My primary (or only) goal is “provocation”? Only if the truth provokes you, as it does so many in the totalitarian indoctrination camp that Stanford and most other American universities have become. I challenge Andrew Ziperski to find one untruth in anything I’ve ever said or written about Islam. He thinks that the truth is “provocation” because he has been so relentlessly bombarded with lies from every quarter that he was told to trust and learn from that he now thinks, like the well-programmed bot that he is, that a reasoned and documented presentation of unwelcome truths is “provocation.”
But unfortunately for young Ziperski, reality is reality despite the lies he has imbibed and the fantasies he has embraced. Jihad violence and Sharia oppression are real, and the “Islamophobia” he so hates and fears isn’t. The truths I have told are likely to confront this young man and his fellow sheep sooner or later, at a time when it will likely be too late for them to realize that they have been lied to and change course.
“A Way Forward For Cardinal Conversations,” by Andrew Ziperski, Stanford Review, January 23, 2019:
…My primary piece of advice to the administration is simple yet essential: those who are invited to speak as part of the Conversations must be provocative, and they must make us uncomfortable. This does not mean, of course, that speakers whose primary (or only) goal is provocation ought to be invited; people like Milo Yiannopoulos and Robert Spencer add no value to a campus like ours, and I would strongly oppose an invitation extended to them or those who employ their tactics….
Halal Bacon says
yah, listen to a kid who only recently got potty trained
gravenimage says
Some young people *are* smart. Andrew Ziperski, not so much…
mortimer says
OK, Ziperski, how about you stand up for a debate? Or are you a craven coward who slanders others and can’t defend his wicked slander with facts?
………………………………
We thought as much.
J D S says
Young fools like this guy are what the future is turning to…Our universities should be turning out good and honest young people who will evolve into future good and honest leaders who have the country’s health at heart..but instead look what is being turned out.
Buraq says
Many American Universities – where you are taught WHAT to think, not HOW to think! Clowns!
Bill says
And parents pay easily over six figures or they and their children mortgage their futures for the privilege of being indoctrinated. What a racket. My only regret is that I have never been clever enough to figure out how to design such a cash cow.
j_not_a says
My now estranged son attends such an “enlightend” institution such as the one the subject of this article does, which is the infamous Ryerson in Toronto. About which Mr. Spencer has noted in some of his articles here
Ryerson is a hotbed of radical leftism and worship of all things Palestinian. My son has disowned me in part because he thinks I’m “hateful”, – I.e. I dont hate Trump and because I hate Islamic ideology, which hates me and nonislamics who hatefully want all non islamics dead. Er, got that?
j_not_a says
Ryerson is in Toronto, Ontario, Canada
gravenimage says
Sorry to hear that, j_not_a.
Rufolino says
As I know to my cost, when you address the truth of Islam’s ideological hate, even long-standing friends may disown you.
Because, “nothing is so uncomfortable as a new idea.”
Mary Ahrweiler says
Tell your “friends” educate themselves befoethey defend an ideology. If they can read, they’ll see.
Giacomo Latta says
Par for the course in Canada since forever.
mortimer says
Note Ryerson is filled with Leftists, globalists and Muslim Brotherhood.
PRCS says
Sorry to hear that, j_not_a, and hope your son will eventually reconcile.
Dave says
Strange to think, yet thousands of young people are paying a large amount of money to have their minds indoctrinated and close to all sensible discussion. If you need to come to some conclusions, then you need to hear two sides of an argument, not just one.
Stanton Lore says
My experience as well, when discussing Spencer with Progressive friends. I am a hater because I oppose Jihad and terrorism! I am a hater because I want to control our borders. I am a hater because I think our strength as a country is our Constitution and rule of law, NOT our diversity. I am a hater because I am opposed to abortion, and female genital mutilation, but in favor of the death penalty. And female Progressives defend Islam! How does this make logical sense? These are intelligent and successful people. What kind of insanity is this?
infidel says
The same thing nationalistic Hindus face in India too… U just cannot discuss the realities of Islamic Jehaad in any public forum.. U are immediately hated and ostracized by fellow Hindus as if U have committed a mass murder… VOW! and all this after repeated acts of Islamic terror all over the world.
