Ward Churchill Fired

[Buckeye_Nut]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,290642,00.html

It's about darned time!!!

For those of you who have followed this story since the beginning, you'd know this man was a disgrace and unfit to teach.

 

[stratman]

I can't believe it took so long, that man should have been fired years ago. Bottom line: spineless, cowardly university administration. I wonder how many influential people behind the scenes threatened to withold funding or donations.

 

[krabapple]

He should not be -- and wasn't -- fired for writing lame-brained, incendiary analogies, which is quite within his First Amendment rights (he was certainly right, btw, that 9/11 had something to do with past US actions in the Middle East; he was certainly wrong to compare the workers in the WTC to 'little Eichmanns'). He was fired for plagiarism and 'falsification'..and for refusing to admit/apologize for it.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

He should not be -- and wasn't -- fired for writing lame-brained, incendiary analogies, which is quite within his First Amendment rights he was certainly wrong to compare the workers in the WTC to 'little Eichmanns'). He was fired for plagiarism and 'falsification'..and for refusing to admit/apologize for it.

You are both correct, and wrong.......sort of.

He was, in fact, fired because of his statements. Because of the political correctness in todays age, the university simply needed to use another excuse to shitcan the fool to protect their own interests.

Yes, the firing took waaaay too long to happen, but the end result was the necessary end. No university can afford to keep educators like that on their staff and maintain any credibility.

 

[Mort Corey]

Think I read somewhere that he already was offered another job at Ohio State.....then again, maybe that was someone else

Mort

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

lol..

Yea...I'm sure the LIBS at tOSU would welcome the biggest fraud & tool indian alive......at the greatest university on this planet..


HEH


That ignoramus is LEFT coast material.... I'm sure Cal or another LEFT coast school will hire him.

Either that...or Cuba....Even Cuba is taking American communist med students and graduating them
these days
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN2422759620070725?feedType=RSS
I'm sure Fidel, cal, or Cuba will make bestest commie buddies with the fake indian fraud.

 

[Gimpy Ric]

I'm glad he's fired. When I would see the bastard on TV, flocks of brainwashed college kids supporting him would crowd around him...Dummies.

 

[hemiram]

I'm glad he's fired. When I would see the bastard on TV, flocks of brainwashed college kids supporting him would crowd around him...Dummies.

Since he isn't an Indian in the first place, he should have been tossed for claiming he was in the first place. I'm probably a 1/16th, and I don't claim it. All we know is one of my mom's ancestors was listed as "Squaw" in some old church records as the wife of my mom's great great grandfather, and presumably the mother of some of his kids, there was a second wife who cranked out some more after she died, and it's not clear who was the mother of her great grandfather.

My mother looks like she is though, the older she gets, the more she looks like it. She has been asked many times over the years if she is. She's Irish and French, except for the one guy we aren't sure about. If he's the son of the "squaw" (no readable name) mom is, if not, she's 100% Irish and French.
Seems like Churchill looked the part and used it to build a career out of.

 

[krabapple]

You are both correct, and wrong.......sort of.

He was, in fact, fired because of his statements. Because of the political correctness in todays age, the university simply needed to use another excuse to shitcan the fool to protect their own interests.

Plagiarism is a fireable offense in academia....holding unpopular opinions is not, and IMO shouldn't be, unless the 'opinion' is a flat denial of fact (e.g., holocaust denial taught as history, creationism taught as biology). So no, he wasn't, and probably could not be, fired for his statements. The belated attention payed to his statement on 9/11, however, certainly led to increased scrutiny of his other work. To use a Churchill-like bit of hyperbole, to some that's like Capone being nailed for tax evasion.

Chances are too that Churchill's notoriety -- kept aflame by the right-wing press -- was eating into alumni donation. Definitely a no-no.

 

[just listening]

The University of Colorado took the high road in my opinion in taking so long to fire Churchill. In doing so they have set a standard and precendent that other institutions will use in a fair effort to rid themselves of academic frauds.

There is no question the "little Eichmann" comments put Churchill under the microscope. But last year CU determined that it fell under free speech and he couldn't be fired for it (correctly I might add).

However, during the process both the investigative committee and the local papers began to find piece after piece of fraudulent academic research and plagerism. This is inexcuseable in academic circles and he was called to the carpet. he has never explained why or tried to disprove the findings. He just keeps going back to the lynch mob defense.

His lawyer thinks that the liberal jury pool in Denver is better suited to his defense. Anyone who knows Boulder County understands how liberal it is. The truth is that the defense wants Denver, hoping for a far less educated group of jurors, who will see it as the big bad stuffy intellectuals pounding on the little guy.

 

[MDS]

However, during the process both the investigative committee and the local papers began to find piece after piece of fraudulent academic research and plagerism. This is inexcuseable in academic circles and he was called to the carpet. he has never explained why or tried to disprove the findings. He just keeps going back to the lynch mob defense.

There was an interview with him posted on msnbc.com. He doesn't seem to be falling on the 'lynch mob' defense. On the contrary, he wants to see the supposed proof that was used to fire him. He is right that the 'proof' should be held up to academic scrutiny. Not doing so is the equivalent of the prosecution withholding evidence from the defense and that certainly does not fly with the legal system.

 

[just listening]

MDF:
Then that is the first time he's gone that route. The proof is in the documents used in the investigation. May I suggest you check out both the DenverPost.com and the RockyMountainNews.com. Neither paper could be considered friendly to Bill O'Reilly, but they exposed Churchill for what he is, a fraud. The guy wrote papers under a pseudonym, then used them as references to prove his point, because support his argument any other way. Then there is the multiple cases of plagerism. Professors from universities outside of Colorado were brought in to be on the investigative committee. That is pretty fair review board, a jury of peers with no ties to one side or the other.