🚀 go-pugleaf

In article Laurie Zack wrote:

snipo

> Frederick Lowy
> President and Vice-Chancellor
> 
> 
> Free Speech and Security at Concordia University
> 
> Regrettably, Concordia University is once again inaccurately represented as an 
> institution that curtails freedom of speech.  Nothing could be further from 
> the truth.

	Can we all say moutain out of a mole hill? What a silly problem, 
as all of the quote major problems at Concordia. Refusing to all Barak 
to speak at Concordia is not a threat to freedom of speech. It is simple 
an issue of security. If Concordia had refused because organizers 
asked for an extra large room that they, the administration could not 
find a room as large, would this also be a threat to freedom of speech?  
Would there be an issue if there was a special audio/visual requirerment 
that Concordia did not have available? Would this even be an issue at 
any other univertsity?


> The University's decision not to host on our campuses the proposed 
> speech by Mr. Ehud Barak, a former Prime-Minister of Israel, but to co-sponsor 
> the event at a more securable location has been distorted as a failure to 
> protect free speech and a caving in to mob role.  This is simply not true.  

	Of course it is not true. What it is, is yet another example of 
how Concordia gets no respect. It is a silly problem. We cannot hold it 
here at the university, let us instead hold it somewhere else is a 
reasonable solution, yet who really wants to hear reason in such an 
emotionally charged issue.


> The University has a responsibility to protect the security of students, 
> staff, professors, and neighbours while promoting free speech-at a location 
> that security experts consider appropriate.

	Gosh what next can we expect? The fact that Lowry even had to 
say this show just how stupid this issue is. Duh just how basic does 
this position have to be. To be educated we need a place with lights as 
well, yet we do not have people claiming that when they turn off the 
lights at night the university is threatening freedom of speech.

>  This is precisely what we have 
> done.  That the organizers of Mr. Barak's proposed visit have rejected our 
> offer to facilitate, co-sponsor and help pay for the event at one of several 
> recommended Montreal sites calls into question whether they truly wish to hear 
> Mr. Barak's views or, rather, wish to advance their own political agenda 
> without regard for the potential consequences for Concordia University.

	Wow, now that statement was unexpected. Lowry seems to be 
growing a pair. To actually question just how committed the organizers 
are to holding this event, is a huge leap for the administration. 
Reasonable and ballsy, who knew Concordias administration had either. 

> Since the events of September, 2002 when a group of violent protesters, many 
> of whom were not our students, prevented another former Israeli Prime-
> Minister, Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu, from speaking, there has been pressure on 
> the University to demonstrate that it is not anti-semitic and that Jewish 
> speakers are welcome.

	Oh please! and you were doing so well. That so called riot was 
silly. Now Chicago in 68, that was a riot. The "Battle for Seattle" that 
was a riot. I have seem angrier mobs in the line up at the caf! The 
damage was how much? A couple of broken windows? Gosh! Lets face it. The 
administration lost it and hit the chicken switch during Netanyahu's 
visit. Course this could be the fact that they had their heads so far 
up their a$$$$$ (Gee people might protest a controversal speaker, what a 
surprise...)

snipo

>  We stand on our 
> proven record of open debate and freedom of expression that is second to no 
> other university in this country.

	Ok so rhetoric is not lost on the admin... :-)

> In summary, we would have been pleased to have Mr. Barak speak to our 
> students, and were prepared to plan for this until our risk assessment team, 
> armed with advice from security authorities, concluded that we do not at 
> present have a locale on campus that can reasonably be made sufficiently 
> secure for such an event. 

	Add to this that we feel our security experts are not qualified 
to secure a five year old's birthday party getting out of hand and we 
all can see how silly they are.

> That is why we made the offer to co-sponsor this 
> speech off campus.
> 
> Unfortunately, this offer was rejected.

	Wow. Who would have thought this. Unreasonable people with 
unreasonable issues that have been fighting for generations... The 
organizers on both sides of this issues have constantly shown they can 
be unreasonable. The key is to get to the people in each organization 
and get them to work out solutions. And the problem is not just here at 
Concordia, but part of the global issues in the middle East. How many 
people must die on both sides before they reach a solution? Clearly the 
answer is not yet enough.

snip


> Let's be fair and truthful. 

	Let's not. Let this silly issue disappear and have people get 
lives. I started Concordia in 1988, each year and sometimes more, we 
have these issues over what amounts to nothing becoming full blown 
problems. The administration is part of that cycle. Break the cycle. You 
do not hear of such problems at other universities. Why is it, that they 
only happen at Concordia? I want to go to university get my pieces of 
paper and walk away without having heard about my university on the 
front page. The only time i want to see us on the front page is when a 
researcher discovers a cure for cancer. Discover life on other planets. 
Or something worthy of being on the front page. Not this this silly 
stuff.

	If there was a real issue for the real world then you would see
it as something more than where to rent a room. Concordia has refused to
allow people from all sorts of different groups to assemble in the past
for valid reasons. The administration, whom i am not particularly fond
of as a collective, have bent over backwards to accomidate these groups
and each time they get burned by bad headlines.

	Concordia is a great place to learn. The people working here are 
some of the best in the world. We have real problems that need 
attention, that need discussion. What this issue is, is nothing more 
then a silly headline grabber that diverts attention from real issues.

		Just Thought I Should Mention It