Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., F.A.C.P.

Medical Oncology/Hematology  Telephone: (215) 333-4900

 Facsimile: (215) 333-2023
Smylie Times Building - Suite #500-C
8001 Roosevelt Boulevard  rsklaroff@gmail.com
Philadelphia, PA 19152
January 3, 2019

To: Patrick J. O’Connor, Esq., Chair, Temple University Board of Trustees – Plus Trustees
Re: Marc Lamont Hill, Ph.D. [D.O.B. 12/17/1978]
Cc: {internet-url}

You have received six communications during the past month exhaustively explaining why Hill should be
fired ASAP; the purpose here is to ensure that you have been provided a complete knowledge-base,
except for a compilation of his anarchy-advocacy c/o “youtube,” which corroborate these observations.
You appear to have allowed yourselves to become neutered, and Temple’s reputation is now risable.

The prior five letters demonstrated that Hill should be fired and Dean Boardman’s status should be
reassessed because he violated the four criteria defining expected conduct in the Faculty Handbook and
fomented violence due to moral-turpitude (exempting him from speech/academic-freedom protection).
The initial (12/9/2018) letter showed his anti-Jew, racist-anarchist rhetoric contravened the basic norms
[https://tinyurl.com/y6uer8u8, with Exhibit 3 [https://tinyurl.com/y6ujgqqw]; the second (12/11/2018)
letter expounded on the local/national implications of these concerns [https://tinyurl.com/yahfe2bm];
the third (12/12/2018) letter highlighted deficiencies in your Statement [https://tinyurl.com/y8dp24jk];
the fourth (12/14/2018) letter revealed he is an incorrigible ideologue, unapologetically defining a career
attacking “Afro-Palestinian” oppression as a result of global colonialism [https://tinyurl.com/y9xhvb9k]
born perhaps of his adherence to Jew-hater Farrakhan. Meanwhile, his defenders remain mute rather
than attempt to rationalize his claims that “New York City police who are killing Blacks are being trained
by Israelis” and “Israel Poisoned Palestinian Water ” and “police and prisons should be abolished”
[https://thegrio.com/2018/12/15/marc-lamont-hill-on-the-breakfast-club-speaks-about-getting-fired-
from-cnn-i-dont-wish-any-harm-for-jewish-people/]. The fifth (12/16/2018) updated these concerns
[https://tinyurl.com/yabyas9m], and the sixth (12/26/2018) was comprised of an op-ed that inter alia
excerpted exhortations that have repeatedly/unambiguously fomented violence to multiple audiences
[https://www.jns.org/opinion/memo-to-anarchist-hill-tenure-does-not-prevent-temple-university-from-
firing-you/]. Thus, the Trustees must initiate an inquiry as to why this known-quantity was hired.

It remains necessary not only to continue to confront Hill’s violence-advocacy, but also to probe how
Temple would have recruited/hired/spotlighted someone harboring views self-characterized as uttered
by an Afro-Palestinian; were his rhetoric reversed, Temple would have faced a profound backlash were a
Black Nationalist to have been granted a tenured-professorial-chair, ignoring “speech-freedom” excerpts.
Coupled with previously-detailed violations of the TAUP contract and refraining from promoting violence
(such as the absence of a disclaimer that he does not speak for Temple), one must note that his advocacy
has roots that sprouted years ago and extend throughout his public/educational career. By “condemning”
his comments, the Trustees have essentially adjudicated a point raised a fortnight prior to the meeting,
to wit, that he besmirches the Community and, therefore, should be fired; that his Dean had to have been
aware of his track-record suggests he must justify supporting Hill or resign for having been complicit.
Simply put, until he has been separated from Temple, he undeniably spews vile hatred on your behalf.

1
His speeches reflect the capacity to function as an oratorical chameleon, ranging from cool-calm-collected
on 12/18/2018 [https://www.democracynow.org/2018/12/18/marc_lamont_hill_speaks_out_after] to
exhorting “nobody” listeners to become “somebody” activists à la BLM (complete with wearing an “I can’t
breathe” T-shirt). In the latter instance, he chastised police enforcement of minor “broken-window”
crimes, an approach widely recognized as having been successful when NYC-Mayor Rudi Giuliani cleansed
the 42nd Street environs; he also suggested that police single-out Blacks for arrest, becoming enraged
when Blacks dare to establish eye-contact. He concludes the “system is working” when imposing state
violence upon Blacks [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jneL4nS3SA]. Much of what people suddenly
discovered to be disconcerting in his more recent speeches—such as that delivered at the U.N.—was
presaged, for example, in his strident opening to the Convention of the Oppressed in Cleveland, a counter-
convention to the Republican National Convention [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ma83Fpbnho].

He fights “mass incarceration in America” [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk2dFixILQc] mirroring

BLM’s posture, and then depicts a trip to “Palestine” that is wholly consistent with Farrakhan’s views
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQLYmrRBhmU]. Noting that The Nation of Islam receives federal
cash to teach prisoners, it would seem that much of his sustained rhetoric is sustained by his questioners;
this was manifest both during his interview at “The Breakfast Club” [one of whom had taken his course]
and during a “news” broadcast by Afrisynergy [which condemned R/D-support for funding Israel and
claimed the word “Nazi” was derivative of the head of the (Jewish) Sanhedrin rather than a summary of
the “National Socialist” Political Party [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSDsW7remZY]. A summary
of his comments following his having been fired by CNN noted he blames Israel for Police Killings of Blacks
[https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/12/17/after-cnn-firing-marc-lamont-hill-blames-israel-for-police-
killings-of-black-people-opposes-renouncing-farrakhan/] and continues to oppose renouncing Farrakhan.
In short, he manifests all major reasons "Why People Hate Jews" [https://youtu.be/Ukd05G9ggb0].

The Inquirer published two op-eds on this issue, one favoring him [From snowflake students to outspoken
professors: Why protecting campus speech matters] and one opposing him [Free speech — especially on
controversial topics — must be based on facts]. Neither addresses the unpleasant fact that Hill peddles
violence; the former predictably hides behind speech-freedom and the latter merely advocates rectifying
factual error. That the Inquirer pointedly ignores the “incitement” factor is illustrated by the fact that
authors of its news-pieces and at least one opinion-writer have received copies of prior letters directed at
the General Counsel. That other independent Internet-based entities have also failed to cover this issue,
despite also having received these letters, this illustrates why journalists appear to view any CHALLENGE
to Hill as emanating from a “radioactive” source, instead of recognizing that Hill is the reprobate.

On 12/19/2018, the Zionist Organization of America again condemned “Temple U’s Lack of Real Action
Against Dangerous, Pro-Violence, Pro-BDS, Antisemitic, Radical Muslim Prof. Marc Lamont Hill”
[https://zoa.org/2018/12/10381915-zoa-condemns-temple-us-lack-of-real-action-against-dangerous-
pro-violence-pro-bds-antisemitic-radical-muslim-prof-marc-lamont-hill/].

Legally, Temple is vulnerable to a charge that the Trustees are harboring a violence-inciter; therefore,
because Hill doesn’t represent Temple values and has violated his contract (without having acknowledged
any intent to rectify black-letter error), he must be removed him from the Steve Charles Chair.

This letter to yourselves channels many of the forces-at-play, the existence of which should be dispositive
if you can’t defend Temple against the claim that this faculty member should be fired:

2
Dear Temple University Board of Trustees,

I've been watching with disgust and extreme concern the way Temple University has
handled the virulently antisemitic employee, Professor Marc Lamont Hill.

It shocks me and thousands (perhaps millions) of people worldwide, especially Jews, that
your esteemed university hasn't yet fired him, something that should have been done
long ago. The anti-Semitic propaganda and incitement that he has promoted for far too
long should not be accepted anywhere, let alone at your university.

Enumerated are choice examples of his egregious views, associations and comments:

1. He calls for the complete destruction of the State of Israel and

the murder of Jews by stating at the UN that there should be a Palestinian
state “from the river to the sea”, a known slogan of the terrorist
organization, Hamas, that calls for the massacre of the Jewish people in
its very charter! To learn more about the “accomplishments” of Hamas in
the last 31 years since its founding [https://worldisraelnews.com/watch-
idf-wishes-hamas-a-happy-31st-birthday/].

2. He didn't consider the brutal murders of 3 Israeli teenagers who

had been kidnapped by terrorists in 2014 to be terrorism.

3. He has complained that Israel's Iron Dome "takes away Hamas'

Military leverage" over Israel.

4. He is a close friend of the world’s most famous anti-semite, Louis

Farrakhan who brags that Hitler was “a very great man” and often refers
to Jews as “satanic” and has compared Jews to “termites”.

5. He is also friends with convicted terrorist Ali Jiddah of the PFLP,

an evil organization that has murdered civilians by means of suicide
bombings, plane and bus hijackings, etc., and Hill has urged his followers
to support this murderous anti-Semite financially through a GoFundMe
page via Twitter.

6. He has also urged black activists to support Rasmea Odeh, a

convicted bombing terrorist.

I understand that the Board of Trustees feels that Hill, as a private citizen can say what he
wants, but I guarantee you that he spews his virulent antisemitic propaganda also in the
classroom and I urge you to reconsider firing him just as CNN did; he doesn’t belong in a
teaching environment where he abuses his position and platform to influence thousands
of students and brainwash them with his antisemitic rhetoric. Hate speech, incitement,
and intimidation all fall well within the scope of reasons to terminate his employment.
Looking forward to your reply, but moreso, your immediate action.

Stefanie Lipson

3
Consistent with our view that rationale to fire Hill exists from Temple University, due to both his rhetoric
[condemned by yourselves as inconsistent with the Temple University culture] and his having fomented
violence [moral turpitude], note that his version of depravity is more profound than the $-motivation cited
by Vermont Law School when it stripped Tenure from 14 of 19 of its Law School Professors, none of whom
were anarchists [https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2018/07/vermont-strips-tenure-from-14-of-
19-law-profs.html]. And note another piece that focuses on his terroristic tendencies [“Temple University
Professor Wants to ‘Go Down’ Like a Terrorist” - https://israelunwired.com/temple-university-professor-
wants-to-go-down-like-a-terrorist/]. Note how he morphs his rhetoric from straight-talk to Ebonics when
modeling his coded-message, word-choice, and delivery-method for audiences ranging from O’Reilly’s
conservatives on Fox News Channel to the graduates of a primarily-Black institution of higher-learning.

Reprinted are two op-eds authored by myself and Lawyer Lynne Lechter that have been disseminated by
editors who recognize the ongoing national implications of what he did and the need to repair damages.

***

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/12/temple_u_hides_behind_constitution_to_defend_ant
isemitic_marc_lamont_hill.html

December 6, 2018

Temple U hides behind Constitution to defend anti-Semitic Marc Lamont Hill

By Lynne Lechter and Robert Sklaroff

Days ago, Marc Lamont Hill, a CNN TV commentator and rock star celebrity professor at Temple
University, called for the total destruction of Israel during an address he delivered to the United
Nations. In solidarity with Palestinians, he exclaimed that Palestinians should be "free from the
river to the sea." This is not a covert dog whistle or code. Rather, it is an overt exhortation to
annihilate Israel, as Israel exists from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

His words were ugly and chilling. More chilling was Hill's confidence that such violent hate speech
could be spewed openly and fearlessly before a global audience, unaware or uncaring of
subsequent retaliation. Thomas Lifson first alerted us to this incident on November 30.

CNN, without explanation, immediately terminated Hill's contract. Temple University did
not. Instead, the university trotted out the hackneyed coward's defense that while it does not
share Hill's views, it supports his constitutional free speech right to say whatever he pleases.

Some opponents, desiring Hill's tenure at Temple ended, raised the issue of hate speech. Hill's
remarks were surely hate speech, but hate speech alone is not unconstitutional. The legal
exceptions to the right of free speech that accurately apply are fighting words, true threat,
defamation (libel and slander), and incitement to imminent lawless action. Hill's words,
dramatically presented at a "Free Palestine Day," clearly exemplified all of these exceptions.

How did we arrive at this ugly situation? Anti-Jewish sentiment, a historical hatred in large parts
of the globe, was mostly muted in the United States. After the 1948 creation of the State of Israel
(the only Jewish country in the world), Arab countries lost their military war against the fledgling
state.

4
Subsequently, they waged a propaganda battle, falsely comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa
in the former's treatment of Palestinians living within its borders. The American left embraced
the fallacy and facilitated its success. From this malevolent platform, Boycott, Divestment, and
Sanction of Israel, commonly known as BDS, was launched in Ramallah around 2005. Its stated
goal is to isolate and pressure Israel; its unpublicized goal is Israel's destruction.

Fueled with Arab petrodollars, Middle East studies departments were established in colleges and
universities throughout the United States. BDS student organizations followed. Aligned with the
plethora of progressive professors on campus, the debate inexorably became one-sided. Today,
Jewish students fight for positions on student organizations, for letters of recommendation, and
for bringing conservative speakers on campus who support their views.

More incredibly, lists have sprung up advising Jewish kids which United States colleges to avoid.
After more than a decade of this relentless anti-Jewish and anti-Israel trope, the false beliefs have
spread from the campus to the MSM and a growing number of elected Democrats. Moreover,
many in the black community who have converted to Islam share these views.

Temple University, geographically and demographically, is at the intersection of the conflict. As

opposing rallies supporting and denouncing Hill are planned, Temple University has a choice. It
can continue to cower behind its false assertion of constitutionality, or it can assert the law,
suspend Hill, and fight it out in federal court.

If this vile and dangerous speech is not confronted and deemed socially unacceptable, it will
further spread and coarsen.

CNN is to be applauded for its swift, courageous, and unexpected action.

Ms. Lechter is a Philadelphia attorney; Dr. Sklaroff is a Philadelphia Hematologist/Oncologist.

https://www.jns.org/opinion/memo-to-anarchist-hill-tenure-does-not-prevent-temple-university-
from-firing-you/

December 26, 2018

Memo to Anarchist Hill:

Tenure Does NOT Prevent Temple University from Firing You

By Robert Sklaroff and Lynne Lechter

Marc Lamont Hill supports directing violent “resistance” against Israeli civilians by emulating the first
female Palestinian Arab plane hijacker: “I’m Going Leila Khaled-Style.”

By professing to be an abolitionist seeking disbandment of the police and emptying of the prisons, this
Green Party rock-star would demolish any semblance of community law-and-order.

5
Hill denounces those attacking Farrakhan’s racist calls for violence against Caucasians, while claiming his
disagreements with the Minister are limited to Farrakhan’s hatred for Jews and the LGBTQAI Community.

All the while, this “Afro-Palestinian” says Israel trained police in New York City and Chicago to kill Blacks,
justifying abandonment of the non-violence of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi.

Yet, Hill remains a Temple University Full Professor holding an endowed chair, lest his speech-/academic-
freedoms be compromised.

That’s why the Board condemned his remarks, but retained him on the Temple faculty.

His reaction to this reprieve was to double-down on his elitist posturing, after having
characterized Temple as a “[H]ostile Academy that doesn’t want me there. They definitely don’t want me
there for talking about all this Palestine stuff.”

Hill thereby “thanked” Temple by continuing to violate the four criteria defining expected-conduct in
the Faculty Handbook; his having fomented violence due to moral-turpitude exempts him from
speech/academic-freedom protection.

