Thursday, November 30, 2017
Does free speech protect nutcase ravings?
A federal court case in West Palm Beach could set a new precedence for free speech. Wednesday morning, an attorney will use the first amendment to prove former Florida Atlantic University professor, James Tracy, was wrongfully terminated.
Tracy and his attorneys say his right to free speech was violated when he was fired because of what he wrote on a blog.
He said the Sandy Hook School Massacre, which killed 20 children, was staged by the government to gain support for tougher gun laws.
FAU countered that statement by saying he was fired simply because he failed to follow the rules applying to all faculty.
Lawyers for FAU explained Tracy, “was repeatedly warned that this failure to follow policy would result in disciplinary action, including possible termination," they added his, “belligerent, rebellious conduct was deliberate and intentional."
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I interpret the FAU Lawyers explanation to be "anyone who doesn't think the way we want them to, and reflect that in their private lives and publications, is out. They have to learn to toe the line!"
But that may be an over-reading of the situation....
Stan,
It is a bit of an over-reading of the situation,
Certainly Tracy's statements on Sandy Hook were outside the mainstream. He went over the top with the insinuation that the children killed at Sandy Hook never existed resulting in one parent filing a harassment charge against him and getting an order of protection against Tracy. This was happening while Tracy was identifying himself with FAU. The school asked that he remove the ties to the school from his personal blog which he did, but by then it was too late and incomplete.
The school instituted a legal policy requiring that professors list outside activities in order to determine whether those activities create a conflict of interest with FAU. Tracy did not fill out the form. He was asked again to fill out the form and didn't. He then filled out the form and lied on it. He was caught using school resources for his personal activities.
The school has said that people have the right to speak their mind but they don't have the right to drag the school into their outside activities. Tracy not only blurred the lines of that separation, he blatantly violated them.
Should a person be held accountable by their employer for their own beliefs, statements and activities made outside of work? Probably not unless those beliefs, actions and statements are illegal (which Tracy's were in harassing the Sandy Hook family.) But in reality, we really don't have to answer that question in that Tracy never separated his beliefs and statements from the school, and then he lied about it.
In short, Tracy has the right to say what he wants, but what he says may have repercussions.
On the morning of December 14, 2012 CNN broadcast video footage of CT State Troopers running into the St. Rose of Lima School that is 1 mile away from Sandy Hook School in Newtown. The CNN video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw_SBl1cvHk clearly shows this.
The troopers were running into the school just before SUNDOWN as proven by the angle and direction of all shadows. No little kids would have even been present either at the St. Rose of Lima School just before sundown or at the Sandy Hook School.
That video was shot the evening of December 13, 2012 at an "Active Shooter Drill" at St. Rose of Lima School...and that script was broadcast to the public the next day on December 14, 2012 at the condemned Sandy Hook School.
This entire thing was a DHS/FEMA National Level Exercise. Newtown got a free replacement school out of it and the “families” were each paid over $250,000.00 each to participate. That is why we aren't getting info and FOIA requests are stonewalled.
That video was shot the EVENING BEFORE the Sandy Hook lie was broadcast us.
The FACT is NOBODY WAS SHOT.
IT WAS A DRILL presented to you "BLEEVERS" are real.
Post a Comment