Everybody's Always Picking on Joel Beinin

Poor Joel Beinin: the world consistently fails to measure up to his high standards of conduct. Year after year, uncaring, boorish individuals fling darts straight through his thin skin and into his pure heart.

The most recent episode of brutish cruelty came earlier this month when, according to Beinin, two professors at Portland State University asked the Stanford professor inappropriate political questions during his interview for a position in PSU's history department. Beinin complained about this roughhouse ordeal in an email to Ken Ruoff, who headed the search committee that invited Beinin for an interview. Willamette Week in Portland published a story on the controversy (in which they erroneously clamed that Campus Watch is run by David Horowitz) along with Beinin's email to Ruoff.

Let's take a look at the email, with my comments and translations in bold:

From: Joel Beinin

Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:36 PM

Subject: regrets

Dear Ken,

Regretfully [translation: I have got to find a way to save face], I feel I have no choice [trans: hope they fall for this] but to withdraw my name from consideration for the modern Middle East position [trans: in any event, it's sunnier in Palo Alto, even though our pinot noirs aren't as good as yours].

I appreciate very much your willingness to protest to the dean regarding Michael Weingrad's words to me at our breakfast meeting [Dean, Mike was waaay out of line with poor Joel! Can we at least send him roses?]. But a protest to someone who already has a record of even more egregious disregard for academic freedom [Beinin's favorite buzz term; translation: he wasn't obsequious in my presence] can't begin to address the problem [what would it take, then, an abject apology? a bar fight?]. If Michael Weingrad's comments were the only issue, it would not be of major concern to me [Trans: But there's this matter of actually being offered a job]. I'm quite sure he has no idea that what he said was inappropriate [so magnanimous of JB--feeling the pain of insult while recognizing the invincible ignorance of his attacker]. In fact, we got on rather well, and I wouldn't be surprised if he came away from our meeting well-disposed towards me [well, then, that explains everything].

Much more serious [hit the heavy mood music], as I told you on the phone, is that Tom Luckett asked me a highly inappropriate political question during my private meeting with him [and yet...]. He too, was unaware of the impropriety of this line of discussion [Who wants to work with folks who can't even lob a good insult intentionally?]. And when I mentioned, as light heartedly as I could [I said, you heard the one about the professor, the priest, and the rabbi?], to Marvin Kaiser that I had been politically vetted by Michael Weingrad, his response was, "Of course." It appears then, that at all levels [coaches, maintenance men, gardeners, physicists--they all hate me] at PSU there is a serious lack of appreciation for academic freedom [Trans: I can't work with people who see straight through me like this...]. This is especially unfortunate for a public institution [Trans cont: ...because they won't hire me!].

It is obvious that despite the improprieties, which are a matter of public knowledge although it has not yet reached the media, regarding the possibility of my joining the PSU faculty last year, insufficient measures were taken to ensure a fair and professional process this year despite my initial willingness to give PSU a second chance [Trans: I've now given you two (2) chances to butter me up sufficiently, and still you fail me! And why are there three (3) other candidates?!?].

Under these circumstances, my further participation in this process can only signal that I regard it as legitimate. And it is not [as if anything in his embarrassingly sanctimonious email is?].

I sincerely hope that PSU will set to work at repairing its deeply flawed institutional culture [you are permitted, dear reader, to lose your lunch at this point]. Until it does, I will urge my colleagues to exercise the greatest caution before considering applying for or accepting a position at PSU [This is supposed to discourage normal people from applying to PSU?].

Yours truly,
Joel Beinin

By Winfield Myers | Wed, 19 Nov 2008 at 6:12 PM | Permalink

Obama's Middle East Studies Mentors

My latest Campus Watch column, which is posted today at The American Thinker, takes a look at Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi and his relationship with presidential hopeful Barack Obama:

When voters go to the polls on November 4th, they will choose not only a new presidential administration, but also the candidate's circles of influence. In the case of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, this includes Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said professor of Arab studies and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs.

Much of the scrutiny surrounding Obama's long list of objectionable and radical alliances has focused on Khalidi, and with good reason. Despite Khalidi's claims to the contrary, facts indicate that he was a spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) during the late 1970s and early 1980s, when it was listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department.

Continue reading "Obama's Middle East Studies Mentors"

By Cinnamon Stillwell | Sun, 2 Nov 2008 at 12:53 PM | Permalink

Inside Higher Ed Goes Cherry-picking for Rashid Khalidi

In "Will Khalidi Displace Ayers as McCain's Favorite Prof?," Scott Jaschik of Inside Higher Ed tries to turn the conclusion of a 2004 Campus Watch article on its head in order to exonerate Rashid Khalidi from charges that he was a spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization when he lived in Beirut during the late 1970s and early 1980s—years in which the PLO was on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.

Jaschik's source for these evidentiary acrobatics? Khalidi's denial of the charges as quoted by the very same authors whose article Jaschik cites—an article, by the way, that demonstrates that during his time in Beirut, Khalidi was identified by Tom Friedman of the New York Times as a PLO spokesman and that his own language from the period reinforces Friedman's claim.

The article in question, "Arafat Minion as Professor," by Asaf Romirowsky and Jonathan Calt Harris, appeared in the Washington Times on July 9, 2004. Ignoring the authors' evidence completely, Jaschik claims that :

Via e-mail, Khaladi said Wednesday night that he was ‘not speaking to the media at this time, and certainly not until this nonsense has passed.' He has long been criticized by some pro-Israel groups, such as Campus Watch. But an article on that group's Web site notes that Khalidi has repeatedly disputed the claim that he worked for the PLO [emphasis added]. The article quotes him as writing of the period when he is alleged to have worked for the PLO: ‘I was teaching full time as an Assistant Professor in the Political Studies and Public Administration Dept. at the American University of Beirut, published two books and several articles, and also was a research fellow at the independent Institute for Palestine Studies.... I often spoke to journalists in Beirut, who usually cited me without attribution as a well-informed Palestinian source. If some misidentified me at the time, I am not aware of it.'

Are we to believe that a denial from Khalidi, which the authors included so that their readers would know Khalidi's position on the matter, is sufficient to undermine their own thesis? That solving the matter over Khalidi's past relations with the PLO can be accomplished by simply asking Khalidi himself and then taking him at his word? Why should willful credulity substitute for the examination of evidence unearthed through research?

Jaschik's piece suffers from other sins of omission, the most notable of which is its one-sided use of sources. In addition to Khalidi, who declined to comment, Jaschik solicited reactions from Carey Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, and Zachary Lockman of NYU, a member of the Academic Freedom Committee of Middle East Studies Association. Both delivered reliably alarmist statements warning of the dangers to academic freedom posed by outside critics of the academy. Given that Campus Watch is the only group mentioned that has been critical of Khalidi's scholarship, the article implies that CW poses a threat to academic freedom—a tired claim that rests on the intellectually and legally unsupportable premise that academe is off-limits to off-campus critics. A more balanced article would have solicited comment from CW.

Finally, Campus Watch is mischaracterized as a "pro-Israel" organization in spite of my prior requests to Jaschik, which he had heretofore honored, not to characterize CW in that way. CW objects to the politicization of Middle East studies without regard to the religion, ethnicity, or nationality of those it critiques.

By Winfield Myers | Fri, 31 Oct 2008 at 8:38 PM | Permalink

Proselytizing Islam at Penn

Islam Awareness Week 2008 is underway at the University of Pennsylvania. Organized by the Muslim Students Association, Islam Awareness Week also has academic sponsors, including the university's Middle East Center.

While "awareness" may be a laudable goal, blatant proselytizing is another matter entirely. Yet today's event, "State and Need for Dawah in the West," promises just that. Here is the description (received by e-mail; emphasis added):

Harvard Chaplain and well-studied individual of Islam, Taha Abdul-Basser will deliver the Friday sermon on the lack of Dawah (invitation) on the part of Muslims in North America, not only to convey a message of submission to God alone but also to wash away misconceptions some share about Islam. Seven years after 9/11, Taha Abdul-Basser will elucidate on the importance of such education, sharing important Prophetic narratives and other occurrences in Islamic tradition that epitomize the magnitude of this act. We expect many non-Muslims to observe our Jummah outside, visually understanding the importance of this holy day.

Clearly, the "need for Dawah in the West" is being met at the University of Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, it's coming courtesy of the Muslim Students Association, an organization tainted by Saudi/Wahhabi funding, ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and a history of inviting radical and anti-Semitic speakers to its events.

Moreover, why would the Middle East Center cosponsor such an event given its overtly religious nature? It amounts to the Middle East Center doing its own version of Dawah. Would the same Center, or any academic department, co-sponsor an event involving evangelical Christian proselytizing? I very much doubt it. But when it comes to Islam, propriety goes out the window.

By Cinnamon Stillwell | Fri, 24 Oct 2008 at 2:44 PM | Permalink

Looking Ahead By Looking Back

Campus Watch adjunct scholar Asaf Romirowsky reviews Colin Shindler's new book, A History of Modern Israel, in the Jerusalem Post. He also notes the significance of Shindler's appointment as the first professor of Israel Studies at The University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS):

One of the greatest myths in Middle East studies departments across North America and Europe is that the presence of an Israeli faculty member makes a "balanced" department. In fact, many Israeli academics have built their reputation on scholarship that is critical of Israel and its existence. These academics are frequently given center stage by the Association for Israel Studies, the Middle East Studies Association and Middle East studies centers, which host them and provide visiting appointments. This gives the scholars the visibility they seek, while allowing their hosts to claim balance in presenting an "Israeli viewpoint."

In Europe, there is hardly any attempt to create this so-called balance; pan-Arabist scholarship has become the coin of the realm. The University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in the first part of the 20th century produced great Middle East scholars such as Bernard Lewis. But over the years, Edward Said and his acolytes, such as Joseph Massad, have been the ones to receive red-carpet receptions, especially at SOAS which is notorious for having an anti-Israel atmosphere. The university's Palestinian Society is the only student society in Britain professionally run by the student union and regularly hosts controversial events such as Israel Apartheid Weeks.

Given this environment, Colin Shindler's appointment as the first professor of Israeli studies at SOAS is significant. Shindler is the author of seven books and an authority on the Revisionist Zionist movement and the emergence of the Israeli Right. His latest book, entitled A History of Modern Israel, appeared just in time for Israel's 60th anniversary. In it the author traces six decades, from David Ben-Gurion to Ehud Olmert.

Continue reading "Looking Ahead By Looking Back."

By Cinnamon Stillwell | Mon, 13 Oct 2008 at 1:09 PM | Permalink

Ruth Malhotra Appointed Research Assistant at Campus Watch

PHILADELPHIA – October 5, 2008 – The Middle East Forum announces the appointment of Ruth Malhotra as a research assistant at Campus Watch, its program to improve Middle East studies at North American universities.

Ms Malhotra is a recent graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology, from which she received bachelor's and master's degrees in International Affairs with a research focus on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

As an undergraduate, Ms Malhotra worked to advance academic freedom, intellectual diversity, and accountability in higher education. In 2006, she filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Georgia Tech challenging unconstitutional policies that supported censorship and the suppression of students' rights. Her case prompted Georgia Tech to repeal its speech code, alter its unconstitutional "speech zone," and eliminate the unconstitutional portion of its "Safe Space" program.

"I am very pleased to join Campus Watch, where I will continue my efforts to bring about greater accountability in higher education," said Malhotra. "Many of the most egregious problems in academe, from politicization of the curriculum to oppressive intellectual homogeneity, afflict Middle East studies, and I look forward to working for reform in that vital field."

Campus Watch director Winfield Myers said he admires Malhotra's advocacy for academic reform. "Ruth Malhotra has a proven record of defending the free speech rights of students and professors who refuse to be intimidated by intolerant faculty and administrators," Myers said. "Her fearlessness in the face of implacable hostility from Georgia Tech's leadership demonstrates her readiness to tackle administrative and intellectual corruption in Middle East studies throughout North America."

For immediate release

For more information, contact Winfield Myers at
_{Myers@MEForum.org}

By Winfield Myers | Fri, 10 Oct 2008 at 12:36 PM | Permalink

John Esposito's Legion of Devils

Our current Quote of the Month is taken from a September 24 lecture that John Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Underdstanding at Georgetown (that makes him the $20 million man), delivered to an audience at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne. An attendee recorded the lecture, and at 9:40 into it Esposito said:

You have myself and others who think roughly in the same school of thought. And you have a second school of thought represented by people like Bernard Lewis, Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, Martin Kramer, and legion. But of course we know that Christ cast out the legion of devils, but I won't go that way.

We thought such an artless remarked deserved an artistic commemoration. So, at our request, the cartoonist Stogie rendered what one might call "The Harrowing of John Esposito."

By Winfield Myers | Fri, 3 Oct 2008 at 12:47 AM | Permalink

Ingrid Mattson and the "U.S. Muslim Engagement Project"

Ingrid Mattson, director of the Macdonald Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations at Hartford Seminary and president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), has been all over the news lately.

	Ingrid Mattson

Mattson was one of the speakers at an interfaith gathering at the Democratic National Convention in August, and now word comes that she's a member of the "leadership group" for the U.S. Muslim Engagement Project. The latter consists of a bipartisan coalition of American leaders from a variety of backgrounds, which, as described at its website, seeks to form "a clear and strong consensus on a strategy to enhance U.S. and international security by working more intensively and directly on the underlying causes of tension with key Muslim countries and communities."

While this would appear to be a laudable goal, Mattson's background and viewpoints demonstrates that she is hardly a suitable candidate for involvement.

As ISNA president, Mattson presides over an organization with troubling ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the unindicted co-conspirators in last year's Hamas terrorism financing case, U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation. In the course of the trial, a Muslim Brotherhood document outlining a strategy for "destroying…Western civilization from within," making "Allah's religion…victorious over all other religions," and listing ISNA, among other allegedly mainstream Muslim-American organizations, as "friends" in this effort came to light.

Mattson has a long history of defending Wahhabism and Sharia law, expressing anti-American and anti-democratic viewpoints, downplaying concerns over Islamic terrorism in the U.S. and worldwide, claiming women's rights are protected in Islam, besmirching Israel and its "rightwing Christian" supporters, placing loyalty to Islam above loyalty to the U.S., and teaching jihadist literature in her courses.

Mattson's influence as a professor at Hartford Seminary is cause enough for concern. But her potential influence on public policy, and that of other problematic Middle East studies professors, is even more worrisome.

One thing's for sure: her involvement in the "U.S. Muslim Engagement Project" raises serious questions about its intent. So does the participation of Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and co-author with Georgetown professor John Esposito of the highly criticized, Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think.

Engagement with the Muslim world is necessary, but doing so through the intermediaries of soft jihad defeat the purpose. Perhaps that's the point.

By Cinnamon Stillwell | Wed, 1 Oct 2008 at 5:40 PM | Permalink

Sharia Law: Coming to a Western Nation Near You?

The advent of Sharia (Islamic) law in the West is of major concern these days, especially in the wake of the news that it has been officially adopted in Britain. If Sharia law can be implemented in the UK, then why not in Europe and the U.S.?

My latest Campus Watch column, which is posted at Frontpage Magazine, examines the efforts of certain high profile players in the field of Middle East studies to make Sharia law more palatable to Western sensibilities. For what purpose? You decide.

Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU) will be hosting a conference on October 23 that asks the loaded question: "Is There a Role for Shari'ah in Modern States?"

The Saudi-funded ACMCU and its founding director, John Esposito, one of the foremost apologists for radical Islam in the academic field of Middle East studies, have certainly been doing their bit to make the idea more palatable.

The Saudi prince for whom ACMCU was named has been pumping millions of dollars into Middle East studies at Georgetown, Harvard, UC Berkeley, and beyond, and as the case of Esposito demonstrates, it magnifies the voices of scholars with a decidedly uncritical bent. As a result, ACMCU analysis regarding Sharia (or Islamic) law tends to focus not on its injustices (amputation, stoning, hanging, honor killing, punishment for blasphemy, execution of apostates, persecution of non-Muslims, sanctioned wife-beating, female genital mutilation, and so on), but rather on repackaging it in ways that will appeal to Western sensibilities. The concept of a more "moderate" version of Sharia law that is compatible with democracy is at the forefront of this effort.

While it's difficult to predict exactly what will take place at the upcoming ACMCU conference, the fact that Esposito will present the opening remarks provides considerable insight into the politics of the event.

Continue reading "Sharia Law: Coming to a Western Nation Near You?"

By Cinnamon Stillwell | Thu, 25 Sep 2008 at 12:49 PM | Permalink

Meet Ingrid Mattson

Campus Watch adjunct scholar Jonathan Schanzer examines the record of Hartford Seminary professor Ingrid Mattson. A convert to Islam, Mattson heads a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization and has a long history of downplaying or denying the dangers of radical Islam.

Ingrid Mattson, a 45-year-old Canadian-born convert to Islam, caused an uproar in the blogosphere after she was invited by the Democratic party to a gathering of religious leaders in Denver on the eve of the convention. Other notable participants included Bishop Charles E. Blake, (Church of God In Christ) and Rabbi Tzvi Weinreb (Orthodox Union).

The commotion stemmed from the fact that Mattson is the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an organization with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which was labeled last year by the U.S. Justice Department as an un-indicted co-conspirator in U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation, a Hamas terrorism financing case.

Mattson's overt affiliation with ISNA created only a fleeting political liability in Denver, but she may pose a longer-term danger to the wider American public.

To read the rest of the article, which appears at National Review Online, please click here.

By Winfield Myers | Thu, 11 Sep 2008 at 4:12 PM | Permalink

Campus Watch Blog Archive