Genociding Ward Churchill for over a 20th of a century

CNews 31August07

From our Ask And Ye Shall Receive department: We asked back in January '06 if anyone had a non-redacted copy of the "Denver Police Department Intelligence Bureau [DPDIB] Information Summary" that contained the allegation that Professor Ward Churchill and Professor Glenn Morris had been targeted for assassination (Russell Means "would only be injured"); a week ago we mentioned that allegation again because the blog "Censored" was thumping the tub about it once again. The main outrage among the DBAB seems to be that Denver police knew of the "plot" but failed to warn Churchill, Morris, and Means of the danger. Denver Post reporter Amy Herdy (she of the deficient math skills) co-wrote the article Churchill's current wife, Natsu Nancy Elaine Truthforce Taylor Saito, and the ACLU-CO has been waving like a bloody shirt as proof of the Denver PD's callous disregard for the safety of Churchill, Morris and Means.

Today, we received in the mail a differently-redacted copy of—not the Denver PD's Orion system's "Incident File Report"—but what purports to be the DPDIB "Information Summary" on "Ward Churchill, Glen Morris, and Russell Means", dated 11-22-94. Follows the complete text of the Narrative section of that summary (names that are redacted but hand-written in by persons unknown are shown below as strikeout; all errors in the original):

IN OCTOBER 1994 DET. PONTARELLI WAS CONTACTED BY S.A. RK HOLTSLAW, WHO RELATED THAT THE FBI HAD BEEN CONTACTED BY AN INFORMANT, WHO INDICATED THAT THE ABOVE SUBJECTS, WHO ARE LEADERS OF COLORADO A.I.M., HAD BEEN ON THE OUTS WITH OTHER INDIAN FACTIONS. INFORMATION WAS THAT GLEN MORRIS AND WARD CHURCHILL WERE TO BE KILLED, AND RUSSELL MEANS WOULD ONLY BE INJURED, IN AN ATTEMPT TO GET HIM BACK IN LINE WITH NATIONAL A.I.M. LEADERS. GLEN MORRIS AND WARD CHURCHILL ARE NOT FULL-BLOODED NATIVE AMERICANS, AND THEIR RADICAL ACTIVITY IS BEING SCRUTINIZED BY MORE TRADITIONAL NATIVE AMERICANS. THE ALLEGED HIT WAS GOING TO BE MADE TO LOOK LIKE THE "FEDS" WERE INVOLVED, AND IT IS ALLEGED THAT IT WILL TAKE PLACE BY THE END OF THE YEAR.

DET. HOLTSLAW INDICATED THAT THE DENVER SHERATON TECH CENTER HOTEL WOULD BE HOST TO THE 51ST, CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS CONVENTION FROM NOVEMBER 13, 1994 TO NOVEMBER 18, 1994. THERE WAS CONCERN ON HIS PART, IN THAT FBI AGENTS WOULD BE MANING A RECRUITMENT BOOTH AT THE CONVENTION, AND THE TIMING OF THE CONVENTION IS NEAR THE END OF THE YEAR AND IS IN THE DENVER AREA WHERE CHURCHILL AND MORRIS LIVE, AND RUSSELL MEANS IS KNOWN TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME.

DET. PONTARELLI INFORMED S.A. HOTLSLAW OF THE HOSTILITIES OF THE PAST YEAR OR SO BETWEEN LEADERS OF A.I.M. COLORADO AND NATIONAL A.I.M., AND OF THE SO CALLED "DECLARATION OF WAR", WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN THE BASIS OF THE INFORMANT'S INFORMATION.

INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO S.A. HOLTSLAW TO CONTACT CHURCHILL, MORRIS, AND MEANS ABOUT THE ALLEGED THREATS ATTRIBUTED TO THE INFORMATION, AND HE RELATED THAT THEY WOULD BE MONITORING THE CONVENTION.

Agoraphobia, or, The Academic Pig In A Poke

by Jim Paine

When someone insists that your judgment is faulty, it a good idea to keep in mind that they aren't saying that all judgment is faulty; theirs, for example, is doing just fine. But if they can't convince you their argument is correct (because, for instance, they have no facts to back it up), then the next step is to convince you that your argument is wrong. And if that's unsuccessful, the fall-back position is always, well, that all opinions are equally valid, which to you might seem like ending the argument in a draw. But then, your judgment on that subject, as we just discussed, is faulty.

I'm sure that it's just a pure-D coincidence that academia (and I mean that in the entire K-12 and higher education sense) has spent the past several decades hammering on all three of the above-noted strategems, alternately telling you that your opinion (any opinion, as long as it's yours) is faulty, fallacious, and equally valid. From kindergarten up through the aptly-named "terminal" degrees, academia has been teaching us that our judgment is bad, that truth is a matter of perspective (or even better, that it simply does not exist); paradoxically enough, academia has also insisted that all opinions are of equal value—which is true, in a way, since zero does in fact equal zero. And if all opinions are equal, then the loudest voice wins.

One solution to counter this problem (miss-identified as liberal bias) in academia—David Horowitz's Academic Bill of Rights—seeks to institute a policy that requires the consideration of (allegedly) all viewpoints, a sort of Fairness Doctrine for higher education. Good thinking, Horowitz. Let's add the silliness of "Intelligent Design" to a curriculum already overloaded with the silliness of Marxist economic theories. Oh, and for the Stupidity Trifecta, let's have the government administer it.

One of the marvels of the Internet Age is the accessibility of information. Want to know what classes Natsu Saito is teaching this semester? Want to know what Ward Churchill considers "scholarly publications"? How about what Professor Peter N. Kirstein had to say about the US when interviewed by Iran TV? At no time in history have the multitudinous foibles and stupidities of the intelligentsia been so glaringly apparent, nor have their motives and goals been so blatantly obvious.

Here's another solution, and vastly simpler: Require all publicly-employed educators, tenured, full-time, part-time—all publicly-employed educators—to post on the internet, accessible to all:

1. Their curricula vitae (with only home address and phone numbers redacted/omitted);
2. The syllabuses of the various classes they teach; and
3. Their assigned reading lists for those classes.

That's it. No impossible-to-enforce "Fairness Doctrine." No internecine warfare among the innumerable academic factions with axes to grind, books of received wisdom to thump, and oxen to gore. Think of it: Wouldn't it be edifying to know who's requiring students to read Michael Bellesisles' Arming America? Or Ward Churchill's Pacifism As Pathology? Or Vine Deloria, Jr.'s Red Earth, White Lies?

Churchill is merely the latest in a long line of educators who assert "there is no truth." I beg to differ. The truth will be what remains after the acid of public inspection (and, of course, ridicule) has washed away all the blurry reasoning, the "critical thinking", and the unsupported (and unsupportable) beliefs of those we entrust with the future.

Or, to put it another way: The university is a marketplace of ideas. Isn't it about time to open up that academic poke to the paying customers?

CNews 29August07

Professor Ward Churchill's Key Demographic, Part VI
Excerpt (emphasis in original):

Because Churchill was protected under consitution [sic] to say whatever the fuck he wants the comittee [sic] dug up miniscule [sic] and insignificant mistakes in his works; such as wrong dates or a faulty citation, these errors make up less than one percent of his work but apparently it was enough to get him fired.

People i can go on forever about hundreds of different injustices that go on just IN THIS COUNTRY off the top of my head. I only hope that through these blurbs and spontaneous fits of rage that you learn something, that you learn to question, and more importantly you learn to learn about the world around you.

CNews 28August07

From our It Don't Mean A Thin' If It Ain't Got That Spin department: Professor Ward Churchill 's socialist friends help him rewrite the narrative (ht John Doe)
Excerpt:

What exactly happened at Fort Clark, a fur trading post on the Missouri River in present-day North Dakota, remains shrouded in fog. It is pretty firmly established that a steamship carrying trading goods to Fort Clark from St Louis brought the smallpox to the Mandan Indians in the late spring or early summer of 1837, spreading it to tribes upriver as well. Accounts vary on who was responsible, with the traders, as one would expect, absolving themselves of blame. Indian accounts saw the introduction of the disease as deliberate. In either case the epidemic resulted in the decimation of Indian tribes over a vast area, facilitating white settlement.

"I think Churchill deserved to get fired. What he said was out of line."
—Phil McMichael, sophomore open-option major

"It's unjustified. It's political. The media took his statements out of context and the situation got out of control."
—Erik DeRoin, senior philosophy major

"I see both sides of the coin. I think Churchill has the right to sue the school if he believes his rights have been violated."
—Erica Silverman, freshman ecology and evolutionary biology major

"From what I've been told it seems like he deserved to be fired, but I also think Churchill experienced a bad run of luck."
—Cedric Wane, junior mathematics major

"I have mixed feelings about Churchill being fired. I do think he should have been punished but firing him was too harsh. Also, I think there are a lot of students who support Churchill and the university did not take student opinions into consideration."
—Lauren Hunt, freshman pre-journalism major

CNews 27August07

At least one student at VCU is not happy with Professor Ward Churchill's scheduled appearance there next week.
Excerpt:

I was surprised and more than a little disgusted to learn that Ward Churchill has been invited for a speaking engagement at Virginia Commonwealth University. As a student (albeit in the Northern Virginia program) I am deeply concerned that my tuition will help to pay an honorarium for a professor who was fired from the University of Colorado at Boulder for academic misconduct less than one month ago. His facile and sophomoric political commentary aside, Churchill was found guilty by his colleagues of plagiarism and fabrication. Either one of these offenses would rightly result in the expulsion of a student and the dismissal of a professor from this institution. So what message does it send to the academic community to allow someone who has been found guilty on seven counts of these and similar misdeeds to speak on campus?

CNews 25August07

	One of PB's jackbooted hooligans dropped by Ward Churchill's CU Ethnic Studies office recently to commune with The Perfesser, and found that someone by the name of Seema Sohi* had moved in! Why, the nerve! You'd think Ward Churchill had been fired or something. Well, don't go getting too comfortable, Professor Sohi! Rumor has it that Churchill's gonna own CU soon, so you might want to save those moving boxes. And if you value your life, keep your mitts off the stash of mini-Snickers hidden up in the overhead!
Just a few steps away from Ward Churchill's ex-office is the "Instructors Office" (left). The right pic is a close-up of the printout below the Instructors Office sign. How they're able to cram three other instructors in there with "Professor" Benjie, his ego, and his stomping boots is surely a marvel of modern science.

CNews 24August07

According to this website, Professor Ward Churchill will be speaking at Virginia Commonwealth University on September 7. Topic for the evening: "From a Native Son: Conquest and Colonization in the Americas: An Evening with Ward Churchill"

Churchill is truly a piece of work: ex-Long Range Recon (“search and destroy”) in Vietnam; ex-Weatherman; ex-white man; American Indian Movement splitter; tenured faculty without a Ph.D or a single scholarly publication; non-Indian pan-Indian nationalist; anti-Semite; and, needless to say (but, in a letter to AJODA [Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed], he did say it), no anarchist. AK Press is forever fumbling for his zipper. Churchill always publishes there the books that even other leftist publishers shrink from. He was keynote speaker at the (unofficially) AK-controlled Bay Area Anarchist Bookfair two years ago. When David Horowitz and other right-wingers campaign against campus academic freedom, Exhibit A is always Ward Churchill. Churchill has always had agent provocateur written all over him. That is how many Native American activists regard him. As I once remarked (AJODA No. 46), "You'd have to be awfully stupid, even by lax anarchist standards, not to notice that this guy has always had agent provocateur written all over him." And as Churchill himself once observed in this magazine, you don’t have to be an agent to do an agent’s work.

CNews 23August07

Drunkablog notes a blog dredging up the old chestnut about Professor Ward Churchill being targeted for assassination. Churchill's current wife, Natsu Nancy Elaine Taylor Truthforce Saito, tried floating this same theory back in January '06 (second item), but the allegation never grew legs among Denver media.
Here's the "Denver Spy Files" note that Truthforce, et al, believe targets The Perfesser:

11-22-94, Det. Pontarelli reported that information had been received from the FBI that a CI had information that Glenn Morris, [redacted] would be the target of a 'hit' arranged by the National members of AIM. This is an attempt to get Colorado AIM 'back in the fold' with national Indian agenda. The report indicated that Morris and [redacted] would be killed and that Means would be injured. It was feared that the incident would happen at an Indian convention in Denver the previous week, bkut [sic] none of the persons involved were seen at the convention.

CNews 22August07

From our Quelle Surprise department: An anthropology blog discovers More Churchillian fabrications
Excerpt:

I have read a little bit by scholars that challenge Churchill’s claims about the intentional infection of the Mandan and Hidatsa—but am in no position to take a side, to evaluate their arguments. Or here’s another example: Tom Kavanagh, an Indianist whose work has focused primarily on the Comanche but who has also spent time with the Hopi, posted these notes(7/30/07; login required) on Anthro-L a couple weeks ago:

I checked out Churchill’s 2002 "Struggle for the Land" (SF: City Lights), the most recent by WC in our library. I was mildly interested in the chapter on recent Iroquois land claims. Then I see the chapter, "Genocide in Arizona: The ‘Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute’ in Perspective." Whose perspective, I wondered?

Since I do know something of the issues, [full disclosure: I lived at Hopi, 1980-81, was hired by Abbott Sekaquaptewa (see below), so I read more carefully].

By the fourth page, in the span of three paragraphs, came the whoopers: "... leadership of the ten-to-fifteen percent segment of Hopi society that had been assimilated into non-Hopi values via compulsory education and Mormon indoctrination—this group represented the totality of Hopi voter turnout during reorganization and in all subsequent Hopi ‘elections’– had long been the station of the Sekaquaptewa family. The men of the family–the brothers Abbott and Emory, later their sons Emory Jr. and Wayne–immediately attained political ascendency within the new Hopi Tribal Council when it was established in 1936 …

"... By 1940, the Sekaquaptewa’s and their followers had converted their alignment with the federal government into control, not only of [lots of stuff], but of the sole Hopi newspaper (QuaToqti) ... However, they had still bigger plans.

"These had emerged clearly by 1943, when the council, in collaboration with the BIA … successfully consummated a lobbying effort for the creation of “Grazing District 6…"

So, let’s see, according to Churchill, "the [Sekaquaptewa] brothers Emory and Abbott, later their sons Emory Jr. and Wayne…" get control of the Hopi tribal council ca 1936.

The basic problem with this scenario is … (wait for it) ... history.

The elder Sekaquaptewa, Emory, was born ca 1900 in Hotevilla. But although he did serve as a tribal judge under the IRA council, was not particularly involved in tribal politics and was apparently not a member of the council. Moreover, he did not have a brother Abbott.

He did have a bunch of kids, though, including the eldest Wayne, and then in order, Eugene, Emory Jr., Abbott, followed by several others. I can’t find absolute birth dates for most of these, but their mother Helen Sekaquaptewa, in her book Me and Mine (1969 UA Press), says they were born about three years apart. Emory Jr. was aged 73 in 2003, so was born ca 1930. Abbott therefore was born in ca 1933 (and died in the 1990s). It must have been a pretty good trick for Emory Jr. and Abbott, three and six year old kids, Mormon or not, to gain control of the tribal council in 1936.

Then, "by 1940 … the Sekaquaptewa’s gained control … of the sole Hopi newspaper… Qua Toqti." Well, yes, Qua Toqti was founded by the Sekaquaptewa’s, but that was in 1973, not 1940.

Finally, "... by 1943, ... the creation of ‘Grazing District 6’..." The Hopi-Navajo grazing districts were drawn in 1936.

The errors Dr. Kavanagh highlights here are not the kinds of errors the UC committee investigated, nor the errors Churchill’s enemies—in the mainstream right wing or in academia—have focused on. This is a much different case than his contention that the Mandan were deliberately infected with smallpox by the US Army, when in fact the evidence (other than that which Churchill himself seems to have fabricated) suggests otherwise. It’s a series of smaller, less significant false steps, yet all the more troubling for it, as they are so seemingly insignificant to raise the question of why anyone would deliberately make them.

Incidentally, PhD candidate Dustin M. Wax, the author of the post, notes earlier in the essay that "[d]espite the evidence for academic misconduct, the committee was unwilling to recommend dismissal", when in fact, the committee he appears to be referring to—SCRM's Investigative Subcommittee—did recommend dismissal. Also incidentally (and despite the evidence he himself cites), Wax doesn't appear to be entirely anti-Churchill:

I’ve been pretty harsh on Churchill in this essay (though not nearly as harsh as many others have been), which doesn’t necessarily reflect my overall stand on his work. Churchill’s strength has always been, it seems to me as a polemecist and gadfly, rather than as a scholar. While the details of his wok [sic] seem to be questionable, his overall impact has been, I think, positive—forcing historians and others scholars to grapple with the implications of an American genocide, exposing and documenting the history of government spying and provocation within the American Indian Movement and the Left in general (a fitting warning for today), and spurring one of the only significant debates about the meaning of 9/11 in a time of intellectual laziness and burly-man chest-thumping. I have not yet come to the point of throwing out the three or four of his books that grace my shelves, and doubt I will, though their usefulness as references will obviously be seriously curtailed.

CNews 21August07

Our go-to guy and bestest buddy Drunkablog links to an excellent essay on the Kantian fallacies of multiculturalism—and why Horowitz's response to it is wrong-headed.

"These private schools are a concern because it's just a matter of time before they bring down the Wake County Public School System as we know it," [school board member Ron] Margiotta said.

CNews 20 August07

Professor Ward Churchill's dog, Benjie, vows his undying love, loyalty, and adoration
Excerpt from his undelivered statement to the CU Regents:

[...] I want to tell you one thing. I’ll be teaching a class next semester called American Indians in Film. The class was designed by Ward Churchill, and I will be teaching it using his syllabus and as close to his spirit as I can. I will also, like thousands of professors across the country, be using his books. And I will happily continue to teach Professor Churchill’s classes until the close of his lawsuit, when, I think it’s safe to say, he’ll own this university.

CNews 19August07

Professor Ward Churchill's Key Demographic, Part VI: Thivai Abhor and his website, Dialogic
From "About Me":

Sprouted in San Diego, CA. Interpellated in alien Midwest universities. Thivai is a dialogic provocateur searching for viable alternative/oppositional cultures. I’m extremely interested in hearing about new projects online, anything from small/independent presses, innovative educational ventures, to art projects and music labels, to neighborhood stories and subcultures. In Kathy Acker's disturbing novel "Empire of the Senseless" Thivai and Abhor are the two main characters. These two characters are products of a horribly diseased society and I combine the names in order to give expression to the absurdity of strict dualistic systems and to celebrate the wondrous chaotic creativity of relational thinking. Thivai Abhor is the revolution of the senses--freedom of expression, the mind virus that will eat the system from the inside out. Thivai Abhor is a catalyzing enteran that seeks to alter the corrupt system through pirated words and frenzied emotional responses. Thivai Abhor operates in the margins of mutated meanings, seeking a new way of being, becoming, understanding and knowing. Thivai Abhor is the monstrous result of a system that eats its young.

It started out as an average personal-injury lawsuit. It ended with instructions for making a marijuana pipe out of a sausage and a surprising lesson about how what you write on the Internet can come back to haunt you.

[...]

