Dr Howard Fredrics is an American-born composer, performer, audio engineer,and forensic audio specialist, whose compositions have been performed and broadcast internationally.  He has received a number of awards and grants, including Emmy and Telly awards for his music for television, and grants from the British Arts and Humanities Research Council and the Kessler Foundation.  Dr Fredrics has been a professor of music at Brown University, Oberlin Conservatory, Texas A&M University and Kingston University, and currently serves as External Subject Examiner at London Metropolitan University.  He is Company Director of Auracle Music, Ltd, a music and audio production firm located in Southwest London.

Q1: Your departure from Kingston University was clouded indisputes some of which continue until today. You claim "anti Semitism" was involved. Please clarify.

During my tenure in my department, which beganin 2002, there were, at one point, six Jewish staff members.  By the time of my departure in 2006, there were none.  It seems unlikely to me that this is a mere coincidence, that all were sacked, forced to resign, or otherwise did not have their contracts renewed. This process of shedding Jewish staff members seems to correlate with achange of management in my department, which took place around the middle of 2004, when the Head of School was forced out by a collective grievance in which I had refused to join.

In March 2005, in connection with another collective grievance, this time filed against me by a group of eleven of my colleagues, I had filed two counter-grievances in relation to the ultra vires nature of the process employed and detriments meted out for my having made anumber of protected disclosures.  Duringthe course of dealing with these grievances, I had some correspondence with the Vice-Chancellor, Prof Peter Scott, in which I attempted conciliation and whereby I reiterated my desire to restore good working relationships with colleagues.  As part of that correspondence, I suggested that some misunderstandings may have taken place asa result of genuine cultural differences, citing my Jewish and American background.  I was surprised and shocked to receive a sharply worded response in which Prof Scott said, "You seek to excuse your behaviour (on those occasions when you agree it was unprofessional) by reference to your citizenship and religion. The terms in which you seek to justify / explain your unprofessional behaviour amount to further disparagement of your colleagues, i.e. the implications are that they are less direct than you (as an American) and care less deeply than you (as a Jew)."

In September 2005, requests from my wife, who was also employed in my department, and I to have a brief period of leave to observe the Jewish High Holy Days were denied by our line manager, whereas we had been granted this leave in past years by our previous line manager. This necessitated our filing of grievances, which were upheld, albeit not on the basis of our request to accommodate ourreligious observance.

In December 2007, after my dismissal, I had a conversation with a former colleague in my department who informed me that the department head, Dr Carol Gartrell, had made some comments to him expressing her objection to the subject matter of my research, which was the composition of an opera based on the life of acousin, Jack 'Kid' Berg, a well-known Jewish boxing champion during the1920s-40s.  Apparently, her objections were based on the Jewish content of the work and its portrayal of an important Jewish historical figure in a positive light. At the same time, my colleague informed me that two other former colleagues had made disparaging comments about the "Jewishness" of my music, an apparent reference to the musical influence of Arnold Schoenberg, a Jewish composer, who was the teacher of my principal composition teacher.

Q2: Collective grievance?

The collective grievance accused me of causing a "breakdown in working relationships" with my colleagues. It was, in the first instance, no more specific than that.  In fact, however, during the course of the "investigation," Mr Ali extracted a series of accusations from colleagues, several of which referred to my "American culture" as having led to the breakdown in working relationships.  I was also accused of "not accepting majority decisions."  To which I would, of course, reply that basic principles of academic freedom allow me to voice disagreements with any decision without fear of retribution.   I was, furthermore, accused of not submitting marks on time, which was a reference to an allegation brought forthin response to my having queried the outcome of a plagiarism investigation during an exam board meeting.  I was, of course, unable to submit the final marks in one of my modules until I knew what the outcome of this investigation was, however, this question appeared to upset my colleagues, most likely because they were concerned that I had raised this matter in the presence of external examiners. In general, I was accused of obstructing changes to the proposed curriculum, changes which I genuinely believed were not in the interests of the students and the University, and I exercised my right to voice my concerns in the proper context of staff meetings and in written communication with the appropriate Course Directors.  During the course of my employment, I raised a number of concerns about quality of service issues, which was my contractual responsibility to do, and about health andsafety issues, including the fact that a number of staff were signed off onlong term stress-related sick leave, and about extreme noise levels caused by students practicing with high-powered amplifiers.  These genuine concerns were distorted by my line manager as representing some sort of personal threat, and were reported as such to members of senior management, I believe in order to mischaracterize my conduct as improper.

Q2: The man who investigated your collective grievance was a man called Zafar Ali. You say he is from Hizb ut Tahrir. Provide the proof. Why would Kingston draft in a bigoted Islamist extremist to investigate a Jewish lecturer?  

I have no proof that he is, in fact, a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir.  What I do know is that he has been along-time activist for the establishment of an Islamic primary school in Slough, and that he now serves as "promoter" and Chair of the Board of Governors of the Iqra Islamic Primary School, which has recently been revealed to be headed by members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, and which has, therefore, lost its government funding.  It seems to me from what I understand about Hizb ut Tahrir, that they would not be inclined to appoint a Chair of the Board of Governors who was not, at the very least, sympathetic to their views.  Having read in the Slough Observer that Mr Ali is the Chair of the Board of Governors(http://www.sloughobserver.co.uk/articles/1/42105), and in the Telegraph, ofthe school's connection to Hizb ut Tahrir(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6475214/Council-suspends-funding-to-schools-linked-to-Hizb-ut-Tahrir.html), I have drawn this rather logical conclusion about Mr Ali's likely ties to the organization.

As to why Kingston would employ someone like Mr Ali, I can only speculate that they were aware ofhis anti-Semitic views, as well as his background in connection with a number of unrelated scandals, and that these facts suggested to them that he would be predisposed to cooperating with their plan to sack a Jewish staff member.  As I understand it, his involvement with the creation of the Iqra School pre-dates the time of his hiring by Kingston, and so they would have presumably known that he was involved in such activities.

Q3: Does Kingston University have a record of collaborating with political extremists?

From my reading and viewing of press reports, there has been a long history of political extremists using the University as a recruiting ground.  I am aware that in 2003, BBC Newsnight broadcast a report on the activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir on the Kingston University campus, and that following this report, related activity has apparently continued, both in terms of student involvement with radical groups,and in terms of the presence of an invited guest speaker, Shakeel Begg, whom, according to a Sunday Times report, appeared on campus in 2006 to extol the virtues of jihad against Jews in Israel. 

Similarly, Kingston University Lecturer in Human Rights, Andy Higginbottom, has spoken outpublicly in support of the UK government-banned LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) group, and the student leader of the Kingston University Tamil Society has been active inraising support for the Tamil struggle against the Sri Lankan government's recent military campaign. 

I must confess, however, that the alleged involvement of University staff andstudents with this latter group has not been at the forefront of my attention, in part because of my more immediate concern about Hizb ut Tahrir and other jihadist groups on campus.

Q4: Would you send your child to Kingston University?

No.  This is for a number of reasons.  Part of the reason has to do with the academic rigour, or lack thereof, at the University.  But part has to do with the inhospitable climate for Jews, which, I believe, is caused by the administration's apparent lack of regard for concerns about anti-Semitism on campus.  In other words, I believe that in the interest of attracting and supporting students from the Muslim community, a perfectly legitimate aim, the administration has needlessly turned a blind eye to those groups and individuals who have expressed and/or supported violent and anti-Semitic views.  I am a strong proponent of academic freedom and cultural engagement, but I do not support extending that freedom to calls for jihad against Jews or the commission of other violent or racist acts. 

I can recall a rather disturbing incident when I was teaching at the University, whereby I learned that one of my students was Jewish.  She made a point of asking me to promise that I would not reveal this fact to other students, apparently because she was afraid that she would therefore encounter some sort of anti-Semitic response.  Coming from the US, where such matters are not generally an issue, I was quite surprised and puzzled by her request.  But now, in retrospect, after what I've myself experienced at the University, I can understand more clearly why she might have had serious concerns.

Q5: As an American Jew living in the UK have you experienced anti Semitic acts aside from the Kingston University Experience?

Only once that I can recall.   When, in response to their academic boycott of Israel, I publicly but briefly tendered my resignation with my union, NATFHE, a resignation which never went into effect, since I didn't stop paying dues and retracted my resignation several days later, I was surprised that the newly formed UCU union, of which I then became a member, refused to provide legal support on the grounds of my so-called "lapse" in membership. When I threatened legal action, they retracted this stated grounds of refusal, and substituted another reason for their refusal to support me, that my dispute pre-dated my initial membership with NATFHE.  In my view, this action was a form of victimization for my outspoken anti-boycott views, and based on my belief that anti-Zionismis, in effect, a form of anti-Semitism, I considered this to be an anti-Semitic act on the part of my union.

Q6: Is your feeling that Anti Semitism is on the rise in the UK?

Yes.  The 2006 All-Party Inquiry into Anti-Semitismin the UK reveals that it is.  Much, though certainly not all of the evidence in this respect, reflects a growing correlation between anti-Zionist or "pro-Palestinian" views held by some members of the academic community, and the expansion of these views into more generally anti-Semitic terms, that include Holocaust denial, media and finance conspiracy theories, and the singling out of Jews for criticism on"human rights" grounds in connection with Middle East conflicts.  The growth of Muslim community political influence, while entirely appropriate based on population demographics and basic fairness, has also had the unintended and undesirable effect of increasing tolerance for extreme anti-Semitic views.  I am certain that such views are not shared by the majority of Muslims in Britain, but the vocal minority that does hold these views, has made life increasingly difficult for the Jewish community in Britain.  At the same time, the rise of the BNP and other extreme-Right groups, which I believe is caused by the misperception that immigrants have done more harm than good for Britain, and by the recent economic crisis, the likes of which has historically led to the rise of anti-Semitic scapegoating, has created considerable difficulty for BritishJews.

Q7: The Black Red Alliance - the Islamist compact with Left wingers - is strong on University Campuses. Already lesser known universities like Strathclyde have been exposed as homes of this alliance. Do you feel that the "trendy left" stance of many university lecturers in the UK and their appeasement of extreme Islamists has led to a rise in anti Semiticfeeling on British University campuses?

Unfortunately, to some extent, yes.   I part company with some, though certainly not all of, my leftist colleagues, when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian issues.  I am saddened by the fact that leftists in Britain and elsewhere have, to some degree, been co-opted by extremist groups advocating violence as the solution to current world disputes.  I have always supported a peaceful resolution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and so Ifind it quite troubling that some colleagues, with whom I might agree on so many issues, have adopted a common bond with groups wanting to resort to violence as a means of not only achieving Palestinian statehood, but of delegitimizing and destroying the state of Israel.  Once one takes the step of dehumanizing Jews in this context, the leap to broader anti-Semitism is, alas, not far behind.  I would add that from a socio-political standpoint, anti-Semitism also appears within the academic Left in the guise of "anti-elitism."  As a Jew, I have been brought up in a culture that places a high value on educational achievement, but since arriving in Britain, I have all too often found myself on the opposite side of an argument with colleagues when I advocate for maintaining high academic standards.  I believe that there is a fundamental difference between providing educational opportunity and support for all, which I favour, and awarding academic accolades to all, without requiring a demonstrated high level of accomplishment.

Dr Frederics spoke to the Westminster Journal in a face to face interview in November 2009 in London.

---

Bookmark with: