- EphBlog - http://ephblog.com -

How Were the Griffin Hall Hate Hoaxers Caught?

How were the students caught? Details, please! I assume that they were smart enough not to use their own swipe cards to enter Griffin. (The news reports suggest that the building was “open,” which I assume means that no cards were required.) Old timers will recall that the Tuft’s vandals — who wrote JUMBOS in big letters on the columns of Chapin 30 years ago — were caught by tracing their purchase of the paint. Where did these vandals get the substance (paint?) that they used? I would guess that this wasn’t how they were caught since it happened so quickly . . .

I am especially curious to know if the vandals had any connection to the anti-Trump protest that occurred that Saturday:

Baladine Pierce, a freshman at Williams College, holds a sign during a protest of the election of Donald Trump in Williamstown on Saturday. The safety pin has become a symbol that communicates protection to anyone who is a victim of bigotry.

More than 400 people appeared at Field Park on Saturday morning to demonstrate their support for minorities in the wake of the election of Republican Donald Trump to the presidency.

The event was organized by North Berkshires for Racial Justice, a group formed a few months ago in Williamstown that hosts regular monthly meetings.

“We’re here because we are concerned about the safety of our black, brown, Latino, gay, lesbian and immigrant brothers and sisters,” said Margeret “Peggy” Kern, one of the organizers of Saturday’s event. “We’re concerned this recent election has validated white supremacy, racism, sexism and transgenderphobia.”

Saturday’s event attracted a multi-generational crowd. And the crowd showed up almost all at once. At 10:53, Kern arrived with several posters. At 11:01, there were almost 180 people in the park. By 11:15, the number had swell to at least 300. By 11:20, that number was up to about 400.

There were dozens of hand-made signs. Some reading “Love Trumps Hate,” “Black Lives Matter,” “You Cannot Unify With Hate” and many other slogans.

The demonstration was suffused with good will. Although some of the demonstrators chanted slogans, many just held up signs. Passing cars honked in support.

Neal Sardona of Williamstown, another organizer said “for me, the election results were shocking. A lot of people are really scared.

“There is a feeling among the minority community that we’re not wanted,” he said.

“We wanted to show that we won’t accept racism, homophobia, xenophobia,” said Jane Burger of Williamstown.

“I think the election has made many people feel that white supremacy will protect them in a way that policy would not have,” said Meg Bossong, director of Sexual Assault and Response at Williams College. “”I’m here for people who are afraid for their safety. I don’t think we can be silent. we have to speak up.”

At least two anti-Trump students did a lot more than “speak up.”

Comments Disabled (Open | Close)

Comments Disabled To "How Were the Griffin Hall Hate Hoaxers Caught?"

#1 Comment By John C. Drew, Ph.D. On November 25, 2016 @ 1:37 pm

This is just so over the top silly. The only people who have reason to fear for their safety are Trump supporters. See, http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/democrats-vicious-violent-anti-democratic.php

#2 Comment By PTC On November 26, 2016 @ 8:28 am

Not one sign mentioning the wars.

Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, … etc. etc. etc.

What’s so funny about peace love and understanding?

Where have you people been for the last eight years?

You voted for the war candidate Hillary Clinton and now have the pretense to cry for peace?

As I drove by, I was not impressed.

#3 Comment By Fendertweed On November 26, 2016 @ 6:00 pm

She, Mr. Drew, head firmly planted in the sand again. ;-)

#4 Comment By Fendertweed On November 26, 2016 @ 6:00 pm

Thanks to autocorrect, “Ah” turned into “She”…

#5 Comment By John C. Drew, Ph.D. On November 27, 2016 @ 2:33 am

– Fendertweed

Really? It looks to me like I’m one of the few people who can plausibly explain Trump’s victory. Here’s the link to my most recent article on the topic.


As I learned from E. E. Schattschneider’s book, The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America, an electoral realignment is the most powerful force in the world.

As Trump demonstrated, a political realignment makes up for a lack of money, a lack of a ground game, and a lack of many other things too.

#6 Comment By factsarestubbornthings On November 27, 2016 @ 3:58 am

Let’s be very clear — everything John Drew predicted about this election was based on the popular vote — indeed, the ony actual prediction he made at Ephblog, despite his triumphalism here, was that assertions that a candidate would win the popular vote but lose the EC vote were, in his words, “ridiculous.” His predictions that Trump would win by 2% were off significantly — Trump did not win the popular vote.

Meanwhile, of course he tells us what he learns from the books of others. For this elite political scientist has never published a book (or journal article) of his own. Not a one. Sad.

#7 Comment By midprof On November 27, 2016 @ 11:14 am

” It looks to me like I’m one of the few people who can plausibly explain” contains the very nectar of untenurability.

#8 Comment By John C. Drew, Ph.D. On November 27, 2016 @ 2:38 pm

– factsarestubbornthings

As I recall, my main argument prior to the election — mainly with the disagreeable and verbally abusive EphAlum — was that he was an amateur who was overly optimistic about Hillary’s chances of winning.

I think I was correct to say that the polls were incorrect and biased against Trump. I think I was correct to say that Hillary’s money and ground game were not enough to ensure her election. I was also among the very first to point out that her electoral college advantage was actually quite fragile. I don’t think I said or did anything prior to the election that would be a surprise to a competent, objective political scientist.

In addition, I should point out that my award-winning dissertation was published — almost exactly as I wrote it — in an edited volume, by an elite publisher. I have, in fact, published journal articles as you can see from my LinkedIn profile.

– midprof

Please. I taught at the number one school in the nation and had the best dissertation in the nation in my field. The only reason someone like me wasn’t allowed to even compete for tenure at Williams College was the school’s pure, unadulterated discrimination against outspoken, young, white, conservative professors. At this point, I doubt any objective observer thinks otherwise.

#9 Comment By John C. Drew, Ph.D. On November 27, 2016 @ 3:25 pm

When I was commenting prior to the election, I was most interested in resisting the widespread message that Hillary’s victory was inevitable.

I thought folks like EphAlum who were suggesting that her victory was virtually certain were wrong on both the facts and the theory. I thought they really didn’t understand what was going on and were motivated mainly by the desire to discourage Trump voters, campaign workers and donors.

This clip from Rachel Maddow shows the over-the-top faith in a Hillary victory that I was seeking to temper with some common sense and unconventional wisdom.

See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn3f0Xav6-w&feature=youtu.be

#10 Comment By factsarestubbornthings On November 27, 2016 @ 3:35 pm

You say you did not get tenure — it is my understanding that you in fact were not renewed after your third year — because of Williams’ opposition to outspoken white male conservatives, yet according to databases you did not publish a SINGLE article while at Williams. Occam’s Razor.

No one is going to your LinkedIn profile — cite, say, three articles that you’ve published in journals.

#11 Comment By midprof On November 27, 2016 @ 10:26 pm


1) I’ll spot you the election, whatever. Growing up in NYC, where it is well known that dt is a crass, ignoramus who a) lies, and b) paints shit gold, I admit I was completely unprepared for the result.

2) the reason dissertation prizes matter at the hiring stage, to the extent they do (and I never won one, so kudos) is that they are imagined to suggest a promising trajectory. To have not even “been allowed to even compete for tenure,” as you write, i.e. not renewed at the 3rd year review, is quite unusual. It requires a pretty clear refutation of that trajectory, e.g. by not successfully or sufficiently publishing, or by demonstrating significant other problems, e.g. teaching, collegiality.

Or, as you say, it could all be a horrible anti-white-male plot.

But either way, to even mention a dissertation prize decades after the diss is to admit that it was the high point.

#12 Comment By John C. Drew, Ph.D. On November 28, 2016 @ 1:38 am

– midprof

It was odd. I think there are very few people who lose a job only to find out their experience is both newsworthy and intellectually significant 30 years later.

See, http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24821/

For the latest research on the mistreatment of conservative professors and potential survival strategies, please check out the new book by Jon A. Shields and Joshua M. Dunn Sr., Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/passing-on-the-right-9780199863051?cc=us&lang=en&#

Shields knows my story. He told me their research showed that the discrimination against conservatives is absolutely the worst in the Northeast.