High Powered Weapons Can Sneak By Metal Detectors

This just in! The United States Military has developed some new weapons that can get by metal detectors, and even evade strip searches of detained soldiers. The idea was born of researchers looking to give allied personnel an advantage if apprehended by the enemy...

Drive By Shooting Caught On Tape

...sweet...

Student Gets Into College With Fake I.D.

How in the world did they not catch this guy during the physical?



HAHAHHAHAHA!!

Joe Rogan In Another MMA vs. Boxing Argument

HA! I'm not posting this to bring up more of the MMA vs. Boxing crap, because everyone who knows what they're talking about knows that they're simply two different sports, but I am posting it because I think Joe Rogan is a funny guy. There are a lot of guys in MMA, some that I train with, who hate Rogan. I think he's great. He owns everyone conversation that I've seen him in. I saw him out near L.A. once and I hope he comes out east some time. Anyway, here's the vid:

UFC 76: Knockout

Knockout? HAHAHAH!!! Oh, that was serious...ok.

No, I'm not at all disappointed by the UFC 76 card. It offered many good fights, including the Sanchez vs. Fitch fight (which my coach Brian thinks Sanchez won...I disagree), the amazing performance put on by Forrest Griffin on Shogun to get the tap with seconds left in the fight, and the Tyson Griffin fight.

Although most people, including myself, would much rather have seen finishes instead of decisions, I would have to say that I agreed with the decisions that were handed out...although not entirely.

Specifically, Chuck vs. Jardine. I was rooting for Chuck the entire way, and I was furious when he was outclassed by Jardine. The only thing that could have put even more embarrassment on this fight was a decision win for Chuck. We're lucky that that didn't happen, but a split decision is too close. The only thing that we learned from that fight (if it hadn't already been painfully obvious from other fights) was the validity with which Joe Rogan constantly spoke about the terrible judging in the UFC by the NSAC, and other commissions. Chuck clearly lost that fight. It was obvious to everyone except, apparently, Chuck and the idiot judge who gave him the fight. Chuck, however, should be excused from having thought that he had a chance at legitimately (meaning not by bad judging) winning a decision because he was floored in the second round and pretty much beat up the other rounds...not to say that Jardine didn't receive his bumps and bruises, he certainly did; I'm just saying that Chuck was far too one dimensional for this fight, and the beating he took should excuse him from poor judgement. Anyway, a loss to Keith Jardine is terribly embarrassing for Chuck, and for myself as a fan of MMA.

Embarrassment aside, this loss for Chuck is made even worse when you consider the dream match of him vs. Wanderlei Silva. Fans have wondered for years when this would happen. The reason fans have been chomping at the bit to see these two knock heads is because they were widely considered the top two 205 pounders in the world. They have exciting styles, amazing records, and, at the top of their game, would make anyone drool from the hardcore MMA fan right down to the idiot who didn't know what he was paying for until he saw the highlight reels of the two the night of the fight after the gladiator suited up.

Look at the situation now: Wandy's last two fights involve him loosing by brutal knockout. Chuck last two fights involve him loosing by knockout in the first round, and then loosing a clear cut decision (even if the judges incorrectly disagree) to someone who everyone was hoping, and thought he should run right through. Exactly how is this a dream match now?

Anyway, I'll likely be upset over the Chuck/Jardine fight for a long time...I'm still not over the GSP/Serra fight.

All that aside, Forrest Griffin fought a great fight. Nothing can take that away from him. It cannot go unsaid, however, that Shogun did not fight like the Shogun we've all come to know and love. There has been much speculation as to why Pride fighters coming into the UFC have done so poorly, the most popular of which seems to be the steroid issue (they don't test, to the best of my knowledge, in Japan). I can't deny that this argument is supported by Shogun's apparent smaller stature (although, next to Griffin who is experience in weight cutting [something Pride fighters seem to be less accustomed to], this at least can be understood), "softness," and lack of aggression. I mean, come on! The only aggressive move Shogun made the entire night was with the elbow that opened a canyon on Griffin's forehead. The next best thing was an array of weak takedown attempts. Bleh.

