rants of the unitedXfront

2007-11-26T11:32:00.001-08:00

http://www.merip.org/mero/interventions/silverstein_tetreault_interv.htm

templates

2007-11-19T11:20:00.000-08:00

3. When I first thought about why young Muslims commit terrorist attacks in the name of jihad, I assumed it was because their religion told them to. Now, however, having learned of the oppression they face in Europe, I’ve come to the conclusion that they commit terrorist attacks as acts of rebellion against the exploitive state and use "jihad" to justify the violence under "allah".
1. Although it is often said that Islam is a violent religion and culture, I argue that the violence exibited is really provoked. [Disagree]

Muslim Assimilation

2007-11-02T11:36:00.000-07:00

Giry, Stéphanie. France and Its Muslims http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=22049793&site=ehost-live

This article describes the current rise of terrorism and jihadist mentality amoung Muslims in Europe. Giry also introduces the idea that Europe, namely France, with its stern integration policies are producing homegrown Muslim terrorists. In my paper, Europe's lack of tolerance for cultural identity will serve as the focal point as to why there is a significantly larger occurance of jihadism in Europe than there is in the United States.

more sources

2007-10-31T11:37:00.000-07:00

Europe's "Terrible Transformation"
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=25539757&site=ehost-live

Religious Diversity and American Religious History

Britannica Encyclopdeia of world religions

i just had me an apostrophe

2007-10-29T11:10:00.000-07:00

refined topic- why is there a higher occurrence of jihadism in Europe than there is in America?

primary sources- scholarly articles, possibly an interview with an expert

i must be edumacated!

2007-10-26T11:02:00.000-07:00

1) so far I've read about how Muslims have had a hard time in France because of the way french society views them and itself. I've learned that the french are a very homogeneous and homogenizing society, in that they believe that once you move into France you must leave your old culture behind and assimilate into french society. The French believe that holding onto their old culture is detrimental to french unity. To the french, religion also carries a negative connotation, they believe it is a divisive subject. This collective french mentality is deeply ingrained in the republic's laws; one of which is laïcité. Laïcité is the French state's aggressive official secularism. But the real cause for muslim youths turning to crime and violence has less to do with religion and more to do with socioeconomic issues.

2) i want to learn what Muslims think the problem is, and why muslims don't use the government to fight the social and economic injustice, and opt instead for violence and crime as a form of protest.

artikles

2007-10-24T12:02:00.000-07:00

Europe and its Muslims
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&hid=116&sid=090ac895-717a-4d07-b919-cf229480fafb%40sessionmgr109

France and its Muslims
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=22049793&site=ehost-live

The French Path To Jihad
http://proxy.elmhurst.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=22761798&site=ehost-live

NEW TOPIC

2007-10-19T11:39:00.000-07:00

topic-Muslims in Europe/Development of Jihadists

purpose- compare: US's V.S. France's treatment of Muslims, convince: Islamic violence isn't due to a violent religion but is rather provoked, illistrate: how Muslims are traeated in Europe

audience- Americans, Political Science and Sociology Majors/Teachers

Q's to be A'd

2007-10-17T11:33:00.000-07:00

is the U.S. Government's account of what really happened supported by the evidence?

is it possible and probable that the U.S. Government had anything to do with the 9/11 Attacks?

what did the government stand to gain from staging or allowing the attacks to happen?

topic Exploration

2007-10-17T11:20:00.000-07:00

Part I: Exploration
1. Identify the issue or problem that you plan to focus on in your research project.

wheather or not there is some truth behind the 9/11 conspiracy that the united states government had a hand in planning or allowing the attacks to happen for the purpose of prompting a U.S. responce.
2. What is your personal connection to and interest in this topic?

i have always been an advocater of justice and believe americans deserve to know the truth
3. What opinions do you already hold about this topic?

i believe it is very possible for the government to have staged these attacks but i think it is unlikely they would have
4. What knowledge do you already have about this topic?

well i know the governments official account of the events and i know a few questions that that account has yet to answer
5. What are your main questions about this topic? What are you most curious about?

wheather or not the government had a hand in the attacks and if they have nothing to hide why is soo much kept secret
6. Within what scholarly discipline (such as history, biology, psychology) do you expect to do most of your research? How does this discipline approach or study this topic?
7. How could you research this topic outside the library (for example, through interviews
and/or observations)?

