Middle East Studies Director Believes “Zionist Plot” Behind Plan to Partition Iraq, Views Hamas “With Great Pleasure,” – And Raises Funds for Mid-East Program, While CMC’s Administration Ignores Charges
The Claremont Independent has learned that Professor of Arabic Bassam Frangieh, head of the Middle East Studies department at Claremont McKenna College, actively supports Hamas, as well as Hezbollah as the newspaper reported in April 2010. The news comes days after a November 9 CMC Alumni Association event the home of Casey Borman CMC ’97 and amidst initial inquiries by the college into setting up a study abroad program headed by Frangieh in the Middle East.
Professional translations of several dozen Arabic documents, including statements, petitions, and interviews, show Frangieh's views in support of Hamas and Hezbollah.
- In a May 26 2006 interview after the controversial election of Hamas in the Palestinian territories, Frangieh celebrated, saying that he “view[s] Hamas with great pleasure.”“Hamas might be able to produce the beginning of salvation,” he told an interviewer. “I wonder what else would the Arabs have without Hamas and Hezbollah? Nothing. Except humiliation. I congratulate Hamas on its victory.” Earlier in the interview, he lamented the harassment he endured at the hands of Syrian intelligence, while Israelis lived safe within miles of their border. [Emphasis added]
The U.S., the U.K., the E.U., Japan, Canada, and Israel all classify Hamas as a terrorist organization. Jordan, where the proposed Middle East study abroad program will likely be located, banned Hamas entirely in 1999. According to the State Department, Hamas is funded by Iran, Palestinian expats, and “private benefactors” in Saudi Arabia and other Arab states.
- During the summer 2006 war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, Frangieh signed a pro-Hezbollah, anti-Israel petition that condemned Israel as a “Zionist killing machine”. Among other things, the petition called for a worldwide boycott of Israeli academics and institutions. According to its signatories, the "Zionist state" was "motivated by historical ambitions vis-à-vis Lebanese territory and waters and by a racist supremacist ideology that denigrates the indigenous population [of Lebanon], their culture, and their very existence." The petitioners called upon Lebanon to adopt Hezbollah - which it terms the "Lebanese Resistance" - as its legitimate army. The signatories deny that Israeli retaliation was due to the thousands of rockets fired indiscriminately on Israeli population centers beginning in July 2006 and the simultaneous kidnapping and killing of two Israeli soldiers near the border – actions described as part of a “heroic operation carried out by HizbAllah” in the petition Frangieh signed. [Emphasis added]
- In 2007, Frangieh signed a petition condemning a nonbinding U.S. Senate Resolution supported by then-Senator Biden dividing Iraq into three separate autonomous regions. The petition called the resolution a “Zionist plot,” led by “Zionist masters” who work with “Cowboys” and “flee[] their countries in search of riches,” thereby purposefully undermining a “strong Iraq” and dragging it into a “barbaric war.”
The term “Zionist plot” evokes language eerily similar from the conspiratorial Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a document which suggested a worldwide Jewish-run cabal. By extension, Frangieh’s support of that petition suggests he thinks that current Vice President Joe Biden, who supported the senate resolution, is part of that “Zionist plot” – a rather strong charge for a director of a program that allegedly hopes to train the next generation of diplomats, as the Fall 2009 CMC Magazine promises.
Unfortunately when it comes to anti-peace bias and ideology, Professor Frangieh’s academic work shows that his support of terrorists and their causes runs deep. Of course, that all of these documents were found with a mere Google search suggests that Claremont McKenna’s selection committee may be in need of serious reform – and it is to Professor Frangieh’s “academic” record that we shall now turn.
Dead Poets Society and Jihad
Frangieh’s Los Angeles’ alumni talk on November 9th was titled, “Poetry: The Soul of Arabs,” according to the school’s website. “Poetry reflects the identity, culture and history of Arabs,” Frangieh is quoted as saying on a promotional brochure. “Repeated verse changes consciousness and views, as it is the rejection of everything ugly in life.” But Frangieh’s writing on Arab “poet-martyrs,” reveal that some Arab poets embrace the ugly – and that Frangieh enthusiastically embraces them.
In a 2000 anthologized essay he wrote titled, “Modern Arabic Poetry: Vision and Reality,” he celebrates the work of dead poet, ‘Abd al-Rahim Mahmud. Mahmud’s poems “The Martyr” and “A Call to Jihad” inspire terrorists and their sympathizers, who often name their children after him. (Shadi Abd al-Rahim Mahmud al-Kahlut, for instance, was a Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative killed on his way to commit a suicide attack against Israel in 2001.)
Mahmud’s poem, 'The Martyr,' became internationally known when Israel during the 1993 Oslo Accords demonstrated that Mahmud's work, among other poets, made its way into sixth grade Palestinian curriculum where it was accused of inspiring hate. The poem also found its way into a 2001 Saudi Arabian textbook for 7th graders.
Given this history, you’d think that Professor Frangieh would be critical, but to him, Mahmud is a “courageous poet and a man of purpose who changed his vision into reality and the reality of his life into a myth – and he shall remain a symbol of heroism and pride for his people.” And lest there be any doubt about it, Frangieh considers himself one such person, telling the aforementioned interviewer that he is a “Palestinian,” notwithstanding his birth in “exile.”
According to Frangieh’s essay, Arabs’ souls have suffered “the most devastating blow” with “the creation of the state of Israel and the transformation of the Palestinians into a stateless people.” (He ignores that Israel allows Palestinians not living in the territories to vote and serve as members of the Knesset.) And most abhorrently, Frangieh condones suicide attacks and untold bloodletting on p. 249:
Nietzsche wrote, “The ideal condition cannot be achieved by dreaming, we must fight and struggle to achieve it.” Clearly, the fights and struggles of isolated poets and individuals have not succeeded in making change. Even if the best one hundred Arab poets loaded themselves with dynamite and exploded in the streets of Arab capitals, it would not be enough. For real change to come about, thousands of people will have to die; thousands must martyr themselves. It appears that only massive revolution will succeed in overturning the corrupt regimes of the Arab world. Only then can significant and radical change take place. [Emphasis added]
That “radical change” is, unfortunately, the Islamic movements Hamas and Hezbollah, to whom Frangieh has given repeated support.
All of these revelations cast still more doubt on whether the director of Claremont’s burgeoning Arabic and Middle East programs supports Middle East peace. And if the program does not support peace, what does it seek to promote?
These questions will have to be answered sooner, rather than later. The school is currently in the early stages of raising money for a study abroad program in Jordan. Bassam Frangieh will be heading up that program and has already taken a public role in fund raising for it. Given his support for terrorist regimes, let’s hope that Claremont McKenna is vetting the money raised more carefully than it did Frangieh’s academic record.
Indeed, Professor Frangieh’s lack of serious academic publications was part of the reason that Yale University initially denied him a tenure-track position in 2005 and that nearly prompted him to depart for the University of Delaware. According to the Yale Herald, Deputy Provost Charles Long said that Frangieh, like works published by most language lectors, lacked “substantive original research” to enable him to put him on the tenure-track.
Frangieh himself told the Yale Herald that he wanted to offer courses in Arabic languages and literatures, which were “[his] specialty.” If that’s the case, what is Frangieh doing teaching, “Trends and Movements in the Modern Middle East”? Why can a poetry scholar, like Frangieh, teach a required course to all Middle East studies majors that purports to study “the emergence of the Modern Middle East,” “Islamic political movements” and that draws “concepts from political science, history, language and literature”? Is he really qualified to teach such subjects?
****
The Claremont Independent unequivocally supports academic freedom, but Frangieh’s – and the other petitions’—calls for boycotts of Israeli academia are designed not to further academic freedom: They are designed to end it. We also support the free inquiry of ideas, but supporting terrorist organizations that assassinate political leaders and that kill American servicemen and civilians of all nationalities, ought to raise serious questions about what kind of campus we want to be and what we want to teach.
It is morally repugnant for President Gann to compare Professor Ken Miller’s arcane ballot testimony in the Proposition 8 trial to Frangieh’s support for terrorist groups that kill civilians. Indeed, Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, put it candidly: "if [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” Do we really want a professor who supports an organization run by a man who wants nothing less than a second Holocaust, funded by a country whose leader denies there ever was a first? Do we want that professor, with those views, running – and helping to raise funds for – an extension of our school in the Middle East? And how does any of this promote peace?
Professor P. Edward Haley, Frangieh’s colleague in the Middle East Studies department at Claremont McKenna and an analyst of the Middle East conflict, described Hamas and Hezbollah as “radical movements” that make peace difficult. “Hamas,” he wrote in September 14, 2010Christian Science Monitor, is “a terrorist organization in Washington’s eyes.” Professor Haley is hardly a pro-Israel scholar, but in the past, has conceded Hamas’s and Hezbollah’s troubled record.
At the very least, Claremont McKenna’s administration owes us an explanation as to why someone with those views was hired and why they have been so silent now that those views are widely known. Ariel Katz CMC ’13 and president of Claremont Students for Israel, offers a suggestion: “Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations, and the school should treat the endorsement of these terrorist organizations as they would treat the endorsement of any other terrorist organization. As to what that entails, that is up to CMC.”
But Claremont McKenna’s community deserves more. Endorsing the murder of civilians ought to be grounds for dismissal. It is not academic freedom to support slaughter.
Will Claremont McKenna’s administration continue to be silent?
We’re waiting.
Charles C. Johnson is editor emeritus of The Claremont Independent.
Some of the original documents
Arabic language sources:
an interview
30 comments:
"Supporting slaughter" and "Endorsing the murder of civilians" are grounds for dismissal?
Then we ought to fire most of the Government department for supporting the War in Iraq, which continues to be hugely murderous.
That you equate support for two terrorist groups and anti-Semitic petitions with support for a war that majorities of this country supported testifies to your underlying lack of moral clarity.
Not a single professor in the government department endorsed suicide bombing, as Frangieh does, or the murder of the innocents . I'll give you a chance to justify yourself, but I consider that comment libelous.
Of course you are just changing the subject now rather than dealing with the fact that Frangieh's views are atrocious.
Hi Charles,
Thank you for writing this article. We have corresponded here before, and I truly do enjoy reading your articles and often agree with some of your opinions.
This comment is coming from me as the president of a newly formed 5C club called Claremont Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
I would like to focus mostly on one aspect of the article, and that is the topic of the academic, economic, and cultural boycott of Israeli products and academics. I want to highlight to motivations behind such a boycott and how this boycott has been and will continue to be effective.
Israel is an apartheid state. You do not need to look hard to find uncanny and disturbing similarities between the way Israel treats Palestinians and how South Africa treated non-whites. The UN, among others, have made this comparison. Separate roads, separate facilities, unequal rights, even for Palestinians living in Israel, the wall being built between the territories, extensive checkpoints for Palestinians. I can go on and on. It all comes down to one fact: Israel is an apartheid state.
And so the boycott is modeled after the boycott of South African economic and academic institutions. Apply pressure to the government and things might change. And conditions did change in South Africa, so why not try with Israel?
These boycott tactics were successful in applying pressure to apartheid South Africa and they will be successful in applying pressure to the apartheid system in Israel. In fact, one of the long term goals of Claremont Students for Justice in Palestine is to push for a Claremont Consortium-wide boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement of Israeli institutions as well as institutions that benefit from the illegal occupation in Palestine.
On a separate note, I find it amusing that you describe Hamas and Hezbollah as "terrorist organizations that assassinate political leaders and kill American servicemen and civilians of all nationalities." I would like to point out that you are describing Israel as well. This summer, in case you didn't know, the Israeli Defense Forces killed 8 Turkish civilians as well as a 19 year old American citizen on board a flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to the besieged territory of Gaza. Also, Israel used faked British passports to carry out an assassination of their own at a hotel in Dubai. And this is before we consider the many thousands of Palestinian civilians murdered by the Israelis over the years.
Thank you, and Free Palestine,
Lowell R.
Claremont Students for Justice in Palestine
I am happy to provide sources and further reading if you would like.
Charles,
Being anti-Zionist is NOT the same as being anti-Semitic.
And, by the way, supporting Israel is also supporting the murder and subjugation and down right extermination of civilians.
Lowell
Lowell,
I hereby challenge you as president of said organization to a debate next semester. We can arrange a mutually agreeable time and publicize the event together.
You can expect a full post in the near future (remind me if I fail to deliver!) on why Israeli is not an apartheid state.
Also, the language used in the petition which he signed is highly questionable. It does suggest anti-Semitism, not merely anti-Zionism.
Thank you for the offer of a debate. I unfortunately will be studying abroad next semester. I will look into finding another club member (many of whom are Jewish, by the way) to participate in such an event.
I look forward to reading that post!
Lowell
I'm a nontheist (of sorts) who thinks the whole notion of a Holy Land is a little silly, so I haven't a problem at all imagining that most of the members of those opposed to a Jewish state are American Jews.
Have your people contact me. If you'd like, you can submit some of your literature and I'll use that as the crux of my piece.
Why is suicide bombing worse than bombing via airplanes and helicopters, as the US does? If you don't have a huge military, suicide bombing achieves pretty much the same goal. (They're equally reprehensible, generally speaking, but the means of killing innocents is irrelevant.)
And besides, it's literally impossible to separate the War in Iraq from the murder of innocents. Yes, you can willfully ignore it, but that doesn't make it ok. If you endorse the War in Iraq, you are, necessarily, endorsing the murder of innocents.
This is neither a change of subject nor a Tu Quoque fallacy. If you're subjecting Frangieh to a certain standard, you'd better subject the rest of the faculty to it as well, or else you're being ad hoc.
Did you read the quotation from Frangieh? Of course not.
You're forgetting the half a dozen times Israel has offered to do everything it can to get peace and ignoring his reprehensible statements.
Oh, and by the way, most of the government is a critic of the Iraq war's subsequent prosecution. Read Iraq and the Neocons by Charles R. Kesler.http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1383/article_detail.asp
"made its way into sixth grade Palestinian curriculum and inspiring hate."
Edits needed.
Thanks, last anonymous. I'll correct the text.
It's unclear from the post - it's clear that Frangieh has supported Hamas in petitions and written works but just to clarify, he hasn't supported them financially? The first time I read the post title I thought that he was raising money for Hamas, not CMC's program.
Kevin, insofar as we know, he is not a financial supporter. He is raising money for cmc's program in jordan and has gone to a cmc alumni program.
Kevin, insofar as we know, he is not a financial supporter. He is raising money for cmc's program in jordan and has gone to a cmc alumni program.
Lowell R,
I think signing off with "Free Palestine" makes it clear what your views are on this matter and makes it hard for us to take you seriously as an objective observer.
On another note, what exactly does it mean to "free Palestine?" There hasn't been a Palestinian state in modern history. Between Ottoman occupation, the British Mandate, and modern Israel, they've never had an autonomous government. Would a two-state solution constitute freeing them? Would improving the quality of life for Palestinian citizens of Israel satisfy what you're looking for? While I agree that the situation in the region is a nightmare right now and that Palestinians are bearing much of the brunt of the problems, I'm not sure how "freeing Palestine" will accomplish peace in the Middle East.
I appreciate your desire to improve the plight of Palestinians, but please explain to me how a boycott will accomplish that? As a Jew (who happens to be proud, but highly critical of Israel), I would look no further than Gaza as an example of how boycotts are an anti-productive tactic. To achieve long-term peace, the answer is not to bring down Israel and free Palestine. It is to sit both sides down together (which Hamas is making difficult, but I'll agree that Netanyahu and right-wing Israel politicians are making just as hard) and come up with a two-state solution or a dramatically reformed Israel in which both groups share the country and enjoy equal rights and opportunities.
On another note, there is a difference between "Israel has made some incredibly poor choices in the past few years and needs to stop so that we can end the violence, see some reforms enacted in Israel, and make life better for both sides" and "for real change to come about, thousands of people will have to die."
The first describes the way that I, and most educated observers think. It is the peaceful and productive way to create stability in Israel. The second is downright scary and is not the message I want people at my school to be sending.
As a Jewish student who has taken classes with Professor Frangieh, I find this criticism misplaced and irrelevant. I have never felt uncomfortable or that Professor Frangieh is anti-Semitic in anyway. Jewish students make up a large percentage of the Arabic program, and I don't know of anyone who has felt attacked. Last year, I started a Hebrew program through Hillel, which Professor Frangieh supported. He let me send out an email to the entire program and said that learning Hebrew would compliment studies of Arabic. He also invited Rabbi Daveen Litwin to speak to the Arabic program. Regardless of his political beliefs, Professor Frangieh is not anti-Semitic.
Professor Frangieh's wife, Aleta Wenger, is CMC's director for International Programs. She is a retired Foreign Service Officer with the US State Department. One of her tasks was to tell Al-Jazeera that the US suspected them of playing hidden messages for terrorists, which ended up being untrue (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2005/jun/29/iraqandthemedia.usnews). It seems strange to me that a former US Foreign Service Officer would marry a staunch supporter of terrorism. As a side note, although it should not matter, Professor Frangieh is a Christian.
Also, the 2006 petition that Professor Frangieh signed was also signed by 455 other intellectuals, including professors at Oxford University, UCLA, Boston University, MIT, Yale, and Princeton. The 2007 petition was also signed by a large number of prominent people. Regardless of the controversial political beliefs expressed in the petitions, everyone who signed them obviously thought they were well within their right to the freedom of speech.
Furthermore, there is absolutely no connection between Professor Frangieh raising funds for a summer program in the Middle East and raising funds for terrorism. I realize that you did not say this directly but the juxtaposition and word choice seemed to send the message that the two were connected. The Summer Program in Jordan will be a valuable experience for whoever is selected to go. The program consists of two classes and an internship. Some people will probably be interning at the US Embassy. The money is going to subsidize plane tickets and living expenses, not to terrorists.
The argument that Professor Frangieh shouldn't have taught "The Martyr" partly because it is used in sixth grade Palestinian curriculum and a 2001 Saudi Arabian textbook for 7th graders makes no sense. I, as someone who is studying the Middle East, want to learn about current cultural artifacts so that I can understand what is actually going on. The fact that the poem is taught makes it more relevant for our education. Your view that this poem should not be taught suggests that you believe that a comprehensive education should be sacrificed to protect our moral sensibilities.
Although Professor Frangieh, may have not published enough to get tenure at Yale, he is about to publish a new Arabic textbook. He’s published more than any of the candidates that have come to get jobs at CMC in the Arabic program. The Trends and Movements in the Middle East Course is primarily an advanced Arabic course. It is taught entirely in Arabic. Because of this, I think Professor Frangieh is extremely qualified to teach this course. However, if he is not, the solution would be to take a constructive approach and hire a new, more qualified professor, not to attack Frangieh.
Regardless of all of this, Bassam Frangieh is a phenomenal teacher. The Arabic program has grown in a short number of years to include over 100 students. Dismissing Professor Frangieh for his political views, which in no way interfere with his teaching, would be a huge loss for this school.
As a Jewish student who has taken classes with Professor Frangieh, I find this criticism misplaced and irrelevant. I have never felt uncomfortable or that Professor Frangieh is anti-Semitic in anyway. Jewish students make up a large percentage of the Arabic program, and I don't know of anyone who has felt attacked. Last year, I started a Hebrew program through Hillel, which Professor Frangieh supported. He let me send out an email to the entire program and said that learning Hebrew would compliment studies of Arabic. He also invited Rabbi Daveen Litwin to speak to the Arabic program. Regardless of his political beliefs, Professor Frangieh is not anti-Semitic.
Professor Frangieh's wife, Aleta Wenger, is CMC's director for International Programs. She is a retired Foreign Service Officer with the US State Department. One of her tasks was to tell Al-Jazeera that the US suspected them of playing hidden messages for terrorists, which ended up being untrue (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2005/jun/29/iraqandthemedia.usnews). It seems strange to me that a former US Foreign Service Officer would marry a staunch supporter of terrorism. As a side note, although it should not matter, Professor Frangieh is a Christian.
Also, the 2006 petition that Professor Frangieh signed was also signed by 455 other intellectuals, including professors at Oxford University, UCLA, Boston University, MIT, Yale, and Princeton. The 2007 petition was also signed by a large number of prominent people. Regardless of the controversial political beliefs expressed in the petitions, everyone who signed them obviously thought they were well within their right to the freedom of speech.
To be continued in the next post...
Continued:
There is absolutely no connection between Professor Frangieh raising funds for a summer program in the Middle East and raising funds for terrorism. I realize that you did not say this directly but the juxtaposition and word choice seemed to send the message that the two were connected. The Summer Program in Jordan will be a valuable experience for whoever is selected to go. The program consists of two classes and an internship. Some people will probably be interning at the US Embassy. The money is going to subsidize plane tickets and living expenses, not to terrorists.
The argument that Professor Frangieh shouldn't have taught "The Martyr" partly because it is used in sixth grade Palestinian curriculum and a 2001 Saudi Arabian textbook for 7th graders makes no sense. I, as someone who is studying the Middle East, want to learn about current cultural artifacts so that I can understand what is actually going on. The fact that the poem is taught makes it more relevant for our education. Your view that this poem should not be taught suggests that you believe that a comprehensive education should be sacrificed to protect our moral sensibilities.
Although Professor Frangieh, may have not published enough to get tenure at Yale, he is about to publish a new Arabic textbook. He’s published more than any of the candidates that have come to get jobs at CMC in the Arabic program. The Trends and Movements in the Middle East Course is primarily an advanced Arabic course. It is taught entirely in Arabic. Because of this, I think Professor Frangieh is extremely qualified to teach this course. However, if he is not, the solution would be to take a constructive approach and hire a new, more qualified professor, not to attack Frangieh.
Regardless of all of this, Bassam Frangieh is a phenomenal teacher. The Arabic program has grown in a short number of years to include over 100 students. Dismissing Professor Frangieh for his political views, which in no way interfere with his teaching, would be a huge loss for this school.
Jennifer,
Hebrew was not allowed as a program to be taught in the Middle East Studies until the last article I wrote. I'm not Jewish (obviously) and I'm probably an atheist, but the language that was used in that petition is anti-Semitic for all the reasons I have already stated. You can't suggest that America's foreign policy is hijacked by a "Zionist plot" without being very clear of the kind of response that would garner. That he signed such a statement anyways indicates one of two things. 1) Either he knew the term would be hurtful and used it anyways. 2) He did not know the term and should explain himself. He hasn't. The burden has now shifted.
Daveen Litwin did great work addressing the plight of the refusenik Jews, which I think we can all agree is a humanitarian issue, but he is not featured as one of the speakers that Frangieh brought to campus and he did not speak on Israel issues.
The link you provided does not work, but it wouldn't be the first time, nor would it be the last that a State Department official married someone with views hostile to the United States or even harbored those views himself/herself. I'm curious as to why you mention that Frangieh is Christian. I mentioned in myself in the first article, but it is not germane. As I mentioned earlier, I am an atheist and yet strongly believe that Israel has a right to exist and strongly oppose terrorist groups that kill Americans and Israelis.
You are correct that many academics signed the 2006 petition, but that doesn't excuse Frangieh's having signed it. Nor does it excuse his having been silent on it. No one is questioning his right to sign whatever he wants. What we are questioning is whether or not it would be such a good idea to have him teaching such a course as "Trends in the Middle East" or whether we need more oversight of the speakers he brings to campus and how it was that someone with such obviously anti-peace views was allowed into a program in the first place.
RE: continued:
I would appreciate it if you do not say I said things I never said. Let me be very clear. I do not believe that Bassam Frangieh is funding terrorism, but rather, that he is funding a group with nebulous sources of funding from Arab and other sources. I am very worried that this funding will come with strings attached that will sully the reputation of a school I love.
I am very worried that he is speaking out of both sides of his mouth to some of the Arab groups that may be funding this new program, including the government of Kuwait. The curriculum for that program should be very careful surveyed. I am even more worried that President Gann is enabling that and that that was part of the reason she gave an honorary degree to the Kuwaiti foreign minister in the high hopes that he would fund that program.
It would not be the first American program to be radicalized and so if we proceed, which I have to confess based on the evidence I have presented which stands as is, it ought to be done with a level of care that is lacking from our administration.
I never said that the poem should not be taught, only that it shouldn't be taught in the gushing manner in which Frangieh teaches it. See the actual source and read the actual article before you attribute things to me which I never said, please.
RE: continued:
I would appreciate it if you do not say I said things I never said. Let me be very clear. I do not believe that Bassam Frangieh is funding terrorism, but rather, that he is funding a group with nebulous sources of funding from Arab and other sources. I am very worried that this funding will come with strings attached that will sully the reputation of a school I love.
I am very worried that he is speaking out of both sides of his mouth to some of the Arab groups that may be funding this new program, including the government of Kuwait. The curriculum for that program should be very careful surveyed. I am even more worried that President Gann is enabling that and that that was part of the reason she gave an honorary degree to the Kuwaiti foreign minister in the high hopes that he would fund that program.
It would not be the first American program to be radicalized and so if we proceed, which I have to confess based on the evidence I have presented which stands as is, it ought to be done with a level of care that is lacking from our administration.
I never said that the poem should not be taught, only that it shouldn't be taught in the gushing manner in which Frangieh teaches it. See the actual source and read the actual article before you attribute things to me which I never said, please.
1. Hebrew wasn't taught as part of the Middle East Studies major because it is a brand new program. There has not been sufficient resources to hire Hebrew and Farsi professors. There aren't even enough Arabic professors yet. Maybe, if the program continues to receive support, it could grow to include these other languages. The program I was referring to was a not-for-credit program sponsored by Hillel.
2. I hope you did not think that I was in anyway implicating your religion in my response. I don't really see how that is relevant.
3. Daveen Litwin is a woman. She is the rabbi for Hillel at the Claremont Colleges.
4. The link I posted does work. Maybe you copied and pasted it wrong. I just checked it.
5. In my comment, I mentioned that I also do not think that Professor Frangieh's Christianity should be relevant in any way. I debated over whether to mention that. I did decide to mentioned it because in the US there is a common, though mistaken, association of terrorism with Islam. I don't believe that this association is correct in any way, but I was hoping that this fact might help to disassociate Professor Frangieh from terrorism for some people. You say yourself that it is not germane, but you mentioned it in an earlier article too. I couldn't find the article, but I am guessing that if you mentioned it, you thought that it was applicable in some context as well.
