Stanford University President Responds Directly to PAAIA Over Retired Professor’s Anti-Iranian Remarks

Share/Save/Bookmark

PAAIA
by PAAIA
14-Jan-2011
 

Stanford University’s president, Dr. John Hennessy, today assured PAAIA that controversial remarks made by a retired faculty member does not reflect the university’s views or admission policies.

In recent weeks, a number of Iranian American organizations and individuals have expressed concern over remarks made in an email sent by Jeffrey Ullman, a professor emeritus at Stanford University, in response to an inquiry made by an Iranian student about admission to the graduate computer science program. Ullman directed the student to a page on his university-hosted website, “Answers to All Questions Iranian.” Ullman went on to express in his email that even if he were in a position to assist Iranian students with admission to the program, he would not do so unless there is a change in Iran's policy towards Israel.

PAAIA and all Iranian Americans hold dear the value of freedom of expression. Although Ullman is certainly entitled to his personal opinion, we believe holding Iranian students responsible for the actions of the Iranian government is not only fundamentally misguided but contrary to the interests of the United States.

More importantly, PAAIA wanted to understand and clarify Stanford University’s position on the matter, as the vocal posturing among some in our community has unfortunately blurred the distinction between an alumnus faculty member’s personal views and the university’s position. If anything, the historical evidence is to the contrary. Large numbers of Iranian and Iranian American students have attended Stanford and many have gone on to excel in various fields. In particular, Stanford has been a magnet for Iranian students in technical fields. Newsweek reported in its August 9, 2008 issue that Stanford has become a favorite destination of Sharif University graduates. Several of whom achieved recognition by attaining highest marks on the PhD entrance exam for the Electric Engineering department.

Dr. Hennessy, a big supporter of international students including those from Iran, has been quoted multiple times stating that great universities are made by attracting the best faculty and students from around the world. He has gone on to say that the economic vitality of the United States is enhanced by immigration policies which allow talented and educated immigrants to remain in the U.S.

To clarify the matter, PAAIA reached out to Mr. Hamid Moghadam, a Trustee of both PAAIA and Stanford University. Mr. Moghadam in turn reached out to President Hennessy who issued the following statement to PAAIA:

“Stanford University has heard the concerns raised by some members of the Iranian American community regarding the personal remarks of a retired faculty member. Dr. Ullman is an emeritus faculty member and no longer on active duty. His opinions do not reflect the opinions of the university, nor does he have any involvement in the admissions process or admissions policies.

Stanford does not discriminate in its admissions. The university seeks to admit the very best students from throughout the world into its programs, as long as they meet the visa requirements of this country. The university-at-large, as well as the Computer Science Department specifically, has enrolled many distinguished students from Iran. We also have a number of faculty members of Iranian descent, and are proud to say that an Iranian American presently serves on our Board of Trustees.  

Stanford does not censor the views expressed by students or faculty on personal Web pages, whether or not they are accessed through a Stanford-based URL. Personal Web pages are not considered part of Stanford University's institutional Web site. As with personal e-mail, they are not created by the university and their content has no official institutional endorsement.”  

PAAIA would like to express its gratitude to Dr. Hennessy for clarifying Stanford University’s position on this matter. 

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from PAAIA
 
aynak

Re:Doctor Mohandes

by aynak on

"The school could have been trying to toe the Government Line and its
politics at the time. That is a strong possibility as well, Does not
mean that there were someone on the Committee who made this decision on
purpose, Or based on the power he or she wielded nor could it be chalked
up to as the premanent and official school policy. Things were tough
back then as they are now. So it would be quite natural to expect some
rough encounters. be it at the counsular level or academic level.

Sure. I think you should do that and then write a book about it and have it published asap!!!"

And that is my point as well.   I don't know what happened.   I don't know how that decision to deny my application was reached, and certainly I have speculated about what has happened.   But I also know, it takes one Gong Ho person, to push for misguided policy and others would simply follow.

But remember there were no internet as such those days, and the bigots like Ullmans opinion would not have a chance to spread and be heard so quickly, and his identity known by so many.

At any rate, the issue at least in my opinion is very simple:

A University, must not allow its name (in this case a domain) be associated with anything that *promotes* hate.   Ullmans page actually violates some of the basic principles in predicate logic!  This is to the point of being embarassing for Ullman, as well as Stanford.  Ironic when you think about, him putting this under "Polemic". Obviously Ullman, a well published and known individual in CS field, is proving in real life example, what happens when you mix ideology in debate.   And how far off rational reasoning you can go.  But his follow up comments have made it even worse!

Dr. Hennessy's, response has a major flaw, where it does not separate --private-- emails vs a published web site.   In the case of a private email, any instituion can claim  --We did not know what was exchanged-- using our resource,  preciesly because it was ****PRIVATE*****.

But once again, Ullman is using this PUBLIC stanford web site to PROMOTE hate, and Stanford can not claim, freedom of speech protection, as promoting hate is not protected by free speech law.

May we all have good dreams.


SamSamIIII

Well

by SamSamIIII on

 

calling the man publicly a Zionist racist stooge ahead of the all righteous "open fact finding dialogue" hardly merits as a civil "educated" dialogue. As well, lynching your subject in dehumanizing terms ahead of the "open debate" does not fall under "educated assesment". We are all philosophers of ethics & experts in "recomendations"when we are not the subject. Lets be realistic about how others may percieve us as we fail to percieve some flaws in our own arguments.    

Cheers!!!

Path of Kiaan Resurrection of True Iran Hoisting Drafshe Kaviaan //iranianidentity.blogspot.com //www.youtube.com/user/samsamsia


Ari Siletz

DM

by Ari Siletz on

"I don't think it would be Prudent to make such conclusions unless we know more facts than we do now. "

Whatever ideas can be formed about Dr. Ullman without a direct discussion with him is conjecture, not conlusion. As Faramarz has suggested, many on this site--including you--have the education to sidestep confusing the two concepts.   


default

Faramarz Bro

by Doctor mohandes on

I am still Kafeeing at your reply to Ari's Moa ma: the witch sex part. LOL.

As our buddy ebi would say : Sepas:)

All those attributes and Virtues are good and should be incorporated in the structure of the society as a whole, But at the same time, NOT DOING IT:))) can not and should not subject someone to harsh and over the top criticism. That is my Drift.

Whether he has a legitimate point or not, That is the position that at least for now he is holding on to and if he decides not to dicuss it, It does not mean that he is breaking any laws. True. He might not be acting democratically and within reason, But so what? How many times have we seen that happening in this country? Did GW discuss his decision for doing what he did in 2003? Na.

He is at a point where he is being pressured to say something, You can bet he is gonna turn around and make an statement like that, as if to say, Leave me the hell alone or i will call the cops on you!

 


Faramarz

Doctor Mohandes

by Faramarz on

The one thing that I appreciate the most about this site is that the majority of its readers are educated, well actually, highly-educated, like a Doctor Mohandes, even some of the pro-Regime crowd!

And the one thing that I have learned from my education in this country is the openness to the new ideas, engaging in the civil discussions and the debates and the thinking out of the box, not out of your boxer!

If this professor has a solid argument to make in favor of his position, he should present that in the context of a debate and lots of back and forths and should not hide behind a website and say, “I am not reading your email, but I will save them to come after you!”

That’s not what I have learned in the course of my education in this country.


default

Aynak jan

by Doctor mohandes on

 

I appreciate you giving me all the details!

This :

You see,  a powerful individual, even though not directly involved in desion making, could make his impression.

We can not be sure of. I mean how can we ever? we may never know. so it would be safe to say it is a worse case scenario assumption that we make.

  The letters were official school letters, so the question is, did someone in school administration made a decision to do this and proposed on some other grounds (like Ullman, using Iranian government recgonition of state of Israel is doing right now) was it an official school policy?  (coincidentally, both of the schools that rejected me were in the South, and the one that admitted me was not).

The school could have been trying to toe the Government Line and its politics at the time. That is a strong possibility as well, Does not mean that there were someone on the Committee who made this decision on purpose, Or based on the power he or she wielded nor could it be chalked up to as the premanent and official school policy. Things were tough back then as they are now. So it would be quite natural to expect some rough encounters. be it at the counsular level or academic level.

Sure. I think you should do that and then write a book about it and have it published asap!!!

 


default

Faramarz and ari

by Doctor mohandes on

Ari

Would You not attest to the fact that this man. whomever he really is deep down and whatever personality he has, is entitled to his right and freedom not to engage in any form of Interviews or exchanges whatsoever? What right do we have to really question his method of Judgment? How closely do we know this man? I don't think it would be Prudent to make such conclusions unless we know more facts than we do now.

Faramarz

Shying away or choosing not to do so? How can you be sure which one it really is? and either way Should we not respect him for that choice? they way we are approaching this, we are This close to crucify him!

How unfair of You (migam hamash tagseere shomast.. Bikhod nist) to assign him with all these dignified!! names and titles and assume that he is the kind of prof. that you think he is. all because he does not want to discuss the issue out in the open. What difference does it make what insititution he is from? That is his choice.

Of course, there really is nothing wrong if his students learn his "academic" pov on all subjects he teaches and it should be obvious to us all that, They will not learn his ideas on other stuff Just through some kinda osmotic process. Those who get into stanford, we can say with a great degree of confidence, Can think for themseleves and make JUdgements and deductions.


aynak

  " The letter said,

by aynak on

 

" The letter said, according to you, that based The ongoing situation with
the IRANIAN GOV. we do not process applications from iranaian
nationals...

And somehow that to you qualifies as "purely" on the basis of your
nationality???? I mean how much more Political and clear than that could
they have gotten? Unless you have omitted anything, there was no
mention of a word pertaining to your "personal" situation and your race
or nationality for that matter."

Doctor mohandes Jan,   read my post carefully again.  I specified, I got accepted by another school at the same time.   Don't know if you understand the tongue in cheek expression or not, (and my usage of taking it personal) but it certainly seemed strange to me that two schools would reject me based on some policy and yet a third would not.   At the time, my social studies teacher (what they called History in high school) advised me to pursue this in court.   But I was on F-1 Visa, and very scared of getting deported.   Call me what you want but if deported back to Iran, I would have had to go back and serve in the Iran-Iraq war, and that was a very scary prospect for me and my family.    Looking back,  (and I have no reason to think there was PER state decision to not accept applications from Iranian students at the time), I wonder if this was an ad hoc decision, by someone in the administration of a university?    You see,  a powerful individual, even though not directly involved in desion making, could make his impression.   The letters were official school letters, so the question is, did someone in school administration made a decision to do this and proposed on some other grounds (like Ullman, using Iranian government recgonition of state of Israel is doing right now) was it an official school policy?  (coincidentally, both of the schools that rejected me were in the South, and the one that admitted me was not).

At any rate, I am sharing some very personal and private infomration with you, and I just opened a bag full of letters, in the hope that I have not lost the letters.   Then I rememberd that I purposely threw away one letter many years back as I moved from the East region to California,  to forget.    The name of one of the schools that rejected me(and the first) was "Louisiana State University"  Baton Rouge.    I suppose it would be a very interesting project, today, to approach LSU and ask about their policy for Iranian nationals in 79-81 time frame.   For that matter, to approach various schools and check this, and see how that policy decision was made?  

May we all have good dreams.


Anonymous Bugger

points well taken

by Anonymous Bugger on

 

state dept vs faculty staff

yet is this professor's remark based on his personal taste on optional assistance to potential students or actual university's policy. Kind of like giving tip to a waitress which is not required but given on personal preference. I might be wrong but based on what I have read so far its the prior and he is entiltled to only afford his optional assistance to those whom he prefers be it politicaly or what not.

As for "letters of recomendation" lets not pretend naivety as to the painstaking process that those so called "letters" are afforded to those who deem as "mote-aaheds and khodies" which goes in the order of approval by 5 memebrs of Neighborhood basij, Mosque, vezarat ettelaat, 5 members of basij daneshjoui and finally approval of the Daneshgah's harasat to certify the students clear records on the campus. based on that the Al sadegh university(Sepah cadre college) can manage to send out the best grades & recomendation for their hand picked candidates.

Thanks again & good night.


Faramarz

Ari, My 4 ¢

by Faramarz on

Also, an academic from a distinguished university who shies away from debate on an important topic and points the people to a post on his website is most likely a rigid, stubborn, closed-minded person and wants to only lecture his class, have them take notes and grade them on how well they learned his point of view.

I would not waste my time with him. I did as PAAIA did and go to the Chancelor. I would also contact John Chambers of Cisco, Hamid Moghaddam and other influential Stanford alumni.


Ari Siletz

Faramarz

by Ari Siletz on

Reasonable position. In which case Dr. Ullman should take it up with the State Department, not Stanford applicants.

Faramarz

My 2 ¢

by Faramarz on

A university or a department head is not, and should not get into the business of vetting the applicants based on their politics, religion, source of scholarship, etc. They don’t have the means or resources to do so. It is wrong for this professor to make that type of judgment about applicants that are from Iran. A university should stick to its academic requirements, as in grades, letters of recommendation, etc. to accept students from Iran.

Now, it is the responsibility of the American Consulates who issue visas to students to determine if a particular student poses a threat (immediate or future) to the American interests around the world. And based on that intelligence deny a student the required visa. They do the same thing for tourist visa applicants.


Anonymous Bugger

Ari, I commend your impartial take

by Anonymous Bugger on

 

 

on basij funded vs regular student applicants. Thats basicaly all I needed to know in regard to atleast yours if not NIAC agenda behind pushing this issue. In my opinion if the professor has a hunch based on his last experinces with Basiji sent undergrads within Stanford then he might have an iota of reasonable reservation but if he collectively dismiss the whole Iranian applicant groups then he is in the red. I think your approach would be much more usefull thru dialogue in order to enlighten him about the big picture rather than childish, baseless rants of racism to confront & alienate the fellow. So in short if his remarks were directed to regime funded students & beneficiaries I might cut him some slack but if its blanket denial then I can support Niac run against him.

regards & thx again for the swift reply.


Ari Siletz

Anonymous Bugger

by Ari Siletz on

Interesting angle. Which is one reason I wanted to interview Professor Ullman about the controversy and get his side of the story. Unfortunately he states in his website that he will not respond to emails on this issue. If the professor has solid reasons for his position, he is at least to be faulted for closing the door to communication. The implication of his defensiveness is not unrelated to the main issue, as it sheds light on Dr. Ullman's methods of judgment. It seems he assumes the exchange will be confrontational. Being the would-be interviewer I know for a fact that this is the wrong assumption, leading me to a conjecture that Dr. Ullman may have been equally hasty in arriving at the opinions in question. 

Anonymous Bugger

Dear Ari

by Anonymous Bugger on

 

I dont know much about this issue but i have a question for you & other NIAC or PIIA members clan here who might help. Is this about Iranian-American students or Iranian based students?. In latter case;

Are you supporting the rights of all Iranian transfering students including the Basijii/IRI funded scholarship recepients & undergrads?. I'm sure you are well aware of the very elaborate "gozinesh" & clearing process in place for the regime picked student transfer applicant. Thru this process only those well connected to regime cadre "khodies" get ministry of ettelaat & olum approval to come to the west which in time act as foreign arms of regime propaganda in western countries. Nowadays you can find their basiji crowd in most campuses as early as my days in college. 

Thanks in advance and kind regards.

 


default

Aynak jan

by Doctor mohandes on

The letter said, according to you, that based The ongoing situation with the IRANIAN GOV. we do not process applications from iranaian nationals...

And somehow that to you qualifies as "purely" on the basis of your nationality???? I mean how much more Political and clear than that could they have gotten? Unless you have omitted anything, there was no mention of a word pertaining to your "personal" situation and your race or nationality for that matter.

 Actually, since the Institution is making the claim about it having to do with the "ongoing situation" with iran, i think thereis a bit of following and abiding by the federal gov. policy involved inhere too.

In any case, I am so sorry about what happened and i hope that your daughter does not get the same trreatment.


Ari Siletz

aynak, PAAIA

by Ari Siletz on

Aynak, Sorry to find out about your bad experience regarding university admissions in the 80s. Political discrimination on campus is outrageous. Particularly during flare ups in Iran-US relations, strong community vigilence is needed. PAAIA, Please note that your use of the word "posturing" dismisses legitimate voices of protest in our community. At best, it is an insulting gaffe suggesting a mindset in your organization that divides our community into "good" Iranians and "bad" Iranians vis a vis an American academic instituion. However, if such is your viewpoint, please lay it out in better detail in the interest of being straightforward with the reader. For now, I am satisfied with leaving this small comment in your blog so as not to exceed your threshold for the perception of "posturing." But your unresponsiveness to a first complaint about the matter has moved the issue a notch further. Does PAAIA really mean to dismiss the voices of protest it has described as "posturing. " If so, please explain why? If not, change the insulting wording.


aynak

Re:Dr.Mohandes

by aynak on

--Is your grief really about resolving the issue or is it something
between you and The stanford on a personal level???

I maintained from the start, this hate blog must be removed from Stanford domain.   That's how the issue will be resolved.   Is it personal?   Yes, in two ways:

I was denied admission to two schools back in the 80's.  One of the letters read as follows:   --Due to the ongoing situation with Iranian government, we regret to inform you we do not process application from Iranian nationals.-- (my application and application fee was returned in both cases, without any further processing).  Needless to say, I came to U.S before revolution, and I had no connection to hostage taking.   I only wish I had duplicated those letters which I kept and lost during a move.   It was obvious at the time, the decision to reject my application, was  purely based on my nationality, and not a federal nor a state level decision.   Because I got admitted to another school in the States, at the same time.   So it definitely opens old wounds for me, as to this date, I always wondered how that decision was reached?   I guess Ullman remarks gave a face to my experience.

My daughter is also considering Stanford.   I  have not broken this news to her.  

So for me it is very personal, but do you think it is personal? or was I discriminated against over something I had no control over?

May we all have good dreams.


default

aynak

by Doctor mohandes on

Is your grief really about resolving the issue or is it something between you and The stanford on a personal level???

Here is what henessey says:

Stanford University has heard the concerns raised by some members of the Iranian American community regarding the personal remarks of a retired faculty member. Dr. Ullman is an emeritus faculty member and no longer on active duty. His opinions do not reflect the opinions of the university, nor does he have any involvement in the admissions process or admissions policies. 

And On top of it all He has endless praise for iranian faculty and students.

 

 


aynak

I am not following Stanford's response

by aynak on

nor PAAIA's reaction to that response.

"Stanford does not discriminate in its admissions."  

"PAAIA would like to express its gratitude to Dr. Hennessy for clarifying
Stanford University’s position on this matter. "

What clarification?   On this Martin Luther King birthday, I thought that is the law NOT to discriminate?  What exactly is PAAIA thankful for?

"Stanford does not censor the views expressed by students or faculty
on personal Web pages, whether or not they are accessed through a
Stanford-based URL."

Is Dr.Hennessy suggesting that pedophiles can express their views freely, or hate speech is allowed using URL that is on Stanford Internet domain?    Would a Swastika in a faculty web page be tolerated, under the guise  of free speech?   Forget all of this, how should a student respecting Dr.Ullman's work in computer science, and reading his school provided blog, feel about a fellow Iranian student?    Is that promoting understanding?  Tolerance?  A good example to be a good human?

Dr.Ullman is prescribing COLLECTIVE punishment, for students based on their nationality.   PAAIA members would not even be in this great country, had the likes of Dr.Ullman, been in a position to decide their admission to a university in U.S.

It is truly disturbing that PAAIA, is not taking a more principled stance to ask for REMOVAL of this RACIST URL from Stanford domain. This not an issue of freedom of speech.   Dr.Ullman is  able to hopefully PAY for his own domain name and express all the bigotry and hate he so wishes there, THAT is his freedom.  But using Stanford URL amounts to this great institution of higher learning condoning the freedom to promote this type of hate.



Bavafa

Well done and thanks for every one's effort

by Bavafa on

This is one step in the right direction.

Mehrdad


Ari Siletz

Stanford's statement gladly accepted.

by Ari Siletz on

 

 Now a suggestion for PAAIA.

"...as the vocal posturing among some in our community has unfortunately blurred the distinction between an alumnus faculty member’s personal views and the university’s position."

Please replace "posturing" with "expressions of resentment."

As it stands, the wording exacerbates the hurt some Iranian-Americans felt as a result of this incident.  Being mindful of the feelings of our fellow Iranian-Americans is just as important as being fair to Stanford. It cannot be PAAIA's role to chastise those who speak out in resentment or to keep our community in line.


Mola Nasredeen

We would like to to express our gratitude to

by Mola Nasredeen on

organizations such as PAAIA and NIAC for standing up for Iranian students in general and Iranian Americans right to study in U.S.A. Job well done.