It is really not so difficult to follow a link to the source, you only need to read a little bit to find the page they reference. Which claim is ludicrous, the one that backs science you don't happen to like? Got it.
I provided science from the CDC, and I did the math using data from the same source. Are you going to claim the CDC is wrong on half of their data? Or you are claiming that you only believe the science that you want to believe? You can't have it both ways and be rational.
Show me which CDC report is wrong and show me where the math is wrong. Demonstrate it! If you can't do so, then you don't give a rats ass about "science" you only care about supporting a deluded believe that your opinion trumps science.
We can't have a rational dialogue because you make statements like that one.
Oh, the fact that you want clarification makes it an irrational dialogue? I don't believe you actually understand what dialogue is supposed to be if that's the case, but I'll bite once. All of the information that follows is using the CDC as the source unless I provide a link.
First, you can look up the rates for Autism without any help. This is one of many neurological disorders which have skyrocketed in the US over the last 40 years. In the 1970s and 1980s we were at 1 in 2000, and today it's at 1 in 68. This is only one of many, not the only disorder that has increased. Yeah yeah, our detection is better now but the reported cases of severe autism make up the majority of those numbers.
You can also look up the fact that we have moved from 8 vaccines (1 combo 1 series) from 1960-1980 to today's 49 doses of 14 vaccines today without help as well. CDC link, and here is a breakdown link to help you get started. Oh, and this by age 6 and by age 18 this goes to 69 doses of 16 vaccines.
We have drastically increased the amount of vaccines we get in our most sensitive year of development, and at the same time seen a similar rise in Autism and other neurological problems. As I said above, this does not prove causation but sure as hell does indicate a link. The CDC guidelines show that "severe" side effects for vaccines are about 1 in 10,000 but we are giving a kid 644 vaccines by age 6 (which is what the CDC recommends) we have upped the odds of receiving severe side effects to 6.44% of the population
Which correlations?
Lots of time, money, and effort has been spent studying vaccines in the wake of Dr. Andrew "brought the medical profession into disrepute" Wakefield's original paper (which has since been retracted along with his UK license to practice medicine).
Do you mean the correlation that I just demonstrated above using the CDC as a data source showing a correlation between increased number of vaccines and increases in the number of autism? Or are you really trying to argue that these profit generators are purely altruistic as your second portion seems to imply?
Have done away with the fast track programs for vaccines? We have forced independent study so that Merck can not do the study for a Merck vaccine, and Bayer can not do the study for a Bayer vaccine to ensure no conflict of interests exist? In fact this is not the case at all. I'm not saying that Merck and Bayer don't spend money on researching effects, I'm saying there is an obvious conflict of interest with our current laws regarding how vaccines are tested and approved for consumption. We further have known issues where contaminated (bad) vaccines have been shipped for use overseas in developing countries.
Lets also not neglect that most of a vaccine is not just the live, altered, or inactive virus but a laundry list of other things that we are exposing kids ourselves to when getting vaccinated. Vaccines contain chemicals, metals, proteins, antibiotics and human, animal and insect DNA and RNA. Those mixtures are sometimes varied batch to batch without additional testing.
Nobody in their right mind should be hedging all of their bets on one doctors paper, just like nobody in their right mind should be claiming that all vaccines are the same.
I really don't get why people are against science when it comes to vaccines. Against it to irrational religious levels.
Have to love watching this post which is neutral and promotes dialogue, research, and education go from +5 insightful to a troll in under 20 minutes. Amazing how easy it is to censor isn't it?
I provided a link and enough information for you to perform a search on anything else. Stop being lazy and do some goddamn work if you want to argue, none of this information is that hard to find.
Lawyers do not make the law or even make a company follow the law. Lawyers determine whether the risk is worth the action. You are simply deluded and believe everything people tell you, as long as they are a person of authority. Works fine until you are hit with a sexual harassment charge and have your life ruined.
The influenza vaccine is probably the most advocated against. That, followed by HPV and chicken pox. Today by age 6 a child is getting 49 doses of 14 different vaccines. Many of these are "combo" vaccines so finding one that may be causing issues has become statistically impossible. Compare this to when I was a kid and we received 8, one series and one combo. You can see the schedule and massive growth in vaccines (and the appropriate industry) here.
Of course even the CDC admits that the MMR vaccine can cause permanent brain damage, yet we are not allowed to discuss this without facing attack. Victims of permanent damage are force to silence in order to receive payment from companies that get sued for damages and victims win. Silencing is not "new" or unique to medical issues but should be flat out illegal.
As I said previously, there is plenty to research to form an educated opinion.
Are you really that daft? Where did I say I had to conduct the investigation? I said I needed to see the results of the investigation to make a determination. The fact that you can't differentiate between those two things is more than bothersome. You are either a deluded psychopath who should not post again on a public site until psychological treatment and medical staff approves your access, or a very pathetic shill (pathetic meaning bad at your job).
While I think not getting vaccinated is incredibly stupid, I also worry about setting a standard of the government being able to force things in to your body.
Which vaccine? Polio or Mumps which have a pretty long history, high rate of effectiveness, and low chance for complications? or influenza which has a very poor rate of effectiveness, short history, and an extremely high number of complications for a large percentage of people? You should not lump all vaccines into a single category because they are all quite different in just about every way. Lumping everything into a single category is ludicrous, yet we can't have a rational dialogue because that is exactly what people do.
I have spoken at length with numerous medical doctors, and their opinions of vaccines is not the same as what we see in media. Vaccines in their opinion are a medical procedure. If you are ill you should not get a vaccine until you are well, and you should only get what you need for vaccines. It's the former that gives medical professionals pause when looking at the massive increase in childhood illnesses that result in permanent damage over the last couple of decades. As we have increased the number of vaccines being given to children, we have also seen an increase in debilitating illnesses. Yeah yeah, correlation does not prove causation but we can't even study at this point because anyone questioning is an "Anti Vac Whacko".
You can do the work to find statistics on vaccines and illnesses, there is enough there to at least start forming an opinion. You can also do the work to find the problems with the reporting system, and that very few cases of complications from a vaccine ever get into the system. You can further talk to doctors who are not pro-vaccine, though you will have to do so off the record because they can lose their licenses for being against "vaccines" (even though they may only be against _some_ vaccines) or simply blackballed out of their jobs.
One day I hope we can have rational dialogue on the subject, but if you read the posts here you will see it's quite impossible at present.
I don't give it any specifics, that is what conspiracy theories are for. I only provide what we know is happening and has happened. You can find plenty of theories for why they are doing these things, but those are all just theories (Illuminati world control, economic collapse, and luciferian cults are probably the most common).
We don't see the plans that are resulting in things like training guides proclaiming people that believe in the US Constitution are "terrorists", but we know those training guides exist. We know that last year DHS alone purchased 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition, and that none of this ammo is really "training rounds" like they claimed because it's mostly hollow point and AP rounds. You don't train with either because they are more expensive than standard FMJ and Hollow points ruin your ability to do any scoring with a target. We know that even after the Snowden leaks the Government has ramped up domestic spying, not reduced domestic spying as the populace has been demanding. We know that programs giving MRAPs and other military gear (sniper rifles, assault weapons,grenade launchers, body armor) to local police forces has been going on for at least 5 years and picking up pace. We also know that military exercises over US cities have been increasing in frequency, even though Posse Comitatus should prevent it to begin with (and during the time I served in the US Army it did prevent exercises over civilian populations). To prevent looking like a douchebag and giving you a LMGT link for you, just search for "US Military exercises over cities" and you will find plenty.
We also know that all of the spying and militarized police have been used to stifle dissent. See OWS, IRS targeting, etc.. We also know that we have seen massive increases in trying to take away the 2nd amendment rights for citizens. Fast and Furious was one example, but look at the rhetoric that follows every shooting event in the US. The whack job from California immediately comes to mind, where his dad's first statement was that he blamed politicians that support the 2nd amendment for the attack instead of his mentally ill kid for the shooting.
I will say that what we know is a cause for concern. We all need to demand transparency in Government and start putting new people on ballots instead of accepting what someone chooses for us. This is the only way to break the oligarchy currently controlling US Politics.
Oh, like the fact that you have no idea if he even had a contract? How about the fact that he could not be "fired" because he was not employed as a professor so this removal seems to be purely vindictive?
Caught doing what exactly? Saying "Look honey, you are going to have to study." at which the student took offense to the term "honey" and filed a sexual harassment charge? There is nothing reported on either the allegation or the alleged 2 month investigation. Nothing, Zero, Zip, NADA!
Is your ESP so good that you know he should be put out to pasture, or can you share actual charges and evidence with the rest of us? Are you somehow under the delusion that saying "Wow, you look really nice today" has not become a "microaggression" and sexual harassment.
After the Duke LaCrosse issue you are damn right I want proof before I believe someones allegation. And if this professor is innocent the person should be facing charges lest they commit arson and murder their boyfriend like the lady that accused the Duke LaCrosse team did.
Covering asses? I hope you are right but the increased militarization of police forces and training the DHS, ATF, CIA, FBI, and every other government agency that people that are liberty minded are highly suspect as "terrorists" and those same government agencies stockpiling 2Billion rounds of ammo and of course the government continuing to spy on everyone locally makes me think of more nefarious purposes.
The old saying "Hope for the best but plan for the worst." should be forefront in everyone's mind today.
1 persons allegation is not "annoying customers", and those allegations thus far appear to be absolutely baseless. Oh I know, the Duke LaCrosse team deserved to have their lives ruined because after all.. they are men right?
I don't really see much benefit in taking this guy's work off-line, but the deal with being a professor is that your living is paid for by the checks of some young woman's father.
Lets say you are a professor and a girl winks at you and says "can I have a good grade" and you say "No". Now you are charged with an allegation of sexual harassment and terminated. Seems fair right? I do notice that you are posting anonymously, I wonder why that is? Can I have your name so I can track down your employer and issue a false allegation for sexual harassment against you? I mean, if an allegation is all it takes to get someone terminated today what do you fear?
And this is not an attempt to just terminate someone, it's an attempt to erase them from the history of the University.
Put a slightly different way, anyone charged with any crime should _ALWAYS_ be able to defend themselves in a public trial before being lynched by public opinion. Sure, I'm an idealist but that is one of the many ideals which were critical in founding our great country.
If YOU don't believe that we should function that way, I'll invite you to go live in a place like North Korea where they have no such rules and people can be punished for an allegation. I'm guessing however that you are content to be here, and just open the shoe never drops on your foot.
At will employment laws vary from State to State, and in some States they don't exist at all. The professor may or not have a contract that negates this theory. Further, even with the "right to work" laws Companies can not stomp on a persons rights under the Law of the Land (US Constitution) without repercussion.
Will you next quote me some Marx or perhaps some Tolkien trying to prove something you can't prove?
This is not evidence, in fact this is only a vague accusation. Where is the evidence? I found the same thing you did and it is only an allegation. What did the professor do? Say "honey" or say "Show me your tits or you don't pass!"? There is a vast difference between those two things, and sadly a woman being called "darlin" has become enough to declare someone a misogynist today.
Do you really have no idea what evidence looks like?
I don't care if an "investigation" was 100 years long, if you don't produce evidence and results I can't determine whether or not an actual crime was committ. An investigation with no results is useless! Are your facts coming via osmosis?
Wrong! A company can not take legal action against an employee or person based solely on accusation or allegation. Imagine if that was the case, and anyone you worked with could submit anonymous charges against anyone at any time which could result in the termination of everyone all the time. I'm really not sure what chaos you plan to live in, but that is not the way it is designed to work.
The purpose of the Government is to protect people's Constitutional rights. In this case, with no facts or trial MIT acted against the professors rights and should face full prosecution for their actions.
Nothing. The Institute apparently thinks he's a scumbag and doesn't want to be associated with him, which is their right.
Prove it! I spent over 30 minutes searching for any actual evidence of sexual harassment and found nothing but conjecture. So you have false accusations that result in life ruining decisions (Duke LaCrosse) and real issues that Universities cover up (Penn. State). Why would they treat this guy like the LaCrosse team? Oh, it suits an agenda... Connect the dots man, it's really not that hard.
Nobody should be able to read history., ever! Or will you change tune and claim that it's okay to teach what _YOU_ want to be taught? We of course have to add the qualifier that it must be taught "how" you want it taught as well, because you know...teaching algebra story problems with a skirt in them is okay, but teaching the same problem with a hardhat is from the "patriarchy".
What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty? Why with claims of sexual harassment and misogyny do Constitutional protections no longer exist? In fairness, it's been happening with racism as well but those charges don't tend to ruin as many people as sexism claims (though the consequences are more dire for the victims).
Why won't the assholes that keep propping up this unconstitutional action bring up facts like the conclusion of the Duke LaCrosse team scandal? You know, the scandal that ruined the lives of more than a dozen people based on a completely false accusations. Not only was the accuser never charged with any crime from the false accusation, but the same person goes on to commit arson, attempted murder, and finally murder. Even today morons quote the Duke LaCrosse team as an example of misogyny.
The problems are not just in the US either. A Canadian University last month suspended an entire Hokey team and prevented graduations based on a top secret internal investigation (no police). Institutionalized vigilantism. There was in reality an allegation that 2 players were involved in sexual harassment, and the rest of the team was suspended for not speaking out against those two players. So in Canada not only is every allegation a criminal event, but if you want to wait for proof for the allegations you are also a criminal.
Welcome to your New World Order! Remain silent, it can only continue to get better.
Actually there are some positive comments about Bennett. Read this thread and you will see quite a few. That said, they are usually followed up by very similar negative comments. The format seems to be "Bennett seems to have a good idea" followed by "it took him 9183747 words to explain his position" and finally "the solution is not realistic".
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm#jeixiaro
It is really not so difficult to follow a link to the source, you only need to read a little bit to find the page they reference. Which claim is ludicrous, the one that backs science you don't happen to like? Got it.
I provided science from the CDC, and I did the math using data from the same source. Are you going to claim the CDC is wrong on half of their data? Or you are claiming that you only believe the science that you want to believe? You can't have it both ways and be rational.
Show me which CDC report is wrong and show me where the math is wrong. Demonstrate it! If you can't do so, then you don't give a rats ass about "science" you only care about supporting a deluded believe that your opinion trumps science.
I was hoping that somewhere on Bennett's list I would find a "Terse Text for Dummies" but alas....
We can't have a rational dialogue because you make statements like that one.
Oh, the fact that you want clarification makes it an irrational dialogue? I don't believe you actually understand what dialogue is supposed to be if that's the case, but I'll bite once. All of the information that follows is using the CDC as the source unless I provide a link.
First, you can look up the rates for Autism without any help. This is one of many neurological disorders which have skyrocketed in the US over the last 40 years. In the 1970s and 1980s we were at 1 in 2000, and today it's at 1 in 68. This is only one of many, not the only disorder that has increased. Yeah yeah, our detection is better now but the reported cases of severe autism make up the majority of those numbers.
You can also look up the fact that we have moved from 8 vaccines (1 combo 1 series) from 1960-1980 to today's 49 doses of 14 vaccines today without help as well. CDC link, and here is a breakdown link to help you get started. Oh, and this by age 6 and by age 18 this goes to 69 doses of 16 vaccines.
We have drastically increased the amount of vaccines we get in our most sensitive year of development, and at the same time seen a similar rise in Autism and other neurological problems. As I said above, this does not prove causation but sure as hell does indicate a link. The CDC guidelines show that "severe" side effects for vaccines are about 1 in 10,000 but we are giving a kid 644 vaccines by age 6 (which is what the CDC recommends) we have upped the odds of receiving severe side effects to 6.44% of the population
Which correlations?
Lots of time, money, and effort has been spent studying vaccines in the wake of Dr. Andrew "brought the medical profession into disrepute" Wakefield's original paper (which has since been retracted along with his UK license to practice medicine).
Do you mean the correlation that I just demonstrated above using the CDC as a data source showing a correlation between increased number of vaccines and increases in the number of autism? Or are you really trying to argue that these profit generators are purely altruistic as your second portion seems to imply?
Have done away with the fast track programs for vaccines? We have forced independent study so that Merck can not do the study for a Merck vaccine, and Bayer can not do the study for a Bayer vaccine to ensure no conflict of interests exist? In fact this is not the case at all. I'm not saying that Merck and Bayer don't spend money on researching effects, I'm saying there is an obvious conflict of interest with our current laws regarding how vaccines are tested and approved for consumption. We further have known issues where contaminated (bad) vaccines have been shipped for use overseas in developing countries.
Lets also not neglect that most of a vaccine is not just the live, altered, or inactive virus but a laundry list of other things that we are exposing kids ourselves to when getting vaccinated. Vaccines contain chemicals, metals, proteins, antibiotics and human, animal and insect DNA and RNA. Those mixtures are sometimes varied batch to batch without additional testing.
Nobody in their right mind should be hedging all of their bets on one doctors paper, just like nobody in their right mind should be claiming that all vaccines are the same.
I really don't get why people are against science when it comes to vaccines. Against it to irrational religious levels.
Have to love watching this post which is neutral and promotes dialogue, research, and education go from +5 insightful to a troll in under 20 minutes. Amazing how easy it is to censor isn't it?
I provided a link and enough information for you to perform a search on anything else. Stop being lazy and do some goddamn work if you want to argue, none of this information is that hard to find.
Lawyers do not make the law or even make a company follow the law. Lawyers determine whether the risk is worth the action. You are simply deluded and believe everything people tell you, as long as they are a person of authority. Works fine until you are hit with a sexual harassment charge and have your life ruined.
The influenza vaccine is probably the most advocated against. That, followed by HPV and chicken pox. Today by age 6 a child is getting 49 doses of 14 different vaccines. Many of these are "combo" vaccines so finding one that may be causing issues has become statistically impossible. Compare this to when I was a kid and we received 8, one series and one combo. You can see the schedule and massive growth in vaccines (and the appropriate industry) here.
Of course even the CDC admits that the MMR vaccine can cause permanent brain damage, yet we are not allowed to discuss this without facing attack. Victims of permanent damage are force to silence in order to receive payment from companies that get sued for damages and victims win. Silencing is not "new" or unique to medical issues but should be flat out illegal.
As I said previously, there is plenty to research to form an educated opinion.
Are you really that daft? Where did I say I had to conduct the investigation? I said I needed to see the results of the investigation to make a determination. The fact that you can't differentiate between those two things is more than bothersome. You are either a deluded psychopath who should not post again on a public site until psychological treatment and medical staff approves your access, or a very pathetic shill (pathetic meaning bad at your job).
I wonder if they have to pay patent royalties to Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson since they invented this app during their Google internship?
While I think not getting vaccinated is incredibly stupid, I also worry about setting a standard of the government being able to force things in to your body.
Which vaccine? Polio or Mumps which have a pretty long history, high rate of effectiveness, and low chance for complications? or influenza which has a very poor rate of effectiveness, short history, and an extremely high number of complications for a large percentage of people? You should not lump all vaccines into a single category because they are all quite different in just about every way. Lumping everything into a single category is ludicrous, yet we can't have a rational dialogue because that is exactly what people do.
I have spoken at length with numerous medical doctors, and their opinions of vaccines is not the same as what we see in media. Vaccines in their opinion are a medical procedure. If you are ill you should not get a vaccine until you are well, and you should only get what you need for vaccines. It's the former that gives medical professionals pause when looking at the massive increase in childhood illnesses that result in permanent damage over the last couple of decades. As we have increased the number of vaccines being given to children, we have also seen an increase in debilitating illnesses. Yeah yeah, correlation does not prove causation but we can't even study at this point because anyone questioning is an "Anti Vac Whacko".
You can do the work to find statistics on vaccines and illnesses, there is enough there to at least start forming an opinion. You can also do the work to find the problems with the reporting system, and that very few cases of complications from a vaccine ever get into the system. You can further talk to doctors who are not pro-vaccine, though you will have to do so off the record because they can lose their licenses for being against "vaccines" (even though they may only be against _some_ vaccines) or simply blackballed out of their jobs.
One day I hope we can have rational dialogue on the subject, but if you read the posts here you will see it's quite impossible at present.
I don't give it any specifics, that is what conspiracy theories are for. I only provide what we know is happening and has happened. You can find plenty of theories for why they are doing these things, but those are all just theories (Illuminati world control, economic collapse, and luciferian cults are probably the most common).
We don't see the plans that are resulting in things like training guides proclaiming people that believe in the US Constitution are "terrorists", but we know those training guides exist. We know that last year DHS alone purchased 1.6 Billion rounds of ammunition, and that none of this ammo is really "training rounds" like they claimed because it's mostly hollow point and AP rounds. You don't train with either because they are more expensive than standard FMJ and Hollow points ruin your ability to do any scoring with a target. We know that even after the Snowden leaks the Government has ramped up domestic spying, not reduced domestic spying as the populace has been demanding. We know that programs giving MRAPs and other military gear (sniper rifles, assault weapons,grenade launchers, body armor) to local police forces has been going on for at least 5 years and picking up pace. We also know that military exercises over US cities have been increasing in frequency, even though Posse Comitatus should prevent it to begin with (and during the time I served in the US Army it did prevent exercises over civilian populations). To prevent looking like a douchebag and giving you a LMGT link for you, just search for "US Military exercises over cities" and you will find plenty.
We also know that all of the spying and militarized police have been used to stifle dissent. See OWS, IRS targeting, etc.. We also know that we have seen massive increases in trying to take away the 2nd amendment rights for citizens. Fast and Furious was one example, but look at the rhetoric that follows every shooting event in the US. The whack job from California immediately comes to mind, where his dad's first statement was that he blamed politicians that support the 2nd amendment for the attack instead of his mentally ill kid for the shooting.
I will say that what we know is a cause for concern. We all need to demand transparency in Government and start putting new people on ballots instead of accepting what someone chooses for us. This is the only way to break the oligarchy currently controlling US Politics.
how about focusing on the facts we know?
Oh, like the fact that you have no idea if he even had a contract? How about the fact that he could not be "fired" because he was not employed as a professor so this removal seems to be purely vindictive?
Those are great facts to start with.
Caught doing what exactly? Saying "Look honey, you are going to have to study." at which the student took offense to the term "honey" and filed a sexual harassment charge? There is nothing reported on either the allegation or the alleged 2 month investigation. Nothing, Zero, Zip, NADA!
Is your ESP so good that you know he should be put out to pasture, or can you share actual charges and evidence with the rest of us? Are you somehow under the delusion that saying "Wow, you look really nice today" has not become a "microaggression" and sexual harassment.
After the Duke LaCrosse issue you are damn right I want proof before I believe someones allegation. And if this professor is innocent the person should be facing charges lest they commit arson and murder their boyfriend like the lady that accused the Duke LaCrosse team did.
Covering asses? I hope you are right but the increased militarization of police forces and training the DHS, ATF, CIA, FBI, and every other government agency that people that are liberty minded are highly suspect as "terrorists" and those same government agencies stockpiling 2Billion rounds of ammo and of course the government continuing to spy on everyone locally makes me think of more nefarious purposes.
The old saying "Hope for the best but plan for the worst." should be forefront in everyone's mind today.
1 persons allegation is not "annoying customers", and those allegations thus far appear to be absolutely baseless. Oh I know, the Duke LaCrosse team deserved to have their lives ruined because after all.. they are men right?
I don't really see much benefit in taking this guy's work off-line, but the deal with being a professor is that your living is paid for by the checks of some young woman's father.
Lets say you are a professor and a girl winks at you and says "can I have a good grade" and you say "No". Now you are charged with an allegation of sexual harassment and terminated. Seems fair right? I do notice that you are posting anonymously, I wonder why that is? Can I have your name so I can track down your employer and issue a false allegation for sexual harassment against you? I mean, if an allegation is all it takes to get someone terminated today what do you fear?
And this is not an attempt to just terminate someone, it's an attempt to erase them from the history of the University.
Put a slightly different way, anyone charged with any crime should _ALWAYS_ be able to defend themselves in a public trial before being lynched by public opinion. Sure, I'm an idealist but that is one of the many ideals which were critical in founding our great country.
If YOU don't believe that we should function that way, I'll invite you to go live in a place like North Korea where they have no such rules and people can be punished for an allegation. I'm guessing however that you are content to be here, and just open the shoe never drops on your foot.
At will employment laws vary from State to State, and in some States they don't exist at all. The professor may or not have a contract that negates this theory. Further, even with the "right to work" laws Companies can not stomp on a persons rights under the Law of the Land (US Constitution) without repercussion.
Will you next quote me some Marx or perhaps some Tolkien trying to prove something you can't prove?
I sure did, did you? If you are asking clarification on my response think carefully first.. but I'm happy to answer
Sorry, termination of employment is a legal action. It's not a criminal act, but it is a legal act. I was very intentional in my wording.
This is not evidence, in fact this is only a vague accusation. Where is the evidence? I found the same thing you did and it is only an allegation. What did the professor do? Say "honey" or say "Show me your tits or you don't pass!"? There is a vast difference between those two things, and sadly a woman being called "darlin" has become enough to declare someone a misogynist today.
Do you really have no idea what evidence looks like?
I don't care if an "investigation" was 100 years long, if you don't produce evidence and results I can't determine whether or not an actual crime was committ. An investigation with no results is useless! Are your facts coming via osmosis?
Wrong! A company can not take legal action against an employee or person based solely on accusation or allegation. Imagine if that was the case, and anyone you worked with could submit anonymous charges against anyone at any time which could result in the termination of everyone all the time. I'm really not sure what chaos you plan to live in, but that is not the way it is designed to work.
The purpose of the Government is to protect people's Constitutional rights. In this case, with no facts or trial MIT acted against the professors rights and should face full prosecution for their actions.
Nothing. The Institute apparently thinks he's a scumbag and doesn't want to be associated with him, which is their right.
Prove it! I spent over 30 minutes searching for any actual evidence of sexual harassment and found nothing but conjecture. So you have false accusations that result in life ruining decisions (Duke LaCrosse) and real issues that Universities cover up (Penn. State). Why would they treat this guy like the LaCrosse team? Oh, it suits an agenda... Connect the dots man, it's really not that hard.
Nobody should be able to read history., ever! Or will you change tune and claim that it's okay to teach what _YOU_ want to be taught? We of course have to add the qualifier that it must be taught "how" you want it taught as well, because you know...teaching algebra story problems with a skirt in them is okay, but teaching the same problem with a hardhat is from the "patriarchy".
What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty? Why with claims of sexual harassment and misogyny do Constitutional protections no longer exist? In fairness, it's been happening with racism as well but those charges don't tend to ruin as many people as sexism claims (though the consequences are more dire for the victims).
Why won't the assholes that keep propping up this unconstitutional action bring up facts like the conclusion of the Duke LaCrosse team scandal? You know, the scandal that ruined the lives of more than a dozen people based on a completely false accusations. Not only was the accuser never charged with any crime from the false accusation, but the same person goes on to commit arson, attempted murder, and finally murder. Even today morons quote the Duke LaCrosse team as an example of misogyny.
The problems are not just in the US either. A Canadian University last month suspended an entire Hokey team and prevented graduations based on a top secret internal investigation (no police). Institutionalized vigilantism. There was in reality an allegation that 2 players were involved in sexual harassment, and the rest of the team was suspended for not speaking out against those two players. So in Canada not only is every allegation a criminal event, but if you want to wait for proof for the allegations you are also a criminal.
Welcome to your New World Order! Remain silent, it can only continue to get better.
Actually there are some positive comments about Bennett. Read this thread and you will see quite a few. That said, they are usually followed up by very similar negative comments. The format seems to be "Bennett seems to have a good idea" followed by "it took him 9183747 words to explain his position" and finally "the solution is not realistic".