Dawne says
He clearly doesn’t think independently but swallows whatever he is told by the media/his peer group. Is this what our elite universities/thinkers have become? If he wants to refute these assertions by Robert Spencer he should obviously take Spencer’s statements, check the original Islamic texts referred to and then see if there is untruth. Of course he would find Spencer’s arguments correct and well researched. But as a supposed academic, why is he not able to apply the principles of academic research?
Mary Ahrweiler says
Another “highly educated” useful idiot.
Or Else! says
Hmm….on what to base an opinion?
Apologetics for 1400+ years of mayhem?
Or the 1400+ years of mayhem?
No Muzzies Here says
Wrong. Robert Spencer is one of a few courageous individuals speaking out about the real danger to the world from Islam.
Merrill Holt says
To put Milo Yiannopoulos and Robert Spencer together shows either a complete failure of research and analytical skills or thinking dominated by ideology. Either way this prmarily sports writer for the Stanford Daily has shown himself to be lacking in journalistic skills.
Steve says
I believe, many, perhaps most, of the dhimmi stooges wouldn’t blame Islam even as their heads were about to be sawed off, for not, converting to Islam. Most of these stooges I’ve met suffer from a terminal case of cognitive dissonance, and no infinitely twisted excuse is too far fetched to justify the reality they are confronted with.
eduardo odraude says
I could understand criticizing aspects of Robert Spencer’s work, just as one can criticize aspects of anyone’s work. But for Andrew Ziperski to suggest that Spencer’s work is without value suggests that something is not right with Ziperski. He clearly doesn’t know the work he is condemning wholesale, so one must ask why he is condemning it. There are a couple of possibilities. He might be a cowardly conformist protecting his career and connections in an unfree university setting. Cowardly conformists are everywhere among the “intelligentsia.” Or Ziperski might genuinely agree with the official line of censorship and repression imposed by leftist professors and administration. Or again, he might be too stupid to realize the extent of the censorship going on, and he may simply actually be of the opinion that he expresses, despite not knowing what he is talking about. In any case, his wholesale dismissal of Spencer’s work speaks very poorly of Andrew Ziperski. Ziperski with his remark shows himself to be either a selfish coward, or a stupid sheep, or just an ignorant fool.
eduardo odraude says
Andrew Ziperski is an economics and finance student. He’s interning at Goldman Sachs this summer. He was a legislative intern with the Republican majority whip in the North Carolina General Assembly. He’s clearly ambitious and he may be a conservative who has to kiss up to the left in the university atmosphere. Looking at the list of the courses he’s taken, he appears to have zero background in the study of Islam. But he’s prepared to blacklist Spencer. Here’s Ziperski’s profile on Linked in:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-ziperski
People today should keep this in mind: If you don’t want to tell the truth, at least keep your mouth shut, don’t actively lie.
Springer says
Ziphislipski, perhaps?
eduardo odraude says
?
gravenimage says
“Ziphislipski” is a pun, Eduardo:
“zip” “his” “lip” + “ski”. In other words, he should shut up.
eduardo odraude says
Well, sometimes I’m a bit slow on the uptake, no doubt of that. Thanks gravenimage for explaining. I read it as Ziph-islipski, did not notice the other reading, duh…
gravenimage says
No problem, Eduardo. I’ve had the same happen myself. Glad to help. 🙂
Dave says
This guy is a nobody, trying to make a name for himself. He should choose a better name, for a start!
The Universities are at fault for allowing this Islamic domination of discussion.
gary fouse says
Typical leftist professor. In truth it is only people who don’t think like him who should be made uncomfortable. At the same time, those who share his views must never be made to feel uncomfortable, hence we have newly-coined expressions like trigger warnings, and micro/macro aggressions. Ziperski thinks that the words of people like Spencer have no place on a college campus. For example I once heard three members of Jewish Voice for Peace describe pro-Israel speech as “useless discourse” and that pro-Israel students should not feel comfortable on campus. What this all means is that conservative, pro-life, pro-America or pro-Israel speakers should not be allowed to speak on campus. What kind of Stalinist thinking is this?
eduardo odraude says
Not a professor. An ambitious student. He may even be a conservative, to judge by his profile on Linked In. Maybe his ambition is causing him to kiss up to the lefties who demand intellectual conformity on campus, or else.
sheliak says
Typical newspeak uttered by a child of cultural marxism.
David Hayden says
Andrew Ziperski,
I would suggest that you seriously read the Qur’an, Hadith (Muhammad’s words and actions according to the early Islamic sources) and biographies of Muhammad written by Muslims. I have done all of the above and have written a book entitled Muhammad and the Birth of Islamic Supremacism: The War with the Jews 622-628 A.D. Check it out on Amazon and let me know what you think. If you would seriously read it, you might think differently about Robert Spencer. Also, read several books on the history of the Muslim Brotherhood and its civilizational jihad to make the United States a shari’a compliant country. Please understand that scholars you disagree with just might be wrong, but how would you know if you haven’t delved in their writing?
David Hayden says
I meant to say “just might be right.”
gravenimage says
Stanford’s Andrew Ziperski: Robert Spencer’s “primary (or only) goal is provocation”
…………………….
What sort of moral idiot are you if you consider standing against Jihad to be “provocation”?
Niemoller says
Is it a surprise this Islamist-friendly garbage is coming from academia? Here’s another article from the same Stanford paper, but from a rare opposition voice:
Does the American Flag Offend You? Stanford Thinks It Might
An administrator encouraged Sigma Chi to take down the American flag flown in front of its house in order to improve its image on campus.
gravenimage says
Here is that appalling story:
“Stanford Fraternity Told to Take American Flag Down to ‘Improve Image”
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/12/01/stanford-fraternity-told-to-take-american-flag-down-to-improve-image/
Niemoller says
Is it a surprise this Islamist-friendly garbage is coming from academia? Here’s another article from the same Stanford paper, but from a rare opposition voice:
Does the American Flag Offend You? Stanford Thinks It Might
An administrator encouraged Sigma Chi to take down the American flag flown in front of its house in order to improve its image on campus.
https://stanfordreview.org/does-the-american-flag-offend-you-stanford-thinks-it-might/
Georg says
Sounds like this proud nitwit in confusing Robert with Reza Aslan, Kamau Bell, or some other terminally misguided, hateful weirdo who doesn’t know he’s obsessed and in love with the thing(s) he protests too much to hate.
Truth says
Ziperski is a dope.
Mr. Maxwell S. J. Fenton says
In my defense, blessed are those who take no offence when truth be told.
Guy Jones says
This is all that the infantile totalitarians of the Left can offer, intellectually — childish and fallacious ad hominem name-calling, mockery and vilification of individuals with whom they disagree, and, a palpable — and, revealing — unwillingness to debate issues on the merits, in a substantive manner.
Georg says
Right. Name-calling and emotion aren’t exactly the hallmarks of sound argumentation, so their prevalence in leftist “discourse” demonstrates the lack of certitude they feel regarding the legitimacy of their positions. Here’s a good case in point that, although painful to watch due to the venom and unfair treatment, is illustrative:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB7XaPT71eg
ANDREW OLTUSZEWSKI says
ANDREW ZIMERSKI, READ KORAN. THEN, OPEN YOUR MOUTH. READ KORAN BOY.
Norger says
Ponder the implications, Mr. Ziperski, that the combined intellectual might of all of the social justice warriors at Stanford cannot stand up to a single learned critic of Islam and expose him for the “provocateur” you claim he is. Just pathetic.
ANDREW OLTUSZEWSKI says
WHY RELIGION – ALL OF IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY IN SCHOOLS? ALL STUDENTS SHOULD READ BOOKS OF ALL MAJOR RELIGIONS ON THIS EARTH. EXACT TRANSLATIONS OF OLD TESTAMENT, NEW TESTAMENT, TORA AND QURAN. THIS WILL BE VERY BENEFICIAL TO THEM. AND THERE WILL BE NO ISLAMOPHOBIA, ANTISEMITISM AND ALL KINDS OF B.. T TO BE USED IN POLITICS. NO FAKE NEWS EITHER. STUDENTS WILL LEARN ON THEIR OWN AND NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO MESS WITH THEIR HEADS. AND HEARTS. NO INDOCTRINATION. I GUESS ROBERT SPENCER WILL BE UNEMPLOYED THEN.