I read with amazement the Guest Column by Penn BDS Conference organizers, “BDS Explained”

I could barely believe my eyes. It is bad enough that Penn has allowed itself to be associated with this hateful genocidal organization, but for you to give room for their “explanation” and then dignify this outpouring of misinformation and anti-Semitism to the level of guest column without any kind of balancing opinion? Is this fair and balanced journalism? Is this the Daily Pennsylvanian I was reading daily since I came here in 1974?

The “explanation” itself presents a fuzzy “anti-Israel” cloak that barely conceals the Hamas and Hizballah daggers. It will deceive only those who, knowing nothing of the history, cannot tell lies from truth, or who, so blinded by animus against Israel and Jews, are willing to be deceived.

The agenda of this group is totally negative and aimed at the only Jewish state on the planet, scheming to inflict damage on it as an alleged violator of human rights. No mention of most of the Arab world, or any of the many countries where human rights are trampled on daily.

If the organizers truly cared about Human Rights, perhaps they should consider targeting the primary perpetrators of abuse, and not the only country in the Middle East that is free and democratic by numerous metrics. Israeli Arabs enjoy better civil rights than Arabs in most Arab countries, while by contrast Palestinians are treated as second-class citizens in many Arab countries to this day. If this group really wanted to improve the lot of Palestinians, they should target Lebanon, Syria, and the Hamas gang currently ruling Gaza.

The purpose of BDS as presented seems similar to what was apparently stated in their version of “Mein Kampf” (I am referring to Omar Barghouti’s book titled “Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions”) and base my understanding of it on the article in the Harvard Crimson.

Notably, true to Crimson’s standards the referenced piece by Mr. Don is written in a way that does not slander any of Penn’s esteemed faculty. By contrast, your Guests from BDS are allowed to introduce our esteemed colleague Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz as a “notorious Israel apologist.” And this passed your editorial review under the guise of an “Explanation”?

The aim of the hateful and discriminatory BDS rhetoric is to delegitimize Israel in preparation for the ultimate goal of its destruction. A relevant precedent for such a movement is the groups organized by the Nazis in the 1930’s to boycott, divest and sanction Jews and their businesses. Sadly, now as then, there are Jews among the posse in the assault on their own people. The macabre sight of the likes of Stella Kübler, (arguably Hannah Arendt) and the Capos in the extermination camps is about to be replayed here at Penn.

The students organizing this event and their sponsors will tarnish Penn for generations to come. Penn’s moral backbone has allowed it thus far to balance the sanctity of free speech against the need to prohibit hateful speech. That backbone will break that day. From then on Penn has made an exception: Unproductive, hateful speech is allowed – as long as it singles out Jews and Israel.

Shame on you DP. Shame on you Penn. Shame on you.

Ruben Gur is a professor in the Departments of Psychiatry, Radiology & Neurology. He is also the director, Brain Behavior Laboratory and the Center for Neuroimaging in Psychiatry.

The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Ruben Gur | BDS is ‘hateful’, ‘discriminatory’.

Prof. Barry Brown, Acting President

Suffolk University

Dear Prof. Brown:

I saw Gilad Sharon on C-Span’s BookTV.  It had been taped at Suffolk University’s Ford Hill Forum on October 27, 2011 and aired on November 5th and 6th.  He was there to discuss the new book, Sharon: The Life of a Leader by His Son.  In my forty year career in higher education (a brief biography appears in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in the World), I have never seen such an ugly spectacle.  Mr. Sharon was the recipient of vicious verbal abuse.  He was mocked and shouted at by Suffolk students, a sight made more poignant by his lack of facility in English.  On stage with him was Wendy Ballinger, but her lack of knowledge of Hebrew prevented her from assisting Mr. Sharon in either understanding or responding to the lengthy speeches made from the floor during the Question and Answer Session.  There were one or two outbursts from hostile students even before the hectoring in the so-called Q and A session began.

At its conclusion, Jennifer Bonardi, the Executive Director of the Forum, went so far as to thank the members of the entire audience for their contributions!  It appears that to her shouting at a guest that they hate both him and his father is of value.  The audience cheered this and similar harangues.

Suffolk’s reputation is for having students who are academically incapable of gaining entrance to any of the excellent institutions of higher learning in Boston or Cambridge, but they should also be known as crude, rude people who are not being tutored by Suffolk faculty and staff in the practice of civil, rational discourse.  Academic interchange is apparently not genuinely prized at your institution.

Since this was filmed by C-Span for BookTV, people throughout the U.S.A.–and, indeed, the world–will be able to view this spectacle for themselves.  This video will, as they say now, “go viral.”

I suggest that Ballenger should not be utilized on stage in the future since she is either not committed to, or capable of, effectively controlling unruly students.  Ms. Bonardi should be fired for her incapacity or unwillingness to implement the purported goals of the Ford Hill Forum (“Listen, learn, and engage”) that she runs.  At best, one could be charitable and accuse her merely of bias or idiocy.

Sincerely,

Stephen Karetzky

The Occupy Oakland protests that degenerated into violent mob action on Wednesday night and early Thursday morning were entirely predictable. The vandalism, the graffiti, and the spasm of violence that resulted in an attack on police who were trying to roust at least 200 demonstrators who had occupied an abandoned building was the result of incitement by the so-called “peaceful” protestors who are now condemning the violence as if they had nothing to do with it.

The worst of the rioting occurred late on Wednesday evening as about 200 protestors occupied the abandoned Traveler’s Aid building, claiming it in the name of the people. Police feared that the protestors would set the building on fire so they formed up a few blocks away and began to move toward the protest. Hearing of the impending police action, protestors barricaded the street and then faced off with authorities. They “smashed windows, threw rocks, ignited a 15-foot-high bonfire of garbage and covered downtown storefronts with graffiti,” according to the New York Times.

via Occupy Oakland’s Mayhem and Destruction | FrontPage Magazine.

Editor’s Note: The following statement signed by dozens of faculty from the University of Pennsylvania was printed in the Daily Pennsylvanian.

Dozens of Penn professors express their support for the Occupy Wall Street protests· October 11, 2011, 11:57 pmShare This 10 More coverageTopics: Occupy PhiladelphiaAs faculty members at the University of Pennsylvania, we wish to express our solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street movement now underway in our city and elsewhere.

via The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Your Voice | Occupy Wall Street solidarity statement.

Israel Law Center hotline to monitor campus anti-Semitism

By JOANNA PARASZCZUK

10/16/2011 17:25

Hotline could provide evidence for legal action against colleges deemed to have failed to protect Jewish students, Law Center attorneys say.

The Israel Law Center (Shurat Hadin) is set to launch a hotline on Monday, to help Jewish college students who are victims of anti-Semitism on their campuses.

According to attorney Kenneth A. Leitner, the Law Center’s director of American affairs, students will be able to call the hotline to report incidents of anti-Semitism and anti-Israel acts on US college campuses, and the Law Center will use the data to take legal action against colleges believed to be breaching Jewish students’ legal rights, he added.

via Israel Law Center hotline t… JPost – Jewish World – Jewish News.

Last spring, UCSB’s Associated Students Finance Board denied a funding request made by the College Republicans to host David Horowitz​, president of the Freedom Center. This denial was the product of viewpoint discrimination and is illegal due to Supreme Court rulings on the First Amendment that prohibit political discrimination in the distribution of student funds. The denial was rescinded, but due to an uproar from the campus Left, the amount allocated was decreased — which is also unconstitutional. Award amounts cannot be dictated by political considerations either. After pressure was brought to bear over this wrong-doing, the university ultimately over-ruled Associated Students’ funding malfeasance.

via Free Speech Victory at UC Santa Barbara | FrontPage Magazine.

One of the more peculiar twists in the caliphate’s tale is that a sizable amount of the funding for Islamic propaganda aimed at Americans comes from Muslim-owned defense contractors.

Sabtech Industries recently made the news when it lost its security clearance after some suspicious donations to Muslim charities cost its president, Rahim Sabadia, his security clearance. Sabtech’s work on upgrading the Navy’s AEGIS system on warships put it at the nerve center of one of the most important defense technologies in the United States.

The real question, though, is not how Rahim Sabadia lost his security clearance, but how he got it in the first place.

via The Defense Contractors of Islam | FrontPage Magazine.

Facing Down Anti-Semitism on Campus

Posted by Herbert London

At long last an attempt is bring made to curtail blatant anti-Semitic commentary on American campuses. The Israel Law Center warns that colleges and universities “may be liable for massive damage” if they fail to prevent anti-Semitism. The center sent hundreds of letters to university presidents drawing a line in the sand. This Israel civil rights center is carrying out this campaign in response to an alarming number of incidents against Jewish and Israeli students at U.S. universities.

