The Bwog
Found in Nussbaum
Yeah, we're not even gonna touch this one...

Posted by that: #1 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:40 AM
This is blatantly anti-semitic. Why do people think that they can hide their anti-semitism in politics.

Not to make any generalizations, but Goddamn ISO, what is wrong with you people.
Posted by what?: #2 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:45 AM
ISO? ...

What about hiding politics in accusations of anti-semitism?
Posted by if you're not: #3 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:48 AM
gonna touch this one, why even post this one? weak, bwog, weak.
Posted by confused: #4 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:48 AM
i don't even think it's jews that are perpetuating anti-islam, "islamo-faschist" horsecrap. it's not the jews, it's us, the americans.
Posted by Savonarola: #5 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:51 AM
that guy's a christian right?
Posted by umteenth time: #6 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:52 AM
I hate having to repeat this, but here it goes again. There's nothing "anti-Islamic" or bigoted about exposing the dangers of radical Islam. Unless, of course, you equate Islam with radical Islam. The horsecrap is yours. Please clean it up.
Posted by yeah.: #7 (in reply to #4) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:53 AM
just keep on being intellectually dishonest and claiming the term islamo-fascist necessitates islamophobia

meanwhile ignore what would be a considered a hate crime on this poster that #3 would have a fit about if it was anti black/hispanic/lgbt/anything but jewish/christian

hypocrites
Posted by In fact,: #8 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:54 AM
I think it's actually quite offensive to decent Muslims everywhere to suggest that they should feel offended by a campaign against Islamic terrorism and terror-state repression.
Posted by Lastly,: #9 (in reply to #3) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Lastly, #4, I don't mean to pick on you endlessly, but it seems that, through a slip of the tongue, you implied that American Jews are not Americans. I suggest you re-think that.
Posted by Orwell: #10 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:07 AM
Incidentally, did anyone catch those Orwell-themed ISO posters? "War=Peace, Anti-Fascists=Fascists, etc..." Self-proclaimed "socialists" so fail to understand the message of Orwell that it would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Posted by I think: #11 (in reply to #9) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:11 AM
whoever's arguing this case denies any difference between "Jewish" and "Zionist"
Posted by um,: #12 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:12 AM
anti-zionism is not anti-semitism.
Posted by I think: #13 (in reply to #12) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:15 AM
A better statement is: Apathy and/or disinterest in Zionism does not mean anti-Semitism
Posted by Well,: #14 (in reply to #12) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:21 AM
we can argue about that on a different day. But when you use the word "Jew," you're expressly referring to the Jewish people, not just the Jewish state.
Posted by Huh?: #15 (in reply to #13) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:22 AM
What does that have to do with this at all?
Posted by Throw the Jew: #16 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:25 AM
down the well! So my country can be free!

You must grab him by his horns,

And then we have a big party.

Jagshemash!
Posted by borat: #17 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:33 AM
solves all world issues. i only wish that were true.
Posted by Same graffitist?: #18 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:51 AM
I somehow wouldn't be surprised if the graffitist is the same visionary behind this little number last semester:

[external link to www.bwog.net]

Assuming it's the same person, I'm not impressed that the graffitist hasn't really matured in his/her commentary. Wow, a leftist blanket statement on a College Republicans' flyer? Now that's daring.

Posted by Orwell: #19 (in reply to #10) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 1:59 AM
himself was a socialist. So I don't see what's so strange about the ISO using language from 1984 in their flyers.
Posted by Well,: #20 (in reply to #19) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:02 AM
not that kind of socialist.
Posted by i actually: #21 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:04 AM
kind of like this. people are getting pissed off at jews and socialists for everything, just like the good old days. fuck all y'all!
Posted by DHI: #22 (in reply to #20) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:05 AM
Yeah dude, wasn't Orwell an extreme totalitarian who wanted to erase free expression through language in order to control thought? I heard that's what Orwellians are all about.
Posted by here we go again: #23 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:13 AM
since when is it anti-semitic to point out a racial double standard? the college republicans have no problem when david horowitz (who was jewish last time i checked) "ties islam to fascism," so why shouldn't they be ridiculed for saying they have a problem with ahmedinejad "tying islam to fascism"? horowitz supporters see anti-semitism around every corner. this is provocative, sure, but to call it anti-semitic is to ignore its obvious sarcasm and willingly put aside the fact that the college republicans are talking out their ass on this one: they love it when ahmedinejad evokes the image of fascism in the west, because each time he does it we're that much closer to the senseless war they crave. the only allegation being made here is against the college republicans: if you think otherwise it says more about your own preconceptions than it does about whoever defaced this flyer.
Posted by Orwell: #24 (in reply to #22) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:13 AM
was a more complex character than a quick reading of animal farm or 1984 make him out to be. #19 is right though because he supported democratic socialism with a heavy trotskiite influence much like the ISO

Either way, Orwell references have sadly became a en vogue substitute for an argument
Posted by fail. utter fail.: #25 (in reply to #23) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:20 AM
there's obviously a disconnect for you here

Horowitz purportedly is pointing out the subset of those who are islamic who engage in fascist methods to promote teh religion

Mahmoud is allegedly actively using those facist techniques under the guise of islam

The person who wrote on the poster also could have chosen the word Horowitz (though it would be nonsensical just as your arguement was) but instead chose 'Jew'

Posted by by the way: #26 (in reply to #23) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 2:23 AM
extra troll points for claiming 'we're (because your views are always the majority) closer to the senseless war they advocate' while not mentioning why its senseless, explaining that 'islamofascism' certainly isn't the only or even most important factor with a possible war with iran, and ignoring the fact that war with the US is probably one of teh last things that ahmadinejad wants to provoke anyway
Posted by Whew!: #27 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 3:04 AM
It would take so much time to sift through your specious arguments and self-contradictions that I'm not even going to try, unless I can't find anything better to do. Good night.
Posted by Apologies: #28 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 3:04 AM
Sorry. That was in response to #23.
Posted by By the way,: #29 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 3:10 AM
Horovitz is not trying to defame a "race" (or religion, to be more precise). It was the vandal who needlessly and insultingly invoked the issue of race. You, and that anonymous individual, apparently can't stop seeing this through the same narrow prism.
Posted by the controversy: #30 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 3:14 AM
The whole "controversy" over this speakers series is a very pathetic reflection of the inability of those in our community to objectively observe the outside world.
Posted by meh: #31 (in reply to #19) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 3:16 AM
orwell was a socialist, but found most socialists to be phoney. read the second half of "the road to wigan pier," because he rips them apart. it's fairly fantastic.
Posted by Sprinkles: #32 · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 4:42 AM
The Hillel put out a statement saying it is not affiliated with Horowitz or this entire shame of an awareness week. FFS, most Jews I met are more knowledgable and sympathetic about Islam than the Christians are.
Posted by anonymous: #33 (in reply to #32) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 8:30 AM
Did I miss when Christianity came up in the discussion?
Posted by thank you!: #34 (in reply to #8) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:00 AM
"I think it's actually quite offensive to decent Muslims everywhere to suggest that they should feel offended by a campaign against Islamic terrorism and terror-state repression."

this is an excellent point. thank you for recognizing something important--decent muslims need not be offended. they should be the ones at the forefront of this kind of event, trying to drive out psychos from their religion.
Posted by those flyers: #35 (in reply to #10) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:33 AM
are not ISO flyers. the ISO is not the only far-left group on campus.
Posted by "decent Muslims": #36 (in reply to #34) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:34 AM
David Horowitz: "the MSA is a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and is funded by the Saudis and is part of the Islamo-fascist jihad"

[external link to www.frontpagemag.com]

Posted by more: #37 (in reply to #36) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Horowitz, in the organizers' guide for "Islamofascism Awareness Week":

"Islam: What the West Needs to Know reveals the violent, expansionary ideology of the so called 'religion of peace' that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government."

"Of course Islam also oppresses Christians, Jews, gays and atheists. We are focusing on the oppression of women..."
Posted by more: #38 (in reply to #37) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:39 AM
those last quotes from here:

[external link to media2.terrorismawareness.org]

we have a lot of commenters here who either 1) don't know what the fuck they're talking about or 2) are College Republicans being utterly disingenuous
Posted by anonymous: #39 (in reply to #38) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Ah, the good old "If you don't agree with me, you're either stupid or you're a Republican!!" line. Charming.
Posted by maybe: #40 (in reply to #39) · reply · track
October 25, 2007 at 11:05 AM
its an old line, but those quotes are pretty fucking clear. "islamofascism" = the MSA & "islam". it's not really a matter of opinion.
Posted by invisible_hand: #41 · reply · track
October 26, 2007 at 4:02 PM
oh fuck me.

the whole reason the PJA published our piece and petitioned hillel is that we knew something like this would happen.

horowitz does NOT speak in the voice of the jewish community, and his hate and lies help noone and further division and strife.
Name:
Email:
Reply to:

Describe this color in one lowercase word.

About Us

Bwog is compiled by the staff of The Blue and White, Columbia University's undergraduate magazine.

Contact Us

Please send tips to bwgossip@columbia.edu.

Questions or concerns? Email bweditors@columbia.edu.

Bwog is always looking for new writing talent. Email bwog@columbia.edu.

In Print

Search

Comment Policy

Our Favorite Comments

don't worry...: [read]
"this is columbia: your virginity will grow back"
omg: [read]
"I understand nothing about money except that I need to marry rich, but I love Jim Cramer"

Bwogroll

Technical

Our headlines are syndicated through Atom.
This site is powered by the Publicate Content Management System, which is available for free.
Our interface icons are from the free Silk set.