“Since when should being polite or making nice be a major criterion for whether you receive academic advancement?” asks the very first comment to this thread?

How about now? I am heartened to see a University use such criteria. While it should never be used to squelch ideas with which the faculty disagrees, there is a way to state views without being hateful.

It’s fairly clear than Finkelstein had no interest in doing so. His writings made their points in the most incendiary manner, calculated not only to inform, but to hurt.

The denial of tenure to Finkelstein signals that civility is important and valuable to public discourse.

HOORAY!

ADR, at 4:55 pm EDT on August 2, 2007

I am appalled at DePaul’s decision. How can the president tell the world w. a straight face that Dershowitz had nothing to do w. this when much of his explanation of the denial of tenure could’ve been written by a more polite & polished version of Dershowitz himself.

It is laughable to claim that Finkelstein doesn’t honor the principle of academic freedom in his treatment of academic peers when it is the university itself which is squelching such freedom to argue unpopular ideas.

Again, I don’t agree w. some of Finkelstein’s views about Israel, but he deserves an honored place within academe to argue those ideas.

Since when should being polite or making nice be a major criterion for whether you receive academic advancement? If DePaul can’t stand the academic heat it should turn itself into a vocational school.

richards1052, Though I Don’t Completely Agree w. Finkelstein’s views..., at 5:35 am EDT on June 11, 2007

The Words of a Scholar?

Dershowitz website is interesting reading. If the quotes in it are accurate, they seem to support judgment of Dean and President.

Publius, at 7:05 am EDT on June 11, 2007

There’s a difference between “emotion” and academic standards

I agree with Jack and am encouraged that the DePaul decision stressed academic standards. It is a false argument to imply that either A) outside pressure made the decision or B) strong views with emotion are not desired. We have a tenure process for higher education, and it worked in this case.

Phil, at 8:15 am EDT on June 11, 2007

Mehrene Larudee, the other DePaul rejectee

I just did a bibliography search for Mehrene Larudee’s publications, to see if she perished in spite of having published. I could not find a single bona fide academic publication by her anywhere. She has a few screeds in a Marxist magazine (URPE) but that hardly “counts” at any serious university. DePaul did not treat her unfairly. Ditto for Finkelstein, who also has never published a single academic journal paper. All the leftist extremists are wringing their hands but they have no idea of what constitutes academic scholarship and research, and there was no academic basis for granting tenure to either of these people.

Stuart Michaelson, at 9:00 am EDT on June 11, 2007

Tenure Denial

The decision to reject Norman Finkelstein’s bid for tenure was made by the DePaul Tenure and Promotion Board. Though the university president has the right to overturn the recommendation of this seven member panel, it would be highly unusual to do so.

Candidates for tenure and promotion at DePaul are reviewed by faculty at the department, the college and university level. The vote at the department level was 9-3 in favor with majority and minority reports submitted to the college personnel committee.

The college personnel committee voted 5-0 in favor of tenuring Finkelstein. A sixth member of the college personnel committee was a member of the political science department who according to college rules was not permitted to vote or participate in the deliberations of the college committee. This is a very reasonable rule but since this person had been one of the writers of the minority report it is safe to assume that had he voted the college vote would have been 5-1. The dean wrote a report based on the discussions of the college committee and his own view of the case and recommended against granting tenure.

The tenure board reviewed the material in the case and interviewed the candidate, the student representative, the chair of the political science department and the dean of the college of liberal arts and sciences. After the interviews the committee made a preliminary vote. Three weeks later the committee reviewed its cases and made a final vote on Finkelstein’s tenure request. We know from documents that have been made public that the tenure board voted 4-3 opposing tenure.

The tenure board is appointed by DePaul’s Faculty Council. The members of the committee are suggested by a Faculty Council committee that is charged with recruiting members for university wide committees. The full Faculty Council then votes to approve or not approve its members. Members of the tenure board are appointed for three years and they are broadly representative of the university as a whole.

This particular group of faculty members is not particularly ideological. My guess is that they are mostly liberal Democrats with no particular agenda concerning the Arab/Israeli conflict. They reviewed the documents, listened to the various players in the process, weighed the issues of fairness to the candidate and the interests of the institution, considered the questions of academic freedom implicit in the case and came to a very difficult decision.

Jonathan Cohen, Professor of Mathematics at DePaul University, at 9:25 am EDT on June 11, 2007

Some perspective..

The first time I heard of DePaul university was when I looked up where Norman Finkelstein works. The second time I heard of DePaul university was when the debate on his tenure case began. This is the third time I heard of DePaul university.

