College Prof Calls 9-11 Victims "Little Eichmans"!

[GregoryA]

Greetings:
First let me say I just came on board and I am glad I found you folks.

You probably heard of the recent essay written by CU professor Churchill who called the 9-11 victims "little Eichmans, refering to the Nazi war criminal and also characterized the terrorists who attacked the twin towers as "brave members of combat squads" Also the Pentagon is called "a military target" by this so called educator.

I am just wondering how this kind of traitor can get away with the spewing of this hatelful, un-Anerican junk. Also I think this is an extreme case to say the least, but still I believe it is an indication of how far down higher edication has declined in this nation.

Any thoughts?

[groucho]

GregoryA said:

Greetings:
First let me say I just came on board and I am glad I found you folks.

You probably heard of the recent essay written by CU professor Churchill who called the 9-11 victims "little Eichmans, refering to the Nazi war criminal and also characterized the terrorists who attacked the twin towers as "brave members of combat squads" Also the Pentagon is called "a military target" by this so called educator.

I am just wondering how this kind of traitor can get away with the spewing of this hatelful, un-Anerican junk. Also I think this is an extreme case to say the least, but still I believe it is an indication of how far down higher edication has declined in this nation.

Any thoughts?

This is typical; the radical liberals have taken over "upper academia," and are poisoning countless minds with crap like this. At least this is the case with privately funded colleges / universities - state schools still are held somewhat accountable (but not nearly as much as they should be), since tax money is their source of funding.

And with heavy Government involvement in public education as well, today's youth are forced to run the liberal gauntlet all the way through their entire time in school!!.

(welcome to the Rant, BTW )

[MIMatt]

It just amazes me how much idiots can suceed in today's world. I mean he's a college professor of all things.

[Ian]

This is the one topic were I will deviate from my most honorable, learned, battle-worn, genius, conservative orators. I think I have sufficiently kissed the asses of every con on the board so let me continue with what will undoubtedly be my most controversial point to date.

I don't believe Churchill should be fired. I don't even think he should be reprimanded. The nature of our colleges has been of a liberal persuasion for decades, this is nothing new. If there were transcripts of every university lecture in the past 40 years you would find references to the United States far more offensive than anything Churchill has said. My problem is with the indoctrination of children in our public middle and high schools.

People in college after all are adults, they are allowed to smoke, enter into contracts and even serve in the military. My point is that if students don't have enough of an understanding of American politics and government to rebut the "crazy" ravings of a professor like Churchill then they ought not be there in the first place. If Churchill's points were so radically and blatantly false, then the student should not have a hard time refuting them. The only reason that this has become an issue, is because a professor made a statement that the “9/11 Families” found offensive, not its anti-American character. I wholly reject the notion that we turn to O'Reillyite, knee-jerk 1st Amendment suppression (something that those of us on the right so fervently proclaim to combat) merely because Churchill put forth a radical position.

[TNRighty]

Good point Ian, but I disagree to a certain extent. You didn't bring up the issue of free speech, but I'm going to approach this from that angle. The concept of free speech does not mean that free speech is without consequences. He has a right to say what he said, but his employers also have every right to fire him for what he said. The Free Speech Ammendment doesn't give you immunity from the ignorance and stupidity of your what you say, only the guarantee that the government cannot throw you in jail for speaking out. I'm not saying that he should've been fired, but you can't take away the right of an employer to fire an employee for saying something stupid. You never insinuated that, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

[Ian]

I completely agree TNR and apologize for not making that more clear. I believe that the university should have the right to fire Churchill, I just don't think its appropriate in this circumstance, especially with the deluge of liberal rhetoric present on today's campuses. My main point was that we ought to engage liberals in debate before we head for the turn-off-the-mic option, no matter how justified that option may be. It leads to an overall immature dampening of the nature of debate when one feels the need to “tone down” their often times controversial debating subjects.

[GregoryA]

Man try this.

I did a Google search on Ward Churchill and this guy is amazing in his perverse veiws of America, animal rights and other topics. It is almost as if this guy is purposely trying to be outragous and irrational with his opinions. If this guy is mainstream academia we need a conservative cultural revolution on our college campuses.

[Ian]

I agree, however, Ward Churchill's views are in line with 90% of American professors. These views if anything have been borrowed from the main campus ideology of places like Berkley or UCLA. The nature of outrage surrounding Churchill’s comments strikes me as rather disingenuous considering the ruling parties in academia have sponsored and encouraged this train of thought for at least the past 40 years. Again, the outrage stems not from Churchill’s anti-American views, rather it stems from his insensitive remarks about America’s impervious “9/11 Families”.

By the way, welcome to the board.