RSS FeedCarleton U fires Lebanese prof after B’nai Brith statement
Carleton prof fired for alleged terror role
“This shows a total disregard for the presumption of innocence until proven guilty – and of academic freedom and due process. We’ve never seen anything like this at a Canadian university,” said Jim Turk, executive director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, which condemned Carleton’s move yesterday. …
Carleton sociology chair Peter Gose called Diab’s abrupt dismissal “appalling, a terrible injustice and fundamental breach of natural justice to terminate a contract without notice or consultation.”
A B’nai Brith statement said “Canadians should be extremely concerned that an alleged terrorist … will be teaching our youth at a leading Canadian university.”
Comments
7 Responses to “Carleton U fires Lebanese prof after B’nai Brith statement”
Leave a Reply
It would be easier to “presume” Diab was innocent if not for the following:
- he was identified by former associates as being a member of the PLO
- his handwriting samples matched those of the bomber
- his passport shows he travelled to France just prior to the bombing, and left shortly afterwards.
- witnesses have identified Diab as the bomber, and police sketches of the suspect match photo’s of Diab.
There is more to this story than a simply case of mistaken identify, and though not yet proven in court, the evidence would indicate that young Johnny or Janie are probably better off having an instructor that isn’t required to wear an ankle braclet.
If it quacks like a duck…….
Circumstantial evidence, without any presumption of innocence, not dissimilar from claims that all black people look the same and are therefore legitimate targets for racial profiling. We had similar “evidence” with Maher Arar and others that have subsequently been proven innocent.
Unfortunately little weight can be afforded to information currently provided by our intelligence community given this abysmal record.
The presumption remains until he is actually convicted.
At what point do you consider that enough circumstantial evidence has accumulated, that one should reconsider putting an individual accused of terrorism in front of a classroom full of our children?
What if we traced receipts for the purchase of TNT to Diab? Would that be enough…..or could you say he was planning on removing old tree stumps from his farm?
No one is saying we have enough evidence to throw Diab in jail, but we certainly have enough to consider him enough of a threat that he needs to be monitored 24 hours a day. That is a little bit more than circumstantial evidence no matter how you try and spin it.
Secondly, Mahar Arar and the others’ to which you refer have not been proven “innocent” as much as they have not been found guilty. Big difference.
There are still a lot of questions that should have been answered, such as their connections to known terrorist supporters and the ilk.
JamesHalifax, it’s a bunch of demagoguery.
No one traced any receipts, and monitors are used to deter flight, not any “threat”. And if you are referring to monitors as legal evidence of anything, God protect us from a legal system where it would be true.
As for your children “Johnny” or “Janie”, name one risk that they face from Diab. And don’t forget your children “Mohammed”, “Pedro”, and “Cheng”.
And please don’t even start about Arar. How much do people like you need to be discredited and debunked at Canadian taxpayers’ great expense so you finally shut up?
Rool noted:
You’ll notice that I never said a receipt WAS found, I asked “what if.”
You never did address the other points I brought up such as the connections to the PLO, witness accounts, police sketches…etc., which by the way were provided by the French police. I know law students are usually fed the myth that the police and intelligence services are “bad people”…but the truth is they’re on our side. The sooner you realize it, the more you can relax.
As for the ankle bracelet, you are partially correct. It is used to deter flight, but it also lets us know where an individual is. As you may know..ankle bracelets are not just handed out when there is no evidence (circumstantial or not) of criminality.
As for Arar, my comments stand. Being proven innocent is NOT the same as being let go. Frankly, the father of Omar Khadr used the public sympathy for his plight to get Jean Chretien to spring him from Pakistan…and we all know how then ended right?
All that aside….Diab has NOT been proven guilty in a court of law, but if you believe the legal system is superior to common sense, then by all means you should approve of his extradition to France to face the charges in court. If Diab is truly innocent then he should have no reason NOT to go and show France why they are wrong.
Hey….this writer says it best.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Tenured+radicals/1860217/story.html