The Right has a License to Write Anything


moghrabi
#1
Ward Churchill and the Mad Dogs
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

When it comes to left and right, meaning the respective voices of sanity and dementia, we're meant to keep two sets of books.

Start with sanity, in the form of Ward Churchill, a tenured prof at the University of Colorado. Churchill is known nationally as a fiery historian and writer, particularly on Indian matters. Back in 2001, after 9/11, Churchill wrote an essay called "Some People Push Back", making the simple point, in his words, that "if U.S. foreign policy results in widespread death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned."

...........

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02052005.html
 
moghrabi
#2
Ward Churchill and the Mad Dogs
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

When it comes to left and right, meaning the respective voices of sanity and dementia, we're meant to keep two sets of books.

Start with sanity, in the form of Ward Churchill, a tenured prof at the University of Colorado. Churchill is known nationally as a fiery historian and writer, particularly on Indian matters. Back in 2001, after 9/11, Churchill wrote an essay called "Some People Push Back", making the simple point, in his words, that "if U.S. foreign policy results in widespread death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned."

...........

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02052005.html
 
moghrabi
#3
Ward Churchill and the Mad Dogs
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

When it comes to left and right, meaning the respective voices of sanity and dementia, we're meant to keep two sets of books.

Start with sanity, in the form of Ward Churchill, a tenured prof at the University of Colorado. Churchill is known nationally as a fiery historian and writer, particularly on Indian matters. Back in 2001, after 9/11, Churchill wrote an essay called "Some People Push Back", making the simple point, in his words, that "if U.S. foreign policy results in widespread death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned."

...........

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02052005.html
 
Reverend Blair
#4
Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.
 
Reverend Blair
#5
Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.
 
Reverend Blair
#6
Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.
 
Paranoid Dot Calm
#7
Hey! Moghrabi

I really enjoyed that article.

Calm
 
Paranoid Dot Calm
#8
Hey! Moghrabi

I really enjoyed that article.

Calm
 
Paranoid Dot Calm
#9
Hey! Moghrabi

I really enjoyed that article.

Calm
 
Paco
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.

The “radical” right is a small minority. They have as much right to voice their opinion as does Mr. Churchill.

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution? The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’” Eichmann organized the identification and transportation to concentration camps of millions of people. He was largely responsible for the extermination of millions. How does that compare to the people in the trade center?

Quote:

Why should Churchill apologize for anything? Is it a crime to say that chickens can come home to roost and that the way to protect American lives from terrorism is to respect international law? I don't think he should have resigned as department chair. Let them drag him out by main force.

Churchill has not apologized for anything. In fact he has been defiant in the face of this controversy. When confronted by a local reporter, Churchill restated his views without remorse and after tiring of the hound dog reporter (who was persistent and would have pissed me off were I in Churchill’s shoes) he flatly stated, “get out of my face.” Further, he called a press conference this same day, (one day last week, I forget when exactly) then failed to show.

Ward Churchill was not forced to resign his department chair even though Alexander Cockburn would try to make you believe it so. Churchill stated his dislike for being chair of the University’s Ethics Committee and this whole controversy is simply a convenient excuse allowing him to dispose of a position he did not want. He resigned his position immediately and expressed his pleasure and relief.

Quote:

fired up by the mad dogs on the Wall Street Journal editorial page and by Lord O'Reilly of the Loofah

More bull****. I watched O’Reilly both nights. He specifically pointed out Mr. Churchill’s First Amendment rights and expressed his opinion that Mr. Churchill should not be fired or punished.

Quote:

And, yes, this is the same University of Colorado whose officials decided last year to take no firm disciplinary action after Katie Hnida and two other women charged they had been raped or assaulted by members of the UC football team, also that Coach Gary Barnett's staff had staged porno movie showings for potential team recruits, also promising them easy sex if they signed on. Once again, two sets of books. For rapists and procurers a wink and a nod;for political commentary, a full press persecution and threats of termination.

What a hoot! Can a University take disciplinary action without evidence? Mr. Cockburn conveniently leaves out the information that each case was highly publicized and the District Attorney investigated (under extreme public scrutiny) and interviewed both accuser and accused. There was not sufficient evidence for any rape charges, nor were there sufficient evidence that Gary Barnett’s staff “staged porno movies.” Gary Barnett was suspended for “insensitive remarks” and was investigated by an independent panel. He was reinstated after 4 months.

If Mr. Cockburn would like to discuss double standards, let us compare. Mr. Barnett was suspended 4 months for insensitive remarks. His insensitivity? He stated Katie Hnida was not a good football player. Insensitive in light of her charges of rape maybe, but Barnett was clear his comments were not related to the rape charge. Now, on the other hand we have another University of Colorado employee who charges and continues to maintain that the dead from 9-11 where Nazis and murderers. However, there is no suspension while the university appoints another independent investigation committee. Double standard indeed.

One more comment. I am offended by Mr. Churchill’s comments. Where I come from, he has spoken “fightin’ words.” I strongly disagree with his views and would jack his ****ing jaw in a second should I have a chance encounter. On the other hand, I do not approve of any firing or punishment. His comments were of a political nature and those are clearly protected by the U. S. Constitution. The First Amendment is bigger than Ward Churchill.
 
Paco
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.

The “radical” right is a small minority. They have as much right to voice their opinion as does Mr. Churchill.

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution? The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’” Eichmann organized the identification and transportation to concentration camps of millions of people. He was largely responsible for the extermination of millions. How does that compare to the people in the trade center?

Quote:

Why should Churchill apologize for anything? Is it a crime to say that chickens can come home to roost and that the way to protect American lives from terrorism is to respect international law? I don't think he should have resigned as department chair. Let them drag him out by main force.

Churchill has not apologized for anything. In fact he has been defiant in the face of this controversy. When confronted by a local reporter, Churchill restated his views without remorse and after tiring of the hound dog reporter (who was persistent and would have pissed me off were I in Churchill’s shoes) he flatly stated, “get out of my face.” Further, he called a press conference this same day, (one day last week, I forget when exactly) then failed to show.

Ward Churchill was not forced to resign his department chair even though Alexander Cockburn would try to make you believe it so. Churchill stated his dislike for being chair of the University’s Ethics Committee and this whole controversy is simply a convenient excuse allowing him to dispose of a position he did not want. He resigned his position immediately and expressed his pleasure and relief.

Quote:

fired up by the mad dogs on the Wall Street Journal editorial page and by Lord O'Reilly of the Loofah

More bull****. I watched O’Reilly both nights. He specifically pointed out Mr. Churchill’s First Amendment rights and expressed his opinion that Mr. Churchill should not be fired or punished.

Quote:

And, yes, this is the same University of Colorado whose officials decided last year to take no firm disciplinary action after Katie Hnida and two other women charged they had been raped or assaulted by members of the UC football team, also that Coach Gary Barnett's staff had staged porno movie showings for potential team recruits, also promising them easy sex if they signed on. Once again, two sets of books. For rapists and procurers a wink and a nod;for political commentary, a full press persecution and threats of termination.

What a hoot! Can a University take disciplinary action without evidence? Mr. Cockburn conveniently leaves out the information that each case was highly publicized and the District Attorney investigated (under extreme public scrutiny) and interviewed both accuser and accused. There was not sufficient evidence for any rape charges, nor were there sufficient evidence that Gary Barnett’s staff “staged porno movies.” Gary Barnett was suspended for “insensitive remarks” and was investigated by an independent panel. He was reinstated after 4 months.

If Mr. Cockburn would like to discuss double standards, let us compare. Mr. Barnett was suspended 4 months for insensitive remarks. His insensitivity? He stated Katie Hnida was not a good football player. Insensitive in light of her charges of rape maybe, but Barnett was clear his comments were not related to the rape charge. Now, on the other hand we have another University of Colorado employee who charges and continues to maintain that the dead from 9-11 where Nazis and murderers. However, there is no suspension while the university appoints another independent investigation committee. Double standard indeed.

One more comment. I am offended by Mr. Churchill’s comments. Where I come from, he has spoken “fightin’ words.” I strongly disagree with his views and would jack his ****ing jaw in a second should I have a chance encounter. On the other hand, I do not approve of any firing or punishment. His comments were of a political nature and those are clearly protected by the U. S. Constitution. The First Amendment is bigger than Ward Churchill.
 
Paco
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Just more of the radical right's attempt to quash any sort of dissent whatsoever. It's sad to see that the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.

The “radical” right is a small minority. They have as much right to voice their opinion as does Mr. Churchill.

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution? The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’” Eichmann organized the identification and transportation to concentration camps of millions of people. He was largely responsible for the extermination of millions. How does that compare to the people in the trade center?

Quote:

Why should Churchill apologize for anything? Is it a crime to say that chickens can come home to roost and that the way to protect American lives from terrorism is to respect international law? I don't think he should have resigned as department chair. Let them drag him out by main force.

Churchill has not apologized for anything. In fact he has been defiant in the face of this controversy. When confronted by a local reporter, Churchill restated his views without remorse and after tiring of the hound dog reporter (who was persistent and would have pissed me off were I in Churchill’s shoes) he flatly stated, “get out of my face.” Further, he called a press conference this same day, (one day last week, I forget when exactly) then failed to show.

Ward Churchill was not forced to resign his department chair even though Alexander Cockburn would try to make you believe it so. Churchill stated his dislike for being chair of the University’s Ethics Committee and this whole controversy is simply a convenient excuse allowing him to dispose of a position he did not want. He resigned his position immediately and expressed his pleasure and relief.

Quote:

fired up by the mad dogs on the Wall Street Journal editorial page and by Lord O'Reilly of the Loofah

More bull****. I watched O’Reilly both nights. He specifically pointed out Mr. Churchill’s First Amendment rights and expressed his opinion that Mr. Churchill should not be fired or punished.

Quote:

And, yes, this is the same University of Colorado whose officials decided last year to take no firm disciplinary action after Katie Hnida and two other women charged they had been raped or assaulted by members of the UC football team, also that Coach Gary Barnett's staff had staged porno movie showings for potential team recruits, also promising them easy sex if they signed on. Once again, two sets of books. For rapists and procurers a wink and a nod;for political commentary, a full press persecution and threats of termination.

What a hoot! Can a University take disciplinary action without evidence? Mr. Cockburn conveniently leaves out the information that each case was highly publicized and the District Attorney investigated (under extreme public scrutiny) and interviewed both accuser and accused. There was not sufficient evidence for any rape charges, nor were there sufficient evidence that Gary Barnett’s staff “staged porno movies.” Gary Barnett was suspended for “insensitive remarks” and was investigated by an independent panel. He was reinstated after 4 months.

If Mr. Cockburn would like to discuss double standards, let us compare. Mr. Barnett was suspended 4 months for insensitive remarks. His insensitivity? He stated Katie Hnida was not a good football player. Insensitive in light of her charges of rape maybe, but Barnett was clear his comments were not related to the rape charge. Now, on the other hand we have another University of Colorado employee who charges and continues to maintain that the dead from 9-11 where Nazis and murderers. However, there is no suspension while the university appoints another independent investigation committee. Double standard indeed.

One more comment. I am offended by Mr. Churchill’s comments. Where I come from, he has spoken “fightin’ words.” I strongly disagree with his views and would jack his ****ing jaw in a second should I have a chance encounter. On the other hand, I do not approve of any firing or punishment. His comments were of a political nature and those are clearly protected by the U. S. Constitution. The First Amendment is bigger than Ward Churchill.
 
Reverend Blair
#13
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state, the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

Quote:

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’”

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

You admittance that you watch, and presumably get your information from, Bill O'Reilly makes any reasonable discussion of this kind of silly.
 
Reverend Blair
#14
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state, the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

Quote:

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’”

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

You admittance that you watch, and presumably get your information from, Bill O'Reilly makes any reasonable discussion of this kind of silly.
 
Reverend Blair
#15
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state, the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

Quote:

Ward Churchill called the people who died in the world trade center, “little Eichmanns.’”

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

You admittance that you watch, and presumably get your information from, Bill O'Reilly makes any reasonable discussion of this kind of silly.
 
ElPolaco
#16
I, probably more than most, have the tendency to blame the entire "right" for most the world's woes. In doing so, I have neglected the fact that there are many diverse schools of thought among the "right", mainly between the libertarian right and the neocons or the cons and neocons. I found this article today by the editor of the "American Conservative":

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_02_14/article.html
 
ElPolaco
#17
I, probably more than most, have the tendency to blame the entire "right" for most the world's woes. In doing so, I have neglected the fact that there are many diverse schools of thought among the "right", mainly between the libertarian right and the neocons or the cons and neocons. I found this article today by the editor of the "American Conservative":

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_02_14/article.html
 
ElPolaco
#18
I, probably more than most, have the tendency to blame the entire "right" for most the world's woes. In doing so, I have neglected the fact that there are many diverse schools of thought among the "right", mainly between the libertarian right and the neocons or the cons and neocons. I found this article today by the editor of the "American Conservative":

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_02_14/article.html
 
Reverend Blair
#19
McConnell raises some decent points, as he usually does. I think he's wrong about there not being a fascist in the administration though. I think Cheney and Rove would slip easily into that role if they thought they could get away with it. I think Rumsfeld is already there. I'm sure that the boys back at PNAC would relish a development of open fascism as well.

I blame the right for many things, but I tend to refer them as radicals, not conservatives. There is nothing conservative about their policies or their rhetoric.
 
Reverend Blair
#20
McConnell raises some decent points, as he usually does. I think he's wrong about there not being a fascist in the administration though. I think Cheney and Rove would slip easily into that role if they thought they could get away with it. I think Rumsfeld is already there. I'm sure that the boys back at PNAC would relish a development of open fascism as well.

I blame the right for many things, but I tend to refer them as radicals, not conservatives. There is nothing conservative about their policies or their rhetoric.
 
Reverend Blair
#21
McConnell raises some decent points, as he usually does. I think he's wrong about there not being a fascist in the administration though. I think Cheney and Rove would slip easily into that role if they thought they could get away with it. I think Rumsfeld is already there. I'm sure that the boys back at PNAC would relish a development of open fascism as well.

I blame the right for many things, but I tend to refer them as radicals, not conservatives. There is nothing conservative about their policies or their rhetoric.
 
Paco
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state,...

The subject is Ward Churchill. My question was who in the radical right was attempting to quash Ward Churchill. You knew the issue and deliberately sidestepped it. An intellectually dishonest… no, I’m sorry. Nothing intelligent there at all.


Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

Dead wrong. Here is Mr. Churchill’s comments from his essay:

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.

No CIA there. He specifically referred to “a technocratic corps… of America’s global financial empire – “ He was talking about civilian stock brokers, not CIA. He was talking about men who invest money. Much of the money those people invest in are in foreign countries. Third world countries. I've no doubt some economic professor could logically reason that the investments of Americans in third world countries ultimately lead to some benefit of the poor.

Seems to me that Mr. Churchill’s reasoning is intellectually weak. If the investments of those people resulted “into the starved and rotting flesh of infants” around the world then where are the South American terrorists? The North Korean terrorists? The African terrorists? The world is full of third world countries who should be attacking America if Mr. Churchill is correct. The fact is only muslims have attacked us. Some history…

In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a muslim.

In 1972, Olympic athletes were massacred by muslims.

In 1979, the American embassy was taken over by muslims.

In 1983, the U. S. Marine barracks was attacked by muslims.

In 1985, TWA flight 847; In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103; In 1993 the World Trade Center; In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania… all muslims.

Mr. Churchill got it all wrong. He's an academic moron. Although, he does not lack company in that regard.
 
Paco
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state,...

The subject is Ward Churchill. My question was who in the radical right was attempting to quash Ward Churchill. You knew the issue and deliberately sidestepped it. An intellectually dishonest… no, I’m sorry. Nothing intelligent there at all.


Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

Dead wrong. Here is Mr. Churchill’s comments from his essay:

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.

No CIA there. He specifically referred to “a technocratic corps… of America’s global financial empire – “ He was talking about civilian stock brokers, not CIA. He was talking about men who invest money. Much of the money those people invest in are in foreign countries. Third world countries. I've no doubt some economic professor could logically reason that the investments of Americans in third world countries ultimately lead to some benefit of the poor.

Seems to me that Mr. Churchill’s reasoning is intellectually weak. If the investments of those people resulted “into the starved and rotting flesh of infants” around the world then where are the South American terrorists? The North Korean terrorists? The African terrorists? The world is full of third world countries who should be attacking America if Mr. Churchill is correct. The fact is only muslims have attacked us. Some history…

In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a muslim.

In 1972, Olympic athletes were massacred by muslims.

In 1979, the American embassy was taken over by muslims.

In 1983, the U. S. Marine barracks was attacked by muslims.

In 1985, TWA flight 847; In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103; In 1993 the World Trade Center; In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania… all muslims.

Mr. Churchill got it all wrong. He's an academic moron. Although, he does not lack company in that regard.
 
Paco
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people?

George Bush and his radically right puppeteers and the liars who have seized control of your media and act as mouthpieces for the White House.

Quote:

How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

The Patriot Act, the degradation of the separation between church and state,...

The subject is Ward Churchill. My question was who in the radical right was attempting to quash Ward Churchill. You knew the issue and deliberately sidestepped it. An intellectually dishonest… no, I’m sorry. Nothing intelligent there at all.


Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

the constant barrage of "Shut up!" spewing from the mouths of idiots like Bill O'Reilly.

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

No, he called the people working in the CIA offices that were in the WTC little Eichmanns.

Dead wrong. Here is Mr. Churchill’s comments from his essay:

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.

No CIA there. He specifically referred to “a technocratic corps… of America’s global financial empire – “ He was talking about civilian stock brokers, not CIA. He was talking about men who invest money. Much of the money those people invest in are in foreign countries. Third world countries. I've no doubt some economic professor could logically reason that the investments of Americans in third world countries ultimately lead to some benefit of the poor.

Seems to me that Mr. Churchill’s reasoning is intellectually weak. If the investments of those people resulted “into the starved and rotting flesh of infants” around the world then where are the South American terrorists? The North Korean terrorists? The African terrorists? The world is full of third world countries who should be attacking America if Mr. Churchill is correct. The fact is only muslims have attacked us. Some history…

In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a muslim.

In 1972, Olympic athletes were massacred by muslims.

In 1979, the American embassy was taken over by muslims.

In 1983, the U. S. Marine barracks was attacked by muslims.

In 1985, TWA flight 847; In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103; In 1993 the World Trade Center; In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania… all muslims.

Mr. Churchill got it all wrong. He's an academic moron. Although, he does not lack company in that regard.
 
Reverend Blair
#25
Here is a passage from the article that Moghrabi started the thread with:
Quote:

That piece was developed into a book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. On the matter of those killed in the 9/11 attacks, Churchill wrote recently, "It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center. Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad 1991 this placement of an element of the American 'command and control infrastructure' in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a 'legitimate' target."

Did you even read that Paco?

You asked,
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

I answered.

Quote:

The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Quote:

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

I've seen it enough times to know that is Bill's only defense when he gets caught in yet another one of lies. That was meant only as an example though, there's a whole radical right cottage industry of trying to silence dissent.

Nice little list of terrorist acts too. You want me to list all the illegal acts your government has been involved in? Not much point, most here are fairly aware of them. You brought up the US embassy in Iran though. That happened when the Shah, an American puppet, was being overthrown. The Shah got his strings when the US government backed a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran. The embassy? That was just chickens coming home to roost.

You are villifying a man for being brave enough to tell the truth, Paco. Churchill is correct. That's why your country is the most despised on the planet. The Muslim extremists are just the first to get organised enough to strike back. I doubt they'll be the last though. I'd guess that within ten years you'll be suffering terrorist attacks from South America. Ten years after that you'll be attacked by Africans.
 
Reverend Blair
#26
Here is a passage from the article that Moghrabi started the thread with:
Quote:

That piece was developed into a book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. On the matter of those killed in the 9/11 attacks, Churchill wrote recently, "It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center. Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad 1991 this placement of an element of the American 'command and control infrastructure' in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a 'legitimate' target."

Did you even read that Paco?

You asked,
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

I answered.

Quote:

The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Quote:

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

I've seen it enough times to know that is Bill's only defense when he gets caught in yet another one of lies. That was meant only as an example though, there's a whole radical right cottage industry of trying to silence dissent.

Nice little list of terrorist acts too. You want me to list all the illegal acts your government has been involved in? Not much point, most here are fairly aware of them. You brought up the US embassy in Iran though. That happened when the Shah, an American puppet, was being overthrown. The Shah got his strings when the US government backed a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran. The embassy? That was just chickens coming home to roost.

You are villifying a man for being brave enough to tell the truth, Paco. Churchill is correct. That's why your country is the most despised on the planet. The Muslim extremists are just the first to get organised enough to strike back. I doubt they'll be the last though. I'd guess that within ten years you'll be suffering terrorist attacks from South America. Ten years after that you'll be attacked by Africans.
 
Reverend Blair
#27
Here is a passage from the article that Moghrabi started the thread with:
Quote:

That piece was developed into a book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens. On the matter of those killed in the 9/11 attacks, Churchill wrote recently, "It is not disputed that the Pentagon was a military target, or that a CIA office was situated in the World Trade Center. Following the logic by which U.S. Defense Department spokespersons have consistently sought to justify target selection in places like Baghdad 1991 this placement of an element of the American 'command and control infrastructure' in an ostensibly civilian facility converted the Trade Center itself into a 'legitimate' target."

Did you even read that Paco?

You asked,
Quote:

I think you have stretched the bounds of logic when you say “the people who are in charge of the US have no regard for their constitution whatsoever.” Who are these people? How have they shown disregard for the U.S. Constitution?

I answered.

Quote:

The author of the article claims “politicians” are howling for his job, but doesn’t point out who the “politicians” are. As far as I can tell, only Governor Bill Owens of Colorado has spoke out for Ward Churchill’s job.

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Quote:

How do you know Bill O'Reilly puts out a constant barrage of "Shut up!" You must watch his show all the time. Or would I be presuming too much.

I've seen it enough times to know that is Bill's only defense when he gets caught in yet another one of lies. That was meant only as an example though, there's a whole radical right cottage industry of trying to silence dissent.

Nice little list of terrorist acts too. You want me to list all the illegal acts your government has been involved in? Not much point, most here are fairly aware of them. You brought up the US embassy in Iran though. That happened when the Shah, an American puppet, was being overthrown. The Shah got his strings when the US government backed a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran. The embassy? That was just chickens coming home to roost.

You are villifying a man for being brave enough to tell the truth, Paco. Churchill is correct. That's why your country is the most despised on the planet. The Muslim extremists are just the first to get organised enough to strike back. I doubt they'll be the last though. I'd guess that within ten years you'll be suffering terrorist attacks from South America. Ten years after that you'll be attacked by Africans.
 
Paco
#28
Yeah, I read it. And dismissed it as chicken**** backpedaling. Ward Churchill said, “Self! That’s going to get me in deep ****. I must come up with an explanation.” Then Ward Churchill discovered later that *gasp* the CIA had an office there. He says, “Eureka! That’s it. I have found my lie, err explanation!”

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Surely you aren’t paranoid enough to believe George is secretly pulling strings behind the scenes over some big mouth radical out in Podunk, Colorado? Oh, wait… The guys down the street… in the car… watching…
 
Paco
#29
Yeah, I read it. And dismissed it as chicken**** backpedaling. Ward Churchill said, “Self! That’s going to get me in deep ****. I must come up with an explanation.” Then Ward Churchill discovered later that *gasp* the CIA had an office there. He says, “Eureka! That’s it. I have found my lie, err explanation!”

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Surely you aren’t paranoid enough to believe George is secretly pulling strings behind the scenes over some big mouth radical out in Podunk, Colorado? Oh, wait… The guys down the street… in the car… watching…
 
Paco
#30
Yeah, I read it. And dismissed it as chicken**** backpedaling. Ward Churchill said, “Self! That’s going to get me in deep ****. I must come up with an explanation.” Then Ward Churchill discovered later that *gasp* the CIA had an office there. He says, “Eureka! That’s it. I have found my lie, err explanation!”

Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

Surely you aren't naive to think that politics always plays out in front of the cameras, are you Paco? We're talking about an administration that is infamous for seeking to control the press,

Surely you aren’t paranoid enough to believe George is secretly pulling strings behind the scenes over some big mouth radical out in Podunk, Colorado? Oh, wait… The guys down the street… in the car… watching…
 

Similar Threads

32
Six Years of 9/11 as a License to Kill
by JBeee | Sep 14th, 2007
17
National Driver's License
by tawker | Feb 6th, 2006
16
Brit License Plates Get Chipped
by jjw1965 | Aug 9th, 2005
no new posts