College presidents refuse to testify against calls for Jewish genocide
During a House Education Committee hearing on Tuesday, presidents from three prestigious universities faced tough questions about their response to student calls for Jewish genocide following Hamas’ attack on Israel. However, their refusal to acknowledge the violation of their codes of conduct has sparked outrage.
The New York Times described the hearing as a Republican-led attempt to hold Harvard, M.I.T., and Penn accountable for their handling of antisemitism. But the questioning revealed that the university presidents have shown little remorse for their slow response, silence, and failure to punish students for promoting antisemitic and anti-Western sentiments.
Rep. Elise Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Conference, even called for the resignation of these college presidents due to their repeated failure to condemn or take action against the antisemitism prevalent in higher education institutions.
In recent months, college students across the U.S. have been protesting against Jews and expressing support for Hamas, even after the terrorist group’s attack on Israel claimed many lives.
The only consequences faced by students endorsing Jewish genocide and the destruction of Israel have come from private activists. Ivy League universities have lost funding from top donors, and watchdog groups have publicly exposed the names and faces of students who blamed Israel for Hamas’ attack. Additionally, major U.S. law firms have vowed not to hire openly antisemitic students.
During the hearing, Rep. Elise Stefanik directly asked MIT President Sally Kornbluth if calling for the genocide of Jews violated MIT’s code of conduct. Kornbluth denied hearing such calls on their campus, despite evidence of chants for intifada and protests labeling Israel as a “racist apartheid system.”
It is clear that these university presidents have been evasive and vague in their responses, failing to address the issue of antisemitism on their campuses.
When pressed further, Kornbluth admitted that she had heard chants that could be considered antisemitic, but she did not explicitly state whether they violated MIT’s code of conduct or rules.
The lack of accountability and action from these university leaders is deeply concerning and demands attention.
In a fiery exchange, Representative Elise Stefanik grilled University of Pennsylvania President M. Elizabeth Magill and Harvard President Claudine Gay over their institutions’ handling of antisemitism. Stefanik demanded a clear answer on whether calling for the genocide of Jews violated their respective schools’ rules or codes of conduct. Both presidents attempted to evade the question, emphasizing that speech only becomes harassment when it turns into conduct. Stefanik, however, persisted, highlighting the absurdity of considering genocide as context-dependent. She called out Magill and Gay for failing to take decisive action against faculty members and student organizations that expressed antisemitic viewpoints. The intense questioning exposed the universities’ double standards on free speech and their reluctance to address the rise of antisemitism on their campuses. Stefanik’s relentless pursuit of answers shed light on the need for accountability and a stronger commitment to combating hate speech in academic institutions.
Engaging Paraphrase:
“So, let me get this straight,” Stefanik questioned.
Gay reiterated that Harvard prides itself on embracing “a wide range of free expression, even if it includes objectionable, outrageous, and offensive views.”
“But we both know that’s not entirely true,” Stefanik countered, pointing out instances where Harvard had rescinded admissions offers and expelled freshmen for sharing offensive memes and making racist statements, some as young as 16 years old.
Gay denied Stefanik’s claim, stating that it happened before her time as president.
“You’re also aware that a faculty dean at Winthrop House was fired for his choice of legal representation. Isn’t that correct? And this happened while you were dean,” Stefanik pressed further.
Gay dismissed Stefanik’s characterization of the incident but refused to provide any additional comments.
“Will Harvard rescind admission offers or take disciplinary action against students or applicants who advocate for the murder of Jews by saying ‘from the river to the sea’ or ‘intifada’?” Stefanik continued to inquire.
Once again, Gay evaded a direct answer.
“When speech crosses the line into conduct that violates our policies, such as bullying, harassment, and intimidation, we take action. We have strong disciplinary processes in place to hold individuals accountable,” Gay responded.
She declined to address Stefanik’s question about specific disciplinary actions taken against students who engage in harassment and call for the genocide of Jews on Harvard’s campus.
“Considering that hate crimes against Jewish Americans are the number one hate crime in the U.S., it’s concerning that Harvard ranks poorly in protecting Jewish students. This is why I have called for your resignation, and your inability to provide a clear moral stance speaks volumes,” Stefanik concluded.
What were the consequences faced by students endorsing Jewish genocide and the destruction of Israel?
During a House Education Committee hearing on Tuesday, the presidents of Harvard, M.I.T., and the University of Pennsylvania were questioned about their response to student calls for Jewish genocide following Hamas’ attack on Israel. Despite facing tough questions, the university presidents refused to acknowledge their violation of their codes of conduct, causing outrage. The hearing, described by The New York Times as a Republican-led attempt to hold these prestigious universities accountable for their handling of antisemitism, revealed that the presidents showed little remorse for their slow response and failure to punish students promoting antisemitic and anti-Western sentiments.
Representative Elise Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Conference, went as far as calling for the resignation of these college presidents due to their repeated failure to condemn or take action against antisemitism prevalent in higher education institutions. The hearing brought attention to the issue of antisemitism on college campuses and the lack of accountability and action from university leaders.
In recent months, college students across the U.S. have been protesting against Jews and expressing support for Hamas, even after the terrorist group’s attack on Israel resulted in many lives lost. However, the only consequences faced by students endorsing Jewish genocide and the destruction of Israel have come from private activists, including the loss of funding from top donors for Ivy League universities and public exposure by watchdog groups of students who blamed Israel for Hamas’ attack. Major U.S. law firms have also pledged not to hire openly antisemitic students.
During the hearing, Representative Stefanik directly asked MIT President Sally Kornbluth if calling for the genocide of Jews violated MIT’s code of conduct. Kornbluth denied hearing such calls on their campus, despite evidence of chants for intifada and protests labeling Israel as a “racist apartheid system.” It is clear that the university presidents have been evasive and vague in their responses, failing to address the issue of antisemitism on their campuses. When pressed further, Kornbluth admitted hearing chants that could be considered antisemitic, but she did not explicitly state whether they violated MIT’s code of conduct.
In another exchange, Representative Stefanik questioned University of Pennsylvania President M. Elizabeth Magill and Harvard President Claudine Gay about their institutions’ handling of antisemitism. Both presidents attempted to evade the question, stating that speech becomes harassment only when it turns into conduct. However, Stefanik persisted and criticized Magill and Gay for their inaction against faculty members and student organizations expressing antisemitic sentiments. The intense questioning revealed the universities’ double standards on free speech and their reluctance to address the rise of antisemitism on their campuses. Stefanik’s pursuit of answers highlighted the need for accountability and a stronger commitment to combating hate speech in academic institutions.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...