Fact: Shelby’s actions have all been taken within the system of the university’s governance. He has followed policies and procedures.

Fact: G&S have acted outside of the system as evidenced by their e-mails indicating there improper and unwarranted investigation of Dr. Dvorak. The AAUP which they attempt to use as giving them the justification for their actions is nothing more than a small faculty union group. The AAUP is neither an official representative of the university nor the state of Mississippi. Their association with the AAUP did not give them the authority to act as they did which is to claim in e-mails to the Univ. of Kentucky that they were official representatives of USM with the authority to seek personnel and confidential information from Dr. Dvorak’s records at the Univ. of Kentucky. They have no more right to that information than any other non administrative faculty member.

To this end they lied to Dr. Thames that they did not seek information on Dr. Dvorak until they received an “anonymous” package last December. The evidence presented by Dr. Thames contained in their e-mails proved this to be false. Note that they did not refute this in their statements given yesterday.

Fact: G&S deliberately misled other faculty members and students through their actions in an attempt to foster such discontent and low moral with the hopes that they could hide behind their tenure status and claims of “freedom of speech” with the aim to force Dr. Thames out of office.

These misleading acts included the failure to disclose to faculty and students that the Univ. of Kentucky had responded to them and that Dr. Dvorak’s resume was in their opinion correct and factual.  They deliberately sought out the editor of the student paper in attempt to spread their knowing incorrect and inflammatory claims with their goal of trying to create an atmosphere of hate and discontent on campus in order to force Dr. Thames out.

And when told they were to be terminated, they did not wait to work through the process and appeal the action through the system but instead participated in rallies claiming they did nothing wrong and challenged Dr. Thames to come forward with the charges against them. They did this knowingly that Dr. Thames was, by the University’s and IHL polices, prohibited form disclosing that information. And when Dr. Thames requested they give him permission to disclose the charges, G&S refused, yet continued to encourage students and faculty to protest without waiting on the established system for their appeal. They wanted students and fellow faculty members to view Dr. Thames as some sort of autocratic fascist acting outside of standard policies and procedures yet all the actions of G&S show them to be the ones who were acting outside the system and due process.

Tomorrow, when the College Board announces the G&S will be “allowed” to retire, I hope the misguided supporters of this sight and G&S will see the light. If, in fact it is announced that they are retiring take note that these are two tenured faculty members with all the protections that come from tenure, and if G&S truly believe this to have been a “free speech” issues which comes with it the protection of the U.S. Constitution, why then did they agree to retire. Lack of legal defense funds? No, they could easily go to their AAUP and the ACLU to resolve funding for legal support for a “freedom of speech” issue. If they have agreed to retire it will be because they have truly done wrong. I will then hope that all of you who insist in staying angry will at least direct that anger at G&S for misleading you. For those who can get beyond the anger, USM, the faculty, and Dr. Thames will need your help in rebuilding the moral and moving the University in a positive direction. I truly think even G&S would want that.