I am not a supporter of Gov. Chris Christie. l disagree with virtually all of his polices and I do not approve of his highly partisan style of governing. I do feel, however, that an op-ed article on these pages by Daniel Pipes and Steven Emerson regarding the governor is neither correct nor fair. It charged that Christie is unfit to serve as vice president because of what the authors feel are his pro-Islamic views and actions.

The authors cite four actions taken by Christie that attempt to portray the governor as being soft on lslamism. A closer review would reveal that the perception is incorrect.

Many public figures from all political points of view, as well as religious leaders including rabbis, supported Mohammad Qatanani when the Department of Homeland Security attempted to deport him. The deportation case against Qatanani was particularly weak. The issue was whether he failed to disclose that he had been detained for a period of time and questioned by Israeli officials. There was no indication that he had been convicted of any offense. Most of the evidence against him was so-called “secret evidence” to which he had no opportunity to rebut. The immigration judge dismissed the government’s case, finding that there was no proof that Qatanani had ever been arrested or attempted to mislead the government.

With regard to supporting the firing of a person who burned pages of a Koran, one cannot question that it was an “unacceptable” act of “intolerance.” Would someone not condemn a person burning three pages of a chumash? Christie is not the first politician of either party — nor will he be the last — to be on the other side of an issue from the American Civil Liberties Union. Derek Fenton should not have been fired, but that does not excuse his actions.

Sohail Mohammed is an excellent attorney who deserved to be appointed to the Superior Court. He is the first Muslim to serve as a state judge in New Jersey. As an attorney, he was a role model to the Muslim community and actively protected the rights of that community. Of special interest was his work in regard to the short-lived special registration program instituted by President George W. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft, which required people from certain countries to report to the Department of Homeland Security, where many were taken into custody and deported.

This program was in many ways reminiscent to the actions in Germany with regard to Jews in the 1930s. To question Mohammed as to his views of Shari’a law would be no different than questioning an Orthodox Jewish appointee as to whether his views of Torah law would color his actions as a judge.

Christie was correct in continuing to support Mohammed in light of the xenophobia surrounding his appointment.

Finally, Christie was not the only political figure to condemn the actions of the New York Police Department in conducting surveillance in New Jersey on New Jersey residents including students at Rutgers University. Sen. Robert Menendez also questioned the propriety of these actions. Reasonable people can differ as to whether it is appropriate for a local police force from another state to conduct surveillance on New Jersey residents.

I find many reasons not to support Chris Christie for national oftice, but to say that he is “soft on lsIamism” and lacks a “moral compass and integrity” are not among those reasons.

ATLANTA, Ga. – When I was eight, I had names picked out for all of my future offspring (a dozen baby girls). At 13, I had my own babysitting business. After grad school, I was teaching a class of fourth-graders.

So by the time I became pregnant with my first child — a boy, go figure! — I knew exactly what kind of mother I was going to be: calm, organized and completely in charge.

Benzion Netanyahu — historian, one-time political activist and father of Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister — died Monday in Jerusalem at 102. An accomplished scholar and the patriarch of one of Israel’s most important political families, he also played a surprising and little-known role in United States political history.

Netanyahu was born in Poland in 1910 to a family deeply immersed in the world of religious Zionism. His father, Rabbi Nathan Mileikowsky, a popular Zionist preacher, brought the family to British-ruled Palestine in 1920. He Hebraicized the family name to Netanyahu.

With the contemporary music world buzzing about Regina Spektor’s upcoming album more than a month before its release, I cannot help but think about the young musician’s rise in the context of Russian-speaking Jewry. Spektor, who came to the United States with her parents when she was a young girl, still identifies deeply with the Russian-speaking Jewish community and has been an outspoken defender of Israel. And she is not an exception.

Even though — perhaps because — many Russian-speaking Jews were deprived for years of a Jewish education or the ability to affiliate with other Jews, the strong emotional connection that many Russian-speaking Jews have with their Jewishness, to Israel, and to the Jewish world at large is tribal. This stands in contrast to the majority of North American Jews, who define their Jewishness as a religious identity.

We are all too familiar with the rhetorical currency of anti-Semites. Jews control the human and material resources of every society in which they are found, the anti-Semites say, no matter how few in number we may be in said society. They maintain an international conspiracy. They meet secretly, presenting a pleasant and cooperative face to the world, but using hidden teachings of their sacred books to plot the overthrow of societies they consider hostile. They say one thing publicly and the opposite in private. They have learned how to “pass” in society, but even the most “assimilated” Jew may be an operative in disguise. They are quick to cry bigotry, but ignore the teachings of contempt within their own synagogues, schools, and sacred books. They never criticize each other. And, of course, they wish to frustrate the public expression of faith by non-Jews.

In the eyes of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), the most depraved enemies of the Jewish people are obnoxious college campus loudmouths. As the editor of New Voices, a national magazine by and for Jewish college students, I have a different perspective.

