Posted on 02/10/2005 9:36:59 PM PST by neverdem
BOULDER, Colo., Feb. 10 - Prof. Ward L. Churchill has made a career at the University of Colorado out of pushing people's buttons, colleagues and students say, clearly relishing his stance as radical provocateur and in-your-face critic.
Whether it is getting arrested by the Denver police for trying to disrupt Columbus Day, which Professor Churchill has described as a "celebration of genocide" because of the deaths of Indians that resulted from European colonization, or ruffling feathers in the faculty lounge, hyperbole and bombast have always been ready tools in the Churchill kit bag, people here say.
Now many of the offended are pushing back. The storm of controversy that has blown up around Professor Churchill over his essay about the Sept. 11 attacks, with its reference to the Nazi Adolf Eichmann - the "technocrats" at the World Trade Center were "little Eichmanns," Professor Churchill said - has turned the professor into a talking point and a political punch line. On conservative talk radio, on campuses across the country, and especially here in Boulder, debate about Professor Churchill means debate about freedom of speech, the solemnity of Sept. 11 and the supposed liberal bias of academia.
Many people here say that the professor - with his scholarly record under investigation by the university l and with Gov. Bill Owens, a Republican, calling for his dismissal - has become a symbol of academic expression under fire. Others worry that subjects like Sept. 11 have become "sacred," and cordoned off from unpopular analysis. Some say that the vitriolic debate itself is the message and that people have been transformed into mirror images of the man they love or loathe - little Churchills, as it were, who are just as entrenched, over-the-top and, apparently, eager to offend as he himself.
"Two sides are being presented without a lot of people listening," said Joe Flasher, 24, a graduate student in astrophysics. "You already have your opinion, right. So it's one person saying what they think and then the other person saying the complete opposite. It seems very polarized. But I guess it is the ultimate exercise in free speech."
Student organizations like College Democrats and College Republicans have skirmished over Professor Churchill, a member of the ethnic studies department. The Democratic group began a petition this week saying, "The attacks on Professor Ward Churchill are attacks on the academic freedom of the university." The Republicans, in calling for his dismissal, said that alumni should freeze donations and that parents should send their children elsewhere until political balance is brought to the professorial ranks.
"It's probably in their best interest to get rid of guys like that, but why hide what this place really is: a bunch of lunatic leftists," said Matthew Schuldt, senior vice chairman of College Republicans.
The undercurrent of the debate, faculty members and students say, is anxiety about how the outside world regards the university. A football recruiting scandal and several alcohol-related deaths among students over the last year created waves of bad publicity for the institution. Now some people fear that everyone will think the university is full of people like Professor Churchill, whose essay, which drew little attention at its publication after the attacks, gained notoriety when he was scheduled to speak at Hamilton College in upstate New York last week. It suggests little emotion about the deaths of thousands of people on Sept. 11 and a cold logic of foreign policy analysis salted with terms that seemed calculated to enrage rather than enlighten.
"If he had just been a little more thoughtful, nothing would have happened," Uriel Nauenberg, a professor of physics and the former chairman of the Boulder Faculty Assembly, said. "He did not have to say these things in the manner that he did."
Nonetheless, Professor Nauenberg said he did not believe that Professor Churchill should be forced out because of the essay, though he added that he personally found the expressions in the essay obnoxious.
Professor Churchill, 57, a Vietnam War veteran who became a lecturer at the university in 1978 and was granted tenure in 1991, has claimed affiliations over the years with many vociferous left-wing groups, including the Black Panthers, Students for a Democratic Society and the American Indian Movement. He said in an interview that winning peoples' attention often meant not being nice. The United States' foreign and domestic policies, he said, are brutal, and the words to describe that can be painful.
"I don't believe in the theory that we get to treat people like dogs, but you have to talk to us in a polite way," he said.
Faculty members say that an objection to his writing style or opinions, however outrageous or unpopular, is not enough to justify firing him. The 30-day review of his "writings, speeches, tape recordings and other works," that was announced last week by the university's governing body, the Board of Regents, must find evidence of outright academic dishonesty, said R L Widmann, a professor of English and the chairwoman of the Academic Affairs Committee of the Boulder Faculty Assembly.
" 'I published a falsehood and I knew it to be untrue' - that's what they'd have to find," Professor Widmann said.
But the passions have led to some dishonesty. University officials said on Monday, for instance, that they were canceling a speech by Professor Churchill because of security concerns. The student organizers of the speech had received death threats because of their support for the professor, university officials said, and safety could not be guaranteed.
The students, whose names were not released, admitted on Tuesday that the death threats were embellished.
"They said, 'We were just being political,' " Ron Stump, the vice chancellor for student affairs, said. "We expressed our disappointment."
The speech came off without incident - and without any apologies from Professor Churchill.
Many students interviewed on campus in recent days said they feared that the lines being drawn around Professor Churchill were also creating boundaries about what could be freely and safely talked about in the United States.
"I think it's no longer about free speech - it's turned into this kind of thing that we can't talk about Sept 11, that it's kind of become a sacred issue," said Erin Langer, 22, a senior humanities major from Naperville, Ill. "People forget we're in a university setting, and the way ideas are challenged is by looking at an extreme view. The fact that he is so extreme challenges people to think more."
Michelle York contributed reporting from New York for this article.
I heard he had AIM bodyguards but who knows with this character. I am hearing now that most of his past is a total fraud.
Your analysis of this embarrassing fake is on the mark. He has a grudge against all those traditional americans that he could not compete with. I know some Indians who would like to punch him in that pasty solar plexus; their words not mine.
LOL! What a great story! I'm a red-headed Irishman.
Well, I'm red-headed and look Irish, but I'm really a great all-American mutt, and wouldn't have it any other way. Something like 1/3rd Irish drinking/humor gene, 1/3rd EyeTie horny bastard, 1/3rd German scientist.
I really do have a sick fantasy about hanging that lying Churchill's scalp on a stick, but it's only a dream.
After Hannity (I only get the rebroadcast at 2200) tore Means to shreds, a guy called in and said he knew Means, and was semi-apologetic.
Said something like Means was a "purist", meaning Native American purist. I didn't buy it.
From the little I heard from him, Means is just as whacked as Churchill. Bet they've BOTH been living off our tax dollar nipple their whole lives.
The good part is that I'm betting this whole thing will expose Churchill for the fraud I believe him to be, and get him fired. I don't think he can go on welfare if he's fired with cause.
I'm hoping being weaned at his age is really gonna hurt! He may develop a thumb-sucking problem, LOL.
I have to disagree with you. I heard it, and your quote from Hannity is correct. I don't think using the language of Howard Stern, no matter how appropriate it might seem, does our side any favors. The culture is already much too crude. Maybe I'm too old already, but when I grew up and fished in the Hudson River, the word that Hannity used was also called Coney Island White Fish.
Two points. One, Churchill should be fired because no one who makes such statements should be supported by taxpayer dollars, period. (It "makes him a martyr" only among idiots who already sympathize with him anyway. Don't buy that nonsense. It's just timidity disguised as sophistication.)
Two, there have been been some great nicknames for him from right-wing columnists or their headline writers: "Sitting Bulls--t" and "Psychiatric Ward." Pass it on!!!!
Alas, Means wouldn't know purist if it bit him on the nose. He's been arrested far more often of late for abusing his wives (he's been divorced and remarried often of late) and his in-laws than he has for any political activism, and in fact is no longer allowed on many reservations at all.
Churchill's not much better, but as I haven't had the misfortune to meet him in-person, I can say that I only know of his idiocy from a distance. However, his issues have been long in occurring; he was expelled from AIM in 1993, and from the Intertribal Treaty Council in 1992, I believe. Even the activists don't want him - he gives /them/ a bad name, and they're good enough at accidentally doing that to themselves already. :)
I only pray that he gets fired for this. He's certainly milked his "positions" for far too long as it is. (Heck, he still claims to be the head of Denver AIM, even though he was formally expulsed years ago - AIM's archives show the full formal letters he was sent at the time, too.) One hopes the university slams him a good one for this.
Churchill should be fired because people who make such extreme statements, let alone fraudulent scholars and "Indians" who make such statements, must not be supported with taxpayer dollars. The argument that "this would only make him a martyr" is nonsense. It concedes to the liberal establishment the authority to define who a "martyr" is. It betrays a lack of confidence in our own rightness. The only people who would see Churchill as a martyr are idiots who already sympathize with his views.
If enough of us vigorously defend his firing (in the unlikely event that it occurs), some previously-slumbering Americans will be awakened to a new way of looking at things, especially things in academe.
Right-wing columnists, or their headline writers, have come up with two excellent nicknames for this evil geek:
"Sitting Bulls--t" and "Psychiatric Ward." Pass it on to everyone!!!!!!!!
Mr. Churchill's words are not free. He is paid a very handsome salary by the University of Colorado (and therefore, the taxpayers). Anyone being paid to speak does not have the right to complain when they stop getting paid because their employer disagrees with them.
Mr. Churchill has every right to say any thing he wants. That is free speech. He does not have the right to insist othere continue paying him to say anything he wants. He can say anything he wants on his own time and his own dime, but not at taxpayer expense.
They ought to create a special Chair just for Prof. Churchill, then forget to fund it.
Or could they possibly designate the unisex lavatory as his office quarters, a la Sheriff Posey in Walking Tall?
You have to admit that Ward Churchill is a genius.
1.)He has no discernable talent other than being an ass pain.
2.)He has leveraged his talent into a lucrative and public forum.
3.)He has been able to somehow retain his job while taking his vocation to a whole new level.
As anyone can
See, this man
Says nothing
Helpful,
Or moderately
Lucid, or vaguely
Entertaining.
I think we know what that makes him...
I'm surprised the Slimes didn't have Jayson Blair out in Colorado on spec. It would have lent a verisimilitude lacking in the Times lately...
Perhaps not. Perhaps it's just that those who hired and tenured him are complete morons, the being of which is a long-standing tradition in academia.
Churchill is nothing but a CHEROHONKIE, a cultural and linguistic entrepreneur and academic fraud who has reached the "End of the Trail."
Hey, you're not that old. Even I know what CIWF are!
Before we left for overseas, we were stationed at Fort Wadsworth (before the big steel whatsitsname bridge was finished).
I was only something like 4, but seem to remember something about "going down to the sea wall" to watch the Coney Island fireworks.
Maybe I'm mistaken. My EyeTie Granpa lived in Hoboken, maybe that's what I remember about Coney Island fireworks.
So the phrase "Coney Island" stuck in my brain at an early age, and the first time I heard the "White Fish" part (much later), it's been a permanent association
Anyway, I apologize if I've offended you.
I should have said that "Hannity completely lost his cool and ended up screaming ..."
I absolutely hate Howard Stern. He brings the basest elements of human nature to the air every single broadcast.
I used to have a (younger than me) boss that loved Stern. I had no respect for the boss as a result. Guess what? The bleep screwed me over! That's what Stern listeners mean to me.
I could go on forever about this POS boss, but here's a tidbit. That same boss, while drunk at his bachelor dinner, went on-and-on about how much he loved anal sex. My first thought was to warn his bride-to-be, but then I remembered that she also loved Stern. That's also what Stern listeners mean to me.
I can't condone Stern's behavior, but I can't really blame Hannity for his outburst tonight, in light of having to deal with the likes of Means. Besides, it's the first time I've heard Hannity use that kind of language.
I don't know how closely Hannity really knew Barbara Olsen, but even if I knew only one person, even as a remote acquaintance on one of those 9/11 planes, I would have had trouble controlling myself when confronted by the likes of Means (on top of the overall rage at the attack on my fellow Americans).
I had a bunch of relatives traveling that day, I think they were my mother, sister-in-law, sister and brother-in-law, all overseas and/or potentially in transit to NYC. With a large family, I wasn't tracking anyone's day-to-day itinerary.
I was pretty freaked on a very personal level. And pissed off on an American level.
They ended up being safe, but I later found out that my cousin was in the lobby of one of the towers and got out in time. He still really can't talk about it.
So, in light of all that, I can put myself in Hannity's shoes, and actually congratulate him on his restraint at not using even harsher language.
When Hannity blew up on that guy, it felt like that scene from that Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, Kindergarten Cop, when Arnold punches out the husband that was beating his wife & child.
p.s.
Thanks, I never knew (or had forgotten) that what Hannity said was derived from CIWF. I always thought it was related to "Pond Scum".
Learn something everyday.
I read a copy of Churchill's resume posted here at FR. His academic credentials are shabby, at best, and they would not have been sufficient for him to even get a job in academe, let alone tenure. His biggest claim to relevance on his resume is that of being an American Indian, which should not have been used in place of scholarly achievements by those who hired him. Now, of course, even that has proven to be false and he'll likely be fired for fraud. IMHO, those who hired him should be terminated as well.
"The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation." - George Washington
IT'S THE SOLDIER
It's the soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the
PRESS.
It's the soldier, not the poet,
Who has given us freedom of
SPEECH.
It's the soldier, not the campus
ORGANIZER,
Who has given us the freedom to
DEMONSTRATE
It's the soldier, not the lawyer,
Who has given us the right to a
FAIR TRIAL.
It's the soldier who salutes the flag,
Serves under the flag
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who gives the protester the right to burn the flag.
-Father D. E. O'Brien
I'm not offended, just surprised by Hannity's lack of control. I feel bad for parents that were put on the spot to explain the derivation of the word to otherwise innocent kids.
Oh, you bad person, you. Yuk, yuk. I love it!
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.