Ward Churchill gets away with his hateful statements

The following statements come from Gunny Bob's webpage at
http://www.850koa.com/shows/newman.html

CU-Boulder Chancellor Phil DiStefano News Conference

Click Here to Read the Chancellor's Report

Key Findings: (1) Churchill’s hate speech is protected speech under the 1st Amendment and is therefore OK with CU, (2) accusations of research misconduct (plagiarism, copyright violations, etc.) will be referred to the research misconduct committee, and (3) allegations of ethnic misrepresentation will also be referred to committee.

The review at the next committee level could take up to 7 months. No intent-to-dismiss warning has been issued.

DiStefano then said that teaching terrorism and advocating violence are protected speech and that they examined this issue. We have Churchill on tape teaching terrorism and repeatedly advocating violence and mass murder, but he did so while off campus. But DiStefano said moments later that he and his fellow reviewers did not look at issues regarding Churchill’s off-campus activities or activities not directly related to his work at CU. This is a contradiction. Which is the truth?


Why is it OK with CU for one of their professors to publicly advocate violence and mass murder? If I was a CU professor and stood up in class with white sheets and a hood on, and called for the mass murder of blacks and Jews, would this be OK with CU? If I stood up and said I was a pedophile and then said children should be gang raped and then murdered, would that be OK with CU?


When a university chancellor says it is OK for a professor to advocate violence and mass murder, and when that chancellor says that threats made by a professor are so insignificant an issue that they didn’t even consider them in their investigation, what message does that send?


He also said that they did not examine the evidence showing Churchill has threatened various people who crossed him because such threats “did not stand within our purview.” Why on earth would an employer like CU not care whether their employee was threatening physical violence upon others? How could this not be within their purview?


Will this news conference help or hurt CU? Do you have less, more or the same level of confidence in the leadership of CU after this news conference?


Would you want your children to attend a university where hate speech is accepted and encouraged? Where professors who advocate violence and mass murder are revered and protected by the school’s leaders and hundreds of other faculty members as well as thousands of students?


Do you have any faith that CU and the Board of Regents will make the right decision in the end?

No Gunny I doubt it. Meanwhile Dan Forsyth at CSU-Pueblo could lose his job. Crying shame if Forsyth does and Churchill keeps his.