Only one question: does he have tenure?

Such apologetics and propaganda for the Jihad at a 501(c)(3) organization are being subsidized, indirectly, by American taxpayers. It used to be that brainwashing took place when you were a helpless POW, in places like Pyongyang, Hanoi, and Beijing. During the Cultural Revolution one had to denounce one's own counter-revolutionary sins, don a dunce cap, and be publicly humiliated while expressing public remorse. Now, instead of Mao's Little Red Book, we have the little Blue Books of American exam-taking, in which dutiful, submissive, and grade-fearing students bow their heads, and regurgitate the pap their "professors of Islamic studies" demand of them.

In this "professor's" ludicrous course, some palpable pap about "Islam confronting modernity," with a breathless parroting of fashionable academic terms that carefully avoid the little matter of what Islam is actually all about, he shows himself to be completely uncomprehending of what free, skeptical, and disinterested inquiry can be -- his task is to present assorted straw-men, knock them down, and make sure the students, just like those Chinese during the Cultural Revolution, are forced to denounce them (albeit in "papers" and "exams") and, he devoutly hopes, once programmmed will go out into the world to pooh-pooh all those who have dared to criticize Islam. And students will fear to take issue with the sinisterly amiable lecturer, master of all he surveys, with the all-important power of the grade over his cowed students, and especially over any who dare to dissent.

This travesty of learning, this lecture-hall thought-control (grades are a way to either reward the submissive regurgitators -- verily, Islam means "submission" -- and to punish those guilty of the "thought-crime" of -- well, thought. Can the students, the Colgate faculty, the administration, the Trustees continue to stand for this?

Congratulations, Robert Spencer. Being on these lists means you are getting to them and effecting cultural change. It is a perverse award, but it is telling.

I was glad to see Bat Ye'or's name on the list too. It was only a couple of years ago that Esposito was telling the media that Bat Ye'Or was an academic joke.

Now they are taking her seriously enough to attack her. Excellent!

Robert, look at that list; are you absolutely certain that you couldn't have a conference, seminar, or formal meeting of some sort on the subject of how Islam endangers us? It looks to me as if having a lot of these experts serving as faculty members would be a huge drawing card.

Surely if the costs of having the conference were kept reasonable, and tuition or fees could also be kept within reason, there would be no problem with cost overruns. Vendors, such as authors, could offer their goods outside the conference halls, there could be post-lecture panel discussions, etc. We do this sort of thing all the time in medicine, and it's a very good format.

Judging from the postings at this site, I can't imagine that the audience interest wouldn't be there. I suppose that it would draw a strong anti-American element to protest, but in a sense, that would be good, since it would clarify to the general population some of the differences we have within our own country, demonstrate to those who have serious concerns about Islam but who feel alone that they aren't really alone, and maybe even make some of our Muslim "friends" a bit nervous, since there could be no doubt that bit by bit, they are being "outed."

Please give it some thought. Sure, you would become the enemy of the PC crowd, but since you already are, it would only increase the number of enemies you have--and provide millions of dollars worth of publicity.

P.S. Maybe it would ultimately provide a little bit of pressure on the politicians, too. . .

Mr. Spencer, consider it a badge of honor. At LGF we've been called gay, homophobe, islamophobe, fascist, racist, neonazi jews-for-bush. I guess those are all synonyms for truth-speakers these days...

;-)

Mr. Spencer - Congratulations. You are correct in characterizing this as attempt to silence your criticism, and then, of course, ours. Hugh is also correct in his description of the "academic courses" that are nothing more than "regurgitation for grades" of the opinions and bias of the instructor.
It is an outrage than anyone affiliated with a college can get away with offering and teaching such a course and with creating and publishing an "enemies list."
Politically correct speech and non-hate policies are just lipservice on many of today's campuses when the perpetrators are Muslim or Muslim-apologists.

The silver lining is that some of Safi's students might actually start READING "Islam Unveiled", instead of merely READING ABOUT Spencer's books.

Futhermore (perhaps due to moral clarity?) writers like Spencer and Ye'or are so much easier to read than double-talking John Esposito and tedious know-it-all Edward Said.

In effect, this can backfire on Safi.

Anti-jihadis in the area should donate copies of these books to Colgate University library in order to help bring about Safi's meltdown.

LOL Not only are you in the power group, Mr. Spencer, you also present a calm and intelligent presence when speaking on television. Now -- if we could only have all of you from this "list" speaking together at one time in the same room ... What an impact! Congratulations.

