Every controversy has a past, often one that is far more complex and in far more shades of grey, blue, red, brown, etc, than one might initially expect. This controversy is no different. But to understand a controversy, one must understand from whence it came. Here are several sections on the background of the dispute between Sami Al-Arian and the Administration of the University of South Florida.

• Freedom of speech. It is hard to imagine a democracy without freedom of speech; in fact, freedom of speech, of the press, of conscience, of assembly, of petition, are together the vital part of the American heritage.
• Due process. The difference between civilized government and tyranny lies in the law. Civilized governments do not make laws up as they go along; they use well-established procedures under law.

• Sages. We are familiar with Greek seers, Hebrew prophets, and Chinese scholars who had greater (but not unlimited) freedom to give advice, and even rebuke their leaders.
• Clowns. While some clowns were mere entertainers, the great ones often gave valuable if indirect counsel, and in some societies it was understood that one does not retaliate against clowns.

• The Museum was destroyed when its scholars, in particular its outspoken director (the arithmetician & astronomer Hypatia) became intolerable to the local religious leadership. Hypatia was murdered, the Museum was burned, and then ordered suppressed. There is a lesson the Museum's successors have taken to heart.

• The famous collisions concerned science, philosophy, and religion. Some followed the appearance of Aristotilean philosophy in the then quasi-Platonic 13th-century Europe: some scholars who taught quasi-Aristotilean works got into serious trouble. But the quasi-Aristotileans won, and so later, during the Renaissance, a resurgence of Platonism led to more confrontations, the most famous being the trial of Galileo Galilei.
• There were also scholars who meddled in politics, often supporting one party against another. Kings and popes tended to regard universities as think tanks full of publicists for hire, and some scholars, out of anger, idealism or greed, were willing to oblige. This could cause trouble trouble for a scholar, or a school, that chose sides imprudently.
• There was also the converse problem of politicians who demanded that scholars endorse some initiative. Most politicians preferred bribery (ahem, appointment to offices, offering stipends, etc.) but a few used threats or even force to get scholars to approve some declaration, and the occasional scholar who declined would get into very hot water.
• There were even scholars who tried to suppress other scholars with whom they disagreed, either by pulling wires within academia, or even by persuading outside authorities to intervene.

• In the 14th century, the Fransiscan brother William of Ockham argued very strongly for vows of poverty --- a sensitive issue at that time --- and also for limitations of papal authority --- an unwelcome issue at any time. After some official expressions of displeasure, he sought the protection of the Holy Roman Emporer, who was squabbling with the pope at the time. However, the Emporer died, and William was going through the machinery of canonical law when he too died.
• In the late 17th century, Isaac Newton's colleagues accused Gottfried Liebniz of plagiarism: Liebniz had developed an alternate version of the calculus (currently the version in the textbooks), and some claimed that Liebniz had lifted it from Newton's work. Publicly above the fray, Newton encouraged a campaign to ruin Liebniz's reputation and position. According to legend, when informed of Liebniz's death, Newton crowed, ``I have destroyed him.''
• In the late Eighteenth century, the University of Jena, in Germany, was a leading cultural and intellectual center. In 1798, the philosopher Gottlieb Fichte published On the Basis of Our Belief in a Divine Governance of the World, and was fired for atheism (a not entirely accurate charge) in 1799. After Fichte left for the new University of Berlin, others started leaving, including the dramatist (and history professor) Friedrich Schiller, who decided to move to Weimer (near his hero Goethe) and the philosopher Friedrich Schelling who moved to Wurzburg, along with the legal scholar Gottlieb Hufeland and the Lutheran theologian Heinrich Paulus. In its attempt to cut out a possible atheist, Jena had slashed its own throat, and went into a deep decline.
• In the mid-20th century, the agricultural researcher Trofim Lysenko denounced Darwinism as a ``bourgeois'' theory, and persuaded the Soviet government to embrace a more ``socialist'' theory of evolution. Lysenko persecuted biologists who dissented, most notably the geneticist Nikolay Vavilov, who was ultimately condemned as an Enemy of the People, and died in the Gulag.

• Whenever the pool of students expands, there are a lot of `non-traditional' students that the Administration does not know how to govern. This was an era of many scandals about unruly students, grade inflation, declining standards, etc.
• The demand for good science education, and faculty interest in science, generated a protracted fight over ``Darwinism'' that continues even now, with accusations of violation of academic freedom coming from all (there are more than two) sides.
• Big business has big bucks, and increasingly funds universities, whose administrators and funded faculty may try too hard to please their patrons. There have been several scandals of faculty who displease business --- either by advocating reforms or by coming to inconvenient conclusions in their research --- being disciplined or even fired.

• Perhaps non-academics should have some kind of freedom from being fired for expressing their opinions. There are already some protections, for whistleblowers and government employees. And there are good reasons for these protections. Perhaps this should not be a special right for academics, but a general right for everyone: but such a right would probably have to be won by organizing unions and having the unions fight for this right.
• One objection is summed up by a parent and school board member who said that she did not want her daughter to be taught unpleasant things about America. To which we can only note the functional analogy between this objection and medical denial: it is sometimes dangerous to tastefully overlook unpleasant things. Besides, scholars are supposed to investigate reality as well as fantasy.
• One issue that has become important recently is the right of citizens and their elected representatives to disinterested counsel on social, scientific, and technological issues. Wealthy corporations can hire scientists and technologists directly (as staff) or indirectly (by setting up corporate-sponsored but officially independent ``think tanks``) that can present reports on environmental, economic, military, and other issues supporting their sponsors. Only a genuinely independent array of institutions, supporting the work of a diverse community of scholars, can guarantee that all aspects of an issue will at least be investigated and reported to the public.
• Students are scholars, too, and have been targeted by unhappy professors, administrators, alumni, politicians, etc. There have been two problems: students who try to learn restricted materials, and students who question (or even denounce) authority. Student academic rights were a major issue during the 1960s, when some high schools and universities even invited police to solve their academic discipline problems. (It is an issue again, with students opposing speech and courtesy codes, and often getting support of alumni in their resistance.) Students (like all youngsters) tend to learn by example, and this makes systemic violation of student academic rights very dangerous for the future of a democracy.

The University of South Florida is probably the single greatest human resource in the Tampa Bay area. But Florida is a young place, populated by many immigrants (young and old) with few roots and little sense of history. When looking at the dispute between the USF Administration and Sami Al-Arian, it is important to remember that this is taking place in Florida, and that it is very much influenced by Florida's culture and Florida's academic politics.

• This is Florida, after all. Florida is a large state, with ancient rural settlements in the north, glitzy development in the south (and center), and a growing high-tech component.
• The Universities. The most well-known institutions of higher education in Florida are its public universities, long starved and now enduring enormous political stresses imposed from outside.
• The University of South Florida. About four decades old, USF is one of the largest universities in the United States.
• The Faculty of USF have endured several administrative panics, often the result of administrators submitting to outside pressures. The faculty have developed organizations to protect themselves and the university.

Sami Al-Arian has long been a very active and outspoken academic, and the issues he addresses are contentious ones. He has been the target of many accusations, but thus far most accusations have either accused him of engaging in unpleasant but lawful activities, or have accused him of engaging in vague, non-specific, possibly illegal, and thus far unproven activities; specific accusations were made (at long last!) by the Federal Government on Feb. 20, 2003. This page starts with some background on the relevant Middle Eastern controversies, and then proceeds to the case at hand.

• A clash of academics. After the Cold War ended, concerns about the Middle East and about terrorism inspired predictions that the West would soon face a confrontation with Islam.
• Israel and Palestine. Once upon a time, America had romantic notions about Arabs and sentimental notions about Israelis. But the confrontation over the land has become a protracted tragedy. We take a close look at the organization Al-Arian is accused of being associated with.
• A nail stands up. Sami Al-Arian is of Palestinian ancestry; he was born in Kuwait; he grew up in Egypt; he studied and later did research in computer engineering in America. He also was active in politics and involved in Islamic studies, and this latter interest brought him to the (friendly at first) attention of USF.
• The hammer descending. In 1994 - 1995, Al-Arian's institute comes under the ferocious if naive scrutiny of a celebrity reporter and one of the employees of his institute turns out to be a leader of a terrorist organization.
• Reverberations. After the events of 1995 - 1996, Al-Arian is put on leave, his institute is shut down, and his brother-in-law placed in detention based on shifting rationales and ultimately ``secret evidence.'' Al-Arian becomes active in the civil liberties movement.