Skip to main content

Yale University: Weighed and Found Wanting

PRINTED WITH PERMISSION FROM PAUL SUTLIFF

By Paul Sutliff

In 2008 Basak Otus, a writer for Yale Daily News, the leading news source for Yale University wrote an article that started:

“English majors getting tired of Shakespeare and Wordsworth will soon be able to turn to Yale’s libraries for a poet of a different kind altogether: Osama bin Laden”.

The backlash to this article should have been taken as a prophetic warning of what was to come, akin to the hand writing on the wall of King Belshazzar of Babylon in the book of Daniel. In that story the fingers of a man’s hand appeared and wrote on the wall an ominous warning that the prophet Daniel interpreted as meaning:




1) God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it.

2) You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting

3) Your kingdom has been divided, and given away.

Basak Otis’ article in 2008 pointed out that Yale no longer had America’s best interests at heart, but had begun a love affair with one of the most notorious men of the modern era: Osama bin Laden. Perhaps the article would have faded into the background and remained forgotten if Yale woke up when it was attacked that June by a jihadist firebombing, which was intended to destroy their power plant. But Yale slumberously ignored wake-up call!

Yale University reverted to its love affair with Osama bin Laden and published a sharia compliant version of a book about Muhammad cartoons, taking care to censor illustrations that, in Paris, had inspired the murder of a dozen members of “Charlie Hebdo,” a publication that had printed cartoons of Mohammed. This occurred in September 2009, less than three months after the attempted fire-bombing.

It was Yale University’s overt attempt to display “dhimmitude”—submission to Muslims -- rather than display their heritage as great defenders of the First Amendment. Yale had the opportunity to take a strong stand for America and her beliefs in liberty for all her citizens! It was a chance to be seen as the University that defends the First Amendment. Yale, however chose to become an example of “being weighed and found wanting” in their defense of the US Constitution.

In 2014 Yale Law School hosted Rachid Al-Ghannouchi to speak to its students and the community as well. Rachid is a member of the Ennahda Party in Tunisia. Ennahda is the Muslim Brotherhood entity in Tunisia. Osam bin Laden was and is still counted as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Yale University has people that vet public speakers. How is it possible they did not know that Al-Ghannouchi was a staunch defender of Hamas[1], a US declared terrorist entity?

Yale’s last act of dhimmitude was their receipt of $10 million dollars from the son of Saleh Abdallah Kamel, a documented financer of  Al-Qaeda with banking ties with Osama bin Laden, himself. Yale has agreed to place an Islamic Law Center in their Law School, but refuses to acknowledge that Islamic law is sharia[2]. This act equates Sharia with the US Constitution.

The act of placing an Islamic Law Center at Yale forces the university to fight itself. Those studying at Yale to earn degrees in its seminary must take a stand, it is their Christian duty. The Music School also must join the struggle, as Sharia requires the destruction of musical instruments and the very concept of a Music School[3].

The writing was on the wall in 2008. It seems 2015 was the year that Yale became a house divided against itself; soon it may no longer exist as the great educational institute it once was.


Can Yale survive its Dhimmitude? I think not?

Paul Sutliff is the Author of  "Civilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam" and
"Stealth Jihad Phase 2: Infiltrate American Colleges." He is a Radio Commentator on the Muslim Brotherhood. His blog site is here: http://paulsutliff.blogspot.com/




[1] "Taamulat Fiddine Wa Siyassa Al Hiwar TV, 22 February 2009." Broadcast Bulletin. December 10, 2009. Accessed October 17, 2015.


[2] Email from the Office of the President of Yale University.

Comments

Hey author, Thanks for such nice content. I am glad to inform you that I have also created content on Study Law in Yale University.You will find some other truth that you haven’t mentioned in your blog. If you have any issues related to the topic, you can call us at 9718417575.

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...