Monday, November 05, 2007

Where Are They Now?

Diane Catotti was the top vote-getter in the October City Council primary and is widely expected to be elected to a second term tomorrow. The most prominent political voice of the “something happened” contingent, Catotti was recently endorsed for re-election by the N&O. Only in Durham could a council member who aggressively attempted first to block and then to neuter an independent inquiry into the Police Department’s misconduct be hailed as a “reliably progressive voice.” Catotti appears to have suffered no political consequences for her efforts to cover up police misconduct.

Reeve Huston was the history professor who, in late March 2006, departed from his syllabus to share with his class what he described as his “research” on the lacrosse case. His findings? That not only did a sexual assault take place, but that “ejaculation” occurred. The five men’s lacrosse players in the class walked out; a women’s lacrosse player stayed for the remainder of the class, in which Huston continued in a similar vein. Huston remains a professor in good standing at Duke; no evidence exists that he was disciplined in any way.

Chauncey Nartey is the only 2006 Duke student whose words prompted the filing of a police report for e-mail harassment. Nartey was never formally disciplined for this behavior (he was asked to send a letter of apology/explanation, instead). He also was the only one of the 1,636 members of Duke’s class of 2007 to serve on the Campus Culture Initiative; and be chosen to participate in the “Duke Conversation” events; and receive a Griffith University Service award. Nartey currently is listed as a M.A./Ph.D. candidate in secondary education at the University of Pennsylvania. Despite the traditional belief that Education programs are a hotbed of “anti-harassment” activism, neither Nartey’s record nor the suspension of his fraternity during his term as president (allegedly for a hazing offense) prevented him from gaining admission.

Group of 88 member Sally Deutsch was the History professor who, in late March 2006, departed from her syllabus to share with her class—a survey course in U.S. history that included six members of the lacrosse team—what she considered the historical legacy of white males’ sexual oppression of black females. She resisted several attempts from students to get the class back to the subjects they were supposed to cover. When asked why she did not address the equally significant legacy of race-based prosecutorial misconduct in the American South, Deutsch did not reply. Not only does no evidence exist that she was disciplined in any way, Deutsch was promoted in summer 2006, and currently is dean of social sciences for Trinity College.

Patrick Baker was the Durham city manager who in May 2006 stated, publicly and falsely, that Crystal Mangum told the same story to every police officer she encountered. He is also the figure who issued a May 2007 report describing the police handling of the lacrosse case as “typical.” Baker remains employed by the City of Durham; the City Council never summoned him to explain publicly his actions in the lacrosse case.

Group of 88 member Grant Farred was the Literature professor who accused Duke students who registered to vote in Durham as “secret racists” and charged that unnamed lacrosse players committed “perjury.” Not only was he never disciplined by Duke for these obvious violations of the Faculty Handbook, but he was hired away—with a promotion to full professor—by Cornell. Gushed English Department chair Molly Hite, author of Class Porn, “We are very enthusiastic about Professor Farred, whose work everyone in this department has long admired.”

Mark Gottlieb was the sergeant who supervised the early months’ lacrosse case “investigation.” In that role, he gave (by his own admission) false testimony to the grand jury, when he stated that Crystal Mangum’s stories were consistent from the moment she encountered SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy on March 14th through the April 17th meeting of the grand jury. Several months later, Gottlieb produced his “straight-from-memory” case report. Gottlieb appears to have suffered no consequences for his professional misconduct, and he remains employed by the DPD.

John Thompson was the History professor who, in late March 2006, e-mailed the two lacrosse players in his class, “Whether the alleged rape and assault took place or not, the men in question must step forward and take responsibility for their actions—whatever those actions were. If they are innocent, a court will decide . . . If these ‘men’ are too cowardly to step forward, it is your duty as real men to identify them.” Thompson never explained how his students could “identify” people if the “alleged rape and assault” did not take place. Thompson remains a professor in good standing at Duke; no evidence exists that he was disciplined in any way.

[Update, 3.51pm: A furious retort from the comments section:

When are you going to stop "big brothering" the Duke faculty, KC Johnson? I fail to see why John Thompson's name is on your hit list today, Prof! And what, pray tell, is "going off syllabus"? Is correct "going off syllabus" allowed? And are you up there somewhere at good old Brooklyn College to tell faculty when they may or may not "go off syllabus"?

You and your blogolites are so hot on letting everyone know what is good teaching/content/research (in your case, it looks like all onstitutional/diplomatic/political history all of the time). Doesn't "going off syllabus" permit creative discussion that is necessary for a good classroom/learning experience? Or is "stick to the syllabus," the prof's in control, we discuss only what the prof wants teaching really the way to go?]

David Addison was the DPD official spokesperson who falsely claimed that you are looking at one victim brutally raped”; “all of the members refused to cooperate with the investigation”; there was “really, really strong physical evidence”; “We’re not saying that all 46 were involved. But we do know that some of the players inside that house on that evening knew what transpired and we need them to come forward.” Addison appears to have suffered no consequences for his professional misconduct, and he remains employed by the DPD. He has never explained on what basis he made his statements.

Group of 88 member Houston Baker was author of the racist March 29, 2006 public letter, which ten times mentioned the race of the lacrosse players in a derogatory fashion. He also suggested, in a June 2006 e-mail, that team members might have committed additional rapes. Baker then left Duke for an endowed chair at Vanderbilt. Since his December 2006 e-mail (sent from his official Vanderbilt account) informing a lacrosse parent that she was the mother of a “farm animal,” Baker has refused all comment on the lacrosse case, as he refused comment for this post.

Dinushika Mohottige is the only Duke student to have publicly admitted to distributing the March 2006 “wanted” posters around campus. Not only was she never disciplined for her admission to have violated Duke’s anti-harassment policies, she was invited to share the platform with President Brodhead and Mark Anthony (“thugniggaintellectual”) Neal at Brodhead’s first post-indictment public appearance on campus. She currently is a listed as an MPH candidate and recipient of the Barnhill-Hatch fellowship at the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Public Health. Mohottige’s on-line bio recalls how, “throughout her undergraduate years, she facilitated and developed dozens of dialogues on identity and social-marker based oppression.”

Mike Nifong was the district attorney of Durham County—until he was disbarred and convicted of criminal contempt. He was last heard from complaining about how the state failed to do the right thing in refusing to pay his legal expenses in a pending civil suit.

Linwood Wilson was the chief investigator for ex-DA Nifong—until he was fired by interim DA Jim Hardin. He was last heard from with his attorney denouncing the possibility of a federal investigation—which could end with Wilson imprisoned.

Whatever else can be said of them, Nifong and Wilson have suffered some consequences for their misconduct. What’s much more remarkable is how so many people whose behavior in the case was (to put it kindly) dubious not only were not held accountable—but actually prospered.

137 comments:

mac said...

Failure to discipline these characters are the clearest, most convincing reason that Duke still hasn't been sued enough, and that the City of Duhh needs to be sued into bankruptcy and deliveres into receivership.

And for the Feds to finally get into this, once and for all.

Debrah said...

"I'm so outraged by how heinous the crime was."

Looney zealot Mohottige

Anonymous said...

KC: Thanks for the reminders. I hope somebody in the Justice Department is reading this.

And thanks to you and Stuart, and your courageous and faithful coverage of this emerging conspiracy, IT IS NOT OVER for these folks.

Justice for them WILL prevail.

Sonner or LATER.

Some of us call this the "Haaman Noose".... whereby the gallows that was prepared for the faithful Mordecai becaume the actual gallows upon which Haaman, the conspirator, was hanged. In the end, the one who was willing to sacrifice the innocent for his own selfish amtitions became the one who suffered the fate he had prepared for another.

IT'S NOT OVER.

Thank you for your faithfulness and your integrity, KC. I'm sure that when you started this venture you had no idea that you would end up a point man for cultural change. But then, we never do know, at the beginning.

Please stay the course. And stay ON course.

We count on you.

DSL

Anonymous said...

Some minor points to add to this account. Deutsch was named as the new dean of social sciences (under the dean of arts and sciences) in January 2006, before the Lacrosse events took place. Her appointment became active in July 2006 but had been settled well before hand. Reeve Huston is her husband, a "trailing spouse" hired when Deutsch was brought in to be history dept chair in 2004. She followed John Thompson as chair.

Debrah said...

The only reason these pathetic "social disaster" addicts have not paid a price for their slander and libel and their unadulterated lies is because no one in the media has any interest in exploring this most provocative issue......

......because they were complicit with these addicts in constructing and keeping the Hoax alive.

There really should be a concerted effort to keep reminding these people just how freakish they are.

Anonymous said...

They are a disgrace. What in the world is Steel and Duke Admins thinking, to keep anyone they do have to keep because they are tenured?

Anonymous said...

Off Topic Maybe - Did Nifong lose his position with the ANimal Patrol Board when he was forced to resign?

Anonymous said...

The house cannot be cleaned until Brodhead and Steele are replaced.

They are putting themselves out in front of the PC faculty, and the other HOAXers and trying to stop the freight train of justice from moving forward.

But sooner or later, they WILL be removed.... and THEN the cards will begin to fall.

Anonymous said...

For me, the most discouraging aspect of this case is that it is NOT surprising that members of the academy (faculty, administrators and student activists) and the media have NOT faced any consequences for "their" dubious behavior. Nifong correctly suffered the consequences of his actions because he was bound by the ethical constraints of his profession. (Members of the DPD, I think, will eventually suffer some negative consequence, even if it just not getting a promotion, etc.) Notwithstanding KC's thorough review of the Duke handbook, it is clear that members of the professoriate, so long as they tow the correct party line, are subject only to the judgment of their own conscience and we already know what a lenient judge that is. The media will continue to rush to judgment so long as it sells.

Gary Packwood said...

What do these people at Duke, the City Council and DPD know and how are they leveraging their knowledge to keep the lid on the real story of who hatched, designed and moved this hoax along?

What do they know and when did they know it ...will be the next book subtitle.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"They are a disgrace. What in the world is Steel and Duke Admins thinking, to keep anyone they do have to keep because they are tenured?"

11/4/07 6:26 PM

Please, please, understand what and with whom you are dealing when you are asking for responsiveness from the administration and trustees of an "elite" institution of "higher education."

The trustees are appointed for financial/presitge/political reasons. They WILL NOT do anything but defer to the Chairman of the BOT and his selection for President, UNLESS there is a rapid and steep decline in the contributions to and ranking of the university. Even so, only a massive public relations nightmare in the MSM will cause them to revolt against the current power structure.

The chairman of the BOT hired Brodhead in order to give Duke some of Yale's prestige. He has a vested interest in being right about his choice and will NOT abandon Brodhead unless the p.r. nightmare reaches epic proportions.

Those who are in "positions of power" at Duke only want this to go away. They do NOT care about cleaning up the mess.

Anonymous said...

These are the same people, especially the academics, who want heads to roll whenever there's malfeasance in the corporate world.

HYPOCRITES.

Duke Prof

Anonymous said...

I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happens to them all." Ecclesiastes 9:11

This latest post is a good reminder: the race is not over, the battle not won; but time and luck already have run out for some. And it will happen to others.

dave

Anonymous said...

It seems at Duke that the inmates are running the asylum.

Anonymous said...

Is Huston a Communist?

don t. said...

anon 6:26pm

Neither Steele nor brodhead have "thought" since March 13, 2006. What a farce!! What an embarassment!!!! Duke has turned into a joke and these clowns do not have a clue.

trinity60

af said...

Duke? Thinking? Surely you jest.

Another great KC post. You truly are a master. DIW is more deserving of the Nobel than was An Inconvenient Truth. Through DIW, so many damaging people were exposed and the principles on which this country was founded were kept ON the front burner.

Only in Wonderland have we come to expect honesty and good judgment. KC, you are a masterpiece!

Anonymous said...

K.C.'s post tells us everything we need to know about the state of "elite" higher education in the United States. Stuart was right; PC IS a cancer.

Note how the people who committed the most grievous wrongs at Duke have been the ones who have been the most rewarded for their deeds. This is not an accident.

Anonymous said...

I didn't realize that Reeve Huston was Sally Deutsch's husband. What a self-important ass he seems to be. And what a poor researcher for an academic--if he concluded from his research that both there has been a long-prevalent problem of alpha males assaulting black females and that there had been a sexual assault at the Buchanan house (DIW, p. 110).

I wish that Jay Jennisen's cartoon of Reeve with the bubble around "ejaculation had occurred" could be posted around campus. Reeve deserves the humiliation. But whoever would post it and Jennison would be punished severely, although those students who posted the dangerous wanted posters and those professors who harangued students in and out of class, who spoke demeaningly of them in public and in writing, go unpunished. A true double standard--and a gutless administration.

So the history department has a husband-and-wife team of self-proclaimed experts on the history of white males assualting black females. How good of them to gratuitously share their vast knowledge with their captive audiences during their history classes. And Reeve, good man, he seemed determined to rout out the rapist, a true avenger.

Clearly, the Dean of Social Sciences will not use her authority to discipline Reeve or other professors in Social Sciences for their inappropriate and hurtful behavior. She's one of them.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

I am not concerned that particular tenured profs at Duke were not disciplined. Duke would have to go the extra mile to do that.

I am concerned that some untenured facutly at Duke were not nonreappointed because of this fiasco including the grade retaliation. It is trivial to nonreappoint someone. That shows where Duke is on this matter.

As far as DPD and Durham goes, I am only unhappy that investigators like Gottlieb have not suffered due to their actions. Spokes people and guys like Baker are not responsible for knowing if what they are told about the case is correct or not.

Anonymous said...

I hope the guilty read their "Where are they now" listing and realize--they can run, but they can't hide.

We will NOT forget. They WILL be exposed. There WILL be consequences. And we will strive to see to it that (as Rae Evans said of Nifong), they will pay every day of their lives for what they've done to these young men.

Jeny in Atlanta

Anonymous said...

Are the FREAKS reading KC's latest? I sure hope so.

No doubt they want us all to move on and just "fuggedaboudit".

Wouldn't you if you were in their shoes?

Well, sorry freaks--NO WAY is that going to happen.

Not in this lifetime. Not as long as KC and the wonderful residents of Wonderland have life left in their bodies.

We will be here until we breathe our last--to push, cajole, remind, rehash, excoriate and eviscerate those who sought with malice aforethought to destroy the lives of these innocent young men.

Wherever you go--there we will be. We'll be there to remind you (and everyone around you) of the role you played in this horrific hoax.

You want to change jobs and/or schools? Cool. We're there. Isn't Al Gore's internet great?

WE (and you freaks) WILL NEVER FORGET what you've done.

You may think you've escaped the consequences--but you haven't. Right now you're lulled into a (false) sense of security--but don't be fooled.

There WILL be consequences.

And you can take that to the bank.

Anonymous said...

I don't see the cultural difference between the fallout from the LAX case and the Clinton scandals, and, therefore, don't understand why I am supposed to be so shocked that the Left at Duke, as elsewhere, has no built-in "market mechanism" to correct itself for untruths.
The same thing happened in France in the thirties, where the entire state was infected by a weak-willed, pacifistic dry rot which led to its humiliating submission to Nazi Germany.
I believe this same "rot" is infecting America, hollowing it out, and that neither our enemies nor our friends are unaware of our condition. No European country has just issued two and a half trillion dollars of impaired mortgage paper; no European CEOs are walking away with nine-figure pay packages after cratering a major fiduciary; no European country has invaded a multi-ethnic, multi-religious Mideastern state on the flimsy basis of desired dramatic cultural change.

scott said...

It is not for nothing that Durham is the Armpit of the Piedmont.

Anonymous said...

Mac is right, the only way that there will be any real justice in this case is for those injured by the illegal actions of both Durham and Duke is for the full force of the legal system to be brought to bear incessantly on two fronts. First, the lawsuits must have as a goal, the prosecution and incarceration of anyone in the DPD and the Durham City government who acted illegally. Secondly, the good citizens of Durham should be put into bankruptcy by the size of the punitive monetary awards associated with the trying of the wrongdoers. There should also be legal action against Duke. It does not appear that the liberal scum who run and teach there have any thought of self-discipline so the action against Duke should be through punitive monetary awards from successful lawsuits.
In my wildest imagination, I would never have thought that a civilized society would act in the way that Duke and Durham have collectively, but then I would also never have thought that the University of Delaware would seek to "indoctrinate" its freshmen into thinking "properly" or that pre-teens would be given birth control pills by their school system as is being done in Maine. What shameful behavior.

AMac said...

A very forthright and articulate defense of the Group of 88 was submitted as an anonymous comment to the 11/14/07 Liestoppers post It Will just get uglier and uglier and uglier. It is worth reposting Anon 3:18am in full.

--- begin copied comment ---

No, the Group of 88 have not damaged themselves. They actually gained strength at Duke and their viewpoint gained strength everywhere. They have been promoted,or moved to better jobs elsewhere and have a new campus initiative they are involved with. They spoke up against what they saw as racism on campus and the community was energised. It is no secret the community as a whole is more sensitive about race and demeaning actions and language right now because of what the Group of 88 started. Look at the last few months since their statement on the lacrosse situation and you will see:

Don Imus was removed from his job for racially demeaning comments

Michael Richards disgraced for his heckling of black audience members and threatening them with Lynching

Now Dog the bounty hunter has been similarly exposed and now he is also off the air

Bill Oreilly was also exposed for racist comments about eating at a Soul food restaurant

Black comedian Eddie Griffin was removed from the stage at an event for Black Enterprise for using the N word

And the biggest episode of all, The Jena 6 demonstration. Black people from all walks of life converged on a racist KKK hotbed and let them know the whole world was watching and they were thousands strong. Other blacks at home wore black the whole day in solidarity. Some of the people on the buses were from Durham and some of them cited the Lacrosse case as an example of disrespecting a black woman and getting away with it and that made them want to get involved in the Jena case. simply put, black people are not taking this stuff quietly any more!

So the Group of 88 have not lost ground. People who beleve it is ok to use racial slurs and to send perverted and threatening racist emails are the ones losing ground( not just the American Psycho one; many Lax supporters sent racist emails to the Group of 88 professors). That is why UPI is a flop as it is an apologia for racist people. Stuart Taylor, for example, still cannot admit that the players started the hostilities that happened: Kim was retalitating after one of the players( Lamade) told her to sodomise herself with a broomstick, a completely uncalled for comment and one that could have turned dangerous if someone had decided to do this to the 2 women who were outnumbered by the team by about 35 to 2! Also, little d--k white boys is not the equivalent of the N word or the cotton shirt comment. Sorry Stuart Taylor, you have made an ass of yourself by supporting the racist viewpoint and that is why the book is stalling.

- 3:18 AM

--- end copied comment ---


3:18's gloating may be a bit offputting, but I think there is a lot of merit to his or her analysis. As KC points out in today's post, the ill effects of the Hoax/Frame on the potbangers, the 88, and their allies and supporters have been just about nil.

I could call 3:18 a Nazi, and most readers would snicker. Even though there really are Nazis, sophisticates would realize that my I just weakened my argument with this burst of name-calling.

But suppose 3:18 ripostes by labeling me a Racist. Readers would gasp--after all, there really are Racists!

Politically, is 3:18 to my Left? Check!

Have I admitted that I am white? Check!

Is it possible that suspicious fellow-Leftists could agree that I might be a Racist? Check!

I'd best abandon whatever 3:18 and I were debating and defend myself as best I can, or I'll be permanently tarred by the R-word!

-----

Once throwaway charges of racism are treated the same way as are baseless accusations of naziism and communism ("Is AMac a communist?"), perhaps Americans will start to demand factual evidence of malicious race-hatred. Maybe they will view both the casual smear artists and the actual racists with cooler, less-forgiving eyes.

On that day, 3:18's triumphant sneer may start to fade.

Terry said...

Let's not forget SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy! Her name is mentioned, but no real update provided. She is no longer with Duke Medical Center, but I'm not sure if that is due to her misdeeds in the LAX hoax.

Anonymous said...

When are you going to stop "big brothering" the Duke faculty, KC Johnson? I fail to see why John Thompson's name is on your hit list today, Prof! And what, pray tell, is "going off syllabus"? Is correct "going off syllabus" allowed? And are you up there somewhere at good old Brooklyn College to tell faculty when they may or may not "go off syllabus"?

You and your blogolites are so hot on letting everyone know what is good teaching/content/research (in your case, it looks like all onstitutional/diplomatic/political history all of the time). Doesn't "going off syllabus" permit creative discussion that is necessary for a good classroom/learning experience? Or is "stick to the syllabus," the prof's in control, we discuss only what the prof wants teaching really the way to go?

Anonymous said...

"Whatever else can be said of them, Nifong and Wilson have suffered some consequences for their misconduct. What’s much more remarkable is how so many people whose behavior in the case was (to put it kindly) dubious not only were not held accountable—but actually prospered." KC

I am beyond disgusted. To even say Nifong and Wilson have suffered is a joke. They have gotten away with deception and criminal acts we assuredly would do hard time for. The entire cast of actors from the governor on down are responsible.

All of this "waiting" for the FED'S stuff is just another example of our disgraceful "judicial system." All of these accolades of the ring of miscreants proves it. Corruption and deception are rewarded, and the innocent are left trampled under foot. They have yet to see their punishment, and have NOT suffered. If they weep, it is for themselves. We weep for the truth.

From our stinging cheeks to God's ears. They may have profited temporarily, but will have to face the judgement seat eventually one day......

Rhonda Fleming

Anonymous said...

Mac might want to consider that racism is more of a threat/part of everyday life than Communism or Nazism. You get called a Nazi, what does that mean? You get called a racially loaded word, people know what that means. The is "so-and-so a communist?" that regularly appears on this blog is aimed only at some people. It's stupid (or perhaps funny depending on your sense of humor), but not threatening.

Finally, IMHO, the 3:18 was no more snearing than many of the posters on DiH are when they make arguments for their opinions.

haskell said...

