so now we have to defend a 9/11 crank!
http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/07/03/madison
Investigation Over 9/11 Teachings
Two months before the start of the fall semester, one syllabus at the
University of Wisconsin at Madison is getting a very thorough review.
Patrick Farrell, Wisconsin’s provost, announced last week that he
would review everything about the course “Islam: Religion and
Culture,” in light of comments made on a radio show by the
instructor, Kevin Barrett. In his remarks, Barrett said that the
United States planned the 9/11 attacks as a way to start a war in the
Middle East. Barrett also indicated that he planned to share his
views during the course this fall.
Barrett, a temporary instructor, received his Ph.D. from Madison in
2004 in African languages, literature and folklore. He has taught one
other course at Madison, but it was not about Islam. Barrett is a
founder of a group called the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for
9/11 Truth. On that group’s Web site, he elaborates on the views that
he discussed on the radio, writing, for example, about the “big lie”
of 9/11 and of the “compelling evidence” that the attacks were “an
inside job.”
The comments set off politicians throughout the state, many of whom
are calling on the university to immediately fire Barrett. In a
typical statement, Wisconsin Rep. Steve Nass, a Republican, said:
“This case isn’t about academic freedom. I firmly believe this is a
case of protecting students from the academic garbage that Mr.
Barrett spews.” He added that Barrett is “free to stand on the street
corner and advocate his nutty left-wing views. However, the taxpayers
and tuition-paying families shouldn’t pay this man one cent to
perform his voodoo in a UW classroom.”
On the radio show and in an interview with a Wisconsin newspaper,
Barrett said that he would share his views in class (noting that he
would also share what he considers the official, whitewashed version
of the events). Madison officials and educators elsewhere typically
have an easier job defending the right of professors to espouse views
that are widely seen as lies if those views aren’t shared in class.
Northwestern University, for example, has repeatedly resisted calls
to fire Arthur R. Butz, an engineering professor who is a Holocaust
denier, but who doesn’t discuss the Holocaust in class.
In his announcement that Barrett’s plans for the fall course would be
reviewed, Farrell stressed the fact that Barrett had talked about
views he would share in class. “Mr. Barrett is entitled to his own
personal political views. But we also have an obligation to ensure
that his course content is academically appropriate, of high quality,
and that his personal views are not imposed on his students,” Farrell
said.
The review will include the planned syllabus, the reading list, and
past teaching evaluations. Farrell said this review was appropriate
to deal with “legitimate concerns about the content and quality of
instruction.”
Barrett did not respond to messages seeking his comment.
— Scott Jaschik