The Diab Chronicles


 

Last week, the sociology and anthropology department at Carleton announced it had hired Hassan Diab to teach a summer course. Diab is accused of masterminding the 1980 bombing of a synagogue in Paris that killed four people. He is wanted in France to face charges of murder and willful destruction of property; he claims it is a case of mistaken identity. He is awaiting an extradition hearing to France, in the meantime he is under very strict bail conditions that amounts to virtual house arrest.

After news of his hiring leaked out, the university promptly fired him. The faculty, CAUT, and CUPE local have all rallied around Diab.

Here’s the latest news story.

Here’s a statement signed by 30 members of the department.

My take on the situation is here.

Here’s Terry Glavin offering a very useful perspective.


 
Filed under:

The Diab Chronicles

  1. Great piece, Andrew. If Diab had been accused of a more serious crime, like possession of child pornography, I doubt he'd have 30 members of his department insisting that he should be rehired, and allowed to teach classes, pending his trial.

    • Which part did you like the most. The bogus claims about what the letter from 30 Carleton professors said or the part where he calls them a pack of anti-semites?

      • I must have missed the part where he called them "a pack of anti-semites". Is this what you were referring to?

        "In the end, there is only one form of political pressure at work at Carleton. It is the usual internal force of anti-Israel ideological conformity that infects virtually every department of humanities and social sciences in the country"- Potter

        • It`s right at the start.

          Later on television, the French prime minister, Raymond Barre, remarked the bomb was "aimed at Jews worshipping in a synagogue, but struck … innocent Frenchmen" — the implication being the Jews inside the synagogue were neither wholly French nor wholly innocent.

          Twenty-nine years later, Barre's horrible, though perhaps unintentional, slur is being repeated by the faculty in the department of sociology and anthropology at Carleton University,through their defence of the department's right to hire Hassan Diab to teach a summer course. In this case, it is hard to interpret the slur against Jews as anything but entirely deliberate.

          A slur against Jews is more commonly referred to as anti-semitism.

          • You know, "slur against Jews" sounds creepily like Frank Dimant, Executive Vice President of B'Nai Brith on this topic: "It's appalling university professors would lobby for the reinstatement of a professor who is alleged to have bombed a synagogue. And one asks this question: is it because a synagogue was bombed?"

            Also, he says in the National Post (of course): "Common sense…would seem to dictate a cautionary route that does not expose the public, especially vulnerable and impressionable young persons, to individuals facing possible conviction unless and until they are exonerated."

            Yup, can't have those minds exposed to people we don't like.

            Even creepier: our right wing President… I mean *Prime Minister* Stephen Harper: "I guess my fear is what I see happening in some circles is (an) anti-Israeli sentiment, really just as a thinly disguised veil for good old-fashioned anti-Semitism, which I think is completely unacceptable"

            So: hiring a man on bail, charged but not convicted of a terrible attack, within the conditions of his bail: totally unacceptable, likely to pollute "impressionable young minds" and presumably putting students at some (unspecified) physical risk. Also, the Carleton staff who think he should be allowed to teach? They're anti-semitic.

            And for the official position, our PM makes it clear: Canada considers criticism of the policies of the state of Israel to be tantamount to anti-semitism. So shut your mouth.

            Thanks Potter, always good to understand the rightwing view.

          • Yup, can't have those minds exposed to people we don't like.

            People we don't like? People we don't like? The man allegedly killed 4 innocent people. The matter must be resolved, unquestionably. You think murder is no big deal? You think we should do nothing about it? You are very creepy.

          • Of course you know perfectly well that that point (young minds shouldn’t be exposed to controversial ideas!) was made by the gentleman from B’nai Brith, not by me. I only pointed it out and questioned its reasoning.

            If you or the gentleman from B’nai Brith have reason to believe that man poses a physical – as opposed to ideological – risk to Carleton students you should speak up asap and show your evidence.

            Only through an Olympic leap of “logic” could you read what I wrote and conclude that I think murder is no big deal, that blowing up a synagog isn’t inherently anti-semitic and that nothing should be done about it. Stop wasting my time with these intellectually dishonest (or deficient) arguments.

        • Here:

          "Twenty-nine years later, Barre's horrible, though perhaps unintentional, slur is being repeated by the faculty in the department of sociology and anthropology at Carleton University, through their defence of the department's right to hire Hassan Diab to teach a summer course. In this case, it is hard to interpret the slur against Jews as anything but entirely deliberate."

          Their defense of Diab is a slur against Jews, according to Potter. It's libel.

  2. Log: rolling in our time:

    Potter: "Here's Terry Glavin offering a very useful perspective."

    Glavin: "Andrew Potter takes a similar view, noting that…"

  3. Isn't that special? Potter blithely defames 30 people just like that.

  4. So is Potter another refugee from the National Post?

    • No kidding.

      Also, the Glavin piece is the most jaw-droppingly irrelevant thing I've seen in ages… 'Well, you care so much for Mr. Diab, why aren't you screaming about the injustice done to Mr. El Qemany on the other side of the world? Well? Address that, Liberals!?!'

      I'm not exaggerating at all, I read the damn thing twice. A quote: "Not to be too cynical, but somehow I can't imagine the brave champions of academic freedom that have rallied to the barricades on Diab's behalf will be paying too much mind to the case of Mahmoud El Qemany, who is facing something rather more than an interregnum in his academic engagements at the moment…"

      So the fact that Carleton's academic staff aren't crying about this obscure case in Egypt means they're hypocrites here in Canada. Well, who could argue with that? Who, I ask you? Potter?

      • It's standard Euston Manifesto boiler-plate.

      • Two perfectly reasonable articles by Andrew Potter and Terry Glavin are used by the leftys to drudge up their anti Israel, anti Bush, anti Harper and anti anything. I do hope the stupidity and blindness I`m seeing in some of the commenters here is pervasive enough to spread into the Liberal and Dipper parties so voters can send them the message they deserve.

  5. I have to say that this irrational and vociferous anti-Jewish, anti-Israel sentiment that pervades the left/lib crowd is both depressing and worrying. There's a book waiting to be written if there isn't one written on the topic already.

    Latterly the most worrying trend is how this depressing phenomenon has crept into the Liberal Party of Canada.

    Dion, himself a sociology professor, purportedly was elected leader of the Liberal Party with the early assistance of a bloc of muslim delegates. (He had a bloc of Orchardbots as well.) Denis Coderre walking in a demonstration filled with Hezbollah flags denouncing Israel was par for the course. Duceppe, another hard-core leftist, was marching there as well, it goes without saying.

    • I have to say that this irrational and vociferous anti-Muslim, anti-Arab sentiment that pervades the far right crowd is both depressing and worrying. There's a book waiting to be written if there isn't one written on the topic already.

      Latterly the most worrying trend is how this depressing phenomenon has crept into the Conservative Party of Canada.

      Harper, himself a economist, purportedly was elected leader of the Conservative Party with the early assistance of a bloc of bigotted delegates. (He had a bloc of Orchardbots…

      …ok, it got too stupid after that.

      • It is the case that today hatred of Jews emanates mostly from the left of the political spectrum. That is where today it has to be rooted out. And it has to be rooted out and called out for what it is. That isn't to say that one can't criticize Israeli foreign policy, obviously that is fair.

        But hiring someone accused of a terrorist act targetting Jews and resulting in the murder of innocents and then crying out academic freedom for cover is another matter altogether. It bespeaks an embarrassing sympathy for the putative terrorist and his cause.

        • It is the case that today hatred of Muslims and Arabs emanates mostly from the right of the political spectrum. That is where today it has to be rooted out. And it has to be rooted out and called out for what it is.

          …etc. etc.

        • It is the case that today hatred of Jews emanates mostly from the left of the political spectrum.

          Actually it mostly emanates from rightwing Muslim fundamentalists and neo-nazis.

          • Right wing muslim fundamentalists who, if you would care to look, find an astonishing amount of support amongst western leftists, who insist they are the anti-imperial resistance.

