Ari Siletz

I agree................

Dear Ari,

I completely agree with your statements.  My reference was directed toward some of the commentators on your blog.  Indeed, it is the statements made by one individual faculty member which are in question here, not Stanford as an institution of higher learning.

11mashty, quite the contrary

Please read thoroughly

Academic freedom or tenure right NEVER trump a right enshrined in the US constitution such as a Civil Right.  That is entirely the wrong question. 

While there are common principles for trerminating a 'tenured' faculty member such as those listed by MM, inevitably these will vary greatly from one institution to the next.  Indeed many universities may even choose to move the individual into a paid 'neutral' position rather than engage in the legal fight of termination.

From what I gather, a professor has made a very improper statement.  Stanford has rejected those statements publicly as it must.  Rest assured there is a lot more going on at Standford which will NOT become public (though termination will not be an outcome). 

To accuse someone of discriminatory practice, you must show the adverse impact suffered by someone else as a result. Did this professor impede the admission of an Iranian student?  If he did, it would be a Federal offense which I am sure the US Dept of Education office of Civil Right's branch in San Francisco will take up without hesitation.  From what I gather, that is NOT the case; he made a statement, albeit a thoroughly stupid one.  World-renowned institutions such as Stanford did not become what they are by engaging in discriminatory practices.  

So again a professor has made a thoroughly disgusting statement (not action) and the university is responding.  Let's not make this a witch hunt....it could be any of you or your opinions next.

at first, i thought that

at first, i thought that the cartoon may be a bit unfair (to the entire computer science department or stanford for that matter) and is over-the-top.  however, i think that considering the nutty professor's weilding of power in the name of his department, it is fair to also go after the department.  considering the limitation facing the grieved; namely, no illegal action on the part of the professor and tenure of the professor, pointing the finger at the entire department may influence them to take some kind of concillatory action against the professor.

even from the economic standpoint (e.g. enrollment, funding of projects), stanford may not lose.  they even may stand to gain by some elements who are sympathetic to the professor's action.  however, from an image standpoint or perhaps the univeristy's mission of diversity, the school would only lose if they do not take action. 

Roozbeh

"And even if I were in a position to help [with admission], I will not help Iranian students until Iran recognizes and respects Israel ..."

Readers familiar with the case would recognize the reference for what it is. For the rest: the cartoon is not meant to suggest an anti-Iranian student conspiracy at Standford (see above paragraphs).  

Ari, of course there is no conspiracy!

But your cartoon suggests otherwise, please take a look at it again. That is all I am saying!

BTW, any idiot who behaves in such discriminatory fashion as this professor is alleged to have, would deprive himself of valuable reserch funding by big US corporations, very keen to follow their own  PC/anti discriminatory guidelines. This is how corporate US works!

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Roozbeh

Esfand

Ari, you are pouring islamist regime's oil on this fire.

knowingly or not, by somehow attributing the alleged discriminatory comments by the said professor to some form of a "zionist/israeli/Jewish" conspiracy against iranian people at stanford. A conspiracy theory I completely reject as no more than a desparate diversionary tactic by the islamist regime of Iran.  

I ask you again, if you have a proof of this "jewish/israeli/zionist conspiracy" at stanford against Iranians, let us all see it. Otherwise I fully understand the professors decline of your invitation to a response.....  

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Ari jaan I agree! How many flogs would u say he should receive?!

Everything is sacred

Esfand jaan: When the comment is in favor of Israel/Zionist

"He wouldn't be able to get away with it had he used the same attitude towards blacks"

It may not matter who they are offending, the Red blooded White Americans can be offended in favor of Israel and no one will give a hoot about that. In case of any real objection, all they need to do is to pull their "anti-Semite" card out and that would be enough to scare every one off.

Mehrdad

Ullman's error and what to do about it

Some computer programming statements cause a crash, even though they may be perfectly legal statements in the program's langauge. Examples are instructing the computer to divide by zero, or referring the program to a non-existent memory location. Free speech is like a programming language; you are free to write any statement you want, but no practitioner of it should take this to mean that all legal statements are free of disastrous consequences. Computer programmers deduce this logically; free speech practitioners learn it by experience.

Though the university campus is a free speech zone, there is at least one statement that cannot be made by a faculty member without consequences: "I oppose admission to a certain class of students."

This was the error that caused the crash; Dr. Ullman's equivalent of sending the program pointer to a non-existent memory location. His statement on the university's official website suggesting an Israel loyalty "password" for admission contradicts Standford University's policy of non-discrimination.

Should Dr. Ullman be fired? Nope. Asking him to clean up the mess he has created would be the proper and measured reaction from university.

Sweep it under the rug? Nope, because other professors, with different politics as to which class of student should be barred, would be tempted to retaliate, victimizing many bright young minds of all nationalities in an escalating war. Better to stop this trend right now before it consumes a very reputable academic institution.

Stanford University must tell Ullman to remove his hate link

This is a clear case of a university faculty (mis)using resources of that institution for a purpose other than it was intended.   Dr.Ullman is inappropriately using Stanford domain to express his Political views, which have nothing to do with his job as a Computer Science professor.   He should move his personal belief to his personal web site.

As it stands, the name of Stanford University,  is also tainted for this misuse by one of its faculty members.   It is indeed mind buggling that a Computer Science professor is incapable of applying basic logic to his own action and understand he is crossing a line with mixing his  bigotry with his profession.

This is not a question of IF Ullman were in  a position in the admission office would he filter out Iranian students, which he would clearly do without hesitation.  It is the issue of how Stanford University name is pulled in all of this hate mongering by this professor.

Perhaps, Dr.Ullman is upset at the fact that a large number of very qualified and capable Iranian students  graduate from Stanford every year, and contribute to the economy here, and likes to derail that by giving a different image of Stanford to a would be Iranian applicant? But Stanford University should not allow for that.

May we all have good dreams.

Well the UCLA police didn't get away with it.

UCLA had to pay $220,000 for the taser incident.  Had they tasered a WASP they'd have only paid $20,000.  So when the time comes we'll sue Stanford, Condaleeza Rice and the professor himself.  This cartoon is just a warmup!

Everything is sacred

btw esfand, i don't think he

btw esfand, i don't think he could've gotten away with most ethnicities especially black, korean, mexican, chinese, japanese,....  was there a huge demonstration in stanford organized by iranians?  are iranians a "recognized minority?"  not that any of these factors change the stupidity of this professor's actions but they do matter in practical terms (and consequence). just saying.

esfand, i agree with you. 

esfand, i agree with you.  and here's the answer to your question:

//weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/ahmadinejad-crosseyed.jpg

Hamsade jaan apply "if" and replace Iranian w/ Black students.

The professor should be flogged as a minimum.  He wouldn't be able to get away with it had he used the same attitude towards blacks.  So why should he be able to get away with it with other ethnicities?  Be it Iranian, Korean, Mexican or what have you. 

Everything is sacred

esfand jan, the professor

esfand jan, the professor stated that "if [he was] in a position to help, [he wouldn't] help iranians students..."  the operative word here is "if."  obviously he is not in the selection committee to admit new graduate students into the computer science program at stanford.  if he was, then the university should take some sort of disciplinary action (tenured or not).  at any rate, i think the university should advise this professor to change his behavior.  i would've liked him to be reprimanded (tenured or not) for this behavior.  in this case, there was no evidence of discrimination in admitting someone into the program.  don't drag aclu into this. :)

also, there is plenty of praise about iranian sudents; specifically, sharif u. students in the u.s.  we shouldn't get so bent out of shape over a nutcase (not that we should be silent about it).  here's a video of praise attributed to stanford's head of electrical engineering department about sharif u. students.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=s957W6jomBc

MM, it happened to Ward Churchill

He's a Native American political activist. His tenure was taken away based on his political views (yes, it can happen here in the US):

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill

Of course, if a tenured professor is anti-Iran or anti-Iranian, that sort of thing is not considered grounds for such. You kidding?

When Can a Tenured Faculty Member Be Fired?

When Can a Tenured Faculty Member Be Fired?

//english.sxu.edu/sites/kirstein/archives/807

The reversal of tenure is a rare act that occurs under the following listed circumstances (See source for details).  So, the process of firing of the tenured professors does happen.  However, usually a reprimend/censure is the normal course of action, which would probably suffice in the case of pro. Ullman with the condition that he does not participate in the process of the evaluation of Iranian students. 

"According to the American Association of University Professors, tenure can only be revoked for cause."

Incompetence:....

Non-performance of duties:....

Moral Turpitude:....

Financial Exigency:....

Cancellation of Program or Department:...

Institutional merger:....

11mashty can you provide a link from any university?

Where does it say the rules of any university that allow a professor to discriminate admission or education with a specific ethnic group? 

Does the "principles of academic freedom" trump the Civil Rights and anti-discriminations laws of the US? 

Everything is sacred

Please Get Serious

Dear Ari,

Your depiction is funny and very appropriate....not that I know much about the case (beyond the notes here on IC).

There seem to be a fair number of readers calling for this professor to be fired or at least sanctioned.  I know Iranians in the US in general are an educated group and indeed many serve as academicians across various institutions (I included).  So, it's fair to assume many would know about tenure rights and even more critically the principles of academic freedom held up since the first part of 20th century by AAUP and universities alike.  These rules allow professors to express their opinions freely without fear of reprisals, that simple and it should be that simple.  So let's stop these calls and get realistic about the environment and rules we have chosen to live within.

A note to MM:  Thank you for posting Stanford's response which is reasonable and completely expected.

Stanford Distances Itself From Prof's Discriminatory Remarks

Stanford Distances Itself From Professor's Discriminatory Remarks

response

"In a response to NIAC, the Stanford Computer Science Department Chair wrote, “Professor Ullman's political views represent his personal opinions and not those of Stanford University. Stanford does not discriminate on the basis of gender, nationality, race, or religion in its admissions process.”"

"Reports of the professor’s remarks have generated concern within the Iranian-American community, the academic community, and in the Middle East.  The Chronicle for Higher Education, the premiere journal for the university community, reported on NIAC’s efforts to address the controversy, as has the Stanford Daily, the Dubai-based Gulf News, and other political blogs and university periodicals."

professor’s right to free speech

"Those involved in the issue have emphasized that the professor’s right to free speech is not in question.  “NIAC’s work to promote and expand free speech stands on its own, whether it has been to increase civic participation here among Iranian Americans or to support human rights in Iran so that the Iranian people can exercise their right to political dissent,” said Abdi.  “Our message on this situation has been clear: this professor has the right to hold his own views, but that doesn't include the right to discrimate against those who seek admission to his department.”"

Esfand and Ari

are right. This is about Standford University as a whole condoning racism. If this was against blacks Ullman would have been given the boot. I also have friends who went to Stanford. However I would at this time advise everyone to boycott Stanford. No donations; no applications; nothing. Standford as a whole has condoned racism and revived "Jim Crow" practice. If you don't know what it is then Google it.

Now a days I would not let my dog go to Stanford to pee much less my kid.

It's the perception of Stanford.

Since Stanford is allowing this behavior by its professor it means the university as a whole is condoning his action.  If this professor were to have made the same accusations against blacks and had called them the N word Stanford would have taken action and terminated his employment.

So since Stanford is not doing the same when he is making such comments against Iranians and bringing in Israel in the middle of it, then Stanford U is the guilty party not just the professor and Ari's cartoon is a reflection of Stanford and appropriate. 

Everything is sacred

Ari, your cartoon is wrong and inappropriate.

Are you suggesting that Stanford computer science lab is controlled by Israel or jews? At least this is the message your cartoon conveys. If so, please lets see your proof.....

I work very closely with two stanford engineering departments on behalf of my employers, working on various research projects, grants and recruitment of Stanfordpost  Grads. I know of many bright researchers and students I have hired from stanford, some Iranian, who'd disagree with the message you are conveying.

I think you are being irresponsible by taking the alleged inappropriate action of one employee of Stanford and then brushing the entire college with the same paint.   

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Welcome to the Machine

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
Where have you been?
It's alright we know where you've been.
You've been in the pipeline, filling in time,
Provided with toys and 'Scouting for Boys'.
You bought a guitar to punish your ma,
And you didn't like school, and you
know you're nobody's fool,
So welcome to the machine.

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
What did you dream?
It's alright we told you what to dream.
You dreamed of a big star,
He played a mean guitar,
He always ate in the Steak Bar.
He loved to drive in his Jaguar.
So welcome to the Machine.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR5KtHR8g7Y

Ari aziz thank you.

Duality

At the same time it is sad, I am actually glad that there are forces that keep intellectuals in Iran, one way or the other. Too much brain-drain damages a country. It is better to slowly build up an intellectual majority in a country where there is a lack among its leaders. Otherwise there will be only sheep left in Iran...

Azadeh, VPK

But that's not the worst that happened to her. A couple of years later she was badly beaten in an Iranian jail for her opposition to the regime. Dr. Ullman does suggest in his writings that he knows such can be the case with Iranian students, but says he holds his attitude as a matter of principle. Exactly what "principle" he has in mind would be worth exploring because as VPK says, highly qualified Iranian students could be facing unfair rejection at Stanford. Their loss actually! As it is Iran's loss that highly qualified "starred" students are not allowed a university education in Iran. 

Dear Azadeh

I prefer it this way. I bet there are people with similar views in Canada who do not dare speak it. Now if a highly qualified Iranian gets refused entry to Standford we know why. Standford puts race above merit.