6. I also believe that Israel should not be destroyed and do not condone the murder of innocent people, regardless of their nationality. I just want to make sure you didn't take my defense of Professor Frangieh to mean that I support terrorism.
7. Just because someone does not respond to your articles does not make you right. People may not respond to your attacks because they do not want to legitimize in any way what you have said.
8. In my response, I was careful to say that I knew that you did not say that Professor Frangieh was funding terrorism. You can re-read my comment. I was refuting what your paragraph composition implied to an earlier commenter.
9. I read your article very carefully. I also read all the petitions and links that you put in it. I am genuinely sorry that I misrepresented your beliefs on that issue though. It wasn't clear to me on my first reading that you were not opposed to the poem being taught.
10. The speakers brought to campus have not been "anti-peace." The Bahraini guest was Jewish. Imam Zaid Shakir spoke about how terrorism is forbidden in Islam. We also visited the Levantine Center, whose mission statement includes a stance on Middle Eastern Peace:
"Many Israelis and Palestinians have come to the conclusion that there is simply no violent solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful and just negotiated settlement will bring about change in the region. With them, Levantine Cultural Center supports only non-violent approaches to cross-cultural understanding. All of our programs emphasize the need for coexistence and taking shared responsibility." (http://www.levantinecenter.org/center/mission-statement)
Bassam Frangieh and the Middle Eastern Studies program is clearly not "anti-peace."
1. Hebrew was not taught as part of the Middle East Studies major because it is a brand new program. There has not been sufficient resources to hire Hebrew and Farsi professors. The program I was referring to was a not-for-credit program sponsored by Hillel.
2. I hope you did not think that I was in anyway implicating your religion in my response. I do not really see how that is relevant. However, I was wondering how it is obvious that you are not Jewish.
3. Daveen Litwin is a woman. She is the rabbi for Hillel at the Claremont Colleges.
4. The link I posted does work. Maybe you copied and pasted it wrong. I just checked it.
5. In my comment, I mentioned that I do not think that Professor Frangieh is Christian should be relevant in any way. I debated over whether to mention that. I did decided to mention it because in the US there is a common, though mistaken, association of terrorism with Islam. I don't believe that this association is in any way correct, but I was hoping that this fact might help to disassociate Professor Frangieh from terrorism for some people. You say yourself that it is not germane, but you mentioned it in an earlier article too. I couldn't find the article but I am guessing that if you mentioned it, you thought that it was applicable in some context as well.
6. I also believe that Israel should not be destroyed and do not condone the murder of innocent people, regardless of their nationality. I just want to make sure you didn't take me defense of Professor Frangieh to mean that I support terrorism.
7. Just because someone does not respond to your articles does not make your allegation correct. People may not reply to your attacks because they do not want to legitimize your attack in any way.
8. In my response, I was careful to say that I knew that you did not say that Professor Frangieh was funding terrorism. You can re-read my comment. I was refuting what your paragraph composition implied to an earlier commenter.
9. I read your article very carefully. I also read all the petitions and links that you put in it. I am genuinely sorry I misrepresented your beliefs on the poetry issue though. It wasn't clear to me on my first reading.
10. The speakers brought to campus have not been "anti-peace." The Bahranian guest was Jewish. Imam Zaid Shakir spoke about how terrorism is forbidden in Islam. We also visited the Levantine Center, whose mission statement includes a stance on Middle Eastern Peace:
"Many Israelis and Palestinians have come to the conclusion that there is simply no violent solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful and just negotiated settlement will bring about change in the region. With them, Levantine Cultural Center supports only non-violent approaches to cross-cultural understanding. All of our programs emphasize the need for coexistence and taking shared responsibility."
Bassam Frangieh and the Middle Eastern Studies program is clearly not "anti-peace."
1. Hebrew was not taught as part of the Middle East Studies major because it is a brand new program. There has not been sufficient resources to hire Hebrew and Farsi professors. The program I was referring to was a not-for-credit program sponsored by Hillel.
2. I hope you did not think that I was in anyway implicating your religion in my response. I don't really see how that is relevant. However, how is it obvious that you are not Jewish?
3. Daveen Litwin is a woman. She is the rabbi for Hillel at the Claremont Colleges.
4. The link I posted does work. Maybe you copied and pasted it wrong. I just checked it.
5. In my comment, I mentioned that I don't think that Professor Frangieh's Christianity should be relevant in any way. I debated over whether to mention that. I did decide to mention it because in the US there is a common, though mistaken, association of terrorism with Islam. I don't believe that this association is in any way correct, but I was hoping that this fact might help to disassociate Professor Frangieh from terrorism for some people. You say yourself that it is not germane, but you mentioned it in an earlier article too. I couldn't find the article but I am guessing that if you mentioned it, you thought that it was applicable in some context as well.
6. I also believe that Israel should not be destroyed and do not condone the murder of innocent people, regardless of their nationality. I just want to make sure you didn't take me defense of Professor Frangieh to mean that I support terrorism.
7. Just because someone does not respond to your articles does not make your allegation correct. People may not reply to your attacks because they do not want to legitimize your attack in any way.
8. In my response, I was careful to say that I knew that you did not say that Professor Frangieh was funding terrorism. You can re-read my comment. I was refuting what your paragraph composition implied to an earlier commenter.
9. I read your article very carefully. I also read all the petitions and links that you put in it. I am genuinely sorry I misrepresented your beliefs on the poetry issue though. It wasn't clear to me on my first reading.
10. The speakers brought to campus have not been "anti-peace." The Bahranian guest was Jewish. Imam Zaid Shakir spoke about how terrorism is forbidden in Islam. We also visited the Levantine Center, whose mission statement includes a stance on Middle Eastern Peace:
"Many Israelis and Palestinians have come to the conclusion that there is simply no violent solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful and just negotiated settlement will bring about change in the region. With them, Levantine Cultural Center supports only non-violent approaches to cross-cultural understanding. All of our programs emphasize the need for coexistence and taking shared responsibility."
Bassam Frangieh and the Middle Eastern Studies program is clearly not "anti-peace."
1. Hebrew was not taught as part of the Middle East Studies major because it is a brand new program. There have not been sufficient resources to hire Hebrew and Farsi professors. The program I was referring to was a not-for-credit program sponsored by Hillel.
2. I hope you did not think that I was in anyway implicating your religion in my response. I don't really see how that is relevant. However, how is it obvious that you are not Jewish?
3. Daveen Litwin is a woman. She is the rabbi for Hillel at the Claremont Colleges.
4. The link I posted does work. Maybe you copied and pasted it wrong. I just checked it.
5. In my comment, I mentioned that I don't think that Professor Frangieh's Christianity should be relevant in any way. I debated over whether to mention that. I did decide to mention it because in the US there is a common, though mistaken, association of terrorism with Islam. I don't believe that this association is in any way correct, but I was hoping that this fact might help to disassociate Professor Frangieh from terrorism for some people. You say yourself that it is not germane, but you mentioned it in an earlier article too. I couldn't find the article but I am guessing that if you mentioned it, you thought that it was applicable in some context as well.
6. I also believe that Israel should not be destroyed and do not condone the murder of innocent people, regardless of their nationality. I just want to make sure you didn't take me defense of Professor Frangieh to mean that I support terrorism.
7. Just because someone does not respond to your articles does not make your allegation correct. People may not reply to your attacks because they do not want to legitimize what you have said in any way.
8. In my response, I was careful to say that I knew that you did not say that Professor Frangieh was funding terrorism. You can re-read my comment. I was refuting what your paragraph composition implied to an earlier commenter.
9. I read your article very carefully. I also read all the petitions and links that you put in it. I am genuinely sorry I misrepresented your beliefs on the poetry issue though. It wasn't clear to me on my first reading.
10. The speakers brought to campus have not been "anti-peace." The Bahraini guest speaker was Jewish. Imam Zaid Shakir spoke about how terrorism is forbidden in Islam. We also visited the Levantine Center, whose mission statement includes a stance on Middle Eastern Peace:
"Many Israelis and Palestinians have come to the conclusion that there is simply no violent solution to the conflict, and that only a peaceful and just negotiated settlement will bring about change in the region. With them, Levantine Cultural Center supports only non-violent approaches to cross-cultural understanding. All of our programs emphasize the need for coexistence and taking shared responsibility."
Bassam Frangieh and the Middle Eastern Studies program is clearly not "anti-peace."
Charles,
Does CMC really have a Department of Middle East Studies? I don't believe they do. What other professors are in the department? Isn't Frangieh a professor in the Department of Modern Languages?
I wouldn't worry about a radical like this (assuming your allegations are true) staying on in Claremont for too long. These things have a way of working themselves out. *cough* Khazeni *cough*
You are right, Priest. We don't have a department, I don't think, but it is kind of becoming one or something.
What's that about Khazeni?
Post a Comment