This is how many on the left want most Universities to look
• Qatar gave $1 billion to elite American universities since 2011, according to Department of Education data.
• The Qatar Foundation is suing the Texas attorney general to prevent information about Qatari funding from becoming public.
• Universities are taking money from Qatar, a nation with a checkered human rights history, as students rally for social justice causes.
The nation of Qatar, a Sharia-law monarchy that has been accused of trying to influence other countries’ governments, gave $1 billion to elite American universities since 2011, according to Department of Education data.
Some universities have refused to discuss where strings are attached to that money. The Qatar Foundation, for example, filed a lawsuit against the Texas attorney general Oct. 12 to hide information about the $225 million Qatar has awarded to Texas A&M University since 2011.
The Qatar Foundation hired the politically connected powerhouse law firm Squire Patton Boggs for the suit, which was filed in response to a researcher’s public information request regarding the foreign funding.
The biggest recipient of Qatar’s educational funding, Georgetown University, repeatedly ignored requests from The Daily Caller News Foundation for basic information about the funding and whether it implicates academic independence.
Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have accused Qatar of meddling in other nations’ internal affairs as well as funding terrorism. Qatar also wields influence through its media group, Al Jazeera.
Top Foreign Funders of U.S. Universities, 2011-2016 (Source: Department of Education)
Country
Amount
Qatar
$1,024,065,043
England
$761,586,394
Saudi Arabia
$613,608,797
China
$426,526,085
Canada
$402,535,603
Hong Kong
$394,446,859
For a nation seeking sway over the U.S., Georgetown University would be a particularly tactical site of influence. Georgetown has received nearly $333 million from Qatar since 2011 — far more than any other U.S. school has received from any foreign nation.
Georgetown is situated in the seat of power, near the State Department, and its experts are frequently cited by groups shaping policy. In fact, the Jesuit Catholic university trains many of the United States’ future diplomats at its Walsh School of Foreign Service.
Its website notes that “At SFS, you can study with former Secretaries of State” and access “connections to diplomats from just about every country, and of course, the seat of the U.S. government. Our location gives SFS the extraordinary opportunity for us to engage (and sometimes even influence) the debates that lead to real action.”
Thanks to the Qatari funding, Georgetown and its foreign service program has an entire outpost in Qatar. “Georgetown University in Qatar (GU-Q) is an additional location of Georgetown University, based in Education City in Doha,” its website says. “The University offers a four year undergraduate program in international affairs leading to the Bachelor of Science in Foreign Service (BSFS) degree.”
Students from VCU’s home campus visit the Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab Mosque, the national mosque of Qatar. Source: VCU
The magnitude of liberal-leaning universities’ reliance on the foreign nation, a poster child for income inequality, provides a stark contrast. As U.S. college students clamor for university endowments to divest from fossil fuels, the schools take money from the oil-rich kingdom. As they rally for social justice causes, Qatar has a checkered human rights record.
Qatar has only 313,000 citizens, and 2.3 million foreigners dwelling there, many of them laborers serving the country’s elite, according to 2017 data.
“The tragedy of 1.7 million migrant workers trapped in Qatar defines modern day slavery,” the International Trade Union Confederation said in 2015.
Nepalese laborers died at a rate of almost one a day in Qatar, according to The Guardian.
“We were working on an empty stomach for 24 hours; 12 hours’ work and then no food all night,” one said. “When I complained, my manager assaulted me, kicked me out of the labor camp I lived in and refused to pay me anything.”
In Washington, professors of Islamic issues have engaged in activism. Jonathan A. C. Brown, a convert to Islam and the director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown, which Qatar rival Saudi Arabia funds, offered an Islam-based defense of slavery, concubinage and non-consensual sex.
“The Prophet of God had slaves. He had slaves. There’s no denying that,” he said in 2017 at an International Institute of Islamic Thought talk. “Was he — are you more morally mature than the Prophet of God? No, you’re not. I’ll answer your question for you.” (RELATED: Before Killing Of Journalist, Elite Universities Took $600M From Saudis)
Studying abroad forms a bond between U.S. students and Qatar and helps Qatari nationals learn about the U.S., according to marketing materials.
Top Recipients of Qatar-Affiliated Funding to Universities, 2011-2016 (Source: Department of Education)
Country
Amount
Georgetown University
$332,818,297
Northwestern University
$277,456,289
Texas A&M University
$225,455,141
Carnegie Mellon University
$71,456,401
Cornell University
$47,577,242
Virginia Commonwealth University
$40,117,185
University of Michigan – Ann Arbor
$7,860,694
Harvard University
$7,693,947
Purdue University
$2,794,462
Arizona State University
$2,276,044
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
$1,223,630
Meanwhile, college students have adopted a fondness for the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions to Israel movement.
The vast majority of funds from Qatar were contracts, the Education Department data shows, requiring Georgetown to do something in return for the money, unlike gifts.
Georgetown spokesman Matt Hill ignored questions from TheDCNF about the strings attached to such funds and whether they could influence curriculum and would not provide the contract governing them.
The dean of Georgetown’s Qatar campus is Ahmad Dallal, who the Middle East Forum describes as “a long-time and enthusiastic supporter of the State Department-designated terrorist group Hezbollah. Dallal, who chaired Georgetown’s Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies from 2003 to 2009, is also pro-Hamas, pro-Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, co-author of an Arabic textbook whose maps omit Israel, and signatory of a letter warning that Israel would engage in ‘ethnic cleansing’ at the start of the Iraq war.”
The Zachor Legal Institute, which opposes the movement to sanction and boycott Israel, submitted a Freedom of Information request in May to Texas A&M (TAMU), a state university, for “a summary of all amounts of funding or donations received” from Qatar and a long list of proxies.
The office of state Attorney General Ken Paxton ruled “the university must withhold the donors’ identifying information … the university must release the remaining information.”
Most of the money to TAMU were contracts, not donations.
The Qatar Foundation’s high-powered lawyers intervened, arguing the relevant portion of the attorney general’s ruling “requiring release of all remaining information other than donor identity is incorrect and without force or effect.”
They wrote:
This is an action to prevent disclosure of confidential financial information concerning the relationship between QF and Texas A&M University … QF operates programs dedicated to education, science, and community development. It is responsible for funding much of the development in Education City, a hub for higher education outside Doha. … In addition to TAMU, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, Georgetown, Northwestern, and Virginia Commonwealth University have all established campuses in Education City.
The Attorney General concluded that TAMU could withhold information identifying ‘donors’ under section 552.1235. But the Attorney General stated that TAMU would be required to release all remaining information requested, which would include information related to payments made by QF to TAMU pursuant to a contract. In so doing, the Attorney General implicitly ruled that those payments were not ‘donations,’ and therefore not exempt from disclosure under the PIA … The information related to these grants and donations is also confidential commercial information and constitutes a trade secret.
The Qatar Foundation’s general counsel is Michael Mitchell, a former vice president of Ohio State University.
Marc Greendorfer, an attorney for the Zachor Legal Institute, responded to the Texas attorney general Nov. 8: “One of the Qatari entities that was the subject of our original request has taken the extraordinary step of taking the Texas Attorney General to court to suppress the information that we requested. Now, with the most recent attempt by TAMU to prevent public disclosure of information as to how Qatari entities are involved with a Texas public university, the intrigue grows, and we have to wonder what it is they are trying to keep from the public.”
TAMU and the Qatar Foundation did not return requests for comment.
The university operations by Qatar are just one prong in a massive public relations and influence push that includes millions to lobbyists and public relations firms in the U.S.
It is also not the only involvement of Squire Patton Boggs with Middle Eastern countries. The same law firm also has a $100,000-a-month contract with Qatar’s rival Saudi Arabia for the kingdom to retain former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and former Democratic Louisiana Sen. John Breaux.
According to Foreign Agent Registration Act disclosures, it worked directly with Saud al-Qahtani, the same aide who allegedly organized the killing of a
A leading Senate Republican wants the Justice Department to investigate a Kentucky woman who allegedly made false claims during the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
In a three page letter to the Justice Department, Republican Senator and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, of Iowa, identified the woman as Judy Munro-Leighton of Kentucky. He described how Munro-Leighton falsely claimed to be the woman previously known as “Jane Doe” of Oceanside, CA.
“Jane Doe” rocked the Kavanaugh hearings in September with anonymous allegations of rape, claiming in a handwritten letter that Kavanaugh and another boy, sometime in the past, raped her repeatedly in the back of a car.
Grassley said Munro-Leighton sent her own letter to senators in October, falsely claiming to be Jane Doe. She allegedly later admitted to committee investigators that she wasn’t the Jane Doe who made the rape allegations, didn’t live in California and had never met Justice Kavanaugh.
According to Grassley’s letter, Munro-Leighton said she made the false claims because she “was angry,” calling it a “tactic” and a “ploy.”
Grassley called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Director of the FBI to launch a criminal investigation stating, “It is illegal to make materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to Congressional investigators.”
WAVE 3 News was not successful Friday night in contacting Munro-Leighton.
The true identity of “Jane Doe” is still not known. Justice Kavanaugh has denied all the allegations.
Grassley previously also requested investigations of another Kavanaugh accuser and her attorney, Michael Avenatti.
A tough guy at college only. Why don’t he move to a socialist country?

Dartmouth College lecturer Mark Bray made the argument to abolish capitalism in a recent op-ed for Truthout, linking capitalism to the prioritizing of profit over the environment and everything else.
The professor has previously donated half of the profits from his book chronicling Antifa to the organization, written an introduction to an Antifa comic book, and tweeted glowingly about Antifa flags made by kids at a summer camp.
A Dartmouth professor argued on Tuesday that “if we don’t abolish capitalism, capitalism will abolish us.”
Dartmouth College lecturer Mark Bray made the remark in an op-ed for Truthout, titled “How Capitalism Stokes the Far Right and Climate Catastrophe.”
“We must recognize that the climate crisis and the resurgence of the far right are two of the most acute symptoms of our failure to abolish capitalism.” Tweet This
“We are on a deadline,” Bray says. “Lesser-evilism among capitalist politicians may have some rationale when spending five minutes casting a ballot on Election Day, but we don’t have time for it to be a guiding strategical outlook. We need to organize movements to build popular power and shut down the industries that threaten our existence.”
“Fascism is ascendant,” the Ivy League professor continues. “The world is on fire. This is no time to be patient. If we don’t abolish capitalism, capitalism will abolish us.”
Bray claims that the far right advocates for environmentally destructive policies, alleging that the faction prioritizes interests of certain groups over those of the entire planet, but takes his argument a step further by blaming capitalism.
“We must recognize that the climate crisis and the resurgence of the far right are two of the most acute symptoms of our failure to abolish capitalism,” the scholar asserts. “A capitalist system that prioritizes profit and perpetual growth over all else is the mortal enemy of global aspirations for a sustainable economy that satisfies needs rather than stock portfolios.”
Bray’s faculty profile lists the Dartmouth lecturer as an associated visiting scholar of the school’s Gender Research Institute. It also describes him as “a historian of human rights, terrorism, and political radicalism in Modern Europe.” But Bray seems to have done more than just document issues of radicalism.
The professor donated half of the profits from his book “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” to Antifa.
[RELATED: Dartmouth prof to donate half of book proceeds to Antifa]
He has also authored the introduction to an Antifa comic book and in a tweet displaying photos of what he suggested were Antifa flags made by kids at a summer camp, said “super rad!”
Campus Reform contacted Bray, asking him what his preferred alternative to capitalism would be among other questions, but the professor did not comment in time for press.
