The campaign against her, with as far as I know no Middle Eastern Studies academic heavyweight joining it, would be easy to ignore if it were not for similar campaigns being successfully waged elsewhere (see for instance Norman Finkelstein).

The bigger point about these kinds of things is that opposition to them as to be strong from the get-go, or we will continue to see academics, journalists, policymakers, thinktankers etc. who are not judged as sufficiently pro-Israel being sidelined, passed over for promotion , or unable to get jobs in their field. This kind of omerta is already largely in effect despite the fact that Israel’s occupation of Palestine continues to be a central problem in US foreign policy. Even Nobel prize winning former US presidents are not immune from it — not just criticism of their thesis, but actual accusations of anti-Semitism, one of the most vile and damaging accusations one can make in America today. You have to fight back this kind of manipulation of the memory of the Nazis’ victims and bullying of legitimate critics of Israel before you have a generation of Middle East “experts” who practice self-censorship for the sake of their careers.

You make some good points, but plenty of major university presses publish bad books. And, great universities make hiring mistakes. Given the central claims of the book, are you at all surprised that Israel’s supporters are up in arms?

I am sure few on either side of this controversy have actually read the book.

Best,
Abu T

I would not be able to judge whether her research is good — from what I understand of its topic, few outside her field would.

Have you considered the possibility that Nadia Abu al-Haj’s book is flawed? I don’t know. I haven’t read it, but maybe it isn’t up to snuff.

Cheers,
Abu T

Jihad For Love- oh for pete’s sake. I thought Parvez had more sense. he had a much better title the last time we really talked about it.

Forked tongue? ssssssssss- Hitchens, definitely….