For some unfathomable reason, the LA Times loves to give UCLA Professor Saree Makdisi plenty of platform to write on their op-ed pages-usually about Israel. Makdisi is one of the plethora of UC professors dedicated to speaking and writing negatively about Israel. As the previous link shows, he doesn't much care for the Je Suis Charlie movement that followed the Charlie Hebdo massacre last January in Paris. Now Makdisi writes an op-ed in the Times explaining why Israeli universities should be boycotted in the US. The blog, Elder of Ziyon effectively rebuts Makdisi's arguments.
Apparently, Makdisi is one of those lefties who believes in the adage, "Freedom of speech for me but not for Thee". In observing the anti-Israel crowd on campus, I am well aware of this fundamental belief to which most-if not all- subscribe. In other words, pro-Israel speech is not welcome on American university campuses. It must not be heard. period. I have witnessed it first hand. I am referring of course to the disruption of the Israeli ambassador to the US's talk at UC Irvine in 2010. I was there.
I have also heard Makdisi speak at UCI in an anti-Israel hate fest in 2009 that lasted all day and featured one anti-Israel speaker and panel after another. (He was actually the most impressive of them all.) There was no disruption unless you want to count the hooting of some 500 people against little ol' me when I raised a critical question.
Ironically enough, Makdisi is listed as a participant in an upcoming three-day conference to be held January 22-24 at UC Irvine and USC. The topic? "Freedom of expression in a changing world-What cannot be said?"
Hint: It's about Islam in a changing world involving almost daily acts of terror and horror by ISIS and its allies. In light of the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Charlie Hebdo etc., some people think that there should be limits as to what one can say (about Islam). They will no doubt be heard at the above conference. I wonder what Makdisi will say.
On second thought, no, I don't.