October 7th, 2023: The Rallying Shot for Antisemites Heard Round The World
On October 7th, 2023, Hamas, a democratically elected terrorist organization in the State of Palestine, launched a ferocious and vile attack on Israeli concertgoers attending The Nova Music Festival in Israel (as well as southern Israel), and the entire world was set ablaze. The initial attack with materiel was bombastic, and the pursuing ground troop behaviors were like those of a Frenzy. Babies were murdered, families were killed, fetuses were removed from wombs, people were burned alive, and women were raped to death so brutally that their pelvises were broken.
This happened on October 7th, 2023.
On October 6th, 2023, I had some little empathy for the plight of the Palestinian – in principle. On October 6th, my feeling was that the Palestinians had gotten a raw deal, and I hated like poison that they were disallowed the vote, because that is intolerable – it was offensive to my American sensibilities. However, I understood nascently that it was impossible for Israel to give Palestine the vote if she intended to survive; Palestine only means to break her any way she can, it is her stated goal. I also understood nascently this was partially a land dispute, having remembered Israel leaving the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians in 2005. To me, it read like they had, after the establishment of Israel in 1948, finally been allowed an inch through the 2005 concessions, and still they were determined to take a mile. Add to that equation that the two “states” (this word has several different meanings in different applications, and it seems as though its definition as it relates to Palestine is a point of extreme confusion to most) are embroiled in a literal mortal battle fueled by religious ideology, I never saw much hope for the future of the Palestinians.
Now I see none.
This was a very simplistic and binary issue for me. Hamas must be broken, and the people must be de-Hamas-ified, whether they like it or not. And they do. Overwhelmingly. It is worth repeating that Hamas is supported by over 80% of the population in Palestine. Thus, I am very dubious about the mythical “innocent Palestinian” I keep hearing about — people keep barking about how ‘collective punishment’ is a war crime, but it is literally in their constitution to indoctrinate their children with a sick and twisted version of Sesame Street which advocates for the genocide of Jewish people. These videos can readily be found on YouTube. For me, it is time to stop respecting this barbaric culture out of some misplaced sense of courtesy, or a misguided sense that it makes one verrry sophisticated; no. These people need to be forced to join the 21st century, or else.
The enormous number of people (chiefly Progressives, the Youth, and Academia, but also a select number of Olds who are trying to be vogue, and they’re the most pathetic of all because they should know better) who have completely unmasked themselves to unapologetically display their rampant and hateful antisemitism is appalling and atrocious. It couldn’t be ignored by the government — kids were rioting on campuses and Jewish students had to barricade themselves in the Cooper Union Library. This happened. In America. Viral video broke the internet of Harvard professors menacing a Jewish student. Antisemitic messages were being projected via light displays onto college buildings. And the country waited for the administrations of these places to make some response, any response, and those reactions were weak, inadequate, and unacceptable. We as the American public said that . . . and watched as we were ignored, as the administrations looked the other way and whistled, fiddling while Rome burnt. The moral rot in the most elite American institutions was so abhorrent they were called to testify before Congress for being in violation of Title IV Funding. And the world watched that too — more than any US Hearing in history. This all happened very, very fast, and then things kept happening, like a car chase that wouldn’t let up. No one could look away.
It’s actually January 12th now, and I should have been journaling about these things as they were happening — I’ve known since October 7th that war journaling about Israel would become a part of my life. Israel, education, the progressive’s ultimate endgame for society, and the upcoming presidential election are quite literally all we ever talk about; even poor Ukraine, invaded by Russia almost two years ago, gets no love anymore. Up until last week, our attentions were focused solely on Massachusetts and the Middle East. And so came and went the least festive Christmas of our lives with barely a kiss, all of the work with none of the joy, because we had been watching with stupefaction what was unfolding on our campuses and streets.
(I really do wish I’d journaled as I’d intended, because as I explained, so much happened so quickly — as in, new terrible information was coming out every single day, sometimes more than once a day. I did find a timeline from ABC online, which I’ll transcribe here and add any details to as I remember them for my own private posterity.)
BACKGROUND: In the days following the October 7th attack, mobs of rabid, pro-Palestinian students activated like the mindless tools they are and rioted across the nation’s campuses, including MIT, UPenn, and Harvard. These protests began even before Israel responded or made any kind of statement whatsoever. Lackluster university response to these shameful demonstrations created public outcry and demand for further action. Further inaction (coupled with additional sensational scandals breaking every day) led to Washington staring the universities down balefully, which ultimately culminated in the December 5th Congressional Hearings.
PERSONAL OPINONS ABOUT THE REPUBLICANS VERSUS THE DEMOCRATS AS REGARDS THE JEWS: I think it is worth mentioning that I have finally learned is that Josh is not paranoid, people really do hate the Jews — but that is beside the current point of the section. The point of the section is to establish my biases, and why I have them. This event has had a profound effect on all of society (ie, people supporting Palestine are being fired and blacklisted), including our own personal lives (we have forfeited friendships of 20 years.) It is my strong impression that as of right now, the Republicans are the only party who are united and showing up to work over this particular issue. I feel just as strongly that every inch of the current Democratic cabinet is a catastrophe from the bottom to the top. Biden has been most disappointing., and I find him to be something of a bad actor, despite his “Scranton Style”. He is a doddering, drooling, stumbling old man raging at the sun, and he doesn’t seem to have any control of his own people — I see little point in talking out of one side of your mouth by saying that Israel is a necessary American ally (true) if you’re going to use Karine Jean-Pierre as your press secretary mouthpiece, as she keeps saying anti-Israel things at every single conference and is only concerned about the mythical “Islamaphobic” oppressors when questioned directly about the appalling increase in antisemitic hate crimes in this country since October.
The world rocks madly on, raging through the night on a clattering train, everything in breakneck motion, but except for a single shining example (John Fetterman, D-PA), the Democratic party seems positively paralyzed. I wish they weren’t, because we could use their unity now, but I’m not angry about it — I don’t pretend to be an expert, but this is just my observation. Upon reflection, I don’t know if they are paralyzed because they are having an identity crisis within their party that is causing a tug-of-war of sorts that will allow no movement towards one side or the other; or if the party itself is so inherently antisemitic that they just can’t keep it under wraps anymore, not now that DEI is on the scene and Jews are involved. Because when Arabs are killing other Arabs — which they do, on the regular — there is no protest. There is nothing. No one cares. But when Israel does it — as any sovereign country worth its salt would, for what’s the good of sovereignty if you can’t use it to defend your people? — it’s ‘genocide’. (Which, ironically, is what Palestine calls for against Israel, and America, by proxy, in its constitution.) A mass, violent rape occurred the likes of which the world has not seen since Nanking . . . and #MeToo is as mute as a swan when it comes to Jewish women.
All Animals Are Equal . . . But Some Are More Equal Than Others
Another phenomenal element of the Democratic DEI movement is the “Queers for Palestine”. These are gays or people with gender dysmorphia who support a ceasefire, and are out in the streets to say so. When confronted with the fact that the country they are coming out in support of thinks they are offensive and illegal and as a result would literally throw them off a rooftop, it has little bearing on their opinion of the place, so entrenched is the “oppressor/oppressed” relationship indoctrinated in school and through programs like DEI. (Later, I know I will read this, and it will all seem so confusing and convoluted — how did the war in Israel begin killing American DEI? Will I even remember what DEI was? It will be very short lived, I think. I will dedicate a whole blog to DEI a different time, I have too many thoughts about it to detail here, but it does feature heavily within the Democratic Party, education, and the Congressional Hearings, so I have to touch upon it. In short, DEI is Cartman in a nice sweater. It looks great at first. It’s a policy that hopes to pacify the wrongs of history by changing our system from a meritocracy to one wherein a (preferably female) minority with no experience or qualifications will be given partiality for anything, based on the assumption that she must have grown up hungry and without a father, and that no one in her family had ever <insert predicate here>. You know. Because there’s nothing racist at all about making blanket assumptions about strangers you think are “disadvantaged” based on their skin color. (How this anomaly is reconciled in the social justice warrior’s mind is only further evidence to me that they cannot think critically.) If you automatically think I was “disadvantaged” because I have brown skin, one, you’re wrong; and two, you’re racist. You think I’m lesser than you, and trying to cover that with the word “disadvantaged” ain’t gonna cut it — just because you think I look stupid doesn’t mean I am stupid, and the narrative that all POC are generally “disadvantaged” is only a thinly veneered diplomatic way to say you think “they” are lesser than you. Because the love never includes white people, even though white people exist in disadvantage, too. DEI is an agenda the Democrats — not just the most progressive of them, but all of them — have been pushing for years, and it is not an agenda I have ever respected, since a large part of its identity is The 1619 Project. I reject anything from that piece of revisionist trash, as it is equally as racist, biased, and ideological as what it claims it is trying to reframe; and I don’t understand why the Democrats insisted that this one work written by someone who had never really published anything before had to become the gospel and cornerstone of our entire educational system.
