Wednesday, December 04, 2002
Critical Mass argues that we are getting good medicine in the settlement. I disagree. In citing the Washington Post article, O'Connor is reading absolutely the worst about this university. Outside of President Saigo, nobody who might disagree with this settlement is quoted. And as I note in the previous entry, the settlement is forced upon us by an elected attorney general and some state lawyers whose career prospects I believe should be called into doubt.
That doesn't mean Pres. Saigo didn't want this settlement -- he may very well have, I cannot be sure. But using the settlement to validate the worst lies perpetrated by the multiculti stormtroopers running over individual freedom is exactly the reason why these settlements are never wise. Here we have a blogger who runs two weblogs (Critical Mass and CantWatch) which I respect, and even O'Connor falls into the trap of believing the slanted reporting of the WaPo. The statements by Saigo that there was no admission of guilt in the settlement are not reported even in the press release from MnSCU (which has less desire to protect us.)
There's more to the story than has been reported. As I clarify a few more facts from those in the know, I'll have more here. I think it's very important that folks like O'Connor read what really happened. You won't find it in the Post.
UPDATE: Critical Mass replies. Perhaps I am a little harsh, but when this was reported last year a Jewish friend in Ukraine sent me a copy of the article. I found that depressing. Perhaps someone can cheer me up?