While the lunatic Kent State professor certainly deserves attention, I disagree with David’s post in that I’m not sure that the University’s response has been unreasonable. As it is, there doesn’t seem to be much tangible proof of his actions, or the nature of his association with the “Global War” site. Information about his contribution to the site seems rather slight at the moment. If some more substantive evidence of his activities is produced then I think the University would be well-advised to look into his activities. Everyone who’s brought attention to this fellow should continue to do so, but at this point the University seems to be doing the right thing. If, as David suggests, he had some involvement with Jihad training manuals then he should be directly removed, but at this point, his activities seem quite short of that. Academic freedom, in this instance, is clearly a bulwark for some loathsome speech, but present evidence offers only that — speech, which doesn’t seem sufficient evidence for a University tribunal. It’s journalists who should look to find more, not the University.