Friday, February 25, 2005
Andy Warhol and soup cans
Chandira raised an interesting question when she asked how the Churchill "art" differes from Andy Warhol's soup can paintings.
I found this link-- http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/checklist.htm --particularly good because it gives a checklist for "fair use." Going down the list, Churchill's "art" (which is simply a reversed copy of the actual artwork done and copyrighted by Thomas Mails in 1972) goes against "fair use" in almost every single instance. Andy Warhol's painting/s, for example, cannot be said to fall under either of the following (I have yet to hear of his painting/s threatening to damage the sales of Campbell's Soup):
Could replace sale of copyrighted work
Significantly impairs market or potential market for copyrighted work or derivative
Okay, I've gone down the entire checklist, and clicked each box appropriate to Ward Churchill.
"Commercial activity"--yes, he sold lithos/serigraphs of his "work."
"Profiting from the use"--again, yes, as he sold the work as his own, and made money from the sales.
"Denying credit to the original author"--yes, all you need do is look at his signature on his "work," and then take into account that the family of the copyright holder absolutely denies that there is any evidence whatsoever that Churchill ever had Mails' permission for use.
"Large portion or whole work used"--yes, he simply flipped the image. If you fold the 2 images together, they match up almost identically. I'd call that a "large portion" of the original work.
"Numerous copies made"--yes, there were numerous copies made, and sold.
"Repeated or long term use"--yes, this was done in 1981 without Mails' permission, and the work is still actively being sold on the internet, which incidentally fulfills another box on the checklist under "Opposing Fair Use"--"You made it accessible on Web or in other public forum."
And all of that is without getting into the law against selling artwork of any kind while claiming to be Native American unless you actually are Native American.
Andy Warhol hardly fulfills an argument in favor of Ward Churchill ripping off someone else's copyrighted drawing. If you go down the list considering the soup cans painting/s, you'll find that Warhol fulfills the "fair use" side of the equation if only since his artwork could be considered "New" by the fact that he altered the original soup labels in a significant enough manner to avoid copyright infringment. For examples of this kind of alteration, see Ethics - Copyright
As for copyright infringement--these laws are meant to protect the creators of original works. They are not meant to defend outright and blatant plagiarism, which it seems more and more that Ward Churchill is guilty of, both in his writings and in his "artwork."
I found this link-- http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/checklist.htm --particularly good because it gives a checklist for "fair use." Going down the list, Churchill's "art" (which is simply a reversed copy of the actual artwork done and copyrighted by Thomas Mails in 1972) goes against "fair use" in almost every single instance. Andy Warhol's painting/s, for example, cannot be said to fall under either of the following (I have yet to hear of his painting/s threatening to damage the sales of Campbell's Soup):
Could replace sale of copyrighted work
Significantly impairs market or potential market for copyrighted work or derivative
Okay, I've gone down the entire checklist, and clicked each box appropriate to Ward Churchill.
"Commercial activity"--yes, he sold lithos/serigraphs of his "work."
"Profiting from the use"--again, yes, as he sold the work as his own, and made money from the sales.
"Denying credit to the original author"--yes, all you need do is look at his signature on his "work," and then take into account that the family of the copyright holder absolutely denies that there is any evidence whatsoever that Churchill ever had Mails' permission for use.
"Large portion or whole work used"--yes, he simply flipped the image. If you fold the 2 images together, they match up almost identically. I'd call that a "large portion" of the original work.
"Numerous copies made"--yes, there were numerous copies made, and sold.
"Repeated or long term use"--yes, this was done in 1981 without Mails' permission, and the work is still actively being sold on the internet, which incidentally fulfills another box on the checklist under "Opposing Fair Use"--"You made it accessible on Web or in other public forum."
And all of that is without getting into the law against selling artwork of any kind while claiming to be Native American unless you actually are Native American.
Andy Warhol hardly fulfills an argument in favor of Ward Churchill ripping off someone else's copyrighted drawing. If you go down the list considering the soup cans painting/s, you'll find that Warhol fulfills the "fair use" side of the equation if only since his artwork could be considered "New" by the fact that he altered the original soup labels in a significant enough manner to avoid copyright infringment. For examples of this kind of alteration, see Ethics - Copyright
As for copyright infringement--these laws are meant to protect the creators of original works. They are not meant to defend outright and blatant plagiarism, which it seems more and more that Ward Churchill is guilty of, both in his writings and in his "artwork."
For those who think Native Americans are NOT angry
AIM Council on Security and Intelligence is an American Indian Movement website listing literally dozens of documents. Among those documents are 29 documents specifically dealing with the American Indian Movement's opinion of Ward Churchill. Scroll down to "listing of document images in directory: Churchill" and have fun reading...
And Churchill's again
Just so that the two can be seen together, and you don't have to scroll down through the blog looking for my earlier posting of this.
The actual legitimate artwork
The actual artwork, so that the public can compare the two pieces...
Local news channel story on lithograph
Pasted below is a bit of this story from our local Channel 4 television station. The entire article can be found at the link, and makes for an interesting read...My next post will contain a pic of the actual legitimate artwork.
Churchill Art Piece Called Into Question
by CBS4 News reporter Raj Chohan
Feb 24, 2005 8:03 pm US/Mountain
BOULDER, Colo. (CBS4) Boulder County resident Duke Prentup has been a fan of native American art for as long as he can remember. That love of art took him to the home of Ward Churchill in the early 1980's, where Prentup bought several pieces of Churchill's art, including a serigraph titled "Winter Attack."
"I have enjoyed them ever since immensely, they're obviously up inside my house," Prentup said.
Last month came a stunning revelation, though, as as Prentup flipped through a 1972 book called The Mystic Warriors of the Plains written and illustrated by the late artist Thomas E. Mails. He found a sketch that was strikingly similar to the Churchill piece.
"I opened it up, and Wham, there it was," he said. "It's the exact same thing, only mirror imaged virtually to every detail."
Intellectual property attorney James Hubbell compared the two works side by side, concluding it was likely no accident.
Churchill Art Piece Called Into Question
by CBS4 News reporter Raj Chohan
Feb 24, 2005 8:03 pm US/Mountain
BOULDER, Colo. (CBS4) Boulder County resident Duke Prentup has been a fan of native American art for as long as he can remember. That love of art took him to the home of Ward Churchill in the early 1980's, where Prentup bought several pieces of Churchill's art, including a serigraph titled "Winter Attack."
"I have enjoyed them ever since immensely, they're obviously up inside my house," Prentup said.
Last month came a stunning revelation, though, as as Prentup flipped through a 1972 book called The Mystic Warriors of the Plains written and illustrated by the late artist Thomas E. Mails. He found a sketch that was strikingly similar to the Churchill piece.
"I opened it up, and Wham, there it was," he said. "It's the exact same thing, only mirror imaged virtually to every detail."
Intellectual property attorney James Hubbell compared the two works side by side, concluding it was likely no accident.
Thursday, February 24, 2005
You can't get much clearer
This applies, I would assume, to the litho in question on eBay, since the description of the item says quite clearly "The item up for auction now is a very striking and impressive serigraph/lithograph by renowned American author and artist, Ward Churchill (Keetoowah Band Cherokee)."
The Native American Arts & Crafts Act of 1990
In advertising goods or merchandise, it is against the law to state or even to imply that craft items are "Native American made" unless the craftsperson is a member of a tribe that has state or federal recognition.
For details read the U.S. Code on this subject,
18 USC, Section 1159 (1993) Failure to comply can result in a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years. That is for a single violation, subsequent violations carry even larger penalties.
Further reading on this law can be found here and here
The Native American Arts & Crafts Act of 1990
In advertising goods or merchandise, it is against the law to state or even to imply that craft items are "Native American made" unless the craftsperson is a member of a tribe that has state or federal recognition.
For details read the U.S. Code on this subject,
18 USC, Section 1159 (1993) Failure to comply can result in a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years. That is for a single violation, subsequent violations carry even larger penalties.
Further reading on this law can be found here and here
"Winter Attack"
This is the litho I posted about in my previous post. It is signed, numbered and dated by Ward Churchill.
Ward Churchill ripping off actual art
eBay is currently selling a lithograph signed, dated and numbered by our illustrious "embattled" "professor" Ward Churchill ;) The item, #7301790643, is currently at over $200. Seems dear Mr. Churchill flipped a pic from a man named Tom Mails and signed his own name to it. You've got to wonder why this clown is still walking around a free man, don't you?
The book Churchill ripped the artwork off from can be found at Amazon.com: Books: The Mystic Warriors of the Plains: The Culture, Arts, Crafts and Religion of the Plains Indians
Oh! Hey, I have an idea! Since Churchill claims (while beating a cameraman with a newspaper--and Channel 4 has it on tape--) that he did do this artwork, give the "embattled" man some paint and paper and see whether he can reproduce "his" work ;) Betcha dollars to doughnuts he couldn't do it.
The book Churchill ripped the artwork off from can be found at Amazon.com: Books: The Mystic Warriors of the Plains: The Culture, Arts, Crafts and Religion of the Plains Indians
Oh! Hey, I have an idea! Since Churchill claims (while beating a cameraman with a newspaper--and Channel 4 has it on tape--) that he did do this artwork, give the "embattled" man some paint and paper and see whether he can reproduce "his" work ;) Betcha dollars to doughnuts he couldn't do it.
Malia Zimmerman causes Ward Churchill meltdown
At a press conference in Hawaii on February 21st, Malia Zimmerman, editor of HawaiiReporter.com, asked Ward Churchill some very searching questions about his ancestry. Remember, he got his job--regardless of his screaming otherwise--because he filled out an Affirmative Action form stating he was Native American by blood. Therefore, Ms. Zimmerman's questions were right on target, regardless of Churchill shouting that they were "irrelevant" and then demanding to know whether Ms. Zimmerman could spell "irrelevant."
This article by Ms. Zimmerman is lengthy and detailed, and should be read by anyone interested in this controversy. In it, she speaks of the press conference, which can be heard at http://www.ward-churchill.com/wc/feb21.mp3 The press conference begins with a harangue by Haunani Trask.
This article by Ms. Zimmerman is lengthy and detailed, and should be read by anyone interested in this controversy. In it, she speaks of the press conference, which can be heard at http://www.ward-churchill.com/wc/feb21.mp3 The press conference begins with a harangue by Haunani Trask.
Spyblogs?
RETRACTION--Hawaii newspaper retracts Churchill admittance
This is today's latest twist in this roller-coaster story (and folks, this guy will hang himself with his own rope, it's only a matter of letting him speak for himself--there is no need to make junk up and thereby sink to his level of "scholarship"):
Hawaiian newspaper misquotes Churchill
CU prof did not back away from Indian heritage claim
By Charlie Brennan, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 24, 2005
A dispute that erupted Wednesday over a published report that CU professor Ward Churchill was backing off his claims to Indian heritage ended when a Honolulu newspaper admitted it had misquoted him.
Ed Lynch, the city editor at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, said, "Unfortunately, our reporter made a mistake." He said the newspaper would run a retraction today.
The paper published a report Wednesday that said Churchill addressed the issue of his ethnicity in a talk Tuesday at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and admitted that he is not an American Indian.
In Wednesday's editions the Star-Bulletin quoted Churchill as asking, "Is he an Indian? Do we really care?" in referring to himself, according to the newspaper. "Let's cut to the chase. I am not."
But Wednesday night, Lynch said a review of a tape of the speech revealed that what Churchill said was, "Let's cut to the chase on that."
Churchill went on to say his pedigree is "not important" and that "the issue is the substance of what is said," the paper reported.
Churchill's true ethnicity has been a topic of public debate, as has his scholarship and his political beliefs, since late January, when a planned panel appearance by Churchill at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., drew protests because of his controversial essay on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.
Churchill's next public appearance is set for Tuesday at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. He'll be speaking during Native Pride Week on the subject of "Racism Against the American Indian."
Hawaiian newspaper misquotes Churchill
CU prof did not back away from Indian heritage claim
By Charlie Brennan, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 24, 2005
A dispute that erupted Wednesday over a published report that CU professor Ward Churchill was backing off his claims to Indian heritage ended when a Honolulu newspaper admitted it had misquoted him.
Ed Lynch, the city editor at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, said, "Unfortunately, our reporter made a mistake." He said the newspaper would run a retraction today.
The paper published a report Wednesday that said Churchill addressed the issue of his ethnicity in a talk Tuesday at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and admitted that he is not an American Indian.
In Wednesday's editions the Star-Bulletin quoted Churchill as asking, "Is he an Indian? Do we really care?" in referring to himself, according to the newspaper. "Let's cut to the chase. I am not."
But Wednesday night, Lynch said a review of a tape of the speech revealed that what Churchill said was, "Let's cut to the chase on that."
Churchill went on to say his pedigree is "not important" and that "the issue is the substance of what is said," the paper reported.
Churchill's true ethnicity has been a topic of public debate, as has his scholarship and his political beliefs, since late January, when a planned panel appearance by Churchill at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., drew protests because of his controversial essay on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.
Churchill's next public appearance is set for Tuesday at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. He'll be speaking during Native Pride Week on the subject of "Racism Against the American Indian."
Churchill signatory on doc advocating militant activist violence
Ward Churchill was a signatory on a document in 1999 that advocated the use of violent force. This document was written immediately after the protests in Seattle over the World Trade Organization's meeting in that city. Considering that Churchill, in a recorded tape, told an audience member that "downtown Seattle" would apparently make a good target, this article from December '99 takes on even more meaning. I'm posting the most chilling paragraphs below:
These include the innovative and joyful protest methods of the Direct Action Network, a sustained consciousness-raising effort from Left Bank Books, alternative social structures offered by Food Not Bombs and Homes Not Jails, the Anarchist hotline, housing networks, and so on.
It also should not go unsaid that developing a community able to produced several hundred predominantly white youths with middle-class backgrounds to take militant action against their real enemy is no small feat of organization. It has taken years of sowing and tending to seeds of awareness and resistance, and we, at least, appreciate that effort.
If the Left activist community is to be united and strong, more communication and internal discussion around strategical issues is necessary. Our contact information is listed below. All of us have experience with social movements, and many of us have mapped the repressive tactics used against them. We encourage media to get in touch with us as well.
These include the innovative and joyful protest methods of the Direct Action Network, a sustained consciousness-raising effort from Left Bank Books, alternative social structures offered by Food Not Bombs and Homes Not Jails, the Anarchist hotline, housing networks, and so on.
It also should not go unsaid that developing a community able to produced several hundred predominantly white youths with middle-class backgrounds to take militant action against their real enemy is no small feat of organization. It has taken years of sowing and tending to seeds of awareness and resistance, and we, at least, appreciate that effort.
If the Left activist community is to be united and strong, more communication and internal discussion around strategical issues is necessary. Our contact information is listed below. All of us have experience with social movements, and many of us have mapped the repressive tactics used against them. We encourage media to get in touch with us as well.
Grant Crowell, cartoonist
No Nazi cartoonist was ever tried, let alone hanged, at Nuremberg, so it would appear that Ward Churchill, seen here viciously denying another man's First Amendment rights, once again has got his history wrong. Surprise, surprise ;) Copied below are a few paragraphs from the article linked above.
Grant Crowell finds it ironic that Ward Churchill was at the University of Hawaii holding forth on free speech Tuesday, because he believes Churchill tried to limit his own when he was a student there. Crowell authored a cartoon while a student at UH-Manoa in 1994 taking a shot at Haunani-Kay Trask, a professor at the Center for Hawaiian Studies who helped arrange Churchill's return visit there this week. The 1994 cartoon, which ran in the school paper Ka Leo O Hawaii, triggered charges from some in the university community that Crowell's work was racist. Crowell's cartoon was a reaction to a poem by Trask, Racist White Woman, which appeared in her book Light in the Crevice Never Seen.
And of Ward Churchill's words on the cartoon, which I have also posted:
"He used the name of an unnamed Nazi cartoonist, who was convicted during the Nuremberg Trials, executed dismembered, and cremated," said Crowell, who attended the 1994 rally where he was assailed. Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer was known for anti-Semitic cartoons, but it was Streicher, not the cartoonist, Phillippe Rupprecht, who was convicted and hanged at the 1946 war crime tribunal. "Churchill was saying, 'I'm not saying this should happen to Grant - but if it did, it could be a good thing,' " Crowell alleged.
Gosh, what a truly great man Ward Churchill is...
Grant Crowell finds it ironic that Ward Churchill was at the University of Hawaii holding forth on free speech Tuesday, because he believes Churchill tried to limit his own when he was a student there. Crowell authored a cartoon while a student at UH-Manoa in 1994 taking a shot at Haunani-Kay Trask, a professor at the Center for Hawaiian Studies who helped arrange Churchill's return visit there this week. The 1994 cartoon, which ran in the school paper Ka Leo O Hawaii, triggered charges from some in the university community that Crowell's work was racist. Crowell's cartoon was a reaction to a poem by Trask, Racist White Woman, which appeared in her book Light in the Crevice Never Seen.
And of Ward Churchill's words on the cartoon, which I have also posted:
"He used the name of an unnamed Nazi cartoonist, who was convicted during the Nuremberg Trials, executed dismembered, and cremated," said Crowell, who attended the 1994 rally where he was assailed. Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer was known for anti-Semitic cartoons, but it was Streicher, not the cartoonist, Phillippe Rupprecht, who was convicted and hanged at the 1946 war crime tribunal. "Churchill was saying, 'I'm not saying this should happen to Grant - but if it did, it could be a good thing,' " Crowell alleged.
Gosh, what a truly great man Ward Churchill is...
Wednesday, February 23, 2005
BREAKING--Ward Churchill admits he is not Native American
Here is the relevant paragraph (link to full article follows this paste):
Churchill did address the issue of his ethnicity, admitting that he is not Native American.
"Is he an Indian? Do we really care?" he said, quoting those he called his "white Republican" critics.
"Let's cut to the chase; I am not," he said.
His pedigree is "not important," Churchill said: "The issue is the substance of what is said."
He went on to explain that the issue of whether he is Native American has been blown up by sloppy reporting and reporters quoting other reporters.
Full article can be found at: Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Churchill did address the issue of his ethnicity, admitting that he is not Native American.
"Is he an Indian? Do we really care?" he said, quoting those he called his "white Republican" critics.
"Let's cut to the chase; I am not," he said.
His pedigree is "not important," Churchill said: "The issue is the substance of what is said."
He went on to explain that the issue of whether he is Native American has been blown up by sloppy reporting and reporters quoting other reporters.
Full article can be found at: Honolulu Star-Bulletin
BREAKING--Ward Churchill teaching terrorism--on tape
There is a tape of Ward Churchill teaching a man how to commit an act of terrorism. Go to 630 KHOW - Denver's Talk Station (you should be on the Caplis/Silverman page), scroll down to "Churchill on Tape Teaching Terrorism," join the station (they do not send you anything, it's free, it takes just a second, and trust me--you must hear these tapes) then listen to all of the various files available there. Churchill not only tells his questioner how to commit a terrorist act, he advises him as to potential targets.
Also on this website is a tape of Ward Churchill having a complete and total meltdown last night in Hawaii when a woman--whom he called "racist" for posing her query--dared to question his genetics ;) He told her that her question was "irrelevant," then asked in a very snotty voice whether she was capable of spelling the word. Irrelevant--yeah, Ward baby, considering you got your effing job in the first place solely on the grounds that you claimed to be Native American by blood. Irrelevant...About as "irrelevant" as listing potential targets--Wall Street and Seattle--for the would-be terrorist in your audience. Hey, Ward, honey, can you spell "jobless?" And maybe, just maybe, Ward, can you spell "incarceration for inciting acts of terrorism and anarchy?"
Oh, and C.U. Boulder--should any person commit a terrorist act because of this blowhard, fraudulent, self-aggrandizing, bully on your payroll, can you spell "billion-dollar lawsuit?"
And on a lesser scale, Ward has also said that there are no Indian groups protesting him. This dude must be living in a cave somewhere, because I personally have posted at least one rather stinging protest from the American Indian Movement Grand Governing Council.
Stay tuned, y'all ;)
Also on this website is a tape of Ward Churchill having a complete and total meltdown last night in Hawaii when a woman--whom he called "racist" for posing her query--dared to question his genetics ;) He told her that her question was "irrelevant," then asked in a very snotty voice whether she was capable of spelling the word. Irrelevant--yeah, Ward baby, considering you got your effing job in the first place solely on the grounds that you claimed to be Native American by blood. Irrelevant...About as "irrelevant" as listing potential targets--Wall Street and Seattle--for the would-be terrorist in your audience. Hey, Ward, honey, can you spell "jobless?" And maybe, just maybe, Ward, can you spell "incarceration for inciting acts of terrorism and anarchy?"
Oh, and C.U. Boulder--should any person commit a terrorist act because of this blowhard, fraudulent, self-aggrandizing, bully on your payroll, can you spell "billion-dollar lawsuit?"
And on a lesser scale, Ward has also said that there are no Indian groups protesting him. This dude must be living in a cave somewhere, because I personally have posted at least one rather stinging protest from the American Indian Movement Grand Governing Council.
Stay tuned, y'all ;)
Remember Pearl Harbor?
Before you read the following, please realize two things-- a)Trask called a halt to the questions at the press conference last night the moment those questions became anything less than fawning and brainless adoration, and b) Churchill wrote that "Pearl Harbor doesn't count." Granted, he wrote in the same paragraph that we were meant to feel pain on 9-11, and I can understand his point--I'd have to be braindead not to. That wasn't a hug those terrorists gave us, after all. But last night's soapbox convention took place in Hawaii, and I'd be willing to bet that more than a few people were pissed off by the fact that Ward Churchill said that Pearl Harbor didn't count ;) Hey, maybe he should try this little grandstanding of his at Ground Zero, Manhattan! I wonder how far he'd get...
Churchill defends his views in Hawaii
Hundreds hear CU prof's speech; 20 students protest
By Jeannette J. Lee, Associated PressFebruary 23, 2005
HONOLULU - Embattled University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill, who has been criticized for his comments likening some Sept. 11 victims to Nazis, defended his position before an overflow crowd Tuesday night at the University of Hawaii.
Churchill emphasized that he did not advocate the attack on the World Trade Center. Rather, he said, he insisted an attack was inevitable, given U.S. international and economic policies.
"One does not advocate the volcano," he said. "It requires no advocacy from mere mortals. One points to the volcano and attempts to make sense of it."
Churchill spoke of U.S. atrocities in Japan, the Philippines and in the United States against Hawaiians and American Indians.
About 200 people, barred from entering the auditorium packed with a mostly supportive crowd of more than 400 people, watched Churchill speak on a television monitor set up outside.
It was Churchill's first university speaking engagement outside Colorado since his essay comparing victims of the World Trade Center attacks with Nazis was discovered on a Web site last month.
Churchill wrote that some "technocrats" killed in the World Trade Center were like Adolf Eichmann, a high-ranking Nazi official who orchestrated the extermination of European Jews in the Holocaust.
Some 20 students, including members of the Hawaii College Republicans, protested outside the campus auditorium before the speech. One held a poster with photos of the terrorists who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks over the label "Churchill's Gallant Combat Team." Kimberly Craven, a spokeswoman for the Hawaii College Republicans, a 12-member club that formed last week, said she was outraged that the university was welcoming Churchill to speak.
"It's not a matter of free speech; it's a matter of common sense," the UH senior said. "We're in a war on terror, and you shouldn't bring a supporter of terrorists here."
State Sen. Fred Hemmings also criticized Churchill's appearance. "I think it's awfully sad Hawaii has to host a person such as this," Hemmings said.
Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie, of Vermont, who was vacationing in Hawaii, was among those who attended. "I support and welcome free speech, but those are my friends (firefighters, police office and other victims) Churchill was referring to," Dubie said.
About two dozen campus groups and departments expressed support for Churchill's appearance, including the Center for Hawaiian Studies and the William S. Richardson School of Law.
Hawaiian Studies professor Haunani-Kay Trask has called the University of Colorado's investigation into Churchill's teaching credentials a "witch hunt" and likened the probe to House Un-American Activities Committee hearings and Communist fears propagated by Sen. Joe McCarthy about 50 years ago.
"I am urging public support of Professor Churchill's struggle as if it were our own, that is to say the native people of Hawaii," said Trask, also an outspoken Hawaiian activist.
Churchill's next university engagement is scheduled for the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater, about 50 miles southwest of Milwaukee. On Tuesday, the Wisconsin Assembly voted to condemn Churchill's comments and urged the university to cancel the speech.
The Churchill paragraph in question regarding Pearl Harbor, taken from the Colorado American Indian Movement website--and bear in mind that the American Indian Movement Grand Governing Council has renounced all ties with Ward Churchill:
Still, at one level, the message delivered was uncensorably straight forward and simple, assuming the form of a blunt question: "How does it feel?" The query was and remains on its face one well worth posing. Not since its own Civil War ended in 1865, after all, has the U.S. been directly subject to a serious taste of what it so lavishly and routinely dishes out to others (no, Pearl Harbor doesn't count; it is located in Polynesia, not North America). WardChurchillGhostsof911
The argument that seems to be related to this twisted view of history is that Hawaii was not, at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, actually part of the United States, nor is it, obviously, mainland America today. The attack was, nonetheless, and revisionist history aside, an attack against the United States, but apparently the American dead that December day do not "count" any more than do the "little Eichmanns" who died on 9-11.
Churchill defends his views in Hawaii
Hundreds hear CU prof's speech; 20 students protest
By Jeannette J. Lee, Associated PressFebruary 23, 2005
HONOLULU - Embattled University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill, who has been criticized for his comments likening some Sept. 11 victims to Nazis, defended his position before an overflow crowd Tuesday night at the University of Hawaii.
Churchill emphasized that he did not advocate the attack on the World Trade Center. Rather, he said, he insisted an attack was inevitable, given U.S. international and economic policies.
"One does not advocate the volcano," he said. "It requires no advocacy from mere mortals. One points to the volcano and attempts to make sense of it."
Churchill spoke of U.S. atrocities in Japan, the Philippines and in the United States against Hawaiians and American Indians.
About 200 people, barred from entering the auditorium packed with a mostly supportive crowd of more than 400 people, watched Churchill speak on a television monitor set up outside.
It was Churchill's first university speaking engagement outside Colorado since his essay comparing victims of the World Trade Center attacks with Nazis was discovered on a Web site last month.
Churchill wrote that some "technocrats" killed in the World Trade Center were like Adolf Eichmann, a high-ranking Nazi official who orchestrated the extermination of European Jews in the Holocaust.
Some 20 students, including members of the Hawaii College Republicans, protested outside the campus auditorium before the speech. One held a poster with photos of the terrorists who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks over the label "Churchill's Gallant Combat Team." Kimberly Craven, a spokeswoman for the Hawaii College Republicans, a 12-member club that formed last week, said she was outraged that the university was welcoming Churchill to speak.
"It's not a matter of free speech; it's a matter of common sense," the UH senior said. "We're in a war on terror, and you shouldn't bring a supporter of terrorists here."
State Sen. Fred Hemmings also criticized Churchill's appearance. "I think it's awfully sad Hawaii has to host a person such as this," Hemmings said.
Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie, of Vermont, who was vacationing in Hawaii, was among those who attended. "I support and welcome free speech, but those are my friends (firefighters, police office and other victims) Churchill was referring to," Dubie said.
About two dozen campus groups and departments expressed support for Churchill's appearance, including the Center for Hawaiian Studies and the William S. Richardson School of Law.
Hawaiian Studies professor Haunani-Kay Trask has called the University of Colorado's investigation into Churchill's teaching credentials a "witch hunt" and likened the probe to House Un-American Activities Committee hearings and Communist fears propagated by Sen. Joe McCarthy about 50 years ago.
"I am urging public support of Professor Churchill's struggle as if it were our own, that is to say the native people of Hawaii," said Trask, also an outspoken Hawaiian activist.
Churchill's next university engagement is scheduled for the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater, about 50 miles southwest of Milwaukee. On Tuesday, the Wisconsin Assembly voted to condemn Churchill's comments and urged the university to cancel the speech.
The Churchill paragraph in question regarding Pearl Harbor, taken from the Colorado American Indian Movement website--and bear in mind that the American Indian Movement Grand Governing Council has renounced all ties with Ward Churchill:
Still, at one level, the message delivered was uncensorably straight forward and simple, assuming the form of a blunt question: "How does it feel?" The query was and remains on its face one well worth posing. Not since its own Civil War ended in 1865, after all, has the U.S. been directly subject to a serious taste of what it so lavishly and routinely dishes out to others (no, Pearl Harbor doesn't count; it is located in Polynesia, not North America). WardChurchillGhostsof911
The argument that seems to be related to this twisted view of history is that Hawaii was not, at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, actually part of the United States, nor is it, obviously, mainland America today. The attack was, nonetheless, and revisionist history aside, an attack against the United States, but apparently the American dead that December day do not "count" any more than do the "little Eichmanns" who died on 9-11.
Jailed bloggers
I have posted two links in the sidebar for some interesting blogging-related stuff, Bloggers' Rights and Committee to Protect Bloggers. Please visit these links!
From Committee to Protect Bloggers (and there are links on that site to many more bloggers who have been jailed for what they've written):
Arash Sigarchi has been sentenced by the Iranian authorities to 14 years in prison. This is an extraordinary sentence for a man guilty only of expressing displeasure at the arrest of other bloggers.
Mojtaba Saminejad was arrested, freed on bail, saw his bail doubled, and is still in prison in Tehran. He was also arrested for complaining on his blog about the previous arrests.
From Committee to Protect Bloggers (and there are links on that site to many more bloggers who have been jailed for what they've written):
Arash Sigarchi has been sentenced by the Iranian authorities to 14 years in prison. This is an extraordinary sentence for a man guilty only of expressing displeasure at the arrest of other bloggers.
Mojtaba Saminejad was arrested, freed on bail, saw his bail doubled, and is still in prison in Tehran. He was also arrested for complaining on his blog about the previous arrests.
Editorial cartoon about Haunani Trask--may offend some
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Free speech applies only to Ward Churchill, apparently
From Hawaii Reporter: Hawaii Reporter Ward Churchill will be speaking in Hawaii.
Free Speech is Not a One-Way Street
Colorado University Ethnic Studies Professor Ward Churchill Attacks U.H. Cartoonist, Ignoring His Free Speech Rights, While Professing His First Amendment Right to Speak Out Against the United States
By Grant Crowell, 2/18/2005 5:40:23 PM
Editor's Note: Ward Churchill, the controversial Colorado University professor who attacked the victims of 9-11 comparing them to Nazis, while endorsing the terrorists who slammed into the World Trade Center towers as combat teams, is scheduled to speak at the University of Hawaii Manoa Campus on Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2005, at 7 p.m. in the Art Auditorium on the U.H. Manoa Campus. See more about the event "Ward Churchill Scheduled to Speak at University of Hawaii" His topic: "Speaking Truth to Power: Academic Freedom in the Age of Terror. Grant Crowell shares his 1994 experience as a student and cartoonist at the student newspaper Ka Leo O Hawaii with Churchill who attacked Crowell during his speech for being "racist."
As a former campus cartoonist and student of both the University of Hawaii-Manoa and the University of Colorado-Boulder, I was naturally interested in the national debate around Professor Ward Churchill, whose virulent condemnation of the 9/11 victims garnered national news coverage, has apparently interested some U.H. Professors into bringing him back to Hawaii for a "public symposium on civil liberties."
For the uninitiated, the origin of the controversy and debate stems from Churchill's 2001 essay and later book, "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens."
In the essay, Churchill characterized the September 11th attacks as "rational military reaction" to a long history of U.S. abuses and exploitations abroad. He also asserted that World Trade Center workers weren't innocent victims, but rather "technocrats of empire." He described the white-collar, corporate workers killed in the attack as "Little Eichmanns," an allusion to Nazi Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann -- a soundbite that echoed throughout the country in recent weeks.
But it wasn’t Churchill’s comments in his essay which fueled my personal indignation -- it was how he prattled afterward in a televised event, demanding that others defend his academic freedom, his First Amendment rights.
My own experience with Dr. Churchill a decade ago proved that he had no real interest in free speech for others, and would actively campaign against it for students if he thought it would suit his own self interest.
Fall 1994. I was an editorial cartoon columnist for the Ka Leo O Hawaii student newspaper at the University of Hawaii-Manoa campus in Honolulu. Like many academic environments, we had our share of "sacred cows" -- issues and individuals considered to be so volatile that oftentimes they were ignored or actively avoided, lest a demonstration appear outside our newspaper building (or on some tempestuous occasions -- people storming into the building.)
At this same time, Ward Churchill was being flown in by the student senate for a paid speaking engagement on his latest book, Fantasies of the Master Race: Racism in the University.
Coincidentally, the student newspaper had just published a cartoon of mine that caused outrage among left-wing activists: I had depicted one of Ward Churchill’s close colleagues on our campus, Professor Haunani K. Trask, U.H.’s Hawaii Studies Director, reading an excerpt from her recently published poetry book, entitled "Racist White Woman," who described in lurid detail her fantasy of punching, knifing, mutilating and ultimately murdering a white colleague she despised.
Churchill arrived, as planned, and began his speech. Shortly thereafter, Churchill's speaking engagement changed from a book discussion into a public protest rally featuring Trask and Churchill both of them blaring into microphones over my "racist cartoon" and demanding my dismissal.
During Churchill’s speaking time at the event, this man -- a man who had never met me and refused to do so before and during the event -- included in his speech a reference to me as "vermin," and shared aloud a story of how an unnamed Nazi cartoonist was tried at the WWII Nuremburg trials, executed, dismembered and then cremated. Churchill’s ended this story with his own personal comment of, "Now, I’m not saying that should happen to Grant, but it would be a good thing."
To me, it's highly ironic that a man with such "extreme" opinions -- even which can easily be perceived as advocating violence toward individuals -- cannot himself be tolerant of other's opinions, whether they be extreme or even "mainstream." Instead, Churchill prefers to pull the "Hate Speech" card -- say somebody else’s speech is offensive to your (assumed) ethnicity, gender, political status, etc., and effectively shut them up. After all, if they hate it, you can’t debate it.
As a Jew with a very small part Potawatomi Indian, I realize that the First Amendment protects all of us, even of us who fail to understand that the First Amendment is supposed to apply to everyone.
But what CU students (and others who are up in arms about Churchill's perceived persecution) should realize is that Churchill is not a man who stands for their own academic freedom, the First Amendment, free speech, or anything of the kind.
My experience has shown that he ultimately aspires to be a demagogue, where criticism on him or his cronies would ultimately be considered "genocidal hate speech" with serious repercussions.
But Churchill’s mistreatment of me, his scholarly abuse and hypocrisy, make me no less fervent a supporter of his free speech rights.
I can support the ACLU for protecting Churchill's rights the same way they protected the Nazis' rights to march in Skokie, because real free speech means being able to separate the principle from the person.
And yes, I do consider myself a real free speech advocate. Meaning, I don’t demand other’s freedom be protected if I am not willing first to stand up for the rights of people who’s opinions I strongly disagree with. I am even willing to be disparaged by my members of my own community for it.
Churchill needs to get it through his skull that it's called the "First Amendment," not the "Me-First Amendment."
Free speech is not a one-way street where Churchill can clog up the whole lane with his SUV-sized ego. If your ego is so big and intolerant that it cannot bear the expression of others you personally find offensive, then perhaps its time for people like myself to come out again, sharp minds and pens blazing. Maybe it's time for me (and others like me) to draw a few satirical cartoons, and pop the bloated academic egos.
And I won’t charge you a hundred grand salary, either.
Grant Crowell, a University of Hawaii graduate, worked as a cartoonist at Ka Leo O Hawaii, the University of Hawaii student newspaper. Today he is the CEO from Grantastic Designs, Inc., an online solutions marketing firm specializing in search-and user-friendly Web sites that provide measurable success. See http://www.grantasticdesigns.com or read the marketing book, "Search Engine Visibility" at http://www.searchenginesbook.com for more details. To contact Grant Crowell, write to him via email at mailto:grantc@ix.netcom.com
Free Speech is Not a One-Way Street
Colorado University Ethnic Studies Professor Ward Churchill Attacks U.H. Cartoonist, Ignoring His Free Speech Rights, While Professing His First Amendment Right to Speak Out Against the United States
By Grant Crowell, 2/18/2005 5:40:23 PM
Editor's Note: Ward Churchill, the controversial Colorado University professor who attacked the victims of 9-11 comparing them to Nazis, while endorsing the terrorists who slammed into the World Trade Center towers as combat teams, is scheduled to speak at the University of Hawaii Manoa Campus on Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2005, at 7 p.m. in the Art Auditorium on the U.H. Manoa Campus. See more about the event "Ward Churchill Scheduled to Speak at University of Hawaii" His topic: "Speaking Truth to Power: Academic Freedom in the Age of Terror. Grant Crowell shares his 1994 experience as a student and cartoonist at the student newspaper Ka Leo O Hawaii with Churchill who attacked Crowell during his speech for being "racist."
As a former campus cartoonist and student of both the University of Hawaii-Manoa and the University of Colorado-Boulder, I was naturally interested in the national debate around Professor Ward Churchill, whose virulent condemnation of the 9/11 victims garnered national news coverage, has apparently interested some U.H. Professors into bringing him back to Hawaii for a "public symposium on civil liberties."
For the uninitiated, the origin of the controversy and debate stems from Churchill's 2001 essay and later book, "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens."
In the essay, Churchill characterized the September 11th attacks as "rational military reaction" to a long history of U.S. abuses and exploitations abroad. He also asserted that World Trade Center workers weren't innocent victims, but rather "technocrats of empire." He described the white-collar, corporate workers killed in the attack as "Little Eichmanns," an allusion to Nazi Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann -- a soundbite that echoed throughout the country in recent weeks.
But it wasn’t Churchill’s comments in his essay which fueled my personal indignation -- it was how he prattled afterward in a televised event, demanding that others defend his academic freedom, his First Amendment rights.
My own experience with Dr. Churchill a decade ago proved that he had no real interest in free speech for others, and would actively campaign against it for students if he thought it would suit his own self interest.
Fall 1994. I was an editorial cartoon columnist for the Ka Leo O Hawaii student newspaper at the University of Hawaii-Manoa campus in Honolulu. Like many academic environments, we had our share of "sacred cows" -- issues and individuals considered to be so volatile that oftentimes they were ignored or actively avoided, lest a demonstration appear outside our newspaper building (or on some tempestuous occasions -- people storming into the building.)
At this same time, Ward Churchill was being flown in by the student senate for a paid speaking engagement on his latest book, Fantasies of the Master Race: Racism in the University.
Coincidentally, the student newspaper had just published a cartoon of mine that caused outrage among left-wing activists: I had depicted one of Ward Churchill’s close colleagues on our campus, Professor Haunani K. Trask, U.H.’s Hawaii Studies Director, reading an excerpt from her recently published poetry book, entitled "Racist White Woman," who described in lurid detail her fantasy of punching, knifing, mutilating and ultimately murdering a white colleague she despised.
Churchill arrived, as planned, and began his speech. Shortly thereafter, Churchill's speaking engagement changed from a book discussion into a public protest rally featuring Trask and Churchill both of them blaring into microphones over my "racist cartoon" and demanding my dismissal.
During Churchill’s speaking time at the event, this man -- a man who had never met me and refused to do so before and during the event -- included in his speech a reference to me as "vermin," and shared aloud a story of how an unnamed Nazi cartoonist was tried at the WWII Nuremburg trials, executed, dismembered and then cremated. Churchill’s ended this story with his own personal comment of, "Now, I’m not saying that should happen to Grant, but it would be a good thing."
To me, it's highly ironic that a man with such "extreme" opinions -- even which can easily be perceived as advocating violence toward individuals -- cannot himself be tolerant of other's opinions, whether they be extreme or even "mainstream." Instead, Churchill prefers to pull the "Hate Speech" card -- say somebody else’s speech is offensive to your (assumed) ethnicity, gender, political status, etc., and effectively shut them up. After all, if they hate it, you can’t debate it.
As a Jew with a very small part Potawatomi Indian, I realize that the First Amendment protects all of us, even of us who fail to understand that the First Amendment is supposed to apply to everyone.
But what CU students (and others who are up in arms about Churchill's perceived persecution) should realize is that Churchill is not a man who stands for their own academic freedom, the First Amendment, free speech, or anything of the kind.
My experience has shown that he ultimately aspires to be a demagogue, where criticism on him or his cronies would ultimately be considered "genocidal hate speech" with serious repercussions.
But Churchill’s mistreatment of me, his scholarly abuse and hypocrisy, make me no less fervent a supporter of his free speech rights.
I can support the ACLU for protecting Churchill's rights the same way they protected the Nazis' rights to march in Skokie, because real free speech means being able to separate the principle from the person.
And yes, I do consider myself a real free speech advocate. Meaning, I don’t demand other’s freedom be protected if I am not willing first to stand up for the rights of people who’s opinions I strongly disagree with. I am even willing to be disparaged by my members of my own community for it.
Churchill needs to get it through his skull that it's called the "First Amendment," not the "Me-First Amendment."
Free speech is not a one-way street where Churchill can clog up the whole lane with his SUV-sized ego. If your ego is so big and intolerant that it cannot bear the expression of others you personally find offensive, then perhaps its time for people like myself to come out again, sharp minds and pens blazing. Maybe it's time for me (and others like me) to draw a few satirical cartoons, and pop the bloated academic egos.
And I won’t charge you a hundred grand salary, either.
Grant Crowell, a University of Hawaii graduate, worked as a cartoonist at Ka Leo O Hawaii, the University of Hawaii student newspaper. Today he is the CEO from Grantastic Designs, Inc., an online solutions marketing firm specializing in search-and user-friendly Web sites that provide measurable success. See http://www.grantasticdesigns.com or read the marketing book, "Search Engine Visibility" at http://www.searchenginesbook.com for more details. To contact Grant Crowell, write to him via email at mailto:grantc@ix.netcom.com
Westword weighs in
Westword cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called a right-wing paper. However...
Separation of Churchill and State
The free-speech chickens come home to roost at CU.
BY PATRICIA CALHOUN patricia.calhoun@westword.com
On the first day of school I awoke with a sick feeling in my stomach. It did not hurt, it just made me feel weak. The sun did not sing as it came over the hill. -- Bless Me, Ultima
By now, University of Colorado president Betsy Hoffman must long for the days when all she had to worry about was a sex-recruiting scandal in the athletic department, and a football coach with a big mouth, and a dead student with a not-big-enough tolerance for alcohol. As she heads off to her increasingly smudged ivy tower, she must fondly recall her days as a medieval scholar, when her toughest task was parsing the meaning of "cunt" in The Canterbury Tales.
Because now controversy has CU by the short hairs and isn't letting go. Or, as Chaucer might say (and did), "He made a grab and caught her by the queint."
This is officially Higher Education Awareness Week, but the whole world is already all too aware of Colorado's flagship educational institution. No matter how many postcards student leaders send to state lawmakers with the message that higher education can't take any more budget cuts -- one of several pathetic "positive" efforts that CU is pushing -- legislators are very clear about one thing they'd like to see on the chopping block.
So what if shutting up Ward Churchill would also shut down free speech?
"We have to get the hell out'a here...this hick town is killing me." -- Bless Me, Ultima
While the Western Slope town of Norwood found Rudolfo Anaya's 1972 Bless Me, Ultima too racy, too obscene to allow in its schools -- it was "garbage," said Bob Conder, the superintendent of the Norwood School District, who didn't finish reading the book before banning it last week -- Boulder considered the novel mild enough to choose it for "One Book, One Boulder," the first community-wide reading event announced last month.
But then, three fictional murders, a whorehouse and a dozen or so swear words are nothing for a town with an unsolved child-beauty-queen murder that still makes headlines, a former CU employee busted for using a university cell phone to call an escort service, and these immortal words from Gary Barnett about the football team's female kicker: "Katie was not only a girl, she was terrible. There's no other way to say it."
I wanted to ask her immediately about the magic in the letters, but that would be rude and so I was quiet. I was fascinated by the black letters that formed on the paper and made my name. -- Bless Me, Ultima
CU's chickens have come home to roost. Over ten years ago, the National American Indian Movement, led by Clyde and Vernon Bellecourt, complained about "wannabe" Indians like ethnic-studies professor Ward Churchill -- who at the time was claiming he was one-sixteenth Cherokee and today is taking the fifth on that score. The Bellecourts even demanded that CU officials review Churchill's credentials, to determine whether he'd received tenure through deception by "billing himself as an American Indian writer, scholar and artist."
But CU didn't do the requested review then, and so last Thursday -- over a decade late and many, many dollars short -- the CU regents ordered Interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano to conduct essentially the same investigation and report back to Hoffman by mid-March. The regents also apologized to the entire nation for Churchill's statements, yet failed to recognize that they had much more to apologize for.
"I appreciate the fact that the CU regents have taken the necessary first step in the formal evaluation of Ward Churchill's employment status," said Governor Bill Owens, who quickly showed his appreciation by using the Churchill controversy to boost his national profile on shows like The O'Reilly Factor. "However, I deplore the behavior displayed by some students at the regents' meeting. Their abhorrent behavior underscores the culture of violence that can be spawned by inflammatory speeches and essays such as those by Mr. Churchill."
That sort of behavior and speech should be saved for the football field, where it belongs.
It clearly doesn't belong at the Universal Memorial Center, where CU had canceled, then rescheduled a speech that Churchill was set to make Tuesday night, a speech in which he discussed his 9/11 essay, "Some People Push Back; On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." That essay had escaped the notice of CU's thought police for more than three years, even though excerpts were published in the spring/summer 2002 issue of Green Anarchy, an environmentalist publication that also contained "Hit Where It Hurts," an essay by Ted Kaczynski. Churchill's screed made the Unabomber's ramblings look mild; about the only thing he didn't suggest was that he'd killed JonBenét. Even so, it wasn't until an enterprising Hamilton College student publicized "Roosting Chickens" that CU caught on -- and the controversy caught fire.
Even as Churchill's supporters threatened to sue the school so that the show could go on -- and on -- CU was preparing for its next "positive" push: an appearance Wednesday by freshmen launching a campaign to educate students about the dangers of excessive behavior fueled by alcohol, drugs and violence, freshmen who say they will no longer tolerate their school's degree value being tarnished by a "party-school reputation."
Tarnished by a party-school, rather than a war-party, reputation? Oh, those were the days.
"I don't know, except that people, grown-ups and kids, seem to want to hurt each other -- and it's worse when they're in a group." -- Bless Me, Ultima
When free speech is stifled, it explodes elsewhere. Last week, CU's Department of Environmental Studies voted to end classes taught by longtime instructor Adrienne Anderson at the end of the semester, citing budget cuts as the reason.
Anderson doesn't buy it. "While CU President Elizabeth Hoffman has touted the 'University Without Walls' concept," she argues, "and service learning programs are promoted as a viable means for involving students in community-based service as an important component of their educational experience, one must wonder why walls go up when certain practices and policies have been revealed, especially when some of CU's major donors' practices and pollution records are at issue, along with failed oversight by the Governor and his agencies."
No, Anderson doesn't buy the budget-cut explanation -- and thanks to CU's boneheaded behavior, she doesn't have to.
It was like a tomb, without the kids the schoolhouse was a giant, quiet tomb with the moaning wind crying around its edges. It was strange how everything had been so full of life and funny and in a way sad, and now everything was quiet. Our footsteps echoed in the hall. -- Bless Me, Ultima
Ward Churchill's latest book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, which contains the offensive essay of the same name, recently won an honorable mention in the Gustavus Myers Human Rights Award. "The bottom line of my argument," Churchill says in a statement posted last week on the website of CU's Department of Ethnic Studies, the department he'd headed until three days earlier, "is that the best and perhaps only way to prevent 9/11-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 ŒGood 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."
He should have won the award for revisionist history.
Still, when the chickens come home to roost, CU's response remains chickenshit.
"I will tell you as I see it. I think most of the things we call evil are not evil at all; it is just that we don't understand those things and so we call them evil. And we fear evil only because we do not understand it." -- Bless Me, Ultima
westword.com originally published: February 10, 2005
Separation of Churchill and State
The free-speech chickens come home to roost at CU.
BY PATRICIA CALHOUN patricia.calhoun@westword.com
On the first day of school I awoke with a sick feeling in my stomach. It did not hurt, it just made me feel weak. The sun did not sing as it came over the hill. -- Bless Me, Ultima
By now, University of Colorado president Betsy Hoffman must long for the days when all she had to worry about was a sex-recruiting scandal in the athletic department, and a football coach with a big mouth, and a dead student with a not-big-enough tolerance for alcohol. As she heads off to her increasingly smudged ivy tower, she must fondly recall her days as a medieval scholar, when her toughest task was parsing the meaning of "cunt" in The Canterbury Tales.
Because now controversy has CU by the short hairs and isn't letting go. Or, as Chaucer might say (and did), "He made a grab and caught her by the queint."
This is officially Higher Education Awareness Week, but the whole world is already all too aware of Colorado's flagship educational institution. No matter how many postcards student leaders send to state lawmakers with the message that higher education can't take any more budget cuts -- one of several pathetic "positive" efforts that CU is pushing -- legislators are very clear about one thing they'd like to see on the chopping block.
So what if shutting up Ward Churchill would also shut down free speech?
"We have to get the hell out'a here...this hick town is killing me." -- Bless Me, Ultima
While the Western Slope town of Norwood found Rudolfo Anaya's 1972 Bless Me, Ultima too racy, too obscene to allow in its schools -- it was "garbage," said Bob Conder, the superintendent of the Norwood School District, who didn't finish reading the book before banning it last week -- Boulder considered the novel mild enough to choose it for "One Book, One Boulder," the first community-wide reading event announced last month.
But then, three fictional murders, a whorehouse and a dozen or so swear words are nothing for a town with an unsolved child-beauty-queen murder that still makes headlines, a former CU employee busted for using a university cell phone to call an escort service, and these immortal words from Gary Barnett about the football team's female kicker: "Katie was not only a girl, she was terrible. There's no other way to say it."
I wanted to ask her immediately about the magic in the letters, but that would be rude and so I was quiet. I was fascinated by the black letters that formed on the paper and made my name. -- Bless Me, Ultima
CU's chickens have come home to roost. Over ten years ago, the National American Indian Movement, led by Clyde and Vernon Bellecourt, complained about "wannabe" Indians like ethnic-studies professor Ward Churchill -- who at the time was claiming he was one-sixteenth Cherokee and today is taking the fifth on that score. The Bellecourts even demanded that CU officials review Churchill's credentials, to determine whether he'd received tenure through deception by "billing himself as an American Indian writer, scholar and artist."
But CU didn't do the requested review then, and so last Thursday -- over a decade late and many, many dollars short -- the CU regents ordered Interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano to conduct essentially the same investigation and report back to Hoffman by mid-March. The regents also apologized to the entire nation for Churchill's statements, yet failed to recognize that they had much more to apologize for.
"I appreciate the fact that the CU regents have taken the necessary first step in the formal evaluation of Ward Churchill's employment status," said Governor Bill Owens, who quickly showed his appreciation by using the Churchill controversy to boost his national profile on shows like The O'Reilly Factor. "However, I deplore the behavior displayed by some students at the regents' meeting. Their abhorrent behavior underscores the culture of violence that can be spawned by inflammatory speeches and essays such as those by Mr. Churchill."
That sort of behavior and speech should be saved for the football field, where it belongs.
It clearly doesn't belong at the Universal Memorial Center, where CU had canceled, then rescheduled a speech that Churchill was set to make Tuesday night, a speech in which he discussed his 9/11 essay, "Some People Push Back; On the Justice of Roosting Chickens." That essay had escaped the notice of CU's thought police for more than three years, even though excerpts were published in the spring/summer 2002 issue of Green Anarchy, an environmentalist publication that also contained "Hit Where It Hurts," an essay by Ted Kaczynski. Churchill's screed made the Unabomber's ramblings look mild; about the only thing he didn't suggest was that he'd killed JonBenét. Even so, it wasn't until an enterprising Hamilton College student publicized "Roosting Chickens" that CU caught on -- and the controversy caught fire.
Even as Churchill's supporters threatened to sue the school so that the show could go on -- and on -- CU was preparing for its next "positive" push: an appearance Wednesday by freshmen launching a campaign to educate students about the dangers of excessive behavior fueled by alcohol, drugs and violence, freshmen who say they will no longer tolerate their school's degree value being tarnished by a "party-school reputation."
Tarnished by a party-school, rather than a war-party, reputation? Oh, those were the days.
"I don't know, except that people, grown-ups and kids, seem to want to hurt each other -- and it's worse when they're in a group." -- Bless Me, Ultima
When free speech is stifled, it explodes elsewhere. Last week, CU's Department of Environmental Studies voted to end classes taught by longtime instructor Adrienne Anderson at the end of the semester, citing budget cuts as the reason.
Anderson doesn't buy it. "While CU President Elizabeth Hoffman has touted the 'University Without Walls' concept," she argues, "and service learning programs are promoted as a viable means for involving students in community-based service as an important component of their educational experience, one must wonder why walls go up when certain practices and policies have been revealed, especially when some of CU's major donors' practices and pollution records are at issue, along with failed oversight by the Governor and his agencies."
No, Anderson doesn't buy the budget-cut explanation -- and thanks to CU's boneheaded behavior, she doesn't have to.
It was like a tomb, without the kids the schoolhouse was a giant, quiet tomb with the moaning wind crying around its edges. It was strange how everything had been so full of life and funny and in a way sad, and now everything was quiet. Our footsteps echoed in the hall. -- Bless Me, Ultima
Ward Churchill's latest book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens, which contains the offensive essay of the same name, recently won an honorable mention in the Gustavus Myers Human Rights Award. "The bottom line of my argument," Churchill says in a statement posted last week on the website of CU's Department of Ethnic Studies, the department he'd headed until three days earlier, "is that the best and perhaps only way to prevent 9/11-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 ŒGood 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."
He should have won the award for revisionist history.
Still, when the chickens come home to roost, CU's response remains chickenshit.
"I will tell you as I see it. I think most of the things we call evil are not evil at all; it is just that we don't understand those things and so we call them evil. And we fear evil only because we do not understand it." -- Bless Me, Ultima
westword.com originally published: February 10, 2005
In the "gosh, I wonder why?" category
C.U. applications are down by 19% from last year. Now, this likely doesn't reflect much yet on the Ward Churchill flap, but rather more on the football sex-for-recruitment scandal and the alcohol-overdose death of Lynn Gordon Bailey, both from last year. But you've gotta wonder what those numbers will look like next year, when parents who aren't willing to pay Churchill's salary send their kids somewhere else.
CU's out-of-state applicants drop 19%
Decrease may mean $15 million loss in tuition revenue
By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 22, 2005
BOULDER - The number of out-of-state students applying to attend the University of Colorado this coming fall has dropped 19 percent compared with last year, school officials said.
If actual enrollment figures for the next school year follow that trend, CU officials project the decrease could translate into a loss of $15 million in tuition revenue.
CU and higher-education officials differ on the reason for the drop. Some cite a grueling year of bad press that included a football recruiting scandal and controversy surrounding CU professor Ward Churchill.
Others counter that a steep climb in out-of-state tuition, coupled with a soft economy, is the real culprit.
But everyone is concerned that the numbers are down.
By the Feb. 15 application deadline, CU had received 9,553 applications from potential freshmen living outside Colorado. Last year, the school received 11,771 nonresident applications.
That is the second decline in two years and the lowest number of out- of-state applications the university has fielded in five years.
The drop is significant because CU relies heavily on revenue from nonresident students to subsidize the cost of education for its Colorado students.
Roughly three in-state students are subsidized by every out-of- state student, said CU spokeswoman Michele McKinney.
"This is important to us," McKinney said.
In addition to the out-of-state applicants, in-state applications are also off by 4 percent, she said.
Last fall, the Boulder campus enrolled 5,149 freshmen, of whom 2,165 were nonresidents.
Typically, 9,000 applicants will not yield 9,000 students.
Five percent of the initial applicants fail to fill out the necessary paperwork. Another 5 to 10 percent are rejected for not meeting CU's standards. Of those nonresidents who are admitted, only about 20 percent actually enroll.
Reasons behind the drop in applications are in dispute.
Rick O'Donnell, executive director of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, blames 15 months of bad press that started with a sex-and- recruitment scandal in the CU football program.
In December 2003, CU found itself enmeshed in a scandal after Boulder District Attorney Mary Keenan accused CU of condoning the use of sex and alcohol as recruitment tools for the football program.
Her allegations stemmed from a lawsuit in which three women said they were raped by CU football players or recruits in December 2001.
The story went national after former CU football kicker Katie Hnida alleged she was sexually assaulted by a former player.
None of the allegations resulted in criminal charges. However, the controversy led to an independent investigation that recommended sweeping reforms in how CU administers its athletics department.
The matter also resulted in a still-sealed grand jury report that sharply criticized CU officials for failure to properly manage the football program.
Then, three weeks ago, another national controversy erupted over an essay written by Churchill.
Churchill wrote that some of the victims in the World Trade Center attack were not innocent victims. He called them "little Eichmanns," referring to the Nazi technocrat who oversaw the systematic execution of the Jews during World War II.
CU Regent Thomas Lucero said he believes "distorted media coverage" of the football scandal, plus the Churchill matter, have soured parents of prospective students.
Lucero said he has received e-mails from parents whose children have been accepted to CU or are already attending the university but who intend to send them elsewhere by the fall.
CU admissions officers said about 99 percent of the current applications were received before the Churchill controversy began. They know of no one who has withdrawn from the school over the matter.
O'Donnell, however, said the cumulative controversies are having an effect. "Parents are smart people, and they want to send their children to a college with a great reputation," he said. "I would say this decrease has a lot to do with CU damaging its reputation."
School officials acknowledged the impact of what they called "negative media coverage." But they also pointed to another factor behind the decrease: steadily climbing out- of-state tuition rates.
Since the fall of 2000, out-of-state tuition has increased from $15,244 to $20,592, a jump of 35 percent.
CU is not the only public university in Colorado experiencing a drop in out-of-state applications.
At Colorado State University, where the price of out-of-state tuition also has climbed, the number of nonresident applicants fell from 5,735 in 2002 to 5,031 in 2004, a decrease of 12 percent.
That trend appears to be continuing this year. As of last week, CSU had received 3,998 nonresident applications, with a deadline of July 1.
CU Regent Michael Carrigan said he believes the costs imposed on out-of-state students have a lot to do with dwindling applications.
"While it's easy to point to the negative issues last year, the real story is how incredibly expensive it is for out-of-state students to attend CU- Boulder," Carrigan said. "It's time for the state to show leadership and recognize that excellent universities don't come for free and that tuition can't cover the whole costs."
Barbara Schneider, executive director for admissions at CU, said the cost of tuition is the most frequent reason she hears from out-of-state high school guidance counselors when they are asked about the declining number of prospective CU students.
"The counselors are telling us, 'You're pricing yourselves to the point where some of the students here can't do it anymore,' " she said.
Schneider is hopeful that the 9,553 students who have applied this year are serious candidates and that their group will yield the same number of nonresident students as last year when the enrollment deadline arrives in May.
CU's out-of-state applicants drop 19%
Decrease may mean $15 million loss in tuition revenue
By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 22, 2005
BOULDER - The number of out-of-state students applying to attend the University of Colorado this coming fall has dropped 19 percent compared with last year, school officials said.
If actual enrollment figures for the next school year follow that trend, CU officials project the decrease could translate into a loss of $15 million in tuition revenue.
CU and higher-education officials differ on the reason for the drop. Some cite a grueling year of bad press that included a football recruiting scandal and controversy surrounding CU professor Ward Churchill.
Others counter that a steep climb in out-of-state tuition, coupled with a soft economy, is the real culprit.
But everyone is concerned that the numbers are down.
By the Feb. 15 application deadline, CU had received 9,553 applications from potential freshmen living outside Colorado. Last year, the school received 11,771 nonresident applications.
That is the second decline in two years and the lowest number of out- of-state applications the university has fielded in five years.
The drop is significant because CU relies heavily on revenue from nonresident students to subsidize the cost of education for its Colorado students.
Roughly three in-state students are subsidized by every out-of- state student, said CU spokeswoman Michele McKinney.
"This is important to us," McKinney said.
In addition to the out-of-state applicants, in-state applications are also off by 4 percent, she said.
Last fall, the Boulder campus enrolled 5,149 freshmen, of whom 2,165 were nonresidents.
Typically, 9,000 applicants will not yield 9,000 students.
Five percent of the initial applicants fail to fill out the necessary paperwork. Another 5 to 10 percent are rejected for not meeting CU's standards. Of those nonresidents who are admitted, only about 20 percent actually enroll.
Reasons behind the drop in applications are in dispute.
Rick O'Donnell, executive director of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, blames 15 months of bad press that started with a sex-and- recruitment scandal in the CU football program.
In December 2003, CU found itself enmeshed in a scandal after Boulder District Attorney Mary Keenan accused CU of condoning the use of sex and alcohol as recruitment tools for the football program.
Her allegations stemmed from a lawsuit in which three women said they were raped by CU football players or recruits in December 2001.
The story went national after former CU football kicker Katie Hnida alleged she was sexually assaulted by a former player.
None of the allegations resulted in criminal charges. However, the controversy led to an independent investigation that recommended sweeping reforms in how CU administers its athletics department.
The matter also resulted in a still-sealed grand jury report that sharply criticized CU officials for failure to properly manage the football program.
Then, three weeks ago, another national controversy erupted over an essay written by Churchill.
Churchill wrote that some of the victims in the World Trade Center attack were not innocent victims. He called them "little Eichmanns," referring to the Nazi technocrat who oversaw the systematic execution of the Jews during World War II.
CU Regent Thomas Lucero said he believes "distorted media coverage" of the football scandal, plus the Churchill matter, have soured parents of prospective students.
Lucero said he has received e-mails from parents whose children have been accepted to CU or are already attending the university but who intend to send them elsewhere by the fall.
CU admissions officers said about 99 percent of the current applications were received before the Churchill controversy began. They know of no one who has withdrawn from the school over the matter.
O'Donnell, however, said the cumulative controversies are having an effect. "Parents are smart people, and they want to send their children to a college with a great reputation," he said. "I would say this decrease has a lot to do with CU damaging its reputation."
School officials acknowledged the impact of what they called "negative media coverage." But they also pointed to another factor behind the decrease: steadily climbing out- of-state tuition rates.
Since the fall of 2000, out-of-state tuition has increased from $15,244 to $20,592, a jump of 35 percent.
CU is not the only public university in Colorado experiencing a drop in out-of-state applications.
At Colorado State University, where the price of out-of-state tuition also has climbed, the number of nonresident applicants fell from 5,735 in 2002 to 5,031 in 2004, a decrease of 12 percent.
That trend appears to be continuing this year. As of last week, CSU had received 3,998 nonresident applications, with a deadline of July 1.
CU Regent Michael Carrigan said he believes the costs imposed on out-of-state students have a lot to do with dwindling applications.
"While it's easy to point to the negative issues last year, the real story is how incredibly expensive it is for out-of-state students to attend CU- Boulder," Carrigan said. "It's time for the state to show leadership and recognize that excellent universities don't come for free and that tuition can't cover the whole costs."
Barbara Schneider, executive director for admissions at CU, said the cost of tuition is the most frequent reason she hears from out-of-state high school guidance counselors when they are asked about the declining number of prospective CU students.
"The counselors are telling us, 'You're pricing yourselves to the point where some of the students here can't do it anymore,' " she said.
Schneider is hopeful that the 9,553 students who have applied this year are serious candidates and that their group will yield the same number of nonresident students as last year when the enrollment deadline arrives in May.
Ex-school official denies offer made to Chruchill
And yet more fallout...
Ex-official: No tenure for Churchill
California university didn't consider him 'serious candidate'
By Stuart Steers, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 22, 2005
University of Colorado officials rushed to award tenure to Ward Churchill in 1991, thinking he had been offered a full professorship in American Indian studies at a California university.
But a former official in the California system says no such offer was ever made.
"He wasn't really a serious candidate because of his lack of credentials," said George Wayne, a former vice president for student academic services at California State University, Sacramento.
"The lack of a doctorate was one factor," Wayne said Monday. "Also, he wasn't writing learned articles - they were advocacy articles that could appear anywhere."
The open position was at the California university's Northridge campus. Wayne says officials there contacted him after Churchill applied because they knew Wayne had previously worked at the University of Colorado at Denver, and they wondered what he might know about Churchill.
Wayne says he remembers hearing about Churchill in the 1980s when Wayne worked at UCD, where he also held a position in academic services. Wayne said he frequently dealt with minority students and knew that Churchill was involved in a tutoring program for American Indians on the Boulder campus.
"I knew of him in as much as I was dealing with Indian students," said Wayne, who is retired and lives in Denver.
Northridge officials never spent much time considering Churchill for the position, according to Wayne.
"He never showed up as a serious applicant," Wayne said. "He received a letter saying, 'We've reviewed your application and are considering someone else.' "
On the Boulder campus, it was a different story. CU officials were convinced they had to move fast and give Churchill tenure or risk losing him to another school.
In January 1991, the incoming chairman of the CU communication department, Michael Pacanowsky, told his faculty that the department was being pressured by CU officials to grant tenure to Churchill as soon as possible.
The university feared that Churchill had been offered a full professorship at Cal State at Northridge, Pacanowsky wrote in a memo to the faculty.
Churchill did not have a doctorate, which is usually required for tenure.
Tenure review typically includes an evaluation of the candidate's published works by scholars from other campuses. That apparently didn't happen in Churchill's case.
In the memo, Pacanowsky tells his colleagues that he is troubled by the hasty process that eventually gave Churchill tenure.
He said CU was eager to add an American Indian scholar to its faculty.
"I apologize for the manner in which we are having to deal with this, and I am uncomfortable with it," he wrote.
Churchill has been under fire ever since an essay he wrote in 2001 comparing the victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to Nazis came to light.
Since then, many aspects of his career have been challenged - from his claim of American Indian ancestry to the veracity of his scholarship.
The CU regents have ordered a complete review of his writings, and Gov. Bill Owens and others have demanded he be fired.
Wayne says that if Northridge had seriously considered Churchill for a job, they would have sent someone to Boulder to interview his colleagues and the university would have known he was being courted.
Wayne thinks CU officials were simply determined to hire an American Indian to teach ethnic studies.
"They thought Churchill was a hot prospect," Wayne said. "He wasn't that hot. The only place he was hot was at CU."
Ex-official: No tenure for Churchill
California university didn't consider him 'serious candidate'
By Stuart Steers, Rocky Mountain NewsFebruary 22, 2005
University of Colorado officials rushed to award tenure to Ward Churchill in 1991, thinking he had been offered a full professorship in American Indian studies at a California university.
But a former official in the California system says no such offer was ever made.
"He wasn't really a serious candidate because of his lack of credentials," said George Wayne, a former vice president for student academic services at California State University, Sacramento.
"The lack of a doctorate was one factor," Wayne said Monday. "Also, he wasn't writing learned articles - they were advocacy articles that could appear anywhere."
The open position was at the California university's Northridge campus. Wayne says officials there contacted him after Churchill applied because they knew Wayne had previously worked at the University of Colorado at Denver, and they wondered what he might know about Churchill.
Wayne says he remembers hearing about Churchill in the 1980s when Wayne worked at UCD, where he also held a position in academic services. Wayne said he frequently dealt with minority students and knew that Churchill was involved in a tutoring program for American Indians on the Boulder campus.
"I knew of him in as much as I was dealing with Indian students," said Wayne, who is retired and lives in Denver.
Northridge officials never spent much time considering Churchill for the position, according to Wayne.
"He never showed up as a serious applicant," Wayne said. "He received a letter saying, 'We've reviewed your application and are considering someone else.' "
On the Boulder campus, it was a different story. CU officials were convinced they had to move fast and give Churchill tenure or risk losing him to another school.
In January 1991, the incoming chairman of the CU communication department, Michael Pacanowsky, told his faculty that the department was being pressured by CU officials to grant tenure to Churchill as soon as possible.
The university feared that Churchill had been offered a full professorship at Cal State at Northridge, Pacanowsky wrote in a memo to the faculty.
Churchill did not have a doctorate, which is usually required for tenure.
Tenure review typically includes an evaluation of the candidate's published works by scholars from other campuses. That apparently didn't happen in Churchill's case.
In the memo, Pacanowsky tells his colleagues that he is troubled by the hasty process that eventually gave Churchill tenure.
He said CU was eager to add an American Indian scholar to its faculty.
"I apologize for the manner in which we are having to deal with this, and I am uncomfortable with it," he wrote.
Churchill has been under fire ever since an essay he wrote in 2001 comparing the victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to Nazis came to light.
Since then, many aspects of his career have been challenged - from his claim of American Indian ancestry to the veracity of his scholarship.
The CU regents have ordered a complete review of his writings, and Gov. Bill Owens and others have demanded he be fired.
Wayne says that if Northridge had seriously considered Churchill for a job, they would have sent someone to Boulder to interview his colleagues and the university would have known he was being courted.
Wayne thinks CU officials were simply determined to hire an American Indian to teach ethnic studies.
"They thought Churchill was a hot prospect," Wayne said. "He wasn't that hot. The only place he was hot was at CU."
When free speech becomes anarchy
Ward Churchill's article has appeared in at least one anarchist publication: Green Anarchy #8, Spring 2002 Please note, if you follow this link, who the first article in Issue 8 is written by.
Asian "Eichmanns"
And this article, found on CNN like my previous post, is from September 13, 2001.
Asia counts its dead and missing
September 13, 2001 Posted: 10:46 AM EDT (1446 GMT)
By Marianne BrayCNN
HONG KONG, China (CNN) -- As rescuers dig through the rubble of terrorist attacks in the United States, details are starting to trickle in on just how many Asian nationals were caught up in the terror.
Governments around Asia are tracking down hundreds of their citizens who were working in the World Trade Center when terrorists slammed their hijacked planes into the towers on Tuesday morning.
But as companies scramble to locate their staff, officials are saying it could take days, if not weeks, to work out just how many casualties there are.
The lower Manhattan district where the towers once resided was also a popular spot for tourists, and it is feared that many more could have died here.
What's more, a number of Asian nationals were among the casualties in the skies, when hijacked planes ploughed into the New York landmark and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
Japan banks
The 110-storey WTC twin towers, which housed around 50,000 workers, were a magnet for many of the world's biggest and most prestigious financial companies.
Japanese companies had a strong presence in the busy complex, with around 31 firms. Most have confirmed their workers were safe.
Four Japanese companies say that around 19 Japanese nationals are still missing.
Japan's Fuji Bank took up the 79th to the 82nd floors of the WTC South tower, and according to Japan's Asahi Shimbun, about a dozen of their 115 workers were still missing on Wednesday night.
There is also no word on around 500 locally-hired staff who worked at the bank's New York branch.
Two workers for the Nishi-Nippon Bank Ltd, whose offices were on the 102nd floor, have not been heard from. Their three-person office was just above the zone of impact.
Five out of 15 workers at the Chuo Mitsui Trust and Banking Co. are missing.
Amid conflicting reports, Japan's foreign ministry said on Wednesday dozens of tourists visiting New York have still not been heard from.
Chinese presence
China Daily's website said 11 out of 18 Chinese businesses scattered across the WTC have got tabs on their staff, but the fate of around 30 others is unknown.
The China Daily, with 56 workers, has its North American headquarters in one of the towers.
One worker, Sun Lingling, told the paper she stumbled down 33 floors, clogged with smoke and people. When she reached the bottom, she noticed eight elevators had crashed and spoke of chunks of granite falling off the lobby walls around her.
Five other Chinese companies have not been able to contact their employees while another company said one of its workers was injured.
It is believed that two Chinese, a man and a woman, were on board the hijacked planes that hit the Pentagon and the twin towers.
South Korea
Most of the 27 South Koreans listed as missing -- nine were confirmed safe Thursday -- also worked in the WTC towers.
The only Korean confirmed dead, was aboard the hijacked United Airlines plane from Boston. Kim Ji-soo, 37, was flying that day to visit her 83-year-old grandmother in Los Angeles.
According to Kim's family, she was a professor at Boston University's medical school and was on the plane with her American husband, Peter Hanson, 32, and two-year-old daughter.
South Pacific
Both Australia and New Zealand have a strong presence in New York's business community.
New Zealand has estimated that 300 of its citizens live in the city and there could be many more just visiting.
So far Australia says that three of its nationals have been confirmed dead. A 66-year-old Sydney man died when American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the World Trade Center while a 62-year-old Sydney woman on board American Airlines 77 was killed after her plane crashed into the Pentagon in Washington DC.
Australia's foreign affairs ministry is still checking out whether another six Australians were on one of the aircraft.
Another 90 Australians who were reportedly in the vicinity of the twin towers at the time of the attacks, are still missing, a statement released by Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Downer said.
One Australian who was spared was swimming star Ian Thorpe, who was planning a trip to the World Trade Center when he heard about the attack.
In the Philippines, journalist Cookie Micaller said her sister, Cynthia Wilson, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was on the 79th floor of one of the towers and used a cell phone to call an uncle in New York before the building collapsed.
"She said, `Please pray for me. We need your prayer.' The conversation was cut off, and she never called again," Micaller said told The Associated Press. "Five minutes later after that call, the building she was on collapsed."
While The Times of India web site says hundreds of Indians may have been caught up in the attack, only one company, Wipro, has commented. It says that four of its workers are still missing.
Asia counts its dead and missing
September 13, 2001 Posted: 10:46 AM EDT (1446 GMT)
By Marianne BrayCNN
HONG KONG, China (CNN) -- As rescuers dig through the rubble of terrorist attacks in the United States, details are starting to trickle in on just how many Asian nationals were caught up in the terror.
Governments around Asia are tracking down hundreds of their citizens who were working in the World Trade Center when terrorists slammed their hijacked planes into the towers on Tuesday morning.
But as companies scramble to locate their staff, officials are saying it could take days, if not weeks, to work out just how many casualties there are.
The lower Manhattan district where the towers once resided was also a popular spot for tourists, and it is feared that many more could have died here.
What's more, a number of Asian nationals were among the casualties in the skies, when hijacked planes ploughed into the New York landmark and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.
Japan banks
The 110-storey WTC twin towers, which housed around 50,000 workers, were a magnet for many of the world's biggest and most prestigious financial companies.
Japanese companies had a strong presence in the busy complex, with around 31 firms. Most have confirmed their workers were safe.
Four Japanese companies say that around 19 Japanese nationals are still missing.
Japan's Fuji Bank took up the 79th to the 82nd floors of the WTC South tower, and according to Japan's Asahi Shimbun, about a dozen of their 115 workers were still missing on Wednesday night.
There is also no word on around 500 locally-hired staff who worked at the bank's New York branch.
Two workers for the Nishi-Nippon Bank Ltd, whose offices were on the 102nd floor, have not been heard from. Their three-person office was just above the zone of impact.
Five out of 15 workers at the Chuo Mitsui Trust and Banking Co. are missing.
Amid conflicting reports, Japan's foreign ministry said on Wednesday dozens of tourists visiting New York have still not been heard from.
Chinese presence
China Daily's website said 11 out of 18 Chinese businesses scattered across the WTC have got tabs on their staff, but the fate of around 30 others is unknown.
The China Daily, with 56 workers, has its North American headquarters in one of the towers.
One worker, Sun Lingling, told the paper she stumbled down 33 floors, clogged with smoke and people. When she reached the bottom, she noticed eight elevators had crashed and spoke of chunks of granite falling off the lobby walls around her.
Five other Chinese companies have not been able to contact their employees while another company said one of its workers was injured.
It is believed that two Chinese, a man and a woman, were on board the hijacked planes that hit the Pentagon and the twin towers.
South Korea
Most of the 27 South Koreans listed as missing -- nine were confirmed safe Thursday -- also worked in the WTC towers.
The only Korean confirmed dead, was aboard the hijacked United Airlines plane from Boston. Kim Ji-soo, 37, was flying that day to visit her 83-year-old grandmother in Los Angeles.
According to Kim's family, she was a professor at Boston University's medical school and was on the plane with her American husband, Peter Hanson, 32, and two-year-old daughter.
South Pacific
Both Australia and New Zealand have a strong presence in New York's business community.
New Zealand has estimated that 300 of its citizens live in the city and there could be many more just visiting.
So far Australia says that three of its nationals have been confirmed dead. A 66-year-old Sydney man died when American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the World Trade Center while a 62-year-old Sydney woman on board American Airlines 77 was killed after her plane crashed into the Pentagon in Washington DC.
Australia's foreign affairs ministry is still checking out whether another six Australians were on one of the aircraft.
Another 90 Australians who were reportedly in the vicinity of the twin towers at the time of the attacks, are still missing, a statement released by Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Downer said.
One Australian who was spared was swimming star Ian Thorpe, who was planning a trip to the World Trade Center when he heard about the attack.
In the Philippines, journalist Cookie Micaller said her sister, Cynthia Wilson, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was on the 79th floor of one of the towers and used a cell phone to call an uncle in New York before the building collapsed.
"She said, `Please pray for me. We need your prayer.' The conversation was cut off, and she never called again," Micaller said told The Associated Press. "Five minutes later after that call, the building she was on collapsed."
While The Times of India web site says hundreds of Indians may have been caught up in the attack, only one company, Wipro, has commented. It says that four of its workers are still missing.
"Little Eichmanns" not just Americans
This old article from just days after the attack--days after Ward Churchill wrote his essay calling the 9-11 dead "little Eichmanns"--serves as a reminder that it wasn't just Americans who died that day...So yes, again, the United States has a messed-up foreign policy and a view of the world that is more than a little askew. I realize that Churchill's point that the World Trade Center was a visible target of American capitalism is a valid one. However, yet again I have to say, he could have chosen his words more carefully, had he wished to. This article is from CNN:
World victims among NY dead
September 14, 2001 Posted: 3:22 AM EDT (0722 GMT)
Hundreds of foreign nationals are feared among the dead in New York
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Nations across the globe are reporting that many of their citizens are among the thousands dead and missing in the U.S. terror attacks.
The vast majority of those who have been confirmed dead were travelling on either of the two planes that slammed into the World Trade Center twin towers in New York on Tuesday.
Some countries are not even beginning to estimate the number of its dead.
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani says more than 4,700 people, of all nationalities, are missing.
About 100 Britons are known to have died in the New York attacks, and the final toll could reach the "middle hundreds" if not higher, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.
Hundreds of Britons are believed to have been working in the twin towers of the World Trade Center when they were destroyed, many in banks and other financial institutions.
Acting Australian Prime Minister John Anderson said three of its citizens who had died had been on one of the Boston planes that crashed into the twin towers.
The government is trying to trying to confirm whether a further six had been on the plane. About 75 are still missing.
Germany has said four of its dead were on the planes.
Ireland has confirmed two of its people had been plane passengers.
Switzerland's foreign ministry said at least two of its nationals, a married couple, were victims of the plane hijack. Four other Swiss nationals had been in the World Trade Center at the time of the attacks, listed now as missing.
Up to 300 were listed missing, though that figure was expected to fall, a spokesman for the ministry said.
Japan reports that it has 100 nationals still unaccounted for. Two are believed to have been airline passengers.
Some 20 Japanese companies had offices at the World Trade Center. They included many of Japan's biggest banks, such as the trust operations of Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank and Chuo Mitsui.
Fuji Bank & Trust operated on four floors in 2 World Trade Center. A spokesman said on Wednesday afternoon that 12 out of 125 Japanese expatriate employees were missing. The rest had checked in and are safe.
Around 90 percent of the 500 local U.S. employees had been located, he said. "We hope the rest are OK," he said.
Office workers were seen falling or jumping from the Twin Towers before they collapsed.
Asahi Bank Ltd. had 94 employees in its New York branch on the 60th floor of 1 World Trade Center. All 94 are alive, the company said Wednesday.
A spokesman said he was unsure how the employees got out of the building but they have all been accounted for."
Also, 27 South Koreans were listed as missing. One Korean was on the hijacked United Airlines plane from Boston. Kim Ji-soo was headed to Los Angeles to visit her grandmother.
Notimex, the Mexican news agency, is reporting that there were 100 to 150 Mexicans working at the World Trade Center and at least 12 cannot be accounted for.
China Daily's Web site said 11 out of 18 Chinese businesses scattered across the WTC had tabs on their staff.
South Korea has confirmed one dead, a professor at Boston University's medical school who was flying to visit her 83-year-old grandmother in Los Angeles. Kim Ji-soo, 37, had been flying with her American husband and their two-year-old daughter.
The Irish Times newspaper reported a story of how a man at the World Trade Center survived but his sister and a niece were in one of the planes that hit the tower.
John Clifford of Cork told the Times that his brother Ronnie, 47, survived but his sister Ruth McCourt, 45, and her 4-year-old daughter Juliana died.
The two boarded a flight in Boston bound for Los Angeles. The woman and her daughter lived in Connecticut, Clifford told the Times.
In the UK, Straw said Scotland Yard's casualty bureau was in the process of contacting the families of the dead.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Straw said: "I understand that the number of confirmed British deaths is now approaching 100.
"The total number of British deaths is unlikely to be less than the middle hundreds and may be higher."
Straw also said British forces were in a state of readiness for any response to the attacks but said he did not wish to discuss what action might be taken.
He said NATO and the U.N. Security Council were both resolved to do whatever was necessary to bring those responsible, and those who were harbouring them, to account for their part in the attacks.
Earlier, Scotland Yard said it had received a "massive" number of calls from anxious relatives.
Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said: "It is difficult to predict with any certainty, but what is becoming clear is that the death toll of British citizens is likely to run into the hundreds."
World victims among NY dead
September 14, 2001 Posted: 3:22 AM EDT (0722 GMT)
Hundreds of foreign nationals are feared among the dead in New York
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Nations across the globe are reporting that many of their citizens are among the thousands dead and missing in the U.S. terror attacks.
The vast majority of those who have been confirmed dead were travelling on either of the two planes that slammed into the World Trade Center twin towers in New York on Tuesday.
Some countries are not even beginning to estimate the number of its dead.
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani says more than 4,700 people, of all nationalities, are missing.
About 100 Britons are known to have died in the New York attacks, and the final toll could reach the "middle hundreds" if not higher, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said.
Hundreds of Britons are believed to have been working in the twin towers of the World Trade Center when they were destroyed, many in banks and other financial institutions.
Acting Australian Prime Minister John Anderson said three of its citizens who had died had been on one of the Boston planes that crashed into the twin towers.
The government is trying to trying to confirm whether a further six had been on the plane. About 75 are still missing.
Germany has said four of its dead were on the planes.
Ireland has confirmed two of its people had been plane passengers.
Switzerland's foreign ministry said at least two of its nationals, a married couple, were victims of the plane hijack. Four other Swiss nationals had been in the World Trade Center at the time of the attacks, listed now as missing.
Up to 300 were listed missing, though that figure was expected to fall, a spokesman for the ministry said.
Japan reports that it has 100 nationals still unaccounted for. Two are believed to have been airline passengers.
Some 20 Japanese companies had offices at the World Trade Center. They included many of Japan's biggest banks, such as the trust operations of Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank and Chuo Mitsui.
Fuji Bank & Trust operated on four floors in 2 World Trade Center. A spokesman said on Wednesday afternoon that 12 out of 125 Japanese expatriate employees were missing. The rest had checked in and are safe.
Around 90 percent of the 500 local U.S. employees had been located, he said. "We hope the rest are OK," he said.
Office workers were seen falling or jumping from the Twin Towers before they collapsed.
Asahi Bank Ltd. had 94 employees in its New York branch on the 60th floor of 1 World Trade Center. All 94 are alive, the company said Wednesday.
A spokesman said he was unsure how the employees got out of the building but they have all been accounted for."
Also, 27 South Koreans were listed as missing. One Korean was on the hijacked United Airlines plane from Boston. Kim Ji-soo was headed to Los Angeles to visit her grandmother.
Notimex, the Mexican news agency, is reporting that there were 100 to 150 Mexicans working at the World Trade Center and at least 12 cannot be accounted for.
China Daily's Web site said 11 out of 18 Chinese businesses scattered across the WTC had tabs on their staff.
South Korea has confirmed one dead, a professor at Boston University's medical school who was flying to visit her 83-year-old grandmother in Los Angeles. Kim Ji-soo, 37, had been flying with her American husband and their two-year-old daughter.
The Irish Times newspaper reported a story of how a man at the World Trade Center survived but his sister and a niece were in one of the planes that hit the tower.
John Clifford of Cork told the Times that his brother Ronnie, 47, survived but his sister Ruth McCourt, 45, and her 4-year-old daughter Juliana died.
The two boarded a flight in Boston bound for Los Angeles. The woman and her daughter lived in Connecticut, Clifford told the Times.
In the UK, Straw said Scotland Yard's casualty bureau was in the process of contacting the families of the dead.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Straw said: "I understand that the number of confirmed British deaths is now approaching 100.
"The total number of British deaths is unlikely to be less than the middle hundreds and may be higher."
Straw also said British forces were in a state of readiness for any response to the attacks but said he did not wish to discuss what action might be taken.
He said NATO and the U.N. Security Council were both resolved to do whatever was necessary to bring those responsible, and those who were harbouring them, to account for their part in the attacks.
Earlier, Scotland Yard said it had received a "massive" number of calls from anxious relatives.
Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said: "It is difficult to predict with any certainty, but what is becoming clear is that the death toll of British citizens is likely to run into the hundreds."
Yes, Canada too...
I finally tracked down the page where Churchill advocates the overthrow and destruction of Canada as well as the United States. Canada. Yeah, known for its violence. Known for its violent foreign policy. I used to live near Vancouver, and I miss deeply the long lazy drive into Canada, the hours spent at a little cafe there on Denman Street eating the most delicious cake I've ever eaten. I miss the ferry ride to Victoria, tea at the Empress Hotel. Canada is not a land of violence or of hatred, but a land desperately trying to preserve some of the fragile peace this world actually has. In fact, dear Mr. Churchill, Canada opposed the current "war" in Iraq, didn't they? Would Canada deserve a 9-11? And notice, please, that Churchill says that Canada is just part of the U.S. I know some people who would beg to differ.
Yes, Ward Churchill, the United States has seriously fucked up, but again, my friend, to quote a Native Alaskan actress playing a Native Alaskan character on "Northern Exposure"--"Words are stones." Be careful how you fling them. Oh, and Ward? Since you're actually not a Native American, no matter how many times you jump up and down and scream that you are, you do realize that when the U.S. and Canada finally return the land to the Native Americans, you won't get a single miserable little acre?
And hugs, by the way, to my peaceful, wonderful Canadian friends--you know who you are :) and I love you...
All of my adult life, I've been an activist. I've been an activist full time one way or another. Every aspect of what I do is [connected] to that central task, and that central task of activism is to clarify and organize around the clarification. In the course of that activist adulthood, I have encountered and agreed with and participated in movements that aspired to certain slogans. When I started out it was "U.S. out of Vietnam," and then that was changed and it became "U.S. out of Indochina," and then it became "U.S. out of Southern Africa," and it was "U.S. out of the Caribbean and Central America," and then it became "U.S. out of the Persian Gulf." I agreed with every one of those, but ultimately there's only one way that any of them will be possible and that is: US out of North America, U.S. off the planet, and take Canada with you when you go!
That creates the basis for that future alternative. That understanding and that understanding alone will create that basis. Every square inch of terra firma that is removed from the corpus of either of these mega-States, and understand when we're in Canada we are only on the Northern provinces of the United States Empire. This is the tail wagged by the dog in Washington, D.C. and never be confused about that. Ultimately, it matters not whether the end structure of Canadian proclaimed soil or US proclaimed soil, every square inch that is returned to Native control, to Native sovereign control, is one inch less they have of consolidated territory to base their power projection upon. Ultimately, if that process was complete, they would have no basis, either materially in terms of territory or materially in terms of resources, in order to conduct themselves in the world elsewhere the way they do now. And in the process they would not be able to conduct themselves here.
ZNet Activism Resistance to War, Occupation, and Empire
Yes, Ward Churchill, the United States has seriously fucked up, but again, my friend, to quote a Native Alaskan actress playing a Native Alaskan character on "Northern Exposure"--"Words are stones." Be careful how you fling them. Oh, and Ward? Since you're actually not a Native American, no matter how many times you jump up and down and scream that you are, you do realize that when the U.S. and Canada finally return the land to the Native Americans, you won't get a single miserable little acre?
And hugs, by the way, to my peaceful, wonderful Canadian friends--you know who you are :) and I love you...
All of my adult life, I've been an activist. I've been an activist full time one way or another. Every aspect of what I do is [connected] to that central task, and that central task of activism is to clarify and organize around the clarification. In the course of that activist adulthood, I have encountered and agreed with and participated in movements that aspired to certain slogans. When I started out it was "U.S. out of Vietnam," and then that was changed and it became "U.S. out of Indochina," and then it became "U.S. out of Southern Africa," and it was "U.S. out of the Caribbean and Central America," and then it became "U.S. out of the Persian Gulf." I agreed with every one of those, but ultimately there's only one way that any of them will be possible and that is: US out of North America, U.S. off the planet, and take Canada with you when you go!
That creates the basis for that future alternative. That understanding and that understanding alone will create that basis. Every square inch of terra firma that is removed from the corpus of either of these mega-States, and understand when we're in Canada we are only on the Northern provinces of the United States Empire. This is the tail wagged by the dog in Washington, D.C. and never be confused about that. Ultimately, it matters not whether the end structure of Canadian proclaimed soil or US proclaimed soil, every square inch that is returned to Native control, to Native sovereign control, is one inch less they have of consolidated territory to base their power projection upon. Ultimately, if that process was complete, they would have no basis, either materially in terms of territory or materially in terms of resources, in order to conduct themselves in the world elsewhere the way they do now. And in the process they would not be able to conduct themselves here.
ZNet Activism Resistance to War, Occupation, and Empire
Individuals, or a generalization?
630 KHOW - Denver's Talk Station has a sound-clip of one of Churchill's lectures (scroll down to "Portions of a lecture") wherein he laughs at the Cantor Fitzgerald victims waving their shirts out of the World Trade Center windows. In this same snippet, he tells his listeners that they have a "homework assignment" to help make sure that more things like 9-11 happen. That isn't only free speech--that's incitement to violence. I'm only glad none of his audience took him up on it. And it isn't a generalization--he mentions the Cantor Fitzgerald firm by name, while he laughs...
As for whether Churchill was merely generalizing, you have to wonder whether he might have found a better way of expressing it than by penning this vitriolic little paragraph, the paragraph the brother of an "Eichmann" is referring to when he mentions cell phones:
There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . . Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to "ignorance" – a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore" – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.
Yes, okay, that not something that mentions individuals, but it does target a pretty specific group of people. A generalization could have so easily been made against the American government, without resorting to laughter over the deaths of these men and women in these buildings. Couldn't it? Somehow, John Kerry and John Edwards made it all the way through their campaign without once using the word "Eichmann" about anybody. Not even loopy Teresa did that. If you have a beef with the government of this country, then take it up with the government of this country. Call Bush a "little Eichmann," since that seems to be the point people like Churchill are trying to make. To resort to calling thousands of innocent dead "Eichmanns" is grotesque, and not designed to bring your point across as a generalization--it is designed to anger and infuriate. It is designed to enrage. Churchill could easily have made his points without using the dead as scapegoats for his own twisted rage.
I cannot imagine the depth of my own anger at this man if I were Jewish. I posted an article about the Jewish dead specifically to make that point, as well. Were the Jewish dead of 9-11 "little Eichmanns"? Churchill would say that they were. I cannot imagine John Kerry being able to get much support if he had resorted to Churchill's tactics. There are better words Churchill could have used if he had wanted to. The point is, though, he has made a career out of being a screaming agitator (his penned words scream off the page in effusions of hatred and bile) and every book he has ever written has been nothing more than an encouragement of violence. The very fact that he says that pacifists are patholigical and should seek professional treatment should be enough to show exactly where he stands.
I have managed to post on this blog all of my anger at Bush, at losing the election, at what's happening to our planet, and not once have I called anyone a Nazi, generalization or not. It's a dictum in our schools today to "choose your words." If someone comes up to my child and calls her names, then they're exercising their right to free speech. If they then gather their pals around and begin saying that Victoria or Veronica deserves to die, or that they should be taken off the planet, then I have to begin wondering whether those bullies are "choosing their words" in anything like an acceptable manner. "Choose your words." Churchill, being the absolutely brilliant man he is (after all, only the truly genius could possibly achieve full tenure--a six year process at best--in one year) could surely have chosen better words. Right?
As for whether Churchill was merely generalizing, you have to wonder whether he might have found a better way of expressing it than by penning this vitriolic little paragraph, the paragraph the brother of an "Eichmann" is referring to when he mentions cell phones:
There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . . Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to "ignorance" – a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore" – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.
Yes, okay, that not something that mentions individuals, but it does target a pretty specific group of people. A generalization could have so easily been made against the American government, without resorting to laughter over the deaths of these men and women in these buildings. Couldn't it? Somehow, John Kerry and John Edwards made it all the way through their campaign without once using the word "Eichmann" about anybody. Not even loopy Teresa did that. If you have a beef with the government of this country, then take it up with the government of this country. Call Bush a "little Eichmann," since that seems to be the point people like Churchill are trying to make. To resort to calling thousands of innocent dead "Eichmanns" is grotesque, and not designed to bring your point across as a generalization--it is designed to anger and infuriate. It is designed to enrage. Churchill could easily have made his points without using the dead as scapegoats for his own twisted rage.
I cannot imagine the depth of my own anger at this man if I were Jewish. I posted an article about the Jewish dead specifically to make that point, as well. Were the Jewish dead of 9-11 "little Eichmanns"? Churchill would say that they were. I cannot imagine John Kerry being able to get much support if he had resorted to Churchill's tactics. There are better words Churchill could have used if he had wanted to. The point is, though, he has made a career out of being a screaming agitator (his penned words scream off the page in effusions of hatred and bile) and every book he has ever written has been nothing more than an encouragement of violence. The very fact that he says that pacifists are patholigical and should seek professional treatment should be enough to show exactly where he stands.
I have managed to post on this blog all of my anger at Bush, at losing the election, at what's happening to our planet, and not once have I called anyone a Nazi, generalization or not. It's a dictum in our schools today to "choose your words." If someone comes up to my child and calls her names, then they're exercising their right to free speech. If they then gather their pals around and begin saying that Victoria or Veronica deserves to die, or that they should be taken off the planet, then I have to begin wondering whether those bullies are "choosing their words" in anything like an acceptable manner. "Choose your words." Churchill, being the absolutely brilliant man he is (after all, only the truly genius could possibly achieve full tenure--a six year process at best--in one year) could surely have chosen better words. Right?
Howard Dean's message
Yes, this is from days and days ago ;) It's Howard Dean's e-mail message to supporters of the Democratic Party:
You run this party.
On Saturday, I was honored when your representatives on the Democratic National Committee elected me Chairman. And I can't wait to get started. But when they voted, it wasn't about me -- they were voting for a plan for the future of our party.
That plan came from people like you -- from conversations I had with ordinary Democrats across the country. When those 447 people voted in Washington this weekend, they united around that plan.
Now I'm asking you to do the same. Those 447 people were a good start, but make no mistake -- I know that this is also your party. And our plan to reform the party can only become a reality with your endorsement.
Please read our plan -- and commit to making it a reality: http://www.democrats.org/plan
Your representatives in the DNC mandated bottom-up reform -- growing the Democratic Party in your neighborhood and every other community in America. They voted to compete in every state for every level of office. And they demanded a Democratic Party that stands up for itself and for an agenda that reflects our values.
They didn't elect me because they think I can accomplish these things. They elected me because I believe that only you can.
Every single one of us must take responsibility for building our party. It's not enough to simply vote for Democrats -- in order to win, every one of us must deliver our message and values into our own community.
That means changing the way we do business, and that's what this plan is about:
http://www.democrats.org/plan
The Republicans' biggest victory has been to convince many Democrats that we can only win by abandoning our values and doing what they say.
It's one of their favorite tactics -- just watch how right-wing pundits talk endlessly about the internal politics of our party. They try to divide Democrats by ideology just as they divide all Americans by race or gender or faith.
But there is no crisis of ideology in the Democratic Party, only a crisis of confidence. Bill Clinton once described the Democratic Party's problems in the era of George W. Bush, saying that in uncertain times people would rather have a leader who is strong and wrong than weak and right.
He's exactly right. And we become both weak and wrong when we abandon our core values for short-term political gain. But when we Democrats talk straight and stand up for ourselves, we have a huge advantage: We are both strong and right.
We will only turn that advantage into victory if we make a concrete plan and work hard to execute it. Declare your support and offer feedback now on the plan to build an organization that will help us win everywhere, and win with pride:
http://www.democrats.org/plan
Millions of Americans became Democrats last year. They sensed that they live in a society where ordinary people's problems and interests don't matter to our government. They chose the Democratic Party because we represent commonsense reform.
And millions more will become Democrats this year as we protect the Democratic Party's greatest achievement. We will not allow George Bush to phase out Social Security -- a Democratic policy that cured an epidemic of poverty among seniors and provides the guarantee of retirement with dignity.
Most importantly, millions of Democrats have become true stakeholders in our party. With grassroots action and small-dollar donations, you have taken our party's future into your own hands.
The stakes are too high to wait for others to lead. Every one of us has a personal responsibility for the future of our party -- and the future of our country.
This isn't my chairmanship -- it is ours. So let's get to work together.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D.Chairman, Democratic National Committee
You run this party.
On Saturday, I was honored when your representatives on the Democratic National Committee elected me Chairman. And I can't wait to get started. But when they voted, it wasn't about me -- they were voting for a plan for the future of our party.
That plan came from people like you -- from conversations I had with ordinary Democrats across the country. When those 447 people voted in Washington this weekend, they united around that plan.
Now I'm asking you to do the same. Those 447 people were a good start, but make no mistake -- I know that this is also your party. And our plan to reform the party can only become a reality with your endorsement.
Please read our plan -- and commit to making it a reality: http://www.democrats.org/plan
Your representatives in the DNC mandated bottom-up reform -- growing the Democratic Party in your neighborhood and every other community in America. They voted to compete in every state for every level of office. And they demanded a Democratic Party that stands up for itself and for an agenda that reflects our values.
They didn't elect me because they think I can accomplish these things. They elected me because I believe that only you can.
Every single one of us must take responsibility for building our party. It's not enough to simply vote for Democrats -- in order to win, every one of us must deliver our message and values into our own community.
That means changing the way we do business, and that's what this plan is about:
http://www.democrats.org/plan
The Republicans' biggest victory has been to convince many Democrats that we can only win by abandoning our values and doing what they say.
It's one of their favorite tactics -- just watch how right-wing pundits talk endlessly about the internal politics of our party. They try to divide Democrats by ideology just as they divide all Americans by race or gender or faith.
But there is no crisis of ideology in the Democratic Party, only a crisis of confidence. Bill Clinton once described the Democratic Party's problems in the era of George W. Bush, saying that in uncertain times people would rather have a leader who is strong and wrong than weak and right.
He's exactly right. And we become both weak and wrong when we abandon our core values for short-term political gain. But when we Democrats talk straight and stand up for ourselves, we have a huge advantage: We are both strong and right.
We will only turn that advantage into victory if we make a concrete plan and work hard to execute it. Declare your support and offer feedback now on the plan to build an organization that will help us win everywhere, and win with pride:
http://www.democrats.org/plan
Millions of Americans became Democrats last year. They sensed that they live in a society where ordinary people's problems and interests don't matter to our government. They chose the Democratic Party because we represent commonsense reform.
And millions more will become Democrats this year as we protect the Democratic Party's greatest achievement. We will not allow George Bush to phase out Social Security -- a Democratic policy that cured an epidemic of poverty among seniors and provides the guarantee of retirement with dignity.
Most importantly, millions of Democrats have become true stakeholders in our party. With grassroots action and small-dollar donations, you have taken our party's future into your own hands.
The stakes are too high to wait for others to lead. Every one of us has a personal responsibility for the future of our party -- and the future of our country.
This isn't my chairmanship -- it is ours. So let's get to work together.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D.Chairman, Democratic National Committee
Monday, February 21, 2005
From the brother of a "little Eichmann"
From the Boulder Daily Camera:
My brother, the 'Eichmann'
By Michael FaughnanFebruary 16, 2005
An open letter to Ward Churchill:
My brother Chris was a 1985 graduate of the University of Colorado, the father of three young children and a compassionate, respectful and generous man. He stood in defense of our environment, volunteered his time and money in support of human rights, and gave unselfishly to help disadvantaged, vulnerable members of our society. He spoke openly against unjust government policies, and followed a private ethic of compassion. Chris was also a U.S. government Treasury bond broker for Cantor Fitzgerald, and therefore by your definition was a "little Eichmann."
At 8:46 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, you claim that my beautiful brother Chris, a "technocrat" in your words, received his "befitting penalty." While Chris rarely used a cell phone in his work (much less self-importantly brayed into one), he did make one call that fateful day. At about 8:30 that morning, Chris bantered back and forth with his 4-year-old daughter to get her to say that she loved him — she was the last of his family to talk with him.
Mr. Churchill, what I want you to see is the human face behind the rhetoric. Human beings are not symbols, and your essay's dehumanization of the victims of 9/11 reduces them to mere symbols — drones in a capitalist machine. In this way, you are guilty of what you claim to condemn, that is the dehumanization of individuals. It is the inability to see the human face of "the other" that allows the horrible violence in this world to continue.
From what I understand after reading your essay, you wish to give the American people a view of the suffering of the Iraqi and the Palestinian peoples, and provide insight into why the attacks of 9/11 may have occurred. This is noble and legitimate. We do need to see and understand the consequences of the actions of our government and the exportation of our culture, and also do what we can to right the wrongs that have been committed. But to make this point is it necessary to forget the individual humanity of those who died in the attacks and reduce them to mere stereotypes?
Recently, our family has been discussing what would be a befitting, honorable tribute to his life. Ironically, your essay arrived with its own recognition of Chris's memory — as a faceless technocrat who deserved to die.
Chris's wife now lives in the Boulder area and continues to raise his children based on the creed he followed throughout his life: respect, appreciation, honesty, benevolence and love. So the media coverage of you and your writings resonates loudly with our family, and clarification of your writings is critical to us.
Mr. Churchill, we have the right to ask you, in fact, we are obligated to ask you publicly. And you, sir, we feel, are obligated to answer us publicly and unequivocally. In your view, was my brother's death justified? Yes or no? Did it right any wrongs that have been committed in this world?
Whether you answer, and how you answer, I believe is critical to the greater message I believe you seek to espouse. Behind the painful rhetoric you use, I sense a nobler goal, the desire to tell the American people that we must be aware of ourselves in the world, take responsibility and work to understand and change the wrongs that have been committed. If this is your greater message, my brother Chris would have agreed with you whole-heartedly. And if this is your message, please state it clearly, and abandon the dehumanizing rhetoric and the pathetic metaphors. If you cannot make your point this way, it is you who is "braying," playing the role of provocateur and not speaking from any coherent moral conviction.
Regrettably, you, like many of those who are zealously attacking you — political leaders, talk-show hosts, those who profess their views around the office water cooler — disgracefully use the victims of 9/11 to advance your own cause. In the view of this family, your grossly inappropriate characterization of Chris and the other 9/11 victims has been surpassed in vulgarity only by the misinformed advocates of aggression who used those beautiful innocents who perished on 9/11 as propaganda for immediate and misguided violence and destruction.
Our family is seeking to steer a course through these two extremes to find some truth in our brother's death. We are concerned that the majority of the public discussion has moved away from the message you are trying to convey, to attacks on your pedigree, your integrity, your scholarship and your right to speak.
We believe in free speech, but also know the truth of the phrase "with great freedom, comes great responsibility." Shame on the University of Colorado, certain political leaders and others who attack you personally, while side-stepping a deeper understanding of the views that you appear to be raising. We would like you to use your right to speak and your privileged position to be clear on our brother's death so that we can better understand your message. Are you capable of rejecting the language of hate and engaging in real constructive dialog to explore realistic solutions to our real world problems, without pitting one group of victims against another?
Mr. Churchill, my family is not ensconced in an ivory tower. We do not have the luxury that you have of pontificating at arm's length on the causes behind the events of 9/11. The reality of that day has been cemented in my family's life forever.
Was our loss justified? Did it right any wrongs that have been committed in this world? We await your clarification.
Michael Faughnan of Denver wrote this on behalf of the family of Christopher Faughnan.
My brother, the 'Eichmann'
By Michael FaughnanFebruary 16, 2005
An open letter to Ward Churchill:
My brother Chris was a 1985 graduate of the University of Colorado, the father of three young children and a compassionate, respectful and generous man. He stood in defense of our environment, volunteered his time and money in support of human rights, and gave unselfishly to help disadvantaged, vulnerable members of our society. He spoke openly against unjust government policies, and followed a private ethic of compassion. Chris was also a U.S. government Treasury bond broker for Cantor Fitzgerald, and therefore by your definition was a "little Eichmann."
At 8:46 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, you claim that my beautiful brother Chris, a "technocrat" in your words, received his "befitting penalty." While Chris rarely used a cell phone in his work (much less self-importantly brayed into one), he did make one call that fateful day. At about 8:30 that morning, Chris bantered back and forth with his 4-year-old daughter to get her to say that she loved him — she was the last of his family to talk with him.
Mr. Churchill, what I want you to see is the human face behind the rhetoric. Human beings are not symbols, and your essay's dehumanization of the victims of 9/11 reduces them to mere symbols — drones in a capitalist machine. In this way, you are guilty of what you claim to condemn, that is the dehumanization of individuals. It is the inability to see the human face of "the other" that allows the horrible violence in this world to continue.
From what I understand after reading your essay, you wish to give the American people a view of the suffering of the Iraqi and the Palestinian peoples, and provide insight into why the attacks of 9/11 may have occurred. This is noble and legitimate. We do need to see and understand the consequences of the actions of our government and the exportation of our culture, and also do what we can to right the wrongs that have been committed. But to make this point is it necessary to forget the individual humanity of those who died in the attacks and reduce them to mere stereotypes?
Recently, our family has been discussing what would be a befitting, honorable tribute to his life. Ironically, your essay arrived with its own recognition of Chris's memory — as a faceless technocrat who deserved to die.
Chris's wife now lives in the Boulder area and continues to raise his children based on the creed he followed throughout his life: respect, appreciation, honesty, benevolence and love. So the media coverage of you and your writings resonates loudly with our family, and clarification of your writings is critical to us.
Mr. Churchill, we have the right to ask you, in fact, we are obligated to ask you publicly. And you, sir, we feel, are obligated to answer us publicly and unequivocally. In your view, was my brother's death justified? Yes or no? Did it right any wrongs that have been committed in this world?
Whether you answer, and how you answer, I believe is critical to the greater message I believe you seek to espouse. Behind the painful rhetoric you use, I sense a nobler goal, the desire to tell the American people that we must be aware of ourselves in the world, take responsibility and work to understand and change the wrongs that have been committed. If this is your greater message, my brother Chris would have agreed with you whole-heartedly. And if this is your message, please state it clearly, and abandon the dehumanizing rhetoric and the pathetic metaphors. If you cannot make your point this way, it is you who is "braying," playing the role of provocateur and not speaking from any coherent moral conviction.
Regrettably, you, like many of those who are zealously attacking you — political leaders, talk-show hosts, those who profess their views around the office water cooler — disgracefully use the victims of 9/11 to advance your own cause. In the view of this family, your grossly inappropriate characterization of Chris and the other 9/11 victims has been surpassed in vulgarity only by the misinformed advocates of aggression who used those beautiful innocents who perished on 9/11 as propaganda for immediate and misguided violence and destruction.
Our family is seeking to steer a course through these two extremes to find some truth in our brother's death. We are concerned that the majority of the public discussion has moved away from the message you are trying to convey, to attacks on your pedigree, your integrity, your scholarship and your right to speak.
We believe in free speech, but also know the truth of the phrase "with great freedom, comes great responsibility." Shame on the University of Colorado, certain political leaders and others who attack you personally, while side-stepping a deeper understanding of the views that you appear to be raising. We would like you to use your right to speak and your privileged position to be clear on our brother's death so that we can better understand your message. Are you capable of rejecting the language of hate and engaging in real constructive dialog to explore realistic solutions to our real world problems, without pitting one group of victims against another?
Mr. Churchill, my family is not ensconced in an ivory tower. We do not have the luxury that you have of pontificating at arm's length on the causes behind the events of 9/11. The reality of that day has been cemented in my family's life forever.
Was our loss justified? Did it right any wrongs that have been committed in this world? We await your clarification.
Michael Faughnan of Denver wrote this on behalf of the family of Christopher Faughnan.
