“Why can’t I say that Mohammed had a wife who was six years old?” As Muslim students at Vanderbilt and their allies gathered to protest an anti-Islam op-ed by a conservative black professor, they probably didn’t expect their party to be crashed by a 1980s-era Saturday Night Livecast member-turned- Concervative Tea Partier.

The College Fix  Jackson – who carried a “ban Sharia” sign with her, later tried to convince a Muslim man at the protest to have a debate on “Sharia law and whether we have freedom of speech,” as captured by The College Fix’s exclusive video.

“Why can’t I say that Mohammed had a wife who was six years old?” Jackson said, prompting several protesters to interrupt her and complain that the media were paying attention to her.

The Saturday afternoon protest was organized by Muslim student Farishtay Yamin, who looked on proudly as chants of “Vanderbilt united will never be divided!” and “To reach peace, teach peace!” grew louder. It was in response to an op-ed written in The Tennessean by Carol Swain, a black professor at Vanderbilt Law School.

Responding to the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris but not targeting any person or group on campus, Swain asserted that Islam “poses an absolute danger to us and our children” and called for “serious monitoring of Islamic organizations.” 

But Swain’s speech must be curtailed, Yamin said: “What I’m really trying to show her is that she can’t continue to say these kinds of things on a campus that’s so liberal and diverse and tolerant” or “say bigoted things about her own students.”

The sizeable Muslim population at Vanderbilt and the terror-linked Muslim Brotherhood front group MSA Muslim Students Association, one of the most prominent radical Muslim organizations on campus, generated such an uproar about Swain’s op-ed that it drew an administration response:

Dean of Students Mark Bandas emailed the student body to say that that Muslim students had told him they have “felt welcome and safe at Vanderbilt until you read this piece.” Bandas told students to use their freedom of expression to challenge “polarizing speech” and “engage in dialogue with … those with whom you disagree.”