It must also be mentioned that Shogun just got married...like a month ago. I don't know about you, but marriage is something that I'd think would distract me from my upcoming fight. Say what you want to about his decision to plan a marriage so close to an upcoming fight, but you'd be challenged to give a valid argument stating that it had nothing to do with his atypical performance.

I must say again, that Griffin looked dead on. As we've seen with Serra/GSP, Chuck/Jardine, Congo/CroCop, the better fighter doesn't always win. I wouldn't put a Griffin win over Shogun in such a drastic category as these other fights that I've mentioned, but it can't be denied: For at least one night, Forrest Griffin proved to be the better fighter of Mauricio Shogun Rua.

Anyway, I could ramble on forever...congrats to the winners, and I hope the losers come back stronger. There isn't anyone on that card that I don't want to see fight again. Thanks to the UFC for giving us a boat load of top-tier fights in the last month, and keep 'em coming!

SUNY New Paltz Student Help Desk

It's not too often that anybody gets good press (yes, I've heard that there's no such thing as bad press), so I thought that I would use my own little news network to give some good press to an office that I think deserves it.

At school today, I ran into a problem with my computer not booting up. I like to think of myself as pretty savvy when it comes to my computer, but this was a problem that I couldn't handle. Basically, the problem was that a minor, yet absolutely necessary boot file went MIA, and Windows couldn't load. Instead, it simply attempted to load, restarted, attempted to load, restarted... I went to the help desk and not only did they fix the problem, but immediately and for free. The people there appeared to be students, were friendly, and knew their stuff. Bravo.

This is in stark contrast to what I experienced at Plattsburgh, but I'd rather not go into that because right now I'm in a relatively good mood and it was 3 or 4 years ago now. So, many thanks to the SUNY New Paltz Student Help Desk. Huzzah!

The Most Brutal 10 Finger of All Time

This is Dan Miller. While at Planet Jiu-Jitsu, he learned and mastered the move while he was with Rob Kahn. See definition of "mastering the guillotine" by clicking below.


The Most Brutal Guillotine Choke in MMA
Uploaded by Bulletproof2

Sprint Nextel to Introduce the Airave

Here it comes! Although the story does point out that this technology doesn't work with Nextel phones, because they use the iDEN technology, this is a step in the right direction. Given that this unit will NOT work with iDEN phones, I'm going to guess that SprintNextel will never introduce a unit that does work on iDENs.

The reason I say this is because Motorola has been making the hybrid phones for Sprint. The hybrid uses CDMA (I think) technology for regular phone calls and then the iDEN network for the walkie talkie thingie. There will likely be no new pure iDEN phones made. Since all of Sprint's phones will eventually be on the CDMA network, there's no real investments to make on the iDEN side.

What does this mean for the pure Nextel user? Well nothing changes for you, but if you want to take advantage of this product, simply switch over to the Sprint network (no termination fee) and get yourself a typical CDMA phone (or the hybrid). You'll likely have to start a brand new contract with Sprint, but that may not be a problem for you. Taking advantage of this will give you crystal clear, unlimited usage at home. The only thing you'll need to worry about is Sprint's cellular coverage outside of your home, which they're claiming will be improved through less usage on their network (people using the Airave are talking over the internet, not Sprint's cell tower googlies). I don't mean to imply that I think that's just a line of bull, but I certainly couldn't validate or refute that claim. I do remember Carol being unhappy with her coverage under Sprint, but part of that had to do with a lack of coverage at home, which with the Airave, would no longer be an issue (she's with Verizon now).

I think for me, I'm still going to wait until my contract expires with Nextel and switch over to Verizon. I'm hoping and guessing that Verizon will have their own version of this product by then (July '08). I'm actually surprised that they haven't jumped on T-Mobile's idea with their HotSpot At Home sooner than Sprint did. However, Sprint may have an even larger interest in this type of product because they may soon own Vonage, which uses the same technology as the Airave and the HotSpot hoosie...anyway, read the article below.

---

Sprint Nextel to Introduce the Airave
Email this Story

Sep 17, 12:57 AM (ET)

By DAVID TWIDDY

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - One of the big complaints lodged against wireless phone companies is poor signal quality inside buildings, especially homes.

Sprint Nextel Corp. (S) is trying to overcome that obstacle with a device that boosts wireless signals indoors and directs the calls over the Internet.

The Airave, which Sprint will begin selling Monday in its stores in parts of Denver and Indianapolis, increases cell reception over an area of about 5,000 square feet and can handle up to three calls at once. It hooks into the customer's existing broadband connection, sending unlimited calls through the Internet instead of over Sprint's wireless network.

Once the customer leaves the device's range, calls automatically switch back to the wireless network.

The Airave retails for $49.99, although Sprint will offer initial rebates to lower the price, and users pay a monthly charge of $15 for individuals and $30 for families. Sprint, based in Reston, Va., with operational headquarters in Overland Park, Kan., plans to expand sales of the devices to the rest of the two initial test markets by the end of the year and begin rolling it out nationally next year.

It's the second such in-home service coming out this year, following the June release of a system offered by Deutsche Telekom AG' (DT)s T-Mobile USA that sends calls through a Wi-Fi router. That system requires specially equipped phones, while Airave works with any Sprint cellular phone.

It does not work with Nextel-branded phones, the company said.

Ajit Bhatia, director of product management for Sprint Nextel, said the Airave solves call quality problems for subscribers, a key reason they give when dropping service.

"Customer satisfaction is directly correlated with coverage satisfaction," Bhatia said.

Besides saving the customer from using their wireless minutes, the device also will reduce the amount of traffic on the mobile network, potentially improving signal quality in the immediate area and reducing the amount of new cell towers and other infrastructure Sprint will have to build to handle future growth.

"This is a very cost-effective way for us to support additional traffic," Bhatia said.

Bhatia said the company also is looking at a version of the Airave for small businesses that could handle a dozen or more calls at once.

Allen Nogee, principal analyst at Scottsdale, Ariz.-based research firm In-Stat, said so-called femtocell technology has been on the drawing boards of wireless carriers in the U.S. and Europe for years. He estimated demand for the devices will be slow, growing to only 21.5 million units a year by 2011.

"It's a niche technology," Nogee said.

But he added that such devices could become popular in densely populated areas where wireless signals are a problem and it's more expensive for carriers to build cell sites.

Mark Bauerlein: Indoctrination in the Classroom

I want to say, first, that by posting this I am NOT claiming that any of my current professors are of such fabric. I will say, however, that I have had professors in the past who are and I know that more exist than I have experienced.

My comments on the subject: Wow. This is perhaps the most well written essay I've ever read on the topic. Thank you, Mark Bauerlein.

---

Return to the Article

September 12, 2007

Indoctrination in the Classroom

By Mark Bauerlein

"Reclaim Your Rights as a Liberal Educator." That's the title of a short essay in this month's Academe, organ of the American Association of University Professors. The phrase has all the imagination of a slogan unfurled at countless marches, but what it lacks in wit it makes up for in fortitude of the uniquely academic kind. Author Julie Kilmer, women's studies and religion professor at Olivet College, sounds the standard "they're-out-to-get-us" call and rallies her brethren to take back the classroom. We have, too, a vicious aggressor: conservative student groups that confront professors of perceived liberal bias, and they form a national network out to undermine the faculty, who come off as vulnerable and innocent professionals. While the professors uphold "freedom of inquiry to examine the worth of controversial ideas" and "teach college students to use analytical thinking in the development of new ideas," groups such as Students for Academic Freedom do their best to subvert the process. Worst of all, they "encourage students to bring complaints against faculty to administrators." To Kilmer, they are no better than spies, and they prompt her to wonder, "Each time a student is resistant to feminist theories and ideas, should I ask if he or she has been placed in my class to question my teaching? How is my teaching affected if I enter the classroom each day asking, 'Is today the day I will be called to the president's office?"

That's the result of conservative student activism, and there is much to note in the panicky chill that descends upon this feminist professor and so many others. That they should so exaggerate the power of students, assume the role of victim, and concoct scenarios of interrogation without offering the slightest factual evidence or acknowledging the special protections of professorial life bespeaks an anxiety deeply held. Such disproportionate responses suggest a psyche in action, the mindset of people who've nursed resentments for many years within the artificial havens of one-party departments, tenure, and a 30-week work year. (Do not believe academics when they talk about summer research work. Outside the scientists, most of them are idle or labor on books and articles that they don't have to write and that less than 50 people will read.)

With such vast disparities between the threat professors envision and the actual security they enjoy, one would think that more people would recognize the problem of ideological bias on campus. But they don't, and the reason lies in a campus advent that has nothing to do with psychology. Instead, it's a sweeping sleight-of-hand that liberal professors have executed in their discipline. We see it operating in this very essay in Academe, and in the sentences I just quoted. Did you spot it? Professor Kilmer worries that a student who "is resistant to feminist theories and ideas" may sit in her class as a "plant," someone to incriminate her and send her upstairs for punishment. That's how she interprets uncongenial students, and it's an astounding conversion. In her class, any student who contests feminist notions falls under a cloud of suspicion. The ordinary run of skeptics, obstructionists, gadflies, wiseacres, and sulkers that show up in almost every undergraduate classroom is recast as an ideological cadre. If a student in a marketing class were to dispute the morality of the whole endeavor, no doubt liberal professors would salute him as a noble dissenter. But when he criticizes feminism, he violates a trust. He doesn't just pose intellectual disagreement. He transgresses classroom protocol.

Behold the transformation. An ideology has become a measure of responsibility. A partisan belief is professional etiquette. A controversial outlook is an academic norm. Political bias suffuses the principles of scattered disciplines. Advocacy stands as normal and proper pedagogy. That's the sleight-of-hand, and it activates in far too many decisions in curriculum, grading, hiring, and promotion. I remember a committee meeting to discuss hiring a 19th-century literature specialist when one person announced, "We can only consider people who do race." For her, "doing race" wasn't a political or ideological preference. It was a disciplinary prerequisite.

The reason professors can declare such biases so blithely is precisely because they have acquired a disciplinary sheen, the mantle of professional criteria. In the subsequent essay in Academe, "Impassioned Teaching," women's studies professor Pamela L. Caughie of Loyola University (Chicago) asserts, "In teaching students its [feminism's] history, its forms, and its impact, I am teaching them to think and write as feminists." So much for the vaunted critical thinking professors prize, and the injunction that they question orthodoxy and convention. Caughie aims to produce versions of herself. And it's more than an ego trip - it's a professional duty: "I feel I am doing my job well when students become practitioners of feminist analysis and committed to feminist politics".

We end up with indoctrination passing as proper teaching. When Kilmer states, "What happens to the feminist classroom when students challenge feminist principle?" we might respond, "An energetic discussion follows." But for Kilmer, it means disruption and intimidation. By her own admission, she can no longer distinguish honest disagreement from insubordinate conduct. That's what happens when disciplines admit ideology into their grounds. Accept the ideology and you're sure to advance. You're okay. Decline it, and you're not okay. You're not only wrong - you're illegitimate.

Mark Baulerlein is a Professor of English at Emory University and former Director of Research and Analysis at the National Endowment for the Arts

Minding the Campus

Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/teaching_as_indoctrination.html at September 17, 2007 - 09:42:02 AM CDT

Tito Resigns With The UFC

See the original article here.

---

Man, if this guy doesn't seem to be the most arrogant person in the world. He's not at the top of the food chain anymore. I don't care if I ever see him fight again.

Sorry Tito, but your attitude, or the public version of who you are just rubs me the wrong way. I don't think your fights are exciting. I'm not a fan of Rashad Evans; I was pulling for you in that fight. However, it came out a draw because you lost a point for grabbing the fence. Even if you hadn't lost that fight, you didn't finish him. Tito Ortiz should have obliterated Rashad Evans.

