-
WAR OF IDEAS
Has the U.S. Reached Peak Car?
-
KILLER APPS
Cyberspies Are Using PRISM for Spearphishing
-
PASSPORT
Remembering Michael Hastings
Posted By Stephen M. Walt
Thursday, May 5, 2011 - 7:15 PM
Share
As readers of the New York Times (and Jewish Week) already know, the Board of Trustees at City University of New York voted to table the awarding of an honorary degree to playwright Tony Kushner after one member of the board, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, accused Kushner of supposedly "disparaging" Israel. Kushner has been critical of some Israeli policies-which hardly makes him unique among human beings, or among Jews, or even among Israelis. But none of his comments on these issues are outside the bounds of civil discourse or worthy of censure, especially by an institution that is supposed to be committed to freedom of thought and the open exchange of ideas. If you're curious, you can read Kushner's response here. Wiesenfeld is unrepentant, by the way, and defends his attack here. For an update on the evolving situation, see Justin Elliott here.
I have only two points to make about this incident, which one of the many attempts by self-appointed "defenders" of Israel to control discourse on this issue.
First, the main reason that hardliners like Mr. Weisenfeld go after someone like Kushner is deterrence. By denying critics of Israeli policy any honors, they seek to discourage others from expressing opinions that challenge the prevailing "pro-Israel" orthodoxy to which Weisenfeld is committed. Kushner was not nominated for an honorary degree for his views on Middle East politics; he was obviously nominated because he is an exceptionally talented and accomplished playwright and literary figure. But if someone like him can also be critical of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and receive an honorary degree, then -- horrors! -- other people who feel similarly might be empowered to speak out themselves and pretty soon such comments will cease to be taboo. People like Mr. Weisenfeld don't want that; they want people who do not share their views to be constantly aware of the price they might pay for expressing them. And it never seems to occur to them that maybe Kushner's views might be both more humane but also better for Israel than the position that Weisenfeld apparently holds.
Second, what this incident also reveals is the reflexive timidity of many academic organizations. There doesn't seem to have been any sort of organized campaign to deny Kushner the honorary degree; instead, the board voted to table the nomination after one member (Weisenfeld) made his disparaging remarks. I've spent more than a quarter century in academia, including seven years as an administrator, and the board's reaction doesn't surprise me a bit. Despite their public commitment to free speech and open discourse, nothing terrifies deans and trustees more than angry donors, phone calls from reporters, and anything that looks controversial. By tabling the nomination, they undoubtedly thought they were avoiding a potentially uncomfortable controversy.
But in this case the CUNY board blew it big-time, both because Weisenfeld's accusations were off-base but also because they would not have been grounds for denying Kushner an honorary degree even if they had been true. And meekly caving as they did is contrary to the principles of intellectual freedom that universities are supposed to defend. The end result is that this incident will get a lot more attention than awarding the degree would have garnered (Kushner already has several), and the board's shameful lack of vertebrae has been publicly exposed.
And why does this matter for foreign policy? Because as John Mearsheimer and I wrote a few years ago: "America will be better served if its citizens were exposed to the range of views about Israel common to most of the world's democracies, including Israel itself. . . Both the United States and Israel face vexing challenges. . .and neither country will benefit by silencing those who support a new approach. This does not mean that critics are always right, of course, but their suggestions deserves at least as much consideration as the failed policies that key groups in the [Israel] lobby have backed in recent years" (pp. 351-52).
Professor Walt,
Under your name it says you are "realist in an ideological world." Well, here some realist news for you. It was a kill mission. You know this very well and so does everybody else. Why the feigned sophistry in the essay?
In the end, by your lights however, perhaps it was lobbying effort of my 97 year old grandmother (part of the Jewish Lobby I might add) and Israel who were really behind the whole thing. :-)
You are very silly fellow who happens to be very bright (I teach IR and I am a professor, and no I don't support everything that Israel does .... I am not a member of AIPAC), I use your work often with great success. Much of your work is excellent which this makes this essay and your recent forays in to interest group politics and American political development so sad in a way.
