headerphoto


The Cancer at UC Irvine




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk

This article first appeared in Times of Israel Blogs.


Recently, we reported on the latest BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) resolution that was passed by the student senate at UC Irvine, where I taught part-time 1998-2016. The resolution against Israel passed, and the university quickly issued a statement that they would not abide by it. The damage is that these resolutions, which go on all over the nation in our universities, only direct more negative attention to Jewish students and increase anti-Semitism. Jews are perceived as universally supporting the Jewish state of Israel, which in reality, is not true. Most American Jews support Israel, but some do not. Some even join forces with those who want to destroy the Jewish state. That is the true aim of BDS.

Richard Cravatts, former president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, has also taken note of the latest out of UCI and has written about it in Frontpage Magazine. I am cross-posting it below.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/02/malignant-tradition-uc-irvines-hate-israel-richard-l-cravatts/

Sadly, UCI has acquired a reputation as a hotbed of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic agitation, largely due to the annual anti-Israel week of events every May. Over the last two decades, I have attended many of those events in order to document them, videotape them, and directly question the speakers. I can tell you, I have seen and heard a lot of vicious people speak at these events. 

As I have always said, 99% of the students at UCI are not involved in this ugliness, but those who are have all but destroyed the reputation of what should otherwise be considered a great university. I blame the administrators at UCI (and the entire UC system) for their weakness in allowing this problem to fester and grow.

In 2015-16, I was active with the Amcha Initiative and others in lobbying the UC Regents to draw up a suitable statement of principles against intolerance that specifically addressed anti-Semitism, as opposed to simply condemning all forms of hate. After all, it was anti-Semitism on campus that was the reason a revised statement of principles was under consideration. In 2016, the UC Regents finalized a statement that included such language. 

https://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2017/06/jewish-organizations-to-uci-chancellor.html

Unfortunately, it has proved to be nothing more than a scrap of paper that UCI can stick in the files of their Office of Inclusive Excellence and show the public that everything is just fine. But since that paper was finalized, UCI has continued to see anti-Zionist weeks every May (at least until the Covid crisis hit), and speakers like Hussam Ayloush (CEO of CAIR in S. California), Rabab Abdulhadi, (professor at San Francisco State University) and Zahra Billoo (CEO of CAIR in No. California) come to campus to spread their poison. Some progress.

Now we have another dangerous ingredient being added to the poisonous cocktail. Thanks to the latest academic creation-intersectionality- all ills of the world can be linked to Israel including the grievances of BLM. If George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis cops, it was partially Israel's fault because they trained that department and taught them the tactic of kneeling on a black suspect's neck-or something like that. And don't think the connection hasn't been made by those who ingest this propaganda. Last May, BLM rioters rampaged through the Fairfax district of Los Angeles, attacking synagogues and yelling curses at Jews from their car windows. It was a pogrom though nobody would admit it. One would think that after such an event, activists might realize that stoking hatred against Jews was a dangerous idea. Not the pro-Palestinian crowd, however. It's full steam ahead, and if they can convince American blacks that the Jewish state of Israel is their enemy too, so what if a few American Jews get beat up?

Shame on the pro-Palestinian movement for stirring up this kind of hate toward American Jews with their lies. And shame on our universities for allowing this treatment of its Jewish students. When I first got involved in this issue at UCI back around 2007, I learned that our university campuses were the focal point for the resurgence in anti-Semitism in the US. Rather than seeing it nipped in the bud, it has metastasized to society as a whole. The only positive aspect is that the issue of anti-Semitism can no longer be denied or swept under the rug. It is there for all to see. And UCI has played a role.

Anti-Semitism: Review of Book Review



Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


I am cross-posting an article by Robert Shrimsley in the Financial Times of London. It is a discussion of modern-day anti-Semitism in reviewing two books on the topic. The two books Shrismley reviews are, "Jews Don't Count" by David Baddiel and "Anti-Semitism Re-visited-How the Rabbis Made Sense of Hatred" by Delphine Horvilleur. 

I have cut and pasted the entire text, which I received from The Israel Group. If you go to the original source, the Financial Times of London, the link to the article requires a subscription to view the entire article. 

I have chosen this article because it makes a very salient point that we must recognize if we are to fight today's strain of anti-Semitism. In the United States, at least, Jews are handicapped by the perception that they are uniformly white-and privileged, in fact, more privileged than most.  In truth, Jews come in many shades of color. In addition, the reviewer correctly points out that it is the left that has chosen to turn a blind eye to the problem.

On the other hand, you will see from the below review that there is scant attention paid to the actual purveyors of today's form of anti-Semitism.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Robert Shrimsley | Financial Times of London

Why do people never refer to the “Y-word” in place of the offensive “yid”? Why, when the BBC recently broadcast a reading of TS Eliot’s poetry did it read out the famously and staggeringly racist lines from “Burbank with a Baedeker” when it is inconceivable that it would regurgitate similar abuse of any other minority, even in the name of art?

Why are Jews excluded from diversity or ethnic minority monitoring? Yes, Judaism is categorized as a religion but there is no anti-Semite in history who viewed atheism as grounds for exemption from persecution. How, with the Holocaust still a living memory, do so many on the left feel content to dismiss the fears of one of the most persecuted peoples in history, to regard anti-Semitism as something that matters less than other prejudice, a sort of second-degree offense?

Underlying all these questions is a simpler point and a deeper hurt. Anti-Semitism is on the rise and yet political progressives, the people who ought to be allies and who normally stress the need to listen to the experience of other minorities, seem to suspend those rules when those voices are Jewish. Why is it, as writer and comedian David Baddiel asks in his short polemic, that Jews Don’t Count?

This book is not aimed at witting anti-Semites or at those who are indifferent. It is aimed squarely at people who think of themselves as progressive but seem to have a blind spot when it comes to casual or not-so-casual anti-Semitism. It is a deceptively easy read, the underlying seriousness lightened by personal stories and regular flashes of Baddiel's wit.

Baddiel’s is one of two short new books on modern anti-Semitism. French rabbi Delphine Horvilleur has also tackled the issue and from the perspective of a country where its manifestations have been more vicious and deadly. Her ruminations, while interesting, are too rabbinical, too much like a sermon. But there is one core nugget. The prejudice, she argues in Anti-Semitism Revisited, lies in the view that “Jews are a bit too much the same and a bit too different”. Both too keen to fit in and insufficiently assimilated.

British Jews, stung especially by the rows over anti-Semitism in the Labour party under Jeremy Corbyn, will read Baddiel’s book with a combination of recognition and despair. Since Labour’s issues, people have been paying more attention. But, given the upsurge of abuse and violence, the shock has been how loud Jews had to shout for the issue to be addressed and how many people were content to shrug their shoulders at the problem.

The author’s question is less about why anti-Semitism exists than why good people care less about it. And here he is in similar territory to Horvilleur’s. The key is that Jews are not seen as underprivileged or marginalised. They are caricatured as rich capitalists. They are also “too white” for campaigners. This means they are beyond the interest of social justice activists who see racism as a class construct, one in which you need to be economically or socially disadvantaged. For progressives, he writes, “no victory is claimed by championing their experience, and this leads to a subtle — and unconscious — exclusion.” The mission of fighting racism has been repurposed to suit the other political causes of campaigners rather than the needs of its victims.

To this point, Baddiel brings up the concept of “Schrodinger’s Whites”. Jews are both white and not white. Since most pass for Caucasian and are “rich”, they enjoy white privilege. If only someone had remembered to share this insight with white supremacists.

While most victims of racism are looked down upon as lesser people, Jews are both looked down upon but also portrayed as part of a sinister, wealthy, powerful force, an enemy within. This was the rhetoric that paved the way to Auschwitz. But the bias also informs the progressive blind spot. Jews are powerful; they don’t need defending. And some on the far-left even buy into the conspiracy theories.

And this is the most tone-deaf part of the issue, because the peculiar nature of anti-Semitism means that status counts for little. With the Holocaust, the key reference point for the modern fear of anti-Semitism, Jews see that the success, integration and respected place in society of many German Jews did not save them and was even used against them.

