Of course, Kaukab Siddique's views are fairly commonplace on the wastelands of propaganda and indoctrination that are American universities these days. "Pa. prof's anti-Israel remarks concern lawmakers," from The Associated Press, October 22 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):
OXFORD, Pa. -- Two Pennsylvania lawmakers are questioning officials at a state-supported university after a professor publicly called for the destruction of Israel.In a letter Wednesday to the president of Lincoln University, state Sens. Daylin Leach and Anthony Williams ask if the professor is expressing anti-Semitic views on campus.
Video of a Sept. 3 rally in Washington, D.C., shows tenured literature professor Kaukab Siddique saying Israel must be destroyed, "if possible by peaceful means."
Siddique tells The Philadelphia Inquirer that "I am against Israel - not against Jews."...
That line "I'm against Israel, not against Jews..." is abit like the old one about "some of my best friends are Jews..."
To call for the destuction of Israel is to call for the destruction of a fellow UN member state, a state founded legitimately in international law, a democratic state and a refuge for people who have faced persecution throughout Europe and the Middle East. In other words it is to call for the destruction of civilised values.
Just for the record I am not a fan of all that Israel does. But I am not a fan of all that Pakistan does, but I am not calling for its destruction.
...the wastelands of propaganda and indoctrination that are American universities these days.
"...Israel must be destroyed, "if possible by peaceful means."" -- tenured professor of literature Kaukab Siddique
The name suggests a cultural diversity hire by the university.
The meaning is clear, and if the professor had a brain he would not have been so careless in using "destroy" and "peaceful," mutually incompatible concepts, in the same sentence. But of course, we know what he really meant - if the destruction of Israel "by peaceful means" turns out not to be possible, then other means will be pursued.
If Juan Williams can get fired from NPR for stating fairly innocuous views, then Professor Siddique should certainly get the boot.
I agree. I don't always agree with things the state of Israel does, but it has a right to exist and should not be destroyed, either literally or as a concept.
It's also funny how he mentions the method, the very method they are using to destroy europe. They infiltrate government on low and high levels and use it against us to destroy our freedom, like that London borough mentioned before, or like they are using our own system of justice to squash freedom of expression in the case against Wilders.
Personally, I'm a strong proponent for freedom of expression so I say this guy has the right to call away and we have the right to call him an idiot.
But check out the latest in the egregious stifling of free speech when it has anything to do with Muslims that smacks of criticism of even the mildest sorts -- famous sci-fi writer Elizabeth Moon was uninvited to be a guest of honour at a literary conference because she had the audacity to suggest on her blog that the guys behind the Ground Zero mosque should have known they were going to cause a controversy, and either intended to push the edges and cause a controversy or didn't know enough about the culture they'd immigrate to to know it would cause a stink. She had the audacity to suggest that in this and other areas "it would be helpful for them to show more understanding of the responsibilities of citizenship in a non-Muslim country” The conference folks said they came under immense pressure to dis-invite her because of her 'bigoted'statements.
You can read what she wrote here and judge for yourself whether or not her statements were out of the mainstream or offensive. Just craziness.
"tenured" = license to lie and defame with impunity. Wonder what would happen if he voiced Islamic views on gays, women, Buddhists, etc...??
Siddique tells The Philadelphia Inquirer that "I am against Israel - not against Jews."...
Translation:
I just want to destroy the house, not the people inside.
"I am against Israel - not against Jews."...
Oh, and there's just such a huge difference between the two.
And destroying Israel by 'peaceful means', means what?
Exactly how do you go about that?
swami, you know their definition of "peace" is different than ours. Therefore, any means that would destroy Israel is "peaceful" to the Mohammedans. Very Orwellian. Straight out of "1984."
A number of things:
Israel is much more like the United States than ANY of the countries throughout the region. This Prof must not like us very much either. Strange how he lives and prospers here.
In the eyes of Islam, ALL of Israel is 'occupied' Muslim land. Here we go again with the idea of a "Nation of Islam" that can defend it's own 'occupied land' or 'waters'. Other than peaceful means is the use of war, which is a tool of a government, not a 'religion'.
Courreges W said: "Straight out of "1984.""
Actually, straight out of 610 AD. Stoning people to death is another of the many principals in Islam that have no business in the modern world. Yet (like slavery) it will take open warfare to rid us of this barbaric practice.
Islam has far too many issues that cause wars to NOT be the cause of violence and war.
Yaeli, thanks for beating me to the punch.
We should indeed have the liberty to say what we believe.
But, don't you think it's highly ironic that all these people who waved Viet Cong flags, displayed posters of Mao and Guevara, and demanded the right to use foul language in the name of free speech back in their student days are now a thought police--and, since most of their policing of Islam-critical comment comes from pure, unadulterated cowardice rather than any regard for Islam--and ridiculous thought police at that?
Waiting for it,
in 3 ... 2 ... 1,
"But, but, my remarks are being TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT!"
Glenn Beck was on Bill O'Reilly this past Friday. When they talked about Kaukab Siddique statement Glenn Beck noted to Bill O'Reilly that it was a call to violence. O'Reilly refused to condemn Siddique. I condemn Bill O'Reilly more than Siddique. Siddique is being true to his barbarism while O'Reilly is a traitor.
amen to that!
siddique is the proverbial scorpion that stung the frog on whose back he climbed to cross the river.
o'reilly ("i'll take care of that woman for you" in reference to pamela geller) is beyond despicable.
and he is one of the ones that is making feeble jabs at islam.... this describes the rest (anderson cooper, suzanne malveaux, rachel maddow etc. etc. etc)
"I am against Israel - not against Jews."... He's attacked and smeared Jews directly in other rants. So this claim itself is false.
