Now Reading:

Prof Who Suggested Israel Responsible For 9/11, ISIS Back Teaching


The publicly-funded University of Lethbridge suspended professor Anthony Hall after he suggested that Israel was responsible for Islamic terrorism like 9/11 and ISIS. But the school has now reinstated him.

In an article for his website, Hall says “the real culprits behind the 9/11 attacks were not a group of Islamic jihadists acting alone out of no other motivation than religious zealotry.” He added, “rather, the dominant group directing the 9/11 false flag event was composed primarily of Israel First neoconservatives who sought to demonize Muslims.”

The article is called “9/11 And The Zionist Question,” a question which Hall notes is “a contemporary extension of what Karl Marx and others used to refer to frequently in European literature as the Jewish Question.” It is a bit odd that Hall leaves out the most memorable promulgator of the Jewish Question, Adolf Hitler.

Hall repeatedly uses the term “Islamophobia” to cast genuine concern and criticism of Islamic extremists as irrational backlash against a marginalized group. What’s really curious, though, is that just a few months before the professor’s nearly 17,000-word screed, the UK government official who popularized the term “Islamophobia” distanced himself from it, stating, “for a long time, I too thought that Europe’s Muslims would become like previous waves of migrants, gradually abandoning their ancestral ways, wearing their religious and cultural baggage lightly, and gradually blending into Britain’s diverse identity landscape.”

“I should have known better,” the UK official concluded. 

Joshua Blakeney, a graduate student of Hall’s, received a $7,714 scholarship essentially to study 9/11 conspiracy theories. Apparently, the “ongoing financial commitment of the Province of Alberta” made this possible.

The University of Lethbridge paid Hall during at least part of his suspension and reinstated him entirely just last week. The school said it would address the professor’s activities “in the context of the faculty handbook,” but did not explain how. Campus Unmasked asked the school what it believed constituted academic freedom, as well as some questions regarding Hall’s tenure, but the university did not elaborate, citing legal implications.

But what about scholarly implications of reinstating the professor? Taxpayers are waking up to the fact that they are funding indoctrination mills and colleges’ opportunities to operate in the shadows are becoming slimmer and slimmer.

Input your search keywords and press Enter.
%d bloggers like this: