Ward Churchill goes ballistic.
I wish the reporter had hit him back.
When Aging Hippies Attack
7 Responses to “When Aging Hippies Attack”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Ward Churchill goes ballistic.
I wish the reporter had hit him back.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Cam Edwards is a talk show host heard nationally on NRAnews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. » Read More
Fox was all over this yesterday. I wish we had the alternative media back in the 60’s.
Man, what a scumbag. No wonder this guy feels no compulshion to teach the truth. He’s a freekin’ crook!
Looks like he’ll get booted out for sure, now.
Woody
I wonder if he thinks plagiarism is also “free speech” for him.
The guy is an idiot. God Bless Fox News. The MSM would have never touched this story.
I just happened to remember something. Didn’t this dweeb (sp) also claim to have Indian (Native American type) ancestry but later information informed that he wasn’t?
So, he lies about being an Indian and he lies about being an artist (at least for the one picture).
Could he also be lying about being a college professor?
This has already gone down the page quite a bit, but I’ve got a ridiculously long post about Mr. Churchill and his “little Eichmanns” speech…
First, let’s start with a little history lesson. Eichmann was a Nazi bureaucrat who moderated a lot of the red tape to arrange the death camp railroad schedules and logistics that made the Holocaust possible. As an SS corporal at the Dachau concentration camp, he knew exactly what he was doing when he became the head of the Department for Jewish Affairs in the Gestapo from 1941-1945. He never killed anyone directly himself, and if it wasn’t him doing the bureaucratic work, someone else would have been. Regardless, he was mostly responsible for the 3 million deaths in the largely-Jewish concentration camps. He would have been more aware of the number of people being killed as a result of Hitler’s Final Solution than anyone else in the Nazi party, and according to a recent History Channel special, even more than Hitler himself.
The Jews were seen as inferior beings. Not only that, but many of them were in positions of influence and wealth. The Reich started running out of money and wanted what they had…artwork, money, and other valuables. The Nazis needed a way to finance a war on two fronts (apparently Hitler didn’t read his history book, either…*cough NAPOLEON cough*) and vilifying the Jews was an easy way to “reallocate” their wealth to the treasury of the Reich. Eichmann was in charge of getting rid of the evidence of their hatred and greed.
But what about his underlings, the “little Eichmanns”? The bureaucrats below him who weren’t aware of the ghastly purpose of the “cargo” they were crunching numbers and pushing paper to transport? They did their job as cogs in the wheel of the Nazi war machine, unaware of the grisly reality of the concentration camps and blissfully far removed from front-line combat. Maybe they didn’t know, or maybe they knew something was wrong but didn’t WANT to know. With the Nazis running out of people to draft into the army, they saw 15 and 60 year olds being sent to the front. Would you want to risk being “reassigned” to satisfy your curiosity? Bottom line: Who’s to say how much they knew? In all likelihood, it was little or nothing.
Some will mistakenly assume from the above statements I’m defending the Nazis. Nothing could be farther from the truth. “Just following orders” isn’t an acceptable excuse. However, at Nuremberg trials that forced the Nazis answer to war crimes during WWII, you’ll notice that few individual soldiers were prosecuted. Sure, there were some combat death squad units that were found to be particularly cruel to POWs and the populace they were trying to conquer. However, less than 150 total were found guilty of their respective war crimes, from top to bottom of the Reich. Why didn’t we prosecute the entire population of Nazi Germany; every soldier, bureaucrat, banker, assembly line worker, or chaplain? They were all cogs in the wheel of the Nazi war machine. They were all responsible to a certain extent for the Holocaust. However, the majority of the populations’ actions didn’t rise to the level of “war crimes”.
