( hint ? Try
Posted on 07/29/2007 7:02:18 AM PDT by george76
THE UNIVERSITY of Colorado Board of Regents finally pulled the trigger and voted to fire the disgraceful Professor Ward Churchill.
Churchill first came to the nation’s attention when he called the victims of the 9/11 attacks “little Eichmanns,” referring to Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi who oversaw Hitler’s “final solution” to execute all the Jews in Europe.
But it wasn’t that comment that caused Professor Churchill’s firing this week. It was his phoney research and his plagiarism.
The Regents’ action on Tuesday followed thorough reviews by other members of the CU faculty and then the recommendation by CU President Hank Brown that the professor be canned. Mr. Brown said the school had little choice but to fire Churchill to protect the integrity of CU’s research.
The prof claimed - falsely - to be an American Indian. He fabricated a story later widely circulated that the U.S. Army intentionally gave members of an Indian tribe blankets tainted with smallpox in order to annihilate them.
Ever since the spring of 2006, he has been on CU’s payroll, even though he was on leave and then on suspension during the academic investigations. That means taxpayers and those who pay tuition have been supporting a jerk.
Furthermore, under current CU policy, he’ll be paid another full year’s salary. We hope the Regents change that policy - liars should not be rewarded.
He’s been on the public dole since 1978 when he began lecturing at the Boulder campus. In 1991 he was granted a tenured associate professorship.
His lawyer, David Lane, has indicated that the professor would sue if he were fired. Good. Let him sue.
The Regents, President Brown and others in CU’s administration bent over backwards to afford him his academic rights.
Meanwhile, he doesn’t need to be anywhere near the Boulder campus - or any other higher education institution in Colorado, for that matter.
and his sock puppet writings.
.
“Furthermore, under current CU policy, he’ll be paid another full year’s salary.”
I didn’t know that.
Even in Boulder : “ Little big man: Firing Ward was right ... on the topic of Ward Churchill, the ACLU is remarkably wrong. “
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/jul/25/little-big-man/
This maggot is so typical of what the liberal/leftist academia system does to protect its own. Look how long it took to get rid of this putrid lizard. And then with a year’s pay?? Another vote for the NEA.
Ward has been on an extended paid vacation : $96,000 per year plus benefits.
And guess who is paying for his lawyers...
He can probably get a gig at Duke.
.
Taxpayers.
8-(
I knew he was on paid leave, but I didn’t know that they were going to pay him a year’s salary after he was fired.
Ridiculous.
Churchill is just the tip of the iceberg of left wing phonies and traitors in our universities.
His firing is music to my ears. There are many more, like this sub-human, who deserve no less. Many of those deserving a firing, occupy congress on the demonrat side of the isle. America can only hope and pray for election time 2008 to be a victory for America, with a message sent to those like this sub-human.
I cannot and will not believe people of this person ilk reflect the views of the majority of Americans. Americans know the cost, should Americans believe as this sub-human believes. It will be seen via the 2008 election.
Audio link at Michell Malkin's website (included below)
Question from audience:
You mentioned a little bit ago, "Why did it take a bunch of Arabs to do what you all should have done a long time ago," that's my question.
Churchill: I'm gonna repeat that, tell me if I got that right: Why shouldn't we do something and how do you you move so they don't see you coming.
As to the first part, not a reason in the world that I could see. I can't find a single reason that you shouldn't in a principled way—there may be some practical considerations, such as do you know how (laughter from audience)
—you know, often these things are processes. It's not just an impulse. And certainly it's not just an event.
And the simple answer, although it probably should be more complicated, but I'm not being flip and giving the simple answer, is: You carry the weapon. That's how they don't see it coming. You're the one…
They talk about "color blind or blind to your color." You said it yourself.
You don't send the Black Liberation Army into Wall Street to conduct an action.
You don't send the American Indian Movement into downtown Seattle to conduct an action.
Who do you send? You. Your beard shaved, your hair cut close, and wearing a banker's suit.
There's probably a whole lot more to it, you know that. But there's where you start. .."
more...
Audio link at:
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001588.htm
I’d bet $10 Ward will be on the public payroll in some form, for the rest of his life.
Excellent point - and at Duke he would hardly be noticed among the many lunatics on their faculty...
Hell, Churchill and President Brodhead of Duke could be soul mates and launch an attack against the remaining white scalawags on campus.
The pessimist in me believes Churchill’s replacement probably won’t be much better.
Leftwing Professor to Sue over Dismissal
Ward Churchill, the University of Colorado professor who has spent much of the last six years justifying al-Qaeda’s attacks on 9/11, has vowed to sue over his dismissal from his post by the Board of Regents. The regents voted 8-1 to dismiss him on grounds of academic misconduct and plagiarism.
Churchill’s essay, titled “Some People Push Back: On Justice of Roosting Chickens,” compared victims of the World Trade Center to Nazi Adolf Eichmann, who played a key role in the Nazis’ systematic murder of the Jews in the Holocaust. That comparison sparked a national outrage and ended up forcing reluctant school officials to closely scrutinize Churchill’s academic writings and research.
Churchill’s lawyer, David Lane, said he will file a First Amendment retaliation lawsuit. “My client may have cited bogus sources, invented ‘facts,’ and plagiarized the work of others,” Lane said. “But it is our contention that these are all forms of expression protected under the First Amendment. The fact that he is a despicable human being is of no consequence. The First Amendment is for the benefit of all Americans—good, bad or indifferent.”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm
While I support that--as stifling academic rights is a big step toward tyrrany--when there's blatant dishonesty and lack of academic regard, it should be possible to take out the trash without gilding it first.
The conclusion one must draw from such examples isn’t that every institution has its bad apples but rather that, at least in the liberal arts in America, moral turpitude and political hucksterism pervades higher education.
Radical criminals with questionable academic credentials flourish in a milieu that bristles with hostility toward real scholars who don’t toe the party line—witness the case of former Harvard President Lawrence Summers.
Individuals with prison records or FBI rap sheets don’t get into major educational institutions because they fudge their resumes.
They get in because they share the political dogmas of those who hire them—and they flourish for the same reason.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9944
“...Churchill thus represents the reductio ad absurdum of the contemporary university’s willingness to subordinate all other values to affirmative action.
When such a grotesque fraud - a white man pretending to be an Indian, an intellectual charlatan spewing polemical garbage festooned with phony footnotes, a shameless demagogue fabricating imaginary historical incidents to justify his pathological hatreds, an apparent plagiarist who steals and distorts the work of real scholars - manages to scam his way into a full professorship at what is still a serious research university, we know the practice of affirmative action has hit rock bottom ...”
— Paul Campos:
No, not cheap but spot on.
And selling that Negative of another artist’s picture as his own!!!
Ah yes, Niel Abercrombie, my hippie,commie,idiot,representative from Hawaii.
“Just desserts” for this fake Indian would be 10 years in prison for inciting terrorism, and then lifetime parole to the poorest Indian reservation in the country.
Ward also copied “Little Big Man,” Copyright 1877 by Charles M. Bell.
http://www.grandfathersspirit.com/cards/111LittleBigMan.html
Then sold it on Ebay ( the Ebay link is gone now ).
Ward Churchill’s response to the Ebay buyer : “The fact that the purchaser was ignorant...is not my responsibility.”
Ward might win from Boulder.
He made up lies about the Army, blankets and smallpox. The kids learned this and have even talked about how bad white men are...they gave the indians smallpox. When I heard this...I didn't believe it...just more re-writing of history. Making indians out to be saints...when they were brutal savages...
I loved the cartoon about Keith Olbermann. Too funny.
The first example was drawn by the late artist Thomas E. Mails published in a 1972 book called The Mystic Warriors of the Plains. The copy ( ? ) “Winter Attack,” was later “drawn” by Ward Churchill.
Ward’s second scheme was “Little Big Man,” by Charles M. Bell.
About the same.
Suh-LYE-duh for Salida.
PWEB-lo...not Peeblo.
Some may disagree with me.
  Countdown to No Ratings |
Of those, at the very least plagiarism does not fall under First Amendment protections. Anyone is free to quote anyone else, as was Churchill here. That freedom does not extend to claiming authorship.
But there is a broader issue here that bears examination, especially in view of Campos's invocation of reductio ad absurdum with regard to affirmative action. There is another reductio at play in this affair, typified by the ACLU's position.
It is simply the 60's notion that dissent has a prima facie value to society that somehow offers the dissenter absolution from the necessity to observe basic restrictions - in this case, on theft, in others, violence, moral dissolution, or murder - based on the spurious argument that society benefits more from dissent than it suffers from the lawlessness of the dissenter. It is a notion beloved of social theorists and amateur philosophers but it offers one prohibitive weakness, and that is the vulnerability to corruption. Should an individual desire to attain absolution from law he or she need only pose as a dissenter. That pose - and Churchill is, if nothing else, a master poseur - acts as a real-world Get Out Of Jail Free card.
In point of fact this case has very little to do with the First Amendment and everything to do with the demonstrable fact that Churchill is a thief and a fake. It has nothing to do with his personal character outside those portions of that character that led him to thievery and fakery. It has nothing to do with academic freedom, which is itself, like dissent, often regarded as a transcendental end in pursuit of which other norms must be disregarded.
It is, in fact, about a thief and a fake who was caught, and it is about nothing more than that. Churchill's outrageously cruel "Little Eichmanns" essay did nothing more than bring attention to what really got him fired. As it should.
Ward will continue to say his garbage, use his ‘sock puppet’ as a source, steal others research and art work...after being fired by CU.
There should be civil lawsuits by the artist Thomas E. Mails family and others.
But Lane’s First Amendment claims are bogus on Ward being fired. CU has the right to fire him. Ward is lucky to be able to collect another year of paid vacation.
The ACLU continues to prove the ACLU founder and longtime executive director Roger Baldwin’s infamous quote :
“I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”
Actually, those would be “just deserts.”
“Dessert” is that sweet stuff you eat after a meal.
Grrrrrrr.
Holy cat! His chin is bigger than Gwyneth Paltrow’s. The only chins that could dwarf it are possibly Jay Leno’s or Bruce Campbell’s.
Lane’s interpretation of the First Amendment is rather original, to say the least. My prediction is after the initial publicity of filing a suit, he’ll find a way out of a case where he won’t be paid. He may well be pushing this absolutist theory because he knows it’ll be thrown out of court and he won’t have to spend much time on the case.
We know that Ward can say his hate speech in public areas forever.
CU fired him for his deliberate false assertions, misrepresentation of sources, and plagiarism. Ward can still go out to promote his garbage.
I assume that most juries would be able to tell the difference.
Ward will hit the lecture circuit then try to marry some rich widow.
Ward will hit the lecture circuit then try to marry some rich widow.
Betcha she'll have more Indian ancestry than he does!
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.