Ward Churchill fires back

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

I don't see why some here are attacking him as well. I don't see what it is about his views that is so outrageous, other than that he doesn't employ feel-good language


Here is a statement released by Churchill yesterday:

"In the last few days there has been widespread and grossly inaccurate
media coverage concerning my analysis of the September 11, 2001
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, coverage that has
resulted in defamation of my character and threats against my life.
What I actually said has been lost, indeed turned into the opposite of
itself, and I hope the following facts will be reported at least to
the same extent that the fabrications have been.
* The piece circulating on the internet was developed into a book, On
the Justice of Roosting Chickens. Most of the book is a detailed
chronology of U.S. military interventions since 1776 and U.S.
violations of international law since World War II. My point is that
we cannot allow the U.S. government, acting in our name, to engage in
massive violations of international law and fundamental human rights
and not expect to reap the consequences.
* I am not a "defender"of the September 11 attacks, but simply
pointing out that if U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and
destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that
destruction is returned. I have never said that people "should" engage
in armed attacks on the United States, but that such attacks are a
natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy. As Martin
Luther King, quoting Robert F. Kennedy, said, "Those who make peaceful
change impossible make violent change inevitable."
* This is not to say that I advocate violence; as a U.S. soldier in
Vietnam I witnessed and participated in more violence than I ever wish
to see. What I am saying is that if we want an end to violence,
especially that perpetrated against civilians, we must take the
responsibility for halting the slaughter perpetrated by the United
States around the world. My feelings are reflected in Dr. King's April
1967 Riverside speech, where, when asked about the wave of urban
rebellions in U.S. cities, he said, "I could never again raise my
voice against the violence of the oppressed . . . without having first
spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today
- my own government."
* In 1996 Madeleine Albright, then Ambassador to the UN and soon to be
U.S. Secretary of State, did not dispute that 500,000 Iraqi children
had died as a result of economic sanctions, but stated on national
television that "we" had decided it was "worth the cost." I mourn the
victims of the September 11 attacks, just as I mourn the deaths of
those Iraqi children, the more than 3 million people killed in the war
in Indochina, those who died in the U.S. invasions of Grenada, Panama
and elsewhere in Central America, the victims of the transatlantic
slave trade, and the indigenous peoples still subjected to genocidal
policies. If we respond with callous disregard to the deaths of
others, we can only expect equal callousness to American deaths.
* Finally, I have never characterized all the September 11 victims as
"Nazis." What I said was that the "technocrats of empire" working in
the World Trade Center were the equivalent of "little Eichmanns."
Adolf Eichmann was not charged with direct killing but with ensuring
the smooth running of the infrastructure that enabled the Nazi
genocide. Similarly, German industrialists were legitimately targeted
by the Allies.
* It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that
a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center. Following the
logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently
sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad, this
placement of an element of the American "command and control
infrastructure" in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade
Center itself into a "legitimate" target. Again following U.S.
military doctrine, as announced in briefing after briefing, those who
did not work for the CIA but were nonetheless killed in the attack
amounted to no more than "collateral damage." If the U.S. public is
prepared to accept these "standards" when the are routinely applied to
other people, they should be not be surprised when the same standards
are applied to them.
* It should be emphasized that I applied the "little Eichmanns"
characterization only to those described as "technicians." Thus, it
was obviously not directed to the children, janitors, food service
workers, firemen and random passers-by killed in the 9-1-1 attack.
According to Pentagon logic, were simply part of the collateral
damage. Ugly? Yes. Hurtful? Yes. And that's my point. It's no less
ugly, painful or dehumanizing a description when applied to Iraqis,
Palestinians, or anyone else. If we ourselves do not want to be
treated in this fashion, we must refuse to allow others to be
similarly devalued and dehumanized in our name.
* The bottom line of my argument is that the best and perhaps only way
to prevent 9-1-1-style attacks on the U.S. is for American citizens to
compel their government to comply with the rule of law. The lesson of
Nuremberg is that this is not only our right, but our obligation. To
the extent we shirk this responsibility, we, like the "Good Germans"
of the 1930s and '40s, are complicit in its actions and have no
legitimate basis for complaint when we suffer the consequences. This,
of course, includes me, personally, as well as my family, no less than
anyone else.
* These points are clearly stated and documented in my book, On the
Justice of Roosting Chickens, which recently won Honorary Mention for
the Gustavus Myer Human Rights Award. for best writing on human
rights. Some people will, of course, disagree with my analysis, but it
presents questions that must be addressed in academic and public
debate if we are to find a real solution to the violence that pervades
today's world. The gross distortions of what I actually said can only
be viewed as an attempt to distract the public from the real issues at
hand and to further stifle freedom of speech and academic debate in
this country.
Ward Churchill Boulder, Colorado January 31, 2005

[poe]

1. The significance of this seems to have been lost by many on the left

It is now acceptable to threaten the lives of antiwar activists, as Tom Frank did recently at the New Republic. As I wrote in a email to the New Republic, “Mr. Frank’s remarks bring to mind Hitler’s Sturmabteilung, or brownshirts, paramilitary goons who not only talked about using physical violence against their opponents but engaged in it with frighteningly sadistic and, eventually, genocidal results. Is it possible the writers and editors of the New Republic wish to emulate the actions of the Nazis, responsible for the murder of millions of innocent people?”We can write this piece off as just another one of the smarmy New Republic 20-something writers getting his jollies slamming the left. We can say that Frank -- his entire piece an exercise in poorly executed humor, ill-written grammar, and awkward phrasing -- just forgot to break his Prozac in half that morning. But there is something far more insidious at work here.

This piece is yet another effort to intimidate and silence people who aren't willing to toe the "party line" espoused by Democrats and Republicans alike that the death of 1,400 US troops and 100,000 Iraqi civilians is somehow justified. Frank's piece is an exercise in hate and intimidation. To be quiet in its face is to give ground in a period when we have precious little to give.
All decent people, whether Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, should denounce the views of Ward Churchill,” Bill Owens, the Republican governor of Colorado, writes in a letter he sent to Isaiah Lechowit, the president of the University of Colorado College Republicans, who will read it to a lynch mob demanding the resignation of Churchill, the latest victim of the Bushzarro world purge of academe. “Not only are his writings outrageous and insupportable, they are at odds with the facts of history.”
Are They Really?
Unfortunately, this is the America we now live in. It will only get worse because the Strausscons and their neoliberal allies have more invasions and bombing runs in mind. In order to accomplish this, America will need to be polarized even further and threats of violence will indeed become actual acts of violence, as Hitler’s Sturmabteilung moved from murmured threats in beer halls to kicking in the doors of dissidents and disappearing them into the night. www.kurtnimmo.com
The Christian pastor Martin Niemoller is credited with saying, "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

[Rockerdem]

2. As I said before, his point merited discussion but

his phraseology was off the deep end. It didnt take a genius to realize that his impolite language would get him into the deep weeds. When he admits it was "hurtful", its a sign that hes beginning to get it. The upper level of academia (especially the fundraisers) are very sensitive to insensitivity. Fact of life.

[K-W]

4. Off the deep end?

Because it could plausibly be taken wrong?

Is that a reasonable standard?

In my life, when I mistake what somebody said I apologize to them, I dont try to get them fired.

[Rockerdem]

8. Just think for a second about all the public figures that have been canned

We are a TV Nation now. Look at all the TV critters who have been let go for indicretions. Even Rush Limpball. College coaches get let go for impromptu remarks that caused firestorms. The mentality in the upper reaches of college campuses is a very puckered one. Anything that might upset wide swaths of people is frightening to them.

WC could have said all sorts of similar things 20-30 years ago when bombthrowers could get away with flying below the radar. With 24/7 cable and the web, those days are gone. Fact of life.

[K-W]

10. You think that oppression is a "Fact of life" that I need to accept as ok?

No thanks, I'll fight for my civil rights thank you.

[Rockerdem]

17. Well thats fine

But dont expect to be hired by any major university (red or blue) if you persist in using less than professorial language. Youd be in the same unemployed rhetorical boat with WC and Ann Coulter. Too hot to handle.

[K-W]

19. This has nothing to do with proffessional language.

And yor defense of, and seeming celebration in the failure of our society to protect our freedom is disturbing.

He said something that could be mistaken for bad things. Thats the only reason this happened.

[Rockerdem]

20. I defended Churchills right to express his opinion

But its up to him to watch his tongue. He didnt have to use that style to make his points. From what he said above, I think that he recognizes his mistake.

[K-W]

21. Excuse me, but akward wording does not justify any of this.

You are just looking for some little reason that this is right, when it is obviously the media outright lying to lynch a leftist.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

22. When they came for Ward Churchill, I said nothing....

You can see where this is heading

[Peak_Oil]

39. When they came for NAMBLA...

I think you see where this is going.

[DulceDecorum]

41. We sent NAMBLA to interrogate the children of Iraq.

And to make certain that No Child was Left Behind.
Ahh, such Rapture.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

44. Churchill is hardly equatable to NAMBLA

Churchill is a respected writer on Native American issues who has earned the respect of a wide array of academics, including Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, and Bill Moyers

His opinion was no different than 90% of what we write here. The only crime he committed was that he didn't convey it in a way that would lend itself to sound bites.

I'm sure everyone here has said something that they stand by on substance 100%, but know they phrased it a way that didn't go across as well as they would have liked

[DulceDecorum]

47. Churchill touched the untouchable

The lights dimmed and Mr. Barnett, clad in a dark turtleneck and khakis, launched into his brief. He soon flashed up on a screen a picture of a mock personal ad that he found taped to a Pentagon wall in the late 1990s.

"ENEMY WANTED: Mature North American Superpower seeks hostile partner for arms racing, Third World conflicts and general antagonism. Must be sufficiently menacing to convince Congress of military financial requirements...Send note with pictures of fleet and air squadrons to CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF/PENTAGON."

In the early days of the current Bush administration, senior Pentagon officials thought China, with its growing arsenal of ballistic missiles and increasingly sophisticated submarine fleet, might fill this role.

Mr. Barnett's work with CANTOR FITZGERALD, which stemmed from A LONG STANDING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FIRM AND THE NAVAL WAR COLLEGE, convinced him otherwise. China was buying U.S. debt, angling to join the World Trade Organization and growing increasingly dependent on foreign direct investment. "China isn't the problem, it's the prize," he told the officers.

He displayed a map of the sprawling "gap," which includes most of Africa, Central Asia, the Middle East and a big chunk of Central and South America. "This is globalization's ozone hole," he said.
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/published/wsj.htm

The Naval War College conducts the exercises in collaboration with the New York-based bond brokerage firm of CANTOR FITZGERALD, which recruits participants from the financial world and supplies the meeting room in the World Trade Center building, officials said.

The exercises more clearly demonstrate the increasing link between economic security and national security, exercise developers said, even though the topics might not, as first look, appear so related.

"In the end, the military and financial markets are in the same business: the effective processing of risk," said Thomas Barnett, the project's director. "As such, it is essential that these two worlds--military and financial--come to better understand their interrelationships across the global economy."
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/projects/newrulesset/Defense%20News%20article%20on%20NewRuleSets_Project.htm

Thursday, February 03, 2005
The Colorado state Senate today joined the House in passing a resolution denouncing a University of Colorado professor who likened some victims of the 2001 terrorist attacks to a notorious Nazi.
The nonbinding resolution was identical to one passed Wednesday by the House, calling Ward Churchill's comments "evil and inflammatory."
Gov. Bill Owens has asked the university to fire Churchill, saying the school had legal grounds to dismiss him even though he is protected by tenure.
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~61~2690542,00.html

[rinsd]

48. Let's see what the American Indian Movement thinks....

http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/USvAIMbackground.html

http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/USgovt-vs-AIMnov99.html

http://www.aimovement.org/csi/

They seem to think Ward is CONINTELPRO...

Here's their reponse to this:

http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/churchill05.html

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

51. that certain branch may...

but many other native activists do respect ward-winona laduke for example. The guy's a personal friend of Howard Zinn. He's written more great stuff on AIM than nearly anyone. Just because certain AIM leaders have gone soft in recent years and are chickenshits and are trying to distance themselves from Churchill doesn't speak for the movement as a whole.

Churchill is part of the Colorado branch of AIM, btw

[Cats Against Frist]

32. Thank you for admitting though, that the criticism is a logical fallacy

If someone is critiquing him on "style over substance," we can call bullshit, right now. The right, the media AND some select DUers are trying to negate his argument, based on his "style."

His argument was sound. His metaphor was apt.

I do agree with you that it is a fact that many colleges would fire him. I don't believe this is acceptable, however.

[Cats Against Frist]

30. So who's driving the PC wagon, now, anyway?

Doesn't it bother you slightly that the right, who can't bring themselves to say "African American," can call out the "politically correct police" any other time that they like -- WHICH THEY DO ALL THE TIME -- most of the outrage over this is from hypocrites who are all whiney because they might have to learn some fucking history. Are you on their side? What ever happened to dialogue -- even if it isn't pretty?

And the man explained what he meant by "Little Eichmanns," and it sounds pretty innocuous AND ACCURATE to me. Sorry the masses, with the gaping chest cavities that are supporting their giant bloody hearts can't deal with a god damn metaphor.

[K-W]

3. Indeed, his views dont differ from the norm at DU

but suprise suprise, selectively quoted by conservatives and passed around the internet it sounds outrageous and all the liberals line up to register thier outrage, by the time anyone bothers to check on it the public has rendered a verdict and conservatives get carte blanche to ruin the life of an outspoken leftist thinker and every professor in the country who has said something similar is going to feel the pressure.

