July 26, 2007
Ward Churchill Was Right By Golly Syndrome (WCWRBGS) Replaces BDS As The Diagnosis Du Jure
Once in a blue moon, so the saying goes, meaning of course, not very often. And so it is with comments on blogs that just deserve their own posts, if for no other reason then to tell the commenter right up front "You couldn't be more wrong if you tried really hard."
Such is a comment my co-blogger Woody received on his post Easier to Fire a QB than a Tenured Professor posted just a few hours before this one. You can read Woody's post and the comments below or by clicking on the link immediately above, but either way, the comment I'm referring to is, in part, as follows:
I believe that the quote within the wikipedia is germain to this topic:Now, this comment is one of the most fatuous comments I've seen in a long time and I've seen a bunch. I've even been known to make one or two myself (No!!! say it isn't so!...ed.... Sorry, sad to say it is indeed true...GM) But I digress, the reality of the matter is that the commenter is so far off base I have to wonder if he has been infected with BDS or WCWRBGS (New Diagnosis: Ward Churchill Was Right By Golly Syndrome) or maybe both."To be clear: the issues here have nothing to do with the quality of Ward Churchill’s scholarship or his professional credentials. However one views his choice of words or specific arguments, he is being put in the dock solely for his radical critique of U.S. history and present-day policy in the wake of the events of September 11, 2001. Apparently, 9/11 is now the third rail of American intellectual life: to critically probe into its causes and to interrogate the international role of the United States is treated as heresy; those inquiring can be denied forums, careers, and even personal safety. . .The Churchill case is not an isolated incident but a concentrated example of a well-orchestrated campaign launched in the name of “academic freedom” and “balance” which in fact aims to purge the universities of more radical thinkers and oppositional thought generally, and to create a climate of intimidation.
– An Open Letter from Concerned Academics"
He may be wrong, but you might first want to read his essay. I thought he was a bit extremist, but I do agree with his quote of Malcolm X. I have always believed that the events of 9/11 had everthing to do with chickens coming home to roost. That thought is sour medicine , but true nonetheless.
First, our delerious commenter uses a "Wikipedia" pronouncement to prove that Ward C. was fired because he called the victims of Al Qaeda "Little Eichmann's" implying of course that in their deskbound duties as part of the collective corporate structure, they were as culpible in the slaughter of millions as was Eichmann. Now, there can be an awful lot of discussion as to whether Churchill was correct or not, but I have seen the ovens in Germany, I've seen up close and personal the concentration camps and though I may be mistaken, I doubt that Ward Churchill has. To even come close to comparing Eichmann to the victims of 9/11 is idiocy beyond belief, and that it was uttered by a supposed academic makes the violation even more egregious. To claim that Churchill was fired because of this supposed comment is equally stupid. It may be true, and probably is true, nay is absolutely true that his comment "precipitated" an investigation into his supposed scholarship that is a far cry from being "fired for the comment." To believe otherwise in face of charges of
...is to believe that the Twin Towers came down because it was an inside job and the Jews weren't on duty that day and that... Ahhh, crap! how can supposedly intelligent people be so blind to the shortcomings of someone just because he is a "revolutionary academic" if indeed he is that? Ward Churchill was a poseur, a scoundrel, an affected, artificial, bogus, counterfeit, fabricator, fraudulent, phony scholar. To pretend (or to believe) that he was anything else and then to wrap that up in a phoney "free speech" defense is to make a mockery of real academics who work hard, teach their students well, don't fake or fabricate, who publish scholarly and learned articles and who uphold everything that is expressed in the motto of say a school like Harvard: "Veritas" (truth) or the University of Texas' motto taken from Mirabeau B. Lamar (the second President of the Republic of Texas) - " A cultivated mind is the guardian genius of democracy."Churchill spent his tenured days posing as a Native American (he isn't) a serial plagiarist with a MA in communications, not a PhD in history his questionable body of academic work—like his claim the U.S. Army embarked on a program of genocide by deliberately infecting Indians with small-pox. Sounds plausible, but, according to this investigation by the Rocky Mountain News, not supported by the available evidence. "In fact, the pages of various books he refers to not only don't buttress his argument," wrote the News, "they contradict it." UCLA professor Russell Thornton, a scholar of Native American history, calls Churchill's writings on the smallpox epidemic "just out-and-out fabrication." 100,000 killed in the closing days of the war by "hyper-lethal types of ordnance"? (As opposed, I suppose, to moderately lethal ordinance.) Easy to understand "why they hate us," I suppose. Except that Churchill's casualty figures are off by about 99,700.
It is this sort of thing that resulted in Churchill's termination; he was not, as this Newsday headline says, "fired over [his] controversial 9/11 essay." If this were true, it would be a clear violation of Churchill's academic freedom—a freedom to write amateurish, semi-coherent philippics comparing sinister capitalists "braying into their cell phones" to the fascist "desk killers" responsible for Auschwitz. His Eichmann comments surely precipitated the accusations of academic misconduct, but so what?
And now, gentle readers, we come to the last part of the comment that needs a serious fisking and that is "I have always believed that the events of 9/11 had everthing to do with chickens coming home to roost. That thought is sour medicine , but true nonetheless." Oh please commentor, surely you can't possibly buy that basest of canards? Ho-Kay, lets see, first, if it is "chickens coming home etc." than it can be for one of two reasons. First, because the foreign policy of the United States precipitated the attack. Second because the actions of George Bush (father or son) is the proximate cause. Lets take those one at a time (although I could be fatuous here and say that the answer is "bullshit.")
Al Qaeda and it's fellow traveling islamofascistic running dogs of the inheritors of Adolf have been at war with the west for ... well, for a long time. As Baron Bodissey and Dymphna say on their marvelous blog Gates of Vienna
At the siege of Vienna in 1683 Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe. We are in a new phase of a very old war.The islamofascists expanded that war to a war against the United States in 1979 when the Islamic Republic of Iran invaded the United States Embassy in Tehran; an act of war by any standard neither George H.W. Bush nor George W. Bush was president at the time. Jimmah Cahtuh was I believe. Since that act of war, the running dogs of Al Qaeda via their fearless leader Osama bin Laden has "declared war" on the US. We were attacked
1979The above doesn't include the killing of Mr. Klinghoffer on the Achille Lauro, the attacks on London, Glasgow, Madrid, Paris, etc., etc., etc. So the commenters sentence "That thought is sour medicine , but true nonetheless" shows either an incomplete understanding of the world stage and the machinations of islamofascism or a specious attack on reason. I would prefer to believe that it is an incomplete understanding of world forces and the real motive behind the islamofascist mindset. It really is a new phase of a very old war, and the sooner that is learned, the sooner this war will be over.
Nov. 4, Tehran, Iran: Iranian radical students seized the U.S. embassy, taking 66 hostages. 14 were later released. The remaining 52 were freed after 444 days on the day of President Reagan's inauguration.
1982–1991
Lebanon: Thirty US and other Western hostages kidnapped in Lebanon by Hezbollah. Some were killed, some died in captivity, and some were eventually released. Terry Anderson was held for 2,454 days.
1983
April 18, Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide car-bomb attack; 63 dead, including 17 Americans. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility.
Oct. 23, Beirut, Lebanon: Shiite suicide bombers exploded truck near U.S. military barracks at Beirut airport, killing 241 marines. Minutes later a second bomb killed 58 French paratroopers in their barracks in West Beirut.
Dec. 12, Kuwait City, Kuwait: Shiite truck bombers attacked the U.S. embassy and other targets, killing 5 and injuring 80.
1984
Sept. 20, east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S. embassy annex, killing 24, including 2 U.S. military.
Dec. 3, Beirut, Lebanon: Kuwait Airways Flight 221, from Kuwait to Pakistan, hijacked and diverted to Tehran. 2 Americans killed.
1985
April 12, Madrid, Spain: Bombing at restaurant frequented by U.S. soldiers, killed 18 Spaniards and injured 82.
June 14, Beirut, Lebanon: TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome hijacked to Beirut by Hezbollah terrorists and held for 17 days. A U.S. Navy diver executed.
Oct. 7, Mediterranean Sea: gunmen attack Italian cruise ship, Achille Lauro. One U.S. tourist killed. Hijacking linked to Libya.
Dec. 18, Rome, Italy, and Vienna, Austria: airports in Rome and Vienna were bombed, killing 20 people, 5 of whom were Americans. Bombing linked to Libya.
1986
April 2, Athens, Greece:A bomb exploded aboard TWA flight 840 en route from Rome to Athens, killing 4 Americans and injuring 9.
April 5, West Berlin, Germany: Libyans bombed a disco frequented by U.S. servicemen, killing 2 and injuring hundreds.
1988
Dec. 21, Lockerbie, Scotland: N.Y.-bound Pan-Am Boeing 747 exploded in flight from a terrorist bomb and crashed into Scottish village, killing all 259 aboard and 11 on the ground. Passengers included 35 Syracuse University students and many U.S. military personnel. Libya formally admitted responsibility 15 years later (Aug. 2003) and offered $2.7 billion compensation to victims' families.
1993
Feb. 26, New York City: bomb exploded in basement garage of World Trade Center, killing 6 and injuring at least 1,040 others. In 1995, militant Islamist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and 9 others were convicted of conspiracy charges, and in 1998, Ramzi Yousef, believed to have been the mastermind, was convicted of the bombing. Al-Qaeda involvement is suspected.
1995
Nov. 13, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: car bomb exploded at U.S. military headquarters, killing 5 U.S. military servicemen.
1996
June 25, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: truck bomb exploded outside Khobar Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring hundreds of others. 13 Saudis and a Lebanese, all alleged members of Islamic militant group Hezbollah, were indicted on charges relating to the attack in June 2001.
1998
Aug. 7, Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: truck bombs exploded almost simultaneously near 2 U.S. embassies, killing 224 (213 in Kenya and 11 in Tanzania) and injuring about 4,500. 4 men connected with al-Qaeda 2 of whom had received training at al-Qaeda camps inside Afghanistan, were convicted of the killings in May 2001 and later sentenced to life in prison. A federal grand jury had indicted 22 men in connection with the attacks, including Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, who remained at large.
2000
Oct. 12, Aden, Yemen: U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole heavily damaged when a small boat loaded with explosives blew up alongside it. 17 sailors killed. Linked to Osama bin Laden, or members of al-Qaeda terrorist network.
2001
Sept. 11, New York City, Arlington, Va., and Shanksville, Pa.: hijackers crashed 2 commercial jets into twin towers of World Trade Center; 2 more hijacked jets were crashed into the Pentagon and a field in rural Pa. Total dead and missing numbered 2,9921: 2,749 in New York City, 184 at the Pentagon, 40 in Pa., and 19 hijackers. Islamic al-Qaeda terrorist group blamed.
Chicken's coming home to roost indeed, except in Ward Churchill's case, it happens to be accurate.
I was sent the entire formal investigation results as presented to the President of the U of C. Slow reading nails all the facts in place. Churchill was, and is, a fraud and a liar.
One side note: He claimed to have been to the Basic Airborne Course (paratrooper). He hadn't.
He claimed he was an LRRP in RVN. He wasn't.
So much BS is in what he is said and written it was indeed, gross negligence by the University not to heave him over the side long ago.
Posted by tad at July 26, 2007 08:31 PM
The situation with Mr. Churchill is pandemic. In his case, he and those who support him, and the millions of others who practice this very same condition every single day, it isn’t about taking credit for the work done by others, or of fudging on his resume. No, this is about selective integrity – a situation where people choose the time, place, and circumstances of their honesty. If a relationship is important, then honesty in that relationship is observed; but the same individual may routinely lie to his employer, cheat on income taxes, or regularly practice some other dishonest activity.
We see this behavior all the time in public education. Parents say that they support zero tolerance for cheating in school, but they do not hesitate to approach a teacher to ask that they give a passing grade to their daughter Susie, so that she can remain on the cheerleading squad, or so that Brad can continue to play football. Thus, we can see that parents teach selective integrity to their children, and too many of our institutions reinforce such behavior – even by doing nothing to correct it.
I therefore surmise that those students and professors who actively support Mr. Churchill selectively conclude that lying is all right in some circumstances, and that taking the credit for the work of others is at least understandable, considering the pressures of teaching at a major university.
On the other hand, perhaps Tad is 100% correct. A liar is a liar, a cheat is a cheat, and a dishonest person is much like a virgin; one can only lose his or her integrity once.
