Lawmakers want instructor fired from University for his 9/11 views

Originally posted by Vushta
And the Radical Islamists proudly accept the credit for the crimes. So whats your point?

Please connect teaching that 911 was an 'inside job' by the US government and a course in 'Contemporary Islam'.
Do you advocate mixing religion with politics? Just curious.

Who proudly accepts the credit for the crimes? "Fat Osama"?

When politics or a political part attack or point fingers at a religion OF COURSE they need to be mixed in a contemporary Islam class.

I bet you know no one of the Islamic faith, if you do, ask them:

"What are the five most important contemporay issues facin Islam today?"

I am sure that their answers will include the neo-con agenda, war on terrorism and the reasoning behind this action.

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by Vushta
And the Radical Islamists proudly accept the credit for the crimes. So whats your point?

Please connect teaching that 911 was an 'inside job' by the US government and a course in 'Contemporary Islam'.
Do you advocate mixing religion with politics? Just curious.

Who proudly accepts the credit for the crimes? "Fat Osama"?

When politics or a political part attack or point fingers at a religion OF COURSE they need to be mixed in a contemporary Islam class.

I bet you know no one of the Islamic faith, if you do, ask them:

"What are the five most important contemporay issues facin Islam today?"

I am sure that their answers will include the neo-con agenda, war on terrorism and the reasoning behind this action.

Osama is one.
He recently stated that he personally picked the 19 to carry out the attacks on 911. But almost without exception there is credit claimed for every attack and suicide bombing that takes place.

When politics or a political part attack or point fingers at a religion OF COURSE they need to be mixed in a contemporary Islam class.

So you're saying that terrorism is a part of contemtorary Islam? I think that the finger has consistantly been pointed at terrorism and not any religion.

So in answer to my question about mixing religion with politics, your answer is yes?

Personally I think that religion has no place in politics.

I am sure that their answers will include the neo-con agenda, war on terrorism and the reasoning behind this action.

Do you think another may be..."the highjacking of our religion by terrorist ideologies"?

Originally posted by Vushta
Osama is one.

Unreliable source. It has been proven at some point he was paid by the CIA. This "source" is BS and the "confession video" totally appears to not even be him...

Good job dodging the rest of my post there Vushta.

Originally posted by Vushta
Personally I think that religion has no place in politics.

In a COLLEGE CLASSROOM IN A CLASS ABOUT CONTEMPORARY ISLAMIC ISSUES it sure does. You are making a stupid statement here and dodged my questions to make this stupid statement.

Originally posted by Vushta
Do you think another may be..."the highjacking of our religion by terrorist ideologies"?

Sure... ANOTHER. Can't just look at that one though. Sorry.

Remember, Courtesy Is Mandatory

Let's not forget to be respectful of one another. This is very important.

Meanwhile, let's also be respectful of the topic...

Teacher under fire for his Cheney-9/11 theory

MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) -- More than 60 state lawmakers are urging the University of Wisconsin-Madison to fire an instructor who has argued that the U.S. government orchestrated the September 11 terrorist attacks.

For those who seem to have completely missed it:

These people want to fire a university teacher for not parroting the official government 9/11 story.

Am I to understand that this is of no interest to some of my fellow members?

With Legislators Like These, Who Needs Nazis?

Yes, I am somewhat disappointed to see something this important turn into a pointless digression about Nazis or Osama.

This is happening in the United States, right now.

Hitler and Osama don't need to do a damn thing if one our own state governments is willing to mandate obedience to a federally-created ideology.

Why Courteous, Topical Discussion Is Important

I am very concerned about the possibility that intelligent discussion in these forums is being deliberately derailed by organized disruptors, and this thread definitely fits the profile.

Since I can't know who is deliberately disrupting discussion and who just doesn't understand the concept, I intend to take action against all forms of disruption.

Members who are willing to politely discuss thread topics and cooperate with moderators are very welcome and will be given the best discussion environment ATS can provide.

Members who are not willing to politely discuss thread topics and cooperate with moderators will be banned.

Again, sorry for the extremely long, off-topic mod rant, but I am already starting to ban people for this sort of thing, and want to give other members as much fair warning as possible that I'm not kidding around.

So please, be courteous to other members and try to stay on topic.

It's important.

Topic: Lawmakers want instructor fired from University for his 9/11 views

My friends, this sort of tyranny is aimed at us.

Please give this topic the respect it deserves and Deny Ignorance.


[edit on 7/27/2006 by Majic]

Originally posted by Majic
Meanwhile, let's also be respectful of the topic...

Teacher under fire for his Cheney-9/11 theory

MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) -- More than 60 state lawmakers are urging the University of Wisconsin-Madison to fire an instructor who has argued that the U.S. government orchestrated the September 11 terrorist attacks.

For those who seem to have completely missed it:

These people want to fire a university teacher for not parroting the official government 9/11 story.

Am I to understand that this is of no interest to some of my fellow members?

With Legislators Like These, Who Needs Nazis?

The facts outlined above should be pretty clear to most who have read this thread. Yet another piece of evidence of Americas slide into fascism. As far as the clarification regarding the meaning of the word "nazi", I also find it to be important. If someone post pure ignorance in a thread, any thread, then off topic or not, it should be addressed, and shown to be false. By ignoring it you imply that you accept it as true.

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by Vushta
Osama is one.

Unreliable source. It has been proven at some point he was paid by the CIA. This "source" is BS and the "confession video" totally appears to not even be him...

Good job dodging the rest of my post there Vushta.

Originally posted by Vushta
Personally I think that religion has no place in politics.

In a COLLEGE CLASSROOM IN A CLASS ABOUT CONTEMPORARY ISLAMIC ISSUES it sure does. You are making a stupid statement here and dodged my questions to make this stupid statement.

Originally posted by Vushta
Do you think another may be..."the highjacking of our religion by terrorist ideologies"?

Sure... ANOTHER. Can't just look at that one though. Sorry.

1. Yeah..Riiight.

2.Review the post I was responding to. There were no points I didn't address.

3. So you're saying the 911 conspiracy theory is a political topic? I agree..its all politics and ideology. I've been saying that all along.

3B. what didn't I address in your post?

4. So you agree with me.


Anyway...Lets get back on topic.

I think it's appropriate to at least question the reasoning behind teaching "G.Bush and the Neo-cons did it" in a class in which the instructor presented himself as providing the sevice of teaching contempory Islam. But I'm not sure what the scope of the class was. Does anyone know for sure? I mean if he brought it up as a 1 day topic for discussion and then had a 1 day topic for people to counter the claim, and then... back to contemporary Islam ..fine. Sounds like healthy discussion. But if he misrepresented himself and his subject in order to provide himself a platform for his political bias...then boot his ass out.

[edit on 27-7-2006 by Vushta]

[edit on 27-7-2006 by Vushta]

Originally posted by Vushta
1. Yeah..Riiight.

2.Review the post I was responding to. There were no points I didn't address.

3. So you're saying the 911 conspiracy theory is a political topic? I agree..its all politics and ideology. I've been saying that all along.

3B. what didn't I address in your post?

4. So you agree with me.

I am going to respond to you the way you respond to me...

1. Like... Yeah.

2. Review the post I was reviewing when I reviewd and responded to your drivel. you will see all the missed points.

3. It is a relevant topic to contemporary Islamic studies... at least according to the Islamic.

3B. Please review the post above.

4. No.

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by Vushta
1. Yeah..Riiight.

2.Review the post I was responding to. There were no points I didn't address.

3. So you're saying the 911 conspiracy theory is a political topic? I agree..its all politics and ideology. I've been saying that all along.

3B. what didn't I address in your post?

4. So you agree with me.

I am going to respond to you the way you respond to me...

1. Like... Yeah.

2. Review the post I was reviewing when I reviewd and responded to your drivel. you will see all the missed points.

3. It is a relevant topic to contemporary Islamic studies... at least according to the Islamic.

3B. Please review the post above.

4. No.

Lets get back to the topic.

Originally posted by Vushta
Lets get back to the topic.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

The Irony.

Denying Ignorance

Originally posted by Implosion
As far as the clarification regarding the meaning of the word "nazi", I also find it to be important. If someone post pure ignorance in a thread, any thread, then off topic or not, it should be addressed, and shown to be false. By ignoring it you imply that you accept it as true.

I understand and respect your position on this, because I'm actually quite a fan of giving members slack to explore all sides of a topic.

But there are reasonable limits, and as a moderator, it's my job to step in when they have been exceeded.

I invite all members to review the first page of this thread and see what I'm calling a stop to.

Admittedly, topical relevance is a judgment call. To make such calls, the administrators have given moderators the discretion to decide when threads are going off topic, and act accordingly.

While we do welcome candid criticism and honest disagreement, staff decisions are nonetheless binding, and members who disregard them are subject to disciplinary action.

Mandatory Godwin-Free Zone

In this case, I have determined that an off-topic digression about Nazis must end. I also insist that members honor the T&C by being courteous and staying on topic.

Members are free to disagree with my decision, but not by derailing the thread or ignoring my instructions.

Anyone who thinks I'm acting improperly is welcome to discuss the issue with me via U2U or submit a Complaint. As long as we keep this thread on topic and discussion civil, I'm happy.

But please don't misunderstand me: No more Nazis in this thread. No more insults. Relevant, topical discussion only.

Topic: Lawmakers want instructor fired from University for his 9/11 views

I will make no further requests.

Action only from here on out, and I'm in no mood to tolerate further disruption.

We need more Professors like this guy in the world, pushing young people to
investigate it. Not to tell them "hey its the US gov who did it" but to look at
all the little things that are not shown in the mainstream media.

If it werent for the "Ah no way they did that!" pre-conclusion every normal thinking
student (anyone actually) would raise his questionmarks and explanationmarks at
a lot of points.

I have talked to a bunch of people about this particular topic (9/11) for the past
years and this is more or less how it goes:

--at some point in a convo we end up talking about terrorists and 9/11 etc--
me: Here, just look at this video and picture, looks fishy or what?
him: Yea it does look a bit odd, but come on man, they wouldnt do that, no fkn way.

It does not matter what you present as at least questionable things, they jump into
denial right away. Most of them at least. And most of them dont go into it any further
because they simply wont believe it and (i think) they just dont care, they are alive,
they are working, they have money and their usual daily business. They just
dont seem to care enough.

Originally posted by zren
We need more Professors like this guy in the world, pushing young people to
investigate it. Not to tell them "hey its the US gov who did it" but to look at
all the little things that are not shown in the mainstream media.

In the case of this teacher and in the context of your above statement...

What is the motivation of the person to point out all these 'little things'? All the 'little things' that are pointed out are chosen to be the things 'pointed out'. If things pointed out to be considered are presented for a hoped for hmmmmm?? reaction, there is most likely an agenda behind it.

But then in this case if I understand it correctly, something like that is not even in the ballpark was what going on there. Theres no "Well..look at that..odd".
Its an outright.."Bush/Cheney did it." and you're all dumb if you can't see it."

To me that crosses the line by a mile. If thats an accurate description of whats going on there.

The Situation On The Ground

Originally posted by Vushta
If thats an accurate description of whats going on there.

I don't think it is, and recommend reviewing the article to understand why.

Teacher under fire for his Cheney-9/11 theory

U.W.-Madison Provost Pat Farrell launched a review after Barrett spoke last month on a talk show about his views that the terrorist attacks were the result of a government conspiracy to spark war in the Middle East. After the review, Farrell said Barrett was a qualified instructor who can present his views as one perspective on the attacks.

The university is saying this is okay. Several legislators are saying it isn't.

Should the state of Wisconsin prohibit the presentation of alternative theories about 9/11 in its colleges?

Should any supposedly free government legally prohibit criticism of it?

These are important questions.

Originally posted by Majic
Should the state of Wisconsin prohibit the presentation of alternative theories about 9/11 in its colleges?

Should any supposedly free government legally prohibit criticism of it?

These are important questions.

Thanks for that Majic. It still doesn't answer the questions I have. At first I thought that he was simply giving his point of view on a talkshow and that's alright with me as long as he doesn't teach it as fact in his class.

Then the article seemed to imply that he was in fact teaching it in his class as it mentioned that some students were upset about it.

So I'm still unclear as to whats going on there.

Should the state of Wisconsin prohibit the presentation of alternative theories about 9/11 in its colleges?

I don't think so...IF thats what the class description is.
If someone offers to teach a class in contemporary Buddhism and starts to preach how George Bush and Dick Cheney are saving the world and the best thing since refridgeration and whoever doesn't think so is wrong..well that just doesn't sit right with me.

Don't sell the class as Buddhism, call it a "Cheerleading for Young Republicans" class.



(Mod edit: Please remember to Trim Those Quotes!)

[edit on 7/27/2006 by Majic]

The relevance is that the professor asserts that a majority of Muslim's don't accept the official line on 9/11 and it might be instructive to do some research into why that's the case. It's also true that all the countries which have been invaded since 9/11 are Muslim and that the fact of this is uniting Muslims against the West, as we have heard tonight, in fact - Al Qaeda's number two is calling on the Islamic world to unite against the US, Israel and their allies.

Originally posted by bob2000
his career is toast. good.

We dont need nazis sneaking propaganda into college kid's courses.

[edit on 21-7-2006 by bob2000]

I so totally agree. Any teacher should know better than to teach a supposed academically oriented class into the crap that is totally propaganda. Who's really to say what happened? It is such an off topic to what our children are expecting, and expected to accumulate throughout his/her scholarly education, that this hardly fits ANY NORMAL CURRICULUM. But, who am I. I know, I want my daughter to learn things that she will benefit to in her future. I let her beliefs in world affairs be soley upon her own research, and beliefs. Not In School! Hell yeah, he should be canned! What a disgrace

Originally posted by rich23
The relevance is that the professor asserts that a majority of Muslim's don't accept the official line on 9/11 and it might be instructive to do some research into why that's the case. It's also true that all the countries which have been invaded since 9/11 are Muslim and that the fact of this is uniting Muslims against the West, as we have heard tonight, in fact - Al Qaeda's number two is calling on the Islamic world to unite against the US, Israel and their allies.

So the class description was "what the professor asserts"?

How exactly is shoveling "Bush/Cheney?PNAC did it" down peoples throats equate to "doing research into why Muslims don't accept the official line"? and how does THAT equal a scholarly study of "Contemporary Islam"?

Originally posted by Majic
These people want to fire a university teacher for not parroting the official government 9/11 story.

In the new Amerika, freethinking will not be tolerated. You will conform to the thoughts and actions of your superiors or you will suffer the consequences.

Originally posted by Vushta
So the class description was "what the professor asserts"?

How exactly is shoveling "Bush/Cheney?PNAC did it" down peoples throats equate to "doing research into why Muslims don't accept the official line"? and how does THAT equal a scholarly study of "Contemporary Islam"?

In non-scientific classes the professors opinions and assetions are rlevant... that is why they are the professsor and you are not.

How do you know he is SHOVELING anything? Source?

A scholarly study includes looking at all sides of the issues... not just the CNN/gov't/Vushta side.

Did you attend a University?

[unnecessary quote of Entire previous post removed]


Appearently the advise to try and get over yourself in relation to your "thing" about me didn't take. Oh well.

You're right a professors opinions are relevent...to the course he/she's teaching.
I wasn't aware the the class being taught was.."The 911 CT." I though it was Contemporary Islam..or Introductory Islam or something like that.

So I take it you would have no problem if the class description was exactly the same and the Prof. was teaching the 'official story'? If not..why not? what would the difference be? It could be masked using the same rationalization i.e. "Most Muslims think it was an inside job..I must balance the information"


Mod Edit: Quoting – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 7/28/2006 by 12m8keall2c]