Tearing apart free speech
So the Ward Churchill fiasco is coming to a close, huh (“Churchill fired; next shot in court,” July 25)?
I guess now it’s time for the powers that be to tear apart the freedom of speech and to limit what one learns at an educational facility. No more free thinking for you kids.
These are our tax dollars hard at work. Great job, University of Colorado!
Mark McCabe, Denver
Yes, it was a great job by CU!
Mr. Churchill had, and still has, the right to stand on a mountain top and pontificate his beliefs at the top of his lungs. But, he didn't have the right to present plagiarized and fabricated scholarly academic work. He should have ensured that his own closet was without skeletons before rattling the bones of others.
This is similar to a drug smuggler with a car full of illegal drugs being pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving. Even if he wasn't drinking or under the influence of a controlled substance, he would still be arrested for possession.
Posted by darfor on July 26, 2007 03:22 AMHe has all the free speech he wants.
He's also a liar and plaigarist.
CU was in such a hurry to hire a minority (Churchill claimed to be a member of a tribe which has since disavowed him) who was published (unfortunately he much of what he published was plagiarized) that they neglected to check his credentials.
I read the "Little Eichmann's" essay in its entirety (which came out the week of 9/11 - but didn't hit the fan until 3 years later). Churchill actually made some valid points in the essay. (Although that comment wasn't one of them - how do you blame the average 'worker bee' - which Eichmann wasn't - for decisions made by upper management? Now if the planes had taken out one or both of the houses of Congress, that might have been a valid observation, since those folks are part of the US decision making process - or took out some corporate HQs while the CEOs were in)
Posted by Mary on July 26, 2007 06:01 AMhey mark you can stop your worry about learning at cu as now they might really teach something that matters and even tell the truth about it.
chunkhill taugh a lie and was free to speak it daily, is that the freedom of speech you want at an university?
All of Churchills supporters scream freedom of speach, freedom of speach. Yet not one of them thinks about the responsibility of that speach. One has to be reponsible for what they say. They law has slander and liable laws on such things. So does Mark believe that these laws no longer ned to be applied. Do they not regulate freedom of speach in some way or not.
I gather Mark does not so there fore if I say Mark is a racist bigot and pediphile I can defend myself without any evidance contrary to facts under freedom of speach.
Posted by on July 26, 2007 07:10 AMIf lying is enuff to get a person fired, maybe we can get Bush out of office afterall. Impeach the liar!!!!!!!
Posted by jimd4x4 on July 26, 2007 07:18 AMIf lying is enuff to get a person fired, maybe we can get Bush out of office afterall. Impeach the liar!!!!!!!
Posted by jimd4x4 on July 26, 2007 07:18 AMThe students at CU deserve the best faculty the university can provide. Ward Churchill did not meet that criteria as he is a falsifier of facts and a plagiarist.
Posted by beh on July 26, 2007 07:51 AMTearing apart free speech???? We cannot get the man to shut up. His views are now widely known. The problem is paid speech. A college professior cannot teach that the world is flat and in the center of the cosmos. The product in college is supposed to be education, not Churchill's free speech. Our right to speak is alive and well. jimd4x4 has uttered many words and not a single thought.
Posted by T on July 26, 2007 07:59 AM06:02AM - anonymous,
A college, or university, should be a place where one can learn to THINK: That is, to see and hear any and all sides of a matter, and then differentiate among them as to their veracity or lack thereof..
Perhaps - after you have learned basic English sentence construction, and simple rules of punctuation - you, too, might be able to begin the process of learning that which would, in due time, admit you to higher education. For now, however, we all see why you remain anonymous when posting on a subject so far out of your grasp as this.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 26, 2007 08:01 AMMary, don't liberals like you ever get tired of spewing your filth? You and Churchill would make a good couple.
Posted by on July 26, 2007 08:18 AMGet real "Old Grouch". Why do you tear someone's English grammar apart if you disagree with them? So What! Maybe anonymous went to CU.
Churchill lied. He committed plagarism. He said her was an American Indian. The list goes on.
Are these the standards you want at our state funded colleges?
People who say his "freedom of speech" was violated are grasping at straws.
Had he used a little tact and diplomacy in his 9/11 speech none of this would have come out.
Churchill is now paying the piper.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive. The spider got caught in his own web.
Posted by Karen on July 26, 2007 08:23 AMKaren wins.
Posted by on July 26, 2007 08:36 AM8:18-
There you go; one more conservative simpleton. Mary makes an observation about the essay, and she is blasted and labeled by someone that probably didn't (and is too gutless to use a username as well) read it as a liberal. Maybe Mary votes more GOP than you do, but since she is not part of the "they hate us for our freedom" crowd, she is automatically the liberal devil. I guess that kind of rationale allows you not to have to think too hard.
The ACLU is now getting involved with Churchill's case. They are claiming his rights to free speech were violated.
This is the same ACLU that went after the president of Harvard for saying men are better at math and science than woman.They got him to resign for using his free speech.
This song keeps playing in my head,the one that goes, " Clowns to the left of me ,Jokers to the right,stuck in the middle with you. "
Posted by on July 26, 2007 09:31 AMI'm a proud liberal.
I don't like what Churchill wrote in that essay, but I support his right to write them.
Churchill is a plagiarist. He used other people's words, statistics, etc not only without giving them credit, but suggesting they were his own.
There's no question that his inflammatory words brought attention to him and his other writings.
His inflammatory remarks may have fueled the fire for his exit, but technically, he was fired for plagiarizing the words of others and he deserved it.
A man who steals the words of others and misrepresents them as his own is not the kind of person who should be a role model position like teaching.
People who truly believe in freedom of speech should pick a better representative for that cause. There are plenty of people more worthy to choose from.
Posted by Thomas on July 26, 2007 09:37 AMThe president of Harvard resigned becuase he was a terrible administrater not because of what he said, although, his sexist comments brought attention to his lack of leadership skills.
Administraters are paid to administrate not to teach. A professor is paid to teach young adults how to think.
You can't compare apples to oranges, buddy!
Posted by J-Mac on July 26, 2007 10:29 AM'A college, or university, should be a place where one can learn to THINK: That is, to see and hear any and all sides of a matter, and then differentiate among them as to their veracity or lack thereof..'
now that is a thought that should be used in university but is lost as the side that is taught is from the liberal left. Please count the number of conservatives who are teachers and what subjects they teach.
Posted by on July 26, 2007 10:31 AMThe problem is that conservatives don't tend to lend themselves to teaching.
The prefer PREACHING.
Posted by Thomas on July 26, 2007 10:53 AMMark McCabe opts for "freethinking kids," i.e. kids who think for themselves. I prefer adults who think for themselves. Moreso, I prefer religious adults who think for themselves; however, religious people have their thinking done for them by ignorant adults who created books with talking animals and stapled them together and called their creativity "Bible," "Koran," et al.
Deicide Corner: Brains for sale: Pilot $1000,
lawyer $2000, doctor $3000 and so forth until you get to minister (god's mouthpiece) $50,000 because it takes so many brains to create an ounce.
Try Jesus from the "loins of David": If you don't like him the Devil will always take you back.
Posted by Richard Grimes, Deicide r22037@yahoo.com (ffrf.org and ask for copy of Freethought today) on July 26, 2007 11:22 AMWard Churchill is a great example of the US hating wing of the Democrat party.Some of the other postings are also good examples.The other wing of the party is the coward wing.The other wing of the party is the coward wing.
Posted by An American on July 26, 2007 11:47 AMWard Churchill is a great example of the US hating wing of the Democrat party.Some of the other postings are also good examples.The other wing of the party is the coward wing.
Posted by An American on July 26, 2007 11:48 AMJ-Mac,I was not comparing apples to oranges.According to the ACLU free speech is free speech except when they don't like the speech.Whether or not he was a bad adminastrator or not,everything was fine until he used his right to free speech and said something the ACLU didn't like. Then they went after him.
Free speech these days only applies to the left.
Posted by on July 26, 2007 12:11 PMThats the trouble with free speech, someone might say something I dont agree with or dont like. Free speech is OK as long as it mimics everything I believe in, and damn those that dont!
I bet 'An American" and some of the others 'free-thinking' patriotics had ancestors in the 1700s that couldnt figure out what those damn liberal soon-to-be american colonists were bitching about, I mean Englandr was the greatest country in the world then, didnt the colonists know that?! Why were the damn liberals (y'know Jefferson, Washington and their ilk) trying to improve on it?!??!??! Troublemakers and ingrates is what they must have been, eh?
Hey "An American"...
Since you're so fond of labeling anyone who disagrees with you as a "U.S. hating liberal"..
What should we call you and your ilk?
How about this?
"A bunch of cold-blooded neo-cons who would sell their own mothers and our country out from under us for their own gain"
Self-centered conservatives who hate our planet and don't care if their childen and grandchildren have to suffer the consequences of the choices they make.
And oh, boy...George Bush must REALLY hate the U.S. military..since he has sent so many of them to be maimed or killed ...
See ...AA...propaganda can go both ways...I concede that conservatives are much better than liberals at it...though...but that's because they don't have consciences to get in the way.
Un American is an impotent coward . He would wet his pants before talking back to anyone outside of an anonymous environment, knowing he would shortly have half his teeth knocked out of his gutless face.
Posted by FYK on July 26, 2007 04:20 PMWard is a liar and a plaigarist, and as such, he deserved to be fired, not be a tenured professor.
I'd give my life fighting for his right to free speech, as repulsive as it is. And, yes, I've served in our U.S. military. If you love your freedom, thank a vet.
(Thanks, 40acres)
Ward's new indian name shall be, evermore:
SITTING BULLS**T
Posted by RickyLee on July 26, 2007 08:52 PMYeah EVERYone's free speech is protected at the college level EXCEPT Christians!!! Gee I wonder why? And who is restriicting it??? FREE thinking STUDENTS. They want all sides EXCEPT the one that doesn't agree with them. WARD CHURCHILL is their CHAMPION!!!
Posted by Rose Tyner on July 26, 2007 10:24 PMWell now. Considering the old definition: "If you steal from one it's plagiarism. If you steal from several - or many - it's scholarship", I wonder how many might also consider this:
It appears that "scholarship" is the heinous offense charged against Churchill; and "scholarship" is the reason Cowlorado U just fired him.
Could that be because he didn't get his "scholarship" from the "right" (wingnut) sources?
Posted by Old Grouch on July 27, 2007 12:33 PMI think Thomas is a good example of the coward wing of the Democrat party.He talks about Bush sending our soldiers to be maimed and killed.Our brave soldiers volunteer to fight for our country but Thomas' fear is so great that he cannot relate to the fact that they are willing to sacrifice for their country.All Thomas feels is overwhelming fear that makes him act in a cowardly fashion.FYK is a harder case to understand.FYK tries to put up a macho front like he would knock someones teeth out if they said a cross word to him.This false bravado shows he is probably in the coward wing of the Democrat party.Most of us know truly brave people,like soldiers,do not bloviate about what they would do if some one looked at them the wrong way.Also I think the anger FYK showed us could put him a little in the US hating wing of the Democrat party but I have no proof
Posted by An American on July 27, 2007 01:26 PMAn American:
When and where did you serve?
Posted by Charles B on July 28, 2007 10:09 AM