max Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2005/129.html University of Colorado at Boulder Chancellor Phil DiStefano today announced the findings of a preliminary review of allegations concerning the conduct and scholarship of Professor Ward Churchill. The review team, led by DiStefano, found that Churchill’s controversial essay on 9/11 and other public comments are protected by the First Amendment, but that other allegations of plagiarism, misuse of others’ work and fabrication may constitute research misconduct. Research misconduct, if proven, is subject to university sanctions. The report also pointed to possible research misconduct related to allegations that Churchill misrepresented his ethnicity “in order to gain credibility and attract an audience for (his) scholarship.” Under established university procedures, allegations of research misconduct are referred to the campus’s Standing Committee on Research Misconduct for further investigation. Findings of the committee will be submitted to the vice chancellor for academic affairs and the chancellor for action. DiStefano said that the recent controversy has “sorely tested our commitment as citizens and educators to the long-held values of freedom of expression, professional integrity, academic freedom and intellectual honesty.” However, he said, the university responded to the intense public debate by engaging in a deliberative process, beginning with the preliminary review just concluded. DiStefano said, “The review process was both laborious and methodical, but we remained constantly aware of the gravity of our task and the importance of its outcomes.” He said the team researched the Laws of the Regents and the historic principles of free speech and academic freedom. They reviewed nearly 100 works by Churchill and published critiques of his work. The team also consulted with outside experts concerning relevant issues. DiStefano was assisted in the preliminary review by Todd Gleeson, dean of arts and sciences, and David Getches, dean of law. The team’s report was released in a news conference held in Denver, following a regular meeting of the CU Board of Regents. To read the report, statements, and other information see the special report: Ward Churchill and the 9/11 Essay. Contact: Pauline Hale, 303-735-6183 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 So this was the guy said by the press to have "compared 911 victims to Nazis"? Before now, I never bothered to go read for myself exactly what it was he said. I just naively assumed that the media was being truthful about what the guy said. Here is the actual essay. Here is the quote, comparing the US attack on Iraq to the Germans in WWII: "It was a performance worthy of the nazis during the early months of their drive into Russia. And it should be borne in mind that Good Germans gleefully cheered that butchery, too. Indeed, support for Hitler suffered no serious erosion among Germany's "innocent civilians" until the defeat at Stalingrad in 1943." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 Yeah, I was a little miffed at how tame his "comparison" was relative to how much shit he caught over it. Seems like they blew it out of proportion. But it looks like some of his other "creative" methods are going to get him in trouble! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 This is a time when it is tough to be a political dissenter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjd Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 This is the quote that got him into a shitstorm: 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 That is pretty damn callous and totally over the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 That is pretty damn callous and totally over the line. Does it seem any worse than "I hate you, you fucking *"? While quite offensive, this seems worse than his "little eichmanns" comment and yet stillwithin the bounds of free speech (I hope!). (I'm assuming the regular disclaimers are not ness. here...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.radon Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 I went to CU and heard of ol' Mr. Churchill. What is so crazy is how everyone on campus speaks up for his right to say these things but if he were to say certain words which the University considers "inflammatory" ie.. racist words, he would be immediately disciplined. Now how does this speech code on the CU campus exist when they defend Churchill’s immensely inflammatory comments? The guy's an idiot and should be fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted March 26, 2005 Author Share Posted March 26, 2005 That pretty much says it all, seems like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 I go to CU right now and can atest that this story is much larger nationally than you would ever know at school. Literally 99% of the student body doesn't give a shit any more and hardly even talks about it. It is pretty amazing how much attention it has gotten cause nobody at school cares any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barkernews Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 dumbass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 dumbass me? Churchill is a dumbass fer sure, but i'm not sure what I said that makes me a dumbass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjd Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 I go to CU right now Are you in grad school or an undergrad (why I ask is that I'm considering CU as a possible backup for grad shool)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 Undergrad. When grad school time comes I would definitely consider here again just due to the fun factor. What are you going to be studying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Churchill in SF Probably - Not Work Safe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.