Critiques should be viewed as freedom of speech

LETTER TO THE EDITOR, Feb. 4, 2010

    In the Dec. 3 issue of the IV Leader, Professor Jason Beyer wrote a colorful response to Neal Pierson’s previous two articles. Pierson’s articles were aimed at pointing out the flaws in governing bodies refusing to call, what Beyer himself said, “a spade a spade.”
    Furthermore, Professor Beyer wrote that Pierson has contributed to “dehumanization,” and “demonization,” of Muslims here on campus at IVCC and around the world. Continuing, he claims that Pierson has brought “the kind of political rhetoric that makes for compelling television,” which in turn, he says, “detracts from our civility and humanity.”
    The falsehoods in his response are wide ranging, but the attack on free speech that Professor Beyer makes as he chastises Pierson for his difference in opinion puts the proverbial icing on the cake. Pierson does not attack Muslims, demean them or make them inferior to any white-anglo-saxon-protestant American, Canadian or European; he does not say that all Muslims are card carrying members of Al-Qaeda or any state-sponsored terrorist network; however, what he does say is that the United States Government, President Obama in particular, has put more emphasis on waging a political war with conservatively centered Fox News rather than done his job and lead the charge against those extremist groups whose sole goal is the end to the American way of life.
    Countries that the free world currently faces conflict with in a variety of manners—Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Somalia, and Pakistan for example—are not part of any civilized world when the central governments fail to control radicalism in urban and rural areas alike. They have allowed their citizens to become indoctrinated with beliefs that are not only self destructive but pose a threat to any free society. Pierson focuses his articles on the current hot button issue of Islamic Radicalism. That does not carry any implication that he believes all Muslims are evil or cruel, because, in fact, they are not.
    In short, the main idea is that we must stop the radical branch of Islam from becoming a destructive force in any society—not just our own. Radicalism is not something inherent to Islam, but at this moment in history Radical Islam is the largest threat to freedom. The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 followed by bombings in London, Madrid, Morocco, Moscow and Israel over the course of the last eight years paint the correct picture: radicalism must be stopped at any cost. Beyer, on the opposite hand, paints Pierson as an Islamophobe and a bigot, which he in fact is not, by holding a dissenting opinion. He portrays Pierson’s words as something that are a dagger to the hearts of Muslims on campus and across the world. In all actuality, Professor Beyer, the words you wrote do nothing but inflame the fire of hate by twisting words and putting spin on them like one of the compelling television hosts you so casually wrote about.

— Bruce Norquist
IVCC Student