Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
NYC’s Jihad Against Debbie Almontaser
Debbie Almontaser has won a victory in her battle against discrimination. She was the founding principal of the first Arabic-language public school in the United States, until a campaign of hate forced her out. She is well known for her success in bridging cultural divides, bringing together Muslims, Christians and Jews, yet as the new school neared its opening date in the summer of 2007, she became the target of anti-Muslim and anti-Arab attacks. Last week, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruled that the New York City Department of Education (DOE) discriminated against her "on account of her race, religion and national origin."
The school is called the Khalil Gibran International Academy. Gibran was a Lebanese-born writer and philosopher. His best-known book, "The Prophet," published in 1923, has sold more than 100 million copies in 40 languages. A line from "The Prophet," prominent on the academy's website, reads, "The teacher who is indeed wise does not bid you to enter the house of his wisdom but rather leads you to the threshold of your mind."
But open-mindedness was hardly the response of a fringe group called Stop the Madrassa. The group used the Arabic word for school because of its negative connotations with religious schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The academy was developed as a secular, dual-language public school for sixth through 12th grades and had no religious curriculum. As the small but vocal group of opponents continued to take issue with the planned school, the DOE compelled Almontaser to submit to an interview with Rupert Murdoch's New York Post. The article's headline read: "City Principal Is ‘Revolting.' "
In the interview, Almontaser was asked to explain the use of the word intifada, because the word appeared on a T-shirt of a women's organization that sometimes used the offices of a community group where she was a board member. The T-shirt had nothing to do with the Khalil Gibran International Academy. Almontaser told me: "He asked me one or two questions about the school and then asked me for the root word of the word intifada. As an educator, I simply responded and said to him that it comes from the root word of the word infad in Arabic, which is ‘shake off'; however, this word has developed a negative connotation based on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, where thousands of people have died. Within the interview, I stated that I ... condemn all violence, any shape, way or form."
Her lawyer, Alan Levine, told me: "Debbie was the victim of a smear campaign. ... The bigots in the community had no power to fire; the Department of Education did. They succumbed to the bigots." The EEOC report concluded, "DOE succumbed to the very bias that the creation of the school was intended to dispel, and a small segment of the public succeeded in imposing its prejudices on DOE as an employer." Almontaser is seeking reinstatement as principal of the KGIA, along with back pay, damages and legal fees. The New York City Law Department has vowed to fight her. Levine hopes for a settlement, but is prepared to file a lawsuit, saying: "The EEOC, which has no ax to grind [and] is the country's premier agency with regard to employment discrimination claims, says that they did discriminate. I'll go with the EEOC. I'm confident that a judge or jury will." Days after the EEOC letter was delivered, the non-Arab-American principal of the KGIA stepped down, without explanation, and was replaced by an Arab-American educator.
Three years ago, in the midst of the firestorm, a group of prominent Jewish leaders, including 15 rabbis, wrote an open letter to the Jewish community in support of Almontaser, saying, "We seek your support and respect for a colleague and friend who has suffered and continues to suffer from a disturbing and growing prejudice in our midst ... her return to her children [at the KGIA] will only bring greater peace and understanding between people of all faiths in our educational system and in our city as a whole." This case, as a metaphor, has broader implications, as protests continue in the streets of Jerusalem following the Israeli announcement of thousands of new housing units in occupied East Jerusalem, blindsiding Vice President Joe Biden as he began a peacemaking visit there.
Almontaser told me, "It's my life's dream ... to lead a school, to establish an institution that would set precedents in helping building bridges of understanding and certainly creating young people who will be global thinkers, competing in the 21st century work force." Hers is a vision the New York City Department of Education should embrace, with her prompt reinstatement.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



14 Comments so far
Show AllAmy Goodman: "But open-mindedness was hardly the response of a fringe group called Stop the Madrassa. The group used the Arabic word for school because of its negative connotations with religious schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
This statement does not go far enough, and in fact is poorly written (Amy writes "...its negative connotations WITH religious schools...": it should say "...negative associations with..." or "negative connotations associated with").
But grammar is not my point here. This negative connotation, or association as the case may be, is entirely the fabrication of the mainstream media, a false image created in the wake of 9/11 to make us believe that these Pakistani/Afghan schools, from which the Taliban originally emerged, are "terrorist breeding grounds" and "schools of hate." Such a false image is predicated on the never-proven association of the Taliban with the events of 9/11. And while I find the reactionary Islam associated with the Taliban and many of these schools uncongenial to my own view of things, I have no objection to people pursuing their own moral, religious, and metaphysical vision, especially on their own turf. It should also be added that many of the Pakistani and Afghan madrassas save their young pupils from lives of wretched poverty and ignorance, and ever present dangers of physical abuse and violence.
