Ward Churchill Solidarity Network

Dear Regents … Some International Perspectives …

Many people writing the CU Regents have shared their letters with the WCSN website. Particularly interesting are some international perspectives:

Dear CU Regents,

I am an American Citizen living in Germany where I am currently completing my Ph.D. in Biophysics. I have been following the case of Ward Churchill’s alleged academic misconduct. It appears to me and I would venture to say much of the rest of the Western world, especially here in Germany, that these charges are foundless. When I discuss this case with other graduate students here they are repeatedly astounded at the treatment Dr. Churchill is recieving. They are shocked, as they somehow have a notion that America is a bastion of free speech and this case is clearly about censorship. As open discussion about September 11, 2001, terrorism and America’s war on Iraq are much less emotionally charged and more rational here in general, such scapegoating of prominent intellectuals is viewed in a quite negative light. I would hope that you consider that these issues attract international attention and are actually very closely followed here. They do not sit well with many in Europe and are especially disturbing to those in academia, who consider censorship based on blatantly political motives contrary to the very idea of academia itself. Please reconsider your position on these charges. It is obvious that they are spurious. As a scientist and a rational human being I would have to say that any serious evaluation of the charges as they stand do not have any merit and are not sufficient as a basis for the dismissal of a tenured professor.

Sincerely,

Brian Gentry
University of Leipzig
Germany

And …

Dear Sirs:

I am living in Portugal, what representatives of your federal administration use to call “Old Europe”.

As perhaps might have come to your attention, Pew, Zogby, and a host of other worldwide opinion polls have shown that the standing of the United States of America in the rest of the world has suffered a great deal during the last years. However, I have been able to use Ward Churchill’s Essay “Some People Push Back” with considerable success in countering antiamericanism here. Most people respond like, “well, not everything is lost over there if they still have people like Ward.”

It is true that the Nov. 2004 reelection of George W. Bush was not exactly helpful in this matter, however I think you should award Mr. Churchill a medal for improving America’s image worldwide, not fire him.

Sincerely yours,

Martin Kratz
Portugal

And, on the other hand …

The United States should have completely finished the Native American problem and not wavered like Vietnam. It would have been a lot easier. Then no one would have to listen to you tell twisted versions of the truth.

love,
andy thompson
President
Ward Churchill is a Bad Man Society for University Re-Polarization

Thank you for your time Mr. Churchill!
May Allah take away your carmel latte, you ivory tower bastard!

Send your views to the CU Regents, c/o Millie.Cortez@cu.edu.

CU Professor Tom Mayer Debunks Plagiarism Charges Against Ward Churchill - June 11, 2007

The research misconduct charges against Ward Churchill are of two general kinds: charges of faulty research and charges of plagiarism. The faulty research accusations have been largely discredited through the efforts of professors Eric Cheyfitz, Michael Yellow Bird, David Stannard, Huanani-Kay Trask, James Craven, Ruth Hsu, and others. These independent scholars, all of whom are intimately familiar with Native American history and culture, have shown that the Report of the Investigative Committee (henceforth called Report) finding Churchill guilty of research misconduct contains numerous errors of omission and commission. The Report improperly converts legitimate scholarly controversies into indictments of the positions taken by Professor Churchill.

In this essay I will argue that the three plagiarism charges discussed in the Report are also without compelling force. Significantly, all these charges pertain to Churchill’s work as an intellectual within the broad but fractured movement to emancipate indigenous people. None of the papers accused of plagiarism were written for the purpose of building an academic career. This is important because the norms of authorship within the social movement context differ substantially from those within the academic domain.

All three plagiarism charges refer to publications that are now fourteen or more years old. Although various persons hostile to Professor Churchill (e.g. John LaVelle, see section two below) have circulated rumors of misconduct for at least a decade, no action was taken against Churchill until he became a political pariah (through the exercise of free speech). On the contrary, prior to his persecution for lack of mandatory patriotism, Churchill was honored as a valuable member of the University of Colorado faculty. He was appointed chair of the Ethnic Studies Department, placed on influential University committees, and given prestigious teaching awards.

The source of all three plagiarism charges is the University of Colorado administration rather than the putative victims of Churchill’s putative misconduct. In two of the three cases the supposed victims made no complaint at all and do not appear critical of Professor Churchill. In the third case, the CU administration solicited a complaint, but the perpetrator of the plagiarism remains obscure and the complaint is not specifically directed against Churchill.

. . . . click here to read entire Mayer essay

CU President Hank Brown Overrides Faculty Appeal Committee; Recommends that Regents Fire Ward Churchill

On May 3, 2007, the Privilege & Tenure Committee’s appeal panel found that the University had not met its burden of proof on several of the charges against Professor Ward Churchill and recommended by a 3-2 vote that Prof. Churchill be demoted and suspended for one year rather than fired.

On June 1, the panel informed Pres. Brown that, despite his recommendation for dismissal, it stood by its decision. Nonetheless, on June 7, Brown decided to override the faculty committee’s recommendation and sent his recommendation to the Regents to fire Prof. Churchill.

Ward Churchill had requested that Brown recuse himself from this process due to his biases, including his ties to ACTA (the neo-conservative organization founded by Lynne Cheney), but Brown declined to do so. (Click here for more on the ACTA connection.)

Brown also chose to disregard the two sets of research misconduct charges recently filed against the Investigative Committee which wrote the Report on which Brown’s recommendation rests. According to the professors and attorneys filing these complaints, the falsification and misrepresentation of evidence found in the Report seriously undermines its credibility and suggests that the investigation was heavily biased against Prof. Churchill. (Click here and here to read their charges.)

The case will now go to the Regents, who are expected to make a decision in July.

University of Colorado Under Fire Again: Professors and Attorneys File New Charges Against Committee Investigating Churchill

May 28, 2007

Five professors and two attorneys today filed new allegations of research misconduct against the University of Colorado committee which wrote the May 9, 2006 Investigative Report in the Ward Churchill case.

The professors and attorneys, a majority of whom are Indigenous, charge the Committee with misrepresenting, fabricating, or suppressing evidence in their Report, and exhibiting bias against Professor Churchill.

The five allegations filed today address the Investigative Committee’s findings regarding the smallpox epidemics of 1616 and 1837. Like many others, this group believes the “investigation” and resulting Report were a pretext intended to silence Professor Churchill and discredit the Indigenous perspectives he articulates. … click here to read entire press release

… click here to read New Allegations against Investigative Committee

… click here to read Allegations filed May 10 by CU faculty members

CU President Hank Brown Recommends Firing Prof. Churchill…Ward Churchill Responds

President Hank Brown has quite predictably recommended that the Regents of the University of Colorado (CU) fire me – not, he claims, because of my constitutionally protected statements about 9/11 but because of my scholarship. However, as hundreds of academics around the country have pointed out, CU’s “investigation” has all along been merely a pretext, transparently catering to the political and financial interests which dictate “educational” policy at CU . . . read the rest.

The Kids Get the Point…

CU President Hank Brown will soon, no doubt, be announcing his recommendation to fire Ward Churchill, despite the fact that the majority of both the “investigative committee” and the P&T appeal panel voted for lesser sanctions … and despite the many fallacies and misrepresentations in the Investigative Report which continue to surface.

This all goes back, of course, to Ward Churchill’s “controversial” remarks about the 9/11 attacks, and CU’s efforts to find a pretext to fire him without appearing to violate the First Amendment. Those remarks continue to be mischaracterized in the mainstream press.

We’ve recently received a March 2005 interview published in a middle school newspaper. Passing up interviews with folks like Geraldo, Ward Churchill talked with then-12-year-old Stephanie Mathewes, who published what appears to be the most accurate explanation of his remarks to date:

What was it exactly that you said to make people so upset, and when did you write this paper?

“I wrote this paper the evening of 9/11 and what it basically said was when you kill other people’s babies and act like it doesn’t matter people are going to get angry and they are going to get back at you. A way to prevent that is just don’t kill people’s babies or anyone for that matter. Obey the law. It is illegal to kill children and people for no reason, so obey the law.”

Do you feel that people have misunderstood/mistreated you and the issue?

“I think that they have deliberately misrepresented the issue. I think that people have twisted what was said because they refuse to hear what was said. They think it is ok for Americans to kill but not ok for us to be killed.”

. . . He also wanted people to know “it’s not that I don’t care about children on 9/11. I do not care any less than what happened to the Iraqi children.” He does not want this for any children. He wants it to end.

Out of the mouths of babes…

May 10, 2007: 11 Professors File Research Misconduct Charges Against the CU Investigating Committee

To: Hank Brown, President of the University of Colorado
The Regents of the University of Colorado
Bud Peterson, Chancellor of University of Colorado, Boulder
Phillip DiStefano, Provost of the University of Colorado, Boulder
Susan Avery, Vice-Provost of the University of Colorado, Boulder
The Standing Committee on Research Misconduct
Members of the Investigative Committee in the Churchill Case Case

On April 23, 2007 the undersigned professors called on the University of Colorado at Boulder to rescind the “Report of the Investigative Committee concerning Allegations of Academic Misconduct against Professor Ward Churchill” [henceforth Report] because it contained so many egregious errors. On May 7, 2007, the University officially declined our call to retract the report. Since the university has declined to act in good faith, we are now compelled to file these charges.

For the dual purposes of defending academic freedom and securing justice for Professor Churchill, we now bring charges of research misconduct against the authors of the Report: Marianne Wesson, Professor of Law at the University of Colorado [chair of Investigative Committee]; Marjorie McIntosh, Professor of History at the University of Colorado; Michael Radelet, Professor of Sociology at the University of Colorado; Robert Clinton, Professor of Law at Arizona State University; and José Limón, Professor of American and English Literature at the University of Texas.

We further ask that any person with a known bias against Professor Churchill recuse themselves from consideration of his case. We note that the decision not to retract the Report came from the new Vice President for Academic Affairs, Michael Poliakoff, whose office has a conflict of interest in this case because of his involvement with the American Council of College Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). Since ACTA has a long and well-documented history of animosity toward Ward Churchill, no-one with ACTA affiliations, including a co-founder like President Hank Brown and a named proponent like Poliakoff, is in any position to make an unbiased decision in this case.

. . . . click here to read the full letter & supporting documentation.

Why Is CU Making Up Excuses to Fire Ward Churchill? Profs say: The ACTA Connection

Pres. Hank Brown, new CU VP Michael Poliakoff, Regent Tom Lucero, and former Gov. Bill Owens all part of Lynne Cheney’s neoconservative American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) …. click here to read more

Defend Ward Churchill - Bill Ayers

Defend Ward Churchill

Dear Colleagues,

In Brecht’s play Galileo the great astronomer sets forth into a world dominated by a mighty church and an authoritarian power: “The cities are narrow and so are the brains,” he declares recklessly. “Superstition and plague. But now the word is: since it is so, it does not remain so. For everything moves my friend.” Intoxicated with his own radical discoveries, Galileo feels the earth shifting and finds himself propelled surprisingly toward revolution. ” It was always said that the stars were fastened to a crystal vault so they could not fall,” he says. “Now we have taken heart and let them float in the air, without support… they are embarked on a great voyage—like us who are also without support and embarked on a great voyage.” Here Galileo raises the stakes and risks taking on the establishment in the realm of its own authority, and it strikes back fiercely. Forced to renounce his life’s work under the exquisite pressure of the Inquisition he denounces what he knows to be true, and is welcomed back into the church and the ranks of the faithful, but exiled from humanity—by his own word. A former student confronts him in the street: “Many on all sides followed you with their ears and their eyes believing that you stood, not only for a particular view of the movement of the stars, but even more for the liberty of teaching— in all fields. Not then for any particular thoughts, but for the right to think at all. Which is in dispute.”

The right to think at all, which is in dispute—-this is what the Ward Churchill affair finally comes to: The right to a mind of one’s own, the right to pursue an argument into uncharted spaces, the right to challenge the church and its orthodoxy in the public square. The right to think at all.

It’s no surprise that this outrage against Professor Churchill occurs at this particular moment— a time of empire resurrected and unapologetic, militarism proudly expanding and triumphant, war without justice and without end, white supremacy retrenched, basic rights and protections shredded, growing disparities between the haves and the have-nots, fear and superstition and the mobilization of scapegoating social formations based on bigotry and violence or the threats of violence, and on and on. There’s more of course, and this isn’t the only story, but this is a recognizable part of where we’re living, and a familiar place to anyone with even a casual understanding of history. Here the competing impulses and ideals that have always animated our country’s story are on full display: rights and liberty and the pursuit of human freedom on one side, domination and war and repression on the other. The trauma of contradictions that is America.

