Ward Churchill - Response from University

University of Colorado | February 10, 2005 | Philip P. DeStefano

[fuquadukie]

Response from University Colorado-Boulder to my email sent last week..

SUBJECT: Response Concerning Professor Churchill
FROM: Philip P. DiStefano, Interim Chancellor
SENDER: Pauline Hale, UCB Communications Executive Director
DATE: February 10, 2005

On behalf of the Board of Regents and President Hoffman, I want to thank you for taking the time to comment on Professor Ward Churchill. While the issue is difficult, we can only be served by having an open and honest dialog as we move forward together.

Let me state unequivocally that Professor Churchill's views are his own and do not represent the views of University of Colorado faculty, staff, students, administration or Regents.

As you may suspect, we have received comments from concerned local and national citizens expressing viewpoints that range from urging for his dismissal from the CU-Boulder faculty and other disciplinary measures to supporting his right to express his opinions.

At the Feb. 3 Board of Regents meeting, I announced a course of action that provides due process. Over the next few weeks, I will oversee a thorough examination of Professor Churchill's writings, speeches, tape recordings and other works. The purpose of this internal review is to determine whether Professor Churchill overstepped his bounds as a faculty member, showing cause for dismissal as outlined in the Laws of the Regents.

At the conclusion of this examination, I will determine whether to issue a notice of intent to dismiss for cause, other action as appropriate, or no action. If a notice to dismiss for cause or some other action is issued then the subsequent process will be governed by the Laws of the Regents.

Before such a decision can be made, the University must observe due process as required by the U.S. Constitution and the Laws of the Regents. The University is obligated to carefully balance the protections afforded by the First Amendment, as well as follow very specific University rules and processes for faculty discipline. Our processes will guide our actions in the most thoughtful and equitable manner.

I am hopeful that you will consider the actions already taken to deal with this matter that strikes so deeply at both our national conscience and the core tenets of any institution of higher education.

President Hoffman has stated, "The rights afforded those of us in the academic community to pursue our scholarly work come with a heavy responsibility to behave with integrity and professionalism and to meet the highest ethical standards our disciplines demand. These standards create the boundaries within which academic freedom rests."

I encourage you to visit the CU-Boulder News Center Web site at for additional information and updates on this situation.

Again, we thank you for your interest in the University of Colorado and for expressing your opinion.
Sincerely,

Philip P. DiStefano
Interim Chancellor

[fuquadukie]

I may get flamed for part of this, but let Churchill keep speaking. Let the University sort this out.

We do have, as a basic right, the right to free speech. Now, that doesn't mean we have to listen or agree with the speaker.

Who's to say one's expressed views are "wrong" or should be suppressed? [Except, of course, if you're a liberal and can scream "hate speech..hate speech..hate crime" at others. Whole 'nother topic for another day.]

Let the "marketplace" determine whether or not Churchill will or can continue his diatribe(s). Let legal authorities investigate whether or not Churchill has violated any laws.

At some point, Churchill will not be able to express his distorted views. The number of people willing to listen are getting smaller every day.

That being said... I don't really expect anything to come out of the investigation.

[OldFriend]

Sorry, you just don't get it......try DU, they might agree with your premise.

[traderrob6]

Sorry, but not on my dime. If he needs to be paid for spewing his venom, let the Michael Moores of the world flip the bill

[zzen01]

let Churchill keep speaking! Not on my GD Dime!

[speed_addiction]

I will oversee a thorough examination of Professor Churchill's writings, speeches, tape recordings and other works.

Again, they leave themselves room to maneuver by only looking at issues that will likely fall under "free speech." No mention of the fact that he lied on his resume about being an Indian.

[backhoe]

 

 Terror Teacher, Take Two- the vile Ward Churchill Saga

[traderrob6]

Or "made up" evidence to bolster his moonbat theories

[Getsmart64]

100 bucks says this guy doesn't actually TEACH anything...just spews his rhetoric...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Sorry, you just don't get it......try DU, they might agree with your premise."

I'm as conservative as it gets, and "fuquadukie" is right on target. The USA is all about laws and due process. As unsavory as Churchill and his blatherings are, he, like all of us, is entitled to a fair hearing and due process.

[Beckwith]

Forget free speech. It's the wrong issue.

He misrepresented himself as a native American.

He met with Qaddafi.

His academic writings are fraudulent.

If the spin on Ward Churchill is "free speech" and the 1st Amendment, he wins.

If the spin is that he's a lying poseur , he loses.

[Always Right]

What stops the state of Colorado from not wanting him as an employee. Does everyone have a right to be employed by the state? If this was a criminal case you would have a point about freedom of speech, but this really has zero to do with free speech.

[Chad Fairbanks]

To hell with going trhrough his output - go through his CV and his background - such as the differences between his resumes over the course of time, to wit:

1980 Resume of Churchill

Military:
Served in the United States Army from 11-16-66 to 11-1-68. One tour of duty in Vietnam (1968) in the capicity of Public Information Specialist, wrote and edited the battalion newsletter and wrote news releases.


1991 Resume of Churchll

Military:
U.S. Army, 16 Nov. 66 - 1 Nov. 68. Airborne, Recondo trained. One tour of combat duty in the Republic of Vietnam, Kontum Province; multiple decorations. Honorably discharged without disability.


So, in 1981, on his resume' he was just a Public Information Specialist, doing newsletters, press releases and such, but by 1991, that had changed to him being "recondo trained"...

In addition, various forms of employment should be in the hands of the UC-B, which has him claiming American Indian status for purposes of EEOC - the forms we all fill out at jobs. This is, as has been shown over and over, patently false.

He should be canned for his lies regarding his employment, and his life experiences, for purposes of hiring, not for the crap he spouts.

[Always Right]

This case has nothing to do with the laws of our land and due process. This is about employment. There is no fundamental right to be employed. Your job can be terminated for any reason. Not a free speech issue, but there could be some contractual issues. But still has nothing to do with due process or free speech.

[Sterco]

Colorado is a very conservative state for the most part. Churchill has embaressed us to no end. If I were him I would fear for my physical well being in dark parking lots and hallways. Colorado has no flag burners for this very reason. Perhaps he will relocate to one of the blue states. I do not condone physical violence but this guy has definately but himself in its realm.

[traderrob6]

I wonder whether we would even be having this discussion if he was glorifying southern lynchings arguing that the southerners were heros trying to protect their families from the evil oversexed black man. I doubt it, the guy would have been gone the first day.

[ken21]

there's a good argument for your point of view. and you shouldn't get flamed for making it.

this is the viewpoint of rush limbaugh. he said churchill's worth more to us conservatives teaching his extremism.

[OldSmaj]

I may get flamed for part of this, but let Churchill keep speaking. Let the University sort this out.

No flame here, but I am not so dumb that I do not know that part of his "support" comes from my taxes, in one way or another.

So yeah, I say let the POS spew all the crap he wants, but not on my dime or on the dime of any publicly supported facility, in any way.

Most universities and academic facilities receive public funds and if one damn red cent was spent to enable this POS to speak, then I vehemently protest.

Let the ignorant POS find an outlet amongst the DUmmies and Dimwitrats to spew as much as he wants.

In fact, I absolutely and positively support his right to do so, but only on his dollar and no one, anywhere, under any circumstances, should forced to hear it.

I will defend the US Constitution to my death and if that defense means that we have to put up with occasional crap like this, then so be it.

Just not at the public expense.

[KC_Conspirator]

This guy shouts down students in his class and gives D's and F's to those who don't follow his hate-America orthodoxy. A klansman would not be allowed to teach at CU and what Ward is saying is just as awful and hateful. All of this on the taxpayer dime.

Churchill should have been fired yesterday.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Before such a decision can be made, the University must observe due process as required by the U.S. Constitution and the Laws of the Regents. The University is obligated to carefully balance the protections afforded by the First Amendment, as well as follow very specific University rules and processes for faculty discipline. Our processes will guide our actions in the most thoughtful and equitable manner.

Are they really so stupid as to not understand that due process applies to the relationship between government and individuals? What we're talking about in this case is an employer/employee, master/servant relationship.

[Always Right]

I wonder whether we would even be having this discussion if he was glorifying southern lynchings arguing that the southerners were heros trying to protect their families from the evil oversexed black man. I doubt it, the guy would have been gone the first day.

Yep, and the guy should have every right to say that without fear of criminal prosecution. And the college would have every right to fire him the next day, just like they do here.