3wire writes, "O'Reilly refused to condemn Siddique. I condemn Bill O'Reilly more than Siddique. Siddique is being true to his barbarism while O'Reilly is a traitor." On one segment, O'Reilly thanked the head of CAIR for his frequent appearances on his show, calling him "a standup guy". What an idiot!
Let me also add that officials at Lincoln insist Siddique can't be fired as "he has tenure". This episode provides yet more evidence that tenure in this day and age has lost whatever might once have justified it. Why, after all, are professors entitled to be immune from the caprices of a free labor market?
But not to worry about Siddique. If he *were* fired, there are many colleges that would readily hire him. Anti-semitism, after all,is no longer an actionable offense.
I support Siddique's right to say what he did, though I completey disagree with him. Free speech, true free speech, means the right to say things which will sometimes offend others. Have to wonder, though, what Siddique would have to say about the First Amendment right Americans have to criticize, even severely criticize or mock, ALL religions, including Islam. My guess is that he would employ a double standard, though I don't know for certain. Most harsh critics of Israel, though, are ordinarily not consistent when free speech issues arise.
Nothing will happen to him for a number of reasons.
1) He has tenure, he'd need to commit a felony where he serves hard time before the university fires him.
2) He's not saying anything American or European Liberal thinks and says on daily basis.
3) He is Muslim and hence a protected minority. Touch him and the DOJ, ACLU and CAIR will reign lawsuits down on you until the cows come home.
Siddique tells The Philadelphia Inquirer that "I am against Israel - not against Jews."...
Before the creation of modern Israel, which is to say before Jews were organized as a polity, they were attacked by antisemites as though they were a sort of polity. It was customary to pretend that to attack "the Jews" was as innocuous as to oppose a political faction or an ideology (the very word antisemitism, popularized by those who applied it to themselves, betrays this fact). Now that Jews are represented by their own state, the antisemites ironically hide behind the opposite pretense that to attack the (actually existing) Jewish polity, the State of Israel, is not an attack on "the Jews" as such.
For the newer members of this forum, who may not yet have come across it - a bitingly satirical exposition of the kind of mind that lies behind such frequently-made statements as "I am against Israel, but not against Jews".
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3CEC078B-97FB-40F6-9617-8447061C0998
"We Are Not Anti-Semites..."
By Steven Plaut (of the University of Haifa)
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, December 11, 2008
To give an idea of the flavour, and to encourage people to click on the link and read the rest of it:
"We have nothing against Jews as such".
'We just hate Zionism and Zionists.
'We think Israel does not have a right to exist.
'But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.
'Heavens to Mergatroyd [sic: Murgatroyd - dda]. Marx Forbid. We are humanists. Progressives. Peace lovers.
'Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews.
'Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism and Israeli policies.
'The two have nothing to do with one another. Venus and Mars. Night and day.
'Trust us.
Sure, we think the only country on the earth that must be annihilated is Israel.
'But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such...".
I would love to see a pro-Israel group, preferably on a campus somewhere in the West, that had the chutzpah to do a dramatic performance of the whole of Plaut's magnificent piece. You could either have one person reading all the main statements and everyone else as the chorus, chanting the refrain 'but that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such'; or you could have the various statements - e.g. ' Sure, we think the only country on the earth that must be annihilated is Israel' or 'We demand equal citizen rights, which is why the only country in the Middle East in need of extermination is the only one in which such rights exist' - read by different individual voices, but the refrain chanted by everyone in the group.
Hold up a mirror to the Haters of Zion and let people who are not entirely brain-dead discover just how empty and indeed vicious this business of pretending to love Jews, whilst hating Israel, really is.
It seems to be a problem of Freedom of Speech and the abuse of this right. Once you stop considering moral issues you find yourself with these abuses. What right does this Muslim have to call for the elimination of a country and its people nobody holds him responsible because of Freedom of Speech ? However ,if something is said about the pedophile roll model that Muslims venerate, all hell breaks loose and PC kicks in from all sides.
Freedom of speech has become a joke on which everything has a validation no matter how immoral or wrong it is.
This right has been abused so much, that it has become the weapon of choice of the Muslim fifth column. It is a one way street for them, since if it is against them they cover themselves with the religious shield and the physical threats that are permitted to them but not to the rest of us,their so called fatwas. Maybe it is time to revive the Templar's.
How did so many people come to the conclusion that the Muslims and the Jews are 2 different sides of the same coin? Over the years, Israel has made many concessions to Muslim demands, but I can't recall ANY similar responsible behavior by ANY Muslim leader. Understanding the Muslim political behavior and goals is simple, confuse public opinion by constantly making accusations and demands, but NEVER EVER capitulate on ANYTHING.
Siddique tells The Philadelphia Inquirer that "I am against Israel - not against Jews."...
And we are against Islam - not against muslims.
But we are called "islamophobes" for that. So what is Siddique?
"If Juan Williams can get fired from NPR for stating fairly innocuous views, then Professor Siddique should certainly get the boot."
Absolutely!