LOL! I thought it said a good fisting at first. I was like, whoah! That's gross!!
Churchill and Lyons, like Fisk, need someone to beat some sense INTO them.
"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to know that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers." And of the character and conduct of educators of our youth!
My brain isn't working... What's a "fisking"?
Not when he's using a false Ethnic ID to obtain benefits and set asides reserved for certain minorities. This guy is nuts.
Scott Richard Lyons author of this piece:
Bio: I am Ojibwe (Bullhead Clan) and grew up at Leech Lake Reservation in northern Minnesota. Before coming to Syracuse in 2002, I taught English and Anishinaabe Studies at Leech Lake Tribal College and worked with a range of local activist groups seeking Ojibwe language revitalization, environmental justice, and community renewal. I also performed as an actor with a traveling Native theatre company. In summertime I can usually be found lugging my kids around the northern powwow circuit.
His wages are being paid by you and I. So his freedom of speech doesn't apply. If he wants to make his statements, then he should use a forum where he pays for it himself or some other private, communist, America hating group, BUT NOT BY OUR TAX DOLLARS.
I don't know what this idiot writer has been smoking, but it must be powerful.
Wound them, don't kill them.
The Census Bureau policy is irrelevant for purposes of this discussion. CU's policy is the relevant standard.
The application Churchill filled out stated clearly that the description Native American/Pacific Islander applied only to persons descended from the original peoples of North America.
I think that's the real reason people are now howling for Churchill's head: he committed the cardinal sin of asking Americans to
consider the factsignore his blatant biases and persistent fraud and think for themselvesthink like him...
There, that's a bit more accurate.
I think there were many well-intentioned critiques written about American foreign policy and whether and to what degree it had anything to do with 9/11. I don't think many of those critics raised nearly the ire Churchill has, and for good reason. I don't recall any of them sinking to Churchill's despicable attempt to equate innocent civilians with Eichmann, nor measured, organized military action to ruthless, murderous terrorism.
Ordinary people can intuitively tell the difference. Mr. Churchill knows the difference. The ire of the American public is ignited when this perverse, inflammatory rhetoric is condescendingly published in the name of scholarly thought. When this vitriol is added to Churchill's long history of fraud and unscrupulous ambition, even a patient and tolerant public might just get sick of it.
Quoted in article, excerpt from http://www.pressaction.com
"A few minutes after the state of the union address, Colorado Governor Bill Owens called in to my evening show, during which I cited the treason statute as I had on previous shows covering the professor. My show is heard via the airwaves in 38 states and around the world via streaming audio (an Internet-based parlor trick), so the more I said treason the more the word caught on. Now the governor has apparently looked into the treason angle and agrees that Churchill has committed treason. So, too, have some people like MSNBCs Joe Scarborough, according to one of my listeners who watch MSNBC."