What happens when you hire females, minorities and others, “discriminated against”?

Disaster happens. You don’t actually get females and discriminated, you get crooks who happen to be females. Why? That’s how the social mechanisms work.

When such job announcement is made, the crooks understand it for what it really means: you can be incapable and incompetent, you are only needed for political purposes. Well, what are these political purposes? Clearly: government and corporations need OBEDIENT servants.An incapable female will throughout all her career remember that she must be grateful for the appointment, since she is an idiot in a good position. Unless she is an extreme unreasonable feminist, she will obey all orders, no matter what they can be. She will lick the hands that gave her the undeserved fortune.

This female, no doubt, will have to beat a competition of many other crooks like her. And the winner will be the crookiest of them all. Then, on the job already, the dumb female is safe: no one will dare to even hint at her unsuitability, because that will be, unquestionably, regarded as a hint to her being hired as female, not as a competent employee, with all the horrific consequences for the career of the sexist-for-life complainer.

We see the results; in my view it’s a disaster, in the view of the government and corporations it’s a success. Explaining: they need 1. Employment rate sufficient to avoid riots, 2. They don’t need (actually, they fear) any competent employees, because competence results in self-respect and independence. The secret, you see, is that employers make an abominable product, a few items on the production line at no cost, the same items for the entire world with a short lifetime to a garbage can. Can you imagine what would happen to that product if a competition from an independent, competent people is allowed? In science, it’s all the same policy, but the fear of an outstanding individual is far greater.

Coming back to the females. Are they all willing to be promoted for having a vagina? Apparently not, because I know about ONE case when SHE REFUSED. And made it public! Karen Selick, Ontario lawyer, said (1991): “I was being asked to consider becoming a judge because I happen to be the owner of a vagina instead of a penis.” (http://www.karenselick.com/CL9106.html) She explained that hiring of judges by their sex, race, etc. is incompatible with the goals of justice. But the bloody criminals who run the administration in Canada never wanted any justice; Karen Sellick may be did not understand this. How many of the 1200 (sic!) females who were proposed in 1991 by the Attorney-General to become judges are now toeing the line of this criminal government?

What I know is that a lawyer told me that if any lawyer will take my court case, his children will not be able to find a job in Canada.

Toronto Star on research fraud, old lies (July 12, 2016)

Once in a few years, some newspaper publishes a piece on the subject. Each time – using the same bogus explanations. This time, by Michael Robinson, “Canadian researchers who commit scientific fraud are protected by privacy laws”. The title should be: “Canadian researchers who commit scientific fraud are protected by Susan Zimmerman referring to privacy laws” because no matter what the governmental agency can or cannot do, NOBODY who committed a fraud is protected if a reporter can publish available authentic documents, period. Now, some other points in this Robinson article.

1) The article “discovers”, so to speak, that it is very wrong that universities are allowed to investigate themselves. This is now the year 2016, but I sent to the Chair of the Expert Panel on Research Integrity, Paul Davenport, on November 11, 2010, 6 years ago, my letter (published on this site below: “Canadian universities are made free from any accountability. Corruption and fraud ARE continuing”), saying:

“They [universities] are accountable only to themselves; universities might or might not investigate their own corruption, fraud, etc. In the past, they never found themselves guilty: every crime was covered up.”

Davenport even answered me, but with this crap:

“Our panel, after review of the extensive literature on research integrity and after much deliberation, came to the conclusion that a positive approach to research integrity, based on education and open discussion, is essential. The CCRI was conceived in that spirit, and our panel hopes that something like the CCRI will be introduced as a result of our report. At the same time, our Report suggests that the authority for setting rules for research integrity, and enforcing those rules, should remain with the universities, hospitals, and Tri-Council.”

Was I the only one who knew that giving universities the right to investigate themselves AND MAKING SUCH UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION THE ONLY INVESTIGATION ALLOWED IN ACADEMIA, was a recipe to allow unrestricted corruption, bribery, etc. No, everybody knew this! The corrupt officials celebrated, others – were scared to loose their sinecure and remained silent.

2) Robinson repeats the decades-old misleading argument that privacy laws prevent blah-blah… disclosure of the names of the fraud perpetrators. Well, first, the names and the documents can be obtained from the sources other than the official ones. That’s what INDEPENDENT PRESS IN FREE COUNTRIES has been doing for decades. Remember the publication of secret Pentagon papers?

But, there is another problem with this misleading argument of privacy. The govt. agency (now – Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research), makes it look that the issue of secrecy can be related only to THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY FOUND GUILTY. But those found guilty, if properly punished, are not of the greatest interest to the public.

What the public must know are all cases, allegations and the documentary evidence, but not necessarily the names of the accused, because the real problem is that the universities and the Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research are CORRUPT and they EXONERATE PERPETRATORS OF FRAUD FOR THEIR OWN CORRUPT REASONS (bribes, politics and the ever-present conflict of interest).

Indeed, in that Report of the CCRI to which Davenport had referred, there is a clear admission that the university administration has a CONFLICT OF INTEREST when investigating the fraud in the university. No any other admission was needed to prohibit university self-regulation and self-policing, if Canada wanted that research integrity.

3) The next decades-old misleading argument is that university administration, when covering up fraud, is acting to protect the university reputation, so that administrators are not really bad people. Not true. A crook who is lying to exonerate the perpetrators of fraud is, in fact, acting to save his own skin and the skin of his friends because the whole line of lying administrators is involved. Nobody would believe otherwise, but I simply have documents to prove this.

4) Another decades-old lie saying that if the rules and the procedures are improved, the integrity in research will also improve. You have to be a naive outsider to believe this. In the last several decades universities underwent a “change”. Scientists are no longer in control; they became puppets of the administrators who have nothing to do with science and were chosen for political reasons, often they are lawyers. 3/4 or more of the scientists today came from the “maruana” generation with political demands and without real interest in science, free from cultural traditions and ethical principles. That’s where the rules and procedures came in. In the absence of general culture, they now spit on the rules and procedures.

An example here is Susan Zimmerman and her Secretariat who refused to investigate my complaint against University of Toronto, lying that this complaint was already investigated by NSERC twice (sic!), see http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/NSERCfraud.html
Susan Zimmerman is the top watchdog of science integrity in Canada, a lawyer, has nothing to do with science, and a criminal. It’s Susan Zimmerman who should be investigated for fraud first.

Cleaning up canadian science must start with making public the crimes of the administration and establishing integrity courts composed of scientists who would not sell their scientific reputation for bribes or under the pressure from political “groups” and “activists”. All that requires establishing free press, freedom of speech and giving genuine power to the whistleblowers, i. e. opening the iron curtain surrounding all mass media.

CBC TV continues wondering about fraud in science

Today, I watched the CBC program by Kelly Crowe (it was an improved version of the story of April 19) – http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/bmj-fiona-godlee-science-1.3541769

The first person fighting against “the dark forces at work in science and medicine” presented by Kelly Crowe was Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor of British Medical Journal. Obviously to me, Kelly Crowe has no knowledge of the situation. I had exchange of letters with Fiona Godlee where she tried to block my reference to the University of Toronto fraud documents. Finally, as far as I remember (I have these letters), she only agreed to allow my email address in my posting to BMJ, not the URL of my website where the documents are. Fiona Godlee is a part of the establishment that has no desire to expose fraud in science.

The second fighter for truth in Kelly Crowe presentation was Dr. Ivan Oransky, in whose blog “Retraction Watch” I published numerous comments while he allowed the URL of my site “University Toronto fraud”. Yet, at one point he banned my comment where I showed that human females have no abilities to draw; as a matter of fact, there were only one female painter among 2000 of men in the Dutch school. At this point in time, the truth in science and anywhere else is a function of leftist, openly communistic politics that now is destroying science and the best scientists. A year ago, Oransky showed astonishing political bias in the case of Sir Tim Hunt, the Nobel laureate, who was removed from the University College of London for “sexism”. The “sexism” was alleged to be present in his joke at a conference.

The truth in science certainly has no chance to emerge when perpetrators of fraud are jewish, females or communists, often this political travesty is not even kept secret, and the situation sometimes turns comical. Look at the reaction to my comment from Dr. S. Rivlin at http://ethicsandscience.scientopia.org/2006/04/20/hierarchies-of-misconduct/ He posted two answers to me, one – before he learned that the perpetrators of fraud were jews and the second – after that.

Another example of political accusations purported to negate all documentary proof of Larsen’s and the UofT fraud, is at http://www.reddit.com/r/UofT/comments/2rpqrv/a_chilling_account_of_how_an_uoft_phd_student_had/

I spoke of this earlier here (“The criminals are very angry with my web site”). This was again practically a confession saying: don’t look at the fraud, look at Michael Pyshnov – he is anti-semite.

A long time shall pass, and very probably, even a great war, before the public, now – at its lowest point in centuries, will be able to tell the criminal from the victim and the truth from falsification.

The fellow Yid problem

Just two weeks after I noted (my previous post) that a string of jewish officials in the UofT and in the canadian government supported the fraud of the jewish crook in the university and, one after another, blatantly obstructed justice to save this criminal from jail, there appeared an article in the Australian “The Age” disclosing jewish motivations in preventing prosecution of jewish criminals.

Australian criminal lawyer, Lewenberg, told a jew who was a sex abuse victim that he should not help police to prosecute a sex abuser who was “a fellow Jew”. This was recorded. Lewenberg said:

“I am not exactly delighted that another Yid would assist police against an accused, no matter whatever he is accused of…”
And he explained:
“Because there is a tradition, if not a religious requirement, that you do not assist against Abraham.”

Lewenberg was found guilty of professional misconduct by the Australian Adminstrative Tribunal, his practicing certificate was suspended for 15 months, and he was sent to study legal ethics. From the article: “Judge Jenkins said that Mr Lewenberg’s behaviour in suggesting the Jewish community should close ranks in the face of criminal prosecution was “truly shocking”.

The management of Canada should think about this.

See the article:
Lawyer Alex Lewenberg banned after telling sex abuse victim not to accuse a ‘fellow Yid’ by Tom Cowrie — The Age April 13, 2016.

CBC Doc Zone, psychopathic manipulators

A couple of days ago I watched, for about half an hour, the DOC Zone program about psychopaths in high positions. There were no DOCs, only a psychopathic, and psychopathically delivered, indoctrination. Psychopaths were all males, the examples of their victims were females. Nothing documented.

The main relevant point, that Canada is ruled by criminals, probably – psychopaths, animals who break the law and are protected by the rules, regulations and procedure and never go to jail for their crimes, was missing. That the top administrative positions are occupied by those who routinely, quite consciously and sadistically commit administrative crimes destroying the lives of the citizens, that was missing. The fact that some of these crimes are perfectly documented, and that these documents are not shown to the public because the press and the television protect the psychopathic criminals and their unlimited power, was, understandably, not mentioned.

So, the presentation was just another vagina monologue based on the largest ever brewed and the most psychopathic of all conspiracy theory saying that men are conspiring against women and preventing them from becoming great scientists, architects, painters and saviours of humanity.

Such blatant political fraud is not surprising: there is no mass media that would challenge the monopoly of talented jews and their attack dogs, the “lesbians”, on shaping public opinion. The producers are also protected by the laws that can put in jail any private political opponent; such court cases are rare but the punishment is publicised and is quite persuasive.

Conversely, the charges against a real canadian psychopathic criminal cannot be even laid when the criminal belongs to the politically protected elite. Neither the mass media will talk about any facts clashing with the political directives. The CBC four times refused even to look at the documents presented by me. The secret was: they learned (not from me) that the psychopathic criminal, actually a prostitute of science who removed me from the university and stole my research, was a jewish woman with the politically protected sexual orientation.

Of a dozen people who protected her in the university and in the Government (the head of the department, the dean, the university president, presidents of two governmental ministries, etc.), some ten were jews. Lastly, the chief governmental investigator who committed a fraud covering up the crimes of this prostitute of science, was a jewish female pervert in her office of seven other females. It finally came to the ridiculous: the decision makers must now have a politically certified body. Nobody else can be trusted. And what a job they are doing!

PLOS journal scam

Why science is going down the drain? It’s the bizarre science politics, it’s the crooked journals. A rather extreme example of it is below.

PLOS-One has published a paper by D.R. Grimes (Oxford) debunking all “conspiracy theories” at once, all of them. He says that a conspiracy theory with the alleged large number of conspirators cannot be true because if it were true, some of the conspirators would come forward, “leak” the information and “expose” the conspiracy. He, moreover, gives statistical calculations showing how many years a real conspiracy can survive without a “scandal”. Therefore, he says, conspiracy theories do not describe real conspiracies, but are just crap.

I wrote my comment on the Grimes paper saying that the paper is wrong. I said, there is no such sure mechanism that will make “a leak” into a scandal, unless mass media decides to make that scandal. I said that corruption in mass media prevents scandals and I gave my experience with Nature magazine (posted at http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/nature.html).

My comment lived only a few hours, and was removed. I received no email explaining the reasons. Moreover, my communications with the journal were electronically cut off, I cannot write to them either.

The journal published another comment that repeated my argument. This comment is titled:
“Between the exposure and the scandal stands the media declaring what we are expected to believe.”
My words in the removed comment were:
“Between the “exposure” and the “scandal” stands the media declaring what should be believed and what should not.”

Here is my comment, a screen shot: https://pyshnov.wordpress.com/plosmycomment/
Here is the URL of the new comment: http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?root=88147

My comment was at http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?root=88138
Before it was removed, it was seen, according to my stat. counter, by 10 people.

The text of the two comments is very different: my comment goes to the real tragedy that hit the world of science, while the new comment avoids this. PlOS would not allow publishing the true causes and concrete examples of corruption in science. PLOS journal is a part of this corruption, probably the worst part of it.

Meanwhile, still another comment has revealed that the mathematical part of the Grimes paper is wrong (http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?root=88142). Interestingly, the Grimes paper is receiving great attention and praise around the world.Will PLOS retract the paper? I don’t think so.

This scam reminds me of the old and forgotten stories from Balkan countries about the tricks of the gypsies or jewish prostitutes. Only this now is a multi-million dollars operation.

Interestingly, the PLOS journal was founded by some members of the London based charity – COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), of which I wrote several years ago (http://www.universitytorontofraud.com/committee.htm). The COPE style was also shockingly deceitful and unprofessional, but for some reason this charitable organisation gained control over 5000 of scientific journals, issuing their Code on publication ethics and collecting the fees from these journals for COPE services. This was when they had no scientists on their board.

How serious is all this? I don’t think it is serious at all. True, money changed hands, the world received a new “proof” that conspiracy theories are wrong which can be exploited by those who wish to exploit it. Science made a small step farther down the drain. And the gypsies are ready for their new adventures.

The criminals are very angry with my web site.

On January 8, 2015, I noticed a number of visitors coming to my site from reddit.com/UofT. In three days there were over 400 visitors. Someone made an entry “A chilling account of how an UofT PhD student had his work stolen by his supervisor” and gave a link to my site. Three comments followed from “eeeeeeekamouse” that put the matter in this way: the guy (that is me) is “racist” and “sexist” and he should not be believed by anybody. I also posted my comment. The comments can be seen at
However, a few days later the name of the poster – “eeeeeeekamouse” was removed and replaced by “[deleted]”. Here is how it looked before:

Initially, I thought that these comments were written by the U of T administration, but the removal of the name makes me think that the author can be Larsen herself. Every time she is trying to deny her fraud, she covers herself with more shit and then trying to hide it.

The “eeeeeeekamouse” is denying the fraud and lying about everything. He (or she) does not refer to any documents, but giving long quotations from my web site reflecting my politically incorrect views, especially ones related to jews. How does it help to deny the fraud?

Amazingly, “eeeeeeekamouse” says that “letters of reference for NSERC awards” that were given to me, mean nothing because “everyone knows that all reference letters are overhyped BS.” (Most of the letters were written by Larsen.) Aha, the university made a “mistake” giving the awards to someone who now is suing them for fraud. The angry criminals are now trying to correct their “mistake”. What a scum!

All I said about the conspiracy in the university is absolutely true, for example, these very clear words:

“Jews, communists, “lesbians”, feminists and marihuana addicts, all, unfortunately for me, had a representation in the figure of Professor Larsen, and saw their special interest in saving her. They acted as a mob. The cunning professor-criminal used political corruption in this society to stay out of jail.”

This is the actual corrupt political situation now, where so-called “groups” gang up to defend “one of their own” when he or she commits crime. In addition to the groups mentioned above, the groups who will protect “one of their own” include doctors, police, university professors, etc. The victims of this activity are intimidated and are totally helpless. There are no whistleblowers and no laws defending individual citizens.

The current wave of the victims will be the school children of Ontario perverted by “lesbians”. Steve Paikin (TVOntario) recently spoke of some mysterious “fear” spreading in the Ontario school boards, but missed to say what actually is the issue. (Was he afraid to appear “sexist”?) One single word, however, was uttered by his guest, the issue appears to be “gender”. Yet, he, surprisingly, revealed that the “feared” group has the support of the “province” (read – the “lesbian” Premier of Ontario?). Too late, Steve! You cannot beat the “gender” gang, unless you, as a journalist should, tell the whole truth.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.