This post was published at World Alternative Media
This post was published at World Alternative Media
The Death of Academic Freedom
On December 11, 2017, in a serious miscarriage of justice, a jury in West Palm Beach, Florida, ruled unanimously in favor of Florida Atlantic University and against former Media Studies Professor James Tracy, who was suing for reinstatement after his firing in 2016.
The jury found that Tracy’s ‘controversial’ articles on Memory Hole Blog were not a ‘motivating factor’ in his firing, the only question they were required to consider. Of course, Tracy’s posts at ‘his conspiracy theory blog’ were indeed the reason he was fired, but the jury was convinced otherwise by FAU’s legal team with assistance from the judge.
The case centered around Tracy’s writings on the anomalies found in the reporting on the Sandy Hook ‘massacre’ of December 14, 2012. His skepticism about the event was not to the liking of the university.
FAU maintained that Tracy was not fired from his tenured position because of his blog posts, but because he did not follow the ‘rules’ set out by ‘his bosses’ at the government-run institution. FAU attorney G. Joseph Curley insisted that Tracy was not denied his First Amendment rights, but that he simply did not follow university procedure.
‘Professor Tracy doesn’t follow the rules,’ Curley told the jury. ‘They’re rules that everyone else follows. He doesn’t play by the rules.’ FAU cast the case as one of a ‘belligerent,’ rebellious,’ and ‘nonconformist’ employee being let go for ‘insubordination,’ instead of that of a tenured professor exercising his right to free speech.
FAU’s current ‘rules’ require that faculty submit forms listing ‘outside activities’ to be vetted for administrative approval, whether the activities are compensated or not. Tracy and other professors at FAU had argued that the policy is vague and confusing, constituting a form of prior restraint forbidden by the First Amendment, and leading to a climate of ‘fear and uncertainty’ among the faculty.
Aside from the fact that ‘outside activities’ can reach into all aspects of a professor’s life and therefore be difficult if not impossible to list, such activities must not be subject to bureaucratic approval. And certainly, no tenured professor can be fired for not filling out a form, even at Florida Atlantic University.
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on DECEMBER 27, 2017.
Two liberal professors from San Diego State University are now claiming that the existence of farmers markets in urban areas, outside the control of corporations, is racist and normalizes the eating habits of white people.
Pascale Joassart-Marcelli and Fernando J Bosco made the insane claims in a chapter of a new anthology released this month that ‘researches’ the correlation between how white a specific farmers market supposedly is and the gentrification in said area.
As Campus Reform notes, ‘The anthology, which features contributions from a variety of professors, aims to highlight the harms of ‘environmental gentrification,’ a process in which ‘environmental improvements lead to…the displacement of long-term residents.’
The Washington Times also reported on this hardcore liberal insanity:
This post was published at shtfplan on December 28th, 2017.
Talk about insane! This one takes home the trophy! It used to be algebra and geometry were required courses for those students who wished to attend college. They were considered college prep classes.
Now, these same classes are considered ‘racist’? Come on people! This is nothing more than political correctness gone amok!
A professor at the University of Illinois made the claim that algebra and geometry perpetuate white privilege because ’emphasizing terms like Pythagorean theorem and pi’ give the impression that math ‘was largely developed by Greeks and other Europeans.’
Rochelle Gutierrez’ work ‘focuses on equity issues in mathematics education,’ and worries that evaluations of math skills can perpetuate discrimination against minorities, especially if they do worse than white students.
Watch Liz Wheeler, OAN News, set this virtue signaling snowflake straight. Hilarious!
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on DECEMBER 27, 2017.
Recently I read in CounterPunch two feminist rants against men. Not all men, just white heterosexual men. It is not always easy for a male of my generation to understand what feminists are saying, but I try. One seems to be saying that women live in a society that puts in power men who believe that violence against women is acceptable. Elevating her accusation to a fact, the writer says that women should not have to prove their case when they bring sexual harassment and assault charges, much less prove their ‘personal validity to even be making a case against a man.’
Is the writer saying that any irate woman should have the right to inpugn a man with an unchallenged charge? Do men and American society believe that violence against women is acceptable? I think not, unless the violence is committed by police. Americans seem to accept police violence against men, women, children, the handicapped, and the family dog.
The other writer says women have to sell themselves to live. She, despite a degree from a prestigeous university, went to work as a stripper, lap dancer, and apparently as a prostitute. She blames men for her poor decisions.
To be clear, I sympathize with anyone who finds themselves in the position that survival requires the sacrifice of their self-esteem. This happens to people everywhere all over the world. It is not an unique experience of women.
This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on December 27, 2017.
In September 1975, The Grateful Dead released what was to become its highest chart-topping album for the next twelve years, Blues for Allah. In an interview at the time, the group’s lyricist, Robert Hunter, described the album’s title song as ‘a requiem for King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, a progressive, democratically-inclined ruler (and incidentally a fan of the Grateful Dead) whose assassination in 1975 shocked us personally.’ Hunter went on to note proudly that the lyrics of the album, inspired as it was as much by Bach as by Eastern influences, were printed in Arabic on the back of album.
This remarkable, trance-like title track referenced Biblical prophecy, Ozymanides, and A Thousand and One Nights. But most of all, it brought attention to the death of one of the Middle East’s then-universally acknowledged enlightened rulers who disdained excess displays of wealth and who opened the first schools for female students in the country. The construction of this vast, progressive-rock tone-poem is a straight line of discursive guitar themes later superimposed by poignant, haunting vocals. It includes two sections, ‘Sand Castles and Glass Camels’ and ‘Unusual Occurrences in the Desert’, in which powerful political statements were woven into the artistry. ‘What good is spilling blood?/It will not change a thing’, observes one line; another is a plea for a resolution of Muslim/Jewish conflict: ‘Let us meet as Friends/the Flower of Islam/the Fruit of Abraham’. Prophesizing the geopolitics of the region, the song grimly warns: ‘The ships of state sail on mirage/and drown in sand.’
Such compelling protest art could have been written today in view of the interminable geopolitical situation in the Mideast. Yet, it hasn’t been, and it won’t be. We are bereft of any near equivalent; the integrating instinct of music, politics and passion nowhere present, nowhere promoted. Certainly, there is no shortage of ‘unusual occurrences in the desert’ – or anywhere else for that matter – to inspire truly creative works of radical brilliance. Yet none of that kind of meaningful protest that defined the eras of the late sixties and the entirety of the seventies is to be found in our current rock/popular music groups. Why? How have we missed this? Where were the songs to protest the 2003 invasion of Iraq? Where are the poignant ballads against the spread of terror or the failures of the so-called ‘War on Terror’? The sixteen-year occupation of Afghanistan? The high rates of American soldier-suicides? Consider the power-lyrics of Vietnam-era anti-war works by such groups as Buffalo Springfield or as found in Joan Baez’s ‘Where Are You Now, My Son?’ (‘Yours was the righteous gun/where are you now, my son?’). Why are we incapable of this? Where are the artists of impact and deep intelligence to make sense of a world in which the irrational is the new and newer normal? Must we only be satisfied with Pearl Jam performing a bland cover of Bob Dylan’s ‘Master of War’? Are we just to accept that these talented groups cannot come up with meaningful statements of their own?
This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on December 25, 2017.
In yet another round of you can’t make this up stuff up hard-left insanity, a liberal writer from Seattle has published an adult coloring book that ridicules white people for their perceived slights against the leftist orthodoxy and unchecked ‘white privilege’ that allows them to vote for someone like Donald Trump.
Author Jim Corbett apparently wrote the book out of frustration (see Trump Derangement Syndrome) with what he was seeing on TV in relation to a wide variety of leftist causes including white privilege, the sham Russian/Trump collusion investigation, censoring conservatives on college campuses, and kneeling during the National Anthem.
‘It came completely out of me screaming at my TV, and the way the GOP is taking the country off in a totally different direction,’ Corbett told USA Today.
The paper reported:
Corbett and Tim Jones (another white guy) wrote the text; the 27 illustrations were done by veteran artist (and African-American) Steve Hartley. The coloring book is available online at Amazon for $10; Corbett says 10 percent of the profits are being donated to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
This post was published at shtfplan on December 22nd, 2017.
In 2013, Professor Lance Dehaven-Smith – in a peer-reviewed book published by the University of Texas Press – showed that the term ‘conspiracy theory’ was developed by the CIA as a means of undercutting critics of the Warren Commission’s report that President Kennedy was killed by Oswald. The use of this term was heavily promoted in the media by the CIA. And – up until recently – it has served its purpose.
Now, however, in 2017, those who were once called ‘conspiracy theorists’ are being vindicated as they watched instance after instance get exposed all year long. To be clear, we are not talking about outlandish, unprovable, and off the wall theories that completely lack evidence. We are talking about well-researched cases that were deliberately dismissed and ridiculed by the mainstream as a means of oppressing the information and protecting the establishment.
Ironically enough, 2017 is the year the conspiracy theorists were proven right as the mainstream media and government began pushing wild conspiracy theories without evidence to back them up.
To show just how vindicated the well-informed are, below is a list of the top 10 conspiracy theories that were proven as real in 2017.
1. Hollywood and the political elite have been exposed for their rampant and horrifying sex abuse against men, women, and children alike
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on DECEMBER 20, 2017.
‘To handle all that [pig-farm feces] waste, farmers in North Carolina use a standard practice called the lagoon and spray field system. They flush feces and urine from barns into open-air pits called lagoons, which turn the color of Pepto-Bismol when pink-colored bacteria colonize the waste. To keep the lagoons from overflowing, farmers spray liquid manure on their fields nearby. The result, says Steve Wing, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is this: ‘The eastern part of North Carolina is covered with shit’.’ -National Geographic, 10/30/14
The above quote describes corporate pig farming around the world.
In order to carry out this operation, giant companies like Smithfield have influenced legislators and government-agency officials. Environmental laws and regulations are ignored, or changed. Lawsuits are fought, hammer and tongs.
Here is what Robert F Kennedy Jr. told radio interviewer, Rachel Lewis Hilburn on 6/3/16:
‘…a hog produces ten times the amount of fecal waste by weight as a human being, so if you have a facility that has ten thousand hogs in it, it’s producing as much sewage as a city of a hundred thousand people. Smithfield has one plant in Utah – they call it Circle Four Farms – that has a million hogs on it, so it’s producing the same amount of waste as New York City every day.’
This post was published at Jon Rappoport on December 20, 2017.
The town of Newkirk, Oklahoma is about to receive a series of ‘gifts’ from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)…in the form of exposing the town to chemical agents. The purpose is to see how much protection is offered by houses and apartments against a bioweapon. It is also to see how first responders will be able to evacuate people and treat those in affected areas.
An article written on 12/16/17 by Jay Syrmopoulos for Activist Post entitled Residents Outraged as DHS Spraying Town With Chemicals – Using Them as Human Guinea Pigs, covers all of the details. Let’s be clear: these are not weapons of biowarfare being tested, but substances that will mimic the spread and ‘adhesion’ to buildings and materials; however, they are used specifically to assess biowarfare capabilities of an actual agent released or delivered. One of the chemicals is a pesticide named Dipel, among other ‘niceties’ such as titanium dioxide, fluorescent brightener, and urea. Here’s an excerpt to illustrate the government mindset on this testing, scheduled to commence in January:
‘I’m really sorry that everyone is so afraid in Newkirk because these are very benign products,’ Kitty Cardwell, a professor at Oklahoma State University and director of the National Institute of Microbial Forensics for Food and Agricultural Biosecurity, who has been involved in other Homeland Security projects, told Newsweek.
Cardwell believes the chemicals are non-toxic at that minuscule amount and likely wouldn’t reach populated areas.
Interestingly, while Cardwell and the U. S. government claim the chemicals used in the testing won’t adversely impact human health or the environment, the EU has proposed to classify titanium dioxide as a carcinogen – meaning that it is suspected of causing cancer – specifically when inhaled.’
This post was published at shtfplan on December 18th, 2017.
Lew Rockwell ran a detailed article on these incongruities. It originally appeared on the Collective Evolution site.
The article makes a claim that half of Americans don’t believe the official story. This is certainly good news. It indicates that people are not so easily suckered. But something in the same percentage range applies also to Kennedy’s assassination. Within a year of the assassination, Mark Lane wrote his book debunking the Warren Commission report, and there have been hundreds of books since then that have been equally skeptical. This is not something new.
In contrast, the percentage of Americans who believe Franklin Roosevelt’s version of Pearl Harbor, which he delivered to Congress in his speech on December 8, 1941, remains high. Revisionist historians began going to work on the official story as early as 1946. But, even today, American history textbooks give no indication that the official story has always had gigantic holes in it. These holes have not been successfully patched. They have simply been ignored. Universities don’t teach anything except the official party line. In this respect, there has been an extraordinarily effective barrier to the truth regarding Pearl Harbor from the day after it took place.
The article on 9/11 contains lots of valuable information on the famous event. There are lots of such summaries online. There are lots of skeptical videos. A cursory examination of half a dozen of these exposs leads the typical person to conclude that there is no way that the official story that the government has pushed could possibly be true. The problem is this: there is nothing like a coherent alternative to the official narrative. We are back to the age-old problem: you can’t beat something with nothing.
THE VIETNAM WAR
There has been a fundamental change in public opinion ever since the Vietnam War. When young people began to turn against Lyndon Johnson when they began to get drafted to fight in that war, there was a loss of confidence in the federal government. The victims of conscription began to figure out that the official justifications of the war were illegitimate. This made them question the narrative regarding the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin and the supposed attack on American ships by the North Vietnamese. We know now that the story really was fake news.
This post was published at Gary North on December 18, 2017.
Chinese government advisors and a senior military officer warned Beijing that it must be ready for a war on the Korean peninsula, with the risk of conflict higher than ever before, the SCMP reported on Saturday. They also warned that Beijing, once seen as Pyongyang’s biggest ally with influence over its neighbor, was losing control of the situation.
‘Conditions on the peninsula now make for the biggest risk of a war in decades,’ said Renmin University international relations professor Shi Yinhong, who also advises the State Council, China’s cabinet. ‘North Korea is a time bomb. We can only delay the explosion, hoping that by delaying it, a time will come to remove the detonator,’ Shi added on the sidelines of a Beijing conference on the crisis.
Shi said US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un were locked in a vicious cycle of threats and it was already too late for China to avert it. However, at best, Beijing could delay a full-blown conflict. Also addressing the conference was Wang Hongguang, former deputy commander of the Nanjing’s Military Region, who warned that war could break out on the Korean peninsula at any time from now on until March when South Korea and the United States held annual military drills.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 17, 2017.