🚀 go-pugleaf

On 20 Feb 2005 16:53:22 -0800, "Barney Lyon"
<fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"When They Came for Ward Churchill"
>
>Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over his
>essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
>firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long program,
>Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
>story told nowhere else on American television: his side.
>
>Schedule(ET): Feb 18th(Fri-8pm), 19th(Sat-3am, 7am & 7pm), 20th(Sun-8am
>& 3pm), 21st(Mon-4am & 3pm), 22nd(Tues- 8pm & 11pm), and
>23rd(Wed-3:30pm).
>
>http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/html/specialprograms.shtml
>
>
>
>
>Churchill's essay, "Some People Push Back":
>http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html

On 20 Feb 2005 16:53:22 -0800, "Barney Lyon"
<fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote:

DC Politics, yes........but for the rest of the newsgroups???????



>"When They Came for Ward Churchill"
>
>Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over his
>essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
>firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long program,
>Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
>story told nowhere else on American television: his side.
>
>Schedule(ET): Feb 18th(Fri-8pm), 19th(Sat-3am, 7am & 7pm), 20th(Sun-8am
>& 3pm), 21st(Mon-4am & 3pm), 22nd(Tues- 8pm & 11pm), and
>23rd(Wed-3:30pm).
>
>http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/html/specialprograms.shtml
>
>
>
>
>Churchill's essay, "Some People Push Back":
>http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html

On 20 Feb 2005, Barney Lyon wrote:

> "When They Came for Ward Churchill"
> 
> Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over his
> essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
> firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long program,
> Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
> story told nowhere else on American television: his side.

What/where is FSTV?  Free Speech TV?  Is this web cast?

World NUT weighs in:

"University committee reviewing Ward Churchill includes supporters

"Two administrators on the committee that will determine whether
controversial professor Ward Churchill gets fired have a long history of
praising him and signing off on hefty salary increases. Newly released
documents shed light on how Churchill, who has never earned a doctorate,
received tenure in one, rather than the customary seven, years. Read it
now on WND.com.

"  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/  "  

> Schedule(ET): Feb 18th(Fri-8pm), 19th(Sat-3am, 7am & 7pm), 20th(Sun-8am
> & 3pm), 21st(Mon-4am & 3pm), 22nd(Tues- 8pm & 11pm), and
> 23rd(Wed-3:30pm).

> http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/html/specialprograms.shtml

> Churchill's essay, "Some People Push Back":
> http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html


Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308 

As punishment for being unAmerican, Churchill should be sent back to where 
he came from.
"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050220233452.954A-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On 20 Feb 2005, Barney Lyon wrote:
>
>> "When They Came for Ward Churchill"
>>
>> Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over his
>> essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
>> firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long program,
>> Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
>> story told nowhere else on American television: his side.
>
> What/where is FSTV?  Free Speech TV?  Is this web cast?
>
> World NUT weighs in:
>
> "University committee reviewing Ward Churchill includes supporters
>
> "Two administrators on the committee that will determine whether
> controversial professor Ward Churchill gets fired have a long history of
> praising him and signing off on hefty salary increases. Newly released
> documents shed light on how Churchill, who has never earned a doctorate,
> received tenure in one, rather than the customary seven, years. Read it
> now on WND.com.
>
> 

"Imno1" <whoha@erewon.com> wrote in message 
news:CgfSd.2307$OU1.2043@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> As punishment for being unAmerican, Churchill should be sent back to where 
> he came from.

Where is that? Do you know where the rock is?  All of the Indian tribes have 
disowned him...

If you are going to raise the question of discussion about Churchill not
being relevant to milw.general or its charter of usage I am compelled to ask
why you have not had anything to say about the anonymous spammer from
Michigan who commercially spams milw.general running their commercialized
snitch reward program when that behavior is clearly not allowed by the
milw.general charter or the acceptable usage guidelines from the ISP the
spammer is using to spam milw.general.

-- 
<%= Clinton Gallagher
         METROmilwaukee "Regional Information Services"
         NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
         URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/



"Who Cares?" <nospam@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:ecii11hva6v1ng6bk88u1trktug8g7b3r2@4ax.com...
> On 20 Feb 2005 16:53:22 -0800, "Barney Lyon"
> <fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> DC Politics, yes........but for the rest of the newsgroups???????
>
>
>
> >"When They Came for Ward Churchill"
> >
> >Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over his
> >essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
> >firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long program,
> >Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
> >story told nowhere else on American television: his side.
> >
> >Schedule(ET): Feb 18th(Fri-8pm), 19th(Sat-3am, 7am & 7pm), 20th(Sun-8am
> >& 3pm), 21st(Mon-4am & 3pm), 22nd(Tues- 8pm & 11pm), and
> >23rd(Wed-3:30pm).
> >
> >http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/html/specialprograms.shtml
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Churchill's essay, "Some People Push Back":
> >http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html
>

krp wrote:
> "Imno1" <whoha@erewon.com> wrote in message 
> news:CgfSd.2307$OU1.2043@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> 
>>As punishment for being unAmerican, Churchill should be sent back to where 
>>he came from.
> 
> 
> Where is that? Do you know where the rock is?  All of the Indian tribes have 
> disowned him...
> 
> 
Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado State 
meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.

Have you actually read the essay?

It seems that the "super patriots" like to fling their feces at him as 
the other apes do, but they sure don't get very far refuting his basic 
premise that the USA has done a lot of things around the world that 
could and did      goad groups to attack us in any way in their means to do.

He states that we have caused the deaths of many thousands of children 
from our sanctions and bombings and rationalized the deaths as "Necessary"

Cheers!  W.N.(Bill) McCaw
"The smallest dog can lift his leg on the tallest building" (Hightower)

"krp" <web2457k@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:g1kSd.14278$uc.4826@trnddc09...
>
> "Imno1" <whoha@erewon.com> wrote in message 
> news:CgfSd.2307$OU1.2043@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>> As punishment for being unAmerican, Churchill should be sent back to 
>> where he came from.
>
> Where is that? Do you know where the rock is?  All of the Indian tribes 
> have disowned him...

I'm sure Churchill considers himself to be a " wild Indian"( as compared to 
the 'tame' Indians on reservations.
The last of the " wild" Indians was discovered living in the mountains of CA 
just about 100 years. Churchill could take to the CO mountains to replace 
him. Yeah! 

You've never actually heard him then.

Stop allowing rightwing hate media tell you how to think.  Listen to
what he has to say himself.  Read his books and essays.  THINK FOR
YOURSELF!

"w.N.(Bill) McCaw" <wnmccaw@bmi.net> wrote in message 
news:421a0f49$1@news.bmi.net...

>>>As punishment for being unAmerican, Churchill should be sent back to 
>>>where he came from.
>>
>>
>> Where is that? Do you know where the rock is?  All of the Indian tribes 
>> have disowned him...
>>
>>
> Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado State 
> meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.

In force huh? How many? Name ONE tribe that accepts him as a member?  Name 
ONE Indian nation that has him  on their tribal census. Shall we go down a 
list of his falsehoods?

> Have you actually read the essay?

Only parts of it, but I have heard him speak.

> It seems that the "super patriots" like to fling their feces at him as the 
> other apes do, but they sure don't get very far refuting his basic premise 
> that the USA has done a lot of things around the world that could and did 
> goad groups to attack us in any way in their means to do.

Oooo gee you can't point out that he LIED about his claim of Native American 
heritage and his other lies?

> He states that we have caused the deaths of many thousands of children 
> from our sanctions and bombings and rationalized the deaths as "Necessary"

    But offers no proof of the same.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

> > Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado State 
> > meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.

> In force huh? How many? Name ONE tribe that accepts him as a member?  Name 
> ONE Indian nation that has him  on their tribal census. Shall we go down a 
> list of his falsehoods?

Oh yes.  Let's.

Carol Lee Smith wrote:
> On 20 Feb 2005, Barney Lyon wrote:
>
> > "When They Came for Ward Churchill"
> >
> > Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over
his
> > essay, his treatment by the media and the people calling for his
> > firing, and even execution, for 'treason'. In this hour-long
program,
> > Prof. Churchill invites FSTV into his home to tell the side of the
> > story told nowhere else on American television: his side.
>
> What/where is FSTV?  Free Speech TV?  Is this web cast?
>

FSTV is a cable television station like CSPAN II, MSNBC, the History
Channel, the Food  Channel, A&E, UCTV, UWTV, PentagonTV, etc.  It is
available through satellite television.  I get it through DishNet.

> World NUT weighs in:
>
> "University committee reviewing Ward Churchill includes supporters
>
> "Two administrators on the committee that will determine whether
> controversial professor Ward Churchill gets fired have a long history
of
> praising him and signing off on hefty salary increases. Newly
released
> documents shed light on how Churchill, who has never earned a
doctorate,
> received tenure in one, rather than the customary seven, years. Read
it
> now on WND.com.
>
> "  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/  "
>

It's funny how conservatives balk at institutions that they think are
liberal monoliths such as tenure and civil service.  They criticize
what they believe isn't a meritocracy.  How unAmerican it is.  How "no
place else in America do you have a protected job for as long as you
live," but they obviously forget the federal judiciary, where
independence of thought is protected with a lifetime job as well.

Conservatives also, ignorantly, think that the tenure system is carved
in stone - if you have a Ph.D. and if you have taught for 7 years you
automatically get it.  Or that a Ph.D. and 7 years of teaching in one
institution of higher learning is a minimum requirement for tenure.  It
isn't.

Universities generally offer tenure to those without a Ph.D. or a
minimum of 7 years teaching as an enticement to talented, accomplished
and valuable people who have much to contribute to a student body.
Most often these people come from outside of the academic community,
having achieved success in a corporate career, in the field that they
are being asked to teach (and offered tenure).  They may work at the
University on a year to year contract, and negotiate tenure as a term
of their continued employment.

It's as free a market system as it gets.  You would think that
conservatives would laud it.  But they don't.


> > Schedule(ET): Feb 18th(Fri-8pm), 19th(Sat-3am, 7am & 7pm),
20th(Sun-8am
> > & 3pm), 21st(Mon-4am & 3pm), 22nd(Tues- 8pm & 11pm), and
> > 23rd(Wed-3:30pm).
>
> > http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/html/specialprograms.shtml
>
> > Churchill's essay, "Some People Push Back":
> > http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html
>
>
> Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable
> http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308

Obviously Ward Churchill is a remarkable teacher and extremely valuable
to the University of Boulder.  You would know that by having heard him
speak, or reading his essays.

I don't care about the man's ethnicity, or what conservatives think
about his heritage, or some backstory daytime drama they have concocted
about "he's not a 'real' native American - another native American says
he isn't!"  Who gives a shit?  You sound like old women gossips.

Even if any of the conservatives' complaints about Churchill were true,
it wouldn't change the truth of his speech or his essays.  But they
don't want to hear that.  Before they will listen to him speak, or let
anybody else hear him speak, the high priests of rightwing conservatism
must vet.

"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050221232630.32042B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:
>
>> > Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado State
>> > meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.
>
>> In force huh? How many? Name ONE tribe that accepts him as a member? 
>> Name
>> ONE Indian nation that has him  on their tribal census. Shall we go down 
>> a
>> list of his falsehoods?
>
> Oh yes.  Let's.

How much do we have to go past the FACT that he has NO Native American blood 
yet he claims to have? He claims to be one eighth Cherokee ancestry yet the 
Cherokee nation says  "NOPE!"  Shall we start there, or do you need more?

Shall we go to his totally false claims of the small pox epidemic in 1837? 
I mean A WHOPPER there..  That the U.S. Army on orders used biological 
warfare against the Indians by deliberately infecting them with smallpox.

Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits on 
9-11.

http://www.observer.com/pages/observer.asp

"Mr. Churchill's job hangs on other factors besides his prose. The ethnic 
group he studies is the Native American, for whom he claims special affinity 
as a part-Cherokee, but it turns out he is no more Cherokee than Andrew 
Jackson. He has been accused of doctoring footnotes, claiming to prove that 
a smallpox epidemic among the Mandan Indians of the Midwest in 1837 was 
deliberately introduced by U.S. Army, when in fact the sources he cited said 
the disease was accidentally spread by traders."

"He has also been accused of three instances of plagiarism, one of them from 
his former wife."


So Carol ........ Your move.

As an ex-academic I agree with and appreciate much of what you say about 
academic freedom and the way in which the great universities go about 
recruiting and retaining people who will make a contribution to the 
university. But with academic freedom come the responsibility to speak with 
fact and .reason.. Demagogues or politicians, or talk radio hosts can play 
fast and loose  but the mark of the scholar is sticking to facts, even 
though they may be uncomfortable to many, and to reason with those facts in 
a new or different kind of way-this is what academic freedom is meant for.
   Does Ward Churchill meet that test?
  Do you, or anybody believe that . 500,000 Iraqui children were killed by 
the embargo on Iraq and or that the deaths that did result  were solely due 
to the US -this in the face of mounting evidence of fraud and corruption 
reaching into the UN and European corporations and  countries that  were 
working  with Saddam to make money off the embargo for him and his henchman. 
Churchill charges that Al-Queda exploded the twin towers to take revenge for 
these deaths-which fits into Bush's contention that there is a link between 
Al0-Quaeda terrorism and Iraq..-except that no link has ever been shown. 
Finally there is  Churchill's backward leap into history where he charges 
that the US was responsible for 500,000-600,000 deaths in their takeover of 
the Philippines better than a hundred years ago. As someone who knows 
something about the Philippines  I can tell you that the number of deaths 
was not even 10% of the figure cited. Churchill clearly plays fast and loose 
with facts in order to make his point that the US throughout its history has 
killed people all over the world.  The way he creates evidence to make his 
points makes me think his " scholarly " articles( assuming he has some)-will 
turn  out to be riddled with similar dubious evidence.

    Churchill portrays himself as a defender of the American Indian and is 
outraged at the treatment of native Americans historically and in Central 
America.  Nowhere in his diatribes I have  seen is there a mention of the 
hundreds of thousands of native Americans being killer  or robbed of their 
land recently and even now by corrupt military regimes, large land owners, 
drug runners in Mexico, Guatemala, Columbia, Bolivia., Brazil. The only 
villain in the world now or in the past, according to him, is the US.
  Chuchill clearly thinks of himself as  an outrageous character-maybe even 
drawing inspiration from his neighbor Hunter Thompson who just died by his 
own hand. If so, he ought to get out there and free lance the way Thompson 
did instead of hiding behind the safety of a college lectern and a tenured 
position.

"Barney Lyon" <fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1109053339.063659.214940@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Carol Lee Smith wrote:
>> On 20 Feb 2005, Barney Lyon wrote:
>>
>> > "When They Came for Ward Churchill"
>> >
>> > Embattled Professor Ward Churchill speaks on the controversy over
> > Universities generally offer tenure to those without a Ph.D. or a
> minimum of 7 years teaching as an enticement to talented, accomplished
> and valuable people who have much to contribute to a student body.
> Most often these people come from outside of the academic community,
> having achieved success in a corporate career, in the field that they
> are being asked to teach (and offered tenure).  They may work at the
> University on a year to year contract, and negotiate tenure as a term
> of their continued employment.
>
> It's as free a market system as it gets.  You would think that
> conservatives would laud it.  But they don't.
>
>
>
> Obviously Ward Churchill is a remarkable teacher and extremely valuable
> to the University of Boulder.  You would know that by having heard him
> speak, or reading his essays.
>
> I don't care about the man's ethnicity, or what conservatives think
> about his heritage, or some backstory daytime drama they have concocted
> about "he's not a 'real' native American - another native American says
> he isn't!"  Who gives a shit?  You sound like old women gossips.
>
> Even if any of the conservatives' complaints about Churchill were true,
> it wouldn't change the truth of his speech or his essays.  But they
> don't want to hear that.  Before they will listen to him speak, or let
> anybody else hear him speak, the high priests of rightwing conservatism
> must vet.
> 

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050221232630.32042B-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...

> > On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

> >> > Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado State
> >> > meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.

> >> In force huh? How many? Name ONE tribe that accepts him as a member? 
 Name ONE Indian nation that has him  on their tribal census. Shall we
go down  a list of his falsehoods?<< <


> > Oh yes.  Let's.
 
> How much do we have to go past the FACT that he has NO Native American blood 
> yet he claims to have? He claims to be one eighth Cherokee ancestry yet the 
> Cherokee nation says  "NOPE!"  Shall we start there, or do you need more?

How about a citation?
 
> Shall we go to his totally false claims of the small pox epidemic in 1837? 
> I mean A WHOPPER there..  That the U.S. Army on orders used biological 
> warfare against the Indians by deliberately infecting them with smallpox.

How about a citation?

> Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits on 
> 9-11.

How about a citation?
 
> http://www.observer.com/pages/observer.asp

> "Mr. Churchill's job hangs on other factors besides his prose. The ethnic 
> group he studies is the Native American, for whom he claims special affinity 
> as a part-Cherokee, but it turns out he is no more Cherokee than Andrew 
> Jackson.

Is there a citation for that?

> He has been accused

Accused?  On what evidence?

> of doctoring footnotes, claiming to prove that 
> a smallpox epidemic among the Mandan Indians of the Midwest in 1837 was 
> deliberately introduced by U.S. Army, when in fact the sources he cited
> said the disease was accidentally spread by traders."

Interesting.  I would like to read original source documents on this
before I venture an opinion.

> "He has also been accused of three instances of plagiarism, one of them from 
> his former wife."

Oh.  Ex-wives never hold a grudge, right?

> So Carol ........ Your move.

I am searching for original source documents.  Got any links?



Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308 

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

> Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits on 
> 9-11.

Where did Ward Churchill say "'Jews' were the real culprits on 9-11"?

His piece "Ghosts of 9.1.1." doesn't contain the word "Jew(s)."

The piece by Brookhiser doesn't contain the word "Jew(s)."

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

> How much do we have to go past the FACT that he has NO Native American blood 
> yet he claims to have? He claims to be one eighth Cherokee ancestry yet the 
> Cherokee nation says  "NOPE!"  Shall we start there, or do you need more?


http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3525487,00.html

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Imno1 wrote:

>   Do you, or anybody believe that . 500,000 Iraqui children were killed by 
> the embargo on Iraq and or that the deaths that did result  were solely due 
> to the US -this in the face of mounting evidence of fraud and corruption 
> reaching into the UN and European corporations and  countries that  were 
> working  with Saddam to make money off the embargo for him and his henchman. 

"Asked by an interviewer on 60 Minutes in 1996 whether the UN's estimate
of child fatalities in Iraq was accurate, U.S. Ambassador to the UN cum
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright confirmed it before a national
television audience." -- Ward Churchill

> Churchill charges that Al-Queda exploded the twin towers to take revenge for 
> these deaths-which fits into Bush's contention that there is a link between 
> Al0-Quaeda terrorism and Iraq..-except that no link has ever been shown. 

In his essay The Ghosts of 9-1-1: Reflections on History, Justice and
Roosting Chickens, Churchill doesn't mention Al Queda.

> Churchill portrays himself as a defender of the American Indian and is 
> outraged at the treatment of native Americans historically and in Central 
> America. 

As we all should be.

> Nowhere in his diatribes I have  seen is there a mention of the 
> hundreds of thousands of native Americans being killer  or robbed of their 
> land recently and even now by corrupt military regimes, large land owners, 
> drug runners in Mexico, Guatemala, Columbia, Bolivia., Brazil.

I haven't read all of his work, so I wouldn't claim he hasn't addressed
such things.

> The only 
> villain in the world now or in the past, according to him, is the US.

Ya think?

> Chuchill clearly thinks of himself as  an outrageous character-

Do you really know what Churchill thinks of himself?

> maybe even drawing inspiration from his neighbor Hunter Thompson who
just died by his  own hand. If so,

What is it?  Clearly?  Or  If so?

<< he ought to get out there and free lance the way Thompson  did instead
of hiding behind the safety of a college lectern and a tenured  position.>>


Perhaps he might not agree that what you think is best for him is indeed
what he wants to do with his life and his career.

"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050222224410.3365E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:

>> >> > Not what I saw on C SPAN as he defended his essay at a Colorado 
>> >> > State
>> >> > meeting. Indians were out in force to back him up.
>
>> >> In force huh? How many? Name ONE tribe that accepts him as a member?
> Name ONE Indian nation that has him  on their tribal census. Shall we
> go down  a list of his falsehoods?<< <

>> > Oh yes.  Let's.

>> How much do we have to go past the FACT that he has NO Native American 
>> blood
>> yet he claims to have? He claims to be one eighth Cherokee ancestry yet 
>> the
>> Cherokee nation says  "NOPE!"  Shall we start there, or do you need more?

> How about a citation?

You got it now LIE about it CAROL!  LIE CAROL! Say I didn't post it! PLEASE 
do yourt usual!



>> Shall we go to his totally false claims of the small pox epidemic in 
>> 1837?
>> I mean A WHOPPER there..  That the U.S. Army on orders used biological
>> warfare against the Indians by deliberately infecting them with smallpox.
>
> How about a citation?

LIE CAROL LIE  PROVIDED!! God Carol you are SUCH a piece opf TOTAL and 
ABSOLUTE DECEIT!

>> Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits on
>> 9-11.

> How about a citation?
>
>> of doctoring footnotes, claiming to prove that
>> a smallpox epidemic among the Mandan Indians of the Midwest in 1837 was
>> deliberately introduced by U.S. Army, when in fact the sources he cited
>> said the disease was accidentally spread by traders."
>
> Interesting.  I would like to read original source documents on this
> before I venture an opinion.

 Carol LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE...... You asked for "REFERENTS" and I 
provided them you SNIPPED them AGAIN!
Disregarded them or rationalized them.

Must I post them EVERY DAMNED MESSAGE? This gets SOOOOOOO OLD and NO 
annoying.

I posted the references to where Churchill's claims of Indian heritage are 
rebuked. I posted where even his former wife accuses him of plagiarizing HER 
earlier published works and claiming them as his own. (ACADEMIC FRAUD 
CAROL!) Not to mention the FALSE claims of the U.S. Army biological warfare 
against the Indians being a product of his own mind.  NEVER HAPPENED CAROL!!

"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050222233429.3365G-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, krp wrote:
>
>> How much do we have to go past the FACT that he has NO Native American 
>> blood
>> yet he claims to have? He claims to be one eighth Cherokee ancestry yet 
>> the
>> Cherokee nation says  "NOPE!"  Shall we start there, or do you need more?
>
>
> http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3525487,00.html


You offer this in rebuttal to me???????  OKAY Carol.. Let's see what YOUR 
SOURCE really says.............

"Ward Churchill traces part of his American Indian lineage to Joshua Tyner, 
a Revolutionary War veteran from Georgia.
But Tyner listed himself on the 1820 census as "white," and historical 
documents report that his mother was killed and scalped by Creek Indians. "

"Meanwhile, genealogy records researched by the Rocky Mountain News show 
that even if Joshua Tyner had been a full-blooded Indian, he would have 
provided Churchill with only one-sixty-fourth Indian blood.

Nevertheless, the fiery Churchill - who maintains that he is at least 
one-sixteenth Cherokee - has fashioned a controversial career of activism 
and education over injustices to America's indigenous people."

"I am not accountable for making the particulars of my genealogy public 
knowledge or to respond to interrogation from a Cheyenne or a Chippewa or 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, as far as I'm concerned," Churchill said.

He will not provide documentation of his heritage. "

"I have never been confirmed as having one-quarter blood, and never said I 
was," Churchill said. "And even if (the critics) are absolutely right (about 
his lack of Indian ancestry), what does that have to do with this issue? I 
have never claimed to be goddamned Sitting Bull."

(OH BUT HE HAS!!!! OH BUT HE HAS!!)

"Officially, he maintains an associate membership, obtained in May 1994, 
from the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Tahlequah, Okla., two 
months before the band stopped issuing such memberships amid controversy 
over whether they were merited."

The band has "officially" revokes all those "honorary" memberships.

"Churchill and his allies have feuded with other Indian leaders, including 
Vernon Bellecourt, of the National American Indian Movement. Bellecourt, his 
allies and some other researchers call Churchill a white man masquerading as 
an Indian."

You didn't want anyone to SEE that, eh Carol? Not something you'd quote?

"But there's no evidence Tyner had any Indian blood at all.

Likewise, research by the News into Tyner family genealogy found no evidence 
that Joshua Tyner was an Indian. Historical accounts from Georgia, in fact, 
claim the Tyner family was attacked in 1788 or 1789 by Creek Indians while 
the father, Richard, was away in revenge for some official action a family 
member had taken against the Creeks. Joshua's mother, Abigail, was killed 
and scalped, along with several of her eight children."

So? This proves "ME" wrong?

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, ~krp~ wrote:

> >> Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits on
> >> 9-11.

> > How about a citation?

How about a citation?

> >> of doctoring footnotes, claiming to prove that
> >> a smallpox epidemic among the Mandan Indians of the Midwest in 1837 was
> >> deliberately introduced by U.S. Army, when in fact the sources he cited
> >> said the disease was accidentally spread by traders."

> > Interesting.  I would like to read original source documents on this
> > before I venture an opinion.

>  Carol LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE......

No.  It is not a lie at all.  I said that I would like to read original
source documents on this before I venture an opinion, and that is the
absolute truth.

> You asked for "REFERENTS" and I 
> provided them you SNIPPED them AGAIN!
> Disregarded them or rationalized them.

I snipped what were allegations.  I did not snip proof.

> Must I post them EVERY DAMNED MESSAGE? This gets SOOOOOOO OLD and NO 
> annoying.

Tough.

> I posted the references to where Churchill's claims of Indian heritage are 
> rebuked.

I have seen no proof either way.  

> I posted where even his former wife accuses him of plagiarizing HER 
> earlier published works and claiming them as his own.

Are you saying that what you posted was absolute proof that any
allegations by his wife were true?

> (ACADEMIC FRAUD 
> CAROL!) Not to mention the FALSE claims of the U.S. Army biological warfare 
> against the Indians being a product of his own mind.  NEVER HAPPENED CAROL!! 

I never claimed it did happen.  I asked for detail and proof and evidence.

I reserve judgment until I have it.  That is the only honorable stance, as
far as I am concerned.



Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308 

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, ~krp~ wrote:

> "Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
> news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050222233429.3365G-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...

> > http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3525487,00.html

> You offer this in rebuttal to me??????? 

No.

I offered it up to anyone who wants to read it.  Let folks read what is
available and make up their own mind.


Experts See Military Draft as Inevitable
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/18/9166/09308 

"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050223222353.20515E-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...

RE: SHOW ME ONE Lie of Ward Churchill::

(several listed but snipped or ignored)

>> >> Not to mention his erroneous claims that "Jews" were the real culprits 
>> >> on
>> >> 9-11.
>
>> > How about a citation?
>
> How about a citation?

Changing the subject Carol AGAIN?? DUCK AND WEAVE... Get the first oens.. 
We'll GET to that one.
>
>> >> of doctoring footnotes, claiming to prove that
>> >> a smallpox epidemic among the Mandan Indians of the Midwest in 1837 
>> >> was
>> >> deliberately introduced by U.S. Army, when in fact the sources he 
>> >> cited
>> >> said the disease was accidentally spread by traders."

NO COMMENT --- AVOIDING the direct FABRICATION of material and plagerizing 
things.

>> > Interesting.  I would like to read original source documents on this
>> > before I venture an opinion.

>>  Carol LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE......
>
> No.  It is not a lie at all.  I said that I would like to read original
> source documents on this before I venture an opinion, and that is the
> absolute truth.

Well Carol THEN that is YOUR obligation. The FACT is that Chucrchill's 
claims that a "biological earfare unit ofd the U.S. Army plotted to commit 
genicide on the Indian people" citing the 1837 events was a BALD FACE LIE.. 
NEVER HAPPEND! "original source documents' on a FICTITIOUS EVENT Carol? HOW? 
FROM WHERE?

>> You asked for "REFERENTS" and I
>> provided them you SNIPPED them AGAIN!
>> Disregarded them or rationalized them.

> I snipped what were allegations.  I did not snip proof.

Carol YOU don't get to decide what is proof. I sourced my statements. If 
Churchill's former wife wrote an article some years before (COPYRIGHTED AND 
PUBLISHED) and then Churchill later included her work and claimed it as HIS 
is very much PROOF that he LIED.

>> Must I post them EVERY DAMNED MESSAGE? This gets SOOOOOOO OLD and NO 
>> annoying.

> Tough.

No Carol PROOF that you are DISHONEST!  Thanks for TWICE in a short space 
that you DELETE things that you don't like and then go on to claim that no 
proof was offered at all. THAT little girl is LYING!

>> I posted the references to where Churchill's claims of Indian heritage 
>> are
>> rebuked.

> I have seen no proof either way.

Yes Carol - in psychology we call that "living in denial."  It's all there. 
Churchill makes SPECIFIC CLAIMS... That he got his indian blood from a 
SOURCE, that source denies the claim, saying he is NOT indian but "white." 
To YOU that is NOT PROOF! To the THINKING world (the not bullshit infested) 
that IS PROOF!  He has consistenly LIED his ass off about Indian heritage. 
Maybe I am sensitive to this becayse my first wife WAS 50% native American.
Complete with tribal registery so i know what a REAL native American is, and 
I have three daughters that are also on tribal roles. So cut your 
BULLSHITTING Ms., Smith! After a while it gets offensive. The man if he has 
ANY (and I suspect I have as much as HE does) it isn't much. My present wife 
(Cuban) has "indiginous" blood. She is mostly of Spanish heritage but has 
some native blood as well. Her ancestors were there to welcome Columbus when 
he landed in Cuba.

>> I posted where even his former wife accuses him of plagiarizing HER
>> earlier published works and claiming them as his own.

> Are you saying that what you posted was absolute proof that any
> allegations by his wife were true?

Well some things are FACTS Caol no matter how they upset your EXTREMIST 
political views. The woman's works were PUBLISHED as were that of Churchill. 
Media bveen all over that one. Her work came years first, publioshed, 
copyrights, then his work lifting whole secitions of hers with NO 
attribution. THAT is fraud and plagerism.

>> (ACADEMIC FRAUD
>> CAROL!) Not to mention the FALSE claims of the U.S. Army biological 
>> warfare
>> against the Indians being a product of his own mind.  NEVER HAPPENED 
>> CAROL!!

> I never claimed it did happen.  I asked for detail and proof and evidence.

    Carol it did NOT happen. There is NO source bnook on an event THAT NEVER 
OCCURRED!! GOT IT? No "referrents."  No details on an event dreamed in in 
some alcholoc stupor that NEVER WAS!   While some Sioux indians did get 
smallpox and died at about that time, the U.S. Army had NO (read my lips) 
"biological warfare unit" and were NOWHERE near the events in 1837. It was 
some "settlers" on a wagon train that left (abandoned) stuff from WHITE 
folks who had died of smallpox (REMEMBER Carol or TRY that they didn't have 
penecillin then) JESUS CHRIST!  When the wagons, blankets etc were 
abandoned, the Indians were not there. They weren't GIVEN the stuff  - they 
were scavengers. Carol people at that time did NOT have microbiology, they 
didn't know how the disease was transmitted, there were NO Walgreens 
pharmacies on the praries.. Lots of Indians died but it was NOT at the hands 
of the "BILOGICAL WAREFARE UNIT OF THE U.S. ARMY" on a mission from 
Washington, DC...   It was a FLUKE at best.

> I reserve judgment until I have it.  That is the only honorable stance, as
> far as I am concerned.

Carol........... it is a tap dance. The evidence is there. What DID happen 
is well documented in history. The sources I gave had further LINKS to that 
information. That YOU in your ARROGANCE refuse to follow those links is NOT 
MY PROBLEM it is YOUR DISHONESTY!

"Carol Lee Smith" <human@csd.uwm.edu> wrote in message 
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.1050223222915.20515F-100000@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
>
>> > http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3525487,00.html
>
>> You offer this in rebuttal to me???????
>
> No.
>
> I offered it up to anyone who wants to read it.  Let folks read what is
> available and make up their own mind.

It don't support Churchill's credibility Carol and you sure made it seem 
like you were offering this to contradict me. I rather shot that down by 
quoting your source and which you snipped. (Wonder why)

Imno1 wrote:
> As an ex-academic I agree with and appreciate much of what you say
about
> academic freedom and the way in which the great universities go about

> recruiting and retaining people who will make a contribution to the
> university. But with academic freedom come the responsibility to
speak with
> fact and .reason.. Demagogues or politicians, or talk radio hosts can
play
> fast and loose  but the mark of the scholar is sticking to facts,
even
> though they may be uncomfortable to many, and to reason with those
facts in
> a new or different kind of way-this is what academic freedom is meant
for.
>    Does Ward Churchill meet that test?
>   Do you, or anybody believe that . 500,000 Iraqui children were
killed by
> the embargo on Iraq and or that the deaths that did result  were
solely due
> to the US -this in the face of mounting evidence of fraud and
corruption
> reaching into the UN and European corporations and  countries that
were
> working  with Saddam to make money off the embargo for him and his >
henchman.

I'm troubled by the practice these days of looking to somehow mitigate
the U.S.'s responsibility once the full understanding of the U.S.' role
behind atrocities becomes public.

"Look at what Europe does," "Look at what the UN does," are the
equivalent of "All of the other kids were doing something bad."

We (the U.S.) are the most dangerous culture that has ever been on the
planet.  We have the biggest and most of everything.  We have the worst
and largest weapons on the globe.  We have a special responsibility to
be better, beyond reproach, without any appearance of impropriety or
wrongdoing, more than any of the other kids on the block.  Combined.
We have to be pristine and saintly.

We are not even close.

Nothing was happening in the food-for-oil program that the U.S. wasn't
aware of and didn't sign off on.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

I believe that the number of deaths of Iraqi children due to the
sanctions is substantial.  Whether it's 500,000, "227,000-350,000" or
1,000,000+, does not lessen the U.S.'s responsibility.

Check it out for yourself -
http://www.unicef.org/newsline/99pr29.htm
http://samsara.mind.net/nuclear/depleted.html
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2004/01sanctionsworth.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/418597.stm
http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/caldicott.html
http://www.shareguide.com/Caldicott.html
http://www.hiddenwars.org
http://www.nuclearpolicy.org
http://www.iacenter.org/depleted
http://www.endthewar.org/frontps/Op-eds/medicalreasons.htm
http://www.rimbaud.freeserve.co.uk/dhap99f.html
http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html
http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/iraq_kids_e/index.html:
http://www.ngwrc.org

Center for Defense Information
http://www.cdi.org

World Policy Institute
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms

Education for Peace in Iraq Center (EPIC)
http://www.saveageneration.org

Institute for Policy Studies
http://www.ips-dc.org

>From the Wilderness Publications
http://www.copvcia.com

Iraq Action Coalition
http://www.iraqaction.org

Military Toxic Project
http://www.miltoxproj.org

Fellowship of Reconciliation
http://www.forusa.org

National Network to end the War against Iraq
http://www.endthewar.org

The American Gulf War Veterans Association
http://www.gulfwarvets.com
http://www.thepowerhour.com

The Mariam Appeal
http://www.mariamappeal.com

Voices in the Wilderness
http://www.voicesinthewilderness.org

The Canadian Network to end the Sanctions on Iraq
http://www.canesi.org

United Nations Association Film Festival at Stanford University, Palo
Alto
http://www.unaff.org

http://hopedance.org
http://www.100fires.com
http://www.conflict-resolution.org/sitebody/education/lectureseries.htm

> Churchill charges that Al-Queda exploded the twin towers to take
revenge for
> these deaths-which fits into Bush's contention that there is a link
between
> Al0-Quaeda terrorism and Iraq..-except that no link has ever been >
shown.

That's not what Churchill said.

You're doing exactly what I suggested people flee from - you're
attributing words and beliefs to Churchill that he didn't say.

I think that people should hear and see him for themselves.

"Barney Lyon" <fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1109284096.541354.50100@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> We (the U.S.) are the most dangerous culture that has ever been on the
> planet.  We have the biggest and most of everything.  We have the worst
> and largest weapons on the globe.  We have a special responsibility to
> be better, beyond reproach, without any appearance of impropriety or
> wrongdoing, more than any of the other kids on the block.  Combined.
> We have to be pristine and saintly.

We never have been from the very start. While I think Churchill is a nut and 
a liar, I think the basic premise buried under all his hyperbolic rhetoric 
has more than a small grain of truth in it and it needs to be said. The 
problem is the WAY Churchill says it he trivializes it. The U.S. from the 
time of the revolution has had a less than honorable history. Frankly what 
we have done in Latin America is despicable. That will never change until we 
can take a hard look at ourselves and correct the things we have been doing 
that are wrong. But time is running out.

"~krp~" <web2457k@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:NNuTd.46350$uc.9192@trnddc03...
> "Barney Lyon" <fountaingrove@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:1109284096.541354.50100@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> We (the U.S.) are the most dangerous culture that has ever been on the
>> planet.  We have the biggest and most of everything.  We have the worst
>> and largest weapons on the globe.  We have a special responsibility to
>> be better, beyond reproach, without any appearance of impropriety or
>> wrongdoing, more than any of the other kids on the block.  Combined.
>> We have to be pristine and saintly.
>
> We never have been from the very start. While I think Churchill is a nut 
> and a liar, I think the basic premise buried under all his hyperbolic 
> rhetoric has more than a small grain of truth in it and it needs to be 
> said. The problem is the WAY Churchill says it he trivializes it. The U.S. 
> from the time of the revolution has had a less than honorable history. 
> Frankly what we have done in Latin America is despicable. That will never 
> change until we can take a hard look at ourselves and correct the things 
> we have been doing that are wrong. But time is running out.
>
  I couldn't agree more. And Churchill compounds the problem. 

"Imno1" <whoha@erewon.com> wrote in message 
news:idBTd.7093$OU1.41@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...

>>> We (the U.S.) are the most dangerous culture that has ever been on the
>>> planet.  We have the biggest and most of everything.  We have the worst
>>> and largest weapons on the globe.  We have a special responsibility to
>>> be better, beyond reproach, without any appearance of impropriety or
>>> wrongdoing, more than any of the other kids on the block.  Combined.
>>> We have to be pristine and saintly.

>> We never have been from the very start. While I think Churchill is a nut 
>> and a liar, I think the basic premise buried under all his hyperbolic 
>> rhetoric has more than a small grain of truth in it and it needs to be 
>> said. The problem is the WAY Churchill says it he trivializes it. The 
>> U.S. from the time of the revolution has had a less than honorable 
>> history. Frankly what we have done in Latin America is despicable. That 
>> will never change until we can take a hard look at ourselves and correct 
>> the things we have been doing that are wrong. But time is running out.

>  I couldn't agree more. And Churchill compounds the problem.

    He turns people off from having an intelligent discussion of the 
constant fukkkkups of the state department and the CIA.  But all through 
Latin America we have "always" been the "ugly Americans" and are resented 
more there than anywhere on Earth. Lots of it is sheer incompetence but 
mostly indifference and a TOTAL lack of respect for those people. Not that 
everything we did was bad, it is that we never learned how to talk to the 
people, partially because we didn't give a shit. It has always been RACISM! 
My wife is Hispanic (Cuban) my ears are very attuned to the racist things 
that are said.  But the problem is that when you have people like Churchill 
who drift into insanity making the points, it isn't that his basic message 
is wrong, but that he has a grotesque way of making a point. Maybe he feels 
that's the only way he'll be heard. Churchill puts people on the defensive 
and they aren't inclined to examine things when you do that, you just set 
their heels in concrete.

On 24 Feb 2005, Barney Lyon wrote:

<snip> what Imno1 wrote

> I'm troubled by the practice these days of looking to somehow mitigate
> the U.S.'s responsibility once the full understanding of the U.S.' role
> behind atrocities becomes public.

> "Look at what Europe does," "Look at what the UN does," are the
> equivalent of "All of the other kids were doing something bad."

> We (the U.S.) are the most dangerous culture that has ever been on the
> planet.  We have the biggest and most of everything. 

And we are using up resources way out of proportion to our numbers because
of our waste and what we think we need.

> We have the worst and largest weapons on the globe. 

And we have used them.

> We have a special responsibility to
> be better, beyond reproach, without any appearance of impropriety or
> wrongdoing, more than any of the other kids on the block.  Combined.
> We have to be pristine and saintly.

That would be nice.

> We are not even close.

I agree.
 
> Nothing was happening in the food-for-oil program that the U.S. wasn't
> aware of and didn't sign off on.
> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/
> 
> I believe that the number of deaths of Iraqi children due to the
> sanctions is substantial.  Whether it's 500,000, "227,000-350,000" or
> 1,000,000+, does not lessen the U.S.'s responsibility.

There are those who would hide that responsibility behind accusations
against other boogie men.
 
> Check it out for yourself -

Thank you for your links.

They have been snipped only to save space.

> > Churchill charges that Al-Queda exploded the twin towers to take
 revenge for these deaths-which fits into Bush's contention that there
 is a link between Al0-Quaeda terrorism and Iraq..-except that no link
 has ever been shown.<<
 
> That's not what Churchill said.

Thank you for pointing that out.

> You're doing exactly what I suggested people flee from - you're
> attributing words and beliefs to Churchill that he didn't say.

That tactic seems to be catching.
 
> I think that people should hear and see him for themselves.
 
Too bad his appearance at Whitewater is sold out.