Gold9472
07-06-2006, 07:32 AM
Sifting and winnowing
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=89975&ntpid=0
A Cap Times editorial, July 5, 2006
State Rep. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, is not very good at legislating. But that doesn't stop him from trying to tell everyone else how to do their jobs.
Indeed, it seems that whenever Nass hears about a college instructor who expresses views that do not fit with his own, the legislator begins to call for sanctions and silencing.
Nass piped up again last week after he learned that a University of Wisconsin lecturer has been active in a movement that raises questions about whether U.S. government officials rather than foreign terrorists were responsible for some or all of the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001.
Kevin Barrett, a co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, an organization of scholars, activists and religious leaders urging an investigation of the possibility of official complicity in Sept. 11, has a part-time, one-semester appointment to teach a class on Islam this fall.
Barrett, who has written guest opinion columns that have appeared in The Capital Times, certainly holds controversial views.
While many Americans entertain deep doubts about whether the full story of the 9/11 attacks has been revealed, Barrett's views are considerably more radical than those entertained by the majority of Americans.
Barrett understands that his views are provocative. In fact, when UW Provost Patrick Farrell said university officials would review Barrett's syllabus and reading list for the course, as well as evaluations of his past teaching performance, the lecturer said he thought the provost's approach sounded reasonable.
"I look forward to the chance to discuss this with anyone who's interested, and I understand why this would raise concerns," says Barrett. "When professors have a strong commitment to a point of view, it's important that they not impose their views on students."
Frankly, the lecturer comes off as far calmer and more thoughtful than Nass, who, on the basis of what he heard about a radio interview Barrett did, called on the UW to bar the academic from teaching.
The vitriol that Nass is spewing now is similar to the language he used last year to attack another academic with whom he disagrees University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill. Nass tried to prevent UW-Whitewater from letting Churchill speak at a student-sponsored event.
In the end, Nass drew more attention to Churchill's appearance, which drew a standing-room-only crowd. And we suspect that, if the UW adheres to its commitment to academic freedom and allows Barrett to teach this fall, his course will be packed as well.
If Barrett tries to force his views about 9/11 on students, he will be called on it. But everything he has said suggests that he will be a responsible instructor. Indeed, Barrett has been very specific about the fact that he wants to try to "present all defensible sides of important issues" and "let students make up their own minds."
That sounds a lot like the values expressed on a plaque at the UW that reads: "Whatever may be the limitations which trammel inquiry elsewhere, we believe that the great state University of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual and fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found."
Steve Nass should go up to Bascom Hall and read the plaque before he starts telling this great university to fire controversial instructors.
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=89975&ntpid=0
A Cap Times editorial, July 5, 2006
State Rep. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, is not very good at legislating. But that doesn't stop him from trying to tell everyone else how to do their jobs.
Indeed, it seems that whenever Nass hears about a college instructor who expresses views that do not fit with his own, the legislator begins to call for sanctions and silencing.
Nass piped up again last week after he learned that a University of Wisconsin lecturer has been active in a movement that raises questions about whether U.S. government officials rather than foreign terrorists were responsible for some or all of the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001.
Kevin Barrett, a co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, an organization of scholars, activists and religious leaders urging an investigation of the possibility of official complicity in Sept. 11, has a part-time, one-semester appointment to teach a class on Islam this fall.
Barrett, who has written guest opinion columns that have appeared in The Capital Times, certainly holds controversial views.
While many Americans entertain deep doubts about whether the full story of the 9/11 attacks has been revealed, Barrett's views are considerably more radical than those entertained by the majority of Americans.
Barrett understands that his views are provocative. In fact, when UW Provost Patrick Farrell said university officials would review Barrett's syllabus and reading list for the course, as well as evaluations of his past teaching performance, the lecturer said he thought the provost's approach sounded reasonable.
"I look forward to the chance to discuss this with anyone who's interested, and I understand why this would raise concerns," says Barrett. "When professors have a strong commitment to a point of view, it's important that they not impose their views on students."
Frankly, the lecturer comes off as far calmer and more thoughtful than Nass, who, on the basis of what he heard about a radio interview Barrett did, called on the UW to bar the academic from teaching.
The vitriol that Nass is spewing now is similar to the language he used last year to attack another academic with whom he disagrees University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill. Nass tried to prevent UW-Whitewater from letting Churchill speak at a student-sponsored event.
In the end, Nass drew more attention to Churchill's appearance, which drew a standing-room-only crowd. And we suspect that, if the UW adheres to its commitment to academic freedom and allows Barrett to teach this fall, his course will be packed as well.
If Barrett tries to force his views about 9/11 on students, he will be called on it. But everything he has said suggests that he will be a responsible instructor. Indeed, Barrett has been very specific about the fact that he wants to try to "present all defensible sides of important issues" and "let students make up their own minds."
That sounds a lot like the values expressed on a plaque at the UW that reads: "Whatever may be the limitations which trammel inquiry elsewhere, we believe that the great state University of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual and fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found."
Steve Nass should go up to Bascom Hall and read the plaque before he starts telling this great university to fire controversial instructors.