A center’s lawyer, Nitsana Darshan-Leitner said, “Anti-Israel rallies and events frequently exceed legitimate criticism of Israel and cross the line into blatant anti-Semitism, resulting in hateful attacks against Jews.” A student at Rutgers, to cite one example, said he was called “a racist Zionist pig” in a Facebook posting. That comment was made when the student questioned a Student Assembly decision to donate money to the Palestine Children’s Relief Fund, a nonprofit organization with ties to the Holy Land Foundation, a foundation that has funded Hamas.

via Facing Down Anti-Semitism on Campus.

The Towerlight » YWC speaks out for ‘silent majority’.

California Universities’ Diversity Machine Under Fire

Money well spent or a waste?

Reporter: Jeff Michael Posted

Los Angeles – California universities have gutted programs and hiked tuition in this tough economy, but they’re not touching what critics call their “Diversity Machine”… staff and programs dedicated to campus multi-culturalism. We’ve found diversity staffing is expanding and costing taxpayers millions.

It’s a taboo subject that few people are willing to talk openly about. The UC’s have cut millions from their budget but are actually beefing up their diversity staff.

Among the new positions: UCSD created a new Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion; UCLA recently added an Assistant Dean for Campus Climate and a Vice Provost for Faculty Diversity; and UC Irvine’s chancellor recently vowed not to cut its diversity programs during hard times.

via California Universities’ Diversity Machine Under Fire | FOX 11 News.

Campus Freedom, AAUP-Style

Posted by KC Johnson

The American Association of University Professors has now issued its final report on “Ensuring Academic Freedom in Politically Controversial Academic Personnel groups.”) The basic principle is as unobjectionable as it is admirable: professors should not be hired, fired, or disciplined on the basis of their political beliefs. Yet the AAUP’s report is basically unchanged from the organization’s draft document, which I described at the time as “worse than nothing: it would have been far better for the organization simply to have issued a statement affirming that its job is upholding the views of a majority of its members, and that those professors whose views conflict with the academic majority can enjoy academic freedom rights only at the pleasure of the majority of their colleagues.”

via Campus Freedom, AAUP-Style.

The Left-Leaning Tower

By JOHN TIERNEY

Why are conservatives such a minority at so many graduate schools? Conservatives like to blame liberal bias. Liberals like other explanations.

One — the most tactful hypothesis — is that conservatives just aren’t interested in academic careers. Another — the most smug hypothesis — is that conservatives are just too close-minded and dimwitted.

Now, fortunately, we have something beyond hypotheses, courtesy of scholars who have been taking a close look at their colleagues. Some even conducted a small sting operation that they believe is the first field experiment on political bias in academia. The perpetrators include Neil Gross, a professor of sociology at the University of British Columbia, whose previous work showed that Democrats outnumber Republicans by about 4 to 1 among professors, by at least 6 to 1 at elite universities, and by still higher ratios in departments of the humanities and social sciences.

via The Left-Leaning Tower – NYTimes.com.

July 6, 2011

YIISA’s Fate and the Corruption of the Peer-Review Process

Posted by KC Johnson

Jamie Kirchick pens what’s likely to be the definitive account of Yale’s controversial decision to terminate the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism (YIISA). Kirchick convincingly demonstrates how a toxic combination of anti-Israel sentiments from some key faculty members combined with Yale’s desire to cultivate Middle Eastern donors (as part of the university’s self-conception as a “global” institution) to doom YIISA. The lengthy article is well worth reading in full; it’s both illuminating and thoroughly depressing.

Kirchick’s tale is also important for reasons beyond the YIISA affair. When confronted by outside criticism, defenders of the academic status quo invariably cite the peer-review process to justify conditions on campus. Specialists know best, they note, and outsiders need to defer to the superior judgment of trained experts. Yale’s termination of YIISA, for instance, came after two levels of peer review. The first was a report from outside academic evaluators. The second was feedback from an oversight committee of Yale faculty. How could anyone object to a decision with so many safeguards?

As to first level of peer review, the university has consistently refused to release the report on which it allegedly based its decision. And comments from members of the Yale faculty committee—especially Sociology professor Jeffrey Alexander—suggest that ideological bias, rather than disinterested scholarly analysis, motivated their reaction to YIISA.