I am cynical and I am pessimistic. The power of the trump cards -- Racism, Sexism, Insensitivity -- cannot be underestimated. These cards overwhelm the self-correcting mechanism of faculty feedback. I believe we are wrong in putting our faith in the professoriat. As a group, the professoriat knows more and more about less and less, seeing the world dimly through prisms and blinders. Most are geeks, most have no background in history, civics, government, or law. There are of course very able exceptions, for example, on this blog Johnson, Horwitz, Anderson, Savant; but in general we have made a tragic error in assuming the best about this body of professors. Most have taken hard science and/or traditional core curriculum courses only when forced. This training has been deficient -- see "The Coming Crisis in Citizenship', quoted in Appendix A of 'Choosing the Right College' or online at www.americancivicliberty.org. This so-called educational experience has given them a deficient and inadequate knowledge and skill base. They think with their hearts with the principle of my race or gender, right or wrong, the defining benchmark. Logic, reason, fairness, justice are alien concepts -- you might as well ask them to do calculus. They are True Believers, Zealots, and hold high their Martyrs. They have chosen to be unapproachable "I can't hear you" or "you are on the e-mail filter list". Their writing is tortured, turgid, and riddled with errors of grammar, spelling and commonsense. They are empowered by a failing system which rewards their excesses. When confronted with undeniable truth, as Taylor and Johnson quoted Churchill, they see only a bump in the road.
I have no answers to this bleak picture, but would hope that efforts like FIRE, mindingthecampus.com, and the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (Choosing the Right College) will continue to address these problems. KC Johnson has shown us how the Dark Citadel can be breached, with thorough and careful dissection of its inhabitants. His work is just amazing, and sets a standard for the new age of informed citizenship. The trick, as in the battle for the Dartmouth Board of Trustees, is for each of us to keep the pressure on, as best we can. For what it is worth, I try to boycott places like Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, and now Delaware. I am probably wrong, maybe the best way to fix things is from the inside. But I do not do business with people who do business with the likes of Houston Baker, Brodhed, Steel, etc.

Civil disrespect, as KC has shown, is our strongest tool. The problem is, our audience has to be smart enough, or involved enough, to care about these issues.

Ad hominem attacks should be expected and anticipated, with the focus kept on the issue. We have seen some most excellent race-baiters on this forum, and I certainly have fallen for their trap and gotten derailed. Once the focus is off the issue, they win. Yes, we can say, I may be a (fill in their perjorative word here), but lets talk about the issue, not my personality. I tell my son, who plays soccer, to expect 2 bad calls a game. He used to get so tied up with the bad call, that he lost focus for minutes if not the entire game. He now has a tool to help him work through the bad call. Anticipate and pre-empt the ad hominem attack. KC does this very, very well -- promptly addresses the post in question, and asks simply for more facts or information. "Can you give me a specific example?" goes a long way.

AMac said...

Anoon 2:12am wrote --

> Mac might want to consider that racism is more of a threat/part of everyday life than Communism or Nazism.

Yeah, I understand. Does that make the way that some folks regularly cast such stones more or less commendable?

"AMac," BTW, "Mac" is a different pseudonymous commenter here (Anon, why don't you pick one for yourself?).

Anonymous said...

1;50 AM

Sorry, if a record of your sorry DukeGroup88 is upsetting, please apologize. You need to apologize. Duke needs to apologize. This is the something that has not happened. Apologize!

Anonymous said...

Many of the (formerly) great universities in the US were begun with a religious background... and most have some motto or stated purpose which includes great and lofty commitments to God, knowledge, pursuit of wisdom, and service to mankind.

Few of those formerly-great schools can be shown to adhere or pusue those great values and pursuits any longer.

They have thrown out God as racist or archaic, exchanged trivial pursuit for knowledge, substituted relativism for wisdom, and selfishness for service.

Not only do we need a radical reawakening of the meaning of true education, we also need a radical return to a spiritual grounding and purpose that calls students, teachers, and nations to a worldview in which there is a God bigger than themselves.

Humanism does not do that. And Humanism is now the prevaling "religion" in America.

The self-serving, naval gazing, blame-shifting behavior of the academics, and their disciples, the MSM, are a logical result of at least two generations of dis-education, or mis-education in our public schools and universities.

The roots are DEEP... and I share the deep concern of some of my fellow-bloggers.

The lacrosse hoax is just a metastasis of a rabid cancer. Stuart is right.

I wonder if he has a proposal/ solution/ action plan???

dsl

Anonymous said...

Kim Curtis is teaching a class this spring. I was, to say the least, surprised. You can see the synopsis from her webpage. I had hoped that Duke would just let her contract run out without inflicting her on students again. I guess they like paying out lawsuit money.

Debrah said...

From Argus Hamilton at JWR:

"Don Imus announced Thursday he will return to the air on ABC Radio beginning in early December. Even civil rights leaders are glad his show is back. The moment Don Imus was taken off the air, nooses started turning up everywhere to fill the void."

Hamilton is a humorist; however, this is about as true as it gets in the world of 88-ism.

Anonymous said...

KC--Hope you are well in Israel. The Duke persons' summaries indicate president Brodhead has learned nothing and that he is a pathetic, craven creature. There are many more, including Tara Levicy, who deserve punishment. Perhaps there will be a final justice for these characters. At any rate ,they have been exposed to a great number of Duke students and alumni, as well as to those who believe in due process.Best--Professor of ethics

A Duke Dade said...

39,000 runners in the New York City Marathon.

Are they all RACISTS ? or just RACERS ?

It is incredible how Racist-Hunting has replaced Witch-Hunting, with all the same methodology. Just hurl this charge at your political enemies, and that ends all discussion.

Can we actually believe that, with all the vigilance of the Group of 88 and their allies, that a hotbed of racism, sexism and classism actually dominates at Duke ?

Or, is the truth that the enormous tuition fees go to support hordes of PC sycophants; that the actual classroom costs are a minor part of what students are charged.

Anonymous said...

I am very discouraged by seeing these many perps walk to their rewards, unimpeded by any justice, any sense of wrong-doing. Very discouraged.

Anonymous said...

A more distant, but related topic.

I just finished reading Clarence Thomas' autobiography. Very easy to read. It was well done.

He has a very "special" place in his heart for Anita Hill who accused him of sexual advances and inappropriate comments in the workplace. It almost destroyed his otherwise spottless career.

The mindless media, liberal politicians, special interest groups (NAACP), perpetuated this ruthless attack for political gain, despite a thorough FBI investigation that exonerated him (sound familiar).

Even worse, the details of the classified FBI report was only in the public domain due to pre-meditated illegal "leak" from someone in the Senate that did not like Justice Thomas' conservative political views towards race and gender equality (he opposes government mandated social engineering experiments pursued by the PC and special interest establishment). Nobody was interested in pursuing how a classified FBI document was leaked by a ranking Senator despite it being both illegal and unethical.

The Anita Hill story capitivated the media because it fell into pre-exisisting stereotypes of black male behaviour towards women. It became 24/7 news coverage based toatlly on a hoax.

The career of one of the most honorable, repsected and powerful men in America was almost destroyed by the very same dynamics and forces that were at play in Durham.

Justice Thomas does not mince words in his biography. There are some very deep feelings towards the mis-directed left wing crowd that perpetuates issues like the LAX hoax for political advantage.

You know there is one very sympathic ear in the supreme court if the Durham issues are ever pursued that far.

The similarities between the Lax hoax and the Anita Hill hoax are striking. The motivations by the political left, the PC establishment and the media were identical.

A good read for all interested in DIW.

Orson Buggeigh said...

The anonymous poster at 1:53 AM is missing the point - whether willfully or because they fail to understand cannot be determined from the posting. The point being that the departure from the syllabus by the professors described in KC Johnson's post was not a positive act of scholarship or teaching.

Anonymous said: "You and your blogolites are so hot on letting everyone know what is good teaching/content/research (in your case, it looks like all onstitutional/diplomatic/political history all of the time). Doesn't "going off syllabus" permit creative discussion that is necessary for a good classroom/learning experience? Or is "stick to the syllabus," the prof's in control, we discuss only what the prof wants teaching really the way to go?"

Departure from the syllabus may have been 'creative discussion,' but I dispute the claim that it was either necessary (the rape claim had nothing to do with the subject of the classes in question), or that it produced a 'good classroom / learning experience.' In point of fact, the departures from the course were the worst sort of unprofessional behavior. The professors made claims or implied strongly that Duke students had committed criminal acts, but had no empirical evidence to support those claims; these professors used class time to address their own personal political agendas instead of the subject the students were registered for. These professors contributed to a situation which made it virtually impossible for Duke students to receive due process. In short, it was wrong. Educated people are supposed to know better. You were correct about one thing, though, Anon 1:53 - at Duke, 'the prof's in control, we discuss only what the prof wants.' The student athletes were shamefully wronged, maligned and accused of infamous crimes by faculty who had NO knowledge that would support such claims, and the rest of the class were cheated of any content that the professor might have offered that actually covered the subject in the catalog. The class discussed what the prof wanted - a bogus charge with trumped up evidence straight out of the Star Chamber. Educational? I think not.

While you may not care for constitutional/diplomatic/political history, I would gladly take more of it from KC Johnson. I wouldn't waste my time taking anything from Chafe or the other fellow hoax supporting professors in Duke's history department. If I wanted social history, I certainly wouldn't waste my time taking a class from, or reading work by someone with so little understanding of the historical craft as to replace factual evidence with personal opinion.

Anonymous said...

Dear 7:01,

There was no 1:50am post, so which poster are you attacking? I'm not sure anyone has to appologize for the opinions of others. Opinions are just that. And, guess what, they're allowed, even if you don't like it. Live with it. Your bile will just give you an early heart attack.

Anonymous said...

Folks, plan to be discouraged, outraged, blah blah blah. Your ire will go exactly as far as this blog. Sure some of you will write irate emails to the 88. And poor pitiful KC will continue his pathologic obsession with Duke faculty members so you folks can be disgusted and have a safe space to share.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, as somebody copied from another site, the Duke faculty you love to hate will continue their patterns of reward, speech, high salaries and other perks of academe. But do not completely despair, you always have this site to talk among yourselves. That is exactly how far your outrage extends, except to those of us who check in to collect our bets on how long KC will be unable to disentangle himself from his obsession. It's really getting quite pitiful, if not borderline hilarious. He can't let go. even from Israel. This has become his identity, and he obviously needs all your praise cause he's not getting it from the academy where he has become a laughingstock.I won money today. Keep it up y'all.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 1:53 said...

...Doesn't "going off syllabus" permit creative discussion that is necessary for a good classroom/learning experience?
::
No. Not really.

It allows for un-prepared professors and students to blather endlessly and bore the bejusus out of the rest of the students who are not especially skilled at free association blathering.
::
GP

pearl said...

As some others have said, the PC "movement" is too imbedded, too well accepted to be stopped. IMHO.

I have had 2 children graduate from Ivy League colleges, I work for a private college and I am depressed and even shocked at the shallowness of the current liberal arts education.

I recently took a course in the English Department...I kid you not it was about Latino/Caribbean identity and iterature. The tenure tract professor was incoherent. He had no specific examples, or rather examples that made his point, but lots of political opinion.

Since I have spent time in Central America, I asked him why, he thought, there was no reading culture in Honduras, for example. He told me he didn't know anything about Honduras. A whole career focused on Latino/Caribbean literature and he had no clue about one of the countries in his area?

I think what "they" do is select a favorite theme/rant/victim and then build a academic sounding frame.

I hope my experience is the exception. But I fear not.

Anonymous said...

Gary Packwood, you haven't a clue what you're talking about. But, keep it up. Boring classes with know-it-all profs are precisely those where the class is always on syllabus. Cuz the old dudes got no clue what to do if they ain't on.

Debrah said...

TO 9:15 AM--

Hi Orin.....or the Mrs.

It's a morph at this point.

What is hilarious to me is how uncomfortable some of you AA hires and creek bed explorers are knowing that KC is halfway around the world and his work is still in demand in the U.S.

We're not going away!

You superfluous urchins wouldn't be checking Wonderland so often if you weren't bothered by the facts ABOUT YOU being exposed by KC.

I personally know that this blog--KC's Wonderland--is a stone in the shoes of so many of you Hoax enablers.

However, we know that the cancer of which you are a part has even infected people like James Coleman.

It will not always be this way.......and try as you might, nothing will stop the mission here.

KC has ignited a revolution!

And it scares the pants off you no-name cretins.

It will be more difficult to try to send innocent people to prison next time.

Debrah said...

"Keep it up y'all."

Indeed.

That's why you're here...as you always are.

Casing the place to see what embarrassing facts have yet to surface to tell the tale of your sleaze and non-existent scholarship.

Wind it up one more time.

The phoney disdain and nonchalance.

You strange Duke 88 clowns are seething with both jealousy and fear.

LOL!!!
LOL!!!

AMac said...

Anon 9:15am wrote --

> Folks, plan to be discouraged, outraged, blah blah blah.

Have a nice day, 9:15. Thanks for the psychoanalysis of KC Johnson. You might know some of the Gramscians at Duke even better than you know Johnson; any comparable insights on their thoughts and deeds? Not that they are winning--we're already aware of that. More a question of how they see their victories, and where they plan to take the Class Struggle* next.

* pun

Anonymous said...

Thank you, amac, for publishing that comment in the DIW Comment Section. I had missed it, and this comment was much more detailed than most on the thinking of G88 supporters. I will follow up with a good response to it also published on the Liestoppers Comment Board.

-begin smip-

Anonymous said...

To 3:18,

I think you are right. The group of 88 has been able to perpetuate their victim status with no accountability. Imagine if a “white” male had dehumanized a group of “black” males, by calling them a bunch of scummy “black “males and farm animals. Do you think that white male would still have his job? Probably not. Yet Houston Baker used those words, inserting “white” for black without any repercussions. Don Imus lost his job for calling a team “Nappy headed hos”, yet Houston Baker still has his job for calling the team “farm animals”. Fair? Just? Equal? I don’t think so.

The infamous Kim Curtis is teaching next semester at Duke. Karla Holloway is teaching at Harvard. So I do think you are right. The group of 88 has done very well advancing their agendas on the backs of the lacrosse team. Clumping them together as “one”. Never did this group apologize to the 10 or so members who were not at the party. Never did this group apologize to those who were not drinking. Never did this group apologize to any lacrosse members for their rush to judgment. Never did they try to speak with the team. Why, because they were not interested in these young men as people, individuals. That would not have served their purpose. Dehumanize them, demonize them, because that suits their purpose and academia is frightened to disciple [sic] them because it is not politically correct.

In reality, if you demonize the lacrosse team, you are rewarded as has been evidenced by all the appointments to committees and Nartey’s awards and his appearance at “The Conversation with Duke”. Duke needs help. Academia needs help. I hope that as the group of 88 sit back and reaps their rewards, those who see how dehumanizing one group without repercussions will lead to dehumanizing another. [We] will continue to fight for fairness and equality. The group of 88 did not care about these concepts.

9:04 AM

-end snip-

At this juncture there seems little doubt that the G88 has profited much, in the short-term at least, from its contemptible behavior, but I believe attributing to the G88 all the perceived positive developments 3:18 has cited in the policing of racial slurs is a bit of a stretch. I can only hope the claim that many Jena 6 supporters rallied because of the "disrespecting " of Ms. Mangum is goundless.

Perhaps this is the time to remind ourselves that in the Scottsboro case, those who promoted injustice likewise profited from their behavior, and those who clung to facts, evidence, and reason suffered political defeat (in the case of Judge James Horton) and all manner of hatred and abuse (in the case of defense lawyer Samuel Liebowitz)--at least in the short- term in the milieu of the South in the 1930s. Of course, there are several sharp contrasts between the Scottsboro case and the Duke case--one of the most telling is that Harvard and Cornell and Vanderbilt did not embrace and laud those happy to lynch whether by the legal system or by force.

Nonetheless, at some point surely cooler minds in command of the facts will finally prevail on the legacy of the Duke LAX case as also happened in the Scottsboro case. The ACLU (Nadine Strossen), the Innocence Project (Barry Scheck), and Susan Estrich (all of whom are esteemed amongst their liberal peers, seem to have a good understanding of the injustices.

Ardent attention to understanding the facts of the case has not been a strength of the G88; in fact, like Mr. Nifong, they seem to have somehow avoided exposure to factual details. The same applies to 3:18. And regardless of short-term successes, ignoring facts seldom works to the long-term benefit of the scholar or any advocate.

This blog and "Until Proven Innocent" are about (1) truth and the integrity of the justice system for people of all races at all times and (2) the close scrutiny of those who attempt to pervert either for their own purposes. Time is not generally a friend to ignorance or dishonesty whether its in Alabama or at Harvard.

Observer

Anonymous said...

"KC has incited a revolution"
Oh right, sure. Be wary in the internet channels. KC might be lurking within, or his minion Desperate Debrah, who thinks if she says it enough it will become true. So ok, revolution revolution revolution? Hmmm, just checked outside my window, and nothing seems to have shifted. Your hope that you matter to someone other than yourselves is so sorry to watch (but not without its own humor). News flash. You don't. And we write because you guys are sooooo easy. And there are bets about how many comments we can get. And then a lot of lunch time laughter. So here's bait people. Go for it. But geesh, can't you make it a little more difficult? Thin skinned, wishful thinking, failures that you are. How many comments can I get for that? Have at it folks, and you first,Desperate Debrah.

KC Johnson said...

To the 10.05:

I invite you to reveal to whom the "we" refers in your statement above.

As to your third-from-last sentence: perhaps Prof. Piot (or his pal Bill O'Reilly, who used a similar tactic against Daily Kos) can quote it in his next attempt to attack the blog.

Anonymous said...

That is why a civil suit should render a very, very large sum on the falsely accused and slandered Duke 3. Those who played a role have not been punished....what about Nancy Grace and Wendy the Witch. What about the New York Times. The list goes on and on. Even to this day there are those who still say....."something happened"....still trying to pin guilt on these young men. This is the reason the civil suit is important.

AMac said...

Anon 10:05am --

Thanks for writing (again). Have a nice day! Couple questions:

(1) Would you mind if KC identified the domain that your IP maps to? Your call, I am supposing.

(2) Could you pick a pseudonym so that readers don't have to rely on stylistic similarities to follow your trenchant arguments from comment to comment?

Again, have a nice day.

Michael said...

Indeed several of the bad actors have been rewarded or overlooked for their wrongdoing in this matter and are probably looked up to in their private circles. But there has been a cost to their reputation. If this didn't matter to them, then Lubiano wouldn't have threatened a suit on UPI's publisher.

As you get older, you realize the value of your reputation and legacy. There are obviously many associated with this case that don't care about their reputation, the people that they trampled or injured or the rot in their minds. At this time. Maybe they will change with age. Maybe not.

It may be that public universities are a better place to avoid this stuff. Where egos aren't as big and where concern for the customer isn't thrown out the window.

John said...

-- quote -- Once throwaway charges of racism are treated the same way as are baseless accusations of naziism and communism ("Is AMac a communist?"), perhaps Americans will start to demand factual evidence of malicious race-hatred. Maybe they will view both the casual smear artists and the actual racists with cooler, less-forgiving eyes. -- end quote --

What a squandered opportunity this case has been for all people of conscience and sound mind to come together and say no to a corrupt criminal justice system.

I despair that the casual smear artists will ever go away. The prime objective is too important ever to let facts get in the way. Nor is the prime objective related in any way to legitimate concern for true victims. Tawana, Crystal, etc. just have to be willing to say whatever to keep the ball rolling.

I don't remember his exact quote, but when Mao was asked about the horrendous losses China would experience if they crossed the Yalu, he pretty much said, what's a million lives, we've got plenty of people. So it is today. What indeed are the reputations of a few white lax players, if we can increase the bus count at the Jena rally. Keep your eye on the ball ...

IMO, the other side of the ideological spectrum is not all that much better, as even this blog goes off on Limbaugh v. lefties, Republicans and Democrats, Horowitz and Horwitz, is KC really a Dem and shouldn't he switch, ad nauseum. After reading on this blog posts asserting that the lax case and hundreds of wrongfully imprisoned, mostly Black defendants profiled by the Innocence Project have nothing in common, because (quote) most people in jail are guilty.(end quote), there is little reason for hope --

Seeing it through our own prisms, left, right, and center, is just so much more important -- and ultimately self-gratifying -- than searching for any common ground.

Evidence of each new outrage always brings more self-satisfying proof of our own bias, and there will always be PLENTY of evidence, from every side, as the Univ of Delaware and Louima and Diallo show ...

... we've met the enemy, and he is us. (Pogo)

Anonymous said...

I heard, second hand, that Lubiano has all but disappeared from her classes and they are being taught by others. Can anybody add any further information?
Just wishful thinking?

Debrah said...

Little Orin and the Mrs., the suppurating and pronation-prone Piot, as well as all the other misguided and ill-educated Duke 88 members should know that many of us in Wonderland hope for a better day for them.

We are not without compassion for those less fortunate.

This article from Salon might give insight into the intricacies of compassion....for the Diva can only say that I feel your pain.

traveler said...

Did anyone notice when you look at some Duke web pages, there is a little sidebar box:
Showcase

**Cleaning Up Duke's 'Swamp'**

Who said there is no true humor on D-I-W, how funny is that?

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/02/clubhouse_0205.html

Anonymous said...

anonymous 88ist said...

I won money today. Keep it up y'all.

11/5/07 9:15 AM


Keep betting on KC and you'll keep winning money. Btw, did you win $30 million? If not, you're way behind our side.

You know why you're behind? Duke is a giant ATM for our side right now. Coach Pressler can set aside his agreement and sue Duke again because Duke will pay any sum of money (up to its full endowment) to avoid the spectacle of seeing someone like you being questioned by someone like me in a forum where there are real consequences for lying.

As for your "laughing at KC in Israel", it reminds me of the laughter a century ago of the Czarist ministers at the expense of that fellow they exiled to Switzerland. What's that saying about "Who laughs last"?

As for the future of higher education, "Nach 88, uns". We should call ourselves "the 89ers" as we are those who will come after (in both senses of the term) the 88.

Esquire.

Nicole said...

If I were a student at Duke I would not register for any courses taught by the 88Gang. My "vaccinations" with communist theories from way back, have produced the contrary effect. These "professors" are POISON.

Anonymous said...

Same old same old.

KC: evidence, logic, clarity

88ers: taunting, name-calling, snickering.

anti-leftist liberal

Anonymous said...

To 10:05

Thank you for telling us about the lunchtime laughter you have with your colleagues.

At my workplace we have been having lunchtime discussions. Most of us have children who will soon be of college age. We all have been visiting schools and examining the brochures we're receiving.

You are dead wrong when you say information never extends beyond this blog. All of my colleagues have heard about K.C. and some have read this book. They ALL know about the Gang of 88.

Among the children of my colleagues NOT ONE plans to apply to Duke. They had considered applying in the past but will not do so now - precisely because of information that is discussed daily on this blog. Yes, they are allprivileged white students who attend private schools and do not need financial aid. One is a state tennis champion, another a star lacrosse player. They are all honor students at competitive schools.

The Group of 88 and their enablers may be pleased that these privileged white youngsters are not applying to Duke. You can be sure the admissions department at Duke is not pleased.

Anonymous said...

"Also, little d--k white boys is not the equivalent of the N word or the cotton shirt comment."

This really sums up Courthouse Connie's post at Liestoppers and in fact her whole worldview: It's okay to do rotten things to white people because anything done to a black person is automatically worse. It's okay to frame 'white boys' for crimes that carry sentences of thirty years in prison, but oooh, if a 'white boy' should "disrespect" a black woman by saying something to her she doesn't like then by God! the only thing to do is to take a bus down to Louisiana and raise a furor in support of black teenagers' rights to commit violent assault on white teenagers and get off with a slap on the wrist!

I wonder if she even realizes how deeply she's insulting black people by suggesting that they can't survive on a level playing field and they need such a double standard.

Ralph Phelan said...

"The Duke persons' summaries indicate president Brodhead has learned nothing"

On the contrary. He has learned that he can get away with anything he wants to.

Anonymous said...

To anon 1:53 AM:

Idiot, nobody including KC is saying it's some big political crime for a professor to "go off syllabus". The problem is, Reeve Huston went off syllabus to commit multiple, egregious offenses of slander against his own students, not to mention his flagrant lies and shooting off his mouth in ignorance.

I wonder if Reevie is still proud of declaring, with the full force of Duke professorship, that a sexual assault did take place, and that ejaculation occurred?

And of saying this in front of 5 of his own beleaguered students -- accusing them of a filthy crime which never occurred, and which Reevie had no reason to think occurred, beyond his own vile imagination and his stinking political bigotry?

Do you not agree that he was an ignoramus and/or a liar for saying this? Or do you join him in these slanderous fictions?

My guess is, Reevie doesn't give a crap, since his 88'er wifie, Her Royal Chairship Sally Deutsch, guarantees his continued employment for nothing at all but being a useless jerk and a disgrace to Duke.

Debrah said...

Please note everyone...in the above right-hand corner of the page the Web blog awards.

KC is not only a finalist, but is far ahead in the voting process.

All who visit should cast your vote for your choice.

BTW, I always choose to take "Durham" out of DIW when I am referring to it; however, I see that there is a really goofy website with the name "Wonderland".....so I will now be using KC's Wonderland to make sure there is never any confusion.

I even had to change it on my roster in The Diva World.

Anonymous said...

I think the taunter at 9:15 and 10:05 AM is missing a critical distinction between what's going on in her world, and what's happening in this one.

She sits cosseted in the faculty commons, engaged in idle and (if her posts are a sample) not particularly witty banter with colleagues, smug and secure in their achievements (which they've convinced each other have altered the course of history and without which the planet would cease its diurnal rotations), while furtively checking DIW to see which of her colleagues has been publicly vivisected (her schadenfreude is a momentary but undeniable pleasure), and wondering if she's next, and when it will end. The uneasiness is momentary; she feels safe, snug, and inviolate. The prestige of her university, she perceives, bars the howling mob outside.

But from the outside, her safe, secure little world looks increasingly isolated, insular, inbred, and vulnerable. It is surrounded, not just by KC and the fraction of his readers who post at DIW, but by every one with whom they have contact. A lot of them are academics, some even inside the walls at Duke. But many more are lawyers (lots of lawyers-- if DIW ever reorganizes as an LLC... shudder), engineers, law enforcement, corporate managers, government employees, advertising, PR and entertainment industry specialists, writers, editors, journalists, the military, students, housewives, househusbands, retirees and... voters. Literally, millions comprise this network. Far more than the isolated fragment of society holed-up in little bastions of outdated ideas and self-congratulatory smugness which the occupants dare not leave.

Outside that little world, millions are watching, listening, thinking, talking... and acting. Blogs like this one affect the larger world. They have already deposed a network television anchor, stopped "comprehensive" congresional legislation favored by every one of the nation's ruling class, and just forced a university to change its "diversity facilitating" policies. This is only the beginning. DIW is just beginning.

The taunting laughter emanates from an echo chamber, and it sounds hollow. What one smells, along with the stink of Durham, is fear.

dave

Debrah said...

From the Wall Street Journal:

Hollywood Writers to Launch Strike
By Peter Sanders

LOS ANGELES – Film and TV writers are set to launch their first strike in nearly 20 years following the breakdown of last-minute talks to stave off a walkout.

After meeting for nearly twelve hours in Los Angeles Sunday, talks between the union representing the writers and the team that negotiates on behalf of the studios broke down late Sunday night.

As a result, members of the Writers Guild of America went on strike at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. ...


************************************************

I hope this doesn't impede the progress on the upcoming film on KC's book.

Debrah said...

"All of my colleagues have heard about K.C. and some have read this book. They ALL know about the Gang of 88."

LOL!!!

Who says the Gritty Gang haven't earned their stripes?

I love it!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Folks, plan to be discouraged, outraged, blah blah blah. Your ire will go exactly as far as this blog. Sure some of you will write irate emails to the 88. And poor pitiful KC will continue his pathologic obsession with Duke faculty members so you folks can be disgusted and have a safe space to share.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, as somebody copied from another site, the Duke faculty you love to hate will continue their patterns of reward, speech, high salaries and other perks of academe. But do not completely despair, you always have this site to talk among yourselves. That is exactly how far your outrage extends, except to those of us who check in to collect our bets on how long KC will be unable to disentangle himself from his obsession. It's really getting quite pitiful, if not borderline hilarious. He can't let go. even from Israel. This has become his identity, and he obviously needs all your praise cause he's not getting it from the academy where he has become a laughingstock.I won money today. Keep it up y'all.

11/5/07 9:15 AM


LOL. ROFLMAO!!

Obviously you're an 88er who's not too happy to see his/her name on KC's "Where are they now".

Move on...? Fuggedaboudit!! Nothing doing. You saw what happened at Delaware, no doubt. The same kind of pressure is being brought to bear on you 88ers and Brodhead.

You rats on the sinking USS Brodhead are getting desperate! Else you wouldn't be here posting your delusions of grandeur.

Get off of here and go ACTUALLY EARN that "big paycheck", 88er. LOL!!

Anonymous said...

11:36--

I don't agree with anything you say. You're offensive and you write badly.

And, I'm not an idiot. I think you probably are, however.

Anonymous said...

11:24,

My son goes to a well-regarded private school. Duke is still one of the popular places to apply. Ditto U. of Chicago, Cornell, and Stanford, and probably many of the other places you and your luncheon-mates are planning to have your kids give a miss. I say, keep it up! Makes it easier for the rest of the kids to get in!!! Please, send your kids to Brooklyn College. Pretty please.

Anonymous said...

We must destroy the metanarrative of lies that tells our children that black misdeeds are a result of white attitudes.

I was recently reading of a study of black teenage gangmembers. Asked why they had joined criminal gangs, none mentioned "white racism" -- apparently they hadn't been yet educated by Prof. Holloway or the anonymice like those visiting here today. You know what was the number one reason given by these black teens for joining criminal gangs? "Lack of parental love and support".

As for Jena, the evidence is already in that shows that Justin Barker may be the Rosa Parks of his generation -- he defiantly walked through the "blacks only" door and suffered the consequences at the hands of a privileged athlete and his fellow goons. How about Duke offering Barker a full scholarship as part of its outreach to victims of black-on-white crime?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
To 10:05

Thank you for telling us about the lunchtime laughter you have with your colleagues.

At my workplace we have been having lunchtime discussions. Most of us have children who will soon be of college age. We all have been visiting schools and examining the brochures we're receiving.

You are dead wrong when you say information never extends beyond this blog. All of my colleagues have heard about K.C. and some have read this book. They ALL know about the Gang of 88.

Among the children of my colleagues NOT ONE plans to apply to Duke. They had considered applying in the past but will not do so now - precisely because of information that is discussed daily on this blog. Yes, they are allprivileged white students who attend private schools and do not need financial aid. One is a state tennis champion, another a star lacrosse player. They are all honor students at competitive schools.

The Group of 88 and their enablers may be pleased that these privileged white youngsters are not applying to Duke. You can be sure the admissions department at Duke is not pleased.

11/5/07 11:24 AM


I am also the parent of teens with an eye on college in only a few short years.

Our twins have not yet entered high school but have already--in middle school--begun looking at colleges.

For the most part both of the children have come up with their own short list of schools and actually have narrowed it down to the one school they *really, really* want to attend. We have already toured both of those schools (they're near family).

Duke is not on either child's list.

My son would like to attend Texas A&M (he is very firm on this). My daughter Emory University (although she's not sure on that).

They are working hard to get the grades and achieve their goals. They're honor students and student athletes. My daughter is a gymnast, her twin brother a top notch baseball player and wrestler.

My $400,000 in tuition alone (4 years x $46,000/yr x 2 children) for both children will NOT be going to Duke.

Beyond that, my time, talent and treasure, and that of my children will NOT be going to Duke.

I would rather my children pursue honest endeavors such as flipping hamburgs at McDonalds, than to spend 4 years attending that truly sick school.

Duke, as she currently is run, with the current faculty and administration is devoid of any truly educational value, and Duke is certainly NOT worth mortgaging the house to pay my kids freight there.

I firmly believe my children would recieve a FAR SUPERIOR education at McDonalds University than Duke University.

And it is *because of* Brodhead and the 88ers that we have removed Duke from the short list.

If things change at Duke before the kids are ready for college, we *might* reconsider. Until then--fuggedaboudit.

Anonymous said...

Please note everyone...in the above right-hand corner of the page the Web blog awards.

I checked it out. So KC is nominated for the category of best 3500-5000 ranked blogs? Is that really a big deal?

KC Johnson said...

To the 1.07:

No, it's not that big a deal. It's better, I suppose, than not being nominated.

Anonymous said...

from an earlier comment:

"If this didn't matter to them, then Lubiano wouldn't have threatened a suit on UPI's publisher."

Huh? What did I miss? Is there anything to this? Where is the citation? What coherent misstatement could she possibly be alleging?

Anonymous said...

I suggest a campaign that, if effective, will cause fundamental changes at Duke.

STOP DONATING MONEY! Or, better yet, donate $.88. Include a note to the development office that this is the amount of your yearly donation until Duke takes serious, measurable steps to rid the university of the PC rot.

What's one measurable step? That Duke hires at least two senior administrators who have a proven track record of being *against* political correctness.

Spread the word to current Duke parents, alumni, and institutional donors (e.g., corporations and foundations) about this "donor protest."

In particular, try to convince the Duke Endowment to join the "donor protest." If you have any connections with the fund managers who invest Duke's endowment, tell them to drop Duke as a client.

Donor money, and those investors who help grow Duke's endowment, are enabling the G88, allow the PC rot to grow, and make it possible for Duke's leaders to avoid accountability.

Some of the innocent departments (e.g., Economics) and schools (e.g., Pratt) might complain that a "donor protest" would unfairly harm them. Tell them that the PC infection permeates the entire university -- note the leadership of the Academic Council and the appointment of deans. And that they need to take a stand.

I realize that Duke's endowment is huge. But I guarantee that an effective "donor protest" will trigger fundamental changes. Why? Because a such a protest will curtail the creation of senior faculty positions and endowed chairs -- and, thus, make it more difficult for Duke to compete for the likes of Houston Baker.

In addition, a successful "donor protest" will limit the construction of new facilities, and diminish the budget for student loans and scholarships -- thus making it more difficult for Duke to compete for prized students.

A successful donor protest would also cause Duke to drop in the rankings, as the donations, facilities, new faculty et al. are factors in determining those rankings.

To echo a comment above, I would also suggest a campaign for parents of impending college students: "Anywhere but Duke." Don't even apply to Duke, as the number of rejected applications is a factor in the rankings.

Duke Prof

tu-nd said...

anonymous 88ist said...
"I won money today. Keep it up y'all."

In large part due to the irresponsibility and stupidity of you and your distinguished colleagues - Durham is about to lose big...in the sum of $30M! Maybe you can share some of your winnings with the rest of the town, they're going to need it. "Keep it up y'all" indeed.

Anonymous said...

Dear KC, I was complimented (I think!!) to find my remarks cut and pasted into today's posting. Point of fact: I was not furious, so I don't suppose you should be calling it a "furious retort." To be accurate, it was a simple response. No sound. No fury.
;-p

Anonymous said...

Dear 12:53, I rather think Duke will not miss your treasure. I hate to break it to you, but Texas A&M is hardly in the same league.

Don't you people understand? Lots of parents of lots of students still want their kids to go to Duke. And Cornell. And Cal. And Chicago. And Columbia. And all those other schools yuse love ta hate! No one is forcing you to send your kid anywhere. No one besides you really cares.

Gunslinger said...

The 88'ers can sneer all they want, but I think the tide may indeed be turning. Witness the recent episode in Delaware where the university was forced, in part due to Internet exposure, to curtail its PC/racist indoctrination of resident students. Here at DiW, we see that for all their affectations of haughtiness, the G88 simply cannot ignore the fact that KC is stripping away their disguises. If it didn't strike home (and if they had any real work to do), they wouldn't be here.

The fact is, as long as we have the 'net and use it, the G88 ideologues cannot hide any longer. Their political extremism and utter lack of scholarly qualifications have been exposed. That's just the first step. The road to a cleaned up and restored Academy may be long, but with time it can be travelled.

Anonymous said...

"KC and the 89ers (those who 'come after the 88ers')" ... I love it :)

Anonymous said...

Are any of the classes taught by members of the 88 compulsory?

Is there any way to gauge what the Duke student body thinks of the 88 and/or the courses they teach?

Is there any way of knowing if the Duke alumni are looking at their Alma Mater differently as a result of the lacrosse case and the 88?

Anonymous said...

Anon at 12:24 PM (i.e., anon at 1:53 AM), wrote:

---------------

Anonymous said...

11:36--

I don't agree with anything you say. You're offensive and you write badly.

And, I'm not an idiot. I think you probably are, however.

-----

Hah, ha!

In other words you have no facts on your side.

NO facts to support Reeve Huston's baselessly and idiotically accusing 5 of his own students, TO THEIR FACES and in front of their peers, of being accessory to a disgusting gang-rape (that, in fact, never happened).

NO facts to support Reevie's false and ignorant assertion that there was a sexual assault, and ejaculation.

NO facts to contradict my suggestion that Reevie enjoys immunity as a "trailed spouse" of Chairperson Sally, even when facts and History prove him dead wrong.

NO facts to refute anything else that I said. NO facts to support anything else that you have said. Period.

"Offensive"? Yes, sometimes the truth hurts. If you assert that what I said is not the truth, prove it. Or at least offer SOME factual contradiction.

And I'm not much impressed, nor at all intimidated by your writing, either -- idiot.

Love,

11:36 AM

traveler said...

Gary Packwood said...
Here are two of the many Political Orientation Self Tests available.
http://www.politicalcompass.org
http://www.politopia.com/
------------------------
That was very good information about the test, and there is other interesting information there as well. I took the first test. I am a centerline person, one step to the right. I am an Independent voter, so I would judge that a sound test. I think anyone with a bit of time to spare might enjoy it. Thank you Gary Packwood. I am going to take the other tests to compare the questions. (No reason to be anything but honest, no one sees the results but you.)

KC Johnson said...

To the 1.52:

If that is your normal emotional level, I'd urge you, in future, to allow your comment to sit for 10-15 minutes before submitting it. Doing so might allow you to come across less angrily.

Anonymous said...

I won money today. Keep it up y'all.
11/5/07 9:15 AM


Think the fight stops at this blog? Keep laughing.

I'm an experienced software professional with ample skills to damage your morally bankrupt ideology.

How? In ways you cannot imagine. This is an undeclared war, and you will learn your opposition hasn't begun to fight yet.

Anonymous said...

11:36,

In fact, I do have facts on my side. It's just that I'm not wasting my time giving them to you. I have them. You don't. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. You lose. I don't.

Have a good day, doll face.

Anonymous said...

Dear KC,

I think it's you, not me. I think you sound snarky and snappy a great deal of the time. Even obsessed.

I probably sounded whatever to you because I disagreed with you. You'll live. I kind of like being incorrectly described in your posts. More correctly would have been, "In my opinion..."

In the end, I don't have to please you. Thank the goddess!!!

Anonymous said...

PS KC,

Do you sit on your comments for 10 or 15 minutes and still come across so cattily, smarmily, snottily, etc? Egad, imagine what you'd sound like if you posted your comments immediately.

I suggest listening to mood music.

Gary Packwood said...

traveler 2:35 said...

...Gary Packwood said...
...Here are two of the many Political Orientation Self Tests available.
...http://www.politicalcompass.org
...http://www.politopia.com/

...That was very good information about the test, and there is other interesting information there as well. I took the first test. I am a centerline person, one step to the right. I am an Independent voter, so I would judge that a sound test. I think anyone with a bit of time to spare might enjoy it. Thank you Gary Packwood. I am going to take the other tests to compare the questions. (No reason to be anything but honest, no one sees the results but you.)
::
Thanks. I am also a centerline person, one step to the left and I learned something also.

As a person who is a political 'centrist' I have little understanding of political 'extremists' such as many of the G88, their staff member and student friends. And they know that.

That is why they are so nasty in their comments. They are trying to run off the political 'centrists' so they can do their thing.

That doesn't work with me as I am not afraid of political extremists!

The IRS will allow just so many extremists on campus before they along with the FBI pull the plug on part of the universities tax sheltered endowment.

Watching the political extremists at work is almost as entertaining as watching Masterpiece Theatre last night on TV.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Kc, Do you always keep threatening up posts? Or is 2:45 just some blow hard? It's ok to threaten people with whose ideas you disagree? Pls. explain.

Anonymous said...

GP,
Do you also have a difficult time understanding the right-wing extremists who post here? Or maybe you don't think they're right wing...?

KC Johnson said...

To the 2.47/2.49:

Another advantage of allowing your comment to sit long enough to compose yourself emotionally: you then can offer your comment in a coherent response, rather than jumping immediately back on the blog with an additional retort.

Again, as you've seen, it's my general practice to clear any comment, no matter how negative, about me. But if you're worried about coming across as angry when you don't consider yourself such, give the 10-15 minute waiting tactic a try!

Anonymous said...

Dear 12:53, I rather think Duke will not miss your treasure. I hate to break it to you, but Texas A&M is hardly in the same league.

11/5/07 1:54 PM


Oh agreed--A&M isn't full of panty-waisted Professors and AA hires who despise young white male students on campus and who seek to warp the young minds they're charged with educating.

A&M is not full of faculty who would throw a student athelete under the bus and send them to prison for 30 years for a crime that never even happened--simply to further their personal political agenda.

I know this to be true--as I said earlier, we have family there. In fact, we have several family members on faculty there.

College Station is a small, very conservative town--if you live there, you work for A&M pretty much.

Funny how there really are no town/gown issues in College Station. Certainly none like Durham.

88er--you're absolutely right.

A&M isn't in the same league as Duke. And I thank the good Lord for that too!

LOL.

Stu Daddy said...

To the Anony-Mouse snob @ 1:54 PM...

Texas A&M is a reputable institution, recently ranked No. 62 by US News & World Report among national research universities, placing it among the finest public land grant colleges in this country.

A responsible student with ambition and discipline can obtain a first rate education at A&M or many hundreds of other colleges, just like a privileged Duke student can (as long as they avoid the The Angry Studies courses taught by the 88 Gang and their ilk.)

Note: I waited 10 minutes before approving this comment. :>))

Anonymous said...

3:09,

KC, darling, I'm not worried at all. I'm laughing at you. You're so pompous. You tactic is so cute. Someone disagrees with you, so you call them angry. But when folks agree with you, angry is just great.

I can imagine why you don't go off syllabus. You'd get your knickers in a twist just like you are over this.

I was laughing as I typed the first post, because I thought you were so silly. Now I am laughing even harder. AT YOU. You're really silly. You just have to be right all of the time.

traveler said...

G-88 Stalwart: Sally/Sarah Deutsch

Just a couple of years ago, it seems Sally/Sarah felt a student’s email was private. And, poor Susan Thorne, do we know if she wanted out of her little world to sign this letter, or was she pushed?
-----------------------
Letter from Scholars to President Sexton
December 2, 2005
John Sexton
President, New York University

“The infiltration of [student and faculty email] constitutes an unauthorized invasion of privacy, And the most recent threat to rescind funding for students engaged in the strike constitutes an abhorrent form of coercion.”

Call to Faculty
Letter from Scholars to President Sexton

Sarah Deutsch
Chair, Department of History
Duke University

Fredric Jameson
William A. Lane Professor of Comparative
Literature and Romance Studies
Duke University

Susan Thorne
Associate Professor
Department of History
Duke University

http://www.facultydemocracy.org/letterfromscholars.htm

Anonymous said...

anon @ 11/05 2:45 PM

In fact, I do have facts on my side. It's just that I'm not wasting my time giving them to you. I have them. You don't. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. You lose. I don't.

Six unsustainable assertions and a worn-out cliche. Duke faculty, for sure.

Anonymous said...

Boy this "Where are they now" listing sure has brought the cockroaches out of the woodwork today, huh?

They're running scared, friends. Their ship is sinking and they *know it*.

They saw what happened in Delaware and that scares the hell out of them.

They *know* the power of the internet and the power of the blog to shine light on illegal and immoral behavior.

They know the power of the blog and the internet to effect change--and to effect change rapidly.

They know that KC has the power to do exactly that with this blog--and with his book.

The idea that they're about to lose their gravy-train ride scares the ever living $hit out of them.

We wouldn't have had this smug 88er posting here all day if they weren't absolutely scared crapless what might happen next.

If our little 88er troll really didn't care about what was said here, he/she/it (IT) wouldn't even bother reading this blog, much less spend the day making comments.

Our troll's obssessive behavior is that of someone who is terrified of being exposed for the absolute fraud they are.

Just wait 88ers--it's only gonna get uglier for you.

***smooches, 88ers***

Anonymous said...

No doubt, Duke Admin and some of the faculty made terrible moves and have disgraced themselves for years to come. Duke Alumi contributions have not gone down - they hit a new high in applications - It does not appear to have affected the school in these areas. I have no affiliation to Duke and never thought about the school till this event. I have no doubt that Broadhead, Burness, Steel and others, first line of their obit will be the Duke Case. That may be all the punishment they get but that is enough for me.

Anonymous said...

10:05

Dear Mrs. Piot,
are you not commenting from Rio?

For where have you been?
you posit only when you're seen.

Perhaps we are thin-skinned,
but we are not of kin.
Unlike yourselves, both dim.

And now for lunchtime laughter,
at the ole' Duke school.
As surely the sun shines,
with the facts KC will chime,
that the '88 will not think so cool.

So the first strike comes to ya',
from our delightfully witty Debrah!
You, may call her,
diva.

Anonymous said...

anonymous 88ist said in a great "think" piece....

11:36,

In fact, I do have facts on my side. It's just that I'm not wasting my time giving them to you. I have them. You don't. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. You lose. I don't.


