It's the least they could do

Submitted by Anonymous Donor (Canada), Feb 19, 2007 at 13:33

It appears Dr. Reinharz and Dr. Hose have under some duress admitted that Dr. Daniel Pipes is a distinguished scholar and not "theatre" and that he is welcome at Brandeis, and that Norman Finkelstein would never ever be mentioned in the same breath as he.

Well, all of that is only stating the obvious.

I am less impressed that they will only try to clear an hour to actually attend Dr. Pipes' lecture, which would hopefully spare us further baseless insights from Dr. Hose.

But the critical question remains - what are Dr. Reinharz and Dr. Hose going to do about the rest of their abysmal record of support for Islamist terrorist apologists and radical fringe viewpoints threatening Israel's very security and legitimacy, as evidenced by their teaching choices, awards, exhibits, visiting lecturers, staged demonstrations, and other activities as outlined by Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America here? Their stewardship of the university seems careless at best.

One is still left with serious doubts about the duty of care these two are providing.

Until Dr. Reinharz and Dr. Hose are prepared to put their actions where their mouths are, donors who support Israel should cut the funding, as the ZOA and Dr. Pipes have suggested. Or cut these two out of the picture. There are, sadly, plenty of other universities where these two and their Islamist and Holocaust-denying colleagues will be welcomed with open arms. Brandeis is not a charity - it is an institution with a long history of fairness to Israel and the Jewish people, a fairness that, under the negligent stewardship of Drs. Reinharz and Hose, has given way to the current rash of dangerous popular trends undermining both.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".