Carl Salonen Libelous Workplace Allegations of Child Pornography and Sexual Harassment at Long Beach City College

Below is an e-mail communication sent to my college by libelous hate-blogger Carl Salonen. This is just one of a number of communications that were sent to the offices of Eloy Oakley, President of Long Beach City College, Doug Otto, President of the Long Beach City College Board of Trustees, Dr. Jack Scott, Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, and Kamala Harris, Attorney General of California.

I previewed my thoughts on this the other day. See: "The Claims of Grievance-Bearing Identity Groups Will Always Prevail Over Fairness." As noted, Carl Salonen's entire hate program is predicated on malice and lies. As I will show later, he made allegations not to correct any perceived injustices, but to destroy a political enemy. His attacks went from what most of us online know as "flame wars" to something else entirely: A specific campaign to harm me personally, by slandering my reputation and by possibly bringing about the termination of my employment. And it was all based on lies. As I noted many times, progressives will sink to the lowest depths of utter depravity to silence and destroy those with whom they disagree and those they hate. Law Professor William Jacobson once wrote on the earlier campaigns of harassment against me:

We don’t all just have to get along. But there are certain lines which should not be crossed, and trying to disrupt another blogger’s employment crosses that line. Can we at least agree on that?

Progressive do not agree on that, because they live by the rule of the mob.

Now, first notice the subject line of Carl Salonen's e-mail: "Invasion of Privacy, Slander, Libel, and Who Knows What Else."

None of this is true:

* I have not invaded the privacy of Carl Salonen.

* I have not slandered or libeled Carl Salonen.

* And there is no "who knows what else."

Now, to continue, let's go to specifics.

First, President Oakley does not hold a Ph.D. Thus Carl gives him a backhanded insult by not doing his research before complaining, since President Oakley would no doubt like to have a Ph.D. and there's a norm in the academy that a college president have that kind of distinction. Thus the slight. Idiotic hubris gets Carl Salonen off on the wrong foot.

Second, as noted previously, I am not posting pictures or videos of underage women. There's only been one specific claim that I've blogged underage women, which was first posted (and made into an urban legend) at the disgraced academic hate blog Lawyers, Guns and Money. Specifically, with permission, I posted a picture of GSGF's blog buddy Lauren, who at the time of the photo was 21-years-old. See GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD, "Soft Power." I have never posted pictures of "underage women" at this blog. Carl Salonen only makes allegations. He provides no evidence to support them.

Third, Carl Salonen claims that I "make" students go to my blog to view "said images" of allegedly "underage women." This is one more of those false legends that's been spread around at the laughingstock hate blog Lawyers, Guns and Money. The allegation holds that I assign students to read my blog. I've never assigned students my blog (all one has to do is review course syllabi, which are the legal records for college classes). I have used my blog in the classroom, although I no longer do so, primarily because of the attack campaign launched by Lawyers, Guns and Money three or four years ago. Besides, there's a separate question of academic freedom, although I don't raise that issue because I obviously wouldn't advocate many of my blog postings for classroom consumption. At issue really is the propriety of outside complaints in and of themselves. My college at first did not take seriously Carl Salonen's complaints. Indeed, they considered them harassment from a party with no legitimate business with the college. It was after I inquired about a second set of complaints (from Lawyers, Guns and Money) that I was informed of Carl Salonen's slanders. The utter depravity and outrageousness of the allegations forced me to obtain legal counsel. I'm thankful for the help I received, although it's a disgrace that such a step was even necessary, given my rights as a professor and citizen. But recall, "The Claims of Grievance-Bearing Identity Groups Will Always Prevail Over Fairness."

Four, Carl Salonen slurs my name with sleazy insinuations, such as "I'm sure you've heard the name in other contexts that have brought less than praise to LBCC." I have a fine reputation at LBCC. I have fine relations with my colleagues and I've built longstanding mentor relationships with a large number of current and former students. I've even been featured in the Long Beach Press-Telegram, with a photograph, when I gave a talk on campus safety issues following the Virginia Tech shootings. And the college's recent panel on the "Facebook Revolution" in Egypt was extremely well received. Everything's just fine. And of course, there's never been any student legal complaints against me. Carl Salonen's mind is warped and his deeds are evil.

Fifth, Carl claims his "evidence" shows that I wrote blog posts about him while at work. While this seems to be a specific allegation, according to a review of all the blog posts in question (Carl Salonen submitted pdf copies of these) not a single post was written during either my contract teaching hours or while I was physically on campus. I often blog in the mornings from home before I leave for my classes, and Carl Salonen must have assumed that I'm in the office at 8:00am pounding away blog posts when more than likely I'm waiting to take my kid to school while reviewing the news online. Further, my college does not in fact prohibit faculty and staff from using college equipment to publish communications to social networking and communications websites. There are limits, of course, but no outright prohibition. If an issue were ever to be raised over such postings, a complaint would have to come from a student filing a formal claim or grievance. Thus, Carl Salonen falsely assumed that he could threaten my employment by claiming that I attacked him with college resources.

Sixth, and this is a doozy, Carl Salonen writes:

But that's not what concerns me. What concerns me is Dr. Douglas has apparently decided to invade the privacy of an innocent man based on the say-so of an admitted emotionally and mentally deficient woman.

My proof is attached in the various PDFs I have accumulated.

To-wit, he accuses me of being someone that I am not: TinTin, an anonymous blogger at a website called "Sadly, No!" which has on occasion mocked Dr. Douglas for factual error, erroneous conclusions and misinformation.

That's amusing to me, of course. While I am someone who has spent a great deal of time at "Sadly, No!" I am neither on the staff of "Sadly, No!" nor am I in any way shape or form associated with the people who run the site.

