Nutty professor? This woman is a lecturer in Arabic at Emory
University, my alma mater:
Ms. Entropy
@MsEntropy
Angry academic. Lover of Libya, Morocco,
Algeria & Egypt. Grammar fascist / dirty commie. I'm sarcastic & I
probably need a nap. Looking for fires to run into.
الله عالم
If I told you I am happy about that, I’d be lying the same way I would
have been lying if I’d said the same about the Arabic instructor my older
daughter had at UVa. That instructor, an Arab male, ignored her requests to
accommodate her hearing deficit. Not only was he unresponsive, but also he was
unapologetic. He, too, may have been an “Angry academic,” if for many different
reasons.
Ms. Entropy, according to her site, is Looking for fires to run into . My hope is
that she will view this an expression of my willingness to be that fire.
Please let me explain. Her real name is NOT Ms. Entropy. Indeed, I’d
never heard of that moniker before I read Rod Nordland’s piece on 8/19/13 in
the very left-leaning N. Y. Times. Midway through Saudi Arabia Promises
to Aid Egypt’s Regime, Nordland comments:
“The
Saudi monarchy is absolutely afraid of an Islamist-based democracy movement,”
said Amanda E. Rogers, a lecturer in Arabic at Emory University in Atlanta and
contributor to Muftah, a blog about the Middle East and North Africa. [my emphasis]
What could have led Nordland to rely on Rogers as an expert to be cited
in the once vaunted Times? Obviously, it had to do with a blog, Muftah. I went
there and found this article by Ms. Rogers:
That article feigns an even-handed approach that attempts to disguise her
bias. (You saw from her intro to Ms. Entropy that the U.S.A. and Israel are not
listed among places she loves.) Like most pro-Palestinian supporters (even very
bright Jewish Americans who seem to bend over backwards to be that way), Rogers’
argument clots periodically when she must overlook historical facts to make it appear
her flag raising is legitimate.
Ms. Rogers, you really can’t do that other than with someone like
Nordland who seems to have been easy to influence. Perhaps the picture that
opens Ms. Rogers’ Muftah article is partly to blame. Its caption reads:
Palestinians stand near the rubble following
an Israeli air strike on Sunday (Photo credit: Eyad Baba)
Standing against a wall are women in Islamic garb. In front of them, one
step from “the rubble” are young children, also standing. Seated to the left are
two elderly men. Altogether, there are about twenty-five witnesses to what
appears to have been a direct hit on…on something. Rogers doesn’t say what.
Of course, it could have been a missile launch site for a missile fired
indiscriminately at Israeli citizens. Or it could have been a factory for
making those missiles. Whatever the case, none of the Palestinians in the
picture were wearing bandages; none were bloodied.
What does that suggest? Rogers dodges the obvious answer by commenting, “I will not engage in
the Möbius strip of who-started-what-when, particularly concerning the current conflict.“
That means there will be nothing in Roger’s opinion piece about causal
factors such as San Remo or UN Resolution 242 or Yasser Arafat’s rejection of
peace, or the Hamas charter that put that rejection in black and white for all
to see.
All but Rogers and Nordland. They choose to overlook Jordan’s role, prior
to the ’67 war, that prevented Jews from having free access to one of their
most holy sites, the Western Wall.
Although Rogers quips, parenthetically, about Pat Robertson, “(he is presumably
unaware of the many Christian Palestinians who live in the Occupied
Territories)”, I
must wonder whether she’s visited Bethlehem lately. Its shrinking Christian
population is being rooted out by the PA Arab/Muslims. [please see: Christians leave Bethlehem amid increasing
pressure from ...
www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/bethlehem... Cached
Practically the only place in the region
where the Christian population is growing is in Israel. In Bethlehem,
Christians now feel besieged. ... less than 8 percent ...]
Something
is very wrong when a Times’ journalist has to rely on opinion rather than fact.
Even
more troubling, Ms. Rogers, is your belief, so clearly stated, “…I support a one-state
solution for Palestine-Israel–one in which citizenship rights are granted
without regard to ethnicity or religion. I believe this is the governmental
system commonly known by the term “democracy,” Your remark treats logic as if it were a magic wand that
only works when you’re holding it.
How
can you expect the Palestinians to join with Jews when they can’t even say that
they want to change Israel because it is a “Jewish nation.” ? They never have,
never will.
How can you foresee Gaza’s Palestinians accepting a blended state when
Gazans won’t amend their charter as a sign that they disavow their commitment
to exterminate Israel and its Jews?
Finally, Ms. Rogers,
how can you convince yourself that a one-state solution means anything at all
to Palestinians, even the ‘moderate’ PA, when they parade the recently released
murderers as heroes?
Will you write that the
Israelis are generous when the second batch is released and they, too, are
treated to a hero’s welcome?
Please run from my fire, Ms. Rogers. It’s an everlasting light!
B.Koplen 8/20/13
p.s. Please see: The Triumph of Illusion
by Shoshana Bryen
American Thinker
August 20, 2013
|
|
The Palestine Liberation Organization was created in 1964. Like
most revolutionary movements, it wrote a Charter to define its aims and
fundamental policies, including:
Article 17: The partitioning of Palestine, which took place in
1947, and the establishment of Israel are illegal and null and void, regardless
of the loss of time...
Article 18: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate
System, and all that has been based on them are considered null and void. The
claims of historic and spiritual ties between Jews and Palestine are not in
agreement with the facts of history or with the true basis of sound statehood.
Judaism... is not a nationality (and) the Jews are not one people with an
independent personality...
Article 19: Zionism is a colonialist movement in its inception,
aggressive and expansionist in its goal, racist in its configurations, and
fascist in its means and aims...
Article
24: This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the
West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, (or) on the Gaza Strip…
No comments:
Post a Comment