A couple of weeks ago (Jan. 10, “Middle-East programs often one-sided), Professor Ira Krull presented that, in his experience, many academic forums have presented an anti-Israeli platform disguised as dialogue, discussion or humanitarian concerns regarding the Arab/Iranian vs. Israel conflict. This is not an issue of free speech as claimed by Ahmed Danso-Faried (Jan. 17, “Criticism valid form of free speech”). Rather, it is criticism of the one-sided biased misinformation that is masqueraded as thoughtful communication. Furthermore, Danso-Faried comments that “too many times we are afraid to criticize, and cower in fear of disagreement with Israel…” This flowering expression of concern is dramatically out of touch with reality. I don’t know of any other topic that has so frequently and obsessively been dissected in academia and the media, most of the time with anti-Israel overtones. I believe Danso-Faried is concerned about the Palestinians in the Israeli-Palestinian component of the larger Middle East conflict. I find it interesting that humanitarian individuals and organizations are either mute or lack vigor, emotional involvement and energy when it comes to topics like the launch of 1,200 rockets on the Israeli civilian population in the past year, to Palestinian atrocities (summary executions, assassinations and lynchings), the cruel oppression of women in the Middle East or even the ongoing genocide of African blacks by the Muslim nation of Sudan.

-Samuel Rabino is a professor in the College of Business.