You seem to a particular kind of academic which is not uncommon in the era of the "opportunistic academic/public intellectual"/ (a creature of the post World War II era in the Anglo/American world of social science) in that you seem to love now, to till the wrong garden too often. Stick with what you know.
And lets be honest and to recapitulate--you know full well this mission was a "kill" mission. Nothing to dance in the streets about per se, but we should be content that dangerous mass murder is not with us.
ADG
Steve's boy Chas, the mideast scholar, comes out with...
...the notion that the Palestinians are really the ancient Israelites who converted to Islam. And this is the guy who was almost our DNI, and for whom Steve was hysterically advocating?
Americans got lucky on that one. For those who believed it was Steve's "Lobby" who derailed his nomination rather than the fact that he was in the pocket of the Saudis and Chinese, you owe the "Lobby" a big thank you. The guy is a crackpot.
Why can;t you stick to teh topic DAVID IN DC?
What has Chas Freeman got to do with the Kurshner issue?
And FYI. the thesis that Palestinians are ancient Israelites who converted to Islam is from an Israeli academic, and has never been challenged.
I suspect your outrage at the idea really tickles your racist funny bone.
And FYI. Freeman withdrew from the nomination and the pressure bought upon him had nothig to do with Saudi Lobbying. In case you forgot, it was APAIC spy Steve rosen and Chuck Schumer who went after him based on out fo context quotes about China.
The guy spoke truth to power and that was unforgivable, so AIPAC got rid of him.
I answered that below...it is related because it was another example of Steve making a non-Foreign Policy post in order to defend an Israel basher. We're lucky to not have him, not because he was an Israel-basher, but because of his temperament and intellectual integrity.
That was not an answer David, it was an ad hominem
>> ...it is related because it was another example of Steve making a non-Foreign Policy post in order to defend an Israel basher.
Cristicising Israel is not Israeli bashing. He was right on the mark.
>> We're lucky to not have him, not because he was an Israel-basher, but because of his temperament and intellectual integrity.
His temperament and intellectual integrity are actually beyind reproach.
You simply cannot bear to hear anyone criticising Israel and sayign it like it is. And the thought of Jews adn arabs being related obviously offends your racist or ethnocetric sentiments.
USMARINE101 - weren't all your comments removed from your last
trollign and spamming effort?
>> Steve is a one-trick pony who would have disappeared into academic obscurity if he didn't re-brand himself as some "mid-east expert"
I don't recall Steven Walt being famous enough to be concerned with disappearing into academic obscurity before he and Meareshimer released their ground breaking book that has blown the lid on the corrupting and destructive influence of the lobby.
>> In a few years his work will be seen for what it is, an opportunistic, biased, conspiracy-theory fad, which relies on poor scholarship.
That's what you pathetic Hasbarats were saying 5 years ago and five years later, his "scholarship" remains unchallenged and his theories strengtheend by events like tke attack on Kushner.
Your work will be far more discredited than Stevens. You've failed to uphold your oath to protect and defend the Constitution. You've supported an Unconstitutional war, failed to defend the this country, rather choosing to support a yahoo who you should have arrested or stood down--I'm talking about Bush's Unconstitutional wars. You are a traitor.
Don't anti-intellectuals like Mr. Wiesenfeld know how ridiculous they sound? How idiotic they make Israel sound? Israel's Department of Hasbara is working overtime to improve Israel's image abroad. They would have more success if they focused their efforts on shutting up some of their stupider supporters.
Gee David, you're ideologically blinded again. There is much genetic evidence to prove that very assertion. Oh yeah, you're in the faith based community. The deliberately ignorant, who prefers to glean his reasoning, current events and political insights from a 3000 year old self serving fable. You support the religious fanatics in the Middle East--those who zealously starve, oppress, occupy and humiliate an entire people.
The Israel project is about to be abandoned like the British left the Middle East. Indians, Chinese, South Americans don't get this whole deference to Israel. And, fewer and fewer white Americans care about Israel. This, like segregation and apartheid, Jim Crow and Israel will all go away once a few more old people die.
Nothing like an unsupported assertion backed up by a few ad hominem attacks to bolster your case, Scott.
Out of curiousity, I looked this up. What I found is below. To me this says that Freeman was shading the science (and history) to fit his ideology. You accuse me of doing this, and while I am not it would be OK if I was because I am just some schmuck writing on a message board. It is not something we could afford in the DNI.
There is no real evidence that most, or even many, of the current Palestinians have lived in the area since "time immemorial", as Freeman put it. And it should be said - this doesn't matter at all. The Palestinians are there now and have a right to their own country. I made my point not to diminish the Palestinians' rightful claims, but to highlight the fact that Steve's judgement becomes questionable when he get lathered up in defending his fellow Israel-bashers. It is apropos because Steve is doing it again here. I have never even heard of this guy Kushner, but somehow missing out on yet one more honorary degree in his apparent stable of them is worth a blog post because he's an Israel-basher.
---------------------
The evidence suggests there was a common ancestor, but at some point the populations diverged (and are now distinct):
Genetic affinities of Arabs to Jews
Arabs are more closely related to Jews than they are to the
Welsh, indicating a more recent common ancestry. At the
haplogroup level, the Y chromosome distribution was
similar in both Arabs and Jews, although a significant difference
was found between Arabs and Sephardic Jews in
haplogroup 2 frequencies. This finding does not necessarily
conflict with the results of Hammer et al. (2000), who
found no significant differences between Jews and non-
Jewish Middle-Eastern populations, as the difference reported
here was only just significant (P<0.05) and Hammer
et al. used a lower significance level (?=0.03)......However, the present study, using high-resolution haplotypes,
also revealed statistically significant differences
between Arabs and Jews. Both populations were characterized
by distinct modal haplotypes that were infrequent
in the other population. Notably, about one third of the
Arab individuals carried I&P Arab clade haplotypes that
were observed once in the Sephardic Jews studied here
and in a single Ashkenazi Cohen out of 306 male Jews
tested (Thomas et al. 1998). Although Arabs and Jews
showed a high frequency of haplotypes with a DYS388 repeat
number ?15, the distribution of the alleles was different
in each population. DYS388 allele 17 was found almost
exclusively in Arabs, while allele 16 was common
among Jews. In addition, both Sephardic and Ashkenazi
Jews had higher frequencies of haplogroup 2 chromosomes
than Arabs...
The authors hypothesize that it could have been because of:
The low haplotype diversity of the Arab clade
chromosomes, as seen in the network (Fig. 2), suggests
that they descended from a relatively recent common ancestor.
Arab clade chromosomes could have been present
in the common ancestral population of Arabs and Jews,
and drifted to high frequencies in one of the subgroups
following population isolation. The event leading to this
isolation might have been the acceptance of the monotheistic
Jewish religion by a subset of the population, or geographic
separation due to the expulsion of Jews after the
destruction of the Second Temple in AD 79. Alternatively,
the Arab clade could have been introduced through geneflow,
perhaps by the immigration of Arab tribes in the
first millennium AD....
The slight genetic dioversity between Seprhardic Jews and Palestinians was created by the Hebrews descendents converting to Islam and assimilating with the Arabs.
As Shlomo Zand summarises in his book, "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?", the Romans didn't expel whole nations from their territories. Zand estimates that perhaps 10,000 ancient Judeans were vanquished during the Roman wars, and the remaining inhabitants of ancient Judea remained, converting to Islam and assimilating with their conquerors when Arabs subjugated the area.
They became the progenitors of today's Palestinian Arabs, many of whom now live as refugees who were exiled from their homeland during the 20th century.
The slight genetic dioversity between Seprhardic Jews and Palestinians was created by the Hebrews descendents converting to Islam and assimilating with the Arabs.
The authors hypothesize several mechanisms by which this could have happened. That was only one, but others are that the divergence occurred at the time the ancient nation of Israel was founded, or that the difference was brought by the invaders themselves.
If you go back to the paper from which Freeman was presumably basing his notion, you will see there is a cluster of not just Israelis and Palestinian Arabs, but also Syrian, Lebanese and while not included in the study, Jordanian (being predominantly ethnically Palestinian) as well. Point being, there is evidence that these genetically similar populations could have come back into the area as the early Zionists created jobs and brought money into the region (as population growth shows must have happened). It suits Freeman's political agenda and ideology to present one possible scenario as fact. I am sure someone on the other side would look at these data and note that Israel, the West Bank and Gaza only make up the smallest percentage of the total area where all of these genetically similar populations reside. One thing I know some do say - the Palestinians are not a distinct people and therefore there already is a "Palestine", namely Jordan. The genetics argument is a double edged sword.
You bring up Sand. The study I quote refutes the hypothesis put forth by Shlomo Sand. His politically motivated book, The Invention of the Jewish People, was basically discredited before it was written. If most Jews are converted Europeans, Russians and Asians, why are they so genetically similar to the other populations from the region?
All this is to say that people pushing these notions for political reasons should be suspect, and most certainly not be serving as DNI! As I said earlier, this stuff is moot as far as I'm concerned. Interesting from a scientific standpoint, but it doesn't change reality as it is now or delegitimize either sides claims, which should be negotiated between the parties.
Clutching at straws DAVID IN DC
The authors hypothesize several mechanisms by which this could have happened. That was only one, but others are that the divergence occurred at the time the ancient nation of Israel was founded, or that the difference was brought by the invaders themselves.
>> Point being, there is evidence that these genetically similar populations could have come back into the area as the early Zionists created jobs and brought money into the region (as population growth shows must have happened).
But that is clearly unsupported seeing as this would only account for less than 10% of Palestinians who were already majority in the region.
>> It suits Freeman's political agenda and ideology to present one possible scenario as fact.
No, it suits logic 1901 to present the most likely scenario, one that has been widely accepted in Israel for decades.
I am sure someone on the other side would look at these data and note that Israel, the West Bank and Gaza only make up the smallest percentage of the total area where all of these genetically similar populations reside.
>> One thing I know some do say - the Palestinians are not a distinct people and therefore there already is a "Palestine", namely Jordan. The genetics argument is a double edged sword.
Yes some people do say that, and they say it for political reason, and furthermore, there is no evidence to support it.
>> You bring up Sand. The study I quote refutes the hypothesis put forth by Shlomo Sand.
No it doesn't refute it at all, it presents an alternative hypothesis, albeit a much more unlikely one.
>> His politically motivated book, The Invention of the Jewish People, was basically discredited before it was written.
False. His hypothesis is not only a long held one is Israeli academic circles, but it's central argument has not been challenged.
>> If most Jews are converted Europeans, Russians and Asians, why are they so genetically similar to the other populations from the region?
There is clearly very little genetic similarity between white, blue eyes, fair headed Ashkenazi Jews and dark skinned, brown eyes, dark haired Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews.
>> As I said earlier, this stuff is moot as far as I'm concerned.
Agreed.
Since we are talking about origins
>> its important to note that the Palestinians themselves are no different from the Arabs of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan ,etc.
False. As early as 1914, Ben-Gurion pointed out that the Palestinians were a distinct people from the Arabs of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan.
>> Maybe we should consider the fact that there already is a Palestinian state then...Jordan.
There is no point considering that seeing as it's false assetion.
>> Establishing another state in the west bank and gaza is just part of the Arab/muslim war against the Jews
That's absurd in the extreme, not to mention hillarious. After all, didn't Israel agree to the partition in 1947? Was the partition, propose by the Peel Commission and then the UN “part of the Arab/muslim war against the Jews”
>> ...those "dhimmi" or second-class non-citizens who were persecuted throughout the ages in arab lands and driven out after 1948.
No dhimmi were driven out, but 750,000 Palestinians were, and done so by Israel intetionally.
Neoleft, you are entitled to your own opinions...
...but simply because you believe something to be true does not make it so. The shrill ad hominems don't do much for your credibility either. I pretty clearly stated multiple times that whatever the origins of the various populations, nobody's claims should be diminished or delegitimized because of it, ie, there should be no discrimination because of racial origin or ethnicity. However, for you it is not enough to simply disagree, you must demonize those with whom you disagree, hence your liberal usage of epithets like "racist".
