CUNY’s Love Affair with Violent Radicals

The choice of Linda Sarsour, an Arab-American activist, as a commencement speaker at CUNY’s School of Public Health last Spring generated much-heated debate. Good. Speech and counter-speech shed welcome light on the views of controversial figures.

That Sarsour once advocated violence against a political opponent – stating that Ayaan Hirsi Ali needed an “ass-whipping” and didn’t deserve her vagina – raises questions about the value of Sarsour’s views, but not about the right of CUNY to choose anyone it wants to address its students. Indeed, CUNY’s choice of Sarsour illuminated CUNY’s odd infatuation with proponents of violence.

Served 16 Years

The Susan Rosenberg case provides one example. Rosenberg, a former member of the Weather Underground, served 16 years for explosives possession. She was also a suspect in the Brinks robbery, during which two policemen and a security guard were killed.  In 2002, following Rosenberg’s release from prison, CUNY’s John Jay College hired her as an adjunct professor.

After four semesters – and in the wake of objections by both the New York City and Rockland County chapters of the Police Emerald Society – CUNY did not renew her contract. In an attempt to get the decision reversed, the chair of the CUNY faculty senate published a letter in support of rehiring Rosenberg. She was not rehired, but that did not stop John Jay College from holding “a celebration of Susan Rosenberg” in 2011.

CUNY’s faculty senate chair was similarly sympathetic to another convicted felon, this time one of CUNY’s own. Mohamed Yousry, an adjunct lecturer at CUNY’s York College, was convicted in 2005 of providing material aid to terrorism and conspiring to deceive the government. Three days after Yousry’s 2006 sentencing on terrorism charges, the senate chair – in an apparent attempt to solicit a job for him – speculated in an email to a faculty senate chat room that Yousry might be looking for work as a teaching adjunct.

A Policeman Beaten

Yousry isn’t the only teacher at CUNY to engage in extreme behavior: three of the six people charged in the 2014 beating of policemen on the Brooklyn Bridge (Eric Linsker, Cindy Gorn, and Jarrod Shanahan) were teachers at CUNY. Of course, assaulting police officers pales in comparison to the crimes of Rosenberg and Yousry, but that act is consistent with the mindset that justifies violence in the service of political causes.

The actions of CUNY’s faculty union, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC) are particularly telling because they presumably reflect the sentiments of substantial numbers of faculty. (The leaders of the union, which represents roughly 19,000 faculty and staff, have repeatedly been re-elected since 2000.)

The PSC’s actions include:

  • Contributing $5,000 in 2000 to a committee dedicated to freeing Lori Berenson, an American who was convicted in Peru on terrorism charges.
  • Contributing to a defense fund in 2002 for Sami Al-Arian, who later pleaded guilty to contributing services to a terrorist organization.
  • Passing a resolution in 2007 calling for “freedom now for Mumia Abu-Jamal,” who was convicted in 1982 of the murder of a Philadelphia police officer. (Note that the union resolution calls for the immediate freedom of Abu-Jamal, not a retrial: those with a fixed world view don’t feel any need to support that view with evidence.)

15 Years for Aiding Al Qaeda

No one can say, based on existing information, whether the favorable attitude of CUNY faculty towards violent radicals affects the students. But the record of the following three CUNY graduates at least puts the question on the table. Farrooque Ahmed was sentenced in 2011 to 23 years in prison for his role in planning bombings in Washington D.C. Syed Hashmi was sentenced in 2010 to 15 years for attempting to supply military gear to Al Qaeda. Noelle Velentzas was arrested in 2015 for plotting to prepare an explosive device to be detonated in a jihadist-inspired terrorist attack in the United States. (Her trial is pending.) Is there another university that can boast such a record?

That CUNY faculty lean left is hardly surprising – that’s standard in the academic world. Leaning towards the violent left is, however, noteworthy. Let me be crystal clear. Although I believe education is best served by a politically diverse faculty body, I support the right of universities to hire and invite any speakers they want to address students. But I also believe in truth in advertising. The taxpayers who support CUNY and the parents who send their children to CUNY schools have a right to know about its faculty’s long record of support for violent radicals.


5 thoughts on “CUNY’s Love Affair with Violent Radicals

  1. “I support the right of universities to hire and invite any speakers they want to address students.”

    I disagree. A taxpayer-supported public university is an arm of the state. The people have an inherent right to say what may be done with their money and in their name.

    CUNY’s rights are those of the elected NY officials who answer to the voters.

  2. Such a miscarriage of justice that obviously unamerican leaders of ultra liberal institutions are never scrutinized and reported on by the media who are supposed to protect Americans from dangers to our culture. Wake up America. Vote out the liberals in both houses of our Congress while we still have time to save our Western culture that has made us the greatest country in history.

  3. This is a pretty good article. But “violent radical” covers a multitude of sins. Take Susan Rosenberg. What were the explosives she had for? For blowing up recruiting offices. In the days before digital records, destroying a recruiting office in the middle of the night when there’s no-one around actively helped undermine its violent criminal activity.

    There’s a big gap between sympathy with Islamic repression and active subversion of the Vietnam War effort.

    1. She committed multiple bombings. She was an accessory to murders and attempted murders of police and civilians.

      Your claim here that you view soldiers’ lives as valuable enough to justify mass domestic terrorism is odd given that Rosenberg participated in the plot to murder hundreds of American soldiers that was only derailed when her fellow bombers blew themselves up.

      The Weathermen were not against the Vietnam War: they were fighting for the other side by trying to kill soldiers on home soil — and also their wives, girlfriends, and families.


    2. You have got to be kidding or delusional. There is no difference. Just violent criminal action supporting the current radical leftist cause at the time. And your night bombing scenario is pure conjecture. It makes no difference unless she kills people doing that one too. Recruiting is a legitimate government function not a violent criminal activity! They sign up volunteers who want to serve their country. I’m guessing here but sympathy with Islamic repression sounds like a euphemism for providing support to terrorism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *