WARD CHURCHILL: Just a Case of Chickens Coming Home to Roost!

Ward Churchill


Ward Churchill is a tenured professor of ethnic studies and coordinator of American Indian studies at the University of Colorado. He was scheduled to speak at Hamilton College, in Clinton, N.Y. early this month, but the event was canceled after a media frenzy ensued over his controversial essay ''On the Justice of Roosting Chickens” In his essay, Churchill starts out by pointing to a statement by Malcolm X:

"When queried by reporters concerning his views on the assassination of John F. Kennedy in November 1963, Malcolm X famously – and quite charitably, all things considered – replied that it was merely a case of "chickens coming home to roost."

If that isn’t offensive enough for you, it gets much worse:

"On the morning of September 11, 2001, a few more chickens – along with some half-million dead Iraqi children – came home to roost in a very big way at the twin towers of New York's World Trade Center. Well, actually, a few of them seem to have nestled in at the Pentagon as well."

He goes on to voice his compassion for the victims of 9/11 that were in the Twin Towers with this poetic paragraph:

"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 hey 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."

Hmmmmmm…… and I thought I could rant!

Since Ward Churchill’s essay has received some well-deserved scrutiny, the controversy surrounding him has been building. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, and The AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT (AIM) have all been blasting his character to smithereens! (I personally feel the actual essay does this all on its own, but who am I?) Churchill claims to be an Indian in order to give himself credibility as he writes and speaks about the evils of America. AIM is not the least bit amused with him and has released a statement that not only questions his Indian ancestry, but accuses him of “masquerading as an Indian for years behind his dark glasses and beaded headband.” I highly recommend reading their statement; it is obvious there is no love lost here.

The heat for Ward doesn’t end there. According to World Net Daily; on Tuesday, Colorado Gov. Bill Owens urged the university to fire Churchill, the state House passed a non-binding resolution yesterday calling his comments "evil and inflammatory,” and a similar measure is presently being considered in the Senate. Sen. Peter Groff (D) was the only one to vote "no", saying he disagreed with Churchill but that the resolution provides him with undeserved attention and attacks free speech.

Churchill released a statement in his own defense on January 31st. In his statement he tries to make the case that the media has grossly misrepresented his essay. I have to admit that upon reading it, I was only MORE convinced that he wasn’t misrepresented AT ALL! Those accusing him of defending the 9/11 hijackers and raking him over the coals for his deplorable words about the victims were spot on in my humble opinion. The one paragraph that convinced me of this reads:

“I am not a "defender"of the September 11 attacks, but simply pointing out that if U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned. I have never said that people "should" engage in armed attacks on the United States, but that such attacks are a natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy. As Martin Luther King, quoting Robert F. Kennedy, said, "Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable."

The University of Colorado Board of Regents ordered an investigation Thursday into whether embattled ethnic studies professor Ward Churchill should be fired, and then took the extraordinary step of apologizing to the nation for Churchill's writings about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. According to Carol McKinley of FOX News Channel, Ward's attorney has threatened to sue if anything "happens to Ward Churchill..." (in reference to his job). On the O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly quoted Ward as saying "they don't want to fire me unless they want me to own this school." (How old is this man?)

I have to say that I think our friend Ward actually brings up a GREAT point. Chickens DO come home to roost. The one phrase that I ABSOLUTELY agree with is the quote by Martin Luther King. By golly Ward, I think you got it! In your essay you try to make the case that the 9/11 hijackers were not "fanatics devoted to Islamic fundamentalism," nor were they “cowards.” In fact, Ward you say that the “men who struck on September 11 manifested the courage of their convictions, willingly expending their own lives in attaining their objectives.” You base this claim on the fact that they were retaliating for the “genocide” by Americans during Desert Storm.
Ward, please remind me, WHY DID WE GO INTO IRAQ BACK IN JANUARY 1991? Let’s recap, okay? Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990, after Kuwait wouldn’t price their own oil the way Saddam WANTED THEM TOO! (Hmmmmmmmm…. The phrase “No blood for oil” comes to mind!) “Saddam himself exploited Islamic rhetoric in his claim that annexing Kuwait had been a religious duty, a jihad, since the al-Sabah family (Kuwait's rulers) had ruled over an artificial state set up by the British. Saddam claimed that his jihad had liberated Kuwait from dominance by Western infidels.”

Sadly, Ward, this is a bunch of malarkey since Kuwait had enjoyed full independence since 1961, and Iraq had officially recognized Kuwait’s sovereignty at that time and then once again in 1963. In response to Saddam’s invasion of Iraq, the Saudi's, themselves INVITED American troops into the area. It was the presence of American troops on Saudi soil that got Osama’s panties in a wad, and lead him to claim that attacks on Americans anywhere in the world were justified. (Is any of this sounding even FAINTLY familiar, Ward?)

Many of the world’s leaders tried desperately, for months to handle Saddam’s greed and arrogance with diplomacy. Saddam REFUSED! See how all this adds up? America heads over to the Middle East, BY INVITATION, to help Arabs and Muslims from a madman. We spilled OUR blood in order to protect Saudi Arabia and free Kuwait; but only after Saddam made “peaceful change impossible.” Please explain to ALL of us how you can justify ANYTHING in your essay by using this quote? The entire War on Terror stems from the actions of Saddam Hussein and HIS greediness for OIL!

Many want to claim that this is all about Israel. In reality, there is a bit more to it than only Israel. It is also about a madman, Saddam Hussein, and his sidekick lunatics Osama and Arafat. Saddam wasn’t happy unless he was planning a war, and he labored over plans with Arafat! If you are going to apply this quote, then apply it to EVERYONE, not just the U.S.! AMAZING! You are a professor? You are writing books and essays? How great is America when someone who is either totally inept in doing research, or is so bent on an agenda that they ignore the facts, can make money from books and speeches? While you sit in your campus office and rattle off your lies, I am sitting in my home exposing those lies. (No fancy degree needed, just me, pounding away on a keyboard and mastering the art of Google!) Not bad for a single mom without a bunch of letters after my name.

In all fairness Ward, I have to admit that I agree with the esteemed Senator in Colorado, Peter Groff. You absolutely have the right to free speech, but that freedom comes with responsibility. Just as you have the right to spew any disgusting, twisted version of 9/11 that you want to spew; so do others have the right to remove you from their campus and classrooms. For Pete’s sake, a cashier at WalMart couldn’t get away with spouting your crud out to paying customers, and for someone who claims to take up the fight for the little guy, what makes you think you are THAT special. YOU are what we REDSTATERS call an elitist, sir. Tenure may bring privilege, but it is not a license to pollute the students who pay for their education; nor does it give you free license to destroy the reputation of your University and negate any consequences for your “freedom of speech.” Say anything you like Ward, but when your words are exposed, take it like a “little Eichmann.” As the Colorado University Administrators are conducting their 30-day review, remember it is merely a case of "chickens coming home to roost."