Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Churchill's Champions
Front Page Magazine ^ | 2-28-2005 | Jacob Laksin

Posted on 02/28/2005 11:31:52 AM PST by Pendragon_6

"Who is defending Ward Churchill, may I ask?" That was the question posed by John Holbo, a philosophy professor and contributor to the leftwing academic blog Crooked Timber, when news broke that the University of Colorado was harboring a leftist extremist in its midst. The gist of Holbo’s question was that no respectable person on the Left could come to the defense of someone so demonstrably in leave of his senses as the former Weatherman accomplice, academic fraud, and faux-Indian.

One can only hope that the professor’s academic acumen is better than his news judgment. In fact, no sooner had the media picked up on Churchill’s now-notorious essay than his leftwing enablers rushed to rescue his reputation.

Carrying the flag of the pro-Churchill campaign was the academic community. Colorado University President Elizabeth Hoffman, before revising her views in the face of broad public condemnation, initially condoned Churchill’s likening of the victims of September 11 to Nazi apparatchiks, insisting that “Prof. Churchill's comments have precipitated a discussion we ought to have.”

Continued


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: academia; churchill; cigarstoreindian; dope; fakeindian; hateamericafilth; hatingamerica; hippietrash; ward; wardchurchill
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 next last

1 posted on 02/28/2005 11:31:53 AM PST by Pendragon_6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6

Please send these, your thoughts, to the Regents....some there care...FR has already had response from one Regent....FREEPING WORKS

Thank you....everyone FREEP all the addresses are here...
governorowens@state.co.us ;
editor@coloradodaily.com; kusa@9news.com ;
Peter.Steinhauer@colorado.edu; Regent.Schauer@Colorado.edu; Jerryrutledge@adelphia.net; tommyjclay@aol.com; Regent.Hayes@Colorado.edu; Gail.Schwartz@colorado.edu; Regent.Bosley@colorado.edu; Regent.Carlisle@Colorado.edu; Carrigan@colorado.edu


just copy and paste


2 posted on 02/28/2005 11:38:06 AM PST by chemainus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6

“Prof. Churchill's comments have precipitated a discussion we ought to have.”

Yeah, sure and so does..'I hope your children die' or 'Aids is a blessing for gay people'.


3 posted on 02/28/2005 11:43:06 AM PST by Lee Heggy (Sorry, I don't do Windows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6
Churchill attempts to assess why so many in the world perceive the United States as a symbol of oppression rather than freedom.

Check out those who believe as such. You will find the WORDT sort of people in that company (including himself)...
4 posted on 02/28/2005 11:49:46 AM PST by Edgerunner (Proud to be an infidel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Edgerunner

WORDT=WORSE


5 posted on 02/28/2005 11:50:36 AM PST by Edgerunner (Proud to be an infidel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6

I support Ward Churchill's right to free speech and I do not support any action that would revoke his tenure on the grounds of what he has published or said publicly.


6 posted on 02/28/2005 11:55:57 AM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
I do not support any action that would revoke his tenure on the grounds of what he has published or said publicly.

How about revoking it for plagarism and fraud? That OK with you?

Or should those who are obnoxiously anti-American get a pass on crimes the rest of us would be held to account for?

7 posted on 02/28/2005 11:59:41 AM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Restorer

Or for lying about his ethnicity on his job application forms, effectively stealing from Native Americans a job from them on false pretenses.


8 posted on 02/28/2005 12:01:50 PM PST by cinnathepoet (Directly, I am going to Caesar's funeral)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cinnathepoet

Which was one of the things I meant by fraud.


9 posted on 02/28/2005 12:12:09 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

What if what he has published is stolen? What if his speech is a manifest lie? What if he has lied about who he is on his job application and about other things.


10 posted on 02/28/2005 12:17:41 PM PST by cajungirl (freeps are my peeps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chemainus

Just checked the UW-Whitewater site-- I believe he was supposed to "lecture" there tomorrow, and I see nothing referring to this piece of crap. Anybody know, was it quietly swept under the table, or am I thinking of the wrong place??


11 posted on 02/28/2005 12:28:00 PM PST by lilmsdangrus (hard work musta hurt somebody, somewhere....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

Oh, shut up.


12 posted on 02/28/2005 12:32:31 PM PST by JFK_Lib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
I support Ward Churchill's right to free speech and I do not support any action that would revoke his tenure on the grounds of what he has published or said publicly.

Are you suggesting that once a fellow has tenure he should never suffer any consequences for what he says, even if his scholarship is bogus, his teaching incompetent, or his tenure acquired fraudulently?

Sure, these things might never have been examined if Churchill had been a quiet and run-of-the-mill campus commie.

But he grandstanded (grandstood? ;) ) and was needlessly offensive.

And this suggests he's too stupid to be a competent teacher! If you get a cushy job with little or no responsibility and a decent income, why imperil it? Thinking for five minutes would have led him to see that if he attracted attention, sooner or later his bona fides would be examined.

But he craved the limelight, and now his record and career are being examined.

A guy like Chomsky probably shouldn't be fired. But Churchill, like DiLorenzo, invents his data and uses footnotes not to support but to obfuscate. SUch people are not scholars and consequently ought not to enjoy the protections afforded to scholars.

13 posted on 02/28/2005 12:34:04 PM PST by Mad Dawg (My P226 wants to teach you what SIGnify means ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

You need to have YOUR head examined. He's a liar, he copied a painting and gave himself credit for it and not Thomas Mails, much of his writing belongs to others as well. He's not just 'on trial' here for what he said. He has a lot more against him. He's not even an Indian, for heaven's sake.


14 posted on 02/28/2005 12:39:28 PM PST by Marysecretary (Thank you, Lord, for FOUR MORE YEARS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

One result of the EEO programs that government and many corporations have adopted is that hiring managers have not applied the same level of scrutiny to work experience and education claimed on resumes for minorities that they would to non-minorities. I can almost guarantee that Churchill would not have been hired for the position at Colorado had he not claimed he was a "Native American". It is almost a certainty that no one did any kind of background check on him--and they didn't review his plagiarized art either.


15 posted on 02/28/2005 12:45:03 PM PST by RightWingConspirator (Glad that Ted the Boorish Drunk, Hitlery the Witch and John Fonda/Fraud Kerry are not my senators.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
You fell on the truth. On the left, if you hate this county enough, you get a pass. They're a sick creepy lot. (Fake art, hate speech, plagiarism, stealing a job from a real minority etcetcetc....)

Or should those who are obnoxiously anti-American get a pass on crimes the rest of us would be held to account for?

16 posted on 02/28/2005 12:50:35 PM PST by GOPJ (Liberals haven't had a new idea in 40 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RightWingConspirator
Good news: www.aztlan.net is claiming the Ward *is* an American Indian, and they have the genetic testing data to prove it!

See, Ward does have supporters - in the Mexican Nazi Party. (Try reading their web-site if you don't believe there are Mexican Nazi's. I haven't seen that level of antisemitism and outright paranoia anywhere else on the web....)
17 posted on 02/28/2005 12:53:32 PM PST by Helium Rat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Restorer; All
You fell on the truth.

On the left, if you hate this county enough, you get a pass. Liberals are tacky double standard liars, and they cover for each other.

Fake art, hate speech, plagiarism, stealing a job from a real minority -- all crimes a conservative would be fired for -- and fired for quickly. Not like the liberals. They get help, sympathy, support, and a pass. Even the MSM wants to help them. Tacky, tacky, tacky.

Or should those who are obnoxiously anti-American get a pass on crimes the rest of us would be held to account for?

18 posted on 02/28/2005 1:02:31 PM PST by GOPJ (Liberals haven't had a new idea in 40 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Restorer; All
You fell on the truth.

On the left, if you hate this county enough, you get a pass. Liberals are tacky double standard liars, and they cover for each other.

Fake art, hate speech, plagiarism, stealing a job from a real minority -- all crimes a conservative would be fired for -- and fired for quickly. Not like the liberals. They get help, sympathy, support, and a pass. Even the MSM wants to help them. Tacky, tacky, tacky.

Or should those who are obnoxiously anti-American get a pass on crimes the rest of us would be held to account for?

19 posted on 02/28/2005 1:03:14 PM PST by GOPJ (Liberals haven't had a new idea in 40 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Helium Rat

He got a job and tenure in an era when many PhD's with much better credentials have worked as adjunct professors and cab drivers. That's an irrational hiring policy that is not in the best interest of the university or its students..


20 posted on 02/28/2005 1:08:47 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

The right to free speach protects us from punishment by the government for something we have said. There are limits. Some of Churchill's statements advocating violence push those limits. But he is not being arrested, so the first amendment doesn't apply.

Getting fired is a wholely different thing. Acedemic freedom would apply, if he were speaking as an academic about his field of expertise. He was not. Tenure is not imunity from moral turpitude. Let a tenured professor advocate the rape and dismemberment of coeds, and see how long he is employed.


21 posted on 02/28/2005 1:09:53 PM PST by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
"I support Ward Churchill's right to free speech and I do not support any action that would revoke his tenure on the grounds of what he has published or said publicly."

The First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "

Congress is not involved in Mr. Churchill's plight, and no abridgement of his free speech has been made by that governmental body.

This "Freedom of Speech" thing has gone the way of "separation of church and state"...out of context entirely.

The public, private institutions, businesses, etc., can say anything they want in response to Mr. Churchill's rhetoric. People are not licensed to say anything they want to another person, or to the public, by the First Amendment...it just says that Congress cannot pass a law against it.

But, in addition to his asinine comments condeming all the 9-11 victims as communists, he has also committed Fraud (It's against Federal Law to claim minority status to get a job), and now forgery/plagerism, and assault on a reporter.

So if you think he should continue to teach young people with a character such as his, based on your mis-interpretation of the first amendment, then you must be childless.
22 posted on 02/28/2005 1:12:01 PM PST by FrankR (Don't let the bastards wear you down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
How about revoking it for plagarism and fraud? That OK with you?

If proven, yes. Neither is a free speech issue.

23 posted on 02/28/2005 2:00:58 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
What if what he has published is stolen?

Theft is not protected speech.

What if his speech is a manifest lie?

Then it should be disproved academically and his reputation suffers accordingly. Otherwise it's just opinion, and opinion is protected speech.

What if he has lied about who he is on his job application and about other things.

That's a question for the university to decide on.

24 posted on 02/28/2005 2:04:23 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JFK_Lib
Oh, shut up.

No.

25 posted on 02/28/2005 2:04:58 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
I don't have a problem with Chruchill being fired for academic fraud or other such reasons. I simply object to anyone (especially an academic or journalist) losing their job for holding an unpopular opinion.

BTW: The best way to say it would be, "He was grandstanding, and was needlessly offensive". I don't think that "grandstood" is a word. :)

26 posted on 02/28/2005 2:10:07 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

I wouldn't take away his job for what he said about the 911 victims either.

But if it attracts people's attention and they find he is guilty of other unethical or illegal behavior, I have no problem at all with him getting canned for that.


27 posted on 02/28/2005 2:12:26 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
The fraud angle remains to be sorted out, I'll leave that to the administration of his college. If I took FR as gospel, there wouldn't be a democrat in the country who wasn't guilty of something. ;)

What I said was that I didn't want him to have his tenure revoked or for him to lose his job for holding an unpopular opinion.

28 posted on 02/28/2005 2:13:37 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: stop_fascism
Getting fired is a wholely different thing. Acedemic freedom would apply, if he were speaking as an academic about his field of expertise. He was not. Tenure is not imunity from moral turpitude. Let a tenured professor advocate the rape and dismemberment of coeds, and see how long he is employed.

Meh, we'll see. Professors have been writing on contreversial topics outside of their fields for years. Alfred Kinsey was an entomologist before he started his sex surveys. And Noam Chomsky is, by occupation, a lingusit, (hell of a linguist, actually) but he's best known for his social commentary.

Now, to be fair, Churchill isn't anywhere near as brilliant as those two examples, but he is a tenured professor. Historically, tenure would protect Churchill in this situation and I don't think that things will be any different this time.

29 posted on 02/28/2005 2:23:14 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FrankR

You and I have a very different view of the meaning and scope of the First Amendment.


30 posted on 02/28/2005 2:25:18 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

Yeah, right, your just defending his freedom of speech?

So what else do you defend; pedophiles? Nazis? Terrorists?

The Founding Fathers never intended for freedom of speech to include speech that is inciteful of violence or panic or is generally harmful to the public good. That is why a good majority of them supported the Sedition Act.

Why dont you just admit that you hate this nation and want to protect anyone who undermines it?

Or are you just too naive to realize that people like Churchill are only 'good' when they are room temperature?


31 posted on 02/28/2005 2:26:53 PM PST by JFK_Lib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: JFK_Lib
Yeah, right, your just defending his freedom of speech?

Yes.

It's "you're" not "your" btw.

So what else do you defend; pedophiles? Nazis? Terrorists?

If you're talking about defending their Constitutional rights, then yes.

The Founding Fathers never intended for freedom of speech to include speech that is inciteful of violence or panic or is generally harmful to the public good. That is why a good majority of them supported the Sedition Act.

Churchill's essay was an opinion piece, not a death threat.

Why dont you just admit that you hate this nation and want to protect anyone who undermines it?

Because I don't.

Or are you just too naive to realize that people like Churchill are only 'good' when they are room temperature?

No, I'm just wise enough to understand that defending his rights and defending mine are one and the same. Also, despite my color-blindness, I've come to realize that the world has more shades than black and white. Those who don't realize that are the real threat to America, not the Ward Churchills.

32 posted on 02/28/2005 2:38:23 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

Was Kinsey a professor? I thought he had his own research institute. No matter, I'd have fired his butt for moral turpitude. Chomsky is another matter. He's a jerk, but what he has said (while smug, self-satisfied, and wrong)is within the bounds of civil discourse.


33 posted on 02/28/2005 2:43:20 PM PST by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: stop_fascism
Kinsey was a professor at Indiana University. The Alfred C. Kinsey Institute is a major research building on the IU campus.

His research methods were questionable (a discussion that I don't want to start again) but he did manage to dispel most of the myths about human sexuality that had been floating around the public conscious.

34 posted on 02/28/2005 2:49:34 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber; FrankR

FrankR and I have the same interpretation. Where did we go wrong.

Another question - if someone has the "right" to advocate violence, why doesn't his boss have the freedom of speach to say, "You're fired"?


35 posted on 02/28/2005 3:01:49 PM PST by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

well, the whole thing is a matter for the university to decide upon, so your opinion and mine are irrelevant.


36 posted on 02/28/2005 3:58:34 PM PST by cajungirl (freeps are my peeps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

Have you ever had a job or do you just show up to make sanctimonius speeches or forums?

The government may not put him in jail for his speech. But everyone who ever had a job knows that if you say or do certain things that draw attention to your employer to his detriment, your are history.

And do tell,do yousupport the restrictions on free speech visited on students in the name of not having "hate speech". This speech was classical hate speech. And are you aware he took a loyalty oath to get his job, I think his speech makes it clear he has violated that oath. And if what he published is a lie, a fraud, then he ought to be fired for that.


37 posted on 02/28/2005 4:04:48 PM PST by cajungirl (freeps are my peeps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

You will leave that to the college?

Who in hell do you think you are? The college is supported in its entirety by the state and the parents of kids and the federal govt via grants.

Do you think that this college, with its 200 profs already on record wanting a halt to this inquiry, is capable of judgiing its own.

I think you are an academic wetting your pants. You know tenure can be given and taken away and this case will make the latter more likely. I have seen tenure and its ills, it protects people who never do anything but loaf after getting it, who use a university as a podium and who are not scholars. Real scholars are rarely in need to tenure.

Again, your hubris is amazing. And your sanctimony.


38 posted on 02/28/2005 4:08:56 PM PST by cajungirl (freeps are my peeps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Restorer

Ah. I was thinking of the artwork fraud, but yes. That's fraud, too.


39 posted on 02/28/2005 4:13:33 PM PST by cinnathepoet (Directly, I am going to Caesar's funeral)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

"losing their job for holding an unpopular opinion."

Opinion is one thing, but this man has went far past opinion.


40 posted on 02/28/2005 4:31:55 PM PST by shellshocked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
Those who don't realize that are the real threat to America, not the Ward Churchills.

That is the biggest pile of BS.

Ward Churchill is defending the actions of these terrorists and trying to demoralize the people fighting against them. That is going to cause more people to get maimed and killed.

People who want to shut up Ward Churchills stupid nonsense and stop him from corrupting and deceiving students are not harming this country one whit.

The BS arguement you make that if the rights of perverts, traitors and scum are not protected then everyones rights are in danger is the lowest grade of fertilizer. It is simply amazing that even cretins like yourself still use it.

And if you want to school marm my prose; then marm this - ESAD.

41 posted on 02/28/2005 4:49:26 PM PST by JFK_Lib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JFK_Lib

RIGHT ON BRO!


42 posted on 02/28/2005 5:04:08 PM PST by ABN 505
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

ZEROISANUMBER

0 is right you obviously can't read and are a leftist apologist


43 posted on 02/28/2005 5:04:44 PM PST by chemainus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: chemainus

I got a response from one when I emailed the regents. They're definitely listening


44 posted on 02/28/2005 5:07:39 PM PST by Nate1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
Even all the application stuff aside...what about how he trained domestic terrorists in bomb-making?
45 posted on 02/28/2005 5:09:28 PM PST by Nate1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6

Ward the Fraud.


46 posted on 02/28/2005 5:12:02 PM PST by aculeus (Ceci n'est pas une tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nate1984

Please send these, your thoughts, to the Regents....some there care...FR has already had response from one Regent....FREEPING WORKS

Thank you....everyone FREEP all the addresses are here...
governorowens@state.co.us ;
editor@coloradodaily.com; kusa@9news.com ;
Peter.Steinhauer@colorado.edu; Regent.Schauer@Colorado.edu; Jerryrutledge@adelphia.net; tommyjclay@aol.com; Regent.Hayes@Colorado.edu; Gail.Schwartz@colorado.edu; Regent.Bosley@colorado.edu; Regent.Carlisle@Colorado.edu; Carrigan@colorado.edu


just copy and paste


47 posted on 02/28/2005 5:36:23 PM PST by chemainus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Please send these, your thoughts, to the Regents....some there care...FR has already had response from one Regent....FREEPING WORKS

Thank you....everyone FREEP all the addresses are here...
governorowens@state.co.us ;
editor@coloradodaily.com; kusa@9news.com ;
Peter.Steinhauer@colorado.edu; Regent.Schauer@Colorado.edu; Jerryrutledge@adelphia.net; tommyjclay@aol.com; Regent.Hayes@Colorado.edu; Gail.Schwartz@colorado.edu; Regent.Bosley@colorado.edu; Regent.Carlisle@Colorado.edu; Carrigan@colorado.edu


just copy and paste


48 posted on 02/28/2005 5:37:53 PM PST by chemainus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Pendragon_6

tenure was instituted after ww2 by leftists to protect leftists.


49 posted on 02/28/2005 5:45:16 PM PST by ken21 ( warning: a blood bath when rehnquist, et al retire. >hang w dubya.< dems want 2 divide us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

you're right...it has no basis whatsoever in law and is quite commonly shown to be a sham proposition...remaining in force ONLY at the whim and convenience of the administration whose appointment , of course, is approved by the faculty in a revolving you scratch my back proposition...again a mutual admiration society...not law


50 posted on 02/28/2005 5:52:35 PM PST by chemainus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-92 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson