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

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

Smylie Times Building - Suite #500-C  Facsimile: (215) 333-2023
8001 Roosevelt Boulevard  rsklaroff@gmail.com
Philadelphia, PA 19152-3041 May 14, 2019

To: Michael B. Gebhardt, Esq., et al.

re: Marc Lamont Hill, Ph.D. []

Smoking-Gun!
“To suggest that the violence was unnecessary or entirely unjustified
would be to misunderstand the complexity of the story.”
—MLH, “Nobody” – page 80 [appended]

This was how he characterized the “tragic” rioting that occurred in Baltimore after Freddy Gray had died.
The quotes that followed were additional calls to violence in a fashion consistent with his speeches:

Even calling the actions “riots” rather than “rebellions” or “uprisings” obscures the
principled outrage that animated many acts of resistance that occurred in the aftermath
of Gray’s death. For many in Baltimore, as in Ferguson, the rebellions were an attempt to
scar public tissue, to draw attention to a deeply troublesome and long-standing state of
civic affairs. By destroying government property, they were attempting to momentarily
disrupt the affairs of a State that was systematically killing them. By tearing down
commercial businesses, they were aiming to strike a blow against the crippling machinery
of late capitalism….

To anyone who would claim that this double-negative is vague, that he didn’t “foment violence” in any
type of positive sense, that he only was identifying a problem plaguing America (and Israel, and the globe),
you must INVERT the above sentence: “To UNDERSTAND the complexity of the story is to SUGGEST that
the VIOLENCE was NECESSARY and JUSTIFIED.” This rabble-rouser has a way with words when trying to
be consciously obfuscatory, but THIS TIME he simply allowed his true motives to emerge in NEON-LIGHTS.

As overwhelming as have been the points made in prior memos, it had been suggested that an overt
quotation hadn’t been uttered; it’s now unambiguously in-writing, in-context, in-his-own-words. {Indeed,
having attended the writer’s group meeting @ the Ludington Library, the book was returned; thus, it is
available—at least @ that site—for anyone to inspect it, assuming any type of corroboration is desired.}

1
 *

He discussed “Working Across Borders For a Just Future” at a conference sponsored by the American
Friends Service Committee; he delved “into intersectional activism as a channel for social change and the
nature of movement building toward a just future [4/12/2019 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-
BeGvyj4rI&fbclid=IwAR3wt2cvp3XWI_RrbDStTjL4tRrVN1gEz2guzzuwCld_rsd85v2iTYfY0RY]. After having
recounted his having been fired from CNN, he promoted the “Historic Palestine” that has never existed
and claimed MLK, Jr. opposed Israel prior to his death (along with Malcolm X, Angela Davis, Alice Walker,
Mumia Abu Jamal) without citing anything to buttress his claim; he then discounted “All Lives Matter”
and name-dropped such notables as Fidel Castro. He also reinforced his goal of Israeli regime-change.

It is instructive to compare/contrast his depiction of Falasha [Ethiopian Jewry – start @ 1:10] with reality
[https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/africa/ethiopia-political-geography/falasha]; he characterized
them as practicing “Temple, not Rabbinic” Judaism, but he failed to recognize that “Since the mid-
twentieth century, Falasha Judaism has been much influenced by Talmudic Judaism; religious practices
not in accordance with it have, for the most part, been abandoned. In Israel, the priests are retrained as
spiritual leaders. They learn rabbinical law, but few attain the status of rabbi. After arrival in Israel, Falasha
immigrants are familiarized with the basics of Talmudic religious law. It is the requirement of a symbolic
"conversion" that has caused the most problems in Falasha social adaptation in Israel. In addition to
their Judaic belief, the Falasha traditionally shared the common Ethiopian beliefs in supernatural forces
and spirits. They also consult magicians; some Falasha were themselves famous magicians, who were
also revered by Christians.” He characterized them as subject to prejudice in Israel (c/w his narrative)
despite their achieving Aliyah; Orthodoxy doesn’t appreciate magic. He claimed they are oppressed
to prompt them to return to Africa [n.b., he views Israel as “Northeast Africa, sharing a tectonic plate”].

The deceit interlaced with his overall message (and how it relates to his anarchy-themed narrative,
notably the intent to empty prisons because “all people would benefit”) cries for parsing that is available;
predictably, it was well-received by Quakers who, themselves, have always been “No Friends of Israel”
[http://www.romirowsky.com/18076/quakers-israel]. Again, as ever, no disclaimer was provided that
would differentiate his comments from whatever stances Temple U. has adopted, violating his contract.

I just read the following, which could serve as a paradigm for what you might start to accomplish today;
I disagree with this action, but it illustrates the level of scrutiny that should be brought-to-bear on a far
more reprehensible pattern of conduct (as opposed to allowing an attorney to pursuing his profession):

Harvard Removing Law Professor Ron Sullivan as Residential Dean for Representing Harvey Weinstein

[https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/05/harvard-removing-law-professor-ron-sullivan-as-residential-
dean-for-representing-harvey-weinstein/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=0da28874-728b-4939-b3f8-
9a60c7e33357]

“Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana said Saturday he would not renew the appointments of
law professor Ronald Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, as faculty deans.”

2
 [resemblance is uncanny]

For months now, students at Harvard have expressed outrage and even held protests because law
professor Ron Sullivan is representing disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. Now, the school is
removing Sullivan from his position as a house dean.

Students have been calling for his firing since at least February. The school conducted a ‘climate
review’ of Sullivan in March.

Now the school is removing him from his dean position at the school’s Winthrop House.

Josh Siegel reports at the Washington Examiner:

Harvard removing black faculty dean for representing Harvey Weinstein at rape trial

Harvard College is removing a faculty dean who drew controversy for deciding to
represent Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein at his rape trial this fall.

Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana said Saturday he would not renew the
appointments of law professor Ronald Sullivan and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, as
faculty deans when their terms end on June 30.

Students who lived in Harvard’s Winthrop House, the undergraduate student residence
that Sullivan supervises — and where he also lives — had demanded he be removed from
his job because of his work for Weinstein.

Does Harvard have any idea how damaging this is to their brand? People see this for what it is. Sullivan is
being punished because social justice warrior students don’t want Weinstein to be represented by a
Harvard law professor.

Has no one explained to these students that law professors often take on high profile and controversial
cases in order to write about them and use them in their teaching?

Kate Taylor of the New York Times has more:

Harvard Drops Harvey Weinstein Lawyer as a Faculty Dean

3
 Harvard said on Saturday that a law professor who is representing Harvey Weinstein
would not continue as faculty dean of an undergraduate house after his term ends on
June 30, bowing to months of pressure from students.

The professor, Ronald S. Sullivan Jr., and his wife, Stephanie Robinson, who is a lecturer
at the law school, have been the faculty deans of Winthrop House, one of Harvard’s
residential houses for undergraduate students, since 2009. They were the first African-
American faculty deans in Harvard’s history…

In a statement, Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Robinson said, “We are surprised and dismayed by
the action Harvard announced today. We believed the discussions we were having with
high-level university representatives were progressing in a positive manner, but Harvard
unilaterally ended those talks.”

“We will now take some time to process Harvard’s actions and consider our options,”
their statement continued. “We are sorry that Harvard’s actions and the controversy
surrounding us has contributed to the stress on Winthrop students at this already
stressful time.”

The decision not to renew the appointments of Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Robinson as faculty
deans does not affect their positions at the law school, where Mr. Sullivan is the Jesse
Climenko Clinical Professor of Law and the director of the Criminal Justice Institute.

In the 1980’s, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz represented Claus von Bülow in his appeal for a
murder case which had become a nightly news item.

Sullivan has the backing of many Harvard Law School professors, including Dershowitz.

The Harvard Crimson reports:

52 Harvard Law School Professors Voice Support for Sullivan

Fifty-two Harvard Law School professors signed a letter supporting their fellow Professor
and Winthrop House Faculty Dean Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr. as he faces on-campus scrutiny
following his decision to represent Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein.

Law School professors Janet E. Halley and Elizabeth Bartholet ’62 organized the effort,
sending a draft to other professors and faculty clinicians early last week. Fifty-two faculty
members — including Professor Emeritus Alan M. Dershowitz, former Harvard Law School
Dean Martha L. Minow, and Professor Laurence H. Tribe — signed on to the document,
and the resulting letter was published in the Boston Globe on Friday.

This is a sad day for Harvard. They have put the anger of a campus mob ahead of the very foundations of
our legal system.