[rinsd]

6. If anything his original essay was worse....

...in terms of language. He was much harsher than any of the excerpts I've seen.

[rinsd]

5. Because some of us feel that collective guilt is BS...

...he's also a liar. In his original piece and its addendum he made no distinctions about those in WTC.

He even blasted those who advocated peace as "non innocent" to use his term.

Then in his addendum to the original rant where he stated the ghosts of Iraqis were haunting us, he also brought up the Toyko firebombing as well as Hiroshima & Nagasaki. A curious addition considering Imperial Japan basically invaded a butchered a great deal of people. For a guy into collective guilt and those responsible suffering consequences he only seems to have one poeple in mind for comeuppance.

"It should be emphasized that I applied the "little Eichmanns"
characterization only to those described as "technicians." Thus, it
was obviously not directed to the children, janitors, food service"

How laudable, he makes a few scant exceptions. Of course he doesn't mention that one of the biggest employers in the WTC was that evil imperialist entity the NJ/NY Port Authority. Or that many business had little to with defense, banking, or any other BS collective guilt umbrella he wants to create.

It's a weak ass attempt to tone down what he actually thought and wrote down without actually saying he was doing so.

Edit: spelling

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

7. I've read Churchill for years, I know what he meant

maybe he didn't dumb it down and make it clear enough for bill o'reilly's viewers. that's the world we live in today. you can't oppose a war without having to add "but i support the troops"

and churchill can't point out how the WTC would have been considered a legitimate military target with out having to add "but i'm not saying the janitors, portauthority worker, and people empoyed (list all non-military companies), deserved it"

of course he means that, but the rightwing thought police aren't going to let you know that and are going to blow his views out of context and destroy the career of one of our foremost authorities on native american politics

[Disturbed]

14. A correct analyis.

Had he not used the "litte Eichmans" term he would not have been news. He seems smart enough to have realized that this would make him a target of the Fascists. Were I him I would not have defended or backtracked. He has the right to express his views. The Bush Junta and their Cult of course will attempt to destroy anyone that does not bow or click their heels to their New World Order. The next 4 years will bring Amerika to a Fascist Police State and the destruction of Amerika's Middle Class. The Fascist agenda will suceed because their is no longer a viable oppositon to the Fascist Judernaught.

The Right Wing (Fascist) Agenda

Abolish

Social Security
Medicare
Employer supplied health insurance
Unemployment Benefits
Welfare
Abortion Rights
Collective Bargaining
EPA
Public Education
Public Housing
IRS

[K-W]

16. They want to abolish liberals too.

Just to connect back to the topic of the thread.

[K-W]

9. Erm...

Collective guilt isnt really what the section of his work in question was talking about.

The fact that Japan committed atrocities would not in any way justify committing atrocities against Japan, if that is what you are trying to argue.

You dont understand his point about the little Eichmanns. His point was that those people in the building who were directly involved in the instruments of empire are not innocent just because they arent doing the killing. He used an EXAMPLE as a COMPARISON meaning you arent supposed to assme he was equating the two. He was illustrating the moral principle with an example from history.

His point was that the US does the exact same thing that the terrorists did. That the US will bomb buildings full of innocent people if it contains military related infrastructure. And that we just call it collaterall damage.

His point was that innocent people dying is wrong, and even the less than innocent people dying is wrong, but its also wrong when we do it, and since we allow our government to continue to do it, we are in no position to be shocked when somebody does it to us.

[rinsd]

24. Of course it doesn't....

"Collective guilt isnt really what the section of his work in question was talking about."

Did you read the whole essay? The whole purpose was to assign collective guilt in hopes that shame would force the American people to act. To rail against Americans the seeds that they have sown.

Here: " There may be a real utility to reflecting further, this time upon the fact that it was pious Americans who led the way in assigning the onus of collective guilt to the German people as a whole, not for things they as individuals had done, bur for what they had allowed – nay, empowered – their leaders and their soldiers to do in their name.

If the principle was valid then, it remains so now, as applicable to Good Americans as it was the Good Germans."


"The fact that Japan committed atrocities would not in any way justify committing atrocities against Japan, if that is what you are trying to argue."

That's my point. Even though grave atrocities were committed, that doesn't excuse grave atrocities to be commited in revenge. He seems to excuse it in this case. Though I wouldn't say the WTC is comparable to everything the US has ever done of course.

More: "This might be seen as merely a matter of "vengeance" or "retribution," and, unquestionably, America has earned it, even if it were to add up only to something so ultimately petty."

"His point was that the US does the exact same thing that the terrorists did. That the US will bomb buildings full of innocent people if it contains military related infrastructure. And that we just call it collaterall damage."

I don't have issue with whether the terrorists were a combat team in a war or whether the WTC or Pentagon were legit targets based on US bombing philosphy. I have an issue with his collective guilt BS that he seems to think is only okay when applied to America.

[K-W]

29. You clearly didnt understand a word of his essay.

In the quote about the Germans youve once again mistaken his meaning. He was, much like the quotes in the media simply pointing out the fact that the moral equivelence of the situations. Any judgement on one applies to the other.

He wasnt defending the attackers, he was explaining thier motives and pointing out that thier grievence was justified, that doesnt mean that the methods were. He didnt say that.

This attack was directly motivated by the United States' immoral and illegal actions abroad. It was earned. He doesnt agree with what happened, that doesnt change the fact that it was a response to our actions.

He isnt talking about collective guilt, hes talking about the American People's failure to hold thier government responsible for its actions abroad and it was those actions that provoked the attack and Americans should not feel as though what was done to them was any more repulsive than what the US has done in thier names.

And we certainly dont have the right to rush off attacking people for revenge, when we picked the fight with islamic militants.

[rinsd]

35. You're being deliberately disingenous....

"He isnt talking about collective guilt"

Really?

"hes talking about the American People's failure to hold thier government responsible for its actions abroad and it was those actions that provoked the attack and Americans should not feel as though what was done to them was any more repulsive than what the US has done in thier names."



What other term is used when the populace as a whole is responsible whether they are blissfully ignorant, not effective enough in their protestations or those who were directly complicit? He makes little distinction other than perhaps a bit more direct scorn on some of the players(he states that hanging Clinton and Albright with the usual RWers would be a good start toward reconcilliation)and the rest of his writing seems to imply an admiration for this act, a hope for a jumpstart of the rightful punishing of the US.

"
He doesnt agree with what happened"

Bullshit. He goes onto to great lengths to justify such. Read the section The makings of a humanitrian strategy. He's hopeful in his writing this will lead to bigger punishmnets for the US until Americans get it.

[K-W]

36. You can choose to misread it if you want. EOM

[rinsd]

37. As you have chosen to misrepresent (nt)

[poe]

11. Focusing on a dangling participle while the Nazis come knocking

Hey i know let's do a course in Media Distortion 101
Hey i know let's not read anything by Ward
Hey i know let's let the larger issues go unexamined and focus on the individual, you know like the Welfare Queen.
Hey i know history started on 9-11 and i hold dear the founding father fairy tale and love the only cumulative flag, which is now made in Bangladesh.
Hey i know let's believe the tale of the land of artificial demarcations and ignore the beast that enslaves us all.

Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph: Haile Selassie

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

15. amen, the silence of the left on this is frightening

is everyone really this scared? are you afraid to speak out?

Do you think a guy should be fired just because his phrasing lends itself to distortion by FAUX News?

media matters, which usally hates bill o'reilly, hasn't uttered a peep. tom tomorrow is going out of his way to distance the left from churchill. is this what it's come to?

has everyone let the rightwing noise machine win?

i've written a letter to UofC in support of churchill. I hope, for the sake of open discourse, you all do as well

---

CU Regents To Discuss Churchill's Fate

University To Decide If Tenure Protects Professor From Termination

POSTED: 6:05 am MST February 3, 2005
UPDATED: 2:25 pm MST February 3, 2005

AURORA, Colo. -- The University of Colorado's Board of Regents will hold a special meeting Thursday at the Fitzsimmons campus to hear from concerned citizens about the tenure of professor Ward Churchill, who compared some victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks to one of Nazi Germany's most notorious leaders.

CU Professor Ward Churchill came under fire for an essay he wrote about the the World Trade Center attacks.


Churchill has resigned as the head of CU's ethnic studies department but now there are calls for Churchill to leave the university entirely -- either by his own accord or by force.


Thursday's meeting is not the usual course of action for the board but in light of the national furor over Churchill's Sept. 11 essay, the regents felt it was necessary to hold a special emergency meeting to discuss whether he is and can be protected by tenure.
more:
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/4158933/detail.html?rss=den&psp=news

[K-W]

18. Nazi Germany's most notorius leaders?

Good god. Good fucking god.

And democrats are chearing them on because they think he was criminally insensitive.

[Montresor]

23. He's not being silenced

Churchill is a representative of the UofC. He has the right to say/write whatever he likes, however if the UofC believes it is harmful to the Unversity, that is their choice. They have to weigh the total value of his contribution to research and education at the University. Churchill can write anything he wants, but if it "damages" the University (which is a very grey area though), then the University can choose the remedy.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

25. it isn't damging UofC

rightwing distortions of a faculty member are what's causing the disruption

but they can't make bill go away, so they cave and fire churchill for no valid reason

[K-W]

26. So anyone with media power can veto university personnel decisions?

Sounds like a sound policy.

[poe]

31. This has a chilling effect that is the purpose

It is now acceptable to threaten the lives of antiwar activists, as Tom Frank did recently at the New Republic. As I wrote in a email to the New Republic, “Mr. Frank’s remarks bring to mind Hitler’s Sturmabteilung, or brownshirts, paramilitary goons who not only talked about using physical violence against their opponents but engaged in it with frighteningly sadistic and, eventually, genocidal results. Is it possible the writers and editors of the New Republic wish to emulate the actions of the Nazis, responsible for the murder of millions of innocent people?”We can write this piece off as just another one of the smarmy New Republic 20-something writers getting his jollies slamming the left. We can say that Frank -- his entire piece an exercise in poorly executed humor, ill-written grammar, and awkward phrasing -- just forgot to break his Prozac in half that morning. But there is something far more insidious at work here.

This piece is yet another effort to intimidate and silence people who aren't willing to toe the "party line" espoused by Democrats and Republicans alike that the death of 1,400 US troops and 100,000 Iraqi civilians is somehow justified. Frank's piece is an exercise in hate and intimidation. To be quiet in its face is to give ground in a period when we have precious little to give.
All decent people, whether Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, should denounce the views of Ward Churchill,” Bill Owens, the Republican governor of Colorado, writes in a letter he sent to Isaiah Lechowit, the president of the University of Colorado College Republicans, who will read it to a lynch mob demanding the resignation of Churchill, the latest victim of the Bushzarro world purge of academe. “Not only are his writings outrageous and insupportable, they are at odds with the facts of history.”


The Christian pastor Martin Niemoller is credited with saying, "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

[poe]

27. this one is gettin' to me, your post breathed a bit of sanity into the air

as long as i can send my kid to montessori and have a slice of american quiche i'll talk identity politics with you. but ask me to accept any degree of culpability or give up my cell phone (Coltan trade fueling wars in congo) or chance getting arrested while striving to halt the earth destroying machine-can't i just sign a petition.

Friends, we are entering waters in which we may all drown, filled with nothing but anger and fanaticism. We had better take a long, hard look before we enter this raging stream because our country never be the same again. For those who advocate this sea change in American polity and social life do not want to talk; they want to impose. They do not want debates; they want obedience. And most importantly, they do not want us to pay attention to their desire for a de facto (and for many a de jure) Christian theocratic state.

I believe there is no longer any room for apathy or laziness. The voices of hatred, masquerading as "Christians" or "liberators," are beginning to echo eerily the pre WWII days in Germany when the bigoted darkness within "decent" people was stirred by racism, intolerance and vindictiveness, stamping out dissent and opposing viewpoints.

We no longer have the option of turning our eyes away for everywhere we go the same familiar faces and voices greet us. Hate radio spews the worst kind of aggressive boorishness, inane TV talk shows belie the deep distress Americans feel about their broken political processes, and a complacent media is ignoring the underlying tensions contained therein that threaten to explode in single-minded fury.

[ikojo]

38. This is why the right is against tenureship for professors

People who do not have to worry about their job are more willing to speak out, as Mr Churchill did.

How is what Mr Churchill said any different from Malcom X talking about chickens coming home to roost following the assassination of JFK?

It is true that the US cannot continue to support totalitarian and dictatorial regimes (as they did with Saddam Hussein and they continue to do with Saudi Arabia where most of those responsible for the attacks on 9/11/01 were from) without the citizenry becoming inflamed with anger against the US. Forget about the bombings that the US routinely inflicts on other countries, remember that the US has supported some pretty heinous leaders throughout the ages.

If Mr Churchill is fired from his job it will send a cool breeze through academia and will do much to hold down dissent.

Tell me again, how is the US different from other countries where the intelligentsia is told what to think and what to say.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

45. The precednet this could set takes out the next generation of chomskys

how can our universities cultivate great thinkers if, because of Uof C's potential decision, professors now think they have to playit safe

please write the school. the implications of this are beyond belief

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

12. meanwhile Ann Coulter can advocate your death for disagreeing with her

and she still gets invited to forums on campuses everywhere w/o problem

and guys like O'Loofah and Joe Dead Intern, who are so horribly, horribly, outraged by Churchilll, can't wait to invite her on their shows to kiss her ass

[DulceDecorum]

13. Fallujah is destroyed

and it is the fault of the Iraqis,
who denied having weapons of mass destruction
and ties to Osama bin Laden.

If we cannot blame someone else
for the events of September 11, 2001,
then we are going to have to look in the mirror
and we cannot afford to do that.

Let us blame the Saudis for the deficit
and the Latin Americans for the drug problem
and the Chinese for the lack of jobs.

None of this is our fault.
Its those godamn people who live outside America.
They hate us for our freedoms
and we must destroy them.

Thursday, February 3, 2005
"Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot," Mattis said, prompting laughter from some military members in the audience. "It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.
"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil," Mattis said. "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/02/03/general.shoot/

[Cats Against Frist]

34. Yeah, ironic, isn't it

that the party of "personal responsibility," can't deal with any.

[Cats Against Frist]

28. Thanks for addressing the knee-jerking freepers, Ward

and the DU freepers.

I'd say most of what's wrong with this world comes from the inability of the rank and file to process and parse complex problems. If people were able to grasp an argument, instead of flipping out at the first chance to get offended, we'd all get a lot further, and Ward Churchill would still have his job, and maybe we could have a REAL DIALOGUE ABOUT SOMETHING IMPORTANT in this country, instead of, as Churchill pointed out, "playing innocent."

And those who made death threats should be arrested. And those against Churchill should step back and get a goddamn grip.

I posted about this before, but there is a "9-11 Sentimental Knee-Jerk Society," -- not withstanding the people who donated to the Red Cross and then got all huffy when their contributions didn't go to the families of actual victims. These people are still with us, both Republican and Dem congresspeople, freepers and DUers.

This shit will never stop, until people wise the fuck up. Our policies caused 9-11, and we're all culpable.

[K-W]

33. I think its worse than that.

Its not neccessarily that they cant process them. Its that they either do not know or do not care whether or not they can.

Anything that sounds plausible to you (based only on your experience of course) and sounds like something you want to be true is true. Anything that seems implausible (based only on your experience of course) or you dont want to be true, isnt true.

[Redleg]

40. What the Freepi really find offensive is that people dare say Americans

have killed innocent civilians and that at time we have done so indiscriminantly and with little concern.

[codswallop]

42. God forbid hypocrisy be starkly illuminated.

We can't have that in Brave New America. The only time we should tolerate blunt rhetoric is when it is cloaked in RW spin and propaganda.

The fuss over this is down right frightening.

[DulceDecorum]

43. The Strategy Guy & the Technicians.

First, we need to expand dramatically the dialogue between Wall Street and the Pentagon regarding how globalization changes our definitions of national security. Over the past several years, the Naval War College has collaborated with the broker-dealer firm Cantor Fitzgerald in conducting a series of Economic Security Exercises examining scenarios such as a terrorist strike against Wall Street, the Year 2000 Problem, and Asia’s future energy needs.

These pioneering war games are the brainchild of retired Navy Admiral William J. Flanagan, Senior Managing Director of Cantor Fitzgerald, which until 11 September had its international headquarters in the uppermost floors of the World Trade Center. It is not hyperbole to call the September terrorist strike a new form of warfare. Cantor Fitzgerald’s catastrophic human loss only underscored the paradigm shift. These individuals were killed not only to terrorize the American people, but also to disable U.S. financial markets and, by doing so, diminish global investor confidence in their long-term stability.
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/published/git.htm


Dr. Tom Barnett earned his PhD in political science from Harvard. He received his on-the-job training if you will, as a project director at the Center for Naval Analysis. He has been a research project director at the Naval War College for over a decade and directed the New Rules Sets Project in partnership with Cantor-Fitzgerald. Dr Barnett is the author of the new book that is causing quite a stir around Washington, “The Pentagon’s New Map, War and Peace in the 21st Century”. Without further adieu, let me introduce the person that Vice Admiral Art Cebrowski, the Director of the Office of Transformation for Secretary Rumsfeld, refers to as “My Strategy Guy”, Tom (Barnett).

I like to describe the brief in this presentation as the product of about a six-year conversation with Art Cebrowski in addition to a long mentoring relationship I’ve had or enjoyed with Hank Gaffney at the Center for Naval Analyses and a similar relationship with retired four-star admiral Bud Flanagan recently of Cantor Fitzgerald. ....

Our worst-case scenario - pretty fantastic. Wall Street shut down for a week; air travel in the United States shut down for about 10 days; a surge in hate crimes against ethnic groups identified as part of the problem, a surge in gun buying; islanding of certain services - especially insurance; breakdowns of just-in-time supply chains - a terrible description of January 1, 2000; a very prescient description of September 12th 2001. It wasn’t because we were predicting anything. I was scheduled to be on 105th floor of the WTC 2 weeks to the day after 9-11 so obviously we weren’t predicting the trigger. But we had thought long and hard about the horizontal scenarios that would emerge from that vertical shock.

We were approached by CANTOR FITZGERALD in the midst of this workshop series. They had done a series of workshops with the war college in the early 1990s - LOOKED AT A WAR IN THE PERSIAN GULF; LOOKED AT A FINANCIAL CRISIS BEGINNING IN SE ASIS; LOOKED AT A TERRORIST STRIKE IN DOWNTOWN MANHATTAN. SO WE WERE PRETTY IMPRESSED WITH THEIR THINKING AHEAD CAPABILITIES. They said we think we’ve seen this Y2k beast before. We said really? What did it look like? They said we think we saw it in the Asian flu. We said, Boy that does not compute. We’re talking about software failure and you are talking a financial panic. The way I translated what they said to me next was essentially, “we like to look at the world in terms of Rule Sets”. What’s a Rule Set? Hockey has a Rule Set; American football has a Rule Set; the U.S. legal system has a Rule Set; the U.S. military has a Rule Set. You walk into these venues; you know what the rules are basically. And their argument for the 1990’s, which they said was similar to the 1920’s, was that rule sets were out of whack. That in the process of expanding the global economy so dramatically across the 80’s and 90’s, economic rules sets raced ahead of political rule sets. Technological rule sets and connectivity in general raced ahead of security rule sets.
http://www.fromtheedge.us/Psychological/Barnett%201.htm

... Thomas Barnett is a professor at the Navy War College in Rhode Island. He is author of the controversial book The Pentagon's New Map that identifies a "non-integrating gap" in the world that is resisting corporate globalization. Barnett defines the gap as parts of Latin America, Africa, Middle East and Central Asia all of which are key oil-producing regions of the world.
In what Barnett calls a "Grand March of History" he claims that the U.S. military must be transformed in order to preemptively take control of the gap, so the U.S. can "manage" the global distribution of resources, people, energy, and money. (It has long predicted that the gap between rich and poor around the world will continue to widen and that the Pentagon will be used to keep the boot on the necks of the people of the third world to the benefit of corporate globalization.)
Barnett predicts that U.S. unilateralism will lead to the "inevitability of war." REFERRING TO HITLER IN A RECENT PRESENTATION, BARNETT REMINDED HIS MILITARY AUDIENCE THAT THE NAZI LEADER NEVER ASKED FOR PERMISSION BEFORE INVADING OTHER COUNTRIES. Thus, the end to multi-lateralism.
Barnett argues that the days of arms talks and international treaties are over. "There is no secret where we are going," he says as he calls for a "new ordering principle" at the Department of Defense (DoD). BARNET MINTAINS THAT AS JOBS MOVE OUT OF THE US THE PRIMARY EXPORT OF THE NATION WILL BE "SECURITY." Global energy demand will necessitate U.S. control of the oil producing regions. "We will be fighting in Central Africa in 20 years," Barnett predicts.
http://www.rense.com/general61/agemnda.htm

Give us your angry, video game-playing 18-19 year olds, for the Leviathan force, Barnett says.
Once a country is conquered by Leviathan, Barnett says the U.S. will have to have a second military force that he calls Systems Administration.
This force he describes as the "proconsul" of the empire, boots on the ground, the police force to control the local populations.
This group, Barnett says, "will never come home."

[Just Me]

46. I suspected he was a target by the RW since he expresses the truth

about what the U.S. has done behind the American people's backs.

Any professor or academic or progressive or liberal who is attacked nowadays is automatically suspect to me. I assume a RW target first.

[Viking12]

49. CO State Sen. Peter Groff, D-Denver, has courage!!!

The Colorado state Senate today joined the House in passing a resolution denouncing a University of Colorado professor ...

-snip-

"Sen. Peter Groff, D-Denver, casting the lone "no" vote on the Senate resolution, saying he disagreed with Churchill but that the resolution provides him with undeserved attention and attacks free speech."

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~61~2690542,00.html

[Viking12]

50. Dustin Craun has courage!!!

"The regents said they would not take public comment because it was a special meeting, prompting an outcry from some of the 35 students who showed up to support Ward Churchill with signs that read "protect academic freedom" and "witch hunt." "Please understand you're going to start a new era of McCarthyism if you allow this," ethnic studies major Dustin Craun shouted at the regents before he was escorted out of the meeting.

Another man shouted, "please invite us to your next book burning." University officials said Craun had been arrested for disrupting a public meeting.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E53%257E2690727,00.html

Arrested for disrupting a public meeting that wouldn't take public comment??? How is is "public" is the public can't participate?
The Google News headline reads, "CU regents discuss Churchill behind closed doors", but the Denver Post has changed their headline.