Let’s change venues for a second and talk about the concept of Manifest Destiny that prevailed throughout the first century after the US was founded. The Powers That Be during the first century of American evolution believed us to be culturally and racially superior to the brown men who contituted the native population of the North American continent. Continuing the imperialist ideology of the Age of Discovery that grew out of Europe in the 1400s-1500s, the reason to conquer new lands was simple: God, Glory, and Gold. Missionaries went first to pave the way for businessmen and merchants, usually with military might following closely at their heels. It was “the thing to do” for any superpower at the time–expand your holdings, promote trade for things that could not be obtained at home, get rich in the process, and do it all for the King, the Crown, and God…and by any means necessary.
The US or individual state governments were responsible for making treaties with the Native Americans, claiming land for its citizens to settle, etc. Many of these treaties were not honored by the US, and substantial battles and guerilla raids ensued.
It was easy–they had no concept of land “ownership”. So how can you steal land that isn’t “owned” by anyone in the first place? The Brits, Dutch, and Germans were doing it in China; forcing opium on the native population to make them easier to contol and to keep up the balance of trade in that counry. They started a war with China when they refused to accept shipments of opium and destroyed stores already in-country. Then, when the war was over, the Brits made them PAY AN INDEMNITY for starting the war in the first place, and claimed numerous ports and made their own rules to facilitate trade. Imperialism was alive and well.
Eventually, post-Civil War America decided the remaining tribes were a problem to be dealt with, and we turned our existing military might towards that end. “Indian fighters” were usually soldiers leftover from the North who were sent to remote outposts out West to deal with the remaining Native American guerilla bands. We slaughtered them by the thousands. Little Bighorn and Wounded Knee were insignificant next to the total number of people we slaughtered to wrest this country’s land from its native population.
And nobody wants to talk about it.
Thousands of soldiers, administrators, bureaucrats, congressmen, and paper pushers made it all happen. Should we only blame those at the top who championed the causes of Indian Reservation relocation and/or extermination? Or were they all responsible, even if only in part, for the grotesque solution few knew the full extent of? Weren’t they all cogs in the wheel of the US war machine?
This is decidedly a “liberal” standpoint, mainly due to the fact that conservatives think this sort of realistic view is “revisionist history” and that America has not made mistakes. We were destined by God to claim this country from sea to shining sea for Democracy…by force if necessary.
That doesn’t refute the fact that it is TRUE. Hitler himself studied and ADMIRED the way the US dealt with its undesirables. The Final Solution HAD to have been based, at least in part, on the US extermination of Native Americans. The US was quick, efficient, and cruel. It’s a skeleton in our collective closet we don’t like to discuss, and for good reason.
So back to Mr. Churchill. The victims of the 9/11 attacks deserve better than to be called Nazis (regardless of the capacity of ideological adherance Mr. Churchill may or may not have been implying). He’s a controversial professor who made an insensitive comment at a time the country needed cohesion and fellowship, not dissention and cruelty. Fortunately, he will probably not be remembered 5 years from now, but he did make an important point we would do well to own up to.
In his attempt to draw parallels between the extermination of the Native Americans in the US and the Jews in Nazi Germany, he made a flawed analogy. Perhaps we could brand the bureaucrats in place in the US during the 1700s-1880s as “little Eichmanns” (nevermind the obvious historical anachronism), but to brand the 9/11 victims as such is just plain wrong. The WTC victims had nothing to do with the slaughter of Native Americans. His premise, in my opinion, is correct; however, his analogy is severely and cruelly flawed. His condemnation came about 150 years too late.
MobileSuitPilotX
I am a conservative and I would never say that America had never made mistakes.
Also, let us not forget that the Indians did something that I don’t remember history talking about the European Jews having engaged in. The Indians instituted attacks against the American population that infringed upon their “own” land. Or at least their hunting grounds. While the Indians were to some degree civilized, at least to their own tribes, they attacked other Indians as well as the white man. It is not unlike a wild animal encountering another animal of its own species, and because that animal is different from itself in some way, it then attacks that encroaching animal.
Perhaps I have missed something in history regarding attacks by the Jews. Please inform me if I am incorrect.