Ever since my attack by Purdue University and its PC police began, central to their argument has been a "recording" of my lecture. Specifically what I supposedly "meant" on those tapes. I will now try to explain these to those who still believe in the freedom of speech in the United States.
One, these tapes are completely anonymous. I do not know who taped them, when they taped them, or how many "hands" it has been through. It is obvious that they have been edited. That is obvious by the "perfect" eight minute "edited" sections. Some of what is on these tapes has clearly been "doctored" or "tampered". Each lecture, from the class from which these tapes are alleged to have come from, was for 2 1/2 to 3 hours. (By the way, there were 15 weeks, so that is 45 hours of lectures in total.) Thus, what is heard is 8 minutes from either one lecture that was over 2 hours in length or multiple lectures each of which were over two hours in length. To use an art term, there is no provenance for these recordings. They are of no use as evidence (or even as a good example.) All of this would be true of any "recordings" that would "pop-up." Why not one from ten years ago, or five, or 20 etc. etc. etc.?
Two, Not a single student from the class that these tapes were alleged to be from has ever filed a complaint. They had 120 days into the summer to file a complaint with the Department Head, the Dean, or with the Chancellor. Nothing, not a word, not an issue, until I came under attack this fall when it all of a sudden "surfaces." Thus, no student who was actually in the class had any issue with my lectures. That is the official and true record of events.
Three, Some of the arguments that are presented come from the specific books I used in the class and addressed the topic of the class. The best that I can tell, it is claimed that these came from a class entitiled: Introduction to Jewish Studies. One may not like the arguments that were being made by these books, but they are legitimate subjects of debate. Two of the books that I used were: The Israel Test by George Gilder and Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin. The first book argues that the root cause of modern anti-Semitism is envy of the Jew, be it in Israel or in other countries. The second book makes the case that the Jewish condition is unique in relationship to all other groups.
Four. In continuation of two and three above, some quotes are simply taken out of context and are plain wrong. Without knowing the books I used and the context within which some of this material was presented, one cannot possibly determine whether a statement is unacceptable or acceptable. Not being in class, one cannot make judgements about what one has no idea about. Live lectures have a physical interaction in them for meaning that cannot be captured on audio tape. That is definitely lost in a doctored clip. Clearly, those very students who were actually in the class and heard my lectures firsthand, did not have any objections.
