FAU Terminates James Tracy for his Failure to Adhere to CBA Policies
Deanna Spingola
January 28, 2016

Beginning just hours after the Sandy Hook mass shooting, twenty-seven seconds of CNN’s nineteen-minute video of Robbie Parker went viral. Within six weeks, there was a relatively small group of people, some with previous connections, who literally “framed the debate” by promoting a dozen talking points claiming that Sandy Hook was a hoax, a government operation. In How to Counter Group Manipulation Tactics, the Techniques of Unethical Consensus-building Unmasked, on page 20, Beverly K. Eakman wrote “Framing the debate is key to keeping control of the psychological environment. When you frame the debate, you direct, or drive the discussion; that is, you deflect attention from the real agenda. In effect, you tell people what they are going to think about and for how long.”

On December 18, 2012, the SGT Report reported that “Firearms industry expert and part-time police officer Mark S. Mann (pseudonym)” says there are just too many inconsistencies with the ‘official’ story and he says, 'things don’t add up.' He says, “Sandy Hook was a false flag operation…they’re coming after the guns.” On December 20, John Friend said, “At this point, it is safe to say that the official narrative of the Sandy Hook school shooting is fraudulent, and a major cover-up and PSYOP is underway.” On December 20, 2012, Dr. James Tracy wrote an article titled, Analyzing the Newtown Narrative: Sandy Hook’s Disappearing Shooter Suspects. On December 21, Jay Johnson, on his web site, Sandy Hook Hoax (created 12/21/ 2012) said, “I think the idea of a young man shooting kids for no reason is a black op type psychological operation and did not happen, and is therefore a hoax.” On December 24, 2012, Dr. James Tracy wrote The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information.     

 
On December 27, 2012, Dennis Cimino and Dr. Fetzer co-authored an article for Veteran’s Today, Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax and Anti-Gun Psy Op.  On January 16, 2013, Joyce Riley interviewed Mike Hollingsworth, aka Mike Powers, on The Power Hour. He claims that Lanza could not have carried off the shooting. On January 19, Mark Howitt published his video, Sandy Hook - The Documentary, Official Video, Part 1 of 2. Then on January 30, six weeks after Sandy Hook, Cimino and Fetzer co-authored The Nexus of Tyranny: The Strategy behind Tucson, Aurora and Sandy Hook in which they introduced 14 points, which others have adopted. Why should any logical person immediately accept these views? Are these people smarter, more intuitive or discerning or are they quite simply framing the debate? We need to evaluate all of the data and not draw our conclusions from self-proclaimed expert analysts of current events.   

On November 5 and December 15, 2013, conveniently before the release of the Connecticut State Police’s official reports of their investigation, on December 27, two videos were released incorporating many of the talking points. View my timeline concerning Sandy Hook. Consider the dates in 2012-13. It is not all-inclusive but certainly includes some important media highpoints.

Just after the release of the official reports, Wolfgang Halbig, a person with a dubious and somewhat litigious history, came forward claiming that he had been threatened by local officials to stop asking questions about Sandy Hook. Many viewed him as a victim because some entity wanted to censor his inquiries. People then wanted to know what Halbig, a purported school safety expert, had to say. In 2015, Dr. James Fetzer edited a book that was listed on Amazon on October 22, 2015. Then, about a month later, Amazon pulled that book. This “censorship” had the predictable effect of encouraging even more people to read it. Was that the original plan when Amazon, a cooperative corporation, accepted the book? Fetzer made that objective easier by offering the book “free” as a PDF file. Was it an example of reverse psychology? Then FAU dismissed Dr. James Tracy. His last day was January 8, 2016. He claims that FAU terminated him because of his Sandy Hook theories. However, there may be more to the story than censorship or reverse psychology. It is ironic that three people have claimed censorship victimhood. This has the attention-grabbing effect of subtly shifting compassion and empathy away from the fatalities of Sandy Hook to the people who have allegedly been censored.

