Virginia Tech University violated a male student’s due process rights when it gave him just one day to prepare for a hearing on allegations he had sexually assaulted a female student, a court has ruled.
The Iranian graduate student, referred to in court documents as John Doe, said in <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.122877/gov.uscourts.vawd.122877.109.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">his lawsuit</a> against the university that he met the female student on a dating app in the fall of 2019, and they had a consensual relationship. It didn’t last, but he said he saw her on campus afterward, and they had a friendly conversation. He also alleges that, at some point, the woman made a racist comment about him, saying he was a “brown guy who smelled very bad.”
On November 20, 2019, the female student asked Virginia Tech administrators to issue a do-not-contact order for John, which it provided. At that time, the female student didn’t want to pursue the matter any further.
Two months later, however, she went back to school administrators and made a formal allegation of sexual assault against John. John wasn’t informed about the allegation until nearly a month later, on February 17, 2020, according to his lawsuit.
On February 28, John met with the school’s Title IX investigator to discuss the student conduct process. On this same day, John received the formal charges against him. On March 3, he met with the school’s assistant director of student conduct to further discuss the process. Just two days later, John was informed that his hearing would take place the next day, which he alleges gave him no time to prepare his defense. He asked for the hearing to be delayed but was denied. He was told he had been made aware of the allegations weeks earlier, on February 17.
At that time, however, John didn’t know the date of the hearing and did not obtain an adviser or legal counsel or procure a witness because he had no idea when they would be needed. It also didn’t give John time to review the school’s investigative report against him so he could mount a defense.
John had to attend his hearing without counsel or an advisor and said in his lawsuit that he couldn’t question witnesses and could not present witnesses of his own. Specifically, John learned that the allegations against him came from an incident with his accuser in an elevator. John said he knew a witness who could dispute the allegations.
John was found responsible for sexual assault and expelled, so he sued. In his lawsuit, John alleges the accuser was convinced to pursue the accusation against him by his former graduate advisor, whom John had made several complaints about. John alleges he was retaliated against after reporting that his advisor had made sexual comments about female students, provided grant money that should have gone to John to a female student, and fraudulently claimed John’s research was funded by grant money.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1712234347815000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1G-VkjVO0p4qoEkiCI9cqF">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
While Chief U.S. District Judge Michael Urbanski – an Obama appointee – allowed Virginia Tech’s motion to dismiss John’s allegations of a hostile environment, he allowed his lawsuit to move forward on John&#8217;s claims of grant funding and retaliation. The court also found that John’s due process rights could have been violated when the school gave him a one-day notice of his hearing to determine whether he would be expelled.
The ruling was a win for John and could lead to a settlement with the university.
<a href="https://twitter.com/kcjohnson9/status/1775271052513624280?s=43&amp;t=zEuer7j4Ff8TVIcpiUO1KA" target="_blank" rel="noopener">H/t K.C. Johnson</a>

Justice Scales

Student Accused Of Sexual Assault Receives Court Win After University Gave Him One-Day Notice Of Hearing

College

Courts

Sexual Assault

Title IX

U.S.

Virginia

Virginia Tech

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that a free speech group lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of Virginia Tech’s bias policies.
In a 2-1 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals <a href="https://richmond.com/news/state-and-regional/crime-and-courts/virginia-tech-bias-policy-upheld-by-appeals-court/article_b2ae724f-e3ef-5681-8326-47a736ddc303.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">upheld</a> Virginia Tech’s Bias Intervention and Response Team (BIRT) and Informational Activities Policy (IAP), ruling against <a href="https://speechfirst.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Speech First</a>, a civil rights organization dedicated to protecting college students’ free speech rights.
“Here, Speech First has failed to demonstrate that a single one of the district court’s numerous findings of fact is clearly erroneous,” wrote Senior Judge Diana Gribbon Motz for the majority. “Speech First offers only speculation in support of its argument that it has suffered an injury in fact.”
BIRT <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2023/06/02/court-speech-first-has-no-standing-challenge-bias-policies" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allows</a> individuals to report students for any “expression made against a person or group” that the university considers motivated by bias. Speech First argued that Virginia Tech, through BIRT, created an “elaborate bureaucratic regime that burdens the exercise of free speech,” according to the court opinion.
The <a href="https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/212061.p.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dissent</a>, written by Judge J. Harvey Wilkinson, focused on the “real-world consequences” of the court’s decision.  Wilkinson argued that the BIRT’s reporting system has a “chilling effect” on the First Amendment and that due to the policy, a “reasonable student” would “keep her head down, sit silently, and avoid the potential fallout” in class when controversial topics are discussed.
The court majority denied this claim, arguing that because the meetings initiated by the BIRT were voluntary, the reporting system could not be regarded as punishing free speech. Further, Motz wrote, “Just as universities may legitimately strive to promote intellectual curiosity, so too they may legitimately strive to promote civility and a sense of belonging among the student body. That is what Virginia Tech’s Bias Policy seeks to achieve.”
IAP is a regulation on who can hand out flyers and leaflets on campus, requiring approval from the Student Engagement and Campus Life Office. For a student’s leafleting activities to be approved, he or she must be sponsored by one of the university’s registered student organizations.
Speech First challenged the IAP, arguing the policy was akin to “prior restraint” policies struck down by courts in the past and a speaker-based restriction on speech in violation of the First Amendment. The majority disagreed, writing that the IAP is a “reasonable” regulation, motivated not by a desire to regulate speech but a system that “ensures fair and equitable access” to [Virginia Tech’s] finite resources.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1685202016677000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3BHv9qMQC3OwHMBCkGZXpF">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) — who filed an <a href="https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/speech-first-inc-v-timothy-sands" target="_blank" rel="noopener">amicus brief</a> supporting Speech First — <a href="https://www.thefire.org/colleges/virginia-polytechnic-institute-and-state-university?_page=1">gives</a> Virginia Tech a “yellow” free speech rating, meaning that the university has “at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application.” Among these policies are Virginia Tech’s “Discriminatory Harassment,” “Bias-Reporting,” “Offenses Against People,” and “Usage and Event Approval” policies, among others.
The two judges ruling in favor of the university — Senior Judge Motz and Judge Albert Diaz — were appointed by Democrats (President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama, respectively), while the dissenting judge — Judge Wilkinson — was nominated by Republican President Ronald Reagan.

Political art, Concept idea of free speech freedom of expression and censored, surreal painting, portrait illustration , conceptual artwork illustration

Court Rules Against Free Speech Group, Upholds Virginia Tech Bias Policy

Education

Free Speech

Many people who suffer from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/ptsd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post-traumatic stress disorder</a> often relive highly-charged fearful and emotional memories while they sleep, and neuroscientists from Virginia Tech have recently discovered what is behind this phenomenon using models of the brain, the news outlet for Virginia Tech <a href="https://vtx.vt.edu/articles/2023/01/science-sujith_vijayan_neroscience_ptsd_rem_sleep.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. The findings provide vital information for creating therapies that could mitigate the effects PTSD has on sleep.
The brain can be very active during rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, so much so that Virginia Tech neuroscientist, professor, and co-author of the study, Sujith Vijayan called it “paradoxical sleep.” Combining the high activity of REM sleep with post-traumatic stress disorder, people who suffer from the disorder can relive painful memories “over and over” again, according to Vijayan.
Normally, the brain can bring up emotional memories during REM sleep to cleanse the emotional charge. However, this normal process can malfunction for people who suffer from PTSD, and the result is that painful memories come to mind night after night.
In their study, <a href="https://www.jneurosci.org/content/43/3/433" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published</a> in The Journal of Neuroscience, Vijayan and his team of researchers constructed a biophysical model of the brain where they could simulate neurophysiological functions like communication between different parts of the brain, neurotransmitters, and brain waves.
By adjusting the brain rhythms between the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2907136/#:~:text=The%20prefrontal%20cortex%20(PFC)%20intelligently,brain%20regions%20(BOX%201)." target="_blank" rel="noopener">prefrontal cortex</a> and the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537102/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">amygdala</a> in the model, researchers were able to link lower levels of the neurotransmitters norepinephrine and serotonin with the brain&#8217;s ability to restrain fear and pain-based memories during REM sleep. They further found that those who suffer from PTSD experienced high levels of norepinephrine and serotonin during REM sleep, thus repeatedly causing painful memories to come to mind.
Other studies have shown that the emotional charge of negative memories is mitigated by REM sleep. However, it is still the “wild west” when it comes to understanding how REM sleep works, Vijayan described. “REM sleep is a lot harder to get your hands around. There are really good models out there for how non-REM sleep might consolidate memories and what role it might play in learning and memory. But when we talk about REM, there are no real, good models on how that stuff is happening,” he said.
So, this new model from Vijayan and his team provides quite the insight. Looking at brain wave rhythms between the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala, they found that four to eight hertz on the theta range of brain rhythm, which is common for humans, allowed for the greatest strength of communication in the brain. This, in turn, inhibits fear expression cells during sleep.
When researchers adjusted the models to include high levels of norepinephrine and serotonin during REM, four to eight hertz on the theta range of brain rhythm was ineffective at inhibiting fear expression cells. But, they did find that ten hertz was effective at suppressing fear expression cells in the PTSD brain model.
Therapies could be created as a result of the findings, namely covert auditory stimulation, as Vijayan calls it. “That means I’m playing those sounds and you’re not aware of it while you’re sleeping,” he said. “That could be useful for any sort of disorder where sleep is disrupted, not only in PTSD, but in traumatic brain injury or Parkinson’s disease. The idea is that by inducing desired neural dynamics, we can engage the recuperative powers of sleep.”

Close-Up Of Ptsd Text On Orange Background

Why Do PTSD Patients Relive Intense Fear-Based Memories In Sleep? New Models Provide Insight.

New Models Provide Insights Into Why PTSD Patients Relive Intense Fear-Based Memories

Brain

Health

Medical Research

PTSD

After being cleared of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/murder">murder</a>, former <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/virginia-tech">Virginia Tech</a> linebacker Isimemen Etute is set to play football at Iowa Western Community College this coming season.
A jury in May found Etute <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wicked-sexual-ruse-ex-football-player-cleared-for-killing-tinder-date-after-learning-match-was-a-man">not guilty</a> of murdering his Tinder date, Jerry Smith, a 40-year-old gay man who presented himself as a 21-year-old physician named Angie Renee. The athlete&#8217;s legal team said Etute was acting in self-defense when he beat Smith, claiming Etute thought Smith was reaching for a gun after the man’s true gender was revealed.
Etute&#8217;s lawyer Jimmy Turk <a href="https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34294436/former-virginia-tech-lb-isi-etute-play-iowa-community-college-being-found-not-guilty-murder">confirmed</a> to ESPN on Monday that his client is set to play for Iowa Western&#8217;s 2022 season. Turk noted that it was difficult to find a school with Division I football willing to give his client a scholarship due to the highly publicized trial.
Since the trial, Turk has suggested that Etute is the real victim in the tragedy.
“Who is the real victim here?” Turk said through tears during closing arguments of the trial, Roanoke.com <a href="https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/former-virginia-tech-football-player-isimemen-etute-found-not-guilty-in-beating-death-of-blacksburg/article_6c4b1fc6-ddf0-11ec-8abc-4f1834bc5978.html">reported</a>. “This was a wicked sexual ruse.”
Turk also told the jury Smith was a “deceitful and dishonest man” who “defrauded young men for his own sexual gratification.”
Etute and Smith linked up last year on hook-up app Tinder. Smith reportedly performed oral sex on Etute, then 18 years old, during their first meetup. Suspicious he was misled by Smith, Etute met back up a second time to try to find out Smith’s sex. After identifying Smith was indeed male, Etute repeatedly struck him in what would be a fatal beating.
Etute said he was acting in self-defense when he beat Smith, claiming he thought Smith was reaching for a gun after the man’s true gender was revealed.
Authorities said there was a knife found under a mattress, but Smith did not have a gun.
“This is one of the proudest moments I’ve ever had as a lawyer,” Turk said following the verdict.
“I’m not in shock because it’s the right verdict, but always wondering and worrying about whether you convinced 12 people,” the defense attorney continued. “That’s always nerve-wracking. I’m just thankful for this jury. It is the right decision and right now I’m still just overwhelmed.”
Following the incident, a spokesperson for Smith’s family who requested to remain anonymous <a href="https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/family-of-blacksburg-homicide-victim-trying-to-come-to-terms-with-his-death/article_7162ff38-c56e-11eb-afe7-37f18a5935c4.html">said</a> they were “at a loss at everything that’s going on.”
“There are horrible stories out there,” the person said. “At the end of the day, no matter what he did or didn’t do, nobody deserves what he got. Whatever happened gives nobody the right to react that way. I’m sorry, it just doesn’t.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wicked-sexual-ruse-ex-football-player-cleared-for-killing-tinder-date-after-learning-match-was-a-man">‘Wicked Sexual Ruse’: Ex-Football Player Cleared For Killing Tinder Date After Learning Match Was A Man</a>

Isimemen Etute

Former Virginia Tech LB Who Was Cleared For Killing Tinder Date After Learning Match Was A Man Back Playing Football

Former VaTech Football Player Isi Etute, Cleared For Killing Tinder Date After Learning Match Was A Man, Back To Playing Football 

Football

Tinder

After days of silence from most female athletes at the NCAA Women&#8217;s Swimming Championships, a young woman whose finals spot was stolen from her by a biologically male swimmer is speaking out.
&#8220;My name is Reka Gyorgy from Hungary. I am a 2016 Rio Olympian, represented Virginia Tech for the past 5 years, a 2 time ACC champion, 2 time All-American and 3 time honorable mention All-American,&#8221; wrote Virginia Tech swimmer Reka Gyorgy in a letter to the NCAA that she <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CbVXQdyunQbZeKQn_e3GfyiFBVTDYa0sRaFyCs0/">posted on Instagram</a>.
&#8220;With all due respect, I would like to address something that is a problem in our sport right now and hurting athletes, especially swimmers,&#8221; wrote Gyorgy. &#8220;Everyone has heard and known about transgender [swimmer], Lia Thomas, and her case including all the issues and concerns that her situation brought into our sport.&#8221;
Gyorgy wrote that she respects and fully stands with Thomas and is convinced that Thomas is &#8220;no different&#8221; than Gyorgy herself or any other Division 1 swimmer who has worked hard their entire swimming career.
&#8220;She is doing what she is passionate about and deserves that right,&#8221; wrote Gyorgy. &#8220;On the other hand, I would like to critique the NCAA rules that allow her to compete against us, who are biologically women.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m writing this letter right now in hopes that the NCAA will open their eyes and change these rules in the future. It doesn&#8217;t promote our sport in a good way and I think it is disrespectful against the biologically female swimmers who are competing in the NCAA.&#8221;
Gyorgy said that she swam the 500 free at the NCAA&#8217;s on Thursday where she placed 17th — meaning that she did not make it back to the finals and was a first alternate.
&#8220;I&#8217;m a 5th year senior, I have been top 16 and top 8 before and I know how much of a privilege it is to make finals at a meet this big,&#8221; she said. &#8220;This is my last college meet ever and I feel frustrated. It feels like that final spot was taken away from me because of the NCAA&#8217;s decision to let someone who is not a biological female compete.&#8221;
<blockquote>&#8220;I know you could say I had the opportunity to swim faster and make the top 16, but this situation makes it a bit different and I can&#8217;t help but be angry or sad. It hurts me, my ear and other women in the pool. One spot was taken away from the girl who got 9th in the 500 free and didn&#8217;t make it back to the A final preventing her from being an All-American. Every event that transgender athletes competed in was one spot taken away from biological females throughout the meet.&#8221;</blockquote>
Gyorgy wrote that the &#8220;NCAA knew what was coming this past week. They knew opinions and minds will be divided and chose to do nothing.&#8221;
&#8220;This week has been more about reporters, media and division in our sport than things like two women going under 21 seconds in the 50 freestyle, 3 women going under 50 seconds in the 100 butterfly and the first woman IN HISTORY to go under 48 seconds in the 100 backstroke,&#8221; she added.
&#8220;Thursday was not a specific athlete&#8217;s fault. It is the result of the NCAA and their lack of interest in protecting their athletes,&#8221; she continued.
&#8220;I ask that the NCAA takes time to think about all the other biological women in swimming, try to think how they would feel if they would be in our shoes,&#8221; she said. &#8220;Make the right changes for our sport and for a better future in swimming.&#8221;
The NCAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Wire.

Screen Shot 2022-03-20 at 2.25.28 PM

‘That Final Spot Was Taken From Me Because Of The NCAA’s Decision’: Swimmer Unleashes On NCAA For Allowing A Biological Male In Her Race

NCAA

Swimming

Transgender Athletes

A Virginia Tech freshman football player has been charged with second-degree murder in the killing of a 40-year-old man who apparently misled about being a male when the pair matched on hook-up site Tinder.
Isimemen Etute, 18, matched with Jerry Smith on the site and went to his apartment. When the athlete found out Smith was a man, he allegedly beat him before leaving on May 31, according to court documents.
Smith, who <a href="https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/family-of-blacksburg-homicide-victim-trying-to-come-to-terms-with-his-death/article_7162ff38-c56e-11eb-afe7-37f18a5935c4.html">according</a> to his family is a physically small, openly gay man, died of blunt force trauma.
The Associated Press <a href="https://cnycentral.com/news/nation-world/virginia-tech-player-killed-tinder-match-after-learning-match-was-a-man-police-say">reported</a>:
<blockquote>Etute said he visited Smith&#8217;s apartment in April after he was matched with someone named &#8220;Angie&#8221; on Tinder, but when he returned on May 31, he discovered his match was a man, prosecutors said during a hearing Wednesday, citing police statements.
Etute told police he punched and stomped Smith and heard gurgling as he left, but didn&#8217;t call police.
The medical examiner&#8217;s office had previously revealed that Smith died from <a class="themeColorForLinks" title="https://wset.com/news/local/richmond-fbi-assisting-blacksburg-police-in-virginia-tech-football-murder" href="https://wset.com/news/local/richmond-fbi-assisting-blacksburg-police-in-virginia-tech-football-murder" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">blunt force trauma to the head</a>.</blockquote>
Etute was granted bond last week.
&#8220;Prosecutors initially filed an expedited appeal that would have kept the 18-year-old from Virginia Beach in jail for up to five more days but agreed to his release once the two sides settled on conditions,&#8221; according to the AP report. &#8220;Etute, who is charged with second-degree murder in the <a class="themeColorForLinks" title="https://wset.com/news/local/1-dead-another-in-custody-following-homicide-in-blacksburg" href="https://wset.com/news/local/1-dead-another-in-custody-following-homicide-in-blacksburg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">death of 40-year-old Jerry Smith</a>, was released on a $75,000 secured bond under house arrest and electronic monitoring.&#8221;
Etute has been suspended from the VaTech team while law enforcement conducts an investigation.
<div class="lee-article-text">
A Radford lawyer named Jimmy Turk is now representing Etute in the case, which he called “heartbreaking.”
</div>
<div class="lee-article-text">
&#8220;Turk said that he deplored any apparent killing, but that his client seems to be an exceptional young man who came to Virginia Tech on a full scholarship and had never been a problem for anyone before,&#8221; <a href="https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/family-of-blacksburg-homicide-victim-trying-to-come-to-terms-with-his-death/article_7162ff38-c56e-11eb-afe7-37f18a5935c4.html">reported</a> Roanoke.com.
<div class="hidden-print asset-breakout-container ">
<div class="lee-article-text">
“We are so at a loss at everything that’s going on,” <a href="https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/family-of-blacksburg-homicide-victim-trying-to-come-to-terms-with-his-death/article_7162ff38-c56e-11eb-afe7-37f18a5935c4.html">said</a> a spokesperson for Smith&#8217;s family, who requested anonymity.
</div>
<div class="lee-article-text">
“There are horrible stories out there. At the end of the day, no matter what he did or didn’t do, nobody deserves what he got. Whatever happened gives nobody the right to react that way. I’m sorry, it just doesn’t.”
</div>
<div class="hidden-print asset-breakout-container ">
<div class="lee-article-text">
According to Roanoke.com, &#8220;Smith has a lengthy legal history, with charges over the years in Montgomery, Loudoun and Fairfax counties, including driving under the influence, reckless driving, public intoxication and filing a false police report, as well as charges that were dismissed. But the family didn’t know anything about that, the spokesperson said.&#8221;
</div>
<div class="hidden-print asset-breakout-container ">
<div class="lee-article-text">
“We know nothing,” the family spokesperson reacted. “I’m going to be honest with you. We know nothing about that. There’s been nothing said to us about it by the police or anything.”
<div class="lee-article-text">
“He was so proud. Everybody knew he was a gay man. He did not like women. He was very proud of who he was.”
</div>
<div class="lee-article-text">
“Regardless of what he did, he did not deserve this,” the spokesperson added. “He was maybe 112 pounds soaking wet. He wasn’t a threat to nobody. He wasn’t a threat to a fly. He wasn’t a dangerous person. Nobody has a right to take someone’s life. Whatever happened should not have happened.”
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Virginia Tech Football Player Charged With Killing Tinder Date After Learning Match Was A Man 

