Setting The Record Straight

Campus Watch corrects false allegations made against it.

Response to:

Exposed: Pro-Israel Modern Day McCarthyites Going to Extremes to Slime Human Rights Activists
by Max Blumenthal, Julia Carmel
September 30, 2015

False allegations of attacking professors who criticize Israel
Falsely alleged dossiers on professors
Misc. Corrections

Original text from Exposed: Pro-Israel Modern Day McCarthyites Going to Extremes to Slime Human Rights Activists:

[Note: this is an excerpt] Besides Middle East Forum, Pipes is the founder of an online venture called Campus Watch comprised of dossiers on professors he considered "anti-Israel" — a blacklist with a strong resemblance to Canary Mission that targeted some of the very same individuals, and which also encouraged pro-Israel students to surveil their professors. He has accused Arabs and Muslims in the US of hatching a secret plot to "make the United States a Muslim country" and warned that "Middle East Studies has become the preserve of Middle Eastern Arabs, who bring their views with them." Many of those who appear on Pipes' Campus Watch blacklist report being bombarded with violent threats and hostile email campaigns from mostly unnamed sources.

Campus Watch Responds:

The execrable Max Blumenthal, joined by the young anti-Israel activist Julia Carmel, proves that his writings are based on old news rather than updated research. In the space of a single paragraph, he falsely charges CW with having dossiers, which he also calls blacklists, on professors. Had he bothered to look, he would have found that CW posted several dossiers at its founding in 2002, but removed them after a couple of weeks after they had served their purpose. And that was it. Moreover, they weren't "blacklists," they were accurate, up-to-date, and factual (which is more than we can say of Blumenthal & Carmel's work). So that those who "appear" (present tense) on the lists have not received "violent threats and hostile email," there being no lists for the past thirteen years. We also questioned then, and do so now, the veracity of any claims that threats of violence emanated from any part of CW's site, then or now. Given these authors' sloppy work on simply knowing what's on a site now compared to what was there many years ago, how is one to believe their more spectacular claims about anything?

(Posted by Winfield Myers)