The ZOA led the campaign to have discrimination against Jewish students recognized as a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, originally passed in 1964 to remedy racial discrimination in programs that receive federal funding. In its charge to circle the Jewish communal wagons, however, the ZOA has overreached.

ZOA President Morton Klein and Susan Tuchman, director of the group’s Center for Law and Justice, wrote in an Op-Ed published here last week that Jewish college students today face “harassment and discrimination at schools receiving federal funding.” The ZOA pitched a six-year fit about it, which the group credits with this triumph: “The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, finally clarified in October 2010 that Jewish students finally would be afforded the same protection” that other minorities have under Title VI.

The ZOA campaign capitalizes on and needlessly exacerbates the Jewish community’s already unwarranted paranoia about what’s happening to our young men and women on campus. As a member of the class of 2011 and as the editor of New Voices, I can say with confidence that there has never been a better time to walk the halls and lawns of American academia as a Jew.

Thankfully, the response from leading groups such as the Anti-Defamation League to the ZOA’s call to steamroll colleges into submission with Title VI has been tepid, at best.

It is good that Jews are covered by Title VI, but let us make sure we use the coverage to protect ourselves from true hatemongers, not mere political opponents. That the ZOA is at the vanguard on this issue — instead of, say, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, which has been unfairly pilloried by Title VI’s Jewish cheering section for cautioning restraint — should be the first clue that this push to sue universities under civil rights legislation is not just about protecting Jews.

In the race to ferret out Israel’s on-campus detractors, ZOA leaders have conflated two unlike things: They wrongly act as though opposition to Zionism is always anti-Semitism. It is not so simple.

As much as our rightmost flank would like for Zionism to be codified into the Jewish faith — perhaps a 14th for Maimonides’ 13 principles? — it is neither universal nor central. Rather, it is a political movement, one that gives expression to an ancient Jewish hope, but a political movement nonetheless. Zionism itself is no more at the essence of Jewish belief than is membership in large suburban synagogues.

Klein and Tuchman tsk-tsk their critics, saying their detractors ignore “that the policy has already shown its value.”

They are right that there have been Jewish Title VI victories, but they skip over the real wins — which involved high schools, not colleges — in their rush to stoke our anxiety about Jewish life on campus. Instead, they cite statements issued by University of California President Mark Yudof and Rutgers University President Richard McCormick condemning behavior on campus that was downright nasty and might be seen as anti-Semitic, as well.

Title VI, however, is a federal law. Should not the real wins come in court or official rulings by the OCR? In fact, such outcomes have been mixed, at best. A case against the University of California, Berkeley was dismissed by a federal court. One complaint at the University of California, Irvine, was tossed out before Title VI covered Jews, but is now being reconsidered. At Barnard College in New York, one was tossed out this year when it became clear there was nothing more than dubious he said/she said evidence.

The real successes, as noted, have come at the high school level. A case regarding a bullied Virginia high school student was ruled in the complainant’s favor. Reportedly, this is the only case so far to result in such a ruling. Most important, the incident did not involve Israel but classic swastika-laden anti-Semitic tropes. When less confrontational means fail, true anti-Semitism like this should certainly be fought under Title VI — wherever this filth rears its head, be it on a college campus, in a high school or, God forbid, in younger grades.

Meanwhile, the ZOA-backed college cases — attempts to use Title VI as a bludgeon to advance the ZOA’s far-right political viewpoints — are not going anywhere. In at least one example, it has even led to the despicable targeting of fellow Jews. As Shani Chabansky, a Jewish student at the University of California, Santa Cruz, wrote in February in New Voices and the Forward, a Title VI complaint at UCSC has sparked a witch hunt within the Jewish community, hurting more than helping many Jewish students. Jewish students who subscribe to left-wing forms of Zionism shamefully have been accused of being anti-Israel.

The ZOA’s intent is now clear: Its use of Title VI is a political tactic that targets valid, albeit distasteful and wrongheaded, political debate. Even as a transparent attempt to stifle legitimate discourse, the ZOA’s Title VI campaign is hardly the success that Klein and Tuchman make it out to be.

JTA Wire Service

Mark Twain famously distrusted statistics. This was due to their malleability. Ask the question the right way, and you can claim a mandate for anything.

In contemporary society, statistics are often used to provide “unbiased evidence” for our pre-existing viewpoints. This is not to say that statistics tell us nothing useful. I believe they tell us much that is useful. Statistics, however, are most illuminating if you look more intently at the numbers that challenge rather than simply confirm your assumptions.

As we ready ourselves for Israel’s upcoming birthday celebration and reflect on the last 64 years, we cannot help but swell with pride at our country’s many accomplishments.

In what seems like no time at all, the State of Israel has become a world leader in scientific research and technological development in fields ranging from medicine to green technology. Over the last several decades, there has been a constant stream of citations and awards recognizing the contributions of our country’s academics, leaders, and institutions. In addition, Israel is known as an international hub for innovation and a trailblazer in virtually every discipline — from economics to political science to biotechnology.