allow the othercandidates to attend and get to know theirconstituents as well. While their races may notbe contested, it is still important for the classto get to know who they are.

We hope you consider this request andmake the change to the event. We thought itwould be inappropriate and inconsiderate tosimply refuse to attend the debates, despite theweight such an action would carry with unani-mous consent of all of the candidates. In rec-ognizing this, we look forward to attendingthe Class of 2003 Candidate Study Break onThursday night.

Alison H. Wong ’03Diana L. Bolton ’03

Class of 2003 Vice Presidential Candidates

Delay P/NR ChangeI write in response to Jason H. Wasfy’s

February 20 column on Pass/No Record poli-

cy [“P/NR Policy: The Wrong Battle”]. Assomeone who served on the P/NR Committeethat examined this topic, I too support theshift to the new grading policy. But along withthe UA’s Student Committee on EducationalPolicy (SCEP), the UA Council, and the over400 students who signed the UA’s petition, Isupport delaying the implementation of thisshift until the Freshmen class entering fall of2003.

The clearest reason for waiting the addi-tional year is to provide the student body abuffer time to adjust. As it stands, the currentimplementation coincides with the 2002 fresh-men-on-campus move. The community bene-fits from our proposed delay as it allows a fullyear of the new rush system to run withoutfreshmen and parental concerns about joininga new social organization while also subject toa visible grading policy.

Of equal importance is the insurance of agreater sense of community on campus.Breaking with two long-standing traditions cre-ates havoc with relations between classesbefore and after the switch, and a delayedimplementation provides for a more gradualshift.

We have been running some version ofPass/No Record grading for over thirty years,and an additional year will not poison the aca-demic environment, but it will go a long wayin providing for the health and continuity ofMIT’s strong living group culture.

Peter A. Shulman ’01Undergraduate Association President

In reality, student advocates arejust following the call to publicservice.They do their best torepresent students, and the

interests of the constituents arealways foremost in their minds.They always have your best

interests at heart.

you have a voice,let us hear your opinions

<letters@the-tech.mit.edu>

thanks thosewho submitted forms for theQuestions for the Communityportion of Wednesday’s debate.

The following movies are playing this weekendat local theaters. The Tech suggests using<http://www.boston.com> for a complete list-ing of times and locations.

★★★★ Excellent★★★ Good★★ Fair★ Poor

Cast Away (★★ )All the physical courage and technical

accomplishments of Cast Away are notenough to balance its unwieldy structure andmake it anything but a extended catalogue ofhuman misery. Just like the central TomHanks performance, it is courageous andelaborate — and surprisingly joyless and lit-tle fun to watch. — Vladimir Zelevinsky

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (★★★ 1⁄2)Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is a “wu

xia” martial arts fantasy crossed with periodromantic drama. It is a showcase foraccomplished direction, stunningcinematography and special effects, andremarkable martial arts choreography. Themost impressive aspect is the performance bya relative newcomer, Zhang Ziyi, whoexplodes on the screen like a force of nature.— VZ

Down to Earth (★★ 1⁄2)Chris Rock plays Lance Barton, an

aspiring stand-up comedian who meets anuntimely death. He strikes a deal withheavenly angels Keyes (Eugene Levy) andKing (Chazz Palminteri) to be reincarnated asa rich, white business tycoon. Chris Rockplays his character with genuine enthusiasmand sincerity, and does not even utter anaughty word, conforming to the film’s PG-13rating. — Erik Blankinship

Finding Forrester (★★★ )Good Will Hunting revisited with Robin

Williams’s humor replaced by Sean Connery’ssexy voice. Newcomer Robert Brown essen-tially plays himself: a brilliant high schoolathlete from the projects who receives a schol-arship to a private school. Warm, dusty senti-mental scenes combine with the vivid, noisylife of New York City to create a literary filmwith humor rather than pretense. — KatharynJeffreys

The Gift (★★★ )Featuring the acting talents of Cate

Blanchett, Greg Kinnear, and Hillary Swank,

and boasting a screenplay by Tom Eppersonand Billy Bob Thornton, The Gift, under thedirection of Sam Raimi (A Simple Plan),seems the perfect formula for a good movie.And it is … to a point. While this yarn about awoman with a psychic gift has well-roundedcharacters and well-developed tension, the lat-ter part of the film reads only as a thrills-a-minute horror film with little substance. Openit up … but know what to expect. — DeboraLui

Hannibal (★★ )Compared to The Silence of the Lambs,

this sequel is lacking lead Jodie Foster,director Jonathan Demme, and pretty muchthe point as well. Ridley Scotts directs byswooshing the camera around and thescreenplay (David Mamet and StevenZaillian, of all people) lurches unevenly. Atleast Anthony Hopkins still seems to havesome fun. — Rebecca Loh & VZ

Head Over Heels (★ 1⁄2)A parody that wants to be a romantic

comedy, Head Over Heels is a story abouttwo normal people that fall for each other in

the midst of the New York City fashionscene. Poorly acted and unnaturally devel-oped, the movie may be considered funny attimes, especially because of some laughableperformances. If you have too much time towaste, you can go and watch it. — BogdanFedeles

O Brother, Where Art Thou? (★★★ )The Coan brothers’ latest endeavor is

clever, witty, and thoroughly enjoyable. Witha stellar soundtrack, O Brother, Where ArtThou? is adapted from Homer’s Odyssey —with a Coan brothers twist. George Clooney,John Turturro, and Tim Blake Nelson giveexcellent performances as three escapedconvicts in the South. — Annie S. Choi

Shadow of the Vampire (★★ 1⁄2)Shadow of the Vampire is experimental

director Elias Merhige’s f ictionalized takeon the creation of F. W. Murnau’s legendary(and amazingly enduring) 1922 silent classicNosferatu, in which eccentric actor/vampireMax Schreck (Willem Dafoe) terrorizes thef ilm crew led by director F. W. Murnau(John Malkovich). Despite a brilliant perfor-

mance by Dafoe, and a demonstrated mas-tery of recreating the look of early silentfilms, Shadow of the Vampire is only quasi-successful and somewhat undeveloped in itstake on the nature of obsession and thevampy nature of ar tistic genius. — JedHorne

Snatch (★★★ 1⁄2)Madonna’s new hubby Guy Ritchie, bol-

stered by the run-away success of his first fea-ture f ilm, Lock, Stock and Two SmokingBarrels, can hardly be blamed for sticking to asuccessful formula — take roughly sixTarantino-esque criminals, throw in a touch ofwry British humor, and mix. This fantastical-ly entertaining movie, which deftly mixes abotched diamond heist with the chaos ofunderground boxing, is a must-see, especiallyfor anyone unfamiliar with Ritchie’s first film.— JH

State and Main (★★★ 1⁄2)The immovable object meets the irre-

sistible force when small-town America col-lides with Hollywood in State and Main, thelatest from the writer/director David Mamet.

State and Main contains a fewreally good one-liners and sight-gags, and a well-concoctedstory. The film brings together atalented group of actors (includ-ing William H. Macy, PhillipSeymour Hoffman, and AlecBaldwin), bringing Mamet’susually high-brow productionethos back down to earth. — JH

Sugar and Spice (★ 1⁄2)What happens when the A-

squad cheerleaders try to rob abank? Plot muddles, characterflaws, and general teenybopperchaos happen. With a flawedscript, flat characters, and anunrealistic premise, Sugar andSpice flounders while trying tobe clever. — Amy Meadows

Traffic (★★★★ )Stephen Soderbergh’s capti-

vating docudrama of a f ilmmakes for a movie that tran-scends the “drug movie” genre.Eloquently written and perfect-ly acted, this movie is ground-breaking and definitely Oscarmaterial . — DevdootMajumdar

THE ARTSMarch 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 7

O N T H E S C R E E N— B Y T H E T E C H A R T S S T A F F —

DAVID LEE

Sontee (Regina King of 227 fame) and Chris Rock fall in love in Down to Earth, an updated version of1978’s Heaven Can Wait.

ClubsAxis13 Lansdowne St., 617-262-2437

Sundays: See Avalon below.Mondays: Static. Gay, casual dress.

$5, 18+.Thursdays: Chrome/Skybar.

Progressive house, soul, disco;dress code. $10, 19+; $8, 21+.

Fridays: Spin Cycle. Progressivehouse, 80’s. $12, 19+; $10,21+.

Avalon15 Lansdowne St., 617-262-2424

Sundays: Gay Night (with Axis onlong weekends). Featuring hard-core house and techno. $10,21+.

Thursdays: International Night.Eurohouse. $10, 19+.

Fridays: Avaland. House. $15, 19+.Saturdays: Downtown. Modern

house, club classics, and Top 40hits. $15, 21+.

CircleEvery Tuesday, 9 p.m.-1 a.m. A smallbut energy-filled place to hear localDJs spin a range of techno/trance.No age restrictions, no dress code.At the VFW, 371 Summer St,Somerville, MA (take the Red Line toDavis Square). $5, $1 before 9:30.

Karma Club9 Lansdowne St., 617-421-9595

Sundays: "Current dance favorites"by guest DJs. Cover varies.

Tuesdays: Phatt Tuesdays. WithBill’s bar, modern dance music.$10.

Wednesdays: STP. Gay-friendly,house. $15, 21+.

Thursdays: Groove Factor. House.Fridays: Pure. Drum and bass, guest

DJ. $15, 19+.Saturdays: Elements of Life.

International House. $15.

ManRay21 Brookline St., Cambridge, 617-864-0400

Wednesdays: Curses. Goth.Appropriate dress required. $5,19+; $3, 21+.

Thursdays: Campus. Popular tunes +House. Gay, casual dress. $10,19+; $7, 21+.

Fridays: Fantasy Factory (First andthird Friday of the month. Featureskinky fetishes and industrialmusic.) Hell Night (every secondFriday. 19+. Includes Goth music.)Ooze (the last Friday of themonth.) $10, 21+. reduced pricesfor those wearing fetish gear.

Saturdays: Liquid. Disco/house +New Wave. $15, 19+; $10, 21+.

Popular MusicAxis13 Lansdowne St., 617-262-2437Next: 423-NEXT

Mar. 3: Grand Theft Audio.Mar. 8: Alice Deejay.Mar. 9: Nullset.Mar. 25: Lagwagon.Apr. 1: Sick of It All.

Avalon15 Lansdowne St.., 617-262-2424

Mar. 8: Xzibit.Mar. 8: Tha Liks.Mar. 11: Insane Clown Posse.Mar. 11: Marz.Mar. 11: Insolence.Mar. 12: O-Town.Mar. 13: Henry Rollins.Mar. 17: Dropkick Murphys.Mar. 17: Reach The Sky.Mar. 17: Lars Frederiksen & the

Bastards.Mar. 17: The Living End.Apr. 5: Cowboy Mouth.

Berklee Performance CenterBerklee College of Music1140 Boylston St.Free student recitals and faculty con-cer ts, 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. someweekdays. For info on these con-cer ts, call the Per formanceInformation Line at 747-8820.

Mar. 10: John Edward.Mar. 11: The Singing Priests.Mar.17: Kings of New York Comedy.Mar. 19-20: Barrage.

Club Passim47 Palmer St, Cambridge, 617-492-

7679

Tuesdays: Open Mic at 8 p.m. (signup at 7:30). $5.Mar. 2: Barbara Kessler.Mar. 3: Lynn Miles.Mar. 4: Martin Carthy.Mar. 7: New Faces with PeterNeuendorffer, Blue Goddess, KieranRidge.Mar. 8: Christopher Williams,Rebecca Martin opens.Mar. 9: Jim’s Big EgoMar. 10: Cosy Sheridan, BerniceLewis opens.Mar. 11: Touchable Stories BenefitShow.

Fleet CenterTicketmaster: 931-2000.Mar. 27: Sarah Brightman. $75,$55, and $35.Jun. 5-6, 8-9: U2. Sold out.

The Middle EastTicketmaster: 931-2000.Ticket prices vary. Call 354-8238 formore info.

Mar. 13: The Donnas, Bratmobile,Mooney Sukuzi.

Mar. 22: Kool Keith w/ SmutPeddlers.

Mar. 30: Planetary Group Presents:Amfibian featuring Tom Marshall.

Mar. 31: Stephen Malkmus and theJicks.

Orpheum Theatre1 Hamilton Pl. , Boston, 617-679-0810 Ticketmaster: 931-2000

Mar. 3: moe.Mar. 11: OutKast.Mar. 20: Jeff Beck.

Sanders Theatre45 Quincy St., 02138, 617-496-

2222

Mar. 4: Ladysmith Black Mambazo.Mar. 10: BeauSoleil.Mar. 23: John Gorka.

Tsongas Arena Lowell, MATicketmaster: 931-2000.

Mar. 15: Pantera.Mar. 28: Ani Difranco. $26.50.

T.T. the Bear’s Place10 Brookline St., Cambridge, 617-492-BEAR

Call for schedule.

Jazz MusicRegattabarConcertix: 876-77771 Bennett St., Cambridge 02138,617-662-5000

Mar. 2-3: Tommy Flanagan Trio.Mar. 23: Roomful of Blues.Mar. 23: Bill Summers.

Scullers Jazz ClubDoubleTree Guest Suites, 400

Soldiers Field Rd., Boston, 617-562-4111

Mar. 2-3: Clark Terry.Mar. 7: Geoffrey Gee.Mar. 9-10: Ray Barretto & New World

Spirit.Mar. 14: Andre Ward.Mar. 15-16: Warren Hill & Jeff Golub.Mar. 18: Joe Sample & Lalah

Hathaway.Mar. 21: Bombay Jim and the

Swinging Sapphires.Mar. 22-23: Deborah Henson-

Conant.Mar. 29: Kendrick Oliver and New

Life Jazz Orchestra.

Classical MusicBoston Symphony OrchestraTickets: 266-1492.Per formances at Symphony Hall.Call for ticket prices.For MIT Students: Tickets areoffered for Th. evening concerts (8p.m.) and Fri. afternoon concerts(1:30 p.m.) and are available on theday of the concert only at the BSOBox Office at Symphony Hall (301Mass. Ave. Open 10 a.m.-6 p.m.).Two tickets may be obtained withtwo current valid MIT student IDs,subject to availability. For updatedMIT student ticket availability, call638-9478 after 10 a.m. on the dayof concert.

Mar. 8, 10, 14 at 8 p.m., Mar. 9 at1:30 p.m.: Stravinsky: Suite fromPulcinella; Bernstein: Halil, Nocturnefor flute, string orchestra, and per-cussion; Brahms: Symphony No. 2.Bernard Haitink, conductor; JacquesZoon, flute. Pre-per formance talkgiven by Hugh Macdonald. Mar. 10performance sold out.

Brahms: Music to Stir the SoulMar. 24 at 8 p.m.: Choral and SoloLieder from the Boston CeciliaChorus; Donald Teeters, conductor.At New England Conser vator y’sJordan Hall. Tickets $60-$11, withdiscounts for students and seniors.To order tickets or for more info, call617-232-4540.

Un Ballo in MascheraApr. 20, 24 at 8 p.m., Apr. 22 at 2p.m. at (Emerson Majestic Theatre,221 Tremont St., Boston). Verdi’sclassic opera, notable for its effec-tive mix of tragedy, music drama andcomedy. This revival of the Met’simpressive staging stars FrancoFarina as King Gustavo, AlexandruAgache as Anckarstroem (thespurned husband) and MicheleCrider as Amelia, the woman caughtin the middle. Tickets: $65, $47,$33, $18.

TheaterCrazy for YouThurs.-Sat. Mar. 8-10 at 8 p.m., Sun.Mar. 11 at 7 p.m., Sat. and Sun.Mar. 10-11 at 2 p.m. at the BostonConser vator y Theater (31Hemenway St., Boston). The BostonConservatory presents the Broadwayhit which celebrates the exuberanceof a Broadway determined to ride outthe Depression with high style and

New Deal optimism. Book by KenLudwig, Lyrics by Ira Gershwin, Musicby George Gershwin. Tickets: $26general, $13 seniors, $7 students.For more info or for reservations, callthe box office at 617-912-9142.

The Doctor’s DilemmaThrough Mar. 14. At the Loeb DramaCenter (64 Brattle St., Cambridge02138), presented by the A.R.T. anddirected by David Wheeler, byGeorge Bernard Shaw. London’sfinest physician is on the horns of adilemma — having discovered a mir-acle cure for tuberculosis, should hetreat a penniless fellow doctor orsave a talented yet unscrupulousartist? A keen-eyed examination ofmedical morals and malpractice anda witty and compassionate comedy.Call 617-547-8300 or visit<http://www.amrep.org> for moreinformation or to reserve tickets.

Mother Courage and her ChildrenThrough Mar. 18: At the Loeb DramaCenter (64 Brattle St., Cambridge02138), presented by the A.R.T.With war raging all around, a desper-ate woman mockingly nicknamed forher cowardice under fire — strugglesto keep her business and her familyalive. Hungarian director JanosSzasz makes his U.S. debut in thisvisionar y production, based onBertolt Brecht’s classic masterpieceof struggle and survival. Call 617-547-8300 or visit<http://www.amrep.org> for moreinformation or to reserve tickets.

AmphitryonMar. 9-Apr. 8: The HuntingtonTheatre Company, a professionaltheatre in residence at BostonUniversity presents Moliere’s come-dy, with the East Coast premiere of anew verse translation by RichardWilbur. Directed by Darko

Tresnjak. The production will be ASL-interpreted on Saturday, Mar. 31 at8:00 pm. Deaf patrons are asked topurchase tickets for this per for-mance via TTY 617-266-8488 byMar. 25th. Tickets $36, $44, $52,$55. Students, Seniors, BUFaculty/Staff/Alums $5. ASL section$27. Visit<www.huntingtontheatre.org> formore information or to reserve tick-ets.

Beauty and the BeastMar. 14-Mar. 24, at the WangTheatre (270 Tremont St., Boston,617-482-9393): The third nationaltouring company of Disney’s firstBroadway hit, based on the highlyacclaimed animated film. Tickets:$60-$20.

RentApr. 10-15, at the Wang Theatre(270 Tremont St., Boston, 617-482-9393): The now classic musical bythe great Jonathan Larson retellsPuccini’s opera La Boheme, com-plete with homosexuals, drugaddicts, transvestites, HIV-positiveartists, and divas. Tickets: $60-$20.A limited number of $20 orchestraseats are offered on the day of theshow, generally through a lottery-limitof two tickets per person (cash only),although the wait is generally long.

Comedy ConnectionMon.-Wed. at 8 p.m.; Thurs. 8:30p.m.; Fri. and Sat. 8 p.m., 10:15p.m.; Sun. 7 p.m. The oldest come-dy club in Boston showcases big-name, national comedians on week-ends and up-and-coming local talentduring the week. At 245 QuincyMarket Place, Faneuil Hall, UpperRotunda, Boston. Admission $10-$8(weekend prices vary). Call 248-9700 for more information and acomplete schedule.

Blue Man GroupCharles Playhouse, 74 WarrentonStreet, Boston, indefinitely. Curtainis at 8 p.m. on Wednesday andThursday, at 7 and 10 p.m. on Fridayand Saturday, and at 3 and 6 p.m.on Sunday. Tickets $35 to $45. Call426-6912 for tickets and informa-tion on how to see the show for freeby ushering.

ExhibitsInstitute of Contemporary Art 955 Boylston St., Boston, 02115,617-266-5152 (Hynes ConventionCenter T-stop). Gallery hours: Wed.,Fri. 12-5 p.m., Thurs. 12-9 p.m., Sat.and Sun. 11 a.m.-5 p.m. Features awide variety of contemporary concep-tual art with shows which emphasizear tists from outside the UnitedStates. Admission $6 adults, $4 stu-dents and seniors, free to childrenunder 12 and members. Admission

free on Thursday evenings after 5p.m. Wheelchair accessible. Formore information visit<icaboston.org>.

Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum280 The Fenway, Boston. (566-1401), Tues.-Sun. 11 a.m.-5 p.m.Admission $10 ($11 on weekends),$7 for seniors, $5 for students withID ($3 on Wed.), free for childrenunder 18. The museum, built in thestyle of a 15th-century Venetianpalace, houses more than 2500 artobjects, with emphasis on ItalianRenaissance and 17th-centur yDutch works. Among the highlightsare works by Rembrandt, Botticelli,Raphael, Titian, and Whistler. Guidedtours given Fridays at 2:30 p.m.

Museum of Fine Arts465 Huntington Ave., Boston. (267-9300), Mon.–Tues., 10 a.m.–4:45p.m.; Wed., 10 a.m.–9:45 p.m.;Thurs.–Fri., 10 a.m.–5 p.m.;Sat.–Sun., 10 a.m.–5:45 p.m. WestWing open Thurs.–Fri. until 9:45 p.m.Admission free with MIT ID, other-wise $10, $8 for students andseniors, children under 17 free; $2after 5 p.m. Thurs.–Fri., free Wed.after 4 p.m.Mon.–Fri.: introductory walks throughall collections begin at 10:30 a.m.and 1:30 p.m.; “Asian, Egyptian, andClassical Walks” begin at 11:30a.m.; “American Painting andDecorative Ar ts Walks” begin at12:30 p.m.; “European Painting andDecorative Ar ts Walks” begin at2:30 p.m.; Introductory tours arealso offered Sat. at 11 a.m. and1:30 p.m.Permanent Galler y Installations:“Late Gothic Gallery,” featuring arestored 15th-century stained glasswindow from Hampton Court, 14th-and 15th-century stone, alabaster,and polychrome wood sculpturesfrom France and the Netherlands;“Mummy Mask Gallery,” a newly ren-ovated Egyptian gallery, featuresprimitive masks dating from as farback as 2500 B.C.; “EuropeanDecorative Arts from 1950 to thePresent”; “John Singer Sargent:Studies for MFA and Boston PublicLibrary Murals.”Gallery lectures are free with muse-um admission.

Museum of ScienceScience Park, Boston. (723-2500),Daily, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.; Fri., 9 a.m.-9p.m.; Sat.-Sun., 9 a.m.-5 p.m.Admission free with MIT ID, other-wise $9, $7 for children 3-14 andseniors.The Museum features the theater ofelectricity (with indoor thunder-and-lightning shows daily) and more than600 hands-on exhibits. Ongoing:“Discovery Center”; “Investigate! ASee-For-Yourself Exhibit”; “Science inthe Park: Playing with Forces andMotion”; “Seeing Is Deceiving.”Ongoing: “Friday Night Stargazing,”Fri., 8:30 p.m.; “Welcome to theUniverse,” daily; “Quest for Contact:Are We Alone?” daily. Admission toOmni, laser, and planetarium showsis $7.50, $5.50 for children andseniors.

Other EventsAlvin Ailey American Dance TheaterApr. 17-21 at 8 p.m., Apr. 21 at 2p.m., Apr. 22 at 3 p.m. At the WangTheatre (270 Tremont St., Boston,617-482-9393). Alvin Ailey’s gound-breaking dance group presents ashow that includes classic worksfrom its much-celebrated repertoire.Many of these pieces are rooted inAiley’s personal experiences: “BluesSuite” inhabits the rural, Depression-era Texas of Ailey’s childhood, while“Cry,” depicts a black woman’s tran-scendent journey through slavery.With rich musical selections (rangingfrom Fela Kuti’s African pop andDuke Ellington’s jazz to rock, gospeland traditional blues) and inventivedirection (in the new work “DoubleXposure,” dancers are equipped withwireless cameras that relay real-time20-foot projections behind them),the Ailey family has put together aper formance that catapults thesenses. Tickets are $55-$35, $40-$20 for matinees, and are availablethrough TeleCharge at 800-447-7400 or via<www.celebrityseries.org>.

Poland Through the Prism ofAndrzej WajdaThrough Mar. 11: The Harvard FilmArchive and The National Center forJewish Film at Brandeis announce alandmark retrospective to honor theAcademy Award winning directorAndrzej Wajda (“the father of mod-ern Polish cinema”) and to celebratehis 75th birthday. The HFA screen-ings will be held in the CarpenterCenter 24 Quincy Street inCambridge. tickets $7, Students &Srs $5. Visit www.har vardfil-marchive.org for a complete sched-ule. The National Center for JewishFilms series will be held in theEdieand Lew WassermanCinematheque (in the SacharCenter) on the Brandeis campus inWaltham. All tickets $6. For moreinformation or group sales call 781-736-8600 or visit their website atwww.jewishfilm.org. No reservedseating.

Page 8 THE TECH THE ARTS March 2, 2001

On The TownA weekly guide to the arts in Boston

March 2 – 9Compiled by Fred Choi

Send submissions to ott@the-tech.mit.edu or by interdepartmental mail to “On The Town,” The Tech, W20-483.

UNIVERSAL RECORDS

Alice Deejay graces the stage on March 8 at Axis.

Olafur Eliasson: Your Only Real Thing Is TimeThrough Apr. 1, 2001: By isolating organic, ephemeralmaterials such as water, ice, sunlight, and wind withinthe spatial and architectural parameters of an exhibitionspace, the internationally recognized artist Olaf Eliassoncreates sublime installations that explore the humanperception of natural phenomena. In his first major U.S.museum exhibition, Eliasson has transformed the ICA’sgalleries with a series of installations using water andlight. At the Institute of Contemporary Art (955 BoylstonSt., Boston, 02115, 617-266-5152). Admission $6adults, $4 students and seniors, free to children under12 and members. Admission free on Thursday eveningsafter 5 p.m. For more information visit <icaboston.org>.FF RR

EEDD’’ SS

PP IICCKK

OOFFTTHH

EEWW EE

EEKK

Page9

March 2, 2001

the crass rat

Page 10 The Tech March 2, 2001

Crossword PuzzleSolution, page XX

strip inAmerican University

ran 2/6 p182x3

March 2, 2001 The Tech Page 11

Friday, March 2

12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. – Al-Anon Open Discussion: Al-Anon Meeting. free. Room: E25-101. Sponsor: MIT Medical. 12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. – FileMaker Pro User Group. free. Room: N42 Demo Center.Sponsor: Information Systems. 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. – “Haptics: Hands, Brains, and Virtual Environments”. free.Room: 3-133. Sponsor: ME Seminar Series. 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. – MacVicar Day. Teaching Demonstrations. free. Room: GrierRoom 34-401. Sponsor: Provost’s Office. MacVicar Fellows.6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. – Discerning God’s Will about my Relationships. Lisa Lamb willspeak on dealing with the issues faced by graduate students in theirfamily/friend/romantic relationships, and how God fits into these relationships. free.Room: Student Center West Lounge (W20-201). Sponsor: Graduate Christian Fellow-ship. 8:00 p.m. – MIT Guest Artist Series: Artis String Quartet. Peter Schuhmayer, violin;Johannes Meissle, violin; Herbert Kefer, viola; Othmar Muller, cello. Haydn’s Quartet inC Minor, Op. 74, No. 3 “The Rider; Berg’s String Quartet, Op. 3; Webern’s Five Move-ments for String Quartet, Op. 5; Zemlinsky’s String Quartet No. 3, Op. 19. free. Room:Kresge Auditorium. Sponsor: Music and Theater Arts Section.

Saturday, March 3

1:00 p.m. – ToBGLAD Week - GABLES Lunch. It’s ToBGLAD (Transgender, Bisexual,Gay, and Lesbian Awareness Days) Week at MIT. Monthly lunch for MIT BGALA (Bisexu-al, Gay and Lesbian Alums). All members of the MIT community are welcome. MITBGALA will be holding board member elections (we have several open seats) during thismonth’s lunch. One of the activities discussed for this year is a dinner event duringgraduation week. Royal East Restaurant, 782 Main St., Cambridge. Phone: (617) 661-1660. Sponsor: LBGT Issues Group. MIT BGALA.8:00 p.m. – Festival Jazz Ensemble: The Music of Guillermo Klein. Guillermo Klein,guest composer and conductor. Fred Harris, director. World Premiere of a new work byArgentine native and NYC based composer, Guillermo Klein, for Jazz Ensemble andString Orchestra; Klein’s El Espejo; Mingus’ Haitian Fight Song, Sue’s Changes; Nel-son’s Emancipation Blues. Pre-concert talk at 7 p.m. $2 at the door. Room: KresgeAuditorium. Sponsor: Music and Theater Arts Section.

Sunday, March 4

1:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. – Ballroom Dance Lessons. Mambo/Salsa 1 at 1p.m., Cha-Cha2 at 2p.m., Tango 3 at 4:30p.m. Free social dancing from 3:30-4:30p.m. $1 to $5.Room: Sala de Puerto Rico. Sponsor: Ballroom Dance Club.

Monday, March 5

12:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. – ToBGLAD Week - Meet the Bunch Lunch. It’s ToBGLAD(Transgender, Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Awareness Days) Week at MIT. A brown baglunch for faculty, staff, and students to get to know each other. Come for the whole 2hours, or just stop by for lunch, a snack, or a quick hello. Dessert and beverages willbe provided. Bring your own lunch. free. Room: West Lounge (W20-201). Sponsor:LBGT Issues Group. 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. – Web Publishing Overview (Formerly HTML Demo). This three-

hour lecture/demonstration session gives an overview of the electronic publishingprocess as it works at MIT, focusing on: how to code files using HTML tags (HTML isthe HyperText Markup Language, the standard for publishing on the Web), how toupload files to the Athena system for delivery through MIT’s primary Web server,web.mit.edu. Special attention is paid to issues affecting websites at MIT (MITnet rulesof use, Athena file conventions, special services available on web.mit.edu, etc.). free.Room: N42 Demo Center. Sponsor: Information Systems. 4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. – “Projective maps and invariants of symplectic 4-manifolds.”free. Room: 4-159. Sponsor: Differential Geometry Seminar. Department of Mathemat-ics.5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. – Aga Khan Lecture: The Historical Imagination: The Place ofMimesis is the Study of Islamic Architecture in Iran. free. Room: 3-133. Sponsor: AgaKhan Program for Islamic Architecture. 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. – ToBGLAD - Gay at MIT: A Student Panel. It’s ToBGLAD (Trans-gender, Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Awareness Days) Week at MIT. Students speak outon a panel about what it’s like to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender at MIT. Hearabout students experiences being out and about inside and outside the world of MIT.free. Room: 4-237. Sponsor: LBGT Issues Group.

Tuesday, March 6

12:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. – The Discovery of the Electron and the Atomism Debate. Dib-ner Institute Lunchtime Colloquia. free. Room: E56-100. Sponsor: Dibner Institute.12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. – Excel User Group. free. Room: N42 Demo Center. Sponsor:Information Systems.2:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. – Alexander Lobkovsky. Refreshments will be served at 3:30 PMin Room 2-349. free. Room: Room 2-338. Sponsor: Physical Mathematics Seminar.Department of Mathematics.4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. – MTL VLSI Seminar Series. The Design and Analysis of theClock Distribution Network for a 1.2 GHz Alpha Microprocessor. free. Room: 34-101.Sponsor: MTL VLSI Seminar. 4:15 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. – Gas Turbine Seminar Series. TBA. free. Room: 31-161. Spon-sor: Gas Turbine Laboratory. 4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. – “How Do People Think About the Norms of War? Insightsfrom a 1999 Survey in Core Conflict Areas”. Mr. Holleufer is Head of the People onWar Project, International Committee of the Red Cross, and Visiting Fellow, FXB Centerfor Health and Human Rights, Harvard School of Public Health. This is a session of theInter-University Seminar on International Migration. free. Room: E38-615. Sponsor:Center for International Studies. 4:30 p.m. – “A Two-State Solution in the Holy Land: Is There Still Time?” A session ofthe Emile Bustani Middle East Seminar. free. Room: E51-095. Sponsor: Center forInternational Studies. 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. – ToBGLAD Week - The State of LBGT Politics in Massachu-setts. It’s ToBGLAD (Transgender, Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Awareness Days) Weekat MIT. Join openly-gay Cambridge State Representative Jarrett Barrios and activistsfrom the state in a discussion about issues facing the gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans-gender communities in Massachusetts. Don’t miss this important discussion. free.Room: TBA. Sponsor: LBGT Issues Group. Q: The Journal of Sexual Orientation and Pub-lic Policy at Harvard (http://www.qjournal.org).6:30 p.m. – Fourth Felix Candela Lecture. “What Can Structures Do for Architec-ture?” Talk by Mamoru Kawaguchi, structural engineer; professor, Hosei University,Tokyo. free. Room: 10-250. Sponsor: Department of Architecture.

TechCalendarTechCalendar appears in each issue of The Tech and features events for members of the MIT community. TheTech makes no guarantees as to the accuracy of this information, and The Tech shall not be held liable for any loss-es, including, but not limited to, damages resulting from attendance of an event. Contact information for all events is available from the TechCalendar web page.

Visit and add events to TechCalendar online at http://tech-calendar.mit.edu

Dilbert® by Scott Adams

student representation and involve-ment in the UA. They said that theShulman administration has been“sugarcoating” interactions withthe administration and not involv-ing a diverse enough range of stu-dent interests.

Rao said that his year off fromthe UA since his election bid lastyear has allowed him to take a stepback and see the problems with theUA. His ticket said that it wouldwork on issues of mental health,conf idential medical transport,online learning, residence-based

advising, and the freshman pro-gram.

Devereaux and Neizmikacknowledged that more studentinput is necessary but cited recentefforts for input including an onlineweb feedback forum, the UA’s Ques-tion of the Week box in The Tech,and UA office hours.

The dark horse ticket ofCreighton from Tau Epsilon Phiand VP candidate Margaret V.Stringfellow ’03 from SeniorHouse functioned as their ownsideshow to the debate. The ticketcharacterized the UA as mired incommittees and said their highest

priorities would be to increase thefrequency and range of Safe Rideruns and bring back social activi-ties such as UA Heart-to-Heart, theInfinite Buffet, and the MillenniumBall.

In the question-and-answer peri-od Spring Weekend organizerSatwiksai Seshasai ’01 said that theUA is already working on a newMillennium Ball this year called theOdyssey Ball, to which Creightonresponded, “So that part’s easy.”

Creighton challenges RaoPerhaps the most lively part of

the debate was the cross-examina-

tion period, when Creighton had theopportunity to “prove” that theRao/Agarwal ticket should not be onthe ballot. Citing an obscure UAelection rule requiring all petitionsignatures to be gathered on UApaper and requiring the papers to bestapled with UA staplers, Creightonrepeatedly questioned Rao, “Shouldyou be on the ballot?”

Rao said, “I think students wantmore candidates on the ballot” and“it depends on how you interpret it.”

Creighton’s questioning followedan insinuation in his openingremarks that Rao was responsiblefor Creighton’s appearance beforethe Dean for Student Discipline andthe UA Judicial Board.

In fact, in an e-mail to the mit-talk mailing list last night, NextHouse resident Raj S. Dandage ’02said he filed the complaint againstCreighton and Stringfellow.Dandage said the team was over 100signatures short and that placingthem on the ballot would set a “dan-gerous precedent.”

In their cross-examination peri-ods, Rao and Devereaux focusedalmost exclusively on each other.Rao questioned why the UA took solong to act on TEAL and why theUA failed to represent MIT beforeThe Boston Globe.

Rao also criticized Devereaux’sunwillingess to reach out to her con-stituents. “You want students tocome to you, when you should begoing to the students,” he said.

Devereaux, who appeared themost restrained of the candidates inher attacks, quizzed Rao about spe-cific UA policies and relations withother student governments.

The debate was hosted and mod-erated by The Tech.

Online voting begins at 10 p.m.on March 4, and paper balloting ison March 9.

Page 12 THE TECH March 2, 2001

Candidates Attack, Parry in UAP Debate

By Brian LouxASSOCIATE NEWS EDITOR

The Undergraduate Association Judicial ReviewBoard voted Wednesday night to remove RhettCreighton ’02 and Margaret V. Stringfellow ’03 fromthe UA presidential ballot. However, the ticket hasacted quickly and will most likely be reinstated onthe ballot.

The decision stemmed from a petition sent to theUA Election Commission claiming that Creightonand Stringfellow’s petition for candidacy containedtoo few signatures to be valid, and that according tothe UA constitution, their ticket must be droppedfrom the ballot. Next House resident Raj S. Dandage’02 said in an e-mail to mit-talk yesterday night thathe in fact filed the complaint.

The ruling said that the commission also holdsthe right to place them back on the ballot if theyattain a sufficient amount of signatures and find thatit would not place an undue burden on the electioncommittee. The Election Commission also reservesthe right to allow the ticket to participate in debatesand other election activities, the Judicial Board rul-ing stated.

Judicial Board Chair Sandra C. Sandoval ’00 stat-ed that “the initial complaint was that the ticket wasput on the ballot unconstitutionally. We looked at the

Election Code … and made a decision that wethought was based on the Constitution and the stipu-lations of the Election Code. We decided that [theultimate decision of putting the ticket back on theballot] rested in the hands of the Election Commis-sion, not Judboard.”

Creighton said that he felt the incident was “alittle unnecessary. To resolve the issue, I had tospeak to the Election Commission, then [AssistantDean] Carol Orme-Johnson, then Judboard, thenthe Election Commission again, who had alreadymade a decision on the matter.” Creighton calledthe decision of Judboard to give the Election Com-mission the ruling on the matter a “fair” and“understandable” conclusion to the incident, andadded that he was happy to be back on the cam-paign.

Both presidential/vice presidential tickets of San-jay K. Rao ’02/Jyoti Agarwal ’03 and Jaime E. Dev-ereaux ’02/Allison L. Neizmik ’02 sent messages tothe mit-talk mailing list Thursday morning support-ing the retention of the Creighton/Stringfellow ticketon the ballot.

Creighton said that the team has already handedin their new petition with 430 signatures, leavingtheir readmittance once again up to the ElectionCommission.

Creighton Likely To Be Reinstated

UA Debate, from Page 1

This space donated by The Tech

Crossword Solutionfrom page 10

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 13

SEPHIR HAMILTON—THE TECH

Gus Solomons ’61 tells how he went from an MIT architecturedegree to pursue a career in New York City as a choreographer anddancer at an event in Du Pont last night. In October he receivedMIT’s first Robert A. Muh Award, which honors a graduate for note-worthy contributions in humanities, arts, or social sciences.

Page 14 THE TECH March 2, 2001

To MIT Undergraduates:Demand passionate student advocates. Demand an effective

student government. Demand an administration that will listento your ideas and improve your life.

It is time for the UA to work for each of you and representyou effectively to the administration. It is time that your viewsand opinions were not just left to discussions but formed intoactions carried out by an efficient and truly concerned leader-ship.

We present to you a different UA that is proactive anddynamic in creating Institute-wide, policy-driven change. Webring to our UA experience, action, energy, passion, studentadvocacy, and concrete ideas.

Hi, my name is Sanjay K. Rao and I am a junior at MIT.In the past I have served as a UA Councilor, a UA CabinetMember, Sophomore Class President (Class of 2002), Fresh-man Class President (Class of 2002), a member of the UANominations Committee, a member of the UA Student Com-mittee on Educational Policy, a member of the UA Subcom-mittee on Faculty Student Relations and Advising, and amember of the MIT Undergraduate Admissions and FinancialAid Committee.

Hi, my name is Jyoti Agarwal and I am a sophomore atMIT in Alpha Phi. I enjoy working with students on campus-wide events including the Habitat for Humanity Sleep Out andthe upcoming Concert for Humanity. I am a member of the2003 Class Ring Committee, a Coordinator for Habitat forHumanity, Director of Alpha Phi Campus Activities and Inter-nal Events and a member of the UA Committee on Faculty Stu-dent Relations and Advising.

Most importantly, we would like to help create a UA thatlistens, represents, and responds to students’ concerns whileworking effectively with the administration. While the UA hasbeen successful in its work on the TEAL initiative, their list ofaccomplishments for the year is below our expectations.

Our advising system, the freshman program, Pass/NoRecord, renovation of the reading room, and other issues oncampus need active direction. Further, the UA still has notdelivered solid plans to address issues such as AnonymousMedical Transport, MIT’s Mental Health system, and prepara-tion for the 2002 housing changes. Student groups includingclass council still receive little support other than money fromthe UA.

Demand better. Both of us have experience working withthe administration and will be your active student representa-tives on these and other issues.

In addition to actively working on the issues around cam-pus, we have a number of ideas to improve student representa-tion and student life. For example, we would like to create aUA Committee devoted to student representation.

Additionally, we would like to create the “SafeRideExpress” which travels across the Mass. Ave. Bridge every 15minutes, and to expand the Tech Shuttle’s route so that it trav-els between FSILGs and campus in the morning and afternoon.

Further, we would like to create a new UA GovernmentRelations Committee that will work with local and nationalgovernments and students, dorms, and FSILGs to resolveissues that affect MIT students.

These are just a few ideas that we hope to work on. We arepretty down-to-earth people and would really like to work withyou and address the issues you care about most. If you are look-ing for experience, dedication, advocacy, ideas and an effectiveUA that works for you then vote for Rao/Agarwal for UA Presi-dent/Vice President. If you have any questions, please e-mail usat: <sanjay@mit.edu> or <jyoti@mit.edu>. For a detailed plat-form statement please visit: <http://www.voteRao.com>.

Why should you vote for Jaime Devereaux and AllisonNeizmik for UA President and Vice President? The answer isclear: we have the experience, goals, and commitment neces-sary to create a successful year for the UA and its members, allundergraduate students.

1) Experience. We have worked for over two years onimproving the quality of life for students here at MIT. Ourexperience within the UA includes membership on the Com-mittee on Student Life, Committee on Housing and Orienta-tion, Student Committee on Educational Policy, and Nomina-tions Committee. We have been involved at the Institute on theStudent Center Strategic Planning Committee, the TransitionsGroup, the MacVicar Advisory Committee, the UA/GSCStrategic Capital Planning Committee, and the Alcohol Educa-tion Working Group. They both currently serve on the UACoordinating Committee.

Jaime became involved in the UA as a representative forMacGregor on the UA Council, our representative government.She worked on SCEP, CHO, and NomComm and is currentlyserving as the Speaker of the UA Council.

Allison began in the UA as a Class of 2002 Social Chairand is currently the UA Public Relations Chair. She served onCSL and SCEP, and also chairs the UA Student Center plan-ning committee.

We’ve advocated for students on a number of issues this yearalone. These include TEAL and the reading room, increasedfunding for student groups, the student response to the Pass/No-Record report, alcohol policy and medical transport, and mentalhealth at MIT. It takes time and effort to truly know how deci-sions are made here and how to fight effectively for students, andwe have gained a wealth of necessary knowledge doing this.

2) Goals. We will ensure that student government works forstudents. We will create avenues for student input and expandthose that already exist. Using the faculty and administrativecontacts we’ve built this year, we will hit the ground runningas advocates for student positions.

With a strong presidential team and the support of the studentbody, the UA can look forward to a number of accomplishments:more funding for social events through the Class Councils andLarge Event Funding; helping to implement changes in MIT’salcohol policy; expanding usage of the MIT Card; ensuring effec-tive use of the newly opened Transitions space; and improvingfaculty/student advising are projects we have already begun. Newprojects such as SafeRide expansion, Student Center and WalkerRenovations, and student input gathering to plan for the upcom-ing changes in the dining system offer exciting opportunities forstudents to make a difference in the upcoming year.

3) Commitment. We are committed to making the UA moreaccessible as a resource for students, emphasizing the fact thatevery undergraduate can and should approach their representa-tive, or any other UA officer, with questions or concerns aboutInstitute issues. We have already realized some distinct steps inthat direction: broadcasting UA Council sessions and develop-ing better communication networks between councilors andtheir constituencies leaves a visible impression of what anactive student government can do for students.

On the other side, we want to know what concerns allundergraduates have. In our current roles in the UA, we havealready begun to gather student input on issues through theonline UA comment form, the Transitions comment sheets, andthe new UA Question of the Week in The Tech.

We constitute a diverse team, coming from different areasof campus and with different backgrounds and interests. Wewill use our strengths and experiences as student advocates torepresent the needs, concerns, and ideas of all undergraduatesto bring about positive change on our campus.

Jason H. Wasfy

On November 6, 1860, Abraham Lincolnwas elected president of the United States withonly 40 percent of the popular vote. Southern-ers began to talk openly of secession, andSouth Carolina would withdraw from theUnion six weeks later. After the election, Sen.Stephen Douglas, who challenged Lincolnmost strongly in the North, realized that thisbitter, less-than-decisive election would threat-en the nation’s fabric at a very precarious time.Douglas — who was one of the new president-elect’s most visible detractors — said, “Parti-san feeling must yield to patriotism. I’m withyou, Mr. President, and God bless you.”

That gesture has become one of the mostenduring symbols of reconciliation in the faceof a common threat. Al Gore used that quotein December when he conceded his election toGeorge W. Bush.

Last spring after the UA election, studentgovernment at MIT faced a similar task. Thoseof us who ran in that election (those three elec-tions, to be precise, because of the re-runs) hadendured a longer-than-expected ordeal marredby controversy, bitterness, a broken vote-counting computer, and confusing electionrules. The mess of rule violations and re-runelections provided an avenue for defeated can-didates to appeal endlessly to the UA JudicialBoard long after the election ended.

But none of us took that route. The othercandidates for president and vice-presidentbelieved as I did that we needed to sacrificeour own ambitions for the good of the under-graduate student body. Since none of theseavenues for appeal would likely have reversedthe outcome of the election, we sent out mes-sages of reconciliation instead of firing offappeal after fruitless appeal. Some of us,myself included, approached Peter A. Shulman’01 and Mendel Chuang ’02 and asked them

how we could best continue to serve the UAunder their leadership.

If the 2001 UA Presidential Election turnsout to be as messy as last year’s race, the los-ing candidates should follow last year’s exam-ple. That’s not to say that they should chal-lenge and appeal elections decisions whenthey see fit, particularly if they feel wronged. Ihave the utmost confidence that Sandra C.Sandoval ’00 — a woman of great ability andintegrity — and her Judicial Board will dealfairly with complaints.

But if this election ends with vague cracksof doubt about the legitimacy of the electionafter it ends, a scenario that now seems likely,the losing candidates should think twicebefore undercutting the legitimacy of the win-ners by filing endless appeals.

I don’t mean to imply that the situation thatfaces the UA now is nearly as dire as the situa-tion that faced the United States in 1860. Thisis just student government at MIT, after all,

not a national government about to face itsmost trying military conflict. And no one atMIT has ever seriously doubted the legitimacyof the UA or of its leaders. But students atMIT need to continue working for a more pro-student education policy and deeper resourcesfor student life. And to do that, we need toensure that the 2001 election produces studentleaders without lingering doubts about theirlegitimacy or their mandate.

My expectations are for a hard-fought racethat will explore the role of the UA in thebroader context of student advocacy and thatwill touch on a whole range of policy posi-tions. The race may be tough. It should be.But once the race is over, no matter howmessy the election may have been,I hope thatall the candidates remember the very realchallenges that we students face here at MIT.And I hope they also remember how impor-tant a strong UA will be in beginning to tacklethose challenges.

We hope to bring a variety of ideas to the UndergraduateAssociation so that it does a better job of representing the cam-pus-wide ideas of the undergraduate student body. We hope toincrease the number of recognized student activity groups.

Student organizations are a very important part of MIT.They are a place for students to express their talents and ideas;we hope to keep expanding the options that people have to dothis.

Here is how we stand some issues that are important to us: 1) Anonymous Medical Transport. The petition of last fall

demonstrated that this is a campus-wide concern. We will tryvery hard to see that anonymous medical transport becomes areality at MIT.

2) UA Heart-to-Heart. We can’t comprehend why anyonewould kill this. MIT is supposed to be the most wired universi-ty in the country. How could we not have a computer datingservice on Valentine’s Day? We will absolutely make sure thisis brought back.

3) Millennium Ball. We feel that the Millennium Ball was avery successful school-wide party. This event united the entirestudent body more than anything else. We are strong advocatesof an annual “Millennium” Ball.

4) The Mass. Ave. Bridge. Crossing the bridge is awful, andwaiting half an hour to cross it is a waste of MIT students’already scarce time. We hope to initiate an “express” SafeRidethat ferries students across the bridge and back to MIT.

5) ILTFP. We support all forms of student freedom. We willnot stand for anyone sacrificing any part of MIT to save facewith the press or for any other petty reason. As UA Presidentand Vice President, we will have many opportunities to talkwith Chuck Vest and other MIT administrators, acting as repre-sentatives of the student body. We intend to hold the values of“ILTFP” throughout our term.

Promote Ideas,Student

OrganizationsRhett Creighton

and Maggie Stringfellow

After This Election Is Over

Experience,Goals, and

CommitmentJaime Devereaux

and Allison Neizmik

2001 UAP/VP Elections

Electronic voting will be begin onMarch 4 after the Class of 2002

debate, and will end on Thursday,March 8. Paper balloting will be held

on Friday, March 9, and electionresults will be announced on March

10 at noon.

A Strong,Effective UA

Working for YouSanjay K. Rao

and Jyoti Agarwal

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 15

Rhett is not a psychopath. This may seem likedamningly faint praise, but it is important to real-ize that he is neither a maniac nor incompetent.While he admittedly is more ebullient than theother candidates, this is hardly a detriment. Fur-thermore, he seems both sincere in wanting toincorporate previously unheard voices into theUA. The fact of the matter is he would also alien-ate a substantial sample of people involved in theUA, as stodgy or unwanted as their opinions maybe (and that’s no way to talk about your professorsanyway).

Maggie is a jazz musician, which is alwaysfun.

Phili

p B

urro

wes Rao/Agarwal

While “experience” does not trans-late into either knowledge or ability, thelack thereof is pretty much synonymouswith ignorance. The dilemma lies incoordinating some sort of proceduralknowledge with a substantive under-standing of its effects. Basically, byloose interpretation of disjunctive infer-ence (assuming there are only threechoices), I must opt for Rao/Agarwal.

They have a quasi-professional air to them(including a relatively nice web site:<http://www.voteRao.com>) that would impress ifonly it didn't seem so unctuous. Yes, they have awide platform that seems to appeal to most peo-ple, but what is it about “The Freshman Program”or “Faculty-Student Relations” that they canaddress beyond the level which sounds good tosay while running for office? What have they donebesides serving as parts of bodies that seem likethey Probably-Did-Something-But-Who-Can-Tell-Nowadays? The ticket at least sounds great;Rao/Agarwal would make an excellent U.N.acronym.

I personally have a problem with people whoconsider meeting residents of Random Hall anexperience. The Fantastic Four Freak Dorms (Bex-ley, East Campus, Random, and Senior Haus) arenot so special. Who cares if you finally got tomeet a few of the rumored weirdos while out onthe campaign trail? Aside from the special ethniccomposition of Bexley (and the fact that it hashighest quality of dorm: reputation of dorm ratio Icould ever imagine) they’re all pretty ordinary.New House or an ILG is honestly more interest-ing.

Rhett and Maggie are the greatest assets tothis election. As Maggie said at Wednesday’sdebate, they are the representatives of those with-out significant representation in the Undergradu-ate Association. That fact alone makes them legiti-mate candidates, JudBoard edicts be damned.

If he tried, Rhett could be an effective leader.He’s popular and can play to a crowd. He also didhis homework and offered a sensible platform.

At the same time, I can’t shake the feeling thatRhett’s running as a gimmick. Additionally, hismain goals involve simple issues (Heart-to-Heart,for example) that he could address without beingUAP.

Mik

e H

all Rao/Devereaux

These two are the best of what’saround. I believe that Rhett and Maggiearen’t serious candidates and that Jyoti isunqualified. That leaves one outsider andtwo insiders. Of those two, I pick Jaime asmy insider because I believe she’s donemore for the UA than has Allison.

Sanjay’s UAP because he’s the classic“Mr. Outside.” He’ll talk to students andget them more involved. Jaime’s UAVPbecause, as a “Ms. Inside,” she’s be moreadept at improving the UA from within.

Sanjay has earned my respect by coming backto run again this year. It takes guts to face the samestudent body (and newspaper) that turned himdown before. He’s also brought a fresh perspectivewith him after a year looking at the UA from theoutside. He’s also more likely than Jaime to elicitstudent opinions on key issues and to act on them.

Legitimate questions remain, however, aboutSanjay’s conduct during the campaign. He was notas honest as possible in his dealings with his oppo-sition and the media. Additionally, Jyoti evokesmemories of James “Who am I? Why am I here?”Stockdale. Her posted qualifications are insuffi-cient at best and misleading at worst.

Jaime and Allison’s platform focuses on threepoints: experience, goals, and commitment.Because of their service this year in high-level UApositions, they beat the other tickets hands downon the first and third points. Their goals are gener-ally in line with the platforms of other candidates,which is fine by me.

The concern I have with these candidates istheir distance from the general student body.Jaime’s my neighbor on the famed Fourth FloorBeltway. Will she venture off the Beltway to meetwith real students? Given her reliance on a “webform” and other UA reps for student feedback, Ifear that she’ll never turn onto the exit ramp.

Creighton and Stringfellow bring a tornado offresh air to the traditional UA scene. They are dis-gusted with the predictable, buzzword-laden banterof campaigning that fails to translate into action.They hope to upset what they see as the stagnant,foul marsh of student government through aggres-sive pursuit of concrete, obtainable, student-orient-ed objectives such as an upgraded Safe Ride ser-vice, more “Millenium Balls,” AMT, and the returnof UA Heart-to-Heart. Their election, while unlike-ly thanks to their radical presentation and igno-rance of pressing UA issues, would dramaticallytransform campus politics by fostering interestamong traditionally underrepresented students.

Ken

Nes

mith Devereaux/Neizmik

While Rao and Agarwal would bringgenuine change to the UA, for whateversmall amount that that’s worth, Dev-ereaux and Neizmik, thanks to theirdepth of experience, commitment to thebetterment of student life, and strongrelationships with the school’s admin-strators, make ideal candidates for UAPresident and Vice President.

Sanjay Rao and Jyoti Agarwal offer a polishedpackage of admirable goals and objectives thatthey seek to achieve through tightened, efficiency-oriented management of the burgeoning UA infra-structure. Rao, after serving consecutive terms as2002 class president, spent the last year outside ofstudent government and insists that this hashelped him to understand just how ineffective andirrelevant the UA remains in the eyes of mostundergraduates. These candidates, likeCreighton/Stringfellow, wish to refresh the staleslate of UA politicians, although somewhat lessdrasticly.

Jamie Devereaux and Allison Neizmik, long-time Stratton Center insiders, can claim morehands-on experience in student government thanany of the other candidates. These battle-hardenedveterans of administrative wars and collaborationsalike are familiar with the ins and outs and stay-the-hell-aways of the clunky bureaucratic web ofdeans, chancellors, committees, boards, councils,and the like. Their hard work over the past yearmade itself evident in the debates as they deftlyparried aggressive cross-examination blows fromSanjay and Jyoti, while their affable personalitieswere revealed in their warm banter with the crowdand their fellow candidates.

Rhett Creighton showed up to debate in a “High Weirdness Zone” T-shirt and rainbow sus-penders. He yelled, stood on his chair, made non-sequitors, and lobbed a frivolous complaintagainst Rao while asking Jaime Devereaux hownice she was. He does not appear to take this cam-paign seriously. At least his presence providedsome contrast to the UA insider culture.K

ris

Schn

ee Rao/DevereauxThe split ticket chosen by The Tech

offers a compromise between incumbentexperience and outsider input. Rao’speople skills make him well-suited to thepresident's role, while Devereaux can getthings done without being in the lime-light.

Rao has some UA experience, but his ticket’sreputation is questionable. Did he make as frivolousan attempt to stop Creighton’s campaign asCreighton claimed? Rao denies he did, but someoneapparently did. Agarwal claims she was on a com-mittee, when her participation was limited to receiv-ing e-mails. Rao also failed to give a straight answerto a simple question. Can we trust him to bestraightforward with us as president? Maybe.

Devereaux has experience in the UA and hasimportant skills and administration contacts. Shecan do the job, but is she the best one for it? A rel-ative outsider like Rao could bring fresh insight tothe UA, and break the present trend of each UApresident anointing the next.

Rhett Creighton and Maggie Stringfellowwant to do something to shake-up the monotonyof personality and stasis of thought within the UA.This is good. Wednesday’s debate demonstratedthat they don’t yet know what exactly constitutes ashake-up. This is bad. Creighton and Stringfelloware well-meaning in their goal, which includesproviding much-needed adequate representationfor students who live east and north of the Mass.Ave. divide. However, their repetitive insistencethat the UA Heart-to-Heart program be reinstitut-ed left those of us who live east of Mass. Ave.feeling cold and mocked. C

hrist

ophe

r D

.Sm

ith Rao/AgarwalSanjay Rao and Jyoti Agarwal effec-

tively bridged the gap between theCreighton and Devereaux tickets, pre-senting a compelling alternative ofdiverse student activist experience, prac-tical new goals, and even that rarest oftraits — populist vision. For this, Rao-Agarwal wins my vote.

Sanjay Rao and Jyoti Agarwal seemed to showa strong grasp of the present and future plight ofUlysses Undergraduate. In particular, Rao was aliving model of the wonders that a year of soberreflection can do for the student office-holder. Hiscriticism of the UA’s current preoccupation withsmall initiatives was apt, and his stated belief thatMIT student government was capable of morebold and relevant things inspired agreement.

Jaime Devereaux and Allison Neizmik demon-strated impressive familiarity with the latest UAinitiatives and the current state of student-admin-istration relations. Especially impressive wasNeizmik, whose breadth of involvement in theShulman administration’s projects of the fall wasexceedingly clear. This, though, proved confusing.Indeed, at times, Neizmik seemed to overtake herequally experienced presidential candidate, Dev-ereaux, inspiring fantasies of a much more com-pelling Neizmik-Devereaux ticket. Despite theirimpressive institutional knowledge, neither Dev-ereaux nor Neizmik seemed to grasp the urgencyof the next UAP and VP being civic leaders morethan technocrats. On summation, they left uswanting more.

The “other candidates.” The other tickets don’tappear to take them seriously. Blame Creighton’srainbow suspenders and their campaign promisesof reviving UA Heart-to-Heart and the Millenni-um Ball. It would be easy to write off these candi-dates. Yet look closer, and you’ll find the mosthonest, passionate ticket. Creighton rightly com-plains that the UA has become a closed culture,and he wants projects to concretely impact stu-dents’ lives in some way. Don’t worry, he has seri-ous things planned too: expanding Safe Ride andCMT. At last, a breath of fresh air.

Veen

a T

hom

as Creighton/StringfellowSend a message by voting for them

too. The current UA represents only theUA, not the rest of the student body.Remember the “Save the Dot” protest? Itworked. No committees, just passionatestudents committed to a cause. See pas-sion in the current UA? I didn’t think so.This ticket got me excited to vote justwhen I thought it was hopeless. If allthose people who feel ignored by thecurrent UA vote for Creighton/Stringfel-low, we’ll see real change in the UA nextyear. What do we have to lose?

This ticket claims they can provide the perfectcombination: one UA insider, someone with “anoutside perspective” (read: little experience). Theticket appears very presidential. Maybe a little toopresidential: during the debate, Rao hedged on asimple yes/no question.

Agarwal boldly advertises that she’s on a UAcommittee (read: she blanched herself to the mail-ing list just before postering). I can do withoutsuch political maneuverings. The dizzying arrayof committees they’ve planned for their adminis-tration doesn’t attract me at all. I want to see realaction.

At first glance, nothing could beat this ticketof “UA insiders.” In this case, however, too muchexperience makes them an unattractive ticket.Both have lost touch with students outside the UA.I asked them point-blank, “How would my life bedifferent if the UA didn’t exist?” Their answer:TEAL would be in the reading room, and wewouldn’t have UA committees. Shouldn’t the UAdo more than move programs from room to room?And what do all those committees do — bud offand form new committees? Electing this ticketwould perpetuate the same ineffective UA we’veseen this year. It’s time for a fresh perspective.

Creighton and Stringfellow bring a new faceto the ballot this year. They represent the portionof the student population they claim current andpast administrations ignore. Creighton’s primaryreasons for running are the above along with hisbelief that the student body wants someone whoisn’t already entrenched in the system; the riskone runs with this is losing touch with the studentbody.

They also come in with some interesting-sounding ideas — I’m a freshman, so you’ll haveto excuse my enthusiasm here — such as thereturn of campus-uniting events such as UAHeart-to-Heart and the Infinite Buffet. Unfortu-nately, most of Creighton and Stringfellow’s focusseems to be on social events and bashing theiropponents.

Jyot

i Tib

rew

ala Rao/Agarwal

Their creative energies have the rightfocus, and their ideas have the potentialto significantly improve the quality ofstudent life at MIT. Creighton andStringfellow lost my support because allthey seem interested in is finally beingnoticed. Devereaux and Neizmik, both ofwhom have been involved in the UA forquite some time, fail to draw my atten-tion because of their inability to producenew ideas for the future.

Unlike Creighton and Stringfellow, theRao/Agarwal ticket carries past UA and campus-wide involvement. Also unlike Creighton andStringfellow, these two candidates actually seeminterested more in the issues than in social events.Agarwal pointed out the current administration’sfailure to deliver plans addressing such issues asanonymous medical transport, MIT’s mentalhealth system, and preparation for the changes inthe housing system in 2002.

Rao and Agarwal stressed increasing studentinput on all matters and also increasing studentinvolvement with the UA in general. They werealso passionate about new initiatives, such as thecreation of an executive council containing mem-bers of the various student government groups oncampus to be more effective in dealing with theadministration.

Devereaux and Neizmik are the typical ticketin this year’s race. Both have been heavilyinvolved with the UA for years, and they made apoint of mentioning it. The answer to almost everyquestion included at least one mention of projectsalready up and running that they have plans tocontinue. While it is certainly an asset to the ticketto have so much experience with the association,it isn’t always such a good idea to flaunt it. Dev-ereaux and Neizmik managed to convey that theyhave plans to continue current projects but thatthey are hard-pressed for ideas that would belongwholly to their administration.

SCO

REC

AR

DS

✔Rhett Creighton andMaggie Stringfellow

Jamie Devereauxand Allison Neizmik

Sanjay Rao and Jyoti Agarwal

otePHOTOS BY JAMES CAMP

AND SAPHIR HAMILTON

Page 16 THE TECH March 2, 2001

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 17

MATCHING FUNDS PROVIDEDBY THE OFFICE OF THE

PRESIDENT

OPENING ACTS

Ten Degree Chill(TDC Funk Band)

Winners of the 2000 MIT Battle of the Bands

MITDance Troupe DJ J Nyce

Page 18 THE TECH March 2, 2001

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 19

New Teaching/New Learning at MITFriday, 2 March 2001

Participate in Active Teaching/Learning3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Room 34-401 Grier Room

Are We Succeeding?Panel Discussion

4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Room 34-101 Edgerton HallChaired by Robert P. Redwine

Dean for Undergraduate Education

What Goes On In theEdgerton Center?

Kim Vandiverand the Edgerton Center

Staff

FORCE FIELD! Visualizingthe Unseen With ModernAnimation Techniques: TheTEAL Project

John Belcher

Can Technology Transformthe Way You LearnJapanese and French?

Shigeru Miyagawa andGilberte Furstenberg

Inciting the LearningProcess: Can SolvingComplex Problems

“Our committee was veryimpressed with all the nominees.There really are some strong andinnovative teachers at MIT,” saidDean for Undergraduate EducationRobert P. Redwine, who chaired thecommittee that recommended thisyear’s winners.

This year’s selection processoperated slightly differently than inthe past. According to Redwine, thecommittee didn’t directly choose thewinners. Rather, they advisedProvost Robert A. Brown, whomade the final decision.

“It’s a semantic change to reflectthe changed role of the committee,”Redwine said.

As usual, any member of theMIT community could nominate afaculty member for the award.

“One aspect of the nominationsthat’s very important is studentinput,” Redwine said.

The award carries with it an annu-al allowance to “assist each Fellow indeveloping ways to enrich the under-graduate learning experience,”according to a press release fromMIT spokesman Robert J. Sales.

This year’s winners will become

MacVicar Faculty Fellows whoserve a ten-year term. The fellowsmeet during the year to discuss edu-cational ideas and policies.

Fellowship winners chosenThe MacVicar Fellowship is

designed to recognize faculty mem-bers who have made a significantcontribution to teaching at MIT.They come from many differentdepartments and have taken a varietyof approaches to further education.

“All six of the awardees were

extremely well qualified and richlydeserved this honor,” Redwine said.

Mayes said she was “deeply sur-prised and honored” upon hearingshe was chosen.

“We made extensive efforts torevamp the curriculum” of theundergraduate laboratory in materi-als science, Mayes said. She madethe experience more hands-on forstudents, allowing them to makediscoveries on theirown, she said.

Boyce has alsoreceived two othersimilar awards: theJoel and Ruth SpiraTeaching Award andthe Keenan Awardfor Innovation inUndergraduate Edu-cation. She has also received severalawards for her research, whichrelates to the mechanics of materi-als, with an emphasis on the physicsof polymer deformation.

Some of Mindell’s research hastaken him over and under seas. Asan assistant professor in the Pro-gram on Science, Technology, andSociety, he has accompanied stu-dents on expeditions to Italy, Israel,Turkey, and Maine. Since 1990,Mindell has assisted in nine deep-sea archeological expeditions. Healso designed part of Jason, anundersea robot.

Nepf adds the MacVicar award

to the teaching awards she has wonthree times from her department.Nepf has created a series of televi-sion shows for high school studentsdealing with environmental issues.

Sonenberg has been the director

of MIT Theater Arts since 1996. Amember of the the ComparativeMedia Studies Admissions Commit-tee, she has extensive experience instage, television, and film produc-tions. Sonenberg won the BakerUndergraduate Teaching Award fiveyears ago.

Vandiver was the foundingdirector of the Edgerton Center.The Center was created in 1992 togive students hands-on experi-ences. From 1984-1989, Vandiverwas the director of the Experimen-tal Study Group, a program thatteaches undergraduates in small,self-paced groups. He has been the

Dean for Undergraduate Researchsince 1999.

Awards part of MacVicar DayThe awards ceremony will begin

the fifth annual MacVicar Day, whichfeatures events related toteaching and learning atMIT.

Four lectures will beheld, including an expla-nation of the EdgertonCenter by new MacVicarfellow Vandiver and ademonstration of theTechnology Enabled

Active Learning project by one oflast year’s MacVicar fellows, Pro-fessor of Physics John W. Belcher.

Afterwards, there will be a paneldiscussion called “Are We Succeed-ing?” featuring Redwine.

The events are in honor of Mar-garet MacVicar, who helped toadvanced the cause of teaching andlearning as Dean for UndergraduateEducation until her untimely deathin 1991 at the age of 47. A professorin the physics department, she alsofounded MIT’s UndergraduateResearch Opportunities Program.

Rima Arnaout contributed to thereporting of this story.

Six Named MacVicar Fellows for Teaching Excellence

The events are in honor of the late MargaretMacVicar, a physics professor and founder

of the UROP program.

“All six of the awardeeswere extremely wellqualified and richlydeserved this honor,”said Dean Robert P.

Redwine.

MacVicar, from Page 1

Page 20 THE TECH March 2, 2001

By Dana LevineEXECUTIVE EDITOR

The Class of 2002 Councilannounced last night that severalMIT administrators have agreed tomatch the donations to Habitat forHumanity raised by the Saturday’sNaughty By Nature concert.

“The Offices of the President,Provost, Chancellor and ExecutiveVice President will — as a group —provide a 2 to 1 match of the fundsyou raise at the concert for con-struction of the [Habitat for Human-ity] house,” said Vice President and

Secretary of the CorporationKathryn A. Willmore in an e-mail toSudeb C. Dalai, president of theclass of 2002.

The idea for administrative spon-sorship of the event came from adiscussion last week between Dalaiand Willmore. “I had a discussionwith her and suggested that theysupport this or one of several othersuggestions,” Dalai said.

Dalai submitted a proposal onTuesday which asked for matchingadministrative support, and learnedlast night that a much stronger levelof support had been granted. “Ittook a little bit of work to write theproposals that were necessary, butthe turn-around was fast,” he said.

Dalai believes that this shows

that students may gain administra-tive support for their programs bysimply talking to administrators. “Ifyou place faith in the administrationand are willing to trust them, theyare definitely willing to support stu-dents,” Dalai said. “This is kind of achange of pace for administrativesupport of students.”

Event will be campus-wideDalai and Class of 2002 Vice

President Sonia Garg hope that thisevent will draw students from allsegments of the MIT community.The concert includes performancesby several campus groups andNaughty By Nature. “We’re hittinga lot of different areas of campusand working towards the samegoal,” Garg said.

Garg hopes that this success willencourage more groups to seek sup-port for campus-wide events. “It’smuch more encouraging for studentslike us who want to have campusevents,” she said. “We would like tosee large community events like thishappen again, or more often.”

Habitat hopes to build MIT houseThe event’s organizers hope to

meet their goal of raising $5,000from the sale of concert tickets,which would allow a $10,000 dona-tion by the administrators. This willgo towards the $65,000 required tobuild a MIT Habitat for Humanityhouse.

“MIT Habitat is dedicated tobuilding this house by themselves.Having MIT students’ name on ahouse would really say a lot aboutus,” Garg said.

Administration WillMatch 2002 CouncilProceeds to Habitat

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 21

Page 22 THE TECH March 2, 2001

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 23

MITEmile Bustani Middle East

SeminarPresents

Professor Helena CobbanGraduate Arts & Sciences

University of Virginia

Tuesday, March 6, 20014:30 - 6:30 p.m.

E51-09570 Memorial Drive

Cambridge

OPEN T O THE PUBLIC

Sponsored by the Center for International Studies

“A TWO-STATE SOLUTION IN THEHOLY LAND: IS THERE STILL TIME?”

the headquarters of the physicsdepartment, which is on the f irstfloor of building 6, and the materialsscience department headquarters onthe fourth floor of the same build-ing. The new Green Center willhouse the department’s headquar-ters, the Center for TheoreticalPhysics, education offices, seminarrooms, and undergraduate and grad-uate labs, Kastner said. The Centerwill also house the physics readingroom, whose current location inbuilding 26 will be used for the

Technology Enabled Active Learn-ing program.

Professor Subra Suresh, head ofthe department of materials science,said that the renovations will be an“even exchange: there is no net gainor loss [of space].” He said that fac-ulty in both departments voted onand approved of the plannedchanges, and that the renovationswill “tie in” with overall departmen-tal goals. Among other improve-ments that will take place, the mate-rials science department willrenovate and add to its labs on theInfinite Corridor.

Physics graduate student Gae-tano Bertoldi, who is part of theCenter for Theoretical Physics(CTP) in building 6, said he hopedthat “the new physics reading roomwill be even better than what wehave now,” and he anticipated “newoffice spaces” with “nicer rooms.”He felt the relocations would bebeneficial to the Condensed MatterTheory (CMT) graduate studentswho “need more office space than[CTP students] do.”

Dru Renner G, another CTP stu-dent, believes that the changes are“def initely better for the physics

department” because it is “reallyspread out.” He thinks the “neatestidea” is for the two theoreticalphysics groups, CTP and CMT, tobe in one area, because it allows for“intellectual consultation.”

Still, said Renner, “losing thephysics reading room is a big con-cern.” He said that the relocatedphysics reading room, which Kast-ner said “probably won’t be aslarge as the old space,” will have“no windows and not all of thebooks and journals” as the readingroom has now. The new temporaryreading room will be on the third

floor of building 4 past the studentcommon area.

Though the time needed toimplement the changes will be“hard to predict,” Suresh remainsenthusiastic about the swap with thephysics department. He said that afaculty committees in both depart-ments considered three differentarchitectural firms and have alreadychosen one.

“Plans are moving along,” he said.

Rima Arnaout and NaveenSunkavally contributed to thereporting of this story.

Faculty Approve Space Swap for Center of PhysicsPhysics Center, from Page 1

Page 24 THE TECH March 2, 2001

JAMES CAMP—THE TECH

“Dirty Rat,” a work by Aaron Edsinger, was one of the most attention-grabbing exhibits to graceLa Sala de Puerto Rico in Tuesday’s “Collision,” an exhibition of art and music put on in part bythe MIT Dance Mix Coalition.

that could solve a Rubik’s Cube, achess-playing computer, and anelectronic mouse that could run amaze. His work helped create thefield of artificial intelligence, theattempt to make machines makedecisions like people would, and heserves as an inspiration for a genera-tion of computer scientists.

Shannon was born on April 30,1916. In 1936 he earned a SB in

Mathematics and Computer Sciencefrom the University of Michigan.He came to MIT as a visiting pro-fessor in 1956. From 1958 to 1978,he was MIT’s Donnor Professor ofScience. In 1978, he became a pro-fessor emeritus.

He is survived by his wife,Mary; his son, Andrew M. Shannon;his daughter, Margarita Shannon; asister, Catherine S. Kay; and twogranddaughters. Services and burialare private.

Shannon Helped LayFoundations for AIShannon, from Page 1

March 2, 2001 THE TECH Page 25

Page 26 THE TECH March 2, 2001

March 2, 2001 SPORTS THE TECH Page 27

Men Narrowly Defeat VermontBy David Hu TEAM MEMBER

Last Saturday, just one weekafter a heavy loss to SpringfieldCollege, the MIT men’s gymnasticsteam competed against the Universi-ty of Vermont in their last meet ofthe season. A loss would leave MITwith a losing season, but a winwould give MIT a winning seasonand an opportunity to compete at theUSA Gymnastics National Colle-giate Championships.

The Engineers earned their high-est score of the year to beat Ver-mont by one-third of one point,160.1 to 159.8.

“I don’t know how this hap-pened,” said Noah Riskin, coach ofthe team.

The Engineers began the meeton floor exercise, tumbling withpower and control. Captain Luke A.Massery ’02 received an 8.30, thehighest score for either team. DavidYin ’01 ended his routine with aspontaneous new element: a twist-ing, hand-flapping back somersaultto prone fall.

On pommel horse, the Engineersswung their worst this season. Start-ing with David L. Hu ’01, a dominoeffect began in which every manmissed his mounting skill, whichdetermines much of the team’sscore.

The Engineers’ final pommelhorse score was four points lowerthan last meet’s score, and it wasseemingly enough to put the meetout of the Engineers’ grasp.

After the disaster on pommelhorse, Riskin gathered the teamtogether. “Don’t think about Nation-als,” said Riskin. “In the grand scaleof infinite time and the universe, itwon’t matter.” He paused, and fromthe eye of the huddle, the crowdseemed silent.

“Don’t think of that small stuff.It will make you anxious, and youcan’t be tentative or hesitant if youwant to do these skills,” said Riskin.“You’ve got to go all the way, let itall out. That’s gymnastics.”

During the remainder of themeet, the team took its time. Theteam again made mistakes, such asin “stutzes” on parallel bars, takingsteps on dismounts, and landingawkwardly, said Riskin. But for thefirst time this season, the team did-n’t look back and performed cleanlyand mindfully.

Damian M Engen ’03 scored atotal score of 45.95, garnering themeet’s highest all-around score andhighest individual scores on pom-mel horse, vault, parallel bars, andhigh bar. He successfully completedhis Yager release move, a somer-sault and regrasp of the high bar andwas called “Division I quality” bymembers of the audience.

Patrick R. Griffin’s ’04 diligent-ly practiced “pike-through” and“tsukihara” pleased the crowd, aswell has his ability to control hisfamous swing of the still rings. Hescored a 40.95, the second-highestscore for MIT. When asked if he“had a good meet,” the usually self-critical Griffin paused and respond-ed, “Yes, I did.”

Massery set a personal recordwith a total score of 40.20.Massery’s immense control both onand off the apparatus was noticed byan anonymous Rhode Island coach,who left a note “for Luke.”

However, Saturday’s very closewin was owed in large part toMammy G. Sterling ’03. Sterlingperformed several new advancedskills on rings and high bar, includ-ing a double back somersault dis-mount. More admirably, under theurgings of Riskin, he learned theseskills on his day off, when he, like atrue Engineer, arrived at gym “tocram.”

The most touching point of theday’s meet occurred when GaryBruening, Vermont’s coach of 15

years, approached Riskin at the endof the meet. In the previous fouryears, Bruening’s team had consis-tently trounced the Engineers. Now,Bruening asked Riskin, “what’syour secret?”

The mottos of the men’s gym-nastics team throughout the yearshave been “do something right,”“just stay on” and “care.” For thepast years, this team has competedagainst bigger, stronger, recruitedgymnasts, while still garnering themost hand-over-mouth gigglingfrom NCAA judges. Now, pendingfinancial approval from the athleticsdepartment, this same team, for thefirst time in four years, may verywell qualify for Nationals this yearat UC-Davis.

“The men’s concentrated workand support of one another through-out the season has made for well-done, good-quality gymnastics,”said Riskin. “We must keep theedge on, for we know how easilythings fall apart. In fact, next week,you’ll experience levels of intimacywith the pommel horse never imag-ined.”

PEDRO L. ARRECHEA—THE TECH

Patrick R. Griffin ’04 maneuvers on the pommel horse duringSaturday’s meet against the University of Vermont. MIT won160.1 to 159.8.

By Eduardo OvalleTEAM COACH

The Anchorwomen from RhodeIsland College invaded Du PontGymnasium sporting a four pointadvantage in the rankings over theEngineers, and although both teamsstruggled a bit during the meet, thefinal outcome of the meet was a truereflection of where the two teamsstand: RIC 175.10 to MIT 171.70.

MIT marched into this meet witha Hawaiian theme, wearing somehand-made flower leis put togetherby the team members.

The Engineers began the meeton vault while RIC started the meeton what is traditionally a difficultevent, bars.

MIT got off to the early lead witha 42.60 vault set to RIC’s 40.85 barsscore. The first rotation was sloppyfor both teams as RIC squanderedtheir opportunities to score higher byhaving to count several falls off theapparatus. The cleanest vaults forMIT came from Amy M. Shui ’02with a score of 8.55 and CarrieGarceau ’03 with 8.575.

The teams switched events andRIC began to pull away. MIT didnot help their own cause as bothGarceau and Deborah J. Dryer ’03struggled with their routines. Eventhough Sonja J. Ellefson ’01 posteda meet-high 9.35, the team scoreamounted to a 40.10.

In the meantime, RIC was scor-ing a 43.925 on vault to give theman 84.775 to 82.700 lead at thehalfway mark.

The host team moved to beam asthe visitors took to the floor exercise.The Engineers started off strong withthree solid routines by Elizabeth A.

Ellingson ’01, Shui and Dryer. Garceau had a beautiful routine

going, but struggled with one smallbalance check and fell. CindyChung ’04 had an equally impres-sive routine working until she fellon her difficult side somersault skill.Ellefson really struggled on theevent and, the team settled for a44.225 total, which was the secondhighest of the season.

RIC was dancing and tumblingwell on floor as they amassed a45.825 total highlighted by SajdahAmhad’s 9.50. The only thing thatwould save MIT now was for RIC tosuffer a disaster on beam. Althoughthey had to count a fall, RIC stillmanaged a higher total on beam thanMIT with a 44.50 while the hometeam was busy trying to dance andtumble to some high scores.

Dryer was the third up on theevent and she suffered what seemedlike a knee sprain on the knee thatshe had reconstructed last year. Theinjury took the wind out of the sailsof the MIT team and suddenly mak-ing the meet close did not mattermuch anymore.

Garceau, Chung and Ellefsonfinished out the meet with an 8.9,9.15 and 9.575 respectively.

MIT’s last home meet of theyear will be this Friday at 7:30 pmin DuPont Gymnasium. It will besenior night as the team will be say-ing ‘Goodbye’ to their seniors.Among them, school record holderon every event, Sonja J. Ellefson’01. Ellefson is currently ranked inthe top five nationally on floor, barsand the all-around. The meet will beagainst Springfield College and it’sone that you don’t want to miss.

Women’s GymnasticsFalls to Rhode Island

dropped the foil bout 5-3, leavingthe teams tied at 1-1 with epee left.

Southpaw Neal K. Devaraj ’02faced Mark Dembitz in a heated bat-tle that ended at a score of 4–3 astime expired. The win gave Brownthe win.

Men take third places in individualsThe men had a tougher time with

the Individual Finals, as fencersfrom each of the three weaponsmanaged third place finishes behindfencers from Brown and BostonCollege.

Chadwick, last year’s foil cham-pion, finished third, with Andre D.Van Horn ’01 sixth.

In sabre, Richard D. Burstein ’02continued to excel in post-seasoncompetition following last year’sIFAs, defeating teammate Millerand placing third overall. Miller fin-ished fourth.

Brown continued to dominatemen’s epee, finishing 1-2, followedby Devaraj in third and Paul J.Thordarson ’01 in fifth.

Men’s epee and sabre saw 1-2finishes in the second string compe-

tition, as Matthew R. Levy ’04(epee) and Anthony P. Reinen ’03(sabre) took gold ahead of team-mates Brendan P. Miller ’02 andArjun R. Narayanswamy ’02.

Leading the way in foil wasDouglas J. Quattrochi ’04 in second,followed by Timothy R. Kreider ’04in 4th.

On the women’s side, MichelleA. Nadermann ’03 captured the goldin epee and Lisa M. Bell ’04 sil-vered in foil. Both Rayka Yokoo’02 (foil) and Sasha R. Manoosingh’03 (sabre) finished fifth.

This weekend MIT fencers willface their best-in-class rivals at theIFA Championships, held at HarvardUniversity’s Gorman Track and Ten-nis Center on Saturday and Sunday.IFAs, one of the most challengingcollegiate fencing competitions in thenation, sets MIT against 13 schools,including top 10 ranked Princeton,Yale, Columbia, St. John’s, andUPenn, along with local rivals BC,Brandeis, and Brown. This post-sea-son matchup is a precursor to theNCAA Northeastern Regionals onMarch 11th, from which fencers areselected to go on to the Division INational Championships.

kwon do, and Christina is a formerjunior National medalist. They wonall of their matches and helpedcoach the team on a chaotic andstressful tournament day.”

The MIT Sport Tae Kwon DoClub was started last fall byChuang and Park in response to theMIT community’s demand andneed for an organization that teach-es, trains, and competes inOlympic-style tae kwon do. As themost widely practiced and stan-dardized form of tae kwon doworldwide, it is unique in its rulesof competition and emphasis on itssport aspect. In the northeast duringthis past decade, a lively and pas-sionate community has sprung uparound Olympic-style competitionsamong schools such as Cornell,Harvard, Princeton, NYU, Yale,and many others. MIT has nowjoined this community and made itsname known.

When asked of his impressionson the team, Chuang commented,“the club performed extremely well,especially given how new many ofthem were to tae kwon do competi-tion. Most of the team members

have been doing tae kwon do foronly about a semester, and theywere competing against much moreseasoned and experienced competi-tors from other schools.”

Chuang said that he hopes the

team will perform better as they gainmore experience and the club grows.

Two days after the competition,the team began to train again inpreparation of their next competi-tion on April 8th at Yale University.

Tae Kwon Do Club Places Fifth in MeetTae Kwon Do, from Page 28

incessant cross-court drives to theback corner eventually won thematch for her.

Hong, Monson to play at Harvard MIT’s number-one player, Eric

A. Hong ’01, will compete in themen’s Individual National Tourna-ment to be held this weekend at

Harvard University. Monson willcompete in the women’s tourna-ment, posing the formidable task ofcompeting against other women forthe first time in the season.

Goela may also compete in indi-vidual nationals, pending the rank-ings of the tournament committee.Hong has competed in the tourna-ment in previous years, while thisyear will be Monson’s first.

Fencers Look Forward to IFAsFencing, from Page 28

Squash, from Page 28

ELIZABETH KIM

Daniel S. Robey ’04 executes a roundhouse kick to his opponent,adding another point to his 4-1 victory.