Irit, at 9:40 am EDT on June 11, 2007

“The tenure board reviewed the material in the case and interviewed the candidate, the student representative, the chair of the political science department and the dean of the college of liberal arts and sciences."Why the latter? One wonders how interviewing the dean, who was the one who had to take the heat for the controversy, was publicly opposed to Finklestein and could rely on a great deal of institutional authority and sway, could have fairly contributed to this mess. Surely the same neocon scholars who decry the supposed general lack of backbone in administrators will question this as well in their fairness and objectivity, eh?

Ken, at 10:00 am EDT on June 11, 2007

Tenure procedures

Ken,

The procedure in all tenure and promotion cases at DePaul is to interview the candidate, the student rep, the candidate’s department chair and the dean of the candidate’s college. Those are the procedures followed by the tenure board and it is the same for all candidates.

Jonathan Cohen, Professor of Mathematics at DePaul University, at 10:40 am EDT on June 11, 2007

The Real Story

Jack Schwatrz writes:

“Scholars holding very strong pro-Israel opinions, for instance, denying the historical existence of a “Palestinian people,” would have a hard time finding an academic post in the USA or Britain.”

He is apparently unfamiliar with a man holding one of the highest academic posts in the United States—Alan Dershowitz, whose book “The Case For Israel” was based in large part on Joan Peters’ “From Time Immemorial” an utterly discredited hoax whose central thesis was that Palestinians do not exist.

Finkelstein documents (in withering detail) the wholesale lifting of the Peters fraud by Dershowitz. Finkelstein is subsequently denied tenure while filth from the sewer like Dershowitz are pampered, multimillionaire celebrity academics.

Such is life in our “open society.”

richard harth, at 11:25 am EDT on June 11, 2007

Tenure is a Farce

I feel that people miss the main issue which is how / why tenure is granted and the long term impact. Finkelstein doesn’t deserve tenure because he likes to voice unpopular, and invalid opionions. Since he is voicing skewed views so popular with the “ivy tower” mentality, but lacking reality, he is a danger to students who might be convinced that he is lecturing the truth. Once tenured, he can become even more warped in his lop-sided teachings and poison the minds of additional students, with no further checks on his rantings. The tenure process needs to be fixed. Tenure should allow some priviledges, but not a free rein to lie and spread his opions as reality. Even tenured teachers should be open to immediate firings for promoting the untruths so popular in the “ivy towers".

Not from the Ivy Tower, at 12:50 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

horrible news

DePaul did the wrong thing. I’m sorry, but I do not believe the president’s statement that outside influence had nothing to do with the decision. And it was not just Dershowitz, though he was the ring-leader. Lots of pro-Israel and Zionist groups and individuals worked their hardest to sway DePaul into denying tenure to a great scholar and a great activist. What are these peole so afraid of? Finkelstein speaks truth to power. He is a beacon of light in a horribly dark world. He won’t stop speaking the truth because of this wrong-headed decision. But it is a shame that more students will not be able to benefit from his teaching... SHAME on you DePaul!

Joelle Ruby Ryan, at 12:55 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Don’t be sorry, Joelle, you’re absolutely right. DePaul’s decision is clearly political, and in all the wrong ways. The hegemonic sway of reflexive, blinkered Zionism has again had its way. There is a difference between criticism of Zionism and criticism of Jews, a difference that N F consistently helped to clarify. He won’t be silenced by this, and his case is far from over.

Willie Mink, associate prof at midlevel midwestern u, at 1:35 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

passion in the classroom/collegiality

I am not surprised that some persons commenting on the Finkelstein matter are indignant that professors and students are expected to be rational and refrain from ad hominem attacks. The history of our sorry species is replete with acting out destructive emotions, and we tend to underestimate the power of the irrational in the everyday decisions we make, whether or not we are in a learning situation. It is a mistake to conflate “passion” with the deployment of insults directed to individuals and groups. For instance, personal emotional investments can fuel vigorous and sustained research, but then the researcher must, must, scrutinize one’s writing, tone, and conclusions for bias.One is helped by a collective of scholars with the same values and respect for facts and sound reasoning. Call the process of self-criticism and group criticism “collegiality."I was simply appalled by the commentator above who described Dershowitz as “filth from the sewer.” How very much like the kind of language in use by Streicher in his famous Nazi newspaper. Are Streicher and his ilk to be in charge of our universities?

clare spark, Independent Scholar, at 1:55 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Pascale Mondane is wrong. Finkelstein does NOT present himself as an authority on German History. His only book dealing with the subject is co-authored by Ruth Birn, a leading holocaust researcher who oversees the very archives Danial Goldhagen claimed to draw on for his preposterous comic book “Hitler’s Willing Executioners.”

Finkelstein and Birn’s dissection became a Times Most Notable book and Goldhagen has been dismissed by literally everone in the field of Holocaust study. (Hilberg calls Goldhagen’s book “worthless.” )

Mondane is also wrong about Finkelstein’s travel—he has been to the Occupied Territories many times, as a guest of his Palestinian friend, a field worker for Israel’s human rights organization, Bt’Selem.

Clare Spark on the other calls my characterization of the repulsive Alan dershowitz Nazi-like, apparently unaware of what true Nazi behavior looks like. She needs to pay more attention to Israel’s daily abominations. The plain similarities to Nazism are described in a moving piece by Harvard scholar Sara Roy:

http://www.bintjbeil.com/E/occupation/roy_holocaust.html

richard harth, at 2:40 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

DePaul rejects Finkelstein

There is an aspect to this affair, along with Harvard’s refusal, at the instigation of Alan Dershowitz, to allow Robert L. Trivers to speak that must be addressed. Surely, it must be obvious to any informed observer that the bullying tactics of Dershowitz and his very powerful pro-Israel allies in suppressing documented scholarly criticism of Israel are feeding the fires of anti-Semitism. Those familiar with the history of the Israel-Palestinian/Arab conflict will remember the fears expressed by Edwin Montagu, the only Jewish member of the British Cabinet when the Balfour Declaration was being debated. He predicted that the creation of a Jewish “national home” in Palestine would eventually lead to the alienation of Jews living elsewhere, and in the case of those who supported the Zionist venture, suspicion of dual loyalties.

Gary, at 3:20 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Tenure is a farce?

I hope everyone read the alarming, but all too comon among conservative critics of academe, comments made by the post titled “Tenure is a Farce” above. Here is a section: “Tenure should allow some priviledges, but not a free rein to lie and spread his opions as reality.” And who will decide who is lying and who is not? The voters of a state? The state legislature (like the one that censored Hugo Black for siding with Brown v. Board)? The board of trustees? A dean or administration (perhaps this very DePaul administration is an example of such a case before us) who can be counted on to cut off a qualified scholar because they can’t stand the heat he brings with his admittedly controversial and provocative work (Copernicus’ work was provocative and controversial too, right)? This is frightening stuff.I appreciate the information from Dr. Cohen’s post. I actually did not think it irregular that the dean was called in, but given his rather public and strident opposition to Dr. Finklestein and the all too unfortunate tendency of college administrators to earn their reputation for compromising principles in the face of the heat of negative publicity, I just doubt whether much principled good came out of this inclusion. Perhaps this was not the case, but who on such a faculty committee would want to have to deny this Dean the man’s head he so badly wanted? Deference, especially on an issue like “collegiality” should have been made to the department and college decisions.

Ken, at 3:50 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Stay Focused

Come on folks...Lets stay focused! This has nothing to do with Dershowitz! Do you really believe the President of DePaul made his decision based on a few comments by Alan Dershowitz? I doubt it! Please give the President of DePaul University a little more credit then that. He looked at his published work and didn’t like what he saw...it’s that simple, no more, no less!

RJ Lash, at 4:00 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Brief Clarification

As Finkelstein pointed out, Jews like Dershowitz, (Edgar Bronfman, Israel Singer, Abe Foxman)go out of their way to behave like the worst anti-Semitic stereotypes, straight out of Der Strurmer. In this respect, they are a leading cause of world anti-Semitism. We should condemn them in the most unsparing terms possible, (just as racist garbage of their ilk who don’t happen to be Jewish should be condemned).

What is clearly ridiculous is to turn decent society’s predictable revulsion at Dershowitz’ pogrom against DePaul University and free inquiry on Israel-Palestine into sympathy for this debased lout, serial plagiarist and OJ Simpson attorney.

richard harth, at 4:40 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Larudee’s publications

Stuart Michaelson’s claim that Mehrene Larudee has never published except for a few screeds in URPE is straightforwardly false, as anyone can verify in a few seconds by doing a search on Google Scholar. She also has a major article coming out in the International Review of Applied Economics this September.

MM, at 4:50 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Disappointing and Discouraging

DePaul’s decision to reject Finkelstein’s tenure bid represents a profound disappointment. As someone still in the training process to become a scholar on the Middle East the decision by DePaul to reject a clearly qualified candidate such as Dr. Finkelstein tenure is highly discouraging to me and my colleagues who work on these issues. It suggests to us that there exists little space in academia for those who dare to criticize established views particularly concerning Israel. It is a silencing decision, not only for Dr. Finkelstein, but for all academics and aspiring academics who share the view that Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian people is unacceptable and must stop. The view of international law, mind you.

Finkelstein is the son of holocaust survivors, he is endorsed by a number of leading holocaust scholars and yet even he is subject to such contemptuous and vile attacks on his character and almost never on the quality of his scholarship. He is often falsely charged as being a “holocaust denier” in spite of his background and the fact that he has never denied the holocaust. He instead denounces the abuse of its memory by some who would use it to cover for new injustices against the Palestinians.

The decision by DePaul to deny Dr. Finkelstein tenure based on a lack of collegiality is absurd. He is unapolegtic in his attacks on Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinians. How is this problematic? Being firmly anti-colonial is a commendable position. The notion that one should not be overly forceful in one’s critique of colonizers is absurd.

In the end, DePaul’s political decision to deny Dr. Finkelstein tenure constitutes an ad hominem attack in and of itself. It is an attack on his personality and his style and not his scholarship.

Tim Kaldas, Georgetown University, at 6:15 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Finkelstein’s tenure

Two thousand years ago a man died on the cross for speaking truth to authority. Now we have a catholic priest a one Father Holtschneider, a modern day Pontius Pilate, who has academically crucified a Jew called Norman Finkelstein, a son of holocaust survivors, for courageously speaking truth to power. Talk of anti-Semitism, here is a primal example. “Father” Holtschneider, like Pilate of old, lacked the moral courage to resist the modern day “temple priests” and has unfortunately succumbed to the terror unleashed by the “high priest” who chief preoccupation seems to be to promote torture (read his LA Times article about how to inflict maximum pain on a fellow human being) and defend murderers. Like in the olden days when court clowns held power, this immoral man who should be struggling for tenure in a community college is a distinguished professor at Harvard. Either Father Holtschneider is unfamiliar with the bible or willfully disregards the teachings of his lord Jesus Christ. Was Christ a “collegial person” for the establishment, Father Holtschneider?

There are some similarities between Spinoza (the great 19th century philosopher) and the modern day giant of an intellectual Norman Finkelstein (see testimonies about the power of his intellect from the highly regarded Raul Hilberg for example.) Like Spinoza, Finkelstein is now exiled from the community for his anti-establishment, original and deeply moral views. A fellow professor tells me, Finkelstein indeed is in a much harder position than Spinoza was, perhaps this is true.

What can we say about a system, an establishment that excommunicates the likes of Spinoza and Finkelstein and glorifies torture propagating Dershowitz?

Finkelstein’s tenure case is a pivotal moment in American academics, either we surrender our deeply cherished freedoms to a lobby or we uphold it with a passion that can only match Finkelstien’s zeal for truth. This is not a moment to be silent dear friends. This is a war for freedom against slavish subjugation to a lobby. This is a war to preserve the values for which many noble men and women (many of them Jewish) gave up their lives for many centuries. This is a war that should honor men and women who like Finkelstein’s parents survived the holocaust and whose sufferings have been exploited by the third rate minds with nth rate morality.

To be silent now is asking for death; death of bold thinking, death of academic freedom, and death of truth seeking. If we let up now, the blatant falsehoods and half truths will dominate as can be seen from that Father Holtschneider’s tenure rejecting letter.

Arise, awake and march forward towards truth! Let us set up a legal defense fund for Finkelstein, mere words are not enough!

A tenured university professor(trying to avoid the beasts!)

Conscious More, Finkelstein, Spinoza and the establishment at A good midwestern major state University, at 8:55 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

The issue of faculty decision is important. Lets look at it. According to the letter issued by Father Holtschneider, the decisions were made as follows. The political science department votes in favor of tenure. The vote is 9-3. The issue then goes to the College Personnel Committee, which voted 5-0. Sources say that there was another faculty member on that committee, but as he or she is in political science, his or her vote did not count as it was already included in the department vote. Given this data, I assume that this Committee is comprised of faculty. So, we have two faculty organizations ruling in favor of Finkelstein, before administration gets involved. At this time, the dean, Charles Suchar, who was/is in Sociology but is more of an administrative figure since he is the dean, denies the request for tenure passed by the two faculty groups. Then the issue is taken up by the University Board of Promotion and Tenure. The board opposes the motion for tenure 4-3. This board is comprised of faculty members. There are 7 members and each member represents a different college in the University.

With regards to collegiality, this issue is something that DePaul claims to be absent from the decision making process.

http://oaa.depaul.edu/_content/wh...%20and%20Tenure%20Committee%2006.pdf

http://oaa.depaul.edu/_content/wh...dTenure2004-2005AcademicYear_000.pdf

those links will provide pdf’s supporting the above notice. The question I have, however, is as follows: why after two faculty committees, one by Finkelstein’s own department (which is in the best position to judge whether he should get tenure because that’s the field of his research and work) and the other by the College Personell Committee, comprised of faculty from faculty throughout the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, another faculty committee (the one for promotion and tenure) votes against Finkelstein (and its close: 4-3, whereas all the other votes were not even close and convincingly supported Finkelstein) and this vote happens after the dean denies Finkelstein’s request.

Now, you can take that for what its worth, which might not be anything and just might be the way things happened, but it is a peculiar scenario to be sure.

Those that did not favor Finkelstein have articulated reasons that are not only vague, but are ill supported—in fact there was not one piece of evidence released to support any of the criticisms leveled against Finkelstein by the Committee and the President’s letter—and ill informed as they demonstrate an affirmation of certain criticisms that are not only still being debated, but time and time again being shown to be inaccurate (such as the idea that Finkelstein fabricates evidence and is not an important part of the DePaul Community and does not contribute enough to Vincentian Values, which as far as I can tell from my experience working with him is not only not true, for he did do a great deal to work with students and organizations in the DePaul Community, but also beside the point in a way because some of those values need not only rethinking, but restrategizing in accord with how effective they are in relation to how they are accomplished; it is not always the case that what you read on paper cashes out the way a university would hope).

I believe that at its best, a university opens itself and fosters intellectual growth through debate, through the exchange of ideas, energy, passion, even if that causes controversy and a variety of arguments and ideas. This is how learning happens, when the university is at its best, and though Finkelstein is committed to his ideas and projects, being committed to what one is passionate about is different than the dogmatism he is often accused of.

MattRoberts, faculty decision? at Emory University, at 10:05 pm EDT on June 11, 2007

Dr. Finkelstein is not a scholar

I ama Holocaust Survivor and in the past have corresponded with Dr. Finkelstein. In exchanding scholarly research, I found him lacking in knowledge regarding the Holocaust. Dr. Finkelstein often became defensive and responded to me in a virulent manner. He is insulting to a person,without ever answering a question. I gained the impression that he was under stress , and may have psycholo0gical personality problems. His anit-Israel bias seems to cloud his judgment and scholarly attempts. The fact that he has been published, to me is no indication of his value as a professor. He , it seems to me, was published because of his diatribes and opposition to the existence of Israel. Being a Jew, that is so anti-Israel seems to the publisher,who is in business to sell books. a detrerminant and not any of his alleged scholarship/ I support the decision of the President of the DePauw University.Dr. Finkelstein alleges he is unemplyed now when in fact he is not. Another of his twisting the truth!

Freddy lejeune, at 4:30 am EDT on June 12, 2007

“This was a faculty decision and not one dictated by the DePaul administration.”

This was largely NOT a faculty decision. Two faculty committees voted in favor of tenure. The first party to put the brakes on the Finkelstein tenure promotion was the dean who recommended against tenure. Then the committee heard fr. the same dean, who lobbied it against granting tenure. By a narrow vote, this faculty committee denied tenure. And the president rejected tenure as well. The two most important factors in this decision were the dean’s & president’s evaluations.

It is understandable that you’d wish to protect the reputation of your school. But I’m afraid it just won’t wash with many of the rest of us.

richards1052, Administrators, not faculty were key deciders, at 4:30 am EDT on June 12, 2007

Finkelstein “Silenced"? Don’t make me laugh.

Every anti-Jewish crackpot is coming out of the closet to claim that Finkelstein was “silenced” and “muzzled” because of his anti-Semitism. But the very fact that American academia is crawling with Israel haters, terrorism cheerleaders, and open anti-Semites attests — if anything — to the weakness and impotence of the imaginary “Israel Lobby” in academia. The simple fact of the matter was that Finkelstein was hired without having a single academic publication and he came close to getting tenure in spite of it. In reality he was hired ONLY BECAUSE of his politics, and was fired in spite of his politics! The vote on Finkelstein’s tenure was apparently 4 to 3 against him. But the fact that 3 members of the committee would vote for a hatemonger with no academic publications states volumes! Israel haters and Jew baiters are to be found in droves in academia in America, and the situation in Europe is worse. Some “censorship". Some “lobby". Some muzzling! If Israel bashing profs are not permitted to speak their minds, how come there are so many running about campus?

Bracha Melch, at 5:45 am EDT on June 12, 2007

I think what is most regrettable is that the author of this article, while mentioning all the negative stuff written about Prof. Finkelstein by his enemies, artfully “forgot” to mention that highest authorities on Holocaust and Jewish studies — Raul Hilberg and Avi Shlaim both praised Finkelshtein work as highly academic. Here is what Hilberg,an author of “Destruction of European Jews” said: “When I read Finkelstein’s book, The Holocaust Industry , at the time of its appearance, I was in the middle of my own investigations of these matters, and I came to the conclusion that he was on the right track. I refer now to the part of the book that deals with the claims against the Swiss banks, and the other claims pertaining to forced labor. I would now say in retrospect that he was actually conservative, moderate and that his conclusions are trustworthy. He is a well-trained political scientist, has the ability to do the research, did it carefully, and has come up with the right results. I am by no means the only one who, in the coming months or years, will totally agree with Finkelstein’s breakthrough.” Later, speaking of Finkelsteon’s ordeal Hilberg added:"It takes an enormous amount of courage to speak the truth when no one else is out there to support him". I think your publication should ask the author of this article if he is also afraid of saying good word for enemies of Dershovitz. Otherwise why did he not even tried to maintain the balance?"Inside Higer Ed"? Give me a brake, professors!

Alex Chaihorsky, at 10:45 pm EDT on June 12, 2007

Norman Won

It would appear, from the facts in the tenure findings, that Norman Finkelstein’s assertions about undue and underhanded influence in Academe has been proven.

Aiman, at 4:30 am EDT on June 13, 2007

to art from UMY:

Twice guilt by association. Mr. Dershovitzs’ support for torture does not bother you, but a cartoon! Omygod!

Alex Chaihorsky, at 10:30 am EDT on June 13, 2007

specifics again

Finkelstein invited that obscene cartoon. The only guilt by association is an association HE voluntarily invited, an association with a Holocaust denier who does obscene cartoons. HE, Finkelstein, was the one up for tenure. One charge against his tenure was his over-the-top behavior, as the President of his University explicitly said. Sorry, Finkelstein-supporters, but it makes sense. An untenured professor who’d done this sort of thing would be in trouble at my university too.

Q.E.D.

art eckstein, professor at university of maryland, at 11:50 am EDT on June 13, 2007

Finkelstein’s charges of plagiarism against Dershowitz

In a tenure case involving Norman Finkelstein, it is Finkelstein who is the topic, though lots of people would like to change the topic into an assault on Alan Dershowitz. Dershowitz in another venue might well be a legitimate target of attack, but the issue in the tenure case is not a comparison with Dershowitz’s various delicts, but rather Finkelstein.

Here one should note that Finkelstein’s public accusations of plagiarism against Dershowtiz, especially of Joan Peters, which still appear on Finkelstein’s website and which some posters here have repeated, were officially investigated by Harvard University in 2004 and the accusations were found to be without foundation and were dismissed.

An assistant professor who was on record as making very serious charges of academic dishonesty against a prominent academic, and those charges were investigated and dismissed by Harvard University—that wouldn’t help in terms of getting that assistant professor tenure, I’ll tell you that.

art eckstein, professor at university of maryland, at 1:25 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

Ashamed DePaul Alumni

I have always had my reservations about the administration of DePaul. I am now ashamed to tell people I am a graduate of that institution. This Finkelstein case shows how strong of a grip zealout Israeli zionists have with their Christian allies. No criticism of Israel will be tolerated. And no criticism of Alan Dershowitz needs to be added to that list of mortal sins at DePaul. In many ways, DePaul is a wonderful school with great professors. If I had to do it over again, I would have chosen another university.

GregM, at 2:25 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

Eckstein’s moronic comments

Dear Art Eckstein,

Here are some wise sayings of your friend Dershowitz. I want to know, are you two in the same cocktail circuit? Let me assure you I have never seen Prof. Finkelstein, even though it would be an honor to meet him at least once.

Wise sayings of Prof. Alan Dershowitz, Frankfurter professor of law:

—“The defendant wants to hide the truth because he’s generally guilty. The defense attorney’s job is to make sure the jury does not arrive at that truth.” —Alan DershowitzFact: Dershowitz defended OJ Simpson among other suspected murderers.

—“So you know, having laws on the books and breaking them systemically just creates disdain ... It’s much better to have rules that we can actually live within. And absolute prohibitions, generally, are not the kind of rules that countries would live within. —Alan Dershowitz(in CNN)

—- “The suspect would be given immunity from prosecution based on information elicited by the torture. The warrant would limit the torture to nonlethal means, such as sterile needles, being inserted beneath the nails to cause excruciating pain without endangering life."—Alan Dershowitz

Comment: Nazis used sterilized needles for torture and so did the imperial Japanese during second world war!

Of course we should congratulate Prof. Dershowitz for advocating the use of sterilized needles instead of infected ones. Shows what a noble man he truly is. Why cannot we accept his greatness and move on? Maybe it is our own smallness..

This Harvard professor also blames civilian victims in Lebanon’s recent war with Israel and refers to them disdainfully as “civilian” victims.

Prof. Art Eckstein, you are supposed to be an university professor who should be seeking truth, not massaging your intellectual soul-mates uncritically! Learn something and set a good example to your kids.

Gautama, Art Eckstein at Better than Eckstein’s, at 4:10 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

Latuff and Mr. Dershowitz plagiarism

Latuff:I have seen nothing to suggest that Latuff, the cartoonist, is a holocaust denier.

He did send a cartoon to the “International Holocaust Cartoon Competition” held by an Iranian newspaper. But his cartoon did in no way denie the holocaust. On the contrary it relies on the holocaust to be fact, in order to work. See link to cartoon below:

http://www.irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/002carlos-Latuff-(12).jpg

Mr. Dershowitz:As for Mr. Dershowitz plagiarism. Anyone can obtain a copy of Joan Peter’s book and compare it with “The Case for Israel". I did this myself, after hearing these “wild” accusations against a famous Harvard professor.

But it was rather clear that Mr. Dershowitz clearly copied many parts from Peters book without quoting her. Which at the time seemed incomprehensible to me, that a Harward professor would risk his career with such a cheap cheat.

But after having seen Harward acquit him, at the risk of their own reputation, it is clear that he did it, because he knew he had such strong backing that he would get away with it.

But apart from copying from Joan Peters book, every other chapter in the book is full of factual errors, misquotes or manipulations. It actually has to be seen, to be believed.

Jens Nielsen, at 6:00 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

counterpunch cartoon of alan dershowitz

After my own search through the various Internet caches, I have not found any evidence that the cartoon in question ever appeared next to a Finkelstein article about Dershowitz in August 12 / 13, 2006 issue of Counterpunch other than Dershowitz’s claim itself. I finally found a link to the cartoonist’s various cartoons in one of Dershowitz’s many versions of his claim, and found the Dershowitz cartoon on something like the fifth page (with about 20 cartoons per page.) It seems odd to me that Dershowitz didn’t save a screenshot of the Counterpunch page and has only provided a link to the cartoonist’s collection.

paul mccarthy, at 6:20 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

Eckstein’s response

Eckstein’s response is even more incredible than his initial comments.

You make it look as if some idiot or idealogue in the middle level of university hierarchy takes a decision then all other higher committees naturally takes the same. If this is true (which it is not) this should be condemned, which you have not done.

I am not going to talk about the silly issues you have framed. You seem to have some agenda against Finkelstein and in general for those who show sympathy for the Palestinian cause, you should have the courage to come out openly about it, after all you have the lobby supporting you, so no need to fear for your career. It is we that need to fear the Gestapo tactics of your supporters.

Your very silly points do not explain anything at all. Here are some facts that you need to be aware of:

—Mehrene Larudee was supported at all levels yet she was rejected in the end. It is said in several quarters that this was a vindictive move by the DePaul administration for her support for Finkelstein. Talk of academic freedom and Stalinistic purges!

—Eckstein, being a university professor you should read and learn about stuff and not blabber some irrelevant things. Raul Hilberg is a world expert and founder of Holocaust studies. He has praised Finkelstein and I quote them below to educate you:

” ...as one hundred percent correct and that is that the response to the issue of the Swiss banks and German industry, which had coincided during the War, was not only coercive on the part of the Jews who mobilized, but also on the part of all the insurance commissioners, the Senate, the House, and the critical committees.” and that “For Finkelstein, this was naked extortion and I’m not sure who agreed with him except for me and I said so openly. In fact, I said so to the press in maybe seven countries.”

Raul Hilberg continues: “Well Finkelstein is now maligned all over the place. There were obviously lobbies who tried to dislodge him from his position. Finkelstein is a political scientist. I believe he has a PhD degree from Princeton and, whatever you may think of Princeton; this is a pretty strong preparation to be a professional political scientist. He wrote to me a couple of times. He was the first one to take Goldhagen seriously. He attacked Goldhagen in a very long essay which I could never have written because I would have never had the patience. Goldhagen is part of an academic group that in my kind of research is a disaster...”

—Finally, How dare you question Finkelstien’s love for his mother? He is a proud son of holocaust survivors, living up to their values in every way. He is a brave man, a man of integrity and brilliance, a combination rarely seen in academics. So please be decent enough not to interfere in the personal affair of mother and son. Have you no sense of decency Eckstein?

