THE SORT OF PEACE PARTY THAT SEES RESISTANCE AS AN OBSTACLE TO AN ORDERLY SURRENDER
In the campaign season it's quite easy to fall prone to hyperbole regarding the major party candidates that exaggerate the differences. My beef with John Kerry is not that he is a peacenik but that his addiction to multilateralism, his innate caution and his dislike of taking clearly defined stands would inevitably, were he president, return the U.S. to a defensive and ineffectively reactive posture vis-a-vis Islamist terrorism. At least for two or three years until repeated setbacks and frustrations with French obstructionism forces Kerry to change policies for political reasons.
On the other hand, it would be wrong as well as unfair to confuse Kerry with the defeatist Left. They're still out there in significant numbers, America-loathing Chomskyians, antiwar-antiglobalization neo-sixties protestors, Stalinist groups like ANSWER and what I can only call Dhimmi Academics -
like this guy. He doesn't merely prefer the defeat of the West but a smooth and peaceful transition to Islamicization, first in Europe then here in the United States. The fact that a few short years after 9/11 and months after 3/11 he feels comfortable enough to publish this fantasist screed openly indicates that this attitude may run much deeper in some segments of the academic world than the public realizes.
Robert Spencer, a conservative author of numerous books critical of radical Islam who runs
Jihad Watch and
Dhimmi Watch, has this to say on the state of Middle Eastern academic programs:
The dhimmi attitude of chastened subservience has entered into Western academic study of Islam, and from there into journalism, textbooks, and the popular discourse. One must not point out the depredations of jihad and dhimmitude; to do so would offend the multiculturalist ethos that prevails everywhere today.
The Middle Eastern Studies Association (MESA), the premier group for scholars of Islamic studies and Middle-Eastern languages, is on record against
The National Security Education Act (NSEA) - in short,
they do not want to train students in Arabic, Farsi, Pushtu or related languages if the students will later be employed by the Department of Defense or in the Intelligence Community. A quote:
"[MESA] URGES that its members and their institutions not seek or accept program or research funding from NSEA unless the above-stated concerns are fully addressed."
The above "concerns" are that students not work for the Pentagon or the CIA, a requirement of NSEA scholarships that MESA "deplores". Can you imagine a group of educators refusing to train students in Japanese or German during WWII ? Or in Russian during the last fifty years ? In fairness this position does
not reflect the opinion of every member of MESA much less those Middle Eastern Scholars who aren't members; and in a few cases it could be argued, myopically in my opinion given the prevalence of Federal grants, that the concern of some MESA members is for academic freedom. But for the majority of those MESA members who pushed for this resolution though, it's important to remember that these folks are not out of their minds, they're highly educated professional academics.
They just sympathize with the Enemy.