Ghent University could have just sat back and watched Cambridge's reputation implode from a safe distance. But for some reason they decided that they too wanted to destroy their reputation and be humiliated.
As a result, millions of people who had never heard of Ghent University before now associate it with punishing one of their own researchers for exposing plagiarism and academic fraud.
But Ghent leadership is so ideologically captured that they believe all of this actually makes them look good.
There couldn't be a better example for why viewpoint diversity matters. They have a glaring blind spot, but nobody there can see it. So they're happily driving off a cliff.
People who hired Jason Arday:
• No consequences
Leadership in Cambridge who signed a letter saying Arday was fully innocent, and that there must be no further investigations about him:
• No consequences
First person who wanted to expose Arday's fraud:
• Threatened with a big lawsuit, investigated by police for 4 months.
Person who exposed Arday's fraud:
• Suspended from academic position
Completely broken, pro-fraud system.
The United States Mission to Belgium condemns, in the strongest terms, Ghent University’s retaliation against an American scholar following his accurate whistleblower reporting on academic fraud.
The United States government regularly funds and supports research, academic exchanges, and other engagements with overseas universities. Dishonest, corrupt institutions that engage in, or reward, scapegoating mob behavior are not desirable partners for us. This is particularly true where the purpose and effect of the scapegoating is to punish accurate journalism unearthing academic dishonesty. We are therefore reviewing any relationships we have with Ghent University.
Bad-faith idealogues will try to make this a referendum on the content of Cofnas’s scholarship – or polemical distortions of it. That’s wrong. Free speech means that controversial views are protected. And Cofnas’s views were known to Ghent University when he was hired.
The ultimate purpose of freedom of speech is to overturn lies, fraud, and false ideologies. This is precisely what Cofnas was doing, and precisely the reason his home institution wants to silence him.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
My full speech at the @OxfordUnion debating whether the west is right to be suspicious of Islam.
I needed a security team to attend and we were spat at, bullied and heckled by a baying mob.
But I will not give up on free speech.
I will not submit.
The Economist's editor-in-chief Zanny Minton Beddoes went to a private all-girls boarding school in Shropshire where fees run up to £45,000 per year (about $60,000).
She was born and raised in Shropshire, one of England's most affluent rural counties. She attacks @elonmusk saying he's wrong and the UK is thriving. Elon hits back that she lives a cloistered existence.
He's absolutely right. She's Oxford and Harvard educated. She doesn't live in the towns where migrant grooming gangs operate. She can't see the destruction from her ivory tower.
So many elites in this country and Europe are removed from the decay their leftist policies have brought. Good on @elonmusk for calling her out.
Walter Isaacson reveals how Elon Musk fired 85% of Twitter's employees in three rounds and why
"He brought in the engineers and figured the amount of people doing Tesla full self-driving and autopilot software was about one-tenth of what was doing software for Twitter. He said this can't be the case"
"He fired 85% in three different rounds. First was firing people because they had a team from Tesla's autopilot team grading the code written in the past year. Then he fired people who didn't seem totally all in or loyal. Then another round of layoffs"
"At each step, almost everybody says that's enough, it's going to destroy things. They were partly right. There was degradation of the service, but not as much as half the services I use"
"He has an algorithm. Question every requirement, then delete delete delete. And the corollary, if you don't end up adding back 20% of what you deleted, you didn't delete enough in the first round"
"You asked me if he overdid it. He probably overdid it by 20%, which is his formula"
As a Japanese watching the UK right now, I have one simple question.
A Sudanese asylum seeker just tried to behead a local man in Belfast. The victim lost an eye.
This comes after years of grooming gangs raping thousands of British girls — gangs that police and councils deliberately ignored because they were afraid of being called racist.
In Japan, even one case like this would have triggered national outrage and immediate policy reversal.
But in Britain, the conversation is still about “not being far-right.”
British people, at what point does protecting your own children become more important than protecting your reputation?
We genuinely do not understand this.
Per espiare il crimine di aver esposto uno striscione con scritto "l'Italia agli italiani" due studenti dovranno scrivere una tesina dal titolo "gli africani siamo noi". Convinto della necessità di rieducarmi e travolto dalla voglia di espiare, ecco la mia tesina:
Henry Nowak died the same way a civilization dies: abandoned, handcuffed by authorities who neither trusted nor cared for him, and accused of hate crimes he did not commit. His murder is as tragic as it is enraging. He should still be alive today, and he would be if the last few generations of European elites had stood their ground against the politics of self-hatred and the mass invasion of migrants, many of whom despise the West and the people who love it.
Henry was far from the first to so needlessly lose his life, and I fear he won’t be the last. Each time a life like his is lost, the proper response—the only response—is righteous anger. One of the most important things the Trump administration has proven to the world is that stopping the flow of mass migration and defending national sovereignty is a matter of political will and leadership. Anything else is an excuse.
It is because we love the West that we want to preserve it. We love our civilization. We love our country. We love our children. And nobody—nobody—should ever die the way that Henry Nowak died. May God comfort those who loved him, and may God rest his soul.
Helen Andrews just reminded us how one of the most powerful men in America got destroyed by feelings.
Larry Summers — ex-Treasury Secretary, World Bank veteran, elite Democrat, and razor-sharp economist — was Harvard president when he dared speak data at an off-the-record academic conference: men dominate the extreme tails of math aptitude bell curves, and top women often gravitate toward people-focused fields over pure abstraction like theoretical physics.
Mainstream science? Yes.
Audience reaction? Some women professors said they nearly fainted or threw up. They leaked it anyway, extracted three apologies, and helped force him out.
No real rebuttal. Just emotional offense overriding evidence.
This wasn’t ancient history — it’s the template for how certain truths became career-ending. We traded open inquiry for protected feelings, and institutions are still paying for it.
Personal reflection: Watching competence kneel to curated outrage feels like self-sabotage on a civilizational scale.
Have we outgrown this, or does it still quietly control what can be said in elite spaces?
Please take 2 minutes to watch this.
On the one hand, you see incredible compassion, decency and moral clarity from @BoyGeorge, in showing solidarity with his Jewish friends, in wake of explosion of antisemitism.
But then there is the presenter @PatricKielty of @RTELateLateShow, who not only shows utter callousness and indifference, but then unconsciously and inexcusably, shifts the discussion to Gaza, as if that can ever justify or excuse the rampant Jew-hatred and violence we are seeing today.
[h/t video and original post to: @RachelMoiselle & @Holocaust_Irl]