 On Point Vincent Carroll, editor of the editorial pages, writes his On Point column most weekdays. He is also an author and freelance writer. Reach Vincent Carroll at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com. |
Carroll: A jarring presence
How invigorating to see professor Glenn Morris back in the news, warning us once again to brace ourselves for “conflict.” Morris wants the public to know that the governor and legislature’s failure to repeal Colorado’s Columbus Day holiday “has set the stage for additional conflict.”
Morris should know, since he’ll be a chief instigator of any future unpleasantness surrounding the holiday. Why, without conflict, he’d be merely an obscure academic nursing Churchillian views (Ward’s, not Winston’s) when he wasn’t decompressing from the intense burdens of an intellectual career with a much-deserved sabbatical.
“We will never allow another Columbus Day Parade in this city,” Morris infamously declared in 1992 after he and others who disdain constitutional rights frightened Denver parade participants, who had lined up and were ready to go, into calling off the event. This feat represents perhaps the summit of Morris’ résumé, although it is by no means the only time he’s sought to trample on First Amendment freedom, including much more recently, too.
As Morris has explained, “the continuing celebration of Columbus and his colonial legacy was sufficiently offensive and inciteful to American Indians as to justify our reaction to the parade.” And never mind, please, that this rationale is little different from the one used throughout history by everyone from monarchs to theocrats intent on scrubbing society clean of “offensive” language or symbols.
Whether Colorado should preserve its official holiday for Columbus is actually an interesting question, with good arguments available on either side. But the sight of Morris heading the opposition is as jarring as seeing Al Sharpton lead the chorus that demanded Don Imus’ firing. Activists who ignore the rights of others have no standing to lecture the public about which words and symbols are beyond the pale.
Sharpton’s Mormon slur
Speaking of the Rev. Sharpton, he insists he was not mocking Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith when he said earlier this week, “As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyway, so don’t worry, that’s a temporary situation.”
Sharpton claims he was only contrasting “those who really believe in God” with Christopher Hitchens, an avowed atheist whom Sharpton was debating at the time.
If you listen to a few minutes of the actual debate, though, and not just the one-line YouTube clip, it sure doesn’t sound as if Sharpton is referring to Hitchens.
Even more to the point, Sharpton had no reason to say really believe in God — that “really” is the giveaway — unless he meant to contrast true belief with what he considers phony belief.
But Sharpton will no doubt slip out of this tight spot as he has from so many others. Hitchens’ presence gives him all of the alibi he needs.
Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountain
News.com.
I don't give a squat about Sharpton, but if you are worried about that, you should be worried about the high percentage of voters who say they won't vote for a Mormon.
Especially amoung Republicans
But you won't hear anything about that from Vince - in his eyes Republicans are pure as the driven snow.
Posted by on May 10, 2007 08:11 AMColumbus Day, October 12, is a black day for Osama Bin Laden, too.
10/12/2000---Terrorists bombed the USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen.
10/12/2002---Terrorists bombed nightclubs in Bali, Indonesia.
Some Americans like Ward Churchill, Glenn Morris, and the late Eqbal Ahmad, share Bin Laden's perspective.
Details here about Osama and Columbus here:
http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2007/02/columbus-day-october-12-and-terrorism.html
The late professor Eqbal Ahmad, a follower of Osama Bin Laden, spoke on 10-12-98 at the University of Colorado in Boulder about Columbus' legacy of genocide and alluded to the killing of Custer, a Ward Churchill/Glenn Morris/AIM theme.
The whole purpose of this event was not to learn from history but to undermine our country and replace our history with one-sided propaganda. Ahmad closed his speech with the words: "These are the chickens of the Afghanistan war coming home to roost."
Here is the text of Ahmad's 1998 Columbus Day speech at CU, "courtesy of the University of Colorado at Boulder":
http://www.sangam.org/ANALYSIS/Ahmad.htm
Ahmad was the professor who was accused of plotting to kidnap Henry Kissinger.
Posted by Snapple on May 10, 2007 05:09 PMPeople like Morris and Ward Churchill would argue that people don't have a First Amendment right (freedom of speech) to celebrate Columbus day because it denies other people their "fundamental human dignity" under (Churchill claims) the Ninth Amendment.
Churchill and Morris make the argument that the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution trumps the First Amendment right to celebrate Columbus Day.
Churchill said:
"I don't believe you have a First Amendment right because that bounces off against my Ninth Amendment right....all rights not otherwise enumerated herein that are inherent in people are retained by them, OK? . . . That goes to human rights, particularly the articulation of international human rights that take the form of ratified treaties. Under Article Six of the Constitution of the United States, those are the supreme law of the land, and among them, are fundamental human dignity, OK? And celebration of the conditions that I was describing as pertaining to native people as an outcome of the process initiated by Christopher Columbus [i.e., "genocide"], celebrating that guy in any respect at all is a celebration of those conditions. That's a denial of fundamental human dignity, that's a denial of my Ninth Amendment rights and you don't have a right to do that..."
http://www.counterpunch.org/churchill02212005.html
Churchill isn't an Indian and he isn't a lawyer, either. He just makes up stuff.
First Amendment violations? If you're worried about violations of the law, why don't you start advocating that enforcement of treaties with native nations? You're silence about that points out your hypocriscy.
Posted by festus on May 11, 2007 06:35 AMThe law professor John LaVelle is an Indian who is hired by Indian nations to represent their interests.
Who hires Churchill? His own AIM site admits that AIM got money from Saddam's Baath Party years ago.
LaVelle, a real Indian, is one of the main people wo exposed Churchill as a fraud as early as 1996.
http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2007/02/professor-john-la-velle-exposes-ward.html
Ward Churchill doesn't care about Indians. He admits he physically abused his young Indian wife, the late Leah Kelly. Leah's sister says Churchill tried to push Leah out of a moving car.
Professor LaVelle points out that Churchill actually is a white "wannabee" who inserts himself "into the political affairs of real Indian people" and "assaults tribal self-determination under the guise of championing Indian rights" [The American Indian Quarterly, Winter 1996, page 109].
Churchill's cynical attempts to exploit Indian issues reminds me a lot of what Churchill's supporters at the Maoist MIM say about making a tactical united front with Indian activists:
"MIM would only see importance in ...a struggle to resuscitate [First Nations] culture if it opposed imperialism........A national struggle that advances the fight against imperialism is positive. Preserving culture for its own sake is not part of the Marxist agenda. Whatever resources the tribes can wrest away from imperialism they should take." ["Resolutions on Cross-Cultural Breeding" 2004]
http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2007/02/professor-john-la-velle-exposes-ward.html
White radicals who masquerade as Indians are the hypocrites. Colorado AIM even admits that AIM got money from Saddam's Baath Party.
http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2006/09/surprise-wardo-is-for-sale-not-that.html
Whose interests are served by that? I never noticed that Saddam was nice to tribes in his country.
The law professor John LaVelle is an Indian who is hired by other Indians to represent them.
Professor LaVelle---who is hired by Indians-- exposed Churchill as a fraud in 1996.
Professor LaVelle points out that Churchill actually is a white "wannabee" who inserts himself "into the political affairs of real Indian people" and "assaults tribal self-determination under the guise of championing Indian rights" [The American Indian Quarterly, Winter 1996, page 109].
The cynical attempts of white radicals masquerading as Indians in order to exploit to exploit Indian issues reminds me a lot of what Churchill's supporters at the Maoist MIM say:
"MIM would only see importance in ...a struggle to resuscitate [First Nations] culture if it opposed imperialism........A national struggle that advances the fight against imperialism is positive. Preserving culture for its own sake is not part of the Marxist agenda. Whatever resources the tribes can wrest away from imperialism they should take." ["Resolutions on Cross-Cultural Breeding" 2004]
Posted by Snapple on May 11, 2007 03:43 PMIs Glenn Morris another white man parading as an Indian like Ward Churchill does?. He claims he is Shawnee, but is he enrolled? Who are his Shawnee relatives?
;)I am not a vegetarian because I love animals; I am a vegetarian because I hate plants.
Anything is possible if you wish hard enough.freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two equals four. if that is granted, all else follows.
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! dnjgwnwcwcvz
Posted by bfxgejxgbd on August 6, 2007 12:27 PMThe sixth amendment doesn't protect us against being offended.
Posted by Don on December 31, 2007 02:16 PM