home

CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:10:55 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The University of Colorado will hold a news conference at 3 p.m. Mountain Time on the results of its review of Ward Churchill's works and whether it has grounds to fire him.

Update: Denver's 9News will live stream the event at this link.

Live blogging:

1. No action warranted for his statements on 9/11. The content and rhetoric, no matter how repugnant, are protected by the first amendment. He did not exceed its limits.

2. Allegations of research misconduct. If they are not found to be frivolous, they warrant referral to Standing Committee on Research Misconduct. They have found there to be a substantive basis for them and they will be referred.

3. On Misrepresentations to get employment. Whether Churchill misrepresented his ethnicity to gain credibility for his work. He says the allegations are of sufficient merit to warrant further inquiry.

These two issues will be assigned to faculty on the Boulder campus --specifically, to the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct.

The Committee will make a recommendation to chancellor.

Mike Ditto is at the press conference and live blogging in the comments here.

Update: Ward Churchill made these comments after the news conference.

< Federal Judge Orders New Schiavo Hearing at 6 pm | U.S. Paratrooper Denied Asylum in Canada >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill | 47 comments (47 topical)
    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 01:31:38 PM EST
    Are you going to be there? If I can get my $#|^ together in a half an hour I'll go down there and cover it. Predictions?

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 01:38:00 PM EST
    When will he be sent to a camp? after all we must start-up reeduication camp so, our government needs to take control of our little lives and ward churchill is a good start, but how long before you go? churchill today you soon. but remember churchill is not the political problem because bush is de-bordering this nation and setting us up for a civil and race war, watch the borders; what ward wants people to do is think about this cultural mad-house, now he will pay for his words, sad world 2005.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 01:44:58 PM EST
    Mike, go for it. I'm staying at work. How about live-blogging here in the comments?

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 01:48:11 PM EST
    I will if their WiFi extends into the Turnhalle. The nearest bas station is across the hall in the Garage student lounge. Cheers, Mike

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:11:28 PM EST
    I almost missed getting in on time, because the police searched my bags. 'We have concluded that the allegations of research misconduct warrant further investigation." They will be referred to the standing committee on academic misconduct. The committee will determine if further action is necessary and will refer it to the Chancellor of Academic Affairs.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:12:43 PM EST
    There has not been a notice of intent to dismiss.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:13:53 PM EST
    Craig Silverman asked about specific threats of violence and anarchy and gave several examples. The Chancellor said that they found them to be protected speech under the First Amendment.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:16:22 PM EST
    He doesn't know where the Regents are in terms of buyout negotiations. The Chancellor said that they confirmed Churchill made threats against CU faculty, but determined that it did not fall within their purview. Presumably he means that they fall within the purview of law enforcement.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:17:52 PM EST
    Short and sweet. More later, I got the whole thing on tape.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:25:27 PM EST
    I wanted to ask Caplis and Silverman a few questions but they bolted out of there to get on the air--they are doing their show from the hallway in the Tivoli. Basically the gist of the whole thing is that the regents found sufficient basis for further investigation on the academic misconduct, but the speech is protected. No action will be taken against Churchill unless the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct recommends disciplinary action to the Chancellor on Academic Affairs.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:32:18 PM EST
    From the written statement by Board of Regents Chair Jerry Rutledge:
    Let me reiterate my very, very strong belief that Professor Churchill's essay and subsequent remarks are outrageous, egregious and patently offensive. Those incendiary remarks are an embarrassment to a tremendously strong teaching and research university such as CU. Further, the allegations of research misconduct have sufficient merit to warrant further inquiry, which is our next step. It is most appropriate that the inquiry moves into the next, very serious level of review.
    He goes on to say:
    Many people have called for more stringent actions, including immediate termination of Professor Churchill, but that was not an option based on my reading of Chancellor DiStefano's report. The university's best recourse is to follow the process outlined by Chancellor DiStefano and Regent Laws and policies.
    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#12)
    by roy on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:33:20 PM EST
    Did they specify whether the Research Misconduct committee would be looking into his art plagiarism, or strictly academic issues?

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#13)
    by roy on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:38:03 PM EST
    Never mind, the full report is here, and the answer to my question is "no".

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:38:16 PM EST
    Listening to Caplis and Silverman now. Silverman doubts that CU will pursue the allegations of threats against other professors. Both Silverman and Caplis say that CU didn't even do as much investigation as they did, and they didn't have first-hand access to the players involved. But Caplis says that the report from the other university detailing Churchill's plagiarism is detailed and enough to get him fired, and he predicts it will after the review from the research misconduct committee.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:38:55 PM EST
    Caplis and Silverman will have the Governor on in the next couple of minutes.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:45:21 PM EST
    Caplis is giving Owens a verbal blowjob about his wonderful leadership during the debacle. Gross.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 02:47:23 PM EST
    Roy: Since the art was presumably done on his own time, the university wouldn;t have much jurisdiction there. What they do have is multiple, clear examples of academic plagiarism, and while Caplis is grossing me out at the moment, I do agree with him in that I think they have plenty of grounds to fire him based on that information alone.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 03:17:51 PM EST
    Bob Beauprez next on KHOW with Caplis/Silverman.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 03:39:27 PM EST
    Caplis and Silverman are hatchetmen when it comes to Churchill. They're on a mission. Please don't count on them for unbiased coverage. Gov. Owens is just as biased.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 04:04:59 PM EST
    Churchill is one more politcal victim like so many others, and to sean s. remember were all this came from? a movie was made about this nut case called "A beautiful mind" Its all in the myth that is what people have been sold over many years, and what is Ward saying but stop the myth, long live Churchill and guy for all seasons. but in the end we will see the barrel of that old gun just to keep all in that old line of total control. camp's anyone? and none off this had to happen, how sad.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#22)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 04:17:19 PM EST
    Either CU has known this guy is a fraud for years--in which case they are complicit, or they didn't, but they should have. In either case, if he's a fraud, there's no reason to treat him as if he's a really great credit to the U, except for the little Eichmann statement which seems to get him a lot of credit around here. In the meantime, what about Prof Klocek and his rights? Cue the crickets....

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#23)
    by soccerdad on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 04:31:19 PM EST
    but they should have.
    How?
    In either case, if he's a fraud, there's no reason to treat him as if he's a really great credit to the U,
    True, there is a process that needs to be followed.
    except for the little Eichmann statement which seems to get him a lot of credit around here.
    Bull@hit, and you know it
    In the meantime, what about Prof Klocek and his rights?
    He was screwed. Depaul violated its own proceedures. Clearly he should be reinstated and a review conducted according to published procedures.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#24)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 04:38:58 PM EST
    Soc. Remember Bernie Ebbers? He claimed he didn't know what was going on. He was convicted not because they showed he knew, but primarily because he should have. CU is supposed to be ignorant of the validity of its profs' representations? They aren't supposed to know? My question is not what happened to Klocek but why the lefties aren't all over it as they are with the case of Whitey Churchill. The difference? Churchill did his little Eichmann thing and Klocek did not. Or is there another difference I'm missing?

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#25)
    by soccerdad on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:18:15 PM EST
    CU is supposed to be ignorant of the validity of its profs' representations?
    The validity of soemones work is first assessed by publications. If something gets published in a reputable journal the presumption is that everything is valid. So did he publish? What were the disputes? A University does not vet the individual work e.g. papers of its profs. Thtas the job of outside reviewers of the papers/grants. So did anyone bring legimate complaints to the University?
    My question is not what happened to Klocek but why the lefties aren't all over it as they are with the case of Whitey Churchill.
    My guess is that its a response to the right's attempt to subvert due process.
    The difference? Churchill did his little Eichmann thing and Klocek did not.
    You always look for a way to bash the left. You miss alot of things, actually most things. But hey you've never let the facts get in the way of a good attack

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:23:52 PM EST
    "Posted by Richard Aubrey: "Either CU has known this guy is a fraud for years..." And blah-blah-blah. There has been NOTHING proven about WC in the negative, other than that he has views about obvious BLOWBACK that wingers and the fake media would like to ignore. NO evidence that he is guilty of malfeasance, so the board will look into it, realize they are holding their arses in their hands, and quietly withdraw. The Governor will keep on trying to get political gain off it, but what he was told today was, up yours, the Constitution is still in effect in Colorado. The winger oom-pah-pah bands are already running on overtime, and the sousaphone player is about to have a heart attack, but it is nothing, working back to zero, for no one. Nice try, idiots.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:41:48 PM EST
    Churchill has published many, many times. Just not in peer-reviewed academic journals. Academic journals wouldn't print his stuff because his "research" doesn't pass the smell test. In fact there are more papers about Churchill's plagiarism published in peer-reviewed journals (two) than there are papers that actually have Churchill listed as the author (one). For the record, I was quoting Caplis and Silverman because I find their self-promotion and manufactured outrage to be disgusting. It was interesting listening to them off-air...magically the outrage went almost completely away. It's the mark of people whose interest is ratings and not the truth. They were more pissed off that CU credited Geraldo for some snippet that they posted on their web site than they were about the facts and the outcomes of events. Every word out of C & S's mouths belies their true priority--C & S.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 05:57:15 PM EST
    Richard: Your question about whether they should have known is moot, because they did know, and chose not to do anything about it. Obviously they are re-assessing that position by re-opening the 1994 investigation, not on the grounds that he made up his ethnicity to gain employment, but on the grounds that he made it up in order to give himself credibility, which falls under academic misconduct.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#29)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 06:16:51 PM EST
    Michael. I don't see why the employment issue is off the table. Soc. You have read the posts on this topic, right? You think anybody on this board is going to sit still for due process if it finds that Whitey loses?

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 06:20:53 PM EST
    I;m just guessing here, but I imagine it's off the table because the regents are a quasi-judicial body, and they have already made a decision in Churchill's favor on that matter, and they have to avoid double jeopardy.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#31)
    by soccerdad on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 07:46:22 PM EST
    RA You are truly pathetic with your racist attacks, and your baseless presumptions. Your hatred of so many people Pathetic

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#32)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 08:06:40 PM EST
    Soc. You, like Paul in LA, have apparently missed the memo. Accusations of racism are cheap, manipulative attempts to shut up people who are making arguments you can't handle. You know/knew that. What you don't know is that EVERYBODY knows it. Therefore...it's useless.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#33)
    by soccerdad on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 08:11:36 PM EST
    RA
    You think anybody on this board is going to sit still for due process if it finds that Whitey loses?
    You said it I didn't You argument that the left like the eichman comment, is an unsubstantiated slur based on your hatred.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#34)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 08:55:24 PM EST
    Yeah, Soc. I've seen all kinds of lefties outraged ...not.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 10:08:33 PM EST
    "Posted by Michael Ditto: "Churchill has published many, many times. Just not in peer-reviewed academic journals." That's because he doesn't work in a field that has such things. Medicine and scientific journals are peer-reviewed for obvious reasons. Ethnic studies? There is no such thing as peer-review...there are what are called EDITORS. "In fact there are more papers about Churchill's plagiarism published in peer-reviewed journals (two) than there are papers that actually have Churchill listed as the author (one)." Because rightwing billionaires are paying for publication of propaganda from that toad in Texas at Lamar. His papers 'conclusions' are nothing more than opinion. There's no substance to your carefully constructed LIES, Michael.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 10:14:25 PM EST
    Racism, Richard, is the idea that there are people who because of their race, ethnic, or national identity, don't have fuill human rights. You don't believe indians should have full human rights -- you clearly express the racist idea of social darwinism. Rather than survival only by the fitest as the operant racist theory, it is CRUCIAL to the survival of those cultures to create bufferzones for these survivors, so their cultures can continue. In the case of the tragedy in MN, the elders have disappeared because survival-of-the-fitest means they die 30 years before their time. And that, given our history, is racism. It is dispossession and unequal justice. You scoff at all that, because you are a racist. Jim and others show their racism when they ignore the obvious war crimes being committed in Iraq. That isn't some kind of rhetorical device, calling them racists, it is FACTS IN EVIDENCE.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 24, 2005 at 10:33:42 PM EST
    Makes sense, doesn't it? They are too scared to challenge him on free speech matters, so they're going to try to take him down with the piddly little complaints that probably most professors in Academia are open to. Big Balls these folks do not have. Yoda said that once, I think.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#38)
    by soccerdad on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 03:15:43 AM EST
    so they're going to try to take him down with the piddly little complaints that probably most professors in Academia are open to.
    Plagarism is not a piddly little complaint in academics, its one of the most serious. As a former prof, i resent your implication that most professors are open to such a complaint. This is just a gratuitous, unfounded statement. Most profs work there whole lives without such complaints. OTH, if Mr. Churchill made a single mistake, then he should be let off the hook. If its a pattern of behavior, then he should be dismissed. I think at this point, everyone would be served by having a review of the academic charges by an outside panel to which Mr. Churchill could pick a portion of its members, provided they meet certain general conditions such as tenured profs, etc. The "everyone does it" defense doesn't work.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#39)
    by pigwiggle on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 06:02:32 AM EST
    “Racism, Richard, is the idea that there are people who because of their race, ethnic, or national identity, don't have fuill human rights.” Paul; racism means, at least to most folks, that so-called race or nationality predetermines a number, even perhaps most, of a given individual's character. Sometimes it is used to rank folks, as you have noted, from the most valued to subhuman. However, I think often it is used in a more benign but only marginally less repugnant way. I see racism most often in the comments of folks who would claim that, for example, blacks or Chinese think this way or do these things. I read it on boards like this, from I assume well meaning folks, in comments about why blacks voted a certain way or why Indians will accept certain ‘likeminded’ folks as their own. Not all folks of a given ethnicity start life with the same perspective, and I imagine most manage to keep their unique perspective even growing in the most homogenizing of cultures. Anyway, that’s been my experience.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#40)
    by Richard Aubrey on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 06:51:48 AM EST
    Pigwiggle: Political parties do quite well presuming in advance the voting patterns of certain groups. It can't be an accident that it works so often. Might be a matter of culture. See Sowell on the matter. Plus the politically-useful brainwashing.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#41)
    by jimcee on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 08:23:42 AM EST
    Plagerism is the greatest sin in academia other than conservatism. In a rather ironic twist, Hamilton College, where all this got started, sent the former president packing for using unattributed lines in an invocation speech. Lines that came from a piece published on the web. He was the best fund-raiser the school ever had and some members of the faculity drove him out because he wasn't an overt Lefty. So if Churchill is found to have plagerized anything he should be dismissed. Overall I think that whoever hired this clown should be dismissed as well. About the rascism charges above I find them unfounded. Mr Churchill is not a blood member of the First American community he is a fakir in the first degree and he should be ashamed of himself but I don't think shame is part of his make up.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 01:07:57 PM EST
    Churchill in any case is not a fakir, you imbecile. And he apparently is of native descent and there has been NO evidence that his racial heritage was a factor in his hiring, which probably wouldn't be LEGAL. As for these alternative meanings of racism, they ignore the ACTION that is racist, namely DISPOSSESION (of property and life) and UNEQUAL JUSTICE. Forty percent poverty is unequal justice in a nation as rich as ours. It is same for the black slaves as for the Iraqi civilians, who are being slaughtered for the dual 'crime' of being Arab and having oil. In the case of MN, these tribes are very poor, with high mortality among the elders. They have few or no speakers of their language, and as a result their cultures are in decline. To a great degree, this results from the slave-like dispossession of the culture's children by white supremacists of the last century. Those Carlysle schools deprived children of their cultural context, of their hair, language, and names. And such policies are STILL having their deadly effects. Ignoring the ACT of racism, Richard and pw try to reduce it to a form of political bias. It is FAR more than that -- it is innocent women and children splattered against their kitchen walls at the whim of a fake American president who is one of the ugliest racists in our history, by his own actions.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#43)
    by jondee on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 03:42:29 PM EST
    'Whitey' - Go back and reread the earlier threads on Churchill, alot of left folks condemned Churchills remarks.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimcee on Fri Mar 25, 2005 at 06:40:50 PM EST
    Paul in LA, Nice come back fella, did you learn that at Dale Carnagie? Um..Paul, Ward Churchill is not an Indian, just a fraud. As has been pointed out here before by others if he were an Indian he would have a BIA number and the Gov't wouldn't have stopped him from selling his plagierized "art" as Native-American art. Supporting a fraud because you hate...whatever it is you hate, which seems to be about everything is pathetic. Name one positive thing that has come from Churchill's tenure. Was it his threats against his peers? His artistic plagierism? His academic plagierism? His inarticulate screeds for his adoring and naive sycophants? His disruption of the Columbus Day parade in Denver and his psychotic defense of it in his speech at CU? His lying about being a paratrooper and sniper in Vietnam when he was a motor pool paper pusher/movie projectionist? This man is a disgrace to academia and an insult to intellegent people everywhere. He has no business "teaching". He has all the first admendment rights that everyone else has but it doesn't mean that he is entitled to a six figure salary and a position of authority at a major university. For you to defend this clown speaks badly about you and your comrades who try as well. If the Left is to gain any credibility it needs to clean house of these jokers and get serious. If this fellow were a conservative PaulinLA would be the first to condemn him. Paul you are a hypocrite and well, rather foolish in a youngish kind of way. Best, jim

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 12:19:03 AM EST
    A useful summary perspective on the current questions being forwarded to the CU committee of nine colleagues of Ward Churchill is "CU's Churchill: Indian Or Not?":
    Prof. Ward Churchill's future is now in the hands of nine fellow professors who may be asked to decide the explosive question of whether he is -- or is not -- an American Indian.
    I suggest reading that article to see what some of the difficult issues that "question" raises for that committee and Churchill's lawyer's position so far on them. Interesting how some people here think that they have all the information that they need "to decide" this "explosive question" preemptorily. So (sigh), I say again, leave such "verdicts" up to his CU peers and any "adjudication" of these remaining issues in "the Ward Churchill matter" to academic processes (including his responses to CU hearings) and, then, the courts, if it comes to that.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 12:40:37 AM EST
    For those who didn't get to see the entire news conference on Mar. 24th, a link to the video at CBS4 Denver is posted that day here (Windows Media Player). I think it's worth watching/listening to the whole news conference in context, including the concluding emphasis on intending to accord "fairness" to Professor Churchill and the subsequent discussion afterward. Thank you to Michael Ditto for blogging the news conference, though I don't agree with several of his comments following it.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 01:50:53 AM EST
    "Posted by jimcee: "As has been pointed out here before by others if he were an Indian he would have a BIA number" That's an outright lie. There are many, many indians and tribes who are not BIA listed, and BIA NON-listing is a PRIMARY method of dispossession, i.e. racist action. "and the Gov't wouldn't have stopped him from selling his plagierized "art" as Native-American art." And then you change the subject, because your argument is so weak it is pathetic. "Name one positive thing that has come from Churchill's tenure." Discussions about the history of racism in America, and discussion of the ONGOING ACTION of racism in America -- two MAJOR results of his life, forget his tenure. The rest of your blather is subject-changing, unsubstantiated, bloviation.

    Re: CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 09:26:20 PM EST
    Information about how to determine American Indian ancestry and related issues is available online at the Department of the Interior's government web site here. According to the information provided there, membership requirements vary among various tribes and one must contact the particular tribes for their membership criteria and enrollment requirements. Re: the three Cherokee tribes mentioned (which, two centuries ago, were termed part of one "Cherokee nation"), further information about "membership" and/or "enrollment" is provided here.

    CU Issues Findings on Ward Churchill | 47 comments (47 topical)