Over two years ago, I wrote about the taxpayer-funded, Saudi-autocrat-denominated institute--the King Fahd Center for Middle Eastern Studies--at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. As I repeatedly detailed, one of its professors, Mohja Kahf, posted on her office door vile invectives about Jews and Israel.

The first item reads: "Every time[,] you hear this: If we include a Palestinian speaker, then we have to include the Israeli point of view for balance; and yet you rarely hear this . . . If we invite an African-American speaker, then [do] we have to include the KKK point of view for balance."

So Kahf proclaimed that the Israeli point of view is equivalent to that of some of the worst racists in history. Ugh.

The second item--posted in both English and Arabic, I gather for that Arabic-only speaking contingency at the school--repeated the mantra promoting the destruction of Israel: "Palestine, from the river to the sea." This call for the elimination of the Jewish state and its replacement by a Palestinian one--as the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea mark the borders of Israel--mirrors the chants of "death to Israel" heard across the Middle East.

National Public Radio reported: "The phrase [Palestine, from the river to the sea] has become especially politically charged in the days since the deadly Oct. 7 attack by Hamas that killed 1,400 people in Israel. Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Congress have condemned the slogan, with one congressman referring to it as a 'thinly veiled call for the genocide of millions of Jews in Israel.'"

But wait. There's more. One month after the Oct. 7 Palestinian terrorist attack on innocent Israelis, Kahf published a piece seeking to delegitimize Israel, titled: "What I Need to Tell My Neighbors in Arkansas." Check it out:

"It's not been going on for hundreds of years, just seventy-five, and it's not about religion: it's about human rights.

"Oh honey, it's not about the ancient kingdom of Israel: hon, that was not the same Israel as this current state of Israel built by European colonizers who stormed in 1948[,] killed the farmers on the land who were living together[,] Muslims and Jews and Christians and Druze and zindiqs[,] growing oranges hiving bees watering trees hundreds of years in peace[.]

"Colonizers stole their homes changed the locks[,] drove them into cages and camps[.] It's not the same Israel, honey[.] It just took the name of Israel, trying to steal its ancient blessing[.] Seized the good name of Jewish folk and Judaism[.]

"Sit yourself on my porch, neighbor, and bring your good Book--it's not about religion, but you seem to think it is."

According to Kahf, the dispute over the Jewish homeland is only 75 years old--not thousands; has nothing to do with biblical Israel--notwithstanding the text to the contrary; is unrelated to Judaism--despite documented history saying otherwise; and that resulted from Jewish invaders from Europe (that post-Holocaust military force conquering foreign lands that you never learned about, because it doesn't actually exist--who, according to this delusional screed, came to Israel to kill, among others, fellow Jews!). There ain't a kiln big enough to fire that crack-pottery.

Don't think, however, that antisemitism today is owned by the left. Just last week, I reported about comments made on Salem Radio Media's program, the Dave Elswick show, on 101.1 FM in Little Rock, by its producer, Val Emmons. (I've been a regular guest and occasional host of the show for years.)

When Dave was discussing Israel with a guest, Emmons interjected and asked why Jews didn't accept any one of several offers to create a homeland in other places--including Alaska, Madagascar, the Soviet Union, and Uganda.

The question was based on an entirely false premise. Jews were never offered land to create a Jewish country before the British and the United Nations offered to split Israel, which the British controlled, between Jews and Arabs. Never.

Jews accepted this first-ever offer for a homeland (their homeland, in fact, in which Jews lived since biblical times). The Arabs rejected it and attacked the Jews.

Emmons' adoption of the recurring, false, fringe-online claim that Jews were offered various countries elsewhere but insisted on Israel instead is precisely the tinfoil-hat revisionist history that festers in the dark corners of antisemitic online spaces. This lie is used repeatedly to portray Jewish attachment to their historic and biblical homeland as opportunistic and manipulative.

Emmons' Madagascar "example" is particularly galling, because Madagascar was proposed by the Nazis for the forced deportation of Jews under the direction of the murderous SS. This, uh, generosity was supplanted by the Final Solution, which "offered" Jews free train rides to, and showers at (no water, though), the concentration camps. Ugh.

Moreover, even if you somehow thought that the idea of a Nazi death-camp island constituted an "offer" to Jews of a homeland (let that one sink in), the Germans never actually controlled Madagascar! So the claim is doubly false.

Last November, a UA-Fayetteville student filed a complaint with the governor's office about Kahf's posters, stating: "Blatant antisemitism and threats should not be tolerated on the University of Arkansas campus."

The governor's office passed along the complaint to the university, which opened an investigation. I guess nobody at Fayetteville read my repeated columns!

The university's Office of Equal Opportunity, Compliance and Title IX informed Kahf that the postings violate the university's discrimination policy and needed to be removed. Brian Raines, dean of the university's Fulbright College of Art and Sciences, ordered Kahf to remove the posters.

In Kafkaesque (or is it Kahfesque?) fashion, Kahf told the Arkansas Times: "I am someone who actively teaches against antisemitism," while she proclaimed that she wouldn't take down her awful signs.

As to Salem Media, I previously told you that in 2019, the radio station posted: "Val Emmons does not represent Salem Media Group in any way, shape or form and [] she will never appear on our air or in any posts relating to us again."

I've since learned that when the general manager who wrote that ban on employing Emmons left, the next manager was again confronted with the issue of Emmons seeking to work at the station. He checked Emmons' social media and refused to hire her.

Then--two managers later--Emmons is back. I asked the current manager who hired Emmons whether he knew about her prior excommunication. He never responded.

Given that commercial radio relies on paid advertising to operate, let's see whether listeners drop off, guests become scarce, and sponsors follow suit.

This is your right to know.

Robert Steinbuch, the Arkansas Bar Foundation Professor at the Bowen Law School, is a Fulbright Scholar and author of the treatise "The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act." His views do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.

© Arkansas Online