Proof That Nobody Reads Anymore: Approval of “Occupation 101”

The Social Justice Alliance at Stony Brook University recently abandoned their commitment to “global justice and human rights” by hosting a screening of the film “Occupation 101.”

This propaganda film is about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from the point of view of people living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, but it gives the viewer that little something extra by lying the entire time. Whether it’s lying outright or lying by omission of facts, this film has it all.

Out of all the fiction, there are certain points that seemed more blatantly false than others. For example, the speakers in the video said that when Israel was officially made the homeland of the Jews, the land chosen was very large and it was the best in the area. That is not even remotely true. If you look at maps for the UN’s partition plan to separate the area into Palestinian and Israeli states, the land is split into almost equal shares. And as far as the quality of land, in 1948 a lot of Israel was swamp and desert. The hard work of Israel’s residents made that swamp and desert into what it is now, and what people imagine when they think of Israel.

In other parts of the film, facts were thrown in without context so as to paint Israel in a bad light. For instance, there was footage of buildings in the Palestinian territories being demolished, and the only thing the viewer hears is that innocent people were killed or lost their homes for no reason. The speakers don’t explain that before the Israeli Defense Forces destroy anything, whether it be by explosives or wrecking equipment, they give a three hour warning in order to spare the lives of civilians, even if it means giving the terrorist targets time to escape. The speakers don’t mention that these Palestinian civilians are killed because they are being used as human shields. There is also nothing said about why the IDF chose the building to be demolished, such as it being a hiding place of weapons or retaliation for a strike against Israel.

Another huge problem with this film is that it is incredibly anti-Semitic. Alex Saiu, the treasurer of the SJA said after the screening that he didn’t think it was at all. Apparently he doesn’t think it’s anti-Semitic to say that Jews in Israel are trying to ethnically cleanse the area of all Palestinians, which is a complete fabrication. Apparently he doesn’t think it’s anti-Semitic to say that all Jews have great living accommodations while people in the Palestinian territories live in poverty. It’s statements like these that led to support for Hitler and the Holocaust. I thought the SJA was established to educate people, not to brainwash them.

After the film the floor was opened for discussion. While Rabbi Topek of Stony Brook Hillel was permitted to clear up some inaccuracies of the film before anyone else spoke, there was nothing stopping people from dispensing false facts during the student debate. One student said that the people in Gaza have no food, clean water or electricity, and that’s why they launch the Qassam rockets into Israel.

This is a ridiculous statement in two ways. First, although Israel no longer occupies Gaza, many international organizations insist that Israel must still provide food, water, electricity and emergency medical care to the people there. Why, if Gaza is now independent from Israel? There is no logical reason, but people in Gaza do actually have access to these things.

The second way that statement is absurd is that the student gave the falsehood as a justification for launching rockets into Israel and killing civilians. Let’s assume that people in Gaza don’t have water or food. Does that give them a license to kill? I don’t think so. If it did, the billions of people in the world living in poverty would be an extreme security threat. Poverty does not justify murder. The money spent on Qassam rockets could be used to buy a better quality of life for civilians. And at the end of the day, Israel does supply people who are not its own citizens with their basic survival needs. So what is the real excuse for the rockets?

The makers of “Occupation 101” call the film a documentary, but I refuse to do that. It is an incredible work of anti-Semitic fiction, and should not be thought of as anything other than that.

Saiu said that the SJA picked the film and just ran with it, despite objections from some students, because they wanted to dive right into this topic. As an organization that is meant to raise awareness, that was a terrible mistake. A group like that should be even more careful than others to present something balanced. I’d say they really messed up on this one, but I doubt the people brainwashed by this movie will agree.

Here's a picture of Tel Aviv before the legal inception of Israel as the Jewish homeland.

The Green Comet Has Arrived

The green streak of Comet Lulin will be bright and visible in the night sky for the next few days. After reaching the point in its orbit closest to the Sun (the perihelion) back in January, Lulin reached its closest to Earth on February 24th. This point is less than half an astronomical unit from us, meaning less than half the average distance from the Earth to the Sun.

Comet Lulin will be moving quickly across the night sky, so if you stand outside long enough you can see its movement. It will be easy to recognize because of its green color, which is caused by the reflection of the Sun's rays off the carbon gases in the comet's Jupiter-sized atmosphere.

Lulin was likely much greener when it was at its perihelion, but at that time it could not be seen with the naked eye. Now, at a position so close to Earth, the comet will likely be able to be seen without a telescope. But if you have trouble, a pair of binoculars or a camera with a good zoom should do the trick.

Check out this video to learn how to find Comet Lulin. The guy's voice reminds me of Ben Stein's character from "Ferris Bueller's Day Off," but it's an interesting clip all the same.

U.S. of Whatever

The United States of Tara is a new series on Showtime about a wife and mother who suffers from Dissociative Identity Disorder, or multiple personalities. While I am impressed by the Australian Toni Collette in the lead role doing four different kinds of American accents, there's not much else about this show that impresses me.

John Corbett can be found in the same role he usually plays of the loyal, dorky but lovable sidekick. But here's the twist- he does it with short hair. It must be a huge stretch for him professionally.

The rest of the cast has mildly decent acting skill, but it goes to waste on a bad script. A lot of the lines are forced and the scenes drawn out. In one episode, Marshall, played by Keir Gilchrist, suffers an allergic reaction. John Corbett's character gives his son a shot of epinephrine, and the audience has to suffer through hearing him count slowly to ten before the scene ends. The counting was completely irrelevant to the rest of the show, and did not advance the plot in any way whatsoever; it was filler. He might as well have been counting the seconds until I completely tuned out the rest of this series.

While the subject matter has potential to make a really dramatic, gripping show, it is ruined because the stories go from realistic and intense to comedic clichés, extreme cheese and unrealistic situations. A little versatility is good in a TV program, but this is just indecision. The writers don't know what kind of show they want, so they give it multiple personalities also. Here's some advice: find another job before you go down with this ship.

Stop What You're Doing

Do you take the same route to and from school or work every day? Do you rush through your walk because you find it old and boring? Are you impatient to reach your destination? If you answered 'yes' to any of these questions, then Michel de Certeau could be for you.

Since the city itself is stationary, it is the movement of people that defines it. As we walk through the city, our paths cross those of others and create an intangible fabric. If we go the same way every day, the threads of the fabric are reinforced and become more permanent.

De Certeau believes that we have to break away from this everyday reinforcement of our city's fabric. When you are walking somewhere routine, take a new path. Make a turn instead of crossing the street. Go in the opposite direction and see where you find yourself. This enables us to see the city from a new perspective, and discover things we didn't know we were missing. Things that were so close all along, but we were so focused on reaching our destination that we couldn't see them.

This idea goes back to philosopher Guy Debord's idea of altering our everyday life in order to change our perspective and realize potential in what is seen as the mundane. When we take a new route to class, we alter our everyday. This allows us to see the beauty in our surroundings, and the beauty in our everyday.

If you are looking to learn more, read de Certeau's chapter on walking in the city from his book "The Practice of Everyday Life." Although it was written in almost 30 years ago, the primary principles are not out of date.

Strand, Will You Marry Me?

For the past handful of years I have had a love affair with the Strand bookstore. Eighteen miles of books means that I spend a lot of time getting lost in there.

When I walk in, the first thing I notice is the aroma of pages. It calls out to me, this smell of paper and ink into which someone had poured out their heart. Old or new, there is nothing like the scent of a book. If it is used, you can get a whiff of the previous owners and imagine them with a cup of green tea in their kitchen, or a dirty water dog in the park, getting lost in the pages. If the book is new, the smell is less musky and more fresh. It is the smell of potential.

Once I inhale deeply, I make my way over to the classics section. It has its own nook in the store, almost like a time capsule. I like to scope it out first, because it tends to have some of the best bargains. Two of my greatest conquests were a copy of The Jungle Books for $3.50 and a compilation of the first two Sherlock Holmes mysteries for $2.95. I almost always find something in this section that I want to add to my collection. Then it’s on to fiction, with stacks that reach up to the ceiling and snake around the back of the first floor.

In the beginning, the sheer volume of volumes can be overwhelming, but I always revert to the same strategy: I find an author with whom I am currently obsessed and then browse the nearby titles. This means looking on neighboring shelves, but it also means spinning around and searching the entire area. More times than not something will grab my attention. I am often too plagued by indecision to make a purchase this way, but it still expands my literary horizons. For instance, it was through gravitating to the Chuck Palahniuk shelf that I saw "Life of Pi" by Yann Martel. A friend had previously recommended it to me, and I had forgotten all about it until the bright orange and blue cover jumped out at me. (I later got a copy, and it was amazing.)

After this point of spinning and discovery, my official mission has ended and I usually wander around the store reading random book jackets for a while. I try to mix it up with a more obscure genre such as books written in German or the very back corner of the basement's science section.

The experience is pleasant in both the heavily crowded areas and the low-traffic areas because the entire store has such a relaxed atmosphere. Honestly, I have sat down on the floor in front of the same narrow wooden bookcase every time I've visited the Strand and just read the descriptions of each book on the lower shelves (I'm not just being ridiculous- the books are different every time). Of course I move my ten-foot spider legs when someone passes, but nobody seems to mind either way. We are all there for the same reason: to be swallowed up.

If you're looking for a yellowed book that has a history, a new book that has never been opened, or a place to sell back your own, the Strand is the place for you. The people are friendly, the prices are low, and the energy is addictive.

Everyday Life Bumming You Out? Blame the Upper Class

Everyday life is boring because people don't fully understand it, and they are spending too much of their lives trying to get out of the ordinary and into the extraordinary. Guy Debord's essay "Perspectives for Conscious Alterations in Everyday Life" offers this opinion, and also puts the majority of the blame on the upper class. (Yes! Finally a win for us plebes.) Don’t let the title scare you. This essay is actually very easy to read, and it will give you some insight into your own activities and views on the world, whether you think you need it or not.

It all started with upper class social thinkers wrongfully believing that everyday life is nothing and therefore that specialized activities are the only way a person can truly live his life. The idea eventually became widespread because of the condescending attitude of these upper class thinkers, who believed that they were outside everyday life, and that everyday life only belonged to the common people, the lower class.

The upper class began to look to only have extraordinary experiences fill their time, and so they alienated themselves from everyday life. This is why they cannot understand and enjoy it. The lower class, on the other hand, is constantly told that their common lives are not special, and so they aim to have the life of the upper class. This alienates them from their own everyday life, and that is why they cannot understand and enjoy it.

Debord's essay goes into much more detail and gives many interesting examples, such as the prison of new technology, the future according to science fiction, and the reinforcement of the above ideas through capitalism. If you have a few minutes, you should check it out. It’s only seven pages long, and it will definitely keep your interest.

Just Another Reason I Don’t Like Zach Braff

My roommate is sitting behind me right now watching The Last Kiss, the Zach Braff movie that came out in 2006. And all I can think about is how awful that movie was, and how much I loved the original. I saw the original version, an Italian film called L’ultimo bacio, a year and a half ago in a course on sex and politics in Italian cinema at Stony Brook University.

The only words I know in Italian, other than various swear words, are the ones that are the same in Spanish. So I don’t speak Italian even remotely, much less the rapid-fire Italian that is in some of the scenes. Normally this would create a problem for me because I hate reading subtitles. I find myself so busy reading about what is going on in the movie that I barely have time to see it, which ruins the viewing experience. But for some reason, that didn’t happen to me when I watched L’ultimo bacio. It probably had something to do with the pacing, or maybe I was just really on top of my game.

Either way, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. The characters are well developed to the point where the viewer even feels a connection to those who aren’t the stereotypically “good” characters. And assuming the subtitles are true to the Italian script, the story was written very well. That, in conjunction with the great acting on the part of the entire cast, made the pivotal scenes of the film even more intense, and it made the lines delivered even more powerful.

After I watched L’ultimo bacio that first time, I was dying to see it again. I later looked for it in Blockbuster, and another video rental place near my home in Queens, but nobody carried it. Finally, after waiting an excruciatingly long time for another student to return it to the university library, I borrowed the DVD. I was afraid that my excitement would make the movie fall below my expectations. But no! L’ultimo bacio came through for me once again. I loved it just as much as the first time, and I honestly think I could watch this movie over and over again.

Rent it! You will not regret it.