Quando i giacobini introdussero il reato di corruzione, punito ovviamente con la ghigliottina, erano felici come pasque.
Bastava loro di accusare qualcuno di ‘corruzione‘ e se lo toglievano di intorno in modo definitivo.
Questa buona idea era stata suggerita loro dal Talleyrand-Périgord, allora soltanto vescovo spretato, ma destinato ai maggiori allori mondiali. Giulio Cesare invitava i propri luogotenenti a non credere mai alla propaganda nemica, ma Cesare non era giacobino. I giacobini ci cascarono come polli.
Dopo aver decapitato allegramente qualche migliaio di teste il vento cambiò direzione: furono gli altri andati al potere e a denunziare i giacobini superstiti di ‘corruzione‘: molti se ne andarono così alla Caienna, ed un buon numero dette lavoro e posto sicuro al boia. Se si usano certe armi, sicuramente anche gli avversari le useranno: ma ride bene solo chi ride ultimo.
* * *
La storia si ripete implacabile.
I liberal democratici hanno di recente inventato il sexual harassment, eleggendolo a reato irredimibile, escluso da ogni prescrizione di legge, da ritenersi essere stato perpetrato sulla sola base di una denuncia fatta in televisione. In alcuni stati è punito come se fosse uno stupro.
Alla sola denuncia fatta sui media si esigono le dimissioni immediate dell’accusato/a. È una vera pacchia quando si profilano all’orizzonte dei concorsi o scatti di carriera.
Per l’eterogenesi dei fini, cominciarono quindi a cadere teste liberal, ad incominciare da quel poveraccio di Mr Weinstein per finire con Eric Schneiderman, procuratore generale a New York, punta di diamante dei liberal democratici.
Di questi tempi questa terrifica accusa grava anche sul capo di Mrs Veronica Ciccone, in arte madonna, supporter sfegatata di Mrs Hillary Clinton.
A questo punto i liberal iniziarono a calmarsi ed a darsi una regolata, ma gli ‘altri‘ non erano scemi ed avevano capito la lezione.
Di questi giorni l’assalto concentrico alla mantide religiosa delle ricerche sul cancro nel Regno Unito: prof. Nazneen Rahman.
La novità consiste nel fatto che è una femmina ed occupa, occupava, uno dei più prestigiosi posti nella ricerca nel Regno Unito: un potere scientifico, sociale, politico ed economico smisurato.
La sua carriera fu spettacolare:
«Sabera Nazneen Rahman CBE FMedSci is a geneticist who specialises in cancer research and head of Genetics and Epidemiology at the Institute of Cancer Research.
Rahman qualified in medicine from University of Oxford in 1991, and completed a PhD in Molecular Genetics in 1999 on the Wilms’ tumor susceptibility gene FWT1. She completed her Certificate of Completion of Specialist Training in Clinical Genetics in 2001.
She is head of Genetics and Epidemiology at the Institute of Cancer Research, based at the Sir Richard Doll Building in Sutton. She specialises in research into the genetic mechanisms that cause cancer, particularly among groups with a predisposition to paediatric cancers or breast cancer. Through her research, Professor Rahman has provided improved screening and treatment options for NHS patients, and also provides advice on rare cancer genetics to clinicians internationally. She blogs about her work at Harvesting the Genome.
Rahman has a clinical role as head of the cancer genetics service at The Royal Marsden and St George’s Hospital in south west London.
Rahman was given leave of absence as of November 2017, after a letter signed by 45 current and former employees accused her of “serious recurrent bullying and harassment”. Of the 45 signatories, 22 claimed to have suffered direct bullying which created an “intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive” working environment. Following the investigation, she announced that she was resigning her position as of October 2018.»
Accusata di “serious recurrent bullying and harassment”, cui si aggiungevano “intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive”, si è dovuta dimettere, lasciando così vacante l’ambito seggio.
Si noti la frase:
«The signatories, who have chosen to remain anonymous, said that the institute had known about the “exceptionally high” number of allegations against Rahman, dating back 12 years».
Pensateci sopra molto bene: denuncie anonime di fatti vecchi di dodici anni.
«Prof Nazneen Rahman resigned from the Institute of Cancer Research in London before disciplinary action could be taken.
One of Britain’s leading cancer scientists has had £3.5m in grant money revoked following allegations of bullying by 45 current and former colleagues.
Prof Nazneen Rahman, who resigned from her post at the Institute of Cancer Research in London last month, is the first scientist to be sanctioned under new anti-bullying rules introduced by the Wellcome Trust this year. In a letter to the ICR, Rahman’s former colleagues accused her of “serious recurrent bullying and harassment” and creating an “intimidating and humiliating” working environment.
Rahman, who was appointed CBE in 2016 for services to medical sciences, announced she would step down as head of genetics and epidemiology at the ICR following an independent investigation into the claims. In response, the Wellcome Trust has confirmed that it will terminate or transfer what remains of a total of £7.5m funding that had been awarded to Rahman.
The case comes amid growing concern about the levels of bullying and harassment in the world of academia, following a recent spate of high profile investigations at labs the US and Germany.
Former colleagues who had raised complaints about Rahman said that they welcomed the step but called for more clarity in cases, such as this one, where those accused of bullying resign before disciplinary action has been taken.
One of the complainants, who wishes to remain anonymous, said: “It is positive that Wellcome has taken this step but what the case reveals is that the practice of people resigning ahead of definitive disciplinary judgment leaves significant ambiguity and opportunity for them to return to funding in a short space of time.”
The latest investigation was prompted after a letter signed by 45 current and former colleagues claimed that Rahman’s behaviour had caused psychological harm and career damage, with 22 of the individuals claiming to have suffered direct bullying. The signatories, who have chosen to remain anonymous, said that the institute had known about the “exceptionally high” number of allegations against Rahman, dating back 12 years, but had failed to act.
However, Rahman also has supporters, who paint a different picture of the workplace dynamics. In an email to the Guardian, 10 other colleagues, including Ann Strydom, a scientific programme manager, said: “She provides a motivating, creative and exciting working environment where we are both challenged and supported to develop our strengths and skills.”
They added that Rahman had nurtured the skills of her staff, encouraged flexible working and been supportive at times of personal stress.
In response to the latest sanction from the Wellcome Trust, she said: “My team and I will complete our Wellcome-funded research prior to my leaving ICR in October. We are working with ICR and Wellcome to ensure science and patients can benefit from our work.”
In a statement, the Wellcome Trust said that the ICR had not shared the full details of the investigation, but that a summary of the findings had given “considerable cause for concern”. The investigation recommended that a disciplinary hearing was warranted, but due to Rahman’s resignation this did not take place.
“As we have been given information that raises serious concerns we have decided that her Wellcome grants will be terminated or transferred to other investigators.”
The charity said that Rahman would also be barred from applying for funding from Wellcome for two years and from sitting on any Wellcome advisory committees or boards for two years.
“Wellcome takes bullying and harassment very seriously,” the statement added. “Unacceptable behaviour causes significant harm, stops people achieving their full potential and stifles good research,” the trust added in a statement.
Speaking anonymously, an academic who complained about Rahman said: “Rahman will not be able to apply for funding from Wellcome for two years and she will not sit on any Wellcome advisory committees for boards for two years. This is a weak position. In reality two years is no time at all.”
A spokeswoman for the ICR said: “We believe an open and supportive working environment is essential for our work to defeat cancer. We welcome the efforts being made by the Wellcome Trust and others to improve the culture of the scientific community.”