The second anniversary of the barbaric attacks of Sept. 11 scarred us with sad memories of unjustifiable acts of terror and cowardice. Evil minds plotted and executed what have been considered the worse terrorist attacks ever. Two years later, we are still coping with the impact these attacks left on us. That impact was especially felt among Americans from Middle Eastern descent.
But what should have been a day of unity and remembrance turned into a day of hate-mongering and intimidation on the ASU campus. The invitation of Daniel Pipes to speak on our campus on Sept. 11 by a fictional student club, ASU Students for Democracy, was a big blow to how the event should be remembered. Any rhetoric that fuels exclusion of any group based on race, religion or ethnicity is a dangerous abuse of academic freedom.
Disagreements over policies do not weaken our country; rather, they are signs of a thriving democracy. The danger lies in extremist views that do not acknowledge the right to disagree. The moderator of Pipes' speech, Oubai Shabbandar, did not display tolerance or respect for any opinions critical of the speaker; thus, a healthy exchange of opinions was not possible. Assuming such a tone of moral superiority as he did is a self-defeating method and reveals a degree of intellectual bankruptcy.
Furthermore, I would posit that the real threat to our political system is not a bunch of militants living in caves thousands of miles away, but might be the "more American than thou" living among us. It seems that this sort of political tribalism is alive and well.
Such shallow demagoguery undermines many legitimate arguments and casts a stigma on well-intentioned supporters. This form of intellectual terrorism must cease to be part of campus environment and political debates.
Conservative groups like the Young American Foundation tend to dismiss college campuses as nothing but "indoctrination camps" for the young. This perception is an inaccurate portrayal. Campuses offer a unique opportunity to re-examine long-held beliefs and question traditional tendencies. The result of this process is not ideological manipulation, but the establishment of critical thinking skills and personal beliefs built on rational analysis - not social pressures.
A committed university administration would encourage the smooth flow of ideas in its community. While some might argue for the benefits of Mr. Pipes' speaking engagement, everybody should be angry at the illegitimate use of resources for this speech as a campus-sanctioned event.
The fact that forged signatures made the event possible shows troubling disregard for student regulations, not to mention a tolerance for federal offenses committed on our campus.
We are blessed to have the freedom of expression we enjoy and might even take for granted. A college campus is and should be an academic marketplace of ideas where individuals debate the pressing issues of the day. But such freedoms entail a level of responsibility that was not reflected in the timing or nature of Pipes' speaking engagement last week.
Some claim that Islam was "hijacked" by a group of terrorists on Sept. 11. That might be true, yet I don't want to wake up one day and realize that our democracy was hijacked, too. Extremism should not be tolerated, whether in the name of religion or ideology.
Yaser Alamoodi is a political science senior. Reach him at yaser.alamoodi@asu.edu.