Wrapped into this, of course, is anger at Israel, a poster cause for the left. But on this Baddiel, no supporter of Israel, has a simple riposte. The issue of Palestine offers no justification for anti-Semitism in Britain and a good cause does not legitimise racism.

Not all his arguments land. He asks why many who would complain if a film does not cast a trans actor in a trans role (or a white actor in a black or Asian role) think nothing of non-Jew in a Jewish role, even if it is played as a cartoonish stereotype (something he describes as “jewface”). He admits that he does not believe Jews must always be portrayed by Jews. But you have to pick your fights and other groups do struggle harder for on-screen representation. It is the double-standard that troubles him. Likewise in the debate on Eliot’s poetry, there is an argument to be had about censoring literature but it is reasonable to wish for a level playing field.

A criticism will be that this is special pleading by a community whose concerns are far from ignored. One can also argue that recognising a hierarchy of urgency is not the same as having a hierarchy of racisms. Some issues are more pressing. In over five decades in London I have only once been stopped by the police without any reason; this is not the average black experience. But Baddiel acknowledges this, both supporting the focus on Black Lives Matter and noting that at different moments in history some struggles should and will move to the forefront. His appeal is only for equal awareness.

I am not a neutral but this pithy, wry book ought to leave one raging that the accepted nostrums of anti-racism are simply discarded for one of the most persecuted peoples in history.

The one worry is that this will be read mainly by Jews and not by those who need to read it. It should be essential reading for progressives, self-proclaimed anti-racists, and those offering diversity and awareness courses. If it is, then Baddiel will have done a sterling service. If it isn’t, he will have the grim satisfaction of having been proved right.

Jews Don’t Count, by David Baddiel, William Collins, RRP£9.99, 144 pages

Anti-Semitism Revisited: How the Rabbis Made Sense of Hatred, by Delphine Horvilleur, translated by David Bellos, MacLehose Press, RRP£12.99, 140 pages

Robert Shrimsley is the FT’s UK chief political commentator

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the interest of full disclosure, I have read neither book, so I cannot say that the two respective authors have failed to identify the perpetrators. (As Shrimsley points out, Baddiel is no friend of Israel.) But if I have one critique of the review, it would be for what it doesn't say. Like so many discussions of anti-Semitism today, it fails to go into detail as to who the biggest perpetrators are. In my view, this new form of anti-Semitism has taken root on college campuses, thanks to the pro-Palestinian movement against Israel, which is quite well organized. From there, it has metastasized into mainstream society. While there is a reference to the anti-Israel movement, it fails to point out that most anti-Semitism today comes from Islamic quarters. That is, at least, my opinion.

Why do I say that? After all, we have the historical example of the Third Reich, and we do have a tiny percentage of people in Europe and the US who consider themselves neo-Nazis. They are certainly to be confronted and condemned, but in my view, they are not the main problem today. I still believe that today's anti-Semitism is largely, if not mostly driven by the pro-Palestinian movement, which is largely Islamic, both in the Middle East and the West.

If you look on our college campuses, the anti-Israel movement (which is huge) is mostly driven by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and the various campus chapters of the Muslim Student Association (MSA). The main difference between these two organizations, which work hand-in-glove, is that SJP has some members who are non-Muslims, and that the MSA is involved in other issues, such as promoting Islam and other religious activities. However, the SJP was co-founded by Hatem Bazian, a Palestinian Muslim, who also co-founded American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), which is a funding arm of SJP.

They all deny they are anti-Semitic, but they have also been guilty of using classical anti-Jewish tropes in making their case against Israel and those who support the Jewish state.

While European universities are also hotbeds of anti-Israel activity, European Jews face another immediate problem. The wave of Muslim immigration-migration into Europe has literally made the streets unsafe for Jews-and to a slightly lesser extent, everybody else. These migrants, mostly uneducated, bring with them a hatred of Jews based on their Islamic teachings. This is not to condemn all Muslims as Jew-haters, but anti-Jewish feeling (as well as anti-Christian feeling) is deeply embedded in Islamic teaching.

Shrimsley also refers briefly to Black Lives Matter (BLM), which as an organization, supports the Palestinian cause. Just as with Muslims, the left and academia want no part of any discussion as to BLM or the fact that the African-American community- just like the white community- has its share of  anti-Semitism. Are all black Americans anti-Jewish? Hardly, but to the extent some are, it should be discussed openly just as we do with white anti-Semites.

In one sense, I am gratified that the topic of anti-Semitism is rising to the fore of public consciousness. On the other hand, what good does it do to condemn anti-Semitism if you don't name the perpetrators-or you assign the blame solely to one sub-group of the anti-Semites?

Sweden: Afghan Man Gets 10 Months and No Deportation for Sexually Abusing His Daughter




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk

Hat tip Fria Tider. Translation by Fousesquawk. 


Mora (Dalarna), Sweden

The insanity continues in Sweden. While the government continues to ignore the carnage and the rapes going on in the country, thanks to their insane immigration policies, the courts continue to treat offenders with light prison sentences and no deportations in spite of the severity of the crimes. 

In this latest report by Fria Tider, translated by Fousesquawk, we read of a 45-year-old Afghan man convicted of sexually abusing his teenage daughter on multiple occasions, beating her, and getting a sentence of 10 months with no deportation.

https://www.friatider.se/forgrep-sig-sexuellt-pa-sin-dotter-att-kontrollera-om-hon-var-muslim

Sexually abused his daughter to "check if she was Muslim"

-Posted January 25, 2021, 15:27


Caption below photo: Mora (Dalarna) Courthouse

Domestic- An Afghan man, aged 45, in Dalarna, has been sentenced to prison but avoids deportation for having sexually abused his daughter on a number of occasions. He blamed the abuse on his daughter and said that she should pray to Allah for forgiveness, according to the judgment.

The man came to Sweden in 2015 from Afghanistan with his daughter. The abuse against his daughter was committed while the daughter, according to the Swedish population register, was about 14 or younger, until May 2020.

On a number of occasions, he lay down beside his daughter in her bed, kissed her and caressed her breast as he masturbated or pressed his sex (organ) against her and made intercourse-like movements.

The girl testified in court that the father, after the first occasion, explained to her that what happened was her fault and they should pray together for Allah's forgiveness.

When they lived with a  Swedish couple, he would lay next to her in the mornings, (scratch himself) against her and "said that he was checking if she was a Muslim", according to the judgment.

According to the daughter's passport, issued in Afghanistan, she was born in 2005. There has since emerged information, which the girl received from her mother, that she was really born in 2007, and that she is, thus, 13 years old now.

The abuse was discovered in the spring of 2020 when the Afghan beat his daughter in front of their neighbors after she had lost a cell phone. The girl told the Swedish couple what she had been exposed to.

The father, who has several other children in Afghanistan, denied the crime and claimed that he "had only shown (his) love for his daughter when he lay next to her in bed. He also claimed that he "had problems with his penis" with an itchy rash and that it was "hard to control the itching."

The court of Mora has now sentenced the man to 10 months in prison for four counts of sexual abuse against a child and one count of  (physical) abuse. He is allowed to stay in Sweden though since the prosecutor had not urged that he be deported.


The Academic Lynching of Law Professor John Eastman




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


On Wednesday, prior to President Trump's speech to protesters in Washington, Rudy Giuliani spoke to the crowd. He then introduced Professor John Eastman a conservative Constitutional law professor at Chapman University in Orange, California. Eastman described how voting machines were allegedly rigged using algorithms to help Joe Biden get the needed number of votes to defeat President Trump. It should be noted that while both speakers passionately stated their belief that the election was stolen, neither encouraged violence, and neither made any mention of the marching to the Capitol. Yet, in addition to President Trump, both men are being accused of engaging in incitement. In addition, efforts are ongoing by some at Chapman University to have Eastman fired. A similar move is underway at Colorado University at Boulder, where Eastman is a visiting professor. The presidents of both universities have severely criticized Eastman's remarks but are refusing to fire him citing First Amendment protections.

The words of both Giuliani and Eastman can be seen here (hat tip Ugetube.com).

Last month, Eastman first came under fire for joining Trump's legal team in a court filing. He was accused of improperly using his work contact information at Chapman in the filing (hat tip Legal Insurrection). 

Now, in the wake of Wednesday's events, Chapman president Daniele Struppa is facing demands to fire Eastman. In two statements to the campus community, Struppa has condemned Eastman but refuses to fire him.

"This week, John Eastman, a member of the Chapman faculty, played a role in the tragic events in Washington, D.C., that jeopardized our democracy."

That is an inaccurate and very unfair characterization. Eastman had nothing whatsoever to do with the events that took place at a separate location, in this case, the Capitol. As previously stated, he neither encouraged violence nor a march to the Capitol, let alone the storming of the Capitol. He expressed his belief that the election was stolen and outlined his reasons. 

Here is Struppa's follow-up statement to the campus.

In addition, Phil DiStefano, President of the University of Colorado, Boulder, strongly condemned Eastman's speech even while conceding his first amendment rights and refusing to fire him.

While the presidents of Chapman and Colorado University are correct in defending Eastman's First Amendment rights and refusing to bend to the demands to fire him, their characterizations of Eastman's words and actions are unfair. As to the December issue when Eastman joined the Trump legal team, our recent history is rife with incidents when university professors have appeared on Capitol Hill to testify, and their university affiliations were prominently noted. Did we not know that Anita Hill was a professor at the University of Oklahoma when she leveled charges against Clarence Thomas in his Supreme Court confirmation hearings? Even Joe Biden should remember that. He presided over the hearings. What about when the Brett Kavanaugh hearings were taken over by the accusations of Christine Blasey Ford? And who was Christine Blasey Ford? A professor at Palo Alto University. That was hardly kept from the public as she testified. And how about that Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, who came to Washington to testify at Trump's impeachment hearings that the President had, indeed, committed impeachable offenses (in her opinion). We all knew she was a Stanford law professor. It was right there on the TV screen. How many times has that prominent Harvard Law Professor, Lawrence Tribe, weighed in on controversial issues, often on Capitol Hill, with his Harvard affiliation prominently displayed? Perhaps we should leave Hill and Ford off the list because, after all, they were the alleged victims, but don't tell me that university professors who enter the political arena are supposed to hide their credentials and pose as shoe salesmen. If it's OK for Pamela Karlan, it's OK for John Eastman.

To sum up, what we have here is an attack on Eastman for taking the side of President Trump in the election controversy. In academia, that is considered an unpardonable sin. To link him to the violence at the Capitol is wrong. That, however, will not stop the campus Jacobins from continuing their attacks. It is a sad commentary on the state of our universities today.

The true opposition To President Donald Trump

This is an outstanding read from the The Conservative Treehouse AKA The Last Refuge. If you are not a treeper or do not know about CTH, NOW YOU Do!. I humbly ask that read this and pass this along to as many as possible. It is a long read so I have just a starter read here and the link at the bottom of the post to the rest at CTH.

Your most humble and obedient servant, PatriotUSA 

 

There are Trillions at Stake – The Big Club and UniParty Opposition to President

 

There are a lot of masks dropping this week.  There is a great deal of new sunlight upon the professional and institutional republican politicians that hold office.  There is a great deal of information this week highlighting establishment opposition against the presidency of Donald Trump. It is valuable to understand what lies at the heart of this opposition.

CTH can get down in the weeds of each specific issue to discuss the motives and intents (we will, and do), but the big picture MUST remain at the forefront of understanding. If we lose track of the big picture, the weeds are overwhelming.

…“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.”

~ Niccolò Machiavelli

♦POTUS Trump was disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S. He was fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss. Our interests, our position, is zero-sum. His DC opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They want to return to full economic control over the U.S.

