Al-Arian Firing will Threaten us All
By Elizabeth Bird
Professor: Department of Anthropology
On Wednesday, December 19, I began my day as a full-time USF administrator in the Office of the Provost, as I had for the past 18 months. Two days later, I turned in my resignation, and became a tenured professor again, still reeling from the events at that Wednesday’s now infamous USF Board of Trustees meeting. For me, it was a decision of conscience, and in the weeks since, I have only become surer that I did the right thing.
As everyone probably knows, the Trustees, after just two hours of discussion, voted to recommend the firing of Professor Sami Al-Arian, and President Judy Genshaft followed through with a letter of intent to terminate. In all the debate since, we seem to have lost sight of what really happened at that meeting, and just why it was such a momentous and fundamentally wrong decision, not only for USF, but for universities around Florida and the nation. It was a decision reached in haste by a group of profoundly ignorant people, who apparently now hold the fate of this university in their hands.
Don’t misunderstand me. The Trustees are doubtless very knowledgeable and informed -- when it comes to making real estate deals, running law offices, or managing steak house chains. But it seems no one at USF took the time to educate our new bosses about how a university differs from such enterprises, and they never tried to find out. In a university, the free flow of ideas is the central purpose of our “business,” with the faculty at its academic heart. Yet from day one, the Trustees have treated USF faculty with indifference and contempt. Other Florida boards have offered a regular place at the table to faculty leaders, creating a relationship of mutual respect and cooperation. On September 21, our faculty senate president respectfully requested a similar courtesy. According to board minutes, “Chairman Beard thanked Dr. Paveza and told him his request would be reviewed.” He is still waiting for a response.
So it was hardly surprising that no one thought to consult with faculty before calling the “emergency” meeting that would pass judgment on Al-Arian. He was an embarrassment, and he had to go.
This meeting was clearly called with the intention of firing him. Chairman Beard’s opening remarks make this clear. The board will “come to a resolution on our relationship with Dr. Al-Arian.” Not discuss it or review it, but resolve it once and for all. Hired attorney Tom Gonzalez had prepared a 7-page document spelling out the way the firing could be achieved; it was handed to Trustees for the first time that morning, and none even pretended to have read it before the action began.
But more important than any of this is the rationale for firing that then unfolded. No, of course Al-Arian was not being fired for what he said (although in the weeks since, some administrators have repeatedly referred to the 1988 tape of Al-Arian’s words, as if somehow those very words seal the case). Gonzalez proceeded to reveal his interpretation that public employees may be fired if their words or actions lead to disruption in the workplace. We heard various spokespeople describing the kind of disruption that USF has experienced:
“It’s had a significant impact on our Admissions Office’s efforts to recruit new students.” I guess that would explain why student credit hours have increased significantly from Spring 2001 to Spring 2002, and why we’re so short of space that we’re teaching 200 students at a time in movie theatres.
“There was a number of telephone calls, 12 of which included death threats … to Dr. Al-Arian,” and this has created a safety threat on campus. Students are apparently living in fear. When was the last one of these threats made? “Just post his appearance on the O’Reilly Factor,” said the police spokesman – that is, in September. And we only learned several weeks later that the most notorious of those threats was made by a caller who then called back to apologize and say he meant no harm. Meanwhile, Student Government President Mike Griffin reports to the Board that Muslim students, who might reasonably be in most fear, are telling him that “the only time I feel safe is when I’m on this campus.” On December 19, we already knew we were enrolling students in Spring classes in huge numbers – a tribute to their desire for an education in spite of their overwhelming security fears, one assumes.
“High level volunteers and corporate donors have reported pressure from peers and customers and clients.” Ah, now we’re getting somewhere. And of course alumni donations are down – I guess it’s just a coincidence that in other, Al-Arian-free universities, they are too.
But as Gonzalez continued, the real significance emerges. What kind of “disruption” is really needed to get an employee fired? As it turns out, not much at all. “The employer doesn’t have to wait for the actual harm … the potential for harm is something it can act on. It can be based on the evidence at the time … and the evidence in [one specific case] was hearsay, where the employee even denied she had engaged in speaking the words attributed to her.” Any speech that “may have undermined managerial authority” also may constitute disruption; “disruption caused by … speech” may be as trivial as “hurt feelings that rose to the extent that people could no longer feel good about working there.”
Gonzalez did point out that this interpretation has never been applied in a university – with good reason, one might add. Make no mistake: if this decision stands, it clearly means that any USF employee can be fired, and any student expelled, if the employer believes his or her speech has the potential to cause disruption. This isn’t about “ivory tower” professors clinging to tenure – it is about everyone’s basic right to speak freely and without fear. And without that right, we do not have a university. Instead, as my colleague Dr. Alvin Wolfe so aptly put it in a letter to the Tampa Tribune, we have “an obedience training school.”
The Trustees weren’t even content with this. They had also decided Al-Arian must go because he had failed to make it clear that he speaks for himself and not the university. The absurdity of this premise has been thoroughly discussed elsewhere – the December 19 meeting showed just how embarrassingly ill-prepared was the USF case. When asked by Trustee Connie Mack if there is evidence that he did not identify himself as a private citizen a USF attorney replied: “We have been in the process of trying to obtain evidence in that regard.” But meanwhile, let’s just fire him anyway!
Every so often, Trustees reminded themselves that, according to the convoluted case they were making, Al-Arian and the content of his speech are irrelevant. But somehow they just couldn’t keep on task. Chairman Beard declared that Al-Arian’s “character is flawed,” while Trustee Gus Stavros fretted that he has been receiving “e-mail calling me unpatriotic because of this professor,” a problem that Mike Griffin also found “upsetting.”
Sitting through that meeting was also just a tad “upsetting.” Studying the transcript has only reinforced for me the depth of the contradictory, repressive, and ill-informed nature of the Trustees’ discussion. Could they have made an attempt to understand the true implications of free speech and academic freedom before they began – perhaps by talking with faculty? Of course, but they chose not to. Could they have set aside some time at the meeting for public comment? Of course, but they chose not to. Could they have listened to President Patrick Swygert, the only Trustee with academic credentials? He suggested that USF, like any other real university, might “demonstrate that we … are bigger, frankly, than (Al-Arian)” Yes, but they chose not to. In their ignorance and arrogance, they set USF on a trajectory that, unless a choice is made to halt it, will likely destroy our credibility for a very long time.
When I came to USF 6 years ago, I was drawn by the optimism, the quality of our academic programs, and the feeling that we were going somewhere. As part of the administration, I felt proud of our achievements and our potential. As I return to the faculty, I feel a great deal of sorrow. Not for the salary I gave up, or for my aborted administrative ambitions. And not particularly for Sami Al-Arian. Rather, I feel sorrow for a university that once chose “truth” and “wisdom” as its guiding principles. For when truth is replaced by spin, and wisdom is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency, then we have finally sold out the soul of the university. And that impoverishes us all.