Where to begin? Notice the lie, for one thing: If my blogging included allegedly underage girls and allegedly making my students read those postings didn't concern Carl Salonen, he wouldn't have filed a complaint in the first place. He long ago slandered me on Twitter as a "child pornographer" and he obviously wanted to get those allegations spread all the way across California's educational system. That's how vicious smears work. Moreover, I never invaded the privacy of an "innocent" man. Information about Carl Salonen is posted all over the web. He applied for a trademark for an apparel line called "Young & Hung" and the listings are available to anyone on Google. And of course his Facebook and Twitter pages are there for all to see as well (he's taken down his Facebook page, however). I've never contacted Carl Salonen's place of employment. Indeed, I wouldn't even know his employer's contact information had Carl Salonen not filed his malicious complaints against me. In sum, everything I've posted or screencapped was available online for anyone to access. There is no expectation of privacy in those circumstances. Carl Salonen's like a bleating pig, whining about harms that exist only in his hate-filled imagination. And note too the lies about the "say-so of an admitted emotionally and mentally deficient woman." That would be Amy Alkon, who wrote about Carl Salonen here: "The Attack On My Book." Whether Amy Alkon is "emotionally and mentally deficient" is irrelevant. Not only does she show that Carl Salonen did indeed attack her book with fraudulent book reviews intended to deflate sales, and hence harm her personal economic livelhood, Carl Salonen bragged about doing so, and posted the same false book reviews to the comment threads at Sadly No! I still believe that Carl Salonen is more involved with the Sadly No! blog than he is willing to acknowledge. But without evidence, all we can do is highlight that which is documented. What's troubling is not just how dishonest are these allegations and excuses in the complaints at my college, but that Carl Salonen thought that it would be fun to try to destroy a woman who he himself claims is "emotionally and mentally deficient." He would bring harm to someone who he considers physically and psychologically inferior. That puts him right up there with Josef Rudolf Mengele, and the only difference in my opinion is that Carl Salonen hasn't had the chance to kill those whom he has targeted. I have no doubt that he's capable of that scale of evil. He's a sociopath. Given real power I shudder to think of the holocaust of hate he would attempt to bring about.

In any case, read the text below for further review of the allegations. Carl is right that I pulled my entries that claimed he is in fact "Tintin." I have insufficient evidence for those claims, and if Carl Salonen thought that was not enough to pull the posts, he could have filed a lawsuit against me for defamation. But again, that's not what Carl Salonen was out to achieve. I've learned a lot about Carl Salonen over the last few months, and he's not one to back off from a challenge nor is he one let others have the last word. What he can't do is win anything on the merits. He can't have an honest debate because he's fundamentally dishonest.

This post is now quite long although I also promised to debunk the other e-mail complaints that were submitted. And you don't want to miss this. Carl Salonen had the extreme temerity to threaten Long Beach City College President Eloy Oakley. I'll have that later.

*****

-----Original Message-----
From: carlsalonen
To: eoakley
Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 3:20 pm
Subject: Invasion of Privacy, Slander, Libel, and Who Knows What Else.

Dear Dr. Oakley,

I trust this letter finds you well. I'm fairly sure it will not leave you that way, sadly.

You have on staff an associate professor Donald Douglas. This is his university website: http://webenhanced.lbcc.edu/polscdd/polsc1dkd/

This is his personal blog: http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/

It seems Dr. Douglas has been rather busy lately, posting photographs and videos of possibly underage women in various states of undress (and of course, making his students go to his blog, thus viewing said images).

I'm sure you've heard the name in other contexts that have brought less than praise to LBCC.

You'll note with interest, I'm sure, the time stamps on his posts at his personal blog. Many if not most appear to occur during academic hours.

But that's not what concerns me. What concerns me is Dr. Douglas has apparently decided to invade the privacy of an innocent man based on the say-so of an admitted emotionally and mentally deficient woman.

My proof is attached in the various PDFs I have accumulated.

To-wit, he accuses me of being someone that I am not: TinTin, an anonymous blogger at a website called "Sadly, No!" which has on occasion mocked Dr. Douglas for factual error, erroneous conclusions and misinformation.

That's amusing to me, of course. While I am someone who has spent a great deal of time at "Sadly, No!" I am neither on the staff of "Sadly, No!" nor am I in any way shape or form associated with the people who run the site.

So Dr. Douglas is about to embark (based on his post of today, entitled "Outing TinTin") on a witch hunt. That's the implication I draw from his comments there and in other places.

Indeed, in that post, he makes reference to having temporarily taken down other, noxious posts that involved my identity, including a screencap of my Facebook page, my photograph and other personally identifying information.

Clearly, he has some hestitation now about his actions, but I'm afraid that is not enough. Dr. Douglas has decided to share his information with his compatriots and fellow right-wing bloggers (see the PDF from Stacy McCain's site entitled "Carl Salonen & The Left Wing Trolls...")

Dr. Oakley, it is within your power to prevent at least some of this, and as Dr. Douglas is a faculty member at your university and therefore represents you to the community, I must ask you to step in and put whatever influence you can to stopping this.

It's bad enough he's chosen to invade my privacy and my quietude but you'll note he's decided to also continue in his quest to pursue yet another individual and expose him/her.

As a matter of course, I am forwarding a hard copy of this letter and all attachments to the attorney general for the state of California, Kamala D. Harris, as well as to the Board of Trustees in care of Douglas Otto. Perhaps it will reach him in time for next week's meeting.

Thank you very much for your attention and have a nice day

Signed,

Carl Salonen