2:01PM
Daniel Pipes' racist campaign marks a victory
Issandr El Amrani
Daniel Pipes' fascist-style campaign against an Arabic-language school in Brooklyn and its principal is succeeding:
Perhaps someone can start a campaign against the Lycée Français in New York, where French-language education will have a tendency to pro-France content and will encourage cheese-eating and surrender-monkeying.
The Evening Bulletin - Stop The NYC Madrassa:Remember, his main objection is that "the more basic problems implicit in an Arabic-language school: the tendency to Islamist and Arabist content and proselytizing."
When Dhabah ("Debbie") Almontaser resigned on Aug. 10 as principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy, her action culminated a remarkable grass-roots campaign in which concerned citizens successfully criticized the New York City establishment. But the fight continues. The next step is to get the academy itself canceled.
Perhaps someone can start a campaign against the Lycée Français in New York, where French-language education will have a tendency to pro-France content and will encourage cheese-eating and surrender-monkeying.
Reader Comments (11)
I'm not commenting on the specifics of this case as I don't know enough about it. I have though, in the past, checked out various criticisms of Pipes along the lines of your "racist" and "fascist" and found them to be totally false.
I doubt he's suddenly given up his values.
I actually came to this site expecting to find rational thought rather than smear tactics.
I seem to recall several fascist movements/governments closing down schools (and other institutions) because of a theory that a certain language, ideology, religion or ethnic affiliation was seen as inherently negative or undesirable. So I don't think I am exaggerating, just as one would not be exaggerating to describe the militaristic occupation policies of Israel as fascist or racist - again, there are clear antecedents notably from 20th century movements that described themselves as fascist.
Issandr: organisations, groups and governments have goals that they attempt to reach by employing tactics. Groups with opposite goals may at times employ similar tactics and what you seem to be doing is cherry picking tactics to define goals of people you don’t like. It fails the test of logic but even so:
I make the point that people on what seems to be "your side," use the same tactics you criticise. Daniel Pipes often has to cancel or move speaking engagements and he is always heckled. Many similar speakers are shut down in North America often by threats of violence. There is a Saudi/Oil anti-Israel lobby that is far more powerful than the pro-Israeli one; so much so that it's not even widely recognised as existing. (Will you deny this?) The examples of lobbying that you present here are trivial by comparison.
The next argument is around the goals of the two sides. Not now though.
Groups with opposite goals may at times employ similar tactics and what you seem to be doing is cherry picking tactics to define goals of people you don’t like.
no he's not. sometimes the goals themselves speak to the motives of the people.
daniel pipes is working to shut down a school because it will be in arabic and teach about arab and islamic culture. why would you be against that unless you have a problem with arab language and/or culture? the campaign itself--including the fact that pipes has shown zero interest in shutting down any of NYS's other language academies--demonstrates pipes' bigotry.
the guy clearly has a problem with arabs as arabs (in fact, when i met him and mentioned my arabic studies, it was clear from the expression on his face). i'm not convinced that he really is a fascist (i.e. believes in a fascist form of government), but there's no question in my mind that he is a bigot.
Racist is probably technically inaccurate for Pipes, bigot would be better. He's quite queer paranoid tendencies with Muslims who are not safely denatured.
I particularly like to recall his silly Iranian led Comintern scare-mongering predictions from the early 90s.
Goes down well with the American Right Bolshy and religious bigot factions.
There is a Saudi/Oil anti-Israel lobby that is far more powerful than the pro-Israeli one
You've now lost all credibility, Brad. One only hopes you were being facetious.
Becon, Have you ever lived or worked in DC? While I'm not sure I agree with the statement entirely, the Oil lobby is extremely powerful, it just doesn't get as much attention and operates very differently. There is no need to write a treatise on this right now.
The other thing about Pipes is that if you ever hear him speak, he doesn't really say that much. It's just that when he gets in front of a camera he makes provocative statements, helped by those who think are being attacked by him. Yes, they make him out to be some wack-o which gets him more attention and more supporters on the right. I'm not saying I agree his policy. I'm just saying one should read and listen closely to what he says. He'll says, the US should confront militant Islam. So what? BUT it's these types of causes (from the article above) that gets him into trouble. that's just silliness.
hi i enjoyed the read
interesting read on this subject: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/895796.html
Get ready for some more cheese-eating and surrender-monkeying, and not just among upper east side elites:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/education/22french.html?_r=1&ref=education&oref=slogin