In other entries, [line cook Trey] Bator writes about his coworkers’ personal lives, including inter-kitchen relationships and drug use on the shift. There are detailed instructions for the fabrication of a marijuana pipe made from a Village Inn sausage, constructed after a worker left a real marijuana pipe at home.

“It’s not quite as complicated as an internal combustion engine, but you should still be impressed. Sausage is a surprisingly difficult medium to create anything out of other than biscuits and gravy,” Bator wrote.

A video on YouTube.com showed Village Inn employees demonstrating its use—while in uniform and in the kitchen, no less—and a diagram and two photographs were included in the lawsuit.

CNews 18August07

Another CU professor floats a trial balloon for the public ownership of all media
Excerpt:

The media’s primary mission is to inform, not entertain. Their rights are granted so they may elevate and educate by informing us of what are often difficult, nuanced and unwelcome truths. As it stands, this public mission is being forsaken in the name of private profit. It thus stands starkly before us as a modern market failure.

But there is a solution. Media represent an essential service like education and infrastructure. As such, media need to be protected from the corrupting influence of private interest, which has finally grown so massive as to exert a crushing grip on journalistic independence.

If we look to Europe we can see media independence there is protected by public funds. Take the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), which is mostly funded by taxes, permitting it to hold every corporation and government’s feet to the fire. In France, two out of the three major networks receive no more than 40 percent of their operational funds from ads. The rest come from taxes. On our end, we have the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), but its budget pales in comparison to the BBC, which has bureaus all over the world. The CPB, which funds both PBS and NPR, has a yearly budget of only $480 million compared to $3.2 billion for the BBC. Still, PBS is widely considered our most trusted news service. Again, this is no coincidence.

CNews 17August07

CNews 16August07

Drunkablog hangs out with the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, no doubt in admiration (and perhaps a touch of awe) of their facility with metaphor: "Some have even advocated throwing Churchill to the dogs in order to protect themselves—which amounts to sawing off the branch you're sitting on."

Michael Bellesiles, professor of history, author of Arming America and recipient of Columbia University's Bancroft Prize. Lying/fabricating. He made "myth shattering" claims about the history of guns in America that were based on fabricated historical records. He resigned from Emory University

Stephen Ambrose, historian/author (2002). Plagiarism. He was almost a book "factory", writing eight books in five years. But that apparently came easier when parts were copied from other books, without attribution.

Joseph Ellis, professor at Mount Holyoke College and historian/author (2001), Pulitzer Prize winner. Lying. He falsely claimed military service in Vietnam and incorporated his war "experiences" into his college courses on "The Vietnam War and American Culture". Mount Holyoke censured him and suspended him without pay for one year.

Ward Churchill, Chairman of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado. Lying and plagiarism. He lied about his credentials and ethnic background to get a job in the first place [PB note: we've found no evidence that Churchill lied about his "credentials"]. His "research" was laden with fabricated evidence, plagiarism and referencing his own previous writings under pseudonyms. He is worthy of Mary McCarthy's quote about Lillian Hellman: "Every word (s)he writes is a lie, including ‘and' and ‘the'." He was fired.

CNews 14August07

Drunkablog takes a look at more signatories of the"Reinstate Churchill" petition, including perhaps the most sincere of all supporters, Jaques Stirrappe (#432). Maya Sissohr (#430) and Lou Netounes (#442) join in.

...Drunka also catches Paul Campos indulging himself in a little "..And 9-11 affects me how?"

Although I’m not one to read much of what the kufaar have to say, professor Ward Churchill had made a very blunt assessment of US foreign policy. This is the article for which he was recently fired by an “independent” commission, for reasons convieniently [sic] not related. Free speach [sic] indeed. If the kufaar really want to understand the turmoil in the Muslim world, then they should read this article with an open mind.

Although I don’t necessarily endorse everything said in this essay, I find it very articulate and compelling, and thought I would share. [follows a complete reposting of The Perfesser's essay "Some People Push Back"].

CNews 13August07

From our Playing Checkers With Churchill's Dogs department: Drunkablog finds even more fish in the Reinstate Churchill barrel. Among the latest signatories is Mike Unteswet (#420).

What would he do with the 250 million people in the United States that would be unable to live off the land?

How would he handle the 20 million men nuclear equipped Chinese Army that would soon come to fill the North American power vacuum thus created by 500 squabbling Native American tribes? Does he really think his nostalgia for Indian warriors on horseback would be any match for Chinese armored divisions?

In that the concern for Native American rights exists only in the Progressive Anglo guilt ridden mind, a guilt not shared by 5000 years of Chinese political tradition, why would not the Chinese merely exterminate this residue of whining contentious Native Americans to pave the way for Chinese resettlement of all of North America? They could do so with only half the population that now resides in the Yangtze River Valley!

CNews 12August07

Drunkablog finds more signatories of the Reinstate Ward Churchill petition to make fun of. We find, however, that one of the signers (well, two, since the "Comite Pro Democracia En Mexico" (#375 & 376) has yet to master the click-and-wait-a-frigging-minute technique of "signing" an internet petition) makes a certain kind of sense:

Professor Churchill has been a victim of a political game that attempts to undermine academic freedom and critical thinking. Comite Pro Democracia En Mexico strongly opposes this attack on Freedom of Speech. We urge you to take action and defend Professor Churchill's constitutional right to express what he thinks in a free manner.

...We agree with that last sentence wholeheartedly, and why wouldn't we? We've been saying for over two years now that the sooner Churchill was free to express his thoughts, the better.

Also btw: "Stan K. Fromage" (think about it) is the 377th signatory, and "Wanda Pass (Cherokee)" (again, think about it; ht Noj) is #379, the two adding their electronic voices to that of "Algonquin J. Calhoun, Esq." in support of The Perfesser. We're surprised, however, that "Jubilation T. Cornpone" has yet to weigh in. The signature count, (for the last btw), is now up to 391, if you count the 23 "Anonymous" individually, the latest of whom (#384) comments: "The courageous take unpopular stands until it is clear that the facts were with them all along." Well, "Anonymous" would know all about courage, wouldn't he.

Update: 394! "Amanda Huegenkicz" (lucky #394; if that name is a joke, we're missing it. Update: ah, "a man to hug and kiss." thx, jgm!) comments intriguingly:

Reverse your decision, Regents. It is time to make doodie or get off the pot. Either we have free speech or you can kiss me where the folded paper goes in five ways from sideways. Professor Churchill tells it like we want it to be!

We got the "make doodie or get off the pot" part immediately, but we're unclear as to exactly where the "folded paper goes in", particularly if one of the requirements is that it does so "five ways from sideways."

The first stage of the process is global warming itself. The team ascertained the reality of global warming by repeatedly viewing the Al Gore documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, and by skimming selected pages of Schmerlich’s Heat-Death by 1970 – The Revised Edition. Several telephone consultations were also arranged with Ward Churchill, noted plastic artist and former chair of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “We wanted the authentic Native American perspective,” Mausse explains, “as part of our diversity mandate.” A photograph of Churchill’s papier-mâché figurine, “Hot Prof,” will decorate the cover of The Mausse Report “whenever it’s published,” its main author affirmed. “Hot Prof” depicts an environmentally sensitive, tribally affiliated, non-Ph.D.-holding chair of an academic department horribly oppressed by a white-male-European-inflicted global climatic catastrophe.

CNews 11August07

Boulder Weekly interviews The Perfesser. (ht John Doe) The only differentiating aspect of this post-canning interview is Churchill's renewed interest in portraying himself as an Indian, and the dismissal as a racist act.
Excerpt:

I guess Bill [O]Reilly] came back with Dennis Miller, and I guess race jokes are no longer offensive either. I'm the "tenured Tonto"? Irrespective of any other consideration, when did Indians stop being offended by that? I haven't heard a goddamned word. Where's Susan Harjo on that? She was all over Andy Rooney for the stuff on mascots, as she should have been. Where's Vernon Bellacourt on that? I guess they're not really offended when Indians get race-baited, so long as it's the right Indians that are getting race-baited.

...Oh, yeah. Churchill also whines about the two vociferously pro-Churchill scholars who resigned from the investigating subcommittee:

So we got Professor Bruce Johansen; they selected him. And Rob Williams, who is one of the absolute top tier of Indian studies and an Indian to boot and who teaches Indian studies and history and so on. And those are the two people who resigned, OK?

So the [blogger] Pirate Ballerina line was that I had cited Rob in a piece called "Ethnic Studies Echo Chamber," and I do cite Rob Williams. It's kind of like citing Felix Cohen or Justice Brandeis if you're going to be writing in law. This is his area. He's top of the heap.

I had cited him, and the [implication from Pirate Ballerina] was, "Well, they cite each other [and are therefore friends]."

Well, so far as anyone could ever find, he has never cited me. But what he had done was issue a public statement that I was as entitled to the same exercise of academic freedom as anybody else, and [his statement] was basically a disqualifying feature. They weren't aware of that until after the fact. And so [the implication was that] he'd been withholding, right? He wasn't even supporting my positions. He supported academic freedom in principle, but he did use my name.

Bruce Johansen. I had, at the request of the publisher, blurbed one of his books once. He'd probably recognize me because my picture's been out there, but if I banged into him at the grocery store I wouldn't know him.

The Pirate Ballerina/Rocky Mountain News bzzzzzzzz had started and [Johansen and Williams went], "Fuck this. We don't need this shit."

So, [Johansen and Williams] go out.

Ahem. Our "Echo Chamber" assertion (original essay here) to which The Perfesser refers is (links included): "Churchill cites Deloria, who cites Johansen, who cites Williams, who cites Churchill." And, as you can see by following that last link [which no longer goes to the actual text; you'll need to view a hard copy of Williams' book Like a Loaded Weapon (footnote 9 to chapter three)], Williams certainly has cited Churchill, albeit only for something non-academic and for which The Perfesser actually may be marginally qualified to write: A movie review.

[Update: John Doe points out that Williams also cited Churchill—twice, in fact—in his 1986 article "The Algebra of Federal Indian Law", Wisconsin Law Review. And as important is the fact that Churchill has cited Williams' "Algebra" article several times in his own writings—removing his assertion "so far as anyone could ever find, he has never cited me" from the realm of innocent forgetfulness and placing it quite firmly on Churchill's terra familiaris of deliberately misleading bullshit. Two of Churchill's cites of the Williams article are here (page 675 [as paginated; page 13 of the pdf], note 52) and here (page 312, note 46).]

...[A]nyone who's followed the field of American Indian Studies for the past three decades would immediately recognize Ward Churchill as an important scholar, writer and advocate, whose published works are widely cited and relied upon. His body of written work and teaching has inspired a generation of younger Native students and activists to unashamedly assert indigenous sovereignty and Indian rights over a broad domain of intellectual and cultural life in American society. In many ways and in many forums, he has helped to shape the discourse of the modern Indian rights movement. He is, in fact, the unquestioned intellectual leader of a vanguard movement of AIS scholars who brandish a no-holds-barred, no compromise form of Indian political rhetoric that upsets and even incites many non-Indians.

Maybe it's just us, but that seems just a skosh more pro-Churchill than "a public statement that I was as entitled to the same exercise of academic freedom as anybody else[.]"

Compared to Williams, Johansen seems less effusive (but who wouldn't?):

The present controversy has focused on only a tiny fraction of Prof. Churchill's work. I have read some of his books, and find them to be well-argued and intensively documented in a scholarly manner.

In addition to blurbing a Johansen book, Churchill has rushed to his defense elsewhere. (you can read what we had to say about all Five Stooges—and what they had to say about Churchill pre-investigation—here)

Later, Churchill talks about the alluded-to but oddly, unreleased by either CU or Churchill "violation of confidentiality":

Finally now that I'm fired I got something useful out of P&T. They determined a week after I was fired that, in fact, the university did breech requirements of confidentiality and did damage my reputation and did so in a systematic manner over a two-year period of time. Of course, then, all they recommend is that the university admit that. [laughs]

They named DiStefano, who has been a repeat violator in this regard.

[BW notes parenthetically:] (Churchill filed a Level II Grievance against CU. He gave Boulder Weekly what appears to be a draft report in which a P&T Level II panel rejected three of Churchill's claims, but found that the university and DiStefano did not adhere to rules governing misconduct allegations when it came to privacy. The draft report states that some of DiStefano's actions were "inappropriate and likely prejudicial." The head of the P&T committee said he could not comment on the document because he cannot speak publicly on personnel matters.)

Oh, and Churchill also whines about the complexity of the allegations against him:

All of a sudden you're supposed to deliver chapter and verse documentation. That takes some time. But it's not that you have to deliver chapter and verse on one complicated issue and provide a coherent explanation and historical record, but you've got five [allegations]?

Gosh, Perfesser, if you hadn't cut your "history" from whole cloth, you might not have had to scramble so to find "explanation and historical record."

The firing of Ward Churchill by UC Boulder was a travesty of justice that should send shivers down the spines of academics everywhere; this is a crack in the dam of tenure that could lead to wholesale firings of talented intellectuals based on the flimsiest of charges, e.g. lying, plagiarism, etc. As far as the future of Mr. Churchill goes, I am personally advocating for his appointment to the faculty here; we are in dire need of a good-looking buck on campus.

...Then there's "Jeff Israel" (#333), who apparently has always wondered what that talking paperclip down in the corner of his screen was all about (drop in [sic] at will):

You can agree or disagree, with his statments. You can even be offended by his statments. But free spech is not something to stop when it is unpleasent. He was not investigated because of plegerism, inacuratly representing his ethinisity or academic misconduct. He was investigated, because he said something unpopular. If you read peoples comments who support the firering, most will contain the phrase, 'shamed the school'. Shame is not a reason for fireing someone. Academic freedom is a nesessity to have a school that teaches new ideas. It is not ment shelter us from thinking out side the norm. Free speach is not to protect us from things we want to hear. Free speach is ment to protect the things we don't want to hear. Reisntate Churchill, or you will set the stage for all unpleasent thought to be censored.

CNews 10August07

Diverse: Issues in Higher Education discovers "in an exclusive interview" that Professor Ward Churchill intends to sue CU.
Excerpt:

The university “has not met its burden of proof,” that he had committed "research misconduct," Churchill said, referring to the reason cited for his firing.

"I didn’t engage in plagiarism," he said, noting that the scholars whose work he is accused of stealing have refused to lodge complaints against him. Rather, it has been found that he ghost wrote some of the material he’s been accused of using.

"There’s been misrepresentation at every step of the way," he said, speaking from his home near Boulder, Colo.

"I was hired for what I do."

Churchill, the author of more than a dozen titles on such topics as government repression, American Indian affairs and global politics, say he plans to continue writing.

"It's not [one] book," he said. "There'll be several."

In addition to the $352,000 in expenses, a four-decades-old CU rule will require that the school keep Churchill on the payroll for one more year, cutting him checks that will amount to more than $96,000.

The payout stems from a 1966 regents' decision to adopt portions of the American Association of University Professors guidelines on tenure and academic freedom. One of those rules requires that professors dismissed for reasons not involving "moral turpitude" receive salaries for at least a year from the date of dismissal.

Personally, I oppose the "Fairness Doctrine" for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it presumes the ignorance of the public and our inability to discern facts from horse manure. But, most significantly, broadcast stations are not owned by the government and should not be considered as government activity. With so many different sources of information - newspapers, major television networks, cable television and talk radio, for example - it is difficult for any one source to give us a "snow job." But, there is one area of American life where I believe something equivalent to a "Fairness Doctrine" ought to be applied: the college classroom.

Despite the clamor for "diversity" on college campuses, one of the most homogenous facets of American life is the college faculty and the perspectives that they teach in the classroom with regard to controversial subjects such as "affirmative action." In fact, college professors have one of the most protected monopolies in our nation. They are protected by tenure, "academic freedom," and our respect for their right to impart their knowledge without infringement by the trustees, the university president or anyone else responsible for university governance.

I am not proposing to abridge the freedom that these classroom dictators enjoy. This would be an instance in which the cure would be worse than the disease. But, unlike someone sitting on the couch with a remote control in hand, a student has little choice but to sit and listen when his or her professor spews forth about the inherent evils of "American imperialism" and how our nation is responsible for many of the things that are wrong on our planet, or why "equity" and "social justice" are being denied to women and "minorities." In short, it is widely acknowledged that there is little intellectual diversity among university faculties.

Please respect our Consititional rights, even though the President does not! This would not have occurred pre-Bush Cheney! Dear University Regents, think as Americans use to and think for yourself! Do not ad to the gestapo mindset, inflicted on the American population by this Nazi White House regime.\ Thank you

Unfortunately, "Heywood Jablome, AA, BA, MA" (previously #238) has joined the growing group of signatories who have withdrawn their support. Still staunchly pro-Churchill, however, are "Algonquin J. Calhoun, Esq." (#24), "Vernon Lee Hill" (#19, "Ward Churchill is an old war buddy of mine and I will always be on his side."), and "Haunani Trask" (#21, "We shall destroy the United States of Amerikkka! We have a right to be academic chairs without any scrutiny from the racist public.") Sadly, it's hard to tell whether that last quote is sarcasm written by a prankster, or some heartfelt "truth" written by the real Haunani-Kay Trask.

Update: Now up to 329. Signatory "Eric Mann" (#324) asks of the Churchill dismissal "Is overstatement possible for one of the greatest crimes in human history?" Um, apparently not.

Several weeks ago, a university professor was fired. Ward Churchill, who taught for more than twenty years at the University of Colorado at Boulder, was dismissed for an essay he wrote, shortly after 9/11, which expressed controversial views about 9/11.

It goes downhill from there, all in the same vein, with nary a mention of what other reasons, however frivolous, CU might have had for firing him.

Update: Drunkablog does a detailed bit of work on "Lady Jayne."

CNews 9August07

Ward Churchill doppelgänger and tryworks security guard "Charley Arthur" is claiming Professor Ward Churchill has already taken a DNA test.
Excerpt:

"[I]t should be mentioned that there’s a rumor to the effect that, for his own reasons, Churchill HAS in fact undergone a DNA test—which confirms what his family told him about his lineage—but that he still refuses to “prove” his identity on the basis of what he calls 'Nazi Science.'"

The Perfesser's probably keeping the test results somewhere safe, like alongside those videos "Charley" was going to post to conclusively prove something (we've forgotten what).

Let me start by saying I have no use for Ward Churchill, but my family is getting dissed here and I have to say something. I am a direct descendant of Richard and Sookie Tyner and trust me, Sookie was a Cherokee. I have tons of documentation to this fact. I recommend you do some research on Emmett Starr's book "The History of the Cherokee". It is considered the Bible of Cherokee genealogy by both Native Americans and whites. Sookie Dougherty is mentioned and her Cherokee ancestry is given. I also have tons of applications to the Cherokee tribe by my ancestors and many, many sworn affidavits to the fact that Agnes "Sookie" Dougherty Tyner and her children were Cherokee. Also, for the record, the attack on Richard's home was by Creek Indians, a known enemy of the Cherokee. The fact that Richard went on to marry a Cherokee after his first wife was killed by Creeks is not unusual. The Cherokees were enemies of the Creeks themselves and fought them with the whites on numerous occasions. Also, the Y DNA test that "proved" Richard Tyner was white really proved nothing of the sort. It proved that his direct male line was European. Tyner is a European name and since Y chromosomes follow surnames that would be expected. Especially since it was usually the white men that married the Native women. The test tells nothing of Richard's mother or his father's mother and so on. A vast majority of his ancestry is ignored by this test.

Having said all this, let me clarify...I am not defending Ward Churchill. I completely disagree with everything he says. I also believe that Richard Tyner's first wife was white and Ward may be 100% white, too. However, please don't trash my family while you're trashing Ward. As for Ward himself, if he wants to prove his heritage, it's not that difficult. Genetree offers a DNA print test that gives percentages of one's ethnic make-up. Why doesn't he just take one?

...to which we've replied:

Autumn: No one I know of here has or is trashing the Tyner name, or your heritage. If you find specific instances of this, please point them out. Just in case, however, if you've been offended by comments I've made concerning Churchill's claims to Indian heritage that may have seemed derogatory of the Tyner family, I apologize.

And, as far as a DNA test for Churchill goes, I offered to pay for it back in 2005.

CNews 8August07

Those slaphappy mutants over at wardchurchill.net have posted a raft of documents concerning the Churchill dismissal. (huge ht John Doe). The documents include a heretofore unreported appeal response to the Privilege and Tenure Panel, the full text of the P&T Committee's Report, and of perhaps even greater interest to many, Ward Churchill's curriculum vita (grown, we notice, from 37 pages in 2005 to 45 fun-filled pages).

Update: Full of surprises, wardchurchill.net is also claiming there is belated evidence that "CU violated Churchill's rights to confidentiality." (via Drunkablog, who wonders why, with all the sudden documentation, wardchurchill.net fails to provide same for this "belated evidence")

Update II: Could this be Churchill's "belated evidence"? From Churchill's April 23, 2007 response to the Privilege and Tenure Panel (page 5):

This Panel fails to acknowledge the bias exhibited by the Investigative Committee when, rather than abiding by the SCRM rule to “keep all details of the investigation confidential” the Committee “demanded” to make its report public, and did so (pp. 9-10), compounding the University’s blatant violations of Professor Churchill’s right to confidentiality and further undermining his ability to have the charges assessed in any reasonable context.

...and it does appear that SCRM had rules in place to protect Churchill's confidentiality—rules that may very well have been broken when the Investigating Committee's report was released back in June of 2006. On the other hand, this language from SCRM's rules indicates there are circumstances where a report can be made public: "However, the Standing Committee shall promptly notify the appropriate dean or vice chancellor during an inquiry or investigation [...] if the scientific or academic community or the public needs to be informed."

Donations raised will be placed in a trust account and used only for legal expenses such as filing fees and depositions, according to the [Ward Churchill Solidarity Network]. Supporters say Churchill's attorney, David Lane, has been representing him pro bono.

...There are quite a few comments to the article, but so far, not a single one supporting The Perfesser. As one commenter asks, "There's not one Liberal in the Boulder area reading this who will stand up and support this fraudulent professor?"

Update: As PB reader Grad points out, the Daily Camera apparently has wardchurchill.net writing for it under the name Brittany Anas, since only the DBAB is claiming Lane is working for The Perfesser pro bono; Lane himself has said he is working on contingency.

As a professor of Indigenous Nations & Dakota Studies (INDS), I have found out, based upon my experience at my higher education institution in southwestern Minnesota, the truth of Professor Roger Buffalohead's statement. Professor Buffalohead writes, "As skilled teachers of American Indian history and culture will agree, it is difficult to tell the truth about Indian experiences in America without leaving the impression that the United States is a wicked, dishonest, immoral hypocritical, racist and self-serving nation." We in Indigenous Nations Studies do teach from an Indigenous world-view and perspective which is not only radically different but also most of the time diametrically opposed to what is taught of U.S. history in the educational systems of this country. We, [sic] Indigenous academics, scholars, & educators, definitely present alternative historical interpretations which [sic] portray the U.S. in an unfavorable light. For example, the peoples who had their lands stolen are going to look at and tell things differently than the people who stole the lands. The United States stole approximately three billion acres within the continental United States from the Indigenous Peoples, etc. We can list example after example of this type of alternative interpretations [sic]. This is what Professor Ward Churchill teaches - he teaches the TRUTH! And, for this, challenging the status quo and encouraging critical thinking, Dr. [sic] Churchill has been, and continues to be, harrassed and punished.

CNews 7August07

Drunkablog catches 1940s Army training film narrator and convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal in the act of defending Ward Churchill.
Favorite Mumiaism:

"Ward Churchill is precisely the kind of scholar Americans need to read and hear. He is a brave and brilliant man, who has slain his share of sacred cows. As America engages in a global war based on lies, they need him now, more than ever."

Now, I don’t know Ward Churchill, and before his name made the news, I wouldn’t have known him from Adam. That I care at all has to do with what happened to him, not what he said – or even did. It is beyond me why American can’t get through their thick heads . . . no, strike that; any body so stupid that in the aftermath of the 35W bridge collapse he calls in to ask where the Mississippi is stupid enough . . . to not recognize that anything done to anyone else, no matter who, what, why, where, and when, is being done to him. It took a lot longer to get Ward Churchill than it took to get Don Imus, of course. But I knew the Land of Free Speech as Long as It’s Speech That’s Politically Correct would get him. I said so. Several times. Here.

And notice that Churchill’s detractors have yet to refute what he said. Damned few will have so much as read it (which, I, of course, in my Spockian-ly contemptibly way, have). It doesn’t work that way. Not in the “Land of the Free,” and “Nation of Laws.” Uh-uh.

Of course, what Churchill did was – reminding ourselves that we are Christian nation (of course, we all think his name was Christ and he was a Christian, too) - unforgivable. He said the victims of the World Trade Center were “little Eichmans.” Is that against the law, civilly actionable? No, it’s not. Does that make any difference? Not to a Christian nation like this one. All those Christians who got Churchill are the same people who stood idly by and watched like Michael Vicks at a dogfight as their government savaged me, too.

They all “love their country,” believe in law, and their government. And they love Jesus; NASCAR, too. Football. Damned betcha!

CNews 6August07

CNews 5August07

Professor Peter N. "Good Show, Old Chap!" Kirstein thinks the Wall Street Journal did him a favor directing readers to his blog. (via Drunkablog).
Excerpt:

I am pleased that the Journal at least chose to link my blog commentary which strongly dissented from President Brown’s dismissal of the tenured Mr Churchill. I must say I think it unseemly, if not meanspirited, for a university president such as Hank Brown to continue his national crusade against Mr Churchill. He has published highly charged commentary in InsideHigherEd.com as well. I am NOT questioning his right to do so or suggesting his free speech should be attenuated. I am asserting that a powerful university president who has trampeled on and denied a professor basic rights of academic freedom, should demonstrate some humility and frankly decency and cease his campaign of intellectual conformity and vilification. I am pleased, however, the Wall Street Journal saw fit to include my blog as a contrarian view of the University of Colorado’s putative defence of academic freedom and critical thinking.

CNews 4August07

That petition wardchurchill.net set up yesterday already has 15 signers, including two "Anonymous" and one "Mickey Mouse" (and one "Cindy Carlisle"—the name of the sole CU Regent who voted against The Perfesser's dismissal). Here's what Donald Bliek (if that is his real name) had to say in the comment that accompanies his signature (all grammatical and typographical errors in the original):

I have read countless books and seen hondreds of hours of film- and video material on politics, war, conspiracy's, empire building, secret societies, human behaviour, political murders, censorship, abuse of power, the effects of fear brought upon people and many, many related subjects. I am well educated but work as a nurse. From this combined background you can take my word for it that I know a great deal of human behaviour. I have never met Ward Churchill but I was, and continue to be chilled to the bone by one of his speeches. You have fired one of he most honest and brave men living in America today and from that: one of the people your country currently needs most. Firing Ward Churchill is a show of force that reads like a expression of fear. It is a decision only people of less integrity can make. It is a manifestation not daring to say 'no'. You lack the bravery of Mr. Churchill and it is my believe that deep down, where it is shared with none, you too share my point of view. But hush, hush... History will prove my point

CNews 3August07

Those sappy pollyannas over at wardchurchill.net offers us all an opportunity to "help Ward Churchill sue the University of Colorado." (ht Leah)
In case you need to know where to send the check, we're reposting their plea in full:

We appreciate your many inquiries regarding ways to support Ward Churchill in the aftermath of the CU Regents’ decision to fire him. Some concrete steps we suggest:

1. Click here to sign the Open Letter to the Regents (see text below).

2. Help Ward Churchill sue the University of Colorado (see text below).
Our goal is to raise $25 each from 1,000 people:

WCSN
PO Box 20035
Boulder, CO 80303
(checks payable to: David Lane, Esq.)

David Lane is donating his time; all funds will be used for legal expenses.

3. Take a stand wherever you see people being silenced.

As Leah wonders in her email to us, will The Perfesser share some of his new-found wealth with the donors once he and his legal sock-puppet have wrung all those millions from CU? Could be the investment opportunity of a lifetime!

You see, this is not only an issue of stopping Ward Churchill's voice. The man isn't gonna shut up anyway. It's a matter of destroying the usage of his academic work within academia. You see, his work is an indictment of the U.S. and Canada for the crimes of Genocide in and of itself. It is an indictment of the U.S. breaking many laws to supply its ultra elite with greater amounts of money at the expense of the masses. His body of work can be put in the position of not being able to be used in the works of people who could use it to FURTHER damn the occupational government of the United States. You see, the United States has the desire to LOOK good while NEVER having to behave in such a manner. If they behaved in a good manner, that would take capital away from the ultra elite, and we all know how wrong that is, right?

"Subject: You are f**king nazi's

"It is IMPOSSIBLE to speak politely, intelligibly, with reason to moral cretins masquarding as humans, cretins utterly devoid of intelligence, humanity, common sense, courage: YOU ARE ALL F**KING NAZI'S. May you and all your progeny burn in hell for eternity. Perhaps there is a special place there for nazi's."

The above was sent to all nine CU Regents the day after they voted to dismiss The Perfesser. The apparent author? Glad you asked.

While Churchill is primarily marketing himself as a free-speech martyr, he's also creating a subsidiary brand: ''Indian-rights martyr.'' He's selling the idea that he was such an Indian advocate that CU and American society generally wanted him canned.

But that doesn't square with the facts of his employment at CU. CU hired him because he was ''Indian'' and because it believed his ''Indian-ness'' enhanced its faculty's cultural and ethnic diversity profile.

CU hired him and gave him promotions and tenure without the academic credentials it usually required of its faculty members. CU has consistently maintained its defense of Churchill as an Indian against actual Native peoples.

Not only did Churchill use ''Indian-ness'' to land a job that he would not have gotten as a white man, he has publicly blamed lapses in research judgment on a lack of Indian studies standards.

CNews 2August07

From Osama Bin Laden's ex-mistress, a poem singing the praises of The Perfesser.
Excerpt:

I will be the heckler of those who dream you
silent.
I will be the mother's hand full of rocks
--to Slap/Hard the Two-faced Martin Luther
King-quoting White Bitch
and the African Church Rag
(at our mercy like a Shadow though they
called her
'Strong black woman')
I will cheerlead the Rebuke/Brown
seahorse...voting naked.
But for peace...
Poison that you sucked out of a snake bite
I will be that Tenderness sucking and
re-entering/Senate's legislation
Laughter that you thought had left your belly
(by now)
I will be the cheerleader (forgiving)/
The hypocrites who fired
you

I will be...America...in all her Good.

Ode d' Ward

Oh, Anger haired, sun-glassed, smoking, pot-belly wanabe,

How have your prose brought you garlands of stink weed,
Instead of the sweet smell of vindication,
and peerly accolades?

Question not, for there are none so qualified to scrutinize his intellect,
let alone his lineage.

And those gasping, wheezing monologues of anger, are they all recorded?

Found out, the damn spot will not away.
It yet grows larger with each washing,
And staining only brightens the hue.

So rage against the learned suits and their standards high,
For once they were low enough to allow the serpent entrance to the meaty paradise,
And its banquet of exploitation.

And now the table grows empty. Bones and crumbs remain to feed a famished soul, unrepentant in its angry roar.

Dr. K

CNews 1August07

Michael Moynihan over at Reason Magazine draws some conclusions from a chat with Professor Ward Churchill
Excerpt:

Indeed, Churchill encouraged his opponents not only to read his books and articles, but to scrutinize them. As one academic told the Rocky Mountain News, he "put the noose around his own neck and urged somebody to kick the chair out from underneath him, so [the firing] was inevitable."

But Churchill is disingenuous (or naïve) when expressing surprise that politically-motivated hatchet men would scrutinize his academic record. He is, after all, a political activist both in his private time and in his classroom. Fair or not, insert yourself into a contentious political debate, and expect to be treated like a politician.

I liken [critical, accusatory emails]—the effect that's occurred here—to having this gigantic boil that's gone untreated for six or eight months, and I mean it's just an inflamed, gooey mess. It's like an over-inflated basketball; it wants desperately to burst but it can't on its own, so someone comes around and lances it, and you get this spray of pus.