http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/08/national/main672507.shtml This is the professor who compared some of the 9/11 victims to a Nazi.
We must keep the word Nazi...if we forget it and remove it from our lexicon then we will in time forget the evil that happened....we should educate people on the proper use of it
Ward Churchill is a world class royal asshat. What he essentially said is that "they deserved to die for getting up in the morning and going to work in an office building". How anybody defend that line of thinking is beyond me.
yeah, better they live on unemployment and barely able to feed their children... Some people are just plain old morons. Or worse.
What the guy said is being completely misinterpreted. He did not say that the people DESERVED TO DIE for working in an office building - he said that they were basically "collateral damage" - something the US government says about the innocent human beings it slaughters daily. And americans are perfectly comfortable with that notion - that innocent human beings killed in an attack are simply "collateral damage," and that such deaths are "unfortunate" but "this is war!" and other such bullshit. Similarly, the 9/11 victims were INDEED "collateral damage" - but people don't want to hear that, because the truth is that americans feel like AMERICAN lives are worth far more to the universe than Iraqi or Nicaraguan or North Korean lives. And when this professor says that we need more 9/11's to radicalize the public, he's probably right. The only way things will get better in this country (and probably the world) is if they become unbearably horrific. Maybe THEN people will start to give a shit. And by the way, remembering the word "Nazi" hasn't prevented the endless stream of genocides that have occurred since WWII - generally ignored, or worse, supported by, the United States. What the huge focus on the Jewish holocaust has managed to do, though, is allow Israel to wage illegal, inhumane war against the Palestinian people and to terrorize the rest of the Middle East with nuclear weaponry. Nice. I'm so glad to see we all learned such a lesson from the systematic murder of innocent women and children.
One thing I hope doesn't happen is the news media portraying this as conservatives vs a liberal. So far I've only seen conservatives criticizing this professor. I want to see more Democrats and Liberals having a say on what Churchill said,especially if they're critical of his views.
Here is what I think... Personally, I think what the man said is deplorable and quite frankly sickening. I know what he meant because I read his exact quote. He called them "little Eichmanns," basically referring to them all as Nazis. I am sure the majority of the people who died in those towers were decent, well-meaning people, as were the men and women who died and risked their lives to save them. I do not think Churchill should be fired. When I say I am for free speech, I mean it. I am not like the majority of the left who are only in favor of free speech when it's about what they want to hear. I also think the reaction by the so-called "conservative" media is absolutely ridiculous. I don't have any more of a favorable opinion of neocon blowhards like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity than I do arrogant socialist scum like Ward Churchill. But belligerent left-wing CRAP is what Churchill's words amount to, only further fueling this divide between the perceived right and left over what amounts to nothing more than utter garbage coming from this false, two-sided paradigm. I know that al-Qaeda (I mean, al-CIAda) is a CIA front and asset, so I am not going to be a gullible fool and pretend that bin Laden orchestrated the 9/11 attacks from his cave and killed all those people, when almost all evidence shows that there is a good possibility that al-Qaeda wasn't even involved at all in the September 11th attacks.
It's already happening! This is what the idiots do not understand. They do not understand that shit like this is being used by the media to fuel this tension between the false left and the false right. Then you have people focusing all their attention on BULLSHIT like this, instead of focuing their attention on what's really going on around them. It's just garbage... all of it. Then people wonder why their country is so fucked up. Maybe it's because you're all being spoonfed a bunch of shit.
'What he essentially said is that "they deserved to die for getting up in the morning and going to work in an office building".' Um, no...that's not even close to what he essentially said. Yeah, what Laughin said. And Laughin, the terrifying and sad thing is that yeah, many (if not most) Americans really don't care much about the innocent civilians of other countries. It's sickening. The photo in your signature speaks volumns, yet makes the ignorant roll their eyes. During Churchill's speech, he made a statement, perhaps the highlight of the entire speech, reminding us of the "golden rule". One of the very few anti-Churchill audience members literally rolled his eyes in front of the camera. That, as well, speaks volumns.
[Here in the Arab world, we are still lagging behind in this global revolution. We are still living under military dictatorships, totalitarian regimes and unconstitutional monarchies. While China is enjoying the development of a society built upon the rule of law, our societies are stagnating under the strangling grip of security regimes.] http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&article_id=12607&categ_id=17 Aren't Arab governments the middle east's biggest problem and not the U.S? Does Churchill take this into consideration?
those military dictatorships, to a large degree, are supported financially and militarily by the U.S. government...
Correct me if I'am wrong,but aren't the non-U.S supported middle eastern countries just as un-democratic and repressive as the U.S supported ones? So it seems that even if you take the U.S gov't out of the middle east there would still be repressive regimes in that region contributing to the poverty and hard lives of Arabs. Does the U.S gov't require that an middle eastern country be an dictatorship in order to get aid? http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-9-2003_pg3_3
Correct me if I'am wrong,but aren't the non-U.S supported middle eastern countries just as un-democratic and repressive as the U.S supported ones? towards their own people, yeah, I would say so. So it seems that even if you take the U.S gov't out of the middle east there would still be repressive regimes in that region contributing to the poverty and hard lives of Arabs. yes. Does the U.S gov't require that a middle eastern country be a dictatorship in order to get aid? considering all the democraticly elected leaders all over the world that the CIA and others have helped destroy, I would say, yes, absolutely.
I'am not familiar with all the leaders that the CIA actually brought down,or are believed to have brought down,but some of the ones I'am familiar with were,and are known to have had oppressive governments themselves. Some believe that the CIA was behind the coup that brought down Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana,but Nkrumah was known for being undemocrtatic in Ghana. Some say the CIA has been involved in plots against Castro,well we all should know that Cuba has never been a Democracey under Fidel.
there are plenty of true DEMOCRATICALLY elected leaders who have been brought down. Hugo Chavez is a prime example. This is a guy who I'D LOVE to have as our president IN THIS COUNTRY!! yet the U.S. regime doens't like his populist stances and the equitable way he treats his people. The U.S. empire is ANTI-democratic...and behind close doors, they will admit it with jovial smiles on their faces.