Gautama, Eckstein’s response is moronic at Better than yours, at 6:40 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

abusive parents and antisemitic children

I should not be astonished that the fight over Finkelstein, which has devolved into numerous ad hominems directed at Alan Dershowitz, Professor Eckstein and possibly myself is still going on. I honestly believe that many of these postings are hysterically antisemitic, or that their faux arguments are simply presented in “bad faith” as Sartre would say (see his “Antisemite and Jew.") So since I don’t believe that I can carry on a rational conversation with those suffering from distorted perceptions, let me simply ask a question that I do not expect to be answered here: Many of the pro-Finkelstein/anti-Dershowitz faction apparently believe that “Zionists” (or “the Jewish Lobby” or “neocons,” etc.)are so powerful that they wield absolute power and are destroying their hapless dependents. Did you, in your childhood, suffer from authoritarian parenting that refused any and all criticism? If so, it is my opinion, and that of numerous psychologists writing after the second world war, that “the Jews” may have became the designated target for the righteous fury of the physically or emotionally abused child that was necessarily repressed in such households. That is the irrationalist explanation. For a rational interpretation of antisemitism, consider the expropriation of Jewish property and the elimination of Jewish rivals in the professions and business. I suspect that both psychological and economic factors operate in the mentality of the antisemite, so that “the powerful Jew,” once defeated or exterminated, arouses no guilt in the perpetrator. After seeing the dominance of antimodernism in the academy and and Pacifica Radio where I had been broadcasting for decades, I predicted in the early 1990s that we would see a frightening resurgence of antisemitism, and sadly, my prophecy is turning out to be all too true. I urge all those on the list who are appalled by many of the (generally anonymous) comments here pay much greater attention to the failures of so-called multiculturalism in the schools (with the blame put on crypto-Jewish capitalists and puritans for crushing the various volk cultures), and give far more attention to the long-term causes and short-term causes of antisemitism, demonstrating the harm that such pathologies inflict upon the holder of these distortions.In sum, we are not always teaching our students the difference between arbitrary and legitimate authority. Such statements as the above one, that the Finkelstein affair “proves” the power of Israel and Zionism, are a symptom of the post-60s failure to teach scientific thought and reasoning, either at home or in the schools and media. (The fight for rationality began much earlier, but the one-sidedness of the humanities faculty is a post-60s phenomenon.)

Clare Spark, Independent Scholar, at 7:50 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

Just google Art Eckstein and you see what is going on. Art is a neocon history professor and a junior Muslim hater from the Dersh-Pipes-Horovitz brigade. Example of his wisdom:"The misery inflicted in Iraq is the direct result of vile barbaric jihadists—not American troops". Its like saying that the misery of Russian population after WWII was inflicted not be Nazis but by Russians themselves who DARE TO RESIST by blowing up infrastructure and crops so it won’t get into the hands of occupiers!A HISTORY professor! Congratulations, Maryland! Leo Tolstoy was right when he wrote that history is the winners’ whore. And many pimps she does have...

Alex Chaihorsky, at 9:00 pm EDT on June 13, 2007

reply to Alex

Alex, the jihadists blow up universities (killing students by the dozens) and book markets (they killed another 50 or so civilians there), and all in all intentionally killed 36,000 civilians last year. Now—when the NAZIS occupied France, did the FFI blow up the Sorbonne, Notre Dame, book markets, civilians? No, they did not. Neither did the Russian or Polish resistance. That you dare to compare the jihadists to the “resistance” in WWII, Alex, tells us, unfortunately, a lot about you. I don’t think the support of folks like you is likely to help F.

Regarding Finkelstein himself: on Oct. 9, 2006, he put THIS on his website:

“Isn’t it time to send over Hitchens, George Packer, Tom Friedman, Paul Berman and all the rest of those top guns in the rear? Personally, I hope they end up among the dead, but if it has to be among the wounded, let’s hope all their limbs (and tongues) will be amputated.”

I’ve voted on lots of tenure cases, and I’ve chaired a couple of tenure sub-committees, and I’d say this: ANY tenure situation, any tenure committee, when faced with out-of-control statements such as the one above from a candidate for tenure, is going to become very difficult very quickly. Given F’s grotesque and out-of-control statements such as the one above, the mystery, frankly, is why F. got so many votes in his Department.

Well, perhaps Finkelstein will deny that he said this on Oct. 9, 2006. (It’s been taken down, like the maturbatory cartoon.) But, like the masturbation cartoon, like the failed public accusation of plagiarism against Dershowitz, like the failed public accusation of corruption against Burt Neuborne, F’s history here would red-flag his candidacy at any university.

art eckstein, professor at history, at 5:10 am EDT on June 14, 2007