Tufts' conservative student newspaper, The Primary Source, published some factual statements about Islam -- quotes from the Qur'an and other sources, during Islam Awareness Week. Now Tufts has found the paper guilty of "harassment" -- apparently for publishing facts about Islam that we aren't supposed to know.
The guy who calls himself "Allahpundit" has the story at Hot Air. And he links to FIRE's Greg Lukianoff:
So does this paint Islam in a nice light? No. Is it one-sided? Yes, but that was kind of the point. The students were responding to what they thought was a one-sided and overly rosy depiction of Islam during Islamic Awareness week. But is it unprotected harassment!? One certainly hopes not, or else “harassment” just became a truly lethal threat to free speech—an “exception” that completely swallows the rule.This is perhaps the most troubling and far-reaching aspect of this case. The Primary Source published a satirical ad filled with factual assertions and because this angered people it was ruled to be unprotected harassment. If what the complaining students wanted to say was that the TPS facts were wrong, then—while this still would not be harassment—that could have been an interesting debate. But instead, in sadly predictable fashion, the students plowed ahead with a harassment claim that, based on the hearing panel’s decision, appeared not even to raise the issue of whether or not the statements in the ad were true, but turned only on how they made people feel. A panel consisting of both faculty and students found the publication guilty in flagrant abuse of what harassment case law and regulations actually say, and demonstrating total ignorance of the principles of a free society. Even in libel law (one of the oldest exceptions to the rule of free speech is that you can be punished for defaming people) truth is rightfully an absolute defense. Here, the fact that TPS printed verifiable information—with citations—was apparently no defense, nor was the fact that the ad concerned contentious issues of dire global importance. Such an anemic conception of free speech should chill anyone who cares about basic rights and democracy itself.
I doubt that the Tufts disciplinary board thought through the full ramifications of their actions. If a Muslim student had published these same statements in an article calling for reform in Islam, would that be harassment? If Tufts wished to be at all consistent (a dubious bet here), it would be.
Read it all, and follow the links at Hot Air and FIRE.
We only whant the sugarcoated truth. It's not Muslims fualt that Islam justifies murder and enslavement. Here lets look at thair wonderful contribution to Architecture.
Now this is what the enforcement thoughtcrime looks like.
Tufts has some very unusual connections, and they bear close investigation. The one I would urge investigative journalists, and the government, to start with, is the Fares Lectureship at Tufts. It is named after its only begetter, a well-known Lebanese middleman, operator, and long-time promoter of Syrian interests, Issam Fares, in 1992, as a way of "encouraging" interest in, and "understanding" of, the Middle East and its issues. The annual Fares Lecture has been delivered by the Great and Good: George Bush, Senior; Colin Powell; Bill Clinton; and others of that well-heeled pocketing-the-fat-fee for nothing but the numinous presence, including this year, the egregious Madeline Albright. It is a way of paying off people, for past favors, for present behavior, and to make sure they remember just how much money is sloshing around and can come their way from Arab interests if they keep any criticism well within bounds.
You show up, you say a few words to the students eager to be in the numinous presence, make sure the right words demonstrating "understanding" for the "Middle East" are uttered, with nothing to displease the likes of Issam Fares, pocket the check, and go home. And everyone is happy. That has been the mixture, for panjandrums in Washington, not only in Medford, Massachusetts, but when they show up to give million-dollar lectures in Kuwait (Bush Senior got his reward from the Al-Sabah rulers of Kuwait for the Gulf War, but for some reason forgot to share his proceeds with wounded veterans of that war), or special gifts for services rendered from other Arab (especially Saudi)interests, that have been a feature of Washington and other western capitals for the last three decades.
Now what can be done to get the attention of the Tufts faculty and administration? Will indignation be enough? Not likely. The beating heart of Tufts, as of all universities today, is the Development Office. And that Development Office pants for more largesse from its biggest donor ever, eBay founder Pierre Omidyar. He has already given Tufts $100 million, no doubt unaware of the Fares lecture business and a good deal more that one might, if given half a chance, enlighten him about. If Pierre Omidyar, whose non-Muslim origins are in Iran, and who is not fond of the Islamic Republic of iran, were to be fully apprised of certain tendencies, including the tendentious farce of "Islam Awareness Week," perhaps tne next 100 million dollars won't be going to a center at Tufts (good god, I can think of many more deserving recipients, that anyone who has fled a Muslim country should be looking into). It's worth a try. Who knows Pierre and Pam Omidyar ? Who wants to bring this little matter described above to their attention, and hope a letter is forthcoming, the kind of letter that will get the attention of the "Tufts"...and the fulsome word that follows, on campuses everywhere, "community."
Yes, the "Tufts Community." The "Harvard Community." The "Princeton Community." "The Columbia Community." No indignation too savage for times like these.
Maybe Al Gore can do another ‘Inconvenient Truth’ movie. Ha Ha.
One of the problems in America is that there is no rational incentive for anybody with brains and a work ethic to become a politician or an academic. So here we are.
...
After reading Hugh’s post, a change. There is a rational incentive. Those government titles are worth money once you’re on the outside. Academic titles can be double dipped. So we get the devious ones. Sigh, late term democracy.
Did I forget to mention Adil Najam, who somehow has transformed or managed to have everyone overlook his supposed area of expertise (google him) and has repackaged himself, for greasy-pole Packard Avenue purposes, as a "Muslim moderate." In fact, anyone who has seen his sly performances at mosques (as the one in Wayland he appeared at a few years ago) knows perfectly well that he is a complete apologist for Islam, with his "I have a theory -- Muslims are the new Jews" and his attempt to prevent any serious discussion of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira. Not to be trusted, one whit, and certainly no worthy guide to Islam, but perhaps those now at Tufts were taken in by his "moderate" pitch and have failed to examine closely what he writes, and what he says. There are all kinds of intelligent people born into Islam who are not sly apologists -- it is they who should be filling the chairs that the Adil Najams of this world so cunningly manage to slip into, without drawing the slightest attention from colleagues who should exercise due diligence. Once these apologists are in place, and have their tenure, then the mask is removed. They should never get there in the first place.
What can we say? A major American university is punishing students for communicating a truth that is important to public policy. It's outrageous, but just another chapter in the infantilization of the college student.
We mustn't hurt the feelings of the young Muslims who might otherwise consider what they are when they give continued loyalty to a predatory belief system. And we mustn't warn the others.
Maybe they would enjoy a picture book!
A shame no academics will do the only worthwhile thing in these circumstances and READ THE DAMNED KORAN.
The continuous intellectual derelection of duty, concerning Islam, by academia is stunning.
They should be ashamed for being so studiously oblivious.
They sound like late-medieval church 'astronomers' who dared not look through a telescope.
And they remain craven weasels who fail to open the "Recitation", since its predatory truths would devour their pet theories.
This is not just a case where the truth about is Islam is not just absolute defense to the claim by Tufts that the students have engaged in harrassment, but the facts the article cite are presumptively established as true by the legal concept of judicial notice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_notice
Judicial notice is a court procedure that allows a court to readily accept facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Everyone of the quotes is easily documented. Robert Spencer is the master of documenting his sources. Each of the facts in the Tufts article which should necessarily disturb the reader are readily indentifiable from Islamic religious sources that cannot be reasonably questioned. Criticism of these students is harrassment of them by Tufts. Tufts should be ashamed of its conduct.
This is not just a case where the truth about is Islam is not just absolute defense to the claim by Tufts that the students have engaged in harrassment, but the facts the article cite are presumptively established as true by the legal concept of judicial notice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_notice
Judicial notice is a court procedure that allows a court to readily accept facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Everyone of the quotes is easily documented. Robert Spencer is the master of documenting his sources. Each of the facts in the Tufts article which should necessarily disturb the reader are readily indentifiable from Islamic religious sources that cannot be reasonably questioned. Criticism of these students is harrassment of them by Tufts. Tufts should be ashamed of its conduct.
This is not just a case where the truth about is Islam is not just absolute defense to the claim by Tufts that the students have engaged in harrassment, but the facts the article cite are presumptively established as true by the legal concept of judicial notice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_notice
Judicial notice is a court procedure that allows a court to readily accept facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Everyone of the quotes is easily documented. Robert Spencer is the master of documenting his sources. Each of the facts in the Tufts article which should necessarily disturb the reader are readily indentifiable from Islamic religious sources that cannot be reasonably questioned. Criticism of these students is harrassment of them by Tufts. Tufts should be ashamed of its conduct.
From the Hot Air link: "If all this seems familiar, it’s because it’s exactly what happened on YouTube to our “First, They Came” video (now posted at QubeTV) and to Nick Gisburne, the British atheist who saw his account deleted (twice) for the sin of quoting — simply quoting — incendiary passages from the Koran after having quoted incendiary passages from the Bible in previous videos without reprimand."
This is going to get real interesting, real fast - the notion that one could be accused of hate speech or harassment for merely quoting from the Koran or the hadith, even without comment. Who is being harassed exactly by these quotes? If anything, one would assume that non-Muslims might complain about being harassed by the actual contents of these hateful texts. But no! On the contrary, it is Muslims who complain of being harassed when non-Muslims quote, even without any comment whatsoever, from Muslim holy texts! Wow! How bizarre is that! Isn't that a tacit acknowledgement on the part of Muslims that there is indeed something quite wrong with their own religious texts?
"...the notion that one could be accused of hate speech or harassment for merely quoting from the Koran or the hadith, even without comment. Who is being harassed exactly by these quotes? If anything, one would assume that non-Muslims might complain about being harassed by the actual contents of these hateful texts. But no! On the contrary, it is Muslims who complain of being harassed when non-Muslims quote, even without any comment whatsoever, from Muslim holy texts! Wow! How bizarre is that! Isn't that a tacit acknowledgement on the part of Muslims that there is indeed something quite wrong with their own religious texts?"
-- from a posting above
But this is exactly the experience of Robert Spencer. He quotes the Islamic texts. He quotes Qur'an, Hadith (the "authentic" Hadith from the most authoritative muhaddithin), the Sira. He quotes accurately. He simply provides the texts. And this drives his Muslim critics wild with fury. How dare he quote, verbatim, the very same texts that they quote every day, but with a different intent? They are bent on uncritical mental submission, on blind obedience. He, Spencer, is bent only on pointing out the passages which, so frequently encountered in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, are uncritically submitted to, blindly obeyed by, so many Muslims. And this, for them, is intolerable.
"And this, for them, is intolerable."
It is so nonsensical that the only inference I can draw from it is that Muslims do not want infidels to know what Islam actually teaches. By calling it harassment for infidels to quote their texts they apparently hope to preempt infidel discussion of what Islam actually has in store for them. Guess you can't blame them for using every ruse at their disposal to conquer the infidel. It is inexcusable though for other infidels to accuse fellow infidels of harassment when they quote these sources, when they ought instead to simply be asking Muslims to explain the meaning of these texts. I hope that our young college students are smart enough not to be silenced this way. If they want to make a point, they could claim harassment the next time a professor teaches them about certain unpleasant, factual aspects of American history - slavery, wiping out the Indians, using the atomic bomb etc.
How do the Left manage to get in charge of everything public, even when the electorate vote for right wing parties.
It's like the greens, you get their policies, whether you vote for them or not.
How did this come about?
Very, very shameful, this Tufts debacle in favor of the Islamists. I e-mailed the cowardly PC President of Tufts expressing that.
Just goes to show what a wasteland our colleges and universities are becoming. No honest debate is permitted and political correctness rules the day.
Yeah, that "Barbara Grossman" at Tufts, Ringleader of Political Correctness in favor of the Islamists, (and she's Jewish!) is truly... gross. What a total and complete PC Idiot.