Tuesday, March 08, 2005
"Out of context" once more--a second Open Letter
This is an Open Letter to the Board of Regents and President of C.U.
Dear Regents--I would urge you, when you read Ward Churchill's piece in today's RMN, to consider every angle of this case. Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman have played the entire tape of Mr. Churchill advocating a terrorist strike on Wall Street and Seattle--the tape is available on www.khow.com at any time. In it, Mr. Churchill does, indeed, tell the young man asking the question that he should send himself, with his hair cut and his beard shaved and briefcase in hand, to accomplish an act of terrorism. This is not, as Churchill would have you believe, taken "out of context" (the standard defense of the indefensible) in any way whatsoever.
As for Chruchill never advocating terrorist attacks similar to 9-11, he repeatedly says in his own writings that "more 9-11s may be necessary." If that isn't advocating what happened on 9-11, I'd like to know what is.
KHOW and its sister station KOA have been unflinchingly determined in their sleuthing on this matter. For Churchill to attack Caplis and Silverman over a "paid ad" when his own supporters the day before took out a "paid ad" is ludicrous. These two men have not set out to do anything more than to expose this fraud for who and what he is--a dangerous, dangerous man.
"By framing my statements as they [Caplis and Silverman] have, and then repeatedly broadcasting their spin to a broad audience, there is an obvious possibility that they might actually precipitate an act of terror by some unbalanced individual." Ward Churchill in today's Rocky. This says quite clearly that Churchill's words can, indeed, be construed as terrorist speech. Period. If someone acts on his words, it will not be the fault of Caplis and Silverman, but the fault of Ward Churchill for broadcasting his own terrible spin to a broad and anarchist audience.
There is a reason that no reputable publisher will touch Churchill's work. There is a reason his venom is only spewed across the pages of anarchist publications such as "Green Anarchy," a rag that, in the same issue in which they published Churchill's "Roosting Chickens," ran a piece by the Unabomber.
I would, again, urge caution when listening to the bile coming from this self-proclaimed member of the Weather Underground.
Dear Regents--I would urge you, when you read Ward Churchill's piece in today's RMN, to consider every angle of this case. Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman have played the entire tape of Mr. Churchill advocating a terrorist strike on Wall Street and Seattle--the tape is available on www.khow.com at any time. In it, Mr. Churchill does, indeed, tell the young man asking the question that he should send himself, with his hair cut and his beard shaved and briefcase in hand, to accomplish an act of terrorism. This is not, as Churchill would have you believe, taken "out of context" (the standard defense of the indefensible) in any way whatsoever.
As for Chruchill never advocating terrorist attacks similar to 9-11, he repeatedly says in his own writings that "more 9-11s may be necessary." If that isn't advocating what happened on 9-11, I'd like to know what is.
KHOW and its sister station KOA have been unflinchingly determined in their sleuthing on this matter. For Churchill to attack Caplis and Silverman over a "paid ad" when his own supporters the day before took out a "paid ad" is ludicrous. These two men have not set out to do anything more than to expose this fraud for who and what he is--a dangerous, dangerous man.
"By framing my statements as they [Caplis and Silverman] have, and then repeatedly broadcasting their spin to a broad audience, there is an obvious possibility that they might actually precipitate an act of terror by some unbalanced individual." Ward Churchill in today's Rocky. This says quite clearly that Churchill's words can, indeed, be construed as terrorist speech. Period. If someone acts on his words, it will not be the fault of Caplis and Silverman, but the fault of Ward Churchill for broadcasting his own terrible spin to a broad and anarchist audience.
There is a reason that no reputable publisher will touch Churchill's work. There is a reason his venom is only spewed across the pages of anarchist publications such as "Green Anarchy," a rag that, in the same issue in which they published Churchill's "Roosting Chickens," ran a piece by the Unabomber.
I would, again, urge caution when listening to the bile coming from this self-proclaimed member of the Weather Underground.