In these economic endeavors President Trump was disrupting decades of financial schemes established to use the U.S. as a host for their endeavors. President Trump was confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host (USA) ie YOU. There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

Read the rest here

 


Tags: ENTER TAGS HERE #stop the steal 2020/2021, Trump, Biden, Democrats, Communists, Uniparty, GOPe, Traitors, Decepticons, Media Bias, Cold Anger, Government corruption liberals, Tea Party, US Agriculture, China, USA Trade, Civil War 2.0 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

Forecast 2021: James Howard Kunstler

This is rather long read so the rest is at the link below. As I am trapped here in Gran Torino West I have a very serious and terminal case of COLD ANGER. It is only slightly eased by my acquisition of more ammo and weapons. Buckle up me hearties for the hard times ahead. PatriotUSA

   

 


      

 

 As I write, the presidential election is still not resolved, with dramatic events potentially unfolding in the first days of the New Year. I’m not convinced that Mr. Trump is in as weak a position as the news media has made him out to be in these post-election months of political fog and noise. The January 6 meet-up of the Senate and House to confirm the electoral college votes may yet propel matters into a constitutional Lost World of political monsterdom. The tension is building. This week’s public demonstration by one Jovan Hutton Pulitzer of the easy real-time hackability of Dominion Voting Systems sure threw the Georgia lawmakers for a loop, and that demo may send reverberations into next Wednesday’s DC showdown.

There may be some other eleventh-hour surprises coming from the Trump side of the playing field. As I averred Monday, we still haven’t heard anything from DNI Ratcliffe, and you can be sure he’s sitting on something, perhaps something explosive, say, evidence of CIA meddling in the election. There have been ominous hints of something screwy in Langley for weeks. The Defense Dept., under Secretary Miller, took over all the CIA’s field operational functions before Christmas — “No more black ops for you!” That was a big deal. There were rumors of CIA Director Gina Haspel being in some manner detained, deposed and…talking of dark deeds. She was, after all, the CIA’s London station-chief during the time that some of the worst RussiaGate shenanigans took place there involving the international men-of-mystery, Stefan Halper, Josepf Mifsud, and Christopher Steele. Mr. Ratcliffe seemed to be fighting with the CIA in the weeks following the election over their slow-walking documents he had demanded.

What else does Mr. Trump know about this rumored inter-agency feud? Or a number of other fraught matters surrounding the election, and also questions concerning the harassment he suffered from the four-year rolling coup run by his Deep State antagonists (many of them CIA). What does he know of China’s infiltration into our national affairs, of which the Biden Family’s business deals with CCP-connected companies is only one piece?  Or of China’s relationship with Dominion systems — China is rumored to have acquired a 75-percent interest in the company as recently as October.

In any case, the president cut short his holiday break in Florida before New Years Eve to fly back to Washington. The company line is that he wants to exhaust all the prescribed legal procedures to contest the November 3 vote tally. And if none of it avails to correct the outcome, he might move on to… something else.  If even the so-far publicly revealed evidence of the Biden family’s influence-peddling schemes overseas is true — and the emails and corporate memoranda from Hunter’s laptop seem genuine — then it would be Mr. Trump’s duty to prevent Joe Biden from becoming president. And outside the constitutionally-mandated process in the national legislature, that would leave him some sort of other emergency executive action.

Read the rest here. 

 

 


Tags:2021, Robber Barons, Commies, Sat Cong, Election theft 2020, Trump, Biden, China, Wankers, Liberals, Traitors, Socialism, Totalitarianism, Communism, 1776, Big Oil, Covid19, Fake Pandemic 2020/2021 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

WORD

 

Lights might go out Wednesday afternoon. Check stores and top off any issues.

Each of us faces an existential conflict.

Either the traditional people in all of the nations of the world exterminate the globalists operating in their countries, or the globalists and their allies will exterminate the traditional peoples.

There is no negotiating.

There is no “live and let live”.

 


 

 

There is no Marquess of Queensbury rulebook, other than the eventual judgment of your Maker for what you did – and what you did not do.

There is no honorable way out but victory.

And victory must be so unmistakable that grandchildren around the world will talk of what happened back in ’21.

War to the knife.

Knife to the hilt.

WRSA

 


Tags: ENTER TAGS HERECivil War 2021, Commies, Poland, Election theft 2020, Trump, Biden To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

The Cornell Campaign Against Law School Professor William Jacobson




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


This article first appeared in New English Review.


Cornell University Law School Professor William Jacobson, who runs a conservative blog called Legal Insurrection, has been going through Hell the past year or so due to his conservative views and recent criticism of Black Lives Matter. Students, faculty and administration have been loudly protesting Jacobson's views and trying to end his academic career at Cornell. He has recently been interviewed regarding his experiences. I have previously written in Jacobson's defense as well as that of other professors in other universities who are having similar difficulties for exercising their free speech rights.

This has caused me to reflect on my own experiences while teaching English as a second language (ESL) part-time at the University of California at Irvine (UCI) Extension from 1998-2016 while running my own conservative blog, Fousesquawk.

I should begin by emphasizing that it was my practice never to opine about political or other controversial issues in the classroom. I considered that it was my job to teach students to improve their English skills, not what to think about the world. However, beginning around 2006-2007, I did become active on other parts of the campus when I became aware of anti-Semitic and/or anti-American events taking place on campus. I am speaking primarily of the annual week of bashing Israel that comes every May to UCI courtesy of the Muslim Student Union and Students for Justice in Palestine. It was around that time that I started my blog in order to publicize these issues on campus. Thus, I began attending these events, listening, videotaping (over the objections of the speakers and those hosting the event-it was my legal right to do so), never disrupting, but asking pointed questions during the q and a.

It became my position-and still is- that the University of California system, as well as universities across the nation, are tolerating (anti-Semitic) intolerance in the very name of tolerance. They are simply afraid to confront the main purveyors of anti-Semitism on campus (pro-Palestinian forces) because they are predominantly Muslim. I thus became an open critic of the UCI administration as well as the chancellors of other campuses and the various presidents of the UC system.

Interestingly, and quite in contrast to the experiences of Professor Jacobson and many others, I never suffered any blowback from the University itself nor the UCI Extension, for whom I worked. In contrast to most humanities departments, the teacher corps in ESL was largely made up of people with foreign living experience, people who were bi-lingual, and often married to foreign spouses-as well as having a variety of political views. The common practice in our office was not to discuss politics (I did violate that occasionally), but the point is that my co-workers and supervisors knew my views, but we all got along very well. The University administration knew very well who I was because I wrote them several letters when I thought they were allowing anti-Semitism to rear its ugly head on campus. Yet, they never tried to silence me or threaten my job. Keep in mind that as a part-timer, I worked on a  quarterly contract. I had no tenure, no employment rights. They didn't need to fire me. All they had to do was not give me a class to teach the next quarter, and I would have been gone. Of course, being a  retired government employee with a pension and health benefits, it would not have caused me any great stress.

The point I am making here is that the University of California and UC Irvine respected my right of free speech. When I needed to communicate with university administrators, I did so in a professional and polite manner. There was no personal acrimony. I did have a couple of unpleasant exchanges with two UCI professors, with whom I was on opposite sides of the fence, as well as professors from other campuses and speakers who came to speak at UCI. But that's what you sign up for when you choose to become an activist and speak out at so many of these ugly events that take place on campuses.

In the end, my age and declining energy told me it was time to pack it in with my teaching career. I also wanted to leave on my own terms and not as a result of some unfortunate occurrence on campus related to my activism. In the end, I chose to stop teaching, but I remained on great terms with those with whom and for whom I worked in the UCI Extension. UCI is in many respects, a great university, but it has similar problems as other great universities. At the risk of digressing, one of the saving graces of UCI is that it has a relatively small Humanities department. It's law school, on the other hand, is little more than a training ground for liberal activists.

It is unfortunate that other teachers like Professor Jacobson have not been as lucky as I was. It is a disgrace that his own colleagues have turned against him simply because they don't share his views. This is not what a university is supposed to be. Cornell is a prestigious university, part of the Ivy League. Yet, that school suffers from several problems, not just the Jacobson issue. Anti-Semitism is one of those issues at Cornell. When you look at other Ivy League institutions like Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, etc., you see the same problems.

It is a great experience working on a university campus, but there are many problems in the academic culture. It is a culture dominated by extreme leftist thinkers, people who all too often, do not respect the free speech rights of others. It is a culture that needs to change, but it is going to take a long time to change the culture that has been building up since the 1960s when I was in college. It will take a long time to change the leftist domination in academia, but at least universities could follow the example of UC Irvine and not try to hound teachers who don't follow the herd.