January 11, 2005

Dear Friend of FLAME:

Last night I viewed the stunning new movie, "Hotel Rwanda," and was struck, as one must be, by the abject, inhuman cruelty exhibited by one group of humans (in this case, the ruling Hutus) against another (the minority Tutsis). More than 1 million people, mostly innocent children, women and men, were slaughtered in Rwanda while the world watched on (with the United Nations, predictably, in the front row). The barbaric murders — genocide — committed by the Hutu marauders in the movie reminded me of nothing more than the wanton beheadings and bombings of innocents by crazed "insurgents" in Iraq. How can people be so irrationally brutal to others, one is forced to ask. How can racism — an outlook so profoundly and historically discredited — still motivate people, still justify hate in our world? Today, however, I read the article appended below, and by the time I finished it, I was experiencing a fierce burning in the pit of my stomach. It was not a feeling of anger per se, but rather one of distress and then of fear — perhaps a taste of the fear the Tutsis in Rwanda felt as the hate against them rose to a delirious violent frenzy. This article, which appeared in the January issue of Commentary, is not about Rwanda, nor about Iraq, but rather about anti-Semitism in the United States, by way of a subversive conference that was held last fall at Duke University. As you'll see, the fact that this conference of the pro-terrorist Palestinian Solidarity Movement took place at a highly visible U.S. university is troubling enough. But what struck me was the resentment that swelled up against Jews during and following the conference. The diatribes described here are shocking and frightening, but what is more frightening is the quiet acquiescence of the Duke administration in the face of blatant anti-Semitism on campus — all in the name of academic freedom. Since one cannot imagine that racist articles or speeches denouncing Blacks, American Indians or even Arabs would be permitted on any American campus, it is all the more disturbing that anti-Semitism has become an acceptable "academic" debate. Indeed, the politically correct excuses made for anti-Semitism are themselves anti-Semitic, because they are selective and discriminatory. The authors of this article have to live in Duke's morally bankrupt environment: Eric Adler is a Ph.D. candidate in classical studies, and Jack Langer is a Ph.D. candidate in history there. We applaud them for their bravery in writing this piece.

Jim Sinkinson
Director, FLAME

P.S.	If you know others who would appreciate the information published in the FLAME Hotline and on the FLAME website (www.factsandlogic.org), please use the "FORWARD TO A FRIEND" button at bottom of this email and pass this article on. Encourage your friends to sign on as a free subscriber to these email alerts, so they receive them every week. Thanks for your support of FLAME.

The Intifada Comes to Duke
A university plays host to anti-Semites and terror advocates.

By Eric Adler and Jack Langer
Commentary, January, 2005

A new ritual on the American academic scene is the annual conference of the Palestine Solidarity Movement. The PSM is an umbrella organization that connects various U.S. and Canadian groups; its yearly gathering offers an opportunity for the constituent elements to establish a visible presence on a prestigious university campus and plan strategy and tactics for a movement dedicated to delegitimizing the state of Israel. Over the past several years, the convocation has been held at Ohio State, the University of Michigan and the University of California at Berkeley. In October, it was the turn of Duke University.

Duke's president, Richard Brodhead, had only just assumed office last summer when the university announced that it would be hosting the PSM conference in the fall. Because the organizers had followed the proper procedures for mounting such an event, Mr. Brodhead explained, the decision to grant approval was an "easy one." After all, the university was only reaffirming "the importance of the principle of free expression."

Easy or not, the decision immediately provoked criticism. Some of it came from Duke alumni and others off campus, and some of it came from a student group, the Duke Conservative Union. Altogether, some 90,000 signatures were gathered for an online petition denouncing the university's move.

Among the targets of protest was the PSM's fifth official "guiding principle," which decrees the group's refusal to denounce any terrorist act committed by Palestinians. Condemnation was also directed at the PSM's amply documented history of anti-Semitism and incitement to violence. One scheduled speaker, Charles Carlson, had openly called for lethal attacks against Israeli youth, declaring that "every young Israeli is military--they are all proper war targets," and that "each wedding, Passover celebration, or bar mitzvah [in Israel] is a potential military target."

Another scheduled participant, Abe Greenhouse, had been arrested in 2003 after smashing a pie in the face of Israeli minister Natan Sharansky as he was about to give a lecture at Rutgers. An organizer of the 2002 PSM gathering, Fadi Kiblawi, had written that the Palestinian plight made him "want to strap a bomb to [his] chest and kill those [Zionist] racists," while an erstwhile PSM speaker, Hatem Bazian, had called for "an intifada in this country" (i.e., the U.S.) and asserted that the sacred texts of Islam require its adherents to "fight the Jews." Prominently active in the movement was Sami al-Arian, who in 2003 was indicted on racketeering and terrorism charges and is currently awaiting trial in Florida.

These and other unequivocal statements and deeds of PSM activists were detailed in letters to the editor and in advertisements that the Duke Conservative Union placed in the Chronicle, Duke's student newspaper. In response, the university administration was largely silent. But Mr. Brodhead himself, moving beyond his previous stance of avowed neutrality in the name of free expression, issued what amounted to an outright endorsement of the conference. Declining to criticize any aspect of the PSM, he asserted only that a great deal of inaccurate information was circulating on the Internet and that the "deepest principle involved [in hosting the conference] is not even the principle of free speech. It's the principle of education through dialogue." How this "dialogue" would proceed under the PSM's practice of prohibiting recording devices and reporters from many of its sessions was never made clear.

Following a month or so of debate on and around the Duke campus, the conference itself opened on Oct. 15. Its hundreds of participants were treated to a series of lectures, panel discussions and workshops. There were also a variety of "cultural events," including a "sing-in" and a reading of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel poetry. Affiliated groups like the International Solidarity Movement and Jews for a Just Peace set up tables at which they distributed leaflets and sold such wares as "Free Palestine" T-shirts.

One keynote speech of the PSM's exercise in "education through dialogue" was delivered by Mazin Qumsiyeh, a Yale professor of genetics, who presented a short history of what he portrayed as the virulent Zionist "disease." There was also a lecture by the PLO legal adviser Diana Buttu, a polished speaker whose theme was that Palestinians under Israeli occupation have suffered a fate worse than blacks under apartheid in South Africa, and that Israel is today "the greatest abuser of human rights" in the world. Nasser Abufarha, a doctoral candidate in cultural anthropology at the University of Wisconsin, spoke of Israel's "racist ambitions" and defended the terrorist activities of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in combating Zionist "aggression." Brian Avery, an activist for ISM, explained that both George W. Bush and John Kerry were "on auction to the Jewish lobby."

Although the Duke administration stoutly maintained both before and during the conference that the PSM and ISM were "distinct and separate" organizations, at least a dozen ISM activists led conference workshops. The ISM specializes in sending European and American students to the West Bank and Gaza to work on behalf of the radical Palestinian cause. The group's co-founder George Rishmawi has candidly explained its purpose in recruiting these foreign students: "When Palestinians get shot by Israeli soldiers, no one is interested anymore. But if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice." That was certainly the case with the ISM activist Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old student at Evergreen State College who was accidentally killed in 2003 while attempting to block Israeli bulldozers from uncovering terrorist smuggling tunnels in Gaza.

One of the two ISM-led workshops at the Duke conference was "Volunteering in Palestine: Role and Value of International Activists." A last-minute addition to the schedule, the workshop was conducted by ISM co-founder Huweida Arraf. Acknowledging during her talk that the ISM cooperates with the terror organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Ms. Arraf encouraged students to join the group and instructed them on how to enter Israel surreptitiously and how to deal with possible arrest and deportation. The Duke administration never commented publicly on the inclusion in the PSM's program of a workshop recruiting for a group with self-professed ties to terrorists and an openly avowed interest in generating casualties.

Another, less practical workshop—"Segregation, Apartheid and Zionism Are Crimes Against Humanity!"—was led by Bob Brown, a veteran of the Black Power movement of the 1960s. Mr. Brown's theoretical discourse consisted mostly of unsubstantiated personal anecdotes and random invective. Thus, he reminisced about meeting Saddam Hussein's spokesman Tariq Aziz in Baghdad in 1974; alleged that Condoleezza Rice's father had tried to force him to marry her some years back; and referred to the Six Day war, in which Israel fought off the armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria, as "the Jew war of '67."

Still other sessions were devoted to such subjects as "Jewish dissent" and the ethics of suicide bombing and kindred forms of "resistance." Charles Carlson's workshop, "The Cause of the Conflict: How Judaized-Christians Enable War," was inexplicably canceled.

After three days of meetings, the conference came to a close. "It's a good thing we did here," announced the university's vice president for public affairs, John Burness, setting the tone for a chorus of self-applause. In its own post-mortem roundup, the student-run Chronicle, which had endorsed the PSM's official refusal to denounce Palestinian terrorism, lauded the university administration for "masterfully" handling the affair and reported with great satisfaction that the "overall tone of the weekend was one of discussion and learning." Looking to the future, the paper urged upon Duke a positive responsibility "to continue the dialogue the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference initiated."

And indeed the close of the conference did not mark the end of Duke's experiment in "discussion and learning." To appreciate what happened next, it helps to know that, unlike the Duke Conservative Union, the university's two Jewish organizations, the campus Hillel (known as the Freeman Center) and a student group called Duke Friends of Israel, had opted from the beginning to refrain from criticizing the university for agreeing to host the conference. In fact, in a demonstration of their own commitment to free expression, the groups publicly praised the decision. At the same time, and in the same spirit, they formulated a "Joint Israel Initiative." This was a resolution pledging that both they and the PSM would conduct a civil dialogue, would together condemn the murder of innocent civilians, and would work toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. On the eve of the conference, the Jewish groups also staged a "rally against terror."

But whatever hopes the Jewish campus organizations held out for civil dialogue were rapidly dashed. Representatives of the PSM refused to sign the Joint Israel Initiative, objecting in particular to its condemnation of violence. Not only that, but in the aftermath of the conference, even as the open anti-Semitism on display there was going entirely without censure, Duke's Jewish organizations themselves--and Jews in general--became the object of furious attack.

The first salvo was an article in the Chronicle by one of its columnists, a Duke senior named Philip Kurian. Headlined "The Jews," it denounced Jews as "the most privileged 'minority' group" in the United States and in particular bemoaned the "shocking overrepresentation" of Jews in academia. Replete with references to the "powerful Jewish establishment" and "exorbitant Jewish privilege in the United States," the article went on to characterize Jews as a phony minority that can "renounce their difference by taking off the yarmulke."

Mr. Kurian's column was followed by an even more intense anti-Semitic outpouring on the Chronicle's electronic discussion boards. "I am glad you have the courage to stand up to the Jews," wrote one correspondent. Another said he "was thrilled to read Mr. Kurian's belligerent critique of that long-nosed creature sitting squarely in the middle of the room that nobody is allowed to talk about. Yes--that elephant Mr. Sharon . . . and his treasonous cousins in America."

One posting, beside providing a link to an online article blaming the Jews for the outbreak of World War II, called for "an investigation into the Jewish community's practices and leadership during the past 150 years." "Whenever anyone says anything negative about the Jews," expostulated still another writer, "they go after them with Mafia-style ruthlessness. . . . This is the reason Jews are the most hated people on earth and why they have always been kicked out of every country."

Having welcomed known anti-Semitic agitators onto its campus, how did the Duke administration react when the aftereffects of the agitation began to play themselves out before its eyes? Responding to Mr. Kurian's article in a letter to the Chronicle, President Brodhead first condemned the "virulence" of some of the PSM's critics. He then pronounced himself "deeply troubled" by Kurian's sentiments, while offering assurances that Mr. Kurian "probably did not mean to . . . [revive] stereotypical images that have played a long-running role in the history of anti-Semitism." Reverting to his by now standard mantra, Mr. Brodhead stressed again that the central issue was the importance of "education through dialogue." "I am grateful," he wrote, "to the many individuals and groups who helped turn last week's Palestine Solidarity Movement conference into a peaceful and constructive event" and "proud to be at a school where difficult matters are dealt with in such a mature and constructive way."

It is all but impossible to imagine the president of Duke offering a similar encomium to, say, a conference of neo-Nazi rabble-rousers on his campus, or defending a parade of speakers dilating on the "diseased" history of, say, black Americans. It is in fact impossible to imagine Duke agreeing to host such debased goings-on in the first place. In that sense, the administration's appeals to free expression and dialogue were the purest disingenuousness.

Moreover, and whether or not a university has a duty to license the unfettered expression on its campus of every venomous notion under the sun, the real issue at Duke was always the refusal of the licensing authorities to call such notions by their proper names--in this case, bald anti-Semitism and incitement to the murder of innocents. That refusal on the part of the university and its president, a mark not of "constructive" liberality but of cowardice and complicity, is what led infallibly to the postconference outbreak of anti-Jewish hatred. Once the guardians of the citadel granted permission to open the gates, is it any surprise that the marauding hordes came storming through?

PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
If you'd like a printer-friendly, text version of this newsletter click the button below.

DONATE
How many times have you heard someone lament that Israel doesn’t have good public relations? By supporting FLAME, you help one of the world’s most powerful information efforts to spread the truth about Israel and the Middle East conflict. Please note that because FLAME is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, your donation is tax-deductible.

FORWARD TO A FRIEND If you know of a friend or colleague who would appreciate learning more Facts and Logic About the Middle East, please forward this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE to them using the link below.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE FLAME HOTLINE If you have received this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE from a friend or colleague and you'd like to subscribe, please use the link below.

Our Ads and Positions | Donate | Our Letters to Editors | Our Acquisition Letters FLAME’s Purpose | Subscribe to Hotline Alerts | FLAME Hotline Back Issues | Home ©2004 FLAME. All rights reserved. | Site Credits | Contact Us

You are receiving this email because you have requested news, facts and analysis about Israel and the Mideast conflict. If you DO NOT want to continue receiving free messages like the one below, go here.