Thrawn Rickle 94
Jersey Prof Urges Fragging of U.S. Officers
© 2005 Williscroft
A few days ago Beach announced a Freedom Week meeting of the Young Americans for Freedom featuring speaker and war hero Lt. Col. Scott Rutter. During Freedom Week, both Veteran’s Day and World Freedom Day (November 9, 1989—the fall of the Berlin Wall) are commemorated.
Beach sent her announcement by email to the staff and faculty of WCCC. Of her many responses, one stood out. It seems that Prof. John Peter Daly, Adjunct Professor of English, took exception to Beach’s membership in the Young Americans for Freedom and her apparent enthusiasm for the night’s speaker, Lt. Col. Rutter.
Prof. Daley responded with a detailed email which is included here in its entirety:
The Professor’s world-view is apparent from his comments regarding the numbers of deaths under Capitalism versus Communism. His characterization of the Young Americans for Freedom as Fascists borders on the ridiculous, and the numbers he quotes regarding deaths in Iraq and elsewhere resulting from American “imperialism” are simply regurgitations of the tired mantras of the far left. But Prof. Daly goes beyond spouting off these mangled statistics.
Every young infantry officer carries a latent fear that one of his own troops will “frag” him – shoot him in the back or otherwise take him down or even out during combat. This practice is as old as warfare itself, and has been part of the “self-disciplining” environment that shapes and molds a young officer. An obviously popular and respected officer stands virtually no chance of being fragged, whereas the typical egocentric blowhard is “selected out” of the process more often than we would like to think.
Prof. Daly’s boycott of the event turned out to be a stunning success – in reverse. Beach told me in an interview that more than eighty students attended the event, significantly more than at any other event at WCCC this year. Lt. Col. Rutter told me that his reception was as warm and friendly as any he had received thus far.
Beach turned over Prof. Daly’s email to the Young Americans for Freedom, and it didn’t take long for the professor’s comments to show up on the World Wide Web. Consequently, WCCC was inundated with information requests. In an instant, WCCC, Beach, and Daly were catapulted into the national arena. Finally, on the afternoon of November 17, WCCC shut down its web site temporarily, in order to insert a disclaimer in front of everything else. Here is the exact wording of that disclaimer:
Two days later the following release appeared on the WCCC website:
I am delighted that the WCCC Board takes this incident so seriously, and am looking forward to the outcome of their emergency meeting. And while I’m heartened to read that WCCC President Dr. William Austin “…firmly believe[s] every employee and student has first amendment rights,” I’m at a loss to understand how this belief translates into supporting Prof. Daly’s “right” to make his comments.
Although I am not a recognized constitutional scholar, I have read and studied the constitution sufficiently often to state unequivocally that it does not directly address this kind of situation. But I also know that several court decisions have firmly established the interpretation that says the First Amendment does not guarantee the right to incite to violence or riot, and this is exactly what Prof. Daly has done.
There is no difference at all between the Islamic Mullah who openly advocates killing Jews or Americans or President George W. Bush, and Prof. Daly who openly advocates that soldiers kill their superiors. His likening of American patriots fighting in the Revolutionary War with Communist insurgents during the Cold War and the Islamic insurgents in Iraq today (which is the only reasonable interpretation of his closing comments) is a stretch that boggles the mind.
President Bush said it as clearly as possible: “Either you are with us, or you are with them.”
There is no middle ground.
Since this incident hit the national scene, I heard a report on FOX News that quoted Prof. Daly refusing to withdraw his comments, and as saying further that the Young Americans for Freedom were nothing but a Fascist organization anyway, not worthy of intellectual consideration.
Remember that Prof. Daly is not just another citizen speaking his mind on the “protest corner” on Friday evening, as his kind are wont to do here in North Hollywood. Daly teaches impressionable young people every day. His subjects center around creative writing, so his class discussions can touch on any subject he desires. He has clearly stated that he is “asking [his] students to boycott [the] event.” This amounts to open politicizing in the classroom.
I am reasonably certain the WCCC did not hire this intellectual misfit to conduct political indoctrination in his creative writing classes. Prof. Daly’s actions thus far in this matter, and his stated intent for the future should seal his fate within the publicly funded academic community whose hospitality he is abusing.
This intellectual lout’s free pass at the public trough needs to be terminated immediately, and his teaching credentials jerked. He needs a healthy dose of reality by having to find a real job doing something useful – like garbage collector – instead of being given a guaranteed job-for-life as a tenured teacher in New Jersey’s State Community College system.
I don’t quarrel with Prof. Daly’s right to spout off while collecting garbage, reading gas meters, or even writing books (if he can actually find a publisher), but I strongly protest his having even a casual conversation with impressionable under-age students while being paid public monies – especially when they are his captive audience in a class where he ultimately assigns a grade based, I suspect, on their political orientation rather than their performance as writers.
It’s time for the professor to go, and leave his teaching credentials behind.
[NOTE: The Editor of L.A. Mentary, Arvin Tseng, unexpectedly wrote a rebuttal of this article in the same issue of the magazine. I protested, and he included a disclaimer with his article, and published my responding letter in the next issue.]