15 seconds. The women’s 7.5-km classic

race began just an hour later, andYates again earned third place. Themen claimed another second-placeteam score in the classic race, com-

pleting the weekend second overallbehind the team’s rival, ClarksonUniversity.

Next weekend, the team will beheading to Boise, Idaho to competein the USCSA National competitionfrom March 5–10, hosted by theBogus Basin cross-country site.

Skiing, from Page 28

Nordic Heads to Idaho

Hong, Monson to Harvard

By Elizabeth Kim and Christina ParkTEAM MEMBERS

Last Saturday 19 MIT studentseach fought hand-to-hand againststudents from eight other colleges.

The MIT Sport Tae Kwon DoClub, only five months old, com-peted in its first intercollegiatetournament, hosted at John JayCollege in New York City. Thoughentering as underdogs with sixteenof its members never competingbefore, the Engineers confidentlyset aside their fears and inexperi-ence and earned fifth place out ofnine schools.

The day began with the poomse(forms) competition, in which taekwon do students perfect theirskills and highlight the beauty ofthe “art” side of martial arts. Eachcompetitor performed a choreo-graphed set of blocks, kicks andpunches, and was given a scorebased on their demonstration ofpower, grace, balance, and agility.Jack C. Kwok’s ’01 crisp and pow-erful forms proved that practicemakes perfect, and he took 3rdplace out of 40 yellow belts in hisdivision. “I was very excited aboutthe tournament and did my best toprepare for it,” said Kwok.

In the sparring competition, thedivisions are broken down intoblack belts, color belts andwhite/yellow belts, and schools

form teams of three (consisting of alightweight, middleweight, andheavyweight). The respectiveweights spar two-round matchesagainst each other and winning twoof the three rounds advances theteam in a single elimination fash-ion. Points are scored by executinga strong kick that displaces thebody, or demonstrating a controlledkick to the head.

MIT’s overall ranking in thetournament received a boost fromthe women’s black-belt sparringteam (Alice S. Chau ’04, Maria E.Stiteler ’03, Christina S. Park ’02),who reached the finals and finishedin second place.

Chau showed a lot of heart,toughening up in the face of asth-ma to land multiple head kicks toher opponent.

Despite her lack of experiencein competition, Stiteler also provedto be resilient, refusing to give upin her match and finishing strong.

Against Cornell, Park figuredout her opponent’s strategy earlyon and adapted her own to controlthe match 5-1.

The women’s yellow belt spar-ring team (Jessica C. Huang ’03,Elizabeth S. Kim ’01, Melissa M.Barbagelata G) also contributed toMIT’s score, winning third place intheir division with a cumulativerecord of 4-1.

Huang used her height and flex-

ibility to her advantage, easily win-ning her first match with severalkicks to the head.

With a burst of energy anddetermination, Kim came backfrom a 2-0 deficit of the first roundto score two points in the secondround and win by decision ofaggression.

Barbagelata’s strong kicks andintimidating spirit joined those ofher teammates’, facing no prob-lems in her first match against UPenn.

The men’s teams faced stiffercompetition. Despite a valianteffort by David A. Wilson ’04 anda 7-0 win by Chinedum O. OsujiG, the men’s black belt team waseliminated in the quarter-finals,lacking a lightweight. The men’syellow belt teams faced toughcompetition as well, but they didnot lose heart or momentum infighting their best.

Head Coach Dan Chuang (thirddegree black belt, U.S. Cup Teammember), said, “The team was real-ly anchored by its two captains,Christina Park and ChinedumOsuji, both of whom were able toshare their wealth of experience incoaching the team.”

Chuang further noted that“Chinedum is the 1998 NationalCollegiate silver medalist in tae

SPORTSPage 28 THE TECH March 2, 2001

By Evan EfstathiouASSISTANT COACH

Last weekend MIT fencingreclaimed one title and relinquishedanother in a thrilling Men’s andWomen’s New England Champi-onships at Smith College.

MIT took the New England titlefor best men’s and women’s com-bined teams ahead of Brown, BC,and Tufts.

In their first championship eventof the postseason, MIT womenshined with 69 wins to pull aheadBrown and University New Hamp-shire to retake the New Englandtitle, their third title in four years.

Women’s fencing finished theseason at a near-perfect 18-3, drop-ping by mere touches to Duke, Cor-nell and Harvard during the regularseason. The men’s team matchedtheir 1999 season record of 14-5,inspired by victories over rivalsincluding Harvard for the third con-secutive year and an upset overDuke at the MIT Invitational.

Women succeed in individualsThe women reigned in the indi-

vidual finals, led by returning NewEngland champions Caroline M.Purcell ’02 and Dianne K. Allen’01, and by a solid performance bynewcomer Clarissa Y. Smith ’04.

Purcell finished the day 11-0 inthe team event and 8-0 in the finals.Purcell is now undefeated at NewEnglands for the last two years.

Jennifer A. McKeehan ’01 andPriscilla del Castillo ’04 followedclosely behind Purcell, qualifying tothe finals and finishing third and

fourth, respectively. In the foil finals were Dianne K.

Allen ’01 and veteran Jade JoanHon ’01. Hon had overcame injuriesduring the season and rallied herteammates to victory in the teamevent. Hon beat out opponents fromUNH, UMass, BC, and Brown totake third in the finals and earn theMIT straight “T” distinction in herfinal year of fencing.

The biggest surprise of the daywas Smith, who squeaked into thefinals with a 5-5 record at the Astrip. Once there, Smith blazedthrough her opponents to finish 7-1and tied for first with 2000 All-American Sarah Hobstetter. For thetie-breaker, the epeeist faced Hob-stetter for the third time that day andwent touch for touch in the bout,taking a 4-3 lead before droppingthe last two touches to place second.

Also in the epee finals was Jen-nifer A. Lue ’03, who finished fifth.

Men fall to Brown in tiebreakerThe MIT men, fresh off two con-

secutive championship titles, fin-ished the day in a dead tie withBrown University at 60 wins. Undera new tie-breaking format, the topMIT sabre, foil, and epee fencershad to face off against the top threefencers from Brown.

Leading the way was Philip W.Miller ’01, who trounced the sabrechampion from the finals in a deci-sive 5-2 bout.

Oliver J. Chadwick ’02, lastyear’s New England foil champion,

A Mixed DecisionFor Fencing Teams

MARISSA YATES

Derek G. Southwell ’01 competes in the 15k skate race on Saturday. Southwell overtook his Clarksonopponent to finish fourth in the race.

By Marissa YatesTEAM MEMBER

Battling snowy weather, slipperyroads, and steep back-country hills,the MIT Nordic ski team traveled toJericho, Vermont for the USCSARegional Championships last week-end.

Saturday morning, the teamawoke to temperature in the 20s,welcoming sunshine, and a fewinches of freshly fallen snow. Thetrails at the Ethan Allen BiathlonRange were neatly groomed, and theconditions were nearly perfect forracing over the hilly terrain.

The women’s 10-km freestylerace set off the weekend, and theonly female racer from MIT, Maris-sa L. Yates ’03, captured thirdplace.

Immediately following thewomen’s race, the men set off totackle the 15-km freestyle race.Derek G. Southwell ’01 led the MITteam with a strong fourth place fin-ish. Following Southwell, TimothyG. Garnett ’02, Christopher M.Testa ’03, and Samuel T. Coradetti’02 crowded in as a pack of skiersand finished within ten seconds ofeach other to capture eighth, ninthand 10th place.

Garnering four top-ten finishes,the men’s team took second place inthe freestyle race.

Saturday’s beautiful weather dis-appeared overnight, and gray skiesand windy weather prevailed by 9a.m. Sunday. As the men preparedfor the 10-km classic race, the pre-cipitation fluctuated between wet

snow, sleet, and rain. These condi-tions complicated the waxingprocess, forcing the men to quicklyapply klister and sprint to the startof the race.

Again, as in the freestyle racethe day before, Southwell led themen’s team with a fourth place fin-ish. Finishing less than 15 secondsbehind his teammate, Testa earnedsixth place.

After missing his start by nearly45 seconds, Coradetti secured aninth place finish with his purestrength in double poling, even overthe toughest hills on the course. Fol-lowing closely behind, Garnettsnatched 12th place, again within apack of skiers separated by less than

Nordic Skiers Take Second Place

By Lila French TEAM ALUMNA

Last Friday and Saturday, theMIT women’s track team competedin the All New England Champi-onship meet at Tufts University.The team scored 10 points, placingthem in a tie for 20th place out of 31schools from Divisions I, II, and III.

In the weight throw, PrincessImoukhuede ’02 continued herstring of outstanding performancesby placing 2nd with a throw of 55’61/2”. She is currently ranked third in

NCAA Division III Nationals in thisevent.

In the shot put, Imoukhuedethrew a respectable 40’7”. She willhave one more opportunity nextweek to improve her personal bestof 41’5 3/4” the 7 inches necessaryto qualify for Nationals.

In the pole vault, Vanessa Li ’02placed seventh with a jump of 10’61/2”. She is currently ranked 9thnationally.

On the track, two varsity recordsfell. Martha W. Buckley ’04 blazed

through the mile in 5:18.72. The4x800 team, made up of Chi-AnWang ’01, Kimberly J. Seluga ’02,Melanie L. Harris ’01, and Buckley,ran a time of 10:04.49 to just nickthe varsity record.

Freshman multi-event athleteNydia M. Clayton ’04 ran an excel-lent 8.59 in the 55m high hurdles.She is currently ranked 13th nation-ally.

This weekend the team willcompete in the ECAC Champi-onships at Boston University.

Tae Kwon Do Club Competes in First Meet

Friday, March 2

Women’s Gymnastics vs. Springfield College, 7:30 p.m.

Saturday, March 3Fencing, IFA Championships (at Harvard) 10:00 a.m.Indoor Track & Field, ECAC Championships (at Boston University)Squash, NISRA Individual Championships (at Harvard)

UPCOMING HOME EVENTS

Track Team in All New England MeetBy Robert AronstamTEAM MEMBER

The varsity squash team won itsfinal match in the national tourna-ment to claim seventh place in the Cdivision of the competition. With 8teams in each division, the seventh-place finish translates to a nationalranking of 23rd. This ranking isdown from MIT’s 16th-place rank-ing last season.

Despite strong individual perfor-mances, MIT was unable to win itsfirst two matches at the tournament.On Friday morning, Colby easilydefeated MIT by a score of 8–1.This victory matched Colby’s nearsweep of MIT during the regularseason.

The outgunned MIT squad washindered further by a revampedColby lineup that included a playerwho did not compete against MIT inthe regular season.

MIT’s next loss came at thehands of Vassar College in the Sat-urday match. Despite the 6–3 loss,MIT had a few highlights. Rita E.Monson ’04, the only female in thecompetition, easily defeated heropponent in the number eightmatch.

Monson maintained control ofthe court, running her opponentfrom side to side relentlessly. Herdrives to the backcourt preventedher opponent from making anyoffensive shots, and eventuallyforced him to make an error.

Naveen Goela ’03 providedanother notable match, in an uncon-

ventional five-game win. In squash,an individual game is decided by atiebreaker when the game is tied at14–14. The player who reached thescore of 14 first is given the choiceof a 1-point or 3-point tiebreaker.The 3-point option is most oftenchosen, in order to prevent a flukeshot from deciding the game, and isnearly always chosen in fifth-gametiebreakers.

Generally, players don’t wish toallow a single point to decide theoutcome of a match that has consist-ed of well over 100 points. Goela,however, didn’t feel compelled tofollow this convention in his match.Goela called for a one-pointtiebreaker in the fifth game, shock-ing his opponent. Fortunately, Goeladropped a winner into the corner,preventing any second-guessing ofhis decision.

MIT victorious in final match MIT broke the losing streak by

defeating Connecticut College in theSunday match. The Engineerspulled out four 3–2 matches, sealinga win that duplicated a home winagainst Connecticut College duringthe regular season.

Monson had a particularlythrilling five-set victory. Poundingthe ball with power and precision,Monson turned in one of her finestperformances of the season. Thoughher opponent was often able tomatch her shot for shot, Monson’s

Squash Finishes at 23rdMIT Wins One Match, Loses Two at National Championship

Fencing, Page 27

Skiing, Page 27

Squash, Page 27

Tae Kwon Do, Page 27