University Presidents Carelessly Resign

From their inception, the Zionists learned how to turn a loss into a gain, how to use debt as collateral, and enrich their interests. Twisting incidents so that their victim becomes the assailant and their assault makes them the victim has been their trademark. Taking a valid reproach to their damaging tactics and converting it into anti-Semitism, a one hundred percent offering, has shielded Zionist distasteful maneuvers from public animosity.

This was apparent in their plan of combating the well-received campus protests that highlighted the ignominious support the United States government gives to Israel’s ongoing extermination of the Palestinian people; what better than turn the campus protest issue into having the public perceive the campus protests as giving support to those who proposed extermination of the Jewish people? The insensible congressional hearing, titled Holding Campus Leaders Accountable and Confronting Antisemitism, before the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce accomplished the task.

Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, claimed students had “chanted support for intifada and many Jews hear that as a call for violence against them.” What a stretch. Support for Intifada is support for Palestinian actions against Israel, much as support for the Maidan uprising supported the Ukrainian people. Can Congresswoman Stefanik tell us how many, if any, Jews hear that as a call against them and not just Israelis? Ms. Stefanik and her committee proved themselves a complete failure; they did not recite one incident of anti-Semitism. How about that?

Without having introduced anything meaningful into the hearing, Representative Stefanik took a giant leap and asked the president of the University of Pennsylvania, Ms. Magill, “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct, yes or no?” Nowhere and at no time has a “calling for the genocide of Jews” been uttered in the campus demonstrations. Like all Zionists, Ms. Stefanik knew that just reciting the “trapping question” was enough to have the thought imprinted on people’s minds, comparable to Trump saying, “Our election was stolen.”

Confronted with a hypothetical, the confused university presidents, people of integrity and dedication, took the high road and felt they could not give an honest answer. Their lapses proved fatal; the initial scratches became clawed wounds and the unfortunate presidents ran for cover and resigned. They erred terribly.

It may be excusable that they did not give appropriate answers to the “trapping question.” Any of the presidents could have responded, “We have not heard of anyone calling for the genocide of Jews during the campus protests, and calling for genocide of any ethnicity, not just Jews, violates acceptable rules of conduct.” Their subsequent behavior did not mollify their initial lapses.

Afterward, when finally arriving in a sensible atmosphere, they could have rationally explained themselves, offered something that soothed the public, and raised doubt of the sincerity of Congresswoman Stefanik who had asked the question. Their inability to respond adequately and rapid resignations betrayed the campus demonstrations, subdued its positive appearance, and gave support to the pro-Israel deception.

An immediate, well-conceived, and authoritative response to the Committee’s false rhetoric, a further elaboration on the University presidents not wanting their problems to become divisive and contentious issues that affect the universities, and a more in-depth explanation for their abrupt actions from others allied to the universities, counters the usual Zionist twisting of incidents in which their victim becomes the assailant and their assault makes them the victim. Otherwise, this is a bad moment in the struggle to inform the American public of the genocide facing the Palestinian people.