Legal Insurrection’s Equal Protection Project files a suit against Northwestern for favoring Palestinian students

The New Neo Posted on by

The other day I wrote about Northwestern University’s craven capitulation to its hate-filled pro-Hamas pro-Palestine anti-Israel anti-Jewish demonstrators.

So I’m very much in favor of this move by the Equal Protection Project:

On April 29, 2024, Northwestern University struck a deal to have the pro-Hamas unauthorized encampment removed, with a twist not seen at other universities. Northwestern agreed to establish preferences for “Palestinian” students in accessing a new scholarship program and “MENA/Muslim” [MENA = Middle East North Africa] students in housing.

These ethnic, national origin, and shared ancestry preferences violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On May 1, the Equal Protection Project (EqualProtect.org) filed a Civil Rights Complaint [full embed can be found at the bottom of the linked post) with the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education. OCR has jurisdiction because Northwestern receives federal funding.

Specifically:

In violation of Title VI, the stated commitment of the University to provide five scholarships exclusively to “Palestinian” students illegally excludes and discriminates against non-Palestinian students based on their ethnicity, national origin, and shared ancestry. Additionally, the reservation of space and housing for “MENA/Muslim” students appears to be segregationist in nature, excluding at least in part students on the basis of ethnicity, national origin, and shared ancestry.

You can find out more about the Equal Protection Project at this link. You can donate there as well; it’s a worthy cause.

Can Democrats mention anti-Semitism without condemning Islamophobia?

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s an Orwellian balancing act:

Last night, CNN spent its prime time segment decrying the Democratic president’s “radio silence” on the Gaza-related campus protests and chaos.

They must be realizing it doesn’t play well with the American public, and since they very much want Biden to win the election they want him to say something on the subject. And so he did:

The amazing thing, really, is that there isn’t more “Islamophobia” – which is not a phobia but is a reaction to the fact that a very significant number of Muslims (especially those in the Middle East) are in favor of enslaving the rest of the world, killing apostates, murdering homosexuals, raping and torturing and burning Israelis, and blowing Israelis and Westerners to bits. Little things like that.

And so now that Biden finally manages to say something about the horrendous hatred and violence unleashed against Jews, why is he generalizing about “hate” and why is he devoting so many words to “Islamophobia” and “discrimination against Arab Americans or Palestinian Americans”? It’s not the issue at all right now and never was, and in fact Biden’s statement is very much the sort of thing that Biden falsely accuses Trump of having said in Charlottesville about good people on both sides (Trump was actually talking about the statue issue and not the anti-black demonstrations).

We know why Biden – and/or his speechwriters – is saying this. He is terribly afraid that any time he says anything nice about Israelis or Jews, a huge number of Democrat voters don’t like it. Many of those voters are those very same “Arab Americans or Palestinian Americans” who live in the swing state of Michigan – and by the way, Palestinians are Arabs, so the phrase is needlessly redundant.

Saying no to Biden’s Title IX declaration on trans participation in women’s sports

The New Neo Posted on by

First it was DeSantis:

Gov. Ron DeSantis said Florida “will not comply” with the Biden administration’s update to federal Title IX regulations that adds protections for transgender students.

“Florida rejects (President) Joe Biden’s attempt to rewrite Title IX,” DeSantis said in a video posted Thursday on social media. “We will not comply, and we will fight back.” …

“We are not going to let Joe Biden undermine the rights of parents, and we are not going to let Joe Biden abuse his constitutional authority to try to impose these policies on us here in Florida,” DeSantis said. …

“We absolutely plan to challenge this betrayal of women in court,” Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody said in a statement.

Then Abbott of Texas:

Governor Greg Abbott today sent a letter to President Joe Biden condemning his recent revision of Title IX, which forces schools to treat biological men as women. The Governor also informed the President that Texas will not adhere to the new rules.

“Title IX was written by Congress to support the advancement of women academically and athletically,” reads the letter. “The law was based on the fundamental premise that there are only two sexes—male and female. You have rewritten Title IX to force schools to treat boys as if they are girls and to accept every student’s self-declared gender identity. This ham-handed effort to impose a leftist belief onto Title IX exceeds your authority as President.

Next we have Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho:

Louisiana’s Republican attorney general announced Monday the state is suing the Biden administration over new Title IX rules … that [expand the definition] to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Louisiana K-12 Education Superintendent Cade Brumley railed against the new rules during a press conference at the State Capitol, arguing the new federal guidance guts historical precedence from the landmark civil rights legislation.

Louisiana is joined in the lawsuit by Mississippi, Montana and Idaho. The plaintiffs seek an injunction to stop the new rules from taking effect and a temporary restraining order to block enforcement while the lawsuit plays out.

Opponents of the new Title IX rule, which the U.S. Department of Education released last week, argue that conflating gender identity with sex would gut Title IX protections and harm biological women.

Good for them. This will almost certainly end up in the court system.

Not nostalgic for 1968-1969

The New Neo Posted on by

And yet here we are.

In some ways it’s better than it was then. For example, the US isn’t actively at war abroad, and young people aren’t subject to the draft to fight in such a war. But in so very many ways it’s worse. The protesting students these days are far more likely to be ignorant and far more motivated by hatred (which is not to say there weren’t ignorant or hateful students back then). The students these days are far more likely to be highly organized and directed (which is not to say there wasn’t such organization and direction back then). And the authorities these days are even more likely to cave in to the students, many of whom are not even students (which isn’t to say there weren’t “outside agitators” back then and plenty of caving by administrations; see all my posts on Cornell in 1969).

I have no nostalgia for the 60s. I was young, and I guess that was nice. I certainly looked better. But the decade seemed to me to be another “low dishonest decade,” although the present time seems lower and even more dishonest. Then again, I wasn’t around in 1939, the decade in which the poem I just linked was written. It was awful, too, although for different reasons.

If you read the news – and just about everybody here does – you can easily see that the current pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic demonstrations are occurring at many many universities and cities, and seem very well-supplied and orchestrated. Authorities differ in their responses depending on their own politics. Ace has several good posts on this; please see this, this, and this, among others.

Last night I was looking at comments at Gerard’s blog, and a commenter there mentioned this post Gerard wrote about the Berkeley riots for the “People’s Park”, and the reaction to them, occurring way back in 1969. Gerard was there at the time, and his piece is entitled “Regarding My ‘Walk-On Part in the War.'” I think it’s well worth reading for “compare and contrast” reasons. Among other things, the Berkeley students and the “outside agitators” weren’t spouting anti-Semitic hatred. Among others, they were up against Ronald Reagan. And something I had forgotten – if I even knew it at the time – was that the police fired buckshot at the students and one student, observing from a roof, was killed by the buckshot. An excerpt from Gerard’s essay:

First, you had the Highway Patrol showing up who were not as gentle as the Berkeley Police. Then you had the Oakland Cops showing up. “Gentle” was not in their instruction manual. Instead, their first move was to open their trunks and take out their street-sweeping shotguns. Then they racked them and opened fire.

This resulted in a lot of loose buckshot wounds with one person blinded for life, and one person killed outright. (James Rector. I remember his name today after fifty years because he was shot on the roof right above me as I was running away from the shotguns at speed.)

I suggest you read the whole thing. It includes many photos, as well as a short news video with a brief cameo appearance by none other than the young (I believe shirtless, if I’m not mistaken) Gerard Vanderleun.

Flying while disabled

The New Neo Posted on by

Commenter “physicsguy” observes:

… I was flying Southwest with their open seating policy [and] I observed that the number of wheelchair people at Delta, UA, American gates was about 50% less…those airlines have reserved seats. Many of the SW wheelchair people were in their 50s. I looked at it as a way to get first boarding even by passing the paid Group A pax.

Disney is running into the same issue and are cracking down. People were claiming disability and getting scooters and wheelchairs which then allowed them and their family to get first in line to rides again by passing both the paid lightning lane people and standbys. Disney said no more and now requires written medical documentation. I was wondering if Southwest does the same?

I had always assumed that in order to get disability boarding on the airlines one had to offer proof from a doctor, much as a person needs to do in order to get a handicapped placard for a car. But when I looked it up for physicsguy, I was surprised to see that I was wrong. Apparently, airlines are forbidden by law from requiring proof of disability. The whole thing is on the honor system, and although the airlines know that people abuse it, their hands are tied.

Here’s the scoop from a Southwest discussion board. The original question went like this:

I understand SWA has wonderful customer services, but departing Chicago yesterday to Florida (a miracle flight) the pre-board number was unreal. There were 10 wheelchairs (and some had person(s) accompanying them, 17 persons with canes (also with some person(s) accompanying them. So there were at least 40 pre-boards. When exiting the plane in Florida, the majority hopped up and exited asap. I even saw one person walking to her rental car in the garage without her cane. I had A-23, but was now A-63….I strongly suggest that SWA re-evaluate its pre-boarding procedure.

And the answer was this:

We follow federal regulations in offering preboarding to Customers with disabilities in order to comply with the Air Carrier Access Act: http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/publications/disabled.htm. Certainly and regrettably, some Customers have taken advantage of preboarding when they did not need it. Still, we cannot ask a Customer what their disability is or for “proof” of a disability. Additionally, we are unable to tell preboarding Passengers where they can/cannot sit on the aircraft (with exception of the emergency exit row). When a Customer requests to preboard, our Employees will ask 1) do you need assistance boarding the aircraft? and/or 2) do you have a specific seating need to accommodate your disability? If the answer to either question is yes, we must allow the Customer to preboard and we are only able to use these parameters to ascertain the legitimacy of a Customer’s preboarding request.

There is no question that some people will abuse this policy, but it seems the airlines are powerless to stop it, unless there’s been some change in the law since this 2017 discussion occurred. There is also no question that sometimes you can’t tell who is disabled by looking at the person; there are indeed invisible disabilities. In an airport, a passenger is usually required to walk long distances and might be carrying or pushing a bag. Some people who look completely fine and are not all that old might have significant trouble doing those things without assistance.

And even with handicapped placards for cars, which require documentation to get, people can and do abuse them. I’ve seen it happen with people I know, for example – where someone in the family is handicapped and got the placard, and then someone else uses it now and then. I’ve also seen genuinely handicapped people be harassed by others who think they don’t look handicapped enough to have the placard, and yet they are handicapped and need the help.

So the bottom line is that abuse will always happen, and harassment of the innocent will also happen. It seems to me, though, that the airline system, which requires no proof at all, is an invitation for people to take advantage.

Dhimmi Northwestern University pays the Jizya

The New Neo Posted on by

When I first saw the headlines for this story I thought they were satirical.

They are not.

I think Northwestern has actually succeeded in out-dhimmi-ing Columbia, which is saying something:

In the face of illegal “encampments” and violence, the Northwestern administrators put out a jubilant statement announcing that scholarships will be provided for “Palestinians” along with a building set aside for Muslim students.

“Most notable among those concessions is a promise to offer full-ride scholarships to Palestinian students and guaranteed faculty jobs for Palestinian academics.

“The University will support visiting Palestinian faculty and students at risk (funding two faculty per year for two years; and providing full cost of attendance for five Palestinian undergraduates to attend Northwestern for the duration of their undergraduate careers),” the document reads. “The University commits to fundraise to sustain this program beyond this current commitment.” …

Northwestern will also provide a “house for MENA/Muslim students” and will “advise employers not to rescind job offers for students engaging in speech protected by the First Amendment.”

Other concessions in the deal Schill and the rest of Northwestern’s leadership struck with the encampment occupants — one of whom assaulted a student journalist attempting to take video — include student oversight of the university’s partnerships with suppliers and the investment of its endowment.

In case you’ve not read up on your Muslim history, here’s what the Jizya is:

[In the] Arab-Islamic empire … a basic hierarchy between three groups emerged relatively early: at the top were (Muslim) believers, at the bottom of the hierarchy were unbelievers who should be fought, and there emerged an intermediate category of non-Muslims who had entered into an agreement with the Islamic state. Those in the third category were governed by a set of laws known as a pact, or dhimma in Arabic, and were called collectively ahl al-dhimma—literally “People of the Pact”—or just dhimmis. …

In exchange for the protection of the Islamic state, dhimmis were expected to pay a special tax, called the jizya. A document known as the Pact of ‘Umar spelled out the details of the agreement between the Islamic state and the dhimmis in considerable detail. … The Pact of ‘Umar lays out a variety of sumptuary laws, meaning laws whose ostensible purpose was to distinguish non-Muslims from Muslims in social interactions, place limits on non-Muslim behavior, and emphasize the social superiority of Muslims.

Northwestern is acting like conquered territory. But it goes beyond that. Not only are the university administrators signaling their own weakness and the weakness of their campus, and not only are they emboldening future Islamicist extremists and discouraging their own Jewish students and those who support them, but they are telling Hamas that attacks like October 7 give huge benefits all around the world.

Nice job, Northwestern! I hope every person who donates to the university informs them they won’t be seeing any more of their money. Of course, Soros may take up the slack.

Roundup

The New Neo Posted on by

(1) That relief pier that’s being built offshore in Gaza is now estimated to be costing $320 million. It seems to me that Hamas will be getting the lion’s share, and much of the rest will go to terrorist-supporters.

(2) In no surprise whatsoever, the Columbia administration’s red line to the occupiers turns out to be a Bidenesque/Obamaesque red line – in other words, meaningless. Most other schools are no better; see this. But now at Columbia there’s a threat to expel them. That’s something the occupiers must think an empty threat. See also this.

(3) Trump held in contempt again. Ho hum; what else is new?

(4) Britain cracks down more on the trans movement.

(5) There’s a class action suit against the FAA for its race-based hiring:

The Federal Aviation Administration is the subject of a massive class action lawsuit alleging that since 2013, thousands of qualified applicants have been denied employment as air traffic controllers based on race [and DEI].

The lawsuit filed by the Mountain States Legal Foundation represents nearly 1,000 people who went to school at their own expense to be air traffic controllers through a network of university-sponsored Collegiate Training Initiative (CTI) programs. These programs, run in cooperation with the FAA since 1991 to train and test future air traffic controllers, were the entry point for the overwhelming majority of the ATC workforce.

Pressure, pressure: two more Israeli hostages in videos from Hamas

The New Neo Posted on by

A few days ago Hamas released “proof of life” videos of two Israeli-Americans held hostage since October 7:

In their latest depraved move, the terrorist group/political entity Hamas released a “proof-of-life” video Saturday of American hostage Keith Siegel, a father of four and grandfather of five. Appearing alongside fellow hostage Omri Miran, the Chapel Hill, N.C., native looked strained and haunted, and his eyes welled up with tears during the nearly three-and-half-minute-long clip. …

The video is not dated, but the 46-year-old Miran says he has been held hostage now for 202 days. Siegel and Miran also say they are aware of the efforts to get all the Hamas captives released …

So these videos do seem recent enough to be considered “proof of life.” It doesn’t surprise me; I’ve said that some hostages are alive, perhaps as many as half – and I think it’s no accident that all the recent hostages shown are also Americans. All the hostages are highly valuable to Hamas and are more valuable alive than dead, as is evidenced from these videos which were met with renewed demonstrations in Israel demanding the hostages be released at just about any cost:

Thousands protested in Tel Aviv on Monday night, calling on the government to make a deal with the Hamas terror group for the release of hostages who have been held in the Gaza Strip since October 7, in a rally that later descended into clashes with police forces, arrests, and claims of violence toward a lawmaker and relatives of a hostage.

Amid heightened preparations for the military to launch an offensive in the Gazan city of Rafah, demonstrators lit a bonfire on Tel Aviv’s Begin Road, near the IDF’s headquarters, and spelled out “Rafah can wait — they [the hostages] cannot” in large Hebrew letters.

Relatives of hostages and captives who were released in the week-long truce in November took part in the protest, calling on the government to stop the war in order to bring the abductees home.

The rally came as Hamas was set to give a response to an Israeli offer that would see a 40-day pause in fighting and the release of potentially thousands of Palestinian security prisoners in exchange for 33 living hostages, and a second phase of a truce consisting of a “period of sustained calm” – Israel’s compromise response to a Hamas demand for permanent ceasefire.

When I read stories like that I experience sharply mixed feelings of sympathy for the families and anger at the extent of what’s being asked. Don’t they see that this only causes more suffering and more hostages being taken in the future? Don’t they see that their current suffering is the result of earlier lopsided hostage deals? Well, they might see, but right now they are suffering unbearably as are their kidnapped loved ones (those who are alive, anyway) and they desperately want that suffering to end.

It’s up to the government to do what’s best, but I think the government may be close to caving from the pressure. For example, I keep reading stories such as this:

Slamming the Netanyahu government for making what he said were dangerous “strategic concessions” in order to secure the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Tuesday appeared to threaten to bolt the coalition if it approves an agreement currently being negotiated in Egypt.

Speaking with the press following a meeting of his far-right Religious Zionism faction in the Knesset, the cabinet member said that while he would have received kudos for coming out in favor of a deal, he believes that such a course of action would endanger Israeli civilians and that he is “ready to pay the political price” to prevent an “existential threat” to the State of Israel — even if it means going to the opposition.

Smotrich skipped a cabinet meeting to attend the faction meeting, amid ongoing political disagreements within the government over the deal and Israel’s pending ground operation in Rafah.

There is little question in my mind that the goal of Hamas in releasing the video was to increase the pressure on the wavering and divided Israeli government on this issue, and to fuel more demonstrations. What will the government do? I don’t know. But I’m very worried.

NOTE: It’s not the case that all the hostages’ families are part of these demonstrations. Some do not want a deal because they realize the extreme dangers and have been standing against conceding to the terrorists. See this.

The sleeping cheetah

The New Neo Posted on by

Today for some unknown algorithhmic reason, Google thought I’d like this story of a guy in a wildlife preserve sleeping next to a cheetah:

Imagine dozing off under the shade of a tree after a taxing day out in the sun, only to wake up to the gentle nudge of a wild cheetah snuggling against you. This isn’t the start of a fable or a campfire story. It’s what happened to Dolph Volker, a wildlife photographer and animal enthusiast, during one of his volunteering stints at Cheetah Experience, a sanctuary for endangered species in South Africa.

It’s an old story; the guy has a YouTube channel with videos such as this one:

Well, whatever floats your boat. The cheetahs seem pretty tame, but they are nevertheless wild animals and I’ll be taking my siestas somewhere else.

But the reason I’m writing this post is that it stirred up a memory I had pretty much forgotten, which is that as a teenager I very much liked this painting by Henri Rousseau:

I had seen the original many times at MOMA and there was just something about it that appealed to me – the sense of danger and yet safety, the mystery, the fact that the gypsy wouldn’t even have been aware of the visitation come morning, or that perhaps it was all just a dream.

I liked the painting so much that when I became a freshman in college, I bought a large print of it at the college bookstore and hung it over my bed in the dorm. I had a roommate who thought it a rather odd and disquieting choice, but I found it comforting.

I haven’t thought of that painting in many decades until today.