The Case against Churchill
They've finally found reason to fire Ward Churchill, but it took some doing. Churchill's comparison of the dead at the World Trade Center to Adolf Eichmann (implying that the victims were working for the very machinery that prompted the attack) could not pass unpunished, and the witch hunt was on.
It wasn't a good analogy. If we are going to blame the victim, workers at Martin-Marietta, Halliburton and Big Oil would be better targets. 9/11 had little to do with stockbrokers. As Michael Moore stated in Fahrenheit 9/11, poverty in the Middle East has the same roots as poverty in the US - a ridiculous concentration of wealth among the few. And poverty is not the sole cause of hostility toward the US - bombs and invasions tend to piss people off. This is the sort of misreading that finally brought Churchill down - an examination of the investigative committee's findings shows that the Professor habitually misrepresented and misinterpreted sources and conveniently transposed details from one event to another in his scholarly publications.
Churchill's real failing is that his inaccuracies provoke controversy but obscure a bigger truth. The problem is that vengeance is usually framed in terms of "getting even," a concept which is plainly inapplicable in this instance. As the above data indicate, it would require another 49,996 detonations killing 495,000 more Americans, for the "terrorists" to "break even" for the bombing of Baghdad/extermination of Iraqi children alone. ("Some People Push Back" - On the Justice of Roosting Chickens)
It should be noted that these numbers concern the pre-9/11 bombing of Baghdad in the Gulf War - the essay was written on September 12, 2001. Whether or not the numbers are accurate (and I read too much of the investigative committee's report to accept them as fact) is immaterial, considering that the war in Iraq has resulted in over 600,000 civilian deaths in excess of pre-war mortality levels. (Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000) Churchill is absolutely right in placing the blame for 9/11 firmly upon US policy and a history of Christian hostility toward Muslims. Moreover, we know - because we keep pointing out the inaccuracies - that Churchill's right-wing critics would hardly stand up to the sort of scrutiny employed by CU's investigative committee. No one would be arguing about smallpox and blanket distributions at Ft Clark if the public were not so determined to see Churchill fired for the heresy of calling Americans to account for 9/11.
Perhaps most chilling is former Gov Bill Owens' statement regarding Churchill's hope that the US would cease to exist as a state (Dismantling the Politics of Comfort): It's amazing that the more we look at Ward Churchill, the more outrageous, treasonous statements we hear from Churchill. Churchill has clearly called for violence against the state, and no country is required to subsidize its own destruction. That's what we're doing with Ward Churchill. (More radical comments by prof weighed)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
It wasn't a good analogy. If we are going to blame the victim, workers at Martin-Marietta, Halliburton and Big Oil would be better targets. 9/11 had little to do with stockbrokers. As Michael Moore stated in Fahrenheit 9/11, poverty in the Middle East has the same roots as poverty in the US - a ridiculous concentration of wealth among the few. And poverty is not the sole cause of hostility toward the US - bombs and invasions tend to piss people off. This is the sort of misreading that finally brought Churchill down - an examination of the investigative committee's findings shows that the Professor habitually misrepresented and misinterpreted sources and conveniently transposed details from one event to another in his scholarly publications.
Churchill's real failing is that his inaccuracies provoke controversy but obscure a bigger truth. The problem is that vengeance is usually framed in terms of "getting even," a concept which is plainly inapplicable in this instance. As the above data indicate, it would require another 49,996 detonations killing 495,000 more Americans, for the "terrorists" to "break even" for the bombing of Baghdad/extermination of Iraqi children alone. ("Some People Push Back" - On the Justice of Roosting Chickens)
It should be noted that these numbers concern the pre-9/11 bombing of Baghdad in the Gulf War - the essay was written on September 12, 2001. Whether or not the numbers are accurate (and I read too much of the investigative committee's report to accept them as fact) is immaterial, considering that the war in Iraq has resulted in over 600,000 civilian deaths in excess of pre-war mortality levels. (Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000) Churchill is absolutely right in placing the blame for 9/11 firmly upon US policy and a history of Christian hostility toward Muslims. Moreover, we know - because we keep pointing out the inaccuracies - that Churchill's right-wing critics would hardly stand up to the sort of scrutiny employed by CU's investigative committee. No one would be arguing about smallpox and blanket distributions at Ft Clark if the public were not so determined to see Churchill fired for the heresy of calling Americans to account for 9/11.
Perhaps most chilling is former Gov Bill Owens' statement regarding Churchill's hope that the US would cease to exist as a state (Dismantling the Politics of Comfort): It's amazing that the more we look at Ward Churchill, the more outrageous, treasonous statements we hear from Churchill. Churchill has clearly called for violence against the state, and no country is required to subsidize its own destruction. That's what we're doing with Ward Churchill. (More radical comments by prof weighed)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.