Jim Gregory is the Director of Media Relations at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, but if that gig doesn’t work out, he really ought to try standup comedy. In defending the university and this nakedly propagandistic course, Gregory says: “Carolina offers academic courses to challenge students — not to advocate one viewpoint over another.”
UNC doesn’t “advocate one viewpoint over another”? Really? Then where is the counterpart course to this one, in which students read accounts by 9/11 victims and the relatives of those who were killed. What courses does UNC offer about the Islamic doctrine of jihad, and the contemporary global jihad? What courses does UNC offer about Sharia and dhimmitude, in which students read the works of Bat Ye’or? What courses does UNC offer about the early origins of Islam, in which students read Alphonse Mingana and Christoph Luxenberg?
The reality is that UNC, like most other universities today, does nothing but advocate one viewpoint over another. Dissenting voices are not welcome. But here’s a chance for Jim Gregory to back up the truth of his claim: I will come to Chapel Hill at my own expense, to address either the 9/11 class or any other class, about the jihad threat. I will debate Carl Ernst or any other professor. How about it, Mr. Gregory? It would show you’re really on the level about allowing for dissenting viewpoints. You can reach me at director[at]jihadwatch.org.
An update on this story. “Literature of 9/11 college class accused of being ‘sympathetic towards terrorism,'” by Michael Schaub, Los Angeles Times, September 1, 2015 (thanks to Darcy):
A student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has raised concerns about the school’s Literature of 9/11 seminar course, claiming the required readings for the class are “sympathetic towards terrorism.”…
The class, taught by UNC associate professor Neel Ahuja, requires students to read books including Mohsin Hamid’s novel “The Reluctant Fundamentalist,” Philip Metres’ poetry collection “Sand Opera” and Art Spiegelman’s graphic memoir “In the Shadow of No Towers.”
Dent criticized the class in an article he wrote for the College Fix, a conservative website. In the article, Dent claimed that the materials on the course’s syllabus “present terrorists in a sympathetic light and American political leaders as greedy, war hungry and corrupt.”…
Some current and former UNC students defended the course. In a comment posted to Dent’s article, Alec Dragelin said he attended the class and, although he is a conservative, enjoyed it. “This article is nothing but gossip about a great course taught by an amazing professor,” Dragelin wrote. “Additionally, through most of the semester and even in my final paper I actively disagreed with some of Neel’s opinions. He in turn welcomed my arguments. As such, this course was amazingly valuable because it challenged my opinions and allowed me to explore what I thought I knew in a deeper way.”
Dent, who said he did’t [sic] want the class removed outright, agreed that it’s “important” for students to be challenged, “[b]ut at the same time, I think you have to give equal showing to both sides of the issue.”…
Jim Gregory, a spokesman for the university, defended the class, noting that it’s not a required course. “The university isn’t forcing a set of beliefs on students; we’re asking them to prepare for and engage in every lesson, debate and conversation, and share what they think,” Gregory said in a statement. “Carolina offers academic courses to challenge students — not to advocate one viewpoint over another.”