Crime

Law enforcement officials arrested a Chinese foreign national attending Virginia Tech on Tuesday for illegally possessing an &#8220;assault firearm&#8221; without being a U.S. citizen after he was caught trying to purchase 5,000 rounds of ammunition and had bought a used police patrol car and researched bulletproof vests.
The investigation, which lasted several weeks, ended with authorities charging Zhao with &#8220;one count of possessing an assault firearm without having U.S. citizenship,&#8221; <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/yunsong-zhao-virginia-tech-student-assault-rifle-tried-to-purchase-5000-rounds-ammo-police/">CBS News</a> reported.
Zhao, whose family is in China, was living in Blacksburg, Virginia for approximately six months when he was arrested. Police said that &#8220;Zhao also purchased a former police vehicle outfitted with special bumpers and had been researching bulletproof vests.&#8221;
Another student at the university, Alvaro Barros, a freshman from Brazil, said that he knew Zhao and was surprised by his actions.
&#8220;He seemed like a normal guy, you know what I mean? Just someone trying to make friends and trying to blend in like everyone else,&#8221; Barros said.&#8221;I was just shocked because he doesn&#8217;t seem like the guy that would do it, not at all.&#8221;
Surprisingly, university officials claim that they did not believe that he ever posed a threat to the university, <a href="http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/updated-virginia-tech-officials-emphasize-no-danger-seen-after-freshman/article_147d3ebf-3de2-5e19-92c5-67ccb874eb14.html">writing</a>, &#8220;at no time &#8230; did police believe there was any threat to our community, nor is there one now.&#8221;
Zhao&#8217;s arrest comes four months after the Las Vegas massacre, the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, in which 58 people died and hundreds more were shot. Virginia Tech is also home to what was the deadliest mass shooting in the nation&#8217;s history at the time: In April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech senior Seung-Hui Cho, armed with handguns, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/at-least-33-killed-in-va-tech-massacre/">murdered</a> 32 people on the campus.

Foreign National Arrested At Virginia Tech With Illegal ‘Assault Firearm,’ Bought Cop Car, Tried To Buy 5,000 Rounds Of Ammo

Las Vegas Shooting

Shooting

After the increasingly powerful conservative group Young America&#8217;s Foundation targeted Virginia Tech on Wednesday for threatening students who fail to complete a mandatory online diversity course with fines, the university <a href="http://www.yaf.org/news/10696-2/">backed down</a> on Thursday.
On Wednesday, YAF noted that the university&#8217;s website threatened students with $105 fines and holds on their accounts if they did not complete a required online course called &#8220;DiversityEdu.&#8221; The website listed three courses, &#8220;Haven,&#8221; &#8220;DiversityEDU,&#8221; and &#8220;AlcoholEdu,&#8221; then stated: &#8220;Students who do not complete the courses by the deadline may be required to pay $105 for an in-person course and/or may have a hold placed on their university record.&#8221;
The Division of Student Affairs at Virginia Tech<a href="http://www.dsa.vt.edu/onlineprograms/diversityedu.php#what_is"> described</a> DiversityEdu like this: &#8220;This course teaches skills for engaging successfully with diversity and mitigating the influence of unconscious biases and stereotypical thinking on personal choices and professional decisions.&#8221; As Lauren McCue of YAF <a href="http://www.yaf.org/news/10629-2/">pointed out</a>, &#8220;DiversityEdu&#8217;s <a href="http://www.diversityedu.com/blog">website</a> is full of references to progressive buzzwords and discusses concepts like critical theory, microaggressions, &#8216;cultural responsiveness,&#8217; and more.&#8221;
But by Thursday, the website was amended so that the fine only applied to students who failed to complete the online course AlcoholEdu, as the website listed the three courses, &#8220;Haven,&#8221; &#8220;DiversityEDU,&#8221; and &#8220;AlcoholEdu,&#8221; then stated: &#8220;Students who do not complete the courses by the deadline may incur the following: Haven and DiversityEDU: You may have a registration hold placed on your university account. For AlcoholEDU: you may be required to pay $105 for an in-person course.&#8221;
As Emily Jashinsky, the spokeswoman for YAF, wrote as she looked forward: &#8220;It cannot be considered a victory for campus conservatives until Virginia Tech ceases to require that students endure the ideologically unbalanced DiversityEdu program altogether.&#8221;

YAF Scores Victory Against PC At Virginia Tech

Political Correctness

Young America's Foundation

Last week, Jason Reilly, a black conservative who has written on race relations for the Wall Street Journal for over twenty years and lectured on college campuses for nearly that long, saw his invitation to speak at Virginia Tech <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/i-was-disinvited-on-campus-1462313788#:bmrq9P7MR611_A">rescinded</a> after he had been invited to speak by a member of the faculty roughly one month ago.
As Riley writes, the professor who issued the initial invitation backtracked, &#8220;citing concerns from his department head and other faculty members that my writings on race in The Wall Street Journal would spark protests.&#8221;
Riley explains that his lectures attempt to educate students about black history in the united stated in the first half of the 20th century vis-à-vis employment, schooling, crime and parenting. He illustrates how &#8220;positive black trends either slowed dramatically or reversed course beginning in the 1960s.&#8221;
But Riley now finds himself one of a number of conservatives who are persona non grata at these institutions; he notes &#8220;a 2010 report by the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that only 40% of college freshman &#8216;strongly agreed that it is safe to hold unpopular positions on campus&#8217; and that by senior year it&#8217;s down to 30%.&#8221;
The Foundation for Individual Rights In Education (FIRE) <a href="https://www.thefire.org/disinvitation-season-report-2014/">stated</a> in 2014 that a fifteen-year study found &#8220;speakers are much more likely to be targeted for disinvitation for holding or expressing viewpoints perceived as conservative by faculty or students&#8230; disinvitation incidents occur with nearly equal frequency among public, private, and sectarian schools, demonstrating that disinvitations are not isolated to any particular type of university &#8230; institutions that have seen the highest number of disinvitation incidents also maintain severely speech-restrictive policies.&#8221; Most importantly, FIRE found &#8220;successful disinvitations from the left of speakers are nearly double those from the right of speakers, with nearly triple the total number of disinvitation incidents.&#8221;
Some recent high-profile disinvitations include former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice rejected by Rutgers University because of her role prosecuting the Iraq war and human-rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali rejected by Brandeis University over her criticism of Islam.
<blockquote>
&#8220;Successful disinvitations from the left of speakers are nearly double those from the right of speakers, with nearly triple the total number of disinvitation incidents.&#8221;
Foundation for Individual Rights In Education
</blockquote>
Riley concludes:
<blockquote>
In April, I spoke at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where the college Republicans who invited me took the precaution of clearing my name with liberal student groups &#8220;to make sure they wouldn&#8217;t be upset.&#8221; We&#8217;ve reached a point where conservatives must have their campus speakers preapproved by left-wing pressure groups. If progressives aren&#8217;t already in absolute control of academia, they&#8217;re pretty close.
</blockquote>

Virginia Tech Uninvites Black Conservative Jason Reilly

Racism

At Virginia Tech Thursday night during the Q&amp;A session following his speech, Daily Wire Editor-in Chief Ben Shapiro eviscerated the argument for &#8220;institutional racism&#8221; in a memorable five-minute dialogue with a leftist student. There were no raised voices, just a back and forth in which Shapiro destroyed the left&#8217;s use of the term to foist their beliefs on the rest of the American public. The discussion went like this:
<blockquote>
Student: Hi. Thank you for your time and thank you for coming here. I disagree with a lot of what you said tonight.
Shapiro: Good! That&#8217;s what makes it fun.
Student: I don&#8217;t believe that being transgender means that you have some sort of mental illness,
Shapiro: Okay.
Student: &#8230; and I think that the majority of the psychological, like national, associations would agree with that. I think there&#8217;s a lot of evidence that institutional racism exists and that it manifests itself in very real and negative and harmful ways.
Shapiro: Okay.
Student: But I don&#8217;t feel any violence or animosity towards you, and I would say that most of the people that I know might wish that you &#8230;
Shapiro: Didn&#8217;t exist. (laughter from crowd.)
Student: &#8230; wouldn&#8217;t spread ideas that they find harmful and negative. But they don&#8217;t feel any direct ill will towards you in any violent way &#8211;
Shapiro: Well, that&#8217;s good. Then we&#8217;re moving in the right direction.
Student: So I guess what I&#8217;ve been feeling throughout this talk is kind of this vast mischaracterization of the left as some sort of homogenous, violent, oppressive body. And I think that the majority of the people that I know, and the majority of interactions I&#8217;ve had with communities on a larger scale have not matched that representation. So I was wondering if you could kind of talk a little bit about the non-violent &#8211;
Shapiro: Sure. So there are two aspects to the non-violence, okay? And I think one you will agree with and one you will disagree with. So the one that you will agree with is the one that you&#8217;ve already agreed with, which is that you don&#8217;t get to hurt people just because of what they&#8217;re saying. Right? This we all agree with. This is also the distinction, there&#8217;s a reason I use the word leftist and not the word liberal. I think there is a distinction between people who are liberals and people who are leftists. I think that people who are liberals may disagree with me on politics, but they don&#8217;t feel that they get to use force to shut people down; leftists don&#8217;t feel the same way. It&#8217;s a natural distinction.
Now here&#8217;s the part where we&#8217;ll disagree. I think that if you are seeking to use the government to cram down your particular vision of society on individuals in violation of their freedom, that this is an aspect of totalitarianism. Whether you want to shut me down, or whether, or whether, you want to, let&#8217;s pretend for a second, that I were a baker, and let&#8217;s say that I&#8217;m a religious baker. I&#8217;m a religious person, so let&#8217;s say that I were a baker. And let&#8217;s say that I don&#8217;t want to participate in a same-sex wedding, because I believe that that&#8217;s sinful in my own religious belief. My belief is that that&#8217;s none of your business. The belief of most people on the left is that there should be legislation that forces me to cater to that same-sex wedding. By polls, this is true.
So, now we&#8217;re getting into dicey territory because now this does implicate violence, it implicates governmentally-used violence. So I&#8217;m happy you&#8217;re a libertarian, essentially with regard to my speech. But when it comes to my behavior, you&#8217;re significantly less libertarian than I am. You can do what you want; I don&#8217;t care. But people on the left deeply care what I do in my personal life; that they have no right to my labor and they have no right to my services. So this is where the pedal hits the metal in terms of American politics; and this is where the pedal will hit the metal as the government starts getting more and more deeply involved. As far as institutional racism, all I&#8217;d ask you to consider, you can believe what you want, but I&#8217;d ask you to consider this: Shouting &#8220;institutional racism&#8221; does not actually combat racism. You have to find individual instances, you have to show me who the racists are so we can fight them together.
I hate racism. I think it&#8217;s evil. But if you&#8217;re just going to say &#8220;institutional racism&#8221; every time something bad happens, there&#8217;s no way to fight it. I need a policy that you&#8217;re proposing, or I need a person who&#8217;s actually racist so we can fight it together, or we can determine whether the policy is good. What I find really problematic is the virtue signaling that I see by so many people on the other side, which is: I don&#8217;t have to give you the racist, I don&#8217;t have to tell you who he is or what measures I&#8217;m proposing; I just say &#8220;institutional racism,&#8221; everybody cheers for me, because that&#8217;s an approved point of view, and now we move on with our lives. You haven&#8217;t helped anybody; you&#8217;ve just made yourself feel better.
Student: Institutional racism, in and of itself, first of all, I would say that the majority of people who do bring up institutional racism do also have solutions as to combat it &#8211;
Shapiro: Invariably involving encroaching on other people&#8217;s liberty, but yes?
Student (as audience laughed): Well, um, I would just say that there &#8230; is &#8230; again, I feel like you&#8217;re painting a wide and diverse group of people with the same brush, in saying that if you can&#8217;t point to a policy or if you can&#8217;t point to a person, then you&#8217;re just wasting everyone&#8217;s time, and I think that a lot of people are trying to point to policies, and while I think that the idea of pointing to a racist person is fundamentally in contrast with the idea with the idea of institutional racism because institutional racism grapples with implicit bias, in the society as a whole &#8211; not like a ghost with a sheet, but in individuals.
Shapiro: Unless you&#8217;re connecting that to a policy, it&#8217;s a copout. Because now we&#8217;re ghost hunting again. If you just said to me, we have a problem in American society: &#8220;income inequality&#8221; is a problem in American society, if you just gave me any problem, and I said, &#8220;well, that&#8217;s the Bilderberg&#8217;s fault. That&#8217;s the fault of the Bilderbergs. It&#8217;s a conspiracy; it&#8217;s the fault of the Bilderbergs. There are all these conspiracy theories about the Bilderberg group. Let&#8217;s say it&#8217;s the Bilderberg&#8217;s fault, or it&#8217;s the protocols of the elders of Zion, whatever it is, there&#8217;s some sort of conspiracy out there.&#8221; You would say to me, &#8220;That&#8217;s not useful, what are you even talking about?&#8221;
When you say &#8220;institutional racism,&#8221; it&#8217;s too broad. You have to at least name me the institution. Which one is the racist one? Which institution is racist? Tell me. So we can fight it &#8212; seriously, so we can fight it together. Just shouting slogans like &#8220;institutional racism&#8221; is not, it&#8217;s not effective. Shouting &#8220;white privilege&#8221; is not effective.
I want to be on your side. I do. I want to fight racists. Again, I think racist behavior is evil. I want to fight it with you. But I can&#8217;t fight it if you&#8217;re not showing me what it is. We have to decide together if the policies you&#8217;re proposing will alleviate racism or exacerbate racism. And it turns out I think that a lot of the policies proposed by the left &#8211;I think &#8220;institutional racism&#8221; is a way, is usually a lever for proposing a policy that is actually unpalatable to freedom, and then castigating people on the other side of that policy as being in league with the &#8220;institutional racism.&#8221; The policies are either good or bad, without regard to words like &#8220;institutional racism,&#8221; is what I&#8217;m saying. Honestly, I would love to sit down and talk with you for an hour about it, because it&#8217;s a worthwhile conversation, and I think we could actually get somewhere with it, but I think that slogans generally tend not to be particularly effective in getting us to solutions.
</blockquote>
The exchange begins at 1:03:41:
<div class="media_embed"><iframe loading="lazy" allowfullscreen frameborder="0" height="315px" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/el4IUVx0IGE" width="560px"></iframe></div>

Watch Ben Shapiro Destroy The Argument For ‘Institutional Racism’ In Memorable Exchange

Ben Shapiro

On Thursday, conservative firebrand and Daily Wire editor-in-chief Ben Shapiro crashed another safe space; this time it was at Virginia Tech. The event was well-publicized by the Young America&#8217;s Foundation at VTech. The group adorned the campus with posters advertising Shapiro&#8217;s speech. Even when a few of the fliers were torn down by peevish social justice warriors, the conservative student group took the provocations in stride, enthusiastically distributing more fliers that included sardonic pronouncements such as &#8220;The Left&#8217;s Worst Nightmare: Facts&#8221; and &#8220;Crybabies!&#8221;
<div class="media_embed">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Come out to See <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro">@benshapiro</a> March 31 in Pamplin 30! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NotAPresCandidateButBetter?src=hash">#NotAPresCandidateButBetter</a> <a href="https://t.co/G7ZJogj0X9">pic.twitter.com/G7ZJogj0X9</a>
&#8212; YAF at Virginia Tech (@YAF_VT) <a href="https://twitter.com/YAF_VT/status/704370345323732992">February 29, 2016</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="media_embed">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Fliers! Fliers! Fliers! <a href="https://twitter.com/YAF_VT">@YAF_VT</a> is hype for <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro">@benshapiro</a> TOMORROW! <a href="https://t.co/IxPSfiStft">pic.twitter.com/IxPSfiStft</a>
&#8212; YAFreedom (@Y_A_Freedom) <a href="https://twitter.com/Y_A_Freedom/status/715203561500618755">March 30, 2016</a></blockquote>
</div>
Shapiro&#8217;s speech drew a huge crowd of students. The lecture hall was filled to capacity, while another 150 students waited in line outside for seats to open up.
Shapiro&#8217;s signature motto of &#8220;Facts Don&#8217;t Care About Your Feelings&#8221; was front and center. Deconstructing the illiberal tactics of the Left, Shapiro addressed five major concepts prolific on college campuses: diversity, white privilege, trigger warnings, microaggressions, and safe spaces.
One by one, Shapiro addressed these vacuous buzzwords floating around college campuses.
On white privilege, Shapiro dismissed the idea of &#8220;ghost busting,&#8221; telling his audience to point to the specific policy, piece of legislation, or person that promulgates racism instead of chasing some phantom &#8220;out there in the ether.&#8221;
Shapiro then slammed the &#8220;regime of feelings,&#8221; this bizarre notion that &#8220;equality of feelings&#8221; should somehow be enforced by Orwellian methodologies like trigger warnings and safe spaces. Feelings are inherently subjective, declared Shapiro: &#8221;There&#8217;s only one way to achieve equality of feelings: Nobody talks and everybody just shuts up.&#8221;
We&#8217;d be living in a &#8220;silent monastery&#8221; if &#8220;feelings equality&#8221; was forcefully imposed. Ridiculing generation &#8220;participation trophy,&#8221; Shapiro quipped, &#8220;Who knows what could happen? You might cry, and that would be the end of the world!&#8221;
As Shapiro noted, if trigger warnings don&#8217;t work, then the Left resorts to the idea of microaggressions, which by definition &#8220;carry in it the seeds of violence.&#8221; &#8220;Aggression is to be met with aggression,&#8221; stated Shapiro, detailing why that term is so perilous.
Ultimately, all these concepts form a toxic brew of instability. It&#8217;s &#8220;a recipe for making people insane,&#8221; said Shapiro. This &#8220;regime of feelings&#8221; is taking over. The solution? &#8220;Individual responsibility,&#8221; asserted Shapiro. 
If you were watching Shapiro&#8217;s speech live via Periscope, you probably noticed the comments streaming across the screen. While some of the comments praised Shapiro, others weren&#8217;t so forgiving. For every &#8220;Ben rocks!&#8221; or &#8220;I like this guy&#8221; comment, there were at least three highly intelligent insults hurled by, you guessed it, Alt-Right Trump supporters! Here&#8217;s a small sample of some their most endearing comments:
<blockquote>
Fuck ben shapiro
Ben Shapiro is a cuck
What a cuck&#8232;Cuck
Cucksville
Trump 2016
Trump
Trump 2016 Cuck Shapiro
</blockquote>
Coincidentally, Shapiro touched upon the Alt-Right movement during the Q&amp;A session after his speech. &#8220;Alt right is a bunch of racist bigots pretending to be free thinkers,&#8221; clarified Shapiro. &#8220;My Twitter feed is filled with people calling me a Kike&#8230;all the Trump supporters.&#8221;
Some say you can tell a man&#8217;s character by the enemies he makes. If that&#8217;s true, then Ben Shapiro is in good shape. During the speech, he drew the ire of misanthropes from both sides of the political aisle.
After Shapiro labeled Donald Trump as a &#8220;smoking garbage heap of human debris,&#8221; two young women, both wearing unusually large thick-framed, pseudo-intellectual, hipster glasses (It was weird. Maybe they matched styles in the morning?) proceeded to condemn all the (factually accurate and data-backed) evils Shapiro had broadcast.
The first Leftist student began. &#8220;I disagree with you a lot,&#8221; she whined, &#8220;but I harbor no personal animosity toward you.&#8221; Politely, Shapiro replied, &#8220;That&#8217;s an improvement.&#8221; She then proclaimed that Shapiro was wrong about transgenderism and institutional racism. That wasn&#8217;t her main point. She went out of her way to repeat multiple times that Shapiro&#8217;s &#8220;vast mischaracterization of the Left&#8221; was out of bounds. Citing anecdotal evidence from her presumably two decades gracing the earth, she pointed to her Leftist friends as examples of tolerance. &#8220;I feel like you&#8217;re painting a wide and diverse group of people with a wide brush,&#8221; she grumbled. When asked by Shapiro to point to examples of institutional racism, she froze, unable to cite any specific policies. Fortunately, the student had a Eureka! moment. White people&#8217;s &#8220;implicit bias!,&#8221; she argued, was the basis of institutional racism. After waiting patiently for the young woman to finish her protracted lecture, Shapiro responded, &#8220;Unless you&#8217;re connecting that with a policy, it&#8217;s a cop-out.&#8221;
<div class="media_embed">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
&#8220;Shouting institutional racism does not combat racism.&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro">@benshapiro</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/YAF_VT">@YAF_VT</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/yaf">@yaf</a>
&#8212; YAFreedom (@Y_A_Freedom) <a href="https://twitter.com/Y_A_Freedom/status/715694757083758592">April 1, 2016</a></blockquote>
</div>
Then came a young girl wearing thick-framed pseudo-intellectual hipster glasses number two. This one was a little meaner, a little angrier, a little more agitated. &#8220;I feel a heavy amount of animosity toward you! Thank you for bringing ignorance to our campus,&#8221; she barked. After promising to actually ask a question (rather than solitarily wandering in the personal abyss of her subjective feelings), she chortled, &#8220;Elaborate on privileges you think minorities have.&#8221; With a stoic, undeterred tone, Shapiro answered that affirmative action and withdrawal of policing from minority neighborhoods constitute tangible privileges, adding that these &#8220;privileges&#8221; always backfire and ultimately end up hurting the very communities they are meant to help.
The rest of the questions were actual questions that ultimately proved educational. Shapiro touched upon everything from image and politics to national debt and social security.
Incredibly, the Young America&#8217;s Foundation (YAF) sponsored three campus lectures across the country by three major conservatives on the same night. Katie Pavlich spoke in Florida; Newt Gingrich spoke in Tennessee; and Shapiro spoke in Virginia. Some say free speech is dead on America&#8217;s college campuses. If that&#8217;s true then YAF seems to be doing everything in its power to resurrect the First Amendment.
Shapiro will continue his college tour next week. Stay tuned for more coverage.

Menu