U. Colorado Prof compares 9/11 victims to Nazis

[Guest Cerebus]

Link:

 

- A University of Colorado professor who provoked a furor when he compared victims of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks to Nazis has resigned as a department chairman but will retain his teaching job, the university said.

 

In an essay written after the September 11 attacks, Ward Churchill said the World Trade Center victims were "little Eichmanns," a reference to Adolf Eichmann, who organized Nazi plans to exterminate Europe's Jews. Churchill also spoke of the "gallant sacrifices" of the "combat teams" that struck America.

...

Churchill resigned as chairman of Colorado's Ethnic Studies Department, telling university officials in a letter that "the present political climate has rendered me a liability in terms of representing either my department, the college, or the university."

 

University officials welcomed the move.

 

"While Professor Churchill has the constitutional right to express his political views, his essay on 9/11 has outraged and appalled us and the general public," interim CU-Boulder Chancellor Phil DiStefano said.

 

In an interview with Denver station KCNC-TV, Churchill said he is not an advocate of violence.

 

"The overriding question that was being posed at the time was 'why did this happen, why did they hate us so much,' and my premise was when you do this to other people's families and children, that is going to be a natural response."

 

You can read read this clown's whole essay here. Here are some choice quotes:

 

The most that can honestly be said of those involved on September 11 is that they finally responded in kind to some of what this country has dispensed to their people as a matter of course.

 

That they waited so long to do so is, notwithstanding the 1993 action at the WTC, more than anything a testament to their patience and restraint.

 

They did not license themselves to "target innocent civilians."

 

There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . .

 

Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to "ignorance" – a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore" – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.

 

The men who flew the missions against the WTC and Pentagon were not "cowards." That distinction properly belongs to the "firm-jawed lads" who delighted in flying stealth aircraft through the undefended airspace of Baghdad, dropping payload after payload of bombs on anyone unfortunate enough to be below – including tens of thousands of genuinely innocent civilians – while themselves incurring all the risk one might expect during a visit to the local video arcade. Still more, the word describes all those "fighting men and women" who sat at computer consoles aboard ships in the Persian Gulf, enjoying air-conditioned comfort while launching cruise missiles into neighborhoods filled with random human beings. Whatever else can be said of them, the men who struck on September 11 manifested the courage of their convictions, willingly expending their own lives in attaining their objectives.

[NoCalMike 0]

He does makes some points though, however the essay as a whole is outrageous.

[Dr. Tom 0]

His "points" are execrable. This Churchill fellow is a waste of flesh. Hamilton College was concerned about violence and canceled him. If I lived in Colorado, I'd be upset that my tax dollars were funding this asshole poisoning the minds of college students.

[NoCalMike 0]

His "points" are execrable. This Churchill fellow is a waste of flesh. Hamilton College was concerned about violence and canceled him. If I lived in Colorado, I'd be upset that my tax dollars were funding this asshole poisoning the minds of college students.

Well let me clarify, when I say he has points, I am more talking along the line of how our military in the past bombed Iraq's sewage systems thus destroying and contaminating water supplies, directly leading to death. I mean if the guy wanted to make that argument alone, then fine. Instead he starts going off on a rant about too broad a subject, and making some rather extreme statements.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Oh why oh why didn't my school have these kind of dipshit professors (thanks for the link, Cereb, I was curious about his essay as a whole, and I wasn't letdown -- I began laughing several paragraphs down). If I were a Co. U student I'd sign up for his class just to torment the living hell out of him...

[Special K 0]

Been listening to talk radio lately, the conservative hosts are having a collective orgasm over this, saying this is how all non-conservatives REALLY think.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Well it's true.

 

And I find it funny how O'Reilly said he "broke the story" and says his viewers/listeners were the ones who called whatever college that guy was going to speak at -- but then he says he doesn't want him fired...

[Guest Smell the ratings!!!]

lol wtf?

[BUTT 0]

I was wondering when this was going to get posted here. This guy is a douchebag and deserves to be fired from his job. Sadly, this is going to provide more ammunition for the right saying that this is an good example of liberal thought. Never mind that this guy also calls Clinton a war criminal in his essay.