Even though the peer-review ideal presumes decisions made according to scholarly expertise, Alexander was named to the evaluation committee without any apparent research background in anti-semitism. (As with the refusal to release the evaluators’ report, the university has refused to disclose the criteria through which it chose members of the YIISA oversight committee.) After a series of inflammatory comments in previous interviews, Alexander went on the record with Kirchick.

via YIISA’s Fate and the Corruption of the Peer-Review Process.

Feds Open Anti-Semitism Investigation at UC-Santa Cruz
Complaint Alleges Pervasive Hostile Environment

San Francisco, March 15, 2011 – The Institute for Jewish & Community Research IJCR announces that the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights OCR has opened a major investigation into anti-Semitism claims at the University of California Santa Cruz. Lecturer Tammi Rossman-Benjamin filed a June 2009 complaint alleging the university failed to address a hostile environment for Jewish students on that campus.

After long deliberation, OCR has determined that the case merits full investigation.The OCR complaint describes a campus environment in which Jewish students feel harassed and intimidated. University-sponsored events vilify Israel while professors openly express hostility toward the Jewish state and its supporters. Rossman-Benjamin adds that “no other … group on campus has been subjected … to such hostile and demonizing criticism.”

via The Institute for Jewish and Community Research | Feds Open Anti-Semitism Investigation at UC-Santa Cruz.

Jewish Student Sues UC Berkeley over Muslim Assault

By Maayana Miskin–Israelnationalnews.com

A Jewish student at the University of California at Berkeley who was attacked by a Muslim student last year has filed suit against UC Berkeley for failing to provide a safe atmosphere. In her suit, 21-year-old Jessica Felber alleges that UC Berkeley did not effectively deal with harassment and intimidation by Muslim and pro-Arab student groups, leading to “a dangerous and threatening environment.”

Felber was attacked by Husam Zakharia, leader of the Students for Justice in Palestine SJP group, during a rally. At the time, she was holding a sign that said “Israel Wants Peace.

”

via Arutz Sheva – IsraelNationalNews.com.

For Immediate Release

State College, PA—February 2, 2011

Penn State students will gather for a “Rally for Affordable Energy” in protest against the elitist energy policies of the current administration, this Thursday, February 3, from 9:00 to 2:00, in front of Rec Hall on Penn State’s University Park Campus. The protest is being led by Young Americans for Freedom, a conservative student group, who cite rising energy costs and a lack of progress on domestic energy sources, like the Marcellus Shale, as their leading points of complaint.

The impetus for the protest is a speech by President Barack Obama, who is visiting University Park to discuss his administration’s energy policies. Young voters, however, are already “energized,” though not in the way Obama would like.

“This administration has consistently opted to favor high-cost, impractical energy solutions under the guise of being ‘green,’” said Penn State junior, and YAF chair, Samuel Settle. “This is truly unfortunate, because the people who get hit the hardest by rising energy prices are the poor and the economically destitute—two segments of the population that have increased under this administration.”

Lauren DeRoo expressed similar sentiments, calling herself “disillusioned” with the Obama administration. “They really haven’t brought the change I was hoping for.”

For further information contact:

Samuel Settle

Chair, Penn State Young Americans for Freedom

Telephone: 814-270-1670

Email:  freedom@psu.edu

Sources:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31778

http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/11/10/the-obama-energy-agenda/

The 12 Worst Colleges For Free Speech

U.S. News can tell you which colleges and universities are ranked the “best,” but what about your right to express yourself on campus? A critical part of the college experience is grappling with ideas that you might not agree with or that might even offend you. In fact, if you go through four years of college without ever being offended, you should ask for your money back.

While over the years we at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education FIRE have dealt with hundreds of examples of universities violating student rights check to see if your school is one of them, the following 12 colleges have distinguished themselves for showing particular hostility to freedom of speech.

Some schools have earned this distinction by refusing to undo punishments of students and faculty for their free speech, others by engaging in ongoing campaigns against student speech, and one for regulating student speech to the hilt. Private religious colleges like DePaul make the list because they promise free speech but fail to deliver time and time again. Is your college censoring speech, too? If so, let others know in the comments section.

via Greg Lukianoff: The 12 Worst Colleges For Free Speech.