Enter Claudine Gay, DEI hire for Harvard.
This same picture of Gay’s ugly ass mug has been splashed on every single newspaper and media website in the entire world.
While the presidents of all three schools would later be called to the December 5th Congressional Hearing chaired by Virginia Foxx (R-VA), it would be Harvard and its president, Gay, that would come under the most fire in the weeks following her disastrous performance before Elise Stefanik (R-NY).
In October, immediately after the wanton attack on Israeli civilians, 34 student groups at Harvard signed a letter condemning Israel for the attacks and calling for a ceasefire. To me, this is akin to blaming America for Pearl Harbor and telling us not to do anything. So, here we were, the world had just officially exposed itself as a powder keg, and these kids deliberately started throwing matches. When the public found out, the shit hit the fan; people demanded that the universities react. The university presidents cloaked their evil professors and mindless students by saying it was free speech, albeit “abhorrent”. (That later appeared to be a buzzword trained into them by their groomers.) This is when things began unraveling so fast that it became difficult to keep up.
TIMELINE:
October 7th: Hamas launches terrorist attacks on civilians. Several Harvard student groups issue a statement after Hamas launched terrorist attacks in Israel that killed more than 1,200 stating that Israeli policies — referencing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza — are "entirely responsible for all unfolding violence." The letter prompts fierce backlash, with some Jewish students at the university saying they felt isolated and scared following the letter's publication, claiming it supported the Hamas attack. The students behind the letter deny supporting Hamas and say the backlash has led to a doxxing campaign against students believed to be connected to the letter. (This is in reference to their names being released to various Masters of the Universe and Titans of Industries who no longer want to hire them, or anyone from Harvard; this bad press has cost them over $1b in donor funds and early admissions are down almost 20%.)
October 24th: The New York Post approaches Harvard asking for comment "on more than two dozen instances in which Gay's words appeared to closely parallel words, phrases or sentences in published works by other academics," according to the publication. Gay subsequently asks the Harvard Corporation — Harvard's main governing board — to initiate an independent review of her published work.
All the while, the shame game was getting sporty. Doxxing trucks were deployed at the elite campuses, revealing the names of the students who had signed letters condemning Israel and parking in front of Claudine Gay’s house, calling for her resignation.
November 30th: Harvard University joins a growing list of institutions being investigated for complaints of antisemitism and Islamophobic discrimination on campus.
The investigations have been opened under Title VI, a law that bans discrimination based on race, color or national origin in any institution or program that receives federal funding from the U.S. Department of Education.
Dec. 5, 2023: Gay and two other university presidents — University of Pennsylvania's Liz Magill and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sally Kornbluth — are grilled before the House Education Committee over how they handled antisemitism on campus amid the Israel-Hamas war.
In a tense back-and-forth, New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik asks Gay the hypothetical question: "Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard's rules on bullying and harassment?"
Gay responds, "The rules around bullying and harassment are quite specific and if the context in which that language is used amounts to bullying and harassment, then we take, we take action against it." Stefanik subsequently calls for Gay and the other presidents, who gave similar responses, to resign.
Instantly, there was backlash, and the angriest, most vocal critic was Bill Ackman, Jewish billionaire, hedge fund manager, and Harvard alum. Claudine Gay immediately became his Fascinating New Thing, and he was on her like a math nerd on a Rubik’s Cube. Look out, Claudine. The hits are comin’ and they won’t stop comin’. Not now that Bill’s on the case.
Captain of the Crusaders Against Claudine
Posted on Twitter (I refuse to call it ‘X’, Elon Musk is truly a dork) for the world to read, Ackman wrote:
<To Twitter Readers> Please see my below letter to the President of Harvard University sent today:
November 4, 2023
Dear President Gay,
I am writing this letter to you regretfully. Never did I think I would have to write a letter to the president of my alma mater about the impact of her actions and inactions on the health and safety of its student body in order to help catalyze necessary change. For the past four weeks since the horrors of October 7th, I have been in dialogue with members of the corporation board, other alumni, as well as students and faculty sharing and comparing our concerns about the growing number of antisemitic incidents on campus, as we wait for you and the University to act. Four weeks after the barbaric terrorist acts of October 7th, I have lost confidence that you and the University will do what is required.
Last Wednesday, I spent seven hours on campus meeting with Jewish, Israeli, and non-Jewish students and faculty at the Law School, at HBS and in a 90-minute town hall in Aldrich 112 with 230 Jewish college students (coincidentally, one for each hostage held by Hamas), research staff, and faculty from the University at large, organized by Harvard Chabad. Over the course of the day, it became clear that the situation at Harvard is dire and getting worse, much worse than I had realized.
Jewish students are being bullied, physically intimidated, spat on, and in several widely-disseminated videos of one such incident, physically assaulted. Student Slack message boards are replete with antisemitic statements, memes, and images. On-campus protesters on the Widener Library steps and elsewhere shout “Intifada! Intifada! Intifada! From the River to the Sea, Palestine Shall Be Free!” as they knowingly call for violent insurrection and use eliminationist language seeking the destruction of the State of Israel and the Jewish people.
When you explained in your October 12th video address that Harvard “embraces a commitment to free expression,” you sent a clear message that the eliminationist and antisemitic statements of the protesters are permissible on campus. Putting aside the legal limitations on free speech that include restrictions on fighting words and true threats, “where speakers direct a threat to a person or group of persons with the intent of placing the victim in fear of bodily harm or death,” if Harvard indeed had a strong track record of protecting free speech, many would have taken your support for free speech more seriously. Unfortunately, Harvard has not embraced a serious commitment to free speech, particularly so in recent years.
In The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) Annual College Free Speech Rankings, Harvard has consistently finished in the bottom quartile in each of the past four years, with its ranking deteriorating each year. On September 23rd, just two weeks prior to October 7th, FIRE announced that Harvard achieved its lowest free speech ranking ever for the 2023 academic year, ranking last out of 254 universities, with a rating of 0.00, the only university with an “abysmal” speech climate. See: https://thefire.org/news/harvard-gets-worst-score-ever-fires-college-free-speech-rankingsfor… the results of the survey where FIRE cites multiple examples of incidents on the Harvard campus where students and faculty were denied their First Amendment rights. Therefore, when you cite Harvard’s “commitment to free expression,” in supporting the protesters, it rings false and hypocritical to the university at large and the Jewish community in particular.
Many Jewish students have also recently become afraid to express their concerns. Many have also felt the need to remove their mezuzahs, yarmulkes, Stars of David, and other overt evidence of their religion and heritage on campus and in Cambridge to avoid being exposed to discrimination, bullying or worse.
I am incredibly saddened to say that Harvard has also become a place where Jewish students are concerned about the threat of physical violence (which likely has a corresponding impact on their mental health) while among other insults, they are forced to sit next to classmates who openly and comfortably post, under their actual names, antisemitic statements and imagery on the student-wide Slack message system with no consequences for their actions.