The Stop the Madrassa group, which Goodman rightly condemns, is simply a clutch of people who have learned their propaganda lesson well, the logical, predictable result of the relentless campaigns of disinformation to which the American public is subject to.
-"a clutch of people who have learned their propaganda lesson well"
Could I add, a clutch of people, with friends high up in the government.
There is nothing technically incorrect about the construction "connotations with." The contruction "connotations associated with" is redundant.
If you want to be so anal about grammar then we can pick apart your own writing.
q
"Connotations with" is not English, pal. Go back to school. One does not have "connotations with" anything. Something can connote something else, which means that it has "connotations of" that something. Use your brain.
"Connotations" is a noun and as such can be modified by a prepositional phrase beginning with the word "with."
Please show me any authorative description of the word "connotation" which prohibits such modification.
Here are the addresses of a few other public examples of this contrsuction.
http://www.gsusignal.com/perspectives/apple-ignores-negative-connotations-with-ipad-1.2143884
http://www.enotes.com/documents/connotations-with-car-names-1395
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9301063
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080203134635AA8qcIN
http://everythingshoe.blogspot.com/2010/03/unsavory-connotations.html
Gee, clovis, I guess that you're just wrong.
q
Well, you really are a pompous ass, aren't you, q?
And ignorant, too.
Try this:
"Connotation" derives from the Latin cum (with) + notare ("to note, to mark").
Thus if you say something has a "connotation with something," your construction is redundant, since the "with" already implied in the word itself.
Try this, too:
"Connotation" is roughly synonymous with "implication" and "meaning," etc.
Now try using one of these words followed by "with" in a sentence.
"The book's negative implication with morbidity." "The book's negative meaning with morbidity." "The book's negative connotation with morbidity."
These sentences, as anyone can see, are awkward and vague. With proper usage, the last sentence becomes clear: "The book's negative connotation of morbidity."
You see, quickstumbler, I don't need to cite other cases of misuse to justify bad style. The logic is implicit in the words themselves. So much for your links. Many people, including the NYT, misuse the word "discomfiture" as just a fancy way to say "discomfort," which is wrong. Their using it doesn't make it right.
I rest my case. Perhaps you need to read more books and a little less internet.
One last point, just to respond to your pseudo-grammar. "Connotation" is the substantive of the verb "to connote," which is transitive and is not followed by a preposition. X connotes Y, quite simply. X does not connote "with" Y. Thus in the substantive, X has a connotation OF Y, not "with" Y.
The verb "to associate," when intransitive, takes the preposition "with." X associates WITH Y, and thus X has an association WITH Y.
To confuse these two cases, as you and Amy Goodman have done, is bad English.
It's you who are wrong, q, and that's not a guess.
A fairly salient point from all of this to any public figure whom is "required" to speak to a reporter from any News Corporation organ is this:
1) Choose your words very carefully.
2) Be sure to record your conversation with them, as they are not above distortions and outright lies in order to satisfy the venal demands of their editors cum propagandists.
3) Thus armed with evidence, be prepared to sue them for the slightest deliberate obfuscation.
Inasmuch as Amy Goodman raises the issue of 15 Rabbis who supported Altmontaser, I would like to know the ethnic/religious background of members of the Stop the Madrassa group. Is (or was) Stop the Madrassa primarily a pro-Zionist organization?
In Amy Goodman's world the heroes are always Jewish.
And she refuses to deal with Building 7.
May we continue our pursuit of justice, wherever there is injustice. Anger at injustice, as Martin Luther King wrote, is the political expression of love.
Out of curiosity I visited the Stop the Madrassa web site and found among a number questions they wanted answered these gems
* Will certified teachers who are Coptic Christian Arabs, Jewish Arabs, and Christian Arabs, be recruited?
* Which Arabic history of the Middle East will be taught? The Islamic? The Christian? The Jewish?
* Who will teach American and European history, math, English?
* Will students be taught be in English?
* How will the prayer requests of KGIA’s Muslim students be accommodated in a public school?
* What will be the reaction to someone eating a pork or ham sandwich if they are in proximity of one of KGIA’s students?
* Will Halal food be served in the cafeteria?
* Will there be concessions made to accommodate the “modesty” requirements of Muslim students?
* How will wudu, or the process of ritual washing – which must precede prayer – take place? In the public lavatories?
* What will happen if someone says “Osama” within earshot of a KGIA student? Are KGIA and the NYC Department of Education prepared to defend themselves against such lawsuits from CAIR and deal with the resultant bad publicity?
* Is the Principal certified according to specific N.Y. State qualifications?
http://stopthemadrassa.wordpress.com/about/
Amy Goodman gets it just right!
AD