Boston University

The incoming Boston University black studies professor who faced national scrutiny after her tweets that slavery was a “white people thing” and that “white college males are the problem population” now faces a new round of criticism for comments she made on Facebook.

Fox News reported Monday that Saida Grundy, a self-described feminist sociologist of race and ethnicity, taunted a white, female rape victim on Facebook in February, months prior to her other controversial tweets.

That victim, Meghan Chamberlin, told Fox News that the posts, made in a February public chat, felt “like a kick in the stomach.”

The woman who identified herself as Grundy posted the comments after Chamberlin took issue with a controversial article on race that the Facebook thread had linked to.

“I LITERALLY cry and lose sleep over this,” Chamberlin wrote, adding she had been raped as a child and felt that: “what this article did was tell me that I’m not aloud (sic) to ask for help… Because I am a WHITE woman… So when I read this article… you do understand what that does to me, right? It kills me…”

Grundy’s reply included this rant, according to Fox News, which obtained screen shots of the exchange:

“’I literally cry’…. While we literally die,” she said before adding, “try this article. A white woman explaining this issue to other white women… who manages NOT to cry while doing it!” …

“^^THIS IS THE S**T I AM TALKING ABOUT. WHY DO YOU GET TO PLAY THE VICTIM EVERY TIME PEOPLE OF COLOR AND OUR ALLIES WANT TO POINT OUT RACISM. my CLAWS?? Do you see how you just took an issue that WASNT about you, MADE it about you, and NOW want to play the victim when I take the time to explain to you some s**t that is literally $82,000 below my pay grade? And then you promote your #whitegirltears like that’s some badge you get to wear… YOU BENEFIT FROM RACISM. WE’RE EXPLAINING THAT TO YOU and you’re vilifying my act of intellectual altruism by saying i stuck my “claws” into you?”

Grundy nor BU officials returned Fox News’ request for comment.

Read the full article.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

A “Whose Jerusalem?” workshop created by a Boston University professor that’s been taught in many high schools in recent years and was added to the Common Core-approved national curriculum has come under fire by critics who contend it whitewashes terrorism, promotes an anti-Israel and anti-American political agenda, and encourages young people to sympathize with Hamas.

Americans for Peace and Tolerance released an expose video April 23 that aims to prove “Whose Jerusalem?” fails “to meet the basic rules of evidence and logic and attempt[s] to indoctrinate students, especially Jewish students, against the state of Israel.”

The workshop teaches that Hamas – a U.S.-designated terrorist group – and Fatah are political parties that support “more peaceful means than intifada,” among other lessons. The group argues the lesson abandons “academic integrity” and enlists students as political activists for an ideological cause.

“Despite its bias and serious flaws, the … workshop is Common Core compliant,” APT president Charles Jacobs said.

The workshop’s curriculum, designed for students in middle and high schools, requires students play the parts of Arab, Israeli, or American leaders to negotiate a “BATNA” (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) for the division of Jerusalem using the materials provided by the workshop.

According to Americans for Peace and Tolerance’s video, the workshop also includes exercises that asks instructors to have Jewish students empathize with Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist group that calls for the death of all Jews in its founding charter. CC1

Boston University Profesor Carl Hobert, who developed the workshop, has defined “Whose Jerusalem?” as “educational civil disobedience” guided by a hands-on approach. Included in APT’s video is a clip of Hobert speaking to an audience about the simulations done in his workshop on the Arab-Israeli conflict. When describing the roles students play in the simulation he says:

“When a student goes, I am devoutly Jewish and I’ve got family members in Israel. I would like to be a member of Likud Party. Guess what we make that student? A member of Hamas.”

In APT’s video, Hobert is also quoted saying that students learn through the workshop that Hamas and Fatah are political parties that support “more peaceful means than intifada.” APT uses the lesson plan’s paperwork to show students are taught to equate these “political parties” with Israel’s democratically elected parties, such as Likud and Labor.
 
The workshop also suggests an equivalence between the use of military drones by the United States and terrorist suicide bombing. APTvideo shows Hobert telling students that drones kill people who CC2are supposedly terrorists. He asks, Isnt that a form of terrorism?

Hobert did openly admit in an interview with Al-Jazeera that through these exercises students will learn to “put pressure on our government to create a Palestinian state.”

Noam Chomsky of MIT and Denis Sullivan of Northeastern, both outspoken critics of Israel and America, assisted Hobert in the creation of the course, according to APT. Hobert even brought Chomsky, who is described in BU Today as his “friend and longtime inspiration,” to speak about the Middle East at Boston University in 2009.

Hobert did not respond to repeated requests for comment from The College Fix. 

Stand With Us released a statement May 7 thanking APT for exposing the bias in the workshop.

“Under the guise of ‘global education’ and ‘conflict resolution,’ it distorts facts about the Arab-Israeli conflict, promotes an anti-Israel political agenda, and encourages sympathy for terrorist groups,” the nonprofit stated. “It is shameful that Boston University would sponsor a program that degrades academic standards, misinforms students, and gives its imprimatur to indoctrination masquerading as scholarship.”

Zionist Organization of America’s Northeast Campus Coordinator Zach Stern said he is also worried about the impact this course will have on students’ understanding of the Middle East.

“This workshop is very troubling,” Stern told The College Fix. “Why pretend that Hamas and the PA are reasonable actors when both openly call for the genocide of the Jewish people and the destruction of the Jewish state? This workshop seems to ignore the actual facts; and its impossible to solve anything without recognizing the facts.” CC3

But Hobert described the workshop as simply “a conflict resolution case study used in middle and high schools around the U.S.” It was created with state and federal education dollars, and is an approved Common Core State Standards-based curriculum workshop, his professor profile notes.

Already the controversial “Whose Jerusalem?”  is conducted in many high schools. It is offered through the nonprofit “Axis of Hope,” which operates out of the Boston University Global Literary Institute and works with at least 25 high schools in various states and three foreign schools, according to the nonprofit’s website.

APT’s Jacobs noted “at a time of growing anti-Semitism on U.S. college campuses, it is very disturbing [Boston University] would permit or promote such biased educational materials in the classroom.”

Axis of Hope describes itself as a nonprofit “dedicated to developing in young adults an understanding of alternative, non-violent approaches to resolving complex conflicts locally, nationally and internationally.”

College Fix reporter Alexandra Zimmern is recent graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGES: APT

OPINION

Many have missed the main problem regarding Boston University Professor Saida Grundy’s recent controversial Tweets: This woman was hired to teach African-American studies at a top-notch university – and she is apparently ignorant of African-American history.

So she called St. Patrick’s Day “white people’s Kwanzaa” and lambasted Bruce Jenner for being a Republican. That’s called free speech, and we defend it for both liberals and conservatives.

And while some of her other Tweets declared her utter contempt for white college males – that’s the norm for most feminist professors. There’s nothing groundbreaking there.

The real problem is she is going to incorrectly teach our nation’s history to young people. If, as they say, “history is written by the victors” – then Ms. Grundy will have the last laugh.

The feminist sociologist of race and ethnicity is an incoming assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies at Boston University, and here’s a sneak peek at her upcoming lectures:

Is white people’s new deflection from dealing with slavery the “all races have had ProfessorGrundyslaves” thing? is this the new “#AllLivesMatter”??

for the record, NO race outside of europeans had a system that made slavery a *personhood* instead of temporary condition

there is also no race except europeans who kidnapped and transported human beings in order to enslave them and their offspring for life

before europeans invented it as such, slavery was not a condition that was defacto inherited from parent to child.

in other words, deal with your white sh*t, white people. slavery is a *YALL* thing. …

“dear white people: you are all Ben Affleck. Those euphemisms for ur ancestors like ‘pioneers’ and ‘farmers’ means owned humans and killed natives.”

Don’t scratch your heads and wonder why so many college grads think America’s founders were racist scum – just look at Grundy and other scholars like her – they are teaching our young people America’s founders were racist scum!

But here’s a twist – does Grundy even know her comments are factually inaccurate? In response to her Tweets making national headlines, many have pointed out how Grundy’s statements are not at all an accurate representation of the history of slavery. Not even close.

Perhaps she doesn’t even realize she is wrong. She completed her doctorate at the University of Michigan this month, maybe we should blame its scholars for their poor job of teaching Grundy.

The bottom line is most scholars teach high schoolers and college students that slavery WAS a white people thing! That’s 100 percent the narrative, and unless enterprising minds actually go out and seek the truth, they will believe “deal with your white sh*t, white people. slavery is a *YALL* thing.”

Consider this: I had no clue freed black Americans pre-Civil War owned slaves until last week. Literally last week. I was sitting on my living room couch watching Dinesh D’Souza’s latest documentary “America” (before all this news about Grundy came to light) when he goes into how it really wasn’t uncommon for freed black people to own slaves in the south, and points out at least one very rich black slave owner who even helped fund the Civil War – for the Confederacy.

Feeling shocked, I asked my husband about this. He’d never heard of black slave owners, either. In fact he was incredulous, and Googled it and found it to be the case – including that the first legal slave owner, in what would eventually become the United States, was a black man.

I earned a high school diploma and college degree, and have a nearly two-decade career in journalism under my belt, but never learned this information until recently. And my husband, who took AP classes in high school, got a nearly perfect score on his SATs, and attended college on an academic scholarship, never had either.

It’s because it’s not being taught. It’s not even being mentioned. Doesn’t fit the narrative.

Does it excuse slavery? No, not by a longshot. Does it make up for post-Civil War racial segregation laws? No way. But it certainly illustrates the mindset of that time.

D’Souza goes on to mention the 300,000 Union soldiers who died to free the slaves, and how the Founding Fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in such a way for future statesmen to abolish slavery. Additional points rarely mentioned by modern scholars.

Instead students learn from the late historian Howard Zinn – a controversial Marxist whose infamous A People’s History of the United States is required reading at many colleges. Zinn openly admitted that the book is biased in what it includes and omits in order to paint an anti-American picture.

So can we blame Grundy for thinking slavery is a “white people thing”? She was taught that. She managed to get her PhD and still believe that – obviously enough to state it publicly and stake her career on the argument.

Can I throw a stone at Grundy when I only learned the truth a mere two weeks ago? The real culprits are administrators who turn a blind eye to the indoctrination going on in classrooms, and teachers who warp history for their own ideological gains.

If scholars just taught the truth, maybe race relations in America wouldn’t be in such a catastrophic mess.

Jennifer Kabbany is editor of The College Fix (@JenniferKabbany)

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Twitter

Saida Grundy, a feminist sociologist of race and ethnicity listed as an incoming assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies at Boston University, has come under fire for Tweets that essentially argued white people were the worst slave owners on the planet.

She also argued on Twitter that “white college males” are the “problem population,” that “white masculinity isn’t a problem for america’s colleges, white masculinity is THE problem for america’s colleges.”

Grundy’s series of Tweets on April 22 declared:

is white people’s new deflection from dealing with slavery the “all races have had ProfessorGrundyslaves” thing? is this the new “#AllLivesMatter”??

for the record, NO race outside of europeans had a system that made slavery a *personhood* instead of temporary condition

there is also no race except europeans who kidnapped and transported human beings in order to enslave them and their offspring for life

before europeans invented it as such, slavery was not a condition that was defacto inherited from parent to child.

in other words, deal with your white sh*t, white people. slavery is a *YALL* thing.

Two days prior to those comments, she opined on Twitter: “dear white people: you are all Ben Affleck. Those euphemisms for ur ancestors like ‘pioneers’ and ‘farmers’ means owned humans and killed natives.”

Students at SoCawlege.com, which first reported on the scholar’s assertions, called them outright falsehoods. Their argument is reprinted below with permission:

First off, Arabs, not “whites” did much of the slave trading in Africa. They also did much of the transportation of those African slaves, an estimated 10-18 million people. Whites didn’t “invent” the idea of transportation, nor did they do this on their own.

And, it wasn’t just Africans who were enslaved by Arabs, but an estimated 1 million + Europeans were also taken as slaves by Arabs. Barbary pirates did a lot of that.

Continuing, slaves were transported from India to Central Asia by Muslims, centuries before the first African was transported by white or Arab slave traders.

There are many more examples of slave transport throughout history besides these. Perhaps if Ms. Grundy took a history class she would know this problem transcends all races, cultures, and geographic locations, and even still continues today with global transportation in the human trafficking industry.

In regards to slavery for generations (which she says is only something white people did as well):  Again, Muslims enslaved Indians who they considered “infidels” for centuries, whites and others were traded in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, and it wasn’t just whites who owned black slaves in the Americas either, but other blacksNative Americans, and of course what we would today call Hispanics in Latin or Central America, which had large slave trades and agricultural industries as well. Generational black slavery in the Americas was not something only done by whites. The notion is absurd.

Writing for Young America’s Foundation, contributor Amy Lutz also weighed in on the scholar’s assertions, pointing out “it was actually Western Civilization, however, that led the charge to outlaw slavery for good. Portugal, Spain, and Great Britain abolished slavery in the 19th century, followed closely by the United States.”

SoCawlege.com also pointed out a number of other Tweets over the last few months posted by the scholar, ones that condemned Bruce Jenner for being a Republican and called St. Patrick’s day “white people’s Kwanzaa.”

They especially took issue with this thread:

SoCowlege responded with this:

Imagine the condemnation if a white person made the reverse statement, that college aged black males are a “problem population” that black America has to address. Well, for the record, young black males are statistically more likely to commit crimes than young white males. Why are young white males a singled out issue to you Ms. Grundy, as opposed to all young males? If you are going to work at Boston University you have to teach college aged white males eventually no? You probably already have/are working with them. To us, this seems like you are unqualified to grade their work as you clearly demonstrate some kind of special bias against them. They are a “problem population” after all.

“Parents who are sending their kids to college should be aware of what the standard for faculty is at Boston University. Apparently, VERY low,” SoCowlege concluded.

Read the full report.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

“The O’Reilly Factor” sent Jesse Watters to Kenmore Square next to Boston University to ask young people about their ISIS strategy. The results? A mixed bag that offers a great glimpse into the wide variety of students found at most colleges across the nation. Some are clueless, some are misguided, and some actually know what is going on in this world and can speak with astonishing clarity and common sense.

As always, Watters’ video is hilarious and telling, in which a “couple young ladies even suggested that we were at war with ‘the Icelandic State’ or some strange place called ‘Pakistanian,'” Fox News reports.

Watch the video:

The National Security Agency can legally monitor every American, inside and outside the U.S., “by collecting their network traffic abroad,” according to a working paper by researchers at Harvard University and Boston University.

This can happen without any checks and balances from Congress or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees surveillance requests from the NSA, said researchers Axel Arnbak of Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society and Sharon Goldberg, a BU assistant professor of computer science.

The paper documents what it calls “interdependent technical and legal loopholes” that the NSA could use to snoop on American citizens inside the U.S.

Arnbak and Goldberg aren’t the only ones raising red flags. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, an independent federal agency that ensures “liberty concerns” are considered in anti-terrorism policy, is reviewing the same NSA legal authority as the researchers, and a former State Department official warned in a recent op-ed the legal authority is prone to abuse.

The researchers focus on Executive Order 12333, which was issued by President Ronald Reagan in 1981 to authorize foreign intelligence investigations, and the U.S. Signals Intelligence Directive 18. The executive order “has largely been ignored by the public and other branches of Government in recent months, especially since relevant legal documents related to EO 12333 remain classified or redacted,” the working paper said.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) limit the NSA’s authority to carry out domestic electronic surveillance, whereas the executive order does not have any congressional oversight and has never been subject to court review.

If messages between two people in the U.S. are intercepted and rerouted through overseas routers, Arnbak and Goldberg say, the NSA could stockpile massive amounts of data and content without violating U.S. law.

“There are various ways one could ‘deliberately’ reroute traffic international[ly] in a manner that is very hard to detect,” such as through “DNS cache poisoning,” Goldberg told The College Fix. She clarified that there’s no evidence “that the NSA or any other government agency is actually doing this,” and that her study with Arnbak was meant to shine a light on loopholes, not to disclose illegal wiretaps.

Executive Order 12333 is on the “short-term agenda” of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, following its review of Section 215 and FISA Section 702, Chairman David Medine said at the body’s July 23 public meeting.

The attorney general’s guidelines for implementing the executive order – some of which go back 30 years – had already been identified as “outdated, to say the least,” when Medine joined the board last year, he said. The board will keep advocating not only for the guidelines to be updated, but consider “how to approach 12333 more broadly” and look at staff recommendations for the order’s operations, he said.

It’s legal to collect an individual’s communications if that collection happens “incidentally” during the course of a lawful overseas foreign intelligence investigation, The Washington Post reported last month following a four-month investigation. An affected U.S. person, who may have never directly interacted with a lawful target, does not have to be suspected of wrongdoing, and there’s no limit on the volume of communications that may be collected and retained through such incidental eavesdropping.

Former State Department official John Napier Tye, who served as section chief for Internet freedom in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor until January and testified at Medine’s public meeting, warned in a Washington Post op-ed last month that Executive Order 12333’s definition of “incidental” is vague and ripe for abuse.

“‘Incidental’ collection may sound insignificant, but it is a legal loophole that can be stretched very wide,” Tye said. Citing reports that the NSA is building a Utah data center with its own power plant, he said. “‘Incidental collection’ might need its own power plant.”

While the executive order might have been a sensible measure in the past, with different levels of privacy for information depending on where it was gathered, “an email from New York to New Jersey is likely to wind up on servers in Brazil, Japan and Britain,” Tye wrote. “The same is true for most purely domestic communications.”

Arnbak agreed. “As long as you tailor your operation to those ancient laws,” he told The College Fix via email, “we find that a range of new surveillance techniques may be conducted fairly unrestrained.”

The NSA told the Boston Globe that neither the executive order nor the directive “authorizes targeting of US persons for electronic surveillance by routing their communications outside of the US.” The agency said that under federal law, it still needs to get a judge to approve a court order before it can “target any US person anywhere in the world for electronic surveillance.”

College Fix contributor Christopher White is a University of Missouri graduate student and an editorial assistant for The College Fix.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: EFF Photos/Flickr