Gay-bashing church pickets GI funeral - damages $11 million (almost)

[Xavier_Onassis]

That was precisely my conclusion.
Churchill makes people think. As a professor, that is his job.

Every so often, the Oligarchy picks someone who has said unkind things about them and pillories them, just to make sure the rest of the bunch stays in line.

It is not hard to control most people. You get them fired, and they become a bad example, they are out of your hair, and they won't misbehave like that again.

Once they have been quelled, you don't have to do more, usually, the bill collectors and repossessers will come and keep them busy. The wife and kids will leave, the house and car get repossessed, maybe a divorce attorney will plant his fangs in the guy's neck.

Booze, drugs, reckless driving can end it all.

In a consumer society, taking away one's money is probably as effective as what the Stasi did.

Churchill might be able to make a living writing books. It worked for Timothy Leary.

[Cynthia]

Well, I have to say I do understand the "railroading experience". I have had that happen to me. WC-hill should not be taken out of the loop based on any amount of such railing the road.

Churchill will have to deal with that ugly aspect of life in the way most people do when they have been manipulated like that, true.

He is a writer. He is a teacher. He is an activist. No crime in any of those things.





Outrageous statements that are thrusted at a community of young people who have paid to learn all they can on a subject must have a sort of balanced approach, imo. He should have provided the outrageous statements from the "Right", as well.

The hysteria over Churchill  was based on the fact that suddenly an educator had influence on many young minds with such an "anti-American tone" (rhetoric to some). It hurt those in particular who had lost  loved ones on 9-11. Set up for a "counter-outrage=the beginning of the "railroading express" sad to say.

Suddenly here was a man of power coming across as someone who seemed to be more concerned about what HE felt was truth......than for the needs of the students under his watch.
Where was the opportunity for discussion of the issue from many sides? Isn't that what a good teacher does? Facilitate, as well as instruct?

Did Churchill provide a myopic view of the world---from such a personal resentment? If so, then he wasn't doing his job------ well.

We teach children to find more than one strategy to solve a math problem, for example.

At the college level, I thought there were supposed to be opportunities for students to learn more than one side to the story, giving him or her a chance to discuss the issue(s)? (...i.e.  responsible teaching)

Ward C-Hill did not offer that, as far as I know as professionally as one would in any classroom. Correct me if I am wrong.
He presented his one- sided personal viewpoint to young students. Those young students loved him, sure!  How do you counter spin such a charismatic teacher as WC? 

I don't doubt that his views are passionate. His writing is brilliant.

The students are the clients, however. They deserve the best.

He should have known better, imo...Xavier...He had 30+ years under his belt. He could have made his point if he had given the students a complete and balanced opportunity to come to an independent conclusion themselves. But he apparently spewed "ill will" towards others which switched his gears and instead  pushed his own ideas out with the bathwater.

Brilliance does not always hit the mark when it comes to being a responsible teacher. . . at any level.
An educator must keep the focus on the subject as well as  the student.

Perhaps that was his learning in all of this....His ego should not be at stake.
WAs it?
 

[Plane]

If one is an excellent writer that is little knwn , or a leader of a Church that has a very powerfully emotional appeal but few adherants,......

An effctive way to gain readers and adherants is to loudly say something stupidin front of news cameras.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I have a feeling that Ward Churchill has a few more fans than Rev. Phelps.

When you say something stupid, occasionally people for whom thinking is painful will agree with you.
Juniorbush said "They hate us for our freedoms", which was a great stretching of the truth.

Unless, one includes the freedom of American oil companies to relieve the Arab world of its resources by paying bazillions to the rulers and not caring that only pennies even trickled down to the average Ahmed-on-the-dune.

Perhaps the freedom of American servicemen and their wives distributing Arabic language New Testaments in Dahrein.

These are two freedoms that I am not all that interested in, actually. The Freedom of US corporations to make deals with satraps, and the freedom to proselitize where unwelcome to do so.

Neither is a classic freedom in my book. They rank up there with the freedom to impersonate Borat's fat travelling companion.
Not a biggie, as freedoms go, though Borat's pal was morbidly obese.

[Plane]

Juniorbush said "They hate us for our freedoms", which was a great stretching of the truth.

Have you really examined this idea?

WE have the freedom to choose our religion or lack thereof , we can undress to a speedo on the beach (less in Europe) , we can publish anti- Mohemmed literature and cartoons .

They do hate these things , especially when w use our freedom to insult them.

[Cynthia]

Ward Churchill has been the "enigma" of the 21st Century in terms of free speech/native rights etc. After reading about him (with an attached  pro/con menu below), I think that I will never really understand who this man really is. Doesn't matter that he is a brilliant writer. My own innate "gut" tells me his in in conflict with self, Xavier.   

 I have to say that he was presented with  a chance for discussion, debate in his own right via the University setting.  As for any sort of right to be "correct" and keeper of the JOB, I don't know. Should he be fired? Should he be allowed to be able to protest that which as been an issue among the REAL Native American? I think, yes.

If anything, he has become a spokesperson for the "freedom of people" in general. The freedom to be who we are. The freedom to get pissed at the government.  The freedom to say...I can speak up.
But has he lost his sights on the issue by slamming the point home in such a one sided rant? I don't really know. Time will tell and so will the essence of his intent. Will he really make a statement out of altruistic means and concern for his "brother", or will he just make a statement because he is angry. More evidence is needed to show that he is the one whom we will "Hear" and "listen to" in the end.

 Who is the man? Yes, he's a professor. Yes, he's a man with solid and marxist convictions. But what mark has he really made on the world in terms of helping his so called "people".

There has to be more than ONE male(in this case, male) out there who is supportive of the Native people. I don't doubt his passion. I don't see a chance to understand the issue he presents beyond is own being. His ego keeps getting in my way.
I don't doubt his truth. I don't. I question his response to a bigger truth that is in scope beyond his own "being". 9-11 is his legacy? why? I see it as his slip up. I see it as his anger gone wrong. I see it as a chance for him to get some therapy, Xavier. sorry, but that's my take on this man.

IF a man or woman has something to truly offer society in terms of change through writing etc.....I feel strongly that there will not be a point where we are STUCK on one element of the voice. Rosie O'Donnell is an example. She has many good passionate points. Her "stuck" point is in the theory that tower 7 was an inside job.
Why the hell do people who have a valid point to begin with....find a point to rant on...that ends their beginning?

Thus the lesson of over kill.


Cynthia
 This is the end of my point of view...lest you want to go for it more. Thanks, Xavier for the chance to learn more.


Ward Churchill holds a BA and MA in Communications from Sangamon State, an "experimental" school for student radicals in Illinois. His academic expertise is as an artist. Yet on the basis of his claim to be a member of the Ketoowah Cherokee tribe (it has since been revealed that the membership was "honorary" and has been revoked and that Churchill is not an Indian), Churchill was made a tenured Professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado Boulder and head of the Department (though he does not possess a Ph.D.).

Professor Churchill is an Anglo-Saxon white man posing as an Indian. An in-depth genealogical investigation tracing Churchill's ancestry back over 100 years, conducted by the Rocky Mountain News, concluded that "there is no evidence of a single Indian ancestor in Churchill's long family history in America." Churchill nonetheless describes himself in the following way: "Although I'm best known by my colonial name, Ward Churchill, the name I prefer is Kenis, an Ojibwe name bestowed by my [Native American] wife's uncle." Far-Left presses have obligingly released books by the "Keetowah Cherokee" activist, Ward Churchill. In a recent speech in Vancouver, Churchill introduced himself thus, "I have to say, I have to bring you greetings from the elders of the Keetoowah Band of Cherokee, my people." But the Keetoowah Band, in which Churchill and Bill Clinton once had "honorary memberships" has disowned Churchill as an imposter.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1835

It?s no surprise that this outrage against Professor Churchill occurs at this particular moment? a time of empire resurrected and unapologetic, militarism proudly expanding and triumphant, war without justice and without end, white supremacy retrenched, basic rights and protections shredded, growing disparities between the haves and the have-nots, fear and superstition and the mobilization of scapegoating social formations based on bigotry and violence or the threats of violence, and on and on. There?s more of course, and this isn?t the only story, but this is a recognizable part of where we?re living, and a familiar place to anyone with even a casual understanding of history. Here the competing impulses and ideals that have always animated our country?s story are on full display: rights and liberty and the pursuit of human freedom on one side, domination and war and repression on the other. The trauma of contradictions that is America.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={475980FF-48A9-45B1-ABAA-F3C209E90463}