Last week a report from The New York Post lambasted a graduate class in the School for Continuing and Professional Studies at NYU. The report was originally kept exclusive, probably because no self-respecting journalistic venue would ever dream of publishing it. The class, Transnational Terrorism, is taught by former Navy criminal investigator Marie-Helen Maras, who recently assigned a project asking students to describe a hypothetical terrorist attack along with its aftermath, factoring in sources of funding, number of operatives and method of execution.
The utter depravity in silencing students in an educational environment from exploring the root causes of terrorism discounts the scholarly approach to defending against, and thus preventing, such a plot. By avoiding any sort of empathy and promoting complete suppression instead, we avoid stopping the ills that have plagued us and ensure they can continue.
The Post, recalling the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, noted, “The [New York City Police Department] lost 23 cops on that dark day, and the Port Authority saw 37 cops vanish in the rubble.” But using the deaths of 9/11 victims as a be-all, end-all red line for debate is not magnanimous. Treating terrorism as taboo disregards the important role it can play. It is cowardly to use those men and women who lost their lives as a tool for stifling discussion concerning why their lives were cut short.
A class like this and, by extension, a university that harbors it encourages honest and open discussion in an intellectual environment. The Post should commend an assignment like this, which attempts to tackle a dangerous problem in a different manner than the newpaper’s age-old prescription of fighting death with more death, using American troops or bombs or missiles.
Unfortunately, the Post doesn’t think we should discuss the ramifications of terrorism, unless they come from the plot of actual terrorists — in other words, until it’s too late. It seems they prefer enjoying the unification that occurs in the aftermath of tragedy to brainstorming ways of preventing it.
Even worse, the Post goes on to use some of our brave men and women in blue to slander the assignment some more. An NYPD source for the Post’s story called it “the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.” The source continued, “What is this, we have our students do the work for the terrorists?”
Sept. 11, the NYPD’s logistical rumspringa from citywide crime prevention to national terror squelching, has allowed the police to capitalize on our fear while unnecessarily ramping up on scare tactics. It’s preposterous to presume that we’re any less safe as a result of hypotheticals from this class. The fact that this assignment can even stir debate sends a clear message: We can’t talk about aggression against America unless we’re trying to stifle it through aggression by America, and we can’t attempt to enter the minds of those who want to do us harm because, somehow, that allows them to win.
Cheerleading our current practices overseas assures moral defeat, not some homework assignment at NYU. I may have to strain my neck to see the Post and NYPD on their high horse, but bear in mind that it’s a long fall down.
A version of this article appeared in the Tuesday, Nov. 6 print edition. Chris DiNardo is opinion editor. Email him at [email protected].
