Middle East studies in the News
Bill Ayers on Why Terrorizing Innocent People Doesn't Make Him a Terrorist [incl. Rashid Khalidi]
by Ed Lasky
Unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers has an eye-popping piece in the New York Times today where he "explains himself" by informing us that he wasn't a terrorist and that all those radicals Obama hung around with weren't really that radical:
"An African-America preacher with a fiery style?". How about a minister who uses his pulpit to attack America, celebrate 9/11, spread conspiracy theories about white people creating the AIDS virus to kill African-Americans? How about a fiery style that includes numerous attacks on "whites". If a white minister had been engaged in this type of behavior would Ayers also merely dismiss it as a "style"?
The same type of dismissal occurs over Rashid Khalidi, Obama's Palestinian friend. Khalidi was not just a Palestinian ‘scholar". Scholar of what? Mathematics, biology, English literature? One would not know from Ayers description that Khalidi is a Middle East scholar who has used his position to propagate extremist views towards the Middle East and spread calumny against Israeli and America's support for our ally.
One would not know that Khalidi is not just a "scholar" but is in fact an "activist" for anti-Israel causes. Ayers dismisses his own role and relationship with Obama by ignoring his early role in hosting one of Obama's first fundraisers, he ignores the fact that Ayers and Obama served-not just on a board together-but a very small board (7 members) for several years when the both served on the Woods Fund. He also ignores the fact that they were both involved in an entirely separate group; The Chicago Annenberg Challenge that Barack Obama headed for several years. The involvement of Obama at the Challenge is a fact the campaign has done all it can to hide (and Ayers does, as well) because Obama's stewardship - the only executive experience in his career-was a complete failure - a $100 million dollar plus failure.
But perhaps Ayers most 1984-type of act was erasing the violent history of his domestic terror group, the Weathermen. Acts of violence are dismissed as "acts of extreme vandalism".
Acts of "extreme vandalism? Does that include planting bombs at the Pentagon, US Capitol (that he does own up to in a separate paragraph)? Ayers dismisses these because they were planted in "empty offices". Of course, the bombs could have malfunctioned, and easily could have blown up people who came to their offices at unscheduled times. Ayers ignores, as he always does when he writes of these times-bombs planted at the home of a New York State Supreme Court Justice. Would the Times publish a complementary op-ed by John Murtagh whose family was targeted when he was a young boy (his father was the Justice). Maybe the Times could include this section from a column Murtagh wrote for City Journal:
In February 1970, my father, a New York State Supreme Court justice, was presiding over the trial of the so-called "Panther 21," members of the Black Panther Party indicted in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores. Early on the morning of February 21, as my family slept, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at our home on the northern tip of Manhattan, two at the front door and the third tucked neatly under the gas tank of the family car. (Today, of course, we'd call that a car bomb.) A neighbor heard the first two blasts and, with the remains of a snowman I had built a few days earlier, managed to douse the flames beneath the car. That was an act whose courage I fully appreciated only as an adult, an act that doubtless saved multiple lives that night.
Ayers claims he isn't a "terrrorist." Can you read the above where one of his victims describes the terror he and his family lived for months, even years following Mr. Ayers "extreme act of vandalism" without concluding that the individual or group responsible didn't have as their motive to terrorize innocents? A terrorist is someone who terrorizes people with violence. That fits Bill Ayers to a "T" and his lying denial that he ever did any such thing only shows him to be a moral coward as well as a despicable human being.
Bill Ayers is the person who is practicing 1984-type strategies - with a willing assist from the New York Times.
Clarice Feldman adds:
Bill Ayers defends himself, saying he never killed anyone. Possibly so, though that would ignore that the bomb he designed was intended to kill innocent soldiers and visitors to Fort Dix and only accidently killed his old girlfriend and other of his confederates.
My friend, JMH, remarks tartly:
Note: Articles listed under "Middle East studies in the News" provide information on current developments concerning Middle East studies on North American campuses. These reports do not necessarily reflect the views of Campus Watch and do not necessarily correspond to Campus Watch's critique.
Campus Watch contact e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org