The fact of the matter is, while I support a Jewish state and one "Arab" and "Muslim" state (as it states in the Palestinian national charter) and have no issues with either, you hold a double racial standard and seemingly only have issues with a Jewish state. If you ever made a post calling out the Palestinians as racist for their national charter similar to the way you do so on an almost daily basis about Jewish Israel, I apologize, but I missed it.
Picking and choosing your "facts"
False. As early as 1914, Ben-Gurion pointed out that the Palestinians were a distinct people from the Arabs of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan.
The studies that show the similarities between Israelis and Palestinians show the same similarities between the Palestinians other Arabs of the immediate region. Where it suits you, you rely on modern population genetics studies to make your case, but where they conflict with your ideology you ignore them and rely on 100 year old statements from historical figures.
not sure what race has to do with land rights. The biggest difference between the Palestinians and Jordanians is that Palestinians live in homes that are in Palestine and Israel. Race has no bearing on land rights.
CUNY has seriously devalued their own brand by this craven act.
Future offers of honorary degrees should be disrespectfully declined.
This would send a clear message that instutions that purport to encourage open debate must not allow themselves to be bullied into silencing dissenting views.
Apparently this is the second time this Wiesenfeld guy has distinguished himself by shooting CUNY in the foot. He tried to have an instructor fired for having a critical take on the I-P conflict. He lost that round, as CUNY re-appointed the instructor.
I don't know who's responsible for appointing or firing board members, but it's time this idiot was replaced.
>> Such an academic. He is going to speak to an "anti-AIPAC" meeting together with such academics as clown doctor patch adams and code pink.
And your point? Are you suggesting that there is no legtimate position to take other than the AIPAC centric POV?
Things are just slow at the Walt office last couple of days. Why can't we find what Tony even said to begin with?
This is a perfect example of the lobby in action and we should place it in the blinding light of public scrutiny. The facts are clear. Tony Kushner has criticized Israel, An ultraright Zionists has tried to blackball him for his views. This a Zionist who refers to Palestinians as "nonhuman". His views alone should be put on public display and we can debate: how can such outright racists occupy positions of power in public institutions?
Anybody notice that the Jewish Week says only that the decision "presumably" had to do with Kushner's (totally misrepresented) views about Israel? Well, THAT's weird, when Wiesenfeld was COMPLETELY EXPLICIT on this point. What gives? Is JW trying to leave the door open a crack for somebody to claim that this was NOT a travesty?
great deal of activity over at Mondoweiss about Kushner. Info etc.
Interesting debate over at MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnells about Condi "mushroom cloud" Rice's appearance on his show last night.
Lawrence I am offended by the persistent recycling of these Bush administration war criminals on our MSM. Just a week before you had thrown a rabid birther liar off your program because she continued to lie, spin and would not answer his questions. The same rules should have applied to Rice who is far more offensive and complicit in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.. Anyway the bases of the interview was "what we know now" instead of "what we knew then" (before the invasion) Lawrence allowed the myth that congress, the public did not have reason to seriously suspect the Bush administrations intelligence. In 2002 I was still a soccer mom in southeastern Ohio but I listened intently to the news. That fall of 2002 Senator Durbin (on the intelligence committee) and 21 other Senators including Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee voted against the 2002 iiraq war resolution. Most of the Dems voted against that resolution in the house. Just a bit of a clue that they had little to no confidence in the validity of the Office of Special Plans "stovepiped" intelligence. All a soccer mom had to do at that point to access information and experts questioning the WMD intelligence was to turn on NPR's Diane Rehm show and The Talk of the Nation along with listening to Democracy now and going on the web. I heard former IAEA weapons inspector Scott Ritter who was in Iraq most of the 90's inspecting question the validity of the intelligence. I heard former CIA middle east analyst Ray McGovern, Former President Jimmy Carter, General Zinni, Scowcroft and many many more CIA analyst, historians, experts questioning Feith, Wolfowitz's intelligence. Former middle east CIA analyst in the Bush administration Flynt Leverett (you should have him on your program) quit the Bush administration because of the unnecessary invasion before the invasion. In early March of 2003 the head of the IAEA El baradei came out and said that the Niger Documents were forgeries and bad ones at that. I of course thought the push to invade Iraq would come to a screeching halt. Foolish to think that facts would apply
In the fall of 2002 and early winter of 2003 hundreds of thousands (millions across the nation) of Americans petitioned, marched, lobbied in the halls of congress against the invasion of Iraq the MSM basically ignored us. Many of us were protesting based on the questions around the intelligence. The crowds in the fall of 2002 in DC (right in NPR's and MSNBC''s back yard) were made up of WWII, Korean,Vietnam, Desert Storm Vets as well as families pushing children in strollers and seniors in wheel chairs, truckers, students, nurses, doctors, plumbers etc. A real representation of how diverse our country is. When I would turn on the national news they would show the same damn clip of the 20 individuals at the march with hoods over their heads. No interviews with the Vets who were marching, the mothers, etc.
In Feb of 2003 the crowd in New York City marching against the invasion was made up of even more. At least 300,000. Again a diverse crowd. At the head of that march the 9/11 families for peaceful tomorrows and Vets lead the huge crowd. Dear friends Bev and John Titus who lost their daughter Alysia who was an airline stewardess on one of the United Flights slammed into one of the Twin Towers. I had the honor to push a 92 year old WWII vet who was there in his wheel chair rolling against the unnecessary and brutal invasion of Iraq. Again the MSM did not show the rest of the American public sitting at home in front of their screens or the rest of the world who was really there. 30 million people around the world marched against the invasion...before the invasion.
O'Donnell allowed Rice to insult the American publics intelligence once again. She spun, lied and endlessly interrupted him during last nights interview. Some simple questions a soccer mom would have asked her based on what I knew from listening to the Rehm show, Talk of the Nation, Democracy Now and reading on the web. (Jason Vest of the nation "The Men from Jinsa and the CSP" fall of 2002 and many other articles.
Now millions of us are sorry the MSM barely covered these protest but there are no way to get around the facts on the ground.
1. Former counterterroism expert Richard Clarke has stated that both you and Steven Hadley ignored his warning about potential terrorist attacks by Al Queda during the Clinton Bush transition. Would you please respond
2. In Ron Susskinds book "The Price of Loyalty" former Secretary of the Treasury in 43's first administration stated that at the very first cabinet meetings in 2001 Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld were all ready discussing ways to go after Iraq militarily. Can you please tell us what you were hearing in those early cabinet meetings in early 2001 about targeting Iraq.
3. In early March of 2003 the head of the IAEA El Baradei came out and told the world that the Niger Documents were forgeries and bad ones at that. Why did the Bush administration keep steam rolling towards the invasion after this was announced. And why has no one been held accountable for the false Niger Documents?
4. The Bush administration demanded that IAEA weapons inspectors in Iraq be taken out of Iraq in early 20003. Why did the Bush administration stop inspections?
5. Why is it that you know how many Iraqi people were allegedly killed by Saddam and you can not report to the world how many Iraqi people have been killed, injured and displaced as a direct consequence of the invasion?
Now these are some simple questions from a concerned soccer mom who could have asked the Bush administration these questions based on what I knew in the fall of 2002 and in early 2003.
O"Donnell pushing the myth that "what we know now" makes the situation look very different. Lawrence what many of us "knew then" before the invasion should have been enough to stop that invasion based on a "pack of lies"
Sir the least you could have done is throw that liar and war criminal off your program the way you did that crazy assed birther lady.
And the very least you can do for American soldiers who have been injured and killed as well as the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people injured and killed (Lancet report in 2006, recently released Pentagon report) is to push our congress our so called justice system, the MSm to hold those responsible for creating, cherry picking and disseminating false pre war intelligence which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people accountable. The same justice and accountability standards applied to Osama Bin Laden for killing innocent people should be applied to the Bush administration war criminals. Hearings and trials would suffice.
"...the bases of the interview was "what we know now" instead of "what we knew then" (before the invasion) Lawrence allowed the myth that congress, the public did not have reason to seriously suspect the Bush administrations intelligence. In 2002 I was still a soccer mom in southeastern Ohio but I listened intently to the news. That fall of 2002 Senator Durbin (on the intelligence committee) and 21 other Senators including Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffee voted against the 2002 iiraq war resolution...."
How many thousands of times have you seen cable news run the footage of Colin Whatsisname at the UN holding up what is supposedly a vial of toxic chemicals? Next time you see it, take a good look at the faces of those listening to him and just see how many of them believe what they're hearing. Those of us outside the USA were believing the UN inspectors; those inside the USA were believing Rice and Bush and Cheney and Rummy.
The reason no other state (except stupid Blair's Britain) joined the "coalition of the bribed and threatened" is that nobody believed the "mushroom cloud" story. Unlike the American public, the British public didn't fall for it--which is why there was so much protest there. There may even have been lotsa US politicians who didn't believe the story, but like all US politicians they go with the flow. Can't be seen to be "unpatriotic," can they?
Over at Democracy Now announces the Kushner controversy today. At 11:00 minutes on "Today's headlines"
CUNY Trustees Deny Honorary Degree to Playwright over Israel-Palestine Views
Intellectual/Academic Terrorism
Terrorism
–noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
I think this newly perfected political tactic is now mature enough to deserve its own name.
We have a bunch of Judeo-fascists running around in our country trying to suppress any form of discussion on Israel. Anyone that does not represent the position of AIPAC or the current racist apartheid regime in Israel is "anti-semite", "self hating jew", blah, blah, blay.... Whenever they have nothing intelligent to say, they have the same comeback. Problem is, they used it one too many times....
What a joke. Do you really think Americans are buying this anymore? The second amendment does not apply to these fascists....
Any day now, this is going to back fire in their face and it is going to be pretty funny to watch.
We have a bunch of Judeo-fascists running around in our country trying to suppress any form of discussion on Israel. Anyone that does not represent the position of AIPAC or the current racist apartheid regime in Israel is "anti-semite", "self hating jew", blah, blah, blay.... Whenever they have nothing intelligent to say, they have the same comeback. Problem is, they used it one too many times....
What a joke. Do you really think Americans are buying this anymore? The second amendment does not apply to these fascists....
Any day now, this is going to back fire in their face and it is going to be pretty funny to watch.
...that the U.S. is a "free country" and we have "freedom of speech"!
It's always sad when powerful pressure groups force a university to withdraw an invitation, rescind an offer, cancel a speaker or any other act that narrows the range of debate. This strengthens the impression that academic society is regulated by a kind of tribalism where issues are decided by the tribe that can generate the most noise and threatening behavior. No one benefits from this. The openness and rigorous debate and discussion that a free society depends upon are the causalities of this kind of super-sensitivity, vigilance and intolerance.
I didn't know the appointment had been tabled
From all of the excitement, it appeared that the proposed doctorate had been snuffed in an orchestrated denial.
But, that does not appear to be the case. Rather, that the request for a doctorate was deferred.
Kushner is an amazing artist and deserves accolades and honorary degrees.
But, the exageration of the event is also an imposition on our collective consciousness.
There is a double standard at play as well. That is that those that hold views supportive of Israel are also periodically denied appointments or honors on a political basis.
WITTYQ's imaginary consciousness
>> I didn't know the appointment had been tabled
Then read the article, not just the headline.
>> Rather, that the request for a doctorate was deferred.
Based onwht evidence?
>> But, the exageration of the event is also an imposition on our collective consciousness.
Imposition Witty? How has this evetn been imposed on your consciousness? Could it be that this has damanegd Israel's reputation and exposed the ugly, behind the scenes balckmail that it's supporters have been excercising, and that this is what is upsetting your consciousness?
>> There is a double standard at play as well. That is that those that hold views supportive of Israel are also periodically denied appointments or honors on a political basis.
Name one example Witty, and them feel feel to elucidate how it happens "periodically".
You really are up an ideological creek. Perhaps this article will open your eyes as to who are the militant terrorists and who are those beset by oppressors, occupation, humiliation, starvation and theft from the poor.
"CUNY Board Member and Professor Tied to Settler Charity With ‘No Arabs’ Policy " http://www.lobelog.com/
CUNY has reversed themselves, putting Weisenthal on the defensive for his support of racist and bigoted groups. Or, a pro-Jewish Israeli Zionist--same thing.
Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(34)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE