|
Thank Goodness for Bar-Ilan
by Jeremy Rosen
 Today Bar-Ilan contains (not without a struggle) the sort of open-minded religious academic environment which is an antidote to the closed, constipated fundamentalism of the sort that wants to deny women an advanced education and which thinks that censoring science is the way either to protect or enhance spiritual values and respect for Torah. Bar-Ilan’s contribution to Israeli life in almost every aspect is today inestimable and invaluable. (SomethingJewish)
Brandeis: Faculty-Student Initiative Averted Unnecessary Carter Crisis
- Editorial
 Whether or not it was a deal breaker, the idea of a debate merits consideration. A bout between a former president and one of the most outspoken voices in the Israeli-Palestinian debate would have been a fascinating academic exercise, especially given their shared history (Mr. Dershowitz was one of the most prominent critics of Mr. Carter during his unsuccessful reelection campaign in 1980). But in the absence of a debate, hearing even one side is better than hearing none at all. Critical examination of ideas and a two-sided debate need not go hand in hand, and students at an institution like Brandeis should be capable of questioning one side of a discussion without immediately hearing a rebuttal. (Justice)
Brown: Iran's New Generation Will Be More Moderate
by William O. Beeman
 Unfortunately for both the reformers and the revolutionary reactionaries, they have very little power. President Khatami and those who represent his political stance are regularly vilified in the press and in public rhetoric. Though President Ahmadinejad has the bully pulpit at his disposal to launch whatever attacks he wishes on Israel, the United States or those who oppose Iran's nuclear-energy program, in fact he has very little actual power. Under Iran's governmental system the president has no control over the military, foreign policy or Iran 's nuclear program. Therefore, his words are empty. The writer is a professor of anthropology and Middle East Studies at Brown University. (Times Daily)
Cornell: (Don’t Be) The Token American
by David Greenky
 I met Israeli Jews and Arabs who did not often befriend one another. Acting as the American intermediary, there were many gatherings in my apartment of Jews and Arabs together. Both groups admitted they had not had much experience “hanging out” with one another. Because of the new friends I made, I was able to go to the Arab quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and get an “authentic” experience with Arabs my age, and later that day travel with some Israeli friends to their homes in Tel-Aviv. I even befriended some Armenian Christian teenagers from the old city of Jerusalem who showed me Jerusalem in a completely new light. Not only did they teach me that in Armenian a polite way to greet someone is to say “let me eat your liver my brother,” their fluency in Hebrew, English, and Arabic combined with their political neutrality gave them a unique perspective on life in Israel. (Cornell Daily Sun)
Iowa: The Fog of Israel
by Meghan Sims
 The impression made on us was that no one lives there - "just because." Israelis are passionate about participating in their citizenship - often because of its religious significance to believers, often because of what it means to the Jewish people in the face of the Holocaust, often because they disagree with the government's actions, especially if they are Arabs living in Israel. The Jerusalem Post reported on March 28, 2006, that during its last general election season voter turnout was its lowest ever at 63.2 percent, but election seasons past averaged a turnout around 80 percent. (Daily Iowan)
Rutgers: Ahmadinejad's First Victim
by Ben-Zion Jaffe
 After two and a half years of attending Rutgers University there are still some thoughts and beliefs that I hear from other students that shock me. One of these surprising moments happened during final exams in December. During our review, Iran was mentioned. One woman in my study group blurted out that she thinks Ahmadinejad is quite intelligent. She continued to say that his Holocaust conference was not such a bad thing. Come again? What I found most disturbing is that the absolute lies spewed by evil people such as Ahmadinejad actually has an effect on conscious, educated, and critical minds. (Jerusalem Post)
|
Boston: What Right of Return, Mr. Baker?
by Richard L. Cravatts
 The demand for a right of return, a notion referred to by Palestinians and their supporters as “sacred” and an “enshrined” universal human right granted by UN resolutions and international law, in fact has, as the Baker commission should well have known, no legal or diplomatic standing at all, and is part of the propaganda campaign that is based on the thinking that if Israel cannot be eradicated by the Arabs though war, it can effectively be destroyed by forcing it to commit demographic genocide. The writer is director of Boston University’s Program in Book & Magazine Publishing at the Center for Professional Education. (History News Network)
Brigham Young: Greetings from the Holy Land
by Stephanie Schaerr
  But perhaps the real jewel of the city is its people. Children wave and call "hello" to us as we pass by. The center's security guards and workers, who are all locals, couldn't be more friendly or helpful, and the merchants and grocers we've met during our trips to the city have offered discounted prices and even transportation to and from their stores. (BYU Newsnet)
UCLA: Palestinian Remarks Generate Cheer and Gloom
by Judea Pearl
 The question of Arab intentions, the mother of all questions and the key to all solutions, has been locked in the closet for 10 good years, and it is only Hamas' victory in the Palestinian election, together with financial sanctions by Israel and Western governments, that have brought it back to the spotlight it deserves. Moreover, now that Hamas is recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, Hamas' official stance toward Israel has given Western observers a crisp and reliable thermometer to gauge the Palestinian vision of peace, many times more reliable than the ambiguous polls and speeches we have been reading about in the past. The writer is a UCLA professor and president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation. (Jewish Journal)
Emory: Jimmy Carter's Jewish Problem
by Deborah Lipstadt
  It is hard to criticize an icon. Jimmy Carter's humanitarian work has saved countless lives. [But] Carter's book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," while exceptionally sensitive to Palestinian suffering, ignores a legacy of mistreatment, expulsion and murder committed against Jews. It trivializes the murder of Israelis. Now, facing a storm of criticism, he has relied on anti-Semitic stereotypes in defense. By almost ignoring the Holocaust, Carter gives inadvertent comfort to those who deny its importance or even its historical reality, in part because it helps them deny Israel's right to exist. The writer teaches at Emory. (Washington Post)
Pace: Defenders of Intolerance, Enemies of Free Speech
by David Lewis Schaefer
 It is understandable, though hardly excusable, that several European governments, faced with substantial, restive, domestic Islamic populations, have treated the problem of radical Islam with kid gloves. What excuse can there possibly be, however, for an American college administration to try to suppress the showing of a film that graphically illustrates the problem? Is it healthy or desirable for mainstream American Muslims to pretend that the problem doesn’t exist, by trying to prevent an open discussion of it? Are college administrators exercising their educational responsibilities when they accede to such demands? If only wishing radical Islam were imaginary would make it so - then college administrators would be our great defenders of freedom. The writer is professor of political science at Holy Cross College. (National Review)
Stanford: A Flaw in the Logic
by Arnold Beichman
 I wonder how a conscientious Economist editor, let alone a conscientious Jew, reacts to the image of Israel, a country with a population of 6 million including 1 million Arabs, as a military giant. I am sure believers in democracy would react happily to a situation where a Middle East democracy, flawed or not, is capable of defending itself against a sea of jihadist enemies. Does the Economist really think the Arab states would accept an unflawed oppressor? Would the Economist be happier if Israel disarmed and stopped being a flawed oppressor? I read into the Economist editorial, with its seeming profundity, a form of polite, gentlemen's club anti-Semitism. The writer is a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. (Washington Times)
|