Jessup, editor of the Fort Beulah The
Daily Informer, in Sinclair Lewis'
famous book "It Can't Happen Here", at its
conclusion, "drove out saluted by the meadow larks,
and onward all day, to a hidden cabin in the Northern
Woods where quiet men awaited news of freedom.....still
Doremus goes on, into the sunrise, for a Doremus Jessup
can never die.
July 2, 2007
Scientist in Tenure Fight With MIT Is Locked Out of
James L. Sherley, a stem-cell biologist who went on a 12-day
hunger strike in February to protest his tenure
denial at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
reached the end of his term of employment at the
institute on Friday and met the scheduled event
with more protest.
After getting locked out of his laboratory this
weekend, Mr. Sherley wrote an e-mail message to the
institutes president, Susan Hockfield, expressing
concern about the strains of mouse and human stem cells
under refrigeration in his lab. He also said he was
concerned about the labs live mice, and about the
possible biohazards of moving live cell cultures.
Mr. Sherley, who is black, has argued that his career
at MIT was cut short because of his race. The university
denies that allegation. It announced in February, days
before Mr. Sherley began his hunger strike, that it would
formally examine the career
issues of minority faculty members.
On June 20, Douglas A. Lauffenburger, director of the
biological-engineering division at MIT, wrote a letter to
Mr. Sherley confirming that his appointment would end on
June 30. In the letter, Mr. Lauffenburger noted that Mr.
Sherleys appointment had been extended three times,
in part to give him time to move out of his lab.
You have not provided any information about the
transition of your research, Mr. Lauffenburger
In his letter to Ms. Hockfield, Mr. Sherley wrote that
the forced closure of my laboratory is an
illegitimate injustice by your office and said that
the institute had not yet given him a fair
hearing with regard to his complaints of
discrimination. John Gravois
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Professor at MIT Resigns, Criticizing
Its Dealings With a Colleague Who Was Denied Tenure
By SIERRA MILLMAN
A prominent professor at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology has resigned, saying the university
breached an agreement to reconsider allegations that
racism played a role in the decision to deny tenure to
his colleague, James L. Sherley.
"I leave because I would neither be able to
advise young blacks about their prospects of flourishing
in the current environment, nor about avenues available
to effect change when agreements or promises are
transgressed," Frank L. Douglas, executive director
of the university's Center for Biomedical Innovation,
wrote in an e-mail message on Friday to MIT's president
and provost, among other officials. Mr. Douglas and Mr.
Sherley are both black.
MIT officials said on Monday that they believed Mr.
Douglas's decision was based on "inaccurate
information" and that they hoped he would
"reconsider his decision" after meeting with
Mr. Sherley, an associate professor of biological
engineering, has been contesting the decision to deny him
tenure for more than two years and held a 12-day hunger
strike this year in an effort to get the university to
admit that racism played a role in that decision. He
ended the hunger strike on February 16 after exchanging
statements with university officials and forging an
agreement with them that is now in dispute.
Faculty members in the biological-engineering
department have defended their decision not to recommend
Mr. Sherley for tenure, and the university has said its
review found no evidence of racism in the proceedings. In
February, the university announced plans to formally
review the hiring, advancement, and experience of
minority faculty members. An administrator said there was
no connection between the timing of that announcement and
Mr. Sherley's hunger strike (The
Chronicle, February 6).
In the statements
exchanged in February, the university pledged to
"work toward resolution of our differences with
Professor Sherley," and the professor said his
demands, while "carefully modified from the
original," were "still on the table."
Mr. Sherley and his supporters say the university's
statement conveyed the spirit of a verbal agreement made
by top administrators to participate in an external
review of Mr. Sherley's case that might lead to his being
tenured and that extended the deadline for his leaving
In an e-mail reply to Mr. Douglas's message of
resignation, however, an administrator unequivocally
"I can state categorically that MIT did not
agree, implicitly or explicitly, to arbitration or to
extend Professor Sherley's faculty appointment beyond
June 30," wrote Claude R. Canizares, associate
provost. "MIT's sole agreement with Professor
Sherley was to exchange and release our respective
Both Mr. Douglas, who declined to comment on Monday,
and Mr. Sherley questioned why such a flimsy gesture
would have persuaded Mr. Sherley to stop fasting.
"I mean, how could anybody believe that all I did
was meet with them, and then we wrote some things down
and passed them to each other, and then I left?" Mr.
