<p>In a story that has been getting more and more press, a former Taliban ambassador is attending Yale University, and taking classes. Assuming his grades are ok (with his 4th grade education), he will be admitted to become a degree seeking student in the fall.</p>
<p>It has got to be a misplaced sense of “seeing all sides of a story.” :eek:</p>
<p>Gee, I go to class with an ex-Taliban ambassador and he says,“…” It probably is interesting and entertaining for students. Better understanding of world issues might be obtained from going and living overseas for a year or two or more.</p>
<p>While the presence of Hashemi at Yale certainly is surprising, I find that his opposition seems to exhibit a virulent strain of pettiness that frankly defies comprehension. He’s never shot anyone or ran a concentration camp, yet the WSJ somehow sees fit to compare him to a Taliban footsoldier, and then, inexplicably, Goebbels. His crime, diplomatic work for the Taliban, is far more benign than the thousands of government activities he could concievable have chosen to undertake. And since the Taliban was running the whole show in Afghanistan, I would venture a guess that most Afghans had to work in some capacity with their one-party government, simply by default. Yet Hashemi might as well have hooves for all the pundits care. </p>
<p>Hashemi’s situation is, of course, the ideal fodder for talking-heads to scream themselves purple. It has very little to with the individual players: brief remarks on Hashemi and Yale quickly fall apart into some overarching conspiracy between the two great pundit bogeymen - Islamofascism and academia. That the situation is little more than a pretext for stock prejudices is already obvious to those at Yale: see here <a href=“http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=32261[/url]”>http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=32261</a></p>
<p>Despite whatever hysterical comparisons John Fund may pen, Hashemi is extraordinarily moderate for his country (he was, I believe, offered a job by the current Afghan president). Conservatives should not be so eager to burn the bridges when the last thing Afghanization needs is isolation from the West. When Afghan courts are actually mulling whether or not to execute a Christian convert, maybe they might need a little MORE exposure to the Western world, not less. I find far more rationale in Yale’s decision than in the ranting of crackpots in need of ratings.</p>
<p>Not sure this has a thing to do with the right wing talking heads or prejudices; to me, it has everything to do with whether or not this is an academically qualified student.</p>
<p>That is the issue, first and foremost. Yale doesn’t need to worry about courting Afganistan, or helping it become less isolated with this one little student. Like the admittance or not of this one individual student would make a difference.</p>
<p>It is more about whether Yale is making a political statement in admitting an academically unqualified student simply because he is Afgani, and former Taliban.</p>
<p>Haha I actually wrote an essay about this for my government class. Quadafi lecturing on democracy…Wow! This shows the sad state of affairs the colleges are in right now, philosophically.</p>
<p>Yale’s Pres. Levin is a conservative and good friend of Bush and the Bush family. When I heard about this, I wondered what government favor or valuable information this young man may have given or is expected to provide in the future. I’ve never heard of any other student coming to Yale on a “trial basis.” It makes me think that we don’t know the whole story.</p>
<p>Levin is a very “hand’s on” adminstrator. It’s not like he had no input.</p>