Sitting here in my room in Amman, I, unsurprisingly, often feel very detached from life at Tufts. However, reading "Bacow and the real bigotry" by Matthew Gardner-Schuster has left me in a state of near disbelief, and I feel it is necessary that his piece sees a response. Although separated from Tufts by many miles and just as importantly, an often unreliable Internet connection, I was able to read the Source's "Islam - Arabic Translation: Submission" as well as President Bacow's response and several of the related Daily news stories on the controversy that followed.
My intent however, is to focus on the most recent letter by Mr. Gardner-Schuster. A significant component of his letter presents evidence to make the case that the Source's position has been critical not of "the Quran itself ... but literalist interpretations of it." In describing the controversial "Islam" piece, Mr. Gardner-Schuster states that the Source "is not attacking people; it is attacking an extremist ideology." He also tries to frame the piece as being part of an attempted debate about "difficult issues." I find these statements hard to justify in light of what the Source printed. All one has to do is take a look at the infamous page from the Source, and Mr. Garden-Schuster's statements become very hollow. The fact is, Mr. Gardner-Schuster is trying to frame the anonymous trash his paper published as a legitimate entry into a debate about Islam.
Mr. Gardner-Schuster, had the Source published an insightful, critical and well-researched article about radical Islam, the situation now would be very different. In fact, I am willing to bet you would have found that Muslim Student Association members were in agreement with such an article's purpose.
The MSA is not an apologist group for the bizarre collection of stories printed in the Source several weeks ago. In fact, moderate Muslims are likely even more hurt by such stories than you are, as they represent corruptions of a faith whose true purpose is peaceful. Before publishing the piece, did you not think that any Muslim here at Tufts, or any Muslim in general who follows Islam's real message, finds the stories you printed to be characteristic of Islam?
You can try all you want to characterize the Source's work last month as a "dissenting [view] in academia", but you can't change what was written. Let's be honest, your paper published hate speech and your attempts to disguise this are, frankly, infuriating.
Nowhere in "Islam - Arabic Translation: Submission" is there a hint of introducing a real discussion; it is clearly just an insult to the religion. Furthermore, for all your arguments and attempts at re-labeling, there is nothing even close to an apology in your Viewpoint in the Daily. Is it impossible for the Source to learn a lesson from these circumstances? Again, nothing even close to an apology, and yet that would be the least you could offer if you truly wanted to move forward and open a debate about Islam. You even wrote the following:
"Far from attacking the Muslim community at Tufts, we wanted to give its members an opportunity to express their support for our values of tolerance and multiculturalism."
Honestly, how dare you suggest that your paper's actions were a means of reaching out to the Muslim community at Tufts? Is this really what the Source considers to be "starting a dialogue"? If it is, perhaps the Source isn't ready to discuss Islam at all. Additionally, the fact that you mention more than once that the Source is "dedicated to fighting bigotry and intolerance wherever it appears" is simply evidence that the Source turns a blind eye to its own actions.
Lastly, to the individual(s) responsible for "Islam - Arabic Translation: Submission": It was cowardly for you not to use a byline in your piece. It will be even more cowardly if you choose not to apologize. Stop dodging the issue, and take some responsibility. Islam is one of many important topics at Tufts that should be given more attention and discussed so we can learn more about our fellow students. However, unless this is done in an environment without discrimination and bigotry, we won't end up learning anything at all.
Ketan Gajria is a psychology major and is currently studying abroad in Amman as part of SIT's "Jordan: Modernization and Social Change" program.
