Last night I spoke at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and I am still here to tell the tale. I didn't actually expect to shuffle off this mortal coil last night, but after all the security arrangements that the university had in place for my talk, I did come away feeling a bit like a presidential candidate, or...Salman Rushdie: I was escorted through corridors and secret passageways by men with earpieces who were communicating with other personnel elsewhere; I had a meeting before my talk with the very courteous, knowledgeable and efficient security chief for the university, who explained to me the measures they had in place, including placing a large number of security personnel at various points all over the hall, and having everyone who entered the venue pass through a metal detector.
Everyone who entered also had to have a ticket. On one side the ticket said, "Robert Spencer Lecture, October 16, 2008, 7:30PM. Tickets do not guarantee entry. All patrons must pass thru security screening for entry." On the other side were printed "Audience Behavior Guidelines." These included: "Audience Members Must Remain Seated...No Sticks or Standards...Noise levels that impede the program's progress or the audience's ability to hear shall not be permitted....Objects may not be thrown: The throwing of any objects will not be tolerated" and "Force or Violence Notification: Behavior that infringes on the safety of others or endangers university property shall not be permitted.
The Rushdiean security precautions and these warnings were all necessary because of the fascist tactics of trying to intimidate and shout down opponents that students and others at UWM have employed in the past against speakers such as David Horowitz and Walid Shoebat. It also became necessary after the MSA published a highly defamatory advertisement about me in the student paper last week -- apparently free of charge (our ad is headed "Paid Advertisement," while the MSA's hit piece, which is the same size as our ad, is headed "Advertisement.") It is also noteworthy that the paper required evidence for the truth of every assertion we made in our ad, or they would not print it -- we happily complied, but clearly the MSA was not asked for any evidence for their wild assertions, or their ad never would have appeared.
In any case, last night the university officials I met with appeared determined not to witness a reprise of the fascist thuggery that the Left and the apologists for Islamic terror employed before, and I commend them for that. The student group was also well organized and determined in the face of enormous opposition, and I am in awe of these students who live day in and day out in these hostile environments and maintain their hope and determination to fight for what is right.
And ultimately the clear signs that fascist intimidation was not going to succeed this time paid off: the crowd stayed quiet all through my talk, I didn't even see any protest signs, and even the question period was generally a fruitful discussion rather than a series of hostile and arrogant counter-lectures (although there were a few attempts at those). This was rather surprising given the fact that some MSA members had told students who organized the event that they were planning to disrupt it. Maybe they were bluffing, of course, but I also suspect that one reason why audiences at my talks this week and in the past have several times been quieter and more courteous than anyone expected them to be is that I am not the hate-filled "Islamophobe" or fire-breathing idiot that the MSA and other Brotherhood-linked Islamic groups have made me out to be in their propaganda. Leftist and Muslim students believe the lies their leadership feeds them and come expecting one sort of person, and a very different kind of person ends up giving the talk. This is not to say that my talks have never been disrupted or never will be again; but I have seen articles before along the lines of Wisconsin-Madison student Ammar Al Marzouqi's "Spencer: Better than I anticipated," in which he says,
I went with a feeling of apprehension and expectations of a repetition of last year’s charade during David Horowitz’s lecture. And I have to admit I was wrong. Spencer was very respectful in his speech, he laid out his case without attacking anyone, and he even thanked the audience for not interrupting his speech. I personally had a brief exchange with him during the Q-and-A session which was very calm and respectful. And for that, I thank him.
Of course, Ammar Al Marzouqi goes on to detail all the ways in which he thinks I'm wrong, but that is what makes his generous words above all the more valuable: with civil discourse so rapidly eroding in the U.S., and with threats to the freedom of speech being energetically pursued by powerful entities around the world, and with libelous propaganda heaped upon me on a more or less daily basis by the Islamic groups in the U.S., this was refreshing -- as was the civility of the audience at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee last night.
Can we then see, in all the precautions that were taken last night, that a strong stand against the thugs and enemies of free speech will stop them in their tracks? I think there's a lot to be said for that point of view. The only difficulty is finding people in sufficient numbers who are willing to make a strong stand.
A university put rules in place to defend free speech, furthering civil and detailed analysis of an issue.
The horror is that this is news. Free inquiry should be the purpose of every educational institution. Even in America, the effort is now heroic.
Islamic immigration will tend to erode the freedoms that the university had to be heroic to protect.
Good news! Thank you, Robert Spencer, for all you do. The extra security precautions just prove how valuable you really are.
Right on, dude!
Mr Spencer
I had the mailing from the T. A. P which listed all the places and dates you would be speaking this month (and listed the gigs for all the other speakers as well).
A punishing schedule!
The atheists/ secularists can laugh at this all they like but...I am running 'prayer cover' for you (and for all the other speakers in the program), and I'm sure other Christians who lurk or post here will be doing the same.
God bless.
I am enjoying reading your reports.
havior Guidelines." These included: "Audience Members Must Remain Seated...No Sticks or Standards...Noise levels that impede the program's progress or the audience's ability to hear shall not be permitted....Objects may not be thrown: The throwing of any objects will not be tolerated" and "Force or Violence Notification: Behavior that infringes on the safety of others or endangers university property shall not be permitted
The shame is that these instructions are necessary for adults.
Thank you, Robert.
Finally, a Muslim admitted that Spencer's position is actually not his, but "some" mainstream Muslim theologans, so in essence, when he said he disagrees with Spencer, he actually disagrees with those who interpret and therefore shape Islam.
Ammar Al Marzouqi in his article did engage in propoganda, the empty charge of increased bias against Muslims in the US since 9/11 as well as Spencer spreading a climate of hate himself, but did offer a very relavent concession:
"If there was anything I learned from Wednesday’s lecture, it’s that awareness is the first step necessary to face the threats of extremism and the erosion of civil liberties."
With the exception of using the qualifier of "extremism" without any supporting documentation, that statement is vital going forward. We must spread awareness of the reality of the doctrinal ideology of Islamic supremacism through Jihad in the face of the growing movement to suppress the right to do so.
A small victory for free speech and the anti-jihad movement. Mr Al-Marzouqi has taken an important first step. Listening! He may not agree in the beginning. He may even be in denial. But if he continues to investigate, he will see.
Mr Spencer
I am sure you do this, but ALWAYS encourage them to look these facts up for themselves and see that the "moderate" position is considered to be heresy.
Behavior Guidelines." These included: "Audience Members Must Remain Seated...No Sticks or Standards...Noise levels that impede the program's progress or the audience's ability to hear shall not be permitted....Objects may not be thrown: The throwing of any objects will not be tolerated" and "Force or Violence Notification: Behavior that infringes on the safety of others or endangers university property shall not be permitted
The shame is that these instructions are necessary for adults.
Posted by: duh_swami at October 17, 2008 8:34 AM
Well, I would say "young adults," since they're just a few years out of high school. But, yeah.
I wish there was a video of RS's talk last night.
Woot to you, Robert.
And I agree with you here: Can we then see, in all the precautions that were taken last night, that a strong stand against the thugs and enemies of free speech will stop them in their tracks? I think there's a lot to be said for that point of view.
I've always found that one reliable crowd control method is the sure knowledge that misconduct will be answered with an good ass-kickin'.
Hey, how did that n get in there?
its good that you are targeting these kids with the truth. god only knows what the terrorists will do to them when they are my age. educating them, thank you.
Could it just be that more and more students are getting it? If so that is great, even though it has been 7 years since America's biggest wake up call.
I was encouraged by most of the comments in the independent student newspaper that ran David Horowitz's ad on behalf of your speech . Certainly they where not all students who commented in one of the articles such as myself,awake,and darcy among others. I was very disappointed in the way this particular independent student newspaper behaved in regards to the MSA add, and requested a thoughtful response twice, simply asking if the MSA Add was vetted the same way as The David Horowitz Foundation Add? I have received no response.
I commend the security team at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee as well for helping to insure a respectful audience..It sounds like you received more security than a Vice Presidential candidate.
I still think Robert Spencer should be a presidential advisor, though I don't see it happening in a Obama Presidency.
Can we then see, in all the precautions that were taken last night, that a strong stand against the thugs and enemies of free speech will stop them in their tracks?
The glass is half full:
I think there's a lot to be said for that point of view.
The glass is half empty:
The only difficulty is finding people in sufficient numbers who are willing to make a strong stand.
Sadly, I see the glass as half empty. That so many precautions were necessary in the first place and that the school was more worried about the truth of your response than it was about the original MSA ad
(It is also noteworthy that the paper required evidence for the truth of every assertion we made in our ad, or they would not print it -- we happily complied, but clearly the MSA was not asked for any evidence for their wild assertions, or their ad never would have appeared.)
says volumes about the school and those who attend it, little of it good.
Continuing a point Awake made:
"There are some Muslim theologians who believe...Yet I cannot emphasize enough how wrong they are. Not only is their opinion a logical fallacy, but it’s also rejected by the bulk of Muslims around the world."
Ammar Al Marzouqi
Another Muslim expressing his personal view of Islam; in this case, a college sophomore declaring (without citation) that Muslim theologians are wrong and claiming (again with citation) that the opinions of those theologians are rejected by most Muslims.
Here's the deal, Ammar. Islam is rife with logical fallacies and your opinion is just that: one Muslim's opinion.
There are 1.2 billion other Muslims on the planet; each with their own opinions.
The shame is that these instructions are necessary for adults.
They're not for adults. They're for maladjusted children incapable of self-sufficiency, who would not all be living in student housing for pedophiles (which I can guarantee you are, 100% of them) had they been raised by monkeys instead of Muslims. And duh_swami, Muslim students - the only students who incite riots - are typically over 25, even as undergrads. It takes a long time to come up with fake credentials stating that you graduated from a 3rd-world high school at 14, or in the case of grad students, they're usually 30+ (still living in housing for pedophiles) with fake degrees from 3rd-world "colleges" obtained at age 17.
Muslims don't grow up. That's why they must always parasitize someone in order to survive. That's why they whine and cry 'racism' when their logical fallacies and flat-out lies ("arguments," as they refer to them) don't discourage people from stating, researching, and believing the truth. That's why they can't go to the bathroom or take a shower without a million little rules, or without consulting a pedophile imam for life advice every time they might actually have to make a decision. That's why they choose to live under pervasive milieu control and they deny science - because, like children, they are simply incapable of coping with cognitive dissonance whenever it threatens their fragile, sick worldview.
I just want IUB to pay for the therapy I have to go to for treatment for PTSD incurred during multiple events on the part of what can only be described as 'terrorists' on campus, since I keep throwing up 8 times a week, whenever I have to set foot at Indiana Third Reich Universitystan (even when I have to go to therapy!). But they won't without a fight, and they keep admitting terrorists who lack the equivalent of a Guatemalan 1st-grade education and then bending over to enable them and to *ssrape my civil and human rights at every opportunity.
Robert Spencer would have gotten the Netanyahu treatment at my hellhole school, and the HAMAS-front MSU would have started a riot which the 5 IUPD officers stationed would not have been able to subdue. It got ugly the other night when Prince Zeid spoke and Student Alliance for National Security and HAMAS (the MSU) were both there.
Mackie, I love the idea of both Robert and Hugh as national security advisors.
Yes Darcy you are right, 'young adults'...
problem is, 'as the twig is bent, so grows the tree'. The idea is to bend the tree to the left so that it is 'left leaning'. In humans, 'left leaning' leads to walking in circles. Like rowing a boat with one oar on one side of the boat only. This is why leftists, trying as hard as they can, never seem to get anywhere. Right leaners are also the result of a bent twig, but unlike the lefties, right leaners have mastered the art of walking a straight line, even if they are bent.
Leftist young people will never be able to stand up straight, but those willing can learn to walk a straight line...It's really hard to catch a bus without walking in a straight line...now you know why so many leftists are late for work... :)
People - this is an excellent article I happened to find from a UK blog in Sept. 2007. "No unity in diversity" about what's happening in Englandistan.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/no_unity_in_diversity_after_all
jdamn...I don't dis-agree, but what I mean by adult is not their mental age, but the legal status of adult which is 18 or over.
This is supposed to carry with it some measure of self control and responsibility...The fact that some 'adults' choose to violate those basic responsibilities in harmful ways, is what is shameful...or at least, I see nothing there to be proud of...
Excuse me, it's an Aussie blog. Here's the first sentence:
"In our repressive world of thoughtcrime and guiltspeak, it now takes great courage to tell the truth, even when it’s obvious."
Can you relate? I thought so. It's really a good article.
Here's one of my fave quotations yet again:
"The Truth-Teller must always have one foot in the stirrup." --Armenian Proverb
'No Sticks or Standards
Sounds so...medieval, doesn't it?
Robert: You should NEVER give out any details into the security that protects you. You will only give the bad guys insights which might help them figure out what they need to do next time to get around your security screen, making it harder for those who seek to protect you. What you always want is a higher level of security than is apparent, unpredictability, and redundant security arrangements.
Interesting proverb, Darcy. Thx.
ROBERT: "The only difficulty is finding people in sufficient numbers who are willing to make a strong stand."
Joe the Plumber's entire life is now being investigated with a fine toothed comb by the MSM and the Left-wing blogs. It's a cautionary tale regarding involvement in politics, even in a peripheral sense.
Facing potential physical harm is another thing altogether, which is all the more reason to respect and appreciate Robert, David Horowitz, and the other great defenders of human freedom linked to the anti-Jihad. While the rest of us spew our two cents from the safety of our anonymity, Robert puts it on the line everyday, just like he did last night. He's a soldier, no less than those on the front lines in Afghanistan.
If you ever have moments when you wonder if it's all worth it, please know Robert that you truly inspire us, that we value not only your wisdom and knowledge, but perhaps most of all your courage.
It is an abomination that such measures have to be taken in America!
On Wednesday, my husband and I make the two-hour drive to Charlottesville to hear David Horowitz. The situation before, during, and after his speech was quite calm, but I did notice that more campus police were on hand in case there was trouble. UVA typically is a well behaved campus, most of the time, anyway.
About 1-2 of the audience in which I sat consisted of Middle Easterners. A few challenged Mr. Horowitz, but to no avail -- as I expected. I've seen Mr. Horowitz speak before, both in person and on various videos. He's fearsome and knowledgeable.
The amazing position taken by some of the Moslems in the audience: "We've never heard those passages," referring to the Haditha or Quranic passages Mr. Horowitz quoted. The Moslems' denials of their knowledge of those verses were met with incredulity by the rest of the audience.
Always on Watch,
Its amazing from a westerner's point of view perhaps (although very few know much about their own religion, when considering all "religious" people) that someone had never heard "those passages." But it makes particular sense in Islam, because it is one of the definitions of Islam. As one could expect, the leaders came out on top again when the developed this scheme: You can only rightly interpret things if you are a scholar, part of the ulema, that is imam. You'll see time and again muslim individuals going to these guys asking them if it is OK to do certain activities, if they are in accordance with teachings. This is so ubiquitous that I'm sure it has led to an overall ignorance to texts and tafsir, because ultimately they can't make personal decisions, so why study it anyway? I see this all the time in the US when randomly a muslim writer in the newspaper will cover some finance scheme where one muslim duped the others. Also as you'll see from Andrew McCarthy's prosecution in the 1993 WTC bombings led by Omar Abdel Rahman, that all the muslim civilians said (about being muslims),
"You can't ask us those questions, we're not qualified."
McCarthy: "Well, then who does one ask?"
They said, "That man over there (pointing to the al-azhar educated madman in the corner)"
PRCS,
I loved your comment about the 1.2b muslims, each with his own opinion. haha.
From Marzouqi:
"Muslims who disagree with his interpretation of Islamic scripture fear his speech will contribute to a climate of hate, in which those who listen to him group all — or even the majority of — Muslims together as believers of the extreme views he references. It’s no secret that attacks against Muslims in America have been on the rise ever since the tragedies of Sept. 11."
Again, falsities. "His" interpretation, Ammar? I should introduce you to Michael Ammar, most famous prestidigitator, for magically creating that one. And attacks against muslims on the rise? Only by muslims. FBI has shown they are 15th on the list, with no significant problem here in America. The Jews are WaY more often target by muslims than anyone committing even a toilet flushing escapade on muslims. This is what we have to fight against. gimme a break.
Good work, Robert; and it's amazing to me that telling the Truth about Muhammad could be so dangerous to ones own life.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Palamas, you're wrong. Every mosque in the free world is owned by the Muslim Brotherhood and financed by Wahhabis. If nothing else those Muslims have had those passages crammed down their throats from day one. And particularly on campus, where the HAMAS-front MSA/MSU are so pervasive and Saudi Agenda departments so powerful that they poison the rest of the university. Muslims - all Muslims - are fed that evil through their mother's milk. They may not fast, they may not pray 5 times a day, they may drink alchohol or eat pork, but they KNOW those passages and they believe every word of them.
Muslims - all Muslims - play that trick. When put it a corner in which tu quoque or ad hominen logical fallacies can't help them they just pretend to be ignorant. They also assume that we don't know about those passages or really anything about Islam. Even in debates with Robert Spencer or Ali Sina, they invariably operate on the assumption that we are as illiterate and ignorant regarding Islam as they are with science. It's a definite sign of desperation, though, when they feign igorance, rather than say that, for example, 'oh, well that's not an authoritative ahadith,' or 'that scholar's not generally accepted in any school of Islam.' Those passages are foundational to Islam, and Horowitz obviously didn't leave that avenue open for them to flee down.
I read Ammar's whole piece on Spencer. Would that all Muslims were so reasoned. Yet, all of the criticisms above definately apply. He still misses the point. Here are my comments I left on the Badger site.
Dear Ammar,
I found your column very decent and thoughtful, yet I would like disagree with you on a point and make an observation. First of all, I don't believe your assertion that "attacks against Muslims are on the rise." Lately, when hearing that claim, the now-disproven Mosque "poison gas case" is cited. And it was a hoax.
Second, your concerns about Mr. Spenser's rhetoric is deeply ironic. If I follow you, you're saying that a) Spencer points out documented cases of Islamic violence; b) These acts of violence are plausibly sanctioned by the Koran; c) The people who commit the violence do so in accordance with many schools of current Islamic teaching; d) When Spencer points that out he's contributing to an atmosphere of hate. It's kind of like saying, "Bob is violent, but don't tell anyone, or they won't like him.
Amman, has it occured to you the vast disparity between the number of violent Muslim fanatics and the number of violent Christian fanatics? Why do Christian fundamentalists drive horse-drawn buggys and Islamic fundamentalists blow themselves up? I walked in off of the street to a prominent Mosque book store in London. It was full of young men. No one was smiling. Scores of books for sale had machine guns and other weapons on the covers. I have never seen anything like this in a Christian book store.
"Joe the Plumber's entire life is now being investigated with a fine-tooth comb by the MSM and the Left-wing blogs. It's a cautionary tale regarding involvement in politics, even in a peripheral sense." --Cornelius
Last night Biden the Big Mouth said on Joe Leno - "We're concerned about the REAL Joe the Plumber," because this guy in Ohio doesn't have a license. Biden - you jerk. You silver-spoon jerk.
Cyril Lucar - let us know if your comment to the Moslem's column at the Badger actually gets published (they moderate). I bet it doesn't.
I've also commented calling his "attacks on Moslems on the rise since 9/11" a total lie. And, to please provide verifiable stats.
It hasn't been printed. Gee, what a surprise. They must "protect" the Mohammedan!
Beg pardon - my comment has been printed! Probably because I challenged, "Any Free Speech at the Badger?" Yet, no "verifiable stats" provided. How surprising.
Cyril - let us know if yours gets printed.
'Last night Biden the Big Mouth said on Joe Leno - "We're concerned about the REAL Joe the Plumber," because this guy in Ohio doesn't have a license. Biden - you jerk. You silver-spoon jerk.'
Welcome to our police state nightmare.
Posted by: darcy at October 17, 2008 3:30 PM
Mine made it through as well.
There are 1.2 billion other Muslims on the planet; each with their own opinions.
Posted by: PRCS
Exactly. And the only one that matters is what is in the canon of Islam. That will trump all.
So really, it does not matter if this lone Muslim is a moderate or not. What we must bear in mind is that once Muslims are a near majority, all this "moderate muslim" stuff can jettisoned by future Muslims, and the real Islam unveiled.
The Bunglawussi reports with glee that "Horowitz lambastes Islam at Brown University in near-empty hall"-
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2008/10/17/horowitz-lambastes-islam-at-brown-university-in-near-empty-h.html
Mr. Spencer,
I spoke with you last night at your lecture, I was the girl who asked about the mujahideen and told you about going to jordan for the peace corps.
I would like to tell you that just as our university did not live up to the rumors you had heard, you did not live up to your reputation of being a crazy, muslim-hater. I was very nervous to hear you speak, and was afraid that I would be hearing more of the same hate. All of your points were well-spoken, well-researched, and quite frankly I do not see the controversy of it. I agree with everything you said, and I certainly do hope that the majority of Muslims, the peaceful ones, will stand up against those that abuse their religion and use it for their own destructive, hateful purposes. I do not affiliate, nor do I agree with any organized religion, but just as you do I respect the freedom that everyone should have to choose their own beliefs and enjoy the same protections under the law.
I think that what you are doing is very great, you are drawing attention to a problem in the face of opposition and I hope to do the same with my life. I would like to say that yesterday before the lecture I expected you to be more of the same, but I have to say that you are the closest thing I've found to someone I can call a role-model. Thank you for influencing me, you will be someone that I will look up to for a long time to come.
Robert, I Had the pleasure to attend your Lecture in Bolton Hall last night. (I was the gentleman with the suit and tie near the front). I was suprised also as to the civil discourse that took place - I expected to see something like what David had to put up with. (of course the woman asking you about your views on off-topic women's rights issues created a bit of a stir but you handeled it with tact and a great deal of patience). I noticed that it was being video taped. Will this be made availalble to the public? Thank you for coming to UWM and thank you UWM conservative student Assoc. for hosting the event. Please take heart in the fact that your message is getting out and the number of people becomming "awake" is growing (esp here in the Upper mid-west). once again I say "Keep it up Robert" We are all behind you.
Darcy - The Herald printed my letter, as they did several more harsh than mine. You probably already saw that, but I wanted to respond. I'm glad free speech isn't completely dead there.
Kasey - Great post! Thanks for giving us an audience perspective on Robert's talk. Please come back to JW, it's the best education on Islam that you'll find.
The Bunglawussi reports with glee that "Horowitz lambastes Islam at Brown University in near-empty hall"-
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2008/10/17/horowitz-lambastes-islam-at-brown-university-in-near-empty-h.html
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 17, 2008 7:00 PM
Can someone please go to this Brown U newspaper link and tell me how the Comments operate? Thank You in advance.
Kasey,
Welcome to jihadwatch! It's heartening to hear a young person like you who is open-minded and willing to listen.
Cheers! And good luck in your endeavors!
In my opinion Robert, you are being to generous to Ammar; his "respectful" tone in this case is reciprocity, which should always be the norm. And besides, there is plenty of objectional material in his article. I took the time to write a response around 5pm yesterday, but by that time, the school paper's moderator had had enough and opted for a little stealth jihad consorship.
Here is what I wrote:
Ammar Wrote: “it is my belief … that the freedom of conscience is a basic human right and that Islam does not restrict that freedom.”
Unfortunately, this is not so, see Al-Bukhari number 6922:
Ibn Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allah said, “Whoever changes his (Islamic) religion, kill him.”
And this is not some relic confined to the ancient past, ex-Muslims today live in constant fear of this death sentence being carried out against them.
The very fact that the OIC rejected the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and crafted their Sharia compliant version - The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights – is further evidence to substantiate the obvious to all but the-liars-and-willfully-ignorant.
There are sadly millions of examples of the Islamic rejection of the freedom of conscience in the past century alone and about 270 million over the past 14.
Ammar Wrote: “It’s no secret that attacks against Muslims in America have been on the rise ever since the tragedies of Sept. 11”
Like everyone else, I too would like some examples. Also, please keep in mind Ammar that over 3,000 Americans were killed by infidelophobic Muslim jihadists on 09/11/2001 and to this date I do not think one Muslim has been killed in America by a non-Muslim in what could be described as hate-crime. Your co-religionists in Somalia shot a Catholic nun –who devoted her life to serving sick Muslims - in the back in response to the Pope quoting a Byzantine emperor who died 700 years ago. If anyone needs to be wary of violent reprisals, it is non-Muslims.
Finally, Ammar, if Muslims are indeed feared and hated anywhere it is the fault of their violent, hate-cultivating religion and the violence committed daily by their jihadist co-religionists. There have been at least 12,062 deadly Islamic terror attacks since 09/11/2001, but you’re right, islamophobia is real threat………
I was able to hear Dr. Daniel Pipes speak at UC Berkeley last night. The event was organized by Tikvah, a pro-Israel campus group. There was a great deal of security: over a dozen police officers, full searches of all bags, confiscation of any questionable items, and checking each person with metal-detection wands.
Dr. Pipes mentioned his experience at Berkeley in 2004--which he recalled, rather wryly, as "most memorable". I wasn't there, but I understand that he was shouted down, jeered at, and threatened by protesters. Not this time. Security was better, and there was a list of rules read right at the beginning asking that the audience listen respectfully, not unfurl banners or signs, and not use the Q & A section to make long speeches of their own. The audience was remended that Berkeley was the birthplace of the "Free Speech Movement", and to please honor Dr. Pipes' freedom of speech.
The speech was called, "The Threat to Israel's Existence--Why It's Back; How to Deal with It." [I might disagree slightly with this--I don't think the threat to Israel is "back", since it never really went away--just waxed and waned]
He started by listing some of Israel's many accomplishments--in science, the arts, human rights. Then he noted that despite all these accomplishments, that Israel's very existance was under threat, from both violent threats such as WMD, conventional warfare, and terrorism--but also what Robert Spencer would call "soft Jihad"--economic boycotts, demographics, and ideology.
He talked about the further rise of radical Islam that began with the "Islamic Revolution" in Iran in 1979, and how the Left has turned against Israel as never before--in Europe, in the US, and even in Israel itself.
Then he spoke to mistakes Israel herself has made--that before 1993 (the year of the Oslo accords) that Israel followed deterrence as their main policy. But deterrence is hard, expensive, and--in a way--"boring". It is relentless. After 1993 there began an urge to finally "resolve" the issue, which led to making concessions. Israel began handing over land, money, and arms.
Then he asked the audience for another word for these unilateral concessions--that of course would be "appeasement". While it might work (to some extent) with small disagreements, it just inflames those who want to destroy you--it shows weakness.
Dr. Pipes quoted Yitzhak Rabin, who said, "You don't make peace with friends. You make it with very unsavory enemies". Pipes notes the flaw in the thinking--you *can't* make peace with your enemies, if they still want your destruction--you can only make peace with your *former* enemies. He notes that the question of Israel is not a matter of boundries--that Israel's enemies do not want to see an Israel in its 1967 boundries, or even a divided Israel (to allow for a contiguous "Palestinian" state), but they want to see *no Israel*. And many maps in the Muslim world reflect this--Israel, quite literally, has been "wiped off the map".
He notes that the West, and especially the U.S., should want Israel to win--and that concessions will not help. These policies will just give the Palistinians hope that they can defeat Israel. He says the Palistinian will to fight Israel, instead, must be broken--that Israel must not give any sense that the Palistinians can destroy them--that they must return to the policy of deterrence.
He notes that as awful as this state of affairs is for Israel, that Israel--even under such seige--is a functioning democracy. For the Palestinians it is much worse--not because of "humiliation", or "poverty", but that they can never develop a functioning society until they give up their obsession with the destruction of Israel. [I'm not entirely sure that I am that optimistic--if Palestinians gave up on the idea that it was feasible to destroy Israel--and I do think this is possible--but I do not imagine that Palestinians would then turn to creating a functioning society of their own. I imagine many of them would then turn to the Jihad in Afghanistan, or Somalia, or Iraq, as we have seen so many jihadists do when the local Jihad becomes "too hard". Still, this is not Israel's immediate concern, and I do agree that they should return to the policy of deterrence.]
The floor was then opened for questions. One person asked about the possible policies of a President Obama. Pipes replied that Obama had been quite anti-Israel, but had turned to the center during his campaign. Only time would tell whether this change was heartfelt, or just a campaign tactic.
The next two questions were essentially the same one--"Why does Israel have a right to exist?" and "Do you have any regrets about the creation of Israel?" [these questions, while quite shocking, have become disturbingly commonplace, and I was not surprised that audience members would ask them] Pipes replied by noting that Israel was a vibrant liberal democracy with a fine human rights record, endlessly inventive in the sciences and arts--why would *anyone* want to make this land more like its neighbors? To the second question, he answered "No".
He noted how tiny Israel is, compared to the Arab world, compared to the huge Muslim world. He also noted (as Hugh Fitzgerald, especially, likes to remind us) that the Palestinian arabs had never before been considered a separate people, with even a regional capital--they were just part of the straggling Ottoman Empire before the British stepped in.
The next question concerned whether it was in America's best interest to support Israel, when it just inflames Muslims and leads to terrorism? Dr. Pipes posited the idea that the U.S. does cut off diplomatic relations with Israel, and as a result, Israel flounders and falls, with their citizens scrambling for Western passports and fleeing. He notes what we will have lost--an ally, the one stable democracy, in a hostile region, and the loss of Israel's medical and scientific inventions.
But, more than this, that this action, far from calming radical Muslims, would instead incite them. If they could bring down Israel, who else could stand against them? Here he noted that--as all JW readers know--that the conflict is *not* local, but is part of a global Jihad--that most of the worldwide Muslim conflicts have nothing to do with the narrow Arab/Israeli issue.
I was never called on, but I had five separate questions, and Dr. Pipes wound up answering four of them. This was the first time I had heard him speak, and he was excellelent--cogent, clear and engaging.
This is slightly off-topic, but as it was so late after the event, my friend and I took a cab home. We chatted with the very friendly driver, and found he was from Afghanistan, and had moved here six years ago. I asked if he had any children? He said, "excellent question, my sister!" Then noted that he had six sons and four daughters, all of whom were now in good schools here in the U.S.
My friend asked him if he had ever run into discrimination in the U.S.? He replied that he had not, and the American people were wonderful--unlike their government. He claimed that things back home were going "from bad to worse". By that time we had arrived at our destination, and that was an end of the conversation. From what he had said, though, I suppose that, while he considered the current situation in his homeland untenable, that things were fine--or at least bearable--under the Taliban, and the chaos of the warlords before them. I couldn't help but wonder what sort of citizens this man and his children will make.
Hugh: ". . . I also suspect that one reason why audiences at my talks this week and in the past have several times been quieter and more courteous than anyone expected them to be is that I am not the hate-filled "Islamophobe" or fire-breathing idiot that the MSA and other Brotherhood-linked Islamic groups have made me out to be . . ."
Or, gasp, could it be that the students actually came to learn something from someone who actually knows something?