That’s why the Board should have fired Hill, notwithstanding the need to probe why Dean David Boardman
had hired him — and immediately granted him tenure to occupy an endowed chair.

Extensive documentation of these concerns was sent to the Board of Trustees before and after its
meeting. Beforehand, the 12/9/2018 letter detailed how his anti-Jew racism contravened basic societal
norms (with Exhibit 3, a compilation of handouts distributed at a pro-Hill campus-march);
the 12/11/2018 letter expounded on the local/national implications of these concerns. Afterward,
the 12/12/2018 letter highlighted glaring deficiencies in the Board Statement; the 12/14/2018 letter
revealed Hill to be an incorrigible ideologue, unapologetically defining a career praising “Intersectionality”
of radical groups while attacking global oppression due to colonialism.

Indeed, Hill protects Farrakhan because he shares his policies. This explains why Hill refuses to denounce
the Nation of Islam’s leader for having defamed white people (“white devils,” “potential humans” who
“haven’t evolved yet” and “sinful by nature”); having exclaimed, “White people deserve to die, and they
know, so they think it’s us coming to do it”; and having proclaimed the ominous goal of the Ferguson, MO
protests to be to “Tear This G**damn Country Up!’

Furthermore, praising plane-hijacker Khaled is not a “one…off” because — to promote the “Resistance”
— Hill has honored other terrorists and rabble-rousers who have praised terrorists, among them: Noura
Erakat, Rasmea Odeh, and Ahed Tamimi and her family.

And dropping any potential ambiguity as to the “hand” to which all these “fingers” are appended, Hill has
characterized terroristic Hamas in a positive light: “Everything that Hamas is doing, everything that the
Palestinian people are fighting for, is from a posture of resistance to occupation.”

6
Imagine hearing your classroom teacher explain his support for the BLM/BDS Movements by charging that
Israel poisoned Palestinian Water and averring, therefore, it is insufficient merely to slap a soldier “that
has stolen my land, destroyed my village, killed my children, locked us out since 1948….If that’s the only
resistance that we accept in a post-Oslo moment then, again, we are constraining and domesticating the
resistance….We have allowed this nonviolent thing to become so normative that we are undermining our
ability to resist in real robust ways.”

By overtly, aggressively rejecting nonviolence, Hill advocates violence be directed against the Israeli
government; while exhorting listeners in this fashion while in Israel (and not in Judea/Samaria), Hill
conveys lamentation for Israel’s survival since the “Nakba” in 1948, else he would “date” his anger from
1967 and thereby countenance Israel’s ongoing existence in the region of the (repeatedly shrunken)
British Mandate (the fate of which was to be determined by the 1917 Balfour Declaration).

How is a student to relate with a teacher who would glorify terrorism by emulating Leila Khaled, a
notorious Palestinian Arab terrorist — affiliated with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine —
who participated in two airplane hijackings?

How can the Temple community tolerate a presumed leader who is enmeshed with a Jew-hating Women’s
March leadership?

How can America accommodate an Academy that tolerates a bigot whose rap-sheet has been
painstakingly compiled by the Zionist Organization of America?

Let him spew hate-speech wherever, but don’t let him poison young minds with his calls for violence.

He is slick — and dangerous.

Dr. Sklaroff is a Philadelphia Hematologist/Oncologist; Ms. Lechter is a Philadelphia attorney.

***

I’m told his Dean has remitted letters defending Hill, in response to complaints directed at the President;
they adopt his “poor language choice” disclaimer, which is falsely characterized as an apology; not one
word has been rescinded and, indeed, as per prior letters hyperlinked to primary-data articles/videos,
unbridled rhetoric has been emitted. Thus, he continues to embarrass the entire Temple U community
[Caucasian, African-American, Hispanic, Asian] — and we haven’t yet “reviewed” his books/movies.