Who’s afraid of Asaf Romirowsky?


Apparently M. A. Muqtedar Khan is.

Kahn has authored a bunch of books and is perceived as a scholar and expert on Islam and the West. He also seems to suffer from IDF-phobia.

Yesterday, the University of Delaware asked Asaf Romirowsky to step down from an academic panel at the University of Delaware because another panelist, University of Delaware political scientist Muqtedar Khan, didn’t want to share the podium with anyone who served in the Israeli Defense Forces.

It reminds me of the tactics used here in California by the Muslim student groups who refuse to participate in any discussions, let alone programs, with Jewish groups because they are Zionists.


67 Comments

  1. Jim R

    10/26/2007 at 10:47 pm

    Who’s afraid of the political left? Israel should be.

  2. traps

    10/27/2007 at 12:01 am

    Isn’t the issue being able to distinguish anti-semitism?

    thoughtleader....

    You’ve got a great blog guys.

  3. Gila

    10/27/2007 at 2:00 am

    As an alumnus of the University of Delaware (and a proud citizen and resident of the State of Israel and a supporter of our troops)…I am so ashamed of my alma mater. Anyone have any ideas as to whom I should write to express my distate and link said distate to my cuttiing off any future flow of $$$$? Of course, I don’t give them money, but hey, theoretically I could start.

    Gila, Class of 97

  4. Gila

    10/27/2007 at 4:59 am

    Email I am sending (well-trying to–the UDel server is down) to Alumni relations

    Dear Alumni Relations,

    I haven’t received any mail from the University since I moved to Israel, over six years ago. No doubt, my address is out of date. My current address is as follows:

    (deleted–don’t think all of the Jewlicious readers need it)

    I suspect that one of the reasons the University wants alumni information is in order to request donations. To tell you the truth, I have never made a donation to the University of Delaware. A major reason for that has been the fact that I live in Israel and it has taken me a while to establish myself here. Put bluntly, my income has been quite low. Now, however, after many years of hard work, the situation has improved and I find myself in the happy position of being able to give more to charity.

    Unfortunately, I cannot say that I am at all inspired to add my alma mater to my list of preferred recipients. To be precise, based on the recent treatment of Asaf Romirowsky by the University, combined with the fact that I am one of the victims of Palestinean violence (April 2002 Machane Yehuda suicide bombing attack)–the chances of you guys getting any money out of me are slim to none. My contribution dollars are better spent supporting institutions in the State of Israel (such as Hadassah, which was recently nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize) or activist organizations that expose and publicise the anti-Israel bias in institutions of higher education, including the University of Delaware.

    But…if you want to keep in touch, by all means, please update my address.

    Gila
    Class of 1997

  5. ck

    10/27/2007 at 7:22 am

    From Mr. Khan’s Wikipedia entry: “I remember telling my wife; maybe I will be our Henry Kissinger, the first Muslim to become the Secretary of State. Then came Bin Laden and his bloody men and along with the World Trade Center, American Muslim dreams and aspirations came crashing down.”

    Mr. Khan, who has lectured at the Pentagon, has just committed a short sighted and stupid career killer move. Secretary of State? The best he can hope for now is to join Norman Finkelstein on his “Jews, oops, I mean Zionists ruined my carreer” World-tour as an opening act.

    Ok, in reality, I have no idea how or if this will affect his carreer. In the post Walt and Mearsheimer world, it seems anything goes. Would Khan sit on a panel with me? I mean, I used to live in the French Hill suburb of Jerusalem, which is technically occupied territory – so I was a West-Bank settler! Now what about those guys and gals in the IDF who served in the West Bank but are opposed to Israel’s presence there? There’s a few of those apparently… dissent is permitted in a Democracy after all.

    I wonder what his employer the Brookings Institute feels about this – how about his clients at the Pentagon? Not that it needs further commentary but the University of Delaware’s move sucks. They should have let Khan speak alone if he didn’t want to join the panel.

    I think it’s time to update someone’s Wikipedia profile…

  6. Sarah

    10/27/2007 at 11:24 am

    Gila, good move! Had you published your address, I’d havesent a Chanuka card ;)

    ck, aren’t you trying to enjoy your holiday? ;)

  7. ck

    10/27/2007 at 12:26 pm

    Well, who said I didn’t enjoy updating Assistant Professor Khan’s Wikipedia entry?

  8. Sarah

    10/27/2007 at 12:44 pm

    Call it womanly intuition, but I think you at least don’t dislike it ;)

  9. ck

    10/27/2007 at 3:33 pm

    Oh my, someone using a Comcast Internet connection in Delaware (Assistant Professor Khan perhaps?) has altered my addition to Khan’s Wikipedia post like 5 times today – each successive version comes off more and more sympathetic to Khan’s position. So what does one do when one takes umbrage to the whitewashing of facts on Wikipedia? Anyone? I can always undo his edits, but it’s clear he’s editing his own entry.

  10. Sarah

    10/27/2007 at 4:07 pm

    Heee, claim there have been rumours about his possibly Jewish ancestry as a dyslexic ancestor changed Kahn (derived from Cohen in medieval Germany) into Khan ;)

  11. Blue Hen

    10/28/2007 at 12:49 am

    As a current student at the University of Delaware and one that has taken numerous classes with Dr. Khan, I can assure you that he is not anti-semitic. Asaf’s participation was sprung up on Dr. Khan at the last moment and it is rational to assume he wasn’t too keen on sitting with someone who has a history of slandering “liberal professors” and promulgated hateful Islamophobia. I actually went to the forum, which had included Dr. Stuart Kaufman and a UD PhD student (both Jewish), and their perspectives were very similar, if not exactly the same as Khan’s. Great job making a disgustingly biased and ignorant blog link on wikipedia. Read his work and talk to those in his class. You all sound like idiots.

  12. ck

    10/28/2007 at 1:36 am

    I never said he was an antisemite Blue Hen. Neither did Rabbi Bookstein. Khan expressed discomfort with Romirowsky based solely on his having served in the IDF. Romirowsky served as an Army liason which is as deskbound a job as you can get. The closest he probably ever got to the “occupied territories” was maybe when he went to visit the Kotel. Pretty much every Israeli citizen has to serve in the IDF. Khan’s shortsighted act of discomfort effectively precludes his ability to have meaningful dialogue with any Israeli – that’s a really good way to make progress. Khan made no mention of Romirowsky’s work with Daniel Pipes and CAMERA.

    Blue Hen, please learn how to read and perhaps how to reason before making an ass of yourself. And try not to put words into other people’s mouths. That’s just a friendly suggestion.

  13. ramon marcos

    10/28/2007 at 2:38 am

    Maybe this should have been mentioned on the Jewlicious site earlier – but of course we’re just a small market here… :)

    It’s a mirror image of the the same issue:

    msnbc.msn.com/...

    It does relate to this post. Read the article and then do a little research on it, especially the local Jewish community’s take on it – if you want to see how skewed commentary can be.

    Just so you know – the mainstream Jewish community here – via the spokespeople from the various organizations that represent it – do not support the uninviting of Archbishop Tutu to this (Catholic) University. Which played a big part in the University re-inviting the Archbishop. But look at how all the various bloggers and so called experts play on this – and then you’ll see how, again, it is to find fault with us.

    More links:

    msnbc.msn.com/...

    christiancentu...

    And know that this issue hasn’t been relegated to this particular city or this University.

  14. Sarah

    10/28/2007 at 11:22 am

    Ramon, somebody ck isn’t too fond of (apparently) had that topic up on his blog a while ago, and I commented in detail there. I wish academic officials over there were not so afraid of open discourse – if university people there conducted research as their boards dump inconvenient speakers, research would never get far. Discourse and controversy constituted as the basis of academic teaching in Ancient Greece.

  15. gingi

    10/28/2007 at 11:57 am

    BlueHen, the fact that the panel included two Jews doesn’t necessarily make a good, balanced academic discussion. How can it be a valuable panel if the “perspectives [of the panelists] were very similar?” What’s the point of that? To congratulate each other on being right?

    And do you honestly expect anyone to be bold enough to express differing, controversial opinions, after a panelist was already kicked off the panel? Do you not think there are potential consequences of this beyond the panel? What is academic freedom to you? Freedom to state or hold to a pre-approved opinion or theory? Great.

    presentensemag...

  16. Tori

    10/28/2007 at 8:47 pm

    So according to “Blue Hen” it is OK for Monsieur Khan to share a forum and speak alongside Jews – as long as they agree with, or share, his opinions. How “liberal” and open-minded of him.

  17. Blue Hen

    10/28/2007 at 11:16 pm

    Hey dbags, have you read Khan’s work? Obviously not. Stop perpetuating your zionist propaganda. Read khan’s work. You cannot veil the word with your bullshit anymore. I’ve seen IDF soldiers shooting innocent civilians, humiliating Palestinians and ethnically cleansing both muslims and christians from East Jerusalem. Khan is the man. Asaf is unqualified to even sit on the same panel as him. He is a joke to the academic community. Show me any of this “scholarly” publications! He doesn’t have any asides from crap blogs. You all suck.

  18. Sarah

    10/29/2007 at 12:39 am

    Blue Hen, not to ruin your concept of the world, but last year, shortly before Xmas, about 2,000 Palestinian Christians were killed by Muslim Palestinians in the Bethlehem area. Out of about 110,000 Christians that settled around Bethlehem in the 1950s, about 100,000 fell victim to Muslim genocide. Wonder whether that never makes that headlines?

  19. ramon marcos

    10/29/2007 at 12:39 am

    Blue Hen – what’s “The word”? Is it one word? Or are there a bunch of words strung together? Describe what you have seen and where and when… those journalistic questions that are asked of journalists.

    And let us know Asaf’s qualifications, since you have that cv in front of you. Let us know all you know. Enlighten us. Tell us more about yourself and what you know. Help us “Dbags” to understand. C’mon, tell us what you have seen and know and have experienced.

  20. ck

    10/29/2007 at 6:47 am

    Blue Hen: I have read Khan’s work. Don’t get me started and it is irrelevant anyways. My only issue was that he essentially refused to sit on a panel with someone by sole virtue of his having served in the IDF. There is no mention made of Ramirowsky’s academic cred or lack thereof. As for what you claim to have seen, I was just in East Jerusalem less than an hour ago. If the IDF is in the process of ethnically cleansing it, I gotta tell ya, they’re doing a terrible job.

  21. Tori

    10/29/2007 at 1:39 pm

    Hey guys stop being so hard on Blue Hen! Afterall, he did manage to throw at least 3 tired and absurd catchphrases into one short paragraph:

    “zionist propaganda”
    “humiliated Palestinians”
    and everyone’s favorite…
    “ethnically cleansing”

  22. ramon marcos

    10/29/2007 at 4:38 pm

    I will say “Blue Hen” is an interesting commenter name.

  23. Sarah

    10/29/2007 at 4:52 pm

    Would explain if (s)he chickened out ;)

  24. themiddle

    10/29/2007 at 6:26 pm

    Sarah, I’m pretty sure your stats in 18 are wrong. Do you have the source? You should probably double-check anyway. If 2000 Christian Palestinians were killed, we would have heard.

  25. Jon C.

    10/29/2007 at 9:20 pm

    either way, i am sure it wasn’t a “genocide”

  26. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 12:15 am

    TM, that’s the sad thing: I even spoke with survivors there. The only media that covered the issue in more detail is a mag issued by a Protestant organization called HMK that works in places where X-ians are being persecuted. There’s been a little mentioning of it over here in some newspapers as well as an article on hagalil, but it never made the big headlines. And yes, killing a people, not individuals, is called genocide.

  27. Blue Hen

    10/30/2007 at 12:45 am

    hahahahahahahaa, you are making up so much it is not even worth commentating. you would be laughed out of any legit academic institution. LIAR! Give me the proof to the aforementioned “genocide!” You can’t!

  28. ck

    10/30/2007 at 5:04 am

    Well, at least you didn’t call anyone a douchebag this time.

  29. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 8:25 am

    Blue Hen, if the accounts of eyewitnesses as well as the reports of NGO-workers and those of writers in no way associated with the Christian community on Palestinian territory don’t suffice for you, I don’t know what does. I don’t think any “legit academic institution” relies on just one-sided propaganda as you seem to consider sufficient. If my above comment hadn’t been worth commenting on, you shouldn’t have commented on it. Stroke your ego elsewhere. BTW, your profane register bespeaks the ‘quality’ of your academic education.

  30. Blue Hen

    10/30/2007 at 9:04 am

    I’m sorry, douchebag!

  31. ck

    10/30/2007 at 9:39 am

    Blue Hen: Mr. Khan must be so pleased to have such an eloquent and well spoken person such as yourself on his side.

  32. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 9:40 am

    I would assume BH’s posts are indicative of the intellectual level of Kahn’s fans and students. Thanks for the hint.

  33. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 9:41 am

    Jinx, ck! ;)

  34. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 12:24 pm

    ck, Shy Guy, you’re my guys ;)

  35. Blue Hen

    10/30/2007 at 12:29 pm

    The notion that disagreeing with US support of Israel and the actual Israeli government is anti-semitic and intellectually bankrupt is usually made by Zionists that cannot substantiate their claims. Give me the sources to your “NGOs” and etc. Do you honestly think our Western media would not cover the massacre of thousands of Arab Christians? Give me your sources, then I will be enlightened. So, unless you can validate your hateful polemic, I see no point in continuing this conversation with ignorant, Islamophobic lowlifes. Good day. If any of you have any balls and are in the Philadelphia area, please come down to UD at the next forum or lecture. How about you sit in one of his classes.

  36. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 12:49 pm

    The plural of “life” still is “lives”. The sources of those NGOs are their staff that work in those areas. Most Western media have not covered this topic just as they have not covered many of the domestic conflicts going on in Central Africa – media are by no means comprehensive or unbiased. I mentioned my sources above, so if you care to take a reading comprehension class, feel free.

  37. ck

    10/30/2007 at 1:25 pm

    OK Blue Hen, clearly you’re an idiot. No one here called Khan anti-Semitic. If this is truly your last comment then vaja con dios. You brought nothing productive to this discussion.

  38. themiddle

    10/30/2007 at 1:25 pm

    I don’t agree with Blue Hen’s insults, but he does make a good point. Without solid evidence, the hear-say accusation of mass killings and a mass, intentional ethnic cleansing based on religious differences relies on preconceptions to make its case. I know your intent was different, Sarah and Shy Guy, but ultimately, the accusation ends up being not much different than saying that that some Jews act greedily or act like a fifth column within “host” societies. The success of convincing the readers depends on their internal biases to accept the statement as fact. Even when the success of convincing relies upon your good reputation, you still need to provide solid evidence.

    The question of Muslims and Christians in Gaza, Judea and Samaria is complicated. From everything I have read and heard, and we can point to some Palestinian-Israeli battles in 2002 and 2003 as evidence (Christians neighborhoods and churches were used by Muslim Palestinians as bases for attacks against Israel, drawing desired responses that affected the Christians in those neighborhoods), there has been displacement for Christian Palestinians by Muslim Palestinians over the past several years. This has been a challenging time for the Christians, apparently. Many have left to other countries or into Israel itself. Those who remain appear weakened and under pressure.

    I have also read, however, that many Palestinian Christians blame Israel and its military presence, roadblocks and other security measures as a key reason for their departure or weakened status. Many blame Muslim Palestinians for making their lives miserable. Even when they have left, Christian Palestinians will often speak cautiously against Muslim Palestinians for fear of retaliation. Hamas is, after all, a religious movement and not quite a nationalistic one, and it is to be found all over Gaza, Judea and Samaria.

    I haven’t read about mass killings of Christians, and definitely not about 2000 killed. I also haven’t heard about forced departures, although that is far more likely and can be kept quiet.

    My point is that we need to be far more careful in making these types of allegations, and we need to be cautious not to implicate one religious group unless there is solid evidence.

    Despite my having said that, Blue Hen, your presence among us has not impressed anybody except your momma. Your bias against “Zionists,” attacks against Romirowsky, comments about ethnic cleansing and the “douchebags” comments indicate that you are an unthinking dupe indoctrinated by a professor whose writings about this conflict have little claim to objectivity and therefore to being correct.

    The fact is that your “moderate” professor refused to sit on a panel with a person who “served in the IDF” because “some people” are opposed to the idea that the IDF “occupies the West Bank.” Khan would not refuse to sit with Hamas because they illegally took over Gaza, or with Fatah members of the PA because they have launched more suicide bombing attacks than all the other Palestinian groups combined, or with PA leaders who threw away the chance for peace and a Palestinian state in 2000. There is no reason he should have a problem sitting with a former Israeli soldier on a panel.

    He is entitled to his positions, of course, but he should expect criticism when he takes those positions.

  39. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 1:39 pm

    As I stated above, I first read about it in the HMK’s mag, then had the chance to talk to Christian Palestinians and also read about it on hagalil.

  40. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 1:54 pm

    TM, I stated that there was no genocide. Furthermore, the article’s I linked to do not claim anything like that or any major case of mass murder, for that matter. I simply wished to point out what the status of Christian Arabs is in the PA.

  41. drew

    10/30/2007 at 3:02 pm

    IF this tiny speck on Khan’s record amounts to him suffering any major pressure or problem, it will not be due to the actual event, but due to the ridiculous and disproportionate amount of buzz that was created from what seems to be the online sayanim.

    All the little blogs are abuzz with this story. But why?

    Anti-Israel policy people are censored all the time.

    *It almost seems like the IDF guy who wanted to speak designed this in order to create the problem.*

    Dr. Khan has really done nothing wrong and it is a joke to blow this up so much

    Shame on this blog and others..

    Will this comment also be deleted?

  42. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 3:17 pm

    If there’s anything ridiculous and disproportionate, then it is to refuse sharing a podium with somebody because of his common-of-Israelis biography. If there’s anything more ridiculous and disproportionate, then it is to give in to such behaviour. Reminds me of kids on a playground, “I won’t go on the swing as long as Joe’s on the next swing.” Most parents would tell their kids to suit themselves and would not ask Joe to leave the next swing.

  43. drew

    10/30/2007 at 3:18 pm

    2 of the panelist were Jewish dude… get over it its not racist..

    My letter to President Harker

    Dear President Harker,

    I have written you before in the strategic planning suggestion box many times. This time I am writing to voice my support for Professor Dr. Khan. Although I am a Muslim that disagrees with his Islamic views, I am able to seperate that fact from acknowledging he is an incredible asset to our Political Science Department.

    Recently he voiced his reservations about a last-minute appearance by an Israeli Defense Force speaker to appear on the panel of an event involved weeks of planning.

    “National Review Online” and “Campus Watch,” two neoconservative biased organizations, began a media campaign to create problems for Dr. Khan, generating such headlines as “Jew-hating Muslim boots IDF member from panel”

    As a UD student and community member, I would hope we could denounce organizations like Campus Watch and NRO for their biased and manipulative rhetoric.

    Drew Marshall

  44. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 3:24 pm

    My concern in my above comment was not supposed racism, but immaturity and non-academic conduct. Anybody who’s confident of their ability to make a point won’t expect possible ‘antagonists’ to be removed, no matter in what numbers those may appear.

  45. themiddle

    10/30/2007 at 3:35 pm

    What other comment of yours has been deleted?

  46. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 3:39 pm

    Background: Drew Marshall.

  47. ck

    10/30/2007 at 4:21 pm

    Drew: Jesus H. Christ. No one associated with Jewlicious called Mr. Dr. Khan a racist or an anti-Semite. Romirowsky is not an “IDF” speaker. He, like most Israeli citizens, merely served in the IDF. My issue with Dr. Khan is simply based on the fact that he voiced his discomfort at sharing the podium with Romirowsky by mere dint of Romirowsky’s IDF service. This means that it is acceptable to exclude pretty much all Israelis from any kind of dialog based on service that they are obligated by law to perform. That seems kind of dumb and counterintuitive to me.

  48. Sarah

    10/30/2007 at 4:36 pm

    ck, is it the spirit of X-mas that makes you mention Jesus a comparative lot as of late? ;)

  49. ck

    10/30/2007 at 5:18 pm

    I am just exasperated a lot lately… me an Christmas, we got nothin’ goin’ on except that Bethlehem is right around the corner…

  50. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 11:42 pm

    Whoa!!! X-mas??? Slow down! Gotta first get past the Great Pumpkin.

    Anyway, ask Khan (and Drew) if they believe what the Quran and Hadith say and command about Jews (and Christians and Polytheists.

    Then decide what to call them.

  51. Shy Guy

    10/30/2007 at 11:59 pm

    Seems like the U of Delaware is encouraging lotsa students to call lotsa folk racists:

    FIRE: U of Delaware student indoctrination teaches that all white people are racist.

  52. Sarah

    10/31/2007 at 12:58 am

    Shy Guy, for those that celebrate Xmas, there are lots of holidays coming up: All Souls’ Day / Reformation Day (today), All Saints’ Day (tomorrow), St Martin’s Day (11/11; also marks the start of the pre-Xmas 40-day fast that many choose to ignore), St Barbara’s Day (4/12), St Nicholas’ Eve & Day (5&6/12), etc. Not Thanksgiving-celebraters though, they don’t celebrate those days except maybe Reformation Day.

    Back to the topic, a case like that would be unthinkable at universities over here. A professor who did something like that would lose all his academic credibility.

  53. Jim R

    10/31/2007 at 8:50 am

    Thanks for the FIRE link SH. Eye-opening, but not altogether surprising.
    I stand by my comment here. The first one.

    I mention Israel only because it is the most obvious democracy, under continous attack since it’s inception, in a sea of brutal totalitarinism.

    Who would dare think our most cheerished institutions, who claim to promote and cheerish free speech, debate, and democracy, would become the very ones to actually not only suppress democratic debate, but suppress it in favor of dictatorships.

    Our educational institutions have been taken over by the political left, and only the litmus tested left are hired by them to ‘educate’ our children ‘relevant’ in world history and current events.

    Democracies should be afraid indeed.

  54. Jim R

    10/31/2007 at 9:11 am

    “I stand by my comment here. The first one.” Literally Comment 1. at the top.

    “…..to ‘educate’ our children ‘relevant’ in world history and current events.” should read “…to ‘educate’ our children on ‘relevant’ world history and current events.”

  55. Jewish Mother

    10/31/2007 at 1:14 pm

    Can Drew Marshall verify if the FIRE link piece is true, and how true? That would be very nice of him. He seems to be right there.

    The FIRE link is just a press release. A press release of an organization with a strong viewpoint, too. Maybe it is an exaggeration. Would he check?

    If anybody asked ME when I became aware of my sexual orientation, I would respond, laughing, either “none of your business” or “I have a boyfriend, if you are trying to date me”. Even if I were not seeing someone. Gee whiz. The very idea.

    As for the other stuff, since when does a person have to care about politics? Some people just don’t. “This just isn’t one of my interests,” I would say. “I am involved in other things”. If they wanted to know what other things, I would say, again, “None of your business.” And then, “thanks for trying to get to know me, but I am rather shy, and don’t want to talk any more. Please excuse me. I am supposed to call my boyfriend now.” And then I would walk away.

    But if politics HAD to be one of my interests, The ACLU should be called. No, that is not a joke. It is serious.

    There is an absolute, G-d given, right to be let alone. Hold an event, seminar, or rally, if you want, but don’t make me attend. You can’t make me attend.

    What’s next, mandatory chapel attendance?

  56. Jewish Mother

    10/31/2007 at 1:21 pm

    Maybe I meant Blue Hen. Whoever is there. Or both of them.

  57. Shy Guy

    10/31/2007 at 5:06 pm

    JM, DU responds to FIRE. Read carefully.

  58. Jewish Mother

    11/1/2007 at 9:22 am

    Thanks.

    Who is funding this vile program?

    I still want to hear from people who don’t think like me. That is more interesting than preaching to the choir.

    It would be just as vile if I agreed personally with every word. It is unacceptable no matter what the content.

    This is not the Soup Nazi. This is the real thing.

  59. Shy Guy

    11/1/2007 at 2:11 pm

  60. Jewish Mother

    11/1/2007 at 3:32 pm

    Thanks again.

    It was TOO a mandatory program.

    It’s a little dead for now. It may wake up again, later, when attention has turned elsewhere.

    I still want to know who funded it, if anybody.

    Was a dorm residential advisor actually threatened with expulsion from the school if he/she did not go along sufficiently? It sounded that way. “… Your future as an RA, and even as a STUDENT… ” .

    Perfect is the enemy of good. People who insist on a perfect world don’t even get a good world. They destroy a good world by trying to make it a perfect world. Write that down.

  61. rootlesscosmo

    11/1/2007 at 5:54 pm

    lol this is a hilarious thread. I love how it took “Blue Hen” until exactly his 2nd post for his mask to totally slip off: Post #1 “uhhh…hey guys don’t be so hard on Khan; he’s a great teacher….” Post #2: “douchebag…Zionist propaganda…ethnic cleansing…killing innocent Palestinians….”

    it was like “balanced contrarian commentator” to “pottymouthed raging anti-Israel hater” in 7.5 seconds!

    I tell you, these haters used to do a little better job at hiding their true feelings…*sigh* well I guess it’s nice to know who your enemies are anyway….

  62. Jim R

    11/1/2007 at 11:36 pm

    Blue Hen got the full ‘treatment’. A UD success story.

  63. James A

    11/2/2007 at 1:37 am

    I must throw in my comment due to some knowledge I have of the situation… Professor Khan was objecting to the late addition of a panelist who was an IDF soldier as it would change the nature and direction the talk. The manner in which Mr. Romirowsky’s possible contribution to the event was purposely kept from the other panelists made it seem as if certain individuals were trying to “pull one over” on Professor Khan. Unfortunately, this was the result.

    I would also like to point out that two of the other panelists are Jewish and supporters of the state of Israel. Let’s not be too quick to label Professor Khan as an anti-semite. Please take the time to read some of Professor Khan’s work, go to one of his lectures, or engage him in some conversation before forming your opinion.

  64. ck

    11/2/2007 at 2:11 am

    To date, no one here has said that Khan was an anti-Semite. Similarly Romirowsky is NOT a soldier. He, like most Israeli men, merely served in the IDF. If Amos Oz or an Israeli member of Peace Now were to be added as panelists would Khan object too? They also had to serve in the IDF and yet that does not seem to have made them part of some homogenous IDF brain trust. In this respect Khan’s move was both ignorant and unbecoming.

  65. Sarah

    11/2/2007 at 2:15 am

    James, please take your time to read through the comments to see that the majority of commenters and the contributors to Jewlicious in particular did decidedly not label Khan an anti-Semite. I, for instance, claimed I’d consider his behaviour immature and non-academic by European standards. Placing alleged accusations into the above comments isn’t proper conduct either. Honi soit qui mal y pense.

  66. Sarah

    11/2/2007 at 2:28 am

    I’d like to add that ck and I posted independently of each other and are in no way part of Semitic-online-brainpool.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

More in Isralicious (4 of 1897 articles)
Retweet for Israel


The concept is simple. Visit retweet4israel.com and click on the "sign in with twitter" button, located front and center. Allow the site to tweet on your behalf and before you know it, your twitter account will automatically send out a ...