11 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(12/02/15 7:16am)
I took the time this past week to twice review the Community Forum on Race hosted by President Brodhead, Provost Kornbluth and Dean Ashby, as well as the subsequent “Demands of Black Voices” follow-up. The battle between students behind the demands and Duke administration has been a total embarrassment and betrayal to the University. Duke students have watched as both President Brodhead and the protestors toss fundamental academic values like facts, peaceful discourse and dissent out the window for politics.
(11/18/15 5:57am)
The Paris terror attacks of November 13, 2015, were an abomination that have left much of the world in tears. Last Friday, teams of ISIS terrorists attacked six different locations throughout the city with suicide bombings and mass shootings, ultimately killing 129 and leaving 352 injured. The Islam-motivated strike has created a ripple effect on policy debates, with the homeland security brain trusts worldwide working around the clock to prevent a repeat of Paris in their own countries. For the United States specifically, two major ramifications have developed as a result of Paris: first, the president’s Syrian refugee proposal is a national security risk and must be ceased immediately; second, ISIS is now the greatest threat to Western civilization, and the U.S. must lead to quickly and decisively thwart the terror network if we wish to prevent repeat attacks.
(10/21/15 5:44am)
As a democratic republic, nothing is more crucial to our governing bodies (national, state and municipal) than the integrity of our electoral process. For our elected officials to truly be representing us, both the candidates and the voters must play by a fair set of rules each election cycle. Over the past ten years, bipartisan efforts in states across the country (from Democrats in Rhode Island to Republicans here in North Carolina) have focused on protecting the voting process by implementing variations of “Voter ID” laws that require state-approved identification in order to vote. In response to those working to secure our elections, an angry army of partisans, race-baiters and preachy academics has sought to vilify these efforts as vote-fixing and racism. The forces behind voter ID, though, should be commended; recent events demonstrate a need for cleaning fraud out of elections, and voter identification is a simple and effective way to honor the integrity of the ballot.
(10/07/15 5:15am)
Since the start of Israeli statehood in 1948, the country has been in constant conflict with its Arab neighbors and the Palestinian population living within and immediately outside her borders. At the conclusion of the Yom Kippur War in 1973 (the fifth time Israel had been invaded in fifteen years), the international community began to look for a diplomatic solution to prevent perpetual war. World powers, specifically those in the West, agreed that any successful proposal would hinge on three key principles: Any agreement would, one, preserve Israeli statehood; two, establish a Palestinian state neighboring Israel; and, three, ensure long term peace in the region for all stakeholders involved. Out of these initial conversations materialized the “Two State Solution”—a call to split Israel using its pre-1967 borders into a Jewish state and a Palestinian state in exchange for an official recognition of Israel’s right to exist by its anti-Semitic, war-hungry neighbors. The Two State Solution has been embraced for over 40 years by our nation’s foreign policy establishment and presidents both blue and red. However, consistent adversarial action by Palestinians and aggression by theocratic neighbors reveal the Two State Solution to be impossible, and as such, it should no longer be treated as a serious diplomatic solution. Israel, as well as the United States, should discontinue trying to make peace with those who don’t believe in Israel’s right to exist, and the U.S. should reaffirm the safety and sovereignty of one state, one Israel.
(09/23/15 6:03am)
A growing isolationist movement across the political spectrum has resulted in, for the first time in a while, more than 50 percent of Americans identifying as “dovish”—defined as those who believe the U.S. should “never or rarely use military force.” This change in attitude likely stems from a few key moments over the past two American presidencies: first, the Iraq war, where our successful invasion failed to uncover significant active weapons of mass destruction that President Bush accused Saddam Hussein of possessing; second, the dovish rhetoric of President Obama, who ascended to the presidency by denouncing the mistakes of his predecessor’s war; and third, a failure of the American establishment (not just politicians) to continually remind the American people of what’s at stake for our security. We should greatly worry about the increased dovish-ness of our fellow patriots, for interventionism throughout the world is the strongest way to ensure American safety at home.
(09/09/15 5:12am)
I hate to look back and identify regrets from my past, but I’d be selling myself short if I never did. In hindsight, one of the dumbest things I’ve ever done was to skip out on the Duke Freshman Convocation in August 2012. For twenty-four years straight, from to 1990 until 2014, convocation was synonymous with one of Duke’s greatest opportunities: the chance to hear Maya Angelou speak. First invited as part of the “Vision for Duke” program, Ms. Angelou returned each year to preach shared sacrifice, hard work and humility to the community’s newest members.
(08/26/15 7:35am)
As Democrats debate the prospect of nominating another Clinton, recent history provides incredible perspective on what I believe is the worst decision made by President Bill Clinton: the disarming of uniformed US military personnel on US military facilities. Implemented early in Clinton’s first term in 1993, the president, through the Department of the Army, disarmed all soldiers and designated military police officers as the sole providers of armed protection on base. Our uniformed men and women, of course, rank as some of the best users of firearms in the American citizenry. They are trained rigorously and are trusted by the nation to use arms in defending our people and values. Why then, according to President Clinton (and Bush and Obama since), should soldiers not be allowed to defend themselves on base?
(08/05/15 8:22am)
We know of four American citizens who lack the freedom to opine on President Obama’s recently announced deal with the Islamic state of Iran: Jason Rezaian, Robert Levinson, Saeed Abedini and Amir Hekmati. Mr. Rezaian is a Washington Post journalist; Mr. Abedini, a Christian pastor and orphanage founder; Mr. Levinson, a CIA contractor; and Mr. Hekmati, a decorated Marine veteran. All four began the negotiations as Iranian prisoners, and their continued imprisonment after the deal is a scarring indictment of our leaders’ misguided moral compasses.
(06/04/15 9:08am)
For more than a year now, President Obama and his negotiating team have been on the hunt for his “Tear down this wall” moment—getting Iran to officially give up pursuit of nuclear weapons. In the interest of keeping the Middle East stable and protecting Israel, preventing Iran from nuclear capabilities is a chief goal for any American leader. However, poor negotiation technique is a bipartisan issue in Washington these days, especially regarding this proposed deal with the ironically named Republic of Iran.
(03/02/15 10:39am)
I’m pleased to announce the Duke IFC has endorsed Keizra Mecklai for DSG President. Keizra’s advocacy experience and established relationships with administrators will be beneficial to both the student body and IFC. She was impressive in her wide range of priorities and ideas, and there is something for everyone to like in her platform. Keira’s track record of successful projects also gives us hope that her best ideas can become reality—which is often a challenge in DSG.
(02/09/15 11:21am)
The recent decision by HDRL to enforce the “30% upperclassmen/10% senior” class distribution for SLG housing is discriminatory, unfair and unjustified. Duke administration’s justification is a correlation of better conduct scores with sections on campus that have a high percentage of seniors. This reasoning is statistically dishonest at worst and misleading at best: correlation does not mean causation. It should be noted that amongst greek organizations, the top four GPAs in Panhel and three of the top four GPAs in IFC belong to organizations that have the lowest percentage of seniors in section.
