NYU president's office reversed library ban because they thought WaPo was covering it (not parody)
Legally binding: Hudson Institute president Herb London was an NYU professor when he fired Evan Gahr, the former and still kind of hatchet man for Eric Breindel, under pressure from Bush White House for denouncing Christian Right leader Paul Weyrich for saying the Jews killed Christ.
Gahr sued Hudson for religious discrimination under DC HRA.
The case was moved to federal court by Hudson's lawyer J. Robert Brame, Yale Law School grad and also board member of Christian Reconstructionist group that favors offing gays caught en flagrante. But, hey, who else would take the case? Right? London probably tried 10 corporate lawyers all over DC and NYC and got turned down. Probably even rejected by lawyers who really needed the billable hours since they had cocaine habits to support or triplets in college. But still wouldn't go anywhere near it.
If memory serves Brame's ties to the group was enough to sink his nomination by George W. Bush for the NRLB. But the neo-con Hudson was happy to work with him. John Podhoretz then lied to Ken Weinstein and Herb London about me and Eric to help them defend the lawsuit. Brame repeated the falsehoods to my lawyer Michael Spekter TK. He later coerced me intro dropping the lawsuit. He lied to me and said he would not represent me if I did not accept the lousy $20,000 wiht a confidentiality agreement Hudson offered. He did not explain to me I was agreeing to have it dismissed with prejudice.
Based on information and belief, NYU president Andrew Hamilton has direct connection to London that is why he is acting so vicious and desperate. Tim Goeglein, an aide to Gary Bauer and Karl Rove, called London at his NYU office after previously calling him at the Hudson HQ in Indianapolis.
After more than two weeks of ignoring emails and phone calls--plus complaints to NYCR and OCR United States Department of Education--NYU rushed to explain this was a big misunderstanding.
Ash in the President's Office: President's Office
Phone Enthusiast: This is Evan Gahr. You are on the phone with Janet Cooke from the Washington Post.
Ash [sounding nervous]: Really?
Phone enthusiast: Yup
Phone enthusiast: Janet are you there? I sent her my emails to spokesman John Beckman. She did great work, by the way, on childhood heroin addiction.
Phone enthusiast: I need a yes or no answer. Is the library still banning me [on the orders of neo-racist Nicole D'Andrea]
Ash, lo and behold, was quite helpful. Previously, she insisted the president's office could not intervene because it has no authority over the library. And another woman who answered the phone outright hung up on me
President's Office: You need to talk to the Library. This is not our department.
Phone enthusiast: Wait? You're telling me the president of NYU has no control over the library? How can he be president of NYU if he doesn't have authority over the library?
President's Office: I am trying to help you.
Phone enthusiast: No, you're not. You are stonewalling and being evasive.
Phone enthusiast: Does the president of NYU have authority over the library?
President's office: [more stonewalling]
Phone enthusiast: Yes or no?
President's office: Not in the way you are saying?
Phone enthusiast: Is NYU opposed to anti-Semitism?
President's Office: Sir.
Preisdent's Office after more stonewalling: [click]
But now with "Janet Cooke one the phone" Ash wanted the Pulitzer Prize winner to know she had checked with the library after I complained to her. And they said there was no ban. It was just that my membership had expired. I just needed to re-new.
So why didn't you tell me that, Ash?
Uh, pumpkin. You previously old me the NYU president's office had no authority over the library.
So if you have no authority over the library why did you call them? And why did you not PROVIDE me the information that you got from them? Don't you think I needed that info?
That was kind of rude, right?
Did Ash hang up on me, of course not. She stayed on the phone and tried to sound polite and helpful.
Then, it seems, she told somebody in her office that "Janet Cooke" was the reporter looking into this.
They saw she has not been at the Washington Post for quite some time. And is unlikely to return unless Wesley Lowery convinces Marty Baron that she should be re-hired for the sake of glorious newsroom diversity.
Andrew Hamilton, John Beckman and library director Nicole D'Andrea, like typical white racists of yesteryear who abused proud black men and violated their rights because they thought "nobody" was watching concluded they could bar a nationally known investigative journalist with impunity because the press would not cover it.
On Wednesday, I went to the library and tried to present the NYU receipt for the $125 that was
just charged to my account for library access.
But D'Andrea, citing "extensive conversations" with the President's office said I was barred for violating the Code of Conduct.
She refused to specify the supposed violation or offer any corroborating evidence.
And if there was a violation why wasn't I just suspended? Why was there no progressive discipline?
What evidence does D'Andera, Hamilton and Beckman have that I did something so heinous I should be irrevocably barred. Is NYU disciplinary policies for accused students and professors also handled like a Stalinist tribunal?
This looks funny and it is funny. But it is also pernicious. Although nobody reading the above stuff of Jon Stewart quality--pardon me for praising myself--could realize that. But NYU was duly informed that the violation of my rights is medically injurious. I am fighting unipolar major depressive disorder. It is medically necessary to write from that library. That is where I go when I have problems writing. I have been doing that since Penn when I could not finish classes because of my chemical imbalance-based condition. I went home and took summer classes at Penn. And worked from the NYU library. And I finished classes. And went back to Penn in the Fall and got to be roommates with the other guys, one of whom I am good friends with literally to this day.
The NYU library is like my service dog. Except it's a chimp.
Mr. Miller, with apologies to Mary McCarthy regarding her famous response to something Lillian Hellman wrote, every word in your letter is a lie including "a" and "the"
I won't call anybody in the President's office anymore. But are you unblocking my number system-wide. Yes or no??? What was the REASON for the block? According to which NYU standard policies was I blocked system-wide?
Don't you worry, Billy. Just your board members from now on. And I am not going near any NYU libraries.
I assume you get reduced tuition at NYU for your kids. But if you have a cocaine habit to support or a mistress or whatever, try moonlighting for the Boston Archdiocese. I just wrote you a brief email letter of recommendation through their website.
"If you need any help covering up for anymore pedophile priests and the alter boys who sue the Church talk to NYU counsel guy Mr. Miller. I just got a letter from him that is the kind of thing the Church lawyers probably send to lawyers for alter boys who got sodomized by priests. You know the drill, blame the victim. But in this case he is Jewish--or as you guys said pre-mid 60 "a Christ Killer--but still an innocent victim of criminal acts (criminal coercion in retaliation for filing complaints with OCR, etc.)
I will talk to one of the Big Macher's there tomorrow.
Maybe, Marty Baron can write me a letter of introduction? He is actually a big fan of mine, I suspect, because until relatively recently I have been covering the Washington Post just as aggressively as I am now covering NYU. And to his immense credit--not sarcasm intended--he does not retaliate against me or hold a grudge because he is a great reporter and a serious Jew. Neither does anybody else at WaPo except Paul Farhi (lied to Kevin Merida and said he knew nothing about Ed Schultz trial I sparked that is why he didn't cover it.)
CC via regular mail: Marty Baron
Senator Charles Schumer--constituent service division
Here is the evidence--to pre-empt more crypto-racist lies by NYU.
Herb London was NYU profesor when he fired Evan Gahr from Hudson Institute under pressure from Tim Goeglein, an aide to Gary Bauer and Karl Rove, incited by OMB general counsel Jay Lefkowitz
Read the article carefully. The Forward called London Tuesday night at his unlisted home number (that I gave to then-editor J.J. Goldberg). London expressly said I would not be fired.
On Wednesday, with Gary Bauer's knowledge, Goeglein called London at his NYU office.
Goeglein threatened him with loss of government contracts if I was not dismissed. Goeglein also got Marshall Wittmann, now AIPAC spokesman, purged by Hudson after he mocked the Administration on his conservativereform.org website. Hudson then deleted the website.
After consulting with Mona Charen and Ken Weinstein, London fired me and instructed Ken Weinstein to tell me the next morning.
On Thursday, shortly after the official announcement London called Weyrich to tell him I was fired. Weyrich said I hope this has nothing to do with me. London said of course not. It was because Evan Gahr used as stuffed chimp in a television debate with David Horowitz.
C. BLOGGER'S MEDICATION CLAIM Bill Clinton has been out of office for nearly five years, and still the conservatives won't get off the former President's case. Washington blogger Evan Gahr, who runs the chimpstein.
com Web site, yesterday wrote that "a psychiatrist colleague of Clinton's physician" revealed to him that Clinton is "taking antidepressants.
" The 59-year-old Clinton underwent open-heart surgery in September 2004, and Manhattan psychiatrist Peter Shapiro, who does not treat Clinton, told me that 20% to 30% of heart-surgery patients - compared with 5% to 15% of the general population - suffer post-operative depression. Yesterday Clinton's spokesman, Jay Carson, denied that his boss is taking antidepressants. From Tel Aviv, where the former President is on a well-publicized visit to Israel with his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Carson E-mailed: "This is totally untrue, but this kind of fabrication is probably to be expected from a guy who has made his living attacking President Clinton and was fired from his last job for, among other things, playing with stuffed animals during a serious TV interview.
" Carson is "lying about me, and he's probably lying about Clinton," Gahr retorted. "When you work for a known liar, you probably shouldn't question others' credibility.
" Gahr, who in 2001 was fired from his job as a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute, conceded that he once brandished a stuffed chimp during a debate on Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes.
And, of course. After I linked the White House and Jay Lefkowitz to my dismissal, his cousin Michael Horowitz conspired with Lefkowitz and AEI/Karl Zinsmeister to criminally harass my father to shut me up. His co-conspirators included National Review/Jonah Goldberg and even Robert Bork.
WTF? Why don't more people know about Karl Rove's right-wing anti-Semitic purge? Because when Dean Baquet was New York Times Washington bureau chief at the height of the Bush Administration he refused to report it. I gave him Weyrich's email. He didn't call Weyrich for comment. He didn't call Karl Rove for comment. He didn't call Herb London for comment.
That is the real reason Baquet is so vicious towards me this day and refused to give me credit for a story Ron Nixon stole from me and cursed me out.
This question of the Jews' responsibility for the crucifixion has
considerable resonance for me because I grew up in Boston, then the most
anti-Semitic city in the country, and lost some teeth after being
punched in the mouth by young hooligans whose after-dark sport was
invading our ghetto and bashing Jews to avenge that deicide.
My mother told me that in the Old Country, when she was a girl and word spread that the cossacks were coming, her mother popped her into the oven, which fortunately was not lit.
Therefore, I have become much interested in a story out of Washington about a Jewish conservative journalist, Evan Gahr, who has been dismissed from three leading conservative institutions after charging Paul Weyrich with anti-Semitism. Weyrich, a founder of the contemporary conservative movement, was at one point its most successful fundraiser.
Thomas Edsall broke the story in the April 21 Washington Post. He cited an April 13 Paul Weyrich commentary, "Indeed He Is Risen!" on Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation's Web site.
The Weyrich statement, e-mailed to supporters, said, "Christ was crucified by the Jews who had wanted a temporal ruler to rescue them from the oppressive Roman authorities. Instead God sent them a spiritual leader to rescue them from their sins and despite the fact that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, performed incredible miracles, even raised people from the dead, He was not what the Jews had expected so they considered him a threat. Thus He was put to death."
In his article, Edsall quoted Evan Gahr, who had criticized Weyrich on the American Spectator Web site. Gahr called Weyrich "a demented anti-Semite" for that resurrection of Jews as Christ killers.
In Edsall's Washington Post article, there was further reaction from Marc Stern, a constitutional lawyer at the American Jewish Congress, whom I consult on establishment-clause cases, and Eugene Fisher, director of Catholic-Jewish relations for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Stern noted that, through the centuries, the "blood libel" that we Jews were the ones who killed Christ had ignited pogroms.
And Fisher declared that Weyrich's accusation "is exactly the type of collective guilt on the Jewish people that the Second Vatican Council specifically condemned in the declaration Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965." He added that last year, while in Israel, Pope John Paul II made clear that the Catholic Church is "deeply saddened by the hatred, acts of persecution, and displays of anti-Semitism directed against the Jews."
In the May 15 Wall Street Journal, David Novak, who teaches Jewish studies at the University of Toronto, noted that Weyrich is a deacon in the Catholic Church, which "has officially repudiated the old charge that the Jews, even the Jews of today, are responsible for Christ's death."
Novak added that "the greatest modern Christian theologian, Karl Barth," emphasized that "Jesus' death on the cross is atonement for the sins of all humans, even the sins of his followers. Thus, for Christians to deny their complicity in the death of Jesus, by shifting sole blame to the Jews, is to deny their own need for atonement."
And the head of the Anti-Defamation League, my friend Abe Foxman, with whom I often debate—but not this time—said of Paul Weyrich's assertion that "such destructive myths stated as fact may well reinforce the bigotry of the ignorant and uninformed, potentially leading to hateful anti-Semitic acts."
Like the removal of my teeth. But I do not call that a hate crime. Thirty days for assault would have been fine. No extra prison time.
On his Free Congress Web site, Paul Weyrich wrote on April 24 that Evan Gahr's charge "is absolutely amazing to me and shows how far down the road to political correctness we have come in our society." (And this response shows that one conservative can accuse another of political correctness.)
About his indictment of the Jews, Weyrich said, "This is historical fact. Are we now to be forbidden to mention historical fact? . . . I was merely quoting Scripture. Scripture is truth. And the truth shall set you free."
Evan Gahr's accurate description of what Weyrich wrote in "Indeed He Is Risen!" has set him free of all his writing and research assignments at three conservative organizations. Gahr has been removed from the list of contributing writers at the American Enterprise Institute's magazine and barred from using its office facilities. The Hudson Institute, where Gahr had been a senior fellow, fired him.
Gahr, who had been writing for David Horowitz's FrontPage Web site, has also been fired by that very paladin of free speech, who so vigorously attacked those college newspaper editors who refused to run the Horowitz ad denouncing reparations for slavery.
I have read the explanations these conservative warriors have given for letting Gahr go, and I have talked with the Hudson Institute. They all claim that Gahr was fired for other reasons. He does not believe this, nor do I. My congratulations to Linda Chavez, head of the Center for Equal Opportunity, who is not afraid of free speech and has brought in Gahr as an adjunct scholar.
If any of the conservative magazines or high-profile conservative intellectuals have spoken up for him, I haven't seen it. Stanley Crouch wrote about Gahr and Weyrich in the May 4 Daily News. But Stanley is not a conservative. He's part of the world of jazz, where free expression is the lodestar.
As Stanley writes: "Dissension in the ranks is a crime among hard-core ideologues, from far right to the far left."
Oddly, little has been reported about the squabble among conservatives over right-wing icon Paul Weyrich's talking the same talk that put Charlie Ward of the Knicks on the hot plate. As you surely must know by now, Ward is a New Testament man who went back into the old charge that the Jews killed Christ. After that got on the front pages, there were some behind-the-scenes movements to make sure we didn't find ourselves in the middle of another moment of hysteria in which Jews were accused of attacking another black man. The point was to get Ward to back up to at least Vatican II and renounce language that has been a staple of anti-Semitic types for centuries. As for Weyrich, this gentle Christian recently published that very same "Jews killed Christ" charge on his Web site. This was exposed by conservative columnist and investigative reporter Evan Gahr. Gahr was promptly attacked and painted as "a publicity hound" by conservative gadfly David Horowitz, whose own most recent claim to publicity has been his buying ads in college newspapers to argue against the idea of reparations for American slavery. In another twist of the knife, Gahr was informed yesterday that he would soon be relieved of his position at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank. That this story has not made much of a showing in the ongoing press discussion of identity as determined by public - or private - statements is more than a bit interesting, particularly in light of the coverage Ward got for much the same thing. It surely proves there's no liberal press bias against the conservatives. After all, the so-called liberal press let off Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) despite plenty of proof showing his connection to the Council of Conservative Citizens, more than a few of whose members consider black people innately inferior to whites. No black politician connected to a group with the opposite view would have gotten away with it. Imagine, for example, if Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice had ever praised the ideas of the Nation of Islam. But if the mainstream press isn't paying attention to Gahr, the right wing certainly is. In fact, he is being treated much the same way that Washington Post reporter Milton Coleman was when he reported the Hymietown comment that boiled Jesse Jackson in charges of anti-Semitism for a few years. No one has promised to "deliver death" to Gahr as Louis Farrakhan did to Coleman. But Gahr has definitely been stripped of his conservative stripes. The irony is that if he had looked the other way and ignored Weyrich's anti-Semitic remarks, Gahr would be quite safe now. But dissension in the ranks is a crime among hard-core ideologues, from the far right to the far left. E-mail: scrouch@edit.
nydailynews.
Gahr sued Hudson for religious discrimination under DC HRA.
The case was moved to federal court by Hudson's lawyer J. Robert Brame, Yale Law School grad and also board member of Christian Reconstructionist group that favors offing gays caught en flagrante. But, hey, who else would take the case? Right? London probably tried 10 corporate lawyers all over DC and NYC and got turned down. Probably even rejected by lawyers who really needed the billable hours since they had cocaine habits to support or triplets in college. But still wouldn't go anywhere near it.
If memory serves Brame's ties to the group was enough to sink his nomination by George W. Bush for the NRLB. But the neo-con Hudson was happy to work with him. John Podhoretz then lied to Ken Weinstein and Herb London about me and Eric to help them defend the lawsuit. Brame repeated the falsehoods to my lawyer Michael Spekter TK. He later coerced me intro dropping the lawsuit. He lied to me and said he would not represent me if I did not accept the lousy $20,000 wiht a confidentiality agreement Hudson offered. He did not explain to me I was agreeing to have it dismissed with prejudice.
Based on information and belief, NYU president Andrew Hamilton has direct connection to London that is why he is acting so vicious and desperate. Tim Goeglein, an aide to Gary Bauer and Karl Rove, called London at his NYU office after previously calling him at the Hudson HQ in Indianapolis.
After more than two weeks of ignoring emails and phone calls--plus complaints to NYCR and OCR United States Department of Education--NYU rushed to explain this was a big misunderstanding.
Ash in the President's Office: President's Office
Phone Enthusiast: This is Evan Gahr. You are on the phone with Janet Cooke from the Washington Post.
Ash [sounding nervous]: Really?
Phone enthusiast: Yup
Phone enthusiast: Janet are you there? I sent her my emails to spokesman John Beckman. She did great work, by the way, on childhood heroin addiction.
Phone enthusiast: I need a yes or no answer. Is the library still banning me [on the orders of neo-racist Nicole D'Andrea]
Ash, lo and behold, was quite helpful. Previously, she insisted the president's office could not intervene because it has no authority over the library. And another woman who answered the phone outright hung up on me
President's Office: You need to talk to the Library. This is not our department.
Phone enthusiast: Wait? You're telling me the president of NYU has no control over the library? How can he be president of NYU if he doesn't have authority over the library?
President's Office: I am trying to help you.
Phone enthusiast: No, you're not. You are stonewalling and being evasive.
Phone enthusiast: Does the president of NYU have authority over the library?
President's office: [more stonewalling]
Phone enthusiast: Yes or no?
President's office: Not in the way you are saying?
Phone enthusiast: Is NYU opposed to anti-Semitism?
President's Office: Sir.
Preisdent's Office after more stonewalling: [click]
But now with "Janet Cooke one the phone" Ash wanted the Pulitzer Prize winner to know she had checked with the library after I complained to her. And they said there was no ban. It was just that my membership had expired. I just needed to re-new.
So why didn't you tell me that, Ash?
Uh, pumpkin. You previously old me the NYU president's office had no authority over the library.
So if you have no authority over the library why did you call them? And why did you not PROVIDE me the information that you got from them? Don't you think I needed that info?
That was kind of rude, right?
Did Ash hang up on me, of course not. She stayed on the phone and tried to sound polite and helpful.
Then, it seems, she told somebody in her office that "Janet Cooke" was the reporter looking into this.
They saw she has not been at the Washington Post for quite some time. And is unlikely to return unless Wesley Lowery convinces Marty Baron that she should be re-hired for the sake of glorious newsroom diversity.
Andrew Hamilton, John Beckman and library director Nicole D'Andrea, like typical white racists of yesteryear who abused proud black men and violated their rights because they thought "nobody" was watching concluded they could bar a nationally known investigative journalist with impunity because the press would not cover it.
On Wednesday, I went to the library and tried to present the NYU receipt for the $125 that was
just charged to my account for library access.
But D'Andrea, citing "extensive conversations" with the President's office said I was barred for violating the Code of Conduct.
She refused to specify the supposed violation or offer any corroborating evidence.
And if there was a violation why wasn't I just suspended? Why was there no progressive discipline?
What evidence does D'Andera, Hamilton and Beckman have that I did something so heinous I should be irrevocably barred. Is NYU disciplinary policies for accused students and professors also handled like a Stalinist tribunal?
This looks funny and it is funny. But it is also pernicious. Although nobody reading the above stuff of Jon Stewart quality--pardon me for praising myself--could realize that. But NYU was duly informed that the violation of my rights is medically injurious. I am fighting unipolar major depressive disorder. It is medically necessary to write from that library. That is where I go when I have problems writing. I have been doing that since Penn when I could not finish classes because of my chemical imbalance-based condition. I went home and took summer classes at Penn. And worked from the NYU library. And I finished classes. And went back to Penn in the Fall and got to be roommates with the other guys, one of whom I am good friends with literally to this day.
The NYU library is like my service dog. Except it's a chimp.
| om: | EvanGahr |
| To: | william.miller.ogc |
| Cc: | erik.wemple
|
| Subject: | NYU lawyer letter of recommendation to Boston Archdiocese following his defense of library ban that he won't repeat publicly |
| Date: | Wed, Feb 22, 2017 8:42 pm |
Mr. Miller, with apologies to Mary McCarthy regarding her famous response to something Lillian Hellman wrote, every word in your letter is a lie including "a" and "the"
I won't call anybody in the President's office anymore. But are you unblocking my number system-wide. Yes or no??? What was the REASON for the block? According to which NYU standard policies was I blocked system-wide?
Don't you worry, Billy. Just your board members from now on. And I am not going near any NYU libraries.
I assume you get reduced tuition at NYU for your kids. But if you have a cocaine habit to support or a mistress or whatever, try moonlighting for the Boston Archdiocese. I just wrote you a brief email letter of recommendation through their website.
"If you need any help covering up for anymore pedophile priests and the alter boys who sue the Church talk to NYU counsel guy Mr. Miller. I just got a letter from him that is the kind of thing the Church lawyers probably send to lawyers for alter boys who got sodomized by priests. You know the drill, blame the victim. But in this case he is Jewish--or as you guys said pre-mid 60 "a Christ Killer--but still an innocent victim of criminal acts (criminal coercion in retaliation for filing complaints with OCR, etc.)
I will talk to one of the Big Macher's there tomorrow.
Maybe, Marty Baron can write me a letter of introduction? He is actually a big fan of mine, I suspect, because until relatively recently I have been covering the Washington Post just as aggressively as I am now covering NYU. And to his immense credit--not sarcasm intended--he does not retaliate against me or hold a grudge because he is a great reporter and a serious Jew. Neither does anybody else at WaPo except Paul Farhi (lied to Kevin Merida and said he knew nothing about Ed Schultz trial I sparked that is why he didn't cover it.)
CC via regular mail: Marty Baron
Senator Charles Schumer--constituent service division
Here is the evidence--to pre-empt more crypto-racist lies by NYU.
July 8, 2014
Patient: Evan Gahr
[SSDOB Redacted]
To Whom It May Concern:
Impairment Update:
In the past
year Mr. Gahr has made strides in his ability to work in his profession as a
journalist but remains significantly impaired.
His concentration and focus is still poor and he can only work on
writing for a short period of time before he looses focus. When he gets “stuck” he easily gives up and
he cannot return to the writing for an extended period of time. He gets quickly frustrated and subsequently
depressed. Language and writing skills
have improved but are still short of the levels needed for steady journalistic
employment. In summary, although he has
made progress he is not, at present, capable of returning to any form of steady
employment. He would not be able to perform at a level acceptable to an
employer.
In addition
he remains, for the most part, socially isolated and interpersonal skills
continue to be markedly diminished.
Diagnosis: Axis
I Major Depressive Disorder- 296.3X
Axis II V71.09
Axis III NA
Axis IV Severe- No job, financial problems, no
support network.
Axis V Current GAF- 48 Lowest Past Year- 45
Prognosis: Fair-
Making slow progress.
REDACTED
New York State Licensed Psychologist
On Feburary 2, NYU charged my debit card for 10 visits
If I violated the Code of Conduct in January, as NYU now contends, why was I re-authorized for 10 visits on February 2nd?
NYU Refuses to Issue Re-Fund for Charged Amount and is reported to New York State Attorney General for Fraud
On Feburary 2, NYU charged my debit card for 10 visits
If I violated the Code of Conduct in January, as NYU now contends, why was I re-authorized for 10 visits on February 2nd?
NYU Refuses to Issue Re-Fund for Charged Amount and is reported to New York State Attorney General for Fraud
Herb London was NYU profesor when he fired Evan Gahr from Hudson Institute under pressure from Tim Goeglein, an aide to Gary Bauer and Karl Rove, incited by OMB general counsel Jay Lefkowitz
Read the article carefully. The Forward called London Tuesday night at his unlisted home number (that I gave to then-editor J.J. Goldberg). London expressly said I would not be fired.
On Wednesday, with Gary Bauer's knowledge, Goeglein called London at his NYU office.
Goeglein threatened him with loss of government contracts if I was not dismissed. Goeglein also got Marshall Wittmann, now AIPAC spokesman, purged by Hudson after he mocked the Administration on his conservativereform.org website. Hudson then deleted the website.
After consulting with Mona Charen and Ken Weinstein, London fired me and instructed Ken Weinstein to tell me the next morning.
On Thursday, shortly after the official announcement London called Weyrich to tell him I was fired. Weyrich said I hope this has nothing to do with me. London said of course not. It was because Evan Gahr used as stuffed chimp in a television debate with David Horowitz.
A JONES FOR PRODUCT PLACEMENT
C. BLOGGER'S MEDICATION CLAIM Bill Clinton has been out of office for nearly five years, and still the conservatives won't get off the former President's case. Washington blogger Evan Gahr, who runs the chimpstein.
com Web site, yesterday wrote that "a psychiatrist colleague of Clinton's physician" revealed to him that Clinton is "taking antidepressants.
" The 59-year-old Clinton underwent open-heart surgery in September 2004, and Manhattan psychiatrist Peter Shapiro, who does not treat Clinton, told me that 20% to 30% of heart-surgery patients - compared with 5% to 15% of the general population - suffer post-operative depression. Yesterday Clinton's spokesman, Jay Carson, denied that his boss is taking antidepressants. From Tel Aviv, where the former President is on a well-publicized visit to Israel with his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Carson E-mailed: "This is totally untrue, but this kind of fabrication is probably to be expected from a guy who has made his living attacking President Clinton and was fired from his last job for, among other things, playing with stuffed animals during a serious TV interview.
" Carson is "lying about me, and he's probably lying about Clinton," Gahr retorted. "When you work for a known liar, you probably shouldn't question others' credibility.
" Gahr, who in 2001 was fired from his job as a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute, conceded that he once brandished a stuffed chimp during a debate on Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes.
And, of course. After I linked the White House and Jay Lefkowitz to my dismissal, his cousin Michael Horowitz conspired with Lefkowitz and AEI/Karl Zinsmeister to criminally harass my father to shut me up. His co-conspirators included National Review/Jonah Goldberg and even Robert Bork.
WTF? Why don't more people know about Karl Rove's right-wing anti-Semitic purge? Because when Dean Baquet was New York Times Washington bureau chief at the height of the Bush Administration he refused to report it. I gave him Weyrich's email. He didn't call Weyrich for comment. He didn't call Karl Rove for comment. He didn't call Herb London for comment.
That is the real reason Baquet is so vicious towards me this day and refused to give me credit for a story Ron Nixon stole from me and cursed me out.
Who Did Kill Christ?
Tuesday, June 26, 2001 at 4 a.m.
Lenny Bruce used
to tell, in his act, about a Jew who was weary not only of being called a
Christ killer but of occasionally being punched in the mouth by
disciples of the Prince of Peace. Finally, this beleaguered Jew
put a note in his cellar, where it could easily be found. He wanted to
absolve all other Jews. It said: "I did it. Morty."
My mother told me that in the Old Country, when she was a girl and word spread that the cossacks were coming, her mother popped her into the oven, which fortunately was not lit.
Therefore, I have become much interested in a story out of Washington about a Jewish conservative journalist, Evan Gahr, who has been dismissed from three leading conservative institutions after charging Paul Weyrich with anti-Semitism. Weyrich, a founder of the contemporary conservative movement, was at one point its most successful fundraiser.
The Weyrich statement, e-mailed to supporters, said, "Christ was crucified by the Jews who had wanted a temporal ruler to rescue them from the oppressive Roman authorities. Instead God sent them a spiritual leader to rescue them from their sins and despite the fact that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, performed incredible miracles, even raised people from the dead, He was not what the Jews had expected so they considered him a threat. Thus He was put to death."
In his article, Edsall quoted Evan Gahr, who had criticized Weyrich on the American Spectator Web site. Gahr called Weyrich "a demented anti-Semite" for that resurrection of Jews as Christ killers.
In Edsall's Washington Post article, there was further reaction from Marc Stern, a constitutional lawyer at the American Jewish Congress, whom I consult on establishment-clause cases, and Eugene Fisher, director of Catholic-Jewish relations for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Stern noted that, through the centuries, the "blood libel" that we Jews were the ones who killed Christ had ignited pogroms.
And Fisher declared that Weyrich's accusation "is exactly the type of collective guilt on the Jewish people that the Second Vatican Council specifically condemned in the declaration Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965." He added that last year, while in Israel, Pope John Paul II made clear that the Catholic Church is "deeply saddened by the hatred, acts of persecution, and displays of anti-Semitism directed against the Jews."
In the May 15 Wall Street Journal, David Novak, who teaches Jewish studies at the University of Toronto, noted that Weyrich is a deacon in the Catholic Church, which "has officially repudiated the old charge that the Jews, even the Jews of today, are responsible for Christ's death."
Novak added that "the greatest modern Christian theologian, Karl Barth," emphasized that "Jesus' death on the cross is atonement for the sins of all humans, even the sins of his followers. Thus, for Christians to deny their complicity in the death of Jesus, by shifting sole blame to the Jews, is to deny their own need for atonement."
And the head of the Anti-Defamation League, my friend Abe Foxman, with whom I often debate—but not this time—said of Paul Weyrich's assertion that "such destructive myths stated as fact may well reinforce the bigotry of the ignorant and uninformed, potentially leading to hateful anti-Semitic acts."
Like the removal of my teeth. But I do not call that a hate crime. Thirty days for assault would have been fine. No extra prison time.
On his Free Congress Web site, Paul Weyrich wrote on April 24 that Evan Gahr's charge "is absolutely amazing to me and shows how far down the road to political correctness we have come in our society." (And this response shows that one conservative can accuse another of political correctness.)
About his indictment of the Jews, Weyrich said, "This is historical fact. Are we now to be forbidden to mention historical fact? . . . I was merely quoting Scripture. Scripture is truth. And the truth shall set you free."
Evan Gahr's accurate description of what Weyrich wrote in "Indeed He Is Risen!" has set him free of all his writing and research assignments at three conservative organizations. Gahr has been removed from the list of contributing writers at the American Enterprise Institute's magazine and barred from using its office facilities. The Hudson Institute, where Gahr had been a senior fellow, fired him.
Gahr, who had been writing for David Horowitz's FrontPage Web site, has also been fired by that very paladin of free speech, who so vigorously attacked those college newspaper editors who refused to run the Horowitz ad denouncing reparations for slavery.
I have read the explanations these conservative warriors have given for letting Gahr go, and I have talked with the Hudson Institute. They all claim that Gahr was fired for other reasons. He does not believe this, nor do I. My congratulations to Linda Chavez, head of the Center for Equal Opportunity, who is not afraid of free speech and has brought in Gahr as an adjunct scholar.
If any of the conservative magazines or high-profile conservative intellectuals have spoken up for him, I haven't seen it. Stanley Crouch wrote about Gahr and Weyrich in the May 4 Daily News. But Stanley is not a conservative. He's part of the world of jazz, where free expression is the lodestar.
As Stanley writes: "Dissension in the ranks is a crime among hard-core ideologues, from far right to the far left."
RIGHT WING PROVES IT AGAIN - HONESTY DOESN'T ALWAYS PAY
Oddly, little has been reported about the squabble among conservatives over right-wing icon Paul Weyrich's talking the same talk that put Charlie Ward of the Knicks on the hot plate. As you surely must know by now, Ward is a New Testament man who went back into the old charge that the Jews killed Christ. After that got on the front pages, there were some behind-the-scenes movements to make sure we didn't find ourselves in the middle of another moment of hysteria in which Jews were accused of attacking another black man. The point was to get Ward to back up to at least Vatican II and renounce language that has been a staple of anti-Semitic types for centuries. As for Weyrich, this gentle Christian recently published that very same "Jews killed Christ" charge on his Web site. This was exposed by conservative columnist and investigative reporter Evan Gahr. Gahr was promptly attacked and painted as "a publicity hound" by conservative gadfly David Horowitz, whose own most recent claim to publicity has been his buying ads in college newspapers to argue against the idea of reparations for American slavery. In another twist of the knife, Gahr was informed yesterday that he would soon be relieved of his position at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank. That this story has not made much of a showing in the ongoing press discussion of identity as determined by public - or private - statements is more than a bit interesting, particularly in light of the coverage Ward got for much the same thing. It surely proves there's no liberal press bias against the conservatives. After all, the so-called liberal press let off Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) despite plenty of proof showing his connection to the Council of Conservative Citizens, more than a few of whose members consider black people innately inferior to whites. No black politician connected to a group with the opposite view would have gotten away with it. Imagine, for example, if Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice had ever praised the ideas of the Nation of Islam. But if the mainstream press isn't paying attention to Gahr, the right wing certainly is. In fact, he is being treated much the same way that Washington Post reporter Milton Coleman was when he reported the Hymietown comment that boiled Jesse Jackson in charges of anti-Semitism for a few years. No one has promised to "deliver death" to Gahr as Louis Farrakhan did to Coleman. But Gahr has definitely been stripped of his conservative stripes. The irony is that if he had looked the other way and ignored Weyrich's anti-Semitic remarks, Gahr would be quite safe now. But dissension in the ranks is a crime among hard-core ideologues, from the far right to the far left. E-mail: scrouch@edit.
nydailynews.
posted by Washington Gadfly Evan Gahr at
9:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home