By Adam Pagnucco.
Montgomery College President Jermaine Williams has issued a statement of condemnation against a virtual panel discussion held last week by one of the college’s faculty members. In a memo to all college employees, Williams wrote, “The inflammatory language used in the discussion is in direct conflict with our mission and values. I am writing to issue a direct and unequivocal condemnation and rejection of hateful sentiments expressed by panelists who advocated for violence against Israel.”
Williams’s statement was in response to a March 7 Zoom panel held by Gus Griffin, a counselor/professor at the Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus. As the announcement below shows, the virtual panel was held using a Montgomery College Zoom account and a room at its Takoma Park campus.
In addition to being a Montgomery College professor, Griffin is on the national steering committee of the Faculty for Justice in Palestine Network, which “endorses the principles of BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions)” and opposes Israel’s “genocidal war on Gaza’s population.” He also writes for the Black Agenda Report. In a column published on October 18, 2023, Griffin wrote: “Some have referred to the Hamas action as Israel’s 9/11. I think of it as their Little Big Horn at which General Custer and his army were slaughtered by the colonized Native people. In both cases, you have inevitable resistance by those who are victims of settler colonial projects.” This column and one written on January 17, 2024 have many similar statements on Israel and Hamas.
Griffin has a First Amendment right to say whatever he wants about Israel, Hamas or anything else on his own time. The question here is the use of Montgomery College’s resources, which come in part from taxpayers. (In FY24, the college’s operating budget received $148 million from county taxpayers and $58 million in state aid.) I do not have a video of Griffin’s March 7 panel. But whatever was said, it provoked a strong reaction from the college’s president. Following is the text of his memo written to the college’s employees.
*****
To: Montgomery College Community
From: Dr. Jermaine F. Williams, President
Subject: Response to Virtual Panel Discussion
Date: March 7, 2024
Montgomery College is aware of a virtual panel discussion held today, which was organized by a faculty member and included guest speakers external to the College. The inflammatory language used in the discussion is in direct conflict with our mission and values. I am writing to issue a direct and unequivocal condemnation and rejection of hateful sentiments expressed by panelists who advocated for violence against Israel. We are committed to creating safe spaces for civil dialogue and will not tolerate threatening speech.
In collaboration with law enforcement agencies, our public safety team will continue its attention and response to any suspicious or concerning activity on our campuses and College locations. We encourage members of our community to report any incident of intimidation, harassment, or threatening behavior by calling 240-567-3333. Further information can be found at the Office of Public Safety.
The College is committed to the right of faculty members to engage in free academic discourse and defends freedom of speech. Events or communications that threaten the safety of any of our community members are unacceptable. We are at our best when students, faculty, and staff are mindful of the ways in which their language might impact others. Our community has committed to welcoming all students and all employees into a community that emphasizes belonging and conducting ourselves with civility, courtesy, and professionalism in all our interactions.
*****
Griffin helped organize another Zoom panel on February 20 titled “Teach-In on Israel-Palestine.” Like the March 7 panel, this one also used a college Zoom account and a classroom on the college’s Takoma Park campus. The college president’s memo does not reference this panel.
I emailed Griffin asking for his response to the president’s memo. He replied, “We absolutely have a response that we first wish to share with the president. Suffice it to say that we do not agree with his characterization nor is his take reflected in the program evaluations that we have received which have been overwhelmingly positive. After we meet with the President, we may have more to say.”
I have asked both Griffin and the college’s spokesman for access to video of the panel. If I get it, I will follow up in a future post.