Opinion: Leading vs. misleading

University of South Florida president Judy Genshaft gave valid reasons Wednesday for her decision to fire engineering professor and accused terrorist organizer Sami Al-Arian: She said Al-Arian "misused the university's name, reputation, resources and personnel," made "false and misleading statements" and failed to live up to the high standards demanded of the USF faculty. That's all true. In particular, by misleading USF officials more than a decade ago about the true purposes of a supposed Islamic "think tank" he founded on campus, Al-Arian brought embarrassment to the university.

After making a far more credible case for punishing Al-Arian than she had in the past, Genshaft also made a game effort to answer questions about her decision. It's too bad Genshaft and other USF officials weren't this candid in their handling of the Al-Arian case from the start. Their original rationalizations for suspending Al-Arian more than a year ago -- his presence on campus provoked death threats, he failed to note in public appearances that he did not officially speak for the university, he violated an order to remain off campus while suspended -- set dangerous precedents that, if not repudiated, could chill legitimate academic activity.

Genshaft's well-reasoned decision Wednesday did not erase her earlier mistakes -- much less those of previous USF administrations that failed to give proper institutional oversight to Al-Arian and the campus organizations he led. However, it did put the university on stronger legal and ethical footing as the Al-Arian case goes forward.

Genshaft's display of common sense was a welcome contrast to the increasingly fantastical rhetoric of Al-Arian and many of his supporters. Al-Arian says he is a "prisoner of conscience" and compares himself to Jesus, but he's not the first inmate with grandiose delusions. Harder to fathom are the many Al-Arian supporters who loudly cast him as a martyr being persecuted by the U.S. government.

Al-Arian deserves the same presumption of innocence afforded every criminal defendant, but he is no innocent in the larger sense. At the very least, he lied for years about his ties to Islamic terrorists and brought embarrassment to USF by planting a fraudulent think tank on campus. His actions may not have been criminal. A jury will decide that. But he certainly hasn't covered himself in glory. The protesters who exalt Al-Arian and dismiss the charges against him without bothering to read the detailed indictment merely reveal their own biases.

Al-Arian has accused newspaper editors of "butchering" the self-serving articles he sends them. His wife says their family was "slaughtered" by the federal agents who peacefully and politely came to their home to arrest Al-Arian. Why is it that the Al-Arians and many of their supporters never manage to employ similarly powerful language to describe the victims of actual butchery and slaughter at the hands of terrorists?

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright