As many of you know, there is a war in the Middle East. There have been calls to denounce the Antisemitism. The Hamas and Jewish Israel people are in a war. Many universities have been called denounce the Antisemitism. Most universities have, as they should, but there have been a couple universities that are walking on thin ice. The house panel has been drilling the presidents of Harvard, University of Pennsylvania, and MIT. All three campus presidents were asked if antisemitic remarks on campus were considered violation of schools rules. The obvious answer, would be yes, as it is considered obvious and blatant hate speech. But all three presidents struggled to answer, and gave lengthy answers in attempts to dodge the question.
As per The Harvard Crimson, President Gay was asked by U.S. rep Stefanik, “At Harvard, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment?” 
The president at Harvard stated, “It can be, depending on the context.” Stefanik repeatedly tried to get Gay to give a yes or no answer to the question. Gay would not give a straight up yes or no answer, however. “Antisemitic speech when it crosses into conduct that amounts to bullying, harassment, intimidation — that is actionable conduct and we do take action,” Gay said. But Stefanik was not satisfied with that response either. “This is why you should resign,” Stefanik said. “These are unacceptable answers across the board.” Stefanik was clearly in the right, as Gay refused a yes or no answer when the blatant answer was yes.
University of Pennsylvania’s president, Magill, also gave unsatisfactory answers. As per ABC, Stefanik asked Magill to respond “yes or no” if calling for the “genocide of Jews” violated Penn’s rules or code of conduct. Magill replied, “If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment, yes.” 
Stefanik followed up: “I am asking, specifically, calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?” Magill responded that it was a “context-dependent decision.” This is just a straight up answer, not an in-depth explanation. “It’s a context-dependent decision — that’s your testimony today? Stefanik countered. “Calling for the genocide of Jews is depending upon the context?” Magill is obviously in the wrong, and this is just so confusing on how she can’t give a straight answer. Later, students were interviewed and they voiced their clear disapproval of her responses. Pennsylvania State Sen. Steve Santarsiero, a Democrat and Jew, has joined the call to fire Magill, saying that her “coached” answer “utterly failed to express the moral clarity that the question demanded.”
MIT’s president did not appear to make any comments, but she is guilty by association. Many people are in outcry about this situation, and a plane was seen flying over Harvard with a banner saying, “Harvard hates Jews”. Many people have called for the resignation of these presidents, and rightfully so. What actions will be taken have yet to be seen.
