By John Perazzo
FrontPage Magazine | May 21, 2007

It is every American’s right to dissent from the domestic and foreign policies of their government. However, when their country is attacked by adversaries who have sworn its destruction, and American critics use the platforms of the enemy as launching pads for their own attacks, other Americans may legitimately wonder about the loyalties such choices reveal.

The Iraq war is a conflict over which well-meaning Americans may reasonably disagree. Some critics argue, for example, that the Bush administration did not show enough patience prior to invading Iraq; that not every peaceful alternative was explored; that the Iraq conflict is a misguided distraction from the effort to track down Osama bin Laden and stabilize Afghanistan; or that the war cannot be won. Supporters of the war will disagree, but they will also recognize that these positions can be held by patriotic Americans who wish their country well.

But this benign attitude towards opponents of the war is bound to change when “critics” characterize their commander-in-chief as Adolf Hitler, their government as the Third Reich, and their nation as “the world’s greatest terrorist state.” Or when they seize any pretext to portray their country as a ruthless aggressor in the war, while painting their country’s enemies sympathetically as its victims. When such hostile critics choose to make these charges from the media platforms of the enemy, their enterprise looks less like dissent within a shared community than a psychological warfare campaign to promote their countrymen’s defeat. Continue reading “Platforms of the Enemy” →

By Cinnamon Stillwell
Campus Watch | May 16, 2007

Stanford Middle East history professor and former president of the Middle East Studies Association Joel Beinin is known for letting his one-sided political perspectives invade the classroom. As former Stanford professor Steven Zipperstein told The Jewish Weekly of Northern California in 2002, “It’s said that Joel Beinin doesn’t believe in balance as an intrinsically crucial goal in academic life. “The charge is accurate, and he would acknowledge it, I think.”

Alyssa Lappen wrote about Beinin for Campus Watch in 2004 and she encapsulates his less-than-savory viewpoints in the following passage:

He denounces American “imperialism” on Al-Jazeera Television. A former Zionist, he refers to jihadist suicide bombers as “martyrs.” He praised Mideast scholars for ignoring the issue of terrorism, and he regularly repeats the most twisted and paranoid claims of Islamist regimes as though they were historical fact. If one individual can showcase all the flaws of Middle East Studies in academia, Joel Beinin is that man.

Although the exact details are somewhat murky due to Stanford’s policy of not allowing colleagues to discuss personnel moves, according to Beinin, he’s “officially on extended leave of absence [from Stanford] until the end of 2008.” In the interim, Beinin has taken up residence at the American University in Cairo, Egypt, where he is the director of Middle East studies. Continue reading “Stanford Prof. Joel Beinin Dredges Up False ‘Death Threat’ Claim Against L.A. Journalist” →