And it is not just the Jewish students and faculty that are up in arms. While on campus, I heard a constant refrain from non-Jewish members of the Harvard community:
Why are Claudine and the administration doing nothing about this?
Harvard’s Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging I have heard from many members of the Harvard community that Harvard’s Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging (“OEDIB”) is an important contributing factor to the problem. I was surprised to learn from students and faculty that the OEDIB does not support Jewish, Asian and non-LGBTQIA White students. I had never read the OEDIB DEI statement until today when I wrote this letter. The DEI statement makes clear that Harvard’s conception of diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging does not include Jews (at least those that are not in one of the other welcomed DEI groups). According to Harvard’s DEI statement:
"We actively seek and welcome people of color, women, persons with disabilities, people who identify as LGBTQIA, and those who are at the intersections of these identities, from across the spectrum of disciplines and methods to join us."
In other words, Jews and others who are not on the above list are not welcome to join. When antisemitism is widely prevalent on campus, and the DEI office – which “views diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging as the pathway to achieving inclusive excellence and fostering a campus culture where everyone can thrive” – does not welcome Jewish students, we have a serious problem. It is abundantly clear that the campus culture that is being fostered at Harvard today is not one where everyone is included, feels a sense of belonging, welcomes diversity, or is a place where “everyone can thrive.”
Equity on Campus The issue of equity, or the lack thereof, was another issue about which I heard constant complaints, i.e., the so-called “double standard.” One member of the faculty rhetorically asked:
"What would Claudine do if 34 Harvard student organizations put out a statement on May 25th, 2020 that ‘George Floyd had it coming,’" noting that you have yet to condemn the student organization letter which holds Israel “solely responsible” for the heinous and barbaric acts of a terrorist organization.
Other faculty, alumni and students asked other rhetorical questions including:
"How would Harvard respond if a trans student attempted to walk by an anti-LGBTQIA demonstration on the HBS campus and was subject to the same abuse that the Jewish HBS student experienced at the Free Palestine demonstration on October 18th?"
"How would you respond to a Harvard white supremacist protest where students shouted 'Tulsa! Tulsa! Tulsa! From the Atlantic to the Pacific, America should be free of Black people.'"
Would Harvard even permit the above demonstrations to take place on campus?
Despite the outburst of antisemitic activities and protests on campus, the first initiative that Harvard took to protect students was the establishment on October 24th of a task force to “support students experiencing doxxing, harassment, and online security issues following backlash against students allegedly affiliated with a statement that held Israel ‘entirely responsible’ for violence in the Israel-Hamas conflict.” The creation of this task force sent a very strong message that the University was not just ignoring the antisemitic incidents and threats to Jewish student safety on campus, but rather it was taking sides in the conflict by only supporting students who held Israel responsible for Hamas’ vile acts.
In summary, your failure to condemn the barbaric acts of October 7th opened the door for a wave of anti-Israel attacks on campus that have led to a growing number of antisemitic protests and actions. Your subsequent two statements about October 7th to the University attempting to address the failings of your first letter were not taken seriously as many perceived those statements as being driven by pressure from the alumni community rather than reflecting a sincere and authentic understanding of the issues, and real empathy for Israel and the Jewish community.
The failure of your communications to the public and the University coupled with the fact that the first tangible action by the University was to protect those who blamed Israel has created a belief among the Jewish and Israeli community at Harvard that they are not deemed welcome nor worthy of protection by the University.
“Narrow Casting” Finally, your announcement on Friday October 27th about launching a task force to address antisemitism and your statement that “Antisemitism has no place at Harvard” was welcomed by members of the Jewish community in attendance, but students who participated in my Thursday town hall were either unaware of that announcement or alternatively questioned your commitment to address antisemitism.
At my town hall, it was noted that your antisemitism speech was made only to Jewish students and parents at a Hillel Shabbat dinner, and a transcript of your remarks was only given to and published in the Forward, a niche Jewish publication with a tiny subscriber base. Two members of the Harvard faculty described this as “narrow casting” to an affinity group rather than you making a serious public commitment to address antisemitism. One research fellow stated, and many in the room agreed, that they would only believe that you were committed to stamp out antisemitism at Harvard if you stood up in front of the entire Harvard community and made that commitment, and you then implemented tangible and decisive actions consistent with that commitment.
While the members of the Jewish community I met with at Harvard were happy to hear from an alum who was willing to listen, many students questioned why you have not sat down with students so that you can hear their concerns first-hand.
Antisemitism at Harvard Prior to October 7th In the transcript of your speech published in the Forward, you said about antisemitism at Harvard: “For years, this university has done too little to confront its continuing presence. No longer.”
Your remarks imply that antisemitism has been a serious issue at Harvard that has gone unaddressed for years. I have been an active alum for 35 years having attended the college and HBS, taught numerous classes on campus each year, have participated in many fireside chats with large student audiences, mentor current students and recent graduates on a regular basis, and have been a member of the Dean’s Advisory Board at the business school for many years. During this period, I have neither experienced nor have I become aware of any antisemitic incidents at Harvard until beginning four weeks ago. When I asked my daughter today about her experience with antisemitism at Harvard (she graduated in 2020), she described antisemitism when she was at Harvard as “non-existent.” While I am sure it is possible if not likely that there have been some antisemitic incidents at Harvard over the last 35 years, the reality is that Harvard has been an extremely comfortable place to be Jewish and/or Israeli, up until the last four weeks.
In truth, the outburst at antisemitism at Harvard is a recent one and is largely due to your actions and inactions and that of the administration and the University at large in failing to appropriately address blatant antisemitism on campus.
How Can You Solve the Problem? What I find particularly upsetting about recent events on campus is that the problem is not so difficult to address. I do not believe that antisemitism is widespread among the student body and faculty at Harvard. Rather, I believe that a small minority of students, faculty, and staff are antisemitic and the administration’s inaction in confronting the problem head on have emboldened this antisemitic subset of the community to escalate their antisemitic actions because there have been no consequences for doing so.
Actions speak much louder than words. Members of the Harvard community have heard some words, but experienced no actions of substance to address antisemitism on campus. I would therefore recommend the following steps which I believe will dramatically reduce if not eliminate antisemitic acts at Harvard immediately.
First, the students involved in harassing and allegedly physically assaulting the HBS student on October 18th should be immediately suspended. I understand that the University is waiting for the outcome of a police department review of the situation to take action, but this makes no sense. It is clear from the multiple videos available of the incident that the conduct of the protesters involved does not meet the standards for student conduct outlined in the Harvard College Student Handbook, in particular Harvard’s anti-bullying policies outlined in the Report & Recommendation from the Anti-Bullying Working Group adopted on September 1, 2023. …https://communitymisconductpolicies.harvard.edu/reports-and-draft-policies… These standards alone are enough to invoke Disciplinary Probation until such time as the police department investigation is completed. Harvard student disciplinary actions should not be outsourced to the police department.
Taking decisive action now will put all Harvard students, faculty and staff on notice that the University takes violations of Harvard’s code of conduct seriously, and will bring great comfort to the Jewish community at Harvard that appropriate actions to reduce threats to their safety are being implemented.
Second, the protesters who have been chanting Intifada and other eliminationist statements should be subject to disciplinary action. There are multiple videos available of the various protests that would enable the University to identify the individuals involved who can then be referred to the Administrative Board where appropriate disciplinary action can be determined and acted upon.
Third, the University should review the student Slack message boards to identify those students who have made antisemitic statements or shared antisemitic imagery. These students should also be referred to the Administration Board for appropriate disciplinary action.
Fourth, the University should publicly reach out to students in an effort to obtain other examples of antisemitic acts that should also be carefully investigated, and for which appropriate disciplinary steps should be taken.
Because Harvard students are notoriously focused on their job and career prospects post-graduation, disciplinary actions by the administration for failure to meet the University’s standards for appropriate conduct that become part of a student’s permanent record should serve as an effective deterrent to overt antisemitic acts on campus. No law firm, corporation or graduate program will hire or admit an antisemitic or racist student. I note that the recent letter to the deans of law schools around the country signed by many of the top law firms in the U.S. has, I am told, already begun to have an effect in reducing antisemitic acts at the Law School.
Fifth, the University should form a task force to review the appropriateness of the activities of the OEDIB and whether its practice of excluding certain minority communities on campus, including Asian and Jewish students, is appropriate, which in fact may be contributing to discrimination against these groups on campus.
Sixth, the results of the antisemitism task force should be made public as promptly as possible so that we can better understand the sources of antisemitism at Harvard. Harvard’s admissions practices should be reassessed to ascertain why the university is admitting racist students, and should consider revisions to the application process to enable the University to better screen the character of candidates for admission.
Seventh, as Harvard president, you should make clear that Harvard supports free speech on campus, but that certain kinds of hate speech as well as fighting words and incitement to violence are not consistent with Harvard’s values or considered appropriate conduct for members of the Harvard community. In connection with your commitment to free speech, Harvard should form a task force to understand the constraints on free speech at Harvard that have led to it ranking last on FIRE’s annual college survey, so the issues that have led to Harvard’s last-place ranking can be addressed.
Violations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: On September 28, 2023, the Biden Administration issued a clarifying release stating that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits certain forms of antisemitism, Islamophobia and related discrimination as part of its National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism released in May 2023 requires universities to provide all students, including students who are or are perceived to be Jewish, a school environment free from discrimination. The consequences for a university’s failure to meet the requirements of Title VI include the cancellation of federal funding. Harvard has failed in recent weeks to meet its Title VI obligations which threatens a major source of the University’s funding. When coupled with numerous Jewish and non-Jewish alumni that have publicly and privately shared these same concerns, important sources of Harvard’s revenues are at risk. While the University should not need a financial incentive to eliminate discrimination on campus, Harvard’s recent failure to create a safe and non-discriminatory environment for Jewish students threatens the University’s funding for research, scholarships, and more.
Your Historic Opportunity You have been president of Harvard, one of the most important institutions in the world, for four months at one of the most challenging times in its history. As Harvard’s leader, your words and actions are followed closely. As a result, the steps you take to address antisemitism at Harvard will be recognized around the world, and can contribute greatly as an example to other institutions seeking to eliminate antisemitism in all of its forms. History has taught us that when the sparks and initial flames of antisemitism emerge, we must promptly put out the flames before a conflagration begins. It is therefore critically important you act with alacrity in addressing these issues. I encourage you to act boldly and promptly to eliminate this scourge at Harvard. I also call upon you to complete the commitment you made at inauguration when you stated that “Knowledge is our purpose. We serve that purpose best when we commit to open inquiry and freedom of expression as foundational values of the academic community.” Harvard must create an environment where free speech is encouraged and accepted. At the same time, the Harvard community at large must understand the difference between speech protected by the First Amendment and speech that incites violence or seeks the elimination of any group. Such speech does not advance knowledge nor does it belong on campus regardless of whether or not it is protected by the First Amendment. Successfully addressing antisemitism at Harvard and creating an environment with true freedom of expression will become a critically important part of your legacy as the Harvard community works together to address these challenges at a difficult time in world history. I would be delighted to help in any way that I can to enable you to succeed in this mission and as Harvard’s president. Please let me know what more I can do to help.
Sincerely,
William A. Ackman A.B. 1988, MBA 1992
cc: The Harvard Corporation Board; Penny Pritzker, Chairman
December 6th, 2023: Gay responds to backlash over her comments during the congressional hearing, saying, “There are some who have confused a right to free expression with the idea that Harvard will condone calls for violence against Jewish students. Calls for violence or genocide against the Jewish community, or any religious or ethnic group are vile, they have no place at Harvard,” she says, adding, “Those who threaten our Jewish students will be held to account.” (They weren’t; when asked at the congressional hearing, she wouldn’t disclose the information, saying it was ‘protected’.)