Anyway, I wish you the best. I hope the fights you've signed up for make me change my mind about you...and please, please, please, put away Rashad Evans.

---

Tito Thinking In the Long-term

By Holli Yargo Hearne

He’s known for agitating t-shirts such as “Guy Metzger Is My Bitch” which set off the three-fight war between him and Ken Shamrock. Tito Ortiz is not just a celebrity athlete; he is a mixed martial arts icon and, frankly, a UFC money maker. Ortiz is largely responsible for packing the houses of many 2006 and 2007 UFC events and is a household name to even the most casual MMA fan.

Now, with the last fight of his current UFC contract looming in the near future, the Huntington Beach Bad Boy is looking to the future, including a rematch with Rashad Evans, the smaller light heavyweight who fought the former champion to a draw at UFC 73. Ortiz has made no secret that he feels Evans stands between him and another shot at the LHW belt. He’s also made no secret of his feelings about Dana White, president and figurehead of the UFC; the two are not exactly exchanging greeting cards for holidays.

I recently had the chance to talk with Tito Ortiz about Evans, White, the t-shirts, and the future.

Holli Hearne: Tito, this is Holli Hearne. First of all, I don’t know how controversial this is for you, but I wanted to start with the boxing match between you and Dana (White) and…

Tito: That’s, uh, that was pretty much the Dana White show that was on Spike TV. When it came about, when I did my contract, me and Dana actually we did a match of boxing. We sparred each other all the time so…And then all the sudden there was the possibility of it being on Spike TV and it being on MMA.tv where it would be pay per view or so forth. You know, I’m a smart business man and when I first talked to him he said, “Yeah, we’ll do everything 50/50” because at first it was just going on DVD. And then all of a sudden there was a chance of putting it on Spike and me and Dana getting paid and so forth.

I just wanted 50% of the revenue or whatever thing they said was going to be brought in from the show where we were going to be boxing each other. And he said, “No, no, no, we can’t do that. We’re not going to be able to give you what you want.” I was like, you know what, I don’t want to do it then. So, the part on the show on Spike of me no-showing, that was just him not wanting me to get over on anything. He was just going to treat me as a fighter and no more than that. And you know that’s one of the reasons why I pulled out because there was no contract, there was no bout agreement, there was no contract saying where the money was going and I’m a smart guy, I’m not going to sit there and trust them because I didn’t want to be taken advantage of.

That makes sense. What do you think the impact would have been on UFC and Zuffa if that fight would have actually happened?

If that would have actually happened, I would take Dana serious and knocked him unconscious. But it’s fine. It’s fine the way it happened and you know I’m going on with my career…

OK so moving on to Rashad Evans, the draw. Were you satisfied with the draw after losing a point?

You know I wasn’t satisfied with a draw. I still thought I won. You know, the first round I dominated completely. The second round I dominated completely but I had a point taken away. The third round we both got a take down so that’s still a draw round so I think I won the first round and should have won the split decision.

Even with the point taken away, I still thought I won. But you know, Rashad just got lucky. He got saved by a point being taken away and a draw became a loss to him.

What are you doing to prepare for the rematch?

Pretty much just the same thing. I’ll keep doing the same stuff and I’ll just train a little harder. You know right now I’ve had some back injuries since after the fight. I have another couple of weeks of physical therapy and after that’s done I’ll start training for the fight itself and get ready for it and do the same stuff I did for the last fight.

Was he what you expected when you fought him or was he a better fighter than you expected or…

He was the fighter I expected, the same fighter that I watched on TV. He was a little bit better with how fast he was than what I expected. His strength was a lot less than what I expected. He was not strong. But he’s just a smaller guy. To me, he’s really a 185 pounder fighting at 205. He went from heavyweight to 205 now I think he should go down to 185. But after I beat him it will just solidify my first win.

To my understanding, this rematch is going to be the last fight on your contract. What do you anticipate happening after that contract is over?

