Punch Sulzberger!

Didja see the New York Times on Tuesday? Me neither.

What we missed:

Editor’s note: To spread awareness of the eliminationist agenda of the anti-Israel Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) movement and its elite supporters in the American university system, the David Horowitz Freedom Center placed the following ad in the op-ed section of the April 24, 2012 edition of The New York Times. The ad elicited objections from numerous Times readers, some of which are printed below the ad along with responses from David Horowitz.

I read your ad on today’s Op-ed page of the NY Times.

As someone who does not want anyone driven into the sea, but as someone who does not believe in bigotry, I have thrown up my hands about the Middle East. I have read quotes in the NY Times from speeches by both the Iranian President and the Israeli Foreign Minister. Except for substituting/changing one word: Jew or Muslim, they were nearly identical, full of what I would call outright bigotry. I do not see anyone leading the charge to get rid of the bigotry of the Israeli Foreign Minister, as they should as far as I am concerned. [You can get rid of the Iranian President as far as I am concerned.] I remember when some leaders in the Middle East were not bigots, something that does not appear to be the case today. Abba Eban, for example. The former King of Jordan, whose name is escaping me at the moment.

It would seem to me that if any country has a bigot as its leader or foreign minister, that country should be called on it, correct?

Reply to Robert Khoury from David Horowitz:

Excuse me, but Palestinian leaders have openly called for the extermination of the Jews and the obliteration of the Jewish state in so many words. Where is the Israeli leader who has said anything remotely comparable? Israel’s leaders have offered the Palestinians a state more than once, and continue to promote a two-state solution. Name me one Palestinian leader who supports the existence of the Jewish state. So don’t tell me there’s anything remotely parallel on both sides of this conflict. There is one side that wants peace and has already made enormous sacrifices and compromises to achieve peace (surrender of the Sinai, failure to annex the aggressors territories on the West Bank and in Gaza, unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and so forth). On the other side are religious xenophobes who have conducted a 60 year war whose stated goal is to destroy the Jewish state and who have either openly called for or have not condemned calls from Hamas, Hizbollah and Iran for the extermination of the Jews.

Response from Times reader Jay Gillen:

Friends,

As a Jew and supporter of Israel, I was concerned and saddened by your advertisement today on the NY Times op-ed page.

I fully understand your disagreement with the divestment movement, and I also understand the parallel with Nazi and other anti-Semitic economic attacks on Jews.

It is wrong, however, to equate the divestment movement with anti-Semitism.

There must be a way to criticize Israeli policy without being labelled an anti-Semite or supporter of anti-Semites. We must enlarge the dialogue about Israel in such a way that people can speak together, act politically without violence, communicate, and not attribute motives that put the “other” into the category of evil.

I think you agree with me, and in fact that you reject the divestment movement precisely because it seems to attack Israelis as “evil”. There are anti-Semites. They do hate Jews and Israel. They do take comfort from the divestment movement. But the professors you mention are not anti-Semites and do not hate Jews. You should be able to distinguish them from others. And you should not hate them, even if you believe they hate you. Disagree with them, if you choose; but disagree on the merits of their arguments, not by associating them with the truly evil. Let us have done with that as a tactic, on our side at least.

Thank you for your attention.

Jay Gillen, Ph.D.
Baltimore, Maryland

Reply from David Horowitz:

With all due respect you need to familiarize yourself with the sponsors, spokespeople and agendas of the BDS movement before drawing such facile and comforting conclusions. This is Hamas in action and its agenda is the liberation of “Palestine” from the river to the sea – in other words the destruction of the Jewish state. It is not about policies of the Israeli government which can be amended. It is about the “crime” of Israel’s very existence. To support such a movement you have to be ignorant and a dupe, or an anti-Semite. I grant you that there is a sucker born every minute and there may be several in this movement. But the organizers of the BDS conference are not among them.

As a recovering liberal myself, I admire and respect David Horowitz. But I wish he were a slightly more articulate spokesman for Israel and Zionism. The argument is there to be made that anti-Zionism IS antisemitism, that arguing at the edges of ghettoization is just spelling Holocaust with a lower-case
H. The case for Israel—Judea and Samaria—is overwhelming, whether haters and bigots want to believe it or not. So, make the case. Don’t let them undermine you. Undermine them.

The ad is good; the responses could have been better.

2 Comments »

  1. DR. BERNHARD ROSENBERG said,

    August 19, 2012 @ 7:50 am

    Dr Bernard Rosenberg is one of the best teachers at Rutgers. He is getting the RU Screw. After 24 years as a part time lecturer in Rutgers University he might not teach again next semester. He refuses to suck up to the administration and treats his students with love and care. If he is not listed as a professor next semester, don’t sign up for a public speaking class- OR YOU WILL GET THE RU SCREWED!!!

  2. DR. BERNHARD ROSENBERG said,

    August 19, 2012 @ 8:06 am

    To Whom it May Concern,

    I am a concerned Rutgers student writing about a really influential professor I had in the Public Speaking class I took in the Fall of 2011. In this class, I learned how to stop repeating phrases like “umm” and “so” in my speeches. He taught me how to cater to the audience, be concise, be clear, and be coherent. His style of teaching, such as through offering criticism during the students speeches allow for students to gain confidence and improve on the spot. He took extra time preparing me for an interview I had for a scholarship and I was able to get to the finalist stage.

    I have recently been in contact with him and found out that he will no longer be teaching the class for Fall of 2012 due to his ‘skills’ and ‘qualifications’ that did not meet the new course content. Being his student for Fall 2011, I can tell you that he adjusted his class, even though he did not agree in entirety with the new curriculum. The emphasis in Dr. Rosenberg’s class was still in the oral aspect as it should be in a PUBLIC SPEAKING course. The new curriculum seemed to take emphasis away from the oral aspect. For example from having students regularly reading long passages from a book, taking away time from practicing speech or watching effective speakers. However, he routinely checked his students written rough drafts to make sure they complied with an effective speech and asked his students to read from the new book. As students in his class, we found of more benefit to read from the book that Dr. Rosenberg offered, which though being concise, allowed us more time to PRACTICE speech. You do not learn how to effectively use hand gestures and avoid filler words through reading a book. I know that not having Dr. Rosenberg teaching Public Speaking is going to have a negative impact for the course.

    What makes me upset even more is that how Dr. Rosenberg was given very short notice (since June) about not teaching this Fall. As some one who has been at Rutgers for decades this is not morally correct. You might say that I am just one student, but if you look at Dr. Rosenberg’s student reviews you will find many other people that would agree with me. I would like to see a great Professor return to Rutgers and at least be further notified what are these vague ‘qualifications’ that Dr. Rosenberg does not possess?

    I look forward to hearing from you,

    Zain Siddiqui

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment