The Fighting Islamists of Notre Dame
Thomas Ryan, at David Horowitz's Front Page Magazine, has published The Fighting Islamists of Notre Dame. It is a very damning article concerning the fools at the Kroc Institute. Of special note is Mr. Ryan's description of Scott Appleby going ga-ga over Brother Tariq:
In truth, Ramadan, like the late Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, is a “master of double talk,” relaying to Western ears an amicable message of unity between Western and Muslim peoples, but expressing his true feelings of Western hatred to his Muslim brethren. Upon offering Ramadan the position at the Institute, Director Appleby stated, “We find him invaluable because he takes the risk of talking to both worlds. If we are going to avoid a violent conflict with radical Muslims, we will do so by taking the risk of understanding their point of view, their criticisms of the West, and also having the authority to talk with them.”
One wonders how utterly stupid an "intellectual" can be. It brings to mind George Orwell's quote stating that no idea is so foolish as that at least one intellectual won't believe it.
Every time a scholar such as Samuel Huntington, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, or Bernard Lewis attempts to "understand" Islamists they are summarily dismissed by the likes of Appleby. Meanwhile, has-been discredited "intellectuals" such as John Esposito are lauded, despite the fact, as Martin Kramer has pointed out, that Esposito has been completely wrong in the past regarding his interpretations and analyses of Islamic fundamentalism. Esposito and his ilk are as bad as Michel Foucault, who continuted to support the Ayatollah Khomeini even when it was apparent that the man was a brutal totalist. And I'd like to see how Appleby proposes to "dialogue" with psychopaths who have an absolute worldview and who allow no dissenting opinions whatsoever.
Mr. Ryan's article is great. He also discusses the "academic convocation" in the fall of 2003 when all incoming freshmen were required to read Seyyed Hossein Nasr's The Heart of Islam. The article mentions a letter published in The Observer questioning the assignment of Nasr's book. The convocation ignored thinkers like Lewis; instead, according to Mr. Ryan:
Appleby justified this on the grounds that “The idea behind the summer reading requirement and academic convocation was not to provide even one percent of the knowledge of the Middle East that professors...provide in their courses – that would be impossible in so short an assignment. Rather, the goal was to demonstrate how scholars think about such issues.” Actual scholars, rather than activists like Appleby, would normally think about such controversial issues by presenting more than one side of the argument. But that is too much to expect from an ideological institute like Kroc.
Monk should be ashamed of the Kroc Institute - of course, he's on his way out, so perhaps Fr. Jenkins will do something.
February 8, 2005 | Permalink
The comments to this entry are closed.