Friday, May 20, 2016

The "Flat Earth" Movement Gains Ground

It’s the ultimate conspiracy, involving all governments, their space programs, the entire scientific community, as well as the airlines. Other minor co-conspirators include GPS manufacturers and cartographers.

The secret, according to some die- hards, is out and the truth is gaining momentum. And once you go down this rabbit hole, you may never see light of day again.

The earth, you see, is flat. Or so asserts the Flat Earth Society, whose website features “evidence” galore, including videos of the moon landing which the proponents of this theory assert are photoshopped, denial of the existence of gravity and claims that star trail photography provides the final nail in the coffin for the “unsupportable claim” that the earth is a globe.

In the third century B.C., Eratosthenes first provided mathematic proof that the earth was spherical, as well as calculating its circumference.  It was not until the 1600s, when Galileo made his startling assertions that the Earth indeed revolved around the Sun, rather than the geo-centric model, that the general perception of man’s place in the cosmos began to assume its actual dimension. Galileo, as we recall, was imprisoned for heresy for his work on this issue.

The Flat Earthers got their first head of steam with the publications of Samuel Rowbotham (1816-1884), who is generally viewed as the founder of the modern Flat Earth movement.  Rowbotham was a nineteenth century inventor and writer, whose experiments are reproduced on the Flat Earth Society website. He authored Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe (1st ed. 1849, 2nd 1869, 3rd 1881), which is considered the seminal work on the subject.

Rowbotham’s ideas saw a revival with Charles K. Johnson, head of the Christian Apostolic Church in Lancaster, California, who employed Biblical passages as providing evidence of the flat earth. More recently, the flat earth has seen a revival among conspiracy buffs. The current head of the Flat Earth Society is an Englishman named Daniel Shenton.  Internet icon Tila Tequila and rapper B.o.B endorse flat earth beliefs.

The Flat Earth Society lists 554 official members as of 2014. The Flat Earth Society Facebook page has over 21,000 likes.

Essentially, this is what Flat Earthers believe:
1)      That the earth is a flat plain centered at the North Pole and enclosed by a 150 ft. ice wall, which we call Antarctica.  
2)      That the sun and moon are only about three thousand miles above earth. 
3)      That the earth may be enclosed by a transparent dome. 
4)      That the sun and moon revolve above the flat earth.  
5)      That eclipses are explained by the existence of an “anti-moon. 
6)      That gravity (which is known to create spherical objects) does not exist and what has been mistaken for gravity is actually the continuous acceleration (up to a rate of 32 ft. per second) of the flat earth. 
7)      That a force simply called “dark energy” is providing the accelerations. 
Some Flat Earthers assert that the plain beyond the ice wall is endless.
Diana, who received her college degree in liberal arts at a West Coast State University and works in a bookstore, is a Flat Earther. “It just doesn’t fit with my perceptions,” she asserted concerning the concept that the earth is a globe. “I don’t see that. I go with what I see and perceive.”

According to University of Minnesota McKnight Professor Emeritus Jim Fetzer, despite a plethora of YouTube videos, the Flat Earthers have failed to substantiate their claim. According to Fetzer, there may in fact be a conspiracy behind the “flat earth” movement.

Fetzer, who studied philosophy at Princeton University and earned his PhD in the History and the Philosophy of Science, sees the emergence of the Flat Earth movement at this juncture in time as “most peculiar.”
“They are trying to bamboozle people,” declared Fetzer in a recent interview. “They are cleverly taking advantage of the fact that Americans are not well grounded in science.”  
“If you can get the members of truth groups divided over an issue, you can create internal dissent which will devalue the issue they may be formed to consider, like 911 truth, like JFK truth,” stated Fetzer.
Fetzer raised concerns that the hidden hand of propagandist Cass Sunstein might be at play here. Sunstein is a legal scholar and college professor who for a couple of years was Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration. In a 2008 paper, entitled “Conspiracy Theories,”  which he co-authored with Adrian Vermeule, the authors openly proposed a program for government infiltration of truth groups (Sunstein called them “conspiracy theory groups”) for the purpose of sabotaging their efforts.

According to the authors: "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." After considering various alternatives, the authors propose that "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups."  The article repeatedly describes such groups as those who believe the US government had a hand in the events of September 11.

Some recent activity on a conspiracy oriented Facebook group raises the red flag that Sunstein’s suggestions may have been acted upon. A rather modest post, suggesting that the time span between the attacks of September 11 and the subsequent media pronouncement that the perpetrator was Bin Laden was suspicious, given how quickly this determination was made--in light of the time it takes for a federal investigation to take place--was met with an onslaught of verbal abuse. One respondent suggested that the author of that post needed a “strait jacket.” Others joined in calling the poster a “moron” and stated falsely that no evidence was provided.

The Real Deal Ep #136 included a debate on whether Earth is flat

However, if, as Fetzer has suggested, the Flat Earth movement is a “government op,” this would take the most dedicated efforts of those in federal employ to discredit alternative groups to quite another level. Fetzer has called the Flat Earth movement “An elaborate form of sowing dissension” which may result in fracturing existing truth oriented groups into an argument from which the integrity and purpose of the group may not recover. 

According to Flat Earthers, the actual motive of this enormous conspiracy to promote the globe earth is somewhat murky. But Diana made a statement that fits well with certain social and New Age trends when she said, “It’s about keeping from us who we are. They don’t want us to know who we are.”

Maybe that’s true. Maybe we are so gullible and ill-informed that we would be an embarrassment to ourselves if we actually knew it. Although that’s not what I think she meant.

Editor's note: The "flat Earth" movement appears to share many beliefs with Creation Scientists and may be inspired, not by government agencies, but by those who accept a literal interpretation of the Bible, instead. 

Monday, May 16, 2016

Francine Wheeler Was Personal Assistant to DNC National Finance Chair

The Wall Street Journal reports on May 14 that Democratic Party presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is “ramping up her fundraising schedule” with prominent supporters now hosting $100,000-per-head events.

Two individuals cited among Clinton’s inner fundraising circle are Maureen White and Steve Rattner, who oversaw one of the money soirees on May 12 at their Manhattan residence. (A second fundraiser was hosted that day by Lynn Forester de Rothschild.) 

“Mr Rattner was a prominent businessman and served in the Obama administration,” the Journal notes. Yet the brief report doesn’t elaborate on the couple’s very close ties to the Obama administration, where Clinton served as Secretary of State.

As MHB observed in 2013, Sandy Hook parent and actor Francine Wheeler was previously employed as personal assistant to chief Democratic National Committee fundraiser White. In fact, White was the DNC’s star campaigner, raising $51 million in 2005 alone. She then served as senior advisor on humanitarian issues in Afghanistan and Pakistan in under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

White’s husband, the powerful Wall Street investment banker and Obama administration advisor Steve Rattner, is also a close personal friend and money manager of anti-gun crusader and founder of Mayors Against Illegal Guns Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg used the Sandy Hook shooting as a rallying cry for more stringent federal gun control measures. Rattner is also a member of the influential Council on Foreign Relations.

Rattner previously worked for the New York Times as an assistant to famed Times’ columnist James Reston. There Rattner befriended Times publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. The Times has played a central role in propagating the Sandy Hook narrative, editorializing for heightened gun control measures, and misrepresenting the issues surrounding Professor James Tracy’s termination by Florida Atlantic University in January 2016.

Readers of this blog may also recall that Francine Wheeler is also a musician member of “The Dream Jam Band,” a group of “from the Northeast who,” according to their website, “write and play an eclectic collection of original music for children of all ages young and old [sic].” Here are Francine and the Dream Jam Band performing a lip-sync performance of the song, “Brush Your Teeth.”

In 2001, Francine married David Cole Wheeler, another professional actor who starred in an obscure short film, Faithful, also produced that year. The macabre production centers around the theme of suicide that eerily reemerges in the Sandy Hook shooting narrative. David is now on the speaking circuit as a bereaved Sandy Hook parent.

One Sandy Hook researcher has recently located photographic and video evidence strongly suggesting that David also clumsily played an FBI sniper in Newtown on December 14, 2012.

Since this possible appearance as an inept militarized policeman David and Francine, with a little help of folks like Francine’s former boss Maureen White, have made virtual careers out of their identity as mourning Sandy Hook parents turned gun control activists.

For example, in April 2013 the Wheelers collaborated in their presentation of the White House Weekly Address for the Obama administration, pointing to their apparent loss and calling on the US Congress to enact “common sense gun responsibility reforms [sic].”

Here David Wheeler performs at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s Brady Bear Awards for its campaign, “Imagine a Future Where No Child Is Killed With a Parent’s Gun.”

The ties between the Democracy Party establishment, Wall Street and the most significant event seized upon to further gun control measures in this country couldn’t be more clear. Yet this is something that major media outlets such as The New York Times are not investigating, and with good reason, as they are integral components of this finely-tuned passion play.

James Tracy,  former Associate Professor of Media and Communications at Florida Atlantic University, has filed a lawsuit against FAU for wrongful termination. has donated $5,000 to support his legal defense fund. 

Saturday, May 14, 2016

Fired professor, James Tracy, sues his University May 10

By Jon Rappoport

James Tracy, a tenured professor at Florida Atlantic University, was fired because he dared to express his contrarian views and lay out his research about the Sandy Hook shooting.

Tracy did so as a private citizen on his blog. He made that clear.

But the University didn’t care. They ripped away his tenure and job.

Now Tracy is suing. As he should. Because the issue is a little thing called the 1st Amendment.

Darrall Hamamoto, Dave Gahary and Jim Fetzer discuss the James Tracy lawsuit 

I’ve read his court filing. It appears to me that Tracy’s own union took his side and then betrayed him. It appears to me that the University cooked up a fake reason for firing him: he didn’t send in a vaguely worded form they wanted him to sign.

But the real reason had to do with Tracy’s view about Sandy Hook: that it was a hoax. It doesn’t matter whether you or I or anyone else agrees with his assessment. What matters is his inherent right to express his view.

The University doesn’t want to grant Tracy that right. The University is worried about press blowback and “reputation.” Apparently, shutting down free speech doesn’t affect the University’s standing in this day and age. It’s an easy sell.

Well, it shouldn’t be.

There is a lot riding on the outcome of this court case.

Where are the thousands of college professors all over the country who should be flocking to Tracy’s side with uncompromising support? Where are their voices?

These professors are already sold out or they’re afraid, and that tells you a great deal about the current academic climate in America. The professors are captives of the system in which they work and live. They’re know which way to jump on any given issue. They know when to shut their mouths. They know when to launch an attack against an officially un-favored person. They know the boundaries and the game, and they play it.

exit from the matrix

Here is a full press release about the case posted at Professor Tracy’s blog. Read it, share it, and support this man who dares to speak and write what he finds to be true without checking, first, with some authority who wants to exercise control over the 1st Amendment.

This is the latest trend, you know, especially on college campuses. Let some group decide what everyone should believe—and then repress any contrary opinion.

This trend needs to die, and soon.

Jon Rappoport, a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California, is thr author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was . He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. 

Monday, May 9, 2016

Pete Hendrickson: "Smoking Gun" Proof of US Government Corruption

By Pete Hendrickson

Here It Is, Activists Of All Causes: THE "Smoking Gun" Proving Government Corruption

HAVE YOU EVER FOUND YOURSELF IN A DEBATE with someone who just can't wrap his or her well-conditioned mind around the fact that the US executive agencies and the federal courts are corrupt? It can be hard.

Usually you're faced with the uphill climb of coaxing the skeptic into learning some complex backstory, following your logic and drawing inferences that support your case. It's only occasionally that you'll be given the kind of time and honest attention necessary to get there using such delicate tools. But now you don't need to rely on mere argument-- concrete proof is at hand!

Whether you're trying to explain "false flags" or election fraud, or support any other good reason Americans should be skeptical of government claims, one single sentence from a federal trial transcript provides you with an atom-bomb of evidence. You will never again have even a single person walk away shaking his head, unconvinced.

Here it is, the best new resource for the entire "truth" community:

It is not a defense to the crime of Contempt that the Court Order that the Defendant is accused of violating was unlawful or unconstitutional.

WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE is an instruction requested by the US Department of Justice in each of the two trials of Doreen Hendrickson (in 2013 and 2014). Doreen was being tried on a DOJ-brought charge of "criminal contempt of court" for refusing to commit perjury as ordered by a court in 2007 at the agency's request.

This instruction (see the actual transcript pages here) was issued by the trial court (over Doreen's objection) and subsequently upheld as valid by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2016. But as is obvious to any kindergartener, this instruction is invalid on its face.

An unlawful order-- by its inherent nature-- imposes no legal duty. Disobedience of an unlawful order cannot be a contempt under ANY circumstances.

So, no leap of logic is needed here. The unlawfulness of an order plainly and unmistakably is a defense to a charge of contempt; indeed, it is the most fundamental kind of defense to such a charge.

In fact, the statute defining criminal contempt, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 401(3), specifies that it only applies to "lawful" orders, to ensure that even the most mentally-challenged among us can't misunderstand this fact: “...Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.”

Plainly, this jury instruction is invalid. Plainly, the request for it, its issuance, and it being upheld are all acts of executive and judicial corruption.

This instruction is the "red pill" with which any doubter of the government's willingness to lie and break the law can be easily awakened to reality. Use it that way yourself, and share it around with everyone-- even those with no interest in the truth about the income tax, but with other causes in which government corruption is a factor.

NOTE: The instruction discussed here would be invalid in ANY contempt prosecution. The details of the charge involved are irrelevant to that point.

But just so everyone using this weapon of truth is fully-equipped if the question should arise, I'll explain that the orders involved in this case command Mrs. Hendrickson to testify over her own sworn signature using expressions dictated by government agents which she does not believe to be true and which directly contradict her previously- and freely-made testimony on the same subjects. (Further, the dictated expressions are meant to be used as evidence against Mrs. Hendrickson for the government's financial benefit.)

Thus, the orders involved in the case in which this instruction was given ARE, in fact, unlawful, and everyone knows it. It was to overcome that problem and allow a false conviction to be accomplished that this corrupt and inherently invalid instruction was sought and issued.

It was to sustain that false conviction that the instruction was upheld by the Circuit Court panel in a ruling in which it also declared that it would not address the constitutionality of the orders themselves. Both those decisions were based on the pretext that unquestioning respect for the "authority" of a court and its orders (even illegal ones!) outweigh the Constitution (by misapplication of the vague judicially-created "doctrine" known as "collateral bar").

Learn more about that appellate decision at And learn why the (misnamed) Department of Justice and its sock-puppet courts are willing to stoop to these crimes at

Saturday, May 7, 2016

American Academic Freedom in Jeopardy

Professor James Tracy vs. Florida Atlantic University (FAU)

American academics will soon realize that their jobs are in jeopardy, if they don’t know it already. Not only their jobs, but their right to think, say, and write what they wish – and to engage in the pursuit of truth, wherever it may lead them.
A battle of epic proportions is about to begin, over the firing of Dr. James Tracy, for alleged infractions against Florida Atlantic University (FAU) in Boca Raton. Tracy contends that his First Amendment right to free speech was abridged, along with his rights to due process and academic freedom.[1]
Tracy was dismissed from his tenured position as Associate Professor of Multimedia Journalism at FAU on January 6, 2016. On April 25, he filed a civil rights suit against the university, including the President, Provost, and other top officials, as well as members of the Board of Trustees and representatives of the faculty union. His complaint calls for reinstatement with back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and a declaration that FAU’s controversial “Conflict of Interest/Outside Activities” policy is unconstitutional.[2]
Ostensibly terminated for not filing university forms regarding his “outside activities,” Tracy was actually fired for research and writing connected with his popular blog, which he runs privately – and which includes the disclaimer that the views expressed “do not reflect the opinions or positions of any institution or entity…No information on this blog will be understood as official.”
The outcome of this lawsuit will affect all areas of education in the USA – not only regarding tenured professors. If Tracy does not prevail, constitutional rights will also be curtailed for non-tenured regular and adjunct professors, who have no job security and are already pressured to toe the line politically and academically. Not only will college professors be affected but also teachers in state public schools, who are under assault regarding tenure policies in California, New York, and elsewhere.[3] Florida has already eliminated tenure for K-12 instructors.
The case for academic freedom
The idea of “academic freedom” is widely embraced by American colleges and universities, which routinely assert that freedom of inquiry and expression are essential for their effective operation. The concept is outlined in the “1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure,” by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), which is followed by most institutions of higher learning in the USA. Amendments of 1970 further protect the rights of professors.[4]
According to the AAUP document, “Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties.” In terms of “outside activities,” the document includes the following:
College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline…they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.
This was amended in 1970 so as to coordinate with a 1964 AAUP “Committee A Statement on Extramural Utterances,” which states as follows:
The controlling principle is that a faculty member’s expression of opinion as a citizen cannot constitute grounds for dismissal unless it clearly demonstrates the faculty member’s unfitness for his or her position. Extramural utterances rarely bear upon the faculty member’s fitness for the position.
These protections are embedded in policies on academic freedom by the University of California,[5] the University of Pennsylvania,[6] Harvard University,[7] and many other institutions. Such policies do not guarantee that the rights of professors are always respected, however, and the AAUP has carried out numerous investigations and censured institutions for infringements.
Freedom from outside influence
In 2011, the AAUP issued a report, “Ensuring Academic Freedom in Politically Controversial Academic Personnel Decisions,” regarding controversial cases relating to disputed events and policies:
…the need for faculty members to contribute their expertise to public discourse and policy debates has increased. The protection of their unfettered expression, including the ability to espouse highly controversial and unpopular views, is an essential social responsibility of universities and colleges…political restrictions on academic expression must not be countenanced…
“Political intrusion” arising out of controversies may come from inside the university community or from outside interests:
It may also come from outside the university when, for example, private corporations or public officials seek to persuade universities to terminate particular research activities, programs, or the services of the faculty members involved.[8]
Such outside intrusion precipitated the termination of James Tracy. This took the form of a media blitz by the Florida Sun Sentinel, a division of Tribune Publishing Co., which also owns the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and the Hartford Courant. The Sun Sentinel published a letter of December 10, 2015, written by Lenny and Veronique Pozner, publicized as the only Jewish family to have lost a child in the alleged Sandy Hook shooting. The letter, “Sandy Hook Massacre 3rd Anniversary: Two Parents Target FAU Conspiracy Theorist,” was reprinted in the Forward on December 14.[9] This was followed by numerous articles and editorials in the Sun Sentinel, such as “Tenure Be Damned, Professor James Tracy Embarrasses FAU” and “Tenure: A Concept Whose Time Has Passed?”
The Pozners’ accusations were false, as has been shown repeatedly, but nonetheless they were picked up by other media outlets and used to bash Dr. Tracy in the US press.[10] The content of the letter is not the issue here – it is the use of the corporate press to coerce the university to fire a tenured professor who was exercising his right to free speech as a citizen, in “extramural” work that he is entitled to pursue.
Outside influence has played a role in several high profile academic cases, notably that of Norman Finkelstein, a brilliant speaker and prolific writer known for his research on the Holocaust and support of Palestinian rights. While Jewish himself, he has been labeled an “anti-Semite” because of his criticism of Israel – and castigated for his allegations of fraud and plagiarism in the writing of others. One of those named was Alan Dershowitz, who tried, successfully, to get DePaul University to deny Finkelstein tenure, even though his faculty colleagues had voted in his favor.[11] DePaul insisted that outside pressure had played no role in the decision. Finkelstein’s university career was destroyed, while Dershowitz was given the Mortimer Zuckerman Award in 2014 for “promoting Israel’s … relentless pursuit of peace” – an honor marred only slightly by an investigation of Dershowitz over accusations of sexual misconduct with underage girls the following year.[12]
Academic freedom at FAU
FAU also has a commitment to academic freedom, as affirmed in official university documents. The Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Board of Trustees and faculty union (UFF) states as follows:
5.1 … The Board, the University, and the UFF are committed to maintaining and encouraging full academic freedom. Academic freedom and academic responsibility are twin guardians of the integrity of institutions of higher learning. This integrity is essential to the preservation of a free society and explains the willingness of society historically to accept the concept of academic freedom and, in addition, to protect it through the institution of academic tenure.
5.2 … The principal elements of academic freedom include the freedom to:
(a) Present and discuss academic subjects, frankly and forthrightly, without fear of censorship…
(b) Engage in scholarly and creative activity, and to publish results in a manner consistent with professional obligations.
(c) Speak freely on, and seek changes in, academic and institutional policies.
(d) Exercise constitutional rights without institutional censorship or discipline.[13]
Tracy was officially reprimanded for questioning a vague and restrictive policy on “Conflict of Interest/Outside Activities,” which he was fully entitled to do (5.2, above). He had declined to submit “outside activities” forms until the policy had been clarified, on the advice of the union. As of 2015, the policy required the faculty to report “any outside activity” (compensated or uncompensated) to the University. As all academics know, outside independent research and its dissemination are not only a right of faculty, but a requirement, affecting decisions on tenure and promotion. Who among us could (or would) report all “outside activities”? This policy was clearly devised as a rationale for Tracy’s termination.
FAU policy on academic freedom is also enshrined in the Board of Trustees’ Board Operations Policies and Procedures:
The Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees supports the principle of academic freedom and is committed to the search for new knowledge… [and] will defend the right of faculty and students to pursue their academic goals free from constraints that hinder lawful intellectual inquiry and discourse, and will protect the freedom of faculty to teach and of students to learn from ideas that might be unpopular or not in the mainstream of accepted thought.[14]
However they did not defend the right of James Tracy to pursue his academic goals free from constraints – to the contrary, they fired him. This is not the first time Tracy has been harassed by FAU at the behest of the press. In 2013 he was reprimanded over his blog, whereupon he removed any mention of FAU as his employer. This was occasioned by a letter written by three of his colleagues, “Why James Tracy, FAU’s Conspiracy Theorist, Should Resign,” published on April 29, 2013, in thePalm Beach Post.[15] This constituted outside influence, from within the university community, also condemned by the AAUP.
Open season on academics
Far from being protected, American academics can now be thrown to the wolves, with unsubstantiated stories in the press leading to a ruined reputation and loss of employment – with no concern for academic freedom or due process. Tracy has been characterized as a “tenured truther” and “cruel and possibly deranged” (Chronicle of Higher Education) and a “conspiracy theorist” many times over (New York Times, New York Daily News, et al.). He has been called “a virus,” “crazed,” “twisted,” and “a never-ending embarrassment to the university and its community” (Sun Sentinel), “kooky,” “nutty,” and “sicko” (New York Daily News), and said to “spin tall tales out of nothing” (Palm Beach Post). In addition he has received obscene cards and threatening e-mails.
Noah Feldman, a professor of Constitutional and International Law at Harvard, called Tracy a “crank” and a “terrible person,” in his recent article, “Free Speech for Bad People.”[16] While ostensibly on the right side of the academic freedom debate, Feldman flogs the same old “conspiracy theory” meme, as well as the false story promoted by the Pozners. Still, he does recognize that a professor should not be fired for extramural research and writing.
Actually, Tracy is a deeply intelligent thinker, a sharp investigator, a talented writer – and an impeccably honest, ethical person. None of this gets any airplay, however, with political forces trying to silence him via the corporate media. This should bring out the academics in force. So gear up, colleagues, and support James Tracy. Stand up for your principles, and for your rights – or be prepared to lose them.
Vivian Lee is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
[1] “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Article I, U. S. Bill of Rights.
[2] “Professor James Tracy Files Civil Rights Lawsuit against Florida Atlantic University and Faculty Union,” Press Release, April 25, 2016.
[3] “Closely Watched Fight over California Teacher Tenure Moves to Appeals Court,” New York Times, February 25, 2016.
[4] “1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure,” AAUP.
[5] “Academic Freedom,” General University Policy Regarding Academic Appointees, University of California, revised September 29, 2003.
[6] “Academic Freedom and Responsibility,” Handbook for Faculty and Academic Administrators, University of Pennsylvania, revised as Article 11, Statutes of the
[7] “Free Speech Guidelines,” Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences,” adopted February 13 and May 15, 1990.
[8] “Ensuring Academic Freedom in Politically Controversial Academic Personnel Decisions,” AAUP (Executive Summary, 2011).
[10] “Sandy Hook: The Hounding of Prof. James Tracy,” Fellowship of the Minds, February 17, 2016. 
[11] “Harvard Law Professor Works To Disrupt Tenure Bid of Longtime Nemesis at DePaul U.,” Chronicle of Higher Education, April 5, 2007.
[12] “Civil Rights Attorney Alan Dershowitz Hailed by Pro-Israeli Group,” New York Daily News, November 24, 2014. “Lawyer Denies Suit’s Allegations of Sex with a Minor,” New York Times, January 7, 2015.
[13] Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees and the United Faculty of Florida Collective Bargaining Agreement 2012-2015 (ratified September 21, 2015).
[14] Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees, Board Operations Policies and Procedures, updated November 19, 2013.