10 thoughts on “Brandeis Caves to Pipes, Donor Pressure – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. What does this seemingly well-meaning man believe will happen when students eventually find out that they find out they’ve been lied to? How does he think they’ll react when they discover that the desert is not blooming, but that this was a metaphor for the acres of toxic waste dumped by Rahat Homav industries in open-air waste dumps in the Negev – a place where respitory problems abound and cancer is 65% greater than elsewhere? How does he think we can say it’s wrong for Mugabe to make 100s of thousands of people homeless, yet not bat an eyelid when ILA destroys Bedouin crops for the nth year running? How does he think they will react when they discover that an Arab Bedouin in the Negev must purchase their own historic land and then not receive the deeds for 25+ years, and have their homes demolished by the Police/IDF because some guy in US/Haifa has plans for your land? How will the students react when the discover that far from making the world a safer place for Jews, these totalitarian acts at corporate/govt behest with no regard for historic rights of other peoples have made life more dangerous than ever before.

  2. How is it that it’s wrong to boycott certain right-wing academics such as the Haifa demographers, but it’s ok to have an Israeli Academic Monitor which witchunts Israelis of conscience? Why is it ok for Pipes’ Campus-Watch to demonise and smear academics in the USA, yet not ok for others to also take this stand?

    Why should conscience be thought of as a left-wing’ attribute.
    Mercy is ‘left’, maybe it is all we have left, but this is a metaphysical morality, and not a political placement.

  3. Richard,

    Pipes is acting in a bad fashion.
    It is painful to watch him.
    He is generalizing.
    Muslims are not yet exclusively all Wahhabists or Khomeinists.
    Terrible to realize that these two branches are merging via Palestine.
    The real trouble that these two branches rule and oppress the people through a State Security System.
    It is a mix of propaganda, extreme theology and police/intelligence brutality.
    Hamas won the election by applying a cheap Iranian style populist propaganda, and holds to the rule by the dirty activity of its secret police, informants, assassins etc.

    On the other end of the scale, most Jewish rabbis are equally guilty, and in denial.

    The only solution is Enlightenment, and discarding theologies. All theologies. Jewish, Christian, and Muslim.

    We can listen to Sam Harris to rebuild our hope.

    Steven

  4. Hamas won the election by applying a cheap Iranian style populist propaganda, and holds to the rule by the dirty activity of its secret police, informants, assassins etc.

    I’m no fan of Hamas, but I’m afraid that this is way over the top, Steven.

  5. I just got President Carter’s book out of the library. I doubt very much if I will discover that Jimmy Carter is an anti-Semite. He is a Libra like me. A peacemaker, and believes in Justice. He even has the great LIbra SMIILE. Thanks for Tikum Olam. We need somebody speaking on our behalf. Why Label people with being Liberals. We are the real intelligentsia–Yes, you may label us using that word.
    How about a little love ye one another.
    I love, You,
    Jeanie xxx000

  6. As a Brandeis alum I find this disheartening. When I was there, we managed to be able to handle a visit by Meir Kahane, who as I recall wasn’t the sole of moderation. We delicate undergrads survived (although I think it got rather interesting). The censoring of points of view by the University will be a lasting embarrassment.

  7. There is a bit too much rhetoric here that seems to obscure a perfectly fine point. Let me explain.

    Richard wrote,
    …Mideast studies faculty (and faculty candidates) being subjected to a pro-Israel smear campaign…

    This is not entirely fair. The smear campaign was not “pro-Israel”–at least, it was no more so than the pro-choice rhetoric is necessarily “pro-abortion”, as the anti-choicers like to label it. Some of the criticism offered at Columbia and at Brandeis was fairly legitimate. And both sides have been guilty of excesses in the debate. But one should not apply the “enemy of my enemy” principle in academic discourse–opposition to a particular academic or academic position need not come from ideological allies.

    To be fair, Daniel Pipes is one of the worst. It is difficult to describe his position as “academic” because most of his data (if one can even refer to it as “data”) are misinterpreted and conclusions extremely biased. Views of Pipes’s critics are usually distorted by his supporters in an attempt to portray Pipes as some kind of heroic figure. Pipes is not a hero–he’s a coward.

    Norman Finkelstein is another matter. To describe Finkelstein as a “Dershowitz gadfly” is not fair to either Dershowitz or Finkelstein. For one, Dershowitz is no Pipes. Pipes revolves in extreme conservative circles and relishes the attention he’s getting from the Cristian Right. Dershowitz, in contrast, is liberal. He is, in fact, far more liberal in his views than some of the self-proclaimed progressives who routinely want to muzzle free speech. But Dershowitz is a supporter of Israel (if not quite a “Zionist” in the more traditional sense), and he likes to provoke his opponents.

    Finkelstein, on the other hand, is not merely an critic of Israel. Finkelstein is the personification of a Jew who gives comfort to anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers and other assorted rabble. Every time an anti-Semitic polemicist wants to justify the myth of Jewish evil by citing a Jew, he can usually find support in Finkelstein’s statements. This is quite disturbing. Finkelstein is no Pipes, but his academic credentials are not much better. Critics of both Finkelstein and Pipes usually have far more data to back up their arguments than either one of these two.

    Having said this, I find it deeply disturbing that Brandeis would find any wisdom in denying speech rights to either Pipes or Finkelstein. It is yet more distirbing that, following criticism, the Brandeis administration found it wise to relent on Pipes, but to continue to have Finkelstein muzzled. This is not representative of any plausible interpretation of free speech.

  8. Buck: I’m glad we agree on Pipes & on Brandeis’ response to the Carter speech. But you’re entirely too gentle on Dershowitz. A liberal? Howso? He was a liberal. In the late 1960s he even wrote an introduction to a book by an Israeli Arab & represented him in court. But I’d challenge you to find anything liberal in Dershowitz these days. He’s closer to neocon than he is to liberal in my book.

    While I have no use for Finkelstein’s anti-Zionist rhetoric, I believe his research on Dershowitz’s plagiarism is sound. It is certainly unfair to say that Finkelstein’s research is poor merely because of the alleged use made of it by anti-Semites. And btw, the Holocaust is a phenomenon that is deeply misused by some Jews and I’m not entirely convinced that his critique of the Holocaust isn’t w/o some merit.

  9. Why and how can so many warm and fuzzy people overlook the elephants in the room? In word and deed a major portion of the Islamic world is on a mission to “subdue or kill the infidel” – a misison acquiesced to and excused by the vast majority of the rest. The voices proclaiming the innocence and benevolence of “the silent majority” of Musims come almost exclusively from wishful thinking “infidels”. Any concerns an “infidel” might have with any non-Islamic movement surely must consider this full grown elephant in the room – these concerns are only “academic” issues vs the survival of freedom, liberties and indeed body, in a world threatened by the spread of Islam.

  10. a major portion of the Islamic world is on a mission to “subdue or kill the infidel” – a misison acquiesced to and excused by the vast majority of the rest.

    How many unsubstantiated gross overgeneralizations can someone pack into a single sentence? You’ve possibly come close to the record. I won’t pretend to try to convince you of the gross ignorance that characterizes your views since that would be next to impossible. Suffice to say that your views find no echo here.

    For every instance of Muslim hate I can find an instance of either Jewish or Christian hate of Muslims. What does it prove? Nothing, except that human beings are better haters than peacemakers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d