Well done, Robert! You have made the A-list of those academics fighting to preserve Western civilization from the Islamist onslaught.

(Note: As for Islamo"phobia"- I must say, I have not seen evidenced in your work any fear whatsoever. Acuity, clarity, perceptiveness, analytical competence- but never fear of Islam.)

The list of people the students have to report on is excellent. Some of the students will actually learn something, despite the professor.

I still remember writing a report when I was 10 or 11 years old on the Byrd dynasty of Virginia. That was part of my earliest political education.

I live in Upstate New York and attended a public lecture by Professor Safi over two years ago at the Utica Public Library. Although I did disagree and question much of what was presented in his lecture on Islam I nevertheless found him to be a well-meaning, courteous, sincere, and kind individual both at his presentation and through several e-mails I exchanged with him over the next 2 years.

I think that what would be both useful and honest would be a curriculum where both the works of, for example, Edward Said and Bat Ye'or, might be read, evaluated, and discussed rather than the one-sided approach the Dr. Safi favors. Also, it might be helpful for Dr. Safi to consider that as a Iranian/Persian of Muslim decent, his Zoroasterian ancestors shared much of the bloody and unhappy treatment doled out to other dhimmi peoples throughout the Near East, North Africa, and beyond.

With best wishes to all. Matthew J. Fleming

I bet that some are out there smiling smugly because they have plenty of cash to disseminate their lies. Cash to fund slanted textbooks, cash to fund universities chairs, cash to fund "educational centers," and so on. Yet who will fund Robert? Ask around. Some of us must know folks with deep pockets.

As a student in Professor Safi's "Islam and the Modern World" course, I am not only shocked at the insults directed towards my professor, but insulted that the students in his class are portrayed as "hapless," "cowed," and "dutiful, submissive, head-bowed" individuals. Essentially, we are described as mindless human beings. Every student enrolled in this course had full access to a class description before signing up and enrolled knowing what we would be discussing. The accusations being made about our assignments and the legitmacy and intentions of Professor Safi are ludicrous and completely false, and I personally find it quite odd that they are being made without any true insight or firsthand accounts of our course.

The assertion by "Hugh" that the students in the class will "fear to take issue with the sinisterly amiable lecturer" as for concern that we will receive a poor grade, could not be farther from the truth. As a Roman Catholic, I have never once felt as though I was being judged by Professor Safi for my own background or beliefs, and he is constantly encouraging us to bring up any thoughts or ideas, even those we might think to be challenging his own beliefs, because he respects all of our opinions. He encourages us to think critically and analyze everything we read, and I cannot think of one student who feels powerless or frightened in any of his courses.

Basically, I simply do not understand how people think they know so much about Professor Safi, his class, and the way he teaches without ever attending a course. That, to me, is the absolute greatest ignorance.

My dear alissa,

I take it, then, that you have no problem with his a priori labeling of the work of an entire group of writers, which includes many serious and internationally respected scholars, with the dismissive and tendentious label of "Islamophobe"?

Leave me and my books out of it, although I reject the label for myself as well. I invite you to read the works of Bat Ye'or and then come back and tell me she is "Islamophobic."

Best regards
Robert Spencer

After reading this string of comments about my professor, I feel compelled to respond. First of all, I am offended by your insinuation that we 'hapless colgaters' are subject to brainwashing by Professor Safi. By your rationale, every introductory class I have taken has brainwashed me. Secondly, I think you have all placed to much emphasis on the "Islamaphobe" assignment. In case none of you knew, Colgate has highly demanding cirriculum. Three pages is nothing. In Safi's class alone we have had to write 30+ pages on topics other than "Islamaphobes. In my four classes combined, I have written close to 100 pages this semster. We don't all spend our time pondering a 3 page assignment we had in the begininning of the year. Furthermore, you have all failed to grasp the methodology behind professor Safi's grouping of Islamaphobes. As he explained it in class, the list was made up of people who have been publically critical of Islam. There is no secret agenda aimed at demeaning the work of serious scholar by grouping them with Falwell and Roberstson. Safi was simply trying to introduce us to some popular ciritcisms of Islam so that we could engange them in our other readings. He never told us to criticize them. He simply told us to objectively summarize their views on Islam. At no point have I suspected that Professor Safi has a 'secret agenda', as some of you seem to suggest. Although I don't plan on studying Islam in the future, I feel privelged to have gotten the opportunity to study with Professor Safi. I have never come across a person who seems so firm in his commitment to peace and understanding among people. Frankly, I am shocked by the way you all have villanized him. He is probably one of the nicer, more understanding professors at this institution. I dont understand how presenting the pluralistic and peaceful aspects of Islam is a bad thing. Yes, there is much ugliness in Islam. We see it in the news all the time. I think everyone should get the whole picture, the good and the bad. If we rely just on what we see on the news, we run the risk of being brainwashed in a much more dangerous way. Imagine if we judged Christianity just by what we saw in the news. Are pedophile preists the norm? Of course not. Do the actions of extreme christian cults like the branch davidians relfect christian values? of course not. Similarly, we cannot denounce Islam as a religon of violence and hate simply because some people chose to distort it's teachings.

In closing, I would like to say that I am appalled by what I have heard on this message board. On the whole, you people appear to be quite an intolerant bunch. How can you pretend to know "what islam is all about"? Have you spent your life studying it? Are you a Muslim?
You compare Safi to Mao? Utterly Ridiculous.

"Does he have tenure?" That's a horrific comment. I though you were a proponent of freedom? Who sounds like Mao, now?

My dear Josh,

"First of all, I am offended by your insinuation that we 'hapless colgaters' are subject to brainwashing by Professor Safi."

Please specify where I made such an "insinuation." This is a piece about Safi's lack of academic objectivity and objective vilification of my work and that of others. Nowhere does it say you or your fellows are brainwashed. If you see through what he is doing, I applaud you.

"By your rationale, every introductory class I have taken has brainwashed me."

I take it you have not studied logic.

"In case none of you knew, Colgate has highly demanding cirriculum. Three pages is nothing."

That was precisely my point.

"Safi was simply trying to introduce us to some popular ciritcisms of Islam so that we could engange them in our other readings. He never told us to criticize them. He simply told us to objectively summarize their views on Islam."

He told you to do that by labeling us (wrongly) as "Islamophobes."

"I dont understand how presenting the pluralistic and peaceful aspects of Islam is a bad thing."

No, that's just swell, Josh. But calling me names, and calling other people names, and thereby demeaning serious scholarship -- that's not so swell.

"How can you pretend to know 'what islam is all about'? Have you spent your life studying it?"

Actually, yes.

Cordially,
Robert Spencer

Mr. Spencer: When I asked "Have you spent your life studying Islam" I was not refering to you. I am well aware of your credentials. I should have clarified that I was responding to "Hugh".

Also, keep in mind that the main purpose of Safi's course is to introduce us to the discourses taking place in progressive and liberal muslim circles. the three page paper was assgined to provide some background on the criticims of Islam, that is all.

My dear Josh,

I suggest you ask Professor Safi why, if "the three page paper was assgined to provide some background on the criticims of Islam," did he tag me and others with the inflammatory, pejorative and inaccurate label of "Islamophobe."

You can also tell him that I'd be happy to come to Colgate this fall and speak to his class about these issues. We can make the whole thing question/answer.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Getting off the topic, I have a few questions id like to get your opinion on.

What kind of approach do you advocate for dealing with the problem of international terrorism? (Broad, I know)

Do you beleive U.S foriegn policy over the last thirty years has consistently reflected our commitment to the ideas of democracy and justice?

Don't we run the risk of creating more hatred towards 'the west' by pursuing only military policies?

Should we put pressure on Israel to appease the Palestininians? Wouldnt that ease tensions and save lives in the long run?

Thanks.

My dear Josh,

"What kind of approach do you advocate for dealing with the problem of international terrorism? (Broad, I know)"

I respectfully suggest you read my book "Onward Muslim Soldiers."

"Do you beleive U.S foriegn policy over the last thirty years has consistently reflected our commitment to the ideas of democracy and justice?"

You are asking me to comment on US foreign policy since 1974; this is a huge topic, involving 6 presidents, about 15 congresses, etc. In any case, my writings focus on jihad, which I demonstrate in "Onward" is not a reaction to any particular policy from outside the Islamic world. My books are not apologetic works for any political policy.

"Don't we run the risk of creating more hatred towards 'the west' by pursuing only military policies?"

Yes. The ideological struggle is pivotal.

"Should we put pressure on Israel to appease the Palestininians? Wouldnt that ease tensions and save lives in the long run?"

Appeasement by anyone is never wise, and always encourages the one being appeased.

Cordially,
Robert Spencer