Yale Update

We here at Blue Crab Boulevard have been pretty persistent in our criticism of Yale's decision to admit a former Taliban official as a student. John Fund reports today that the redefinition of the rules for the programs that admit non-traditional students may signal that Yale is going to dump Mr. Hashemi.

Please let this be so.

Fund also takes note of the potential hiring of Juan Cole. Let's just say Mr. Fund isn't a big fan and recommends Yale not do that, either. Oh well, hiring Cole would simply give us more opportunity to attempt to make Yale into a laughingstock.

We're just saying.

This entry was posted in Yale Follies. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Yale Update

  1. Tano says:

    I’ve found Fund and the WSJ to be pretty disgusting on the Yale issue. Seems obvious that the bizarre and sleazy Fund is trying to rehabilitate himself on the back of a 22 year old. The Taliban guy was a kid who grew up in a very small town lost in Afghanistan somewhere, where the Taliban was the movement that captured the imagination of his townpeople. He got sucked up into it, and, given his brains, was given PR responisbilities when still in his teens. Now thats all in the past, and the kid, he is still a kid, is being given the opportunity to learn about the real world, and put his brain to some use. I say great. Remember, we brought people like Werner von Braun from the Nazis to this country and gave them very high positions after WWII. We realized their potential usefulness, but also had some sense that redemption is possible. That with a guy who was one of Hitler’s right-hand men. Here we have a 22 year old kid! I mean, for chrissakes, if we can teach this kid about liberal democracy, and he certainly seems willing to learn, that could have long-term benefits in terms of winning the hearts and minds campaign – something everyone understands is the longterm strategy.
    But Fund just wants to play the demagouge game – I find him revolting.

    As for Cole, he is a an excellent scholar, and a valuable public intellectual. Personally I agree with most of his perspectives, not all, but probably a higher percentage than with most intellectuals who have written about the mideast.
    Ya gotta admit it is ironic though. Just when the right-wing reactionaries are engaging full bore in an attack on the “ideological academy”, they simultaneously mount an ideological attack on an academic hire! Can’t have it both ways guys – either the academy will be a free speech zone, or we can have ideological tests for hiring. I’m not sure y’all want to go there, cause I don’t think you will win the majority of the cases.

  2. Gauis Arbo says:

    Last I heard 22 was considered a man. Obviously, you think Hashemi should be forgiven for his youthful indiscretions. I don’t.

    Bringing up what happened a long time ago, in a completely different context is irelevant and an attempt at moral equivilence.

    My objection to Cole, in case you’d care to go look into it, is not ideological. It’s that he is, contrary to your assertions, wrong most of the time. Period.

  3. Tano says:

    Wrong most of the time? You must be kidding. He has been far more often correct than all of the war-supporting “experts” who help convince half the nation that the war would be a good idea.

    And whats up with this “moral equivalence” canard? You think you can hide behind a phrase? What does it mean? You want to claim that the Taliban kid is somehow MORE morally culpable for the spread of evil in the world than one of Hitler’s rocket makers, and Holocaust enablers?

  4. Gauis Arbo says:

    Tano, you’re shrill and tiresome.

    You’re also wrong.

  5. Tano says:

    Oh, and BTW Gaius,

    I dont think it is fair to call what the kid did an “indescretion”. The term usually refers to behavior that one commits despite having every reason to know better. Like growing up a rich and priviliged kid and becoming a druken lout. This is a kid who grew up in an enviroment where most people were uneducated, with little contact with or understanding of the outside world, in the midst of civil wars and communist occupation. So he got caught up in a movement that probably sold itself as a force for national pride and religous redemption.

    We routinely forgive enemy combatants, most of who are older than this kid was, and who actually killed some of our own people. Its not just von Braun – how many Germans and Japanese have gone on to find a new life – even here in America? What would we do with a young Cuban who defects to America and wants to get an education? No, this guy is being singled out by a scumbag demagouge who is trying to build his own rep by picking on someone who is an easy target. Shame on you for mindlessly joining in.

  6. Gauis Arbo says:

    Shame on you for having such flexible a sense of right and wrong.

    Quite simply, conflating the issues of Von Braun and Hashemi is a classic attempt to derail a discussion. Bringing up the “poor misguded person who just didn’t know better” is also misdirection. By your reasoning, so long as they don’t know any better, murder is completely acceptable. So is every single evil act – so long as they just didn’t know any better.

    Bull. Some things are not excusable. He actively spread disinformation about the Taliban and continues to do so. You’re trying to enable him with your stance.

    Fund doesn’t need to build up his rep, so that’s misdirection. Nor does he need my assistance. I chose to do this on my own. I rather doubt anyone at Yale even knows I exist as well. This isn’t exactly Instapundit.

  7. Tano says:

    Let me just understand you completely here Gaius.

    First off, feeling that redemption is possible makes me a believer in a flexible sense of right and wrong???? Isn’t the belief in the possibility of redemption at the heart of the teachings of those institutions that are the strongest defenders of concepts of right and wrong? How can you have redemption if you don’t make a distinction between right and wrong? And where did I ever squidge on whether the Taliban was wrong? I think you are trying to simply dredge up some popular RW tropes to hurl at me without thinking through what they mean.

    Second, why is talk of von Braun etc. a derailing of the issue? It is a direct, relevant comparison. You believe in applying certain standards in one case – in a similar case, in fact one that is far far less egrigious, you choose a harsher standard? Why? (my guess,,,you havent really thought about it much yet – just jumping on the latest RW frenzy).

    The “he didnt know any better” argument happens to be simply true. And it is the basis for why we have forgiven countless millions of people who have taken up arms against us in previous wars. Hell, we excused a few million of our own traitorous countrymen who “murdered” hundreds of thousands of our troops in the civil war. Sorry, but your logic is the one that needs to be realigned with your own principles, as you apply them in all other cases.

    Anyway, I realize that you take these positions on your own. Thats why I said, shame on you. But I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt by noting that you ddnt make up this obnoxious campaign, you just seem to have been sucked up by it. Don’t worry though, redemption is always possible. :)

    So, you don’t excuse anyone for having committed any sin as serious as spreading propaganda for an evil group, when he is around 20yo?

  8. Tano says:

    oops, sorry – that last sentence was meant to be cut.

    And I didnt mean to use the damn smiley face!

  9. Gauis Arbo says:

    Von Braun is a long, long time ago. Saying “well we did it then makes it ok now”, is bull.

    Redmption is not possible when Hashemi does not even acknowledge what he did is wrong. His only attempt to address what he did was to blame it on evil elments taking over.

Comments are closed.