 

And just in case anyone is wondering, O'Reilly on Friday announced a FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT, telling Hamilton alumni not to donate any money to them if they led Churchill speak. Thankfully, they cancelled his appearance before Bill would have without a doubt put them into bankruptcy.

[Guest Cerebus]

Well he wasn't fired, he just resigned his chairmanship of the Ethnics Study department.

[therealworldschampion 0]

Is anyone really suprised that another douchebag from the Univ of Colorado is making news? First Gary Barnett, now this..

[The Czech Republic 0]

The stock market kills babies so they deserved to be burned to death? Fascinating. If one of us had written that we would've had the good sense and taste to call them "little Snitskys" instead of "little Eichmanns."

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

Man, talk about getting lost in the message. This guy had a couple valid points, but its like cream filling in a hand grenade. But hey, at least its another perspective. Aint nothin' wrong with multiple perspectives, one can only hope the CU students are wise enough to wade through the bullshit.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

O'Reilly on Friday announced a FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT...

Much like his FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against Pepsi for having a rapper as a spokesperson.

 

Much like his FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against France for ... well, being France.

 

Much like his FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against some hippie shoe maker for having a porn star as a spokesperson.

 

Much like his FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against the Muppets (or was it a TV network) for having Snoop Dogg as a guest.

 

I like Bill and all, but sometimes ... meh...

[Special K 0]

I want a 5-minute looping clip of him 'apologizing' to America.

 

EDIT: I used to sort of like him (though he's, like, the worst interviewer ever.)

Ever since the phone sex thing, though, all he does is bitch about character assassins and insinuate the left was responsible for him being a little hypocrite pervy.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Here's something from AIM. An American Indian group.

 

AIM.COM

[Jingus 0]

Man, one of these days, I'm gonna start a Send Jingus Around The Country To Kick These People's Asses collection drive. This Churchill cunt is way up there on the list, right near that Fred Phelps fag. In fact, come to think of it, I might include Bill O'Reilly on the list too, if for no other reason than Tina Fey might sleep with me if I did.

 

And, ya know what? It's been too long since I've done one of these, and this prick's essay really pissed me off, so here's the least-awaited return of all time: DISSECTION OF DOOM. (Note: the essay is REALLY fucking long, so I'm just gonna hit on the high notes.)

 

When queried by reporters concerning his views on the assassination of John F. Kennedy in November 1963, Malcolm X famously – and quite charitably, all things considered – replied that it was merely a case of "chickens coming home to roost."

When the very first paragraph of your Great Work is an out-of-context quote from Malcolm Fucking X, you've pretty much signed your integrity's death warrant right there.

The Iraqi youngsters, all of them under 12, died as a predictable result of the 1991 US "surgical" bombing of their country's water purification and sewage facilities... the death toll has been steadily ratcheted up by US-imposed sanctions for a full decade now. Enforced all the while by a massive military presence and periodic bombing raids, the embargo has greatly impaired the victims' ability to import the nutrients, medicines and other materials necessary to saving the lives of even their toddlers.

Actually, those would be UN-imposed sanctions, thank you. And they were only enacted in the first place because of Saddam Hussein's continued refusal to obey the UN regulations which he accepted as part of his surrender after the Gulf War. (Saddam's wasting untold millions of dollars on military buildup and palaces for himself probably didn't help his starving people either.)

it should be noted that this sort of "aerial warfare" constitutes a Class I Crime Against humanity, entailing myriad gross violations of international law, as well as every conceivable standard of "civilized" behavior

Is that a Geneva Convention-classified crime? This pussyfart doesn't exactly include a lot of sources for his claims.

In trying to affix a meaning to such things, we would do well to remember the wave of elation that swept America at reports of what was happening along the so-called Highway of Death: perhaps 100,000 "towel-heads" and "camel jockeys" – or was it "sand niggers" that week? – in full retreat, routed and effectively defenseless, many of them conscripted civilian laborers, slaughtered in a single day by jets firing the most hyper-lethal types of ordnance.

Firstly, I dare you to find ONE example of any respectable media outlet using those ethnic slurs in its news reports. Secondly, 100000 in just one day, huh? Wow. Our military rules.

As a whole, the American public greeted these revelations with yawns. There were, after all, far more pressing things... Getting "Jeremy" and "Ellington" to their weekly soccer game, for instance, or seeing to it that little "Tiffany" an "Ashley" had just the right roll-neck sweaters to go with their new cords.

Just because the rich girls at your high school refused to date you, it doesn't give you the excuse to write shitty essays. Plus, "Ellington"?!

It must also be conceded, however, that those involved by-and-large contented themselves with signing petitions and conducting candle-lit prayer vigils, bearing "moral witness" as vast legions of brown-skinned five-year-olds sat shivering in the dark, wide-eyed in horror, whimpering as they expired in the most agonizing ways imaginable.

Homer: "Play the race card! Play it..." ::shakes fist::

So pure of principle were these "dissidents," in fact, that they began literally to supplant the police in protecting corporations profiting by the carnage against suffering such retaliatory "violence" as having their windows broken by persons less "enlightened"

Firstly, how does one "supplant the police" in America? Secondly, how does a corporation turn a profit from starving third-world children? Musta missed that lesson in my entrepreneurship classes.

 They did not, for starters, "initiate" a war with the US, much less commit "the first acts of war of the new millennium."  A good case could be made that the war in which they were combatants has been waged more-or-less continuously by the "Christian West" – now proudly emblematized by the United States – against the "Islamic East" since the time of the First Crusade, about 1,000 years ago. More recently, one could argue that the war began when Lyndon Johnson first lent significant support to Israel's dispossession/displacement of Palestinians during the 1960s,

Actually, the Muslims started everything when they forcefully invaded and occupied Palestine back before the 1st Crusade (which started exactly 910 years ago, thank you, please drive thru) thus stealing it from the Jews in the first place. Also, how were the 9/11 hijackers striking back for all those starving Iraqi children since the terrorists themselves were all from Saudi Arabia, a country which has prospered greatly from its alliance with the US?

They did not license themselves to "target innocent civilians." There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple.

Yes, innocent civilians WERE killed in the Pentagon attack: what about all the people on the plane, for example? Also, NO target is valid when the attackers are civilians themselves who have no allegiance with any nation's military.

As to those in the World Trade Center... True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire... they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants.

What about all the janitors, secretaries, filing clerks, cops, firemen, and other various persons who've never had a power lunch or arranged a stock transaction in their entire lives? This cocknocker has clearly never worked for a living inside a corporation, either.

little Eichmanns

The 1st Universal Law Of Debating: the first guy who mentions the Nazis loses.

the "firm-jawed lads" who delighted in flying stealth aircraft through the undefended airspace of Baghdad... while themselves incurring all the risk one might expect during a visit to the local video arcade... all those "fighting men and women" who sat at computer consoles aboard ships in the Persian Gulf, enjoying air-conditioned comfort

Furthermore, this chickenfucker has clearly never even seen the inside of a combat aircraft or battleship, and any of his opinions about military actions are completely invalid.

Evil – for those inclined to embrace the banality of such a concept – was perfectly incarnated in that malignant toad known as Madeline Albright, squatting in her studio chair like Jaba the Hutt

Jingus's 1st Law Of Debating Morality: anyone who claims that evil doesn't exist is very likely evil themselves. And it's spelled "Jabba".

There is no reason, after all, to believe that the teams deployed in the assaults on the WTC and the Pentagon were the only such... To the contrary, there is every reason to expect that there are many other teams in place, tasked to employ altogether different tactics in executing operational plans at least as well-crafted as those evident on September 11, and very well equipped for their jobs... it can only be adduced that there are plenty of other components ready to go, and that they will be used, should this become necessary in the eyes of the strategists.

Then why haven't they done anything else already? It's only been 3.5 years.

FBI's SWAT units have displayed their ability to combat child abuse in Waco by burning babies alive

ATF's SWAT units, actually. And the Davidians started the fires.

and its vaunted Crime Lab has been shown to pad its "crime-fighting' statistics by fabricating evidence against many an alleged car thief

I triple-dog-dare this snausage-eating hypocrit to leave his car alone and unlocked for a single night on the streets of any large city.

By this, it should be understood that Middle-Easterners, unlike Americans, have no history of exterminating others purely for profit, or on the basis of racial animus. Thus, we can appreciate the fact that they value life – all lives, not just their own – far more highly than do their U.S. counterparts.

I fucking give up.

 

Surely, we can pool together enough gas money to get me to Colorado and knock this dirty bastard's teeth in.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Eichmann was either directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of about 6 million people. To compare anyone to him in particular, let alone the Nazis in general, is tasteless to the extreme. And I'm not even sure this is a "liberal" rant as some have characterized it, given it's filled with shots at the Clinton administration. It's more of a Noam Chomskyish "anti-USA, pro-anarchy" rant.

 

And props to KKK for his "FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT" post.

[Vern Gagne 0]

As long has the e-mail segment continues. I can't boycott the O'Reilly factor.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Much like his FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against Pepsi for having a rapper as a spokesperson.

For what it's worth, this is not an official FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT because Bill says that it never happened.

 

Thank god for lies, and the power of lies to revise history as Bill sees fit.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT/THREATENED FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT, what's the difference, hippie?

 

I think the Pepsi/Ludacris one was the "start" of the FACTOR-LED BOYCOTTS.

 

Oh, I forgot about this one:

 

The FACTOR-LED BOYCOTT against Vh1 for that "Prisoners Behind Bars Playing in Bands" or whatever that goofy show was.

 

EDIT:

If I lived in Colorado, I'd be upset that my tax dollars were funding this asshole poisoning the minds of college students.

 

I heard on a certain LOL Report last night that this guy gets 100k/year at the University. That is the thing that offends me about this buttmunch...

[2GOLD 0]

At the end of the day, all this was is some college professor who is desperate to make his impact in life and he knows he is not going to do it with something smart.

 

So what does he do? Thinks of the stupidest thing he can say and says it, knowing it'll get the reaction and knowing he might become a household name even just for a little bit.

 

This sounds like nothing more than a man with a bruised ego desperate for any kind of legacy.

[NoCalMike 0]

Have you guys seen a pic of this guy? He highly resembles Ron Kuby, the attourney who would defend OJ Simpson on a nightly basis as a victim of police tampering.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Have you guys seen a pic of this guy?

 

Hippie pseudo-Indian.

 

Oddly, I did a Google search for a pick of this guy and two pictures from the University of Colorado's Web site that were on Google couldn't be found. I wonder why...

[NoCalMike 0]

Have you guys seen a pic of this guy?

 

Hippie pseudo-Indian.

 

Oddly, I did a Google search for a pick of this guy and two pictures from the University of Colorado's Web site that were on Google couldn't be found. I wonder why...

Oh man, that pic is much more flattering then the one I saw. It was one of those black and white photo, that for some reason makes an otherwise normal looking person, look like a hardened criminal/child molester. You know what I'm talking 'bout.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

That might have been one of the pics I tried linking here but is "missing" from CU...

[Guest Cerebus]

Judging by the way this guy looks, I'd say he thinks its still 1965, not 2005.

[Vern Gagne 0]

That's how most of those old hippies think.

[Styles 0]

Have you guys seen a pic of this guy?

 

Hippie pseudo-Indian.

 

Oddly, I did a Google search for a pick of this guy and two pictures from the University of Colorado's Web site that were on Google couldn't be found. I wonder why...

Oh man, that pic is much more flattering then the one I saw. It was one of those black and white photo, that for some reason makes an otherwise normal looking person, look like a hardened criminal/child molester. You know what I'm talking 'bout.

I think this is the pic: http://www.drury.edu/uc/archives/churchill_acv.jpg

(too big to post).

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Ha. That was one of them, although it was considerably smaller...