Ward Churchill is under a sustained, orchestrated, and determined attack because of his political beliefs and statements and activities, and nothing more. No one doubts his productivity or his accomplishments. But the attack on Churchill is neither isolated nor innocent— the high school history teacher on the west side of Chicago gets the message, and so does the English literature teacher in Detroit and the math teacher in an Oakland middle school: be careful what you say; stay close to the official story; stick to the authorized text. If someone of Ward Churchill’s stature and standing for so many years at the University of Colorado can suffer this kind of campaign, what chance do I have?

Every committee, every investigation, every report plays out under a shadow of the star chamber; everyone must choose who to be and how to act in response. For this reason I support Ward Churchill unequivocally, unapologetically, whole-heartedly. I urge my colleagues and my students and everyone who values education as a grand enterprise geared toward enlightenment and liberation to speak out forcefully and fearlessly now on behalf of the liberty of teaching and learning, on behalf of the right to think at all.

Sincerely,
William Ayers
Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar
University of Illinois at Chicago
billayers.org

CU Faculty and American Indian Studies Experts to CU: Rescind the Report of the Investigative Committee

On April 23, nine professors issued an Open Letter Calling on the University of Colorado to retract the Report upon which the recommendation to fire Ward Churchill is based.

According to the professors, a close reading of the Report shows “a pattern of violations” of “standard scholarly practice that are so serious” that research misconduct charges against the authors of the Report may be warranted.

After studying the May 9, 2006 Report, which the CU Investigative Committee insisted on making public in violation of University rules on confidentiality, these faculty members find that it:

* relies on a single biased source for major arguments, importing its errors or distortions;

* artificially excludes independent sources representing alternative views;

* misrepresents a Supreme Court Case to create the false appearance of authoritativeness;

* turns a scholarly debate into an indictment by arbitrarily limiting the scope of interpretation; and

* suppresses text from sources cited by Prof. Churchill, deliberately distorting them to prejudice the reader against Prof. Churchill.

The authors find the pattern of violations “serious enough to justify failing a PhD thesis, let alone an investigative report that is to serve as a basis for firing a tenured, full professor.”

They conclude that the Report “compromises . . . the integrity of the protocols and principles that protect academic freedom” and “puts any professor at risk of arbitrary dismissal.”

Click here to read the Open Letter.

Click here to read the professors’ Summary of Violations.

Click here to read their Documentary Evidence of some of the violations.

Colorado Conference of AAUP Backs Call to Rescind Report

The Executive Committee of the Colorado Conference of the American Association of University Professors called upon CU President Hank Brown to rescind the report accusing Prof. Ward Churchill of research misconduct.

Its letter of April 24, 2007 further states that if the report is not rescinded, the University has an obligation to ensure a thorough examination of the charges made by the faculty by “an independent, qualified, and unbiased panel, not by the investigating committee that made the apparent mistakes in the first place.”

It adds that “no action should be taken on the basis of the Report until this examination is completed.”

Click here to read the letter from the President of the AAUP Colorado Conference.

Attention All Students and Faculty Nationwide

As some of you may know, the investigation and firing decision of University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill is coming to a close. Students and Faculty for True Academic Freedom at CU (a group of committed people supporting dissent and critical thinking as well as Academic Freedom) need YOUR help. We are hosting an Emergency National Forum this Saturday, April 28th, 2007 to discuss Ward’s case and its implications for students and faculty here at Boulder, its impact on Indigenous Studies, and how it can be used to critique imperialism. We are reaching out to build an action network to stop the firing of Ward.  If anyone can make it to Boulder, Colorado, we can put up 10 people in billets but beyond that we can tell you how to find cheap lodging in Boulder. If you cannot make it we need your support on Friday, April 27th. We are planning a national walk-out for students at noon to show that we will not be silenced and that we demand fair and equal respect for all professors. I urge you all to stand up, come together and send out press releases before the walk-out. If you have any questions or concerns please contact Kim Collins at kim4wardchurchill@yahoo.com or at 719-321-4343.