Whenever Brodhead or Steel star asking, "Why do we have to keep paying and paying -- why don't we take our case in front of a jury?", the Duke attorneys show them posts like this one. :)

An attorney doesn't have to be a Perry Mason to want to get one of these pea-brains on the witness stand in front of the world.

Ethical Duke said...

Duke Students for an Ethical Duke has begun a new blog to go with our existing website. There we have posted video to Stuart Taylor's speech on 11/2/07.

http://ethicalduke.blogspot.com/

Best,
Duke Students for an Ethical Duke

Debrah said...

The fact that KC has garnered about half the Weblog Awards votes----half!.......from a whole list of nominees....definitely IS a big deal.

It's amusing to watch the Gang of 88 and their disgruntled appendages throw sand from their sandboxes Dicky Brodhead bought for them....

......just to keep their little crinkley, idle paws from signing another "Listening Statement".

It's getting very expensive!

LIS!!!

Debrah said...

Phi Beta Cons......

Doubling down on diversity

Debrah said...

From H-S's John McCann:


Before you go to the polls ...

Nov 4, 2007

You know, we really ought to be talking in terms of the Mike Nifong case. Or the Durham Police Department case. Or the city of Durham case.

Instead, it's still all about Duke lacrosse.

THE DUKE LACROSSE CASE.

But Nifong's the one wanting taxpayers to foot his legal bill. He's the one still in hot water, facing a civil lawsuit along with the city and some of its law-enforcement personnel.

Interestingly enough, the fight continues to free Erick Daniels, who was 14 when he was arrested for robbing a lady named Ruth Brown, who was -- ahem! -- a Durham police employee. Daniels' attorney, Carlos Mahoney, said there wasn't a shred of evidence to convict him.

And ... hey, wait a second, that sounds like the weak Mike Nifong-city of Durham case, because it's strangely coincidental that Daniels' case from 2001 looks similar to a case just five years later where those boys from Duke's lacrosse team registered on our radar. Both cases involved police lineups that weren't right.

Thing is, as Daniels, 21, sits in jail, we could be saying the same about the similarly aged boys who were on the lacrosse team.

What? Never in a million years? No way they could've gotten locked up? Because they're rich and could afford the high-powered lawyers and Daniels couldn't?

Listen, for one thing, not everybody who goes to Duke is rich. That's for starters.

As well, even if justice can be bought, nobody wants to play in that market. And I know you're not saying it's OK for rich people to get done dirty just because they have serious money.

If it sounds like I've reversed course on this matter, let me just say that I still have my issues with the whole party scene at the infamous Buchanan Boulevard house that led up to this mess. Some of you had problems when I said that in the past.

Some also may have problems with me referring to the Duke lacrosse players as boys. But I must see them that way, especially now, because I'm thinking more in terms of those rugged lacrosse guys as sons -- young boys -- of parents who stood to lose them to the penal system on trumped-up charges. Rich or poor, those mamas and daddies would be hurting the same way Erick Daniels' mama is right now.

At the outset, the Mike Nifong-City of Durham case was portrayed in terms of race. But it also was about relative power (rich, white Duke kids) versus relative poverty (struggling, black stripper).

Yet now, with the former lacrosse players suing the city, it's power versus power.

Or perhaps the script's been flipped, with the now underdog players squaring off against our mighty municipality.

Mind you, when we thought the lacrosse players were guilty, all we kept saying was somebody in that Buchanan Boulevard house knew what happened on the night of the party where a presumed beer keg turned into a powder keg.

Well, the same has to apply now to the politicians in office when the Duke lacrosse players were getting a raw deal: Somebody must have known Nifong didn't have a leg to stand on. Somebody had to know the police work wasn't right.

Somebody knew something!

So as we head to the polls on Tuesday, and as we think about how bond money would be handled and all that, I'm just wondering ...

Which incumbents will get your vote?

no justice, no peace said...

Charles Prince is to Citigroup as ______________is to Duke University.

no justice, no peace said...

Ken Lay is to Enron as ___________is to Duke University.

no justice, no peace said...

Stan O'Neal is to Merrill Lynch as ________is to Duke University.

no justice, no peace said...

David Duke and Senator Robert Byrd are to the KKK as __________ are to Duke University.

Anonymous said...

One person who was conspicuously absent from the list:

ATLANTA (AP) - Nancy Grace is now the mother of twins, after doctors induced labor two months before her due date. Grace, host of legal affairs talk show "Nancy Grace" on CNN Headline News, gave birth to a boy, John David, and a girl, Lucy Elizabeth, on Sunday, said CNN spokeswoman Janine Iamunno.
John David weighed 5 pounds, 1 ounce, and Lucy Elizabeth weighed 2 pounds, 15 ounces at birth.

I will resist the temptation to make a tasteless joke about the potential academic or athletic future of her son and simply wish them all well.

Anonymous said...

POSTED BY AN EARLIER ANONYMOUS:

"I wonder if Reevie is still proud of declaring, with the full force of Duke professorship, that a sexual assault did take place, and that ejaculation occurred?"

This kind of rush to judgment for political reasons and beliefs is especially frightening now that the Duke Humanities have decided to go unabashedly political with their new fellowships.

Will the persons manning these new fellowship positions also "rush to judgment" regarding supposedly scholarly issues? How can such scholarship be trusted?

It used to be that science and scholarship required that theories be proved and that evidence be compiled. When the scientist's or scholar's own pet theory was being tested, he had to put it through doubly stringent testing (or provide twice the evidence) because scholarship was not a matter of politics, but a matter of truth.

In those old, long ago days, an idea was debated and tested before it became a truth.

W. R. Chambers said...

from Liestoppers:

Monday, November 05, 2007
Duke Students for an Ethical Duke Blog

The Duke Students for an Ethical Duke have started a new Blog and we encourage those who are following the case to check it often.

Duke Students for an Ethical Duke

Their mission statement is as follows



Duke Students for an Ethical Duke exists to achieve and protect a constructive and wholesome educational and extracurricular environment for ALL Duke students. We pledge to defend the dignity and the academic and legal rights of Duke students, both individually and collectively, whether threatened by other students, faculty, or administrators alike. Whenever hatred, racism, prejudice, slander, or plain administrative and academic incompetence manifest on Duke Campus, we are listening not as personal advocates but as advocates of principle, fairness, and equality. Mission Statement

This organization has sponsored the recent separate presentations on campus by co-authors of Until Proven Innocent, Prof KC Johnson & Stuart Taylor.

LieStoppers commends these students at Duke for their work. Let's give them our full support as they are on the fronts line defending the "dignity and the academic and legal rights of Duke students, both individually and collectively." They face off against the prejudice of the "88" on a daily basis, and we thank them for it.

Here is the url for the Duke Students for An Ethical Duke blog:

http://ethicalduke.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

These snide and snotty criticisms of KC and the DIW blog tell us more about the people who enabled the frame-up. In short, anyone who isn't totally incensed over the criminal and moral outrages committed by Nifong, the Durham authorities, and the DNA experts and compounded by Duke's "leadership" and the angry studies thugs, must be someone without intelligence, morals, integrity, or human feelings. I read these childishly taunting remarks and wish more than anything I could get close enough to the little pukes to bitch-slap them into reality. What kind of scum does Duke have in its Halls of Academe?

haskell said...

"Don't you people understand? Lots of parents of lots of students still want their kids to go to Duke. And Cornell. And Cal. And Chicago. And Columbia. And all those other schools yuse love ta hate! No one is forcing you to send your kid anywhere. No one besides you really cares." -- 11/5/07 1:54 PM

Duke, Cornell, Cal, Chicago, and Columbia are still great schools. They have enormous strengths. But they have perverted weaknesses as well. Many of us believe that we have a collective responsibility to our children to raise them properly and educate them well. When parents, and students, work hard to obtain their college education, most of us feel they should receive value for their investment of time and money. They should not be conned by folks who think "no one besides you really cares". How sad that a university faculty member thinks that way.

I challenge you to read the following article which discusses many of our concerns.

The Coming Crisis in Citizenship

Debrah said...

(Duke Students for an Ethical Duke) now has a new blog for those interested:

DSED

Anonymous said...

2: 47/ 2:49

You know, you really don't have to be here if you don't enjoy this site. The rest of us appreciate KC and the exchanges. I know a lot of people who woud be grateful if I did exactly as KC recommends and cooled it for 15 minutes before replying..... like I waited for several hours before inviting you to take your snarky comments elsewhere.

KC Johnson probably wears his halo lopsided, but I guarantee you there are a lot of us who think this has got to be one of the most courageous men of the year.

If I were him I would pull the plug on a lot of this nonsense. But he lets it through... even some people who make way too many comments as if it is THEIR blogsite... because I think he ultimately values the airing of thoughts and search for truth more than he does his own "reputation".

If UPI doesn't win a Pulitzer Prize there are a lot of folks who will think it was rigged.

Then... the critics will have another beef.

Meanwhile, KC, Stuart, and DIW are making a BIG difference. ( smile).


dsl

Anonymous said...

One very noticable KEY person was left off the "Where are they now" list....

Crystal Gail Mangum

While we *ALL* know she will not be prosecuted for her crimes in the cruel Duke hoax, she was let off the hook--scott free, it would be only right and fair to update what she is doing now, and exactly where she is.

If only to serve as a warning to all men in her current locale.

As long as she walks the streets (literally) a free woman--men everywhere in this country are at risk of being FALSELY accused of rape by this psychotic person.

Anyone seen, heard from or know the whereabouts of one Crystal Gail Mangum, FALSE "victim" and sperm bank extraordinaire??

A Public Service Announcement on her whereabouts would be a good thing for society.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
When are you going to stop "big brothering" the Duke faculty, KC Johnson? I fail to see why John Thompson's name is on your hit list today, Prof! And what, pray tell, is "going off syllabus"? Is correct "going off syllabus" allowed? And are you up there somewhere at good old Brooklyn College to tell faculty when they may or may not "go off syllabus"?

You and your blogolites are so hot on letting everyone know what is good teaching/content/research (in your case, it looks like all onstitutional/diplomatic/political history all of the time). Doesn't "going off syllabus" permit creative discussion that is necessary for a good classroom/learning experience? Or is "stick to the syllabus," the prof's in control, we discuss only what the prof wants teaching really the way to go?

11/5/07 1:53 AM


Judging by the time of this post--I'd say an 88er was up late losing sleep last night. LOL.

Too bad, Prof. YOU put yourself in this position--you've only yourself to blame.

I hope you have MANY MANY more sleepless nights ahead. Lord knows the Duke 3 and their families had many UNDESERVED nights of lost sleep.

However, YOU earned 'em. You deserve 'em. Gotta love that karma.

hman said...

As always, the defenders of the gang of 88 have nothing of substance to say about the actual facts of this story. Their comments are about the personalities (or identities) of other commenters..
And that is perfectly logical for them, in a twisted, stunted kind of way. After all, what are your options after the AG of the state said on TV that the Lax guys were innocent and were owed apologies? And your favorite city government is facing annihilation if the civil case against them gets to discovery phase?
Somewhere in the reptilian brain of the hoax defenders is the awareness that if they ever got put under oath in a court of law there are lots of questions they would not want to have asked of them. So they throw up verbal sand and sticks into the air as if to confuse and distract their freshly acquired nemesis. Why not? It has worked before.
It is fact that every out-break of witch-hunting and witch-burning rolled along full bore until the witch burners picked the wrong would-be victims.
If Karla Holloway and her ilk were ever deposed by a sharp lawyer about this case Duke would go down in flames.

Anonymous said...

WOW!...history has been re-written at Duke University.

Here is Duke's "official" version of the Lacrosse Rape Hoax story:
http://news.duke.edu/lacrosseincident/

Anonymous said...

No, not "wow" -- rewriting history has been a specialty of the left from the beginning.

Austin said...

The ratio of nastiness to illumination in this thread of comments is too high for my taste. I suppose it is inevitable that the comments section of this blog should from time to time dramatize the dialogue of the deaf that passes for “political discourse” at many levels in our land. But it is reduced to its sad essence in the brilliant exchange that begins, in effect, “Your are an idiot,” to which the devastatingly witty response is “No, I am not an idiot. You are an idiot.”
I’d like to return to the subject of the post: namely, the effect of what has happened so far to various people at Duke
The expectation of Apocalypse Now on the Duke campus is and will remain unrealistic. “Why don’t they fire Brodhead?” “Why don’t they ‘clean house’ in this or that department?” “How can they make an 88-er a dean?” To this list of supremely na├»ve questions I’ll add another one that shows up in various forms: “Why don’t they hire KC Johnson?” Such questions betray a serious lack of understanding of the operations of large and complex educational institutions. They move rather ponderously and within the confines of strict protocols. Our universities have a “business” aspect to them, but it is only one aspect, and the models of business reform or restructuring frequently brought forward are largely irrelevant to them. Duke and many other wealthy institutions are also large charitable entities that view their mission in terms of the redistribution of wealth—first in the relatively paltry manner of handing out scholarships and fellowships, but much more importantly in the creation of lasting “social capital” in their graduates. Most parents are incompetent to judge the actual intellectual quality at a given institution, but they know, rightly, that an average college graduate will have a lifetime income far greater than that of an average non-graduate, and that the average Duke graduate will do considerably better than the average graduate of Western Kentucky State Teachers’ College. Universities are staffed by faculty members who for the most part enjoy the protection of appointment with continuing tenure. The institution of academic tenure has defensible aims but often-lamentable results. It is nearly impossible to fire a tenured professor, however deep that person sinks into sloth or incompetence. To be fired for “moral turpitude” in today’s climate presupposes a level of sexual athleticism requiring long, arduous Olympic training beyond the capacities of most of us. Hence a university faculty, though highly and self-consciously professionalized, has many of the characteristics of a voluntary organization, like a civic or church committee, or a campaign organization, or a baby-sitting pool. There is seldom a very good match between the need as seen from a center and the competence, willingness, or availability of someone to fill the need. The administration has to cajole people into taking on necessary but perhaps irksome jobs. “Madge, would you be willing to be recording secretary this year? Oh, you’re tied up with the Garden Club?...Well, Tom, how about you? I can teach you to write…” I have not perused a Duke catalogue, but from what has come up incidentally in this blog I get the impression that many Duke faculty (a) teach very little, and (b) teach pretty much what they want to teach, which is (c) two or three variations on an esoteric theme. A university president may and does have very great power, but is almost guaranteed to fail if he cannot at least achieve a state of uneasy non-belligerence with his faculty. Hence the strange gyrations and even stranger silences of Richard Brodhead. He is a prudent and experienced fellow. If you want to consider what happens when a self-identified political conservative is brought in with powerful board support to “clean up” an institution with a faculty run amok, and is imprudent enough to try to do so, review the sad history of Boston University under the presidency of John Silber. So don’t look for swift actions and dramatic gestures that feature so prominently among the desiderata in these comments. But don’t go to the opposite extreme and suppose that “nothing has changed”. A good deal has changed because of this Rape Hoax.
1. Richard Brodhead’s is a failed presidency. Everybody in higher education knows that, which is why practically nobody in higher education will say it. He will not disappear immediately, but he will disappear. And I mean disappear—not reappear as the president of some other institution. This may not be fair to Brodhead, who is an able person, and his successor is unlikely to be better. But nobody who has presided over such a genuine “social disaster” can recover. And people will in the future reflect on why and how he failed.
2. Another development on the local Duke scene is the “raised consciousness” of sensible alumni and institutional friends. There is a large effort from various sources trying to blunt the effect of this blog and what it has represented. To paint Duke’s critics as neocon, reactionary, racist “blog hooligans” will now work for only a very diminished audience. There now is a very detailed, circumstantial, well researched and well written book that needs to be answered. The one attempt to answer it to date—Piot’s—is so pathetic as actually to amplify the work’s power by giving such a vivid example of the intellectual quality of its opposition. Any intelligent Duke alumnus of whatever age should now realize that he or she probably has more sensible and constructive ideas that many prominent Duke faculty.
3. Do not underestimate the power of the derision and opprobrium heaped on various faculty members through various posting and especially the “Group Profiles”. These were particularly effective, because they were not name-calling but intelligently collected anthologies of the individuals’ own written opinions. It is one thing to shout out that “the Emperor has no clothes”. It is another to present the Emperor in the buff before our own horrified eyes. Professor Piot undoubtedly still has his clannish friends at their unread and unreadable academic journal. But for literally thousands of other people, not to mention hundreds of silent colleagues on his own faculty, the man is now a public fool. This is the result not of name-calling but of self-advertisement. There probably will not be immediate professional effects. But I think it very unlikely that even with a deck of fifty-two race cards Professor Baker, for example, will today seems such a hot property to anybody else as he did to Vanderbilt before the publication of his racist diatribe.

mac said...

11/5 9:36 am

Good post.
I once had a course in English called "The Bible and Literature."

The prof. must have had the class put-upon her; she knew nothing about the Bible, and so the class became just an opinion session.

I don't know who was to blame: a dept. chair who decided that the course would be taught, and couldn't find someone to teach it, or the prof/instructor, who didn't know her subject. Not knowing the structure of the university's teaching assignments, I suspect that it was the former.

She didn't seem like an idealogue with an agenda, but like someone who wasn't prepared to teach her subject.

Anonymous said...

3:08 AM ( Wow!... I suspect you are in a different time zone.... literally and figuratively)
I appreciate your intelligent and objective contribution.

As an absolutely faithful and grateful reader/ participator in this blog, I too am put off by the juvenile "he said/ she said" entries... and the narcicissm of others who need to tell us what they had for lunch. They diminish the impact and distract from the focus.

However, I have been challenged, even goaded to wake up to what is happening to Duke ( my graduate school) and Durham ( where my two oldest children were born) and to Higher Education in general, to the destructive evil of PC ideaology, and to the suffocating tenacles of political, media, and police corruption.. all because of this blog and UPI.

It may be that some of my own contributions to this blog have been less than cutting edge... perhaps more emotion than reason... but at LEAST I am wrestling on both levels with issues that will NOT go away. I think that is true of others as well.

Unfortunately, I believe you are right about some of the points you made so early this morning. Fortunately, I believe you are also right about others.... We'll leave it to time, and legal proceedings to sort the one from the other.

To many of us, and perhaps history will record, KC Johnson was/is a prophet in a bow tie. No, not on the par with an actual god... just a man of courage whose relentless pursuit of truth made a significant difference in his lifetime. I am surprised, though I should not be, at the villification he endures with relative good humor.

Add to KC's tenacity that of Stuart Taylor's incisive dissection of this whole case and we have a book worthy of a Pulitzer. If Woodward and Bernstein deserved it for Watergate, surely Johnson and Taylor deserve it for the HOAX.

I hope this blog continues throughout the unfolding of this drama. It is one of the best "distance learning" exercises we could hope for. The public classroom may not merit academic respect... but it may actually weigh more heavily on the scales of social change.


dsl

Anonymous said...

Anon wrote

"Duke Alumi contributions have not gone down . . ."

If true, then a "donor protest" campaign is sorely needed.

An institution this dysfunctional deserves to lose financial support -- just as did the Catholic Chruch, and just as did Citigroup.

Incidentally, I have it on good authority that donations from parents of *current* Duke students have dropped dramatically.

Duke Prof

Anonymous said...

11:20 --

I'm reading Duke's version of the Hoax now (thanks for the link) and to be as fair as possible, I'm trying to read it through the eyes of someone who was unfortunate enough to get bad information throughout the whole affair.

This line, however, jumped out and hit me between the eyes: "At the time, the district attorney was saying emphatically that as many as 46 of the players were still under suspicion for the alleged crimes." The administration had to have known if they'd done the slightest bit of investigation that some of those 46 players were not in Durham that night and could not reasonably be under suspicion (save perhaps as accessories after the fact, but only under the same theory that everyone who knew a lacrosse player could have been told hearsay about the commission of a crime and thus become an accessory by failing to report this theoretical hearsay.) The administration must have known that the district attorney was overreaching!

Debrah said...

TO "dsl"--

Perhaps you need to get out more.

Have real discussions with real people who read DIW.

Those little additions and embroidery to this blog are some of the things which have made it so popular.

Please, if white bread is all you enjoy on your menu, have at it.......but don't try to put a damper on everything for the rest of us.

You have no idea what you're talking about; however, I am well-aware at whom your silly digs are aimed.

LOL!!!

Anonymous said...

austin said ...

To paint Duke’s critics as neocon, reactionary, racist “blog hooligans” will now work for only a very diminished audience.

11/6/07 3:08 AM


I resemble that remark. :D

RRH

Anonymous said...

Re: 10:41

"The ratio of nastiness to illumination on this thread is too high for my personal taste"

Debrah said...

Michael Gaynor on Stuart and PC

Anonymous said...

dsl says

"I hope this blog continues throughout the unfolding of this drama. It is one of the best 'distance learning' exercises we could hope for. The public classroom may not merit academic respect... but it may actually weigh more heavily on the scales of social change."

I'll second that!

Observer

Anonymous said...

This fascinates me. I am an amature in looking at this topic. A few elements seem obvious to an outsider like me.
1. People made mistakes. When the lacross/rape accusation hit the paper it was shocking and upsetting. Strangely, for some of the reasons many of you name, notably the privledge of the setting...and the non privledged status of the alleged victim.
2. Is it wrong for a professor to speak in class of a current event that has direct impact on the community? Certainly it was wrong to draw conclusions...or were those who spoke restating what had been presented to them as fact?
3. What are the consequences of being wrong in such a setting? Certainly the first act for such a person would be a retraction and apology. Did any of these professors say they were wrong and apologize? I heard at least one did. And if they did, would that satifiy anyone here? If not, what is needed? Is it possible to improve the situation or do you just want to punish?
4. This forum sounds bitter. People got hurt in this. Young men were falsely accused and prosecuted. They were humiliated in public for an extended period of time. It is possible that persecution continued even after some in positions to change the course,declined to do so. Does ongoing disgruntlement and attacks on teachers help those who were wronged and/or help to correct this wrong?
What I am seeing here tells me 'no.'
What I read above looks like a partisan argument, choose a team. I prefer to allign myself with standards. It is just as wrong to presume guilt because a person is white as it is if a person is black. But I don't see bloggers here seeking the cause or corrections of such presumptions. I see the painful bitterness of victimhood.

Debrah said...

" But I don't see bloggers here seeking the cause or corrections of such presumptions."

Then you haven't been following Wonderland long enough.

"I see the painful bitterness of victimhood."

If you're going for a laugh, you just got one.

Read UPI.

Read KC's latest post highlighting Stuart's column. It's been a year and eight months and many answers have been found here.

We've been discussing phony "victimhood".

I fear that your attempt to be "above it all" and present some objective views have revealed your lack of knowledge of this entire long saga.