First, on Monday May 26, 8:00 - 11:00 am, there is a planned protest event at UWI front Gate, with a dress code, funeral colours, with mouths taped with masking tape with "Freedom of Speech" on the tape.
Were I in Jamaica, I would be there, no ifs ands or buts.
I strongly recommend similar protests at the gates of other UWI campuses and extramural centres across the region.
I also suggest writing to UWI's leadership and the news media across the region by old fashioned mail as well as email. (NB: I am not comfortable to learn that apparently my signing the petition triggered an email to the personal email boxes of the VC etc, I did not know that. I plead with the petition organisers to modify if possible. I think the petition should be printed off at a certain time and communicated on paper to the UWI, to the governments of the region and to Caricom, perhaps introduced in parliaments under the petition rules.)
Also, the email rebuts the counter-points that have been spread in an attempt to make the firing of prof Bain for speaking unwelcome truth to power seem legitimate.
Here are those counter-points, slightly adjusted for readability and with a few clarifying notes on arrow-points in square brackets:
CONTRADICTION: yet still they claim Professor should be dismissed for acting contrary to an imaginary mandate.
CONTRADICTION: yet still they claim he should be dismissed because he argued for the retention of the law.
Bain’s affidavit does not take or register a stance against gay communities or gay men. It earnestly steers clear from such opinions and tries to stick to the figures. Towards the end of the paper when he seems to make recommendations, none of them include encouraging gay men to give their lives to Christ or to turn away from their evil ways. His affidavit accepts that men will have sex with men and so his recommendations are far more pragmatic – encouraging the use of condoms, lubricant, constant testing, delaying the age that one begins to engage in intercourse, etc."
CONTRADICTION: yet still certain interest groups have been fighting for 'human rights' including the right to freedom of speech, yet still they are unwilling to extend that right to Professor Bain.
CONTRADICTION: yet still certain interest groups want the science contained in the Affidavit to 'disappear.'
No one has actually countered the Affidavit with science, only politics.
CONTRADICTION: some people ignore this fact, yet the objecting groups that have acknowledged this still say he did something that warrants dismissal without providing some other justification.
CONTRADICTION: yet still some people claim that he argued points for the church
CONTRADICTION: yet the 35 unverified lobby groups act as if they are the only persons that C.H.A.R.T. is supposed to help.
CONTRADICTION: yet still they claim that the information, which did not oppose any C.H.A.R.T. objective or mandate and made no legal recommendations, was a 'conflict of interest'.
CONTRADICTION: yet still they claim that Professor Bain discriminated or included discriminatory words in his Affidavit.
CONTRADICTION: Carolyn Gomes erroneously claimed that Prof Bain claimed that retaining the laws has in actuality lowered infection rates.
Food for thought indeed, and it is clear that we need to seriously think again about where our premier university is headed, and what the homosexualist lobby and their financial backers are implying by what they have done. Dr Bain is the canary in the mine, gasping for breath in a poisonous atmosphere for freedom. What are we going to do? END