Posted by Mustang at July 27, 2007 07:55 AM
The islamofascists expanded that war to a war against the United States in 1979 when the Islamic Republic of Iran invaded the United States Embassy in Tehran; an act of war by any standard neither George H.W. Bush nor George W. Bush was president at the time. Jimmah Cahtuh was I believe. Since that act of war, the running dogs of Al Qaeda via their fearless leader Osama bin Laden has "declared war" on the US.
Your reckoning is a bit off here. Bin Laden was armed by the CIA throughout the 80's to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. He had certainly not declared war against the US in 1979 and in fact at that time was merely a pawn in the Cold War as far as the US was concerned.
Posted by e. nonee moose at July 27, 2007 08:19 AM
Moose, re-read the passage: "Since that act of war, the running dogs of Al Qaeda via their fearless leader Osama bin Laden has "declared war" on the US."
"Since that act of war..." meaning the Iranian act of war... That has nothing to do with the "LATER" declaration of war on the US by bin Laden. In the 80's bin Laden fought the soviets and we armed not him specifically, but anyone fighting the soviets in Afghanistan. That he later took on the U.S. is a different issue entirely unless you are implying that we are responsible for his turning ... and if so, that is a bit of moral equavalence I'm not going to subscribe to and I'm surprised that you would so, I'm assuming then that you merely misread my statement.
Posted by GM Roper at July 27, 2007 09:05 AM
Mustang REALLY hit a vital element in the Churchill saga. This is just one example of the lowering of intergrity among Americans. That it is not only allowed at universities, but (apparently) tacitly encouraged says very much about the state of our academics. Thus, students (too dumb in some things, but bright enough in others) quickly see what "works" and embrace low morals, non-integrity and doing whatever they need to do to "succeed". America, thanks to Churchill and those like him, is coming apart at the seams. Parents of students, at every age level ought have the moral courage AND enough real love for their children to let them fail...if they're failing. Life is not about intervention all the time. Someday the Momma Lion will not be there to "rescue" her cub from bad behavior. We see it every day in the news. Every day. It occurs, every day, in classrooms in America.
Posted by tad at July 27, 2007 09:22 AM
Your “Special Post Dedicated to Me” was laughable. You have evidently missed the boat on this one. I’ll trade you my WCWRBGS for your raging case of CCDD (Conservative Cognitive Dissonance Disorder.) Your comment that I was fatuous in my comments was dubious, and intellectually indolent. (I’ll be more than happy to trade ad hominem blows all day long.)
Ward Churchill has never been the issue with me. I find that his academic style relies on the tactics of fear and disinformation. It has a level of left wing zealotry that makes me look at him twice, and wonder if he really is that dumb. Like most of the hacks that teach in the universities he was quite adept at parroting the party line and quoting men far greater than himself.
My issue is with CU. Here is why. His dishonesty and penchant for stretching the truth were well known before this essay, and it wasn’t until he engaged in unpopular speech that they went after him in earnest. This is why I quoted what I did, because this became a witch hunt instead of a search for academic integrity. If this were a genuine inquiry into Churchill’s integrity they would have started this investigation long before he engaged in unpopular speech. Instead they waited until he became politically inconvenient to begin the inquiry. Unfortunately for those who have graduated from CU this has severely devalued their degrees because their university tolerated this behavior.
Churchill’s comparison of Adolf Eichmann to the WTC employees is silly. Anyone who read that would see through that deception with ease. The reason being is that this comparison gives these people a level of culpability that is beyond reason. It comes from the Chicken Little left wing zealotry that believes there are conspiracies around every corner and that anyone that assists in furthering these plans is in on it as well.
What sickens me is that the outrage about the Eichmann comment is misplaced. They should be outraged that he suggested that soldiers should “frag” their officers. Yes! Near the end of his essay he talks about this. This thought is far more reprehensible than the name calling he engaged in.
There were a few nuggets of interest that caught my eye. First the FBI isn’t doing its job, because the number of convicted terrorists can be counted on our hands and toes. In all likely hood an exaggeration, but if they were successful wouldn’t they want to let the country know? The second nugget has to do with the number of terrorist attacks predicted and/ or stopped by the CIA. I believe that a doughnut can still represent that number. Their uncanny ability to smell a plot has never ceased to amaze me.
Now finally, let us deal with the chickens coming home to roost. We can start with OBL being used as a pawn in the cold war. We can move on to our continued support of the regime of Israel, who has proven that they are no one’s friend (Yes they have attacked the US.) Then we can look at our tacit acceptance of the Taliban and their 10+ year reign of terror upon their populace. Also the less known fact that the US had OBL in the crosshairs and we failed to pull the trigger. This is followed by our economic partnership with China, a country that has quite the stellar track record when it comes to human rights. We’ll end our journey right here in the good old US of A with a government that has withheld civil rights guaranteed by law.
By now I’m sure that the old fingers are in the ears and you are singing the “I can’t hear you” song. This is ok, but no one yet has been able to show me proof positive that the US is not reaping what it has sown over the last 30 years. In fact the older I get the more I see that this nation is ruled by liars, thugs, and charlatans. We are reaping what they are sowing.
Admittedly Churchill’s track record of dishonesty makes anything he has ever said suspect at best, but occasionally small tidbits worth consideration can be found in the worst sewers. I feel that most of what he said was garbage, but he had some points that I feel are spot on. Yes America is facing more terrorist actions if we continue in the vein we are in. Yes the CIA and FBI are about as useful as toothbrush scrubbing Texas Stadium. Yes America should reengage itself in the humanitarian causes we are so expert at dealing with, and abandon this warmongering. The fact that I could take his essay and boil out all of the dross for those three declarative sentences illustrates the level of hack that he is.
The real criminals in all of this are the University of Colorado, their regents and their board. They have betrayed the trust of their state, their students and the world of academia. Their witch hunt only provided proof to me that they were trying to cover their rears for some terrible decisions that they made, and if they were truly interested in academic integrity they would have pursued an investigation before he engaged in unpopular speech.
Posted by psyberwolfe at July 27, 2007 04:39 PM
Psyberwolofe:
Ward Churchill has never been the issue with me. I find that his academic style relies on the tactics of fear and disinformation. It has a level of left wing zealotry that makes me look at him twice, and wonder if he really is that dumb. Like most of the hacks that teach in the universities he was quite adept at parroting the party line and quoting men far greater than himself. [...]Right, that is why you quoted the wikipedia saying WC was terminated because of his essay which you thought contained a good quote. There are many more quotes of Malcom X that are equally good...and?
My issue is with CU.
This is why I quoted what I did, because this became a witch hunt instead of a search for academic integrity. If this were a genuine inquiry into Churchill’s integrity they would have started this investigation long before he engaged in unpopular speech.Which makes me wonder why you didn't just come out and say this?
Now finally, let us deal with the chickens coming home to roost. We can start with OBL being used as a pawn in the cold war. We can move on to our continued support of the regime of Israel, who has proven that they are no one’s friend (Yes they have attacked the US.) Then we can look at our tacit acceptance of the Taliban and their 10+ year reign of terror upon their populace. Also the less known fact that the US had OBL in the crosshairs and we failed to pull the trigger. This is followed by our economic partnership with China, a country that has quite the stellar track record when it comes to human rights. We’ll end our journey right here in the good old US of A with a government that has withheld civil rights guaranteed by law.Oh please, if this is cause for 9/11 than you are not only grasping for straws, you might as well side with the truthers.By now I’m sure that the old fingers are in the ears and you are singing the “I can’t hear you” song. This is ok, but no one yet has been able to show me proof positive that the US is not reaping what it has sown over the last 30 years. In fact the older I get the more I see that this nation is ruled by liars, thugs, and charlatans. We are reaping what they are sowing.
Yes America is facing more terrorist actions if we continue in the vein we are in. Yes the CIA and FBI are about as useful as toothbrush scrubbing Texas Stadium. Yes America should reengage itself in the humanitarian causes we are so expert at dealing with, and abandon this warmongering.OK, so what do you prescribe Dr. Humanitarian (that is an ad hominim - attacking your arguments is not) and why aren't you grossly involved in "taking back America?"
The real criminals in all of this are the University of Colorado, their regents and their board. They have betrayed the trust of their state, their students and the world of academia. Their witch hunt only provided proof to me that they were trying to cover their rears for some terrible decisions that they made, and if they were truly interested in academic integrity they would have pursued an investigation before he engaged in unpopular speech.Then why didn't you say that in the original comment?. In fact, had you argued the above you would have found yourself agreeing with Woody and I'm pretty sure that would have been anathama to you.
Conservative Cognitive Dissonance Disorder? Define please and give an example of how you think that applies to either Woody or myself, or, as is more likely, is it an attempt at humor since you can't argue the original? Yeah, that must be it.
Posted by GM Roper at July 28, 2007 12:45 PM
In fact the older I get the more I see that this nation is ruled by liars, thugs, and charlatans.
Must be referring to Pelosi, Reid and Murtha...
Posted by John at July 28, 2007 01:14 PM
And he didn't side with the Truthers?
Somehow I missed where he didn't.
Churchill deserves what he got, I don't think it had a thing to do with the little Eichmanns thing. It had to do with his running a department based on a lie. He's a white guy with no native blood. Then there's the issue of his plagiarizing numerous works, both written and artistic and claiming them as his own. Then there's his accusations toward certain people of being pedophiles. The man is a disgusting embarrassment to academia and I'm glad he was canned.
Universities today are so extremely leftist because they get government funding - that it is surprising that someone so hateful as Churchill would get the boot. If you're willing to say America is an imperialist white patriarchy that needs to be destroyed, you're in!
And now he's going to fight to get his job back based on his contention that he was fired because they didn't allow his 'free speech'.
Does free speech include lying, plagiarism and falsely representing himself?
Guess so.
Posted by pollywollygooglealltheday at July 28, 2007 01:19 PM
I don't really give a rodent's derrière why they fired Churchill, just so long as they did. He was a vile cretin who should have been taken out and scalped.
But, let us discuss this idea of free speech. No one has a right to free speech in daily life. The Constitution says that government will not abridge your right to free speech. You employer, your clubs, your schools, can tell you what may and may not be said. Churchill might have had academic freedom to write what he did, and I don't care what he writes because I tend to ignore idiots, but some of the things he has said has brought undue attention and discredit to the university. They certainly had the right to start looking deeper when he opened the door.
Glad he is gone, just wish he had steped in front of a bus instead.
Posted by Hugh R. at July 28, 2007 01:39 PM
ok psyberwolfe....wow...talk about cognitive dissonance.
I am just going to guess that you are somewhat of a liberal, and would be willing to bet that some of the following disconnects apply to you:
You can't kill a murder on death row (against the death penalty) but it's ok to kill an innocent unborn child (support a womans right to choose)
We must lessen our dependence on foreign oil (green energy advocate) but for golly sake don't drill here (save the wild places)
We must leave nature to its own devices (stay out of the forests and quit cutting down trees) but we must intervene in nature if man is involved (its not fair that some folks have more than others so we must redistribute income to the poor)
I could go on, but your comment about the government withholding civil rights guaranteed by law has me shaking my head at your complete idiocy.
What civil rights have you lost?
Who has lost civil rights?
I believe you suffer from cranial-rectal inversion there, sunshine boy, and am certain that this conversation is only going to get more inane before it is over.
So, again....what civil rights have you lost?
Posted by whippersnapper at July 28, 2007 01:53 PM
Ward Churchill is only the latest example of the lack of intellectual honesty and integrity in our colleges. Frankly, U of C (or however it's abbreviated) acted far too slowly once this all came to a head. Of course, the man ought never to have been hired, which is yet another black eye for the institution.
Ah, "chickens coming home to roost." Yet another phrase for "It's all AmeriKKKa's fault!" Gadzooks, and you wonder why we question liberals' patriotism?!
Look, psyber, I am not claiming that the US is perfect - far from it. But we are currently the best darn place on this poor ol' sorry world. I have LIVED outside the US - and not in a third world country, either - and we have the most freedom, the most robust culture, the most generous hearts, and the strongest "can-do" attitude in the world. *WE* are the ones everyone turns to when they're in trouble, and we offer assistance with open and (forgive me) liberal hands.
Just because some little two-bit megalomaniac and his pissant religion doesn't like that we have more power than him, don't worship his "god," and refuse to bow to his intolerant ideas of "how things OUGHT to be," he attacks our country. And he cannot even do it with honor by selecting military targets - he goes after the dumb joes on the street.
Well, honeycakes, if that's what YOU consider our just desserts, then I offer you an enthusiastic invitation to the world. Renounce your citizenship and go live amongst the injustly oppressed terrorists.
After all. It's AmeriKKKa's fault, so I'm sure you wouldn't want to be associated with this awful country, right?
[rolls eyes at the stupidity and shortsightedness of the liberal moonbats]
GM, and you humor this... this... this PERSON, why?!
Posted by Traveller at July 28, 2007 02:06 PM
"Churchill was, and is, a fraud and a liar."
Yep. And a plagiarist to boot. No one takes this person seriously as an academic. An ageing hippy-era Big Man on Campus, maybe he can claim a handful of undergraduates who think he's cool because he's different. Apart from that, he's a self-important fool with zero influence over public opinion. If there were fewer like him in the rank and file of The Party of Uprightness, the world would scarcely have noticed his existence.
Posted by Jassalasca Jape at July 28, 2007 03:53 PM
JJ - quick note. I wish that Churchill were indeed uninfluential. But as this controversy was breaking, I read two serious books which had previously quoted him. Not much, perhaps, but an indication of how public opinion is gradually resettled under the radar.
As to Churchill in general. Psyberwolfe is right, at least, that UC knew at least something of Churchill's history, but he begged for trouble by bringing himself to public attention, forcing his bosses to look more closely. I don't necessarily draw the same conclusion, however. Bureaucrats like to have no trouble. We would wish that public colleges would be first concerned with academic excellence, but that's not going to happen soon. To half-know that there was something fraudulent about WC is not enough to make a bureaucrat act.
Because he was used to getting away with it, Ward Churchill grew bolder in his overreaching. That kind always does, which how they usually get caught. Once on the public stage, he could no longer heckle from the wings, but had to have the light turned on himself. Thus his political views triggered his examination, but did not cause his firing. An analogy would be getting stopped for speeding, but getting arrested for drunk driving. If you hadn't been speeding, you might have gotten away with DUI, but one can't turn and blame the arrest on the speeding.
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at July 28, 2007 04:22 PM
sp come on psychomutt....what civil rights have you lost?
Posted by whippersnapper at July 28, 2007 07:14 PM
Anyone who speaks the words Churchill did of the 9-11 victims WILL become a national embarrassment to the colleges and universities and other employers…and the scrutiny they receive will be well deserved. CU is no exception to this.
Free speech does come with responsibility…and sometimes this means one has to really consider what they wish to speak about. Ward Churchill made a decision, a choice. He didn’t like the reaction but he sure glowed in his hours of glory. The attention he got was very ego-fulfilling for him. Naturally people took an interest in his actual works, his writings and what not. That’s when people began to question the mans honesty…and integrity. People everywhere recognized the outright lies of Churchill’s works. This wasn’t and isn’t about free speech.
This isn’t about his comments regarding September 11th victims being little Nazi’s. Churchill’s writing on this opened him up to scrutiny- as it would to me had I written that. Churchill is a man who has lied about his race; his academic research has been found to not only faulty, but historically inaccurate. He has plagiarized the works of others. Churchill can blame NO one but himself.
Posted by Raven at July 29, 2007 07:58 AM
Churchill was fired because he was a liar, plain and simple. The primary reason the board was forced to fire him was because he wrote academic papers and used false references. He made up references and wrote papers himself under other people's names -- and then referenced those false papers himself. Fraud and liar, never mind what his position was on, well, anything.
Posted by Annon E. Mouse at July 29, 2007 05:46 PM
Ward Chruchill is merely an erupting pustule which warns of of a spreading virus throughout the body intellectual. For 50-odd years, David Susskind-like White Man's Guilt has gradually burned hotter and hotter - rather like a lobster put in a pot of tepid water which gradually begins to boil, and kill the crustacean. So also are we gradually being given more and more outrageous things as 'truths' until actual fact becomes retrograde and uncivil. Stalin wasn't the only one who knew a thing or two about rewriting history - the American Association of University Professors are gifted amateurs at the game.
Posted by Harry Hedgehog at July 31, 2007 08:51 AM