I’ve actually taken a step, since me and Dana really don’t have a good working relationship, I’ve gone a step over him. I’m going straight to Lorenzo Fertitta, the owner of UFC and I’ll speak with him. He’s a very smart businessman and he looks out for my best interest and I’m excited too.

I’ll be re-signing with the UFC and they gave me what I want. I know a lot of other companies that are asking about me and I can’t count how many phone calls I’ve said “I can’t talk to you guys anymore,” because it’s against my contract. I’ve got guys literally who have called me and they’ve said, “Is this Tito?” And I’ve said, “Yes.” And they’ll say, “This is so and so.” And I’ll have to stop them right there and tell them, “Oh, let me stop you there. I can’t talk to you no more.”

It’s just one of those things. I think if you look at the history of Ultimate Fighting Championship, and you look at a person or a fighter who’s made more money for the company than any other fighter in the world, my name’s going to be right on top of all those names, way past Liddell, way past Couture because I’ve had a huge draw and a huge fan base that still support me 100%, win, lose, or draw.

You pretty much hold a record for ticket sales as far as pay per view shows…

Yeah, for sure. I mean, even for ticket sales for the fights at the gate. We’ve sold out almost everyone one of the houses that I’ve ever fought in. It just shows how powerful my fans are, how much support they give me and how much I love them.

How much of the kind of mean t-shirts are marketing for you?

Well, you know, it’s all marketing. It’s all smart, intelligent marketing that’s been through my whole career. The t-shirts get into the guys heads a little bit and make my fans want to support me more. It’s just one of those things that I see as a marketing tool that I’ve used really well and I will continue to use it. It’s just being a smart PR person. I learned a lot from other guys and I’m going to continue doing what I’m doing.

I think they’re funny.

Ah, well, thank you much. You know, some of them mean a lot to me. You know, I lot of them I get are for the troops and so forth. But I just find a happy medium between all of them.

Moving on to maybe some general questions. What do you feel about the popularity of MMA right now? Where do you see it going?

I think it’s just starting to be recognized as one of the largest sports in the world. It’s grown so fast, faster than NASCAR. It’s really one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Fans are really educated and getting more educated on the sport. We’re selling out tickets at arenas and it shows that this sport is finally almost where it needs to be. In another year or two and we’ll be right where we need to be. You know when Tito Ortiz is a household name, you know this sport has really gone far.

For you personally, what are your ultimate MMA goals?

Of course, my number one goal is to win my world championship back. I want to be competing for another 3 or 4 more years and I want to make sure I make the best of it for next 3 or 4 years. That’s my first goal is to become world champion once again.

What do you feel like was your greatest moment in MMA and why?

You know my greatest moment, I would have to say, is when I beat Wanderlei Silva for the light heavyweight belt. I look back on that and there was a lot of hard work that happened really, really quick. I was a champion within a year and a half and it’s just one of those things that I worked really, really worked hard to get where I am. I had the world championship belt around my waist and I realized that with hard work and dedication and if I never stop believing in my dreams that you can achieve anything.

What would you say was your worst moment?

My worst moment must have been when I fought Randy Couture. When I lost to him, I lost my title to him. I’d say that was my worst moment. You know that really hurts my heart. If people understood how hard I train and how serious I take my job. I’m working 8 hours a day, six days a week and I’m really putting my butt on the line so when I come out with a loss, I feel like I failed all of my fans. It really hurts you. But I pick up my stuff and continue on with my life and continue competing and never let anything hold me back.

Would you say that Couture was your toughest opponent?

I wouldn’t say my toughest. I think Liddell. It’s a mismatch between me and him just because we trained with each other. We know how each other fight.

Finally, tell me about Punishment Athletics.

They’re my clothes company that I built back in ’91. It’s been doing really, really well cornering the market, thanks to my fans, of course. My next step is to go out of the box of just mixed martial arts and kind of going on to making jeans and making fitted shirts and button-up shirts, stuff people would wear out to a night club or a nice dinner and so forth. I think that’s what I want to do.

Excellent. Well, Tito, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it.

No problem at all, man, I thank you very much. I appreciate it.