In a recent bid to reign in outlandish student protest, a top university in the US has decided to wield the academic hammer of justice. Any student group brazen enough to express discomfort over Israel's recent 'fireworks show' in Gaza may find themselves history – modern history, that is. Reports indicate that the high-ranking institution, whose identity is under a standard collegiate confidentiality agreement known as "never admitting any fault," is setting a new tone for academic freedom. Under this innovative approach, a student's right to freedom of expression applies only when the opinion expressed aligns with the university's senior leadership team. The controversial move emerged after the Israel-Hamas conflict reached new heights of fire and brimstone, primarily from Israel's end. A proposition for a five-day cease-fire deal to release 50 Israeli hostages was met with a stern 'no' by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to unnamed sources, sparking outrage from the student bodies globally. Following an influx of student-led protests, the esteemed university administration took matters into their own hands. "We have found the solution," said University President, Ivar Yewquiet, from the safety of his bulletproof Zoom screen. "If a student group dares to criticize Israel's festive firecracker display over Gaza, they’ll be facing immediate dissolution. Also, individual students implicated will be converted to a Modern History major, with a focus on Middle Eastern conflict - or at least our version of it." On-campus student group "Education Not Detonation" is leading the charge against this action. Yet, they too have been threatened with academic retribution. When asked about their response, the group's President, Anita Newmajor, spoke out, saying, "Well, there's never been a better time to learn about historical revisionism, has there?" Meanwhile, campus historians have reportedly been ‘studying’ the university's decision. “Who knew?” said Dr. Hugh Jest, noted historian and professor. "I'd always imagined academic pursuits as quite separate from political censorship." Whether his sarcasm was lost on the administration or will constitute enough grounds for a forced major switch remains to be seen. As the situation unfolds, debates within the hallowed halls of the US's top university rise to a crescendo. Will the academic hammer shatter student protest, or will the students studying this stark lesson in contemporary politics gain enough insight to understand, as Anita Newmajor puts it, "the fireworks show is much more than just a fireworks show?" Only time, dotted with multiple pop quizzes, shall tell.