Extremist left-wing professors are attacking UCLA chancellor Julio Frenk for the thoughtcrime of opposing antisemitism and terrorism, in the name of the university, in a recent statement.

It is truly outrageous.

In response, Frenk wrote the professors a very polite letter. He should have told them to go to hell instead.

UCLA’s law school held a symposium on September 11 that criticized America’s response to the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. One of the panelists had represented Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, or KSM, the alleged mastermind of the attack. 

KSM also allegedly confessed to decapitating Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, partly because Pearl was Jewish. Pearl’s father, Judea, is a professor at UCLA. He didn’t try to stop the event, but spoke critically of it.

When the story of the symposium emerged, there was public outrage. And why wouldn’t there be? 

This is a university that claims it has learned the lessons of 2024, when it allowed radicals to occupy the center of campus for a week in an “encampment” that excluded journalists and blocked Jewish students from walking to their dorms or classes unless they denounced Israel.

Frenk reacted to the 9/11 event the way any normal human being would — at least, one not brainwashed by radicals. He opposed it. A little late, perhaps, but he did the right thing.

Note what he did not do.

He did not try to stop the event. He did not kick it off campus. He did not send the organizers to sensitivity training, which UCLA might have done if professors had brought a lawyer for the KKK to lecture on the anniversary of the Selma-to-Montgomery march.

Frenk stated, simply: “UCLA’s values are clear. We reject antisemitism and terrorism in all their forms. …Academic freedom does not require us to be neutral about antisemitism or terrorism.” 

That’s what triggered the faculty, whose senate wrote to Frenk that it had “concerns and reservations” because his statement was “interpreted as criticizing the law school event.”

Evidently academic freedom means defending a terrorist, but not criticizing someone who defends a terrorist. (The distinguished professors can’t even obey their own lofty principles.)

Frenk wrote back, thanking the senate for its “thoughtful” (really, brainless) letter. He almost backed down.

He framed his opposition to terrorism and antisemitism as a way to support Judea Pearl “and others in our community who carry their own lived experiences of September 11 and its aftermath,” as if being outraged by terrorism was just a personal perspective.

“[W]e can uphold academic freedom while also expressing support for members of our community who are hurting,” he said.

No — this is not about feelings. It’s about taking the side of civilization versus barbarism.

People who are upset about 9/11 aren’t asking for “empathy.” We’re asking first for physical security, and then for basic moral decency.

We have also decided that what makes us a great civilization is that we are prepared to allow total freedom to those who would preach barbarism.

So let the professors rant. We get it. They hate the society that subsidizes them, that gives them tenure and summers off and campus parking.

But the rest of us are allowed to have an opinion about it — and not just as private individuals.

Frenk was too nice to the faculty. He should have told them that while professors are free to say what they want, and that even al-Qaeda terrorists deserve lawyers, if they have a problem with UCLA taking a stance against antisemitism and terrorism, they are also free to leave.

Joel Pollak is the Opinion editor at the California Post.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters