America’s Most Dangerous Professors

David Horowitz’s The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America contains two or more pages on each professor describing why each professor should be considered dangerous. However, Horowitz conceded that the 101 profiles represent only a sample of more than ten thousand dangerous professors. As a Marxist student at Columbia University during the Cold War of the 1950’s, David Horowitz was able to do well in courses taught by anti-communist professors. As an undergraduate business school student and capitalist at the University of Michigan during the Vietnam War in the 1960’s, I was able to do well even in a Philosophy of Communism course taught by a communist professor. My communist professor knew well the differences between all forms of communism and attended international conventions of communists. John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr’s In Denial: Historians, Communism, & Espionage documented the extent of the dishonesty of many communist professors today. David Horowitz has noted correctly that many current professors are destroying America’s once great university system by changing classrooms to indoctrination camps where professors attack students who dare to disagree with the idiotic views of the professors. For details of the latest cases involving students, see the Web site of David Horowitz’s Students for Academic Freedom (SAF): http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/ Approximately 30 researchers prepared the profiles of the 101 professors. Other than the names of the researchers who prepared each profile, there is no guidance to the reader about the credentials of the researchers or about the quality control techniques. David’s Blog at Front Page Magazine contains details of disputes raised about some of the profiled professors: http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/index.asp However, if the profiles had been prepared by professors who know the works of the profiled professors, then the profiles could have been even more critical. Peter Collier wrote the profile of Noam Chomsky, MIT Professor of Modern Languages and Linguistics. Peter Collier and David Horowitz were the co-editors of The Anti-Chomsky Reader. While some professors are being placed on trial in Europe for Holocaust denial, Noam Chomsky blundered with Pol Pot’s Cambodian genocide denial. While linguistics professors applaud Noam Chomsky’s contributions to linguistics and many readers would agree with some of his political views, it is difficult to understand why any professor (or anyone else) could deny Pol Pot’s Cambodian genocide. Since 1984, even people who rely only upon movies know about “The Killing Fields”. Among Chomsky’s many books, readers can find these books on the concept of rogue states: Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affairs and Acts of Aggression: Policing "Rogue" States. Professor Raymond Tanter, not profiled as one of the 101 most dangerous academics in America, published a book on a similar topic, Rogue Regimes: Terrorism and Proliferation. By David Horowitz’s criterion of professors who are dangerous in the classroom, Noam Chomsky probably has a greater following among students than Professor Raymond Tanter does. However, by the criterion of which professor is more dangerous to the world, Professor Raymond Tanter is the clear winner. Professor Raymond Tanter, a Republican, works with the Iran Policy Committee and is a strong supporter of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists. For descriptions of honest books about the MEK, see: http://www.iran-interlink.org/ In addition to Professor Raymond Tanter, the Iran Policy Committee includes a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee and retired military officers: http://www.iranpolicy.org/ If there are any honest communist professors, they should be exposing the activities of the Iran Policy Committee and of the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) who support the communist overthrow of Iran. A Republican professor who promotes support for Iranian communists with a Republican administration is more dangerous than non-Republican professors in classrooms. On January 13, 2006, David Horowitz’s Front Page Magazine published Michael Rubin’s “Monsters of the Left: The Mujahedin al-Khalq”. If the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists are monsters of the Left, then all professors who support them should be profiled, such as Professor Raymond Tanter and Professor Rabbi Daniel Zucker, founder of Americans for Democracy in the Middle East: http://www.adme.ws/ Unfortunately, David Horowitz’s Front Page Magazine has been publishing articles by supporters of the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists, including Professor Rabbi Daniel Zucker’s “Iran’s Interference in Iraq” on December 20, 2005. Professor Howard Zinn, one of the 101 professors profiled, is also a signer of the Stop War on Iran Statement: http://www.stopwaroniran.org/statement.shtml Zinn’s name and the names of communist organizations did not stop me, a conservative Republican, from signing this statement, too. The most honest disclosures about the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists and about Americans who support them have been at Web sites publishing right-wing authors: (1) Traitors USA http://groups.yahoo.com/group/traitorsusa/ (2) Antiwar.com, especially Justin Raimondo http://antiwar.com/justin/ (3) LewRockwell.com, http://www.lewrockwell.com/ David Horowitz is the author also of Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left. The problem with many authors on the left and right is that their simplifications to gain readers can result in dangerous consequences. A far more dangerous unholy alliance has been between the neo-conservatives (neo-Trotskyites) and the Republicans who permitted them to pose as conservatives. In 1959, the lies of Democrats and of Republicans about Fidel Castro being the “George Washington of Cuba” resulted in the communist takeover of Cuba and the Cuban Missile Crisis. On April 15, 2005, the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) permitted the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists to hold a convention at its Constitution Hall. On May 6, 2005, Front Page Magazine published David Johnson’s “A Third Option for Iran” supporting the MEK. As a conservative Republican professor who has been a target of some left-wing professors seeking the removal of all Republican professors from universities and who has supported David Horowitz’s years of work against political correctness in universities, I remain opposed to his editors at Front Page Magazine who have attempted to both support and oppose the Iranian Communist MEK (Rajavi Cult) terrorists.

Professors Paul Sheldon Foote, California State University, March5,2006

Service

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button