December 7th, 2023: In an interview with the Harvard Crimson, Gay apologizes for her remarks during the congressional hearing, saying, “Words matter” and that “When words amplify distress and pain, I don’t know how you could feel anything but regret.” To me, this is such a bullshit apology.
December 12th, 2023: Amid questions over Gay's fate following the hearing, the Harvard Corporation issues a statement unanimously affirming its support for the president. "Our extensive deliberations affirm our confidence that President Gay is the right leader to help our community heal and to address the very serious societal issues we are facing," the Harvard Corporation says in the statement. The board also addresses the plagiarism allegations, saying an independent review of three articles Gay published "revealed a few instances of inadequate citations. While the analysis found no violation of Harvard's standards for research misconduct, President Gay is proactively requesting four corrections in two articles to insert citations and quotation marks that were omitted from the original publications," the board says.
At this point, Claudine Gay had cost “The Harvard Corporation” (I found it slightly sinister they have a ‘corporation’, and even more so when I learned how they had used it to wield power over the NY Post to make them stop pursuing Claudine Gay plagiarism charges) over one billion dollars. Why was one single woman worth so much money to them? No one in the world is worth that much money. Oh. DEI. They can’t admit it’s a failure; that she was a DEI hire; that they automatically disqualified any white males; that she was never fit for the job; that they rushed their own qualifying rounds. They decided they wanted Claudine Gay, hell or high water, and that was it.
Well, they were about to get it with both barrels.
December 19th, 2023: The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, publishes an anonymous complaint addressed to the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences Research Integrity Office that alleges nearly 40 instances of plagiarism by Gay.
December 20th, 2023: Harvard says it found two additional instances of “duplicative language without appropriate attribution” in Gay's 1997 dissertation, which had not been part of the original independent review, but that they did not amount to “research misconduct”, The New York Times reports. The university says Gay will update her dissertation “correcting these instances of inadequate citation,” the Times reports. In a letter to the Harvard Corporation, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce says it has begun a review of Harvard's handling of “credible allegations of plagiarism” by Gay over 24 years.
An absolutely insane period then passed wherein the wildest straws were being grasped — this was racism, this was a witch hunt, this wasn’t plagiarism, they now needed to investigate every former male white Harvard president in the interest of equity. These calls were, from what I saw, completely ignored, which is always the best way to deal with morons. Progressives/leftists then tried to redefine plagiarism.
January 1st, 2024: The Washington Free Beacon publishes an anonymous complaint leveling six more accusations of plagiarism against Gay.
January 2nd, 2024: Gay announces her resignation in a lengthy letter to the school community.
"This is not a decision I came to easily. Indeed, it has been difficult beyond words because I have looked forward to working with so many of you to advance the commitment to academic excellence that has propelled this great university across centuries."
"But, after consultation with members of the Corporation, it has become clear that it is in the best interests of Harvard for me to resign so that our community can navigate this moment of extraordinary challenge with a focus on the institution rather than any individual," the statement continued.
Alan Garber, provost and chief academic officer, will serve as interim president until a new leader takes office, according to the Harvard Corporation.
BUT
As of today, Gay will still remain on the faculty at the same salary as she had as president . . . $900,000.00 That’s a lot of zeroes for being a racist piece of shit that got busted down by AMERICA and now basically got a sweet gig doing nothing. It’s unbelievable to me that plagiarism is what brought her down, not her hateful actions that jeopardized children. She had the gall to say that her resignation was partially fueled by “racial animus” against her — I’m sure this is some kind of DEI payoff. Literally nothing good comes of it.
MIT President Sally Kornbluth is still standing, but we shall see. She seems to have gotten a pass because she herself is Jewish . . . thus, I label her as one of these self-hating Jews who want to identify with the other side in the interest of being “open-minded” . . . and in doing so, becomes the biggest traitor of all.