Yet another harbinger of corporate news media’s continued demise is evident when a familiar mainstream journalist with admitted ties to US intelligence agencies plays covert roles in the issues and events he claims to report objectively on. The case of Kurt Eichenwald suggests how the CIA’s famous Operation Mockingbird is alive and well in the twenty-first century.
On December 16, 2015 FAU administrators terminated this author on pretextual grounds. Less than 24 hours beforehand the same school officials received an inflammatory email from Newsweek‘s Kurt Eichenwald, among the internet’s most avid gun control advocates and anti-Trump crusaders who boasts of being “deeply wired into the intelligence community.”
In the query, one of thousands of emails produced by FAU during discovery, the fiercely partisan Eichenberg more than subtly pressures the FAU administration on Tracy’s public speech concerning the Sandy Hook massacre event, further suggesting that Tracy is mentally ill, guilty of criminal harassment, and may pose a legal liability to the university.
Eichenwald’s email was received by the university’s chief public affairs officer and immediately forwarded to FAU President John Kelly, General Counsel David Kian, and Provost Gary Perry. Perry forwarded the email to Associate General Counsel Lawrence Glick and Vice Provost Diane Alperin. Less than 24 hours thereafter Alperin informed this author he would be fired.
Fwd: Interview request re: James Tracy
From: Peter Hull <email@example.com>
To: John Kelly <—–@fau.edu>, David Kian <—–@fau.edu>, Gary Perry <—–@fau.edu>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 06:25:17 -0500
And now this…
Vice President for Public Affairs
Florida Atlantic University
Begin forwarded message:
From: KURT EICHENWALD <——–@mac.com>
Date: December 14, 2015 at 10:52:19 PM EST
Subject: Interview request re: James Tracy
My name is Kurt Eichenwald and I am a senior writer with Newsweek and a contributing editor with Vanity Fair. I am currently working on an article about people in positions of authority who are advocates of bizarre conspiracy theories or advance ideas far outside the mainstream that do not appear to supported by rational evidence.
As you may know, Professor James Tracy of your school has been harassing parents whose children were slaughtered at Sandy Hook. He is suggesting that their children never existed, that they have been bribed and/or received compensation to pretend their children existed, and that – in at least once instance – a five year old killed Sandy Hook was in fact killed two years later in the Peshawar Army School shooting in Pakistan.
I have several questions that I would like to discuss with you:
1. Do any other members of the faculty or administration also advance these theories of Mr. Tracy?
2. Has any official research been conducted by anyone at the university through the use of university funds to determine that the Sandy Hook attack was fake?
3. Does President Kelly subscribe to the belief that the Sandy Hook attack did not occur?
4. As you may be aware, Mr. Tracy has been contacting parents of children killed at Sandy Hook, calling them “so-called parents” and generally harassing them. Are you aware if this has been done during school hours or while using school computers? Does this conform with policy of the school
4. Does Mr. Tracy have tenure?
5. Have there been any complaints from students, parents or other stakeholders in FAU regarding concerns about Mr. Tracy’s mental stability?
6. If neither the school nor President Kelly subscribes to the belief that Sandy Hook never occurred, is there concern on the part of the school that allowing a man who may be mentally unstable to work on campus could place students or faculty in danger?
7. Has administrators school held any discussions about the potential liability Mr. Tracy might pose if the Sandy Hook parents decide to sue the school for facilitating his harassment?
Finally, under the state open records act, I am requesting all emails sent or received by any member of the office of the president regarding Mr. Tracy since the date of the Sandy Hook attack.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Paul Craig Roberts
Institute for Political Economy
The orchestration “Russiagate” proves that the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI are so corrupt and unaccountable that they comprise the greatest threat to the American people in the entire history of America.
Russiagate originated in a conspiracy between the military/security complex, the Clinton-controlled Democratic National Committee, and the liberal/progressive/left. The goal of the military/security complex is to protect its out-sized budget and power by preventing President Trump from normalizing relations with Russia. Hillary and the DNC want to explain away their election loss by blaming a Trump/Putin conspiracy to steal the election. The liberal/progressive/left want Trump driven from office.
As the presstitutes are aligned with the military/security complex, Hillary and the DNC, and the liberal/progressive/left, the Russiagate orchestration is a powerful conspiracy against the president of the United States and the “deplorables” who elected him. Nevertheless, the Russiagate Conspiracy has fallen apart and has now been turned against its originators.
Despite the determination of the CIA and FBI to get Trump, these powerful and unaccountable police state agencies have been unable to present any evidence of the Trump/Putin conspiracy against Hillary. As William Binney, the former high level National Security Agency official who devised the spy program has stated, if there was any evidence of a Trump/Putin conspiracy to steal the US presidential election, the NSA would most certainly have it.
Federal Court in TracyvFAU Confirms: Government Employers May Lawfully Censor Workers’ Protected Speech, “Outside Activities”
Revisiting “Why James Tracy, FAU’s Conspiracy Theorist, Should Resign”
On October 31, 2017 The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled (rejoinder here) that Florida Atlantic University’s firing of a tenured professor was lawful, and moreover, that FAU could discipline or terminate any employee who fails to disclose their political speech, or any other “outside activity” administrators deem objectionable. The article below was posted at MemoryHoleBlog on May 15, 2013 as a response to an opinion piece penned by three FAU faculty administrators and published simultaneously by South Florida’s major newspapers, the Palm Beach Post and Sun-Sentinel. The FAU middle managers were apparently piqued by Tracy’s public commentary concerning the April 15 Boston Marathon “bombing” event. This marked one of several initial attempts to attack and suppress Tracy’s personal blogging.
Upon the article’s publication unknown parties with access to several dozen faculty mailboxes of Professor Tracy’s FAU colleagues distributed copies of the slanderous article. Tracy’s repeated pleas with FAU administrators to investigate the incident on the grounds of potential retaliatory harassment were left unacknowledged. Subsequent documentation obtained under Florida’s Sunshine Law suggests that FAU administrators were aware of and at least condoned the article’s broad dissemination.
The post observes how in the age of “homeland security” and the so-called “war on terror,” citizen whistleblowers alongside those who otherwise question complex events and their sometimes incredible narratives are forcefully deprived of the same free speech rights enjoyed by the general citizenry. From the country’s founding to today’s phony terror war, every era has its political scapegoats. As the court’s clear bias in the TracyvFAU case suggests, those inquiring on government misdeeds may be readily deprived of both their livelihoods and civil liberties, while today’s “Red Coats” are granted million dollar, taxpayer-funded legal representation and walk free.
In a recent statement to local newspapers I have been publicly accused by colleagues of being a “conspiracy theorist.” The statement’s authors are asking that I resign my university post because my extracurricular commentary is deemed offensive and allegedly interferes with my ability to properly assess and articulate complex ideas in a scholarly manner.
In addition to blithely accepting official narratives they have not seriously interrogated, these would-be thoughtful and meticulous academics carelessly adopt and wield the “conspiracy theorist” pejorative without deeper consideration of its etymological meaning and cultural significance. In this way they awkwardly violate the exact professional code and etiquette to which they claim an academic should adhere while contradictorily upholding a popular perspective they might otherwise–following their own criteria–see fit to reject.
Disparaging labels draw on and reflect the cultural and political beliefs of the given historical era. They may be used as disciplinary devices that at once legitimate certain worldviews and their attendant assumptions while designating others as dangerous and verboten. As the histories of many religions and political regimes suggest, concerted and vocal alarm directed toward unorthodox thought has typically been the focus of the state-sanctioned intellectual, reflecting the prevailing interests and beliefs of the given time.
As feds and Facebook join forces to rein in ‘fake news’ who will fact check the ‘fact-checkers’?
Facebook is the world’s most powerful social media platform, deemed by one observer as “the biggest nation in the world” with no semblance of democracy. The mass medium’s size and breadth is often obscured by its capacity to interlink 1.8 billion users with their friends and loved ones in the broader context of everyday life. Situated at this primary intersection of human relations one cannot overemphasize the significance of the outlet’s self-appointment as chaperon of public discourse.
By its own admission Facebook is no longer merely a for-profit corporation seeking to inject advertising and commerce into the abundant social interaction it oversees. The entity’s new censorial ventures, loosely masquerading as promotion of “good journalism” and “information you can trust,” strongly suggest combined government and corporate efforts to suppress citizen-generated “alternative” news and analysis.
In the United States alone close to half of the population (44% 2016 Pew Research) receive “at least some of their news” from the social media behemoth, putting Facebook among the nation’s most influential distributors of news. This makes the entity’s actual transition from neutral observer to forthright interventionist aided by often unprincipled, even amateurish news media, a momentous and worrisome political event.
Facebook’s recently-announced “news literacy” and “fact checking” initiatives must be recognized as coming in the wake of two other especially significant and likely uncoincidental developments: 1) corporate media’s recent propaganda campaign highlighting so-called “fake news” and alleged Russian-inspired media seeking to “undermine faith in American democracy,” and 2) US lawmakers’ December 8 passage of the “Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act” within the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act