Another Professor in the Crosshairs of Fox News-Ward's Not Alone

[poe]

FoxNews Puts Me In Its Crosshairs

By M. SHAHID ALAM

I published an essay, "America and Islam: Seeking Parallels," in Counterpunch on December 29, 2004. A day later, I began to receive nasty and threatening emails, all at once. These were orchestrated by a www.littlegreenfootballs.com. Shortly thereafter, other right-wing websites got into act, posting excerpts from the essay; these included jihadwatch.org, campuswatch.org, frontpagemag.com, freerepublic.com, etc. The messages posted on these websites were equally vicious, and some of them, containing explicit death threats, were 'kindly' forwarded to me.

What did I say in this essay? I made two points. First, that the 9-11 attacks were an Islamist insurgency: the attackers believe that they are fighting--as the Americans did, in the 1770s--for their freedom and dignity against a foreign occupation/control of their lands. Secondly, I argue that these attacks were the result of a massive political failure of Muslims to resist their tyrannies locally. It was a mistake to attack the US.

I followed the first essay with a second one, "Testing Free Speech In America," where I elaborate on the points I had made earlier. This too was published in Counterpunch.Org on Jan 1/2, 2005.FoxNews Puts Me In Its Crosshairs

By M. SHAHID ALAM

I published an essay, "America and Islam: Seeking Parallels," in Counterpunch on December 29, 2004. A day later, I began to receive nasty and threatening emails, all at once. These were orchestrated by a www.littlegreenfootballs.com. Shortly thereafter, other right-wing websites got into act, posting excerpts from the essay; these included jihadwatch.org, campuswatch.org, frontpagemag.com, freerepublic.com, etc. The messages posted on these websites were equally vicious, and some of them, containing explicit death threats, were 'kindly' forwarded to me.

What did I say in this essay? I made two points. First, that the 9-11 attacks were an Islamist insurgency: the attackers believe that they are fighting--as the Americans did, in the 1770s--for their freedom and dignity against a foreign occupation/control of their lands. Secondly, I argue that these attacks were the result of a massive political failure of Muslims to resist their tyrannies locally. It was a mistake to attack the US.

I followed the first essay with a second one, "Testing Free Speech In America," where I elaborate on the points I had made earlier. This too was published in Counterpunch.Org on Jan 1/2, 2005.It appears that Bill O'Reilly is doing a series on 'unAmerican' professors on US campuses. Last night, my wife tells me, he did a piece on Ward Churchill. Tonight will be my turn. I expect he will make all kinds of outlandish accusations that will resonate well with the left- and Muslim-hating members of his audience. This will generate calls and emails to Northeastern and to me ? containing threats, calls for firing me, and threats to withhold donations. I am not sure how well NU will stand up against this barrage.

If we can generate a matching volume of emails, letters and call to NU supporting my right to free speech, it might be helpful.

What else can we do?

The contact information for President Richard Freeland is available
at:

http://155.33.227.141/president/letters.nclk

Contact for Provots and Senior VP for Academic Affairs:

Ahmed Abdelal
Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost
112 Hayden Hall
[phone]
[e-mail]

The contacts for the leading people in the President's office are
available here:

http://www.president.neu.edu/cabinet.htmlDean, College of Arts and Sciences

James Stellar
100 Meserve Hall
Northeastern University
360 Huntington Ave.
Boston, MA 02115
[e-mail]
[phone]

M. Shahid Alam, professor of economics at Northeastern University

[tishaLA]

1. Of course they're going after the academics

It's what fascists do. They attack us, try to define the parameters of permissible discourse through intimidation, and squelch intellectual inquiry.

[bloom]

2. They seem to be esp. targeting

people who speak out in a way that zionists disapprove of.

As seen in the New York Times article today about Churchill:

Controversial speakers are nothing new to academic institutions: For years, Leonard Jeffries of the City University of New York would create a stir on campus and elsewhere with provocative remarks, and a Columbia University faculty panel is now investigating remarks by some pro-Palestinian professors that offended some Jewish students.

In 2002, hundreds of Harvard students protested when a graduating senior was chosen to deliver a commencement speech entitled, "The American Jihad." The student, Zayed Yasin, who received a death threat, said his speech was a defense of the meaning of jihad as a nonviolent struggle to do right. After negotiations with a representative of Harvard's Jewish community, Mr. Yasin changed the title to "Of Faith and Citizenship," and delivered his remarks under tight security.

Later in 2002, Harvard College's English Department canceled a campus reading by a poet who had once referred in verse to the Israeli Army as a "Zionist SS." and had criticized American-born Jewish settlers. As at Hamilton, professors at Harvard said they had not known about the remarks of the poet, Tom Paulin, before inviting him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/02/education/02hamilton.html?pagewanted=1&th&oref=login

This also seems to be Daniel Pipes deal.

[poe]

4. shhhhhh

this issue with churchill was inflamed and distorted by the right and then the mild liberals few of who have read anything other than a few quotes of his, further distorted the facts and as usual the truth of it all comes out and the damage is done. The Mighty Wurlitzer keeps playing it's same old song and the larger patterns continue to go unnoticed or wilfully denied by those who should and often do claim to know better.

[bloom]

3. They are also after Juan Cole

"You get the drift. On PBS, he's Dr. Cole: a moderate, soft-spoken expert. The minute he gets in front of his PC, he becomes Mr. Juan: a wild conspiracy theorist, a prophet of defeatistism, a nasty source of innuendo and baseless accusations, a biased ideologue and demagogue masquerading as an expert, and overall, a pissy sourpuss."

http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/1579


also:

http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/1578

[bpilgrim]

5. thanks for passing the word

:toast:

will write tonight and call tomorrow.

peace