James Tracy’s Termination: Education, Fake News, and the Jury

by Max Skinwood

Perhaps this is where we should start this school of thought: James Tracy was an educator –ed·u·ca·tor, by definition is a person who teaches, informs, or inspires others. This term educator takes many forms in a myriad of ways: with new ideas or ideals, styles, forms, opinions, even just simply inspiring others to reach their collective creative inner-selves or, most importantly, their critical-thinking. In this case, it seems that James Tracy wasn’t allowed his freedom of speech in using the Sandy Hook shooting as a hoax, to promote any form of education but all the while being throttled by an institution of higher education.

There have been other documented cases of the Sandy Hook shootings being a complete fabrication. Why is it now that a tenured Professor is fired for blogging the same theories? To close to the truth is the best bet. The very body of the FAU’s argument that he didn’t “reveal all outside work activities that could affect his work or the university” is an outright copout. Many professional people—professors, teachers, police officers, even city officials—moonlight to generate additional income (some while on their current job). They may take a phone call, or respond to an email (answering a call to see if you are available to work extra hours). If there was to be an assessment of how many others employed by FAU were moonlighting as a means to generate a secondary income, would it change the outcome? Doing in effect the exact same thing. No, it wouldn’t. Because, it doesn’t raise suspicion that possibly could lead to federal dollars being taken away—hence used as leverage that the school counts on.

The chances that someone inspiring others to look closer at what the ‘authorities’ tell them, or to, in effect, challenge authority is what the idea of being an educator is all about vs the school’s idea of not rocking the boat, or being in direct conflict with their views. While this borders on the infringement of his 1st Amendments right to free speech, the whole scenario borders on censorship, coercion, controlling a Pandora’s Box; don’t open it and no one will be the wiser.

James Tracy was fighting an uphill battle from the beginning. Not only was he a professor speaking his mind, he was an educator that could bring discord to the hoax that is Sandy Hook. Passion should not be overlooked; even if he was spending an inordinate amount of time blogging on the subject, it was within his professional forum and met his work as a communications professor, that the news should be reported accurately and informatively, thereby helping his teaching methods.

If Mr. Tracy was in fact using school equipment to further his blog on school time, then of course he shouldn’t be free from the consequences, however; if he was or wasn’t, then this case sets a dangerous precedent in how the court system is yet again making, bending, or outright violating our constitutional rights. We need greater ability to think critically and help see through the subversion of the truth.

Comparing this to Colin Kaepernick, it is not the cause he is fighting for that’s the problem; it is the forum in which he is using. Kaepernick is paid to play football—when on the field in costume, he should play as he is paid to do, or suffer the consequences, which again is where this comparison takes a dark turn: why is it that Kaepernick can make a stand and not be the subject of a jury trial (football skills or salary demands aside) and, in particular, the left jumps to defend his right to kneel?

Opinions are like derrieres—we all have one, and, they all stink. As such there is no such thing as neutrality any longer; many people take the hard-line approach of one side or the other based on the idea of incomplete, biased information. From this point of view, individuals don’t have dialogues anymore; they have arguments—not respecting the other’s point of view. Instead, when they need to take a step back, envision walking a mile in their shoes and see if your view changes.

The jurors in Tracy’s hearing say they were trying to stay away from the emotion of the case, thinking nothing of the emotion that it brings up in the people smart enough to challenge the fake news propaganda machine that has become the new norm in investigative journalism. Where are they getting their information? It is implausible to believe that the jury wasn’t influenced by outside sources. In a state that has a law called “stand your ground”, how can you purportedly believe the jury’s spokesmen?

Even the Pope has reportedly chastised the news as being fake and urged to stop pushing fake, incomplete, biased news. How does this point tie in? Now we have two high profile figures: President Trump, leader of the free world; and the Pope, leader of the largest group of Christians – saying the same thing. The background setting that is Newton, CT. is more spectacular than some high-priced movie sets. In other words, the shooting could have easily been faked and the gun-hating left just feeds their biased agendas with fake, incomplete, or outright lies.

The bottom line is the masses believe everything they see on TV and read on the internet because that is all they know. Thanks to educators like Tracy, we are provided with a glimpse of the suppressed or censored information that keeps us from being zombies feeding off establishment-manufactured news for unsuspecting consumption.

 

  •  
    1
    Share
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • 1
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.