Sender: “Dr. Machen and Dr. Patricia Telles-Irvin”
To: UF-STUDENTS-L@LISTS.UFL.EDU
Date: Thu Dec 13 17:29:17 EST 2007
Subject: Obsession Email

We are writing to comment on recent developments regarding free speech and open discourse on campus related to advertising for the film “Obsession.”

A misunderstanding of free speech concerns led to the suggestion that the film’s sponsors apologize for the posters advertising the film and clarify their message.

Upon reflection, the suggestion of an apology was not appropriate and is retracted.

First Amendment protected speech is of paramount importance and foundational to our institution. Therefore, we plan to ask experts to help us develop a website, which will provide information on the First Amendment and rights of expression on campus. This resource should be valuable to all constituents of the university community.

We encourage suggestions for topics to be covered in this website.

The Law School Republicans are terribly excited by this announcement. It means that all parties involved are satisfied. Although the UF administration’s image was tarnished during the conflict, its courage in ignoring its pride and admitting error must be praised.

While much credit must go to Representative Hasner and Attorney General McCollum for their resolute defense of free speech principles, the indispensable knight of the cause was Professor Steven Willis. He is the lone Republican amongst tenured faculty not on retirement track, amongst several dozen faculty. From the moment the administration told us to apologize, not just to allegedly harmed students but also to the entire campus, Professor Willis took the offensive in his defense of us. His devotion to the cause and dedication of time proved to be the absolutely indispensable part of our campaign. At the moment he sent his letter to the administration, a copy you will find linked from the free speech blog, the tide of the battle turned decisively in our favor. His actions may come at some cost in terms of the UF administration’s ire and potentially even the law school administration’s ire. Therefore, his courage must not be forgotten.

If you get a chance, please email him at willis@law.ufl.edu and let him know your appreciation. Better still, take one of his classes. The organization is forever in his debt.

After reading the editorial, we wonder why it was even written since it has nothing about the issue. All it does is throw out an insult that conservatives don’t go out of their way to defend liberals. Odd.

For the sake of diversity, the University of Florida threw water on free speech. For the sake of political correctness, the university demanded an apology from students who posted fliers about a movie on radical Islam. Now for the sake of the university’s reputation, Patricia Telles-Irvin, the overly sensitive vice president of student affairs, should go. [...]

And it’s distressing that a vice president would so easily sacrifice a protected constitutional right for the sake of diversity. Law professor Steven Willis, faculty advisor for the Law School Republicans, who sponsored the film, clarified her lapse in judgment. “Your arguments about ‘diversity’ and ‘responsibility’ and ‘divisiveness’ are irrelevant to that fundamental issue: The actions are protected speech and you have no right – in your “official” capacity – to censure them, either before or after the fact. Indeed, you have the obligation not to do so,” he said.

To quote from the article:

[Dr. Telles-Irvin] said the ads promoting the film offended Muslim students on campus and that the students responsible for the posters should apologize. Her letter touched off a flurry of blog chatter, radio show debates and reprimands from elected officials, culminating with McCollum’s recent letter.

State Rep. Adam Hasner, R-Delray Beach, called Machen shortly after Telles-Irvin’s letter went out, expressing his concern that she reacted unfairly and inappropriately. Machen responded in a letter Nov. 28, defending his vice president. He told Hasner the message from Telles-Irvin was “intended to promote tolerance and diversity,” and to ensure “civility.”

President Machen defends his subordinate’s actions by referring to Dr. Telles-Irvin’s intentions. Unfortunately, this does not address the issue of depriving students of free speech rights. Actually, it only reflects a double standard on the part of the administration. In her original email, Dr. Telles-Irvin herself dismisses the intentions of the Law School Republicans, instead referring to the effects:

Regardless of its original intent, the language reinforced a negative stereotype, created unnecessary divisiveness and contributed to a generalization that only furthers the misunderstanding of the religion of Islam.

It is time for the UF administration to come clean and realize that regardless of intent, the administration committed a serious error — one for which it should apologize.

Certainly, the tide of public opinion long ago went over to our side. Unfortunately, it has come to light that not everything in the second email from the administration may have been accurate either. The story, despite us being in exam period, continues to develop. Stay tuned.

From the article by Jack Stripling in The Gainesville Sun:

“The second e-mail that went out last week has absolutely not satisfied the attorney general,” said Sandi Copes, McCollum’s press secretary. “In the first response sent to students, Dr. Telles-Irvin called for an apology. That particular call was the very act that potentially chilled free speech on the campus and until an official response is made rescinding that call for an apology or acknowledging that it was wrong, the attorney general will remain unsatisfied and gravely concerned.”

Janine Sikes, a spokeswoman for UF, said Tuesday that the university was still working to clarify McCollum’s continuing areas of concern.

“We’ve had conversations with the attorney general’s office and we are still talking,” she said.

The controversy over the fliers marks yet another free speech debate on UF’s campus, where such discussions have been plentiful in recent months. Free speech advocates latched onto the “Don’t Tase me, bro” incident in September, saying the Tasering of a UF student at a political forum was an affront to the free exchange of ideas universities are designed to promote. A recent appearance by former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales also sparked controversy when several students rushed the stage unimpeded by security.

A student advocacy group reports an administrator at the University of Florida has backed down after demanding an apology from a students showing a movie about radical Islam. Several student groups advertised a screening of a film called “Obsession — Radical Islam’s War Against the West.” On the fliers was the phrase – “Radical Islam wants you dead.”

Florida vice president for student affairs Patricia Telles-Irvin e-mailed all students and said the groups owe the campus, and particularly Muslim students, an apology.

But the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education quickly reminded Telles-Irvin that the flier was unquestionably protected free speech under the constitution.

A week later, Telles-Irvin wrote a second e-mail — assuring students of their right to — “freely express themselves on any issue” — and saying there would be no disciplinary action against the groups.

One of my favorite FOXNEWS moments. The Law School Republicans did not ask for this fight, rather, it was thrust upon them. It is important to defend free speech when challenged like this.

Hasner criticizes University of Florida

Published December 11th, 2007

News Analysis And Commentary

By John Johnson
Managing Editor

Nothing is free, including free speech. Speech uttered without responsibility or accountability is not what the founders had in mind. Irresponsible speech in fact ends up ultimately hindering the very freedom it professes by example to symbolize.

In short – free speech permits a multitude of things to be written, said, portrayed, filmed, acted, etc, etc. What free speech doesn’t do is give someone the right to harm others in its name, i.e., free speech doesn’t give a person the right to yell “fire” in a crowded theater.

What it also doesn’t do, according to House Majority Leader Rep. Adam Hasner, (R-Delray Beach), is give University of Florida professors the right to shut up or shut down students there who want to promote a film that portrays radical Islam as what radical Islam in fact declares itself to be – murders of non-believers.

Some of the fliers used by the students to advertise the film read in part, “Radical Islam wants you dead.”

That prompted University of Florida’s Vice President of Student Affairs, Dr. Patricia Telles-Irvin, to distribute a campus-wide email condemning certain students and calling for them to apologize for posting an advertisement in advance of the showing of the film “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.”

“Offensive”

In a campus-wide email to approximately 50,000 students, Dr. Telles-Irvin condemned the posting of the flyers as “offensive behavior,” and demanded that the film organizers — which included the Law School Republicans, Jewish Student Union, College Republicans, Gators for Israel, and the Jewish Law Students Association — apologize.

In turn, Rep. Hasner called upon on University of Florida President Dr. James Bernard Machen to admonish the Florida’s Vice President of Student Affairs “and take steps to repair the University’s image after a troubling freedom of speech episode which has drawn criticism from conservative pundits, free speech advocates and Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum,” said Hasner.

“Tolerance”

In sum, Hasner said that the film’s organizer’s “rights to free speech were being unfairly targeted.”

Dr. Machen responded to Rep. Hasner in a letter that the email was meant to “promote tolerance and diversity” and that “as educators we must speak up when the debate is inaccurate or when students do not feel safe on campus.”

Putting it in corporate terms, Dr. Machen noted one Muslim student group had expressed safety concerns, and the email communication was to make students feel safe and to “help ensure accurate debate.”

There is absolutely nothing inaccurate about Radical Islam’s stated and oft demonstrated belief in death for all non-believers.

Feel safe? How about be safe.

“Dangerous”

Responding to Machen’s letter Hasner said, “I fully recognize the University’s obligation to preserve campus safety and its interest in encouraging accurate debate. But the dissemination of the poster in question and publicly addressing the dangers of Radical Islam are not inherent threats to campus safety. Moreover, the University’s call for “accurate” debate of this subject implies that the University’s official position is that the advertisement was inaccurate.

“According to the administration’s view of the world, elements of Radical Islam do not want to kill us,” Hasner said. “Not only is this view wrong, but it is itself dangerous.”

Hasner is plainly and simply correct. Radical Islam is intent on killing. Its extreme views sanction the death and destruction of those who are non-believers – including in fact Muslims – and whose non-radical members hold beliefs only culturally different than most Americans.

But Radical Islam’s mission is everyone’s death, except those who are equally as insane as its followers.

“That is a fact. It is documented. It is undeniable,” says Hasner.

“By failing to differentiate between the Muslim students on campus whom they sought to protect and the elements of Radical Islam who pose a real threat, the University has breached its responsibility to its students by creating its own atmosphere of inaccuracy,” Hasner continued, adding:

“Furthermore, true and accurate debate cannot commence at UF while its administration adopts a position that is one of appeasement and denial.”

McCollum Agrees

State Attorney General Bill McCollum agrees.

In a Dec. 3 letter to Dr. Machen, Attorney General Bill McCollum stated Dr. Telles-Irvin’s letter “may have violated the free speech rights of the students and organizations who posted this ad and sponsored the movie.” Added Attorney General McCollum, “At the very least it has created a chilling effect on the free speech rights of students enrolled at the University of Florida.” Attorney General McCollum asked Dr. Machen to review the incident with his staff, legal counsel and the Board of Trustees to “formulate and take some appropriate remedial action.”

In his follow-up letter to Dr. Machen’s reply, Hasner said, “In light of Dr. Telles-Irvin’s actions today and the University’s inadequate initial response, I believe the following actions are appropriate in order to restore confidence in the University of Florida’s commitment to free speech:

• A public apology by Dr. Telles-Irvin to the students who were attacked for promoting the film.
• A public reprimand by the University of Dr. Telles-Irvin.
• A substantive and enunciated policy expressing Florida’s commitment to free speech and an action plan for how incidents like this can be avoided in the future.”

“As a proud product of Florida’s public university system and an elected representative of the state, this is not something I take any joy in,” Hasner concluded. “However, I believe that remaining silent will only contribute to the erosion of confidence in the University’s ability to promote serious discussions about the important issues facing the students.”

Bottom line: there are two things you do with a howling beast bent on your destruction: You cage it, and if you run out of food to keep it alive, you kill it.

That’s humane thing to do; it’s also the sane thing to do.

To: All UF students
From: Patricia Telles-Irvin, Vice President for Student Affairs
Subject: My e-mail last week

There has been much discussion about an e-mail I sent Nov. 26 regarding the posters advertising the movie “Obsession.”

Since that time, some important dialogue has been exchanged between members of the student groups involved. But over the last week, there has been some misunderstanding on the university’s position on certain points. Please allow me to clarify.

* The university supports the rights of students to freely express themselves on any issue.

* The university condemns terrorists acts and those who perpetrate them, regardless of who they are. And we clearly recognize there are people who use Islam to support violence.

* The university has no intention of taking disciplinary action against anyone involved in creating or distributing the posters. That was never a consideration.

* The university has heard allegations that the posters were removed by people who opposed their message. Efforts by the University Police Department and Student Affairs to confirm this or identify offenders were unsuccessful. Removal of posters from proper venues is prohibited by the university’s policies and will not be tolerated.

The original intent of my e-mail was to foster greater understanding and communication among groups. As we all surely know, free speech is a cherished right not only in this country but also on this campus. We should always feel comfortable expressing our diverse opinions.

What do you think?