Activist Professor Denis Rancourt's Judicial Lynching

Stephen Lendman

Injustice defines Western societies. Canada marches in lockstep with Washington. Rogue state ruthlessness defines both countries. Imperial priorities matter most. Inviolable laws don't matter. Nor judicial fairness.

Denis G. Rancourt reflects academia's best, most competent, most responsible and bravest. He has two blog sites. Visit them for updated information. Activist Teacher and U of O Watch provide updates. They explain what most people can't imagine. What happened to Rancourt can happen to anyone responsibly challenging what's too deplorable to accept.

Rancourt is a distinguished University of Ottawa professor. He's tenured. He's a recognized physics and environmental science expert. Students loved him. He's a "phenomenal teacher," they said. He didn't teach to the test like in America. He prioritized learning. He inspired academic achievement. He supports fundamental human and civil rights. Political activism caused his dismissal. University of Ottawa's campus isn't safe. President Allan Rock is a former Canadian politician. He runs University of Ottawa like his private fiefdom. Like a police state. He's unprincipledly hard right. He ignores fundamental Canadian law doing so. Academic freedom doesn't matter. Or free thought, opinion or expression. University of Ottawa is a hotbed of fascist extremism. It's inhospitable to learning.

University of Ottawa Law Professor Joanne St. Lewis colluded with Rock. She did so against Rancourt. She sued him unjustifiably. She wants $1 million. She irresponsibly charged racism. It related to his legitimate blog site comments. He called St. Lewis a "house negro." He cited Malcolm X. He first used the term.


University of Ottawa Racism, Censorship and Abuse of Power

Stephen Lendman


Allan Rock, le recteur de l'Université d'Ottawa (lapresse.ca)

In June 2008, Allan Rock became university president. He's a former Canadian politician and UN ambassador. He's a pro-Israeli flack. He supports its worst crimes.

His administration is unprincipled. It's marked by secrecy, political censorship, abuse of power, and repudiation of fundamental university values. He targets academic and speech freedoms. He violates Canadian law.

Article 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association."

Article 7 assures "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person and the right not to be deprived thereof in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."

Hardline rule is university policy. What Rocks says goes. Faculty and student activists are targeted, vilified, persecuted, suspended and dismissed.


Denis Rancourt's Struggle for Justice

Stephen Lendman

U OF O WATCH: St. Lewis v. Rancourt - In A Nutshell
Denis G. Rancourt: Why Donate to My Legal Fund?

Injustice defines Western societies. America long ago spurned rule of law principles. Canada marches in lockstep. Democratic values are quaint and dying. So are honor, integrity, righteousness, and believing right over wrong matters. Even university officials and complicit staff members are tainted. Academia proves not so hallowed ground.

Denis Rancourt is a distinguished tenured University of Ottawa physics professor. He's a recognized expert in his field. His students called him a "phenomenal teacher." His classrooms provided an enriching learning experience. He inspired student confidence and academic achievement. He also champions equity, justice, and human rights. Political activism led to his dismissal. On U of O's campus, it's not safe to advocate right over wrong.

Beginning in September 2005, university officials targeted him unfairly. They oppose his support for Palestinian rights.

The Palestinians are some of the world's most oppressed people. They live under militarized occupation hell. Institutionalized racism harms them. Israeli state terror is policy. Palestinians are treated like subhumans. Their crime is praying to the wrong God. Rancourt eloquently supports them.

He also expresses views forthrightly on political and environmental issues, professional ethics, lobbying, scoundrel media influence, and the right of all persecuted people to live free. He does it in articles, broadcasts, blog postings, at public venues, and in classrooms when he taught. He did the right thing and got punished.


Why Donate to My Legal Fund?

Denis G. Rancourt

U OF O WATCH: St. Lewis v. Rancourt - In A Nutshell

This is an appeal to donate to my legal fund (the Denis Rancourt Legal Fund) in order to provide a moderately fair trial in what some observers have characterized as a SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) against me.

I am committed to obtaining justice but justice is illusive when there is a large asymmetry of means between the opposing parties. At this point I will have exhausted all my financial savings within a month or so.

I was wrongly fired in 2009 from my tenured full professorship in physics at the University of Ottawa by a president, Allan Rock, who had a personal mission to get me. He instructed his executives and hired lawyers to fire me, and this was executed without due process.

Under false pretence, in November 2008, my students and I were locked out of our laboratory and offices without warning.

My research associate of 12 years was summarily fired (she sued and won a settlement).

The laboratory was dismantled before I was even informed of the mock procedure to fire me that was initiated in December 2008 when I was banned from campus, again without notice, under police escort.


University of Ottawa Independence for Sale to the Israeli Lobby

Professor Denis G. Rancourt

The university executives do not have the authority to subvert the University of Ottawa Act, 1965. Indeed, the executives have a duty and a responsibility to uphold the Act.

Canadian universities have institutional independence guaranteed by a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. This independence from governments and corporations was explicitly granted to universities in order to protect the academic freedoms of its professors and students.

At the University of Ottawa this established institutional independence is used to subvert lawsuits from mistreated students, and to shield the university from sanctions related to its own violations of its professors' academic freedoms. Such is the perversion of legalese in the service of unprincipled administrations.

In addition, observers have been concerned about the influence of private corporate donations; which are never made transparently and which go into the protected slush fund known as "University of Ottawa Foundation".

This becomes of direct concern when the private donations are overtly tied to specific research chairs, to new research themes, or to newly tailored academic programs.

This is why university senate (the highest institutional authority on all academic matters) recently questioned the university administration's unilateral campaign to create a two-for-one graduate degree in law (LL.M.) and exchange program with the University of Haifa, Israel. (See all posts on this matter HERE.)

In addition to being an obvious degree inflation scheme ("two distinct LL.M. degrees after only one year of studies") -- which is becoming too common as a marketing device at the university -- the Haifa deal came with a tied scholarship thanks to "generous support" from the Gerald Schwartz and Heather Reisman Foundation.

It was therefore the duty of senate to examine any conditions tied to the Schwartz-Reisman scholarship that might harm academic integrity and institutional independence in view of any risks to academic freedom.


On the gargantuan lie of climate change science

Denis G. Rancourt
Activist Teacher Blog


(Illustration: Ravy Puth)

Based on a public event organized by the geography student association at Universite du Quebec a Montreal (UQAM).

In all of human history, what was believed and promoted by the majority of service intellectuals (high priests) in each civilization was only created and maintained to support the hierarchy and the place of the high priests within the hierarchy. To believe that the present is any different regarding any issue managed by our “experts”, whether in medicine, psychology, cosmology, economics, law and governance, population health or ecology, is pure distilled idiocy.

Never mind that the whole climate change scam is now driven by the top-level financiers newly eyeing a multi-trillion-dollar paper economy of carbon trading and that this is the reason it’s now a dominant mainstream media and corporate messaging presence [1].

Never mind that this paper economy of carbon trading will be the largest financial extortion enterprise since the invention of the US-centered military-backed global finance structure of predation itself.

Never mind that establishment scientists are service intellectuals who virtually never diverge from supporting power, who at best look for sanitized and hypothetical “problems” that do not threaten hierarchy and who feed their false self-image of relevance [2][3].

Never mind also the pathetic recent historical record of science with regard to identifying or solving public health and environmental problems [4][5][6].

Never mind all that. Take the red pill by considering the climate “science” fairy tale itself and examine its story elements. Here goes, in five story-element steps.


The Canadian Zionism Question

Denis G. Rancourt
Activist Teacher Blog

This is the kind of obviousness that a child can see—though the child may, later in life, become browbeaten into believing that the obvious problems are "non-problems", to be argued into nonexistence by careful reasoning and clever choices of definition.” ~ Roger Penrose

... so obvious that it takes really impressive discipline to miss it ...” ~ Noam Chomsky

Here we have Israel as an internationally recognized thug, keeper of the largest open-air prison on earth, regularly practicing war crimes against civilians, targeting civilian infrastructure and continuously disregarding the Geneva Conventions – virtually unanimously denounced by the international community, by every human rights watch group on the globe, and by international civil society for the last many decades [1] – and how do Canadian politicians and parliamentarians respond?

Israel, the modern sate that shamelessly uses the Nazi holocaust to justify overtly racist domestic and foreign national policies, stock piles nuclear weapons, incites wars on its neighbours, overtly funds propaganda in foreign countries, routinely practices international pirating, kidnappings and murders, openly performs political assassinations [1]... and how do Canadian politicians and parliamentarians respond?

Israel has no significant economic exchanges with Canada and performs no significant geopolitical service of benefit to Canada; a Canada with virtually no economic ties with the Middle East and a Canada that is a net exporter of oil and gas.

Yet, apart from the independent-thinking Bloc Quebecois, it seems that half the time that English Canadian politicians open their mouths it’s to denounce a “new anti-Semitism” that social scientists and statisticians tell us is a media fabrication or to express Israel’s “right to defend itself” or to declare Canada’s “unwavering support for Israel.” Not to mention Israel’s “right to exist”! [2]

What about unwavering support for human rights and international law?


About the obscenity of the legal mind and its grotesque displays of arrogance

Denis G. Rancourt


Dogs of war ... a detainee at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad
cowers in fear as he is approached by an unmuzzled dog. Photo:
The Washington Post

Reflections on our Ottawa RBC fire and on our genocidal prison system

FALLACIOUS PROPERTY DAMAGE VERSUS HARM TO A PERSON

I was reminded again recently in court about the charade that passes for logical and objective propositions made by the brilliant legal minds that are the gatekeepers of society’s “justice” system.

The issue at hand was the attribution of bail for a political crime in which the entrance lobby area of a neighbourhood branch of a multi-national bank was set on fire in the middle of the night. No person was harmed and the fire did no damage to any personal property. [1][2]

The value of the so-called (see below) property damage was reported in the media first as three hundred thousand dollars, then as five hundred thousand dollars, then as one million dollars, and in court today as 1.2 million dollars. The value of the damage increases as more and more estimates are made. And these ballooning estimates of course are not questioned, in the media or elsewhere. It seems obvious to this observer that an entire new building could be erected with all its furnishings for far less than one million dollars, never mind an entrance lobby area and two cash dispensing machines?

In any case, the point is that the accused has no past criminal charges or convictions of any kind and that, as correctly stated by the defence, the relevant legal precedents show that alleged multiple murderers are regularly released on bail under the principle that one should be assumed innocent until proven guilty, except if there is compelling evidence of significant risk of danger to society (to people).

Next the defence lawyer is found arguing that, in terms of the severity of the charge, one should compare multiple murders to relatively less serious million-dollar property damage.

Hello? Does anyone in the courtroom recognize an error in argumentation? Nope – not a peep. Both sides and the judge appear to concur.


University of Ottawa: Dean caught lying in cover up

Denis G. Rancourt
academicfreedom.ca


Dean André E. Lalonde

"IPC rules in ATI case at U of O: Dean, VP-Academic and Legal Counsel conspired to send dubious letter questioning dissident professor’s ‘physical and mental well-being’"

INTRODUCTION

The Denis Rancourt case at the University of Ottawa (Ottawa, Canada) is a major ongoing academic freedom case being presently investigated by a Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) Independent Committee of Inquiry and expected to go before the courts as a significant labour dispute. [Endnote-a]

The case has been covered by national and local media in both Canada and the US (New York Times -twice, Globe and Mail -twice, National Post, CBC radio The Current, TV Ontario). [Endnote-b]

Rancourt has presented his views on the case at a conference on academic freedom at New York University. [Endnote-c]

Academic workplace expert Professor Kenneth Westhues’ independent report concluded that Rancourt was subjected to an academic workplace administrative mobbing [Endnote-d].

The present example can be understood as one incident in the broader administrative mobbing phenomenon described by Westhues and enacted by the Allan Rock administration of the University of Ottawa. Several of the players mentioned by Westhues appear here also.


Why we love to hate conspiracy theories: 911 Truth as threat to the intelligentsia

Denis G. Rancourt
Activist Teacher Blog

Especially left and liberal professionals and service intellectuals but also right-wing members of the intelligentsia vehemently attack and ridicule “conspiracy theories” such as the present 911 Truth movement.

Why?

It’s as though power did not covertly orchestrate its predation of us? Is that not the modus operandi of power?

Is it so difficult to believe that the complex and highly successful military attack on US soil that was 911 (levelling three gigantic sky scrapers, blasting a hole into the Pentagon, and destroying four commercial jets and their passengers) was not orchestrated by a religious zealot from a cave in Afghanistan and executed by failed Cessna pilot trainees with box cutters? Or that those who measurably benefited in the trillions had nothing to do with it?

What the hell? Not even (admittedly rare) authoritative mainstream reports seem to matter [1].

What ever happened to “war is a racket” and “follow the money”?

In rigorous compliance with the true meanings of "academic freedom" [2] and "freedom of the press" virtually no academics or mainstream journalists have made it their research to find truth or to radically (at the root) question the establishment version.

Indeed, all the major and considered-radical academic pundits such as Noam Chomsky and Ward Churchill, have actively avoided the possibility that the 911 attacks could have been known or aided from within the finance-corporate-military complex.

What keeps them from crossing that line? What makes them demean attempts to cross that line? [3]


:: Next >>

Health topic page on womens health Womens health our team of physicians Womens health breast cancer lumps heart disease Womens health information covers breast Cancer heart pregnancy womens cosmetic concerns Sexual health and mature women related conditions Facts on womens health female anatomy Womens general health and wellness The female reproductive system female hormones Diseases more common in women The mature woman post menopause Womens health dedicated to the best healthcare
buy viagra online