Sherley said in an interview on Monday.
Mr. Douglas posed a similar question in his response
to Mr. Canizares's e-mail message.
Mr. Sherley said he would not meet with administrators
until they agreed to acknowledge that the June 30
deadline for his exit was "not legitimate within our
understanding of our agreement." So far,
administrators have declined.
He also said that he was not sure that Mr. Douglas's
resignation would persuade administrators to reconsider
his case, but that he was "stunned" and
"moved" that Mr. Douglas was willing to put his
career at risk on principle.
He added that until learning of Mr. Douglas's decision
on Friday, he had not spoken with the more-senior
professor since a point during the hunger strike. At that
time, he said, Mr. Douglas had, with "almost
fatherly" support, suggested that he consider
The two academics have said they are responding to
what they see as a pattern at MIT of poor treatment of
faculty members who are black or members of other
underrepresented minority groups.
Another supporter of Mr. Sherley's said he also
believed that there was such a pattern. "MIT's
failure to fulfill their promise ... sends a very
chilling message to all the minorities in the faculty,
including the young and up-and-coming individuals,"
said Chi-Sang Poon, a research scientist who calls his
own experience at the institute "terrible."
Mr. Poon sued the university in 2001, alleging
discrimination and retaliation. He said he took that
action "out of desperation" after having been
consistently passed up for promotion over nearly two
decades. Since he filed the lawsuit, he said, more
Asian-Americans and members of underrepresented minority
groups have been hired in his department and at the
university, but it hasn't helped him. "I'm still
struggling," he said.
Sylvia L. Sanders, a former assistant professor of
biology at the institute, said she admired Mr. Douglas
for taking a stand.
In February, Ms. Sanders wrote an open letter to the
university protesting its treatment of Mr. Sherley.
"I was the sole African American member of MIT's
biology department from 1997-2001, when I resigned,"
Ms. Sanders wrote. "Some of my experiences during
that time undercut my status and represent the kind of
racism that Professor Sherley is opposing and that his
... colleagues claim does not exist."
Ms. Sanders left academe and now teaches third grade
at a public school in Palo Alto, Calif. She said racism
contributed to her resignation but was not the only
cause. "It depends a lot on your personality too,
whether you would thrive in an environment like
that," Ms. Sanders said in an interview on Monday.
"And, clearly, mine was not the thriving sort. Was
that because of race? I don't know. Probably, partly. It
gets very complicated and hard to say."
Ms. Sanders said she puts little faith in the
university's decision to formally review the experience
of minority faculty members. "The university
announced that they would start this task force or
whatever, and then they renege on their promise to James
Sherley to negotiate, so why would anyone believe
them?" she asked.
Copyright © 2007 by The Chronicle
of Higher Education
Social Activism is not a hobby: it's a Lifestyle lasting a Lifetime
[TheBlackList] Black Scientist in Tenure Fight With MIT Is Locked Out of his Lab
Indictments Sought Against Police, Giuliani Staffers Who
Had Reporter Arrested For Asking Question
Eyewitnesses describe how Secret Service were
directing arrest, intimidation of group
Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Matt Lepacek, the reporter who was kicked out of the CNN
press room and arrested after asking Rudy Giuliani's
staff a question, has now been released on bail. Criminal
indictments are now being pursued against the police
involved as well as Giuliani's staffers for their
flagrant abuse of the First Amendment, assault and
Lepacek appeared as a guest on the Alex Jones Show to
relate his experience after the Republican presidential
debate last night.
In addition to the details that were already outlined in
our previous article, fellow We Are Change member Luke
Rudkowski also related how he was just silently filming
the fracas when Giuliani staffers, and in particular one
unidentified female, started hitting and attempting to
steal his camera, before Lepacek and Rudkowski were
pointed out by the staffers and five to seven police
arrived to grab them and throw them out of the building.
The female staffer was witnessed to be instrumental in
alerting the police to the "crime" of Lepacek
asking a question that the Giuliani camp weren't
Rudkowski was assaulted and questioned on who he was
working for despite the fact that he hadn't even asked a
question and was standing separately from Lepacek.
Lepacek was told that other eyewitnesses saw police stamp
on one of the cameras as it lay on the floor.
Another eyewitness said that the entire arrest was
clearly being directed by Secret Service, who were
ordering the police to threaten anyone who asked
questions about the incident with arrest.
Lepacek was later released on $400 bail but faces charges
of criminal trespassing even though he had obtained a CNN
press pass well in advance and the debate was a public
event. State police have refused to hand back electronic
equipment that they seized from the group.
CNN staff attempted to dissuade police from arresting
Lepacek as he was led out into the parking lot but were
Presidential candidate Ron Paul was informed about what
had occurred and stated words to the effect that while we
are supposed to be spreading freedom and democracy
abroad, we couldn't even handle it in New Hampshire.
We are now being inundated by media requests and expect
this controversy to receive attention on the major news
networks and newspapers over the coming days.
The fact that the Giuliani camp views it as legitimate to
have members of the media intimidated, assaulted and
arrested for asking a question should be a wake up call
for the kind of America Giuliani would oversee as a
future President and this incident should contribute to
derailing his entire campaign.
The actions of the New Hampshire State Police were
completely unconstitutional and we are now pursuing
criminal indictments against the police involved as well
as the Giuliani staffers that assaulted the group and
their property, and demanding that any charges against
Matt Lepacek be dropped immediately.
This represents a flagrant abuse of the First Amendment,
clear wrongful arrest and an act of official oppression.
|On Tuesday [May 26,
2007], members of a 911 truth activist
group confronted former Mayor Rudy
Giuliani at a New York fundraiser about
the fall of the World Trade Center.
come people in the buildings weren't
notified?" asked one member of the
group. "And how can you sleep at
Giuliani's politely-phrased response,
caught by WNBC newscameras filming the
"I didn't know that the towers
were going to collapse."
That response contradicts remarks the
former New York City mayor made about
being warned about the collapse during a
phone interview with onetime ABC anchor
Peter Jennings on September 11, 2001, as
shown in a transcript WNBC obtained from
the Giuliani 2008 campaign. Giuliani told
"I--I went down to the
scene and we set up headquarters at 75
Barkley Street, which was right there
with the police commissioner, the fire
commissioner, the head of emergency
management, and we were operating out of
there when we were told that the World
Trade Center was going to collapse. And
it did collapse before we could actually
get out of the building, so we were
trapped in the building for 10, 15
minutes, and finally found an exit and
got out, walked north, and took a lot of
people with us." Global
Research Articles by David Edwards
Atlast a media reader gets angry -
Glaister in Los Angeles
Friday June 29, 2007
Did the release of Paris Hilton from a Los Angeles
jail merit the media attention it received? That question
reached a critical point for one US cable news presenter
when she refused to read out the lead item on a popular
morning breakfast show.
"I have an apology," presenter Mika
Brzezinski told the host of MSNBC's Morning Joe
programme, "and that is for the lead story. I hate
this story. I don't think it should be the lead."
Taunted by her co-presenters, Brzezinski proceeded to
tear up the script, attempting to set light to it before
finally putting it through a shredder. "You have
changed the world," mocked host Joe
Scarborough."Yes I have," replied Brzezinski,
"at least my world."
The exchanges, broadcast a few hours after the early
morning release of the celebrity heiress, have become an
internet hit, with an edited clip of the show viewed
250,000 times on YouTube.
Throughout the exchanges Brzezinski appeared angry at
the inclusion of the item as the lead in the morning's
news and at the action she is taking. At times she held
her head in her hands, at others she appeared close to
tears, her face bearing an exasperated expression.
Other news that morning included criticism of George
Bush's Iraq policy from a senior Republican. But editors
at MSNBC had other priorities.
"My producer is not listening to me," said
Brzezinski, brandishing the script in her hands,
"he's put it as the lead."
She took a cigarette lighter from a fellow presenter
and tried, but failed, to set light to the sheaf of
"I'm done with the Paris Hilton story," she
declared. "I won't do it."
Having failed to set fire to the script, she started
to tear it up before offering it to a colleague.
"Will you burn this for me, please?" she asked.
"I'm about to snap." When he refused, she took
it back and rose from her desk, saying, "I'm
As she returned to her seat, Scarborough asked the
producer to run footage of Hilton leaving jail. When the
cameras returned to the studio Brzezinski was shown with
her head in her hands.
"I just don't believe in covering that story,
especially not as the lead story in a newscast when you
have a day like today," she said. Brzezinski was
brought up to consider weightier matters than a pampered
socialite. Her father, Zbigniew Brzezinski, served as
national security adviser under President Jimmy Carter.
Anti-Defamation League Sees New Form of Jew-Hatred in
A high school student in this West Bank town has been
arrested for "multiplication denial," after
repeatedly insisting that a negative number multiplied by
another negative number yields a negative product. A
world-wide consensus of mathematicians determined long
ago that two negative numbers multiplied together
produces a positive product.
"It's obvious," protested the 14-year-old
student, Rihab Hanafi, as she was led away in chains by
Uzi-toting guards. "Multiplication magnifies;
therefore two negative numbers multiplied together
necessarily produces a more negative
Hanafi's dogmatic insistence on her own point of view,
and her refusal to instantly accept the word of others,
gave her away as a died-in-the-wool Denier right off the
bat. "This kind of superficially plausible reasoning
is characteristic of Holocaust Deniers, to which
Mathematics Denial is obviously related," said
Abraham Foxman, Director of the Anti-Defamation League.
"But the underlying motive is obviously hatred for
truth and hatred for Jews, the principal bearers of
According to the Anti-Defamation League, Hanafi's antics
are just the latest in a series of anti-math atrocities
that are making the world a perilous place for number
theorists. Last year, a Belgian neo-Nazi announced he had
discovered a new whole number, which he claimed belonged
between 3 and 4. He was arrested for trivializing the
integers. A short time later a Palestinian detainee
claimed that Israel's policy of reserving 92% of the land
for the Jewish people made it mathematically impossible
to achieve equality with the Palestinians. He is
currently serving a life sentence for denying the
Given the growing threat to objective numerical truth,
Rihab Hanafi has been placed in solitary confinement, and
her website arguing her case has been removed from the
world wide web. ADL officials stated yesterday that
thousands of innocent victims around the world have been
led astray by her multiplication deviance. The Hanafi
family lawyer responded that if Enron could proceed on
the basis that a negative plus a negative is a positive
then there is no reason his client can't bring
"creative accounting" to the multiplication
tables. Israeli officials will soon charge him with
Auschwitz survivor Elie Wiesel, reached for comment at an
international conference on Peace Through Guilt, said
that the negative numbers fiasco highlights the
terrifying fragility of quantitative truth. "Numbers
are the foundation of civilization. Once we allow them to
be questioned, only disaster can ensue. If Mathematics
Denial is left unchecked, buildings will fall, bridges
collapse, cities grind to a halt. Just think where we
would be if Einstein had deliberately miscalculated
e=mc2. Hiroshima might never have become famous."
Asked for an estimation of how serious the current
situation is, he replied: "Today negative numbers,
tomorrow the extinction of world Jewry. Never
A spokesman for the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which has
spent years tracking down Nazi war criminals that escaped
Allied prosecution at Nuremberg, added his opinion that,
"Denying the properties of negative numbers is no
different than denying that six million Jews died in the
Holocaust. Next thing you know Deniers will argue that
Jesus's mother was not a virgin. We can't have that.
Skepticism in any form is but a first step towards
genocide against Jews."
In a surprise development, Jews are no longer alone in
fighting off Denial. Political activists the world over
are now finding parallels with their own struggles in the
Hanafi case. Randall Berry of "No More Gays," a
pro-family group, says that Procreation Deniers are his
biggest challenge. "They just don't get it. We tell
them over and over that same-sex relations are sterile,
but they consciously lie and say that any two people who
love each other ought to be left alone. How sick can they
And there are many other examples, including:
Islamofascist Deniers, who argue that the U.S. invasion
and occupation of Iraq is a crime. "None of them
will admit that Muslim evil predates 2003," observes
Vanity Fair columnist Christopher Hitchens, "and
therefore is the cause of the current war."
Merit Deniers in the affirmative action movement.
"It's incredible," says UC Regent Ward
Connerly, "these people actually think that social
conditions have something to do with one's station in
life. It's some kind of bizarre mystical doctrine."
Free Market Deniers, who insist people have a right to
the resources they need to live a decent life, regardless
of whether they can prostitute themselves to the private
owners of the economy. "The entitlement mentality is
running amok," warned economist Milton Friedman just
before his death.
Fetal Holocaust Deniers, who cannot get it through their
thick heads that a child conceived in rape is just as
precious in the eyes of God as any other. The
consequences of their selfish delusions have long since
reached genocidal proportions.
American Dream Deniers, who would substitute the perverse
ideal of bio-diversity for the opportunity to consume
without limit. What can they be thinking of?