|
|
It's a Free
Country:
Personal
Freedom in America After September 11
Edited by Daniel Goldberg, Robert Greenwald, and
Victor Goldberg
Publisher: Akashic Books/RDV Books, 130 Fifth Avenue (7th Floor),
New York, NY 10011
The following is Dr. Sami Al-Arian's chapter in the book.
Academic Freedom and Free Speech in the Wake of September 11 by Dr.
Sami Al-Arian
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people
to do nothing. -Edmund Burke
It wasn't quite 9:30 yet on the morning of this dreadful Tuesday when
someone approached me as I was speaking to a few students at a local
Islamic school. He asked, "Did you hear about what happened in New
York?" As we rushed to the nearest TV, our hearts sank as we saw horrifying
scenes of planes crashing into buildings and people running for safety.
Everyone in the room became suddenly speechless. Soon our shock turned
to sadness, then to anger. Some were sobbing. It was an agonizing
and solemn moment.
Soon after the media descended on our Islamic center, and before we
realized it, we became part of the news. We expressed our deep sorrow
and grief. We condemned this criminal act and supported the government
in its call for justice against the perpetrators and their benefactors.
We joined our fellow citizens in prayer services in many churches
starting on the evening of that dark Tuesday.
On Wednesday-the day after the tragedy-seventy-five members of our
mosque donated blood. We felt patriotic, but more importantly, part
of a national mobilization for doing good. In addition, over $10,000
was collected for the victims' fund of the Red Cross. On Friday, I
gave a sermon in the mosque conveying the Islamic teachings in the
Qur'an and from the prophet's life that totally reject the logic of
indiscriminate killing and hatred. "Whoever kills one innocent life
is as though he killed the whole humanity, and whoever saves one life
is as though he saved the whole of humanity," the Qur'an teaches.
I further reiterated the Islamic principles of cooperation, unity,
and tolerance for all faith communities. Needless to say, in all of
our interviews with the media, we expressed our heartfelt grief, sadness,
and condemnation.
By the following Sunday our call to an ecumenical service in our mosque
the previous day in a full-page advertisement brought over four hundred
people-more than half non-Muslims. The service was beautiful. All
three Abrahamic faiths were represented. We were united in our grief
as well as in our determination to overcome this tragedy. I explained
in this almost three-hour service how Islam not only condemned this
crime but also called for justice. We said that whoever did this evil
act could not invoke religion or use religious texts to justify their
twisted logic.
While we were engaging in all of that, our community was suffering
from the backlash of misguided people and some media outlets. A gun
was fired at a mosque in the area. Several members were harassed with
ugly words and acts. Women with their traditional Muslim scarves were
especially easy targets for hate-filled comments and gestures. Arab-looking
people were taken off airplanes. Others were fired from their jobs.
The nonstop talk shows on the radio and television continued to attack
the Islamic faith to the point that even some children questioned
their parents about why they were Muslim. We had to heighten security
at our mosque and school to the tune of $20,000. We felt it was unfair
that the Arab and Muslim communities not only had to suffer because
of the tragedy at the hands of the terrorists, but they also had to
endure the hate, distrust, and threats from their fellow citizens.
It must be said on the other hand, however, that we received as a
community, as well as personally, many heartfelt expressions of love,
support, and embrace. They represented the best of America. We made
many new friends.
But the sense of inclusion would soon disappear. On Wednesday, September
26, almost two weeks after the tragedy, I was called by one of the
producers of the O'Reilly Factor of the Fox News Network. She asked
me if I would be a guest on the show and primarily explain the relationship
between a think tank I co-founded called World and Islam Studies Enterprise
(WISE), established in 1990 and closed in 1995, and the University
of South Florida (USF); what the purpose of WISE was; and the controversy
that surrounded it six years ago. After much discussion it was agreed
that because of the limited time, the show would only address WISE's
relationship with USF. I also told her that although I was on the
faculty of USF, I wanted to be introduced as chairman of the coalition
that was established to defend civil rights and political freedom.
Unfortunately, this was never mentioned, because clearly the intent
was to put pressure on the university.
Needless to say, the interview was anything but what it was purported
to be. The host turned it into a guilt-by-association exercise. You
knew A, B, and C. A, B, and C are bad people, therefore you are bad,
and must be marked. This was yellow journalism and McCarthyism at
its worst. Not only did the producers lie about the purpose of the
interview, but also most of what the host said was old news, inaccurate,
irrelevant, bigoted, and, most importantly, lacked time-frame and
context. On their printed version they called the show "Professor
or Terrorist?"
Three individuals were mentioned during this brief "interview." The
first topic was a seven-year-old situation that resulted in an extensive
investigation by the government, as well as an investigation by USF
conducted in 1996 by the former president of the America Bar Association,
William Reece Smith, Jr. No wrongdoing was ever found. And certainly
no charges were ever filed as a result of these investigations. Mr.
O'Reilly never mentioned the time frame of this situation, and that
it had absolutely nothing to do with the September 11 tragedy.
Another individual that was mentioned was Dr. Mazen al-Najjar, who
is also my brother-in-law. He was never charged or implicated in any
wrongdoing. A judge ruled in October 2000 that there was absolutely
no evidence that he did anything wrong, and that he was not a threat
to national security. Judge R. Kevin McHugh said in his ruling: "Although
there were allegations that the ICP [another charity] and WISE were
fronts for Palestinian political causes, there is no evidence before
the Court that demonstrates that either organization was a front for
the P[alestinian] I[slamic] J[ihad]. To the contrary, there is evidence
in the record to support the conclusion that WISE was a reputable
and scholarly research center and the ICP was highly regarded."
It was simply irresponsible journalism for some media outlets to exploit
the current tragedy and deflect the blame, looking for scapegoats
so that they might increase ratings or serve their hidden agenda.
After the program aired on the Fox news channel, I received death
threats as well as numerous hate-filled emails. It was terrorism perpetrated
by journalists against innocent civilians and public institutions.
Because of these threats against me and the university, USF administrators
put me on paid leave because of their "concern" about my safety and
the safety of USF. I regretted the decision because over ninety of
my students were affected by it. I was also disappointed that the
administration did not forcefully defend academic freedom.
After the Fox network interview, many other media outlets started
their own onslaught and attacks on me because of anti-Israeli positions
or statements I made many years ago. For instance, as I was active
during the first Palestinian uprising (intifada) between 1987 and
1993, the words "death to Israel" were uttered in one of the rallies
in 1988. The reference to this slogan spoken fourteen years ago was
in the context of a speech, given in Arabic, about the brutal and
continuing occupation of the Palestinians by Israel. It simply meant
death to occupation, to oppression, to the Israeli apartheid system
instituted against the Palestinians. It certainly did not mean death
to any Jewish person, as it was being portrayed. In this I am reminded
of the early American revolutionary patriots such as Patrick Henry,
Joseph Warren, and the poet John Trumbull. They called for the "burial
of the British Empire," and wished for the "Empire's everlasting grave."
I'm sure that these early American patriots did not mean to bury the
citizens of the British Empire, but rather to end the brutal British
occupation of America. Patrick Henry's "Give me liberty or give me
death" speech during the American Revolution is probably one of the
most admired speeches of all time. His words describing the American
sentiments against the British then prophetically tell of the Palestinians'
plight and their predicament today. Nevertheless, the media attacks
as well as an orchestrated campaign that was waged by pro-Zionist
groups across the U.S. continued to pressure the university to terminate
my employment, although I have been at the university since 1986.
On December 19, 2001, the USF Board of Trustees met in an "emergency"
meeting and recommended my termination. Later that day, USF president
Judy Genshaft sent me a notice of her intention to terminate my employment
despite the fact that I have been tenured for ten years. During all
my USF years my record shows that I have always conducted myself professionally.
I love the teaching profession and have always enjoyed the challenges
of the classroom. I received the best-teacher award as well as the
prestigious Teaching Incentive Award in the College of Engineering.
I have over forty publications, including a chapter that just appeared
in the Mechatronics handbook in early 2002.
The USF president gave three frivolous reasons for terminating my
employment at a public institution. First, she maintained that I did
not make it clear when I appeared on the Fox news program that I was
not speaking on behalf of the university. Secondly, that I appeared
on campus once in early October. And finally, she claimed that I caused
disruption at the university because of the death threats against
me, the hate mail that ensued, and supposedly the decline in financial
contributions to the university and its alumni association.
Needless to say, I was invited on that program not because I was a
USF faculty member, but because I was considered a leader in the American
Muslim community, as well as a civil rights activist. Obviously, I
do not speak, nor have I ever spoken, on behalf of the university.
I have on many occasions made it clear to journalists and reporters
that I speak as a leader of the American Muslim and Arab community
and in my capacity as the president of the National Coalition to Protect
Political Freedom (NCPPF), a group of over forty organizations coming
together to defend civil and constitutional rights. A July 16, 2001,
article in Newsweek magazine about the participation of Arab-Americans
in the 2000 campaign reported: "Al-Arian is one of the country's leading
advocates for repeal of secret-evidence laws." I was not identified
in that article as a USF professor, but as the country's leading advocate
in an important civil rights issue.
Furthermore, I came once to campus on October 5, 2001, to address
a campus student organization that I advise. If I had thought that
I was "banned" from coming to campus I certainly would not have attended.
In fact, the USF provost told me that I could meet with my graduate
students on nights and weekends during our conversation on September
27, 2001, when he placed me on paid leave for "safety." When the police
asked me if everything was all right on the day I talked to my students,
they did not ask me to leave because they did not know that the purported
ban was in effect. As for the disruption, it's a classic "blame the
victim" argument that defies logic and rationality. * * * *
I was eighteen when I took my first civics course during my sophomore
year, in 1976. On the first day of class, the professor talked about
the two Ds of American government, as he called them: due process
and dissent. Ironically, a quarter of a century later, these two important
concepts are at the center of my professional career. I was neither
afforded any due process, nor was my right of political dissent respected
or penalty-free as promised by the Constitution. This case is indeed
about academic freedom and freedom of speech.
I did not choose to be the poster child for the debate about academic
freedom in the post-September 11 world. Now that I am, however, some
important questions in this debate must be raised and discussed by
all academics:
- Are university
administrators justified in terminating the employment of a sixteen-year-tenured
faculty member because he did not accompany off-campus remarks
with a disclaimer that he wasn't speaking on behalf of the university?
- Should university
administrators be able to fire a tenured faculty member because
he attended a meeting on campus while on paid leave?
- Should university
administrators be allowed to dismiss a tenured faculty member
because his public pronouncements conflict with the political
views of those in power?
Indeed, if the termination is allowed to stand, then all faculty across
the nation will be vulnerable as to their job security and the professional
compromises they may be required to make to keep their jobs. As someone
who has lived in the U.S. for over a quarter-century, I value our
freedom and openness. I believe the Islamic faith, which has been
vilified in post-September 11 America, is not only compatible with
democracy, but cannot be fully practiced without it. I believe in
the American political system and in the Constitution. If I disagree
with a governmental policy, I believe in working within the system
to improve it. And this is what I have practiced and taught my children.
For over four years, my wife and I have visited over 150 congressional
offices in order to ban the use of secret evidence. I believe that
we were very effective in bringing to the attention of many members
of Congress the due process concerns associated with the use of secret
evidence. I believe that our hard work paid off when President Bush
and many political leaders spoke against it during the 2000 political
campaigns.
Many people have pleaded with me to simply remain silent. This is
exactly what my critics want. Some think that there are powerful groups
that are out to get me. My answer is simple. I believe in freedom
of speech now more than ever. I believe that people have the right
to hear what some may consider "unpopular" views as much as I have
the obligation to express my beliefs and opinions.
Sami Al-Arian, PhD, P.E., was born to Palestinian parents in Kuwait.
He was a Professor of Computer Engineering at the University of South
Florida. He is currently the President of the National Coalition to
Protect Political Freedom. |
|