-Yale Daily News
Last night, Muslim apostate Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke at Yale University on the dangers of Islam in spite of protests and objections by the Muslim Student Association and other groups. The event was sponsored by the William F. Buckley Program.
In the lead-up to the event, David Gelernter, a professor of computer science at Yale, wrote this piece in National Review in the form of an open letter to the MSA.
And speaking of the MSA, it appears they are under fire for charges that they falsified signatures on a petition against Ali's appearance.
This morning's report in the Yale Daily News says that the speech went off in front of a crowd of 300 "without significant interruption or disturbance", which would suggest to me there was some interruption or disturbance not described.
Kudos to the event organizers, who refused to back down in the face of intimidation. Ms Ali has once again demonstrated her physical and moral courage in the face of intimidation. As for the MSA and their allies, once again they show that they have a problem in understanding what free speech is all about. At least they didn't replicate what the UC Irvine Muslim Student Union did when the Israeli ambassador to the US spoke at UCI in 2010. On that occasion (I was present), they repeatedly tried to disrupt the speaker and attempted to shut down the event.
As for the arrogant argument that Ali lacked scholarly credentials to speak on Islam, I would counter that her own life experiences growing up as a Muslim outweigh any PhD. She was subjected to a forced genital mutilation, escaped an arranged marriage and experienced the gruesome murder of Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch film maker who, with Ali, produced a film critical of Islam's treatment of women. Ever since, she has had to live under security in the US after being forced to leave her adopted Netherlands. Scholarly credentials? Please.
MSA definitely misunderstands free speech... as reported elsewhere, one of their leading talking heads said what Hirsi had to offer "is hate speech, which would be libel and slander, which the First Amendment would not protect."
ReplyDeleteHate speech is not libel or slander, the former is mostly not illegal, the latter mostly a civil matter, and none of them are subject to prior restraint, which the First Amendment just about totally forbids.
Siarlys,
ReplyDeleteHere is all you need to know about virtually any MSA chapter. The leadership will be committed to the principles of the Muslim Brotherhood-to which they are aligned. They will fight against Israel and promote the idea that Islam will eventually become dominant in America-not necessarily through violent means, but dominant nonetheless. Check out the memorandum of understanding seized by the FBI and introduced in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas. It spells it out.
Gary, that is NOT all I need to know about virtually any MSA chapter. Further, what would be the purpose of knowing anything about MSA?
ReplyDeleteTo decide whether to join?
To decide whether to commit a pogrom against Muslim students?
To decide whether to vote for a congressional candidate who wants to put all MSA members in concentration camps?
To decide whether crimes are being committed by MSA members that should be prosecuted as such?
"All you need to know" is a cry of ignorance and laziness, unwilling to do the hard work of making out a specific case for specific legal purposes.