I also think it a tad extreme. But it is duplicitous to lament deterioration in academic standards wrt to radicals without 1) trying to examine why they are radical and 2) trying to examine if there is significant academic bias against even exploring 1). People, who fail to look for explanations, seldom find them.
To explore why they are radical is indeed a proper course for study. However, it does not usually involve inviting the radicals over to lay out their crackpot theories, or even more insidiously, to tone them down to something moderate-sounding for the consumption by guileless and ignorant American students. Would you have invited Goebbels to speak on why the Nazis were radical? They had grievances too, lots of them. Some of them were real and serious. We still don't give them a pass on their reaction. Why should I give a pass to warmed-over Nazism when I hear it from the Arabs and Persians?
For example a single paragraph on an issue like Jimmy Carter’s book, and the reaction to that needs to be addressed as well.
Carter's book is woefully biased, full of outright untruths, and he has both plagerized and twisted the work of others, as Dennis Ross and others, some from his own center, have complained. I would not put him in the same category as Khatami, but I would bring him in as part of a debate, which in reality, means he wouldn't come. Carter said he wrote the book to stir debate, but somehow, whenever Alan Dershowitz or Dennis Ross offer to debate him, he's outta there.
Please keep firmly in mind that almost all my former white Rhodesian friends have been chased out of Zimbabwe for a similar issue: Land theft by their ancestors about 100 years ago. You know the old saying about sins of the fathers and 3'rd & 4'th generations?
And isn't Zimbabwe a marvelous example of progress!
Even there, it's a bad example, as the Zionists bought their land at high prices, and attracted many more Arabs to Palestine than had ever been there before. The war came later and was fought mainly against the Arab armies of the surrounding countries.
There is not one acre on the face of the Earth that has not changed hands a thousand times. Israel is just held to standards of purity that nobody else is judged by, certainly not the Arabs.
found it glaring that he should not see the damage caused by PC on the flip side of the ME mirror.
What, you mean the PC that renders Israel immune to criticism? Does any exist? I haven't noticed any. By now the right-thinking people at the BBC (I really should say "left-thinking") have managed to convince their listeners that Israel alone is the greatest threat to world piece, thus taking on board the thinking that propels the Arabs and Persians. |