Migrants are the “lifeblood” of America, not Americans and their children, says former top Democrat Sen. Harry Reid.
“Immigrants are the lifeblood of our nation,” Reid said, ignoring the 4 million Americans who turn 18 this year in a homeland with 260 million Americans, 34 million legal immigrants and at least 11 million illegal migrants.
Migrants, he said, “are our power and our strength.”
Reid made the claim as he tried to slam President Donald Trump’s call on Oct. for a reform of the birthright citizenship rules.
Reid led the Senate Democrats until 2016. His elevation of migrants above Americans came shortly after President Donald Trump declared himself to be a pro-American nationalist.
But Reid’s praise for migrants and contempt for Americans is echoed by many Democrats, by progressive columnists, some GOP-affiliated columnists, and by many immigrant political activists.
For example, the Democrats’ leaders in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi declared in a lengthy speech in February 2018 that:
We’re a great country because we’re constantly reinvigorated by immigrants coming to our country. Their commitment and courage and commitment to the American dream which drew them here in the first place strengthened the American dream. As newcomers with all of that hope and aspiration, they make America more American when they come here and that’s why our country will not stagnate.
…
Great things, discoveries in America came from immigrants coming here. Many of the great academic minds in our country came from another country. But then — at the same time America produced our own and that’s a pretty exciting combination.
Rep. Joe Kennedy, in an October article for Time magazine, tried to revive the claim that America is a “nation of immigrants,” not a nation of and for Americans and their children:
Few felt it as deeply as President John F. Kennedy. In his 1964 book A Nation of Immigrants, recently re-released, my great-uncle outlines the compelling case for immigration, in economic, moral, and global terms. “The abundant resources of this land provided the foundation for a great nation,” he writes. “But only people could make the opportunity a reality. Immigration provided the human resources.”
Many pro-migration advocates also argue that migrants are more important and productive than Americans:
New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote in January 2018:
Over all, America is suffering from a loss of dynamism. New business formation is down. Interstate mobility is down. Americans switch jobs less frequently and more Americans go through the day without ever leaving the house.
…
Of course [Americans] react with defensive animosity to the immigrants who out-hustle and out-build them. You’d react negatively, too, if confronted with people who are better versions of what you wish you were yourself.
In June 2017, a former Wall Street Journal writer who is now working for the New York Times declared America belongs to immigrants because immigrants make the nation more powerful. Bret Stephens wrote:
I speak of Americans whose families have been in this country for a few generations. Complacent, entitled and often shockingly ignorant on basic points of American law and history, they are the stagnant pool in which our national prospects risk drowning…
Bottom line: So-called real Americans are screwing up America. Maybe they should leave, so that we can replace them with new and better ones: newcomers who are more appreciative of what the United States has to offer, more ambitious for themselves and their children, and more willing to sacrifice for the future.
Americans have no right to America, Stephens continued, saying:
We’re a country of immigrants — by and for them, too. Americans who don’t get it should get out.
In January 2018, the Washington Post’s (WaPo) op-ed editor, Fred Hiatt, declared:
Here’s the bottom line: I think we should remain open to immigrants because it’s part of who we are as a nation, because every generation of newcomers — even, or maybe especially, the ones who come with nothing but moxie and a tolerance for risk — has enriched and improved us …
A vote to choke off immigration is a vote for stagnation and decline.
In February 2017, Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of the D.C.-based Weekly Standard magazine, declared that population replacement would be the best for national power:
“Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don’t you want to get new Americans in?
[I hope] this thing isn’t being videotaped or ever shown anywhere. Whatever tiny, pathetic future I have is going to totally collapse. You can make a case that America has been great because every — I think John Adams said this — basically if you are in free society, a capitalist society, after two or three generations of hard work everyone becomes kind of decadent, lazy, spoiled — whatever. Then, luckily, you have these waves of people coming in from Italy, Ireland, Russia, and now Mexico.
Stephens’ progressive and elitist peers have lauded the Hamilton musical, which portrays says American was founded by immigrants, not settlers, and that today’s immigrants as the rejuvenating diverse lifeblood of dull, white America. The play includes a song titled: “Immigrants (We Get The Job Done),” which glamorizes the imported, underpaid cheap-labor and sweatshops which serve Hamilton‘s wealthy ticket-buyers:
Pelso also said Americans owe a moral debt to illegals for bringing their children into the United States:
I say to their parents: Thank you for bringing these Dreamers to America. We’re in your debt for the courage it took, for you to take the risk, physically, politically, in every way, to do so.”
Tuesday on MSNBC’s “All In,” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said President Donald Trump was a “poster boy for what a mob protester looks like.”
Discussing conservative media calling protests a “mob,” Waters said, “Well, I think it’s absolutely ridiculous. It’s not believable. As a matter of fact, this country was built on peaceful protests. And those of us who were part of the Civil Rights movement, who understood the power of protest taught by Dr. Martin Luther King and others know that we cannot allow Donald Trump and anybody else to take protests away from us and to deem it to be violent and to try and make us look like a mob. It is because of peaceful protests, not only in the Civil Rights movement, but the labor movement was able to get better wages, able to get better working conditions, able to get better pay, everything because they learned to march and protest. And they still do it today. We know that protest is guaranteed to a democratic society. We know that this is guaranteed to us by the Constitution.”
What A Damn Joke
She continued, “They’re trying to change the description of protest and call it a mob. Well, this president is the poster boy for what a mob protester looks like. He is—matter of fact, he’s the one who has been violent in his speech. He’s the one in his rallies has said things like ‘I’d like to punch him in the face.’ Trump said that at one of his rallies, he said ‘knock the crap out of them, would you, and seriously, okay, just knock the hell out of them, I mean, I promise I will pay the legal fees.’ That’s the kind of talk that he has done. That’s violent talk. With don’t have that kind of talk that has come from the women who are protesting. As a matter of fact, this country is past due for the kind of protests that we have seen women do in the last few days as we have gone through this confirmation process of Kavanaugh. It is time for women to say that we’re tired of being disrespected.”
I wish that these GOP members would talk like this when there was no Election coming up.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell frequently reassured President Donald Trump that the Senate would vote on his nominee to the Supreme Court, The New York Times reported Saturday.
Trump asked McConnell at one point if Senate Republicans were committed to seeing Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation through to the end, the report notes, citing interviews with senators and White House officials. McConnell replied: “I’m stronger than mule piss” on Kavanaugh, who consistently denied accusations that he assaulted three women the 1980s.
The Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court Saturday afternoon, concluding an agonizing nomination process, which included fierce discussion about identity, violence and the spirit of the presumption of innocence.
The final vote was 50 to 48, with Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska as the lone Republican to oppose Kavanaugh. Trump was wary about Kavanaugh’s chances after Christine Blasey Ford finished testifying on Sept. 28 that he once tried to force himself on her as a teenager.
Nearly everyone in the White House and in Congress found her story credible, sincere and sympathetic, the report notes. Trump immediately called McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, and they agreed she was impressive. “We’re only at halftime,” he told the president.
McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, also said that the issue of pulling Kavanaugh was discussed but he was not concerned that Trump would take that route. “No, we talked about it,” said McConnell. “These issues are very controversial. We had numerous conversations about it through the course of time, but he hung in there.”
Senators cast their vote inside the Capitol as demonstrators wailed outside.
Protests roiled Washington throughout the day, though they were less intense than the demonstrations that unsettled the nation’s capital. A handful of demonstrators screamed at senators in the gallery as lawmakers cast their votes, before they were removed by Capitol Police.
Several thousand protesters circulated in Senate office buildings on Thursday and Friday. The demonstrators were browbeating senators and chanting anti-Kavanaugh slogans, as lawmakers scurried between secure rooms under armed escorts. There were several hundred arrests.