Okay, let’s backtrack a bit. In the online history of the UFF-FAU, it states, “In 2000, the Florida Legislature mandated a restructuring of higher education in Florida, which led Governor Jeb Bush to dissolve the Board of Regents… In 2003, the FAU faculty (presumably including Tracy) reaffirmed its desire to be represented by UFF (United Faculty of Florida) by an overwhelming vote. Although the recertification campaign was burdensome for UFF-FAU’s volunteer leadership and members, it had the unintended impact of leading to a new era of activism, as faculty recognized that they needed to be organized and vigilant in order to resist pressures that would impact working conditions and contractual rights at FAU.” [1]

Further, we read, “In 2009-2010, UFF-FAU, (under the leadership of Dr. James Tracy) protested vigorously when the FAU Administration violated the Collective Bargaining Agreement in its announced plan to lay off six tenured faculty members in the College of Engineering. With assistance from its statewide affiliate and outside legal counsel, UFF-FAU filed a grievance which culminated when the arbitrator ruled that the layoffs were ‘arbitrary and capricious’ and reinstated laid-off UFF members. This led to the immediate reinstatement of tenured faculty.” [2] In November 2009, Tracy wrote to Dr. Diane Alperin about the “College’s reorganization and the abrupt termination of five tenured faculty in spring 2009.” [3] As mentioned, this vigorous protestation regarding a violation of the CBA occurred under the direction of Tracy, then president of the UFF-FAU. He apparently believed that the CBA should be strictly observed and protected.

The FAU Chapter of the UFF represents more than 800 tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure track faculty in Boca Raton and FAU's sister campuses. [4] Dr. Tracy is a former First Vice President and then President of the FAU chapter of the union; there are letters, and survey results from Tracy, when he functioned in this position at least until March 22, 2012 and exercised sufficient influence with the teaching staff. He supported the CBA and was able to help employees with various issues especially pertaining to upholding the CBA and its policies, something about which he was apparently adamant. [5] [6] [7]

Dr. Tracy, a tenured associate professor of media history at FAU, a faculty member since 2002 started a blog on March 28, 2012, originally called originally called Memory Gap, about the same time that he left the UFF position. He registered the name MemoryHoleBlog.com on September 5, 2012. [8] Tracy’s web site, which currently has 9,744 followers, has a donation button on every single page payable via PayPal to Memory Hole Independent Research Fund. C.W. wade points out that every individual engaged in fundraising in Florida must register with the Florida Department of Consumer Services before soliciting donations. Wade’s research of available records, indicate that Tracy never registered. Evidently, he is non-compliant with Florida law regarding this particular matter. [9] PayPal closed MHB’s account on January 22, 2016 “due to the nature” of MHB’s activities. [10]

In November 2012, Tracy, then a former UFF-FAU president, but apparently still quite influential, facilitated, along with Chris Robé, FAU’s faculty union president, a meeting with other staff members about an annual survey in which 200 staff members had previously participated. Tracy most certainly is well aware of the compliancy CBA policies practiced at FAU. [11]

On December 20, 2012, Tracy wrote an article titled, Analyzing the Newtown Narrative: Sandy Hook’s Disappearing Shooter Suspects in which he wrote, “… the observations and analyses of citizen journalists and alternative media suggest how coverage of the Newtown Connecticut school shooting was substantially altered in the several hours and days following the event.” In addition, Tracy wrote, “When the news media act as willing partners in such acts the public becomes an unwitting accessory in its own psychic imprisonment, lulled into the notion that fair play still exists and public servants remain intent on service.” Then he wrote, “Several independent researchers and most recently Infowars.com reporter Rob Dew have over the past few days pointed to evidence strongly suggesting how two additional Sandy Hook shooting suspects were apprehended by police in the minutes following 9:35AM when officers were dispatched to the elementary school.” Those two individuals were, within hours, and before Tracy’s article, identified and released as they had nothing to do with the shooting. ^[12]

Christian Dem wrote about Tracy’s post of December 20, when Tracy claims that the media were complicit in omitting evidence of a second shooter. Dem says, “These claims have to be taken with a healthy amount of salt, though Tracy thinks that the Oklahoma City bombing and 9-11 were both staged.” [13] The fact that thousands of people believe that those two events were staged added to Tracy’s credibility and apparently his increasing internet traffic.

Tracy also said, “Journalists capable of exercising a modest degree of autonomy and personal insight would have clearly recognized such leads, thereby extending them to a more rigorous examination of law enforcement spokespersons and the broader Newtown community.” GlobalResearch.ca republished the article the same day that Tracy published it. ^[14] The FAU website, describing the Assistant Professor, states, “James Tracy teaches classes in media history and communication theory.” [15] Given his professed “expertise,” shouldn’t he recognize that misreporting in the media is quite common because of the pressure that is put on journalists to obtain and report the story as quickly as possible? Which is more troubling: on-site anxious reporters, unintentionally misreporting or a media and communications expert, perhaps nestled in his armchair in front of his computer several states away suggesting speculative theories? Had he read the official report yet? Of course not, because it came out almost a year later after an extensive investigation.

On December 24, 2012, Tracy published an article titled, The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information. I always found the Christmas Eve date of this article interesting. Apparently, despite what is often a very busy time of the year, especially for a family with children, Tracy was incredibly focused on what he viewed as “inconsistencies and anomalies” surrounding Sandy Hook. His spontaneous speculations, before any kind of an investigation had begun, have since been addressed by competent researchers. Tracy wrote, “While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.” He referred to Dr. H. Wayne Carver as The Accidental Medical Examiner. Tracy, obviously with a biased interpretation, provided a transcript of Carver’s comments, evidently to try to show that Dr. Carver was acting inappropriately. ^[16]

Of course, Dr. Carver, exhausted by long hours working with the other staff members of his office, was uncomfortable. What rational, empathetic human being, despite seeing terrible things during the performing autopsies and providing testimony would not be impacted by twenty dead children? The medical examiner oversaw the identification of those who were slaughtered at Sandy Hook Elementary School, including twenty first graders. He said he has “been so busy trying to get the children's bodies released to funeral homes that he hasn't had time to grieve.” During that press conference on December 15, the day that the names of the victims were released, Chief Medical Examiner Dr. H. Wayne Carver said,

“I've been at this for a third of a century and my sensibilities may not be the average man, but this probably is the worst I have seen or the worst that I know of any of my colleagues have seen.” ^[17]

Timing is very significant in the release or subtle concealment of information by the big-pharma-friendly media. For instance, on July 7, 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) issued a joint statement alerting clinicians and the general public of their concern about thimerosal, a preservative used in some vaccines. [18] The media released the information on Friday afternoon, July 9, 1999, at 4:15 pm, recognizing that distracted people busy with Saturday activities might not notice, especially since the press failed to focus on this very crucial news that impacted the lives of thousands of vaccinated children. ^[19] Of course, this timing and lack of focus benefitted the pharmaceutical industry which seeks to hide the fact that their products are dangerous and deadly.

However, this was not the case with Tracy’s Christmas Eve media musings. People are especially busy during this time of the year, even those who might follow Tracy’s blog. Why would the media give any attention to an ignominious blog post by what some would classify as a “conspiracy theorist?” Yet, that is not what happened. The big-pharma-friendly, cover-your-butt corporate media widely disseminated Tracy’s speculative theories. How did the media even discover Tracy; it is not as if he were some renowned professor-turned-journalist extraordinaire. His blog was relatively new, only created in 2012. Did some corporate media mogul just happen to notice the article and direct its wide dissemination? Seriously, what are the happenstance chances of that transpiring? Of course, this timing and exaggerated focus benefitted the pharmaceutical industry which seeks to hide the fact that their products (psychiatric drugs) are dangerous and deadly. The article helped frame the debate. People typically believe the first, seemingly revelatory or conspiratorial information that they hear about any event and rarely follow up on relevant research afterwards. If people believe that Sandy Hook was a farce, based on some of the very first claims, then they would not think to question the weightier causes and consequences. 

The pharmaceutical industry and the government would have us believe that no one died at Sandy Hook. On the other hand, if they did die, then people need more psych drugs to prevent such a tragedy in the future. Given the accelerating rate of mass shootings by people on psychiatric drugs, astute people are going to start focusing on the cause. Real people, hyped up on psychiatric drugs engage in violent, uncharacteristic activities.

Obviously, lots of people would like to conceal the root cause behind Lanza’s actions. These individuals include high-level federal and state politicians and their corporate cronies, the vaccine and psychiatric drug manufacturers. In order to obfuscate the facts and distract people from looking too deep, the government uses operatives who inevitably attract hundreds of useful idiots who invent all sorts of distracting scenarios or make ludicrous claims that the government orchestrated the event. A counter-intelligence operation would sidetrack and obfuscate the deadly, avoidable tragedy that occurred at the Sandy Hook Elementary School.

By January 24, 2013, FAU would receive 384 pages of emails, the majority of which expressed outrage over an article about Tracy’s theories in the Sun Sentinel of January 7. FAU media relations director, Lisa Metcalf said, “We don’t comment on personnel matters.” She also did not say whether or not Tracy was under an FAU investigation. The university has “taken a big public relations hit” as a result of Tracy’s theories. [20] Now, if the university was going to fire Tracy because of his views on Sandy Hook, they would certainly have done that in 2013, not more than two years later.

Perhaps some of those negative emails received by January 24 were the result of a CNN program. Because, on January 11, 2013, Anderson Cooper (reportedly with continuing connections to the CIA), on his CNN program, 360 Degrees opened his program, “We begin tonight Keeping Them Honest with the story that is frankly hard to believe. You are going to want to sit down for this one.” Then he refers to the “horrific shootings” in Newtown in which twenty-six people were killed and says that “tonight we expose a number of people who are claiming that the Sandy Hook shootings were staged.” Cooper spent much of the program talking about the “horrifically outrageous claims” of Dr. James Tracy, even showing a picture of him. Cooper said that normally, they would not give such claims air time. [21] He also mentioned that Alex Jones had been on Piers Morgan’s CNN show on January 7. Did the producers and directors all receive the same morning memo or was it merely a series of coincidences and common interests?

Purporting not to want to give air time to such claims, he proceeds to do just that. Cooper makes sure that the viewers know that Dr. Tracy is a tenured associate professor at Florida Atlantic University, “a state university that gets taxpayers' money.” Cooper, to make sure we have the name correct, repeats his name, James Tracy in consecutive sentences. Cooper then reveals that Tracy, who claims the “shooting did not happen,” has a blog on which he wrote, “one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place, at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation's news media have described.” [22]

Undeniably, there were some idiosyncrasies in the mainstream media reports about Sandy Hook. However, until Tracy wrote about them, one might not have noticed or questioned them until Cooper called attention to Tracy which probably brought thousands to his web site. Does anyone really think that this was not Cooper’s intention? Television programming is after all, programming.

Tracy, according to Cooper, suggested that news organizations and the government “may have worked together” to gain support for gun control laws. Tracy suggested that the government may have “hired trained crisis actors to aid in this ruse” and is “not convinced the parents whose children were killed are really who they say are.” Cooper reminds his viewers that Tracy, the professor, has a blog. Cooper then plays an audio clip with a local reporter talking with Tracy who sounds very credible, rational, and reasonable, and looks very distinguished, even handsome. [23]

Cooper then follows up a few minutes later and says, Tracy isn't the only one spinning conspiracy theories and then refers to YouTube and mentions another web site that he does not give the web site address as he did not want to “get them extra traffic. Some of them are claiming that 6-year-old Emilie Parker killed in Sandy Hook didn't actually die.” Then Cooper implies that there are other web sites “spinning conspiracy theories,” about which he is not going to give information. Then he says, now, unless you frequent these types of conspiracy web sites, you probably never see them. Cooper, so his viewers will remember, says, “James Tracy, here he is again, is as we said a tenured professor at a public university. Taxpayers pay part of his salary.” [24]

On January 12, 2013, according to the University Press, FAU’s Finest News Source (UP), over 800 news sources discuss FAU professor’s Newtown conspiracy. The article begins, “On Christmas Eve, FAU communications professor James Tracy wrote one 3,000 word blog post that sparked controversy throughout the nation.” As I mentioned earlier, it is interesting that the father of small children would be busy working on a blog article on Christmas Eve. Further, the UP states, “Then on Jan. 8, Lisa Metcalf, Director of Media Relations, told the UP, “James Tracy does not speak for the university. The website on which his post appeared is not affiliated with FAU in any way.” The Huffington Post re-ran the Sun Sentinel’s story about it; thousands of people were tweeting about the blog post. What powerful entity has the capacity, the ability and the motivation to propagate what is an unproven, speculative, hurtful hypothesis and why? [25] [26]

Then, “Just one day later, President Mary Jane Saunders released a statement on behalf of the university.” She said, “I am sure that many of you are aware of the recent comments by a Florida Atlantic University faculty member regarding the tragic events that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. on December 14. I want to make it clear that those views and opinions are not shared by Florida Atlantic University, and I am personally saddened by any media stories that have added to the pain felt by the victims’ families.” [27]

On January 16, 2013, Ryan Cortes reported in the University Press, FAU’s Finest News, “His blog posts weren’t picked up by the mainstream media until he wrote this on Dec. 24: ‘While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place — at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.’” Tracy responded, “But, you know, if they intend to fire me, ultimately, how good of an institution is it? If they’re not going to stand up for free speech and ideas and things of the like, then I’m not too sure I want to be here, either.” [28] Given that comment, early in the continuing escapade, one wonders just how committed Tracy was to his job at the university or was he anticipating a likely possibility of losing that job? Why would he jeopardize his career unless there was some other feasible objective or reward?

The following comments are from his FAU peers:

In an article in the Sun Sentinel dated April 28, 2013, Jeffrey Mortonis, Patricia Kollander, and Thomas Wilson, all professors at FAU, said this about James Tracy, “He and his supporters quickly reference his First Amendment right to express his ideas. What James Tracy does not understand is that ideas represent the end product of the intellectual process. Before they can be publicly espoused, ideas must be subjected to rigorous and intensive examination. Academics test ideas to prove their worth, commentators simply state them. Academics expose their theories to other academics, conspiracy theorists blog them to each other. Academics build on a rich intellectual tradition; people like James Tracy spin tall tales out of nothing. James Tracy should not resign because he has upset people or brought shame to the university. He should resign because he is not an academic.” [29]

In a Huffington Post article, dated January 7, titled James Tracy, FAU Professor, Disputes Newtown Sandy Hook Massacre Account, Tracy states, “I describe myself as a scholar and public intellectual, interested in going more deeply into controversial public events. Although some may see (my theories) as beyond the pale, I am doing what we should be doing as academics.” [30] At least he admits that his ideas are theories.

Fast forward about a year - on May 17, 2014, Tracy started a radio program, Real Politik, which he currently conducts on Mondays from 3-4 (EST) on Truth Frequency Radio. His first guest was Kevin Barrett followed the next week by Allan Weisbecker and the week after that by Sofia Smallstorm who discussed Sandy Hook. She is the individual that published the video about Sandy Hook on November 5, 2013 [31] In his radio interviews, Tracy claims that “crisis actor” may have been (plausible deniability term) employed by the Obama administration in an effort to shape public opinion in favor of the event's true purpose: gun control.” [32] Often, people ignore plausible deniability terms and accept the claim as a fact.

On an Internet forum, on July 16, 2015, reddit conspiracy, Dr. James Tracy said, “I am presently working with a colleague on an edited volume for TrineDay which we hope will be published in 2016. The book will feature chapters by several notable scholars and journalists addressing the topic of false flags.” ^[33] Is that “colleague” James Fetzer?

In as much as Tracy is working on a book, he may not want to disclose this on the FAU's Activity Form because he is quite possibly using his university time and employment to fund this project. That is, while fully employed by FAU, he is working on a profit-producing book. This is in addition to the information contributed by Tracy to Fetzer’s book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook; It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control. Fetzer’s book is a compilation of previously-published, thoroughly debunked articles by various named and un-named individuals.

In that same Internet forum where he talked about his upcoming book, Tracy was asked “what do you think about Judy Wood?” He said, “I'm not a physicist so I am not inclined to chime in on Wood or specifically how the World Trade Center was demolished. The topic (and not necessarily Wood) serves as a tremendous source of divisiveness in the 9/11 Truth community which is unfortunate. It's safe to conclude that the event was pulled off with the probable active involvement of the US government and Western intelligence community. Thus far, it's the crime of the century, the basis for the phony ‘war on terror’ (war of terror), and the bread and butter of the military-academic-intelligence-media complex.” ^[34]

Apparently, Dr. Judy Wood, who has a BS in Civil engineering, an MS in Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics) and a PhD in Materials Engineering Science, is “divisive” because she presents actual evidence and not theories and multiple-choice speculations that encourage people to descend into numerous never-ending rabbit holes. Divisiveness is a contemptuous term for anyone who has a different assessment, based on actual research and evidence, in the so-called alternative media. After all, why bother with facts and evidence when speculation and consensus opinions work to gather people into one group-think herd. Interestingly, Tracy finds evidence divisive but not speculative theories. If Tracy’s theories are incompatible with other people’s evidence, he labels them divisive.

Dr. Judy Wood is not a participant in the so-called 9/11 truth movement (which has not progressed). Web site hosts have excluded her information from various web sites. Forum members who mention Dr. Wood’s evidence are regularly ostracized. This treatment exists towards anyone who has a non-herd discernment of Sandy Hook. Dr. Wood is also the only individual who has filed a federal qui tam case related to the NIST report on the destruction of the WTC. The court did not categorize her case as frivolous, unlike conspiracy theories. Knowledgeable people, who know better, dare not file inappropriate litigation as they understand the consequences. One must actually have legitimate evidence to file an authentic lawsuit. There are some individuals, like Wolfgang Halbig, who collect thousands of dollars alleging that they are going to file a lawsuit but fail because their claims are based on hearsay and theories. Alternatively, they use donor money to file lawsuits against bloggers who have hurt his feelings. [35] [36]

On January 5, 2016, Diane Alperin, vice provost for FAU, wrote to Tracy (the former UFF-FAU president that defended CBA policies) that his last day would be Friday, January, 8. Alperin cited Article 16 of the FAU BOT/UFF Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) for the disciplinary action. On December 16, 2015, Alperin told Tracy that he was going to be fired but he could “request an appeal.” Alperin advised Tracy that he had ten days to respond in writing. Evidently, according to the letter, Tracy did not respond. The letter stated, “In a reprimand from Dean Coltman dated November 10, 2015, you were advised that you had not submitted Report of Outside Employment or Professional Activity for 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, as required by the CBA, Article 19, and University policy. Dean Coltman required you to submit these Activity Forms within 48 hours of receipt of her letter, and indicated that failure to do so may result in further disciplinary action. Your reprimand made clear that ‘…if you continue to fail to meet your professional and administrative obligations and respond to directives from your supervisor, you will face additional disciplinary action.’” [37]

Further, Alperin said, “You refused her directive and did not submit the Activity Forms when required. Instead, you sent the Dean a letter dated November 22, 2015, in which you presented arguments as to why you should not have to submit Activity Forms. Rather than impose further discipline as warned, the Dean gave you another opportunity to comply.” Then, “On December 11, 2015, the Dean sent you an email that she reviewed and considered your December 22 response, and concluded that you unequivocally must complete the Activity Forms. She set a new deadline of December 14, 2015 at 5 p.m. for you to submit the forms. The Dean put you on clear notice that you ‘will receive further disciplinary action up to and including termination’ if you fail to meet the new deadline. By simply submitting the completed Activity Forms, you would have been compliant with no further discipline. However, you again refused the Dean’s clear directive and did not submit the forms by the new deadline.” [38]

FAU’s Activity Forms policy, applicable to all employees, is to “provide guidance and resources for FAU employees and supervisors as they deal with the increasingly complex issues of today relating to conflicts of interest, conflicts of commitment and outside activities.” A “conflict of commitment relates to an individual’s distribution of effort between a University appointment, obligation, and commitment and external professionally-related or personal activities. And a conflict of commitment can arise when the external activities burden or interfere with the employee’s primary obligation and commitments to the University.” On December 15, Tracy said that, since he was on parental leave that he did not see the email from the Dean. Is that akin to saying the dog ate my homework? If your job is in jeopardy, one would reasonably watch for any communication from the university. However, Tracy was well aware of the FAU policy and the F.A.I.R. that required “disclosure for both compensated and uncompensated activity.” [39]

According to the letter, Tracy was non-compliant because of the following situations: (a) Tracy engaged in outside activity on GlobalResearch.ca and on his personal blog; (b) Tracy failed to submit any Activity Reports for the three years that he had his blog; (c) Tracy clearly spent time and resources maintaining his blog and contributing to other sites; (d) he publicly promoted outside activity projects that he failed to report to FAU; (e) Tracy “deprived the University of the Forms needed to assess if a conflict exists for your blog and other activity, or if the University resources are being used for those also.” Tracy missed two deadlines and, according to the letter, “remained insubordinate and knowingly failed to provide all of the Activity Reports required. You were disciplined and given multiple warnings, progressively, but you chose to ignore these warnings and continue your misconduct. You have forced further disciplinary action rather than simply submit properly completed forms. The University will not tolerate continued direct insubordination and circumvention of policies.” [40]

Professors are salaried employees, not hourly workers. If a professor, on a full-time salary, should spend his time and efforts working for whatever university employs him or her. Is it appropriate or ethical for a professor to spend hours on an endeavor that has nothing whatsoever to do with his full-time employment? Alperin wrote, “You publicly engage in external personal activity that requires your time and effort. It is for the administration to decide, with your input, if a conflict exists, and how to manage a conflict where necessary. You have repeatedly and willfully failed to provide the administration the information it needs to discharge its responsibilities. Other faculty engage in outside activity without issue, or have managed conflicts, by complying with the clear reporting rules.” [41]

Tracy apparently appealed to the United Faculty of Florida UFF-FAU. Current union president Robert Zoeller apparently believes that Tracy should not have been terminated. Zoeller is withholding any further statements in order to avoid violating Dr. Tracy’s “rights.” Tom Johnson is Tracy’s attorney. Johnson is not answering any media questions because of the lawsuit. [42] He was scheduled to teach three classes for the spring semester; other instructors will teach those classes.

Tracy, choosing the martyr route and playing the convenient victim card, claims that he lost his job because of his theories about Sandy Hook. He has a lot of followers who won’t bother to evaluate all of Tracy’s possible unethical actions. If that were the case, he would have been fired in 2013 with the eruption of such substantial opposition against him.