    • You know, I've spent countless hours here laboriously debating people I strongly disagreed with. I've rarely lost my temper, I've been pretty patient and methodical, I tend to plod through the most dense and discouraging disingenuous or insulting arguments and try to refute them point by point.

      This one blows it for me. Screw you, Jarrid. You brainless, hate-filled jerk.

      There's not much on the rightwing side that's as Orwellian or as virulently hateful as rightwingers who throw charges of anti-semitism around like it's no big deal. But it *is* a big deal. The Jews in my family, my coworkers, my friends, my past lovers – these are among the most important people in the world for me. I've shed tears at their Bar/Bat Mitzvahs, I've had intense, engaging and enlightening debates, I've loved, liked and laughed with them all.

      I'm not anti-semitic. I never have been and I never will be. I have nothing to apologize for. But I disagree with many of the policies and actions of the *state* of Israel and I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the deliberate stifling of the debate. For some wanker like you to float in here and casually repeat the latest hate-filled talking points makes me sick.

      Worst of all – you're not just insulting me. You're cheapening the words "anti-semitism". You're crying wolf for your own political gains. You're making it harder for the people I love to call out actual, real anti-semitism when it affects their lives in real ways. You and your fellow rightwing hate-mongers are actually making life more difficult for actual Jews on the receiving end of actual anti-semitism. You should be ashamed of yourself, but you won't be. It's all a game to you petty, pathetic people.

      • Go get 'em, tiger.

      • Take a valium and get some perspective. The story is about someone who allegedly bombed a syagogue, killing numerous people. How on earth this is not anti-semitism, please explain. So now we have a group of people coming to the defense of someone who allegedly bombed a synagogue. There is enough evidence for the issue to come to trial. Please explain how this does not reek of anti-semitism, if there is enough evidence to take this to trial then there is absolutely no way the man should be allowed to continue his work, but he should certainly be allowed to resume his work if he is acquitted.

        Jarrid is talking about a group of people who have shown allegiance to Hezbollah, an organization that has unquestionably killed innocent Jewish civilians in Buenos Aires and elsewhere. Hezbollah is not about reclaiming territory, or a two-state solution, or anything of the sort. Hezbollah is all about killing Jews, whether they are military or civilians. It IS anti-semitic to show support for such a group of people.

        • …And right on time, scf wades in, deliberately misrepresents my arguments, strikes a fatal blow against his own strawmen, declares victory and goes home.

          No integrity requred.

          • I think that's what Cook considers a "patient and methodical", "point by point" refutation.

      • Take a pill dude. He just implied (falsely) that most lefties are racist. Happens to us righties all the time. Someone just implied the same about me by name on another thread. Big deal.

        Geez, what a blowhard.

        P.S. I loved the part about how you're "patient and methodical" and "try to refute [opponents] point by point", (particularly after the Birther exchange we just had in which counterarguments were generally ignored when you didn't like them). You're also amazingly humble, and never toot your own horn. All this in one commenter! How fortunate we are.

    • I think you're wrong here chief. A lot of far lefties are Jewish. There is some anti-semitism on the left, and it is more widespread than on the right, but it's hardly fair to tar them all with that brush. It's a bit like lefties trying to pin white-supremacist racism on all righties. Granted, they do it a lot, but you shouldn't descend to their level by responding in kind.

    • I think you're wrong here chief. A lot of far lefties are Jewish. Rahm Emmanuel and Ruth Ginsburg come to mind.

      There is some anti-semitism on the left, and it is more widespread than on the right, but it's hardly fair to tar them all with that brush. It's a bit like lefties accusing the right of being motivated by white-supremacist racism. Granted, they do it a lot, but you shouldn't descend to their level by responding in kind.

    • I think you're wrong here Jarrid. A lot of far lefties are Jewish. Rahm Emmanuel and Ruth Ginsburg come to mind.

      There is some anti-semitism on the left, and it is more widespread than on the right, but it's hardly fair to tar them all with that brush. It's a bit like lefties accusing the right of being motivated by white-supremacist racism. Granted, they do it a lot, but you shouldn't descend to their level by responding in kind.

      • Anti-semitism is finding a home on the left of the political spectrum. It is something I've been observing for some time. I'm certainly not saying or implying that all or most leftists are anti-semitic, only that that is where many anti-semites have found a home, so maybe the word "pervades" that I used above goes a little too far. I think that anit-semites have found a home on the left may have something to do with the moral relativism that informs much leftist thinking these days. I will have no truck nor trade with anti-semites myself, they're irrational and border on the diabolic. If this Diab fellow is indeed guilty of this evil act, he's aptly named.

        • “Anti-semitism is finding a home on the left of the political spectrum. It is something I’ve been observing for some time”

          Well then you won’t have any problem defending your assertion then. Won’t take long if you’ve been observing it for some time. Please go ahead.

          Guanilon sez: “There is some anti-semitism on the left, and it is more widespread than on the right”, so I’m sure he has lots of credible evidence just standing by as well. Let’s go guys, make your case.

          When McCarthy yelled “Commie!” that didn’t mean that communists had actually fulfilled his paranoid fantasies. Now you’re yelling “Anti-semites!” Demonstrate how you’re not just new-century McCartyites.

      • "A lot of far lefties are Jewish. Rahm Emmanuel and Ruth Ginsburg come to mind."

        True enough, although according to some credible commentators, not for long. Here's David P. Goldman, a.k.a. Spengler, writing on his blog earlier this week, about, amongst other things, none other than Rahm Emmanuel:

        "There simply isn't any arguing with liberal Jews. The only solution is the Biblical one: in forty years, all of them will be dead, like the feckless generation of freedmen who left Egypt with Moses. Secular Jews have one child per family, Reform Jews 1.3, Conservative Jews 1.6, and modern Orthodox nearly 4. A new Jewish majority will form over the next forty years, and it will be religiously observant, close to Israeli thinking, and politically conservative."

        • So basically the far right's solution to the Liberal Jewish Problem is a kind of Darwinian Final Solution. I guess that's progress vis-à-vis 1943.

          • That's a bit of a non sequitur. You might want to give that one another whirl Jack.

            Without children, at least 2.1 per per family, a culture withers and dies out. It's basic demographics and mathematics, something even the rationalistic modern mind can wrap its head around. Choosing not to have children amounts to a cultural death wish. The systematic genocide of the Jews in Europe was perpetuated against a culture that was nothing if not rich and dynamic, including, as far as I know, demographically.

            I've often said that the Nazis, those most modern of the moderns, lobotomized Europe with their genocide against the Jews. I don't think Europe has ever recovered from it.

          • I agree Europe has never recovered, and I lament the fact that liberal-minded Jews are not an expanding demographic. I was just implying that David P. Goldman's quotation was positively macabre in its gloating over the demographic difficulty of liberal-minded Jews.

  6. I like Potter's piece in the Citizen. Calls it as it is.

    • Gaunilon, respectfully, i think the expression is 'call it like i see it' which is a more apt description of what Potter is doing. He is providing his interpretation of reality by imposing motive and impugning character.

  7. Interesting how Diab's academic credentials are an after-thought in Carleton profs letter and 9/11 'dark shadow' is near the top.

    If the best defence of Diab is “The judge said he was not an immediate threat to anyone,” than you are on a loser of an argument. I would love to attend meeting where Gose explains how the judge doesn't think Diab will blow anyone up today to the parents of Carleton students.

    Other than that, this is dog bites man story. Ivory tower profs prattling on about Bush and 9/11, even tho we live in Canada, and their pride in anti-semitism wrapped up in nonsense about the rule of law.

    • I wonder whether the Carleton profs would have had the same reaction if Diab had been accused of bombing a school bus, rather than a synagogue.

      • I wonder whether the Carleton profs would have had the same reaction if Diab had been accused of bombing a school bus, rather than a synagogue.

        …or a mobile synagogue in a refurbished school bus?

      • "I wonder whether the Carleton profs would have had the same reaction if Diab had been accused of bombing a school bus, rather than a synagogue".

        I am in that department, and I can tell you with certainty that the faculty's position would be the same. I can also surmise that if Diab is indeed found guilty after a trial, his firing would be supported by most if not all of the faculty. Key here is ensuring the university Administration is held to standards of transparency and accountability in their decisions, and those principles are clearly being bypassed in this case.

    • The letter is disgusting. I'd love to see them all fired. To somehow equate this with 9/11 is completely insane.

  8. Depends on whether they were Jewish children or not.

  9. I thought I read somewhere that this Diab is maybe not the right Diab, "Hassan Diab" being a not uncommon name, i.e. that there's a strong chance the guy is not guilty. If this is true (I have no idea), it is surely a major factor in talking about l'affaire Diab: it's one thing to hire and defend a guy who is likely falsely accused of a terrible crime, quite another if he is probably the same guy. Of course, the French courts will decide, etc. etc., but in the meantime I find it hard to praise or blame either side in this case without knowing, to some extent, whether Diab is wrongly accused or not.

    Meanwhile, can someone please tell me why anybody cares about the ceaseless quarrels of (some vociferous) Jews and (some vociferous) Arabs? Zionists and anti-Zionists alike all strike me as a parcel of complete whackjobs who eminently deserve each other.

    • in the meantime I find it hard to praise or blame either side in this case without knowing, to some extent, whether Diab is wrongly accused or not.

      Good point. It really does come down to that. In fairness to the Carleton professors, Diab is their friend and colleague, and they are probably convinced that he is innocent.

      • I wonder though, why Diab wasn't simply put on paid leave until the matter is resolved.

        • Agreed. That seems like the simplest solution. By the way, I read up on this story and the evidence that the French have against Mr. Diab seems quite strong. Rightly or wrongly, that's probably why the Carleton administration terminated his employment.

          • I doubt it. The evidence existed when they hired him so I think they simply caved into Dimant's demand.

          • As a part-time temporary hire I suspect his options for dispute
            are limited.

        • my understanding, is that he was a sessional, so not a real option

      • CR, out of interest, you agree this is a big issue here, but you also slap Potter on the back above for the story, during which he says; "Nor does it have anything to do with Diab being innocent until proven guilty"….

        not that you have to answer to me or anyone else, or have any responsibility for the story, but unlike Potter, I see this as the crux… to the degree that the guy is complying with highly restrictive conditions (none of which was do not work) and that he has been declared to be no risk is it not better for him to be productive until his guilt is assessed?

        unless you think is about to indoctrinate the students, as Potter hangs out there, discounting that any student would raise objections if this was the case (seems odd that Potter as a liberal arts/philosophy student himself if i recall wants to advocate these students are without the skills of critical thinking).

        And Jack you are right, he does claim that is a mistaken identity case.

        • sea_n_mountains:

          I think that Diab has been credibly accused of a horrific crime, and he is very likely to be extradited to face trial in France. Of course, he's innocent until proven guilty, but I think there is a good chance that he will be proven guilty in France, based on what we have seen of the case against him (granted, there is a lot about the case that we don't know).

          So ask yourself: if Diab had been credibly accused of being a serial killer, or rapist/torturer, or some equally horrific crime, would you still think that he should keep his teaching job until he's extradited? It's not about "indoctrinating students", it's about whether suspected mass murderers should be allowed to teach Canadian students, even if the suspected mass murder was politically motivated.

          If he turns out to be innocent, he should of course be rehired, and his name cleared.

        • sea_n_mountains:

          I think that Diab has been credibly accused of a horrific crime, and he is very likely to be extradited to face trial in France. Of course, he's innocent until proven guilty, but I think there is a good chance that he will be proven guilty in France, based on what we have seen of the case against him (granted, there is a lot about the case that we don't know).

          So ask yourself: if Diab had been credibly accused of being a serial killer, or rapist/torturer, or some equally horrific criminal, would you still think that he should keep his teaching job until he's extradited? It's not about "indoctrinating students", it's about whether suspected mass murderers should be allowed to teach Canadian students, even if the suspected mass murder was politically motivated.

          If he turns out to be innocent, he should of course be rehired, and his name cleared.

          • I am pretty torn on this one CR. I agree that if he is guilty he ought not be teaching, and while I am inclined to say Carleton should just not have hired the guy, we simply don't know that yet.

            as for the evidence, i watched the video. some of it seems strong, but than again i am not big on trusting the police here or there implicitly on evidence matters, here or there, especially on terrorism cases where they don't seem to have all that impressive a batting average. not to mention his right to a defense.

            the problem with your suggestion that if he turns out to be innocent he should then be rehired, with a cleared name, is we all know ti does not work nice and neatly like that. first, this thing will drag on for a long time, being out of the labour force in this kind of field for an indeterminate amount of time is very difficult to overcome. and, more critically, once tarred with not just an allegation but an extradition is even more difficult to overcome regardless of exoneration. if he is guilty there is no issue. if his only offense is a common name, that is absurdly unfair.

            setting aside the nature of the crime for a second, the same principles are at play here:

            http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.ht

            she, to the best of my knowledge was left on staff.

          • I'm mostly in favour of the paid leave option mentioned above (somewhere), although I'm not completely convinced that he should be prevented from teaching at all at this time. My misgivings come from these thoughts:
            – before conviction it is OK to take actions that:
            + ensure that the accused doesn't pose an ongoing, further hazard to the public, and
            + ensure that the accused doesn't avoid the trial or extradition hearing or whatever,
            – after conviction is it OK to take actions that:
            + impose punishments (eg jail time, other rights restrictions), and
            + ensure that the public is protected from further (similar) crimes by the convicted person.

            On that basis the current restrictions that he was given by the Canadian justice system should be adequate until he is tried (and presumably found guilty). Firing Diab seems to fall into the punishment category of actions, and the justice system has not made it that far yet. Firing Diab at this time could be justified if there was evidence that his teaching is being compromised.

          • the trouble with paid leave, is that the guy is a sessional – he is temp help and is suspect it is not actually a contractual option.

            that said, i like your break down and think you are quite correct in asserting the primary difference as the instillation of punishment. what potter, in alleging antisemitism, and others here manage to gloss over is that even the judge in the case seems to have explicitly supported Diab's teaching. the judge, i think it is safe to assume knows the case better than the rest of us.

          • the trouble with paid leave, is that the guy is a sessional – he is temp help and I suspect not actually eligible for paid leave contractually.

            that said, i like your break down and think you are quite correct in asserting the primary difference as the instillation of punishment. what potter, in alleging antisemitism, and others here manage to gloss over is that even the judge in the case seems to have explicitly supported Diab's teaching. the judge, i think it is safe to assume knows the case better than the rest of us.

          • and i should say good post Phil.

          • You are obviously more informed wrt the intricacies of sessional employees and so on – those details are not unimportant, but I trust knowledgable others to take those into consideration, while still honouring the idea that we have not yet reached the punishment phase of the process.

          • yeah that is the key point. his current dismissal crosses the threshold of being punitive.

      • Precisely – the faculty, as I understand it, cannot conceive of this guy doing such a horrible thing. If he did, their opinions will change. Until anyone knows for sure, they'll support the principle of innocent until proven guilty. We've seen what happens when societies don't abide by that precious rule.

    • Very well said.

  10. Still waiting for one of the left/lib regulars to agree with Potter and reason on this one, I thought it might be Jack, close, but no cigar, he wants more evidence that they've got the right diablo before he wades in.

    Please, left/lib readers and commenters, time to stand up and be counted on this one.

    • Stop being anti-semitic.

    • Still waiting for you to go back and finish what you started earlier in the thread by properly addressing TJ Cook's remarks.

    • I generally agree with Potter here, except he throws the 'ant-semite' argument around a bit frivolously.

  11. I don't know much about the merits of this case, but I know a really bad piece of journalism when I see it. I haven't read much of Potter's work in the past and I'll be reading less of it in the future.

  12. I agree with your piece, Andrew. Good one.

    Peter Gose is clearly someone who should be fired for his abhorrent views.

    I disagree with only one thing (partially). I do think it is appropriate to deny someone's freedom before trial, however, this is only conditional on the right for a speedy trial. No accused person should have to be held in custody for 4 years awaiting trial. The person should be freed long before that because his rights have been abrogated. This is a big problem in Canada, we need to speed up the court system.

  13. Anyone who is interested in the Hassan Diab case should watch this CBC report. It doesn't seem like a case of mistaken identity at all. This is not some frivolous charge; the French seem to have a strong case against him, including physical evidence and the testimony of members of the terrorist cell he was allegedly part of.

    http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/internation

    • That's an excellent report, well worth watching. So basically the case against U of O's Hassan Diab, as far as we know it, depends:

      1) Upon the Stasi files that identified a Hassan Diab as the planner and executor of the synagogue bomb;
      2) Upon the comparison between the handwriting of a Hassan Diab at the University of Lebanon in 1983 (later U of O's Hassan Diab) and the handwriting of the Paris bomber as discovered at his hotel and motorcycle shop;
      3) Upon the testimony of several ex-members of the PFLP.

      #2 seems to me sufficient grounds for extradition, not to mention a strong suspicion that U of O's Diab is the Diab who bombed the synagogue.

      On the other hand, I had to watch a 17-minute video to discover all this, i.e. that the case is so strong. Neither Potter's post, nor the Ottawa Citizen story, nor the blog post about it, nor the professors' statement mentions any of this stuff. Irresponsible journalism all round: without the facts, it's all mere rhetoric (on both sides), which is probably why this comment thread is so windy.

      • #2…

        "One expert said the writing was definitely Mr. Diab's, though he had tried to change it. The other expert said Mr. Diab could have been the writer."

        see scf's, link… below.

        • Yup. I think the defense gets to present a case too.

          At least that's how it works on television.

          We should ask Mr. Dimant.

          • Ah, right, good point. So it's not open-and-shut at all: the handwriting is everything, as far as we know.

            Why the hell is the extradition hearing scheduled for JANUARY!?!

          • Ah, right, good point. Good lesson for me in reading both links.

            So it's not open-and-shut at all: the handwriting is everything, as far as we know.

            Why the hell is the extradition hearing scheduled for JANUARY!?!

          • Ah, right, good point. Good lesson for me in reading both links.

            So it's not open-and-shut at all: the handwriting is everything, as far as we know.

            Why the hell is the extradition hearing scheduled for JANUARY!?! And meanwhile, why the media scare campaign on the basis of a case that is not, as far as we know, open-and-shut?

            Being accused by the French police of a foul crime should not be grounds for losing your job, being under house arrest for six months, being vilified by the media. Why is our criminal justice system so ridiculously SLOW?!

          • on the day when Donald Marshall – the victim of one of our most notorious cases of wrongful conviction dies – one would think we would have learned a bit more, huh Sisyphus?

          • Unfortunately, most of us have a memory that reaches back all of six minutes.

  14. Here is another good link, the evidence is not circumstantial, they do have not just one, but four primary pieces of evidence.

    http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.ht

    Still not enough to make the case open and shut, but it looks to me like he should be tried.

  15. The moon is full this evening, I had an inkling by the pronounced winginess on this comment thread, and have confirmed it by going out on my deck to observe the orb shine brightly in its fullness as it rises up in the south east sky.

    • For you to decry the “winginess” of the commenters here is truly a joke for the ages.

      Instead of calling everybody crazy, how about you address what I wrote above? Take respobsibility for your words – either defend them or back away from them.

  16. Don't paint all us "lefties" all with the same brush. I'm generally no defender of Israel, and I think Potter's "horrible…slur is being repeated by the faculty " goes too far. But anyone accused of murder and terrorism – and by accused I mean facing charges in a country like France, not Syria – should not be teaching at a university. If he is found innocent then hire him by all means hire him.

  17. You'll notice that one of the "faculty" who's name was on the list supporting Diab was a Ms. Tfaily.

    Google it…..She's Diab's wife.

    Yep…..no conflict there.