"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." --- attributed to Voltaire

The above quotation is frequently cited to defend "unpopular" ideas to those who would seek to stifle the expression of such ideas. That phrase has come to mind often in the months following the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

As the Ithaca College community joined the rest of the world in absorbing the horror of what had been done, the question naturally arose as to why it had been done. Colleges and universities have a particular responsibility to examine --- from an informed, scholarly perspective --- this very question, and to convey whatever "answers" they may come up with. This notion is embedded in the Ithaca College mission statement:

To that end, in the aftermath of the attacks and the ensuing "war on terror," Ithaca College sponsored a number of faculty-led forums to engage community members in discussion about the what and to take a closer look at what might be behind the why. And the most recent issue of the Ithaca College Quarterly also devoted much of its space to September 11 coverage, including profiles of alumni who lost their lives in the attacks as well as commentary written by alumni and faculty members.

Since the issue’s publication, both magazine editor Maura Stephens and I have received letters and e-mails from alumni. Many of those provided thoughtful responses --- both positive and negative --- to the ideas expressed in the articles. Some, however, complained about "one-sided," "offensive," and even "anti-American" articles being published. In particular, a number of writers condemned the essay by associate professor of politics Asma Barlas titled "Why Do They Hate Us?" Some of the alumni writers stated that this article had no place in "their magazine" and that criticism of the United States government is unacceptable in an Ithaca College publication.

I found these reactions unsettling, causing me to question how well we are doing our job --- which is to educate our students to think critically, appreciate diversity of background and outlook, and engage in intelligent, informed, and respectful discourse. Professor Barlas does not need me to defend her scholarly and teaching record. She has published numerous articles and has a book forthcoming on the Qur’an’s teachings about women that is critical of both Muslim cultural practices and Western media stereotypes. A native of Pakistan, Professor Barlas served with that nation’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and was assistant editor of the Muslim news paper. It is ironic, in light of the calls from some that her views be censored --- or even censured --- that one reason she left Pakistan for the United States was that she was not free to express her opinions there.

Academic freedom is at the heart of all we do at Ithaca College. I realize that when we actually exercise that academic freedom on a less-than-popular issue, some people may be upset or offended. I regret that this was the case for some readers of the College magazine. But I believe firmly that it is crucial for us to listen to and try to understand differing and divergent points of view on important questions. That was certainly the intent with the array of articles in the Quarterly, as its editor wrote in her opening essay.

History --- both ancient and recent --- has shown us that extremism thrives in countries where assaults on academic freedom foster a climate of ignorance and intolerance. If we objected when Afghanistan’s ruling Taliban shut down schools and shut out voices of opposition, we must also object when attempts are made closer to home to call critical thought an attack on public decency, or even national security. In the wake of September 11, faculty members at colleges and universities in this country have come under official or public pressure for questioning various aspects of the U.S. government’s past or projected policies. As a college president, I am alarmed that my academic colleagues can be threatened for exercising what is not only their right but is also their duty to speak freely. I find such threats to be anti-American.

It is more important than ever that campuses be safe havens for the exchange of ideas, even if you --- or I --- do not agree with all of those ideas. I am pleased that the editor of the Quarterly is publishing as many of the letters received in response to the magazine’s September 11 coverage as space allows. Though I may disagree with what some of those letters have to say, their very inclusion in the following pages demonstrates that the College is staying true to its mission.