i'm going to do most of my research by reading articles of other authors who have raised questions and by reading the U.S. Government's account of the events

Synthesis Statement

2007-09-21T12:01:00.000-07:00

Does technology have a truly beneficial implication in education? The authors of the article "Video Games and the Future of Learning" certainly believe so. They claim that video games help in the development of knowledge by offering a virtual platform in which players learn by doing. Richard Ohmann, however, believes that computers should have no role in the classroom as they are a distraction and just make it easier to plagiarize.

out of the dark

2007-09-21T10:05:00.000-07:00

The biggest innovations to effect the way we live today came about as a result of the industrial revolution. Business Week describes the makings of a new serge of innovations to effect the education system in his article "Wired Schools". Business Week is right to call this new approach to teaching a revolution, as it is evident that it has the potential to antiquate traditional teaching methods by introducing a more efficient and effective technological method. Confirmation of this can be seen in the Union City, NJ school district that went from being on the verge of state occupation to have the highest test scores of any New Jersey city. Richard Ohmann disputes this by stating that "Thirty percent of college courses had websites a year ago, and sixty percent used e-mail... but only fourteen percent of the administrators held that 'technology has improved instruction on my campus' ". But as I see it, polls don't tell the whole story and aren't reliable enough to base decisions on. Statistics of improvements, however, like the ones we see in Union City, are reliable. He goes on to say that making computers accessible to students is to expensive and does more harm than good; as students have more opportunity to use computer for frivolous uses. This is a valid point but many schools have prevented this by using firewalls to block out websites that have no academic worth. Obmann claims that students using the internet during class won't be paying attention to the teacher or the lecture. Furthermore Obmann fears that computers will facilitate cheating by making it easy to plagiarize assignments. I don’t think it would be hard for a teacher to stop the students from being online when trying to teach if she makes the students turn off their computers when they are not necessary. And as far as plagiarism goes, technology has made it easy to spot plagiarized work through the use of search engines. I think its high time people like Ohmann step out of the dark ages and, although its scary, step into the light of innovation.

fast food natioon

2007-09-12T10:32:00.000-07:00

1) In “Don’t Blame the Eater”, David Zinczenko states “Complicating the lack of alternatives is the lack of information about what, exactly we are consuming.” David is right in saying that there is a lack of knowledge of the nutritional value of fast food. However, the consumers’ ignorance isn’t by any means through the efforts of the company. It is the responsibility of the consumer to make informed decisions. Moreover, if anyone should want to know the nutritional facts, one needs look no further than the restaurant’s website. All fast food chains display the nutritional facts to all the food they serve on their websites in an easy-to-use, interactive platform. Once one has made the informed decision that fatty fast food is not what one wants to consume, it is time to look for healthier options. Fast food companies such as Subway, Panera Bread, and Wendy’s have all developed “healthy choice” menus. Americans need to stop blaming corporations for their irresponsibility and realize that there is no shortage of convenient, healthy food.
2) Fast food companies, much like cigarette and alcohol companies, are merchants of death that sell products that are unhealthy for their customers. I agree David Zinczenko in that the fast food the companies sell directly cause the childhood obesity that plagues our country. However, i don't believe that it's right to sue them for making our children fat. That is like sueing an alcohol company for causing someone to drive drunk. Although, the companies food causes obesity, it is the responsibility of the parents to teach thier children to make healthy eating decisions.

They = Republicans

2007-09-07T10:22:00.000-07:00

http://somepeoplesay.paco.org/?cat=7

This blog is a rant from Bill Maher where he compares President Bush to other presidents who have been described as being the worst. Bill talks about how Republicans have taken to comparing Bush to Harry Truman. Bill states that it not a fair comparison because Truman didn't start WWII and Truman didn't lose WWII.

I don't see any other president as being on a level as low as Bush. Sure other presidents have lied to the American people, but none of those lies have resulted in such a disastrous war. Not only did Bush get us in this mess but he, with his stubborn ignorance, refuses to end it. WE'VE ALREADY LOST THIS WAR, it's just not over because Bush prolongs it with troop surges. At some point you say "i've buried myself too deep" and throw in the towel but instead Bush decides (as a decider would) to send more of America's sons to die.