If you knew much about academia you would know this is not an uncommon occurrence nor undesirable occurrence. Some of the finest professors in great academic insbreastutions have Master's degrees from places like Cambridge, and were offered professorships in order to keep them on staff, because of their scholarship and reputation. To be a full professor and not have a doctorate is more a compliment to the professional stature of the man than some sort of inference that he is not up to scratch.
The university *has* the ability to do so. The question of whether or not these are "outrageous claims" and whether what he has said discredits the university is a matter of opinion but which should be debated publicly. Why gag free speech? If he is wrong, then prove he is wrong, but don't threaten his human rights. He's simply doing his job by raising alternative interpretations of the evidence.
There have been examples since Sept 11 of academics losing their jobs and being discriminated against because they chose to speak up in defence of unpopular causes - because universities were afraid of losing their benefactors if they did not do so. Clearly you don't support the principle of free speech and open debate. That puts you in the category of some Islamic states which don't tolerate adverse opinion.
No doubt. No doubt everyone would have to toe the party line if you were in charge, just like when someone works for Rupert Murdoch.
Rifty -- Academic and Computing Help
