Prof Jason Arday

Cambridge's reputation may not recover from this
Another one

Dr. Farah Ahmed, an assistant research professor at the University of CambridgeFaculty of Education, faced media scrutiny over her past association with Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist group proscribed as a terrorist organization in the UK in 2024. Writings attributed to her from the early 2000s criticized Western education and democracy, though she stated she left the group in 2010. [1, 2, 3]

Background and Controversy
    • Appointment: Farah Ahmed works as an assistant research professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Cambridge and as a research fellow at Hughes Hall. [1]
    • Resurfaced Writings: Media reports highlighted a past educational pamphlet where she described Western education as a threat to Muslim values and called democracy a corrupt tradition. [1, 2]
    • Affiliation Timeline: Reports noted she stated she left Hizb ut-Tahrir in 2010, long before the group was officially banned in the UK. [1, 2]

University Response
    • Academic Freedom: A spokesperson for Cambridge’s Faculty of Education defended the appointment (information via The Times of India), emphasizing the institution's commitment to academic freedom and lawful freedom of speech. [1]
    • Debate: The university noted that members of its community are free to challenge differing ideas and theories through robust scholarly debate. [1]
 
I don't know why you're so keen to involve yourself, but the inference is obvious, and further supported by his inability to clarify what specifically about this suicide was cowardly and immoral.

Writing YOU in capital letters just isn't that convincing in response unfortunately.

No, you’re just adding that second subsequent aspect as a diversion. It’s a public forum and we can all contribute, especially when you’ve drawn a completely incorrect inference.

eaglesdare wrote, “In the end he died as he lived, immoral and cowardly”. He couldn’t have been any more specific if he’d tried.

To try and suggest he ‘inferred’ that everyone who commits suicide is immoral and a coward is simply wrong and absurd.

YOU chose to draw that inference, no one else and then publicise that on here. That is just unethical but then again very typical of you.
 
No, you’re just adding that second subsequent aspect as a diversion. It’s a public forum and we can all contribute, especially when you’ve drawn a completely incorrect inference.

eaglesdare wrote, “In the end he died as he lived, immoral and cowardly”. He couldn’t have been any more specific if he’d tried.

To try and suggest he ‘inferred’ that everyone who commits suicide is immoral and a coward is simply wrong and absurd.

YOU chose to draw that inference, no one else and then publicise that on here. That is just unethical but then again very typical of you.

It’s not remotely incorrect and that’s certainly not for YOU to decide.

Since YOU’re so keen to defend him, maybe YOU can answer: what specifically about Arday’s death was cowardly and immoral?
 
I believe Fraud charges would definitely have followed. There would’ve been a police investigation and it is already clear that he acted dishonestly and received financial gain or caused financial loss to another because of his actions.
The Times Higher Education journalist got a visit from the MET on a charge of harassment, later dropped by the police, but enough to scare off a legitimate question from a journalist and their employer.
 
It takes more courage to end your own life than many of us have in us.

Any healthy young person driven by whatever reason to suicide is a loss

Whatever this guy did a system allowed him to do it and it seems that that system simply dropped him like a hot spud once they looked bad.

We see this all the time in society, I do a lot of work with ex military, veterans who have served given their lives and just chucked out and ignored. Society lacks responsibility as it has lost accountability

Oh look, someone else who got the exact same inference from the post. What an amazing coincidence.

Eaglesdare even replied to this one, disputed that suicide is courageous, and didn’t remotely challenge the fact that this is what he was inferring in his original post.

Days after, suddenly this isn’t what he meant, but he can’t tell us what he actually meant.
 
Oh look, someone else who got the exact same inference from the post. What an amazing coincidence.

Eaglesdare even replied to this one, disputed that suicide is courageous, and didn’t remotely challenge the fact that this is what he was inferring in his original post.

Days after, suddenly this isn’t what he meant, but he can’t tell us what he actually meant.

Disputing the claim that suicide is "courageous" is not the same as saying every suicide is immoral or cowardly. Which I did not say.

My original post was still only about arday and the specific circumstances of his life and death not a generalisation about suicide.

I hope that clears up your confusion once and for all.

Im happy to tell you what I meant once you retract your accusation.
 
Disputing the claim that suicide is "courageous" is not the same as saying every suicide is immoral or cowardly. Which I did not say.

My original post was still only about arday and the specific circumstances of his life and death not a generalisation about suicide.

I hope that clears up your confusion once and for all.

Im happy to tell you what I meant once you retract your accusation.

What specifically about Arday’s death was immoral and cowardly?

It’s interesting you are very clearly still engaging with me and the thread, but just stuck on that one question.
 
It’s not remotely incorrect and that’s certainly not for YOU to decide.

Since YOU’re so keen to defend him, maybe YOU can answer: what specifically about Arday’s death was cowardly and immoral?

Of course it’s incorrect. Eaglsedare used the word he twice in one sentence, directly referring to Arday. He then also immediately corrected your inference and went on to do so three or four more times. To say it was correct is laughable and not supported by any of the statements he made or facts of the matter.

I’m not answerable to you and have no interest of getting drawn into your diversion.
 
the HOL-Troll rule. You make 5 or more inflammatory postings, on a single thread, mostly abusive and/or irrelevant to the OP..... and a yellow card will be requested.

What’s the rule if you make dozens and dozens of posts, across multiple threads, attempting to police the boards and calling for others to be banned?

There’s an ignore button - use it or shut up about what people want to post.
 
Of course it’s incorrect. Eaglsedare used the word he twice in one sentence, directly referring to Arday. He then also immediately corrected your inference and went on to do so three or four more times. To say it was correct is laughable and not supported by any of the statements he made or facts of the matter.

I’m not answerable to you and have no interest of getting drawn into your diversion.

Interesting angle for someone who voluntarily got involved.

I’m not answerable to you.
 
What’s the rule if you make dozens and dozens of posts, across multiple threads, attempting to police the boards and calling for others to be banned?

There’s an ignore button - use it or shut up about what people want to post.

your logic being
a) you can be constantly abusive & irrelevant
and
b) its my responsibility to filter you out of my head ?

Anyhoo.............Jason Arday...an invite to all the rest of you to discuss.
 
To be clear when I said Jason arday died as he lived...immoral and cowardly. It was because of the pattern that defined his career and how it ended.

The evidence showed repeated fabrication of his "achievements" that included academic misconduct, and a public persona built on claims that did not hold up.
When those claims collapsed under scrutiny he resigned and then took his own life rather than face the full consequences like the investigations, or the people affected by the deceptions.

He left his family and children to deal with the fallout and avoided accountability for his actions. This is what I regard as both immoral and cowardly.

That is my specific opinion of him and the circumstances of his life and death. It is not a statement about anyone else who dies by suicide.

As for the me disagreeing that suicide is “courageous”. yes of course I disagree. Calling it courageous can romanticise and potentially promote it. Hollywood does this regularly, and I think that is harmful.

Just my opinion anyway.
 
To be clear when I said Jason arday died as he lived...immoral and cowardly. It was because of the pattern that defined his career and how it ended.

The evidence showed repeated fabrication of his "achievements" that included academic misconduct, and a public persona built on claims that did not hold up.
When those claims collapsed under scrutiny he resigned and then took his own life rather than face the full consequences like the investigations, or the people affected by the deceptions.

He left his family and children to deal with the fallout and avoided accountability for his actions. This is what I regard as both immoral and cowardly.

That is my specific opinion of him and the circumstances of his life and death. It is not a statement about anyone else who dies by suicide.

As for the me disagreeing that suicide is “courageous”. yes of course I disagree. Calling it courageous can romanticise and potentially promote it. Hollywood does this regularly, and I think that is harmful.

Just my opinion anyway.
Correct.
Jason Arday lived a lie and was caught out. But like the Grooming Gangs, serious questions need to be asked about who failed to catch him all along.
 
Interesting angle for someone who voluntarily got involved.
I was correcting the original nonsense you posted.

I have no interest getting drawn into your secondary diversion.

eaglesdare has succinctly clarified his position in any event. You’d struggle to draw another incorrect inference from it but I’m sure you’ll give it a damn good go.
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top