a question; a comment
Reader comment on item: Is Campus Watch Part of a Conspiracy? [On Mearsheimer-Walt and The "Israeli Lobby"]

Submitted by roger wilkinson (Australia), May 18, 2006 at 23:37

Dear Dr Pipes,

Some of what the learned professors say (perhaps most of it) is outrageous. On the specific of what they say about Campus Watch - to 'discourage...open discourse' - their attitude would not itself exactly encourage discourse. Reading their article generally one finds the same tone; they give, for example, a version of the Israeli-Palestinian history which they say is in no way open to controversy i.e you just can't quarrel with it; but I didn't agree with it at all!

Worryingly, however, as I read around what the professors would describe as neo-conservative or right-wing web-sites, books, I'm not sure that I am finding much higher standards. I have read some dreadful diatribes. This is not a charge that could be successfully levelled at you. However the professors do make some claims about one specific group, AIPAC, of which I have no clear account, and wonder if you could make some comment. You tend to stress the high level of Arab lobbying in Washington, but clearly there is pro-Irael activity too.

Reading M and W it would seem important to have a clear working idea of what is meant by anti-semitism. I found Bernard Lewis very clear on this. I think I would accurately summarize him as saying it is not being anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, or even anti-Jew; it is holding a wholly irrational view of Jewish people as pigs, dogs, snakes etc., who need to be eradicated. One hopes that the Lewis view is the prevalent one. I found the M and W notion of the high importance of avoiding being seen in the US as anti-semitic a very odd one.

Yours,

Roger Wilkinson

---

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 for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.